Flint Municipal water 89

[moon161]

So, Flint has been MI lead poisoned and exposed to legionella bacteria because the water supply was switched from Detroit municipal to the Flint River. Since the polluted river is corrosive and iron rich, lead was leached from pipes and solder into the water of thousands of homes, and legionella bateria (legionaire's diseased) apparently thrived on the dissolved iron.

It was done to save money, it stayed that way because people who knew of the crisis sat on the information and obstructed inquiry.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/14/e...nation-for-months-without-telling-the-public/

http://m.democracynow.org/stories/15874

There HAS to be a (ir)responsible engineer in that chain. What are their duties, did they fail to perform? Would whistleblower action have been appropriate?

 

[bimr]

Regarding "Looks like Flint also started adding 2.5 milligrams phosphate per liter to the water."

With that small amount of phosphate, there is little value. Control of the pH is much more important if you are trying to control corrosion.

 

[bimr]

"I would like an answer about the pH as well. If this were my swimming pool, I would consider those readings perfect. But I don't know about the pH which should come from the water plant."

Don't think you have piping that contains iron in your swimming pool do you? The water in a swimming pool is corrosive, but the swimming pool components are fabricated from materials that are corrosion resistant like plastics and stainless steel.

A pH of 7.4 provides good chlorine disinfection in a swimming pool where the organic loading is much higher than drinking water. Organics in drinking water would mean that you have water contamination.

Generally, the pH is controlled in a swimming pool for improved disinfection, and not to provide corrosion control.

The pH in a swimming pool and the pH in a potable water applications are like apples and oranges, with different requirements

 

[hokie66]

OK, thanks. Another question. Why would you add phosphate to water? Again, based on swimming pool experience, you want as little phosphate as possible, because it facilitates algal growth.

 

[bimr]

Orthophosphate based additives are classified as corrosion inhibitors and are supposed to react with dissolved metals (e.g. Ca, Mg, Zn, Al etc.) in the water and may form a very thin metal phosphate coating or may simply react with metals on a pipe surface acting as a barrier between the pipe and the water. Polyphosphate type chemicals are supposed to react with soluble metals by sequestering the metals to maintain their solubility in water. The sequestering process is supposed to minimize the risk of discoloration, staining, scaling, chlorine demand and related taste/odor and other water quality complaints. Certain types of polyphosphates are supposed to inhibit corrosion since they may bind with metallic pipe surfaces or with the corrosion deposits inside water pipes.

There is little research available that will support the claims of the sales people that are selling these chemicals. It is more a seat of the pants approach or an art if you will.

Feeding a few milligrams per liter is such a small amount of material that it is not plausible that phosphate will provide any corrosion control. One ppm is 1 part in 1 million or the value is equivalent to the absolute fractional amount multiplied by one million. A better way to think of ppm is to visualize putting four drops of
material in a 55-gallon barrel of water.

The only approach that ensures corrosion control is to raise the water pH.

I would say that the water industry is moving away from the use of phosphates. One reason is that it is a big problem to remove phosphates from wastewater. Phosphates are the cause of toxic algae in streams and rivers.

 

[JohnRBaker]

Could this be the 'smoking gun'?

Flint official: State overruled plan for corrosion control

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/2df9...ficial-state-overruled-plan-corrosion-control

Excerpt from the above item:

Shortly before this poverty-stricken city began drawing its drinking water from the Flint River in April 2014 in a cost-cutting move, officials huddled at the municipal water treatment plant, running through a checklist of final preparations.

Mike Glasgow, the plant's laboratory supervisor at the time, says he asked district engineer Mike Prysby of the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality how often staffers would need to check the water for proper levels of phosphate, a chemical they intended to add to prevent lead corrosion from the pipes. Prysby's response, according to Glasgow: "You don't need to monitor phosphate because you're not required to add it."

Recalling the meeting Tuesday in an interview with The Associated Press, Glasgow said he was taken aback by the state regulator's instruction; treating drinking water with anti-corrosive additives was routine practice. Glasgow said his gaze shifted to a consulting firm engineer in attendance, who also looked surprised.

"Then," Glasgow said, "we went on to the next question."

John R. Baker, P.E.
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without

 

[boo1]

I thought it was the PH that was more important?

 

[bimr]

boo1, I am pleased to see that you are paying attention.

Mike Glasgow, the plant's laboratory supervisor is the MDEQ LICENSED water treatment plant OPERATOR and is responsible. He put his name on all of the documents.

"I was only following orders" is a cop out. "I did have some concerns and misgivings at first," Glasgow told the committee. "But unfortunately, now that I look back, I relied on engineers and the state regulators to kind of direct the decision. I looked at them as having more knowledge than myself."

The excerpt just highlights the lack of experience of the Flint operator. If Mr. Glasgow was qualified to operate the Flint water treatment plant, he would have never asked the question in the first place.

