M A I NLI NE newspapers
Problem with pump station brought to Jackson Township Water Authority Vol. 98 No. 6
By Allie Garver
of Mainline Newspapers
An issue with the pump station in Mundys Corner required a lengthy conversation at the Jan. 22 Jackson Township Water Authority meeting. According to foreman Fred Meier, he had Hemlock Valley and P&M Pumps, who put the original pump in, take a look at the system to find the problem. “I kept throwing the breaker in the electric box,” said Meier. “The pump would run its cycle, and then at the end of it, it would kick off.” Meier said that he “cut the pumps back again,” after P&M Pumps looked at the problem. “They’re working OK right now,” said Meier. “It’s working like it’s supposed to be.” According to Meier, it takes about three hours to pump water into the tank and fill it. He added that normally it took four to five hours, so the authority is “still ahead of the game with about three hours of pumping time,” and it’s not blowing the breaker.
Nanty Glo, Pa.
“Everything seems to be working by cutting that pump back, we had to cut the valve back,” said Meier. Meier was told by a representative from P&M Pumps that the only way to keep the RPMs down on the pump’s motor is to cut back the time. “That doesn’t make sense to me,” said board member John Wallet. “The old pump was identical. Everything was the same. It ran since 1982 just fine. Now, all of a sudden, we gotta throttle it back because it’s drawing too much power and it throws the breaker.” Meier agreed, and said he doesn’t think it makes sense either. He explained that when he spoke with Hemlock Valley, the suggestion was made to change some of the internal parts of the pump. “A 40 horsepower motor, he told us, in order to bring the amps down with that pump,” Meier said. He added that he and laborer Willy Evans even checked the impeller size because that could have been a problem, but they
Thursday, February 7, 2019
were 10 inches, just like the last one. “Everything was spec’d exactly the same as the old pump that we just took out,” said Meier. “The only way to bring the RPMs down on the pump itself is to cut it back.” Meier said that he received two bids from two different companies, who both feel that the only way to bring the RPMs down to what they should be running at is by going with a 40 horsepower motor and changing the breakers, or change the conductors. Meier asked what engineer Pat Mulcahy allowed, from a budget standpoint, for the pump station maintenance. “What we showed in the budget for George Wyse was $7,000 for a new pump upgrade and $25,000 for piping upgrades in there, which would be $32,000 total,” said Mulcahy. Mulcahy also doesn’t understand why the new pump is drawing more amps, when it should be run-
SEE PUMP, PAGE 4A
email: email@example.com www.mainline-news.com
Newsstand Price 75¢
Kalyssa Walsh and Tressa Fatula warm up before their game against Windber Feb. 4 at Blacklick Valley. Photo by Allie Garver.
422 project update given to BVMA
By Allie Garver
of Mainline Newspapers
Sydney McAndrews, Alivia Lucas and Sara Muriceak meet up with each other at Bishop Carroll’s Snowflake Dance, held Jan. 26. Photo by Kristin Baudoux.
The Jan. 30 Blacklick Valley Municipal Authority (BVMA) meeting brought about an update on the 422 East wastewater project. The funding process and eventual construction has been in the works for over five years due to several setbacks. But late last year, the Pennsylvania Infrastructure Investment Authority (PENNVEST) offered funding to the authority, which they accepted. Since accepting the funding, the authority, engineer Rich Wray and solicitor Bill Barbin have been working to complete the necessary documents through PENNVEST and the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation (PennDOT). According to Wray, PENNVEST requested that some changes be made prior to the final document due date of Jan. 28. He said that one request was for PENNVEST to be taken off the documents as a co-insurer, which was done. They also asked for a date change for the final payment request. Originally, the final payment date was scheduled for
SEE PROJECT, PAGE 5A
Supervisors approve outdoor wood furnace ordinance By Allie Garver
of Mainline Newspapers
A new ordinance in Jackson Township regarding the regulation of outdoor furnaces sparked a conversation at the Jan. 31 supervisors meeting. Ordinance No. 182 will regulate the installation and use of outdoor furnaces and the emission of smoke from building heating systems. Originally, the ordinance was proposed at the Nov. 29, 2018, meeting, but it was met with
‘What we’re really looking at is making sure you don’t unreasonably disturb the neighbor’
some public backlash. After a lengthy meeting and conversation that evening, the supervisors and solicitor Bill Barbin went back to the drawing board to rewrite some sections of the proposed ordinance. They took into consideration the suggestions from the public who attended the meeting and better composed the ordinance. At the most recent meeting, residents still had questions about the ordinance. One resident questioned if the wording of “outdoor wood furnace” meant that he could burn exclusively coal, since “wood”
is in the name. “They’re described as outdoor wood furnaces,” said supervisor Bruce Baker. “But, burning coal doesn’t make you exempt from the ordinance,” said Barbin. “The reason that that definition was changed is, if y’all remember, is people commented that they had bucket-a-day stoves, old oil furnaces, [and] whatnots in their garages and they didn’t want those regulated,” explained Baker. “So, that’s why the old definition was taken out, to exclude any of those things.”
Baker added that all of the comments made during the November 2018 meeting were addressed. In order to better update the community, Barbin listed all of the changes that were made between the original proposed ordinance and the ordinance the supervisors planned on approving that night. The ordinance needed to be created in order to help township residents who had issues with neighboring properties blowing smoke from their outdoor wood furnace directly into a neighbor’s home.
“What we’re really looking at is making sure you don’t unreasonably disturb the neighbor,” Barbin said. One major problem the residents had was that combustible items had to be kept 20 feet away from the outdoor furnace, which was taken out. The original ordinance included that vegetation, except grass not exceeding four inches in height, also needed to be kept away from the furnace. “We just took that out entirely,” said Barbin. “Partly because people had a lot of
SEE OUTDOOR, PAGE 4A