#1114

ADVANCES IN THERMOPHILIC ANAEROBIC DIGESTION

John Willis* and Perry SchaferA
* Brown and Caldwell
990 Hammond Drive, Suite 400
Atlanta, GA 30328
A
Brown and Caldwell Rancho Cordova, CA

ABSTRACT
Significant advances have been made in the knowledge base and practical options for improving
thermophilic anaerobic digestion over the past 10 to 15 years. Today, more options exist that
promise to enhance the degree of stabilization achieved and finished product quality in new and
retrofitted existing processes. In parallel, the body of knowledge regarding pathogen
inactivation in these systems has also been advanced, well beyond that available at the time that
the 40 CFR Part 503 regulations1were promulgated. This paper summarizes recent work with
thermophilic anaerobic systems. This paper is a literature review and comparison of recent
publications and work from a number of sources.

KEYWORDS
Anaerobic Digestion, Thermophilic, Vector Attraction Reduction, and Pathogen Inactivation.

DEVELOPMENT OF THERMOPHILIC ANAEROBIC DIGESTION

Thermophilic anaerobic digestion of municipal wastewater sludge has been investigated from the
1920s onward, initial work being completed at laboratory scale. However, full-scale work
began by the 1940s and 1950s.

Garbers work at the City of Los Angeles in the 1950s and 1970s (Garber et al, 1975)2
was aimed primarily at improved dewatering, but the work indicated process concerns
and instability at temperatures above about 49 degrees C.
Popova and Bolotina (1963) 3identified thermophilic digestion for Moscow (Russia).
The primary purpose was better pathogen reduction and operation at lower Solids
Retention Time (SRT) than mesophilic digestion.
Research by Goluecke (1958)4 and Malina (1961)5 was instrumental.
Chicago work (Rimkus et al, 1982)6 at the Stickney Plant showed thermophilic digestion
success at limited SRTs and the ability to reduce digester foaming.

By the late 1980s, thermophilic anaerobic digestion was generally thought to achieve greater
Volatile Solids Reductions (VSRs) than comparable mesophilic digestion, and perhaps be

#1114

operated at reduced SRTs. However, there was major concern for process stability and concern
for product odor. Dewatering recycle characteristics were known to be strong. Pathogen
reduction benefits were recognized; however the US EPA had not recognized thermophilic
anaerobic digestion as a PFRP Process to Further Reduce Pathogens.
By the 1990s, the situation began to change significantly. Work in Germany showed that
thermophilic digestion worked well, especially in combination with mesophilic digestion (i.e.,
thermophilic, then mesophilic, staged digestion), and that thermophilic temperatures of 55
degrees C provided stable operation. At Vancouver, Canada, the Greater Vancouver Regional
District (GVRD) operated its Lions Gate Plant first with single-stage thermophilic digestion,
then with 2-stage thermophilic digestion and showed the significant disinfection improvement
(and disinfection reliability) with a 2-stage configuration (Krugel et al, 1998). 7 Work by
Professor Richard Dague at Iowa State University in the mid-1990s showed that thermophilic
operation at 55 degrees C was quite reliable and, in combination with a second stage mesophilic
digester, produced a high-quality, well-stabilized product with low odor (Han and Dague,
1996).8
Engineers working for GVRD then designed, in the mid-1990s, the Annacis Island Plant
digestion facility using 4-stage thermophilic digestion and modeled the pathogen reductions
based on the US EPAs research work for Class A biosolids that had evolved from development
of the Part 503 regulations. By 1999, this facility proved that it could produce a continuous,
Class A digested (and dewatered) product that was not odorous and operated in a stable and
reliable manner at 55 to 56 degrees C (Schafer et al, 2002). 9 Total system SRT was about 25
days.
With the publication of the US EPAs Part 503 rules in 1993 and especially the time/temperature
equations that could be used to produce Class A biosolids, engineers developed various process
configurations to meet the requirements. There was some confusion initially about the
time/temperature equations until it was recognized that they were developed with the intention
that every particle of sludge was to be subjected to the time/temperature requirements (i.e.,
operated in a batch or plug-flow arrangement).

