Holland Lake Lodge Wastewater Variance (Condon)

The Missoula Health Board approved the variance for Holland Lake Lodge to use a holding tank until December 31, 2028, or when the Forest Service replaces the failed lagoon wastewater system, whichever comes first. They also approved the use chemical toilets as a backup, so guests and employees always have access to bathroom facilities. These approval do come with conditions.

Before they can begin operating, Holland Lake Lodge will have to meet the conditions of the variance, which include testing the existing tank, or a new tank, for watertightness. The conditions adopted by the Board are as follows:

The pump chamber must be watertight to ensure wastewater does not leak out, and groundwater does not leak in.
If the Applicant wants to use the existing tank, the collection lines must be scoped and shown to be free of breaks or leaks and to be watertight.
The Applicant must do a two-part water leak test before the pump chamber is put into use as a holding tank and again at the beginning of the 2027 and 2028 season if a holding tank is still needed:
- The Applicant must notify the Department of the leak test schedule at least two workdays before performing the tests. Department staff will be onsite during key parts of the test.
- The tank must be emptied and then left for 24 hours to ensure no groundwater is intruding into the tank.
- A leak test must be performed on the tank in accordance with DEQ 4, Chapter 5.1.7.A.2, and the Department’s leak test policy.
If the leak tests are successful, the Applicant must purchase a septic permit to use the pump chamber as a holding tank.
The variance from Section 10(A)(1) only applies to the existing pump chamber, and is limited to the following sections of DEQ 4:
- 8.1.2 Holding tanks are septic tanks that have no standard outlets and are modified to provide full time access for pumping.
- 8.1.4 Holding tanks must meet the construction standards for septic tanks in Chapter 5, except that no outlet opening shall be cast in the tank walls.
- 8.1.6 Holding tanks installed where the seasonal groundwater table may reach any portion of the tank must be evaluated for buoyancy by a qualified individual and floatation prevented. The tanks must be a single pour (seamless) tank design...
If the pump chamber shows evidence of leaks, it must be replaced with a tank that meets the specifications in DEQ Circular 4. Before a new tank can be installed, it must be reviewed by DEQ and permitted by the Department. The tank must be inspected, water tested and approved before it is put into use.
The Applicant must follow the alert and pumping plan outlined in the variance application or as approved by the Department as part of the septic permit. The tank must be pumped by a licensed septage pumper as often as needed to ensure that wastewater does not back up into any buildings or surface on the ground.
If wastewater flows exceed the ability of the septic pumpers to keep the tank pumped, the Applicant must reduce occupancy and activity on the property to levels that make wastewater management manageable; or replace the pump chamber with a tank of sufficient size that meets the specifications in DEQ Circular 4. Before a new tank can be installed, it must be reviewed by DEQ and permitted by the Department. The tank must be inspected, water tested and approved before it is put into use.
If water is turned off because the tank has reached 75% capacity, all food service must be suspended. Guests on the property must have access to drinking water and alternative bathroom facilities, which can be portapotties.
The Applicant must maintain service and pumping records for the duration of the variance, and provide them to the Department upon request.
The Applicant must allow department staff to access the site during reasonable hours to assess the holding tank and compliance with conditions of the variance and the permit.
Wastewater from the holding tank must be disposed of at an approved wastewater treatment plant or a DEQ-approved land application site.
Chemical toilets must be available to guests and staff as backup toilet facilities;
The Applicant must maintain chemical toilets in a sanitary fashion;
The chemical toilets must be rented from a supplier licensed by DEQ; be of sturdy construction to assure no leakage of wastewater occurs; the doors must be self-closing; and other outer openings must be screened to exclude insects;
The chemical toilets must be located at least 100’ away from any wells or surface water, in a secure location so that they will not be tipped over by winds or other forces;
Contents of the chemical toilets must be disposed of off-site, at a DEQ-approved facility;
Failure to comply with the conditions of the variance and any permit issued under the variance will void the variance in its entirety; and,
This variance does not relieve the Applicant of any obligations under other local, state and federal laws or regulations.
The variance expires after the lagoons have been replaced and put back into service or December 31, 2028, whichever comes first.

Project Description:

The owners of Holland Lake Lodge in Condon are requesting a health code variance to use holding tanks for wastewater management as a temporary measure until the U.S. Forest Service replaces the wastewater lagoons that serve the lodge complex and neighboring campground.

The Missoula City-County Health Code prohibits the use of holding tanks because they are an expensive way to manage wastewater, especially on a long-term basis. When operated correctly, holding tanks do not release wastewater or contaminants into the ground. However, the tanks must be in good condition, pumped regularly, and the wastewater must be disposed of at an approved treatment plant or treatment site. In addition, holding tanks requires a lot of attention and monitoring to ensure wastewater doesn’t overflow onto the ground or back up into buildings.

To temporarily use holding tanks, Holland Lake Lodge needs a variance from the Health Code. The Health Board can only grant a variance if the applicant meets the following criteria:

The variance is needed to address extraordinary conditions that the applicant cannot have reasonably prevented,
There is undue hardship to the applicant if the variance is not granted,
No alternatives are reasonably feasible, and
The variance request is not more than the minimum needed to address the extraordinary conditions, and
The variance will not contaminate drinking water supplies, cause a public health hazard, violate other laws governing water pollution or wastewater treatment, pollute or degrade state waters or cause a nuisance.

Staff will complete a report, which includes an assessment of whether the application meets the variance criteria, and draft a proposed decision document based on the staff report. The Health Code requires these documents to be available at least one week before the hearing. Once they are completed, they will be posted on this page.

The health board is taking public comment on the requested variance. Comment demonstrating how the variance request does or does not meet these criteria is the most productive. All public comments are received and reviewed by board and staff prior to the health board meeting.

Background:

Using a temporary holding tank for a failed septic system is not uncommon. However, because the ownership changed after the lagoons failed, and the holding tank will likely be needed longer than is typical, a variance is required to operate with a holding tank as the wastewater system. The longer timeframe results from several factors. It takes time for a public wastewater system to be engineered and reviewed. Because this is a Forest Service project, time is needed to take and incorporate public comment. The Forest Service, not the operator of Holland Lake Lodge, is responsible for installing the new wastewater system, giving the operator less control over the timeline.

The holding tank is located near Cabin 2. Under normal operating conditions, this tank houses a grinder pump that pumps sewage up to two septic tanks near the lagoons. The sewage then goes through primary treatment in the tanks and is released into the lagoons for further treatment. Because the lagoons have failed, they must be replaced by the U.S. Forest Service. The Forest Service estimates they will be able to replace them in 2026 or 2027, after going through Montana Department of Environmental Quality review, public review and permitting. The Forest Service has indicated the pump in the holding tank has been turned off and cannot be turned back on except by Forest Service personnel with a key. This assures no sewage will be pumped into the upper septic tanks or released into the failed lagoons.

The holding tank is estimated to hold between 4,000 and 5,000 gallons of sewage. Holland Lake Lodge has service agreements with two pumping companies who have confirmed they could pump the tank as often as they need (as often as once a day).

Wastewater pumped from the holding tank would be disposed of at the City of Missoula Wastewater Treatment Plant or at a DEQ-approved land application unit in Kalispell.

Criteria the Health Board Uses to Make a Variance Decision

The purpose of a variance is to provide some flexibility from strict compliance with the health code, while ensuring that public health and the environment are protected. The Health Board can only approve a variance if all criteria are met:

The variance is necessary to address extraordinary conditions that the applicant could not have reasonably prevented;

Compliance with the requirement from which the variance is requested would result in undue hardship to the applicant;
No alternatives that comply with the requirements are reasonably feasible; and
The variance requested is not more than the minimum needed to address the extraordinary conditions.
Granting the variance will not:

contaminate any actual or potential drinking water supply;
cause a public health hazard as a result of access to insects, rodents, or other possible carriers of disease to humans;
cause a public health hazard by being accessible to persons or animals;
violate any law or regulation governing water pollution or wastewater treatment and disposal except for the rule that the variance is requested from;
pollute or contaminate state waters in violation of 75-5-605 MCA;
degrade state waters unless authorized pursuant to 75-5-303 MCA; or
cause a nuisance due to odor, unsightly appearance or other aesthetic consideration.

In addition, the Board cannot approve a variance if the applicant’s proposal may adversely affect the health, safety, or welfare of any individual or cause adverse environmental effects greater than those effects caused by uses commonly permitted by the Code.

Project Timeline:

Missoula City-County Health Board hearing: 12:15 p.m. Thursday, Feb. 19

In-person location: Second floor conference room, Missoula Public Health, 301 West Alder, Missoula
Virtual option: Residents can attend the meeting via Microsoft Teams. The Health Board agenda, which will include the meeting link, is posted a week before the meeting here: https://missoulapublichealth.org/boards-councils/missoula-city-county-board-of-health-boh/

Public Comment:

Submit public comment by Wednesday, Feb. 18, using the comment tool below. Comments most useful for this project are when they reference the variance criteria above. The Health Board will also take public comment at the variance hearing. All public comments are received and reviewed by board and staff prior to the health board meeting.

Project Lead:

Shannon Therriault, 406-258-4988

Charles Shane, 406-258-3367

Important Links and Documents:

