The E. coli incident
Extracted from the Norfolknet Notes.

This page contains all the messages relating to the town water quality that appeared on the Norfolknet webpage in the Notes from the Webmaster section. They have been gathered here for convenience, but are also logged in the archives as usual.

  • 8/11  4:23pm   I'm reading comments about Cable 8 and I think our local station did as good a job as they possibly could have. I also think that Peter Chipman represented our town in a professional manner when dealing with the press. He had a tone of confidence in his voice as he explained what was going on. I think the town did a good job, but I also liked Bill Perron's idea of the reverse 911. HOW ABOUT ANOTHER OVER-RIDE? - BS

  • 8/11  8:53am   One of the town's selectmen has apparently been following the messages posted to Norfolknet, and has composed and posted a lengthy reply to the concerns expressed on the page. It's quite long and detailed, so we've put it on its own page here. Judging by the time it was sent, it must have been composed right after the board of health meeting made information available on Thursday night. Here are the opening words:

    Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2000 02:43:02 EDT
    Subject: a note to the webmaster

    Let me introduce myself before you read further. My name is Jack McFeeley. I am a member of the Norfolk Board of Selectmen and a constant reader of NofolkNet. I am very supportive of the efforts that Vijay and Andras have been achieving with this site. They have done a tremendous job of reaching out to everyone in Norfolk and I commend them for their tireless efforts.

    I am posting this note to steer straight into the questions that have been posted and not to avoid them. I hope the readers appreciate my attempt to answer their concerns.

    I have read with a lot of interest all of the recent postings to NorfolkNet. I am sincerely happy to see the number of people who are interested in our Town. In the best of times, in the worst of times. Too bad it's the latter right now. Needless to say, many of us have been very busy the last few days. So have many others at Town Hall, in particular the Water Department and the Board of Health. I have now had a chance to read all of the notes posted here on NorfolkNet and I am willing to put my head in the Lions mouth by trying to comment on some of these. However, as I do so there will inevitably be a few points that I will miss, so when I miss something please bring them to my attention and will rectify the oversight. I will not hide anything.

    C o n t i n u e d . . .

  • 8/10  10:37pm   Well, after listening to the first-hand account by Jim Martin (of the water department) of how the boil order came about, I'm now of the opinion that it's unlikely that there was every any E. coli in the water. I went to the board of health meeting, and remained as long as I could with an ever more tired toddler (who behaved wonderfully, and even whispered most of the time. Some days we're just lucky). We left around 8:45pm, in the middle of the E. coli incident chronology session, but a lot of the relevant facts had been touched upon. This is my understanding of what happened:
    (8/2 Wed)  On Wednesday, Aug. 2, the monthly water samples were taken and sent for analysis to the lab referred to as the ``chain of custody'' (ie, the usual) lab. The samples are taken at six pre-determined locations as approved by the State, these being 158 Main, Liberty Lane, 157 Seekonk, at Tedeschi's, Gold St., and Suffolk Rd. The samples were collected into sample bottles that were left over from the previous month (the bottles are sealed and can be stored).
    (8/3 Thu)  Analysis takes 48 hours, but the lab phoned on Thursday with preliminary results indicating coliform bacteria at the Liberty Lane and Seekonk locations. (The test consists of two 24-hr incubation periods. It is customary for labs to phone ahead a heads-up if the first incubation yields bacteria, even though the second incubation is still required for a positive result.)
    (8/3 Thu)  Upon hearing this, the water department followed established procedure and ran an expanded set of tests on the affected locations. The State realizes that false positives are not uncommon, and does not mandate action on the first detect. The expanded tests take fresh samples from the test locations, as well as sample the water both upstream and downstream of the test points. In addition, two extra samples were taken to be sent to an independent lab, to cross-check the results of the chain-of-custody lab. Norfolk had an incident in the past with bacterial contamination that would not go away that was ultimately traced to unclean equipment at the testing lab, so lab results were not being taken for granted. The six expanded-test samples were collected into sample bottles from a new batch, while the two double-check samples were collected into the last two bottles from the old batch (this sample-bottle shell-game is relevant; don't lose sight of the pea).
    (8/5-6 Sat-Sun)  No word came from either lab on Saturday or Sunday, which, although not conclusive, tends to imply that no bacteria have yet been detected, ie. that the test will most likely come up clean.
    (8/7 Mon morn)  The chain of custody lab telephoned the water department on Monday morning and informed them that the six samples from the expanded test were all clean, no contaminant was detected. The water department contacted the DEP officer on the case and informed him that there now was one set of results contradicting the initial test, but a second set of tests were being performed at an independent lab and their results are not yet available.
    (8/7 Mon aft)  Later Monday the second lab (who tested samples collected into bottles from the previous month's batch) phoned with word that it ``looks pretty bad'', both samples detected E. coli. This, however, directly contradicted the findings of the first lab, making the equipment contamination theory increasingly likely. Suspecting the sample bottles, the water department went out to collect another round of expanded samples from the two affected sites (one at the site, one upstream, one downstream, and one for the independent lab, and the same for the second site). When they returned in the afternoon, a DEP boil order was already waiting for them. The boil order went out late Monday afternoon per the order of the DEP.
    (8/8 Tue)  The results of the second round of expanded testing came back clean from both the chain-of-custody and the independent labs, convincing the DEP that the water was safe after all.

