water

purification
Innovative On-site Wastewater Treatment
water
purification
Innovative On-site Wastewater Treatment

A project of Rodale Institute

Copyright © 2013
4 water purification 5

Table of Contents Letter from the Executive Director

Rodale Institute has been dedicated to making the world a better place through organic agriculture since J.I.
5 Letter from the executive director Rodale first chalked our motto on a blackboard in 1947. Healthy Soil = Healthy Food = Healthy People drives all of
our projects. It is the touchstone against which we test all of our efforts, including making improvements to our
6 Foreword, by Bob Bastian, U.S. EPA buildings and nonagricultural landscapes.

7 Introduction, by Jeff Moyer, Rodale Institute The need to upgrade our public facilities offered us the perfect opportunity to expand our research on
sustainable systems into an area we hadn’t considered in the past but that has an impact on farmers
9 The Next Generation Septic System nationwide: wastewater management.
9 Constructed Wetlands PLUS
10 Efficient and Cost Effective Rural agricultural land is being lost every day to encroaching development. There is continual pressure to build
14 Permitting new residential, commercial and industrial facilities on prime agricultural lands simply because water and
wastewater systems are easier to install. These productive lands are often selected solely on the soil’s ability to
16 CASE STUDY: Water Purification Eco-Center percolate water without regard for the food-growing potential being lost.
18 Above the Ground: Construction
20 Below the Ground: Design and Installation But we believe in the transformative power of demonstration. Perfecting and promoting a simple system that
24 The Science works on marginal land and is still cost effective can deflect development pressure from agricultural lands to
lands that are hilly or contain poorly draining soils. These marginal lands could then be used for residential or
28 Commonly Asked Questions commercial construction.

29 Acknowledgements We hope everyone—from individual homeowners to community planners—can find something within these
pages they can use to create a more sustainable wastewater management system in their community. And let’s
29 Resources preserve our rich soil resources for growing healthy food to feed America’s families.

30 Partners
Coach Mark Smallwood

Rodale Institute is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit dedicated to pioneering organic

farming through research and outreach. For more than sixty years we’ve been
researching the best practices of organic agriculture and sharing our findings
with farmers and scientists throughout the world, advocating for policies that
support farmers, and educating consumers about how going organic is the
healthiest option for people and the planet.
6 water purification 7

Foreword Introduction
In the spring of 1997, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) responded to a request from Congress to Water is one of the most undervalued resources we have. Less than 1 percent of all the water on earth is
assess the benefits and costs and the applicability of decentralized wastewater treatment technology and considered potable and available for our use. Today, an average American household uses 400 gallons of water
management as a means to help address the nation’s water quality problems. In a landmark report, “Response per day, most of this precious resource literally going down the drain. In Pennsylvania more than 30 percent of
to Congress on Use of Decentralized Wastewater Treatment Systems”, EPA wrote that “Adequately managed all households use a well as their source of water and an on-lot or decentralized system for handling the waste
decentralized wastewater systems are a cost-effective and long-term option for meeting public health and water coming from their residences. According the U.S. EPA, more than 10 percent of these sewage systems
water quality goals, particularly in less densely populated areas.” fail every year.

The EPA report set the stage for a number of initiatives at the federal level to support advancements in the field When Rodale Institute began looking at replacing our outdated public facility we started by looking more
and to provide guidance to state and local officials and experts across the country. In 1999, Congress began closely at the source of our water and the systems we were using to manage our waste water. The idea of
funding a series of National Community Decentralized Wastewater Demonstration Projects, with twenty-one simply hooking up to public utilities such as municipal water and sewage is not always the answer and many
sites designated at funding levels ranging from $700,000 to $5.5 million. These demonstration projects were on-lot systems are in some stage of periodic failure. Our waste water systems, nationally, are taxed beyond
intended to “jump start” technology transfer of improved treatment methods and management approaches, and their ability for expansion and we felt it only right to view our system within this context.
were selected to provide a diversity of climate, soils, and ecosystems, while focusing on different challenges or
aspects of innovative technology and/or management. Rather than add to this problem with our own expansion, we explored innovative systems to bring water into
our facility for use and to handle it once it had been used. We began the journey of discovery by reaching out
The Rodale Institute was selected as a site to demonstrate the effective use and treatment of water resources, to others more closely involved in the source water and waste water communities such as the Pennsylvania
including rainwater collection for toilet and urinal flushing and constructed wetlands treatment of wastewater. Department of Environmental Resources and the National Environmental Protection Agency. At the same
EPA views this particular project, now referred to as the Water Purification Eco-Center, as an important time we set in motion the internal task of defining what a successful design would look like from a
opportunity to help educate diverse audiences, including municipal officials, watershed management groups, philosophical prospective.
children, interested individuals affiliated with the Rodale Institute and the general public about the capabilities
and benefits of decentralized wastewater treatment systems. The design criteria we identified was this: The appropriate system had to be based on complex biological
principles, it had to be rooted in natural processes, it had to be simple in its design, it had to be easily adaptable
Bob Bastian to any size, it had to be easily adoptable by the general public, it had to be aesthetically pleasing and it had
Office of Wastewater Management, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to be cost effective. Since the roots of Rodale Institute’s mission are grounded in agriculture we wanted to
design a system that could function on marginal lands to reduce development pressure on prime agricultural
land which is often selected for the soil’s ability to easily “pass perc.” We also wanted to design a system
that would demonstrate methods of handling waste water more effectively and efficiently that municipal
sewage treatment plants so that even small to mid-sized communities could adopt the technology. Since we
were dealing with new construction, we also addressed bringing water into the system with an eye toward
conservation and sustainability.

