Sei sulla pagina 1di 75

HANDBOOK

Tools for Waste Water Treatment in


Small and Medium Sized Municipalities
in Turkey

Handbook
October2010

Table of contents
Acknowledgement ........................................................................................... 5
1

Introduction................................................................................................ 7
1.1
1.2

Legislative/ institutional framework ........................................................ 9


2.1
2.2
2.3

Introduction ................................................................................................................9
Legislative framework ................................................................................................9
Institutional framework .............................................................................................12

Tools for organisation, management & financing................................ 15


3.1
3.2

Background................................................................................................................7
Structure ....................................................................................................................7

Introduction ..............................................................................................................15
Recommendations for improved organisation, management and financing ............15

Technical Approaches and Tools .......................................................... 19


4.1
Introduction ..............................................................................................................19
4.2
General recommendations for improved waste water treatment .............................19
4.3
State-of-the-art activated sludge configuration types...............................................20
4.3.1
Control of sludge bulking ..................................................................................21
4.3.2
Configuration biological phosphorus removal...................................................22
4.3.3
Configuration choice .........................................................................................23
4.3.4
Configuration types...........................................................................................24
4.4
Innovative techniques ..............................................................................................27
4.5
Design Criteria .........................................................................................................29
4.4.1
Screens.............................................................................................................29
4.4.2
Sand removal....................................................................................................29
4.4.3
Pre settling........................................................................................................29
4.4.4
Biological ..........................................................................................................30
4.4.5
Aerator types ....................................................................................................31
4.4.6
Secondary settling ............................................................................................32
4.4.7
Air purification ...................................................................................................33
4.4.8
Sludge digestion ...............................................................................................33
4.4.9
Sludge dewatering ............................................................................................34
4.6
Automatisation .........................................................................................................34
4.6.1
Introduction .......................................................................................................34
4.6.2
Aeration control.................................................................................................35
4.7
Dimensioning WWTPs TAUW calculation tool......................................................37

Operation and Maintenance ................................................................... 39


5.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................39
5.2 Organisation, management and finances .....................................................................39
5.3 Operation ......................................................................................................................41
5.4 Maintenance .................................................................................................................42

Handbook
October2010

Annexes.......................................................................................................... 43
Colophon ........................................................................................................ 73

Handbook
October2010

Acknowledgement
The past two years we have successfully co-operated with a vast number of enthusiastic Turkish
colleagues in the framework of the Dutch-Turkish Government-to-Government programme. Several
pilots, trainings and working meetings were held on the topic of waste water treatment in small and
medium sized municipalities. These experiences resulted in the development of this Handbook.
We would sincerely like to thank the experts involved of the following organisations for their
contribution to the project and for their enthusiasm and valuable input:
Iller Bank
The Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF)
Turkish Municipalities Union (TMU)
We hope that everyone enjoyed the co-operation as much as we did, and we are looking forward to
continuation of our co-operation in the very near future.

Yours truly,
The project team:
Corinne van Voorden (Ameco)
Nicola Bekker (Ameco)
Hans Jansen (TAUW )
Mike van Boldrik (TAUW)
Paul Telkamp (TAUW)
Gerard Rundberg (World Waternet)
Otto Ferf Jentink (World Waternet)
Cavit Soydas (World Waternet)
Monique van der Straaten (NL Agency)
Fatih Altunkaynak (IBS)
Seyla Ergenekon (IBS)
Tamer Atabarut (IBS)

Handbook
October2010

Handbook
October2010

1
1.1

Introduction

Background

This Handbook was developed in the framework of the project Development of an Appropriate
Methodology for Wastewater Treatment in Small and Medium Sized Municipalities in Turkey
(G2G08/TR/7/2), a Government-to-Government project funded by the Dutch Government.
The purpose of the project was to contribute to the implementation of Council Directive 91/271/EEC of
21 May 1991 concerning urban wastewater treatment.
By 2017 all small and medium sized municipalities in Turkey (2.000 - 50.000 p.e.) should have access
to waste water treatment.
Specific priorities include:
Identification of sustainable technological solutions which are appropriate for small and medium
sized municipalities and which comply with the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive.
Improving management and organisation of waste water treatment (development of water unions,
co-operation within the chain, training).
Improving the operation and maintenance of (existing) waste water treatment plants (allocation of
human and financial resources, improving efficiency, training).
The purpose of this Handbook is to provide organisational, managerial and financial tools for waste
water treatment in small and medium sized municipalities. The Handbook is meant for professionals
and experts working in the field of waste water treatment (local, regional and national authorities,
municipalities and other associated organisations).
For small and medium sized municipalities, the definition according to the Urban Waste Water
Treatment Directive (UWWTD) is used, namely municipalities with a population equivalent of 200050.000. This means in Turkey approximately 2500 municipalities still need to get access to waste
water treatment.

1.2

Structure

The first chapter of the Handbook provides an overview of the legal and institutional framework for
waste water treatment. This chapter is followed by a chapter with recommendations and tools for
improved organisation and management of waste water treatment and a chapter on tools in the
technological field. The topic of operation and maintenance of WWTPs is included as a separate
chapter, due to its importance.

Handbook
October2010

Handbook
October2010

2
2.1

Legislative/ institutional framework

Introduction

This chapter provides an overview of the legislative framework and of the institutional setting for waste
water treatment. Some future challenges have been identified when it comes to responsibilities and
duties related to waste water treatment.

2.2

Legislative framework

Taking into consideration (waste) water treatment, the following Turkish legislative documents have
been harmonised with European directives:
UWWTD;
Water Framework Directive;
Drinking Water Directive;
Quality of Surface Water intended for the abstraction of Drinking Water Directive;
Directive on Dangerous Substances Discharged into Water;
Nitrate Directive; and
Bathing Water Directive.
The two Turkish regulations that regulate UWW discharges, based on the UWWTD Council Directive
91/271/EEC of 21 May 1991 (UWWTD), are:
By-law on UWWT, in which the collection, treatment and discharge of urban wastewater on
UWWPs is arranged.
By-law on Control of Water Pollution, whose aim is to regulate the water pollution of all discharges
of households and industries on surface water.

Handbook
October2010

T.C
T.C
MINISTRY
OF
ENVIRONMENT
MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENTAND
ANDFORESTRY
FORESTRY
Establishment
Law
Establishment Law
(4856
(48562003)
2003)

By-Law
By-Lawon
onControl
Controlofof
Water
WaterPollution
Pollution
(2004)
(2004)

NOTIFICATIONS
NOTIFICATIONS
Notification
NotificationofofSample
SampleGetting
Getting
and
Analyze
Methods
and Analyze Methods
Notification
NotificationofofTechnical
TechnicalMethods
Methods
Notification
NotificationofofAdministrative
Administrative
Methods
Methods

ENVIRONMENTAL
ENVIRONMENTALLAW
LAW
(2872-1983)
(2872-1983)
(5491-2006)
(5491-2006)

By-Law
By-Lawon
onControl
Controlofof Pollution
Pollution
Grown
Grownout
outofof Dangerous
DangerousMaterials
Materials
ininthe
theWater
Waterand
andEnvironment
Environment(2005)
(2005)

By-Law
By-Lawon
on
Urban
UrbanWastewater
WastewaterTreatment
Treatment
(2006)
(2006)

Sensitive
Sensitiveand
andless
lesssensitive
sensitive
water
waterareas
areascommunique
communique
concerning
concerningurban
urbanwaste
wastewater
water
treatment
treatmentregulation
regulation
(2009)
(2009)

The
TheRegulation
Regulationon
onthe
theQuality
Quality
ofofthe
theSurface
SurfaceWater
WaterFrom
FromWhich
Which
Drinking
Water
is
Obtained
or
Drinking Water is Obtained orPlanned
Planned
totobe
beObtained(2005)
Obtained(2005)

By-Law
By-Lawon
onControl
Controlofof
Soil
SoilPollution
Pollution(2005)
(2005)

Figure 1: overview of relevant wastewater legislation


(Source: Country Report presentation by Fatih Topba (MoEF), 3 March 2008)
Figure 2 shows a schematic diagram of the legislation of discharges on public UWWTPs and surface
water. In each step the applicable articles of both By-laws are provided.

10

Handbook
October2010

Figure 2: Legislation for discharges

In Annex 1 the articles of both By-laws in Figure 2 are explained.


As shown in Figure 2 the most important steps in the UWWT chain are the following:

Treatment requirements of urban waste water.

Requirements for construction and maintenance of sewer systems of controlling


discharges.
o Granting discharge permissions and control of industrial waste water on sewer
systems by municipalities.
o Control of discharges quality: both influent and effluent of UWWTP by the MoEF.
o Granting discharge permissions and control of industrial waste water directly on
surface water by the MoEF.

2.3

Institutional framework

To control discharges, an efficient working institutional framework is necessary. The steps


mentioned above have to be followed by the responsible institutions. These duties and
responsibilities are described in more detail below.
General duties and responsibilities

The MoEF is responsible for wastewater discharge principles, sectoral discharge


standards, legal permissions related discharging to the receiving environment,
controlling and monitoring, financing, and approval of WWT projects.
The General Directorate of State Hydraulic Works can construct WWTPs if necessary for
special situations.
The Ministry Of Agriculture And Rural Affairs is responsible for nitrate pollution
controlling and monitoring.
Iller Bank (Bank of Provinces) is responsible for WWTP project-design, tendering and
construction when a municipality asks for loan or credit from the Iller Bank. In addition,
Iller Bank provides technical services upon request of municipalities.
The Metropolitan Municipality and other municipalities are responsible for establishment
of sewage system and UWWTPs, maintenance, improvement and operation.

12

Handbook
October2010

Duties and responsibilities related to industrial discharges on public UWWTP


1.

Municipalities provide data of analysis of measurements of industrial discharges on


sewerage systems

2.

Municipalities check whether the wastewater conforms with Article 44 and Table 25 of the
By-law on Control of Water Pollution

3.

Control regular intervals

4.

Permission is given by the municipality to the company

5.

In case of food/dairy industries, municipality measures discharges and checks whether


pre-treatment is necessary;

6.

Change permits when necessary (conditions Table 25 of the By-law on Control of Water
Pollution)

13

Handbook
October2010

Duties and responsibilities for discharges of public UWWTP on surface water


1. A permit application is sent to the provincial office of the MoEF

2.

The provincial office of the MoEF checks whether the application conforms to the
Notification about Administrational Methods of the By-law on Control of Water Pollution

3.

The provincial office of the MoEF checks whether the wastewater conforms to Article
37 (Table 5 - 21) of the By-law on Control of Water Pollution

4.

Within 2 months a permission certificate is extended to the municipality by the provincial


office of the MoEF

5.

The municipality takes samples. Data are kept for three years

6.

The provincial office of the MoEF checks the discharge permission values with own
measurements

7.

The provincial office of the MoEF makes a status report of all the public UWWTP
discharges in their region every two years and sends it to the MoEF in Ankara

8.

The MoEF in Ankara evaluate the result of regions every two years;

9.