PROCESS OPTIONS
The thermophilic process options and configurations for wastewater sludge in the US are largely
driven at this time by the desire to achieve Class A digestion and Class A biosolids. The most
common approaches that have evolved are summarized in Figure 1, although there are several
variations on these concepts. However, some agencies have implemented thermophilic
digestion, or more normally the thermo-meso staged arrangement, to achieve greater VSR, more
gas production, and a more stable digested product (i.e., not necessarily a Class A objective).
Pre-pasteurization of sludge prior to anaerobic digestion, is a proven PFRP process, but is not
discussed in this paper because the pre-pasteurization process is usually conducted at higher
temperatures (65 to 70 degrees C) which are not conducive to a biological anaerobic digestion

#1114

process. This paper evaluates only thermophilic anaerobic digestion processes that are
successfully operated with a viable thermophilic anaerobic biological population.
Figure 1: Options for Class A Thermophilic
Anaerobic Digestion Process Configurations

Thermophilic
CFSTR

Thermophilic
Batch

Class A Product

Option 1: Batch digestion with rapid sludge transfer

Class A Product

Fill/Hold/Draw
Digester
Fill/Hold/Draw
Digester
Fill/Hold/Draw
Digester

Option 2: Sequencing batch digestion using

fill/hold/draw rotation through at least 3 reactors

Thermo
CFSTR

Thermo
CFSTR

Thermo
CFSTR

Class A Product

Option 3: Thermophilic digesters in series with not batch

(none yet approved in US)

Thermo
Acid-Phase
Digester

Mesophilic
Methane
Phase

Option 4: Acid/Gas with pathogen

destruction in first thermophilic stage

Class A Product

For any of the process

configurations shown in Figure 1,
a mesophilic stage can be added at
the end to obtain a product with
reduced odor level and a product
with greater overall stability.

PROCESS AND SENSITIVITY

ISSUES
Thermophilic digestion is proving
to be a robust process even at high
loading rates. Thermophilic
digesters are often loaded at 0.15 to
0.2 lb VS/cubic foot/day and in
some cases are being loaded at
higher rates. At Wilhelmshaven,
Germany, the thermophilic digester
at 55 degrees C (first stage of a
thermo-meso staged system) has a
3-day average SRT and loading
rates are about 0.7 lb VS/cubic
foot/day. Few agencies are willing
to push thermophilic anaerobic
digestion to this degree, but its
successful performance at
Wilhemshaven gives credence to
claimed high reaction rates and
ability to handle very high loading
rates (Schafer, 1999). 10

Operating alkalinities for thermophilic anaerobic digestion are somewhat higher than comparable
mesophilic digester alkalinities. This is due to higher reaction rates and greater destruction of
organic material. Ammonia concentrations are also higher in the thermophilic digesters and
there is concern at some facilities (especially plants with very high percentage of WAS feedrate)
of achieving levels where ammonia toxicity could occur. Digester pH is often above 7.5 (even
approaching pH of 8.0 on occasion) in thermophilic anaerobic digesters, which is higher pH than
comparable mesophilic digesters (usually closer to 7.0 to 7.2).
Volatile fatty acid (VFA) concentrations are higher in thermophilic, over mesophilic, digesters.
VFA levels are often over 500 mg/l (as acetic acid), and levels as high as 1000 mg/l are not

#1114

unusual. This is one of the issues of concern with thermophilic digestion products the odor
from VFAs. However, with a high degree of dewatering, this odor is largely an issue for the
dewatering recycle stream and less of an issue in the dewatered cake product.
Thermophilic anaerobic digestion requires additional heating to achieve the temperatures
required. This need pushes agencies to provide thicker feedstock sludge, typically at least 5
percent solids and in most cases toward 6 percent solids or higher, if possible. Others recover
heat off of the discharged biosolids to preheat the raw sludge feedstock and reduce the total fuel
required to reach thermophilic temperatures.
Digestion Solids Retention Times (SRTs)
The total SRTs of the configurations shown in Figure 1 can vary. Only about two systems are
known to be operating with SRTs at or slightly below 15 days, and there is concern for product
stability when SRTs drop below about 15 days. Most thermophilic digestion systems provide
total system SRTs of 20 to 25 days. Many thermo-meso staged systems also have well over 20
days of total system SRT, although the thermo-meso system at Wilhelmshaven, Germany has as
little as 15 to 18 days of total SRT.
Temperature Sensitivity
The ability to obtain consistent temperature has been identified as a key issue for successful
thermophilic anaerobic digestion. The thermophilic biological population appears to be more
sensitive to temperature changes than mesophilic populations. Modern temperature control
features on digestion heating systems provide much more consistent digester temperatures than
historically. Reactor temperature fluctuations at modern thermophilic digesters typically show
only minor variations on a daily basis (such as 0.1 to 0.2 degrees C variation throughout the
day).
The requirement for consistent thermophilic temperature means that mixing within the digester
must be very good, or there will be pockets of sludge at reduced temperature. Agencies are
using various mixing technologies including mechanical draft tube mixers, gas mixing, and
hydraulic mixing, with the common theme to insure that all portions of the tanks are well-mixed.
The experience at the City of Los Angeles (Iranpour, 2003 and 2005) is instructive for
temperature control. Thermophilic digester temperatures were raised rapidly perhaps in an
inadvertent manner. A several-degree C temperature increase occurred, bringing the digester
quickly into the range of 58 degrees C or higher. This rapid increase negatively affected the
biology and the digestion process suffered. Reduced sulfur emissions caused odor problems.
At GVRDs Annacis Island Plant, digestion operation at 56 degrees C over most of the past 6
years has provided stable digestion operation with no odor or process problems. At least 25
wastewater agencies in North America and Europe operate thermophilic anaerobic digesters at
54 to 55 degrees C with no reported problems in process stability. Therefore, the City of Los
Angeles experience shows that rapid increase in thermophilic temperature must be avoided.

