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?

 

[SwinnyGG]

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

This is not the case.

The public record also seems to pretty clearly state that Glasgow obtained F-1/F-2 certification well before the changeover to Flint River water was a glimmer in anyone's eye.

 

[bimr]

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

1. After being told incessantly for the last 40 years since Reagan how screwed up the government is and that your only choice between candidates is the lesser of two evils, most people don't bother to vote.

2. Low information voters.

 

[bimr]

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

If the Flint water treatment plant had been operating, why was it so difficult to restart the water treatment plant for the emergency manager? I would offer that any qualified operator would have refused to restart the plant.

Flint's old water treatment plant was taken out of service over 50 years ago when Flint switched to the Detroit water. Since then, the Flint water treatment plant has only been the backup supply should the Detroit pipeline fail. Considering the difficulty of starting up the old plant, the absence of a licensed water treatment plant operator, and the added expense of operating the old water treatment plant, it is hard to understand how the old water treatment would have operated for any significant length of time. Since the old Flint water treatment plant has not likely operated for any length of time, it would appear that Mr. Glasgow committed fraud to obtain his water license since experience operating a water treatment plant is a prerequisite to obtaining a water treatment license.

Mr. Glasgow has never operated any other water treatment plant nor apprenticed with any other water treatment plant operator. The typical career path for a water treatment plant operator is that a new person would start out working under a senior operator to obtain experience. One doesn't get a license and just start operating without experience. The Flint fiasco is a good example of why someone lacking experience should be allowed to operate a water treatment plant whether he has a license or not.

Mr. Glasgow was the person in responsible charge that approved the startup of the old Flint water treatment plant. Responsible charge means a licensed operator who has been designated by the system as the operator who has direct responsible charge for the operation and maintenance of the plant, distribution system or water system. If he had been more experienced, and responsible, he would not have authorized the startup.

 

[SwinnyGG]

"Mr. Glasgow has never operated any other water treatment plant nor apprenticed with any other water treatment plant operator"

That you know of. You're inferring a lot from the very limited information available to all of us.

I get that you're on a witch hunt to pin this entire thing on one guy, first it was Snyder, now it's Glasgow. It's more complicated than that. Failure at all levels is the simplest term.

 

[bimr]

Snyder, previous governors, and legislators over the last 30 years set the stage for the Flint fiasco by defunding the MDEQ. These people as well as the low information crowd who voted for them are the ones responsible. Snyder shares credit as he pushed through the $1.7 billion in tax cuts with little guarantee that the cuts will lead to job growth. “The results are likely to be very disappointing,” said Timothy Bartik, senior economist at the W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research in Kalamazoo, Michigan.

I was talking to someone that works for the EPA last night who told me that the MDEQ emergency response staff had also been defunded. He said that he was told to contact the Michigan State Police if there was an environmental emergency (train crash for example) in Michigan.

Limited information? Really. The typical operator for a water treatment the size of Flint would have 20 years of experience. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see there is a problem with the Flint operating staff.

Unfortunately for Mr. Glasgow, he just happened to be the guy in charge when the crap hit the fan.

Get over it and go sign the Snyder recall petition.

 

[SwinnyGG]

*sigh*

I don't know why I bother.

You, along with the rest of us, know very little about this guy's employment history, and even the available information is contradictory and ambiguous for long stretches.

But, of course, you need a Repubican to blame.

You'd probably convince a lot more people if you were dispassionate, instead of ranting about the political affiliation of one official out of many.

 

[cranky108]

Maybe this is a wrong impression, but it sort of looks like the government is suffering with the same problem as most business, in that NOW the cost to pay people is much higher than it was in the past.

What some business has done is to automate so as to reduce the numbers of people required to do the same work. But Government has not been able to do that to the same extent. So the cost of government has increased faster than the budgets. To add to this, the amount of paper work has increased, which requires more people.

The lack of success of automating government may have to do with the type of work, or the unionizing of the work force, or just bad decisions. However from looking at our local government, the unionizing may be only a small part as our local government is non-union, and has as many budget problems.

Or it could just be the voters, and non-voters, are asking for more from the government and are unwilling to fund these new features.

 

[bimr]

Unions are not the crux of the problem. Example: Illinois is union government and pension is underfunded. Wisconsin is also union and pension is totally funded.

A trend since government since the 1990's is to get tough on crime. Unfortunately, that is expensive as it costs to house the inmates and pay for the guards. None of the states increased taxes to pay for it. Instead, the states laid off other workers.

The governments have been playing a shell game.

 

[bimr]

Sighing is not going to erase any facts. Are you stating that this fellow is a republican?

Michael Glasgow is 40 years old;
Graduated college in 1998
Began work in Flint as Laboratory Supervisor in 2005
Began work as Utilities Administrator in 2015

So the question is, where in this work history did Mr. Glasgow magically pickup the required experience as a water treatment plant operator?

