Laserfiche WebLink
ENVIROVIETRICS. INC./R.O.PLANT/ODOR CONTROL PROTECT <br />The Board reviewed a letter of February 21, 1995: <br />ENVIROMETRICS <br />Inc. <br />,, eo9Fc� �S MI <br />(18 1 S. X71%'%* �LfP, • Vero ► Reach. FI(SorhrrA3sioner phcmr i 30'� 302-1408 <br />sfi Administrator Fax i-107) 5h'-018(1 <br />�, Ati0rncy <br />X-1 <br />�`� Personoei <br />Mr. Ken Mac Public Works Feb. 21, 1995 <br />County Administration Building Community Der. _ <br />1640 25th Street Utilitil~s T✓________ <br />Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Finance <br />OMB <br />Emerg. Serv. <br />Dear Mr. Macht: Risk M <br />Other <br />A recent article in the Press Journa conc ruing an odor control <br />project at the South County R.O Plant vuotes.Mr. William Suratt. an <br />engineer with Camp, Dresser & McKee as accusing my company, <br />Envirometrics with responsibility for the failure of the project. <br />Unfortunately we were not present -to input into the scenario, so I <br />would like to clarify the chronology with the following. <br />Envirometrics was contacted and asked to analyze samples for <br />hydrogen sulfide and trihalomethanes. Subsequently, James Fyler, <br />our organic analyst met Mr. Suratt at the site to collect process <br />streams for analysis. At that. time it was discovered that Mr. <br />Suratt was not interested in routine analyses, but was in the <br />middle of a research project. He was informed that neither <br />"Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater" nor <br />the EPA manual for water and waste analysis contained a protocol <br />for the determination of chlorine breakpoint on a volatile species <br />such as hydrogen sulfide. He was also informed that the <br />preservative for hydrogen sulfide might interfere with the <br />subsequent determination of the chlorine breakpoint. It was <br />suggested that we attempt to determine the chlorine breakpoint by <br />taking samples in volatile organic vials and adding doses of <br />chlorine using a microsyringe. This approach would allow us to <br />handle the samples without the water coming into contact with air. <br />After the tests were completed, Mr. Fyler took the time to outline <br />the methods we used in a letter rather than simply issue a report <br />containinv_ results only, see attachment. Please note: due to the <br />research nature of these studies, Mr. Suratt wen, warned that <br />-further studies might be necessary to clarify the findings. <br />Unfortunately, we were never contacted by Mr. Sv att nor any member <br />of his firm following issuance of the report. Imagine our surprise <br />and distress at being labeled inaccurate and incomplete. Our <br />results were accurate for the samples taken and known protocols <br />were used for sample collection; in fvvt, Mr. Suratt witnessed the <br />sampling. We stand behind the report as given, even if its <br />popularity is questioned. ReseRrch speculation is not always <br />provable in a bench study despite the best of theories. <br />We have provided analytical services to Indian River County since <br />1981 as well .as to many other local commer.•fal customers. <br />BOOK 94 PAu 4 ' <br />FEBRUARY 28, 1995 75 <br />