The Provincial office of the MoEF, together with the municipalities, prepares an
implementation program to implement the By-law

Future challenges

The requirements of the UWWTD have been incorporated in Turkish laws and
regulations; however a more integrated approach to the waste water and other
environmental directives could be developed.
Municipalities extend permits for industrial discharges into the sewerage system but do
not check the quality of these discharges; to improve the control of discharges the
capacity at regional and local authority level should be enhanced.
The Enforcement of regulation could be improved. The Provincial Directorate of the
MoEF is responsible for monitoring the operational performance of the UWWTP. The
MoEF would prefer municipalities to carry out these tasks too, but there is insufficient
capacity to do so.

14

Handbook
October2010

Tools for organisation, management


& financing

3.1

Introduction

Municipalities are held responsible for the realisation, operation and maintenance of
UWWTPs and financing waste water services.
By 2012 all municipalities with more than 50,000 p.e. and by 2017 all municipalities with
more than 2,000 p.e., should have access to waste water treatment. There are about 2,500
small and medium sized municipalities (with a population equivalent between 2,000-50,000)
that still need to get access to waste water treatment. To be able to treat financing and
construction requests from municipalities in an efficient way, some organisational
recommendations are provided.
The operation and maintenance of UWWTPs could be improved considerably when
considering efficiency measures, organisational and financial tools. Recommendations are
provided to improve operation and maintenance.

3.2

Recommendations

for

improved

organisation,

management and financing


1) Co-operation between municipalities and the establishment of water unions
The common practice of constructing UWWTPs in small and medium sized municipalities is
individual municipalities realising a plant, with assistance from either the Iller Bank, from
MoEF, with support of other investors, or on their own. The operation and maintenance of
UWWTPs is carried out separately by each municipality. Due to the small scale of the
UWWTPs is it difficult to realise cost efficient UWWT solutions and viable organisation of
operation and maintenance.
Efficiency could be improved in situations where a UWWTP serves more than municipality.
The costs associated with the realisation and functioning of such plants could be significantly
reduced. Resources, particularly human resources, could also be maximised if municipalities
cooperate in the investment, construction, operation and maintenance of one UWWTP.
MoEF initiated the establishment of water unions and combined UWWT for more than one
municipality. Some municipalities started a co-operation for waste water treatment; however
co-operation is often hampered because financial obligations are not met by one of the
partnering municipalities. Management systems should be elaborated which support a sound
co-operation. Annex 2 provides an overview of possible organisation forms for the
establishment of water unions.

15

Handbook
October2010

2) Co-operation between MoEF, Illerbank and municipalities


Improved co-operation between MoEF, Iller bank and municipalise will support common
decision-making on waste water regulation, priorities and practices. Annex 3 shows a
decision making model developed for Iller Bank. The model is a proposed situation for an
optimal process. Current practices are not in line with this model yet, but are currently being
negotiated.
3) Role municipalities; polluters pay principle, staff
In the present situation a municipality takes the initiative to start the realization of a WWTP
and asks Iller Bank or the Ministry of Environment for support. The municipality is not
involved in the construction off the WWTP. The municipality gets involved only when the
construction is finalised. Then the operations and maintenance has to be organised under
the responsibility of the municipality. This often results in insufficient operation and
maintenance practices. Municipalities should be more closely involved in the process of
designing and building the WWTPs and in considerations related to the operation and
maintenance after the construction of the plants. This enhances the feeling of ownerships
and responsibility.
The following activities should be undertaken by municipalities:
Organisation of the collection of fees from the polluters; these fund could cover
investment, exploitation - and maintenance costs
Calculate the tariff/tax for waste water treatment and the moment of introduction
Arranging staff for operation and maintenance
Communicate about necessity of waste water treatment to there inhabitants.
4) Attention for costs of Operation and Maintenance in Feasibility studies
Feasibility studies for the construction of smaller UWWTPs do not include financial
considerations for operation and maintenance (i.e. studies prepared by Iller Bank). Multiple
costs such as for energy, operation, maintenance and staffing should be taken into
consideration for at least 30 years when designing the UWWTPs. Including financial
considerations in the stage of the feasibility studies could considerably impact the decision
on appropriate small-scale UWWT techniques (e.g. automation and other energy efficient
aerators).
5) Supervision during construction
The constructed UWWTPs are not always in line with the initial design. Building failures or
bad quality can be the course of large amounts of money needed for maintenance or
renovations earlier then necessary. Increased supervision during the construction of the
UWWTPs could address this problem. Arrange inspection on the building process by
qualified staff.
6) Unification UWWTPs
There are insufficient qualified personnel for operating UWWTPs at municipal level.
Therefore unification of the UWWT processes, especially of neighbouring municipalities is
favourable. When plants are similar, personnel can easily be exchanged between the
different UWWTPs.
7) Involve the public
The public could be involved more frequently in the process of waste water treatment.
Involving the public in decision-making on water regulation/management will enhance their
commitment towards waste water treatment and their understanding about having to pay for
waste water treatment.

16

Handbook
October2010

8) Review tendering process


In general there are three forms of tendering, the Traditional forms, Design & Construct and
Public Private (see annex See annex 4: forms of tendering) The D&C and Public Private
form of tendering are currently not executed in Turkey. The traditional form is most relevant
as then the construction can be controlled maximal. With respect to the current form of
tendering, the following can be notified:
In the pre-design phase only investment costs are considered. The exploitation costs are
not included. Also in the final design phase the exploitation costs seem to get little
attention. As exploitation costs are as important as the investment costs for the end-user
it is recommended to pay more attention to the exploitation costs. Including both costs
within the design prevents that a system is chosen that might be cheap to build but has
high exploitation costs.
The use of a Multi Criteria Analysis (see annex) supports taking a decision based on
various criteria
9) Subsidy on energy costs
In October 2010, the WWTP energy incentive regulation was published. This regulates the
financing of a percentage of the energy cost of urban and industrial properly operated
WWTPs (the actual percentage still needs to be determined). Municipalities can apply for
this subsidy
10) Consider outsourcing
The most important cost components of the operation of WWTPs are the personnel and
electricity costs (see table below). Municipalities can either operate the plants themselves or
outsource the operation to a private company. Outsourcing has certain advantages:. The
private sector is always more flexible in hiring personnel and is more efficient in controlling
personnel expenditures. Another advantage of outsourcing is the flexibility in procurements.
The state procurement rules are less flexible and usually it takes a long time to buy spare
parts or chemicals for the treatment plants. In case of outsourcing, procurement will be
realised by the private company who doesnt have to follow the public procurement rules.
Description

Unit cost, EUR

Energy consumption

0,10 per kWh

Manpower, management

24.000 per year

Manpower, technicians

16.800 per year

Manpower, labour

7.000 per year

Precipitation chemicals

200 per tonne

Polymers

3,8 per Kg

Transport of sludge

0,20 per tonne per km

11) Be aware of the costs


To support with the estimation of costs of operation and maintenance, a table is presented in
Annex 5. This table provides a general guideline for costs op operation and maintenance.

17

Handbook
October2010

18

Handbook
October2010

4
4.1

Technical Approaches and Tools

Introduction

Based on assessments of existing UWWTPs in Turkey, general technical recommendations


are provided for improved waste water treatment. Paragraph 4.3 provides an overview of
appropriate waste water treatment technologies, taking into consideration the UWWT
Directive. Paragraph 4.4 elaborates on innovative techniques. Design criteria are elaborated
and automation is profoundly discussed as an important efficiency measure. A tool is
provided for dimensioning WWTPs and Operation and Maintenance is referred to in the final
paragraph.

4.2

General recommendations for improved waste water


treatment

Based on an assessment of existing UWWTPs in Turkey, the following general


recommendations are given:
1) Analyse the influent and effluent of the UWWTP frequently in order to determine
the efficiency
The actual efficiency of the UWWTPs is often not known and the characteristics of the
influent and effluent are not adequately analysed. It is very important to know the efficiency
of a UWWTP.
2) Installation of online oxygen measurement and control the amount of oxygen
input
Often, it is found that aeration devices at UWWTPs are switched off. This is done to
decrease the energy costs; however this also decreases the efficiency of the UWWTP
considerably. It is advised to install an online oxygen measurement that controls the oxygen
input (see also point 3).
3) Installation of more online measurements in order to improve the operation of the
UWWTP
In addition to online flow measurement, there are often no online measurements installed at
UWWTPs. This makes it difficult to operate a UWWTP. Especially an online oxygen
measurement in the activated sludge tank is important. The surface aerators should be
controlled by this online oxygen measurement. In this way you make sure that the amount of
oxygen input is related to the current load of the UWWTP. Oxygen (=energy) does not have
to be wasted in this way. In general more online measurements result in less time needed for
operators. A good balance in online measurements could be considered.
4) Assess the necessity of chlorination in effluent
The current operation of UWWTPs is often poor which results in a bad effluent quality. If the
treatment process is properly controlled with among other things the mentioned oxygen
measurement, chlorination seems unnecessary. Building costs and operational costs will
decrease considerably. Another accompanied advantage is that working with the hazardous
chloric gas is not needed anymore.

19

Handbook
October2010

5) Reduce construction costs by layout improvements


In general the existing UWWTPs are composed of many buildings, Long pipelines, Many
distribution chambers. Combining buildings and a more logical layout will reduce
construction cost significantly.
6) Efficiency in design
Some UWWTPs are built taken into account possible future expansion. At the time of
designing and constructing the UWWTP this might seem cost efficient, however in practice
building costs will be higher than necessary. The installed components for future expansion
will be subject to depreciation (due to weather influences, pollution by wastewater etc.) and
will most probably need to be renewed at the time of expanding the UWWTP. Furthermore,
the technique for UWWTPs can change considerable in time.
7) Take safety measures for operators
Safety measures should be taken to optimise working conditions for operators, for example
installing a safety work switch at a pump or another electric device ensures that there is no
electric current flowing anymore. This ensures safe working conditions when maintenance is
performed. Another safety measure is a safety cords in the activated sludge tanks. Safety
cords are installed a few metres before surface aerators and propulsors. The function of the
safety cords is that if someone accidentally falls into an activated sludge tank he or she pulls
the safety cord. By pulling the safety cord the propulsors and surface aerators are stopped to
prevent physical injuries.
8) Training of operators
In general the training executed by the contractor is mainly technical (how to switch things on
and off) and less technological.
9) Keep MLSS (Mixed Liquid Suspended Solids) content under or on the design
value
10) Arrange final destination for dewatered sludge

4.3

State-of-the-art activated sludge configuration types

Taking into consideration that Turkey wants to comply with the Urban Waste Water
Treatment Directive, activated sludge UWWTPs are found to be the most appropriate plants
for small and medium sized municipalities. Other treatment forms include for example SBR
(Sequence Batch Reactor) and lagoons (see annex 6 small size technologies for domestic
waste water treatment) which are more simplified and economical feasible, however
UWWTD requirements with respect to Nitrate and Phosphate removal are not met.
Activated sludge UWWTPs consist of simultaneous and multi compartment systems. The
multi compartment systems are in the Netherlands at the forefront of smart technology for
UWWTPs. The multi compartment systems prevent bulking sludge and are focussed on
optimal biological nitrogen and phosphate removal. The following paragraphs discuss the
process choices and configurations forms.

