United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
 Water Engineering
 Research Laboratory
 Cincinnati OH 45268
Research and Development
 EPA-600/S2-84-167 Jan. 1985
Project  Summary
Technical-Economic  Study  of
Sewage  Sludge  Disposal  on
Dedicated  Land

Lilia A. Abron-Robinson and Leon W. Weinberger
  This study documents the technical,
cost, and environmental factors involved
in sludge .disposal on dedicated  land
(OLD). Three general types of OLD
operations were identified based on
cadmium and nutrient loadings to the
land.
  Six sludge disposal sites (two of each
general type) were analyzed. Site visits
and existing data were used to determine
the relative environmental impacts and
costs for the three types of municipal
sludge application to DID sites.
  Study results  indicate that well
managed and properly used DLO sites
are environmentally acceptable even at
high sludge application rates. Cost
advantages for any of the three types of
sites are difficult to determine, however,
because costs are dictated by local
conditions and institutional, social,
political, and aesthetic factors.
  This Project Summary was developed
by EPA's Water Engineering Research
Laboratory, Cincinnati. OH. to announce
key findings of the research project that
is fully documented in a separate report
of the same title  (see Project Report
ordering information at back).

Introduction
  Many  municipal sewage treatment
agencies apply some of their wastewater
sludges to land to fertilize growing crops.
Generally the amount of  sludge applied
depends on the nitrogen requirements of
the crop(s), the cadmium application
rates, and other limitations as specified in
the "Environmental Protection Agency
Regulations on Criteria for Classification
of Solid Waste Disposal Facilities and
Practice,"  Environmental Protection
Agency 40  CFR Part 257, "Criteria for
 Classification of Solid Waste Disposal
 Facilities and Practices; Final, Interim
 Final,  and Proposed  Regulations (as
 corrected  in the Federal Register of
 September 21,1979)," and State regula-
 tions or requirements. The sludge applica-
 tion rate must  be controlled to protect
 groundwater supplies from possible
 nitrate contamination and to prevent
 excessive uptake of cadmium in growing
 plants. Although nitrogen and cadmium
 are the elements of the most frequent
 concern and are the  principal criteria
 used inthis report, other heavy metals, in-
 organic and organic toxic substances, nu-
 trients, etc., could affect the land applic-
 ability of wastewater sludges.
   Many communities have  adopted a
 program of sludge application to land that
 is used primarily for sludge disposal; the
 growing of crops is incidental or nonexis-
 tent. In these  cases, relatively  large
 amounts of sludge  may be applied. The
~ Federal criteria governing application
 rates for nitrogen, cadmium, and other
 constituents applicable to the production
 of food-chain crops could  be exceeded.
 Usually the land that is  dedicated to
 sludge disposal is owned by the municipal-
 ity, has limited public access, and  is not
 intended for future sale. Groundwater at
 dedicated sites  must be  protected by
 natural geological conditions, or the site
 must be underdrained and the drainage
 water must be treated before release. If
 crops are grown, they must be either of
 the non-food-chain type or  meet the U.S.
 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
 criteria for animal feed.
   Three types of DLD operations were
 identified:
  Type I:    Sludge is applied according
          to the nutrient needs of the

-------
           crop. Cadmium application
           limits specified by the EPA
           are not exceeded.
 Type II:    Sludge is applied at rates
           that supply more than  the
           crop's nutrient requirements,
           and EPA  annual cadmium
           limits are equaled or exceeded.
Type III:    Sludge is applied at rates
           that greatly exceed crop
           nutrient requirements, and
           the EPA  annual cadmium
           limits are  exceeded.
  Based on the availability of cost and en-
vironmental data, six sites (two repre-
senting each type of DID operation) were
selected for analysis. Sludge application
and site data are given in Table 1. Sites
owned by  municipal  sewage agencies
that matched the Type I description exact-
ly and had cost and environmental data
available could not be  located. Most mu-
nicipalities employing  OLD apply sludge
at the maximum rates  possible within
technical, land, and environmental limits.


