Town officials say poor circulation led to failed water test in July

Though it’s died down a bit, one of the bigger topics of discussion in recent months has been the quality of water, particularly in town and area districts. One item that has been a concern is the amount of total trihalomethanes (TTHM) and them being in compliance with the EPA standard of .080 micrograms per liter.

In July, the water for the town tested at .087 micrograms of TTHM per liter, though the construction for the water line rehabilitation project factored into that reading according to town officials.

Mayor Mike Mortimore explained, “The testing spot at the sewer office on Second Street failed in July due to the water project construction. It was found that due to water being shut-off and re-routed, this area did not have the adequate circulation. This is a dead-end area that primarily serves the office there and because of this we have made it one of our test areas and flush sites. We immediately informed the EPA and they concurred that it was most likely due to the construction.

“I do know that when the initial reading came through, I directed the engineers to put together a plan to run that line through to Park Street, thus fixing the dead-end problem.

“There was no panic on our end due to the construction variable, and that in fact proved to be the unusual culprit. We have also located the metered water to this location for the project and are considering keeping it located here as its use has helped with circulation and levels.”

Chief Water Plant Operator Chris Seilaff further explained, in regard to testing, one of the regulations is that there be a free chlorine residual in the line in case there is a break, to protect from any contamination that could happen after the water’s been treated and made safe to drink. He noted the EPA regulation is to have a trace of chlorine. “But, of course,” he said, “you have to chlorinate to a specific level to make the water safe, so this is the residuals sitting out here after that.”

He pointed out that, though E. coli is listed on the testing, it is just the EPA gathering data and this is for a sample directly from the river.

Seilaff explained every year the town is required to do a bunch of testing for several items, including TTHM and haloacetic acids (HAA5) – another byproduct created commonly with chlorine – and that test is done at the tap, on the first water leaving the plant, and does not relate to what’s been happening in the system. He further explained that the overage of TTHM is based on a running average, so unless an entity is consistently over it is still within regulations.

“That’s why when we had that,” he said, referring to the high reading, “we didn’t have to do public notices or anything like that.” He was aware Owl Creek had to do notices in the past, but it was due to consistent breaking of the acceptable TTHM limit.

If the average were to be consistently over, Seilaff explained is he has to notify the town so everyone is aware there is a problem. With that, the EPA puts out a document explaining the dangers. Seilaff said the EPA has specific information that has to be used to notify the public.

When it comes to TTHM and HAA5, Seilaff said there is a potential correlation between the compounds and cancer after long-term exposure. “The EPA has never done the study themselves, the government has never done the study to make sure that it actually does cause cancer,” Seilaff said, noting that a university did a study and found they might be linked to cancer but now TTHMs are being treated like the definitely cause cancer after long-term exposure at a high level. “Even though it’s actually just one of those minor correlations.” He pointed out there is no set definition through the EPA for what is “long term.”

When the high reading came in, Seilaff started investigating and found the reason to be issues caused by the water line project, noting there were valves closed on a main line that weren’t opened when they should’ve been. That and other issues “messed the flow of our system up. And that happens with construction.” He added the EPA understands that this was a brief issue.

“I was a little stunned in July,” Seilaff said, as testing was done at the Owl Creek vault as well. That test came back as within the acceptable range of TTHM and he didn’t understand how the reading at Owl Creek could be low while the town was high; it was another indicator something had gone wrong.

Energy Laboratories is used for the testing, Seilaff said, and is certified for testing for various elements, including TTHM.

Another thing to keep in mind is that results don’t come back for two to three weeks after a sample is sent in. The sample that was high for TTHM was taken July 16, but Seilaff did not get the results until July 31. As soon as he saw we the sample was high, he said, there was brainstorming as to the reason and, after further research, the closed valves were found to be the culprit.

Though not required by the EPA – as the running average didn’t break – Seilaff ran another test on Aug. 9. He received the results Aug. 21, and the TTHM reading was .041, which is what he expected in July.