Septage Policy Paper

POLICY PAPER ON
Septage Management
in India
CENTRE FOR SCIENCE AND ENVIRONMENT

New Delhi
POLICY PAPER ON
Septage Management
in India

New Delhi
We are grateful to the Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India for their support to CSE as a
Centre of Excellence for Sustainable Water Management.
Prepared by
Water Management Team
May 2011
Centre for Science and Environment

41, Tughlakabad Institutional Area, New Delhi-110062
Phones: 91-11-29955124, 2995125
Fax: 91-11-29955879
Email: cse@cseindia.org
Web: www.cseindia.org
Contents
Abbreviations 5
Executive Summary 6
1. Introduction 8
1.1 Need for Septage Management
1.2 Understanding Septage
1.2 Status of Water Supply, Wastewater Generation and Treatment
1.4 Septic tank Dependence in India
1.4 Present status of Septage Management
2. Technological Options for Septage Management 14
2.1 Background
2.2 Current Practices
2.3 Stages of Septage Management
2.4 Septage Treatment Options
2.5 Sludge Disposal and Reuse
2.6 Liquid Effluent Disposal/Reuse
3. Case Studies 26
3.1 Background
3.2 Case Study 1: Septage treatment facilities in Indonesia
3.3 Case Study 2: Septage management in Malaysia
3.4 Case Study 3: Septage management in Philippines

3.5 Case Sudy 4: Faecal Sludge Collection service in Bangladesh (Dhaka)
3.6 Case Study 5: Septage Management in Thailand
3.7 Case Study 6: Sludge Treatment Plant at Musiri, Tamilnadu
4. Policy Framework for Septage Management 33
4.1 Background
4.2 Existing framework for wastewater management
4.3 Key Challenges
4.4 Policy Recommendations
4.5 Technical and Managerial Guidelines
4.6 Public Participation
5. Recycling and reuse of wastewater 49
5.1 Background
5.2 Recycling and reuse of wastewater
5.3 Quality concerns
5.4 Sewage/septage quality standards in practice
5.5 Categories of sewage/septage reuse
5.6 Wastewater Treatment-Technological options
5.7 Proposed guidelines
References 64
Annexure 66
Annexure 1 General Effluent standards
Annexure 2 Comparative statement of standards applicable in different countries for
septage, manure or leachate
Annexure 3 Standards for compost quality notified under MSW Rules 2000
Annexure 4 Standards for Leachate Quality from solid wastes dump sites as notified
under MSW Rules 2000
Annexure 5 Comparative analysis of various technologies
Annexure 6 Building Bye-Laws

POLICY PAPER ON SEPTAGE MANAGEMENT IN INDIA
Abbreviations
COD Chemical Oxygen Demand
CPCB Central Pollution Control Board
CPHEEO Central Public Health and Environmental Engineering Organisation
CSE Centre for Science and Environment
CSTF Common Septage Treatment Facility
CW Constructed Wetlands
DFID Department for International Development
DPS Duckweed Pond System
DWASA Dhaka Water and Sewerage Authority
DWWTS Decentralised Wastewater Treatment Systems
GDP Gross Domestic Product
HCWL Horizontal flow constructed wetland
IWK Indah Water Konsortium
LGU Local Government Units
MBR Membrane Bio- Reactors
MDG Millennium Development Goals
MLD Million Litres per Day
MoEF Ministry of Environment and Forests
MWCI Manila Water Company, Inc.
NUSP National Urban Sanitation Policy
O&M Operation and Maintenance
OSS On-site Sanitation Systems
PDU Pilot cum Demonstration Unit
RZT Root Zone Treatment Systems
SAF Submerged Aeration Fixed Film
SBT Soil Biotechnology
SCOPE Society for Community Organisation and Peoples Education
STP Sewage Treatment Plant
TKN Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen
TS Total Solids
UASB Up flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket
UIDSSMT Urban Infrastructure Development Scheme for Small and Medium Towns
ULBs Urban Local Bodies
USAID United States Agency for International Development
USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency
UV Ultra violet
WHO World Health Organisation
WSP Waste Stabilization Ponds
WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant
5
Executive Summary
This document from the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) is to assist the Ministry of Urban
Development, Govt of India in the preparation of policy guidelines for Septage Management. CSE has been
recognised by the Ministry of Urban Development (MoUD) as a Centre of Excellence in the area of sustainable
Water management. This document on septage management is draft providing the strategies and guidelines for
the preparation of National level septage management policy paper. This paper is presented in five chapters
With fast growing economy and urban population, the waste generation is steeply increasing in India. Due to
paucity of resources, the local bodies, which are responsible for management of wastes, are not able to provide
this service effectively. According to Centre Pollution Control Board (CPCB) study, out of 38254 MLD of sewage
generated in India, the treatment facilities are available for 30% (11787MLD). The indiscriminate disposal of
domestic wastewater is the main reason for degradation of water quality in urban areas, with negative impacts
on health, the economy, and the environment. Major part of urban India is yet to be connected to the municipal
sewer system and the people are mainly dependent on the conventional individual septic tanks. It is estimated
that about 29% of the India’s population uses septic tanks (USAID ,2010).
Access to improved sanitation in urban India has risen but the management of onsite sanitation systems such
as septic tanks remains a neglected component of urban sanitation and wastewater management. Septage,
which is a fluid mixture of untreated and partially treated sewage solids, liquids and sludge of human or
domestic origin, flows out of septic tanks and enters waterways or is generally disposed into nearest water
body or low lying areas. This leads to serious health and environmental implications. This necessitates a well-
defined regulation, guidelines, and management strategy for septage in the country. The septage management
approach, discussed in this report, is an effort for assuring that septage is managed in a responsible, safe, and
consistent manner across the states.
Chapter 2 of this document presents treatment and disposal options for septage. One has to select the suitable
option based on the local conditions, expected septage production per day, and its characteristics. While
selecting the technological options, suitable background study to be done to ensure effective operation and
maintenance of the treatment system adopted. Measures should be put in place to maximise the resource
recovery e.g. reuse of treated wastewater, manure used for biogas generation. The treated wastewater can be
reused for irrigation or other non-potable use. The sludge can be used as a bio fertilizer.
Septage management is a new concept in India. This guidance note for preparation of policy document for
septage management in India draws its strengths from the existing case studies and methods, which are
practised in other parts of the world in order to tackle septage. Chapter 3 showcases these case studies. These
6
endeavours throw light on the technical as well as on the policy or regulations that are being implemented and
followed by the agencies. In addition, these practices showcase the role of public and private service providers
for managing septage in the region or the country which will enable us to understand the vital positions and
responsibilities of both the players.
In India, there is no separate policy or regulation for septage management. However, there are several
environmental laws, which prohibit discharge of sewage into a water body or on land without proper treatment
beyond the prescribed standards. Consent is required for disposal of sewage or septage from State Pollution
Control Boards under the law. There are penal provisions for violation of the law. The above environmental
laws enforcement framework for industrial pollution control resulted in large change in the behaviour of the
industries and was successful in reducing industrial pollution in the country.
However, similar success was not evident in case of domestic wastewater including septage. This can be
attributed to inadequate technical ,managerial and financial capacities for management of domestic wastewater
and septage within the concerned agencies such as PHEDs and ULBs. Thus, it is very important that these
agencies are strengthened to manage the wastewater/septage in effective manner. A policy proposal including
strengthening of these local bodies and involvement of private service providers, a system of revenue generation
and effective collection, transport, treatment and disposal of wastewater, septage is included in chapter 4.
Finally several options for reuse of wastewater after proper treatment are proposed in chapter 5. A detailed
review of the WHO guidelines for wastewater reuse is discussed and a comparison is made on standards from
different countries to help the decision makers for adoption of appropriate standards for India. The major
problem in wastewater reuse is related to health as the septage contains human pathogens. It is very important
that the sewage is properly treated before reuse. The treatment options depend on the qualities required in the
treated wastewater, which in turn depends on the type of reuse. Various treatment options and their efficiencies
are presented which can help adopting a particular option for treatment depending on reuse.
7
1. Introduction
1.1 NEED FOR SEPTAGE MANAGEMENT

Providing environmentally safe sanitation to the people of world’s second most populous nation is a challenging
task. This task becomes more intricate in context to the country like India where introduction of new paradigms
of plans, policies or projects can challenge people’s tradition and belief. Around 600 million people i.e., 55% of
country’s population do not have access to safe sanitation or any kind of toilet/latrine (ADB, 2009). With around
102 million septic tanks and 60 million latrines (World Bank, 2006) and the projected improvement level to be
achieved in sanitation sector of the country, it is intriguing to observe that India lacks national septage
management guidelines/policies.
Inadequate sanitation has a great environmental economic and health impacts in India. In order to minimize these
impacts, Government of India has under taken several measures including increased investment in sanitation,
policy initiatives, regulations, and public campaigns to improve sanitary conditions in the country. This has resulted
in raising the sanitation status during the last two decades but a marked improvement is yet to be achieved.
The report “Asia Water Watch 2015” projected that India will likely to achieve its Millennium Development
Goals1 (MDGs) sanitation target in both urban and rural areas if it continues to expand sanitation access at its
1990–2002 rates (ADB, 2006). It is expected that by 2015, the percentage of people in urban areas served by
improved sanitation will reach 80% (up from 43% in 1990) and in rural areas, the projection is 48%, an incredible
improvement over the coverage rate of just 1% in 1990 (ADB, 2006). In real numbers, that means more Indians
will have improved sanitation. Despite the recent progress, access to improved sanitation remains far lower in
India compared to many other countries with similar, or even lower, per capita gross domestic product.
In the absence of any consolidated septage management practices, all these improved sanitation facilities will
continue to degrade surface water bodies and groundwater resources. Therefore, there is a need to invest in
septage management as a complement to sewerage development.
This document is an attempt in this direction. It provides some significant policy guidelines and legal framework
including technical options for septage handling, transport, treatment and disposal.
1.2 UNDERSTANDING SEPTAGE

“Septage2” is septic tank sludge that is a combination of raw primary sludge and anearobically produced raw
sludge. It has an offensive odour, appearance and contains significant levels of grease, grit, hair, debris and
pathogenic micro organisms (Solomon et al, 1998). There are broadly three categories of septage namely:
1. The Millennium Development Goals enjoin upon the signatory nations to extend access to improved sanitation to at least half the urban population
by 2015, and 100% access by 2025.
2. Ecology dictionary
8
domestic septage, industrial septage and grease septage. This document focuses on management of domestic
septage (household, non-commercial and non industrial sewage) in a responsible, safe and consistent manner.
Generally septage has three main components as follows:

Scum - floats on the top and is generally where the bacteria live that treat the waste
Effluent - the semi-treated liquid that comprises the majority of the material in the septic tank
Sludge- solids which collect at the bottom of the tank
The physical and chemical characteristics of these components and the whole septage can vary depending
on the septage characters (like size, design, pumping frequency and climatic conditions of the place where
it is located), the quality of water supplied and type of the waste from the household which is user specific
(WEF, 1997).
Source of Septage
Septic tanks are the primary source of septage generation. A septic tank is a horizontal continuous flow type of
a sedimentation tank (with a detention period of 12-36 hours), directly admitting raw sewage, and removing
about 60-70% of the dissolved matter from it (Garg, 2001). Septic tanks receive black and/or grey water and
separate the liquid from the solid components. A septic tank is generally followed by a soak-pit to dispose off
the effluent into the ground. The sludge settled at the bottom and the scum at the top surface of the sewage
is allowed to remain in the tank for several months during which they are decomposed by bacteria through
anaerobic digestion. Septic tanks are generally provided in areas where sewerage system is not present and for
catering to the sanitary disposal of sewage produced from isolated communities, schools, hospitals and other
public institutions.
Why is septage a problem?

The indiscriminate disposal of domestic wastewater is the main reason for degradation of water quality in urban
areas, with negative impacts on health, the economy and the environment. Discharging wastewater to the land
or to surface waters is a menace to public health and is a violation of the fundamental right guaranteed by The
Constitution of India (Right to Clean Environment). The unmanaged septage can pose direct and indirect socio
economic impacts. According to the report prepared by ECO-Asia in collaboration with Department of Waste
and Sanitation in Developing Countries, most countries neglect septage management, which results in significant
damage of environmental, and public health. This finding is further supported by World Bank study which
appraises that inadequate sanitation costs Rs 2.44 trillion (US $53.8 billion) per year to India (USAID, 2010).
Septic tanks require de-sludging at regular intervals in accordance with its design and capacity. Often only when
a tank gets clogged and filled beyond its holding capacity that de-sludging is done. The overflow from the tank
finds it way into any nearest waterways or land surface and pollutes it. The effluent and sludge from septic tanks
are often rich in phosphates and nitrates. The effluents lead to saturation of surface soil and water bodies with
nutrients posing a threat of eutrophication to the surface waters. People and animals in contact with these
contaminated areas are susceptible to infections. It also pollutes the groundwater, when the sludge percolates.
The leachate from the unmanaged septage virtually disposed on the subsurface can pollute the ground water.
Communities coming in contact with these contaminated soil or water become susceptible to infections and
water borne diseases.
9
Is septage only a menace or can be a resource ?

Though septage is problem it can be harnessed into a useful resource. USEPA (1984) indicates that domestic
septage can be a resource rather than a waste when properly managed. Septage contains plant nutrients such
as nitrogen, phosphorus, and in some cases varying amounts of micro nutrients such as boron, copper, iron,
manganese, molybdenum, and zinc (EPA, 2011). Septage can reduce reliance on chemical fertilizers and when
combined with fertilizers can provide the required nutrients for crop production.
1.3 STATUS OF WATER SUPPLY, WASTEWATER GENERATION AND TREATMENT

As per 2001 census, India’s population was 1027 million, out of which urban population was about 27.8%
presented in Figure 1.1. It is observed that from a modest base of 25.8 million urban populations in 1901, the
number of urban dwellers has raised to 285 million, signalling a phenomenal eleven fold increase in urban
population over the period hundred years (Government of India Census (1901, 1911, 1921, 1931, 1941, 1951,
1961, 1971, 1981, and 2001). Rapid urbanization followed by increasing prosperity has led to steep increase in
waste generation (both liquid and solid waste) in urban India. The uncontrolled growth in urban areas has made
planning and expansion of water and sewage systems very difficult and expensive to carry out. As per estimates
of UIDSSMT3, about 46% of households have water borne toilets while only 36% are connected with public
sewerage system. The local bodies, which are responsible for management of wastes, are not able to manage it.
FIGURE 1.1: Urban population growth trends
30
Percentage of urban population
25
20
15
10
0
1901 1911 1921 1931 1941 1951 1961 1971 1981 1991 2001
Year
Source: Government of India Census (1901, 1911, 1921, 1931, 1941, 1951, 1961, 1971, 1981, 2001)
Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) has been carrying out inventory of water supply, wastewater generation,
its treatment and disposal in class-I cities and class-II towns in the country since 1977-78. It is observed that the
sewage generation in class II cities is just 10 % of that of class I cities, the share of total sewage generated in
smaller towns is considerably low. This can be attributed to low per capita water supply and their widespread
dependence on septic tanks in the smaller towns. The water supply, waste water generation and treatment
status for class I and class II cities over the last four decades is presented in Figure 1.2 and 1.3 respectively.
From these figures it is evident that there is a phenomenal growth in urban population, water supply and
wastewater generation across the country. However the wastewater collection and treatment are lagging far
3. Urban Infrastructure Development Scheme for Small and Medium Towns
10
FIGURE 1.2: Water supply, wastewater generation, treatment in

class I cities (MLD)
44,769
50,000
1978
1988
35,558
40,000 1995
29,782 2006
2009
23,826
30,000
20,607
18,882
15,190
20,000
12,148
11,554
8,638
6,955
7,007
10,000
4,037
2,495
2,756
0
Water supply Wastewater Treatment
Source: CPCB reports (1978, 1988, 1995, 2006, and 2009)
FIGURE 1.3: Water supply, wastewater generation and treatment

in Class II cities (MLD)
3,325
3,500
3,035
1978
2,697
3,000 1988
2,428
1995
2,500 2006
1,936
2009
1,650
2,000
1,622
1,533
1,280
1,226
1,500
1,000
324
500
67
89
62
27
0
Water supply Wastewater Treatment
Source: CPCB reports (1978, 1988, 1995, 2006, and 2009)
11
behind. CPCB (2009) indicated that about 38,254 MLD of sewerage generated from class I cities and class II
cities out of which the treatment facility exists only about 11,787 MLD. This dismal position of sewage treatment
is the main cause of pollution of rivers and lakes.
1.4 SEPTIC TANK DEPENDENCE IN INDIA

Septic tanks are one of the most common forms of urban sanitation facilities in India. Major part of urban India
has not been connected to municipal sewer system which makes people dependent on the conventional
individual septic tanks. Access to improved sanitation in urban India has risen but the management of on-site
sanitation systems such as septic tanks remains a neglected component of urban sanitation and wastewater
management. As per USAID(2010) projections, by 2017 about 148 million urban people would have septic tanks
and about 425 million rural people would have access to improved sanitation (USAID, 2010) shown in Figure 1.4.
Thus the number of septic tanks will grow steeply in the next few years.
FIGURE 1.4: Growth in population and access to sanitation in India

900
800
760
800
760
700
700
700
640
Population (in million)
600
500
500
425
420
350
400
335
290
250
300
234
210
148
200
150
126
102
79
68
100
58
37
44
0
1992 1997 2002 2007 2012 2017
Year
Urban population Access to septic tank Rural population Access to improved septic tank
Source: USAID India, 2010
1.5 PRESENT STATUS OF SEPTAGE MANAGEMENT

According to World Bank (2006), approximately 50% of population in India lives in unhygienic situations. Among
the 350 million urban residents in India, 206 million (58.8 %) urban households do not have access to a drainage
network, only 102 million (29 % of the urban population) are connected to septic tanks, and 60 million (17%)
use pit or vault latrines4. Even though there are over 160 million OSS in Indian cities, there are no septage
management programs or treatment facilities in the country (NUSP, 2008).
4. National Institute of Urban Affairs, estimated in 2005 that 26% of all urban households have a septic tank
12
The adequate facilities and services for collection, transportation, treatment and disposal of urban domestic
septage do not exist in Indian cities. Most on-site sanitation systems (OSS) are emptied manually in absence of
suitable facilities. Ideally a septic tank system should be desludged every 2-5 years. But ignorance towards
maintenance and operational conditions often results in accumulation of organic sludge, reduction in effective
volume and hydraulic overloading which ultimately causes the system failure and release of partially treated
or untreated septage from the septic tank. Private operators often do not transport and dispose of septage
several kilometres away from human settlements and instead dump it in drains, waterways, open land, and
agricultural fields.
Manual de-sludgers working in inaccessible low-income areas and squatter settlements, usually deposit the
septage within the family’s compound, nearby lanes, drains, open land or waterways without permits or any
safety regulations. Indiscriminate discharge of untreated domestic/municipal wastewater has resulted in
contamination of 75% of all surface water across India (NUSP, 2008). This has imposed significant public health
and environmental costs to urban areas. According to a study by World Bank, the total economic impacts of
inadequate sanitation in India is estimated to be Rs 2.44 trillion (US $53.8 billion) a year which is equivalent to
6.4 per cent of India’s GDP in 2006 (USAID, 2010).
In India, septage management has not gathered much required attention, hence there is a strong need to invest
in septage management to develop well defined guidelines, policy and regulation.
The next chapter elaborates the technological options for collection, handling, transport, treatment and disposal
of septage.
13
2. Technological Options for Septage Management
2.1 BACKGROUND
The septage treatment required depends on the types and sources of domestic wastewater and faecal sludge
(see Table 2.1).
The domestic wastewater and faecal sludge often contains high concentration of organic matter and pathogens.
Hence it is important to provide environmentally suitable technological options for collection, transport,
treatment and disposal/reuse of faecal sludge/ septage.
2.2 CURRENT PRACTICES

In Indian towns/cities, municipalities/local government bodies are mainly responsible for ensuring the safe
handling and disposal of septage generated within its boundaries. They also establish local ordinances or
regulations to govern septage handling and to meet all requirements and standards for state permits. In most
of the cities, only crude and unhygienic septage handling practices exist and there is no proper municipality
infrastructure that performs the task of septage management. Most of the septic systems are not well
maintained in the country and if they are maintained by individual home owners, many of them do not have
the technical know-how for its operation and maintenance. For example, the household garbage disposals and
pouring of grease into domestic drains can reduce the effectiveness of the septic tank in the long run. In terms
of system operation, as many as 75 percent of all system failures have been attributed to hydraulic overloading.
National Building Code of India (2005) have published guidelines for septic tank design, construction, installation,
O&M but in practice the central, state and local governments fails to enforce these guidelines and requirements.
In reality, the sizes and designs of septic tank vary from one place to another and are influenced largely by the
local construction standards or the skill of masons.
TABLE 2.1: Types and sources of domestic wastewater and faecal sludge
Type Source
Faecal sludge Pit latrines and leach pits
Septage Septic tanks