We chose a constructed wetlands system with rain water catchment component.

The pages that follow are an attempt to capture the process we followed to identify these criteria, the path
that lead us to selecting a constructed wetlands system and the design features that make it possible. It also
lays out the reasons the technology works, the documented science that proves it works, and the parameters
anyone can use to adopt this technology as a retro fit to an existing on-lot system or in new construction.

Jeff Moyer
Farm Director, Rodale Institute
8 water purification 9

The Next Generation Septic System

Traditional on-site wastewater treatment systems, A decentralized wastewater infrastructure system
when functioning and sited properly, adequately should be simple to construct, operate and maintain.
remove biological pollutants before the wastewater Local contractors should be able to build the system
enters the wider environment. But, according to the without resorting to specialized equipment or
Environmental Protection Agency, more than two contractors. The design should avoid proprietary
thirds of U.S. land is not suitable for conventional equipment that requires specially trained personnel.
septic systems. And septic system failures are
rampant. In Indiana alone, an estimated 15.3 billion Using gravity to transport water whenever possible can
gallons of raw sewage from failing or inadequate significantly minimize the cost of water infrastructure,
septic systems are discharged into the environment while equipment power requirements are minimized
every year. This sewage, containing bacteria and by avoiding high rate processes. In addition to the
viruses, can run off into surface water or into wells and monetary cost of power, which is expected to increase
groundwater reserves, contaminating drinking water in coming years, every kilowatt of electricity required
and endangering wildlife. to run equipment puts approximately 1.34 pounds of
carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, as well as 5 mg
The fact is, the vast majority of on-site, decentralized of methane and 9 mg of nitrous oxide, all of which are
sewage systems in use today rely on technology considered “greenhouse gases,” believed to contribute
developed more than a century ago. Conventional to global climate change.
on-site wastewater treatment systems are usually
made up of a septic tank and some sort of subsurface The system should require minimal operator
wastewater infiltration system (commonly known as a involvement. High rate processes should be avoided,
drain field or leach field). as they require near-constant supervision. The
design should rely on biologically robust, low-energy
On the other hand, the available technology for the technologies with relatively longer detention times.
collection and on-site treatment of wastewater Mechanically simple systems have fewer pieces of
has rapidly evolved in the last few decades. The equipment that will need to be repaired or replaced.
introduction of “advanced” decentralized treatment Small community and building-specific systems
systems (consisting of more than a septic tank should be designed to operate using equipment that
and leach field) has made sustainable nutrient is readily available from the local wholesale plumbing
management and safe water reuse applications supply. And the system should be as cost-effective to
possible if not yet widely practiced. construct and operate as possible.

Alternative technologies for on-site wastewater

treatment run the gamut from the now ubiquitous
sand mound to aerobic lagoons and activated sludge
Constructed Wetlands PLUS
where oxygen is pumped into the effluent to trickling Constructed wetlands are a little-known yet incredibly
and recirculating filters of both natural and synthetic efficient way to deal with all those things we flush
materials to constructed wetlands and other systems down our pipes. Less in-your-face than a composting
that model natural processes. No matter the system, toilet, this literally green method for sewage treatment
experience over the last three decades has shown that can lead to some long-term savings over traditional
the following design criteria are critical in developing septic systems, not to mention reducing the potential
a viable decentralized treatment plan: simplicity, cost pitfalls of pump-reliant sand mounds.
efficiency and energy efficiency.
10 water purification The next generation septic system 11

Natural wetlands are considered “earth’s kidneys” Figure 1. Free Water Surface Constructed Wetlands
because they filter impurities and pollutants from
The ABCs of Success our waterways. Constructed wetlands replicate this
natural process in creating biological answers to
some of the waste issues related to a growing human
In wastewater treatment, success population. The natural processes of constructed
is often measured by looking at wetlands scrub wastewater twice as clean as that
of a traditional septic system and are capable of
BOD and TSS. removing pathogens and organic contaminants.
Research suggests wetland plants may even be able
BOD, aka biochemical oxygen to neutralize pharmaceuticals and pesticides. Best of
all, constructed wetlands cycle nutrients and water
demands through the landscape, creating greater fertility,
According to the EPA: “Wastewater ecological vibrancy and cleaner groundwater.
from sewage treatment
There are two types of wetlands; free water surface
plants often contains organic wetlands (FWS) and subsurface flow (SF) wetlands.
materials that are decomposed Figures 1 and 2 show their respective cross sections.
by microorganisms, which use Each type has its advantages and disadvantages and
they must be properly evaluated in the context of the
oxygen in the process. (The amount
collection system, the possible methods of discharge
of oxygen consumed by these of the treated effluent, and the permit requirements.
organisms in breaking down the Although the technology is simple, understanding ©Biohabitats, Inc.

waste is known as the biochemical the proper role of each type of wetlands is no trivial
process and requires experienced designers to Figure 2: Subsurface Constructed Wetland
oxygen demand or BOD.” properly evaluate the most appropriate system.