"For nearly 10 years Mike Glasgow has worked in the laboratory at the City of Flint Water Service Center."

https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Gov.-Doc-for-Hearing-Folder.pdf

There is a reason that Mr. Glasgow is now being sued:

"Administrator for the City of Flint. Glasgow is individually liable because as Utilities Administrator, he deliberately created, increased and prolonged the hazards of using Flint River water because he provided the MDEQ with misleading and inaccurate reports about the threats and dangers that arose by replacing of safe drinking washing and bathing water with a highly toxic alternative.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2016/i...int.for.injunctive.and.declaratory.relief.pdf

For someone with no experience in the water treatment business as you stated yourself:

"I'm sure there are people on this board who know more about the specifics of drinking water supply systems than I ever will- and I have no problem with admitting that."

Don't understand why you keep coming up with excuses for these people. The republicans are supposed to be the party of personal responsibility.

 

[IRstuff]

"The republicans are supposed to be the party of personal responsibility."

They are; they hold the democrats personally responsible for everything that goes wrong, even when it's obviously the republicans at fault.

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

 

[MacGyverS2000]

I stopped reading this thread weeks ago, but I came back... now I remember why I stopped reading it

Dan - Owner

http://www.Hi-TecDesigns.com

 

[SwinnyGG]

"Sighing is not going to erase any facts. Are you stating that this fellow is a republican?"

No. I'm stating what your line of posts is trying to imply- that Glasgow was unqualified and was appointed by Republicans, meaning that at the root of the issue Republicans are responsible for this fiasco because of their republicanism.

I'm sighing because dealing with people who are afraid to admit when they don't know something is, to put it mildly, frustrating.


"Michael Glasgow is 40 years old;
Graduated college in 1998
Began work in Flint as Laboratory Supervisor in 2005
Began work as Utilities Administrator in 2015

"So the question is, where in this work history did Mr. Glasgow magically pickup the required experience as a water treatment plant operator?

"For nearly 10 years Mike Glasgow has worked in the laboratory at the City of Flint Water Service Center." [dead link redacted]"

You have already stated in other posts that the guy is likely not 'a savvy linkedin type' and thus his linkedin page is not a reliable source for information about his exactly employment/responsibility history. You then turn around and use that exact set of limited information to declare that he is not qualified (after grossly oversimplifying the requirements to obtain F-1/F-2 certification in MI) based on his employment history.

You can't have it both ways.

"There is a reason that Mr. Glasgow is now being sued:

"Administrator for the City of Flint. Glasgow is individually liable because as Utilities Administrator, he deliberately created, increased and prolonged the hazards of using Flint River water because he provided the MDEQ with misleading and inaccurate reports about the threats and dangers that arose by replacing of safe drinking washing and bathing water with a highly toxic alternative. [dead link redacted]"

Right, because a civil suit surely means that whoever is doing the suing knows all the facts.

"For someone with no experience in the water treatment business as you stated yourself:

"I'm sure there are people on this board who know more about the specifics of drinking water supply systems than I ever will- and I have no problem with admitting that."

Don't understand why you keep coming up with excuses for these people. The republicans are supposed to be the party of personal responsibility."

I don't need to be in the water business to read and understand the certification process. You seem to think it's some big mystery that only you have the key to unlock, so you dumb it down and speak on it in what appears to me to be a deliberately misleading way.

As far as the administrators above Glasgow, I'm not making excuses for them- I'm simply acknowledging the incontrovertible fact that I (and pretty much anyone whose knowledge of this is hearsay and internet news) don't know enough about the chain of events to state who acted ethically, and who did not. I'm very comfortable stating that the information is incomplete and that whatever I may think happened is, at best, my opinion. You seem very content to spout mostly unsupported opinions about various people's motivations as fact.

I'll say it again- if you want to convince people, you'd be better off clearly stating what you know, admitting what you don't, and making conjectures based on that, instead of contradicting yourself and claiming that you know everything everyone else doesn't know based on the same sources of information.

 

[cranky108]

Why are we back to blaming political parties? Honestly both of the major parties have a large amount of bad baggage, and I personally don't trust either one.
But, this is about people, not political parties.

This sort of stinks of cronyism, and both political parties are guilty of doing that.

 

[SwinnyGG]

Thank you. At least someone else sees it.

 

[bimr]

Regarding "No. I'm stating what your line of posts is trying to imply- that Glasgow was unqualified and was appointed by Republicans, meaning that at the root of the issue Republicans are responsible for this fiasco because of their republicanism."

I have never mentioned that Glasgow was hired by a republican. Flint is run by the democratic party, correct? So Glasgow was appointed by the democratic political types in charge of Flint. Don't see why you keep bringing politics into it. The responsible people should be fired or should resign, it is as simple as that.

If you want to know who was responsible, read the report (uploaded below). It was written by a water professional, not a politician.

Here is an example from the report:

"The Flint Utilities Department personnel were under-trained, inexperience with full-time plant operations, and ill-prepared to manage complex water chemistry issues. We note that selected staff members conveyed concerns as events unfolded, only to have those concerns discounted. Several aspects of the situation are particularly troubling."........

