Translate to:

Pool Industry Duped - Pool Owners Scammed #3

  • Rating: No Rating

When the NPIRC’s Phase 2 report is completely reviewed, it becomes obvious that the conclusions rendered are not supported by the results of their test pool experiments. It appears that the two Cal Poly professors and NPC leaders confused plaster surface weaknesses, discoloration, and degradation (caused by poor workmanship) with uniform etching (caused by aggressive water).

For example, the reports states that Pools 1, 5, 8, and 12 showed signs of “etching deterioration” in just six weeks’ time after plastering and filling with water. But those pools did not have aggressive water (negative LSI) during the first six weeks! And Pools 1, 3, 4, 5, and 12 had discoloration, all without the water being aggressive. White soft spots (called “spot etching” by the plasterers) were reported in Balanced Pools 1, 4, 5, and 12 at the fourth month inspection.

A review of the results of Spa 13 and Spa 14 is also revealing. Spa 13 was deemed to be the “Aggressive” spa, and Spa 14 was the “Balanced” spa. But the first four months water test results shows that the water in both spas were virtually identical with balanced and positive LSI numbers.

At the six week and fourth month inspections, the NPIRC claimed that Spa 13 had significant signs of etching and discoloration, but Spa 14 did not. Shouldn’t the condition of both spas have been the same since the water balance was the same? Yet, the NPIRC concluded that aggressive water caused the unsightly issues in Spa 13 even though the water was balanced.

It is very curious that the professors and NPC leaders did not consider improper workmanship practices as causes of the discoloration and degradation of their test pools since the water was balanced with positive LSI’s, and especially since the cement/concrete industry has documented issues like this. Didn’t they review the water chemistry data? Were they just unaware of the facts, or was it something else?

The twelve pools and two spas had different plaster finishers working in them. They claimed to have videotaped the plastering. Shouldn’t they have reviewed that and learned what went wrong, instead of blaming the water chemistry?

Views: 181


You need to be a member of Pool Genius Network to add comments!

Join Pool Genius Network

Comment by Kim Skinner on November 9, 2013 at 5:03pm

It has been the past policy of the NPC to charge $500 to receive a one year study report. I believe there have only been four so far. 

Comment by Richard A. Falk on November 9, 2013 at 12:21pm

The link to the NPIRC website from the CalPoly site:

is down.  Is there any link to the NPIRC report or is this something one has to buy?

Sign in


 or Sign Up
By signing in, you agree to the amended Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
Forgotten your password?


Latest Activity

Timothy M Kersting is now a member of Pool Genius Network
John McGehee joined Brian Galella's group
John McGehee joined Richard A. Falk's group

Water Chemistry

This group is for in-depth discussion of pool and spa water chemistry issues at a more technical…See More
Kim Skinner posted blog posts
Jan 17
Kim Skinner replied to John McGehee's discussion Issues with using rainwater for everything pool construction and maintenance related
"Using rain water for mixing with cementitious materials is fine.  I don't see significant…"
Jan 17
Kim Skinner's blog post was featured

The LSI is Reliable

Using the Langelier Saturation Index as a guide for maintaining proper pool water balance and to…See More
Jan 16
Jackie gingras is now a member of Pool Genius Network
Jan 15
Profile IconShaunta Clint and Marquise Pools, LLC joined Pool Genius Network
Jan 10

© 2019   Created by PGN Admin.   Powered by Pool Genius Network

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service


Live Video