INDUSTRIAL/MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER DISPOSAL 



A number of industries and municipalities discharge 

 wastewater to the Clark Fork and its tributaries. These are 

 point source discharges that are permitted by the DHES-WQB 

 under the Montana Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

 (MPDES) . A list of MPDES permittees in the Clark Fork Basin 

 is provided in Table 2-12. These industries and municipal- 

 ities discharge a variety of substances to the Clark Fork and 

 its tributaries, including nutrients, organic wastes, and 

 sediment. An MPDES permit for wastewater discharge is 

 designed to protect all beneficial uses of the receiving 

 water. It is designed to assure water quality protection 

 when streamflows are as low as the minimum consecutive 7-day 

 average flow that may be expected to occur on the average of 

 once in ten years. 



Nearly all of the cities and towns in the basin have 

 wastewater treatment plants, although a few of the smaller 

 communities such as Gold Creek, Clinton, Bonner, and Noxon 

 are served solely by septic systems. The wastewater 

 treatment plants range from fairly simple lagoon systems to 

 more elaborate secondary treatment facilities in the larger 

 cities such as Butte and Missoula. An inventory of WWTPs in 

 the basin is provided in Table 2-13. All of the operators 

 (except Anaconda, whose system does not currently discharge 

 to state waters) are required to monitor their discharges and 

 report to the DHES-WQB. These monitoring reports are 

 reviewed by WQB personnel to ensure compliance with permit 

 requirements. Regular inspections of the facilities are also 

 conducted by the WQB. 



Among the larger dischargers in the basin, the two that 

 have raised the most controversy are the Frenchtown pulp mill 

 (previously owned by Champion International Corporation, now 

 owned by Stone Container Corporation) and the Missoula WWTP. 

 In 1983, Champion International applied for a permit that 

 would allow it to discharge a portion of the wastewater into 

 the Clark Fork year-round, rather than only during spring 

 high flows (as stipulated by its previous permits) . Although 

 the WQB was initially inclined to approve the permit, public 

 concern over the lack of scientific data to support such a 

 permit modification resulted in the issuance of an interim 

 two-year permit and the initiation of a number of scientific 

 studies. The WQB analyzed the information gathered during 

 the two-year study period and issued a draft environmental 

 impact statement (EIS) late in 1985, recommending renewal of 

 the permit for five years. Public concerns over the EIS led 

 to the issuance of an addendum to the EIS, wherein some of 

 the disputed issues were clarified. A five-year permit for 

 the pulp mill was finally issued in November 1986. The 



2-19 



