By Marcelle Dibrell

When two sets of children became sick this summer after visiting a Virginia splash pad, their parents were sure there was something wrong with the water.

Chelsea Easterbrook had been taking her daughter to the Lynchburg Riverside Park Sprayground all summer.

“We come probably like two or three times a week,” Easterbrook said.

This July, her daughter, Ellie, began feeling sick, so Easterbrook took her to a doctor.

“She’s been having constant diarrhea, so they wanted to take a stool sample,” Easterbrook said.

The sample tested positive for two types of E. coli.

Easterbrook was sure Ellie got the E. coli from the splash pad because a month prior, another mother had also reported her kids got really sick after visiting the facility.

Nicole Huguley took her children to the splash pad in early June. Not long after, they had runny noses, ear infections, sore throats, and fevers. They were vomiting and had diarrhea.

Huguley took her children to the Baffles

From page 1

doctor, who said they had a viral infection and that the source could have been something in the water at the splash pad.

But officials with Lynchburg Parks and Recreation said there was no way the children got sick from the water at the splash pad, defending their water-treatment protocols.

However, after Easterbrook reported her child’s illness, the Central Virginia Health Department came out to visit the splash pad and conducted its own testing.

“We made a visit to the splash pad yesterday (July 18), actually looked at the operation a little bit, and conducted a test on the water. The disinfectant level was good, and the pH and the water were good,” said Jim Bowles, the department’s environmental health manager.

The health department didn’t test for bacteria because Bowles said most bacteria are killed within a minute with the proper chemical levels.

So investigative reporters with a local news channel decided to have the water tested for bacteria. They took samples from three different area splash pads.

Riverside Park Sprayground in Lynchburg tested positive for E. coli and fecal coliform.

Huguley said she’s not surprised to hear it.

“That right there proves that the water is not treated like it should be, and that’s clearly probably where my children picked up the bacteria, and it could’ve gotten a lot worse,” she said.

But the bacteria test results are a bit perplexing. If the splash pad had the proper chemical levels — especially chlorine — how is it possible that it also had E. coli?

The facility operators insist that the splash pad always has the proper chemical sanitation levels.

The City of Lynchburg put out a statement, detailing their treatment procedures: “Water safety standards for the Sprayground are set by the Pool and Hot Tub Alliance, the leading industry organization accredited by the American National Standards Institute recognized to promote and develop the nation’s standards for swimming pools and hot tubs. Those safe operating standards require the water to be monitored at least two (2) times per day with results that have a concentration of chlorine between 2.0 and 5.0 ppm with a pH between 7.2 and 7.8.”

The facility is monitored by a Certified Pool Operator to ensure that the water chemistry is personally overseen.

Furthermore, the city states that:

• Sensors in an automated system check the splash pad’s chemical levels and automatically adds chemicals that are needed.

• Parks & Recreation staff also test the water reservoir chemical levels at least four (4) times per day and make chemical adjustments manually if needed.

• The splash pad has a sand filter system, as well as traps and skimmers, that are cleaned daily. The entire system is backwashed as needed, based on the monitoring readings taken.

With such rigorous protocols, it doesn’t seem reasonable (to Service Industry News) that the water DID test positive for E. coli bacteria.

Is it possible this is some kind of chlorine-resistant E. coli bacteria?

So, we contacted Dr. Thomas Shahady, the environmental scientist at the University of Lynchburg who had conducted the bacteria testing of the splash pad. We wanted to know if he had also tested the chlorine levels when he obtained his positive bacteria results.

Unfortunately, Shahady did not test for chlorine.

“I just don’t think Lynchburg is properly treating the water,” Shahady said in an email. “It’s no more complicated than that.”

We reached out to Dr. Roy Vore, microbial physiologist and author of PHTA’s RWI manual and contributor to the CDC Model Aquatic Health Code, to ask him if this could be chlorine-resistant E. coli.

Dr. Vore provided a thorough response.

“There are NO chlorine-resistant E. coli,” Vore said. “But if there are large chunks of biofilm from the holding tank, those chunks can contain viable E. coli and skew the test.”

Dr. Vore said that it was also possible that there could be spikes in bacterial contamination if there were a fecal incident because the patrons of a splash pad are children, so there will likely be fecal incidents. He said the only way to know about the possibility of fecal incidents is to look at a readout of the continuous addition of free chlorine at the splash pad. “Was it spiking after the feeder kicked in and suddenly crashing with an influx of patrons?” Vore asked.

Dr. Vore also mentioned that it was important that the water sample used to test for bacteria must be very fresh, because samples held too long will allow existing and trace bacteria to grow, which would invalidate the results.

On that note, concerning the water sample, Dr. Shahady said “It should not have any bacteria; this test should be zero.”

Dr. Vore said he strongly disagrees with that statement.

“That disagrees with U.S. EPA guidelines adopted by the American Public Health Association in 1964,” Vore said. “Pools, hot tubs, and splash pads are open systems designed for physical interaction with humans. There will be a few bacteria, viruses, fungi, and assorted other microorganisms. Treatment programs are designed to manage the risk of illness. This is accomplished by reducing the concentration of germs to a safe level. As such, the health risk in properly managed venues is quite small. If you want zero risk, stay indoors and watch TikTok.”

Finally, Dr Vore said that per the Model Aquatic Health Code, the splash pad should have had a secondary disinfection system, such as UV or ozone, to supplement chlorine, because splash pads are “defined as an increased-risk aquatic venue.” In its defense of its water treatment protocols, the Riverside Sprayground officials did not mention that the splash pad has a secondary disinfection system.

On the whole, however, Dr. Vore questioned the probability that the splash pad was the culprit behind the children’s sicknesses.

“Could the kids have gotten ill in the splash pad? Yes, but unlikely if the chlorine was maintained properly,” Vore said. “There are no absolutes in biology. But there are no documented cases of E. coli illness when there is at least 1.0 ppm of free chlorine. I do not have enough information on this incident to offer an opinion either way. But if the kids were also in a daycare, I would be particularly careful about implicating a splash pad as the source of the infection.”

E. coli, Photo credit: CDC