Holland Lake Lodge Variance Application

HLL Variance Incomplete Letter

HLLL Variance Resubmittal 11-25-25

HLL Variance Incomplete Letter 2

HLL Variance Resubmittal 12-2025

HLL Variance Completeness Determination

Health Board Variance Criteria

MPH Staff Report

2004-215

Agenda for Feb. 19 public meeting

MPH Proposed Decision Document

The pump chamber must be watertight to ensure wastewater does not leak out, and groundwater does not leak in.
If the Applicant wants to use the existing tank, the collection lines must be scoped and shown to be free of breaks or leaks and to be watertight.
The Applicant must do a two-part water leak test before the pump chamber is put into use as a holding tank and again at the beginning of the 2027 and 2028 season if a holding tank is still needed:
- The Applicant must notify the Department of the leak test schedule at least two workdays before performing the tests. Department staff will be onsite during key parts of the test.
- The tank must be emptied and then left for 24 hours to ensure no groundwater is intruding into the tank.
- A leak test must be performed on the tank in accordance with DEQ 4, Chapter 5.1.7.A.2, and the Department’s leak test policy.
If the leak tests are successful, the Applicant must purchase a septic permit to use the pump chamber as a holding tank.
The variance from Section 10(A)(1) only applies to the existing pump chamber, and is limited to the following sections of DEQ 4:
- 8.1.2 Holding tanks are septic tanks that have no standard outlets and are modified to provide full time access for pumping.
- 8.1.4 Holding tanks must meet the construction standards for septic tanks in Chapter 5, except that no outlet opening shall be cast in the tank walls.
- 8.1.6 Holding tanks installed where the seasonal groundwater table may reach any portion of the tank must be evaluated for buoyancy by a qualified individual and floatation prevented. The tanks must be a single pour (seamless) tank design...
If the pump chamber shows evidence of leaks, it must be replaced with a tank that meets the specifications in DEQ Circular 4. Before a new tank can be installed, it must be reviewed by DEQ and permitted by the Department. The tank must be inspected, water tested and approved before it is put into use.
The Applicant must follow the alert and pumping plan outlined in the variance application or as approved by the Department as part of the septic permit. The tank must be pumped by a licensed septage pumper as often as needed to ensure that wastewater does not back up into any buildings or surface on the ground.
If wastewater flows exceed the ability of the septic pumpers to keep the tank pumped, the Applicant must reduce occupancy and activity on the property to levels that make wastewater management manageable; or replace the pump chamber with a tank of sufficient size that meets the specifications in DEQ Circular 4. Before a new tank can be installed, it must be reviewed by DEQ and permitted by the Department. The tank must be inspected, water tested and approved before it is put into use.
If water is turned off because the tank has reached 75% capacity, all food service must be suspended. Guests on the property must have access to drinking water and alternative bathroom facilities, which can be portapotties.
The Applicant must maintain service and pumping records for the duration of the variance, and provide them to the Department upon request.
The Applicant must allow department staff to access the site during reasonable hours to assess the holding tank and compliance with conditions of the variance and the permit.
Wastewater from the holding tank must be disposed of at an approved wastewater treatment plant or a DEQ-approved land application site.
Chemical toilets must be available to guests and staff as backup toilet facilities;
The Applicant must maintain chemical toilets in a sanitary fashion;
The chemical toilets must be rented from a supplier licensed by DEQ; be of sturdy construction to assure no leakage of wastewater occurs; the doors must be self-closing; and other outer openings must be screened to exclude insects;
The chemical toilets must be located at least 100’ away from any wells or surface water, in a secure location so that they will not be tipped over by winds or other forces;
Contents of the chemical toilets must be disposed of off-site, at a DEQ-approved facility;
Failure to comply with the conditions of the variance and any permit issued under the variance will void the variance in its entirety; and,
This variance does not relieve the Applicant of any obligations under other local, state and federal laws or regulations.
The variance expires after the lagoons have been replaced and put back into service or December 31, 2028, whichever comes first.

Project Description:

To temporarily use holding tanks, Holland Lake Lodge needs a variance from the Health Code. The Health Board can only grant a variance if the applicant meets the following criteria:

The variance is needed to address extraordinary conditions that the applicant cannot have reasonably prevented,
There is undue hardship to the applicant if the variance is not granted,
No alternatives are reasonably feasible, and
The variance request is not more than the minimum needed to address the extraordinary conditions, and
The variance will not contaminate drinking water supplies, cause a public health hazard, violate other laws governing water pollution or wastewater treatment, pollute or degrade state waters or cause a nuisance.

Background:

Wastewater pumped from the holding tank would be disposed of at the City of Missoula Wastewater Treatment Plant or at a DEQ-approved land application unit in Kalispell.

Criteria the Health Board Uses to Make a Variance Decision

The variance is necessary to address extraordinary conditions that the applicant could not have reasonably prevented;

Compliance with the requirement from which the variance is requested would result in undue hardship to the applicant;
No alternatives that comply with the requirements are reasonably feasible; and
The variance requested is not more than the minimum needed to address the extraordinary conditions.
Granting the variance will not:

contaminate any actual or potential drinking water supply;
cause a public health hazard as a result of access to insects, rodents, or other possible carriers of disease to humans;
cause a public health hazard by being accessible to persons or animals;
violate any law or regulation governing water pollution or wastewater treatment and disposal except for the rule that the variance is requested from;
pollute or contaminate state waters in violation of 75-5-605 MCA;
degrade state waters unless authorized pursuant to 75-5-303 MCA; or
cause a nuisance due to odor, unsightly appearance or other aesthetic consideration.

Project Timeline:

Missoula City-County Health Board hearing: 12:15 p.m. Thursday, Feb. 19

In-person location: Second floor conference room, Missoula Public Health, 301 West Alder, Missoula
Virtual option: Residents can attend the meeting via Microsoft Teams. The Health Board agenda, which will include the meeting link, is posted a week before the meeting here: https://missoulapublichealth.org/boards-councils/missoula-city-county-board-of-health-boh/

Public Comment:

Project Lead:

Shannon Therriault, 406-258-4988

Charles Shane, 406-258-3367

Important Links and Documents:

Holland Lake Lodge Variance Application

HLL Variance Incomplete Letter

HLLL Variance Resubmittal 11-25-25

HLL Variance Incomplete Letter 2

HLL Variance Resubmittal 12-2025

HLL Variance Completeness Determination

Health Board Variance Criteria

MPH Staff Report

2004-215

Agenda for Feb. 19 public meeting

MPH Proposed Decision Document

Let us know what you think by logging in or creating an account and submitting your comment below.

Staff do not respond to comments submitted here. If you have a question you would like answered, submit it on the Questions tab. All public comments are received and reviewed by board and staff prior to the health board meeting.

CLOSED: This discussion has concluded.

Please do not allow any variance I have been coming up to this area and seeing the rugged beauty and doing the hiking for over 20 years, now they want to commercialize it and privatize it. There is no desire for this to occur. Keep Montana beautiful!

John matrix 69 About 2 months ago

Please do not allow this variance. These people are trying to privatize something that should be public. Not to mention that this kind of a system shouldn't be going right in next to Holland lake. It's too much.
For people who want to privatize something that should be public.I adamantly oppose this

signe About 2 months ago

Dear Missoula City-County Health Board members:

A few years ago my husband and I had an incredible opportunity to buy property with an old septic system a few hundred feet from Holland Lake. We asked if we could install a new septic system and were denied due to the proximity to the lake and creek and concerns about contamination. We then asked if we could use a holding tank with a legal requirement to have it serviced. That was also denied, so we passed on the purchase of the property. We were very grateful that Missoula County took so seriously potential contamination, even if we were not able to purchase the property. We hoped that it meant that, until an acceptable option was available, the County would continue to protect these pristine waters and the animals who rely on them for survival.

When the current owners of HLL purchased the property, they did so knowing that they could not operate until the wastewater situation was resolved with integrity. Unlike us, they chose to go ahead with the purchase of the lease. I hope that the County will again do everything in its power and responsibility to defend clean lakes and rivers from contamination, as they are a top priority to the community (as evidenced by results from the Swan Valley Community Plan and common sense) and, most importantly, our greatest legacy.

Please note that the precedent to deny the option of a holding tank as a safe alternative has already been established, and use the evidence for that determination in your evaluation. The quality of our wellwater and the natural ecosystem depend on the integrity of this decision.

Sincerely,
Caroline Lonski
120 Alpine Drive
Condon, MT 59826

Caroline About 2 months ago

Dear Missoula City-County Health Board members:

A few years ago my husband and I had an incredible opportunity to buy property with an old septic system a few hundred feet from Holland Lake. We asked if we could install a new septic system and were denied due to the proximity to the lake and creek and concerns about contamination. We then asked if we could use a holding tank with a legal requirement to have it serviced. That was also denied, so we passed on the purchase of the property. We were very grateful that Missoula County took so seriously potential contamination, even if we were not able to purchase the property. We hoped that it meant that, until an acceptable option was available, the County would continue to protect these pristine waters and the animals who rely on them for survival.

When the current owners of HLL purchased the property, they did so knowing that they could not operate until the wastewater situation was resolved with integrity. Unlike us, they chose to go ahead with the purchase of the lease. I hope that the County will again do everything in its power and responsibility to defend clean lakes and rivers from contamination, as they are a top priority to the community (as evidenced by results from the Swan Valley Community Plan and common sense) and, most importantly, our greatest legacy.

Please note that the precedent to deny the option of a holding tank as a safe alternative has already been established, and use the evidence for that determination in your evaluation. The quality of our wellwater and the natural ecosystem depend on the integrity of this decision.

Sincerely, 
Caroline Lonski 
120 Alpine Drive
Condon, MT 59826

Dear Missoula City-County Health Board members:

I’m requesting that you oppose the variance requested by Holland Lake Lodge to use temporary holding tanks to collect wastewater and sewage while federal officials try to design and build a new wastewater lagoon.

Previous efforts to use the lagoon ended badly, with state and county officials saying it wasn’t working correctly. Moreover, oversight of the facility was very spotty from federal officials and it took citizen involvement and public outcry to shut down the leaking wastewater lagoon. With recent federal budget cuts and terminations of U.S. Forest Service employees, we can expect less scrutiny of these types of temporary facilities as well as the Special Use Permit that dictates how the lodge, on public land, is to operate correctly and in full compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations. That hasn’t been the case in the past, and a variance to allow a prohibited use doesn’t pass the simple common-sense test; such an action would make sense only if and when the Forest Service and we taxpayers provide a viable wastewater system.
In a recent survey of Condon and Swan valley residents, prepared to help direct the newly adopted Swan Valley Community Plan for the Condon area, property owners and residents overwhelmingly identified clean rivers and lakes as the top priority in their community.
In ranking important elements of the Swan Valley in Question 3, 225 people responded, with these values being ranked as “extremely important” in a ranking from 1 to 5, with 5 being extremely important and 1 being not important:
Subject # Ranked Extremely Important
● Clean rivers and lakes 211
● Wildlife 202
● Open spaces 200
● Low-population density 166
● Recreation 119
● Hunting and fishing 105
● Local businesses 75
● Other (open-ended response) 32
So, allowing a prohibited use for who knows how long and before a shovel has been put in the dirt to build a wastewater system for a lodge on public land defies common sense and could jeopardize public health.
So please deny this requested variance until a real wastewater system can be built.

Sincerely,

Bill Lombardi
P.O. Box 267
Seeley Lake, MT 59868

Bill Lombardi About 2 months ago

Dear Missoula City-County Health Board members:

I’m requesting that you oppose the variance requested by Holland Lake Lodge to use temporary holding tanks to collect wastewater and sewage while federal officials try to design and build a new wastewater lagoon.

Previous efforts to use the lagoon ended badly, with state and county officials saying it wasn’t working correctly. Moreover, oversight of the facility was very spotty from federal officials and it took citizen involvement and public outcry to shut down the leaking wastewater lagoon. With recent federal budget cuts and terminations of U.S. Forest Service employees, we can expect less scrutiny of these types of temporary facilities as well as the Special Use Permit that dictates  how the lodge, on public land, is to operate correctly and in full compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations. That hasn’t been the case in the past, and a variance to allow a prohibited use doesn’t pass the simple common-sense test; such an action would make sense only if and when the Forest Service and we taxpayers provide a viable wastewater system.
In a recent survey of Condon and Swan valley residents, prepared to help direct the newly adopted Swan Valley Community Plan for the Condon area, property owners and residents overwhelmingly identified clean rivers and lakes as the top priority in their community.
In ranking important elements of the Swan Valley in Question 3, 225 people responded, with these values being ranked as “extremely important” in a ranking from 1 to 5, with 5 being extremely important and 1 being not important:
   Subject                                 # Ranked Extremely Important
● Clean rivers and lakes         211
● Wildlife                                 202
● Open spaces                       200
● Low-population density       166
● Recreation                           119
● Hunting and fishing             105
● Local businesses                 75
● Other (open-ended response) 32
So, allowing a prohibited use for who knows how long and before a shovel has been put in the dirt to build a wastewater system for a lodge on public land defies common sense and could jeopardize public health.
So please deny this requested variance until a real wastewater system can be built.

