Public Pool Inspection Violations: Closure Rates and Most Common Citations in Six US Jurisdictions, 2019 to 2026

At a glance

• Sacramento County, California ended 13.9% of 2,163 routine pool inspections in 2025 with a permit suspension, imminent hazard finding or closure (Sacramento County EMD).
• New York City found at least one public health hazard violation in 11.2% of 960 routine pool inspections in 2025 (NYC DOHMH).
• Arlington, Texas closed 12.5% of routine pool inspections in its 2026 permit season (October 2025 to September 2026) (City of Arlington).
• VGB suction (drain) covers were the single most cited violation in Sacramento County routine inspections from April 2023 to March 2026, at 17.4% of 12,371 citations (Sacramento County EMD).
• Disinfectant, pH and cyanuric acid problems made up 32.2% of Sacramento County violation citations from April 2023 to March 2026 (PC&S analysis of Sacramento County EMD data).
• In Louisville Metro, Kentucky, 53.6% of spa free chlorine readings and 14.5% of pool readings were below the MAHC minimums from October 2021 to April 2024 (Louisville Metro Public Health and Wellness; CDC, 2024 MAHC).
• Montgomery County, Maryland failed 15.2% of pre-opening pool inspections in 2026, against 7.2% of annual inspections (Montgomery County DHHS).
• CDC found that 12.3% of routine inspections in 16 jurisdictions in five states resulted in immediate closure in 2013 (8,118 of 66,098 inspections with closure data), the most recent multi-state benchmark this review found (CDC, MMWR 2016).

Public pool inspection violations and closure rates in six US jurisdictions

Closure-level outcomes cluster between 10.0% and 13.9% of routine inspections in the latest year for five of the six jurisdictions, close to the 12.1% and 12.3% immediate closure shares CDC found in 2008 and 2013. The definitions differ, so the figures show a common order of magnitude rather than a ranking. Austin is the outlier because it counts operator self-closures.

Sacramento County, California recorded a permit suspension, imminent public health hazard or closure in 14.9% of routine inspections in 2023, 14.8% in 2024 and 13.9% in 2025 (Sacramento County EMD).

Arlington, Texas closed 56 of 449 evaluated routine pool inspections (12.5%) in the 2026 season, and another 16.0% passed with a follow-up required (City of Arlington).

New York City does not publish closures in its pool file. The city recorded at least one public health hazard violation, the category that allows immediate closure under Health Code Article 165.11, in 11.2% of routine inspections in 2025 (NYC DOHMH; NYC Health Code Article 165).

Louisville Metro, Kentucky recorded an imminent health hazard in 10.7% of routine inspections in 2022 and 11.2% in 2023 (Louisville Metro Public Health and Wellness).

Austin, Texas ended 32.1% of routine inspections from February to December 2025 in a closure. Self-closures made up 70.8% of Austin closures from February 2025 to September 2026, and COA-closures (the dataset’s label, read here as City of Austin) made up the rest (Austin Public Health).

Montgomery County, Maryland reported a ‘Pool closed’ result in 14.1% to 18.8% of routine inspections in 2018 and 2019 and 13.8% in 2023 under its previous system; its current system recorded Fail or Closed status for 9.1% of 2026 inspections (Montgomery County DHHS, 2018 to 2024 data; Montgomery County DHHS, 2025 to 2026 data).

Most common public pool inspection violations: drain covers, disinfectant and pH

Sacramento County is the only jurisdiction in this profile that publishes violation names for every inspection. Its 12,371 routine citations from April 2023 to March 2026 are led by drain-cover (VGB) violations, followed by low disinfectant, flow meters and low pH. Louisville and Montgomery County item data point the same way on water chemistry, with safety equipment second in Louisville.

VGB suction covers accounted for 17.4% of Sacramento County routine violation citations from April 2023 to March 2026 (Sacramento County EMD).

VGB refers to the federal Virginia Graeme Baker Pool and Spa Safety Act, which sets design requirements for drain covers and anti-entrapment systems in public pools and spas (Montgomery County DHHS). The MAHC treats a broken, unsecured or missing main drain grate as an imminent health hazard (MAHC 6.6.3.1) (CDC, 2024 MAHC).

