← SSLOCSD

Clients/SSLOCSD/slack/2026/04/2026-04-29_south-county.md

slack
Source
1
Chunks
3
Entities
Doc
Type

Content

# #south-county — 2026-04-29 **06:48 [Mason Radke](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1777470524821599):** ``` nvestigated the delayed callout response for the Influent Pumps UPS Trip alarm (UPS_0112_ON_BACKUP_Alm_TgtDisagree) that activated at 03:45:55 on 4/20/2026 and was not acknowledged until 04:03:37. Review of the WIN-911 logs showed that the alarm condition chattered repeatedly with very short active durations (5–7 seconds per occurrence) before clearing, and the assigned callout workflow ("Test 2") was configured to send notifications only when the alarm was in the Active + Unacknowledged state. Because the workflow's callout list cycles through contacts at one-minute intervals, each dispatch attempt evaluated the alarm state at the moment of dispatch — and since the alarm was inactive (but still unacknowledged) for the majority of the cycle, WIN-911 correctly skipped notifications to the District Call Out Phone, Mike Arias, and Mycal Jones contacts on multiple passes per the configured Send Notification settings. A successful dispatch eventually occurred to Mycal Jones at 03:54:58 when the workflow cycle happened to coincide with a brief active window; the call connected on each of four attempts but failed three times due to invalid authorization code entry on the receiving end before being acknowledged on the fourth attempt at 04:03:37. To prevent this filtering behavior from suppressing future callouts on chattering alarms, the Test 2 workflow's Notifications Behavior was updated to include both Active + Unacknowledged and Inactive + Unacknowledged states, ensuring the callout chain proceeds to completion based on acknowledgment status rather than instantaneous alarm state. It is additionally recommended that the underlying chatter on the UPS target/feedback disagreement signal be investigated at the source (PLC logic or UPS feedback wiring) to address the root cause ``` **08:29 [Kevin](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1777476559741339):** Thank you! **08:30 [Kevin](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1777476629975489):** @AutoBot new task for Kevin to investigate the influent pumps UPS chattering alarm due 5/1 priority 3 **08:30 [AutoBot](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1777476631601559):** :white_check_mark: *Task created:* investigate the influent pumps UPS chattering alarm :bust_in_silhouette: Kevin :star: High :calendar: 2026-05-01 :office: SSLOCSD [View in list](https://app.slack.com/lists/T089GAQQHTN/F09DBBTNQFJ/Rec0B0RTRE50C) **08:31 [Kevin](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1777476663138949):** @Mason Radke Is there a delay on that alarm **08:43 [Mason Radke](https://slack.com/archives/C08G4KZG7D5/p1777477393774179):** I’m no longer logged into the system. Give me a bit and I’ll check.

Extracted Entities

TypeKeyValueConfidenceEvidence
site client name SSLOCSD 100% Client: SSLOCSD
system alarm system WIN-911 90% Review of the WIN-911 logs showed that the alarm condition chattered repeatedly
task investigate influent pumps UPS chattering alarm owner: Kevin, due date: 2026-05-01, priority: 3 100% new task for Kevin to investigate the influent pumps UPS chattering alarm due 5/1 priority 3
File: Clients/SSLOCSD/slack/2026/04/2026-04-29_south-county.md
Updated: 2026-04-29 15:45:21.793185