Sincerely,

Bill Lombardi
P.O. Box 267
Seeley Lake, MT 59868

If the new management is diligent in timely pumping of the temporary wastewater holding tanks I see no reason they should not be granted this variance and allowed to open for business. GVF

Gman About 2 months ago

I respectfully urge the County and Public Health Board deny this request for variance. The previous owners of the property ignored the water/sewage problem for many years, to the detriment of the local environment. The current owners were absolutely and fully aware of this problem when they offered to purchase and then closed on the property. It appears that they have made the assumption that they are not required to observe the rules. The public has no guarantee that the system they are proposing will preserve the water quality of Holland Lake and its environs, and there is no sufficient means to monitor this process.
Rather than enumerating all the points upon which the variance request is not valid, I refer to previous communication from Dean Johnson, Dan Hall, Mike Garrity and others. It is possible that there is a long term solution to the water problem at HLL. This is not it and the variance should not be granted.
CS

cs About 2 months ago

February 18, 2026

Shannon Therriault - Environmental Health Director
Charles Shane - Environmental Health Manager
Members of the Public Health Board

RE: Holland Lake Lodge Wastewater Variance Request;
I am writing you to urge you to refuse to consider the request for a health code variance from the owners of Holland Lake Lodge. After reviewing the eligibility requirements for variance requests, it is my conclusion the petitioners have failed to comply with the requirements to seek a variance.
Mr. Dean Johnson has done a more than adequate job of documenting and explicating this conclusion in his comments.
My name is Jim Parker, I reside in Hamilton, MT. at 212 Bedford, 59840

13trapper About 2 months ago

February 18, 2026
Comments to the Staff and Board of Health.

Thank you for your work on the Holland Lake variance request. Many diverse comments and opinions have been posted here.

I would like to remind the Board and staff that that it is the substantive comments regarding issues of public health and water quality that are germane to your decision to approve or deny the variance request; it is not the popularity of HLL, potential jobs, or whether investors make a profit. Investing involves risk. In the case of Holland Lake Lodge, the investors were well aware of risks before they decided to invest in the lodge.

Thank you.

HPSL About 2 months ago

I am a full time resident of Condon, MT
Living nearby and recreating year round at Holland Lake. I agree with all the comments posted by
Shannon Therriault - Environmental Health Director
Charles Shane - Environmental Health Manager
Members of the Public Health Board.
I participated in “Hands off Holland” as well as other public platforms that concerned the use and sale of Holland Lake Lodge, as well as the entire lake and surrounding park.
I ask that you deny this variance based on that fact that this situation was all clearly known before current owner purchased the Lodge, and therefore it does not create undue hardship. The majority of citizens in Swan Valley wish to see the HLL open and be a positive presence in our community. But not by taking shortcuts, and asking for special variance’s.

Christine Straube About 2 months ago

The Health Board should deny the requested variance from MC-C Health Code Regulation 1 Section 10(A)(1)1 because:
• A variance from Section 10(A)(1) is more than the minimum needed to address the condition (Criterion 4).
• There are reasonably feasible alternatives that comply with Section 10(A)(1) (Criterion 3); and
• Approval of the requested variance from 10(A)(1) would violate MC-C Health Code Administrative Section 6(F)(1).
The cistern the applicant proposes to use as a holding tank is seriously deficient for that use. It is more than 50 years old (well past the typical lifespan of subsurface concrete tanks); cracked; not designed to function as a holding tank; perforated by inlet pipes low in the tank wall; likely not watertight; very close to or in contact with groundwater; and too small to function properly as a holding tank receiving the design wastewater flows for anticipated uses of Holland Lake Lodge.
Installation of holding tank that complies with DEQ-4 is a reasonably feasible alternative.
Given the existing condition of the cistern, its use as a holding tank for high strength wastewater may contaminate local drinking water supplies with toxins, pathogens, and infectious diseases such as E. coli and norovirus. Use of the cistern as a holding tank may cause adverse environmental effects – such as toxic algal blooms and eutrophication of Holland Lake - greater than those caused by commonly permitted uses. Thus, MC-C Health Code Administrative Section 6(F)(1) prohibits approval of a variance from 10(A)(1).
The requirements of (DEQ-4) are not frivolous or arbitrary. They are necessary to “assure the protection of public health and the quality of state waters.” (ARM 17.38.101). The Board should deny the requested variance from 10(A)(1) and require any modifications of the Holland Lake wastewater treatment system meet the requirements of MONTANA STANDARDS FOR SUBSURFACE WASTEWATER TREATMENT (DEQ-4).

Jim Morrison About 2 months ago

This seems yet another attempt to profit from federal lands without respect for the consequences that has plagued HLL for years. The new owners knew full well the problems that needed to be addressed before resuming operations and now are asking for special privileges. I was an employee there for 7 years until 2014 and saw the many large weddings and full bookings that put a strain on the system - which was also in place for the adjacent campground and the lodge. The area is heavily used already with hiking, cabins, and the campground - who all seem to be managing the changes and seem to be working within the parameters that are set, even if temporary. The main difference seems to be that HLL is for profit. The lodge has fallen into a state of disrepair and before operations resume, this variance needs to be denied or I fear irrevocable damage to the lake and the precious surrounding area will be further damaged.
Thank you for your consideration, I trust that you have the environment in your best interest.

Chef Amber About 2 months ago

This seems yet another attempt to profit from federal lands without respect for the consequences that has plagued HLL for years. The new owners knew full well the problems that needed to be addressed before resuming operations and now are asking for special privileges.  I was an employee there for 7 years until 2014 and saw the many large weddings and full bookings that put a strain on the system - which was also in place for the adjacent campground and the lodge. The area is heavily used already with hiking, cabins, and the campground - who all seem to be managing the changes and seem to be working within the parameters that are set, even if temporary. The main difference seems to be that HLL is for profit. The lodge has fallen into a state of disrepair and before operations resume, this variance needs to be denied or I fear irrevocable damage to the lake and the precious surrounding area will be further damaged. 
Thank you for your consideration, I trust that you have the environment in your best interest.

Please NO! There are environmental restrictions for very good reasons. The language "until the Forest Service addresses the problem " is very troublesome. It is estimated to be in the 2026-27 time frame but there are no guarantees. That is leaving an unspecified time frame, they could have this for years. That is unacceptable. This is an example of extremely poor planning. Why wasn't the sewage system inspected before the expansion was started?

Anetanut About 2 months ago

Dear Members of the County Health Board,

The forests and lakes of Montana are what make a big part of Montana. Special. It is the duty of our citizens, cities, towns and government entitles such as the USFS to protect it at all costs. I am writing to respectfully request that the current variance request for Holland Lake Lodge be returned to Missoula Public Health for further evaluation. In its current form, there is insufficient information to justify approval, even with the proposed conditions.

Please consider the following points:

1. Delinquent Property Taxes
The applicant is currently delinquent on property taxes. I suggest that no further departmental work or evaluation be conducted until these payments are brought current.

2. Lack of Clear Ownership and Authority
There are currently six different business entities associated with Holland Lake Lodge on the Montana Secretary of State website. None is named Holland Lake Lodge LLC, as mentioned in MPH's first incomplete letter. It remains unclear who holds the controlling interest in the business operations and, crucially, who owns the improvements (buildings and infrastructure) on this public land. Per the State of Montana and Missoula County property information systems, the primary owner of these improvements is Christian Wohlfeil. The County should verify and share:

- Who holds the overall controlling interest?
- Who owns the infrastructure and improvements?
- Is the applicant legally authorized to request this variance on behalf of the owner of those improvements?

3. Failure to Meet Variance Criteria
A variance may only be approved if specific criteria are met. I do not believe the following requirements have been satisfied:

- Extraordinary Conditions: The current situation was entirely preventable. The applicant chose to close on the purchase with full knowledge that the property lacked a functioning, approved wastewater treatment system and was closed to the public. These were known risks that should have been addressed during due diligence prior to closing.

- Undue Hardship: There is no undue hardship that the applicant didn't know about before closing on the Lodge purchase. The status of the wastewater system and the Forest Service’s uncertain timeline for repair were well-documented and communicated before the sale.

The application and public comments contain statements that are unsupported, including employment numbers and claims about exclusivity of events on public land. The Board needs verified facts and documentation when weighing hardship and necessity.

- Feasible Alternatives: Numerous alternatives exist that would allow the property to generate income without a holding tank variance. These include food & beverage catering, gear rentals (paddle boards, canoes, etc.), and gift shop/online merchandise sales. That model provides immediate public land access, fulfills the mandate to provide recreational opportunities, and generates revenue without relying on exclusive events that strain limited infrastructure.

4. Public Health and Environmental Risk
Approving a two-year holding tank variance for the intense use outlined in the applicant’s Operating Plan is a significant risk. There are no clear safeguards regarding oversight, enforcement, or liability should the system fail. Furthermore, the regular presence of septic pumper trucks presents an environmental and aesthetic concern for this public area.
---
Staff Recommendation to Approve the Holland Lake Lodge Holding‑Tank Variance
(Based on the February 12, 2026 Staff Report)

Comments:

1. Staff findings show the application does not meet multiple mandatory variance criteria

The Health Code requires all criteria to be met. Staff acknowledges uncertainty, conflicting evidence, and unresolved risks—yet still concludes the applicant “HAS MET” each criterion. That conclusion is not supported by the facts in the report.

Below is a point‑by‑point refutation.

---

Criterion 1 — Extraordinary Conditions
Staff conclusion: Applicant met the criterion.
Refutation: The conditions are not extraordinary and were entirely foreseeable.

a. The lagoon failure was known, documented, and under enforcement before purchase
The staff report confirms that DEQ had already identified lagoon leakage, required monitoring wells, and issued violation letters in 2023—before the applicant purchased the lodge
A known,
documented system failure is not an extraordinary condition. It is a preventable business risk the applicant voluntarily assumed.

b. The Forest Service’s timeline is not an “extraordinary condition”
The staff report treats federal process timelines as extraordinary. They are not. Every operator on federal land must navigate NEPA, public comment, and agency review. This is routine, not extraordinary.

c. The Special Use Permit explicitly requires compliance with local health rules
The SUP states the operator “shall comply with applicable standards set by state and local health departments”
The applicant’s misunderstanding of local rules is not an extraordinary condition.

Conclusion: Criterion 1 is not met.

---

Criterion 2 — Undue Hardship
Staff conclusion: Applicant met the criterion.
Refutation: The hardship is self‑created, which does not justify a variance.

a. Purchasing a business with a failed wastewater system is a risky and voluntary business decision.
The report documents that the applicant knew the system was shut down and that holding tanks were prohibited without a variance as early as June–July 2025 .

b. Financial hardship is not a valid basis for a variance

The staff report repeatedly cites the applicant’s need for cash flow, deposits, and operations. Financial considerations cannot substitute for compliance.

c. The SUP’s 153‑day operation requirement was waived by the Forest Service because of the failed wastewater treatment system. The Operating Plan says, “For the 2025/26 operating season and until the wastewater treatment system is fully operational, operations may not be open to the public for the minimum number of days.”

