Environmental Management

, Volume 38, Issue 2, pp 286–303 | Cite as

Integrated Risk Framework for Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems

  • Steven Carroll
  • Ashantha Goonetilleke
  • Evan Thomas
  • Megan Hargreaves
  • Ray Frost
  • Les Dawes


Onsite wastewater treatment systems (OWTS) are becoming increasingly important for the treatment and dispersal of effluent in new urbanised developments that are not serviced by centralised wastewater collection and treatment systems. However, the current standards and guidelines adopted by many local authorities for assessing suitable site and soil conditions for OWTS are increasingly coming under scrutiny due to the public health and environmental impacts caused by poorly performing systems, in particular septic tank-soil adsorption systems. In order to achieve sustainable onsite wastewater treatment with minimal impacts on the environment and public health, more appropriate means of assessment are required. This paper highlights an integrated risk based approach for assessing the inherent hazards associated with OWTS in order to manage and mitigate the environmental and public health risks inherent with onsite wastewater treatment. In developing a sound and cohesive integrated risk framework for OWTS, several key issues must be recognised. These include the inclusion of relevant stakeholders throughout framework development, the integration of scientific knowledge, data and analysis with risk assessment and management ideals, and identification of the appropriate performance goals for successful management and mitigation of associated risks. These issues were addressed in the development of the risk framework to provide a generic approach to assessing risk from OWTS. The utilisation of the developed risk framework for achieving more appropriate assessment and management techniques for OWTS is presented in a case study for the Gold Coast region, Queensland State, Australia.


Integrated risk assessment Onsite wastewater treatment Water pollution Effluent irrigation Septic tanks 

