Hydrohistorian
Will O Wisp Metro District
Modelled boundary. EPA estimated this service area (Random Forest) rather than tracing a utility-supplied map; treat the edge as approximate. About 0 km².
Where the water comes from
| Facility | Kind | Water |
|---|---|---|
| WELL NO 7 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 2 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 3 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 4 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 6 | Well | Groundwater |
These are EPA's facility records, not DWR structures. Which decreed rights sit behind an intake is the next phase; nothing here is inferred.
DWR structures that name this system
Source Probable join · fetched 2026-10-06 · matched on DWR's recorded contact or an EPA intake name; verify on the dossier
No DWR structure on file records this system as its contact, and none of its EPA intakes matches a structure name in its districts. DWR records a contact on only a fraction of structures, and only for districts fetched from its live service, so this is absence of a record, not evidence of no rights.
Compliance record
Source Register of another agency · fetched 2026-10-07 · verify at EPA ECHO ↗
2 violations open now, none health-based. These are monitoring, reporting or notice requirements — a sample not taken, or a result not filed on time. They are real obligations, but they are not a finding about the water itself.
EPA's own summary: violations in 12 of the last 12 quarters. In violation for, in EPA's words: 2456=Total Haloacetic Acids (HAA5); 2950=TTHM; 7000=Consumer Confidence Rule. Currently: 7000=Consumer Confidence Rule.
What happened
All 3 violation records on file, grouped into the 2 distinct things EPA's codes describe. Dates are the compliance period the violation is filed against.
Rule: Consumer Confidence Report -- the annual report to customers.
Rule: Stage 1 Disinfectants and Disinfection Byproducts Rule.
Every violation record, as filed (3 of 3)
| Compliance period | What | About | Kind | Status | Measured |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-07-01 | CCR Complete Failure to Report | Consumer Confidence Rule | other | open | |
| 2025-07-01 | CCR Complete Failure to Report | Consumer Confidence Rule | other | open | |
| 2022-05-01 | Treatment Technique No Certif. Operator | DBP Stage 1 | health-based | returned to compliance (2022-05-06) |
What the regulator did about it
11 enforcement actions on this system's federal record. In Colorado the state is the primacy agency, so most actions are the state's; EPA acts directly on tribal systems and when it steps in.
| Date | Action | By |
|---|---|---|
| 2026-08-11 | St Violation/Reminder Notice | state |
| 2026-08-11 | St Public Notif requested | state |
| 2025-09-08 | St Compliance achieved System collected next required routine sampling in 2025 lmf 11/3/2025 |
state |
| 2025-07-15 | St Violation/Reminder Notice | state |
| 2025-07-15 | St Public Notif requested | state |
| 2023-10-18 | St Violation/Reminder Notice | state |
| 2023-10-18 | St Public Notif requested | state |
| 2022-05-13 | St Public Notif received | state |
| 2022-05-06 | St Compliance achieved | state |
| 2022-05-03 | St Violation/Reminder Notice | state |
| 2022-05-03 | St Public Notif requested | state |
Lead and copper
The latest 90th-percentile lead result is 0.0055 mg/L (sampling period ending 2025-12-31) against an action level of 0.015 mg/L, below it. 7 results on file.
The action level is not a health limit: it is the level at which the rule requires a system to act (corrosion control, public education, and in some cases replacing lead service lines). Lead mostly enters water from household plumbing, so a system-wide percentile does not tell you what comes out of one tap.
Violation, enforcement and lead/copper records are EPA SDWIS federal reporting, fetched monthly; the summary is EPA ECHO. Code names come from EPA's own REF_CODE_VALUE table. SDWIS carries violations, not routine sample results — nitrate, disinfection by-product and PFAS values are not in it, and a clean record here means nothing was reported as a violation, not that nothing was ever detected. For what was measured, ask the system for its Consumer Confidence Report.
PFAS and lithium: EPA's UCMR 5 monitoring, 2023–2025
Source Register of another agency · fetched 2026-10-09 · verify at EPA UCMR occurrence data ↗
EPA did not sample this system under UCMR 5 (the rule covered every system serving more than 3,300 people and a drawn sample of smaller ones).
What changed recently
Differences EPA's monthly federal record showed against the month before. A date in brackets is EPA's own; otherwise it is when this site first saw the change.
- Enforcement action: St Violation/Reminder Notice (2026-08-11)
- Enforcement action: St Public Notif requested (2026-08-11)
- New violation: CCR Complete Failure to Report — Consumer Confidence Rule (2026-07-01)
Save this system to My Water and these changes appear there each time you visit.
Common questions
Who provides drinking water in Bailey, Colorado?
Will O Wisp Metro District is the public water system serving 300 people in Park County, from groundwater. Its EPA public water system id is CO0147200.
Where does Will O Wisp Metro District get its water?
Will O Wisp Metro District reports groundwater as its primary source. EPA lists its source facilities as WELL NO 7, WELL NO 2, WELL NO 3, WELL NO 4.
Does Will O Wisp Metro District have any drinking water violations?
EPA's compliance record shows no open health-based violations for Will O Wisp Metro District at the last monthly fetch. Older and non-health-based entries, if any, are listed on this page.
Every provider in Park County.
The record
EPA SDWIS federal reporting as of 2026-10-06; the compliance record above is EPA's own, fetched monthly, and the ECHO report carries the rest. Report a problem →