20

Handbook
October2010

4.3.1 Control of sludge bulking


Research results have shown that it is possible to design a UWWTP at an SVI (Sludge
Volume Index) of 120 ml/g, but certain conditions are essential:
1) The most important factor is to create a sufficient fraction of aerobic sludge in the aerated
reactor at temperatures below 15 C. This is crucial for ensuring a sufficiently low SVI. The
forming of Microtrix parvicella has to be inhibited as much as possible as this is the major
cause of bulking sludge at such low loads and extensive nitrogen removal. The following
figure presents the relationship (indicative) between the relative fraction of aerobic sludge (xaxis) and SVI (y-axis). This is based on experiments in Germany and lab scale practical
results in South Africa.
In this figure it can be seen that a very low fraction of aerobic sludge provides a good SVI
and a high fraction gives a good SVI. The IWA (International Water Association) mentions a
fraction larger than 50%, Casey mentions 60% and Kruit uses 80% as the limit above which
you have the best guarantee for a good SVI. So the different sources do not fully agree with
each other. At temperatures > 15 C the shape of the filaments will change (more like
elbows). Because of this change of shape the filaments will not play a relevant role anymore
in the formation of bulking sludge.

R w z is in N L m e t B Z V /N v a n 2 ,8 -3 ,0
kom en veel voor
R e la t ie S V I e n F r a c t ie O 2 s lib

IW A C a se y

120

K ru it

Re latie v e SVI (%)

100
80
60
40

S T O W A L ic h tslib o n d e rz o e k

20
0
0

20

40

60

80

100

F r a c t ie a e r o o b s lib

Figure 3: Trend of the relative SVI as a function of the fraction of aerobic sludge
2) Microtrix parvicella is a hydrophobic filamentous bacterium with a low growth rate but a
high substrate affinity. It can only grow at higher fatty acids and reduced N and S, below
(micro-aerophilic) aerobic conditions. Under anoxic conditions Microtrix parvicella is not able
to grow, but it is still able to adsorb higher fatty acids. An aerobic tank with an oxygen
concentration >1.5 mg/l and a sufficiently high aerobic sludge fraction will result in a low
ammonia concentration in the effluent. This creates a competitive disadvantage for Microtrix
parvicella.
3) Plug-flow conditions in the anaerobic tank (if applicable) and pre-denitrification tank (if
applicable) also support the penetration of higher fatty acids in the floc, making them less
available for Microtrix parvicella in the aerobic tank.

21

Handbook
October2010

4) A pre-denitrification tank with a certain minimum contact time after the anaerobic tank also
encourages the formation of the correct bacteria and prevents the growth of Microtrix
parvicella due to the lack of simultaneous conditions
In the fixed anoxic reactor Microtrix parvicella is not able to grow, but it can absorb higher
fatty acids. However other micro-organisms can also adsorb higher fatty acids under these
circumstances, but these micro-organisms can grow and prove to be more competitive. A
pre-denitrification tank contributes to the selection of the appropriate flocculation bacteria.
The plug flow configuration results in a substrate gradient resulting in adsorption of COD and
(higher) fatty acids on the floc.
5) A facultative tank for nitrification in winter and denitrification in summer might be
necessary
This is depending on the BOD/N ratio in the wastewater (see paragraph 5.3.4).
Summarized
Sludge bulking problems resulting from Microtrix parvicella only occurs at lower
temperatures (< 15 C). In summer Microtrix parvicella is irrelevant. The filamentous bacteria
will get a different shape at temperatures above 15 C and dont contribute anymore to the
sludge bulking problem. In practice this means that at temperatures above 15 C the fraction
of aerobic sludge and the ammonium concentration (in relation to prevention of sludge
bulking) is not as critical.

4.3.2 Configuration biological phosphorus removal


For biological phosphorus removal in the main process flow (activated sludge system) two
configurations can be distinguished: the Phoredox process and the UCT process (University
of Cape Town Process). In the following figure the Phoredox process and the UCT process
are schematically shown.

Figure 4: Schematic representation of Phoredox and UCT process.


The only (but essential) difference between these configurations is the location of the entry
of the return sludge and recirculation A. At the Phoredox process the return sludge is
recycled to the anaerobic tank. In the UCT process the return sludge is recycled to the
anoxic tank and is transported to the anaerobic tank by separate recirculation (recirculation
A). In case of the Phoredox process a part of the anaerobic reactor will be anoxic due to the
recycle of nitrate-containing return sludge. This mainly occurs at low temperatures and high
loads.

22

Handbook
October2010

Due to this effect a disturbance of the Bio-P process will occur. Especially in the winter
phosphate concentration in the effluent can become higher. The effect of inhibited phosphate
removal may last for several weeks. The UCT process is designed in such a way that in the
fixed anoxic tank full denitrification occurs. In this way the anaerobic tank will stay strictly
anaerobic throughout the year.
This has the following advantages:

The UCT process uses less (or no) chemicals. The UCT process is therefore more
durable than the Phoredox process.

The system is independent of the return sludge flow.

All fatty acids will be used for the biological Premoval, which reduces the P
concentration in the effluent. Besides the more efficient phosphorus removal also more
BOD is available for the denitrification which results in a faster denitrification process.

4.3.3 Configuration choice

Percentage of needed anoxic and


aerobic volume

The amount of compartments within a UWWTP for nitrogen removal is based on the BOD/N
ratio (Dutch guideline). The following figure presents the relation between the BOD/N ratio
and the amount of compartments.

Aerobic volume

Anoxic volume

BOD/N ratio influent


Figure 5
The figure above shows three areas which represent the amount of compartments needed:
1. no fixed anoxic volume needed simultaneous (BOD/N ratio approx. > 5)
2. fixed anoxic volume needed (BOD/N ratio approx. > 2.5 and < 5)
3. fixed anoxic and facultative volume needed (BOD/N ratio approx. < 2.5)
So for a BOD/N ratio above approximately 5 one simultaneous compartment can be used,
like a carrousel system. With a BOD/N ratio lower than approximately 5 and higher than
approximately 2.5 two compartments are needed. If the BOD/N ratio is even lower a third
compartment is needed. The two lines represent the percentage of aerobic and anoxic
volume needed for a good nitrogen removal. So for instance if a BOD/N ratio of 4 is
applicable, you need about 30% anoxic volume and 70% of aerobic volume.

23

Handbook
October2010

4.3.4 Configuration types


In recent history purification processes were always held in one tank and the various
processes took place simultaneously. These simultaneous processes are not always
efficient. By using different tanks for different processes ideal conditions can be reached
which lead to optimal speed of the processes.
In this paragraph different process configuration are presented like UCT, BCFS , Phoredox
and simultaneous nitrification/denitrification, with and without biological phosphorus removal.
UCT-Process

spuislib

Figure 6
In the anaerobic reactor the selection for the bio-P bacteria takes place. In the first anoxic
reactor (Anox 1) pre-denitrification takes place. In this reactor the nitrate in the return sludge
is reduced with the residual biodegradable COD from the anaerobic tank. Then the sludge
without nitrate is recycled to the anaerobic tank (recirculation A). In this process the volatile
fatty acids are completely for the bio-P bacteria.
In a second anoxic reactor (Anox 2) the nitrate is denitrified that was formed in the aerobic
reactor (Aerobic). In the aerobic reactor nitrification takes place and the remaining
biodegradable COD is degraded. The formed nitrate is recycled from the aerobic reactor to
the anoxic tank (with recirculation B) for denitrification. In this system all volatile fatty acids
will be beneficial for the bio-P bacteria. Thats why in this system the biological phosphate
removal is prior over the nitrogen removal.
In the Netherlands the UCT process is mainly used in combination with Chemical-Biological
Nitrogen and Phosphate Removal (UCT-BCFS process).

24

Handbook
October2010

BCFS process

spuislib
Figure 7
The influent enters the anaerobic zone. After the anaerobic zone the mix of wastewater and
sludge enters the other compartments starting with the selector (contact tank), the anoxic
zone 1 (fixed anoxic reactor), anoxic zone 2 (facultative reactor) and the aerobic reactor.
The process is regulated by controlling the different recirculation flows (recirculation A, B and
C). The last aerobic reactor is oxygen regulated. Additional phosphorus removal is achieved
by extracting phosphate-rich water from the anaerobic zone through a so-called stripper
tank. A metal solution will be added to this phosphate-rich stream and the stream is
transported to a sludge thickener where precipitation occurs.
Phoredox process

spuislib

Figure 8
In the anaerobic reactor the selection for bio-P bacteria takes place. In the first anoxic
reactor (Anox 1) pre-denitrification takes place. Nitrate is fed by the recirculation from the
aerobic reactor towards Anox 1. In the first aerobic reactor nitrification takes place and the
remaining biodegradable COD is degraded. In order to limit the recirculation the remaining
nitrate is denitrified in a second anoxic reactor (Anox 2). In the following aerobic reactor the
sludge is refreshed. The return sludge is recycled to the anaerobic reactor. The first part of
the anaerobic tank will be anoxic because there is still some remaining nitrate left in the
return sludge.

25

Handbook
October2010

In this system a part of the volatile fatty acids will be beneficial for the denitrification and not
for the bio-P bacteria. In this system the nitrogen removal is prior over the biological
phosphate removal.
The original Phoredox process is based on complete plug flow reactors which results in 5
different reactors. In the Netherlands the last three reactors are almost always combined to
one carrousel reactor (simultaneous (de)nitrification). Within this carousel reactor the same
zones can be distinguished. In the following figure the Phoredox process is shown as used in
the Netherlands.

spuislib

Figure 9

Simultaneous process with/without Bio-P

Figure 10

26

Handbook
October2010

The simultaneous (de)nitrification takes place in one reactor. The reactor is a circulation
reactor with one ore more aerated and non-aerated zones. The process conditions will
fluctuate between aerobic and anoxic conditions continuously as a result of the different
zones. The simultaneous process can reach very low nitrate concentrations. De
simultaneous process can lead to a high SVI. Therefore the settling tanks need to be
designed for a SVI of 150 ml/g. For the UCT or Phoredox process the design SVI is 120
ml/g.
For the realization of Bio-P removal a separate anaerobic tank before the circulation system
needs to be installed.

4.4

Innovative techniques

In the previous paragraph a lot of attention has been paid to state-of-the-art activated sludge
systems. Besides these systems there are also new innovative techniques on the market.
Within this paragraph some innovative techniques are described.
Anammox, Oland, SHARON, DEMON and BABE
These are all techniques for removal of nitrogen in wastewater. These techniques consume
less oxygen than conventional activated sludge systems, but they are only appropriate for
highly concentrated nitrogen streams like rejection water from dewatering digested sludge.
Also the operation of these techniques is more complex than the operation of conventional
activated sludge systems. By treating the rejection water with one of these techniques the
amount of nitrogen that will return to the activated sludge plants will be considerably
reduced. These kinds of techniques are only cost-effective at large UWWTPs with anaerobic
digesting tanks. So these kinds of techniques are not appropriate for the small and medium
sized municipalities.
Sand filtration
Sand filtration can be used when the effluent demands are strict (for instance N < 5 mg/l and
P-total < 0,5 mg/l). This might be the case when effluent is discharged to sensitive areas.
Sand filtration can be placed as a post treatment after the (secondary) settling tanks for
lowering the nitrogen, phosphorus and suspended solids.
MembraneBioReactor (MBR)
With a MBR a high effluent quality can be obtained. The footprint of a MBR is relatively small
which makes it interesting for situations where the available space is limited or if the land
value is high. Disadvantages of an MBR are the high energy consumption, high investment
cost and the complexity of the operation. For the small and medium sized municipalities it is
advised to only consider a MBR when the needed area for a conventional activated sludge
system is not available.
NeredaTM
With this innovative technique the bacteria do not grow in the form of a floc but in compact
granules. It is stated that the energy consumption will reduce considerably and less surface
is needed because there is no need for separate settling tanks. This technique is promising,
but has not been proven on full-scale yet.
The complexity of Nereda is possibly higher than with a conventional activated sludge
system and also the robustness is not known yet. At this moment the first full-scale
installation for urban waste water is built in the Netherlands. The start-up is planned for
2011. As this technique is not a proven technique (yet), it is not recommended to apply this
in Turkey at this moment.

