J. Appl. Environ. Biol. Sci.

, 7(2)134-141, 2017 ISSN: 2090-4274

Journal of Applied Environmental
© 2017, TextRoad Publication
and Biological Sciences
www.textroad.com

Risk Analysis and Optimization of Fishing Port Waste Water Treatment

Plant Using Fault Tree Analysis Method
Diki I. Perdana* and Nieke Karnaningroem

Department of Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Planning,

Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember (ITS) Surabaya, 60111, Indonesia

Received: October 23, 2016

Accepted: January 1, 2017

ABSTRACT

This research will analyze the potential risks that will jeopardize the performance of fishing port Waste Water
Treatment Plant (WWTP) and propose an optimization strategy. The variables of the analysis are human
resource capacity, machinery and tools, and wastewater treatment process. The operations of WWTP will be
analyzed using Failure Mode Effect Analysis (FMEA) to discover the factors of potential risks. The risks will
then be scrutinized to find out the true causes of the problems using Fault Tree Analysis (FTA) method and be
calculated on the value of probability and its consequences to determine into which category in the risk matrix
that they will fall. Pursuant to the risk matrix, an optimization will be strategized by mitigating the risks.
Optimization priority will be given to those with the category of Severe and High. The major causes of
decremental effluent quality reside on the factor of machinery and tools i.e. defective flow meter and
hydroextractor; the factor of wastewater treatment process i.e. the value of BOD loading, recirculation ratio,
airflow, and the substandard efficiency of the aeration tank; and the factor of human resource i.e. the inadequate
capacity of the technicians due to absence of training on wastewater treatment and WWTP operations.
KEYWORDS: Risk Analysis, Failure Mode Effect Analysis, Fault Tree Analysis, Wastewater Treatment Plant
(WWTP), Optimization.

INTRODUCTION

Pelabuhan Perikanan Samudera Nizam Zachman Jakarta is the largest fishing port in Indonesia of
which industrial zone is packed with small- to large-scale fish processing business entities. Their wastewater
contains high organic matter [1], and the level of pollution very much depends on the type of processing and of
the processed raw material [2]. The fishing port Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) applies biological
treatment using activated sludge technology, with the maximum treatment capacity of 1.000 m3/day, the
wastewater contains maximum BOD 500 mg/l and TSS of 500 mg/l [3]. Data of periodical inspection on the
quality of the WWTP effluent from 2013 to 2015 demonstrate that 87% of the effluent do not meet the standard
quality. A number of factors have caused the failure and measures have been taken to address the issue, however
they have yet to increase the WWTP performance as targeted.
Therefore, methods for risk identification and analysis are needed. Some of the commonly used ones
are Failure Mode Effect Analysis (FMEA) and Fault Tree Analysis (FTA). Both can be used as an instrument to
develop a process, product, or service [4]. To obtain an optimum condition, the identified risk will be analyzed
to determine and measure, as well as assess each of the elements of problem-causing factors [5]. Fault Tree
Analysis has ability to analyze system failure and to determine risk-causing factors from the smallest element
[5], [6], [7], [8] and [9]. The risk factors will be measured and assessed by considering their probability and
consequences. Risk assessment is important in determining risk category based on risk matrix [10].
The objectives of this research are evaluating the WWTP operations and identifying factors that have
caused the failure; and analyzing risk category and determining priority for optimization in order to optimize the
WWTP treatment and operation performances. If the WWTP operations and treatment performances are
optimum, the effluent quality will meet the standard quality and reduce the level of pollution in the receiving
waters.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this research, the risk analysis and performances optimization are carried out using descriptive
quantitative method. Research activities include field observation on the WWTP operations, effluent sample
testing, questionnaire and interview, evaluation of the WWTP performances, and data analysis and
interpretation. The data collected for risk identification and determination are:

*Corresponding author: Diki Indra Perdana, Department of Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Civil Engineering and
Planning, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember (ITS), Surabaya, 60111, Indonesia.
Email: [email protected]

134
 Perdana and Karnaningroem,2017

1. WWTP Planning/Design documents.

2. WWTP Standard Operating Procedure or Operation and Maintenance Manual.
3. Sampling and effluent quality testing according to standard quality [11].
4. Daily operation report of the operator and technician (malfunction and troubleshooting).
5. Maintenance, repair, and replacement of WWTP machinery and tools.
6. Personnel Data, Job Description and Personnel Workload Analysis.
7. WWTP operation and maintenance budget.
The risk identification steps using FMEA method are: a. reviewing every unit of process in WWTP,
b.composing Fishbone Diagram for the reviewed aspects, c. identifying risk by taking into account affecting
factors, and d. validating and determining risk as top event. Next, risk analysis is conducted using Fault Tree
Analysis method which comprise of two steps: a. quantitative analysis i.e. composing Fault Tree diagram and b.
quantitative analysis which includes value of Probability, Likelihood and Consequence.

