2025 report; each result retains its sampling period
Results for City of Beaumont Water Utilities (TX1230001) within Jefferson County. Other suppliers and private wells require their own reports or tests.
See the amount, the comparison and what it means. “Below” refers to the stated benchmark, not zero risk.
Not quantified
No numeric hardness value verified in the reviewed report
No numeric result
Unknown hardness does not mean soft water. Confirm a current value before sizing and setting a softener.
3.24mg/L
Reported amount; range ND–4.12
MRDL 4 mg/L
The report marks no violation.
33µg/L
Reported amount; sample range 19.0–41.9
MCL 80 µg/L
The amount column is preserved separately from the sample range.
22µg/L
Reported amount; sample range 7.3–25.1
MCL 60 µg/L
1µg/L
90th percentile; range ND–9; 0 of 204 sites over action level
Action level 15 µg/L
0.08mg/L
Reported amount; range ND–0.08
MCL 10 mg/L
Continue with your home details for general filtration guidance. We will not use another utility’s numbers as your result.
Find My Water System →A city report cannot establish a well’s water quality. Well-water treatment depends on your test results and site conditions.
Explore well-water systems →The figures below are provider-specific. They are not a countywide average.
| Utility | Hardness | Hardness source |
|---|---|---|
| Not quantified · Test incoming water | 2025 report review |
Selected useful results—not a replacement for the utility’s complete report. Older measurements retain their original year.
Open the complete utility report ↗
| What was measured | Reported amount | Sample year / source date | How to read it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hardness | Not quantified No numeric hardness value verified in the reviewed report | 2025 report reviewView source ↗ | Test incoming water · No numeric resultUnknown hardness does not mean soft water. Confirm a current value before sizing and setting a softener. |
| Chloramine | 3.24 mg/LReported amount; range ND–4.12 | 2025View source ↗ | Reported level below MRDL · MRDL 4 mg/LThe report marks no violation. |
| TTHMs | 33 µg/LReported amount; sample range 19.0–41.9 | 2025View source ↗ | Below report benchmark · MCL 80 µg/LThe amount column is preserved separately from the sample range. |
| HAA5 | 22 µg/LReported amount; sample range 7.3–25.1 | 2025View source ↗ | Below report benchmark · MCL 60 µg/L |
| Lead | 1 µg/L90th percentile; range ND–9; 0 of 204 sites over action level | 2025View source ↗ | 90th percentile below action level · Action level 15 µg/L |
| Copper | 0.04 mg/L90th percentile; range ND–0.21; 0 of 205 sites over action level | 2025View source ↗ | 90th percentile below action level · Action level 1.3 mg/L |
| Nitrate | 0.08 mg/LReported amount; range ND–0.08 | 2025View source ↗ | Below report benchmark · MCL 10 mg/L |
| PFAS | Not assessed No complete compound-specific assessment in this guide | Report review: November 2026View source ↗ | No presence or absence conclusion · Separate testing neededThis guide does not classify PFAS as high, low or absent. Consult the original report and compound-specific data. |
ppm ≈ mg/L; ppb ≈ µg/L; ppt ≈ ng/L in drinking water. Hardness in gpg = mg/L as CaCO₃ ÷ 17.1. ND means not detected at the method’s reporting limit—not zero.
MCL is a maximum contaminant level. MRDL is a disinfectant limit. Lead/copper action levels use system sampling percentiles and are not a safe-tap threshold. TTHM/HAA5 compliance uses locational annual averages.
PFOA/PFOS comparisons use EPA’s 4 ppt values. Historical detections are not a present compliance finding; EPA assesses compliance using running annual averages. Rule implementation is being reviewed. EPA PFAS benchmarks and implementation ↗
Choose the system size, keep useful existing equipment, and review your filtration goals.
Source water. Neches River surface water and Chicot Aquifer groundwater from well sites in Hardin County. Both supplies receive chloramination.
Email delivery is coming soon. Copy the report link to share it now.
More about your local water
This Texas guide uses Beaumont’s municipal results.
Beaumont uses both river water and groundwater, with chloramine treatment for each. Its 2025 report gives separate distribution and customer-tap results but no numeric hardness value verified here. Port Arthur, Nederland, Port Neches and other Jefferson County systems have their own water reports.
A useful local question
No. These figures belong to the Beaumont public water system, TX1230001. Use the retail supplier on your bill to find the appropriate source report and test your home’s hardness before final sizing.
We keep each utility’s results separate, show the reported sample year, and distinguish averages, maxima and tap-sampling percentiles. Hardness classifications use USGS ranges. Missing data stays unknown.
Sources checked November 14, 2026
Your water → your home → your system
Choose the system size, keep useful existing equipment, and review your filtration goals.