City water profile
Compare local ZIP estimates, evidence quality, associated public systems, and compliance history for Helena, Montana.
Median indexed hardness
84PPM
3 indexed ZIPs
Range 84.1–84.1 PPM
City summary
Helena has 3 published ZIP profiles across Lewis And Clark County. The indexed median is 84 PPM, compared with 122 PPM across Montana.
Among the 117 Montanacities with an indexed median, Helena ranks #76from highest to lowest. Across all 145 state ZIP profiles, available estimates run from 0.2to 799.5 PPM.
The 84.1–84.1 PPM range shows how much the available ZIP estimates vary within the city label.
Hardness distribution
3 of 3 ZIP profiles have a hardness estimate. Bars count ZIP profiles, not households or laboratory samples.
Evidence quality
Confidence labels
Observation window: Feb 3, 2016 to May 6, 2026.
ZIP directory
Open a ZIP for site-level provenance and measurements.
Public water systems
PWSID MT0000241
The system names this served city; Census place overlap links the city to this ZCTA.
PWSID MT0000196
The system names this served city; Census place overlap links the city to this ZCTA.
PWSID MT0000590
The system names this served city; Census place overlap links the city to this ZCTA.
PWSID MT0002978
The system names this served city; Census place overlap links the city to this ZCTA.
PWSID MT0002005
The system names this served city; Census place overlap links the city to this ZCTA.
PWSID MT0004264
The system names this served city; Census place overlap links the city to this ZCTA.
PWSID MT0002917
The system names this served city; Census place overlap links the city to this ZCTA.
PWSID MT0002390
The system names this served city; Census place overlap links the city to this ZCTA.
PWSID MT0001924
The system names this served city; Census place overlap links the city to this ZCTA.
PWSID MT0004039
The system names this served city; Census place overlap links the city to this ZCTA.
Compliance history
No active health-based violation appears among the associated systems in the represented EPA reporting quarter. This does not mean every contaminant was tested at every tap.
| Record | System | Period | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Revised Total Coliform Rule | MT0004559 | Mar 1, 2026 | Resolved |
| Lead and Copper Rule | MT0002005 | Jan 1, 2026 | Unaddressed |
| Revised Total Coliform Rule | MT0004190 | Oct 23, 2025 | Resolved · health-based |
| Lead and Copper Rule | MT0004264 | Oct 1, 2025 | Resolved |
| Consumer Confidence Rule | MT0002917 | Oct 1, 2025 | Unaddressed |
| E. COLI | MT0004872 | Sep 2, 2025 | Resolved |
| E. COLI | MT0004039 | Aug 14, 2025 | Resolved |
| Consumer Confidence Rule | MT0002917 | Jul 1, 2025 | Resolved |
| Revised Total Coliform Rule | MT0000196 | Jun 1, 2025 | Resolved |
| TTHM | MT0005088 | Apr 1, 2025 | Resolved |
Practical next steps
Continue comparing
Questions people ask
The indexed city median is 84 PPM. Open the ZIP report to verify the distance and confidence behind that estimate.
Compliance history is utility-wide and cannot guarantee conditions at every tap. Check current notices and test when address-specific evidence is needed.
Choose treatment only after confirming the problem at the property. A softener targets hardness; contaminant treatment requires a matching, verified performance claim.