Introduction to Domestic Wastewater

Treatment

Course No: C02-029

Credit: 2 PDH

J. Paul Guyer, P.E., R.A., Fellow ASCE, Fellow AEI

Continuing Education and Development, Inc.

22 Stonewall Court
Woodcliff Lake, NJ 07677

P: (877) 322-5800
info@cedengineering.com
  
An Introduction  
To Domestic 
Wastewater 
Treatment 
 

Guyer Partners J. Paul Guyer, P.E., R.A.

44240 Clubhouse Drive
El Macero, CA 95618 Paul Guyer is a registered civil engineer,
(530)7758-6637 mechanical engineer, fire protection engineer,
jpguyer@pacbell.net and architect with over 35 years experience in
the design of buildings and related
infrastructure. For an additional 9 years he
was a senior advisor to the California
Legislature on infrastructure and capital outlay
issues. He is a graduate of Stanford University
and has held numerous national, state and
local positions with the American Society of
Civil Engineers and National Society of
Professional Engineers.

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 1

This course is adapted from the Unified Facilities Criteria of the United States government,
which is in the public domain, has unlimited distribution and is not copyrighted.

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 2

 CONTENTS

1. GENERAL
2. SITE SELECTION
3. TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS
4. BASIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 3

1. GENERAL

1.1 Purpose. This introduction provides general information, illustrative guidance, and
criteria for the design of domestic wastewater treatment.

1.2 Scope. Criteria presented here are applicable to new and upgraded domestic
wastewater treatment facilities. This course provides information on how to determine
the sizes of wastewater treatment unit operations.

1.3 Objectives. A wastewater treatment plant should be designed to achieve Federal,

State and local effluent quality standards stipulated in applicable discharge permits.
Specifically, the plant must be easy to operate and maintain, require few operating
personnel, and need a minimum energy to provide treatment. Plants should be capable
of treating normal laundry wastes together with sanitary wastewater. Pretreatment of
laundry wastes will not be considered except where such wastes might exceed 25
percent of the average daily wastewater flow, or as a resources conservation measure
when feasible. In a design for the expansion of existing plants, criteria contained herein
regarding flows and wastewater characteristics may be modified to conform to existing
plant performance data, if the plant has been in operation long enough to have
established accurate data.

1.4 Special design considerations. In the design for the expansion of existing
treatment works or construction of new facilities, the designer may offer criteria on new
treatment processes for consideration. Pollution control facilities will incorporate the
latest proven technology in the field. Technology is considered proven when
demonstrated successfully by a prototype plant treating similar wastewater under
expected climatic conditions. If treatment level is obtained, operational performance and
maintenance records would have been adequately documented to verify the capability
of the process.

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 4

2. SITE SELECTION

2.1 Location. The major factors in the selection of suitable sites for treatment facilities
include the following: topography; availability of a suitable discharge point; and
maintaining a reasonable distance from living quarters, working areas and public use
areas of the proposed facilities, as reflected by the master plans. The siting criteria for
the water pollution control facility should consider State wellhead protection
requirements for drinking water sources. In the absence of a state requirement, a
minimum distance of 1,000 feet should be maintained between a drinking water source
and any proposed water pollution control facility. For on-site treatment systems, rainfall
and soil characteristics are major criteria. For plants of 50,000 gallons per day or less,
treatment capacity will be more than 500 feet from the facilities when this minimum
distance will not result in unacceptable noise or odor levels. Larger plants, and
wastewater treatment ponds regardless of size, will be more than one-quarter mile from
such facilities. Greater distance may be required when such facilities are located on the
leeward side of the treatment plant; in areas subject to prolonged or frequent air
stagnation or fog/mist cover; and at a lower elevation than the treatment works, with
surface and ground water flowing from the treatment plant toward the occupied area.

2.1.1 Cold climate. Exceptions to the 500-foot restriction can be made for cold climate
module complexes where the treatment system is part of the module complex.
However, sewage treatment works will not be located within the same module as living
quarters.

2.1.2 Septic tank systems. Standard septic tank systems with subsurface drain fields
do not fall under the 500-foot restriction. Distance reductions must not result in creation
of unacceptable noise levels when plant equipment is in operation.

2.2 Space requirements. Sufficient space must be allocated not only for suitable
arrangement of the initial units and associated plant piping but also to accommodate
future expansion. Future expansion includes the provision of increased capacity for

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 5

existing processes and the addition of new types of units known to be required for
upgrading predesigned systems to the future requirements of more stringent stream and
effluent standards.

