Management & Education Track
(Afternoon of October 26)
Development and Delivery of Web-Based Education in Decentralized and Cluster Wastewater Treatment, Larry Stephens, Stephens Consulting Services, P.C.
In a 2007 WERF study entitled Overcoming Barriers to Evaluation and Use of Decentralized Wastewater Technologies and Management the authors placed “Engineers’ lack of knowledge of decentralized systems” second on a list of the five primary barriers. In fact, one could argue that a lack of education on this subject is a major contributing factor to 4 of the 5 barriers listed. The other 3 are:
• Engineer’s unfavorable perception of decentralized systems
• Unfavorability of the regulatory system for decentralized systems
• Lack of systems thinking applied to wastewater issues
On the next page the following statement is made in support of this barrier: “Universities have limited or no curricula on decentralized technology and management.”
Funded by a USDA Higher Education Challenge Grant, Michigan State University, The Ohio State University and Stephens Consulting Services, P.C. have joined forces to develop four courses that deal with agricultural and rural environmental issues at the rural/suburban interface. Two of these courses deal with 1) Suburban/rural Watershed Interface Modeling, and 2) Design and Management of Decentralized and Cluster Wastewater Systems. A goal of these courses is to prepare curricula material that can be delivered by common distance learning technology and shared with other qualified educational institutions. By the time of the conference, the course on decentralized wastewater design and management will have been taught once in the classroom, and once on-line. The goal of this educational effort is to reach both students on campus and practicing professionals.
This author is one of the course developers for the wastewater design course and the current lead instructor of the on-line delivery. This presentation will discuss the author’s experience regarding the need, the scope of the project, the curricula, and the delivery methods.
Integrated Water Resource Characterization at a Municipal Scale, Amy Macrellis, Stone Environmental, Inc.
The Town of Colchester, Vermont is a lakeside community with approximately 6,000 onsite wastewater treatment systems. Colchester is using a town-wide integrated approach to water resource management with an interdisciplinary consulting team. The initial steps in this project were the characterization of decentralized wastewater infrastructure, stormwater infrastructure, water supply infrastructure, and available stream morphology data. Additionally, Colchester has been tracking summer E. coli concentrations at public beaches for the past six years. This information is being used to inform the next steps, which include: monitoring of phosphorus in surface water; microbial source tracking to identify E. coli host species using ribotyping; and a town-wide wastewater needs assessment. This initial data collection approach can be used by other communities who are looking to understand their water resources and water infrastructure in a systematic and organized fashion, thus enabling development of water resource management programs.
Integrated Water Management Demonstration Project for Low Impact Development Urban Retrofit and Decentralized, Alfonso Blanco, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Prince George’s County, Maryland began the Low Impact Development (LID) concept in 1990 with the introduction of bioretention techniques as an alternative to conventional storm water and wastewater Best Management Practices (BMP’s). Prince George’s County and their watershed partners have been collaborating on a comprehensive storm water management plan using LID techniques for urban retrofit and development of a decentralized wastewater treatment systems for watershed protection and regulatory compliance for implementation of the Upper Patuxent Watershed Restoration Action Strategy (WRAS). The watershed partners involved in this project area: City of Laurel, Prince George’s County Public Schools, Lowe’s Home Improvement Center, Patuxent River 4-H Center and US EPA.
Development of an Economic Model to Project the Cost of Various Decentralized Wastewater Management Options, John Buchanan, University of Tennessee
When properly designed, installed, and maintained, decentralized wastewater treatment systems are very effective at renovating domestic wastewater from individual sources, cluster-developments and small communities. These systems provide significant protection of public and environmental health. Where individual systems are used, each structure has land dedicated to the treatment and dispersal of wastewater. Depending upon the nature of the community and system performance, continued use of existing individual systems and establishment of new ones is a valid consideration. Older individual systems are often located on small lots where there is not sufficient suitable soil to increase the capacity of the existing system or to install an upgraded system when it becomes necessary. In some cases, land near the wastewater source may be too valuable to be dedicated to wastewater renovation as communities grow both in population and commerce. Under these circumstances, cluster-development or community-scale wastewater solutions may be warranted and use of engineered wastewater management systems should be explored. It is imperative to consider a range of decentralized and distributed wastewater management systems and various treatment and dispersal options.
Leaders and planners in small communities need basic information to make good decisions concerning improvements in local wastewater management. They must not only have knowledge of fundamental wastewater process requirements, they must also have an understanding of realistic system performance as well as accurate capital, operation and maintenance (O/M), and life cycle costs. Without this information, decentralized and distributed treatment systems cannot be considered in parity to other available options.
The Consortium of Institutes for Decentralized Wastewater Treatment (CIDWT) pursued development of a Cost Estimation tool with funding provided by the US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) through the Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF). The purposes of the project were to establish basic criteria for process performance and selection; collect reliable cost information and representative data for development of factual, field-based databases, and; determine the nature of management programs necessary to sustain larger onsite distributed applications as a part of local infrastructure.
This paper provides an account of the process of creating the Cost Estimation Tool, including the challenges related to collecting real-world life-cycle costs for systems. It also describes the Cost Estimation Tool itself and how it may be used by local decision-makers and other stakeholders in the realm of decentralized wastewater management.
