THE COMPTRAIN PROJECT
-------
THE COMPTRAIN PROJECT
FINAL
REPORT
Submitted To
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Water Program Operations
By
National Demonstration Water Project
July 1985
-------
THE COMPTRAIN PROJECT: FINAL REPORT
Table of Contents
Page
Overview of the Project 1
Project Objectives 2
Comptrain Methodology 3
An Example of Change 8
The Comptrain Guide 11
Financial-Management Training 12
Conclusions and Recommendations 15
Exhibits
Exhibit I - The Comptrain States 4
Exhibit II - Comptrain Methodology 5
Exhibit III - Comptrain Diagnostic
Instrument Summary 6
Exhibit IV - Improvement Shown in Plants
Receiving Comptrain Assistance 9
Appendices
Appendix A - Computer Generated Plant Analyses
Appendix B - Sample Service Plans
Appendix C - Financial-Management Activities Materials
Appendix D - Toward a National Plan for Wastewater Treatment
Operator Training
Also included Comptrain Guide and Financial-Management
Manual.
-------
THE COMPTRAIN PROJECT: FINAL REPORT
Overview of the Project
In October, 1982 the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), through its Office of Water Program Operations
(OWPO), made a grant to National Demonstration Water Project
(NDWP) to carry out a program of "over-the-shoulder"
training for the operators of small wastewater treatment
plants. This program was called, by NDWP, the Comptrain
(Compliance-Through-Training) Project. Subsequently, a
grant for a second program year was provided, and this was
extended to allow a period of time for completion of the
field work and project wrap-up at the national level,
including the preparation of a final report. The project
officially ended on June 30, 1985. Thus, in total, the
Comptrain Project represented 29 months of program effort
and the expenditure of approximately $1.1 million.
(Supplementary funding for the project was also provided by
the Appalachian Regional Commission, and this allowed the
Comptrain Project to do some work in water treatment
plants.)
-1-
-------
-2-
Project Objectives
The funding of Comptrain was one attempt by EPA to
address directly the problem of wastewater treatment plant
compliance. EPA's basic mission is to clean up, and prevent
further pollution of, the nation's water supplies, ground-
water and surface water. To accomplish this mission, it has
both grant-making and regulatory authority. It provides
grants to local communities to build better wastewater
treatment plants, thus helping to prevent water pollution
through municipal sewage. It also works through the states
to insure by regulatory action that local wastewater treat-
ment plants are in compliance with federal standards that
Congress has authorized EPA to issue.
The training function at EPA is an adjunct of the
compliance mission. If plants are to remain in compliance
with federal standards, they must be properly operated and
maintained. Historically, local plant operators have not
always been properly trained to perform O&M tasks. The OWPO
has attempted to help states and localities with this
problem by funding a variety of training assistance activi-
ties. This includes help in establishing state training
centers (the so-called 109(b) centers), financial support
for the development of training materials, and the funding
of discrete demonstration projects, such as Comptrain.
The objective of the Comptrain Project was to
demonstrate that small wastewater plants could be brought
into compliance through on-site, plant-specific training of
-------
-3-
operators. The emphasis was to be on achieving compliance,
or at least improving plants toward compliance, rather than
conducting formal training. The program brochure explained
the difference this way:
The activity is not purely technical assistance because
the intent is to educate the operator, not just improve the
plant; but is not entirely training either because the merit
of the activity is judged in terms of improved plant perfor-
mance, not just greater operator competence....To conclude
from this that the ideal is a combination of training and
technical assistance is to miss the point. The way to bring
small water and wastewater systems into compliance is
neither through training nor technical assistance. The way
to bring them into compliance is to bring them into
compliance. In other words, we must work our way backward
from the problem, identifying the cause of the problem, and
employing whatever corrective measures are necessary to end
the non-compliance.
Comptrain Methodology
NDWP's approach in carrying out this work was to target
selected states (see Exhibit I) in which to work and then to
recruit and hire locally "field operations directors" --
over-the-shoulder training specialists. The field opera-
tions directors, working with state and local officials;
then identified a manageable number of plants in need of
assistance and carried out the training on a circuit-riding
-------
-4-
EXKIBIT I
THE COMPTRAIN STATES
Comptrain States 1982-83
Conrotrain State? 1984
basis. The field work was back-stopped from the national
level, either by NDWP staff directly or by other organiza-
tions working under contract to NDWP. These organizations
included the National Environmental Training Association,
the American Clean Water Association, and Great Lakes Rual
Network. Their work ranged from the preparation of
simplified manuals for plant use to the holding of formal
training sessions. NDWP monitored and managed all the field
work.
-------
-5-
The field operations directors included a microbiolo-
gist, a training and operations specialist, and professional
engineers with plant experience. NDWP's in-house pro-
fessional engineer, also a certified operator, provided sup-
port and guidance to the field operatives.
A fairly systematic methodology was used in the
training effort. (See Exhibit II). The intent was to used
a broad approach to preliminary problem diagnosis in an
effort to turn up problems which were not solely operator-
related.
EXHIBIT II
COHPTRAIN METHODOLOGY
j— —
T
Identify
plants
out of
compliance
A
Revise
list
t
Revise
list
Preliminary
diagnosis
system
problem
System
nnancial-
probtem
identified
Operator
training
problem
identified
Program/
policy
problem
identified
Develop
plan for
financial-
management
Improve-
ments
Develop
spec! He
plan for
plant
improve-
ments
Develop
agenda for
policy
changes
Cany out
finandal-
management
training
Carry out
corrective
operator
training
WorKfor
program/
policy
changes
Improve
system
forma nee
1
*
Improve
per-
formance
-------
-6-
Once the final list of target plants was developed in
each state, a series of diagnostic, corrective and reinfor-
cement actions was initiated. NDWP continued to use its own
diagnostic instrument for evaluating plant performance.
Exhibit III summarizes the kind of data that is generated by
this instrument. The computer program developed by EPA
Region X for the Apple lie was also used extensively as a
diagnostic tool. (Copies of some of the analyses generated
using this program are included as Appendix A.) At the
EXHIBIT III
COHPTRAIN DIAGNOSTIC INSTRUMENT
Summary
Phase I - Preliminary Investigation
* Make initial contact and request background material
* Review background information, make a preliminary
visit to the plant and formulate hypothesis about
possible causes of non-compliance
Phase II - Conduct On-Site Functional Evaluation
• Complete functional evaluation questionnaire
* Prepare a report considering management, support and
wastewater facility functions and their impact on
plant performance
Phase III - Develop Data-Based Profile of Plant Performance
• Complete design information summary form
• Collect energy costs, chemical costs, supplies and
maintenance costs
• Develop laboratory test data
- implement a testing program with tests, frequen-
cies, and types of sample appropriate to the faci-
lity being evaluated
- Test parameters to be considered include: BODj,
TSS, VSSt, TKN, PH, Alkalinity, Temp, DO, COD,
Sodium 13, priority metals, MLSS, 30 minute settla-
bility, RAS, WAS, RAS MLSS, Microscope Evaluation
t Apply computerized diagnostic program
I Apply evaluation checklist
• Prepare plant evaluation report
- summarize interviews with management and plant per-
sonnel
- evaluate commitment of operating officials to pro-
vide continued support to project
- evaluate need for "over-the-shoulder" training and
technical assistance
Phase IV - Revise Tentative Plant List As Required
Phase V - Develop A Service Plan For Each Plant And Obtain
Local Approval
-------
-7-
conclusion of the diagnostic phase, a service plan was deve-
loped showing each plant's deficiencies and proposed correc-
tive and remedial actions. Local endorsement was then
sought for each service plan. (Sample copies of Service
Plans are attached as Appendix B.) Corrective actions
addressed plant deficiencies shown in the service plans
through intensive, on-site, individualized training and
technical assistance activities.
In the first year of operation, the emphasis was on
technical training, i.e., work directly with the operators
in the problem plants. In the second year, increased atten-
tion was paid to financial training, and this necessitated
more work with officials other than the operators.
In the first year of Comptrain, there were six target
states -- West Virginia, Kentucky, South Carolina,
Tennessee, Mississippi, and Louisiana. West Virginia and
Louisiana dropped out of the program after one year, and
second-year effort was concentrated on the remaining four
states. (In addition, some program development work was
done in Alabama, although this state was never targeted for
site-specific field work.)
In all, the Comptrain project provided direct operator
assistance in some degree to over 200 water and wastewater
treatment plants. Intensive training was provided in nearly
150 plants as field operations directors logged thousands of
miles going from plant to plant. Of course, other plants
-------
-8-
also received some benefits through the non-site-specific
work of the program, such as the major financial training
session in Tennessee and the Comptrain Manual. The concept
of target plants could not be rigidly defined because once
the presence of an assistance project becomes known, many
needy communities are likely to ask for help, whether or not
they are on the original target list. Comptrain attempted
to help everyone who asked, at least to some extent.
Over 80 percent of the plants receiving intensive
training were either brought into compliance or "improved
significantly toward compliance." The latter category was
used as one measure of progress because compliance, in the
field, is not a static condition that can readily be pin-
pointed. There are commonly lags in reporting and other
circumstances that leave plants technically out of
compliance even when the quality of the effluent being pro-
duced is acceptable. In broad, however, Comptrain did
achieve its objective of moving plants into or close to a
compliance status in most cases. (See Exhibit IV).
An Example of Change
An example of the kind of change that may be brought
about is provided by the plant in Clemson, South Carolina,
where numerous repairs and improvements to the facility have
been made at the suggestion of the Comptrain field opera-
tions director. Two aeration basins have been cleaned and
repaired and are ready to be returned to service. A
-------
-9-
EXHIBIT IV
IMPROVEMENT SHOWN IN PLANTS RECEIVING COMPTRAIN ASSISTANCE 1982-84
STATE TOTAL BROUGHT INTO IMPROVED TOWARD NEEDS MORE
South Carolina
West Virginia
Louisiana
Kentucky
Mississippi
Tennessee
TOTALS 146 70 48% 52 36% 24 16%
COMPLIANCE
34
32
8
22
36
14
No.
19
16
2
9
14
10
%*
56%
50
25
41
39
71
COMPLIANCE
No.
10
6
4
12
18
2
%
29%
19
50
55
50
15
ASSISTANCE
No.
5
10
2
1
4
2
%
15%
31
25
4
11
14
*Percentages have been rounded off.
clarifier has been rebuilt and is operational. Automatic
samplers have been installed at the influent and effluent
sampling locations. The effluent flow meter has been
replaced with a new unit and the chlorination unit has been
repaired. In addition, a pilot study for a belt press has
been conducted for the dewatering of sludge, and the Town's
engineering firm has been authorized to start on plans and
specifications for upgrading the facility.
The laboratory staff has implemented an extensive
program of process control testing which includes mixed
-------
-10-
liquor suspended solids, volatile suspended solids and
settleable solids, return sludge flow rates, suspended
solids and volatile suspended solids. Food-to-microorganism
ratio is being calculated, clarifier sludge blanket depth
checked, and microscopic examinations of the activated
sludge conducted. The facility now has a full-time properly
certified operator and additional laborers are to be hired.
However, this facility still remains extremely sen-
sitive to fluctuations in flow rates and sometimes violates
its N.P.D.E.S. permit due to solids washouts. The daily
flow varies from a low of 300,000 gpd to 800,000 gpd maxi-
mums. The facility,, when operating with aeration basin #3,
is designed for 350,000 gpd. Once aeration basins #1 and #2
are returned to service, 550,000 gpd can be handled. The
sudden loss of solids from the treatment plant creates
operational problems as the F:M ratio changes and the MLSS
drops. As a result, the plant losses its ability to effec-
tively treat waste.
The main difference in the facility, other than the
physical improvements, is that the staff is now aware of the
problems at the facility and work is being completed to
correct the problems. Once aeration basins #1 and #2 are
placed back in service, the belt press installed to handle
waste sludge and the mode of operation converted to conven-
tional activated sludge, the facility should consistently
achieve permit compliance.
-------
-11-
The Comptrain Guide
As much as possible of NDWP's experience from the
Comptrain Project was codified in "The Comptrain Guide: A
Manual for Evaluating the Performance of Small Water and
Wastewater Systems."
The guide is intended for nonprofit organizations,
state and local agencies, and others interested in setting
up a "Comptrain-Type" .project. It is aimed at plants in
small, rural communities, i.e., those whose capacity is less
than three million gallons per day. This includes about 80
percent of the plants nationwide and a majority of the
plants in all states. The manual covers both water and
wastewater systems, since these operations are usually com-
bined in small towns and is based on NDWP's field
experience. It takes a comprehensive approach to looking at
problems rather than focusing exclusively on the technical
side of operations. It is not, however, a primer on water
and wastewater treatment plants. The assumption of the
manual is that the reader has or has access to someone who
has some technical capability in water and wastewater treat-
ment.
The manual is divided into four chapters, each chapter
discussing one or more steps in the Comptrain methodology:
project organizations, target identification, problem
diagnosis, corrective action, and project evaluation.
Sample forms, guidelines and procedures are included as aids
in setting up a Comptrain project.
-------
-12-
NDWP has distributed the manual to participants in the
Comptrain project and to others by request. (An additional
copy is included with this report.)
Fi nanci al-Management Trai ni ng
In 1982-83, Great Lakes Rural Network, an NDWP affi-
liate, was given a contract to conduct a review of the
existing financial-management capabilities in eleven plants
located in West Virginia. This small sampling of plants
revealed a need for an improved understanding of the
operation and management techniques that are needed to run a
utility efficiently and effectively. In 1984-85, NDWP
increased its emphasis on the training needs of small town
employees other than the plant operators involved in the
provision water and wastewater services.
Communities to receive financial-management (f-m)
training were identified in each of the target states —
Kentucky, Tennessee, South Carolina, Mississippi. The
training was carried out through over-the-shoulder training;
small group intensive training sessions; or larger training
sessions. Some states received a combination of these.
The over-the-shoulder f-m training drew heavily on the
over-the-shoulder operator training as a model. The same
diagnostic, corrective and reinforcement stages were
followed. For many of the communities receiving the over-
the-shoulder f-m training it was the first time they had ever
participated in a management study of their systems. Each
-------
-13-
utility was given a detailed report with a summary and
recommendations for their operations. This over-the-
shoulder approach to providing f-m assistance helped several
town clerks in Mississippi to improve record keeping and to
make available timely and accurate information to local
decision makers. In Rosedale, the town clerk, with the aid
of the Comptrain f-m specialist, developed a new accounting
system to separate the entries made to the ledger to show
water and sewer as distinct accounts. In West, the town
clerk was helped to construct a semiannual reporting form to
report the status of the wastewater system to local offi-
cials in terms of receipts and disbursements. Similar
improvements to financial record keeping and management
activities were realized in other communities receiving the
over-the-shoulder f-m training. (Individual reports on
these activities and all other f-m training activities are
included as Appendix C.)
Three, small group, intensive financial-management
workshops were held during the 1984-85 project. These
workshops focused on the financial-management process,
planning, financing, budgeting, cost recovery, and record
keeping and information systems. In South Carolina, 1.0
hour of Continuing Education Units (CEU) was awarded on
completion of the workshop held there. Clerks, recorders,
mayors, board/council members and plant operators were
represented at the workshops held in South Carolina,
-------
-14-
Kentucky, and Mississippi. A copy of the manual used at the
workshops and the certificate awarded to all participants is
enclosed with this report.
One larger training session was held in Tennessee.
This session, called "Clean Water Finance 1985: The
Tennessee Initiatives," was attended by more than 150
mayors, public work officials, finance officers, health
officers, engineers, construction and utility contractors,
builders, pollution control managers, county executives, and
bookkeepers and financial advisors. Information on topics
such as federal programs, contract management/procurement,
alternative small scale technology, enforcement, rate
structure/depreciation, financial programs, privatization
and pre-treatment was presented. (An agenda, list of
speakers and exhibitors and attendees are included in
Appendix C.) The session was very favorably received. One
review, from the Tennessee Municipal League's Town and City,
called the seminar "wonderful," and continued:
Last month's workshop, "Clean Water Finance 1985:
The Tennessee Initiatives," at the Sheraton Hotel in
Nashville was one of the best attended in TML history.
Areas covered included the governor's clean water
initiatives, the revenue bond market, funding trends
and enforcement trends and alternative small scale
technologies.
"What took us so long to get around to a conference
like this?" Larry Eddins exclaimed afterwards.
Eddins, manager of the Fayetteville water and
sewer system, is one of the nation's top ten public
works leaders.
-------
-15-
He said afterwards, "The people who put this con-
ference together, made it one of the best ever, first
class all the way.
"I got more information from it than I got from a
lot of others all put together," said Eddins, who is
chairman of Tennessee's Water and Waste Water Board of
Certification which certifies water and waste water
operators."
Conclusions and Recommendations
Throughout the project, NDWP has monitored performance
in the field with a view to arriving at conclusions that
would be useful to EPA-OWPO in establishing training poli-
cies and carrying out future programs. Although the work
done through Comptrain benefitted hundreds of rural com-
munities (and thousands of rural residents) and could be
justified in that sense alone, this target group represented
only a small portion of the needy population. Thus the real
value of Comptrain was seen in terms of its contribution to
EPA's long-run efforts to deal with the problem of system
compliance through operator training. With this in mind,
NDWP offers the following conclusions and recommendations as
being warranted on the basis of Comptrain experience.
Conclusion #1: Over-the-shoulder training works.
It was no surprise to find that operators improve their
performance when they receive competent, direct training.
Comptrain was not really funded to test the premise — which
is widely accepted already — that this technique works.
Rather, the question was whether a program centered around
this technique could be successful. Training cannot work
-------
-16-
unless the trainee is receptive to being trained. The
question of whether they would be receptive was the object
of the field demonstration.
At the beginning, there was some fear that system
operators and other community officials might not be recep-
tive to outside, site-specific assistance since it might
imply that they were not doing their jobs. This fear proved
to be unfounded. With minor exceptions, operators welcomed
any help they could get and were disappointed when the pro-
ject ended. Likewise, community leaders were not reluctant
to accept financial-management training.
Of course, to gain this kind of acceptance, Comptrain
staff had to approach communities with some sensitivity and
to stress the fact (and act out the fact) that they were
there to help and not to expose violations or be an instru-
ment of punishment. Also, the trainers had to know what
they were talking about. But once Comptrain people had
established their "bona fides," they had, by and large, good
working relations with people in the communities.
In general, there was more suspicion on the part of
state agencies than local agencies. In one case, in fact
(West Virginia), the project was actually terminated after
one year because of a lack of state cooperation. Comptrain
made every effort to work with state officials and to keep
them informed of activities, and this led to satisfactory
relationships in most cases, but probably any federally-
-------
-17-
directed effort working in an area of state responsibility
would have to proceed with caution. Although the federal
government (i.e., EPA) should continue to support demonstra-
tion projects, it is clear that long-run over-the-shoulder
training should be a state responsibility.
Recommendation #1; States should establish over-the-
shoulder training programs, with EPA
assistance.
Every state that does not have an over-the-shoulder
training program (and many states do) should establish one.
EPA should assist states in planning these programs and
should provide some "seed" financing under its 104(g) and
109(b) authorities. The training to be provided should
include both in-plant "technical" training for operators and
in-community financial-management training. Thus, at a mini-
mum, the state training team should include two full-time,
well-qualified people. These may operate out of the state's
regulatory agency, but it is generally a good idea to
separate the regulatory and training functions to some
extent. Logically, the state 109(b) center (which should be
established if it does not exist) would be the locus of the
training team, although this should be true only if the
center is going to receive solid state support.
The implementation of this recommendation is already
well underway. Increasingly, EPA 104(g) funds have been
channeled to state agencies, and these agencies have been
encouraged to establish field training programs. Grants
-------
-18-
have been provided to the National Environmental Training
Association to survey current state programs and develop
standards for future programs.
While these efforts are needed, there is more that
should be done. It is not enough to develop standards that
states may or may not implement. EPA should use or withhold
its training funds as an inducement to states to move more
quickly in setting up programs that meet decent standards as
far as over-the-shoulder training is concerned. At the same
time, EPA should provide program development assistance to
states. The fact is that many state agencies do not know
how to set up workable programs. Without help, they are
likely to set up "paper" systems that are long on admin-
istrative detail and short on field performance. In states
that have neither 109(b) centers nor effective training
programs, a special EPA push will be required.
NDWP's Comptrain Guide is an aid to establishing
programs that can be used by state agencies, but it was
really developed more with nonprofit organizations in mind.
There is a need for a manual aimed specifically at state
action and based on work with states in setting up programs.
Conclusion #2: Training alone will not solve the operation
and maintenance problem in wastewater
plants.
Plants that have operator training problems tend to
have other problems that have little to do with the opera-
tor. NDWP's second-year shift to more financial-management
-------
-19-
training was one response to this problem. Many small com-
munities do not know how to make budgets or even keep books,
and this hinders even the most well-trained operator. For
example, there is little value in training an operator to
handle chlorine feed better if the town neglects to put
aside enough money to buy chlorine. This is why financial-
management training must nearly always be a companion to
technical operator training.
But the problem goes beyond financial-management inade-
quacies, which can also be handled by training. In case
after case, NDWP saw plants that were not designed for the
loads they were carrying. In rural America, industrial
plants may be added to a municipal wastewater system willy-
nilly, as a way of attracting industry, with little thought
to the operation and maintenance problems that will be
caused. Funding agencies (EPA and state) do not exercise
enough care in approving system designs and equipment.
Of course, even the worst plant can probably be
improved somewhat by a competent operator, but until plants
are designed better, they will continue to have compliance
problems.
Recommendation #2: States should coordinate their funding,
"regulatory, and training problems for
wastewater systems.
Ideally, states would have a single "compliance
system," preferably based in one agency or a consortium of
agencies, that would have funding, regulatory, and training
-------
-20-
arms. Each function would be performed with due regard for
the other functions. At present, the three are often un-
coordinated and training takes a back-seat to the others.
NDWP has spelled this idea out in greater detail in a
"model" training plan that is included as Appendix D.
Obviously, adoption of such a plan would mean some changes
in the way most states do business, but until something like
this is done, full compliance will not be achieved. Neither
the building of new plants, nor the threat of regulatory
action, nor improved training can do the job if they con-
tinue to act in isolation from each other.
Conclusion #3; Local communities will accept their training
responsibilities if they have financial
reasons for doing so.
Local communities are well aware that it is their
responsibility to bring local wastewater treatment plants
into compliance with federal standards. They are also aware
that the compliance situation can be improved through more
training leading to better operation and maintenance. What
they do not know is where they will get the money. If the
federal or state government provides training free of
charge, they will accept it. If they must take the lead in
asking for training help, and in paying for it, they are
more reluctant, because they are not convinced that it is
cost-effective.
To be sure, they are impressed when minor changes lead
to savings, and there are occasions when that occurs. In
-------
-21-
several instances, the Comptrain project was able to save
plants hundreds of dollars in power costs just by
recommending that blowers be turned off at certain times.
Naturally, trainers tend to stress these examples in pro-
moting the virtues of training.
In the more typical case, however, the local community
perceives that training leading to better operation and
maintenance costs them money, not just for the training
itself but for the demands placed upon them when operation
and maintenance improves. Better-trained operators want
higher wages; it costs more to repair equipment than to
leave it broken; if there are figures to be reported, it
costs more to do lab tests than to simply make up numbers.
Small rural communities are existing on the margin in a
financial sense. They are under great pressure from hard-
pressed residents to keep water and sewer rates, to say
nothing of local taxes, low. Thus resources are thin and
every expenditure, even a new pH meter, is a major item.
Before they become too concerned with training, they have to
see, in financial terms, the increased benefits, because the
increased costs are all to evident.
Recommendation #3: EPA should provide more information on
the financial benefits of training.
At present, we have inadequate information to present
to local communities about the financial advantages of
improved operation and maintenance through training.
Dramatic examples of cost-savings only go so far. We need
-------
-22-
some indepth studies of long-run cost benefits, studies
based in field experience but with hard economic analysis,
Until we have this, local communities will continue to
accept training, if it is free, but to ignore many of the
recommendations of the trainers.
-------
FINANCIAL STATUS REPORT
(•Folio* liufraeCfou en Ike tuck)
*. RECIPIENT OROANIIATION IK.-. ..W «M.»M. «U,.M. (.djl.. IIP..*)
National Demonstration Water Project
1725 DeSales Street, N.W., Suite 402
Washington, D.C. 20036
10.
PROORAMS/FUNCTIONS/ACTIViTIES *>
a. Nat outlay* previoutly reported
b. Tola! outlay* thr* report period
e. Lnt: Program Income credit*
d. Net outlay* thl* report period
{Lint t miimi lint c)
t. Net outlay* to date
{Lint • plm tin. i)
1. Leu : Non-Federal ihare of outlay*
g. Total Federal there of outlay*
(Liiu * mirma Km 1)
h. Total unliquidated obligation*
L Ltii : Non-Federal (her* of unliquidated
obligation* ihown on line h
|. Federel *h*r* of unllquMeted obligation*
k. Total Federal there of outlay* and
unliquidated obligation*
L Total cumulative amount of Federel fund*
authorized
m. Unobligated balance of Fedeial fund*
DIRECT LABOR
$
452,247.00
22,619.00
429,628.00
429,628.00
472.605.00
42,977.00
1. FEDERAL AQENCT AND OROANIIATIONAl ELEMENT TO WHICH REPORT It *U*MITTED
Environmental Protection Agency
1. EMPLOYER lOCHTtftCATION NUM1ER
237367533
t. FEDERAL ORANT OR OTHER IDENTTFYIN* OMB Approved FADE OF
IIUM"" No. 80-ROIBO '
T901424-01-3 1 • 2 rAOtt
t. RECIPIENT ACCOUNT NUMIER OR HWNTWYINa NUMRER
*. PROJECT/GRANT PERIOD |9» liulr.rtl.iiil
FROM IM..I.. 4.K r>«) TO IM..I.. it,. r~r|
9/1/82 fi/.^n/.R.^
*. FINAL REPORT
g| YE* Q NO
1. RAM*
[3 CAIH (^ ACCRUAt
t. PERIOD COVERED RY THI* REPORT
fROM |M»lk, i*t. tftr> TO |M..lt, if,. m*r>
9/1/82 6/30/85
STATUS OF FUNbS
FRINGE
$
126,321.00
1,500.00
124,821,00
124.821.00
107,753.00
(17,068.00)
' TRAVEL
1
$
91,897,65
4.125.65
87,772.00
87.772.00
100,000.00
12,228.00
a. TYPE or RATE It. CERTIFICATION
II. f Place "X" to •pprepricf* »«> Jgj PROVWIONAL Q PREDETERMINED Q FINAL Q] FIXED | certify to the be*t
EXKN1E •• •»« „ 1 e. •»•« 1 <- TOTAL AMOUNT U. FEDERAL SHARED „ "•' Inal lnlf "P0" '
32.87% $225,106.00 B225,I06.00 th.t *n outiey. .«
1 1 1 _ •*-• fnr Ih* mimntf
i.^«,b.,^i«j»,r-«-WWH.,««...^pH..«.^. oocum,nu/
""01 Nonexpendable Equipment Inventory
*These funds were used to purchase
computer is in 'good condition. We
EQUIPMENT
$
3,392,00*
,0.
3.392.00*
3,392,00*
4,000.00
^08, no
of my knowledge end be-
I correct end complete end
1 unliquidated oMIgetlon*
* let forth In the ewerd
''^SUPPLIES
$
4.359.25
4.121.25
238.00
238.00
1,000.00
767 ,nn
"'CONTRACTUAL
$
191.774.88
29.244.88
162,530.00
162,530,00
. 162,530.00
~0-
SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED CERTIFYING
OFFICIAL^ r\ 1 T J.S
TYPED OR PRINTED NAME AND TITLE
Edwin L. Cobb, Exec. Dir.
' --nTRFrr
OTHER" (,) COSTS
I
41,739.22
2,611.22
39,128.00 '
39.128.00
29.360.00 i
(9,768.00)]
PATE REPORT
SUBMintO
7/31/85
TELEPHONE (Am cede, ,
•iimeer end exleneien)
(202)659-06611
STANDARD FORM N« (l-Ji)
Pr«Krlb«d by Ome« •( Mcn»«im«nl ene~ tutfe*!
an Apple He computer as approved in the grant. The «r.N,.A-no
need instructions from EPA regarding the disposition j
-------
FINANCIAL STATUS REPORT
(FiUttt iulmclfoiu en l*e »«*)
I. MClniNT OMANIIATION |W»i *mt ttmfliU »U,ut, hd^l.f ttPm*)
National Demonstration Water Project
1725 DeSales Street, N.W., Suite 402
Washington, D.C, 20036
10.
PROQRAMS/FUNCTIONS/ACTIVmES *>
e. Nal outlay* pnvtouily reported
k. Total outlay* thh report parted
e. LtH:
Program htcoma cndN*
d. Ntl outlay* Ihla report parted
(Lint k minui lint c)
o. Nal outlay* lo dale
(Lint • flat fin* t)
1. l««e:
Non-Federel (her* of outley*
|. Total Federal ahare ol outley*
(Lint * mlniia 11* • />
h. Total unllquldeled oMIfallon*
L L<». -Non Federal (hare of unliquidated
obllf illont thown on Una h
|. Federal ahem ol unliquidated obNptloM
k. Total Federal ahere ol outlay* and
unliquidated obllf alloni
1. Tola! cumulative amount of Federel fund*
aulhorlied
m. Unobllf ated balance of Federal fund*
II.
iHoiiucr
nKNii
it. BIHAR*
f«»«T«f«
Mt 101
INDIRECT COST
$
225,106.00
-0-
225,106.00
225,106.00
197,775.00
C27.331.00)
1. not Ml AatHCT AW> OMANItATIONAl tllMIHT TO WHICH BtfOejT It *UeMITTIO
Environmental Protection Agency
t. riMMl OMMT OW OTHIM (DfHT»fTIM» OMB Approved '*°' »T
""""" No. BO-ROI80
T901424-01-3 2 • 2 rxoti
«. lunon* ncnnricAnoN NUMaia I *. IMCIPIIKT ACCOUNT Huwaia o« lot wnrriiM Huyete.
237367533 |
a. rnoiicT/oiUNT rt woo i>» <«inrii»>i
rROM |M«lt, «•>. (Mr) TO (K..H, <*>. ,Mrl
9/1/82 6/30/85
C fflNAt. IIIFOejf
(3 nt D HO
». etna
Q CAIH 0 ACCHUAI
*. rtmoo covtmo ar THie utran
FROM |H..lk. An. r»r| TO I«..U. J.J. j~r|
9/1/82 6/30785
ITATUt OF FUNDS
r»)
$
M
$
a. rrrt or Mil n. ewnif ICATION
(PUet -X" in •pprtfrictt »»> p movnioiiAi Q MiDniRMiHio Q fiNAi Q rixiD | cartlry lo the beat
k. Ml( e. (At! t. TOTAL AMOUNT e. HOI Ml SHAMC "" ln*' ""• "P°n '
V 87% 225,106.00 225,106.00 ^«^^.
"••"•"-'
*,,„..,,„ „»**•.-*«- ««-*,. M~. to— ^<.«.^,» „«„„,,„,./
W
$
.
ol my knowtedfa and be-
i correct and complete end
1 unllqukJeted oMIfallon*
a ael forth In the award
<•>
$
(ft
1
.
SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED CERTIFYINQ
TYPED OR PRINTED NAME AND TITLC
Edwin L. Cobb, Exec. Dir.
'^TOTALS'
i
1,136,837.00
64, 222. OC
1,072, 615. 06
1, 072,615. 0(
1,075, 023. OQ
2,408.0(
DATE REPORT
SUBMITTED
7/31/85 !
TELEPHONE (Art* cede.
•nm*
-------
Appendix A
Computer Generated Plant Analyses
-------
z
TR: Z CKII_ X MO
Prepared by ES Environmental Services,
by contract with Boise State
University. Boise, Idaho. Through a grant
Environmental Protection Agency. Region X
Seattle Washington.
RUNfrl 5/21/84
-from the
-------
DATE:
TIME:
AVERAGE DRY WEATHER FLOW
PEAK DRY WEATHER FLOW
DESIGN FLOW
INFLUENT BOD
INFLUENT TSS
INFLUENT VSS
TEMPERATURE
TKN
.ALKALINITY
PH
P04-P
MOD: ..8
MGD: 2
MGD: 1.5
MG/L: 132
MG/L: 130
(7.): 75
' C: 20
MG/L: 30
MG/L: 100
: 7
MG/L: 8
DEFAULT VALUE USED
F" R I
V
Z
F-l_*!=»r-4T COMF^ I (3LJR#=»T I ON
DESIGN AVERAGE DAILY FLOW (MGD): 1.5
DESIGN PEAK WET WEATHER FLOW (MGD): 3
DIMENSIONS
X OM
NUMBER OF RECTANGULAR CLARIFIERS: 2
DIMENSIONS EACH TOTAL
LENGTH XFT) :
WIDTH (FT):
DEPTH (FT) :
WEIR LTH (FT):
SFC AREA (FT2):
85
13
8. 14
34.08
1530
68.16
060
TFC x CK:L_ x
MEDIA TYPE: ROCK
CONSTANT RECIRCULATION
NUMBER OF TRICKLING FILTERS:
DIMENSIONS EACH
DIAMETER (FT): 100
DEPTH (FT): 4.25
RECIR.RATE(GPM): 1042
-------
DATE:
TIME:
i X
X Oh4
NUMBER OF RECTANGULAR CLARIFIERS: 2
DIMENSIONS EACH TOTAL
LENGTH
WIDTH
DEPTH
WEIR LTH
SFC AREA
XFT) :
(FT) :
(FT) :
(FT) :
(FT2) :
85
18
8. 14
34 . 08
1530
68. 16
3060
SI—LJDC3IE: F-i<=%lNJE>L_ I r-4(3
TYPE OF DIGESTION: ANAEROBIC
NUMBER OF PRIMARY DIGESTERS: 1
#1
VOLUME (GAL): 364935
DIGESTER HEATED Y
DIGESTER MIXED Y
-------
HAZARD, KY DATE:
TIME: :
BOD: 132
T.SS: 130
' ' TEMP 20
F=-Ft I M <=% Ft Y SYSTEM L-OftO X rxJOS
-**********«-***•**«•*•***•*****-*#***•**•***
* * *
FLOW * CLAR. LOADINGS * DETN *
MGD * SURFACE * WEIR * TIME *
* GPDSF * GDP/FT * MRS. *
. 600
. 670
. 740
.810
. 880
. 960
1 . 03
1 . 1 0
1. 17
1.24
1.31-
1.38
1.45
1.52
1.59
1.67
1.74
1.91
1.88
1.95
196
219
242
265
288
314
337
359
382
405
428
451
474
497
520
546
569
592
614
637
8802
9829
1 0856
11883
12910
1 4084
15111
16138
17165
18192
19219
20246
21273
22300
23327
24501
25528
26555
27582
28609
7.45
6.67
6 . 04
5. 52
5.08
4.66
4.34
4.07
3.82
3.61
3.41
3.24
3 . OS
2.94
2.81
2.68
2.57
2.47
2.38
2.29
-------
HAZARD, KY
SYSTEM f=- E R: F^ Q Ft f-1
DATE:
TIME: :
BOD: 132
TSS: 130
TEMP 20
FLOW •*
MGD *
*
****•#*****-
. 600
.670
. 740
.810
. 880
.960
1 . 03
1.10
1. 17
1.24
1.31
1.38-
1.45
1.52
1.59
1.67
1.74
1.81
1.88
1.95
7. REMOVAL
BOD * TSS
•x
**-«-**-***•*
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
55
54
52
51
50
49
48
47
46
45
44
43
43
f- •*•*•**•***•*•
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
65
64
63
62
61
60
59
58
57
56
55
*F.C. EFF
* BOD *
*• •*
#•*-*#•*-****•*••*•*•
59
59
59
59
59
59
59
60
61
63
65
•66
68
69
70
72
73
74
75
76
MG/L
TSS
46
46
46
46
46
46
46
46
46
46
46
48
49
51
52
54
55
56
57
59
* PRIMARY SLUDGE PROD. *
*LBS TSS*LBS VSS* 7. SOL* GDP *
* #
423
472
522
571
620
677
726
775
825
874
914
945
975
1 003
1031
1062
1088
1113
1137
1161
317
354
391
428
465
507
544
581
618
655
685
709'
731
753
774
797
816
835
853
871
#
*•#••***•**••
6 . 20
6.20
6 . 20
6.20
6.20
6 . 20
6 . 20
6 . 20
6 . 20
6 . 20
6 . 20
6.20
6.20
6.20
6 . 20
6.20
6 . 20
6 . 20
6 . 20
6 . 20
* *
818
913
1 009
1 1 04
1199
1 308
1 404
1499
1595
1690
1767
1827
1885
1941
1995
2054
2104
2153
2200
2245
-------
HAZARD, KY
SYSTEM L_O<=iD I
DATE:
TIME: :
BOD: 132
TSS: 130
TEMP 20
(f-
* *
*FILTER LOADING*
* * * B°D *
* GPDSF*1000FT3*
* * *
* * *
RECIR. * CLAR. LOADINGS * CLARIFIER *
RATIO ^SURFACE* WEIR * DETN. TIME *
7. * GPDSF * GPD/FT * HRS. *
* * * *
. 600
^670
-.740
taio
leso
|960
1'.03
1.10
i: 17
I24
pi
|?3B
I?5
Pr*- '
I*.52
£f
J.V'67
I?4
ITBi
tit5"
76 .
85
94 .
103
112
122
131
140
148
157
166
175
,184
193
202
212
221
230
239
248
B
Q
10
12
13
14
15
16
' 17
19
21
-Clji.
24
26
27
29
31
33
35
36
250
223
202
185
170
156
145
136
128
121
114
1O8
103
98
94
S9
86
82
79
76
196
219
242
265
288
314
337
'359
382
405
428
451
474
497
520
546
569
592
614
637
8802
9829
10856
11883
12910
14084
15111
16138
17165
18192
19219
20246
21273
22300
23327
24501
25528
26555
27582
28609
7.45
6.67
6.04
5.52
5.08
4.66
4.34
4 . 07
3.82
3.61
3.41
3.24
3.O8
2.94
2.81
2.6S
2 . 57
2.47
2.38
2.29
-------
HAZARD, KY
DATE:
TIME:
BCD:
TSS:
TEMP
i
1 W
i m
132
130
20
SE£:cofMr>*=!»FSY SYSTEM R-ER^QRMiAhJCE:
•LOW *
1SD *
600
670
740
810
880
,960
1 . 03
1. 10
1.17
1.24
1.31
1.38
1.45
1.52
1.59
1.67
1.74
1.81
1,. 88
1..95
EFF CONC.
BOD *
4
4
5
6
6
7
S
8
9
10
11
11
12
13
13
14
15
15
16
17
MG/L
SS
*-****•*
3
4
5
5
6
7
S
8
9
10
11
12
12
13
14
15
15
16
17
IB
* SEC. SLUDGE PROD *
* LBS TSS
113
136
159
184
209
239
267
294
323
351
381
410
440
471
502
537
569
600
632
664
* LBS VSS*
80
95
111
128
144
164
182
199
217
236
254
272
291
3 1 0
329
350
369
388
407
426
LBS TSS
631
701
769
837
904
979
1044
1107
1171
1233
1294
1355
1415
1474
1533
1599
1657
1713
1769
1825
TOTAL SLUDGE
* LBS VSS *
469
519
569
618
665
719
764
809
853
897
939
981
1022
1062
1102
1147
1185
1223
1260
1296
l<"****"*"»
PROD
7. SOL
«"#***-»H
4.50
4.41
4.32
4.24
4. 17
4. 10
4 . 04
3.98
3.93
3.88
3.83
3.79
3.75
3.71
3.67
3.64
3.60
3.57
3.54
3.51
I-****"**
* GPD
1681
1907
2135
2365
2598
2865
3101
-3337
3574
3811
4049
4287
4525
4764
5002
5274
5513
5750
5988
6226
-------
PLANT
FLOW
MSD
*•*•**•*#
.60
.67
.74
.81
.88
.96
1 . 03
1.10
1.17
1.24
1.31
1 . 38
1.45
1.52
1.59
1.67
1,74
1.81
1.88
1.95
#•*••*•**#•#•*•*"*••*"»!
* *
* TOTAL *
* SLUDGE *
* FLOW *
* GPD *
•*•***•*#••*#••****
1681
1906
2134
2365
2597
2865
3 1 00
3336
3573
3811
4049
4287
4525
4763
5002
5274
5512
5750
5988
6225
E> I CBEEE
HAZARD, KY DATE:
TIME: :
BHTEEFi F=' E£ Ft F=- ?D Ft M ^ fxf CEEBOD: 132
^h-f^EFtOEtlC TSS: 130
TEMP 20
PRIMARY DIGESTER VOLUME (GAL): 3.
•#••*•***•#•*•*•**• -J>-*"*-#*»*-X
* *
VSS * MCRT *
LOADING * DAYS *
LB/FT3/ * *
DAY * *
!••***• *•*#•**•*•***•**•*•*•»
.01
-01
.01
.01
.01
.01
.02
.02
.02
.02
. 02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
.02
. 03
. 03
. 03
217.
191.
170.
154.
140.
127.
117.
109.
102.
95.8
9O. 1
85. 1
80.6
76.6
73.0
69.2
66.2
63.5
60.9
5B. 6
7. *
VSS *
RED. *
*
(•**••*•#*•*"*"*-**
75.00
75.00
75.00
75.00
75.00
75.00
75.00
75 . 00
75 . 00
75.00
75.00
75. 00
75. 00
75.00
75.00
75 . 00
75 . 00
75.00
75. 00
74.56
r#*"**"K"**"**"i
*
ALK. *
MG/L *
*
*
4053
3967
3889
3818
3754
3686
3632
3581
3534
3490
3449
3410
3374
3339
3307
3272
3242
3215
3138
3163
* '/. *
GAS * SOL •*
PRO. * DIG. *
FT3/ * SLUDGE *
DAY * *
5273
5842
6400
6947
7483
8084
8599
9104
9601
10088
10566
11036
11497
11951
12398
12899
13330
13754
14172
14499
2.04
2.00
1.97
1.94
1.91
1.88
1.86-
1.83
1.81
1.80
1,78
1.76
1.75
1.74
1.72
1.71
1.70
1.69
1.68
1.68
-------
J H> E #=* L_ I 21 E O
I Ofxl O X I
OfM E> I TCM
WZTMOLJT
Prepared b'y EB Environmental Services,
by contract with Boise State
University, Boise, Idaho. Through a grant -from the
Environmental Protection Agency, Region X,
Seattle Washington.
RUN*! 4/24/34
-------
DATE:
TIME:
i
AVERAGE DRY WEATHER FLOW MGD: .03
PEAK DRY WEATHER FLOW MGD: .11
DESIGN FLOW MGD: .165
INFLUENT BOD MG/L: 200
INFLUENT TSS MG/L: 200
INFLUENT VSS ('/.): 75
TEMPERATURE 'C: 20
TKN MG/L: 35
ALKALINITY MG/L: 100
PH : 7
P04-P MG/L: a
*
DEFAULT VALUE USED
CONF" I C3LJR«=*T Z ON *=»NE> DIMENSIONS
DESIGN AVERAGE DAILY FLOW (MGD) : .16
DESIGN PEAK WET WEATHER FLOW (MGD): -412
NUMBER OF OXIDATION DITCHES: 1
DIMENSIONS EACHTOTAL
VOLUME (GAL): 135600 135600
-------
DATE:
TIME:
I F7 X CAT J
NUMBER OF ROUND CLARIFIERS: 1
DIMENSIONS EACH TOTAL
DIAMETER (FT)
DEPTH (FT)
WEIR LTH (FT)
SURFACE AREA
26
10.29
81.7 31.7
530 530
-------
DRAKESBQRO, KY
OL_OG I
QX I
DATE:
TIME: :
BOD: 200
TSS: 200
TEMP 20
iR-OFiM^rMCE:
*********
-LOW * MAX * MLVSS * F/M * MCRT * SVI * RAS * RAS * WAS *
MGD * MLSS * '/. * * DAYS * * MGD * M6/L *LBS/DAY*
*********
020
, 030
, 040
,050
, 060
, 070
, 080
, 090
- 1 00
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
2736
2802
2912
2754
2910
2802
2976
2893
2323
2764
2950
2S99
2854
2614
2779
2967.
2934
2904
2877
2852
36
39
41
43
44
46
47
48
49
50
50
51
52
53
53
53
54
55
55
56
. 030
. 040
. 050
. 060
. 070
. 080
. 090
. 100
.110
. 120
. 120
. 130
. 140
. 1 50
. 1 60
. 160
. 170
. 180
. 190
. 200
209
141
108
79
69
55
51
43
37
32
31
28
25
•"^T
21
21
19
18
16
15
1 00
100
1 00
1 00
1 00
1 00
i 00
1 00
100
1 00
1 00
100
1 00
100
100
100
1 00
100
1 00
100
9.96
9.96
. 0 1 9
.019
. 029
. 029
. 039
. 039
. 039
. 039
. 049
. 049
. 059
. 059
. 059
. 069
. 079
.079
. 079
. 089
1 0000
1 0000
10000
10000
1 0000
1 0000
10000
10000
10000
10000
10000
10000
1 0000
1 0000
10000
10000
10000
10000
10000
1 0000
15
22
30
39
47
57
65
75
85
96
105
115
126
137
149
15B
169
ISO
192
204
-------
DRAKESBORO, KY DATE:
TIME: :
BOD: 200
TSS: 200
TEMP 20
********
FLOW * OUR * DOB * EFF * EFF * EFF * EFF * EFF *
MGD * MG/L * FT * BOD * TSS * NH3 * N03 * P04-P *
* /HR * * * MG/L * MG/L * MG/L * MG/L *
**********************************************************************
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
'
•
•
•
«
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
020
030
040
050
060
070
080
090
100
110
120
130
140
150
160
170
180
190
200
210
1
.ii.
