LAND APPLICATION OF
WASTEWATER SYSTE
IN AUSTRALIA
A Report of Foreign Trip
DECEMBER 1974
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Municipal Construction Division
Office of Water Program Operations
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
-------
ABBREVIATIONS
Board - MMBW-Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works
BOD - biochemical oxygen demand
cm - centimeter
COD - chemical oxygen demand
Farm - Werribee Farm soil treatment system of MMBW
in. - inch
MMBW - Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works
N - nitrogen
mgd - million gallons per day
mg/L - milligrams per litter
ppm - parts per million
P - phosphorus
SS - suspended solids
TERMS
Conventional secondary treatment - Reduction of pollutant concen-
trations in wastewater by physical, chemical or biological means.
Crop irrigation - Application on land of water to meet the growth
needs of plants.
Evapotranspiration - The unit amount of water used on a given area
in transpiration, building of plant tissue, and evaporated from ad-
jacent soil, snow, or intercepted precipitation in any specified time.
Grass filtration - Same as overland flow.
Land application or Land Treatment - The discharge of wastewater
onto the soil for treatment, reuse or crop irrigation.
Overland flow - Wastewater treatment by grass filtration, flooding
or spray-runoff, in which wastewater is applied onto gently sloping,
relatively impermeable soil which has been planted to vegetation.
Biological oxidation occurs as the wastewater flows over the ground
and makes contact with the biota in the vegetative litter.
Raw sewage - Untreated wastewater.
Secondary treatment - Something more than primary treatment,
usually treatment by physical, chemical, or biological means such
as trickling filters, activated sludge, or chemical precipitation
and filtration. Sometimes called mechanical treatment.
CONVERSIONS
Acre feet - million gallons (US) x 3. 06 (Imperial) x 2. 55
Currency exchange - A$ = Australian dollars
A$1.00 = US$1.35
US$1.00 = A$0.74
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract 1
Map of Melbourne and Metropolitan Area 2
Conclusions 3
Summary 7
Background - Land Treatment of Municipal
Wastewater in the United States 10
Site Visits in Australia 13
Highlight of Site Visits 14
List of Principal Persons Interviewed 15
Melbourne's Land Treatment System
The Werribee Farm 17
Livestock and the Treatment Process 19
Soil Characteristics 22
General Observation s 23
The Mosquito Problem 24
Farm Operations 25
Wastewater Treatment 25
Figure 1: Areas used for various
treatment methods 1958/59 26
Figure 2: Areas used for various
treatment methods 1970/71 27
Farm System 27
Table A: 1959 and 1971, Loadings and
Treatment Processes 27
Crop Irrigation (land filtration) 27
Table B: Chemical Characteristics of
Untreated Wastewater and Effluent
from Crop Irrigation Treatment 30
Overland Flow (or grass filtration) 30
Oxidation Ponds Treatment .31
Oxidation Ponds 32
Treatment Efficiency 32
Table C: Estimated Performance by Treatment
Processes on Annual Basis 33
Odors 33
Livestock Production 34
Other Systems of MMBW 35
The Storm Drainage System - MMBW 35
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Report 36
Movie of Werribee Farm 37
-11 -
-------
Other Land Treatment Systems in Victoria, Australia
Latrobe Valley Water and Sewerage Board,
Traralgon, Victoria 37
Map of Latrobe Valley System 38
Present Methods of Disposal 39
Mansfield Sewerage Authority 41
City of Benalla Sewerage Authority 41
Shepparton Sewerage Authority 42
Town of Kyabram Sewerage Authority 42
City of Bendigo Sewerage Authority 43
Miscellaneous Comments Concerning the Werribee Farm . . 44
References 45
Attachment A: Memorandum: Subject: Land Treatment,
from Deputy Administrator to Regional
Administrators A
Attachment B: EPA Press Release on Mosquito
Control Pesticide B
Attachment C: Report of U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
on Werribee Farm C
- 111 -
-------
LAND APPLICATION OF WASTEWATER SYSTEMS IN AUSTRALIA
ABSTRACT
This is a report of the soil treatment system in Australia operated
by the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works (MMBW) since 1897
and of some six smaller land treatment systems in the State of Victoria.
The Melbourne system, located at Werribee in the State of Victoria, is
currently handling an average daily hydraulic load of 150 mgd (US). The
annual percapita cost for the fiscal year ending June 1974 was US $1. 53
for operating the Werribee Farm. However, as the populations of Mel-
bourne and Geelong increase, and the urban areas extend outward toward
the Werribee Farm, obtaining additional land use adjacent to Werribee
has not been possible. As a consequence, MMBW is constructing con-
ventional mechanical secondary treatment works and plans to transfer
some of the hydraulic load from the Werribee Farm to the new South
East Mechanical System. In spite of this, however, by 1980 the Board
estimates that the pollutant loading will return to the maximum that the
Werribee Farm can handle. Speculation, caused by the building of
conventional mechanical treatment wx>rks, has led to reports in the United
States that the Board plans to discontinue the land treatment system. The
Board has stated in the most positive terms that it intends to operate its
soil treatment system indefinitely to the limits of its capacity. This re-
port is the result of site visits and interviews in Australia by Belford L.
Seabrook, Office of Water Program Operations, during the period between
October 15, 1974 and November 3, 1974.
- 1 -
-------
MMIW PLANNING I
"' 100MOMW !
MELBOURNE AND METROPOLITAN AREA
- 2 -
-------
CONCLUSIONS
With some modifications, mostoi' the conclusions in the report
(of which I was the Project Officer) entitled, "Survey of Facilities
Using Land Application of Wastewater", July 1973, EPA-430/9-
73-006, can be applied to the Melbourne system and to the other
systems I visited
1. Land application of waetewatersfrom community and indus-
trial processing sources is practiced successfully and extensively
in Australia.
2. TheMMBW Werribee Farm uses raw sewage, as do some
other land treatment systems; but in other projects various de-
grees of municipal sewage treatment are practiced prior to land
application. Most prior treatment is primary treatment in which
suspended solids, grit and oils are removed.
3. Under proper conditions, land application of wastewater
is a workable alternative to advanced or tertiary treatment of
municipal wastes.
4. Land application of wastewaters is practiced for several
specific reasons. Among the major reasons are: to provide for
supplemental irrigation water; the desirability of augmenting
groundwater sources; excessive distances to suitable bodies of
receiving waters; extraordinary cost to construct facilities to
reach suitable disposal sites.
- 3 -
-------
5. Land application of wastewaters can be considered as a part
of a water reuse cycle. Emphasis should be placed on waste-water
utilization, reuse and renovation.
6. Except for the Werribee Farm, present land application
facilities generally are not " stressing "the system. Many smaller
facilities were found to be using effluent on a crop-need basis.
7. Small communities and food processing industries will
probably continue to be the principal users of land treatment of
effuents for the near future. Melbourne is the exception for size
with a mean daily flow of 150 mgd.
8. A variety of beneficial uses are being made of wastewater
effluents. Although the Werribee Farm uses all of its effluents for
the production of grass on which livestock is fed, a variety of
beneficial uses is being made of wastewater in many smaller
Australian communities.
9. A large variety of potential opportunities for land appli-
cation of wastewater exist in many communities.
10. Successful operation of aland application system requires
the inputs from a variety of disciplines. For many systems, the
services of a geologist and environmental engineer are required.
For systems designed to augment the indigenous crop water re-
quirements by supplemental irrigation, the advice and guidance
of an agronomist and soils specialist will be needed. For larger
systems, social and behavioral scientists, as well as medical-
health personnel, may be required to assist in evaluating and
securing acceptance of this alternative means of utilization.
- 4 -
-------
11. Operation of land application facilities can be accomplished
without creating a nuisance or downgrading the adjacent environment.
The site visits indicated that a majority of the facilities were operated
by well-trained personnel, aware of the need for careful operation of
the systems.
