Brooklyn Park updates water‑system PFAS response: staff weigh treatment, source change and rate impacts

Brooklyn Park utility staff and consultants presented a detailed update on the city—s drinking‑water system and options to address rising levels of PFAS (per‑ and polyfluoroalkyl substances). Staff said the city currently operates about 17 wells, three reservoirs/towers (soon four), and more than 330 miles of water main and that system planning must balance capacity, compliance and affordability.

Staff reported that recent Minnesota Department of Health sampling shows some wells with increasing PFOA/PFOS levels. Well 11, a key firm‑capacity well, measured above the April 2024 state action level of 4 parts per trillion and had been taken out of production: "Well 11 here for both the PFOA and the PFOS are significantly above that yellow line. And so for that reason, we are no longer drawing water from Well 11," a utilities presenter said. Other wells (e.g., Well 13) were reported near the action level but remain in use because blending the city—s sources keeps distribution water under the current limit.

Staff described funding and earlier settlement receipts: planning grants (approx. $1 million) and class‑action settlement proceeds (initial partial payment under $1 million, with an expected full city share discussed at roughly $3.8 million) that provide initial design and planning dollars but will not cover full capital and long‑term operating costs. "We're expecting a full $3,800,000 in that settlement," staff said, while cautioning settlement funding is a fraction of estimated long‑term expenses.

The city reviewed four broad options: 1) localized treatment at Well 11 (lower capital cost, quicker to return the well to service, but short‑term if contamination migrates); 2) a centralized PFAS treatment facility (granular activated carbon or ion‑exchange vessels sized to treat multiple wells — higher capital and operating cost but a longer‑term solution); 3) connecting to Minneapolis regional treated surface water or the Mississippi River (substantial capital cost and ongoing rates; Minneapolis water would increase customers— bills significantly and the city would not control rates); and 4) drilling into a different aquifer (Mount Simon) — staff said regulatory protections currently prevent major new withdrawals from that aquifer.

Consultants discussed treatment technology characteristics: GAC vessels can be used at municipal scale, media can be reactivated off‑site by vendors, and concentrated residuals are subject to disposal or destruction methods (reactivation, advanced oxidation), with disposal rules and waste‑management costs a key long‑term consideration. "Each star is about 66% of your current rate," said consultant Steve Allison when describing relative order‑of‑magnitude rate impacts tied to options; staff explained a localized well treatment could raise rates by roughly one‑third for customers, while switching to Minneapolis or river water could multiply customer bills severalfold.

Councilmembers pressed for pilot testing, timing and the risk that a plume could migrate or that regulatory action levels could change. Staff said additional groundwater investigation is under way (MPCA drilling planned), the Minnesota Department of Health will continue sampling, and the city is pursuing grant and settlement funds to support design and potential piloting. Staff also emphasized system capacity: Well 11 has long been a key "ace in the hole" for firm capacity, and losing it raises near‑term capacity risk in a dry summer or with northwest area development.

Next steps: staff will pursue further grant funding and design studies, coordinate MPCA drilling to better understand plume propagation, model capacity implications, and report back with a recommended alternative once more data and funding clarity are available. No formal council vote occurred at the work session.

Ending: Councilmembers expressed concern about affordability, the moving‑plume uncertainty and the need for pilot data; staff committed to produce more analysis on capacity, pilot options and refined cost estimates before a formal recommendation.