What is the Munimetric score for Connecticut?

Munimetric assigns a state-level average MISI score based on the individual scores of all covered community water systems in Connecticut. The state average, band distribution, and market-level rankings are shown on this page. Higher MISI values indicate greater structural stress.

Which water systems in Connecticut face the most infrastructure stress?

The state page ranks the highest-stress systems in Connecticut by MISI score. Stress reflects operational burden, capital gaps, revenue fragility, rate affordability constraints, and governance risk, not a single compliance event. The headline remains a blended structural stress composite rather than a pure physical-condition index. Workflow actions remain reserved for account access.

How does Connecticut compare to other states for drinking water infrastructure risk?

Connecticut is compared against all 50 states and territories using average MISI score, market count, and band distribution. Munimetric tracks nationwide coverage across 9,000+ scored service markets.

Are there lead pipe or corrosion-related concerns in Connecticut water systems?

Where lead and copper rule compliance data is available from EPA SDWA records, Munimetric factors it into the Operational Stress family score. Specific lead service line inventories vary by system. Individual system profiles contain the most detailed compliance context available.

Does Munimetric include PFAS monitoring context for Connecticut water systems?

Munimetric summarizes stored PFAS monitoring context where public contaminant-monitoring records are available. Missing PFAS summaries remain missing records, not non-detections, and this public-record layer does not change the MISI score by itself.

What compliance signals are active in Connecticut?

Munimetric tracks signals such as compliance escalation, monitoring and reporting failures, population decline, income erosion, data staleness, and parent-government fiscal stress across Connecticut water systems.

Does Munimetric track boil water advisories in Connecticut?

Munimetric does not track real-time boil water advisories. For current advisories, contact your local water utility or state drinking water program. Munimetric monitors structural conditions that provide context around system reliability over time.

How many covered systems in Connecticut have recent recorded drinking-water violations?

Stored public records show 31 covered systems with recent drinking-water violations, with 291 recorded violations across 59 covered systems in the recent 3 years window.

How does Munimetric summarize PFAS public-record context in Connecticut?

Stored contaminant-monitoring summaries are present for 57 covered systems; 40 systems have PFAS detection context in this state summary.

How does Munimetric summarize lead & copper context in Connecticut?

Stored lead & copper summaries are present for 57 covered systems; 25 systems have violation or action-level context in this state summary.

What source-water types are represented across covered Connecticut systems?

Stored identity records group covered Connecticut systems by source-water type: Surface water: 47, Groundwater: 12.

Where can I find official drinking-water records for Connecticut?

The Official records drawer lists Public drinking-water profile, Contaminant monitoring records links where currently available for Connecticut.

Is this a real-time statewide tap-water condition rating?

No. This is not a real-time tap-water condition determination. Munimetric summarizes stored public-record context for research and navigation, and this layer does not change MISI.

States / Connecticut

Connecticut

Name: Connecticut Drinking Water Infrastructure Stress Data
Creator: Munimetric
License: https://munimetric.com/terms

Statewide Munimetric profile for Connecticut, covering drinking-water market scores, signal activity, infrastructure stress context, and population insights across 59 scored service markets serving approximately 2.6 million people. This state profile highlights what is happening and why it matters using water-system, fiscal, capital, and signal context.

Connecticut has an average MISI infrastructure stress score of 30.6/100 in the Watch band as of 2026-08-17. Public records summarize recent drinking-water violations, PFAS monitoring records, lead and copper context, and source-water mix across 59 covered systems. Updated May 2026.

National context

States sized by scored-market count. Color reflects average stress band.

59Markets scored

30.6Headline composite

~2.6MPop. served

214Active signals

Band distribution (MISI)

State headline composite

Component of current headline composite

Infrastructure Stress15.8 / 100

Physical, compliance, and capital-execution pressure reflected in the blended headline composite.

Socioeconomic Stress14.8 / 100

Affordability, demand-base, and parent-government fiscal pressure reflected in the blended headline composite.

Observability Stress0.0 / 100

Staleness, disclosure freshness, and reporting-visibility effects reflected in the blended headline composite.

