EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

water E n vi ron m en t R e s e a r c h F o u n d at i o n D ec entr a liz ed Systems

Quantitative Tools to Determine the Expected

Performance of Wastewater Soil Treatment Units

nsite wastewater treatment

systems (OWTS) are an
important and significant
part of water management infrastructure in the United States.
OWTS serve almost one-quarter of
the U.S. population. Thus, proper
OWTS selection, design, installation, operation, and management
are essential.
While these systems vary widely in
their design and implementation,
the most prevalent type of system
is a conventional OWTS that uses
the soil for wastewater constituent
treatment, hydraulic capacity,
Figure 1. The toolkit helps users evaluate the
and eventually recharge to water
treatment and fate of nitrogen, microbial pollutants,
resources. Although the soil
and organic wastewater contaminants and guides
treatment unit (STU) within an
them to the tool most appropriate for their conditions.
OWTS provides an effective and
sustainable means for wastewater
reclamation, occasional water quality degradation has been experienced. Current permitting
and design focus remains primarily on ensuring that hydraulic loading is not excessive.
A lack of available simple tools for assessing the performance of the STU has resulted
in limited assessment of treatment performance, based on scientific principles, during
OWTSdesign.
The overall goal of this project was to provide a toolkit to evaluate and design for STU
performance for important wastewater constituents over a variety of OWTS operating
conditions. It was developed for a wide range of users faced with different needs of varying
complexity. The toolkit addresses three main objectives:

QQ

Identify the current best practices and tools utilized in STU design and performance.

QQ Develop and test tools to aid system designers and decision makers assessing the
expected STU performance.
QQ

Provide decision diagrams (protocol) for selection and use of the different tools.

The first objective was addressed in a comprehensive literature review submitted as a

separate WERF report (DEC1R06). Results from the literature review were combined with
laboratory and field experimentation to create simple tools based on known scientific
principles. Protocols consisting of flow charts and decision steps were prepared to aid
users for performance-based STU design and treatment performance. The toolkit evaluates
treatment of nitrogen, microorganisms (bacteria and virus), and organic wastewater
contaminants (OWCs). These pollutants are currently of primary concern, or are projected to
be of high concern, to nearly every county and state in the United States. While phosphorus
is of concern in some cases (e.g., shallow ground water in the vicinity of small lakes or
sensitive waterways), in general, soils have a high affinity for phosphorus attenuation via
chemical-precipitation mechanisms. Also, the available literature and relevant data were

Benefits
QQ Provides simple, detailed guidance on
soil treatment processes for the design
of performance-based onsite wastewater
treatment systems.
QQ Illustrates the steps incurred during
the STU design with decision diagrams to
guide users to appropriate tools and input
parameter selection.

Related Products
Influent Constituent Characteristics of
the Modern Waste Stream from Single
Sources (04DEC1)
Modeling Onsite Wastewater Systems at
that Watershed Scale: A Users Guide
(04DEC6)
Factors Affecting the Performance of
Primary Treatment in Decentralized
Wastewater Systems (04DEC7)
State of the Science: Review of
Quantitative Tools to Determine
Wastewater Soil Treatment Unit
Performance (DEC1R06)
Development of Design Criteria for
Denitrifying Treatment Wetlands
(DEC13U06)
Performance Dynamics of Trace Organic
Chemicals in Onsite Treatment Units and
Systems (DEC14U06)

AVAILABLE FORMAT
Online PDF and web-based Excel
modeltools

TO ORDER
Contact WERF at 571-384-2100 or
visit www.werf.org and click on Search
Research Publications & Tools.
WERF Subscribers: Download unlimited
free PDFs at www.werf.org.
Non-Subscribers: Charges apply to
some products. Visit www.werf.org for
more information.
Refer to: STOCK NO. DEC1R06a, b, or c