Table 1. Criteria of Probability or Likelihood Value

Category Description Value Range
Rare The performed activities rarely cause risk to the environment <10%
Unlikely The performed activities may cause risk to the environment 11 – 30%
Moderate The performed activities will possibly cause risk to the environment 31 – 60%
Likely The performed activities will probably cause risk to the environment 61 – 80%
Almost Certain The performed activities will cause risk to the environment >81%
Source: [10]

Table 2. Criteria of Consequences Value

Category Description Value Range
Negligible Risk consequences to the environment are insignificant <10%
Low Risk consequences expose minor negative impact to the environment but, in order to reduce 11 – 30%
possible risk, necessary actions such as on-site troubleshooting are needed
Medium Risk consequences expose intermediate negative impact to the environment, thus management 31 – 60%
based on normal procedure is needed
High Risk consequences expose major negative impact to the environment, thus intensive 61 – 80%
management measures are needed to tackle the issue
Extreme Risk consequences are very destructive to the environment >81%
Source: [10]

The obtained risk value will be evaluated based on the category of risk level [9] and cross-checked in
the risk map. Risk of highest level will be given priority for optimization.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A. Risk Identification
The purpose of risk identification is to recognize any possible risks so that the system can be optimized
by preventing or minimizing the event. Based on data, interview, and observation, it can be identified that
risk factors are human resource, machinery and tools, and wastewater treatment process. The benchmark for
WWTP performance failure is the decremental effluent quality which goes below the standard quality [11].
In each of the risk factors, there are several risk subfactors that influence the value of risk factor.

Figure 1. Fishbone Diagram of WWTP Decremental Effluent Quality

135
 J. Appl. Environ. Biol. Sci., 7(2)134-141, 2017

B. Risk Analysis and Evaluation

Determining Probability and Likelihood
The probability calculation is done by plugging the value of frequency of event and frequency of
process that have been determined from each of the components of root events into the following formula:

∑
where:
P : Probability
Fp : Frequency of Process
Fk : Frequency of Event
The result of the probability calculation on each factor and subfactor will then be plugged into a
mathematical formula which is an expression of quantitative logic of Fault Tree qualitative analysis to have
the value of likelihood.
Mathematical formula for factor of human resource (HR) is as follows:
P HR = P quantity + P quality + P job description + P guidance & supervision
= {P operator + P technician + P analyst} + {P education + P expert + P operation} + {P SOP + P unfeasible of SOP +
P implementation of SOP} + {P person in charge + P work report + P assestment of performance}
= {P operator + P technician + P analyst} + {P education + P expert + (P training x P literature)}+ {P SOP+ (P tools x
P method) + P implementation of SOP} + {P person in charge + P work report + (P evaluation+ P sanction)}

Figure 2. Fault Tree Diagram of Factor of Human Resource

Figure 3. Fault Tree Diagram of Factor of Machinery and Tools

136
 Perdana and Karnaningroem,2017

The following is the mathematical formula for the factor of machinery and tools:

P Machinery &Tools = P manhole pump + P flowmeter + P blower + P diffuser + P lift pump + P sludge circulation pump +
P hydroextractor
= {P condition/function+ P spare part+ P lifetime + P maintenance} + {P condition/function + P spare part +
P repair} + {P condition/function + P capacity + P spare part + P lifetime + P maintenance} +
{P condition/function + P placement + P maintenance} + {P condition/function + P spare part + P lifetime +
P maintenance} + {P condition/function + P spare part + P lifetime + P maintenance} + {P condition/function +
P spare part + P repair}
= {P condition/function + P spare part + P lifetime + P maintenance} + {(P jammed x P out of order) +
P spare part + P repair} + {P condition/function + P capacity + P spare part + P lifetime + P maintenance} +
{(P clogged x P out of order) + P placement + P maintenance} + {P condition/function + P spare part + P lifetime
+ P maintenance} + {P condition/function + P spare part + P lifetime + P maintenance} + {(P nonoperational x
P out of order) + P spare part + P repair}