2.3 Access. The site will be selected so that an all-weather road is available or can be
provided for access to the plant. Available rail sidings will also be utilized when
practical. Consideration should be given, during layout of buildings, roads, fencing and
appurtenances, to winter conditions such as snow drifting and removal. Considerable
energy savings may result from partially earth protected north walls, from solar passive
collectors, and from proper insulation. Evergreen shrubs planted in the correct location
may dampen cold prevailing winter winds, but if planted in an incorrect position, can
cause drifts or interfere with snow removal.

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 6

3. TREATMENT REQUIREMENTS

3.1 General considerations. Before treatment plant design is begun, treatment

requirements will be determined on the basis of meeting stream and effluent
requirements set by either U.S. or State governments or foreign governmental agencies.

3.1.1 Standards. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issues effluent
standards covering the discharge of toxic and hazardous pollutants. Strict limitations on
discharges of these pollutants should be imposed.

3.1.2 Pretreatment. Public Law 92-500, with subsequent amendments, requires

pretreatment of pollutants which may interfere with the operation of a sewage treatment
plant or pass through such a plant untreated. Additionally, in many cases, pretreatment
of industrial wastewater will be necessary to prevent adverse effects on the sewage
treatment plant processes. Some types of industrial waste may be admitted to
wastewater treatment plants, e.g., cooling tower discharges, boiler blowdown, vehicle
washrack wastewater, swimming pool filter discharges, and aircraft wash wastes using
biodegradable detergents. Flow of industrial wastewater may be reduced through
process modification or wastewater recirculation. Adverse impacts on the treatment
plant can be mitigated by reducing the concentration of those compounds causing the
problem. Table 3-1 is a listing of compounds which inhibit biological treatment
processes. In some cases, the adverse impact may be caused by short-lived
occurrences of either wastewater containing high concentrations of compounds or a
wastewater flow rate much higher than the average daily flow. This situation, which is
commonly called “slugs,” may in some cases be managed by including an equalization
basin upstream of the treatment plant.

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 7

 Table 3-1
Information on materials which inhibit biological treatment processes
Inhibiting or toxic concentration (1), mg/L
Pollutant Aerobic Anaerobic Nitrification
processes processes
Copper 1.0 1.0 0.5
Zinc 5.0 5.0 0.5
Chromium (hexavalent) 2.0 5.0 2.0
Chromium (trivalent) 2.0 2,000 (2) *
Total chromium 5.0 5.0 -
Nickel 1.0 2.0 0.5
Lead 0.1 * 0.5
Boron 1.0 * *
Cadmium * 0.02 (2) *
Silver 0.03 * *
Vanadium 10 * *
Sulfides * 100 (2) *
Sulfates * 500 *
Ammonia * 1,500 (2) *
Sodium * 3,500 *
Potassium * 2,500 *
Calcium * 2,500 *
Magnesium * 1,000 *
Acrylonitrite * 5.0 (2) *
Benzene * 50 *
Carbon tetrachloride * 10 (2) *
Chloroform 18.0 0.1 (2) *
Methylene chloride * 1.0 *
Pentachlorophenol * 0.4 *
1,1,1 Trichloroethane * 1.0 (2) *
Trichlorofluoromethane * 0.7 *
Trichlorofluoroethane * 5.0 (2) *
Cyanide * 1.0 2.0
Total oil (petroleum 50 50 50
origin)

(*) Insufficient data available to determine effect.

(1) Raw wastewater concentration unless otherwise indicated.
(2) Digester influent concentration only; lower values may be required for protection of
other treatment processes.
(3) Petroleum-based oil concentration measured by API Method 733-58.

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 8

3.1.3 State regulations. Most states require a minimum of secondary treatment for all
domestic wastewaters. In critical areas, various types of advanced wastewater
treatment processes for the removal of phosphorus and nitrogen will be imposed by the
State regulatory agencies to protect their water resources. The designer must review the
applicable State water quality standards before setting the treatment level or selecting
the treatment processes.

3.1.4 Local regulations. In general, local governments do not specify requirements for
wastewater treatment facilities. Construction of wastewater facilities must conform to
applicable zoning and Occupational and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements.

3.2 Preliminary treatment. Preliminary treatment is defined as any physical or

chemical process at the wastewater treatment plant that precedes primary treatment. Its
function is mainly to protect subsequent treatment units and to minimize operational
problems. Pretreatment at the source to render the wastewater acceptable at the
domestic wastewater treatment facility is not included.

3.3 Primary treatment. Primary treatment is defined as physical or, at times, chemical
treatment for the removal of settleable and floatable materials.