  • 8/10  6:12pm   There is a board of health meeting today, Thursday, Aug. 10, 2000. The notice board in Town Hall said ``Board of Health meeting downstairs at 7pm'', but not on which day. After calling around, we could confirm that there's a meeting today, but not at what time. Putting the two together, one of us plans to be at town hall at 7pm to find out.
  • 8/10  5:52pm   No, today's Norfolk Press is NOT correct when it says several samples were found to have higher than acceptable levels of bacteria. According to the Water Department, only one sample of a dozen or so samples collected on August 2 was found to have E.Coli. Since then, the department has sampled on August 3 and daily since August 7; it takes 24 hours before results are available. All results obtained as of 3 pm today were negative for E. Coli.
    Correction: apparently facts vary depending on whom you talk to; our latest information is that two locations tested positive twice (ie, four tests) out of a total of 6 + 8 + 8 = 22 tests performed at 10 separate sites. So ``several samples'' is correct, the ``dozen'' is not.
  • 8/10  8:56am   The answers by the Water Dept are not acceptable. A review is needed of the present procedures. - JO
    8/10  6:20pm   Consider:
    A. Sun Chronicle quote Tues Aug 8 - per Jim Martin - "It seems that the message is getting out very well."
    B. Tank was last inspected in 1997 .
    C. Speculation that a bird managed to get inside the tank
    D. A e.coli incident 10years ago that was never confirmedand "went away"
    E. State Dept has approved the towns steps to rectify the problem. If this is true then why suggest that the state test was flawed ?
    F. If nothing is wrong why the increase in use of chlorine ?
    The answers raise more questions than solutions. Also no chronology and time line of notification appears. - JO
    References: Sun-Chronicle Article, Aug. 8, Sun-Chronicle Article, Aug. 9
    8/10  6:25pm   Update:Today's (Aug 8) edition of the Norfolk Press has a page-3 article that sheds light on several of these points; more on this later this evening.

