SBM (2.O) Ready Recknor-Final-Signed

Swachh Bharat Mission – Urban 2.
0
Ready Reckoner
on
Municipal Used Water Treatment Technologies
for
Medium and Small Towns
September 2022
Central Public Health and Environmental Engineering Organisation
(CPHEEO)
Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs
Government of India
www.swachhbharaturban.gov.in www.cpheeo.gov.in
Ready Reckoner – Municipal Sewage Treatment Technologies –
Medium and Smaller Towns in India
Swachh Bharat Mission – Urban 2.0

Ready Reckoner
on
Municipal Used Water Treatment Technologies
for
Medium and Small Towns
September 2022
Central Public Health and Environmental Engineering Organisation
(CPHEEO)
Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs
Government of India
www.swachhbharaturban.gov.in www.cpheeo.gov.in
ii
Disclaimer
Ready Reckoner on Municipal Used Water Treatment Technologies for Medium and
Small Towns is an advisory document aiming to guide ULBs in setting up suitable Used Water
Management Facilities. This document contains information on size/ land area of facilities as
well tentative costs based on data collected from ULBs as well technology providers. While
implementing it, a more detailed understanding need to be developed, wherever needed, by
setting up pilot plants in one or two cities and then taking up in others. The technologies
included in this document is only few, on sample basis, which could be accessed, but it doesn’t
exclude similar other technologies and their modifications from implementation in field. All is
needed is to examine its suitability for city through technical experts and testing pilots and then
based on performance evaluation it can be taken up for implementation in other cities. The
design sizes of various modular units of 1, 2 and 5 MLD plants can be suitably revised
according to land available.
This document can be used for quick guidance of technology selection and DPRs
preparation, however, while implementing, guidance of experts is important and 5 years O&M
has to be integrated part of contract for assured performance.
iii
T+q oM qr{d TT{tFrt
rrffs 7€.a. enfllri oil{ qEt 6d qarflq
Manoj Joshi
JnqrA-
orTdq+*? ffiq q6q, +{ ftd-rroorr
Government of lndia
Secretary
Il.!t" sq) Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs
Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi-110011
Foreword
lndia is urbanizing fast and this pace is likely to continue for next several decades.
Urban population, as per Census 2011, was around 38 crores, representing 31% of
lndia's total population. This figure is estimated to go up to nearly 81 crores by 2050,
comprising of 50% of lndia's population. This increase in population and mnsequent
discharge of untreated domestic sewage is responsible for pollution of about 70o/o ot
surface water bodies.
To improve the environment and health & well-being of citizens, Ministry has
accorded top priority to used water and faecal septage management through its
Missions like AMRUT and SBM. To take the initiatives further, the second phase of
Mission i.e., SBM-U 2.0 is focusing adequately on safe management of used water
and faecal sludge in towns having population less than 1 lakh. To guide the States
and ULBs in technical mafters, thereof, CPHEEO, technical wing of Ministry, brings
out requisite technical guidelines from time to time. The present "Ready Reckoner
on Municipal Used Water Treatment Technologies for Medium and Small
Towns" is another effort in this direction and will provide the requisite technical
guidance to States & ULBs to expeditiously manage used water in cost effective
manner leading to achievement of safe sanitation in all urban areas. lt is presented in
simple way to help decision makers also to identify and choose suitable used water
treatment technology based on the local needs.
I congratulate CPHEEO and Deutsche Gesellschaft f0r lnternationale

Zusammenarbeit (GlZ) GmbH team in bringing out this comprehensive "Ready
Reckoner on Municipal Used Water Treatment Technologies for Medium and
Small Towns" at the appropriate time.
M*Z /-L
(Manoj Joshi)
New Delhi
September 281h.2022
Office Address: Room No. 122'C'winq, Nirman Bhawan, NewDelhi-110011
Tel.:01'l-23062377, 23061'179; Fax: 011-23061459; Email: secyurban@nic.in
Website: ww\,Y. m oh u a. gov. in
6Cr frfi 7roa7
ql{( Tl-lm'R
sgffi {fuE gs ftT{ frcr6 srrqt4i-r
elrqr€-r 3lR {rEt 6Id q-ndq
ROOPA MISHRA
n[a rdtffid ffi1 rs1, { ffi-noor r
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
Joint Secretary & Mission Director MINISTRY OF HOUSING AND URBAN AFFAIRS
Swachh Bharat Mission - Urban Tre{< sqt NIRMAN BHAWAN. NEW DELHI-110011
Preface
Since the launch of SBM-U in 2014, the journey of Urban lndia towards
holistic sanitation has already achieved many milestones like ODF urban lndia,
significant behaviour change in public and has become now a Jan Andolan. More
importantly, we have not stopped at it and have taken up requisite steps to ensure
sustainability in functionality of the constructed infrastructure, along with safe
management of Used water. Hence was born the ODF+, ODF++ and Water+
protocols. Further, under SBM-U 2.0, the newly added component of "Used Water
I\/anagement" aims that no untreated used water including faecal sludge is
discharged into the open environment or water bodies,in the towns having population
of less than '1 lakh.
To achieve this holistic sanitation, MoHUA is supporting the endeavourers of

states/UTs particularly in off-site and on-site sanitation. lam delighted to see this
"Ready Reckoner on Municipal Used Water Treatment Technologies for
Medium and Small Towns" brought out by CPHEEO, which will not only be an
excellent complement to the existing advisories but would greatly help in speedy
selection in approach and technologies for safe management of Used Water.
I take this opportunity to congratulate the CPHEEO team for bringing out this
Reckonercontain ing planned approach of used water management in small
cities/towns. The efforts put in by Dr. V.K. Chaurasia, Joint Adviser (PHEE), Shri
Rohit Kakkar, Dy. Adviser, Shri Sathish Kumar S. - Assistant Adviser (PHE), and
Shri Vipul Gulati and Shri Ashish Sharma, Consultants WASH lnstitute are well
appreciated. I also acknowledge the efforts of various stakeholders including the
technical experts and consultants from GIZ led by Ms. Monika Bahl who have
contributed their time and energy in preparation of the document.
(Roopa ishra)
New Delhi
September 2022
Office Address: Room No. 140, C-Wing, Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi-l10011
Tel.: 0'11-2306'1558,23061300 . Email: rmishraTT@nic.in . Website: www.mohua.gov.in
Table of Contents
Foreword __________________________________________________________________________ ii
Preface ___________________________________________________________________________ v
Executive Summary _________________________________________________________________ xii
1 Introduction ______________________________________________________________________ 1
1.1 Context _____________________________________________________________________ 1
1.2 Need for Ready Reckoner _______________________________________________________ 1
1.3 Trends of adoption of Used Water Treatment technologies in India_____________________ 1
1.4 Discharge standards for treated usedwater ________________________________________ 2
1.5 International Experience- approach for Used Water treatment in Brazil and Germany _____ 3
1.6 A brief about Sewage Treatment Processes ________________________________________ 6
2. Sewage Treatment Technologies _____________________________________________________ 9
2.1 Nature Based Technologies _____________________________________________________ 9
2.1.1 Waste Stabilization Pond _______________________________________________________ 9
2.1.2 Root Zone or Constructed Wetland ______________________________________________ 13
2.2 Mechanised Treatment Technologies ____________________________________________ 17
2.2.1 Aerated Lagoon ______________________________________________________________ 17
2.2.2 Activated Sludge Process ______________________________________________________ 20
2.2.3 Extended Aeration ___________________________________________________________ 23
2.2.4 Sequencing Batch Reactors ____________________________________________________ 26
2.2.5 Trickling Filter _______________________________________________________________ 30
2.2.6 Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor ____________________________________________________ 33
2.2.7 Up flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket_______________________________________________ 37
2.3 Combination of Treatment processes (UASB or ABR + additional treatment) ____________ 41
2.3.1 UASB or ABR + Polishing Pond __________________________________________________ 41
2.3.2 UASB or ABR + Land Disposal ___________________________________________________ 43
2.3.3 UASB or ABR + Trickling Filter __________________________________________________ 45
2.3.4 UASB or ABR + Activated Sludge ________________________________________________ 47
2.4 Decentralised and On-site treatment technologies _________________________________ 49
2.4.1 Decentralised Treatment System ________________________________________________ 49
2.4.2 On-site treatment technologies __________________________________________________ 53
2.4.2.1 Anaerobic Packaged Systems ___________________________________________________ 54
2.4.2.2 Packed Anaerobic-Aerobic On-site Treatment Systems ______________________________ 55
2.5 In-line treatment of Drain (Nallah) ______________________________________________ 57
2.6 Community Soak pit __________________________________________________________ 58
3 Co-Treatment of Faecal Septage __________________________________________________ 61
vi
3.1 Addition of faecal septage with sewage __________________________________________ 61

3.2 Addition of faecal septage with STP sludge________________________________________ 62
3.3 Solid Liquid Separation ________________________________________________________ 63
3.4 Faecal Septage Receiving Facility at Co-treatment STPs ______________________________ 63
3.5 Cost estimate of Solid liquid separation unit and & O&M cost ________________________ 66
3.5.1 Solid Liquid Separation option at Existing STP _____________________________________ 67
3.5.2 Low-cost Gravity based Faecal Septage Treatment Plant for Smaller Towns _____________ 67
4 Criteria for selection of technologies ______________________________________________ 70
4.1 Comparison of key treatment technologies along critical parameters __________________ 72
4.2 Steps Involved in Preparation of Projects and Implementation: _______________________ 73
5 Case Studies_________________________________________________________________ 74
5.1 Decentralised Wastewater Treatment Systems ____________________________________ 74
5.2 Waste Stabilisation Pond ______________________________________________________ 76
5.3 Root Zone or Constructed Wetland or Phytorid ____________________________________ 77
5.4 Up-flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket Reactor _______________________________________ 79
5.5 Activated Sludge Process (ASP): _________________________________________________ 81
5.6 Extended Aeration (EA): _______________________________________________________ 82
5.7 Sequencing Batch Reactor (SBR) ________________________________________________ 84
5.8 Jhokasou ___________________________________________________________________ 85
5.9 Other Methods ______________________________________________________________ 87
5.9.1 Container based or Packaged Treatment Systems __________________________________ 87
5.9.2 IN-SITU BIOREMEDIATION-BASED ISR MODULAR STP _______________________________ 89
5.9.3 TIGER BIO-FILTER BASED STP ___________________________________________________ 91
Photographs _______________________________________________________________________ 92
References ________________________________________________________________________ 94
vii
List of Figures
Figure 1: Treatment technologies adopted in India as per treatment capacity in MLD ...............2
Figure 2: Technology wise distribution of number of STPs in Brazil (n=2,187) .........................4
Figure 3: Percentage of WWTPs (2800 Nos.) per population range in Brazil .............................5
Figure 4: Change in urban wastewater treatment in Germany from 1990 to 2017.......................6
Figure 5: Unit operations in aerobic mechanized biochemical sewage treatment process ...........8
Figure 6: Process flow of conventional anaerobic sewage treatment ...........................................8
Figure 7: Photographs of 3.0 MLD WSP technology based STP at Goniana, Punjab ...............11
Figure 8: WSP – Process.............................................................................................................11
Figure 9: Schematic Diagram of the Cross-Section on of a Waste Stabilization on Pond .........12
Figure 10: Typical Layout for WSP plant...................................................................................12
Figure 11: Root zone– Process ...................................................................................................14
Figure 12 : Root zone–schematic cross section ..........................................................................15
Figure 13: Photo of Root Zone technology based STP (180 KLD STP at Dharamshala, H.P.) .15
Figure 14 Typical layout for Root Zone System ........................................................................16
Figure 15: Flowsheet of Facultative Aerated Lagoon.................................................................18
Figure 16: Typical Layout for Aerated Lagoon ..........................................................................19
Figure 17: ASP – Photographs....................................................................................................21
Figure 18:Common process in ASP............................................................................................21
Figure 19: Typical Design Layout for ASP plant .......................................................................22
Figure 20:Photographs of Extended Aeration based STP...........................................................24
Figure 21: Typical layout of Extended Aeration Process ...........................................................25
Figure 22: EAP Process .............................................................................................................25
Figure 23: SBR based STP .........................................................................................................28
Figure 24: SBR -Process .............................................................................................................28
Figure 25: SBR – Typical Layout for SBR plant........................................................................29
Figure 26: Trickling filter ...........................................................................................................31
Figure 27: General layout of a STP with TF...............................................................................31
Figure 28: Layout for 1 MLD STP with trickling filter ..............................................................32
Figure 29: 10 MLD STP with trickling filter at Kalyani West Bengal .......................................32
Figure 30 MBBR technology based 5 MLD STP at Uttrakhand ................................................35
Figure 31: MBBR – Process .......................................................................................................35
Figure 32: Typical Layout for MBBR Plant ..............................................................................36
Figure 33: Photograph of 14 MLD UASB technology based STP at Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh .39
Figure 34: UASB Process Diagram ............................................................................................39
Figure 35: Typical Design Layout for UASB .............................................................................40
Figure 36: UASB + Polishing Ponds – typical configuration ....................................................42
Figure 37: Typical Design Layout for UASB+ Polishing ponds ................................................42
Figure 38: UASB + Land disposal – typical configuration ........................................................44
Figure 39: Typical Design Layout for UASB+ Land disposal ...................................................44
Figure 40: UASB + Trickling Filter – typical configuration ......................................................45
Figure 41: Typical Design Layout for UASB+TF ......................................................................46
Figure 42: UASB + Activated sludge - typical configuration ....................................................47
Figure 43: Typical Design Layout for UASB+ASP ...................................................................48
Figure 44: Flowchart of DTS ......................................................................................................51
Figure 45 Construction of DTS...................................................................................................51
Figure 46 DEWATS of 307 KLD, Pondicherry .........................................................................52
Figure 47 Landscaping above DTS.............................................................................................52
Figure 48 Typical Layout for the DTS .......................................................................................53
Figure 49: Photograph of Modular DTS being installed in Discovery village Banglore ..........54
viii
Figure 50: A Typical site installation picture of Johkasou .........................................................56

Figure 51: Process diagram of Johkasou ....................................................................................56
Figure 52: Photographs of the nature-based treatment 12 MLD at drains in Prayagraj .............58
Figure 53: Type Design Drawing of Community Soak pit .........................................................59
Figure 54: Type Design Drawing of Community Soak pit Horizontal Filter Type ....................59
Figure 55: Type Design Drawing of Community Soak pit Vertical Filter Type ........................60
Figure 56: Photograph of Community Soak pit Horizontal & Vertical Filter Type at Tamil
Nadu ............................................................................................................................................60
Figure 57: Process flow for direct addition of FS in Pumping Station .......................................62
Figure 58: Proc Process flow for direct addition of FS in STP ..................................................62
Figure 59: Process flow for addition of faecal septage with STP sludge (solid stream) ............63
Figure 60: Photographs of the Septage Receiving Station..........................................................65
Figure 61: Septage Receiving Facility ........................................................................................65
Figure 62: Co-treatment of FSS options at Bharwara STP Lucknow(suitable for larger towns
having population more than 1 lakh) ..........................................................................................66
Figure 63: Low cost gravity based FSTP....................................................................................69
Figure 64: Flow Chart of project preparation and implementation ............................................73
Figure 65 Screen with grit collection structure (left) floating wetlands (right) .........................75
Figure 66 Aerial View of DEWATS treatment system ..............................................................76
Figure 67 Aerial view of WSP located in Goniana, Punjab .......................................................77
Figure 68 Side view of constructed wetland treatment system installed in Hyderabad .............79
Figure 69 UASB technology based STP installed in Rajamundry, Andhra Pradesh..................80
Figure 70 Aerial view of Activated Sludge Process based STP in Yelahanka, Bengaluru ........82
Figure 71 Snapshots of treatment plant, Cubbon park, Bengaluru .............................................83
Figure 72 Aerial view of SBR treatment system installed in Jetpur, Gujarat .............................85
Figure 73 Pre-fabricated Johkasou treatment unit installed in New Delhi .................................86
Figure 74 Package sewage treatment plant installed in a residential complex in New Delhi ....88
Figure 75 Units and Process diagram of the treatment facility in drain .....................................90
Figure 76 Treatment units of Tiger Biofilter treatment facility ..................................................93
List of Tables
Table 1:Treatment technologies adopted in Indian cities .............................................................2
Table 2: Treated Usedwater Discharge Standards ........................................................................3
Table 3: Classification of common wastewater treatment processes............................................7
Table 4: Fact Sheet - WSP ..........................................................................................................10
Table 5: Design inputs for 1, 2 and 5 MLD for WSP .................................................................13
Table 6: Fact Sheet-Root zone ....................................................................................................13
Table 7: Design inputs for 1, 2 and 5 MLD of Planted Gravel Filter .........................................16
Table 8: Fact Sheet –Aerated Lagoon .........................................................................................17
Table 9: Design inputs for 1, 2 and 5 MLD Aerated Lagoon .....................................................19
Table 10:Fact Sheet for Activated Sludge Process .....................................................................20
Table 11: Design sizes for different unit for 1, 2 and 5 MLD of ASP........................................22
Table 12: Fact Sheet - Extended Aeration ..................................................................................23
Table 13: Design sizes of different units for 1, 2 and 5 MLD of EAP ......................................26
Table 14: Fact Sheet – SBR ........................................................................................................27
Table 15: Design sizes for SBR ..................................................................................................29
Table 16: Fact Sheet –Trickling Filter ........................................................................................30
Table 17: Design sizes of different units for1, 2 ad 5 MLD for Trickling Filter ........................33
Table 18:Fact Sheet - MBBR......................................................................................................34
Table 19: Typical Design sizes of different units for 1, 2 and 5 MLD MBBR plant .................36
ix
Table 20Fact Sheet - UASB........................................................................................................38