3.4 Secondary treatment. Secondary wastewater treatment is defined as processes

which use biological and, at times, chemical treatment to accomplish substantial
removal of dissolved organics and colloidal materials. Land treatment can be classified
as secondary treatment only for isolated locations with restricted access, and when
limited to crops which are not for direct human consumption.

3.5 Advanced treatment.

3.5.1 Definition. Advanced wastewater treatment is defined as that required to achieve

pollutant reductions by methods other than those used in a conventional treatment
(sedimentation, activated sludge, trickling filter, etc.). Advanced treatment employs a

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 9

number of different unit operations, including ponds, post-aeration, microstraining,
filtration, carbon adsorption, membrane solids separation, and specific treatment
processes such as phosphorus and nitrogen removal.

3.5.2 Efficiency. Advanced wastewater treatment is capable of very high effectiveness

and is used when necessary to meet strict effluent standards. Organics and suspended
solids removal of over 90 percent is obtainable using various combinations of
conventional and advanced wastewater treatment processes. Phosphorus levels of
less than 1 milligram per liter and total nitrogen levels of 5.0 milligrams per liter or less
can also be achieved through advanced treatment.

3.6 Evaluation of wastewater treatment processes. Table 3-2 provides a

summarized evaluation of wastewater treatment processes. Tables 3-3 and 3-4 illustrate
the applicable processes and their possible performance. All of the above will be used
for guidance in selecting a process chain of treatment units, which applies directly to the
selection of treatment processes.

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 10

 Table 3-2
Evaluation of wastewater treatment processes
Treatment process Application Advantages and capabilities Disadvantages and
limitations
1. Preliminary
a. Equalization Waste streams with high 1. Dampens waste variations 1. Need large land areas
variability
2. Reduce chemical requirements 2. Possible septicity, requiring
mixing and/or aeration
3. Dampens peak flows, reduces
treatment plant size
b. Neutralization Waste streams with extreme 1. Provides the proper conditions for 1. May generate solids
pH values biological, physical, chemical treatment
2. Sophisticated equipment,
2. Reduces corrosion and scaling instrumentation
c. Temperature Waste streams with extreme Provides proper conditions for biological High initial equipment costs
adjustment temperatures treatment
d. Nutrient addition Nutrient deficient wastes Optimizes biological treatment
e. Screening Waste streams containing 1. Prevents pump and pipe clogging Maintenance required to
large solids (wood, rags, etc. prevent screen plugging.
2. Reduces subsequent solids handling Ineffective for sticky solids.
f. Grit removal Waste streams containing Lower maintenance costs, erosion Solids to be disposed of are
significant amounts of large, sometimes offensive
heavy, inorganic solids

2. Primary Treatment
a. Sedimentation Waste streams containing 1. Reduces inorganic and organic 1. Possible septicity and odors
settleable suspended solids solids loadings in subsequent biological
units 2. Adversely affected by
variations in the nature of the
2. By far the least expensive and most waste
common method of solid/liquid
separation 3. Moderately large area
requirement
3. Suitable for treatment of wide variety
of wastes

4. Requires simpler equipment and

operation

5. Demonstrated reliability as a
treatment process
b. Dissolved air flotation Waste streams containing 1. Removes oils, greases and High power and maintenance
oils, fats, suspended solids suspended solids cost
and other floatable matter.
Can be used for both 2. Less tank area than a sedimentation
clarification and thickening. tank

3. Higher content of solids than

sedimentation

4. Satisfies immediate oxygen demand.

Maintains aerobic conditions.

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 11

 Table 3-2 (continued)
Evaluation of wastewater treatment processes
Treatment process Application Advantages and capabilities Disadvantages and
limitations
3. Secondary Treatment
a. Activated sludge Biologically treatable organic 1. Flexible --- can adapt to minor pH, 1. High operating costs (skilled
(aeration and secondary wastes organic, temperature changes labor, electricity)
sedimentation)
2. Produces high quality effluent--- 2. Generates solids requiring
90%% BOD and suspended solids sludge disposal
removal
3. Some process alternatives
3. Small area required are sensitive to shock loads,
and metallic or other poisons
4. Available in package units
4. Requires continuous air
5. The degree of nitrification is supply
controllable

6. Relatively minor odor problems

b. Aerated pond (with Biologically treatable organic 1. Flexible --- can adapt to minor pH, 1. Dispersed solids in effluent
secondary wastes organic and temperature waste changes
sedimentation) 2. Affected by seasonal
2. Inexpensive construction temperature variations

