See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/327435111

Domestic Wastewater - Treatment and Re-use

Chapter · November 1998

CITATIONS READS

0 2,744

1 author:

Phillip Milton Geary

University of Newcastle
55 PUBLICATIONS   526 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

On-site Treatment of Domestic Wastewater View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Phillip Milton Geary on 05 September 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 <- Table of Contents
E N V I RThe
ORoyal
N M Australian
E N T DInstitute
E S I ofGArchitects
N G U ACN I D E000 023 012 – © Copyright RAIA NOVEMBER 1998 • DES 24 • PAGE 1

ENVIRONMENT DESIGN GUIDE

DOMESTIC WASTEWATER –
Treatment and re-use
Phillip M Geary
This note describes the typical quantity and pollutant loads of wastewaters generated by domestic households and outlines
some of the treatment, disposal and re-use options available. Domestic wastewater re-use is seen as an important
environmental design criteria in new developments, however, there are environmental and health issues which need to be
considered with this practise.

1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 WASTEWATER

Water for potable domestic use in Australia is
generally provided to residences in urban areas by
a reticulated supply managed by a local or
statutory authority. In rural/residential, rural and
isolated locations, where potable water cannot be
supplied from a reticulated supply, water may be
individually sourced from ground or surface
waters or collected in rainwater tanks.
Wastewaters which are then generated by
domestic residences may be either collected by a
reticulated sewerage system and treated at a
wastewater treatment plant, or treated and
disposed of on-site, where the wastewaters are
generated. As Australia is one of the most
urbanised countries in the world, the majority of
domestic residences are provided with a
reticulated water supply and serviced by a
sewerage system managed by a local or statutory
authority.
Opportunities for the re-use of domestic
wastewaters are limited in many locations because
of the existing infrastructure associated with
supply and sewerage services, and because it may
be illegal in many locations to re-use wastewaters
where sewerage systems exist. In this paper,
domestic wastewaters are characterised and
treatment options summarised. Management
opportunities are examined for the re-use of
wastewaters, primarily from individual residences.
While there are some opportunities for re-use of
collected stormwaters, these are not considered
here.
CHARACTERISATION
It has been widely reported that households,
which rely on a limited supply of potable water,
use significantly less water for all internal
purposes. They also generate less wastewater.
Residences which receive a reticulated supply of
mains water use significantly more water and for
planning purposes 900 to 1000 Litres per day is
commonly used. Estimates of typical internal
domestic use are shown in Table 1, as well as a
revised demand based on the utilisation of a
number of household flow reduction devices.
While the use of these devices often results in less
water being used internally, this is not always the
case. The conservation of water which should
result from the re-use of domestic wastewater is
principally related to the market value of water as
a commodity. It is currently under-valued in terms
of the cost to supply. The re-use of domestic
wastewaters will only be seriously considered
when the supply costs of potable water are
significantly higher than they are currently.
Domestic wastewaters are generally characterised
by two major waste streams: the toilet wastes,
commonly referred to as the blackwater, and the
other household wastes, commonly referred to as
greywater or sullage (Figure 1). Domestic
greywater is household wastewater which has not
come into contact with toilet waste.

Table 1. Estimates of Internal Domestic Water Use

Typical demand Revised demand*

total use Total use Hot water use
Room Activity (Litres/person/day) (Litres/person/day) (Litres/person/day)

Bathroom Shower 35 21(1) 10(1)

Bath 7 - -
Hand basin 7 7 -
Toilet Toilet 35 22(2) -
Laundry Clothes washing 32 20(3) 10(3)
Kitchen Drinking/cooking 7 7 -
Dishwashing 18 12(4) 6(4)
Total 141 89 25

T he E nvir on men t Des ign Guide is publ i sh ed by Th e Royal Aust r a l i a n I n st i t u t e of Ar c h i t ec t s

PAGE 2 • DES 24 • NOVEMBER 1998 ENVIRONMENT DESIGN GUIDE

Notes: contamination. While the potential for pathogenic

* Excessive water demand of many residents can be contamination appears to be substantially lower
reduced by the following means: than that of either toilet wastes or combined
household wastewater, greywater still requires
(1) restrict time under shower to 3 minutes or
adequate treatment and disposal (Jeppeson &
use an aerating shower rose
Solley, 1994).
(2) install dual-flush toilet
(3) use top-loading washing machine with water
level control and suds saving facility or use
3.0 WASTEWATER
twin tub/wringer TREATMENT AND
(4) be economical when using water for DISPOSAL
dishwashing. Domestic wastewaters require treatment before
disposal or re-use. There are a number of
methods for the treatment of domestic
wastewaters, several of which are described
Household below.