Literature Cited

  1. ANZECC. 2000. Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality, Volume 1, The Guidelines (Chapters 1–7). Volume 1–3 Australian and New Zealand Environment and Conservation Council (ANZECC) and Agriculture and Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand (ARMCANZ), CanberraGoogle Scholar
  2. AS/NZS 1547. 2000. AS/NZS 1547:2000 Onsite domestic-wastewater management, Standards Australia/New Zealand, StrathfieldGoogle Scholar
  3. AS/NZS 4360. 1999. AS/NZS 4360:1999 Risk Management, Standards Australia and Standards New Zealand, Sydney and WellingtonGoogle Scholar
  4. Beavers, P. D. 1999. Onsite sewerage facilities: what is expected of new regulations. R. A. Patterson, (ed). Proceedings of Onsite ‘99 Conference: Making Onsite Wastewater Systems Work, Armidale, pp 39–44Google Scholar
  5. Borchardt M. A., P. D. Bertz, S. K. Spencer, D. A. Battigelli. 2003. Incidence of enteric viruses in groundwater from household wells in Wisconsin. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 69(2):1172–1180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brouwer, J., and R. M. Bugeja. 1983. Land capability for septic tank effluent absorption fields. Australian Water Resources Council Technical Paper No. 80Google Scholar
  7. Brown & Root Services. 2001. Onsite Sewage Risk Assessment System. NSW Department of Local Government, NSWGoogle Scholar
  8. Carroll, S., and A. Goonetilleke. 2004. Assessment of high density of onsite wastewater treatment systems on a shallow groundwater coastal aquifer using PCA. Environmetrics 16:257–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carroll S., A. Goonetilleke, L. Dawes. 2004. Framework for soil suitability evaluation for sewage effluent renovation. Environmental Geology 46(2):195–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chen, C. W., L. H. Z. Weintraub, R. A. Goldstein, R. L. Siegrist, and S. Kirkland. 2001. Framework to account for onsite wastewater systems in calculating total maximum daily loads. Onsite Wastewater Treatment. Proceedings of the Ninth National Symposium on Individual and Small Community Sewage Systems, Fort Worth, Texas., ASAE. pp 523–531Google Scholar
  11. Cliver, D. O. 2000. Research Needs in Decentralised Wastewater Treatment and Management: Fate and Transport of Pathogens. Proceedings of the National Research Needs Conference: Risk-Based Decision Making for Onsite Wastewater Treatment, Palo Alto, CA, pp 1–36Google Scholar
  12. Cromer, W. C. 1999. TrenchTM 3.0: A computer application for site assessment and system sizing. Onsite ‘99: Proceedings of Onsite ‘99 Conference: Making onsite wastewater systems work, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Lanfax Laboratories. pp 85–88Google Scholar
  13. Dawes L., A. Goonetilleke. 2003. An Investigation into the role of site and soil characteristics in onsite sewage treatment. Environmental Geology 44(4):467–477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. EPRI. 2001. National Research Needs Conference Proceedings: Risk-Based Decision Making for Onsite Wastewater Treatment. Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA. Environmental Protection Agency and National Decentralised Water Resources Capacity Development Project. 1001446. Available online at http://www.ndwrcdp.org/
  15. Ganoulis J. 1994. Engineering risk analysis of water pollution: probabilities and fuzzy sets. VCH Publishers, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  16. Geary P. M. 1992. Diffuse Pollution from Wastewater Disposal in Small Unsewered Communities. Australian Journal of Soil and Water Conservation 5(1):28–33Google Scholar
  17. Geary, P. M., and J. H. Whitehead. 2001. Groundwater contamination from on-site domestic wastewater management systems in a coastal catchment. In Proceedings of the Ninth National Symposium on Individual and Small Community Sewage Systems, Fort Worth, Texas, American Society of Agricultural EngineersGoogle Scholar
  18. Gold, A. J., and J. T. Sims. 2000. Research needs in decentralized wastewater treatment and management: a risk-based approach to nutrient contamination. National Research Needs Conference Proceedings: Risk-Based Decision Making for Onsite Wastewater Treatment, St. Louis, Missouri, pp 1–43Google Scholar
  19. Goonetilleke A., L. Dawes, and D. Biddel. 2002. Performance evaluation of septic tanks in the Gold Coast region. Environmental Studies, Gold Coast City Council Research Unit, Volume 8, Gold Coast, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  20. Harris P. J. 1995. Water quality impacts from on-site waste disposal systems to coastal areas through groundwater discharge. Environmental Geology 26(4): 262–268CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hoxley, G., and M. Dudding. 1994. Groundwater contamination by septic tank effluent: Two case studies in Victoria, Australia. Pages 145–152 in Water Down Under ‘94: Proceedings of 25th Congress of International Association of Hydrogeologists, Adelaide, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  22. Isbell R. F. 2002. The Australian Soil Classification. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, Victoria, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  23. Jones D. S., A. Q. Armstrong, and M. D. Muhlheim. 2000. Integrated risk assessment/risk management as applied to decentralised wastewater treatment: A high-level framework. Proceedings of the National Research Needs Conference: Risk-Based Decision Making for Onsite Wastewater Treatment, Palo Alto, CA, ppGoogle Scholar
  24. Joubert, L., D. Q. Kellogg, and A. J. Gold. 1996. Watershed nonpoint assessment and nutrient loading using the geographical information system-based MANAGE. Proceedings of Watershed ‘96: A National Conference on Watershed Management, Baltimore, MD, US EPA. pp 84–86Google Scholar