3. Minimum attention 3. Operating problems (ice,

solids settlement, etc.)
4. Moderate effluent (80-95% BOD
removal 4. Moderate power costs

5. Large area required

6. No color reduction
c. Aerobic-anaerobic Biologically treatable organic 1. Low construction costs 1. Large land area required
ponds wastes
2. Non-skilled operation 2. Algae in effluent

3. Moderate quality effluent (80-95% 3. Possible septicity and odors

BOD removal)
4. Weed growth, mosquito and
4. Removes some nutrients from insect problems
wastewaters
d. Trickling filter Biologically treatable organic 1. Moderate quality effluent (80-95% 1. Clogging of distributors or
wastes BOD removal) beds

2. Moderate operating costs (lower 2. Small, mosquito and insect

than activated sludge and higher than problems
oxidation pond)

3. Good resistance to shock loads

2
e. Chemical oxidation Low flow, high concentration 1. Disinfects effluent 1. Chemical cost
wastes of known and
consistent waste 2. Aids grease removal 2. High initial equipment costs
composition, or removal of
refractory compounds 3. Removes taste and odor 3. Skilled operation

4. Removes organics without producing 4. Requires handling of

a residual waste concentrate hazardous chemicals

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 12

 Table 3-2 (continued)
Evaluation of wastewater treatment processes
Treatment Process Application Advantages and Disadvantages and
Capabilities Limitations
f. Chemical mixing flocculation and Waste stream high in 1. Removes metallic ions, 1. Sophisticated equipment
clarification dissolved solids, nutrients, colloids, dissolved and instrumentation
colloids, metals, or salts
precipitable 2. Residual salts in effluent
inorganics and waste 2. Recovery of valuable
containing emulsified materials 3. Produces considerable
oils sludge
3. Provides proper conditions
for biological treatment
g. Gravity filtration Waste streams with 1. Breaks emulsions 1. Clogging
organic or inorganic
suspended solids, 2. Removes suspended 2. Frequent backwashing
emulsions, colloids solids
h. Pressure filtration Waste streams high 1. High solids removal (80- 1. High pressure costs
in suspended solids 95%)
(i.e. sludges, organic 2. Clogging
solids)
3. High pressure drop (power
costs)
i. Dissolved-air flotation with chemicals Waste streams 1. Produces high degree of 1. High initial equipment
containing oils, fats, treatment costs
colloids, and
chemically coalesced 2. Removes oils, greases 2. High operations cost
materials
3. Sophisticated
instrumentation
j. Anaerobic contact Waste streams with 1. Methane recovery 1. Heat required
high BOD and/or
high temperature 2. Small area required 2. Effluent in reduced
chemical form requires further
3. Volatile solids destruction treatment

3. Sludge disposal

4. Requires skilled operation

4. Advanced Treatment
a. Activated carbon adsorption Waste streams 1. Removes 1. High equipment costs
containing trace nonbiodegradable organics
amounts of organics from wastewaters 2. Carbon costs –
and color-, taste- and a. pH adjustment
odor-producing 2. Removes taste and odor b. Initial carbon
compounds producing compounds c. Make-up carbon

3. Reduces color 3. No inorganic removal

4. Wastes must be solid-free

to prevent clogging

5. Air pollution potential when

regenerating activated carbon
b. Micro straining filtration Tertiary treatment 1. Up to 89% of suspended 1. Very sensitive to solids
solids removed overloading

2. Can produce final effluent 2. Requires automatic

of solids less than 10 mg/l controls, absorbent
techniques

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 13

 Table 3-2 (continued)
Evaluation of wastewater treatment processes
Treatment Process Application Advantages and Disadvantages and
Capabilities Limitations
c. Land treatment “T” Biologically 1. Inexpensive 1. Large land area required
treatable wastes with
low to moderate 2. Minimum operator attention, 2. Possible contamination of
amounts of toxic minimum sludge potable aquifers
substances
3. Water conservation 3. Freezing in winter

4. Crop production 4. Odors in summer under some

conditions; usually minor concern
5. Very high quality effluent
and/or in discharge
d. Subsurface disposal (e.g. Solids-free, 1. Disposal of inorganics and 1. Subsurface clogging
deep well injection) concentrated waste organics
streams 2. Groundwater pollution
2. Ultimate disposal of toxic or
odorous materials 3. High maintenance and
operation costs

4. Limited aquifer life

5. High initial costs

e. Groundwater recharge Treated waste streams 1. Reduces bacterial 1. Possible groundwater
concentration contamination