27

Handbook
October2010

In addition to the above mentioned innovative techniques there is also another innovative
approach called New Sanitation (or Decentralised Sanitation). New sanitation is based on
separation at source within a household. Within a household we can distinguish different
wastewater streams, namely:
Black water (consists of urine, faeces and an amount of flushing water and is a
concentrated stream)
Grey water (coming from kitchen, bathroom and washing machine and is a relatively
slightly polluted stream).
Rain water (least polluted stream)

Rain water

Alternatively
separate urine
Grey water
Food waste
Black water

Figure 11
For the Turkish situation rain water is already kept separately from the black and grey water.
But the concentrated black water is still mixed with the less polluted grey water. So the
polluted stream is mixed with the less polluted stream. Concentrated black water (which can
be obtained with for instance vacuum toilets) contains almost all nutrients and pathogens
and all medicines and hormones.
Keeping the black water separated from the relatively slightly polluted grey water results in
opportunities to produce biogas, recover phosphorus and effectively treat the medicines and
hormones if desired. As New Sanitation already starts within a household it is in many cases
only worth considering with the development of new urban areas or large scale renovations.

28

Handbook
October2010

4.5

Design Criteria

In this section, an overview is given of design criteria of the different parts of a waste water
treatment plant.

4.4.1 Screens

Screen width: 6 mm (or less)


At least 1 screen, but better double screen
Use concrete protection
Material: steel IP65 (3 mm thickness)
Use aluminum for covering the channel
Design based on rain water flow
A by-pass must be foreseen
Screen must be in operate for more then 95%
Steering: level difference and flow

4.4.2 Sand removal

Build from concrete or steel


Use concrete protection (lining)
Use aluminum for covering the channel
Design based on rain water flow
Surface load: between 20-40 m/hr

4.4.3 Pre settling

Maximum tank diameter: 30 45 meter


Surface load: 2-4 m/hr (av. 2,5 m/h)
Site depth: 1,5 2 meter
Concentration outgoing sludge: 0,5-2,0 % ds

Component
Solids
COD
BOD
P-total
N-total
BOD:N:P
Outlet pre set.

Without pre
settling
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
24:6:1
BOD/N = 4,0

Normal pre
settling
30-40 %
25-35 %
20-30 %
10-20 %
5-10%
21:6:1
BOD/N = 3,5

29

With
precipitation
60-80 %
35-60 %
45-70%
60-90 %
15-30 %
10:5:1
BOD/N = 2,0

Advanced pre
treatment (PE)
60-90 %
30-60 %
40-50 %
20-35 %
10-30 %
13:5:1
BOD/N = 2,6

Handbook
October2010

4.4.4 Biological
Activated sludge
Bacteria and other micro organisms such as ciliates, flagellates, amoeba, etc. consume the
pollution from the waste water in the biological stages of the waste water treatment:
Phosphate removal, denitrification and nitrification. General design rules for all biological
stages:
Dry solids content (DS) of activated sludge on average 4-5 g/l
Water temperature 10 C 30 C (Dependent on season)
Sludge Volume Index (SVI) 120 ml/g. If SVI > 150 ml/g possibly bulking sludge
Size of settling tank is based on SVI and dry solids content
Sludge load between 0,05 0,25 kg BOD/kg DS.day (depending on nitrification and
temperature)
pH value: 6,5 8,0
Biological phosphate removal tank
Dissolution of phosphate by bacteria in the anaerobic tank is followed by an increased
bacterial phosphorous uptake in the aerobic stage (nitrification tank). Biological phosphorous
removal can be used as an alternative or in combination with P-precipitation.
Oxygen content in phosphate removal tank 0,5 mg/l
Preferably low NO3- content
Minimal amount of mixed compartments in sequence to create a plug flow: 4
Hydraulic retention time (HRT) 1 hour (depending of the amount easily biodegradable
COD). See the table below.
Unit
HRT
BOD < 10% COD influent
BOD 10-15% COD influent
BOD > 15-20% COD influent
Minimal amount of compartments

without pre
settling

Min
Min
Min
-

120
<60
45
4

With pre
settling
60
60
45
4

Chemical phosphate removal


Phosphate precipitation is chemical P-removal by addition of metal salts (Fe, Al) or of lime
(seldom) in the pre settling tank, the aeration tank or the secondary settling tank.
Netto metal versus P dosage: 3 mol Me/mol P
Denitrification tank
Conversions: NO3- -> N2
Oxygen content 0,5 mg/l
Optimal pH value: 6,8 7,7
BOD5/N ratio: 4-5
Recirculation from nitrification tank dependent of the required NO3 removal
Size of denitrification tank depending on denitrification rate (mostly dependent of
available BOD, temperature and pH) and NO3 requirements.
Example average denitrification rate at 10 C : 0,2 kg N/kg DS.day.
Example average denitrification rate at 20 C : 1,0 kg N/kg DS.day.
Size of denitrification tank between 20% - 65% of total nitrification/denitrification space. If
more space is required an external C-source must be added to meet the effluent N
requirements.

30

Handbook
October2010

Nitrification tank
Conversions: NH4+ -> NO2- and NO2- -> NO3 Oxygen content > 1.0 2.0 mg/l
Optimal pH value: 7.0 8.0
Sufficient aerobic sludge age (dependent on temperature and sludge load). At 10 C, a
minimal aerobic sludge age of 10 days is required for nitrification. This equals a sludge
load of maximally 0.15 kg BOD/kg DS.day.
No toxic substances
Preferably low NH4 and NO2 content
The aerobic volume must be aerobic for > 80%.
Size of nitrification tank is based on a maximal sludge load of 0.15 kg BOD/kg DS.day
(depending on the required minimal aerobic sludge age in relation to the temperature,
DS content, etc).
The nitrification rate is mostly dependent of DS content, temperature and pH.

4.4.5 Aerator types


Main part of the activated sludge tank is the nitrification zone. In this zone ammonium will be
converted to nitrate. This process uses oxygen that can be provided by a different kind of
aerators. There are two main groups of aerators:
surface aerators
bubble aerators

Air
20%

Aeration systems

Bubble aerator

Fine
bubble

plates
tubes
disk

Membrane
elements

jet
aerators

Surface aerator

coarse
bubble

downflow
jet
aerators

rotor

ceramic
elements

fast
rotating
vert.s. aerat.

slow
rotating
vert.s. Aerat.

Traditional
Disk shape

innovative
Disk shape

Figure 12
These two main groups contain different systems with different specifications. One of the
main issues is the energy consumption in relation to oxygen input. The following table
presents the relation between oxygen and energy use for the most used aerators.

31

Handbook
October2010

Type of aerator
Bubble aerator: plates (fine bubbles)
Bubble aerator: disks (fine bubbles)
Surface aerator.: Vertical shaft slow speed (high efficient)
Surface aerator: Vertical shaft slow speed
Surface aerator: Vertical shaft (high speed rotating)
Surface aerator: rotor

O2 input per kW
4,5 5,5 kg O2/kW
4,0 5,0 kg O2/kW
2,0 2,2 kg O2/kW
1,6 1,8 kg O2/kW
1,4 1,6 kg O2/kW
1,2 1,7 kg O2/kW

The following table presents the operational aspects between bubbles and surface aerators.
description

Bubble aerators

reliability
serviceability
suitability
Sustainable energy
Sustainable noise and smell
experience
substitutability
capacity

++
+
+++
+++
+++
++
+
+++

Surface
shaft)
+++
+++
+++
+
+++
+++
+++
+++

aerators

(vertical

4.4.6 Secondary settling


Clarification process is a process in which the sludge settles and the purified water is
decanted.
SVI 125 150 ml/g
Surface load depending on SVI
SVI
< 80 ml/g
80-150 ml/g
> 150 ml/g

Required surface load (m/h)


< 0.3 0.5
< 0.5 0.8
< 0.3 0.5

Flow rate < 1 cm/sec


Settling time (HRT) 3-4 hour
Surface settling tank (m2) = influent flow (m3/h)/ surface load (m/h)
Average side depth: 1.5 2 meter
Average concentration outgoing sludge: 0,8 % ds
Diameter Center feed well/Clifford (inlet : 15-20% of the diameter of the settling tank
Depth Center feed well/Clifford: 2/3 of side depth of the settling tank
Required flocculation time in Center feed well/Clifford: 3-5 min
Settling tanks with a diameter > 40 m: a deflection is used to prevent shot circuit between
the inlet and the outlet of the sludge.
Diameter of the deflection is 1.1 1.2 x the diameter of the Center feed well/Clifford
The space between the edge of the deflection and the depth of the Center feed
well/Clifford must be > 1 m
The space between the bottom of the deflection and the bottom of the tank must be >1m
With regard to the settling tank bridge :
Diameter settling tank < 30 m: length bridge is 0.5 x diameter settling tank
Diameter settling tank 25-40 m: length bridge is 0.75 x diameter settling tank
Diameter settling tank > 40 m: length bridge is 1 x diameter settling tank

32

Handbook
October2010

4.4.7 Air purification


Purification of the air from the anaerobic and anoxic process tanks, such as the screens and
sand removal, the pre settling tank, anaerobic phosphate tank, denitrification tank and
sludge buffers.
A biological air filter can be used, consisting of mulch and compost or lava
Dimensions of the lava filter are based on the required amount of air to be purified and
the amount of H2S, depending on what is more critical
Dimensions of the amount of air volume to be purified: 10x the volume of enterable
spaces (for example a space of 10 m3 -> 100 m3/h air will need to be purified) 3x the
volume of spaces that are not entered
Air load lava filter: 100 m3 air/m2/h
H2S load lava filter: 20 g H2S/m3/h
Water spraying: minimal 20 l/m2/h for every 15 minutes at least 1 minute in operation
The whole surface needs to be sprayed
Minimal diameter lava filter 1 m. Height according to supplier
Piping in GVK or HPE
A fan placed on the press side and constructed in synthetic material and with condense
removal
H2S detection necessary to switch on the fan if necessary

4.4.8 Sludge digestion


Anaerobic biological process, converting waste sludge to CH4 and CO2
Size of digestion tank depends on the hydraulic retention time (which depends on the
temperature)
Applied value
Temperature
HRT
Mixing
Mix energy
Operation time

27-37
15-30

Advised design
value
33
20

Unit
C
days

7
25

W/m3
% of time

Optimal pH 6.5 7.5


COD:N:P is 1000:5:1
No toxic compounds
The wall surface of the digester must be isolated (Warmth friction is at least 3 m2/K/W
Manholes for inspection necessary (1 x 1 m)
The type and material of the digester must be chosen depending on the project

33

Handbook
October2010

4.4.9 Sludge dewatering


Physical reduction of the sludge volume is caused by using a belt press or a sludge
centrifuge. For dimensioning the sludge dewatering, see table below.
Parameter

Applied value

Advised design
value

Unit

Belt press
Guaranteed DS%
Operational time
Water recovery
Polymer use

17-32
100
> 95
3-8

20
100
98
7

%
hour/week
%
g PE/kg DS

Centrifuge
Guaranteed DS%
Operational time
Water recovery
Polymer use

17-32
100
> 95
5-15

22
100
97
10

%
hour/week
%
g PE/kg DS

In case a belt press is chosen, measures must be taken for air purification.

