Skip to main content
WaterVerge

Water quality report · updated Jul 2026

Is Administrative Contact, CO Tap Water Safe to Drink?

Graded F, with 87 unresolved violations on record. See what was cited — and what it means for your tap. What to do ↓

0 contaminants over a legal limit
2.8 ppb lead, 90th percentile · low
87 unresolved violations
4K people served by 2 water systems

PWSID CO0123133 · high data confidence · local government utility

Reviewed by WaterVerge Editorial Team · Last updated July 2026
F 43.2 / 100

#214 of 244Colorado cities
How we grade →

01The verdict: is Administrative Contact water safe?

Administrative Contact's drinking water has significant quality concerns based on EPA testing data. With a grade of F (43.2/100), the system has issues across multiple categories. A water filter is recommended for all residents. The city's 2 water systems serve approximately 4,161 residents using surface water (rivers, lakes, or reservoirs).

The concern

87 unresolved violations on record

EPA records show open compliance items for this system. Most are administrative, but unresolved items are worth watching.

See what was cited ↓
The good news

Lead is well under the limit

90th-percentile lead is 2.8 ppb — beneath the 15 ppb federal action level and under the 5 ppb watch threshold.

See the trend ↓
Keep watching

lithium is approaching its limit

Measured at 54.0000 µg/L — 120% of the 0.004 µg/L limit. Within the rules, but with less headroom than you'd want.

See the ledger ↓

Administrative Contact's drinking water received a grade of F (43.2 out of 100), indicating failing water quality. The city's 2 water systems serve approximately 4,161 residents using surface water.

Lead levels were measured at 2.8 ppb (90th percentile), well within EPA limits. UCMR 5 testing detected 1 PFAS compound in the water supply. The system has 383 violations on record, including 9 health-based violations. 87 remain unresolved.

Administrative Contact ranks #214 out of 244 cities in Colorado for water quality, placing it among the lowest-rated in the state. The city draws from surface water sources, which are more susceptible to seasonal runoff and agricultural contamination, requiring extensive multi-barrier treatment including coagulation, filtration, and disinfection. PFAS compounds were detected in testing, though levels remain within current EPA limits. Residents seeking extra precaution may consider an activated carbon or reverse osmosis filter. The system has seen 141 violations in the past five years, suggesting a pattern of compliance challenges that residents should monitor closely.

How the 43.2/100 breaks down Methodology →
ViolationsHistorical violation record including health-based and monitoring violations.
0 / 45F
Lead & CopperLead at 2.8 ppb (90th percentile).
20 / 20A
Contaminants1 PFAS compound detected.
14.2 / 20C
ComplianceMonitoring and reporting compliance with EPA regulations.
5 / 10D
Source RiskWater source: Surface water.
4 / 5B

02What's in Administrative Contact's water

Every contaminant flagged in Administrative Contact, on one shared scale: distance to its own legal limit. The red line is the limit — anything past it is out of compliance, and the closer a bar gets, the less headroom the system has.

3 detections · sorted by % of legal limit
Over the limit Elevated — watch Within limits
0 50% LEGAL LIMIT 150%
lithium PFAS / Forever Chemical
54.0000 µg/L 120% of limit
Lithium Inorganic
54.0 µg/L 90% of limit
32 contaminants tested under EPA SDWIS, LCR and UCMR programs · 3 detected

Full contaminants report

Contaminant Detected Level EPA Limit Unit Category Status
Lead (90th percentile) 2.8 15 ppb Inorganic Safe
11Cl-PF3OUdS ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
4:2 FTS ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
6:2 FTS ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
8:2 FTS ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
9Cl-PF3ONS ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
ADONA ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
HFPO-DA ND 0.01 µg/L PFAS Not Detected
lithium 54.000 HI µg/L PFAS Detected
NEtFOSAA ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
NFDHA ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
NMeFOSAA ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
PFBA ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
PFBS ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
PFDA ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
PFDoA ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
PFEESA ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
PFHpA ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
PFHpS ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
PFHxA ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
PFHxS ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
PFMBA ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
PFMPA ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
PFNA ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
PFOA ND 0.004 µg/L PFAS Not Detected
PFOS ND 0.004 µg/L PFAS Not Detected
PFPeA ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
PFPeS ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
PFTA ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
PFTrDA ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
PFUnA ND HI µg/L PFAS Not Detected
Data source: EPA SDWIS, UCMR 5, local utility CCR.

03Administrative Contact's ten-year track record

Each box is one year. A green check means no EPA violations; a numbered badge counts that year's violations — red if any were health-based, amber if they were monitoring or paperwork issues. The system has 383 violations on record, including 9 health-based violations. 87 remain unresolved.

1 of the last ten years was clean. The numbered years had EPA violations — red when any were health-based, amber when they were paperwork or missed-testing issues.

