NATIONAL WATER REUSE
ACTION PLAN
DRAFT
SEPTEMBER 2019
-------
Disclaimer
The draft National Water Reuse Action Plan is not a budget document and does not imply approval for any specific action
under Executive Order 12866 or the Paperwork Reduction Act. All federal government activities included in the draft
Action Plan are subject to budgetary constraints, interagency processes, stakeholder input, and other approvals, including
the weighing of priorities and available resources by the Administration in formulating its annual budget and by Congress
in legislating appropriations. This document is not intended, nor can it be relied upon, to create any rights enforceable by
any party in litigation with the United States. This document does not impose legally binding requirements. Mention of
case studies, public, private, or nonprofit entities, trade names, or commercial products or services in this document does
not and should not be construed to constitute an endorsement or recommendation of any such product or service for use
in any manner.
On the Cover
Clockwise from top left:
« A farm in Idaho applies treated, reclaimed wastewater to a potato field.
« Monterey One Water in California treats and reclaims approximately 4 billion gallons of wastewater annually for crop
irrigation, supplying water to 12,000 acres of edible food crops.
« The City of Columbia, Missouri, incorporated constructed wetlands into its wastewater treatment process, increasing
plant capacity from 13 MGD to 20 MGD. The treated effluent is a consistent water source to the Eagle Bluffs
Conservation Area, which provides habitat for resident and migratory waterfowl.
« Vegetation along a stream at the Brooklyn Botanic Garden in New York filters water collected on the garden grounds
as part of their treatment and recirculation infrastructure, reducing the garden's freshwater consumption.
« The Don van Rasfeldt Power Plant in Santa Clara, California, takes high-salt water (750 mg/L total dissolved solids) and
runs it through reverse osmosis. The resulting reclaimed water is fed into the power plant boilers.
« The Prairie Water Project in Aurora, Colorado, supplements groundwater supplies using South Platte River water
purified through Riverbank Filtration and Aquifer Recharge and Recovery. The water is then treated at a 50 MGD
purification facility for potable use.
i
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
Acknowledgements
Two relevant definitions of the word "collaborate"1 are: (1) to work jointly with others or together, especially in an
intellectual endeavor; and (2) to cooperate with an agency or instrumentality with which one is not immediately connected.
Development of this draft National Water Reuse Action Plan has truly been a collaborative effort. When development of the
draft Action Plan was announced on February 27, 2019, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) began with a clear
objective: to facilitate discussions among the federal, state, tribal, and water sector stakeholders and form new partnerships
to develop and deploy the plan. David Ross, the EPA's Assistant Administrator for Water, emphasized the following
approach and intent on development of the draft Action Plan (press release April 18, 2019):
"Working with our federal partners, we are looking to tap the expertise of our nation's
farmers, utilities, industry, [non-governmental organizations] NGOs, scientists and others
to craft a Water Reuse Action Plan that helps our country better prepare for current and
future water challenges and meet the water needs of generations to come."
— David Ross, EPA
It is difficult to fully and accurately acknowledge all contributors thus far. Particular gratitude is extended to:
• The research and water reuse pioneers of the last 50 years who have built the strong foundation of science,
technology, and policy on water reuse. An extent of their work is captured in the literature review that helped
underpin the development of this draft Action Plan.
• The federal agency partners who helped lead this collaborative effort across the water sector.
• Our state and tribal partners, who most often have the lead role in implementing water resource management
programs. Special thanks to the Association of Clean Water Administrators (ACWA) and the Association of State
Drinking Water Administrators (ASDWA) for providing integrated feedback from the Clean Water Act (CWA) and
Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) perspectives.
• The water utility sector and associations (e.g., WateReuse Association, National Association of Clean Water Agencies
[NACWA], Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies [AMWA], Water Research Foundation [WRF], American Water
Works Association [AWWA], Water Environment Federation [WEF]) for the extensive process of collecting, discussing,
and compiling feedback from a diverse set of experts and input from the agricultural, industrial, and academic sectors,
as well as other non-governmental organizations that shared significant inputs, expertise, and perspectives in this water-
sector-led process.
• International partners that excelled in reusing their water resources and providing a frame of reference for what is
possible (e.g., Australia, Israel, Namibia, Singapore, South Africa).
• SUEZ and the Wharton School (Initiative for Global Environmental Leadership, University of Pennsylvania) for hosting
the February 2019 Water Reuse Conference, which served as the forum for announcing that this draft Action Plan would
be developed.
• The WateReuse Association for hosting the Symposium on September 8-11, 2019, which provided the forum for
introducing and discussing the draft Action Plan.
• The stakeholders who provided input on the Discussion Framework, lent their expertise during outreach, helped facilitate
our outreach efforts to ensure our comprehensive understanding of stakeholder views—or, in some cases, all of the above.
• Support from PG Environmental and Eastern Research Group, Inc. under EPA Contract No. EP-C-17-041 and ICF
International, Inc. under EPA Contract No. EP-C-16-011.
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
Seeking Commitments to Actions that Enhance
Consideration of Water Reuse to Support Water
Resilience, Security, and Sustainability
Safe and reliable water supplies for human consumption, agriculture, business, industry, recreation, and healthy ecosystems:
are critical to our nation's communities and economy. Due to various pressures, 80 percent of U.S. states anticipate water
shortages in some parts of their states in the next decade.£Communities, agriculture, and businesses are looking to diversify
their supply portfolios to meet current and future needs. Water reuse (also commonly known as water recycling or Water
reclamation) represents a major opportunity to assure the quality of and supplement existing water supplies from sources
such as industrial process water, agricultural return flows, municipal wastewater;®oil and gas produced water, and stormwater.
Over the past several decades, agriculture, industry, and communities have demonstrated the value of reusing water, largely
in response to various forms of water crises such as drought or source water contamination. Water reuse can increase
water security, sustainability, and resilience, especially when considered at broader scales (e.g., watershed, basin, regional)
through integrated and collaborative water resource planning approaches,4
To accelerate the consideration of water reuse approaches and build on existing science, research, policy, technology, and
both national and international experiences, we have engaged stakeholders across the water sector to develop this draft
National Water Reuse Action Plan
This draft Action Plan identifies proposed actions across a spectrum of needs (e.g., policy Coordination, technology
development, outreach and communication, workforce development). The formal public comment period for the draft
Action Plan wiii seek to:
• Identify the most important actions to be taken in the near term.
Identify and describe the specific attributes and characteristics of the actions that will achieve success,
• Secure specific commitments to lead/partner/collaborate on implementation of actions.
Our goal is to issue a final Action Plan that includes clear commitments for actions that will further water reuse and
help assure the sustainability, security, and resilience of the nation's water resources. Water quantity, supply, and quality
decision-makers have historically worked through independent management regimes. Addressing future water resource
challenges will require more holistic thinking that embraces the "convergence of water" through more integrated action.
Please join us in this challenge. On behalf of our federal partners.
David Ross
Assistant Administrator, Office of Water
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
Table of Contents
Disclaimer i
Acknowledgements ii
Call to Action—Seeking Commitments to Actions that Enhance Consideration of Water Reuse
to Support Water Resilience, Security, and Sustainability iii
Section 1. The Business Case for a National Water Reuse Action Plan 2
1.1 Drivers, Opportunities, and Challenges for Water Reuse 3
1.2 Sources of Water and Potential Applications for Water Reuse 5
1.3 Guiding Principles for the National Water Reuse Action Plan 7
1.4 Building the Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan 8
Section 2. Proposed Actions to Support Consideration and Implementation of Water Reuse 14
2.1 Enable Consideration of Water Reuse with Integrated and Collaborative Action at the Watershed Scale 15
2.2 Coordinate and Integrate Federal, State, Tribal, and Local Water Reuse Programs and Policies 17
2.3 Compile and Refine Fit-for-Purpose Specifications 23
2.4 Promote Technology Development, Deployment, and Validation 25
2.5 Improve Availability of Water Information 28
2.6 Facilitate Financial Support for Water Reuse 30
2.7 Integrate and Coordinate Research on Water Reuse 32
2.8 Improve Outreach and Communication on Water Reuse 34
2.9 Support a Talented and Dynamic Workforce 36
2.10 Develop Water Reuse Metrics That Support Goals and Measure Progress 38
Section 3. Next Steps 40
3.1 Formal Public Comment and Feedback 40
3.2 Facilitating Implementation of the Actions 41
3.3 Building an Enduring Legacy of Watershed-Based Action 41
Section 4. Notes and References 42
Appendices (Available Online)
Appendix A: Discussion Framework A-1
Appendix B: Federal Partner Profiles B-1
Appendix C: Compilation of Ideas/Actions from the Literature and List of Literature Sources C-1
Appendix D: Compilation of Ideas/Actions from Outreach D-1
Appendix E: Compilation of Public Comments from the Docket and List of Commenters E-1
Appendix F: WateReuse Association Convening Report F-1
Appendix G: Selected International Profiles G-1
Appendix H: Selected Water Reuse Case Studies H-1
Appendix I: Methodology 1-1
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
SECTION 1
THE BUSINESS CASE
FOR A NATIONAL WATER
REUSE ACTION PLAN
Water is critical to our nation's health, strength, security, and resilience, but the solutions
available to manage water and its availability are often complex. Water reuse can be a
valuable tool to enhance the availability and effective use of water resources.
"Water is a vital resource,
and its management requires
a comprehensive approach."
— American Society of Civil
Engineers
There are various names for integrated and
collaborative water management approaches
(e.g., "One Water" and "Total Water Solutions"!
Regardless of the terminology, the concept aims
to replace the traditional, fragmented, siloed
approach often applied to water resources
management with broader, more comprehensive
solutions and strategies to meet diverse water quality and quantity needs. Because the
points for consideration related to implementing water reuse often cut across federal,
state, and regional water programs and may involve multiple local jurisdictions, the
decision to recycle water often requires some degree of integrated planning. Thus, the
draft Action Plan seeks to encourage consideration of water reuse as a part of integrated
Water resource management efforts at the watershed or basin scale.
Water reuse can provide alternatives to existing water supplies and be used to enhance
water security, sustainability, and resilience. These terms are described in Insets 1 and 2.
Inset 1. Water Reuse Defined
Discussions of water reuse commonly
include terms such as "recycled water,"
"reclaimed water," "purified water," "alter-
native water supplies," "improved water
reliability," and "water resource recovery."
Sources of water for potential reuse can
include municipal wastewater, industry
process and cooling water, stormwater,
agriculture runoff and return flows, and
oil and gas produced water.
These source waters can be reused after
they are assessed for their fit for purpose
for a new use and treated to meet speci-
fications for the chosen use application.
Examples of reuse applications include
agriculture and irrigation, potable water
supplies, groundwater storage and
recharge, industrial processes, onsite
non-potable use, saltwater intrusion bar-
riers, and environmental restoration.
Seawater desalination and atmospheric
water generation technologies are not
included in the draft Action Plan.
i
The Carrabassett Valley Sanitary District (ME) provides treated
wastewater to Suaarloaf Mountain Ski Resort to generate snow.
¦¦¦
2 National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
Drivers, Opportunities, and Challenges for Water Reuse
¦^W3««tKW
-------
Water reuse is not without significant challenges, particularly related to protection of public health, the environment, and protection of end
use quality and needs (e.g., food safety, groundwater/aquifer protection). Inset 6 summarizes examples of these challenges and barriers to
water reuse. Recycled water may not be an optimal source in all situations and local decision makers are encouraged to assess the advantages
and disadvantages of reuse for their communities.
Though water reuse is a well-established practice in some areas of the United States and internationally, substantial opportunities exist to
expand its consideration and application for many different purposes and benefits.
Inset 4. National Drought Resilience Partnership
The National Drought Resilience Partnership (NDRP) supports state, tribal, and local efforts to enhance their drought resilience capacity at
regional and basin scales through financial and technical assistance. In July 2019, the NDRP released a priority actions document that NDRP
member agencies have identified will strengthen our nation's drought resilience. The National Water Reuse Action Plan is an NDRP priority
action, which showcases the importance of water reuse in building long-term drought resilience and collaboration between federal, state, and
tribal, governments; local communities; and other stakeholders.
Inset 5. The U.S. Department of Energy's Water Security Grand Challenge
The Water Security Grand Challenge is a White House initiated, DOE led framework to advance transformational technology and innovation
to meet the global need for safe, secure, and affordable water. Using a coordinated suite of prizes, competitions, early-stage research and
development, and other programs, the Grand Challenge has set five goals for the United States to reach by 2030. Each goal has a nexus with
water reuse.
• Goal 1: Launch desalination technologies that deliver cost-competitive clean water.
• Goal 2: Transform the energy sector's produced water from a waste to a resource.
• Goal 3: Achieve near-zero water impact for new thermoelectric power plants, and significantly lower freshwater use intensity
within the existing fleet.
• Goal 4: Double resource recovery from municipal wastewater.
• Goal 5: Develop small, modular energy-water systems for urban, rural, tribal, national security, and disaster response settings.
Some actions in this draft Action Plan, such as Action 2.4.3, will specifically leverage the Water Security Grand Challenge. Learn more
about the Water Security Grand Challenge at: https://www.enerav.aov/eere/water-securitv-arand-challenae.
Inset 6. Example Challenges and Barriers Associated with Reuse
Challenges related to water reuse commonly cited in the literature and outreach include:
• Public health protection from known and unknown
constituents.
• Cost of infrastructure upgrades, including system
assessment, installation, and operation.
• Safety risk from inadequate levels of treatment, in situ
reactions, or inadequate monitoring.
• Consumer concerns about contamination and safety.
Inadequate technologies or validating technology
performance.
Inadequate monitoring including lack of real-time
information.
Unintended downstream impacts from reduced flows
Unclear, inconsistent, or conflicting regulations governing
the applications of water reuse.
The City and County of San Francisco (CA) adopted the Onsite Water Reuse for Commercial Multi-Familv. and Mixed Use
Development Ordinance for collection, treatment, and use of alternative water sources for non-potable applications.
National Water Reuse Action Plan -
September 2019
Draft
-------
® Sources of Water and Potential Applications
for Water Reuse
The major sources of water for potential reuse include: (1) municipal wastewater, (2) industry process water and cooling water, (3) agriculture
runoff and return flows, (4) oil and gas produced waterf and (5) stormwater.1® The use of the reclaimed water may be different than the source
(e.g., agricultural use of a municipal or industrial source).
Fit-for-purpose treatment specifications are the treatment requirements to bring water from a particular source to the quality needed for the
Intended use. When considered together, the water source and the use application determine the extent and nature of treatment required.
Example use applications are described in the Discussion Framework for Development of a Draft Water Reuse Action Plan (Appendix A).
Figure 1 attempts to characterize various sources of water and the potential use applications.
National daily volumes (e.g., discharge, withdrawal, use, or needs) from the various available source waters demonstrate significant reuse
potential. However, water generated as discharge from these sectors is largely an untapped resource. For example, municipal wastewater
facilities collectively treat a total estimated 33 billion gallons per day (BGD), most of which is returned to the environment as treated effluent.
Only an estimated 2.2 BGD (6.6 percent) is recovered for reuse.11
Figure 1. Examples of water sources and use applications.
Conventional water
usage & treatment
Fit-for-purpose
treatment & usage
—~
Discharge/runoff
GROUNDWATER / . ¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦¦
J Q
UTC Aerospace Systems (CT) installed a closed loop system to recycle 80 percent of its wastewater
as deionized water for reuse in its industrial processes, such as metal finishing.
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft 5
September 2019
-------
Figure 2 iiiustrates, for five different source categories (from left to right): (1) the estimated daily water discharge volumes; (2) estimated
withdrawal percentages; and (3) estimates of how the water is currently used, which together offers an estimated percent of reuse in the
United States. The intent of this graphic is simply to illustrate the clear potential to reclaim considerably more of our nation's water resources
than currently practiced.
Figure 2. Estimated daily volumes (e.g., discharges, needs, withdrawals, consumptive uses) and current uses of sources
of water in the United States.
Sources of Water for
Potential Reuse
Sector Use and
Outputs
2.2 BGD (6.6%) Recovered
Potential Reuse
Outputs
1.24 BGD (56.4%) Irrigation
0.66 BGD (30%) Other Accounted End Use
30.6 BGD (93%) Not Recovered
12 BGD (39.2%) Direct Ocean Discharge
17.5 BGD (57.2%) Other Non Reused
Municipal Wastewater
33 BGD
(U.S. Water Resource
Recovery Facilities Effluent)
Agriculture
(Irrigation, Livestock,
Aquaculture)
128 BGD
(surface and groundwater
withdrawals)
Industry
152 BGD
(surface and groundwater
withdrawals)
0.3 BGD (1%) Unaccounted End Use
73 BGD (62%) Consumed
118 BGD (92%) Irrigation
Withdrawals
2 BGD (2%) Livestock Withdrawals
45 BGD (38%) Agricultural
Runoff and Return Flows
1.4 BGD (70%) Consumed
0.6 BGD (30%) Agricultural
Runoff and Return Flows
7.6 BGD (6%) Aquaculture
Withdrawals
133 BGD (87%) Thermoelectric
Withdrawals
5.3 BGD (70%) Consumed
2.3 BG0T(30%) Agricultural
Runoff and Return Flows
127.7 BGD (96%) Once-Through Cooling
|5 BGD (1036) Other Industry Withdrawal!
4 BGD (3%) Mining Withdrawals
5.3 BGD (4%) Recirculation Cooling
Oil and Gas
Produced Water
2.4 BGD
1.3 BGD (55%) Deep Well Injection
Opportunities for Reuse Not Yet Quantified
1.1 BGD (45%) Reuse on Oil Field
f
Stormwater
>27.4 BGD
(urban stormwater only)
Opportunities for Reuse Not Yet Quantified
Note that not all flows and associated percentages in Figure 2 add up to 100 percent.
Figure 2 Sources:
• Rauefi-vVillwm T; Mfsfell, MR; Da-1 DJ 120-1S} 9a li h tlis« urrerit amwitotfesoupy recovaryfrom jWRF tfratH Eri^rimerit Sateajjore httixJhimnmei;
U.S. tWofftsI 2015). ESJHiSJMBI of wBfer i;ithe 111nt&LSB&Btrft 2 15. FKffiytl
fr Of. of EriefflMpOW * SMtengaMrid oilMffij rial!i/&it6i/oiS^te^SCW!^g^teS2!3paMSj81jlfigusiaQ'
fali" 3n?eor
• iteil, J. (2015). ff^-f-'i $ HferWifn r|oarHB8BlltafflPiil®- iif HGL Fie|i|pg^SPlr the Grgggrid $§£* Prcfjgpiori IJguriSit }rfftrfwWaiaMMi-.WB'i&itBi8Afetaa1f/fife8/:
nMt.
Ml. En faMMMPHS" fi l>[il|i JJ043,,;RBfcirt to Ccfltttllai BBSfeStgWi ooritrgtM'SaiarsglBBs BttE#.?wM:fe&MwAitsi/MS8LtfeCSa^fi1'te/3Cfl5olC!iSlii3::Bliffts/
6 National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
Guiding Principles for the National Water Reuse
Action Plan
l he development of the draft Action Plan was guided by the following key principles:
• Protect public health. The paramount need to protect public health, given the
array of chemical and pathogenic contaminants that may exist in sources of water
for potential reuse applications. Protection of public health is central to virtually all
the potential uses.
Protect the environment and ecosystems. Recognize water reuse can have both
positive (e.g., ecosystem restoration) and negative (e.g., diminished in-stream
flows) impacts on aquatic ecosystems.
• Promote action based on leadership, partnership, and collaboration. Rely on
the expertise and leadership at all levels of a diverse range of water partners to
ultimately lead and support the actions.
• Build on past progress and experience. Rely and build upon the decades of
existing research, policy, technology, practice, and experience as the foundation of
the draft Action Plan.
Identify the most impactful actions. Identify the actions that1
value and impact on consideration of water reuse.
have the greatest
Recognize distinct challenges posed by water reuse Recognize that water reuse
demands new levels of technology, monitoring, and workforce expertise given the
characteristics and variability of sources of water for potential reuse.
• Consider water reuse in an integrated water resources management framework.
Water reuse must not be considered in isolation or as a unique outcome; rather, it
should be considered as part of an integrated planning framework perhaps best
accomplished at the watershed scale. Inset 7 illustrates one example of integrated
planning for water reuse.
Recognize and address state and local considerations, Many important factors
are beyond the scope of this draft Action Plan but should be identified at the
national, state, or local scale when evaluating water reuse scenarios. These include
affordability; water rights, and environmental justice.
This draft Action Plan (and ultimately the final Action Plan) will contribute to a growing
community of practice and national, state, and local efforts to consider applications of
water reuse. It will seek to identify the critical technology, policy, and programmatic issues
we must address as a nation to enhance the sustainability, security and resilience of our
water resources.
The City of San Jose, California, uses reclaimed
water for city offices and a public fountain.
Inset 7. Planning and
Implementation of Recycled Water
Benefits Farmers in California
The Eastern Municipal Water District
(EMWD) in southern California is
converting wastewater into water that
can be reused (currently 35 percent of
the EMWD's water supply portfolio),
regularly repurposing and selling 100
percent of its recycled water for use
in agricultural, irrigation, landscaping,
and industrial applications. The EMWD
uses treatment facilities and storage
ponds to ensure year-round water
availability, drought-proofing, and
setting up the community for future
urban development. The EMWD is also
exploring future uses of recycled water,
including recharging local groundwater
supplies that could then be extracted for
drinking water. More info: https://www.
emwd.org/recvcled-water-service.
The Western Pennsylvania Conservancy implements water reuse at the famed Fallinawater. designed by Frank
Lloyd Wright, to recycle 100 percent of wastewater produced by 140,000 annual visitors for toilet flushing and irrigation.
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft 7
September 2019
-------
Building the Draft National Water Reuse
Action Plan
Runoff from a Florida interstate and adjacent
drainage basins flows into a regional
stormwater facility that delivers reclaimed
water to the city ofAltamonte Springs for lawn,
landscape, and other non-drinking purposes.
An extensive foundation of research, practice, and experience in water reuse exists, both
here in the United States and abroad. Development of the draft Action Plan has attempted
to build on this progress and experience by including significant outreach, engagement,
and collaboration with individuals and organizations across the water sector and federal,
state, and tribal partners.
Key sources of information, ideas, and inputs informing the draft Action Plan include:
Current federal agency roles. Several of the federal partners have summarized and
documented their efforts and explicit roles related to water reuse (Appendix B).
Analysis and summary of the water reuse literature (over 155 sources) (Appendix
C). Four particular sources of water reuse information stand out and are
summarized (see Insets 8, 9,10, and 11) because of their pertinent scope and
thoroughness regarding categories of sources Of water for potential reuse:
The National Research Council's Water Reuse: Potential for Expanding the
Nation's Water Supply Through Reuse of MunicipalWastewater}1
The Ground Water Protection Council's Produced Water Report: Regulations;
Current Practices and Research Needs7s
The Water Research Foundation's Agricultural Reuse of Recycled Water:
Impediments and Incentives J4
Bluefield Research's U.S. Municipal Water Reuse: Opportunities, Outlook and
Competitive Landscape 2017-2027,16
• Outreach and dialogue through more than 20 forums with an estimated 2,300
participants (Appendix D).
• Public input submitted to the docket by 55 commenters .(Appendix E). Examples of
relevant statements from some of the public input are included in italics, in the draft
Action Plan.
WateReuse Association expert convening report (spring 2019) (Appendix F). We
include this as a distinct appendix to the draft Action Plan given the significance of
the two national convenings that were held and the broad representation among
the participants. We recognize that the WateReuse Association final report may not
reflect the views of all convening participants.
• Review of international experiences (Israel, Singapore, Australia, South Africa,
Namibia) (Appendix G).
Consideration of reuse case studies provided on facilities in the United States
(Appendix H). In addition, examples of water reuse applications are included at the
bottom of the pages of the draft Action Plan.
The methodology for development of the draft Action Plan is discussed in more detail in
Appendix I,
The National Security Aaencv (MD) uses reclaimed wastewater from Howard County as industrial
cooling water for critical IT infrastructure at its East Campus, addressing all first phase cooling needs.
8 National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
Inset 8. Water Reuse: Potential for Expanding the Nation's Water Supply Through Reuse of Municipal Wastewater
l he National Research Council of the National Academies of Sciences, hngineering, and Medicine completed a comprehensive study of
reuse of municipal wastewater in 2012. The following are selected conclusions and recommendations from the study:
Municipal wastewater reuse offers the potential to significantly
increase the nation's total available water resources.
Approximately 12 billion gallons of municipal wastewater
effluent is discharged each day to an ocean or estuary out of
the 32 billion gallons a day discharged nationwide,
The de facto reuse of wastewater effluent as a water supply
is common in many of the nation's water systems, with some
drinking water treatment plants using waters from which a
large fraction originated as wastewater effluent from upstream
communities.
• A portfolio of treatment options, including engineered and
managed natural treatment processes, exists to mitigate
microbial and chemical contaminants in reclaimed water,
facilitating a multitude of process combinations that can be
tailored to meet specific water quality objectives.
Natural systems are employed in most potable water reuse
systems to provide an environmental buffer. However, it
cannot be demonstrated that such "natural" barriers provide
any public health protection that is not also available by other
engineered processes.
Source: National Research Council. (2012), Water reuse: Potential for expanding the nation's water supply through reuse of municipal
wastewater. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, https://www.nap.edu/cataloq/13303/water-reuse-potential-for-expandina-
the-nations-water-supply-through
Reclamation facilities should develop monitoring and
operational plans to respond to variability, equipment
malfunctions, and operator error to ensure that reclaimed
¦water meets the appropriate quality standards for its use....
Reuse systems should be designed with treatment trains that
include reliability and robustness.
Improved coordination among federal and nonfederal entities
is important for addressing the long-term research needs
related to water reuse.
When assessing risks associated with reclaimed water, the
potential for unintended or inappropriate uses should be
assessed and mitigated.
Guidance and user-friendly risk assessment tools would
improve the understanding and application of these risk
assessment methods.
The F, Wayne Hill Water Resources Center in Gwinnett County, Georgia, treats up to 60 MGD of wastewater effluent for surface water
recharge to Lake Lanier, while also recovering phosphorus and methane gas.
The King County (WA) regional water plant produces nearly 77 million gallons of reclaimed water each year for park irrigation, street
and sewer cleaning, and wetland recharge as well as 669 million gallons of reclaimed water each year for in-plant processes.
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
Inset 9. Produced Water Report: Regulations, Current Practices, and Research Needs
In June 2019, the Ground Water Protection Council (GWPQ completed a comprehensive report on oil and gas produced water. The
report engaged geologists, engineers, lawyers, toxicologists, soil experts, public health experts, the petroleum industry, and regulators.
From this group, the GWPC sought ideas and advice on the report's content and conclusions. Relevant highlights considered in
development of the draft Action Plan are excerpted below.
Produced water varies widely in quality. Most produced
water is highly saline and may contain a mix of mineral
salts; organic compounds; hydrocarbons, organic
acids, waxes, and oils: inorganic metals and other
inorganic constituents; naturally-occurring radioactive
material; chemical additives; and other constituents and
byproducts....The physical and chemical properties of
produced water vary considerably depending on the
geographic location of the field, the geologic formation,
and the type of hydrocarbon product being produced.
Based on the best available data from 2012, the nearly 1
million producing oil and gas wells in the United States
produce approximately..2.4 billion gallons/day, or 2,7
million acre-feet/year.
in a 2015 GWPC report, which analyzed 2012 data, about 45
percent of produced water was used within conventional
oil and gas enhanced recovery operations, leaving about
55 percent to be disposed of in permitted underground
injection control (UIC) wells with a small percentage
managed in other ways including evaporation and
discharge.
The multi-stage hydraulic fracturing of a single horizontal
well can use an average of about 12 million gallons of water.
Growth in volumes of sourced and produced water required
in hydraulic fracturing operations has raised sustainability
concerns in unconventional regions, prompting greater
emphasis on long-term water planning.
While produced water is currently being used in
applications both within and outside of oil and gas
operations, many potential applications remain. Further
research will be needed to assure that these potential
applications are both suitable and safe.
Although some states require volume reporting,
widespread available data on produced watervolumes is
currently limited. Limited data on produced water volumes
and current management strategies also limits the ability
to identify pressure points on existing disposal options
in advance or to identify volumes that may need other
management options, such as reuse.
Most research needs identified...pertain to produced water
treatment and reuse outside the oil and gas industry....
Produced water is complex, and in most cases further
research and analysis is needed to better understand and
define the "fit for purpose" quality goals for treatment and
permitting programs.
Managing potential risks with such applications requires
improved understanding of the composition of a specific
produced water source and identification of the health and
environmental risks of reuse or release.
As water becomes scarcer, the increasing benefits of
reusing produced water in some regions may outweigh
the costs of managing, treating, storing, and transporting
it If health and environmental risks can be understood and
appropriately managed.
Source: Ground Water Protection Council. (2019). Produced water report: Regulations, current practices, and research needs.
http://www.awDC.orq/sites/default/files/files/Produced%20Water%20Full%20ReDort%20-%20Diaital%20Use.Ddf
Apache Corporation, an oil and gas company, recycles produced water, reducing its freshwater withdra wals to only 1 to 2 percent.
Pictured here is an Apache Corporation facility in Texas.
Emerald Coast Utilities Authority (FL) recycles 100 percent of the wastewater from its Central
Water Reclamation Facility, providing it to Gulf Power and International Paper.
1 0 National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
Inset 10. Agricultural Use of Recycled Water: Impediments and Incentives
The Water Research Foundation completed this comprehensive study in 2019, based on literature reviews, stakeholder interviews, case
studies, and data analysis; relevant highlights are below. The researchers developed recommendations (provided in an appendix to
the report) for wastewater and water supply utilities, agricultural operations, regulators, journalists, community members, and elected
officials to address potential impediments to agricultural water reuse. Following are excerpts of selected findings:
In aggregate and under idealized conditions, existing
effluent could supply an average of about 17% of the
irrigation water needed in the west and more than 75% of
demand in the eastern states.
The extent to which existing discharges of effluent to
surface waters represent a viable opportunity for increasing
agricultural reuse depends largely on existing water rights.
Impediments to the use of recycled water in agriculture
vary substantially from one location to another Some of
the identified impediments in one region acted as drivers
under certain conditions in other regions.
Many commonly cited impediments and incentives to water
reuse (broadly) are not relevant or differently relevant
when considering only agricultural water reuse.
Regulatory constraints vary greatly from one area to
another: there are no global or national (U.S.) standards for
water reuse.
Water quantity (scarcity drought, climate-change, overdraft)
was one of the most frequently cited impediments and/or
drivers across all stakeholder groups.... Another impediment is
seasonality of recycled water demand for irrigation.
Water quality issues are both impediments and incentives to
agricultural reuse.
Capital investments needed to upgrade treatment facilities
and/or construct recycled water distribution networks to
agricultural customers are some of the most commonly
cited impediments for utilities.
Policy changes are needed in some areas to allow for
recycled water to be transported in existing infrastructure.
increasing agricultural water reuse may require incentives
at multiple points along the produce supply chain.
Increasing [the Clean Water Act's (CWA) National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System] NPDES limits on nutrient
loads and/or effluent temperature were commonly cited as
motivation for agricultural water reuse.
Policy innovations are needed to create appropriate
incentives to capture the nutrient benefit of agricultural
application of recycled water.
Creative combinations of financing, collaborative
management agreements, and outreach can (and have
helped) overcome many common impediments to
agricultural reuse projects.
Source: Water Research Foundation. (2019). Agricultural use of recycled water: Impediments and incentives.
https://www.waterrf.ora/research/proiects/aaricultural-reuse-impediments-and-inceritives
This study was funded by The Water Research Foundation, California State Water Resources Control Board, and Pentair
A farm in Idaho applies treated, reclaimed wastewater to a potato field.
The Walla Walla Water Reclamation Plant (WA1 produces 7.2 MGD reclaimed
water for agricultural use and to satisfy Mill Creek water rights.
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft 11
September 2019
-------
Inset 11. U.S. Municipal Water Reuse: Opportunities, Outlook, and Competitive Landscape 2017-2027
Bluefield Research, LLC completed a market assessment In 2017 of water reuse in the United States over a ten-year period. The
Biuefieid "Outlook" offers an analysis of the rapidly changing U.S. municipal water reuse landscape, examining regulatory changes,
technology trends, and company strategies influencing the deployment of water reuse as a water resource management strategy.
Selected highlights are provided below:
Bluefield Research forecasts the municipal wastewater
reuse segment to total an aggregate US$21.5 billion from
2017 to 2027, demonstrating significant opportunity for
deployment of innovative technologies and solutions in a
mature U.S. utility market.
Water managers are increasingly looking at long-term
strategies, including reuse, in order to secure water supplies
in the face of increased future demand and uncertain water
availability.
Power plants, oil refineries, and tracking operations are the
biggest opportunities for expansion of municipal reclaimed
water use for industrial users.
Potable reuse is an increasingly important application for
reclaimed water as it avoids issues of finding willing off-
takers and can reduce costs by avoiding the installation of
segregated reclaimed water distribution systems.