  25. Kenway S., R. Irvine, and R. Moorhead. 2001. The onsite sewage risk assessment system. R. A. Patterson, and Jones M. J. (eds.), Proceedings of Onsite ‘01 Conference: Advancing Onsite Wastewater Systems, Armidale, pp 227–234Google Scholar
  26. Khalil W. A.-S., A. Goonetilleke, S. Kokot, S. Carroll. 2004. Use of chemometric methods and mulitcriteria decision-making for site selection for sustainable onsite sewage effluent disposal. Analytica Chimica Acta 506(1):41–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kirkland S. 2001. Coupling site-scale fate and transport with watershed-scale modeling of nutrients from onsite wastewater systems. Colorado School of Mines Report, Boulder, Denver, COGoogle Scholar
  28. Kleene J. W., C. R. Mote, J. S. Allison. 1993. Environmental impact of irrigating lawns with treated domestic wastewater. Journal of Environmental Health 55(5):1–5Google Scholar
  29. Lipp E. K., S. A. Farrah, B. Rose. 2001. Assessment and impact of microbial fecal pollution and human enteric pathogens in a coastal community. Marine Pollution Bulletin 42(4):286–293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McGuinness, R. I., and D. M. Martens. 2003. GIS-based model to assess potential risk of individual onsite effluent management systems: development assessment module (DAM). Proceedings of Onsite ‘03 Conference: Future directions for onsite systems-best management practice, University of New England, Armidale, NSW, Lanfax Laboratories. pp 265–271Google Scholar
  31. McLaughlin J. A., G. B. Jordan. 1999. Logic models: A tool for telling your programs performance story. Evaluation and Program Planning 22:65–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Meays C. L., K. Broersma, R. Nordin, A. Mazumder. 2004. Source tracking fecal bacteria in water: a critical review of current methods. Journal of Environmental Management 73(1):71–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Noble K. E. 1996. Understanding and managing soils in the Moreton Region. Queensland Department of Primary Industries, BrisbaneGoogle Scholar
  34. NH&MRC. 1996. Australian Drinking Water Guidelines. National Health and Medical Research Council, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  35. Nicosia L. A., J. B. Rose, M. T. Stewart. 2001. A field study of virus removal in septic tank drain fields. Journal of Environmental Quality 30(6):1933–1939CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Otis, R. J., and D. J. Anderson. 1994. Meeting public health and environmental goals: performance standards for onsite wastewater treatment systems. Proceedings of the Seventh National Symposium on Individual and Small Community Sewage Systems, pp 1–10Google Scholar
  37. Parveen S., K. M. Portier, K. Robinson, L. Edmiston, M. L. Tamplin. 1999. Discriminant analysis of ribotype profiles of Escherichia coli for differentiating human and nonhuman sources of fecal pollution. Applied and Environmental Microbiology 65(7):3142–3147Google Scholar
  38. Perkins R. J. 1984. Septic tank, lot size and pollution of water table aquifers. Journal of Environmental Health 46(6):298–304Google Scholar
  39. Ryan (1999). Ryan versus Great Lakes Council, Federal Court of Australia, 177Google Scholar
  40. Scandura J. E., M. D. Sobsey. 1997. Viral and bacterial contamination of groundwater from on-site sewage treatment systems. Water Science and Technology 35(11-12):141–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Siegrist, R. L., E. J. Tyler, and P. D. Jenssen. 2000. Design and performance of onsite wastewater treatment soil adsorption systems. Proceedings of the National Research Needs Conference: Risk-Based Decision Making for Onsite Wastewater Treatment, Palo Alto, CA, pp. 1–48Google Scholar
  42. Stace H. C. T., G. D. Hubble, R. Brewer, K. H. Northcote, J. R. Sleeman, M. J. Mulcahy, E. G. Hallsworth. 1968. A handbook of Australian soils. Glenside, South Australia, Rellim Technical PublicationsGoogle Scholar
  43. US EPA. 1997. Response to Congress on Use of Decentralized Wastewater Treatment Systems. United States Environmental Protection Agency. EPA 832-R-97-001bGoogle Scholar
  44. US EPA. 2002. Onsite Wastewater Treatment Systems Manual. Office of Water, Office of Research and Development and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/625/R-00/008Google Scholar
  45. Wells, M. 2001. Assessment of Land Capability for Onsite Septic Tank Effluent Disposal, Department of Agriculture Western AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  46. Whitehead J. H., P. M. Geary. 2000. Geotechnical aspects of domestic onsite effluent management systems. Australian Journal of Earth Sciences 47:75–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Whitlock J. E., D. T. Jones, V. J. Harwood. 2002. Identification of the sources of fecal coliforms in an urban watershed using antibiotic resistance analysis. Water Research 36(17):4273–4282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yates M. V. 1985. Septic tank density and groundwater contamination. Ground Water 31(6):884–889Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steven Carroll
    • 1
  • Ashantha Goonetilleke
    • 1
  • Evan Thomas
    • 2
  • Megan Hargreaves
    • 3
  • Ray Frost
    • 4
  • Les Dawes
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Urban DevelopmentQueensland University of TechnologyBrisbaneAustralia
  2. 2.Gold Coast City CouncilGold CoastAustralia
  3. 3.School of Life SciencesQueensland University of TechnologyBrisbaneAustralia
  4. 4.School of Physical and Chemical SciencesQueensland University of TechnologyBrisbaneAustralia

Personalised recommendations