•j)
3
4
5
5
6
7
7
a
9
9
10
11
11.
12
13
13
14
7.
7.
7.
7.
7 .
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
5
4
3
5
•— '
4
-^V
T-
4
4
T;
.ji
4
4
4
2
3
^»
3
4
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
S CT
'-. uJ
<5
<5
<5
<5
:;. 5
<5
<5
<5
< 5
<5
5
5
6
<5
<5
<5
<. 5
<5
< 5 -
<5
<5
<5
5
5
6
7
3
9
9
11
12
14
16
<1.
<1.
<1.
--' H
•*. X •
< 1 .
< 1 .
< 1 .
<1.
< 1 .
< 1 .
< 1 .
< 1 .
<1.
<1.
<1.
<1.
<1.
< 1 .
< 1 .
<1-
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
o
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
o
o
o
30.
30.
30.
30 .
30 .
29.
29.
29.
29.
29.
29.
29.
29.
29.
29.
29.
29.
23.
23.
23.
7
5
3
1
0
9
3
7
5
4
4
•J>
2
i
0
0
0
9
8
7
'5
5
5
5
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
-------
•
*#**#*••»
•LOW *
1GD *
*
(•#*•*##•]
, 020
, 030
, 040
,•050
, 060
, 070
, 080
, 090
, 1 00
.110
, 120
. 130
. 140
. 150
, 160
, 170
, ISO
, 190
. 200
,210
SE:
:corjn>(=i
*
CLARIFIER LOAD *
SFC
GPSFD
42
57
75
94
113
132
151
170
188
207
226
245
264
283
3,0 1
320
339
358
377
396
* WEIR *
* GPLFD *
275
367
489
611
734
856
979
1101
1223
1346
1468
1591
1713
1835
1958
2080
2203
2325
2447
2570
DRAKESBORO, KY
iRY SVSTTEir-1 F-EIR:
SEC. SLUDGE
H».«HH
PROD *
LBS TSS * LBS VSS*
*
15
20
28
37
45
54
64
72
82
92
101
112
122
133
144
153
164
176
187
199
*
*"*•*#•*•**•)
5
8
11
16
20
25
30
35
40
46
51
57
64
71
~7~7
/ f
82
89
96
1 04
111
LBS TSS
15
20
28
37
45
54
64
72
82
92
1 0 1
112
122
133
144
153
164
176
187
199
DATE:
TIME:
BOD:
TSS:
TEMP
TOTAL SLUDGE
* LBS VSS *
* #
•***••**•*##••*#•#•*•$
5
8
11
16
20
25
30
35
40
46
51
57
64
71
77
82
89
96
1 04
111
i •
i •
200
200
20
ire:
>r •*•*•**•*")
PROD
'/. SOL
2.45
2.40
2.35
2.28
2.24
2. 19
2. 15
2. 12
2 . OS
2.05
2 . 03
2.00
1.97
1.94
1.92
1.91
1.8S
1.86
1.84
1.82
*•***•**•*••*
*
*
* GPD *
# *
*•*•*•*•*"**•*
72
101
143
192
239
295
355
408
473
540
598
670
744
821
901
963
1045
1130
1217
1 305
-------
MOOE:L_ OF7
T i OM ox i D^T i O?NI O
WITMOLJT F'RIMi^RY CL_ #=iR I F^ I C#=%~T I ON
Prepared by ES Envircimental Services,
by cor. tract with Boi se State
University., Boise, Idaho. Through a grant -from the
Environmental Protection Agency, Region X,
Seattle Washington.
RUNttl 4/26/S4
-------
DATE:
TIME: :
CM^RftCTEIR: I Z <=%T I ON
AVERAGE DRY WEATHER FLOW
PEAK DRY WEATHER FLOW
DESIGN FLOW
INFLUENT BOD
INFLUENT TSS
INFLUENT VSS
TEMPERATURE
TKN
ALKALINITY
PH
F04-P
MGD:
MGD:
MGD:
MG/L:
MG/L:
('/.):
*C:
MG/L:
MG/L:
1.95
3.5
175
197
75
20
30
100
: 7
MG/L: s
DEFAULT VALUE USED
CONR- I CBLJRftT I ON *=»NE> E> I MENS I OMS
DESIGN AVERAGE DAILY FLOW (MGD) : 3.5
DESIGN PEAK WET WEATHER FLOW
-------
DATE:
TIME:
X
NUMBER OF ROUND CLARIFIERS: 4
DIMENSIONS EACH TOTAL
DIAMETER (FT)
DEPTH (FT)
WEIR LTH (FT)
SURFACE AREA
1_I%J
12
160 640
2375 9500
-------
MURRAY , KY
DATE :
TIME: :
BOD: 175
TSS: 197
TEMP 20
X OI_OC3 I C«=tL_ OX Z
I OhJ
*********
'LOW * MAX * MLVSS * F/M * MCRT * SVI * RAS * RAS * WAS *
MGD # MLSS * y. * * DAYS * * MGD * MG/L *LBS/DAY*
*********
.46
.63
.79
.95
:. ii
:.2B
!.44
!.60
1.76
' . 93
:.09
:.25
:.4i
:.5S
:.74
:.90
• . 06
.23
.39
.55
2824
2743
2986
2915
2852
2796
2745
2986
2939
2895
2855
2819
2785
2753
2987
2956
2927
2900
2875
2851
38
40
40
41
42
42
43
43
44
44
45
46
46
47
46
47
47
48
48
49
. 060
. 060
. 060
. 070
. 070
. 080
. 080
. 080
- 090
. 090
. 1
. 1
. 1
. 1
. 1
00
00
10
10
10
. 120
. 1
. 1
. 1
. 1
20
30
30
40
1 00
86
85
75
66
59
54
55
50
46
42
39
-T-T
34
36
34
32
30
28
27
1 00
1 00
1 00
1 00
100
1
1
1
1
1
•1
1
1
J.
1
1
1
1
1
00
00
00
00
00
oo
00
00
oo
00
00
00
00
1 00
1
00
•
.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
577
606
756
796
835
875
915
. 10
. 14
. IB
.22
.27
.31
.35
.58
.63
.67
.72
.76
.80
10000
10000
1 0000
1 0000
10000
10000
10000
10000
i oooo
10000
1 (1)000
1 0000
10000
10000
10000
10000
10000
10000
10000
10000
984
1114
1228
1361
1498
1637
1779
1891
2035
2181
2328
2478
2629
2782
2890
3043
3199
3355
3513
3673
-------
MURRAY, KY
*
-LOW *
'IGD *
*
********
1.46
L.63
L.79
1.95
2. 11
2.23
2.44
2.60
2.76
2.93
J.09
5.25
J.41
:..58
5.74
5.90
k06
-.23
••39
•.55
F=- X M
*********
*
OUR *
MG/L *
/HR *
^
3
3
4
4
4
4
5
5
5
6
6
6
7
7
7
a
a
a
9
£=tL_
DOB
FT
*****•!
3.6
3. 7
3.4
3.5
3.6
8.6
3.7
8.4
8.5
3.5
8.6
8.6
8.7
3.7
8.4
8.5
8.5
8.5
8.6
8. 6
'L-LJEMT
* *
* EFF *
* BOD *
* *
<5
<5
<5
'••. 5
<5
<5
< 5
•\ 5
<5
<5
\ 5
<5
''-. W
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
< 5
<5
I EIF
CMP
*•*****•;
EFF
T3S
MG/L
<•*****-
•:-. 5
<5
<5
<5
:::5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
<. 5
<5
<5
< 5
<5
<5
5
5
5
6
*RiP»C~rE:R:
* *
* EFF *
* NH3 *
* MG/L *
*************
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
<1.0
< 1 . 0
=;: i . o
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
<1.0
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
DATE:
TIME: :
BOD: 175
TSS: 197
TEMP 20
E"T*J 9"1«ri! -i***^.
t ^^u B 1 f i
J S~T
*******
EFF
N03
MG/L
******
25.6
25.5
25.5
25.4
0=; T
A. W . *~'
^^ "T
^.
-------
MURRAY, KY
E: C Q rM H> #=% Ft Y SVSTEM R'EIFC
DATE:
TIME: :
BOD: 175
TSS: 197
TEMP 20
*^
#• # *• *
'LOW * CLARIFIER LOAD * SEC. SLUDGE PROD * TOTAL SLUDGE PROD *
ISO * SFC * WEIR * LBS TSS * LBS VSS* LBS TSS * LBS VSS * '/. SOL * GPD *
* GPSFD * GPLFD * * * * * * *
46
63
79
95
11
28
44
60
76
93
09
25
41
58
74
90
06
O "T
39
55
154
172
188
205
^^.rfi.
240
257
274
290
308
325
342
359
377
394
4 1 0
427
445
462
479
2285
2546
2796
3046
3296
3562
3812
4062
4312
4578
4828
5078
5328
5593
5843
6093
6343
6609
6859
7109
984
1118
1230
1361
1496
1641
1781
1891
2033
2185
2330
2478
2627
2787
2892
3043
3196
3360
3516
3673
383
449
494
560
629
705
779
824
899
982
1061
1143
-i *— i ' — i i.
J. -L.-L1O
1316
1356
1442
1529
1623
1712
1804
984
111B
1230
1361
1496
1641
1781
1891
2033
2185
2330
2478
2627
2787
2892
3043
3196
3360
3516
3673
383
449
494
560
629
705
779
824
899
982
1061
1143
1226
1316
1356
1442
1529
1623
1712
1804
2.
•->
J^ •
•tU. •
jL. m
2.
2.
2.
2.
A» •
2.
•C. •
^_ •
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
28
25
*lsJ'
20
17
14
11
10
08
05
03
01
99
97
96
94
93
91
89
88
5164
5967
6613
7425
8270
9202
1011 0
10794
11735
12766
13764
14788
15837
16980
17678
18776
19897
21112
22278
23466
-------
X :ZE::D M^THEII-lftT I Cftl_ MODEL- OF"
KY
ftERftT X OM OXIDATION* DITCH
WITHOUT i=" Ft T M ft- Ft V CI_#=*Ft I F7 I C*=%T I OfM
TREATMENT SYSTEM
P r e p a r e d b v E S E n v i r D n rr i e n t £ 1 5 e r v i c e =•. .
by contiract with Boise Sta~.t'
Un i % er si t - , Boise, Idaho. Through =, grant -f^on: the
E n v i r o r; rn e n t a I Protect! a n A g e n c v = R e g i o n X ?
a 1 1 3. e Wa =-!~ i n g t on .
RUNfri 7/23/34
-------
AVERAGE DRY WEATHER FLOW
PEAK DRY WEATHER FLOW
DESIGN FLOW
INFLUENT BOD
INFLUENT TSS
INFLUENT VSS
TEMPERATURE
TKN
ALKALINITY
FH
PQ4-P
MGD:
MGD:
MGD:
MG/L:
MG/L:
(7.) :
? r-» •
w- •
MG/L:
MG/L:
•
•
MG/L:
V
IS
1 T'
X o^
200
200
75
20
30-
1 00
7
8
•K-
DEFAULT VALUE USED
DATE;
TIME: :
X ZftT I ON
F'L_<=»NT CQNF- I
I ON
DESIGN AVERAGE DAILY FLOW (MGD) :
DESIGN PEAK WET WEATHER FLOW (hBD):
OX T O ft T X O N
NUMBER OF OXIDATION DITCHES; 2
DIMENSIONS EACHTOTAL
12
IS
E> I MIEINS I ONS
VOLUME \3AL): 6050000 12100000
-------
DATE:
TIME:
EI CO SNIDERY CL_f=*R X F^ X CftT I OM
NUMBER OF RECTANGULAR CLARIFIERS:
DIMENSIONS EACH TOTAL
LENGTH (FT): 164
WIDTH (FT): 41
DEPTH (FT): 15
WEIR LTH (FT) : 276 552
SURFACE AREA :6724 1344S
-------
33 X Ol_OG Z
ASHLAND, KY
OX I
DATE:
TIME: :
BOD: 200
TSS: 200
TEMP 20
*****
'LOW * MAX * MLVSS * F/M * MCRT * SVI
MBD * MLSS * '/. * * DAYS *
*****
****
* RAS * RAS * WAS *
* M6D * MG/L *LBS/DAY*
****
6.75
7.22
7.68
8.15
8.61
9.08
9.54
10.0
10. 4
10=9
11.4
11. B
1 2'. 3
12.3
13.2
13.7 .
< n —.
it1. JL
i*"!". O
;15, i
15.o
2777
2996
2950
2908
2869
2834
2301
2771
2984
2955
'•'92B
2902
2878
2856
2834
2814
2795
2777
2982
2964
46
46
47
48
48
49
49
50
50
50
51
51
52
52
52
53
53
54
53
53
. 090
. 090
. 090
. 1 00
. 1 00
.110
. 110
. 120
. 120
. 1 20
. 130
. 130
. 140
. 140
. 150
. 150
. 160
. 160
. 160
. 160
52
53
48
44
41
38
35
33
34
32
30
28
27
25
24
23
22
21
•"*7i ~
"~ "j
1 00
100
1 00
1 00
100
100
i oo
1 00
100
i oo
100
1 00
100
1 00
100
1 00
1 00
100
1 00
100
2.58
3 . 07
3. 19
3.32
3.45
3.57
3.69
3.82
4 . 43
4.56
4.69
4.82
4.96
5.09
5.22
5.35
5.48
5.61
6.39
6. -53
10000
10000
1 0000
1 0000
10000
10000
1 0000
1 0000
10000
1 0000
10000
1 0000
10000
10000
10000
10000
10000
1 0000
10000
i oooo
5292
5648
6096
6552
7014
7483
7958
8438
.8783
9266
9755
1 0248
10746
11249
11755
12266
12781
13300
13616
14135
-------
ASHLAND, KY
********
*
FLOW *
MGD *
6.75
7.22
7.68
8. 15
8.61
9.03
9.54
10.0
10.4
10.9
11.4
11. B
12.3
12.8
13.2
13.7
K.2
L 4 . 6
;15, i
i5i. 6
!=• X fxl,
*
OUR *
MG/L *
/HR *
5
5
6
6
6
7
7
7
S
S
8
o
o
10
10
10
11
11
11
12
DATE:
TIME: :
BOD: 200
TSS: 200
TEMP 20
ftl_ CL_ftR X !=• I EIR: F'ERIF^aFtM^rMCE:
DOB
FT
10.
1 0 .
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
10.
1 C .
10.
*********
*
* EFF
* BOD
*
<5
<5
<5
<5
.•• cr
<5
<5
<5
<5
<5
5
5
6
7
B
9
10
11
11
12
f-*********
*
* EFF
* TSS
* MG/L
<5
<5
5
6
7
B
9
10
11
12
14
15
17
19
22
24
27
30
30
"•7 ?\
* *
* EFF *
* NH3 *
* MG/L *
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
< i . o
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
< i . o
< i . o
<1.0
<1.0
a . o
< 1 . 0
< i . o
< 1 . 0
< 1 . 0
EFF
NQ3
MG/L
24. S
24.8
24.8
24.7
24.6
24.6
24.5
24.4
24.5
24.4
24.4
24.3
24.3
24.2
24.2
24. 1
24. 1
24 . 0
24. i
24 . 0
***********
* *
* EFF *
* P04-P *
* MG/L *
***********
5
5
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
-------
ASHLAND, KY
DATE:
TIME: :
BOD: 200
TSS: 200
TEMP 20
* * *• *
LOW * CLARIFIER LOAD * SEC. SLUDBE PROD * TOTAL SLUDGE PROD *
GD * SFC * WEIR * LBS TSS * LBS VSS* LBS TSS * LB3 VSS * 7. SOL * BPD *
* GF'SFD * GF'LFD * * * * # * *
.75
.22
.68
.15
.61
.08
.54
0.0
0.4
0.9
1 . 4
1.8
^ -r
2.8
3.2
3.7
4.2
4 . 6
5.1
5. -6
502
537
571
606
640
675
709
744
779
814
848
883
. 913
953
987
1022
1056
1091
1125
1160
12228
13079
13913
14764
15597
16449
17282
18134
189'85
19813
20670
21503
22355
23206
24039
24891
^ c.' / •*- 4
26576
27409
28260
5292
5652
6095
6554
7011
7484
7953
8438
8787
9264
9757
10244
10747
11254
11754
12270
12778
1 3302
13612
14135
2477
2642
2892
3156
3421
3697
3975
4264
4417
4702
4999
5294
5601
5912
6221
6540
6857
7184
7303
7630
5292
5652
6095
6554
7011
7484
7953
8438
8787
9264
9757
10244
10747
11254
11754
12270
12778
13302
13612
14135
2477
2642
,2892
3156
3421
3697
3975
4264
4417
4702
4999
5294
5601
5912
6221
6540
6857
7184
7303
7630
1 . 90
1.88
1.85
1.82
1 . 80
1.77
1.75
1.73
1.72
1 . 70
1.68
1.66
1.65
1.63
1.62
1.60
1.59
1.57
1.57
1.56
33473
36 1 03
39522
43131
46775
50607
54461
58501
61294
65350
69587
73820
78232
82728
87207
91B62
96492
01296
039B3
OBB40
-------
APPENDIX C
TREATMENT PLANT CONFIGURATION
DATA SHEETS
Treatment Plant Name Ashland Wastewater Treatment
State of Kentucky
Type of Treatment Plant (check appropriate box)
( ) 1. Primary treatment
( ) 2. Conventional activated sludge, with or without
primary sedimentation
( ) 3. Single stage activated sludge for nitrification,
with or without primary sedimentation
( ) 4. Extended aeration with or without primary sedimentation
(X) 5. Extended aeration oxidation ditch with or without
primary sedimentation
(. ) 6. Contact stabilization, with or without primary
sedimentation
( ). 7. Single stage trickling filter with primary sedimentation
( ) 8. Two stage trickling filter with primary sedimentation
( ) 9. Activated Bio-Filter Process, with or without primary
sedimentation
( ) 10. Rotating biological contactors with primary sedimentation
1. Primary Clarification Input Data:
Circular Clarifiers
Clarifier Number £1 £2 £3 £4 £5
Diameter of ea. clarifier (ft)
Avg. depth of ea. clarifier (ft)
Weir length of ea. clarifier (ft)
Rectangular Clarifiers
Clarifier Number £1 £2 £3 £4 £5
Length of ea. clarifier (ft)
Width of ea. clarifier (ft)
Avg. depth of ea. clarifier (ft)
Weir length of ea. clarifier (ft)
C-2
-------
Fine Screen
Are fine screens being used (yes or no):
If yes, answer the following questions:
Type of screen:
Number of screens:
Width (ft):
Height (ft)
Screening opening: (in):
Capacity ea. (MCD): 12 M6
2. Secondary Clarification Input Data:
Circular Clarifiers
Clarifier Number £1 £2 13 . f4 #5,
Diameter of each clarifier (ft)
Avg. depth of ea. clarifier (ft)
Veir length of ea. clarifier (ft)
Rectangular Clarifiers
Clarifier Number £1 £2 £3 £4 £5
Length of ea. clarifier (ft) 164 164
Width of ea. clarifier (ft) 41 41
Avg. depth of ea. clarifier (ft) 15 15
Weir length of ea. clarifier (ft) 276 276
3. Reactor(s) Input Data:
Type of Reactor: circle the type of reactor shown below and indicate
the dimensions for each of the reactors
Activated Sludge/Extended Aeration
Circular Reactors (Aeration Basins)
Reactor Number £1 £2 £3 £4 £5
Diameter (ft)
Water depth (ft)
C-3
-------
Rectangular Reactors (Aeration Basins)
Reactor Number fl
12
13
f4
15
Length of ea. basin (ft)
Width of ea. basin (ft)
Avg. depth of ea. basin (ft)
Extended Aeration tarros.e1!! Ditch
Ditch Number
fl
f5
Volume of ea. ditch (gal)
6.05 MG 6.05 MG
Contact Stabilization
Round Reaeration Tanks
Tank Number
fl
12
#3
f4
#5
Volume of ea. tank (MG)
Rectangular Reaeration Tanks
Tank Number
f2
Length of ea. tank (ft)
Width of ea. tank (ft)
Avg. depth of ea. tank (ft)
Round Contact Tanks
Tank Number
Volume of ea. tank (MG)
Rectangular Contact Tanks
Tank Number
f2
13
f4
f5
Length of ea. tank (ft)
Width of ea. tank (ft)
Avg. depth of ea. tank (ft)
C-4
-------
Activated Bio-Filter (ABF)
Bio-tower aedia (circle one): Redwood, stacked plastic, packed plastic
Are bio-towers constant flow or constant recirculation:
Circular Bio-Filters fl £2 13 £4_
Diameter of ea. bio-filter (ft)
Depth of ea. bio-filter (ft)
Flow rate (GPM)
Rectangular Bio-Filters £1 (2
Length of ea. bio-filter (ft)
Width of ea. bio-filter (ft)
Depth of ea. bio-filter (ft)
Flow rate (GPM)
Circular Aeration Basins
Reactor Number £1 £2 £3 14 #5
Diameter (ft)
Avg. depth (ft)
Rectangular Aeration Basins
Reactor Number £1 £2 £3 £4 £5_
Length of ea. basin (ft)
Width of ea. basin (ft)
Avg. depth of ea. basin (ft)
Activated Sludge/Extended Aeration/Contact Stabilization/ASF
Type of aeration (circle one): diffused air,(mechanical aeration^)
Tank Number £1 £2 £3 14
diffused: scfm/reactor
mechanical; hp/reactor 150 150 150
C-5
-------
Single Stage Trickling Filter
Filter »edi£ (circle one): rock, stacked plastic, packed plfc&tic
Are filtera constant flow or constant recirculation:
Filter number II £2 13 I4_
Diameter of ea. filter (ft)
Depth of ea. filter (ft)
Flow rate (GPM)
Two Stage Trickling Filter
Primary Filter media (circle one): rock, stacked plastic, packed plastic
Are filters constant flow or constant recirculation:
Primary Filter Number II
Diameter of ea. filter (ft)
Depth of ea. filter (ft)
Flow rate (GPM)
Secondary .Filter Media (circle one): rock, stacked plastic, packed plastic
Are filters constant flow or constant recirculation:
Secondary Filter Number £1 £2 £3 14 15
Diameter of ea. filter (ft)
Depth of ea. filter (ft)
Flow rate (GPM)
C-6
-------
Rotating Biological Contactor (RBC)
Manufacturer of RBC units
Type of drive unit (air or Mechanical)
No. of process trains
No. of stages per train
Stage No. 1 surface area/per stage
Stage No. 2 " " " "
Stage No. 3 "
Stage No. 4 "
Stage No. 4 "
Stage No. 5 "
Stage No. 6 "
n it
tt n
it il
ii
ft
ft
ft
ft
ft'
ft
ft
Example:
I inflow
No.
No.
i
; NO.
No.
No.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
T *
to secondary clarifier
In example there are two trains
with six stages in series. Stage
Nos. 1,2,3 in each train have
100,000 ft2 of surface area each
or a total of 600,000 square feet.
Stages Nos. 4,5,6 have a surface
area of 150,000 ft2 each or a
total of 900,000 ft2.
C-7
-------
A. Sludge Digestion Input Data:
Anaerobic Digestion
Primary Digesters
Tank Number II 12 13 £4
Volume of each primary digester ________^___________^_____ gallons
Are the digesters heated _ (yes or no)
Are the digesters nixed (yes or no)
Is there any type of thickening prior to digestion? If so what kind
Secondary Digesters
Tank Number £1 £2 £3 £4
Volume of each digester gallons
Can the digesters be heated ___^_______-_______^____ (yes or no)
Can the digesters be mixed (yes or no)
Aerobic Digestion
Tank. Number £1 £2 £3 £4
Volume of each digester gallons
Is there any type thickening prior to digestion? If so what type
C-8
-------
SC
Review of Contract Operations and Maintenance Proposal
Wastewater Treatment Facility
A proposal for contract operations and maintenance of the
wastewater treatment plant by PSC Water Services, Inc. was
reviewed. fts with any complex issue, a direct answer to the
proposal is not straight forward without looking at many facets
and options of the current situation.
The following comments are offered as guidelines for aiding
in reaching your final decision:
ft. General
The operation of the Hardeeville WWTP has been difficult
for the town for the last few years. fllthough the facility is
only about four years old, there has been some difficulty in
obtaining compliance with the NPDES permit. During the past
year, the National Demonstration Water Project has included
Hardeeville in its Cornptrain Project ivi South Carolina. Frequent
visits and training by tne NDWP Field Operations Director has
produced many positive results and improvements. This project
has now been terminated, however, leaving the operators to be on
their own for operating the facility. There still needs to be
some continuous assistance from outside sources to provide for
permit compliance.
B. Contract 0 &• M Proposal
Pi proposal has been made by PSC Water Services, Inc. , a
subsidary .of the Philadelphia Suburban Corporation. This
proposal offers to take over complete charge of the operation and
management of the WWTP for an annual fee of $154-, 550. The
contract proposal guarantees meeting all requirements of the
NPDES permit under PSC/WS management. This would releive the
Mayor, Council, and fldrninist rator of day-to-day concern over the
treatment operation and its problems, allowing more time to be
devoted to other matters such as community development and
improvements.
C. Contract 0 & M Benefits and Concerns
Contract operations would certainly solve the present
situation of meeting permit limits and its associated 0 &• M
problems, since the total resources of PSC/WS would be available.
It would have the disadvantage of the town losing control over
the wastewater utility and its personnel. There is also no
assurance in the long term that present employees would retain
their jobs, although initially they will be hired and given
benefit of their capability and performance.
-------
The major concern for any contract 0 £ M plan is the cost
of such a venture to the community. When the town manages its
facility they have complete control over all expenditures. If
money is short they can delay obligations and suffer the
consequences. When someone else guarantees performance they can
not delay any actions, in fact, they may have to go a little
further to make sure they will always meet the standards. The
contract operators may have, however, experience and knowledge
that can save energy costs and certain other expenditures that
may not be necessary because of better preventive maintenance.
It is therefore very important that the contract fee be
carefully reviewed since some other costs that the town may be
responsible for could surface later. 0 review of the current
budget reveals the following:
a. 1985 Budget $188,446
b. Contract 0 &• M -154,550
c. $+33,896
d. Other obligations -35,152
(Bonds, loans, etc. ) ========
e. $ -1,£5£
However, the major difference as the budget appears to be
established, is that the current sewer budget includes some part
of the salaries for the Mayor, Council, Administrator, and
clerks. These cost are included in the $154,550 portion of the
money that would be paid to the contractor, so where would money
be available to pay the town's administration? It appears that
some portion of the following sewer budget items would still be
required :
No._
1 Salaries
£ F. I. C. Pi.
3 Health Ins.
4 Worker' s Cornp.
6 Telephone
11 Audit
1£ Postage
13 Dues
14 Subscription
1 5 Tort Liability
16 Miscellaneous
17 Employee bonds
19 Office supplies
If none of the money in the above line items is required
for the town administration, then the $188,446 budget minus
$154,550 would be realistic.
-------
D. General Opinions
1. The contract proposal would certainly be an answer to
the current permit compliance problem.
£. The proposal cost is realistic provided no additional
funds are required from the line items discussed above.
3. PSC/WS certainly has the resources to provide adequate
0 & M for the WWTP.
A. It appears that PSC/WS is very generous in guaranteeing
permit compliance and any fines up to $100,0013.
5. It would be well to have PSC/WS to include laboratory
cert ification, since this is one of the current programs
being established by DHEC.
Larry Pi. Parker, P. E.
January £5, 1935
-------
Alabany Wastewater Plant
pftE-TREATMENT STRUCTURE
murofi
-------
ALBANY
WASTEWATER CHARACTERIZATION
AVERAGE DRY WEATHER FLOW MGD: 0.146
PEAK DRY WEATHER FLOW MGD1, 0.200
DESIGN FLOW MGD: 0.493
INFLUENT BOD MG/L: 226
INFLUENT TSS MG/L: 240
INFLUENT VSS (%): 75
TEMPERATURE °C: 20
TKN MG/L: 30*
ALKALINITY MG/L: 100*
PH : ?
p MG/L: 8*
* DEFAULT VALUE USED
PLANT CONFIGURATION AND DIMENSIONS
DESIGN AVERAGE DAILY FLOW (MGD) : 0.432
DESIGN PEAK WET WEATHER FLOW (MGD) : 0.752
-------
APPENDIX C
TREATMENT PLANT CONFIGURATION
DATA SHEETS
Treatment Plant Name Albany
State of Kentucky
Type of Treatment Plant (check appropriate box)
( ) 1. Primary treatment
( ) 2. Conventional activated sludge, with or without
primary sedimentation
( ) 3. Single stage activated sludge for nitrification,
vith or without primary sedimentation
( ) 4. Extended aeration with or without primary sedimentation
'(X) 5. Extended aeration oxidation ditch without
primary sedimentation
(. ) 6. Contact stabilization, with or without primary
sedimentation
( ). 7. Single stage trickling filter with primary sedimentation
( ) 8. Two stage trickling filter with primary sedimentation
( ) 9. Activated Bio-Filter Process, with or without primary
sedimentation
( ) 10. Rotating biological contactors with primary sedimentation
1. Primary Clarification Input Data:
Circular Clarifiers
Clarifier Number £1 £2 £3 £4 #5
Diameter of ea. clariiier (ft)
Avg. depth of ea. clarifier (ft)
Weir length of ea. clarifier (ft)
Rectangular Clarifiers
Clarifier Number £1 £2 £3_ £4 #5
Length of ea. clarifier (ft)
Width of ea. clarifier (ft)
Avg. depth of ea. clarifier (ft)
Weir length of ea. clarifier (ft)
-------
Fine Screen
Are fine screens being used (yes or no):
If yes, ansver the following questions:
Type of »creen:
Number of screens:
Width (ft):
Height (ft)
Screening opening: (in):
Capacity ea. (MGD):
2. Secondary Clarification Input Data:
Circular Clarifiers
Clarifier Number £1 £2 13 IA £5.
Diameter of each clarifier (ft)
Avg. depth of ea. clarifier (ft)
Weir length of ea. clarifier (ft)
Rectangular Clarifiers
Clarifier Number £1 £2 13 £4 £5.
Length of ea. clarifier (ft) 52 52
Width of ea. clarifier (ft) 13 13
Avg. depth of ea. clarifier (ft) 12 12
Weir length of ea. clarifier (ft) 24 24
3. Reactor(s) Input Data:
Type of Reactor: circle the type of reactor shown below and indicate
the dimensions for each of the reactors
Activated Sludge/Extended Aeration
Circular Reactors (Aeration Basins)
Reactor Number £1 £2 £3 £4 £5
Diameter (ft)
Water depth (ft)
C-3
-------
Rectangular Reactors (Aeration Basins)
Reactor Kumber #1
Length of ea. basin (ft)
•Width of ea. basin (ft)
Avg. depth of ea. basin (ft)
Extended Aeration Oxidation Ditch
Ditch Number
12
Volume of ea. ditch (gal)
642,083
Contact Stabilization
Round Reaeration Tanks
Tank Number
#1
#2
#3
#4
ts
Volume of ea. tank (MG)
Rectangular Reaeration Tanks
Tank Number
Length of ea. tank (ft)
Width of ea. tank (ft)
Avg. depth of ea. tank (ft)
Round Contact Tanks
Tank Number
Volume of ea.
tank (MG)
#1 12 #3 #4 #5
Rectangular Contact Tanks
Tank Number
(2
Length of ea. tank (ft)
Width of ea. tank (ft)
Avg. depth of ea. tank (ft)
-------
Activated Bio-Filter (AEF)
£io-tover ttedia (circle one): Redwood, stacked plastic, packed plastic
Are bio-towers constant flow or constant recirculation:
Circular Bio-Filters
Diameter of ea. bio-filter (ft)
Depth of ea. bio-filter (ft)
Flow rate (GPM)
Rectangular Bio-Filters
Length of ea. bio-filter (ft)
Width of ea. bio-filter (ft)
Depth of ea. bio-filter (ft)
Flow rate (GPM)
Circular Aeration Basins
Reactor Number
Diameter (ft)
Avg. depth (ft)
Rectangular Aeration Basins
Reactor Number
Length of ea. basin (ft)
Width of ea. basin (ft)
Avg. depth of ea. basin (ft)
Activated Sludge/Extended Aeration/Contact Stabilisation/ABF
Type of aeration (circle one): diffused air, mechanical aeration
Tank Number £1 £2 #3 *4
diffused: scfW reactor
mechanical: hp/reactor 30 30
C~5
-------
Single Stage Trickling Filter
Filter media (circle one): rock, stacked plastic, packed plastic
Are filter* constant flow or constant recirculation:
Filter number £1 £2_
Diameter of ea. filter (ft)
Depth of ea. filter (ft)
Flow rare (GPM)
Two Stage Trickling Filter
Primary Filter media (circle one): rock, stacked plastic, packed plastic
Are filters constant flow or constant recirculation:
Primary Filter Number
Diameter of ea. filter (ft)
Depth of ea. filter (ft)
Flow rate (GPM)
Secondary- Filter Media (circle one): rock, stacked plastic, packed plastic
Are filters constant flow or constant recirculation:
Secondary Filter Kuaber
Diameter of ea. filter (ft)
Depth of ea. filter (ft)
Flow rate (GPM)
C-6
-------
Rotating Biological Contactor (RBC)
Manufacturer of BBC units
Type of drive unit (air or aechanical)
No. of process trains
No. of stages per train
ti n
ii ti
it
Stage No. 1 surface area/per stage
Stage No. 2 * M
Stage No. 3 "
Stage No. A "
Stage No. 4 "
Stage No. 5 "
Stage No. 6
ft'
ft2
ft
ft'
Example:
\ inflow
No.
No.
! No.
No.
No.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
to secondary clarifier
In example there are two trains
vith six stages in series. Stage
Kos. 1,2,3 in each train have
100,000 ft2 of surface area each
or a total of 600,000 square feet,
Stages Nos. 4,5,6 have a surface
area of 150,000 ft2 each or a
total of 900,000 ft2.
C-7
-------
4. Sludge Digestion Input Data:
Anaerobic Digestion
Primary Digester*
Tank Number £1 £2 £3 £4
Voluae of each primary digester gallons
Are the digesters heated (yes or no)
Are the digesters nixed (yes or no)
Is there any type of thickening prior to digestion? If so vhat kind
Secondary Digesters
Tank Number #1 #2
Volume of each digester
Can the digesters be heated
Can the digesters be mixed
Aerobic Digestion
Tank- Number #1 #2
Volume of each digester 92,820
Is there any type thickening prior to digestion?
No prior thickening.
*3 #4'
(yes
(yes
#3 #4
gallons
or no)
or no)
gallons
If so what type
C-8
-------
NDWP II
Winnsborp: Facility Operations
The operational staff is inexperienced in the operation of a facility of
this type. Two of the five operators are certified (1-C, 1-D), however, all
staff personnel are working to become certified or upgrade their certification.
The staff appears capable of learning how to operate the facility. Overall
moral of the facility personnel is good.
At the time of evaluation, no process control scheme was being followed.
The lead operator had been at the facility less than three months and had not
instituted any process control testing to date. The same holds true for the
anaerobic sludge digesters. Conversations with sate regulatory personnel in-
dicate that the lead operator has made many improvements in the organization of
the facilities laboratory, offices, and shops. The plant grounds were very well
kept. Major equipment problems at the time of inspection centered around the
sand filters. The available information concerning the sand filters is incon-
sistent with the units as they are installed.
-------
NDWP II
Winnsboro: Laboratory Evaluation
1) Laboratory facilities:
- Lacks a.convenient location for muffle furnace
- Lacks proper 220 volt power plug for muffle furnace
- Need file cabinets for lab records
- Table and chair would be useful
2) Sample collection records should have each sample point designated in the log
books and type of sample and parameter to be collected at each point.
3) Laboratory equipment:
- Should be keeping A.M. and P.M. temperatu-s records on incubators and ovens
when in use
- A spare pH electrode should be kept
- The date electrodes are received and placed into service should be kept
- Winkler reagents for D.O. measurement are not dated. Sodium thiosaTfate is
not standardized. This should be done monthly in triplicate and records
maintained.
- Another case of BOD bottles is needed
- Need to begin dechlorinating and reseeding BOD samples
- The analytical balance should be serviced and calibrated once per year.
Laboratory weights can be used to check performance of balance between ser-
vicing.
- Desiccating material inside weighing chamber should be open to the
atmosphere. The desiccant should be routinely replaced and recharged by
drying in a 103° oven. Might want to use a color indicating desiccant.
- Need a thermometer graduated in 0.1°C increments for the fecal coliform
water bath
- Need an incubator, warm air for verification of fecal coliforms
- Need a wide field binocular microscope (10-30X) with fluorescent light for
counting fecal coliform plates.
- Need bacterialogical media for fecal coliform verification (Lauryl tryptase
and E.G. media)
-------
-2-
Need glassware for F.C. verification (culture tubes, fermentation tubes and
cups)
Need small (100-200 ml) wick mouth bottles, sterilized with dechlon'nating
agent added., for fecal coliform sample collection
Need to institute a quality control program for fecal coliform test: to
include sterility control checks, positive control test and verification
test
-------
1984 COMPTEAIN PROGRAM OBJECTIVES
CITY OF DAYTOH WATER TREATMENT PLANT
I. TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
A. Turbidity Compliance Problems
1. Prefilter turbidity
a. Cleaning sedimentation tanks
b. Cleaning backwash basin
c. In-line turbidimeters
d. Cost of frequent backwashing
e. Chemical dosages and possible change in coagulent
aids
2. Jar Tests
B. Maintenance and Repair of Equipment
1. Preventive maintenance system
2. Maintaining chemical dosage equipment
a. Lime and alum
b. Fluoridation
c. Calgon
3« Pumps
a. Raw water pumps
b. Backwash water basin return water pumps
C. Review Consulting Engineers' Feasibility Plan for
Distribution System
II. TRAINING
A. Chemical Dosages
1. Jar testing
2. Calibrating chemical feeders
-------
TENNESSEE COMPTRAIN 1984
¥ATER TREATMENT SYSTEM ASSESSMENT
A. General
Facility Name Dayton WTP Design Population 6,000
Type of Plant Filtration Facility
Year Built (& Major Renovations) 1964
Town/County Dayton/Ehea
Operating Agency: Name City of Dayton - City Manager
Official Jim Smith Telephone No. (615) 775-1817
Regulatory Agency Tennessee Department of Public Health
Permit No. PVS ID 000174
Major Pre-identified Non-compliance Areas 1. Occassional final
water turbidity violations. 2. CaC03 equilibrium. 3. Failure to
analyze for sodium and corrosivity. 4. Maintenance problems.
B. Water Treatment System
Water Supply
Source Description Tennessee River
Typical Characteristics on Records :
Raw Finished
Turbidity (NTU) (4-17) 0.45
avg. = 7
Alkalinity (mg/l) 50 41 (phenolphthalein)
Hardness (mg/l) 56 64
Organics Less than MCL
Total THM's Not applicable
Sodium (mg/l) Not sampled
-------
Problems with Source
Raw water turbidity is extremely variable
uite high.
Reporting Requirements
State Report (Attach copy) See State Reports (January-April, 1984)
Parameters Reported
Water treated, turbidity, alkalinity. pH.
hardness, fluoride, chemicals used, filter operation data,
microbiological examination (total coliform), chlorine residual
Sampling Methods Desciption: Type (grab or composite)
Grab
Frequency and Location
Raw, finished and pre-filter
(turbidity only) once per shift.
Analyses Techniques
Turbidity - Hach Turbimeter 2100A. pH -
pH meter, hardness and alkalinity - titration, chlorine residual -
amperometric. total coliform - constant temp, bath
Laboratory Capabilities
State certified for turbidity analysis
Analysis of all reportedparameters
Records sent in on time?
Water Treatment Plant
Storage Reservoir: Capacity
Controls Manual operation
Yes
None
Type
Intake Structure Description
Influent pumps with bar screen.
Pumping to Plant: No. Available
No. Operating
1
Capacity and Comments One high capacity (1400 gpm) and one low
capacit
due to condition of second Dump.
Design Conditions: Average Daily Flow 2.0 MGD
Actual Water Usage
1 .5 MGD
Metering Description Finished
water meter - Badger
Metering Calibration, Balance or Checks Not known
-------
Gallons per customer per month: Design
Actual 16,600 gals/month
Chemical Addition: Type(s) of chemical & Purpose Alum -
coagulant aid, lime - pH adjustment, flouride - dental hygiene and
calgon - corrosivity control.
Dosages Lime - 12 mg/1; Alum - 30 mg/1; Flouride - 0.6 mg/1
Chemical Feeder Type Dry Feeders
Chemical Storage Capacity Dry bags of chemical
Rapid Mix Tank: Size & Volume 8'x 8' X 11'- 4' deep, 5.400 gals.
Mixer & Type Mechanical mixer - 5HP
Average Detention Time 5 minutes
Condition of Equipment & Comments Rapid mix
equipment is old .
Flocculation Basins: Size & Volume 76* x 15' x 11'- 4* deep,
100,000 gals.
Mixing, Baffling Arrangement Flocculator
paddle with 1 1/2 HP drive.
Detention Time 1.6 hrs.
Condition of Equipment & Comments Paddles
have been replaced this past month. Alum being fed intermittently
on manual basis, and a good floe was not forming.
Sedimentation Basins: Size & Volume 2 basins - (76'x 70' area)
437,700 gals.
Average Dentention time 7 hrs.
Overflow Rate (gpd/sf) 282 gpd/sq ft
Sludge Collection Drain valve to backwash
water basin.
-------
Condition of Equipment & Comments Sedimentation basin has 4 ft.
of mud on the bottom, but cannot be removed because the backwash
water storage tank is also full of mud. This effects water
turbidity.
Filtration
Disinfection
Size & Surface Area 12'- 6" x 14' = 175 sq ft each
Number of Tanks : Available 4_
On-line 4
Type of Media Sand and anthraite.
Typical filtration rate = 1.5 gpm/sq ft
Backwash Procedure Once daily (2nd shift)
Loss of Head Gauge Gauges are not functional
Control System(s) When raw water pump capacity is
reduced, filters are backwashed.
Frequency of Backwashing Two filters, once per
24 hrs. at about 36 gpm/sq ft (20,000 gals/day)
Backwash Water Quality Very muddy, but not sampled.
Backwash Discharge To storage tanks. Supernatent
pumped back to influent.
Condition of Equipment & Comments Loss of head
gauges not functional. Finished water turbidity is
occasionally in violation of State standards.
Type Gas chlorinators
Number of Chlorinators 2 - Pre & Post chlorination
Type & Size of Injector 2" throat
Feed Rate
70 Ibs/day - raw water.
45 Ibs/day - clearwell.
Dosage(s)
Pre chlorination = 5.6 mg/1
Post chlorination
-------
Mixing Turbulence in pipes
Alarms None
Size of Cylinders One ton cylinders.
Cylinder Storage In chlorinator building.
Cylinder Replacement Technique Two cyclinders
manifolded together.
Separate Chlorine Room Yes
Safety ("A" or "B" Kit) No
Type of Contact Chamber Clear Veil
Contact Time 8 hrs.
Residual Readings 1.4 mg/1 on top of filters and
2.9 mg/1 to distribution system.
Loss of Weight Measurement Fairbanks Morse dual
cylinder scale.
Condition of Equipment & Comments In fair condition.
Fluoridation: Type Dry feeder
Nu mb e r One
Mixing Procedures In-line injection to the
clearwell.
Dosage Rate About 0.5 - 1*0 mg/1 , but equipment is
out of service since February, 1984
Residual Readings 1.1 mg/1 finished water
Storage None on site ______
Condition of Equipment & Comments Equipment has
been out of service since February.
Distribution System (Attach Schematic);
Pumping: Number & Type Tvo high service pumps - vertical turbine
pumps from clearvell.
-------
Capacity (Attach Pump Curve) 2 @ 1600 gpm each.
Number of Pumps in Service One _____
Pumping Schedule & Sequence Pumps are operated 24 hours
per day unless storage tanks are full and begin to
run over.
Power (HP) 200 HP each.
Condition of Pumps & Comments Pumps are in fair
condition.
Piping & Transmission: System Map Available? Yes at City Hall
Date(s) Installed Prior to plant construction in 1964.
Sizes and Types of Piping Mains are asbestos cement and
are 10 inches in diameter.
Minimum Pressure in System Minimum pressure is on the
other side of town, downstream of pressure relief valve.
Maximum Pressure 140 psig
Pressure Regulators Two on water loop in town.
Individual Homes Newer homes are installing them
Individual Metering Yes
Hydrant Description No information
Pressure Gauges None in system.
Leak Survey No survey has been conducted on water loss
in the system.
Equipment Available for Repairs? Normally
Inventory Available Meters, valves and standard size
piping.
Pressure Problems in System Yes, maintaining pressure
at furthest point above 15 paig.
Highest Elevation No information
-------
Lowest Elevation No information
Head Loss Conditions No information
Free C1 Residual Maintained 1.5 - 1.6 mg/1 in
2
distribution system.
Storage Tanks : Number Two
Capacity of Each 500>000 gallons each.
Types Standpipe storage floating off the system.
Year(s) Constructed 1 964
Elevations 1075 feet ("both at same elevations
across town.)
Altitude (PRV) Values Two adjustable PRV'S in town to
regulate pressure at furthest point in system.
Describe Pumping Practices to Storage Trys to keep
storage tanks full to keep up with demand.
Changes in Elevation in Tank(s) Usually full.
Records None
Day & Night Levels
Days of Storage 16 hours in system.
Condition of Tanks One tank needs to be painted.
Can tanks provide water when service pumps are off? Yes
Operation and Staffing; Hours Staffed per Day 24 hours/day.
Certification Superintendent is certified .
Certification Training of Operator(s) Operators have not
received formal training.
