separation and land based treatment of mortuary and ...€¦ · the removal of mortuary and funeral...

Separation and land

based treatment of

mortuary and funeral

home fluid wastes:

Appendices

Prepared for the Gisborne District

Council

November 2015

Nga Mahi Te Taiao

dlw

Typewritten Text

Appendix 2

dlw

Typewritten Text

Separation and land based treatment of mortuary and funeral home fluid wastes 1

Contents

Appendix

1 FILENOTE: Removal of mortuary waste from the Wastewater system, GDC June 9 2015

2

2 Taruheru Cemetery soil description 3

3 Examples of trade waste classifications (GDC 2015) 6

4 Schedule 1A: Permitted discharge characteristics 7

5 Proposed leach-field discharge and the Policies and Objectives of the Discharges Plan

10

6 US Medical Wastes Guide 2014 (US Bioclean) 14

7 NZS4304:2002 7.6 Table 2: Healthcare Waste Pre-treatment and disposal methods

17

8 Schedule 5: Controlled Substance List (Taupo District Council Trade Waste Bylaw 2010)

18


Appendix 1 FILENOTE: Removal of mortuary waste from the Wastewater

system, GDC June 9 2015.

FILENOTE: Removal of mortuary waste from the Wastewater system

Meeting of WTAG stakeholders, 1.30 – 2.30pm, Tuesday 9 June 2015

Present: Martin Baker, Bill Ruru, Ray Farmer, Ian Ruru, Bruce Duncan

Council staff: Lois Easton, David Wilson, Sarah Pohatu.

In preparation for the removal of wastewater to a land based system iwi have requested

“tapu” water used in mortuaries be removed from the system. Opportunity now to build the

case for this through gathering evidence to produce a policy position for Council and

eventually a bylaw to regulate the system. Example of evidence base is impact on the

crayfish nursery (and other kapata kai) near the port.

There is also the physical project of the removal of mortuary wastewater to a separate

system.

Solution lies in septic tank type system called the Wisconsin mound potentially at Taruheru

Cemetery. Use of mound system to alleviate high water table at the cemetery (most

domestic systems in the Poverty Bay Flats use this and cost is approx. $25K for a domestic

system). Planted appropriately to be reflective space. Other solutions suggested are cultural,

such as removing water used as well, more education on embalming process and the

benefits or not.

Further investigations required: discussion on water volumes – is it 500L per body or 50L?

Discussion on liquid contaminants – eg. embalming fluid containing formaldehyde?

Discussion on processes at hospital ie. Wash in the ward. Chelsea Hospital processes unsure.


Appendix 2 Taruheru Cemetery soil description


Appendix 3 Examples of trade waste classifications (GDC 2015)


Appendix 4


Appendix 5 Proposed leach-field discharge and the Policies and Objectives of the Discharges Plan

Objective 1 Environmental contamination arising from effluent associated with human activities being discharged from on-site wastewater treatment systems into land within the margins of ground and surface water bodies in the region, is avoided where possible, or otherwise remedied or mitigated.

The treatment field is set at a distance from the nearest surface water (Taruheru River) and is elevated on a Wisconsin Mound well above the nearest ground water system (Te Hapara Sands Aquifer). The volumes of effluent being treated by the field will be very small (?) and nearby septic systems handling greater volumes, even at ground level, are functioning satisfactorily. The proposed system is designed to be the most suitable for the effluent treated and site characteristics. It will be constructed to the best national and GDC standards.

Policy 1 To ensure that selection and design of on-site wastewater treatment and/or land application systems are appropriate to system location, the environmental characteristics and limitations of the site and the activities occurring on the site.

Policy 2 To ensure that materials and workmanship are of an acceptable standard when systems are installed.

Policy 3 To ensure that wastewater receives the best practicable treatment to minimise adverse effects on the receiving environment, including cumulative effects.

It is considered in-situ septic tank systems at the hospital and individual funeral homes followed by a leach-field further treating and discharging the effluent is the most efficient and sustainable method of treating these wastes. Without removal of these wastes from the main municipal wastewater flow, land based treatment and reuse of the treated effluent would be discharged into a receiving environment from which food is gathered, and thus unacceptable to the iwi Maori of Turanganui a Kiwa and many in our community.