Cost Analysis
  The  following elements  and  factors
should be considered  in a' cost analysis
for sludge application on land:
  Land
  Site Preparation
  Drainage
  Drainage Treatment
  Pumping Equipment
  Roads
  Environmental Monitoring
Table 1.    Summary of Sludge Application and Site Data for Dedicated Land Operations

                                         Type I                           Type II
  Energy
  Sludge Transportation Costs
  Overhead
  Interest Rates
  Taxes
  Type of Sludge Treatment
  Value of Sludge as a Soil Conditioner/
   Fertilizer
  Sludge Application Rates
  Crop Revenues
  Labor

  Table 2 summarizes costs  for each
sludge application site  studied and
itemizes them by certain cost categories.
To compare the different  types of DLD
operations, the itemized costs have been
converted to cost per metric ton (t) of
sludge applied,  based on the amount of
sludge applied at each site. For example,
                                                              Type III
Item
Application rate, dry solids:
t/ha
N, kg/ha
Cd. kg/ ha
P, kg/ ha
Application frequency, years
Sludge characteristics:
Solids - %
N-%ofDS
P-%ofDS
Cd - mg/kg
Haul distance (km)
Amount of land
Springfield,
Ohio

5
150
0.2
—
3

6.9
3
1.8
39
20f
47(
Toledo,
Ohio

11.2
230
0.22
330
6

22
2
2.9
20
1211
900*
Springfield,
Illinois

76
2,700
1.2
128
1

1-2
*
*
*
Onsite
15
Hanover ParK.
Illinois

34-45
1.480
1.74
—
1

2.44
5-7
1.5-2
10-120
Onsite
81
Fulton
County,
Illinois

44-83
3.9OO
86
2,539
1

6
4
3
280
321*
1,881
Sacramento,
California

224
13.450
4.5
4.500
1

4.1
5.9
1.9
19
Onsite
8
'Sludge applied in liquid form.
tRound trip.
*One way.
f£ach year for 3 years.
ttfach year for 6 years.
Table 2.   Summary of Costs for Each Sludge Application Site (1980 Dollars}
Type!
Item
Transportation and
application
Monitoring
Land
Construction
Taxes
Sludge dewatering
Total Cost
Revenue from crops
Net Cost
includes only the application
^Amortized, 20 year life, 10%
^Farmer-derived benefit from
Springfield,
Ohio
($/t)
$93.00
93.OO
$93.00*
cost.
use of sludge.
Toledo,
Ohio
f$/t)
$68.00
7.00
98.00
173.00
$173.00*

Type II
Springfield,
Illinois
<$/t)
$45.OO*
6.00
51.00
$51 00

Hanover Park,
Illinois
l$/t)
$35.00*
4.00
69.00
119.0O\
226.00
15.00
$21 1.00

Type III
Fulton
County
Illinois
($/t>
$275.00
7.00
6.OO
5.00
293.00
3.00
$290.00

Sacramento,
California
($/t)
$41.00
6.00
0
47.00
$47.00


-------
 land costs were originally given as $/ha,
 which was converted  to $/t  based on
 the amount of land (hectares) used per
 ton of sludge applied. Although consider-
 able cost data are available for each of the
 sites, any  direct comparison must take
 into account major differences in opera-
 tional mode, major unit price differences,
 special local requirements, and the lack
 of consistency in  distributing the cost
 items.  These  differences occur  even
 within the three types of sludge application
 sites.

 Type I Sites
  The sludges for the Type I operations
 (Springfield and Toledo, Ohio) are applied
 to privately owned  lands. The city of
 Springfield personnel haul and apply the
 sludge, whereas those functions are
 performed by a contractor for Toledo, who
 also receives  some payments from the
 farmers on whose land the  sludge is
 applied. The sludge application rate for
 Springfield is  5 t/ha applied once in 3
 years; for Toledo it is 11.2 t/ha applied
 once in 6 years. Toledo dewaters sludge
 to 22 percent solids and transports the
 sludge  to  farms approximately 60 km
 from the  plant. Springfield  dewaters
 sludge to approximately 7 percent solids,
 and the disposal sites are 10 km from the
 plant. At  both sites,  farmers receive
 nutrients at costs lower than commercial
 fertilizers.

