Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Water
Washington, D.C.
EPA 832-F-00-023
September 2000
Wastewater
Technology Fact Sheet
Wetlands: Subsurface Flow
DESCRIPTION
Wetland systems are typically described in terms of
the position of the water surface and/or the type of
vegetation grown. Most natural wetlands are free
water surface systems where the water surface is
exposed to the atmosphere; these include bogs
(primary vegetation mosses), swamps (primary
vegetation trees), and marshes (primary vegetation
grasses and emergent macrophytes). A subsurface
flow (SF) wetland is specifically designed for the
treatment or polishing of some type of wastewater
and are typically constructed as a bed or channel
containing appropriate media. An example of a SF
wetland is shown in Figure 1. Coarse rock, gravel,
sand and other soils have all been used, but a gravel
medium is most common in the U.S. and Europe.
The medium is typically planted with the same types
of emergent vegetation present in marshes, and the
water surface is designed to remain below the top
surface of the medium. The main advantages of this
subsurface water level are prevention of mosquitoes
and odors, and elimination of the risk of public
contact with the partially treated wastewater. In
contrast, the water surface in natural marshes and
free water surface (FWS) constructed wetlands is
exposed to the atmosphere with the attendant risk of
mosquitoes and public access.
The water quality improvements in natural wetlands
had been observed by scientists and engineers for
many years and this led to the development of
constructed wetlands as an attempt to replicate the
water quality and the habitat benefits of the natural
wetland in a constructed ecosystem. Physical,
chemical, and biochemical reactions all contribute to
water quality improvement in these wetland
Vegetation
Optional Inlet
Manifold Warm
Climates
Outlet Zone
2 to 3
Gravel
Inlet Zone
2 to 3
Gravel
Inlet Manifold
Cold Climates
Treatment Zone
1
2 to 1 / 2 Gravel
1/
Water
Surface
Outlet
Manifold
Membrane Line or
Impermeable Soils
Disadvantages
DESIGN CRITERIA
Typical Influent
Concentration mg/L
Target Effluent
Concentration mg/L
3 to 12**
BOD
30 to175
10 to 30
60 to 140
TSS
30 to150
10 to 30
40 to 150
NH3/NH4 as N
2 to 35
1 to 10
1 to 10
NO3 as N
2 to 10
1 to 10
3 to 12
TN
2 to 40
1 to 10
3 to 11
TP
1 to 10
0.5 to 3
1 to 4
TABLE 2 BACKGROUND SF
WETLAND CONCENTRATIONS
Constituent
Units
Concentration
Range
BOD5
mg/L
1 to 10
TSS
mg/L
1 to 6
TN
mg/L
1 to 3
NH3/NH4 as N
mg/L
NO3 as N
mg/L
TP
mg/L
MPN/100ml
50 to 500
Fecal Coliforms
PERFORMANCE
A lightly loaded SF wetland can achieve the
background effluent levels given in Table 2. In
the general case, the SF constructed wetland is
typically designed to produce a specified effluent
quality and Table 1 can be used for a preliminary
estimate of the size of the wetland necessary to
produce the desired effluent quality. The design
models in the referenced publications will provide a
more precise estimate of treatment area required.
Table 4 summarizes actual performance data for 14
SF wetland systems included in a US EPA
Technology Assessment (EPA, 1993).
Porosity, n (%)
Hydraulic Conductivity ks
(ft3/ft2/d)*
Coarse Sand
28 to 32
300 to 3,000
Gravelly Sand
30 to 35
1,600 to 16,000
Fine Gravel
16
35 to 38
3,000 to 32,000
Medium Gravel
32
36 to 40
32,000 to 160,000
Coarse Rock
128
38 to 45
16 x 104 to 82 x 104
* mm x 0.03937 = inches
** ft3/ft2/d x 0.3047 = m3/m 2/d, or x 7.48 = gal/ft2/d
Source: Reed et al., 1995.
BOD5
28** (5-51)***
8** (1-15)***
TSS
60 (23-118)
10
(3-23)
TKN as N
15 (5-22)
9 (2-18)
NH3/NH4 as N
5 (1-10)
5 (2-10)
NO3 as N
9 (1-18)
3 (0.1-13)
TN
20 (9-48)
9 (7-12)
TP
4 (2-6)
2 (0.2-3)
270,000 (1,200-1,380,000)
57,000 (10-330,000)
COSTS
The major items included in the capital costs for SF
wetlands are similar to many of those required for
lagoon systems. These include land costs, site
investigation, site clearing, earthwork, liner, gravel
media, plants, inlet and outlet structures, fencing,
miscellaneous piping, etc., engineering, legal,
contingencies , and contractors overhead and
profit. The gravel media and the liner can be the
most expensive items from this list. In the Gulf
States where clay soils often eliminate the need for
a liner the cost of imported gravel can often
represent 50 percent of the construction costs. In
other locations where local gravel is available but a
membrane liner is required the liner costs can
approach 40 percent of the construction costs. In
many cases compaction of the in-situ native soils
provides a sufficient barrier for groundwater
contamination. Table 5 provides a summary of
capital and O & M costs for a hypothetical 378,500
liters/day (100,000 gallons per day) SF constructed
wetland, required to achieve a 2 mg/L ammonia
concentration in the effluent. Other calculation
assumptions are as follows: influent NH3= 25 mg/L,
water temperature 20C (68F), media depth = 0.6
meters (2 ft), porosity = 0.4, treatment area = 1.3
hectares (3.2 ac), land cost =$12,355/hectare ($5,000/ac).
TABLE 5 CAPITAL AND O&M COSTS FOR 100,000 GALLONS PER DAY SF WETLAND
Item
Cost $*
Native Soil Liner
$16,000
16,000
Site Investigation
3,600
3,600
Site Clearing
6,600
6,600
Earthwork
33,000
33,000
66,000
142,100
142,100
Plants
5,000
5,000
Planting
6,600
6,600
Inlets/Outlets
16,600
16,600
Subtotal
$229,500
$295,500
$133,000
$171,200
$362,500
$466,700
$6,000/yr
$6,000/yr
Land Cost
Liner
Gravel Media**
Cost Item
Wetland
SBR
Capital Cost
$466,700
$1,104,500
O &M Cost
$6,000/yr
$106,600/yr
$530,300
$2,233,400
REFERENCES
Other Related Fact Sheets
Free Water Surface Wetlands
EPA 832-F-00-024
September, 2000
Other EPA Fact Sheets can be found at the
following web address:
http://www.epa.gov/owmitnet/mtbfact.htm
1.
TVA
Mr James Watson
311 Broad Street, HB 25 27OC - C
Chattanooga, TN 37402-2801
2.
3.
4.
5.
U.S. EPA
(2000) Design Manual
Constructed Wetlands for Municipal
Wastewater Treatment, US EPA CERI,
Cincinnati, Ohio (in press.)
6.
7.
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Southwest Wetlands Group
Mr Michael Ogden
901 W. San Mateo, Suite M,
Santa Fe, NM 87505
City of Mandeville
Mr Joe Mistich, Public Works Director
3101 E. Causway Approach
Mandeville, LA 70448-3592