12. Environmental analysis of the effects of land application facil-
ities reflects a general improvement of the environment rather than
impairment of the indigenous ecology. Several facilities were observed
where the effluent provided the only irrigation water available. No
instances of health hazards were reported from any existing facility.
13. Local public opinion - objection to becoming the recipients
of "somebody else's waste" - could be a major limiting factor in the
development of large land application systems at distances from waste -
water sources. Psychological concern over distasteful characteristics
of effluents can result in distrust of the ability of public agencies
to operate, control and manage such systems. However, successful
examples of effective operations, such as the Werribee Farm, demon-
strate that public acceptance can be achieved.
14. Monitoring of land application facilities and effects has been
minimal and mostly inadequate.
15. Energy requirements for land application systems may be
an important consideration.
16. The nature and quantity of receiving waters must be carefully
evaluated prior to diverting effluent to land application.
- 5 -
-------
17. When waste-water is discharged to land, and this method
is used as a means of advanced treatment by natural means, the
land must receive priority for this use over other optional land
uses. The needs of crop production, recreation and other benefits
can be in conflict with the utilization of a land application system
for the treatment of wastewater. For instance, the planting, cul-
tivation and harvesting of crops and the use of recreation facilities
may interfere with continuous application of wastewater onto land
areas. The need for the system to either utilize all of the flow
or provide sufficient retention storage for needed periods of non-
operation must be considered. The objective of providing adequate
treatment of the effluent cannot be sacrificed for other needs and
uses of the land; proper handling of the wastewater must be the
first priority.
18. Choice of ground cover can play an important role in the
success of a land application system.
19. Land application facilities that have been used for many
years are available for the study of long-term effects of such use.
They offer the opportunity to study effects on soils and ground-
waters.
20. Observations in the field of land application systems did
not reveal the existence of specific health hazards and disclosed
very little concern over threats to the health of on-site workers,
residents of neighboring areas, domestic animals or wildlife,
or of those who consume or come in contact with land-applied
wastewaters.
- 6 -
-------
SUMMARY
In the State of Victoria, and in some of the other Australian States,
there are numerous country towns which use effluent from sewage troal.
ment plants for the irrigation of pastures, recreation grounds, orchards
and golf courses. There are some 50-60 treatment works in Victoria
alone from which the effluent is taken for irrigation.
At the end of this report, in the section, entitled, "Other Land
Treatment Systems", I will comment on the other systems in Victoria
which I visited. The first and major part of this report however will
concern the Werribee Farm soil treatment area operated by the Mel-
bourne and Metropolitan Board of Works (MMBW). The Board (MMBW)
was constituted in 1890 by an Act of the Parliment of Victoria to
develop and operate a system of main and general sewerage for the
metropolis. James Mansergh, an eminent sanitation engineer from
London, submitted eight alternative schemes, five of which involved
treatment by land; two, disposal by ocean outfall; and one, by chemical
precipitation. Mansergh stated that the Werribee site was well situated
for land purification of sewage because it was exceptionally dry and
had an abnormally low rainfall compared with surrounding districts.
His recommendation, based on proven success in England, and on
the benefit of irrigation in an area of low rainfall, was for disposal
by flood irrigation on prepared land without prior treatment of the
sewage. Even today raw sewage is used at the Werribee Farm. Work
began in 1892; and in 1897 the sewage from the first property (a hotel)
was delivered to the system. Mansergh, of course, could not have
foreseen Melbourne's rapid population growth nor the demands that
- 7 -
-------
would be placed on the Werribee Farm within 30 years of its estab-
lishment. By the late 1930's, the heavy waste loadings had made
it necessary to not only enlarge the area of the Farm but also to
complement land filtration (calledcrop irrigation in the United States)
is called crop irrigation, with sedimentation, grass filtration (over-
land flow) and lagooning. Despite these additions to the F'arm's land
treatment operations, the 1897 system remains, to this day, basically
as it was originally conceived and built. Even the introduction of the
South-Eastern Sewerage System (in 1974) on the opposite side of Port
Phillip Bay fulfills Mansergh's original concept of a disposal system
serving each side of the Bay. The relationship of the Werribee Farm
to the South-Eastern Sewerage System can be seen on the accompaning
map of the Melbourne Metropolitan area. In June 1974, there were
some 800,000 ratepayers (population 1, 880, 000) being served by the
Board. The Werribee Farm serves about 95 per cent of the sewered
areas in the metropolis. The balance is served by four other major
and two minor systems. In addition to Werribee, the other major
systems are Braeside, Lower Plenty, Altona and Heatherton. The
minor systems are Kew and Maribyroong.
For the fiscal year ending June 1974, the annual per capita cost
of the Board's Werribee system was A$l. 13 (US$1. 53) for 95 percent
of the population of 1, 880, 000. Thisfigure includes all current costs.
The capital costs of the land and the original construction were written
off years ago. The average daily flow to the Werribee Farm is 125
million British Imperial gallons (150 mgd US).
-------
Because the cost of purification at Werribee is substantially less
than by mechanical treatment, as well as because the quality of the
effluent from Werribee is higher, the MMBW intends to continue to
utilize land treatment to the extent possible. However, as the popu-
lations of Melbourne and Geelong increase, and the urban areas extend
outward toward the Werribee Farm, the acquisition of additional land
adjacent to Werribee has not been possible. As a consequence, MMBW
is constructing conventional secondary mechanical treatment works and
plans to transfer about 45% of the hydrological load from the Werribee
Farm to the new South East mechanical system. In spite of this,
by 1980/81 the MMBW estimates that the pollutant loading will return
to the maximum that the Werribee Farm, as presently operated, can
handle.
Currently, all sewage to the Werribee Farm is raw sewage. This
has been the practice since land treatment was started in 1897. How-
ever, in order to provide increased treatment capacity at Werribee,
MMBW is giving consideration to using a combination of part primary
to full secondary treatment in conjunction with biological processes.
In summary, the MMBW Werribee system is in full operation, is
most successful, is substantially lower in annual per capita cost of
operations, and MMBW intends to continue to operate its land treat-
ment facilities indefinitely.
- 9 -
-------
LAND TREATMENT IN THE UNITED STATES
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972
(Public Law 92-500), the legislative history of the Act, and the reg-
ulations which have been issused in accordance with the provisions
of the Act, provide the statutory basis for consideration and funding
of land-application systems in the treatment of municipal wastewater.
The rationale and goals within which land-application systems
are to be considered are contained in the following sections of the Act:
Section 208 - Areawide Waste Treatment Management
Section 201 - Facilities Planning
Section 304 - Best Practicable Treatment Technology (BPT)
Section 212 - Cost Effectiveness Analysis
These sections, together with the regulations pertaining to these sec-
tions of the Act, and the Program Memoranda to the EPA Regional
Administrators, have resulted in a growing interest in the United
States in soil treatment systems for municipal wastewater. The EPA
Deputy Administrator, on November 1, 1974, wrote to the Regional
Administrators urging them to ascertain that the regional review
of application for construction of publicly-owned treatment works
requires that land application of wastewater be considered as an
alternative waste management system. The DA said that the RA's
should refuse to fund projects using other systems of waste treat-
ment if it can be demonstrated that land treatment is the most cost-
effective alternative; is consistent with the environmental assess-
ment; and, in other aspects, satisfies applicable tests. This
memorandum is included as Attachment A.
- 10 -
-------
In addition to the potential for being the most cost effective treat-
ment alternative (note the Werribee total annual per capita cost for
the fiscal year ending June 1974 is US$1. 53 for sewage treatment
serving a population 95percent of 1.88 million people), another signi-
ficant reason for the growing interest in land treatment is that PL
92-500 gives authority to the EPA Construction Grants Program to
fund publicly-owned soil treatment systems including the acquisition
of the land that will be an integral part of the treatment process --
Section 212(2)(A).