Total Treatment Costs No information.
Personnel Costs No information.
Describe Over-all Operator Duties Operator performs
laboratory tests, backwashes filters, fills chemical
-------
feeders, starts and stops raw and distribution water
pumps, cleans plant and checks elevations in storage tank,
(See attached monitoring program.)
Work Order System (Attach Copy) None
Maintenance Procedures
Preventive Maintenance No formal system is used.
Restoring Equipment back in Service The floridator
and alum chemical feeder have been out of service for
several months.
Tools & Inventory Appears to be adequate.
Manuals
Plant O&M Manual None
Equipment Catalogs None at the plant.
Training No information on formal school training.
Housekeeping Practices Plant is kept fairly clean.
Report Keeping
Log Sheets (attach copy) Each shift has a duty log.
(See attachment)
Supervisory Skills Superintendent could give more .
direction to operators.
Operating Knowledge & Capabilities
(Troubleshooting Techniques) Needs to improve maintenance
of equipment and cleaning out backwash storage tank.
This causes excessive backwashing and turbidity problems.
Turbidity control needs to be improved.
-------
uayiun, i ennessee
NAME.
SECOND SHIFT 3:30 p.m. - 12:00 Midnight
DATE_
»HYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS!
Gallons Raw Water Pumped Gallons Finished Water Pumped
CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS)
CHLORINE RESIDUAL
ON TOP OF FILTER p. p.m. PLANT EFFLVENT p. p.m.
ALKALINITY
pH
/
HAW FINISHED
HARDNESS
RAW p p m FINISHED p. p.m.
FREE CO2
RAW p. p.m. FINISHED p. p.m.
IRON
RAW ppm FINISHED p. p.m.
MANGANESE
RAW p. p.m. FINISHED p. p.m.
FLOURIDE
RAW p. p.m. FINISHED D.D.m.
HIXALD PHINT-OATTON
Raw Water Temp. C° Turbidity
RAW SETTLED FINISHED
I I
[BACTERIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION! MONDAY FRIDAY
COLIFORM/100ML
RAW PLANT FFFIVFNT DIST. SYSTEM
[DAILY DUTIES! (INITIAL WHEN COMPLETED)
1 Wash 9 Filters
2 Clean Building (Dust, Sweep, Mop)
3. Equipment Check
4. Reclaim Wash Water
5 Fill Chemical Feeders (Alum, Ume)
[COMMENTS]
-------
DAYTON WATER TREATMENT PLANT
Dayton, Tennessee
DATE
>HYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS)
Gallons Raw Water Pumped Gallons Finished Water Pumped
CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTIC'S)
CHLORINE RESIDUAL
ON TOP OF FILTER p. p.m. PLANT EFFLVENT p p.m.
ALKALINITY
RAW p. p.m. FINISHED p.p.m.
PH
HAW FINISHED
HARDNESS
RAW p.p.m. FINISHED p.p.m.
FREE CO2
RAW p.p.m. FINISHED p.p.m.
IRON
HAW p.p.m. FINISHED p.p.m.
MANGANESE
RAW p.p.m. FINISHED p.p.m.
FLOURIDE
HAW p.p.m. FINISHED p.p.m.
HIHALD PRINT— DATTOH
Raw Water Temp. C° Turbidity
RAW SETTLED FINISHED
[BACTERIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION] MONDAY FR.DAY
COLIFORM/100ML
RAW PLANT FFFI VFNT DIST. SYSTEM
IDAILY DUTIES! (INITIAL WHEN COMPLETED)
1 fihflrt fihannp
2 Clean Building (Dust, Sweep, Mop)
3 Equipment Check
4. Reclaim Wash Water
5. Fill Chemical Feeders (Aium, i imp, Finm-in-n t
and Calgon When Needed)
„
[COMMENTS]
-------
PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM RATING FORM-DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY CONTROL
Tennessee Department of Public Health
NAME OF SYSTEM.
DATE
WATER QUALITY (58)
DEFICIENCY
POINTS
SCORE
1.
2.
4.
5.
6.
7.
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS - Turbidity more than 2 units ( ) Color More than 15 units ( )
- Taste and Odor ( ) ( ) ( )
CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS-Iron? )-Manganese ( ) Chloride ( ) Sulfate ( )-
Calcium Carbonate Equilibrium f ) - Hardness ( ) - Total dissolved solids ( ) -
Other ( ) Chemical Analysis ( ) - Ojher { ) (-)
BACTERIOLOGICAL QUALITY - Samples submitted on monthly basis ( 3
Check Samples ( } Mean Density and positive sample ( ) ( )
SOURCE OF SUPPLY - Adequacy ( ) Standby ( )-Pollution Hazards ( )
Supply protection ( ) — Raw water quality ( ) ( )
CROSS CONNECTIONS - Ordinance or policy filed with department ( )
Signed statement to department ( ) — On-going cross connection program ( )
DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM, RESERVOIRS & TANKS - Free chlorine residual in system ( )
Adequate storage ( ) — Disinfection of new works or existing works subject to con-
tamination ( ) — Maintenance of Reservoirs or tanks ( <*} - Routine flushing ( ) —
20 psi residual pressure in systems ( ) ( J )
OPERATION & LABORATORY CONTROL OF TREATMENT WORKS - Systematic operation of all
treatment facilities p
17
NOTE: Defects marked with a Cross (xl
Signed
1976
-------
PUBLIC WATER SYSTEM DATA
Key Identification Number
0000174
Name of Water System
Mailing Add1
Dayton Water System
iress P.O. Box 226, W. First Avenue
City-
Dayton, Tennessee
Zip Code .
37321
.Office Phone .
. County _
775-1817
Rhea
P1,nlph_
775-2752
Title of Person
Mayor
City Manager
Superintendent
Operators
Time
Wendell Brown
Jim Smith
Agnew Jewell Filt.
Arnold Wilkey, Charles Robinson,
Sherman Shnyder
Certification
CII Di
Interviewee]
st. X
Corres-
pondence
X
X
X
Source
No.
1
2
3
4
R
A
R
A
R
A
R
A
Name
Tennessee River
•
INTAKE LOCATION
USGS Map
LATITUDE
LONGITUDE
River Mile
DEG
3
c
MIN
2
8
SEC
.
8
MARK
(ONE ONLY)
SURFACE
X
GROUND
PURCHASED
TREATMENT
AERATION
PRECHLORINATION
X
COAGULATION
X
SEDIMENTATION
X
FILTRATION
X
CORRISION CONTROL
SOFTENING
TASTE AND ODOR
CONTROL
-
IRON REMOVAL
FLUORIDE ADJUSTMENT
X
INFECTION
O
X
Name of Systems served by this System
Evensville Utility District
Other Systems Connected to this System
Plant Classlficaiton
Distribution Classification
Desian Caoacity I H Z _>
Raw Water Pump Capacity
Distribution Storage, Gravity Flow
Clearwell Caoaclty
Date of Last Inorganic Chemical Ar
Date of Last Radionuclide Analysis
Number of Wholesale Customers
Ramarks- Check fo
I
(oom) Filter Area
2
0
ial
r
(a 1
21?
,000
ysis
5-2
0
400
million ,
5-16-83
7-80 "
ne
maintenance
1 3
/
Date Laboratory Certified 11—29
-H
4 @ 14 X 12.5 ,„,„, «=,„„«„„.
.. (qpm) Finished Water Pumo Capacity 2 ($
4 (JHliolollirQ)n Emergency Power Only
(million gallons) Date Cross Connection Control Program Appro
Date of Last Ornanir Chemical Analueie
DateE
fre
:m
q
urgency Plan Approved
Number of Meters 2709
uently
1
•i T
600
n T Ti i r] i 1~
2.0
None
vefl
1
Or dinan r e
5_
.ast Rat
4
16-83
-8-82
y
(Of
(0
On 1 y
2
am/ft.1)
(gpm)
al/oay)
Date of Last Survey
Date
of
Survey
11-29-8
Number
of
Connections
3 2709
Household
Factor
2 .99
Population
Served
8100
Average Daily
Pumpage
(million gallons)
1 .379
Maximum Day
Pumpage
(million gallons)
1 . 765
Engineer
GKR
Rating
.__ 92
Year
1988
1987
1986
1985
1984
1983
PH-035S WOC-112/76)
-------
WATER FIELD SHEET
SYSTEM.
Dayton Water Department
DATE n-29-83
COUNTY.
Rhea
SAMPLES REQUIRED PER MONTH.
REPORTS SUBMITTED 12/12
1982 1983
MONTH
SAMPLES RUN
ORGANISM/100 ML
OCT
'9
NOV
8
DEC
9
JAN
9
FEE
9
MAR
11
APR
9
MAY
10
JUNE
10
JULY
9
AUG
9
SEPT
9
REMARKS 1. Violates CaCOr, equilibrium.
2. Rapid mix broken
3. Oster Tank needs paint
4. CeniennioJ Rights, Hatch bent on tank,
5. Pipe Gallery leaks
6. Air Relief Valve leaks on clearwell
RECOMMENDATIONS.
DATE LETTER SFNT Dec. 2. 1983
WQS
Gary Burriss
-------
STATE OF TENNESSEE
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE
2501 MILNE STREET
CHATTANOOGA. TENNESSEE 37406
December 7, 1983
Honorable Wendell Brown, Mayor
City of Dayton
P.O. Box 226, W. First Avenue
Dayton, Tennessee 37321
Re: Dayton Water System
Sanitary Survey of Water System
Rhea County, Tennessee
P.W.S.I.D. # 0000174
Dear Mayor Brown:
Pursuant to the Tennessee Safe Drinking Water Act of 1983,
a sanitary survey was conducted on the public water system
referenced above on November 30, 1983. In accordance with the
published Procedures for Rating Public Water Supply Systems
in Connection with Investigations, your system was awarded a
numerical score of 92, placing it among the State's APPROVED
public water supplies.
During the survey the filter plant laboratory was recertified
to run turbidity analysis. ......
The following are deficiencies observed during the survey:
1. Maintenance of the storage tanks needs to be improved.
The tank at the Oster Plant needs to be painted as soon
as possible to prevent rust from totally destroying it.
The Centennial Rights tank needs a new and stronger
hatch in order to prevent unwanted entry into the tank.
2. The filter plant should be operated systematicly and
not allowed to fall into a state of disrepare as it has
in the past-.
3. Jar tests should be conducted frequently to determine
proper chemical dosage.
4. The chemical feeders should be calibrated frequently
and maintenance of all treatment units should be improved
-------
1'uge 2
Honorable Wendell Brown, Mayor
December 7, 1983
If you have any questions or need information on requirements
please contact Gary Burriss, Robert Moore, or me. Our telephone
number is 624-9921 in Chattanooga.
Sincerely,
Philip L. Stewart
Assistant Manager
Chattanooga Basin Office
Division of Water Management
PLS/GKB/agk
cc: Rhea County Health Department
cc: Agnew Jewell, Superintendent
be: Southeast Regional Health Office
be: W. David Draughon, Division of Water Management, Nashville
-------
1984 COMPTHAIK PROGRAM OBJECTIVES
CITY OF DAYTOH VASTE¥ATEE TREATMEHT PLART
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
A. Compliance Sampling Program
1. Technique and procedures
2. Schedule and record keeping
B. Assess Laboratory Analysis Needed
1. Analysis for process control
2. Staffing for performance of sampling and lab work
3. Assess adequacy of laboratory equipment
C. Process Control
1. Measuring sludge blankets in clarifiers and control-
ling return activated sludge (HAS) flow
2. Wasting sludge .by solids retention time (SET)
a. Measure WAS flow by fill and draw
b. Wasting more continuously
3. Settleability of mixed liquor suspended solids (MLSS)
4. Grit removal
5. Sand drying bed operation
D. Odor Control
1. Review consulting engineers' report(s) on odor
control
2. Prepare comments on source of odor and proposed
control methods
E. Solids Disposal
1. Alternatives for disposal of sand drying bed sludge
and/or liquid stabilized sludge
2. Assist in preparation of permit application
F. Evaluate Treatment Plant Capacity
1. Use "Idealized Computer Model"
2. Lrquid handling capacity
3. Solids handling capacity
G. Energy Conservation Opportunities (ECO)
1. Energy Audit
a. Review power bills
b. Identify major energy comsumers
2. Assess ECO's - cost savings and payback periods
H. Long Term Planning
1. Equipment replacement and recommended capital
improvements program
2. Define alternatives for I/I problem
3. Review color discharge problem
II. TRAINING
A. Laboratory Training
1. BOD analysis
2. Suspended solids and volatile suspended solids
3. Maintenance of lab equipment
B. Process Control Techniques
1. Sludge blanket levels
2. Sludge wasting, settleability and DO measurements
-------
FVT
FW CONSULTANTS, INC.
310 W Liberty StrMl
environmental consultants uomwuy Building - suit* TH
LouisvtIK, Kentucky 40202
502-589-3272
July 25, 1984
Mr- James M. Smith, Jr.
City Manager
City of Dayton
P.O. Box 226
Dayton, Tennessee 37321
Re: Comptrain Sampling Compliance Program
Dear Mr. Smith:
Based on my visit to the Dayton Wastewater Treatment Plant, I
feel that your highest priority should be to establish a
representative, consistent compliance sampling program. The
elements of this recommended program consist of sampling on the
same day each week (regardless of the conditions prevailing on
that day), of sampling according to EPA recommended procedures
and of maintaining records as required in your NPDES permit.
This recommended procedure should result in data representative
of plant conditons and will provide you with an established
program, so that the Tennessee Department of Public Health should
be confident that the data actually represents plant performance.
It is also to your advantage to initiate a program like this to
verify self-monitoring compliance.
I will be in touch directly with the Chief Operator to assist in
setting up this routine practice. It should be noted that
sampling on this routine basis should have a high priority at the
plant, and that only an emergency should interupt the schedule.
Attached is a copy of the EPA manual, "NPDES • Compliance Sampling
Manual", .for Mr. Snyder's use.
Sincerely,
Neil A. Webster, P.E.
COMPTRAIN TENNESSEE
Field Director
cc: Mr. Agnew Jewell - Superintendent
Mr- Marvin Snyder - Chief Operator
-------
Compliance Sampling Schedule
City of Dayton, Tennessee
Sample
1 . Raw Sewage
Type of
Location Sample
Inlet box Composite (l)
at top of
screw pump.
Frequency
and
Amount
Monday
Wednesday
Friday
Handl ing
and
Preserving
Refrigerate
composite
Analysis
TSS
BOD5
Ammonia
Record
Keeping
Time, Date
Amount ,
Location .
2. Final
Effluent
Collection
chamber at
clarifier
effluent.
Composite (1)
(3 days)
sample every
2 hours for
16 hours/day
200 mis per
3 am pi e .
Monday
Wednesday
Friday
(3 days)
Sample every
2 hours for
16 hours/day
200 mis per
sample .
Refrigerate
composite
TSS
BOD5
Ammonia
Individual
(See Part B
Monitoring
Procedures
Pg. 4 of 17
Dayton NPDES
Permit.)
Maintain re-
cords for 3
years.
Time, Date
Amount,
Location,
Individual
(See Part B
Monitoring
Procedures
Pg. 4 of 17
Dayton NPDES
permit. )
Maintain re-
cords for 3
years.
-------
Compliance Sampling Schedule (con't.)
3.
Final
Effluent
At the
discharge
point to
the stream
Grab
Monday -
Friday
(5 days)
Once per
day grab
sample -
2 liters,
Refrigerate
Perform fecal
coliform
within 6 hrs
of sampling.
Fecal
coliform,
D.O. ,
chlorine
residual ,
settleable
sol ids,
pH
Time, Date,
Amount,
Location,
Individual
(See Part B
Monitoring
Procedures
Pg. 4 of 17
Dayton NPDES
permit.)
Maintain re-
cords for 3
years.
(1 ) The raw sewage sample pump should be repaired in order to use the automatic sampler.
final effluent sampler can be used if construction does not affect the sample.
The
-------
COMPOSITE SAMPLE LOg
DATE-
SAMPLE LOCATION TIME SAJfPLE VOLUME OPERATOR CO»
-------
TENNESSEE COMPTRAIN 1984
¥ASTEVATER TREATMENT SYSTEM ASSESSMENT
A. General
Facility Name Dayton V¥TP Design Population 6 ,000
Type of Plant Complete mix extended aeration activated sludge.
Year Built (& Major Renovations) Start-up - January 1974
Town/County Dayton/Ehea
Operating Agency: Name City of Dayton - City Manager
Official Jim Smith Telephone No. (615) 775-1817
Regulatory Agency Tennessee Department of Health
Permit No. TN 0020478
Major Pre-identified Non-compliance Areas (ref. State letter
May 21, 1984) 1. Not running ammonia analysis. 2. Color in
effluent. 3. Chlorine residual analyzer not in service.
4. sampling deficiencies. 5* Excessive I/I.
B. Vastewater Treatment System
Permit Conditions: Discharge Requirements
BOD (mg/l) 10 (avg.) 20 (daily max.)
5
TSS (mg/l) 30 (avg.) 45 (daily max.)
NH (mg/l) 10 (avg.) 15 (daily max.)
3
D.Q. (mg/l) 5.0 Minimum
Fecal Coliform (count/100 mis) 200/100 mis
Receiving Stream Richland Creek Embayment ® Mile 2.3
(Attach NPDES Permit) ~~
-------
Description of Treatment Plant & Equipment
Hydraulics
Average Daily Flow (Design) 2.0 MGD (in 18 hrs.)
(Current) 1.88 MGD (Jan.- June 1984)
Maximum Daily Flow (Design) 2.67 MGD
(Current) 2.4 MGD
Minimum Daily Flow (Design)
(Current) 1.6 MGD
Peak Hourly Flow (Design)
(Current) 5.2 MGD
Collection System (Combined, Separate):
Combined sewer system
Seasonal Variation (explain) None except during wet
and dry season.
Average Influent Characteristics
BOD : Design (mg/l) 220
5
Current (mg/l) 167 mg/l (Jan.- June 1984)
TSS: Design (mg/l) 220
Current (mg/l) 178 mg/l (Jan.- June 1984)
Types of Waste
% Domestic 60%
% Infiltration/Inflow Very high during rain
% Industrial Waste 4?J
Types of Industrial Waste Dye manufacturer,
hoisery mill, sink manufacturing
Connected Population Greater than 6,500
-------
Processes Description (attach schematic diagram of all unit
processes)
Preliminary Treatment
Bar Screens
* Number One
* Dimensions 36" across the channel.
* Openings 1 1/4"
* Flow-through Velocity About 1.5 fps
* Method of Cleaning (Manual/Mechanical) Manual
* Cleaning Frequency Three times per shift.
* Daily Volume of Screenings Trash can full .
* Disposal Hauls to local landfill.
* Comments The raw sewage influent flow is split
between the bar screen and comminutor. There is an
excessive amount of rags and debris in the plant.
Comminutors
* Type Vorthington
* Dimensions 35" across and 57" high.
* Hydraulic Capacity of Each Unit 0.5 MGD to 11 MGD
* Comments Comminutor is maintained in service.
Grit Removal
* Type of System Aerated grit channel.
* Hydraulic Capacity 2.67 MDG (7 min. - 24 sees.
detention time.) ___
* Dimensions 12ft x 12ft 10ft deep
* Volume of Grit Pumps with air eductor.
* Velocity (Average) 0.04 fps
* Disposal To landfill
-------
* Comments Only removes grit once every three months
and maybe scouring grit off the bottom.
Flow Measurement Influent
* Type of Device Parshall flume
* Recordings Local indicator and remote circular
chart recorder.
Primary Treatment
Clarifiers
* Number None
* Surface Area
* Depth
* Volume
* Weir Overflow Rate
* Surface Settling Rate
* Scum Collection Method^
Comments
Sludge Pumping
* Number
* Method of Control
* Capacity & HP_
* Comments
-------
Secondary Treatment
Activated Sludge
* Number of Basins Two
* Volume 1.08 MG
* Hydraulic Detention Time 13 hrs @ 2.0 MGD.
* F/M Ratio 1.19 Ibs BOD5/lb MLSS/day
* Mixed Liquor (MLSS) and Volatiles (MLVSS)
Avg. MLSS = 1670 mg/1 (Ho volatiles)
* Sludge Residence Time Approximately 4-5 days
* Describe Operating Control Procedure Measures
DO twice daily, wastes according to MLSS concentra-
tion (about 1 hr/day), checks settleability and
pumps RAS according to solids carryover in clarifier
* Type of Aeration Diffused air
(Mechanical)
* Number__
* HP
* Rated Capacity
* Dissolved Oxygen Levels
(Diffused Air)
* Type of Diffusers Chicago pump (discfusers)
* Number of Compressors Two
* Type of Compressor Hoffman centrifugal
* Capacity 3500 scfm @ 7 psig
* HP 200 HP each (one on line)
* Estimated Oxygen Transfer Efficiency About 5%
* Dissolved Oxygen Levels 5-0 nig/1
-------
* Air Limitation Problems Cannot throttle blowers
any lower to save energy.
* Control of Air System Inlet air butterfly valve.
* Condition of Equipment & Comments Diffused air
equipment seems to be in over-all good condition.
Trickling Filter Process
* Media Type Not applicable.
* Surface Area
* Media Depth
* Hydraulic Loading_
* Organic Loading
* Recirculation Ratio
* Recirculation Pump Capacity
* Troubleshooting (Ponding, etc.)
Secondary Clarifiers
* Number Two
* Type (Rectangular or Circular) Rectangular
* Weir Loading Rate 7250 gpd/ft
* Surface Area 440 sq ft/day
* Solids Loading Rate 7 Ibs/sq ft/day
* Hydraulic Loading 450 gpd/sq ft
* Detention Time 4.7 hrs.
* Sludge Collection System Chain and flight collector to
hopper at influent end. _
* Return Sludge Pump(s) Capacity Three pumps - 300 gpm
each.
-------
* Pump Control Three pumps used between 2 tanks.
* Waste Sludge Pump Capacity Wastes off HAS line.
* Wasting Schedule Wastes sludge for about 1 hour each
day to control MLSS concentration.
* Waste Sludge Problems Metering on wasting rate may not
be accurate. Wastes entire amount in one hour.
* Comments (Short circuiting or bulking problems) Good
settleability for MLSS, however there is a problem in
pumping RAS evenly from each clarifier. Without a
sludge judge to measure sludge blankets, operator
observes solids carryover from one clarifier before
changing pumping rate.
Disinfection
Contact Basins
* Number None (under construction)
* Volume
* Detention Time
Chlorinator
* Chlorinator Capactiy (0 - 500 Ibs/day)
* Ejector Type Process water pressure eductor.
* Feed Control Based on chlorine residual in effluent.
* Dosage Rate 3 mg/1
* Chlorine Residual 0 - 1 mg/1 at discharge point.
* Cylinder Size & Storage 1 ton cylinders
* Alarms Low chlorine pressure from ton cylinder.
* Loss of Weight Control Reads scale daily.
* Separate Building Yes
-------
* Safety ("A" or "B" Kit) No "B" kit available, but
there is a self-contained breathing apparatus.
* Cylinder Replacement Electric hoist used to replace
cylinders. Two cylinders can be manifolded together.
* Fecal Coliform Count Usually 100/100 mis
* Comments Chlorine contact basin, currently under
construction, will assist in controlling dosage.
Solids Handling
Sludge Generation
Primary None
Secondary 90,000 gals/day or 4,000 Ibs/day
Describe Solids Handling Processes and Design
1. Two aerobic digesters - DO maintained at 7.0 mg/1
and is supernated daily by pumping to influrent
(TOO gpm pump). Digested sludge is pumped to drying
beds with 250 gpm pump. TS and TVS are monitored once
per week. Data on TS and TVS is questionable (i.e. TS =
1.0% VS = 80-90%). Capacity = 0.2 MG, Detention Time =
8 days, Volatile Solids Loading 0 = .11 Ibs VS/cu ft.
2. Sand dry beds - Five beds for a total surface area of
10,000 sq ft. Devatered sludge is hauled by City of
Dayton Street Department.
Ultimate Disposal of Sludge
Contract Hauling No
Location of Disposal Site Farmland or sites in the City
of Dayton^.
Description of Disposal Practice Dried or liquid sludge
is disposed of on land.
-------
Permit for Land Spreading? In the process of applying
for permit from the State of Tennessee.
Alternative Future Sludge Disposal Methods Not known
By-Passing Capability; For Preliminary or Primary (Frequency,
Duration, % of Flow) No
For Secondary (Frequency, Duration, % of Flow) No
By-Pass Reporting Sent in monthly to State report
(See attached)
System By-Passing At the lift station during the
heavy rain .
Reporting to EPA Yes
Average Effluent Characteristics (Attach past 6 months of State Report)
Characteristics: BOD (mg/l) 6
5
TSS (mg/l) 6
Ammonia (mg/l ) Not measured
Dissolved Oxygen 5 • 1 mg/l
Sampling Methods (Daily, Weekly, Monthly, Grab or Composite) Raw
sewage sampler pump for automatic sampler is out of service. Grab
samples taken once/hour, three days/week by Chief Operator. Final
effluent sampler is usable vhen effluent pumps are in service, but
due to construction, it is not used.
State Inspection Reports (Attach latest report) (January 18, 1984)
Compliance Sampling Inspection
1. Infiltration/Inflow excessive 2. Color discharge 3« Capacity
problem 4. Sampling problems 5. Plant is understaffed.
Laboratory Capability
Describe Equipment and Testing Apparatus Chief Operator performs
laboratory analysis. BOD5 analysis, TSS, TS, TVS, pH, DO and fecal
-------
Problems experienced with anaytical balances.
Quality Assurance Program Description Marginal . The State requires
the Plant to do 10% spikes and duplicates for each sample are done.
Operator should check seeded vs. unseeded on effluent. _
Process Control (Attach Control Practices)
Activated Sludge Process Control Description (i.e., settleablility ,
SET, F/M, D.O., O.U.R.'s, Bulking Sludge _ Measures
settleability and DO'S. Does not control process according to SRT or
F/M. _
Process Knowledge Chief Operator is a self trained Class III _
operator and has never had formal training. A definite need exists
for specific on-site training in sampling, analytical procedures and
process control. _
Record Keeping (Attach Copies) Refer to attached sheets which _
outline daily analysis and duties to be performed. _
Process Control Problems 1. Proper control of wasting rate, RAS rate,
DO, sludge blankets and sampling are needed. _
Administrative Support Appears to be okay, except for training and
possible additional staffing needs. _
Operation and Staffing
Hours Staffed Per Day 16 hrs/day - 7 days/week _
Number of Operators 1 Chief Operator, 3 Operators _
Organizational Structure City Manager - Superintendent of water and
wastevater and Chief Operator. _ __ _ _
Certif ication(s) Chief Operator - Class III and one Class I operator.
Certification Training Ho formal training at Murfreesboro training
center by any operators. _ _____ _ _ ____
-------
Describe Over-all Operator Duties Chief Operator does sampling and
all laboratory work. Determines process control decisions and super-
vises operators. Operators remove rags from pumps, bar rack, and
gates, wastes sludge, records chlorine levels, skims tanks, cleans
areas and checks lift stations.
Work Order System (Attach Copy) None in existence - Chief Operator
informs superintendent of needed repairs.
Maintenance: Preventive Maintenance Fills oilers, lubricates bottom
bearing in influent screw lift pump, and checks
equipment.
Restoring Equipment Back in Service Most critical
equipment is kept in service.
Tools & Inventory Appears to be adequate.
Planning & Schedule There is no established priority
system.
Manuals: Plant O&M Manual Yes, a complete two volume set.
Equipment Catalogs Manufacturers' information is in the
O&M Manuals.
Housekeeping Kept up routinely.
Safety Practices No formal program exists and no formal training has
been received .
Budget Preparation - Who helps prepare annual budget? Superintendent
and City Manager (see attached budget).
Preliminary List of Compliance Problems
1 Sampling - technique and record keeping.
2. Analytical procedures.
5. Dye discharge to stream.
4. Infiltration/Inflov.
-------
Collection System
Pumping Stations: Controls Level control - wet veil
Alarms None
By-passing Yes during heavy rains - reported to
State .
Location North drainage basin.
Numbers One lift station.
Condition & Documents Pumps are old and are
being replaced this year along vith new station.
Piping Sizes 8j]
Gravity of Force Mains Mostly gravity fed to plant.
Possible H2S Problem(s) Yes, a severe odor problem exists at
the plant and has been documented as H2S problem.
Type of Pipes Concrete, clay
Manhole Entry Procedures No established procedures and rare
entry into manhole.
Emergency Planning A section in the 0 & M Manual addresses this
situation for standby -power generator (170 kv) and natural disasters.
Planning: Capacity The City faces many problems vith the plant right
nov in terms of capacity, infiltration/inflow, pretreatment,
staffing and compliance with discharge regulations.
Future Standards No anticipated change.
Regulations on Hand ____^
-------
A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
During the period beginning the effective date of this permit and
lasting through the-expiration date of this permit, the permittee is
authorized to discharge from all point sources associated with this
operation.
Discharge 001, consisting of treated municipal wastewater from a
facility with a design capacity of 2.54 mgd, discharges to mile 2.3
of Richland Creek. Discharge 001 shall be limited and monitored by
the permittee as specified below:
Effluent
Characteristic
Effluent Limitations
Mjmitoring_ Requirements
' ' "
Monthly
Avg.
Cone.
mg/1
Monthly
Avg.
Amount
Ib.(kg)
Weekly
Avg.
Cone.
mg/1
Weekly
Avg.
Amount
Ib.(kg)
Daily
Max.
Cone.
mg/1
Daily
Max.
Amount
Ib.(kg)
Measurement
Frequency
Sample
Type,
Sampling
Point
Ammonia as
Nitrogen
Suspended
Solids
Fecal
Coliform
D.O.
Chlorine
Residual
Settleable
Solids
pH
10
10
30
210(95) 15
210(95) 12.5
635(288)
320(145) 20
260(118) 15
847(384) 45
See below
5.0 minimum
0.5
0.1 ml/1
6.0 - 9.0 standard units
Flow, mgd (rn /day)
420(190) 3/week
320(145) 3/week
953(432) 3/week
3/week
5/week
5/week
5/week
5/week
7/week
composite influent
effluent
composite influent
effluent
composite influent
* effluent
grab
grab
grab
effluent
effluent
effluent
grab effluent
grab effluent
continuous effluent
Conservative
Parameters
See Part [If, REPOENER CLAUSE
\
s
tn
-------
t'J. <=?•/-
STATE OF TENNESSEE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE
2M)1 MILNE STREET
CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE 37406
January 27, 1984
Certified Mail
Mr. James M. Smith, Jr.
City Manager
City of Dayton
P. 0. Box 226
Dayton, Tennessee 37321
Re: City of Dayton's WWTP,
Operation and Maintenance Inspection
NPDES Permit .No. TN0020478
C. O. NO. 80-009
Rhea County, Tennessee
Dear Mr. Smith:
In our letter dated January 18, 1984, the following information was
inadvertantly omitted from deficiency number 2.
This Division has received several complaints from private
citizens concerning color in the Richland Creek embayment.
The source of these complaints is the Dayton Wastewater
Treatment Plant's outfall. The culprit appears to be the
Pentafab Corp. discharging dye wastes directly into the
City sewerage system without pretreatment. If this is the
case, the City of Dayton needs to require that Pentafab
Corp. install pretreatment facilities capable of handling
all dye wastes before they're discharged into the City's
sewerage system.
Please include comments for this in your response letter to us. If
you have any questions or comments, please contact Mr. Pilkin at this office.
The telephone number here is 615/624-9921.
Sincerely,
Philip L. Stewart, Assistant Manager
Chattanooga Basin Office
Division of Water Management
PLS/JFP/tdm/dfp
-------
Mr. J.iW-::- M. :-.!!.1 Mi, Ji
January 2 I, i'JU-4
Paye Two
cc: Hlioa County HoaJ Lh Uupdx. tiutsiit
cc: City of Dayton, c/o Mr. Marvin ijuy
-------
STATE OF TENNESSEE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE
2501 MILNE STREET
CHATTANOOGA, TENNESSEE 37408
May 21, 1984
Certified Mail
Mr. James M. Smith, Jr.
City Manager
City of Dayton
P. 0. Box 226
Dayton, Tennessee 37321
Re: City of Dayton's WWTP
Compliance Sampling Inspection
NPDES.Permit'No. TN0020478
Commissioner's Order No. 80-009
Rhea County, Tennessee
NOTICE OF NON-COMPLIANCE
NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE REVIEW MEETING
Dear Mr. Smith:
A routine, on-site compliance sampling inspection (CSI) of the City of
Dayton's WWTP was conducted on January 16, and 17, 1984 by Eugene 0. Scrudder
and Terrence P. Whalen of the Division of Water Management's Chattanooga Basin
Office. They were accompanied by Mr. Marvin Snyder, Chief Operator at the
facility. The findings of the inspection were reported on U.S.-EPA Form 3560-3.
A copy of the completed form, a summary of effluent analytical results and a copy
of the Reports of Analysis of samples collected during the inspection are attached.
Please note that a copy of this report has been .forwarded to the U.S.-EPA Region IV,
Atlanta.
The .following problems were noted during the inspection:
1. The plant is currently operating under both a NPDES Permit
and a Commissioner's Order. The Permit limits are in effect
for those parameters listed in the Permit but not in the
Order. Therefore, the City is found to be in non-compliance
with NPDES Permit No. TN0020478 in two respects since ammonia
is not being run or reported. Also, the effluent being discharged
to the Richland Creek Embayment caused an objectionable color
contrast at the time of the inspection.
2. The effluent was in non-compliance with Commissioner's Order No.
80-009 for BOD5 and fecal coliform.
-------
Mr. James M. Smith, Jr.
May 21, 1984
Page
3. The effluent flow totalizer reading was substantially less
than the influent flow reading and could not be used. The
influent flow was checked and found to be approximately
thirteen percent high. It is imperative that all flow
measurement devices be placed in correct working order as
soon as possible.
4. The influent composite sampler should be restored to service.
It was necessary to hand composite an influent composite sample
from hourly grab samples taken in volumes proportional to flow.
5. As explained to the City on several earlier occasions the
recommended staffing for this facility is 7.5 persons
(equivalent) of which one is a Grade 3 operator and three
are Grade 1 operators. Currently, Mr. Snyder (Grade 3) is
the only certified operator. An increase in staffing is
necessary to insure that adequate'manpower, properly trained,
is available to perform all operation and maintenance functions.
6. All laboratory equipment was in working order except for the
amperometric titrator. It should be repaired or replaced as
soon as possible since it is the only practical device available
for measuring total residual chlorine in samples containing
color bodies which interfere with other procedures.
7. It appears that analyses are being performed according to
approved procedures and are correctly calculated. The
laboratory exceeds the U.S.-EPA recommendations of 10%
duplicate samples. However, to insure accuracy of the results,
the laboratory should spike approximately 10% of the applicable
samples. In this instance, BOD and ammonia are the only parameters
amenable to spiking.
8. Our laboratory personnel have reviewed the May 23 and 24, 1983,
U.S.-EPA Compliance Sampling Inspection report. It is believed
that references to 0.99 normal N and 0.375 N sodium thiosulfate
are the result of misunderstanding and typographical error. When
used for dissolved oxygen determinations (either perse or in the
BOD procedure), a stock solution of 0.1 N sodium thiosulfate is
diluted to a working strength of approximately 0.025 N and
standardized. For convenience in calculations, the strength of
the working solution is expressed as a factor, which is a ratio
of actual strength to the ideal strength of 0.025 N. The above
lead our personnel to believe that the factor of 0.99 is referred
to instead of 0.99 N. The reference to 0.375 N is believed to be
a typographical error based on an EPA procedure which we understand
uses 0.0375 N.
-------
Mr. James M. Smith, Jr.
May 21, 1984
Page Three
9. On February 8, 1982, Messrs. Anwar H. Mujahid and Eugene 0.
Scrudder of this office performed a Performance Audit Inspection
(PAI) of the Dayton WWTP. Results were reported in a letter
dated February 23, 1982. That letter contained a request that
a written response be submitted within thirty (30) days; as of
May 14, 1984, no response has been received in this office.
10. This Division sent the City of Dayton a letter dated February 29,
1984, requesting further information on four of the deficiencies
noted during our January 16, 1984 Operation and Maintenance (O&M)
inspection. It also contained a request that a written response
be submitted within thirty (30) days and no response to that
request has been received in this office either.
11. The Chattanooga Basin Office has continued to receive and investi-
gate complaints of objectionable color in the Richland Creek
Enibayment. The investigations have found the source of this
color to be the dye waste in the effluent being discharged from
the City of Dayton's WOTP's outfall'line. Also, during the
course of these investigations, evidence of very poor preventive
maintenance on the wastewater collection system was found. A
A map with notes describing some of the problem areas found is
attached. Preventive maintenance is required to limit infiltration/
inflow (I/I) and so reduce the periodic hydraulic overloading of the
treatment units at thn WWTP.
Based upon the items noted above, this Division is issuing this formal
Notice of Non-Compliance to the City of Dayton. It is requested that the City
prepare a written response to this Notice for submittal to this office. The
response should outline what steps have been taken or are being proposed to
correct the recurrence of various problems and violations. The response must
be submitted to this office within thirty (30) days of receipt of this letter.
This letter also serves as a Notice of Compliace Review Meeting. It is
requested that you or your designated representative meet with us in this
office on June 28, 1984 at 1:00 p.m. Please bring any information or documentation
which may be relevant to this matter. Our offices are located on the third
floor of the Southeast Regional Health Office at 2501 Milne Street, Chattanooga.
We appreciate the cooperation shown our personnel by Mr. Snyder and his
staff during the inspection. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Scrudder
Mr. Whalen or me at 615/624-9921.
Sincerely,
Philip L. Stewart, Assistant Manager
Chattanooga Basin Office
Division of Water Management
PLS/JFP/EOS/tdm/dfp
-------
Mr. James M. Smith, Jr.
May 21, 1984
Page Four
Enclosures
cc: Division of Water Management, Nashville, c/o Bob Slayden
cc: Mr. Marvin Snyder, Dayton VWTP
cc: Environmental Protection Agency, Atlanta, Georgia, c/o Gil Wallace
(through Garland Wiggins, Nashville)
cc: Division of Water Management, Nashville, c/o Garland Wiggins and
Bill Duffel through Paul Davis
cc: Ehea County Health Department
cc: Southeast Regional Health Office
-------
y^^aif^^^,1*^^^^
-------
NPDES COMPLIANCE INSPECTION REPORT < i ,.,/m. !n -.'"<• '<••" ••" '•••• >• "'_^ f'"ft^J
NHLitS
HANSACTION
CODE
[Nj liJ |T|N|0|0|2|0|4|7|8
TNL.PLC FAC
TYPE 7GH TYPE
12
UA
^J LsJ LsJ UJ
12 US 12 2fl_
TIME
10:00
Is Is li |Q!N|E|R|S| lo
REMARKS
I8l0l0lol9l I ' I I I I I M I I I I I I I I I
L1_LL1_
ECTION A • Permit Summary
64
ADDITIONAL
AWE AND ADDRESS OF FACILITY (liu'luJc County. Stall.' and /.!/> cujc)
Dayton Wastewater Treatment Plant
Highway 27 South
Dayton, Bhea County, Tennessee 37321
IESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL
James M. Smith, Jr.
ACILITY REPRESENTATIVE
Marvin Snyder
TITLE
City Manager
TITLE
Chief Operator
EXPIRATION DATE
May 1, 1985
ISSUANCE DATE
April 24, 1980
PHONE
(615)775-1817
PHONE
(615)775-0780
IECTION B • Effluent Characteristic* (Additional itu-cts aitaclit-J
ARAMETER/
OUTFALL
MINIMUM
AVERAGE
MAXIMUM
ADDITIONAL
SAMPLE
MEASUREMENT
(see table 1)
PERMIT
REQUIREMENT
SAMPLE
MEASUREMENT
PERMIT
REQUIREMENT
SAMPLE
MEASUREMENT
PERMIT
REQUIREMENT
SAMPLE
MEASUREMENT
PERMIT
REQUIREMENT
SAMPLE
MEASUREMENT
SECTION C - Facility Evaluation (S = Satisfactory. U - Unsatisfactory. N/A = Not applicable}
PERMIT
REQUIREMENT
JJ_ EFFLUENT WITHIN PERMIT REQUIREMENTS TJ OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
U
SAMPLING PROCEDURES
RECORDS AND REPORTS-.
S PERMIT VERIFICATION
N/flP
MPLIANCE SCHEDULE
LABORATORY PRACTICES
TJ
PLOW MEASUREMENTS
OTHER:
SECTION D- Comments
ECTION E - Inspection/Review
SIGNATURES
-AGENCY
INSPECTED BY
3RM 356(^J(9.77)
REPLACES EPA FORM T-51 (9-76) WHICH IS OBSOLETE.
•PAQE 1 OF 4
-------
Sect!')"* Ir lin'J L: Compleu- on all inspect ions, as jppropnjie. N/A - Noi
(,_n _ANALY_S_£S_pATES._TjMES .
jjlil UMDIVIDUAL PERFORMING ANALYSIS
(iv) __ANALYTICAL. METHODS/TECHNIQUES USED
iv) ANALYTICAL RESULTS IL-.K-. consistent with SflJ-in
-------
" • ' '
:CTION J • Compliance Schedule*
*• t H M i r NO.
TN0020478
:RMITTEE IS MEETING COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE. D YES DNO KlN/A fl-urlhtT e xpluiiation attached )
CHECK APPROPRIATE PHASE(S):
0 (•) THE PERMITTEE HAS OBTAINED THE NECESSARY APPROVALS FROM THE APPROPRIATE
AUTHORITIES TO BEGIN CONSTRUCTION.
D (b) PROPER ARRANGEMENT HAS BEEN MADE FOR FINANCING (mortgage cummitintnts, grants, ftc.j.
0 (e) CONTRACTS FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES HAVE BEEN EXECUTED.
D Id) DESIGN PUANS AND SPECIFICATIONS HAVE BEEN COMPLETED.
D (*l CONSTRUCTION HAS COMMENCED.
D (0 CONSTRUCTION AND/OR EQUIPMENT ACQUISITION IS ON SCHEDULE.
D (8) CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN COMPLETED.
D (h) START-UP HAS COMMENCED.
D (i) THE PERMITTEE HAS REQUESTED AN EXTENSION OF TIME.
•CTION K - Self -Monitoring Program
tit 1 - Flow measurement (Further explanation a'lached ;
ERMITTEE FLOW MEASUREMENT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS AND INTENT OF THE PERMIT.
DETAILS: *
I PRIMARY MEASURING DEVICE PROPERLY INSTALLED. *
D YES
D YES
g NO
D NO
TYPE OF DEVICE: DwEIR D PARSHALL FLUME DMAGMETER D VENTURI METER D OTHER fSpecifvSSS-
I CALIBRATION FREQUENCY ADEQUATE. (Date of last calibration NOV. 12 , 1983 j
) PRIMARY FLOW MEASURING DEVICE PROPERLY OPERATED AND MAINTAINED. *
(SECONDARY INSTRUMENTS (totalizers, recorders, etc.} PROPERLY OPERATED AND MAINTAINED. *
) FLOW MEASUREMENT EQUIPMENT ADEQUATE TO HANDLE EXPECTED RANGES OF FLOW RATES.
art 2 - Sampling (Further explanation attached • X j
ERMITTEE SAMPLING MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS AND INTENT OF THE PERMIT.
DETAILS:
*
) LOCATIONS ADEQUATE FOR REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLES.
i) PARAMETERS AND SAMPLING FREQUENCY AGREE WITH PERMIT.
1 PERMITTEE IS USING METHOD OF SAMPLE COLLECTION REQUIRED BY PERMIT.
IF NO, DGRAB D MANUAL COMPOSITE DAUTOMATIC COMPOSITE FREQUENCY
1) SAMPLE COLLECTION PROCEDURES ARE ADEQUATE. *
li) SAMPLES REFRIGERATED DURING COMPOSITING
(ii) PROPER PRESERVATION TECHNIQUES USED
(iii) FLOW PROPORTIONED SAMPLES OBTAINED WHERE REQUIRED BY PERMIT *
(iv) SAMPLE HOLDING TIMES PRIOR TO ANALYSES IN CONFORMANCE WITH 40 CFH 136.3
>) MONITORING AND ANALYSES BEING PERFORMED MORE FREQUENTLY THAN REQUIRED BY
PERMIT.
) IF (e) IS YES. RESULTS ARE REPORTED IN PERMITTEE'S SELF-MONITORING REPORT.
art 3 — Laboratory (Further explanation attached )
ERMITTEE LABORATORY PROCEDURES MEET THE REQUIREMENTS AND INTENT OF THE PERMIT.
DETAILS: *
i) EPA APPROVED ANALYTICAL TESTING PROCEDURES USED. (40 CFR 136.3)
>) IF ALTERNATE ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES ARE USED, PROPER APPROVAL HAS BEEN OBTAINED.
:i PARAMETERS OTHER THAN THOSE REQUIRED 8Y THE PERMIT ARE ANALYZED.
1) SATISFACTORY CALIBRATION AND MAINTENANCE OF INSTRUMENTS AND EQUIPMENT. *
>) QUALITY CONTROL PROCEDURES USED.
I) DUPLICATE SAMPLES ARE ANALYZED. 2fl H OF TIME.
)) SPIKED SAMPLES ARE USED. % OF TIME.
1) COMMERCIAL LABORATORY USED.
^COMMERCIAL LABORATORY STATE CERTIFIED.
