Words of Appreciation
To the editor:
I just started working at a small wastewater treatment plant for a meat company with flows of about 200,000 gpd. I saw your magazine on a desk in the main office at the other building and asked if I could read it, being new to this kind of work. I have spent 19 years dealing with hazardous chemicals in the past.
The other two operators and I were so floored by this magazine of yours, impressed with the information and to see how the water treatment industry is coming to be noticed more and more.
The best part about the magazine is the way you see the operators’ viewpoints and the positive feedback they have about the industry. We are so used to being the low-level employees while only the higher-ups get noticed in these kinds of stories.
We enjoy reading stories from real people at this level. I have let other friends at my old chemical plant jobs read the magazine, and they, too, said it was nice to read the positive feedback and stories on how people in this industry help each other out. They are very uplifting.
I hope you continue the positive stories. And since you have written more than one story about the need for new operators due to the old ones moving on, maybe you could set up a help wanted page or two for these positions in the back of the magazine. Just update it every new issue.
This is a great magazine, and there is much to say that I have not. You can count on us looking forward to the future issues. Thank you for all your time and research.
Jody McQuarters
Plainfield, Ill.
—————
A Few Suggestions
To the editor:
First of all, I would like to say great job on the new magazine. It is full of great information about old and new techniques and technologies. I also appreciate the blue-collar point of view.
I am a wastewater treatment plant operator for OK Foods in Fort Smith, Ark. We are a poultry facility, and we discharge to the Arkansas River at about 2.4 mgd. I have a Class IV municipal wastewater license as well as an Advanced Industrial license and 11 years’ experience. I have a few ideas for the magazine:
1. Make a section for industrial plants. We are pretty proud of what we do, too, and there are a lot of us.
2. Have a section for new environmental laws being looked at or passed at the state and federal levels.
3. Include a “tricks of the trade” section where operators can share how they troubleshot and fixed certain problems when the textbook fixes didn’t work.
I’m sure I will think of more as the issues come rolling in. The whole crew here likes to read your magazine. I have it delivered to my house and then bring it to work, where it is read cover to cover. Why, if we could get our picture on the cover of TPO, I’d buy five copies for my mother! Keep up the great work.
Joe Young
Fort Smith, Ark.
—————
Two Critical Issues
To the editor:
I have comments on two important issues, to me, and I’m sure to others. The first is getting new blood into the field. This has been pretty easy in larger cities as there is a promotional path that will bring in some new people.
In the smaller cities and municipalities, similar to where I work now, there is very little to coax anyone into the job. Since jobs are pretty well dead-ended when there are some young operators already working, how do we entice our replacements?
The second issue is water reclamation facilities. What we do with our reclaimed water. Well injection? Aquifer storage and recovery (ASR)? Release the excess into surrounding bodies of water? Some ideas and articles on this topic would be great.
Keep up the good start. I love the magazine and look forward to the next issue. Since it covers the whole USA, it really gives some of my operators who have never been in any other facility something to think about.
Phil Pantaleo
Rockledge, Fla.
—————
Theory and Practice
To the editor:
I was weaned, so to speak, on the Water Pollution Control Federation Journal. I liked that magazine, and I like TPO magazine. What I would like is a section in TPO that takes the theory of the old WPCF Journal and the practice approach of TPO and closes the circle, with discussion about the relationship between practice and theory and vice versa — with encouragement to think outside the box in the process.
By way of illustration, in the early 1970s, while I was a treatment plant superintendent, I read an article in WPCF that seemed to be advising how to control the dissolved oxygen to avoid bulking sludge — a predominance of filamentous bacteria. Zoogeal bacteria, the clumpy ones, were considered the good guys. Their association in forming floc is important, as the filamentous forms the skeleton and the zoogeal the body of the floc particle. Go too far either way and you have an excess of floc in the effluent.