Table 21: Typical Design sizes of different unitsfor 1 2 and 5 MLD UASB .............................40
Table 22: Typical Design sizes of different units for 1 ,2 5 MLD for UASB+ Polishing Pond.43
Table 23: Design inputs for 1, 2 and 5 MLD for UASB + Land disposal ..................................44
Table 24: Typical Design sizes for different units for 1, 2 and 5 MLD for UASB+TF .............46
Table 25: Typical Design sizes of different units for 1, 2 and 5 MLD for UASB+ ASP ...........48
Table 26: Factsheet – DTS .........................................................................................................50
Table 27: Typical Design sizes of different units for 1, 2 and 5 MLD DTS .............................53
Table 28: Design Parameters for Modular DTS .........................................................................55
Table 29: Factsheet for Johkasou System ...................................................................................56
Table 30: Factsheet of Inline drain treatment .............................................................................57
Table 31: Factsheet of Community soakpits ...............................................................................58
Table 32 Sewage treatment process selection considerations.....................................................70
Table 33Performance of various treatment technologies along with various parameters for
selection of suitable technology ..................................................................................................71
Table 34Comparison of key wastewater treatment technologies ...............................................72
Abbreviations
AAOTS Anaerobic-Aerobic On-site Treatment Systems
ABR Anaerobic Baffle Reactor
ASP Activated Sludge Process
AL Aerated Lagoon
AMRUT Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban Transformation
AnPS Anaerobic Packaged Septic Tank
Bcm billion cubic meters
BOD Biological Oxygen Demand
BOT Build Operate and Transfer
COD Chemical Oxygen Demand
CPCB Central Pollution Control Board
CPHEEO Central Public Health and Environmental Engineering Organization
CWC Central Water Commission
DTS Decentralised Treatment System
EC Electro Coagulation
EA Extended Aeration
FAB Fluidized Aerobic Bed Reactor
FMBR Facultative Membrane Bioreactor
GLSS Gas Liquid Sludge Separator
GoI Government of India
HVAC Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning
INR Indian Rupees
O&M Operation and Maintenance
MBBR Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor
MLD Million Litres per Day
MoHUA Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs
MPN Most Probable Number
OP Oxidation Pond
SBM-U 2.0 Swachh Bharat Mission (Urban) 2.0
SBR Sequencing Batch Reactors
SS Suspended Solids
STP Sewage Treatment Plant
TDS Total Dissolved Solids
x
TF Trickling Filter
UASB Up flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket
WSP Waste Stabilization Pond
xi
Executive Summary
Government of India has launched the SBM-U 2.0 with the overall vision of creating “Garbage
Free Cities”. The newly added component “Used Water Management” aims that in the towns
having population less than 1 lakh, as per census 2011, no untreated used water including faecal
sludge is discharged into the water bodies or open environment. However, there exist several
challenges in these towns like lack of financial resources, institutional capacity and technical know-
how to plan, design, construct and operate these treatment facilities.
To overcome the technical challenges, there felt necessity for a Ready Reckoner on different Used
Water Treatment options, that are suiting to smaller towns in Indian climatic conditions. This
Ready Reckoner is prepared considering above said challenges and suggests more affordable
sewage treatment options, that are low in CAPEX & OPEX, easy to implement and simple to
operate & maintain, as compared to the cost intensive conventional treatment technologies being
adopted indiscriminately.
The sewage treatment options suggested in this document are based on the extensive review of
various documents, advisories, discussion with sector experts, studies of existing plants in India
and other countries like Brazil which share similar climatic conditions. The views/ suggestions/
comments received on draft document from states/UTs/cities and from other sector partners
including IITs are also considered and incorporated.
In this document, the sewage treatment technologies are divided into three categories, namely,
nature-based technologies, mechanised technologies and combination of various treatment
processes to get desired treatment standards. Nature-based and combination of various treatment
processes have negligible OPEX and can be operated with even less skilled operators or many
times with available personnel of ULBs. Apart from these Used Water treatment technologies,
different technologies to treat diluted sewage/ grey water, in-situ treatment in drain (nallah) and
community level treatment options etc. are also covered in the Reckoner. Guidance on options of
Co-treatment of Septage at STPs is also provided. Some of these technologies provides good
aesthetics and option for treating used water in decentralised manner depending on any piece of
land easily available.
This Ready Reckoner contains Factsheets for each technology option depicting details like
requirements of land, energy, capital cost, O&M cost, treatment efficiency, advantages and
disadvantages etc. It also presents the flow charts, design components, typical design layouts, unit
sizes and list of equipment etc. for modular 1, 2 and 5 MLD plants. These details will be helpful
not only to practicing Engineers but also decision makers in understanding and opting right
technology suiting to the needs of town. These details would be very helpful in quickly preparing
xii
DPRs under Mission. Contents of Ready Reckoner are kept very objective, as great details about
these technologies, are available in Manual on Sewerage and Sewage Treatment 2013.
Some of these technologies may require more land area as compared to energy intensive
mechanised plant, but it would be recommended to acquire/purchase required piece of land in these
smaller towns, which would help to treat more flows when town grows in future with upgradation
of technologies. Moreover, investment in acquiring more land, at this stage, is an ever growing
asset and can be monetised on need. Many states are financially supporting ULBs to acquire land to
set up less suitable/mechanised treatment plants.
In the end, Ready Reckoner contains information on some operational plants to sensitise
engineers and decision makers alike. While selecting a technology for treatment, a consideration to
be made whether to go with simple and tested technologies, with due discipline in O&M in these
smaller towns, or adopt high end technology without having commensurate end use of treated
effluent, and allow ULBs to drain out its resources in O&M or sometime in such cases, bypass the
treatment on defaulting payment of O&M/energy charges.
xiii
1 Introduction
1.1 Context
The Government of India (GoI) has recently launched Swachh Bharat Mission-Urban –
2.0, the second phase of SBM-U, on 1st October 2021 with the overall vision of creating
“Garbage Free Cities”. To achieve the vision, the prime objectives.“i.e. Sustainable Sanitation
and treatment of used water” and “Sustainable Solid Waste Management” are targeted to be
achieved. The newly added component of “Used Water Management” aims that no untreated
used water including faecal sludge is discharged into the open environment or water bodies,
especially in the towns having population of less than 1 lakh.
The estimated sewage generation from urban centres in country is 72,386 MLD as of
2020-21.Againstthis, thereare1631 STPs (including proposed) having 36,668MLD capacity,
however, the actual capacity utilization is 20,235 MLD i.e., just 27.9%. This clearly indicates
that the existing approach to setup mechanised/highly skilled STPs often face operational
problems on commissioning at ULB level, leading to discharge of untreated usedwater,
thereby, polluting rivers, lakes, and water bodies. Further, due to lack of collection &
conveyance network of sewage, and low number of house connections, the problem is further
compounded, as only part of sewage generated from the households lead to STPs. At present,
out of about 4,800 ULBs, only around 700 ULBs have partial or full sewer network.
To improve the water quality of rivers and lakes, there is an urgent need (i) to increase
sewage treatment capacity including its optimum utilization and (ii) strengthening of sewage
collection network with emphasis on house service connections.
1.2 Need for Ready Reckoner

Majority of the small and medium towns have no sewerage system. To improve
sanitation in these towns, a customised approach will go a long way, which accounts for
constraints of smaller ULBs like lack of financial resources, institutional capacity and technical
know-how to construct and operate STPs. Keeping above in view, this Ready Reckoner is
developed to provide guidance on STPs especially suiting to smaller ULB’s, in warm climate
of India. This will also be helpful in selection of suitable technology(ies) while preparing DPRs
by State/UTs/ULBs.
1.3 Trends of adoption of Used Water Treatment technologies in India
As per CPCB Report 2021, various technologies are employed for treatment of domestic
wastewater. It is observed that Sequential Batch Reactor (SBR) and Activated Sludge Process
(ASP) are the most prevailing technology adopted by ULBs, especially in larger ones.
Treatment technologies adopted in Indian cities in terms of treatment capacity is given at
Figure 1. Type of treatment technologies adopted in Indian cities is categorized under Nature-
Based/ Mechanized/ Combinations of more than one technologies are listed in Table 1.
1
Awareness about nature based STPs like anaerobic and aerobic systems has been increasing of
late and hundreds of such nature based STPs are installed and successfully operating in various
countries.
Figure 1: Treatment technologies adopted in India as per treatment capacity in MLD
Table 1:Treatment technologies adopted in Indian cities

Nature based Treatment technologies
1 Waste Stabilization Pond (WSP) 2 Root Zone/Constructed Wet Land
Conventional/MechanizedTechnology
1 Aerated Lagoon 5 Trickling Filter
2 Activated Sludge Process (ASP) 6 Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR)
3 Extended Aeration (EA) 7 Up-flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket
(UASB)
4 Sequencing Batch Reactor (SBR)
Combination of UASB/ABR technologies for higher rate of removal

1 UASB/ABR + Polishing Pond 4 UASB/ABR + Activated Sludge Process
2 UASB/ABR + Land disposal 5 Decentralised Treatment System (DTS)
3 UASB/ABR + Trickling Filter
1.4 Discharge standards for treated usedwater

Level of treatment, and therefore the adoption of treatment technology, should be
governed by factors like receiving environment, available dilution level and end use of treated
effluent. The lack of clarity on treated effluent standards in various ULBs and their perception
on adopting of stringent treatment standards is probable the reason for going for more
mechanized STPs having high CAPEX, OPEX and skilled maintenance. This approach of
selection of treatment technology is often unsustainable given the weak financial base of
ULBs, especially smaller ones.
2
Here, it is important to clarify that the ‘general discharge standards 1986’, were revised
vide MoEF&CC notification dated 13th Oct 2017 in respect of few important parameters.
Subsequently, Hon’ble NGT stayed the notification and directed MoEF&CC vide OA
no.1069/2018 dated 30thApril 2019, to issue an appropriate Notification in the matter. But since
the matter is subjudice and revised standards yet not notified by MoEF&CC, therefore, the
‘general discharge standards 1986’ still prevails except in those cases where CPCB/ SPCB
enforced a more stringent set of standards. Some selected parameters of general discharge
standards of 1986 ,those notified in Oct 2017 and the one directed by NGT in 2019, to
incorporate in notification, are given in Table 2 below.
Table 2: Treated Usedwater Discharge Standards
Source: NGT 2019, MoEF&CC 1986, 2015 and 2019
1.5 International Experience- approach for Used Water treatment in

Brazil and Germany
Two international experiences from Brazil and Germany are presented below intending
to infuse confidence in ULBs on two aspects i.e. (i) for smaller towns having population less
than 1 lakh, with similar warm climatic condition as of India, Brazil has adopted predominantly
nature-based/ less mechanized used water treatment technologies to address the pollution
problem and (ii) approach of Germany that shows to keep environment very clean, over a
period of time, all usedwater has to be safely collected through sewer network and to be
treated to tertiary treatment level.
Whereas Brazil case is useful in guiding our ULBs of < 1 lakh population on affordable and
sustainable Used water technology adoption, to begin with, even in smaller towns, the feat that
Germany has achieved, in last 40-50 years, with concerted efforts to address used water related
pollution, would guide that how our ULBs should start planning and implementing for Used
water management for India@100. Now most of the municipalities in Germany are responsible
3
for creation and management of wastewater treatment facilities.Although, Indian towns will
aspire to reach to this level in coming 20-30 years or so, but, given the present financial and
skill base with ULBs, it is important to learn from Brazilian experience and incrementally,
based on end use, used water can be treated up to tertiary level as Germany has done.
Predominance of nature based STPs in Brazil

Brazil is in many ways comparable to India in terms of economy, demographics, and
warm climatic conditions. There are a total of 5,570 towns in Brazil, and out of these around
95% towns have population less than one lakh. Therefore, the vast majority of ULBs in Brazil
are small to medium-sized. Around 1,900 (34%) ULBs have STPs. The total number of STPs
in Brazil is estimated to be around 2,800 plants. A survey conducted in 2015 by National Water
Agency of Brazil on 2,187 STPs highlighted the following:
i. The treatment configurations most widely adopted in terms of number of treatment plants
are, in this order: Anaerobic Pond followed by Facultative Pond, UASB, ASP, Ponds
followed by Maturation Ponds, Septic Tanks followed by Anaerobic Filter.
ii. In terms of groupings of treatment systems, it is observed that:
a. Ponds and UASB reactors alone/or followed by any form of post-treatment,
dominate in terms of number of treatments plants representing almost 80% of 2,187
STPs.
b. UASB reactors alone/or followed by any form of post-treatment, ASP and different
combinations of ponds, treat the largest number of inhabitants representing 95% of
the total population equivalent surveyed.
iii. Different sewage treatment configurations are being used in Brazil. The most traditional
system involves stabilization ponds, which are present in large numbers of populations
up to around 20,000 inhabitants. Variants of the ASP have been used for many
population ranges, covering small, medium, and large cities.
iv. UASB reactors represent the main trend for all population ranges, especially when they
are followed by a post-treatment stage. Several post-treatment options for UASB effluent
are available, with a special mention to trickling filters, which are being implemented in
many locations, especially when land availability is not large.
Different sewage treatment technologies adopted in Brazil is given in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Technology wise distribution of number of STPs in Brazil (n=2,187)

4
Further, the distribution of number of Wastewater Treatment plant (WWTP) range, are
given in the figure 3 below, which shows that the nature based system can be provided in the
towns having population as low as 5000.
Figure 3: Percentage of WWTPs (2800 Nos.) per population range in Brazil
This approach enlightens that opportunity available under SBM-U 2.0 for treatment of
Used Water need to be availed now even by smaller towns and let’s not leave planning and
implementation of UWM in these towns till they become Class I or Million Plus. This is
important for cost effective and ease of implementation of such systems on one hand and for
behaviour change towards it from very beginning on other hand.
However, in large 10% towns (class I and above) accounting for 75% of urban
population, considering factors like land cost, financial health of ULB, end use of treated Used
water etc. mechanised STPs may be preferred on lines guided in CPHEEO manual of 2013 in
detail.
Status of Treatment Infrastructure in Germany1
More than 95 percent of the German population (8 Crore inhabitants) are linked to the
public sewage system (2004). Wastewater is treated in more than 10,000 sewage treatment
plants. In general, municipalities are responsible for wastewater treatment facilities. There are,
however, also privately owned sewage treatment plants in industry. Around 94 lakh ML of
wastewater are treated annually in public wastewater treatment facilities. During 1990 to 2017,
Germany has moved from 72% of tertiary treatment systems to 94% of the tertiary treatment
systems as shown in Figure 4.
1
Source: https://www.bmu.de/en/topics/water-resources-waste/water-management/wastewater/sewage-treatment-plant
5
Source: https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/indicators/urban-waste-water-treatment/urban-waste-water-treatment-
assessment-5
Figure 4: Change in urban wastewater treatment in Germany from 1990 to 2017
Almost 100 percent of the wastewater is treated in sewage works with three purification
stages2.
1. Primary stage: Mechanical processes (adsorption, filtration, stripping) with grill, sand
filtration, primary sedimentation tank
2. Secondary treatment stage: Microbiological processes, decomposition of organic
components (aerobic & anaerobic), elimination of organic Nitrogen & Phosphorus
3. Tertiary treatment stage: Abiotic-chemical processes (oxidation, precipitation) to
further eliminate Phosphorus and nitrogen.
Once smaller ULBs are provided with Used Water treatment facilities, depending on
need and end use up-gradation of treatment technology can be taken up with closed sewer
networks to achieve high level of hygiene and improved public health.
1.6 A brief about Sewage Treatment Processes
The objective of wastewater treatment is to separate various pollutants from water. There
are a large variety of treatment techniques designed to remove pollutants from wastewater. The
CPHEEO Manual on Sewerage and Sewage Treatment Systems (2013) discusses in detail the
different types of treatment technologies including decentralized wastewater treatment
technologies along with their design considerations and operating requirements. A significant
classification categorising the type of treatment is as below.
2
Source:
https://www.ecologic.eu/sites/default/files/event/2017/prasentation_evenlyn_water_management_in_germany_and_waste_water_treatment.pdf
6
i. Primary treatment: the purpose of primary treatment is to settle materials by

gravity, removing floating objects and reduce the pollution to ease secondary
treatment. Primary treatment aims to reduce the Biochemical Oxygen Demand
(BOD) and Total Suspended Solids (TSS) in the wastewater. It essentially consists
of removing the suspended solids present in the wastewater through physical
sedimentation or coarse screening methods. Primary treatment system consists of
bar screen, grit chamber and primary settling tank has been suggested for all
technologies except for Extended aeration where Primary Settling Tank (PST) is
absent.
ii. Secondary treatment: Secondary process is stage where major biological reaction
occurs. The microbes present in the activated sludge degrade the organic pollutants
that exerts the biochemical oxygen demand resulting in the treatment of wastewater.
The various technologies are described in the later sections 2.2
iii. Disinfection: The last stage in the wastewater treatment process is disinfection. The
process ensures the elimination of E-Coli and other microbes to permissible level.
Disinfection using chlorine is a common practice. It shall be provided for all the
technologies mentioned in the Ready Reckoner document. Ozone and Ultra Violet
(UV) radiation can also be used for disinfection but these methods of disinfection
are not in common use
iv. Depending on need, Tertiary treatment process after Secondary process can be used
to remove Phosphorous and Nitrogen etc. It can be further treated using
Ultrafiltration and Reverse Osmosis techniques to meet industry process
requirements.
The classification of common wastewater treatment process according to their level of

advancement is summarized in the Table 2 below.
Table 3: Classification of common wastewater treatment processes

Primary Secondary Disinfection
Bar or bow screen Waste Stabilization Ponds Chlorine disinfection
Grit removal Aerated Lagoon (AL) Ozone
Parshall Flume Root Zone Technology (RZT) Ultra Violet (UV)
radiation
Primary Settling Tank Activated Sludge Process (ASP)
Extended Aeration (EA)
Sequential Batch Reactor (SBR)
Trickling Filter (TF)
Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor
(MBBR)
Up-flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket
Reactor (UASB)
Source: Adapted from Water Pollution Control - A Guide to the Use of Water Quality Management Principles, WHO/UNEP
The sizing of primary treatment and disinfection units described in the Ready Reckoner
will be common for all the treatment options described in section 2.2
7
Further, the treatment processes can be classified as mechanised & non-mechanised.

Mechanised system involves pumps, blowers, skilled resource, and electric motors. The non-
mechanised wastewater treatment are nature-based systems involving primary, secondary, and
tertiary treatments require almost negligible energy, chemical and low skilled resource.
However, depending on technology opted, since the biological processes are not intensified by
mechanical equipment, in some cases relatively large land areas are required to provide
sufficient retention time to allow for a high degree of contaminant removal. This makes it
suitable for relatively smaller towns. Further, the land acquired at this stage for sewage
treatment can accommodate larger volume of sewage for treatment at later stage, when the
town grows.
The mechanised and nature based secondary technologies broadly work on aerobic
(ASP) & anaerobic (UASB, Anaerobic filter etc.) degradation principles. The choice between
aerobic and anaerobic technologies must be considered mainly with the fact that added
complexity of the oxygen supply that is in need for aerobic technologies and its higher O&M
cost.
Unit processes in aerobic and anaerobic treatment processes are shown in Figure 5& Figure 6
below.
Primary treatment
Secondary treatment
PST: Primary settling tank, SST: Secondary settling tank
Figure 5: Unit operations in aerobic mechanized biochemical sewage treatment process
ANAEROBIC REDUCTION
SCREENING GRIT REMOVAL SETTLING & SYNTHESIS
Grit 1.Anerobic Filter

Screen Settling 2. Anaerobic RBC
Chamber 3. UASB
RAW WASTE WATER

TREATED WATER
Figure 6: Process flow of conventional anaerobic sewage treatment
8
2 Sewage Treatment Technologies

Sewage Treatment Technologies, suitable for small and medium towns, can be broadly
classified into three categories, namely, nature-based treatment technologies, conventional or
mechanised treatment technologies and combination of the two. The factsheet, photograph,
typical layout, process diagram and design sizes for various components for modular 1, 2 & 5
MLD STPs are given in subsequent paragraphs. The representative influent quality parameters
in respect of BOD, COD and TSS are considered250 mg/l,425mg/l and 375 mg/l respectively
as per CPHEEO Manual. The Ready Reckoner considers the technologies meant to comply
with treated effluent standards notified by MoEF&CC.
2.1 Nature Based Technologies

Nature Based Systems are biological treatment systems that require no or very low electrical
energy instead they rely on entirely natural factors such as sunlight, temperature, filtration,
adsorption, biodegradation, sedimentation etc, to treat wastewater3. NBS include waste
stabilisation pond, Root zone technologies etc. These are characterised by low dependence on
fossil energy, mechanical equipment’s and chemicals. Two technologies are described under
section below.
2.1.1 Waste Stabilization Pond
Waste stabilization ponds are open, flow-through earthen basins specifically designed and
constructed to treat sewage. They provide comparatively long detention periods extending from
7-10 days4 depending on the type of pond. The soluble and fine particulate BOD is aerobically
stabilized by bacteria that grow dispersed in the liquid medium, while the BOD in suspension
tends to settle, being converted anaerobically by bacteria at the bottom of the pond. The ponds
can be used individually or linked in a series for improved treatment.
3
Source: IWA Online-Nature based solutions for wastewater treatment
4
https://sswm.info/factsheet/waste-stabilisation-ponds
9
I. The Factsheet of Waste Stabilization Pond is given below.
Table 4: Fact Sheet - WSP

