Drinking Water — Newark Civic Intelligence

57 ppb

peak lead recorded — crisis era (H1 2019)

7 sites

monitored sites exceeded 15 ppb during 2017–2019 crisis

0 of 10

post-2020 samples exceeding 15 ppb action level

HAA5 / TTHM disinfection byproduct MCL violations, 2003–2020

What the Record Shows

Question	Answer
Has water quality improved?	Partially. The disinfection byproduct violations — HAA5 and TTHM, both regulated carcinogens — stopped after Q1 2020 and have not recurred. Turbidity failures (filtration breakdowns) also ended after September 2020. Those clusters appear resolved. For lead: all monitored sites sampled from 2020 through 2025 returned results below the 15 ppb action level, with values ranging from 0 to 13.9 ppb. This is a real improvement from the 2017–2019 crisis peak.Partly. The disinfection byproduct violations — HAA5 and TTHM, both regulated cancer risks — stopped after the first quarter of 2020 and haven't come back. Filtration failures (turbidity) also ended after September 2020. Those problems look resolved. For lead: every monitored site tested from 2020 through 2025 came back below the 15 ppb action level, with readings from 0 to 13.9 ppb. That is a real improvement from the 2017–2019 crisis peak.
Is the lead crisis over?	Partially resolved, with caveats. Newark replaced roughly 18,000 lead service lines (street-level pipes) at a cost of ~$125 million, completing the program in 2021. The high-lead monitoring sites from 2017–2019 — which recorded 17–57 ppb — were associated with addresses that had lead service lines; those lines were replaced and the sites retired from active monitoring. Post-replacement monitoring (2020–2025) shows values below the action level at the sites that remain active. However: (1) service line replacement doesn’t address lead in internal building plumbing — brass fixtures, galvanized pipes, and solder joints inside pre-1986 homes; (2) only 1–2 results per monitoring period appear in SDWIS for recent years, too few to compute a statistically valid system-wide 90th percentile; (3) the Jul–Dec 2022 treatment technique violation shows corrosion control chemistry was not meeting required parameters six months after replacement ended.Partly fixed, with caveats. Newark replaced about 18,000 lead service lines — the pipes running from the street into buildings — for about $125 million, finishing in 2021. The monitoring sites that recorded high lead (17–57 ppb) in 2017–2019 were tied to addresses with lead service lines; those pipes were replaced and the sites retired from monitoring. Testing since then (2020–2025) shows lead below the legal action level at the sites still active. But three things temper the good news: (1) replacing service lines does nothing about lead inside buildings — brass fixtures, galvanized pipes, and solder joints in homes built before 1986; (2) only 1–2 test results per period show up in the federal database in recent years — too few to calculate a valid citywide lead level; (3) six months after replacement ended, the city was cited (Jul–Dec 2022) because its anti-corrosion water chemistry wasn't meeting requirements.
Where were the high-lead sites?	Addresses are not in the federal database. SDWIS identifies monitoring sites by a sample ID (e.g., NJ144558 for the 57 ppb site in H1 2019) but does not publish the street addresses in its bulk data. The specific addresses are in NJDEP’s internal records and would require an OPRA request to obtain. News coverage from 2018–2019 identified the East Ward / Ironbound neighborhood as having the highest concentration of affected homes due to its older housing stock and the density of pre-1986 lead service lines in that area.The addresses are not in the federal database. The database identifies monitoring sites only by a sample ID (for example, NJ144558 for the site that hit 57 ppb in early 2019) — not street addresses. The addresses are in NJDEP's internal records and would take an OPRA public records request to get. News coverage from 2018–2019 pointed to the East Ward / Ironbound neighborhood as hardest hit, because of its older housing and the density of pre-1986 lead service lines there.
Why no violations since 2023?	Enforcement gap, not confirmed compliance. The SDWIS data is current as of April 8, 2026. The last formal violation is July–December 2022 (Lead & Copper Rule water quality parameter non-compliance; enforcement January 19, 2023). There are zero violations recorded for 2023, 2024, or 2025. This three-year gap spans both administrations — NJDEP was already not issuing formal actions before the federal transition. Whether current monitoring results would trigger a violation under the existing LCR requires knowing the full set of samples in the current period, not just the 1–2 results visible in SDWIS.A gap in enforcement — not proof of compliance. The federal data is current as of April 8, 2026. The last formal violation on record is July–December 2022 (a water chemistry failure under the Lead & Copper Rule; enforcement issued January 19, 2023). There are zero violations recorded for 2023, 2024, or 2025. That three-year silence spans both federal administrations — the state agency NJDEP had already stopped issuing formal actions before Washington changed hands. Whether today's water would trigger a violation can't be known from the 1–2 test results visible in the database.
Does the current administration matter?	Yes, at the margin. The 2023–2025 enforcement gap predates the current administration, so it is not solely a Trump EPA story. But the current administration is rolling back the 2024 Lead and Copper Rule Improvements (LCRI) — finalized under Biden in October 2024 — which would have lowered the trigger level from 15 ppb to 10 ppb, mandated full lead service line replacement across all systems within 10 years, and strengthened public notification requirements. Without the LCRI, there is no federal mandate to accelerate remediation of internal building plumbing. NJDEP remains the only enforcement backstop and has been inactive for three years.Yes, at the margins. The 2023–2025 enforcement gap started before the current administration, so this is not only a Trump EPA story. But the current administration is rolling back the 2024 Lead and Copper Rule Improvements (LCRI) — finalized under Biden in October 2024 — which would have lowered the lead trigger from 15 ppb to 10 ppb, required every water system to replace all lead service lines within 10 years, and strengthened public notification. Without that rule, no federal mandate pushes remediation of lead plumbing inside buildings. NJDEP is the only enforcement backstop left, and it has been inactive for three years.

