Study shows water plant almost ‘never operated efficiently’

By HEATHER CATHLEEN COX
Staff Writer
reporter@sbnewspaper.com

water

A recent study of the membrane filtration plant process performance at the City of San Benito’s Water Treatment Plant No. 2 reports that the $17 million facility “has never operated efficiently except in the early months of operation.”

Due to the current incapacitation of Plant No. 2, which was put into commission in 2009, Water Treatment Plant No. 1 has since acted as the sole water treatment facility in San Benito.

Plant No. 1, which officials reported has never stopped operating, is the City’s original and second water treatment facility, and it was placed in service in 1927. The City planned to decommission Plant No. 1 at a point in time when Plant No. 2 was considered reliable and could meet the total water demand for San Benito.

With regard to water production capacity, the study – prepared by Lou Portillo and Associates PLLC as well as Coym, Rehmet & Gutierrez Engineering LP – states, “The decommissioning was anticipated to be completed at the time that (Plant No. 2) would expand to 10 MGD (million gallons daily). At present, (Plant No. 2) produces approximately 2.4 MGD. With great effort on the part of City staff, (Plant No. 2) can produce a maximum flow of 2.8 MGD, which is less than half of its rated capacity.”

The balance of the daily demand produced by Plant No. 1 ranges between 1 MGD and 2.4 MGD. Plant No. 1 “can serve the City’s daily needs,” the study states.

When Plant No. 2 was first established, it produced approximately 5 MGD. However, according to the study, “over time, degradation and fouling of the membrane filters decreased the plant capacity to less than 2.5 MGD.”

The report states, “Within 16 months of placing the original membranes in service, the membranes required total replacement,” even though the membranes’ anticipated life expectancy was 10 years.

Experts have reportedly concluded that the problems with the membrane filters will require additional maintenance and chemicals, resulting in maintenance expenses that could cost San Benito as much as $3 to $5 million.

The poor condition of the membranes is referred to as “a fouled membrane, and the only alternative to return the membrane to a reliable operating performance is a Clean In Place (CIP) process on the membrane.”

The typical time for a CIP in most applications is once a year, every six months or in some cases every three months. “The plant at San Benito is performing CIPs every month to every week,” the report says. “This is expensive due to chemical and labor costs since the operators are not running the plant to make water.”

This study concluded, “The probability of the raw water containing…contaminants is high…. The bottom of the membrane was coated with a brown colored foulant material. The center of the membrane fibers had a light brown coating, but the bottom of the membrane had thicker coating. A Chromatic Element Imaging confirmed the majority of the foulant material…was composed of clay (calcium and aluminum silicates), colloidal material…(and) that the bulk of scaling was due to algae, biofouling and scaling.”

Foulant material scraped off the fouled membrane contained “Gram positive and negative bacteria, algae (diatoms) yeast and amorphous organic material,” the report further states.

Experts recommend that the City “explore the cost of full membrane replacement.” At 456 membranes totaling more than $1,000 each (the regular price of membrane filters as opposed to the previously reported $212 – a reportedly at-cost discounted price), could result in the City spending nearly half a million dollars each time it’s necessary to update said filters.

Among other recommendations, experts state that the City should improve and add certain cleaning techniques and incorporate cleaning detergents such as chlorine, which they say will “help reduce the biofouling on the membrane.” It was also noted in the report that a standby generator is needed for Plant No. 2, due to the fact it only has one source of power at this time.

Finally, the report also states, “If no pretreatment improvements are made, fouling of the membranes will continue.”

Experts anticipate that the plant will initially produce approximately 5 MGD if all membranes are replaced; however, “within the next 24 to 30 months, the plant will return to the reduced production rate of 2.0 to 2.5 MGD because fouling of the membranes will continue.”

City leaders, citing the advice of legal counsel, have yet to comment concerning these recent developments.

 

Permanent link to this article: https://www.sbnewspaper.com/2014/07/25/study-shows-water-plant-almost-never-operated-efficiently/

15 comments

Skip to comment form

    • Juan on August 1, 2014 at 11:33 am
    • Reply

    This Resaca boardwalk smells of the exact same scam,wakeup,don’t let us be taken again.Get the house in order before starting other daydream projects.