30.6 headline compositeConnecticut state composite59 markets~2.6M people served

State interpretation guide

How to read Connecticut headline composite

Plain-language summary

Connecticut currently shows an average MISI headline composite of 30.6 versus a national average of 24.4. In v0.1.2, the headline composite remains a blended structural stress measure rather than a pure physical-condition index. A frozen national reference and a 50 percent single-factor cap reduce the dominance of near-universal and very rare factors, while the component bars continue to separate infrastructure, socioeconomic, and observability readings.

Why this page stands out

59 scored systems are included in this state view, with explicit confidence and source-backed context.
State posture is benchmarked against national averages, not evaluated in isolation.
Top system links below connect state-level findings directly to profile-level diagnostics.

What to do next

Review the executive context to understand the state-level pressure pattern.
Open top system profiles to inspect what is actually driving stress at market level.
Use saved monitoring after research access is enabled to follow high-stress systems over time.

Priority Connecticut paths

Public record layer

Statewide Water Quality Context

Stored public-record context for recent drinking-water violations, contaminant monitoring, and source-water mix across covered systems. This is not a tap-water safety determination and does not change the MISI score.

Systems with recent violations

31 of 59Systems with recent public violation rows.

Source-water mix59 systems

Surface water47
Groundwater12
Purchased water0
Mixed source0
Not stored0

Latest identity snapshot: Jun 30, 2026

Coverage

Violation, enforcement, and compliance-burden counts use the recent 3 years window for dated stored records.
Drinking-water identity snapshots are stored for 59 of 59 included scored systems.
PFAS monitoring summary records are stored for 57 of 59 included systems; missing records are not treated as non-detections.
Lead and copper summary records are stored for 57 of 59 included systems; missing records are not treated as absence of lead/copper context.

Water quality questionsDefinitions and public-record context

How many covered systems in Connecticut have recent recorded drinking-water violations?: Stored public records show 31 covered systems with recent drinking-water violations, with 291 recorded violations across 59 covered systems in the recent 3 years window.
How does Munimetric summarize PFAS public-record context in Connecticut?: Stored contaminant-monitoring summaries are present for 57 covered systems; 40 systems have PFAS detection context in this state summary.
How does Munimetric summarize lead & copper context in Connecticut?: Stored lead & copper summaries are present for 57 covered systems; 25 systems have violation or action-level context in this state summary.
What source-water types are represented across covered Connecticut systems?: Stored identity records group covered Connecticut systems by source-water type: Surface water: 47, Groundwater: 12.
Where can I find official drinking-water records for Connecticut?: The Official records drawer lists Public drinking-water profile, Contaminant monitoring records links where currently available for Connecticut.
Is this a real-time statewide tap-water condition rating?: No. This is not a real-time tap-water condition determination. Munimetric summarizes stored public-record context for research and navigation, and this layer does not change MISI.

Official records

Public drinking-water profileEPA ECHO: Federal drinking-water dashboard and public-record search entry point.
Contaminant monitoring recordsEPA UCMR: Federal contaminant-monitoring program reference and public data entry point.

Methodology/source notes

Methodology/source notesDisplayed from stored public drinking-water records and official program references. This layer does not change MISI.
Enforcement historyEPA ECHO / SDWIS: Violation and enforcement counts are aggregated from stored public compliance records across covered systems.
Contaminant monitoring recordsEPA UCMR: PFAS context uses stored contaminant-monitoring summaries where available; missing records are not treated as non-detections.
State drinking-water programOfficial link not currently stored for this state program mapping.

Top recent compliance-burden systemsRecent 3 years

System	Population	Source water	Recent violations	Recent enforcement	Public-record flags
Berlin Water Control CommissionCT0070021	5,128	Surface water	46	40	recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, PFAS detections in stored records, lead/copper context
Wallingford Water DepartmentCT1480011	37,267	Surface water	44	14	recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, PFAS detections in stored records
Bethel Water DeptCT0090011	9,507	Surface water	42	138	recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, PFAS detections in stored records, lead/copper context
Colchester Sewer & Water CommissionCT0280011	4,020	Groundwater	21	43	recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, PFAS detections in stored records
Putnam Water Pollution Control AuthorityCT1160011	7,300	Surface water	20	144	recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, PFAS detections in stored records, lead/copper context
Southington Water DepartmentCT1310011	43,069	Surface water	16	38	recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures, PFAS detections in stored records, lead/copper context
Kensington Fire DistrictCT0070011	7,553	Surface water	12	20	recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures
Watertown Water & Sewer AuthorityCT1530021	9,972	Surface water	10	16	recent violations recorded, recent enforcement history, recent monitoring/reporting failures

This is not a real-time tap-water condition determination. For current advisories or health guidance, consult the utility or state drinking-water program.

