The one about Chloramines, Breakpoint, and Crystal Lagoons

In this episode, Rudy Stankowitz dives deep into the complexities of pool chemistry, particularly focusing on chloramines and breakpoint chlorination. He shares personal anecdotes, discusses industry events, and answers listener questions about lagoon pools versus traditional pools. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding water treatment processes and the misconceptions surrounding chloramines in swimming pools.

takeaways

• Chloramines are a persistent issue in pool maintenance.
• There is no singular solution to eliminate chloramines.
• Proper water chemistry and airflow are crucial for pool health.
• Lagoon pools operate differently than traditional pools.
• Breakpoint chlorination is often misunderstood in the industry.
• Organic chloramines are more challenging to eliminate than inorganic ones.
• Superchlorination can sometimes worsen combined chlorine issues.
• Understanding the chemistry behind pool maintenance is essential.
• Municipal water treatment can impact pool water quality.
• Effective pool management requires ongoing education and adaptation.

Sound Bites

• "It's a matter of dollars."
• "Check it out. Phenomenal."
• "Somebody screwed up the math."

Chapters

00:00
Holiday Greetings and Reflections

01:21
Chloramines: Understanding the Challenge

03:10
Upcoming Speaking Engagements and Industry Events

10:03
Personal Experiences: Dining and Ghost Hunting

12:53
Listener Questions: Natural vs. Traditional Pools

20:51
Breakpoint Chlorination: Myths and Realities

40:33
Closing Thoughts and Future Episodes

Transcript

Rudy Stankowitz (00:00)
Welcome to Friday, and this is no ordinary Friday.

I've got a lot that I wanted to talk about.

I want to start though by plagiarizing the heck out of a friend who put something up on LinkedIn

it ties into what I want to speak on.

This is from Dewey Case of the...

counsel for the Model Aquatic Health Code. Dewey says, my almost three decades of running pools, chloramines have been a constant discussion point, their cause, their significance. Do this to eliminate, do that to eliminate. The industry has constantly looked for the silver bullet to eliminate them. Spoilers, in his best River Song voice, the silver bullet does not exist.

There is no singular step, action, device, or process to remove chloramines. Sorry folks, if you're looking for an easy answer, there isn't one. The removal of chloramines is a series of steps, actions, devices, and processes working in unison to remove and prevent chloramines in no particular order. Proper water chemistry, proper airflow with source capturing, including air exchanges,

adequate chlorination practices, not necessarily less Cl2, the use of full-flow secondary treatment systems such as ozone, UV, or AOP, the use of product-based treatment systems like chlorine dioxide.

properly designed systems that exceed minimum requirements, healthy water replenishment practices, the use of easily accessible on-deck rinse showers, managing and practices focusing on better hygiene, the use of a sparger system in the filtration systems. There's your roadmap for prevention and elimination of chloramines. Right there. It's not hard. It's a matter of dollars.

making sure you have the right physical systems in place, operator diligence and people management.

So that's what Dewey shared on December 13th, so a little bit over a week ago.

Then one of the more, and there were several very good responses to that, but one of the more notable responses came from Samantha Spurdudo.

She's the regional account executive for Patek Pool Equipment.

And her response said, informative post from an industry friend. Thanks for the mention and the opportunity to educate others. I'm looking forward to my speaking session on indoor air quality and trichloramines in January. So I'm going to assume she's referring to the AOAP show, Association of Aquatic Professionals, or the Nespa show.

the Northeast show, the Atlantic City show. Those are the shows that typically happen in January. Me, where will I be? Time to make my rounds. I will be speaking at the Western show and looking forward to seeing all of my friends out on the West Coast and anybody from the East Coast and in between, who's traveled there.

Hope to see you all there. Grab a cup of coffee, talk pools, talk industry, and talk in my discussion something that's, might not be expecting to hear from me.

Symposium and Tabletop Expo that's in March 23rd and 26th. That's in Houston, Texas. I will be speaking there on exactly what you do.

expect I should be speaking of or speaking on if you know me.