 Type II Sites
  As with Type I operations, the costs for
Type II sludge disposal operations in
Springfield and Hanover Park, Illinois, are
also  different, partly  because of the
difference  in sludge disposal practices.
The  Springfield, Illinois, site required
relatively little site grading and preparation
for spray application of sludge, whereas
the  Hanover  Park  site had precision-
sloped  fields  for  gated pipe sludge
application. The Springfield site can use
spray application of sludge because of its
isolated location, but the Hanover Park
site  requires  gated irrigation pipe for
sludge application to  reduce sludge
visibility and minimize citizen complaints.
The Hanover Park site operation is close
to a  comparatively  affluent area and
therefore incurs higher labor and land
costs than the Springfield operation. The
sludge application rate used at Springfield
 is nearly double the Hanover Park rate.
The Springfield operation has no monitor-
 ing costs available, but monitoring costs
were estimated to be less than $6.00/t
based on the  cost of monitoring for the
other sites studied.  Some Hanover Park
costs are covered by sale of crops.
Type III Sites
  The two Type III sludge application sites
also showed a wide range of costs. Wide
differences occurred in operations at
Fulton County, Illinois, and Sacramento
County,  California. The Sacramento
operation does not incur a transporation
cost, whereas the Fulton County operation
is 321  km from the  point  of  sludge
generation in  Chicago. Capital and land
costs are quite similar  because both
operations are located in rural .communi-
ties and both use a  soil incorporation
method. Although no costs are available
for monitoring at  Sacramento,  it was
assumed that these costs  would  be
similar to those of the  other  sludge
application operations where monitoring
costs  are available and that they would
probably be less than $6.00/t. But large
differences occur in the cost  for sludge
application to land. These differences are
due to the relatively inexpensive seasonal
labor  used at the Sacramento operation
and the more expensive labor that Fulton
County uses from nearby Peoria,  Illinois.
Some  of the  Fulton  County operation
costs  are recovered by the sale of crops.
The latter operation also  has  real estate
and other taxes levied against it because
it is located outside the political boundaries
of the operating  agency.

Summary of Costs
  The relative cost effectiveness of the
three  types of OLD operations was
impossible to  determine  from cost data
compiled for the six sludge disposal sites
studied.  The cost  data compiled were
influenced mainly by local conditions
and, to a smaller extent, by  social and
aesthetic factors. The most  important
cost factors  affecting the  economic
analysis are site preparation, land, sludge
transportation, and labor  costs.

Social and Environmental Impacts
  The social and environmental impacts
include the nonmonetary costs, benefits,
advantages, and disadvantages of sludge
disposal  on land. Public acceptance was
cited as crucial to a successful operation
and assures good public relations. This
factor was found to be essential for all
types  of sludge disposal operations.


Type I Sites
  With this type of sludge disposal, the
municipality is not required to purchase
land. But new sites must be continuously
sought for sludge disposal. The farmers
who use sludge in place  of inorganic
fertilizer reduce fertilizer costs and
increase  crop yields. Though there were
some complaints about odor and increased
truck traffic at the Toledo site, these were
reduced  by the private contractor, who
initiated street  sweeping and vehicle
rinses to reduce odor complaints.
  No extensive environmental monitoring
is conducted at either of the sites because
the sludge application rates satisfy the
restrictions. But at the Toledo site in the
spring, surface water, tile water, and well
water samples are analyzed before the
sludge application and afterward. No con-
tamination problems were detected.

Type II Sites
  The Springfield  site has no public
opposition or complaints probably because
of the remoteness of the site and the
sludge application  process generates
little odor. At Hanover Park, where local
residents  live  close to the  site,  the
experimental farm was accepted.  Both
sites provide  a permanent repository for
sludge.
  A more detailed environmental monitor-
ing program is required for Type II sites.
Soil samples taken at the Springfield site
revealed  no significant accumulation of
heavy metals. Cadmium levels increased
in plant tissues, but by less than 1.0/ug/g.
All surface water runoff is returned to the
treatment plant.  The monitoring results
at the experimental farm at Hanover Park
indicate  no adverse environmental
impacts. Virtually no change has occurred
in groundwater quality since 1968. All
underdrainage is returned to the treatment
plant.  Crop yields were  greater  with
sludge application than with  inorganic
fertilizer.

Type III Sites
  The main advantage of Type III sludge
disposal operations is that land require-
ments are minimized and application
rates are maximized. The flexibility of
sludge application rates is also increased.
Both sites provide a permanent repository
for sludge. Fulton County originally used
traveling sprinklers for sludge application,
but an incorporation device is now used
because it can apply a greater amount of
sludge with  reduced visibility to  the
public. Cooperation  with  local officials
(who wish to restore the strip-mined land)
proved invaluable to public  relations at
Fulton County.
  Adverse impacts at the Sacramento
site have been identified in the planning
process. Wind machines and barriers will
be used to mitigate odor problems. Buffer
lands producing forage crops and leased
for seasonal grazing will also limit
impacts. Sludge injection wifl be used to
reduce odor problems.  There  is no

-------
intention of growing crops at the Sacra-
mento site.
  Although monitoring data are not
available on  the Sacramento site, the
experimental farm data indicate that soil
metal levels will increase  with  sludge
application. Extensive environmental
monitoring is  required  at the  Fulton
County site. Runoff water is stored until it
meets Illinois standards for release to the
adjacent stream. No significant change
has occurred in surface water quality, but
metal content of the soil has increased.
Ammonia levels are well within the
prescribed  limits, and the N02+NO3-N
concentration has not changed in ground-
water wells.  Essentially, the sludge
disposal  at Fulton County has restored
the strip-mined land without adverse
impacts.