Executive context

What This Page Shows

59 of the community drinking-water systems in Connecticut are currently scored. Analytics below are calculated from this covered subset only. Covered systems serve approximately 2.6M people.

What the Data Suggests

Connecticut has 59 scored service markets in the Munimetric coverage set, covering roughly 2.6 million residents in total. At the latest reading, the state-level average lands at 30.6 out of 100, indicating early but meaningful signs of structural stress in aggregate. About 24% of scored markets sit in elevated-stress bands, a notable but not extreme share.

Across state markets, Rate Constraint stands out as the dominant contributor to headline stress (13.7 points average), with Capex Pressure a distant second at 9.7. That pattern suggests a particular kind of pressure — concentrated rather than broadly distributed.

214 active signals are recorded across state markets. The most prevalent is Income Erosion, affecting 59 markets.

State-level average stress has been relatively steady between recent observation periods, suggesting the current picture reflects persistent conditions rather than a sudden shift.

This summary is based on structured, source-backed public data and is intended for research and monitoring only. It is not investment advice, a credit opinion, or municipal advisory guidance.

Recent Movement

Latest average MISI is 30.6 as of Aug 17, 2026. Movement since Aug 16, 2026 is flat.

Compact summary from 95 stored state observations.

State Family Contribution Summary

Rate Constraint13.7 / 20.0

Capex Pressure9.7 / 20.0

Operational Stress6.0 / 20.0

Governance Risk1.2 / 20.0

Revenue Fragility0.0 / 20.0

Signals

Signal Frequency

Signal	Severity	Markets affected	% of scored
Income Erosion	high	59	100%
PFAS Contamination Risk	high	40	68%
Compliance Escalation	high	40	68%
Lead & Copper Rule Risk	high	25	42%
Infrastructure Capital Gap	high	23	39%
Parent-Government Fiscal Stress	high	15	25%
Monitoring / Reporting Failures	medium	11	19%
Rapid Score Deterioration	medium	1	2%

Markets

Top Markets

#	Market	Score	Band	Population	Signals
1	Manchester Water Department	54.7	Fragile	51K	5
2	Colchester Sewer & Water Commission	52.8	Fragile	4K	6
3	Aquarion Water Co of Ct-New Milford	51.9	Fragile	13K	6
4	Southington Water Department	47.7	Fragile	43K	6
5	Bethel Water Dept	44.8	Fragile	10K	6
6	Valley Water Systems, Inc.	44.3	Fragile	18K	4
7	Bristol Water Department	44.0	Fragile	52K	5
8	Putnam Water Pollution Control Authority	43.9	Fragile	7K	5
9	Aquarion Water Co of Ct-Main System	42.4	Fragile	352K	5
10	Waterbury Water Department	41.8	Fragile	107K	5
11	New Britain Water Department	41.6	Fragile	74K	5
12	Metropolitan District Commission	41.3	Fragile	391K	4
13	Jewett City Water Company	40.9	Fragile	7K	5
14	Ctwc - Unionville System	40.5	Fragile	15K	5
15	Winsted Water Works	39.7	Watch	8K	4
16	Regional Water Authority	39.4	Watch	419K	5
17	Portland Water Department	39.1	Watch	5K	5
18	Aquarion Water Co of Ct-Greenwich System	38.8	Watch	53K	5
19	Danbury Water Department	38.6	Watch	62K	5
20	Cromwell Fire District Water Department	38.0	Watch	14K	4

Comparison

State Comparison

National average: 24.4

Rank	State	Avg Score	Band	Markets	Delta vs State
5	Pennsylvania	30.9	Watch	357	+0.3
6	Louisiana	30.6	Watch	239	+0.0
7	Connecticut	30.6	Watch	59	+0.0
8	New Jersey	30.3	Watch	260	-0.2
9	Minnesota	28.7	Watch	176	-1.9

Analytical posture

State Stress Analytics

Score Distribution

Distribution of scored market scores with the state average overlay.

