Polson, other cities band together on wastewater issues

Representatives from cities across western Montana say they’re tired of bearing the brunt of costly upgrades to wastewater treatment facilities because of increasingly stringent state and federal regulations.

In October, the Flathead Regional Wastewater Management hosted a workshop in Kalispell that brought city and county officials together with representatives from the Montana Department of Environmental Quality and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

City representatives said something needs to be done about non-point pollution sources in the Flathead Basin. Nonpoint sources include septic systems, agriculture, forests and dust.

Numbers presented at the workshop showed that in the last three decades the cities of Kalispell, Columbia Falls, Whitefish, Polson and Bigfork have spent a combined $85 million to upgrade wastewater treatment facilities.

Columbia Falls city councilor Mike Shepard said cities are paying for facility upgrades, with incremental improvements in water quality resulting.

“As an elected person,” Shepard said. “What happens when the well runs dry and we can’t pay any more. It’s an astronomical number (what has been spent). It’s time the state works with the cities.”

The EPA and the state DEQ regulate municipal wastewater facilities.

The wastewater management group includes representatives from Flathead and Lake county and municipal cities in those two counties along with other interested stakeholders.

The group commissioned a study that indicated that a number of aging septic systems are likely contributing to pollution loads to Flathead Lake due to surface-groundwater interactions.

City of Polson engineer Shari Johnson said cities are forced to meet stricter regulations, while septic tanks outside city limits are causing pollution.

“I’m not convinced that the municipalities are the sources we need to target,” she said. “We need to take a bigger look at this issue.”

Jason Gildea, a hydrologist with the EPA, said work continues on defining the guidelines that cities have to follow and those may actually become less strict in the future. He acknowledged that a complaint a lot of cities have is that there is no regulation on nonpoint sources.

“Don’t panic,” he said. “I think there is additional work that needs to be done in terms of the science.”

Gildea said ongoing work could help further conversations about how septic systems are impacting the watershed.

At the crux of the issue is total maximum daily load or TMDL. Gildea said TMDL provides the road map for achieving water quality, but the TMDL for Flathead Lake was created in 1991.

“It’s 15 to 20 years later and quite frankly things have changed here,” Gildea said. “A lot of treatment plants have upgraded since then. There has been a lot of restoration.”

“We’re going to be re-assessing the targets we set for Flathead Lake,” Gildea added. “That’s going to be ongoing for the next few years.”

The city of Whitefish has spent $11.2 million since 1983 to upgrade its facilities and it may have to spend more in the future.

During a panel discussion, Whitefish Public Works Director John Wilson said the city is looking at challenges, in particularly in areas like around Whitefish Lake.

He pointed to a study by the Whitefish Lake Institute that shows failing septic tanks are leaking into the lake.

“What we’re finding is there is some septic issues,” he said. “But the cost benefit ratio doesn’t pencil out. The expense of extending (city) sewer really adds up fast.”

The city applied for a state Department of Natural Resources and Conservation grant to study nutrient reductions that could eventually turn into nutrient trading opportunities.

“We’re hopefully going to finish this work by the end of the year and we’ll have ideas to take to DEQ,” Wilson said. “This has potential to find creative ways to work together.”