[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6232922,"mediaKeyId","3425626-e04df4f4e791140dd9d2d238cd7a8fbf","parentId",3425626,"title","Commission considers reclaimed-water demand smoothing, ordinance changes and targeted outreach to large users","audioSeconds",1219,"startMs",5511000,"endMs",6730000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3425626-e04df4f4e791140dd9d2d238cd7a8fbf&start=5511&end=6730","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3425626-e04df4f4e791140dd9d2d238cd7a8fbf/thumbnail_5511000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6232922/Flagstaff-City/Coconino-County/Arizona/Commission-considers-reclaimed-water-demand-smoothing-ordinance-changes-and-targeted-outreach-to-large-users","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6232922-9eab257eb494ad1e8baa2a35560561a2/orig.mp4?Expires=1771188113&Signature=OmYlejzwj8AHmED5~K4LHPRWpgLP-QzOoGiy4EnPaFzcEpc81a~VSjBo1ajU6oS0dv2Qmlc9PToS~KjhmGdzhsHo0ObM1r-SekCSLdqtd4OAeinotYe9-BNZqDTDxxxDffmAijpDB9lKyK9C0qcaZPEYvZGuVs0xVObidWkifJtCCKOu0WYriF5oj4PJ9NuZhCO8l-bm7VZ4DZiloOkVdVuF61HY8j7Qb59lX1zj7goRd9gA9UaHwX4ISHqq3ECWvmBdm-9QphSc-E0ZcFISCAqTcdUX4ZXDQv9E84sCknteOorhSFMjLWyEdd7CZrY48M7tovzgWayJyUPAO8zNlg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of Flagstaff, AZ","date","2025-05-21T15:54:48.367Z","article","City staff presented options on May 15 for conserving reclaimed water and reducing peak demand on the purple‑pipe system, asking the Water Commission whether to pursue specific goals and whether to extend potable water conservation rules to reclaimed users.

Erin Young, water resources section director, opened the discussion and said staff had investigated the legal basis for sharing individual usage records and suggested nondisclosure agreements for any third‑party review of customer meters. \"The first question really will be, is there a need to know what that information is?\" she said, explaining staff had sought legal guidance on privacy and data-sharing considerations.

Tim Morales, the water conservation program manager, reviewed possible approaches staff could pursue: prohibiting irrigation between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., requiring weather-sensing irrigation controllers and equipment upgrades, implementing outdoor water budgets tied to evapotranspiration, and using odd/even day schedules or no‑watering Mondays as peak-demand measures. Morales said city parks and other large users are a small number of accounts but represent a large share of purple‑pipe demand, and that staff have not yet quantified per-hour demand patterns across all users.

Why it matters: The city is managing finite reclaimed-water resources and is considering whether smoothing peak demand would free capacity for future users, including industrial or advanced-water-purification projects. Staff said some users (for example, golf courses with on-site storage) may be better positioned to adapt to schedule changes than others (athletic fields that need continuous watering during events).

Questions and next steps
Commissioners suggested steps staff could take before any ordinance changes: convene the reclaimed-water work group (which includes major users), collect hourly production and customer‑use data for summer months, and pilot scheduling changes with city parks and willing large users to test whether demand smoothing would help system resilience.

Young said staff would prepare two items if the commission directed it: (1) a technical briefing showing monthly and hourly reclaimed-water production and customer-use patterns, and (2) a draft of potential ordinance amendments to apply selected potable-water conservation rules (for example, no irrigation between midday hours) to reclaimed water where feasible. Commissioners emphasized stakeholder engagement with major users (golf courses, schools, NAU and large commercial users) before any formal policy change.

