Back to the water search

Florida, first statewide pass.

Sources reviewed October 13, 2026. The site covers all 67 counties. ZIP matching and report coverage have different levels of completeness.

Scoring updated October 14, 2026: known-results-0.3 scores the available measured findings. Missing tests no longer impose score ceilings. It is an unvalidated guide, not a guarantee of safe water.

What is available

• 1,592 active retail community systems in the audited provider inventory, including systems without service-area polygons.
• 1,554 systems with official testing records, drawn from EPA UCMR5, Florida DEP monitoring exports, and reviewed utility reports.
• 245,136 source observations after conservative cross-export deduplication. Dates, locations, units and statistical types remain attached.
• 1,016 ZIP areas supported by Census ZIP approximations and explicit utility-reported ZIP associations where boundaries are missing.
• 59 systems with reviewed utility-report data. This is not a claim that every Florida CCR has been read.
• 813 systems have at least one usable result for the known-results score. Coverage varies: a partial report can score 100. Missing data and test uncertainty appear separately as confidence limitations.

Representative PFOS results

These are reported observations, not a ranking of personal health risk. Plant averages and individual samples are different statistics. Each source and date must be read with the result; none of these values establishes today's concentration at every household tap.

How the statewide process works

EPA registry records establish active community-system identity and distinguish retail systems from wholesalers. EPA service boundaries are intersected with Census ZIP Code Tabulation Areas. The suggested provider uses 2020 housing units at Census block interior points, and remains changeable.

Some systems lack boundaries. Utility-reported EPA ZIP associations fill specific gaps, including the Keys, but do not receive invented housing shares. Where multiple associations lack usable prevalence data, the site asks the visitor to choose a provider. Private wells are outside this public-water site.

The official statewide FDEP chemical export covers 2024. Northwest and Central district files include actual 2023–2025 sample dates; older or raw samples are excluded according to documented filters. The final EPA UCMR5 release provides 2023–2025 PFAS observations and explicit reporting limits. Reviewed 2025 CCRs provide annual statistics for major providers, with dated fallbacks kept visible.

What the 100-point rating can and cannot do

The rating remains an experimental screening index. Its point weights are product choices, not a scientifically validated health-risk model or an EPA score. A score is not a percentage safe. Expert review is required before public promotion.

Individual FDEP chemical samples and monthly disinfectant residuals remain visible but do not replace the averages used for rating. Twelve complete monthly residual averages may produce a clearly labeled calculated calendar-year mean; it is not claimed to be the highest rolling annual average. EPA PFAS samples are benchmark comparisons, not legal violation determinations.

Explicit nondetects retain their reporting thresholds and null numeric values. Database numeric zeros without detection qualifiers do not mean absence. Published contradictions, such as FKAA lead data and some Charlotte/Broward source tables, stay flagged and are excluded from affected calculations. Secondary taste/odor findings are separate from health violations.

Remaining coverage gaps

• Most systems have monitoring data, but the complete latest CCR has not been reviewed for every system.
• Some providers and postal ZIPs lack reliable service-area matching. No boundary or prevalence share is invented.
• Some latest report retrievals remain incomplete, including Collier, Naples and Sarasota; their available official monitoring records are shown.
• One reviewed South Dade report section has an unresolved exact PWS identity and is kept outside the joined dataset.
• Current boil-water notices and a complete statewide enforcement refresh are not connected. Historical report violations are not presented as active advisories.
• Plant-to-household routing and clinical calibration of the rating require additional evidence and review.

Download the evidence

All observations, one CSV in ZIP · Provider CSV files in ZIP · Audited provider inventory · ZIP/provider matching data

Each provider page also offers its own CSV. The data index and provider JSON files keep source notes, exclusions and laboratory thresholds.

Primary sources

• EPA service-area documentation
• EPA water-system registry
• EPA UCMR occurrence data
• Florida DEP chemical data and dictionary
• Florida DEP Northwest 2025 CCR workbook
• Florida DEP Central district datasets
• EPA PFAS rule and proposed changes

Original Tampa Bay pilot findings