The EPA report, entitled, Survey of Facilities Using Land Appli-
cation of Wastewater by American Public Works Association identifies
certain existing soil treatment systems that were started in the United
States as early as 1880. However, these early systems started as
disposal projects, and there is a major gap in reliable design data
and information. The consequences of this dearth of design informa-
tion has handicapped the construction grants program, primarily be-
cause of the lack of standard criteria. Another deterrent has been
the lack of information concerning potential health hazards from soil
treatment systems.
Strangely, however, the same dearth of information concerning
potential health hazards from secondary treatment and discharge to
surface waters has not slowed the demand for the more costly conven-
tional reinforced concrete treatment works. In fact, it seems to
me that there could be far greater health hazards from secondary
discharge into surface waters because these waters are so often used
as sources of potable water by other downstream municipalities.
- 11 -
-------
Because the Werribee system is relatively large and has been
operating long and successfully, it was decided that EPA represent-
atives should make site inspections to obtain first-hand knowledge
technical data. In this connection, visits were to be made to other
Australian soil treatment systems as well. Information was to be
collected regarding: operating costs of the Werribee system; future
plans for soil treatment ope rations, and extent of public acceptance
throughout Australia of land treatment.
SITE VISITS IN AUSTRALIA
During the period between October 15, 1974 and November 3,
1974, I visited various locations in Australia and consulted with
various municipal officials, State officials, consulting engineers,
and other persons for the primary purpose of observing and collect-
ing information and data on existing long established land treatment
systems of municipal and industrial wastewater. During 4 days
(October 21-25, 1974) I was accompanied by Dr. Curtis C. Harlin,
Jr., of the Water Quality Research Laboratory, Robert S. Kerr
Environmental Research Laboratory, EPA, Ada, Oklahoma. To-
gether we visited the Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works
land treatment site at Werribee, Victoria, and the Latrobe Valley
Water and Sewerage Board at Traralgon, Victoria. Following these
two visits, Dr. Harlin and I separated and visited different land
systems in order that between us, we would have the opportunity
to observe, inspect, and collect information from the greatest
number of systems in Australia. Dr. Harlin visited the following
additional soil treatment systems:
- 12 -
-------
Mildura Sewerage Authority, Mildura, Victoria
Zinc Corporation Ltd., Broken Hill, New South Wales
The Broken Hill Water Board, Broken Hill, New South Wales
The Engineering and Water Supply Dept., Adelaide, South Australia
South Australia Department of Agriculture, Adelaide, South Australia
This report does not contain any information collected by Dr. Harlin
at these sites, which I did not visit.
My site observations include the following:
Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works, Melbourne, Victoria
Latrobe Valley Water and Sewerage Board, Traralgon, Victoria
Mansfield Sewerage Authority, Mansfield, Victoria
City of Benalla Sewage Authority, Benalla, Victoria
Shepparton Sewerage Authority, Shepparton, Victoria
Town of Kyabram Sewerage Authority, Town of Kyabram, Victoria
City of Bendigo Sewerage Authority, Bendigo, Victoria
HIGHLIGHT OF SITE VISITS
The highlight of the visit to Australia was the MMBW Werribee
land treatment farm where the net annual cost was A$l. 13 (US$1. 53),
as of June 1974, for 95 percent the population of 1. 88 million served
by this sewage system. For 1975, the projection of annual costs for
an estimated population of 1. 925 million, is A$l. 45(US$1. 95) per
capita. These costs are for an average daily flow of 125 million
British Imperial gallons (150 mgd US).
It has been said, "if you don't know where you're going, any
road will get you there. " This could have been as true of the
Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works, as it is of individuals.
Fortunately for the people of Melbourne, the Board of Works has,
- 13 -
-------
since its inception, known where it was going and has charted a
course that has led to a land treatment system equivalent to tertiary
treatment at a fraction of the cost of conventional mechanical
secondary treatment.
LIST OF PRINCIPAL PERSONS INTERVIEWED
(In chronological order of meetings)
1. Alan H. Croxford, Chairman, MMBW
2. A. G. Robertson, Engineer-in-Chief, MMBW
3. Frank B. Barnes, Assistant Engineer-in-Chief for
Engineering Services, MMBW
4. Jack Gray, Assistant Engineer-in-Chief for Operations, MMBW
5. James B. MacPherson, Werribee Farm General Manager, MMBW
6. Frank McCarthy, Werribee Farm Operations, MMBW
7. Allan Robbins, Werribee Farm Construction, MMBW
8. Keith Levey, Werribee Farm Engineer, MMBW
9. Bruce Salau, Werribee Farm Records, MMBW
10. Arthur Pierce, Werribee Farm Stockman, MMBW
11. Basil Holmes, Secretary to MMBW
12. George Samuel, Chairman, Perth Metropolitan Water
Supply Sewerage and Drainage Board, Perth, Western Australia
13. O. Max Falkiner, Member, Legislative Council (Upper
House) NSW Parliament, Sydney, NSW
- 14 -
-------
14. William Kennedy, Member, Legislative Council (Upper
House) NSW Parliament, Sydney NSW
15. E. J. Coffey, Director, State Pollution Control Commission,
Sydney, New South Wales
16. Norman B. Hannah, U.S. Consul, Sydney, NSW
17. James C. Marshall, U.S. Commercial Officer, Sydney, NSW
18. Robert Brown, Deputy U.S. Consul, Melbourne, Victoria
19. Gordon Coulson, Chief Engineer, Latrobe Valley Water
and Sewerage Board, Traralgon, Victoria
20. Dr. R. G. Downes, Director, Ministry for Conservation
of Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria
21. D. Little, Chairman, Environmental Protection Authority (EPA)
in Ministry for Conservation, Melbourne, Victoria
22. J.H. Alder, Deputy Chairman, EPA in Ministry for
Conservation, Melbourne, Victoria
23. Don A. Reinsch, Caldwell Connell Engineers, 434 St. Kilda
Road, Melbourne, Victoria
24. Honorable John Jess, Retired Member, Federal Parliament,
of Australia, Melbourne, Victoria
25. R.A. Sisson, Operations Engineer, Mansfield Sewerage
Authority, Mansfield, Victoria 3722
26. Keith D. Borley, System Engineer, Benalla, Victoria 3672
27. W. F. Humphreys, System Engineer, Shepparton Sewerage
Authority, Shepparton, Victoria 3630
28. C. L. Godfrey, Town Engineer, Town of Kyabram, Victoria 3620
29. Mayor A. M. Rowlands, Town of Kyabram, Victoria 3620
30. H. M. Moors, Engineer /Secretary, City of Bendigo, Victoria
- 15 -
-------
THE WERRIBEE FARM - INTRODUCTION
There are 17 residences located in the midst of the Werribee
Farm which are used by farm employees and their families. I
visited several of the homes of farm employees, met members
of their families including the children, and enjoyed a Sunday picnic
on the front lawn of one of these residences. There is no evidence
of health hazards caused by sewage irrigation in the adjacent fields,
and no concern was expressed by the occupants of these houses
about potential health hazards. To the foreign observer that I was,
these residences appeared no different than any other farm resi-
dences, and their occupants appeared no different than any other
farm families, either in Australia or in the United States. Inci-
dentally, on previous trips to Australia, I visited many rural
communities in every Australian state, except the Northern Terri-
tory; and I lived and worked on farms in the United States over
a period of several decades. In my judgment, the farm houses
located on the Werribee Farm are better than the majority of
farm dwellings in the United States, and the occupants are living
under better health conditions than some of their counterparts in
both Australia and the U. S.
The Werribee Farm soil treatment system is the outstanding
project in Australia from the standpoints of the lowest annual
operating costs, success, size and extent of experience with the
use of wastewater effluents. The map of Melbourne on page 2 shows
the relationship of the Board's Werribee Farm to Port Phillip Bay
and the surrounding Melbourne and Metropolitan areas. The South
Eastern Purification Plant (secondary treatment) is also shown
on this map.