Conclusion: Criterion 2 is not met.

---

Criterion 3 — No Feasible Compliant Alternatives
Staff conclusion: Applicant met the criterion.
Refutation: Staff’s analysis ignores the most obvious compliant alternative.

a. The Forest Service is already required to replace the lagoon system
The report confirms DEQ enforcement is underway and the Forest Service is obligated to install a compliant system .
This is a feasible, code‑compliant alternative.

b. “Not operating” is a legally valid alternative
The Health Code does not guarantee business continuity. If a system is unsafe or noncompliant, the alternative is to remain closed until compliance is achieved.

c. Staff report seems to equate “feasible” with “financially desirable”
The Board should not allow a variance simply because the compliant alternative is inconvenient or delays revenue.
Economic inconvenience or business preference does not constitute undue hardship.

Conclusion: Criterion 3 is not met.

---

Criterion 4 — Minimum Necessary Deviation
Staff conclusion: Applicant met the criterion.
Refutation: A multi‑year holding‑tank operation is not a minimal deviation.

a. Holding tanks are explicitly prohibited because they are high‑risk and unsustainable
Staff’s own report explains why holding tanks are banned:
- prone to overflow
- expensive to maintain
- risk of illegal discharge
- at least one documented problem with a holding tank was identified in Missoula County

A two‑year commercial‑scale holding tank is a major deviation, not a minimal one.

b. The tank’s size, depth, and watertightness are unknown
Staff admits:
- conflicting information on tank volume
- conflicting evidence on groundwater intrusion
- historical documentation of leakage
- uncertainty about construction and compliance with DEQ 4

A variance cannot be “minimum necessary” when the basic facts about the tank are unknown.

Conclusion: Criterion 4 is not met.

---

Criterion 5 — No Risk to Health, Water Quality, or the Environment
Staff conclusion: Applicant met the criterion.
Refutation: Staff’s own evidence contradicts this conclusion.

a. The tank has a documented history of groundwater intrusion
The report cites:
- 2005 documentation of groundwater entering the tank
- 2023 WGM memo noting “high water table potentially causing water to leak into the tank”

If groundwater can enter, wastewater can exit.
b. The tank does not meet DEQ 4 construction standards
Staff acknowledges the tank fails multiple DEQ 4 requirements and the applicant is seeking to vary from those standards as well.

A variance cannot be granted when the system is structurally noncompliant.

c. Staff relies on future leak tests to justify present approval
Leak tests need to be done. Existing infrastructure is very old and hasn't been in use since 2023. The applicant must demonstrate safety before approval, not after.

d. Chemical toilets are prohibited for permanent structures
Staff acknowledges chemical toilets are banned for exactly the reasons they are being proposed:
- maintenance failures
- leakage risk
- lack of permanence
Conclusion: Criterion 5 is not met.

---

2. Staff’s recommendation contradicts the purpose of the Health Code

The Code prohibits holding tanks because they are unsafe, unreliable, and prone to failure. Staff’s own report reinforces these risks in detail.

Approving this variance would:
- undermine the prohibition
- set a precedent for commercial holding‑tank operations
- shift risk to the public and the watershed
- reward a business model built on noncompliance

---

3. The staff recommendation relies on assumptions, not evidence

Throughout the report, staff uses conditional language:
- “as long as…”
- “if the tank is watertight…”
- “if pumping is adequate…”
- “if groundwater does not intrude…”
- “if the tank is large enough…”

A variance cannot be granted on the basis of future hopes or conditional safety.

The Code requires certainty—not speculation.

---

4. Conclusion:

Because the application fails multiple mandatory criteria, the Board should not approve the variance.

The safest, most legally defensible path is to deny the variance and require the applicant to fully operate only after the Forest Service installs a compliant wastewater system.

---
The public comment record already reflects the following concerns:

- Claims of 20 employees without evidence.
- Assertions of community economic harm without documentation.
- Marketing language implying exclusive private use of public land.

The Board must base its decision on verified facts.The proposed holding tank's true capacity is unknown, but would likely require frequent pumping (potentially daily). Extended reliance on a holding tank for a commercial, event‑oriented lodge is a substantial deviation from the Health Code’s intent and increases the likelihood of failure, transport spills, overflow, and operator error—especially given remote access. These operational risks are not minimal.

A holding tank is not the only option; it is simply the applicant’s preferred option. Preference is not a legal criterion.

Approving a variance that:

- shifts risk onto the public,
- allows a private business to operate on public land with a known failed system, and
- disregards the community’s repeated concerns
would erode trust in the regulatory process.

The community should not bear the environmental and safety risks created by a private entity’s business decisions.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for your consideration of this important issue. While I wish to see the Lodge reopen, it must be done with certainty and in full compliance with all regulations. I urge you not to approve this variance without further information and a more comprehensive evaluation.

ter About 2 months ago

Dear Members of the County Health Board,

The forests and lakes of Montana are what make a big part of Montana. Special. It is the duty of our citizens, cities, towns and government entitles such as the USFS to protect it at all costs. I am  writing to respectfully request that the current variance request for Holland Lake Lodge be returned to Missoula Public Health for further evaluation. In its current form, there is insufficient information to justify approval, even with the proposed conditions.

Please consider the following points:

1. Delinquent Property Taxes
The applicant is currently delinquent on property taxes. I suggest that no further departmental work or evaluation be conducted until these payments are brought current.

2. Lack of Clear Ownership and Authority
There are currently six different business entities associated with Holland Lake Lodge on the Montana Secretary of State website. None is named Holland Lake Lodge LLC, as mentioned in MPH's first incomplete letter. It remains unclear who holds the controlling interest in the business operations and, crucially, who owns the improvements (buildings and infrastructure) on this public land. Per the State of Montana and Missoula County property information systems, the primary owner of these improvements is Christian Wohlfeil. The County should verify and share:

- Who holds the overall controlling interest?
- Who owns the infrastructure and improvements?
- Is the applicant legally authorized to request this variance on behalf of the owner of those improvements?

3. Failure to Meet Variance Criteria
A variance may only be approved if specific criteria are met. I do not believe the following requirements have been satisfied:

- Extraordinary Conditions: The current situation was entirely preventable. The applicant chose to close on the purchase with full knowledge that the property lacked a functioning, approved wastewater treatment system and was closed to the public. These were known risks that should have been addressed during due diligence prior to closing.

- Undue Hardship: There is no undue hardship that the applicant didn't know about before closing on the Lodge purchase. The status of the wastewater system and the Forest Service’s uncertain timeline for repair were well-documented and communicated before the sale.

The application and public comments contain statements that are unsupported, including employment numbers and claims about exclusivity of events on public land. The Board needs verified facts and documentation when weighing hardship and necessity.

- Feasible Alternatives: Numerous alternatives exist that would allow the property to generate income without a holding tank variance. These include food &amp; beverage catering, gear rentals (paddle boards, canoes, etc.), and gift shop/online merchandise sales. That model provides immediate public land access, fulfills the mandate to provide recreational opportunities, and generates revenue without relying on exclusive events that strain limited infrastructure.

4. Public Health and Environmental Risk
Approving a two-year holding tank variance for the intense use outlined in the applicant’s Operating Plan is a significant risk. There are no clear safeguards regarding oversight, enforcement, or liability should the system fail. Furthermore, the regular presence of septic pumper trucks presents an environmental and aesthetic concern for this public area.
---
Staff Recommendation to Approve the Holland Lake Lodge Holding‑Tank Variance
(Based on the February 12, 2026 Staff Report)

Comments:

1. Staff findings show the application does not meet multiple mandatory variance criteria

The Health Code requires all criteria to be met. Staff acknowledges uncertainty, conflicting evidence, and unresolved risks—yet still concludes the applicant “HAS MET” each criterion. That conclusion is not supported by the facts in the report.

Below is a point‑by‑point refutation.

---

Criterion 1 — Extraordinary Conditions
Staff conclusion: Applicant met the criterion.
Refutation: The conditions are not extraordinary and were entirely foreseeable.

a. The lagoon failure was known, documented, and under enforcement before purchase
The staff report confirms that DEQ had already identified lagoon leakage, required monitoring wells, and issued violation letters in 2023—before the applicant purchased the lodge
A known,
documented system failure is not an extraordinary condition. It is a preventable business risk the applicant voluntarily assumed.

b. The Forest Service’s timeline is not an “extraordinary condition”
The staff report treats federal process timelines as extraordinary. They are not. Every operator on federal land must navigate NEPA, public comment, and agency review. This is routine, not extraordinary.

c. The Special Use Permit explicitly requires compliance with local health rules
The SUP states the operator “shall comply with applicable standards set by state and local health departments”
The applicant’s misunderstanding of local rules is not an extraordinary condition.

Conclusion: Criterion 1 is not met.

---

Criterion 2 — Undue Hardship
Staff conclusion: Applicant met the criterion.
Refutation: The hardship is self‑created, which does not justify a variance.

a. Purchasing a business with a failed wastewater system is a risky and voluntary business decision.
The report documents that the applicant knew the system was shut down and that holding tanks were prohibited without a variance as early as June–July 2025 .

b. Financial hardship is not a valid basis for a variance

The staff report repeatedly cites the applicant’s need for cash flow, deposits, and operations. Financial considerations cannot substitute for compliance.

c. The SUP’s 153‑day operation requirement was waived by the Forest Service because of the failed wastewater treatment system. The Operating Plan says, “For the 2025/26 operating season and until the wastewater treatment system is fully operational, operations may not be open to the public for the minimum number of days.”

Conclusion: Criterion 2 is not met.

---

Criterion 3 — No Feasible Compliant Alternatives
Staff conclusion: Applicant met the criterion.
Refutation: Staff’s analysis ignores the most obvious compliant alternative.

a. The Forest Service is already required to replace the lagoon system
The report confirms DEQ enforcement is underway and the Forest Service is obligated to install a compliant system .
This is a feasible, code‑compliant alternative.

b. “Not operating” is a legally valid alternative
The Health Code does not guarantee business continuity. If a system is unsafe or noncompliant, the alternative is to remain closed until compliance is achieved.

c. Staff report seems to equate “feasible” with “financially desirable”
The Board should not allow a variance simply because the compliant alternative is inconvenient or delays revenue.
Economic inconvenience or business preference does not constitute undue hardship.

Conclusion: Criterion 3 is not met.

---

Criterion 4 — Minimum Necessary Deviation
Staff conclusion: Applicant met the criterion.
Refutation: A multi‑year holding‑tank operation is not a minimal deviation.

a. Holding tanks are explicitly prohibited because they are high‑risk and unsustainable
Staff’s own report explains why holding tanks are banned:
- prone to overflow
- expensive to maintain
- risk of illegal discharge
- at least one documented problem with a holding tank was identified in Missoula County

A two‑year commercial‑scale holding tank is a major deviation, not a minimal one.

b. The tank’s size, depth, and watertightness are unknown
Staff admits:
- conflicting information on tank volume
- conflicting evidence on groundwater intrusion
- historical documentation of leakage
- uncertainty about construction and compliance with DEQ 4

A variance cannot be “minimum necessary” when the basic facts about the tank are unknown.