With an infrastructure investment gap of more than
US$500 billion for drinking water and wastewater
treatment over the next twenty years, wastewater reuse is
expected to be a key part of the water supply solution.
Population growth, largely in urban areas, is driving an
increase in water demand, precipitating an increase in
potable, commercial and industrial reuse applications.
Climate change will greatly Increase the risk that water
supplies will not be able to keep pace with demand,
necessitating the need to develop new, drought proof
supplies.
Thirty-nine out of 50 states currently have reuse
regulations or guidelines in place, with three more in the
process of adopting regulations, a key development for the
growth of the water reuse industry
The growing water demand from the tracking sector
is forcing energy services players to look to municipal
reclaimed water in order to secure supplies for operations.
At least five midstream operators have already signed
purchase agreements with local municipalities in Texas and
Oklahoma.
In 2014, Pioneer Natural Resources began to address its
water challenges with a 10-year take-or-pay contract with
the City of Odessa, Texas and its Bob Derrington Water
Reclamation Plant. The deal is expected to deliver up to five
million gallons per year at a declining rate for US$6.33 to
US$6.00 per thousand gallons based volume.
In 2014, Apache signed a contract to purchase up to 3
million gallons per day from the city of College Station's
WWTP over a two-year period. The contract is expected to
net the city US$5 million
Alpha Reclaim Technology, owned by BNN Energy,
purchases municipal reclaimed effluent from Karnes City
and other municipalities in the area and resells it to oilfield
operators. Since 2011, Alpha Reclaim Technology has
contracted with over 120 cities in Texas to purchase their
treated wastewater.
Source: Bluefield Research. (2017). U.S. municipal water reuse: Opportunities, outlook, and competitive landscape 2017-2027
The Upper Occoquan Sewage Authority in Virginia treats wastewater for recharge to the Occoquan Reservoir. Currently about 50 MGD of
treated wastewater is recycled, which, depending on hydrologic conditions, is 10 to 90 percent of the drinking water reservoir inflow.
Gary, North Carolina, operates two water reclamation facilities providing a total of nearly 25 MGD of treated
wastewater for non-potable reuse including irrigation, cooling, and industrial processes.
12 National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
The Tres Rios Environmental Restoration
Project in Arizona pumps treated wastewater
effluent through 700 acres of Salt River
wetlands, creating wildlife habitat and
reducing flood risk.
-------
SECTION 2
PROPOSED ACTIONS
TO SUPPORT CONSIDERATION
AND IMPLEMENTATION OF
WATER REUSE
This draft Action Plan identifies 46 proposed actions organized around 10 strategic
objectives (e.g., policy coordination, technology development and validation, research
coordination, communications, workforce, metrics).
During the formal public comment period, we will engage in a process to: (1) narrow the
actions to the most important and impactful while ensuring the inclusion of key actions
that may not be included in this draft; (2) identify the key attributes and characteristics
that are needed to ensure success; (3) identify the leaders, partners, and collaborators
whose contributions are needed for success: (4) and outline key milestones and
accountability to ensure successful action execution. We anticipate that this process may
result in a smaller set of actions than what is proposed in this draft Action Plan. Example
attributes of the ideal actions in the final Action Plan include:
• Address key opportunities and barriers to consideration of water reuse.
Lead to answers about key science, risk, and technology problems and solutions.
• Optimize the expertise of many water interests.
• Achieve greater efficacy and efficiency of delivery of policy, science, research, and
technology.
• Recognize the different needs of geography, capability, and community size.
• Support the role of states and tribes.
Encourage watershed-scale action.
• Achieve: substantial progress in the near term.
• Create momentum for future actions and success.
The Denver Zoo in Colorado, in partnership
with Denver Water, has reduced its water
consumption by 42 percent, using reclaimed
water for irrigation, enclosure washdown, and
animal swimming pools. Overall, 35 percent
of the zoo's water comes from Denver Water's
Recycling Plant.
The San Ysidro Land Port of Entry (CA) features a membrane bio-reactor blackwater onsite treatment system, producing non-
potable treated gray water that is combined with rainwater for flushing toilets, irrigation, and cooling towers.
14 National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
The formal comment period following release of the draft Action Plan will help identify the priority actions; articulate the attributes and
implementation steps; and seek leaders, partners, and collaborators for each action in the final Action Plan. Key questions to consider include:
• Of the proposed actions, which are the most important and would have the greatest positive impact at the local, regional, and
national level?
• What are the attributes, characteristics, and steps necessary for success?
• What are the key implementation steps and milestones necessary to successfully implement these actions?
• Is your organization willing to lead the action and collaborate with others to implement the actions?
• Is your organization willing to contribute to implementation as a partner or collaborator?
Do you have additional information or recommendations to inform these or other proposed actions?
Enable Consideration of Water Reuse with Integrated
and Collaborative Action at the Watershed Scale
Water management, and water reuse as a water
management tool, is most successful when viewed as part
of the entire water portfolio at the watershed scale.
Successful comprehensive water reuse projects, such as Orange County's early Water
Factory 21 (commissioned in 1975) and northern Virginia's Upper Occociuari Sewerage
Authority (UOSA) (constructed in 1978), have shared many attributes that are hallmark
traits of effective integrated water resources management,
• Gathering and sharing information about current water needs and resources.
• Critical thinking about long-term water availabiiity, security, and sustainability for
both quantity and quality.
Integrated planning and implementation that addresses multiple needs and
objectives.
Effective water sector and public health outreach to gain acceptance and
confidence.
"A key lesson from the ongoing [Orange County, CA] [groundwater
replenishment system] GWRS experience is that water reuse is complex and
regional in nature, and local agencies that utilize an integrated stakeholder-
engaged planning strategy are better positioned to provide sustainable water
supplies that are safe, reliable, cost-effective, and environmentally responsible."
— Orange County Sanitation District, California
The City of Pomona Water Reclamation Plant in
California now recycles approximately 8 MGD
of water for landscape irrigation, dust control,
and industrial use.
The Orange County Water District (CA) recycles water through its Groundwater Replenishment System
000 MGD), Green Acres Project for irrigation, and Water Factory 21 to combat saltwater intrusion.
m
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft 15
September 2019
-------
Integrated water resource planning is a well-established framework supported by states,
basin-level planning entities, and local communities. Academic institutions can also play a
role in facilitating integrated planning (see Inset 12).
Inset 12. Bay Area One Water Network
A coalition of state and local water management agencies and districts in the San
Francisco Bay region, facilitated by Stanford University and University of California,
Berkeley, are developing a regional network to encourage integrated water resource
planning and management and water reuse.
The network will help align planning of water resources projects, improve coordi-
nation among currently single-purpose water management districts, and serve as
a forum to promote wastewater recycling, stormwater capture and use, and onsite/
distributed water reuse systems, demonstrating the utility of regional-scale planning.
"The Action Plan will be a critical
step toward advancement of
Integrated Planning across regulatory
boundaries and for promoting more
resilient water management across
the United States."
— New York City Department of
Environmental Protection
Proposed Actions
Develop a Federal Policy Statement to Support and Encourage Consideration of Water Reuse in
a Watershed-Scale Planning Context
To support and encourage water managers to engage in planning efforts at watershed scales and to fully evaluate
approaches such as water reuse, federal partners could develop a common policy statement supporting protective
watershed-scale integrated water resources management planning approaches to enhance water resilience, security,
and sustainability through a diverse water portfolio.
act'on prepare case Studies of Successful Applications of Water Reuse Within an Integrated Water
2.1.2 Resources Management Framework
Compile, prepare, and disseminate case studies and programs where water reuse was considered and implemented as
part of successful integrated water resources management programs. One such program is the Regional Conservation
Partnership Program (RCPP) administered by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) at the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA), which facilitates watershed scale planning through projects involving the NRCS,
conservation partners, and agricultural producers.16
2.1.3
Incorporate Water Reuse and Capture Concepts into Integrated Planning Efforts at the
Local Level
Explicitly recognize the importance of wastewater reuse, stormwater capture, and drinking water supply in the
design of integrated water management plans and policies. This should include consideration of financial capacity
to implement integrated solutions addressing combined sewer system, wastewater, stormwater, and drinking water
management needs.
Microsoft teamed with the Citv of Quincv (WA) to build a water treatment plant, which
provides reclaimed water for cooling at data centers and injection into the local aquifer.
16 National Water Reuse Action Plan -
September 2019
Draft
-------
Coordinate and Integrate Federal, State, Tribal, and
Local Water Reuse Programs and Policies
Federal, state, tribal, and local programs and policies can
be aligned and coordinated to encourage consideration of
water reuse.
Laws, regulations, and policies can have a substantial bearing on the consideration,
application, and implementation of water reuse. The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and
CWA, for example, provide the framework and baseline requirements—e.g., the SDWA's
Maximum Contaminant Levels, the CWAs NPDES and Effluent Limitations Guidelines
(ELGs), water quality standards, and source water protection—to ensure drinking water and
surface waters are protective of public health and the environment.
"Going forward, perhaps the
most important action EPA
can undertake is to maintain
its stature as an honest
broker for water reuse policy.
4s our nation's lead regulator
for water policy, the Agency
is in a unique position, one
that if maintained allows the
Agency to backstop sound
local and state decision
making."
- AWWA
In most cases, states have the primary role to
implement these requirements and programs (i.e.,
cooperative federalism).
Beyond the CWA and SDWA, there are other
federal, state, tribal, and local regulations, statutes,
programs, and policies that can support water
reuse as part of a watershed-scale integrated
water resources management approach.
Several states have: established regulations,
policies, and programs specifically tailored to
encouraging, managing, and/or regulating water
reuse activities.1711® Inset 13 describes examples
of state-wide initiatives and policies intended
to address water resource challenges. Some states have also established state-wide
legislation and initiatives to encourage, foster, and/or require water reuse, States can
benefit from sharing their successes and the challenges they face both facilitating and
regulating the use of recycled water. The spectrum of experience and practice with
water reuse at the state level is diverse across the country. Maryland and New Mexico are
examples of states with very different interests and needs (see Insets 14 and 15).
The water sector has also played an important role in advocating water reuse, including, for
example, the Water Environment Federation Water Reuse Roadmap (2018) and the recent
California WateReuse Action P!ann- released by WateReuse California earlier this year.
Inset 13. Example State Actions
Relating to Water Reuse
California: California's Recycled Water
Policy from 2013 establishes a mandate
to increase the use of recycled water by
200,000 acre-feet per year (afy) by 2020:
and by an additional 300,000 afy by 2030.
Florida: Florida's state budget for fiscal
year 2019-2020 appropriates $40 million
toward advancing alternative water
supplies.
Hawaii: The Fresh Water Advisory Council
of the Hawaii Fresh Water Initiative
developed a 2015 Blueprint for Action to
make up the fresh water deficit facing the
state by 2030. The blueprint identifies a
strategic target of more than doubling
the amount of wastewater reused to 50
million gallons per day.
New Mexico: New Mexico enacted a new
law in 2019 (HB 546). effective July 1, for
the protection of water quality by en-
couraging the oil and natural gas industry
to favor reuse, recycling and treatment
options over reliance on New Mexico's
iimited fresh water resources.
Texas: Texas' 2017 State Water Plan (one
in a series published every five years)
called for 4.5 million cubic meters per day
of additional reuse capacity over a 50-
year period with 85 projects specified.
Alaska: In 2013, Alaska issued the Alaska
Water and Sewer Challenge, focused on
decentralized water and wastewater treat-
ment, recycling, and water minimization.
Reuse approaches have high potential for
use in the 3,300 homes currently lacking
running water and flush toilets.
The Citv of St. Petersburg's (FL) reclamation system provides 37 MGD
of reclaimed water for non-potable uses including 300 fire hydrants.
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
On May 15, 2019, the EPA released a draft of its Study of Oil and Gas Extraction Wastewater
Management Under the Clean Water Act. The draft study describes input from states, tribes,
and stakeholders on available approaches to manage produced water from onshore oil and
gas extraction facilities and input on whether potential revisions to federal regulations that
may allow for broader discharge of treated produced water to surface waters are supported.
Inset 15. New Mexico's Management of Produced Water
Reuse, recycle, and treatment of water produced during oil and gas extraction can
help provide a more sustainable fresh water supply for the State of New Mexico. As
of 2018, the State of New Mexico is the third largest producer of oil in the country.
For every barrel of oil, four to seven barrels of produced water may be generat-
ed, which totaled more than one billion barrels of produced water generated in
2018 alone. In 2019, the New Mexico Legislature passed the Fluid Oil & Gas Waste
Act, clarifying jurisdiction of state agencies to regulate produced water. The law
facilitates recycling and treatment of produced water, while providing regulatory
oversight and conserving existing freshwater. It also authorizes development of
regulations for use of treated produced water outside of oil fields, including in
irrigation, road construction, and industrial applications.
Inset 14. State Leadership: Maryland
Develops State Water Reuse
Strategy
The Maryland Department of the Envi-
ronment (MDE) is currently adopting
regulations for generating and using Class
IV quality wastewater effluent (water with
high potential for human contact) and is
developing regulations to enable residen-
tial graywater reuse for outdoor irrigation,
indoor toilet flushing, and fire suppression.
The MDE is working with several jurisdic-
tions on pilot projects to address local
water and wastewater challenges to guide
future reuse projects and help establish
appropriate regulatory frameworks. The
MDE will continue to provide outreach and
tools via its Water Reuse Center.
"ACWA members are interested in updating current Effluent Limitation
Guidelines (ELGs) for oil and gas extraction wastewater management. Water
scarce states would benefit from more cost-effective treatment so that they
can utilize produced water"
- ACWA and ASDWA
Inset 16. Aquifer Recharge Terminology
Aquifer recharge: The replenishment of water in aquifers, either by natural or artificial (surface spreading, infiltration basins, or injection
wells) processes.20
Managed aquifer recharge (MAR): The recharge of an aquifer using either surface or underground recharge techniques.21 Synonyms
include enhanced aquifer recharge (EAR),22 artificial recharge,23 planned recharge,23 and water banking.21
Aquifer storage and recovery (ASR): The storage of water in an aquifer for later withdrawal and beneficial use.24
Managed underground storage (MUS): Encompasses a number of approaches that purposefully add water into (recharge) an aquifer
system for later recovery and use.25
0
Loudoun Water's Broad Run Water Reclamation Facility (VA) reclaims 1MGD of its water (treated to
drinking water quality) for irrigation, industrial cooling for data centers, and other non-potable uses.
18 National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
Proposed Actions
2.2.1 Compile State Policies and Approaches to Implement Water Reuse Programs
Compile existing state-level statutes, regulations, policies, programs, frameworks, and/or approaches that are currently
in place for water reuse. This would also include a compilation and description of water-reuse-related terms and
opportunities for greater alignment. For example, Inset 16 provides examples of various terms used to describe aquifer
recharge and recovery. Assembling this information will enable sharing across states. This could build on prior efforts,
such as the State Water Policy and Program Database managed by Western Resource Advocates and state-based
resources managed by the WateReuse Association.
2.2.2 Enhance State Collaboration on Water Reuse
The states, principally led by the ACWA, the ASDWA, and the Environmental Council of the States, will create ongoing
forums for states to share and discuss experiences and attributes of their water reuse programs. The first such
opportunity to engage a spectrum of states is expected to be initiated in September 2019.
2.2.3 Complete the EPA Study of Oil and Gas Extraction Wastewater Management
The EPA is continuing to review public input received on the May 15, 2019, draft Study of Oil and Gas Extraction
Wastewater Management Under the Clean Water Act and anticipates finalizing the study in 2019. The final study will
inform the EPA's consideration of potential regulatory and nonregulatory approaches for management of produced
water under the CWA, including the potential for greater reuse opportunities. See https://www.epa.gov/eg/studv-oil-
and-aas-extraction-wastewater-management for more information.
action Enhance Wastewater Source Control through Local Pretreatment Programs to Support Water
2.2.4 Reuse Opportunities for Municipal Wastewater
Develop best practices describing how local pretreatment programs can mitigate and reduce problematic pollutants
discharged into publicly owned treatment works and enhance reuse opportunities for reclaimed wastewater. For
example, this might involve convening pretreatment program coordinators to compile, share, and advance approaches
and strategies for wastewater source control to support water reuse.
f ACTION
2.2.5
Compile and Develop Protection Strategies for Different Sources of Waters for Potential Reuse
Pollution prevention concepts and best practices can be applied to sources of waters for potential reuse (e.g., industry
process water, oil and gas produced water, agricultural return water, stormwater). Protecting various source waters
from problematic contaminants can reduce treatment costs and expand opportunities to reclaim water. Compile and
develop best practices for pollution prevention to reduce contamination and enhance opportunities for reclaimed
water. For example, lessons learned from the drinking water source water protection program could be summarized
and disseminated to local water managers.
Scottsdale Water Campus (AZ) reuses up to 1.7 billion gallons
of treated wastewater annually through aquifer recharge.
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
2.2.6 Develop Informational Materials to Better Enable Water Reuse in CWA NPDES Permits
Develop informational materials describing how NPDES permits can enable reuse associated with municipal and industrial
wastewater recycling and stormwater capture projects. This suite of materials (e.g., training programs) could be actively
distributed to existing permit writers and inspectors to help foster better understanding of the potential for water reuse.
Convene a Federal Multi-Agency Working Group to Serve as a Forum for Coordinated
Engagement on Water Reuse
ACTION
2.2.7
Convene a working group (or groups) to serve as a forum for discussion of water reuse, including in federal
installations and buildings. This would include working with all federal agencies that have designated responsibilities
related to practices enabling water reuse. See Insets 17 and 18 as examples of federal leadership.
Inset 17. Executive Order 13834, "Efficient Federal
Operations"
Section 2 of E013834 establishes eight goals, one of which concerns
water management. Federal agencies are directed to reduce potable
and non-potable water consumption and comply with stormwater
management requirements at federal facilities. Specifically the Imple-
menting Instructions issued by the Council on Environmental Quality
in April 2019 recommend that agencies identify and implement
measures to replace use of freshwater with alternative water, where
feasible, and consider life cycle cost-effective measures,26 consistent
with state and local laws, to achieve performance toward the water
management goal outlined in Section 2(c) of E013834.
The Implementing Instructions of E013834 define alternative water
as water from non-freshwater sources, such as onsite harvested rain-
water and stormwater, harvested sump pump/foundation water, gray
water, air-cooling condensate, reject water from water purification
systems, reclaimed wastewater, or water derived from other water
reuse strategies.
Inset 18.Reuse at U.S. Embassies
As a matter of standard practice, the State
Department recycles water for irrigation in
most new embassies and consulate projects
undertaken through the Capital Security
Construction Program. Modeled on existing
requirements from California and Arizona,
new onsite wastewater treatment plants treat
effluent for drip or spray irrigation. Example
projects include U.S. embassy buildings in
Dakar, Senegal; Paramaribo, Suriname; Islam-
abad, Pakistan; and Tegucigalpa, Honduras. In
water-scarce regions, the State Department
considers further additional reuse design fea-
tures. For example, the new embassy campus
in Mexico City, currently under construction,
will take reclaimed water from the city, treat it
to a higher standard, and use it for evapora-
tive cooling and sewage conveyance.
2.2.8
Advance Alternative Water Use in Federal Operations through the Federal Energy Management
Program
The Implementing Instructions for Executive Order (EO) 13834, "Efficient Federal Operations" (see Inset 17) describe how
the DOE's Federal Energy Management Program (FEMP) will consolidate previously issued guidance and technical materials
into an integrated web resource and issue a plan on developing an updated federal water management resource guide that
provides direction on how to design and optimize water use at federal facilities, track and report water use, expand use of
alternative water, use water balance methodologies, and implement water conservation measures that promote energy
efficiency in accordance with 42 U.S.C. § 6834(a)(3). In developing the updated federal water management resource guide,
FEMP should consider the objectives in this draft Action Plan and opportunities to expand the use of alternative water
sources, including reclaimed water, within federal facilities and operations.
The Hart-Dole-lnouve Federal Center (Ml) sends rainwater to a 125,000-gallon cistern, treats
and filters the water, and uses it onsite for cooling tower make-up water and irrigation.
20 National Water Reuse Action Plan -
September 2019
Draft
-------
A
action pevjSe Guidance on "Disposal of Unused Medicines" to Better Reflect Source Control Benefits
2.2.9 that Support Water Reuse and Recycling
Modify and align existing guidance to discourage any flushing of unused and/or expired medicines to sanitary
sewers or septic systems. The guidance would describe alternative means for disposing of medicines (e.g., take-back
programs) to provide further source control for difficult-to-treat compounds.
Incorporate Water Reuse Considerations in the Development of Civil Works Projects through the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Civil Works Program
The Civil Works Program of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers focuses on responsible development, protection, and
restoration of the Nation's water and related land resources. Civil Works projects are developed, implemented, and operated
with non-federal sponsors for flood risk management, commercial navigation, ecosystem restoration, recreation, and
environmental stewardship. Clarification on how the civil works project development process can directly include water
reuse considerations could enable better incorporation of such reuse features in projects authorized by Congress.
Incorporate Stormwater Capture Considerations in Assessment of Stormwater Finance
Needs and Opportunities
Through the Environmental Financial Advisory Board's Stormwater Infrastructure Funding Workgroup/Task Force,
evaluate costs and funding options regarding stormwater capture as part of overall assessments of stormwater
program funding needs and opportunities.
AC
-------
Promote Water Reuse through the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Hazard
Mitigation Programs
Promote the consideration and inclusion of water reuse and stormwater capture and reuse through the Federal
Emergency Management Agency's Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, Pre-Disaster Mitigation Program, and Flood
Mitigation Assistance Program projects to reduce long-term risk from natural hazards, as appropriate.
2.2.15 Work wlth Tribes to Support Water Reuse Solutions to Drought Challenges
Partner with the National Tribal Water Council, National and Regional Tribal Operations Committees, and the NDRP
to identify strategies to support consideration of water reuse in tribal water supply and drought management
planning.
"States are at various stages of water reuse development ranging from mature,
multi-decade programs to very limited or no program. Additionally, it will be
important for EPA to recognize the drivers for reuse and the type of water being
reused will vary from state to state based on state and local conditions."
— Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality
Constructed wetlands in Orlando, Florida, provide advanced treatment for reclaimed water.
Wichita's Aquifer Storage & Recovery project (KS) diverts Little Arkansas River water above a minimum flow threshold, treats it to
drinking water standards, and then injects it into the Equus Beds aquifer to meet water demand and ensure drought preparedness.
22 National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
Compile and Refine Fil-for-Purpose Specifications
A compilation of existing fit-for-purpose treatment
specifications, and focused effort to develop new
specifications, for all potential end uses of reclaimed water
would facilitate a better understanding and consideration
of potential sources and use applications.
A thorough understanding of the nature and quality of sources of water for potential
reuse and end user needs can help inform the decision-making process for a reuse
strategy that considers public and environmental health. Inset 19 provides examples of
pathogens that may be found in sources of water for potential reuse.
Fit-for-purpose specifications (see Inset 20) describe the level of treatment needed
to protect public health, the environment, or other needed end points for a given use
application of reclaimed water While it is not possible to eliminate ail risks, treatment
technologies are available to generate high-quality water designed for specific use
applications that do not pose significant risks.
"Compiling thresholds for
fit for purpose can be a
resource intensive roadblock
for many States. States could
benefit from a compilation of
evidence-based information
so that States can match use
and source."
- ACWA and ASDWA
Development of future fit-for-purpose
specifications can be informed by human health
and ecological risk assessments designed to
address specific exposure scenarios and risk
management questions. See Inset 21 for example
specifications for direct potable reuse. The
principles of hazard identification, dose-response,
exposure assessment, and risk characterization are
used to inform risk evaluations. For example, risk
assessments can influence engineering design and
treatment facility monitoring to ensure protection
of end user health and the environment.
Inset 19. Example Microbial
Constituents of Concern Related to
Reclaimed Water27
Bacteria: Vegetative cells can be inacti-
vated by most common disinfectants
(ultraviolet radiation, chlorination.
ozonation, or chlorine dioxide): spore-
forming bacteria are more resistant to
treatment; concerns about regrowth
(legtorwHsft} Examples: Salmonella,
Campylobacter, £ coll.
Viruses: Important to reuse applications
because of their small size (0.02-0.03
microns) and resistance to disinfection:
can cause infection at low doses. Exam-
ples: norovirus, adenovirus, enterovirus,
hepatitis A.
Protozoa: Oocysts highly resistant to
environmental stressors and chlorine
disinfection; can cause infection at low
doses. Examples: Cryptosporidium and
Giardia.
Inset 20. Fit-for-Purpose Treatment
Specifications
Fit-for-purpose treatment specifications
describe and quantify the water quality
Characteristics necessary to meet end use
needs, including public health protection.
Inset 21. Example Fit-for-Purpose Specifications for Acute Microbial Risks for Potable Reuse Applications
California's "12/10/10 Rule" for indirect potable reuse: Requires 12 loglff reductions of enteric viruses and 10 log10 reductions of
Cryptosporidium oocysts and Giardia cysts, based on a risk benchmark of 1 infection per 10,000 people per year?
World Health Organization for potable reuse: recommends 9.5 log1{! reduction of viruses and 8.5 log10 of enteric bacteria and protozoa,
based on a disability-adjusted life year risk approach,3®
Hamoton Roads Sanitation District (VA) performs advanced treatment on wastewater effluent and injects
the drinking quality water into the Potomac Aquifer, a primary source of drinking water for eastern Virginia.
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
Maximizing the utility of risk assessment to inform decision-making requires thorough
and accurate information. Certain source waters for potential reuse can contain a variety
of chemicals and pathogenic microbes that can result in adverse human, animal, and/or
environmental health effects. In addition, contaminants and health risks can result from
interactions between reclaimed water and receiving water (e.g., an aquifer). Chemical
risk assessments are useful to evaluate known chemicals and contaminants of emerging
concern, such as endocrine disruptors, pharmaceuticals, and other contaminants including
per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Microbial risk assessments evaluate pathogen
exposure, which may be infectious at low doses, resulting in acute adverse health effects
within hours or days of exposure. Microbial risk assessments are important to safely manage
water in all scenarios, but are particularly relevant when ingestion of the reclaimed water is
possible. Inset 22 describes an effort to assess microbial characteristics of stormwater.
"The academic and professional communities in the United States are
embracing a 'One Water' approach that recognizes that water sources that
were once thought to be unfit for consumption (e.g., treated wastewater,
urban runoff, agricultural runoff) can now potentially be made safe for
human consumption with appropriate treatment technologies."
— National Science Foundation's (NSF's) Engineering Research Center for Re-Inventing
the Nation's Urban Water Infrastructure (ReNUWIt)
Inset 22. Minnesota Studies
Microbial Quality of Captured
Stormwater
The State of Minnesota, EPA Region
5, and the EPA Office of Research and
Development are investigating storm-
water quality and required treatment for
non-potable application in urban areas.
The effort will identify and rank appropri-
ate treatment technologies and conduct
treatability studies at selected water
reuse sites. It will involve data collection
and analysis regarding microbial quality
of captured stormwater to help identify
the appropriate level(s) of treatment
for captured stormwater in specific use
applications.
Proposed Actions
2.3.1 Compile Existing Fit-for-Purpose Specifications
Compile existing fit-for-purpose specifications (e.g., chemical and microbial) for different sources of water for
potential reuse and end use applications to inform water reuse best practices and facilitate broader implementation of
reuse projects.
2.3.2 Develop Frameworks for Public and Environmental Health Risk-Based Targets
Develop a quantitative risk framework to inform public and environmental health risk-based targets for microbial and
chemical hazards of concern. The framework would inform water reuse best practices across use applications, aid
states in decision-making on treatment technologies (i.e., multi-barrier needs) and permitting, and/or assist in the
creation of state-level reuse recommendations for potable and non-potable applications.
2.3.3 Convene Experts to Address Challenges Related to Stormwater Capture and Reuse
Convene experts to identify critical institutional, legal, and technical barriers to stormwater capture and use and
recommend key actions to address these challenges.
El Paso Water (TX) provides nearly 6 MGD of reclaimed water to golf courses, city parks, schools, apartments, construction,
and industrial sites, and to recharge the Hueco Bolson. The company is pursuing an advanced water treatment purification
B facility to treat wastewater for potable use by2024.
24 National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
a Promote Technology Development, Deployment,
» and Validation
Advances in treatment technologies and corresponding
information on technology performance can accelerate
water reuse opportunities.
The provision of safe and reliable water reuse systems relies heavily on technologies that
are demonstrated to be responsive and resilient to the dynamics of diverse sources of
water for potential reuse and needs of various use applications. Reuse technologies fall
into four broad categories: (1) collection and distribution, (2) monitoring, (3) treatment,
and (4) operation and maintenance. The ability to effectively operate and maintain these
systems and keep pace with innovation relies on efficient data management, dependable
communications, real-time control, and strategic asset management.
The water utility sector is a champion for
transforming the nation's "Municipal Wastewater
Treatment Plants" to "Water Resource Recovery
Facilities;' where technologies and operators now
emphasize recovery of energy, nutrients, water, and
other products (see Figure 3).
The collection and sharing of technology
performance information can support the
deployment of future water reuse systems.
Currently, a wide range of academic, private,
public, and non-government organizations are
leading such efforts, both in the United States
and abroad. For example, the Water Research
Foundation's Leaders Innovation Forum for Technology (LIFT) Program established a test
bed network that aggregates data analysis from many water technology categories.
One of the greatest needs for technology development, deployment, and validation is
for small and rural communities, building-scale applications, disaster response, and other
small and remote systems.
"Establishing a national
framework for reuse water
Quality, dictated by the
source and end use, would
promote reuse technology
development and provide a
greater economy of scale for
manufacturers of equipment
and engineered solutions."
— The U.S. Chamber of
Commerce Business Task Force
on Water Policy
UMass Amherst in Massachusetts offsets its
water consumption by using reclaimed water
from the Amherst Wastewater Treatment Plant
for non-potable applications such as steam and
hot water, cooling water, and irrigation.
"Onsite systems are cost-effective, and scaling investment in these decentralized
solutions is an important way for communities to meet their resilience and
sustain ability goals."
— WaterNow Alliance
Alliant Energy (IA), in partnership with Clear Lake Sanitary District, uses tertiary treated water
that is further disinfected and blended with groundwater for power plant cooling processes.
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft 25
September 2019
-------
Figure 3. Model of water resource recovery facility of the future.
Energy Efficiency and Resource Recovery
Facilities will use energy-efficient operations to recover water, energy,
and nutrients as well as to produce clean water and other products.
Integrated Production
Facilities will produce clean water, energy, other water
grades, and a slate of products for industry, agriculture, etc.
v\\
1
D
Clean Drinking Other Water "qyatlc
Water Grades Systems
Fuels Electricity Chemicals
Smart Systems
Sensors, software, and advanced
devices monitor volume and content
of incoming streams, inform plant
operations, track performance, and
verify output safety and quality.
Outcomes
• Healthy environment
• Renewable energy supply
• Reduced carbon emissions
• Economic growth
• Vibrant and green communities
' T v
A
Si
. us.
~3
P Residential
Commercial
Power Plants
Transportation Industrial Agricultural
Engaged & Informed Communities
Officials, industry, and the public will manage demand and waste better, support resource
recovery goals, and contribute to integrated solutions for water, energy, and food supply.
The water resource recovery facility approach to water management involves the incorporation of operational efficiencies
with the recovery of valuable resources, including reclaimed water. Operating advanced systems like these relies on
deploying technologies that are enabled by performance validation.
Figure J Source:
NSR 11 -iiid i EPA 20J5> Eii-i^t'^'^wrewwaireeavw Wfliwi report.
Fort Carson Armv Base (CO) conserves up to 300 million gallons of potable water annually
through wastewater reuse for irrigation and a closed-loop vehicle wash facility.
26 National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
Proposed Actions
^CT'0N Integrate, Coordinate, and Enhance Technology Demonstration and Validation Programs to
2.4.1 Provide Reliable Performance Information to Support Water Reuse
For entities to evaluate the adoption of water reuse, reliable and actionable technology performance and cost data should
be generated and shared. This action will build on technology evaluation programs (e.g., LIFT, Isle Utilities, Smart Water
Networks Forum [SWAN], Transitions to the Urban Water Systems of Tomorrow [TRUST]) in the water sector to focus and
enhance their support of water reuse systems. Through active collaboration and coordination, reuse-oriented information
will be collected/generated and delivered to those considering and implementing water reuse systems.
Identify and Fill Science and Technology Gaps and Needs Inhibiting Greater Consideration of
Off-Field Use of Treated Produced Water
The State of New Mexico, in partnership with the EPA, the DOE, and local universities, will build on existing research
efforts to better understand the science and technology gaps and needs associated with consideration of off-field use of
treated produced water that protects public health and the environment. This would include assessment of the feasibility
and efficiency of existing or future technologies to treat produced water to fit-for-purpose specifications and the
availability of reliable analytical methods to test treated produced water for all constituents of concern.