2. Conserves water resources 2. Limited to porous formations

3. Prevents salt water intrusion

into potable aquifers

5. Sludge
a. Anaerobic digestion Biodegradable solids 1. Methane production 1. Heat required

2. Solids stabilization and 2. Process upsets when excess

conditioning volatile acids generated

3. Liquefaction of solids 3. Odors

4. Minimum land required 4. Skilled labor

4. Use of digested sludge as 5. Explosion hazard

fertilizer or soil conditioner
b. Aerobic digestion Biological solids 1. Relatively little odor 1. Moderate land area required

2. Solids stabilization and 2. High energy usage

conditioning
3. Reduced dewatering ability
3. Unsophisticated operation
c. Autoclaving Biological solids 1. Compact operation 1. High initial equipment costs

2. Solids conditioning 2. Power costs

3. Kills microorganisms 3. Skilled labor

d. Elutriation Sludges with high mineral 1. Enhances solids conditioning 1. Large volumes of water of low
content or high alkalinity alkalinity required
2. Chemical savings

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 14

 Table 3-2 (continued)
Evaluation of wastewater treatment processes
6. Sludge
Treatment Process Application Advantages and Disadvantages and
Capabilities Limitations
a. Vacuum filtration Organic or inorganic 1. Solids concentration 1. High equipment, energy and
sludges maintenance costs
2. Compact equipment
2. Skilled labor

3. Necessity for pretreatment

(thickening and chemical addition)

4. Limited throughput
b. Centrifugation Non-abrasive, non- 1. Solids concentration 1. Equipment costs
corrosive sludges
2. Compact equipment 2. Skilled labor

3. Low chemical conditioning 3. Energy costs

4. High throughput
c. Sand beds (including wedge Organic or inorganic 1. Solids concentration 1. Land area required
wire and vacuum assisted) sludges
2. Low chemical costs; 2. Weather problems;
polymer sometimes used a. Winter – freezing
b. Summer – odor
d. Presses Organic or inorganic 1. Solids concentration 1. High capital and operating costs
sludges
2. Compact equipment 2. Precoat and chemical conditioning
necessary

3. Not applicable for small quantities

7. Sludge Disposal
a. Incineration (regular and Combustible organic 1. Excellent sludge volume 1. High equipment costs
fluidized) sludges (25 – 33% reduction
solids) 2. Fuel and power costs
2. Kills biological organisms
3. Air pollution potential
3. Possible by-product
recovery 4. Ash disposal required
a. Heat
b. Valuable metals 5. Sophisticated equipment
b. Wet oxidation Combustible organic 1. Produces easily handled 1. High initial costs
sludges (3 - 10% solids) product
2. Fuel and power costs
2. Kills biological organisms
3. High organic concentration in
3. Possible by-product effluent stream
recovery

4. Conditioning prior to other

disposal techniques
c. Land disposal Stable biological sludge 1. Low investment 1. Large land area required

2. Postpones ultimate sludge

disposal process installation,
or

3. Provides ultimate disposal if

land is available

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 15

 Table 3-2 (continued)
Evaluation of wastewater treatment processes
Treatment Process Application Advantages and Disadvantages and
Capabilities Limitations
d. Sanitary landfill Dewatered biological 1. Low investment 1. Groundwater contamination
sludges (30 – 35% solids)
2. Suitable for undigested 2. Requires cover material
sludges, odorous or toxic and compaction
materials
3. Hauling costs
3. Land reclamation
(1) Effluent quality cited cannot consistently be obtainable during some seasonal periods of the year.
(2) This process is also applicable for advanced waste treatment.
Note: The individual processes listed and standing alone do not constitute secondary treatment or
advanced treatment.

Table 3-3
Approximate performance data for various wastewater processes (1)
Process Constituent, effluent from process, mg/L Waste for
ss (4) BOD (4) COD (4) N (4) NH 3 (4) P (4) ultimate
(200) (200) (450) (30) (15) (10) disposal
Imhoff tank 80 120 350 25 15 9 Sludge
Rotating biological disks 25 13 100 20 5 7 Sludge
Trickling filter processes:
Conventional (low rate) 25 18 100 20 1 7 Sludge
Conventional (high rate) 30 20 100 25 15 7 Sludge
Tower filter 30 20 100 25 15 7 Sludge
Activated sludge process:
Complete mix 20 15 90 20 12 7 Sludge
Contact stabilization 20 15 90 20 12 7 Sludge
Extended aeration 20 15 90 15 2 7 Sludge
Aerated lagoon (with settling) 20 15 90 25 2 7 Sludge
Oxidation ditch (with settling) 20 15 90 25 2 7 Sludge
Stabilization pond processes:
Aerobic (aerated) 170 60 200 25 1 9 Sludge (3)
Aerobic-anaerobic 120 40 150 15 1 4 Sludge (3)
(natural aeration)
Aerobic-anaerobic 90 25 140 15 1 4 Sludge (3)
(partial mechanical aeration)
Anaerobic (2) 100 40 140 15 1 4 Sludge (3)
Land treatment processes:
Slow rate 2 4 80 5 1 0.5
Overland flow 4 6 90 10 4 4
Rapid infiltration 2 4 50 10 1 0.5
(1) Under ideal conditions
(2) Usually followed by aerobic or facultative ponds
(3) Following pretreatment
(4) Concentration in incoming wastewater, mg/L