Enforcement gap: 2023–present. The SDWIS violation file was last updated April 8, 2026 and is current. The most recent formal violation is July–December 2022 (Lead & Copper Rule water quality parameter non-compliance; enforcement issued January 19, 2023). There are zero violations recorded for 2023, 2024, or 2025. This predates the current federal administration; it reflects a pattern of state-level under-enforcement that the Trump EPA’s rollbacks — cuts to SDWA enforcement staff and the pending reversal of the 2024 LCRI that would have tightened the trigger to 10 ppb — make harder to reverse. Eight violations remain open with no return-to-compliance date in SDWIS. Enforcement gap: 2023 to now. The federal violation file was last updated April 8, 2026 and is current. The most recent formal violation is July–December 2022 (a water chemistry failure under the Lead & Copper Rule; enforcement issued January 19, 2023). There are zero violations on record for 2023, 2024, or 2025. This started before the current federal administration — it reflects state-level under-enforcement. But the Trump EPA's rollbacks — cutting drinking-water enforcement staff and moving to reverse the 2024 rule that would have tightened the lead trigger to 10 ppb — make it harder to fix. Eight violations remain open with no return-to-compliance date on file.

Governance note. Newark’s Department of Water and Sewer Utilities is a city operating department, not an independent authority. It has no public board meetings or minutes. Accountability runs through City Council appropriations, NJDEP permits, and federal EPA enforcement under the Safe Drinking Water Act. The violations below are the public record. Who's accountable. Newark's Department of Water and Sewer Utilities is a regular city department, not an independent authority. It has no public board meetings or minutes. The only oversight comes through the City Council's budget votes, state (NJDEP) permits, and federal EPA enforcement under the Safe Drinking Water Act. The violations below are the public record.

Lead Service Line Replacement by Ward

Source: Newark Water / CDM Smith ArcGIS FeatureServer (public, last fetched 2026-06-19). “Lead replaced” = properties where the original pipe material was confirmed lead and a full replacement was completed. “Lead %” = lead-replaced properties as a share of all properties in the program inventory for that ward. Source: Newark Water / CDM Smith public mapping data (last fetched 2026-06-19). “Lead replaced” means the original pipe was confirmed lead and a full replacement was completed. “Lead %” is the share of all properties in that ward's program inventory where lead was replaced.

North Ward had the highest lead prevalence at 53% — not East Ward, as media coverage often implied. The Ironbound (zip 07105) accounts for 2,445 of 2,652 East Ward lead replacements (92%), but East Ward’s overall lead rate (38%) is the second lowest of the five wards. Central Ward has the fewest lead pipes (16%) reflecting more recent construction and commercial properties. The North Ward had the most lead pipes — 53% of properties — not the East Ward, as news coverage often implied. The Ironbound (zip 07105) accounts for 2,445 of the East Ward's 2,652 lead replacements (92%), but the East Ward's overall lead rate (38%) is the second lowest of the five wards. The Central Ward has the fewest lead pipes (16%), reflecting newer construction and more commercial buildings.

