City of Lamar
Serves Lamar.
Its service area also reaches South Platte Cheesman to Denver Gage (1.0%), Republican River (0.0%), South Platte: Denver Gage to Greeley (0.0%).
Boundary traced from WSP. About 10 km².
Where the water comes from
| Facility | Kind | Water |
|---|---|---|
| WELL NO 28 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 8 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 9 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 10 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 11 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 14 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 15 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 16 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 17 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 18 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 19 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 20 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 22 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 23 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 24 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 25 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 26 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 27 | Well | Groundwater |
| WELL NO 1 | 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.
Wholesale connections
Sells water to 1 system: PROSPERITY LANE WA.
DWR structures that name this system
Source Probable join · fetched 2026-09-09 · 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 2026-09-09 · verify at EPA ECHO ↗
No open violation and no health-based violation on EPA's federal record for this system at the last monthly fetch. That is a record of reported compliance, not a test result: SDWIS carries violations, not routine sample values.
EPA's own summary: violations in 0 of the last 12 quarters.
No health-based or open violation on the federal record for this system.
What the regulator did about it
1 enforcement action 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 |
|---|---|---|
| 2016-09-07 | St Compliance achieved | state |
Lead and copper
The latest 90th-percentile lead result is 0.004 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 2026-09-09 · verify at EPA UCMR occurrence data ↗
2 samples, 60 results, 2025-02-05 to 2025-08-26. 2 of the 29 PFAS were detected at least once; lithium was measured up to 83.0 µg/L (no federal limit).
| Contaminant | Results | Detected | Highest, µg/L | Reporting limit |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HFPO-DA | 2 | 0 | < 0.005 | 0.005 |
| PFBS | 2 | 1 | 0.0047 | 0.003 |
| PFHxS | 2 | 1 | 0.0033 | 0.003 |
| PFNA | 2 | 0 | < 0.004 | 0.004 |
| PFOA | 2 | 0 | < 0.004 | 0.004 |
| PFOS | 2 | 0 | < 0.004 | 0.004 |
| lithium | 2 | 2 | 83.0 | 9.0 |
Rows shown: every detected contaminant plus the regulated PFAS and lithium; the rest were below their reporting limits. These are UCMR monitoring samples, not compliance samples. EPA's April 2024 rule set 4.0 ng/L (0.004 µg/L) for PFOA and PFOS, the same as UCMR 5's reporting limit, so any detection of either is at or above it; the rule's compliance date and its other limits have been under revision since 2025 and are not applied here. State PFAS sampling is on CDPHE's pages ↗.
Common questions
Who provides drinking water in Lamar, Colorado?
The City of Lamar is the public water system serving 7,500 people in Prowers County, from groundwater. Its EPA public water system id is CO0150700.
Where does the City of Lamar get its water?
The City of Lamar reports groundwater as its primary source. EPA lists its source facilities as WELL NO 28, WELL NO 8, WELL NO 9, WELL NO 10.
Does the City of Lamar have any drinking water violations?
EPA's compliance record shows no open health-based violations for the City of Lamar at the last monthly fetch. Older and non-health-based entries, if any, are listed on this page.
Places this system serves
Census places its EPA service-area boundary substantially covers. Each page lists every system serving that place.
Every provider in Prowers County.
The record
EPA SDWIS federal reporting as of 2026-09-08; the compliance record above is EPA's own, fetched monthly, and the ECHO report carries the rest. Report a problem →