#1114

However, consistent operation at 55 degrees C (and even 56 degrees C) is providing stable

operation. Laboratory-scale work has shown that thermophilic digestion of wastewater sludge
becomes less stable at temperatures toward 60 degrees C, and, therefore to date, agencies have
felt most comfortable operating in the range of about 53 to 56 degrees.
Thermophilic Acid Phase Digestion
The operation of an acid-phase thermophilic digestion phase has received much less research and
evaluation than thermophilic gas phase digestion. Lab-scale and pilot-scale work has been
conducted for thermophilic acid-phase, and the DuPage County, Illinois plant was operated in
this arrangement for a short period of time. Controlling the short SRT to the required degree
(such as 1 to 1.5 days) is expected to be challenging at full-scale.
The combination of very high VFA concentrations (such as 5000 to 10,000 mg/l), coupled with
thermophilic temperatures, and low pH (6 or below), creates a tremendously odorous gas.
Managing the gas from a thermophilic, acid-phase reactor is expected to be additionally
challenging because of its extreme odor and because the gas is not expected to support
combustion on its own due to low methane content. Any leakage of this gas, even in minute
amounts prior to its combustion, is bound to cause an odor problem.
A treatment plant in Lakeland, FL is in the process of implementing the Infilco Degremont
2PAD process which employs the thermophilic acid phase step with a 6-hour batch. This plant
is expected to be operational by 2007.
Gas Management for Thermophilic Digestion
Gas production rates can be much higher in thermophilic digestion than in mesophilic digestion.
For fairly low-SRT thermophilic digestion (say 4 to 8 day SRT), much higher gas production
rates will occur than from a 20-day SRT mesophilic digester. Therefore, gas piping is likely to
need upsizing and gas management systems need to be able to handle high gas flowrates.
Thermophilic digester gas contains much greater moisture content than mesophilic digester gas,
and, therefore, condensing this moisture becomes a much more important need.

STABILIZATION WITHIN THERMOPHILIC DIGESTION

It is now well-accepted that thermophilic anaerobic digestion systems will destroy more volatile
solids than mesophilic anaerobic digestion systems at the same total SRT. Comparative work at
full-scale and pilot-scale supports this statement and Schafer et al, 2002 provides a summary of
recent comparisons. The amount of additional VSR depends on several factors. At relatively
low SRT (say 15 to 20 days), the thermophilic system is likely to achieve about 4 to 8 percentage
points of additional VSR. For example, if the mesophilic anaerobic system achieved 50 percent
VSR, the thermophilic anaerobic system (at the same SRT) is likely to achieve between 54 and
58 percent VSR. At high total SRT (say 30 days) there will tend to be less difference between
the two systems. Another comparison is that the same VSR (say 50 percent) can be achieved in

#1114

less total SRT with thermophilic systems, over mesophilic systems. The additional VSR that is
achieved within the thermophilic system creates commensurately more digester gas.

PATHOGEN REDUCTION TO ACCHIEVE CLASS-A PERFORMANCE

A number of plants have converted their anaerobic digestion operations from mesophilic
temperatures to temperatures in the thermophilic range over the past 15 years. While the
improvement in pathogen destruction at the higher temperatures when maintained for a given
contact time is not disputed, the ability for these converted systems to produce biosolids meeting
Class A pathogen requirements as defined in the Part 503 regulations has been addressed on an
application-by-application basis.
While Part 503 provides 6 alternatives to achieve Class-A pathogen destruction designation, the
most commonly used alternatives for thermophilic anaerobic digestion have been:
Alternative 1: Time and Temperature
Alternative 3: Documented Virus and Helminth Ova Destruction
Alternative 6: Treatment with an PFRP-Equivalent Process
In general, Alternative 1 requires the least amount of additional investigation and additional
proof of a processs efficacy. Conversely, Alternative 1 typically requires the most conservative
combinations of time and temperature batch operation of the three alternatives. It is also not
surprising that the earliest plants that achieved Class A operation did so using Alternative 1.
More recently, plants have used full-scale data to obtain EPA Regional approval to operate
Class-A systems by qualifying under Alternative 3. Often, the full-scale testing does not fully
demonstrate the process effectiveness on helminths and virus reduction so that plants operating
under Alternative 3 typically have monitoring requirements that are more extensive than for
Alternative 1. There are currently plants operating with Alternative 3 authorization and all have
requirements to periodically test feed and treated biosolids for helminths and enteric viruses.
Even more recently, utilities and engineers have explored processes using Alternative 6. The
investigations have used pilot-scale pathogen spiking studies and have required process
definitions that address scale-up issues. The data collected from the pathogen spiking tests have
shown that Class A performance can be reliably achieved at pilot scale using considerably less
conservative combinations of batch time and temperature. While there are not any Class A
plants currently operating under Alternative 6, this is likely to change as more data become
available from similar tests and upgrades currently under construction are brought on line.

