Professional Documents
Culture Documents
DEP Inspection Report
DEP Inspection Report
Person(s) Interviewed
Name: MIchael Hindman Title: Daily_Operator
eFACTS info
Inspection ID: 3415767 Inspection Type RTPT
Violations
C1D - 25 PA Code, §109.606
ST:001 - STANDPIPE
Remarks: FAILURE TO USE CHEMICALS, MATERIALS OR EQUIPMENT THAT ARE CERTIFIED BY ANSI/
NSF STANDARD 60 OR 61. A bullet hole in the finished water storage tank was plugged using a tree
branch (stick) and an unknown epoxy or resin-like material, neither of which are NSF-certified
materials. DEP requests on 6/30/22 and 7/14/22 for information on the method and materials used to
temporarily plug the tank (including proof of NSF certification) were not responded to by the Boro.
Failure to use chemicals and materials for the finished water storage tank that are NSF-61 certified
violates §109.606(c)
There is no documentation for the most recent 12 months to demonstrate that routine
quarterly calibration verifications have been completed in accordance with EPA Method 334.0
for each handheld or benchtop instrument used for analysis of chlorine to compliance
monitoring, comparison grab samples or to obtain results needed to calculate log inactivation.
Remarks: There is no documentation for the most recent 12 months to demonstrate that routine
quarterly calibration verifications have been completed in accordance with EPA Method 334.0 for
each handheld or benchtop instrument used for analysis of chlorine to compliance monitoring,
comparison grab samples or to obtain results needed to calculate log inactivation.
Routine quarterly calibrations have not been performed on either chlorine testing meter for the 2nd
or 3rd quarters of 2022, which violates §109.304(a). Assistance for this may be available from
organizations like PA Rural Water
Failure to produce records and data upon DEP request violates §109.6(a)(1)
Failure to take whatever corrective action necessary (permanently and properly repairing the water
storage tank in a timely manner) to assure that safe and potable water is continuously supplied to the
users violates §109.4(4)
Outstanding Violations
This is the second instance reported to the Department within the last 12 months where the PWS
failed to mark water and wastewater lines in response to One Call notifications. See August and
September 2021 inspection reports for more detail.
Failure of a Public Water System to mark underground utility lines in response to PA One Call notices
violates Title 25 Pa. Code ? 109.4(3) and Title 25 Pa. Code ? 109.4(4). It may also violate the
Underground Utility Line Protection Law (PA Act 287 as amended) which is enforced by the PA Public
Utility Commission (PUC)
B4 - Section 13(a) of the PA SDWA (35 P.S. Section 721.13(a)) and 25 PA Code, Chapter 109.4(4)
Remarks: FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH AN ORDER ISSUED BY THE DEP. An Administrative Order was
served to the PWS on 2/28/22 requiring: submission of an Uninterrupted System Service Plan
Corrective Action Schedule by 3/30/22, submission of an Operation & Maintenance Plan by 4/29/22,
and submission of an Emergency Response Plan by 4/29/22. The Order required all plans meet the
requirements of their applicable regulations.
As of today 5/20/22, and as described in previous inspection reports, previous emails with the PWS,
and a letter to the PWS dated 5/18/22, the O&M Plan, ERP, and USSP Corrective Action Schedule
submitted have not met the requirements of the regulations.
Failure to comply with an Order issued by the Department is a violation of the PA SDWA [35 P.S.
Section 721.13(a)] and Title 25 Pa. Code ? 109.4(4).
General Comments
Conducted a partial inspection of the Public Water System (PWS) to review operation of the
water treatment plant, operational logs and records, and collect water samples for iron and
manganese.
As of the date of this inspection, the PWS has not retained an appropriately Certified Operator.
The Administrative Order deadline for retaining a Certified Operator is Wednesday, September 7.
Michael and other Boro employees have continued to operate the treatment plant in accordance
with SOPs developed by the previous Certified Operator (Caleb Geist), and the SOPs are still
kept at the water treatment plant. Records appear to be maintained and testing performed at the
treatment plant in accordance with Caleb's SOPs.
Review of the plant log sheets and testing records for July and August show that chlorine, pH,
iron, and manganese have been tested onsite daily in accordance with the SOPs. All iron and
manganese readings from both Filter #1, Filter #2, and the Entry Point met the respective
SMCLs. There were no instances of free chlorine residual being less than the minimum required
0.40 mg/L at the Entry Point. Raw water was tested weekly in July for iron, manganese, and pH.
Raw water was tested the 2nd and 3rd weeks of August for iron, manganese, and pH.
For today, Entry Point chlorine was 1.98 mg/L, Filter #1 iron was 0.00 mg/L, Filter #1 was 0.029
mg/L, Filter #2 iron was 0.03 mg/L, Filter #2 manganese was 0.028 mg/L, Entry Point iron was
0.00 mg/L, Entry Point manganese was 0.030 mg/L, Entry Point pH was 6.35. All these
measurements meet regulatory requirements.
We walked through the treatment plant before Michael shut it down for the weekend, and all
treatment processes appeared to be functional and working correctly. Well #1 was pumping at
72 GPM which is within the 75 GPM permitted capacity.
Before he left, Michael noted that a welder should be onsite early next week to weld a steel
patch onto the tank. On the 6/30/22 inspection report, it was noted that a Boro employee said
the tank had been shot again. On page 6 of the report, the Department requested additional
information be submitted by 7/7/22 about the temporary plugging procedure used on the tank.
No response was received, so the Department sent a letter dated 7/14/22 to make a formal
records request under §109.6(a)(1) for the plugging procedure used on the tank. No response
was received.
We examined the water storage tank to see the materials used to make the temporary plug. A
tree branch (stick) was inserted into the bullet hole approximately 8.5 feet above ground on the
west side of the tank, and the area around the stick was sealed with an unknown epoxy or resin-
like material. We were unable to determine what, if any, sealants or chemicals may have been
applied to the inside of the plug. Tree branches are not a NSF-61 approved material, and it is
unknown if the resin/epoxy is NSF-certified because specifications were never provided by the
Boro. Water was slowly dripping through the stick and onto the ground.
Samples were collected at the Entry Point and in the distribution system for laboratory analysis
for iron, manganese, and bacteria.
Field Samples continued -8-
Field Samples
Subfacility: SRC-001-WELL 1
Signatures
Received by(Print Name): Unable To Receive Signature:
MIchael Hindman Report Typed Offsite