HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0428.000 1998-2000
08; 1999 THU 11:29 FaY 80898188~J DPtt-e:aSTEt1:4TER DIPISION X002
<e.
~.y<~
e,
.S' '~yl ~"~Sq BRUCE S. ANDERSON Ph D N.P.N.
BENJAMIN J. GAY ETANO 4 I
pp.:/,,~.I XXORNlRR46f[iplfRX
G4bFPNOR 4F M1W11i C~ I Wt OWN f.ROG OF MEMTM
'99 AUG 19 P~ 12 G1 STATE OF HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
i` C ~ pp BOXJ3TB InrvDIEMpIWBIP/b.
NONOLVLV, HA`NAII 96801
CUUJ ~ Y H; ?~^1,11!
May 19, 1999 saoaas
Mr. Jiro A. Sumada
Chief Engineer
Department of Public Works ,
County of Hawaii
25 Aupuni Street ,
Hilo, Hawaii 96720 -
Dear Mr. Sumada:
Subject: Hilo Wastewater Treatment Facility
Operation and Maintenance Inspection
The Department of Health's (DOH) annual operation and maintenance inspection
report for the subject facility is attached for your use. The facility was
inspected on August 18, 1998. We sincerely apologize for the late submittal
of our report. The report was delayed because we were awaiting receipt of the
County's comprehensive annual financial report for the fiscal year ending
June 30, 1998. Our report also included comments based on a review of the
financial report. We plan to conduct a more extensive review of the County's
sewer user charge system and will issue a report under separate cover.
The facility's overall condition has deteriorated since its startup in 1993.
An excessive number of plant equipment was out of service awaiting repairs.
Some of the inoperable equipment were noted in previous DIDH inspection
reports. Design defects have not been repaired since plant startup. We are
concerned that plant equipment is not being properly maintained by plant
personnel. The facility is therefore given a general rating of
"Unacceptable."
Please submit within 60 days after receipt of this letter a written corrective
action plan to address the cited deficiencies. The plan should also include a
reasonable time schedule for implementation of your actions.
Should you have any questions, please call Ken Muranaka of our Wastewater
Branch at telephone no. 586-4294.
Sincerely,
THOMAS E. ARIZUMI,
Chief, Environmental Management Division
AttachmcnC
c: EPA, ROglon IX [Attn: Mr. Dan Meoa 1w lrOportll QOIEISri. P)0. c~~
County Counoil Pu blie Works Chairperson (w/reporU J W
Cleen Wetor Branch (w/report) ~e N0.
YwP~
get. Toy
AUG g 0 1999 _
Ref. Date_.~---
08119; 99 THL' 11:29 F.aS 80898188dd DP11-IL4STE11'ATER DIVISIO\' ~OOa
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE INSPECTION REPORT
INTRODUCTION
Facility: Hilo wastewater Treatment Plant
Date(s) of Inspection: August 18, 1998
Inspector(s): K. Muranaka, DOH Wastewater Branch
D. Shimabuku, boH Clean water Branch
C. Furukado, DOH Clean water Branch
Facility Representative(s)/Job Title:
Lyle Hirota, wwTP Superintendent
Andy L. Narido Sr., WWTP Supervisor (TA)
BACKGROUND
i. Current status of deficienoies cited is previous i.nspeetion reports:
a. Inf ow and Infiltration fI/I1 continues to impact plant
operations The high I/I dilutes the BOD cpo centration of the
influent entering the plant This is the main reason the
facility continues to experience problems in meeting its permit
requirement for 85 percent GODS removal. 'Phe 8ayfront sewer
line rehabilitation project to reduce I/I rras recently completed.
b. Influent barscreen no. 1 was inoperable. 7:!he unit was repaired
and is currently back in operation.
c. Primary clarifier no. 1 was still not in sE:rvice awaiting repairs
due to a malfunctioning variable frec[uency drive. Clarifier no.
1 was still inoperable as of the inspectior,l date. This unit has
been inoperable since 1995.
d. Secondar clarifier no. 1 was not in se vi ;:e awaiting repairs.
The clarifier arm was bent. The bent arm was removed and the
clarifier unit was back in service. However, denitrified sludge
clumps were noted passing over the effluent; weir since the unit
did not have a skimmer (clarifier arm).
e. The waste gas burner was inoperable. The 1>ackflash preventer
needed to be repaired. Gas was being ventt;:d into the atmosphere.
The backflash preventer was repaired and t)te unit was placed back
in service.
f. The hydrogen sul ide meters in the centrifi,iae and digester
bu' din s were ino erable. The units were repaired and placed
back in service.