OVERVIEW OF METHODS TO ACHIEVE CLASS-A OPERATION

Alternative 1 Time and Temperature

#1114

Utilities have used the time and temperature batch requirements defined under Class-A
Alternative 1 of the Part 503 Regulations to modify their digestion process to produce Class-A
biosolids. Figure 2 shows a plot of the time and temperature curve for sludge with total solids
concentrations of less than seven percent.
Plants that have considered
time and temperature
options have gravitated to
operational criteria near 55
degrees C which require
approximately 24 hours of
batch detention time. This is
due to reported operational
stability of thermophilic
systems at temperatures in
the 55 degrees C range,
while allowing the batch
times to be maintained at
practical times/volumes.

Plants have used the ~1 day at

~55 degrees C for compliance
with time and temperature

The time/temperature
Figure 2: Time and Temperature Relationship
equations between 50 and
70 degrees C within
Alternative 1 were developed from the following information which included prior guidance of
US and European rules. Also, the equations were developed within a framework of
conservatism and safety (Farrell, 2003): 11
The prior 40 CFR Part 257 rule contained the PFRP definition for sludge pasteurization
i.e., 70 degrees C for 30 minutes.
Feachem12(Feachem, 1983) developed time/temperature plots for pathogen reduction
including ascaris ova, enterovirus, and salmonellae. However, Feachem did not explain
in detail how he developed his time/temperature plots from the raw data, so EPA placed
some additional conservatism on Feachems work.
The US Food and Drug Administration pasteurization requirements for milk products
were used. Eggnog pasteurization requirements, in particular, were important because
eggnog more closely represents a slurry situation. Extending the time/temperature plot
for eggnog pasteurization (i.e., extending to lower temperatures and longer times) fit well
with being on the safe side of Feachems plots. The FDA believes the pathogen
reduction capability of its pasteurization rules provides many logs at least 7 log10
reduction, and probably more.
Pathogen reduction rates tended to follow straight lines when plotted as temperature
versus the log of time. Therefore, EPA equations were developed on this basis.
All pathogen reduction time/temperature information assumed batch-type operation,
whereby the entire mass is subjected to the required temperature for the associated time.

#1114

A 3-degree C benefit was provided for less than 7 percent solids slurries since heat
transfer is clearly better in a slurry than within bulk materials such as compost, and data
on pathogen reduction supported this approach.
EPA used the lower limiting temperature of 50 degrees C for these equations since
reduction of ascaris ova, in particular, below this temperature was not considered
sufficiently reliable based on available data in the early 1990s.

Dr. Joseph Farrell, who developed the pathogen reduction information and the time/temperature
equations for the Part 503 rule, indicates he believes these equations in Alternative 1 probably
provide at least 5 logs of pathogen density reduction.
The following plants are either online, producing Class-A biosolids or in start-up and plan to
qualify under Alternative 1:
Orange Water and Sewer Authority (OWASA) Chapel Hill, NC: Mason Farm WWTP.
The system uses a batch held at greater than 55.5 degrees C for at least 21 hours (Willis
and Gottschalk, 2001).13.
City of Los Angeles, CA: Terminal Island WWTP. System uses a batch held at 55
degrees C for 24 hours (Iranpour, 2002, 2005). 14, 15
Metropolitan Sewerage District Madison, WI: Nine Springs WWTP: process is in startup and plans to use batches held at g 55 degrees C for 24 hours (Schimp, 2003).16
Chattanooga, TN: starting up an upgraded system, and they plan to utilize a 59.3-degree
C, 6-hour batch.
Alternative 3 Full-Scale Testing for Helminths and Viruses
In 2001 and 2002, two plants (in California) were allowed Class-A operation by qualifying under
Alternative 3. Alternative 3 requires that testing of process influent and effluent show that, if
there are enteric viruses and helminths in the process feedstock, that the process effluent have
concentrations below the permitted limits. The perception by both regulators and the regulated
community is that Alternative 3 allows for a less rigorous proof of a process efficacy than either
Alternative 1 or 6.
The processes that are operating under an Alternative 3 justification are typically less
conservative than the time and temperature equation. Regulators have required ongoing
monitoring for helminth ova and enteric viruses in the treated biosolids to provide further data in
support of the operation of these systems.
Plants currently operating under Alternative 3 include:
Inland Empire Utilities Agency (IEUA) Rancho Cucamonga, CA: Regional Plant
Number 1. Plant uses a three-phase system that includes mesophilic acid phase,
thermophilic methane phase, followed by an intermediate-temperature third phase
(Fondahl, 2001).17
City of Los Angeles, CA: Hyperion WWTP. System uses a 16-hour, 53-degree-C batch
(Iranpour, 2005). 18, 19, 20.