Mike Prysby is correct, there is no requirement to add phosphate or monitor it. However, there is a requirement to make the water non-corrosive. That question that should have been directed to Mr. Glasgow by Mike Prysby; How do you plan to make the water non-corrosive?

With all due respects to the VT Doctor, one can see from the water treatment reference text (AWWA Water Quality and Treatment) that you would have to add 10 times the amount of phosphate to control the corrosion. Just 2.5 milligrams phosphate is inadequate and will not reduce the corrosion.

All Mr. Glasgow had to do was to lower the pH from 10 units to 8.5 units and the problem was solved. pH control is the most common and cost-effective method for corrosion control. Instead, Mr. Glasgow lowered the pH to 7.5 and created the problem.

As was stated previously, the MDEQ has oversight over this issue and gave Mr. Glasgow a license to operate. That was the smoking gun if you want to put it in those terms.

 

[JohnRBaker]

Are you SURE that Mr. Glasgow WAS the Flint water treatment plant operator at the time of this switch-over?

The item I posted identifies him as being the supervisor of the treatment plant's laboratory at the time of the switch-over and as such, I would think that his question was appropriate. And the most recent news item identifies him as the city's Utilities Administrator, a position he has held for something like 11 months. Note that this is consistent with his Linkedin profile, links to which YOU'VE posted several times in this thread, and which I've reposted below. It clearly states that he was a "Laboratory Supervisor" during the timeframe when these events were taking place. No where does it ever mention him being the plant's operator.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/michael-glasgow-21b8816b

John R. Baker, P.E.
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without

 

[bimr]

Yes, I am SURE. The Operator is the person in responsible charge that signs the MDEQ forms:

Don't believe that Flint has any other F-1 water operators:

https://www.linkedin.com/in/michael...cmpt:primary,VSRPnm:true,authType:NAME_SEARCH

http://www.deq.state.mi.us/otcis/otcis.aspx

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/deq/deq-ess-otu-dw-part19_252853_7.pdf

All of the documentation has been previously posted above.

Several questions come to mind:

Why was someone with no experience employed? Perhaps Flint was not willing to pay the market rate for an operator.

Why is this fellow still employed there? People get fired for much less than this.

Why did Flint not have any other operators?

Why did the MDEQ give this person a water treatment plant operator license when he lacked the require 3 years of experience?

 

[SwinnyGG]

His question was if Glasgow was the OIC at the time of the switchover, in April of 2014. It appears that is/was not the case, if the change in job title on his oft-linked linkedin page reflects his new job as plant operator in Flint.

 

[boo1]

ok thanks two more questions
If Flint only been "treating", Detroit's water treated Lake Huron's water. How did Flint have the expertise to treat more corrosive raw Flint River water?

What pipe materials typically would you expect Flint water distribution pipes be?

 

[SwinnyGG]

From a Detroit Free Press article:

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/ne...tate-lawmakers-hear-flint-residents/82370916/

"Glasgow, a Flint employee for over a decade, previously worked as a laboratory supervisor from 2005 to May 2015.

He passed the state’s F-1 certification program for water treatment and received his license May 6, 2010, according to state records. The license requires five years of relevant experience in a treatment plant, with one of those years operating a plant."

It appears this guy was qualified, in the sense that he carried the required license. The Detroit Free Press article also implies (but does not explicitly state) that he was OIC when the changeover happened in '14.

Apparently his linkedin profile is not accurate.

Here are some other excerpts:

“We originally had this chemical in the design, but the DEQ did not mandate it from the start,” Glasgow wrote in the email. “(They) informed us to wait and see the results of our lead and copper sampling to determine if it was necessary.”- Glasgow

"Glasgow said he wanted to run the Flint plant for six months prior to switching to river water and asked to double his staff. The plant had 40 employees in 2005 when it was used as a backup source, but 26 when it went into full-time use in 2014, he said."

This reads to me like a guy with not a lot of options. The water plant operator isn't going to be able to upgrade services or equipment with money he doesn't have.

 

[bimr]

The Flint water treatment plant has not operated in over 50 years.

Mr. Glasgow has worked at Flint his entire career.

If both of these are true, then Mr. Glasgow does not have the required five years of experience. The point being made is that Mr. Glasgow should not have been licensed by the MDEQ because of the lack of experience.

One does not take the keys to the automobile or airplane with zero hands on experience. In effect, Mr. Glasgow said he learned how to operate a water treatment plant from reading a book. There is a reason that hands on operating experience is required to obtain a license.

Sometimes it is necessary to stand up for one's principles. Either Mr. Glasgow did not know what he doing, or Mr. Glasgow intentionally put out bad water.

The person that signs the MDEQ reports is the "Operator".

If I was Mr. Glasgow, I would be talking to an attorney as it appears that he fraudulently obtained the license. When one applies for the license, you sign this statement.

