c/EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office Of Water
(4204)
EPA 832-B-96-001
January 1996
Nomination Guidance
1996 Beneficial Use Of
Biosolids Awards Program:
For Operating Projects,
Technology Development,
Research, And Public Acceptance
-------
INVITATION TO PARTICIPATE
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is pleased to
announce the 1996 Beneficial Use of Biosolids Awards Program. This nine
year old program has previously recognized outstanding operating projects,
research studies, technological advances, and public acceptance activities
which promote the beneficial use of municipal biosolids. EPA especially
encourages your submission for awards consideration in the latter three
areas. Work and contributions you have made in these three developmental
and public acceptance areas is very important and could be very beneficial
when written up and shared with others.
New for 1996 is the initiation of a State Beneficial Use of Biosolids Awards
Program. This expanded program would promote public understanding of
biosolids recycling at the local level and emphasize the benefits and sound
science behind use. These local awards programs would involve actual on-
site demonstrations with municipal, citizen, university, etc involvement. The
public would see biosolids being generated, treated, and land applied. They
would also see and learn how monitoring and compliance with Federal and
State regulations are assured during biosolids recycling. Finally, there would
be clear demonstration of the benefits of biosolids use. Such an expanded
program would significantly increase the number of deserving projects that
receive recognition, and simultaneously help achieve the goal of making the
use of biosolids publicly acceptable by the year 2000. This State awards
program would also help educate the public and respond positively to those
who fear that biosolids use is a hazardous practice. EPA Regional Offices,
Water Environment Federation (WEF) member associations, and agriculture,
university and other stakeholder groups will join our National Headquarters
Office in helping to implement this program.
This pamphlet describes the awards program in detail and provides guidance
for preparing and submitting nominations. Separate guidance will be
available for those wishing to participate in the new on-site State awards
program. Please note that you need to send your nominations to EPA's
Regional Offices by the deadlines specified in this document so that your
outstanding efforts can be considered by both our Regional and National
competitions. The National awards will be presented in October 1996 at the
National WEF Conference in Dallas, Texas.
Sincerely,
1st s-S / / / I .--I
_ f/^*t(*i
Michael J. Quigle
Director, Municipal Support'-
Office of Wastewater Management
-------
NOMINATION GUIDANCE
for the
1996 BENEFICIAL USE OF BIOSOLIDS
AWARDS PROGRAM
OMB Control # 2040-0101
Expires 10-31-97
OMB NOTICE
Interested respondents may express their concerns regarding this nomination guidance. The
respondents' burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 8 hours per
response. The collection burden includes the time for the respondent to review instructions,
search existing data sources, gather and present the data needed, and complete and review the
collection of information. EPA's burden is estimated to average 6 hours to review the
responses.
Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of
information, including suggestions for reducing the burden: to Chief, Information Policy
Branch (2136), US Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street SW, Washington, DC
20460; and to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and
Budget, Washington, DC 20503.
PURPOSE
The purpose of the awards program is to recognize the significant
contributions which have encouraged the development and implementation of
cost-effective and environmentally safe biosolids beneficial use practices
which recycle nutrients, improve soil conditions, or otherwise conserve
valuable natural resources. EPA has a new booklet entitled: "Biosolids
Recycling: Beneficial Technology for a Better Environment" that lists many of
the sustained agricultural and environmental benefits. Many of the examples
given in the booklet were taken directly from past award winning nomination
packages.
-------
AWARD CATEGORIES
Nominations will be accepted to recognize excellence in a wide range of
activities that have stimulated beneficial use of municipal biosolids. National
awards will be presented in the following categories:
o Operating Projects (large & small). Outstanding, full-scale, beneficial
use technologies.
o Technology Development Activities. Significant technological
improvements that have been developed and fully proven at the
operational level; these may be pilot or full scale activities.
o Research Activities. Studies that have substantially contributed to an
improved understanding of biosolids beneficial use practices, improved
public acceptance, and/or advanced the technology.
o Public Acceptance Activities. Significant local and regional activities
that have been aimed at and have increased the acceptance by the
public of biosolids beneficial use practices.