1
08i19~99 THL1 11:29 F.iS 8089818811 DPI?'-1TASTEI1:iTER DIPISION Cm 001
g. Calibration of the chlorine and laboratorv,~}}alytical scales were
not u -to-date. Calibration of the units >,~ere completed.
h. Certification o the cranes and hoists at t;he facility have
expired. The certification of the cranes and hoists were
completed.
i. The chlorine feed lines were still obstructed. The feed lines
were cleared and placed back in service.
j. The broiect to repair__the fou_1 air binina ui~as still out5tandina.
water intrusion into the foul air piping isw a design problem
relating to the high water level in the influent channel. The
County temporarily addressed the problem b}~ closing off the foul
air piping by installing blanks over the olrenings.
k. The facility continued to have problems with its existing
corrective maintenance management system-- An improved system to
track work order status still needed to be implemented. Anew
computerized maintenance management system has been instituted.
Z. NYDES Permit status:
Permit Expiration Date: NPDES Permit HI 002137;" expiras at midnight
on August 31, 2000.
Comments: None.
3. Enforceraeat Actioas
Status: None.
4. Capacity Analysis:
Average flow: 3.76 million gallons per day (MGI)) for the period 07/97
to 06/98
Design Flow: 5.0 MGD; Percent of design capac::ity: 75 percent
Previous year's comparison: Last year's reported flow averaged 3.83
MGD. This year's average flcw decreased by approximately 0.07 MGD or
1.8 percent. The recently completed Bayfront SE:>.wer Line
Rehabilitation Project and the dry weather encountered during the past
year may have contributed to the reduction in i~ifluent flows.
S. Influent/Effluent Data Analysis: Based oa monthly averages
for 07/97 to 06/98.
a. Influent BOD, 63.9 mq/1 (composite)
b. Effluent BoD, 10.7 mg/1 (composite)
c. Influent Tss 90.8 mg/1 (composite)
d. Effluent T55 9.4 mg/1 (composite)
2
08;19/99 THL1 11:90 FdS 80898188dd DP11'-P~ASTE1i'.~TER DIVISION fm 005
e. pH (min) 6.8 (grab)
f. pH (max) 7.2 (grab)
Permit limits are 30 mg/L and 30 mg/L for BOOS and TS.;, respectively.
6. Modifications/Additions - Planned/Present Con9truatlon Status:
a. chlorine sampling pump 9P-03 was replaced w~'ith a larger capacity
pump.
CIIRRENT INSPECTION
1. Maintenance: Check either: No. of:
Preventive Maintenance:. Current X Backlogged
Corrective Maintenance: Satisfactory X Unsatisfactory
Major (or all) items requiring repair/replacemerkt:
a. Influent Screen No. 2. - Gear reducer problem.
b. Primary Clarifier No. 1. - Malfunctioning `vrFD.
c. Grit Screw - Rebuild screw and replace hous;,ing.
d. Aeration Tank Diffusers - Needs replacementr..
e. Centrifuge No. 1 - Tiles are falling off. The bowl will be
shipped back to the manufacturer for repair:•s.
f. Biotower Pump Nos. 2 and 4.
g. Final Clarifier No. 1 - No skimmer arm.
h. Final Clarifier No. 3 Sludge Pump.
2. Reuse:
The facility has a DOH approved effluent irrigat;:ion plan:
_ Yes _ No X Not applicable.
3. NPDES or Chapter 62 violations (effluent limitatil.ons, spills, etc.):
a. A 100 gallon wastewater spill at the disch<<rge septage pit of the
Septage Receiving Station occurred on the <;lay of the inspection.
The cause was due to the septage hauler's a:rror.
4. Visual quality of efflusnt on date of inspection (inspector's
judgment):
The final effluent appeared Fairly clear on the day of the inspection.
5. Facility's Present Deficiencies:
a. Infiltration/Inflow (I/I) continued to imp2act plant operations
during the past year as noted by the low influent BOOS/TSS. As
such, the facility was having difficulties in meeting its 85
3
08/19!99 THU 11:00 F.4S 8089818814 DPR'-R:4STEt1:9TER DIVISION Cm 008
percent removal permit requirement for BODS. However, with the
completion of the Bayfront Sewer Line Rehak>ilitation Project, the
I/I problem should lessen;
b. The influent sampler tube bracket had comp]..etely corroded away
detaching the tube from the wall. This condition subjects the
tube to downstream displacement caused by t::urbulence from the Pua
Pump Station influent. A sidestream return line located
downstream of the sample point may contamir::ate the influent
sample. The influent sample tube must be r°esecured;
c. The refrigerated influent sampler at the he;:adworks was unlocked.