Decreasing concentration of
Blackwater Water closets pollutants and pathogens
(top to bottom)
Domestic sewage Sullage and black water mixed together
Sullage (grey water) Personal washing, laundary cooking and cleaning
Source: WSP, 2008
14
Desludging of septic tanks is an over burden for many home owners that they postpone until the tanks have
reached its capacity and they start overflowing. Untreated septage is often disposed in low lying areas or
agriculture farms or even in a water body, which poses serious health and environmental problems.
2.3 STAGES OF SEPTAGE MANAGEMENT

The septage management basically consist of collection, treatment and proper disposal of septage. The basic
stages of the septage management are represented in the Figure 2.1.
2.3.1 Septage Collection FIGURE 2.1: Basic stages of the

An important feature of septage which has to be
Septage management
considered for septage collection is the septage
generation rate and sludge withdrawal.
Septage generation
Septage generation rate

Septage generation rates vary widely from place to
place depending on practices of septic tank use, Septage collection
number of users, water used for flushing, efficient
SEPTAGE HANDLING
functioning of the tank and level of contamination
control. It can be considered that the volume of Septage transportation
sludge evacuated from a septic tank corresponds
more or less to the volume of the septic tank, plus
some cleansing and rinsing water. The size of a septic
Septage treatment
tank in individual houses in India ranges from 1 to 4
m3, the size of a septic tank in office or apartment
buildings from 10 to 100 m3.
Septage disposal
The following estimations and assumptions can be

used for the purpose of this guideline, which can be adjusted to the local requirements:
● One septic tank per 4 inhabitants
● Average volume of septage produced through emptying of a septic tank by vacuum tanker: 2.5 m3.
● Emptying frequencies, which are in accordance with septic tank design (5-10 years intervals), will be observed
● Assuming there are 2500 houses in a town having individual septic tank.
● Number of houses served each year = 2500/5= 500
● Assuming septic tanks are emptied during 250 days (working days)/year or 500/250 = 2 tanks/d
● Total volume of septage in a day would be 2.5*2 = 5 m3
● Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD) loading would be 2,800*5 = 14 kg/d
● Suspended Solids (SS) loading would be 15,000*5 = 75 kg/d
(*) stands for multiply
15
Desludging of Septic Tanks

In most of the cases the septic tanks are desludged manually. This is considered as unpleasant and repulsive job
since the sludge (including fresh excreta) generally gets spilled around the tank during emptying, and poses a
risk of transmission of diseases of faecal origin. Given the safety and health risks of manual desludging, it is
critical for cities to take measures to stop this common practice. The most satisfactory method of sludge removal
is by vacuum tankers (Tilley et al. 2008). The faecal sludge needs to be correctly disposed and further treated.
For this, the faecal sludge should be separated from the liquid in drying beds or by settling. The separated
effluents from these systems should be treated in Waste Stabilization Ponds (WSP) or constructed wetlands as
described in next sections. Though desludging frequencies vary, it is generally recommended to desludge tanks
once every three to five years, or when the tank becomes one third full (Boesch et al. 1985). Frequent desludging
also helps reduce the pollution levels in the liquid effluent, which normally enters waterways untreated.
However, small amount of sludge should be left in the tank to ensure that the necessary microorganisms
responsible for anaerobic digestion remain in the system. Gas produced due to anearobic digestion might escape
when tank is open for desludging. Hence it is highly advisable to avoid open fires in these cases. Regular
desludging activities require well-organized community and public/private service providers. Because of the
delicate nature of septic systems, care should also be taken not to discharge harsh chemicals such as soap;
detergents etc into the septic tank (Tilley et al. 2008).
2.3.2 Septage Transportation

The septage transportation is one of the most important components of septage management. Recognizing a
standard method of collection, handling and transportation of septage is an important requirement. Desludging
trucks act as a “mobile sewer network” for onsite sanitation systems. They collect the septage at the building
level and transport it to treatment or disposal sites, thereby complimenting the underground sewer network.
These systems range in size and design, such as the small scale Vacutug (see Section 5.3), which can reach to
areas inaccessible to large desludging vehicles.
2.3.3 Septage Treatment and Disposal

Septage can be treated in a variety of ways, and there is no single best option considering the widely varying
conditions of urban areas in India. The selection of treatment depends upon characteristics of septage to be
handled.
Septage characteristics
The quality and quantity of septage coming out of the tank depends largely on the type of treatment adopted,
the frequency of desludging, climate, soil conditions, water usage and household chemicals going in the septic
tank. The physical and biological characteristics of septage are highly variable. The anaerobic nature of septage
results in the presence of odorous compounds such as hydrogen sulfide, mercaptans, and other organic sulfur
compounds (USEPA, 1994). Septage contains constituents that may result in unpleasant odours, risk to public
health and serious environmental hazards. Since septage is highly concentrated, if it is discharged into a water
body it may cause immediate depletion of oxygen, increased nutrients leading to eutrophication and increased
pathogens leading to a risk of health hazards. Knowledge of septage characteristics and variability is important
in determining acceptable disposal methods. In the absence of adequate information on septage characteristics
in India, typical characteristics of the septage in tropical countries are discussed in Table 2.2 based on the
results of Faecal Sludge studies in Argentina, Accra/Ghana, Manila/Philippines and Bangkok/Thailand.
16
TABLE 2.2: Characteristics of Septage in tropical countries

Parameter Type “A” high strength Type “B” low strength
Example Public toilet or bucket latrine sludge Septage
Characterisation Highly concentrated, mostly fresh FS; stored for days FS of low concentration; usually stored
or weeks only for several years; more stabilised than Type “A”
COD mg/l 20 - 50,000 < 15,000
COD/BOD 5: 1 to 10 : 1 5: 1 to 10 : 1
NH4-N mg/l 2 - 5,000 <1,000
TS mg/l ≥ 3.5 % <3%
SS mg/l ≥ 30,000 7,000 (approx.)
Helm. eggs no./l 20 - 60,000 4,000 (approx.)
Source: Strauss ,1996
The management strategies for septage differ based on the differences in the chemical and physical
characteristics of septage. The different septage treatment and disposal options are described in detail in the
following section.
2.4 SEPTAGE TREATMENT OPTIONS

The treatment and disposal methods of septage can be conventional or non conventional. The conventional
methods are the most widely used and they serve the purpose of treatment of sludge and effluent.
The non conventional methods are more improved and the methods are recommended for countries where
septage management does not exist. This is because these methods help the septage management sector to
leapfrog to improvement. The different methods of treatment of septage are summarized in Figure 2.2.
2.4.1 Pretreatment of septage

Pretreatment/stabilization includes physical, chemical, or biological processes. Stabilization is a pretreatment
method that decreases odours, the levels of pathogens and further decay of septage. Stabilization options
include lime stabilization, aerobic digestion, anaerobic digestion, and composting .
Alkali (Lime) Stabilization

Lime or other alkaline material is added to liquid septage to raise the pH to 12.0 for a minimum of 30 minutes.
Although there is a lot of variation in septage characteristics and lime requirements, mixing is not very difficult,
and approximately 20 to 25 pounds of lime is used for every 1,000 gallons of septage. Lime addition could be
done at any of these three points:
i) To the hauler truck before the septage is pumped,
ii) To the hauler truck while the septage is being pumped, or
iii) To a septage storage tank where septage is discharged from a pumper truck.
17
FIGURE 2.2 Methods of Septage Treatment and Disposal
DOMESTIC SEPTAGE
PUMPED OR TRUCKED
PRETREATMENT/ SCREENING
Lime stabilization Anaerobic digestion Aerobic digestion Composting
TREATMENT
INDEPENDENT SEPTAGE MUNCIPAL WASTEWATER

LAND APPLICATION
TREATMENT FACILITIES TREATMENT PLANTS
Aerobic Digestion
In this method, septage is aerated for 15 to 20 days in an open tank to achieve biological reduction in organic
solids and odour potential. The time requirements increase with lower temperatures. Normally, this is not a cost-
effective option.
Anaerobic Digestion
Septage is retained for 15 to 30 days in an enclosed vessel under anaerobic conditions to achieve biological
reduction of organic solids. Anaerobic digestion is generally not suggested except for co-treatment with sludge.
However, one advantage is that anaerobic digestion produces methane gas, which can be used as fuel.
Composting
Liquid septage or septage solids are mixed with a bulking agent (e.g., wood chips, sawdust) and aerated
mechanically or by turning. Biological activity generates temperatures that are high enough to destroy
pathogens. The composting process converts septage into a stable, humus material that can be used as a soil
amendment. However, there is a possibility of odours. After the septage is stabilized, it can then be sent for
further treatment or disposal.
2.4.2 Land Application

Land application is the most commonly used method to manage the septage after stabilization. There are
various application methods to dispose off septage on the land viz. Surface application, sub-surface application
and burial (USEPA, 1984).
18
a. Surface application
It is relatively simple and cost effective, uses low energy, and recycles organic material and nutrients to the
land. However, it has high odour potential during application and possibility of pathogen dispersal if not lime
stabilized. Surface application includes spreading septage from septage hauler trucks, specially designed land
application vehicles, or tank wagons onto sites, or using spray irrigation, ridge and furrow irrigation, and overland
flow (USEPA 1984). Septage can also be applied to the land as a fertilizer and soil conditioner. Application rates
depend on the slope, soil type, depth of application, drainage class and hydraulic loading. Septage must not be
applied before or during rainfall or in the areas where water table is shallow. Thus, an interim storage facility is
needed. The various surface application methods are as follows:
● Spray irrigation- Pre-treated septage is pumped at 80 to 100 psi through nozzles and sprayed directly onto
the land. Spray irrigation can be used on steep or rough land and minimizes disturbances to the soil by
trucks.
● Ridge and furrow irrigation- In this disposal method, pretreated septage is applied directly to furrows or to
row crops that will not be directly consumed by humans. This is used for relatively level land, usually for
slopes in the range of 0.5 to 1.5%.
● Hauler truck spreading- Septage is applied to the soil directly from a hauler truck that uses a splash plate to
improve distribution. The same truck that pumps out the septic tank can be used for transporting and
disposing the septage.
● Farm tractor and wagon spreading -Liquid septage or septage solids are transferred to farm equipment for
spreading. This allows for application of liquid or solid septage. The septage must be incorporated into the
soil within 6 hours, if lime stabilisation has not been done.
b. Subsurface incorporation
In this method, untreated septage is placed just below the soil surface, reducing odour and health risks while
fertilizing and conditioning the soil. Subsurface incorporation allows better odor control than surface spreading
and reduce the risk of pathogen dispersal. Septage can only be applied to slopes less than 8%, and the soil
depth to seasonal high water table must be at least 20 inches (or as mandated by local regulations). A holding
facility is required during periods of rainfall or wet ground. To prevent soil compaction and allow sufficient
infiltration, equipment must not be driven over the site until 1 to 2 weeks after application. There are two
ways for subsurface application:
● Plough and Furrow Cover— Liquid septage is discharged from a tank into a narrow furrow about 15 to 20 cm
deep and is then covered by a second plough.
● Subsurface Injection— Liquid septage is injected in a narrow cavity created by a tillage tool with an opening
of about 10 to 15 cm below the surface.
c. Burial
Major form of septage burial includes disposal in holding lagoons, trenches, and sanitary landfills. High odour
potential during septage application is inherent until a final cover is placed on the top. Appropriate site selection
is important not only to control odour, but also to minimize potential groundwater pollution.
● Holding lagoons- These lagoons are a maximum of 6 feet deep and do not allow any soil infiltration. The
septage is placed in small incremental lifts of 15 to 30 cm and with multiple lagoons loaded in sequential
order for optimum drying. To decrease odours, the lagoon inlet pipe can be placed below liquid level.
● Trenches- Septage is filled sequentially in multiple chambers in small lifts of 15 to 20 cm for optimum drying.
Each trench is then covered with soil (2 feet) as a final covering and new trenches are opened. An alternate
19
option is to leave a filled trench uncovered to permit maximum solids to settle and liquids to evaporate and
leach out. The solids, as well as some bottom and side wall material, are then removed and the trench can
be reused.
● Sanitary landfills- Production of leachate, treatment, and odour are the primary problems to be considered
when septage is added to sanitary landfills. As such, septage must not be added in landfills in areas that
have over 90 cm of rainfall, landfills that do not have leachate prevention and control facilities, or those not
having isolated underlying rock. A 15 cm of soil cover needs to be applied each day in the landfills where
septage is added and 2 feet of final cover within 1 week after the placement of the final lift. In general,
sanitary landfills are not cost-effective disposal options for septage.
2.4.3 Treatment at sewage treatment plants

Co-treatment of septage along with domestic sewage at a sewage treatment plant (STP) is a feasible and
acceptable alternative for septage treatment. Though septage is much concentrated in its strength than the
domestic sewage, its constituents are similar to municipal wastewater. Sewage treatment plant should have
an adequate capacity in order to accept the septage without hampering the normal functioning of other
processes. Septage has the potential to cause negative impact on the performance of plant, if the facilities are
not planned and designed to deal the septage. It may be necessary to increase treatment plant aeration capacity
as a result of direct septage discharge. Therefore, additional organic loads due to inclusion of septage could lead
to the requirement of facility expansion or up gradation of the plant to cater to the excess waste. The main
approaches to treating septage at a sewage treatment plant are:
● Septage addition to nearest sewer manhole- Septage could be added to a sewer upstream of the sewage
treatment plant, and substantial dilution of septage occurs prior to it reaching the sewage treatment plant,
depending on the volume of sewage flowing in the sewer.
● Septage addition to STP- Septage could be added to sewage immediately upstream of the screening and
grit removal processes. It is economical because of the very simple receiving station design and also allows
the wastewater treatment plant staff to have control of the septage discharge
● Septage addition to sludge digesters/sludge drying beds- Septage could be processed with the sludge
processing units of STP.
20
2.4.4 Treatment at independent septage treatment facilities

When the distance or the capacity of the plant becomes a limiting factor, it is not a feasible option to transport
and treat the septage to the wastewater treatment facilities. In this case treatment plants specially meant for
septage treatment becomes an attractive option. Independent septage treatment plants are designed
specifically for septage treatment and usually have separate unit processes to handle both the liquid and solid
portions of septage. These facilities range from stabilization lagoons to septage treatment plants such as
constructed wetlands (see Section 2.4.5). The benefit of using these treatment plants is that they provide a
regional solution to septage management.
Independent septage treatment facilities use processes like stabilization lagoons, chlorine oxidation, and aerobic
and anaerobic digestion, biological and chemical treatment. Many septage treatment plants use lime to provide
both conditioning and stabilization before the septage is de-watered. Solid residual can be sent to a landfill,
composted, applied to the land, or incinerated. The remaining effluent can be released to another treatment
works where it can undergo further treatment and then finally can be discharged.
Another feasible option is composting where bulking agents are easily available. The humus is produced after
composting which can be used as a soil conditioner. It is advised to de-water septage before composting but
since septage is resistant to de-watering, role of conditioning chemicals comes into play and usage varies
according to different loads. Septage treatment plants also use other processes to de-water conditioned septage
such as screw presses, plate and frame presses, belt presses, rotary vacuum filters, gravity and vacuum-assisted
drying beds, and sand drying beds.
Choosing an appropriate septage management method relies not only on technical aspect but also on regulatory
requirements. The management option selected should be in conformity with local, state, and central
regulations. Some of the factors that determine the process of selection include: land availability and site
conditions, buffer zone requirements, hauling distance, fuel costs, labour costs, costs of disposal and other
legal and regulatory requirements. Brief guidelines for selecting the technological options are presented in
table 2.3 below.
21
TABLE 2.3: Guidelines for selecting treatment and disposal options and
financing norms for septage
Town category Conditions Recommended Capital Cost O&M cost Facility Financing norms
technologies ownership
Unsewered Class-III, Remote land are Land application Low Low Municipality or Fees to users
IV and V towns and avoidable with of septage private
rural communities suitable site and soil
condition
Land available but Land application a Low to Low to Municipality or Fees to users
close to neighbour fter stabilization medium medium private
Inadequate land Disposal at Low to Low to Municipality Fees to users

area available with WWTP medium medium
suitable site and soil
condition, WWTP
available within
30 km with
adequate capacity
Partially sewered Land area available Land application Low to Low to Municipality or Fees to users
Medium size with suitable site after stabilization medium medium private
(class-II towns) and soil condition
but close to
settlements
Inadequate land Disposal ot WWTP Medium Medium Municipality or Fees to users

area, but available private
WWTP capacity
lnadequate land Disposal at High High Municipality or Fees to users

area; no available independent private
WWTP capacity treatment facility
or CSTF*
Class-I and Available WWTP Disposal Medium Medium Municipality or Fees to users
Metro-cities capacity private
No available WWTP Independent High High Municipality or Fees to users

capacity septage private
treatment facility
or CSTF
*Common septage treatment facility

Source: Complied by Centre for Science and Enviornmnent
2.4.5 Non- conventional Management of septage

The conventional methods of septage management can be improved further for better management of septage.
The improvement of septic tanks can help in improving the septage management by reducing the septage
generation rate, while constructed wetlands as a method of septage management makes it more sustainable.
a. Improved septic tank/Anaerobic baffled reactor

In conventional septic tank, most of the solids entering the septic tank settles down and form sludge layer at
the bottom of the tank. Oils, greases and other light materials float to the surface and form a scum layer (Figure
2.3). The accumulation of the sludge at the bottom and scum at the top of the septic tank over the period
reduces the wastewater volume storage and treatment capacity of the septic tank. This leads to reduced settling
of solids and gradually causes clogging and premature system failure.
22
To overcome the operational problems and to FIGURE 2.3: Conventional septic tank
improve the performance of the conventional
Vent
septic tank, baffle walls are introduced to have Inspection chamber
a multi chambered baffled septic tank. The

incoming raw sewage settles in the first Inlet Outlet
Gas Wall
chamber and the overflow moves to the next
Scum
chamber through pipes provided at the top of
each chamber. This movement of wastewater Liquid
inside the tank helps in creating the turbulent

flow which causes enhanced mixing of the raw Sludge
sewage with already existing activated sludge
and accelerates the decomposition of the solids Conventional septic tank
because of intensive contact between the

activated sludge and fresh influent (Figure 2.4). This biological activity can be further enhanced by providing an
up-flow filter. Anaerobic filters are provided in the penultimate chamber of the improved septic tank and provide
an ideal breeding ground for the microbes and results in effective treatment of incoming wastewater. Hence by
increasing the retention time of the incoming sewage, sludge accumulation problem can be significantly reduced
and overall efficiency of septic tank can be greatly improved (Sasse, 1998).
FIGURE 2.4: Improved septic tank

Vent for gas
Inlet
Outlet
Scum
Liquid effluent
Sludge Anaerobic filter
b. Constructed Wetlands (CW)

A septic tank provides only primary treatment and should always be followed by a soakage pit. In the areas
where water table is shallow, the effluent from the septic tank/improved septic tank could be connected to
constructed wetlands to prevent ground water contamination. Constructed Wetlands (CW) are a biological
wastewater treatment technology designed to mimic processes found in natural wetland ecosystems. These
systems use wetland plants, soils and their associated micro-organisms to remove contaminants from
wastewater. They act as a filter removing sediments and pollutants such as nutrients and other heavy metals
from waste water and septage. The bed is filled with porous media and vegetation is planted in the media.
These systems require land but offer very effective biological treatment response in a passive manner so that
23
mechanical equipment, energy and skilled operator attention are minimized. Vegetation in a wetland provides
a substrate (roots, stems, and leaves) upon which micro-organisms can grow as they break down organic
materials. Constructed wetlands are of two basic types: horizontal flow constructed wetlands and vertical flow
constructed wetlands.
Horizontal flow constructed wetlands