NOMINATION AND AWARD INFORMATION
o Nominations for awards may be submitted by anyone including the
nominee, EPA Regions, States, municipalities, consultants, researchers,
or other interested parties.
o Nominated entries may include both individuals and groups from private
as well as public organizations.
o As these Nomination packages are prepared, it is important to tell the
story about your biosolids beneficial use activity in a manner that
clearly shows the benefits and simultaneously reduces natural public
concern. This information can often be utilized locally for press
releases, brochures and other public acceptance materials.
o Previous first place winning projects or activities will not be considered
as candidates for the same award category for a five-year period. In
addition, special award winners in 1995 will not be considered for public
acceptance awards for five years. However, second place winners can
reapply after a one year wait to try for first place in the same award
category. Unsuccessful nominees for awards may be immediately
submitted again the next year. Persistence has paid off for many
nominees that have won awards after submitting an improved
application in subsequent years.
-------
Check with your Regional EPA office for any details about a possible
local awards competition in your state.
For consideration in the National Awards Program, completed
nomination packages (see specified format pages 6 & 7) must be
received in duplicate by the Regional office in which your office is
located (see pages 9 & 10).
The tentative Regional deadlines for receipt of nominations are shown
on page 9. Important-Please check with your Regional Office contact
(page 10) for any Region-specific nomination guidance and for that
Region's final submission deadline.
Entries will be considered for State and Regional Awards (where
applicable) as well as National awards. Regions will forward one copy
of each qualified Nomination package to EPA Headquarters by the June
3, 1996 National deadline.
Nomination packages, received for the National competition, will be
reviewed by a panel consisting of representatives from EPA, WEF, and
other groups against the evaluation criteria (see pages 4 & 5) during
June 1996. State and EPA Regional offices (where applicable) will also
review the nominations for a separate competition in their Region.
Because the National and Regional award programs involve separate
review panels and because all qualified entries may be considered in
both competitions, it is possible that winners in the National award
program may differ from the Regional award winners.
Nominated activities may sometimes be chosen for special recognition
rather than a categorical award.
National award recipients will be notified about July 22, 1996.
National awards consisting of a certificate and plaque will be presented
in October 1996 at WEF's National Conference in Dallas, Texas.
Because of budgetary limitations EPA will be unable to pay for travel to
the awards program. Alternate provisions will be made to present
awards to those entities that are unable to attend the National ceremony
in October.
A short article describing each National award winning beneficial use
activity will be developed for the WEF Conference. Subsequent
publications describing those Regional as well as National activities will
be encouraged. Photographs and key facts about both winning and not
winning entries are very useful in EPA publications to encourage
beneficial biosolids recycling.
-------
EVALUATION CRITERIA
The beneficial biosolids use award candidates will be evaluated against the
following criteria.
FOR OPERATION PROJECTS [Two Categories: (1) <5 MOD (2) >5 MGD
(Note: Categorization is based upon the actual operational capacity, and not
the design capacity)
o Significant recycling/reuse of natural resources (e.g., nutrients, organic
matter, and energy).
o Sustained (several years), full-scale, proven operation.
o Consistent, cost-effective operation.
o Publicly acceptable.
o Compliant with applicable Federal, State, and local regulations.
o Excellence in project management.
FOR TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION OR DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES
o Sustained excellence in advancing our knowledge of technology (e.g.,
improved design criteria or operational practice).
o National application -- technology has potential for use in many areas
across the country.
o Operationally proven.
-------
FOR RESEARCH ACTIVITIES
o Greater public acceptability of biosolids beneficial use.
o Greatly improves our understanding of the environmental effects
associated with beneficial use of biosolids.
o Substantial contribution toward the development of improved
technology design and operation.
o Key information generated for the development of improved sludge
biosolids regulations and guidance.
FOR PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE
o Demonstrated increase in public acceptance. The term "public" is
meant to include regulatory agencies, agricultural organizations, water
quality professionals, public health officials, environmentalists,
academic institutions, and the news media as well as the general public.
o Characterized by dedicated successful individual and team efforts.
o Demonstrated willingness to share information and approaches for
gaining public acceptance.
o Proactive approach for successfully working with such entities as the
press and cultivating and gaining allies to explain the benefits and
diffuse alarmist stories that may arise.
o Program with excellent information transfer and training efforts that
have made a positive difference locally. Includes examples of making
biosolids management non-controversial at the national, regional and/or
local level.
