Uncertainties

There’s a strong likelihood that the deadline will be extended again, with the government publishing a possible six-month extension for public comment.

Much less certain is the possibility that the ADA requirements for pools will be repealed by law. Senator Jim DeMint (R, SC) introduced a bill prohibiting enforcement of the ADA rules on commercial pools and spas (S. 2186), referring to the current law as a flawed “one size fit all” approach.

Given Democratic control of the Senate, it’s not likely DeMint’s bill will be heard.

The Issue

Unlike DeMint, many stakeholders in the industry acknowledge that pools should be accessible to the disabled, but disagree on how the law is interpreted in current regulations. The heart of the issue is whether portable lifts comply with the requirements, and whether these lifts could be shared by multiple pools.  Up to now, the government has argued that fixed lifts are required, but the very high cost of those tools makes pool operators resist.

A six-month extension to permit further discussions is probably a great interim solution.  Stay tuned.

You can get the details on the industry’s compliance record from Fowler, which he estimates at about 30%, but we’d just like to recap the requirements in case you’ve forgotten them.

What’s That ADA Thing Again?

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) has been around for decades at this point, slowly transforming American public spaces into accessible spaces for the disabled. On September 15, 2010, the guidelines for public pools and venues were completed, to go into effect March 15, 2012.  As in, about one month from now.  These regulations are mandatory – pools must be accessible to disabled persons.

Who Must Comply?

If members of the general public have access to your pool, you must comply.  This includes even residential pools, though it is unlikely that these pools are truly open to the public.  If they are, they are included.

In summary, pools, spas, water treatments, and therapy pools open to the public must comply.  This includes pools in hotels, universities, clubs, schools, facilities, and neighborhoods where the public may enter.

What Do You Have To Do?

Pool owners and managers are responsible to provide sloped entry, a lift, transfer walls or systems, or specially designed stairs for the disabled.  Pools with a perimeter of greater than 300 feet must have two access points.  The exact requirements vary depending on the type of venue.  You can get details from this PDF provided by APSP.

If you think you will be scrambling to comply with these regulations in the next 30 days, you might want to connect with someone like Pentair who can supply the ADA compliant lifts and devices you need.

We certainly have to agree that more research is needed – there is always room to improve our understanding.  And we also agree that swimming is a beneficial exercise.

But there are at least two ways to interpret Webb’s comment:

First, we shouldn’t do anything to discourage people from swimming in chlorinated pools because the health benefits of swimming are important.

And second, by implication, chlorinated pools are ok, at least until we know more about the health effects of chlorine.

Well, not quite.

In fact, we do know quite a bit about chlorine as a disinfectant for public swimming venues.  There is evidence that connects swimming in chlorinated (indoor) pools and asthma, even if it is inconclusive.  But more important, there is the growing consensus that chlorine is inadequate as the basis for a pool sanitation program, not least because of its ineffectiveness in killing pathogens like Cryptosporidium parvum.

A broader view of chlorine and RWIs points to the need to supplement the role of chlorine in pool sanitation or disinfection.  Whether or not we can “prove” that swimming in chlorinated pools may cause asthma should not be a reason to delay transforming the sanitation programs of public pools to reduce chloramine and other disinfection byproduct production, and at the same time make the pools safer for swimmers.

We are now almost half way through the comment period on the Regulatory Program Administration module.  Given the happy distractions of the holidays, maybe you should put this into your tickle file for early January 2012.  The deadline for public comments on this module is February 5, 2012, and you will need some time to think about how it affects your operations.

About the Regulatory Module

The Regulatory module is really a set of guidelines for how to set up an aquatics regulatory program, and in broad terms, what should be included in it (the other modules provide detailed guidelines on specific issues).  The MAHC describes the module as “the framework around which an effective model aquatic health code is built.”

In other words, and this is the important point, this module is where local and state jurisdictions can get guidance on how to build an effective regulatory program.