4.6

Automatisation

4.6.1 Introduction
Use of automated systems will increase the efficiency of plants substantially. In general, the
components of the UWWTPs in small and medium sized municipalities are served on and off
manually. The operation and control of the machinery can be made easier and more efficient
by using simple controllers and timers. There is no need for using complicated hardware or
software. With smart process control- equipment and adjustments the high workload of the
operators will be reduced (they are available 24 hours a day).
The automatic operation of the systems will also reduce the energy use in the UWWTP:
Using better quality measuring equipment and applying extra level switches will prevent
flooding or running the pumps dry.
The use of more measuring sensors (Level, Oxygen, flow) and using more feedback for
targeted control of the machinery and more linearity of the process ensure a stable
process operation of the system.
Many process fluctuations, switching the machinery on and off too frequently without
feedback, disrupt the desired process results.
Execution of an energy assessment of the plant components with energy efficient
alternatives of machines is expected to increase improvements, which will reduce the
energy demand and therefore lower the yearly operating costs.
The functioning of existing UWWTPs can be improved by some relatively small
adjustments like online measurement equipment and automated process control
equipment.
Mainly the small UWWTPs have to be equipped with next measuring and controlling
instruments. It will reduce the cost of operation and maintenance.
Level switch
Level sensor
Flow sensor
Oxygen sensor
Controller

34

Handbook
October2010

For the bigger installations has to be use:


Process Logic Controls
SCADA an event loggers
Alarm and warning systems
Communication systems
Net work
Remote control

4.6.2 Aeration control


Different aeration control schemes can be made. In the following text three aeration control
schemes are discussed.
Oxygen control scheme
Within the oxygen control scheme the oxygen concentration is measured in the activated
sludge tank. The measured oxygen concentration is compared to the oxygen set point.
Depending on the difference between the measured oxygen concentration, the set point and
the tendency of the change in oxygen concentration, the PI-controller sends out a signal
between 0 to 100% to the blowers or aerators.
Depending on the size of this signal the capacity of the blowers is reduced or one or more of
the aerators are switched on or off. In the following figure the control scheme is visualized.

Figure 13

Ammonium/oxygen control scheme


The ammonium/oxygen control schema is a so called cascade-automatisation. This means
that the aerators are still controlled by the oxygen control scheme, while the oxygen set point
is determined by the ammonium control scheme.
The ammonium concentration is measured in the activated sludge tank. This concentration is
compared to the ammonium set point. Depending on the difference between the measured
ammonium concentration, the set point and tendency of the change in ammonium
concentration, the PI-controller sends out a signal between 0 to 100%. This output value of
the ammonium control scheme determines the oxygen set point. The oxygen set point can
be limited between two values with a limiter. The aeration is then controlled according to the
oxygen control scheme as described in the previous section. In the following figure the
control scheme is visualized.

35

Handbook
October2010

Figure 14
Nitrate/ammonium/oxygen control scheme
The nitrate/ammonium/oxygen regulation can also be described as a so called cascadeautomatisation. In this control scheme the ammonium set point is determined by the nitrate
concentration in the activated sludge tank. The ammonium control scheme determines the
oxygen set point and thereby the oxygen control scheme. The oxygen control scheme sends
out a signal to the aerators.
The nitrate content is measured in the activated sludge tank. If the nitrate concentration is
above a specified value (set point), the ammonium set point will be increased with a
specified value. If the nitrate content is below a specified value, the ammonium set point will
be decreased with a specified value. If the nitrate content is between the minimum and
maximum value, the ammonium set point will be set to the average value of the minimum
and maximum set points of ammonium. The control scheme will proceed as previously
described in the ammonium/oxygen control scheme. In the following figure the control
scheme is visualized.

Figure 15

36

Handbook
October2010

4.7

Dimensioning WWTPs TAUW calculation tool

The TAUW calculation tool is an Excel spreadsheet for dimensioning wastewater treatment
plants. It is also possible to calculate the annual average N-total value in the effluent of
existing plants (calculating backwards). The effect of seasonally dependent loads can also
be calculated.
The calculations regarding the activated sludge are based on the German HSA model. In the
calculation tool the nitrification is set to as a temperature-dependent process instead of the
static conversion as in the HSA model. The nitrate formed (from ammonium) is the input for
the HSA-calculation for the effluent nitrate value. This model for nitrogen removal gives the
opportunity to calculate the annual average N-total effluent value even if there is a time
period where the temperature is below the design temperature. Different process
configurations (UCT, mUCT, BCFS, Phoredox and carrousel) can de dimensioned or fitted
within the calculation tool. Besides the HSA-model several other modules are included within
the tool such as a module for the aeration and a module for the settling tanks. For the
usability of the calculation tool a navigation toolbar is included.
Using a calculation tool is of course convenient because there is no need anymore to
dimension a UWWTP on paper and saves time, but using a calculation tool is only useful if
the background of the model is understood and the user knows how results should be
interpreted. Otherwise there is a considerable risk that the design made is not appropriate.
Annex 7 includes information on the TAUW Calculation Tool.

37

Handbook
October2010

38

Handbook
October2010

Operation and Maintenance

5.1 Introduction
The operation and maintenance of UWWTPs could be improved considerably when
considering efficiency measures, planning, organisational, managerial and financing issues.
This chapter provides an overview of recommendations which could be taken into account.

5.2 Organisation, management and finances


1) Co-operation between municipalities and the establishment of water unions
The common practice of constructing UWWTPs in small and medium sized municipalities is
individual municipalities realising a plant, with assistance from either the Iller Bank, from
MoEF, with support of other investors, or on their own. The operation and maintenance of
UWWTPs is carried out separately by each municipality. Due to the small scale of the
UWWTPs is it difficult to realise cost efficient UWWT solutions and viable organisation of
operation and maintenance.
Efficiency could be improved in situations where a UWWTP serves more than municipality.
The costs associated with the realisation and functioning of such plants could be significantly
reduced. Resources, particularly human resources, could also be maximised if municipalities
cooperate in the investment, construction, operation and maintenance of one UWWTP.
MoEF initiated the establishment of water unions and combined UWWT for more than one
municipality. Some municipalities started a co-operation for waste water treatment; however
co-operation is often hampered because financial obligations are not met by one of the
partnering municipalities. Management systems should be elaborated which support a sound
co-operation. Annex 2 provides an overview of possible organisation forms for the
establishment of water unions.
2) Co-operation between MoEF, Illerbank and municipalities
Improved co-operation between MoEF, Iller bank and municipalise will support common
decision-making on waste water regulation, priorities and practices.
3) Role municipalities; polluters pay principle, staffing
In the present situation a municipality takes the initiative to start the realization of a WWTP
and asks Iller Bank or the Ministry of Environment for support. The municipality is not
involved in the construction off the WWTP. The municipality gets involved only when the
construction is finalised. Then the operations and maintenance has to be organised under
the responsibility of the municipality.
This often results in insufficient operation and maintenance practices. Municipalities should
be more closely involved in the process of designing and building the WWTPs and in
considerations related to the operation and maintenance after the construction of the plants.
This enhances the feeling of ownerships and responsibility.

39

Handbook
October2010

The following activities should be undertaken by municipalities:


Organisation of the collection of fees from the polluters; these fund could cover
investment, exploitation - and maintenance costs
Calculate the tariff/tax for waste water treatment and the moment of introduction
Arranging of staff for operation and maintenance
Communicate about necessity of waste water treatment to there inhabitants.
4) Attention for costs of Operation and Maintenance in Feasibility studies
Feasibility studies for the construction of smaller UWWTPs do not include financial
considerations for operation and maintenance (i.e. studies prepared by Iller Bank). Multiple
costs such as for energy, operation, maintenance and staffing should be taken into
consideration for at least 30 years when designing the UWWTPs. Including financial
considerations in the stage of the feasibility studies could considerably impact the decision
on appropriate small-scale UWWT techniques (e.g. automation and other energy efficient
aerators).
5) Supervision during construction
The constructed UWWTPs are not always in line with the initial design. Building failures or
bad quality can be the course of large amounts of money needed for maintenance or
renovations earlier then necessary. Increased supervision during the construction of the
UWWTPs could address this problem. Arrange inspection on the building process by
qualified staff.
6) Unification UWWTPs
There are insufficient qualified personnel for operating UWWTPs at municipal level.
Therefore unification of the UWWT processes, especially of neighbouring municipalities is
favourable. When plants are similar, personnel can easily be exchanged between the
different UWWTPs.
7) Involve the public
The public could be involved more frequently in the process of waste water treatment.
Involving the public in decision-making on water regulation/management will enhance their
commitment towards waste water treatment and their understanding about having to pay for
waste water treatment.
8) Review tendering process
In general there are three forms of tendering, the Traditional forms, Design & Construct and
Public Private (see annex See annex 4: forms of tendering) The D&C and Public Private
form of tendering are currently not executed in Turkey. The traditional form is most relevant
as then the construction can be controlled maximal.
With respect to the current form of tendering, the following can be notified:
In the pre-design phase only investment costs are considered. The exploitation costs are
not included. Also in the final design phase the exploitation costs seem to get little
attention. As exploitation costs are as important as the investment costs for the end-user
it is recommended to pay more attention to the exploitation costs. Including both costs
within the design prevents that a system is chosen that might be cheap to build but has
high exploitation costs.
The use of a Multi Criteria Analysis (see annex) supports taking a decision based on
various criteria

40

Handbook
October2010

9) Subsidy on energy costs


In October 2010, the WWTP energy incentive regulation was published. This regulates the
financing of a percentage of the energy cost of urban and industrial properly operated
WWTPs (the actual percentage still needs to be determined). Municipalities can apply for
this subsidy.
10) Consider outsourcing
The most important cost components of the operation of WWTPs are the personnel and
electricity costs (see table below). Municipalities can either operate the plants themselves or
outsource the operation to a private company. Outsourcing has certain advantages. The
private sector is always more flexible in hiring personnel and is more efficient in controlling
personnel expenditures. Another advantage of outsourcing is the flexibility in procurements.
The state procurement rules are rigid and usually it takes a long time to buy spare parts or
chemicals for the treatment plants. In case of outsourcing, procurement will be realised by
the private company who doesnt have to follow the public procurement rules.
11) Be aware of costs
To support with the estimation of costs of operation and maintenance, a table is presented in
Annex 5. This table provides a general guideline for costs op operation and maintenance.