3.1 Sewage treatment plants

and reticulated sewerage
Kitchen Dish- Bath/ Clothes Misc- systems
Toilet ellan-
sink washer shower washer
eous In the most common situation, where residences
are connected to a sewerage system (88% of the
Australian population), the wastewaters are
removed to a central facility where the
Grey
management authority decides on the treatment
Black
water water and disposal system. Wastewaters are commonly
treated to a secondary standard using basic
physical and biological processes. The
Figure 1. Segregation of household management authority may be licensed by a state
wastes (Siegrist, 1977) Environment Protection Authority and the resulting
effluent disposed to the environment by land
application or in a coastal or river discharge.
The results of a number of domestic wastewater
There is an increasing trend to re-use part of the
characterisation studies have been summarised by
treated waste stream for above ground irrigation.
Siegrist (1977). A typical distribution of the quality
While many local authorities are now examining
and quantity components of the blackwater and
re-use opportunities, the long term sustainability
greywater streams is presented in Table 2.
of land application of wastewaters needs to be
carefully examined in any proposed scheme.
Table 2. Pollutant Distribution of
Household Wastes
3.2 Septic tanks plus soil
absorption trenches
Greywater Pollutant Blackwater
Approximately 12% of the Australian population is
65% Flow 35% unsewered and relies on septic tanks to treat
63% BOD5 37% domestic wastewaters. Within NSW alone, there
39% Suspended solids 61% are approximately 250,000 on-site systems using
septic tanks. It has been estimated that 130,000 of
18% Nitrogen 82% these dwellings are connected to reticulated mains
70% Phosphorus 30% water while a further 120,000 septic systems rely
low Pathogens majority on rainwater inputs (Patterson, 1993). The
percentage of the population relying on septic
tanks is also likely to increase as the cost of
The results of the characterisation studies have conventional sewerage rises and greater numbers
been used to predict the division of chemical/ of people move to semi-rural and peri-urban
physical pollutants between the two waste areas. Many people are also concerned about the
streams. Greywater contributes about 65% of the impact that effluent from sewerage systems is
flow, 70% of the phosphorus and 63% of the having on the environment in some sensitive
BOD5, while the blackwater contributes about areas.
61% of the suspended solids, 82% of the nitrogen In unsewered areas, effluent from the septic tank
and 37% of the BOD5. The characterisation is disposed of by soil absorption using a soakage
studies also demonstrated that a wide range of trench or placed in a transpiration bed where
indicator organisms can be expected in raw bath evapotranspiration and absorption are used. A
and laundry wastewaters, which in turn indicated number of surveys in NSW by Geary (1992;1994)
a potential for pathogenic greywater and O’Neill (1993) concluded that in excess of
ENVIRONMENT DESIGN GUIDE
40% of on-site systems were failing and
contributing to nutrient related water management
problems. These results suggest that the failures
result from poor public awareness, poor local
authority guidance and inadequate design
standards and procedures. A major revision to
Australian Standard AS1546 (which deals with the
design septic tanks) has been completed, while a
review of AS1547 (which deals with effluent
disposal) is underway. NSW has recently
introduced new guidelines and procedures for the
management of on-site systems (Department of
Local Government, 1998), while a number of other
states have recently updated and revised their
design guides.
The conventional domestic on-site system has two
components: a septic tank, used to provide partial
treatment of the raw waste, and the disposal field,
where final treatment and disposal of the liquid
discharged from the septic tank takes place. Both
are generally installed below ground surface
(Figure 2). The passive anaerobic pre-treatment of
wastewaters in the septic tank results in the
removal of approximately 40-60% biochemical
oxygen demand (BOD5), 50-70% suspended solids
(SS), 10-20% nitrogen (N), 30% phosphorus (P)
and a reduction in numbers of biological
contaminants. The effluent from the tank
percolates through the soil where renovation
occurs, prior to it reaching surface or
groundwaters. The inefficient use of the
renovative capacity of the soil can result in the
transport of biological and chemical contaminants
over substantial distances (Gardner, et al, 1997).
Distribution box Absorption field
(trench)
Inspection ports
cum zone
etention zone Gravel or
crushed rock
udge zone Unexcavated
Septic tank
Figure 2. Conventional Septic Tank/
Disposal System
Aeration
chamber
From septic tank
Sludge return
Figure 3. Aerated Wastewater Treatment System
NOVEMBER 1998 • DES 24 • PAGE 3
3.3 Aerated Wastewater
Treatment (AWT) Systems
Aerated wastewater treatment (AWT) systems are
small self-contained proprietary biological
treatment systems which rely on mechanical
devices to provide mixing, aeration and pumping
of effluent. AWT systems are based on either two
tanks or a single tank where effluent is subjected
to accelerated aerobic breakdown (Figure 3). A