Horizontal flow constructed wetland is suited for secondary treatment of wastewater or liquid component of
the septage coming out of improved septic tank/anaerobic baffled reactor. The flow pattern is horizontal in the
filter bed. A horizontal planted gravel filter acts through the combined effect of the filter material and plants
growing on the filter media (see Figure 2.5). The effluent is odour free. As wastewater flows from one end to
the other end through the planted gravel filter, it is resupplied with oxygen. A depth of 30-60cm is maintained
in the bed with a slope of 1% (Srinivasan et al, 2008). The advantage of this system is that it can achieve high
treatment efficiency at low-cost and since the flow is sub-surface, there is no odour problem.
FIGURE 2.5: Reed bed systems with horizontal filter
Reeds
Inlet
Gravel
Liner
Gravel Bed media Outlet
Vertical flow constructed wetlands

Vertical-flow operation is normally used to treat sludge or septage having high solid contents. To operate in a
vertical-flow mode, the septage is uniformly distributed on the surface of the CW units (see Section 3.7). Vertical
flow constructed wetland are usually preceded by some form of primary treatment, although some are built to
receive raw sewage/septage. Each bed resembles a trickling filter, except that it has a layer of sand on top where
aquatic plants are grown, usually the common reed (Cana indica). The septage is introduced to the surface of
the bed and it percolates down through the sand and gravel media to the base. Intermittent dosing of the bed
by a pump or flushing device improves distribution and improves the aeration (see Figure 2.6).
Based on the septage handling, the system could be designed for optimum solids loading rate of 250 kg TS/m2.yr
and 6-day percolate impoundments. At these operational conditions, the removal efficiencies of CW units
treating septage at the range of 80 – 96% for COD, TS and TKN are achieved. The system could be designed to
retain the de-watered sludge at the top of the bed for 5-10 years without any adverse effect on septage
treatment and de-watering efficiency. The bio-solid contains viable helminth eggs below critical limit of sludge
quality standards for agricultural use. The above mentioned operational criteria is subjected to local conditions
and should be reassessed at the full-scale implementation (Koottatep et al., 2004).
24
FIGURE 2.6: Reed bed systems with vertical filter
Perforated pipe Reeds

Inlet
Liner
Gravel Bed media Outlet
2.5 SLUDGE DISPOSAL/REUSE:

The sludge which is generated after the treatment of septage should be disposed appropriately. Even after the
sludge is stabilised in the lagoons, additional stabilization or treatment measures may be required to generate
final product of acceptable quality.
Sludge can be handled and disposed in various ways:

De-watering, stabilization and application to approved land application sites (bio solids only) de-watering and
composting at an approved facility; incineration at an approved facility; disposal at an approved landfill,
processing into a fertilizer at an approved facility. These are detailed in chapter 5 (section 5.5.3).
2.6 LIQUID EFFLUENT DISPOSAL/REUSE

Supernatant/liquid effluent from stabilization lagoons or any other treatment process can be disposed of
through the following methods:
1. By approved subsurface disposal systems which are designed in accordance with the environmental
regulations in India including Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act,1974 and Environment
(Protection) Act,1968.
2. By discharge to a surface water body/ watercourse provided the liquid effluent quality meets the
requirements as specified in the CPCB/CPHEEO Standards and Guidelines Manual for the Collection,
Treatment and Disposal of Sewage.
3. Treated effluent can be reused for horticulture/landscaping or irrigation purposes under the WHO guidelines
for safe use of wastewater, excreta and grey water. Percolation or evaporation is not acceptable as methods
of disposing of the supernatant from stabilization lagoons. Lagoons must be designed with liners that reduce
percolation. More detailed options and guidelines on this subject are provided in Chapter 5.
The treatment methods discussed in the above sections are not common in India; however, they are being
extensively used in other parts of the World. In order to implement these options in India, it is important to learn
lessons from other countries. Some important case studies from Asian countries are presented in the next
chapter to comprehend the concept of best practices in septage management, that could be followed in India.
25
3. Case Studies
3.1 BACKGROUND
Septage presents a big challenge in our country and demands earnest consideration. India still lacks expertise
in various aspects of planning and promotion of septage management services. As this is a new subject in India,
it is important to understand the methodology and policies adopted in other countries to handle septage. Few
case studies showcasing good practices on septage management in Asian countries are described in this chapter.
These case studies from Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, Bangladesh and a recently started pilot
project in India displays the concept of septage management from technical and regulatory perspective. Also,
these practices display the efforts done by public and private players collaboratively to handle septage.
3.2 CASE STUDY 1: SEPTAGE TREATMENT FACILITIES IN SURABAYA, INDONESIA5

Indonesia with a growing population is one of the emerging economies of South-east Asia. The country struggles
to manage its septage as only 67 percent of the urban population is dependent on the OSS (WHO, 2008) and
only 11 cities have Waste Water Treatment Plants (WWTP). This situation has acted as an impetus for
introduction of septage management in the country. Government established 150 septage treatment plants in
large and medium sized cities across the country (USAID 2010). One such model treatment plant is in the
Surabaya which is a second largest city in Indonesia with a population of 3 million. 87% houses in the city have
access to improved sanitation facilities including OSS (USAID, 2010).
Surabaya’s septage treatment plant is regarded as one of the successful initiatives for septage management. The
facility is operated by the local agencies (Dinas Kebersihan) and activities like sludge collection and
transportation is provided by private companies using hauler truck service. The outline of the process for
septage treatment is shown in Figure 3.1
FIGURE 3.1 Surabaya septage treatment facility

Inflow
SAND SINKING TANK SEDIMENTATION TANK STERILIZATION

TANK
OXIDATION DITCH
Outflow
Excess sludge
Recycled sludge concentrated
Source: Malisie, 2008.
5. (For details, visit weblink http://issuu.com/lindashi/docs/indonesia-country-assessment_0/1 Accessed on March 15, 2011)
26
The septage treatment facility has a capacity of 400 cubic meters per day and is based on modified activated
sludge process. The plant consists of a sludge receiving facility, oxidation ditches, and sedimentation tanks,
sludge collecting tanks and sludge drying beds (Malisie, 2008). Dried sludge from the drying beds is then used
as manure. The results achieved in this facility are showed in Table 3.1
TABLE 3.1: Analytical results from sludge treatment plant in Surabaya

Parameter Inlet (mg/l) Outlet (mg/l) Efficiency (%)
pH - 6-8
BOD (Biochemical Oxygen Demand) 8,250 80 99
COD (Chemical Oxygen Demand) 17,250 200 98
TSS (Total Suspended Solid) 2000 100 95
Source: Malisie, 2008
Over the past decade private companies have been active in septage management sector. These companies
obtain a business license, nuisance permit and a disposal permit from the local government. This ensures the
compliance with the national standards and regulations. Surabaya city level government has comprehensive
ordinances and regulations like nuisance permits, tipping fees at treatment facilities, water quality management
and water pollution control to manage the septage efficiently. Surabaya’s sanitation agency collects tipping fees
each month at a rate of $0.30 per cubic meter (USAID, 2010). In this way the decentralised approach of planning,
development, implementation and management of wastewater and septage in Indonesia equipped the local
governments with responsibilities to monitor the cycle of septage management effectively.
3.3 CASE STUDY 2: SEPTAGE MANAGEMENT IN MALAYSIA6

Malaysia is deemed as a pioneer in sewerage and septage management services in Asia. It has achieved 100
percent septage treatment under Indah Water Konsortium (IWK) service area (USAID, 2010). In Malaysia, 95 %
of the urban population has access to improved sanitation (USAID, 2010). 73 % of the urban households are
well connected to sewerage and rest of 27 % relies on septic tank systems (Malaysia Water Association, 2005;
USAID, 2010). Malaysia generates approximately 6 million cubic meters of raw sewage and septage every year
(USAID, 2010). IWK (formerly a private company) provides sewerage and septage management services in most
of the parts of the country. The 100 percent status achieved under the auspices of IWK is attributed to the
holistic approach through legislative reforms and successful implementation of the treatment facilities. IWK’s
operational scheme is based on the three tier approach. First, to conduct a comprehensive study to locate and
restore the old treatment plants, subsequently developing its septage handling capacity. Secondly, to use
oxidation ponds for septage disposal while identifying and constructing trenching sites. Thirdly, is to construct
centralised septage management facilities for densely populated area.
IWK develops sewerage systems, takes care of O&M and de-sludging activities. IWK works in close association
with the regulatory bodies to establish limpid and concise policy guidelines along with the operating procedures
for the developers and operators of the treatment plants. Individual septic tank users participate in de-sludging
6. (For details, follow weblink http://issuu.com/lindashi/docs/malaysia-country-assessment_0/1 Accessed on March 15, 2011)
27
programs and pays semi annual wastewater bills at the rate of $1.70 a month as compared to $2.20 for those
connected to sewerage. For special de-sludging requests, IWK charges $14 to $50 per tank depending on the
size of the tank (Indah Water Konsortium , 2008). This demonstrates the collaborative efforts of Government
and private sectors to achieve a unified goal. During this process, expertise in various aspects of planning and
promotion of the septage management services has also been achieved. Malaysia has also established
consolidated legal framework along with the institutional responsibilities to ensure provision of sewerage and
septage services at the national level. Regulations like Sewerage Services Act (SSA) (from 1993 to 2008) and
Water Services Industry Act (from 2008) act as a tool to provide efficiently monitored water and sewerage
services in the country.
In this manner, Malaysia’s government has improved sewerage and septage management practices
exponentially in past two decades. These experiences can help other countries which are in the process of
developing the guidelines and services in wastewater/septage management field.
3.4 CASE STUDY 3: SEPTAGE MANAGEMENT IN MANILA, PHILIPPINES7

Approximately 40 % of all Filipino households are based on septic tanks (ADB, 2007). In Manila, 85 % of
households are OSS systems based and only 5 % of the septage generated in the city is being treated. In the east
zone, Manila Water Company, Inc. (MWCI) initiated septage management pilot projects in the city to provide
regular de-sludging services to 5.6 million people (USAID, 2010). MWCI has encouraged decentralized treatment
of septage by establishing localized treatment plants. MWCI maintains a fleet of over 90 vacuum trucks for de-
sludging of septic tanks in its service area on a rotating, five-to-seven-year cycle. MWCI operates three septage
treatment facilities with a total treatment capacity of over 1,540 cubic meters per day (USAID, 2010). In the west
zone another company, Maynilad Water Services, Inc. (MWSI) operates a dedicated septage treatment plant
with a capacity of 450 cubic meters per day and perform de-sludging activities. These agencies charge an
“environmental fee” by adding 10 percent to the water bill as de-sludging activity charges . The Philippines is
one of the few countries in Asia that has a national policy and has issued inclusive set of laws on septage
management. The Clean Water Act of 2004 (CWA) necessitate Local Government Units (LGUs) and water districts
to build septage management programs in those areas which are deficient of sewerage systems. As a result, two
cities have adopted decree on septage management and constructed septage treatment facilities. Private service
providers in Metro city Manila have also participated in the collection and treatment of septage. These initiatives
serve as an example for other cities and countries in the region.
The Department of Health manual states detailed guidance and local regulation notes on septage collection,
handling, transport, treatment, and disposal (USAID, 2010).
3.5 CASE STUDY 4: FAECAL SLUDGE COLLECTION SERVICE IN DHAKA, BANGLADESH8

Recognising the potential demand for faecal sludge removal in all urban entities in Dhaka, WaterAid (non profit
organisation in Bangladesh) addressed the need by introducing a pilot project in December 2000. WaterAid
imported a Vacutug system for collection and transportation of faecal sludge in Dhaka. The O&M responsibility
was delegated to a regional partner DSK. DSK was also responsible for establishing partnership with Dhaka
Water and Sewerage Authority (DWASA) for the discharge of the collected faecal sludge into main sewer line.
Vacutug system was inspired and adopted from the technology developed in Kenya. But due to the technical
7. (For details, follow web link http://issuu.com/lindashi/docs/philippines-country-assessment_0), Accessed on March 15, 2011
8. (For details refer: Decentralised domestic wastewater and faecal sludge management in Bangladesh- An output from a DFID funded research project
(ENG KaR 8056) May 2005).
28
FIGURE 3.2: The Vacutug being used to desludge a cesspool
Source : DFID 2005
limitations and high density of housing in slums, this system was inaccessible to many places and became limited
in its approach. To overcome this drawback, Vacutug was redesigned and manufactured locally to offer flexibility
and mobility without losing the capacity to collect a substantial volume of faecal sludge within one operation.
A larger 1900-litre and a small tank of 200-litre capacity was manufactured. This new Vacutug was mounted on
wheels and could be attached to other vehicle. It was operational in July 2001. It took 10- 20 minutes to fill. One
complete operation took 90 minutes which included preparation and cleaning of the Vacutug after use.
The Vacutug system garnered interest from other areas also. Apart from providing services to households in
slums and squatter settlements, the facility also responded to demands from households in middle and higher
income neighbourhoods, schools and other institutions and factories, which were located in other parts of the
city. As a result, within a few months the revenue generated from the Vacutug services was enough to cover the
staff salary and maintenance expenses (DFID, 2005).
3.6 CASE STUDY 5: SEPTAGE MANAGEMENT IN THAILAND9

Thailand generates 18.5 million cubic meters of septage each year (USAID, 2010). Most of the treated septage
is used as a fertilizer as it does not contain any harmful chemical or heavy metals. The septage treatment
facilities are based on anaerobic digestion, co-treatment with sewage or constructed wetlands (USAID, 2010).
A septage treatment plant is running successfully in Nonthaburi municipality. Nonthaburi has 270,000
populations and is situated in the north of Bangkok. This treatment plant is considered as successful effort to
tackle septage in the city. The plant is based on anaerobic digestion tanks (called “bio-tanks”), sludge drying beds
and oxidation ponds to transform septage into fertilizer. The process is shown in Figure 3.3.
FIGURE 3.3: Septage treatment process at Nothanburi treatment

plant
Solids as fertilizer
Septage
Bio tank
Oxidation pond
Liquid
Anaerobic digester Sludge drying bed effluent
Reuse for horticulture
9. For detailed information, visit we blink http://issuu.com/lindashi/docs/thailand-country-assessment_0/1, Accessed on March 15, 2011
29
FIGURE 3.4: Anaerobic digestion tanks/bio tanks at septage treatment

plant Nonthaburi
Source: USAID 2010
The collected septage from the septic tanks first undergoes anaerobic digestion. Then the digested sludge goes
to the drying beds. The liquid portion filters through sand beds from the sludge drying beds and goes into the
oxidization ponds. The treated liquid effluent is then used as fertilizer in the city’s public parks and surrounding
green areas. The plant also has its own collection vehicles.
The Nonthaburi septage treatment plant is designated as a remarkable endeavour because of its concerted
approach for its public outreach as a service provider, spreading awareness in the community about the facility
and also generating revenues by selling the fertilizer. There is a growing demand for both septage collection and
fertilizer in the area which has influenced Nonthaburi to expand its facilities. Swiss Federal Institute for
Environmental Science and Technology (EAWAG) and Asian Institute of Technology (AIT) performed a
collaborative research on septage treatment efficiency of Constructed Wetland (CW) under tropical conditions
in Thailand. The seven year pilot scale experiment was conducted from 1997 on three vertical flow CW units
planted with cattails (Typha augustifolia). Under optimum conditions of loading rate of 250 kg TS/m2.yr or
constant volume loading of 8 m3/week, once-a-week application and percolate impounding periods of 6 days
with plant harvesting of twice a year; the removal efficiencies of CW units are in the range of 80 – 96% for COD,
TS and TKN. The solids accumulation @ 12 cm per year, resulted in an 80-cm sludge layer after seven years of
continuous septage loading and no bed clogging was observed. Thus with a free board of 1.0m for the AIT pilot
plant, solids accumulation could last upto 10 years (Koottatep. et al, 2005).
Ministry of Public Health has formulated policy and technical guidelines to collect and treat septage. Public
Health Act (1992) has commissioned local government authorities for septage management. 78 % of the major
local government authorities had adopted these guidelines (USAID, 2010). In accordance with the Public Health
Act, no operator can charge more than $7 to de-sludge first cubic meter of septage and $4 for each subsequent
unit. To consolidate the implementation, Ministry released a “Manual on Integrated Septage Management” in
30
2001 (revised in 2008) that provides a general framework for designs of septic tanks, anaerobic treatment
systems, standards for health and safety, encourages record-keeping and cost estimation for the construction
of facilities (USAID, 2010).
3.7 CASE STUDY 6: SLUDGE TREATMENT PLANT AT MUSIRI, TAMILNADU10

Musiri is a panchayat town at Tiruchirappalli district in Tamil Nadu. To prevent the nuisance due to sludge in the
water bodies, Sludge Treatment Plant (STP) is constructed in Musiri. This STP was a joint initiative by a regional
NGO- Society for Community Organisation and Peoples Education (SCOPE), international organization-WASTE
Netherlands and District Rural Development agency of Trichy District. It is operating since July 2010 and is based
on constructed wetland model.
To treat the sludge from the septic tanks, a vertical flow constructed wetland is built as a Pilot cum
Demonstration Unit (PDU). The treatment unit consist of three compartments for rotation of sludge application.
All the three compartments have a common feed channel for loading of sludge and a common under drain for
removal of percolates. The feed channel is located on the one side of the beds and the percolate channel at the
centre. At the bottom of the beds, a slope of 1/8 is provided towards the channel. The media in each
compartment is supported by a stainless steel mesh laid on the top of the channel. The beds are planted with
locally available species of reeds namely Phragmites karka and Typha latifolia. The organisation has also planned
FIGURE 3.5: Sludge Treatment Plant at Musiri, Tamilnadu
Source: Society for Community Organisation and Peoples Education (SCOPE), Sludge Treatment Plant (STP) at Musiri
to expand the treatment system by constructing additional units of Horizontal flow constructed wetland (HCWL)
for percolates in order to tackle the increased amount of loading rates.
Preventative measures are also proposed to prevent the inconvenience caused due to the foul odour emanated
from the anaerobic digested sludge. Steps like: loading of the beds only during night time, usage of dilute lemon
grass oil spray to mask bad odour as well as for vector control and planting of trees along the periphery of the
unit to provide a green belt has been contemplated.
The PDU is operational for over 6 months (up to Dec. 2010). All the three beds are used and 240 trucks of septic
sludge applied (each truck capacity of 1500 litres). It is estimated that 75-80 percent of the volatile solids (VSS)
in the sludge will be reduced by this process. As a result of this reduction, a 3m-deep annual application will be
reduced to 6-10 cm of residual sludge. In order to take full advantage of the PDU, the Town Panchayat is planning
10. Email on dated 11 February 2011 , Mr M.Subburaman , Director, SCOPE provided CSE the following information regarding the case study’ Sludge
Treatment Plant at Musiri, Tamilnadu ‘
31
to take up the following:
1. Monitor the performance of the PDU in terms of treatment of sludge, quality of percolate growth rate of
reeds etc.
2. Construct the percolate treatment unit (horizontal flow constructed wetland)
3. Conduct the cost benefit analysis of the technology
4. Conduct a study of the Social-economic benefits.
These case studies present a variety of options which can help in adopting a particular option of septage
management. However, a well defined regulation and guidelines is needed to implement the options. In the next
chapter an attempt is made to propose policy percept, regulatory measures and guidelines for septage
management in India.
32
4. Policy Framework for Septage Management
4.1 BACKGROUND
In wake of a large number of initiatives taken by the government and rising prosperity in the country sanitation
has significantly improved. A large part of improved sanitation is dependent on septic tanks and other form of
onsite sanitations and hence the septage problem is growing fast in India. Without a proper septage
management policy, plan and programme, the improved sanitation facilities will continue to remain significant
source of waterborne diseases and water pollution. Strengthening septage management by developing the
enabling policies and physical infrastructure for septage collection, transport and treatment capacity can be an
effective and practical solution to the problem. Presently there is no regulation or guidelines existing for safe
handling, transport and disposal of septage in the country. Most of the current laws and policies deal with
water, wastewater and sanitation services but the septage management is not covered in a holistic manner
This necessitates a well defined regulation, guidelines and management strategy for septage in the country.
4.2 EXISTING FRAMEWORK FOR WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT

The existing provisions for regulating sewage management under environmental laws are as follows:
4.2.1 Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974

