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

-------