lastID = -293073
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
SOLIDS MANAGEMENT CASE STUDIES FOR FIVE COMMUNITIES
  • Browse
  • Compilations
    • Compilations list
  • Subscriptions
Tools

Related contents

Loading related content

Workflow

No linked records yet

X
  • Current: 2022-05-04 16:40:44 Adam Phillips
  • 2020-03-27 00:46:43 Adam Phillips
  • 2020-02-22 23:17:43 Adam Phillips
  • 2020-02-22 23:17:42 Adam Phillips
  • 2020-02-01 08:16:07 Administrator
  • 2020-02-01 04:19:04 Administrator
  • 2020-02-01 04:19:03 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
SOLIDS MANAGEMENT CASE STUDIES FOR FIVE COMMUNITIES

SOLIDS MANAGEMENT CASE STUDIES FOR FIVE COMMUNITIES

SOLIDS MANAGEMENT CASE STUDIES FOR FIVE COMMUNITIES

  • 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
SOLIDS MANAGEMENT CASE STUDIES FOR FIVE COMMUNITIES
Abstract
Available solids management options for utilities are selected by widely varying methods. These methods not only take into account the purely technical issues, but must also include political concerns, future regulations, and local impacts. In addition, personality issues and the individual experiences of the operators and managers of the utility must be included in any evaluation. The authors have selected five small to medium-sized communities to demonstrate this and show that one solution cannot fit all situations. All of the work was conducted by CH2M HILL.The communities investigated include: Snyderville Basin Water Reclamation District, Park City, Utah; Sherman, Texas; Gresham, Oregon; Upper Trinity Regional Water District, Lewisville, Texas; and the Grand Strand Water & Sewer Authority, South Carolina.The eventual goal of each utility is to achieve Exceptional Quality (EQ) biosolids by producing biosolids that are below Table 3 pollutant levels in the Part 503 Regulations, have a pathogen density of under 1,000 MPN fecal coliforms/gram total solids, and meet one of the first eight vector attraction reduction options, also listed in the Part 503 Regulations.Although producing an EQ product sets a direction, system implementation was a key issue in all situations. Generally, most utilities do not want to spend significant capital to achieve EQ biosolids today unless public or regulatory issues are forcing them to do so. But virtually all utilities are planning for the time when they will be required to produce EQ biosolids. As such, they want to set a direction so that all future enlargements and modifications to the liquid and solids processes are made with this in mind.Interestingly, despite the fact that each project was completed by different engineers at CH2M HILL and for different clients across the country, the goals were remarkably similar. Differences in the costs of the studies, ranging from under 50,000 to over 120,000, were more a result of local public issues than the technical side.
Available solids management options for utilities are selected by widely varying methods. These methods not only take into account the purely technical issues, but must also include political concerns, future regulations, and local impacts. In addition, personality issues and the individual experiences of the operators and managers of the utility must be included in any evaluation. The authors...
Author(s)
Sieger Ronald B.Foess JerryAllen ChrisRobert Forbes
SourceProceedings of the Water Environment Federation
SubjectSession 7: Biosolids Case Studies II
Document typeConference Paper
PublisherWater Environment Federation
Print publication date Jan, 2006
ISSN1938-6478
SICI1938-6478(20060101)2006:2L.304;1-
DOI10.2175/193864706783796862
Volume / Issue2006 / 2
Content sourceResiduals and Biosolids Conference
First / last page(s)304 - 331
Copyright2006
Word count321

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 'SOLIDS MANAGEMENT CASE STUDIES FOR FIVE COMMUNITIES'

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
SOLIDS MANAGEMENT CASE STUDIES FOR FIVE COMMUNITIES
Pricing
Non-member price: $11.50
Member price:
-293073
Get access
-293073
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 'SOLIDS MANAGEMENT CASE STUDIES FOR FIVE COMMUNITIES'

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
SOLIDS MANAGEMENT CASE STUDIES FOR FIVE COMMUNITIES
Abstract
Available solids management options for utilities are selected by widely varying methods. These methods not only take into account the purely technical issues, but must also include political concerns, future regulations, and local impacts. In addition, personality issues and the individual experiences of the operators and managers of the utility must be included in any evaluation. The authors have selected five small to medium-sized communities to demonstrate this and show that one solution cannot fit all situations. All of the work was conducted by CH2M HILL.The communities investigated include: Snyderville Basin Water Reclamation District, Park City, Utah; Sherman, Texas; Gresham, Oregon; Upper Trinity Regional Water District, Lewisville, Texas; and the Grand Strand Water & Sewer Authority, South Carolina.The eventual goal of each utility is to achieve Exceptional Quality (EQ) biosolids by producing biosolids that are below Table 3 pollutant levels in the Part 503 Regulations, have a pathogen density of under 1,000 MPN fecal coliforms/gram total solids, and meet one of the first eight vector attraction reduction options, also listed in the Part 503 Regulations.Although producing an EQ product sets a direction, system implementation was a key issue in all situations. Generally, most utilities do not want to spend significant capital to achieve EQ biosolids today unless public or regulatory issues are forcing them to do so. But virtually all utilities are planning for the time when they will be required to produce EQ biosolids. As such, they want to set a direction so that all future enlargements and modifications to the liquid and solids processes are made with this in mind.Interestingly, despite the fact that each project was completed by different engineers at CH2M HILL and for different clients across the country, the goals were remarkably similar. Differences in the costs of the studies, ranging from under 50,000 to over 120,000, were more a result of local public issues than the technical side.
Available solids management options for utilities are selected by widely varying methods. These methods not only take into account the purely technical issues, but must also include political concerns, future regulations, and local impacts. In addition, personality issues and the individual experiences of the operators and managers of the utility must be included in any evaluation. The authors...
Author(s)
Sieger Ronald B.Foess JerryAllen ChrisRobert Forbes
SourceProceedings of the Water Environment Federation
SubjectSession 7: Biosolids Case Studies II
Document typeConference Paper
PublisherWater Environment Federation
Print publication date Jan, 2006
ISSN1938-6478
SICI1938-6478(20060101)2006:2L.304;1-
DOI10.2175/193864706783796862
Volume / Issue2006 / 2
Content sourceResiduals and Biosolids Conference
First / last page(s)304 - 331
Copyright2006
Word count321

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
Sieger Ronald B.# Foess Jerry# Allen Chris# Robert Forbes. SOLIDS MANAGEMENT CASE STUDIES FOR FIVE COMMUNITIES. Alexandria, VA 22314-1994, USA: Water Environment Federation, 2018. Web. 12 Jun. 2025. <https://www.accesswater.org?id=-293073CITANCHOR>.
Sieger Ronald B.# Foess Jerry# Allen Chris# Robert Forbes. SOLIDS MANAGEMENT CASE STUDIES FOR FIVE COMMUNITIES. Alexandria, VA 22314-1994, USA: Water Environment Federation, 2018. Accessed June 12, 2025. https://www.accesswater.org/?id=-293073CITANCHOR.
Sieger Ronald B.# Foess Jerry# Allen Chris# Robert Forbes
SOLIDS MANAGEMENT CASE STUDIES FOR FIVE COMMUNITIES
Access Water
Water Environment Federation
December 22, 2018
June 12, 2025
https://www.accesswater.org/?id=-293073CITANCHOR