Leverage the U.S. Department of Energy's Water Security Grand Challenge
Use the DOE's Water Security Grand Challenge to develop challenges that promote specific technological advancements
in support of water reuse, including:
1. A modular reuse challenge focused on the design of a "plug and play" system to be employed in rural communities,
during emergency response, or at a building interested in implementing onsite reuse.
2. A multi-phase challenge for the development and testing of sensor technology that promotes the implementation of
water reuse, to include prototype testing and complete International Organization for Standardization certification.
3. Innovative brine management (e.g., reclamation) approaches and treatment technologies that do not require a
discharge.
Provide Case Examples and Identify Candidates for Water Reuse System Implementation in
Federally Owned Facilities
Review the portfolio of federally owned facilities to identify candidates for water reuse systems and compile examples
where federal facilities have been champions of water reuse. For example, the federal supercomputer facilities may be
able to consider using reclaimed water for cooling.
Allianz Field (MN) soccer stadium in Saint Paul recycles more than 2 million gallons of rainwater every
year for irrigation of trees and grass using a smart hub to clean the water and adjust its levels.
fct
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft 27
September 2019
-------
Improve Availability of Water Information
imm
OH
Data and information on the quality and quantity of
available water can improve opportunities for water reuse.
"Sharing information in a
sector-specific context can
help build awareness of
the benefits of reuse and
encourage stakeholders
not yet engaged in reuse
to consider options for
implementation,"
— WateReuse Association
Convening Report
Enhancing the availability of water data can
create opportunities to make more informed
water resource management decisions. Water
data owners span all levels of government
utilities, industry and agriculture, non-
governmental organizations, academia, and
citizen scientists, Sharing information on quality
and quantity of potential sources of water for
reuse and reclaimed water users can highlight the
potential for and eventually enable more reuse
(see Insets 23, 24, and 25),
improvements in availability of water information may contribute to:
Opportunities for Water trading to meet regional/watershed user needs,
A more effective use of water resources and alternate water supplies, including
groundwater recharge.
Public reassurance about "what is in the Water."
Quicker identification of public health threats.
improved system reliability to ensure systems perform as designed.
Near-real-time understanding of water quantity and quality to satisfy fit-for-
purpose user needs.
Improved understanding of downstream impacts (i.e., freshwater stream flow).
Inset 23. Data to Confirm Designer
Water Quality from West Basin
Water District
The West Basin Municipal Water District's
Edward C. Little (ECL) Water Recycling
Facility in El Segundo, California, was built
in 1995 and is the only water recycling fa-
cility in the world that produces five types
of "designer" recycled waters tailored
for irrigation, commercial and industrial
applications, and potable groundwater
augmentation. The ECL facility, which
recently celebrated 200 billion gallons of
recycled water produced, treats approxi-
mately 40,000 acre feet of water annually
and conducts more than 2,000 tests per
month using near-real-time monitoring to
deliver accurate data. West Basin's water
recycling efforts are the cornerstone of Its
"Water for Tomorrow" program.
Inset 24. National Water Census
The U.S. Geological Survey's National Water Census is designed to systematically provide information that will allow resource managers
to assess the supply, use, and availability of the nation's water. The census's goal is to provide nationally consistent base layers of well-
documented data that account for water availability and use nationally.
The West Basin Municipal Water District's (CA) supplies reclaimed water, which is treated using
reverse osmosis, for low- and high-pressure boiler feed water for three major refineries.
28 National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
The quality of water information can be improved through several approaches: (1)
strengthening data sharing networks and partnerships at the watershed scale; (2)
improving data sharing practices for more user confidence: (e.g., by standardizing units
of measurements, using industry best practices for constituents and surrogates, and
identifying water collection methods); (3) deploying advanced monitoring technologies
for near-real-time data (e.g., sensors and remote sensing capabilities); and (4)
advancing near-real-time detection methods for microbiological constituents.
Inset 25. Water Quality Portal
The Water Quality Portal is a cooperative service sponsored by the U.S.
Geological Survey, the EPA, and the National Water Quality Monitoring Council
It provides data collected by over 400 state, federal, tribal, and local agencies.
In-field water quality monitoring of reclaimed
water is conducted at a Florida water reuse
facility to ensure fit-for-purpose specifications
are being met.
Proposed Actions
2.5.1 Foster Watershed-Scale Pilot Projects to Share Water Information to Support Water Reuse Actions
Seek opportunities and support existing case studies and databases that share information about water quality and
quantity at the watershed scale, which facilitates and enables consideration of water reuse. Sharing information and
experiences can help identify and pilot best practices toward data sharing for water budgets and local, market-based
solutions for water trading.
2.5.2 Identify Monitoring Best Practices for Various Sources of Water and Reuse Applications
Develop guidance or best practices relating to sampling and monitoring techniques based on the source water type
and use application of reclaimed water.
2.5.3
Use National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration/U.S. Geological Survey Water Forecast and
Prediction Network to Target Watersheds with Reuse Potential
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Geological Survey, the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, and others can integrate and apply real-time water quality and
quantity observing and forecasting tools to support local understanding of current and predicted water issues that
can directly inform consideration of and opportunities for water reuse as alternative water supplies.
The Long Island Water Reuse Initiative (NY) created an interactive
permitting roadmap displaying reuse opportunities for golf courses.
12
,-fc.
i
ate7: J.
It'.'-. { v
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
¦caana
Facilitate Financial Support for Water Reuse
¦¦¦Man
— mtm\
Improved understanding of water reuse finance options can
enable water reuse projects.
Assembling adequate project funding is crucial to the success of water reuse projects,
and many reuse proponents have found access to funding to be a significant challenge.
Several sources of federal funding are available to supplement state, local, and private
investment in water reuse, including Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving
Funds (SRFs); the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA); the Bureau of
Reclamation's WaterSMART Title XVI Program, WaterSMART Drought Response Program,
and Desalination and Water Purification Research Program; and Rural Development (USDA).
Inset 26 summarizes one example of combining funding sources for a large-scale reuse
project. Improving community access to information about existing federal and non-federal
financing programs could enable the consideration of more reuse projects in the future, as
the varied landscape for financing infrastructure can be challenging for communities relying
on funding and administrative approval from many sources. Wastewater utility managers
view expanding funding opportunities, specifically "additional grants, loans or other sources
of funding for pilot projects," as having high potential for technology innovation.®
in addition, existing and future financing programs
could clarify and emphasize water reuse project
eligibility. At times, funding mechanisms lack an
official policy on, or do not permit, funding for
water reuse projects. The lack of consistency in the
procurement and eligibility of funding could be
daunting to smaller systems exploring water reuse
for the first time. In Fiscal Year 2019, WIFIA funding
specifically identifies water reuse as a priority area
for the $60 million allocated by Congress (see
inset 27). EPA estimates that this new appropriation will provide approximately $6 biliion
in direct credit assistance, and/when combined with other funding sources/will result in
approximately $12 billion in water infrastructure investment.
To help with navigating the funding landscape, clearinghouses like the Water Infrastructure
and Resiliency Finance Center seek to aggregate and organize financial information into
useful sources for decision makers.
"EPA should clarify that
water reuse projects are
eligible expenses for State
Revolving Funds (SRF) and
which SRF, clean water or
drinking water, should fund
which pieces of a project"
- ACWA and ASDWA
Inset 26. Monterey One Water
Financing Approach
By the mid-2010s, Monterey County,
California, was facing a water crisis.
State-ordered restrictions to local drink-
ing water supplies spurred the public
agency for wastewater treatment into
action. Monterey One Water developed
a coalition of stakeholders to commit to
their involvement, develop a collective
plan, and secure funding from disparate
mechanisms. All told, with agreements in
hand, Monterey was able to secure $103
million in SRF funding, plus another $30
million in various federal, state, and local
grants. Together, the coalition built a novel
wastewater treatment facility that treats
to drinking water standards and promotes
groundwater replenishment.
Inset 27. WIFIA Funds Focus on
Water Reuse in 2019
When the EPA issued its Notice of Funding
Availability for the WIFIA program on April
5,2019, the notice highlighted water reuse
as a key priority for project selection:
"The EPA is highlighting water reuse
and recycling as a new or innovative
approach. The EPA recognizes that
reuse and recycling of water can
play a critical role in helping states,
tribes, and communities meet their
future drinking water needs with
a diversified portfolio of water
sources.'1
In addition to public funding options, water trading, market-based financing, and public-
private partnership approaches can support reuse and capture projects and enable more
cost-effective financing solutions. Clarifying how these innovative financing approaches can be applied to water reuse projects will help build
capacity to finance reuse and capture projects. An example of state funding to support agriculture enhanced water management practices is
shown in Inset 28.
The Santa Rosa Regional Water Reuse System (CA) pumps tertiary treated wastewater 40 miles uphill to steam
fields where it generates electricity for 100,000 households as part of the Geysers Recharge Project.
¦ ¦ Ml Mil II
30 National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
Inset 28. Kentucky On Farm Water Management
The On Farm Water Management Program is a collaboration between the Kentucky Agricultural Development Board and the Energy and
Environment Cabinet's Water Resources Board, which provides 50/50 cost share monies to support agriculture producers to promote
innovative water management and improve farm resiliency to drought, including through stormwater capture and reuse.
Proposed Actions
2.6.1 Compile Existing Federal Funding Sources for Water Reuse
Identify, compile, and publicize programs that fund the planning, construction, and maintenance of water reuse
projects and explore opportunities to better coordinate and highlight funding programs.
2.6.2 Promote Eligibility of Existing SRF and WIFIA Funding for Water Reuse
Work with states to promote water reuse projects' eligibility as expenses under SRFs and clarify which SRFs, clean water
or drinking water, apply to various elements of a project. The EPA plans to continue to support the use of WIFIA funds for
water reuse projects as was explicitly called out in the 2019 WIFIA Notice of Funding Availability (see Inset 27).
2.6.3 Compile Resources Concerning Non-Traditional Funding Mechanisms
Identify and compile information about the design and use of non-traditional reuse project funding and financing
approaches, including credit trading programs, collaborative funding models, public-private partnerships, pay-for-
performance procurement approaches, and innovative local fee-financing options.
Compile and Promote Existing U.S. Department of Agriculture Funding and Resources for Rural
Communities
Identify, compile, and promote USDA funding opportunities for water and wastewater infrastructure projects that can
advance reuse and conservation, such as the Rural Development's Water and Waste Disposal Loan and Grant Program
and NRCS' Conservation Innovation Grant. Provide information and technical assistance to both rural communities and
farmers on assessing opportunities for water reuse.
2.6.5
Support Development of Tools to Assist Effective Integration of Onsite Water Reuse Systems in
Communities
Develop planning approaches, financial models, and decision support tools to assist appropriate implementation of
onsite non-potable reuse projects while maintaining viability of centralized community water systems.
The Austin Water Forward Plan (TX) provides community-scale onsite reuse for
up to one-third of Austin's water, creating a diversified water portfolio.
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
cBsmffifc
Integrate and Coordinate Research on Water Reuse
Enhanced coordination of past and future water reuse
research can optimize its value, better identify critical
gaps, and speed delivery to users.
While innovative examples of water reuse are increasing, research can help expand
its scope and effectiveness. For example, the range of potential fit-for-purpose reuse
options calls for a quantitative assessment of a variety of risks, emphasizing the need
for new analytical capabilities, a more comprehensive understanding of technology
performance, and a deeper knowledge of potential health effects. Improving the energy
efficiency and reliability of treatment systems will increase applications and reduce
impacts but may also require fundamental advancements in process engineering.
"Federal leadership is sorely
needed to help ensure
that, as we go forward
with utilizing this critically
important resource, we
make sound, scientifically
based decisions that work to
prepare our country for the
successful utilization of all
alternate water sources."
Relevant research areas cut across scientific
disciplines, including technological
advancements in membrane technologies and
nanomaterials, public health assessments of
existing and emerging contaminants, and the
sociology of both acceptance and response to
reuse. Development and implementation of a
coordinated research action plan can help to
effectively address the broad range of topics
related to water reuse.
— Plumbing Industry Leadership
Coalition
I here is a need to collate the breadth of
existing and rapidly developing research,
synthesize this information to prioritize
targets for future research, and clearly coordinate the research activities of many
federal agencies and multiple nonfederal entities currently conducting or supporting
research related to Water reuse. Translational research—in which research or user
communities stay in early, frequent contact to define research questions, review
results, and define next steps—should be emphasized in future actions .(see Inset
29 for a successful example of ongoing water reuse research coordination and
collaboration),
Inset 29. Partnership in Action: National
Blue Ribbon Commission for Onsite Non-
Potable Water Reuse Systems
The National Blue Ribbon Commission was
originally established as a partnership between
the U.S. Water Alliance and the Water Research
Foundation, and is now supported by the
WateReuse Association. It is composed of rep-
resentatives from municipalities, public health
agencies, water utilities, and national organiza-
tions leading the industry in onsite non-potable
water systems. To date, the Commission has
undertaken the following initiatives:
• Served as a forum for collaboration and
knowledge exchange.
• Conducted research that has led to
transformational human health risk-
based water quality thresholds.
» Crafted guidance and frameworks for
nationally consistent state regulations
for onsite non-potable water reuse
systems.
Developed resources for water utilities
based on best practices and lessons
learned in the design, development,
integration, and operation of onsite non-
potable water reuse systems.
Identified additional research needs in
the field.
This group's efforts are an excellent example of
translational research. Close linkage between
the users and researchers allowed for definition
of a priority knowledge gap (i.e., specific guid-
ance on treatment requirements), completion
of needed peer-reviewed science on risk-based
treatment, development of a framework for
guidance, and passage of state legislation to
occur within four years. Similar workgroups
could advance key, science-related implemen-
tation in other priority areas (e.g., stormwater,
produced water),
As part of its Water Independence Now (WIN) initiative, the Water Replenishment District of Southern California
operates spreading grounds and coastal injection wells to recharge aquifers and prevent saltwater intrusion, A
stormwater capture system also recharges aquifers with rainwater that would otherwise flow into the ocean.
¦BBS
32 National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
Proposed Actions
Develop and Maintain a Comprehensive, Accessible, and Searchable Inventory of Water Reuse
Research
Water reuse research is conducted by many entities (e.g., federal, state, academics, utilities, industry). Several entities
stated that better integration and synthesis of research findings and results could provide critical access to research
and benefit existing and potential water reuse initiatives. These data and research results could be housed in a data
clearinghouse, along with case studies, with a robust search function.
2.7.2 Develop a Coordinated National Research Strategy on Water Reuse
In order to best leverage water reuse research efforts, a coordinated water reuse research strategy based on research gaps
identified in Action 2,7.1 should be developed. The strategy would include a prioritized list of research needs across various
Water reuse applications and sources of water for potential reuse, including those specified through public input.
2.7.3 Coordinate Federal Water Reuse Research to Address Action Plan Priorities
Federal agencies with relevant internal research programs could define specific actions in the near term relating back to
the National Water Reuse Action Plan. For example, the agencies could develop grant requests for applications focusing
on research needs and gaps identified during development of the National Water Reuse Action Plan. This could leverage
existing federal efforts to ensure immediate progress before finalization of a national research strategy on water reuse.
2,7,4 Coordinate Research and Compile Best Practices for Enhanced Aquifer Recharge
Aquifer recharge seems to be a growing practice, yet (as Inset 16 indicates) there are apparent differences in how it is
described and implemented. Senate Report 114-281 and House of Representatives Report 115-765 identify partnerships
among federal agencies, institutes, foundations, and universities that could leverage scientific expertise in the field of
enhanced aquifer recharge to establish a best practices approach.
Idaho's private Hidden Springs sewage treatment facility provides treated wastewater for irrigation on public land and small-scale crops.
The Murfreeshoro Water Resources Department (TN) provides drinking-water-quality reclaimed water
to the West Fork Stones River, supporting downstream users, aquatic life, and agricultural irrigation.
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
33
-------
Improve Outreach and Communication on
Water Reuse
¦hi
mmm
s&wmmm
A critical aspect of implementing a successful water reuse
program across applications is public acceptance and user
confidence.
Successful international and U.S. water reuse programs included effective outreach with
early public engagement and education, namely to clarify how treatment processes
and regulatory requirements (e.g., monitoring, performance standards) provide safe
water. Broad and transparent engagement with stakeholders (including academia,
non-governmental organizations, public health specialists, industry, and the public) and
leveraging various media and community engagement efforts were key to their success.
Inset 30 describes how utilities and others are using the novel approach of brewing beer
from reclaimed water as a community engagement technique.
"More messaging on a national level of the benefits and successes [of water
reuse] in tandem with discussion of the public health and environmental
protection safeguards and benefits is necessary."
- NACWA
Inset 30. Homebrew Made with
High-Quality Reclaimed Water
As a novel approach to raising awareness
about water reuse, a group of utilities,
brewers, engineering firms, and technology
companies involved in brewing beer from
high-quality reclaimed water formed the
Pure Water Brewing Alliance. Their beer,
Pure Water Brew, is produced in nine states
nationwide with reclaimed water.
Clean Water Services (Hillsboro, Oregon)
is one of the founding members of the
alliance; it has one of the largest water
reuse programs in Oregon. They launched
Pure Water Brew to deliver high-quality
reclaimed water to Oregon homebrewers,
along with a competition to showcase the
homebrews.
Inset 31. El Paso Water Public
Outreach34
A clear communication strategy is key to
the success of reuse projects, especially
when the application is direct potable
reuse. For example, the award-winning
El Paso Water communication strategy
around advanced water purification has
included a speakers' bureau, third-party
expert endorsements, proactive media
relations, health community outreach, and
tours of a pilot facility. The utility's TecH20
Learning Center hosts thousands of
student and public visitors every year for
events and tours. Visitors gain an appreci-
ation for water in the desert, the need for
reuse, and the treatment processes that
makes purified water safe to drink. For El
Paso Water, public outreach is essential to
building customer trust and acceptance
of advanced purified water as a drought-
proof, reliable water supply,
The green roof at the U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters (DC) intercepts, stores, and treats stormwater—up to and including water
from a 95th percentile storm—and uses it for onsite irrigation and water features.
In the United States, water reuse practitioners have articulated the need for a new and
specific level of engagement with users and the public.
While different uses of reclaimed water will likely require a tailored outreach and
communications approach, common public (domestic and international) concerns related
to water reuse, specifically potable reuse, reoccur across four main themes:3-
Water quality and safety. Outreach to address public health concerns and ensuring
the water is clean and safe for its intended use is key.
Education. Potable water reuse is a new concept in many communities. Early
stakeholder engagement and public understanding and support are cited as factors
in the success of Singapore's NEWater program. (NEWater is the treated Wastewater
that makes up about 30 percent of Singapore's water needs.) El Paso, Texas, educates
the public, including school children, using several effective strategies (see Inset 31),
Emotional response. This is best characterized as the visceral aversion to drinking
highly treated reused water, based on emotional reactions rather than on facts. A
message that has been used to counter this aversion: "Judge water by its quality,
not by its history.''®
Trust Trust in water authorities shapes public opinion on water reuse, including
the perception of water safety and treatment system reliability. The City of
Ventura, CA understood the need for public outreach to ensure the success of
mm
34 National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
its VenturaWaterPure demonstration project. The city maintained transparency
through frequent and clear communications to stakeholders throughout the project
by publishing information on the reuse process, monitoring protocols, and water
quality results.32 Inset 32 describes a framework to increase public support in water
management programs through a transparent decision-making process.
"The [Action] Plan is an opportunity to expand education efforts by USEPA
and others that reuse water is not characterized as dangerous to human
health, but part of an overall strategy to ensure adequate supplies of usable
water will continue to be available to everyone in the future."
— Tyson Foods
Inset 32. Framework to Increase
Public Support Through Multi-
Benefits
In April 2019, the Pacific Institute pub-
lished Moving Toward a Multi-Benefit
Approach for Water Management. The
report provides a holistic decision-making
framework for addressing water challeng-
es. The multi-benefit approach maximizes
resources, increases public support, and
builds project coalitions by identifying and
incorporating costs and benefits of water
sustainability alternatives.
Proposed Actions
2.8.1 Compile and Develop Water Reuse Program Outreach and Communication Materials
Compile examples of outreach and communication strategies and techniques that have been implemented for successful
reuse projects, and develop new materials based on the needs articulated by stakeholders. The materials could address
programmatic themes with the overarching goal to educate key audiences, such as the public, decision makers, and
key message carriers (e.g., public health professionals). A potential aspect of the framework could be an outreach and
communications kit (with contents such as talking points; press materials; public safety announcements; and other utility,
state, and tribal enforcement and compliance assistance materials) crafted and tailored for different audiences.
2.8.2 Develop a Community of Practice Around Water Reuse
A community of practice can serve as a "network of practitioners with a shared passion who learn how to do
something or how to do something better through repeated interactions."35 A water reuse community of practice
would create a peer network of water reuse stakeholders and professionals both face-to-face and virtually. The
repeated convenings could bring together examples of lessons learned, implementation challenges, regulatory
strategies, recognition and partnership programs, communication approaches, and outcomes to catalyze water
reuse projects. Virtually, the community could be a central database of tools or a listserv intended to facilitate open
questions, discussions, and requests. This group, or topic-specific subgroups, could be led by sector experts focused
on water reuse advancement, technology, and deployment building on existing resources and forums.
2.8.3 p"rsue a National Branding Campaign for Water Reuse
Initiate a collaborative campaign to assess the public's understanding and acceptance of water reuse. This campaign
could be available nationally, while recognizing regional variation in reuse based on local understanding of needs.
Southern Nevada Water Authority reclamation facilities treat water for non-potable use as well
as input to Lake Mead and the Las Vegas Wash to supplement drinking water supplies.
1
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
35
-------
y LJ Support a Talented and Dynamic Workforce
Water reuse is driving a new generation of treatment
technologies, monitoring, and operations and maintenance
needs that, in general, exceeds existing workforce
capabilities.
Water sector professionals are vital to protecting public health and the environment
through strategic planning, operation and maintenance of treatment technologies, and
implementation of water management programs for various use applications. Many
professionals undergo significant training and complete certification programs to ensure
they can properly operate their respective systems.
In a recent survey of water utility .operators and water regulators across the country
about innovative water technologies, only 54 percent of respondents indicated they had
experience with implementing non-potable reuse, while 73 percent indicated they had no
experience with potable reuse,®
Since many Water reuse practices (e.g., potable and non-potable) apply technologies
or management approaches that are not widely used, there is a growing need to fill
knowledge gaps and ensure the workforce is fully capable of designing, reviewing, and
operating complex reuse systems. Meanwhile, thousands of water treatment operators are
expected to retire from their positions in coming years,® Pursuing new efforts and making
targeted investments to build and train an emerging, more diverse generation of water
sector professionals will help fill the projected gaps in an aging workforce and create a
community of practice around strategies for water reuse.
"With increasingly complex systems, particularly in the case of direct potable
reuse, there are skills, knowledge and abilities that go beyond traditional
operator certification requirements. ACWA and ASDWA recognize and respect
the States' autonomy in implementing their operator certification programs,
however water reuse represents a unique opportunity for EPA to partner with
states to identify key knowledge and skills needed by water system operators
who are presiding over these water reuse projects."
- ACWA arid ASDWA
Inset 33. A Partnership for Water-
Reuse-Related Operator Certification
in California and Nevada
To help fill the void between existing
drinking water and wastewater
operator certifications, the California
Water Environment Association and
the California-Nevada Section of AWWA
have partnered to develop a voluntary
Advanced Water Treatment Operator
(AWTO) certification program.
"The AWTO certification program
dovetails with the water sector's
move toward the 'One Water'
concept, which stresses that all
water—wastewater, stormwater and
drinking water—has value and should
be managed as a resource;"*?
Since 2004, the Xcel Cherokee Station, one of Colorado's largest power plants, combines raw water with
reclaimed municipal wastewater for cooling towers, ash silo washdown, and fire protection.
36 National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
Proposed Actions
2.9.1
Support State(s) Development of a Pilot Operator Certification Program for Water Reuse
Applications
Foster development and propagation of an operator certification program for water reuse applications, which bridges
and complements existing water and wastewater certification programs. The program could address planned potable
reuse technologies and be focused on the intersection of wastewater and drinking water programs. It could also include
training for designers, operators, and permitting authorities undertaking new reuse projects, such as onsite non-potable
water systems. Inset 33 describes an example collaborative effort.
Support Opportunities to Promote a Skilled Workforce of Practitioners Across Various Water
2.9.2 Reuse Sectors
Promote a skilled workforce through workforce development efforts, including training and transition mechanisms to
address an aging workforce and creating opportunities for knowledge transfer and peer-to-peer engagement related
to water reuse across various use applications. Encourage and support development and dissemination of training
opportunities and materials for operators, technical assistance providers, and regulators related to water reuse. As part
of this action, existing training resources and delivery mechanisms (e.g., webinars, workshops, newsletters) could be
leveraged to reach a broader audience.
2,9 3 Support Water Reuse Training Networks
Seek opportunities to integrate water reuse considerations into the existing networks of national, regional, and state
and tribal training forums.
Shakopee Mdewakanton Sioux Community in Minnesota operates a water reclamation facility, using reclaimed water for irrigation and
discharge to wetlands for wildlife habitat.
Frito-Lavin Arizona recycles up to 75 percent of its process water, reducing its water use by 100 million gallons annually,
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft 37
September 2019
-------
Develop Water Reuse Metrics That Support Goals
and Measure Progress
Setting goals and accountability for implementation of the
actions in the Action Plan can help ensure progress and
results.
Metrics and benchmarks for overall water usage and reuse are important tools to assess
conditions, set targets, and measure progress. Such water metrics are routinely used by
International partners who, by many measures, are among the global leaders in water reuse.
Israel and Singapore have achieved notable rates of water reuse. Israel recycles approximately
87 percent of its wastewater, while Singapore relieson recycled water to meet 30 percent of
its water needs. These targets were met in part because of longstanding commitments to and
needs for diverse water portfolios (see Appendix 6);3a*:
Overall water usage and reuse metrics are essential components to water system
planning, providing managers with feedback to help determine the progress of
programmatic goals. Without specified performance goals and metrics, it becomes
difficult to evaluate the efficacy of a program or technology objectively.
Generating metrics for water reuse in the United States could begin with improving
current baseline estimates for both general water usage and reuse. Currently, national
estimates on water information and availability across all water uses are lacking.
Exceptions include the Water Environment Federation's methodology and estimates
for resource recovery from municipal wastewater, which identified an estimated 33 BGD
total volume of treated municipal wastewater. Of that volume, approximately 7 percent is
currently reused.12 In addition, the GWPC produced water report indicates the oil and gas
sector reuses 45 percent within oil and gas operations. Water reuse metrics would also
help inform the water-reuse-related goals in the DOE's Water Security Grand Challenge;41
"According to the 2017 Reuse Inventory Report, Florida reused approximately
813 [million gallons per day] MGD of reclaimed water, which was estimated to
have offset the use of442 MGD (over 161 billion gallons per year) of potable
quality water while serving to add252 MGD (approximately 92 billion gallons
per year) back to available water supplies."
— Florida Department of Environmental Protection
The Eohrata WRF (WA) treats municipal wastewater to produce water for groundwater
recharge, irrigation, holding in a seasonal fish pond, and equipment cleaning.
38 National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
*
IRRIGATION WITH
RECLAIMED WATER
DO NOT DRINK
V GUEST
^1 J' LAUNDRY
YOU
ARE
HERE
01 BLDG J k GATE
' ^ 7 HOUSE
Bilingual signage about the use of reclaimed
water for landscaping is protective of the entire
community at one Florida hotel complex.
-------
Compile National Estimates of Available Water and Water Needs
Develop one or more approaches or methodologies to explore and clarify the national volumes of current water use and
water potentially available for reuse (such as existing ocean discharges); This protocol would also estimate or update the
current baseline of water reused from key sources, including:
• Municipal wastewater • Oil and gas produced water
• Agricultural drainage43 • Stormwater
• Industry process and cooling water
2.10.2 Establish Goals for Extent and Types of Water Reuse in the United States
Create reuse targets (e.g., percentage goals) for reuse applications (e.g., potable and onsite non-potable) and
associated supplies (e.g., rainwater, graywater, ocean discharges), in accordance With state and local laws. These
objectives can be rolled up into broader, aggregated goals for reuse among communities nationwide.
2.10.3 Ensure Implementation of the National Water Reuse Action Plan
Develop and maintain an online implementation plan that is updated and available that describes the progress to
implement each of the actions in the final National Water Reuse Action Plan.
Monterey One Water in California delivers reclaimed water for irrigation of 12,000 acres of edible food crops.
UNC-Chaoel Hill (NC) partnered with Orange Water and Sewer Authority to use treated wastewater
effluent, in parallel with rainwater captured by cisterns, for irrigation and cooling water.
0
H
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
SECTION 3
NEXT STEPS
This draft National Water Reuse Action Plan is the beginning of a new collaborative effort among federal, state, and tribal partners and across
the entire water sector to identify the critical science, technical, policy, communications, and other opportunities and incentives to enhance
consideration of water reuse. We hope and expect the draft Action Plan will stimulate continued conversation and the articulation of the
ultimate actions to be pursued by the spectrum of water interests.
Formal Public Comment and Feedback
BBS
« MWI |
¦BUrrrr
M III IB
Following release of the draft Action Plan, a Federal Register Notice Will open a formal comment period. An accompanying docket in
regulations.gov will open for the submission of comments. During the comment period, any interested stakeholders are encouraged to provide
specific feedback on a variety of topics such as:
• The proposed actions identified and other suggested actions that can enhance implementation of Water reuse.
The key attributes, implementation steps, and milestones to successfully implement the proposed actions.
Potential action leaders to champion the proposed actions.
• Potential contributing organizations to serve as partners/collaborators in implementing the proposed actions.
• Additional information or recommendations to inform these or other proposed actions.
Comments received on the draft Action Plan will be received on the docket website fwww.requlations.gov'). Due to the action-oriented nature
of this plan and the need for commitments to help ensure its execution, ongoing outreach and engagement will continue during the comment
period and during finalization of the Action Plan.
The Sterling Creek Water Reclamation Facility (GA) provides 3 MGD of treated effluent to the Elbow
Swamp, sustaining a constructed wetland system and providing water for irrigation.
40 National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft
September 2019
-------
Facilitating Implementation of the Actions
During the comment period, we will also consider ways to build a framework to help facilitate the implementation of actions in the National
Water Reuse Action Plan and provide routine status updates to interested stakeholders.
Building an Enduring Legacy of Watershed-Based
Action
Our hope is to enhance and stimulate Watershed-based collaborations where business, finance and policy leaders, communities, nonprofits,
and others come together to solve local water resource (quantity and quality) challenges. Water reuse applications provide an opportunity for
this level of collaboration and offer the potential to improve water resilience, security, and sustainabiiity.
Thank you for contributing to the security, resilience, and sustainabiiity of our most precious resource...water.
The Heart of the Valley Metropolitan Sewerage District treatment plant (Wl) discharges approximately
1.7 MGD treated effluent to a nearby power generating facility for use as cooling water:
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft 41
September 2019
-------
SECTION 4
NOTES AND
REFERENCES
fpiPII
\\f
I Cbilabarafe. 65®), Merriam-Webster.com. httDs://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionarv/collaboration
® 66vernment.Mfi©uill;ability Office. (JEM) Freshwater: Supplytoneerhs continue, and uneertaintieSieernplifiate planning, :(
-------
21 American Geosciences Institute. (2017). Managed aquifer recharge: A tool to replenish aquifers and increase underground water storage.
https://www.americanaeosciences.ora/sites/clefault/files/CI Factsheet 2017 6 MAR 170921.pdf
22 Redely, KR. (2008). Enhanced aquifer recharge. In Darnault, CJG. (eel.). Overexploitation and contamination of shared groundwater resources. NATO Science
for Peace and Security Series C: Environmental Security. Dordrecht: Springer.
23 National Research Council. (1994). Ground water recharge using waters of impaired quality: Chapter 1: An introduction to artificial recharge. National
Academies Press. httPs://www.nap.eclu/reacl/4780/chapter/3
24 Yang, J; Neil, C; Neal, J; Goodrich, J; Simon, M; Burnell, D; Cohen, R; Schupp, D; Krishnan, R; Jun, Y. (2017). Decision support system for aquifer recharge
(AR) and aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) planning, design, and evaluation—principles and technical basis. (EPA/600/R-16/222). Washington, DC:
U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development, National Risk Management Research Laboratory, https://cfpub.epa.aov/si/si public record report.
cfm?Lab=NRMRL&clirEntrvlcl=335408
25 National Research Council. (2008). Prospects for managed underground storage of recoverable water. National Academies Press.
26 Life Cycle Cost-Effective is defined as "[t]he life cycle costs of a product, project, or measure are estimated to be equal to or less than the base case (i.e.,
current or standard practice or product) in accordance with 10 CFR part 436" as per page 36 of CEQ EO 13834 Implementing Instructions.
27 Nappier, SP; Soller, JA; Eftim, SE. (2018). Potable water reuse: What are the microbiological risks? Current Environmental Health Reports 5(2): 283-292.