-------
NOMINATION FORMAT
The information described in the Nomination Format should be supplied in the
nomination package. The completeness of information provided and manner
in which the nomination addresses the Evaluation Criteria in both the
Executive Summary and the text is especially important.
All nominations must be submitted in duplicate in the following format to the
appropriate EPA Regional Office (see pages 9 & 10).
1. IDENTIFYING INFORMATION (See sample front page form at end of this
section)
Name, address, affiliation, telephone number, NPDES number (if
applicable), and the spokesperson for the project or activity. Please
also indicate the applicable government officials that you would like
notified should your entry win an award (see form on page 8).
2. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (2 pages or less)
Describe the project or activity indicating the award category for which
the nomination is proposed and how it meets the evaluation criteria.
3. FACILITY/ACTIVITY INFORMATION (4-5 pages)
Provide the following relevant information to adequately support the
nomination.
(a) Biosolids type, volume (on the basis of dry solids being used per
day, week or year), quality, and processing information. Be
specific regarding the unit processes, including biosolids
production and processing details, biosolids quality, (e.g.,
nutrients and pollutants), and other details relevant to the
beneficial use practice or activity.
(b) Cooperating parties and their contributions to the beneficial use
project or activity.
(c) Duration and size of the project or activity, extent of ability to
operate at design level, and cost and effectiveness information.
-------
(d) Please give sufficient information about nominated operating
projects so that awards judges can determine their compliance
with applicable local, State, and Federal regulations.
(e) Where applicable give the project monitoring program, including
its use for determining compliance, to keep the public informed of
where biosolids are being transported how they are being used,
and to evaluate and modify management practices where needed.
(f) Description of project management activities emphasizing efforts
to hold down costs, to maintain and promote excellence in project
performance including working with allies, press and the public
and explaining and maximizing benefits of using biosolids.
(g) Description of training activities where applicable, leading to
improved operations, performance, and public acceptability.
(h) POTW pretreatment program and its effectiveness, if appropriate.
(i) Special innovative practices or activities.
(j) Obstacles (technical, political, public acceptance, or other)
overcome as a result of the activity.
(k) Evidence of enhanced benefits resulting from the activity (such as
lower costs for biosolids management, lower energy
consumption, enhanced soil properties, better crop productivity
and quality, enhanced plant disease resistance, lower human
health risks, greater National adoption of practice, and improved
public acceptance).
4. ATTACHMENTS
Supporting materials may be attached. The attachment should include a
short cover index page that lists the various supporting materials and
gives about a 4- to 6-line description of each item.
Photographs of the activity are strongly encouraged (where
appropriate). Photographic prints that can be copied for publication are
preferred rather than xerox copies of prints.
Note: Sheer bulk of information is not desirable. Be concise and attach
items that truly substantiate the importance and relevance of the
beneficial use project or activity. Please do not send materials that you
wish to have back because application materials are not returned.
-------
SAMPLE FRONT PAGE (1996 Biosolids Beneficial Use Awards Program)
I. Proposed Award Category
II. Facility Identification Name
a) Official Name and Address of Award Entity to be Engraved on Plaque
and Certificate
b) Type of Ownership
(e.g., corporate, private or public, university, etc.)
Zip Codes of Service Area
(used to notify US Representatives)
c) Contact Person Regarding the Nomination
Their Title, Address, Telephone No.
III. Award Notification
a) Name, Organizational Title, Address and Telephone No. of Local
Official (e.g., Mayor, Authority Board President, Corporate
President, Department Chairman, etc.):
b) Federal and State Political Notifications
US Senators & Representatives (list names only)
State Governor's Name & Address
c) Other
8
-------
TENTATIVE REGIONAL DEADLINES FOR NOMINATIONS
EPA Tentative *
Region Deadline Dates States
1 05-20-96 Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont
2 03-15-96 New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, Virgin
Islands
3 05-20-96 Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland,
Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia
4 05-20-96 Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky,
Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina,
Tennessee
5 05-20-96 Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio,
Wisconsin
6 05-20-96 Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma,
Texas
7 05-20-96 Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska
8 05-20-96 Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South
Dakota, Utah, Wyoming
9 05-20-96 Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, American
Samoa, Guam
10 05-20-96 Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington
* These deadline dates for receipt of award nomination packages are
tentative. Please check with your Regional Office for verification.