- 16 -
-------
The Farm has served the residents of Melbourne as a reliable and
economical means of wastewater treatment and utilization since 1897.
The use of wastewater for irrigation of pasture land, and the subse-
quent production of cattle and sheep, is1 an outstanding example of
reclamation and conservation. Over the years, however, population
and industry have increased greatly. As a result, the Farm is no
longer able to cope satisfactorily with the volumetric and organic
loadings imposed upon it. Public and governmental awareness and
increasing interest in air and water pollution have focused attention
on odors from the Farm and on the quality and effects of effluent
discharged to Port Phillip Bay. The challenging objective of develop-
ing a master plan for water quality management at the Board's Farm
is to eliminate or minimize the adverse conditions while retaining
or even increasing the benefits attributable to reclamation and con-
servation.
LIVESTOCK AND THE TREATMENT PROCESS
The livestock at the Farm are not only money-earners from
the point of view of meat, they are also an essential part of the
treatment operations.
Because wastewater treated at the Farm contains a high propor-
tion of natural fertilizers, it promotes a prolific growth of pasture;
but since crop irrigation is an efficient method only if the vegetation
cover is kept short, cattle and sheep are effectively used to "mow"
the grass.
- 17 -
-------
Sheep were introduced to the Farm in 1900 and cattle some 10
years later. In the years since, the Board has sold more than 1.7
million sheep and well over a quarter million head of beef cattle
from its Angus and Hereford herds.
Grazing of sheep is on a seasonal basis, and the Board buys the
animals in various parts of the southeastern corner of Australia to
fatten them for market. The beef cattle, on the other hand, are
bred on the Farm and remain there until they are ready for sale.
The most suitable animals are retained for breeding and the others
are sold as prime meat on the hoof at Newmarket, Melbourne.
Sales of cattle are subject to the condition that they must be im-
mediately slaughtered at an abattoir in the Melbourne metropolitan
area, and those killed must undergo rigid inspection. This condition,
imposed in the 1920's by the Parliament of Victoria, was a political
one obtained by the commercial beef producers and had no health
hazard basis.
Diversion to the South Eastern Purification Plant of a portion of the
wastewater now reaching the Farm will ease, but not solve, the situ-
ation for a number of years, but continued growth in the Western
Catchment will produce flows and loadings well in excess of those
at present. For example, the loading of biochemical oxygen demand
will total about 750, 000 pounds per day before completion of the South
Eastern Purification Plant; diversion to that plant will remove slightly
over 100,000 pounds per day; increased development in the Western
Catchment will gain this amount back before 1985; and, less than
fifty years hence, the total loading may exceed 1,000, 000 pounds per
day.
- 18 -
-------
The l<'arm system serves about !).':> percent ol the sewered areas in
the metropolis. Except for wastes from the greater part of the Munici-
pality of Sunshine, which are discharged directly in the Main Outfall
Sewer, and from Williamstown, which enter the main system at Spots -
wood, all wastes collected by the Farm system flow by gravity through
two main sewers -the North Yarra and the Hobsons Bay Main Sewers
which unite at Spotswood.
The combined flow then continues for 21/4 miles via a 9 ft. 3 in.
diameter trunk sewer which terminates at the Brooklyn pumping station.
Flows in this sewer enter the pumping station through two penstocks,
or control gates, set at the bottom of a well, 144 ft. deep and 22 ft. in
diameter. The penstocks control the flow into each of two protective
screen wells, 156 ft. deep and 22 ft. in diameter.
From each screen well, the flow continues to its corresponding
pump well.
The two pump wells are each 178 ft. deep (internal) and 66 ft. in
diameter. Four pumps are installed in each well, and the eight pumps
are driven by individual electric motors, the combined rating of which
totals 12, 800 horsepower. Each pump has a maximum capacity of
42 mgd (50 mgd, US).
When Melbourne's sewerage scheme was originally designed,
Port Phillip Bay was selected as the most suitable body of water for
the final disposal of the effluents after purification.
The most suitable method of purification known in European
countries at the time was land treatment, and the site chosen near
Werribee, between the Geelong Road and Port Phillip Bay, possessed
- 19 -
-------
all the factors essential for the satisfactory operation of the method --
ample area, reasonable isolation, suitable soil and climatic conditions.
An area of 8, 847 acres was acquired, and the preparatory work began
in 1893. As the city has grown, it has been necessary to expand the Farm
area and today it covers 27, 000 acres or nearly 42 square miles.
The Board's Farm at Werribee begain operating in 1897. By 1900,
it handled a wastewater flow averaging 12 million gallons per day (14.4
mgd, US). Since that time, the flow has increased as a result of growth
of population and industry in the metropolitan area; andatpresent, averages
about 125mgd (150 mgd, US or 568,650 cubic meters). The mode of opera-
tion, originally begun as irrigation of 6,000 acres of land to produce pas-
turage for cattle and sheep, has been expanded over the years to include
all-year use of anaerobic and aerobic lagoons, sedimentation basins and
open sludge digestion lagoons, as well as overland flow (grass filtration)
from mid-autumn to mid-spring when irrigation demands are minimal or nil.
Rainfall at the Farm averages 19 in. (48.3 cm.) annually, of which
about 12. 5 in. (32. 2 cm. ) of evenly distributed rainfall can be expected
during the crop irrigation season; whereas the evapotranspirational potential
during the same period averages about 35.6 in. (90.4 cm.), indicating
that a major portion of the annual application of 44 in. (112 cm. ) of sewage
effluent has evaporated. The daily flows of raw sewage arriving at the
Farm vary greatly depending upon rainfall. The current average flow is
about 150 mgd (568,650 cubic meters); however, during storm periods,
peak flows as high as 300 mgd (1,140, 000 cubic meters) may occur.
Temperature variations are from a low of 40 degrees F (4. 4 degrees C)
in winter to a high of 112 degrees F (44 degrees C) in summer.
- 20 -
-------
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
There is no detailed classification of the Farm soils, but the surface
of the soil profile consists of a red-brown silt clay loam which is slightly
acid. Clay occurs at a depth of about 12 in. (30 cm.). The depth of
the clay subsoil is substantial, extending far below any core samples
that have been recorded. The report issued by the U. S. Army Corps
of Engineers in January 1974, entitled, "Selected Chemical Character-
istics of Soils, Forages, and Drainage Water from the Sewage Farm
Serving Melbourne, Australia", contains much detail on soil and forage
characteristics.
GENERAL OBSERVATIONS
Many aspects of the Farm operations are praiseworthy. Wide-
spread recognition of the need to conserve or reuse natural resources
has evolved only in recent years; however, since 1910 the Farm has
reused wastewater from Melbourne for irrigation of pasture land. This
process has converted land of little potential for agriculture to prime
pasture which now carries over 20,000 cattle and 10,000 sheep. By
using the natural resources, water and land, the Farm has marketed
more than 270,000 cattle and 1, 500, 000 sheep since 1910. Taking into
account the equipment and manpower costs related to livestock pro-
duction, the net returns from sales presently average over A$500, 000
(US$675,000) per year and significantly reduce the costs directly
associated with sewage purification at the Farm. Thus, from con-
servation and financial standpoints, the Farm represents a valuable
valuable resource to the residents of Melbourne.
- 21 -
-------
Conversely, there are features of the Farm which have led to con-
cern about continuing its present mode of operation. As both Melbourne
and Geelong extend outwards toward the Farm, and as the volume of
traffic on the Princess Highway increases, odors from the anaerobic
lagoons, sludge digestion, and grass filtration processes have become
a matter of increased importance and public notice. In addition, the
effluent from the Farm is the major source of nutrient chemicals
compounds of nitrogen and phosphosous discharged to Port Phillip Bay.