28 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2019). Management of Legionella in water systems. Washington, DC: The National Academies
Press, https://cloi.ora/10.17226/25474
29 California Department of Public Health. (2014). Regulations related to recycled water, http://www.waterboarcls.ca.aov/clrinkina water/certlic/drinkinawater/
clocuments/lawbook/RWreaulations 20140618.pdf
30 World Health Organization. (2017). Potable reuse: Guidance for producing safe drinking-water. Geneva: World Health Organization, https://www.who.int/
water sanitation health/publications/potable-reuse-auidelines/en/
31 Sherman, L. et al. (no date). Examining the complex relationship between innovation and regulation through a survey of wastewater utility managers,
(manuscript currently in progress for publication, date pending).
32 Coxon, SK; Eggleton, CM; lantosca, C; Sajor J. (2016). Increasing public acceptance of direct potable reuse as a drinking water source in Ventura, California.
http://bren.ucsb.edu/research/2016Group Proiects/clocuments/VenturaPotableReuseFINALREPORT-l.pcIf
33 Bowen, P. (2017, May 4). #AZPureWaterBrew say judge water by its quality not by its history @WEForg @AZWater_org. https://twitter.com/paultbowen/
status/860152626830229505
34 El Paso Water. (2019). Communicating purified water in El Paso.
35 U.S. Department of Energy. (2014). Communities of practice: A tool for creating institutional change in support of the mission of the Federal Energy
Management Program, https://www.enerav.aov/sites/procl/files/2015/04/f21/communities of practice.pdf
36 These results are based on 223 responses. Information from Sherman, L. et al. (no date). Examining the complex relationship between innovation and
regulation through a survey of wastewater utility managers." (manuscript currently in progress for publication, date pending).
37 Kane, J; Tomer, A. (2018). Renewing the water workforce: Improving water infrastructure and creating a pipeline to opportunity. Metropolitan Policy Program
at Brookings. https://www.brookinas.eclu/wp-content/uploacls/2018/06/Brookinas-Metro-Renewina-the-Water-Workforce-June-2018.pclf
38 California Water Environment Association. (2019). Better together: CA-NV AWWA and CWEA join forces for the first time to create certification for those
taking the "waste" out of wastewater. Clean Water 2,13-14.
39 Eclan, G. (2016). Responsible businesses—Where we are now, and where we are heading. (Conference opening remarks). Israeli CSR Experience Conference,
Tel Aviv, Israel, December 1, 2016.
40 Singapore Public Utilities Board. NEWater. (no date), https://www.pub.aov.sa/watersupplv/fournationaltaps/newater
41 The Water Security Grand Challenge was announced by the Secretary of Energy on October 25, 2018. It includes five challenge goals, including goals to
"transform the energy sectors' produced water from a waste to a resource" and "double resource recovery from municipal wastewater" by 2030:
https://www.enerav.aov/articles/cloe-launches-water-securitv-arancl-challenae.
42 7 U.S.C. §8791 establishes parameters for releasing certain producer information obtained by the U.S. Department of Agriculture to cooperators helping
implement its programs.
Photo Credits
Cover: Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, Monterey One Water, City of Columbia, Missouri, U.S. EPA/David W. Smith, Idaho Department of Environ-
mental Quality, City of Aurora, Colorado; Pg. 2: King County, Washington; Pg. 7: Idaho Department of Environmental Quality; Pg. 8: U.S. EPA/Pamala Myers;
Pg. 9: F. Wayne Hill Water Resources Center, King County, Washington; Pg. 10: Apache Corporation, Emerald Coast Utilities Authority; Pg. 11: Idaho Department
of Environmental Quality; Pg. 12: Stockholm International Water Institute; Pg. 13: City of Phoenix, Arizona; Pg. 14: North Texas Municipal Water District, Denver
Zoo, U.S. General Services Administration; Pg. 15: City of Pomona; Pg. 17: City of St. Petersburg, Florida; Pg. 20: U.S. General Services Administration; Pg. 21:
City of Columbia, Missouri; Pg. 22: U.S. EPA/Pamala Myers; Pg. 23: Hampton Roads Sanitation District; Pg. 25: UMass Amherst, Clear Lake Sanitation District;
Pg. 26: National Science Foundation, U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Fort Carson Army Base; Pg. 28: West Basin Municipal
Water District; Pg. 29: U.S. EPA/Pamala Myers, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation; Pg. 30: City of Santa Rosa, California; Pg. 32: Water
Replenishment District of Southern California; Pg. 33: Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, City of Murfreesboro, Tennessee; Pg. 34: U.S. General Services
Administration; Pg. 37: Shakopee Mclewakanton Sioux Community; Pg. 38: U.S. EPA/Pamala Myers; Pg. 39: Monterey One Water; Pg. 40: City of Los Angeles,
Sanitation and Environment; Pg. 41: Eastern Research Group/Sargon cle Jesus, Heart of the Valley Metropolitan Sewerage District; Pg. 42: U.S. EPA/David W.
Smith, North Texas Municipal Water District.
The Holmes Harbor Sewer District (WA) facility discharges reclaimed water for golf course
irrigation in dry months and stores it in lagoons during wet months.
9L
National Water Reuse Action Plan - Draft 43
September 2019
-------
-------
Appendix A: Discussion Framework
NATIONAL WATER REUSE
ACTION PLAN
DRAFT
-------
Appendix A: Discussion Framework
Appendix A contains the EPA's Discussion Framework for Development of a Draft Water Reuse Action
Plan. This document was publicly released on April 18, 2019, in conjunction with the opening of the
docket to receive early public input on development of the draft National Water Reuse Action Plan. The
Discussion Framework is provided in this appendix unaltered from its initial release as posted on the
EPA's water reuse website: it does not reflect the contributions of commenters, outreach, or literature
consulted since its release.
Disclaimer
This Discussion Framework is intended to frame the context for the draft Action Plan and provide key
background information about the business case for reuse, potential water reuse applications, potential
framework for the draft Action Plan, potential collaborators and contributors, example forums for
discussion, and published water reuse literature. It is not a draft Action Plan, but rather a framework for
discussion about the development of a draft Action Plan. It may be revised or updated. It is not
intended, nor can it be relied on, to create any rights enforceable by any party in litigation with the
United States. The EPA and its employees do not endorse any products, services, or enterprises.
Mention of trade names, entities, or products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for
use. The contents of the Discussion Framework are not exhaustive. Nothing in the Discussion
Framework is intended to reflect the EPA's position regarding any water-related policy or solicitation of
public comments.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | A-l
-------
Discussion Framework for Development of a Draft Water Reuse Action Plan
4/18/2019
Discussion Framework for Development of a Draft Water Reuse Action Plan
A Collaborative Call for Action: Development of a Water Reuse Action Plan
On February 27, 2019, at a water reuse summit in San Francisco, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
announced the development of a Water Reuse Action Plan that will better integrate federal policy and leverage the
expertise of both industry and government to ensure the effective use of the Nation's water resources. The EPA is
bringing together experts across the water sector to identify a path forward that will provide more water to users
while protecting human health and the environment.
"The Nation's water resources are the lifeblood of our communities, and the federal government has the
responsibility to ensure all Americans have access to reliable sources of clean and safe water/' said David Ross,
U.S. EPA's Assistant Administrator for Water. "There is innovative work happening across the water sector to
advance water reuse, and the EPA wants to accelerate that work through coordinated federal leadership."
A draft of the plan is scheduled for release and public review in September 2019 at the Annual WateReuse
Symposium in San Diego. This Discussion Framework is intended to frame the context for, and inform the
development of, a Water Reuse Action Plan.
I. Vision
Water reuse can be a valuable means to enhance the availability and effective use of our Nation's water resources
and should be considered as part of an integrated water resources management approach to meet the future needs
of our Nation. An integrated approach commonly involves a combination of water management strategies (e.g.,
water supply development, water storage, stormwater management, water use efficiency, and water reuse) and
engages multiple stakeholders and needs. The EPA, in collaboration with the Department of Interior, Department of
Agriculture, the Department of Energy and other federal agencies, states, tribes, locales, the water sector, and other
partners and stakeholders, will work to enhance consideration and application of water reuse through development
and implementation of a Water Reuse Action Plan (WRAP).
For purposes of this discussion framework, "water reuse" includes other common terminology including recycled
water, reclaimed water, alternative water supplies, improved water reliability, and water resource recovery.
The EPA will leverage and continue to engage with other federal agencies, states, tribes, local governments, water
utilities, industry, agriculture, and others with keen water interests. The EPA will also be a key partner to implement
the Water Security Grand Challenge with the U.S. Department of Energy, which has elements related to water reuse:
"The Water Security Grand Challenge will incentivize new technologies aimed at solving one of the
most important global challenges of our time - providing access to clean, safe, and secure water. EPA
looks forward to partnering with DOE to help bring clean and safe water to communities across the
country and find innovative ways to transform non-traditional water sources into resources."
— EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler, October 25, 2018
II. Business Case - Impetus for Action
The Nation's water resources are the lifeblood of our communities, supporting our economy and way of life. Across
the country, we depend upon reliable sources of clean and safe water.1 Though water reuse is a well-established
practice in certain areas, substantial opportunities exist to optimize its consideration and application for many
different purposes across the country. For example, forty out of fifty state water managers expect to face freshwater
shortages in their states in the next ten years.2
1 EPA Strategic Plan, FY 2018-2022, February 12, 2018
2 Government Accountability Office (GAO) 2014. Freshwater: Supply Concerns Continue and Uncertainties Complicate Planning. GAO-14-43
1
-------
Discussion Framework for Development of a Draft Water Reuse Action Plan
4/18/2019
Multiple federal and state agencies maintain initiatives that address water reuse (see Sections IV and VI), but
improvements in coordination or leveraging could maximize benefits and progress could be accelerated with an
integrated, crosscutting strategy and action plan. Congress, multiple states, and stakeholders have increasingly
called for action and focus on water reuse, which could be bolstered by federal, state, and watershed-based
collaboration, when desired and appropriate.
The literature identifies many motivations for consideration of water reuse as part of a diverse portfolio of water
sources to meet current and future water demands, including:
Widespread adoption of coordinated and integrated water resources management;
Creating water alternatives in response to prolonged and severe droughts;
Accommodating population growth and urbanization;
Substituting reclaimed water for applications that do not require drinking-quality water;
Protecting aquatic ecosystems through targeted restoration and avoided withdrawals/diversions;
Addressing groundwater overdrafts and related impacts (land subsidence, saltwater intrusion, etc.);
Lowering energy costs for treatment and transportation of water;
Enhancing water security through portfolio diversification and resilience; and
Augmenting existing water sources to enable long term economic and environmental sustainability.
III. Use Cases - Possible Examples of Types and Fit-for-Purpose Applications of Water Reuse
Table 1 identifies some broad categories of potential water reuse applications. The information in the table is not
exhaustive. The table is followed by brief illustrative examples of current water reuse practices that help to demonstrate
applications and opportunities for fuller consideration of water reuse.
Table 1. Example water reuse categories, applications, and implementation challenges.
Category
Use Application
Challenges for Implementers
Agriculture &
Irrigation
Urban lands/green infrastructure and fixtures
Dual distribution costs and geographic extent limitations; seasonal
demand; salinity; cross connection control; state variability in food
irrigation water quality standards
Row Crops (tile drains/irrigation return flows)
Livestock
Drinking Water
Source
Direct potable
Energy intensive; state preclusions; public support; risk-based
frameworks; infrastructure limitations; broad
acceptance of treatment capabilities
Indirect potable / Augmentation
Aquifer storage and recovery
Non-potable
onsite reuse
Rainwater/Stormwater capture and reuse
Prior appropriation, local constraints, lack of data on quality
Air conditioning condensate
Inefficiency; monitoring data
Atmospheric water generation/ biomass gasification
Inefficiency; monitoring data
Building-scale/localized systems
Cost effective treatment technologies, risk assessments re: fit-for-purpose
reuse, appropriate safety indicators; varied regulations across the states
National
Security &
Military
Military operations
Mobility; automation; real-time QA/QC; variable source water quality
U.S. disaster response
Mobility; uncertainty in source water quality
Impoundments
Recreational/Landscape Impoundments
Nutrient removal needs; ecological risks; dual systems
Snowmaking
Sometimes a non-point discharge; site ecology; public support
Environmental
Restoration
Wetlands
Species sensitivity and site-specific requirements; nutrient removal needs
Protection from salt water intrusion
Stream flow augmentation and wildlife
Groundwater/Aquifer recharge
Site hydrogeology; aquifer degradation; advanced treatment needs
Source water protection
Numerous
Industrial
(onsite,
imported)
Cooling (effluent reuse, stormwater capture)
Fit-for-use treatment variability; dual distribution; cost of alternative
management methods
Boiler water
Other energy and process source water
Manufacturing
Oil and Gas
Production
Agriculture, Wildlife/Habitat Support, Industrial Source
Water and Oil and Gas Replenishment Water
Availability and validation of cost-effective treatment technologies and
adequacy of monitoring data; dual distribution; management methods
2
-------
Discussion Framework for Development of a Draft Water Reuse Action Plan
4/18/2019
The following presents some examples of water reuse that correspond to reuse applications listed above in Table 1:
Agriculture and Irrigation - Agriculture is among the most significant of water stewards
in the United States. Indications of use of wastewater for agricultural irrigation extends
back about 3000 years to ancient Greece.3 In 1929 the City of Pomona, CA, initiated use
of reclaimed water for lawn and garden irrigation.3 By 2002, nearly half of all reclaimed
water produced in California was used for agricultural irrigation.3 The Monterey Regional
Water Pollution Control Facility began delivering 20 million gallons per day (mgd) of
recycled water for food crop irrigation in 1998,4 and today, Monterey One Water recycles
around four billion gallons a year for crop irrigation.5 The Transforming Drainage project
across the upper Midwest is exploring the connection of agricultural drainage water management and irrigation.
Direct Potable Reuse (DPR) - The first demonstrated practice of DPR began in Namibia in 1968 and continues
today.3 The first DPR in the U.S. may have taken place in Chanute, KS, in 1956-1957 when the Neosho River ceased
to flow; Chanute reused its treated sewage for five months, recirculating it some eight to fifteen times.3 In 2013,
Wichita Falls and Big Spring, TX, both spurred by drought, received approval from the Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality to implement DPR programs.4 El Paso, TX, launched a pilot facility in 2015 to create water
suitable for DPR; its future full-scale facility will produce 10 mgd, helping to serve 36,000 homes.6 Currently, several
states are exploring or developing frameworks for DPR.
Indirect Potable Reuse (IPR) - The Upper Occoquan Sewage Authority (UOSA) in Northern Virginia is a commonly
cited example of a planned IPR. UOSA's advanced water reclamation facility, operating since 1978, discharges about
50 mgd to the Occoquan Reservoir, used as a source for drinking water. The reclaimed water represents as little as
10 percent or as much as 90 percent of the reservoir inflow, depending on rainfall conditions.3 While UOSA is an
example of planned IPR, unplanned or "de facto" IPR is very common across the U.S.4
Onsite Non-potable Reuse - The Alaska Water and Sewer Challenge is spearheading
research and development of decentralized systems that enable reuse in rural
households, to cost-effectively protect public health and manage water resources while
improving affordable access to clean and safe water.7 In New York City, eight Battery
Park City buildings that utilize onsite non-potable reuse consume 50 percent less water
and discharge 60 percent less wastewater than similarly-sized buildings in NYC.8
Groundwater Recharge - In California, Orange County Water District (OCWD) began
groundwater injection of reclaimed water in 1975. Today, OCWD injects 100 mgd into
the aquifer to replenish water production wells and prevent saltwater intrusion.4
Industrial Reuse-Opportunities for reuse include cooling water, boiler water, process,
water, and other needs. In 1995, 0.4 percent of U.S. manufacturing water needs were met with reclaimed water while
60 percent came from surface water and 17 percent from public water supplies.3 Bethlehem Steel Company in
Baltimore, MD, used chlorinated wastewater effluent for steel processing from 1942 through the 1990s.3 West Basin
Water District (Los Angeles, CA) produces water fit for specific needs of various types of customers (e.g., cooling tower
and boiler feed water, irrigation).3
3 Metcalf & Eddy. 2007. Water Reuse: Issues, Technologies and Applications. Published by McGraw Hill.
4 Water Environment Federation. 2018. Water Reuse Roadmap. Alexandria: Water Environment Federation.
5 Monterey One Water. 2017. Monterey One Water: Providing Cooperative Water Solutions. Retrieved from http://www.montereyonewater.org/.
6 WateReuse. 2015. "El Paso Officially Launches 'First-of-its-kind' Water Reuse Project." September 6. https://watereuse.org/el-paso-officially-launches-first-of-
its-kind-water-reuse-project/.
7 Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation. 2019. Alaska Water and Sewer Challenge (AWSC). https://dec.alaska.gov/water/water-sewer-challenge/.
8 Natural Systems Utilities. "Case Studies: Battery Park City." https://www.nsuwater.com/case-studies/battery-park-city/
3
"The United States uses
587.76 million gallons of
recycled water per day
for agricultural irriga-
tion, and this number is
on an upward trend."
- CONSERVE website
"The need to secure future
water supplies, in the face of
increasing demand and un-
certain water availability, is
driving adoption of water re-
use. Bluefield Research fore-
casts municipal water reuse
systems will reach over
$21.5 billion between 2017
and 2027, including more
than 775 projects in the de-
velopment pipeline across
19 states."
— Bluefield Research
-------
Discussion Framework for Development of a Draft Water Reuse Action Plan
4/18/2019
Stormwater Capture and Reuse - Small-scale (rain barrels, rooftop diversions) and large-scale capture of stormwater
runoff for treatment, storage and future use is a means of repurposing stormwater for beneficial purposes.
Environmental Restoration- Phoenix, AZ, uses treated wastewater to restore and maintain 500 acres of vital wetland
and riparian habitat in the Salt River bottomlands.4
IV. Examples of Efforts Potentially Related to a Water Reuse Action Plan
Federal
- Presidential Memo: Promoting the Reliable Supply and Delivery of Water in the West (10/19/18) "directs for
federal investment in technology and reduction of regulatory burdens to enable broader scale use of recycled
water; and programs that promote and encourage innovation, R&D of technology that improve water
management, using best available science through real-time monitoring of wildlife and water deliveries."
- Water Security Grand Challenge announced by Secretary of Energy Perry (10/25/18) has at least two challenge
goals that specifically involve opportunities for water reuse: energy produced water and municipal wastewater.
- Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act (Public Law 114-322) (WIIN) amended the Water
Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) to include explicit eligibility for "a water recycling project or a
project to provide alternative water supplies to reduce aquifer depletion" (Section 5008 of WIIN). Integrated
Planning was also codified as a component of Clean Water Act implementation in 2019.
- America's Water Infrastructure Act of 2018 specifies Congress' intent that water reuse is a key part of the
national water infrastructure:
o S.2004 - Sense of Congress that nonpotable sources for industry can relieve supply/demand challenges. Encourages
implementing and incentivizing nonpotable reuse to achieve water savings and conservation needs,
o S.2007- Authorizes $10m in FY19/20; requires new grant program to accelerate research and development and
technology deployment.
o S.2017- Requires the EPA to comprehensively review drinking water treatment technologies and disseminate results,
o S.4102 - Requires the EPA to disseminate information on cost-effective and alternative technologies, and Report to
Congress within one year, and tri-annually thereafter, on alternative wastewater treatment and recycling tech.
- Federal Technology Transfer Authority (15 (JSC 3710a) and Federal Prize Competition Authority (15 (JSC 3719)
authorizes federal agencies to collaborate on research and development and related efforts.
- National Drought Resilience Partnership (NDRP), established by Presidential Memorandum (2016), coordinates
efforts among agencies to assist in building long-term drought resilience in basins and regions.
- U.S. Government Global Water Strategy (2017) outlines the Federal Family's global approach to fostering a water-
secure world, describing each Agency's roles therein, such as Bureau of Reclamation's charge to foster water
reuse and recycling.
U.S. EPA
- EPA Reuse Guidelines (5): 2017 Potable Reuse Compendium and Guidelines for Water Reuse (2012, 2004, 1992
and 1980).
- Office of Water Study of Oil and Gas Extraction Wastewater Management to solicit perspectives on, and consider
management approaches, in unconventional and conventional oil and gas wastewater management.
- Office of Water Microbial Risk Assessments related to Potable Reuse (see "Nappier et al." in Section X).
- EPA-New Mexico Memorandum of Understanding to clarify existing regulatory and permitting frameworks
related to the way produced water from oil and gas extraction activities can be reused, recycled, and renewed for
other purposes. The EPA and New Mexico developed a draft white paper, "Oil and Natural Gas Produced Water
Governance in the State of New Mexico," released November 9, 2018.
V. Potential Areas of Focus
Over the past several years, a range of federal and non-federal activities have been carried out to characterize the
potential for water reuse in different sectors or subsectors of the economy. For example, in 2018, the Water
Environment Federation released a Water Reuse Roadmap and the report Mainstreaming Potable Water Reuse in
the United States, was published by ReNUWIt, Johnson Foundation, and the EPA. Other federal agencies and
4
-------
Discussion Framework for Development of a Draft Water Reuse Action Plan
4/18/2019
organizations have developed similar works. The WRAP will not attempt to repeat these recent efforts but will draw
on their findings and recommendations to determine what knowledge gaps or actions need to occur to bolster
opportunities for water reuse across all sectors of the U.S. economy. International examples and models will also be
used, as appropriate, to determine if they would also serve as solutions in the U.S.
Components of a WRAP may include the actions of many water stakeholders and address several thematic areas
frequently identified in the literature, including: 1) technological improvements, 2) regulatory/policy aspects, 3)
financial initiatives; 4) performance metrics, 5) water information use and availability, and 6) public outreach. Each
type of reuse could be evaluated against these six components to provide a greater understanding of the incentives
for and barriers to water reuse. Below are some examples of high-level actions and/or information gaps under each
of the six components. In facilitating development of the WRAP, the EPA will engage stakeholders and brainstorm
action items and specific activities related to water reuse. Actions identified for consideration in the WRAP could be
taken by a variety of different water stakeholders or groups with collaborative interests.
1. Technological Improvements
a. Technology Development. Piloting. Validation - Identifying technological needs and validation
requirements; evaluating applications, efficacy, and limitations of existing technologies; and
fostering opportunities for onsite and mobile pilot testing to assist regulators and drive costs and
feasibility towards "pipe parity" (e.g., closer or equal to other water supplies).
b. Monitoring and Sensors - Collecting timely, robust, quality data (constituents and surrogates) to (a)
verify that water is safe and meets quality expectations, namely online and offline standardized
methods to understand reuse water needs and fit for purpose baselines (for example, biological
risks and operations for potable reuse; dissolved mineral content for niche manufacturing; or
optimizing stormwater management and capture with real-time weather information); and (b)
ensure systems operate as designed (e.g., component performance, protection of downstream
components).
c. Concentrate and Brine Management - Determining the management and reclamation opportunities
for managing brines/concentrates, with specific focus on areas facing limited viable and
environmentally acceptable disposal methods.
d. Research Coordination and Critical Science Gaps - Building upon decades of research across the
Federal and private sector to close any remaining critical gaps.
e. International Experience- Building upon the extensive technology and reuse practices of the
international community (e.g., Israel, Namibia, Singapore, Australia).
2. Regulatorv/Policv Aspects at All Levels of Government
a. Public Health Protection - Exploring establishment of public health benchmarks and guidelines, and
risk-based baselines (e.g., pathogen removal targets and other risk-based constituent removal
targets), to advance the practice - particularly in types of reuse which lack guidelines/regulatory
frameworks - and continuing development and utilization of tools and processes for locales and
water managers to evaluate public health risks and ensure any reused water is fit for purpose.
b. Regulatory and Policy Incentives. Challenges. Barriers, and Facilitation - Creating an environment
where reuse can be realistically and routinely considered within a unified framework.
c. Source Control - Building on existing programs and capabilities such as using local Pretreatment
Programs to apply source tracking and control to help protect the quality of recycled municipal
wastewater.
5
-------
Discussion Framework for Development of a Draft Water Reuse Action Plan
4/18/2019
d. Workforce and Operator Training Certification Programs - Fostering a workforce with training and
skills to operate complex technologies, and manuals of practice and procurement to support
operators and administrators alike.
e. Addressing Other Regulatory or Institutional Barriers - Considering expanded alternatives for the
management and disposal of wastewaters, such as oil and gas produced water, that in turn spur
technology development.
3. Financing
a. Financing and Funding Eligibility - Providing additional funding opportunities and incentives; and
ensuring federal and state funding eligibility is clear and can be easily integrated with other funding
programs.
b. Affordability - Bolstering water reuse's ability to lower the total cost of water, as one of many tools
to address burgeoning household water affordability issues around the country.
4. Fit for Purpose
a. Water Quality Performance Metrics to Assure that Recycled Water Meets Use and User Needs -
Helping states and other entities determine frameworks and scale-specific levels of treatment for
recycled water depending on intended use (i.e., including potable; ecosystems; groundwater;
irrigation/agriculture; boiler/cooling water; etc.) and technical and/or infrastructure specifications.
b. Transform the Design and Implementation of Agricultural Drainage - Helping states and landowners
understand the potential benefits of storing water in the landscape and implement various forward-
looking drainage practices to support resilient and productive agricultural systems and improve
downstream water quality.
c. Maximizing Opportunities for Environmental Restoration - Understanding water quality-based
capabilities for targeted environmental restoration, such as reducing secondary and/or combined
stormwater discharges while improving streamflow and habitat in impaired watersheds.
d. Identifying Frameworks - Identifying frameworks and design scale ranges for which metrics and
standards are needed, desired, and applicable.
5. Information about Water Use and Availability
a. Data Sharing. Integration and Exchange - Creating the mechanisms for water quality and quantity
information to be shared and integrated and usable at the different scales to facilitate integrated
water resources management, including water reuse opportunities. This sharing and integrating of
water information is often referred to as the "Internet of Water".9
b. Data Governance - Encouraging watershed-based water information hubs and collaboratives to
optimize sharing and integration of information to improve integrated water management.
6. Outreach Opportunities
a. Public Outreach - Understanding the importance of public acceptance of reused water, and
ensuring clear, consistent messaging and risk communication from federal agencies on basic
questions related to reuse. Articulating lessons learned. More messaging on a national level of the
benefits of reuse and the appropriate and applicable public health and environmental safeguards.
b. Public Education - Using best-practices in risk communication to help the public understand the
level of protection and risk associated with current programs and requirements.
c. Communication - Facilitating the deployment and dissemination of critical and relevant water
reuse-related information and templates for information delivery.
d. Reuse Case Examples - Identifying successful projects to provide insights on opportunities and
barriers to water reuse.
9 Aspen Institute. 2017. Internet of Water: Sharing and Integrating Water Data for Sustainability. www.aspeninstitute.org/publications/internet-of-water/
6
-------
Discussion Framework for Development of a Draft Water Reuse Action Plan 4/18/2019
VI. Example Collaborators* and Potential Owners of Actions in a Water Reuse Action Plan
Federal Partners on Water
- Council on Environmental Quality
- White House Office of Science & Technology Policy
- National Economic Council
- EPA: OW, ORD, OP, OECA, OMS, OSRTI, Regions 1-10
- Department of Agriculture (USDA) (e.g., NIFA, ERS,
ARS, NRCS)
- Department of Interior (DOI) (e.g., BLM, BoR, USGS)
- Department of Commerce (National Oceanic &
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA))
- Department of Energy (DOE)
- Army Corps of Engineers
Other Federal Agencies and Working Groups
- Department of Defense (DoD)
- National Science Foundation (NSF)
- National Research Council
- National Academies of Science, Engineering and
Medicine
- NSTC Subcommittee on Water Availability and Quality
- Department of State (DOS)
- National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
- Centers for Disease Control (CDC)
- Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
- US Agency for International Development (USAID)
- Water Treatment Interagency Working Group (WaTr)
States
- Association of Clean Water Administrators (ACWA)
- Association of State Drinking Water Administrators
(ASDWA)
- Association of State and Territorial Health Officials
(ASTHO)
- Groundwater Protection Council (GWPC)
- Specific States (e.g., Virginia; Texas; Georgia; Alaska;
California; Florida; Colorado River Basin States)
- Western States Water Council (WSWC)
- Western Coalition of Arid States (WESTCAS)
- Environmental Council of the States (ECOS)/ITRC
- National Governors Association
NGOs
- WateReuse Association
- Water Environment Federation (WEF)
- American Water Works Association (AWWA)
VII. The EPA Water Reuse Team
Jake Adler (ORISE), OW-OST
Ryan Albert, OW-OGWDW
Bob Bastian, OW-OWM
Veronica Blette, OW-OWM
Adriana Felix-Salgado, OW-OST
Katie Flahive, OW-OWOW
* Not intended to be an exhaustive list.
- Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies (AMWA)
- The Water Research Foundation (TWRF)
- National Water Research Institute (NWRI)
- National Association of Clean Water Agencies
(NACWA)
- National Rural Water Association (NRWA)
- National Association of Clean Water Companies
- US Water Alliance
- Alliance for Water Efficiency
- CA Coastkeeper Alliance
- Conservation X Labs
- Clean Water Action
- Environmental Defense Fund
- Natural Resources Defense Council
- Pacific Institute
- Rural Community Assistance Project (RCAP)
- The Nature Conservancy
- Western Resource Advocates
Water Sector/Utilities/Regional Partnerships/Locales
- National Blue Ribbon Commission on Onsite Non-
potable Water Systems
- Water Utilities (e.g., OCWD, SFPUC, El Paso, HRSD)
Technology Developers/Providers/Accelerators
- Water Technology Clusters such as The Water Council
(Milwaukee)
- Imagine H20
- Suez, Xylem, Ecolab and many others
Academia
- University of Arizona - Tucson
- Re-Inventing the Nation's Urban Water Infrastructure
(ReNUWIt)
- UC Berkeley
- Stanford Woods Institute/Water in the West
- Center of Excellence at the Nexus of Sustainable Water
Reuse, Food and Health (CONSERVE)
- University of Colorado CIRES
- Colorado State University Water Center
- Columbia University
- Southern CA Coastal Water Research Program
- The Water Institute at UNC
- University of South Florida
Aspen Flynn (ORISE), OW-OGWDW
Peter Ford, OGC
Jay Garland, ORD-NERL
Robert Goo, OW-OWOW
Roger Gorke, OW-IO (LA)
Chris Impellitteri, ORD
7
-------
Discussion Framework for Development of a Draft Water Reuse Action Plan
4/18/2019
Jeff Lape, OW-OST
Cissy Ma, ORD-NRMRL
Jan Matuszko, OW-OST
Dan Murray, ORD
Sharon Nappier, OW-OST
Smiti Nepal, OW-OWM
Jan Pickrel, OW-OWM
John Ravenscroft, OW-OST
Hema Subramanian, OA Ag Advisor
Deborah Vacs Renwick, OW-OGWDW
Regional Water Reuse Designated PoCs
Ken Moraff, Region 1
Sean Dixon, Region 1
Janice Whitney, Region 2
Javier Laureano, Region 2
Ayn Schmit, Region 8
Dave Smith, Region 9
VIII. Informing Development of the Water Reuse Action Plan
As the EPA facilitates among federal and state agencies, tribes, and across the water sector, potentially key
considerations include:
- Maximizing opportunities for public engagement to ensure broad participation, including identifying
scheduled conferences, forums, and meetings in various sectors pursuing water reuse (such as
agriculture, municipal, and industry);
- Including the proper scope and elements in the WRAP;
- Creating an overarching emphasis on integrated water resources management where water reuse is
considered;
- Identifying specific actions that can be taken now and in the future by federal agencies, states, tribes,
local governments, and the entire water sector;
- Addressing how federal agencies and states can improve coordination in their activities related to water
reuse;
- Identifying barriers, opportunities, and areas of focus that should be addressed by the WRAP;
- Ensuring that the WRAP reflects and builds upon existing works by the water sector related to water
reuse; and
- Building on the knowledge and experience of the international community.
IX. Water Reuse and Related Forums
Recent and upcoming meetings and forums are opportunities to gain insights. This list, which is not intended to be
exhaustive, identifies example opportunities to engage in discussion to inform the development of the draft water
reuse action plan.
Attended Events
- Resource Revolution of Water Reuse (Wharton, IGEL, Suez), San Francisco, February 27, 2019
- 2019 WateReuse California Annual Conference, Orange County, CA, March 17-19
- ACWA Mid-Year Meeting, Alexandria, VA, March 19-20, 2019
- ASDWA Member Meeting 2019, Alexandria, VA, March 25-27, 2019
- National Water Week/Water Policy Fly In, Washington, DC, March 31-April 1, 2019
- National Blue Ribbon Commission for Onsite Non-potable Water Systems Annual Meeting, Denver, CO,
April 10-12, 2019
Upcoming Events
- 2019 Water Microbiology Conference, The Water Institute at Chapel Hill, NC, May 13-16
- NACWA National Pretreatment Workshop, Tacoma, WA, May 14-17, 2019
- AWWA Annual Conference and Expo, Denver, CO, June 9-12, 2019
- ASDWA/EPA Data Management Users Conference, Atlanta, GA, July 22-25, 2019
- ACWA Annual Meeting, Austin, TX, Aug. 27-29, 2019
- 34th Annual WateReuse Symposium, San Diego, CA, Sept. 8-11, 2019
- US Water Alliance One Water Summit 2019, Austin, TX, Sept. 18-20, 2019
- WEFTEC, Chicago, Sept. 21-25, 2019
- AWWA Water Quality Technology Conference, Dallas, TX, Nov. 3-7, 2019
8
-------
Discussion Framework for Development of a Draft Water Reuse Action Plan 4/18/2019
X. Relevant Published Literature
The list below represents literature reviewed for purposes of developing this Discussion Framework. Action op-
portunities identified in this and other literature will inform the WRAP. This list is not intended to be exhaustive.