Efficient and Cost Effective

Wetlands, as one part of a multi-part treatment
system, can meet state environmental department
criteria for both total nitrogen and nitrates in
the groundwater while maintaining very simple
operating conditions. And the technology can be
scaled up and down to suit a variety of needs from
TSS, aka total suspended solids a single homeowner to a decentralized system for
According to the EPA: “Total multiple homes in a residential development to a an
institution, organization or a public facility.
solids are dissolved solids plus
suspended and settleable solids When comparing performance of wetlands, the
in water… Higher concentrations comparison should be based on the performance
of suspended solids can serve as of complete systems remembering that wetlands
are only one part of a larger system. A multistep
carriers of toxics, which readily system with multiple microbial ecologies is more
cling to suspended particles.” robust than a single-step microbial ecology system.
Multiple, distinct microbial ecologies provide
different opportunities for biological degradation
©Biohabitats, Inc.
12 water purification The next generation septic system 13

of pollutants. For example, a three-step treatment parameters established by regulatory agencies, Lifetime Cost Comparison (All costs are estimates)
system, operating at its lowest overall BOD removal and unlike mechanical systems, they are able to
rate, would result in a 99% efficiency. The inclusion treat low flow volumes as well as those more nearly System Installation Septic tank Other annual Effluent pump 20-years Annual cost
(cleaning every (based on 20-year
of a constructed wetlands cell in a multistep system approaching the maximum. 3 years)
maintenance preplacement maintenance payoff)
actually improves the individual efficiency of the other
treatment processes as well. A system in Nebraska, which is designed for stream Elevated sand mound $30,000 $360 $0 $1,600 $1,200 $2,420
discharge, is currently being monitored by both
When properly designed, built and operated, an independent laboratory and the University of
Wetlands $25,000 $360 $375 $1,600 $1,200 $2,445
constructed wetlands can be counted on to remove Nebraska College of Engineering under the direction
40 – 80% of the total nitrogen in wastewater. of Prof. M.F. Dahab. This system serves 120 homes Wetlands
Additionally, they will remove 99.0 to 99.9% of fecal plus a clubhouse. Except for the discharge pumps, $37,000 $360 $600 $1,600 $1,200 $2,830
w/Drip Dispersal
coliforms, as well as other pathogens, including this system does not use any energy. The operating
viruses. Constructed wetlands are primarily biological bill, including testing, is $12,000 per year, or $100/ NOTE: PaDEP regulations require a 4-bedroom house be designed for 500-gallons-per-day flow. Annual lifetime cost does not
so removal rates vary seasonally, being greater in the year/home. include interest. All dollar amounts are estimates. Regulations require an annual maintenance of the wetlands systems. Twenty-
summer. year maintenance for sand mound system is the estimate to remove and replace ESM cover soil, aggregate and piping, and top 12”
For the individual homeowner, a wetlands system can of contaminated sand. Twenty-year maintenance for wetlands systems is the estimate to remove and replace filter media.
The energy costs for a small package treatment be comparable to an elevated sand mound system.
facility processing 25,000 gallons per day (gpd) is The life cycle cost over twenty years is actually in a
approximately $300/month. The monthly energy cost narrow range. The following spreadsheet is based on The elevated sand mound includes a The constructed wetlands system consists
for an operating wetlands is $0. Wetlands rely on self- a typical four-bedroom home designed to conform 1250-gallon, two-compartment septic tank, of a 1250-gallon, two-compartment septic tank,
maintaining, self-regulating biological processes and to Pennsylvania Department of Environmental 500-gallon pump tank with effluent dosing pump, a media filter (sand or other media), a 500-gallon
when compared to other technologies that accomplish Protection regulations at 500 gallons per day. and a 1,000-square-foot sand mound. Depending pump tank with dosing pump, and a wetlands
the same task, they come out ahead of the curve on upon site conditions, this system would cost cell from which the clean water either dissipates
energy use. Wetlands can consistently meet design between $27,000 and $30,000 on average. Septic directly into the soils below the cell or overflows
tank cleaning every three years has been included upon the surface of the ground. The installation
as good average preventative maintenance. cost of this basic configuration is less than an
Multistep Treatment efficiencies In general, there are no other annual costs to elevated sand mound. Septic tank cleaning is the
maintain an elevated sand mound system and same as recommended for all septic systems,
there are no regulatory requirements for any such but there will be a permit requirement to have an
maintenance. All systems described here have operation and maintenance agreement with a
one pump as part of the designed system. Eight firm knowledgeable in such systems, and there
years is the average lifespan of such pumps. is some cost to this annually. A pump will be
included in the system unless there is enough
An elevated sand mound may not last forever, topography to have gravity convey the water
even with good maintenance. The single problem flow. This pump will have the same lifespan as
that will occur eventually is a clogging of that top any pump in a septic system application. It is
Primary treatment tank/ Constructed wetland Recirculating sand filter layer of sand just under the dispersal aggregate. estimated that the media filter will have to be
setting tank Twenty years is an average time at which the replaced after approximately twenty years.
mound would need to be refurbished by removing
Anaerobic digestion and settling BOD/TSS reduction Organic and nutrient polishing the soil cover and the aggregate and distribution The constructed wetlands system with drip
piping. Then the layer of clogged sand is removed dispersal added to the backend is most similar
BOD reduction 40% BOD reduction 85% BOD reduction 90% and replaced with clean sand. The aggregate, to the system installed at Rodale Institute. The
distribution piping, and soil cover are then drip dispersal portion of the system adds about
Reduction range 40-45% Reduction range 85-95% Reduction range 90-95% reinstalled. This puts the sand mound back in “like $12,000 to the installation cost and adds some
©Biohabitats, Inc. new” condition. annual cost of maintenance.
14 water purification FORWORD 15