Minimum disinfectant residual accounted for 10.8% of citations, flow meters 8.1% and minimum pH 7.9% in Sacramento County over the same period (Sacramento County EMD).

Grouped into categories, drain and suction outlet covers made up 18.2% of Sacramento County citations, circulation and chemical feed equipment 16.8%, disinfectant level 14.8%, pH 13.9% and enclosures and gates 12.9% (PC&S grouping of Sacramento County EMD data).

In Louisville Metro, Kentucky, 21.6% of routine inspections from October 2021 to April 2024 failed the disinfectant level item and 20.8% failed the safety equipment item (Louisville Metro Public Health and Wellness).

Chlorine and pH: water chemistry violations at public pools

Water chemistry is the most consistent problem across the datasets. It is 32.2% of Sacramento County citations and 54.8% of Montgomery County’s unsatisfactory critical items, and measured chlorine in Louisville shows why: spa readings often fall short of the higher spa minimum.

Sacramento County cited at least one disinfectant, pH or cyanuric acid violation in 47.6% of routine pool inspections from April 2023 to March 2026 (Sacramento County EMD).

Louisville Metro recorded disinfectant level or pH out of range in 24.2% of routine inspections from October 2021 to April 2024 (Louisville Metro Public Health and Wellness).

In Louisville, 14.5% of 1,748 pool free chlorine readings were below the MAHC minimum of 1.0 ppm, and 8.6% read 0 ppm (Louisville Metro Public Health and Wellness; CDC, 2024 MAHC).

The MAHC sets a minimum free chlorine of 1.0 ppm for venues without cyanuric acid, 2.0 ppm with cyanuric acid and 3.0 ppm for spas, and a pH range of 7.0 to 7.8 (CDC, 2024 MAHC).

Hot tubs and spas versus pools: inspection failure rates

Spas close more often than pools in four of five closure-level comparisons, but only by 1.6 to 3.3 percentage points, and Louisville’s imminent hazard share runs the other way. The large gap is in chlorine: spas must hold a higher minimum, and in Louisville more than half of spa readings fell short of the MAHC spa level.

Arlington, Texas closed 14.6% of routine spa inspections and 12.4% of routine pool inspections in the 2026 season (City of Arlington).

Austin, Texas ended 33.9% of routine spa inspections and 32.3% of routine pool inspections in a closure from February 2025 to September 2026, with venue type inferred from facility names (Austin Public Health).

In Louisville Metro, 59.5% of routine spa inspections and 60.3% of routine pool inspections did not pass from October 2021 to April 2024, 0.8 percentage points lower for spas (Louisville Metro Public Health and Wellness).

In Louisville, 53.6% of 69 spa free chlorine readings were below the MAHC spa minimum of 3.0 ppm, against 14.5% of pool readings below the 1.0 ppm pool minimum (Louisville Metro Public Health and Wellness). The median spa reading was 2.4 ppm.

CDC reported that 15.1% of routine hot tub and spa inspections and 11.8% of pool inspections resulted in immediate closure in 2013; pH violations were found in 27.5% of spa inspections (CDC, MMWR 2016).

When public pools fail inspection: seasonality of violations

In New York City and Montgomery County, failure shares peak in spring and early summer, when pre-opening and first inspections find equipment and chemistry problems, and fall by July and August. Sacramento County’s closures are concentrated in its June to August inspection season, and the year-round Texas and Kentucky programs show no strong seasonal pattern.

New York City found a public health hazard violation in 17.7% of routine inspections from January to June and 9.1% in July and August, pooling 2019 to 2025 (NYC DOHMH).

Montgomery County, Maryland recorded Fail or Closed status in 16.7% of April and May inspections and 4.7% of July to September inspections, pooling April 2025 to September 2026 (Montgomery County DHHS).

Sacramento County ended 15.4% of June to August routine inspections in suspension or closure, against 1.8% from September to April; 91.1% of its routine inspections fall in June to August (Sacramento County EMD).

Austin’s monthly non-compliance share stayed between 48.3% and 63.3% across the calendar year from October 2023 to September 2026 (Austin Public Health).