Figure 4. Fault Tree Diagram of Factor of Treatment Process

Mathematical formula for the factor of treatment process is as shown below:

P process = P buffer tank + P aeration tank + P sedimentation tank

= {P td} + {P BOD loading + P air required + P aeration time + P RAS + P efficiency} + {P td + P efficiency}
= {P Q x P volume} + {P BOD loading + P air required + P aeration time + P RAS+ P efficiency} + {P td +
P efficiency}

Determination of Consequence
Consequence is an effect/impact of an event that is usually expressed as a loss caused by that event.
The value of Consequence is obtained from the calculation of each of the factors in the Fault Tree Diagram.
The result will then be categorized according to the range of value attained from the value of
Consequence/the largest impact with the category of Extreme observed in the factor of Machinery and
Tools (Flowmeter and Hydroextractor components) and factor of Treatment Process (Aeration Tank
components).

Risk Mapping
The results of the calculation of Likelihood and Consequence are plotted into a matrix of risk level category
with Consequence on the X-axis and Likelihood on the Y-axis. The plotting will then become the risk map
which will serve as the basis for designing strategy for optimization action.

137
 J. Appl. Environ. Biol. Sci., 7(2)134-141, 2017

Table 3. Recapitulation of Risks Assessment

Subfactor Level Subfactor Level Subfactor Level Category of Category of Category
Risk Factor
1 2 3 Probability Consequence of Risk
WWTP Operator Likely Medium Major
Mechanic and Likely Medium Major
Quantity Electrician
Laboratory Almost Certain Medium High
Analyst
Education Level Likely High High
Expert Moderate High Major
Quality Comprehension Training Almost Certain High Severe
on WWTP Reference/ Likely High High
Human Operations Literature
Resource
Set of SOP Likely Medium Major
Tools Almost Certain Medium High
Unfeasible SOP
Job Description Methods Likely Medium Major
Implementation of Almost Certain Medium High
SOP
Person in Charge Likely Medium Major
Guidance & Work Report Likely Medium Major
Supervision Assessment of Evaluation Likely Medium Major
Performance Sanction Almost Certain Medium High
Condition/ Likely Low Significant
Function
Inlet Pump
Spare Parts Likely Low Significant
(Manhole Pump)
Pump Lifetime Moderate Low Moderate
Maintenance Likely Low Significant
Condition/ Jammed Unlikely Extreme Major
Function Out of Order Almost Certain Extreme Severe
Flowmeter
Spare Parts Almost Certain Extreme Severe
Repair Almost Certain Extreme Severe
Condition/ Likely Low Significant
Function
Capacity Likely Low Significant
Blower Spare Parts Likely Low Significant

Blower Lifetime Moderate Low Significant

Maintenance Likely Low Significant

Machinery Condition/ Clogged Likely Low Significant
and Tools Function Out of Order Moderate Low Moderate
Diffuser
Placement Moderate Low Moderate
Maintenance Moderate Low Moderate
Condition/ Likely Low Significant
Function
Lift Pump Spare Parts Likely Low Significant
Pump Lifetime Moderate Low Moderate
Maintenance Likely Low Significant
Condition/ Moderate Low Moderate
Sludge Function
Recirculation Spare Parts Moderate Low Moderate
Pump Pump Lifetime Moderate Low Moderate
Maintenance Moderate Low Moderate
Condition/ Non Operational Almost Certain Extreme Severe
Function Out of Order Unlikely Extreme Major
Hydroextractor
Spare Parts Almost Certain Extreme Severe
Repair Almost Certain Extreme Severe
Influent Moderate Negligible Trivial
Buffer Tank Detention Time Discharge
Tank Volume Unlikely Negligible Trivial
BOD Loading Almost Certain Extreme Severe
Air Intake Likely Extreme Severe
Process
Aeration Tank Aeration Time Moderate Extreme High
Circulation Ratio Almost Certain Extreme Severe
Efficiency Likely Extreme Severe
Sedimentation Detention Time Almost Certain Negligible Trivial
Tank (Clarifier) Efficiency Likely Negligible Trivial