Waste Stabilization Pond (WSP)
1. Process and units • There are two basic types of waste stabilization ponds, and these are normally connected
in series to provide a two- or three-stage treatment process as mentioned below:
• Anaerobic ponds: Comparatively small and deep (3–4 m) as there is no need for
aeration. They receive raw sewage, which is treated by anaerobic bacteria, while sludge
that builds up in the bottom of the pond is digested by anaerobic micro-organisms.
• Facultative ponds: Shallower (1.5–2 m) with a larger surface area than anaerobic
ponds. They consist of an aerobic zone close to the surface and a deeper, anaerobic
zone.
• The treatment units of WSP are shown in the figure 8.
2. Land Requirement 0.5 – 1.0 Ha/ MLD installed capacity [10,000 Sq.m.] [100m x 100m]
3. Energy Negligible
Requirement5
3. Capital Cost INR 30 to 60lakh/MLD (depends on whether earthened or bricklined)
4. O&M Cost INR 0.6 to 2.5 lakh/year/MLD Installed capacity. The cost substantially varies with different
type of WSP i.e., lined, unlined and as per geographical location.
5. Effluent Quality • BOD: 15-50 mg/l
• Suspended solids (SS): 75 to 125 mg/l
• BOD removal efficiency: 80-95%, COD: 85-90%, TSS: 80-95%
6. Advantage • Simple to construct, operate and maintain
• Low O&Mcost
• Extremely robust and can withstand hydraulic and organic shock loads
7. Disadvantage • Large land requirement
• High cost of lining
• Likelihood of odour nuisance and mosquito
8. O&M • Start-up Procedures – Pond systems should preferably be commissioned at the
beginning of the hot season to establish as quickly as possible the necessary microbial
populations to effect waste stabilization.
• Routine Maintenance –Desludging once in two years orwhen it is accumulated to the
desired height.
Weeds and floating materials should be removed
• Process Control – Ensure the sludge accumulation does not exceed 30% of the total
liquid depth or the design depth of sludge.
• Records – Daily tests of Flow, SS, and monthly tests of DO.
9. Plant examples • Fatehgarh: 2.7 MLD (1993)
• Punjab: Bhucho: 3 MLD (2012) and Goniana: 3 MLD (2012)
• Mandapal, Talcher: 2 MLD (2018)
10. Sludge generated6 • 32 T /year for 1MLD
11. Suitability • Suitable for all location and weather condition with temperature above 20°C. If the
required temperature is low appropriate change can be made in the design of the
treatment system.
• WSP is very much suitable for smaller towns having population less than 20,000 due to
its robustness and less O&M cost and low skill maintenance. Land acquired at this stage
would be capable to manage increased sewage flow through upgradation of technology
when town grows in coming decades.
5
On-site and Off-site Sewage management practices,2020
6
Source: Wastewater Treatment: Concepts and Design Approach by GL Karia, RA Christian
10
II. The photographs of Waste Stabilisation Pond are given below
Figure 7: Photographs of 3.0 MLD WSP technology based STP at Goniana, Punjab
III. The process diagram of WSP is given below.
The below image Figure 8 shows the schematic diagram of a waste stabilization pond with
Anaerobic and Facultative Pond
Note: Maturation pond can be replaced by disinfection unit to save land, after suitable modification in facultative
pond.
Figure 8: WSP – Process

Source: https://xtremeindia.com/services/stp/
11
Figure 9: Schematic Diagram of the Cross-Section on of a Waste Stabilization on Pond

Source: SSWM, Waste Stabilisation Pond-Factsheet7
IV. The typical layout of WSP is given below
Figure 10: Typical Layout for WSP plant
V. The unit sizes for different capacities for WSP may vary based as indicated below:
7
https://sswm.info/factsheet/waste-stabilisation-ponds
12
Table 5: Design inputs for 1, 2 and 5 MLD for WSP

1 MLD 2 MLD 5 MLD
LIST OF (L X B X D) (L X B X D) (L X B X D)
STRUCTURES*
Primary Treatment
Screen (m) 1.75 x 0.35 x 0.30 2.25 x 0.45 x 0.40 2.75x 0.55x 0.50
Grit chamber 3.0 x 0.50x (0.4 + 5.0 x 0.60 x (0.50 + 7.0 x 0.8 x (0.7
(m)with 0.3 FB) 0.30 FB) +0.30 FB)
Proportional flow
Parshall Flume (m) 3.80 x 0.15 x 3.80x 0.15 x (0.35 + 3.80 x 0.15(throat) x
(0.22 + 0.30 FB) 0.30 FB) (0.54 +0.30 FB)
Secondary Treatment
Facultative pond 62.00 x 124.00 x 87.00x174.00x2.20 140.00 x
(m) 2.20 280.00x2.20
Anaerobic Pond 13.50 x 27.00 x 19.00 x 38.00 x 30 x 60 x
(m) (3.50+0.50 FB) (3.50 +0.50 FB) (3.5+0.5FB)
(BOD removal = 2XT-20)L = Length, B = Breadth, D = Depth, FB =Free Board
* The dimension can be re-oriented according to the available space
List of Equipment
Bar screen 10 x 10 mm bar, 10 x 10 mm bar, 10 x 10 mm bar,
25mm spacing 25mm spacing 25mm spacing
STP is designed for a minimum average temperature of 15°C
2.1.2 Root Zone or Constructed Wetland
They are also known as constructed wetlands or Planted gravel filter or Horizontal Gravel
Filter, based on the flow pattern of wastewater. The Root zone process functions according to
the laws of Nature. To effectively purify domestic wastewater, Root Zone encompasses the life
interactions of various species of bacteria, the roots of the reed plants, soil, air, sun and water.
Constructed wetlands represent an alternative treatment system to conventional treatment
systems such as activated sludge process.
I. The factsheet for Root Zone based STP is given below.
Table 6: Fact Sheet-Root zone

Root Zone
1. Process and units • Constructed filtration systems planted with wetland vegetation like cattails (Typha
species), reeds (Phragmites species), bulrushes (Scirpus species), sedges (Carex
species), Canna indica etc. with defined filter material and direction of wastewater flow
• It is based on slow filtration of pre-treated wastewater
• The filter environment must fulfil the pre-defined requirements in terms of hydraulic
conductivity and load of wastewater by pollution, flow rate, frost penetration, or the
possibility to bind phosphorus and heavy metals
• The treatment units of Root Zone process are shown in the figure 11.
2. Land Requirement 0.6 – 1.5 Ha/ML
3. Capital Cost Rs 30-150Lakh per MLD8
The per MLD cost varies depending on capacity and geographical location.
4. O&M Cost Rs 1.2 - 3 Lakh per MLD per Annum
5. Advantage • Construction does not need expensive materials
8
Based on the cost of STPs implemented in Himachal Pradesh
13
• Operation and maintenance of the system is easy

• Process does not require fossil fuels and chemicals for treatment.
• Besides purification, facility can be used for fish cultivation, production of biomass,
agriculture, recreation, flora and fauna conservation and water supply for different
purposes
6. Disadvantage • Land availability is a constraint.
• Optimizations of parameters become difficult when different wastewater get mixed
together
• Regular harvesting of the biomass and removal of dead plant material is essential to
maintain consistent performance
7. O&M • Substrate - Clean the substrate and replace if necessary for proper functioning of
system. Check clogging of the substrate.
• Inlet - Remove end caps from inlet pipe and distribution network and flush out and
clean thoroughly to remove slimes and blockages
• Outlet - Clean and remove plants around outlet pipe to provide access and guard against
blockages.
• Vegetation - Harvest vegetation and replant if necessary
• Primary treatment - Check sludge levels in primary treatment and de-sludge as
necessary to maintain treatment performance and avoid sludge drift into wetland.
8. City/plant examples Kalyan Dombivali Municipal Corporation(Manda Titwala) – 2 MLD
Hyderabad- Kanhasanthivanam-1.2 MLD
Dharmshala, H.P.- 180 KLD
9. Sludge generated Minimal to be cleaned filter once in 10 year or when clogged
10. Suitability Suitable for all location and weather condition with a moderate to high temperature . If the
available temperature is low appropriate change can be made in the design of the treatment
system required.
II. The process flow diagram for Rootzone based STP is given below.
Figure 11: Root zone– Process
14
Figure 12 : Root zone–schematic cross section
III. The photograph of Root Zone based STP is given below
Figure 13: Photo of Root Zone technology based STP (180 KLD STP at Dharamshala, H.P.)
15
IV. Typical Layout of Root Zone based STP is given below.
Figure 14 Typical layout for Root Zone System
V. The Unit sizes of different capacities of Planted Gravel Filter are in Table 7.
Table 7: Design inputs for 1, 2 and 5 MLD of Planted Gravel Filter

1 MLD 2 MLD 5 MLD
STRUCTURES
Primary Treatment
Screen (m) 1.75 x 0.35 x 0.30 2.25 x 0.45 x 0.40 2.75x 0.55x 0.50
Grit chamber 3.0 x 0.50x (0.4 + 5.0 x 0.60 x (0.50 + 7.0 x 0.8 x (0.7 +0.30
(m)with 0.3 FB) 0.30 FB) FB)
Proportional
flow
Parshall 3.80 x 0.15 x (0.22 3.80x 0.15 x (0.35 + 3.80 x 0.15(throat) x
Flume (m) + 0.30 FB) 0.30 FB) (0.54 +0.30 FB)
Secondary Treatment
Planted 30.00 x 40.00 x 30.00 x 75.00 x (0.80 30.00 x 95.00 x (0.80 +
Gravel Filter (0.80 + 0.30 FB) 4 + 0.30 FB) 8 Nos 0.30 FB) 16 Nos
Nos
Tertiary Treatment
Disinfection 5.60 x 5.60 x (1.50 8.90 x 7.00 x (1.50 + 10.90 x 8.70 x(1.50
tank (m) + 0.5 FB) 0.50 FB) +0.50 FB)
Sludge Treatment
16
L = Length, B = Breadth, D = Depth FB = Free Board

* The dimension can be re-oriented according to the available space.
List of Equipment
Bar screen 10 x 10 mm bar, 10x10mm bar, 10x10mm bar, 25mm
25mm spacing 25mm spacing spacing
Flow 1(W) 1(W) 1(W)
measurement
devices
W = Working, S = Standby
2.2 Mechanised Treatment Technologies
Mechanised treatment technologies, such as ASP, Extended aeration, MBBR etc., achieve
treatment by creating an artificial environment using chemicals, tanks, pumps and other
components to eliminate the contaminants. These systems require less land but are more
expensive as they are energy-intensive and require external reagents. Such systems are
described in this Reckoner as below.
2.2.1 Aerated Lagoon

Aerated lagoons are of two principal types depending on how the microbial mass of solids in
the system is handled. Facultative Aerated Lagoons are those in which some solids may leave
with the effluent stream, and some settle down in the lagoon since aeration power input is just
enough for oxygenation and not for keeping all solids in suspension. As the lower part of such
lagoons may be anoxic or anaerobic while the upper layers are aerobic, the term facultative is
used.
While, Aerobic Lagoons, on the other hand, are fully aerobic from top to bottom as the aeration
power input is sufficiently high to keep all the solids in suspension besides meeting the
oxygenation needs of the system.
I. Factsheet for Aerated lagoon is given below.

Table 8: Fact Sheet –Aerated Lagoon
Aerated Lagoon
Technology Options- Wastewater Treatment [Grey + Black Water; Septic Tank Effluent], Secondary Treatment
1. Process and units • Lagoons are generally rectangular, though it is not particularly essential.
Natural land contours may be followed to the extent possible to save on
earthwork.
• Lagoon units may be built with different length-width ratios and arrangement
of internal baffles to promote desired mixing conditions.
• Lagoons may also be provided as two or three stage systems with the
subsequent units placed at a lower level than the first if desired.
• The treatment units of Aerated Lagoon are shown in the figure 15.
2. Land Requirement • 0.27- 0.4 Ha/ MLD installed capacity [4000 Sq.m.] [80mx50m]
3. Energy Requirement • 15-20 kWh/ML treated
17
3. Capital Cost • INR 40 to 60lakh/MLD capacity9
4. O&M Cost • INR 1.5to 3.0 lakh/year/MLD Installed capacity

5. Effluent Quality • BOD: 25-30mg/l; COD: 40-65mg/l
• SS: 40-150 mg/l
• BOD removal efficiency: 80-90%; COD: 85-90%, TSS: 95%
6. Advantage of FAL10 • Relatively simple construction, O&M
• Lower land requirements than the facultative and anaerobic-facultative pond systems
• Satisfactory resistance to load variations
7. Disadvantage of FAL11 • Land requirements still high
• Relatively high energy requirements
• Need for periodic (some years interval) removal of sludge from aerated pond
8. City/ plant examples12 • Sadalaga, Chikkodi (Karnataka): AL 3.72 MLD (2018) and 15 MLD (2004)
• Ramanagara, Karnataka City Municipal Council (CMC) (2014) – 7.5 MLD
• Puri (Odisha): AL 15 MLD (2014)
10. Suitability • Suitable for all location and weather condition with a moderate to high temperature .
If the available temperature is low appropriate change can be made in the design of
the treatment system required.
II. Process flow diagram for Aerated lagoon is given below.
Figure 15: Flowsheet of Facultative Aerated Lagoon
9
Compendium of sewage treatment technologies, 2006 (Considering current increment by 10% 27.5lakh/MLD)
10
Source: Biological Wastewater Treatment in Warm Climate Regions, Volume – I, IWA (2006)
11
12
Source: CPCB Inventory (2021)
13
18
III. Typical Layout for Aerated lagoon is given below.
Figure 16: Typical Layout for Aerated Lagoon
IV. The unit sizes for different capacities of Aerated Lagoon based STP may vary based as
indicated below Table 9:
Table 9: Design inputs for 1, 2 and 5 MLD Aerated Lagoon

1 MLD 2 MLD 3 MLD
STRUCTURES*
Primary Treatment
Screen (m) 1.75 x 0.35 x 0.30 2.25 x 0.45 x 2.75x 0.55x 0.50
0.40
Grit chamber (m) 3.0 x 0.50x (0.4 + 5.0 x 0.60 x 7.0 x 0.8 x (0.7 +0.30 FB)
with Proportional 0.3 FB) (0.50 + 0.30 FB)
flow
Parshall Flume 3.80 x 0.15 x (0.223.80x 0.15 x 3.80 x 0.15(throat) x (0.54 +0.30 FB)
(m) + 0.30 FB) (0.35 + 0.30 FB)
Secondary Treatment
Facultative 100.00 x 12.50 x (136 × 34 (212 × 53 × 3.50+0.50 FB)- 2 no's
aerated pond (m) (4.00 +0.5 FB) ×3.5+0.5 FB)-
2 no's
L = Length, B = Breadth, D = Depth, FB = Free Board
List of Equipment
Bar screen 10 x 10 mm bar, 10 x 10 mm bar, 10 x 10 mm bar, 25mm spacing
25mm spacing 25mm spacing
19
Sludge pump 0.75kW,2900rpm 0.75kW,2900rpm 0.75kW,2900rpm (For desludging)- 2

(For desludging)- 2 (For desludging)- no
no 2 no
Aerators 10HP 7.5 HP (4 no) 7.5 HP (4 no)
2.2.2 Activated Sludge Process
In principle all ASPs consist of three main components: an aeration tank, which serves
as bio reactor; a settling tank (“final clarifier”) for separation of activated sludge solids and
treated wastewater; a return activated sludge (RAS) equipment to transfer settled activated
sludge from the clarifier to the influent of the aeration tank. The oxygen supply is done by
mechanical aerators or by diffused air. The solids are smashed during this process. The sewage
is bubbled, and the sewage liquor is discharged into a chamber with activated sludge. The live
bacteria will sink to the bottom of the tank, while dead bacteria float to the surface
I. The Factsheet of ASP based STP is in Table 10.
Table 10:Fact Sheet for Activated Sludge Process
Activated Sludge Process (ASP)
1. Process and units • Sewage and return activated sludge (RAS) enter together or separately into the
reactor and leave as mixed liquor. à This mixed liquor flows into the clarifier
where it can settle and the treated effluent separates from the activated sludge.
• The settled activated sludge is recycled to the aeration tank and a portion wasted
out of the system as waste activated sludge (WAS).
• The treatment units of ASP are shown in the figure 18.
2. Land Requirement 0.15 - 0.25 Ha/ MLD installed capacity [2500sqm/MLD] [50*50]
3. Energy Requirement 180 to 225 kWh/ML treated [225 units/ML]
3. Capital Cost INR 80- 170 lakh/MLD
(55 % as civil cost & remaining 45% as electrical & mechanical cost)
4. O&M Cost** INR 6to 10lakh/year/MLD Installed capacity
(INR 12.5 lakh/ MLD as per SBM Advisory CPHEEO (2020))
• Suspended solids (SS): 20-5’0 mg/l; BOD removal efficiency: 75 -90%; TSS:
95%
6. Advantages • Less land requirement and Low installation cost in comparison to mechanized
treatment systems
7. Disadvantages • Difficulty in sludge removal and disposal.
• High operational costs
8. O&M • Equipment – The whole unit should be thoroughly inspected once a year.
• Abnormal Operation: Activity of the bacteria is varied based on seasonal
temperature variations which requires the operator to gradually adjust aeration
rates, return sludge rates and wasting rates.
• Records – Activated sludge operation should include recording of flow rates of
sewage and return sludge, DO, MLSS, MLVSS, biota, SRT, air, BOD, COD and
nitrates in both influent and effluent.
Refer Part B – Section 4.7.2 of CPHEEO manual 2013 for more details
9. Plant examples14 • Bangalore Urban, Yelahanka: 10 MLD (year 2003)
• Nellore (at Janardhan Reddy Colony): 5 MLD (Year 2019)
• Nashik (at Panchak): 7.5 MLD (Year 2004)
14
15
20
** Higher cost is for treatment plant including sludge treatment like anaerobic digestion or for small capacity plants
without sludge treatment.
II. The Photographs of ASP based STP of a plant is given below
Figure 17: ASP – Photographs
III. The Process diagram of ASP based STP is given below.
Figure 18:Common process in ASP
21
IV. The Typical layout of ASP based STP is given below.
Figure 19: Typical Design Layout for ASP plant
V. The Unit sizes of different capacities of ASP based STP is in Table11.

Table 11: Design sizes for different unit for 1, 2 and 5 MLD of ASP
1 MLD 2 MLD 5 MLD
STRUCTURES
Primary Treatment
Screen (m) 1.75 x 0.35 x 0.30 2.25 x 0.45 x 0.40 2.75x 0.55x 0.50
Grit chamber 3.0 x 0.50x (0.4 + 5.0 x 0.60 x (0.50 + 7.0 x 0.8 x (0.7 +0.30
(m)with 0.3 FB) 0.30 FB) FB)
Proportional
flow
Parshall 3.80 x 0.15 x (0.22 3.80x 0.15 x (0.35 + 3.80 x 0.15(throat) x
Flume (m) + 0.30 FB) 0.30 FB) (0.54 +0.30 FB)
Primary 11.00 x4.00 x 3.00 15.90 x 5.30 x 3.00 25.20 x8.40 x 3.00
settling
tank(m)
Secondary Treatment
Aeration tank 5.00 x10.00x (4.50 6.50x13.00x(5.00 10.00x20.00x(5.00+0.50
+0.5 FB)(No.1) +0.50FB) (No.1) FB) (No.1)
Secondary 8m dia, 2.7m depth 8m dia, 2.7m depth 8m dia, 2.7m depth
settling tank
Tertiary Treatment
22
Disinfection 5.60 x 5.60 x 1.50 8.90 X 7.00 X 1.50 + 10.90 X 8.70 X 1.50
tank (m) + 0.5 FB 0.50 FB +0.50 FB
Sludge Treatment
**Sludge 25 x5 x0.2 m, 18 25 x 5 x 0.2m, 34no's 25 x5 x0.2 m, 81 no’s
drying bed no’s
L = Length, B = Breadth, D = Depth FB = Free Board
**Area required for Sludge drying bed can be drastically reduced by providing
Mechanised sludge dewatering unit
List of Equipment
Bar screen 10 x 10 mm bar, 10x10mm bar, 10x10mm bar, 25mm
Return sludge 1(W) + 1(S) 1(W) + 1(S) 1(W) + 1(S)
pump
Flow 1(W) 1(W) 1(W)
measurement
devices
Sewage 1(W) + 1(S) 1(W) + 1(S) 1(W) + 1(S)
Transfer Pump
Blower 250m3/hr 450m3/hr 1100 m3/hr
Chlorination 1 1 1
Dosing System
Aerator 2 no’s of 20 HP + 1 2 no’s of 20 HP + 1 2 no’s of 20 HP + 1
standby standby standby
2.2.3 Extended Aeration

Process: The extended aeration process is one of the modifications of the ASP. It is complete
mix system and provides biological treatment for the removal of biodegradable organic wastes
under aerobic conditions. Air may be supplied by mechanical or diffused aeration to provide
the oxygen required to sustain the aerobic biological process. Mixing must be provided by
aeration to maintain the microbial organisms in contact with the dissolved organics.
I. The Factsheet of EA based STP is given in Table 12.