-------
EPA REGIONAL CONTACT: (See List of States in Each Region, Page 6)
Region
Address
Contact
Telephone
1
2
3
Municipal Evaluation Section Charles Conway
Water Division
JFK Federal Building, WCM
Boston, MA 02203
Water Management Division Alia Roufaeal
290 Broadway, 24th Floor
New York, NY 10007-1866
Water Protection Division Jim Kern
841 Chestnut Street (3WP23)
Philadelphia, PA 19107
617-565-3517
Fax:
617-565-4940
212-637-3864
Fax:
212-637-3891
215-597-3423
Fax:
215-597-3359
Municipal Facilities Branch Jim Adcock
Water Management Division
345 Courtland Street
Atlanta, GA 30365
Permits Section (WN-16J) Pankaj Parikh
Water Division
77 West Jackson
Chicago, IL 60604
Assistance & Outreach Branch Gene Wossum
Water Water Quality Protection Div (6WQ-AO)
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas, TX 75202
10
NPDES & Facilities Mgmt.Br.
726 Minnesota Avenue
Kansas City, KS 66101
Biosolids Mgmt Program (P2-W-P)
999 18th Street Suite 500
Denver, CO 80202-2466
Permits and Compliance
Water Division (W-5-2)
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
NPDES Permits Unit
Water Division (WD-134)
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
Mike Turvey
Bob Brobst
Lauren Fondahl
Dick Hetherington
404-347-3633 x 6543
Fax:
404-347-1798
312-886-6706
Fax:
312-886-7804
214-665-7173
Fax:
214-665-6490
913-551-7424
Fax:
913-551-7765
303-312-6319
Fax:
303-312-6067
415-744-1909
Fax:
415-744-1235
206-553-1941
Fax:
206-553-1280
Also The Water Environment Federation
Contact: Attention: Technical Services
601 Wythe Street, Alexandria, VA 22314
703-684-2400
Fax:
703-684-2492
10
-------
PREVIOUS NATIONAL BENEFICIAL SLUDGE USE AWARD WINNERS
Category
Winner \Activity]
AwardVYear
Operating City of Austin, TX, [Multiple Uses] 1st 1995
Projects Takoma Utilities Services, WA [Land Ap, TAGRO Soil Mix] 2nd 1995
(>5 MGD) City of Los Angeles, CA [Multiple Uses] 1st 1994
City of Columbus, OH [Multiple Uses] 2nd 1994
Clayton Co, Water Authority, GA [Heat Dry. Comp] 1st 1993
City of Austin Water & WW Util, TX [Comp. Air Or] 2nd 1993
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Util. Dist., NC [Land Ap] 1st 1992
Truckee Meadows Water Reclaim, Dist., CA [Land Ap] 2nd 1992
City of Omaha, NE [Land Appl] 1st 1991
Miami-Dade, FL [Air Dry. Composting, Marketing] 2nd 1991
Vallejo San. & Flood Control Dist., CA [Land Ap] 1st 1990
Cape May County Mun. Util. Auth., NJ [Composting] 2nd 1990
Hampton Roads, VA [Nutragreen • Land Ap., Comp] 1st 1989
Clayton Co., GA [Comp, Heat Dry, Tree Prod] tie 2nd 1989
Pima County, AZ [Land Application] tie 2nd 1989
Seattle Metro, WA [Forest & Ag. Land Use] 1st 1988
San. Dist of Los Angeles Co., CA [Composting] 2nd 1988
Operating Elizabethton, TN [Cocomposting]
Projects Chippewa Falls, Wl [Land Ap by Injection]
(<5 MGD) Cumberland County Util Auth, NJ [Land Ap]
City of New Smyrna Beach, FL [LandAp]
Lafayette Wastewater Trtment Plant, GA [Land Ap]
Chillicothe Munic Util WW Tmt Pit, MO [Liq Land Ap]
The City of St. Peters, MO [Land Appl]
The Sussex Co. Mun. Util. Auth., NJ [In-Vess, Comp]
Alpena, Ml [Revegetate Industrial Waste Site]
Blackfoot, ID [Land Appl., Outreach]
Hannibal, MO, Bd of Pub. Works [Econ Land Ap]
Redwood San. Sewer Service Dist., CA [Co-Compost]
1st 1995
2nd 1995
1st 1994
2nd 1994
1st 1993
2nd 1993
1st 1992
2nd 1992
1st 1991
2nd 1991
1st 1990
2nd 1990
Technology WSSC Montgomery Co., MD Regional Compost. Fac.