We think this is pretty important for aquatics professionals to know about and review.  The topics it covers include staffing, training, permitting, and recordkeeping requirements, as well as critical factors like enforcement and fees. One important item recommended in these guidelines is the establishment of an Aquatic Health Advisory Committee that would advise and support the Authority Having Jurisdiction (AHJ) in the implementation of the code.   These will have direct impacts on your operation.

You can see more about this module in the abstract about it, and in more detail in the PDF you can download from the module review schedule page (both of these pages cover all of the modules).

What Would This Module Do In Practice?

You can get a flavor of how this module might be implemented in this proposed standard for “Plan Submittal”:

Section 4.1.1.2: No person shall begin to construct a new AQUATIC FACILITY or shall alter or renovate an existing AQUATIC FACILITY without first having the construction plans detailing the construction or renovation submitted to and approved by the AHJ.

And later, in Section 4.1.2.3.9:

The technical specifications for each AQUATIC VENUE shall include information on each piece of equipment associated with that venue.

This kind of review already exists in many (perhaps most) jurisdictions, but in the context of MAHC, it will include a much wider standard range of factors.  And as you can see, the requirements are highly detailed.

The recommended language goes on to define compliance and enforcement requirements, and potential fees that might be charged for various elements of the process.  It also defines the composition of the Aquatic Health Advisory Committee, which is where the industry would be represented in the process.

This is Mission Critical

This module is where the rubber hits the road.  It is one thing to discuss best practices for sanitation, life safety, and risk management.  It is entirely another to talk about how all these guidelines might become requirements.

As always, we are interested in your comments!

Now, with the advent of the MAHC recommendation of ozone or UV for secondary disinfection of public pools, the maintenance of the pool will change.  This change is going to be for the better, both because there will be fewer unwanted chemical byproducts and because the disinfection program will be more effective in combating chlorine-resistant micro-organisms like cryptosporidium.

The question is, are we ready for it?

Traditional Training to Manage Pool Water

We decided to take a quick look into how ozone and other non-chlorine sanitizers are treated in current training regimens.  We did not do an exhaustive study of this, but just looked through the National Recreation and Park Association (NRPA) Candidate Handbook (PDF in new window) which gives an overview of the test requirements for their Aquatic Facility Operator certification.

The NRPA is one of the most respected organizations for its aquatics program.  There is nothing easy about passing its 3-hour certification exam, which covers mechanical concepts, pool systems equipment, repair and maintenance issues, pool water chemistry, and risk management. This extensive body of knowledge provided the basis for traditional pool management.  When applied rigorously, these practices provided sanitary pool conditions, most of the time.

In the practice questions in the NRPA’s Candidate Handbook, there is one asking about what ozone is.  This is a good start.  A thorough answer to this question would indicate that the candidate understands how ozone can supply reliable disinfection working in combination with traditional practices.

Beyond the Basics:  Ozone and Pool Chemistry

Perhaps in that full 3-hour exam, there’s a lot more about ozone pool sanitation.  We certainly think there should be.  The emerging MAHC water quality guidelines point to some of the issues aquatics pros should know about:

• The kinds of venues where ozone is mandatory, rather than just recommended.
• Ozone equipment sizing, installation and maintenance.
• Control systems, including integration with chlorine feeds and monitors (the NRPA test covers ORP already, so the concepts are in place).

Beyond this, aquatics professionals will need to understand how ozone interacts with their traditional chemicals.  What kind of dosing is required when ozone is in place?  What kinds of contaminants are NOT eliminated by ozone?  How will ozone affect water chemistry testing and desired chemical profile?

In our experience, the answers to these questions depend on specific pool system parameters.  But there is clearly scope for a general introduction of these issues and concepts into an aquatics curriculum.  We look forward to helping the industry define these concepts.

Please Share Your Thoughts

This is a forward-looking post, and we know many of you are also thinking about the issue we are raising here.  What do you think about this?

The 3 documents are highly related, covering the same materials in somewhat different perspectives.  The documents correspond to ‘code’, ‘annex’ and ‘comments’ sections.