Water pollution in India is regulated under the provision of Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act,
1974. The Act provides for a permit system or “Consent” procedure to prevent and control water pollution.
The Act generally prohibits disposal of polluting matter in streams, wells and sewers or on land in excess of the
standards established by the state boards.
A person must obtain consent from the state board before establishing any industry operation or process, any
treatment and disposal system or any extension or addition to such a system which might result in the discharge
of sewage or trade effluent into a stream well or sewer or onto land. The state board may condition its consent
by orders that specify the location, construction and use of the outlet as well as the nature and composition of
new discharges.
The Act empowers a state board, upon thirty days notice to a polluter, to execute any work required under
consent order which has not been executed. The board may recover the expenses for such work from the
polluter. The Act gives the state boards the power of entry and inspection to carry out their functions. Moreover,
a state board may take certain emergency measures if it determines that an accident or other unforeseen event
has polluted a stream or well. These measures include removing the pollutants, mitigating the damage and
assuming orders to the polluter prohibiting effluent discharges.
33
Under the provisions of the Water Act, there is no difference between industrial and domestic pollution. However,
because the responsibility of sewage or septage treatment lies with concerned Urban Local Bodies (ULBs) and
most of the time they do not have adequate resources to fulfill this responsibility with septage/sewage treatment
in most of the cases is lagging behind. This is the biggest cause of pollution in India. According to former
additional director of CPCB, Water Act, 1974 does not discriminate between pollution from industrial and
domestic sources, however domestic pollution is not regulated in the same manner (personal communication).
The urban bodies and other public bodies are providing a highly subsidized service to society in order to help the
ULBs, the Government of India launched the Ganga Action Plan and subsequently National River Action Plan and
established several STPs. However, today their operation and maintenance is in a dismal condition.
4.2.2 Environment (Protection) Act, 1986

The potential scope of the Act is broad with environment which includes water, air and land and interrelationship
among water, air, land, human beings, other creatures, plants, micro organisms and property. Section 3(1) of
the Act empowers the Center to take all such measures as it seems necessary or expedient for the purpose of
protecting and improving the quality of the environment and preventing, controlling and abating environmental
pollution. Central Government is authorized to set new national standards for ambient quality of the
environment and standards for controlling emissions and effluent discharges; to regulate industrial locations;
to prescribe procedures for managing hazardous substances; to establish safeguard for preventing accidents;
and to collect and disseminate information regarding environmental pollution.
The EPA was the first environmental statute to give the Central Government authority to issue direct written
orders including orders to close, prohibit or regulate any industry operation or process or to stop or regulate
the supply of electricity, water or any other services (Section 5). Other powers granted to the Central
Government to ensure compliance with the Act include the power of entry for examination, testing of
equipment and other purpose (Section 10) and power to take samples of air, water, soil or any other substance
from any place for analysis (Section 11). The Act explicitly prohibits discharge of pollutants in excess of
prescribed standards (Section 7). There is also a specific prohibition against handling of hazardous substances
except in compliance with regulatory procedures and discharges (section 8). Persons responsible for discharges
of pollutants in excess of prescribed standards must prevent or mitigate the pollution and must report the
discharge to government authorities (Section 9.1).
The Act provides for severe penalties. Any person who fails to comply with or contravenes any of the provisions
of the Act, or the rules or directions issued under the Act shall be punished for each failure or contravention,
with a prison term of up to 5 years or a fine up to 1 lakh or both. The Act imposes an additional fine up to Rs.
5000 for every day of continuing violation (Section 15 (1)). If a failure or contravention occurs for more than one
year after the date of conviction an offender may be punished with a prison term which may extend to seven
years (Section 15 (2)).
The Act empowers the central government to establish standards for the quality of the environment in its
various aspects, including maximum allowable concentration of various environmental pollutants (including
noise) for different areas. These standards could be based on ambient levels of pollutants which are sufficiently
low to protect the public health and welfare. Emission or discharge standards for particular industries could be
adjusted to ensure that such ambient levels are achieved. The Environment (Protection) Rules, 1986 allow the
State or Central authorities to establish more stringent standards based on recipient system.
34
The EPA includes a citizen’s suit provision (Section 19.6) and a provision authorizing the Central Government to
issue orders directly to protect the environment (Section 5). The Central Government may delegate specified
duties and powers under the EPA to any officer, state government or other authority (Section 23). The Central
Ministry of Environment and Forests (MoEF) is responsible for making rules to implement the EPA. The Ministry
has delegated the powers to carry out enforcement to the Central and State Pollution Control Boards in the country.
The MoEF has so far enforced several rules and regulations. It has adopted industry specific standards for
effluent discharges and emissions from different categories of industries. The Ministry has also designated
certain state and Central Officials to carry out specified duties under the Act and has designated specific
laboratories for testing the samples of air water and soil obtained under the Act.
4.2.3 Other legislation

There are several other pieces of legislation that impact on the control of water pollution. A more complete
list is presented in Table 4.1.
TABLE 4.1: Important policies, legal provisions and authorities related

to water pollution
Central/State Legal Provisions Main Objectives
Constitutional Provisions on sanitation Statutory powers conferred on states to make law on water and sanitation
and water pollution
Policy Statement for Abatement of Suggests developing relevant legislation and regulation, fiscal incentives, voluntary
Pollution, 1992 agreements, educational programs, information campaigns, need environmental
considerations into decision making at all levels, pollution prevention at source,
application of best practicable solution, ensure polluter pays for control of
pollution, focus on heavily polluted areas and river stretches and involve public in
decision-making
The National Conservation Strategy and Promotes judicious and sustainable use of natural resources, preservation of
Policy Statement on Environment and biodiversity, land and water
Development, 1992
The National Environment Policy, 2006 Promotes conservation national resources, protection of wild life and ecosystems,
prevention of pollution, reuse and recycling of wastewater, adoption of clean
technology, application of ‘polluter pay principle’ and amendment in the existing
law from criminal to civil suit provisions
National Sanitation Policy, 2008 Aimed at awareness generation, behaviour change, open defication free cities, safe
disposal of wastes and propoer operation and maintenance of sanitary
installations. It requires different states and cities to develop their sanitation
policies, startegies and goals
The water (Prevention & Control of To charge cess on water consumption for polluting activities to strengthen the
Pollution) Cess Act, 1977, as Amended pollution control boards by providing financial support for equipment and
in 1993 and 2003 technical personnel and to promote water conservation by recycling
Central Ground Water Authority To regulate and control abstraction, development and management of
groundwater resources
The Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991 To provide for public liability- insurance for the purpose of providing immediate
relief to the persons affected by accident occurring while handling any hazardous
substance
Connued on next page
35
TABLE 4.1:Important policies, legal provisions and authorities related

to water pollution
Central/State Legal Provisions Main Objectives
Hazardous waste (Management and Legislative framework for laws enactment related to storage transport, handling
Handling) Rules, 1989 and disposal of hazardous wastes
Manufacture, Storage and import of Rules for manufacture, storage and import of hazardous chemical
Hazardous Chemical Rules, 1989
Municipal Solid waste (Management Rules for Municipal Solid waste Management at urban cities
and Handling) Rules, 1999
The National Environment Tribunal To provide for strict liability for damages arising out of any accident occurring
Act, 1995 while handling any hazardous substance and for the establishment of a National
Environment Tribunal for effective and expeditious disposal of related cases.
Environment Impact Assessment To impose restrictions and prohibitions on the expansion and modernization of any
Notification, 1994 activity or new projects being undertaken in any part of India unless environmental
clearance has been accorded by the Central Government or the State Government.
73rd and 74th Constitutional Obliging state governments to constitute Urban

Amendments - Role of Local Self Local Bodies (ULBs) and transfer responsibility for water supply and sanitation
Government services to them
Municipalities Act, District Municipalities Complete authority and jurisdiction over all urban amenities, including water
Act or the Nagar Palika Act supply and sanitation with municipality
Town Planning Act/Urban Development To establish development and planning authorities, having powers over any
authorities Act development activity in the area under their jurisdiction
Source: Compiled by Centre for Science and Environment, CSE
All the current legal provisions deal with diverse water, wastewater and sanitation services and have resulted
in multiple bodies and jurisdictions in India. However, the septage management is not covered in a holistic
manner except prohibition of its discharge into water bodies.
4.2.4 Enforcement of Regulations

The above environmental laws enforcement framework for industrial pollution control could bring a large
change in the behaviour of the industries and was successful in reducing industrial pollution in the country
from large and medium industries. However, nearly 80% of the water pollution is caused by discharge of
untreated domestic wastewater from urban centers, responsibility of which lies often with the government
supported PHEDs and ULBs. Due to lack of technical, managerial and financial capacities these agencies are
not able to carry out their duties. Thus even if all the industrial effluents are fully treated to the stipulated levels,
the water quality objectives cannot be achieved without similar surveillance and strict adherence to water
quality protocol for domestic sources including pollution from increasing septage. The following section
discusses the various constraints in regulating sewage and septage.
4.3 KEY CHALLENGES

In order to formulate any policy guidelines or regulatory mechanism, it is important to go into the details of the
key challenges in septage management before the country. Following are some important challenges identified:
36
4.3.1 Urban Sanitation

● No physical infrastructure to treat septage in the country, and very limited use of mechanized de-sludging
● Manual scavenging still widespread, although prohibited by law; on-site sanitation not viewed as a problem
or priority
● Emphasis on centralized, advanced engineering solutions for sanitation; septage management not perceived
as a solution
● Most cities and states do not have policies on septage management and lack data concerning onsite
sanitation systems in their jurisdictions
● Low prioritization and awareness of the public and government agencies;
● Lack of explicit policies on sanitation, particularly safe disposal;
● Abundance of fragmented agencies that lack sanitation;
● Focus on project- and technology-based investment decisions rather than city wide planning;
● Lack of attention on access by the poor to safe sanitation; and
● Supply-driven rather than demand-responsive sanitation solutions.
4.3.2 Fragmented Policy Frameworks and Weak Enforcement

Inadequate policies and piecemeal implementation.
Despite the widespread use of septic tanks, still there are no comprehensive policies, legal and institutional
frameworks for septage management. The interconnection of water supply and sanitation are often ignored.
This leads to weak septage management strategies even though it impacts public health and water quality in
direct and profound ways. Many policies are also segmented hierarchically and developed without consulting
the needs of the local implementers and service providers.
Lack of clear delineation and delegation of responsibility.

Since implementation of septage management policies require involvement at multiple government levels, it
is important to establish a coherent institutional framework that clearly delineates roles and responsibilities
among responsible agencies, including decentralizing or devolving authority in line with national and local laws.
In Thailand, for instance, the Ministry of Public Health is responsible for guiding municipalities on managing the
septage inside the septic tank, while a separate regulation requires the Ministry of Natural Resources and
Environment to manage the liquid waste discharged from septic tanks (see chapter 3 of this report).
4.3.3 Inadequate Human and Institutional Capacity

Limited Stakeholder Awareness.
Policymakers, government officials, civil society and even common man has a limited awareness about
the importance of effective OSS management and implementation strategies, costs and various environment
impacts of developing it. The government agencies typically prioritize water above sanitation, and only
place emphasis on toilet construction in sanitation programmes; and often septage management only
an afterthought.
For households, septic tanks are often constructed below or behind the house and are difficult and inconvenient
to access and open; the lump-sum expense of de-sludging also discourages frequent emptying. Moreover, few
people know where desludged septage goes once it leaves their houses, or understand how improperly disposed
septage can impact water quality and human health. This lack of awareness about septage is consistently cited
as the main cause of inadequate septage management services.
37
Lack of Skilled Manpower

In addition to a lack of awareness, there is a significant capacity gap on the technical and institutional aspects
of septage management at all levels of government. Moreover, universities and training centers have not
incorporated septage management into their curricula. Accordingly, when responsibilities are delegated to local
governments, they are unable to undertake effective or timely implementation.
Inadequate Regulation and/or Partnership with Private Service Providers.

In most regions, private entrepreneurs play an important role in providing either all de-sludging services or
supporting limited public de-sludging services. Their presence demonstrates the inability of public service
providers to meet existing de-sludging needs. In the absence of any regulation, the operators either sell the
septage to farmers for use as a fertilizer or illegally dump septage to avoid traveling long distances to designated
disposal sites. These practices degrade the quality of service, impact the environment, and endanger the health
of workers and others. Cities do not have the capability and resources to regulate private service providers, nor
do they form strategic public-private partnerships.
Insufficient Wastewater Planning

Urban growth in most Indian cities out-paces the public sector’s ability to plan or provide sanitation services,
especially for new residential and commercial developments. As a result, the gap between the need and facilities
for sewerage/sanitation continuously widens.
4.3.4 Funding Capital and Operational Costs
Inadequate Public Funding and Over-reliance on External Aid

While allocating funds for water and sanitation projects at national levels, most of the funding is for water and
centralized wastewater treatment, and not for septage management. In addition, many of the target cities rely
on central development assistance to fund sanitation and wastewater projects. Dependence on external
assistance can reflect a lack of long-term commitment and project ownership.
Low Wastewater Tariffs and Inadequate O&M Funding

Cities and utilities that have constructed centralized wastewater treatment and septage treatment facilities
often have difficulty generating funds to cover O&M cost. National regulations have either reduced tariffs over
time, or kept them the same, even while costs have inflated. In case of OSS the household payments (if any)
for desluidging cover only collection costs not treatment costs.
4.3.5 Institutional Issues

Traditionally, the ULBs have been facing many problems in providing adequate waste management services in
the cities. Major problems are listed below:
● Shortage of government finances;
● Inefficiency of ULB-run system;
● Paucity of qualified and experienced human resources and finances; and
● Administrative: frequent transfer of trained staff leads to weak commitment, political changes and
management changes leave many plans inconclusive, local leaders may impose their agenda for vested
interest, which may not be in line to make sewage management service viable and self sustaining.
38
4.4 POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

In order to properly manage the septage in the country it is important to address following issues in the policy:
4.4.1 Septage Collection and Treatment

Septage generation rates vary widely from place to place depending on septic tank use practices, number of
users, water used for flushing, efficient functioning of tank and contamination control. It can be considered
that the volume of sludge evacuated from a septic tank corresponds more or less to the volume of the septic
tank, plus some cleansing and rinsing water. The size of a septic tank in individual houses in India ranges from
1 to 4 m3, the size of a septic tank in office or apartment buildings from 10 to 100 m3. Assuming that about 20%
of the population has combined septic tank of about 50 m3 and rest is connected to individual septic tanks of
about 2.5 m3. Thus there are about 24 million individual septic tanks and 0.3 million larger septic tanks. If a
septic tank is emptied every five years, the annual generation of septage would be around 24/5=12 MMC+3
MMC=15 MMC. Being highly concentrated waste, if discharged into a water body, it may create serious impact
on water body due to shock load discharged instantly at one time. With large number of initiatives on improving
sanitation in the country and rising prosperity in the country, the number of septic tanks would steeply grow
and the problem of septage disposal would become very serious. Thus, there is a need to develop policies,
guidelines and regulation for septage management.
4.4.2 Regulatory Measures for Septage/Sewage Pollution

The following framework is proposed for implementation:
● Septage should be regulated in the same way as industrial effluents are regulated; i.e., through consent and
compliance monitoring as per the Water Act, 1974 or it can be regulated in the manner municipal solid
wastes or biomedical wastes or hazardous wastes are regulated under different rules notified.
● Respective ULBs should be made responsible for compliance, keeping in view the adverse effect of septage
on land, low lying areas or receiving surface water or groundwater bodies. There is a need for establishing
good collection system for septage and its proper disposal.
● The “Polluter Pays” principle needs to be imposed for recovering the full cost of collection and treatment
of septage from the beneficiaries.
● ULBs should have effective management and monitoring system to ensure regular collection, transport and
proper treatmen including monitoring discharges into land/water bodies.
4.4.3 Techno-Economic Aspects

● Effective technologies need to be selected based on local needs.
● It is suggested to pilot a few privatized septage management services with appropriate tools of process
monitoring to further refine and develop an effective model for septage management at national level.
● Effective management system needs to be established to monitor the collection, transport, treatment and
disposal of septage. Presently the ULBs have implicit roles of a provider, manager and regulator. This should
be changed and the regulation function should be given to independent bodies similar to those in the power
and telecom sectors.
4.4.4 Additional Regulatory Measures

● Strengthening the monitoring of compliance by SPCBs and vigilance monitoring by CPCB/MoEF, by increasing
the number of qualified and trained personnel to the level necessary to with the task at hand. This makes
it necessary to empower these agencies acquire the financial resources to ensure long term sustainability.
39
● Regulation of de-sludging frequency of septic tanks, handling, transport, treatment and disposal of septage
on land or in a water body under either Water Act or under separate Septage (Handling and Management)
Rules under Environment (Protection) Act similar to MSW Rules imposing a consent or authorization
conditions and their effective monitoring for compliance.
● Strict regulation of groundwater pollution under the Water Act. This needs to be adequately regulated. This
will also require repealing of the Indian Easement Act.
● Corporate Responsibility for Environmental Protection (CREP) programme needs to be further strengthened
for septage management.
● Incentives should be given to new residential developments having their own recycling and reuse systems
and their own fully functional septage/sewage treatment systems.
4.4.5 Capacity Building

Technological capacity building for effective septage management and enforcing septage handling and
management guidelines/regulations needs to be strengthened in the country. Skill development in septage
management, professionalization of waste management groups and strengthening environmental mediation are
some of the major steps needed in this direction.
Capacity building must be based on an examination of the magnitude of problem on septage/sewage sector to
analyze their physical and institutional characteristics in detail, define opportunities and key constraints for
sustainable development, and then select a set of short and long-term action programmes.
Very often the waste management sector performs poorly because of non-coordinating and vertical
institutional arrangements. If these can be improved, structural constraints to effective coordination can be
removed. In order to achieve the objectives of Millennium Development Goals, India must build “capacities”
which is effective in service delivery, efficient in resource use and has sustainabiity. These include the
following:
● Institutional development, including community participation.
● Changing the emphasis from capital creation to effective operation and maintenance for enhanced efficiency.
● Human resources development and strengthening of managerial systems.
● Price setting, cost recovery and the enforcement of rules, are more difficult to implement than regulation
(of water quality, for example). Therefore, strategies to achieve these deserve priority.
● Allocating the right mandates and reviewing the performance of the arrangements regularly. This will render
organizations more alert and target-orientated.
● Facilitation of O&M and cost recovery.
● Development of the right expertise profile in organizations.
● A number of tools can be applied in capacity building. These are:
◆ Technical assistance for institutional change, which may include policy, micro or macro-economic
structures, management systems, and administrative arrangements.
◆ Training for change at different levels of decision-makers, senior staff and engineers with managerial
assignments, junior staff and engineers with primarily executive tasks, technicians (plumber, masons) and
operators, students and instructors and other stakeholders (such as caretakers and people in local
communities who have undertaken to operate or to manage community-based septage collection and
treatment systems).
40
◆ Education of prospective experts who will play a role in the septage sector. This encompasses physical
and technological sciences, as well as financial and administrative management, and behavioral sciences.
◆ ‘Septage management’ subject needs to be included in the curriculum at appropriate levels.
4.4.6 Wastewater as a Resource

If there is no dilution available in a receiving water body, it is important that no septage/wastewater is
discharged into it even after treatment. The effort should be to use all the septage/wastewater after proper
treatment. There are many cases where the sewage or industrial wastewater is treated and used for various
inferior uses. Many companies are coming in this business. Focus should be to promote such business. This will
benefit the water quality in many ways:
● reduce pollution
● save water
● save nutrients
● reduce over-exploitation of water resources
● These are discussed in detail in chapter 5 of this report.
4.4.7 Financing Septage/Sewage Management

Funding septage management through the exchequer places an unreasonable strain on the nation’s finances.
This is not only detrimental to the economy of the country – it also engenders a lack of accountability and
immediate responsibility among the ULBs to generate revenue for septage/sewage management. Thus, it is
important that the beneficiaries also share the responsibility of waste management following the ‘Polluters
pay principle’. As per the present pace of economic growth in India, the government’s financial capacity would
be strengthened due to higher collection of taxes and private participation is also expected to increase.
Therefore, it is necessary to draw up a long term financing and investment plan for septage/sewage
management based on expected economic development. It is important here to consider options for public-
private partnerships (PPP), as being done in many countries and also in many cities of India for emptying the
septic tanks and its collection and disposal. Since charge collection serves as important conditions of PPP project
implementation, PPP requires formation of a suitable charge system from the beginning. Setting up a rational
charge system also has the effect of asking citizens for the formation of environment friendly consumption
patterns, such as saving water and waste reduction through a price mechanism. Application of PPP is a complex
issue, which needs to be addressed by the government through its administrative and financial reforms. Key
issues are: 1) policy framework development for PPP 2) target setting, 3) tariff design, 4) role of government,
and 5) contractual arrangements of PPP projects. Some of these aspects are described in the Table 4.2:
The involvement of the private sector must be under very controlled conditions.
41
TABLE 4.2: Public Private Partnership