138
 Perdana and Karnaningroem,2017

Table 4. Map of Risk Category

Human Consequence
Resource Extreme High Medium Low Negligible
Severe Severe High Major Trivial
Out of Order, Spare Training Laboratory
Parts & Repair Analyst Tools
Almost (Flowmeter) Implementation of
Certain Non Operational SOP
(Hydroextractor) Sanction
BOD Loading
Sludge Circulation Ratio
Severe High Major Significant Trivial
Air Required Education Level STP Operator Condition/Function, Efficiency
Efficiency (Aeration Reference/ Mechanic & Spare Parts & (Clarifier)
Tank) Literature Electrician Maintenance (Inlet
Set of SOP Pump)
Method Condition/Function,
Likely Person in Charge Spare Parts &
Work Report Maintenance (Blower)
Evaluation Clogged (Diffuser)
Likelihood

Condition/Function,
Spare Parts &
Maintenance (Lift Pump)
High Major Significant Moderate Trivial
Aeration Time Expert Lifetime (Inlet Pump) Effluent
Lifetime (Blower) Discharge
Out of Order, Placement
& Maintenance
Moderate (Diffuser)
Lifetime (Lift Pump)
Condition/Function,
Spare Parts, Lifetime &
Maintenance (Sludge
Circulation Pump)
Major Significant Moderate Low Trivial
Jammed (Flowmeter) Tank Volume
Unlike
Out of Order (Buffer Tank)
(Hydroextractor)
Significant Moderate Low Trivial Trivial
Rare

C. Optimization Action
The method that will be used for optimization is risk mitigation. Risk mitigation is risk management
with the strategy to reduce the frequency of risk events and prevent the emergence of other risks. The
optimization is focused more on the last level of subfactor (minimal cut set), or on the problem-causing root as
identified with FTA method.
Mitigation strategy is carried out by taking into account the scale of priority. The recommendations are
actualized starting from the highest risk criterion (Severe) which imposes the largest potential in decrementing
the WWTP performances. Next, the optimization is performed gradually for risks with the category of High and
Major by of course considering availability of budget.

Table 5. Recommendation and Estimation of Optimization Cost (Risk Category of Severe and High)
Risk
Recommended Mitigation Plan Requisite/Investment Cost (IDR) Outcome
Category
Routinely sending relevant - Training of Wastewater Increased proficiency
personnel to technical training of Treatment and WWTP 30,000,000 and skill of the
WWTP operations Operations (6 personnel @ personnel which will
once/year) result in better
- Courses for Mechanic and performance
Electrician (6 personnel @ 15,000,000
once/year)
Replacing Flowmeter with the - Sewage Hi-Flowmeters (1 unit Known effluent
Severe
one needed and specifically for reserve) 30,000,000 intake so that WWTP
designed to endure the WWTP treatment load is
environment assessable
Supplying fast-moving spare - Flowmeter maintenance
parts of the Flowmeter (quarterly) 600,000
Conducting periodical
maintenance and repair of
Flowmeter every month