#1114

Alternative 6 Demonstration the Process is Equivalent to a PFRP

The PEC requires that a 2-log10 reduction of viable helminth ova density and a 3-log10 reduction
of enteric virus density be demonstrated in order to prove PFRP equivalency. Even with PECapproved Equivalent PFRPs, compliance with a bacterial indicator test (either fecal coliform or
salmonella) is still required by the Part 503 regulations.
Researchers who have undertaken pathogen-spiked, pilot-scale tests have documented pathogen
destruction at time and temperature combinations that are considerably less conservative than
those defined by the Alternative 1 time and temperature equation. Some of the proposed PFRPEquivalent processes (if based on time and temperature criteria) also attempt to take advantage
of the pathogen destruction that occurs in non-batch thermophilic systems.
Currently, only the following two processes have pursued Qualification using Alternative 6;
Ondeo Degremonts 2PAD process21 is scheduled to be started at a treatment plant in
Lakeland, FL some time in 2007. The process uses a thermophilic, acid-phase digester
with a roughly 6-hour batch with at least 4-hours at greater than 55 degrees C followed
by a mesophilic, methane-phase digester. (Ferran, 2002)
Columbus Water Works first CBFT3 process first implementation will be at the South
Columbus Water Resource Facility and is currently scheduled for start-up in 2008. The
process consists of a 6-day-MCRT thermophilic digester without a batch followed by a
30-minute batch at either 55 degrees C (still under review by the PEC) or 60 degrees C
(currently conditionally approved as a PFRP Equivalent).
Each of the above processes has been granted Conditional PFRP Equivalency by the PEC
based on laboratory- or pilot-scale testing. The conditional PFRP equivalency is dependent on
full-scale testing to prove that helminths and enteric viruses can be reduced by 2- and 3-log10,
respectively, without exceeding the allowable pathogen densities in the effluent. While the
sampling for these organisms in the feed and finished biosolids is occurring, the finished
biosolids may be treated as Class-A provided all identified operational criteria are met.

CURRENT DATA ON PATHOGEN DESTRUCTION CAPACITY OF THERMOPHILIC

ANAEROBIC DIGESTION
While the plants that are operational in Class-A mode have qualified under either Alternative 1
or Alternative 3, it has been the new processes attempting to qualify under Alternative 6 that
have performed more robust testing to achieve Class-A compliance using the shortest/lowest
combinations of batch time and temperature.22(Willis, 2005) These same tests have developed
data on the ability of thermophilic anaerobic digestion systems ability to inactivate helminths
and viruses, in addition to fecal coliform or other bacterial indicators. The Alternative 6
investigations have used pilot-scale pathogen spiking studies and have required process
definitions that address scale-up issues. While there are not any Class A plants currently
operating under Alternative 6, this is likely to change as more data become available from
similar tests.