Many people, including the treatment plant inspectors, considered a DO 2.0+ in the aeration a necessity for the treatment plant to achieve its limit of 30 mg/l TSS and BOD, which it frequently did not.
I observed that the final effluent was always cloudy to some degree with floc. I also knew from other reading that the water from bulking sludge was very clear. So I decided to try to find the Goldilocks point by dropping the DO slowly until I had bulking sludge. The article had said filamentous sludge grew very strongly below 1.0 mg/l DO.
It turned out that the point that worked well was around 1.1 mg/l. I then had the operators regulate the blower air output by checking the DO on an hourly basis and adjusting accordingly. As a result of the change, the final effluent was consistently in the range of 5 to 10 mg/l of TSS and BOD. An additional benefit was the saving of tens of thousands of dollars in electricity costs.
The strange thing in my mind was that the inspectors and middle management were very upset about the change in internal plant parameters, in particular the mixed liquor suspended solids at 1,000 mg/l, rather than the textbook value of 2,000 mg/l.
Had I had a forum I could call on to show that others were getting the same results as I was, I think I would have gotten a lot less grief, and the operational approach would have been accepted.
Jack R. Jones
Riverdale Park, Md.
—————
The New Generation
To the editor:
I recently started to receive TPO, and I find it informative and interesting. I am a heavy-equipment operator and plant operator. I work for a solids-handling facility for Colorado Springs Utilities.
I would like to see more information about methods being used by utilities around the country to counteract not only the aging infrastructure but the aging workforce. Large numbers of folks are set to retire within a relatively short time, leaving magnificent room for opportunity for a younger generation.
With this being said, I will quickly fill you in on what Colorado Springs Utilities has done to combat their loss of its workforce. Several of the lead managers in the water and wastewater fields got together with deans at the local community college (Pikes Peak Community College) and adopted an AAS Water Quality Management Degree program.
These leaders of our industry, knowing that something needed to be done to create competent recruits for our aging work force, have volunteered to instruct these classes at the local community college several nights a week. This new degree and certificate program in Water and Wastewater Technology is one of only two in Colorado, and it was created in response to critical local need for qualified technicians.
The curriculum includes solid foundations in science and math, water and wastewater techniques, and group projects. The program started out relatively slow, but it has been consistently growing. It kicked off about two years ago, and the first eligible class for getting the degree should be coming out this summer.
Thanks for all you do, and keep up the good work!
Ramsey Knowles
Colorado Springs (Colo.) Utilities
—————
The Real Heroes
To the editor:
Your new publication, TPO, offers great insight to the many challenges operators face around the country. I am a certified operator in two states (Wisconsin and Indiana).
Now that I serve in a technical support role for private industry, I found the publication refreshing because it provided a great reminder how these challenges are faced on a daily basis by the true heroes in the water-quality profession: operators who positively affect the environment with their dedication to improving our quality of life.
Best wishes on your endeavors!
Michael Keleman
Environmental Engineer
InSinkErator
—————
Life After Retirement
To the editor:
I’ve enjoyed your publication for the past five issues — keep up the good work. I wanted to offer up a topic some of your readers may be interested in: life after wastewater operations. I retired after 31 years of working at a Class A wastewater treatment plant.
I hold a Class A Operator certificate for operations for any treatment plant in Michigan. After retirement, I was approached by Hubbell, Roth & Clark Inc., consulting engineers: They asked if I would keep my Class A permit active and join their staff as a senior project representative on a part-time basis.
I agreed to a contract and have been with them for two years now. I work on treatment plant construction projects as an observer and record keeper. I am also involved in studies for treatment plant upgrades. My wastewater experience gives their firm a leg up on other consulting firms with no one on staff with my experience.
I now work in Holt, Mich., on a new IBES digestion system at the Delhi Township treatment plant. It has been very gratifying to me to put my experience to work and stay involved in the business. Good luck with the magazine.
Dennis W. Smith
Holt, Mich.