* See Letter
LAB NAME
LAB ADDRESS
H YES
D YES
D YES
E YES
D YES
B YES
E) YES
Kl YES
D YES
H YES
B YES
D YES
D YES
E! YES
D YES
K) YES
& YE8
O YES
D YES
D YB8
B YES
KJ YES
D YES
D YES
D YES
D NO
CS NO
El NO
D NO
& NO
D NO
D NO
D NO
K) NO
D NO
D NO
8 NO
D NO
D NO
CO NO
D NO
D NO
• D NO
• B NO
• H NO
D NO
D NO
£ NO
E NO
D NO
DN/A
DN/A
letter /
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
ON/A
D N/A
D N/A
DN/A
ON/A
D N/A
D N/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
BN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
DN/A
BN/A
-
PAGE 3 OF 4
-------
PE RMI T NO.
1N0020478
SECTION L • EHIuent/Receivmg Water Observations (I'urili, ;•. \i
-------
REPORT OF ANALYSES
Divisiott-of--Wacer Quality Control
SOURCE :
Tennessee Depaetme.nr of-^ Public ;
Mile
IDENTIFICATION : =L
Field Number Collected 3y /7VX Primary Station Number
Time r*ii«r.t«d io&-/03o gamaia Depth (ft.)
Date Collected
Lcboratory No.
- 7
lO-Temocrature °C
300-D.O. mff/L
310-5-dav B.O.D. 20 °C ms/L ./
403-oH. Lab.
WO-oH. Field
SI- ADD. Color Pt - Co units
80-True Color Pt - Co units
70-Turbiditv NTU
410-Totai Alk. as CaCO^ m«z/L
ftl5-Phth. Alk. As CaCO^ mg/L
437-Acidity as Ce.CO.3 mg/L
X4
900-Totai Hardness as CaCOj3 mK/Lj
910-Calcium as CaCO-? mg/i.
927-Magnesium as Mg mg/L
929-Sodium as Na mg/L
937-Potassium as K mg/L
500-Total Residue mg/L
330-Sua. Residue m?jL
515-Diss. Residue mg/L
31501-Coliform No./ 100 ml
31616-Fecal Coliform No./ 100 ml.
31679-Fecal Streo. No./ 100ml.
A35-Totaj Kj|,. Nitrogen a*; N mw/L
630-NO3 * N02 as N mg/L
1097-Antimony as Sb ug/L
1045-Iron as Fe ug/L
1055-Manganese as Mn ug/L
940-Chloride as Cl mu/L
9JO-Fluoride as F mg/L
665-Total Phosohate as P mg/L
943-Sulfat^ as SOa m?/L
wo-Totai Organic Carbon mg/L
iub/-Nicke| as Ni us/L
iUj>l-Lead as Pb ug/L
Iu42-Copper as Cu ug/L
I92ZrCadmium as Cd ug/L
-l^Zinc as Zn ug/L
LSi^Silica as SiO? mg/L
B-
%%
2
3
r.
6
7
2_
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
IS
19
20
21
22
23..
74
25
26
27
23
29
30
1
7
3
c
2
b
9
10
11
34C-C.O.D- me/L (Hich Level)
335 C.O.D. mf.'L ("Low Lev*])
70508 Aciditv Total - Hot mg/L
4 Alkalinity 'Net) mg/L
38260-MRAS mg/L
95-ConductivItv M'cromho 25 °r:
1 105-Aluminum as AJ ue/L
1007-Barium as Es up/L
1032-Chromium-Hex. as Cr. ug/L
1033-Chromium-Tri. as Cr. ug/L
1034-Chromium-total as Cr. ug/L
1037-Cobalt as Co ug/L
1147-SeloniuTi-totai as Se ug/L
1 145-Selenium (Diss.) as Se ug/L
1077-Silver as Ag ug/L
32730-Phenols ug/L
1022-Boron- Total as B ug/L
515-Nitrite Nitrogen as N mg/L
520-Nitrate Nitrogen as N mg/T
i05-Free CO2 ms/L
505- Total Vol. Residue mg/L
535- Vol. Sus. Residue mg/L
545-Settl(-ablf» Rf»«;iriiie ml/T
566-Diss. Phosphate as P mg/L
^45-Sulfide. total as S mg/L
746-Sulf ide. Dissolved as 5 mg/L
369-Cl2_Demand. 30 min. mg/L
50064-C1?. Free Res. ms/L
50CSO-C17. Combined Res. mg/L
590-Total Carbon mg/L
550-Oil and Grease mg/L
720-Cyanide as CN mg/L
32240- Tannin and Lignin mg/L
5 10- Ammonia Nitrogen as N mg/L •-'
505-Organic Nitrogen as N mg/L
58-Flow Rate CFM
61-Flow Rate CFS, Instantaneous
60-Flow Rate CFS, Mean Daily
]
r
: ;
T
1
1 '
1 :
<*»
2
2
.?::'
2/1'
2-:!
1
P"
,.
5 ;
fi '•
7
R
9 :
U
11
1?
14
16
17
1?
19
-------
REPORT OF ANALYSES
--Water Quality Control
SOURCE :
Tennessee Department of^Public;HeaI
Mile
OENTIFICATION '.
riold Number
Collected By TfcJ Primary Station Number
Date
.Sample Depth (ft.)
Laboratory No.
10-Temoerature UC
300-D.O. ms/L
310-5-dav B.O.D. 20 °C mjz/L jX
W3-oH. Lab.
400-oH. Field
81-App. Color Pt - Co units
SO-True Color Pt - Co units
70-Turbidity NTU
410-Total Alk. as CaCO^ ms/L
415-Phth. Alk. As CaCO^ mg/L
437-Acidity as Cs.COl mg/L
// /
900-Total Hardness as CaCO^ ms/Li
910-Calcium as CaCOi ms/L
927-Maenesium as MB me/L
929-Sodium as Na ms/L
937-Potassium as K mg/L
500-Total Residue m?JL
330-Sus. Residue mp/L •/
515-Diss. Residue mg/L
31301-Coliform No./ 100 ml
31616-Fecai Coliform No./ 100 ml.
31679-Fecal Strep. No./ 100ml.
£35-Tot3l Kjl, N.itrQ"fn as N mp/L
630-NO3 & NO2 as SI mg/L
1097-Antimony as Sb ug/L
1045-Iron as Fe ug/L
1055-Manganese as Mn ug/L
910-Chloride as Cl ms/L
130-Fluoride as F mg/L
165-Total Phosnhati. qs p mjr/L
J*3-Sulfat* as SOU mg/L
WO-Total Organic Carbon nWL
jLw>/-Nickel as Ni usr/L
^i?00-Memjrv-Tnt?it as'Hg ug/L
m !"Lead ** Pb us/rL
-*"^*-^opper as Cu ug/L
J002-Arspnir ac Ac no/!
-iSZT^Cadmjum as Cd ue/L
3.
9y-
2
3
^
5..
$
7
g
9
10
11
12
13
1 ^
15
16
17
13
19"
20
21
22
2J._
74
25
26
27
23
29
30
1
3
5
b
7
o
9
JO
11
34G-C.O.D. me/L (High Level)
335 C.O.D. mji/L I'LOW LewJ)
7050S Aciditv Total - Hot mg/L
&J2jMkalinity 'Net) mg/L
38260-MBAS mg/L
?5-Conductivlty M;cromho 25 C.
1 105- Aluminum as AJ ui?/L
1032-Chromium-Hex. as Cr. ug/L
1033-Chromium-Tri. as Cr. ug7L
lOS'f-Chromium-total as Cr. ue/L
1037-CobaltasCoug/L
ll'^-Sel^niurrj-total as Se us/L
1 U5-Seienium (Diss.) as Se usz/L
1077-Silver as Ag ug/L
32730-Phenois ue/L
1022-Boron- Total as B ue/L
515-Nitrite Nitrogen as N mg/L
520-Nitr^te Nitrogen as N m^/L
^05-Free CO? me/L
505- Total Vol. Residue mg/L
535- Vol. Sus. Residue mg/L
5^5-Sett!*»ahlf» R*«;irlti(» m!/T
J66-Diss. Phosohate as P mg/L
^5-SulfideT total as S mg/L
7^6-Sulf ide. Dissolved as S ms/L
369-C12 Demand, 30 min. mg/L
50064-C1?, Free Res. mg/L
50060-C1?, Combined Res. ms/L
590-Total Carbon mg/L
550-Oil and Grease mg/L
^20-Cyanide as CN mg/L
32240- Tannin and Lignin mg/L
5 10- Ammonia Nitrogen as N mg/L I/
605-Organic Nitrogen as N mg/L
58-Flow RateCFM
bl-Flow Rate CFS, Instantaneous
60-Flow Rate CFS, Mean Daily
—
5
1
^ :
f
1
| •
1 .
1
7
2
2
2.
2
i
r
f
2,
2:
21'
21;
L
2
-, .
4
5
c
Y ;
i
n. 7
— == — i
9
K
11
j-
12
U
1'
16
17
i
19,
PH-054
-------
REPORT OF ANALYSES
visioiwaf- Wacer Qua-lit^ Control
,ivi
SOURCE :
Tennessee Depastme.nr of> Public ;Heal
Mile
DENTIFICATION !
Held Number
FLU t^tJ-T - &
Collected
Time Collected
Primary Station Number
Depth (ft.) _
Data Collected
Laboratory No.
- <- o
- J '
10-Temoerature UC
^go-o.o. m*/!_
JlO-5-dav B.O.D. 20 °C me/L
Rf»«?idn*» m!/T
S66-Diss. Phosphate as P me/L
74 5-Sulfide. total as S mg/L
^6-5ulf ide. Dissolved as S me/L
369-C12 Demand, 30 min. ms/L
50064-C12, Free Res. me/L
50060-C17, Combined Res. me/L
590-Total Carbon me/L
550-Oil and Grease me7L
720-Cyanide as CN mg7L
[32240- Tannin and Lignin mg/L
610-Ammonia Nitrogen as N me/L
605-Organic Nitrogen as N mg/L
58-Flow Rate CFM
61-Flow Rate CFS, Instantaneous
60-Flow Rate CFS, Mean Daily
i
F
i
i
i
1;
|
1
•
<
c
?'
1
2:
2i
2J
2«
2?"
25!
25:
™;;
1 '!'
»2 :
•
^ •
£j
5
, !
7
8
9
in:
11'
12
13
U
n
16
17
]*•
19
C PH-054
^ WCC-6/71
-------
REPORT OF ANALYSES
ivisiotb«of--Wa&er Quality Control
JOURCE :
Tennessee Department of% Public;'Heal
Mile
DENTIFICATION :
'ield Number
•jme Collected
.Collected By lPf.J Primary Station Number
/ 3 / O Snmnl* Depth (ft.)
Date (V.n.<.f.H
Laboratory No.
lO-Temoerature UC
300-D.O. ms/L
?10-5-dav B.O.D. 20 °C mg/L
403-oH. Lab.
400-oH. Field
Sl-App. Color Pt - Co units
80-True Color Pt - Co units
70-Turbiditv NTU
MO-Total Alk. as CaCO-* me/L
/ 2- , /"^ ^
:•>
2
3
4
5
7
X
9
10
11
12
13
1 ^
15
16
17
18
19
20
2!
22
23
74
25
26
27
28
29
bo
i
2
3
5
fa
7
8
9
JO
11
^»^— «
34C-C.O.D. mg/L (Hieh Level)
335 C.O.D. m^.'l. iLow Lev*»J)
70508 Aciditv Total - Hot mg/L
ft 12 Alkalinity 'Net) mg/L
^8260-MRAS mg/L
?5-ConductivIty M'rromho 25 P
1 105-Aluminum as ^AJ up/L
1 007-Rarium as Ba 'Jg/L
1032-Chromium-Hex. as Cr. ug/L
1033-Chromium-Tri. as Cr. ug/L
103^-Chromium-total as Cr. ug/L
[1037-CobaltasCoug/L
11'^7-SeIeniurn- total as Se ug/L
1 1 *5-Selenium (Diss.) as Se ua/L
1077-Silver as Ag ug/L
32730-Phenols ug/L
1022-Boron-Total as B ug/L
515-Nttrite Nitrogen as N mg/L
520-Nitrate Nitrogen ars N m«»/L
W5-Free CO? mg/L
505- Total Vol. Residue mg/L
53J-Vol.J5us. Residu*- mfj/L
5^5-Settl«»ah!»» Rc*^iHti*» ml/T ' /'
566-Diss. Phosphate as P mg/L
^5-Sulfide, total as S mg/L
746-Sulf ide. Dissolved as S mg/L
369-C12 Demand, 30 min. mg/L
50064-C1?. Free Res. mg/L
50060-C17, Combined Res. mg/L /
590-Total Carbon mg/L
550-Oil and Grease mg/L
^20-Cyanide as CN mg/L
32240- Tannin and Lignin mg/L
610-Ammonia Nitrogen as N mg/L
605-Organic Nitrogen as N mg/L
58-Flow Rate CFM
61-Flow Rate CFS, Instantaneous
60-Flow Rate CFS, Mean Daily
f
I
i
j
f
£\& vx
^./
'
• ;
1
1
1
j
1
1
7 :
2
2
2. i
7 :
2.
2 :::
2. ;
2! i
; [
i ;
2 i
•^ •
,j
5
r
7
S
9
K;
11
i:
^•H*
i:
T
16
17
I'1
15
ft.
£ ..PH-054
-------
Table 1
Summary of.Effluent Analytical Results *
City of Dayton's WWTP
NPDES Permit # TN0020478
C.O. # 80-009
araneter
lew, gpd
CDs mg/L
Ibs/day
iuspended Solids, mg/L
Ibs/day
OTronia as N, mg/L
Ibs/day
)issolved Oxygen mg/L
>H
total Residual Cl2, mg/L
Jettleable Solids, ml/L
fecal Coliform, col/100 ml
Found
1,714,800
41
519
34
430
4.9
62
5.2
7.0
0.1
0.1
> 12, 000
Limitations ,
C.O.
25
584
45
843
3.0 min.
6.0-9.0
0.5
O.l'
1,000
(Daily Maxima
Permit
20
420
45
843
15
320
3.0 min.
6.0-9.0
0.5
0.1
1,000
* Results from samples collected January 16 through 17, 1984,
-------
City of Dayton
^ Location of Sewer Line Crossing
On the west bank there is an
opening in the pipe which spills
sewage into Little Richland Creek.
B. Manhole on Market Street
This manhole fjas overflowed.
This indicates that the sewer
line may be clogged.
C. Location of Sewer Line Crossing
Sewage was seen seeping fron the
west bank. Ihis indicates a broken
line.
On the east bank there is a broken
manhole which has sewage flowing from
it into Little Richland Creek.
-------
STATE OF TENNESSEE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ENVIRONMENT
SOUTHEAST REGIONAL OFFICE
2&01 MILNfc STBtET
CMATTANOOQA, r&NNESSEE 37404
Jam.ar./ i ."i, 198U CVrtified Mail
Mr. .lames M. Siui tli, ,)r.
Ci'> Manager
Cit-y ol' Dayton
KO. Box 2L'6
ton, Tennessee 3Y.jL\
He: City of Dayton's WWTP
Operation and Maintenance
Inspection, NPD1T,
Permit No.
C.O. # 80-009
Rhea County, 'i
Mr.
•.ID Jan.jury i6, 198't, a i-out. ine, ori-site Operation and Maintenance
(OfcM) Inspection of the City of Dayton's Wastewuter Treatment Plant (WWTP)
wa.i. performed by Mr. James F. Pilkin, Jr., of this office. A Compliance
:Ja:np.l ing Inspection (CSl) was performed at the s;une time and will be
reported in a separate letter. Mr. Pilkin was assisted by Mr. Marvin Snyder,
Chief Plant Operator, during the O&M Inspection. The overall evaluation of
the Inspection was reported on EPA Form 7>Ou-5, of which a copy is attached.
At the time of the inspection, the effluent was of an unsatisfactory
visual quality, being dark brown in color and extremely turbid with solids.
The following deficiencies were noted during the Inspection:
1. Infiltration/inflow into the collection system is one of the major
problems at the plant. The plant is designed to treat 2.000 million
gallons per day (MGD). The average daily flow was less than 2.000 MGD
for only 5 of the past 12 months. Overa.ll, the average dally flow for
the past year was 2.0o9 MGD. The peak day for the past year wau 3.690
MGD flow. This figure does not include i.he amount that was periodically
bypassed at the North Drainage Basin Pumping .'tation.
Due to the infiltration/infiow, the 1 rt;ui ment uui ' d M! the plant
suffer periodically a severe hydraulic i'-'».-r' i..'i 1. 'I'h ; condition causes
i. reduced treatment efficiency, shorter !' '.'<• • ' -••in; :>me:N'» , mid an increased
•sisL for operation.
liit'i! ,ration/inflow nee.lii U> be rt ..•.•• ( •• .- n • ; ' .•)! :•• aiiioU! '
A r-.ju'.iite [ualntt:nance scheJuL- f..r I i ••".- • .- • '•> -< \ • t, :,v.. t.-n, i LJ
necei>:ju.!-y ' o ur'-vent additions! i nj ' '• i' w , .- : • n, >'< •• ."ri.-'.nK.
4_. i'nduu t r' a L waste appear:; ' , L».; >: 1-1.1'; • . •' ' i ;* ui,'.. T' e
Ci t.V •'!' Uaytt'll I'redS t'.i dfrl.e ririL li'- ' I .• iJif , ' '' !. -inu /.'•'(:'
-------
-ed.
--ed
•then
nal
-;s listed
v-.nde.tio*3
only
"be
x.\\3
> , VS «e6<
. sv are,
-------
constitution of the industrial waste discharged into the sewerage
system. During the inspection, Mr. Snyder was unable to provide this
information.
Dye wastes entering the plant cause the effluent to be highly colored.
This color can be offensive and leads to difficulties in analyzing the
final effluent for total residual chlorine which are compounded by the
amperoinetric titrator being unserviceable. It should be either repaired
or replaced as soon as possible.
3. Our records show that the plant is designed to treat the sewage
equivalent to that produced by 6000 persons. Information provided by
the City diring the inspection showed that the population served was
over 6300. If this figure includes the population equivalents (P.E.)
of the industrial waste, then the plant is mildly overloaded organically.
If the p.e. of the industrial waste are not included in that figure, then
the plant is operating above its design capacity and no additional
connections should be allowed to the collection system.
U. The publication "Estimating Manpower Requirements for Conventional
Wastewater Treatment Facilities", printed for the Tennessee Department
of Public Health in January, 197^, recommends that at least 7.5 persons
staff a 2.0 MGD plant such as Dayton's. The recommended staffing is listed
on Page U, Section E. of the attached 7500-5 form. These recommendations
have been made in past inspection reports as well.
5. it is suggested that the City of Dayton purchase a copy of the 15th
edition of Standard Methods for the Analysis of Water and Wastewater.
This reference is very important to insure that the required analyses
are performed properly. The book can be ordered from:
American Public Health Association
1015 Fifteenth Street NW
Washington, D.C. 20005
6. There appears to be a rather large discrepancy between the flow
readings of the influent and effluent totalizers. The effluent only
showed 58% of the reading of the influent. Mr- Snyder stated that the
effluent has worked erratically for some time. The source of the
discrepancy should be located and resolved.
7. The refrigeration unit on the influent sampler was out. This should be
repaired as the NPDES Permit requires composite samples on the influent
and effluent. If this is a common problem, it may be more economical
if the sampler is replaced rather than repaired.
8. The weirs of clarifier #2 look to be unlevel. Also this clarifier
was loosing solids at the time of the inspection. The weirs need to be
checked to determine if they are infact unlevel and if they are, then
they need to be leveled.
9. The T'roth spray on one of the aeration bar," rib hud frozen during the
recent cold weather. Mr. Snyder said that r'.-plact-riK-'it pipe had been
ordered t::j. would be installed as soon as possible.
-------
-j-
10. Tin: oliui nl ink fence surrounding the plant i u in need or repair at
l.he back of L!it_- tilant where u true r:ol. I ujnu.-d onto i '. .
II. Mr. Snydi_-r titaled that the water iint-.- feedj iif/ UK,- ''hJ ori nator
frequently becomes clogged and need:.; L>.> L>c.- I'luulu-d. Wi.ju.ld it be feasible
to use putubJe water for thi;; pur[)i)L>e Lo a L 1 i t.-v i at,t_- the prubleiu?
Due tn tliti above rioted det'iei eiK:ieu , t.he U i Ly of bayti.m'u
awarded u rtiLJng of "Conditional Ai.-ccpr.ancc:" l\'f ! yG'1' .
It is reiipec ti'ully requited that the iJ.i ty ut' DuyL
feti(jonde to the above rioted de t'.i c i enc L en witli'in thirty
of this letter. Pleatic; address ttiit; j-e:J|>oiuj^ to Mi*, .la
t.hiij office.
We would like to t.nank Mr. iniyder r»r hi
If you have uny questions i.>r eoiiuiu.-nts r'-j^a.r'd i. rit-r
rus
provide a written
'lay^i of tlie receipt
!•'. I'iJkin, Jr. at
fi. our inspection.
. ion , f/leai>e do not
iletiitate to contact Ilr. t'ilkin. 'Phe teleiihone nujubuj1 h..-iv.- i :.; 6 J.S/62'l-9921.
be
be
be
i'hi..li|. !>. ;;i,.-w;..ri., ALj.;i:Jtaiit Manager
iJlial.'.itnuoj.1,.1! Hit:, i n OI'I'Jcc
Divi;iL'jtj nf WaJ.i.-i'
Mr-- ')! IL WaJlace
Khca County Health Department
City of Dayton, c/o Mi1- Marvin Giiyder
Environmental Proteetion A/.'/.-ncy , ALlanl, ilt_-
(through Garland Wiggins)
Division of Water Management, Hashville c/o Garland Wiggins and Paul
Davis
Division of Construction Grants and Loans, Nashville c/o Roger Lemasters
Southeast Regional Health Office
-------
/> 1
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REPORT ON OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
DATE OF INSPECTION
t*i 0 \ I
b
Form Approved
OMB No. /58-R0035
A. GENERAL INFORMATION
I. PLANT
(1.) NAME
I ) u 3 T \->
2. TYPE OF PLANT
(b.) OWNER ., (e.) LOCATION 1, . e ^ i ".*-.,
3. PROJECT NO.
6< COLLECTION SYSTEM ' 7. DATE PRES
COMBINED
^1 SEPARATE
BOTH ' . ,
4. AVG. DESIGN FLOW (mtdt
ENT PLANT BEGAN OPERATING
. • . ; ; / ' /
5. DESIGN POPULATION
EQUIVALENT
8. STATE PERMIT NO. • • -
9, IN THE SPACE PROVIDED BELOW. FURNISH A SIMPLIFIED FLOW DIAGRAM OR A WRITTEN DESCRIPTION OF THE PLANT UNITS IN
FLOW SEQUENCE.
10. IDENTIFY RECEIVING WATERS
c - ; /
i\ "I I \ ,. I
n. IDENTIFY PERTINENT STREAM STANDARDS AND.-OR USES OF THE RECEIVING WATERS
1 •• L ..I",,./ A"' « ••; I- .(..--., -r , ^. ; , J- - . - , o.
i ' • J • : , I
12. GIVE THE EFFLUENT STANDARDS AND/OR REQUIREMENTS FOR STATE OPERATING PERMIT
"
B. CURRENT PLANT LOADING
I. ANNUAL AVG DAILY FLOW RATE (mgd)
PEAK FLOW RATE fmftd)
DRY WEATHER
WET WEATHER
3. POPULATION SERVED
ANNUAL AVG BODS OF RAW SEWAGE (mg/l)
S. ANNUAL AVG SUSPENDED SOLID OF RAW SEWAGE (mg/1)
I
6. PRINCIPAL TYPES OF INDUSTRIAL WASTE DISCHARGED TO
MUNICIPAL SYSTEM " . ' , >
f~- • - - .1 ' ^ i
7. POPULATION EQUIVALENT (BOD) OF INDUSTRIAL WASTES
'v 1 ? i £ ' •• / V.
B. PpPULATION EQUIVALENT rSS; OF INDUSTRIAL WASTES
-O i w
a. VOLUME OF INDUSTRIAL WASTES (rn^
'0. INFILTRATION PROBLEMS
i \ • ' ~. .,- - i
-. -4.
Fomi 7500-5 (4-72) REPLACES FORM FWPCA-12 WHICH IS OBSOLETE.
-------
Form Approved
OMB No. J58-R0035
C. PLANT PERFORMANCE
LABORATORY ANALYSIS (Total Plant)
(a) RETHORTINO PERIOD
FROM (Month, year)
\ . nu
MONTHLY ITEMS
(b) .
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
•««•«_
(6)
(9)
••^•^^
(10)
111)
— L
FLOW (mgd)
(monthly average)
PEAK FLOW (mgd)
(maximum day)
SETTLEABLE SOLIDS
(monthly average)
INFLUENT (ml/1)
EFFLUENT (ml/1)
% REMOVAL
SUSPENDED SOLIDS
(monthly average)
INFLUENT (mg/1)
EFFLUENT (mg/ 1)
* REMOVAL
BOD (monthly average)
INFLUENT (mg/1)
EFFLUENT(m«/l)
% REMOVAL
DISSOLVED OXYGEN
(monthly average)
EFFLUENT (mg/1)
CHLORINE RESIDUAL
(monthly average)
EFFLUENT (mg/1)
COLIFORM (per 100 ml)
(monthly average)
TOTAL
FECAL
pH RANGE EFFLUENT
MINIMUM
MAXIMUM
TOTAL PHOSPHORUS <••*>;
(monthly overage)
INFLUENT (mg/1)
EFFLUENT (mg/1)
* REMOVAL
TOTAL NITROGEN (a* N)
(monthly average)
INFLUENT (mg/1)
EFFLUENT (mg/1)
* REMOVAL
ACTUAL PLANT
PERFORMANCE
DATA
(c)
y , 0 (r ''I
3 , L- 1 0
c.l
< '•/
1 :
;,/
•/ /
: ' /
5".i
-^\ — ^
•} , 3J)
1.3
T.C
T.'?
TO fMonth, year>
k_/< c , -.-. L j^, i i .j
PLANT
DESIGN
DATA
(d)
^ - 0
Q . C;
t>
NPDES-
PERMIT
REQUIREMENTS
•f »•
, i (*).. .
'. i
> s-.
.-—
* '"v
"> "' '"
^» V^X 4
i
• j
"'l •".
/, .••••
/. ~)
PLANT
ACHIEVES
DESIGN
EFFICIENCY
fO
YES
NO
X
\
PLANT
COMPLIES
WITH PERMIT
REQUIREMENTS
If]
YES
\
\
•\
K
N
x\
\
A
1
NO
ARE MONTHLY OPERATING RECORDS FILED WITH STATE ACENCYT
YES
NO
F*m 7500.5 (R.,. 1-74) PAGE 2
REPLACES PACE 2(4-72) WHICH IS OBSOLETE
-------
Form Approved
OMB No. 1S8-R003S
3. DOES PLANT HAVE ALTERNATE ELECTRIC POWER SOURCE?
Q DUAL FEED 03 GENERATOR [~~]NONE
4. ADEQUATE ALARM SYSTEM FOR POWER OR EQUIPMENT
FAILURES? "QYES d NO
EQUIPMENT PROGRAM
(«.) ROUTINE MAINTENANCE SCHEDULES
(b.) RECORDS OF MAIK • rN AN CE.REP AIRS a REPLCMT
(,.,) JPARE PARTS INVENTORY
ADEQUATE
INADEQUATE
,\
\
">\
6. IS PLANT EFFLUENT
BEING CHLORINATED?
lx"l YES I I NO
7. DOES SEWAGE BY-PASS
PLANT IN WET WEATHER?
"a. DOES SEWAGE BY-PASS
PL ANT IN DRY
WEATHER?
9. AGENCIES NOTI FIEO OF EACH BYPASS
> ; ,...:. 0 \.
10. BYPASS FREQUENCY
(Monthly). i
' |
1 1. AVG DURATION OF
BYPASS (Ht*) /
12. REASON FOR BYPASSING
' 1
• * 4 \ !«. ~ ! _
13. CAN BYPASS SEWAGE BE
CHLORINATED? r~| V ES
« -|J
14. DO SEWER OVERFLOWS OCCUR
UPSTREAM OF PLANT?
EYES ONO
15. ANY ODOR COMPLAINTS BEYOND PLANT PROPERTY? (11 ye,, explain)
4
V; ^ v y ..... .,. ^ ._. ^ ,; ^^ - ;|^
16. OBSERVED APPEARANCE OF EFFLUENT, RECEIVING STREAM OR DRAINAGE WAY
17. IS A CONSULTING ENGINEER RETAINED OR AVAILABLE FOR CONSULTATION ON OPERATING AND MAINTENANCE PROBLEMS?
H YES Q NO (It yvm, check one of the following) ]py> CONTINUING BASES O REQUEST BASES ) i^ {_. : ,• 1 . , V
16. DO OPERATORS AND OTHER PERSONNEL ROUTINELY ATTEND SHORT
COURSES. SCHOOL OR OTHER TRAINING? (3 YES CD NO
(B.) If yes, cite course sponsor, and date of last coura««
~~ if < \ iv"i ; • '• '"^ •
,.;-.. • u ^--'-i !• i < - ^
(b.) If no, are there any courses available in this area?
(c.) Is there an established procedure for training new operators?
19. IS LAB TESTING ADEQUATE FOR THE CONTROL
REQUIRED FOR THIS SIZE AND TYPE OF PLANT
AND USES OF RECEIVING WATERS?
£3 YES f~] NO (11 No, explain)
20. EXPLAIN MAIN DIFFICULTY EXPERIENCED WITH INDUSTRIAL WASTES
C .~ i :: '<. T \ :
21. PERMANENT RECORD FILE
(a.) PLANT OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE MANUAL? J3 YES Q NO
-------
Form Approved
OMB No. 1S8-R0035
0. LABORATORY CONTROL
CODING INSTRUCTION
Enter test codes opposite appropriate items. If any of the below tests are used to monitor industrial wastes, pi ace an "X* in
addition to the test code.
1 . 7 or more per week 3 - 1, 2 or 3 per week 5 - 2 or 3 per month 7 - Quarterly 9 - Annually
2-4, 5 or 6 per week 4 - as required 6-1 per month 8 - Semi-Annually
ITEM
(«.)
1. BOD
2. SUSPENDED SOLIDS
9. SETTLEABLE SOLIDS
4. SUSPENDED VOLATILE
g. DISSOLVED OXYGEN
g. TOTAL SOLIDS
7. VOLATILE SOLIDS
1. pH
». TEMPERATURE
10. COLIFORM DENSITY
11. RESIDUAL CHLORINE
12. VOL ATIL E ACIDS
13. M B STABILITY
14. ALKALINITY
IS.
1«.
17.
II,
IE.
RAW
(b.)
.,.-_
!
>
i
PRIMARY
EFFLUENT
(c.)
MIXED
LIQUOR
(d.)
•'
i
I
!
FINAL
(e.)
,_
i
/
;
1
-
1
•
(f.) SLUDGE
RAW
SUPER-
NATANT
DIGESTER
(e.)
j
, '
1
-.
I
RECEIVING
STREAM
(b.)
COMMENTS
E. PLANT PERSONNEL INVENTORY
PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION
(a.)
1. MANAGEMENT/SUPERVISOR
2. OPERATOR
3. LABORATORY
4. MAINTENANCE
'• OTHER PLANT WORKERS
•• OTHER OFFICE/CLERICAL
'• TOTAL
EMPLOYMENT
(b.)
AC TU AL
MAN-HOURS
P ER WEEK
' / -
. , -
J , ^
NUMBER
1
"<
O
'1
NUMBER
BUDGETED
NO. RE-
COMMENDED
(c.) CERTIFICATION
VOLUNTARY
MANDATORY
NO. RECOM-
MENDED OR
REQUIRED
BY STATE
1 • .*
i
1 .i-
J>
\
.,-
•A.
7-r
X
ACTUAL
NO.
CERTIFIED
'• .—
/
'
•-
1
TRAINING REQUIRED
NEXT 12 MONTHS
(d.)
NEW
HIRES
i
-
.3^
* .,
UPGRADE
(Promotion
or fklll Im-
provement
—
EPA Form 7500-5 (4-72) PACE 4
-------
Form Approved
OVB No. 158-R0035
F. GUIDE - VISUAL OBSERVATION . UNIT PROCESS
RATING CODES: S = Satisfactory; U = Unsatisfactory; M = Marginal; IN = In Operation; OUT - Out of Operation
CONDITION OR APPEARANCE
GENERAL
PRELIMINARY
PRIMARY
SLUDGE DISPOSAL
OTHER
SECONDARY-TERTIARY
(List Items as retpitretQ
Ul
Z
0
_l
I
U
GROUNDS
BUIL DINGS
POTABLE WATER SUPPLY P RO T
SAFETY FEATURES
BYPASSES
STORM WATER OVERFLOWS
MAINTENANCE OF C O L L E C Tl ON SYSTEMS
PUMP STATION
VEN TIL ATION
BAR SCREEN
DISPOSAL OF SCREENINGS
COMMINUTOR
GRIT CHAMBER
DISPOSAL OF GRIT
SETTLING TANKS
SCUM REMOVAL
SLUDGE REMOVAL
EFFLUENT
DIGESTERS '. .
TEMPERATURE ANDpH
G AS P RODUCTION
HEATING EQUIPMENT
SLUDGE PUMPS
DRYING BEDS
VACUUM FILTER
INCINERATION
DISPOSAL OF SLUDGE
FLOWMETER AND RECORDER
RECORDS
LAB CONTROLS
°i •».
r \
.
~
-- -f*'
E F F L U EN T
CHLORIN ATORS
EFFECTIVE DOSAGE
CONTACT TIME
CONTACT TANK
RATING
•
*M
.',
—
—
.-
COMMENTS
-
: . - ; i
i ,
•
_
.
'
-» ;
_^
..
.
/ x
EPA Form 7500-5 (4-72) PACE 5
-------
Form Approved
OMB No. 15K-R0035
G. NOTATIONS BY EVALUATOR
1. OPERATION AND MAI NT EN ANCE' PROBLEMS/ DEFICIENCY ES
CHECK EACH OF THE FOLLOWING ITEMS IN TERMS OF THEIR ESTIMATED ADVERSE AFFECT ON THE PERFORMANCE
ITEM
STAFF COMPLEMENT
PERSONNEL TRAINING
OPERATING BUDGET
LABORATORY CONTROL ( \ .)
INSTRUMENTATION
INDUSTRIAL WASTE / | .
PLANT OBSOLESENCE
EQUIPMENT FAILURE:
TREATMENT PROCESSES
SLUDGE HANDLING
AND PROCESSING
EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE
SPARE PARTS INVENTORY
POWER FAILURE
MAJOR
X
MINOR
,\
X
X
• NONE
X
X
V
\
.\
ITEM
OVERLOADS (type)
HYDRAULIC
PERIODIC
CONTINUOUS
ORGANIC
F ERIODIC
CONTINUOUS • ,'
OVERLOAD CAUSE'S):
IN FILTRATION • i
COMBINED SEWERS
INDUSTRIAL GROWTH
RAPID POPULATION GROWTH
INCREASED SERVICE AREA
OTHER:
OTHER:
MAJOR
A
-\
OF THE
MINOR
K
PLANT.
NONE
2. DESCRIBE BRIEFLY THE MAJOR PROBLEMS INDICATED ABOVE (include tollav.~up actions needed see instructions)
([_..' I \ < t -'
/
;'
t
U '
i / t.
3. PURPOSE OF INSPECTION
Q GRANT COMPLIANCE [~~j FOLLOW-UP
Q PERMIT COMPLIANCE C*Q. OTHER: .^. -,. fv\
EVALUATION PERFORMED BY
LJ i-.ii. .
INFORMATION FURNISHED BY
TITLE
C- 1 ,T Z±-
TITLE
—
4. GENERAL RATING
ACCEPTABLE
CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE ,\
UNACCEPTABLE
ORGANIZATION
- K' »~: i—
ORGANIZATION
'
"A Form 7500-5 (R«v. 1-74) PAGE 6 REPLACES PAGE s (4-721 WHICH is OBSOLETE
DATE
Y / i \ -
DATE
. ;
-------
PJ
• * *-i-^*rf
tiJKsss
i
0--8—-'
-------
CITY OF DAYTON
BUDGET 1983-84
WATER & SEWER FUND
Sewer Expenses
Salaries 66,000.
Employee Benefits - OASI 4,f>00.
Employee Benefits - Ins. 5,100.
Employee Benefits - Ret. 3,500,
Materials & Supplies 12,500.
Maintenance of Facility 15,000.
Freight 250.
Gas, Oil, Tires, Flats, Washes, etc. 1,600.
Maintenance of Vehicles 1,000.
Purchase, Maintenance, Rental of Small Equip. 500.
Billing 5,200.
Legal & Accounting 2,800.
Bad Debts 1,300.
Other Ins. 5,200.
Training 250.
Telephone
Utilities "
Interest Expense 35,300.
Depreciation - Sewer 85,950.
Miscellaneous 1,000.
Capital Outlay 5,000.
Bond Amortization 150.
Micro Screen Study 2,000.
Industrial Pretreatment 750.
Unemployment Comp. 100.
Contingency 1,000^
Total 306.450.
i'O
-------
NNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
FICE CORRESPONDENCE
TE:
DM:
BJECT:
FROM
May 24, 1984
Garland Wiggins, Nashville
&3
Gene Scrudder, Chattanooga
City of Dayton's WWTP
TN0020478 CSI
TO
DATE
Enclosed are two (2) copies of the CSI Report for the City of
Dayton's WWTP, Rhea County. One copy is to be forwarded to EPA.
EOS/dfp
Enclosures
es-i
f
l-o
I-! , j.
!Vf
I'-f
« DATE
PH-0001
SR vri
-------
DAILY TEST & WORK ASSIGNMENTS
DAYTON WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
Rainfall
Temperature
H L
Tern p. -Wastewater
R F
Suspended Solids in Wastewater
Raw Final
Red. % Red.
Dissolved
R
Chlorine
Residual
Oxygen
F
PH
R F
Ibs used
PPM in 24 hrs.
One
Digesters
Two
PH
Sett. Sol
PH
Sett. Sol.
Aeration Basins
DO
#1
PH
#1
MLSS
#1
Sett. Sol.
#1
SV1
#1
#11
#11
#11
#11
Checked Pumping Station
Time
Condition
By:
Coliform Count
1 /100ml
o /100 ml
Final Effluent
Sett. Solids in Wastewater
Raw Final
Red. Red.
Raw Wastewater.
Final Effluent
FLOW
Return Sludge.
Waste Sludge.
COMMENTS
H1RALD PRINT—OAVTON
-------
DATE
WORK ASSIGNMENTS
First Shift
1. Skim two (2) times
2. Wash all basin walls two (2) times
3. Clean the Div. Box, Bar Screen, Div., Gate, two (2) times .
4. Fill the oilers on the eff. pumps
5. Grease the screw lift at 8:00 AM
6. Clean the flushing water fitter and micro jets two (2) times
7. Check the Lift Station
8. Put a water seal on the B.O. D
9. 'Clean the samplers inside and out
10. Clean the skimmer basket at the digester
By:
Second Shift
1. Skim two (2) times
2. Wash all basin walls two (2) times
3. The Second Shift will wash the Final Clarifiers each day
4. Clean the Div. Box, bar screen, div. gate, two (2) times
5. Fill the oilers on the eff. pumps
6. Grease the screw lift at 8:00 PM
7. Clean the flushing water filter and micro jets two (2) times.
8. Put a water seal on the B.O.D
9. Clean the bath room
10. Clean the skimmer basket at the digester
11. Check the Lift Station between 9:00 PM -10:00 PM
By:
Third Shift
1. Skim two (2) times
2. Wash all basin walls two (2) times
3. Clean the div. box, bar screen, div. gate two (2) times _
4. Fill the oilers on the eff. pumps
5. Clean the flushing water filter and micro jets two (2) limes
6. Put a water seal on the B.O.D
7. Clean the Skimmer basket at the digester .
8. Sweep and mop the Lb. Bldg. each day
By:
-------
Appendix B
Sample Service Plans
-------
PIPPA PASSES, KENTUCKY
WASTEHATER TREATMENT PLANT PROFILE
JUNE 22, 1984
(0.1 M.G.D. CONTACT STABILIZATION)
I. PROBLEMS:
This plant was in some degree of operation when it was picked
for the Comp Train Project. However, by the time we arrived to do the
Comp Train plan of work this wastewater plant experienced major
mechanical breakdowns. These breakdowns made it impossible to operate
the plant. Since our work schedule was so tight we did not have time
to pick an alternate treatment plant that would fit the Comp Train
Process. Therefore we evaluated the condition of the plant and gave
what assistance we could in guiding the needed rehabilitation work
plan for this plant.
Pippa Passes wastewater plant was originally picked for the Comp
Train Project because the May 1984 Compliance Sampling Inspection
(C.S.I) found the plant to be in significant non-compliance. The area
of non-compliance that needed to be addressed were:
1.) N.P.D.E.S. limits are not being met in regards to B.O.D.g,
S.S., and Dissolved Oxygen.
2.) There are no flow records (flow records are missing).
3.) The plant is not being properly operated and maintained.
The final clarifier is encrusted in solids. The drying beds
are not being used.
4.) There is a leak in the chlorine equipment.
5.) The aeration tank is very low in mixed liquor suspended
solids (M.L.S.S).
-------
The problems that existed after we made our evaluation are
listed below.
1.) Raw Influent Wet Well - has accumulated a large amount of
grit. Of the two raw sewage pumps in this wet well only one
is dependable. One has a loud knocking noise. Also these
pumps are wired direct without breaker protection. The
electrical control panel for these pumps is in need of
repair.
2.) The comminutor does not work.
3.) This plant has three blowers. Only one of these is
operational. Two of the blowers and two of the electric
motors are bad. The air filters for these blowers are also
bad. The electric control panel for the motors have bad
breaker contacts and fuses.
4.) The aeration basin has clogged diffusers with only partial
mixing. This basin also has a large accumulation of
anaerobic sludge on the bottom several feet thick.
5.) The final clarifier electric motor, drive chain, and gear
mechanisms that drive the sludge rakes are out of service
and need to be completely rehabilitated.
6.) The aerobic digester is full of septic solids and need to be
cleaned.
7.) The entire plant needs to be drained, cleaned, sand blasted,
painted, and refurnished with proper working components.
8.) The chlorine feed unit needs to be replaced.
9.) The chlorine contact basin needs to be cleaned of septic
solids and the baffles repaired.
10.) A new effluent flow meter needs to be installed.
-------
11.) The sludge drying beds need to be cleaned and completely
overhauled. The sludge drying bed valves also need to be
replaced for some of them have cracked and are leaking
sludge. These valves were cracked because of winter
freezing this would not have happened if the water had been
drained from them. This means the valve from the aerobic
digester should also be checked for leaks. If this valve
leaks it should be repaired or replaced or the drying beds
valves would freeze again this winter.
12.) This facility also needs a sludge disposal permit or an
approved sludge management scheme for disposing of the
sludge off the sludge drying beds.
II. ACTION TO SOLVE PROBLEMS:
We contacted Mr. Jim Bergman, Chairman of the Caney Creek water
District, Pippa Passes, Kentucky Mr. Bergman was aware of some of the
problems at the wastewater plant and had already negotiated a contract
with Kennoy Engineers out of Lexington, Kentucky to do the wastewater
plant improvements. Mr. Bergman had obtained H.U.D. & A.R.C. Block
grants to rehabilitate the plant. Mr. Bergman was able to obtain this
grant because the city and Alice Lloyd College had received
considerable flood damage to the water treatment plant. The
wastewater plant received only minor damage.
We reviewed the specifications and scope of work to improve the
wastewater plant and added the following recommendations to Mr.
Bergman's scope of work. See attachment #1.
Also we gave Mr. Del mar SI one, Caney Creek Plant Process Control
training at the Whitesburg Wastewater Plant so that he would know more
about wastewater treatment plant operation and maintenance. Also Mr.
-------
Slone was Certified a Class I wastewater treatment plant operator
after passing the certification exam.
PROGNOSIS:
This wastewater treatment plant should give good performance and
be able to meet its N.P.D.E.S. permits limits if all the
rehabilitation work is done correctly and if properly operated and
maintained.
At present Mr. Delmar Slone is the only operator for both the
Water and Wastewater plants. This is not adequate or a safe
situation. There should be at least two workers for the wastewater
plant. Otherwise, the plant will most likely go down hill again.
FINAL STATEMENT:
This plant got into this bad condition through eight years of
neglect. Management must do its part to insure that adequate
maintenance and repairs are made and that the plant is adequatly
staffed and operated. This should be done as responsible stewardship
of our tax dollars. See attachment #1 on our advice to Mr. Bergman.
-------
ATTACHMENT 1
-------
HARUOTTE E. BALDWIN
SECRETARY
MARTHA LAYNE COLLINS
GOVERNOR
COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY
NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION CABINET
DEPARTMENT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
FORT BOONE PLAZA
1 8 REILLY ROAD
FRANKFORT, KENTUCKY 4O6O1
July 6, 1984
Mr. Jim Bergman, Chairman
Caney Creek Water District
Pippa Passes, KY 41844
Dear Mr. Bergman:
Re: Wastewater Treatment Plant
Rehabilitation Project
We have received a copy of Kennoy Engineers specifications relative
to subject project and we find that, since the work does not involve either a
modification of the treatment process or expansion of plant capacity, the
approval of plans and specifications by this branch is not required. We can,
therefore, only make recommendations to you regarding the contract which is
to be awarded and items of work to be performed as follows:
(1) Negotiate a reasonable reduction in the lump sum bid for relieving
the contractor of the responsibility of draining and disposing of
the plant's contents.
(2) Negotiate a reasonable reduction in the lump sum bid for replacement
items of equipment which you may find unnecessary.
(3) Negotiate a reasonable reduction in the lump bid for either deleting
the flow meter or substituting a less expensive scheme such as the
Stevens SIR flowmeter, Catalog No. 17638 (copy of specs enclosed).
(4) Negotiate a reasonable price for two new motors for the blowers.
