No Wastewater in the Lake, Please
Austin area officials oppose discharging treated wastewater into Lake Travis
By Lee Nichols, Fri., Nov. 20, 2009
Led by Austin state Rep. Valinda Bolton, the area officials, including Austin Mayor Lee Leffingwell, Lakeway Mayor Dave DeOme, and others, said they opposed the petition because Lake Travis serves as a source of drinking water for the region. Bolton said that although treatment removes bacteria, it does not remove nitrogen and phosphorous, which act as fertilizer that can spawn algae blooms. Instead, she said, the effluent should be sprayed onto lawns, golf courses, and other green spaces where fertilizer is welcomed. "While we may not be in control of when, or even if, water will pour from the heavens, it is within our power to control the quality of our water," Bolton said. "Since the 1980s, there has been a ban on discharging effluent into the Highland Lakes, and as a result, Lake Travis is ranked as one of the four clearest lakes in Texas."
She pointed out that if the ban is lifted, it would not apply solely to Leander and Granite Shoals – the 34 permitted wastewater treatment facilities in the Lake Travis watershed potentially could discharge. (Only one has a grandfathered permit to do so.) "These cities do not need the ban to be lifted in order to provide water to their citizens or treat their discharge," Bolton said. "Their desire to keep costs for the new facility down by just $4 million does not justify endangering the health of the lake, the health and livelihood of our citizens, or the health of our businesses, both small businesses and major employers."
"We want to be treated like every other city and every other watershed in Texas," Granite Shoals Mayor Frank Reilly responded to the Chronicle. "This ban only exists in the Highland Lakes. I would hope that if the TCEQ grants our permit, they would do so with strict limits, unlike those that the city of Austin has, which are not at all strict." (Austin discharges into the Colorado River, but Bolton contends that sending treated water into a moving river doesn't pose the same problems as a standing lake intended to provide drinking water.) Reilly says his community of 5,000 northwest of Austin is currently mostly on septic tanks, and that asking a small community to absorb the extra costs is simply not feasible. And if the ban gets lifted, he said, "it's lifted for everyone to have the opportunity to apply to the TCEQ for a permit to discharge ... which would require public hearings, the full-blown process."
Got something to say on the subject? Send a letter to the editor.