Absar, Mariya et al. n.d. Life Cycle and Cost Assessments of Atmospheric Water Generation Technologies and Al-
ternative Potable Water Emergency Response Options. Under clearance. ORD-028439.: EPA/600/X-
18/331.
American Waterworks Association. 2014. G481-14 - Reclaimed Water Program Operation and Management.
American Water Works Association AWWA. 2018. G485-18 Direct Potable Reuse Program Operation and
Management.
American Water Works Association. 2017. M50 Water Resources Panning, Third Edition.
American Water Works Association. 2016. Potable Reuse 101: An Innovative and Sustainable Water Supply
Solution.
American Water Works Association AWWA. 2018. M62 - Membrane Applications for Water Reuse. AWWA.
Arden, Sam, and Mark Brown. Xin (Cissy) Ma. 2018. "Energy Analysis of Constructed Wetland for Greywater
Recycle and Reuse." Sciene of the Total Environment (630) 587-599. ORD-024459.
Army Public Health Center. April 2017. Review of the Applicability of Published Water Reuse Guidelines for
Contingency Operations. PHIP No. 39-06-0417.
https://phc.amedd.army.mil/PHC%20Resource%20Library/PHIP-39-06-0417-WaterReuseGuidelines-
2017.pdf
Bluefield Research. 2017. U.S. Municipal Water Reuse: Opportunities, Outlook & Competitive Landscape 2017-
2027.
California Urban Water Agencies. 2019. Guiding Regional Reuse Options - A Distributed Systems Approach.
Cashman, Sarah et al. July 2017. "Holistic evaluation of decentralized water reuse: life cycle assessment and cost
analysis of membrane bioreactor systems in water reuse implementation." International Water
Association.
Cashman, Sarah et al. 2018. "Energy and greenhouse gas life cycle assessment and cost analysis of aerobic and
an-aerobic membrane bioreactor systems: Influence of scale, population density, climate, and methane
recovery." Bioresource Technology (254) 56-66. ORD-018382.
Cashman, Sarah et al. 2016. Life Cycle Assessment and Cost Analysis of Water and Wastewater Treatment Options
for Sustainability: Influence of Scale on Membrane Bioreactor Systems. Environmental Protection Agency.
EPA/600/R-16/243. ORD-019901.
Christian-Smith, Juliet and Peter H. Gleick. 2012. A Twenty-First Century US Water Policy. Oxford University Press.
Colorado Energy Office and Colorado Mesa University. 2014. Produced Water Beneficial Use Dialogue: Opportuni-
ties and Challenges for Re-Use of Produced Water on Colorado's Western Slope.
Colorado General Assembly. 2018. House Bill 18-1093, Concerning the allowable uses of reclaimed domestic
wastewater, and, in connection therewith, allowing reclaimed domestic wastewater to be used for food
crops and making an appropriation.
Colorado Water Quality Control Commission. 2018. Regulation No. 84 - Reclaimed Water Control Regulation, 5
CCR 1002-84.
Colorado Water Quality Control Division. 2017. Safe Drinking Water Program - Immediate Staff and Service Level
Reductions.
Douglas, B. 2019. Direct Water Reuse in New England -Today & Tomorrow. Presentation at NEWEA, Boston, MA.
Engelke, P., Michel, D., Atlantic Council. 2016. Toward Global Water Security. https://www.atlantic-
council.org/publications/reports/toward-global-water-security.
Freedman, Jon, C. Enssle. 2015. Addressing Water Scarcity Through Recycling and Reuse: A Menu for Policymak
ers.
Harris-Lovett, S.R. et al. 2015. "Beyond User Acceptance: A Legitimacy Framework for Potable Water Reuse in
California." Environmental Science and Technology (49) 7552-7561. doi:10.1021/acs.est.5b00504.
9
-------
Discussion Framework for Development of a Draft Water Reuse Action Plan 4/18/2019
Harris-Lovett, Sasha, Judit Lienert, and David L. Sedlak. 2018. "Towards a New Paradigm of Urban Water
Infrastructure: Identifying Goals and Strate-gies to Support Multi-Benefit Municipal Wastewater
Treatment." Water 10(9) 1127. https://doi.org/10.3390/wl0091127.
Jahne, Michael A. et al. 2017. "Simulation of enteric pathogen concentrations in locally-collected greywater and
wastewater for microbial risk assessments." Microbial Risk Analysis (5) 44-52.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mran. 2016.11.001.
Keeler, B.L., Gourevitch, J.D., Polasky, S., Isbell, F., Tessum, C.W., Hill, J.D., Marshall, J.D. 2016. "The social cost of
nitrogen." Science Advances (2): el600219.
Mack EA, Wrase S. 2017. A Burgeoning Crisis? A Nationwide Assessment of the Geography of Water Affordability
in the United States. PLOS ONE 12(1): e0169488. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0169488.
Medina, Victor F., Richard J. Scholze, Scott A. Waisner, and Chris S. Griggs. 2015. "Energy and Resource Recovery
from Wastewater Treatment: State of the Art and Potential Application for the Army and DOD." US Army
Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC).
https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a619808.pdf.
Metcalf & Eddy. 2007. Water Reuse: Issues, Technologies and Applications. Published by McGraw Hill.
Morelli, Ben et al. n.d. Life Cycle Assessment and Cost Analysis of Distributed Mixed Wastewater and Graywater
Treatment for Water Recycling in the Context of an Urban Case Study. EPA report: EPA/600/X-18/280.
Under clearance. ORD-028027.
Nappier, S.P., J.A. Soller, and S. Eftim. 2018. "Potable Water Reuse: What Are the Microbiological Risks?" Current
Environmental Health Reports 5(2) 283-292. doi:10.1007/s40572-018-0195-y.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. 2018. Future Water Priorities for the Nation:
Directions for the U.S. Geological Survey Mission Area. Washington, District of Columbia: National
Academies Press, http://nap.edu/25134.
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Using Graywater and Stormwater to Enhance
Local Water Supplies: An Assessment of Risks, Costs, and Benefits. Washington, DC: The National Acade-
mies Press, https://doi.org/10.17226/21866.
National Research Council. 2012. Understanding Water Reuse: Potential for Expanding the Nation's Water Supply
Through Reuse of Municipal Wastewater. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
doi:https://doi.org/10.17226/13514.
National Research Council. 1996. Use of Reclaimed Water and Sludge in Food Crop Production. Washington, DC:
The National Academies Press, https://doi.org/10.17226/5175.
NSF International. 2011. Standard 350 and 350-1: Onsite Water Reuse. NSF/ANSI.
O'Neill, P and JP Dobrowoiski. 2005. Water Security White Paper. Cooperative State Research, Education, and Ex-
tension Service Agricultural.
Page, M., MacAlister, B., Hur, A., Jenicek, E., and D. Cropek (2017). Distributed Water Reuse Systems in Military
Settings. Worldwater: Water Reuse and Desalination.
Paltiel, O, G Fedorova, G Tadmor, et al. 2016. Human Exposure to Wastewater-Derived Pharmaceuticals in Fresh
Produce: A Randomized Controlled Trial Focusing on Carbamazepine. Environmental Science and Technology 50:
4476-4482. Presidential Memo. 2018. Promoting the Reliable Supply and Delivery of Water in the West.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-memorandum-promoting-reliable-sup-
ply-delivery-water-west/?mc_cid=46ed9122f7&mc_eid=92f6fcel82.
Rice, J. 2014. Modeling Occurrence and Assessing Public Perceptions of De Facto Wastewater Reuse across the
USA. Arizone State University.
River Network. 2018 .Annual Report, https://www.rivernetwork.org/wp-
content/uploads/2018/12/RiverNetwork-AnnualReport-2018.pdf.
Salveson. 2018.
Schoen, ME, and J Garland. 2017. "Review of pathogen treatment reductions for onsite non-potable reuse of
alternative source waters." Microbial Risk Analysis 25-31.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mran. 2015.10.001.
10
-------
Discussion Framework for Development of a Draft Water Reuse Action Plan 4/18/2019
Schoen, ME, MA Jahne, and JL Garland. 2018. "Human Health Impact of Cross-Connections in Non-Potable Reuse
Systems." Water 10(10) 1352. doi:doi:10.3390/wl0101352 .
Schoen, ME, NJ Ashbolt, MA Johne, and JL Garland. 2017. "Risk-Based Enteric Pathogen Reduction Targets for
Non-Potable and Direct Potable Use of Roof Runoff, Stormwater, and Greywater." Microbial Risk Analysis
32-43. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mran.2017.01.002.
Sedlak, David. 2015. Water 4.0. Yale University Press.
Sheikh, B. 2017. Significance to human health of carbamazepine detected in fruits and vegetables irrigated with
recycled water. Water Science and Technology 75(5): 1059-1062.
Soller, JA et al. 2017. "Evaluation of microbiological risks associated with direct potable reuse." Microbial Risk
Analysis 3-14. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mran.2016.08.003.
Soller, JA, SE Eftim, and SP Nappier. 2018. "Direct potable reuse microbial risk assessment methodology:
Sensitivity analysis and application to State log credit allocations." Water Research 128(1) 286-292.
doi:10.1016/j.watres. 2017.10.034.
State of California. 2016. California Water Action Plan: Actions for Reliability, Restoration and Resilience.
Tasker, TL et al. 2018. "Environmental and Human Health Impacts of Spreading oil and Gas Wastewater on
Roads." Environmental Science and Technology 52(12) 7081-7091. doi:10.1021/acs.est.8b00716.
The Water Research Foundation. 2017. "Blueprint for One Water."
http://www.waterrf.org/PublicReportLibrary/4660.pdf.
The Water Research Foundation. 2019. Agricultural Use of Recycled Water: Impediments and Incentives.
The Water Research Foundation. 2018. Review of Non-Culture-Based Methods for Pathogen Monitoring in
Potable Reuse. Project No. Reuse-14-17/4768.
U.S. Army Public Health Command. March 2014. Water Reuse in Contingency Operations.
https://phc.amedd.army.mil/PHC%20Resource%20Library/TG364a_Water_Reuse_in_Contingency_Opera
tions_2014.pdf
U.S. Congress. 2016. Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act (Public Law 114-322).
United States Conference of Mayors. 2017. The 85th Annual Meeting of the Conference of Mayors.
United States Environmental Protection Agency and the State of New Mexico. 2018. Oil and Gas Produced Water
Governance in the State of New Mexico - Draft White Paper.
http://www.emnrd.state.nm.us/wastewater/documents/Oil%20and%20Gas%20Produced%20Water%20
Goverance%20in%20the%20State%20of%20New%20Mexico%20Draft%20White%20Paper.pdf
United States Environmental Protection Agency. 2018. 2017 Potable Reuse Compendium. EPA/810/R-17/002.
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-01/documents/potablereusecompendium_3.pdf.
—. 2018. "FY 2018-2022 U.S. EPA Strategic Plan." February, https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-
02/documents/fy-2018-2022-epa-strategic-plan.pdf.
—. 2018. "National Water Program Guidance FY 2018-2019." 800D17001.
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-09/documents/fyl8-19-ow-npm-guidance.pdf.
—. 2018. Detailed Study of the Centralized Waste Treatment Point Source Category for Facilities managing Oil and
Gas Extraction Wastes. EPA/821/R-18/004.
—. 2018. Public Meeting EPA Oil and Gas Extraction Study Effluent Guidelines Program. October 9, 2018. Wash-
ington, DC. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-10/documents/epa_oil-gas-study_public-
meeting_10-09-2018.pdf.
—. 2015. "Safe and Sustainable Water Resources Strategic Research Action Plan 2016-2019." November. EPA
601/K-15/004. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-
10/documents/strap_2016_sswr_508.pdf.
—. 2012. 2012 Guidelines for Water Reuse. EPA/600/R-12/618.
https://www3.epa.gov/regionl/npdes/merrimackstation/pdfs/ar/AR-1530.pdf.
—. 2012. Integrated Municipal Stormwater and Wastewater Planning Approach Framework.
—. 2012. Total Water Management. Office of Research and Development National Risk Management Research
Laboratory. EPA/600/R-12/551.
11
-------
Discussion Framework for Development of a Draft Water Reuse Action Plan 4/18/2019
—. 1972. Water Supply-Wastewater Treatment Coordination Study.
United States Environmental Protection Agency, Reinventing the Nation's Urban Water Infrastructure (ReNUWIt),
and the Johnson Foundation at Wingspread. 2018. "Mainstreaming Potable Water Reuse in the United
States: Strategies for Leveling the Playing Field." April, https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-
04/documents/mainstreaming_potable_water_reuse_april_2018_final_for_web.pdf.
United States Government Accountability Office. 2014. "Freshwater: Supply Concerns Continue, and
Uncertainties Complicate Planning." GAO-14-430. https://www.gao.gov/assets/670/663343.pdf.
US Bureau of Reclamation. 2014. "Development of Methodologies to Evaluate the Environmental, Financial, and
Social Benefits of Water Reuse Projects." https://www.usbr.gov/research/projects/detail.cfm?id=4180.
US Bureau of Reclamation. 2016. "WaterSMART Progress Report 2010-2016." December.
https://www.usbr.gov/watersmart/docs/2016/2016watersmartprogressreport.pdf.
US Department of Agriculture, Research, Education and Economics Mission Area. 2004 "Agriculture Water
Security Listening Session Final Report."
US Department of Agriculture Agricuture Research Service. 2016. "Water Availability and Watershed
Management Action Plan 2016-2020." National Program 211: Water Availability and Watershed
Management, https://www.ars.usda.gov/natural-resources-and-sustainable-agricultural-systems/water-
availability-and-watershed-management/docs/action-plans/.
US Department of Agriculture, National Institute of Food and Agriculture. 2019. Managing Water for Increased
Resiliency of Drained Agricultural Landscapes, https://transformingdrainage.org/.
US Department of Agriculture. 2017. "Report to the President of the United States from the Task Force on
Agriculture and Rural Prosperity." Task Force on Agriculture and Rural Prosperity. October 21.
https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/rural-prosperity-report.pdf.
US Department of Energy. 2018. Water Security Grand Challenge, https://www.energy.gov/eere/water-security-
grand-challenge.
US Department of State and US Agency for International Development. 2017. "US Government Global Water
Strategy." https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/275842.pdf.
US Water Alliance and Water Research Foundation. 2017. "A Guidebook for Developing and Implementing
Regulations for Onsite Non-potable Water Systems." National Blue Ribbon Commission for Onsite Non-
potable Water Systems.
http://uswateralliance.org/sites/uswateralliance.org/files/publications/NBRC%20GUIDEBOOK%20FOR%2
0DEVELOPING%20ONWS%20REG ULATIONS.pdf.
US Water Alliance. 2017. "One Water for America Policy Framework."
http://uswateralliance.org/sites/uswateralliance.org/files/publications/One%20Water%20for%20Americ
a%20Policy%20Framework%20Executive%20Summary.pdf.
—. n.d. "Resources for Onsite Non-potable Water Programs." National Blue Ribbon Commission for Onsite Non-
potable Water Systems, http://uswateralliance.org/initiatives/commission/resources.
—. n.d. "Making the Utility Case for Onsite Non-potable Water Systems." National Blue Ribbon Commission for
Onsite Non-potable Water Systems.
http://uswateralliance.org/sites/uswateralliance.org/files/publications/NBRC_Utility%20Case%20for%20
ONWS_032818.pdf.pdf
Water Environment Federation. 2018. Water Reuse Roadmap. Alexandria: Water Environment Federation.
Water Research Foundation. 2017. "Potable Reuse Research Compilation: Synthesis of Findings."
http://www.waterrf.org/Pages/Projects.aspx?PID=4645.
Water Research Foundation. 2018. "White Paper on Water Reuse in Hydraulic Fracturing." Project No. Reuse-14-
05/4927.
Water Research Foundation. 2018. "Reuse in Fracking." Project Number Reuse-14-05/4927.
WateReuse Association. 2018. "Proceedings of the 33rd Annual WateReuse Symposium, September 9-12, 2018."
—. 2014. "The Opportunities and Economics of Direct Potable Reuse." https://watereuse.org/watereuse-
research/the-opportunities-and-economics-of-direct-potable-reuse/.
12
-------
Discussion Framework for Development of a Draft Water Reuse Action Plan
4/18/2019
—. n.d. "Water Reuse: Transforming Water, Sustaining Our Future." https://watereuse.org/wp-
content/uploads/2018/04/Water-Reuse-Transforming-Water-Sustaining-Our-Future.pdf.
WateReuse Association, American Water Works Association, Water Environment Federation, and National Water
Research Institute. 2015. "Framework for Direct Potable Reuse." Project 14-20.
https://watereuse.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/14-20.pdf.
WateReuse Colorado. 2018. "Advancing Direct Potable Reuse to Optimize Water Supplies and Meet Future
Demands; Executive Summary".
WateReuse Colorado. 2018. "Advancing Direct Potable Reuse to Optimize Water Supplies and Meet Future
Demands; Technical Memorandum 1: Development of DPR Regulations in Colorado".
WateReuse Colorado. 2018. "Advancing Direct Potable Reuse to Optimize Water Supplies and Meet Future
Demands; Technical Memorandum 2: Communications and Outreach Plan for Direct Potable Reuse in
Colorado".
WateReuse Colorado. 2018. "Advancing Direct Potable Reuse to Optimize Water Supplies and Meet Future
Demands; Technical Memorandum 3: Potable Reuse Planning Tools and Case Studies".
Western Resource Advocates. 2017. A Survey of Key States' Regulatory Approaches to Water Reuse.
Western States Water Council. 2012. Water Reuse in the West: State Programs and Institutional Issues.
World Health Organization. 2017. "Potable Reuse: Guidance for Producing Safe Drinking Water."
http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/258715/9789241512770-
eng.pdf;jsessionid=lCA76772277CBlA8E6362F287EC5F496?sequence=l.
World Health Organization. 1989. Health Guidelines for the Use of Wastewater in Agriculture and Aquaculture.
Disclaimer
This Discussion Framework is intended to frame the context for the WRAP and provide background information
about the business case for reuse, potential water reuse applications, potential framework for the draft Water
Reuse Action Plan, potential collaborators and contributors, example forums for discussion, and published
literature. This document is not a draft Water Reuse Action Plan, but rather a framework for discussion about the
development of a draft Water Reuse Action Plan. This document may be revised or updated. This document is not
intended, nor can it be relied on, to create any rights enforceable by any party in litigation with the United States.
The EPA and its employees do not endorse any products, services, or enterprises. Mention of trade names, entities,
or products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
13
-------
Appendix B: Federal Partner Profiles
NATIONAL WATER REUSE
ACTION PLAN
DRAFT
-------
Appendix B: Compilation of Federal Partner Profiles
Appendix B provides a selection of profiles from federal partners involved in the development of the
draft Action Plan. Each profile is intended to illustrate the context, role, and opportunities the agency
has to champion reuse within their mission area. This compilation serves to describe the individual and
collective efforts across the federal partners. The descriptions below are intended to be high level and
illustrative, not comprehensive or representative of each agency's entire portfolio that may be
applicable to water reuse or nexus opportunities. The following federal partner profiles are provided in
this appendix:
• U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
• U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
• U.S. Department of Defense
• U.S. Department of Energy
• U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
• U.S. Food and Drug Administration
• Agricultural Research Service
• National Institute of Food and Agriculture
• Natural Resources Conservation Service
• U.S. Geological Survey
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | B-l
-------
Water Reuse Partner Profile
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation
Washington, D.C./Denver, Colorado
Agency Mission
The mission of the Bureau of Reclamation is to manage, develop, and protect water and related resources
in an environmentally and economically sound manner in the interest of the American public.
Context and Applicability to Water Reuse
Reclamation provides grant funding and technical expertise for water reuse research and project
development and implementation.
Explicit Roles and Actions in Water Reuse
Desalination and Water Purification Research (DWPR) Program
The DWPR Program is authorized under the Water Desalination Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-298), amended in
2016 by the Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN) Act. The program provides financial
assistance for desalination and water treatment research and development leading to improved
technologies for converting unusable water sources into useable water supplies. Water sources include,
but are not limited to, sea water, brackish groundwater, municipal wastewater, and produced waters from
oil and gas activities. The DWPR Program released two competitive funding opportunity announcements in
fiscal year 2019: the first closed in December 2018 and the second opened in April 2019. The first invited
research projects at the laboratory and pilot scale. The second invites proposals to pilot projects to test
innovative and disruptive technologies poised for commercialization, featuring an application process
streamlined for small businesses and entrepreneurs. Both funding opportunities seek solutions that
address water reuse objectives identified by the National Research Council's 2012 report Water Reuse:
Potential for Expanding the Nation's Water Supply Through Reuse of Municipal Wastewater.
WaterSMART Title XVI Water Reclamation and Reuse Program
Through the Title XVI Program, Reclamation provides funding for planning, design, and construction of
water reclamation and reuse projects in partnership with local entities in the West. Title XVI projects
reclaim and reuse municipal, industrial, domestic, and agricultural wastewater and impaired ground and
surface water. The Title XVI Program provides funding on a year-by-year basis through a competitive
selection process, with a maximum federal cost share of 25 percent of total project costs, up to $20 million,
unless Congress specifies otherwise. Reclamation has released three funding opportunity announcements
in fiscal year 2019—one for congressionally authorized Title XVI projects, one for reuse projects that are
eligible under the WIIN Act amendments to the Title XVI Program, and one for water reuse research
through the Title XVI Program.
WaterSMART Drought Response Program
In 2015, Reclamation reformulated its existing drought program to improve its ability to help stakeholders
build resilience to drought in advance of a crisis. Through the Drought Response Program, Reclamation
partners with states, tribes, and local governments for drought contingency planning and actions that build
long-term resiliency to drought—including projects that increase flexibility for water managers through
system modifications and improvements, development of alternative water supplies, and other projects to
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
mitigate the impacts of future drought. Water desalination or recycling projects with a total estimated
project cost of less than $5 million are eligible for funding. Reclamation allocates program funding annually
through Funding Opportunity Announcements. Projects are chosen through a competitive process and a 50
percent non-federal cost share contribution is required.
Examples of Partners and Stakeholders
• States.
• Indian tribes or tribal organizations.
• Municipalities.
• Water districts.
• Wastewater districts.
• Rural water districts.
• Regional or local authorities.
• Individuals/entrepreneurs.
• Institutions of higher education.
• For-profit organizations.
• Nonprofit organizations.
• Federally funded research and development centers.
• United States-Mexico binational research foundations and interuniversity research programs.
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
2
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC)
Atlanta, Georgia
Agency Mission
The CDC's mission is "to serve as the national focus for developing and applying disease prevention and
control, environmental health, and health promotion and health education activities designed to improve
the health of the people of the United States" (mission/function statement). With respect to achieving
clean and safe water, the CDC strives to protect people's health from environmental hazards that can be
present in the water we drink and use in diverse ways to sustain our health, productivity and well-being.
Context and Applicability to Water Reuse
The CDC strives to protect public health through non-regulatory actions that decrease environmental
threats to water systems and may directly and indirectly influence water reuse. Non-regulatory actions that
CDC has undertaken to protect public health from waterborne diseases and outbreaks include:
• Conducting applied scientific research for risk assessment:
o National Center for Environmental Health (NCEH) Safe Water Program,
o Waterborne Disease Prevention Branch (WDPB).
• Developing better laboratory detection and sampling methods.
• Investigating the causes and sources of waterborne disease and outbreaks.
• Tracking waterborne diseases nationally.
• Developing partnerships with state, local, and tribal public health organizations.
• Providing technical assistance and funding to state, local, territorial, and tribal public health
organizations.
• Promoting safe water guidance through public communication and education.
Explicit Roles and Actions in Water Reuse
Science and Research of Contaminants of Emerging Concern
• The CDC develops reports, recommendations, and other studies for investigation and prevention of
waterborne disease outbreaks, including:
o An A-Z Index of water-related health topics and data.
o Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Reports (MMWRs) containing publications on emerging infectious
diseases and outbreak surveillance. For example:
• Lead in Drinking Water and Human Blood Lead Levels in the United States.
• Surveillance of Waterborne Disease Outbreaks Association with Drinking Water—United States,
2013-2014.
• Waterborne Disease Outbreaks Associated with Environmental and Undetermined Exposures to
Water—United States, 2013-2014.
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
• The CDC's National Environmental Public Health Tracking Network provides public access to climate
change, community design, drought, drinking water, populations and vulnerabilities, and toxic
substance release data.
• The CDC is developing improved laboratory methods for sampling, testing, and monitoring water
quality through the Division of Foodborne, Waterborne, and Environmental Diseases (DFWED)
Waterborne Disease Prevention Branch Environmental Microbiology Laboratory. The CDC NCEFI
Environmental Health Laboratory conducts laboratory testing of clinical specimens to enable detection,
diagnosis, treatment and prevention of diseases resulting from exposure to environmental chemicals
and toxins.
Building National Surveillance Capacity
• The CDC operates the National Outbreak Reporting System (NORS) and national Waterborne Disease
and Outbreak Surveillance System (WBDOSS), which collect data on waterborne disease and outbreaks
in the United States. These efforts provide important information on how germs, harmful chemicals, or
toxins spread, and which types of water are linked to people getting sick.
Collaboration and Partnerships
• The CDC works with EPA and other federal and non-governmental partners (e.g., AWWA) to provide
guidance on water-related best practices, policies and research priorities.
• The CDC provides water-related support to state health departments and works with national partners
(e.g., ASTHO, CSTE, and NACCHO) that represent state and local partners on water-related issues.
• The CDC's Safe Water Program and Waterborne Disease Prevention Branch supports state, local, and
tribal public health organizations in planning, implementation, and evaluation of programs promoting
water safety. For example:
o During a harmful algal bloom (HAB) in Lake Erie, the CDC provided health officials from Toledo,
Ohio, with tools and educational materials to support their response to HABs and protect nearly
500,000 citizens.
o The CDC has worked with Iowa's Cerro Gordo County Department of Public Health to protect the
health of residents who may be exposed to arsenic in private well water.
• The CDC's Safe Water for Community Health (Safe WATCH) cooperative agreement funds local health
departments to identify and close environmental health service gaps in their programs.
Risk Communication and Information Dissemination
• The CDC develops and improves access to water-related health and prevention information through
expansion of the content and resources on the Healthy Water website.
• The CDC promotes national drinking-water-related observances, celebrations, and awareness days to
educate the public about water-related issues.
• The CDC assists health departments respond to natural disasters and other emergencies that disrupt
water service and create environmental hazards and infectious disease risks
• The CDC assists health departments investigate water related disease outbreaks and exposures to
water-related contaminants.
• The CDC has developed a Drinking Water Advisory Communication Toolbox, which provides
information on how to plan for, develop, implement, and evaluate communication activities with the
public and stakeholders during drinking water notifications and advisories. The toolbox complements
the EPA's Revised Public Notification Handbook.
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
2
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
Examples of Partners and Stakeholders
• State, local, territorial, and tribal health departments.
• Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists.
• National Environmental Health Association.
• National Network of Public Health Institutes.
• Association of Public Health Laboratories.
• Association of State and Territorial Health Officials.
• National Association of County and City Health Officials.
• The Environmental Protection Agency.
• American Water Works Association.
• Association of State Drinking Water Administrators.
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
3
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
U.S. Department of Defense (DoD)
Washington, D.C.
Agency Mission
The Department of Defense provides the military forces needed to deter war and ensure our nation's
security.
Context and Applicability to Water Reuse
Water reuse intersects with the DoD mission in key areas such as the establishment of resilient water
supplies at installations and the reduction of water resupply requirements for personnel operating in
expeditionary settings. Through the US Army Corps of Engineers, the DoD also supports water resource
planning, development, and management, as well as the development and management of unified
facilities criteria. The DoD executes its mission under the National Defense Authorization Act, and civil
works water resource activities of the Corps of Engineers are authorized under the Water Resources
Development Act.
Examples of DoD activities that address water reuse include:
• Establishment of policies for resilient military facilities and operations
• Research and development of water reuse capabilities for military environments
• Development of standards and guidelines for the protection of health of military personnel and the
environment
• Facilities engineering guidance for military construction
• Implementation of projects and acquisition of systems
Explicit Roles and Actions in Water Reuse
DoD Policies Relating to Water Reuse
• Department of Defense Directive 4705.01E Management of Land-Based Water Resources in Support
of Contingency Operations establishes policy, assigns responsibilities, and prescribes procedures for
management of land-based water resources in support of contingency operations to ensure inter-
Service compatibility and interoperability of water support equipment.
• Army Regulation 700-136 Tactical Land-Based Water Resources Management sets policy, defines the
Army role in tactical operations, and outlines responsibilities for tactical water support.
• Army Directive 2017-07 Energy and Water Security Policy, describes objectives for resilient water
systems at fixed facilities.
DoD Health Standards Relating to Water Reuse
• TB MED 577/NAVMED P-5010-10/AFMAN 48-138_IPSanitary Control and Surveillance of Field Water
Supplies. This publication provides general instructions and detailed technical guidance and
recommendations for the sanitary control and surveillance of land-based field water supplies. It
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
provides water quality standards for deployed personnel, including standards and guidelines for gray
water reuse.
Examples of DoD Research and Development Relating to Water Reuse
• Gray Water Recycling in Expeditionary Settings. Research and development organizations within the
DoD have developed and tested various technologies for gray water recycling, integrated into
containerized, deployable systems. The goal of these systems is to treat gray water from shower and
laundry systems such that it can be safely and efficiently reused again in the shower and laundry
facilities. This necessitates a high level of treatment similar to advanced treatment processes used for
direct potable reuse. The small scale of these systems requires increased automation and multiple
barriers of treatment to control health risk. Technologies investigated include biofiltration,
membrane bioreactors, forward osmosis, reverse osmosis, advanced oxidation, and disinfection.
• Direct Potable Reuse. The US Army Engineer Research and Development Center has been developing
and studying direct potable reuse capabilities for both expeditionary and fixed military facilities.
These studies have assessed various treatment processes and frameworks, as well as methods for
monitoring and validating water quality in military environments. It should be noted that direct
potable reuse in expeditionary settings in not currently allowed, and these efforts are specific to
research for those settings.
• Distributed/Decentralized Wastewater Reuse. The Environmental Security Technology Certification
Program (ESTCP) has funded several demonstrations of innovative wastewater treatment systems
with potential applications for distributed wastewater treatment and reuse applications at fixed
facilities. These have included membrane bioreactors, microbial fuel cells, and membrane distillation
processes. Many of these systems were developed under the Strategic Environmental Research and
Development Program (SERDP)
• Integrated Building-Scale Water Conservation and Reuse. ESTCP has funded demonstrations of water
conservation technologies and their integration with water reuse technologies to assess relative costs
and benefits.
Examples of DoD Engineering Guidance Relating to Water Reuse
• UFC 4-214-03 Central Vehicle Wash Facilities. This manual provides a comprehensive reference source
for planning, and designing a central vehicle wash facility (CVWF) and decentralized, net zero wash
facilities.
• UFC 3-240-02 Domestic Wastewater Treatment. Includes stipulations for DoD facilities to implement
water reuse when financially competitive to conventional discharge systems.
• UFC 3-240-13FN Industrial Water Treatment Operation and Maintenance
• UFC 1-200-02 High Performance and Sustainable Building Requirements
• Public Works Technical Bulletin 200-1-142. Applicable Guidelines for Water Reuse at Army
Installations.
• Review of the Applicability of Published Water Reuse Guidelines for Contingency Operations. PHIP No.
39-06-0417. Army Public Health Center. April 2017.
• Water Reuse in Contingency Operations. US Army Public Health Command. March 2014.
Examples of Implementation and Acquisition Programs Relating to Water Reuse
• Energy Resilience and Conservation Investment Program (ERCIP). ERCIP is a subset of the Defense-
Wide Mil Con Program specifically intended to fund projects that save energy and water (herein after
"energy"), reduce DoD's energy costs, improve energy resilience/security, and contribute to mission
assurance.
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
2
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
• Force Provider Shower Water Recycling System (SWRS). The SWRS is a containerized system that uses
membrane filtration and supporting processes to convert gray water into high quality water that can
be reused for showering and laundry. It is part of the Force Provider equipment series that provides
an integrated deployable system for billeting, hygiene, dining, sanitation, and other services for up to
600 personnel. The SWRS is managed by the Army Product Manager for Force Sustainment Systems.