Ward	Lead pipes replaced (properties)	Housing units served	Lead prevalence	Unknown material
North Ward	3,328	6,925	53%	160
West Ward	3,911	7,586	50%	189
South Ward	3,466	7,460	46%	194
East Ward	2,652	6,371	38%	348
Central Ward	932	2,143	16%	63

954 properties citywide still have unknown pipe material and may not have been fully inspected. City total: 14,289 properties / 30,485 housing units with confirmed lead service lines replaced. 954 properties citywide still have pipes of unknown material and may not have been fully inspected. City total: 14,289 properties — covering 30,485 housing units — with confirmed lead service lines replaced.

Lead Monitoring Site Results (30 records, 1992–2025)

Each row is one monitoring site with its most recent result in SDWIS (submitted to the federal database in Q1 2026). Sampling periods range from 1992 to 2025 — these are not all current readings. Red-shaded rows are crisis-era sites (2017–2019) whose lead service lines were subsequently replaced; their last recorded result is from before replacement. Sample IDs link to specific Newark addresses in NJDEP’s records (not publicly available in SDWIS — OPRA request to NJDEP required). Vertical line marks the 15 ppb action level. Each row is one monitoring site and its most recent result in the federal database (submitted in the first quarter of 2026). The sampling dates run from 1992 to 2025 — these are not all current readings. Red rows are crisis-era sites (2017–2019) whose lead pipes were later replaced; their last recorded result is from before the replacement. Sample IDs correspond to specific Newark addresses in state records (not public — getting them requires an OPRA records request to NJDEP). The vertical line marks the 15 ppb action level.

Sampling period	SDWIS sample ID	Result	Status
2025-01–25-12	NJ157893	0.0 ppb	below AL
2024-01–24-12	NJ155382	0.0 ppb	below AL
2023-07–23-12	NJ153795	0.0 ppb	below AL
2023-01–23-06	NJ152800	4.1 ppb	below AL
2022-07–22-12	NJ152511	4.8 ppb	below AL
2022-01–22-06	NJ150801	4.4 ppb	below AL
2021-07–21-12	NJ150488	9.8 ppb	below AL
2021-01–21-06	NJ149003	6.6 ppb	below AL
2020-07–20-12	NJ147387	13.0 ppb	below AL
2020-01–20-06	NJ146549	13.9 ppb	below AL
2019-07–19-12	NJ146473	31.0 ppb	EXCEEDS 15 ppb
2019-01–19-06	NJ144558	57.0 ppb	EXCEEDS 15 ppb
2018-07–18-12	NJ144516	47.9 ppb	EXCEEDS 15 ppb
2018-01–18-06	NJ143046	17.8 ppb	EXCEEDS 15 ppb
2017-07–17-12	NJ142063	26.7 ppb	EXCEEDS 15 ppb
2017-07–17-12	NJ144559	26.7 ppb	EXCEEDS 15 ppb
2017-01–17-06	NJ142371	27.0 ppb	EXCEEDS 15 ppb
2013-01–15-12	NJ139254	10.0 ppb	below AL
2010-01–12-12	NJ135077	9.0 ppb	below AL
2007-01–09-12	NJ129702	11.0 ppb	below AL
2005-01–07-12	NJ113846	7.9 ppb	below AL
2002-01–04-12	NJ91459	8.3 ppb	below AL
2002-07–02-12	NJ36916	13.8 ppb	below AL
2002-01–02-06	NJ93277	12.0 ppb	below AL
2001-07–01-12	NJ36914	12.0 ppb	below AL
2000-01–00-06	NJ36907	11.0 ppb	below AL
1999-07–99-12	NJ36923	12.9 ppb	below AL
1998-07–98-12	NJ36922	10.4 ppb	below AL
1998-01–98-06	NJ36913	12.6 ppb	below AL
1992-07–92-12	NJ36920	22.6 ppb	EXCEEDS 15 ppb

Disinfection Byproduct MCL Violations (2003–2020)