Development [Scrubber and Mixing Advances/Comp. Odor Cont]
City of Lancaster, PA [Composting Odor Cont]
N-Viro [Alkaline Stabilization of Sludge], OH
WSSC Montgomery Co., MD Regional Compost. Fac.
[Thermal Odor Control]
Austin, TX [Accelerated Air Drying]
WSSC Montgomery Co. MD, Regional Compost. Fac.
[Chemical Odor Control]
Sussex Co., NJ [Compost Odor & Process Control]
(continued on next page)
1st 1992
2nd 1992
1st 1990
2nd 1990
1st 1989
1st 1988
2nd 1988
*1st and 2nd place awards are not always given
11
-------
PREVIOUS NATIONAL BENEFICIAL SLUDGE USE AWARD WINNERS (cont)
Category
Winner [Activity]
AwanT/Year
Research
Activities
Pubic
Acceptance
Special
Recognition
City of Phila.Water Dept, PA [Comp Opns & VOC's] 1st 1995
Dr. Terry Logan, Ohio State Univ, OH 1st 1994
Rocky ML Forest & Range Exp Sta, NM 2nd 1994
Los Angeles County San Dist, CA [Comp Odor/VOC\ 1st 1993
Drs. Al Page & Andrew Chang, Univ of CA, Riv. 1st 1991
Dr. Paul Giordano, Tenn Valley Authority, AL 2nd 1991
Dr. Rufus Chaney, US Dept. of Agriculture, MD 1st 1990
Dr. Michael Overcash, NC State University 2nd 1990
Univ. of MN, USDA Research Team 1st 1989
W124/W170 Regional Research Comm., USDA, CSRS 1st 1988
Ailentown, PA/Penn State U, Palmerton [Reveg] 2nd 1988
Dr. Lee Jacobs, Mich State Univ.. Ml 1st 1995
Northwest Biosolids Mgmt Assoc, WA [Pub Acpt] 1994
Maine Waste Water Control Assoc, ME [Pub Acpt] 1994
Oyzboyd Environmental Svc, GA [Vert Bet Oewater] 1994
City of Tampa Hookers Point WW Trt. Plant
[Optimizing Use of Digester Gas] 1992
Dr. Aurthur E. Peterson, Dept of Soil Sci,
Madison, Wl [Sludge Research in Wi] 1992
The College of Forest Resources, Univ of WA
[Cooperative R&D, Appl to Forest Ecosystems] 1992
NutraLime, St. Paul, MN [Incirt. Ash + Water
Treatment Sludge for Land Improvement] 1991
Metro. Water Reclam. Dist. of Greater Chicago
[Long Term Multiple Contra, to Beneficial Use] 1991
BioGro Systems, Inc., MD [Sustained Service &
Enhanced Public Acceptance] 1990
City of Los Angeles, CA & Ag Tech Co., AZ [Public-
Private Team from Ocean Disp. to Ben Use] 1989
East Bay Municipal Utilities Dist., CA [Sustained
Contribution to Beneficial Use & Compnsting] 1989
Honorable Bloomington & Normal Water Rec Dist, IL [L AP] (OP) 1995
Mention Knoxville, Util Bd, TN [Land Ap, Strip Mine] (OP) 1995
St Charles MO River Trt Fac, MO [Land Ap] (OP) 1995
City of Salem, OR [Land Ap] (OP) 1994
Reedy Creek Improv Auth [Comp] (OP) 1994
Broward County [Mkt & Product] (Res) 1994
Benton Harbor-St. Joseph WW Trt Pit. [Land Ap] (OP) 1992
Madison, Wl, Metro-Gro [Land Use] (OP) 1988
Lime Lakes, OH, PPG Corp. \fm. Svc. Reclaim Alk Site] (OP) 1988
Hannibal, MO [Land Application] (OP) 1988
Bowling Green, KY [Land Application] (OP) 1988
Fallbrook, CA [Verm/composting] (TD) 1988
Ohio State Univ, Wooster, OH [Composting Biotech.] (Res) 1988
"1st and 2nd place awards are not always given
12
------- |