For more information, log on to

www.werf.org.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Quantitative Tools to Determine the Expected Performance of Wastewater Soil Treatment Units

relatively sparse. Efforts were therefore focused on developing

the most effective tools possible for nitrogen, bacteria and virus,
and OWCs. Of note, is that the literature review on phosphorus
treatment and modeling is a useful tool for OWTS professionals
on its own merits. The components of the toolkit are outlined in
Figure1.
The toolkit helps users evaluate the treatment and fate of nitrogen,
microbial pollutants (bacteria and virus), and organic wastewater
contaminants. It also guides them to the most appropriate tool.
Simple tools include look-up tables and cumulative frequency
distributions. Nomographs enable insight into expected nitrogen
removal based on the predicted output from STUMOD. Cumulative
probability graphs illustrate modeling results in a risk-based
framework. The Excel-based spreadsheet tools, N-CALC and
STUMOD, allow users to evaluate a range of STU operating
conditions, soil hydraulics, and/or treatment parameters, and their
relative influence on performance (i.e., determine which parameters
are expected to exert the greatest influence on STU performance).
These spreadsheet tools aid in the estimation of treatment for userspecified conditions, but are presented in a simple-to-use format
that does not require prior modeling knowledge or lengthy model
run times.
Visual-graphic tools provide an indication of whether treatment
goals are likely or unlikely to be met for specific technical
assumptions, site conditions, and OWTS operating factors. Three

types of visual-graphic tools are included in the toolkit: nomographs,

cumulative probability graphs, and scenarioillustrations.
QQ Nomographs provide insight into the range of STU performance
that can be expected for a given set of conditions.

Cumulative probability graphs illustrate the likely range of

treatment outcomes and the probability associated with any
particular treatment effectiveness. They provide an understanding
of key parameter variability based on reported values. These
cumulative probability graphs help planners and regulators make
decisions based on their willingness to accept an agreed upon
level of quantified risk.
QQ

Scenario illustrations are based on selected HYDRUS-2D

model simulations of different OWTS scenarios. They visually
demonstrate the usefulness of such a numerical model while
showing the impacts of different scenarios on subsurface nitrogen
concentrations, spatial treatment distributions, and mass-flux
below a specified boundary.
QQ

Look-up tables or charts and Cumulative Frequency Distribution

(CFDs) are also visual-graphic tools that aid users in selecting
appropriate parameters for specific conditions or numerical
modeling (i.e., denitrification rate in HYDRUS). CFDs are based on
statistical evaluation of actual OWTS data from the literature or
laboratory data.

Contractor

TECHNICAL REVIEWERS

John McCray, Ph.D.

Colorado School of Mines

Steven Berkowitz
North Carolina Department of Environment
& Natural Resources

Co-Principal Investigators
Jrg Drewes, Ph.D.
Mengistu Geza, Ph.D.
Kathryn Lowe
Colorado School of Mines

Research Team

Matt Byers, Ph.D.

Zoeller Company
Bob Freeman, P.E.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Anish Jantrania, Ph.D., P.E.
NCS Wastewater Solutions

Sarah Roberts
Maria Tucholke
Assaf Wunsch
Colorado School of Mines

Charles McEntyre, P.E., CHMM

Tennessee Valley Authority

David Radcliffe, Ph.D.

Ken Bradshaw
University of Georgia

Robert Rubin, Ed.D.

McKim Creed

Thomas Boving, Ph.D.

Jose Amador, Ph.D.
Janet Atoyan, Ph.D.
David Kalen
George Loomis
University of Rhode Island

George Tchobanoglous, Ph.D.

Tchobanoglous Consulting

The research on which this report

is based was funded in part by the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(U.S. EPA) through Cooperative
Agreement No. X-83085101-0 with the
Water Environment Research Foundation
(WERF). Unless an U.S. EPA logo appears
on the cover, this report is a publication
of WERF, not U.S. EPA. Funds awarded
under the agreement cited above
were not used for editorial services,
reproduction, printing, or distribution.

Eberhard Roeder, Ph.D.

Florida Department of Health

Edwin Swanson, P.E.

Arizona Dept. of Environmental Quality

3/12