HAA5 and TTHM are disinfection byproducts formed when chlorine reacts with organic matter in source water. Both are regulated carcinogens under the Safe Drinking Water Act. HAA5 (haloacetic acids) are probable human carcinogens; TTHM (trihalomethanes) include chloroform, a possible carcinogen linked to bladder cancer and reproductive effects. Newark violated these MCLs in 20 quarterly periods across three distinct clusters: 2003–2005, 2015–2016, and 2018–2020. All violations are listed as resolved. HAA5 and TTHM are chemical byproducts created when chlorine (the disinfectant) reacts with natural material in the source water. Both are regulated as cancer risks under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. HAA5 (haloacetic acids) are probable human carcinogens; TTHM (trihalomethanes) include chloroform, which is linked to bladder cancer and reproductive harm. Newark exceeded the legal limits (MCLs) for these chemicals in 20 quarterly periods, in three clusters: 2003–2005, 2015–2016, and 2018–2020. All of those violations are listed as resolved.

Period start	Period end	Contaminant	Violation type
2020-01	2020-03	HAA5 (Haloacetic Acids)	MCL exceeded
2019-10	2019-12	HAA5 (Haloacetic Acids)	MCL exceeded
2019-07	2019-09	HAA5 (Haloacetic Acids)	MCL exceeded
2019-04	2019-06	HAA5 (Haloacetic Acids)	MCL exceeded
2019-04	2019-06	TTHM (Trihalomethanes)	MCL exceeded
2019-01	2019-03	HAA5 (Haloacetic Acids)	MCL exceeded
2019-01	2019-03	TTHM (Trihalomethanes)	MCL exceeded
2018-10	2018-12	HAA5 (Haloacetic Acids)	MCL exceeded
2018-07	2018-09	HAA5 (Haloacetic Acids)	MCL exceeded
2016-04	2016-06	TTHM (Trihalomethanes)	MCL exceeded
2016-01	2016-03	TTHM (Trihalomethanes)	MCL exceeded
2015-10	2015-12	TTHM (Trihalomethanes)	MCL exceeded
2015-07	2015-09	TTHM (Trihalomethanes)	MCL exceeded
2005-01	2005-03	HAA5 (Haloacetic Acids)	MCL exceeded
2004-10	2004-12	HAA5 (Haloacetic Acids)	MCL exceeded
2004-07	2004-09	HAA5 (Haloacetic Acids)	MCL exceeded
2004-04	2004-06	HAA5 (Haloacetic Acids)	MCL exceeded
2004-01	2004-03	HAA5 (Haloacetic Acids)	MCL exceeded
2003-10	2003-12	HAA5 (Haloacetic Acids)	MCL exceeded
2003-07	2003-09	HAA5 (Haloacetic Acids)	MCL exceeded

Treatment Technique & Lead Rule Violations

Treatment technique (TT) violations indicate the water system failed a required treatment process, not just a contaminant concentration. Turbidity failures mean the filtration system did not adequately remove particles, leaving the potential for pathogen passage. Lead & Copper Rule TT violations include failures to issue legally required public education notices during the 2018–2019 lead crisis, and a 2022 water quality parameter non-compliance six months after the lead service line replacement program ended. Treatment technique (TT) violations mean the water system failed a required treatment process — not just that a contaminant tested too high. Turbidity failures mean the filters weren't removing particles well enough, which can let germs through. The Lead & Copper Rule violations here include failing to send legally required public warnings during the 2018–2019 lead crisis, and a 2022 failure of water chemistry standards six months after the lead pipe replacement program ended.

Period start	Period end	Rule	Violation
2022-07	2022-12	Lead & Copper Rule	WQP entry point/tap treatment technique non-compliance
2020-09	2020-09	Surface Water Treatment	Turbidity exceedance
2018-12	2018-12	Surface Water Treatment	Monthly turbidity exceedance
2018-11	2018-11	Surface Water Treatment	Monthly turbidity exceedance
2019-03	—	Lead & Copper Rule	Public education notice not issued
2018-09	—	Lead & Copper Rule	Public education notice not issued
2016-02	2016-02	Surface Water Treatment	Turbidity exceedance
2016-01	2016-01	Surface Water Treatment	Turbidity exceedance
2015-12	2015-12	Surface Water Treatment	Treatment technique failure
2015-11	2015-11	Surface Water Treatment	Treatment technique failure