Issues Existing System PPP Scheme
Policy • Public works • Private sector participation and deregulation

• Decision by government • Construction according to local needs,
• Monopoly of ULBs strengthening of local role
• Low efficiency • Improvement of efficiency
• Delay in construction • Increase in speed of construction
• Streamline procedures of site inspection and
time bound clearance of invoices with assured
quality control.
Implementation body • ULBs • Private sector and public sector: various

combinations of roles and responsibilities.
• Involvement of RWAs to optimise costs.
Role of ULBs • Direct service provider • Manager, supervisor and negotiator
Financial resources • Construction: revenue, national/local bonds, • Construction cost: private sector (equity capital,
beneficiary charges corporate bonds, stocks, bank loans, beneficiary
charges and support from government revenue)
• O&M cost and repayment: charge income,
revenue (government)
Project finance • Operating body: ULBs • Operating body: private sector

• Financing method: national bond, local • Financing method: loan from commercial
bond, policy oriented finance, multilateral banks etc
international agencies etc
Risks • Risk sharing: ULBs pays unitary • Risk sharing: risk sharing between ULBs and
• Contents of risks: aggravated of raising private sector
funds by budget deficit and inefficient • Content of risks: financial risk, monopoly
management, lack of technical development formation, consider lack of social equity
incentives, stagnation of construction level
Contract form • Construction turn-key contract under the • Construction: BOT, concession, joint venture etc
responsibility of ULBs • O&M: service, management and lease contract
Source: Compiled by Centre for Science and Environment , CSE
4.5 TECHNICAL AND MANAGERIAL GUIDELINES

In order to effectively manage the septage, there should be a comprehensive description of technical
requirement of the entire septage management system. This description is detailed in chapter 2 of this
document. Some important aspects to be covered are as follows:
● Description of the Septage Management System
● Design, Operation, and Maintenance
● Septic Tanks – Design and Construction Requirements
● Desludging Procedures
● Septage Treatment Facility
● Administration and Enforcement Provisions

a. Management
b. Monitoring and Evaluation
c. Finances and User Fees,
d. Administrative Procedures
e. Violations and Penalty Provisions
42
4.5.1 Septage Management System

The septage management system includes designing, operation and maintenance, desludging, institutional
mechanism, monitoring, financial arrangements, legal provisions and administrative procedures.
4.5.2 Design of Septic Tanks

The detailed design for the conventional septic tanks is given in the CPHEEO manual, 1993 (Part II, Chapter 21,
Section 21.2) and that for the improved septic tanks in Chapter 2 of this report. Some important aspects
regarding its construction and maintenance are suggested as follows:
Construction
● Concrete structures are preferred.
● They should be water tight and multichambered.
● Bottomless septic tanks should be prohibited.
● Must be sized so that the volume is at least 1.6 times the daily flow but preferably 2 or 2.5 times the daily
flow.
● The bigger the tank, the less frequently it will need to be desludged. Multiple chamber septic tanks should
be designed for new installations.
● Must also be accessible (have a removable cover and not be located directly under the house) to pump
sludge when sludge level becomes too high.
● Small housing blocks may share a community septic tank to reduce per household costs.
Maintenance
● When the septage occupies two-thirds of the depth of the tank, it needs to be removed; otherwise there is
a risk that excreta will pass directly through the tank and overflow into the disposal system.
● Septage should be taken to an approved sludge treatment and disposal site by means of a vacuum tanker.
● Households should be encouraged to minimize their use of water and be careful about what they put into
their septic tanks.
● The septic tank should be desludged every 2 to 5 years11 depending on the capacity and design.
● The desludging schedule should be prepared (preferably computerised) and should be notified to the
household about their due date.
4.5.3 Desludging Procedure

There is a widespread promotion of OSS. However, all the programmes and city agencies still do not address
adequately the issue of septage that accumulates inside septic tank/ OSS. Due to lack or inadequate public
services, private service providers have emerged to empty OSS by hand or with vacuum trucks. Operators with
mechanized equipment often transport and dispose of septage several kilometers from people’s homes in drains,
waterways, open land, and agricultural fields. Manual desludging is also done in low-income areas and squatter
settlements. They are often inaccessible by truck and hence deposit the septage within the household, into
nearby lanes, drains, open land or waterways. Thus, the poorest have the highest health risk both because they
are the most likely to provide manual desludging services, and because their homes are closest to the actual
dumping grounds.
11. The National Building Code of India (2005) states that septic tanks should be regularly maintained and desludged on yearly basis. However, desludging
interval increases for improved septic tanks as described in chapter 2.
43
In carrying out manual desludging all the precautions should be taken to protect the workers as provided under
Municipal Solid Waste Rules. The sludge after removal should be transported in a controlled manner to avoid
leakages or spillage en-route.
Before desludging, if the liquid level in the tank is higher than the outlet pipe, this may indicate clogging in the
outlet pipe or in the drain field. The sludge then may be collected through safe containers or pumping. Before
pumping, the scum mat is manually broken up to facilitate pumping. Before this is done, the liquid level in the
septic tank first is lowered below the invert of the outlet, which prevents grease and scum from being washed
into the drain field. After the scum mat is broken up, the contents of the tank are removed. Normally, the
vacuum/suction hose draws air at a point where 1 to 2 in. (2.5 to 5 cm) of sludge remains over the tank bottom;
this material should be left in the tank. Washing down the inside of the tank is not required unless leakage is
suspected and the inside must be inspected for cracks, if internal inspection is warranted, fresh air should be
continuously blown into the tank for at least 10 minutes.
4.5.4 Septage Transportation

The sludge after collection should be transported through trucks to the treatment or disposal sites, with proper
regulation. In India there is a comprehensive regulation on transport of solid wastes (municipal solid wastes,
biomedical wastes and hazardous wastes), however similar regulation is not existing for transport of septage.
The septage transport should be regulated in the same manner as provided under Municipal Wastes (Handling
and Management) Rules 2000.
4.5.5 Septage Treatment Facilities

There are number of treatment options available. Treatment using natural processes, including waste
stabilization ponds, unplanted sludge drying beds, constructed wetlands, and composting, are considerably
cost-effective solutions. Anaerobic digestion (with biogas generation), lime treatment, and mechanized systems,
such as activated sludge process, are also widely used technologies in treating septage. Important considerations
include the cost of land, the capacity of staff to operate and maintain the system, and the location of the
treatment facility with respect to OSS. Digested sludge from OSS is 100 times more concentrated than domestic
wastewater flowing in the sewer systems, and therefore should not be treated with wastewater in sewage
treatment plants. If the dried sludge meets established standards, it can be used as a soil amendment for
reclaimed land, landfill cover, landscaping compost, or fertilizer for non-edible plantations. For use as compost
for edible crops, treatment facilities need to ensure that the end product attains standards for agricultural
reuse.
There are different techniques for the treatment of septage. Following main options are available:
● Land application after stabilization
● Treatment at wastewater treatment plants
● Treatment at independent septage treatment plants
● The details of technologies are provided in chapter 2 of this report.
4.5.6 Decentralizing Physical Infrastructure

In all the large cities there is difficulty of collecting septage and hauling it across cities to designated disposal
and treatment sites. It is important to consider decentralized treatment and reuse of wastewater and nutrients
may be the best option. This may significantly reduce collection and haulage costs. Capital, operating and
44
maintenance costs decrease with increasing plant size. However, since larger treatment plants require longer
haulage distances between pits and disposal sites, costs escalate for collection companies, which in turn increase
the risk of indiscriminate and illegal dumping. The optimum plant size has to be determined on a case-by-case
basis as it depends on the local context (e.g., labor cost, land price, treatment plant scale, haulage distance, and
site conditions).
4.5.7 Administrative and Enforcement Provisions

It is proposed that each city/town or Panchayat may have Septage Management Authority, or Administration
with following important functions:
a. Survey or inventory of septic tanks
b. Inspect construction of septic tanks
c. Issue certificates of compliance
d. Conduct of education and information campaign on septage management
e. Supervise the operation of septage treatment plant
f. Direct and supervise day-to-day operations of septage system
g. Preparation of desludging schedule
h. Notifying the households about their due dates
i. Informing the septage desludging agencies for executing the desluging as per schedule and monitor them
for effective functioning
j. Ensuring that all the septage is reaching to the treatment plant
k. Ensuring that the treatment plant is working effectively and the monitoring results are complying with
standards.
l. Fee collection to be handled by water supply authority. This is because it will require modifying their billing
structure.
4.5.8 Constitution of the Authority

City/Panchayat Septage Management Authority (CSMA) will be chaired by mayor or Sarpanch and composed
of representatives from the following offices:
a. State Pollution Control Board/Pollution Control Committee
b. City/village Health Officer or representative
c. Representative from Desludging Agency
d. Representative from Transporter agency
e. Representative from Finance Department
f. Representative from Water supply authority
g. Representative from Legal Office
h. Representative from Public Health Engineer’s Office
i. NGO (appointed by the Mayor or Sarpanch)
j. Other persons who may be invited to provide technical advice to the CSMA
4.5.9 Costs and Cost Recovery

Neither local authorities nor water supply authorities in India have adequate capital or leverage to finance
expensive sewer networks or sewage/septage collection and treatment facilities. Thus, major sanitation
improvements are dependent on a mix of government funding, external assistance and increased user charges.
Project design should incorporate institutional building and financial viability. Obtaining funds and enacting
45
necessary reforms (e.g., linking revenues with expenditures) requires careful negotiation and cooperation
between local stakeholders, especially when elected officials are sensitive to popular concerns regarding tariffs.
Multi-sourcing of funds can be used to effectively reduce the funding requirements of ULBs by encouraging
project investment and O&M costs.
Operation and maintenance (O&M) expenses for septage management programs typically include the following:
a labor
b. overhead (e.g., benefits, employment taxes)
c. utilities
d. transportation for processed and incoming materials
e. vehicles and other equipment maintenance
f. taxes
g. disposal costs for dried cake
h. licenses and permits; insurance
i. testing and other monitoring and
j. miscellaneous supplies
Revenue Generation Plan

1. Political approval and effective administration of such taxes and charges have proven to be too difficult.
Many cities in the country are increasingly realizing the importance of septage management and trying to
introduce the taxes to recover at least the part of the cost with water bill. Charges can be linked to water
consumption; disconnection of water supply provides an effective sanction against non-payment.
2. The disadvantages are that the water service provider is not always willing (or able) to collect sanitation
charges, and, while there are strong synergies in financial management, sanitation services require different
skills and resources to those needed for water supply.
3. Government funding is also essential, notably for the provision of sanitation services to the urban poor who
remain excluded from public sanitation services and unable to develop private alternatives.
4. Some cities charge a flat rate (or zero) tariffs, collect revenues lower than their O&M costs and, are
dependent on subsidies from the ULBs or, where managed by a Water Supply Authorities, on cross-subsidies
from water supply income.
5. The other part of the arrangement is between the Sewage Treatment Facilities and ULBs (or the contractor
collecting the septage). The tipping fee is perhaps the only variable of the facility’s financial system.
Calculating the desired tipping fee requires “working backwards.” The cost to process the septage is
determined by the facility’s monthly operating expenses.
6. The tipping fee (per unit basis) is determined by dividing the total tipping revenue by cubic meters of
incoming septage. Therefore, to determine the tipping fee, the tipping revenue must first be calculated using
the following equation: Tipping Revenues = Operating Expenses + Profit Margin – Material Revenues.
7. In most cities, desludging is done only when requested by households and usually when the septic tank
overflows. Costs are paid by the household directly to a private desludging company. To implement a city-
wide septage management program, there is a need for the ULB and/or water supply authority to develop
a system to ensure that all septic tanks are desludged regularly and that the septage removed is treated. Each
ULB should develop a system that works for them. ULB/water supply authority could collect fees from the
households and pay the contractor for each truck-full of septage brought to the treatment facility. This would
give the contractor an incentive not to simply dump the septage, as is currently being done. This can be a
46
source of revenue generation.

8. In case sewage, septage, or sludge is collected, transported, treated & disposed by a third party, the final
disposal of the treated sewage, septage or sludge shall comply with relevant MINAS Standards notified under
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986.
9. Reuse of treated sludge for agriculture application should comply with the standards notified for compost
under EPA. A more detailed guideline in this regard is proposed in the next chapter.
4.6 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Public awareness and interest on the issues related to the conservation of natural resources have steadily
increased and their participation needs to be promoted in the septage management programmes. The effective
management of septage is of concern to a broad segment of the population as it affects the day-to-day life of
individuals and communities. Communities should become involved in decisions concerning the development
and siting of septage disposal point and desludging procedures, handling, transport and treatment methods and
possible adverse effects including health effects of septage mis-management. Hence a strong public awareness
programme is very important to implement the septgae management policy. The ultimate aim of the public
awareness programme is to shape human behavior of all concerns including septic tank users, desludging staff.
An education system is to be established in order to achieve effective awareness generation programme and
to promote responsible citizenship behaviour. Following four areas need to be focused:
a. Sensitivity: to help citizens and social groups gain a variety of experiences in, and acquire a basic
understanding of septage and associated problems.
b. Attitude: to help citizens and social groups acquire a set of values and feelings of concern for septage and
motivation for actively participating in septage management.
c. Skill: to help citizens and social groups acquire skills for identifying and solving septage related problems.
d. Motivation: There should be a system to motivate the citizens through various incentives e.g. image boosting
for better work and rebate in charges on septage collection and disposal .
In order to ensure public participation in septage management, it is important to consider/develop the

followings:
4.6.1 Training Material

In order to maximize the learner’s behavior in septage management, a training material needs to be developed.
Following components should be addressed:
● Teaching material on environmentally significant septage management concepts and environmental and
health relationships.
● Teaching material on the economics of septage including its economical value in terms of energy, nutrients
and soil conditioner and also cost on health if not managed properly.
● Teaching materials on the economic benefits of proper septage management including improvement in
property value, health, scenic beauty, hygiene, tourism and environment.
● Teaching material on religious importance of our rivers and consequences of throwing septage in them.
● Teaching material for learners to achieve some level of sensitivity towards management of septage that will
promote a desire to behave in appropriate ways.
● Provide a curriculum that will result in in-depth knowledge of issues and develop skill of problem
understanding, analysis and remedies.
47
4.6.2 Awareness generation cell

The ULBs may consider creating a Mass Awareness Cell. This cell will be responsible for creating awareness
programmes on septage management. The cell should constitute committees at various levels and involve
various stakeholders including representatives of citizens, RWAs, ULBs authorities, NGOs, transporters and
others. In organizational aspect, the cell should-
● Assess current practices
● Identify the role of key community members
● Identify the resources available from the authorities and resources to be contributed from the citizens,
businessmen, industrial units, dairies etc.

● Highlight personal responsibilities and obligations in keeping septic tanks clean as per schedule
● Inform people about the duties and responsibilities of both individuals and community in cooperating with
municipality in septage management

● Inform people about advantages of desludging septic tanks regularly
● Inform people about need of septage treatment before disposal in terms of health and environmental
impacts
● Inform people about the need to pay for septage collection and its disposal
● Development of monitoring mechanism for effective implementation of awareness programme
4.6.3 Mechanism of communication

All the above information will help define a proper strategy for communicating with different stakeholders. To
reach out to the community media, group campaigns, video forums, pamphlets, home visits and other outreach
formats can be prepared. The various means of public contacts could be-
● Print media, hoardings, posters, leaflets, publicity materials, radio, TV
● Open forum, signature campaign
● Direct communication, through RWAs, seminars, meetings
● Door-to-door awareness and motivation programme
● School programme
● Involvement of National Cadet Corps, National Social Service, scouts
● Involvement of religious leaders
● Involvement of mahila mandal and women associations
● Organize best septic tank management awards at local levels
48
5. Reuse of Septage/Sewage
5.1 BACKGROUND
Reuse of domestic sewage/septage is a common practice in India since historical time. The sewage/septage is
used either raw or partially treated due to non-existence of any kind of treatment system in majority of cases.
In spite of ill effects of untreated sewage/septage on human health and the environment, the practice continues
in India, as it is highly reliable, nutrient rich and provides year-round income and employment. In many
cities/towns the sewage/septage is sold to farmers by municipal authorities. Due to continuous rise in water
demand and high pressure on water resources, reuse of sewage is being promoted in several policy percept and
regulatory measures by Government of India. While initial emphasis was mainly on reuse for agricultural and
non-potable reuses, the recent trends prove that there are direct reuse opportunities to applications closer to
the point of generation. Since the generation of sewage/septage is steeply growing in the country, it is very
important that sewage/septage reuse is promoted and regulated. Hence there is a need to develop proper
regulations and guidelines for reuse of sewage/septage.
5.2 RECYCLING AND REUSE OF WASTEWATER

Recycling of wastewater is essentially, reusing treated waste water for beneficial purposes such as agricultural
and landscape irrigation, industrial processes, toilet flushing, and replenishing a ground water basin (referred
to as ground water recharge) (USEPA,1993). Recycling and reusing are both aimed at conservation and waste
reduction, but they are not the same thing. Recycling is a process, while reusing is a practice.
5.2.1 Classification of wastewater

Classification of wastewater is in two main categories namely, grey and black water. While, grey water is the term
used for water from kitchen, baths, laundries and sinks and black water is wastewater contaminated by faeces
or urine, and includes wastewater arising from toilet, urinal, or bidet. Both require different degree of treatment
and require different treatment mechanisms. Waste water treated in appropriate technology can be reused
for a large number of uses and reduce intake of freshwater from the supply systems or groundwater.
5.2.2 Benefits of Reuse of wastewater

The major benefits are as follows:
● Helps save water, since it reduce the demand for freshwater for various uses, thus it helps to supplement
potable water for non potable uses
● Helps reduce pollution in the water bodies, since water is being recycled and treated
● Recharges ground water and replenishes surface water bodies
● Provision to develop and use a reliable in-house water source availability
● Reduction in fresh water cost and reduction in disposal cess-pools
49
● An approach towards zero liquid discharge

● A low-cost method for sanitary disposal of municipal wastewater
● Reduces pollution of rivers and other surface water bodies
● Conserves nutrients, thereby reducing the need for artificial fertilizer
● Provides a reliable water supply to farmers
● Protection of environment and effectively combat the water scarcity
Reuse of wastewater can be a supplementary source to existing water sources, especially in arid/semi-arid
climatic regions in India. In such regions people already face severe water scarcity problem and there is
competing demand of water for irrigation, industrial and domestic needs. For this reason wastewater reuse
schemes form an important supplement to the water resource in such regions. Costs associated with water
supply or sewage/septage disposal may also make reuse of sewage/septage an attractive option. Positive
influences on treatment costs of sewage/septage and water supplies, and scopes for reduction in costs of head
works and distribution systems, for both water supply and sewage/septage systems has been the motivation
behind many reuse schemes in countries like Japan. Reuse is also practiced as a method for groundwater
recharging through highly treated sewage/septage to prevent depletion of aquifer levels to restore groundwater
yields or preventing saltwater intrusion (in coastal zones). Avoidance of environmental problems arising due to
discharge of treated/untreated sewage/septage is another factor that encourages reuse. While the nutrients in
sewage/septage can assist plant growth when reused for irrigation, their disposal, in extreme cases, is
detrimental to ecosystems of the receiving environment. In addition, there may be concerns about the levels
of other toxic pollutants in sewage/septage.
5.3 QUALITY CONCERNS

Despite a long history of sewage/septage reuse in India, the quality issues linked with safety of sewage/septage
reuse still remains an enigma. Public health concern is the most important issue in any type of reuse of
sewage/septage, be it for irrigation or non-irrigation use. There is always a difficulty in delineating acceptable
health risks and wastewater reuse is a serious debate all over the world. The fundamental precondition for
water reuse is that its application should not cause unacceptable public health risks. Untreated wastewater
poses a serious risk of water-borne diseases, such as cholera, typhoid, dysentery, plague and helminthiasis. Use
of untreated wastewater for irrigation should be discontinued and replaced with irrigation using treated
wastewater that meets public health guidelines in order to minimize the exposure of farm workers and
consumers. For agricultural applications, the WHO has published guidelines for wastewater for restricted and
unrestricted irrigation (WHO 2006). Governments have also developed more stringent criteria for agricultural
applications. For non-agricultural applications, no global water quality standards exist, and various governments
have issued their own standards (Annexure 2). Some of the key pathogens that are found in raw wastewater are
summarized in Table 5.1.
Besides these pathogens, untreated wastewater may contain chemical substances that are harmful to humans
and the environment. The other issue is related to socioeconomic considerations including community
perceptions, and the costs of reuse systems. Generally no public accepts potable use of wastewater, whereas
non-potable reuse option is a technically accepted option. Almost all the guidelines and standards for sewage
reuse deal mainly with the reuse of sewage for irrigation purposes available. Irrigation is the highest water
consuming activity in India, hence it should be the first option considered in any reuse planning.
50
TABLE 5.1: Some important pathogens associated with municipal

wastewater
Pathogens Examples
Waterborne bacteria Salmonella sp, Vibrio cholerae, Legionellaceae
Protozoa Giardia lamblia, Cryptosporidium sp
Helminths Ascaris, Toxocara, Taenia (tapeworm), Ancylostoma (hookworm)
Viruses Hepatitis A virus, Rotaviruses, Enteroviruses
Source: UNEP, 2004
5.3.1 Pathogen Survival

Public health concerns centre around pathogenic organisms that are or could be present in sewage/septage in
great variety. Survival of pathogens in sewage/septage and in environmental conditions other than their host
organisms (mainly humans) is highly variable. Table 5.2 presents the survival periods of various types of
pathogenic organisms under various conditions.
Although sewage/septage reuse is risky due to associated health hazards, it is also important to understand
the factors which reduce the risk. The factors include the level of sewage/septage treatment previously applied
leading to settling, adsorption, desiccation of pathogens, as well as soil moisture, temperature, UV irradiation
due to sunlight, pH, antibiotics, toxic substances, biological competition, available nutrient and organic matter,
leading to pathogen die-off and/or removal from the sewage/septage source until final ingestion by humans to
result in infection. The method and time of application of sewage/septage and the soil type will also have an
influence. Another aspect of indirect pathogen contamination due to sewage/septage reuse has been the
contamination of soil and subsequent entry of pathogen into groundwater. The principal methods of pathogen
TABLE 5.2: Survival of pathogens in different environment

Type of pathogen Survival time in days
In faeces and sludge In sewage/septage and freshwater In soil
Enteroviruses <100 (<20) <120 (<50) <100 (<30)
Fecal coliforms <90 (<50) <60 (<30) <70 (<20)

<70 (<20)
Salmonella spp. <60 (<30) <60 (<30) <70 (<20)
Shigella spp. <30 (<10) <30 (<10) -
Vibrio cholerae <30 (<5) <30 (<10) <20 (<10
Entamoebahystolytica cysts <30 (<15) <30 (<15) <20 (<10)
Ascaris-lumbricoides eggs many months many months many months
Note: Figures in bracket shows the normal survival time.