Table 12: Fact Sheet - Extended Aeration
Extended Aeration (EA)
1. Process and units • This is a modification of the activated-sludge process using long aeration periods to
promote aerobic digestion of the biological mass by endogenous respiration.
• The treatment units of EA are shown in the figure 22.
2. Land Requirement 0.15 - 0.25 Ha/ MLD installed capacity [25000 sq.m.] [50mx50m]
3. Energy Requirement 180 to 225 kWh/ML treated [225 units/ML]
3. Capital Cost INR 90 to 200 lakh/MLD capacity excluding civil cost
4. O&M Cost INR 7to 12lakh/year/MLD Installed capacity
• Suspended solids (SS): 50-100 mg/l BOD removal efficiency: 75 -90%
COD: 85-90%, TSS: 95%
6. Advantage • Variant with Highest BOD removal efficiency
• Consistent Nitrification
23
7. Disadvantage • Increased energy consumption compared to ASP

• Skilled operators required
• High investment and operational costs
8. O&M • Operation of Aeration Equipment - Aeration equipment should be operated
continuously 24x7, non-stop
• Abnormal Operation - As the temperature changes from season to season, activity
of the organism’s speeds or slows down. This requires the operator to gradually
adjust aeration rates, return sludge rates and wasting rates.
• Maintenance - Items requiring attention include – plant cleanliness, aeration
equipment, air lift pumps, scum skimmer, etc.
Refer Part B, CPHEEO Manual, Chapter 14 – Section 4.7.3 for more details.
9. Plant examples16 • Bangalore Urban, K& C Valley: 30 MLD (2005)
• Pimpri Chinchwad (Chikhaliphase I): 16 MLD (1987)
• Mangalore(panchady) 8.75 MLD (2011)
II. The aerial view of an EA based STP of a typical plant is given below.
Figure 20:Photographs of Extended Aeration based STP
16
17
Source:Wastewater Treatment: Concepts and Design Approach By GL Karia, RA Christian
24
III. The typical layout of EA based STP is given below.

Figure 21: Typical layout of Extended Aeration Process
IV. The process diagram of EA based STP is given below(Refer Figure 22).
Figure 22: EAP Process
25
V. The unit sizes for different capacities of EA based STP is given below Table 13.
Table 13: Design sizes of different units for 1, 2 and 5 MLD of EAP
1 MLD 2 MLD 5 MLD
STRUCTURES*
Primary Treatment
Screen (m) 1.75 x 0.35 x 0.30 2.25 x 0.45 x 0.40 2.75x 0.55x 0.50
Grit chamber 3.0 x 0.50x (0.4 + 0.3 5.0 x 0.60 x (0.50 + 7.0 x 0.8 x (0.7 +0.30
(m)with FB) 0.30 FB) FB)
Proportional flow
Parshall Flume 3.80 x 0.15 x (0.22 + 3.80x 0.15 x (0.35 + 3.80 x 0.15(throat) x
(m) 0.30 FB) 0.30 FB) (0.54 +0.30 FB)
Secondary Treatment
Aeration tank 18.00 x9.00 26.00x13.00x5.00 40.00x20.00x5.00 +
x5.00+0.5 FB +0.50 FB 0.50 FB
Secondary settling 10.50Dia x 14.00 Diax3.20 + 24.00 Diax3.00 +0.50
tank 3.20+0.50FB 0.50FB FB
Tube Settler 3.60 x 3.60x 3.20 + 5.00x5.00x3.20 + 7.50x7.50x3.20 +0.50

0.50 FB 0.50 FB FB
Tertiary Treatment
Disinfection tank 5.60 x 5.60 x 1.50 + 8.90 X 7.00 X 1.50 + 10.90 X 8.70 X 1.50
(m) 0.5 FB 0.50 FB +0.50 FB
Sludge Treatment
**Sludge drying 28.00 x 6.00, 6Nos 38.00 x 6.00, 6 Nos 42.00 x 6.00, 10Nos
bed
L = Length, B = Breadth, D = Depth, FB= Free Board
**Area required for Sludge drying bed can be drastically reduced by providing Mechanised
sludge dewatering unit
List of Equipment
Bar screen 10 x 10mm bar,25 10 x 10mm bar,25 15 x 10mm bar,25 mm
mm spacing mm spacing spacing
Blower with motor 2(w) + 1(s) 2(w) + 1(s) 2(w) + 1(s)
Return pump 1(w) + 1(s) 1(w) + 1(s) 1(w) + 1(s)
Flow meter 3 3 3
Sewage transfer 1(w) + 1(s) 1(w) + 1(s) 1(w) + 1(s)
pump
Aerator 3 no’s of 20 HP + 1 3 no’s of 20 HP + 1 3 no’s of 20 HP + 1
standby standby standby
Chlorine dosing 1 1 1
pump
2.2.4 Sequencing Batch Reactors
The Sequencing Batch Reactor (SBR) is an Activated Sludge Process designed to operate
under non steady state conditions. An SBR operates in a true batch mode with aeration and
sludge settlement both occurring in the same tank. Thewastewater is added to a single “batch”
reactor, treated to remove undesirable components, and then discharged. They suitable for
treatment applications characterized by low or intermittent flow conditions. These systems
have a relatively small footprint, they are useful for areas where the available land is limited.
I. The Factsheet of SBR technology based STP is given in Table 14.
26
Table 14: Fact Sheet – SBR

Sequential Batch Reactors (SBR)
1. Process and units • In SBR operations, the cycle processes Fill-react, React, Settle and Decant are
controlled by time intervals to achieve the objectives of the operation.
• Each process is associated with reactor conditions (turbulent/quiescent,
aerobic/anaerobic) that promote selected changes in the chemical and physical nature of
the sewage.
• These changes lead ultimately to a fully treated effluent.
• The treatment units of SBR are shown in the figure 24.
2. Land Requirement 0.10– 0.15 Ha/ MLD installed capacity [1500 sq.m.] [39mx38m]
3. Energy Requirement 150 to 200 kWh/ML treated [200 unit/ML]
3. Capital Cost INR 150 to 300 lakh/MLD capacity
4. O&M Cost INR 10 to 20 lakh/year/MLD Installed capacity
5. Effluent Quality • BOD< 5 mg/l
• Total Suspended Solids (TSS)< 10 mg/l BOD removal efficiency: 75 -90%; COD: 85-
90%, TSS: 95%
6. Advantage • High BOD removal efficiency
• Low land requirement
• High degree of coliform removal
7. Disadvantage • Moderate/low area required for operation
• Comparatively high energy consumption
• Highly skilled operators needed
8. O&M • The precaution needed is to make sure that power supply is available continuously.
• Process Control – SBR has inbuilt process control. Depending on the BOD load, it
adjusts the DO supply.
• Records – The limited parameters as per the design requirements and the flow rate and
cycle times.
9. Plant examples18 • Bangalore Urban, Halasuru: 2 MLD (year 2018)
• Daman: 4.21 MLD (2018)
• Bhiwani (Chiriya Road Charkhi Dadri Bhiwani): 5 MLD (year 2013)
11. Suitability • Suitable for all location and weather condition with a moderate to high temperature . If
the available temperature is low appropriate change can be made in the design of the
treatment system required.
18
19
27
II. The photograph of SBR technology based STP is given below.
Figure 23: SBR based STP

III. The process diagram of SBR technology based STP is given below.
Figure 24: SBR -Process
28
IV. The typical layout of SBR technology based STP is given below.
Figure 25: SBR – Typical Layout for SBR plant

V. The unit sizes for different capacities of SBR technology based STP is given in
Table 15.
Table 15: Design sizes for SBR
1 MLD 2 MLD 5 MLD
STRUCTURES*
Primary Treatment
Screen (m) 1.75 x 0.35 x 2.25 x 0.45 x 0.40 2.75x 0.55x 0.50
0.30
Grit chamber 3.0 x 0.50x(0.4 + 5.0 x 0.60 x (0.50 + 7.0 x 0.8 x (0.7
(m)with 0.3 FB) 0.30 FB) +0.30 FB)
Proportional flow
Parshall Flume 3.80 x 0.15 x 3.80x 0.15 x (0.35 3.80 x 0.15(throat) x
(m) (0.22 +0.30 FB) + 0.30 FB) (0.54 +0.30 FB)
Secondary Treatment
SBR Tanks (m) 9 x 8.2 x 5 (2nos) 14 x 10.8 x 5 14x 27 x 5 (2nos)
(2nos)
Tertiary Treatment
Disinfection tank 5.60 x 5.60 x 8.90 X 7.00 X (1.50 10.90 X 8.70
(m) (1.50 + 0.5 FB) + 0.50 FB) X(1.50+0.50 FB)
**Sludge Drying 28.00 x 6.00, 6 38.00 x 6.00, 6 Nos 42.00 x 6.00, 10 Nos
Beds Nos
29
Treated water 7.5 x 7.5 x 5 m 7.5 x 7.5 x 5 m 7.5 x 7.5 x 5 m

tank
**Area required for Sludge drying bed can be drastically reduced by providing
Mechanised sludge dewatering unit
List of Equipment
Bar screen 10 x 10 mm bar, 10 x 10 mm bar, 10 x 10 mm bar,
25mm spacing 25mm spacing 25mm spacing
Blower with motor 2(w) + 1(s) 2(w) + 1(s) 2(w) + 1(s)
Sewage transfer 1(w) + 1(s) 1(w) + 1(s) 1(w) + 1(s)
pump
Parshall Flume 1 1 1
Chlorination 1 1 1
dosing system,
Decanters 1 1 1
2.2.5 Trickling Filter

The Trickling Filters can treat domestic blackwater or brown water, greywater, or any other
biodegradable effluent. Trickling filters can be built in almost all environments, but special
adaptations for cold climates are required. Compared to other technologies like waste
stabilization pond, trickling filters are compact, although they are still best suited for peri-urban
or large rural settlements.
I. The Factsheet of Trickling Filter based STP is given in Table 16.
Table 16: Fact Sheet –Trickling Filter
Trickling Filter
1. Process and units • A trickling filter consists of a shallow bed filled with
natural or synthetic media. It is aerobic attached
growth process.
• Wastewater is applied on the surface by means of
rotating arms. Biofilm that develops over the media
removes the organics present in the wastewater.
• A portion of the clarified wastewater is recirculated.
Organic matter is adsorbed on the slime layer, and it is
degraded by the aerobic microorganisms present in the
slime.
• The treatment units of TF are shown in the figure
27.
2. Land Requirement 0.25– 0.50 Ha/ MLD installed capacity [5000 sq. m.]
[72mx70m]]
3. Energy Requirement 150-180kWh/ML treated [180units/ML]
4. O&M Cost INR 2-5 lakh/year/MLD
5. Effluent Quality • BOD 25-30 mg/l
• BOD removal:75-90%; COD: 85-90%, TSS: 95%
6. Advantages • Low energy requirement compared to ASP
• Low land requirement
• Simple mechanical equipment
7. Disadvantage • To improve effluent quality, a settling tank can be
provided,
30
• Sensitivity to low temperatures,

8. City/ plant examples20 • Bangalore Urban V valley, 10 MLD, two stage TF
(2009)
• Nagpur, Sonegaon NIT, 0.3 MLD, Phytorid bed TF
(2019)
10. Suitability • Suitable for all location and weather condition with a
moderate to high temperature . If the available
temperature is low appropriate change can be made in
the design of the treatment system required.
II. The photograph of Trickling Filter based STP is given below(Refer Figure 26).
Figure 26: Trickling filter
III. The process diagram of Trickling Filter based STP is given below.
Figure 27: General layout of a STP with TF
20
21
31
IV. The typical layout of Trickling Filter based STP is given below.
Figure 28: Layout for 1 MLD STP with trickling filter
Figure 29: 10 MLD STP with trickling filter at Kalyani West Bengal
32
V. The unit sizes for different capacities of Trickling Filter based STP is given in
Table 17.
Table 17: Design sizes of different units for1, 2 ad 5 MLD for Trickling Filter
1 MLD 2 MLD 5 MLD
STRUCTURES*
Primary Treatment
Screen (m) 1.75 x 0.35 x 0.30 2.25 x 0.45 x 0.40 2.75x 0.55x 0.50
Grit chamber 3.0 x 0.50x 0.4 + 0.3 5.0 x 0.60 x 0.50 + 7.0 x 0.8 x 0.7 +0.30
(m)with FB 0.30 FB FB
Proportional flow
Parshall Flume 3.80 x 0.15 x 0.22 + 3.80x 0.15 x 0.35 + 3.80 x 0.15(throat) x
(m) 0.30 FB 0.30 FB 0.54 +0.30 FB
Primary settling 11.00 x4.00 x 3.00 15.90 x 5.30 x 3.00 25.20 x8.40 x 3.00
tank(m)
Secondary Treatment
Trickling filter 18.00m Dia x 26.00Dia 40.00Dia x 2.20
2.20+0.50m 2 Nos x2.20+0.50m FB +0.50m FB 2 nos
2 No
Tertiary Treatment
Chlorination tank 6.52 dia, 3 depth 10 dia, 2 depth 14.57 dia, 2 depth
(m)
Sludge Treatment
**Sludge drying 28.00 x 6.00 6 Nos 38.00 x 6.00 6 Nos 42.00 x 6.00 10 Nos
bed
L = Length, B = Breadth, D = Depth
List of Equipment
Bar screen 10 x 10 mm bar, 10 x 10 mm bar, 10 x 10 mm bar, 25mm
Recirculation 1(w) + 1(s) 1(w) + 1(s) 1(w) + 1(s)
pump
Sludge transfer 1(w) + 1(s) 1(w) + 1(s) 1(w) + 1(s)
pump
Air blower 2(w) + 1(s) 2(w) + 1(s) 2(w) + 1(s)
Chlorination 1 1 1
dosing pump
2.2.6 Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor

MBBR is a highly effective biological water treatment process which is based on a
combination of biofilm media and conventional activated sludge processes .Moving Bed
Biofilm reactor (MBBR) processes improve reliability, simplify operation, and require less
space than other traditional wastewater treatment systems like ASP and is tolerant of both load
swings and temporary load deprivation.
33
I. The Factsheet of MBBR based STP is given in Table 18.

Table 18:Fact Sheet - MBBR
MBBR
1. Process and units • It is modern water treatment technology and process
• It’s a combination of activated sludge process (suspended growth) and attached
growth process (media).
• It uses simple floating media, which are carriers for attached growth of biofilms.
Biofilm carrier movement is caused by the agitation of air bubbles.
• This compact treatment system is effective in removal of BOD as well as nitrogen and
phosphorus while facilitating effective solids separation.
• The treatment units of MBBR are shown in the figure 30.
2. Land Requirement 0.04 - 0.05 Ha/ MLD installed capacity i.e. [500 sq.m. for 1 MLD i.e., 25mX20m]
3. Energy Requirement 200 to 250 kWh/ML treated [250 units for 1 ML]
4. O&M Cost INR 8-12 lakh/year/MLD Installed capacity
5. Effluent Quality • BOD< 10 mg/l; COD< 50 mg/l
• TSS < 20 mg/l; BOD removal efficiency: 80-90% COD: 85-90%, TSS: 95%
6. Advantage • Smaller footprint compared to conventional treatment
• Resistant to shock loads
• Work quickly with Low Hydraulic retention time
7. Disadvantage • High operating cost due to large power requirements
• Skilled manpower requirement
• Reduce nutrient removal
8. O&M • Equipment - The electro-mechanical components such as blowers, aerators and
pumps need to be checked on weekly basis.
• The overhauling of the needs to be done on annual basis for detailed check up to avoid
major break down.
• Records - operation should include recording of flow rates of sewage and return
sludge, DO, MLSS, BOD, COD (Chemical Oxygen Demand).
9. City/ plant examples23 • Sonepat: Kharkhoda 4.5 MLD (2013), Gohana 3 MLD (2015)
• Ambala: total 12 STPs with capacity ranging from 0.25 MLD to 6 MLD
11. Suitability • Suitable for all location and weather condition with a moderate to high temperature . If
the available temperature is low appropriate change can be made in the design of the
22
Source: SBM Advisory, CPHEEO (2020)
23
24
Source: Wastewater Treatment: Concepts and Design Approach By GL Karia, RA Christian
34
II. The photograph of MBBR based STP is given below.
Figure 30 MBBR technology based 5 MLD STP at Uttrakhand
III. The Process diagram of MBBR based STP is given below.
Figure 31: MBBR – Process
35
IV. The Typical layout of MBBR based STP is given below
Figure 32: Typical Layout for MBBR Plant
V. The Unit sizes of different capacities of MBBR based STP is Table 19.
Table 19: Typical Design sizes of different units for 1, 2 and 5 MLD MBBR plant
1 MLD 2 MLD 5 MLD
STRUCTURES
Primary Treatment
Screen (m) 1.75 x 0.35 x 2.25 x 0.45 x 0.40 2.75x 0.55x 0.50
0.30
Grit chamber (m)with 3.0 x 0.50x 0.4 + 5.0 x 0.60 x 0.50 + 0.30 7.0 x 0.8 x 0.7 +0.30 FB
Proportional flow 0.3 FB FB
Parshall Flume (m) 3.80 x 0.15 x 3.80x 0.15 x 0.35 + 3.80 x 0.15(throat) x 0.54
0.22 + 0.30 FB 0.30 FB +0.30 FB
Secondary Treatment
Primary Settling 6.50 Diax 3.00 + 9.00 Dia x 3.20 +0.50 FB 14.00 Dia x 3.20 + 0.50 FB
Tank(m) 0.50 FB
MBBR Reactor 1(m) 4.00 x 4.50 x 4.50 X 7.30 x (4.50 4.80 x 11.30x(4.50+0.50
4.50 +0.50 FB +0.50 FB) FB)
2.80 x 9.10 x (4.50 +0.50
36
MBBR Reactor 2(m) 4.00 x4.00 x 4.50 2.50 X 5.80 X (4.50 FB)
+0.50m +0.50 FB)
(HRT-4.5HR)
Secondary Settling Tank 8.00 Dia x (3.00 12.00m Dia x (3.20 18.00 Dia x (3.20m+0.50 FB)
+0.50FB) +0.50m FB)
Or 7.50x7.50x(3.20 +0.50 FB)
3.60 x 3.60x 5.00x5.00x(3.20 + 0.50
Tube settler (3.20 + 0.50 FB) FB)
Sludge Treatment
**Sludge Drying Bed 25 x 5 x 0.16 m, 25 x5 x3 m, 3 no’s 25 x 5 x 3 m, 3 no’s
18Nos
L = Length, B = Breadth, D = Depth,FB= Free Board
List of Equipment
Bar Screen 10 x 10 mm bar, 10 x 10 mm bar, 25 mm 10 x 10 mm bar, 25 mm
25 mm spacing spacing spacing
Blower with Motor Capacity 450 Capacity 900 m3/hr Capacity 2200 m3/hr
Coarse Bubble diffuser m3/hr
1(W) + 1(S)
Media for MBBR Tank 1 Carrier specific Carrier specific surface Carrier specific surface area,
surface area, area, 500m2/m3 500m2/m3
500m2/m3
Media for MBBR Tank 2 Carrier specific Carrier specific surface Carrier specific surface area,
surface area, area, 500m2/m3 500m2/m3
500m2/m3
Chlorination Dosing 1 1 1
pump
Recirculation pump 1 1 1
Dosing Pump 1 1
W = Working , S = Standby
2.2.7 Up flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket
Up flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket also popularly known as UASB is a methane-producing

digester, which is based on an anaerobic process. In UASB reactor, the sewage flows upwards
through a layer of sludge. At the top of the reactor, phase separation between gas-solid-liquid
takes place. Any biomass leaving the reaction zone is directly recirculated from the settling
zone. Appropriate tertiary treatment which mentioned in Table 2 should be given as a polishing
system after the secondary treatment, with approved disinfectant technology in order to make
pathogen free treated water. As mentioned, the UASB is a methane producing digester, which
has a global warming potential 28 times greater than carbon dioxide, it has to be managed
properly. Methane can be trapped and stored which can be used as biofuel or for generating
electricity and simplest and common method is combusted before letting out into the air.
37
I. Factsheet about technology is given in Table 20 below.

