Skip to main content
WaterVerge

Water quality report · updated Jul 2026

Is Reading, MA Tap Water Safe to Drink?

Graded A- — but Chlorate was detected above EPA limits. Here's what's in the water and how to remove it. What to do ↓

1 contaminant over a legal limit
8.4 ppb lead, 90th percentile
1 unresolved violation
27K people served by 1 water system

PWSID MA3246000 · high data confidence · local government utility

Reviewed by WaterVerge Editorial Team · Last updated July 2026
A 85.5 / 100

#101 of 269Massachusetts cities
How we grade →

01The verdict: is Reading water safe?

Reading's tap water meets most EPA standards but has areas that warrant attention. With a grade of A- (85.5/100), some contaminant levels or compliance issues suggest that residents may benefit from additional filtration. The city's 1 water system serves approximately 27,358 residents using surface water (rivers, lakes, or reservoirs).

The concern

Chlorate is over its legal limit

Measured at 307.0 µg/L against the EPA Lifetime HA of 210 µg/L. The ledger below shows how far over — and which filter removes it.

See the measurement ↓
The good news

No forever chemicals detected

UCMR 5 laboratory testing found no PFAS compounds above detection thresholds in this system.

See PFAS results ↓
Keep watching

1 violation in the last five years

Recent compliance history is the best predictor of future problems — the year-by-year record is below.

See the record ↓

Reading's drinking water received a grade of A- (85.5 out of 100), indicating good water quality. The city's 1 water system serves approximately 27,358 residents using purchased surface water.

Lead levels were measured at 8.4 ppb (90th percentile), which is within EPA limits but above recommended levels. PFAS testing under UCMR 5 found no detectable forever chemicals. The system has 4 violations on record, including 1 health-based violation. 1 remains unresolved.

Reading ranks #101 out of 269 cities in Massachusetts for water quality, placing it mid-range 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. Hexavalent chromium (chromium-6) was detected at 0.05 µg/L in UCMR 3 testing. While below California's 10 µg/L limit and with no federal MCL set, residents sensitive to this contaminant may consider reverse osmosis filtration. While lead levels are within EPA limits, they are above the recommended 5 ppb threshold that health organizations consider ideal. A point-of-use filter adds an extra layer of protection.

How the 85.5/100 breaks down Methodology →
ViolationsHistorical violation record including health-based and monitoring violations.
43.5 / 45A
Lead & CopperLead at 8.4 ppb (90th percentile).
16 / 20B
ContaminantsNo PFAS compounds detected.
17.1 / 20B
ComplianceMonitoring and reporting compliance with EPA regulations.
5 / 10D
Source RiskWater source: Purchased surface water.
4 / 5B

02What's in Reading's water

Every contaminant flagged in Reading, 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.

6 detections · sorted by % of legal limit
Over the limit Elevated — watch Within limits
0 50% LEGAL LIMIT 150%
Chlorate Disinfection Byproduct
307.0 µg/L 120% of limit
Manganese Inorganic
8.0 µg/L 16% of limit
Strontium Inorganic
44.0 µg/L 3% of limit
36 contaminants tested under EPA SDWIS, LCR and UCMR programs · 6 detected Contaminants without a federal MCL are shown against the strictest state or advisory level named in each row.

Full contaminants report

Contaminant Detected Level EPA Limit Unit Category Status
Lead (90th percentile) 8.4 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 ND HI µg/L PFAS Not 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.

03Reading'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 4 violations on record, including 1 health-based violation. 1 remains unresolved.

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

1 health-based in 10 yrs 1 monitoring & paperwork
UpdateWater quality data updatedLatest EPA compliance and testing data incorporated into Reading's water quality assessment. Grade: A- (85.5/100).
DisasterHURRICANE LEEFederal disaster declaration (FEMA DR-3599). Hurricane event — may have impacted local water infrastructure.
Violation1 drinking water violation recordedContaminants: Nitrite.Resolved
Violation1 drinking water violation recorded1 health-based. Contaminants: Revised Total Coliform Rule.Resolved
DisasterHURRICANE SANDYFederal disaster declaration (FEMA DR-3350). Hurricane event — may have impacted local water infrastructure.
Violation1 drinking water violation recordedContaminants: Coliform (TCR).Resolved
Lead, 90th percentileppb · lower is better
010203040EPA action level · 15 ppb1993 — 33 ppb1994 — 12 ppb1995 — 7 ppb1996 — 5.6 ppb1997 — 6 ppb1998 — 2.5 ppb2001 — 4 ppb2004 — 2 ppb2007 — 7.8 ppb2008 — 3.7 ppb2009 — 5.9 ppb2010 — 7.1 ppb2011 — 6 ppb2014 — 4.3 ppb2017 — 8.3 ppb2020 — 5 ppb2023 — 8.4 ppb338.419931997200720112023

Down 25 ppb since 1993. Latest reading: 8.4 ppb (2023) — 56% of the action level. Sampled at higher-risk homes (90th percentile).