Permitting has a website on sewage disposal where each

While a collaborative multi-step system is the most municipality lists the projects permitted each month
vibrant way to process wastewater, it complicates and the wastewater professionals involved.
the permitting procedure. Portions of the system
may be permitted through local municipalities while The Environmental Protection Agency’s Decentralized
other portions may require additional paperwork Wastewater Management Program has compiled
and a state-level review process. The challenge is a list of states that have reviewed and approved
that most regulations are on a state-by-state or advanced wastewater treatment solutions. The
even county-by-county basis, so anyone interested links also include information about individual
in installing constructed wetlands really has to do state approval processes and the departments with
some footwork for their own particular area. And authority over wastewater management and is a
there are definitely some areas of the country where great place to start.
it is more widespread, well-known and accepted by
the water authorities. Patience and persistence are
essential when considering an innovative wastewater
treatment system.

Where you live will often determine how difficult the

red tape may or may not be. In Pennsylvania, every
township has a sewage enforcement officer (SEO)
who issues permits, but an SEO can’t issue a permit
for all systems. And not every state has SEOs. In Ohio,
the County Health Department issues the permits
and in New Jersey, the County Health Department
issues a primary permit and each township issues
a secondary permit. New Jersey also requires a
professional engineer to design everything. For the
Rodale Institute’s Water Purification Eco-Center, the
permitting process from application through testing
and then final permitting took approximately one
year and involved township authorities, the local
SEO, and state-level Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental Protection approval.

A recommendation appropriate to all states would

be to obtain the services of a quality wastewater
professional if you’re contemplating innovative
technologies. Finding someone who is familiar with
the local procedure and requirements to help guide
you through the permitting process could save both
time and money in the long run and avoid costly
mistakes that could shut down your project. Look
for engineers, surveyors, soil scientists, or SEOs
who don’t work for the county but who consult. The
local municipality can help point out wastewater
professionals who might be utilized in a particular
region. For example, Hunterdon County, New Jersey
16 water purification case study: Water Purification Eco-Center at Rodale institute 17

CASE STUDY:
Water Purification Eco-Center
at Rodale Institute
The Water Purification Eco-Center (WPEC) is flows into another storage tank where water and
essentially a decentralized wastewater treatment and solid wastes are separated. The water is sent into a
disposal system for the new visitor center restrooms. wetland area to be treated with the help of microbes
The system incorporates both traditional and growing in the roots of plants. Finally, the clean water
alternative systems in a multi-step process including flows through a drip irrigation system to nearby
a septic/equalization tank, a constructed wetland perennial gardens.
cell, a recirculating bio-filter, and subsurface drip
irrigation. The footprint of the system would fit in most The star components of the project are the wetland
backyards and treats about 300-500 gallons per day, cell and a recirculating feature between the wetland
the output from a typical 3-bedroom house. cell and the equalization tank. The liquid effluent
recirculates several times between the wetland and
In brief, the Rodale Institute system works by the equalization tank through a bio-filter. The end
collecting rainwater from the building’s roof and goal of the wetland-recirculation design is to treat the
storing it in a cistern underneath the building. The effluent to a level clean enough to discharge to the
rainwater is then used to flush toilets after which it ground or to a stream.

Trickling bio-filter

wetland cell
drip irrigation system
drip irrigation tank
rain water
settling tank flow equalization tank level adjust basin
18 water purification case study: Water Purification Eco-Center at Rodale institute 19