Table 20Fact Sheet - UASB
UASB
1. Process and units • Wastewater flows upwards through the blanket and is processed by the anaerobic
microorganisms. The upward flow combined with the settling action of gravity suspends
the blanket with the aid of flocculants. Provision of feed inlet pipe in a UASB reactor such
a way that 1 feed inlet/sqm area of UASB subject to minimum of 1 feed inlet pipe for 2
sqm of floor area of UASB
• The treatment units of UASB are shown in the figure 34.
2. Land Requirement 0.2 - 0.3 Ha/ MLD installed capacity i.e. [3000 Sq.m./MLD] or [60mx50m]
3. Energy Requirement 10 to 15 kWh/ML treated
3. Capital Cost INR 40- 60 lakh/ MLD
4. O&M Cost INR 2.0 - 3.5 lakh/ year/ MLD
5. Effluent Quality • BOD:70-100 mg/l
• TSS: 75-100 mg/l
• BOD removal efficiency: 50 -70%; TSS: 95%, COD: 85-90%
6. Advantages25 • Low land and energy consumption
• Low construction and operational costs
• Production of methane, a highly calorific fuel gas
7. Disadvantages26 • Longer start-up period.
• Post treatment required to achieve surface water discharge quality.
• Efficient working only between the temperature 15° to 35° c
8. City/ plant examples27 • Mirzapur 14 MLD (1994)
• Panipat (Jattal Road): 10 MLD (2000)
• Karoli(Karauli): 5 MLD (2018)
9. Combination of • UASB + Aerated biofilter
Treatment processes • UASB + Overland flow (land disposal)
to achieve surface • UASB + Anaerobic filter
water discharge • UASB + Trickling filter
quality • UASB + Physical-chemical treatment
• UASB + Polishing Pond (facultative or maturation)
• UASB + Activated sludge
11. Suitability Suitable for all location and weather condition with a moderate to high temperature . If the
available temperature is low appropriate change can be made in the design of the treatment
system required.
25
26
27
28
Source : Reference , Sl No: 14
38
II. Photograph of UASB is given below .
Figure 33: Photograph of 14 MLD UASB technology based STP at Mirzapur, Uttar Pradesh
III. The process diagram of UASB is given below.
Figure 34: UASB Process Diagram
39
IV. The typical layout of STP based on UASB treatment technology is given below
Figure 35: Typical Design Layout for UASB
V. The unit sizes for different capacities may vary based as indicated below in Table 21:
Table 21: Typical Design sizes of different unitsfor 1 2 and 5 MLD UASB
LIST OF 1 MLD 2 MLD 5 MLD
STRUCTURES
(L X B X D) L X B X D) L X B X D)
Primary Treatment
Screen (m) 1.75 x 0.35 x 0.30 2.25 x 0.45 x 0.40 2.75x 0.55x 0.50
Grit chamber 3.0 x 0.50x (0.4 + 5.0 x 0.60 x (0.50 + 7.0 x 0.8 x (0.7 +0.30 FB)
(m)with 0.3 FB) 0.30 FB)
Proportional flow
Parshall Flume (m) 3.80 x 0.15 x (0.22 + 3.80x 0.15 x (0.35 + 3.80 x 0.15(throat) x (0.54
0.30 FB) 0.30 FB) +0.30 FB)
Secondary Treatment
UASB reactor(m) 12.0 x8.0x 18.00 x 11.00 x (5.00 30.00 x 16.50 x (6.00 x0.50
(5.0+0.50 FB ) +0.50 FB) FB)
Sludge Treatment
**Sludge drying 12.00 x 5.00 4 Nos 13.00 x 6.006 No’s 24.00 x 6.00 8No’s
bed(m)
Disinfection tank 5.60 x 5.60 x 1.50 + 8.90 X 7.00 X 1.50 + 10.90 X 8.70 X 1.50 +0.50 FB
(m) 0.5 FB 0.50 FB
40

**Area required for Sludge drying bed can be drastically reduced by providing Mechanised sludge
dewatering unit
List of Equipment
Bar screen 10x10mm bar, 10 x 10 mm bar, 25mm 10 x 10 mm bar, 25mm
25mm spacing spacing spacing
Provision for Flaring or methane can be trapped and stored
2.3 Combination of Treatment processes (UASB or ABR + additional

treatment)29
The Anaerobic baffled reactor (ABR) or Fluidised Baffled Reactor (FBR) is a modified
form of UASB in which the flow occurs mainly by gravity, thus eliminating the need for
mechanical pumps. The series of baffled tank forces the sewage through the fluidised sludge
blanket resulting in a high degree of pollution reduction. The number of chambers in the series
determine the extent of pollution reduction.
An Anaerobic filter (AF)or Fixed Film reactor (FFR) is a fixed bed biological reactor
with one or more filtration chambers in series. Its construction is like the ABR, with media
placed in the chambers. The media surface supports the growth of active biomass that helps in
degrading the organic matter as it passes through them. The efficiency of the AF increases with
the number of sequential chambers.
The effluents from anaerobic reactors like UASB or ABR usually require a post-
treatment step to adapt the treated effluent to the requirements of the environmental legislation
and protect the receiving water bodies.
The main role of the post-treatment is to complete the removal of organic matter, as
well as to remove the constituents little affected by the anaerobic treatment, such as nutrients
(N and P) and pathogenic organisms (viruses, bacteria, protozoans, and helminths). The post
treatment technologies can be based on aerobic treatment or nature-based treatment. Some of
the combination of UASB + post treatment technologies, widely implemented in Brazil
(similar climatic condition as India) are given in subsequent para.
Wherever high standard effluent quality is required, such combination of treatment
systems can be adopted.
2.3.1 UASB or ABR + Polishing Pond
• This is a very interesting alternative from the technical-economical- environmental
point of view, mainly when there are area limitations for the construction of only
stabilization ponds. The effluent from this combination can be used for agriculture
purpose since the aim of polishing pond is removal of pathogenic organisms. Because
of these advantages, this combination is very common in developing countries.
29
Source: Biological Wastewater Treatment in Warm Climate Regions, Volume -I, IWA, 2006 and Urban Wastewater Treatment in Brazil,
Sperling, 2016
41
• Besides the preliminary treatment units (screen and grit chamber), the flowsheet
comprises basically the anaerobic treatment unit, the polishing pond (either a single
baffled pond or ponds in series) and the dewatering unit for the sludge produced in the
UASB reactor.
• Dewatering units using drying beds are also usual in smaller plants.
• The main disadvantage is the high concentration of algae in the final effluent, which
leads to serious restrictions by some environmental agencies.
I. The Typical Configuration of UASB & Polishing Pond is given below.
Figure 36: UASB + Polishing Ponds – typical configuration
II. The Typical Layout of UASB & Polishing Pond is given below.
Figure 37: Typical Design Layout for UASB+ Polishing ponds
III. The unit sizes of different capacities of UASB & Polishing Pond based STP is given
in Table 22.
42
Table 22: Typical Design sizes of different units for 1 ,2 5 MLD for UASB+ Polishing Pond
1 MLD 2 MLD 5 MLD
LIST OF (L X B X D) (L X B (L X B X D)
STRUCTURES* X D)
Primary Treatment
Screen (m) 1.75 x 0.35 x 0.30 2.25 x 2.75x 0.55x 0.50
0.45 x
0.40
Grit chamber 3.0 x 0.50x (0.4 + 0.3 5.0 x 7.0 x 0.8 x( 0.7 +0.30 FB)
(m)with FB) 0.60 x
Proportional flow (0.50
+ 0.30
FB)
Parshall Flume 3.80 x 0.15 x (0.22 + 3.80x 3.80 x 0.15(throat) x (0.54 +0.30 FB)
(m) 0.30 FB) 0.15 x
(0.35
+ 0.30
FB)
Secondary Treatment
UASB reactor(m) 13.00 x 9.00 x 5.00 9.00 x 13.00 x 20.00 x 5.00
13.00 x
5 .00
Polishing pond 2200 sqm 4400 11000 sqm
sqm
List of Equipment
Bar screen 10 x 10 mm bar, 10 x 10 10 x 10 mm bar, 25mm spacing
25mm spacing mm
bar,
25mm
spacing
2.3.2 UASB or ABR + Land Disposal

• The overflow system as a means of post treatment of effluents from UASB reactor is
covered in this document. This is least dependent on type of soil. In this method, the
vegetation, associated with the top-soil layer, acts as a filter, removing nutrients and
providing conditions for the retention and transformation of the organic matter
contained in the sewage.
• This method is limited by the climate, cultural tolerance in relation to treated water and
slope of the land. The application may be limited during wet weather.
comprises the anaerobic treatment unit, the land treatment system and the dewatering
unit for the sludge produced in the UASB reactor.
43
I. The Typical Configuration of UASB & Land disposal is given below.
Figure 38: UASB + Land disposal – typical configuration

Source: Urban Wastewater Treatment in Brazil, Sperling, 2016
II. The Typical Layout of UASB & Land disposal is given below.
Figure 39: Typical Design Layout for UASB+ Land disposal
III. The Unit sizes of different capacities of UASB & Land disposal are in Table 23.
Table 23: Design inputs for 1, 2 and 5 MLD for UASB + Land disposal
1 MLD 2 MLD 5 MLD
LIST OF
STRUCTURES*
Primary Treatment
Screen (m) 1.75 x 0.35 x 0.30 2.25 x 0.45 x 0.40 2.75x 0.55x 0.50
44
Grit chamber 3.0 x 0.50x (0.4 + 5.0 x 0.60 x (0.50 + 7.0 x 0.8 x(0.7 +0.30 FB)
(m)with 0.3 FB) 0.30 FB)
Proportional flow
Parshall Flume (m) 3.80 x 0.15 x (0.22 3.80x 0.15 x (0.35 + 3.80 x 0.15(throat) x (0.54
+ 0.30 FB) 0.30 FB) +0.30 FB)
Secondary Treatment
UASB reactor(m) 9.00 x 6.00 x 5.00 9.00 x 13.00 x 5.00 13.00 x 20.00 x 5.00
Plantedgravel filter 750.00 x 3.00 x 1500.00 x 3.00 x 1.40 3750.00 x 3.00 x 1.40
1.40
List of Equipment
Bar screen 10 x 10 mm bar, 10x10mm bar, 25mm 10 x 10 mm bar, 25mm
25mm spacing spacing spacing
2.3.3 UASB or ABR + Trickling Filter

• A trickling filter consists basically of a tank filled with a highly permeable material,
onto which wastewater is loaded in the form of drops or jets. Wastewater percolates
towards bottom drains, allowing growth on the surface of the packing material, in the
form of a fixed film (biofilm). Wastewater passes over the biofilm, allowing a contact
between the microorganisms and the organic matter.
• This combination helps in reduction of the power and operational costs of the treatment
plant.
comprises sequential anaerobic and aerobic biological units (UASB reactor, trickling
filter, and secondary sedimentation tank), as well as the dewatering unit.
• In this configuration, the excess aerobic sludge removed from secondary sedimentation
tank is returned to the UASB reactor for thickening and anaerobic digestion. Therefore,
in this flowsheet, primary sedimentation tanks and separate units for thickening and
anaerobic digestion of the excess aerobic sludge are not required, different from the
conventional treatment plants that use trickling filters.
I. The Typical Configuration of UASB &Trickling Filter is given below.
Figure 40: UASB + Trickling Filter – typical configuration
45
II. The Typical Layout of UASB &Trickling Filter is given below.
Figure 41: Typical Design Layout for UASB+TF

III. The unit sizes of different capacities of UASB &Trickling Filter are given in Table 24.
Table 24: Typical Design sizes for different units for 1, 2 and 5 MLD for UASB+TF
1 MLD 2 MLD 5 MLD
STRUCTURES*
Primary Treatment
Screen (m) 1.75 x 0.35 x 0.30 2.25 x 0.45 x 0.40 2.75x 0.55x 0.50
Grit chamber 3.0 x 0.50x 0.4 + 5.0 x 0.60 x 0.50 + 7.0 x 0.8 x 0.7 +0.30
(m)with 0.3 FB 0.30 FB FB
Proportional flow
Parshall Flume 3.80 x 0.15 x 0.22 + 3.80x 0.15 x 0.35 + 3.80 x 0.15(throat) x
(m) 0.30 FB 0.30 FB 0.54 +0.30 FB
Secondary Treatment
UASB reactor(m) 13.00x 9.00x 5 9.00 x 13.00 x 5.00 13.00 x 20.00 x 5.00
Trickling filter 2 no’s (28.45m dia, 2 no’s (13m dia, 2 m 2 no’s(20m dia, 2 m
2 m depth,55.30 m depth,25m dia, 2 m depth,40 m dia, 2 m
dia, 2 m depth) depth) depth)
Secondary settling 8 m dia, 2m depth 11 m dia, 2m depth 18 m dia, 2m depth

tank
Sludge Treatment
**Sludge drying 25 x 60 x 3 m (25 x 5 x 3 m) 17 no’s (25 x 5 x 3 m) 38 no’s
bed
List of Equipment
Bar screen 10 x 10 mm bar, 10 x 10 mm bar, 25mm 10 x 10 mm bar,
25mm spacing spacing 25mm spacing
46
2.3.4 UASB or ABR + Activated Sludge

• The essence of the continuous flow activated sludge process is the integration of the
aeration tank (aerobic biological reactor), secondary sedimentation tank and sludge
recirculation line. These three components are maintained in the alternative of activated
sludge systems acting as post-treatment of effluents from anaerobic reactors.
• When the activated sludge system acts as post-treatment of anaerobic effluents, the
anaerobic reactor is used instead of the primary sedimentation tank (which is an integral
part of the conventional activated sludge system). The aerobic sludge is recirculated in
the usual manner, that is, from the bottom of the secondary tank to the entrance of the
aerobic reactor (aeration tank).
• The excess aerobic sludge generated in the activated sludge stage, not yet stabilized, is
sent to the UASB reactor, where it undergoes thickening and digestion, together with
the anaerobic sludge. As the return flow of the excess aerobic sludge is very low
compared with the influent flow, there are no operational disturbances in the UASB
reactor.
• There is no need for separate thickeners and digesters, and just the dewatering stage is
necessary. The mixed sludge removed from the anaerobic reactor is digested, has solids
concentrations like those from sludge thickeners and presents good dewatering ability.
I. The Typical Configuration of UASB & Activated Sludge is given below.
Figure 42: UASB + Activated sludge - typical configuration
47
II. The Typical Layout of UASB &ASP is given below.
Figure 43: Typical Design Layout for UASB+ASP
III. The Unit sizes of UASB &ASP are in Table 25.
Table 25: Typical Design sizes of different units for 1, 2 and 5 MLD for UASB+ ASP
1 MLD 2 MLD 5 MLD
LIST OF STRUCTURES* (L X B X D) (L X B X D) (L X B X D)
Primary Treatment
Screen (m) 1.75 x 0.35 x 0.30 2.25 x 0.45 x 0.40 2.75x 0.55x 0.50
Grit chamber (m)with 3.0 x 0.50x (0.4 + 0.3 5.0 x 0.60 x (0.50 + 7.0 x 0.8 x (0.7 +0.30 FB)
Proportional flow FB) 0.30 FB)
Parshall Flume (m) 3.80 x 0.15 x (0.22 + 3.80x 0.15 x (0.35 + 3.80 x 0.15(throat) x (0.54
0.30 FB) 0.30 FB) +0.30 FB)
Secondary Treatment
UASB reactor (m) 13.00 x 9.00 x 5.00 13.00 x 9.00 x 5.00 13.00 x 20.00 x 5.00
Aeration tank 2x (3 x 3 x 3.5 m) 2x (4.5 x 4.5 x 3.5 m) 2x (7 x 7 x 3.5 m)
Secondary settling 8 m dia, 2.7m depth 11m dia, 2.7 m depth 18m dia, 2.7 m depth
tank
Sludge Treatment
**Sludge drying bed (25 x 5 x 0.16 m) 19beds (25 x 60 x 3 m) (25 x 60 x 3 m) 83
35 beds beds
**Area required for Sludge drying bed can be drastically reduced by providing Mechanised sludge
dewatering unit
48
List of Equipment
Bar screen 10x10mm bar, 25mm 10 x 10 mm bar, 10 x 10 mm bar, 25mm
spacing 25mm spacing spacing
Blower with motor Capacity 3053 m3/hr Capacity 3053 m3/hr Capacity 3053 m3/hr.)
GLSS Aperture 13 x 0.7m, Aperture 13 x 0.7m, Aperture 13 x 0.7m, width
width of deflector beam width of deflector of deflector beam 1m
1m beam 1m
Sludge transfer pump 1(W) + 1(S) 1(W) + 1(S) 1(W) + 1(S)
Recirculation pump 1(W) + 1(S) 1(W) + 1(S) 1(W) + 1(S)
Aerator 3 nos. of 20 HP + 1 3 no’s of 20 HP + 1 3 no’s of 20 HP + 1 standby
standby standby
2.4 Decentralised and On-site treatment technologies
2.4.1 Decentralised Treatment System

Decentralised Treatment System (DTS) is a combination of a series of Anaerobic
Baffled Reactor followed by the Fixed Film Reactor. The DTS is based on the principle of
making effective use of natural processes like gravity, microbiological activity, and
temperature. This results in a system which works without wasting scarce energy resources and
needs only minimal maintenance. In fact, the system produces energy in form of
methane/biogas. DTSs are typically placed underground and offers a chance to reuse the roof
surface for alternate applications such as roads, parking spaces and parks, thus offering an
alternative to ULBs with land constraints.
Note: The Decentralised Systems such as DEWATS/BIO STP DTS and many other of
constructed wetland family (some of them are patented as well) are being used
independently or in combination with other treatment systems in domestic market which
provides desired level of effluent.
Since performance of these technologies varies in handling sewage from medium and small
towns, therefore, the Urban Local Bodies are advised to select one or two suitable
technologies on pilot basis and on successful testing the results, can go ahead for replicating
in other towns.
49
I. Factsheet about DTS is given in Table 26 below.
Table 26: Factsheet – DTS