At a time when public and governmental attention is being focused on
the water quality of the Bay, these loads, as well as those of other
chemicals contained in the effluent, are of increasing concern.
Initial diversions from the Farm system to the Board's South
Eastern Purification Plant are scheduled for 1975. Although this will
result in lower loadings at the Farm in the short-term, growth of
population and industry tributary to the Farm will generate additional
loadings well in excess of those diverted.
THE MOSQUITO PROBLEM
I inquired about the mosquito problem in flat areas where there
was often little movement of the surface water. I was told that a
larvicide, called, Abate, made by American Cyanamid Corporation,
Wayne, New Jersey, was an effective chemical in controlling mosquitos,
sand fleas and gnats that often thrive in grass irrigated with sewage
effluent. Quite likely there are similar chemicals made by other firms,
but this is the only one that I could identify by name and source.
Please note EPA Press Release dated March 14, 1975, Attachment
B, which identifies Altosid SR-10 as an acceptable mosquito control
pesticide for use in the United States.
- 22 -
-------
FARM OPERATIONS
It is logical to consider operations at the Kavm I'rom two
first, in relation to its primary function for wastewater treatment and
second, in terms of its use for livestock production. In addition,
approximately three-fourths of the Farm area is a declared Wildlife
Sanctuary and provides a habitat for a variety of waterfowl and other
birds and animals.
WASTEWATER TREATMENT
In the early years, treatment at the Farm consisted of land fil-
tration by irrigation of pasture land with the underflow collected in
drainage channels and discharged to Port Phillip Bay. During winter,
wastewater flows in excess of the land's capacity were held in shallow
lagoons along the foreshore. Increasing flows during the intervening
70 years have lead to increasing the size of the Farm from about
6,000 acres to nearly 27,000 acres. Of this total, about 17,000 acres
are used for some form of treatment, and the balance is devoted to
drygrazing, roads, buildings, yards, and other purposes.
The use of grass filtration (overland flow) during winter months
began about 1928 and made it possible to phase out the shallow lagoons
along the foreshore previously used for winter flows. Farm operations
were extended west of Little River in 1930, and in 1939 the Board gave
Geelong an assurance that wastewater would be treated by sedimentation
prior to its conveyance across the river.
- 23 -
-------
1000 ACRE FEET PER MONTH
- 24 -
-------
its
cu
cu
O)
3
r-~
o
I/)
-o
o
_c
4->
cu
-------
Anaerobic and aerobic lagoons were introduced about 1935. Lagoons
can handle higher loadings of organic matter than either of the two other
methods of treatment, and as a result, their area has been increased
greatly in recent years to match increases in loadings. For purposes
of comparison, numerical values for the years ending 30 June 1959
and 30 June 1971 are listed in Table A and the monthly variations during
each year are shown on Figures 1 and 2.
Table A. Loadings and Treatment Processes, 1959 and 1971
Year Ending 30 June
TF53 1971
Total wastewater volume, milllion
gallons (US) 35,160 50,900
Average BODS, milligrams per liter
Pounds per day
Crop irrigation, million gallons (US)
Percent of total
Overland flow, million gallons (US)
Percent of total
Lagoons, million gallons (US)
Percent of total
384,
451
000
13,320
38
13
8
,680
39
,160
23
588
661,000
10,680
21
15,360
30
24,960
49
On arrival at the Farm, the wastewater is distributed to the various
treatment areas through a network of channels. Three methods of
purification are used. Short explanations of each method along with
pertinent comments follow.
Crop Irrigation (land filtration). This is the primary method which is
used throughout the summer. The land filtration areas are carefully
- 26 -
-------
prepared pastures, about 20 acres in exent, and divided into 50 bays
by low check banks. They are subsoiled, graded evenly and sown with
selected pasture grasses.
The wastewater is applied as in normal flood irrigation. Every
18-20 days, each block is covered to a depth of about 4 in. In all,
about 600 acres are irrigated each day. The wastewater filters through
the soil and when purified seeps into deep earth drains.
The periodic irrigation of pastures with wastes containing a large
proportion of fertilizing materials promotes a very vigorous growth of
grass. Rotational grazing by shc^p, cattle and some horses is essential
to maintain these pastures in a condition suitable for continued waste -
water purification.
Application rates for crop irrigation are controlled by the ability of
the soil to absorb water, rather than by the strength of the wastewater.
Examination of irrigation records from 1935-1971 shows wastewater
irrigation depths average about 3. 5 feet per year and range between
2. 9 and 4. 2 feet per year. In a given year, the application rate depends
on the rainfall pattern and evaporation. Including annual rainfall, the
land receives more than 5 feet of water depth per year. Based on
present wastewater strength, the average application rate amounts
to 30 Ib. of BOD per acre each day.
Crop irrigation is quite effective in reducing the concentrations of
many chemical constituents of concern in terms of their effects on the
receiving waters. Compounds of nitrogen, phosphorous, and most
- 27 -
-------
of the heavy metals are reduced dramatically. Table B shows results
of analyses made on the incoming wastewater and the average for effluent
collected from seven different drainage channels which pick up the
underflow from the irrigation areas.
Table B. Chemical Characteristics of Untreated Wastewater and
Effluent from Crop Irrigation Treatment
2J
mg/L Concentrations
Constituent
Organic nitrogen
Ammoniacal nitrogen
Nitrite
Nitrate
Orthophosphate
Total Phosphorous
Sodium
Potassium
Calcium
Magnesium
Copper
Nickel
Chromium
Cadmium
Zinc
Lead
Mercury
Untreated
Wastewater
14.3
35.0
0.75
0
26.2
32.1
400.0
95.0
65.0
80.0
0.45
0.20
1.0
0.01
1.3
0.55
0.0015
Effluent
1.0
3.2
1.3
0.4
2.6
2.9
770.0
26.0
45.0
107.0
0.07
0.16
0.09
0.006
0.18
0.12
0.0003
Percent
Removal
93
91
-
90
91
73
30
84
20
90
40
86
78
80
Source: MMBW Analyses on samples collected 17 May 1972.
2/ Concentrations of nitrogen compounds expressed as N; phosphorous
~~ compounds as PCX ; all other as the particular element.
Overland Flow (grass filtration). This process is used in purifying
the greater part of the normal winter flow when reduced evaporation
makes crop irrigation impracticable. In this method, the wastewater
is first directed into sedimentation tanks and, when the sludge has
- 28 -
-------
settled, the water is allowed to flow slowly but continuously over graded
areas on which Italian rye grass supplements the natural herbage to
make a dense growth. The plants act as a filter in which micro-
organisms absorb the organic matter in the wastewater so that by the
time it reaches the drain, it has the required standard of purity. The
overland flow areas are grazed only in the summer when they are
not needed for purification purposes.
Detention times are about 2 days. In contrast with crop irrigation,
loading rates are governed by wastewater strength rather than by volume.
Because of the short detention time, daily loadings rather than long
term ones are important. Maximum loadings of about 90 Ib. of BOD per
acre each day can be handled. In practice, however, it is more con-
venient to control application by regulating wastewater volume to the
overland flow areas. To keep BOD loading rates within the maximum,
the volumetric rate of application of sedimented wastewater is held
at about 1 mgd per 50 acres. Experience at the Werribee Farm
indicates that daily BOD application rates average about 70 Ib. per
acre per day.
Oxidation Ponds Treatment. This process operates throughout
the year to handle the balance of the normal flows which cannot be
treated by the other methods and also copes with the wet weather
excess flows. During this treatment, the wastes flow slowly through
large areas of shallow ponds where purification is effected by oxygen
which is partly absorbed from the atmosphere and partly provided by
algae in the presence of sunlight.
- 29 -
-------
Oxidation Ponds. In the lagoon treatment process, wastewater
passes through anaerobic lagoons and then through aerobic lagoons.