So come to Long Beach, California. Let's hang out at the Western Show. Come to Houston. Let's hang out at the chlorine Institute's technology symposium if you've never been to that one. Come to both of them. And of course, as always, you will be able to find me at the Florida show, the Orlando show, the everything under the sun show in Orlando. I will be there.

as pedestrian, but it is likely that you will see me from time to time in the booths of one of the many sponsors of the Talking Pools podcast. Blu-ray XL, Revved Up Apparel, Aqua Star Pool Products.

Jack's Magic Products.

Lamott Company.

C-MAC if they're there. I think they're there. I'll be in the C-MAC booth if they're there.

Buffer zone, if they have a table there, I'll be in that booth as well.

Rudy Stankowitz AI (04:18)
the Western Show, I'm going to try to spend time in the California Pool Association booth. I don't think they do the Florida Show.

Rudy Stankowitz (04:25)
and of course, my friends over at Pool Magazine. And yes, you know what? You will see me in the Aqua Magazine booth as well, because as you know, I do have a monthly column in Aqua that I absolutely enjoy writing and hopefully you enjoy reading, I will be at that booth as well. So I'll be making my rounds at the Florida show.

Come see me.

Now, before I jump into pool chemistry, I want to take a minute to set the table for you. I've had a couple of interesting weeks here. Last week was my anniversary and my wife and I, normally we go to Manhattan and in Manhattan we go to this restaurant called Butter, which is owned by chef Alex Garnaschelli. Amazing experience, always absolutely amazing food. If you have not been there, go there. It is an experience.

But this year it was booked. How dare she? So we flipped gears and we went to another restaurant, one I've been wanting to try. It's called the Red Rooster, it's in Harlem. This is owned by Chef Marcus Samuelson. And it did not disappoint. my God. I had the oxtail, it was off the fucking chain. The music, jazz.

The ambiance, You know, it just, the whole experience takes you somewhere and it's somewhere wonderful. So if you are ever in Manhattan, there are two now, three actually, or four restaurants that I frequent, but Butter, Alex Garnaschelli's place, definitely make your way into Harlem. Find the Red Rooster.

Check it out. Phenomenal.

After that, we shot up into Connecticut. Why? Well...

We had to go visit a friend. And that friend we had to go visit was none other than Annabelle. That's right, Annabelle from the Conjuring movies. We stayed the night in Ed and Lorraine Warren's house. I know some of you know that I do ghost hunting stuff on the side, my hobby.

as well as my horror movie addiction. This is kind of right up my alley.

And I went there, my wife and I, with, well, one of my childhood friends, Butchy Nordenberg, his plus one, Jen, and then one of Joy's cousins,

we went there and we spent the night and we set up ghost hunting equipment all over the house. And I have to tell you, you know, what sets this stuff off is stray electrical charges, stray energy. Some things create an electrostatic field and if the field is broken,

alarm goes off, some things detect an electrostatic field, and that's basically how this stuff works. So what I can tell you is that the equipment was extremely active from the moment we set it up all the way up until 2 a.m. and then dead stop. Silence. Weird, right? Never been someplace that's been so active before. Now, whether you buy into the whole ghost thing or not, you do have to buy into the fact that

We have energy. People have energy. And that it's also known that energy cannot be destroyed. So that energy has to go somewhere. So whether it's a stray ghost or just a stray charge, who knows? It was there. In that, we had four hours access, unsupervised access, to the Warren's Museum where they keep all their creepy demonic stuff. All the things that have been possessed, including Annabelle.

We did a bunch of recordings. We have a bunch of info. We have a bunch of video. I have to go through the whole thing. There's hours and hours and hours of it. But I can tell you some of the EVPs that we got that we listened to. Thank God I couldn't hear this stuff in real time. Otherwise I might have run out of there screaming like a little girl because I'll tell you. Freaky does not cover it.

Rudy Stankowitz AI (12:56)
going to share a brief clip of that. Now this is not a recording on a spirit box. This is not white noise. This is just the actual voice recording with me asking questions. After that, I promise you we will talk about swimming pools. But let me know if you can hear any voices or sounds ⁓ other than me and my crew here.

Rudy Stankowitz AI (14:09)
Grunts and growls following my questions, but no recognizable words or language.