Ending: The commission supported reconvening the reclaimed-water work group and asked staff to return with data on hourly production and a draft approach—including outreach plans—so the commission can consider targeted demand‑smoothing measures without impeding current customers or potential future allocations.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Flagstaff Water Commission Meeting - May 15, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Staff asked the Water Commission whether to pursue targeted conservation and demand‑smoothing for the reclaimed-water (purple‑pipe) system, including applying some potable‑water rules to reclaimed users and convening a reclaimed‑water work group.","taxTitle","Flagstaff City, Coconino County, Arizona","taxId",4650,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6232925,"Flagstaff examines lower-cost solids-handling at Rio de Flag; dryer option may cut costs and hauling",1513,3839000,5352000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3425626-e04df4f4e791140dd9d2d238cd7a8fbf&start=3839&end=5352","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3425626-e04df4f4e791140dd9d2d238cd7a8fbf/thumbnail_3839000.jpg","/articles/6232925/Flagstaff-City/Coconino-County/Arizona/Flagstaff-examines-lower-cost-solids-handling-at-Rio-de-Flag-dryer-option-may-cut-costs-and-hauling","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6232925-e4fa9393cebeb7235df81bd62475b7ff/orig.mp4?Expires=1771188113&Signature=KvbbTsUVfQoQO5NvemDG2HYzi7TD2SmdYSOsyRtQU5Ymbk-tE3zNuXmSnu0~p5ZQ6~7yz8hprBjiqHsXV25GM6-YYMkeAW0p1~Hum-yPYa1DhlCcIxYbRH6g4ICUsYIt7-MvdViF4pu6vk83fIA88tgoU0QO86ObEbW37fDOq9hcJv3rBlcoASDJK5uM7dejOXJ6~gKgd~mWsoEi7MJzvsrpBUkaJ17SjOodq3v~1-fGLHYLRGpU98DWyOe1Y~WonTRDMBewyo3Q-HmBl1QpvgprTpWimElEYx74OOzSRgyiVOUOqmQavl9clF~QtZ9X1k4adH4TnLj6RNVIB6sBIw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City wastewater staff presented alternatives on May 15 for handling solids at the Rio de Flag Reclamation Facility, including a lower-footprint dewatering-and-drying technology intended to reduce the solids delivered to the Wildcat Hill plant and to produce a dried, Class A biosolid product.

Troy Dagonard, wastewater treatment manager, summarized the city’s multi-year design effort to add solids handling at Rio. The initial design—two digesters and a dewatering facility—produced cost estimates approaching $60 million. Staff pared scope to one digester plus dewatering with a roughly $36 million estimate, but the rescope remained over budget. \"Cost models came in at roughly $36,000,000,\" Dagonard said, and staff then evaluated alternative technologies.

Why it matters: Wildcat Hill’s solids loading has increased with changing flows and conservation trends; removing roughly 11,000 pounds per day of solids from the collection system would return Wildcat to earlier design‑basis loadings and provide relief for maintenance and future rehabilitation.

Drying alternative and pilot results
Staff described a two-step mechanical approach piloted previously: a screw press dewatering stage followed by a low-temperature dehumidifying dryer. The pilot produced dewatered material that passed landfill paint-filter tests and a dried product meeting reduction targets for total solids and total coliforms.

Dagonard summarized estimated capital and operating tradeoffs: preliminary cost estimates for a dryer-based facility at Rio were in the $18–24 million range (PCL reported an initial estimate of about $18 million plus contingencies that pushed the total to roughly $22–24 million); staff said the dryer option is materially less costly than the earlier digester alternatives. Operating cost for a dryer was estimated at roughly $700–$1,000 per day in electricity under current assumptions. Dagonard said the dryer route would reduce hauling to the landfill to about 1–2 roll-off bins per week versus 4–5 roll-offs per week with dewatered-only material moved from a digester scenario.

Benefits and risks
Staff said the dryer approach can produce EPA Class A biosolids, reduce solids transport costs and create a dried feedstock compatible with future biochar processes. The dryer’s footprint also fits the Rio site better than large digester tanks, and a fully enclosed building with odor control was part of the 60% design package. Dagonard said the finished dried product could be landfilled or used as a feedstock for biochar if the city pursues that sustainability pathway.