The Code

The brief code document is organized around the content outline of Section 1.0 of the code, so it is a very helpful summary of the background, purpose and direction of the code. It describes the code as a set of recommendations for a set of uniform nationwide standards (model performance standards) for aquatic venues operations and management.  Among other things, it makes provision for the ongoing revision of the code.

The Annex

The Annex provides a deeper discussion of the rationale and some of the sources of the code, including footnotes and a bibliography.  It adds to the summary of Section 1.0 with a description of Section 2.0, where key elements of the code are described, including the MAHC structure and the role of Annexes (annexes are not part of the code; they are included to help in “understanding and applying” the code).

The Comments

This document summarizes salient comments made on these opening portions of the code, with the response of the MAHC committees included.  Please note that the comments period on these sections closed on December 9, 2008, so the current documents reflect aging commentary and the internal responses of the MAHC staff and committees.

Please Let Us Know Your Thoughts

As always, we are interested in your thoughts about the evolving MAHC.  Get in touch.

This post is an overview of the module based on the PDF published for public comment.  Please visit the CDC site to download the PDF in order to make your own thorough review.

Summary of Content

This relatively brief module includes draft standards for the physical plant facilities for bathers’ hygiene. The standards specify the structure and components’ characteristics, as well as their maintenance and operations.

Within the MAHC topic matrix, this module includes:

In 4.0 Design Standards and Construction

4.10:   Hygiene Facilities (Bathhouse):  General; Location: Bathhouse Design; Fixture Requirements; Suits and Towels; Foot Baths; Sharps

In 5.0  Operation and Maintenance

5.10:  Hygiene Facilities (Bathhouse):  General; Location; Bathhouse Design; Fixture Requirements; Suits and Towels

The physical plant components in these draft standards include quite detailed descriptions of the number, function, surface type and location of hygiene facilities required for each venue.  Both plumbing and non-plumbing fixtures are specified.  An extensive list of requirements for diaper changing stations is included.

The operations section of this module refers often to “EPA-approved” sanitizers used in cleaning surfaces, shared equipment, plumbing or shared towels and suits. Many of the cleaning and sanitizing routines are stipulated for daily repetition.  Some of these standards refer to other kinds of operational matters, like how the rinse showers should be set up.

Please Share Your Comments

We are very interested in your comments on the MAHC in general, or regarding a specific module.  We’d love to hear from you!

This post is a summary of the module based on the PDF published for public review, and is not a replacement for your own review of the module.  But we thought a short version that describes the content and issues in the module would be helpful for those of you who don’t have time for a closer look, or would choose to spend your time on a different module.

An Abstract

The authors of the Facility Maintenance module supply an abstract that succinctly describes the content:

Aquatic facility operation and maintenance is a critical component of maintaining health and safety. Past outbreaks have commonly found operation and maintenance lapses to be critical contributors to disease outbreaks and injuries. The Facility Maintenance and Operation Module lays the foundation for operational improvement by containing requirements for:

1) Closure and reopening guidance for long and short term closures.

2) Comprehensive plans for preventive maintenance, equipment inventorying, and development of an operations manual to be maintained at the facility.

3) Reducing and mitigating excessive glare and reflection on the pool surface through design and adjustments to windows and lighting equipment.

4) Comprehensive daily records of pool operation & maintenance and of operational items inspected daily.

Summary of Content in Context

The Facility Maintenance module contains draft standards that would be part of sections 5 and 6 in the final MAHC.  The main sections include:

5.4:  Recreational Water Venue Operations and Facility Maintenance:  Closures and Reopenings; Preventive Maintenance Plan

5.6:  Indoor/Outdoor Environment:  Lighting; Electrical; Heating; Plumbing; Solid Waste; Decks; Aquatic Facility Maintenance

5.12:  Specific Venues – Special Requirements:  Water Slides; Wave Pools; Moveable Floors; Bulkheads; Spraygrounds; Wading Pools

6.4:  Facility Management:  Operations [recordkeeping]

The contents of each of these topics is somewhat detailed.  These standards address physical plant structure and maintenance, including documentation of these.

