Worst Infrastructure: Minneapolis Metro — 2026

Out of 71 ZIP codes with infrastructure data in the Minneapolis metro area, these areas face the highest estimated risk of water pipe failure based on infrastructure age, funding gaps, and violation history.

Statistic	Value
ZIP codes ranked	71
Highest risk	56%
Median risk	41%
Average risk	39%

Top 71 Highest Risk ZIP Codes

Rank	ZIP Code	City	State	Pipe Failure Risk	Risk Level	Safety Score
1	55409	Minneapolis	MN	56%	High	68/100
2	55407	Minneapolis	MN	54%	High	63/100
3	55412	Minneapolis	MN	54%	High	68/100
4	55419	Minneapolis	MN	54%	High	63/100
5	55417	Minneapolis	MN	53%	High	63/100
6	55402	Minneapolis	MN	52%	High	63/100
7	55405	Minneapolis	MN	52%	High	68/100
8	55406	Minneapolis	MN	52%	High	68/100
9	55410	Minneapolis	MN	51%	High	63/100
10	55418	Minneapolis	MN	51%	High	68/100
11	55411	Minneapolis	MN	50%	High	68/100
12	55424	Minneapolis	MN	49%	High	63/100
13	55408	Minneapolis	MN	48%	High	68/100
14	53073	Plymouth	WI	47%	High	76/100
15	55422	Minneapolis	MN	47%	High	63/100
16	55403	Minneapolis	MN	46%	High	68/100
17	55404	Minneapolis	MN	46%	High	68/100
18	55413	Minneapolis	MN	46%	High	68/100
19	55423	Minneapolis	MN	46%	High	63/100
20	55430	Minneapolis	MN	46%	High	68/100
21	55420	Minneapolis	MN	45%	High	68/100
22	55426	Minneapolis	MN	45%	High	63/100
23	55429	Minneapolis	MN	45%	High	68/100
24	55421	Minneapolis	MN	44%	High	68/100
25	55427	Minneapolis	MN	44%	High	63/100
26	55428	Minneapolis	MN	44%	High	63/100
27	55431	Minneapolis	MN	44%	High	68/100
28	55432	Minneapolis	MN	43%	High	76/100
29	55439	Minneapolis	MN	43%	High	68/100
30	55454	Minneapolis	MN	43%	High	64/100
31	55425	Minneapolis	MN	42%	High	64/100
32	55436	Minneapolis	MN	42%	High	63/100
33	55437	Minneapolis	MN	42%	High	63/100
34	55444	Minneapolis	MN	42%	High	68/100
35	55416	Minneapolis	MN	41%	High	63/100
36	55435	Minneapolis	MN	41%	High	63/100
37	55438	Minneapolis	MN	41%	High	68/100
38	55447	Minneapolis	MN	41%	High	68/100
39	53804	Bloomington	WI	38%	Moderate	65/100
40	55441	Minneapolis	MN	38%	Moderate	63/100
41	55414	Minneapolis	MN	37%	Moderate	68/100
42	55433	Minneapolis	MN	37%	Moderate	81/100
43	55434	Minneapolis	MN	36%	Moderate	81/100
44	55448	Minneapolis	MN	36%	Moderate	81/100
45	55401	Minneapolis	MN	33%	Moderate	68/100
46	55442	Minneapolis	MN	32%	Moderate	68/100
47	55443	Minneapolis	MN	32%	Moderate	68/100
48	55445	Minneapolis	MN	31%	Moderate	68/100
49	55440	Minneapolis	MN	30%	Moderate	64/100
50	55450	Minneapolis	MN	30%	Moderate	64/100
51	55458	Minneapolis	MN	30%	Moderate	64/100
52	55459	Minneapolis	MN	30%	Moderate	64/100
53	55460	Minneapolis	MN	30%	Moderate	64/100
54	55467	Minneapolis	MN	30%	Moderate	64/100
55	55470	Minneapolis	MN	30%	Moderate	64/100
56	55472	Minneapolis	MN	30%	Moderate	64/100
57	55473	Minneapolis	MN	30%	Moderate	64/100
58	55474	Minneapolis	MN	30%	Moderate	64/100
59	55478	Minneapolis	MN	30%	Moderate	64/100
60	55479	Minneapolis	MN	30%	Moderate	64/100
61	55480	Minneapolis	MN	30%	Moderate	64/100
62	55483	Minneapolis	MN	30%	Moderate	64/100
63	55484	Minneapolis	MN	30%	Moderate	64/100
64	55485	Minneapolis	MN	30%	Moderate	64/100
65	55486	Minneapolis	MN	30%	Moderate	64/100
66	55487	Minneapolis	MN	30%	Moderate	68/100
67	55488	Minneapolis	MN	30%	Moderate	64/100
68	55415	Minneapolis	MN	26%	Moderate	64/100
69	55446	Minneapolis	MN	23%	Moderate	68/100
70	55449	Minneapolis	MN	23%	Moderate	81/100
71	55455	Minneapolis	MN	20%	Low	64/100

Methodology

Infrastructure risk rankings combine four data sources, each weighted equally (25%): (1) EPA Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey (DWINS 2023) — state-level 20-year funding gap per capita for pipe replacement, treatment, and storage; (2) Census ACS housing vintage — percentage of homes built before 1980, when lead solder and galvanized pipes were common; (3) EPA SDWIS violation and enforcement data — system-level compliance history; (4) Lead and Copper Rule indicators — service line material inventories and 90th percentile lead testing results. The combined score is normalized to a 0-100% probability scale.

Data sources: EPA DWINS 2023, Census ACS, EPA SDWIS, Lead and Copper Rule data. Last updated: 2026-06-04.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does pipe failure probability mean?

Pipe failure probability estimates the likelihood of water main breaks, lead contamination from corroded pipes, or service disruptions based on infrastructure age, state funding gaps, violation history, and lead indicators. It is not a prediction of imminent failure, but a risk assessment based on known factors.

How is infrastructure risk calculated?

The risk score combines four equally weighted factors: state-level infrastructure funding gap per capita (from EPA DWINS 2023), housing vintage (Census ACS pre-1980 housing percentage), water system violation and enforcement history (EPA SDWIS), and lead exposure indicators (service line probability and testing results).

What can homeowners do about aging infrastructure?

Test your tap water annually, especially for lead. Check if your home has a lead service line through your water utility. Consider a whole-house water filter (NSF/ANSI 53 certified). Review your water system Consumer Confidence Report for violation history.

Does high risk mean my water is unsafe right now?

Not necessarily. Infrastructure risk indicates long-term vulnerability, not current contamination. However, areas with aging pipes and high violation counts have a statistically higher chance of water quality issues. Regular testing is the best way to verify your water safety.