Bromodichloromethane
- Reported average
- 2.90 ppb
- EWG guideline
- 0.06 ppb
- Legal limit (EWG report)
- No legal limit
Local water. Clear information.
Contaminants Detected in Twin Cities Tap Water
Everyone deserves access to cleaner water — and understandable information about it. Explore Environmental Working Group’s reports for Minneapolis and Saint Paul as a starting point for informed, affordable treatment decisions.
EWG reporting period: 2015–2024
19
Contaminants detected
10
Above EWG health guidelines
EWG health guidelines are not enforceable drinking-water limits. A detection or guideline exceedance does not, by itself, establish a legal violation or the quality of water at your tap.
Contaminants above EWG health guidelines
Utility-level averages as presented by EWG; sampling windows vary by contaminant. Not a current household water test.
Chloroform
- Reported average
- 13.5 ppb
- EWG guideline
- 0.4 ppb
- Legal limit (EWG report)
- No legal limit
Chromium (hexavalent)
- Reported average
- 0.310 ppb
- EWG guideline
- 0.02 ppb
- Legal limit (EWG report)
- No legal limit
Dibromochloromethane
- Reported average
- 0.306 ppb
- EWG guideline
- 0.1 ppb
- Legal limit (EWG report)
- No legal limit
Dichloroacetic acid
- Reported average
- 11.5 ppb
- EWG guideline
- 0.2 ppb
- Legal limit (EWG report)
- No legal limit
Haloacetic acids (HAA5)
- Reported average
- 15.4 ppb
- EWG guideline
- 0.1 ppb
- Legal limit (EWG report)
- 60 ppb
Haloacetic acids (HAA9)
- Reported average
- 20.4 ppb
- EWG guideline
- 0.06 ppb
- Legal limit (EWG report)
- No legal limit
Nitrate
- Reported average
- 0.892 ppm
- EWG guideline
- 0.14 ppm
- Legal limit (EWG report)
- 10 ppm
Total trihalomethanes (TTHMs)
- Reported average
- 16.7 ppb
- EWG guideline
- 0.15 ppb
- Legal limit (EWG report)
- 80 ppb
Trichloroacetic acid
- Reported average
- 3.16 ppb
- EWG guideline
- 0.1 ppb
- Legal limit (EWG report)
- No legal limit
Other contaminants detected
Listed separately in EWG’s utility report; detection does not automatically mean a health guideline was exceeded.
- Fluoride
- Manganese
- Molybdenum
- Monochloroacetic acid
- Perfluorobutanoic acid (PFBA)
- Perfluorohexanoic Acid (PFHxA)
- Perfluoropentanoic acid (PFPeA)
- Strontium
- Vanadium
ppb = parts per billion; ppm = parts per million; ppt = parts per trillion. “No legal limit” means none is listed for that individual contaminant in this EWG report; group limits may still apply. It does not mean the contaminant is harmless. Limits shown reflect EWG’s report and may not reflect subsequent regulatory changes.
Source: Environmental Working Group, Tap Water Database. Retrieved October 18, 2026. Saved reference data, not live monitoring. Minnesota Water Pros is not affiliated with or endorsed by EWG.
Put the numbers in context
A utility report isn’t a test of your home.
EWG compiles utility testing supplied by the Minnesota Department of Health and federal compliance information. The reporting periods differ, and individual contaminant averages can cover different sampling years.
Both EWG reports state that the utilities met federal health-based drinking-water standards for April–June 2024, the latest quarter assessed in those reports. This is historical context, not a statement about compliance today.
The detected counts include individual chemicals and overlapping groups, such as haloacetic acids and total trihalomethanes. They are report entries, not counts of distinct chemicals. Home plumbing can also affect tap water.
What does this mean for your water?
Does exceeding an EWG guideline mean my water is illegal or unsafe?
Not automatically. EWG’s health guidelines are separate from enforceable drinking-water limits and are often lower. These historical utility figures alone cannot establish a legal violation, diagnose your water’s safety, or predict an individual health outcome.
Are these results for my ZIP code or private well?
No. These are reports for the two named public utilities, not ZIP-specific or address-specific test results. Nearby communities may use different utilities. Private wells require their own testing; city-water reports do not describe well water.
Which treatment may be worth exploring?
Activated carbon and reverse osmosis may be worth exploring for particular concerns, but performance depends on the specific system, its documented contaminant reductions, water conditions and maintenance. Softening primarily addresses hardness; it is not a blanket contaminant-removal solution. Review your utility report or current test results before selecting equipment.
How can I check another utility or more recent results?
Use EWG’s Tap Water Database to find your actual water supplier, then review that supplier’s latest annual drinking-water quality report. For questions specific to your home or a private well, arrange appropriate laboratory testing.
Cleaner water, with pricing you can understand.
Start with your water source and the concerns you want to address. Compare installed package pricing, then discuss the documented treatment capabilities and ongoing costs for your home.
Compare installed pricesYour next step
toward better water.
Tell us what you're noticing. We'll help you explore the next step for your home.
Request a Consultation