139
 J. Appl. Environ. Biol. Sci., 7(2)134-141, 2017

Proposing the reactivation of - Filter Press machine repair Hydroextractor being

hydroextractor operation 250,000,000 able to treat sludge,
Supplying fast-moving spare - Spare Parts of machinery and by-product of
parts electrical tools 30,000,000 biological process,
Conducting periodical - Machinery and tools maintenance which is usually
maintenance every month (12 months, @ IDR 5.000.000,-) 60,000,000 dumped and pollutes
the waters
Routinely monitoring and - Portable COD meter Known intake load to
assessing BOD load intake and 8,500,000 WWTP to prevent
soliciting industry to pretreat shock loading of the
their effluent process
Replacing DO meter monitoring - Tools/sensor of DO meter, ORP Managed work of the
device for out-of-order DO and pH meter including monitor 25,000,000 blower to keep
meter, ORP & pH meter and oxygen transfer at
monitoring the performance of desirable rate
the blower & hyper rater
Controlling, monitoring and - Automatic sensor and timer of Maintained number of
daily registering the process of sludge circulation pump 500,000 microorganisms in
active sludge recirculation (20- aeration, extended
40%) sludge lifetime, and
better process
efficiency
Monitoring and maintaining WWTP treatment
processes criteria at designed performance in
criteria by conducting periodical desired target and
assessment/calibration and consistently
registration maintained effluent
quality
Employing a Laboratorium - Recruiting personnel (1 person, More frequent and
Analyst 13 months of salary) 43,550,000 routine analysis of
effluent quality
Replacing and/or hiring more - Hired personnel
operators based on evaluation of having the needed
performance & competence competence and skills
Enriching references/literature Increased knowledge
relevant to WWTP processes and understanding of
and operations the operators and
technicians
Procuring necessary tools as - Mechanical and electrical Better performances
mentioned in the SOP working tools 30,000,000 of the operators and
technicians that will
increase their
productivity
Conducting regular monitoring - Monthly Meeting of Coordination Evaluated
High
and supervision to WWTP and Evaluation (meeting 9,000,000 performance,
operators consumption for 15 people x IDR discussion and
50.000,-) problem solving, and
maintained
communications and
relations among
personnel
Imposing sanction based on Increased work
applicable personnel regulations discipline and
compliance of the
operators
Monitoring and assuring that Available data of
effluent intake does not exceed daily effluent
the WWTP capacity (1000 discharge and status
m3/day) and filling out logbook of WWTP treatment
on daily basis capacity
Total Cost 532,150,000

CONCLUSION

Risk factors which influence the operations of WWTP are human resource, machinery and tools, and
treatment process. Risk with the category of Severe can be observed in the following subfactors: absence of
training for personnel, damaged Flowmeter without further repair and availability of spare parts, nonoperational
and unmaintained hydroextractor, BOD loading exceeding WWTP capacity, unqualified air required and sludge
circulation ratio, and low processing efficiency of aeration tank. Optimization action is prioritized for risk with
the category of Severe and High with estimate cost of IDR 532.150.000,-.

140
 Perdana and Karnaningroem,2017

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the Ministry of Marine and Fisheries of the
Republic of Indonesia, for granting the scholarship and fund for this research.

REFERENCES

[1] Gonzalez. 1996. Wastewater Treatment in Fisheries Industry. FAO Fishery Technical Paper 335. Rome.
[2] Ibrahim, B. 2005. Review Active-Sludge Wastewater Biological Treatment System in Fishing Industry.
Bulletin of Technology of Fishery Products. Vol. VIII, No. 1, pp. 31-40.
[3] Pacific Consultants International. 2002. Final Completion Report Jakarta Fishing Port Phase IV.
Directorate General of Capture Fisheries. Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries - Government of
Indonesia. Jakarta.
[4] Perdana R., dan Yuliawati E. 2014. Integration of FMEA Method and Topsis to Analyze Risk of
Accident on the process of Frame and Fork Welding. Journal of Industry Spectrum. Vol. 12, No. 1, pp
43-52.
[5] Apsari, M.N. 2014. Risk Analysis and Optimization of Quality of Water Produced by Ngagel I Water
Processing Installation. Thesis Department of Environmental Engineering, Faculty of Civil Engineering
and Planning, Institut Teknologi Sepuluh Nopember.
[6] Clemens, P.L. 1993. Fault Tree Analysis 4th edition.
[7] Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) 3071. 2002. Job Hazard Analysis. U.S.
Department of Labor.
[8] Syaifudin, M., Sugiono., dan Yuniarti, R. 2014. Risk Analysis on the Workshop Division of PT. XYZ
Branch Office Malang. Journal Purification Department of Industrial Engineering. Universitas Brawijaya.
[9] Wulandari, T. 2011. Analysis of Failure of System with Fault Tree. Essay. Mathematical Study Program.
Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences. Universitas Indonesia.
[10] Government of Western Australia. 1999. Guidelines for Managing Risk In The Western Australian Public
Sectors.
[11] The Regulation of the Minister of the Environment of the Republic of Indonesia No. 5 of 2014
concerning Standard Quality of Effluent. Ministry of the Environment and Forestry of the Republic of
Indonesia. Attachment XIV.C Standard Quality of Effluent in Fishery Industrial Zone with Off-site
Wastewater Treatment.

141