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 16

 Table 3-4
Operational characteristics of various treatment processes
Process Characteristics Rotating Trickling Activated Wastewater Land
Disk Filters Sludge Treatment Treatment
Ponds
Reliability with respect to:
Basic process Good Good Good Good Excellent
Influent flow variations Fair Fair Fair Good Good
Influent load variations Fair Fair Fair Good Good
Presence of industrial waste Good Good Good Good Good
Industrial shock loadings Fair Fair Fair Fair Good
Low temperature (20 deg C) Sensitive Sensitive Good Very sensitive Good (to 0 deg
C)
Expandability to meet:
Increased plant loadings Good; must Limited (stone Fair to good, if Fair; additional Good
add additional may be designed ponds required
disk module replaced by conservatively
synthetic
media)
More stringent discharge requirements with respect to:
Suspended solids Good; add Good; add Good; add Add additional Excellent
filtration or filtration or filtration or solids removal unit
polishing polishing ponds polishing
ponds ponds
BOD Improved by Improved by Improved by Improved by Excellent
filtration filtration filtration solids removal
Nitrogen Good; Good; Good; Fair Excellent
denitrification denitrification denitrification
must be added must be added must be added
Operational complexity Average Average Above average Below average Below average
Ease of operation and Very good Very good Fair Good Excellent
maintenance
Power requirements Moderate Low High Low to high Moderate
Waste products Sludges Sludges Sludges Sludges ---
Potential environmental impacts Odors Odors --- Odors ---
Site Considerations
Land area requirements Moderate, plus Moderate, plus Moderate, plus Large, plus buffer Large, plus
buffer zone buffer zone buffer zone zone buffer zone
Topography Level Level to Level Level Level to
moderately moderately
sloped sloped

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 17

4. BASIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

4.1 General. The required treatment is determined by the influent characteristics, the
effluent requirements, and the treatment processes that produce an acceptable effluent.
Influent characteristics are determined by laboratory testing of samples from the waste
stream or from a similar waste stream, or are predicted on the basis of standard waste
streams. Effluent quality requirements are set by Federal, interstate, State, and local
regulatory agencies. Treatment processes are selected according to influent-effluent
constraints and technical and economic considerations.

4.2 Design population. Treatment capacity is based on the design population, which
is the projected population obtained by analysis. The design population is determined
by adding the total resident and one-third the non-resident populations and multiplying
by the appropriate capacity factor (taken from Table 4-1 for smaller communities), which
allows for variations in the using population. The resident population is determined by
adding the following:

Table 4-1
Capacity Factors
Effective Population Capacity Factor
Under 5,000 1.50
5,000 1.50
10,000 1.25
20,000 1.15
30,000 1.10
40,000 1.05
50,000 1.00

4.3 Estimating future service demand.

4.3.1 Nature of activities. The nature of the activities in a community is a very

important factor in determining per capita waste loads because different activities have
different water uses. Table 4-2 illustrates this fact in terms of gallons per capita per day
(gpcd); Table 4-3 shows how waste loadings vary between resident and non-resident
personnel. The values shown in Table 4-3, for that portion of the contributing population
served by garbage grinders, will be increased by 30 percent for biochemical oxygen

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 18

demand values, 40 percent for oil and grease, and 100 percent for suspended solids.
Contributing compatible industrial or commercial flows must be evaluated for waste
loading on a case-by-case basis.
Table 4-2
Example of per capita sewage flows
Residents (gpcd)
Type of facility Permanent Non-residents
Hospitals 300-600 100
All other residential 100 35
Note: Add 30 gallons per 8-hour work shift for non-residents

