Contact Report Details | Data Online | Oregon Drinking Water Services

More information for this water system: SDWIS ID 4370
System Info :: Report for Lenders :: Alerts :: Violations :: Compliance & Enforcement :: Contacts & Advisories :: Site Visits :: Public Notice
Coliform Summary :: Coliform Results :: Coliform Schedules :: LT2 :: GW/GWUDI Source Details :: Plan Review :: Annual Fee
Chemical Summary :: Chemical Results :: Chemical Schedules :: Chemical Schedule Summary :: Arsenic RAA :: Cyanotoxins :: PFAS
Lead & Copper :: DBP Sample Sites :: FANLs :: MRDL :: GWR 4-Log :: Turbidity :: SWTR :: LRAA

Corrosion Control has moved to the Lead & Copper page.

Information for all water systems:
Water System Inventory :: Water System Surveys :: Outstanding Performers :: Treatment Plant Inspections :: Treatment :: Plan Reviews
Alerts :: Violations :: Compliance & Enforcement :: Deficiencies :: System Scores :: Exceedances :: Public Notices :: Service Lines
Water Advisories :: Contact Reports :: Cyanotoxins :: PFAS :: Post-wildfire VOCs :: Fluoride :: Certification List

OHA Drinking Water Services Contact Report Details
PWS ID:	OR41 01081
PWS Name:	USFS BEAR SPRINGS RS

Who Was Contacted:	James Belliveau
Contact Phone:	508-215-6110 (Email address hidden)
Contact Date:	07/31/2020
Contacted By:	BAILEY, NICOLE (WASCO COUNTY)
Contact Method/Location:	Email

Assistance Type:	OTHER REGULATORY - Repeat coliform sample requested to be labeled as routine- denied

Details:	I requested to the state yesterday that a sample that Bear springs took on the 20th of July be changed from a repeat to a routine sample as today is the last day of the month. That request was denied for a few factors:: Advisory was lifted on 7/17 (prior to these samples being collected) The chlorine residual on the June samples was 0 The chlorinator is currently broken (as of 7/30 Level 2 investigation) The chlorine level recorded on these samples is 1.4 The highest recorded chlorine level in the past 3 years is 1.0 (once) and generally averages between 0.02 and 0.8. The assumption is that the chlorinator was likely broken in June and not repaired in-between then and the July samples. The chlorine residual on these results is 1.5X higher than their average high reading. As a result, these samples appear to be a result of shock chlorination. With that, they are not representative of normal operations.