      • WeThePeople on August 1, 2014 at 6:28 pm
      • Reply

      Fortunately the Boardwalk project is a grant. The tricky part is to see if everyone plays by the rules of the grant, or the grantee will ask for their money back!

    • WeThePeople on August 1, 2014 at 11:19 am
    • Reply

    City Code of Ethics?? If that came in to play there may be some folks out of work!

  1. What ever happened to the city code of ETHICS? Its been over 2 yrs and nothing the VOTERS
    are waiting. When bad calls are made over and over again the COMMISSION has
    to answer or FORCED TO STEP DOWN.

    • Reform San Benito on July 31, 2014 at 2:41 pm
    • Reply

    I am wondering when the report by Coym, Rehmet & Gutierrez was submitted to the city, because I suspect something even more sinister at play here than a $17M water plant that can’t process water. I suspect a cover-up that has spanned two city managers and at least four city commissions to date. The one constant in all this, until our current mayor took office earlier this year, the city has had only one elected mayor since the plant went into operation in 2007: Joe Hernandez. Only now may we fully realize the depth of his failed leadership as mayor. But he is not alone. Past and present City and Interim-City Managers Trevino, Jalomo and Lara also have some explaining to do.

    Since the plant went operational in 2007, and the city first learned of its deficiencies, the moment the city learned of problems the clock started running on the time they could take legal action against Cruz-Hogan and other responsible parties. At the very latest, the clock started running on the last date Cruz-Hogan tried to rectify the deficiencies. Generally, the statute of limitations to take legal action against an entity for failure to fulfill their contractual obligation is four years. No doubt that is the question the Houston firm of Arnold and Itkin is trying pinpoint.

    It may very well be that the city has no recourse to recover money from the engineer, contractors and suppliers, and the city may have to pay out-of-pocket to fix the issues with the plant. Believe we’re already learning as much. There are questions this commission and, more specifically, City Manager Lara and Assistant City Manager Jalomo, need to answer, like, why has this issue gone on so long and not been previously addressed? Why are we, the citizens, for the first time learning of these failures – the water plant failure and the failure of our elected officials and city administration?

    Each of these people – commissioners and city managers, past and present – have a fiduciary duty to the people of this community to safeguard the city’s assets. That they would indebt the city 17 million dollars and force the citizens to pay for it with rate hikes all these years without ensuring the plant operated as intended from the outset, is a colossal failure on their part and a dereliction of their fiduciary duty. That the water plant has not functioned as intended for seven years and these facts have been secreted from the citizens all this time is beyond irresponsible management, it is downright criminal.

    Each of these commissioners, mayor included, have used the word transparency to get our votes, promising they will give us open and transparent government if we vote for them. CM Lara has written guest columns in this very paper, telling us citizens how transparent and accessible the city administration is to us citizens. Now we learn differently. It’s now time you practice what you preach, commissioners and administration. It’s time you come forward and give us the transparency you promised. If the advice you’re receiving is contrary to the transparency you promised, then it’s time to secure a different advisor.

      • WeThePeople on July 31, 2014 at 7:18 pm
      • Reply

      Excellent points and questions! Unfortunately the term ‘transparency’ is nothing more than the favorite bureaucratic platitude du jour.
      The truth is that the two CM’s have their personal friends as engineers doing work for the City. The truth is that CM Trevino was complicit with the engineer in selling the new water plant to the public. What makes matters worse is CM Lara and his staff have known about the deficiencies for several years. Smoke testing?? Really!
      Asst CM and everyone working in the water department is also culpable. NO ONE has spoken up. A code of SILENCE at the expense of the community!
      The only fiduciary duty these people are thinking about is collecting their paychecks! WHERE is the leadership, accountability and REAL transparency??

    • Concerned Citizen on July 30, 2014 at 8:39 am
    • Reply

    My question is where is the preliminary engineering? Where are the reports, tests, pilot testing, tceq reports, etc. Its my understanding that these systems have to be proved to work before they are actually built. The addition of chemicals should have been thought of during the initial water quality test phases. Who design the filtration system ? What are their thoughts on the fouling and also projects such as these come with a warranty period, why was this not questioned when production even dropped at all much less half of proposed capacity… ALOT OF QUESTIONS AND NO ANSWERS. I say shame on the Engineer and Filtration system manufacturer.

    • Reform San Benito on July 29, 2014 at 9:49 pm
    • Reply

    What is the date of the engineering report done by Coym, Rehmet & Gutierrez? Editor, can you provide that info?