Conclusion: Criterion 4 is not met.

---

Criterion 5 — No Risk to Health, Water Quality, or the Environment
Staff conclusion: Applicant met the criterion.
Refutation: Staff’s own evidence contradicts this conclusion.

a. The tank has a documented history of groundwater intrusion
The report cites:
- 2005 documentation of groundwater entering the tank
- 2023 WGM memo noting “high water table potentially causing water to leak into the tank”

If groundwater can enter, wastewater can exit.
b. The tank does not meet DEQ 4 construction standards
Staff acknowledges the tank fails multiple DEQ 4 requirements and the applicant is seeking to vary from those standards as well.

A variance cannot be granted when the system is structurally noncompliant.

c. Staff relies on future leak tests to justify present approval
Leak tests need to be done. Existing infrastructure is very old and hasn't been in use since 2023. The applicant must demonstrate safety before approval, not after.

d. Chemical toilets are prohibited for permanent structures
Staff acknowledges chemical toilets are banned for exactly the reasons they are being proposed:
- maintenance failures
- leakage risk
- lack of permanence
Conclusion: Criterion 5 is not met.

---

2. Staff’s recommendation contradicts the purpose of the Health Code

The Code prohibits holding tanks because they are unsafe, unreliable, and prone to failure. Staff’s own report reinforces these risks in detail.

Approving this variance would:
- undermine the prohibition
- set a precedent for commercial holding‑tank operations
- shift risk to the public and the watershed
- reward a business model built on noncompliance

---

3. The staff recommendation relies on assumptions, not evidence

Throughout the report, staff uses conditional language:
- “as long as…”
- “if the tank is watertight…”
- “if pumping is adequate…”
- “if groundwater does not intrude…”
- “if the tank is large enough…”

A variance cannot be granted on the basis of future hopes or conditional safety.

The Code requires certainty—not speculation.

---

4. Conclusion:

Because the application fails multiple mandatory criteria, the Board should not approve the variance.

The safest, most legally defensible path is to deny the variance and require the applicant to fully operate only after the Forest Service installs a compliant wastewater system.

---
The public comment record already reflects the following concerns:

- Claims of 20 employees without evidence.
- Assertions of community economic harm without documentation.
- Marketing language implying exclusive private use of public land.

The Board must base its decision on verified facts.The proposed holding tank's true capacity is unknown, but would likely require frequent pumping (potentially daily). Extended reliance on a holding tank for a commercial, event‑oriented lodge is a substantial deviation from the Health Code’s intent and increases the likelihood of failure, transport spills, overflow, and operator error—especially given remote access. These operational risks are not minimal.

A holding tank is not the only option; it is simply the applicant’s preferred option. Preference is not a legal criterion.

Approving a variance that:

- shifts risk onto the public,
- allows a private business to operate on public land with a known failed system, and
- disregards the community’s repeated concerns
would erode trust in the regulatory process.

The community should not bear the environmental and safety risks created by a private entity’s business decisions.

Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for your consideration of this important issue. While I wish to see the Lodge reopen, it must be done with certainty and in full compliance with all regulations. I urge you not to approve this variance without further information and a more comprehensive evaluation.

Feb. 16, 2025

Shannon Therriault - Environmental Health Director
Charles Shane - Environmental Health Manager
Members of the Public Health Board

RE: Holland Lake Lodge Wastewater Variance Request.

Hello,

The Alliance for the Wild Rockies opposes Mr. Jacobsen request for a health code variance to use holding tanks for wastewater management as a temporary measure until the U.S. Forest Service replaces the wastewater lagoons that serve the lodge complex and neighboring campground.

The USFS plan to rebuild the WWTP was submitted to the Montana Department of Environmental Quality in the spring of 2025. It only created enough capacity for a 101 day season and without any planning for additional sewage from events. That plan - as of December - has been kicked out of the Montana DEQ review process due to lack of progress. Any new plan must start completely over. Increasing capacity will likely require a larger footprint and would thus likely fall outside the CE process that has been proposed. The new solution will not be in place for several years. Therefore the proposed variance is not a temporary solution and instead it is a long term solution which would violate Missoula County's rules.

County records still show Christian Wohlfeil as the only owner. Title search has shown no change to ownership. Taxes have not been paid. On what basis is Mr. Jacobsen the right one to apply and why did the County spend resources reviewing his request?

What are the calculations for wastewater flows for the operational limits Mr. Jacobsen has proposed? Mr. Jacobsen is proposing hosting regular events of up to 200 people. Has an engineering study been done to estimate waster flows for this type of use to Missoula County?

What are the plans for having the tank pumped daily or every other day? What is the plan in case of a spill? This tank is less than 100 feet from the only PWS well that draws at a very shallow depth. What happens in case of a spill? What is the plan for the additional traffic on the road throughout the season? The previous operator of Holland Lake Lodge never paid his fees for road maintenance and this proposal calls for more heavy vehicles on a daily schedule.

Has the holding tank been tested for leaks? Holland Lake and Holland Creek are bull trout critical habitat. Putting sewage into Holland Lake would be a violation of the Endangered Species Act. If the holding tank leaks what would prevent the sewge from getting into Holland Lake?

Thank you for your consideration of our comments.

Sincerely yours,
Mike Garrity
Exectutive Director
Alliance for the Wild Rockies
P.O. Box 505
Helena MT 59624
Mike

Mike Garrity About 2 months ago

Feb. 16, 2025

Shannon Therriault - Environmental Health Director
Charles Shane - Environmental Health Manager
Members of the Public Health Board

RE: Holland Lake Lodge Wastewater Variance Request.

Hello,

The Alliance for the Wild Rockies opposes Mr. Jacobsen request for a health code variance to use holding tanks for wastewater management as a temporary measure until the U.S. Forest Service replaces the wastewater lagoons that serve the lodge complex and neighboring campground.

The USFS plan to rebuild the WWTP was submitted to the Montana Department of Environmental Quality  in the spring of 2025.  It only created enough capacity for a 101 day season and without any planning for additional sewage from events.  That plan - as of December - has been kicked out of the Montana DEQ review process due to lack of progress.  Any new plan must start completely  over. Increasing capacity will likely require a larger footprint and would thus likely fall outside the CE process that has been proposed.  The new solution will not be in place for several years.  Therefore the proposed variance is not a temporary solution and instead it is a long term solution which would violate Missoula County's rules.

County records still show Christian Wohlfeil as the only owner.  Title search has shown no change to ownership.  Taxes have not been paid.  On what basis is Mr. Jacobsen the right one to apply and why did the County spend resources reviewing his request?

What are the  calculations for wastewater flows for the operational limits Mr. Jacobsen has proposed? Mr. Jacobsen is proposing hosting regular events of up to 200 people.  Has an engineering study been done to estimate waster flows for this type of use to Missoula County?

What are the plans for having the tank pumped daily or every other day?  What is the plan in case of a spill?  This tank is less than 100 feet from the only PWS well that draws at a very shallow depth.  What happens in case of a spill?   What is the plan for the additional traffic on the road throughout the season?  The previous operator of Holland Lake Lodge never paid his fees for road maintenance and this proposal calls for more heavy vehicles on a daily schedule.

Has the holding tank been tested for leaks? Holland Lake and Holland Creek are bull trout critical habitat. Putting sewage into Holland Lake would be a violation of the Endangered Species Act. If the holding tank leaks what would prevent the sewge from getting into Holland Lake?

Thank you for your consideration of our comments.

Sincerely yours,
Mike Garrity
Exectutive Director
Alliance for the Wild Rockies
P.O. Box 505
Helena MT 59624
Mike

I ask, respectfully, for the Missoula City-County Board of Health to deny the variance requested by Holland Lake Lodge for the wastewater.
These owners knew when they purchased the Lodge of the issue and proceeded anyway; I assume expecting to have all their needs met.
This is a pristine, fragile area and what they are proposing appears to potentially harm the lake and watershed; and the wildlife that inhabits this area.
It seems a very temporary fix; and one, frankly, without supervision. The lodge and existing wastewater situation have gone along with noone maintaining the agreed permit requirements, by the previous owner, nor the Forest Service. The Lodge has been allowed to do whatever it wants, and there is no reason to believe this will not happen again. Who is going to monitor all of this? Assure the public the water is safe?
Also, it seems the fix is only for the Lodge, a private venture on public land, and not for the campgrounds and visitors. They have also stated publicly that for the next year or two (maybe forever), only private weddings and events, excluding the public, neighbors, locals will be held. Why should the City-County give them a permit to serve only the very few?
I ask that the variance be denied. Further review and other possible more environmentally sound solutions should first be considered.
Thank you for your consideration.
LB Dayton

lbd About 2 months ago

I ask, respectfully, for the Missoula City-County Board of Health to deny the variance requested by Holland Lake Lodge for the wastewater.
These owners knew when they purchased the Lodge of the issue and proceeded anyway; I assume expecting to have all their needs met.
This is a pristine, fragile area and what they are proposing appears to potentially harm the lake and watershed; and the wildlife that inhabits this area.
It seems a very temporary fix; and one, frankly, without supervision.  The lodge and existing wastewater situation have gone along with noone maintaining the agreed permit requirements, by the previous owner, nor the Forest Service.  The Lodge has been allowed to do whatever it wants, and there is no reason to believe this will not happen again.  Who is going to monitor all of this?  Assure the public the water is safe?  
Also, it seems the fix is only for the Lodge, a private venture on public land, and not for the campgrounds and visitors.  They have also stated publicly that for the next year or two (maybe forever), only private weddings and events, excluding the public, neighbors, locals will be held.  Why should the City-County give them a permit to serve only the very few?  
I ask that the variance be denied.  Further review and other possible more environmentally sound solutions should first be considered.
Thank you for your consideration.
LB Dayton

Feb. 16, 2025

Shannon Therriault - Environmental Health Director
Charles Shane - Environmental Health Manager
Members of the Public Health Board

RE: Holland Lake Lodge Wastewater Variance Request;

My name is Dean Johnson. I was married at Holland Lake Lodge (HLL) and have frequented it for many years since. I would like to see HLL maintained and preserved for future guests and generations to come.
However, at the risk and cost of environmental pollution of a pristine alpine lake, public waters and public land and a veiled attempt by HLL Inc. to bypass environmental safety regulations (due to poor planning),
I am requesting that the Missoula City-County Board of Health deny the requested wastewater variance for HLL.

The application does not meet the mandatory criteria required for granting a variance. Additionally, it raises significant concerns regarding public health, environmental protection
and compliance with existing State, County and U.S. Forest Service permits and regulations.

I am requesting a denial of a Wastewater Variance sought by Eric Jacobsen/HLL Inc. to host 200-plus person events at Holland Lake for the following reasons:

From the MPH website, Criteria the Health Board Uses to Make a Variance Decision states that "The Health Board can only approve a variance if all criteria are met."

