Save the Peaks!

Could reclaimed water study sway EIS?

By SETH MULLER
Sun Staff Reporter
02/22/2004

A study on the city of Flagstaff's reclaimed water has found trace levels of organic contaminants such as pharmaceuticals and hormones.

What impacts that could have on the environment are unknown -- but it could provide an added dynamic in the study to use that water for snowmaking at the Arizona Snowbowl on the San Francisco Peaks.
The U.S. Geological Survey, working in cooperation with Northern Arizona University biology professor Catherine Propper, recently submitted findings to the city's water department after conducting tests at the wastewater treatment plants and two other sites.
Bob Hart, hydrologist with the USGS, declined the discuss the particulars of the findings during a phone interview Friday.
"There were several things that showed up in very small concentrations," Hart said of the study. "I can't really say what the impacts are."
USGS officials plan to discuss and explain those findings with the Flagstaff Water Commission at its March 25 meeting, and they will share information about what's known as "endocrine disruptors" -- certain types of pollutants that affect reproduction or hormonal activity of animals or humans. Most studies report that aquatic life like fish are the most affected.
The treated water that the city sends into the Rio de Flag is considered "A+ grade" water by Environmental Protection Agency and Arizona Department of Environmental Quality standards, but that does not fully account for trace levels of what is referred to as "pharmaceuticals, pathogens and hormones" in the draft environmental impact statement for the Snowbowl upgrade.
The section of the EIS about those trace elements ends inconclusively, reporting that the USGS's "results of the investigations are expected by early 2004."
Hart said the study was not prompted because of the Snowbowl, noting that the timing was coincidental.
Instead, the USGS has taken an active role in studying endocrine disruptors on a national level following a study out of Iowa City, Iowa.
The USGS initially applied five analytical methods it developed to measure concentrations of 95 organic contaminants in water samples from a network of 139 streams across 30 states during 1999 and 2000.
Of those, about 80 percent of the areas tested showed trace levels of the contaminants.
The most frequently detected compounds included forms of steroids and caffeine, and some tests found up to 38 such contaminants. The results prompted the USGS to look at other water supplies, including treated effluent.
Little is known about the potential interactive effects that may occur from complex mixtures of organic contaminants in the environment, according to the USGS. But results of its studies show the presence of such contaminants in the hydrologic system and could help to further understand "their ultimate overall effect on human health and the environment."
Propper said that there has been no pressure to complete the field studies and the report in time for the Snowbowl environmental impact statement draft, which is now open for public comment through mid-April.
"For better or worse, it's within the time frame of the EIS. Nobody has pushed us in any way shape or form," said Propper, who has worked as a professor at NAU since 1994. "I have no specific agenda with respect to the Peaks. If anything, the information is good to know for human health reasons."
While Propper conducts studies that could play into the environmental considerations with the Snowbowl snowmaking proposal, other professors are taking a hard look at the current draft environmental impact statement and considering input.
Abe Springer, a hydrologist and professor of geology at NAU, said he's trying to review the extensive document with plans to provide his own independent comments on it. He said he's looking at the proposal from a scientific standpoint.
"My approach has been to be an independent scientist to anyone who is interested in the issue. I'm willing to work with everyone," Springer said. "My students and I have done the study of the hydrology systems in the Hart Prairie area, and that information has been extremely valuable to the process."
Springer said he also is working with other hydrologists and scientists to convene a forum to "discuss some of the hydrology issues" that relate to the Snowbowl proposal, preferably during the 60-day public comment period that started on Feb. 14.
The owners and operators of the Snowbowl hope to have the Forest Service approve the use of reclaimed water for snowmaking at the 777-acre ski area on the Peaks. They contend that the recent drought and unpredictable snowfall, when combined with the increasing costs of doing business, creates a formula that requires snowmaking for economic stability.
The EIS report shows how the snowmaking would improve the Flagstaff area's winter economy, mainly in the form of adding more skier days that would equate to a boost in tourism.
However, concerns tied to the cultural significance of the Peaks for 13 Native American tribes has fueled controversy over the proposal. A grassroots group called Save The Peaks Coalition formed on Feb. 2, the day the Forest Service announced it supported the proposal for snowmaking in the draft EIS.
Reporter Seth Muller can be reached at 913-8607 or smuller@azdailysun.com