By Belle Nelson

A Kyle resident’s claim that effluent discharged by Buda is overflowing into a privately owned reservoir has been met with staunch rebuttal from the city. 

The issue stems from a claim made by Kyle resident Rose Byrd that Buda’s effluent is pouring into Soil Conservation Service Site 6 Reservoir (SCS6), which is privately owned and part of a floodplain. 

Buda Mayor Todd Ruge, who said the city hasn’t heard of such an accusation, said it has followed its permit from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to discharge effluent into Plum Creek. 

“We’ve never been cited by the state or TCEQ. If this is happening we would have heard of it by now, and this is the first we’re hearing of these accusations,” Ruge said. “Buda plays by the rules, we always have.” 

The City of Buda has been discharging its waste waters into publicly owned Plum Creek since 1985. 

Plum Creek is a body of water that flows into the Guadalupe River Basin. Water flows from several creeks and reservoirs into Plum Creek, including water from Porter Creek and SCS6. 

The private dam where Buda is releasing flood waters is managed, or sponsored, by Plum Creek Conservation District (PCCD). 

In 2011, Hays County joined PCCD as an equal sponsor. 

The sponsors’ responsibility is to ensure that the easement rights (flood control) are enforced. 

They also have the task of managing appropriate maintenance and repairs to the dam. The dam itself is meant to store rain waters and then release them slowly over a period of time so that Plum Creek isn’t overwhelmed with a lot of rain water at one time. 

But according to Byrd, when wastewater is put into Plum Creek, it overflows into the privately owned SCS6. 

“When the flood waters arrive, they are pushed …onto private property because Buda’s wastewater is occupying the space that was intended for rainwaters, that’s why properties came close to flooding in 2013,” Byrd said. 

Byrd went on to claim that Buda is saying it is not violating any rules because the TCEQ gave it a permit. 

According to Byrd, TCEQ has a disclaimer on all of their permits that indicates the permit holder is responsible for ensuring they have obtained the right to release wastewater. 

“Buda never obtained any rights and Hays County is apparently looking the other way,” Byrd said. 

But Ruge said the city has been playing by the rules since the permit was first issued. 

“As far as the disclaimer on the TCEQ permit, the issue was discussed and resolved a number of years ago, and as long as we’re not disrupting the flow of water, we’re within our legal rights,” Ruge said. “We’ve complied with requests to submit water and soil quality samples, and we’ve never dealt with legal ramifications because nothing we’re doing is outside of our legal rights.” 

In addition, Ruge said the city is also following and complying with regulations set by the Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority (GBRA). 

The Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority was created as a water conservation and reclamation district and a public corporation that provides stewardship for the water resources in its ten-county statutory district. The district begins near the headwaters of the Guadalupe and Blanco rivers, ends in San Antonio Bay, and includes Hays County. 

“We’re complying with the GBRA’s regulations as well as the TCEQ’s, we’ve never broken any laws set forth by either,” Ruge said.