Examples of Partners and Stakeholders
• Regulatory agencies (State, Federal)
• Local communities
• Other federal agencies (DoE, EPA, BoR)
• Industry contractors
• Academic collaborators
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
3
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
Washington, D.C.
Agency Mission
The DOE's mission is "To ensure America's security and prosperity by addressing its energy, environmental,
and nuclear challenges through transformative science and technology solutions." The DOE has developed
a robust set of activities that address challenges and opportunities related to the energy-water nexus.
Context and Applicability to Water Reuse
Energy and water systems are interconnected. Energy is required to extract, treat, and deliver water; water
is used in multiple phases of energy production and electricity generation, from hydraulic fracturing and
irrigating crops for biofuels to providing cooling water for thermoelectric power plants. Despite these
interdependencies, energy and water systems have been historically developed and managed
independently. The DOE focuses on the "energy-water nexus," aiming to advance holistic solutions that can
improve resiliency, affordability, and environmental performance of energy and water systems
concurrently.
The DOE has investments addressing energy efficiency and energy recovery in water reuse processes as
well as water reuse in energy operations. In addition, at a systems level, the DOE's investments in
desalination research and development can lead to a more diverse set of water resources ultimately being
available for reuse.
Explicit Roles and Actions in Water Reuse
Water Security Grand Challenge
The Water Security Grand Challenge is a White-House-initiated, DOE-led framework to advance
transformational technology and innovation to meet the global need for safe, secure, and affordable water.
Using a coordinated suite of prize competitions, early-stage research and development, and other
programs, the Grand Challenge has set the following goals for the United States to reach by 2030:
1. Launch desalination technologies that deliver cost-competitive clean water.
2. Transform the energy sector's produced water from a waste to a resource.
3. Achieve near-zero water impact for new thermoelectric power plants, and significantly lower
freshwater use intensity within the existing fleet.
4. Double resource recovery from municipal wastewater
5. Develop small, modular energy-water systems for urban, rural, tribal, national security, and disaster
response settings.
Goals 2 and 4 have the most direct relevance to water reuse. Cost-effectively treating the produced waters
that come up as a byproduct of inland oil and gas drilling could bring new supplies of water online and
relieve stress on limited sources of freshwater in certain communities. Within goal 4, clean water is one of
the resources being targeted for doubling, in addition to energy and nutrient recovery.
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
Indirectly, some of the technologies developed to advance cost-competitive desalination processes (goal 1)
could add to the water resources that are ultimately available for water reuse. Additionally, strategies
deployed to reduce freshwater use intensity within thermoelectric power plants (goal 3) could include
increasing the number of cooling cycles for which water can be reused or reusing municipal wastewater for
cooling purposes. Water reuse may also be a feature of different decentralized energy-water solutions
developed through goal 5.
Some specific examples of water reuse activities launched by the DOE include:
• The Energy-Water Desalination Hub, a planned $100 million, five-year effort that will focus on early-
stage research and development for energy-efficient and cost-competitive desalination technologies,
and for treating non-traditional water sources for multiple end-use applications. A Funding Opportunity
Announcement (FOA) for the Flub was released in December 2018, with selections expected in summer
of 2019.
• Cost-shared research on produced water treatment and management from the DOE's Office of Fossil
Energy, including a recently announced $5 million FOA to advance low-cost, efficient treatment
technologies for produced water.
• Partnerships with the wastewater treatment sector to advance energy efficiency and energy recovery.
These programs, which include the DOE's Sustainable Wastewater Infrastructure of the Future
Accelerator, the Better Plants Program. Industrial Assessment Centers, and Combined Fleat and Power
Technical Assistance Partnerships, provide wastewater treatment plants with technical assistance,
tools, and other resources to help them meet their energy efficiency and energy recovery goals.
• The DOE's Federal Energy Management Program helps federal agencies meet their energy and water
efficiency goals. It has developed a series of tools and training resources focused on water efficiency
and water reuse.
• The U.S.-lsrael Cooperation in Energy and Water Technologies call for proposals issued by the DOE's
Office of International Affairs (which closes in September, 2019) has a topic on testbeds for energy-
smart water infrastructure, which can support water reuse.
• The DOE's Office of Fossil Energy issued the Crosscutting Research for Coal-Fueled Power Plants FOA in
early 2019. It featured a topic on water management.
Examples of Partners and Stakeholders
• Water and wastewater utilities.
• Energy companies, including electric utilities, gas utilities, oil and gas production, and renewable energy
providers.
• Water sector associations/organizations (e.g., WRF, WEF, WERF, NAWC, AWWA, NACWA, U.S. Water
Alliance).
• Energy sector associations (e.g., EPRI).
• Academics, National Laboratories, and other researchers.
• Technology companies.
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
2
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
Washington, D.C.
%, ,to
*L pRO^v
Agency Mission
The EPA's mission is "to protect human health and the environment." With respect to achieving clean and
safe water, the EPA's goal is to ensure that waters are clean through improved water infrastructure and, in
partnership with states and tribes, sustainably manage programs to support drinking water; aquatic
ecosystems; and recreational, economic, and subsistence activities (EPA 2018-2022 Strategic Plan).
Context and Applicability to Water Reuse
The EPA implements water resource programs under the authority of the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA),
the Clean Water Act (CWA), and other statutes. The EPA and its state and tribal partners perform many
functions and implement programs and requirements that have a direct and indirect influence on water
reuse:
• National policy direction.
• Drinking water standards and regulations for the protection of public health:
o Surface water pollution control programs,
o Funding programs for water and wastewater infrastructure:
¦ Clean Water State Revolving Fund.
¦ Drinking Water State Revolving Fund.
¦ Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA).
• Grants to reduce nonpoint sources of pollution.
• Financial assistance to states and tribes to support CWA and SDWA implementation.
• Technical and programmatic guidance and training.
• Science and research.
Explicit Roles and Actions in Water Reuse
Funding for Water and Wastewater Infrastructure
• The State Revolving Fund (SRF) Program, implemented by the states, supports water and wastewater
infrastructure. SRF funding can be used to support projects that include water reuse strategies:
o The Clean Water SRF has provided more than $133 billion to support communities since 1987.
o The Drinking Water SRF has provided more than $38 billion to support communities since 1997.
• The WIFIA Program accelerates investment in the nation's water infrastructure by providing long-term,
low-cost supplemental loans for regionally and nationally significant projects.
o In the most recent Notice of Financial Availability (February 15. 2019). Congress provided $60
million in budget authority, which is anticipated to help finance about $12 billion in water
infrastructure investment. In the notice, the EPA explicitly identified water reuse and recycling as
priority areas.
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
o Example project: In 2018, the EPA provided a $614 million loan through the WIFIA program to the
city of San Diego for an innovative water recycling project.
• The EPA has established the Water Infrastructure and Resiliency Finance Center to provide financing
information to help local decision-makers make informed decisions for drinking water, wastewater,
and stormwater infrastructure to protect human health and the environment.
Standards for the Protection of Public Health for Drinking Water
• The EPA has established primary drinking water regulations (i.e., Maximum Contaminant Levels or
treatment techniques) for 90 contaminants that provide the baseline level of public health protection
from consumption of drinking water.
• The EPA has established secondary drinking water standards (non-enforceable guidelines) for 15 other
contaminants.
Surface Water Pollution Control Through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
• The EPA administers the NPDES program to address water pollution by regulating point sources that
discharge to waters of the United States. Many states implement NPDES programs through state
primacy delegations. The NPDES permitting program, pretreatment program, and others play a role in
many water reuse opportunities.
Underground Injection Control Requirements for Aquifer Recharge and Aquifer Storage and Recovery
• The EPA's Underground Injection Control (UIC) program regulates aquifer recharge and aquifer storage
and recovery injection wells under the category of UIC Class V wells; these wells may require a permit
through the state primacy program or the EPA.
Technical Guidance on Water Reuse
• The EPA has developed and issued four Guidelines for Water Reuse since 1980 (i.e., 1980, 1992, 2004,
2012). The EPA's two most recent related publications are the 2012 Guidelines for Water Reuse and the
2017 Potable Reuse Compendium to compile and share information on current and best practices.
Science and Research
• The EPA is engaging in research, including research collaborations with external partners, on new and
existing water reuse practices. This includes research related to alternative water sources,
understanding of public health risks, treatment targets and monitoring surrogates, and interactions
between stormwater and groundwater to increase supplies but reduce potential contamination.
• In May 2019, the EPA completed a study, titled Study of Oil and Gas Extraction Wastewater
Management, to evaluate how the Agency, states, tribes, and stakeholders regulate and manage
wastewater from the oil and gas industry. Most of this wastewater is disposed of through underground
injection; there may be opportunities to treat and reuse it for other purposes.
Examples of Partners and Stakeholders
• State and tribal environmental agencies and associations (e.g., ASDWA, ECOS, ACWA, National Tribal
Water Council).
• Permitted entities (e.g., water utilities, wastewater utilities, municipal stormwater programs, oil and
gas companies).
• Water sector associations/organizations (e.g., WRA, WEF, WERF, AWWA, NACWA, U.S. Water Alliance).
• Citizens.
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
2
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition (CFSAN)
College Park, Maryland
Agency Mission
The FDA is responsible for protecting the public health by ensuring the safety, efficacy, and security of
human and veterinary drugs, biological products, and medical devices; and by ensuring the safety of our
nation's food supply, cosmetics, and products that emit radiation.
Context and Applicability to Water Reuse
The Food Safety Modernization Act Produce Safety Rule establishes science-based minimum standards for
the safe growing, harvesting, packing, and holding of fruits and vegetables grown for human consumption.
The rule focuses on major routes of contamination that can affect the safety of fruits and vegetables, and
includes standards relating to the safe use of agricultural water throughout growing and postharvest
activities.
In recent years, members of the produce industry have shown an interest in the use of reused water,
recycled water, and graywater during the production of fruits and vegetables, and a desire to better
understand how they can do so safely. FDA recognizes that this is an area of growing interest and remains
committed to ensuring that industry has the knowledge and resources needed to reuse water in a way that
is protective of public health and in compliance with the applicable regulations.
Explicit Roles and Actions in Water Reuse
Current
Examples of water reuse activities in which the FDA has played a role include:
• Participating in educational farm visits in which members of the growing community can share
information about their water use and water quality management practices, including any interest they
might have in water reuse.
• Attending listening sessions in which various stakeholders—including representatives from states
focused on implementing water supply planning solutions—have the opportunity to share their
perspectives on water reuse and what it means for the fresh produce industry.
• Serving on the advisory committee for a project aimed at facilitating the adoption of non-traditional
water sources for use in irrigation of food crops.
Near Term
The FDA seeks to:
• Better understand the challenges the produce industry faces in meeting both water reuse and food
safety goals.
• Provide support as needed to ensure that members of the fresh produce industry interested in water
reuse have the information needed to do so in a way that is protective of public health.
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
Long Term
The FDA intends to support the EPA in its roll-out of programming in the water reuse action plan in a
variety of ways, including:
• Supporting stakeholders—including the fresh produce industry and others—as interest in water reuse
continues to evolve.
• Engaging with interested stakeholders to develop relationships and better understand the challenges
faced when using a variety of water sources in the production of fresh produce.
Examples of Partners and Stakeholders
The FDA regularly engages in outreach with agricultural water stakeholders through a variety of means,
including educational farm visits; attending and presenting at meetings of groups such as the International
Association of Food Production (IAFP), the Institute of Food Technologies (I FT), and the American Water
Resources Association (AWRA); and engaging with technical experts on challenges that growers face
through using water in the production of fresh produce.
We welcome and encourage other stakeholders involved in water reuse to participate in discussions and
opportunities to share knowledge and provide different perspectives as we move forward in our activities
related to water use in produce production.
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
2
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
Agricultural Research Service (ARS)
Washington, D.C./Denver, Colorado
The ARS conducts research to develop and transfer solutions to agricultural problems of high national
priority and provide information access and dissemination. It seeks to ensure high-quality, safe food and
other agricultural products; assess the nutritional needs of Americans; sustain a competitive agricultural
economy; enhance the natural resource base and the environment; provide economic opportunities for
rural citizens, communities, and society as a whole; and provide the infrastructure necessary to create and
maintain a diversified workplace.
Context and Applicability to Water Reuse
The ARS provides research capability and already published studies on wastewater reuse in the agricultural
sector. Recent work has focused on:
• The accumulation of salinity.
• Pathogen and pharmaceutical transport.
Explicit Roles and Actions in Water Reuse
Agriculture is one of the largest users of the nation's surface water and groundwater and thus has a large
potential role in the reuse of wastewater to irrigate crops. The specifics depend on local climate. In dry
climates where irrigation is needed for crop production, wastewater can supply all or part of
evapotranspiration (ET) demand throughout the growing season. In more humid climates, wastewater
should be viewed as a supplemental water source for irrigation during droughts. In these cases, use of
wastewater for irrigation could help maximize food production during times of short-term water scarcity.
Future research to maximize the utility of wastewater for irrigation will focus on salinity management,
preventing foodborne illnesses, preventing the development of antibody resistance, quantifying the effect
of the accumulation of biologically active compounds (e.g., PFAS/PFOS, endocrine-disrupting compounds,
and pharmaceutical^ active compounds) within the food chain, and cost-effective low input treatment
methods for wastewater.
The ARS implements many national programs that may have a direct and indirect influence on local water
reuse efforts:
• Water Availability and Watershed Management.
• Aquaculture.
• Sustainable Agricultural Systems Research.
Examples of ARS Research Projects
• Case study on the Phoenix active management area. The Phoenix active management area contains
more than 60 percent of the total population of Arizona. Within the area, 82 percent of all wastewater
produced is reused. One community within the active management area is the town of Gilbert, with a
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
population of about 250,000. In Gilbert, 100 percent of all wastewater produced is treated and reused
for either groundwater recharge or landscape irrigation.
Over three years, the ARS evaluated natural soil processes' ability to remove pharmaceuticals from
wastewater during groundwater recharge. It was determined that these processes prevented the
accumulation of some pharmaceuticals. Others did accumulate, but at very low levels; in all cases,
accumulation was less than 5 parts per billion over 30 years of groundwater recharge. These levels are
orders of magnitude below the lowest therapeutic dose.
• Low-input treatment methods for removing trace organics from wastewater. The ARS investigated the
ability for increased aeration to reduce the fate and uptake of pharmaceuticals in wastewater using an
air injection system prior to subsurface drip irrigation. The air injection was shown to reduce the
concentration of three pharmaceuticals (caffeine, carbamazepine, and gemfibrozil) in the soil and
leachate. Uptake of caffeine and gemfibrozil into lettuce was lower in the air injection treatments, but
carbamazepine uptake was greater. In addition, the air injection resulted in changes in the soil
microbial community. Air injection may be a useful point-of-use treatment technology to reduce the
environmental availability of pharmaceuticals.
For more information on research projects, search the ARS database here.
Examples of Partners and Stakeholders
• Farmers.
• States.
• Indian tribes or tribal organizations.
• Municipalities.
• Water districts.
• Wastewater districts.
• Rural water districts.
• Regional or local authorities.
• Individuals.
• Institutions of higher education.
• For-profit organizations.
• Nonprofit organizations.
• Federally funded research and development centers.
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
2
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
National Institute of Food and Agriculture
(NIFA)
Washington, D.C.
Agency Mission
The NIFA's mission is "Invest in and advance agricultural research, education, and extension to solve
societal challenges." Addressing critical water resource issues such as drought, excess soil moisture, and
flooding is a top priority as climate-related changes pose uncertain and mixed challenges for American
farmers and producers. NIFA supports research, education, and outreach toward development of
management practices, technologies, and tools for farmers, ranchers, forest owners and managers, public
decision-makers, and citizens to improve water resource quantity and quality.
The NIFA's Water Program focuses on critical water issues by developing regional systems for the
sustainable use and reuse, flow, and management of water, as well as production and environmental
sustainability efforts at the watershed and farm scales (NIFA Strategic Plan Subgoal 1.3).
Context and Applicability to Water Reuse
The NIFA funds water quality and quantity programs under the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (the
Farm Bill), which authorizes the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) flagship competitive and
other funding lines. A domestically focused agency, the NIFA partners through competitive and capacity
grants with universities, research laboratories, other governmental and nongovernmental organizations
and tribes to improve the knowledge base and technology adoption of water reuse in agriculture. More
specifically, the NIFA:
• Establishes national priorities for research, education, and outreach in the use of recycled water for
agricultural irrigation, salt water intrusion, groundwater conservation and replenishment, surface
water habitats, crop processing, and agroecosystem functioning.
• Creates irrigation guidelines for the use of recycled water on crops eaten fresh for food safety and the
protection of public health.
• Secures water for agriculture by funding the use of nontraditional water sources.
• Promotes a new paradigm for water and water reuse education.
• Creates new processes for research translation and outreach.
• Advances science through research.
Explicit Roles and Actions in Water Reuse
Competitive Funding for Water Reuse in Agriculture Research (Research Only)
• AFRI foundational funding line, agricultural water sciences (investment $5 million):
o Contaminants of emerging concern in recycled water affecting agroecosvstems.
o Contaminants of emerging concern from recycled water irrigating crops eaten fresh,
o Antimicrobials and Salmonella uptake by crops irrigated with recycled water,
o Endocrine-disrupting compounds found in turf irrigated with recycled water.
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
Competitive Funding for Water Reuse in Agriculture Research (Integrated Across Research, Education
and Outreach)
• AFRI water for agriculture challenge area (investment: $10 million):
o "Water Reuse. Food Production and Public Health: Adopting Transdisciplinarv. Systems-Based
Approaches to Achieve Water and Food Security in a Changing Climate."
o Collaboration by memorandum of understanding with the EPA: organized workshop on food safety
and water treatment for local and small farms.
• AFRI water for food production systems (investment: $34 million):
o Water and nutrient recycling: a decision tool and synergistic innovative technology (L.F. Greenlee
at the University of Arkansas; $4,342,280.00 for five years),
o SmartPath: grower-directed convergence of nanotechnology and smart decision analytics for
irrigation water quality management related to pathogens (E.S. McLamore at the University of
Florida; $4,867,723 for five years),
o Coupling domestic wastewater resources to urban controlled environment agriculture systems (Y.
Chen at Georgia Tech University in Atlanta; $4,838,263 for five years).
• AFRI pre- and post-doctoral fellowships (investment: $1 million):
o Green recycled and bio-compatible materials for wastewater reuse for crop irrigation (J.L. Morales
at Recinto Universitario Mayaguez, Puerto Rico; $152,000 for two years),
o Potential of woody substrate-based bioreactors to remediate plant pathogens in agricultural runoff
for onsite water reuse (N. Bell at Clemson University; $89,000 for two years).
• Active Small Business Innovation Research (investment: $100,000):
o Energy-positive wastewater treatment and reuse system for agriculture applications (Z. Huang at
Cameron Innovation Inc.; $100,000 for two years).
• Specialty Crop Research Initiative (investment: $12 million):
o Clean Water3 (reduce, remediate, recycle): informed decision-making to facilitate use of alternative
water resources and promote sustainable specialty crops (S. White at Clemson University;
$8,700,000 for five years),
o Integrated management of zoosporic pathogens and irrigation water quality for a sustainable green
industry (C. Hong at Virginia Tech University; $2,700,000 for five years).
Capacity Funding for Water Reuse in Agriculture
• Active Hatch Act projects (examples):
o Using high resolution mass spectrometry to assess the impacts of reclaimed wastewater use for
crop irrigation (University of Connecticut),
o Drought, reclaimed water, and complex interactions within agricultural systems (University of
California at Riverside).
o Water reuse, saltgrass selection, and carbon footprint of urban turfgrass systems (Colorado State
University).
• Active Hatch multistate projects (example):
o Beneficial reuse of residuals and reclaimed water: impact on soil ecosystem and human health
(Project No. W-3170).
National Specialty Workshops
• Introduced agriculture as a potential customer for municipal wastewater treatment plants and offered
opportunities and challenges in agricultural water reuse, Santa Rosa, California.
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
2
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
• State-of-the-science and issue-driven conference focused on water reuse in agriculture: ensuring food
safety, Monterey, California.
New Data for Irrigation Water Use
• NIFA National Program Leaders for Water requested and were granted a new question in the USDA
National Agriculture Statistical Service's Farm and Ranch Irrigation Survey (now called the Irrigation and
Water Management Survey) focused on recycled water use in agriculture: Table 23. "Farms Using
Recycled or Reclaimed Water: 2013 and 2008."
Technical Guidance on Water Reuse
• The NIFA edited the 2012 Water Reuse Guidelines and contributed to Chapter 3, "Types of Reuse
Applications—Discussion on Agriculture."
Science Policy
• The NIFA, in cooperation with the University of Connecticut and Purdue University, concluded a
synthesis of 13 years of water quality and quantity funding and its relevance to water reuse technology
adoption, nontraditional water source use, and water conservation practice efficacy.
• The NIFA helped write and edit the Coordinated Strategic Plan to Advance Desalination for Enhanced
Water Security, a report by the Desalination Science and Technology Task Force, Subcommittee on
Water Availability and Quality, and Committee on Environment (all part of the National Science and
Technology Council).
Examples of Partners and Stakeholders
• Tribal colleges and associations (e.g., 1994 land-grant institutions, Native Waters on Arid Lands).
• Universities, NGOs, and research laboratories (e.g., 1862 and 1890 land-grant institutions; other
universities with agricultural research capabilities; national, federal, and state research laboratories;
the National Academy of Science and Engineering; private consultancies; USDA Climate Hubs; and the
National Institutes of Water Research).
• Water sector associations/organizations (e.g., Water Education and Reuse Association, U.S. Water
Partnership).
• Outreach and educational institutions (e.g., Water Education Foundation, Cooperative Extension,
Universities Council on Water Resources).
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
3
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
Natural Resources Conservation Service
(NRCS)
Washington, D.C.
Agency Mission
"Helping People Help the Land." The NRCS has a vision for productive working lands in harmony with a
healthy environment. The NRCS improves the health of the nation's natural resources while sustaining and
enhancing the productivity of American agriculture. It achieves this by providing voluntary assistance
through strong partnerships with private landowners, managers, and communities to conserve, protect,
restore, and enhance the lands and waters upon which people and the environment depend (NRCS
Strategic Plan Update FY2016-2018).
Context and Applicability to Water Reuse
The NRCS mission of helping people help the land was originally established by Congress under the Soil
Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act of 1935. Providing national leadership in a partnership that helps
people conserve natural resources remains NRCS' principle tenet. In support of this mission, strengthening
the stewardship of private lands through technology and research is a core strategic goal of NRCS. The
Agency holds paramount its responsibility to meet the challenges of population increases, land use
changes, and water supply deficits with science-based conservation systems. The cornerstone of the
nation's long-term water resilience is the adoption of new science and technology that provides
economically and environmentally sustainable solutions to water resource needs.
NRCS' leadership is supported by technical and financial assistance provided to its customers, our nation's
agricultural producers. Pursuant to the 2018 Farm Bill, NRCS is directed to offer enhanced financial
incentives to farmers who protect water quality and water quantity.
NRCS is committed to collaborative efforts with other federal agencies, state and local governments, tribes,
and conservation partners to leverage resources to accomplish our shared responsibility of protecting
human health and conserving natural resources.
Agriculture is one of the largest users of the nation's surface water and groundwater, with irrigation being
the greatest use.1 The NRCS supports agricultural producers who implement local-level conservation
practices and management strategies that benefit water quality and improve water management. The
NRCS has worked for decades to promote water conservation efforts, and water reuse is one of the
approaches used to reduce stress on surface water and ground water supplies.
A common example of agricultural water reuse is collecting irrigation or drainage tailwater to help meet
irrigation needs. The water is applied by gravity (from higher-elevation fields to those at lower elevations)
or with a pump. Another example is the reuse of nearby municipal or industrial process water for
agricultural irrigation.
The NRCS performs many functions and implements programs that may have a direct and indirect influence
on local water reuse efforts:
1 "Irrigated Agriculture in the United States," information compiled by USDA Economic Research Service (ERS), from USDA's
2013 Farm and Ranch Irrigation Survey conducted every 5 years by the USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS).
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
• Financial assistance programs:
o Conservation Innovation Grants (CIG).
o Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP).
o Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP).
o Agricultural Management Assistance Program (AMA).
o Water Bank Program (WBP).
• Landscape Conservation Initiatives.
• National Water Quality Initiative (NWQI).
• Technical assistance.
• Service centers.
• National Water and Climate Center/Water Supply Forecasts.
Explicit Roles and Actions in Water Reuse
Financial Assistance Program for Agricultural Producers
• The NRCS' Conservation Innovation Grants (CIG) are competitive grants that drive public and private
sector innovation in resource conservation. CIG projects inspire creative problem-solving that boosts
production on farms, ranches, and private forest land —ultimately, they improve water quality, soil
health, wildlife habitat and promote water conservation. NRCS recognizes both the water supply
challenges facing our nation and the significant breadth of opportunity for expanding the application of
reclaimed water. Accordingly, NRCS stands committed to supporting the development of innovative
conservation approaches necessary to harness the value of recycled water in the coming years.
• The Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) assists farm, ranch, and forest production and
improves and protects environmental quality. EQIP offers payments for 171 conservation practices,
some of which are directly related to water resources (e.g., irrigation water management, irrigation
and drainage tailwater recovery, pipeline , stormwater runoff control, waste transfer).
• The Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) helps producers build on existing conservation efforts
and strengthen operations. An example of this is advanced tailwater recovery. This is the largest
conservation program in the United States, with more than 70 million acres of productive agricultural
and forest land and thousands of people voluntarily enrolled.
• The Agricultural Management Assistance Program (AMA) provides financial assistance for installing
conservation practices in the 16 states where participation in the Federal Crop Insurance Program is
historically low. This program can provide up to 75 percent of the cost of a conservation practice, up to
a $50,000 annual maximum per participant.
• The Water Bank Program (WBP) is designed to keep water on the land for the benefit of migratory
wildlife such as waterfowl. Landowners and operators can sign new 10-year rental agreements to
protect wetlands and provide wildlife habitat.
• The Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP) offers new opportunities for the NRCS,
conservation partners, and agricultural producers to work together to harness innovation, expand the
conservation mission, and show the value and efficacy of voluntary, private lands conservation. RCPP
projects may include conservation activities associated with other USDA programs, such as the EQIP,
CSP, and PL 83-566 Watershed Program.
• The Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Program (PL 83-566) helps federal, state, and local
governments and tribes protect and restore watersheds up to 250,000 acres. This program provides for
cooperation between the Federal government and the unit of governments and their political
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
2
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
subdivisions to work together to prevent erosion; floodwater and sediment damage; to further the
conservation development, use and disposal of water; and to further the conservation and proper use
of land in authorized watersheds. USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) offers
financial and technical assistance through this program for the following purposes: erosion and
sediment control, watershed protection, flood prevention, water quality improvements, rural,
municipal and industrial water supply, water management, fish and wildlife habitat enhancement, and
hydropower sources.
Landscape Conservation Initiatives
• The NRCS uses Landscape Conservation Initiatives to accelerate the benefits of voluntary conservation
programs, such as cleaner water and air, healthier soil, and enhanced wildlife habitat. These initiatives
enhance the locally driven process to better address important conservation goals that transcend
localities to the regional or national level. Approximately 10 water-based initiatives are underway. For
example, the Ogallala Aquifer Initiative (OAI) aims to reduce aquifer water use, improve water quality,
and enhance the economic viability of croplands and rangelands in Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma,
Nebraska, New Mexico, Texas, South Dakota, and Wyoming. The OAl's overall goal is to reduce
withdrawals of water and support local projects that demonstrate how agriculture can be productive
and sustainable in the Ogallala region. To achieve this, the NRCS has set five milestones for its work
with producers and partners to complete by 2018. These milestones include the conservation of
102,320 acre-feet of water, improving irrigation efficiency on 49,400 acres, converting operations
to dryland farming on 30,350 acres, installing 202 irrigation water management systems, and applying
nutrient management practices on 21,000 acres.2 Substantial progress has been made toward the
achievement of each milestone as a direct result of the collaboration between NRCS and its partners as
outlined in the OAI 2017 Progress Report.
National Water Quality Initiative
• As the USDA's premiere water quality initiative, the National Water Quality Initiative provides a way to
accelerate voluntary, on-farm conservation investments and focused water quality monitoring and
assessment resources where they can deliver the greatest benefits for clean water.
Technical Assistance and Service Providers
• The NRCS delivers conservation technical assistance to private landowners, conservation districts,
tribes, and other organizations across the country through its voluntary Conservation Technical
Assistance CTA program. This support can help in many ways, including to help land users protect and
improve water quality and quantity and to develop and apply sustainable agricultural systems. The
assistance may take the form of resource assessment, practice design, resource monitoring, or follow-
up on installed practices. The CTA program provided more than $5 billion of technical assistance funds
from 2003 to 2013. Between 2012 -2017 over $5M was spent just on tailwater recovery, not including
associated practices that may have been used (pumps, pipelines, irrigation systems).
• NRCS will contribute to the development of water reuse program outreach and communications
materials. This action will include the development of materials which showcase farmers and
landowners who have successfully implemented water reuse systems on their farming or ranching
operations. In addition, NRCS will contribute to the production of new materials based on the needs
articulated by stakeholders. NRCS will develop training resources geared towards peer-to-peer
knowledge transfer as well as a broader audience of stakeholders. NRCS will produce technical
reference documents for the design of water reuse practices across agricultural landscapes.
2 Ogallala Aquifer Initiative 2017 Progress Report, https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/lnternet/FSE MEDIA/nrcseprd 1407817.pdf
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
3
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
• Technical service providers (TSPs) offer services to agricultural producers on behalf of the NRCS. TSPs
help producers plan, design, and implement conservation practices or develop conservation activity
plans to improve agricultural operations.
National Water and Climate Center/Water Supply Forecasts
• The National Water and Climate Center's staff publish water supply forecasts throughout the western
United States; serve as technical specialists on issues of drought, soil moisture, and climate change; and
provide database operations and management for snow pack, water supply, and climate data.
Examples of Partners and Stakeholders
• Farmers, ranchers, conservation districts, canal companies, irrigation districts.
• Private forestry operations.
• Local, state, and tribal agencies and associations
• Agricultural associations/organizations (e.g., the Agricultural Drainage Systems Management Task
Force, the Irrigation Association).
• Citizen and recreation groups.
• Agricultural businesses (i.e., Agribusinesses).
• Other federal agencies, such as the U.S. Forest Service.
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
Reston, Virginia
Agency Mission
The USGS serves the nation by providing reliable scientific information to describe and understand the
Earth; minimize loss of life and property from natural disasters; manage water, biological, energy, and
mineral resources; and enhance and protect quality of life. Water information is fundamental to national
and local economic well-being, protection of life and property, and effective management of the nation's
water resources. The USGS works with partners to monitor, assess, conduct targeted research, and deliver
information on a wide range of water resources and conditions including streamflow, groundwater, water
quality, and water use and availability. (For more information, see the USGS's strategic plan for water
science.)
Context and Applicability to Water Reuse
The USGS implements water resource programs under the authority of the Organic Act, the SECURE Water
Act, and other statutes. As the nation's largest water, earth, and biological science and civilian mapping
agency, the USGS collects, monitors, analyzes, and provides science about natural resource conditions,
issues, and problems. Current and projected water demands will require many areas of the country to
access alternative sources of water to meet multiple use needs.
The USGS draws on its diverse expertise to carry out large-scale, multidisciplinary investigations and
provide impartial scientific information to resource managers, including assessments of water availability.
Understanding how alternative sources of water (reuse, brackish, etc.) can be used, and are used, is an
important component of availability. The USGS collects data on water reuse and collaboratively assesses
water reuse in terms of availability with local and regional partners.
Explicit Roles and Actions in Water Reuse
The SECURE Water Act directly asks the USGS to assess including impaired surface water and groundwater
supplies that are known, accessible, and used to meet ongoing water demands. While reused water may
not be "impaired," it is accessible water that can be used to meet ongoing demands.
As part of its mission to give resource managers the data, tools, and information they need to make water
management decisions, the USGS focuses on the following activities to improve understanding of water
reuse and how it influences water availability:
• Modernized data collection, which can include improved water reuse data in applicable basins.
• Modernized data delivery.
• National water prediction capabilities.
• Integrated water availability assessments (IWAAs).
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
-------
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile
Examples of Partners and Stakeholders
The USGS's water resources mission area and its Science Centers and Regions partner with over 1,800
agencies, tribes, municipalities, universities, organizations, and research centers both locally and nationally.
Water Reuse Federal Partner Profile—September 2019
2
-------
Appendix C: Compilation of Ideas/Actions
from the Literature
NATIONAL WATER REUSE
ACTION PLAN
DRAFT
-------
Appendix C: Compilation of Ideas/Actions from the Literature and List of
Literature Sources
Appendix C provides the results of a primary review of literature identified using targeted literature
searches. High-level actions from the literature are organized by the Strategic Objectives outlined in the
draft Action Plan.
Disclaimer
The literature reviewed herein is not exhaustive. It is intended to serve as a high-level sampling of
available literature that EPA and its water reuse partners were aware of and received by July 1, 2019.
Actions are not listed in order of significance.
