The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1911-10-03

i public funds.
 He also pointed out that the advo- l cates of tI1e system are not in accord, | that one declares the sewage system of the city a disgrace, and another | that it is 90 percent satisfactory. It
 was then that he called attention to. l the transformation of the advocates of the Herring system.
 1 Mir. Goodsell's communication rid | dled the hero-wOrship of the advocates ! of the Herring system in his communi- | cation. It was listened to with the | closest attention as City Clerk Bouch- l CT read the communication as follows: To The Honorable Common Council l Gentlemen:
 | A hearing having been called to- night for the acceptance or rejection of ] the Herring Disposal Sewer System, I l beg to submit the following commun- | ication:
 | On Monday, September 18th, visited | Reading, Pa, where I understood a l Herring Sewage Disposal System had been installed, Mr. Herring being the chief engineer. As Reading has 100,- 900 population, the same as Bridgeport, I anticipated securing satisfactory in formation in regard to his sewage dis posa1 system. I first went to the pumping station where pumps are in- stalled, that had a capacity of pump ing 5,00O000 gallons of sewage each
 
 the main trunk sewer flows into large receiving vault. The Segregator or fine screen which was used for screening the sewage, was out of order and a very much coarser screen was being used, making it much more diff ficult for treatment by the subsequent processes. I found by the Engineers report this seggregator had been out of order for sixty-three days during the last year, and in 1909, seventy seven days. I saw the place where the sewage overflowed from the re- ceiving vault into the, river direct. was told that in making general re- pairs, the pumps had been closed down about eight days during the last year, allowing the full ah7Aent of Sewage to overflow into the river during that time. I then visited the septic tank some two miles and a half south of the city where found a tank of about 100000 gallons capacity to take care of 5,000,O00 gallons sewage daily flow ing through septic tank having about 100000 gallons working capacity could not possibly be fermented and digested in the time allowed for pass ing through, consequently, the capacity of the septic tank should be increased three Or four times it S present size.
 The City Engineer of Reading, Penn. says In his annual report that this septic plant has been cleaned six times during the year. that it was not originally designed for frequent cleaning, and there is no provision for taking care of the sewage while cleaning IS done. When the tank is cleaned it is necessary to put the whole plant out of service and to by pass the sewage into the river.
 Poor Arrangement.
 The City Engineer says it is a very poor arrangement to purify sewage for large per cent. of the days in the year, and rather absurd to allow crude sewage to run directly into the river on other days of the year. He] states in his annual report "The tank itself is not an efficient type"
 From there, visited the sprinkling filters at Fritz'S Island about half T mile below the septic tank. The En- gineer's report says these filters are numbered No. 2 and No. A. No has not been free from clogging and No. 2 shows still greater tendency for clogging, which is due to accumt,- lation of undigested solids. This clogging is most serious in later win ter and early spring. On the night bed, there were about 75 sprinklinc filter nozzles frozen completely shut.
 The final sedimentation basins have both been in constant use save during cleaning. The engineers re- port says. both basins are faulty in design by having the floor slope to- wards the outlet end. This tends to work the sludge forward, so that the suspended matters in the final efflu- ent are increased at times of sludge fermentation. Basin No is also faulty, in that the sides slope, where by the sludge which accumulates on the sides is more easily brought to