Timeline

Date	Event
1995–1997	First Lead & Copper Rule violation: failure to install optimized corrosion control treatment (OCCT). Earliest violation on record.
2003–2005	First cluster of HAA5 disinfection byproduct MCL violations — 5 quarterly exceedances.
2015–2016	Second cluster: TTHM and HAA5 MCL violations; plus turbidity treatment failures in Nov–Dec 2015 and Jan–Feb 2016. Nine quarterly violations.
2017	Lead monitoring results begin showing elevated readings: 26.7–27.0 ppb at three monitoring sites. Action level exceedance triggers mandatory public notification and accelerated response requirements.
2018	Third cluster of HAA5 MCL violations (Q3–Q4). Turbidity failures Nov–Dec. Lead crisis intensifies: 17.8–47.9 ppb at monitored sites. City fails to issue legally required public education notices — TT violation issued Sep 2018.A third cluster of HAA5 (disinfection byproduct) violations in the third and fourth quarters. Filtration failures in November and December. The lead crisis deepens: 17.8–47.9 ppb at monitored sites. The city fails to send legally required public warnings — cited in September 2018.
2019	HAA5 MCL violated Q1–Q4. TTHM MCL violated Q1–Q2. Lead readings peak at 57 ppb (H1 2019) and 31 ppb (H2 2019). Second public education notice failure (Mar 2019). EPA and NJDEP issue administrative orders requiring filter and lead service line replacement.Legal limits for HAA5 were violated in all four quarters, and for TTHM in the first two. Lead readings peaked at 57 ppb (first half of 2019) and 31 ppb (second half). The city missed a legally required public education notice for the second time (Mar 2019). The EPA and NJDEP, the state environmental agency, issued orders requiring water filters and lead service line replacement.
2020 Q1	Last recorded HAA5 MCL violation. Turbidity failure Sep 2020. Post-2020 lead monitoring returns below 15 ppb at active sites.
2021	City declares lead service line replacement program complete. Roughly 18,000 lead service lines replaced at cost of ~$125 million. Lead monitoring shows 6.6–9.8 ppb at active sites.The city declares the lead service line replacement program complete. Roughly 18,000 lead service lines replaced at a cost of about $125 million. Lead monitoring shows 6.6–9.8 ppb at the active sites.
Jul–Dec 2022	Lead & Copper Rule water quality parameter (WQP) treatment technique non-compliance — six months after replacement program declared complete. Indicates corrosion control chemistry not meeting required parameters.The city failed the Lead & Copper Rule's water chemistry standards — six months after declaring the pipe replacement program complete. The treatment that keeps pipes from leaching lead into the water wasn't working as required.
Jan 2023	Last enforcement action on record. SDWIS records zero violations for 2023, 2024, or 2025. Active monitoring sites show 0–4.8 ppb.
2025	Most recent SDWIS sample result: 0 ppb at one active monitoring site (full-year 2025 period). NJDEP has issued no violations in over two years.

Data Notes

Source: EPA Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) bulk data download, SDWA_VIOLATIONS_ENFORCEMENT.csv and SDWA_LCR_SAMPLES.csv, filtered to PWSID NJ0714001 (City of Newark Department of Water and Sewer Utilities). 349 raw SDWIS records de-duplicated to 122 unique violation events. LCR lead sample records were submitted to the federal database in Q1 2026 (NJDEP’s quarterly SDWIS update); the actual sampling periods in each record span 1992–2025. Each row represents one monitoring site’s result for the period listed, not a snapshot of current conditions. Site addresses are not published in the SDWIS bulk data; they are in NJDEP’s internal records (obtainable via OPRA request). “Resolved” in SDWIS means the utility returned to compliance — it does not mean affected residents received remediation or compensation. Source: the EPA's Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS) bulk download — the violations file and the lead sample file — filtered to Newark's water system ID (NJ0714001). 349 raw records were de-duplicated to 122 unique violation events. The lead sample records were submitted to the federal database in the first quarter of 2026, but the actual sampling dates span 1992–2025 — each row is one monitoring site's result for the period listed, not a snapshot of current conditions. Street addresses aren't published in the bulk data; they're in NJDEP's internal records (obtainable via an OPRA request). And “Resolved” only means the utility returned to compliance — it does not mean affected residents received remediation or compensation.

Newark Drinking Water