Criteria 1. "The variance is necessary to address extraordinary conditions that the applicant could have not reasonable prevented"

EXTRORDINARY CONDITIONS Item 5, Claimed by HLL in initial Variance Request:
The sewage lagoon is USFS-owned; Holland Lake Lodge cannot repair or replace it.: Eric Jacobsen was aware of this fact prior to signing closing documents and the USFS 2025 Operation Plan.
The USFS directed the Lodge to operate with daily pumping until lagoon restoration.: This was never permissible as it conflicts with food service per Missoula County regulations, Regulation 1, Section 5(BX2).
Closure would cause major economic harm to employees and the Swan Valley community: This is totally false, HLL is and never has been a major employer or economic cornerstone in the Swan Valley.
Daily pumping prevents any risk of wastewater discharge to the environment. This is a false statement. Wastewater held in holding tanks can overflow or back-up into structures. Lines, hoses and pipes can freeze, leak or fail.

Prior to the purchase of HLL Eric Jacobsen, the Public and the U.S. Forest Service(USFS) was fully aware that the waste water treatment plant (open sewage lagoon) was non-functional and leaking due to a torn liner.
(See DEQ letter from James Fehr-Deputy Director Montana DEQ, dated Oct. 17, 2023 directed to Carol Hatfield USFS and MPH letter, dated Oct. 2, 2025, to Patrick Siers USFS page 3 of 4 and 4 of 4 in the initial HLL Variance Application.)
In addition, in the 2025 USFS HLL Operation Plan, the USFS states that Holland Lake Lodge would Not be allowed to open to the public until the system was repaired and made operational. It was also clearly known by all parties involved that the timeline to repair the existing wastewater system at HLL was several years away. In the HLL Variance Resubmittal 11-25-25 Appendix A -Map 2, the information clearly states that the lodge will not be operational until 2027.

Based on the above facts that were widely known by all parties involved, the non-functioning wastewater System at HLL does not constitute an "extraordinary condition" or "undue hardship" to the applicant. It was pre-existing.
The applicant was aware of the circumstances and chose to move forward with his business venture with full knowledge of a non-functioning system and the timeline involved to repair said system.
In short, the defects of HLL's wastewater system were known and the ramifications foreseeable by the USFS and the applicant prior to the applicant's purchase of the HLL and his acceptance of the USFS 2025 HLL Operation Plan.
The current so-called Extraordinary Conditions that the applicant is claiming to exist were clearly visible prior to purchase and could have been "reasonably prevented". For this reason, I request that you deny the variance.

..............................................

Criteria 2. "No Undue Hardship Caused by Denial of the Variance"

Any "undue hardship" asserted by the applicant for the USFS failure or delay to install and new wastewater system was present and fully known by the applicant prior to time of purchase of Holland Lake Lodge
and his acceptance of the USFS 2025 HLL Operation Plan. All claims of Undue Hardship or Extraordinary Conditions were known pre-existing conditions with the applicant making the conscious decisions to move forward.

It should be stressed that the permit to operate HLL should have never been issued by the USFS in the first place, given the known condition of the wastewater system*.
Moreover, it is the obligation of the USFS to terminate the permit, not the obligation of the County to help the USFS and HLL skirt the rules and environmental safeguards.
The permit has not historically been enforced. To claim it as a hardship now is misleading of the facts and past practice.

Per Jacobsen Application for Variance, “Since closing on the transaction in July 2025, not having the ability to use water or toilets within the buildings has already caused hardship and added unbudgeted expense.”
This was a known issue by the applicant prior to purchase; it is not something that unexpectedly happened. This is also why Eric Jacobsen/HLL has had a Porta-Potty contingency plan in place since taking ownership.
It should not be the Health Department's responsibility to mitigate a deficiency that Eric Jacobsen chose to ignore and now wants rectified due to claims of budget overrun.

In the Initial request for Variance submitted to you, Holland Lake Lodge states, “Without this variance, Holland Lake Lodge would be forced to close indefinitely, resulting in loss of employment for 20 staff members".
This is a false statement. HLL does not have 20 staff members on payroll. In fact, HLL's General Manager Rebecca Ramsey (who submitted this request for variance) recently parted ways with HLL.
At best, HLL has one fulltime handyman, and several part time cleaning people on staff, the rest are family members working to fix up the lodge per my being on site numerous times and conversations with Jacobsen.
It is also worth noting that, as HLL asks for an variance and leniency, they are delinquent on their 2025 taxes.

The following statement was made in the 11-25-25 Variance Resubmittal:
"Without this variance, Holland Lake Lodge is forced to close indefinitely. The business model was reliant upon taking non-refundable event deposits and regular cash flow based upon projected opening dates.
Without a projected opening date, and guaranteed cash flow, ownership does not feel comfortable continuing to invest in repairs and restoration and moving forward in hiring a team for operations."

The Variance should not be granted based on Mr. Jacobsen's business model, his inability to obtain non-refundable deposits, or whether or not he is comfortable continuing with restorations.

Prior to purchasing HLL, Mr. Jacobsen's financial resources and ability to operate HLL were thoroughly scrutinized by the USFS. The USFS had to determine if Mr. Jacobsen had the long-term financial resources to afford renovation and upgrades, maintenance, future operations and taxes. Mr. Jacobsen passed the financial background check. Now, not even a year into the ownership of HLL Mr. Jacobsen is crying foul and making claims of "undue hardship" when he was fully aware of required infrastructure upgrades and the timelines involved for those upgrades. In public information meetings, Eric Jacobsen has often touted his Montana roots. He has publicly stated that his desire to own and operate HLL is a labor of love not driven by profit and that he wants to preserve and share it with future generations. However, Jacobsen's current motivations, with his claims of hardship and his desire to book 200 person events for revenue and his desire for a variance to usurp environmental protections, seem to indicate otherwise.

"Loss of tourism revenue and economic harm to Missoula County” and “Closure would cause major economic harm to employees and the Swan Valley community” stated by Ramsey/Jacobsen are also false and erroneous statements. HLL has been closed since 2023. There is absolutely NO evidence to support the claim that the closure of HLL has caused any “major economic harm,” “loss of tourism revenue,” or “economic harm to Missoula County.”
Historically, Holland Lake Lodge has operated from Memorial Day - Labor Day weekend and provided seasonal employment for a handful of employees. Holland Lake Lodge has never been a huge employer or contributed significantly to the economic viability of the Swan Valley or Missoula County. Eric Jacobsen has done renovation and upgrades to the lodge, but his renovation costs should not be a reason to usurp public health, safety and environmental safeguards.

In Variance Resubmittal 12-2025, the USFS 153 minimal days of operation requirement is referenced as specified in the Special Use Permit. It states: “Failure of the holder to exercise this minimum use may result in revocation of this permit under clause VII.A.” Jacobsen cites HLL’s inability to meet this requirement as an “undue hardship.” This is a false and misleading statement by HLL Inc. The Lodge has not met this requirement in years, not even when it was operational by the previous owner, Christian Wohlfeil, and not since 2023 while the lodge has been seeking new ownership. The USFS has never enforced this operational rule. In reality, the new Special Use Permit for the operation of HLL should have never been issued by the USFS in the absence of a properly functioning Wastewater System.
In addition, the 2025 HLL Operation Plan issued to Eric Jacobsen by the USFS explicitly states, "For the 2025-26 operating season and until the wastewater system is fully operational, operation of HLL may not be open to the public for the minimum number days." This creates an exception to the 153-day open requirement until the wastewater system is fully operational. Therefore, there is no "undue hardship" and the variance should be denied.

As quoted by the health department, the “Missoula City-County Health Code prohibits the use of holding tanks because they are an expensive way to manage wastewater, especially on a long-term basis” and “holding tanks require a lot of attention and monitoring to ensure wastewater doesn’t overflow onto the ground or back up into buildings." In Variance Resubmittal 12-2025 Missoula Health Department says: "Your plan states that the well pump will automatically shut off when/if the tank reaches 75% capacity. If that occurs, any food service would have to stop operating and could not resume until water is turned back on."
On Dec 12, 2025, Jacobson replies, "Yes, we agree to this requirement as stated."

Jacobsen's contingency plan to stop food service during an "exclusive" 200-person event when the tank is 75% full is a non-viable, unacceptable solution for the following reasons.

There is no way to know at what time during the day/event the system will reach 75% capacity and shut off. (As food is being served to the bride and groom)?
Is Jacobsen going to have a septic contractor on standby 24/7 to pump the system every time it reaches capacity?
Unknown food service and water interruption(s) during a high-dollar exclusive event is not a realistic or viable business model. No restaurant or bar would operate like this let alone an exclusive resort.
Where are guest supposed to go to the bathroom during shutdowns while the system is being pumped?
Who is going to monitor Jacobsen to ensure that he stops operation in the middle of a "exclusive, private" event so no spills or contamination occur?

..............................................

Impact to Public Safety and the Environment:
Granting this variance would unnecessarily increase the risk of public exposure and environmental contamination to untreated sewage.

Granting this variance would increase the likelihood of contamination/pollution of state waters (in violation of 75-5-625MCA) due to the shallow water table on site; (the water table is eight-ten feet below the surface).
Drinking water for the lodge is also at risk. The existing well that supplies drinking water to HLL is a hand dug well 15 feet to 20 feet deep.

Granting this variance would expose drinking water, public recreational waters, public land, a pristine alpine lake and the surrounding environment to unnecessary contamination risk from fecal borne pathogens like: E.coli, Hepatitis, Salmonella, Giardia, Cryptosporidium and Norovirus to name a few.

In the event of a sewage leak, the rural location would increase response times by responding agencies, if discovered and reported at all. The delayed response time increases the likelihood of significant and damaging exposure to land, water, wildlife, as well as significant environmental contamination. Preventing nuisance conditions, contamination, or public health hazards would require extensive, ongoing, independent oversight.
This should not be the responsibility of the public or taxpayers.

In conclusion, due to a non-functioning wastewater system for HHL and its guests and the associated health and environmental risks associated with a deeply flawed contingency, this variance application does not meet the legal threshold for approval. HLL Inc has made no offer or contingency plan to reduce initial operations or water usage. Hollan Lake Lodge also does Not have any sort of an adequate emergency response plan in place to mitigate a sewage spill and prevent contamination. In addition, HLL does not intend to reduce water usage, instead they are actively promoting a massive INCREASE in water usage above historical use (with 200 person venues plus support staff currently being advertised). HLL has conveniently failed to mention this in their variance request, but it can be viewed here: Micro Weddings — Holland Lake Lodge. 200 people crammed
into less than 1.5 acre space to include the lodge and front lawn is not a "micro" event on a small lakeside peninsula...especially when it lacks a proper wastewater system.

The pre-existing conditions were known. The hardship is self-imposed. Reasonable alternatives exist. The public and environment should not have to bear the burden or risk of a poorly executed business plan. The request exceeds the minimum necessary while posing ongoing public health and environmental risks. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the Missoula City-County Board of Health deny the wastewater variance for Holland Lake Lodge.

