WaterProfile Local

Utilities / North Carolina

Charlotte, NC water hardness

Charlotte Water publishes an average hardness of 32 mg/L for its system, in its Charlotte Water 2025 Annual Drinking Water Quality Report. On the USGS scale that is soft water.

Soft Moderate Hard Very hard 0 60 120 180 500+ 32 mg/L Charlotte, NC sits in the soft band mg/L as CaCO₃. Bands drawn equal width, so the axis is not linear.
Charlotte Water published an average of 32 mg/L, with a published range of 27 to 35 mg/L shown as the bar. The plotted point is the published average. Classification bands from the USGS Water Science School.

The published figure, exactly as it appears

This is the hardness line transcribed from the source, with nothing added:

Hardness, Total as CaCO3 (ppm) 2025 32 27 – 35 N/A

Charlotte Water, Charlotte Water 2025 Annual Drinking Water Quality Report

Units as published: ppm. What kind of figure it is: an average with a range. Retrieved 2026-10-17.

Charlotte hardness in mg/L and grains per gallon

Water-quality reports use mg/L (identical to ppm). Softener instructions and plumbing specifications use grains per gallon. Both are below. Where a figure is our arithmetic rather than the utility's own number, it says so.

Figuremg/L (ppm)Grains per gallonWhose number
Published average321.9mg/L published, gpg is our conversion
Low end of published range271.6mg/L published, gpg is our conversion
High end of published range352mg/L published, gpg is our conversion
Plotted on the scale above321.9published average; the gpg here is our conversion at 17.1, so it can differ slightly from a utility’s own rounded gpg figure

The conversion, both ways: gpg = mg/L ÷ 17.1 and mg/L = gpg × 17.1. Worked for this system: 32 ÷ 17.1 = 1.9 gpg. The converter does °dH and °f as well, and why the factor is 17.1 explains where the number comes from.

What this figure does not tell you

Service area and source water

UtilityCharlotte Water
Public water system ID01-60-010
Service area as publishedCharlotte Water's system, water system number 01-60-010. The row is sampled at the entry point to the distribution system rather than at customer taps.

Provenance of every number on this page

Source documentCharlotte Water 2025 Annual Drinking Water Quality Report
Source URLhttps://www.charlottenc.gov/files/sharedassets/cltwater/v/3/documents/water-quality/ccr/current-consumer-confidence-report.pdf
Published byCharlotte Water
Report year2025
Year noteThe hardness row is in the report's “Other Miscellaneous Water Characteristics” table, sampled at the entry point to the distribution system, and carries the year 2025 in its own column.
Retrieved2026-10-17
Classification bandsUSGS Water Science School, retrieved 2026-10-16

Notes the report forces on this page

If you are sizing a softener for Charlotte water

At 1.9 gpg, the sizing arithmetic starts from your household's water use, not from the hardness alone. The calculator below is pre-filled with this system's figure and every other input is an editable assumption.

Whether a softener is worth installing at this hardness is a judgement, not arithmetic, and it is not one this site makes for you. Nothing here has been tested by the author.

Where Charlotte sits against other verified systems

Soft Soft 0–60
Moderately hard Moderate 61–120
Hard Hard 121–180
Very hard Very hard 181+
  1. Portland, OR 9 mg/L 0.5 gpg Soft
  2. Boston, MA 16 mg/L 1 gpg Soft
  3. Manchester, NH 17.9 mg/L 1 gpg Soft
  4. Raleigh, NC 25 mg/L 1.47 gpg Soft
  5. New York, NY 32 mg/L 2 gpg Soft
  6. Charlotte, NC 32 mg/L 1.9 gpg Soft
  7. Memphis, TN 46 mg/L 2.7 gpg Soft
  8. Anchorage, AK 56 mg/L 3.3 gpg Soft
  9. Oakland, CA 68.4 mg/L 4 gpg Moderately hard
  10. Nashville, TN 77.3 mg/L 4.5 gpg Moderately hard
  11. Sacramento, CA 83 mg/L 4.9 gpg Moderately hard
  12. Fresno, CA 89.3 mg/L 5.2 gpg Moderately hard
  13. Saint Paul, MN 90 mg/L 5 gpg Moderately hard
  14. Austin, TX 93 mg/L 5.4 gpg Moderately hard
  15. Washington, DC 95 mg/L 5.6 gpg Moderately hard
  16. Birmingham, AL 98 mg/L 5.7 gpg Moderately hard
  17. Kansas City, MO 100 mg/L 5.8 gpg Moderately hard
  18. Denver, CO 105 mg/L 6.1 gpg Moderately hard
  19. Tulsa, OK 114.5 mg/L 6.7 gpg Moderately hard
  20. Louisville, KY 115 mg/L 6.7 gpg Moderately hard
  21. Columbus, OH 120 mg/L 7 gpg Moderately hard
  22. Cleveland, OH 120 mg/L 7 gpg Moderately hard
  23. Philadelphia, PA 125 mg/L 7.3 gpg Hard
  24. Ann Arbor, MI 126 mg/L 7.4 gpg Hard
  25. Cincinnati, OH 133 mg/L 7.8 gpg Hard
  26. Milwaukee, WI 137 mg/L 8.01 gpg Hard
  27. St. Louis, MO 138 mg/L 8.1 gpg Hard
  28. Fort Worth, TX 145 mg/L 8.5 gpg Hard
  29. Honolulu, HI 162.5 mg/L 9.5 gpg Hard
  30. Wichita, KS 170 mg/L 9.9 gpg Hard
  31. Omaha, NE 170 mg/L 10 gpg Hard
  32. Los Angeles, CA 192 mg/L 11.2 gpg Very hard
  33. Lincoln, NE 192 mg/L 11.2 gpg Very hard
  34. Tampa, FL 220 mg/L 12.9 gpg Very hard
  35. Phoenix, AZ 237 mg/L 13.9 gpg Very hard
  36. Mesa, AZ 239.4 mg/L 14 gpg Very hard
  37. San Diego, CA 276 mg/L 16 gpg Very hard
  38. Las Vegas, NV 280 mg/L 16 gpg Very hard
  39. Chandler, AZ 282.2 mg/L 16.5 gpg Very hard
  40. San Antonio, TX 299.3 mg/L 17.5 gpg Very hard
  41. Anaheim, CA 300 mg/L 18 gpg Very hard
  42. Indianapolis, IN 317 mg/L 19 gpg Very hard
  43. Madison, WI 324.9 mg/L 19 gpg Very hard
  44. Scottsdale, AZ 352.5 mg/L 20.6 gpg Very hard

mg/L as calcium carbonate. Each classification band is drawn the same width, so the axis is not linear in mg/L.

Charlotte, NC is the highlighted row. Every other system on this chart has its own page with its own published figure and report date. Grains per gallon are the utility's own figure where it published one, and our conversion at 17.1 mg/L per grain where it did not.

Systems with similar published hardness

All 44 verified systems   How to find hardness in your own utility's report   If you are on a well instead