updated 4/09/2019
I have added a fourth page titled "Water Quality Report for 2019"
It appears to me that testing for Coliform and other bacteria is a routine testing function. It appears to be "good" as far as I can tell. It is far above my pay grade to say any more about it. This is a good example where an association blog or page that could answer member questions, would be useful. Perhaps Bob Haskin or April can comment more on this. I have added this page right below this red update writing. Click on it to enlarge...
Several pages from the monthly report...
Looking good...
The real question is....
Now that we have a General Manager with the needed water experience, how much longer will we be paying North Beach 65,000 plus a year for their NOT needed service?
Click on each page for a larger view.
14 comments:
It may be the January report that mentions stepped-up testing for increased presence of coliform. This report makes mention of the testing. March report mentions the Water Dept. desire to vacate an agreement with the State to test for pollutants resulting from chlorination, though I believe those rates have been high. It's a bit cloudy what this stuff means in the final analysis.
And how can it be acceptable to change only one Carbon vessel after a year's use, when it was predicted to require full replacement after 6 to 8 months ?
Bill talked about how the one well had much more tannins in it that the other. The media with less of the tannin was switched to save having to buy 2 new medias at once since the other is still usable.
Whew! A little rational discourse!
Interesting that tannin is considered particularly significant in this decision, as it isn't harmful, just colors the water. Stepped-up testing is due to increased coliform detected and bi-products of chlorination to deal with it. The carbon was supposed to last 6 to 8 months before needing replacement. I believe we're talking about replacement of ONE column in a year. This doesn't "wash" as they say.
Yes that J3 deep Well is really only useful for backwashing filters as it was punched into some very organic soils.
It is really sad that years ago Surfside doomed themselves with their desire to have clear water.
The water wells and the soils the wells sit in is high in organic matters, iron and manganese. All of which are classed as secondary contaminants and are considered harmless but does discolor the water and affects the taste of the water.
Surfside's choice to treat and remove these secondary contaminants, has brought on all these expensive items and upgrades and related costs along with higher state and federal monitoring and sadly recently poor operational practices have all added to Shoa's woes.
The byproducts of using chlorine has been known for years, sadly Surfside management chose to bury their heads in the sand and avoided dealing with it.
Sadly chlorine is required in the water even at the extremes of the water system and that is why the age of the water is so important. The various components contained in the water being exposed over time to chlorine is the big problem and the real reason for all the efforts to reduce the organic matter in the source water.
Surfside pissed away a bunch of money on those new filters now rusting and expensive to operate. The Potassium permanganate that I was attempting to utilize would have done the job on several fronts but it appears that Surfside own and some pinheads in the state DOH had other thoughts regarding this process... What they forget is that their opinions don't cost them, it costs Surfside and boy as time goes by it is proving just so.
There was some talk about an over zealous board member that some are pointing the finger of blame at. For the new filter permits as well as the permit for the new maintenance building. I need to remind you that Bill Neal and Gil are the licensed water system operators and for them to not put a stop this foolishness, falls squarely on them as the competent system operators and everything related to it operation and compliance.
Good luck Surfside, hopefully in time things will finally right themselves.
Thanks Bob...
This may be a stupid question, but would we be better off if we returned to unfiltered and treated water? You seem to be saying that by trying to improve the harmless color, it has created expensive costs and health risks? Do I have that right?
I have never, what I considered, an extreme coloring of my water. I understand that some areas are worse than others and that flushing helped there. When I was in the hardware business, I sold many different kinds of water filters. One of the cheaper was for removal of color. There were others for various functions at different prices. The carbon ones were the most expensive. Most of the customers were those on private wells in rural Clark County.
Would private water filters on some homes in Surfside be a better solution? I know you can get "whole house" systems (expensive) or less costly for under the sink installs. Simple to install and change filters. Perhaps the cost could be subsidized by the association.
Thanks again Bob, for your straight answers.
Hi George,
Yes...
I don't know if you can go back, you guys have what you need to do a good job w/o the expensive carbon filters, you just need to have things implemented correctly and properly monitored.
When I first started to work for SHOA the system had not been flushed in years and it was terrible. The build up in the sediments and the floating matter was atrocious. When people start seeing the orange / brown / yellow floating matter in their pools, hot tubs and washing machines the system needs to be vigorously unidirectionally flushed.
I don't know about the home filters in the long run...I'm on a home well unfiltered and we don't have any issues and yes we have Iron and manganese not sure about the organic matter but we are good straight out of the ground.
The chlorine is the real problem combined with the organic matter that is the federal issue.
The water color etc are personal issues and relates to the age of the water in the system. That is why I was so active in the annual unidirectional flushing program and constant monitoring of the water throughout SHOA water system for color and temp changes and resulting spot / region flushing if the water was showing its age.
The old existing Atec filters were originally designed for use with Potassium permanganate as its primary oxidizer but the pot perm needed the proper contact time in the water column to work properly before the filters and the chlorine was to be added after the filters for residual / safety purposes.
The Pot perm is a much better oxidant for organic matter and very effective for iron and manganese and simple to apply once a process was laid out and approved. Which is what I was trying to do before Barb and the other pinheads got in my way.
Bottom line it is the chlorine reacting with the components in the water that is the big problem and why it is so important to get this water components properly oxidized and filtered out before the water gets to the reservoirs and then pumped out to the system.
The personal filtering in the long run, will become problematic and expensive especially for seniors and their abilities to operate and monitor them.
Thank you Bob,
If you don't mind, I will keep asking you questions and hope other blog people will also. This blog is the only source members have to get information that is shared with everyone.
OMG...
Are you saying that we have wasted a half million dollars on a carbon treatment plant, when you were working on a simple solution?
Yes George, you can ask me questions. A lot of folks really don't know what's right or wrong when it comes to a water system. If I know the answer then no problem or I will point you in the right direction.
In as far as the new (rusting) carbon filter, I believe you guys went the wrong way and yes you pissed away a lot money for??
The pot perm system that I was developing and testing was never completed and to this day I still think it would have resolved many of the source water issues that I was dealing with and you are still dealing with today. The system that was being developed should have worked out far cheaper than the mess you guys have now.
Bob, thank you for your work, and your comments. I hope you will continue to speak to these issues.
$900 for the filtering system in my house, to be able to use a service I already pay for.
7:57 AM. Do you mind sharing the company name that you hired for that work?
It was Taft Plumbing. Very happy with the work!
Ah yes. I've hired them. Good to kbow.
Thanks
Post a Comment