City public works staff were 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. But it’s now on hold.

In August, staff briefed commissioners on their plans for a pilot program, but during the Feb. 6 work session, told commissioners that pilot was paused since they discovered they can’t use state funds as they’d hoped.

The city is preparing for new federal regulations pertaining to lead levels in public drinking water that are set to go into effect in 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.

City planning pilot program to replace lead lines for upcoming EPA rule [2023]

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 in August 2023 that they were proposing a pilot program to make sure of some available funding to help property owners.

City staff have been briefing commissioners on the new rule for nearly two years.

During the Feb. 6 meeting, James Hewitt of public works said their initial plan was to use some of the state funds to help cover line replacement costs for homeowners, but have since found out they can’t use the funds in that way.

How far will Montana’s push to remove lead from school drinking water go? [2023]

The city had been planning a pilot program that would 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.

The state was expecting about $28 million a year for five years through the infrastructure bill and the 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.

Hewitt said the city was applying for those funds through the Montana Department of Environmental Quality when state officials said told the city they couldn’t pass a portion of those funds on to homeowners, they had to stay within the city.

The Montana League of Cities and Towns is now involved in trying to establish an option for municipalities to open some of that state funding for the pilot program that would help cover homeowner costs, he said.

State accepting applications for lead mitigation projects in public water supplies [2022]

Hewitt said during the Feb. 6 meeting that there’s $21 million in the state fund one other project in the state was using $2 million of it, otherwise, the City of Great Falls was the only city to show interest in using the funds.

Hewitt told commissioners that it might be a good time to contact to DEQ and encourage them to make that funding available for homeowners through a loan program like what the city is proposing.

Hewitt said they’re awaiting clear answers from the EPA on who’s responsible for the service line replacements, regardless of who owns the lines.

Commissioner Shannon Wilson asked how apartment buildings were factored into the EPA rules.

Hewitt said those lines, as of now, would be the responsibility of the property owners.

City developing plans for new federal rules on lead in drinking water [2022]

In the meantime, the city is continuing their inventory of service lines in the city limits as part of the new EPA regulations.

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.

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 in the summer of 2022 asking them to do identification tests of their pipes.

Unknown lines are considered lead until proven otherwise under the EPA regulations.

Once the inventory is complete, it has to be reported to the EPA and also made publicly available, Hewitt said.

Staff has to complete the inventory by October and are encountering a number of challenges, he told commissioners.

GFPS working to replace, fix faucets, sinks where lead detected under new state rule [2022]

About 7,500 people didn’t respond to the city’s mailers about testing their lines, so staff has been following up with phone calls. Hewitt said they ask homeowners to return the info or staff will go out and help them get the info to identify the line material.

Hewitt said homeowners aren’t returning messages, hanging up on staff or choosing not to participate.

As of the Feb. 6 meeting, staff had identified:

• 15,092 non-lead lines
• 150 lead lines
• 543 galvanized lines
• 6,132 unknown lines

For galvanized lines, the city has to prove they were never downstream from a lead line, because those will absorb lead. Hewitt said the city can’t do that, so have to consider galvanized lines as requiring removal and replacement under the new EPA rules.

Unknown lines are considered lead until proven otherwise under the EPA rules, he said.

That leaves the city looking at more than 6,000 lines that will have to be replaced under the new rules.

It’s not yet clear, city officials said, who will bear the costs and what the consequence of noncompliance will be, but if the past is any indication, the city has been fined by the EPA before, after asking for help with an issue, a cost that affects the budget and available resources for city services.

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.

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.

City prepping for new EPA rules on lead in public water systems [2022]

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, according to public works.

That part of the rule will be in place in late 2024 or early 2025, and the results will determine the city’s action levels in terms of more sampling, monitoring or replacing the pipes, according to public works.

Hewitt said that currently, they have to get permission from a property owner and take a water sample. The new rule will require two samples.

If there’s lead in the water above the EPA’s new allowable limits, the city will have to provide water filter pitchers, which are about $25-$30 currently, for six months, Hewitt said.

Since that’s a national rule, the cost of pitchers could increase with the demand.

Hewitt and Chris Gaub, city public works director, said that they’re waiting for the EPA rules to be finalized for more firm details.

Hewitt said the public comment period closed on the proposed rules in early February and there were thousands of comments.

Jesse Patton, city engineer, said one issue is that staff can’t go on to private property to test the lines without the owner’s permission.

He said the city has to make a good faith effort to identify the line before the EPA will say the line doesn’t count against the city, but they’d have to follow up on that line every time it changes ownership.

Gaub and Hewitt said the rules are finalized, but it’s been proposed that beginning in 2025, municipalities would have to replace a certain number of lead and galvanized lines every year for a decade.