#1114

In discussions with the Pathogen Equivalency Committee (PEC) of the USEPA, three criteria
have been identified for PFRP Equivalency:
Systems must prove capable of affecting a 2-log10 reduction of Helminth ova while
having no viable ova after treatment.
Systems must prove capable of affecting a 3-log10 reduction of enteric viruses while
having no viable viruses after treatment.
Systems must be capable of producing a product with fecal coliform densities of less than
1,000 MPN/gram of dry solids as ongoing fecal coliform or Salmonella testing will be
required, as with all Class-A processes. There has been less emphasis placed on the
bacterial reduction performance of pilot-scale systems because this ongoing monitoring
requirement remains in place regardless of the Alternative used to qualify. Bacteria are
gaining more attention recently, however, as they may represent the most resistant of the
current indicator organisms to the conditions present in thermophilic anaerobic digesters.
Infilco Degremont 2PAD Pilot-Scale Testing
The 2PAD system consists of a thermophilic, acid-phase digester followed by a considerably
larger, mesophilic methane-phase digester. During the pilot testing, the acid-phase digester was
fed four times per day with each feeding depressing the reactor temperature to between 49 and
50 degrees C. The temperature would then recover to above 55 degrees C for the last 2.5 to 3.0
hours prior to the next set of transfers.
Naturally occurring fecal coliform were present in the feedstock at an average concentration of
6.35 log10 MPN/g TS. While treated biosolids fecal coliform concentration data were not
presented in the references, Ferran (2002) states that the Class-A fecal coliform levels were
achieved.
Ascaris, which traditionally have been considered the most thermally resistant of the indicator
organisms, were spiked in the process feed at an average concentration of 2.61 log10 PFU/4g TS.
No viable ascaris ova were detected in eleven 4+ g TS samples.
Poliovirus were spiked in the feedstock at an average concentration of 4.02 log10 PFU/4g TS.
Poliovirus were reduced by between 2.82 and 3.15 log10 without detecting a viable plaque
forming unit in the finished product in seven samples.
Of interest are the thermophilic and mesophilic digester average pH and chemical concentrations
shown in the table to the right. Ferran cites anti-pathogenic enhancements from non-ionized
VFAs at pH lower than 5.0 and from free ammonia at pH greater than 7.5; He also notes,
however, that the operating ranges of the 2PAD system do not fall within the ranges identified.
In addressing the observed Class-A performance of the 2PAD system, Ferran compares the much
shorter holding time (roughly 2.5 hours) at 55 degrees C compared to the 24 hours required by
the time and temperature equation. The following is a condensed excerpt from that paper:

#1114

Table 1: pH and Chemical Concentrations During

Based on the US EPA
2PAD Pilot Testing with 4 feedings/day at 55OC
guidance for the
production of Class A
Free Ammonia, Non-Ionized
biosolids, a minimum of
pH
mg/l
VFA, mg/l
24 hours at 55 degrees C
Thermophilic,
should be maintained
Acid-Phase
6.08
2.1
138
between the feedings of
Digester
draw and fill
Mesophilic,
thermophilic digester to
Methane-Phase
7.22
13.4
0.7
ensure freedom from
Digester
pathogens. Only 6
hours separated feedings
of the pilot unit and the inside temperature was not steady at 55 degrees C. Therefore,
parameters other than temperature may have intervened to achieve the observed pathogen
destruction. The presence of a toxic substance in the feed was rapidly ruled out since the
seeding recoveries were acceptable and absence of cytotoxicity to poliovirus was
demonstrated. The presence of substances such as VFA and free ammonia in the
digesters was investigated next. By comparison with the data from literature the
(observed) free ammonia and VFA are too low to trigger any significant pathogen
decay.(Ferran, 2002)
CBFT3 Laboratory-Scale Testing
The CBFT3 testing was conducted at laboratory-scale at the University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill. A continuous-feed, stirred tank reactor (CFSTR) was continuously Ascaris-suumand poliovirus-spiked sludge. After a stable operation was achieved, a portion of the CFSTR
contents would be transferred to a second vessel so that samples could be taken to simulate
various batch times downstream of a CFSTR. Both the CFSTR and the batch tank were
maintained at the same temperature. The tests were also conducted with sludge from three
different sources:
1. Co-thickened primary and secondary sludge from the South Columbus Water Resource
Facility in Columbus, GA;
2. Fermented primary sludge from the Orange Water and Sewer Authoritys (OWASA)
Mason Farm WWTP in Chapel Hill, NC; and
3. Pure-oxygen waste activated sludge from the Western Lake Superior Sanitary District
(WLSSD) in Duluth MN.
Table 2 shows the ascaris and poliovirus reductions observed across the CFSTR alone operating
at an SRT of between 4.5 and 6 days. Only the 51 degrees C operation detected any viable
ascaris downstream of the CFSTR. Poliovirus was not detected in any of the effluent samples at
any of the temperatures tested. Similarly, neither organism was detected at any batch detention
time downstream of the CFSTR either.