Commissioners pressed staff on lifecycle costs, energy consumption and alternative options. Staff estimated that, even accounting for electricity, the dryer option’s capital savings would shorten the payback period relative to digesters; one commissioner cited a rough 30‑year ROI comparison that did not favor digesters at large scale. Staff acknowledged the dryer consumes significant electricity (each unit rated at 600 amps, 480 volts in design materials) and said the city is investigating tariffs and supply-chain issues for imported equipment.

Timeline and next steps
Dagonard said the project had reached 60% design and that staff planned to refine cost estimates and evaluate micro‑screen piloting and other pre‑drying options that might reduce dryer energy needs. He estimated about 18 months until construction could begin, subject to updated cost estimates and procurement.

Ending: Commissioners asked staff to continue refining capital and operating comparisons, to pilot pre‑drying or screening options where feasible, and to return with an updated cost estimate and schedule before moving to procurement.","After digesters proved cost‑prohibitive, Flagstaff wastewater staff presented a dewatering-and-drying alternative at Rio de Flag that would produce a dried, lower‑volume biosolid and reduce solids sent to Wildcat Hill.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6232928,"Flagstaff lays out 2025 water production plan; emphasizes backup power and infrastructure repairs ahead of fire season",1779,1817000,3596000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3425626-e04df4f4e791140dd9d2d238cd7a8fbf&start=1817&end=3596","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3425626-e04df4f4e791140dd9d2d238cd7a8fbf/thumbnail_1817000.jpg","/articles/6232928/Flagstaff-City/Coconino-County/Arizona/Flagstaff-lays-out-2025-water-production-plan-emphasizes-backup-power-and-infrastructure-repairs-ahead-of-fire-season","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6232928-dd71697b155d239061ef3f347e216f0a/orig.mp4?Expires=1771188113&Signature=O0ts5WCF~4eyWwjU8XGtQvQD7rDEt-M0cTTUAl8Dci6PwV4r8v1ApUdlOQxGWoFBih2X7M4kJrRI5cOJfBublwwlmae3g8so8moykiYOuE-G4H~T4X7UlwNTOZ2KjomIWX~1Bojyf2pWQOFLzYBz7jIT~Minz-0-T424ZX5zj1cq6Edlsg1AMid0fepp9lXdoqsxG3Sc6DXKfa-wzmYu2ZDlu4eZz3bIbhm2g8QDC6C5zt0h1Fn2adN5jmQE--QLoU31FgW8ShlaJXamGIEM3sOU5XvnMxgjMYZr2H6NkNtjCRepZxgit122eIzVgfzhViEbr7qO0zrgn6EiSZmqUg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City water-production staff presented the 2025 Water Production Plan on May 15, telling the Water Commission the utility will rely more on groundwater this year, proceed with multiple infrastructure repairs and upgrades, and expand emergency backup power ahead of potential APS Public Safety Power Shutoffs (PSPS) tied to wildfire risk.

Brian Hunsinger, the city’s water production manager, said the system started the spring at about 35% of available Lake Mary surface-water supply and has fallen to roughly 26 percent. \"It's not a good year for surface water production,\" Hunsinger told the commission, and the utility will \"rely more heavily on groundwater\" including increased output from the Woody Mountain Well Field and Lake Mary groundwater sources.

Why it matters: The combined program of repairs, meter improvements and backup power is intended to protect daily delivery during wildfire-season power interruptions and to preserve limited surface-water resources.