Sincerely,

Dean Johnson
Condon, MT

* There are numerous examples as to how the USFS has been delinquent, deceptive or incompetent in its management of HLL, but they are not relevant to this variance request, with the exception of the leaking sewage lagoons
where the USFS attempted to ignore and/or hide the problem from the public and the DEQ. See DEQ letter from James Fehr-Deputy Director Montana DEQ, dated Oct. 17, 2023 directed to Carol Hatfield USFS in initial HLL Application Request.
https://www.hollandlakelodge.com/weddings

Bluekestral About 2 months ago

Feb. 16, 2025

Shannon Therriault - Environmental Health Director
Charles Shane - Environmental Health Manager
Members of the Public Health Board

RE: Holland Lake Lodge Wastewater Variance Request;

My name is Dean Johnson. I was married at Holland Lake Lodge (HLL) and have frequented it for many years since. I would like to see HLL maintained and preserved for future guests and generations to come. 
However, at the risk and cost of environmental pollution of a pristine alpine lake, public waters and public land and a veiled attempt by HLL Inc. to bypass environmental safety regulations (due to poor planning), 
I am requesting that the Missoula City-County Board of Health deny the requested wastewater variance for HLL.

The application does not meet the mandatory criteria required for granting a variance. Additionally, it raises significant concerns regarding public health, environmental protection
and compliance with existing State, County and U.S. Forest Service permits and regulations.

I am requesting a denial of a Wastewater Variance sought by Eric Jacobsen/HLL Inc. to host 200-plus person events at Holland Lake for the following reasons:

From the MPH website, Criteria the Health Board Uses to Make a Variance Decision states that "The Health Board can only approve a variance if all criteria are met."

Criteria 1. "The variance is necessary to address extraordinary conditions that the applicant could have not reasonable prevented"

EXTRORDINARY CONDITIONS Item 5, Claimed by HLL in initial Variance Request:
The sewage lagoon is USFS-owned; Holland Lake Lodge cannot repair or replace it.: Eric Jacobsen was aware of this fact prior to signing closing documents and the USFS 2025 Operation Plan.
The USFS directed the Lodge to operate with daily pumping until lagoon restoration.: This was never permissible as it conflicts with food service per Missoula County regulations, Regulation 1, Section 5(BX2).
Closure would cause major economic harm to employees and the Swan Valley community: This is totally false, HLL is and never has been a major employer or economic cornerstone in the Swan Valley.
Daily pumping prevents any risk of wastewater discharge to the environment. This is a false statement. Wastewater held in holding tanks can overflow or back-up into structures. Lines, hoses and pipes can freeze, leak or fail.

Prior to the purchase of HLL Eric Jacobsen, the Public and the U.S. Forest Service(USFS) was fully aware that the waste water treatment plant (open sewage lagoon) was non-functional and leaking due to a torn liner.
(See DEQ letter from James Fehr-Deputy Director Montana DEQ, dated Oct. 17, 2023 directed to Carol Hatfield USFS and MPH letter, dated Oct. 2, 2025, to Patrick Siers USFS page 3 of 4 and 4 of 4 in the initial HLL Variance Application.) 
In addition, in the 2025 USFS HLL Operation Plan, the USFS states that Holland Lake Lodge would Not be allowed to open to the public until the system was repaired and made operational. It was also clearly known by all parties involved that the timeline to repair the existing wastewater system at HLL was several years away. In the HLL Variance Resubmittal 11-25-25 Appendix A -Map 2, the information clearly states that the lodge will not be operational until 2027.

Based on the above facts that were widely known by all parties involved, the non-functioning wastewater System at HLL does not constitute an "extraordinary condition" or "undue hardship" to the applicant. It was pre-existing.
The applicant was aware of the circumstances and chose to move forward with his business venture with full knowledge of a non-functioning system and the timeline involved to repair said system. 
In short, the defects of HLL's wastewater system were known and the ramifications foreseeable by the USFS and the applicant prior to the applicant's purchase of the HLL and his acceptance of the USFS 2025 HLL Operation Plan. 
The current so-called Extraordinary Conditions that the applicant is claiming to exist were clearly visible prior to purchase and could have been "reasonably prevented". For this reason, I request that you deny the variance.

..............................................

Criteria 2. "No Undue Hardship Caused by Denial of the Variance"

Any "undue hardship" asserted by the applicant for the USFS failure or delay to install and new wastewater system was present and fully known by the applicant prior to time of purchase of Holland Lake Lodge 
and his acceptance of the USFS 2025 HLL Operation Plan.  All claims of Undue Hardship or Extraordinary Conditions were known pre-existing conditions with the applicant making the conscious decisions to move forward.

It should be stressed that the permit to operate HLL should have never been issued by the USFS in the first place, given the known condition of the wastewater system*.
Moreover, it is the obligation of the USFS to terminate the permit, not the obligation of the County to help the USFS and HLL skirt the rules and environmental safeguards. 
The permit has not historically been enforced. To claim it as a hardship now is misleading of the facts and past practice.

Per Jacobsen Application for Variance, “Since closing on the transaction in July 2025, not having the ability to use water or toilets within the buildings has already caused hardship and added unbudgeted expense.” 
This was a known issue by the applicant prior to purchase; it is not something that unexpectedly happened.  This is also why Eric Jacobsen/HLL has had a Porta-Potty contingency plan in place since taking ownership.
It should not be the Health Department's responsibility to mitigate a deficiency that Eric Jacobsen chose to ignore and now wants rectified due to claims of budget overrun.

In the Initial request for Variance  submitted to you, Holland Lake Lodge states, “Without this variance, Holland Lake Lodge would be forced to close indefinitely, resulting in loss of employment for 20 staff members".
This is a false statement. HLL does not have 20 staff members on payroll.  In fact, HLL's General Manager Rebecca Ramsey (who submitted this request for variance) recently parted ways with HLL. 
At best, HLL has one fulltime handyman, and several part time cleaning people on staff, the rest are family members working to fix up the lodge per my being on site numerous times and conversations with Jacobsen. 
It is also worth noting that, as HLL asks for an variance and leniency, they are delinquent on their 2025 taxes.

The following statement was made in the 11-25-25 Variance Resubmittal: 
"Without this variance, Holland Lake Lodge is forced to close indefinitely. The business model was reliant upon taking non-refundable event deposits and regular cash flow based upon projected opening dates.
Without a projected opening date, and guaranteed cash flow, ownership does not feel comfortable continuing to invest in repairs and restoration and moving forward in hiring a team for operations."

The Variance should not be granted based on Mr. Jacobsen's business model, his inability to obtain non-refundable deposits, or whether or not he is comfortable continuing with restorations.

Prior to purchasing HLL, Mr. Jacobsen's financial resources and ability to operate HLL were thoroughly scrutinized by the USFS. The USFS had to determine if Mr. Jacobsen had the long-term financial resources to afford renovation and upgrades, maintenance, future operations and taxes. Mr. Jacobsen passed the financial background check. Now, not even a year into the ownership of HLL Mr. Jacobsen is crying foul and making claims of "undue hardship" when he was fully aware of required infrastructure upgrades and the timelines involved for those upgrades. In public information meetings, Eric Jacobsen has often touted his Montana roots. He has publicly stated that his desire to own and operate HLL is a labor of love not driven by profit and that he wants to preserve and share it with future generations.  However,  Jacobsen's current motivations, with his claims of hardship and his desire to book 200 person events for revenue and his desire for a variance to usurp environmental protections, seem to indicate otherwise.

"Loss of tourism revenue and economic harm to Missoula County” and  “Closure would cause major economic harm to employees and the Swan Valley community” stated by Ramsey/Jacobsen are also false and erroneous statements. HLL has been closed since 2023.  There is absolutely NO evidence to support the claim that the closure of HLL has caused any “major economic harm,” “loss of tourism revenue,” or “economic harm to Missoula County.”
Historically, Holland Lake Lodge has operated from Memorial Day - Labor Day weekend and provided seasonal employment for a handful of employees. Holland Lake Lodge has never been a huge employer or contributed significantly to the economic viability of the Swan Valley or Missoula County.  Eric Jacobsen has done renovation and upgrades to the lodge, but his renovation costs should not be a reason to usurp public health, safety and environmental safeguards.

In Variance Resubmittal 12-2025, the USFS 153 minimal days of operation requirement is referenced as specified in the Special Use Permit. It states: “Failure of the holder to exercise this minimum use may result in revocation of this permit under clause VII.A.” Jacobsen cites HLL’s inability to meet this requirement as an “undue hardship.” This is a false and misleading statement by HLL Inc. The Lodge has not met this requirement in years, not even when it was operational by the previous owner, Christian Wohlfeil, and not since 2023 while the lodge has been seeking new ownership.  The USFS has never enforced this operational rule. In reality, the new Special Use Permit for the operation of HLL should have never been issued by the USFS in the absence of a properly functioning Wastewater System.
In addition, the 2025 HLL Operation Plan issued to Eric Jacobsen by the USFS explicitly states, "For the 2025-26 operating season and until the wastewater system is fully operational, operation of HLL may not be open to the public for the minimum number days."  This creates an exception to the 153-day open requirement until the wastewater system is fully operational. Therefore, there is no "undue hardship" and the variance should be denied.

As quoted by the health department, the “Missoula City-County Health Code prohibits the use of holding tanks because they are an expensive way to manage wastewater, especially on a long-term basis” and “holding tanks require a lot of attention and monitoring to ensure wastewater doesn’t overflow onto the ground or back up into buildings." In Variance Resubmittal 12-2025 Missoula Health Department  says: "Your plan states that the well pump will automatically shut off when/if the tank reaches 75% capacity. If that occurs, any food service would have to stop operating and could not resume until water is turned back on."
On Dec 12, 2025, Jacobson replies, "Yes, we agree to this requirement as stated." 
 
Jacobsen's contingency plan to stop food service during an "exclusive" 200-person event when the tank is 75% full is a non-viable, unacceptable solution for the following reasons.

There is no way to know at what time during the day/event the system will reach 75% capacity and shut off.  (As food is being served to the bride and groom)?
Is Jacobsen going to have a septic contractor on standby 24/7 to pump the system every time it reaches capacity?
Unknown food service and water interruption(s) during a high-dollar exclusive event is not a realistic or viable business model. No restaurant or bar would operate like this let alone an exclusive resort. 
Where are guest supposed to go to the bathroom during shutdowns while the system is being pumped?
Who is going to monitor Jacobsen to ensure that he stops operation in the middle of a "exclusive, private" event so no spills or contamination occur?

..............................................

Impact to Public Safety and the Environment:
Granting this variance would unnecessarily increase the risk of public exposure and environmental contamination to untreated sewage.

Granting this variance would increase the likelihood of contamination/pollution of state waters (in violation of 75-5-625MCA) due to the shallow water table on site; (the water table is eight-ten feet below the surface). 
Drinking water for the lodge is also at risk. The existing well that supplies drinking water to HLL is a hand dug well 15 feet to 20 feet deep.

Granting this variance would expose drinking water, public recreational waters, public land, a pristine alpine lake and the surrounding environment to unnecessary contamination risk from fecal borne pathogens like: E.coli, Hepatitis, Salmonella, Giardia, Cryptosporidium and Norovirus to name a few.

In the event of a sewage leak, the rural location would increase response times by responding agencies, if discovered and reported at all. The delayed response time increases the likelihood of significant and damaging exposure to land, water, wildlife, as well as significant environmental contamination. Preventing nuisance conditions, contamination, or public health hazards would require extensive, ongoing, independent oversight.   
This should not be the responsibility of the public or taxpayers.

