2026 Rankings

Infrastructure Risk Rankings 2026 — By ZIP Code

Last updated: June 3, 2026

81.0% HIGHEST RISK Washington, DC
10.0% LOWEST RISK Kissimmee, FL
38,549 ZIP Codes Ranked

Average Pipe Failure Probability by State

Loading map…
Low (<25%) Moderate (25-44%) High (45-64%) Very High (65%+)

Top 15 States

Rank State Avg Score
1 DC 53.4%
2 AK 49.6%
3 IA 47.8%
4 NY 47.4%
5 RI 45.3%
6 NJ 45.2%
7 PA 44.1%
8 MA 43.8%
9 VT 42.9%
10 KS 41.9%
11 OK 41.7%
12 ND 41.6%
13 IL 41.4%
14 WV 40.6%
15 NE 39.8%

Infrastructure Risk Distribution

38,548 total ZIP codes

States with Highest Infrastructure Risk

Eleven of the twenty-five highest-risk ZIP codes in the United States sit inside the borough of Brooklyn, New York — 11204, 11209, 11215, 11220, 11225, 11226, 11228, 11210, 11213, 11203, 11216, 11223, 11229, and 11230 spread across a borough where cast iron water mains were installed during the Roosevelt and Taft administrations and have been patching, not replacing, ever since. Four more cluster in Albany, New York: 12202, 12209, 12206, and 12210. And at the very top of the risk list, above every other ZIP code in the country, is Washington, DC: postal code 20317, failure probability 81.0%.

Welcome to the 2026 Infrastructure Risk Rankings. We analyzed 38,549 ZIP codes using federal and engineering data — EPA Safe Drinking Water Information System violation records, American Community Survey housing vintage data on the share of housing units built before 1980, state-level infrastructure funding gaps from the American Society of Civil Engineers, and EPA lead exposure records — and combined them into a single pipe failure probability score from 0% to 100%. The result is a ranking that answers one question: which U.S. ZIP codes face the highest modeled probability that their water delivery infrastructure will fail, leak, or degrade service in the near term.

What the data reveals. The geography of America's highest-risk ZIP codes follows the industrial waterline of the nineteenth century. The ZIP codes occupying the top of this list are not random accidents of data collection — they are the postal boundaries of cities whose water infrastructure was laid before the automobile, maintained through the Depression, and then left substantially in place as population and tax revenue declined after 1970. Brooklyn's water mains trace to the 1880s and 1890s; Albany's distribution system was substantially built out before World War II; Washington DC's oldest transmission lines include cast iron pipes dating to the Civil War era. When deindustrialization hollowed out the tax base of Northeastern and Rust Belt cities in the 1970s and 1980s, the capital investment that would have replaced those mains never materialized. What remained were aging pipes under streets that carry the full daily water demand of dense urban populations — with a funding gap per capita of $1,196 in New York and $2,320 in the District of Columbia.

The bottom of the list is just as revealing. The twenty-five lowest-risk ZIP codes are concentrated in communities that did not exist, or barely existed, before 1980. Kissimmee, Florida appears three times — 34759, 34747, and 34758 — representing master-planned subdivisions platted from orange groves in the 1980s and 1990s. North Port, Florida adds four more: 34286, 34291, 34289, and 34288 — a city incorporated in 1959 whose major residential buildout came decades later, with PVC and ductile iron pipe replacing the materials that define the risk leaders. The Villages (32163, 32162) and two Tampa subdivisions (33647, 33626) complete Florida's near-sweep of the safest tier. These communities share a common trait: their infrastructure funding gap per capita is $505, their housing stock is almost entirely post-1980, and their water systems have accumulated minimal violation history. Florida, Virginia, Tennessee, Texas, and Nevada dominate the low-risk table for the same underlying reason: post-1980 construction is simply newer pipe.

How to read this ranking. The failure probability shown here is a modeled estimate derived from structural and compliance inputs — it is not a measured failure rate or a real-time monitoring feed. A ZIP code scored at 74% is not guaranteed to experience a main break this year; it means that the combination of housing age, infrastructure funding shortfall, violation history, and lead exposure data for that area produces a risk profile consistent with systems that historically fail at elevated rates. The score tells you where structural vulnerability is concentrated. If you are evaluating a property, the ranking tells you which neighborhood warrants questions to the local utility about capital replacement schedules, line material, and recent repair history. If you are already living in one of these areas, the data is a starting point — not a final answer.

What this ranking does not tell you. It does not assess the condition of the private service line that runs from the street main to your building's meter — that segment is the homeowner's or landlord's responsibility in most jurisdictions, and its material (lead, galvanized steel, copper, or plastic) is not captured in this dataset. It does not measure the plumbing inside your walls. It does not account for utility-specific capital improvement programs that may have already replaced the highest-risk segments in a given ZIP code. And because infrastructure funding gap data is reported at the state level and apportioned by housing vintage, two ZIP codes with identical scores may face meaningfully different actual conditions depending on local utility investment. A score here is a flag for further investigation, not a substitute for it. See the rankings methodology for the full treatment.

