wastewater disposal and water supply preliminary report woodlane

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Section 8 indicates that there was to be auto paging systems incorporated into both sewer pump stations, but this is not the case, as verified by ITT Flygt Limited who had installed the pump stations. Section 9 of the report indicated that WPS were initially to be engaged to undertake the work due to their successful disinfection trials conducted with SA Water Corporation. However it appears that the works were undertaken and commissioned by Abtech Environmental Services Pty Ltd (Abtech). The reason for this change could not be determined. An application was lodged with the SA Health Commission for the WWTP, however the application was based on the outdated drawing 91632/ST1 as described earlier and there is not any response letter from the Commission attached in the report. The above inconsistencies indicate that there were a number of changes made to the installation after the compilation of this report. It is clear that the Secon report was preliminary in nature and a number of changes were made and not registered. 2. Health Commission (DH) The proposed scheme for the installation of the wastewater collection and treatment system for the Woodlane sub-division and Mypolonga shacks was approved by the Department of Health (DH) (refer Appendix G), however due to the lack of an EPA license the DH approval is considered invalid, as bounded by one of its conditions of approval. The United Water audit report identified that the scheme was within the Murray River Water Protection zone. This means that the threshold for requiring an EPA license is lowered from 1000EP schemes to 100 EP schemes. This scheme has an EP greater than 100 and therefore if it is in a water protection zone should be licensed by the EPA. Other DH conditions of approval not met are (refer Appendix G): - There is a lack of an automatic telemetry notification system for both pump stations in the event of alarms. - There is no formal management agreement between the then-developer, the Mypolonga shacks owners and Council for the continued Woodlane Wastewater Disposal and Water Supply Preliminary Report Wallbridge & Gilbert/070250rp002RevB/January 2008 Page 7
esponsibilities of each party required to connect to the scheme, the individual requirements to connect to the scheme, and the on-going operation and maintenance of the wastewater collection, treatment and irrigation scheme. A draft effluent scheme agreement between Council and Secon was drawn up by Norman Waterhouse, ref 227041/SDK0006, dated 15 May 1997 but it wasn’t formalised. - There is a lack of evidence to indicate that Shack Lot 19 as shown on Drawing 96210/P01 is connected to the scheme by pumping, as required in the management agreement described above. Interviews with Council staff has also revealed that only 18 out of a total 19 pre-existing shacks are connected to both the wastewater treatment and water supply schemes. Nonetheless it is understood that Council is currently in the process of establishing the connection of Lot 19 to the scheme. - Non availability of any operation and maintenance manuals for the wastewater treatment system and the irrigation scheme. Attached in Appendices H and I are the letters of pre-approvals from the South Australian Health Commission (SAHC) for the development of the wastewater treatment and water supply system respectively, both dated 1996. 1.2.2 Investigation and Exploration In addition to meetings and interviews with Council staff, W&G explored other means of obtaining any available updated information outside Council’s network. This was done to achieve the most accurate and reliable database on which to base the scheme assessment. The organisations contacted and the relevant findings are summarised below: 1. Secon Consulting Engineers (Secon) Based on the initials printed on the Secon drawings, Mr Ken Hutt was traced and contacted, who had been the project manager and main liaison person representing the developer in the project. At the time of contact he had left Secon but verified that the available drawings provided by Council are all that are available. A similar enquiry to Secon directly had drawn the same conclusion. Woodlane Wastewater Disposal and Water Supply Preliminary Report Wallbridge & Gilbert/070250rp002RevB/January 2008 Page 8
Page 1 and 2: WASTEWATER DISPOSAL AND WATER SUPPL
Page 3 and 4: CONTENTS (continued) 5. APPENDICES
Page 5 and 6: 1. PROJECT APPRECIATION 1.1 INTRODU
Page 7: The key information deficiencies id
Page 11 and 12: 4. Aquatec-Maxcon Pty Ltd (Aquatec)
Page 13 and 14: 2. SEWAGE DISPOSAL SCHEME 2.1 Sewer
Page 15 and 16: 2.1.2 Capacity Assessment To determ
Page 17 and 18: Table 5 - System Capacity Breakdown
Page 19 and 20: 2.2.2 Irrigation Class B treated ef
Page 21 and 22: 3. WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM 3.1 GENERAL
Page 23 and 24: een sourced from SA Water directly
Page 25 and 26: with a view to decommission the pla
Page 27 and 28: 4. ISSUES AND RECOMENDATIONS 4.1 SE
Page 29 and 30: APPENDIX A SECON Consulting Enginee
Page 31 and 32: APPENDIX C Sewer Pump Curves Woodla
Page 33 and 34: APPENDIX E Sewage Capacity Assessme
Page 35 and 36: APPENDIX G DH Approval December 199
Page 37 and 38: APPENDIX I DH Approval 17 December
Page 39 and 40: APPENDIX K Abtech WTP Specification
Page 41 and 42: APPENDIX M Abtech Plant Log Sheet W
Page 43 and 44: APPENDIX O SA Water Main Layout Woo

wastewater disposal and water supply preliminary report woodlane

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?