59 markets plotted.

Stress vs Population

Each point is a scored market; tooltip reveals market-level context.

59 markets plotted.

Population View

People served by community water systems in Connecticut, colored by stress band.

~2.6M people served by 59 systems in Connecticut

Stable

Watch

Fragile

High Stress

Critical

59 scored systems · colored by stress band

Peer Constellation

Select a market to see its nearest peers by score similarity.

Center market:

24 nearest peers by score distance.

Score Trend

Latest

30.6

Trend

+5.9

Observations

Extended layers

Advanced State Context

Priority views, detailed registers, and methodology supporting the analytical core above.

Markets & signals

Priority Views

#	Market	Score	Band	Population	Signals
1	Manchester Water Department	54.7	Fragile	51K	5
2	Colchester Sewer & Water Commission	52.8	Fragile	4K	6
3	Aquarion Water Co of Ct-New Milford	51.9	Fragile	13K	6
4	Southington Water Department	47.7	Fragile	43K	6
5	Bethel Water Dept	44.8	Fragile	10K	6
6	Valley Water Systems, Inc.	44.3	Fragile	18K	4
7	Bristol Water Department	44.0	Fragile	52K	5
8	Putnam Water Pollution Control Authority	43.9	Fragile	7K	5
9	Aquarion Water Co of Ct-Main System	42.4	Fragile	352K	5
10	Waterbury Water Department	41.8	Fragile	107K	5
11	New Britain Water Department	41.6	Fragile	74K	5
12	Metropolitan District Commission	41.3	Fragile	391K	4
13	Jewett City Water Company	40.9	Fragile	7K	5
14	Ctwc - Unionville System	40.5	Fragile	15K	5
15	Winsted Water Works	39.7	Watch	8K	4
16	Regional Water Authority	39.4	Watch	419K	5
17	Portland Water Department	39.1	Watch	5K	5
18	Aquarion Water Co of Ct-Greenwich System	38.8	Watch	53K	5
19	Danbury Water Department	38.6	Watch	62K	5
20	Cromwell Fire District Water Department	38.0	Watch	14K	4

Detailed records

Registers

#	Market	Score	Band	Population	Signals
1	Manchester Water Department	54.7	Fragile	51K	5
2	Colchester Sewer & Water Commission	52.8	Fragile	4K	6
3	Aquarion Water Co of Ct-New Milford	51.9	Fragile	13K	6
4	Southington Water Department	47.7	Fragile	43K	6
5	Bethel Water Dept	44.8	Fragile	10K	6
6	Valley Water Systems, Inc.	44.3	Fragile	18K	4
7	Bristol Water Department	44.0	Fragile	52K	5
8	Putnam Water Pollution Control Authority	43.9	Fragile	7K	5
9	Aquarion Water Co of Ct-Main System	42.4	Fragile	352K	5
10	Waterbury Water Department	41.8	Fragile	107K	5
11	New Britain Water Department	41.6	Fragile	74K	5
12	Metropolitan District Commission	41.3	Fragile	391K	4
13	Jewett City Water Company	40.9	Fragile	7K	5
14	Ctwc - Unionville System	40.5	Fragile	15K	5
15	Winsted Water Works	39.7	Watch	8K	4
16	Regional Water Authority	39.4	Watch	419K	5
17	Portland Water Department	39.1	Watch	5K	5
18	Aquarion Water Co of Ct-Greenwich System	38.8	Watch	53K	5
19	Danbury Water Department	38.6	Watch	62K	5
20	Cromwell Fire District Water Department	38.0	Watch	14K	4

Munimetric tracks infrastructure stress across 59 community drinking-water systems in Connecticut, covering compliance conditions, capital needs, revenue and rate pressure, and governance risk. Use this page to research which systems face the highest structural stress and how Connecticut compares nationally.