New York City pool inspection violations, 2019 to 2025

New York City’s seven-year file shows fewer routine inspections with any violation since 2019, while the share with a public health hazard has held between 8.7% and 16.6%. Most violations cited are general (lowest severity).

General violations made up 60.3% of all violations cited at New York City routine pool inspections in 2025, and public health hazard violations 21.6% (NYC DOHMH).

New York City routine inspections averaged 0.87 violations each in 2025 (NYC DOHMH).

The share of New York City routine inspections with any violation fell 18.9 percentage points from 2019 to 2025 (NYC DOHMH).

How often public pools are inspected

Inspection frequency ranges from one routine visit a year to monthly checks. The data show about one routine inspection per permit a year in New York City and Austin, and two or more in Louisville and Montgomery County.

• New York City: 1.0 routine inspection per permitted pool in 2025 (NYC DOHMH).
• Austin, Texas: 1.02 routine inspections per facility in 2025; operating permits are valid for 1 year (Austin Public Health; City of Austin).
• Sacramento County, California: 1.69 routine inspections per facility in 2025; EMD conducts annual inspections at approximately 2,200 public pools, spas, spray grounds and water parks (Sacramento County EMD; EMD Recreational Health Program).
• Louisville Metro, Kentucky: 2.57 routine inspections per facility in 2023; the department says pools are inspected twice annually (Louisville Metro Public Health and Wellness; Louisville Metro bulletin, June 19, 2026).
• Montgomery County, Maryland: 2.84 inspections per registered pool in 2026, counting pre-opening, annual and monitoring visits (Montgomery County DHHS).
• Metro Nashville, Tennessee: pools are inspected at a minimum every month that they are open (Metro Nashville Public Health).
• CDC: routine inspections are conducted one to three times per year, primarily in warmer months, in the 2013 NAFIS jurisdictions (CDC, MMWR 2016).

How local pool inspection results compare with CDC surveillance

The latest local closure-level shares sit near the CDC multi-state benchmarks from 2008 and 2013. Those two CDC reports are the most recent multi-state inspection summaries this review found, so local open data carry the newer evidence.

CDC analysed 121,020 routine pool inspections from 15 agencies in 2008; 12.1% of the 111,487 with closure data resulted in immediate closure and 61.1% identified at least one violation (CDC, MMWR 2010).

CDC’s Network for Aquatic Facility Inspection Surveillance found that 12.3% of routine inspections resulted in immediate closure in 2013, and 78.9% identified at least one violation (CDC, MMWR 2016).

Austin, Texas was one of the 16 NAFIS jurisdictions, reporting 1,348 routine inspections for 2013 (CDC, MMWR 2016).

Sacramento County’s 2025 closure share was 1.6 percentage points above the 2013 NAFIS immediate closure share, a difference within the range expected from different codes and years (Sacramento County EMD; CDC, MMWR 2016).

Hotel and motel pools had an immediate closure share of 15.3% in CDC’s 2008 sample (CDC, MMWR 2010).

Fifteen numbers that matter

1. New York City: 43.4% of 960 routine pool inspections in 2025 found at least one violation of any severity, down from 62.3% in 2019 (NYC DOHMH).
2. New York City: the annual share of routine inspections with a public health hazard violation ranged from 8.7% to 16.6% between 2019 and 2025 (NYC DOHMH).
3. New York City: indoor pools had a public health hazard violation in 13.8% of routine inspections from 2023 to 2025, compared with 9.0% for outdoor pools (NYC DOHMH).
4. Austin, Texas: 60.4% of 1,777 routine pool and spa inspections in 2025 were rated non-compliant (Austin Public Health).
5. Austin, Texas: 32.0% of routine inspections from January 1 to September 10, 2026 ended in a closure, 22.1% self-closures and 10.0% COA-closures (Austin Public Health).
6. Montgomery County, Maryland: 13.8% of routine pool inspections in 2023 ended with a ‘Pool closed’ result under the county’s previous reporting system (Montgomery County DHHS).
7. Montgomery County, Maryland: water chemistry accounted for 54.8% of 602 unsatisfactory critical-item marks from April 2025 to September 2026 (Montgomery County DHHS).
8. Louisville Metro, Kentucky: 62.6% of 1,082 routine pool inspections did not meet the passing standard (score of 86% with no critical violation) in 2023 (Louisville Metro Public Health and Wellness).
9. Louisville Metro, Kentucky: 11.2% of routine pool inspections in 2023 recorded an imminent health hazard, the condition that requires immediate closure (Louisville Metro Public Health and Wellness).
10. Louisville Metro, Kentucky: 13.9% of 533 permitted pools had a most recent 2026 inspection score below 86, through October 1, 2026 (Louisville Metro Public Health and Wellness).
11. Sacramento County, California: 80.2% of routine pool inspections in 2025 found critical violations or ended in suspension, and 9.5% were rated pass or in compliance (Sacramento County EMD).
12. Sacramento County, California: 47.6% of routine pool inspections from April 2023 to March 2026 cited at least one disinfectant, pH or cyanuric acid violation (Sacramento County EMD).
13. Arlington, Texas: 50.7% of 793 preliminary (permit) pool inspections in the 2026 season were rated Fail (City of Arlington).
14. CDC: hot tub and spa inspections resulted in immediate closure in 15.1% of routine inspections in 2013, compared with 11.8% for pools, in 16 jurisdictions in five states (CDC, MMWR 2016).