Source: Feachem et al 1983
51
transport in soils include movement downwards with infiltration water, movement with surface runoff and
transport on sediments and waste particles. One of the important processes that control the contamination of
groundwater is the adsorption or retention of organisms on soil particles. Another process assisting in the
removal of bacteria and viruses from water percolating through the soil is filtration.
5.3.2 Other Risk Factors

Other water quality parameters of concern in sewage/septage reuse are:
i. Toxic metal accumulation in soil
ii. Salinity due to salt present in sewage/septage
The availability of heavy metals to plants, their uptake and their accumulation depend on a number of soil,
plant and other factors. The soil factors include, soil pH, organic matter content, cation exchange capacity,
moisture, temperature and evaporation. Major plant factors are the species and variety, plant parts used for
consumption, plant age and seasonal effects. Dissolved salts causing salinity in sewage/septage exert an osmotic
effect on plant growth. An increase in osmotic pressure of the soil solution increases the amount of energy
which the plant must expand to take up water from the soil. As a result, respiration is increased and the growth
and yield of plants decline. However, it has been found that not all plant species are susceptible. A wide variety
of crops normally are tolerant to salinity. Salinity also affects the soil properties such as dispersion of particles,
stability of aggregates, soil structure and permeability.
5.4 SEWAGE/SEPTAGE QUALITY STANDARDS IN PRACTICE

Although, no specific standards exists for sewage/septage reuse, however General Effluent Standards notified
under Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 (Schedule - VI, Part A, GSR 801(E) dt. 3 1.12.93) by Government of
India for disposal on land for irrigation are applicable. These standards specify limits on suspended solids, pH,
oil and grease, biochemical oxygen demand, arsenic; cyanide, radioactive substances and toxicity (refer
annexure-1). Considering the wide-ranging potential for sewage/septage reuse, it may be difficult to set some
common quality standards for all types of reuses. World Health Organization (WHO) and US Environmental
Protection Agency (USEPA) have developed detailed guidelines which form basis for many countries to regulate
sewage/septage reuse. Standards or guidelines for other possible reuses such as groundwater recharge,
industrial uses etc., are not common, mainly because such types of reuses are not widespread. First water
quality criteria for reuse of sewage/septage in irrigation were set in 1933, by the California State Health
Department. These standards are for microbiological parameters that indicate the presence of pathogenic
organisms in sewage/septage. In 1971, the WHO meeting of experts on reuse of sewage/septage recognized that
mere presence of pathogens is not sufficient to declare water for reuse as unsafe, and considered that the
California standards were overly strict and hindered widespread reuse practice, and recommended a much
relaxed microbiological standard for sewage/septage irrigation. Table 5.3 presents the microbiological quality
guidelines for sewage/septage reuse in agriculture, recommended by WHO.
a. For example, for secondary treatment, filtration and disinfection: BOD5, <10 mg/l; turbidity, <2 NTU;
Cl2 residual, 1 mg/l; pH, 6−9; and faecal coliforms, not detectable in 100 ml (State of California, 2001).
b. When children under 15 are exposed additional health-protection measures should be used (see Section 5.3
for details).
c. A rolling arithmetic mean should be determined throughout the irrigation season. The mean value of
≤1 egg per litre should be obtained for at least 95 per cent of samples in order to allow for the occasional
high-value sample (i.e. with >10 eggs per litre) (See Section 5.3).
52
TABLE 5.3: WHO guidelines for using treated wastewater in agriculture

Type of irrigation Health-based target for Required Verification Notes
helminth eggs pathogen monitoring level
reduction by (E. coli per 100 ml)
treatment
(log units)
Unrestricted ≤1 per litre (arithmetic mean)b,c 4 ≤103 Root crops.

High-growing crops: d,e 3 ≤104 Leaf crops.
No recommendation 2 ≤105 Drip irrigation of high-
Low-growing crops:d 4 ≤103 growing crops
≤1 per litre (arithmetic mean) 6 or 7 ≤103 ≤101 or ≤100 Drip irrigation of low-growing
E crops.
Verification level depends on
the requirements of the local
regulatory agency.
Restricted: F 3 ≤104 Labour-intensive agriculture

G 2 ≤105 (protective of adults and
H 0.5 ≤106 children under 15)
Highly mechanized
agriculture.
Pathogen removal in a septic
tank.
Source: WHO, 2006
Standards for other polluting parameters are intended to prevent pollutant inputs becoming harmful to
consumers of the harvested food, and to the soil. If pollutants are allowed to accumulate in the soil, its potential
use, over the long term, may become limited. By regulating land application, accumulation of pollutants in the
sewage/septage receiving soil can be prevented. However, it is often argued that reuses regulations based on
stringent pollutant loading limits, tend to discourage the land application option. Moreover, such limits do not
consider the capacity of soils to attenuate pollutants. Through proper management of land applications, the
agronomic benefits of sewage/septage can be realized, and accumulation of pollutants in the soil can be
controlled not to reach harmful levels. A comparison of water quality standards for physico-chemical, and toxic
polluting parameters for irrigation reuse of sewage/septage in some of the countries of the world is presented
in Annexure 2.
5.5 CATEGORIES OF SEWAGE/SEPTAGE REUSE

Wastewater can be recycled/ reused in many ways such as agriculture, aquifer recharge, aquaculture, fire
fighting, flushing of toilets, industrial cooling, parks and golf course watering, formation of wetlands for wildlife
habitats, recreational impoundments, and essentially for several other non-potable requirements. Potential
reuses of sewage/septage depend on the hydraulic and biochemical characteristics of sewage/septage, which
determine the methods and degree of treatment required. While agricultural irrigation reuses, in general,
require lower quality levels of treatment, domestic reuse options (direct or indirect potable and non-potable
reuses) need the highest treatment level. Level of treatment for other reuse options lie between these two
extremes. The important reuse categories are summarized in Table 5.4.
5.5.1 Irrigation
Irrigation is the largest user of water in India. It is also estimated that nearly half of the domestic sewage/septage
generated in India is used for irrigation. Irrigation reuse is also more advantageous, because of the possibility
53
TABLE 5.4: Categories of wastewater reuse

Wastewater reuse categories Issues/constraints
Agriculture irrigation 1. Surface and groundwater pollution if not managed properly

Crop irrigation 2. Marketability of crops and public acceptance
Commercial nurseries 3. Effect of water quality, particularly salts, on soils and crops
Landscape irrigation 4. Public health concerns related to pathogens (bacteria, viruses and parasites)
Parks 5. Use for control of area including buffer zone
School yards 6. May result in high user costs
Free way medians
Golf courses
Cemeteries
Greenbelts
Residential
Industrial recycling and reuse 1. Constituents in reclaimed wastewater related to scaling, corrosion, biological growth
and fouling,
Cooling water 2. Public health concerns, particularly aerosol transmission of pathogens in cooling water
Boiler feed
Process water
Heavy construction
Groundwater recharge 1. Organic chemicals in reclaimed wastewater and their toxicological effects
Groundwater replenishment 2. Total Dissolved Solids, nitrates and pathogens in reclaimed wastewater
Salt water intrusion control
Subsidence control
Recreational/environmental uses 1. Health concerns of bacteria and viruses,

Habitat wetlands 2. Eutrophication due to nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) in receiving water,
Lakes and ponds 3. Toxicity to aquatic life
Boating
Marsh enhancement
Stream-flow augmentation
Fisheries
Miscellaneous uses 1. Public health concerns on pathogens transmitted by aerosols,

Fire protection 2. Effects of water quality on scaling, corrosion, biological growth and fouling
Air conditioning 3. Cross-connection
Toilet flushing
Aquaculture 1. Constituents in reclaimed wastewater, especially trace reservoir organic chemicals and
their toxicological effects
2. Aesthetics and public acceptance
3. Health concerns about pathogen transmission, particularly viruses
Source: Tchobanoglous and Angelakis, 1996
of decreasing the level of purification, and hence the savings in treatment costs, due to the role of soil and crops
as biological treatment facilities. As the water supply requirements of large metropolis are growing, the option
of reuse of sewage/septage for domestic purposes is increasingly being considered. Based on international
experience, there is potential for reuse at all levels, from household level to the large irrigation schemes. Reuse
has advantages as well as disadvantages at each level. The choice is conventionally technical and economic
one, though it is important that the community as a whole should become more involved in the working of
reuse systems. The major issues of this reuse are:
● surface and groundwater pollution, if poorly planned and managed;
● marketability of crops and public acceptance;
● effect of water quality on soil, and crops;
● public health concerns related to pathogens
54
However, many research studies have proved that in addition to providing a low-cost water source, other side
benefits of using sewage/septage for irrigation include increase in crop yields, decreased reliance on chemical
fertilizers, and increased protection against frost damage. A summary of current regulations for reuse of
wastewater for irrigation is provided in Table 5.5.
TABLE 5.5: Regulations of different countries for sewage/septage reuse

in irrigation
Country Main regulatory parameters
US EPA 200 FC/100mL + residual chlorine depending on the type of crop.
Cyprus 50–100 FC/100mL and 200–1000 FC/100mL, for areas with unlimited public access, and crop irrigation
with limited public access, respectively.
France 200–1000 FC/100mL depending on the type of crop
Israel 120–250 FC/100mL. Regulations for BOD, SS, DO and residual chlorine
Japan No detectable coliform bacteria for landscape irrigation. Less than 10/mL for reuse as toilet flush
Spain Less than 1000 FC/100mL and less than 1 nematode per liter
Saudi Arabia 2.2–100 and 23–200 FC/100mL for unrestricted and restricted irrigation, respectively. Intestinal
nematodes 1 per liter
Tunisia Intestinal nematode less than 1 per liter
Source: Vigneswaran and Sundervadivel, 2009
Irrigation of Landscape and Recreational Area

In India, sewage/septage is generally an urban problem and in urban areas the agricultural land is hardly
available. Hence the scope for irrigation use is reduced. In such case, application of treated sewage/septage for
landscape irrigation includes use in public parks, golf courses, urban green belts, freeway medians, cemeteries,
and residential lawns. This type of application is one of the most common applications of sewage/septage reuse
worldwide. Examples of such uses can be found in USA, Australia, Japan, Mexico and Saudi Arabia (Vigneswaran
et al, 2009). These schemes have been operating successfully in many countries for many years. This type of
application has the potential to improve the amenity of the urban environment. However, such schemes must
be carefully run to avoid problems with community health. Because the water is used in areas that are open to
public, there is potential for human contact, so reuse water must be treated to a high level to avoid risk of
spreading diseases. Other potential problems of application for landscape irrigation concern aesthetics such as
odor, insects, and problems deriving from build-up of nutrients.
5.5.2 Domestic and Industrial Use

Reuse of wastewater for purposes other than irrigation may be either for:
● industrial reuse;
● non-potable purposes;
● indirect potable purposes; or
● direct potable purposes
55
a. Industrial Reuse
Industrial reuse of reclaimed wastewater represents major reuse next only to irrigation in both developed and
developing countries. Reclaimed wastewater is ideal for many industrial purposes, which do not require water
of high quality. Often industries are located near populated area where centralized treatment facilities already
generate reclaimed water. Depending on the type of industry, reclaimed water can be utilized for cooling water
make-up, boiler feed water, process water etc. Cooling water make-up in a majority of industrial operations
represents the single largest water usage. According to former additional director of CPCB, in India many
industries located in water scarce areas have already adopted use of treated wastewater as a source of water
e.g. Madras Refineries, Madras Fertilizers, Pragati Power Station in Delhi and many more industries are using
wastewater at large (personal commuinication). Operational problems encountered in cooling water
recirculation systems are irrespective of the quality of make-up water used. They are scaling, corrosion,
biological growth, and fouling. A major problem associated with reuse of wastewater will be biofilm growth in
the recirculation system. Presence of microorganisms (pathogens or otherwise) with nutrients such as nitrogen
and phosphorus, in warm and well-aerated conditions, as found in cooling water towers, create ideal
environments for biological growth. The important options to overcome the problems associated with industrial
use are summarized in Table 5.6.
TABLE 5.6: Industrial water reuse: concerns, causes, and treatment

options
Concerns Causes Treatment options
Scaling Inorganic compounds, salts Scaling inhibitor, carbon adsorption, filtration, ion
exchange, blowdown rate control
Corrosion Dissolved and suspended solids pH imbalance Corrosion inhibitor, reverse osmosis
Biological growth Residual organics, ammonia, phosphorous Biocides, dispersants, filtration
Fouling Microbial growth, phosphates, dissolved and Control of scaling, corrosion,microbial growth,
suspended solids filtration chemical and physical dispersants
Source: Asano and Levine, 1998
b. Non-potable Domestic Reuse

Adequately treated wastewater meeting strict quality criteria, can be planned for reuse for many non-potable
purposes. Non-potable reuse leads to both: a reduction in water consumption and a reduction in wastewater
flow rate. Therefore, non-potable reuse schemes can avoid adverse environmental consequences associated
with conventional water sources and wastewater disposal systems. Non-potable domestic reuse can be planned
either within single households/building, or on a larger-scale use through a reticulation system meant only for
use for non-potable purpose.
Systems for individual households/buildings/facilities

In many parts of the world, it has become apparent that it may not be possible to provide a centralized sewage
collection facility for all the households, due to both geographic and economic reasons. Wastewater from
individual dwellings and community facilities in such locations with out sewerage connectivity is usually
managed by on-site treatment and disposal systems. Although a variety of onsite systems have been used, the
most common system consists of a septic tank for the partial treatment of wastewater, and a subsurface disposal
56
field for final treatment and disposal. By segregating the “grey” sullage from “black” toilet wastes, potential for
reuse with minimal treatment within the household enhances manifold. There are several different schemes
for reusing grey water at the household levels. In California, systems which use grey water treated to a primary
level for subsurface irrigation of gardens have been in use for many years, and studies have shown no health
problems associated with the use. In areas of Australia which are not sewered, water scarce conditions in some
regions of Victoria have prompted interest in grey water recycling for garden irrigation (WHO 2006). Collection
and recycling systems for bathroom and laundry water have recently been tested in Victoria. A simple valve
arrangement for diversion of laundry grey water for garden watering has been developed. Australian authorities
are currently considering the introduction of comprehensive guidelines for grey water recycling systems in
individual households. When the grey water is not separated from toilet wastes, improvements in the quality
of treated wastewater can be brought about by many alternative ways. One of the alternatives includes
intermittent and recirculation granular-medium filters. The effluent from a recirculation filter has been found
to be of such high quality, it can be used in a variety of applications, including drip irrigation. In Japan, the major
in-house grey water reuse system is the hand basin toilets, which uses a hand basin set on the top of the cistern,
so the water from hand washing forms part of the refill volume for toilet flushing. Hand basin toilets are
reportedly installed in most new houses in Japan (WHO 2006).
Large-scale non-potable reuse through a dual reticulation system

A dual reticulation system is the wastewater reuse concept for urban areas where a centralized sewage
collection system is in place, on a large scale. This system supplies treated wastewater to houses, and
commercial/official/shopping complexes through a separate water supply network, to be used primarily for
toilet flushing, and irrigation of lawns. Thus, households will have two water supply lines, one for potable
and human-contact use purposes, and the second for non-potable, non-contact uses such as toilet flushing,
use in the yards and gardens etc., hence the name “dual reticulation system.” Such systems are in practice in
Tokyo, Japan.
c. Indirect Potable Reuse

Indirect potable reuse of treated wastewater may occur unintentionally, when wastewater is disposed into a
receiving water body that is used as a source of potable water supply like Yamuna River used in Delhi, Mathura
and Agra. It can also be through planned schemes, such as that of Cerro del la Estrella sewage treatment plant
in Mexico City. In Mexico City, treated wastewater which meets the criteria for potable reuse except for total
dissolved solids, is diluted by water from other sources to meet these criteria, and used for potable purposes.
Another planned indirect potable reuse can be through groundwater recharge of treated wastewater. Deliberate
(artificial) recharge of groundwater aquifers with treated wastewater can be carried out to achieve one or more
of the following objectives:
● as storage during periods of low water demand;
● as an additional treatment method;
● as a measure to recharge depleting groundwater
● as a measure to improve the overall quality of groundwater by injecting reclaimed water of specific qualities.
5.5.3 Septage Sludge Reuse

Wastewater sludge is the solid/semi-solid substance, concentrated form of mainly organic, and some inorganic
pollutants, generated because of treatment of wastewater. With the expansion of sewerage, system comes the
ever-increasing problem of how best the sludge generated in wastewater treatment facilities can be disposed.
57
It is traditionally suggested that the sludge can be applied on land as soil conditioner and as fertilizer; however
there are concerns involved in its handling, transportation, and odor nuisance because open disposal of sludge
poses threat to health and environment. Thus the need of proper treatment of sludge is a prerequisite for its
reuse (USEPA, 1984).
Properly treated sludge can be reused to reclaim parched land by application as soil conditioner, and as a
fertilizer in agriculture. Deteriorated land areas, which cannot support the plant vegetation due to lack of
nutrients, soil organic matter, low pH and low water holding capacity, can be reclaimed and improved by the
application of sludge. Sewage sludge has a pH buffering capacity resulting from an alkalinity that is beneficial
in the reclamation of acidic sites, like acid mine spoils, and acidic coal refuse materials. Sludge with a solid
content of 30 percent or more handled with conventional end-loading equipment, and applied with agricultural
manure spreaders. Liquid sludge, typically with solid content less than 6 percent managed and handled by
normal hydraulic equipment. Agricultural use of sludge matches best with priorities in waste management.
Sewage sludge contains nutrients in considerable amounts, which lead to fertilization of soil and organic matters
that improve the soil through humic reactions.
5.6 WASTEWATER TREATMENT-TECHNOLOGICAL OPTIONS