. (5) Negotiate a reasonable price for rehabilitating the electrical
control panel for the blowers.
(6) Negotiate a reasonable price for rehabilitating the chlorine feed
equipment.
(7) Negotiate a reasonable price for construction of two additional
sand beds, and specify proper gradation of sand to be placed in the
beds. In order to maintain the necessary sludge disposal schedule,
these additional beds are needed. The alternate would be to sludge
tank truck loading scheme.
(8) Negotiate a reasonable price for installing a dividing wall and
overflow weir so as to constitute a sludge reaeration compartment.
-------
Mr. Jim Bergman
July 6, 1984
Page 2
This is necessary in order that the plant can function in the
contact stabilization treatment mode. The plant capacity in the
extended aeration mode is about 450 population equivalent, and
since it is now serving about 800 persons, conversion to contact
stabilization should be a high priority item in that its rated
capacity would then become 1,000 persons.
I believe that the draining and disposal of plant contents would
constitute enough money to provide for the additional items recommended.
Very truly yours,
Paul K. Wood
Environmental Engineer
Division of Water
PKW:fml
cc: Kennoy Engineers
-------
SOLIDS MANAGEMENT PLAN
Caney Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant
The entire plant will have to dewatered and cleaned in preparation for
the sandblasting and painting so it will be necessary to set up a very tight
schedule for draining and the disposal of the plant's contents.
The total volume in the plant (including the chlorine contact basin) is
90,000 gallons. The characteristics of the wastes range from that of raw
sewage to that of partially digested sludge. Measurements made by D.O.W.
personnel indicate that about 2,000 pounds of dry solids are contained in
these wastes, and this means the average suspended solids concentration would
be 2,666 mg/1 (0.2%) which would render it suitable for land application. The
average width of the farmland lying between the highway and Caney Creek is
about 250 feet. It seems that a gravity discharge to Becdownstream property
would be the most feasible application site. If applied to say a strip 300
feet x 150 feet, the average depth of application would be 3 inches. At 100
gallons per minute, 15 hours would be required to complete this task.
This plan has been discussed with the Division of Wastes Management and
there is no indication of disapproval.
-------
ATTACHMENT 2
-------
851 Corporate Drive
Lexington, Kentucky 40503
606-223-1000
June 28, 1984
Mr. Oerther
Department of Natural Resources
and Environmental Protection Cabinet
Division of Water
18 Reilly Road
Frankfort, Kentucky 40601
RE: Caney Creek Water District
Wastewater Plant Improvements
Dear Mr. Oerther:
Mr. Woods, of your department, was recently in Pippa Passes and spoke with
Mr. Jim Bergman, Chairman of Caney Creek Water District, regarding the upcoming
wastewater treatment plant improvements. He had several inquiries which Mr.
Bergman relayed to me and I would like to try to clarify some of these items.
I have enclosed one (1) copy each of the following pages from the specifi-
cations: TS-A-001, 002: B-001, 002: D-001 and 002. These pages delineate the.
scope of the work on the wastewater treatment plant. However, they do not
specifically instruct the contractor as where to dispose of the material removed
from the clarifier. Some of this material could be placed upon the sludge drying
beds but, the contractor will have to find an additional and alternate site to
dispose of the balance of the material. I think Mr. Woods indicated that he
was aware of a local property owner who would be willing to receive this material.
The second inquiry was related to the amount of funds set aside for the
removal of waste material from the clarifier. The project was bid as a lump
sum amount and I have enclosed a copy of the bids submitted by the low bidder,
Titus Construction Company, for your information.
Any further inquiries regarding this matter should be directed to either
Steve Hollar or myself at your convenience.
Since
OCM/scm
Enclosure
cc: Mr. Jim Bergman
Mr. Steve Hollar
?ra C. Main,
Principal - -project Manager
-------
WWTP TS-A-001
871A
Contract III
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT IMPROVEMENTS
SECTION A
GENERAL
1. DESCRIPTION AND SCOPE OF WORK
1.1 The scope of work to be done by the Contractor includes the furnishing
of all labor, tools, materials, and equipment necessary to complete
the work as stipulated herein and in other Contract Documents. The
work to be done is more particularly described but not limited to
the following:
1.1.1 Circular Contact. Stabilization Package Sewage Treatment Plant;
Removal and replacement of scrapper mechanism, including the
drive unit, skimmer, scum collector, inlet well with scum gate,
sludge collector, comminutor, and blades. Also the removal and
replacement of the diffusers and drop headers. Sand blasting
the interior and exterior along with repainting all interior,
exterior, inner compartment walls, piping, equipment new and
existing. This also includes the removal and proper disposal
of all discarded existing equipment.
1.1.2 Control Building; Removal of existing blowers and replacement
with new blowers and air filters and the installation of a new
flow recorder/totalizer.
1.1.3 Chlorine Contact Basin: Furnishing and installation of a new
ultrasonic flowmeter. The removal and replacement of reinforced
concrete baffle walls.
1.1.4 Sludge Drying Beds: Removal of existing sand in both compart-
ments, and replacement of sand to a depth of six inches (6")
in both compartments, and modifications to and replacement of
the sludge influent valves and piping.
1.1.5 Lift Station; Replacement of two (2) submersible sewage pumps and
assemblies, electrical control panel, guide rails, precast con-
crete top slab, and hatch cover.
1.1.6 Yard Piping: All main line process piping-between each unit
shall be replaced as in accordance with Section B thru L Contract
II & III of this specification. Pipe material shall be Class
160 PVC and conformed to above referenced specification. This
item will be paid for on a unit price basis as presented in the
bid documents.
-------
WWTP TS-A-002
871A
Contract III
2. ALTERNATE I; This alternate will consist of removal of the gate
valves and check valves from the wet pit of the pump station
and installed in a separate manhole outside the pump station
as shown on the plans. Included in this alternate is all
additional piping, fittings and manhole necessary for a com-
plete and functional installation.
-------
WWTP TS-B-001
871A
Contract III
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
SECTION B
SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION
1. GENERAL
1.1 All construction and renovation work shall be scheduled so as to mini-
mize down time of the treatment facility. This section outlines the
sequence of renovation work under this contract and procedures to
follow for legal bypassing of the facility.
2. BYPASSING OF EXISTING FACILITIES
2.1 In order to accomplish the work as outlined in this specification inter-
mittant bypassing of unit process is required. Bypassing shall be in
compliance with all state regulations as prescribed by the Kentucky
Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet, Division of
Water, Enforcement Branch, 18 Reilly Road, Frankfort, Kentucky. At a
minimum the Contractor is required to notify the state and the
Engineer of any intentional bypassing at least 24 hours prior to its
scheduled occurance. Information required in this notification shall
be the beginning date and time of the bypass operation, anticipated
duration of the bypass, and the estimated quantity of wastewater flow
to be bypassed. Bypassing of the package treatment plant will require
notification of the state and Engineer in writing at least 14 days
prior to this operation and shall be accompanied with a schedule of
construction for repair work on the plant. All construction shall
be scheduled so as to minimize the duration of any bypass.
3. INTERIM TREATMENT OF BYPASSED FLOW
3.1 At a minimum all bypassed flows shall receive chlorination. The
Contractor shall make all temporary arrangements and connections
>> necessary to achieve point chlorination. In the operation of bypassing
the package treatment plant the influent shall be diverted to the
chlorine contact chamber where it will receive chlorination and
limited primary settling. The Contractor shall be responsible for
, any temporary connections necessary to accomplish this operation.
In addition any settled material remaining in the chlorine chamber
after completion of the work on the package plant shall be removed to
the aeration compartment for treatment.
4. SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION
Scheduling of work shall be done so as to decrease down time of the plant
and minimize bypassing. Therefore, the following recommendations shall
be incorporated into the contractor's schedule of construction.
-------
871A
Contract III
4.1 No work shall begin on the package treatment facility until all
equipment and materials are on the plant site. This includes
equipment and material for painting of the tank's interior. Any
equipment that can be preassembled prior to placement in the tankage
must be done prior to shutdown of the facility. Shutdown of the plant
shall not be allowed until the Engineer has been given the opportunity
to inventory all material and equipment at the job site. This
inventory shall in no way relieve the Contractor of his responsibility
for insuring all equipment and material is present at the site.
Realizing time delays due to the manufacturing process of this equip-
ment, a request for time extension shall be considered based on a
presubmitted date of delivery. Any work not associated with the
delivery of the replacement equipment and which can be performed while
the plant is in operation shall not be included in this request.
4.2 Construction shall proceed in the following recommended
sequence:
1. Replacement of baffle walls in chlorine contact chamber.
This will require bypassing of this unit'process, therefore,
temporary chlorination and effluent line will need to be
provided. Influent and effluent lines to this unit process
should be replaced at this time.
2. Replacement of sand in sludge drying beds.
3. Replacement of equipment and painting of interior of the
package treatment plant, replacement of the influent sewage
pumps, and piping changes at the sludge drying beds. All
related process piping shall be replaced at this time.
4. Replacement of the blowers and sandblasting and painting
of the external portion of the package plant after the
plant has been returned to service.
4.3 Contractor shall schedule work to minimuze weather related delays,
most specifically, in relation to work on the package plant. In the
event of rain during painting of the interior of the tank, the Con-
tractor shall make provision to temporarily cover the tankage and
provide heating to prevent any delays.
-------
WWTP TS-D-001
871A
Contract III
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
SECTION D
CIRCULAR CONTACT STABILIZATION PACKAGE
1. SCOPE
1.1 The work under this section covers the removal of the existing and
replacement of new scraper mechanism, including the drive unit,
skimmer, scum collector, inlet well with scum gate, sludge collector,
blades and comminutor. Also the removal of the existing diffusers
and replacement with new ones and replacement of the drop pipe
and headers. Also sand blasting the interior and exterior, along
with repainting all interior, exterior, inner compartment walls,
remaining piping, and equipment existing and new.
2. CIRCULAR CONTACT STABILIZATION PACKAGE SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT
2.1 No work shall begin on the Package Sewage Treatment Plant until ALL
equipment pertaining to the Package Sewage Treatment Plant is on the
site, and has been inspected for damage and.preassembled, if necessary,
for installation.
2.2 The Contractor shall remove and properly dispose of the existing
equipment as indicated on the plans.
•*...
2.3 All field welding by the Contractor shall be in conformance with
the information shown on the equipment manufacturer's drawings
regarding location, type, size, and length of all welds in
accordance with "Standard Welding Symbols" AWS A2.0 of the American
Welding Society, and special conditions as shown by notes and details.
All field welds shall be touched up with compatible paint.
2.4 All replaced equipment shall be Smith and Loveless. All Smith and
Loveless equipment shall be in accordance with the specifications of
the existing equipment.
2.5 The existing circular contact stabilization package sewage treatment
plant is Smith and Loveless Model No. 34R100, 100,000 gallon/day.
The tank has an inside diameter of thirty-four feet (341) and a
side depth of fourteen feet, six inches (14'-6"). The tank floor has
a slope of one inch (1") in twelve inches (12") towards the center where
the sludge well with agitator is located.
2.6 The following equipment shall be removed and replaced with new
equipment as manufactured by Smith and Loveless:
-------
WWTP TS-D-002
871A
Contract III
Drive Unit and Motor
Drive Tube
Skimmer
Scum Collector
Sludge Collector
Inlet Well with Scum Gate
Scraper Mechanism
Blades
Comminutor Model Number 7R
All Existing Diffusers
All drop pipe and header pipe for diffusers
Foam control pump
-------
KNOTT COUNTY FISCAL COURT
WASTE WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS AT PIPPA PASSES, KENTUCKY
BID SCHEDULE
CONTRACT III
Bid By: Titus Construction, Inc.
The low bidder shall be determined based on the lowest total lump sum bid.
ITEM UNIT TOTAL
KO. DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE QUANTITY PRICE
1. This work basically involves the
replacement of most of mechanical
equipment including the influent
sewage pumps , blowers, f lowmeter ,-
aeration piping and diffusers.
Also included is the replacement
of the sand media and influent
piping and valves at the sludge
drying beds and reconstruction
of baffle walls in the chlorine
contact chamber. L.S. 111.745. 1 111.745.
2. 6" CL 160 PVC Pipe (Installed) L.F. 12.00 100 1.200.
10" CL 160 PVC Pipe (Installed) L.F. 20.00 30 finn.nn
DEDUCTIVE ALTERNATE I
This work involves relocation of
the existing valves inside the
influent pump station wet well
to an outside valve vault L.F. 2.400. 1 2.400.
TOTAL BID (Figures) $ 115.945.
-1-
-------
LONDON, KENTUCKY
HASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT PROFILE
OCTOBER 29-31, 1984
(4.0 M.6.D. R.B.C. PLANT)
PROBLEMS:
The undersized secondary sludge pump allows periodic overflows
from the pump well. These overflows are recycled through the screen to
the first stage RBC's and impose undue organic loadings.
The dissolved oxygen concentration are low enough to allow
pro!ifiration of the nuisance type growths on the RBC's.
The rotational speed of the RBC's is less than 1.5 rpm. Besides
reducing the oxygen transfer rate, the slow rotation may induce
excessive biomass buildup.
Solids are settling in the first two or three RBC basins.
Besides exerting additional oxygen demand, those solids deposits create
additional 0 & M problems when ultimately flushed from the RBC basins.
The clarifier sludge is not being completely picked up as
evidenced by the clumps of solids rising to the surface and the maroon
hues imparted by tubifex (blood worms).
It appears that the plant is subjected to "slug loadings".
The sludge thickener, while producing what seems to be a very
good quality overflow, does not produce the desired concentration of
solids in its underflow. There is fortunately, an excellent sludge
disposal scheme in effect; so the low solids concentration presently
affects only the operational costs, but may eventually shorten the life
span of the disposal site.
-------
ACTION:
The baffles between the first two RBC stages have been removed.
This reduces the design stages from six to five, but, more importantly,
doubles the number of RBC's in the first stage.
The sludge blanket depth is maintained at about ten inches, as
this is the depth which produces the thickest sludge.
Only three of the five RBC trains are used. This reduces the
detention time through the RBC's from about 10 hours to about 6 hours
(at the present dry weather flow volumes). This, in turn discourages
denitrification in the clarifiers. The use of the trains is rotated,
and this requires flushing out the dead biomass from the deactivated
RBC'S.
PERFORMANCE:
The plant loadings average about 30% of its flow capacity and up
to 80% of its BOD capacity, and yet it seems to be under great stress
and out of compliance with respect to its BOD limit of 10 mg/1. The
operators seem to be knowledgeable and industrious, and are adequately
supported by management. It seems probable that, considering the
Industrial Waste (I.W.) control program along with plant operational
needs, two additional operators that have capabilities for Class III
certification will be needed.
PROGNOSIS:
The London plant is not the typical municipal facility in that
50% of the organic load is expected to be from industrial sources. It
is expected that extreme diligence will be required in the I.W.
control program, and that above average plant operational skills will
be needed as the plant approaches its design loadings. Also, in order
-------
that the plant can meet all its permit conditions on a continuous
basis, it seems likely that some in-plant modifications/additions will
be required. Increasing the secondary sludge pumping capabilities to
about 800 GPM and experimenting with air diffusion in the first two or
three RBC basins are recommended for immediate action. Secondarily, it
is recommended that a gauge for measuring RBC axle loads be obtained,
and that two portable automatic samplers be procured for in-plant
sampling as needed for operational control practices. These portable
samples will also be needed in the I.W. Monitoring Program.
-------
LONDON
EVALUATION OF COMPOSITE SAMPLES BEFORE AND AFTER
COMPTRAIN PROGRAM
BEFORE
AFTER
IN
OUT
IN
OUT
Flow MGD
Permit «
C.O.D. mg/1
C.O.D. Ibs
C.O.D. %
B.O.D.c mg/1
B.O.D.r Ibs
B.O.D.c J
Permit X
S.S mg/1
S.S. Ibs
S.S. %
Permit %
V.S.S. mg/1
V.S.S. Ibs
V.S.S. %
T.S. mg/1
T.S. Ibs
T.S. %
V.T.S. mg/1
V.T.S. Ibs
V.T.S. %
NH3-N mg/1
NHo-N Ibs
NHg-N %
Permit mg/1
pH
Permit
D.O. mg/1
Permit mg/1
2.8
4.0
388
9,061
Reduction
230
5,371
Reduction
Reduction
127
2,966
Reduction
Reduction
108
2,522
Reduction
500
11,676
Reduction
265
6,188
Reduction
2.92
70
Reduction
N/A
6.7
N/A
2.8
4.0
20
467
95
12
280
95
85
16
374
87
85
16
374
85
290
6,772
42
72
1,681
73
1.97
46
34
10
7.6
6-9
8.1
7.0
2.1 MGD
228 7
3,993 123
Reduction 97
Reduction 85
160 4
2,802 70
Reduction 98
Reduction 85
N/A 1.5
N/A 26
N/A 10
7.0 7.4
6-9
7.2
7.0
-------
LONDON
EVALUATION OF COMPOSITE SAMPLES BEFORE AND AFTER
COMPTRAIN PROGRAM
BEFORE AFTER
Fecal Col i form
per/100 ml
Permit
IN
N/A
N/A
OUT
10
200
IN
N/A
N/A
OUT
<5
200
-------
Livingston, Kentucky
Wastewater Treatment Plant Profile
June 28, 1984
(0.04 H.6.D. Extended Aeration)
I. Problems:
This wastewater treatment plant has design and equipment problems
that make the plant difficult to operate. This plant is also located
in a floodplain and has been flooded twice in the last three years.
Also, this plant does not have a certified wastewater operator and has
not been keeping records or submitting monthly (DMR's) Discharge
Monitoring Reports. These problems have caused this plant to be in
significant noncompliance.
II. Problems Defined and Actions Taken:
(A) Design Problem:
The design capacity of subject plant is 27.8 6PM (40,000 6PD) and
the usual practice for influent pump station is to design the pumps
for about twice the design flow rate of the plant on the theory that
the pump would be operating about 50% of the time. In this case, 60
GPM pumps were specified, but it is most impractical to employ a
centrifugal pump of less than 100 GPM, so rather than change the
station's design from wet pit pumping to pneumatic ejection,
submersible centrifugal pumps with 100 GPM outputs were installed.
Another usual design practice is to limit the influent flow to 2.5
times design flow rate (2.5 x 27.8 = 69.5 GPM = 100,000 GPD). Due to
manner in which the pump controls operate the static pumping head is
less than that shown on the plans, therefore, the pump output may be
as much as 200 GPM on occasions and for a very short duration. On the
first day, there were 15 pump cycles and the 70 GPM limit was exceeded
on 8 occasions for an average duration of 3 minutes. On the second
day there were 21 pump cycles with essentially the same quantity of
influent flow (these additional cycles were induced by recycling
digester supernatant), but the 70 GPM rate was exceeded only twice at
about 3 minutes duration each time.
Plant performance is not adversely affected by the high pumping
rates. Lower pumping rates may reduce power usage and should have a
favorable influence on plant performance.
The reason plant performance is not adversely affected at present
is because the plant is only receiving one third of its hydraulic
load. This plant needs surge control as the plant approaches its
design loading.
Actions to Solve Problem:
The city should investigate the cost of installing a speed
control device on these 100 gal/min pumps. This may also result in an
-------
energy savings for the city. By controlling the (rpm) speed of these
pumps the problem of surging can be eliminated. See attached brochure
for more information on this subject (see attachment #4).
(B) Equipment Problem:
The location of the return sludge and waste sludge splitter box
on the top side of the aerobic digester wall causes about 1/3 of the
return sludge to continually splash over into the aerobic digester.
This causes the operator to have no control over the waste sludge or
return sludge flow rate and also causes the aerobic digester to
overflow continuously.
Action:
The return sludge and waste sludge splitter box was removed from
the wall of the digester and placed over the aeration basin 3 feet
from the digester. A section of pipe was then added to the box and
extended into the digester. This pipe is properly called the waste
sludge line. The operator now has control of both the return sludge
and waste sludge flows.
(C) Equipment Problem:
The final effluent weir trough leaked and the weir was unlevel
causing severe short circuiting in the final clarifier at high flow
rates.
Action:
The final effluent weir was removed cleaned and coated with
asphalt roofing compound along the edge of adjustment and then
realined, leveled, and placed back into operation. The weir no longer
leaks and problems of short circuiting have been eliminated.
(D) Equipment Problem:
Number two blower has a stuck pressure relief valve.
Action:
The pressure relief valve broke while trying to free it so a new
one was installed.
(E) Certification Problem:
No certified wastewater operator.
Action:
Mr. Robert Wilson was trained in the proper operation of the
treatment plant. He was also taught how to run the various process
control test and how to plot and use trend charts. Mr. R. Wilson was
-------
given the Class I wastewater certification exam and he passed the
exam. Mr. R. Wilson is now a Class I certified wastewater plant
operator.
(F) Records, Testing, and Reporting Problems:
Records and testing for the (N.P.D.E.S.) Permits were not being
done.
Action:
Livingston signed an agreement with Allegheny Labs of London,
Kentucky to do testing in the Livingston Lab. The (D.M.R.) Discharge
Monitoring Report for the N.P.D.E.S. permit for the months of April
and May, 1984 have been received by the Commonwealth of Kentucky,
Division of Water, London Field Office. These reports were in
compliance with their permit.
(G) Other Problems and Actions Taken:
Problem:
The chlorine contact basin had 2 feet of anaerobic sludge on the
bottom.
Action:
The chlorine contact basin was pumped down and the solids were
pumped back to the head of the aeration basin. The chlorine tank was
then hosed down, cleaned and placed back into operation.
(H) Problem:
The aerobic digester had about 1 1/2 feet of sludge in the bottom
that had compacted and could not be mixed. Also, when the solid level
in the digester reached about 12,000 mg/1 the contents of the digester
could not be mixed adequately. Only about half of the digester could
be mixed and aerated at 12,000 mg/1. Problem- insufficient aeration
capacity and mixing.
Action:
Top half of digester is = 12,000 ppm. or 1.2% solids; the bottom
of the digester is = 26,000 ppm. or 2.6%. Therefore, 1.2% + 2.6% =
3.8%, (3.8% * 2) = 1.9% or 2% average solids in the digester. The
aerobic digester was drained by filling two sludge drying beds with
sludge at about 2% solids or 20,000 ppm.
Comment:
The flat bottom tank of the digester makes it difficult to remove
thick heavy sludge. Thick sludge was pushed to the pump with scrapers
and was sometimes dilutee with water so the pump could lift it. After
cleaning, the digester was placed back in operation.
-------
(I) Problem:
No permit to dispose of sludge from the sludge drying bed.
Action:
A sample of the sludge was taken and is being tested at the state
Department for Environmental Protection's Lab for pH, T.S.S., T.V.S.,
T.K.N., NH4-N, No3-N, Cd, Cu, Ni, An, Pb, and PCB.
Also a site for ultimate disposal has been selected and presently
the Division of Waste Management is processing the permit application
for this site.
III. Performance:
This treatment plant is performing very well because the
treatment plant is only receiving 1/3 of its hydraulic and organic
loading. This treatment plant was headed for serious performance
problems because of the lack of operator skill and knowledge of waste
treatment. With the corrective actions taken above , serious
performance problems have been averted.
IV. Prognosis:
This treatment plant is now in compliance and should give
excellent performance for quite sometime. The two major problems that
could cause noncompliance would be damaged because of major spring
flooding and if surge control is not monitored as the plant approaches
its design loading.
Analysis of Composite Samples Before and After Comptrain Program.
See attachment #1.
Analysis of Flow:
See attachment #2 - flow chart from Stevens Recorder with notations.
Analysis of Computerized Mathematical Model:
The computerized model does not work on small wastewater treatment
plants or plants smaller than 0.200 M.G.D. unless the model is calibrated
to satisfy the condition of smaller plants. (See Attachment #1 - top of
Page 2).
Analysis of Sludge for Land Spreading:
See attachment #3 for analysis. There is no problems with toxic
material for land spreading this sludge.
-------
ATTACHMENT #1
-------
AERATION TANK MIXED LIQUOR SUSPENDED SOLIDS
Before After Computer
M.L.S.S.
M.L.V.S.S.
% Volatile
1,900 mg/1
1,380 mg/1
73%
3,390 mg/1
1,940 mg/1
57 %
2,800 mg/1
1,176 mg/1
42X
* Note - A problem exists with the accuracy of the B.O.D.g test. The B.O.D.c
test as reported do not correlate with the other test data. A good
correction can be made for B.O.D.c by taking the C.O.D. and
multiplying it by 0.4 for the influent, and by 0.2 for the effluent.
By doing this, a good figure for B.O.D.c, can be obtained form the
C.O.D. This method of obtaining a B.O.D.c answer from the C.O.D. was
developed by taking 20 municipalities with domestic sewage only and
averaging the B.O.D.c and C.O.D. ratios. These B.O.D.5 and C.O.D.
relationships correlated with other test data and were reliable.
Therefore, the true B.O.D.c. for Livingston would be as follows:
CORRECTIONS
Before - Influent
150 C.O.D. x 0.4 B.O.D.c/C.O.D. = 60 mg/1 B.O.D.5
This influent B.O.D.c, is low because of infiltration and inflow problems
which dilute the B.O.D.c. and C.O.D. Note the difference between flow of 0.023
M.G.D. on Before Survey and flow of 0.00698 on After Survey. The first is wet
weather flow the second is dry weather flow.
Before - Effluent
29 C.O.D. x 0.2 B.O.D.5/C.O.D. - 6 mg/1 B.O.D.5
After - Influent
547 C.O.D. x 0.4 B.O.D.5/C.O.D. = 218 mg/1 B.O.D.c.
After - Effluent
31 C.O.D. x 0.2 B.O.D.5/C.O.D. = 6 mg/1 B.O.D.c.
* Corrected Ibs and % reductions for B.O.D.c, are attached to evaluation
sheet.
-------
ATTACHMENT #2
-------
3
8
10
11 12
NOON
1
6
s
8
10
11
12
-------
Livingston Hastewater Treatment Plant
Evaluation of Composite Samples Before and After
Comptrain Program
Flow
Permit %
C.O.D. mg/1
C.O.D. Ibs
C.O.D. %
B.O.D.c mg/1
B.O.D.r Ibs
B. O.D.g %
Corrected Figur
S.S. mg/1
S.S. Ibs
S.S. %
Permit %
V.S.S. mg/1
V.S.S. Ibs
V.S.S. %
T.S. mg/1
T.S. Ibs
T.S. %
V.T.S. mg/1
V.T.S. Ibs
V.T.S. %
NH3-N mg/1
NH^-N Ibs
NHJ-N %
Permit %
PH
Permit %
D.O. mg/1
Permit %
Fecal Col i form
per/100 ml
Permit
BEFORE
IN
0.023 M.6.D.
0.56 maximum
150
29
reduction
60
12
reduction
es - See Page 2
77
15
reduction
reduction
66
13
reduction
355
68
reduction
146
28
reduction
9.0
1.72
reduction
mg/1
7.6
maximum 6.0
—
___
—
OUT
0.023 M.6.D.
0.56 maximum
29
6
79
6
1
92
of this attachm
14
3
80
85
14
3
77
304
58
15
91
18
36
0.13
0.024
98.6
30 maximum
7.6
maximum 9.0
8.2
4.0
80
400 maximum
AFTER
IN
0.00698 M.G.D.
0.56 maximum
547
32
reduction
218
13
reduction
;nt for method of
144
8
reduction
reduction
112
7
reduction
772
45
reduction
304
18
reduction
35
2.03
reduction
mg/1
7.9
minimum 6.0
—
—
—
OUT
0.00698 M.G.D
0.56 maximum
31
2
94
6
0.4
97
correction.
7
0.4
95
85
3
0.007
99.9
601
35
22
100
6
67
0.15
0.0087
99.5
30 maximum
7.7
maximum 9.0
2.0
4.0
15,000
400 maximum
-------
4 5
J
678
1.0 11 12
NOON
23
10 11
-------
ATTACHMENT #3
-------
;HARLOTTE E. BALDWIN
SECRETARY
MARTHA LAYNE COLLINS
GOVERNOR
COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY
NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION CABINET
DEPARTMENT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
FORT BOONE PLAZA
1 8 REILLY ROAD
FRANKFORT, KENTUCKY 4O6O1
July 20, 1984
Report No: A02-2022
SA No: 84-1690
TO: Division of Water
#18 Reilly Road, Fort Boone Plaza
Frankfort, Kentucky 40601
Res Livingston WWTP
ATTK: Bob Oether
FROM: William E. Davis, Director
Division of Environmental Services
Sample Collector: Bob Oether Date: 06/28/84 Time: 1600
Sample Identification: Sludge from Drying Bed
Received: 06/29/84 Started: 07/06/84 Finished: 07/18/84
Results :
PARAMETER
pH
Volatile Total Solids
Ammonia Nitrogen
Nitrate-Nitrite Nitrogen
Cadmium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Nickel
Zinc
Hexachlorobenzene
Hexachlorocyclohexane, alpha
isomer
Hexachlorocyclohexane, gamma
isomer
Heptachlor
Aldrin
CONCENTRATION (mg/kg)
6.5
43.7%
1,430
575
0.015
0.059
11,700
325
1.03
1,290
0.031
<0.05
<0.05
0.069
<0.05
-------
Page 2 of 2 pages
July 20, 1984
Heptachlor Epoxide
t-Chlordane
c-Chlordane
0, P1 - DDE
P, P' - DDE
Dieldrin
Endrin
0, P1 - DDD
P, P1 - DDD
0, P1 - DDT
P, P' - DDT
Total DDT
Methoxychlor
Mirex
Endosulfan I
Endosulfan II
Endosulfan Sulfate
Endrin Aldehyde
Endrin Ketone
Toxaphene
Technical Chlordane
Aroclor 1016
Aroclor 1221
Aroclor 1232
Aroclor 1242
Aroclor 1248
Aroclor 1254
Aroclor 1260
Aroclor 1262
Aroclor 1268
Report No: A02-2022
SA No: 84-1690
0.056
0.28
0.22
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.05
<0.5
2.33
< 0. 5
<0. 5
<0.5
<0.5
<0. 5
<0. 5
<0.5
<0.5
<0.5
-------
ATTACHMENT #4
-------
s*»£^£;
R.-.^v^s^HcAjH.Sieffii
-- -~ -~-^ - '*^-_~ .- -*-•.-> ..--vao-^'
-------
Vary simple
Vary economical
Vary reliable
ParaJust Y is a variable frequency
speed control for three phase AC
motors. It was specifically designed
for speed control of motors used to
drive pumps, fans or blowers so as to
save energy on these applications.
Variable Frequency
If a three phase AC motor operates on
variable frequency, the motor be-
comes a variable speed motor. Its
speed is directly proportional to the
frequency on which it operates.
ParaJust Y is a solid state elec-
tronic device which is wired between
plant power and the motor. It converts
the normally fixed frequency of plant
power (50 or 60 Hz) to infinitely vari-
able frequency power to make the
motor a variable speed motor.
ParaJust
Y
(50 or 60 Hz) Variable
frequency
Variable
Speed
Parametrics, manufacturers of Para-
Just Y, has built approximately 50,000
variable frequency controls. The con-
cept is well proven with units operat-
ing worldwide.
-2-
Pumps, Fans &
Blowers
Centrifugal pumps as well as fans and
blowers are ideal candidates for vari-
able speed operation to provide ener-
gy savings. Ideal because:
• As the flow of the pump fan or blow-
er is varied through speed control,
the horsepower required to operate
the device changes in proportion to
the cube of the speed. Thus, at half
flow only Vs of design hp is needed,
for example, and considerable ener-
gy is saved.
• Most pumps, fans and blowers are
oversized and have or could have
reduced output to save energy'.
Variable speed is the most efficient
means of reducing output. In addi-
tion, it will often pay to replace other
flow control devices, if used, with
ParaJust Y.
The benefits of ParaJust Y operatior
on pump1: fans & blowers are out-
lined in detail on page 3.
Vary Simple
ParaJust Y uses the very latest state-
of-the art electronic circuitry.
Control circuits employ micro-
processor technology.
Power circuits employ gate turn off
devices, the latest in power-switching
technology.
These design innovations reduce
parts count and space consumption
and improve efficiency.
To the best of our knowledge, Para-
Just Y is the most optimally designed
AC motor speed control for centrifugal
loads.
Vary Economical
ParaJust Y has been designed specif-
ically for flow control for fans and blow-
ers. The nature of this application
allows cost savings in some respects
and necessitates options and acces-
sories not required with industrial
drives. The cost reduction items
include:
• Limited overload capacity. Only
10% overload ability is required
compared with 50% in industrial
applications.
• Limited starting torque. Pumps,
fans and blowers do not require the
high break-away torque of industrial
drives. These two factors, alone,
allow major cost reductions in Para-
Just Y controls compared with Para-
metrics'industrial product of- f
ferings. Most options and accesso- V,
ries can be programmed into the
ParaJust Y's E-Prom, furnishing low
costs on these items.
Vary Reliable
Pumps, fans and blowers are used on
sensitive applications where round the
clock control operation is critical. Pa-
rametrics understood this as a para-
meter of the product's design and ev-
ery consideration was given to reliabil-
ity of circuits and components. Pro-
duct design was accomplished with an
actual blower load for testing through-
out the program. A high priority was
given to long term testing and to pro-
tective features. See page 5.
C.
-------
Vary Beneficial
ParaJust Y Will Pay for Itself in Less Than
2 Years on Energy Savings Alone
• When used to control flow from a centrifugal pump, compared to the cost of power with valve-controlled flow
• When used to control flow from a fan or blower, compared to the cost of power with constant air flow systems.
•*•***•«
•*»••••
lit
•Hi.
Payback is only one user benefit
of the ParaJust Y. Some others
include:
Small Size
The small physical size of ParaJust Y is
evidence of its efficiency and eco-
nomical design. The ease with which it
can be located and mounted pays di-
vidends to the user.
Use Any Motor
Motors of any manufacturer, of any
enclosure, of any speed may be used.
New motors or old motors. Motor
maybe changed in the future to handle
service problems or new require-
ments. Parametrics has no "axes to
grind" in promoting one motor over
another. Sometimes those who manu-
facture motors and controls find them-
selves defending superceded motor
designs.
No In
When ParaJust Y accelerates a motor
to speed, there is no inrush current.
Current is limited to 110% of ParaJust
Y rating. No overheating of motor nor
ParaJust Y. No penalty for "demand".
This can be an important, considera-
tion on blowers where high inertias
are common.
Essentially Unity
Power Factor
Regardless of load or speed ParaJust Y
operates on customer's power line at
essentially unity power factor. In a
control designed to pay for itself in a
short time period, we do not believe
the customer should pay a penalty for
poor power factor.
Completely
Enclosed
ParaJust Y is standardly furnished in an
oiltight industrial enclosure to exclude
dust, oil mist, and solid contaminants
from interior of controller. This means
that ParaJust Y does not have to be
located in a motor control room.
Isolated Control
Circuits
ParaJust Y's control circuits are iso-
lated from the input power lines. Thus
no consideration need be given to
possible ground loops when speed
control and/or start-stop signals are
wired into ParaJust Y circuits.
No Load Operation
ParaJust Y can be operated with no
connected load. This is important in
startup because the control can be run
less motor for checkout. Further-
more, a disconnecting device must
be located near the motor and in some
installations this may be quite a dis-
tance from the ParaJust Y. Opening of
such a disconnecting device, even
when operating, does not damage
ParaJust Y.
Electrically Silent
There are no SCR's, nor other devices
across the incoming power lines to
create line notching, only diodes with a
capacitive load. The result is a signifi-
cant reduction in incoming line, noise
which can affect other equipment.
No Line Reactors
ParaJust Y operates directly from
460v plant power (optional voltages
available) with no need for line reac-
tors, nor any other devices to add to
system cost, space or complexity.
Reduced Equipment
Maintenance
When pump or blower flow is reduced
by speed control, maintenance is
materially reduced on the entire-
pumping or air flow system.
•3-
-------
Vary Compact
Parajust Y is constructed on two chas-
sis which form the front and rear of the
enclosure.
When the front door is opened, the
two chassis are exposed for set up,
wiring, adjustment, service, etc.
If desired, the two chassis may be
removed from the enclosure and re-
mounted in another enclosure.
If the chassis are to be mounted in
another enclosure, they can be
mounted with their fins against the en-
closure and no exposed fins would be
used. The enclosure must be able to
dissipate heat as follows, maintaining
internal air temperature at 40 deg. C
or less.
ParaJuslY
Ylxxxx
Y2mx
YSxxxx
YSrax
Heat
Dissipation
350 watts
750 watts
1120 watts
*N/A
If chassis mounting is selected,
order an additional set of mounting
feet for the front chassis (2 feet). The
standard Parajust Y mounting feet are
used for the rear chassis. See page 8.
JKEl.Lr'^iSiff ;r~ T: ' ^.TO-3^
" The YSxxxx controls are externally fan cooled
and cannot be chassis mounted.
ParaJust Y with
front door open.
JLJLJ1
-
T
•wan
rtooxx
Ymoxx
TJOOXX
<• */•
• i tt
»i i/i
10* '.
• i»
»i »-t
M 1'4
a a tt
•
lift ft*
Note: Parajust Y must always be mounted with fins vertical and with clear access for air flow 6" above and
below chassis. Ambient air temperature around fins must not exceed 40 deg C. Avoid mounting heat
producing devices under Parajust Y controller.
-------
Note: Mount chassis side by side 1" to 8" apart.
Do not cut, splice or alter factory supplied inter-
connecting harnesses.
Chassis Style Mounting
ZERO SPEED
Vary Informative
OVER TEMP I CURRENT LIMIT I OVER CUflRENl I UNDER VOLTAGL I OVtll VO1TAI.I
An eight-function LED status indicat-
ing panel is mounted on the front door
of the Parajust Y. These lights are
duplicated on the inside of the door so
they may be read when the unit is
chassis mounted or when the door is
opened.
Power
This light will be illuminated when in-
put power is applied to the Parajust Y.
If input voltage is too low or high, the
under voltage or over voltage light will
also be illuminated. The power light
should be on in order for Parajust Y to
operate.
Zero Speed
Illuminates if Parajust Y is not receiv-
ing a speed command. Will illuminate
whether Parajust Y is enabled or
not should it not receive a speed
command.
Enabled
Illuminates when Parajust Y is "on."
There are many methods of enabling a
Parajust Y explained on Page 6.
Over Temperature
Illuminated when the internal temper-
ature of the Parajust Y exceeds set
point. This light will blink if internal
temperature is within 10 deg. C of the
set point. If set point is exceeded Pa-
rajust Y will shutdown and this light
will be illuminated.
Current Limit
Illuminates whenever output current
from Parajust Y exceeds 110% of
rated current but is less than 150% of
rated current. If unit is in this mode
during acceleration or deceleration Pa-
rajust Y will cease accelerating or de-
celerating until current drops below
110% at which time accel or decel will
resume. If unit is in this mode during
running, output frequency will be re-
duced until current is reduced to 110%
of rated current. Illumination will con-
tinue if Parajust Y is incapable of creat-
ing output frequency commanded by
speed signal.
Over Current
Should output current exceed 150% of
rated current this light will be illumin-
ated and Parajust Y will shut down.
Under Voltage and
Over Voltage
Should the input power source experi-
ence low or high voltage, these lights
will be illuminated and the Parajust Y
will shut down. The following set
points are used:
Nominal Under Over
Input Voltage Voltage
Voltage Trip Trip
460V
415V
380V
230V
208V
404V
365V
335V
202V
183V
515V
515V
515V
515V
515V
Additional
Indicators
LED's are also located on each driver
module (3 modules 2 LED's per mod-
ule) to indicate the power semi-
conductors receipt of turn-on
information.
-5
-------
Specifications
ilnput Power
3 phase
50 or 60 cycles
460 volts ±10%
380v and 415 volt versions are avail-
able, also ± 10%. These versions
have an adaptor cable (P/N 700542 for
380v, P/N 700541 for 415v) inserted
in one of the internal wiring harnesses.
These adaptor cables reconnect the
logic control transformer from voltage
to voltage. Adaptor cables can be
ordered for conversion of any unit.
Parajust Y can be supplied with 230
volt logic control transformers. By in-
serting adaptor P/N 700761, these
units will operate on 208v plant power.
Note significant reduction in HP rating
for 208 and 230 volt controls. See cur-
rent ratings below.
Output Power
3 Phase
2-60 Hz if unit is ordered for 208, 230
or 460v input.
2-50 Hz if unit is ordered for 380 or
415v input.E-Proms may be ordered
'• (spare parts) to change output fre-
quency range in the field.
0-460v(if208, 230, 380 or 415 volt
controllers are ordered, the output
voltage is arranged for 0-208, 230, 380
or 415 volts respectively, in the E-
Prom.)
Model Rated Amps
At 460V At other voltages
Ylmx
Y2xna
Y3xm
YSrax
15
27
40
65
16.5
33
40
70
Output Frequency
Output frequency will be held
±0.1% of maximum frequency re-
gardless of load, input voltage
(± 10%) or ambient temperatures.
Reversing
By making and maintaining a connec-
tion between two screw terminals, the
Parajust Y will decelerate the motor to
zero speed and accelerate the motor
to set speed in the opposite direction.
. Opening that connection will reverse
- the process. This feature is most often
used to reverse the flow of propeller
fans.
-6-
Ambient Conditions
Operating 0 to 40 deg C
Storage -20 to 60 deg C
Not to be mounted in sunlight or ex-
posed to rain and/or snow.
0-95% relative humidity
0-3000 ft. altitude.
Speed Command
Parajust Y will follow any of following
signal sources:
0-5 vdc
0-10 vdc
4-20mad.c.
A selector switch is provided which
allows Parajust Y to follow inverted
speed signals, i.e. 20ma = 0% speed
and 4 ma = 100% speed
Setting of 5000 ohm potentiometer
Setting of 135 ohm potentiometer
Output frequency will be proportional
to any of above signals with a linearity
of ±0.5%.
Start-Stop
(Enabling)
Commands
Parajust Y will start and stop (become
enabled and disabled) with any of the
following:
• Operaton of momentary
stop and start pushbuttons
or
• Closure of contact rated 50 ma, 115
VAC or
• Application & removal of 115v on-off
signal or
• Application & removal of input
power.
Speed Reference
Signal
A 0-5 vdc signal is furnished to indicate
output frequency. The signal varies in
direct proportion to the output fre-
quency and may be used with a load
having an impedance of 100k ohms or
greater
Protective Trip
Parajust Y will cease operating if:
• Output current exceeds 150% of
rated current
• Input voltage exceeds 515 VAC.
• Input voltage falls below 88% of
rated voltage.
• Internal temperature exceeds set
point.
Appropriate indicator lights wiU be
illuminated if the Parajust Y trips
protectively (see page 5).
Remote Indication
In addition to the eight door-mounted
indicating lights and six additional in-
ternal LED's (see page 5) the follow-
ing signals are available for customer
use:
• Relay contact rated 1 amp resistive,
115 vac, is furnished with one n. o.
and one n. c. contact with the follow-
ing truth table.
no power relay deactivated
power applied relay activated
power applied ^ relay activated
Parajusl enabled'
power applied—
»relav deactivated
Parajusl tripped-''^
• A115 vac signal is standard to indi-
cate that the Parajust Y is enabled.
Even if a trip circuit disables the Pa-
rajust, this signal remains available.
A115 vac signal is standard to
indicate that input power is applied.
A total of 50 va is available from the
two 115v signals.
Internal
Adjustments
• Acceleration time adjustable from
10-100 seconds linear from zero to
full speed. Longer 10:1 ranges avail-
able as an option.
• Deceleration time is independently
adjustable from 10-100 seconds
linear from full to zero speed.
Optional longer acceleration ranges
affect deceleration range as well.
• Input signal offset adjustable from
0-50% of input signal. Allows zero
speed operation from signals not
reaching zero, i.e. 4-20 MADC.
• Input signal gain from 1:1 to 10:1.
Allows full speed operation from sig-
nals which do not reach standard
levels, i.e. 0-8 VDC.
• Volts per hertz may be adjusted ±
10%. If more adjustment is needed
another E-prom must be ordered.
• Maximum frequency can be set at
0-100%.
• Minimum frequency can be set at
0-80%.
The max and min adjustments are
operable with potentiometer speed
settings as well as all external speed
commands, i.e. 0-10V, 4 - 20 MADC
etc.
Should Parajust Y shut itself off in
response to over voltage, under vol-
tage, overcurrent or over tempera-
ture, it can be restarted by removal of
stop (disable) command and reapplica-
tion of the start command (enable). An
automatic restart is available as an op-
tion (See page 7).
c
-------
Basic Control
Full specifications of Parajust Y are
given on page 6. Even,' Parajust Y
meets these specifications. Add-
itional features are shown on Pages 3,
4 and 5.
Standard
Offerings
Model Numbers
HP 460v 415v 380v* 230v" 208 v*
10 YlOOxx Ylllxx Y121xx Y131xx Y141xx
20 Y200xx Y211xx Y221xx Y231xx Y241xx
30 YSOOxx Y311XJC Y321xx Y331xx Y341xx
50 YSOOxx YSllxx Y521xx Y531xx Y541xx
*HP ratings do not apply. Size by current capacity. See
OUTPUT POWER PAGE 6.
xx Refers to options (shown below).
Use 5th and 6th Digit of Parajusl Y to specify options as follows:
00
01
No options. Unit described on
pages 3 through 6
3-15 psi signal. Has W NPT
pipe fitting at bottom of Parajust
Y enclosure. Customer applies 3-
15 psi air signal to Parajust Y and
its output frequency (2-60 or 2-50
Hz) will be directly proportional
to the signal
02 Automatic Restart. After Pa-
rajust Y has tripped on overcur-
rent, it will attempt to restart af-
ter 20 seconds. If unable to res-
tart after 5 attempts it must be
restarted by hand. (Disable then
re-enable).
