lastID = -291563
Skip to main content Skip to top navigation Skip to site search
Top of page
  • My citations options
    Web Back (from Web)
    Chicago Back (from Chicago)
    MLA Back (from MLA)
Close action menu

You need to login to use this feature.

Please wait a moment…
Please wait while we update your results...
Please wait a moment...
Description: Access Water
Context Menu
Description: Book cover
STRUCTURED DECISION MAKING TO EVALUATE WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
  • Browse
  • Compilations
    • Compilations list
  • Subscriptions
Tools

Related contents

Loading related content

Workflow

No linked records yet

X
  • Current: 2022-05-06 15:02:33 Adam Phillips
  • 2020-03-26 23:21:08 Adam Phillips
  • 2020-03-26 23:21:07 Adam Phillips
  • 2020-02-01 04:32:56 Administrator
  • 2020-02-01 04:32:55 Administrator
Description: Access Water
  • Browse
  • Compilations
  • Subscriptions
Log in
0
Accessibility Options

Base text size -

This is a sample piece of body text
Larger
Smaller
  • Shopping basket (0)
  • Accessibility options
  • Return to previous
Description: Book cover
STRUCTURED DECISION MAKING TO EVALUATE WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES

STRUCTURED DECISION MAKING TO EVALUATE WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES

STRUCTURED DECISION MAKING TO EVALUATE WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES

  • New
  • View
  • Details
  • Reader
  • Default
  • Share
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • New
  • View
  • Default view
  • Reader view
  • Data view
  • Details

This page cannot be printed from here

Please use the dedicated print option from the 'view' drop down menu located in the blue ribbon in the top, right section of the publication.

screenshot of print menu option

Description: Book cover
STRUCTURED DECISION MAKING TO EVALUATE WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
Abstract
With the many recent additions to air emission regulations governing wastewater treatment plants, it is becoming more challenging to evaluate wastewater treatment technology comprehensively. It used to be possible to select technology based strictly on cost and performance requirements to comply with the Clean Water Act. Now, with the publication of various amendments to the Clean Air Act, regulatory considerations have become prominent in the decision-making process. The Hazardous Organic National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) (HON), Miscellaneous Organic NESHAP (MON), and Subpart YYY Performance Standards regulate volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from wastewater streams. If the site in question falls under one of these regulations, the process of selecting a wastewater treatment technology is complex. During the preliminary evaluation phase and selection of wastewater treatment upgrades, all the regulatory impacts must be factored into the decision-making process. Proper presentation of the operational risks, regulatory issues, and capital costs in a concise manner is critical to selecting the best option. A work flow process that generates the necessary information in a timely fashion is essential for efficient use of resources during this assessment phase. This process must be designed into the project at the outset to order work flow and deliver the necessary data when needed.At an integrated chemical manufacturing site in Texas, CH2M HILL performed a technology assessment to select a pretreatment system that met several objectives. Low capital cost, minimized plant operational risk, and minimizing current and future regulatory impacts were identified as critical success factors. In addition to these challenges, there was a critical timing issue to develop responses for the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality (TCEQ).One of the first steps was to break down the work flow into a process that had decision points. The decision points allow evaluation of the selected technologies based on the critical success factors. A parallel approach was used to develop regulatory understanding at the same time the technology evaluation was being performed. Data were summarized in tabular format to easily compare the options and allow informed decision making by the client.This paper describes the successful work flow process used showing the project as a case study in the application of this process. This process applies to industrial facilities that are faced with changing their wastewater treatment system. By using a structured approach, the cost of investigating options can be reduced and the risk of overlooking viable options can be mitigated.
With the many recent additions to air emission regulations governing wastewater treatment plants, it is becoming more challenging to evaluate wastewater treatment technology comprehensively. It used to be possible to select technology based strictly on cost and performance requirements to comply with the Clean Water Act. Now, with the publication of various amendments to the Clean Air Act,...
Author(s)
Eric HiltonTom Sandy
SourceProceedings of the Water Environment Federation
SubjectSession 15: Industrial Air Emission and Toxicity Issues
Document typeConference Paper
PublisherWater Environment Federation
Print publication date Jan, 2004
ISSN1938-6478
SICI1938-6478(20040101)2004:6L.879;1-
DOI10.2175/193864704784105625
Volume / Issue2004 / 6
Content sourceIndustrial Wastes (IW) Conference
First / last page(s)879 - 886
Copyright2004
Word count410

Purchase price $11.50

Get access
Log in Purchase content Purchase subscription
You may already have access to this content if you have previously purchased this content or have a subscription.
Need to create an account?

You can purchase access to this content but you might want to consider a subscription for a wide variety of items at a substantial discount!

Purchase access to 'STRUCTURED DECISION MAKING TO EVALUATE WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES'

Add to cart
Purchase a subscription to gain access to 18,000+ Proceeding Papers, 25+ Fact Sheets, 20+ Technical Reports, 50+ magazine articles and select Technical Publications' chapters.
Loading items
There are no items to display at the moment.
Something went wrong trying to load these items.
Description: Book cover
STRUCTURED DECISION MAKING TO EVALUATE WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
Pricing
Non-member price: $11.50
Member price:
-291563
Get access
-291563
Log in Purchase content Purchase subscription
You may already have access to this content if you have previously purchased this content or have a subscription.
Need to create an account?