Decentralised Treatment System (DTS)
1. Process and units • It is a combination of different wastewater treatment technologies cascaded in modules to
a full-blown system, to achieve the required effluent quality for the claimed reuse purpose.
• The settler in DTS acts as a gas tight septic tank with low hydraulic retention times. The
digestion process in settler ensures that the accumulated sludge is reduced and stabilized.
• Fluidized Baffled Reactor in the treatment plant helps in reduction of BOD by the
activated sludge process occurring within the chamber.
• Fixed Film Reactor helps in treating non settleable and dissolved solids by bringing them
in close contact with a surplus of active bacterial mass fixed on filter material.
2. Land Requirement • 0.13 - 0.14 Ha/ MLD installed capacity
3. Energy • <Nil, (gravity flow)
Requirement
3. Capital Cost • INR 80-200 lakh/MLD capacity
4. O&M Cost • INR 2-2.5 lakh/year/MLD Installed capacity (annual desludging required)
5. Effluent Quality • BOD<30 mg/l; COD<100 mg/l
• TSS < 100 mg/l, BOD removal efficiency: 75 -80% (High rate); 85-90% (Normal rate)
COD: 85-90%, TSS: 95%
6. Advantages • Construction by locally available materials and makes it very affordable.
• No power requirement for treatment processes
• Tolerance to high fluctuation
• Low operational cost &no skilled labour required
• No noise pollution.
• Zero space required, as STP goes underground
• Sludge clearance to be done only once in 2 years.
7. Disadvantages • High construction cost
8. O&M • Scum removal in settler checked once in 3 months- The scum accumulation leads to lower
efficiencies.
• Desludging of Settler done once in 18 months- It may wash the accumulated sludge to the
subsequent stages
Desludging of FBR done once in 12 months - Excess sludge causes reduction in treatment
due to lowering of hydraulic retention time.
9. City/ plant examples • Kundalahalli lake, Karnataka 1MLD (2017)
• Martha’s Hospital, Karnataka 1MLD (2009)
11. Suitability • Suitable for all location and weather condition with a moderate to high temperature . If the
available temperature is low appropriate change can be made in the design of the
30
Source: Case study of Kundalahalli Lake
50
II. Flowchart of DTS is given below.
Figure 44: Flowchart of DTS
III. DTS being constructed underground enables space utilisation for other purpose such as
Car parking, gardening, roads etc., An example of DTS roof space utilisation for Car
parking is shown in the following figure.
Figure 45 Construction of DTS
51
Figure 46 DEWATS of 307 KLD, Pondicherry
Figure 47 Landscaping above DTS
52
IV. Layout of DTS is given below.
Figure 48 Typical Layout for the DTS
V. The unit sizes for different capacities for DTS STP may vary based as indicated below:
Table 27: Typical Design sizes of different units for 1, 2 and 5 MLD DTS
LIST OF STRUCTURES 1 MLD 2 MLD 5 MLD
Dimensions* (LxBxD) L X B X D) L X B X D)
Primary Treatment
Settler 15.00 15.00 15.00 x50.00x(3.20+0.8FB)
x10.00x(3.20+0.8FB) x20.00x(3.20+0.8FB)
Fluidized Bed Reactor 1.50 X 92.00 X 1.50 X 184.00 X 1.50 X 470.00 X
(3.20+0.80FB) 6 Nos (3.20+0.80FB) 6 Nos (3.20+0.80FB) 6 Nos
Fixed Film Reactor 3.00 x 75.00 x 3.00 x 150.00 x 3.00 x 400.00 x (3.20+0.50
(3.20+0.50 FB) 1 No (3.20+0.50 FB) 1 No FB) 1 No
Disinfection Treatment
Disinfection tank (m) 5.60 x 5.60 x 1.50 + 8.90 X 7.00 X 1.50 + 10.90 X 8.70 X 1.50 +0.50
0.5 FB 0.50 FB FB
2.4.2 On-site treatment technologies

On-site usedwater treatment is typically used in locations where housing density is
sufficiently low that centralized wastewater treatment is not economically feasible. It is also
53
used in areas where technology and resource limitations do not permit centralized
wastewater treatment systems. The purpose of the packaged or prefabricated systems for on-
site wastewater treatment application is to reduce the concentrations of contaminants to
acceptable levels before the treated waste water discharged. The system plays a vital role in
removing scum, nutrients, pathogens, grease, and settleable solids, thus, protecting the living
system. Some of the packaged treatment plants are mentioned below.
Note : The following prefabricated or packaged technologies are available and claim to cater
to domestic market.
Since these technologies are not adequately rested in handling sewage from medium and small
towns, the Urban Local Bodies are advised to select one or two suitable technologies on pilot
basis and on successful testing the results, go for replicating in other towns.
2.4.2.1 Anaerobic Packaged Systems

Process: Anaerobic Packaged Systems with floating media is a wastewater treatment solution
based on the principle of making effective use of natural processes like gravity,
microbiological activity, floating media, and temperature. This results in a system which can
work without wasting scarce energy resources and needs only minimal maintenance. In fact,
the system produces energy in form of methane/biogas. The solution is also designed to meet
environmental laws. Anaerobic packaged System (AnPS – FM) core system generally consists
of Settler, Fluidized Bed Reactor (FBR) and Fixed Film Reactor (FFR). The treated water can
be disposed into soak pit also.
I. The photograph of a typical Anaerobic Packaged system with floating media is
given below.
Figure 49: Photograph of Modular DTS being installed in Discovery village Banglore
54
II. The Design parameters for Modular DTS is given below.
Table 28: Design Parameters for Modular DTS

Sl. No. Design parameters Wastewater
Characteristics
1 Capacity 0.5 -3.0 KLD
2 CAPEX INR 60,000 - 80,000
3 OPEX INR 1500 - 3000/year
4 Chemical Oxygen Demand (CODin) 800 mg/l
5 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BODin) 400 mg/l
6 MOC Ferrocement
7 Mode of Installation Horizontal type
8 Treatment Efficiency BOD: <20mg/l

9 Dimensions of 0.50m3/d to 30m3/day 2.4 m x 1.2m x 2.2m to
13.5m x 4.0m x 2.2
2.4.2.2 Packed Anaerobic-Aerobic On-site Treatment Systems

Process: This is an on-site compact sewage treatment plant which was developed in Japan
(also known as Johkasou) and adopted by households/ group of households not connected with
sewerage system. It is usually installed underground as a single compact tank. There are five
functional chambers namely, sedimentation, anaerobic, aeration, storage, and disinfection in a
tank.
There are similar modified packaged on-site treatment systems available in market.
However, before adopting such packaged treatment systems, their performance need to be
monitored by setting up one or two such plants.
The brief details of widely used Johkasou or its variants is given below:
I. The photograph for Johkasou is given below.
55
Figure 50: A Typical site installation picture of Johkasou

II. The Factsheet for Johkasou is given below.
Table 29: Factsheet for Johkasou System
1. Process and units • Pre-treatment process: This process removes insoluble substances that are difficult
to decompose biologically by means of sedimentation, floating, and screening. In
the large-scale system, a flow equalizer is planned for stabilizing the biological
treatment.
• Main treatment process: The main treatment process biologically removes BOD-
related contaminants by aerobic treatment and removes nitrogen by combination
of anoxic and aerobic treatment. The system employs a sedimentation tank for
solid-liquid separation in most cases, but use of a membrane separator in place of
the sedimentation tank makes it possible to downsize the system and to improve
the quality of treated sewage further.
• Advanced treatment process (to be installed if necessary): This process removes
COD-related contaminants and phosphorus from the biologically treated sewage
by means of flocculation sedimentation, sand filtration, activated carbon
absorption, and dephosphorization.
• Disinfection process: This process disinfects E. coli and other bacteria to make
effluent water safer.
2. Capital Cost INR 2.2 – 3.4lakh/KLD capacity higher unit cost for small capacity plants.
3. O&M Cost INR7,650/KLD/year
4. Effluent Quality • BOD< 30 mg/l; COD<150 mg/l

• TSS <50 mg/l; BOD removal efficiency: 75-90%
5. Advantage • Short installation time and early realization of the effects
• Johkasou-treated water and sludge are easy to reuse
6. Disadvantage • High Initial Investment Cost
• Uninterrupted Power Supply required
• Periodic Operation and Maintenance
7. City/ plant examples • Aizwal
• Mizoram
• Chennai
III. The Process Diagram of Johkasou is given below.
Figure 51: Process diagram of Johkasou

Note: It should be understood that these (decentralised and on-site treatment) technologies are
proprietary /patented and should be chosen carefully, as the dependence on these suppliers/vendors will
be needed for the entire life of the plant. Special attention needs to be undertaken to operation and
maintenance aspects like - dependence on electricity and chemicals for operation, special skilled
labour, replacement of membranes, bio-culture, durability and/or dependence on proprietary
56
components. Preference should be given to technologies that use local material, compliance to
prescribed norms etc., In case the proprietary technology is of imported origin, then the dependence of
spare parts, replacement of components etc., will be expensive and time consuming for importing. The
effluent may need further polishing in some cases, and hence, additional steps may need to be taken to
comply with reuse norms. Selection decision should be made after considering all these factors.
2.5 In-line treatment of Drain (Nallah)

Drains carrying sewage or grey water can be tapped and treated through Ex-situ
treatment or In-situ treatment. Ex-situ treatment involves installation of a complex network of
drainage pipes to collect sewage or pumping the same to a sewage treatment plant with intake
structures. On the other hand, In-situ nallah treatment treats the sewage in the nallah/drain by
the most natural and environment friendly way. Wastewater treatments using constructed
wetland treatment systems for have become widely used world-wide, since the last few decades
as it offers a low-cost alternative technology for wastewater treatment. However, In-line
treatment can normally reduce the pollution load of the wastewater and often not a complete
treatment and any further improvement can be achieved by combining any one of the packaged
systems which above mentioned.
I. The Factsheet of In-line treatment of drain is given below.
Table 30: Factsheet of Inline drain treatment

Inline Drain Treatment
1. Process and units 1. Screens: Screens and Oil & Grease trap are provided to remove the
floating matter such as paper, shampoo sachets, sanitary napkins along
with fat, oil, grease and scum.
2. Primary treatment: The Grit chamber, sedimentation zone and the

Anoxic zone are provided to remove the organic and inorganic solids by
settling and by enhanced anaerobic digestion.
3. Secondary treatment: In secondary treatment, Anoxic zone, Bio media

and Diffused Aeration are provided to degrade the organic matter in the
sewage by the microorganisms.
4. Phyto-remediation: Planted beds are created to remove the nutrients and

Suspended solids from the sewage. These units contained beautiful
wetland plant species like cattails (Typha sp.), reeds (Phragmites sp.),
bulrushes (Scirpus sp.), sedges (Carex sp.), Canna indica etc. which
purifies the Sewage and increase the DO Level of the sewage as well as
add to the aesthetics of the locality.
5. Disinfection: To remove the bacteria from sewage, disinfection is done

before discharging wastewater in the waterbody.
2. Land Requirement In-line
3. Energy Requirement Zero or negligible
3. Capital Cost INR 25-35 lakh/MLD capacity, higher unit cost for small capacity plants.
4. O&M Cost INR 50 lakh/year/ML Installed capacity
5. Effluent Quality • BOD<20 mg/l; COD<100 mg/l
• TSS <30 mg/l; BOD removal efficiency: 75-90%,
57
6. Advantage • Beautiful aesthetics

• Low Capital and O&M Cost
• Zero or negligible electricity requirement
7. Disadvantage • This system is not a complete treatment solution, and it only improves the
quality of the wastewater flowing in the drains.
• It requires periodical removal of the plants, the decayed plant can add up
BOD to the treated water
• During heavy rainfall, stormwater runoff in drains can occur in such
conditions it should be removed, or raw water should be bypassed
8. O&M • Records -operation should include recording of flow rates of wastewater
flowing in drain, DO, BOD, COD
9. City/ plant examples • Jhansi, Prayagraj
II. The Photograph of In-line treatment of drain is given below.
Figure 52: Photographs of the nature-based treatment 12 MLD at drains in Prayagraj
2.6 Community Soak pit

A Community Soak Pit is an extended version of household soak pit, where multiple
houses can be connected to a single pit. Areas where faecal septage and grey water are
managed separately and places where higher amounts of greywater are generated, such as
schools, restaurants, community stand ponds, etc. should adopt the community leach pit based
on the volume of greywater generated. To avoid clogging and condition of soil sickness these
soak pits are to be provided with post treatment technology such as Planted Gravel filter etc.
This method is often not well controlled and is used to reduce pollution load.
I. The Factsheet of Community Soak pit is given below.
Table 31: Factsheet of Community soakpits
Community Soak Pits
1. Process and units • It is a covered, porous structure that allows water to slowly soak into the ground. It is
filled with graded stones and gravels. The stones increase the surface area over which
biological and chemical actions take place. As used water percolates through the
58
layers of graded aggregates and soil, small particles get filtered out and organics gets
digested.
• The number of houses to be connected should be calculated based on the used water
discharged from each house and the space available for the community soak pit.
• The Grey water generated from the HHs are collected through a drainage channel and
the outlet of this channel is connected to an Inspection chamber and then to the
Community Soak Pit.
2. Energy Requirement Nil
3. Capital Cost INR 12,500 for Community Soak Pits for Common Places
INR 1,33,000for Community Soak Pits horizontal Filter Type
INR 1,27,000for Community Soak Pits vertical Filter Type
4. Advantage • Low cost and easy to construct
• Can be built and repaired with locally available materials
5. Disadvantage • low function ability in semi-permeable soils
• Not suitable for areas with high water table
6. City/ plant examples • Tamil Nadu
7. Suitability • Suitable for all location and weather condition with a temperature of 20°C +. If the
required temperature is not achieved appropriate change can be made in the design of
the treatment system
II. The Type Design Drawing of Community Soak pit is given below.
Figure 53: Type Design Drawing of Community Soak pit
Figure 54: Type Design Drawing of Community Soak pit Horizontal Filter Type
59
Figure 55: Type Design Drawing of Community Soak pit Vertical Filter Type
III. The Photographs of Community Soak pit are given below.
Figure 56: Photograph of Community Soak pit Horizontal & Vertical Filter Type at Tamil
Nadu
60
3 Co-Treatment of Faecal Septage

This section provides guidance on co-treatment of septage at either STP or Solid waste
treatment facility. In case of new STPs, septage co-treatment facility can be simultaneously
built. However, in case of existing STPs, supporting infrastructure components like ramp for
desluding, screens, solid-liquid separation facility etc. can be created to facilitate co-treatment.
This will eliminate the requirement of separate facilities for treatment of solid and liquid
portions, after its separation at solid liquid separation units, normally required at FSTPs.
Co-treatment of septage simply means treating faecal septage (FS) along with domestic sewage
at a sewage treatment plant (STP) or some times at Solid waste treatment plants as well.
Septage is more concentrated in its strength than domestic sewage, but otherwise, its
constituents are similar to municipal wastewater. Co-treatment is the most desirable option to
treat faecal septage having many advantages such as saving funds (CAPEX and OPEX), land
and better capacity utilization.
Broadly, co-treatment at STPs can be carried out in two ways: (1) addition of faecal septage
with sewage (liquid stream), and (2) addition of faecal septage with STP sludge (solid stream).
Similarly, at compost plants also, the septage can be dewatered and solid fraction can be
composted and liquid fraction can be treated at leachate treatment plants. The co-treatment
options at STPs are explained as under:
3.1 Addition of faecal septage with sewage
This option is best suited in situations where (a) septic tanks are periodically emptied or (b)
comparatively low number of population covered with septic tanks, where the solid
concentration in sludge is comparatively low (< 4%). This option should be practiced only
when source of septage is known along with its characteristics, else, it may impair functioning
of STPs and have to be avoided.
Generally, faecal septage desludged in a city/town accounts only about 1-3% that of the
existing/proposed STP capacity of the town. Therefore, adding faecal septage into
existing/proposed STPs can be a quick solution to its safe management.
Currently, the most popular practice under the pretext of co-treatment in India is direct disposal
of faecal septage in the nearby manholes. This uncontrolled direct discharge of faecal septage
in the nearby manhole can have damaging effects on the sewerage infrastructure. Therefore,
ULBs need to curb these uncontrolled direct discharge of faecal septage in the nearby
manholes and ensure that the faecal septage is either added to the trunk sewer line at sewage
pumping stations or added at the inlet of the STPs. Care shall be taken by the ULBs for
uniform mixing of faecal septage with incoming sewage over some time based on the design
criteria of the receiving STP rather than abrupt discharging. In addition some preliminary
treatment shall also to be given for the septage received to remove the trash/grit present with
them. In no case the resultant concentration after addition of faecal septage shall exceed the
design loads of the receiving STP.
61
In case of co-treatment of septage at existing STP, it will be necessary to construct a septage

receiving station for ensuring the aforementioned points and having better control over the
system. Such a station will consist of an unloading area (sloped to allow gravity draining of
septage hauling trucks), preliminary treatment units such as screen/grit chamber, a septage
storage tank with mixing arrangement and flow control valve/pump arrangements. The detailed
description of the faecal septage receiving facility is given in the later part of this section.
Once the infrastructure for co-treatment is implemented, it has to be tested by adding faecal
sludge gradually, starting from 25% of the co-treatment potential to 100% in a few days. This
gives time to record and monitor any deviations or process abnormalities in the STP. During
such trial runs, the system must be monitored by a competent engineer. During peak septage
loadings, aeration basin’s dissolved oxygen (DO) concentrations should be checked frequently
to ensure that adequate levels (usually ≥ 2.0 mg/L) are present.
Figure 57: Process flow for direct addition of FS in Pumping Station
Figure 58: Proc Process flow for direct addition of FS in STP
Source: Ecosan Services Foundation’s Training Module on Co-Treatment of Septage and Sewage
3.2 Addition of faecal septage with STP sludge
This option is ideally suited in situations where the solid concentration in faecal septage is
usually very high (i.e. >5%) as septic tanks are usually emptied after a long periods (say > 5
years) & often filled with sludge. This option is better, in general, when compared to that of
mixing septage into the liquid stream because most STPs designed, generally, with facilities for
sludge handling and treatment.
In this case, the faecal septage needs to be screened for removing trash followed by solid-liquid
separation. Various methods are existing for the solid-liquid separation process depending on
the extent of dewatering that is being aimed. Ministry’s Manual on Sewerage and Sewage
Treatment Systems, 2013 may be referred to for details on the various solid-liquid separation
technologies. This is, in turn, dependent on the downstream solid handling processes. A
Typical solid liquid separation layout is given below and explained in subsequent section in
detail.
62
Figure 59: Process flow for addition of faecal septage with STP sludge (solid stream)
Source: Ecosan Services Foundation’s Training Module on Co-Treatment of Septage and