"I CERTIFY, TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, THE DRINKING WATER COMPLETE TREATMENT SYSTEM OPERATION JOB DUTY INFORMATION PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT ON THIS PAGE IS TRUE. I AM AWARE THERE MAY BE SIGNIFICANT PENALTIES FOR SUBMITTING FALSE OR MISLEADING INFORMATION INCLUDING FORFEITURE OF MY OWN CERTIFICATIONS."

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/deq/deq-ess-otu-dw-CompleteTreatmentApplication_257357_7.pdf

Would be interesting the ask for a FOI on this application for a water treatment operator license to see what is stated.


List of Flint licensed people are listed in the attachment.

 

[bimr]

Boo1,

"If Flint only been "treating", Detroit's water treated Lake Huron's water. How did Flint have the expertise to treat more corrosive raw Flint River water?"

Flint was repumping water from Detroit, not treating the water. Treating the water takes more expertise than just pumping the water. Flint should have hired a qualified operator.

"What pipe materials typically would you expect Flint water distribution pipes be?"

The water main pipes are probably a mix of cast iron, ductile iron, and PVC depending on when the pipes were installed..

 

[bimr]

Since we are discussing licensing, there is a fellow working for a Koch Brothers foundation who goes around the United States giving speeches telling anyone who will listen that occupational licensing is a job killer and people should not have occupational licenses. This includes Engineers.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morris_Kleiner

"Summers believes that all licensing laws should be abolished, letting the market create its own certification system, such as the product-review information offered by Consumer Reports, Amazon.com or CNET."

Some states are buying into it:

http://www.in.gov/pla/files/JCC_-_2015_Annual_Report_for_Licensing_Boards_Part1(1).pdf

The Flint fiasco is proof that Morris Kleiner is an idiot.

 

[bimr]

Regarding: "His question was if Glasgow was the OIC at the time of the switchover, in April of 2014. It appears that is/was not the case, if the change in job title on his oft-linked linkedin page reflects his new job as plant operator in Flint."

The MDEQ requires someone at the water treatment plant to have a license and Mr. Glasgow is the only one with a license.

Whatever is posted on Linkedin may or may not be appropriate to the responsibility of the position that one holds. With just 43 connections, Mr. Glasgow does not appear to be a savvy linkedin type and he may not even know that he is on linkedin. If I was his attorney, I would advise him to delete the linkedin page.

Sounds like the well known concept (The Peter principle) in management theory formulated by Laurence J. Peter in which the selection of a candidate for a position is based on the candidate's performance in their current role, rather than on abilities relevant to the intended role. Thus, employees only stop being promoted once they can no longer perform effectively, and "managers rise to the level of their incompetence."

 

[IRstuff]

I don't think I usually agree with bimr, but it's clear where Kleiner is coming from, which is consistent with Koch brothers and other Repubs philosophy of continually driving down wages and taxes, always to the benefit of the rich, because they implicitly believe in supply side (trickle down), even though they've demonstrated over the past 30+ yrs since Reaganomics that it just doesn't work.

Kleiner obviously has no clue how generally useless market-driven certifications are. Take ISO9000, for example; you get certified that you follow your own documented procedures, so the obvious lowest denominator is to minimize the documentation to the bare minimum, which makes it, overall, pretty superficial and close to useless. If ISO certification were that good, military procurements could do away with military standards.

TTFN
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!
faq731-376 forum1529

 

[bimr]

OMG, IRstuff likes my comment. I am going to take the rest of the day off.

Indiana was pushed back on licensing of Engineers after a state legislature hearing brought up the topic of the Sugarland Concert where the stage blew down killing 7. Indiana had waived engineering requirements for temporary structures and ended up paying $50 million in liability damages.

 

[JohnRBaker]

Michigan's governor, Rick Synder, is now taking credit for all the jobs that are being created as a result of the Flint water crisis.

In addition to the people working at the high-priced PR firm that he's spending taxpayer's money on so as to put a rosy spin on what's happening (I assume this 'news item' is one of their 'products' which was paid for by the citizens), it appears that 81 temporary workers have been hired to distribute bottled water to city residents. The way the Governor has been hyping this 'program', he makes it sound like this is more than just a temp job but an opportunity to learn workplace skills that could lead to a long term career. But doing what, or is this some sort of admission that perhaps delivering bottled water to the residents of Flint might indeed be a "long term career"...

https://www.politicscentral.org/snyder-boasts-81-new-jobs-created-flint-water-crisis/

John R. Baker, P.E.
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without

 

[cranky108]

'governor is now taking credit for all the jobs that are being created as a result of the' Other than the state name, governors name, and the crisis, it sounds like my state.

Not to downplay the Flint water crisis, we all seem to be treated badly by the government we elect.

So exactly why do we elect them? Is the problem really us, or is it something else?