It is important to identify technologies suitable for delivering different qualities of treated water, both
conventional (secondary) and advanced (including disinfection). Based upon different reuse applications,
suitable treatment should be given to meet international guidelines and standards (see Figure 5.1).
FIGURE 5.1: Suggested treatment for wastewater reuse applications
Water collection system Suggested water recycling treatment and uses*
Increase level of treatment
Primary Treatment:
Sedimentation Secondary treatment: Biological Tertiary / Advanced treatment: 1. Chemical
oxidation and disinfection coagulation, filtration, disinfection
No uses recommended Surface irrigation of Landscape and golf

at this level orchards and vineyards course irrigation Indirect potable
reuse:
Non food crop irrigation Toilet flushing Groundwater
Restricted landscape Vehicle washing Recharge of

impoundments potable aquifer
Food crop irrigation and surface water
Groundwater recharge of reservoir
non potable aquifer** Unrestricted recreational augmentation
impoundment
Wetlands, wildlife habitat,
stream augmentation
* Suggested uses are based on guidelines
for water reuse developed by USEPA
** Recommended level of treatment is site
Increase level of human exposure specific
Source: USEPA, 1998
58
5.6.1 Wastewater treatment technologies

Several wastewater treatment systems are in use ranging from conventional low cost and small systems to large,
expensive systems each having its distinct advantages and disadvantages. In the present scenario, emphasis
has to be laid upon on site treatment of wastewater rather than offsite treatment. Various technologies such
as up flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket (UASB), Rotating Biological Contractors (RBC), Sequencing Batch Reactor,
Membrane Bio- Reactors (MBR), Submerged Aeration Fixed Film (SAFF) etc. could effectively be implemented
at small scale to recycle and reuse the wastewater at local levels.
It is equally important to explore the alternative natural technologies for wastewater treatment such as Root
Zone Treatment Systems (RZTS)/ constructed wetlands, Soil Biotechnology (SBT), Decentralised Wastewater
Treatment Systems (DWWTS), Duckweed Pond System (DPS) and Bioremediation. These technologies adopt
the science from old practices and improve the treatment process. They are designed to enhance the natural
aerobic and anaerobic processes and create conditions in which wastewater can be treated with the least use
of energy and machines. Annexure 5 provides a comparative analysis of different technologies commonly used
for treating wastewater.
5.6.2 Pathogen Reduction

Disinfection is most commonly used technology and an essential step prior to wastewater reuse in order to
minimize environmental and health risks. The main purpose of disinfection is to kill or inactivate pathogenic
microorganisms, viruses and parasites from treated water. Commonly, disinfection is carried out using strong
oxidizers such as chlorine, ozone and bromine, but they do not inactivate helminth eggs. Chlorine is the most
common chemical widely used for disinfection since it is relatively inexpensive and can also be produced easily
as a by-product of other industrial processes, such as caustic soda production. Chlorine must be injected in the
appropriate dosage and for the appropriate contact time, depending on the targeted water quality and
microorganisms. The effectiveness of chlorine is influenced by the presence of suspended solids, organic
matter and ammonia in water. Suspended solids act as a shield for microorganisms from chlorine. In
wastewater reuse, chlorine can act not only to secure the safety of recycled water but also to control biological
growth such as slime formation in water distribution pipes. Chlorine residuals that remain in wastewater can
prolong disinfection even after initial treatment. On the other hand, the residual chlorine may have negative
effects on some applications of reuse, such as crop irrigation, as well as the aquatic environment. The injection
of reducing agents such as Sulphur dioxide or carbon absorption can be used for de-chlorination (USEPA,
1999a). However, the de-chlorination process could be costly and might increase the cost of wastewater
treatment so much as to make it unaffordable for agricultural purposes.
Ultraviolet (UV) radiation has been recognized as one of the viable alternatives for disinfection. UV radiation is
a physical disinfection. It penetrates the cell wall of a microorganism in wastewater and destroys the cell’s ability
to reproduce. It does not produce by-products such as Trihalomethanes and it leaves no residual effect. The
effectiveness of disinfection depends on some factors including the intensity of UV radiation and the amount
of exposure time (USEPA, 1999c).
Ozone is also used for disinfection. It is a strong oxidizer, and is more effective than chlorine in destroying viruses
and bacteria. However, an ozone generator is relatively expensive and is not readily available.
In addition, coagulation with high-alkaline chemicals, such as lime, can show disinfection effects, even though
59
treated wastewater needs to be neutralized before discharge. Membrane filtration also has a function of
disinfection by removing bacteria and viruses. In order for any disinfectant to be effective, it is important that
wastewater is adequately treated prior to disinfection. For example, coagulation, sedimentation or sand
filtrations are common treatment methods prior to disinfection. While these treatments remove suspended
solids, they can also remove protozoan cysts and bacteria to a significant degree. Highly treated water will
maximize the effectiveness of the following disinfection process, and minimize generation of by-products in
chlorine disinfection. Based on the evaluation of advantages and disadvantages, the most appropriate
technology may be selected for effective disinfection.
The removal of helminth eggs is an important concern in India. Helminth ova possess a shell that consists of
three basic layers secreted by the egg itself: a lipid inner layer, a chitinous middle layer, and outer protein layer.
All these layers give high resistance to eggs under several environmental conditions. Helminth eggs of concern
in wastewater used to irrigate have a size between 20-80 μm, a relative density of 1.06-1.15 and are very sticky.
All these three properties determine the helminth ova’s behavior during treatment (Jimenez, 2005). It is very
difficult to inactivate them, unless temperature is risen above 40°C or moisture is reduced to less than 5 percent
conditions that are not often achieved in wastewater treatment but are common in sludge treatment. Thus, in
wastewater it is not common to inactivate helminth ova but to remove them. This is done by processes that
remove particles through sedimentation (in stabilization ponds, or coagulation flocculation) or through filtration.
Helminth ova removal from different processes is shown in Table 5.8
TABLE 5.8: Pathogen removal achieved by selected wastewater

treatment processes
Treatment process Helminth ova/eggs removal
Waste Stabilization ponds Excellent
Waste storage and treatment reservoirs Good
Constructed wetlands Good
Primary sedimentation Medium
Advanced Primary treatment Excellent
Anaerobic up flow sludge blanket Medium
Activated sludge + secondary sedimentation Good
Trickling filter + secondary sedimentation Good
Aerated lagoon or oxidation ditch + settling pond Excellent
Tertiary coagulation flocculation Excellent
High rate or slow rate sand filtration Excellent
Source: UNEP, 2004
60
5.7 PROPOSED GUIDELINES

For any septage/sewage reuse programme a careful consideration of the local conditions is needed. It must be
based on the sufficient and well-integrated analysis of technology options, financial implications, health risks
mitigation, and other factors. Following guidelines are proposed:
5.7.1 Initial Planning

The first step in designing a wastewater reuse programme is to carefully evaluate the appropriateness of water
and wastewater reuse applications needs against the volume of available wastewater, degree of water scarcity,
availability of existing infrastructure, and receptivity of potential users. The purpose of the application, such as
irrigation, industrial use, landscape, and household use, needs to be evaluated together with the water quality
requirements and associated health risk. Such evaluation is useful in identifying necessary treatment and
disposal technologies, as well as operational and maintenance requirements. Public perception and receptivity
also need to be analyzed carefully. The public should be recognized as legitimate stakeholders, and their roles
and responsibilities should be clearly defined in the planning process.
5.7.2 Financial Requirements

Economic and financial analyses are also needed to identify viable solutions and to access financial
assistance when necessary. While wastewater reuse programmes have many benefits and long-term cost
effectiveness, they may have a high initial cost associated with additional treatment and infrastructure needs,
such as additional treatment, pumps, pipes, reservoirs, and so on. Alternatives to address this impediment,
such as public assistance, incentives, and preferential private sector financing, must be explored. The
decision-makers and the users should be aware of the impact on water prices resulting from wastewater
reuse projects.
The cost involved in building and maintaining wastewater treatment plants, and installing water distribution
lines for reuse is very high. Financing such services from exchequer’s fund could be detrimental to the
national economy. Hence it is important that such services are fully charged to the beneficiaries. In view of
water scarcity in many parts of the country, this can be a cheaper option to augment water availability in
many parts of the country than bringing water from distant places. However, by decentralised wastewater
treatment systems and planning for reuse near to the source can considerably redue the related costs of
wastewater treatment including reuse. Locally controlled funds or small-scale financing mechanisms (i.e.
microcredit schemes) may also be established to facilitate financing. Along with the introduction of financing
mechanisms, a capacity to understand and access such services needs to be fostered among utilities and
potential wastewater users.
5.7.3 Setting National standards on reuse of wastewater

One of the most important factors in wastewater reclamation projects is complying with standards to minimize
health risks, or establishing them if they do not exist While the WHO guidelines for agricultural applications of
wastewater are available, there are no international guidelines or criteria for other types of wastewater reuse.
Therefore, it is important to evolve national standards for septage/sewage reuse in India considering health
risks as well as technical and economic feasibility. Technological options should be explored and suitable
technology should be selected to meet such guidelines and standards and ensure the protection of human
health and the environment.
61
5.7.4 Setting Institutional Mechanism

Wastewater reuse involves many stakeholder institutions, such as utilities and private users that implement
the initiative, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, Central Pollution Control Board, State
Pollution Control Boards, urban local bodies and other authorities for permits and enforcement, financial
institutions for provision of funding. Their responsibilities and roles for facilitating reuse programmes need to
be identified and understood clearly. In many cases, institutions need to be supported or newly established.
Many cities and towns in India have already well organized institutions for water supply, those for wastewater
collection treatment and disposal may not exist at all. For providing effective waste management and reuse of
wastewater services, it is very important that a well organized institutional arrangement is established. The
institutional arrangement should ensure the credibility and responsibility within its target community, and
developing a client-oriented organizational structure. In order to undertake wastewater reclamation projects,
it is necessary to examine relevant existing institutions and strengthen them, or to create new ones
and assign adequate mandates and responsibilities. It may also be worthwhile establishing collaborative
frameworks with other reclamation and reuse programmes particularly with industries to achieve a critical
mass for service provision.
5.7.5 Human Resources Development

Building technical and managerial capacity for operating septage and sewage management and reuse
programmes is a critical necessity, due to the variable qualities of source of septage/sewage reuse and the
complexity of processes. Analytical and problem-solving skills, as well as the ability to maintain and manage
technologies, systems and organizations, need to be fostered. Well-trained personnel, including engineers,
scientists and technicians, are necessary for successful water and wastewater recycling projects. In some
organizations, resource constraints may force staff with limited training to assume supervisory and management
positions, posing a challenge to implementing effective programmes. Following steps are essential to develop
human resources effectively:
● Carrying out internal human resource development by training courses and on-the-job training;
● Developing human capabilities through hiring and retention of qualified personnel.
In addition, care should be taken to favour operations that enhance, rather than diminish, employment
opportunities, and to utilize reliable mechanisms that can be maintained by a locally trained labour force.
Community-level training is also important, as many water reuse and recycling techniques involve actions at a
household or shop-floor level. Training materials and methods need to be tailored to meet the needs and
qualifications of the target audience.
5.7.6 Development of Policy and Legal Framework

It is important to develop policy and law at national, state and city levels. Septage/sewage reuse projects must
include regulatory mechanism to ensure the protection of human health and the environment. Necessary
regulations may include permit systems to authorize wastewater discharges, technical specifications on
wastewater treatment, reclaimed water quality standards for various applications, and regulations on disposal
of waste (sludge, brine, etc.) from treatment. In water scarce areas, water reuse requirements or the installation
of a reuse infrastructure may also be introduced. Mechanisms to enforce these regulations are also necessary,
including required and voluntary monitoring, inspection programmes with adequate staffing, and clear authority
to assess and collect fines and penalties. Incentives, such as grants and low-interest loans, flexible permits and
priority access to the infrastructure, may also be effective in increasing interest in wastewater reuse.
62
5.7.7 Public Awareness

In view of water getting scarce in most parts of the country, it is very important that the public is made aware
of importance of water conservation and its reuse. They should be made aware of present and future scenario
of water shortages and encouraging their participation in remedial action is crucial in the implementation of
wastewater reuse. The issue is of particular importance for water reuse for indirect and direct potable use,
including groundwater recharge, as many initiatives have been delayed due to public resistance and legal action.
To raise the awareness of stakeholders and ensure that their voices are heard, the decision-making process
needs to be participatory, with clearly outlined roles and responsibilities. Proactive public outreach initiatives,
such as publications, public announcements, and site visits, are some of the main means to secure wider public
acceptance and support.
Civil society organizations usually play an important role in undertaking various activities aimed to raise public
awareness. In some countries, local governments and local politicians also take part directly to raise the public
awareness of water conservation, better usage to improve public health, and recycling water for secondary
uses. Public participation can be scaled-up by bringing the community into the decision-making process. Their
participation in the decision-making process also improves public participation in the implementation process.
Public participation can be aimed at different objectives including the payment of user charges, conservation,
minimizing unaccounted for water rates, recycling and reuse of water, and ownership and operation of the
small projects, mainly in slums or peri-urban areas.
5.7.8 Promotion of onsite wastewater treatment and reuse

Finding a local reuse option is difficult in the centralized treatment of wastewater as the quantum of treated
wastewater is high. As such it requires a new network for the distribution of treated effluent to various places,
thereby increasing the cost besides transmission losses. While, in decentralized systems, the treated wastewater
is recycled / reused on site for irrigation, toilet flushes and cooling towers. Such systems can be set up locally
in offices, individual houses and institutions, thereby reducing the extra burden of laying of separate pipelines.
They are not only easy to operate and maintain but also have good efficiency. Adoption of wastewater treatment
systems at institutional and community level will not only reduce the load on existing STPs but also help in
recycling and reuse of wastewater in an economical and sustainable way. Several cities already have
incorporated recycling and reuse of wastewater in their building bye-laws (see Annexure 6- Delhi, Bengaluru,
Rajkot, Chennai, and Chandigarh).
63
References
1. ADB (2006) Asia Water Watch 2015: Are Countries in Asia on Track to Meet Target 10 of the Millennium Development Goals. Asian Development
Bank
2. ADB (2007), Philippines: Country Sanitation Action Plan, Draft. Asian Development Bank
3. ADB. (2009) India’s Sanitation for All: How to Make It Happen, Series 18
4. Asano, T. and Levine, A. (1998). Wastewater recycling, recycling, and reuse: an introduction. Chap. 1 In: T.Asano (Ed.). Lancaster :Wastewater
Recycling and Reuse. Technomic Publ. Co.,PA.
5. Boesch A., Schertenleib R. (1985). Emptying on-site excreta disposal systems: field tests with mechanized equipment in Gaborone
(Botswana).Duebendorf (Switzerland): International Reference Centre for Waste Disposal (IRCWD Report No. 03/85)
6. City Government of Surabaya. (2000). Local Ordinance No.4(2000). Surbaya: City Government of Surabaya, USAID
7. DFID (2005) .Decentralised domestic wastewater and faecal sludge management in Bangladesh. Department for International Development ,GHK
8. Feachem R.G., Bradley D.J., Garelick H., and Mara D.D.(1983) Sanitation and disease: health aspects of excreta and wastewater management (World
Bank Studies in Water Supply and Sanitation 3). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
9. Garg, S.K. (2001) Sewage Disposal and Pollution Engineering (Vol. II). New Delhi : Khanna Publishers.
10. Indah Water Konsortium. (2008). Individual Septic Tank –Responsive Desludging. Indah Water Konsortium, USAID
11. Jimenez B. (2005) ‘Helminth Ova Removal from Wastewater for Agriculture and Aquaculture Reuse’, 5th International Symposium on Wastewater
Reclamation and Reuse for Sustainability of the International Water Association, 7-8 November 2005, Jeju, Korea
12. Jiménez, B. (2005) ‘Treatment technology and standards for agricultural wastewater reuse: a case study in Mexico’, Journal of Irrigation and Drainage
Vol. 54, pp 1−11
13. Koottatep T. , Polprasert C. , Oanh N. T. K. , Surinkul N. , Montangero A., & Strauss M. ,2004 . Treatment of septage in constructed wetlands in tropical
climate – Lessons Learnt after Seven Years of Operation. In: Ninth International IWA Specialist Group Conference on Wetlands Systems for Water
Pollution Control and Sixth International IWA Specialist Group Conference on Waste Stabilization Ponds, ( 27 Sept. – 1 Oct., 2004, Avignon, France),
Water Science & Technology, Vol. 51 (9) pp 119–126.
14. Koottatep,T, N. S. (2005). Treatment of septage in constructed wetlands in tropical climate – Lessons learnt after seven years of operation. Water
Science & Technology , pp. 119-126.
15. Malaysia Water Association. (2005). Malaysia Water Industry Guide. Kuala Lumpur: The Malaysian Water Association, USAID
16. Malisie, A. (2008). Sustainability Assessment on Sanitation Systems for Low Income Urban Areas in Indonesia.Unpublished Thesis (Doctor of
Engineering), Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH)
17. NUSP (2008) .National Urban Sanitation Policy, Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India
18. R K Srinivasan and SV Suresh Babu. (2008), “ Do – it – yourself- Recycle and Reuse Wastewater” , New Delhi :Centre for Science and Environment
19. Solomon, C, Casey, P, Mackne, C, and Lake, A. (1998). Septage Management National Small Flows .Clearinghouse
20. Strauss, M. (1996) ‘Health (pathogen) considerations regarding the use of human waste in aquaculture’, Environmental Research Forum vol. 5−6, pp
83−98
21. Sasse, L ;BORDA (Editor) (1998): DEWATS . Decentralised Wastewater Treatment in Developing Countries. Bremen: Bremen Overseas Research
and Development Association (BORDA).
22. Tchobanoglous, G., and Angelakis, A.N. (1996). Technologies for wastewater treatment appropriate for reuse: potential for applications in Greece.
Wat. Sci. Tech., 33(10–11), 17–26.
23. Tilley, E. et al. (2008). Compendium of Sanitation Systems and Technologies. Duebendorf and Geneva: Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science
and Technology (EAWAG)
24. UNEP. (2004) Saving Water through Sustainable Consumption and Production: A Strategy for Increasing Resource Use Efficiency. Paris, France:
United Nations Environmental Program, United Nations
25. US AID(1992) US Agency for International Development Manual-Guideline for Water Reuse, EPA/625/R-92/004, Washington, D.C., USA.
26. USEPA (1999c)Wastewater Technology Fact Sheet, Ultraviolet Disinfection, EPA-832-F-99-064, Washington, D.C., USA.
27. USEPA(1998)US Environmental Protection Agency, Water Recycling and Reuse: The Environmental Benefits, EPA909-F-98-001, Washington, D.C.,
USA
28. USAID. (2010). A Rapid Assessment of Septage Management in Asia: Policies and Practices in India, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Srilanka,
Thailand and Vietnam. USAID.
29. USEPA (1999c) Environmental Protection Agency, Wastewater Technology Fact Sheet, Ultraviolet Disinfection, EPA-832-F-99-064, Washington, D.C.,
USA
30. USEPA (2011).Agriculture from Nutrient Managemnt and Fertlizer: Made from Domestic Septage and Sewage Sludge (Biosolids). US Environmental
Protection Agency: Available from : http://www.epa.gov/agriculture/tfer.html#Fertilizers [Accessed 07/04/2011].
64
31. USEPA.(1984) US Environmental Protection Agency, Handbook: Septage Treatment and Disposal, EPA-625/6-84-009. Cincinnati, OH: CERI
32. USEPA.(1993) A Guide to the Federal EPA Rule For Land Application of Domestic Septage to Non-Public Contact Sites, Washington: Environmental
Protection Agency.
33. Vigneswaran,S. and M. Sundaravadivel (2009).Wastewater Recycle, Reuse, And Reclamation - Recycle and Reuse of Domestic Wastewater –
Encyclopaedia of Life Support System (EOLSS)
34. Water and Sanitation Program (2008). A Guide to Decisionmaking: Technology Options for Urban Sanitation in India. Government of India.
35. WEF. (1997) Septage Handling Manual of Practice No 24. Alexandria. Virginia: Water Environment Federation.
36. WHO. (2008). World Health Organization and United Nations Children’s Fund Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation:Special
Focus on Sanitation. New York, Geneva: WHO.
37. WHO.(2006) Guidelines for the Safe Use of Wastewater, Excreta and Grey Water, volume 2: Wastewater Use in Agriculture. Geneva, Switzerland:
World Health Organization
38. World Bank. (2006) India Water and Sanitation : Bridging the Gap between Infrastructure and Service. Washington DC, World Bank.
WEBLINKS
1. CPCB Reports; Central Pollution Control Board, New Delhi. available from : http://cpcb.nic.in/
2. Ecology dictionary, definition of septage, available from http://www.ecologydictionary.org/EPA-Glossary-of-Climate-Change-Terms/SEPTAGE.
Accessed on May 30,2011
3. Government of India Census. available from : http://www.censusindia.net/ Accessed May 11,2011
4. USAID, 2010, Country assessment. available from http://issuu.com/lindashi/docs/indonesia-country-assessment_0/1 Accessed on March 15, 2011
5. USAID( 2010)Country assessment. available from http://issuu.com/lindashi/docs/malaysia-country-assessment_0/1 Accessed on March 15, 2011
6. USAID(2010)Country assessment.available:http://issuu.com/lindashi/docs/philippines-country-assessment_0) Accessed on March 15, 2011
7. USAID ( 2010)Country assessment. available:http://issuu.com/lindashi/docs/thailand-country-assessment_0/1) Accessed on March 15, 2011
65
Annexure
Annexure 1: General Effluent standards by Government of India