Sewage
3.3 Solid Liquid Separation
Solid-liquid separation is desirable in all cases of co-treatment for the faecal sludge having
solids content of at least 1% or greater. After separation, the supernatant (liquid fraction) is
diverted to the headworks of the STP where it is treated along with sewage inflows and the
separated solids are sent for further processing along with the STP sludge at the solid
management facility of the STP.
Depending upon the solids content of the inlet FSS, the following solid–liquid separation
techniques may be preferred:
i. FSS with solids content between 1–5%

a) Settling thickening tanks
b) Geo-bags
c) Mechanical De-watering – Belt filter press, Screw press
ii. FSS with solids content greater than 5%

a) Sludge drying beds
3.4 Faecal Septage Receiving Facility at Co-treatment STPs
The aim of the receiving station is to reduce the impact and risk on the STP due to co treatment
of septage and sewage. While designing a receiving station, one must consider the following:
• The quantity of the septage to be received daily along with the number of the trucks to
be simultaneously emptied.
• The design and dimension of the desludging truck, especially the turning radius, its
power to operate in reverse mode.
• Degree of pre-treatment to be given to the raw septage. This depends on the
appurtenances and the STP where the mixed septage and sewage will be co treated.
• Disposal mechanism of the solid waste and grit separated from the raw septage
63
• Odor nuisance. If the receiving station is near the residential/commercial area, odor
control measures needs to be provided at the receiving station.
The most common way is the controlled addition of the septage based on design and actual
loading. However, by providing a septage receiving station (SRS) that provides adequate raw
solids screening and de-gritting, the risk of hindering the performance of the STP can be
reduced. The SRS, depending on need, should also have additional features such as odor
control, flow equalization, site monitoring, and access control. SRS is the most common way
of pre-treatment of septage before it is co-treated at the STP.
The receiving septage facility generally consists of the following components:
1. A septage unloading zone (Dumping station):It enables safe transfer of the raw
septage from hauler truck to the pre-treatment components such as screens. It is
important that dumping station provides a leak proof equipment for transfer of raw
septage and avoid odour nuisance. Odour control can be done using chemical scrubbers
or activated charcoal filters. Dumping station has normally following components such
as
(i) Ramp for the truck to enter and exit, the ramp should be sloping towards the dumping
inlet so that any spillage or wash water will drain into the dumping hole,
(ii) Dumping inlet arrangements with a removable lid
(iii) Water hydrant with pressurised water hose to wash down any spillage or the truck
components after dumping.
(iv) Chemicals such as lime or chlorine can also be added to the septage in the storage tank
@ 2.4 kg/1000 litre of septage to neutralize it, to render it more treatable, or to reduce
odours.
However, a decision to be taken regarding necessity of a unit/component to be constructed so

as to economize cost involved.
64
Figure 60: Photographs of the Septage Receiving Station
Alternatively, at larger STPs, depending on quantum of septage to be desludged, septage

unloading zones may be completely computerized with appropriate quick connection coupling
and an access card reader system for drivers with or without sampling arrangements.
2. Manual screens are used for smaller receiving station and mechanical screens are used
where human intervention needs to be completely eliminated and higher flows need to
be accommodated.
3. A tank housing a 6 mm fine screen, auger, and screenings washer/compactor system.
4. A washed screenings bagging system.
5. A Grit Removal System where needed. However, it is recommended to have it so that
inert grit along with the fat and grease can be removed from the septage. Both these
constituents have a potential to upset the biological treatment processes at the STP.
6. Holding tank with submersible transfer pumps. This allows controlled addition of pre-
treated septage to the liquid stream depending on the actual flow rate of domestic
sewage.
Figure 61: Septage Receiving Facility
Source: Advisory on On-Site and Off-Site Sewage Management Practices, 2020
At larger existing STPs where the volume of septage to be desludged is high, a

homogenization tank of 10 KL capacity or so with a valve or pump is proposed for a
controlled discharge to the STP. In this method, the FS is mixed with the influent with a pre-
defined ratio. The ratio of FS addition can initially be restricted to 0.2% and increased
65
gradually while monitoring the treatment efficiency of the plant. The module for this option
includes
a. Screening
b. Homogenization cum mixing tank
c. Valve chamber
d. Pump for conveyance to the existing STP
Figure 62: Co-treatment of FSS options at Bharwara STP Lucknow(suitable for larger towns
having population more than 1 lakh)
Source: Mainstreaming Co-treatment of Faecal Sludge &Septage (FSS) in STPs in Uttar Pradesh: Co-
treatment of FSS options at Bharwara STP Lucknow, Centre for Science and Environment, 2019
The cost estimation of a homogenization and controlled discharge unit of capacity 10 KLD is
about Rs 8.0-10.0 lakhs depending upon capacity and land area required would be
approximately 60–70 sqm. Approximate O&M cost for the option would be Rs 10,000 per
month.
3.5 Cost estimate of Solid liquid separation unit and & O&M cost
The estimated cost estimate and area required for solid liquid separation is tentatively as below
for guidance. The solid liquid separation is separately given for two scenarios i.e. (1) where
STPs exist (generally large in size) and (2) in smaller towns where STPs doesn’t exist.
66
3.5.1 Solid Liquid Separation option at Existing STP
A representative cost estimate for a Solid–Liquid Separation unit of capacity 10 KLD (for
30,000 population equivalent) is given below for guidance:
S Description Amount (INR

No Lakhs)
1 1. Tanker receiving station (with ramp), screening, receiving 2.5
chamber
2 2. Homogenization tank for FS receiving and polymer dozing 3.5
including civil works for conveyance
3 3. Pump-house with sump 1.5
4 4. Electrification 1.5
Total 9.0
Approximate O&M cost for the option would be Rs 10,500 per month. This would
include manpower, power cost for pumping, consumables and periodic repair and
maintenance. Break-up shown below:
S No Description Amount (INR per

month)
1 5. Operator (1/2 workday of unskilled staff @ Rs 6,000
400/day)
2 6. Power requirement for pumping (@ 8 hrs pumping; 3,000
Rs 10 per unit)
3 7. Periodic Repair & Maintenance (LS) 1,500
Total 10,500 (approx..)
The approximate land area required for this option is 60-80 sqm. However, where larger STPs
exist to reduce land requirement mechanized sludge dewatering devices may be used.
3.5.2 Low-cost Gravity based Faecal Septage Treatment Plant for Smaller Towns
The faecal sludge and septage collected can be treated at standalone faecal sludge
treatment plants (FSTPs) or co-treated at existing STPs in the vicinity. For the towns where
population is less than 20,000, this option as an interim measure till STP is being
implemented, can be considered. It is to be noted that, these low cost gravity based FSTP
only treats the collected Faecal septage from the Septic tanks. The main operation involved
in this process is of solid liquid separation, is described by the following process flow diagram
67
Process Flow Diagram
Treatment
•Solid: Through Drying bed
Screening Solid Liquid Separation •Liquid: Through
evapotranspiration and
filter bed
Tertiary Treatment/ Soak Settling tank with

End Use
Pit Coagulation & flocullation
The main unit of this energy-saving FSTP is planted drying bed method which dewatering
and stabilizes the collected faecal sludge. The bed is filled with filler material, usually with
varying sizes of Aggregates ranging from 20mm to 4.75mm. Plants selected for a specific
climate grow in the filter media. Dewatered solid sludge is removed every few months to
years. Plants are harvested according to their growth cycle.
Drawing- Design of 3/5/8/10 KLD-Decentralised FSTP
68
Figure 63: Low cost gravity based FSTP
Costing for Low Cost Gravity based FSTP
S.no Size of FSTP Cost of FSTP (in Lakhs) O&M Cost (in Lakhs per
annum)
1 3 KLD 3.50 2.50
2 5 KLD 4.50 3.00
3 8 KLD 5.50 3.50
4 10 KLD 6.50 4.00
5 20 KLD 11.00 4.50
6 100 KLD 25.00 9.00
Note: The derived costing is only for Gravity based FSTP, as per those implemented in Chattisgarh
It is highlighted that the faecal sludge is semi digested and its safe containment, treartment and
disposal/ re use can be ensured following above methods economically rather going for high
end FSTPs which entail high CAPEX and OPEX.
69
Ready Reckoner – Municipal Sewage Treatment Technologies – Medium
and Smaller Towns in India
4 Criteria for selection of technologies

The selection of a particular technology depends upon various parameters – qualitative,
quantitative and performance. Of course, any type of synthesis is subject to a degree of
uncertainty because of strong influence of the local conditions. The synthesis is presented only to
allow a fast comparison and selection between the treatment process, and the values should not be
taken as invariable.
Process: The process is to be selected based on required quality of treated water. While
treatment costs are important, other factors should also be given due consideration. For instance,
effluent quality, process complexity, process reliability, environmental issues and land
requirements should be evaluated and weighted against cost considerations. Important
considerations for selection of sewage treatment processes are given in Table 31.
Table 32 Sewage treatment process selection considerations
Consideration Goal
Quality of Treated Sewage Production of treated water of stipulated quality without interruption
Power requirement Reduce energy consumption
Land requirement Minimize cost and constraints in land acquisition
Capital cost of plant Optimum utilization of capital and financial viability
O&M cost Low recurring expenditure and financial viability
Maintenance requirement Simple and reliable
Operator attention Easy to understand process
Reliability Consistent delivery of treated sewage
Resource recovery Production of quality water and manure
Load fluctuations Withstand variations in organic and hydraulic loads
• Oxygen requirement: The choice between aerobic and anaerobic technologies need to
consider mainly based on the complexity of the oxygen supply. The supply of large amounts
of oxygen by a surface aeration or bubble dispersion system adds to the capital cost of the
aeration equipment substantially, as well as, to the running cost because the annual energy
consumption is rather high (it can reach 30 kWh per population equivalent (pe).
• Mechanized: The choice between mechanized or non-mechanized technologies centers on
the locally or nationally available technology infrastructure which may ensure a regular
supply of skilled labour, local manufacturing, operational and repair potential for used
equipment, and the reliability of supplies (e.g., power, chemicals, spare parts).
Conclusion: Inoverall, the selection process for the most appropriate treatment technology may
be decided using multi-criteria analysis involving overall unit costs, the environmental, aesthetic,
health risks involved, quality standards, efficiency of removal(as given in Table 33 ), skilled staff
,land requirements and the reliability of the potential for recovery by the technology. All must be
evaluated to give a total score that indicates the feasibility of each technology for a particular
country or location to select appropriate one. Comparison of key treatment technology along with
critical parameters is given Table 32. Steps involved in project preparation and implementation is
also provided in the Figure 71.
70
Ready Reckoner – Municipal Sewage Treatment Technologies – Medium and Smaller Towns in India
Table 33Performance of various treatment technologies along with various parameters for selection of suitable technology
Effluent Coliform Process Land Ease of Ease of Energy Electrical Capital Track
S.no. Process quality Removal Reliability Use Operation Maintenance recovery demand Cost Record
1 ASP 3 3 4 3 3 3 4 2 2 4
2 EA 4 3 4 2 4 4 1 1 3 3
3 MBBR 4 4 1 3 4 1 2 1 2 3
4 SBR 4 4 3 4 3 3 1 2 2 3
5 UASB 2 2 3 3 2 4 3 2 2 3
6 WSP 2 1 1 1 2 4 1 4 3 2
7 CW 1 1 1 1 3 4 1 4 3 2
8 TF 2 1 2 3 3 3 2 2 3 2
Source: Guidelines for Decentralized Wastewater Management Prepared by MoUD Centre of Excellence, Indian Institute of Technology Madras –
Chennai, India for Ministry of Urban Development, Government of India
Abbreviations: ASP-Activated Sludge Process; EA- Extended Aeration; MBBR- Moving Bed Bio-Reactor; SBR- Sequencing Batch Reactor; UASB-
Up flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket Reactor; WSP- Waste Stabilisation Pond; CW- Constructed Wetland; TF- Trickling Filter;
Grading for performance: 1- Poor; 2- Average; 3- Good; 4- Very Good
71
Ready Reckoner – Municipal Sewage Treatment Technologies – Medium and Smaller Towns in India
4.1 Comparison of key treatment technologies along critical parameters

Table 34Comparison of key wastewater treatment technologies
Land Electricity
Capital cost O&M cost Effluent Quality
requirement required.
Technology
kWh/ ML
Ha/ MLD INR lakh / MLD INR lakh / MLD BOD, mg/ lit TSS/ SS, mg/ lit
treated
Nature Based Technologies
Waste Stabilization Pond (WSP) 0.5 - 1.0 30 –60 0.6 –2.5 negligible 15-50 SS: 75-125
Root Zone Aeration/ Contructed

0.6-1.5 30-150 1.2-3.0 negligible 20-30 SS: 60-90
Wetland
Mechanised Treatment Technologies
Extended Aeration (EA) 0.15 - 0.25 90-200 7.0-12.0 180 - 225 20-30 SS: 50-100
Aerated Lagoon (AL) 0.27 – 0.4 40-60 1.5-3.0 15-20 25-50 SS: 40-150
Sequencing Batch Reactors (SBR) 0.10 - 0.15 150-300 10.0-20.0 150 - 200 <5 TSS< 10
Moving Bed Biofilm Reactor (MBBR) 0.04 - 0.05 170 - 230 8.0-12.0 200 - 250 <10 TSS: <20
Activated Sludge Process (ASP) 0.15 - 0.25 80 - 170 6.0-10.0 180 - 225 20-30 SS: 20-50
Trickling Filter (TF) 0.25-0.50 50-80 2.0-5.0 150-180 25-30 ---
Up flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket

0.2 - 0.3 40-60 2.0 -3.5 10.0-15.0 70-100 TSS: 75-100
(UASB)
Onsite treatment Technologies
Decentralised Treatment System

0.13 – 0.14 80 - 200 2.0 – 2.5 negligible <30 TSS <10
(DTS/DEWATS)
72
4.2 Steps Involved in Preparation of Projects and Implementation:
Figure 64: Flow Chart of project preparation and implementation
73
5 Case Studies
These case studies are compiled after getting information from vendors/plant operators/ULBs.
These case studies are for sensitization of ULBs, however, in case State decides to implement any
one of them, it is advised to do so in selected one or two cities on pilot basis and depending on
performance of technology, the same can be scaled up in other towns.
5.1 Decentralised Wastewater Treatment Systems
1. Site & Name of town Mahadevapura lake, Bangalore

Owned by BBMP
2. Name of State Karnataka
3. Population served by Approx. 10,000
STP
4. Capacity of STP 1 MLD
5. Year of commissioning 2019
6. Duration of construction 12 months
7. Land area required 950 sq.m.
8. Capital cost of the ₹ 2.5 Crore
project
9. O&M arrangement Outsourced to an NGO which deployed part time resources to
(In house/Out sourced) manage the treatment system
10. O&M cost (per KL) ₹0.73 /KL
11. Recycle & reuse of Inland surface water disposal
treated water
12. Reuse of treated sludge Agricultural fields
13. Description of technology The wastewater treatment includes primary, secondary and
tertiary treatment process, chosen and combined in order to
handle the pollution load entering through the selected inlet drain.
It also has designed with aim of very low Operation and
Maintenance requirements.
• Preliminary treatment- Screen with grit collection structure
with gate for wastewater diversion
• Primary treatment- Diversion channel with two stages of
screening, sedimentation basin and balancing tank
• Secondary treatment – Integrated Anaerobic Baffle Reactor
74
with Anaerobic filters

• Tertiary treatment- Combination of gabions followed by
floating wetlands.
14. Influent Parameters BOD : 200-250 mg/l
(BOD, COD, TSS etc) COD : 400-500 mg/l
TSS: 250-300mg/l
TN: 40 mg/l
15. Outlet Parameters (BOD, BOD : <20mg/l
COD, TSS etc) COD : <100 mg/l
TSS: <20 mg/l
TN: <20 mg/l
16. Skill requirement for Automation of pumps were done, a Part time operator who can
O&M clean the screens and check flow is sufficient
17. Mode of collection of Open storm water drain (partially cemented)
Sewage from Household
to the Treatment Facility
18. Unit Sizing- (including Primary treatment: 165sq.m
layout map) Secondary treatment: 550 sq.m
Tertiary treatment: 250sq.m
19. Remarks More details can be found in
1. https://cddindia.org/wp-
content/uploads/2019/04/Mahadevapura-Factsheet.pdf
Figure 65 Screen with grit collection structure (left) floating wetlands (right)
75
Figure 66 Aerial View of DEWATS treatment system
5.2 Waste Stabilisation Pond
1. Site & Name of town Goniana, Jaito Road,

2. Name of State Punjab
3. Population served by STP 19,147 persons approx.
4. Capacity of STP 3.00 MLD
5. Year of Commissioning 2011
6. Time taken for 1 year
Construction
7. Land area required 4046.86 sq.m
8. Capital Cost of the Project ₹ 85.95 Lakh
9. O&M arrangement Out sourced to contractor maintained by MC Goniana
(In house/Out sourced) Mandi
10. Recycle & Reuse of Land Irrigation

Treated water
11. Reuse of Treated Sludge Being used as manure, removed on 6 monthly bases.
12. Description of Technology Based Stabilization of ponds consisting of Anaerobic
ponds, Maturation, and Facultative ponds
13. Inlet Parameters (BOD, BOD : 150 to 175mg/l, COD: 250mg/l, TSS 2000 to
COD, TSS etc) 2500
14. Outlet Parameters (BOD, BOD: ≤30 mg/l, COD : ≤100 mg/l, TSS : ≤50 mg/l
COD, TSS etc)
15. Skill requirement for O&M Training to maintain the plant.
76
16. Mode of collection of Existing sewerage network

Figure 67 Aerial view of WSP located in Goniana, Punjab
5.3 Root Zone or Constructed Wetland or Phytorid
1. Name of town Bangalore

3. Population served by STP 22000
4. Capacity of STP 500 KLD
5. Year of commissioning March, 2020
6. Time taken for construction 60 Days
7. Land area required 2000 sq.m.
8. Capital cost of the Project ₹1.85 crore
9. O&M arrangement Outsourced
In house/Out sourced
77
10. O&M cost (per year) Total O&M cost –₹13 lakh/year
Detailed breakdown:
Microbes: ₹ 7,10,000
SME/Retainer: ₹ 2,40,000
Power: ₹ 1,20,000
Gardener: ₹ 2,40,000
11. Recycle &reuse of treated water Used for gardening.
12. Reuse of treated Sludge Anaerobic digestion & partly digested treated
within the wetland
13. Description of technology Passive Wetland System
14. Influent Parameters (BOD, COD, TSS pH: 6.5, BOD: 150 mg/l, COD: 150 mg/l, TSS:
etc) 125 mg/l, O&G: <12 mg/l
15. Effluent Parameters (BOD, COD, TSS pH: 7.5, BOD: <10 mg/l, COD: <10 mg/l, TSS:
etc) <10 mg/l, O&G: <5 mg/l
16. Skill requirement for O&M Low level
17. Mode of collection of Sewage from Through pipes/drains taken to the Screens,
Household to the Treatment Facility holding tank followed by wetlands.
18. Unit Sizing- (including layout map) Holding tank: 500 m2 Wetland: 2000 m2
78
Figure 68 Side view of constructed wetland treatment system installed in Hyderabad
5.4 Up-flow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket Reactor
1. Site & Name of town Hukumpeta, Rajamahendravaram

2. Name of State Andhra Pradesh
3. Population served by STP 3,43,903
4. Capacity of STP 30 MLD
6. Duration of construction 5 years
7. Land area required 113312
8. Cost of the Project ₹10 Crores
9. O&M arrangement Outsourced
10. O&M cost (per KL) ₹49.95 lakhs
11. Recycle &reuse of treated Gardening & Horticulture
water
12. Reuse of treated sludge Can be used as manure, removed on 6 monthly bases.
13. Description of technology (UASB) Sedimentation separation followed by
Anaerobic contact media, Aerobic attached growth
process, secondary sedimentation & disinfection.
14. Influent Parameters (BOD, pH – 7.34
COD, TSS etc) TDS – 728
TSS – 142
COD – 380
BOD – 124
79
15. Effluent Parameters (BOD, pH – 7.49

COD, TSS etc) TDS – 696
TSS – 18
COD –40
BOD –12
16. Skill requirement for O&M Product works automatically; Common service person
was given desired training to maintain the plant.
17. Mode of collection of Existing Sewage network
18. Unit Sizing- (including 400m x 230m
layout map)
19. Description on technical Design MLSS - (attached growth process)
details
(A) Design F/M ratio HRT- Sedimentation Separation: 4 hrs
B) Design MLSS Anaerobic chamber: 4 hrs
C) HRT Disinfection chamber: 3.5 hrs
D) SRT
E) Design SOTE
Figure 69 UASB technology based STP installed in Rajamundry, Andhra Pradesh
80
5.5 Activated Sludge Process:
1. Site & Name of town Yelahanka new town, Bangalore

3. Population served by STP 1.01 Lakh
4. Capacity of STP 10 MLD (including Tertiary Treatment Plant)
6. Duration of construction 2 years
7. Land area required 14,771 sq.m
8. Capital Cost of the Project ₹22.00 Crore
9. O&M arrangement Out sourced
10. O&M cost ₹5.70/KL
11. Recycle &reuse of treated water Reused for sale of treated water to consumers
Like BIAL, Airforce, BEL, Prestige, ITC and others
for Gardening/landscaping purpose
12. Reuse of Treated Sludge Sludge generated are being discharged to Jakkur
TTP through pipeline
13. Description of Technology Activated sludge process & Biological treatment
14. Influent Parameters (BOD, COD, TSS BOD-380: COD-720:TSS-450
etc)
15. Effluent Parameters (BOD, COD, TSS BOD-≤5: COD-≤50:TSS-≤5 TN-<10
etc)
16. Skill requirement for O&M Mechanical, electrical and operational aspects
17. Mode of collection of Sewage from Sewerage network
Household to the Treatment Facility
18. Description on technical details
(A) Design F/M ratio A) 0.5
B) Design MLSS B) < 3500
C) HRT C) 2.5 DAYS
D) SRT D) 5.69 HR
E) Design SOTE E) 10%
81
Figure 70 Aerial view of Activated Sludge Process based STP in Yelahanka, Bengaluru
5.6 Extended Aeration:
S.no. Particulars Details