You can purchase access to this content but you might want to consider a subscription for a wide variety of items at a substantial discount!

Purchase access to 'STRUCTURED DECISION MAKING TO EVALUATE WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES'

Add to cart
Purchase a subscription to gain access to 18,000+ Proceeding Papers, 25+ Fact Sheets, 20+ Technical Reports, 50+ magazine articles and select Technical Publications' chapters.

Details

Description: Book cover
STRUCTURED DECISION MAKING TO EVALUATE WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
Abstract
With the many recent additions to air emission regulations governing wastewater treatment plants, it is becoming more challenging to evaluate wastewater treatment technology comprehensively. It used to be possible to select technology based strictly on cost and performance requirements to comply with the Clean Water Act. Now, with the publication of various amendments to the Clean Air Act, regulatory considerations have become prominent in the decision-making process. The Hazardous Organic National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) (HON), Miscellaneous Organic NESHAP (MON), and Subpart YYY Performance Standards regulate volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from wastewater streams. If the site in question falls under one of these regulations, the process of selecting a wastewater treatment technology is complex. During the preliminary evaluation phase and selection of wastewater treatment upgrades, all the regulatory impacts must be factored into the decision-making process. Proper presentation of the operational risks, regulatory issues, and capital costs in a concise manner is critical to selecting the best option. A work flow process that generates the necessary information in a timely fashion is essential for efficient use of resources during this assessment phase. This process must be designed into the project at the outset to order work flow and deliver the necessary data when needed.At an integrated chemical manufacturing site in Texas, CH2M HILL performed a technology assessment to select a pretreatment system that met several objectives. Low capital cost, minimized plant operational risk, and minimizing current and future regulatory impacts were identified as critical success factors. In addition to these challenges, there was a critical timing issue to develop responses for the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality (TCEQ).One of the first steps was to break down the work flow into a process that had decision points. The decision points allow evaluation of the selected technologies based on the critical success factors. A parallel approach was used to develop regulatory understanding at the same time the technology evaluation was being performed. Data were summarized in tabular format to easily compare the options and allow informed decision making by the client.This paper describes the successful work flow process used showing the project as a case study in the application of this process. This process applies to industrial facilities that are faced with changing their wastewater treatment system. By using a structured approach, the cost of investigating options can be reduced and the risk of overlooking viable options can be mitigated.
With the many recent additions to air emission regulations governing wastewater treatment plants, it is becoming more challenging to evaluate wastewater treatment technology comprehensively. It used to be possible to select technology based strictly on cost and performance requirements to comply with the Clean Water Act. Now, with the publication of various amendments to the Clean Air Act,...
Author(s)
Eric HiltonTom Sandy
SourceProceedings of the Water Environment Federation
SubjectSession 15: Industrial Air Emission and Toxicity Issues
Document typeConference Paper
PublisherWater Environment Federation
Print publication date Jan, 2004
ISSN1938-6478
SICI1938-6478(20040101)2004:6L.879;1-
DOI10.2175/193864704784105625
Volume / Issue2004 / 6
Content sourceIndustrial Wastes (IW) Conference
First / last page(s)879 - 886
Copyright2004
Word count410

Actions, changes & tasks

Outstanding Actions

Add action for paragraph

Current Changes

Add signficant change

Current Tasks

Add risk task

Connect with us

Follow us on Facebook
Follow us on Twitter
Connect to us on LinkedIn
Subscribe on YouTube
Powered by Librios Ltd
Powered by Librios Ltd
Authors
Terms of Use
Policies
Help
Accessibility
Contact us
Copyright © 2024 by the Water Environment Federation
Loading items
There are no items to display at the moment.
Something went wrong trying to load these items.
Description: WWTF Digital Boot 180x150
WWTF Digital (180x150)
Created on Jul 02
Websitehttps:/­/­www.wef.org/­wwtf?utm_medium=WWTF&utm_source=AccessWater&utm_campaign=WWTF
180x150
Eric Hilton# Tom Sandy. STRUCTURED DECISION MAKING TO EVALUATE WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES. Alexandria, VA 22314-1994, USA: Water Environment Federation, 2018. Web. 29 Jun. 2025. <https://www.accesswater.org?id=-291563CITANCHOR>.
Eric Hilton# Tom Sandy. STRUCTURED DECISION MAKING TO EVALUATE WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES. Alexandria, VA 22314-1994, USA: Water Environment Federation, 2018. Accessed June 29, 2025. https://www.accesswater.org/?id=-291563CITANCHOR.
Eric Hilton# Tom Sandy
STRUCTURED DECISION MAKING TO EVALUATE WASTEWATER TREATMENT ALTERNATIVES
Access Water
Water Environment Federation
December 22, 2018
June 29, 2025
https://www.accesswater.org/?id=-291563CITANCHOR