Detention times, relatively short in the former and long in the latter,
depend on the rate of wastewater addition, but generally are about
one month. BOD loading rates vary with wastewater strength and the
volume added. Experience indicates that average loading rates of
about 60 Ib. of BOD per acre per day can be handled in winter, while
about 100 Ib. per day can be handled in summer when photo synthetic
activity is greater due to higher temperatures and longer hours of
sunlight.
Treatment Efficiency. As shown by the annual averages on
Table C, the three treatment processes vary in their ability to
remove organic matter and other chemical constituents in raw waste-
water. The crop irrigation process is the most effective, but as
noted above, area loading rates are low and only about 20 percent
of the year's flow at the Farm can be treated by this process. The
reductions it achieves in compounds of nitrogen and phosphorous are
particularly noteworthy. In raw wastewater given crop irrigation
treatment, only 5 pounds pass through the top soil and are found in the
effluent. In contrast, the comparable values for overland flow are
40 pounds of nitrogen and 6 5 pounds of phosphorous, while for lagoons,
the values are 65 and 70 pounds respectively. In terms of nitrogen
removal, crop irrigation is 8 times more effective than overland flow
and 13 times more effective than lagoons. Similarly, for phosphorous
removal, it is 13 and 14 times more effective, according to MMBW.
- 30 -
-------
Table C. Estimated Performance by Treatment Processes
on Annual Basis
Characteristics
Percent of total flow
treated
Percent removal
BOD
Suspended solids
Total nitrogen
Total phosphorous
Detergent
E. Coli
Method of T
Crop Irrigation
20
98
97
95
95
80
98
Overland
30
96
95
60
35
50
99.
reatment
Flow Lagoon System
50
94
87
40
30
30
5 99.8
Odors. Sources of odors at the Farm have been studied intensively
several times, particularly in 1950, 1966, and 1968-1970. The 1966
work disclosed that the "odor potential", based on measured hydrogen
sulphide emissions, was four times greater in winter than in summer,
and that sedimentation and sludge digestion basins, lagoons, and over-
land flow areas were the principal sources. Crop irrigation areas
and effluent channels were found to be relatively insignificant sources.
At each of the major sources, the treatment processes are, or are
prone to be, anaerobic. Sedimentation and sludge digestion basins
are open, and hydrogen sulphide and other odorous gases are readily
released to the atmosphere. The anaerobic lagoons, an inherent part
of the lagoon system presently used, are economic on space due to
the high BOD loading which they can handle, but are the odorous
component. During winter, the area of anaerobic lagoons is greater
than in summer, which leads to the release of greater quantities of
hydrogen sulphide. In the 1966 tests, this gas was detected over
about half of the area used for overland flow.
- 31 -
-------
Livestock Production. Since 1910, the Farm has operated a commercial
beef enterprise, producing 20-22 month old steers and fat cull cows for
the Melbourne market. During the past 62 years, over 270, 000 cattle have
been marketed. Since 1946, almost the entire cattle output has been bred
and raised on the Farm. In addition, sheep are brought in and fattened
on the Farm, and during the same period, more than 1.5 million have
been marketed.
Early prohibitions against marketing the cattle for human consumption
because of the incidence of beef measles (cysticercosis) were overcome
in 1946 by the adoption of the carcass inspection and branding program.
In addition, the Farm stock has built up an immunity, and market rejection
for this reason is rare - 29 rejections out of over 116,000 cattle marketed
since 1946.
In summary, the principal purposes of operating the Werribee Farm
has been to renovate the sewage effluents and to recover resources that
could be converted into cash. Research for the sake of research alone
have not been a major factor, although some elements of research have
been done to seek out solutions to specific problems. The Werribee
Farm has 31 test wells for monitoring the influent (daily) and the effluent
(twice weekly) to Port Phillip Bay.
The Board has some information on soil analyses at certain locations.
In certain small areas affected by salt accumulation caused by ground-
water, there is some information. There is limited data on receiving
water quality, odors, and potential health hazards, as well as information
on BOD, SS, COD, pH, fecal coli, P, total N, nitrate, nitrite and Cl.
- 32 -
-------
OTHER SYSTEMS
Three of the other major systems -- Braeside, Lower Plenty,
Altona -- and the minor systems at Kew and Maribyrnong all use a
treatment process which involves sedimentation of the wastewater and
subsequent biological purification of the settled wastewater by trickling
filters and oxidation ponds, followed by chlorination. In the larger
plants, the settled material is broken down in special heated tanks, by
biological processes to an inert, humus-like material.
The extended aeration process at the Heatherton plant is suited to
the short term purpose of this plant. It is an activated sludge process
in which the wastewater is retained for purification in metal tanks
for over 24 hours.
THE STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM - MMBW
Since 1923, the Board has been empowered, by Act of Parliament,
to deal with main drainage works and control of watercourses and
drains in the metropolitan area. By agreement with councils, the
Board deals only with drainage, downstream of the point where the
catchment area exceeds 150 acres. Responsibility for the drainage
upstream of this point remains with the municipal councils.
The Board now has under its control about 720 miles of rivers,
creeks, watercourses and drainage works, including nearly 40 miles of
the Yarra River. It has constructed some 255 miles of drainage works.
In addition to the normal range of drainage work, major projects
have been undertaken from time to time and, in recent years, includes
work on the Yarra River, Moonee Ponds, Elster and Gardiners Creeks
and works at Altona. Work has also started on the Mordialloc Settle-
ment Drain.
- 33 -
-------
CORPS OF ENGINEERS REPORT
In May 1972 a team from the U. S. Army Corp of Engineers made
an intensive inspection and study of the Werribee Farm, land treatment
system. An important aspect, among others, was to learn as much
as possible about long term responses of the soil/plant ecosystem to
sewage applications. Accordingly, soil and plant samples were collected
and analyzed for their nutraient and heavy metal contents.
A report published by the Corps in January 1974, entitled, Selected
Chemical Characteristics of Soils. Forages, and Drainage Water from
the Sewage Farm Serving Melbourne, Australia, presents and discusses
the findings of this study. Specifically, data resulting from the analyses
of soil and plant samples, from sites under irrigation for periods of
48 to 73 years, is discussed in relation to a control sample, length
of time under irrigation, resultant water quality produced by the treat-
ment system, and expected ranges of constituent concentrations found
in soils and plants from the literature on the subject. A copy of
the Corps report is attachment hereto.
MOVIE OF WERRIBEE FARM
The MMBW has produced a 16mm film, entitled Werribee - In
Harmony with Nature, showing the land treatment operations at
the Werribee Farm. This is a nontechnical film, 773 ft. in length.
Copies can be purchased from the MMBW. EPA has ordered 10 copies
of this film, one for each Regional Office. Persons wishing to buy
a copy should address their inquiries to James B. MacPherson,
Manager, Werribee Farm, Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of
Works, 625 Little Collins Street, Melbourne, Victoria 3001, Australia.
- 34 -
-------
Other Land Treatment Systems in Victoria, Australia Latrobe
Valley Water and Sewerage Board, Traralgon
The Latrobe Valley Water and Sewerage Board was constituted
in 1954 as a regional water supply and wastewater disposal authority
and its first major project was to construct a wastewater outfall
from the Morwell area to a point near Bass Strait at Dutson where
either ocean or land disposal would take place. Land disposal at
Dutson was ultimately adopted.
A plan showing the location of the outfall and disposal area is
attached.
The Latrobe Valley Outfall was commissioned in 1956 to accept
wavStes from the Gas and Fuel Corporation's Lurgi Brown Coal Gasi-
fication Plant and the Australian Paper Manufacturers Maryvale Mill,
having a designed trunk capacity of 9 mgd (US).