Section 2.1—Enable Consideration of Water Reuse with Integrated and Collaborative
Action at the Watershed Scale
• Create tools so that communities can "set the foundation" to start implementing an IWRM (or ONE
Water) approach in their region/basin/city. This phase kicks off the entire IWRM planning approach
by defining what IWRM means to your entity, identifying a core group of critical partners, and
assessing the needs and opportunities that your IWRM approach would address (United States
Water Alliance, 2019a,b; WRF, 2017a).
• Support an integrated water management approach to address site-specific conditions and
objectives; no one reuse strategy fits all communities (CUWA, 2019; WE&RF, 2017a; Kunz et al.,
2015; AWWA, 2014; NRC, 2012; U.S. EPA, 2012a).
• Identify ways to encourage flexibility at the local level so legislation or codes related to water reuse
(including permitting) enable implementation of the reuse strategy that best fits the needs of the
local community (CUWA, 2019; WateReuse California, 2019; WRF, 2019b; Pacific Institute, 2018;
CUWA, 2017; State of California, 2016; Freedman and Enssle, 2015; Kunz et al., 2015). Include
consideration of flow and life cycle assessment (WRF, 2019c; CUWA, 2019; Ghimire et al., 2019;
AWWA, 2017; CUWA, 2017; Tran et al., 2017; National Academies of Sciences Engineering and
Medicine, 2016; Wiener et al., 2016). Areas where revision is needed include: local regulations that
require all water meet potable standards, plumbing codes related to dual piping, stringent
permitting and inspection requirements for recycled water, change petition processes, the use of
alternative treatment trains, and raw water and treated drinking water augmentation (WateReuse
California, 2019; Freedman and Enssle, 2015).
• Conduct analysis to understand impacts of water conservation and reuse on downstream water
supplies (NRC, 1996) under future population scenarios, considering that contributions of
wastewater in receiving streams are likely to increase under current population projections and
migration trends - additionally how will the likely associated increase in salinity and other effects on
water quality affect water reuse applications (NRC, 2012).
o Consider how policies can account for a holistic view of the water service sustainability
tradeoffs and potential benefits, including the beneficial use of stormwater (California
Water Boards, 2018; Cashman et al., 2018; Pacific Institute, 2018; Cashman et al., 2017;
Cashman et al., 2016; National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine, 2016).
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-l
-------
• Support and/or identify policy innovations to create appropriate incentives to capture watershed-
based environmental benefits of agricultural application of recycled water. Specifically,
states/locales' reuse regulations need to be coordinated with irrigation water quality requirements
(within the watershed and existing conveyance infrastructure when possible) (WRF, 2019b).
• Conduct an analysis to understand the non-monetized costs and benefits of reuse to help planners
and regional managers understand benefits of water reuse within IWRM. For example, reuse
coupled with conservation can reduce seasonal peak demands to potable systems, thereby reducing
capital/op costs and stretching potable supplies. These benefits can be challenging to quantify prior
to implementing a project and documenting performance (NRC, 2012).
• Support collaboration between communities and industrial water facilities, which are some of the
highest volume water users in the United States and offer a key partnership for municipalities
looking for reclaimed water off-takers (Bluefield Research, 2017).
• Utilize a framework that outlines a strategy for systematically identifying and incorporating the costs
and benefits of water management strategies into decision making. The framework could be used
by the public sector, for example, when evaluating which water supply/supplies or water quality
interventions to pursue. Or, it could be used by the private sector, when assessing which projects to
invest in within their value chains or as part of their philanthropic activities (Pacific Institute, 2019).
Section 2.2—Coordinate and Integrate Federal, State, Tribal, and Local Water Reuse
Programs and Policies
• Assess the potential harmonization of regulations across agencies. Regulatory inconsistency
between agencies is cited as an impediment to reuse by studies and stakeholders (WRF, 2019b; U.S.
EPA, 2018a; Bluefield Research, 2017; U.S. EPA, 1972).
• Add to the NPDES Action:
o Consider the development of "umbrella permits' so that a WRRF wishing to deliver reuse
water to agriculture does not need to apply for a new NPDES permit solely because the
discharge point to the same waterbody has changed (e.g. moved from the centralized WRRF
location to somewhere near agricultural lands) (WEF, 2018b).
• Consider modifying SDWA's structure or implementation to increase public confidence in all potable
supplies and ensure appropriate controls exist in reuse projects; adjustment to consider treatment
or monitoring for effluent-dominated source waters (e.g. water reuse) would respond to concerns
raised by state/local regulators and advisory panels (NRC, 2012).
• Develop policies to account for water shortages over 10-year time frames (U.S. GAO, 2014).
• Conduct an exploratory analysis of regulatory and policy incentives and/or clarifications to
encourage additional reuse of industrial water (U.S. EPA, 2018e). The industry is adept at dealing
with a regulated environment and will pursue creative uses of water (and produced water), if it
makes financial sense (WRF, 2018e; WE&RF, 2016c; Colorado Energy Office & Colorado Mesa
University, 2014).
• Consider the establishment of structures for ongoing regulatory oversight to ensure compliance of
onsite non-potable projects. Oversight is essential to protect public health and sustain safety and
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-2
-------
reliability by meeting regulatory standards and permit requirements (United States Water Alliance,
2018).
• Develop new regulatory programs to authorize and manage beneficial use of produced water,
particularly reuse outside the oil and gas industry, as programs specific to these uses are not well
developed. Legal and regulatory considerations include determining state water rights and
applicable regulations such as those relating to water quality standards and permitting
(Groundwater Protection Council, 2019).
• Determine the applicability of current centralized waste treatment effluent guidelines to oil and gas
operations interested in water reuse applications (U.S. EPA, 2018b).
Section 2.3—Compile and Refine Fit for Purpose Specifications
• Develop a risk-based regulatory framework to both maintain quality and increase confidence in
reuse as a safe alternative. As part of this effort, develop a new quality assurance framework for
water reuse and establish health benchmarks for various uses of recycled water (Groundwater
Protection Council, 2019; Nappier et al., 2018; Soller et al., 2018; Tasker et al., 2018; U.S. EPA,
2018a; WRF, 2018c; United States Water Alliance, 2017a; WE&RF, 2017b; National Academies of
Sciences Engineering and Medicine, 2016; USAPHC, 2014).
¦ As part of this effort, identify better indicators and surrogates that can be used to monitor
process performance in reuse scenarios and develop online real-time or near real-time
analytical monitoring techniques for their measurement (Schoen et al., 2018; Soller et al.,
2018; WateReuse Colorado, 2018b; WRF, 2018d; AWWA, 2017; Jahne et al., 2017; United
States Water Alliance, 2017a; WE&RF, 2017b, 2016d; NRC, 2012). This will have the
additional benefit of reducing unnecessary treatment costs (California Water Boards, 2018).
¦ Both microbial contaminants and contaminants of emerging concern, such as xenobiotics
and pharmaceuticals (e.g., carbamaxepine), should be considered in risk frameworks
(Ibekwe et al., 2018; Sheikh, 2017; Paltiel et al., 2016).
• Utilize a framework as a planning support tool to reveal the environmental impacts (e.g.,
greenhouse gas emissions, energy consumption) of integrating decentralized non-potable reuse
with existing centralized wastewater infrastructure, which can be adapted to evaluate different
treatment technology scales for reuse (Kavvada et al., 2016).
• Identify risks associated with the unintended or inappropriate uses of reclaimed water (Danforth et
al., 2019; Rahm and Riha, 2014; NRC, 2012). For example:
¦ Understand cross-connection contamination or unacceptable reclaimed water sources for a
future use (NRC, 2012).
¦ Consider subtle changes associated with wastewater derived compounds (e.g., reports of
treated wastewater causing severe lesions and developmental alterations in amphibians,
which are not common sentinel testing organisms in the Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET)
testing paradigm) (NRC, 2012).
¦ Endorse an implementation framework to ensure public health protection through reuse of
industrial water (Groundwater Protection Council, 2019; Colorado General Assembly, 2018;
WE&RF, 2016c; U.S. EPA, 2012c, 1980). Industrial water recycling requirements can be site-
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-3
-------
specific and must be based on careful evaluations of process requirements (Groundwater
Protection Council, 2019; WE&RF, 2016c; Colorado Energy Office & Colorado Mesa
University, 2014; Argonne National Laboratory, 2007; U.S. EPA, 1980).
¦ Continue researching the risks of unconventional oil and gas, which can vary on a site-
specific basis. This work should include consideration of emerging chemicals of concern,
exposure, and impact on health (including chronic toxicity) and the environment (e.g.,
sediments, plants) associated with produced water (U.S. EPA, 2019; Hull et al., 2018; U.S.
EPA, 2018b, e; Blewett et al., 2017; Chen et al., 2017; He et al., 2017; Orem et al., 2017; Pica
et al., 2017; Silva et al., 2017; Shonkoff et al., 2016; Torres et al., 2016; Colorado Energy
Office & Colorado Mesa University, 2014; Skalak et al., 2014). For produced water treated to
achieve acceptable TDS (salinity) limits, non-saline toxicity may still pose residual risks that
must be understood and managed (Danforth et al., 2019).
¦ Support monitoring and data collection related to water resource risks as part of the
planning process for oil and gas development (Rahm and Riha, 2014).
• Conduct pilot project with respect to risks associated with produced water use for dust suppression
and other current practices (Colorado Energy Office & Colorado Mesa University, 2014). (could be
potentially funded under the EPA START GRANT).
• Develop a better understanding of pathogen removal efficiencies and establish default performance
levels for various wastewater treatment processes for use in risk assessments in potable and non-
potable reuse projects (Schoen et al., 2018; WateReuse Colorado, 2018a, b, d; Jahne et al., 2017;
NRC, 2012). This will have the additional benefit of reducing unnecessary treatment costs (California
Water Boards, 2018; WE&RF, 2017b).
• Retrofit existing wastewater treatment plants as a model for reuse project development (Bluefield
Research, 2017).
Section 2.4—Promote Technology Development, Deployment, and Validation
• Develop standardized guidance (or best practices) for design and operation of engineered natural
systems (e.g. environmental buffers employed in reuse projects) so that (a) their performance can
be quantifiably compared to engineered unit processes and (b) designs can be adjusted to ensure
uniform protection offered by one natural system/environmental buffer versus another (Attwater
and Derry, 2017; NRC, 2012).
• Conduct an assessment of what technologies can be applied to water reclamation so that new
plants can recover energy and use resources most efficiently (NRC, 2012).
• Increase investment in the agriculture/water quality nexus. Investments in research and in the
development of new technologies targeting water quality, and plant and soil protection, may reduce
or eliminate impediments relating to water quality (Wall et al., 2019; WRF, 2019b; USDA, 2016;
Medina et al., 2015; O'Neill and Dobrowoiski, 2005; NRC, 1996).
• Improve monitoring and implementation of new technologies for urban runoff capture and
infiltration practices, which are necessary to protect local drinking water supplies. Advances in
sensing and forecasting can make stormwater capture more dynamic through interconnectivity and
real-time decision making (Luthy et al., 2019; Luthy and Sedlak, 2018; U.S. EPA, 2018d).
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-4
-------
Research and quantify the specific process modifications needed for reuse projects for contaminants
found to increase in concentration owing to the use of specific treatment processes (salinity, NDMA,
aluminum, recalcitrant organic nitrogen, bromate, and other DBPs) (Danforth et al., 2019; WRF,
2017b). Sodium and boron can impair agricultural/landscape irrigation if not treated to specific
baselines; a systematic review of treatment systems can determine where systems matching fit for
purpose can be improved and/or made less expensive (NRC, 2012).
Explore the use of various treatment trains and combinations of treatment technologies to clean
effluent before it is blended with existing water supplies. There is no single technology solution for
wastewater reuse and a range of treatment technologies is often required (Bluefield Research,
2017).
Consider the use of technologies (such as evaporation) to remove total dissolved solids that use
waste heat from other industrial sources that, where co-located. The use of these technologies can
significantly reduce the costs of treatment of oil and gas extraction wastes (U.S. EPA, 2018b).
Specific Literature R&D requests:
o R&D in salinity reduction and point-of-use treatment for application of reuse water in
irrigation. Cost effective methods to reduce salinity and meet disinfection requirements may
foster greater adoption of reuse (WRF, 2019a).
o R&D to reduce cost of targeted NH3/ammonium (not nitrate) removal, which must occur if
water is used to stock a recreational lake, engineered wetland, coastal marsh, or woodlands
(toxic to aquatic life) (NRC, 2012).
o Increase R&D of technologies that will allow industrial water to be reused, specifically
including brine disposal (WRF, 2019c; U.S. EPA, 2019; WateReuse California, 2019; Silva et
al., 2017; Colorado Energy Office & Colorado Mesa University, 2014).
o R&D to develop and validate standardized methods for analyzing industrial/oil and gas
related chemicals for use in water quality monitoring (Shonkoff et al., 2016).
o R&D to support mobile treatment plants to potentially make nonindustrial uses [of oil and
gas produced water] more feasible, both logistically and financially. In many basins, mobile
plants are used to some degree or on a preliminary basis; more widespread use will require
funding support and collaborative investment (Bluefield Research, 2017; Colorado Energy
Office & Colorado Mesa University, 2014).
o R&D for new technologies (e.g., sensors) can be used to address continuous monitoring to
ensure adequate performance (United States Water Alliance, 2017a; WE&RF, 2017b;
Western Resource Advocates, 2017; National Academies of Sciences Engineering and
Medicine, 2016; Freedman and Enssle, 2015; U.S. EPA, 2012b).
o R&D to develop alternative measures to reflect the toxicity caused by the presence of trace
organic compounds (TrOCs) (WRF, 2017a) and other oil and gas-related chemicals (Shonkoff
et al., 2016).
o R&D to develop techniques to assess produced water quality characteristics that overcome
the challenges that hypersaline or corrosive produced waters pose to routine analytical
methods (Danforth et al., 2019). More research is needed to understand the complex
chemistry of hydraulic fracturing fluids, wastewaters, and treatment methods and efficacy
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-5
-------
for removal of organic compounds in produced water, which can vary by operator, geologic
formation, and fluid age (Butkovskyi et al., 2018; Luek et al., 2018; Silva et al., 2017).
o R&D summary of needs for power plant cooling water (Argonne National Laboratory, 2007).
Section 2.5—Improve Availability of Water Information
• Develop an operational database to better understand common failure modes at DPR facilities and
impacts on water quality to allow for more effective design of resilience strategies (WRF, 2018c;
WHO, 2017; WE&RF, 2016a; WateReuse Association, 2015). The industry would benefit from the
compilation and analysis of data from existing potable reuse facilities (WRF, 2017b).
• Develop a centralized database with information on the amount of wastewater reused by states.
Include data from smaller systems (WEF, 2018a).
• A more effective mechanism for the compilation and sharing of AWTF operation and performance
data (plant design, process performance, operation practices, and mechanical reliability) should be
compiled in a consistent format and made accessible in a timely manner to all interested WateReuse
135 parties. Data can be used to assess current practices, as well as inform and potentially promote
new designs (WateReuse Association, 2015).
• Establish a database on effluent and surface waters impaired by TDS at the national level, which
would help farmers make water management decisions when addressing increasingly-brackish
groundwater supplies (WRF, 2019b).
• Create a mechanism for utilities to report data on agricultural reuse practices in publicly accessible
formats that facilitate analysis. Federal and state databases on water management and reuse are an
important research asset (WRF, 2019b).
• Gather and share trusted, accessible information about produced water, including baseline data and
the rapidly-evolving technologies for treating and re-using produced water. Emphasize principles of
joint data collection, monitoring, and conveying such data to stakeholders in accessible ways.
Education institutions and a structure for such data-sharing could play important roles (Colorado
Energy Office & Colorado Mesa University, 2014).
• Reporting of produced water chemical composition should be expanded in frequency and cover
more chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing fluids. Produced water management practices should be
oriented towards safer and more sustainable options such as reuse and recycling, but with adequate
controls in place to ensure their safety and reliability (Chittick and Srebotnjak, 2017).
• Public information about the chemicals and effects on health associated with onshore
unconventional oil and gas production is incomplete because some are considered confidential,
which has created mistrust towards the industry (Torres et al., 2016).
• Establish a program for source water monitoring and pretreatment and programs for the control of
pathogens and chemical risks with the goal of protecting public health and safety (AWWA, 2018).
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-6
-------
Section 2.6—Facilitate Financial Support for Water Reuse
• Quantify the non-monetized costs and benefits of potable and nonpotable water reuse compared
with other water supply sources to enhance water management decision making (NRC, 2012). For
example:
o Consider balance between crop restriction and wastewater application techniques with
respect to overall costs (WHO, 1989). Include a triple bottom line cost benefit analysis to
compare nontraditional water sources (WRF, 2018a).
o Document the non-monetized costs and benefits of reuse projects in comparative cost
analyses of water supply alternatives. EPA's WEAP model might provide a useful tool for this
effort (NRC, 2012; U.S. EPA, 2012b).
o Quantify the non-monetized costs and benefits of potable and non-potable water reuse
compared with other water supply sources to enhance water management decision making
(NRC, 2012).
• Identify (or compile) non-traditional funding mechanisms that allow greater efficiency to implement
water reuse into management plans (Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC), 2019; WateReuse
California, 2019; Colorado General Assembly, 2018; River Network, 2018; Bluefield Research, 2017;
United States Water Alliance, 2017b; WRF, 2017a; Perrone and Rohde, 2016; State of California,
2016; Colorado Energy Office & Colorado Mesa University, 2014; U.S. EPA, 2012b; NRC, 1996). These
may include: a credit trading program (Colorado General Assembly, 2018; United States Water
Alliance, 2017b; Colorado Energy Office & Colorado Mesa University, 2014; NRC, 1996),
collaborative funding models (River Network, 2018; United States Water Alliance, 2017b; NRC,
1996), public-private partnerships (P3s) (Colorado General Assembly, 2018; WRF, 2017a; U.S. EPA,
2012b), EPA innovation grants (Colorado General Assembly, 2018; WRF, 2017a; U.S. EPA, 2012b),
grants from the Bureau of Reclamation to support drought mitigation projects (Bluefield Research,
2017), low cost financing for recycled water projects (State of California, 2016), fees from
developers and non-residential properties (Colorado General Assembly, 2018; WRF, 2017a; U.S. EPA,
2012b), inclusion of operation and maintenance of nonpotable on-site systems in the total cost of
the building (and thus covered by the property owner) (Pacific Institute, 2018), the sale of green
bonds (WateReuse California, 2019; Bluefield Research, 2017), state revolving and WIFIA funds
(Bluefield Research, 2017), and make compelling cases to increase rates (WRF, 2017a).
• Target financial support/subsidies for reuse projects to small farms. Smaller farms' irrigation
practices are disproportionately affected during surface and groundwater shortages, which are
major drivers of reuse (WRF, 2019b). Economic challenges are the greatest barrier to successful
project implementation on farms. High costs of distribution systems (pipelines) present a significant
challenge (Bischel et al., 2012).
• Leverage the Water Security Grand Challenge funding to advance transformational technology and
innovation to meet the global need for safe, secure, and affordable water (U.S. DOE, 2018).
• Leverage investments in advanced water treatment as an alternative to plant upgrades (CUWA,
2019; WE&RF, 2017a). Consider adjustment of rate structure to equitably distribute cost of service
to existing and future purveyors (AWWA, 2014).
• Incentivize innovative water exchange arrangements and innovation in water and wastewater
treatment and recycled water infrastructure (WateReuse California, 2019).
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-7
-------
• Provide a recycled water rate structure discounted from potable water rates (Bischel et al., 2012).
Section 2.7—Integrate and Coordinate Research on Water Reuse
• Issue a challenge to develop approaches for using industrial water to meet the demands of future
water availability (Colorado General Assembly, 2018; U.S. EPA, 2018e).
• Explore the impacts and potential opportunities for utilizing recycled water for agricultural irrigation
presented by the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) Produce Safety rule (WRF, 2018a).
• Engage the National Academies to set a national research agenda to examine institutional
challenges to potable reuse and provide funding to meet those challenges as well as the Water
Research Foundation, which funds a suite of research projects focused on both potable and
nonpotable reuse (WRF, 2019a; U.S. EPA, 2018c).
Section 2.8—Improve Outreach and Communication on Water Reuse
• Produce more science and highlight success stories across states relating to recycled water for food
crop irrigation, to aid state regulators considering expansion of water reuse permitted use in
agriculture (WRF, 2019b). In particular, document case examples of agricultural reuse in coastal
areas, especially those driven by saltwater intrusion and/or coastal subsidence, that are not typically
considered as strong opportunities for reuse (e.g. Puget Sound) (WRF, 2019b). Additionally:
o Help farmers understand the nutrient content potential of recycled water, particularly in
areas adjacent to POTWs that do not remove nutrients (78%) or do discharge to nutrient-
impaired waterbodies (1500). It will be important to convey that existing POTW effluent
could supply 17% of irrigation needs in the west and 75% of seasonal irrigation needs in the
east (WRF, 2019b).
• Help develop public relations campaigns to alleviate public concern and minimize risks associated
with a reduction in sales from irrigation with recycled water (WEF, 2018b).
• Develop mechanisms to ensure utilities and regulators have the ability to learn about emerging
topics in water reuse, because not all have the professional development budget to purchase access
to journal articles and reports (WRF, 2019b). Regional conferences (such as the Idaho Water Reuse
Conference) have proven to be an effective forum for learning about neighboring states successes,
challenges, and approaches to regulation (WRF, 2019b).
• Invest in water knowledge, including improved public understanding of a region's available water
supplies and the full costs/benefits associated with water supply alternatives, both to increase
general public awareness/support/understanding of the value of water, and to enable more efficient
processes for the evaluation of specific reuse projects (Bischel et al., 2012; NRC, 2012). (This could
include K-12 educational programs)
o Promote collaborative and cooperative outreach with a uniform message and consistent
terminology to facilitate public acceptance of potable reuse. For example, develop school
educational programs for grades 1 through 12 that address source control issues related to
potable reuse (AWWA, 2018; WRF, 2017a; AWWA, 2016; Millan et al., 2015; AWWA, 2014).
Make the natural water cycle part of the conversation (include aspects of
WWTP/DWTP/reuse) (AWWA, 2016).
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-8
-------
• Develop public outreach for future planned potable projects. Outreach efforts should be applied
early, include set goals, engage the media, use consistent terminology, avoid the use of jargon,
confront misinformation as soon as it is encountered, education about emerging technologies, and
provide information to the public about constituents of concern and acceptable discharges to the
sewer (AWWA, 2018; U.S. EPA, 2018a; WHO, 2017; WRF, 2017a; AWWA, 2016, 2014; NRC, 2012).
Mainstreaming planned potable reuse will require building legitimacy, planning within an integrated
water context, enacting a robust communications strategy, and appropriate regulatory environment
(CUWA, 2019; WE&RF, 2017a; NRC, 2012; U.S. EPA, 2012a). Could also apply to outreach to other
use applications:
o Develop materials/help states, locales, and industry closely collaborate with local tribes
when considering or planning to employ snowmaking using recycled water, when applicable
(Leao and Tecle, 2003).
o Help decision-makers at all levels identify and understand relevant receptors and potential
adverse effects at the individual, population, and community level for a particular use [of
produced water] (Danforth et al., 2019).
• Document successful applications of reuse/recycle technology at industrial installations (Colorado
Energy Office & Colorado Mesa University, 2014).
• Develop best practices for communicating relative risk and develop effective guidance for improving
risk communication around exposure to contaminants of emerging concern that might be found in
reclaimed water (ACWA & ASDWA, 2019).
Section 2.9—Support a Talented and Dynamic Workforce
• Develop operator training and licensure/certification programs specifically for DPR facilities (WRF,
2019a; WateReuse Colorado, 2018a, b, c, d; WRF, 2018b; WE&RF, 2017a; WRF, 2017b; WE&RF,
2016a, b, d; WateReuse Association, 2015; AWWA, 2014).
• Create recognition awards and certification programs for reuse facilities (Freedman and Enssle,
2015).
• Provide guidance on requirements for ability to manage complex water projects, technical
understanding, and operator licensing needed for potable reuse projects (WE&RF, 2017a;
WateReuse Association, 2015; AWWA, 2014).
Section 2.10—Develop Water Reuse Metrics that Support Goals and Measure Progress
• Conduct an analysis of de-facto potable water reuse to quantify the number of people possibly
exposed to wastewater constituents/in quantifiable concentrations; such as study has not been
done for nearly 40 years (NRC, 2012).
• Redo the analyses to understand coastal discharges as a percent of total discharges, to better
understand the extent of public supplies potentially saved by reusing instead of discharging to
oceans/estuaries (WateReuse California, 2019; NRC, 2012).
• Support development of real-time nutrient measurements. Real-time data on nutrient
concentrations are needed to adaptively manage recycled water to accommodate the variability in
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-9
-------
evapotranspiration rate and fertilization needs throughout a crop's production cycle (WRF, 2019a;
Soller et al., 2018; WRF, 2018d).
• Perform and publish studies to better-characterize opportunities for reuse specifically in small
communities (WRF, 2019a, b). Most data indicating proximity of POTWs to irrigable land are based
on large-community POTW data that is self-reported, such as the Clean Watersheds Needs Survey
(WRF, 2019b).
• Coordinate and incorporate the following recommendations concerning analysis of Clean
Watersheds Needs Survey data (WRF, 2019b):
1. Spray irrigation (land application) represents a major gap in accounting for agricultural
water reuse. Further review of the CWNS data revealed inconsistencies between states and
POTWs in how these data are reported. How many of the POTWs reporting spray irrigation
are growing a crop? Those that are not currently growing crops represent an opportunity to
increase food or fodder production with no or little additional investment in infrastructure
(WRF, 2019b).
2. Disinfection appears to be under-reported in the CWNS data, but is an important
determinant in the type of crops that can be irrigated with recycled water. Further
clarification is needed to identify the actual prevalence of disinfection (WRF, 2019b).
3. The CWNS class 'reuse for irrigation' does not distinguish between reuse for landscape
irrigation and reuse for agricultural irrigation. Future surveys should provide further
distinction between these classes (WRF, 2019b).
4. Data on unit processes present at a facility are useful for evaluating the potential for a given
facility to produce water suitable for reuse. However, reporting rates for these variables are
low. Higher response rates would facilitate a more complete analysis of these data (WRF,
2019b).
5. The class 'advanced treatment' could be made more useful for evaluating the potential for
recycled supply if the data included a variable indicating the presence of membrane
processes or other technologies which would meet requirements for 'filtration' (WRF,
2019b).
Other potential ideas
• Related to water rights:
o States should clarify water rights laws (for example, the right to use aquifers as reuse supply
storage; and the rights and interests of downstream interests), so that those interested in
reuse can efficiently understand whether they may proceed in acquiring necessary water
rights/permits and implementing their projects (Bluefield Research, 2017; NRC, 2012).
o Clarify/address water rights regarding stormwater in most western states. Points requiring
clarification include the acquisition of water rights as a requirement for large-scale
stormwater capture and use projects, and water rights may limit widespread
implementation of smaller-scale stormwater and graywater projects for consumptive uses
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-10
-------
(California Water Boards, 2018; AWWA, 2017; Bluefield Research, 2017; National Academies
of Sciences Engineering and Medicine, 2016).
o Clarify/address water rights and water sharing related to the use of produced water,
particularly reuse outside the oil and gas industry (Groundwater Protection Council, 2019).
Midstream water operations and other forms of water sharing are typically outside
traditional state oil and gas regulatory frameworks and require state authorization and
oversight for activities that are not associated with other permitted oil and gas operations
(Groundwater Protection Council, 2019).
o Clarify water rights specifically to facilitate trading of reclaimed water and/or trades
offsetting one supply of water with reuse water will enable more surface water
augmentation (NRC, 2012).
• Related to snowmaking:
o Conduct extensive monitoring to determine the impacts of snowmaking with recycled water
on regional water resources, vegetation, and wildlife resources (Szpaczynski, 2019; Kursky
and Tecle, 2015; Niraula and Tecle, 2006; Leao and Tecle, 2003).
• Related to climate change:
o Consider the impact of climate change on droughts, rainfall distribution, and storm
intensity, which impact wastewater flow and volume of water available for reuse (Public
Policy Institute of California (PPIC), 2019; WateReuse California, 2019; Attwater and Derry,
2017; Bluefield Research, 2017; Tran et al., 2017).
o Climate change might necessitate the need to develop new, drought proof water supplies
(Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC), 2019; Bluefield Research, 2017).
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-ll
-------
Published Literature Received and/or Reviewed for draft Action Plan
ACWA & ASDWA (The Association of Clean Water Administrators and the Association of State Drinking
Water Administrators). (2019). Recommendations report: Contaminants of emerging concern
workgroup. https://www.asdwa.org/wp-content/uploads/2Q19/Q5/ASDWA-ACWA-Report-on-
Contarninants-of-Ernerging-Concem-2Q19.pdf
APHC (United States Army Public Health Center). (2017). Review of the applicability of published water
reuse guidelines for contingency operations. (PHIP No. 39-06-0417). U.S. Army, Public Health Center,
Environmental Health Sciences and Engineering Directorate.
https://phc.amedd.army.mil/PHC%20Resource%20Library/PHIP-39-06-0417-WaterReuseGuidelines-
2017.pdf
Arden, S; Ma, X. (2018). Constructed wetlands for greywater recycle and reuse: A review. Science of the
Total Environment 650: 587-599.
Argonne National Laboratory. (2007). Use of reclaimed water for power plant cooling. (ANL/EVS/R-
07/3). U.S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory.
Attwater, R; Derry, C. (2017). Achieving resilience through water recycling in peri-urban agriculture.
Water 9: 223.
AWWA (American Water Works Association). (2014). G481-14 - Reclaimed water program operation
and management. 1st ed. Denver, CO: American Waterworks Association.
AWWA (American Water Works Association). (2016). Potable reuse 101: An innovative and sustainable
water supply solution. Denver, CO: American Water Works Association.
AWWA (American Water Works Association). (2017). Manual of water supply practices M50: Water
resources planning, 3rd ed. Denver, CO: American Water Works Association.
AWWA (American Water Works Association). (2018). G485-18 direct potable reuse program operation
and management. 1st ed. Denver, CO: American Waterworks Association.
AWWA (American Water Works Association). (2018a). Manual of water supply practices M62:
Membrane applications for water reuse. 1st ed. Denver, CO: American Water Works Association.
Bischel, HN; Simon, GL; Frisby, TM; Luthy, RG. (2012). Management experiences and trends for water
reuse implementation in Northern California. Environmental science & technology 46:180-188.
https://doi.org/10.lQ21/es2Q2725e
Blewett, TA; Delompre, PL; He, Y; Folkerts, EJ; Flynn, SL; Alessi, DS; Goss, GG. (2017). Sublethal and
reproductive effects of acute and chronic exposure to flowback and produced water from hydraulic
fracturing on the water flea Daphnia magna. Environmental science & technology 51: 3032-3039.
Bluefield Research. (2017). U.S. municipal water reuse: Opportunities, outlook & competitive landscape
2017-2027.
Bradshaw, JL; Luthy, RG. (2017). Modeling and optimization of recycled water systems to augment urban
groundwater recharge through underutilized stormwater spreading basins. Environmental science &
technology 51: 11809-11819.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-12
-------
Butkovskyi, A; Faber, A-H; Wang, Y; Grolle, K; Hofman-Caris, R; Bruning, H; Van Wezel, AP; Rijnaarts, HH.
(2018). Removal of organic compounds from shale gas flowback water. Water research 138: 47-55.
California Water Boards. (2018). Strategy to optimize resource management of stormwater. Product 1-
Final report: Enhancing urban runoff capture and use. Sacramento, CA: California Water Boards, Office
of Water Programs & California State University.
Carey, SA; Goldstein, RER; Gibbs, SG; Claye, E; He, X; Sapkota, AR. (2016). Occurrence of vancomycin-
resistant and-susceptible Enterococcus spp. in reclaimed water used for spray irrigation. Environmental
research 147: 350-355.
Cashman, S; Ma, X; Mosley, J; Garland, J; Crone, B; Xue, X. (2017). Holistic evaluation of decentralized
water reuse: Life cycle assessment and cost analysis of membrane bioreactor systems in water reuse
implementation. 11th International Conference on Water Reclamation and Reuse, July 23-27, 2017.
Cashman, S; Ma, X; Mosley, J; Garland, J; Crone, B; Xue, X. (2018). Energy and greenhouse gas life cycle
assessment and cost analysis of aerobic and anaerobic membrane bioreactor systems: Influence of
scale, population density, climate, and methane recovery. Bioresource technology 254: 56-66.
Cashman, S; Mosley, J; Ma, X; Garland, J; Cashdollar, J; Bless, D. (2016). Life cycle assessment and cost
analysis of water and wastewater treatment options for sustainability: Influence of scale on membrane
bioreactor systems. (ORD-019901. EPA/600/R-16/243). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Research and Development.
Chen, SS; Sun, Y; Tsang, DC; Graham, NJ; Ok, YS; Feng, Y; Li, X-D. (2017). Potential impact of flowback
water from hydraulic fracturing on agricultural soil quality: Metal/metalloid bioaccessibility, Microtox
bioassay, and enzyme activities. Science of the Total Environment 579: 1419-1426.
