Prince Albert’s months-long water problems appear to be easing, but city councillors are already asking what can be done to prevent residents from going through the same thing next summer.
Council heard Monday that levels of geosmin responsible for the earthy or musty taste and smell have dropped, while the number of water-related service requests coming into the city has also declined.
Coun. Darren Solomon said he had noticed a “substantial improvement” after reviewing the city’s latest information and experiencing the change himself.
“I did notice that in my shower this morning as well that the water was not quite as musty,” Solomon said.
Acting Public Works director Tim Earing said the city was about 35 per cent finished flushing Zone 1 and service requests had “really tapered off.”
“The geosmin has really tailed off in the water, so the smell should be getting better here shortly,” Earing said.
He said the city continues to test the water and stressed that it remains safe. Residents who continue to experience problems are encouraged to contact the city so crews can respond.
The improvement follows a summer of complaints about discoloured water and an earthy or musty taste and smell.
As previously reported by the Daily Herald, city officials have repeatedly said the water remains safe to drink. The problems followed an unusual year for the North Saskatchewan River basin, with a heavy snowpack and spring runoff followed by significant rainfall and sharply elevated river flows.
The city’s latest report separates the problems into two events. Discolouration that began in June was associated with elevated naturally occurring organic matter following runoff and higher river flows. The taste and odour that became more noticeable in August was linked to geosmin, a naturally occurring compound present in the source of water.
Despite the improvement, Coun. Blake Edwards said he continues to hear from residents and cautioned that declining service requests may not tell the whole story.
“I think that there still are issues. I’m hearing about it,” Edwards said.
He said the city has experienced shorter periods of poor water quality before, but not for this length of time.
“I’m hoping that next year this isn’t a repeat, and I don’t know what we need to do,” he said. “I know that the workers down there are doing everything possible, but is there something we’re missing? Is there something we can provide?”
The Water Treatment Plant has already adjusted its response, including optimizing powdered activated carbon dosing, increasing testing and adjusting other treatment processes based on river conditions and laboratory results. The city is also comparing treatment approaches with the Water Security Agency and other regional water providers.
Some isolated discolouration complaints remain difficult to explain.
Mayor Bill Powalinsky raised cases where one home has reported heavily discoloured water while neighbouring homes supplied by the same line have not.
Earing said the city was down to nine water-related service requests last week, most involving smell. Crews have flushed lines where individual discolouration complaints were reported, but testing has not identified the same problem in the city’s mains.
“I truly don’t have a good answer for that,” Earing said.
He said the Water Security Agency has reviewed what the city is doing at both the treatment plant and in the distribution system. The city has followed its recommendations, but the cause of problems isolated to individual homes remains unclear.
Council also unanimously approved a motion from Coun. Daniel Brown directing administration to prepare a report on the financial impact of rebating or waiving one month of residential water service fees because of this year’s water quality problems.
Brown said preliminary figures suggested a rebate could cost about $300,000. Businesses were not included in his proposal.
The scope of the report was expanded during debate after Coun. Dawn Kilmer said council needed more than the immediate dollar figure before deciding whether to proceed.
The report will examine direct and administrative costs, the revenue involved, operating and capital requirements, effects on reserves and debt, possible shortfalls and potential impacts on future rates, taxes and the long-term financial sustainability of the utility. Brown accepted the expanded scope.
Solomon said he was “cautiously supportive” of obtaining the information.
“We only have one taxpayer,” he said. “So if we give back now, and then we got to take back later in a different form, what are we really doing to our taxpayers?”
Council has not approved a rebate. Monday’s decision only directs administration to determine its financial impact before council decides whether to proceed.
Council also approved a separate $44,185 Water Treatment Plant contamination removal study, including a $5,000 contingency. KGS Group was awarded the engineering work for $39,185.11, including taxes.
The study is not intended to investigate this summer’s isolated discolouration, taste or odour complaints. It will assess the plant’s ability to remove or inactivate a broader range of contaminants, including those that could enter the North Saskatchewan River during an upstream contamination event.
The work follows lessons from the 2016 Husky oil spill, when the city was forced to shut down its river intake and incurred more than $10 million in direct emergency response costs. The pipeline owner ultimately covered those costs.
Administration expects the new study to begin immediately, with results anticipated within about six months.
arjun.pillai@paherald.sk.ca