04Where Reading's water comes from

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

Source

Purchased Surface Water

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

Treatment

Wholesale supplier

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

Distribution

1 system

1 water system, operated under local government ownership.

Delivery

27,358 people

Residents served across Reading'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 27,358 people through 1 water system.

System namePWSIDPopulationSource
READING WATER DEPARTMENT (MWRA) MA3246000 27,358 Purchased Surface Water

Water bodies near Reading

Shawsheen River · river Ipswich River · river Saugus River · stream Aberjona River · river Upper Mystic Lake, Gate House, · lake

As a surface-water system, these water bodies may directly influence Reading's drinking water supply.

05Pressure on Reading'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.

Industrial discharge

Present — monitored

5 facilities within 10 miles reported 11 lb released to surface water in the latest EPA Toxics Release Inventory. Proximity doesn't equal tap contamination — treatment and hydrology decide — but it's pressure on the watershed.

GE AEROSPACE — chromium 11 lb · 8.7 mi
ANIKA THERAPEUTICS 0 lb · 8.9 mi
THERMO FISHER SCIENTIFIC 0 lb · 8.9 mi
+ 2 more facilities

Flood & storm history

Recurring — declared disasters

10 federal disaster declarations on record for Middlesex County. Flooding and severe storms can overwhelm treatment plants, cause sewage overflows, and push runoff into supplies.

HURRICANE LEE Sep 2023 · DR-3599
HURRICANE SANDY Oct 2012 · DR-3350
HURRICANE IRENE Aug 2011 · DR-3330

Superfund proximity

Multiple tracked sites nearby

6 National Priorities List sites within 10 miles. Proximity does not necessarily indicate tap-water contamination — the connection depends on hydrology and treatment.

INDUSTRI PLEX 2.2 mi
OLIN CHEMICAL 2.5 mi
WELLS G H 3.1 mi
+ 3 more sites

Drought

D2 — severe drought

Middlesex County is in D2 (severe 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+ severity9 wks
Weeks at D2+ in the last 5 years9 wks
Months in D2+ over the last 30 years8.3%

06How Reading compares

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

Beverly
87.5 · A-
Reading (this city)
85.5 · A-
Springfield
82.9 · B+
Cambridge
81 · B+
Worcester
78.9 · B
Boston
76.8 · B

dashed line = Massachusetts average (81/100)

Reading scores 85.5/100on par with the Massachusetts average of 81/100. It outscores 7 of 10 nearby cities. Full Massachusetts rankings →

Middlesex 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 Reading's water — not generic advice.

Because of lead

Filter drinking & cooking water

Basic carbon filter for extra protection. Lead detected at 8.4 ppb

Compare tested filters →
Because lead was detected

Flush taps & check your service line

Lead leaches from pipes as water sits. Run cold water 30 seconds before drinking (especially mornings), and ask the utility whether your address still has a lead service line.

Lead risks explained →
Stay informed

Watch for Reading alerts

This area has a history of flood declarations — after severe weather, watch for boil-water advisories from the utility, and check the live alerts on this page.

All water alerts →

Frequently asked questions

Is Reading, MA tap water safe to drink?

Reading's water quality earned a grade of A- (85.5/100). The water generally meets EPA standards and is considered safe for consumption. The city ranks #101 out of 269 cities tested in Massachusetts.

What contaminants are in Reading's water?

Lead was measured at 8.4 ppb (90th percentile). No PFAS compounds were detected. 4 violations are on record.

How is Reading'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 Reading?

While lead levels are within EPA limits, a filter adds extra protection. Based on current data, basic filtration should suffice for additional peace of mind.

Where does Reading's water come from?

Reading's water is sourced from Purchased surface water. The city has 1 water system serving approximately 27,358 residents.

What health violations has Reading's water system had?

Reading has 1 health-based violation on record. The most recent violation was recorded in June 2023. Health-based violations mean the water exceeded EPA maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) for a regulated substance. 1 violation remains unresolved.

How does Reading's water compare to other cities?

Reading ranks #101 out of 269 cities in Massachusetts (better than 62% of state cities) and #5216 out of 15382 cities nationally (66th percentile). The grade of A- 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
About Reading, MA: Reading is a town in Middlesex County, Massachusetts, United States, 16 miles (26 km) north of central Boston. The population was 25,518 at the 2020 census. Median household income $154,662 · median home value $714,998 · median age 44.2 · 83.9% homeowners · 64.7% college educated. Wikipedia → Service area: 2 ZIP codes across Middlesex.
Show ZIP codes 0181301867
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.