Sewer rate spike ahead

Every Spokane sewer customer will have to pay more than $1,000 from now to 2018 to clean up the Spokane River.

More than $500 million in sewer improvements are proposed, including installation of high-tech filters to remove much of the phosphorus now being discharged from the city’s wastewater plant into the river.

The spending equals more than $1,000 by 2018 for every person in every Spokane city and county home that is connected to the system, and it is just part of the high cost of cleaning up a river long plagued by pollution.

To pay for the sewer projects, the city is charging ratepayers an extra $10 a month this year for a sewer rate stabilization fee, up from an extra $7 a month last year. The surcharge will increase to $13 a month in 2007 and is expected to remain at that amount for 20 years.

As a result, residential sewer bills inside the city, including the surcharges, are projected to go from $31.18 a month this year to $49 in 2018. Rates for county residents are also expected to increase. City Council members said the escalating sewer bills are especially hard on elderly and low-income residents. Even so, state and federal regulators say the proposed improvements may not be enough to meet requirements of the federal Clean Water Act.

Despite the city’s willingness to commit nearly a half billion dollars of ratepayer money to clean up the river, City Council members said they are wary that regulators may want the city to spend even more.

“We are spending every dime we can scavenge from the public,” city Councilman Bob Apple said during a recent meeting with state and federal environmental officials. “We are supposed to be representing the best interests of the public. Right now we are pushing the edge of possibility.”

Apple said he is concerned the city will embark on its multimillion-dollar improvements only to have state and federal regulators say the spending is insufficient.

“I want them to know we are doing everything we can,” he said.

Even city officials acknowledge that the proposed improvements are barely enough to bring the river into compliance with clean water standards for oxygen content. Phosphorous pollution comes from a variety of sources, including lawn fertilizers and agricultural uses along the river’s tributaries. Reductions in pollution coming from the city’s sewer system may not be enough to meet clean-water standards.

As a result, state and federal regulators said they cannot guarantee that Spokane’s proposed projects will be acceptable for complying with federal law.

“I can’t say that today. I know you would like a yes-or-no answer,” said Dave Peeler of the state Department of Ecology.

Spokane is not alone in facing cleanup requirements. The region’s other wastewater dischargers – sewage plants and industries like Kaiser Aluminum and Inland Empire Paper Co. – are under the gun to cut phosphorus and other emissions into the river.

State lawmakers last week approved a ban on phosphorus in dishwashing detergents as part of a broader effort to clean up the Spokane River and other state waterways. Officials also are discussing the option of banning phosphorus from fertilizers as another means of improving water quality.

In addition, the Spokane County Conservation District and the state Department of Ecology are promoting better farming practices and erosion control to reduce pollution in Hangman Creek and the Little Spokane River, which feed into the Spokane River.

City officials have suggested that Stevens County homeowners along Long Lake – the Spokane River reservoir also known as Lake Spokane – be required to treat their wastewater rather than allowing the use of septic tanks there.

But the city’s sewer system is clearly the place where substantial pollution reductions can be achieved.

The city is under the gun because its five-year permit, required by the state to operate the plant, expired at the end of 2005.

Spokane city officials are asking DOE to issue a permit based on the city’s commitment to spend more than $500 million on cleanup and other improvements, allowing the city to continue discharging its improved effluent into the river.

But some at City Hall fear that the environmental regulators could force the city to stop using the river for its discharges, leaving the city with the costly alternative of pumping effluent out of the river basin and onto the Columbia Plateau. Utility officials say that would cost an additional $500 million to $1 billion, based on two engineering estimates.

Existing treatment technology removes 90 percent of phosphorus coming into the plant now, but there is still a residual amount of 730 parts per billion of phosphorus remaining in the effluent going into the river.

The city is proposing construction of new sewage “clarifiers” with advanced filtration to remove about 90 percent of that phosphorus, reducing the concentration to less than 75 parts per billion. The cost is estimated at $136 million.

The law requires certain levels of oxygen in the river’s water to protect spawning trout in Long Lake. Phosphorus contained in the sewer plant’s discharge water stimulates the growth of algae, which in turn depletes oxygen levels during summer when the river is at its lowest flows. Oxygen is needed for the health of salmonid fishes such as trout, as well as other aquatic life. The problem is most acute in Long Lake, which is downstream from the wastewater plant.

Separate improvements are being planned in conjunction with better phosphorus treatment, all of which are designed to increase the capacity and performance of the 30-year-old plant.

In 2004, malfunctions at the plant on Aubrey L. White Parkway caused one of the sludge “digesters” to overfill, leading to a tank collapse and the death of one worker.

The city plans to replace the damaged digester with two new egg-shaped digesters with greater capacity for growth.

On Monday, the City Council will be asked to approve a contract with Garco Construction Inc. of Spokane to build the two digesters.

Other projects at the plant involve installation of pumps, pipes and improvements to odor-control systems as well as improvements to the way solids are processed.

Those projects are budgeted at $123 million, including the $44 million cost of the digesters.

In addition, the city proposes developing irrigation uses for its cleaner effluent at nearby city golf courses, and possibly cemeteries along the river. A long-range goal involves piping wastewater to agricultural land. However, the amount of water coming from the plant is much higher than can be easily used for irrigation.

“To reuse all of it would be a large step, but we are going to do what we can do,” said Dale Arnold, director of wastewater management.

The city is also initiating water conservation programs to preserve the aquifer, the region’s underground source of drinking water, and considering financial contributions to programs to clean up Hangman Creek and the Little Spokane River.

For years, the state has been pushing the city to improve its sewer and stormwater collection systems to stop the dumping of untreated sewage during high rainfall or snowmelts.

Sewers on the south and east sides of the city were designed to also carry stormwater, but when there is a lot of rain or snowmelt, the pipes are so full of water that they could overflow and inundate the sewer plant on Aubrey L. White Parkway.

To prevent that, the combined sewers have nearly two dozen overflow structures that allow excess water to spill out of the pipes and directly into the Spokane River.

According to the city’s 2004 annual report – the last full year the report was available – the city that year dumped 63 million gallons of combined stormwater and sewage into the river. That was a five-year high. In the 1980s, the city dumped 930 million gallons of combined sewage and stormwater into the river each year, but stormwater improvements on the North Side reduced that amount dramatically.

Preventing the remaining spills is included in the cleanup proposal. The city would install as many as 20 underground holding tanks along the river to collect the excess sewage during rainstorms and snowmelts. Afterward, the waste in the tanks would be slowly pumped back into sewer lines for treatment at the wastewater plant.

The cost of building those tanks is estimated at $221 million.

In addition, there are plans for added collector pipes and renovation of older existing pipes at a cost of $37 million.

City officials said that under its proposal, the river will be much cleaner 20 years from now.

“It’s going to be expensive no matter what happens,” said Mayor Dennis Hession.

One public opinion survey conducted as part of the planning for wastewater improvements showed that residents are willing to pay as much as $10 more a month in sewer bills to clean up the river. Some officials are talking about offering reduced rates to low-income senior citizens.

Roger Flint, director of public works and utilities, said the ultimate question is: “How much can we afford to do?”