5.3 Operation
Focal points for the operation of UWWTPs include:
1) Monitoring
Regular sampling of the effluent water is needed to be able to measure if the effluent water
meets the standards. By monitoring the quality, energy consumption can be organised more
efficiently
2) Automation
Automation provides the operator with regular information; this information can be used to
improve the performance of the installation which will result in better effluent water quality
and efficient use of the installation
3) Staff, co-operation, exchange of knowledge

Involve trained staff with knowledge and experience on waste water treatment
Facilitate exchange of knowledge between the operators and maintenance staff by
holding meetings on regular basis
Initiate co-operation with plants of neighbouring municipalities

4) Manuals
The Iller Bank provides complete operation manuals.

41

Handbook
October2010

5.4 Maintenance
Focal points for the maintenance of UWWTPs include:
1) Development of a maintenance plan

Develop a (digital) maintenance scheme


Describe the daily maintenance tasks
Develop a plan for maintenance for a period of e.g. five years ahead (based on work
hours on parts of the installation)
Plan financing based on the maintenance plan
Take care of equipment (tools) that is used for maintenance

2) Staff, co-operation, exchange of knowledge

Involve trained staff with knowledge and experience on waste water treatment
Facilitate exchange of knowledge between the operators and maintenance staff by
holding meetings on regular basis
Initiate co-operation with plants of neighbouring municipalities

3) Take safety measures

42

Handbook
October2010

Annexes

Main articles By-Laws


Organisation forms water unions
Decision Making Model WWT
Forms of tendering
Operation and Maintenance Costs of WWTPs
Small scale technologies for waste water treatment
Tauw calculation tool

43

Annex 1
Annex 2
Annex 3
Annex 4
Annex 5
Annex 6
Annex 7

Handbook
October2010

44

Handbook
October2010

ANNEX 1: MAIN ARTICLES BY-LAWS


Discharge into sewerage systems
By-law on UWWT
According to Article 9, the principles of discharging the industrial waste water to the
sewerage system, municipalities ensure that industrial waste water discharge to the
sewerage system are subject to permission for connection on sewerage system (government
cares for all kind of waste water).
By-law on Control of Water Pollution
According to Article 25, basic principles for discharge on sewerage system, when there is a
sewerage system, preference is given to discharging waste water to the sewerage systems
instead of treatment and direct discharge on surface water.
In Article 44, permission for companies to discharge on the sewerage system is described:
Permission is given by the municipality.
Its a written document for household water and industrial waste water.
Article 45 refers to limitations of discharging to sewerage systems:
In case of separate systems, rain or drainage water is not connected to the sewerage
system.
Companies must build balance pools before connection to a sewerage system.
Article 47 concerns maximum values parameters. Standards for discharges on sewerage
systems are provided in Table 25 in the By-law.
In Article 48, maximum values for pre-treatment for food/diary industries are provided in
Table 5 and 25 of the By-law. With more than 10% of total flow and pollutant rate of the
sewerage system, the company must establish special pre-treatment facilities.
Treatment public UWWTP and discharge into surface water
By-law on UWWT
Article 7 and 8 are concerned with the treatment requirements for UWW:
Discharge standards/ values/ criteria Table 1 Annex IV (in By-Law)
In sensitive areas standards/ values/ criteria Table 2 Annex IV (in By-Law)
Principles sensitive areas in Annex I (in By-Law)
Evaluation of monitoring results in Annex II (monitoring method, number of annually
samples, in By-Law)
Article 10 deals with permission for discharging wastewater with biologically degradable
compounds directly into surface water:
Municipalities will be ensured that the biologically degradable waste water originating
from the facilities belonging to the industrial sectors that are mentioned under Annex-III
(in By-law) and that cannot enter the UWWT facilities due to technical and economic
reasons and discharged industrially to e.p. of 4000 or more, is in conformity with the
discharge standards stated under Tables 5 and 6 of the By-law on The Control of Water
Pollution.
The permission for discharging to the receiving environment is subject to the Article 37 of
the By-law on Control of Water Pollution.
Article 12 is less stringent then secondary treatment for collection areas 2.000-10.000 p.e. in
less sensitive areas in the following cases:

45

Handbook
October2010

Such discharges are shown to be in conformity with the control procedures laid down in
Annex II (In By-Law)
Comprehensive studies indicate that such discharges will not adversely effect the
environment. The municipality must send the outcome of the studies mentioned above to
the MoEF at least once a year.
The MoEF shall ensure that the identification of less sensitive areas is reviewed at
intervals of no more than four years.

Article 14 addresses monitoring and control:


Provincial office of MoEF monitors the compliance of the discharges.
The municipality monitors the discharges of waste water made by industries of Annex III
(allowed direct discharges with biological degradable compounds, in By-Law).
The provincial directive of the MoEF sends the information of control every two year to
the MoEF, or on request.
Article 15 refers to evaluation:
Provincial office of MoEF makes a status report of all the public UWWTP discharges in
their region every two year and sends it to MoEF Ankara.
The provincial directive MoEF prepares an implementation program to implement the Bylaw together with the municipalities.
The MoEF evaluates the result of regions every two year.
By-law on Control of Water Pollution
Article 26 is concerned with responsibility for measurement and control:
Municipality as owner of the public UWWTP is responsible for the amount and quality
control of waste water, decrease of pollution, appropriate to given waste water discharge
values. Data are kept by the municipality during three years.
Provincial offices of the MoEF control whether these activities are realized and control
this with own measurements; these measurements of MoEF are paid by the municipality.
Article 32 contains standards and values for household discharge referring to Table 21. The
discharge standards were defined in four categories depending on BOD5 loads or equivalent
population. It is getting more stringent with the increase of load/population. However, it refers
only discharge parameters of BOD5, COD, SS and pH. Table 21 differs from the values for
discharges in Table 1 and Table 2 of the By-law on UWWT due to the fact that the By-law on
UWWT is the most recently published By-law. New UWWTPs should comply with Table 1 or
2 of the By-law on UWWT and the existing UWWTPs should comply with Table 21 of the Bylaw on Control of Water Pollution.
According to Article 37 on the basis discharge permission:
All kinds of household or industrial wastewater discharges have to have permission for
discharging from the Provincial office of the MoEF.
Permission given by the Provincial office of the MoEF is valid for five years.
Basis of permission are the standards/values/criteria in Table 5 21.
Realizing limits: twelve months after notification of the limitations.
In Article 39, limitations and cancellation of permissions is presented. When discharge
permission is exceeded, a penalty is given two times with a period to make the necessary
amendments. If the company does not provide the required discharge conditions, the
discharge permission is cancelled.
Article 40 concerns process permitting:
The administration has to give permission at least within 2 months after the permission
application.
Permission certificates are renewed periodically. In the phase of this renewing, the
probable changes of mentioned features, amount of waste water and pollution,

46

Handbook
October2010

realization of required technological; precautions, necessity of new precautions,


measurement programs are controlled.
When there are changes mentioned above, the applicant must begin to permission
procedures again and take a permission certificate again.

47

Handbook
October2010

48

Handbook
October2010

ANNEX 2: ORGANISATION FORMS FOR WATER UNIONS


Based on experiences in the Netherlands, the following organization forms can be
considered for combined waste water treatment for more than one municipality:
1. One of the co-operating municipalities takes the responsibility for the operations and
maintenance of the UWWTP;
One of the municipalities, for instance the one in which the UWWTP has been
constructed, or the largest municipality, takes the responsibility for the operations and
maintenance of the collection pipe and the UWWTP. The other municipality/
municipalities pay an equal part of the total costs. This can be calculated on the p.e.
input, or on the volume of influent, or even on the numbers of inhabitants of the
municipalities.
2. The municipalities establish a union or foundation, with responsibility for the UWWTP
residing within this union or foundation;
By participation of more then two municipalities a union or a foundation could be helpful.
This offers greater independence during the application of local policies by the
municipalities in their operations. This union/foundation can, on a yearly basis, make a
calculation of the total cost of the UWWTP. The municipalities can then decide how to
collect their contribution for the UWWTP. The collection of the contribution can be done
by the union/foundation or by the municipality itself.
3. The municipalities establish a water board as an independent organization;
The difference between this organization form and the one mentioned above is that a
water board has its own independent board (elected).
4. Several municipalities establish a union or Waterboard for managing more then one
UWWTP;
A step further is to establish an organization that operates and maintains several
UWWTPs. Waternet in the Netherlands operates and maintains 12 UWWTPs in the
surroundings of Amsterdam. The benefit is more efficiency and the capability to acquire
experts in different fields required for management and operation of the plants (waste
water treatment, operations, maintenance but also on legislation, permits, enforcement
and financing/taxes). Besides it is easier to recover the costs for these plants.
5. Source out the operations and maintenance of the UWWTP(s) to a private company. It is
also possible to outsource all activities, or some activities, to a private company. The
municipality can decides which activities should be outsourced and which will be carried
out by the municipality itself;
This form could be efficient when there is more than one private company specialized in
this field. If not, there will be limited competition and it will be difficult to set a list of
demands.

Organisation forms for


combined UWWT
One of the municipalities is
responsible for
management and
organisation of the
UWWTP
Development of union or
foundation by
municipalities
Establishment of Water
Board, with elected
independent members

Advantage

Possible bottlenecks

Clear
organisation
form

The municipality who is not responsible


might lack performing financial
contributions for operation and
maintenance
Capacity needed at Municipality
Differences in political priorities /policy
issues might hamper reaching common
solutions
Capacity needed at Municipalities for
Organisation and Management
Lack of commitment of municipal public
officers; Capacity needed at
municipalities/MoEF to organise
elections for Board members

Shared
responsibility

Independent
management
and
organisation
(elected board);
facilitating

49

Handbook
October2010

Establishment of Water
Board for managing
several UWWTPs

Outsourcing of Operation
and Maintenance of
UWWTPs to private
company

decisionmaking
Efficiency,
return on
investment
reached within
relative short
period
Capable
experts
available

Capacity required at
municipalities/MoEF to organise the
Water Board, elections etc.

Availability of professional private


companies; capacity needed at
municipality for tendering
procedures/managing private
companies

General remarks:
Differences between municipalities need to be considered (geographical barriers, climate
issues, waste water characteristics, etc.).
Capacity needed at municipalities for organisation and management of waste water
treatment.

50

Handbook
October2010

ANNEX 3: DECISION MAKING MODEL WWT


See following pages.

51

Handbook
October2010

52

Handbook
October2010

53

Handbook
October2010

54

Handbook
October2010

ANNEX 4: FORMS OF TENDERING


In principal three forms of tendering can be distinguished, namely
1. Traditional
2. Design & Construct
3. Public Private
Each form of tendering has its own process steps. The following subparagraphs present the
process steps for each form of tendering.