Above the Ground: Construction at the top of the window frames. These awning • The exterior walls were then designed to be built • The extensive roof overhang was moved to the
The Water Purification Eco-Center is a very windows are operable electronically with remote with standard dimensional lumber including new area that includes the “education center.”
complicated project that does not visually appear controls for temperature maintenance. basic batt insulation that still complied with the The education center is basically an outdoor area
to be so. In fact the most important elements of the IBC (International Building Code). Even though that provides a flat screen TV on an exterior wall in
WPEC are located below the aesthetically pleasing • A central exterior education space that would this reduces the theoretical energy conservation between the women’s and men’s restrooms.
landscape. But thought and care were still given to the be attached to the silo with an extensive substantially from the original design, the
design and construction of the above-ground structure roof overhang protecting guests from either functional use of this facility does not require a
so that it functioned seamlessly with the below-ground precipitation and/or the summer sun rays. high level of energy for heating or cooling.
system and met both the environmentally conscious
and budgetary goals of the Rodale Institute. • A “tight envelope” (also called a very thermal • The windows and doors were still maintained in
protective building exterior walls and roof). The the design to provide natural lighting for both
The architectural aspects of the WPEC were designed floor of the building would be a concrete slab comfort and energy conservation based on
in an integrative format where the designers worked poured over at least 2” of rigid insulation. The lighting. All the windows were kept high on the
with the Institute staff and the builder. Original walls were designed with ICFs (Insulated Concrete exterior walls and up in what is called a “roof
design goals included shelter on the inside to house Forms) at the foundation below grade, SIPs monitor.” The roof monitor is a raised roof with
the bathroom facilities and a welcoming public (Structural Insulated Panels) for both the walls small walls located on the center of the main roof.
educational facility on the exterior. The Center was and the roof and highly efficient windows that This provides cost-free natural lighting to come
originally designed as a LEED (Leadership in Energy allow the sun to warm the interior of the building into the facility, while providing full privacy and
and Environmental Design) top level facility that would in the winter while avoiding the overheating in the roof overhangs that protect the interior during the The master plan included the option to add a Ground
achieve the Platinum Certification level and included: summer. summer when natural heating is not required. That Source Heat Pump (a.k.a. Geothermal) heating and
sun-provided natural heating does enter in the cooling system along with a Photovoltaic array that
• A farm-like silo that incorporated a rural element When the construction cost estimates were submitted, fall, winter and spring seasons. can be installed adjacent to the WPEC building. Both
and would serve as the main “body” of the facility the initial design needed to be revisited and revised to of these renewable energy systems can be installed
and served as the shelter for the WPEC’s rainwater meet the budgetary goals of the project. The project • The roof serves in the future and easily attached to the WPEC for its
cistern—the source for the collection of all the then went through the V.E. Phase (Value Engineered as a portion of heating, cooling and electricity source.
rainwater that fell onto the entire building’s roofs. Phase) that focuses on revising the architectural the facility’s
The rainwater cistern would be warmed in the design in an effort to reduce the cost of construction: water supply. All Some of the other green elements include reliable
winter by the south-facing windows in order to the precipitation and local material/products which include locally
avoid it to be frozen. All the heat gained in the • To reduce the size of the facility overall, the that touches harvested and manufactured cement, fiber-cement (or
silo during the winter was designed to be moved central silo element was eliminated and the the roof is cementitious) siding, recycled drywall, recycled metal
over the WPEC bathroom wings through insulated rainwater re-use cistern was relocated below- brought down to roofing, efficient water/plumbing fixtures and, most
ducts with hot air source grilles located and the ground in a concrete foundation format. The two the sub-grade importantly, native vegetation that match our local
top of the silo delivering the warm air into the “arms” of the facility were then brought together cistern which is then pumped to supply the non- environment and climate zone. In the end, the LEED
lower level of the bathroom wings. with an 8’ wide utility room between the women’s potable and free water for the toilets and urinals. Certification process was released while the guidelines
and men’s restrooms. This both reduced the size In an effort to ease the rainwater management, provide by the U.S. Green Building Council’s LEED
• Two bathroom wings designed to include what are and reduced the complicated aspects of building standing seam metal roofing was installed as per program were followed to help verify the WPEC was as
called “roof monitors” that are raised roof areas walls on angles and in curvilinear format. the original design. The original roof overhang sustainable and green as can be.
with wide awning windows that have the hinges designs were also retained to ensure the windows
were shadowed during the summer season.
20 water purification case study: Water Purification Eco-Center at Rodale institute 21

Below the Ground: Trickling Bio-Filter

Design and Installation Trickling filters are very efficient in reducing soluble BOD and removing
nitrogen. The trickling filter is located after primary treatment, and helps
As with the above-ground construction, the below-ground reduce high levels of soluble BOD to levels such that nitrification can
design went through a visioning stage and then a revised proceed. They consist of loosely packed high-surface-area media within an
to-budget revision with the idea of achieving the same enclosed tower. The media in the WPEC site is made of plastic “honeycomb”
results at a lower cost. boxes which create a sturdy home for a biofilm of beneficial bacteria.
The bacteria that grow on the media surfaces break down organics and
• The original single 4000-gallon fiberglass tank was nutrients in the effluent. Periodically these biofilms slough off and fall to
replaced with two single-compartment 2000-gallon the bottom where they are also returned to the tank.
concrete tanks which were 1/3 the cost of the single
fiberglass tank. Wastewater is sprayed intermittently over the media and allowed to trickle
down to the bottom where it is collected and flows by gravity back to the
• The second 2000-gallon concrete tank replaced the tank. The trickling filter provides an ideal environment for ammonia to be
recirculating tank from the original plans. converted into nitrates. The nitrified effluent is further treated in the tank
and wetlands, where the denitrification process transforms the nitrates
• The recirculating sand filter originally envisioned into harmless nitrogen gas. In this way, the system minimizes the amount
was large in size and presented both cost and of nitrates being released into the environment. In normal continuous use,
installation challenges due to lack of space at the trickling filters require 10-50% of the energy required for the same level of
site. Changing to a single-tank trickle filter resulted in treatment in an aerated lagoon or an activated sludge process.
both substantial savings in costs and solved a major
site problem.