6 health-based in 10 yrs 287 monitoring & paperwork 78 still unresolved
PFAS1 PFAS "forever chemical" compound detectedDetected at levels within current EPA limits. PFAS persist indefinitely in the environment.
UpdateWater quality data updatedLatest EPA compliance and testing data incorporated into Administrative Contact's water quality assessment. Grade: F (43.2/100).
Violation1 drinking water violation recordedContaminants: Public Notice.Open
Violation1 drinking water violation recordedContaminants: Public Notice.Open
Violation5 drinking water violations recordedContaminants: Public Notice, Chlorine, Revised Total Coliform Rule.Open
Lead, 90th percentileppb · lower is better
020406080EPA action level · 15 ppb1993 — 5 ppb1994 — 5 ppb1995 — 5 ppb1996 — 5 ppb1998 — 10 ppb1999 — 7 ppb2001 — 5 ppb2004 — 2.3 ppb2007 — 2 ppb2010 — 5 ppb2013 — 58 ppb2015 — 4 ppb2016 — 5.3 ppb2017 — 0.50 ppb2018 — 1.9 ppb2019 — 11 ppb2020 — 12 ppb2021 — 0 ppb2022 — 0 ppb2023 — 0 ppb2025 — 0 ppb5019931999201320192025

Down 5 ppb since 1993. Latest reading: 0 ppb (2025) — 0% of the action level. Sampled at higher-risk homes (90th percentile).

04Where Administrative Contact's water comes from

Administrative Contact's drinking water comes primarily from surface water sources such as rivers, lakes, or reservoirs.

Source

Surface Water

Rivers, lakes, or reservoirs — more exposed to runoff, agriculture, and seasonal swings than groundwater.

Treatment

Local treatment

Multi-barrier treatment: coagulation, sedimentation, filtration, and disinfection to meet EPA standards.

Distribution

2 systems

2 water systems, operated under local government ownership.

Delivery

4,161 people

Residents served across Administrative Contact's service area.

Surface water systems require multi-stage treatment including coagulation, sedimentation, filtration, and disinfection to meet EPA Safe Drinking Water Act standards. These sources can be impacted by seasonal changes, stormwater runoff, upstream agriculture, and industrial discharge. The system is operated by local government ownership and serves approximately 4,161 people through 2 water systems.

System namePWSIDPopulationSource
BATTLEMENT MESA MD CO0123133 4,100 Surface Water
HARTMAN TOWN OF CO0150500 61 Groundwater

05Pressure on Administrative Contact's watershed

Outside forces that shape what reaches the treatment plant. None of these is a verdict on the tap by itself — but each adds pressure worth knowing about.

Drought

D4 — exceptional drought

Garfield County is in D4 (exceptional drought) per the U.S. Drought Monitor (week of Jul 2026). Drought can raise disinfection-byproduct levels and taste/odor issues as utilities draw from lower reservoirs.

Current streak at D2+ severity23 wks
Weeks at D2+ in the last 5 years23 wks
Months in D2+ over the last 30 years34.1%

06How Administrative Contact compares

Scores for nearby Colorado cities on one line, with the average marked.

Fort Collins
46.8 · D
Administrative Contact (this city)
43.2 · F
Denver
39.6 · F
Aurora
38.1 · F
Lakewood
36.9 · F

dashed line = Colorado average (45/100)

Administrative Contact scores 43.2/100on par with the Colorado average of 45/100. It outscores 5 of 10 nearby cities. Full Colorado rankings →

Garfield water quality rankings
Compare all cities in the county — grades, violations, and contaminant data side by side.

07What to do at home

Steps matched to what testing actually found in Administrative Contact's water — not generic advice.

Because of pfas

Filter drinking & cooking water

Activated carbon or reverse osmosis filter. 1 PFAS compound detected

Compare tested filters →
Know your report

Read your utility's annual report

Every utility must publish a yearly Consumer Confidence Report with its own testing results. It pairs well with the independent data on this page.

How to read a CCR →
Stay informed

Watch for Administrative Contact alerts

We refresh EPA data monthly and surface new violations, advisories, and boil-water notices for your county on this page.

All water alerts →

Frequently asked questions

Is Administrative Contact, CO tap water safe to drink?

Administrative Contact's water quality earned a grade of F (43.2/100). Significant issues have been found. A water filter is strongly recommended. The city ranks #214 out of 244 cities tested in Colorado.

What contaminants are in Administrative Contact's water?

Lead was measured at 2.8 ppb (90th percentile). 1 PFAS compound was detected. 383 violations are on record.

How is Administrative Contact's water quality grade calculated?

The grade is based on four factors: violation history (40%), lead and copper levels (25%), PFAS contamination (25%), and regulatory compliance (10%). The score is also adjusted based on how complete the available data is. See our methodology page for full details.

Do I need a water filter in Administrative Contact?

PFAS compounds have been detected. A filter with activated carbon can help reduce exposure.

Where does Administrative Contact's water come from?

Administrative Contact's water is sourced from Surface water. The city has 2 water systems serving approximately 4,161 residents.

What health violations has Administrative Contact's water system had?

Administrative Contact has 9 health-based violations on record. The most recent violation was recorded in December 2025. Health-based violations mean the water exceeded EPA maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for a regulated substance. 87 violations remain unresolved.

How does Administrative Contact's water compare to other cities?

Administrative Contact ranks #214 out of 244 cities in Colorado (better than 12% of state cities) and #14315 out of 15382 cities nationally (7th percentile). The grade of F reflects the combined assessment of violation history, lead and copper levels, PFAS contamination, and regulatory compliance.

Share this reportHelp others learn about their water quality
WhatsAppXFacebookLinkedInEmail
Sources: EPA SDWIS & ECHO · UCMR 3–5 · Lead & Copper Rule samples · EPA TRI · U.S. Drought Monitor · FEMA declarations. Data last updated Jul 2026. Analysis by the WaterVerge Editorial Team · methodology.