Rudy Stankowitz (14:14)
Anyway,

You guys can always go look on my Facebook page paranormal recon That's paranormal recon. It has it's not the most active page in the world, but I do post several things a year and it's all of my ghost hunting expeditions everywhere from brand castle in Romania to the valley of the kings in Egypt

through Jim Morrison's grave to Lizzie Borden's house. Now the Warrens and then there's a whole bunch of other stuff in between. So go check that out. Anyway, pool stuff. That's what we're here for. I know shut up Rudy talk pools. That's why we come to see you. I got it.

I want to address right off the bat a listener question. This one comes from Deborah. Deborah says, listened to last week's episode, the natural pools versus traditional pools conversation. Okay, that was the throwback Tuesday episode. posted the conversation actually from a year prior, but definitely a good talk, a lot of arguing and you know, on the verge of a fight, but don't let that stop you from going back and checking it out. And

Like many of you that did listen, it got her thinking about those lagoon style pools that are being built in Florida and large developments. You know the ones I'm talking about, the ones that cover acres and acres of area. Her question is this,

lagoon pools operating like the BioNova natural pools we had discussed? Are they relying on biofiltration or

Are they something entirely different?

Well, Deborah, let me lay it out straight for you. This is going to be the real talk version, not what the marketing brochure says, not the way the marketing brochure explains it. So when people look at a crystal lagoon, one of the first things they ask is, where's the chlorine? Or,

How can that much water be safe?

And those are fair questions if you're thinking about this like a traditional swimming pool. But Crystal Lagoons does not treat water the way a traditional pool does.

idea of a constant uniform disinfectant residual throughout the entire body of water. That assumption that everything is always mixed, always at the same part per million, that's a pool mindset. Crystal Lagoon uses a different model. What they describe in their own patents and documentation is disinfection by controlled pulses, not constant saturation. So in practical terms,

That means disinfectants are applied strategically, periodically, and in specific locations instead of just everywhere all the time. Now, disinfectants are absolutely being used. There is no mystery there. Their patents reference maintaining an oxidation reduction potential or ORP at or above 500 millivolts, but not continuously. The duration that ORP is held

depends on the water temperature and is managed by an algorithm over a multi-day cycle. That tells us two things right away. One, chemistry is active and intentional. Two, time and contact matter more here than a fixed part per million number. That's a very different way of thinking if you grew up in the pool world. Now, people who want to jump straight to chlorine

Let's talk about it. Crystal Lagoon's does not publish a simple chemical recipe. You won't find a sheet that says maintain X parts per million free chlorine at all times. What you will find are references to disinfectant agents, oxidants, and microbiocides.

conventional swimming pools, sometimes described as around 1%. But that's a claim, not a regulatory standard. The key point is this, they are not relying on

a permanent residual everywhere in the lagoon. Instead, use localized dosing, targeted treatment, and timed disinfection events. And

where distribution really matters. Crystal Lagoon describes a system of strategically placed injectors and sensors all tied to a centralized control platform. Water quality is monitored remotely, in real time, and dosing decisions are made based on data.

But even more important than that is zoning. Their patents clearly describe different zones within the lagoon system. There are treatment or sedimentation zones where disinfectants are applied to achieve specific CT values. Again, that's contact time CT values within defined windows like achieving a contact time of 42 every 72 hours. That's drinking water language, by the way. That's not pool slang.

Rudy Stankowitz AI (18:50)
So they are allowed to have up to 42 units of X as long as the rolling average over 72 hours stays below that. 42 being the measure concentration and of course 72 hours being time.

Rudy Stankowitz (19:03)
Then there are bathing zones where disinfection can be applied locally and temporarily at higher concentrations without requiring the entire lagoon to sit at that level. So this is not one giant bathtub. It's a managed system with different chemical expectations in different areas.

Now let's talk about the part that is very clearly documented. Flocculation. Crystal Lagoon explicitly describes the use of flocculant agents combined with ultrasonic energy to cause fine particles, microorganisms, and suspended solids to clump together. Those particles settle to the bottom where they're removed by bottom suction.

That water is filtered on the side stream and then returned to lagoon. That's not turnover filtration. That's selective solids removal. And yes, flocculants are chemicals.