However, from 1964 increasing contribution of domestic wastes
occurred, and the closure of the Lurgi Plant in 1969, together with
acceptance of saline wastes from the State Electricity Commission's
Hazelwood Power Station in 1971 caused marked changes in quality and
quantity of effluent accepted into the Dutson Disposal Area.
Disposal at Dutson has always been by way of pondage of effluent
on site for the colder half of the year, followed by irrigation over
some 2, 500 acres of pasture. Sheep and beef cattle are run on this
area and adjacent areas of developed dry pasture totalling 6, 500 acres.
- 35 -
-------
-------
Present Methods of Disposal. Currently all wastewater is transported
to the Dutson Disposal Area by a gravity outfall system starting from
the town of Churchill, via Morwell, Traralgon, Rosedale and Longford.
The outfall system comprises some 25 miles of reinforced concrete
pressure pipeline to downstream of Rosedale followed by the same
length of open channel.
On reaching the disposal area, all wastewater passes through a
paper fiber settling pond in order to remove some of the suspended
fibrous material before any irrigation occurs. Failure to do this
can result in the covering of pastures with sheets of "cardboard" and
consequent growth retardation.
From this pond the wastewater flows into holding storages which
are drawn on for irrigation water during the dry part of the year.
The irrigation layout consists of main distribution channels, head
ditches, thirty-three feet wide bays, and drains which lead all runoff
to the south shore of Lake Coleman.
The present stocking rate at the disposal area is 1, 200 beef cattle
and 8, 000 sheep.
The system serves a population of 55, 000 people and several
industries.
The collection system is 60 miles in length with an average daily
flow of 9.6 mgd (US). The only alternative to this land treatment
system that was considered was ocean dumping. The annual rainfall
is 23 in. (58 cm. ). Winter temperatures vary from 32 degrees F-65
degrees F; and summer temperatures vary from 50 degrees F-100
degrees F. The soil is sandy.
- 37 -
-------
The variable mixture of wastes has caused many problems. Gas
making wastes contain large slugs of tar. Paper wastes contain large
quantities of grit and fiber which vary wildely from day to day. The
State Electricity Commission wastes consist of up to 10, 000 ppm of
dissolved solids, mainly sulphates and carbonates. Increasing amounts
of domestic sewage without provision for peak storage has resulted in
operating problems in wet weather. There has been an odor problem
caused by the gases from the open collection channels which are mostly
hydrogen suphide, mercaptans, ammonia and carbon dioxide. Although
some of the wastewater is held in ponds for periods up to six months
the intense dark color is not reduced and the salinity increases slightly.
There appears to be a build up of ground salinity on irrigated areas
during extended dry weather periods. The increase in the use of brown
coal by the State Electricity Commission in the future is expected to
contribute to a substantial increase in saline wastes. Unless some
changes are made in the operation of the system soon, it would appear
that these problems could be expected to increase. Operating costs
have varied widely due to fluctuations in labor costs and sheep and
cattle prices, but since 1969 the operating costs have been running
between US$. 045 to US$. 058 per 1000 gallons (US).
Mansfield Sewerage Authority
This land treatment system, serving a population of 2, 000 was
started in 1970. The average daily flow is 144,000 gallons (US),
primary treatment only. The total area consists of 64 acres (soil
type-loam) of which 8 acres are used for ponding. Crops grown are
rye, clover and barley grass. The effluent is applied by spray
- 38 -
-------
irrigation, which is operated for 6-8 hours at night, 5-6 days a week
because of a lower night powe'r rate. The Authority does not own
any livestock or harvest any of the grass or hay, but has a contract
arrangement with a farmer to do this. The livestock owner pays a
small fee for grazing. The system works well and so far there have
been no problems. There are no objectionable odors.
City of Ben alia Sewerage Authority
This soil treatment system, serving a population of 8, 000 was
started in 1936. The average daily flow is 600,000 gallons (US),
secondary treatment. The total land area consists of 320 acres of
sandy loam, of which 290 acres are in grass for grazing livestock
owned by the Authority. Additional adjacent land is leased for growing
hay. Negotiations are proceeding to buy some adjacent land to expand
the irrigation operations. Flood-type irrigation is used. Lagoons are
used only for wet weather storage. The only odors are from the
lagoons, when they are in use. Until cattle prices declined in the last
year there has been no cost to the city for operations, but the current
cost is now approximately $1. 00 to $2. 00 per capita per year. The
system works well and there are no unusual problems.
Shepparton Sewerage Authority
This Authority does not use a soil treatment system, but uses
lagoons only and discharges the effluent to the Goulburn River. The
population is 20, 000, but 87%of the daily average flow of 7. 7 mgd (US)
originates from 3 food processing plants. The City's consulting
- 39 -
-------
engineers are studying the effect on the Goulburn River from, the
wastewater, and are considering a land treatment system but have
not yet made a report.
Town of Kyabram Sewerage Authority
This soil treatment system, serving a population of 5, 000, was
started in 1941. The average daily flow is 360,000 gallons (US),
secondary treatment. The total land area consists of 120 acres of
which 60 acres are irrigated and 55 acres are in holding ponds. The
Town is attempting to purchase 30 acres of adjacent land to expand
the system. The soil is loam and clay. The grass is grazed by
sheep owned by the Authority. The only objectionable odors are in
the vicinity of the trickling filter. The secondary treatment plant
is an old plant that was built before the effluent was first applied
to crop irrigation in 1941. A fruit canning plant in the city is not
connected to the city system, but has its own land treatment system
adjacent to the city system.
City of Bendigo Sewerage Authority
This land treatment system, serving a population of 46, 000 people
was started in 1922. The average daily flow is 3.6 mgd (US), primary
treatment. The total land area consists of 800 acres, of which 400
acres of grass are irrigated and 250 acres are in trees. The area
in trees is mostly a buffer area. The soil is loam, silt and clay.
The normal average annual rainfall is 18 in. (45.7 cm.) but in the
last 2 years the rainfall has averaged 40 in. (101.6 cm. ) per year.
Flood irrigation is used. The principal industries are meat processing
- 40 -
-------
plants and the fatty acids from the processing plants cause objectionable
odors in the oxidation ponds. The soil treatment system is functioning
well and the city plans to continue to use it, but is considering the
Dutch carousel treatment method to upgrade its primary treatment
facilities because of the fatty acids from meat processing wastes.
MISCELLANEOUS COMMENTS CONCERNING THE WERRIBEE FARM
The Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works is in the process
of making laboratory studies of trace elements in the livers of cattle
grown at Werribee Farm. The results of these studies will be re-
ported to EPA when they are completed, hopefully in mid-1975.
Certain additional soil samples were taken from Werribee Farm
during my visit, using the same procedures suggested by Dr. Thomas
D. Hinesly for Corps of Engineers samples taken in 1972. The
samples are currently being analyzed and will be compared with the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1972 soil tests. This will be done
in cooperation with the Corps.
- 41 -
-------
REFERENCES
1. Melbourne and Metropolitan Board of Works, Reports, Publicity
Brochures, Newsletters, Staff Newspaper, Unpublished Memoranda,
Calculations, Lists, Fact Sheets, Charts, Sewerage Committee
Notes, Board of Works Notice Papers, and Interviews with Board
Officials, Employees and Specialists.
2. Survey of Facilities Using Land Application of Wastewater, Prepared
by American Public Works Association, July 1973. No. EPA-
430/9-73-006: National Technical Information Service No.
PB-227-351 A/S. U.S. Government Printing Office Stock No.
5501-00666; Cat. No. EP2. 2:aW28/4.
3. Article, Waste into Wealth, Water Spectrum 1972.
4. Report, Program for Development of a Master Plan for Water Quality
Management at the Board's Farm, March 1973, by Caldwell
Connell Engineers.
5. Data and statistics from certain Principal Persons Interviewed.
6. Data and statistics from Dr. Thomas D. Hinesly, University of
Illinois.