#1114

Table 2: Ascaris and Poliovirus Reduction in CBFT3 Pathogen-Spiked CFSTR

Free
Ascaris
Viable
Viable Poliovirus
Test (number of
Avg.
Ammonia/
Reduction, Ascaris Reduction, Poliovirus
replicates)
pH
Non-ionized
log10
?
log10
?
VFA, mg/l
O
SCWRF-55 C A
>2.07
N
>2.07
N
7.38
73 / 6
(2)
SCWRF-55OC B
>2.35
N
>4.29
N
7.37
77 / 6
(2)
SCWRF-53OC (2)
>2.18
N
>4.36
N
7.34
73 / 8
SCWRF-51OC (2)
2.04
Y
>3.37
N
7.52
102 / 2
OWASA-53OC (2)
>2.10
N
>5.76
N
7.02
19 / 8
WLSSD-53OC (2)
>2.85
N
>3.26
N
7.44
110 / 4
Fecal coliform were detected in the CFSTR effluent in excess of the Class-A limit of 1,000
MPN/g TS. In fact, it was observed to take as long as a 2-hour batch downstream of the CFSTR
at 55 degrees C to reach Class-A levels. Counter to what would be expected these results were
not repeated at lower temperatures:
Five out of six tests conducted at 53 degrees C produced Class-A fecal coliform levels
leaving the CFSTR. The sixth produced Class-A levels at less than a 1-hour batch
(interpolated from the reductions to be 30 minutes) downstream of the CFSTR.
Finally, both tests at 51 degrees C failed to meet the fecal coliform criterion immediately
after discharge from the CFSTR but did achieve the Class A levels after a 1-hour
downstream batch.
Because the CFSTR proved to be extremely effective in reducing the ascaris and poliovirus, a
separate test was
Table 3: Ascaris and Poliovirus Reduction in Batch Digester during
conducted to
CBFT3 Tests
determine the
Ascaris
Time
to
Reduce
Time to Reduce
effectiveness of the
Poliovirus
at T=0,
ascaris below
poliovirus
batch reactor. Spiked
Test
at T=0,
log
/g
Detection
Limit,
below
Detection
concentrations of
10
log10/g TS
TS
hr
Limit, hr
ascaris and poliovirus
49OC
3.20
>6
2.18
2
were monitored in a
O
51 C 1
3.15
2
4.71
0.5
batch digester to
51OC 2
3.25
1
3.43
0.5
observe the rate of
O
53 C 1
3.35
0.5
3.21
0.17
destruction. Table 3
53OC 2
3.29
0.5
4.85
0.5
shows the results from
O
55 C
2.56
0.5
Not done
Not done
this effort.

D-Factors Support Results Obtained in Alternative 6 Testing

#1114

In looking at research that predated the Part 503 promulgation, a number of references support
the more recent findings. In particular the following are relevant and indicate ascaris destruction
times that are much more similar to those observed by Ferran and Aitken. In particular:
R. J. Barnard23(1987) enumerated dead and live ascaris ova at various batch times and
temperatures. His research identified that a greater than 3-log10 reduction and complete
inactivation of ascaris was reached after:
o 287 minutes at 50OC
o 46.7 minutes at 52OC
o 6.5 minutes at 55OC
E. G. Carrington24(1985) performed similar experiments and observed the destruction of
ascaris in sludge pasteurization scenarios at relatively low thermophilic temperatures. In
particular, the conclusions of that work state that if sludge containing ascaris ova is
heated to 55OC and maintained at this temperature for 2 hours the treated material will be
free of viable ascaris ova.
Jones and Martin25(2003) reference D-values (the amount of time to cause a 1 log10
reduction for a given organism) of 1.3 minutes at 60OC for ascaris and 32 minutes at
55OC and 19 minutes at 60OC for poliovirus. They also cite 7 minutes at 55OC as the
time required for destruction of Ascaris.
As the recent investigations by Ferran and Aitken suggest that operating regimes defined by the
Alternative 1 Time and Temperature equation may have a major level of conservatism for
ascaris ova and enterovirus, the PEC is interested in identifying other mechanisms that may be
responsible for the reported results. Others argue that the time and temperature equations, which
were appropriately conservative at the time of their development and publication based on the
data available at the time, are not closely reflective of the minimums required to achieve Class-A
performance. At the same time, additional research is advancing on the minimum requirements
to achieve Class-A treatment levels with respect to fecal coliform and on the effectiveness of a
variety of possible stressors (in addition to heat) that occur normally within digesters.

SUMMARY
The combination of recent research shows that unionized ammonia and volatile acids can aid in
the disinfection of biosolids under certain operating regimes and have little or no effect under
other regimes. These results support the foundation of the 2PAD argument that the volatile acids
contribute to the disinfection observed in their pilot testing of low-pH, acid-phased digestion.
The same results also support the CBFT3 research claims that, at neutral pH, ammonia and
volatile acids have little or no effect and that the observed pathogen destruction is due to thermal
stressors alone. The CBFT3 results are also supported by D-value research from the 1980s.
Within the research work for thermophilic anaerobic digestion, there appears to be a large
amount of conservatism in the Class A time/temperature equation with respect to certain
pathogens (ascaris ova and viruses, for example). Also, more general pathogen research work
indicates that more rapid dieoff of certain pathogens is very supportable (i.e., more rapid dieoff
than would be predicted by the EPA Class A time/temperature equation). For fecal coliform,

#1114

there appears to be less conservatism in the Class A time/temperature equation, and the amount
of conservatism can be argued based on a wide variety of data. Ongoing work with respect to
fecal coliform reactivation and regrowth and other aspects of indicator organism inactivation
may provide helpful information on this issue.