So when somebody says there are no chemicals, that's simply not accurate. This is engineered water. Now, in at least one project related environmental document, sodium hypochlorite is mentioned as part of the site's

specifically for treating stored desalinated water.

that does not conclusively prove it's what's used everywhere in the lagoon, but it does confirm that traditional disinfectants are part of the broader system. So let's land this plane. Crystal Lagoon absolutely uses chemistry. They use disinfectants, they use oxidants, they use flocculants. What they don't do is apply chemistry the way a pool does. They also don't not apply chemistry the way a natural pool does.

They rely on timing, location, contact, control, not constant residuals. And whether you love that model or hate it, you can't evaluate it honestly using pool assumptions. You have to understand how the system is designed to work, not how we're used to working. That's the real conversation.

Deborah, thanks for the question. I hope that clears that up just a little bit. And then Deborah adds that she can't wait or she's hoping to actually get to be able to check one of these out and peek around in the pump room. All I can say is me too.

Rudy Stankowitz (21:09)
Okay, let's jump into the next listener question. This one comes from Jackson out of Kenosha and Jackson asks, when is the best time of year to replace the pool filter and are those AquaStar filters really any good? Great question, Jackson, and I'm going to answer both parts together because they actually belong together. First, the best time to replace a filter is before you need it, but it's also now, not in the middle of the swim season,

Most filters don't get replaced because you plan ahead. They get replaced because pressure spikes, the tank starts weeping, the band cracks, cartridges finally wave the white flag, usually in June or July when everybody's busy and nobody has the time to deal with it. So replacing a filter now in the cold down season means you get to do the install right. Clean plumbing, proper unions, correct flow direction, no rush.

None of that, we'll come back later and fix that shit. And just as important, the filter gets a break in period under normal water conditions, not thrown straight into the fire, sunscreen, soup, pollen, 90 degree weather, all of that. That timing matters more than people think. So now, your second part of your question, are those AquaStar filters really any good? Short answer, yeah. And here's why I'm comfortable saying that. I have an AquaStar pipeline filter on my own pool.

And I've had it there for three years now. No leaks, no clamp failures, no fighting to get the lid off in the heat, no awkward canister taking over my equipment pad. The pipeline filter, it's different by design. water moves straight through instead of fighting gravity and sharp turns. That means lower head loss, better flow, and less stress on your pump, heater, salt system, whatever, piping.

From a service standpoint, which is the lens I always use, this system is the filter that I've had to clean the least out of any filter I've ever had on a pool, just simply because of the way the debris hits the element inside. You're getting full coverage. The entire element is used Do ever take a cartridge out of a filter and see that only the bottom portion is dirty or only one side has the dirt on it?

Rudy Stankowitz AI (23:23)
Remember in those quad filters, how does the pile of schmutz accumulate at the bottom between the four cartridges?

Rudy Stankowitz (23:29)
That's because of the way the water is coming in. It only hits that one side of the element, so you really never get 100 % of it.

So the way the water's coming into this system, it wraps around the entire cartridge, which means you have much, much longer filter runs, which in layman's terms means your cleaning periods are further apart. That's if you are cleaning based off of every manufacturer's recommendation when the filter rises eight to 10 PSI above your normal operating pressure. That's what we should be going by. I know some of you have it scheduled once a month, once a week. That's your protocol of care. That's awesome.

have at it, but as far as when it needs to be cleaned, it's when the pressure gauge raises the 8 to 10 psi above the normal operating pressure. anyway, getting back to your question, timing and equipment choice. The answer is really clear. If you're going to replace a filter, doing it now desperation. choosing intentionally,

the AquaStar pipeline is a filtered design for long-term ownership, not emergency replacement. So again, best type to replace the filter. Now, before it becomes a problem. And yeah, the AquaStar filters, the pipeline filters, they're legit. I wouldn't say it if I didn't have one on my own pool. Great question. Jackson, thank you. Everybody, keep them coming.

Rudy Stankowitz (24:51)
then we'll be back talking chloramines and shock.

or breakpoint or super chlorination, whatever word you like to use. We're going to talk about all of it. Give us just a minute.

Breakpoint chlorination is one of the most cited concepts in swimming pool operation and one of the most consistently misapplied. Hear me out.

While breakpoint is a real chemical phenomenon, its use in pools is often based on incorrect assumptions about nitrogen chemistry, measurement units, and the nature of combined chlorine present in real world swimming environments. Understanding where breakpoint chlorination works and where it does not requires separating

inorganic chloramine chemistry from organic nitrogen chemistry and recognizing how a unit conversion error became institutionalized as a rule of thumb.