38,549 ZIP codes analyzed · Data last refreshed 2026-04-12

38,549 ZIP codes analyzed · Worst score: 81.0%

25 Worst ZIP Codes

# ZIP Code City State Failure Prob. Risk Level Infra Gap/Capita
1 20317 Washington DC 81.0% very-high $2,320
2 12202 Albany NY 76.0% very-high $1,196
3 12209 Albany NY 76.0% very-high $1,196
4 12206 Albany NY 75.0% very-high $1,196
5 12210 Albany NY 75.0% very-high $1,196
6 11204 Brooklyn NY 74.0% very-high $1,196
7 11209 Brooklyn NY 74.0% very-high $1,196
8 11215 Brooklyn NY 74.0% very-high $1,196
9 11220 Brooklyn NY 74.0% very-high $1,196
10 11225 Brooklyn NY 74.0% very-high $1,196
11 11226 Brooklyn NY 74.0% very-high $1,196
12 11228 Brooklyn NY 74.0% very-high $1,196
13 19083 Havertown PA 74.0% very-high $1,042
14 20015 Washington DC 74.0% very-high $2,320
15 39210 Jackson MS 74.0% very-high $914
16 99677 Tatitlek AK 74.0% very-high $2,160
17 11210 Brooklyn NY 73.0% very-high $1,196
18 11213 Brooklyn NY 73.0% very-high $1,196
19 12010 Amsterdam NY 73.0% very-high $1,196
20 11203 Brooklyn NY 72.0% very-high $1,196
21 11216 Brooklyn NY 72.0% very-high $1,196
22 11223 Brooklyn NY 72.0% very-high $1,196
23 11229 Brooklyn NY 72.0% very-high $1,196
24 11230 Brooklyn NY 72.0% very-high $1,196
25 13138 Pompey NY 72.0% very-high $1,196

25 Best ZIP Codes

# ZIP Code City State Failure Prob. Risk Level Infra Gap/Capita
1 34759 Kissimmee FL 10.0% low $505
2 34747 Kissimmee FL 10.0% low $505
3 34286 North Port FL 10.0% low $505
4 32163 The Villages FL 10.0% low $505
5 20136 Bristow VA 10.0% low $636
6 92350 Loma Linda CA 11.0% low $658
7 37614 Johnson City TN 11.0% low $668
8 34758 Kissimmee FL 11.0% low $505
9 34291 North Port FL 11.0% low $505
10 34289 North Port FL 11.0% low $505
11 34288 North Port FL 11.0% low $505
12 33647 Tampa FL 11.0% low $505
13 33626 Tampa FL 11.0% low $505
14 32162 The Villages FL 11.0% low $505
15 20105 Aldie VA 11.0% low $636
16 89034 Mesquite NV 12.0% low $861
17 75126 Forney TX 12.0% low $622
18 75078 Prosper TX 12.0% low $622
19 38677 University MS 12.0% low $505
20 38029 Ellendale TN 12.0% low $505
21 38021 Crockett Mills TN 12.0% low $505
22 37732 Elgin TN 12.0% low $505
23 37719 Coalfield TN 12.0% low $505
24 36313 Bellwood AL 12.0% low $505
25 35052 Cook Springs AL 12.0% low $505

Rankings by State

State ZIP Codes
Texas 2,543
California 2,335
New York 2,050
Pennsylvania 1,998
Illinois 1,538
Florida 1,368
Ohio 1,363
Michigan 1,109
Missouri 1,086
Virginia 1,022
North Carolina 1,016
Iowa 995
Minnesota 923
Indiana 920
Georgia 874
Wisconsin 840
West Virginia 813
Kentucky 790
Alabama 765
Oklahoma 756
Kansas 725
Tennessee 699
Washington 688
New Jersey 653
Arkansas 642

Methodology

Infrastructure risk scores are based on pipe failure probability, calculated from state infrastructure funding gaps per capita, housing vintage (pre-1980 percentage), water system violation counts, enforcement actions, and lead exposure data. Data sources: EPA SDWIS, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), American Community Survey.

Last updated: 2026-06-03.

Frequently Asked Questions

How are these rankings calculated?

Rankings are based on federal agency data including EPA, FEMA, USGS, and PHMSA. Each ZIP code receives a score based on the specific risk factors for this category. See the methodology section above for details.

How often are rankings updated?

Rankings are regenerated quarterly using the latest available data. The date shown reflects the most recent update.

Explore More 2026 Rankings

See Also

How this ranking is calculated, data sources, and limitations: Rankings Methodology →


Related Rankings

Lead Risk 2026 Old pipes are the primary lead source Water Safety 2026 Infrastructure age affects water quality Home Safety 2026 Infrastructure in overall safety score
Disclaimer: Rankings are based on EPA, FEMA, and federal agency data. They reflect historical patterns and risk indicators, not necessarily current conditions. For the most current information, contact your local water utility or request a Consumer Confidence Report.

Attribution link required. Data updated quarterly.

Get safety alerts

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.