"In summary, while we cannot begin to explain or excuse MDEQ's transgressions in its oversight of the conversion to the Flint River water supply, the Flint Public Works role in the crisis appears attributable to an inexperienced and poorly resourced organization struggling to take on enormous, untenable responsibilities. Flint's EM, relying on sole-sourced consultant support, held responsibility for ensuring adequate staffing, training, and preparation for conversion of Flint's drinking water source. Those responsibilities were not met.

Findings

F-23. Flint Public Works personnel were ill-prepared to assume responsiblity for full-time operation of the the Flint WTP and distribution system."


Sighing, isn't this the same thing that I have been posted previously? If you had worked in the water business, you would not have to read the report to understand what was going on.

If you want to understand the issue in depth, stop posting here and read the report. If you have a fact please post it. But lacking facts, don't go back to the politics.

 

[SwinnyGG]

"I have never mentioned that Glasgow was hired by a republican. Flint is run by the democratic party, correct? So Glasgow was appointed by the democratic political types in charge of Flint. Don't see why you keep bringing politics into it. The responsible people should be fired or should resign, it is as simple as that."

Oh, so now you have no political motive, huh?

This is your first sentence posted in this thread:

"This was not an engineering failure, just another failure of the right wingnuts and their nonsense policies."

This an excerpt from my first post:

"Please don't attempt to push your own personal political agenda by making this a partisan issue. It isn't one."

You talked up an down about how this was entirely the Republican's fault from the beginning, and then quit the political discourse when it became clear everyone else wasn't buying what you were selling.

If you would have stuck to posting useful information (which you did a lot of in spite of your political raving) this e-fight never would have started. Take a deep breath, go read all the posts where I asked questions and stated in clear terms that I'm not in the industry and don't know everything about running a water plant, and begged you to give up on the politics and stick to facts, and go about your day. Please. This is getting old.

And also:

", the Flint Public Works role in the crisis appears attributable to an inexperienced and poorly resourced organization struggling to take on enormous, untenable responsibilities."

This is literally the argument I've been making since the Glasgow issue became the primary topic of discussion.

 

[MacGyverS2000]

HEY GUYS!

Remember the name of this website? The discussion should be about engineering, or failures thereof. Politics should be, at BEST (worst?), a sideline mentioned in passing when it comes to engineering.

So drop it...

Dan - Owner

http://www.Hi-TecDesigns.com

 

[cranky108]

So my political vent. Why do we accept cronyism from either party? Why do we vote for these people?

Is this an engineering failure at all? Would this be more of an operational person failure? I don't have a problem of us digging into water chemistry, but why do we as engineers want to be associated with this?

The thing I see is there was oversight, but they were also not looking. I suspect that the oversight is so complacent with everything being fine, and now they quit looking.

 

[IRstuff]

But, aren't most failures that might be listed here ultimately people failures?

> Cranes fall because people failed to anticipate severe weather or overloading, or bad geometries
> Buildings that collapsed because someone(s) took shortcuts
> Bridges collapsing because of poor maintenance, or poor planning, or poor sequencing of operations, or poor construction, or poor design



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

 

[SwinnyGG]

"So my political vent. Why do we accept cronyism from either party? Why do we vote for these people?"

Power propagates power. Our system is a huge mess. It does seem as if the tide is at least beginning to turn, and people are realizing they can act to force change.

"Is this an engineering failure at all? Would this be more of an operational person failure? I don't have a problem of us digging into water chemistry, but why do we as engineers want to be associated with this?"

It seems to me that the people who failed to act (EPA, or water department personnel, people at the DEQ, whomever) knew there was a problem and didn't act because of political pressure or in some cases a personal lack of decisiveness.

I would argue that as engineers, we bear a moral responsibility in any safety-critical role to make it clear to decision makers above us (who often may not/do not fully understand the system of set of variables under their control) what is important and what isn't. It seems to me that this situation stems from some failures at the actual number-crunching engineering level, and many more failures at the bureaucratic level, because decision makers failed to empower or listen to their engineers, and the engineers were either incompetent or willing to compromise where they shouldn't have been.

"The thing I see is there was oversight, but they were also not looking. I suspect that the oversight is so complacent with everything being fine, and now they quit looking."

Oversight only works if either A) the people making decisions know what they don't know, and empower their technical staff as a result or B) the decision makers have enough technical knowledge to be a part of the conversation.

It appears to me that in this case, whether you look at the EPA, the MDEQ, the local government, or the state government, neither of the above was true. That's a perfect storm really. These four organizations bear different levels of responsibility with regard to the water quality of this town, but ultimately all of them were in a position to at least mitigate the problem early on, and no one made an attempt, even as the information began to roll in. My suspicion is that if Dr. Mona Hanna-Attisha or the Virginia Tech researchers hadn't dug into this, we might still not be aware.