We analyzed tap water quality data for hundreds of cities in Vermont to identify the 25 with the most contaminants exceeding health guidelines. This ranking is based on 2026 data from the EPA and EWG databases.
While all public water systems must meet EPA legal limits, many health experts — including the Environmental Working Group — argue that these legal limits are outdated and don't reflect current scientific understanding of safe exposure levels. The cities below have the widest gap between what's in their water and what's considered safe by modern health standards.
Rankings at a Glance
Brattleboro, Vermont
Brattleboro has 11 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 15 detected — significantly above the national average. Multiple known carcinogens were found at levels of concern.
See full Brattleboro water report →Bennington, Vermont
Bennington has 10 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 18 detected — significantly above the national average. Multiple known carcinogens were found at levels of concern.
See full Bennington water report →Chatham, Vermont
Chatham has 10 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 18 detected — significantly above the national average. Multiple known carcinogens were found at levels of concern.
See full Chatham water report →Southwick, Vermont
Southwick has 10 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 18 detected — significantly above the national average. Multiple known carcinogens were found at levels of concern.
See full Southwick water report →Barre, Vermont
Barre has 10 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 16 detected — significantly above the national average. Multiple known carcinogens were found at levels of concern.
See full Barre water report →Proctor, Vermont
Proctor has 10 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 12 detected — significantly above the national average. Multiple known carcinogens were found at levels of concern.
See full Proctor water report →Rutland Town, Vermont
Rutland Town has 10 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 12 detected — significantly above the national average. Multiple known carcinogens were found at levels of concern.
See full Rutland Town water report →Colchester, Vermont
Colchester has 9 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 16 total detected, placing it among the most concerning water supplies analyzed.
See full Colchester water report →Woonsocket, Vermont
Woonsocket has 9 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 15 total detected, placing it among the most concerning water supplies analyzed.
See full Woonsocket water report →Burlington, Vermont
Burlington has 9 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 14 total detected, placing it among the most concerning water supplies analyzed.
See full Burlington water report →Websterville, Vermont
Websterville has 9 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 11 total detected, placing it among the most concerning water supplies analyzed.
See full Websterville water report →Graniteville, Vermont
Graniteville has 9 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 11 total detected, placing it among the most concerning water supplies analyzed.
See full Graniteville water report →Westminster, Vermont
Westminster has 9 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 11 total detected, placing it among the most concerning water supplies analyzed.
See full Westminster water report →Bondville, Vermont
Bondville has 9 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 10 total detected, placing it among the most concerning water supplies analyzed.
See full Bondville water report →Teaneck, Vermont
Teaneck has 9 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 10 total detected, placing it among the most concerning water supplies analyzed.
See full Teaneck water report →St Johnsbury, Vermont
St Johnsbury has 8 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 15 total detected, placing it among the most concerning water supplies analyzed.
See full St Johnsbury water report →St Johnsbury Ctr, Vermont
St Johnsbury Ctr has 8 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 15 total detected, placing it among the most concerning water supplies analyzed.
See full St Johnsbury Ctr water report →Milton, Vermont
Milton has 8 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 14 total detected, placing it among the most concerning water supplies analyzed.
See full Milton water report →Jeffersonville, Vermont
Jeffersonville has 8 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 12 total detected, placing it among the most concerning water supplies analyzed.
See full Jeffersonville water report →Shaftsbury, Vermont
Shaftsbury has 8 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 12 total detected, placing it among the most concerning water supplies analyzed.
See full Shaftsbury water report →St Albans, Vermont
St Albans has 8 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 11 total detected, placing it among the most concerning water supplies analyzed.
See full St Albans water report →Montpelier, Vermont
Montpelier has 8 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 10 total detected, placing it among the most concerning water supplies analyzed.
See full Montpelier water report →Woodstock, Vermont
Woodstock has 8 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 10 total detected, placing it among the most concerning water supplies analyzed.
See full Woodstock water report →Alburgh, Vermont
Alburgh has 8 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 10 total detected, placing it among the most concerning water supplies analyzed.