Traditional tendering
Within the traditional tendering four process steps/phases can be distinguished. The
following overview shows the four process steps including its sub steps (if applicable).
1. Pre-design
a)
Points of Departure/preconditions
b)
System choice
c)
Technological design /dimensioning main components
d)
PFDs
e)
Process control scheme
f)
Basic design lay-out
g)
Basic information equipment
h)
Civil calculations
2. Final design
3. Construction
4. Completion
Phase 1: Pre-design
1. Points of Departure/preconditions
In the Netherlands it is common to look 30 years ahead. This timeframe is related to the
lifetime of the civil works. At this sub step the loads of the future WWTP are determined,
biologically as well as hydraulically. The loads are based on the current situation of the
existing WWTP + the prognosis for 30 years. The prognosis is based on the building plans of
the county, building plans of the involved municipalities and expected industry. The future
effluent demands are of course part of this sub step. The points of departure/preconditions
are (almost) always determined by the water boards.
2. System selection
In general the system selection starts with an exploration of possibilities. In many cases this
starts with a brainstorm session between the involved water board and the contracted
engineering firm. The result of the exploration is a number of different system
possibilities/alternatives. Remark: in some cases the water board has a specific preference
for a system configuration.
The different alternatives are elaborated; the technological dimensioning will be performed
for each alternative and a rough cost evaluation (investment and exploitation costs) is made
for each alternative. In some cases a specific system configuration already prevails after the
elaboration of the alternatives. In other cases no specific alternative prevails and a
qualitative multi criteria analysis (MCA) is needed.
A MCA consists of different aspects like the yearly costs, sustainability (e.g. energy,
chemicals), robustness, risks and complexity for the operators. These aspects are just
examples. The exact aspects are decided in consultation with the involved water board.
Each aspect will be assigned a weighing factor (e.g. between 1 and 3). An aspect with a
higher weighing factor means that that aspect is more important than the aspect with a lower

55

Handbook
October2010

weighing factor. The elaborated system possibilities are set next to each other within the
MCA table. Subsequently the different alternatives are rated. This could be rated with
numbers (e.g. from 3 till +3) or with plus signs and minus signs (e.g. from -- till ++). Each
aspect is multiplied with the rate given to the specific system possibility. This adds up to a
final score. The MCA should give a clear picture of the qualitative differences between the
different alternatives. In the following table an example is included.

56

Handbook
October2010

MULTI CRITERIA ANALYSIS


Weighing
factor

Alternative 1

Alternative 2

Alternative 3

Alternative 4

1 Costs (total yearly costs)

2 Sustainability

--

++

No

Aspect

Sustainability: total
2a Energy (elektricity, gas, transport)

++

2b Chemicals

--

++

++

2c Sludge production

--

2d Emissions to air

2e Needed area

--

2f Noise

Subtotal

--

--

++

--

++

++

Costs and sustainability

Risks
3 Operation during construction
phase
4 Construction time and
construction stages (effect on
effluent quality)
5 Complexity of operation and
maintenance
6

Certainty
Certainty: total

6a Failure during normal operation


6c Proven technology
6d Risks of floating sludge

7 Robustness
Robustness: total
7a Effluent demands

7b Higher load / wrong prognosis

8 Tender risks in relation to


suppliers
Subtotal
Risks
9 Innovativity

Total

57

Handbook
October2010

The total score of the MCA is placed next to the building costs and the exploitation costs for
each alternative. Based on this total overview the system configuration of the future WWTP
is chosen. The inclusion of a MCA for the system selection means that the cheapest
alternative does not always prevail. In the following table an example is presented. Although
alternative 1 has the lowest buildings costs and alternative 4 has the lowest exploitation
costs, alternative 3 was the one that prevailed.

Criteria
Building costs
Exploitation costs
Qualitative criteria

Alternative 1
Alternative 2
Alternative 3
Alternative 4

3.060.850
7.256.450
7.602.400
6.640.200

1.702.146
1.809.392
1.691.728
1.635.685
--++
+

3. Technological design / dimensioning main components


This sub step is a further elaboration of the one made at sub step C System selection. The
system configuration is chosen and now the main components need to be dimensioned /
checked, such as:

Flows

Volumes

Oxygen input

Diameters

Sludge production

Sludge treatment
This dimensioning is only from a technical point of view. Mechanical or civil engineering is
not included
4. PFDs
Based on the dimensioning of the main component in sub step C a PFD (Process Flow
Diagram) is made. The PFD gives an overview of the process flow of the WWTP and the
flow to/of every component is included. In the following figure shows an example of a PFD.
Within this specific PFD two flows are mentioned: the flow between brackets is the dry
weather flow, the other flow is the rain weather flow.

58

Handbook
October2010

5. Process control scheme


Within this sub step the basic automatisation controls are determined. So where do we need
to install on-line measurements and how can the process be controlled? For example:

Automatic control of blowers based on ammonia sensor in AT

Automatic control for excess sludge based on MLSS sensor in AT


This sub step is performed by the discipline electrotechnic in cooperation with the discipline
technology. In the following figure an example is given of a process control scheme for the
aeration in an activated sludge tank.

6. Basic design lay-out


In this sub step the basic design is made. The size of for instance the activated sludge tanks
and settling tanks are known and the lay out can be made. This sub step is mainly performed
by the discipline civil engineering. Almost no complete new WWTPs are built in the
Netherlands. This means that we are confronted with mainly (large) renovations/adjustments
on-site. Fitting all the new components within the available space can be quite a puzzle. The
following figure presents an example of a lay-out of a WWTP.

59

Handbook
October2010

7. Basic information equipment


Within this sub step a preliminary equipment list is made for all the components of the future
WWTP. The needed space for the equipment is estimated based on experience. This sub
step is executed by the discipline mechanical engineering. In many cases sub step F (basic
design lay-out) is performed simultaneously with this sub step (basic information
equipment)
Civil calculations: when sub step A till G are executed the civil calculations can be made.
The civil calculations include:

hydraulics

building height

construction depth

well point system

foundation
Phase 2: Final design
After the pre-design phase the final design can be made. The final design is more or less a
further detailed elaboration of the pre-design and includes:

Definitive PFD

Functional design

Definitive equipment list

Electrical installation

P&IDs

Exact costs

60

Handbook
October2010

Phase 3: Construction
When the final design is made the construction phase can start. A contractor is assigned for
the construction. In many cases the contracted engineering firm is responsible for the
supervision of the construction phase.
Phase 4: Completion
When the construction is (almost) done the completion phase starts. Within the completion
phase the following activities can be distinguished:

Pre completion
o
Site Acceptance Test (SAT)
o
Wet testing
o
Functional testing
o
Process control test

Start up procedure is made

Scheme operation and maintenance is made

Training of operator(s)

The process is optimized

Final completion

Design & Construct


Design & Construct (D&C) is a form of tendering where a consortium is responsible for as
well the design as the construction. A D&C can basically be distinguished in eight
steps/phases, namely:
1. Water board makes specification of demands
2. Tender consortium is formed and action plan is made
3. Tender evaluation, signing contract
4. Purchase order placed
5. Detail design by consortium
6. Construction process
7. Commissioning, start up
8. Hand over to client
Phase 1: Water board makes specification of demands
Before a D&C can start a specification of demands has to be made by the end-user. For the
Dutch case this is a water board. The specification of demands contains the following items:

Hydraulics

Influent specifications

Effluent specifications

Design specification

Energy consumption (kWh/person equivalent)

Regulations from permits

Criteria for tender selection

Material choices (most cases)


Within this form of tendering there is still a relatively strong control by the water board on the
chosen solutions. When the specification of demands is done, it can be put out to tender.
Phase 2: Tender consortium is formed and action plan is made
When the work is put up to public tender several consortia are formed. A tender consortium
usually consists of a consultant, a civil contractor and a mechanical & electrical (M&E)

61

Handbook
October2010

contractor. There is some freedom to fill own expertise of the consortium. When a tender
consortium is formed a risk assessment within the consortium is executed.
If the consortium is stable the involved companies/organisations sign an agreement where
the cooperation is put down in writing.
Based on the specification of demands an exploration for possible alternatives starts. Every
alternative has to be checked if it fully complies with the specification of demands. In this
phase there is usually the possibility to ask questions to the water board. In the end one
alternative/solution is left/chosen. For this solution an action plan is made. The action plan
contains the following aspects:

Process technology and design choices

Design and realisation

Operation and maintenance

Costs of exploitation

Project management

Drawings and calculations


The water board will select the consortium that translates the specification of demands the
most effectively into an appropriate design (technically and financially). So the action plan
has to be carefully composed.
Phase 3: Tender evaluation, signing contract
The water board will evaluate the action plans of the different consortia. In some cases a
consultancy firm assists the water board. Finally one consortium will be chosen. After this
decision the contract has to be made and of course signed by the involved parties. The
contract contains aspects like price, guarantee, mile stones, payment conditions, planning,
etc.
Phase 4: Purchase order placed
Phase 5: Detail design by consortium
In phase 2 the basic design is already made. Within this phase this design is further detailed
and extended. This phase includes the following aspects:

Definitive PFD

Functional design

Definitive equipment list

Electrical installation

P&IDs
Phase 6: Construction process
This phase is more or less the same as with the traditional tendering. The main differences
are that with D&C less supervision by client/water board is necessary, less involvement of
client/ water board at selecting brands and materials and the overall planning is dealt with by
the consortium.
Phase 7: Commissioning, start-up
When the construction phase is done the commissioning of the WWTP can start. This phase
is more or less the same as phase 4 of the traditional tendering.
Before the wastewater will actually be treated several tests need to be performed, namely:

Site Acceptance Test (SAT)

Wet testing

Functional testing

Process control test

62

Handbook
October2010

Also a manual for operation and maintenance is made and a start up procedure is written.
When these steps are performed the real start up of the WWTP can be executed. After the
start up the operators are trained. When all these steps are performed the WWTP is ready
for the last phase: hand over to client.
Phase 8: Hand over to client
In this phase the WWTP is officially handed over to the client. In this phase the client will
receive the final operation and maintenance manual. Usually the handing over to the client is
accompanied with a formal opening ceremony. After the guarantee period the client will pay
the outstanding amount (final payment).

Public Private Partnership (PPP)


The PPP form of tendering is basically a D&C, but extended with the following
responsibilities:

Finance

Operational aspects

Maintenance
Of course it has to comply with legislation. Characteristics of the PPP form of tendering are:

Design process in less time

Construction in less time

Less supervision

Mostly less costs

No influence on process by client

Solid contract is necessary

Rock hard starting points

Financial solid partner required


This form of tendering is quite new in the Netherlands. Up to now only one WWTP in the
Netherlands (WWTP Harnaschpolder) is designed and operated in a PPP form.