General effluent standards
Schedule - VI, Part A, GSR 801(E) dt. 3 1.12.93.
Parameter Unit Standards
Inland surface water Public sewer Land for irrigation Marine coastal areas
Colour and odour All efforts should be - All efforts should be All efforts should be
made to remove colour made to remove made to remove
and unpleasant odour colour and unpleasant colour and unpleasant
as far as practicable. odour as far as odour as far as
practicable. practicable.
Suspended solids 100 600 200 a) For process

effluent—100
b) For cooling water -
10 percent above total
suspended matter of
influent
Particle size of - Shall pass 850 micron - - a) Floatable solids–

Suspended solids IS sieve max. 3 mm
b) Settleable solids–
max. 850 µm.
pH - 5.5 to 9 5.5 to 9 5.5 to 9 5.5 to 9
Temperature °C, max. Shall not exceed 5 0C - - Shall not exceed 5°C
above the receiving above the receiving
water temperature water temperature
Oil and grease mg/l, max. 10 20 10 20
Total residual chlorine mg/l, max. 1 - - 1
Ammoniacal nitrogen mg/l, max. 50 50 - 50

(as N)
Total kjeldahl mg/l, max. 100 - - 100

nitrogen (as N)
Free ammonia (as NH3) mg/l, max. 5 - - 5
Biochemical oxygen mg/l, max. 30 350 100 100

demand (3 days at 270 C)
Chemical oxygen mg/l, max. 250 - - 250

demand
66
Annexure 1: General Effluent standards by Government of India

General effluent standards
Schedule - VI, Part A, GSR 801(E) dt. 3 1.12.93.
Parameter Unit Standards
Inland surface water Public sewer Land for irrigation Marine coastal areas
Arsenic (as As) mg/l, max. 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2
Mercury (as Hg) mg/l, max. 0.01 0.01 - 0.01
Lead(as Pb) mg/l, max. 0.1 1 - 2
Cadmium (as Cd) mg/l, max. 2 1 - 2
Hexavalent chromium mg/l, max. 0.1 2 - 1

(as Cr + 6)
Total chromium (as Cr) mg/l, max. 2 2 - 2
Copper (as Cu) mg/l, max. 3 3 - 3
Zinc (as Zn) mg/l, max. 5 15 - 15
Selenium (as Se) mg/l, max. 0.05 0.05 - 0.05
Nickel (as Ni) mg/l, max. 3 3 - 5
Cyanides (as CN) mg/l, max. 0.2 2 0.2 0.2
Fluorides (as F) mg/l, max. 2 15 - 15
Dissolved Phosphates mg/l, max. 5 - - -

(as P)
Sulphides (as S) mg/l, max. 2 - - 5
Phenolic compounds mg/l, max. 1 5 - 5

(as C6H5OH)
Radioactive materials: Micro 10-7 10-7 10-8 10-7

a) Alpha emitters curie/ml, 10-6 10-6 10-7 10-6
b) Beta emitters max.
Bioassay test - 90% survival of fish 90% survival 90% survival of fish 90% survival of fish
after 96 h in 100% of fish after after 96 h in 100% after 96 h in 100%
effluent 96 h in 100% effluent effluent
effluent
Manganese (as Mn) mg/l, max. 2 2 - 2
Iron (as Fe) mg/l, max. 3 3 - 3
Vanadium (as V) mg/l, max. 0.2 0.2 - 0.2
Nitrate nitrogen (as N) mg/l, max. 10 - - 20
67
Annexure 2: Comparative standards applicable in different countries for

Septage, manure and leachate
Parameters Canada USA Taiwan Hungary China Saudi Arabia Tunisia India India
All soils Sandy soils All soils All soils Paddy crop Vegetables All soils All soil Leachate
PH - 6.0-9.0 6.5-8.5 5.5-8.5 5.5-8.5 6.0-8.4 5.5-9.0 6.5-8.5 5.5-9.0
Total dissolved solids, 500- - - - 1000- 1000- - - 2100

mg/L 3500 2000 2000
Suspended solids, - - 100 - 150 200 10 20030 -

mg/L
Chloride, mg/L - - 175 - 250 250 280 -2000 600
Sulphate, mg/L - - 200 - - - - - -
BOD, mg/L - - - - 80 80 10 100- 100
COD, mg/L - - - - 200 150 - -90 -
Aluminum, g/L - 5000 5000 5000 - - 5000 - -
Arsenic, g/L 100 100 1000 200 50 50 100 200100 200
Boron, g/L 500-600 750 750 700 1000-3000 1000-3000 500 -3000 -
Beryllium, g/L 100 100 500 100 - - 10 - -
Cadmium, g/L 10 10 10 20 5 5 100 -10 -
Chromium (total), g/L 100 100 100 5000 100 100 50 -100 -
Cobalt, g/L 50 50 50 50 - - 400 -100 -
Copper, g/L 200-1000 200 200 2000 1000 1000 - -500 -
Iron, g/L 200 5000 2000 100 - - 5000 -5000 -
Lead, g/L - 200 - 1000 - - - 1000 -
Manganese, g/L - - - 10 - - 200 -500 -
Mercury, g/L 10-50 10 5 0 1 1 1 -1 -
Molybdenum, g/L 200 200 10 1000 - - 100 - -
Nickel, g/L - 20 - - - - 200 -200 -
Selenium, g/L 20-50 - - 5000 20 20 20 -50 -
Zinc, g/L 1000-5000 2000 5000 10000 2000 2000 4000 -5000 -
Cyanide (total), g/L - - - - 500 500 500 200 200
Oil and grease, g/L - - 5000 50000 5000 5000 5000 10000 5000
Surfactants, g/L - - - - - - - - -
Radioactive –
alpha emitters - - - - - - - 10 -8
Radioactive – - - - - - - - 10-7 -
beta emitters
Bioassay - - - - - - - 90% fish -

survival
in 96 hrs
C/N Ratio - - - - - - - - -
Source: Adopted from Andrew C. C., Albert L. P., Asano T., and Hesphanhol I., “Developing human health related chemical guidelines for
reclaimed wastewater irrigation,” Water Science & Technology, 33(10–11), 463–472
68
Annexure 3: Standards for compost quality notified under MSW

Rules 2000
Parameters Concentration not to exceed * (mg/kg dry basis , except pH value and C/N ratio)
Arsenic 10.00
Cadmium 5.00
Chromium 50.00
Copper 300.00
Lead 100.00
Mercury 0.15
Nickel 50.00
Zinc 1000.00
C/N ratio 20-40
PH 5.5-8.5
Annexure 4: Standards for Leachate Quality from solid wastes dump sites
as notified under MSW Rules 2000
Parameter Standards ( Mode of Disposal )
Inland surface water Public sewers Land disposal
Suspended solids, mg/l, max 100 600 200
Dissolved solids (inorganic) mg/l, max. 2100 2100 2100
PH value 5.5 to 9.0 5.5 to 9.0 5.5 to 9.0
Ammonical nitrogen (as N), mg/l, max. 50 50 -
Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (as N), mg/l, max. 100 - -
Biochemical oxygen demand ( 3 days at 270 C) max.(mg/l) 30 350 100
Chemical oxygen demand, mg/l, max. 250 - -
Arsenic (as As), mg/l, max 0.2 0.2 0.2
Mercury (as Hg), mg/l, max 0.01 0.01 -
Lead (as Pb), mg/l, max 0.1 1.0 -
Cadmium (as Cd), mg/l, max 2.0 1.0 -
Total Chromium (as Cr), mg/l, max. 2.0 2.0 -
Copper (as Cu), mg/l, max. 3.0 3.0 -
Zinc (as Zn), mg/l, max. 5.0 15 -
Nickel (as Ni), mg/l, max 3.0 3.0 -
Cyanide (as CN), mg/l, max. 0.2 2.0 0.2
Chloride (as Cl), mg/l, max. 1000 1000 600
Fluoride (as F), mg/l, max 2.0 1.5 -
Phenolic compounds (as C6H5OH) mg/l, max. 1.0 5.0 -
69
Annexure 5: Comparative analysis of various technologies

Process technology Land Operation and Energy Capital cost Effluent Distinct
type requirement maintenance requirement quality advantage
cost
Activated Sludge 0.15 to 0.25 Rs 0.3 to 0.5 180 to 225 Kwh/ Rs 2 to BOD: 10-20 Land
Process hectares / MLD million / year/ ML treated 4 million/ MLD mg/L requirement is
installed MLD installed capacity Suspended very less and
capacity capacity solids(SS): performance is
20 to 50 mg/L not affected by
normal variation
in waste water
characteristic
Trickling Filter (TF) 0.25 TO 0.65 Slightly lower 180 Kwh/ML Relatively Comparable Rugged system
hectares / MLD than ASP treated lower than ASP to ASP with simple and
installed capacity silent operation
Waste Stabilization 0.8 to 2.3 Rs 0.06 to 0.1 Energy required Rs 1.5 to 4.5 BOD: 30-50 Very easy
Ponds (WSP) hectares/ MLD million/year/ for the operation million/MLD mg/L operation and
installed capacity MLD installed of screen and capacity Suspended maintenance
capacity grit chamber, solids(SS):
negligible as 75 – 125 mg/L
compared to ASP The color of
the water is
greenish
Upflow anaerobic 0.2 to 0.3 Rs 0.08 to 0.17 10 to 15 KWh / Rs 2.5 to 3.5 BOD: 30-40 Can absorb
sludge blanket (UASB) hectares/MLD million/ year / ML sewage million/MLD mg/L hydraulic and
installed capacity MLD installed treated installed Suspended organic shock
capacity capacity solids(SS): 75 – loading. Sludge
100 mg/L handling is
minimal
Rotating 1biological NA NA Very low as NA Comparable Ease of

contractor (RBC) compared to ASP to ASP installation and
commissioning.
Simple to
operate and
maintain
Sequencing Batch 0.1 to 0.15 Higher than ASP 150 to 200 Higher than BOD< 5 mg/L The process is
Reactor (SBR) hectares/ MLD KWh/ML treated ASP Total time controlled
installed capacity Suspended and flexible
solids (TSS):
<10mg/L
Fluidized Aerobic 0.06 Hectares / 0.5 – 0.75 99-170 KWh / ML 3-5 million/ BOD < 10mg/L No sludge
Bed (FAB) MLD installed million/year/ sewage treated MLD installed Suspended recycling and
capacity MLD installed capacity solids(SS): monitoring of
capacity <20mg/L MLSS required
Submerged Aerobic 0.05 hectares / 1.14 million/ 390 KWh /ML Rs 7 million / BOD < 10mg/L More compact
Fixed Film (SAFF) MLD installed year /MLD treated MLD installed Suspended than the
reactor capacity installed capacity solids(SS): conventional
capacity <20mg/L STP’s
Membrane bioreactor 0.035 hectares / Rs 0.6 to 0.75 180 to 220 KWh/ Rs 3-5 million/ BOD < 5 mg/L Highest effluent
(MBR) MLD installed million/ year / ML treated MLD installed Suspended quality for reuse
capacity MLD installed capacity solids(SS): and very high
capacity <10mg/L life cycle cost
colorless water
is obtained
Connued on next page

70
Annexure 5: Comparative analysis of various technologies

Process technology Land Operation and Energy Capital cost Effluent Distinct
type requirement maintenance requirement quality advantage
cost
Septic tank with 0.2 hectares / NA Very low power Rs 1 million/ BOD < 10mg/L Little space
soak pit MLD installed required MLD installed Suspended required, simple
capacity capacity solids(SS): and durable
<20mg/L
Duckweed pond 2-6 hectares / Rs 0.18 million/ It is much less as Is of the same BOD < 10mg/L Easy to harvest,
system (DPS) MLD installed year / MLD compared to ASP order as WSP Total les sensitive to
capacity installed with an Suspended surrounding
capacity additional cost solids(TSS): environmental
floating <10mg/L conditions
material
Root zone treatment 0.1 to 0.2 Rs 0.05 million/ Energy Rs 1 – 1.5 BOD < 5 mg/L Low cost,
system (RZT) hectares /MLD year /MLD requirement is million/ MLD Suspended natural looking
installed capacity installed very low installed solids (SS): and high
capacity capacity <10mg/L. pathogen
colorless water removal
is obtained
Anaerobic baffled 0.7 to 0.8 Rs 0.01 million/ These systems Rs 1 million/ BOD < 5 mg/L Less
reactor + RZTS hectares /MLD year /MLD do not rely on MLD installed Suspended dependence on
installed capacity installed systems driven capacity solids(SS): electricity and
capacity by machines and <10mg/L easily fits into
electricity landscaping
Source: 1. Compendium of Sewage Treatment Technologies by Vinod Tare and Purnendu Bose
2. Report on “SBR Technology: An Appraisal” by Dept. of Civil Engg., IIT Roorkee
3. ”Do-it-yourself: reuse and recycle waste water” by CSE Publications.
Annexure 6: Building Bye-Laws
1. DELHI
Ministry of Urban Development & Poverty Alleviation (Delhi Division), Govt. of India by its notification dated 28.7.2001 had made
modification / additions in the building bye-laws 1983 as under; Clause 22.4 Part-III (Structural Safety and Services) of the Building Bye-
laws, 1983:
22.4.2: All buildings having a minimum discharge of 10,000 liters and above per day shall incorporate waste water-re-cycling system.
The recycled water should be used for horticultural purposes.
The above amendments have been endorsed by Municipal Corporation of Delhi.
To enforce amendments in building bye laws regarding water harvesting and recycling of waste water, instructions were issued vide
letter numbers D. No. DJB/DOR/06/20275 to 20288 dated 12.01.2007, by the Director of Revenue, Delhi Jal Board, which provided that
“while sanction of individual domestic (8mm) water connection is accorded for a new house a certificate is to be given by the concerned
ZE, DJB (in case of Bulk Connection, it is to be given by the concerned EE & SE, DJB) to the effect that applicant has provided the requisite
systems as provided in the building plans sanctioned by the MCD/DDA/any other land developing authority, in accordance to
modifications in the building bye laws-1983 under clause 22.4.1 and 22.4.2.”
2. BENGALURU
BMWSSB, Bengaluru To ensure use of recycled water and prevent over-exploitation of ground water has drawn up a plan to put in
place a dual water supply system in all new layouts and apartment complexes coming up in the city.
The BWSSB has asked the Bengaluru Development Authority (BDA) to set up a dual water supply system in all its new layouts. The BDA
has decided to put up separate lines for potable and recycled water in all its new ventures.
71
The builders of over 30 new apartment complexes coming up in and around the city have been asked to install dual lines for potable
and recycled water.
BWSSB is stressing on the use of recycled water for all construction activities.
3. RAJKOT
In August 2009, RMC amended building bye laws, making it mandatory, the recycling and reuse of waste water for the buildings. The
use of potable domestic water for non potable uses like car washing, gardening, construction purposes, landscaping, irrigation uses is
forbidden by virtue of powers vested with government
The essential parts of a recycling system will be separate pipes for collecting grey water. The term grey water refers to the waste water
generated from bathroom, laundry and kitchen.
Treated grey water is pumped to a separate tank on the roof from where grey water will be supplied to toilets, garden taps, car washing
taps etc. This treated grey water may be used for ground water recharge. Only water from toilets should be let in to sewerage system.
The corporation may in exceptional cases due to dearth of land or water logged areas exempt (with the approval from Municipal
Commissioner) from providing facility for recycling the grey water.
The water generated after treatment should be safe for its use for flushing toilets, car washing, gardening etc. The company or the
agency engaged for installation of system for recycling of waste water shall preferably confirm IS0:14000.
Provision may be made for checking the quality of recycled water with Water testing laboratory with Municipal Corporation at very
nominal rates.
4. CHENNAI
City Corporation building rules way back in June 2003 clearly mandated wastewater recycling. The amended rules state that only the
water from toilets must be the outlet to the sewer system. In case of ordinary buildings (ground-plus-one and residential buildings of
four dwelling units), the grey water should be used for groundwater recharge after a simple organic filtration. In case of multi-storied
apartments, the rules say that the recycled water should be used for toilet flushing.
Grey water recycling has been implemented for an eight-apartment complex in West Mambalam. For treatment chamber, bricks and
pebbles were used in addition to charcoal and blue metal.
The Corporation has given permission to the households to construct the recycling pits on the pavements, where space is a problem.
The Corporation zonal officers have been sensitised on the programme. Corporation officials hope that the city’s beautification
programme would receive a fillip through wastewater recycling.
One important outcome of the scheme, if implemented by several residents, would be a reduction of nearly 60 per cent of water
reaching the sewer system.
5. CHANDIGARH
The city had come out with byelaws on reuse of recycled water since 1990.
72
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
Centre for Science and Environment
41, Tughlakabad Institutional Area, New Delhi-110062
Phones: 91-11-29955124, 2995125 Fax: 91-11-29955879
Email: cse@cseindia.org Web: www.cseindia.org

Septage Policy Paper

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Septage Policy Paper

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Septage Policy Paper

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

POLICY PAPER ON

CENTRE FOR SCIENCE AND ENVIRONMENT

CENTRE FOR SCIENCE AND ENVIRONMENT

Centre for Science and Environment

1.1 Need for Septage Management

1.2 Understanding Septage

1.2 Status of Water Supply, Wastewater Generation and Treatment

1.4 Septic tank Dependence in India

1.4 Present status of Septage Management

2. Technological Options for Septage Management 14

2.2 Current Practices

2.3 Stages of Septage Management

2.4 Septage Treatment Options

2.5 Sludge Disposal and Reuse

2.6 Liquid Effluent Disposal/Reuse

3.2 Case Study 1: Septage treatment facilities in Indonesia

3.3 Case Study 2: Septage management in Malaysia

3.4 Case Study 3: Septage management in Philippines

3.6 Case Study 5: Septage Management in Thailand

3.7 Case Study 6: Sludge Treatment Plant at Musiri, Tamilnadu

4. Policy Framework for Septage Management 33

4.2 Existing framework for wastewater management

4.3 Key Challenges

4.4 Policy Recommendations

4.5 Technical and Managerial Guidelines

4.6 Public Participation

5. Recycling and reuse of wastewater 49

5.2 Recycling and reuse of wastewater

5.3 Quality concerns

5.4 Sewage/septage quality standards in practice

5.5 Categories of sewage/septage reuse

5.6 Wastewater Treatment-Technological options

5.7 Proposed guidelines

Annexure 1 General Effluent standards

Annexure 2 Comparative statement of standards applicable in different countries for

septage, manure or leachate

under MSW Rules 2000

Annexure 5 Comparative analysis of various technologies

Annexure 6 Building Bye-Laws

1.1 NEED FOR SEPTAGE MANAGEMENT

1.2 UNDERSTANDING SEPTAGE

Generally septage has three main components as follows:

Why is septage a problem?

Is septage only a menace or can be a resource ?

1.3 STATUS OF WATER SUPPLY, WASTEWATER GENERATION AND TREATMENT

FIGURE 1.1: Urban population growth trends

3. Urban Infrastructure Development Scheme for Small and Medium Towns

FIGURE 1.2: Water supply, wastewater generation, treatment in

Source: CPCB reports (1978, 1988, 1995, 2006, and 2009)

FIGURE 1.3: Water supply, wastewater generation and treatment

Source: CPCB reports (1978, 1988, 1995, 2006, and 2009)

1.4 SEPTIC TANK DEPENDENCE IN INDIA

FIGURE 1.4: Growth in population and access to sanitation in India

Source: USAID India, 2010

1.5 PRESENT STATUS OF SEPTAGE MANAGEMENT

2. Technological Options for Septage Management

2.2 CURRENT PRACTICES

Faecal sludge Pit latrines and leach pits

Septage Septic tanks