7. Reports, Data, Fact Sheets and Interviews with Engineers and
Officials of other Land Treatment Systems Visited.
8. Notes from personal observations during Site Visits.
ATTACHMENTS
Memorandum from EPA Deputy Administrator to RA's, Attachment A.
EPA Press Release, dated March 14, 1975, which identifies Altosid
SR-10 as an acceptable mosquito control pesticide, Attachment B.
Report, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, January 1974 "Selected
Chemical Characteristics of Soils, Forages, and Drainage Water
from the Sewage Farm Serving Melbourne, Australia".
- 42 -
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
SUBjECT-JLand Treatment DATE: November 1, 1974
FROM: Deputy Administrator /s/ John Quarles
Hro: Regional Administrators
The purpose of this memorandum is to express my concern that
EPA must do a better job in assuring that land treatment is given
full and adequate consideration as a possible method for municipal
sewage treatment in projects funded with Federal grants.
Land application of wastewaters is practiced successfully and
extensively in the United States. Many land treatment systems
have been in continuous use since 1900. It is apparent from this
long-term experience and documented research work that land treat-
ment technology is a viable alternative to be considered as part of
waste management systems.
In section 201 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1972, it declares that:
"Waste treatment management plans and practices shall
provide for the application ,of the best practical waste
treatment technology before any discharge into receiving
waters, including reclaiming and recycling of water, and
confined disposal of pollutants so they will not migrate to
cause water or other environmental pollution and shall
provide for consideration of advance waste treatment
techniques".
Pursuant to section 304(d)(2), which directs EPA to publish in-
formation on alternative treatment management techniques and systems
available to implement section 201, the document "Alternative Waste
Management Techniques for Best Practicable Waste Treatment" was
published. Therein it considers land application as a viable
alternative for best practicable waste treatment.
In addition, the Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Regulations
which apply to all projects subject to best practicable treatment
state that:
"All feasible alternative waste management systems
shall be initially identified. These alternatives should
include systems discharging to receiving waters, systems
using land or surface disposal techniques, and systems
employing the reuse of wastewater".
EPA Form 1320-6 (Rev. 6-72)
-------
- 2 -
The above requirements shall be met for all projects awarded
after June 30, 1974. This means that land treatment must be con-
sidered in the basic selection of method for waste treatment.
I urge that you ascertain that your regional review of appli-
cation for construction of publicly-owned treatment works require that
land application be considered as an alternative waste management
system. If it can be demonstrated that land treatment is the most
cost-effective alternative, is consistent with the environmental as-
sessment, and in other aspects satisfies applicable tests, the Region
should insist that land treatment be used and should refuse to fund
projects using other systems of waste treatment.
Your director of Water Programs Division has received the draft
document "Evaluation of Land Application Systems". This document
should be utilized during the review process. Additional assistance
can bt- obtained by contacting the Municipal Construction Division
(OWPO), the Municipal Technology Division (ORD), or the Robert
S. Kerr Laboratory (ORD).
In order to promulgate proper consideration of land treatment
systems by future grant applicants 1 suggest that the Regional Office
provide opportunity for public awareness of land treatment tech-
nology. As an example, Region III is planning a two day symposium
November 20-21, 1974 at the University of Delaware to highlight
land application technology. The idea for the symposium originated
in the Regional Office and was planned cooperatively between the
regional staff and Office of Water Program Operations headquarters
staff. The objective of the symposium is to clarify the technical and
policy issues involved and to chart directions for future decisions
on land treatment techniques. The symposium will provide useful
information to over 300 engineers, scientists, public officials and
private citizens. This technique or a similar one could be used by
your region to emphasize consideration of land treatment.
-------
(A - 107)
UNITED STATES
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
ATTACHMENT B
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PBNALTV FOH PRIVATE USB $SOO
AN tCQUAL OPPORTUNITY BMPLOYKR
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA-339
^^Environmental News
O'Neill (202) 755-0344
FOR USE UPON RECEIPT
EPA REGISTERS "GROWTH REGULATING" MOSQUITO CONTROL PESTICIDE
The Environmental Protection Agency today announced regis-
tration of a "first of a kind" mosquito control pesticide for
limited use by public health officials and other trained
mosquito abatement personnel.
The pesticide, trade name Altosid SR-10, chemical name
Methoprene, is a growth regulating chemical that prevents harm-
less mosquito juveniles from maturing into pesky adults. The
mosquitoes are trapped by chemical action in their larval or
pupal stages until they perish. Altosid is produced by the
ftoecon Corp./ Palo Alto, California.
Prior to registration, Zoecon field tested the material
under EPA safeguards for the past two years in limited areas of
37 States ranging from New York to Hawaii.
The Altosid registration allows use against one category
of mosquitothe "floodwater" varietyin flooded pastures or
non-crop areas. Experience with the material, however, may
warrant EPA's extending the registration to cover additional
mosquito breeding areas. Altosid may be applied by either
airplane or ground equipment.
The pesticide appears to offer certain environmental
advantages over other EPA approved mosquito control techniques.
It is "specific" to the mosquito, i.e. it kills mosquitoes but
(more)
Rsturn this sh«»t If you do NOT wish to r*c*lv« this material Q, or It Chang* of address Is n*«d*d Q (Indlcat* thing*, Including zip cod*).
tPA FORM tSIO-1 (REV. S>72)
i-> C 1 '-'" '
-------
-2-
appears to pose less of a hazard than other mosquito pesticides
to applicators, fish, birds and most other wildlife. The Alto-
sid label notes, however, that it may kill shrimp and crab and
should not be used where these are important resources.
In addition, Altosid degrades quickly. Most of the
material is gone within two weeks, less than half the time it
takes other chemical mosquito controls to neutralize. The pro-
duct also has a low application rate three to four ounces
per acre of water.
EPA notified the public of receipt of the Altosid regis-
tration application in the July 31, 1974 Federal Register.
In the March 3, 1975 Federal Register, EPA published "exemptions
from tolerances" for residues of the chemical in drinking water,
forage grasses and legumes, and certain other specific agricul-
tural commodities. These exemptions represent EPA's findings
that Altosid poses no human health problems if it contacts
these food materials. Persons who feel they may be adversely
affected by these exemptions may file written objections within
30 days to the hearing clerk, EPA, Room 1019 East Tower, 401 M
Street, S.W., Washington, B.C. 20460.
A photo depicting the effects of Altosid is enclosed or
available from the EPA Press Office (202) 755-0344.
# # #
March 14, 1975
-------
Ml IHUHMtiNI L,
selected chemical characteristics
of soils, forages, and drainage water
from the sewage farm serving
m si bourne, australia
JANUARY
ft *(****f**?****
«! it«***»*»«*******««**
*» *****«#««**«****«**
»* i*»»«»»«******«»»»
it* it**»»«*»»«»»»»*f»»»«*»**»#»*«»»«»««««»
I***********
»*********«**»***** ************»*****
****ii*****t*****(***»****»******<>*
»**«**************'' - ' (*9**«»***» ***«* 9
**»**»»*>?, «****«********
**«**%**«*««^t**»««*****»***
***«*******»*****
>**>««**»**
»**(*«*i9it»a***«*«»t
** t *********
*»»»»!»»J*f?*«*»«I*»»»«»»»»
*******
****
*»**
»*****»
: ***f**««***(*******t»***»t**
»?*(«§*»»*«»t**».,*!?*«*»«**
**IiI«fI*»«jf****!*%***t***«***««t
*«***«»**»{«*§*****
t*»*t«**««ifI«ti«*Bi«I«**>«**I«t
«**»*»»»»****«*«'
tfi****ii**«>*«**i*{£** *
**»t*»**f«*f*««***
t**«****««fi*«S*|«f*}****
!***i*S|»*»i*(**
»t*i«**!*I*!***
**!****«**S*S**I2««*i««*t
prepared for Department of the Army, Corps of Engineers
------- |