The Arizona Water Company is still looking to place a one million gallon ground storage tank somewhere southeast of Sedona to augment its current distribution system.

At present the water needs of neighborhoods in Back O’ Beyond, the Chapel and others along the State Route 179 corridor are being served by a storage tank located in the Jordan Park subdivision.

“You can see the pipe running under the bridge near Tlaquepaque,” said Lee Hetrick, division manager for the company. “All it would take is one puncture and no one over there would have any water.”

Gary Johnson, deputy fire marshal for the Sedona Fire District, agreed that the bridge is the weak point in the system.

He also said that the hydrants in the middle and lower rear of the Chapel area do not currently meet all of the flow requirements.

When the fire district fought a major house fire nearby in Back O’ Beyond several years ago, the entire water system for the area was overtaxed, Johnson said.

“Arizona Water is trying to make the system as simple as possible, keeping it gravity fed instead of using pumps which can fail and which require a backup system,” Johnson said. “What they’re trying to do is put in something much more reliable.”

It was 1991 when the company first started looking for a site.

Holding a purchase option for private property on the backside of Sky Mountain, the company went before City Council requesting a permit.

Their request was denied, the city’s decision leaving the water company with no options other than federal land, according to Hetrick who said staff has been going through what it describes as an exhaustive analysis ever since.

The difficulty is that in order for the gravity system to work properly, any new tank must be at the same elevation as the one on Jordan.

Arizona Water has been unable to find any private property with that specification; the only sites to choose from are on U.S. Forest Service land which requires a federal land use permit.

Five possible areas have been identified by a hired consultant as possibilities: near Broken Arrow, near the cemetery, on Airport Mesa, to the east of the Chapel area and south of Little Horse area.

According to Hetrick, EnviroSystems Management is the Flagstaff-based consultant.

“The exact locations of the sites they’re looking at are not available until more work is done on the environmental assessment including the visual quality analysis and alignment with respect to access road and pipeline,” Hetrick said. “Pursuing any of those options is arduous, requiring thorough investigations into the alternatives, impacts and mitigation of the proposed location.”

Most of the demands follow from the National Environmental Policy Act, according to Red Rock District Ranger Heather Provencio.

“The NEPA process began in 2007 when we released a proposed action to the public which indicated a location along Broken Arrow for the water tank,” Provencio said. “We had a public meeting and official comment period. Issues were identified based on comments received during that review. To address those issues, we’ve developed alternatives to consider for analysis and one of those is in the Chapel area. Our consultants are preparing an analysis comparing the alternatives and displaying their effects.”

At present, environmental assessments are being conducted on each of the alternative sites, and Hetrick said there was a chance the assessments could be completed this year.

However, nothing will be decided without public input.

“We have already scoped the proposed action in Broken Arrow,” Provencio said. “There will be another 30-day opportunity for the public to officially comment on the [other sites] being developed.”

Provencio added that comments can be made at any time and that it’s particularly helpful to have them early in the process.

“However, while folks can comment now, we haven’t sent the details of those alternatives to the public yet and the consultants don’t yet have information on the effects of those alternatives since the analysis isn’t complete,” Provencio said. “So, it’s probably better to wait until we can see what the details of the alternatives are and what the analysis shows.”

In order to have standing to appeal the project, the public needs to comment during official comment period.

“The Forest Service dictates a formal public process,” Hetrick said. “We take this very seriously and we’re willing and obligated to follow it.”

Susan Johnson can be reached at 282-7795, ext. 129, or e-mail sjohnson@larsonnewspapers.com