Table 4-3
Example of sewage characteristics
Residents Non-residents
Item (lb/capita for 24 hours) (lb/capita for 24 hours)
Suspended solids 0.20 0.10
Biochemical oxygen 0.20 0.10
demand
Oil and grease 0.09 0.05

4.4 Volume of wastewater.

4.4.1 Variations in wastewater flow. The rates of sewage flow at military installations
vary widely throughout the day. The design of process elements in a sewage treatment
plant is based on the average daily flow. Transmission elements, such as conduits,
siphons and distributor mechanisms, will be designed on the basis of an expected peak
flow rate of three times the average rate. Clarifiers will be designed for a peak hourly
flow rate (i.e., 1.75 times the average daily rate). Consideration of the minimum rate of
flow is necessary in the design of certain elements, such as grit chambers, measuring
devices and dosing equipment. For this purpose, 40 percent of the average flow rate will
be used.

4.4.2 Average daily wastewater flow. The average daily wastewater flow to be used
in the design of new treatment plants will be computed by multiplying the design
population by the per capita rates of flow determined from Table 4-2, and then adjusting
for such factors as industrial wastewater flow, stormwater inflow and infiltration. Where

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 19

shift personnel are engaged, the flow will be computed for the shift when most of the
people are working. A useful check on sewage volumes is to compare water
consumption to the sewage estimate (neglecting infiltration which will be considered
subsequently). About 60 to 80 percent of the consumed water will reappear as sewage,
the other 20-40 percent will be lost to irrigation, fire-fighting, washdown, and points of
use not connected to the sewer.
4.4.2.1 Good practice requires exclusion of stormwater from the sanitary sewer system
to the maximum practical extent. Infiltration must also be kept to a minimum. Both must
be carefully analyzed and the most realistic practical quantity that can be used in design
must be assigned to these flows. Leakage of stormwater into sewer lines often occurs
through manhole covers or collars, but this is usually no more than 20 to 70 gallons per
minute if manholes have been constructed and maintained properly. However, leakage
into the sewer mains and laterals through pipe joints and older brick manholes, with
increase in groundwater levels, can result in large infiltration. The amount of water that
actually percolates into the groundwater table may be negligible if an area is occupied
by properly guttered buildings and paved areas, or if the subsoil is rich in impervious
clay. In other sandy areas, up to 30 percent of rainfall may quickly percolate and
subsequently lift groundwater levels. Infiltration rates have been measured in
submerged sewer pipes. Relatively new pipes with tight joints still displayed infiltrations
at around 1,000 gallons per day per mile, while older pipes leaked to over 40,000
gallons per day per mile. Sewers built first usually followed the contour of water courses
and are often submerged while more recent sewers are not only tighter, but are usually
built at higher elevations as the system has been expanded. In designing new treatment
facilities, allow for infiltration. Utilize existing flow records, sewer flow surveys, and
examine the correlation between recorded flows and rainfall data to improve the
infiltration estimates. The economic feasibility of improving the collection system to
reduce the rate of infiltration should be considered.
4.4.2.2 Another method for calculating the infiltration component of total flow is to
multiply the miles of a given pipe size and condition by the diameter in inches and to
sum the inch-miles. The sum of inch-miles of the pipe estimated according to conditions
is then multiplied by factors between 250 and 500 to obtain gallon/day. If infiltration is

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 20

known to be negligible at manholes, then an infiltration allowance may be calculated
based upon the area served and Figure 4-1. Curve A should be used for worst
conditions when pipes are old and joints are composed of jute or cement. Curve B
applies to old pipes with hot or cold asphaltic joints or for new pipes known to have poor
joints. Curve C is used for new sewers where groundwater does not cover inverts and
when joints and manholes are modern and quite tight. Of course, field tests may be
conducted to closely estimate infiltration.

Figure 4-1
Infiltration allowances

4.4.2.3 Average wastewater flow is usually expressed in million gallons per day, but will
be calculated in the appropriate units for the design of the unit process under
consideration.

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 21

4.4.3 Contributing populations. In calculating contributing populations, use 3.6
persons per family residential unit. In hospitals, count the number of beds, plus the
number of hospital staff eating three meals at the hospital, plus the number of shift
employees having one meal there. This total is the number of residents to be used in
the design calculations. Individuals will be counted only once, either at home or at work.
The capacity factor still applies in calculating design populations.