1. Site & Name of town Lalbagh STP, Bangalore
3. Population served by STP 11,112
4. Capacity of STP 1.5 MLD (1500 M3/Day)
6. Duration of construction period 2 Years
7. Land area required 2.4 acres
8. Capital cost of the Project ₹3 Crore
9. O&M arrangement
In house/Out sourced Out Sourced
10. O&M cost ₹15/ KL
82
11. Recycle &reuse of treated water Plant Domestic purpose, gardening,

Construction etc
12. Reuse of treated Sludge Horticulture department and local farmers
13. Description of technology Extended aeriation followed by tube settling
and UV disinfection
14. Influent parameters (BOD, COD, TSS BOD: 330 mg/l, COD: 660 mg/l, TSS: 450mg/l,
etc.) pH: 7-8
15. Effluent parameters (BOD, COD, TSS BOD: <5 mg/l, TSS: <5mg/l, Turbidity: <3NTU,
etc.) pH:6.5-7.5
16. Skill requirement for O&M 6 ( Manager, Engineer, Chemist, Skilled
operators for Membrane)
17. Mode of collection of Sewage from
Household to the Treatment Facility Sewerage network
18. Description on technical details
A) Design F/M ratio A) 0.1 Based on MLSS
B) Design MLSS B) 3000- 4000 mg/l
C) HRT C)22 Hours
D) SRT D) 14 days
E) Design SOTE E) 130 Kg/h
Figure 71 Snapshots of treatment plant, Cubbon park, Bengaluru
83
5.7 Sequencing Batch Reactor
1. Site & Name of town Jetpur STP, Taluka-Jetpur, Dist Rajkot

2. Name of State Gujarat
3. Population served by 1,29,653
STP
6. Duration of construction 51 Months
7. Land area required 9100 m2
8. Capital cost of the ₹30.10 Crore
project
9. O&M arrangement Out sourced to implementing agency for 5 years under same
(In house/Out sourced) contract
10. O&M cost (per KL) ₹2.00
11. Recycle & reuse of Currently reuse of treated wastewater is not practiced.
treated water Discharged into Bhadar River.
12. Description of technology SBR Technology. In this technology, all process i.e. filling,
aeration, settling and decanting are performed in one tank which
saves the foot print.
13. Influent Parameters BOD-250 mg/l COD- 475 mg/l; TSS- 350 mg/l
(BOD, COD, TSS etc)
14. Outlet Parameters (BOD, BOD- less than 10; COD- Less than 50; TSS- less than 10
COD, TSS etc)
15. Mode of collection of Underground drainage network
16. Description on technical
details
(A) Design F/M ratio A) 0.135
B) Design MLSS B) 4500 mg/L
C) HRT C) 14.65 Hrs
D) SRT D) 12.7 Day
E) Design SOTE E) 20%
84
Figure 72 Aerial view of SBR treatment system installed in Jetpur, Gujarat
5.8 Johkasou

1. Name of the Site Jahapnah City Forest Park, Chirag Delhi
2. Name of State NCT of Delhi
3. Capacity of STP 100 KLD
6. Land area required 70 m2 approx.
7. Capital cost of the project ₹33.00 lakhs
8. O&M arrangement Part of Contractor Scope (by M/s Jai Maa
In house/Out sourced Associates), It is EPC+O&M Contract
9. O&M cost (per year) Contract has many other items so please refer to
the O&M Sheet for Johkasou O&M Cost.
10. Recycle &reuse of treated Treated water is used in horticulture replacing
water borewell water as per NGT order
11. Reuse of treated sludge Can be used as manure

12. Description of technology Sedimentation and separation of settleable &
floating solids, followed by anaerobic filter & MBBR
attached growth aerobic process and finally
sedimentation, disinfection and filtration (Johkasou
85
Technology)
13. Influent parameters (BOD,
COD, TSS etc.) BOD: 290 ppm, COD: 400 ppm, TSS: 245 ppm, O
& G: 52 ppm, pH: 6.5
14. Effluent Parameters (BOD, BOD: 20 ppm, COD: 48 ppm, TSS: 18 ppm, O &
COD, TSS etc.) G: 5 ppm, pH: 7.8
15. Skill requirement for O&M Semi-skilled person with few weeks of training can
handle
16. Mode of collection of Sewage is collected from municipal drain/well by
Sewage from Household submersible pump
17. Unit Sizing 11 x 6 meter approx. for treatment area + 10 m2 for
Blower and Panel
Figure 73 Pre-fabricated Johkasou treatment unit installed in New Delhi
86
5.9 Other Methods
There are other options developed/under development in the country, which can be
considered where there is land constraint. Although, these options have high OPEX in
comparison to above mentioned options, but many of such methods (some of them are
patented as well) are being used independently or in combination with other treatment
systems in domestic market which provides desired level of effluent.
Since performance of these technologies varies in handling sewage from medium and
small towns, therefore, the States are advised to select one or two suitable technologies
on pilot basis and on successful testing the results, can go ahead for replicating in other
towns. Cases of a few of such methods are presented below.
5.9.1 Container based or Packaged Treatment Systems
1. Site & Name of town Residential quarters, Wazirabad Water Works, Delhi Jal
Board
2. Name of State Delhi
3. Population served by 700 + 100 = 800 people
STP
4. Nature &Capacity of 200 KLD (MBBR based containerized STP)
STP
5. Year of commissioning February 2022
6. Duration of construction Prefabricated, Compact STP
7. Land area required 70 Sqm
8. Capital cost of the ₹ 95.00 Lakhs
project
9. O&M arrangement In house
(In
house/Outsourced)
10. O&M cost (per KL) ₹ 8 per KL
11. Recycle & reuse of Reuse in flushing and horticulture
treated water
12. Reuse of treated sludge As fertilizer in city parks
13. Description of Prefabricated, Decentralized, Mobile, Compact & Shipping
Containerized wastewater treatment system with Dual technology
technology
and customized design and application, delivered at door step for
treatment and conservation with Aerobic, Anaerobic and Anoxic
method, which can be easily customized according to the
availability of space and contaminated discharged water quality.
87
Advanced Oxidation Process based on Moving Bed Bio-reactors

with Multi Stage Reactors.
Primary Treatment – Secondary Treatment & Tertiary Treatment
14. Influent Parameters 46mg/l, 168mg/l, 8.8mg/l
(BOD, COD, TSS etc)
15. Effluent Parameters 3mg/l,12 mg/l,<5 mg/l

(BOD, COD, TSS etc)
16. Skill requirement for Semi-Skilled (Plumbing, Electrical)
O&M
17. Mode of collection of Sewerage Pipeline to Equalization Tank
Sewage from
Household to the
Treatment Facility
18. Unit Sizing One Unit 40x8x8.5 – 320 Sq/ft x 2 = 640 Sq/ft
Figure 74 Package sewage treatment plant installed in a residential complex in New Delhi
88
5.9.2 IN-SITU BIOREMEDIATION-BASED ISR MODULAR STP
In-line drain treatment such as ‘In-situ bioremediation-based ISR modular STP’ is designed to
function on "the principles of Bioremediation" at 3-stage operations, namely, primary, secondary,
and tertiary wastewater treatment in the drain. Following are the features of this option.
• This modular-based ISR treatment plant can be installed on drains; this space and reduces
the land requirement.
• This technology is effective in continuing the wastewater treatment via advanced
Bioremediation techniques on downstream water bodies and producing minimal sludge
generation.
• This modular-based ISR STP can be rapidly installed (30 – 45 days) and requires minimal
space (100 – 250 sq. m.) than conventional technologies.

1. Site & Name of town Mankameshwar Ghat, Lucknow
2. Name of State Uttar Pradesh
3. Population (2011) 17,500
4. Population served by STP 30,000
period
8. Land area required 250 sq.m
9. Capital cost of the Project 4.5 Cr.
10. O&M arrangement In house
11. O&M cost Rs. 2.29 Cr. for five years (Inclusive of
consumables and repairs) (Rs. 5.6/KL)
12. Recycle & reuse of treated Reuse of treated water for secondary
water purposes, road cleaning, vehicle
washing, construction activities, and
gardening.
13. Reuse of treated Sludge Reuse of treated sludge as soil
conditioner/manure for gardening.
14. Influent parameters (BOD, BOD: 250, COD: 400,
COD, TSS etc.) TSS: 300, TN:45, TP:5, FC:>1000
15. Effluent parameters (BOD, BOD: <20, COD: <30, TSS: <20, TN:<15,
COD, TSS etc.) TP:<1, FC:<1000
16. Skill requirement for O&M Manpower – 1 technician + 3 shift
operator
17. Mode of collection of Sewage Open Drain (Ganda Nallah)
from Household to the
Treatment Facility
18. Description of technical
details
A) Design F/M ratio 0.1 gBOD/gMLVSS/d
B) Design MLSS 3000 mg/L
C) HRT 2 hours
D) SRT 20 days
E) Design SOTE 25%
89
Figure 75 Units and Process diagram of the treatment facility in drain
90
5.9.3 TIGER BIO-FILTER BASED STP
1000 KLD Capacity Sewage Treatment Plant based on Tiger Biofilter Technology at
Poona Golf Club, Yerawada, Pune
1. Site & Name of town Poona Golf Club, Yerawada, Pune
2. Name of State Maharashtra, India
3. Population Pune City
2011 Census As per 2011- 31,24,458
Current Population As per 2021- Approximate 45,00,000
4. Population served by STP As per 2011 Census- 10,000
5. Capacity of STP 1000 KLD or 1000 Cum/Day
6. Year of commissioning March 2022
7. Duration of construction 6 Months
8. Land area required 1800 SqM.
9. Capital cost of the project 1,75,70,000/-
10. O&M arrangement In House
(In house / Out sourced)
11. O&M cost (per KL) Rs. 3.42 per KL
12. Recycle & reuse of treated Treated Water is used for Gardening and irrigation
water purpose. Currently treated Water is used to irrigate 100
Acres of Golf Club Greens.
13. Reuse of treated sludge No sludge generation. Vermicompost is generated as a
byproduct and is it used as compost in garden area.
14. Description of technology The system comprises of a Screen Chamber, Grit
chamber, raw sewage sump and a Tiger Bio filter unit
followed by optional tertiary treatment. The system
configuration can be altered depending upon end use of
treated sewage.
The screened and degrited raw sewage is pumped and
allowed to pass through specially designed Tiger Bio
filter bed. The bed consists of various layers of filter
material along with Tiger worms and bacterial culture. It
forms ecology to treat the wastewater aerobically.
15. Influent Parameters (BOD, • pH- 7.0-8.5
COD, TSS etc) • BOD5 @ 200C- 250 mg / liter (Max.)
• COD- 400 mg / liter (Max.)
91
• TSS- 200 mg / liter (Max.)

16. Outlet Parameters (BOD, • pH - 6.0-8.5
COD, TSS etc) • BOD5 @ 200C- <10 mg / liter
• COD- <50 mg / liter
• TSS- <20 mg / liter
• Color- Unobjectionable
17. Skill requirement for O&M Unskilled labor can operate the Plant by operating only
TBF flow distribution network
18. Mode of collection of The sewage is tapped from the existing trunk sewage
Sewage from Household to line of Pune Municipal Corporation. All collected
the Treatment Facility wastewater is diverted and receiving at inlet of the
Screen Chamber of STP by Conveyance System.
19. Description on technical The Technology employs different design
details parameters than conventional activated sludge process.
(A) Design F/M ratio Following design parameters are used
B) Design MLSS • Surface Loading Rate for TBF Beds-
C) HRT 1.5-2.0 Cum / Sqm / Day
D) SRT • Organic (BOD) Removal Rate-
E) Design SOTE 0.50 KG BOD / KG Tiger Worms
• HRT for Raw Sewage Sump- 4-8 Hrs
• HRT for TBF Beds- 15-30 Minutes
Photographs
Screen Chamber and Intermediate Sump Screen and Grit Chamber, Raw Sewage Sump
92
Tiger Bio Filter Beds-Sprinkling water Tiger Bio Filter Beds-Sprinkling water
Filter Feed Tank with PSF and ACF Units Raw Water and Treated Water Sample
Figure 76 Treatment units of Tiger Biofilter treatment facility
93
References
1. CPCB (2021) - National Inventory of Sewage Treatment Plants in India, CPCB (March
2021)
2. CPHEEO Sewerage Manual (2013) - Manual on Sewerage and Sewage Treatment
Systems – 2013, CPHEEO
3. Kerala IWSMG, GIZ (2021) - Final Draft - Integrated Wastewater and Septage
Management Guidelines, Kerala, GIZ (Feb 2021)
4. APUIAML Liquid Waste Management - Liquid Waste Management – Standard Layouts
for MBBR, SBR & ANOT technologies for STPs, Andhra Pradesh Infrastructure Asset
Management Ltd.
5. SBM Advisory, CPHEEO (2020) - Swachh Bharat Mission Advisory on Onsite and
Offsite Sewage Management Practices, CPHEEO, MoHUA (July 2020)
6. Sperling & Chernicharo, 2006 - Biological Wastewater Treatment in Warm Climate
Regions, Volume -I, Marcos Van Sperling, and Carlos Chernicharo, IWA, (2006)
7. Sperling, 2016 - Urban Wastewater Treatment in Brazil, Marcos Sperling, Inter-American
Development Bank (IDB) (Aug 2016)
8. NRCD Compendium of Sewage Treatment Technologies (Aug 2009), NRCD, IIT Kanpur
9. MoHUA Recent Trends (2012) – Recent Trends in Technologies in Sewerage System,
MoHUA (Mar 2012)
10. IITK Sewage Treatment in Class I Towns (2010) - Sewage Treatment in Class I Towns:
Recommendations and Guidelines, IIT Kanpur (Dec 2010)
11. Manual on Grey Water Management, MoJS
12. BORDA Cost and Management of STPs (2018) – A presentation on Cost and
Management of ssSTPs – Improving Sewage Management and Reuse, BORDA, Sewage
(Apr 2018)
13. Dorai (2020) - Co-treatment of Septage and Faecal Sludge in Sewage Treatment Facilities,
DoraiNarayana (2020)
14. UASB Technology for Sewage Treatment In India: Experience, Economic Evaluation And
Its Potential in other Developing Countires :Twelfth Internation water technology
Conference, IWTC12 2008, Alexandria
15. Wastewater treatment:concepts and Design Approach, Second edition By GL Karia and R
A Christian
16. Suresh Kumar Rohilla, Rahul Mankotia, HemantArora and Sarim Ansari, Mainstreaming
Co-treatment of Faecal Sludge &Septage (FSS) in STPs in Uttar Pradesh: Co-treatment of
FSS options at Bharwara STP Lucknow, Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), 2019
17. United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), Guide to Septage Treatment
and Disposal, United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), 1994.
18. Ecosan Services Foundation and National Institute of Urban Affairs (NIUA), Training
Module on Co Treatment of Septage and Sewage, National Institute of Urban Affairs
(NIUA).
94
19. Central Public Health and Environmental Engineering Organisation (CPHEEO), Advisory
on On-Site and Off-Site Sewage Management Practices, Ministry of Housing and Urban
Affairs (MoHUA), Government of India, 2020
20. A.A. Kazmi, AnkurRajpal, Akansha Bhatia and Raja Zubair, Co-Treatment of Septage at
STPs of Ganga Towns in Uttarakhand. NIUA, 2019.
21. National Institute of Urban Affairs (NIUA) and Ecosan Services Foundation, Design
Module for Co-Treatment of Faecal Sludge and Septage with Sewage in Sewage
Treatment Plant (Part C: Workbook), National Institute of Urban Affairs (NIUA), 2021.
22. Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA), Advisory Note on Septage
Management in Urban India, Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA),
Government of India, 2013
23. Suresh Kumar Rohilla, BhitushLuthra, Amrita Bhatnagar, MahreenMatto and
UdayBhonde, Septage Management - A Practitioner’s Guide: Urban India's journey
beyond ODF, Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), 2017
24. Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA), Swachh Bharat Mission - Urban 2.0
Operational Guidelines, Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs (MoHUA), Government
of India, 2021
95

SBM (2.O) Ready Recknor-Final-Signed

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SBM (2.O) Ready Recknor-Final-Signed

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Swachh Bharat Mission – Urban 2.

Swachh Bharat Mission – Urban 2.0

I congratulate CPHEEO and Deutsche Gesellschaft f0r lnternationale

To achieve this holistic sanitation, MoHUA is supporting the endeavourers of

3.1 Addition of faecal septage with sewage __________________________________________ 61

Figure 50: A Typical site installation picture of Johkasou .........................................................56

Table 20Fact Sheet - UASB........................................................................................................38

1.2 Need for Ready Reckoner

Figure 1: Treatment technologies adopted in India as per treatment capacity in MLD

Table 1:Treatment technologies adopted in Indian cities

Combination of UASB/ABR technologies for higher rate of removal

1.4 Discharge standards for treated usedwater

Table 2: Treated Usedwater Discharge Standards

Source: NGT 2019, MoEF&CC 1986, 2015 and 2019

1.5 International Experience- approach for Used Water treatment in

Predominance of nature based STPs in Brazil

Different sewage treatment technologies adopted in Brazil is given in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Technology wise distribution of number of STPs in Brazil (n=2,187)

Figure 3: Percentage of WWTPs (2800 Nos.) per population range in Brazil

Figure 4: Change in urban wastewater treatment in Germany from 1990 to 2017

1.6 A brief about Sewage Treatment Processes

i. Primary treatment: the purpose of primary treatment is to settle materials by

The classification of common wastewater treatment process according to their level of

Table 3: Classification of common wastewater treatment processes

Further, the treatment processes can be classified as mechanised & non-mechanised.

PST: Primary settling tank, SST: Secondary settling tank

Figure 5: Unit operations in aerobic mechanized biochemical sewage treatment process

Grit 1.Anerobic Filter

RAW WASTE WATER

Figure 6: Process flow of conventional anaerobic sewage treatment

2 Sewage Treatment Technologies

2.1 Nature Based Technologies

2.1.1 Waste Stabilization Pond

I. The Factsheet of Waste Stabilization Pond is given below.

Table 4: Fact Sheet - WSP

II. The photographs of Waste Stabilisation Pond are given below

III. The process diagram of WSP is given below.

Figure 8: WSP – Process

Figure 9: Schematic Diagram of the Cross-Section on of a Waste Stabilization on Pond

IV. The typical layout of WSP is given below

Figure 10: Typical Layout for WSP plant

Table 5: Design inputs for 1, 2 and 5 MLD for WSP

2.1.2 Root Zone or Constructed Wetland

I. The factsheet for Root Zone based STP is given below.

Table 6: Fact Sheet-Root zone

• Operation and maintenance of the system is easy

Figure 11: Root zone– Process

Figure 12 : Root zone–schematic cross section

III. The photograph of Root Zone based STP is given below

IV. Typical Layout of Root Zone based STP is given below.

Figure 14 Typical layout for Root Zone System

Table 7: Design inputs for 1, 2 and 5 MLD of Planted Gravel Filter

L = Length, B = Breadth, D = Depth FB = Free Board

2.2 Mechanised Treatment Technologies

2.2.1 Aerated Lagoon

I. Factsheet for Aerated lagoon is given below.

3. Capital Cost • INR 40 to 60lakh/MLD capacity9

4. O&M Cost • INR 1.5to 3.0 lakh/year/MLD Installed capacity

II. Process flow diagram for Aerated lagoon is given below.

Figure 15: Flowsheet of Facultative Aerated Lagoon

III. Typical Layout for Aerated lagoon is given below.

Figure 16: Typical Layout for Aerated Lagoon