  • 8/9  4:58pm   That last posting from 8/9 @ 3:58 says it all. In a situation like this, large signs should be posted at major points throughout town, information should be placed in every mailbox and the local cable stations should be constantly broadcasting an emergency banner at the bottom of the screen which is updated regularly. The information needs to go to the residents and not vise-versa! It is not difficult to inform the public in a timely manner. It is a disgrace that these simple solutions were not implemented. - LW
  • 8/9  4:53pm   I have until now resisted the urge to add my comment to this situation because others have expressed my feelings adequately... but!
    With the amount of money I spend on taxes each year I would think it is completely reasonable to expect to be notified of a potentially deadly bacteria existing in our towns water. I also have children: ages three years and four months, where is the concern for them.
    I would like a response from town officials. I want to know who is in charge, if anyone, of conveying this information to the public...you know, the same public that keep this town running with their hard earned money.
    This is the information age and most people have computers, cell phones and even fax machines in their home along with their telephones. We are willing, however, to accept flyers in a mail box as an acceptable means of spreading the word that we are all in danger. Unfortunately not even that was done. In the Boston Globe an article announced that the residents had been "notified" of the contamination. I would like to know which residents those are...the friends of the person who tested the samples. - PMD
  • 8/9  3:58pm   The water quality may have been restored, but the problem persists --
    I am outraged at the way that the E.Coli situation has been handled. I have two small children and cannot understand why we were not notified sooner -- We had been using the water for 3 days before finding out on the nightly news that we had a problem. How can a town government be run so poorly? Surely if this had happened in a major corporation, someone would have been fired. Maybe it's about time our town be run like a business -- Notices should have been placed in each and every mailbox in the town of Norfolk.
    How is it that Water Ban information gets out to the townspeople quicker and more efficiently than a Life Threatening situation such as this?!!! And one last thing... I am angered by the casual attitude that was displayed on the Norfolk Cable channel regarding this situation. I'm sure that none of our elected officials have ever experienced a family member becoming sickened by E.Coli, because if they had, I assure you it would have been handled better. - BAC

  • 8/9  12:39pm   The word is that it's all over, we can drink the water again -- I called the water dept. who said they gave an all clear as of 5:30pm yesterday afternoon - JH
  • 8/9  2:01pm   The water department is flushing the pipes, and the water is running brown. When we called, they assured us that the water is safe to drink, and to have the color clear up, just let it run for a while. They didn't say, but it seems reasonable to let it run onto the lawn and not down the drain, but who knows, maybe I'm taking liberties with their instructions :-)

  • 8/9  12:00pm   Neither one of us is in town right now, so we don't have access to the latest news -- if anyone hears anything new about the water quality, please e-mail us so we can let others know.
    Update:  12:39pm  I called the water dept. who said they gave an all clear as of 5:30pm yesterday afternoon - JH
  • 8/9  11:55am   It is truly unacceptable for the town not to have notified all residents of the problem. It should be mandatory to post large warning signs at all entrances to the town, such as they do for water bans. Alternately, a flyer in every mailbox would do the trick. This failure to notify could result in serious illnesses for towns people and legal ramifications for the town. I am the parent of a one year old, who falls into the "greater risk" category, I am outraged that more was not done to alert people of the danger. - JLM