See full Alburgh water report →Waterbury, Vermont
Waterbury has 8 contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines out of 9 total detected, placing it among the most concerning water supplies analyzed.
See full Waterbury water report →What We Found: Key Patterns
The most frequently detected contaminants exceeding health guidelines across these cities are Bromodichloromethane, Haloacetic acids (HAA5), Total trihalomethanes (TTHMs). These appear repeatedly across different water systems and regions.
Water quality varies significantly even within the same state, driven by local geology, agricultural activity, and industrial proximity.
Across all ranked cities, 223 contaminant readings exceed EWG health guidelines, but only 0 exceed EPA legal limits. This gap of 223 highlights how legal standards may not fully protect public health — EPA limits haven't been updated for many contaminants in decades.
Full Rankings Table
| Rank | City | State | Detected | Above Guidelines | Above Legal | People Served |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Brattleboro | VT | 15 | 11 | 0 | 12,200 |
| 2 | Bennington | VT | 18 | 10 | 0 | 13,250 |
| 3 | Chatham | VT | 18 | 10 | 0 | 290 |
| 4 | Southwick | VT | 18 | 10 | 0 | 125 |
| 5 | Barre | VT | 16 | 10 | 0 | 14,000 |
| 6 | Proctor | VT | 12 | 10 | 0 | 18,500 |
| 7 | Rutland Town | VT | 12 | 10 | 0 | 136 |
| 8 | Colchester | VT | 16 | 9 | 0 | 8,300 |
| 9 | Woonsocket | VT | 15 | 9 | 0 | 301 |
| 10 | Burlington | VT | 14 | 9 | 0 | 42,000 |
| 11 | Websterville | VT | 11 | 9 | 0 | 1,638 |
| 12 | Graniteville | VT | 11 | 9 | 0 | 700 |
| 13 | Westminster | VT | 11 | 9 | 0 | 200 |
| 14 | Bondville | VT | 10 | 9 | 0 | 540 |
| 15 | Teaneck | VT | 10 | 9 | 0 | 388 |
| 16 | St Johnsbury | VT | 15 | 8 | 0 | 3,800 |
| 17 | St Johnsbury Ctr | VT | 15 | 8 | 0 | 370 |
| 18 | Milton | VT | 14 | 8 | 0 | 19,500 |
| 19 | Jeffersonville | VT | 12 | 8 | 0 | 2,960 |
| 20 | Shaftsbury | VT | 12 | 8 | 0 | 950 |
| 21 | St Albans | VT | 11 | 8 | 0 | 10,200 |
| 22 | Montpelier | VT | 10 | 8 | 0 | 8,912 |
| 23 | Woodstock | VT | 10 | 8 | 0 | 1,300 |
| 24 | Alburgh | VT | 10 | 8 | 0 | 300 |
| 25 | Waterbury | VT | 9 | 8 | 0 | 2,403 |
Frequently Asked Questions
What city has the worst tap water in Vermont?
Based on 2026 data, Brattleboro, VT has the most contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines among the cities we analyzed.
How are cities ranked in this report?
Cities are ranked by the number of contaminants exceeding EWG health guidelines. These guidelines are typically stricter than EPA legal limits and reflect current scientific research on safe exposure levels.
Is my tap water safe if my city isn't on this list?
Not necessarily. Even cities not on this list may have contaminants of concern. We recommend checking your specific water quality using our free water scan tool.
What's the best water filter for contaminated water?
A reverse osmosis (RO) system is the most effective for removing the widest range of contaminants. For whole-home protection, a combination of RO for drinking water and a whole-home filter for showers and baths is recommended.
Related Reports
Data sources: Environmental Working Group (EWG) Tap Water Database, U.S. EPA Safe Drinking Water Information System (SDWIS)
Last updated: April 2026
Methodology: Contaminant levels are compared against both EPA legal limits (Maximum Contaminant Levels) and EWG health guidelines, which are often stricter and based on the latest scientific research.