For example, these standards would require each venue to keep a written description of all equipment components of the physical plant, including information on the manufacturer and service dates, with operations manuals available for each piece of equipment.

There is extensive documentation and recordkeeping in this draft.  Venues would have to have a general operations manual covering all aspects of venue management, including chemical data, operation and maintenance instructions, fecal/vomit contamination response plan, and so forth.  In addition, operating records would be required at a detailed level for many procedures and events, and would have to be kept for a minimum of 3 years.

Some parts of these standards are very specific.  For example, electrical equipment requirements make many references to external codes, including the NEC, and cover a wide range of circumstances.  Other parts are quite broad:  “Required fencing, barriers, and gates shall be maintained at all times.”

In sum, there is a lot here.  Most of it will be familiar to venue operators, but remember:  it is being proposed as part of a code that might be adopted by a public health agency near you!

What do You Think?

We are very interested in your comments about this module, or about the MAHC in general.  Leave us a note.

Module Comment Period and Context

Each module will be submitted to the public for comment for a period of 60 days, followed by editing and revisions. At this point (early November 2011), seven modules have been released for the first public comment, and seven remain to be released.

When all the modules have been edited for comments, a complete draft of the MAHC will be released so the public can see the parts of the code in context.  To help you understand the draft modules, which are fragments of the whole, each module includes a topic outline of the MAHC, and uses the outline topic numbering to show how the specific draft standards fit in.  Undoubtedly, there will be areas of overlap and possibly conflicting concepts, but this organization will make it easy to see them.

The MAHC topic outline is included below for reference.

Review Guidelines from the MAHC

Use the Word document comment form that you can find on the CDC website here (scroll down to find it).  You can download the form, enter your comments, and then either mail or email the document to the MAHC Coordinator.

The CDC asks reviewers who are part of a group or organization to consolidate comments as much as possible.

Use the specific section numbers in the draft document to make your comments on that section.  The section numbers may change in subsequent drafts, so be prepared to adapt accordingly.

For your information, the MAHC grading system, A through C, is used in the proposed standards to help you understand their context.

Grade A:  Practice supported by science/research/data.
Grade B:  Generally accepted practice not supported by science/research/data.
Grade C:  No generally accepted practice.  Proposed language not yet supported by science/research/data.

Add your own detailed comments about the code in the form provided.  If you have questions about the review process, you can contact the MAHC coordinator at MAHC@cdc.gov.

MAHC Overall Topic Outline

1.0 Preface
2.0 User Guide
3.0 Definitions
4.0 Design Standards and Construction
5.0 Facility Maintenance and Operation
6.0 Policies and Management
7.0 Index
8.0 Annexes9.0 Summary of Changes

Copy Us on your Comments, Please

We would love to hear your thoughts about these modules as they roll out.  Our own expertise is expressed through our participation on the Water Quality Technical Committee (our VP Beth Hamil serves on that committee), but we want to know more about all aspects of the code.  Your thoughts would be greatly appreciated.

To begin your review, here is the link to the CDC module review table for more information, including PDFs for download.  (Some of you may have received the announcement email from the CDC, but it included at least one bad link, so here’s another way to get to the information.)

Revised MAHC Draft Module Review Process

Some of you may have read our earlier post on the MAHC module review process.  It did include discrete steps, each of which had to be completed before the next could begin.  Now, in an attempt to speed up the process, the CDC is releasing modules “prior to their being fully complete and formatted.  These drafts will continue to be edited and revised while being posted for public comment.”

This obviously introduces the possibility that your comments will be made obsolete due to internal changes during the review process.  However, we urge you to press ahead with your comments anyway.  You never know if your points will be the same as the internal review produces.

Once Again:  Risk Management

Another reminder for you:  the Risk Management/Safety module that was released to public comment a few weeks ago will close to public comment on November 18.  Please take a look at that one also.

What are Your Thoughts on the Modules in Comment?

We will follow up on the Facility Maintenance and Hygiene Facilities modules in later posts.  We’d love to hear your comments on them!