If tripped due to overtempera-
ture, over voltage or undervol-
tage, Parajust Y will attempt to
restart five times, such attempt
taking place 20 seconds after the
fault has been resolved.
The five-times circuit resets to
zero with 10 minutes of successful
operation.
03
Hand-Off-Automatic, Speed
Potentiometer. H-O-A switch
mounted in cover of Parajust Y
starts it in "Hand" and allows its
output frequency to be set with
speed control potentiometer
mounted in cover.
When in "Auto" it's starting and
stopping as well as its output fre-
quency are controlled from some
other devices and in "off" it will
not operate.
04 Start, Stop/Reset, Speed
Potentiometer full manual speed
control is furnished using devices
mounted in the front cover of the
Parajust Y.
PH PARAMETRICS, ORANGE, CT. USA
>EED CONTROL
Options
05 3-15 psi signal, Automatic
Restart. Combines 01 and 02
options in same Parajust Y
06 3-15 psi signal Hand-off
Automatic, Speed Potentio-
meter. Combines 01 and 03 op-
tions in same Parajust Y.
07 3-15 psi signal Automatic
Restart, Hand-off Automatic
Speed Potentiometer. Com-
bines 01, 02 and 03 options in
same Parajust Y.
08 Auto Restart, Hand-Off Auto-
matic, Speed Potentiometer.
Combines options 02 and 03 in
same Parajust Y.
09 Auto Restart, Start/Stop/
Reset, Speed Potentiometer.
Combines options 02 and 04 in
same Parajust Y
10 Special (Specify). Control fur-
nished to customer specifications
-7-
-------
Chassis Mounting
Feet
Two brackets for attachment to front
chassis when chassis are to be
mounted in customer's enclosure with
fins inside the enclosure. Use brackets
furnished as standard with rear chassis
for mounting the rear chassis. P/N
700413.
Spare Parts Kit
For support of single Parajust Y. Kit
consists of one Dual Driver Module,
one input power module and ten (10)
input fuses.
Model
P/N
Ylxxxx
Y2xxxx
YSxxxx
YSxxxx
700854
700630
700631
700855
Voltage Adaptor
Cables
When Parajust Y is operated on 208v,
380v or 415v, an adapter cable is con-
nected in the control transformer wir-
ing harness. This cable reconnects the
transformer for the proper supply vol-
tage. If the Parajust Y is ordered for
208v, 380v or 415v the cable is supplied
at no charge. Order adaptor cable only
if a change is to be made to supply
voltage after Parajust Y is shipped.
Voltage
Cable P/N
208
380
415
700761
700542
700541
New Identification
Labels
If adaptor cables and/or E-Proms
(above) are field-installed in Parajust
Y's the original identification labels will
show incorrect voltage and/or fre-
quency. Contact Parametrics with full
information on original identification
labels requesting new labels reflecting
the change.
c
Isolation Transformers
Parajust Y controllers require 460 Volt input power (380 or 415 Volt optional). They can be operated from 208,230, or 575 Volt plant
power by inserting one of the following transformers between the power line and the Parajust Y input terminals. Note that isolation
transformers not only supply correct input voltage, they also protect the Parajust Y controller from ground faults. An isolation
transformer for 460 Volt plant power is also offered.
Isolation transformers are strongly recommended when Parajust Y controllers are used with motors located in
high-moisture or wash-down installations. 65 Amp (YSxxxx) ParaJust Y controllers have solid state ground fault
protection. Isolation transformers not required on these ratings
ParaJust
Model
YlOOXX
Y200XX
Y300XX
Y500XX
Transformer
Rating
10KVA
20KVA
34KVA
50KVA
For 208 V
Plant Power
P/N 680521
P/N 680431
P/N 680435
P/N 680525
For 230 V
Plant Power
P/N 680160
P/N 680432
P/N 680436
P/N 680526
For 460 V
Plant Power
P/N 680343
P/N 680390
P/N 680391
P/N 680527
For 575 V
Plant Power
P/N 680524
P/N 680433
P/N 680437
P/N 680528
Non-Isolating Buck Transformers
Two single-phase buck transformers are used. Instructions are furnished for connection in an open delta configuration to furnish three
phase 460v input power to the Parajust Y.
. For 575 V Plant Power Y2ooxx
C
Y300XX
24.8KVA
41.0 KVA
P/N 680434
P/N 680438
-------
Accessories.
Operator's Stations.
NEMAl
: General Purpose.
Die Cast
Aluminum en-
closure. Speed
Control Potenti-
ometer. Start-
Stop/Reset
toggle switch
with spring re-
turn on "start";
maintained "stop/reset" position.
P/N 680001.
To substitute 10-tum speed control
potentiometer for 1-turn poten-
tiometer, order P/N
680001 with P/N 900463.
NEMA7-9
Explosion-
Proof.
For Class I,
Group C & D
and Class II,
Groups E, F,
and G locations.
Shipped unassembled.
Three-Function Stations.
Start. Stop/Reset. Speed Control.
P/N 680007.
Four-Function Stations.
Start, Stop/Reset, Speed Control,
Jog/Run P/N 680057.
Start, Stop-Reset, Speed Control,
Manual/Auto P/N 680058.
To substitute 10-turn speed control
potentiometer for 1-tum potentio-
meter, order operator's station by
Part Number "with P/N 900463."
Contact Parametrics for other
Explosion-Proof Operator's Stations.
Shielded Cable.
AD remote Start, Stop and Speed
Control wiring must be made with
shielded cable. Order three-
conductor, size-22. Specify length
required, P/N 680292. Use one cable
for start-stop (enabling) circuitry and a
second cable for speed control.
NEMA4-12
Washdown
Duty.
Enclosures are
fiberglass.
Operator's devices
meetNEMA4
(watertight)
requirements and
NEMA12(oiltight)
requirements.
Three-Function Stations.
Start, Stop-Reset, Speed Control.
P/N 680018.
Four-Function Stations.
Start, Stop-Reset, Speed Control,
Jog/Run. P/N 680054.
Start, Stop-Reset, Speed Control,
Manual/Auto. P/N 680055.
Contact Parametrics for other NEMA
4-12 Operator's Stations.
Speed
Control
Potentiometer.
Furnished unassembled, for customer
mounting. With dial plate (3" x 4" high)
and knob. (5K2W potentiometer).
Order P/N680002.
Ten-turn
Potentiometer.
For accurate setting of speed. Has
digital readout 0-999.
Supplied loose for
customer mounting
(5K2watt
potentiometer).
Order P/N 900463
(fits Whole).
Motor Operated
Potentiometer.
Allows speed to be adjusted from
more than one location when more
than one set of "Increase" and "De-
crease" pushbuttons is used. Consult
Parametrics.
Meters.
Speed Indicator (Frequency
Meter). Customer wires meter to Pa-
rajust motor output terminal block.
Meter displays actual output frequen-
cy of Parajust (motor speed) and is
calibrated 0-100% speed.
Includes calibra-
tion potentio-
meter. Meter
may be removed
from enclosure
for mounting in
customer panel.
P/N 680423. Please specify if special
calibration is desired and use P/N
680424.
Ammeter (Motor Load Meter).
Same size meter and enclosure as Fre-
quency Meter. Customer wires meter
into one of the Parajust-to-motor
leads. Meter displays actual motor
current. May be removed from enclo-
sure for mounting in customer panel.
SCALE
P/N
0-30 AMP
0-50 AMP
0-80 AMP
680286
680290
"680425
Voltmeter.
Same size meter and enclosure as fre-
quency meter. 0-600 VAC scale indi-
cates output voltage of Parajust Y.
P/N 680417.
Technical Services.
Parametrics can furnish special wiring
diagrams and documentation, and field
service (including start up supervi-
sion) maintenance training, service
engineering, etc. as ordered by our
customers.
-9-
-------
Fractional
through 50 HP.
Parajusts and accessories are avail-
able for virtually every speed control
application through 50 HP. Contact
your distributor for full catalog in-
formation and our award-winning Ap-
plication Manual.
Warranty
PnmetriaiimtofBarry Wright, then
ufx
. nu that for a period of twelve
tl2)maitrafrom date of shipment by the manufacturer or 12 months from Parametrks
nce^c(WaRaityRegutriDwtaril,no(toeiceedl8inomtefrtiindateofshifiiiienl, it
•i repair, or it its option replace, my new apparatus which proves defective n material
or workmanship, or which does not conform to applicable drivings aid specifications
approved by themaniifatiirer. All repairs and replacements sbaDbeF.O.B. factory. All
•dims must be made in writing to the manufacturer.
•• bi)oeventaiidiiiideriiocirc
cessbafiiiBiiiiDCtiB^beliablefor(a)daniagesiri
rttRproeRK (b)feuures or damages due totnisuse. abuse, "iyi i^»»r m^tana^n e* •typ^^i^i
^UinBlKtmoftempeiauire, dirtoroorroSfvesT (c) failures due to operation, Dtentianal or
«berrae,«bi7ve rued capacities, and (d)ann-authoroede»peDSes fa removal, inspec
tinj, tmuporUocp. repair or rework. Nor ahaHnunirartiirer ever be liable tor conse-
-TtowamntyiikiLIEUOF ALL OTHER WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR
IMPUED, mCLUDIVG
-------
HAZARD, KENTUCKY
HASTEHATER TREATMENT PUNT PROFILE
OCTOBER 1-5, 1984
(1.5 M.6.D. TRICKLING FILTER PLANT)
PROBLEM:
The plant has design limitations, operational control handicaps,
and lacks a sludge management plan. There is ample hydraulic capacity
(1.50 MGD), but the shallow trickling filter limits the organic
capacity to about 7,000 population equivalent. The anaerobic digester
should accomodate a population equivalent of about 12,000. The sludge
dewatering on sludge beds restricts the solids loadings to a population
equivalent of about 7,500. At the present loadings and plant
performance level, the bed dosage cycle will range from 30 to 50 days
(dependent upon the degree of solids reduction and concentration
achieved by the digester).
The plant influent pumping station contains two 1,050 GPM pumps
and one 700 GPM pump. One of the 1,050 GPM pumps is inoperable and
operation of the pumps must be manually controlled. The secondary
effluent recirculation was intended to serve as makeup flow to the
influent wet well so that one or more of the plant influent pumps would
operate continuously. The recirculation control valve in the wet well
valve was long ago eaten up by corrosion, so the recirculation rate is
now fixed by manual operation of a shear gate in the effluent weir
basin. It has not been possible to regulate the recirculation so as to
prevent the on-off cycling of the plant influent pump which will
usually occur about four times between midnight and 6:00 a.m. The
trickling filter distributor arms will sag when the pump kicks off so
that they hang up on the media and have to be manually re-started. It
-------
is believed that the. filter distributor arms remain stationary after
the first stoppage each night and remain that way until re-started the
next day.
The grit collection equipment is badly corroded and not in
operation.
The plant has a plunger pump (39 6PM) for primary sludge and a
300 GPM centrifugal pump for secondary sludge, and both are served by a
single pump pit. This double used single pit scheme necessitates the
opening and closing of the valves at the primary and secondary
clarifiers each time the use is changed. This troublesome task results
in minimal sludge withdrawals from the clarifiers because of the extra
labor involved.
ACTION TO SOLVE PROBLEMS:
The control panel for the plant influent pumps must be rewired.
The City Manager and Division of Water personnel are seeking to
expedite the processing of the permit for dewatered sludge from the
sludge beds for disposal at the County Landfill. The City Manager has
been advised that a back up plan for sludge disposal is needed. The
City Manager was also advised as to the rehabilitative needs of the
sand beds.
Work on replacing the corroded grit collection equipment is in
progress.
The city engineers were furnished plans and specifications for
the installation of a flow meter at the effluent weir basin.
The operators were given basic instructions in primary and
secondary sludge pumping schedules, digester supernatant recycling,
sand bed dosage and dosing cycles, and secondary effluent recirculation
rates.
-------
PERFORMANCE
The plant performance has been generally below its design
expectations and has been out of compliance with its permit with
respect to BOD, Suspended Solids and Fecal Coliform. The plant has
never had valid flow measurement and the analyses of effluent samplings
are performed by a commercial laboratory.
PROGNOSIS
With optimum operational and maintenance practices, the plant
could be in compliance with its permit (25 B.O.D./30 S.S./12 NH3-N/2
D.O.) for probably not more than four months out of the year. It seems
probable that a moderate amount of plant improvements would enable
permit compliance to be achieved for as much as eight months out of the
year. The improvements recommended are:
1. Revise piping so that secondary sludge could be returned to
the primary influent on a continuous basis.
2. Extend the secondary effluent recirculation pipe downward to
within about 12 inches of the intended high water level in
the wet well, and then install a butterfly valve which would
control the recirculation flow rate in inverse proportion to
the raw sewage flow.
3. Construct three or more new sand beds, and reserve one bed
to serve as a filter for the digester supernatant return.
4. Install bar screen with 1/2 inch spacings at the downstream
end of the Parshall Flume.
5. Install plastic sprockets to mate up with the plastic chains
in the primary clarifier sludge collection equipment.
-------
6. Purchase two portable automatic samplers so as to provide
basis for operational controls and to furnish representative
performance data. Consideration should be given to the
conducting of sample analyses by plant personnel.
7. Construct a chlorine contact basin downstream from the
effluent weir basin. Consideration should be given to flow
proportioned chlorine feed equipment.
CONCLUSIONS:
The foregoing recommendation will not increase the plant's BOD
capacity. Increasing the depth of media in the Trickling Filter
appears to be the most cost-effective means of increasing the BOD
capacity.
As is, the plant's BOD population equivalent capacity is about
7,000.
It appears that, without the wastes from Airport Gardens, the
plant loadings are about 6,500 population equivalent. Whenever the
Airport Gardens wastes are received the BOD loadings will be very near
to plant capacity.
Submission of a schedule for upgrading the treatment facilities
should be required, and approval for future tap-ons should be
contingent on compliance with this schedule.
-------
HAZARD
EVALUATION OF COMPOSITE SAMPLES BEFORE AND AFTER
COMPTRAIN PROGRAM
BEFORE
AFTER
IN
OUT
IN
OUT
Flow
Pennit X
C.O.D. ng/1
C.O.D. Ibs
C.O.D. X
B.O.D.g ng/1
B.O.D.c Ibs
B.O.D.c X
Permit X
S.S ng/1
S.S. Ibs
S.S. X
Pennit %
V.S.S. mg/1
V.S.S. Ibs
V.S.S. X
T.S. ng/1
T.S. Ibs
T.S. X
V.T.S. ng/1
V.T.S. Ibs
V.T.S. X
NHo-N ng/1
NHg-N Ibs
NH^-N X
Pennit ng/1
pH
Pennit
D.O. mg/1
Pennit ng/1
0.773 MGD
483
3,114
Reduction
168
1,083
Reduction
Reduction
520
3,352
Reduction
Reduction
224
1,444
Reduction
955
6,157
Reduction
313
2,017
Reduction
11
71
Reduction
N/A
6.9
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.773 MGD
Flow meter went out of service
during survey.
113 365 165
728
77
32 178 65
206
81
85
34 96 20
219
93
85
20
129
91
556
3,584
42
119
767
62
9 16 13
58
18
12
7.4 7.0 6.9
6-9
5.2
2.0
-------
HAZARD
EVALUATION OF COMPOSITE SAMPLES BEFORE AND AFTER
COMPTRAIN PROGRAM
BEFORE AFTER
IN OUT IN OUT
Fecal Colifonn N/A >1000,000 Not run by lab
per/100 nl
Permit N/A 200
*&••••
-------
JACKSON, KENTUCKY
WASTEHATER TREATMENT PLANT PROFILE
AUGUST 20-23, 1984
(0.300 M.G.D. EXTENDED AERATION)
I. PROBLEMS:
During the period the Comptrain project was conducted, 5 of
the 11 lift stations were out of service. Included in the inoperable
group was the main lift station from Jackson and the lift station
which pumps the waste water from the neighboring town of Quicksand. No
percise count of 75% sewer service connections was available at this
time. The estimated population in Jackson and Quicksand is 2,300 and
1,500, respectively. A guess at the population being served is 3,000.
Estimating 150,000 GPD. The measured flow during this period was
54,000 GPD, and on this basis, 64% of the sewage flow from the two
towns is being discharged to North Fork Kentucky River.
The Division of Water's records show the subject plant to be
the extended aeration process with a rated hydraulic capacity for"
3000,000 GPD. This hydraulic capacity should provide organic loading
equivalent to a population of 3,000. Calculations based on the
construction drawings show the following data:
Aeration Compartment Volume = 26,716 cubic feet (199,835 gallons)
Digester Compartment Volume = 9,157 cubic feet (68,494 gallons)
Clarifier Compartment Volume = 47,285 gallons
Sludge Drying Bed Area = 2,664 square feet
Clarifier Net Surface Settling Area = 415 square feet
On the bases of the foregoing calculations, the hydraulic
capacity is 200,000 GPD and the organic capacity in terms of
population equivalent is for 1998 people. The surface area of the
clarifier is the limiting hydraulic factor. Adding the digester
volume to the aeration volume could (theoretically) increase the BOD
capacity to 2,688 population equivalent, but the hydraulic loading
1
-------
should be pegged at not more than 250,000 GPD. The digestion
compartment, properly used, would be of more value in burning off
surplus solids production.
Theoretically, converting to the Contact Stabilization mode
would nearly double the BOD capacity, but this would not be feasible
because the clarifier surface area would still limit the hydraulic
capacity to 250,000 G.P.D. Besides, the trade off would be about a
300% increase in surplus solids production.
The Spring flooding inundated the sludge drying beds which
has necessitated replacing all of the sand. High poroscity sand with
very little fine material is available locally. City personnel have
immediate plans for securing and placing this media on the beds.
II. PROBLEMS DEFINED AND ACTIONS TAKEN:
A.) Problem:
No operation control proceedures have been practiced.
Action Taken to Solve Problem:
The wastewater operators were given instructions in the
basic principals of operational controls.
B.) Problem:
The wastewater plant is oprating without licensed wastewater
operator.
Action Taken to Solve Problem:
The wastewater operators were given training and were
instructed to take the Class I and II wastewater examanation
as soon as they obtain the needed experience.
-------
C.) Problem:
Routine housekeeping chores have been neglected for a long
period of time.
Action Taken to Solve Problem:
High pressure hosing was used to wash off solids which were
caked on the walls and the aeration piping.
D.) Problem:
The aeration compartment contained about 12 inches of
compacted solids. The great majority of those solids seemed
to consist of grit.
Action Taken to Solve Problem:
There was no action taken to solve this problem during the
Comp Train Project. The city was instructed that all
compartments should be drained and cleaned during the month
of November and December, because of the load that would be
imposed on the stream during the period of bypassing. Also,
the Department of Environmental Protection, Division of
Water, should be notified prior to this work. This
accumulation of solids take up volume and reduce plant
capacity.
E.) Problem:
There was a large backlog of surplus mixed liquor suspended
solids (M.L.S.S.) in all the plant compartments.
Action Taken to Solve Problem:
There was ho action taken to solve this problem during the
Comptrain Project. The city was instructed to refurbish the
sludge drying beds so that sludge could be wasted. The
sludge after it has been dried on the sludge beds can be
-------
removed and taken to the Perry Co. Landfill for
incorporation with the cover material.
F.) Problem:
The aerobic digester compartment was not being used as
design. About 70% of the return sludge was routed through
what was designed to be the digester supernatant overflow.
Action Taken to Solve Problem:
The air supply to aerobic digester was shut off long enough
to allow the sludge blanket to settle. The clear
supernatant was then pumped to the aeration compartment.
The adjustable digester supernatant over flow weir was
elevated to its maximum height so that the digester solids
would not escape while under aeration. The operators were
instructed to the settling and pumping method to extract the
maximum amount of water from the digester sludge so as to
increase the effectiveness of the sludge drying beds.
G.) Problem:
Several of the air diffusers appeared to be clogged.
Action Taken to Solve Problem:
There was no action taken to solve this problem during the
Comptrain Project. When the city drains the plant they are
to repair this equipment.
H.) Problem:
All the metal work is in need of sand blasting and painting.
Action Taken to Solve Problem:
The city was informed that this needed to be done.
-------
I.) Problem:
Working conditions in the laboratory and office are
intolerable because of noise and heat.
Action Taken to Solve Problem:
There is no action that could easily solve this problem. It
is bad design when the blowers are put in the same building
with the Lab and Office.
J.) Problem:
All four sludge drying beds received minor damage because of
the flood. Most of the sand on the drying beds had been
washed away.
Action Taken to Solve Problem:
New Sand - of the right uniform coefficient and effective
size was ordered. The city has now completed the
rehabilitation of the sludge drying beds.
K.) Problem:
The waste sludge valve on the waste sludge line was frozen
shut and could not be unfrozen. This prohibits the wasting
of sludge from the aerobic digester.
Action Taken to Solve Problem:
The city was instructed to replace these ball valves with
gate valves.
L.) Problem:
On the day of the Comptrain Project five of the eleven lift
stations were out of operation.
-------
Action Taken to Solve Problem:
The Department of Environmetnal Protection, Division of
Water, put a restraining order on the city of Jackson. See
attachment #1.
M.) Problem:
The chlorine contact tank was full of solids about four
feet.
Action Taken to Solve Problem:
The operators were instructed to pump these solids over into
the aerobic digester.
III. PERFORMANCE:
This wastewater plant is not performing very well because of
the above problems. This plant will not be in compliance unless
elected officials take seriously their job and see that the plant is
adequately staffed and run by certified wastewater plant operators who
are willing to do the work necessary to keep this plant in
compliance. This means the city should hire two full-time wastewater
plant operators.
IV. PROGNOSIS:
This city will stay out of compliance until,? their attitude
changes towards wastewater treatment. Their attitude is, "give us a
grant and we will fix it." This is a syndrome of this region. The
syndrome is, "receive federal and state grant monies and build what is
required by law but do not spend money to take care of it. If it
breaks down, ask for more grant monies to fix or replace it with a new
one." The problem with this syndrome is that it is reckless
stewardship of federal and state grant monies. Therefore, the return
on the dollar is not cost effective. Maybe we should not give grant
-------
monies to cities with poor stewardship of past monies received? Maybe
grant monies ought to go to cities with a good stewardship record?
Then at least our grant monies have a better possibility of be well
spent.
A tap-on ban has recently been enacted because of the
bypassing of the pump stations etc. With marginal performance at 25%
of its design loading, the plant should be carefully monitored after
all the pump stations have been restored to service because it seems
quite likely that the plant would then be at or very near its design
loading. Without good operational and maintenance, the plant will not
be able to meet its permit limitations under full loading conditions.
-------
JACKSON
EVALUATION OF COMPOSITE SAMPLES BEFORE AND AFTER
COMPTRAIN PROGRAM
BEFORE
AFTER
IN
OUT
IN
OUT
Flow
Permit %
C.O.D. mg/1
C.O.D. Ibs
C.O.D. %
B.O.D.c mg/1
B.O.D.c Ibs
B.O.D.c X
Permit %
S.S mg/1
S.S. Ibs
S.S. %
Permit 2
V.S.S. mg/1
V.S.S. Ibs
V.S.S. %
T.S. mg/1
T.S. Ibs
T.S. %
V.T.S. mg/1
V.T.S. Ibs
V.T.S. %
NH3-N mg/1
NHo-N Ibs
NH.-N %
Permit mg/1
pH
Permit
D.O. mg/1
Permit mg/1
0.258
268
577
Reduction
97
209
Reduction
Reduction
80
172
Reduction
Reduction
66
142
Reduction
528
1,136
Reduction
162
349
Reduction
22
47
Reduction
7.1
6.0 - 9.0
N/A
N/A
0.258
14
65
89
0.1
0.2
99.9
85
3
6
97
85
3
6
96
392
843
26
70
151
57
3
6
87
20
7.3
6.0 - 9.0
2
6
The after C.S.I was not run
because of five down lift
station and only 54,00 gpd
flow.
The before C.S.I represents
mostly rain water and 3 lift
stations were down at the time
of sampling. About 50% or more
of the flow and organic load
was not entering the
wastewater plant.
-------
JACKSON
EVALUATION OF COMPOSITE SAMPLES BEFORE AND AFTER
COMPTRAIN PROGRAM
BEFORE AFTER
IN OUT IN OUT
Fecal Coliform N/A 40
per/100 ml
Permit N/A 200
BEFORE AFTER
Aeration Solids
MLSS mg/1 6,620
MLVSS mg/1 3,020
-------
ATTACHMENT 1
-------
Tl
at the
~ f.'V
track
:: Above, a 280-yard rac* wad
the first race run at the new
Paducah Downs In Paducah'
„ yesterday. At right. Tangle
;; Randolph, left. NOfniah
•* Randolph and David BUttl*,
< all from Nashville, Tenn^
, looked over race programs
before the races at the
quarter-horse'track;
STAFF PHOTOS'
BY BILL RIGHT
Court prohibits new sewer tap-ons in Jackson
1 By LIVINGSTON TAYLOR j
, CMrtwslMinMl stiff Wrlfw
FRANKFORT, Ky. — A court or-
'der temporarily barring the city of
Jackson from approving new con-
nections to Its sewer system was ob-
tained yesterday by attorneys for
the state Natural Resources and En-
vironmental Protection Cabinet.
] A sewer tap-on ban Issued through'
.the state Division of Plumbing has
4>«en In effect at JacMon for the
•pflst year, a Division of Writer effl-
«tal said later.
t^Vesterday's temporary restraining
•OTtfer, obtained from Franklin Clr»
4ult Judge William L. Grahanii ap-
"fjarently will put more weight be-
hind efforts to enforce the ban. .
A complaint filed In court by the
Cabinet yesterday alleges that the
city has failed to comply with state
laws and regulations by: .:
" .., V Allowing ' sewage to bypass
pumping stations and by not report-
ing the Bypasses.,
** Falling,to meet allowed efflu-
ent-quality standards at Its sewage-
treatment plant, oo the North Fork
of the Kentucky River. >
** Failing to Obtain permits for
the construction of sewer lines. * t
The complaint alleges that the
city him violated a 1982 agreement
In which It agreed tb ban new sewer
connections In the Quicksand area
without state approval; report spills
and bypasses; repair Its plant; and
maintain a treatment level suffi-
cient to meet water-quality stan-
dards. | i
"The sewage-treatment- system
serving the Jackson area Is still by-
draullcally and biologically over-
loaded, so that the system cannot
handle additional Influent without
further detriment to the, public
health and environmental quality,"
the complaint alleges.
The suit asks for a pe'riSanenf In-
junction against new MW«T connec-
tions and an order requiring Jack-
son to remedy Us sewer problems.
Claims made In a lawsuit give
only side of a easel
Jackson Mayor Frank Noble
could not be reached for commenl
Untreated sewage has been
passing two pumping stations In thi
Quicksand area for several years,
the Division of Water official said.
The stations were originally pa
of the Quicksand sewer district
which later was taken over by
city of Jackson.
The Division of Water's records;
on the case have been sent to
Cabinet general counsel's office,
vision officials said, i
An attorney In the general
set's office, Katnryn Rargraves.
fused to release any records
those filed In court because "we're
In the middle of an enforcement
tlon."
III
t
4t
""
4
1
i
.. ."•
;
-
: t ,.
,:-,_ ,^l".
i
j
H
i
i — r
-
.
•JTT-T i '
J ;
!
.-i
V
; 4
i
. !
' (
•t"
': t-*
• *
•i \
hi
*f
1
i
i i i
1
|j
ll
[li.y
i nt J i
M !i! ! i
i ! '!! ::! :
i: ;
11
j ]
i j
~i
'
~
. ,., n
i
>o j
>X— V
y .,
T
•*•
-------
ALBANY, KENTUCKY
KASTEHATER TREATMENT PLANT PROFILE
JULY 15-20, 1984
(0.45 M.6.D. OXIDATION DITCH)
I. PROBLEMS:
This wastewater treatment plant has design and construction
problems that make the plant difficult to operate. This plant is
operating without certified wastewater operators. Also, this plant
does not have a sludge disposal permit. These problems have caused this
plant to be in noncompliance.
II. PROBLEMS DEFINED AND ACTIONS TAKEN:
A. Design Problem:
High water marks in the plant influent pump well and plant
drain metering pit indicate that manholes CF-1 through CF-9 in the
plant influent line have been surcharged. It also appeared that
manholes CF-2, CF-3, and CF-4 have been subject to inundation. This is
probably the major source of silt and clay in the plant solids. This
silt and clay are found throughout the plant basins, ditch, clarifiers,
etc. One of the final clarifiers was drained in order to clean this
silt and clay out of the clarifier.
Action to Solve Problem:
The city should investigate and eliminate the major sources
of sand, silt, and clay entering the collection system. Manholes CF-2,
CF-3, and CF-4 should possibly be raised to prevent inudation. Sand
silt, and mud is to be were physically removed from the clarifier.
B. Design Problem:
Excessive harmonic wave action in the oxidatiton ditch
prohibits the simultaneous operation of both rotors. This is a
1
-------
serious problem in that poor plant performance will be the result when
the organic loadings exceed the oxygen transfer capability of one
rotor.
Action to Solve Problems:
Lake Side Equipment has been contacted and they are going to
visit the plant and correct the problem.
C. Design Problem:
The aerobic sludge digester is severely handicapped by the
existing fixed level supernatant overflow scheme. This mode of
operation does not provide for the maximum amounts of supernatant
withdrawal, and this results in shortened solids retention time and
decreased solids concentrations being applied to the beds.
Action to Solve Problem:
Replace the digester overflow pipe with a telescopic valve
which provides a six foot elevation range for decanting supernatant.
D. Design Problem:
The solids in the chlorine contact basin must be physically
shoveled to the drainage valves. About 12" of solids had accumulated
in these basins. Flat bottom chlorine contact basins with drainage
valves above the floor level is a common design problem which was found
in this plant. (It required 3 hours of shoveling and washing to remove
the solids.)
Action to Solve Problem:
Reconstruct the floor of the chlorine contact basins so that
sludge will readily drain to the mud valves. See attached drawing.
-------
E. Construction Problem:
The sludge drying beds were not constructed in conformance
with the plans and specifications as approved by the Division of Water.
An aggregate resembling pit gravel was substituted for sand. The plans
and specifications called for an effective size of 1.0 mm to 3.37 mm
with a uniform coefficient of 3.0 or less. The sieve analysis of the
material on the drying beds showed the effective size to be 0.635 mm
and the uniform coefficient to be 7.27. This material permitted sludge
solids to penetrate about 2 inches into the media, and the filtrate
produced contained a very high solids concentration.
Action to Solve Problem:
Remove the existing media from the sludge drying beds and
purge the beds of sludge which may have penetrated to the course stone
media, and replace with sand which will conform with the contract
specifications. Final grant payments will not be made until this
problem is corrected.
F. Construction Problem:
There is 1 to 3 inches of solids deposited in the screw pumps
discharge area and in the comminutor by pass channel.
Action to Solve Problem:
Construct fillets in the corners of the plant influent
structure. Also, slope the comminutor by pass channel floor so as to
eliminate the grit accumulation.
G. Problem:
The lack of a flap valve in the plant influent pump pit allows
for backup flooding of the plant drainage system at storm flow
conditions.
-------
Action to Solve Problem:
A flap valve has been ordered and will be installed to
prevent flooding of the plant drainage system.
H. Problem:
The chlorine water supply scheme requires a considerable
amount of maintenance. Excessive amounts of grease and plastics settle
in the chlorine contact basin near the point where the water is
withdrawn. This grease and trash clogs the chlorine feed equipment.
Action to Solve Problem:
Connect the chlorine feed equipment to the city water supply.
Use the chlorine tank water only for wash down. A one inch diameter
high pressure hose and nozzle is needed for wash down.
I. Certification Problem:
No certified wastewater operators.
Action to Solve Problem:
The operators were trained in the proper operation of the
treatment plant. They were also taught how to run the various process
control tests and how to plot and use trend charts. They are to attend
the next certification school to take the exam for certification.
J. Problem:
There is no room to waste sludge into the aerobic digester.
The digester is full of solids. Also there is an excessive amount of
solids carried in the oxidation ditch.
Action Taken to Solve Problem:
Sludge was cleaned off of the five sludge drying beds and
stored on the plant grounds. The five beds were then filled again with
28,793 gallons of sludge which contained 10,484 pounds of solids from
the aerobic digester. The operators now have room to waste sludge into
-------
the digester again orv a daily basis. The wastewater operators were
trained how to waste sludge and balance solids. The MLSS in the
Oxidation Ditch were lowered from 4,153 ppm to about 2,800 ppm to agree
with the computer model.
K. Problem:
No permit to dispose of sludge from the sludge drying beds.
Action Taken to Solve Problem:
A sample of sludge from the drying beds is being run at a
private laboratory to determine if any toxic material is present in
quantities large enough to cause problems. If the sludge sample shows
no prohibitive concentration of certain substances, Albany will be able
to dispose of their sludge in the Clinton County permitted landfill
while they pursue the selection of a site for sludge recycling and
utilization of agricultural land.
III. Performance:
This new wastewater treatment plant is performing very well
despite all of the above problems because the treatment plant is
receiving only 25% of its design hydraulic and organic load. The
harmonic wave problem in the ditch prevents the operation of both
rotors together, and this will limit the plant's organic loadings to
significantly less than its design intent. Serious operational
problems will result from the faulty sand beds and the digester
limitation, and this will most probably exert a negative affect on
plant performance.
-------
Prognosis:
Special Note: This plant will go out of compliance because
of the lack of adequate sludge management equipment. Sludge drying
beds alone are not sufficient because Kentucky receives more rainfall
than evaporation and the sludge will not dry in wet weather. The
sludge will then build up in the plant and then wash out in the
effluent at high flow periods. Therefore the city needs to develope a
sludge management plan that includes hauling liquid sludge to a
permited agricultural site.
This plant is now experiencing a back log of sludge that
needs to be wasted and they have neither the equipment or an approved
way of doing this. The problem is getting worse every day.
Other problems that could cause noncompliance would be failure
to correct the problems of mud and sand entering the plant, excessive
infiltration and inflow, and organic loadings in excess of the ditch's
oxygenation capability.
-------
ALBANY
EVALUATION OF COMPOSITE SAMPLES BEFORE AND AFTER
COMPTRAIN PROGRAM
BEFORE
AFTER
IN
OUT
IN
OUT
Flow
Permit
0.170
0.170
0.232
0.232
C.O.D. mg/1
C.O.D. Ibs
C.O.D. X
731 21
1036 30
Removal 97%
938 84
1,902 163
Removal 91.5%
B.O.D.c mg/1
B.O.D.r Ibs
B.O.D.c X
Permit %
288 3.0
408 4.25
Removal 99%
360 6.3
697 12
Removal 98%
S.S mg/1
S.S. Ibs
S.S. %
Permit %
278 4
394 5.7
Removal 98.5%
568 10
1,099 19.34
Removal 98%
V.S.S. mg/1
V.S.S. Ibs
V.S.S. X
163 <1
231 <1.41
Removal 99.9%
434 6
839 12
Removal 98.5%
T.S. mg/1
T.S. Ibs
T.S. %
932 283
1,321 401
Removal 70%
1,200 475
2,322 919
Removal 60%
V.T.S. mg/1
V.T.S. Ibs
V.T.S. %
462 44
655 62
Removal 90.5%
672 83
1,300 161
Removal 88%
*NH3-N mg/1
NHo-N Ibs
NH.-N %
Permit %
11.1 4.42
16 6.25
Removal 61%
20 16
39 30
Removal 23%
pH
Permit
9.4
7.7
not run by lab
D.O. mg/1
Permit
not run by lab
-------
ALBANY
EVALUATION OF COMPOSITE SAMPLES BEFORE AND AFTER
COMPTRAIN PROGRAM
BEFORE AFTER
IN OUT IN OUT
Fecal Coliform
per/100 ml not run by lab
Permit
BEFORE AFTER
Aeration Solids
MLSS mg/1 7,000 3,630
MLVSS mg/1 3,350 1,930
* Ammonia Nitrogen removal was bad on the after C.S.I.
This was because the operator blast wasted sludge and put
14" on the drying beds. This reduced the sludge age andn .the
nitrifying bacteria causing the NH3-N reduction to xlenfifrrsh.
I phoned the operator and told him to do this more slowly
the next time and never put more than 8" of sludge on the
beds.
-------
ATTACHMENT 1
-------
CHARLOTTE E. BALDWIN (|( ffl i b) MARTHA LAYNE COLLINS
C SECRETARY \&&&y GOVERNOR
" COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY
NATURAL RESOURCES AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION CABINET
DEPARTMENT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
FORT BOONE PLAZA
1 8 REILLY ROAD
FRANKFORT. KENTUCKY 4O6O1
September 6, 1984
The Honorable Sid Scott, Mayor
City of Albany
P. 0. Box 96
Albany, Kentucky 42602
Dear Mayor Scott:
In conducting the Comptrain Program for the Albany Wastewater
Treatment Plant Operators, many shortcomings in the plant's design and
operational features were brought to light. A copy of the report on the
plant's status is enclosed for your information and use. The items in need
of corrective action are listed in the order of priority as follows:
; 1. Replace the existing sludge drying bed media with the type of
media as called for in the job specifications.
2. Secure a sludge disposal permit from the Division of Waste
Management.
3. Provide flood protection for plant drain line.
4. Correct sources of mud entering collection system.
5. Connect chlorine feed equipment to a city water supply.
6. Install a telescopic valve for digester supernatant.
7. Procure a one inch high pressure hose and nozzle for plant
washdown purposes.
8. Modify floor of chlorine tank as shown on enclosed drawings so
that sludge will drain to the mud valves.
9. Construct corner fillets in screw pump influent chamber and slope
floor in comminutor by-pass channel so as to prevent solids
accumulation in these areas.
10. Install baffles in the ditch on the downstream side of each
rotor.
-------
The Honorable Sid Scott
September 6, 1984
Page 2
The responsibility for construction in conformance with the plans
and specifications as approved by this office lies solely with the city.
This office can have no legal issue with agents the city may have employed
to attend to the duties required in the construction, operation,
maintenance and management of the facilities.
We have plans to follow up on the performance of the plant and
the operators and will be available after November for any aid we can give
towards making the needed improvements.
Very truly yours.
Paul K. Wood
Environmental Engineer
Division of Water
PKW:fml
Enclosures
-------
Loyal], Kentucky
Wastewater Treatment Plant Profile
August 23, 1984
(0.185 M.G.D. Extended Aeration)
I. Problems:
This wastewater treatment plant has operational problems because
of the lack of operator knowledge, experience, and training.
II. Problems Defined and Actions Taken:
Problem:
The wastewater operators did not know how to balance the mixed
liquor suspended solids (M.L.S.S.) in the three aeration tanks. Also
they did not know at what level of M.L.S.S. in mg/1 they should
maintain for best operation.
Action Taken:
The operators were trained in process control procedures and
were instructed on how to balance the solids in the reactors. The
operators then balanced the solids in the reactors by splitting flow
and solids equally between the reactors.
Problem:
The operators did not know how to draw off supernatant and waste
sludge to control the M.L.S.S. in the aerators (2,800 mg/1 level).
Action Taken:
The operators were instructed to obtain a portable pump with
flexible hose connection, and one of the aeration tanks was converted
to an aerobic digester. Then the operators were instructed how to
operate this digester and how to waste sludge. The total solids
inventory in the plant was calculated to be 9,619 Ibs. and the total
solids wasted by the end of the Comptrain Project was 4,246 Ibs. The
1
-------
M.LS.S. in the aeration was lowered from an average of 4,500 mg/1 to
an average of 2,800 mg/1 of M.L.S.S. which is the near the design
level. One of the aeration basins could temporarily be
converted to a digester because this plant is only receiving about 2/3
of its des gn hydraulic and organic loading.
Problem:
This plant has no sludge drying beds. Therefore, all sludge
disposal has to be hauled off in the liquid form by tank truck. For a
1,000 gallon septic tank hauler this cost the city $100.00 a load.
Also, one load 1,000 gallons, amounts to 100 Ibs. of solids, and a 100
Ibs of solids in what the city needs to waste each day. Therefore, it
cost the city $100. a day to waste sludge by this method. This is
cost prohibitive. Therefore, the city must search for a better scheme
for solids disposal.
Action Taken:
The City is checking to see if they own or if they can purchase
some land next to the treatment plant so that they can build some
sludge drying beds. This would reduce their sludge hauling cost and
volume tremendously.
Hauled Wet: .001 MGD x 8.34 x 12,000 p. p.m. = 100 Ibs/day
Cost $100.00 per 1,000 gallons or $1.00 per Ib.
100 Ibs. waste each day = $100 per day
Drying Beds
Dry Sludge Gallons = 7^™!^ R U .00° .000
650'000 ppm x 8'34
65% solids
Hauled Dry
Gallons = 18.4
Therefore 18.4 gal. * 7.5 gal/ff>
= 2.45 ft3 of dry sludge/day
-------
This volume could be hauled off in a pickup truck at the city's
cost of their own labor and truck.
Problem:
The flow meter and totalizer are out of order.
Action to Solve Problem;
The flow meter is to be serviced on a regular scheduled basis in
an agreement between the Seaboard Railroad and the city of Loyall.
The railroad has a discharge to the city sewer system and they have to
monitor the flow. Therefore, they will have their repair man service
the city's flow meter also.
The city has not been charging the railroad for their discharge.
This is now being changed with a price agreement is to be reached in
the near future.
Problem:
This wastewater plant does not have an adequate operating staff.
This plant should have two permanent daily operational personnel.
That is they should not be called off their operational duties to take
care of water line breaks and other city business. At present this is
being done.
Action Taken to Solve Problem:
They were advised that this should not be done.
Other Problems:
The city is not collecting all of their sewer bills or property
tax. Over one-third of the citizens and one council member do not pay
their property tax.
-------
Action to Solve Problem:
Set up a management system and enforcement collection of bills
and back unpaid bills.
III. Performance:
This wastewater plant was performing very well at the time of
Comptrain Project with a effluent B.O.D.g of about 10 mg/1.
Prognosis:
This treatment plant is in compliance except for flow
measurement. They are submitting their monthly operational reports
and also their discharge monitoring reports. The plant is being
operated by a certified wastewater operator and the second operator
will be certified as soon as he obtains enough experience.
I do not expect this plant to stay in compliance because of the
cost of sludge disposal. The city just cannot meet this high cost.
Therefore, it is absolutely necessary that the city construct sludge
drying beds in order to dispose of solids and to stay in compliance.
Also, the city should obtain a sludge disposal permit from the
Division of Waste Management to dispose of the sludge by landfarming.
Otherwise, they should take it to a permitted landfill site.
-------
LOYALL
EVALUATION OF COMPOSITE SAMPLES BEFORE AND AFTER
COMPTRAIN PROGRAM
BEFORE
AFTER
B.O.D.c mg/1
B.O.D.r Ibs
IN
OUT
72 1.6
59 1.32
IN
OUT
Flow
Permit X
C.O.D. mg/1
C.O.D. Ibs
C.O.D. X
0.099
160
132
Reduction
0.099
13.7
11
92
Flow meter
stopped
351
No data for
flow
25.1
178
9.9
B.O.D.c X
Permit X
S.S mg/1
S.S. Ibs
S.S. X
Permit X
V.S.S. mg/1
V.S.S. Ibs
V.S.S. X
T.S. mg/1
T.S. Ibs
T.S. X
V.T.S. mg/1
V.T.S. Ibs
V.T.S. X
*NH3-N mg/1
NH3-N Ibs
NH3-N X
Permit X
PH
Permit
D.O. mg/1
Permit
Reduction
34
28
Reduction
29
24
Reduction
276
228
Reduction
94
78
Reduction
10
8
Reduction
7.2
98
6 87 13
5
82
6 73 5
5
79
217 681 608
179
21
59 220 78
49
37
0.80 22 0.065
.66
92
7.1 7.2 7.4
-------
LOYALL
EVALUATION OF COMPOSITE SAMPLES BEFORE AND AFTER
COMPTRAIN PROGRAM
BEFORE AFTER
IN OUT IN OUT
Fecal Coliform
per/100 ml N/A 20 N/A Not run
Permit
BEFORE AFTER
Aeration Solids
MLSS mg/1 2,710 5,220
MLVSS mg/1 1,410 3,060
-------
Appendix C
Financial-Management Activities Materials
-------
COMPTRAIN PROJECT FINAL REPORT
The primary objective of the Comptrain Project was to bring
a select number of small wastewater treatment plants into compliance
with their NPDES permits. The way to achieve this goal was to provide
over-the-shoulder technical assistance to the towns to upgrade the
performance of the wastewater system. Special emphasis nationally
was placed on operator training and financial management.
In the state of Mississippi, operator training is under the
jurisdiction of the Department of Natural Resources, Bureau of Pollut-
ion Control (BPC). BPC has three training regions in the state.
Operators throughout the state received training in the areas of
chlorination, plant inspection, laboratory procedures, lagoon operat-
ions, math, and troubleshooting operation and maintenance problems.
Even with the on-going effort by BPC to provide technical training
to the state's small town wastewater treatment system, there still
exist the need to address the problem of inadequate financial manage-
ment of these systems.
To ensure that small wastewater systems received financial
management assistance, the Mississippi Institute for Small Towns
(MIST) contracted with the National Demonstration Water Project
to administer a project aimed at increasing the financial management
capacity of 10 small town wastewater treatment systems. MIST is
a non-profit organization that provides technical assistance to
rural, low-income communities in the areas of community development,
-------
planning and management. Keenan D. Grenell, Public Administration
Specialist for MIST, was responsible for program implementation
and on-site assistance for the project.
The initial step in the project was to construct a program
implementation schedule. This document was used by MIST staff as
a guide to pinpoint activites that needed to be carried out over
the duration of the project. The first phase of the schedule involved
participant selection. MIST staff received a list of twenty-three
(23) towns from BPC that the agency felt could benefit from financial
management assistance.