In conclusion, due to a non-functioning wastewater system for HHL and its guests and the associated health and environmental risks associated with a deeply flawed contingency, this variance application does not meet the legal threshold for approval.  HLL Inc has made no offer or contingency plan to reduce initial operations or water usage.  Hollan Lake Lodge also does Not have any sort of an adequate emergency response plan in place to mitigate a sewage spill and prevent contamination. In addition, HLL does not intend to reduce water usage, instead they are actively promoting a massive INCREASE in water usage above historical use (with 200 person venues plus support staff currently being advertised). HLL has conveniently failed to mention this in their variance request, but it can be viewed here: Micro Weddings — Holland Lake Lodge.   200 people crammed
into less than 1.5 acre space to include the lodge and front lawn is not a "micro" event on a small lakeside peninsula...especially when it lacks a proper wastewater system.

The pre-existing conditions were known. The hardship is self-imposed. Reasonable alternatives exist. The public and environment should not have to bear the burden or risk of a poorly executed business plan. The request exceeds the minimum necessary while posing ongoing public health and environmental risks. For these reasons, I respectfully request that the Missoula City-County Board of Health deny the wastewater variance for Holland Lake Lodge.

Sincerely,

Dean Johnson
Condon, MT

* There are numerous examples as to how the USFS has been delinquent, deceptive or incompetent in its management of HLL, but they are not relevant to this variance request, with the exception of the leaking sewage lagoons
   where the USFS attempted to ignore and/or hide the problem from the public and the DEQ.  See DEQ letter from James Fehr-Deputy Director Montana DEQ, dated Oct. 17, 2023 directed to Carol Hatfield USFS in initial HLL Application Request. 
https://www.hollandlakelodge.com/weddings

The variance request submitted by Holland Lake Lodge's owner, Jacobsen appears to be yet another attempt to avoid compliance with requirements stated in its USFS Special Use Operating Agreement. Missoula County is under no obligation to grant an exception to the ongoing waste water issue identified several years ago and would in fact be remiss in granting such a variance. As stated very clearly in the Special Use Permit Authorization, the USFS and permit holder must share in the costs associated with maintaining and operating the waste water system which includes both within and out-of-permit area sewage lagoons and septic tanks. To date, this concern has not been adequately addressed and the threat of waste water pollution persists.
The recently submitted Swan Valley Community Survey made it very clear that Holland Lake Lodge and it's surrounding ecosystems are deemed invaluable by the overwhelming majority of its residents as vital economic and natural resources that exemplify the Valley's reputation as one of Montana's last remaining ecologically intact landscapes.
The Special Use Permit requires the remediation of any discharge of hazardous materials into surface or groundwater both within and near the permit area. Protected and threatened species including endangered bull trout and vulnerable west slope cutthroat trout are found within Holland Lake and the watershed it feeds. The issuance of a variance would kick the proverbial can further down the road posing not only a danger to multiple species of concern but also potentially interfering with the public's right to enjoy Holland Lake in a safe and enjoyable manner (RI-E4). I oppose any variance that would allow the operation of Holland Lake Lodge without a permanent solution to this serious and persistent concern.

Ted Muhs About 2 months ago

The variance request submitted by Holland Lake Lodge's owner, Jacobsen appears to be yet another attempt to avoid compliance with requirements stated in its USFS Special Use Operating Agreement.  Missoula County is under no obligation to grant an exception to the ongoing waste water issue identified several years ago and would in fact be remiss in granting such a variance. As stated very clearly in the Special Use Permit Authorization, the USFS and permit holder must share in the costs associated with maintaining and operating the waste water system which includes both within and out-of-permit area sewage lagoons and septic tanks.  To date, this concern has not been adequately addressed and the threat of waste water pollution persists.
The recently submitted Swan Valley Community Survey made it very clear that Holland Lake Lodge and it's surrounding ecosystems are deemed invaluable by the overwhelming majority of its residents as vital economic and natural resources that exemplify the Valley's reputation as one of Montana's last remaining ecologically intact landscapes. 
The Special Use Permit requires the remediation of any discharge of hazardous materials into surface or groundwater both within and near the permit area. Protected and threatened species including endangered bull trout and vulnerable west slope cutthroat trout are found within Holland Lake and the watershed it feeds. The issuance of a variance would kick the proverbial can further down the road posing not only a danger to multiple species of concern but also potentially interfering with the public's right to enjoy Holland Lake in a safe and enjoyable manner (RI-E4). I oppose any variance that would allow the operation of Holland Lake Lodge without a permanent solution to this serious and persistent concern.

Dear County Board Members:

I'd like to update earlier comments.

The primary ownership data on the Missoula County Property Information System was updated over the weekend removing Christian Wohlfeil's name as primary owner. Eric Jacobsen and Thomas Knowles are shown as owners now. Disregard that part of my earlier comment. As of this moment, however, 2025 property taxes are still showing up as delinquent and the owner's name in the itax system is still Christian Wohlfeil.

Please know that I appreciate all of the hard work MPH staff has put into this and my comments are not a criticism of their work. I am requesting more evidence from the applicant to support his variance request. MPH has been working with the Forest Service, the public, and the Lodge owners for many, many months, if not years, to ensure public safety at Holland Lake Lodge. This variance request is just the most recent challenge. All of the work the staff has put into this effort is greatly appreciated.

Please add the following comments to my earlier submission:

●The applicant plans on operating at full capacity—up to 50 overnight guests and 350 meals per day—unlimited # of 200+ group events, despite:

- A 5,000‑gallon tank (alleged, not proven)
- Historical peak flows up to 3,853 GPD (Estimated)
- A pumping plan that requires daily or every‑other‑day pumping
- A system that shuts down at 75% capacity

The applicant provides no analysis of

- Reduced occupancy
- Limited # of events and guests
- Water‑use minimizations

---

●The applicant relies on:
- One primary pumper (Rockin’ B)
- One backup pumper (Ready Freddy)
- A long list of pumpers who have no agreements with the lodge

The plan assumes:

- Daily availability
- No mechanical failures
- No weather or access issues
- No staffing shortages
- No peak‑flow events exceeding pumping capacity

The applicant’s own data shows maximum flows that could fill the tank in less than two days. A single missed pump‑out could cause overflow, especially during peak operations.

The “emergency plan” is simply:

- Shut off the well
- Use chemical toilets and provide bottled water to guests
- Hope a pumper becomes available.

●The application asserts that the cistern:

- Cannot leak
- Cannot be accessed by animals
- Cannot contaminate groundwater
- Has no structural concerns

Yet the applicant provides no engineering report, only a pumper’s visual inspection. A 5,000‑gallon concrete tank in a high‑water‑table area, used far beyond its original design purpose, presents clear risks:

- Buoyancy and flotation
- Structural fatigue
- Infiltration/exfiltration
- Freeze‑thaw damage
- Overflow during peak use

The applicant’s assurances are not supported by qualified engineering analysis or other evidence.

Thank you again.

59826 About 2 months ago

Dear County Board Members:

I'd like to update earlier comments.

The primary ownership data on the Missoula County Property Information System was updated over the weekend removing Christian Wohlfeil's name as primary owner.  Eric Jacobsen and Thomas Knowles are shown as owners now. Disregard that part of my earlier comment. As of this moment, however, 2025 property taxes are still showing up as delinquent and the owner's name in the itax system is still Christian Wohlfeil.

Please know that I appreciate all of the hard work MPH staff has put into this and my comments are not a criticism of their work. I am requesting more evidence from the applicant to support his variance request. MPH has been working with the Forest Service, the public, and the Lodge owners for many, many months, if not years, to ensure public safety at Holland Lake Lodge.  This variance request is just the most recent challenge. All of the work the staff has put into this effort is greatly appreciated.

Please add the following comments to my earlier submission:

●The applicant plans on operating at full capacity—up to 50 overnight guests and 350 meals per day—unlimited # of 200+ group events, despite:

- A 5,000‑gallon tank  (alleged, not proven)
- Historical peak flows up to 3,853 GPD  (Estimated)
- A pumping plan that requires daily or every‑other‑day pumping  
- A system that shuts down at 75% capacity

The applicant provides no analysis of

- Reduced occupancy  
- Limited # of events and guests 
- Water‑use minimizations

---

●The applicant relies on:
- One primary pumper (Rockin’ B)  
- One backup pumper (Ready Freddy)  
- A long list of pumpers who have no agreements with the lodge

The plan assumes:

- Daily availability  
- No mechanical failures  
- No weather or access issues  
- No staffing shortages  
- No peak‑flow events exceeding pumping capacity

The applicant’s own data shows maximum flows that could fill the tank in less than two days. A single missed pump‑out could cause overflow, especially during peak operations.

The “emergency plan” is simply:

- Shut off the well  
- Use chemical toilets and provide bottled water to guests 
- Hope a pumper becomes available.

●The application asserts that the cistern:

- Cannot leak  
- Cannot be accessed by animals  
- Cannot contaminate groundwater  
- Has no structural concerns

Yet the applicant provides no engineering report, only a pumper’s visual inspection. A 5,000‑gallon concrete tank in a high‑water‑table area, used far beyond its original design purpose, presents clear risks:

- Buoyancy and flotation  
- Structural fatigue  
- Infiltration/exfiltration  
- Freeze‑thaw damage  
- Overflow during peak use

The applicant’s assurances are not supported by qualified engineering analysis or other evidence.

Thank you again.

First off I wanted to thank the Health Department staff for providing so much information. There have been numerous problems with a lack of transparency with so much of the controversy at Holland Lake, Second, the staff report is thorough and presents an incredible amount of information. These two points show the County Health Department is taking this wastewater variance seriously.

I have two questions for staff. The staff report states “If water is turned off because the tank has reached 75% capacity, all food service must be suspended.” What monitoring method or enforcement method will be utilized if this situation arises?

The staff report states “If wastewater flows exceed the ability of the septic pumpers to keep the tank pumped, the Applicant must reduce occupancy and activity on the property to levels that make wastewater management manageable; or replace the pump chamber with a tank of sufficient size that meets the specifications in DEQ Circular 4 .” Will there be any monitoring or testing to determine if wastewater flows have exceeded the ability of the septic pumps?
Thank you. Dan Hall

DanHall About 2 months ago

I have two questions for staff. The staff report states “If water is turned off because the tank has reached 75% capacity, all food service must be suspended.” What monitoring method or enforcement method will be utilized if this situation arises?

The staff report states “If wastewater flows exceed the ability of the septic pumpers to keep the tank pumped, the Applicant must reduce occupancy and activity on the property to levels that make wastewater management manageable; or replace the pump chamber with a tank of sufficient size that meets the specifications in DEQ Circular 4 .”  Will there be any monitoring or testing to determine if wastewater flows have exceeded the ability of the septic pumps?
Thank you.   Dan Hall

Holland Lake Lodge Wastewater Variance (Condon)

Let us know what you think by logging in or creating an account and submitting your comment below.

CLOSED: This discussion has concluded.

Key Dates

Who's Listening

Important Documents

Signup Banner