      • Denny Crane, Jr. on July 31, 2014 at 4:20 pm
      • Reply

      My understanding is this study and resultant report by Lou Portillo and Associates PLLC as well as Coym, Rehmet & gutierrez Engineering LP was done very recently after Water Treatment Plant #2 (WTP #2) was shut down.

      There must be a good reason Cruz/Hogan Consultants, INC is not mentioned as having participated in the preparation of this study or report.

      I agree that in the spirit of Open Government and transparency, the City of San Benito should upload the study or report to its web page for public viewing. I am almost positive the city honchos read these open forum comments.

      So what do you say City Commissioners, City Manager, City Attorney, etc.?

    • Juan on July 26, 2014 at 10:30 pm
    • Reply

    Why is it that the defective water plant was never brought up before now,answer up city water dept.,we’re paying your salaries,new mayor take the bull by the horns,get answers,fire people that can’t give answers,do something.

      • Pepe Roni on July 28, 2014 at 3:24 pm
      • Reply

      I agree with your sentiment that the public needs answers from the city.

      However, after reading the City Charter on the city web page, the mayor has no “hiriing or firing” authority. The city commission has the authority of hiring and firing the City Manager, City Engineer, and City Attorney only. The hiring and firing of the city staff is done by the City Manager.

      However, the City Commission has TOTAL CONTROL of the city commission, EDC, and all boards. The mayor basically has no power. They have recycled/reappointed ALL of former Mayor Joe Hernandez appointees (reported here in this newspaper) just to spite the new mayor.

      To add to that, they also rejected some of Mayor Celeste Sanchez appointments just to spite her for defeating the other member of their clique, former Mayor Joe Hernandez.

      It was Joe Hernandez and Commissioners JD Penny, JD Gonzalez, and Rene Villafranco who VOTED to REHIRE Cruz-Hogan as the city engineers in the fall of last year 2013. I was informed they are receiving a $2,000 monthly retainer since October of last year.

      I find this city commission action unbelievable after reading the headline “Study shows water plant almost ‘never operated efficiently’

      Seventeen million taxpayer dollars for a plant that “never operated efficiently!!!!!!!

      Remember this at the next election.

        • WeThePeople on July 28, 2014 at 4:22 pm
        • Reply

        Yes, please remember who the bad guysreally are come election time!
        The Mayor has very little power at this point and no alliances with the Commission. She needs more support to get to the bottom the dirty business that has been going on for at least 8 years!

    • Karma is a ***** on July 26, 2014 at 4:13 pm
    • Reply

    Not only should the administration start informing the taxpayers via public comment as to the findings of the report, they should also name those in charge of making the decisions; financial and engineering for this apparent fiasco.

    The city should list the names of those individuals (city manager and City Commission members in office at the time, legal representation involved) without making allegations of misconduct.

    All I would like to know is what individuals were involved and if they are still in office or collecting taxpayer dollars via employment by the city of San Benito

    It is the city’s responsibility to inform the public and the taxpayers’ right to know!

    Otherwise, we should start a recall election to rid the city of those that are not only holding the city back but bankrupting the city.

      • concerned citizen on July 27, 2014 at 11:44 am
      • Reply

      I agree we need to put those names of the individuals who were responsible for this mess. If we have to pay a higher water bill for the multi million dollar junk, we have the right to know who’s responsible. We do need a recall election if they are no going to listen to we the people.

      • WeThePeople on July 27, 2014 at 11:54 am
      • Reply

      At the time, City employee Martha McClain and City Manager Victor Trevino were in charge of convincing the citizens that there was an immediate need for the water plant.
      Who was Chairman of the Community Steering Committee for the new Water Plant ? Pete Claudio
      Where did the Invitation for Bids information come from?
      CRUZ-HOGAN Consultants, Inc., 1221 E. Tyler, Suite A, Harlingen, TX 78550
      Who built the water plant? Cruz-Hogan
      Who was the engineer that signed the final inspection on the water plant? Guess who??

      http://server.cocef.org/aproyectos/ExComSanBenito2002_08ing.htm

      http://www.nadb.org/pdfs/pastnadbnews/Volume_10/35.pdf

      Mayor in 2006 was Cesar, in 2007 Joe.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.