The initial draft of new Thurston County regulations aimed at protecting drinking water supplies would prohibit LOTT from building wastewater recharge sites at four properties that LOTT owns around the county.
All of the sites feature well-draining soils that make them ideal places to infiltrate reclaimed wastewater, but they also are likely candidates for groundwater pollution.
The clash between the Lacey, Olympia, Tumwater and Thurston County sewer utility and the county is spelled out in a chapter of the county’s critical area ordinance that deals with protecting groundwater, which is the sole source of drinking water in the county.
“The reclaimed water provisions in this draft would effectively shut down expansion of LOTT’s reclaimed water program,” LOTT community relations and environmental policy director Karla Fowler said in a Sept. 30 letter to county associate planner Andrew Deffobis.
LOTT has spent tens of millions of dollars on planning, land purchases and construction of its first reclaimed water treatment plant and infiltration site in Hawks Prairie with the formal approval of the state departments of Ecology and Health, Fowler said.
The next reclaimed wastewater site slated for development beginning with on-site studies next year is near the Olympia Airport. Others are located near Rixie, Mullen and Stedman roads.
As written, the county regulations would stifle urban growth and violate the state Growth Management Act, which allows siting of essential public facilities and prevent cities such as Olympia and Lacey from using reclaimed water to mitigate new water rights, the letter went on to say.
“We’re concerned – we want to meet with county staff and talk about it,” Olympia interim public works director Rich Hoey said.
Deffobis said county planners are working on a revised draft of regulations for the critical aquifer recharge areas with LOTT’s point of view in mind. It should be out for further review in a week or two.
However, he said, the county’s first priority is to protect groundwater for human consumption.
“We support reclaimed wastewater recharge,” Deffobis said. “Our principal concerns are: Where is the reclaimed wastewater going and what effect does it have on drinking water supplies?”
Studies prior to construction of the Hawks Prairie reclaimed water infiltration basins suggested the wastewater wouldn’t degrade groundwater. It operates under permits issued by the Ecology and Health state agencies.
However, new data are emerging that suggest trace amounts of everything from personal care products to prescription drugs can be found in treated wastewater. To date, there are no regulations for these types of potential pollutants.
“Our goal here is to rely on the best available science,” Deffobis said.
One way LOTT could reduce some of the uncertainty over its impact on drinking water supplies would be to add treatment processes to its wastewater, including reverse osmosis or nanofiltration.
But those would roughly double the cost of treatment and plant operations, which could lead to a doubling of costs for LOTT sewer customers, LOTT executive director Michael Strub said.
LOTT and county officials expect to meet to try to settle their differences once the draft regulation is rewritten.
Meanwhile, LOTT has set aside $1.4 million to begin a four-year study next year designed to provide greater detail on how its reclaimed wastewater reacts with groundwater.
“LOTT recognizes that there is a lack of definitive science and engineering regarding groundwater recharge in this area,” the LOTT 2012 budget document noted.
Ecology was working on a new rule to govern use of reclaimed water, but that work was suspended because of state budget cuts, Ecology spokeswoman Sandy Howard said.
John Dodge: 360-754-5444 jdodge@theolympian