final effluent is produced using various
combinations of pumps, fans, air blowers, contact
media for bacterial growth, and settlement and
chlorination chambers. With the required
management and maintenance (including periodic
sludge removal), the final effluent produced
should be clear and odourless and should meet
quality criteria approved by the State Department
of Health.
The number of AWT systems has increased
substantially in recent years and there are
approximately 20,000 units in NSW alone.
However, they are not well suited to intermittent
use and effluent quality is reduced as a
consequence of shock loads which may occur due
to episodic hydraulic or organic loading. Final
effluent quality criteria recommended for these
systems is BOD5 less than 20 mg/L and SS less
than 30 mg/L. It also should contain less than 10
organisms per 100 mL for thermotolerant coliforms
(i.e. faecal coliforms) and have a free residual
chlorine concentration of less than 0.5 mg/L. After
chlorination, effluent from these systems is
typically land applied using surface or sub-surface
irrigation. In general, a minimum area of 200 m2
should be used and the land area should be
appropriately landscaped and used solely for the
purpose of irrigation.
With the increase in the number of these systems,
local government has been finding the
administration and management of these systems
difficult. Apart from maintenance, there are also
reported difficulties with the effectiveness of the
chlorination system, and the adequate sizing of the
landscaped area for irrigation in relation to
hydraulic and nutrient loads. Surveys of the
disinfection performance of aerated systems
reported in Rawlinson (1994) and by Khalife and
Air
Setting and
Chlorination chamber
Outlet
(after Chlorination)
Sludge
PAGE 4 • DES 24 • NOVEMBER 1998
Dharmappa (1996) suggest that a high percentage
of systems fail to meet the residual chlorine and
faecal coliform requirements, while Martens and
Warner (1995) recommend disposal areas larger
than 200 m2 to reduce the risk of nitrate leaching
to groundwaters. One advantage of these systems
is that effluent which meets the final quality
criteria can be re-used on landscaped, segregated
areas.
4.0 RE-USE MANAGEMENT
OPTIONS
The in-house segregation of domestic wastewaters
offers a means of enhancing the conventional
methods of treatment and disposal, and of
facilitating the development of alternative
strategies for wastewater management, one of
which may be to re-use wastewaters. The use of
a segregated waste treatment system becomes
more attractive and cost-effective if its use results
in:
• a lower effluent pollutant concentration and
mass;
• a reduced potential for pathogenic
contamination if effluent is to be discharged;
• the conservation of water resources; and
• a potential for recycling valuable nutrients to
the soil in a beneficial manner.
4.1 Greywaters
In the urban environment, where a reticulated
water supply and sewerage system is available,
there are limited opportunities for re-use related to
greywaters. Current use in Australia is generally in
an ad-hoc manner, principally because it is still
illegal in metropolitan areas in a number of states
where sewerage systems exist. It may also be
illegal to fit devices to drains to redirect water
onto the garden. In some states, where greywater
re-use is not illegal, homeowners could still be
prosecuted if improper greywater disposal causes
or contributes to environmental problems. If
greywater re-use is being considered in urban
design, it is appropriate to consult the relevant
authorities to determine their position or policy
regarding greywater re-use in the urban
environment.
A number of State Departments of Health are now
examining domestic greywater re-use systems with
a view to approving several proprietary brands
and several have developed guidelines for
domestic greywater recycling (for example, NSW
and WA). An increasing number of local
management authorities encourage householders
to re-use greywater, particularly the rinse water
from the washing machine, and various guidelines
have been developed to provide information
suitable for general use by the community
(McQuire, 1995). A number of local authorities
have also developed guidelines for greywater re-
use (for example, Newcastle and Shoalhaven) and
ENVIRONMENT DESIGN GUIDE
model guidelines for re-use have been developed
by Jeppeson (1996) for the Urban Water Research
Association of Australia.
The reuse of greywaters from the bathroom and
laundry is usually undertaken by pumping or
bucketing from a waste tank or by direct flow
through an agricultural drainpipe. These ad-hoc
plumbing arrangements need to be undertaken
with care and all the authorities recognise this. It
is still regarded as the homeowner’s responsibility
to guard against possible risks to health and
property arising from their activities.
Greywater should be regarded as polluted water
and pathogens are potentially present. This is
particularly important if greywaters are to be used
to grow certain types of vegetables for human
consumption. It should not come into contact
with the edible portion of fruit or vegetables. In
addition to the bacteriological aspects (on which
there has been significant research), greywaters
can contain concentrations of nutrients, salts and