Virginia- The towns selected by MIST to participate in the project
are listed below:
BoIton Mound Bayou
Crosby Shubuta
Falcon Union
Marion Woodville
West Rosedale
MIST project towns are small (below 3,000 in population) and
among the poorest in the state. A majority of these towns have
unpaved streets, substandard housing, inadequate water and wastewater
systems, high rates of low-income and elderly citizens, and very
little economic activity. For instance, Mound Bayou a predominantly
black city, has a median family income of $3,100. In March of 1984,
BPC levied a fine of $1,000 a-day for failure to correct cited defi-
ciencies in the municipal sewer system. In order to get the towns
-2-
-------
to participate each town was mailed a letter explaining the project
and general scope of services to be rendered along with an acceptance
form. Those communities that were reluctant to participate were
visited by MIST staff and an official from the Bureau of Pollution
Control. With the help of BPC, MIST was able to convince at least
two towns to participate in the project which probably would not
have without this joint effort.
The second phase of. the program implementaiton schedule was
the development and completion of the participant needs assessment.
In this phase MIST staff used a wastewater treatment facilities
financial management evaluation survey and a wastewater facility
cost assessment to assess the needs of participant towns. The waste-
water treatment facilities financial management evaluation survey
concentrated on areas such as overall utility organization, budgeting,
accounting, debt service, cost recovery and operation and maintenance.
The wastewater facility cost assessment looked at the current user
fee rate for both water and sewer, how the present system was
financed, the indebteness of the system, shut-off policy for
consistently delinquent accounts, and the expenditures and revenues
for the system on a monthly basis. Once the data had been gathered
and the needs of the towns analyzed, they were then ranked according
to an established program of work.
A major component of this phase of the program implementation
strategy was that of site visits to individual project towns. Much
of the activity in the site visits included analyzing the current
rate structure, budgeting and accounting system, operation and
-------
maintenance procedures and other areas of importance for the
wastewater system.
The site visits worked to achieve greater concern for the
wastewater system among local elected officials. More attention
and emphasis began to be placed on management of the towns systems.
MIST staff bridged the communication gap between the elected
officials, town clerks, and plant operators.
MIST's over-the-shoulder-approach to providing technical
assistance helped several town clerks in developing new and innovative
ways to keep records and to make available timely and accurate
information to local decision makers. For instance, in Rosedale,
the town clerk developed a new accounting system to separate the
entries made to the ledger to show water and sewer as distinct
activities. In West, the town clerk constructed a semianual reporting
form to report the status of the wastewater system to local officials
in terms of receipts and disbursements.
The third phase was the preparation and submission of an
evaluative report which recommended corrective action to participant
towns. Each participant received a report highlighting the present
deficiencies in the financial management of their wastewater system.
The reports contain remedies and steps to take to make the
corrections.
In an effort to further assist the project towns with financial
management a Small Utilities Financial Management Workshop was held
at the Holiday Inn 1-55 North in Jackson, Mississippi on July 26,
1984. The purpose of the workshop was to bring about a comprehensive
-4-
-------
understanding of small utility financial management. Approximately
seven of the seventeen project towns were in attendance, along with
other small towns throughout the state, BPC officials, and MIST
staff. The facilitators for the workshop were Beth Ytell, Trainer
for Great Lakes Rural Network in Freemont, Ohio, and Jim Fagan,
NDWP Financial Management Consultant,
The Comptrain Project has opened communications with project
towns and their larger, more sophisticated neighbors. For instance,
an informal service agreement has been established between Falcon
(population 260) and Clarksdale (population 21,137) where the
Superintendant of Clarksdale's Wastewater Treatment Plant has agreed
to make staff available on weekends to make routine maintenance
checks on Falcon's wastewater system. The agreement was reached
as a direct result of project staff assistance.
During the course of the project, MIST encouraged participant
towns to share with other project towns information that might be
useful in their day-to-day management of the wastewater system.
At the Small Utilities Financial Management Workshop the mayor of
Shubuta informed other participants that her town's financial
management services had been contracted out. The inception of this
idea relieved her of political pressures from local citizens. The
service agreement between Shubuta and Systems Management Incorporated
takes away the burdensome responsibility of collecting all revenues,
making the necessary repairs in the system, reading all meters,
and maintaining and operating the system. Other towns at the workshop
seemed interested in this "privatization" concept.
Because of the Comptrain Project in Mississippi, local elected
-5-
-------
officials have begun to define policy needs broad enough to encompass
full wastewater system activities for a self sustaining system.
Project town officials now realize that ineffcient management of
the wastewater system is a serious impediment to future development.
The wastewater system is the most important capital facility in
small towns. Therefore, small towns must be willing to carefully
operate and maintain their system. This can be achieved through
installing a workable financial management system.
-6-
-------
FINAL COMPTRAIN PROJECT SUMMARY
SOUTH CAROLINA
MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT - WASTEWATER FACILITIES
Monthly summary reports and copies of recommendations have al-
ready been provided to indicate progress at each of the towns that
were participants in the Comptrain Project. This report summarizes
the status of each community.
Batesburg
The Batesburg wastewater treatment plant provides service for
about 1600 customers. Their cash flow and financial status had been
very tight in the past. As a result of the Comptrain project and
meetings with their Public Works Commission, they have become more
aware of budget items and their relationship with operation of the
facility. Thirteen major recommendations were made to them includ-
ing personnel practices, safety considerations, determining tap fees,
rate structure, separation of administrative costs, use of an activi-
ty budget, computer billing, and prorated debt distribution. Imple-
mentation has started on many of the items with emphasis on changing
from an old machine billing system to computer billing. The commis-
sion and utility clerk have been very responsive.
Clover
The Clover wastewater treatment plant serves about 1500 custom-
ers. It is an old system that is due for replacement within the
next two years. Since it is an old plant providing essentially
primary treatment, the rates have been low. This gave a sense of
well-being when in reality some financial problems existed. Thirteen
major recommendations were made including personnel practices and
safety considerations, determining twp fees, rate structure, separa-
tion of administrative costs between water and sewer, use of an acti-
vity budget, computer billing, prorated debt distribution, and the
use of B formal monthly operations report. The Mayor and Council
were very receptive to all recommendations and are eager to imple-
ment them as soon as possible.
Dillon
Dillon was the largest town included in the project with two
wastewater treatment plants serving 2600 customers. About middle
way in the project year, a new city manager was hired. He was very
receptive to Comptrain and the thirteen recommendations that were
made, which included some refinements to personnel practices, cost
of sewer taps and deposit fees, proration of administrative costs
and debt distribution, use of an activity budget, issuance of a
monthly operating report, and the installation of• a computer billing
system As a result of the recommendations, the city manager wanted
more computer information for a possible network system. There has
been considerable improvement in their management.
-------
Hardeeville
Hardeeville was among the'smallest population grouping, but it
had the unique status of having a high transient peculation because
of the many motels located near 1-95. The overall revenues were
good, but they had high expenses with a new wastewater treatment
plant that had an inadequately trained staff. Thirteen major recom-
mendations were made including personnel practices, tap fees and
deposit, rate structure, capital replacement costs, formal operating
report and computer billing. About half way through the project,
a new town administrator was hired. He became very interested in
implementing the recommendations, especially the use of computers to
help them better perform their administrative functions. At the end
of the Project, they asked for a review of a contract operations pro-
posal of their wastewater treatment plant. They have been extremely
responsive to the project.
Kershaw
The Kershaw wastewater treatment facility has several operations
problems in its service to 1100 customers. The overall rates are in
the upper level for its size, but the community has some management
problems. A CPA firm performs all of the accounting and financial
reporting, but does not participate in any financial planning. Thir-
teen major recommendations were made for improving personnel prac-
tices, determining tap fees and deposits, rate structure, use of an
activity budget, separation of administrative costs between water and
sewer, capital replacement of equipment, use of a formal wastewater
operations report, and computer billing. Several meetings were held
with the Mayor to explain the issues, but it is doubtful any improve-
ments will be apparent for a long time. Implementation will be very
slow.
Ridgeland
The Ridgeland wastewater treatment plant is an old under-sized
facility that is planned for upgrading. The new plant will be funded
by internal financial arrangements of the town using accumulated funds,
loans, and community block grants, but no EPA funds. The new town
administrator was very receptive to the Comptrain project. Thirteen
major recommendations were made which included some revision to per-
sonnel practices, salary and wage reviews, deposit fees, cost and debt
distribution, separation of administrative costs between water and
sewer, capital replacement costs, and a formal operations report. The
community has been using an old computer billing system and wants to
upgrade to a new system. The town administrator will probably imple-
ment most of the recommendations, but at a slow pace. He was very
receptive to most management concept discussions and imorovements.
-------
Saluda
Saluda has a new wastewater treatment plant serving 1100 cus-
tomers. The utility is under a Public Works Commission with a full
time superintendent. The superintendent is open to suggestions, but
reluctant to change some procedures for those that are new and dif-
ferent. The utility bookkeeping is very outdated, but a new com-
puter was purchased for billing using a simplified program developed
by the vendor to complete the sale. Thirteen major recommendations
were made including improved personnel practices, determining tap
fees and deposit, rate structure, use of a new commercial computer
program to give much more needed information, use of an activity
budget, prorated debt distribution, and more formal operations re-
porting. The superintendent quickly responded to operating cost
management recommendations and been keeping better track of expendi-
tures. Some improvement to personnel management was also noted. The
other items will be implemented much slower, especially anything per-
taining to the computer.
Whitmire
The Whitmire wastewater treatment facility serves about 1100
customers. There has been a number of problems with its operation
and management and the financial standing of the overall utility.
The system never had a budget until last year, and it did not reflect
the true conditions of its operation. The Mayor and Clerk were
friendly during the visits, but claimed they had little time to con-
sider any changes. Several recommendations were made, but implementa-
tion will be very slow because of many problems. The Mayor stated
during the last visit, that perhaps he had not shown much enthusiasm
for the project, but that in due time they might make some changes.
He appreciated the effort.
Conclusions^
This was the first time any of these communities ever partici-
pated in a management study of their systems. It was totally new to
them, but all could see the need for such a project. Each utility
was given a detailed report with a summary and recommendations for
their operation. It was the first time any of them had ever seen
graphic representation of their financial information. All of the
communities, even those that respond slowly, have become much more
aware of their management and financial responsibilities.
-------
A REPORT ON
WATER RESOURCES ASSISTANCE CORPORATION
1984 COMPTRAIN ACTIVITIES
-------
ACCOMPLISHMENTS
The COMPTRAIN program set out to train the clerk to do FmHA
reporting and to make the clerk, operator and politicians aware
of the true financial status of the system. Once completed,
WRAC would strive to establish in the system the characteristics
that a well managed -water and/or sewer system would exhibit in
its regular routine. The characteristics are as follows: (1)
an expense sheet which tracked the incoming bills for the month
and if they were paid, (2) use of a simplified ledger acceptable
to FmHA, (3) preparation of a monthly financial report and
review of it by the clerk, operator and the politicians, (A)
water and sewer rates sufficient to meet the day to day operating
expenses, (5) water and sewer rates sufficient to fund a depreciation
and reserve account, (6) a monthly operator report outlining the
water used, water loss, and hours worked, (7) attendance at all
utility meetings by the clerk, operator and politicians, (8) a
customer delinquency rate of 1%, (9) a special utility commission
to oversee utility operations, (10) use of a computer billing
service or process, (11) repair of minimum physical structure
to have water loss below 15%, 24 hour a day service, and
economical operation, and (12) awareness by operator, clerk
and politicians of each person's role. Obviously, this was
an energetic goal.
No community was able to reach all these goals but we did well.
Many of the systems had special issues like receivership or
grant problems which required attention before consideration of
good operation of the utilities could be improved.
.Besides working directly with the communities, WRAC engaged
in five special projects. The first project was assisting
Great Lakes Rural Network with a financial management workshop.
The second project was preparing a sewer management plan for a
county in the region and exploring a non-profit sewer management
company to implement the plan. Work on the project resulted
in selection of the county for an indepth EPA study on rural
wastewater. The third project was coordination of a workshop
to explain innovative financing of water meters and the affects
on cash flow. The fourth project was evaluation of different
computer billing and maintenance programs. The fifth project
was presentation of a report on contract management for small
wastewater systems at the annual meeting of the Kentucky-
Tennessee Section of AWWA.
-------
Expense Tracking System
Simplified Ledgers
Monthly Financial Report
Rates for Day to Day
Rates for Depriciation
Monthly Operator Report
Meeting Attendance
1% Customer Delinquency
Use of a Utility Commission
Use of Computer Billing
Improved Operating Practice
Job Awareness
NOTES':
X
The activity was already being performed by the
H..I system in it's regular routine. •
J The activity was discussed or tried but had not
^ = =r. 2.c.ce7t£d iitc the Tegular routine.
Ihfe activity VES SULC. e.s si-uily i-jt&gretfei iatc t
regular routine of the; utility.
The activity was never really discussed.
-------
i - *
V ^ v *
"SMALL UTILITIES AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP
*
June 26 - 27,1984
South Carolina Water Quality Institute
Sumter Area Technical College
506 Guignard Drive
Sumter, South Carolina 29150
(803) 778-1961
A COMPTRAIN project activity sponsored by...
p
National Demonstration Water Project
South Carolina Water Quality Institute
Great Lakes Rural Network
99
Great Lakes Rural Network
P.O. BOX 568
FREMONT, OHIO 43420
"Small Utilities and Financial Management Workshop
ABOUT THE COMPTRAIN PROJECT.. .
The goal of the Com p train Project is to field test a method for bringing small water and wastewater treatment plants into compliance
With federal-state performance standards. The method involves: (a) intensive, on-site, plant-specific training in equipment operation
«xlprocess control; (b) community-specific management and financial training; and (c) efforts to bring about policy and program
(hinges leading to improved plant performance. The training targets are plant operators, municipal officials, and state officials.
Cwnptrain is funded by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Appalachian Regional Commission. NDWP conducts
to project through its national and field staff, through contractors as appropriate, and sometimes through state agencies. In 1982-83
o-year project worked in West Virginia, Kentucky. Tennessee, South Carolina, Mississippi, and Louisiana. In 1984. the target
are Kentucky, Tennessee, South Carolina. Mississippi, and Alabama. In addition, NDWP hopes, through the Comptrain Project,
to have an impact on national policy in the area of water and wastewater treatment operator training.
-------
SMALL UTILITIES AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP"
In conjunction with the COMPTRAIN Project, the Great Lakes Rural Network is planning a workshop on FINANCIAL MANAGEME
This workshop will address the problems and concerns experienced by SMALL COMMUNITIES. The training will explore the specific
needs of small water/wastewater treatment plant staff.
WHO SHOULD ATTEND: Clerks • Recorders • Mayors
Board/Council Members • Treatment Plant Operators
PURPOSE: By involving the key staff and decisionmakers of small utilities, we hope to bring about a comprehensive understanding
financial management. The topics and materials presented will focus on:
Managing Money an overview of the financial management process
What Steps to Take planning
How to Get the Credit and Capital to Fund Your System financing
Knowing Where the Money Goes budgeting
Finding the Money to Operate and Manage your System cost recovery
Managing Information Before it Manages You record keeping and information systems
AGENDA
Tuesday, June 26th
Wednesday, June 27th
9:00 a.m.
9:30 a.m.
12:00
1:00 p.m.
9:30 a.m.
12:00
1:00 p.m.
4:30 p.m.
8:30 a.m. — 12:00
12:00
Registration
Morning Session
Lunch (Restaurants Nearby)
Afternoon Session
Morning Session
Adjourn
Lodging
Holiday Inn of Sumter
(803) 775-2323
Downtown Sumter Motor Lodge
(803) 775-6303
•
1.0 Hours Continuing Education Units (CEU) will be issued on
completion of this workshop.
For more information contact:
Andy Fairey, NDWP Field Operations
Director, Columbia, South Carolina
(803) 799-9709 or
Beth Ytell, Trainer, Great Lakes
Rural Network, Fremont, Ohio
(419)334-8911
REGISTRATION FORM
(Please Print or Type)
Community/Organization
Add ress
City
State
Phone
Persons Attending
Zip Code,
Title
There is NO registration fee. Please return to: Beth Ytell, Great Lakes Rural Network, P. O. Box 568f Fremont, Ohlol
by June 21, 1984.
-------
"SMALL UTILITIES AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP'
July 26,1984
10:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.
Holiday Inn - North
5075 I-55 N - P.O. Box 16083
Jackson, Mississippi 39206
(601)366-9411
A COMPTRAIN project activity sponsored by...
National Demonstration Water Project
Mississippi Institute of Small Towns
Great Lakes Rural Network
jreat Lakes Rural Network
'.0. BOX 568
/REMONT, OH 10 43420
'Small Utilities and Financial Management Workshop"
ABOUT THE COMPTRAIN PROJECT. . .
"togoal of the COMPTRAIN Project is to field test a method for bringing small water and wastewater treatment plants into
Ompliance With federal-State performance Standards. The method involves: (a) intensive, on-site. plant-specific training in
[iCluipment operation and process control; (b) community-specific management and financial training; and (c) efforts to bring about
olicy and program changes leading to improved plant performance. The training targets are plant operators, municipal officials
nd state officials.
'OMPTRAIN is funded by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Appalachian Regional Commission. The
Wional Demonstration Water Project conducts the project through its national and field staff, through contractors as appropri-
fe. and sometimes through state agencies. In 1982-83, the two-year project worked in West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, South Caro-
"a, Mississippi, and Louisiana. In 1984, the target states are Kentucky, Tennessee, South Carolina, Mississippi, and Alabama. In addi-
*n,NDWP hopes, through the COMPTRAIN Project, to have an impact on national policy in the area of water and wastewater treat-
ir** operator training.
-------
SMALL UTILITIES AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP"
In conjunction with the COMPTRAIN Project, the Great Lakes Rural Network is planning a workshop on FINANCIAL MANAGE
MENT. This workshop will address the problems and concerns experienced by communities with populations of less than
5,000. The training will explore the specific needs of small water/wastewater treatment plant staff.
WHO SHOULD ATTEND: Clerks • Recorders • Mayors
Board/Council Members • Treatment Piant Operators
PURPOSE: By involving the key staff and decisionmakers of small utilities, we hope to bring about a comprehensive understands
financial management. The topics and materials presented will focus on:
Managing Money an overview of the financial management process
What Steps to Take . planning
• How to Get the Credit and Capital to Fund Your System financing
• Knowing Where the Money Goes budgeting
• Finding the Money to Operate and Manage your System cost recovery
• Managing Information Before it Manages You record keeping and information systems
AGENDA
Thursday, July 26th
9:30 a.m. — 10:00 a.m.
10:00 a.m. - 12:30 p.m.
12:30 p.m.— 1:30 p.m.
1:30 p.m. — 5:00 p.m.
5:00 p.m.
Registration
Morning Session
Lunch
Afternoon Session
Adjourn
Lodging —
Holiday Inn - North
5075 1-55 N
P. O. Box 16083
Jackson, Mississippi 39206
(601)366-9411
For more information contact:
Keenan Grinell, Mississippi Institute of
Small Towns, Jackson, Mississippi
(601)981-9737 or
Beth Ytell, Great Lakes Rural Network,
Fremont, Ohio
(419)334-8911
REGISTRATION FORM
(Please Print or Type)
Com m u n ity/Organ izati on
Address
City
Phonef
State
Persons Attending
Zip Code,
Title
i
There is NO registration fee. Please return to: Beth Ytell, Great Lakes Rural Network, P. O. Box 568, Fremont, Ohio4!
by July 16, 1984.
-------
"SMALL UTILITIES AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP"
July 11,1984
10:00 a.m.-5:00 p.m.
Kentucky River Area Development District Office
381 Perry Park Road
Hazard, Kentucky 41701
(606)436-3158
A COMPTRAIN project activity sponsored by...
National Demonstration Water Project
Water Resources Assistance Council
Kentucky Association of Community Action
Kentucky River Area Development District
Great Lakes Rural Network
Great Lakes Rural Network
P.O. Box 568
FREMONT, OHIO 43420
"Small Utilities and Financial Management Workshop"
ABOUT THE COMPTRAIN PROJECT...
The goal of the COMPTRAIN Project is to field test a method for bringing small water and wastewater treatment plants Into
compliance with federal-state performance standards. The method involves: (a) intensive, on-site, plant-specific training in
equipment operation and process control; (b) community-specific management and financial training; and (c) efforts to bring
about policy and program changes leading to improved plant performance. The training targets are plant operators, municipal
officials, and state officials.
COMPTRAIN is funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Appalachian Regional Commission. The National
Demonstration Water Project conducts the project through its national and field staff, through contractors as appropriate, and
sometimes through state agencies. In 1982 - 83, the two-year project worked in West Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, South
Carolina, Mississippi, and Louisiana. In 1984, the target states are Kentucky, Tennessee, South Carolina, Mississippi, and
Alabama. In addition, NDWP hopes, through the COMPTRAIN Project, to have an impact on national policy in the area of water
and wastewater treatment operator training.
-------
"SMALL UTILITIES AND FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT WORKSHOP"
In conjunction with the COMPTRAIN Project, the Great Lakes Rural Network is planning a workshop on FINANCIAL
MANAGEMENT. This workshop will address the problems and concerns experienced by communities with populations of less
than 5000. The training will explore the specific needs of small water/waste water treatment plant staff.
WHO SHOULD ATTEND: Clerks • Recorders • Mayors • Board/Council Members • Treatment Plant Operators
PURPOSE: By involving the key staff and decisionmakers of small utilities, we hope to bring about a comDrehensivi
understanding of financial management. The topics and materials presented will focus on:
• Managing Money an overview of the financial management process
• What Steps to Take planning
• How to Get the Credit and Capital to Fund Your System financing
• Knowing Where the Money Goes budgeting
• Finding the Money to Operate and Manage Your System cost recovery
• Managing Information Before It Manages You record keeping and information systems
AGENDA
Wednesday, July 11th
Lodging
LaCitadelle Motel
Hazard, KY
(606) 836-2126
9:30 a.m.
10:00 a.m.
12:30 p.m.
1:30 p.m.
10:00 a.m.
12:30 p.m.
1:30 p.m.
5:00 p.m.
5:00 p.m.
Registration
Morning Session
Lunch (provided)
Afternoon Session
Adjourn
For more information contact:
Rob Nicholas, Water Resources Assistance Council
Prestonburg, Kentucky (606) 886-1071 or
Beth Ytell, Great Lakes Rural Network,
Fremont, Ohio (419) 334-8911
Community/Organization
Address
City
Phone (
REGISTRATION FORM
(Piease Print or Type)
State
Zip Code
Persons Attending
Title
There is NO registration fee. Please return to: Beth Yteil, Great Lakes Rural Network, P.O Box 568 Fremont
Ohio 4342C by July 2,1984.
-------
COMPTRAIN II
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT TRAINING
FINAL REPORT
December, 1984
Submitted To:
THE NATIONAL DEMONSTRATION WATER PROJECT
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. Background. ................... 1
II. Objectives and Scope. .............. 2
III. Project Implementation 3
PHASE I - On-Site Inverviews ......... 1-
PHASE II - Development of Training Materials . 5
PHASE III - Planning and Implementation of
Training Sessions . . 6
PHASE IV - Evaluation ............ 6
IV; Recommendations .................. 7
-------
I.
BACKGROUND
The COMPTRAIN project is a two-year pilot program conceived of by the
National Demonstration Water Project (NDWP). The purpose of the project
is to field test a method of on-site training and technical assistance
to upgrade the operations and management of rural water and wastewater
systems.
During Year I, NDWP contracted with the Great Lakes Rural Network (GLRN)
to conduct a review of the existing financial management capabilities in
eleven target plants located in West Virginia. The information compiled
revealed that the majority of the plants were experiencing similar dif-
ficulties. Based upon the evaluation in the first year of COMPTRAIN, GLRN
recommended that a set of training materials for small treatment plant
staff and decision-makers be developed and field tested. These tasks were
then carried out by the Great Lakes Rural Network in Year II of the project.
The Great Lakes Rural Network, Fremont, Ohio administers a regional train-
ing and technical assistance project designed to assist rural, low-income
communities in water and wastewater management. GLRN is primarily funded
by the Office of Community Services, U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services.
Elizabeth Ytell, Program Developer for the Great Lakes Rural Network was the
project manager. GLRN collaborated with JWF Associates, Annadale, Virginia,
in the program design and implementation. JWF Associates is a small con-
sulting firm specializing in providing management assistance to small
utilities and regulatory agencies. James W. Fagan, JWF Associates, and
Ms. Ytell were responsible for developing the training materials and con-
ducting the workshops.
The project was conducted in Kentucky, Mississippi, and South Carolina. GLRN
collaborated with NDWP's field staff and contractors in preparing the materials
and workshop logistics. In South Carolina, the NDWP Field Operations Director
an'd Larry Parker & Associates, Project Consul tant, assi sted GLRN along with the
South Carolina Water Quality Institute in preparing the workshop. The workshop
in Kentucky was coordinated with the Water Resources Assistance Council, Ken-
tucky Association for Community Action and the Kentucky River Area Development
District. GLRN worked with the Mississippi Institute of Small Towns and JWF
Associates in planning the training session held in Mississippi.
-------
II.
OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE
As in Year I, the primary goal of the COMPTRAIN project was to bring a
selected number of small water and wastewater treatment plants into com-
pliance with the NPDES permit program. The financial management of these
small systems impacts upon their day-to-day operations. It was Great
Lakes Rural Network's responsibility to contribute to the primary goal of
the project.
The following objectives were established for the Financial Management
Training Component of the program:
• Use the recommendations from the West Virginia
project to develop a guide to financial management
geared toward small utilities,
• Field test the guide as part of a series of work-
shops for local officials and treatment plant staff,
• Following the workshops, make the final revisions to
the guide, and
• Assist in the ongoing evaluation of the project.
-------
III.
PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
The financial management training project was carried out in four phases;
• PHASE I - On-Site Interviews. The project team worked
with the NDWP staff and consultants to assess the exist-
ing needs of the utilities participating in COMPTRAIN.
On-site interviews were conducted in at least one utility
in each of the three states.
• PHASE II - Development of Training Materials. Following
Phase I, GLRN developed the draft version of the "Guide
to Financial Management for Small Utilities". A case
study and additional resource materials were compiled
for use in the training sessions.
• PHASE III - Planning and Implementation of Training Ses-
sions.A one-to-one and a half day workshop format was
designed to provide the participants with an overview of
the topics addressed in the guide book. Three sessions
were held, one in South Carolina, one in Kentucky, and
one in Missi ssippi.
• PHASE IV - Evaluation. In Phase IV, revisions were made
to the guide book and submitted to NDWP for publication.
A detailed discussion of the project activities follows:
PHASE I - On-Site Interviews
During Year I of COMPTRAIN, GLRN completed a detailed review of the financial
management capabilities of eleven utilities in West Virginia. These utili-
ties were experiencing similar problems. These evaluations served as a
primary source of information for beginning (PHASE I of) Year II.
Designing a training session to meet the needs of the small utilities in each
state was an important task of Phase I. GLRN staff collaborated with the
NDWP project staff and consultants to obtain "state specific" information
which was incorporated into each of the workshops. These activities are
summarized on the next page.
-------
South Carolina - NDWP's Field Operations Director,
Andrew Fairey and Larry Parker, Project Consultant
met with GLRN to review the status of COMPTRAIN
activities in each community- A site visit was
made to a town participating in the COMPTRAIN
Project. Additional meetings were held with William
Engel and Lynn Wrigley of the South Carolina Water
Quality Institute. The Institute provided co-
sponsorship for the workshop and assumed respon-
sibility for the meeting logistics. (May, 198*0
Kentucky - Project team members met with Robert
Nicholas, Water Resources Assistance Council (WRAC)
to review the training guide and become familiar with
WRAC's technical assistance efforts in the state.
WRAC staff accompanied the project team to Greenhills
Water System, Stoney Fork, Kentucky. Two additional
meetings were held with the Kentucky Department of
Natural Resources (Division of Water) and the Kentucky
River Area Development District Office. The Executive
Secretary for the Kentucky Association of Community
Action, Jesse Amburgey, assisted with the workshop
logistics. (May, 1984)
Mississippi - The site visit for Mississippi was com-
pleted in connection with the technical assistance ef-
forts of Mississippi Institute of Small Towns (MIST)
and JWF Associates. MIST provided GLRN with the mail-
ing lists and JWF met with the Bureau of Pollution Con-
trol (on GLRN's behalf).
-------
PHASE II - Development of Training Materials
Many of the materials on financial management currently available to utili-
ties are aimed toward larger treatment facilities. This knowledge rein-
forced the project team's thinking that more information should be made
available to the facilities with part-time staff and policy-makers. *
Our interviews in Year I of the project indicated that a number of clerks
and recorders had attended trainings that did not meet their needs. Their
comments reflected dissatisfaction with sessions and materials aimed at
more sophisticated financial management activities. It was the project
team's objective to develop a manual written in a simple, easy to read for-
mat, including numerous resource materials.
The four major problem areas identified in Year I became the foundation for
the guide. They include:
• Failure to recover costs for operation and maintenance
• Overall absence of planning,
• Lack of understanding about basic accounting procedures
and record keeping by support staff, and
• Communities and governing boards not viewing utilities
as self-sustaining or having the potential to be self-
sustain! ng.
The draft of the "Guide to Financial Management for Small Utilities" was de-
veloped in module form. Six chapters addressed each of the following topics
An Overview of Financial Management,
Planni ng,
Budgeting,
Financi ng
Cost Recovery,
Accounting, and
Record Keeping.
-------
PHASE III. - Planning and Implementation
of Training Sessions
Based upon the work completed in Phases I and II of the project, a series
of three workshops were scheduled. The training sessions were used as an
opportunity to field test the "Guide to Financial Management". At two of
the three workshops, Chris Stuver represented a Blacksburg, Virginia firm,
TECNOMICS. Ms. Stuver demonstrated two software packages on utility bil-
ling and accounting. This software was designed especially for use by
small uti1ities.
On June 25th and 26th, the workshop for South Carolina was held at the
Water Quality Institute, Sumter Area Technical College, Sumter, South
Carolina.
Twenty Six (26) individuals attended the session including representatives
from the Department of Health and Environmental Control and the South
Carolina Municipal Association. A presentation by TECNOMICS took place
at this session.
A second workshop took place at the Kentucky River Area Development Office,
Hazard, Kentucky on July llth. The attendance at this workshop was thirty.
The COMPTRAIN Field Coordinator from the Kentucky Department of Natural
Resources was present. A demonstration of software by TECNOMICS was the
final session for the day.
The third training session took place on July 25th in Jackson, Mississippi.
Twenty (20) participants attended the workshop held at the Holiday Inn North,
The Mississippi Institute of Small Towns was successful in obtaining funds
(from local engineering firms) to cover travel costs for the workshop
participants.
PHASE IV - Evaluation
Based upon the evaluations from the training sessions, the project team
made the final revisions to the guide book. The guide book was submit-
ted to the National Demonstration Water Project for printing.
-------
IV.
RECOMMENDATIONS
As Year II of this project draws to a close, it is important to point out
our recommendations based upon the implementation of the training sessions,
They include:
Until recently, the target group for the project has
been virtually an untapped market. For this reason,
it is necessary to identify the appropriate moti-
vation and incentives to encourage their attendance
at training sessions. Additional research needs to
be conducted to identify motivation for changes in
financial management practices.
Paying a small registration fee would encourage parti-
cipants to attend sessions. Because there was no
charge, some individuals decided not to attend on the
morning of the workshop. Whereas, an investment of a
small sum of money might have served as an incentive.
Utilize the cluster concept for scheduling workshops.
By targeting sessions in "regions" of a state, indivr
duals might be more likely to attend. Also, this
would encourage "networking" with neighboring com-
muni ties.
Ongoing training conducted on a series of topics would
help build a framework for consistency and follow through
for participants. For example, if a problem arises, an
individual could ask for help at a future session, in-
stead of just giving up on the fdea.
-------
AGENDA
FOR
"CLEAN WATER FINANCE 1985: THE TENNESSEE INITIATIVES"
October 16 - 17, 1984
Tuesday, October 16, 1984
8:00 - 8:45 REGISTRATION (Danish/Coffee served in "Exhibit Area")
9:00 - 9:15 Convene: Vice Mayor John Franklin, President of TML,
City of Chattanooga
/
9:15 - 9:45 Keynote Address: "The Tennessee Initiatives"
9:45 - 10:00 Stage of Events: Larry Silverman, Executive Director
American Clean Water Association
10:00 - 10:15 Break
10:15 - 10:45 "Waters of Tennessee" - A slide presentation by Ms. Suzanne
Haegert, Administrative Assistant, Department of Health and
Environment
10:45 - 11:15 University of Tennessee's Technical Assistance Program:
Tom Ballard, Executive Director, IPS; C. L. Overman,
Executive Director, Municipal Technical Assistance Service
11:15- 11:45 Federal Program Initiatives: "What Tennessee Water
Managers Should Expect from the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency"- Robert J. Blanco, Director Facility Requirements
Division, Office of Water Programs Operation, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency
11:45 - 12:00 Break
12:00 - 1:30 Lunch (12:30 - 1:30 Luncheon Speaker) "Wall Street's
Response to the Tennessee Initiatives" - Philip M. Richardson,
Vice President of Ehrlich-Bober & Co., Inc. (Investment
Bankers)
-------
1:30 - 2:00 Visit Exhibit Areas
2:00 - 5:00 Concurrent Roundtable Discussions:
2:00 - 2:45 "Financial Programs, Loans, IDA, Grants, Privatization" -
Ben Smith, Executive Director, Safe Growth Team; Tom Samuel,
Executive Assistant to the Comptroller; Arnold Darrow,
President, Whalen Corporation; Harvey Goldman, Partner,
Arthur Young & Co.
2:00 - 2:45 "Rate Structure/Depreciation" - Joe Muscatello, Municipal
Management Consultant, Municipal Technical Advisory Service;
Dennis Dycus, Director of Municipal Audit, Comptroller's
Office; Isabelle Condra, Retired Water Manager, Whitwell,
Tennessee
2:45 - 4:00 "Enforcement" - (Also includes EPA Compliance Deadline)
Elmo Lunn, Director, Water Management; Dr. Michael T. Bruner,
Assistant Commissioner for Environment, Department of Health
and Environment
2:45 - 3:15 "Federal Programs" - Larry Silverman, Executive 'Director,
American Clean Water Association; Robert J. Blanco,
Director, Facility Requirements Division, Office of Water
Programs Operation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
3:15 - 3:30 Break
3:30 - 4:00 "Contract Management/Procurement" - Steve Gordon, Director,
Professional Development/Research, National Institute of
Government Purchasing, Inc.; Eugene Vanderbilt, P.E.
Terraqua Resources Corporation
4:00 - 5:00 "Alternative Small Scale Technology" - Dr. Ed Thackston,
Chairman of the Department of Civil and Environmental
Engineering; Pio Lombardo, Lombardo & Associates,
Consulting Engineers/Small Community Centers
4:00 - 5:00 "Training/Technical Assistance" - C.L. Overman, Executive
Director, Municipal Technical Advisory Service; Andy Jordan,
Manager of Utility Management Projects, Municipal Technical
Assistance Service; Jack Hughes, Director of Operator
Training Center, Murfreesboro, Tennessee
-------
Wednesday, October 17, 1984
7:00 - 8:00 Continental Breakfast Served in "Exhibit Area" - Compliments
of Air Products and Chemicals, Inc., Environmental Products
Dept., Allentown, Pa.
8:15 - 8:30 Convene
8:30 - 9:15 "Tennessee General Assembly's Response"
9:15 - 9:30 "University of Tennessee Water Resource/Research" -
Bill. Brandes, Director of Water Resources Research,
University of Tennessee; "Center for Excellence" -
Dr. Rafael Bustamante, Chairman of the Department of
Civil Engineers, Tennessee Technological University
9:30 - 10:30 "Pre-treatment" - Paul Davis, Director of Water Management
Permit Section, Tennessee Department of Health and
Environment; and George Smelser, Environmental Engineer,
Division of Water Management, Tennessee Department of Health
and Environment; "Pipeline Management" - Ralph Petroff,
President, American Digital Systems
10:30 - 10:45 Break
10:45 - 12:00 Concurrent Roundtable Discussions:
"Financial Programs"
"Enforcement"
"Training and Technical Assistance"
12:00 Adjourn
-------
Tom Ballard
Robert J. Blanco
Bill Brandes
Dr. Michael T. Bruner
Dr. Rafael Bustamante
Edwin Cobb
Isabelle Condra
Arnold Darrow
Paul Davis
Dennis Dycus
John P. Franklin
Kenneth Guthrie
Suzanne Haegert
Jack Hughes
Peter Lau
Pio Lombardo
Jess Lovelace
Elmo Lunn
Chuck Mangum
SPEAKERS & EXHIBITORS
Knoxville, Tennessee
Washington, D.C.
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Cookeville, Tennessee
Washington, D.C.
Whitwell, Tennessee
Dallas, Texas
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Orlando, Florida
Nashville, Tennessee
Murfreesboro, Tennessee
Allentown, Pennsylvania
Boston, Massachusetts
Pasadena, Texas
Nashville, Tennessee
Atlanta, Georgia
Hubert L. McCullough, Jr. Nashville, Tennessee
U. A. Moore
Ralph Petroff
Philip M. Richardson
Tom Samuel
Mary Shahan
Larry Silverman
George Smelser
Ben Smith
Millington, Tennessee
Huntsvilie, Alabama
New York, Nw York
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennesse
Washington, D.C.
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
-------
SPEAKERS & EXHIBITORS
Stephen Sorrett Washington, D.C.
Kathy Stanley Washington, D.C.
Glenn L. Taylor, Jr. Atlanta, Georgia
Dr. Ed-Thackston Nashville, Tennessee
William Whitson Nashville, Tennessee
Roy L. Worthington Manchester, Tennessee
-------
THOMAS B. BALLARD: B.S., Communications, University of Tennessee; Executive
Director of The University of Tennessee's Institute for Public Service; member: International
City Management Association, American Management Association, Council for Advancement
and Support of Education, Southern Consortium of University Public Service Association;
participated in Tennessee Executive Development Program and University of Tennessee's
Institute for Leadership Effectiveness in Higher Education; President of National Kidney
Foundation of East Tennessee 1980-81; Board of Directors National Kidney Foundation
of East Tennessee 1977-83; State of Tennessee Renal Disease Advisory Committee
1978 - present; Cited Outstanding Young Men of America in 1980.
ROBERT J. BLANCO: Started work at Washington'Headquarters of U.S. Environment
Protection Agency June 25, 1984; Director for Facility Requirements Division, Office
of Water Program Operations; extensive background in areas of Environmental Impact
Assessment, Water Planning, Air Programs, and Sewage Treatment Construction Grants;
B.S., Civil Engineering, New York University; M.S., Environmental Engineering, New
York University; Eight years professional experience with City of New York; Registered
Professional Engineer in the State of New York.
COLONEL B. BRANDES: Graduate of the United States Military Academy; M.S., Engineering,
University of Illinois; present position, Associate Professor of Civil Engineering, U.T.
Knoxville; Director of Water Resources Research Center.
DR. M.T. BRUNER: B.S., Education, Southern Illinois University; M.S., Community
Health Education and Community Organization, Southern Illinois University; Doctor
of Public Health, University of Texas at Houston; 1980 to present, Assistant Commissioner
for Environment, Tennessee Department of Health and Environment.
DR. RAFAEL BUSTAMANTE: Ph.D., Civil Engineering, Oklahoma State; M.S., Civil
Engineering, Tulane University; B.S., Civil Engineering, Auburn University; Registered
Professional Engineer; Chairman of the Department of Civil Engineering at Tennessee
Technological University.
ISABELLE CONDRA: With the City of Whitwell since 1957; In. 1972 took over management
of the Whitwell Water System which was in default status; using practical and common
sense approach had the Whitewell Water System in stable financial condition by 1975
where it has remained to date.
ARNOLD DARROW: B.S., Chemical Engineering, University of Minnesota; President
and Chief Executive Officer of Whalen Corporation, a wholly owned subsidiary of Triton
Energy Corporation, for almost 15 years, has been involved in providing private sector
funding for water-related projects; is primarily responsible for the development and
implementation of the concept the firm presently uses; member of a number of professional
organizations; frequent speaker on subject of privatization.
PAUL DAVIS: B.S., Engineering, University of Tennessee at Knoxville; M.S., Engineering,
University of Tennessee; Registered Professional Engineer; present position, Section
Manager for Permits in Water Management, Division of Bureau of Environment, Tennessee
State Department of Health and Environment.
DENNIS F. DYCUS: Graduate of Western Kentucky, Certified Public Accountant; Member
of: American institute of Certified Public Accountants, Tennessee Society of Certified
Public Accountants, Association of Government Accountants, Governmental Finance
Officers Association; Director of Division of Municipal Audit; 11 years with the Comptroller's
Office; guest lecturer and speaker.
JOHN P. FRANKLIN: B.S., Physical Education, Fisk University; M.S., Educational Administration
Indiana University; post graduate work, The University of Tennessee, in Administration
and Supervision; Chairman of the Chattanooga Board of Education; Member of the Executive
Council of Tennessee School Boards Association; Member of National School Boards
Association; President of Tennessee Municipal League, serves on Board of Directors
for National League of Cities.
-------
-2-
SUZANNE HAECERT: B.A., Communication Design and Psychology; University of
Tennessee; present position, Director of Public Relations, Bureau of Environment, Tennessee
Department of Health and Environment.
JACK HUGHES: B.S., Physics, Marshall University, Huntington, West Virginia; M.A.,
Molecular Biology Vanderbilt University; has served 12 years as Director of Water
Operator Training Center.
ANDY JORDAN: Twenty years of Utility Management experience with cities of Maryville,
Athens, and Morristown, Tennessee, served as Director of Public Works and City Engineering
in these systems; past president of the Tennessee Chapter of the American Public Works
Association; presently serving on the Executive Board of the Water Quality Management
Association; Project Manager for the newly created Utility Management Consultant
Program through the University of Tennessee's Municipal Technical Advisory Service.
PIO LOMBARDO: B.S., Chemical Engineering, University of Massachusetts; M.S., Civil
Engineering, University of Washington; President of Lombardo and Associates, a 20
person environmental engineering firm with offices in three states specializing in innovative
and alternatives waste water management systems for medium and small size communities;
Registered Professional Engineer in 17 states; consultant and lecturer to U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency on alternative small community waste water management systems.
D. ELMO LUNN: J.D., YMCA Law School, Nashville; B.S., University of Tennessee;
present position, Director of Division of Water Management, Bureau of Environment,
Tennessee State Department of Health and Envirpnment; past experience. Environmental
Engineer.
COMMISSIONER HUBERT L. MCCULLOUCH, JR.: B.S., Middle Tennessee State University;
on leave of absence as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of McCuIlough Associates,
Inc., an environmental engineering firm and McCuIlough Industries Inc., a Murfreesboro
manufacturer of patented water meter boxes, to serve in Governor Alexander's cabinet;
also served as Commissioner of the Department of General Services.
U. A. MOORE: Tennessee State Representative; member of 88th, 89th, 90th, 91st,
92nd, and 93rd General Assemblies; Professional Businessman; member of: Masons,
Rotary, Optimist, Veterans of Foreign Wars.
JOE MUSCATELLO, JR.: B.S., West Virginia University; M.P.A., West Virginia University;
served as City Manager of Welch, West Virginia; served as Municipal Consultant for
Mid Ohio Valley Development Corporation; presently Municipal Consultant for The
University of Tennessee's Municipal Technical Advisory Service, Cookeville, Tennessee;
author of publication on Water Rate Structures.
C. L. OVERMAN: B.S., East Tennessee State University; M.S., City Management, East
Tennessee State University; present position, Executive Director, University of Tennessee's
Municipal Technical Advisory Service; professional organizations: International City
Management Association, International Personnel Management Association, Tennessee
Public Employee-Employer Relations Association; 1981 Outstanding Public Service
Professional Award, University of Tennessee's Institute for Public Service.
RALPH G. PETROFF: B.S., Stanford University, Palo Alto, California; President of
American Digital Systems, a firm that has worked for some 1500 cities in the area of
water pollution control; recently testified before the U.S. Congress on Waste Water
Issues; member of: APWA, WPCF, and Legislative Coordinator for NASSCO; recognized
authority on Pipeline Management.
-------
-3-
PHILLIP M. RICHARDSON: Graduate of Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Vice
President with Ehrlich-Bober 6 Company, Inc., New York Investment Banking House;
began career in tax exempt securities industry as analyst for Municipal Bond Department
of Citi Bank; in 1968 joined Lehman Brothers and specialized in short term finance;
at Ehrlich-Bober & Company, participated in structuring many of first successful Farmers
Home Administration and Environmental Protection Agency backed construction financing
for Waste Water Plant Utility issues; provides investment banking service throughout
the U.S. and specializes in small community transactions.
THOMAS W. SAMUEL: B.S., Indiana University; M.B.A., Indiana University; J.D., University
of Tennessee College of Law; served as Assistant Commissioner for Administrative
Services Department of Mental Health and Retardation; Associate Dean for Administration,
University of Tennessee College of Medicine; presently Executive Assistant to Comptroller
of the Treasury.
LARRY SILVERMAN: Attorney at Law residing in Washington, D.C.; present position,
Executive Director of the American Clean Water Association, a private non-profit trade
group for people in the water business; Registered Lobbyist; member of Bar, District
of Columbia and State of Vermont; J.D., University of Pennsylvania Law School; B.A.,
Cum Laude, St. Johns College, Annapolis, Maryland.
GEORGE W. SMELCHER: B.S., Chemistry, Middle Tennessee State University, M.S.,
Environmental Engineering, Vanderbilt University; present position, Environmental
Engineer in charge of municipal NPDES permits, Tennessee State Department of Health
and Environment.