• Even a minimal reduction in the size of the wetland

cell and some small changes in pipe and material
were enough to make a difference in cost.

By making slight changes that would not change the

function of the system but would allow for greater control
over both material and installation costs, we were able to
reduce the price tag by 50%. Following are summaries of
the system components and how they work in the Rodale
Institute Water Purification Eco-Center.

Wastewater collection and primary treatment

Wastewater generated from the WPEC restrooms flows by
gravity to a buried primary treatment septic tank. Solids
settle in the bottom of the tank as sludge that will be
decomposed by microorganisms. The septic tank effluent
is collected from the primary tank by septic tank effluent
pumps (STEP) via buried small-diameter collection pipes.
The collection system includes:

• Primary treatment tank

• Flow equalization tank (or chamber)
• In-tank high-head effluent pumps, and
• Small-diameter collection mains
22 water purification case study: Water Purification Eco-Center at Rodale institute 23

Constructed Wetlands Subsurface Drip Dispersal Effluent disposal to the shallow soil system continues
Water is pumped into the wetland cell where The upper layers of native soil contain a complex the process of water quality improvement begun in
plants and microorganisms reduce pollutants and ecology and are excellent natural systems for the the treatment phase. Treated effluent is first collected
remove odorous gases. The WPEC system utilizes removal, sequestration and transformation of in a dosing tank and then pumped to an undeveloped
a subsurface horizontal-flow constructed wetlands nutrients that are toxic or problematic to water bodies. area of native soil, where it is spread via a system
where lined gravel filters are planted with wetland Compounds and pathogens that soil systems remove, of perforated drip tubing buried approximately 6-10
plant species. As water moves through the gravel and sequester or transform include ammonia, nitrate, inches below the soil surface. The drip tubing is
plant roots, bacteria attached to these surfaces break nitrite, organic nitrogen, phosphorus compounds, trenched into the ground and is designed to avoid
down and/or remove organic waste (BOD), suspended suspended and dissolved solids, fecal coliforms, freezing by draining out after each dose, while the
solids, and nitrogen. viruses, carbonaceous compounds, heavy metals, distribution piping is either buried beneath the frost
pesticides, cosmetics and medications. The EPA depth or allowed to drain back to a central pumping
Ammonia is not consistently removed to desired Manual “Land Treatment of Municipal Wastewater” point. After dispersal, the treated effluent percolates
levels from constructed wetlands alone, which is describes the treatment provided by the soil column: through the soil matrix, providing nutrients for plant
why the wetlands are paired with a trickling bio-filter any remaining ammonia, BOD, TSS, phosphorus and growth and microorganisms. Effluent moves through
and a dispersal system that maximizes the nitrogen fecal coliform are generally removed within the first 2 the undisturbed soil system until it joins the water
removal capability of the soil. feet of soil. table in an improved condition.

The service life of subsurface flow wetlands has been

estimated to be about 100 years, assuming regular
maintenance. A more conservative operational
lifetime estimate is 30 - 40 years, at which point the
front end gravel may need to be removed and cleaned
or replaced, and the liner should be tested for water-
tightness prior to gravel replacement.

From the wetland cell, water flows to the level adjust

basin which controls the amount of water contained
in the wetland cell. It also provides a staging zone
which determines if the water should flow through the
trickling filter for recirculation, through the wetland
cell or if it should be processed through to the drip
irrigation field.

©Biohabitats, Inc.
24 water purification case study: Water Purification Eco-Center at Rodale institute 25

The Science Phosphorus wastewater appears to have been filtered out by the
Research studies on small constructed wetland Phosphorous, in the form of phosphate, was measured soil. This is evidenced by the low levels of phosphorous
systems are few and far between. The Water at different locations throughout the WPEC. This in the leachate from the irrigated areas.
Purification Eco-Center (WPEC) affords us the chart shows the average for each point across seven
opportunity to increase the amount of research on sampling dates, with the earliest being March 14, 2012 For subsurface flow wetland systems, such as the
this kind of revolutionary system. Since the WPEC and the latest December 4, 2012. Notice the dramatic WPEC, the EPA recommends maximum phosphorous
opened researchers have been collecting and testing difference in phosphorous levels between the water levels of 3 mg/L in the effluent. While the effluent
water samples between each section of the system held in the irrigation tank and the leachate collected from the wetland cell itself does not meet this
and from the soil surrounding each area. The water from the irrigated areas. recommended level, averaging 8.3 mg/L, the
is analyzed for various biological contaminates to phosphorous levels in the leachate are well below,
ensure the water leaving the system is clean and safe There was a substantial drop in phosphorous levels with an average of .4 mg/L across the irrigated areas.
to release to the surrounding landscape. Because this between the septic and the pre-cell chambers, likely
system adds at least two additional cleansing steps to due to solids settling out of the water. The wetland cell Fecal Coliform
treat the water that would normally be released from seems to have had little overall effect on phosphorous Fecal coliform is an indicator of human waste. The
a traditional septic system, we expect the end product levels throughout the season. Removal of phosphorous WPEC reduced the levels of fecal coliform (FC) by
to be that much cleaner. in constructed wetland systems is largely due to 99.99% by the time the wastewater was released
adsorption to rock surfaces or soil particles. It is to the irrigation system. Whereas the septic tank
In order to evaluate the functioning of the WPEC, possible that the phosphorous storage capacity of the contained an average of 120,000 FC/mL, the water
routine sampling was performed at 14 locations wetland cell was used up quickly, thereby limiting the leaving the wetland cell averaged only 6.5 FC/mL.
around the site. Samples were taken from “cleanest” phosphorous removal from the wastewater. Luckily, Filtration by soil in the irrigated areas reduced the
to “dirtiest” points throughout the system to prevent because the effluent from the wetland cell is used to fecal coliform levels even further, with an average of
cross contamination of the samples. The water irrigate plants, the phosphorous still present in the 3.6 FC/mL in the leachate.
samples were poured into different bottles for
different tests. Samples were analyzed for levels
of phosphorous, fecal coliform, nitrogen (including
nitrates, ammonia, total organic nitrogen, and Total Average Phosphorus
Kjeldahl Nitrogen), dissolved oxygen (measured as
carbonaceous biochemical oxygen demand or CBOD),
and Total Dissolved Solids (TDS). 30