trace elements which may be harmful to plants
and the soil. Most common laundry powders
contain sodium salts as bulking agents which
results in wash waters being alkaline and high in
salt levels (depending on the particular product
being used). The permeability of the soil may be
affected by long term application of greywaters at
high hydraulic application rates (Patterson, 1993).
In addition, some Australian native plants are
sensitive to the high phosphorus levels present in
greywaters, and boron, which may be present in
some detergent mixtures and powder cleansers,
may be toxic to plants.
In all situations where domestic greywaters are to
be collected, stored and land applied, advice
should be sought on the contents of laundry
products and care should be taken, particularly
because there is a general presumption that
because the toilet wastes have not come in contact
with greywaters, pathogenic organisms are
unlikely to be present. Greywaters may still
contain human faecal indicator bacteria in
concentrations high enough to indicate a health
risk from the potential presence of pathogenic
micro-organisms.
Apart from the ad-hoc approach to greywater
reuse, a number of commercial proprietary recycle
systems are currently available and some of these
are being evaluated by the State Departments of
Health. These systems are in-house wastewater
treatment systems employed to remove specific
pollutants from one or more wastewater streams
in order to meet a specific water use objective.
Although a number of household re-use schemes
have been developed for both blackwater and
greywater, the only re-use scheme which
approaches potential cost-effectiveness is
considered to be the re-use of greywaters for toilet
flushing. The costs of other re-use schemes may
be prohibitive because of the need for significant
treatment prior to re-use.
ENVIRONMENT DESIGN GUIDE
Based on the results of investigations described by
Anderson et al (1981) and others, greywater re-use
has been shown to be technically feasible.
Disinfection and routine system maintenance are
essential for effective recycle system performance.
Home recycle systems offer significant water
savings and waste flow reductions, however, they
can only be justified on purely economic grounds
under extreme water cost or stringent wastewater
disposal conditions. If recycled water is to be
used solely for toilet flushing, then simpler, more
cost effective fixtures are available that provide
similar flow reductions. At this stage of their
development, the potential problems with the
installation of available systems and the
requirement for home owner maintenance for
proper functioning mitigate against their
widespread use.
The most extensive study on the potential for
greywater re-use in Australia (Jeppesen & Solley,
1994) identified three domestic greywater re-use
systems. These are listed below along with some
of the conclusions from this study, which
examined the applicability of overseas practice to
Australia.
Hand basin toilets - these fixtures incorporate a
hand basin in the top of the cistern with a tap for
hand washing. The tap operates automatically
with the flushing of the toilet for the purpose of
refilling the cistern and facilitating hand washing
at the same time.
Primary greywater system - this system collects
greywater and immediately redistributes it directly
to the landscape for sub-surface lawn and garden
watering. No storage is allowed, although a surge
tank can be incorporated for coping with sudden
Bathroom
Vent
Screen
Pump
Surge tank
To subsurface
Drip Irrigation
Figure 4. Primary greywater system with re-use by subsurface drip watering
(Source: Jeppeson & Solley, 1994)
NOVEMBER 1998 • DES 24 • PAGE 5
influxes and for housing a distribution pump
(Figure 4).
Secondary greywater system - this system
incorporates a storage tank, treats the wastewaters
and uses it for toilet and/or urinal flushing as well
as for above ground lawn and garden watering.
This study concluded that greywaters must be
treated to destroy the micro-organisms present and
that human contact with greywaters must be
prevented. Ensuring that these requirements are
met is expensive as there is unlikely to be any
short-term cost benefit to the owner of a simple
greywater system. The greatest potential for
greywater re-use exists in the area of garden and
lawn watering and this can result in some savings
in potable water use, provided that greywater
does not reach the ground surface or form
aerosols in its application. The study questioned
those water authorities which allowed or did not
discourage sullage disposal by surface
broadcasting.
There is perhaps more potential for greywater re-
use in unsewered areas where wastewaters are
disposed to soil absorption systems or
transpiration beds. Prior to the introduction of the
all-purpose septic tank, greywater or sullage was
often diverted untreated to the allotment. In many
unsewered areas, sullage commonly entered the
street water table where it was considered by
many to be relatively innocuous. With the all-
purpose septic tank, all wastewaters are treated in
the same manner and the greywater is grossly
contaminated by the toilet wastes. The disposal
system is therefore required to treat all the
domestic wastewaters.
Laundry Rainwater
supplement
Active/passive valve
Over-
flow
To sewer