Policy 4 To ensure that there is adequate treatment of wastewater on sites where environmental constraints mean soils cannot adequately assimilate primary treated effluent within the site.

Soils, slope, exposure to light and distance to neighbouring residential properties provide a suitable environment for the proposed leach-field. Any potential constraints (e.g. silt layer near surface) will be addressed by construction components.

Policy 5 To encourage innovative solutions from landowners for wastewater treatment and disposal.

The removal of mortuary and funeral home liquid wastes from the main municipal waste stream utilising a low-energy and biological system of treatment will demonstrate a


commitment to effectively addressing the GDC desire to provide for the relationship of tangata whenua with their taonga (s6e etc) and the removal of culturally unacceptable wastes from the coastal environment. In so doing, GDC will develop a wastewater treatment and monitoring program that is unique nationally.

Policy 6

To ensure that Council staff have the opportunity to adequately assess non-conventional wastewater treatment and land disposal systems.

Although the system is conventional, the wastes treated differ from standard domestic or industrial wastes, and the monitoring program proposed will provide Council staff and the wider national and international communities with further data around the efficacy of such programs. Similarly, as the system will be operated by the GDC for the wellbeing of the wider community, maintenance and functioning standards will be high.

Policy 7 To ensure that wastewater systems are inspected, cleaned and maintained at appropriate intervals, particularly in Residential, Commercial, Industrial, Rural Lifestyle and Reserve zones, in order to minimise the likelihood of system failure and minimise adverse environmental effects.

Policy 8 To encourage the use of effluent outlet filters and extensions on conventional wastewater systems in the region, particularly in Residential, Commercial, Industrial, Rural Lifestyle and Reserve zones, in order to minimise adverse environmental effects.

Policy 9

To ensure that wastewater systems are repaired and/or upgraded at the appropriate time to minimise adverse environmental effects.

Policy 10 To ensure that there are adequate facilities for the management, treatment and disposal of septage from on-site wastewater treatment systems throughout the Gisborne District, in order to minimise adverse environmental effects.

The anticipated solids from the combined septic systems [currently one morgue and two funeral homes?] will be small [roughly how much?]

Policy 11 To ensure that owners and users of wastewater systems know how to locate, use and care for wastewater systems in a way that minimises adverse environmental effects.

It is anticipated that GDC will closely manage the performance of any contractors performing these functions.


Policy 12 To discourage the use of on-site wastewater systems where a sewer network is available.

The use of on-site septic tanks for mortuaries and funeral homes is a strategy to better manage liquid wastes from these venues in terms of wider community wellbeing and statutory requirements [ref?], and will be developed to ensure that there will be no adverse effects.


Appendix 6 US Medical Wastes Guide 2014 (US Bioclean) Treatment Standards, Quantification of Microbial Inactivation and Efficacy Testing Protocols (R18-13-1415) These guidelines detail the standards for microbial inactivation used to determine efficiencies of medical waste treatment equipment. The efficiency of medical waste treatment technology is commonly based on the numbers of microbial microorganisms inactivated after treatment. The results detailed in the following must be used as standards for determining efficacies of medical waste treatment equipment. A. Treaters using alternative medical waste technology will ensure treatment based on the following standards: a. A 6 log 10 inactivation in the concentration of vegetative microorganisms. b. A 4 log 10 inactivation in the concentration of Bacillus stearothermophilus or Bacillus subtilis. B. Treaters using alternative medical waste technology must conduct efficiency studies and must achieve standards in the subsection (A) through one of the following: a. Mycobacterial species Mycobacterium phlei or Mycobacterium bovis (BOG) (ATCC 35743). "15 of 2" 0 b. Spore suspensions of Bacillus stearothermophilus (ATCC 7953) or Bacillus subtilis (ATCC 19659). The equipment must demonstrate 4 log 10 reduction of viable spores, from the initial suspension of 5 log 10 or greater. C. Treaters using an alternative medical waste treatment method must quantify microbial inactivation as follows: a. Microbial inactivation, or “kill” efficacy is equated to “Log 10 Kill” that is defined as the difference between the logarithms of the number of viable test microorganisms before and after treatment. This definition is stated as: Log 10 Kill = Log 10 (cfu/g “I”) - Log 10 (cfu/g “R”) where: Log 10 Kill is equivalent to the term Log 10 reduction, “I” is the number of viable test microorganisms introduced into the treatment unit, “R” is the number of viable test microorganisms recovered from the treatment unit, and “cfu/g” are colony forming units per gram of waste solids. b. For those treatment processes that can maintain the integrity of the biological indicator carrier of the desired microbiological test strain, biological indicators of the required strain and concentration may be used to demonstrate microbial inactivation. Quantification is evaluated by growth or no growth of the cultured biological indicator. c. For those treatment mechanisms that cannot ensure or provide integrity of the biological indicator, quantitative measurement of microbial inactivation requires a two-step approach: Step 1 “Control” and Step 2 “Test.” The purpose of Step 1 is to account for the reduction of test microorganisms due to loss by dilution or physical entrapment. i. Step 1: i. Use microbial cultures of a predetermined concentration necessary to ensure a sufficient microbial recovery at the end of this step. ii. Add suspension to a standardized medical waste load that is to be processed under normal operating conditions without the addition of the treatment agent (that is, heat, chemicals).