4.4.4 Industrial flow. Industrial wastewater flows will be minimal at most military
installations. When industrial flows are present, however, actual measurement is the
best way to ascertain flow rates. Modes of occurrence (continuous or intermittent) and
period of discharge must also be known. Typical industrial discharges include
wastewaters from the following:
— wastewater treatment plant itself
— maintenance facilities
— vehicle wash areas
— weapons cleaning buildings
— boiler blowdowns
— swimming pool backwash water
— water treatment plant backwash
— cooling tower blowdown
— fire fighting facility
— photographic laboratory
— medical or dental laboratories

4.4.5 Stormwater flow. Including stormwater flows in treatment plant design is

important either when combined sewer systems are served or when significant inflow
enters the sewer system. Separate sewers are required in new systems and only
sanitary flows are to be routed through treatment plants. For existing plants that are
served by combined sewer systems, capacities will be determined by peak wet-weather
flow obtained from plant flow records. In the absence of adequate records, hydraulic
capacities of four times the dry-weather flow will be used in the design.

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 22

4.5 Population equivalents. Suspended solids and organic loading can be interpreted
as population equivalents when population data constitute the main basis of design.
Typical population equivalents are given in Table 4-3. These equivalent values can also
be used to convert non-domestic waste loads into population design values. The effects
of garbage grinding will be incorporated into population-equivalent values when
applicable. The waste stream to be treated at existing military installations should, when
feasible, be characterized. This actual data should be used in the design.

4.6 Capacity factor. A capacity factor (CF) taken from Table 4-1 is used to make
allowances for population variation, changes in sewage characteristics, and unusual
peak flows. The design population is derived by multiplying the actual population (called
the effective population) by the appropriate capacity factor. Where additions are
proposed, the adequacy of each element of the plant will be checked without applying
the capacity factor. When treatment units are determined to be deficient, then capacity
factors should be used to calculate the plant capacity required after expansion.
However, the use of an unnecessarily high CF may dilute waste sufficiently enough to
adversely affect some biological processes. If the area served by a plant will not,
according to the best current information, be expanded in the future, the capacity factor
should not be used in designing treatment components in facilities serving that area.
The following equation (Eq 4-1) may be used to estimate total flow to the sewage plant
where domestic, industrial and stormwater flows are anticipated.

x=a+b (Eq 4-1)

Where:
x = Total flow to sewage plant
a = Flow from population (effective population × 100 gpcd × capacity factor)
b = Infiltration + industrial wastewater + stormwater (4 × dry-weather flow)

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 23

4.7 Wastewater characteristics.

4.7.1 Normal sewage. The wastewater at existing facilities will be analyzed to

determine its characteristics and constituents as required. Analytical methods will be as
given in the current edition of the American Public Health Association (APHA)
publication, Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater and as
approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). For treatment facilities at new
installations, which will not generate any unusual waste, the treatment will be for normal
domestic waste with the following analysis:

• pH 7.0 std units

• Total solids 720 mg/L
• Total volatile solids 420 mg/L
• Suspended solids 200 mg/L
• Settleable solids 4 ml/L
• BOD 200 mg/L
• Total nitrogen 30 mg/L
• Ammonia nitrogen 15 mg/L
• Oils and grease 100 mg/L
• Phosphorus 10 mg/L
• Chloride 50 mg/L

Concentrations presented above are in milligrams per liter which is equivalent to parts
per million (ppm). These values represent an average waste; and therefore, should only
be used where detailed analysis is not available. When the water supply analysis for the
installation is known, the above analysis will be modified to reflect the normal changes
to the constituents in water, as they arrive at the wastewater treatment plant. Changes
will be as follows:

• P in water supply + 12 mg/L = P in plant influent;

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 24

 • Cl in water supply + 8 mg/L = Cl in plant influent;
• Total nitrogen in water supply + 12 mg/L = Total nitrogen in plant influent.

4.7.2 Non-domestic loading. Non-domestic wastes are stormwater, infiltration, and

industrial contributions to sewage flow. Stormwater and infiltration waste loadings can
be determined by analyses of the constituents of normal sewage, as presented in the
previous section. For these types of flows, the major loading factors are suspended
solids, biochemical oxygen demand, and coliform bacteria.

4.7.3 Industrial loading. Industrial waste loadings can also be characterized to a large
extent by normal sewage parameters. However, industrial waste contains contaminants
not generally found in domestic sewage and is much more variable than domestic
sewage. This is evident in terms of pH, biochemical oxygen demand, chemical oxygen
demand, oil and grease, and suspended solids. Other analyses (e.g., heavy metals,
thermal loading, and dissolved chemicals) may also be necessary to fully characterize
an industrial waste. Each industrial wastewater must be characterized individually to
determine any and all effects of the treatment processes.

© J. Paul Guyer 2010 25