PAGE 6 • DES 24 • NOVEMBER 1998
The segregation of domestic wastewaters and
appropriate treatment of each waste stream has
often resulted in better system performance. This
is usually ascribed to a reduction in wastewater
hydraulic loadings and a reduction in the quantity
and concentration of certain pollutants (refer to
Table 1). The increased tank volume in using two
septic tanks also means there is less chance of
solids carry over into the soil absorption system,
which is commonly a significant factor in the poor
performance of soil disposal systems.
Manipulating the waste fractions in this manner
may also mean that reduced-size soil absorption
systems may perform successfully. Studies suggest
that this may be primarily attributable to a reduced
hydraulic loading (for example, in sizing a soil
absorption field for greywater, only 65% of the
normal wastewater load requires disposal).
The successful application of waste segregation
and separate treatment requires the effective
management of both the blackwater and
greywater fractions. Several management
alternatives for greywaters have been discussed.
However, the re-use options must be considered
in relation to the conclusions by Jeppesen &
Solley (1994). One treatment option which is
increasing in popularity is the use of wetland
filters such as reed beds. Vegetation is grown
specifically for the purpose of treating domestic
wastewaters. Research has shown that effluent
quality may be substantially improved after
passage through a wetland filter and design guides
are now available for the use of these natural
systems in domestic situations (Tennessee Valley
Authority, 1993). A recent conference at Southern
Cross University (Davison, 1996) described the
results from a number of systems utilising
composting toilets and reed bed systems for
treating greywater.
A number of other greywater treatment systems
for purifying wastewater to a level which is
suitable for re-use have been evaluated by ACTEW
Corporation’s Sewerage Planning Section and
these are commercially available. These systems
include a mineral enhanced slow sand filter
(Biosand), a treatment system for greywater and
solids-separated toilet waste (Aquapro) and a
modular pod-based reed bed treatment system
(Ecopod).
Several low technology user-contrived methods of
treating and disposing of greywaters, such as the
coarse stone roughing filter, are described by Van
der Ryn (1978) and others. These types of
systems are often of limited application and/or the
experiences gained tend to fall far short of
sufficiently delineating the operation and
performance characteristics of the systems
involved.
4.2 Blackwaters
Various strategies have been proposed to enable
segregation and separate management of domestic
toilet wastes. Those strategies which appear most
ENVIRONMENT DESIGN GUIDE
feasible for residential use are described by the
United States Environment Protection Agency
(1980), or more recently by Burks and Minnis
(1994).
Alternative toilet systems consist of waterless no
flush urinals, composting toilets, incinerating
toilets, recycle toilets and low volume flush toilets.
The waterless no flush toilet (which probably
should not be included in the blackwater section)
is a fibreglass urinal in which the urea is separated
from oxygen by a proprietary collection trap. A
bio-degradable sealant ensures there is no contact
between the urine and oxygen and there is
consequently no odour. The system does not
require plumbing, valves or associated
maintenance resulting in a saving of
approximately 200 kL of water per year.
Composting toilets accept toilet wastes (and
sometimes garbage wastes) and utilise the natural
process of composting to effect their
decomposition. The heat from aerobic
decomposition destroys pathogenic organisms,
decomposes organic wastes into humus-like
material and drives off the water content of the
wastes. A number of different types of
composting toilets are available and the
composting process may be wet or dry. One
commonly used type has the point of use
separated from the decomposition chamber
(separated systems) while another has the point of
use directly attached to the chamber (non-
separated systems). These latter systems often
contain heater elements to accelerate the
composting process. Bulking agents may be
periodically required to provide a carbon source
and toilet products must be chosen with care to
maintain an aerobic microbiology in the compost
pile.
Incinerating toilets are small self-contained units
which utilise the process of incineration to burn
the solid wastes and evaporate the liquids. The
incineration is usually fuelled by propane/natural
gas, electricity or a combination of the two and
usually lasts for 10 or 15 minutes followed by a 5
minute cooling period. The incinerated waste
materials are removed periodically and the unit
cleaned. Incinerating toilets are not used
frequently in permanent homes, and while there is
merit in conserving water, problems with
overloading, incomplete combustion and odours
have frequently been reported. There are a
number of commercial products available.
Recycle toilets utilise a flushing liquid in a closed
loop to cleanse the toilet bowl and transport the
waste materials. The process used to purify the
flushing medium varies considerably between