NPDES samples must be kept locked to prevent possible tampering
by unauthorized personnel;
d. Influent screen no. 2 was inoperable awaiting repairs;
e. The design problem relating to water intru:;,ion of the foul air
piping at the headworks is still outstandir:~g. Foul air is not
being removed and treated as originally dee;igned;
f. Primary clarifier no. 1 has been inoperabler. since 1995 due to a
continually malfunctioning variable frequer:cy drive (VFD).
Efforts to repair the unit have been unsuce.:essful. The
co-settling mode of operation requires two of the 3 clarifiers to
be on-line at all times. Therefore, no bac;:kup is available
should another clarifier unit break down;
g. The diffusers for the preaeration basin required replacing due to
plugging problems;
h. Biotower pump nos. 2 and 4 were inoperable awaiting repairs;
i. The bent skimmer arm, noted in last year's inspection report, for
final clarifier no. 1 was removed. Floatir:g sludge clumps were
passing through with the final effluent;
j. Final clarifier no. 3 was inoperable due tc> the pending repair of
sludge pump no. 1. Although only 2 clarif~,.ers are needed at any
time, this situation provided no available backup unit;
k. The effluent flowmeter was last calibrated in October 1997. The
County's NPDES permit requires semiannual calibration or as
required by manufacturer's recommendation, whichever is less.
The 1995 inspection report reminded the Cotilnty that calibration
was required every 6 months. The 6 month kareventive maintenance
sheet should be updated to include this rec;~uirement;
1. The packing for the digester sludge mixing pump no. 1 was
leaking;
m. The waste gas burner does not relight autonnatically when the
4
08/19/99 THU 11:91 F.4S 8089818849 DP~~'-1I:9STE11:9TER DIVISION X007
flame goes out;
n. Thickened sludge pump no. 2 stator was worn out;
o. Centrifuge no. 1 was inoperable. The bowl needed to be shipped
to the manufacturer for extended repair work. No backup unit was
available;
p. The electrical conduits in the primary MCC room still has not
been painted as noted in previous inspections;
q. The odor control prechlorination system continues to be
inoperable as noted ih previous inspections. Parts have been
removed for use elsewhere in the plant;
r. As noted in previous inspections, the automatic flow proportioned
chlorinator remains inoperable and the unit continues to be
operated manually on constant feed. This results in possible
over or underfeeding of the amount of chlorine needed to fully
disinfect the effluent caused by fluctuation in plant flows;
s. Bacterial sampling results for the effluent are suspect due to
the lack of adequate detention time in the chlorine contact tank.
The sampling station is located only about is-feet downstream
from the chlorine feed line;
t. staff vacancies have impacted preventive and corrective
maintenance work at the Hilo WWTP. Current vacant positions
include: a sewer maintenance supervisor, an assistant operator,
and a maintenance technician. In addition, the WWTP supervisor
has been on leave for the past year due to a worlrn~an's
compensation case;
u. safety - The stairway to the second floor of the centrifuge room
was missing the middle rail. For safety and liability reasons, a
rail should be installed;
v. safety - The non-potable water warning sign for the hose station
atop the biotower was broken and should be replaced;
w. Security - The main security gate at the access roadway leading
to the plant is not equipped with electrical power. The gate
remains open when the plant is manned. This is a design
deficiency that has not been addressed by the County;
x. The sewer user charge appears inadequate to cover annual
operation and maintenance costs of the facility. The 1996/1997
fiscal year (FY96/97) annual report indicated a shortage in the
sewer fund and a portion of the fund was subsidized by the
County's General Fund. The Hilo WWTP was partially constructed
with state and federal construction grant funds. Federal
regulations 40CFR§35.2208 requires grantees to implement an
5
08/19/99 THC1 11:01 Fdl' 80898188dd DP11'-11'.4STER'ATER DIVISION X008
adequate user charge system and sewer use ordinance throughout
the useful life of the treatment works. The Hilo WWTP has
deteriorated during its 5 years of operation; and
y. The equipment replacement fund for FY97/9S showed a balance of
$2,052,775 on June 30, 1998. Considering all of the equipment
problems noted above, a zero ($0) disbursement during the fiscal
year is questioned.
SUMMARY
1. General Rating:
ACCEPTABLE ~ CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE X UNACCEPTABLE
Explanation: Previous boH inspection reports issued the Kilo WWTP
Conditional Acceptance ratings for having an unusual number of plant
equipment being inoperable awaiting repairs. Problems relating to the
design of the facility have also been reported but not addressed. The
Hilo wwTP has been in operation for only 5 years, yet the county
continues to experience difficulty in maintaining equipment in
operational condition. Adequacy of the user charge to fund the daily
operation and maintenance costs of this facility is questioned. The
facility has also not been able to maintain a full staff during the
past year. Based on the foregoing, the facility's rating is
UNACCEPTABLE. Continual breakdowns in plant equipment must be
addressed by the County before the facility experiences serious
effluent violations.
6