Connecticut Water Systems Serving the Most Disadvantaged Populations — 2026

Connecticut community water utilities serving populations with the highest combined percent of non-white residents and households below 200% of the Federal Poverty Level (Census ACS 2019-2023, aggregated via EPA CWS Service Area Boundaries v3).

41 Systems
ranked
22,183 PWSIDs
with demographic data
2019-23 Census ACS
vintage
EPA v3 CWS service area
boundaries (March 2026)
How to read this list Systems serving the highest combined percent of non-white residents and households below 200% of the Federal Poverty Level. Within-size-class percentiles are used to neutralize the confound of system size. A cap of five systems per state is applied to produce a nationally-representative list. See the methodology page for calculation details.

These 41 Connecticut water utilities serve populations with the highest combined percent of non-white residents and households below 200% of the Federal Poverty Level. Within-size-class percentile rankings neutralize the confound of system size; no geographic cap is applied at the state level because all utilities are within a single state.

RankWater SystemStatePop servedEquity score% PoC served% Below 200% FPLUnresolved violations
1 Waterbury Water Department Connecticut 107,884 87 69% 45%
2 Windham Water Works Connecticut 21,377 87 50% 48%
3 New Britain Water Department Connecticut 68,375 82 58% 38%
4 New London Dept. of Public Utilities Connecticut 26,517 80.2 55% 38%
5 Meriden Water Division Connecticut 55,394 74.1 51% 34%
6 Danbury Water Department Connecticut 61,746 69.4 59% 29%
7 Norwich Public Utilities Connecticut 34,847 68.7 43% 33%
8 South Norwalk Electric & Water Connecticut 50,030 62.2 60% 23%
9 Manchester Water Department Connecticut 53,222 61.2 45% 27%
10 Middletown Water Department Connecticut 42,102 58 35% 28%
11 Groton Utilities Connecticut 27,653 55.6 33% 28%
12 Torrington Water Company Connecticut 27,280 53.2 27% 30%
13 Metropolitan District Commission Connecticut 303,545 52.9 57% 28%
14 Norwalk First Taxing District Connecticut 49,511 52.6 50% 19%
15 Bristol Water Department Connecticut 45,530 48.6 35% 22%
16 Bethel Water Department Connecticut 10,524 46.3 36% 20%
17 Regional Water Authority Connecticut 361,784 45.3 47% 29%
18 Montville Water Supply Connecticut 3,684 44.8 32% 21%
19 Ctwc - Naugatuck Region-Central System Connecticut 24,705 44.8 36% 19%
20 Putnam Water Pollution Control Authority Connecticut 6,713 44.6 16% 31%
21 Watertown Water & Sewer Authority Connecticut 14,938 37.4 28% 17%
22 Ctwc - Northern Reg-Western System Connecticut 95,747 36.6 27% 18%
23 Hazardville Water Company Connecticut 17,379 36.2 24% 19%
24 Ledyard Wpca, Gales Ferry System Connecticut 3,740 36.2 25% 19%
25 Ctwc - Gallup System Connecticut 3,723 35.2 12% 28%
26 Aquarion-Eastern Fairfield County Connecticut 471,577 35.1 46% 23%
27 Cromwell Fire District Water Department Connecticut 6,948 34.6 26% 17%
28 Winsted Water Works Connecticut 5,821 32.6 13% 25%
29 Ctwc - Unionville System Connecticut 20,323 31.8 30% 12%
30 Waterford Wpca Connecticut 18,938 28.6 19% 17%
31 Ctwc - Naugatuck Reg-Terryville System Connecticut 3,992 28 15% 20%
32 Watertown Fire District Connecticut 5,858 27.5 20% 15%
33 Jewett City Water Company Connecticut 5,001 26.3 11% 23%
34 Avon Water Company Connecticut 13,162 26.2 26% 9%
35 Wallingford Water Department Connecticut 38,446 24.8 20% 13%
36 East Lyme Water & Sewer Commission Connecticut 13,256 21.5 18% 12%
37 Aquarion-Ridgefield Connecticut 9,622 19.2 17% 11%
38 Portland Water Department Connecticut 4,995 17.6 12% 15%
39 Ctwc - Shoreline Region-Guilford System Connecticut 35,346 15.9 14% 12%
40 Southington Water Department Connecticut 28,906 15.3 14% 11%
41 Berlin Water Control Commission Connecticut 4,116 14.8 14% 10% 1

How to read this ranking

Each row links to a full utility profile with violation history, lead testing results, and service-area ZIPs. The demographic context columns are from independent data sources (ACS, not EJScreen) and are provided for readers who want to examine equity patterns alongside the operational data.

See the full methodology for calculation details, data vintages, and known limitations.

Frequently asked questions

What does the "equity score" mean?

A 0-100 composite that combines two within-size-class percentile ranks: (1) percent of population served that is non-white (Census ACS B03002), and (2) percent below 200 percent of the Federal Poverty Level (Census ACS C17002). Within-size-class comparison (small, medium, large) is used because small rural systems and large urban systems have structurally different demographic profiles; mixing them in a single ranking produces a methodologically weak list dominated by size rather than disparity.

Why is the list capped at 5 systems per state?

Without a cap, the list concentrates in states with large numbers of historically disadvantaged small-to-medium systems (Texas, California). A geographic diversity cap produces a more nationally-representative snapshot. Per-state rankings, if available, show the full within-state comparison without a cap.

Does this claim discrimination?

No. It reports a demographic fact: these water utilities serve populations that are more non-white and lower-income than the national median, after controlling for system size. Causation — why that pattern exists — is a separate research question requiring different data and methods.

ZipCheckup is an independent public-data tool. We are a referral service and do not provide water testing, remediation, or utility services. Rankings reflect publicly-available federal data and are provided for informational purposes. For issues with your specific water system, contact your local water utility or state drinking water program.

Get safety alerts for Connecticut

Free updates when EPA data changes for this area. No spam.

Unsubscribe anytime. Privacy Policy.

Share This Page

X Facebook
Check your water filter options Free tool — no phone call required.