Rates, trends and severity we calculated

Download the calculation sheet (CSV)

New in this edition

• 2026-09-30Arlington, Texas published inspections through September 30, 2026, covering its full 2026 permit season (1,795 records) (City of Arlington).
• 2026-09-25Montgomery County, Maryland’s current dataset runs to September 25, 2026, with 2,776 evaluated inspections in 2026 (Montgomery County DHHS).
• 2026-09-10Austin Public Health’s rolling three-year file runs to September 10, 2026 (Austin Public Health).
• 2026-06-19Louisville Metro Public Health and Wellness restated that pools are inspected twice a year and pointed residents to its open inspection data (Louisville Metro Public Health and Wellness).
• 2025-12-31New York City’s dataset now holds the full 2025 inspection year (960 routine inspections) (NYC DOHMH).
• 2025-02Austin began labelling non-compliant results as Open, Self-closure or COA-Closure in February 2025, which makes closure rates measurable (Austin Public Health).
• 2024-12-16CDC posted the 2024 Model Aquatic Health Code (5th edition), which adds three imminent health hazards requiring immediate closure, including free chlorine above 10 ppm with bathers present; the Annex was revised on February 4, 2025 (CDC).

What people ask

Common questions

Evidence tiers

Tier 1: primary and government sources (23)

• Sacramento County (Environmental Management Department data, County GIS): Pool Inspections: Facilities and Inspection & Violation History
• NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH), NYC Open Data: NYC Pool Inspections (dataset 3kfa-rvez)
• City of Arlington, TX, Planning and Development Services, Health Services: Pool Inspection (Arlington Open Data)
• Louisville Metro Public Health and Wellness, Louisville Open Data: Louisville Metro KY: Pool Inspections (feature layer and data dictionary)
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): 2024 Model Aquatic Health Code, 5th edition (code)
• Montgomery County, MD, Department of Health and Human Services (dataMontgomery): HHS: Pool Inspection from July 2024 and onward (dataset 5zm9-xdka)
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): Immediate Closures and Violations Identified During Routine Inspections of Public Aquatic Facilities: Network for Aquatic Facility Inspection Surveillance, Five States, 2013 (MMWR Surveill Summ 2016;65(No. SS-5))
• Austin Public Health, City of Austin Open Data: Pool Inspections (dataset peux-uuwu)
• Montgomery County, MD, Department of Health and Human Services (dataMontgomery): Pool Inspections (dataset k35y-k582)
• Louisville Metro Public Health and Wellness, Louisville Open Data: Louisville Metro KY: Inspection Results Pools (last three scores per permitted pool)
• Louisville Metro Public Health and Wellness (GovDelivery): Check pool inspection data before you dive in (June 19, 2026 bulletin)
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): About The MAHC Current Edition
• NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene: New York City Health Code Article 165: Bathing Establishments
• Montgomery County, MD, Department of Health and Human Services: Swimming Pools (Licensing and Permits Unit)
• Texas Department of State Health Services: 25 TAC Chapter 265, Subchapter L: Public Swimming Pools and Spas
• City of Austin (Austin Public Health): Request a pool, spa, or interactive water feature inspection
• Sacramento County Environmental Management Department: Recreational Health Program: Pools and Spas
• Metro Nashville Public Health Department: Public Facilities Inspection
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): Violations Identified from Routine Swimming Pool Inspections: Selected States and Counties, United States, 2008 (MMWR 2010;59(19))
• Harris County Public Health (Texas): Swimming Pools & Spa Safety
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): What You Can Do to Stay Healthy in Hot Tubs
• Florida Department of Health: Public Swimming Pools
• DeKalb Public Health (Georgia): Inspection Scores for Public Swimming Pools, Beaches and Spas