Which water systems in Connecticut face the most infrastructure stress?: The highest-stress systems in Connecticut are ranked by MISI score above. Stress reflects operational burden, capital gaps, revenue fragility, rate affordability constraints, and governance risk—not a single compliance event. In v0.1.2, the headline composite remains a blended structural stress measure rather than a pure physical-condition index. A frozen national reference and a 50 percent single-factor cap reduce the dominance of near-universal and very rare factors, while the component bars continue to separate infrastructure, socioeconomic, and observability readings.
How does Connecticut compare to other states for drinking water infrastructure risk?: Connecticut is compared against all 50 states and territories using average MISI score, market count, and band distribution. The state comparison table above shows where Connecticut ranks nationally and how its average score compares.
Are there lead pipe or corrosion-related concerns in Connecticut water systems?: Where lead and copper rule compliance data is available from EPA SDWA records, Munimetric factors it into the Operational Stress family. Specific lead service line inventories vary by system. Individual system profiles contain the most detailed compliance context available.
What compliance signals are active in Connecticut?: Munimetric tracks signals such as compliance escalation, monitoring and reporting failures, data staleness, and financial stress indicators across Connecticut systems. The signal frequency table above summarizes which signals are most prevalent statewide.
Does Munimetric track boil water advisories in Connecticut?: Munimetric does not track real-time boil water advisories. For current advisories, contact your local water utility or state drinking water program. Munimetric monitors structural conditions—compliance posture, infrastructure stress, and governance risk—that provide broader context around system reliability.

Keep monitoring this state

Research access covers saved monitoring, alerts, recurring briefs, and team review.

Get the Water Stress Brief Request research access

Water Infrastructure in Connecticut

Munimetric tracks infrastructure stress across 59 community drinking-water systems in Connecticut. Each system receives a Munimetric Infrastructure Stress Index (MISI) score from 0 to 100, calculated across five risk families: Operational Stress, Capex Pressure, Revenue Fragility, Rate Constraint, and Governance Risk. Higher scores indicate more structural stress. Scores are source-backed and deterministic, drawing from EPA SDWA compliance records, American Community Survey demographic and economic data, FEMA National Risk Index hazard profiles, and state financial disclosures.

State-level monitoring shows which systems face the highest structural stress, how Connecticut compares against other states nationally, and which monitoring signals are most active across the state. Each individual system profile includes compliance history, score family drivers, peer rankings within population-based cohorts where safeguards pass, and public source context. Full provenance cards and source workbench views remain workflow-gated. Munimetric covers community water systems across all 50 states and territories. This is structural risk research—not a water quality rating, advisory feed, or credit rating. Updated May 2026.

The statewide public-record layer adds drinking-water violation categories, PFAS monitoring summaries where stored, lead and copper context, source-water mix, and official record links across covered systems. These records help explain water-system context alongside infrastructure stress without turning Munimetric into a tap-water safety determination.

What is the Munimetric score for Connecticut?: Munimetric assigns a state-level average MISI score based on the individual scores of all covered community water systems in Connecticut. The state average, band distribution, and market-level rankings are shown on this page. Higher MISI values indicate greater structural stress.
Which water systems in Connecticut face the most infrastructure stress?: The state page ranks the highest-stress systems in Connecticut by MISI score. Stress reflects operational burden, capital gaps, revenue fragility, rate affordability constraints, and governance risk, not a single compliance event. The headline remains a blended structural stress composite rather than a pure physical-condition index. Workflow actions remain reserved for account access.
How does Connecticut compare to other states for drinking water infrastructure risk?: Connecticut is compared against all 50 states and territories using average MISI score, market count, and band distribution. Munimetric tracks nationwide coverage across 9,000+ scored service markets.
Are there lead pipe or corrosion-related concerns in Connecticut water systems?: Where lead and copper rule compliance data is available from EPA SDWA records, Munimetric factors it into the Operational Stress family score. Specific lead service line inventories vary by system. Individual system profiles contain the most detailed compliance context available.
Does Munimetric include PFAS monitoring context for Connecticut water systems?: Munimetric summarizes stored PFAS monitoring context where public contaminant-monitoring records are available. Missing PFAS summaries remain missing records, not non-detections, and this public-record layer does not change the MISI score by itself.
What compliance signals are active in Connecticut?: Munimetric tracks signals such as compliance escalation, monitoring and reporting failures, population decline, income erosion, data staleness, and parent-government fiscal stress across Connecticut water systems.
Does Munimetric track boil water advisories in Connecticut?: Munimetric does not track real-time boil water advisories. For current advisories, contact your local water utility or state drinking water program. Munimetric monitors structural conditions that provide context around system reliability over time.