Key projects and status
- Upper Lake Mary dam spillway repairs: Hunsinger said the Army-recommended work on concrete spalling is scheduled while lake levels are low; contractors (preconstruction services awarded to PCL) are planning repairs this spring.
- Lake Mary Water Treatment Plant sedimentation-basin rehabilitation: Staff described a multi-year design and budget process; prior designs were paused for budget reasons and the project is now in preconstruction with PCL. The work will replace aging flocculation equipment, sludge collectors and concrete infrastructure that staff said had reached roughly twice its design life.
- Lake Mary master meter replacement: A previously recommended vault and full‑flanged mag meter will replace a failing insertion mag meter. Hunsinger said the original insertion meter was installed with insufficient velocity and the replacement should improve accuracy and restore automated control logic used by plant pumps.
- 27‑inch raw-water pipeline replacement: The pipeline installed in the 1960s has experienced multiple failures and currently leaks overnight; staff plan a design solicitation later this year to evaluate parallel replacement options and whether to abandon the existing pipe in place.
- Tank maintenance and paint projects: Several potable and reclaimed tanks (including Buffalo Park and Railroad Springs) will receive exterior painting and inspection; the Buffalo Park tank exterior will also receive a mural from Beautification Arts and Sciences.
- Interbasin pipeline restoration: Staff reported continued repairs to the interbasin pipeline damaged in the 2022 pipeline fire; contractor Hunter has completed multiple sites with funding from the Arizona Department of Forestry and Fire Management and expects to finish remaining work by fall.

Backup power and PSPS planning
Hunsinger said APS’s Public Safety Power Shutoff policy can de-energize about 75% of the city’s potable supply (Woody Mountain, Lake Mary wellfields and raw water pump station). The city has been installing mobile generators and interconnection infrastructure since 2018 and purchased five trailer-mounted diesel generators (350-kilowatt units) to deploy to critical sites. \"We purchased 5 of these 350 kilowatt, trailer mounted diesel powered generators,\" Hunsinger explained, and the utility is installing permanent connections at the Woody Mountain Well Field so four of those units should power roughly 2.5 million gallons per day from half the well field when needed.

Hunsinger acknowledged cleaner or battery alternatives have been discussed but said supply-chain and capacity constraints make diesel the most reliable emergency source at present. \"A solar field would be a massive array,\" he said, and battery storage sized for a single well would be impractical with current technology and costs.

Operational notes and controls
Hunsinger described redundancy and control challenges: the Lake Mary master meter ties groundwater and surface-water inputs to pump controls and SCADA logic, and the plant has operated with manual controls since the meter failed last fall. He stressed the importance of meter replacement to restore automated pump operation. Commissioners asked about chlorine residuals on the west side of town; Hunsinger said wells at Tuthill and the shop well help maintain residuals and that reconfiguring the Tuthill wellhouse to use both Tuthill 1 and 2 could raise available groundwater capacity substantially.

Next steps and timeline
Hunsinger said the city expects to proceed with preconstruction work and Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) discussions this year for major plant rehabilitation items and to solicit design services for the 27-inch pipe replacement. Other projects are scheduled through fall and into the next construction season.

Ending: Commissioners thanked staff for the detailed update and asked staff to return with progress updates on the master meter project, sedimentation-basin rehabilitation and interbasin pipeline restoration.","City water staff told the Water Commission they will shift more production to groundwater in 2025, pursue repairs at Lake Mary and other treatment infrastructure, and expand backup-power capability to withstand APS Public Safety Power Shutoffs.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6232931,"Flagstaff officials present 2024 Consumer Confidence Report; one PFAS detection flagged during EPA monitoring",1301,794000,2095000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3425626-e04df4f4e791140dd9d2d238cd7a8fbf&start=794&end=2095","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3425626-e04df4f4e791140dd9d2d238cd7a8fbf/thumbnail_794000.jpg","/articles/6232931/Flagstaff-City/Coconino-County/Arizona/Flagstaff-officials-present-2024-Consumer-Confidence-Report-one-PFAS-detection-flagged-during-EPA-monitoring","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6232931-de9db7fd286cf3a53d62251f068d037c/orig.mp4?Expires=1771188113&Signature=ZYJKOxZwz79Z6zMFQ7TlsIOVa46qgyZzMvaUxAwuW8vRpM9EYxXbp-gfLDszJF7-6SfGd6PIx7UgfbG9byqFdN4L-j2tCLdEPaRYgxpryzRbX8O767H~aLteI8XG~nDwmTe7JXXDCgQ7BwvH-Y48BWs9YC5RaEwJ~-BtD7KsINmB9IzO3BEEzZTlkImG5ru1b9LfDHh588LZSWM~Wrq4J~tMdRE9Zj2BNYsfG0gWwte6zp6ClqwwNrMbbP9uyO5griUjylafRa2DTphn1RfyxubDR6mRlX2eY7YHUBZ6g4ESiyWQxd33pNqMOcjrIB-kP0e3OLuSezS0wutbaYrXEA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City of Flagstaff staff presented the 2024 Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) to the Water Commission on May 15, detailing routine water-quality testing and one detection of a PFAS compound during federal UCMR5 monitoring.