63

Handbook
October2010

64

Handbook
October2010

ANNEX 5: OPERATOIN AND MAINTENANCES COSTS OF WWTP


Costs of operation & maintenance - UWWTP *
WWTP
Population
Fixed costs
Electricity

30000 pe
16000 inhabitants
Object
Water treatment
Aeration
Sludge treatment

description

used

750 MWh
Chemicals

sub
dewatering
thickenning
phosphorus removal
effluent chlorine disinfection

polymeer
polymeer
Ferro salts
chlor

Residual

screenings
grid sand
industrial waste water

Sludge treatment

dewatering sludge,
transportation dewatered sludge

Water use

drinking water serving polymer production,


drinking water serving buildings

tax

WVO-tax

Variable costs
Maintenance

2400
0
0
0

total

65.00 per MWh

3.50 per kg

per kg

per ton

per ton

5.00 per m3

5.00 per m3

per kg

5.00 per ton

2.00 per ton

0.50 per m3

0.50 per m3

per pe

48,750.00
48,750.00
8,400.00
8,400.00
1,250.00
500.00
1,750.00
6,000.00
2,400.00
8,400.00
240.00
50.00
290.00
-

total investment

67,590.00

kg
kg
ton
ton

250 m3
100 m3
kg

1200 ton
1200 ton

480 m3
100 m3

pe

Object
Instrumentation

description
Flow
Oxygen,
Nitrate

Mechanical equipment

pumps
blowers
mixers
belt filter

10
2
3
1

Manager
Technologist
employee

1 fte
0.5 fte
4 fte

used
3 pc
1 pc
1 pc
pc
pc
pc
pc

tariff
3000
4000
5000
1000
5000
1000
120000

Cleaning
Organization

Staff expenses

Average %

tariff

20000 per fte


10000 per fte
5000 per fte

total

17.82

3.07

0.64

3.07

0.11

0.00

24.70
Average %

9,000.00
4,000.00
5,000.00
18,000.00
10,000.00
10,000.00
3,000.00
120,000.00
143,000.00
20,000.00
5,000.00
20,000.00
45,000.00

6.58

52.27

16.45

Total variable costs

206,000.00

75.30

total budget

273,590.00

100.00

cost p.p.e
* This is a cost-calculation sheet for benchmarking UWWTP's in the Netherlands. Filled in figures are not real.

17.10

65

Handbook
October2010

66

Handbook
October2010

ANNEX 6: Small size technologies for domestic wastewater treatment


Small size technologies for waste water treatment that could be applied are:
1) Lagoons/wetlands/ponds
2) Anaerobic digestion
3) SBR
These technologies do not meet the effluent requirements with respect to Nitrogen and
Phosphorous as incorporated in the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive, however could
be used as solutions in case no funding for treatment technologies is available and some
treatment has to be initiated.
1) Lagoons
Wastewater treatment can be realised in ponds, wetlands or lagoons. These are artificial
marshes or swamps, created for anthropogenic discharge such as wastewater or sewage
treatment, and as habitat for wildlife, or for land reclamation after mining or other
disturbance. Natural wetlands act as bio-filters, removing sediments and pollutants such as
heavy metals from the water, and constructed wetlands can be designed to emulate these
features. The aerobic alternative is an aerated lagoon system.
Wastewater lagoons
Wastewater lagoons
have been used as
a process for
wastewater
treatment for
centuries. In the
1920's artificial
ponds were
designed and
constructed to
receive and stabilize
wastewater. By 1950, the use of ponds had become recognized as an economical
wastewater treatment method for small municipalities and industries. As of 1980,
approximately 7,000 waste stabilization lagoons were in use in the U.S. Today, one third of
all secondary wastewater treatment facilities include a pond system of one type or another.
Of these, just over 90% are for flows 1 MGD or less. But ponds can be used for larger cities
for wastewater treatment as well. Some of the largest pond systems in USA are in Northern
California, serving such cities as Sunnyvale (pop. 105,000), Modesto (pop. 150,000), Napa
(pop. 175,000), and Stockton (pop. 275,000).
The major advantages of lagoon systems are their low cost (investment and operation) and
their minimal need for operator attention. The effluent is disinfected by the long hydraulic
retention times in the system and effluent can be applied for irrigation purposes because of
higher nutrient levels. Chlorine is not required for disinfection.
The main drawback is the long retention times in the ponds and subsequently the relatively
large area required. But, if the pond is well designed it can be an attractive addition in the
landscape. Phosphate is not greatly removed with this system, but if the effluent is applied
for irrigation in agricultural areas this can be an advantage. Also, phosphate can be removed
by applying iron dosing.
The pond can be aerated or non-aerated. The minimal energy requirement of the nonaerated pond is attractive where aeration costs are an issue.
Types of aerated lagoons or basins:
There are many methods for aerating a lagoon or basin:
Motor-driven floating surface aerators

67

Handbook
October2010

Motor-driven submerged aerators


Motor-driven fixed-in-place surface aerators
Injection of compressed air through submerged diffusers.

A Typical Surface-Aerated Basing (using motor-driven floating aerators)


Ponds or basins using floating surface aerators achieve 80 to 90% removal of BOD with
retention times of 1 to 10 days. The ponds or basins may range in depth from 1.5 to 5.0
metres.
In a surface-aerated system, the aerators provide two functions: they transfer air into the
basins required by the biological oxidation reactions, and they provide the mixing required for
dispersing the air and for contacting the reactants (that is, oxygen, wastewater and
microbes). Typically, the floating surface aerators are rated to deliver the amount of air
equivalent to 1.8 to 2.7 kg O2/kWh. However, they do not provide as good mixing as is
normally achieved in activated sludge systems and therefore aerated basins do not achieve
the same performance level as activated sludge units.
Biological oxidation processes are sensitive to temperature and, between 0 C and 40 C,
the rate of biological reactions increase with temperature. Most surface aerated vessels
operate at between 4 C and 32 C.
Aerated lagoon technology, especially that of high-performance systems, is one of the
most misunderstood technology in wastewater treatment. This misunderstanding is largely
the result of its evolution from the technology of facultative lagoons, in which algae play a
vital role and hydraulic retention times are long. In fact, the technology of high-performance
aerated lagoons has much in common with that of activated sludge. With proper design and
operation, aerated lagoons can deliver effluents that meet limits of 30 mg/L, both for TSS
and CBOD5. Furthermore, with modification or with the addition of low-tech process units,
they can be designed to nitrify. The major advantages of aerated lagoon systems are their
low cost and their minimal need for operator attention.
Experience in swine wastewater treatment
Animal operations with limited land area can avoid the need for offsite waste disposal if
management options that increase the farm's capacity to treat wastewater are adopted. One
promising option is the use of constructed wetlands to reduce wastewater pollutants prior to
land application. Treatment wetlands generally have one of two designs, either continuous
marsh or marsh-pond-marsh. While swine wastewater treatment by continuous marsh
wetlands has been studied extensively, treatment by marsh-pond-marsh wetlands has not.
We investigated the ability of marsh-pond-marsh wetlands to reduce pollutants in swine
wastewater. The objective of this research was to determine how the presence of a pond
section affects NH3 volatilization from constructed wetlands treating wastewater from a
confined swine operation.
Ammonia (NH3) volatilization is an undesirable mechanism for the removal of nitrogen (N)
from wastewater treatment wetlands. To minimize the potential for NH3 volatilization, it is
important to determine how wetland design affects NH3 volatilization. Wastewater was added
at different N loads to six constructed wetlands of the marshpondmarsh design that were
located in Greensboro, North Carolina, USA. A large enclosure was used to measure NH3
volatilization from the marsh and pond sections of each wetland in July and August of 2001.
Ammonia volatilized from marsh and pond sections at rates ranging from 5 to 102 mg NH3N
m2 h1. Pond sections exhibited a significantly greater increase in the rate of NH3
volatilization (p < 0.0001) than did either marsh section as N load increased. At N loads
greater than 15 kg ha1 d1, NH3 volatilization accounted for 23 to 36% of the N load.
Furthermore, NH3 volatilization was the dominant (5479%) N removal mechanism at N
loads greater than 15 kg ha1 d1. Without the pond sections, NH3 volatilization would have
been a minor contributor (less than 12%) to the N balance of these wetlands. To minimize
NH3 volatilization, continuous marsh systems should be preferred over marshpondmarsh
systems for the treatment of wastewater from confined animal operations.

68

Handbook
October2010

2) Anaerobic digestion
Anaerobic digestion is a treatment that reduces highly concentrated (industrial) wastewaters
and domestic wastewater sludge under anoxic conditions and at higher temperatures
(>30C) and releases biogas. Biogas is an attractive energy source. Anaerobic treatment
could be attractive in Turkey because the technique is innovative, it creates biogas as
energy source and the ambient temperature is higher than in Holland.
Anaerobic digestion is a series of processes in which microorganisms break down
biodegradable material in the absence of oxygen. It is widely used to treat wastewater
sludges and organic waste because it provides volume and mass reduction of the input
material. As part of an integrated waste management system, anaerobic digestion reduces
the emission of landfill gas into the atmosphere. Anaerobic digestion is widely used as a
renewable energy source because the process produces a methane and carbon dioxide rich
biogas suitable for energy production helping replace fossil fuels. Also, the nutrient-rich
digestate can be used as fertiliser.
The digestion process begins with bacterial hydrolysis of the input materials in order to break
down insoluble organic polymers such as carbohydrates and make them available for other
bacteria. Acidogenic bacteria then convert the sugars and amino acids into carbon dioxide,
hydrogen, ammonia, and organic acids. Acetogenic bacteria then convert these resulting
organic acids into acetic acid, along with additional ammonia, hydrogen, and carbon dioxide.
Methanogens, finally are able to convert these products to methane and carbon dioxide.
Previously, the technical expertise required to maintain anaerobic digesters coupled with
high capital costs and low process efficiencies had limited the level of its industrial
application as a waste treatment technology.[3] Anaerobic digestion facilities have, however,
been recognised by the United Nations Development Programme as one of the most useful
decentralised sources of energy supply, as they are less capital intensive than large power
plants.
3) SBR
The SBR (Sequenching Batch Reactor) is an aerobic biological waste water treatment. The
waste water is brought into a large reactor where it comes into contact with the microorganisms (active sludge, M.O.) and where oxygen is injected in a controlled manner. These
micro-organisms convert the poluttion into carbon dioxide (CO2) and new biomass.
This process requires a lot of oxygen wich is injected with different aeration techniques. The
nitrogenbonds are also converted into nitrate (nitrification). An appropriated process control
converts this nitrate into nitrogengas (denitrification).
The advantages of a SBR are:
Simplicity of process control and maintenance.
Large buffering capacity and hence protection against peak loads and periods of low
demands.
Simple adjustment to the nitrification- and denitrification processes in relation to the
nitrogen load.
No need for a separate sludge clarifier.
The specific control of the waste water supply into the aeration tank reduces the
production of floating sludge.
A low loaded system will produce relatively low amounts of sludge in comparison with a
high loaded system. The sludge mineralisation also reduces the smell.

69

Handbook
October2010

The construction sizes are available from 4 to 50,000 population equivalents

70

Handbook
October2010

ANNEX 7: TAUW CALCULATION TOOL

71

Handbook
October2010

72

Handbook
October2010

Colophon

This Handbook was developed in the framework of the project Development of an


Appropriate Methodology for Wastewater Treatment in Small and Medium Sized
Municipalities in Turkey (G2G08/TR/7/2), a Government to Government project supported
by the Dutch government.
Governmental parties The Netherlands
Wereld Waternet, Amsterdam
Agentschap NL (NL Agency NL Environment), The Hague

Governmental parties Turkey

Iller Bank, Ankara

Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MoEF), Ankara

Implementing organisations
Ameco, Utrecht, the Netherlands (www.ameco-ut.nl)

Tauw, Deventer, The Netherlands (www.tauw.nl)


IBS Research & Consultancy, Istanbul, Turkey
(www.ibs.research.com)
Funding organisation
NL EVD International/Netherlands Ministry of Economic Affairs
(www.evd.nl/business)

73

Handbook
October2010

74

Handbook
October2010