systems, but commonly includes separation,
aeration, filtration or a combination thereof.
Purification normally takes place in a treatment/
storage tank installed outside the structure
containing the toilet fixture. Chemical toilets,
which use a water-chemical flush mixture to treat
and sterilise wastes, are an example of a recycle
toilet.
ENVIRONMENT DESIGN GUIDE
Low volume flush toilets use low volumes of
water as a flushing medium with compressed air
or a vacuum being used to assist in the flushing.
Other devices used to minimise toilet flows
include toilet tank inserts, low flush volume or
dual flush cisterns. The smaller volume of wastes
produced through using a low flush toilet can be
directed to a retention tank for periodic pumping
with either on or off site disposal.
The major advantage of segregating waste using
an alternative toilet is that the use of often potable
quality water as a transport medium is completely
(or partially) eliminated and that the volume of
water is reduced for final disposal. Other
advantages of alternative toilet systems include the
conversion of a waste product into a resource
(compost) and the reduction of hydraulic loads on
existing infrastructure including centralised sewage
treatment plants.
5.0 SUMMARY
There has been a substantial amount of work
undertaken in the field of domestic wastewater
treatment and re-use. The opportunities which
exist in this area relate mainly to greywater re-use,
primarily in the area of land application. The
benefits that this may bring relate mainly to
reducing domestic water consumption and to
garden or lawn watering using water which has
already been used and paid for. Unfortunately,
the message concerning greywater re-use is
unclear when it comes to the general public. Most
authorities agree that water should be conserved
and re-used where possible, yet the current
practise is generally ad-hoc and may be illegal in
certain domestic situations. There are also major
concerns about the environmental and public
health impacts associated with this practice which
must be considered and these have been referred
to in this guideline.
The re-use of greywaters in both sewered and
unsewered communities is increasing. However,
the greywater must be appropriately treated
before re-use. Although authorities are mindful of
the public health concerns, there are major
administrative and management difficulties which
exist in relation to distribution systems currently in
place in sewered areas and the fact that system
management is totally in the hands of the
homeowner in unsewered areas. These
arrangements need to be examined much more
closely along with the current pricing of water if
wastewater re-use is to be considered as a serious
option in relation to the conservation of our water
resources. The design of systems to re-use
domestic greywaters is to be encouraged, however
householders wishing to undertake this practise
must be made aware of the issues associated with
greywater re-use.
NOVEMBER 1998 • DES 24 • PAGE 7
REFERENCES AND
FURTHER READING
Anderson, DL, Siegrist, RL and Boyle, WC (1981).
Performance Evaluation of Greywater Recycle
Systems. AWWA Water Reuse II Symposium,
Washington, DC, USA.
Australian/New Zealand Standard AS 1546.1 (1998)
On-Site Domestic Wastewater Treatment Units, Part
1 Septic Tanks, Homebush, NSW.
Australian Standard AS 1547 (1994) Disposal
Systems for Effluent from Domestic Premises,
Homebush, NSW.
Burks, BD & Minnis, MM (1994) Onsite
Wastewater Treatment Systems, Hogarth House
Ltd, Madison, WI. 248pp.
Department of Local Government (1998)
Environment & Health Protection Guidelines, On-
Site Sewage Management for Single Households,
Bankstown, NSW.
Davison, L ed (1996) Innovative Approaches to the
On-site Management of Waste and Water,
Conference Proceedings, Southern Cross
University, Lismore, NSW.
Gardner, T, Geary, P & Gordon, I (1997)
Ecological Sustainability & On-Site Effluent
Treatment Systems, Australian Journal of
Environmental Management, 4, 2, 144-156.
Geary, PM (1992) Evaluation of On-site Disposal
Options, Water Science and Technology, 27, 1, 59-
62.
Geary, PM (1994) Soil Survey & the Design of
Wastewater Disposal Systems, Australian Journal of
Soil & Water Conservation, 7, 4, 16-23.
Jeppeson, B (1996) Model Guidelines for Domestic
Greywater Reuse in Australia, Research Report
107, Urban Water Research Association of
Australia, Melbourne.
Jeppesen, B & Solley, D (1994) Domestic
Greywater Reuse: Overseas Practice and its
Applicability to Australia, Research Report 73,
Urban Water Research Association of Australia,
Melbourne.
Khalife, M & Dharmappa, H (1996) Aerated Septic
Tank Systems: Field Survey of Performance, Water,
23 (5), 25-32.
Martens, D & Warner, R (1995) Impacts of On-Site
Domestic Wastewater Disposal in Sydney’s
Unsewered Areas, Department of Geography,
University of Sydney.
McQuire, S (1995) Not Just Down The Drain, A
guide to re-using & treating your household water,
Friends of the Earth, Collingwood.
O’Neill, R, Roads, G, & Weise, R (1993) On-Site
Wastewater Treatment and Disposal in NSW,
report prepared for Department of Water
Resources and the University of Technology,
Sydney.
Patterson, R (1993) Effluent Disposal - The Sodium
Factor, Environmental Health Review - Australia,
November, 42-44.
 PAGE 8 • DES 24 • NOVEMBER 1998 ENVIRONMENT DESIGN GUIDE

