One more question regarding Flint

There is probably no sense belaboring the failures in the Flint water story any longer, but I want to mention just one more thing that points to a breakdown in the customary engineering management of that project. Recall, once again, the Associated Press story:

Mike Glasgow, the plant’s laboratory supervisor at the time, says he asked district engineer Mike Prysby of the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality how often staffers would need to check the water for proper levels of phosphate, a chemical they intended to add to prevent lead corrosion from the pipes. Prysby’s response, according to Glasgow: “You don’t need to monitor phosphate because you’re not required to add it.”

Recalling the meeting Tuesday in an interview with The Associated Press, Glasgow said he was taken aback by the state regulator’s instruction; treating drinking water with anti-corrosive additives was routine practice. Glasgow said his gaze shifted to a consulting firm engineer in attendance, who also looked surprised.

“Then,” Glasgow said, “we went on to the next question.”

Generally, regulators do not design or plan anything; they review for compliance with regulations the designs and plans prepared by others. This is the reason that the top of the class goes to the private sector, where they can actually design, and the bottom of the class goes to the public sector, where they will never design anything. It’s a variation on that cruel remark about teachers: Those who can do, do, and those who can’t — regulate.

That conversation should have gone like this:

Glasgow: We plan to test for phosphates every (whatever). Are you allright with that?

Prysby: Yes / No / Discussion …

Why was Prysby making design and operating decisions about anything?

It is always true that there are local ways of doing things, local levels of cooperation that vary from one jurisdiction to another according to the personality of the people involved, but the description of that conversation, and the word ‘instruction,’ suggests that the ordinary relationship between the engineers and the regulators had been upended.

This entry was posted in General. Bookmark the permalink.