  • 8/8  7:55pm   This certainly has been a busy day in town; below you will find all the letters and information we received (and gathered) about the Escherichia coli situation. The boil order will be lifted once additional testing proves that no problems remain.
  • 8/8  8:25pm   The URL first mentioned below (http://www.epa.gov/safewater/ecoli.html) contains some useful information about E. Coli O157:H7 and its effects on humans. Only that strain can cause serious illness, and serious complications are quite rare, so no need to worry that exposure will cause instant hospitalization.
  • 8/8  7:22pm   The town has put up a sign at the intersection of Main St. and Route 115 advising residents about the boil order. Unfortunately, by 6:30 pm the sign was only legible to pedestrians crossing from the Sunoco toward Town Pizza, as it must have been knocked over by the wind and was lying on its back in the mulch on the traffic island.
  • 8/8  7:08pm   I live in Norfolk and only heard about this E. Coli problem today (8/8/00) through a family member who notified me of a newspaper article. Up until late this morning, I have been using the water to shower, brush teeth, wash vegetables, etc.
    I think it is disgusting that the town has not taken a proactive role in getting this information to towns people. In a life and death situation such as this, resources should be expended to either knock on every single door in the town, or at the very least, drop a note in EVERY MAILBOX.
    Additionally, I understand that chlorine can kill the bacteria. It would have been preferable to hear that you should not use the water due to high chlorine content than to hear (THROUGH THE GRAPEVINE) that you can contract a deadly disease by using the TRUSTED TOWN WATER. - AD
  • 8/8  10am   Here's an update on the E.Coli situation, based on information received from the Board of Health and the Water Department at 10 am August 8, 2000.
    The town water supply is routinely tested on a monthly basis during the first week of each month. During this month's sampling, two of 12 samples tested positive for E.Coli. According to the Water Department, these may represent either contamination of the sample collection vial or the presence of bacteria in the town water tank. Since then, the department has received test results with no E. Coli. The town water tank has been disinfected and chlorinated, and will continue to be tested.
    Until sufficient clean samples have been confirmed, there is a BOIL order in effect as detailed below. The order applies to all water from the town water supply that may be ingested or used in food preparation, including toothbrushing and handwashing prior to cooking. Dishwashers, and washing machines run on the hot cycle, get hot enough to kill the bacteria; coffeemakers do not, and should use bottled or boiled water in the interim. Further details about E.Coli in drinking water are on-line at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/ecoli.html.
    According to the Board of Health, the town groundwater supply itself has not been affected, and water from private wells is safe to use.
    The results of additional samples that have been sent to a testing lab are expected later today. When there is sufficient evidence that the water is safe to drink without boiling, the department will lift the boil order. The public will be notified via the media, including WBZ radio, Channel 56, channels 4, 5, and 7, and Fox-TV.
  • 8/8  10am   I understand that Norfolk has three wells from which water is drawn for residences. Do we know which well(s) was suspected? - RCC
  • 8/8   Whether we have e coli or not there should be a review of how the info gets to people. Is there a plan in place that gets activated when a situation arises like this ? Nothing on local tv etc. - JO
    7:45am Response:  We're not sure how the water department spreads the word; we heard from a neighbor, who'd been passed the word by someone who heard it on the radio. Our neighbor then contacted the water department directly for details, and was told that there'd be further information available today, plus further testing conducted.
    Also, since we're not the official town website, we aren't on their media distribution lists, although we're working with people on an informal basis to get added to their cc: lists. So if you're involved with a local group that would like to get information on-line, please let us know!
    9:10am  Update:  Apparently, one way the Water Department is notifying residents is via flyers distributed in the post office lobby. Here's the complete text of the (undated) sheet I picked up this morning:
    Norfolk Water Department
    Town Hall
    Norfolk, Massachusetts 02056

    BOIL ORDER NOTICE
    (For Water Users)

    All consumers of the Norfolk Water Department are hereby advised that, due to E. Coli counts in water samples, all water used from the system for human and animal consumption, eg. brushing teeth, hand washing, washing of vegetables or food preparation, etc., should be boiled before use. The water should be brought to and kept at a vigorous boil for not less than ONE MINUTE.

    Improvements in the rather flat taste of boiled water can be accomplished as follows:

    1. Store in refrigerator
    2. Pour back and forth from one clean container to another
    3. Add a pinch of salt per quart
    The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, Drinking Water Program has been notified of the problem and has approved the procedures taken. This BOIL ORDER remains in effect until the water quality problem is corrected, and the Department of Environmental Protection terminates this ORDER in writing. When the BOIL ORDER is officially terminated you will be notified, but until that time water must be boiled as described above to protect your health.

    If you have any questions on this information, please contact James Martin at (508) 528-1412.

    Office (508) 528-1412 * P.O. Box 264, Norfolk, MA 02056

  • 8/7   Word has it that two of several tests performed on the town's drinking water supply may have tested positive for E. Coli contamination. The town is re-running the tests to double-check the results; until more is known, residents are advised to boil their drinking water. The water is fine for washing, bathing, and outdoor use.
    When we called, the water department line was busy, and there was no update left on their after-hours answering message. We'll post more details as soon as available.
    8/8  Update:  First, I mis-understood, that's several, not seven tests; one of the two town wells came up detect. We don't yet know the actual number of tests done, nor on what date they were performed.
    8/8  7:55pm  Update:  Our word-of-mouth information was incorrect, both town wells passed. The problem was most likey due to the town water tank, which has been chlorinated and has passed subsequent tests.