Regulatory Aspects
  Sludge disposal on land  is subject to
regulations at  the Federal, State, and
local levels. The EPA has regulations on
criteria for classification of solid waste
disposal  facilities and practices. State
and local  authorities  may  regulate
disposal operations through laws, statutes,
ordinances, guidelines, land-use regula-
tions, permit conditions, criteria standards,
rules, and regulations. In general, each
jurisdiction has  a different approach to
controlling or regulating  a site, and
conditions tend to be site-specific.

Type I  Sites
  Both  sites  are located in Ohio and
subsequently  are subject  to the Ohio
Sludge to Land  Guidelines.  The latter
give sludge  application rates to land
based on soil cationic exchange capacity
(CECy. In addition, the guidelines require:
(1) that sludge having a cadmium level
greater than 25 /jg/g (dry weight) not be
applied to farmland if that level is greater
than 1.5 percent of'the zinc content, (2)
that yearly application  of cadmium be
limited to 2.2 kg/ha, and (3) that the soil
pH  always be 6.5 or higher. Both State
and Federal guidelines are met by both
Type I sites.

Type II Sites
  The EPA limits the use of crops grown
at these  sites to animal feed — not food
for human consumption. The Illinois EPA
has  no  documented  guidelines,  but  it
reviews each case on a site-by-site basis.
The Hanover Park permit required that all
underdrainage be returned to the treat-
ment plant influent, and  it restricted
land application methods to gated irriga-
tion pipe for  adequate control of odor
emissions.

                                    4
Type III Sites
  The Fulton  Country site  has permit
restrictions  that specify  18 special
conditions  relating  to  how  the. sludge
disposal operation is to be conducted, site
conditions, monitoring requirements,
and  runoff water quality. One of the
purposes for disposal at this site was the
restoration of strip-mined land to agricul-
tural productivity. The  crops grown are
limited  by the  EPA to animal feed.
Although the Sacramento  site is not yet
in full-scale operation at the time of this
study, the planning  process is  well
documented.  The site is subject to rules
from the State and County Departments
of Health and to orders from the Regional
Water Quality  Control Board, which
dictate how sludge is to be handled. The
regulations require that the groundwater
be protected,  that nuisance conditions
be minimized, and that there be no direct
surface  runoff.

Conclusions and
Recommendations

   1.  No evidence was found of adverse
      environmental impacts at the three
     types of dedicated municipal sludge
     application sites investigated. This
      result strongly suggests that well-
      managed  sludge-application-to-
      land projects can be environmentally
      acceptable regardless of application
      rate if properly sited, designed, and
      operated.
   2. The costs of the three types of OLD
      sludge operation varied extremely
      and were  strongly  influenced  by
      local conditions. No cost advantage
      could be determined for any particu-
      lar type of operation (Type I, II, or III)
      based on the costs of the six sites
      studied.
   3.  Selection of sludge management
      options for any community should
      be based on the relative information
      available for that community.  At
      many of the sites, specific methods
      of operation were dictated less by
      cost  than by social  and aesthetic
      issues.  For example,  the use of
      sludge incorporation equipment at
      the two Type III sites was dictated
      by concern about odors and other
      aesthetics. Sludge incorporation is
      more aesthetically pleasing, because
      the sludge applied cannot be seen
      (as, for instance, in spray irrigation,
      which is highly visible).

  The full report was submitted in partial
fulfillment of Contract No. 68-03-3018 by
PEER Consultants, Inc., Rockville, Maryland
under the  sponsorship of the  U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency.
                                                                                        r U 8 GOVERNMENT FWNTlNa OFFICE 1«M- 559-111/10758

-------
    LiliaA. Abron-Robinson and Leon W. Weinberger are with PEER Consultants, Inc.,
      Rockville. MD 20852.
    Gerald Sttrn is the EPA Project Officer (see below).
    The complete report, entitled "Technical-Economic Study of Sewage Sludge
      Disposal on Dedicated Land, "(Order No. PB 85-117 216; Cost: $14.50, subject
      to change) will be available only from:
            National Technical Information Service
            5285 Port Royal Road
            Springfield, VA 22161
            Telephone: 703-487-4650
    The EPA Project Officer can be contacted at:
            Water Engineering Research Laboratory
            U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
            Cincinnati, OH 45268
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Center for Environmental Research
Information
Cincinnati OH 45268
     BULK RATE
POSTAGE & FEES PA
        EPA
   PERMIT No. G-35
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use $300
        PS   0000329

-------