Breakpoint chlorination originates from drinking water and wastewater treatment. these systems, is a defined contaminant measured directly and expressed as ammonia nitrogen, PPM as nitrogen. When chlorine is added to water containing ammonia, it reacts sequentially to form inorganic chloramines, monochloramine, dichloramine, and trichloramine.

As chlorine dosage increases, these chloramines are oxidized and destroyed. Once all reactive ammonia derived nitrogen is consumed, additional chlorine produces a free chlorine residual. That inflection point is the break point. The classical stoichiometric relationship, approximately 7.6 parts chlorine.

per one part ammonia is explicitly based on ammonia measured as nitrogen, not as chlorine equivalents. This distinction is not optional, it's foundational to the chemistry. Breakpoint chlorination therefore is a process designed to eliminate inorganic chloramines formed from ammonia under controlled conditions with limited competing oxidant demand.

Swimming pools do not typically measure ammonia nitrogen. Instead, operators measure free chlorine, FC, and total chlorine, TC. And we calculate the combined chlorine level as the difference between the two. Total chlorine minus free chlorine equals combined chlorine. These measurements are reported in part per million as Cl2, which is

the same units used for free chlorine. This is where the industry error begins. Combined chlorine in pools is not ammonia nitrogen. It is a chlorine equivalent measurement of chlorinated nitrogen compounds. Treating combined chlorine as though it were ammonia nitrogen skips a required unit conversion

misrepresents the amount of nitrogen actually present.

The molecular weight disturbance between chlorine, chlorine almost equal to 70 and nitrogen almost equal to 14

that parts per million as chlorine values are roughly five times larger than the equivalent part per million as nitrogen values.

invalidates the direct application of ammonia-based breakpoint ratios to

combined chlorine measurements. Follow me here. Compounding the error further, combined chlorine already represents nitrogen that has already reacted with chlorine. One chlorine atom has already been consumed in forming that chloramine. Applying a full ammonia oxidation dose to an already chlorinated compound is chemically inconsistent.

So the commonly taught rule, raise the free chlorine level to 10 times the combined chlorine level is often justified by referencing breakpoint chlorination theory. The explanation usually cites the 7.6 to one chlorine to ammonia relationship and then inflates it for safety. This reasoning is flawed for multiple reasons. First, the 7.6 to one ratio applies only when ammonia is measured as nitrogen.

Combined chlorine is measured as chlorine, not nitrogen. There is no factor of five conversion embedded in combined chlorine. That conversion was already applied when the chlorine test was reported. Second, combined chlorine already contains a chlorine atom bound to nitrogen. Treating combined chlorine as though it were raw ammonia ignores that prior reaction. Third, there is no chemical basis whatsoever for a magic 10 times multiplier.

Higher chlorine concentrations do accelerate oxidation kinetics, but

Kinetics are not stoichiometric. Increasing chlorine speeds reactions. does not change the amount of oxidant required to complete them. This result is the 10 times rule significantly overstates the amount of chlorine theoretically required to oxidize ammonia derived chloramines when starting from a combined chlorine measurement.

so in layman's terms, somebody screwed up the math. We all ran with it. And everyone now is using a tremendous amount more chlorine to achieve breakpoint than is absolutely necessary. How's that for real talk?

Breakpoint chlorination is effective only for inorganic chloramines. Inorganic chloramines form when chlorine reacts with free ammonia or ammonium ions. These compounds are small, structurally simple, and chemically accessible. Their nitrogen-chlorine bonds can be cleaved oxidatively by free available chlorine, allowing the system to progress through the breakpoint curve.