iii. Collect and wash waste samples after processing to recover the biological indicator organisms in the sample. "16 of 2" 0 iv. Plate the recovered microorganism suspensions to quantify microbial recovery. The number of viable microorganisms recovered serves as a baseline quantity for comparison to the number of recovered microorganisms from wastes processed with the treatment agent. v. The required number of recovered viable indicator microorganisms from Step 1 must be equal to or greater than the number of microorganisms required to demonstrate the prescribed Log reduction, either a 6 Log 10 reduction for vegetative microorganisms or a 4 Log 10 reduction for bacterial spores. This can be defined by the following equation: Log 10 RC = Log 10 IC - Log 10 NR or Log 10 NR = Log 10 IC - Log 10 RC where: Log 10 RC is greater than 6 for vegetative microorganisms and greater than 4 for bacterial spores, and where: Log 10 RC is the number of viable “control” microorganisms in colony forming units per gram of waste solids recovered in the non-treated, processed waste residue; Log 10 IC is the number of viable “control” microorganisms in colony forming units per gram of waste solids introduced into the treatment unit; Log 10 NR is the number of “control” microorganisms in colony forming units per gram of waste solids which were not recovered in the non-treated, processed waste residue. Log 10 NR represents an accountability factor for microbial loss. ii. Step 2: i. Use microbial cultures of the same concentration as in Step 1. ii. Add suspension to the standardized medical waste load that is to be processed under normal operating conditions with the addition of the treatment agent. iii. Collect and wash waste samples after processing to recover the biological indicator organisms in the sample. iv. Plate recovered microorganism suspensions to quantify microbial recovery. "17 of 2" 0 v. From data collected from Step 1 and Step 2, the level of microbial inactivation, “Log 10 Kill”, is calculated by employing the following equation: Log 10 Kill = Log 10 IT - Log 10 NR - Log 10 RT where: Log 10 Kill is equivalent to the term Log 10 reduction; Log 10 IT is the number of viable “Test” microorganisms in colony forming units per gram of waste solids introduced into the treatment unit. Log 10 IT = Log 10 IC; Log 10 NR is the number of “Control” microorganisms in colony forming units per gram of waste solids which were not recovered


in the non-treated, processed waste residue; Log 10 RT is the number of viable “Test” microorganisms in colony forming units per gram of waste solids recovered in treated, processed waste residue. d. A treater shall employ the appropriate methodology to determine efficacy of the treatment technology following the protocols in subsection (C) that are congruent with the treatment method.


Appendix 7 NZS4304:2002 7.6 Table 2: Healthcare Waste Pre-treatment and

disposal methods

Retrieve from NZS4304:2002 document


Appendix 8 Schedule 5: Controlled Substance List (Taupo District Council

Trade Waste Bylaw 2010)

separation and land based treatment of mortuary and ...€¦ · the removal of mortuary and funeral...

Documents