Tier 2: trade bodies, public companies, market research (1)

• Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School (text of California regulation): Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 22, § 65529: Public Pool Disinfection

References

1. Sacramento County (Environmental Management Department data, County GIS). Pool Inspections: Facilities and Inspection & Violation History. Accessed 2026-10-06.
2. NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH), NYC Open Data. NYC Pool Inspections (dataset 3kfa-rvez). Accessed 2026-10-06.
3. City of Arlington, TX, Planning and Development Services, Health Services. Pool Inspection (Arlington Open Data). Accessed 2026-10-06.
4. Louisville Metro Public Health and Wellness, Louisville Open Data. Louisville Metro KY: Pool Inspections (feature layer and data dictionary). Accessed 2026-10-06.
5. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). 2024 Model Aquatic Health Code, 5th edition (code). Accessed 2026-10-06.
6. Montgomery County, MD, Department of Health and Human Services (dataMontgomery). HHS: Pool Inspection from July 2024 and onward (dataset 5zm9-xdka). Accessed 2026-10-06.
7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Immediate Closures and Violations Identified During Routine Inspections of Public Aquatic Facilities: Network for Aquatic Facility Inspection Surveillance, Five States, 2013 (MMWR Surveill Summ 2016;65(No. SS-5)). Accessed 2026-10-06.
8. Austin Public Health, City of Austin Open Data. Pool Inspections (dataset peux-uuwu). Accessed 2026-10-06.
9. Montgomery County, MD, Department of Health and Human Services (dataMontgomery). Pool Inspections (dataset k35y-k582). Accessed 2026-10-06.
10. Louisville Metro Public Health and Wellness, Louisville Open Data. Louisville Metro KY: Inspection Results Pools (last three scores per permitted pool). Accessed 2026-10-06.
11. Louisville Metro Public Health and Wellness (GovDelivery). Check pool inspection data before you dive in (June 19, 2026 bulletin). Accessed 2026-10-06.
12. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). About The MAHC Current Edition. Accessed 2026-10-06.
13. NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. New York City Health Code Article 165: Bathing Establishments. Accessed 2026-10-06.
14. Montgomery County, MD, Department of Health and Human Services. Swimming Pools (Licensing and Permits Unit). Accessed 2026-10-06.
15. Texas Department of State Health Services. 25 TAC Chapter 265, Subchapter L: Public Swimming Pools and Spas. Accessed 2026-10-06.
16. Legal Information Institute, Cornell Law School (text of California regulation). Cal. Code Regs. Tit. 22, § 65529: Public Pool Disinfection. Accessed 2026-10-06.
17. City of Austin (Austin Public Health). Request a pool, spa, or interactive water feature inspection. Accessed 2026-10-06.
18. Sacramento County Environmental Management Department. Recreational Health Program: Pools and Spas. Accessed 2026-10-06.
19. Metro Nashville Public Health Department. Public Facilities Inspection. Accessed 2026-10-06.
20. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Violations Identified from Routine Swimming Pool Inspections: Selected States and Counties, United States, 2008 (MMWR 2010;59(19)). Accessed 2026-10-06.
21. Harris County Public Health (Texas). Swimming Pools & Spa Safety. Accessed 2026-10-06.
22. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). What You Can Do to Stay Healthy in Hot Tubs. Accessed 2026-10-06.
23. Florida Department of Health. Public Swimming Pools. Accessed 2026-10-06.
24. DeKalb Public Health (Georgia). Inspection Scores for Public Swimming Pools, Beaches and Spas. Accessed 2026-10-06.