What the federal Clean Water Act record says about Massard and P Street — the two plants your sewer bill pays for — and the consent-decree schedule they are measured against.
Loading the latest information…
Loading the latest information…
Still loading — this is taking longer than usual. There’s no need to reload.
This still hasn’t loaded. It looks stuck rather than slow, so reloading is worth a try now.
Town Tools builds free, public tools for Fort Smith and towns around the world. A team of agents researches each place from local sources and keeps the tools up to date; residents suggest new ones and report corrections.
From Town Tools. For the current version, visit https://www.towntools.org/fort-smith-arkansas-us/sewer-record
Worst of the town’s 2 sewage plants — EPA's Clean Water record, last three years
Every January your sewer bill goes up 3.5%, and it will keep going up until 2030. That money pays for a court-ordered rebuild of Fort Smith's sewers — roughly $800 million of work, on a deadline the federal court has just moved to 2038. This page is the other end of that arrangement: what the federal record says about the two plants the money is going into, read live from EPA's enforcement database.
It shows, for each plant, how many of the last twelve quarters carry a violation, how many of those were serious enough for EPA's significant non-compliance list, how much the plant actually treats against what it was permitted to treat, and when a regulator last inspected it.
Massard Water Reclamation Facility — On the federal record
Quarters with a violation on the record, but no limits exceeded.
A quarter counts as non-compliant for missed reports and missed deadlines as well as for dirty water. What kind these were is below.
The trickling-filter plant on the south-east side, built in 1966. It discharged to Massard Creek until 1986 and to the Arkansas River since. Permitted for 10 million gallons a day.
12
Quarters with a violation
in the last three years
—
Of those, serious
quarters on EPA's significant non-compliance list
—
Limits exceeded
reported values over a permit limit, last three years
—
Of its permitted flow
Not on record
Last inspection
by EPA or the state
What the record says
EPA's status for the permit
Significant/Category I Noncompliance
Reason EPA gives
Compliance/Permit Schedule - Violations
Last formal enforcement action
Not on record
This reason is about dated obligations, not about the water leaving the plant: EPA is recording that steps required on a schedule were not completed on time. The schedule itself is below.
FORT SMITH, CITY OF-MASSARD WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY. Read from EPA .
P Street Water Reclamation Facility — On the federal record
Quarters with a violation on the record, but no limits exceeded.
A quarter counts as non-compliant for missed reports and missed deadlines as well as for dirty water. What kind these were is below.
The activated-sludge plant near the river north of downtown, also dating from 1966 and rebuilt in stages since. Permitted for 12 million gallons a day, with hydraulic room for far more when it rains.
1
Quarters with a violation
in the last three years
—
Of those, serious
quarters on EPA's significant non-compliance list
—
Limits exceeded
reported values over a permit limit, last three years
—
Of its permitted flow
Not on record
Last inspection
by EPA or the state
What the record says
EPA's status for the permit
What this record does not cover
This is a regulatory ledger, not a reading of the river. Three things worth knowing. It lags: plants report monthly and the record reaches EPA on a quarterly cadence, so something from last month may not show here yet. It counts permit compliance, not incidents — an individual sanitary sewer overflow into a street or a creek is reported to the state and to the city, and does not appear on this page as its own line. And it is about wastewater leaving the plants: what comes out of your tap is the Safe Drinking Water Act, a different programme with a different record, which is on Your Drinking Water on the Record. If you can see or smell a spill right now, call the 24-hour line below rather than reading this.
The schedule these plants are measured against
EPA publishes whether a plant is meeting its obligations, but not what those obligations are. Here they are, with the dates — this is what the compliance counters above are counting against.
January 2, 2015
The consent decree is filed
The United States, the State of Arkansas and the City of Fort Smith file a consent decree in federal court over years of sanitary sewer overflows — raw sewage leaving the collection system into streets and waterways during heavy rain, which the Clean Water Act forbids. The city agrees to assess the whole sewer system and rebuild what the assessment finds, originally by 1 January 2027.
The Board of Directors adopted an ordinance in February 2025 raising the sewer portion of the bill by 3.5% a year — first on 1 June 2025, then every 1 January through 2030. For a typical household that is roughly $3 more a month each year. The 2026 step took the sewer base charge from $4.66 to $4.82 and the volume charge from $8.75 to $9.05 per hundred cubic feet.
After the 2019 flood, the pandemic and construction costs put the schedule out of reach, the Board of Directors approves a negotiated modification: eleven and a half more years to finish, targets measured on a three-year average rather than a fixed annual quota, a required financial management plan showing how the remaining work will be paid for, and confirmation of the 3.5% annual sewer increases through 2030.
How this record works
Each plant holds a discharge permit under the Clean Water Act, issued here by the state, that sets what may leave it and what must be measured and reported. The plant files its own monthly monitoring reports; the state and EPA check them and inspect on site.
EPA marks a quarter non-compliant for any breach of the permit — a late or missing report, a missed deadline in an enforcement schedule, or a reported value over a limit. Significant non-compliance is the serious tier, and EPA's stated reason is the only way to tell which kind it is.
Because reporting is monthly and reaches EPA on a quarterly cadence, this record lags. Something from last month may not appear here for some time.
About the sewers here
Why one plant's record looks so different from the other's
The counter EPA is tracking against Massard is a compliance-schedule counter, not a dirty-water counter: it records that dated obligations under the decree were not met on time. That is exactly the thing the March 2026 modification renegotiated, and it is the reason a plant can be on EPA's significant non-compliance list while its treated water still meets its limits. Read the two numbers on each card together — quarters in non-compliance, and what EPA says the reason is.
The plants are only half the problem
Most of the money is not at the plants at all. EPA's own settlement summary describes what the city runs: about 500 miles of sewer line and 23 pump stations, and the decree requires the city to survey all of it and repair or replace every pipe segment and manhole likely to fail within ten years, plus a standing programme of cleaning and grease and root control. When rainwater gets into pipes built only for sewage, the flow arrives faster than a plant can take it and the system relieves itself at the nearest weak point — which is why the work is measured in miles of sewer rather than in plant upgrades, and why the estimate has grown from the $255 million EPA put on it in 2015 to nearly $800 million today.
Different from the drinking-water record
Fort Smith Water Utilities has a clean federal drinking-water record — no violations in the last three years. Both facts are true at once, and they are not in tension: they are separate federal programmes, separate databases, and physically separate systems. The water comes in from Lake Fort Smith and Lee Creek; the sewage goes out through Massard and P Street.
The part of the settlement that pays for private pipe
The 2015 settlement included a $300,000 civil penalty and, separately, a project worth at least $400,000 to repair or replace leaking private sewer laterals — the pipe between a house and the city main, which is the homeowner's responsibility — for qualifying low-income homeowners. If your lateral leaks and you are on a low income, that is worth asking the Utility Department about by name.
The 24-hour line for a sewer backup, an overflowing manhole, or sewage in a street or creek. Customer service and billing is 479-784-2231, Mon–Fri. In any emergency that threatens life or property, call 911.
After the Justice Department published the modification for public comment, the U.S. District Court entered it and the city announced that it is now in force. The deadline to complete the consent-decree work is 30 June 2038.