Organic chloramines are fundamentally different. Organic chloramines form when chlorine reacts with nitrogen containing organic compounds such as urea, amino acids, creatinine, proteins, and other bather

constituents. In these compounds, nitrogen is embedded with carbon-based molecular structures. The resulting nitrogen-chlorine bonds are more stable

often sterically shielded and do not follow classical breakpoint behavior. Most persistent combined chlorine in swimming pools is not ammonia-based chloramine. is overwhelmingly organic in nature and often

chlorourea or related compounds. These do not collapse neatly under breakpoint conditions. So what's the harm in somebody peeing in the pool? Well, guess what? You release urea in urine in that are these different byproducts of protein metabolism that can form chloramines with chlorine that we can't get rid of in breakpoint chlorination. Not only that,

This type of chloramine is also more prone to becoming a carcinogenic disinfection byproduct. So we don't want them. Why shower before you get in the pool? Guess what? We also secrete urea through our skin and perspiration, creating or lending to this same problem.

compounds.

do not collapse neatly under breakpoint conditions. This is why super chlorination can sometimes create more combined

of eliminating it. Increasing chlorine concentration increases reaction rates, but if the dominant nitrogen species are organic, additional chlorination can simply produce more combined chlorine than destroy it. There's no getting stuck at breakpoint.

So persistent combined chlorine is not due to an incomplete breakpoint. It's due to compounds that oxidize slowly or incompletely. Raising chlorine concentration will always speed up chemical reactions. Superchlorination can be useful, but it's not selective. So depending on what is present in the water, it can reduce combined chlorine or increase it.

When super chlorination is used, in indoor pools, aggressive aeration becomes critical. Running air systems at full capacity helps strip volatile chlorinated compounds and other volatile organic compounds from the water. Without adequate off-gassing, elevated chlorine levels may persist far longer than intended. If chlorine does not decay quickly enough, particularly indoors,

Dechlorinating agents May be required to bring levels back down safely. That does not indicate failure. It indicates that oxidation demand was lower than the applied dose or that volatization pathways were limited.

Breakpoint chlorination requires a disinfectant that delivers free available chlorine capable of cleaving nitrogen-chlorine bonds

Chemicals capable of achieving

breakpoint include chlorine gas, sodium hypochlorite, calcium hypochlorite, lithium hypochlorite. Chlorinated isocyanurates such as dichlor and trichlor release free chlorine, but

cyanuric acid reduces reaction kinetics and distorts breakpoint behavior, especially at higher stabilizer levels. So watch for that mono persulfate, your non chlorine shock, or we call it MPS, potassium, mono persulfate is often used in an attempt to reduce combined chlorine or oxidize organic precursors. MPS cannot achieve breakpoint chlorination. It just can't do it.

It does not release the chlorine and it does not reliably cleave nitrogen-chlorine bonds. It's not strong enough to break the nitrogen-chloride bond.

It may oxidize some organic material, it cannot correct established chloramine chemistry. Complicating the interpretation, MPS registers as combined chlorine on your standard DPD tests. Accurate testing requires the use

of an MPS interference remover ⁓ without it operators misinterpret test results and believe chloramines are present or worsening when the reading reflects oxidizer interference.

So yeah, there are some modern handbooks that attempt to revise breakpoint guidance by targeting a free chlorine level equal to 10 times the combined chlorine concentration rather than adding a tenfold increment. This revision still rests on the same flawed premise. The underlying error remains. The 10 time rule is valid only when starting with ammonia measured in parts per million as nitrogen, not

when starting with combined chlorine measured as parts per million as in chlorine. These approaches also incorrectly suggest that adding less than calculated breakpoint amount may fail to achieve breakpoint. Ignoring the fact that higher chlorine levels merely accelerate reactions, they do not change the stoichiometric requirements.

Breakpoint chlorination is real, but it's narrow in scope. applies to inorganic ammonia derived chloramines measured in nitrogen units treated with free available chlorine. Swimming pools, however, measure combined chlorine in chlorine units and are dominated by organic nitrogen chemistry. So the 10 time rule persists not because it's chemically correct, but because it sometimes produces acceptable outcomes for unrelated reasons.

So understanding that distinction

should reduce unnecessary chemical loading and address chlorine problems with strategies aligned to the actual chemistry in the water. Now, when do we look to treat for chloramines? When do we achieve breakpoint? Only when we have a combined chlorine level. And you have a test for that,

If you're using the drop test, five drops of EPD-1, five drops of EPD-2, that gives you your free chlorine reading. You invert the test block, hold it to the lights of the Northern horizon. Not the aurora borealis. Just hold it North. The reason we hold it North, this type of test where you match color by eye, it's called colorimetric. It's proven that your eye recognizes color best when you are facing North.