A total of seven rounds of sampling took place

25
between March and December 2012. The septic tank,
pre-cell, in-cell (wetland cell), and irrigation tank
were sampled each time. The 10 remaining samples 20
were taken from leachate collected 2 feet and 4 feet
underneath the landscaped areas which receive

mg/L
the wetland effluent as irrigation. At some of these 15
sampling locations, it was not always possible to
collect enough leachate in order to run all of the tests,
and so there are some gaps in the data. However, as 10
these irrigated sites all perform the same treatment,
that is, soil filtration of the effluent, the information 5
that we were able to collect is sufficient to evaluate
the efficacy of all parts of the system.
0

4’

’
’

2’
’
c

ll

ll

ig

-2

-4

-2

-4
-2

-4

-2

-4
pti

-ce

ce

E-
irr

E-

SW
NW

SE
NE

SW
NW

SE
NE
in-
se

pre
26 water purification 27

Nitrogen The WPEC was very effective in processing ammonia, of drinking water. For matters of aesthetics and taste,
Nitrogen is also present in human waste. From the with a 93% reduction by the time the water reached the the EPA has established a recommended maximum of
septic tank to the irrigation system, total levels of irrigation tank. Fairly low levels of nitrates were found 500 mg/L TDS in drinking water. Levels above this may
nitrogen fall dramatically, and that which remains is in the irrigation leachate, with an average of 6.4 mg/L, be undesirable for consumption, as they will start to
transformed into plant-available forms that can be comfortably below the EPA’s maximum contaminant appear cloudy and taste salty.
utilized by the flowers and shrubs in the surrounding level goal (MCLG) of 10 mg/L for drinking water.
landscape via the drip irrigation system. We found that the WPEC did not significantly decrease
Total Dissolved Solids the TDS as the water moved through the system: the
Total Kjeldahl Nitroten (TKN), which is the sum of Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) describes the amount septic averaged 483 mg/L, while the average level in
ammonia, ammonium, and organic nitrogen, was of salts and very small particles of organic matter in the irrigation leachate was 439 mg/L. If TSS or Total
measured at different locations throughout the WPEC. water. TDS differs from Total Suspended Solids (TSS) in Solids (TS) had been measured, we would likely find
This chart shows the average for each point across the size of the particles: TDS particles are smaller than these numbers to be greatly reduced as solids settle
seven sampling dates, with the earliest being March 2 µm, while TSS particles are larger. and are filtered out of the system.
14, 2012 and the latest December 4, 2012. These
forms of nitrogen were greatly reduced by the time As most of the dissolved solids are usually ions from Dissolved Oxygen
they reached the irrigation tank, where the average salt compounds (calcium, magnesium, potassium, Dissolved oxygen measures how much decomposition
level across the sampling period was 8.8 mg/L. This carbonate, etc.) TDS levels can be quite high without is going on in the water and how much (and what kinds
was reduced even further when the effluent was having negative impacts on human health. High TDS of) microbial life can survive. The dissolved oxygen in
filtered through soil, resulting in an average TKN level levels do, however, affect the taste and appearance the septic tank (from which a traditional septic system
of 1.3 mg/L in the leachate. releases wastewater to the environment) is less than 1
mg/L. By the time the wastewater reaches our wetlands
cell in the WPEC system, the dissolved oxygen has risen
to at least 5 mg/L, a level that is high enough to support
aquatic life.
Average Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (TKN)
Most of the regulatory and design language
250 surrounding constructed wetlands uses Biochemical
Oxygen Demand (BOD) as a measure of the system’s
effectiveness. While we did not measure BOD, we
200 did measure the Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen
Demand (CBOD), which is a subset of BOD. Whereas
BOD measures the oxygen required for the breakdown
150 of all organic matter in a sample, the CBOD measures
the oxygen used in the decomposition of only the
mg/L

carbon-based material. CBOD testing is becoming

popular in the water quality industry because it can be
100
performed much faster than BOD testing, which takes
five days.