BEN SMITH: B.S., Civil Engineering, Tennessee Technological University; Master of
Science in Planning from the Graduate School of Planning, University of Tennessee;
on November 15, 1981, appointed by Governor Alexander as Executive Director of the
Safe Growth Team, coordinator of Governor Alexander's Initiative for Environmental
Protection and Enhancement Programs involving six departments of state government.
STEVEN M. SORRETT: B.A., Cum Laude, Yale; J.D., George Washington University;
manager for Government Contracts in Washington, D.C. Service Center of Touche-Ross
and Company, a national accounting firm; prior to joining Touche-Ross, Senior Attorney
at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, responsible for all procurement under
the Sewage Treatment Construction Grant Program; currently Chairman of the Federal
Grants Committee of the Federal Bar Association.
DR. E. L. THACKSTON: B.S., Civil Engineering, Vanderbilt University; M.S., Sanitary
Engineering, University of Illinois; Ph.D., Sanitary and Water Resources, Vanderbilt
University; faculty member at Vanderbilt since 1965; on leave 1972-73 as Assistant
for Environmental Affairs and Energy Advisor to Tennessee Governor Winfield Dunn;
Tennessee Conservationist of the Year for 1974; currently Professor and Chairman
of the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Vanderbilt.
WILLIAM WHITSON: B.S., Political Science, Middle Tennessee State University; M.S.,
Public Administration, University of Tennessee; 29 years of service with Metropolitan
Government; Associate Director of Water and Sewer.Services Metropolitan Government
of Nashville.
ROY WORTHINGTON: B.S., Business Administration, The University of Tennessee;
served four terms as Mayor of Manchester; active in Boy Scouts of America; past president
of Chamber of Commerce; Trustee of Tennessee Municipal League Insurance Pool; Director
of TML District Six, Member of the State Board of Directors, TML; elected Mayor of
the Year for 1984 by TML.
-------
October 16-17,1984
Sponsored By
Tennessee Municipal League
The University of Tennessee
Institute for Public Service
mnessee Department of Health and Environment
The Safe Growth Team
American Clean Water Association
National Demonstration Water Project
-------
ONFERENCE HEADQUARTERS
The Sheraton Nashville Hotel will serve as con-
irence headquarters. A block of 220 rooms has been
at aside for conference participants at the current
tate of Tennessee rates. So, please make your reser-
jtions directly with the hotel at your earliest conve-
ience to ensure the State rate.
The conference hotel address is:
The Sheraton Nashville Hotel
920 Broadway at Tenth
Nashville, Tennessee 37203-3899
A reservation card is attached for your convenience
isecuring accommodations. Please fill out the desired
formation and mail directly to the Sheraton Hotel.
EGISTRATION FEE
Registration fee for in state participants will be
30.00; the fee for out of state participants will be
50.00. This fee will cover the cost of the luncheon, con-
lental breakfast, coffee breaks, and materials. An ad-
ance registration form is attached for your
onvenience.
DVANCE REGISTRATION
Please send the advance registration form today.
his will enable us to prepare materials and name
adges so they will be ready upon your arrival. Please
igister in advance; however, if it is not possible for you
) do so, you will be allowed to register when you ar-
ve for the conference.
Checks should be made payable to: THE UNIVER-
>ITY OF TENNESSEE.
iDDITIONAL INFORMATION
For additional information, please call or write:
Dee Roberts, Assistant Director
The University of Tennessee
Center for Government Training
P- 0. Box 24180
Nashville, Tennessee 37202
(615) 251-1401
-------
SCHEDULE OF EVENTS
TUESDAY, OCTOBER 16, 1984
8:00-8:45 a.m. Registration: (Danish/Coffee
served in Exhibit Area)
9:00-9:15 a.m. Convene
9:15-9:45 a.m. Keynote
The Tennessee Initiatives
9:45-10:00 a.m. Stage of Events
0:00-10:15 a.m. Break
0:15-10:45 a.m. Tennessee's Water Policies
0:45-11:15 a.m. The University of
Tennessee's Technical
Assistance Program
1:15-11:45 a.m. Federal Program Initiatives
1:45-12:00 noon Break
12:00-1:30 p.m. LUNCHEON
Wall Street's Response to the
Tennessee Initiatives
Philip M. Richardson,
Vice President, Ehrlich-Bober
& Company, Inc. (Investment
Bankers)
1:30-2:00 p.m. Visit Exhibit Area
'2:00-5:00 p.m. CONCURRENT ROUNDTABLE
DISCUSSIONS
Financial Programs,
Loans, LDA,
Grants, Privatization
2:00-2:45 p.m.
Enforcement—Also includes
EPA Compliance Deadline
2:45-4:00 p.m.
-------
Training/Technical Assistance
4:00-5:00 p.m.
Rate Structure/Depreciation
2:00-2:45 p.m.
Federal Programs
2:45-3:15 p.m.
Contract Manage-
ment/Procurement
3:30-4:00 p.m.
Alternative Small Scale
Technology
4:00-5:00 p.m.
'3:15-3:30 p.m. Break
SCHEDULE OF EVENTS
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 17, 1984
7:00-8:00 a.m. Continental Breakfast Served in
Exhibit Area
8:15-8:30 a.m. Convene
8:30-9:15 a.m. The Tennessee General
Assembly's Response
9:15-9:30 a.m. Water Resource/Recovery
and Center for Excellence
):30-10:30 a.m. Pre-Treatment/Pipeline
Maintenance
):30-10:45 a.m. Break
5:45-12:00 a.m. CONCURRENT ROUNDTABLE
DISCUSSIONS
Financial Programs
Enforcement
Training and Technical
Assistance
12:00 noon ADJOURN
-------
ADVANCE REGISTRATION FORM
Please return this registration form along with a check payable
to: THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE and mail to:
The University of Tennessee
Center for Government Training
P.O. Box 24180
Nashville, Tennessee 37202
NAME.
BUSINESS PHONE
MAILING ADDRESS
(Street)
(CHy) (State) (Zip)
Enclosed is a check in the amount of $ to
cover registrations. ($30.00 for residents of Ten-
nessee; $50.00 for out of state residents.) If registration for
more than one person, list additional names and positions on
an attached sheet.
PLEASE MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO:
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE.
Detach and Mail
RESERVATION FORM
THE SHERATON NASHVILLE HOTEL
920 Broadway at Tenth
Nashville, Tennessee 37203-3899
(615) 244-0150
NAME OF GROUP OR ORGANIZATION:
Clean Water Finance 1985: The TN. Initiatives
One Person Two Persons
$27.00 $37.00
Double/Double (2 double beds)
$32.00 $42.00
Executive King
$65.00 $65.00
Suite
Rooms not reserved by October 1,1984 will be released. Let-
ters of confirmation will be mailed directly to you from The
Sheraton.
Name Phone
Address
Ci|y- State Zip
Arrival Date Departure Date
-------
The University of Tennessee
Center for Government Training
106 Student Services Building
Knoxville, Tennessee 37916
CGT01860
-------
PRE-REGISTERED
Clark Annis
Ron Ashe
Edith W. Beaty
Joe Beavers
Paul Bennett
Ron, Berry
Gladys Billings
Billy Billingsley
Joseph D. Bishop
Elizabeth S. Blair
Marvin H. Bowers
/
William Brakebill
Sandra L. D. Branch
George Brower
Don M. Brown
Howard C. Brown
Jack Brownfield
Wilton Burnett
Beverly R. Cameron
John G. Campbell
John R. Campbell
Steve 'Campbell
Evans iCarr
James-B. Carson
Joseph E. Gate
Douglas Clark
William R. Cook
Jim Crocker
Jim Cross
Mary^Margaret Cross
Jim Crumley
Pat Curtis
Crossville, Tennessee
Savannah, Tennessee
Memphis, Tennessee
Cleveland, Tennessee
Trenton, Tennessee
Rockwood, Tennessee
Gallaway, Tennessee
Pikeville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Knoxville, Tennessee
Athens, Tennessee
Oak Ridge, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Erwin, Tennessee
Cleveland, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Jefferson City, Tennessee
Johnson City, Tennessee
Elizabethton, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Kingsport, Tennessee
Tullahoraa, Tennessee
Lake City, Tennessee
Lynchburg, Tennessee
Kingsport, TEnnessee
Martin, Tennessee
Franklin, Tennessee
Memphis, Tennessee
Johnson City, Tennessee
Johnson City, Tennessee
-------
PRE-REGISTERED
Lloyd E. Deasy
Philip E. Delano
Tommy Dillow
W. Larry Eddins
Bill R. Elmore
James Epps
Wayne Everett
Frank Failing
E. Ray Farley
Bill Poland
Rick Ford
Asa B. Foster
Tim Freestone
Thomas K. Fullerton
T. Larry Gardner
Craig C. Gatani
Bettye Glover
Mike Goodman
Scott L. Goodman
Toramie Goodwin
Thomas B. Green, Jr.
Jere H. Hadley
William N. Hansard
W. Arnold Harrod
Dennis Henderson
Gary Hensley
Paul R. Hicks
Pete Hiett
Jimmy Highers
Portland, Tennessee
Bristol, Tennessee
Jonesborough, Tennessee
Fayetteville, Tennessee
Knoxville, Tennessee
Johnson City, Tennessee
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Lewisburg, Tennessee
Crossville, Tennessee
Joplin, Missouri
Atlanta, Georgia
San Francisco, California
Covington, Tennessee
Dickson, Tennessee
Lenox, Massachusetts
Portland, Tennessee
New Johnsonville, Tennessee
New Johnsonville, Tennessee
Trenton, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Covington, Tennessee
Manchester, Tennessee
Athens, Tennessee
Jackson, Tennessee
Maryville, Tennessee
Alcoa, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
-------
PRE-REGISTERED
C. W. Hill, Jr.
Larry Holden
Lee D. Holland
Bobby Jobe
Dessia K. Johnson
Emmett Johnson
S. Leary Jones
Bobby King
James G. Kirby
Martha Land
Stephen C. Lane
Robert E. Langford
Roy Langs let
Charles Lathan
Charles J. Lee
John M. Leonard
Stan Little
Ruby Luckey
Lenard Lynch
Janet L. Manookian
James E. Marshall
Kenneth W. Martin
James Mathis
Martin A. McCullough
Bobby McKinney
Jimmy D. Merryman
Douglas L Miller, Jr.
James S. Montgomery
Larry W. Moore
John G. Morgaiv
Cleveland, Tennessee
Mount Pleasant, Tennessee
Collegedale, Tennessee
Johnson City, Tennessee
Meraph i s , Tenne s s ee
Atlanta, Georgia
Nashville, Tennessee
Adamsville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Ripley, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Ashland, Ohio
Allentown, Pennsylvania
Hopkinsville, Kentucky
Madisonville, Tennessee
Memphis, Tennessee
Humboldt, Tennessee
Kingston, Tennessee
Union City, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Atwood, Tennessee
Jackson, Tennessee
Collierville, Tennessee
Murfreesboro, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Hartsville, Tennessee
Murfreesboro, Tennessee
Dayton, Ohio
Memphis, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
-------
Fred Murphy
Bradley Nicolaisen
David Olson
David R. Ornduff
Dale L. Overton
Russ Parham
Austin Pate
Lynn E, Patillo
Richard C. Phillips
Robert Polk
James Kelly Powell
Bill Revell
James T. Reynolds
Beverle J. Rivera
Lewis W. Roach
Alan Robertson
Maynard W. Robertson
Garland Rose
Paul L. Sexton
J. Millard Shelley
Jerry Shoemake
David Shrum
Donald F. Simonic
C. J. Smith
James M. Smith, Jr.
Wendle R. Snapp
C. Norman Spencer
Mike Stone
W. T. Sute
Rick Tiagliaferri
PRE-REGISTERED
Cleveland, Tennessee
Atlanta, Georgia
Atlanta, Georgia
Elizabethton, Tennessee
Martin, Tennessee
Franklin, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Elizabethton, Tennessee
Lewisburg, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Columbia, Tennessee
Dyersburg, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Lakeland, Tennessee
Sweetwater, TEnnessee
Lenox, Masachusetts
Greenville, Tennessee
Nahville, Tennessee
Covington, Tennessee
Decherd, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Lafayette, Tennessee
Alcoa, Tennessee
Knoxville, Tennessee
Loudon, Tennessee
Knoxville, Tennessee
Kingsport, Tennessee
Athens, Tennessee
Plainfield,
Dayton, Ohio
-------
PRE-REGISTRATION
Wes Tallon
Michael E. Tant
Russell Treadway
John L. Turner
Wayne E. Vandevere
Cathy Waiden
James T. Watson
J. R. Wayford
Joe Whitson
Tom Witherspoon
Ronald Woody
Eugene G. Wright
Janie Yandell
George Yardley
Chattanoogaj Tennessee
Franklin, Tennessee
Sevierville, Tennessee
Covington, Tennessee
Collegedale, Tennessee
Greeneville, Tennessee
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Johnson City, Tennessee
Kingston, Tennessee
Chattanooga, TEnnessee
Martin, Tennessee
Mascot, Tennessee
-------
ON-SITE REGISTRATIONS
Timothy R. Henson
Fred J. Crates
Howard Bell
John W. Saucier
Kenneth Glass
Chip Johnson
Jess Lovelace
Carroll E. Lingerfelt
Brad Nicolajsen
Doug Jones
C. J. Smith
Asa B. Foster
T. L. N. Assoc.
J. H. Chaney
Tommy Treece
James R. McCroy
Thomas Puckett
Danny Farmer
Brence Dement
BiU Terry
Wayne Rogers
Laura McGrath
Harold Sansing
Wesley C. Tallon
John Harris
Ann D. Tidwell
Byron Pale
Wayne Everett
Adams, Tennessee
Findley, Ohio
Hopkinsville, Kentucky
Brentwood, Tennessee
Oak Ridge, Tennessee
Atlanta, Georgia
Pasadena, Texas
Knoxville, Tennessee
Atlanta, Georgia
Cottontown, Tennessee
Knoxville, Tennessee
Atlanta, Georgia
Memphis, Tennessee
Brentwood, Tennessee
Union City, Tennessee
Ridgetop, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Mt. Juliet, Tennessee
Murfreesboro, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Sparta, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Clinton , Ternsssee
Chattanooga, Tennessee
-------
ON-SITE REGISTRATIONS
Dan Shilstat
Denzil Biter
Ollie Smith
Jim Tarpy
James Freeman
Ken Joines
Judy Jordan
Michael Sweet
Mike Callahan
Susan Silverman
Stephen Smith
William Kilp
Billy Matthews
Tommy Barlow
William Phillips
Stan Nelson
Richard Self
Gary M. Mabrey
Dee Roberts
Tommy Himes
John Fort
Clark Williams
Kathy Huffines
Cheryl Smith
Diane Gregory
Beverly Erwin
Helyn Keith
Nashville, Tennessee
Clarksville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Somerville, Tennessee
Knoxville, Tennessee
Maryville, Tennessee
Cleveland, Ohio
Cookeville, Tennessee
Washington, DC
Bartlett, Tennessee
Bartlett, Tennessee
Springfield, Tennessee
Adamsville, Tennessee
Rogersville, Tennessee
Birmingham, Alabama
Kingsport, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Chattanooga, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Memphis, Tennessee
-------
MTAS
Bill Bailey
Wendy Greear
Andy Jordan
Frank Kirk
Nashville, Tennessee
Knoxville, Tennessee
Knoxville, Tennessee
Knoxville, Tennessee
Jim Leuty
A. C. Lock
Nashville, Tennessee
Jackson, Tennessee
Joe Muscatello
Cookeville, Tennessee
Kim Norris
Knoxville,;Tennessee
C. L. Overman
Knoxville, Tennessee
Jerry Robinson
Sylvia Trice
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
Ralph Harris
Ed Young
TML
Nashville, Tennessee
Nashville, Tennessee
GENERAL ASSSEMBLY
Senator Douglas Henry
Nashville, Tennessee
-------
This certifies that
-------
Appendix D
Toward a National Plan for Wastewater Treatment Operator Training
-------
TOWARD A NATIONAL PLAN FOR WASTE WATER
TREATMENT OPERATOR TRAINING
ABC • capital investment • certification • 'Clean Water Act •
compliance • Comptrain • Congress • construction grants • design •
development assistance • effluent • EPA • enforcement • engineers •
environment • equipment • federal government • financial management •
GAO • healtn department • implementation • industrial waste
infiltration/inflow • 109(b) centers • local government • maintenance
• management • manuals • monitoring • municipality • NDWP • NPDES
permits • operators • overloads • OWPO • performance audit • PL 92-500
planning • plant classification • plant performance • primacy •
priority lists • private sector • policy reviews • pollution • POTW •
PPC • process control • rate-setting • responsibility
• self-sufficiency • sludge nandling • standards • state government •
supreme law • technical assistance • treatment • training • wastewater
National Demonstration Water Project
1725 DeSales Street, N.W., Suite ^02
Washington, D.C. 20036
(202) 659-0561
December 1983
-------
CONTENTS AND SUMMARY
Page
Mandates 1
Congress has called for the submission by EPA of a national
plan for wastewater treatment operator training by March 1,
1984. NDWP has been asked to make suggestions regarding
this plan.
Premises 3
The national plan must begin with the premise that waste-
water plants are not performing well. Effective training is
one way to deal with the problem, but it cannot do the job
alone.
Approaches 5
A "minimalist" approach to a national plan looks only toward
improving training programs. A "maximalist" approach moves
toward the creation of state-level plant performance pro-
grams. NDWP prefers the maximalist approach.
Roles 6
The municipal role in wastewater plant performance is to
comply with federal standards, assume part of the cost, and
accept training if necessary* The federal role is to -enforce
the law, assist in construction funding, and establish train-
ing policies. The state role is to implement enforcement,
construction grant, and training programs.
Elements 10
A complete state-level plant performance program should
include six elements: plant classification and operator
certification; operator courses and materials; management
and technical assistance; planning and development assist-
ance; training coordination and leadership; plant per-
formance coordination and auditing.
Objections 19
There are objections that may be entered to the plan
presented, but they can be answered.
Actions 21
The national training plan should be implemented over a
five-year period with transitional funding being provided
by EPA.
Afterthoughts 23
Industrial and water treatment plants should ultimately be
a part of the plant performance structure.
-------
TOWARD A NATIONAL PLAN
FOR WASTEWATER TREATMENT OPERATOR TRAINING
Mandates
In its fiscal year 1984 appropriations for the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), the Congress included $2,625,000 for
wastewater treatment operator training. Accompanying this action,
however, was the stipulation, in the Conference report, that a
"national plan" for such training be submitted by EPA by March 1,
1984.
This provision appears to reflect a number of Congressional con-
cerns, as revealed in reports accompanying the appropriations legisla-
tion. The Senate report focuses on the impact of training, in
particular the extent to which it actually improves effluent quality.
EPA, the report advises, should be prepared to provide some answers to
questions in this regard by the time FY85 hearings are held. But the
Senate report also calls for a national plan "for phasing out Federal
funding and achieving state self-sufficiency in operator training."
The House report on the appropriations legislation justifies the
continued funding in terms of protecting the Federal capital invest-
ment in plant and equipment. Its call for a national plan also looks
toward state assumption of responsibility for training but urges the
multiyear plan as a way of making the transition orderly and effec-
tive.
1
-------
Of the two reports, the House version comes closest to capturing
the essence of the backstage maneuvering that has characterized the
training appropriations process in recent years. From the beginning,
the current administration has attempted to terminate federally-funded
operator training, but the Congress, at the behest of environmental
training groups, has continued minimum funding anyway. The uncer-
tainty over funding has left training efforts in limbo. The House
report says, in effect: "All right, the states should assume the
responsibility for training, but please give us a well-thought-out
plan for doing this so that training can be effective at the state
level."
Responsibility for preparation of the plan is centered in EPA's
Office of Water Program Operations, which oversees federal training
efforts, although many EPA levels as well as the Office of Management
and Budget will have to approve the final product. Groups with
experience in wastewater treatment operator training, such as the
National Environmental Training Association (NETA) and National
Demonstration Water Project (NDWP) were invited to make suggestions
regarding the national plan. The present document has been prepared
in response to this invitation. EPA has submitted a preliminary
report with the promise of a final report by March, 1985.
NDWP has been active for twelve years in improving water and
wastewater facilities in small towns and rural areas, working both to
develop new facilities and to upgrade operation and maintenance of
existing facilities. To this end, it has carried out over $17 million
worth of local projects, including operator training projects. NDWP's
most extensive effort in training is currently underway. Called the
Comptrain Project, this EPA-funded activity includes onsite training
-------
to bring plants into compliance, special management and fiscal
training for communities, and work with state agencies to improve
training programs.
NDWP's perspective on training is slightly different from any
other organization. It is not a government agency, profit-making
business or association of trainers or operators. It is a nonprofit
development organization whose sole concern is the small community
that needs assistance, and it views training as a means of bringing
better, more cost-effective service to such communities.
Premi ses
If it is to be effective, a national training plan for wastewater
treatment operator training must be based on a number of premises.
The premises, in NDWP's view, represent statements of fact we.ll-
supported by studies and field experience.
Premise No. 1. It is incontrovertible that the nation's
wastewater treatment plants, many of them built with federal funds,
are not performing well. The most thorough independent studies of
this were done by the U.S. General Accounting Office. The 1980 report
(Costly Wastewater Treatment Plants Fail to Perform As Expected,
CED-81-9, November 1980) found that 87 percent of the plants surveyed
were in violation of their NPDES permits and 31 percent were in
"serious" violation. This finding was consistent with EPA's statisti-
cal reports, which showed 50 to 75 percent of the plants in violation
at any given point. A later GAO report revealed similar deficiencies.
NDWP's field experience, including intensive work in six states
over the last year, suggests that the problem may be even worse. Many
-------
plants considered in compliance witn federal effluent standards in
fact file inaccurate information; otners file no information at all.
These problems are particularly prevalent in the smaller plants.
The net result of this is that EPA's goal of cleaning up the
nation's waterways is being significantly retarded, and many thousands
of communities are suffering pollution problems.
Premise No. 2. Operator training can improve plant performance.
There is no question that onsite, how-to-do-it training will be
reflected in improved effluent quality. In the first year of the
Comptrain Project, for example, NDWP improved the performance of at
least 90 percent of the plants in which it worked; nearly 50 percent
were actually brought into compliance. The impact of formal
(classroom) training is harder to perceive "at the end of the pipe,"
but it unquestionably has a place in an overall training program.
Premise No. 3. The problem of plant performance cannot be solved
by operator training alone, because the reasons for poor performance
are not always operational reasons. When GAO looked at the reasons
for plant non-compliance, it found that nearly two-thirds of the
plants examined intensively had operational problems. However, nearly
all the plants had problems that could be traced to the construction
of the system rather than the operator, such as design deficiencies,
equipment failures, infiltration/inflow problems, and industrial waste
overloads.
Thus the improvement of training in isolation from the other fac-
tors that cause plants to malfunction will have only a limited impact
on the overall plant performance record.
-------
Approaches
In the context of the above premises, there are two ways to
approach a national training plan. One might be called the
"minimalist" approach. This would involve evaluating activities that
have traditionally been regarded as "training," recommending such
improvements as seem warranted within the narrow context of training
effectiveness, and leaving it to the states to carry on as best they
can with assistance from private organizations and some EPA back-up.
The "maximalist" approach involves using the national training
plan as an opportunity to forcefully address the plant performance
problem. In this scenario, training would be the catalytic force in
a clean water implementation structure that would include enforcement
and construction funding. The focus would not be on operators and how
best to train them but on plants and how to improve their performance.
NDWP strongly favors the maximalist approach. If we simply tidy
up training, we will indeed improve some plants and this will be all
to the good. But it may leave the impression that patient -- and
relatively inexpensive — effort expended over a period of years will
solve the problem. Almost certainly, this is not true. Although most
wastewater treatment plants can be improved by training, the primary
reasons for their non-compliance with federal effluent standards are
that they are poorly designed and constructed and that enforcement
action is not a deterrent to non-compliance.
The construction grants program under the Clean Water Act sup-
posedly sets standards and procedures to insure that federally-funded
plants being brought on line can do the job for a long period of time.
-------
In practice, communities repeatedly find themselves saddled with new
facilities that never work properly. In addition, many existing
plants were built before federal standards were codified. Often these
older plants are far out of compliance.
The Clean Water Act was intended to be a law "with teeth." If
plants did not come up to standard, people could ultimately be fined
and imprisoned. However, such enforcement is effective only when there
is no more than an occasional transgressor. When many transgress, as
in the case of wastewater treatment, the threat of punishment ceases
to be a real deterrent. Not surprisingly, enforcement action by EPA
and the states has been inconsistent; it could hardly be otherwise.
Enforcement is only one tool for improving plant performance, and a
limited one at that.
On the other hand, if we use training as a beacon to focus the
attention of both construction grants and enforcement programs on
plant performance rather than compliance with the law in an adminis-
trative sense, we may be able to solve the problem.
Roles
Any extensive ameliorative effort under public auspices in the
United States is likely to involve, in one way or another, all levels
of government -- federal, state, and local. This is certainly true
of the drive to clean up the nation's waters through better waste-
water treatment because the problem extends beyond the borders of any
municipality or state. If we adopt the maximalist approach to a
national training plan, it is necessary to clarify the roles of the
-------
various units of government because all units must assume some bur-
dens, and there is some tendency for all units to attempt to lighten
their loads as much as possible.
The Legal Roles
It is the duty of municipalities to comply with the law and to
incur whatever costs are necessary to remain in compliance. Federal
law specifies the wastewater treatment standards to be met, and
publicly-owned treatment works have no choice but to meet those stan-
dards.
The municipality must take the initiative in seeing that its
wastewater is properly treated, installing the necessary facilities
and supervising their operation and maintenance. It must use its
bonding, taxing, and rate-setting powers as appropriate to accomplish
these ends. If certified operators are required, it must hire and pay
them; reporting requirements must be met.
In this sense, wastewater treatment in the United States is a
local responsibility. Complain though it may of federal intrusion and
lack of financial resources, the municipality is not at liberty to
ignore the law.
If compliance is the first duty of the municipality, enforcement
is the first duty of the federal government, EPA being the responsible
agency in this case. Wastewater standards are matters of federal law,
and federal law is the "supreme law of the land," according to the U.S.
Constitution. EPA may delegate the implementation of the law, but it
cannot delegate the responsibility. If federal wastewater standards
are not met, EPA cannot blame the municipalities or the states; the
ultimate responsibility is federal.
-------
8
To carry out this responsibility, EPA must commit financial
resources, establish appropriate procedures, and even undertake legal
action if necessary.
Under tne Constitutions federal law can be implemented directly
without state participation,, In practice, given tne federal nature of
the system, Congress tends to involve states, by statute, in implemen-
tation. The Clean Water Act of 1977, the major authorizing legisla-
tion for all EPA wastewater programs, gives an important role to the
states in enforcement,, The NPDES permit system is first of all state
sction, and most specific enforcement action comes from the state
Tte Policy Roles
Traditionally, when the federal government places a major legal
responsibility on local government, such as the present wastewater
standards, it also provides assistance in meeting the obligation.
Tlius a construction grants program, the largest public works program
in American history, was established to help municipalities build the
necessary facilities. As with enforcement, much of the implemen-
tation, including the priority list procedure, is state-based.
Congress also saw the need for training as a method of assisting
municipalities, and this is authorized in Title I of the Clean Water
Acts Under this mandate, EPA has carried out a variety of programs.
it has provided funding for the so-called 109(b) state training cen-
lfr$ (now found in over 20 states), underwritten the production of
training materials9 and financed many research and demonstration pro-
jects in the training area. As a result of these actions, municipali-
-------
ties have received a mixture of federal and state assistance, but EPA
has never established and enforced basic policies on training as it
has on enforcement and construction grants.
Logically, the major implementation of training should be lodged
at the state level along with enforcement and construction grants.
However, the ultimate responsibility for training, under Title I, is
still that of EPA. Thus before states, in effect, "assume primacy"
over training, they should have programs in place, and EPA should help
them to establish these programs. This is the purpose of the national
training plan.
To summarize the various roles:
(1) The municipality should -
- accept training assistance as required to bring their
plants into compliance;
- be prepared to assume part of the cost of such training.
(2) EPA should -
- establish guidelines for state training programs;
- assist the states in setting up programs and monitor the
performance of such programs;
- provide transitional funding until state plans for finan-
cial self-sufficiency are achieved;
- continue to carry out special training projects in the
research and demonstration area.
(3) The states should -
- establish and operate training programs under EPA
guidelines;
- gradually assume the financial responsibility for such
programs.
-------
10
Elements
Suppose that each state had an effective training program, one
based on the premises discussed here and designed in accordance with
the maximalist approach. What would be the key elements of the
program? In other words, what would a model state training program
look like? (See graphic, page 25). There are six elements.
Element No. 1. Plant Classification and Operator Certification
In every state, there should be a list of wastewater plants sub-
ject to federal-state regulation, and these should be classified in
accordance with size (gallons per day capacity) and complexity of
treatment process. A certified operator for each of these plants
should be mandatory under state law. There should be classes of cer-
tification related to the classes of treatment plants. The assumption
is, of course, that plants work better if there is a competent person
in charge and that certification requirements are a means of insuring
competence.
Although the principle of operator certification is well
established at the state level, there is much slippage in practice.
The Association of Boards of Certification (ABC), a kind of trade
association for state boards, reports that the number of certified
wastewater treatment plant operators tripled in the 1970s and numbered
73,000 in 1980. Certification is now mandatory in 44 states, volun-
tary in the others, but there continues to be some resistance to the
general drive for professionalism in the operator ranks. It is
appalling at a time when even beauticians must be licensed that people
argue against the use of proficiency standards for persons on whom the
health of the community depends.
-------
11
Sometimes the objections are based not so much on principle as on
money. Each time a profession or trade is upgraded through certifica-
tion, its practitioners demand more money for their services. Many
municipalities prefer the old days when the operator was part-time and
incompetent but not very costly to the town. But there were no
federal effluent standards to meet in the old days. Today, there are
such standards, and the earlier methods will not do. Every state
should require by law certified operators for every wastewater plant
under its jurisdiction.
Of course, it is true that certification and competence are not
the same thing — a point frequently made by opponents of cer-
tification — but if they are not, they should be made so. A medical
license does not insure that the doctor is competent either, but it
certainly makes it more likely because much effort has gone into
training a doctor before the license is granted. We must do the same
for wastewater operators.
Element No. 2. Operator Courses and Materials
Every state should provide the means whereby a person may become
competent as an operator and thus certified. This means formal
courses to take and appropriate materials to use. The formal courses
should include both four-year and two-year college-level training
programs. (All operators should have high school diplomas or
equivalents.) In addition, since there are so many people now with
plant experience but without the formal training, there should also be
special "certificate" programs so that they may become certified
without losing years in school. Finally, all operators should be
required to upgrade their skills periodically, and special "short
-------
12
courses" serve well for this purpose. Periodic recertification, which
should also be mandatory, should not be automatic in the absence of
such upgrading.
Successful conduct of formal education programs necessitates the
production of considerable written and graphic material -- manuals,
booklets, trouble-shooting guides, O&M manuals and so on. Luckily,
most states are well-supplied with these materials because EPA, over
the years, put a great deal of money into materials production. But
the materials need updating from time to time.
As with certification, formal education for operators is no
stranger at the state level. There are now in existence at least 61
certification programs covering the entire U.S. and Canada, according
to ABC. By and large, those who want to acquire the necessary skills
can do so. The major problem lies in inducing municipal officials to
insist on formally qualified operators for their systems and to pro-
vide pay and working conditions adequate to make the operator posi-
tions attractive.
A good deal is heard about the "turnover problem" among opera-
tors. Some even argue that it is self-defeating to train operators
because the higher skill levels they achieve permit them to leave
their jobs. But this happens in all occupational areas; the best
people move up. The goal should be to create pools of qualified
people at all levels, including the entry level. Those who upgrade
their skills and move out of the lowest operator classifications are
replaced by entry-level people from the formal training programs.
Financial compensation at every level should be commensurate with
training and experience. Vacancies thus become a normal part of a
-------
13
flexible and healthy job market. What absolutely must come to an end
is the practice of filling vacancies with unqualified people simply
because they can be had at lower prices.
Element No. 3. Management and Technical Assistance
Probably the most pressing training need at the state level today
is for a vigorous program of onsite management and technical
assistance to local communities. "Technical" assistance means working
in the treatment plant to help the operator diagnose and correct
operational problems, such as sludge handling. "Management"
assistance goes beyond the plant to the organizational and fiscal
aspects of system operations — bookkeeping, budgeting, rate-setting.
In both cases, the training comes "over-the-shoulder," not through
classrooms or written materials.
NDWP's Comptrain Project, among other efforts, has demonstrated
that this kind of trouble-shooting assistance can be effective in
improving plant performance, and it is a cost-effective approach if
the people doing the training are well-organized in their work and
competent. Every state should have a small cadre of people — not
necessarily engineers or accountants but people who are experienced in
process control and system operations — to be dispatched to local
communities on an as-needed basis. Each year they would map out and
implement a program of work -- identifying target communities on a
priority basis, doing the necessary diagnostic and corrective work,
and engaging in follow-up actions as necessary.
This field staff should be backed up by a trouble-shooting "hot
line" that would enable plant operators anywhere in the state to call
in and get at least some direct assistance at any time. Indeed, the
-------
14
plant situation in an entire state could be computerized and updated
as remedial action is taken.
Small communities will need this kind of assistance for many
years. In the first place, it will be some time before every com-
munity has an efficient wastewater system, i.e., a competent and cer-
tified operator working under businesslike management practices. In
any case, even if all systems were efficient operationally, there will
still be plenty of problems encountered, given the design and
construction deficiencies that are still being built in.
Some states do conduct technical assistance (management
assistance rarely) on a limited basis; most states do not. Cost is
usually a factor. In many cases, however, states are reluctant to
assist plants because they fear this may compromise later enforcement
actions. It is Catch-22 for the local community: no one helps them
comply with the law because they are not in compliance with the law.
Element No. 4. Planning and Development Assistance
If all wastewater treatment plants were properly designed and
constructed to begin with, they would have fewer operational problems.
Unfortunately, they are not properly designed and constructed. They
are frequently oversized or undersized for the communities they serve;
they often include equipment that does not function as it should; they
are built atop old sewer systems with tremendous infiltration/inflow
problems; they must accept industrial waste they cannot adequately
treat. Furthermore, the operation and maintenance planning is usually
skimpy. Cost projections are hopelessly optimistic; rates are
established that do not produce sufficient revenue; there is no provi-
sion for repairs or replacement of equipment.
-------
15
Who is at fault in this situation? The design engineers? The
state agency that processes the funds? EPA? The municipality?
Usually, as GAO found, all parties can be blamed to some extent. One
thing is clear. The primary responsibility must be assumed by the
municipality. It must supervise the planning, design, and construction
of the system; it must make arrangements for the necessary funds. A
second thing is clear as well: the municipality needs help in doing
all these things. At the present time, it is at the mercy of the
engineering firms and the funding agencies, and each of them has a
slightly different agenda than the municipality. To be sure, the
engineers are well-intentioned, but they have to make a profit. Also,
there are many reviews built into the EPA construction grants program,
but all these are administrative reviews. They do not help the muni-
cipality make informed choices on basic matters.
As a part of its training component, every state should have a
cadre of people, similar to the management and technical assistance
specialists, who go into the field and help municipalities plan and
develop wastewater systems. They would not review engineering
drawings and advise on details. Neither would they duplicate the
administrative reviews of the funding agency. Instead, they would
make sure that the municipality asks the right questions and gets
clear answers. Is a totally new system really needed? How much can
the community afford to pay for a system, given its economic
situation? Is the proposed plant properly sized? Is industrial waste
likely to be a problem? Is the proposed rate structure adequate? If
these kinds of questions are raised, at least the community can go
into the matter with its eyes open.
-------
16
At the present time, the municipality gets no impartial advice
"on its side of the table." Its "advisers" are people who have other
basic interests, such as making a profit or enforcing the state's
priority lists. These are indeed legitimate interests, but they do
not help the municipality make informed choices.
No state today really provides this kind of help on a regular
basis. Sometimes there are private development assistance organiza-
tions (such as NDWP) that do. Certainly it goes beyond the tradi-
tional concept of training as instruction for plant operators. But
this is precisely where more effort is needed if there is to be im-
provement in plant performance. If correcting mistakes in treatment
plants is a legitimate state function, surely it is logical to take
steps to prevent mistakes.
Element No. 5. Training Coordination and Leadership
Responsibility for the four "line" elements in the state training
program — those discussed above — should be fixed in one state
agency. This need not be a separate department but should be a
separate component, if a part of a larger department. The important
thing is that the training agency snould be an important part of the
state government and not simply a group that "does its thing" on the
side. For example, in a state where the enforcement and construction
grants functions for wastewater plants are lodged in the state health
department, the training function should be there as well, but as a
separate function not administratively subordinate to the other func-
tions.
Having the training responsibility does not mean that the
training agency would do everything on an in-house staff basis. Thus,
-------
17
given its quasi-judicial function, the state board of operator cer-
tification would be a separate entity. Likewise, training courses
could, by and large, be conducted as a part of the existing state
higher education system. In both cases, however, the training agency
should maintain close liaison with and provide guidelines for these
groups. Certification actions should be in accordance with
established state policy, and training courses should reflect the
state's training needs as determined by the training agency, not by an
independent educational establishment.
Direct field assistance, both management-technical and planning-
development will probably be most effective if conducted in-house by
the training agency staff, but work could also be contracted to the
private sector under clear agency guidelines.
In the end, if the state is to have an effective program, the
training agency must exercise leadership, not simply engage in coor-
dination. If it simply processes paper and lays all the work off on
others, the program will quickly revert to the kind of training jumble
that usually exists today. The training agency should be vigorous in
pursuing plant peformance goals.
Are the state 109(b) centers the models for a state training
agency? Possibly. However, the existing centers are mostly attached
to educational institutions rather than the state's wastewater struc-
ture. If a state expands training to include all the elements
outlined here, a different lead training agency may be called for,
although the 109(b) centers would cetainly play a major role in
environmental education. However, there is nothing magic about a par-
-------
18
ticular bureaucratic structure, and the centers should not be ruled
out as lead training agencies. The important thing is the program,
not the precise structure.
Element No. 6. Plant Performance Coordination and Auditing
A major problem in wastewater plant performance at present is
that enforcement, construction funding, and training programs are not
closely related at the state level. Different groups, or groups of
groups, are responsible for each function. They have different
legislative mandates and they conduct their affairs with little
reference to the others. As a result, no agency is responsible for
plant performance as a whole.
As the final element in a model state training program, every
state should create, by law, a Plant Performance Council composed of
representatives from the enforcement, construction grants, and training
agencies. This group would have no implementation responsibilities.
Instead, it would be an advisory mechanism for coordinating the work
of the operating agencies at the outset and assessing the results of
that work on a plant performance basis. The PPC should be chaired by
the training agency, which would also perform such staff work as was
necessary, since there would be no separate PPC staff.
The PPC should periodically review the results of the various
activities being conducted by its member organizations. What is the
size of the backlog on the state priority list? How does this relate
to the perceived need for new construction in the state? What com-
munities particularly need planning and development assistance? How
effective has onsite technical assistance been? What is the current
-------
19
picture with regard to certified operators? How many plants are out
of compliance with their NPDES permits? Which seem most in need of
direct assistance? Do policy changes seem needed in any of these
areas?
Although the PPC should have a statutory basis, its authority
should be advisory. The intent in establishing a formal body is to
create a forum for the interchange of ideas and the exertion of peer
pressure. The state as a .whole has a job to do, namely to keep its
wastewater treatment house in order, and the role of the PPC would be
to serve as the principal agent for the discharging of this respon-
sibility. In a sense, it would be an auditing agency, but its
"audits" would be of performance, not dollars.
If all six elements described here are put in place at the state
level, the state will be well on the road to dealing with its
wastewater compliance problems. It will have more than a model
training program; it will have a model Plant Performance Program, and
that is the real objective: to use training as a lever to bring
greater effectiveness to the entire construction-operation-compliance
process.
Objections
Aside from problems of implementation (which will be discussed
momentarily), there will surely be some objections to the plan itself.
It is NDWP's view that there are no objections that cannot be
answered, save possibly one: "We have not done it this way in the
past." The only answer here is that what has been done in the past
-------
20
has not worked very well and something else should be tried. Here
are some other likely objections.
Objection No. 1. State technical assistance will compete with
the private sector, i.e., engineering firms. Not really. Engineering
firms are rarely able to provide the kind of broad-brush advice the
communities need at the development stage. At the operations stage,
trouble-shooting is usually not cost-effective work for such firms.
Where it is — and where a firm has shown some ability to work on a
community's behalf — the firm may receive the work under contract.
All the system design and construction work remains in the hands of
private engineering firms. State assistance will even create private
sector work. Many community systems are in such poor shape now that
an engineer has little to offer.
Objection No. 2. Municipalities will never be willing to raise
rates enough to cover the cost of proper system operation. This
remains to be seen. Towns are rather testy about rates at present,
but that is because it is usually a case of their users being asked to
pay for someone else's mistakes. If municipalities have some con-
fidence that the bills they are handed are the result of a rational
process, they will pay the bills. A strong state assistance effort
will encourage them to feel that the process is rational.
Objection No. 3. Enforcement, funding, and training are separate
functions that should remain entirely separate. All these functions
bear heavily on plant performance, and such performance is not likely
to improve unless these functions are exercised in concert. It is
what comes out of the pipe that matters. In any case, the agencies
-------
21
carrying out each function would continue to have independent admin-
istrative responsibility. The PPC would simply be a means of
encouraging each agency to do its job in the larger context of plant
performance.
Objection No. 4. Planning and development assistance is not
really training and should not be a part of a training plan. What is
being recommended is a plant performance program, not just a training
plan, and development assistance is certainly important in that
regard. Anyway, "training" is anything that helps people make better
decisions.
Objection No. 5. The Plant Performance Council would never have
any real power and would be just another layer of bureaucracy.
Possibly. It depends upon the seriousness with which the parties
involved go about it. However, the PPC would be a formal body with a
statutory mandate, which is more than we have now. Function fre-
quently does follow form. The lack of staff would militate against
the PPC's becoming a new bureaucracy.
Actions
Before state training (or plant performance) programs of the kind
described here become a reality, EPA has a good deal of missionary
work to do. Thus a national training plan must give some attention to
implementation.
Action No. 1. The states must be convinced that a plant perfor-
mance program is necessary. A national conference devoted to this is
one possible educational device. Also a short-term task force of
interested parties might be useful as a prelude to the conference.
-------
22
However, the task force should be charged with commenting on the EPA
plan, not developing a new plan. If charged with the latter, the task
force will produce the lowest common denominator of the various
interests. The resulting plan will be easier to implement but is
likely not to be worth implementing at all.
Action No. 2. EPA must issue specific training guidelines. The
purpose of the conference should be to iron out these details. Once
the guidelines were issued, states would not be allowed to "assume
primacy" over training (and would receive no funds) without making
progress toward the institution of appropriate programs. Program
planning would have to cover proposed activities, administrative
mechanisms, and funding strategies.
Action No. 3. EPA must assist the states in establishing
programs. Program planning of this kind required will involve several
state agencies. To bring these agencies together and link their
efforts to EPA guidelines, EPA must send people into the field to pull
things together.
Action No. 4. Some federal funds will be required in a trans-
itional period. An effective training program will require skilled
personnel to carry out the various activities. Some of these, par-
ticularly technical assistance, will be new activities for states.
They are not in a position to suddenly commit resources to the activi-
ties. Until they are, there should be continued federal subsidies.
However, states would be expected to assume full financial respon-
sibility after a transitional period, and would be required, as a part
of program planning, to prepare specific self-sufficiency plans. This
could include schemes for charging the municipalities for services.
-------
23
EPA should probably look toward a five-year period during which
the training function will gradually shift to the state level. Once
state programs are in place, EPA should continue to monitor their per-
formance, as it monitors their performance in other areas.
Afterthoughts
The plan described in this document is written with publicly-
owned treatment works in mind. These are the plants that receive EPA
construction funds. However, private treatment works, i.e.,
industrial plants, are also subject to federal-state regulation and
the NPDES permit system, and there is a need for trained operators and
technical assistance for these plants as well as municipal systems.
Accordingly, the Plant Performance Council should consider industrial
plant performance as a part of its overall mandate.
In addition, water systems could eventually be made a part of the
structure. These systems are subject to federal drinking water stan-
dards (Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974) and need training to meet
these standards. EPA funds some water system training activities,
chiefly through the National Rural Water Association and its indivi-
dual state associations. In the long run, EPA might consider making
this program a part of the total state training structure. EPA does
not, by and large, fund water systems, but there are other federal
agencies that do, especially the Farmers Home Administration in the
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Sadly, water treatment plants fail to
meet federal standards about as often as wastewater plants, according
to 6AO studies.
-------
24
For the moment, it is certainly enougn if effective state-level
training programs, set in the context of plant performance and aimed
at municipal wastewater plants, are created. Ultimately, however,
industrial and water plants should be brought into the fold.
-------
_PpJ i_cy_ Reviews
P
L
A
N
T
P
E
0
F
0
R
M
A
N
C
E
C
0
ii
N
C
I
L
Enforce-
ment
Agency
r
1
1
1
X"~^ "X • —
/ . V^
1 1 Agency I
V ^
^\
XstructionV
. inin.Ki^^ UrullL.i /
Enforcement Action and Compliance Review
NPDES System
Planning and Development Assistance /
^^^ *
State Operator Classification & Certification
Educational Formal Operator Training
Xs^^^ Management and Technical Assistance
V
Construction Funding and Administrative Review
... - . . . . , .,,. V
— L — j g
Priority List System
------ T - - - - - - - - V
P
u
B
L
I
C
L
Y
0
W
E
D
T
R
E
A
T
n
E
N
T
w
0
R
K
1C
o
Performance Audits
STATE PLANT PERFORMANCE PROGRAM
c = contractors
------- |