Rawlinson, L (1994) Review of On-Site Wastewater

Systems, Report prepared for Environment
Protection Authority, Southern Tablelands Region,
Queanbeyan.
Siegrist, R (1977) Waste Segregation as a Means of
Enhancing On-Site Wastewater Management.
J Env Health, 40, 1, 5-9.
Tennessee Valley Authority (1993) General Design,
Construction, & Operation Guidelines: Constructed
Wetlands Wastewater Treatment Systems for Small
Users Including Individual Residences (2nd ed),
TVA/WM-93/10, Chattanooga, Tennessee.
United States Environment Protection Agency
(1980). Design Manual - On-Site Wastewater
Treatment and Disposal Systems, Office of Water
Program Operations, Office of Research and
Development, Municipal Environmental Research
Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA.
Van der Ryn, S (1978) The Toilet Papers - Designs
to Recycle Human Waste and Water: Dry Toilets,
Greywater Systems and Urban Sewage. Capra
Press, Santa Barbara, California, U.S.A.

BIOGRAPHY
Phillip Geary, M Sc is a lecturer in Environmental
Science in the Department of Geography and
Environmental Science at the University of
Newcastle. He has been involved in researching
small scale waste management systems, such as
constructed wetlands and soil based systems, for a
number of years. He is also Chairperson of
NOSSIG, the National On-site Systems Interest
Group, which is affiliated with the Australian
Water and Wastewater Association.

The views expressed in this Note are the views of the

author and not necessarily those of The Royal
Australian Institute of Architects.
These Notes are issued by The Royal Australian Institute
of Architects and without responsibility on the part of
the authors, The Royal Australian Institute of Architects
or any of its Councillors, officers, members or staff.

View publication stats