REFERENCES
1

40 CFR Part 503: Standards for the Use or Disposal of Sewage Sludge, Federal Register,
Volume 58, No. 32 (1993), pp.9387-9404.
2
Garber, W. F., Ohara, G., Colbaugh, J., and Raksit, S., Thermophilic digestion at the Hyperion
Treatment Plant. Journal WPCF Vol 47, No. 5, May 1975
3
Popova and Bolotina (1963) The present state of purification of town sewage and the trend in
research work in the City of Moscow. International Journal of Air and Water Pollution
Vol 7, 145.
4
Golueke, C. G. (1958) Temperature effects on anaerobic digestion of raw sewage sludge.
Sewage and Industrial Wastes, Vol 30, 1225.
5
Malina, J. F. Jr. (1961) The effect of temperature on high rate digestion of activated sludge.
Proceedings of 16th Industrial Waste Conference, Purdue University, p. 232
6
Rimkus, R., Ryan, J., and Cook, E. (1982) Full-scale thermophilic digestion at the WestSouthwest Sewage Treatment Works, Chicago, Illinois. Journal WPCF, Volume 54,
number 11.
7
Krugel, S., Nemeth, L., and Peddie, C., Extended thermophilic anaerobic digestion for
producing Class A biosolids at the Greater Vancouver Regional Districts Annacis Island
Wastewater Treatment Plant. Presented at IAWQ conference in Vancouver, Canada,
June 1998
8
Han, Yue, and Dague, Richard, Laboratory studies on the temperature-phased anaerobic
digestion of mixtures of primary and waste activated sludge. Presented at WEFTEC
Conference, October 1996.
9
Schafer, P., Farrell, J., Newman, G., and Vandenburgh, S. Advanced anaerobic digestion
performance comparisons. Presented at WEFTEC conference, 2002.
10
Schafer, Perry (1999) Site visit and data evaluation at Wilhelmshaven, Germanys Main
Wastewater Treatment Plant.
11
Farrell, J. 2003. Discussion with Dr. Joseph Farrell, November 2003.
12
Feachem, Bradley, Garelick and Mara, Sanitation and Disease: Health Aspects of Excreta and
Wastewater Management, John Wiley and Sons 1983.
13
Willis and Gottschalk, Operational Improvements from Start-up of OWASAs Class-A,
Thermophilic Anaerobic Digestion System, WEFTEC 2001, Atlanta, GA Oct. 2001.
14
Iranpour, et. al, Changing Mesophilic Wastewater Sludge Digestion into Thermophilic
Operation at Terminal Island Treatment Plant, Water Environment Research, (Volume
74; Number 5) pp. 494-507 Oct./Sept. 2002.
15
Iranpour, R. 2005. Discussion with Dr. Reza Iranpour, June 2005.
16
Schimp, et. al, Anaerobic Digestion: Retooling an old process to meet a Class A objective,
Water Environment and Technology, May 2003, pp. 45-49.

#1114

17

Letter from Lauren V. Fondahl (EPA Region 9) to Douglas Drury (Inland Empire Utilities
Agency), December 21, 2001
18
Iranpour R, et. al, Full-scale Class A biosolids production by two-stage continuous-batch
thermophilic anaerobic digestion at the Hyperion Treatment Plant, Water Environment
Research (in press) 2005.
19
Iranpour R, et. al, Thermophilic anaerobic digestion to produce Class A biosolids; initial fullscale studies at Hyperion Treatment Plant, Water Environment Research (in press)
2005.
20
Iranpour, et. al, Production of EQ Biosolids at the Hyperion Treatment Plant: Problems and
Solutions for Reactivation/Growth of Fecal Coliforms, WEFTEC 2003, Los Angeles, CA
Oct. 2003.
21
Ferran, et. al, Two-Phase Anaerobic Digestion of Municipal Sewage Sludge Optimization of
the Pathogen Destruction, WEFTEC 2002, Chicago, IL Oct. 2002.
22
Willis, et. al, The State of the Practice of Class-A Anaerobic Digestion: Update for 2005,
WEFTEC 2005, Washington, DC Oct.-Nov. 2005.
23
Barnard, et. al, Ascaris lumricoides suum: Thermal Death Time of Unembryonated Eggs,
Experimental Parasitology (Vol. 64), 1987.
24
Carrington, Pasteurization; Effects upon Ascaris Eggs, Inactivation of Microorganisms in
Sewage Sludge by Stabilisation Processes, 1985
25
P. Jones and M. Martin, A Review of the Literature on the Occurrence and Survival of
Pathogens of Animals and Humans in Green Compost, The Waste and Resources Action
Programme, Nov. 2003.