50 In a set of case studies done by the EPA and published

in 2000, twenty constructed wetlands demonstrated
a reduction of 81% between the average influent and
0 effluent BOD levels. In 2012, the WPEC reduced CBOD
by 98.8%, with an average of 3.2 mg/L observed in the
’

’
’

2’

’
’
c

ll

ll

ig

-2

-4

-2

-4
-2

-4

-2

-4
pti

-ce

ce

E-
irr

E-

SW
NW

SE
NE

SW
NW

SE
NE

irrigation leachate.
in-
se

pre
28 water purification 29

Commonly Asked Questions ACKNOWLEdGEMENTS

What happens when it rains? The following partners were integral in not only the completion of the WPEC project but in creating this booklet,
Rainwater shortens the treatment time while diluting the wastewater. There is no effect on treatment. providing text, illustrations and advice:
Surface water is kept out by a surrounding berm. No wastewater is allowed to overflow out of the wetlands. Erin English, Biohabitats, Inc.
Tom Ferarro and Tim Long, Franc Environmental, Inc.
What happens in cold weather?
Wetlands, like all wastewater treatment processes, are temperature dependent. The engineer must design for David Hartke, Architectural Design Works, Inc.
the worst case, which is the low temperatures occurring in winter. Snow cover actually helps. Systems have Joseph A. Valentine, qualified soil scientist
been designed for use in Wyoming and mountain communities in the Rockies. There are even Norwegian
systems above the Arctic Circle.

What about odor?

One of the virtues of subsurface wetlands is that wastewater flow is under the gravel surface. Noxious odors
Resources
are trapped and actually become food for the microorganisms attached to the gravel and plant root surfaces.
Rodale Institute WPEC Page
A similar event takes place with surface-flow wetlands on plant stems; often small floating plants such as
rodaleinstitute.org/our-work/water-purification-eco-center
duckweed and azolla contribute to odor removal. However, primary treatment must be aerobic in surface-
flow wetlands. Biohabitats, Inc.
www.biohabitats.com
Can they be included in a public or high-visibility landscape, for example at visitor centers, Franc Environmental, Inc.
schools or next to golf course fairways? www.francenviro.com
Absolutely. The EPA has a publication showing 17 examples of municipal treatment wetlands that serve both Down to Earth Design Foundation
as parks and wildlife habitats. The PGA has a publication showing man made wetlands adjacent to fairways www.toearth.org
and greens and their effects on improving habitat. And, the book Constructed Wetlands in the Sustainable
Landscape documents numerous examples of treatment wetlands in the public landscape.
Books:
Reed, Sherwood C., Crites, Ronald W., Middlebrooks, E. Joe. Natural Systems for Waste Management and
How much land is required and how much do they cost? Treatment. 2nd Edition. McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1995.
See the chart “Lifetime Cost Comparison” in the text above for information on a home-scale system. The
system is scalable both up and down but even small changes in design can affect cost. Water quality, winter Crites, Ronald W., Tchbanoglous, George. Small and Decentralized Wastewater Management Systems.
temperatures, amount of flow to be processed and more all affect size and ultimate price tag. McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1998.
Campbell, Craig, Ogden, Michael. Constructed Wetlands in the Sustainable Landscape. Wiley, 1999.

Online:
Environmental Protection Agency. “Constructed Wetlands Resource List.” From
water.epa.gov/type/wetlands/restore/cwetlands.cfm
Environmental Protection Agency. “On-Site Wastewater Treatment Systems Manual,”
water.epa.gov/aboutow/owm/upload/2004_07_07_septics_septic_2002_osdm_all.pdf
The Humanure Handbook, Chapter 5. From weblife.org/humanure/chapter5_9.html
Rutger’s Cooperative Research and Extension. “Fact Sheet: On-Site Wastewater Treatment Systems: Alternative
Technologies.” From www.water.rutgers.edu/Fact_Sheets/fs530.pdf
Purdue Extension. Home & Environment. “Wastewater Biological Oxygen Demands in Septic Systems.” From
www.extension.purdue.edu/extmedia/HENV/HENV-14-W.pdf
The University of Arizona Water Resources Research Center. “Constructed Wetlands: Using Human Ingenuity,
Natural Processes to Treat Water, Build Habitat.” From wrrc.arizona.edu/publications/arroyo-newsletter/
constructed-wetlands-using-human-ingenuity-natural-processes-treat-wa
30 water purification

Partners

Alvin H. Butz, Inc.

CD Meyer, Inc.
DelVal Soil & Environmental Consultants, Inc.
Down to Earth Design Foundation
Franc Environmental, Inc.
Garvey Resources, Inc.
Keystone Consulting Engineers, Inc.
Kutztown University
Langan Engineering and Environmental Services Our mission
Liberty Engineering, Inc.
Through organic leadership, we improve the health and well-being of people and the planet.
Maxatawny Township Board of Supervisors
Natural Systems International, a wholly owned subsidiary of Biohabitats, Inc.
NewVision Communications, Inc.
North Carolina State University
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
Rodale, Inc.
Stampfl Hartke Associates, Architects
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Weaver’s Hardware
Other anonymous private, corporate and foundation funders

This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, under Grant
Agreement Number XP-83369301. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in
this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency.
 ©2013 Rodale Institute (20788)

611 Siegfriedale Road, Kutztown, PA 19530

Tel 610.683.1400 rodaleinstitute.org