So we're going to hold it north at eye level. Find the color, whatever it is. Then we're going to take that third yellow bottle in your test kit, DPD-3. This one is very easy to find in your test kit because it's the one that's probably still full.

Add five drops of that to the vial that already contains DPD 1 and 2, invert it, hold it up again to the lights of the Northern horizon, match the color. If the color got darker, you need to shock your pool.

Is it possible that it's organic chloramines and shocking the pool link gonna do shit? Yeah, but we don't know. You don't have a test to differentiate the two. So the only chance choice you have is to shock your pool with what we just discussed here.

not necessarily 10 times the amount, add a large dose of chlorine, bring the chlorine level up. I don't care what you want to call it, hyperchlorinate, superchlorinate, shock, napalm, whatever, just do it. If you still have a combined chlorine level afterwards, well guess what? Then we know that what we have is organic chloramines and we're only gonna make

problem worse. have to pursue some different means of eliminating those chloramines. And that's where we look at UV, ozone, AOP, things along those lines. Is water replacement a viable option? It could be. It could be. It really depends on what's coming out the tap. I'll tell you a story. This is a true story.

A major university contacted me. They said, hey, Rudy, we're having problems with our pool. We have a handful of patrons. They're getting itchy eyes, itchy skin, red eye. They're complaining. OK. Sounds like a combined chlorine problem, right? Well, this is a university where I had gone and trained the staff on pool maintenance.

So I had a pretty good feeling that they knew what they were doing. Testing their levels, no combined chlorine level showing in the pool. Had them take a sample to a pool store just to double check, no combined chlorine level. Had them use a different test method to double check. Again, no combined chlorine level. So it's a mystery. We do not know why these people have itchy skin and itchy red eyes.

So we have to dig a little bit deeper. I have to ask some more questions because part of what we do in our role as pool service professionals is we play detective.

So I put on my detective hat and I started asking questions. Okay, so we narrow it down. This is a select group of people that this is happening to and it's happening to this select group of people time and time again, but only this group of people.

common denominator. Okay, tell me more about these people. Well, these people typically use the outdoor pool on the other side of campus. Typically use that pool, but it's closed. It's September now. They closed that pool down, so they shifted to the indoor pool. Okay, more good information. But still, we don't have a combined chlorine level in the water. What could possibly be doing this?

And then the aquatics director says something to me that sticks. And the funny thing is, she says, these folks are the only folks I have.

that use the pool that religiously take a shower first and then take a shower afterwards.

Well that's send up red flags because nobody showers, right? We know they're all supposed to, but nobody does. We want them to, we can pretend they do, but we know they don't.

So that's the common denominator. So on a hunch, I look at Google Earth. I want to see where the municipality is. I want to see how close it is to that pool at this campus. And it is super close. So I contact the municipality and say, hey, what are you doing to treat the water? And they said, why we chlorinate the water. Chloramination of the water. That's what I was looking for. Go back, contact the aquatics director, and say, hey, look, do me a favor.

Go check the combined chlorine level of your shower water. And she did. And guess what?

combined chlorine level of 0.6 parts per million in the shower water. Pool's fine as the tap water's going in, they're handling it, they're remediating it, they're doing everything they can do to take care of it properly, but what they can't control is what the municipality is sending them.

chlorinated water. yeah, you know what drain and refill is an option if you're far enough away from the municipality. Now, why do municipalities chlorinate the water? Well, even though chloramination is not good for us because it's very slow reacting it does still disinfect. We need in a pool open to the atmosphere immediate quick reactions. They chlorinate the water because in the miles and miles of dark plumbing that this water travels through before it gets to you

That's plenty of time for these chloramines to do the job, disinfect, use themselves up.

Anyway.

That's what I have for this week. I You know what?

You guys rock. You work too hard to not have all the information. I don't know why it's filtered the way that it is.

Sometimes it's oversimplified to the point that it's just wrong.

And not going to do that. You deserve to know the truth. Like I said, you bust your ass, you work hard, you're out there in the heat, in the cold, in the rain.

It's hard work. I've done it. I know. I feel you.

I appreciate you.

I'm Rudy Stankiewicz. This is the Talking Pools Podcast. Until next time, be good, be safe.