City public works staff are developing a pilot program to help homeowners replace lead water service lines to comply with a rule change coming from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
The city is preparing for new federal regulations pertaining to lead levels in public drinking water that are set to go into effect October 2024.
The rules will lower the amount of detectable lead in the water that triggers treatment actions and data reporting, with the potential for significant cost to the City of Great Falls.
The new rules are from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and city officials said the revision for stricter compliance was triggered by the 2014 Flint, Mich. water crisis in which public water supplies were contaminated with lead.
Current city code makes the water line from the house to the main the responsibility of the property owner.
The new EPA rules will likely mandate replacement of lead lines by 2025 and Mark Juras of the city public works department said they’re proposing a pilot program to make sure of some available funding to help property owners.
State accepting applications for lead mitigation projects in public water supplies
City staff have been briefing commissioners on the new rule for a year and a half.
The state is expecting about $28 million a year for five years through the infrastructure bill and the state is making that funding available to municipalities through the state revolving loan program with 60 percent forgiveness and up to $2 million per project, according to the city public works department.
“It’s prudent planning for the future,” Juras told commissioners.
Under the new rules, the inventory will have to show what water service lines are not known as lead, those that are known as lead and those that are unknown
City developing plans for new federal rules on lead in drinking water
The city adopted rules in the 1960s or 70s that prohibited lead pipes and they can use that documentation to help identify what type of pipes are where in the city.
The city has been using historical records to identify as many service line materials as possible, and sent 10,000 letters to property owners who might have non-copper service lines last summer asking them to do identification tests of their pipes.
As of May 2023, the city had identified 14,846 or 67.8 percent lines as non-lead; 142 or 0.6 percent as lead; 502 or 2.3 percent as galvanized; and 6,423 or 29.3 percent as unknown.
Unknown lines are considered lead until proven otherwise under the EPA regulations.
The current rules trigger actions at lead levels above 15 parts per billion and the new rule would trigger action at 10 parts per billion.
GFPS working to replace, fix faucets, sinks where lead detected under new state rule
The new rules require lead pipes to be replaced and city officials said that’s an ongoing community conversation about who will bear that cost.
The city has to identify the lead, galvanized and unknown lines and has to provide online access to the public of their locations.
Under the new rules, the city will also have to do tap line sampling at homes with known lead service lines and have to test at the fifth liter, which targets water that’s been stagnant in the service line, Juras said.
City prepping for new EPA rules on lead in public water systems
That part of the rule will be in place in late 2024 or early 2025, Juras said, and the results will determine the city’s action levels in terms of more sampling, monitoring or replacing the pipes.
Juras said public works staff has developed a plan for a pilot program.
They’ve reached out to property owners with known lead lines and are planning to do a full replacement of 20 known lead service lines.
They’ve had about 30 property owners express interest in participation and staff intends to start with the 20 with the highest lead concentrations in their water.
If they get less than 20 volunteers for the pilot, Juras said they’d open the program to those with known lead lines on a first come first serve basis.
Staff is estimating $300,000 per project and they’re looking at project design this fall, bidding in early 2024 and construction in summer 2024, Juras said.
Staff would look to use federal Community Development Block Grant funds for eligible properties, Juras said.
He said under the proposed pilot program they’ll request a 40 percent match of the construction cost from the property owner, whether through CDBG funds or out of pocket, to the 60 percent loan forgiveness.
Juras said public works is coordinating with the finance department to discuss payment agreements with property owners.
In the pilot program, they’d have signed agreements with property owners, bid information would be delivered to the property owners and the cost share would be based on actual cost and payment terms, Juras said. The interest free loan would be assessed on the property owner’s water bill or paid in full at completion, according to city staff.
Juras said replacement of lead service lines hasn’t yet been mandated but they are planning for that eventuality.
He told commissioners that assuming they end up with 200 known lead lines and 800 galvanized, the city could maximize the state revolving loan fund through a $15 million loan at $15,000 per line with $9 million forgiveness for five projects using $2 million from the water enterprise fund and $4 million through CDBG funds or the property owners.
Or they could use a $3 million loan through the state’s revolving loan fund for the known 200 lead lines at $15,000 per line with $1.8 million forgiveness; $0.4 million from the water enterprise fund and $0.8 million through CDBG or property owners.
Commissioner Joe McKenney said there will likely be pushback from property owners who don’t want to particiapte.
Juras said the real estate market will likely start including lead service lines as a liability when selling property.
The current rules require the city to send nonconforming property owners letters about the EPA rule and options to replace.
The idea is to reduce lead in drinking water, according to the EPA and city officials, but there could be a significant cost to the city, particularly if the changes impact the city’s water treatment plant.