Jolene Montoya, regulatory compliance section director for the City of Flagstaff, said the city submitted the CCR to the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality for review before printing. \"We have taken the stance of getting their approval before we do any printing,\" Montoya said, explaining the city’s choice to avoid reprinting if ADEQ requests edits.

Why it matters: The CCR is the annual public summary of water-quality monitoring for consumers. A detection of a Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS) compound can raise public concern; commission members asked staff how to put the result in context so readers understand the scale of testing and the rarity of detections.

Montoya told commissioners the city conducted UCMR5 monitoring required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and that \"we had 1 detection\" among the many samples collected across sources. She said the single detection occurred at a Lake Mary entry point in August and that the lab reported a concentration above the UCMR5 reporting limit. \"We are not overly concerned,\" Montoya said, \"but we are doing our due diligence and testing for that.\" Krista Snow, the city’s drinking water laboratory supervisor, attended the meeting and supported Montoya’s technical answers.

Commissioners pressed staff for context and suggested adding explanatory language to the public outreach for the CCR. One commissioner noted that a single reported value (6.1 parts per trillion) versus the reporting limit (5 parts per trillion) can alarm readers unless framed by the total number of tests and by showing that the finding was isolated. Montoya said the UCMR5 suite tests many analytes; when the sample exceeded the lab reporting limit, regulations require the city to list it in the CCR. She told the commission the city will incorporate context into the public communications accompanying the CCR and can add links or explanatory material on the city website.

Commissioners also asked about the sampling frequency and sources. Montoya said testing frequency varies by analyte and source; groundwater sources were tested at least twice during the UCMR5 cycle and surface-water sources four times. In response to a question about the detected sample, Montoya said the sample represented a mix of Lake Mary well water and surface water and that the positive result appeared in the fourth of four consecutive samples at that entry point.

On other CCR items, staff discussed a Level 1 assessment conducted under the Total Coliform Rule. Montoya said staff completed the assessment with ADEQ and performed corrective actions; she said the city had not identified a definitive on‑system cause during internal review and that the utility will consider posting a summary or a link to the ADEQ assessment on its website to give readers more context.

Next steps: Staff said they will finalize ADEQ’s edits, distribute the CCR to the public, and include additional explanatory material in public communications to clarify the UCMR5 finding and the corrective actions for coliforms.

Ending: Commission members thanked staff for the report and suggested staff return with any public‑facing clarifications before broad distribution.","City of Flagstaff staff presented the 2024 Consumer Confidence Report to the Water Commission and said federal UCMR5 monitoring detected a single PFAS compound at a Lake Mary entry point during one August sample.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Commission considers reclaimed-water demand smoothing, ordinance changes and targeted outreach to large users

Flagstaff examines lower-cost solids-handling at Rio de Flag; dryer option may cut costs and hauling

Flagstaff lays out 2025 water production plan; emphasizes backup power and infrastructure repairs ahead of fire season

Flagstaff officials present 2024 Consumer Confidence Report; one PFAS detection flagged during EPA monitoring