Chittick, EA; Srebotnjak, T. (2017). An analysis of chemicals and other constituents found in produced
water from hydraulically fractured wells in California and the challenges for wastewater management.
Journal of environmental management 204: 502-509.
Christian-Smith, J; Gleick, P; Cooley, H; Allen, L; Vanderwarker, A; Berry, K. (2012). A twenty-first century
U.S. water policy: Oxford University Press.
Colorado Energy Office & Colorado Mesa University. (2014). Produced water beneficial use dialogue:
Opportunities and challenges for re-use of produced water on Colorado's western slope. Prepared by
CDR Associates, for the Colorado Energy Office & Colorado Mesa University Water Center.
Colorado General Assembly. (2018). House Bill 18-1093: Concerning the allowable uses of reclaimed
domestic wastewater, and, in connection therewith, allowing reclaimed domestic wastewater to be
used for food crops and making an appropriation.
Colorado Water Quality Control Commission. (2018). Regulation No. 84 - Reclaimed water control
regulation. (5 CCR 1002-84).
Colorado Water Quality Control Division. (2017). Safe drinking water program - Immediate staff and
service level reductions.
CUWA (California Urban Water Agencies). (2017). Adapting to change: Utility systems and declining
flows. White paper. Walnut Creek, CA.
https://staticl.squarespace.eom/static/5a565e93b07869c78112e2e5/t/5a568f078165f545d7122ebe/15
15622156186/CL ingFlowsWhitePaper ll-28-17.pdf
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-13
-------
CUWA (California Urban Water Agencies). (2019). Guiding regional reuse options - A distributed systems
approach. Walnut Creek, CA.
Danforth, C; McPartland, J; Blotevogel, J; Coleman, N; Devlin, D; Olsgard, M; Parkerton, T; Saunders, N.
(2019). Alternative management of oil and gas produced water requires more research on its hazards
and risks. Integrated environmental assessment and management.
Douglas, B. (2019). Direct water reuse in New England -Today & tomorrow. NEWEA.
Engelke, P; Michel, D. (2016). Toward global water security. Atlantic Council & U.S. Water Partnership.
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/publications/reports/toward-global-water-security
Freedman, J; Enssle, C. (2015). Addressing water scarcity through recycling and reuse: A menu for
policymakers. White paper. GE Ecoimagination.
Ghimire, SR; Johnston, JM; Garland, J; Edelen, A; Ma, XC; Jahne, M. (2019). Life cycle assessment of a
rainwater harvesting system compared with an AC condensate harvesting system. Resources,
Conservation and Recycling 146: 536-548.
Groundwater Protection Council. (2015). U.S. produced water volumes and management practices in
2012.
Groundwater Protection Council. (2019). Produced water report: Regulations, current practices, and
research needs. Oklahoma City, OK: Groundwater Protection Council.
http://www.gwpc.org/producedwater
Harris-Lovett, SR; Binz, C; Sedlak, DL; Kiparsky, M; Truffer, B. (2015). Beyond user acceptance: A
legitimacy framework for potable water reuse in California. Environmental science & technology 49:
7552-7561.
Harris-Lovett, S; Lienert, J; Sedlak, D. (2018). Towards a new paradigm of urban water infrastructure:
Identifying goals and strategies to support multi-benefit municipal wastewater treatment. Water 10:
1127.
He, Y; Flynn, SL; Folkerts, EJ; Zhang, Y; Ruan, D; Alessi, DS; Martin, JW; Goss, GG. (2017). Chemical and
toxicological characterizations of hydraulic fracturing flowback and produced water. Water research
114:78-87.
Hull, NM; Rosenblum, JS; Robertson, CE; Harris, JK; Linden, KG. (2018). Succession of toxicity and
microbiota in hydraulic fracturing flowback and produced water in the Denver-Julesburg Basin. Science
of the Total Environment 644: 183-192.
Ibekwe, A; Gonzalez-Rubio, A; Suarez, D. (2018). Impact of treated wastewater for irrigation on soil
microbial communities. Science of the Total Environment 622: 1603-1610.
Jahne, MA; Schoen, ME; Garland, JL; Ashbolt, NJ. (2017). Simulation of enteric pathogen concentrations
in locally-collected greywater and wastewater for microbial risk assessments. Microbial risk analysis 5:
44-52.
Kavvada, O; Horvath, A; Stokes-Draut, JR; Hendrickson, TP; Eisenstein, WA; Nelson, KL. (2016). Assessing
location and scale of urban nonpotable water reuse systems for life-cycle energy consumption and
greenhouse gas emissions. Environmental science & technology 50:13184-13194.
https://doi.org/lQ.lQ21/acs.est.6b02386
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-14
-------
Keeler, BL; Gourevitch, JD; Polasky, S; Isbell, F; Tessum, CW; Hill, JD; Marshall, JD. (2016). The social costs
of nitrogen. Science advances 2: el600219.
Kunz, NC; Fischer, M; Ingold, K; Hering, JG. (2015). Why do some water utilities recycle more than
others? A qualitative comparative analysis in New South Wales, Australia. Environmental science &
technology 49: 8287-8296. https://doi.org/10.lQ21/acs.est.5b01827
Kursky, J; Tecle, A. (2015). Watershed restoration efforts at Hart Prairie in Northern Arizona. Hydrology
and Water Resources in Arizona and the Southwest 44: 21-27.
Leao, D; Tecle, A. (2003). Possible impacts of snowmaking using reclaimed water on water resources and
other related issues in Flagstaff, Arizona. Hydrology and Water Resources in Arizona and the Southwest
33.
Luek, JL; Gonsior, M. (2017). Organic compounds in hydraulic fracturing fluids and wastewaters: A
review. Water research 123: 536-548.
Luek, JL; Harir, M; Schmitt-Kopplin, P; Mouser, PJ; Gonsior, M. (2018). Temporal dynamics of
halogenated organic compounds in Marcellus Shale flowback. Water research 136: 200-206.
Luthy, RG; Sedlak, D. (2018). Regional partnerships for sustainable water supply: A ReNUWIt strategy for
the San Francisco Bay Area. White Paper Submitted to NSF.
Luthy, RG; Sharvelle, S; Dillon, P. (2019). Urban Stormwater to Enhance Water Supply. Environmental
science & technology 53: 5534-5542.
Mack, EA; Wrase, S. (2017). A burgeoning crisis? A nationwide assessment of the geography of water
affordability in the United States. PloS one 12: e0169488.
Marron, EL; Mitch, WA; Gunten, Uv; Sedlak, DL. (2019). A tale of two treatments: The multiple barrier
approach to removing chemical contaminants during potable water reuse. Accounts of chemical
research 52: 615-622.
Medina, VF; Scholze, RJ; Waisner, SA; Griggs, CS. (2015). Energy and resource recovery from wastewater
treatment: State of the art and potential application for the army and DoD. U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center (ERDC).
https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a6198Q8.pdf
Metcalf & Eddy Inc. (2007). Water reuse: Issues, technologies and applications: McGraw-Hill.
Millan, M; Tennyson, PA; Snyder, S. (2015). Model communication plans for increasing awareness and
fostering acceptance of direct potable reuse. (Project Number: WRRF-13-02). WateReuse Research
Foundation.
Morelli, B; Cashman, S; Ma, C; Garland, J; Bless, D; Jahne, M. (2018). Life cycle assessment and cost
analysis of distributed mixed wastewater and greywater treatment for water recycling in the context of
an urban case study. (ORD-028027. EPA/600/X-18/280). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Research and Development.
Nappier, SP; Soller, JA; Eftim, SE. (2018). Potable water reuse: What are the microbiological risks?
Current environmental health reports 5: 283-292.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-15
-------
National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine. (2016). Using graywater and stormwater to
enhance local water supplies: An assessment of risks, costs, and benefits. Washington, DC: National
Academies Press. https://doi.org/lQ.17226/21866
National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine. (2018). Future water priorities for the nation:
Directions for the U.S. Geological Survey mission area. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
http://nap.edu/25134
Niraula, BK; Tecle, A. (2006). Ecosystem impacts of artificial snowmaking at Arizona Snowbowl.
Proceedings of the Arizona-Nevada Academy of Science, Hydrology and Water Resources in Arizona and
the Southwest 36: 75-81.
NRC (National Research Council). (1996). Use of reclaimed water and sludge in food crop production.
Washington, DC: National Academies Press. https://doi.org/lQ.17226/5175
NRC (National Research Council). (2012). Understanding water reuse: Potential for expanding the
nation's water supply through reuse of municipal wastewater. Washington, DC: National Academies
Press. https://doi.org/lQ.17226/13514
NSF International. (2011). Standard 350 and 350-1: Onsite water reuse. NSF/ANSI.
O'Neill, P; Dobrowoiski, J. (2005). CSREES agricultural water security white paper. U.S. Department of
Agriculture.
Orem, W; Varonka, M; Crosby, L; Haase, K; Loftin, K; Hladik, M; Akob, DM; Tatu, C; Mumford, A;
Jaeschke, J. (2017). Organic geochemistry and toxicology of a stream impacted by unconventional oil
and gas wastewater disposal operations. Applied geochemistry 80: 155-167.
Pacific Institute. (2018). Stormwater capture in California: Innovative policies and funding opportunities.
Oakland, California. https://pacinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2Q18/Q7/Pacific-lnstitute-Storrnwater-
Capture-in-California.pdf
Pacific Institute. (2019). Moving toward a multi-benefit approach for water management. Oakland,
California. https://pacinst.org/wp-content/uploads/2Q19/Q4/rnoving-toward-rnulti-benefit-
approach.pdf
Page, M; MacAlister, B; Hur, A; Jenicek, E; Cropek, D. (2017). Distributed water reuse systems in military
settings. Worldwater: Water Reuse and Desalination.
Paltiel, O; Fedorova, G; Tadmor, G; Kleinstern, G; Maor, Y; Chefetz, B. (2016). Human exposure to
wastewater-derived pharmaceuticals in fresh produce: A randomized controlled trial focusing on
carbamazepine. Environmental science & technology 50: 4476-4482.
Perrone, D; Rohde, M. (2016). Benefits and economic costs of managed aquifer recharge in California.
San Francisco Estuary and Watershed Science 14. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7sb7440w
Pica, NE; Carlson, K; Steiner, JJ; Waskom, R. (2017). Produced water reuse for irrigation of non-food
biofuel crops: Effects on switchgrass and rapeseed germination, physiology and biomass yield. Industrial
crops and products 100: 65-76.
Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC). (2019). Managing wastewater in a changing climate.
https://www.ppic.org/wp-content/uploads/managing-wastewater-in-a-changing-climate.pdf
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-16
-------
Rahm, BG; Riha, SJ. (2014). Evolving shale gas management: Water resource risks, impacts, and lessons
learned. Environmental Science: Processes & Impacts 16: 1400-1412.
http://dx.doi.org/lQ.lQ39/C4EM00018H
Rao, P; Sholes, D; Cresko, J. (2019). Evaluation of U.S. manufacturing subsectors at risk of physical water
shortages. Environmental science & technology 53: 2295-2303.
Rice, J. (2014) Modeling occurrence and assessing public perceptions of de facto wastewater reuse
across the USA. (Doctorate of Philosophy). University of Arizona, Retrieved from
https://repository.asu.edu/attachments/135039/content/Rice_asu_0010E_13813.pdf
River Network. (2018). The power of our network. Annual report. River Network.
http://www.rivernetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2Q18/12/RiverNetwoAnnualReport-2Q18.pdf
Schoen, ME; Ashbolt, NJ; Jahne, MA; Garland, J. (2017). Risk-based enteric pathogen reduction targets
for non-potable and direct potable use of roof runoff, stormwater, and greywater. Microbial risk analysis
5: 32-43.
Schoen, ME; Garland, J. (2017). Review of pathogen treatment reductions for onsite non-potable reuse
of alternative source waters. Microbial risk analysis 5: 25-31.
Schoen, M; Jahne, M; Garland, J. (2018). Human health impact of cross-connections in non-potable
reuse systems. Water 10: 1352.
Sedlak, D. (2015). Water 4.0. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Sheikh, B. (2017). Significance to human health of carbamazepine detected in fruits and vegetables
irrigated with recycled water. Water Science and Technology 75: 1059-1062.
Shonkoff, S; Stringfellow, W; Domen, J. (2016). Preliminary hazard assessment of chemical additives
used in oil and gas fields that reuse their produced water for agricultural rrigation in the San Joaquin
Valley of California [Technical Report], Oakland, CA: PSE Healthy Energy, Inc.
Silva, TL; Morales-Torres, S; Castro-Silva, S; Figueiredo, JL; Silva, AM. (2017). An overview on exploration
and environmental impact of unconventional gas sources and treatment options for produced water.
Journal of environmental management 200: 511-529.
Skalak, KJ; Engle, MA; Rowan, EL; Jolly, GD; Conko, KM; Benthem, AJ; Kraemer, TF. (2014). Surface
disposal of produced waters in western and southwestern Pennsylvania: Potential for accumulation of
alkali-earth elements in sediments. International Journal of Coal Geology 126:162-170.
Soller, JA; Eftim, SE; Warren, I; Nappier, SP. (2017). Evaluation of microbiological risks associated with
direct potable reuse. Microbial risk analysis 5: 3-14.
Soller, JA; Eftim, SE; Nappier, SP. (2018). Direct potable reuse microbial risk assessment methodology:
Sensitivity analysis and application to State log credit allocations. Water research 128: 286-292.
State of California. (2016). California water action plan: Actions for reliability, restoration and resilience.
Szpaczynski, JA. (2019). The use of natural soil for the treatment of secondary effluent in a northern
climate. The First International Scientific Conference on Ecological and Environmental Engineering 86: 1-
9.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-17
-------
Tasker, T; Burgos, W; Piotrowski, P; Castillo-Meza, L; Blewett, T; Ganow, K; Stallworth, A; Delompre, P;
Goss, G; Fowler, L. (2018). Environmental and human health impacts of spreading oil and gas
wastewater on roads. Environmental science & technology 52: 7081-7091.
Torres, L; Yadav, OP; Khan, E. (2016). A review on risk assessment techniques for hydraulic fracturing
water and produced water management implemented in onshore unconventional oil and gas
production. Science of the Total Environment 539: 478-493.
Tran, QK; Jassby, D; Schwabe, KA. (2017). The implications of drought and water conservation on the
reuse of municipal wastewater: Recognizing impacts and identifying mitigation possibilities. Water
research 124: 472-481. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0043135417306425
Trump, D. (2018). Presidential Memorandum on promoting the reliable supply and delivery of water in
the west. Washington, DC: White House, Office of the President.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/presidential-memorandum-promoting-reliable-
supply-delivery-water-west/?mc_cid=46ed9122f7&mc_eid=92f6fcel82
U.S. DOE (United States Department of Energy). (2011). Institutional impediments to using alternative
water sources in thermoelectric power plants. (DOE/NETL-2011/1506). Washington, DC: National Energy
Technology Laboratory.
U.S. DOE (United States Department of Energy). (2018). Water security grand challenge. Washington,
DC: U.S. DOE Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, https://www.energv.gov/eere/water-
securitv-grand-challenge
U.S. DOI (United States Department of Interior). (2014). Development of methodologies to evaluate the
environmental, financial, and social benefits of water reuse projects. Washington, DC: U.S. DOI Bureau
of Reclamation, Research and Development Office.
https://www. usbr.gov/research/projects/detail. cfm?id=4180
U.S. DOI (United States Department of Interior). (2016). WaterSMART progress report 2010-2016.
Washington, DC: U.S. DOI Bureau of Reclamation.
https://www.usbr.gov/watersmart/docs/2016/2016watersmartprogressreport.pdf
U.S. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). (1972). Water supply-wastewater treatment
coordination study. (Contract No. 68-01-5033). Washington, DC: U.S. EPA Office of Drinking Water.
https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZvPDF.cgi/9100W55U.PDF?Dockev=9100W55U.PDF
U.S. EPA. (1980). Industrial reuse and recycle of wastewaters: Literature review. (EPA/600/2-80/183).
Ada, OK: U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development, Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research
Laboratory.
U.S. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). (2012a). 2012 guidelines for water reuse.
(EPA/600/R-12/618). Washington, DC: U.S. EPA Office of Water, Office of Wastewater Management.
https://www3.epa.gov/regionl/npdes/merrimackstation/pdfs/ar/AR-1530.pdf
U.S. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). (2012b). Integrated municipal stormwater
and wastewater planning approach framework. Washington, DC: U.S. EPA Office of Water.
https://www3.epa.gov/npdes/pubs/integrated planning framework.pdf
U.S. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). (2012c). Total water management.
(EPA/600/R-12/551). Washington, DC: U.S. EPA Office of Research and Development, National Risk
Management Research Laboratory. https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi?Dockey=P100EYEP.txt
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-18
-------
U.S. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). (2015). Safe and sustainable water resources
strategic research action plan 2016-2019. (EPA/601/K-15/004). Washington, DC: U.S. EPA Office of
Research and Development, https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-
10/documents/strap_2016_sswr_508.pdf
U.S. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). (2018a). 2017 potable reuse compendium.
(EPA/810/R-17/002). Washington, DC: U.S. EPA Office of Ground Water and Drinking Water.
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2Q18-Ql/documents/potablereusecompendium 3.pdf
U.S. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). (2018b). Detailed study of the centralized
waste treatment point source category for facilities managing oil and gas extraction wastes. (EPA/821/R-
18/004). Washington, DC: U.S. EPA Office of Water, Engineering and Analysis Division.
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2Q18-Q5/documents/cwt-study rnay-2Q18.pdf
U.S. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). (2018c). FY 2018-2022 U.S. EPA strategic
plan. Washington, DC. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2Q18-Q2/docurnents/fy-2Q18-2Q22-
epa-strategic-plan.pdf
U.S. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). (2018d). Mainstreaming potable water reuse
in the United States: Strategies for leveling the playing field. Washington, DC: U.S. EPA, Reinvention the
Nation's Urban Water Infrastructure (ReNUWIt) & Johnson Foundation at Wingspread.
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2Q18-
04/documents/mainstreaming potable water reuse april 2018 final for web.pdf
U.S. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). (2018e). Oil and gas produced water
governance in the State of New Mexico - Draft white paper. Washington, DC: U.S. EPA & the State of
New Mexico. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2Q18-
11/docurnents/oil and natural gas produced water governance in the state of new mexico draft
white paper 5Q8.pdf
U.S. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). (2018f). National water program guidance FY
2018-2019. (EPA/800/D-17/001). Washington, DC. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2017-
09/documents/fyl8-19-ow-npm-guidance.pdf
U.S. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). (2018g). Public meeting EPA oil and gas
extraction study effluent guidelines program. October 9, 2018. Washington, DC: U.S. EPA Office of
Water, https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-10/documents/epa_oil-gas-study_public-
meeting_10-09-2018.pdf
U.S. EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). (2019). Study of oil and gas extraction
wastewater management under the clean water act. (EPA/821/R-19/001). Washington, DC: U.S. EPA
Office of Water, Engineering and Analysis Division. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2Q18-
05/documents/cwt-study may-2Q18.pdf
U.S. GAO (United States Government Accountability Office). (2014). Freshwater: Supply concerns
continue, and uncertainties complicate planning. (GAO-14-430). Washington, DC.
https://www.gao.gov/assets/67Q/663343.pdf
United States Conference of Mayors. (2017). The 85th annual meeting of the conference of mayors.
United States Congress. (2016). Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act. (Public Law 114-
322). Washington, DC: United States Legislative Branch.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-19
-------
United States Department of State. (2017). US Government global water strategy. Washington, DC:
United States Department of State & United States Agency for International Development (USAID).
https://web.archive.Org/web/20181202100824/https://www.state.gov/documents/organization/27584
2.pdf
United States Water Alliance. (2017a). A guidebook for developing and implementing regulations for
onsite non-potable water systems. Alexandria, VA: National Blue Ribbon Commission for Onsite Non-
potable Water Systems, United States Water Alliance, Water Environment & Reuse Foundation and
Water Research Foundation.
http://yswateralliance.org/sites/yswateralliance.org/files/NBRC%20GUIDEBOOK%20FOR%20DEVELQPI
NG%200NWS%20REGUL.AT10NS.pdf
United States Water Alliance. (2017b). One water for America policy framework. Alexandria, VA.
http://yswateralliance.org/sites/yswateralliance.org/files/publications/One%20Water%20for%20Ameri
ca%20Policv%20Framework%20Executive%20Summary.pdf
United States Water Alliance. (2018a). Making the utility case for onsite non-potable water systems.
Alexandria, VA: National Blue Ribbon Commission for Onsite Non-potable Water Systems, United States
Water Alliance & The Water Research Foundation.
http://uswateralliance.org/sites/uswateralliance.org/files/publications/NBRC Utility%20Case%20for%2
OONWS 032818.pdf.pdf
United States Water Alliance. (2019a). One water for American state policymakers' toolkit. Alexandria,
VA: U.S. Water Alliance & The Council of State Governments.
http://yswateralliance.org/sites/yswateralliance.org/files/State%20Policymakers%27%20Toolkit.pdf
United States Water Alliance. (2019b). Resources for onsite non-potable water programs. Alexandria,
VA: National Blue Ribbon Commission for Onsite Non-potable Water Systems.
http://uswateralliance.org/initiatives/commission/resources
USAPHC (United States Army Public Health Command). (2014). Water reuse in contingency operations: A
strategy for comprehensive health risk management. Army Institute of Public Health.
https://phc.amedd.army.mil/PHC%20Resource%20Library/TG364a Water Reuse in Contingency Oper
ations 2014.pdf
USDA (United States Department of Agriculture). (2004). Agriculture water security listening session
final report. Washington, DC: USDA Research, Education and Economics Mission Area.
USDA (United States Department of Agriculture). (2016). Water availability and watershed management
action plan 2016-2020. (National Program 211: Water Availability and Watershed Management).
Washington, DC: USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS). https://www.ars.usda.gov/natural-
resources-and-sustainable-agricultural-systems/water-availability-and-watershed-
management/docs/action-plans
USDA (United States Department of Agriculture). (2017). Report to the President of the United States
from the Task Force on Agriculture and Rural Prosperity. Washington, DC: USDA Task Force on
Agriculture and Rural Prosperity, https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/rural-prosperity-
report.pdf
USDA (United States Department of Agriculture). (2019). Managing water for increased resiliency of
drained agricultural landscapes. Washington, DC: USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture.
https://transformingdrainage.org/
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-20
-------
Wall, GL; Clements, DP; Fisk, CL; Stoeckel, DM; Woods, KL; Bihn, EA. (2019). Meeting report: Key
outcomes from a collaborative summit on agricultural water standards for fresh produce.
Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety 18: 723-737.
WateReuse Association. (2014). The opportunities and economics of direct potable reuse. Project
synopsis. (WRRF-14-08). https://watereuse.org/watereuse-research/the-opportunities-and-economics-
of-direct-potable-reuse/
WateReuse Association. (2015). Framework for direct potable reuse. (Project 14-20). WateReuse
Association, American Water Works Association, Water Environment Federation & National Water
Research Institute. https://watereuse.org/wp-content/uploads/2Q15/09/14-2Q.pdf
WateReuse Association. (2018a). Proceedings of the 33rd Annual WateReuse Symposium, September 9-
12, 2018.
WateReuse Association. (2018b). Water reuse: Transforming water, sustaining our future.
https://watereuse.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Water-Reuse-Transforming-Water-Sustaining-Our-
Future.pdf
WateReuse California. (2019). California WateReuse action plan, https://watereuse.org/wp-
content/uploads/2Q19/Q7/WateReuse-CA-Action-Plan July-2019 r5~2.pdf
WateReuse Colorado. (2018a). Advancing direct potable reuse to optimize water supplies and meet
future demands. Executive summary. https://watereuse.org/wp-content/uploads/2Q15/Q3/WRCO-
DPR Executive-Summary Sep-2Q18.pdf
WateReuse Colorado. (2018b). Advancing direct potable reuse to optimize water supplies and meet
future demands; Technical memorandum 1: Development of DPR regulations in Colorado.
https://watereuse.org/wp-content/uploads/2Q15/Q3/WRCO-Regulating-DPR-in-Colorado TM1 July-
2Q18.pdf
WateReuse Colorado. (2018c). Advancing direct potable reuse to optimize water supplies and meet
future demands; Technical memorandum 2: Communications and outreach plan for direct potable reuse
in Colorado. https://watereuse.org/wp-content/uploads/2Q15/Q3/WRCQ-Cornrnunications-and-
Qutreach-Plan-for-DPR-in-Colorado TM2 July-2Q18.pdf
WateReuse Colorado. (2018d). Advancing direct potable reuse to optimize water supplies and meet
future demands; Technical memorandum 3: Potable reuse planning tools and case studies.
https://watereuse.org/wp-content/uploads/2Q15/Q3/WRCQ-PotableReusePlanningTool-
CaseStudies TM3 Sep~2Q18.pdf
WE&RF (Water Environment & Reuse Foundation). (2016a). Critical control point assessment to quantify
robustness and reliability of multiple treatment barriers of a DPR scheme. (Project No. Reuse-13-03).
Alexandria, VA.
WE&RF (Water Environment & Reuse Foundation). (2016b). Development of an operation and
maintenance plan and training and certification for Direct Potable Reuse (DPR) systems. (Project No.
Reuse-13-13). Alexandria, VA.
WE&RF (Water Environment & Reuse Foundation). (2016c). A framework for the successful
implementation of on-site industrial water reuse. (Project No. Reuse-14-04). Alexandria, VA.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-21
-------
WE&RF (Water Environment & Reuse Foundation). (2016d). Monitoring for reliability and process
control of potable reuse applications. (Project No. Reuse-11-01). Alexandria, VA.
WE&RF (Water Environment & Reuse Foundation). (2016e). Equivalency of advanced treatment trains
for potable reuse. (Project No. Reuse-11-02). Alexandria, VA.
WE&RF (Water Environment & Reuse Foundation). (2017a). Guidelines for source water control options
and the impact of selected strategies on direct potable reuse. (Project No. Reuse-13-12). Alexandria, VA.
WE&RF (Water Environment & Reuse Foundation). (2017b). Risk-based framework for the development
of public health guidance for decentralized non-potable water systems. (Project No. SIWM10C15).
Alexandria, VA.
WEF (Water Environment Federation). (2018a). Baseline data to establish the current amount of
resource recovery from WRRFs. (WSEC-2018-TR-003). Alexandria, VA: Water Environment Federation.
https://www.wef.org/globalassets/assets-wef/direct-download-librarv/public/03—resources/WSEC-
201S-TR-003
WEF (Water Environment Federation). (2018b). Water reuse roadmap. Alexandria, VA: Water
Environment Federation.
Western Resource Advocates. (2017). A survey of key states' regulatory approaches to water reuse.
Boulder, CO. https://westemresourceadvocates.org/publications/a-survev-of-kev-states-regulatory-
approaches-to-water-reuse/
Western States Water Council. (2012). Water reuse in the west: State programs and institutional issues.
https://repository.uchastings.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1281&context=hastings_environmental_l
awjournal
WHO (World Health Organization). (1989). Health guidelines for the use of wastewater in agriculture
and aquaculture. Geneva, Switzerland. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/lQ665/39401
WHO (World Health Organization). (2017). Potable reuse: Guidance for producing safe drinking water.
Geneva, Switzerland, https://www.who.iiit/water sanitation health/publications/potable-reuse-
guidelines/en/
Wiener, MJ; Jafvert, CT; Nies, LF. (2016). The assessment of water use and reuse through reported data:
A US case study. Science of the Total Environment 539: 70-77.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/SQQ48969715306161
WRF (Water Research Foundation). (2017a). Blueprint for one water. (Project No. 4660). Alexandria, VA.
http://www.waterrf.org/PublicReportLibrary/466Q.pdf
WRF (Water Research Foundation). (2017b). Potable reuse research compilation: Synthesis of findings.
(Project No. Reuse-15-01). Alexandria, VA. http://www.waterrf.org/Pages/Projects.aspx?PID=4645
WRF (Water Research Foundation). (2018a). Agricultural sector research efforts, factsheet. Alexandria,
VA.
WRF (Water Research Foundation). (2018b). Curriculum and content for potable reuse operator training.
(Project No. Reuse-15-05/4772). Alexandria, VA.
WRF (Water Research Foundation). (2018c). From collection systems to tap: Resilience of treatment
processes for direct potable reuse. (Project No. Reuse-14-13/4fapp766). Alexandria, VA.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-22
-------
WRF (Water Research Foundation). (2018d). Pathogen risk evaluation of treatment and monitoring
system performance for potable reuse. (Project No. Reuse-14-16). Alexandria, VA.
WRF (Water Research Foundation). (2018e). Reuse in fracking. (Project No. Reuse-14-05/4927).
Alexandria, VA.
WRF (Water Research Foundation). (2018f). Review of non-culture-based methods for pathogen
monitoring in potable reuse. (Project No. Reuse-14-17/4768). Alexandria, VA.
WRF (Water Research Foundation). (2018g). White paper on water reuse in hydraulic fracturing. (Project
No. Reuse-14-05/4927). Alexandria, VA.
WRF (Water Research Foundation). (2019a). Active research in water reuse. Alexandria, VA.
WRF (Water Research Foundation). (2019b). Agricultural use of recycled water: Impediments and
incentives. (Project No. Reuse-15-08/4775). Alexandria, VA.
WRF (Water Research Foundation). (2019c). Non-potable reuse research portfolio. Alexandria, VA.
WRF (Water Research Foundation). (2019d). Reuse 101 outreach materials. Alexandria, VA.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | C-23
-------
Appendix D: Compilation of Ideas/Actions
from Outreach
NATIONAL WATER REUSE
ACTION PLAN
DRAFT
-------
Appendix D: Compilation of Ideas/Actions from Outreach
Appendix D presents high-level action items provided during extensive outreach throughout the
development of the draft Action Plan. Between November 2018 and August 2019, the EPA attended
more than 20 public forums and met with an estimated 2,300 stakeholders with an interest in water
reuse.
Event
Event
Date
Resource Revolution of Water Reuse (Wharton, IGEL, Suez)
2/27/2019
WateReuse California Annual Conference (Garden Grove, CA)
3/15/2019
ACWA Mid-Year Meeting (Alexandria, VA)
3/19/2019
ASDWA Member Meeting (Alexandria, VA)
3/25/2019
Water Policy Fly In (Washington, DC)
3/31/2019
National Tribal Water Council
4/8/2019
National Blue Ribbon Commission for Onsite Non-potable Water Systems
4/11/2019
WateReuse Association Convening (Los Angeles, CA)
4/18/2019
WaterVent (Philadelphia, PA)
4/24/2019
State/EPA SRF Workgroup
4/26/2019
WateReuse Association Convening (Washington, DC)
5/9/2019
UNC Water Microbiology Conference (Chapel Hill, NC)
5/13/2019
NACWA Pretreatment and Pollution Prevention Workshop (Tacoma, WA)
5/15/2019
Idaho Reuse and Operators Conference (Boise, ID)
5/21/2019
WateReuse Webinar
5/21/2019
Club 20 - Western Colorado Fly-In (Washington, DC)
5/22/2019
ACWA ASDWA Webinar Series
6/5/2019
WEF Mid-2019 Federal Legislative and Regulatory Update Webcast
6/13/2019
IWA International Conference on Water Reclamation and Reuse (Berlin, Germany)
6/16/2019
Zero Mass Water Convening (Washington, DC)
6/17/2019
Region 6 Stormwater Conference (Denton, TX)
7/29/2019
National Tribal Caucus
8/7/2019
ACWA ASDWA Webinar Series
8/7/2019
New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission
8/8/2019
National Tribal Water Council
8/14/2019
Outreach included meetings with federal partners, states, non-governmental organizations, the water
sector, utilities, technology developers, and academia. High-level actions identified through outreach
are organized by the strategic objectives outlined in the draft Action Plan (Section 2.0).
Disclaimer
Actions are intended to serve as a high-level sampling of actions identified during outreach. Actions are
not listed in order of significance. Additional suggested actions and discussions with reuse stakeholders
are welcome to ensure that a robust set of action ideas related to water reuse are assessed and
considered.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | D-l
-------
Section 2.1—Enable Consideration of Water Reuse with Integrated and Collaborative
Action at the Watershed Scale
• Publish a policy statement/message that has all relevant federal agency logos.
o Clarify continued collaborations with the National Association of Clean Water Agencies, the
Water Research Foundation, the American Water Works Association, the Water Environment
Federation, and the WateReuse Association.
• Transparency and effective communication between the EPA and states—convene face to face
meetings with state regulators to solicit feedback.
• Relevant state examples:
o Maryland state example: Leverage actions and resources to utilize water reuse for mitigating
water supply issues (in state of Maryland and other similar cases).
o New York state example: Leverage actions and resources to utilize water reuse for mitigating
groundwater contamination issues (being investigated in New York).
o West Virginia state example: Leverage actions and resources to convert mine pools into water
reuse opportunities (potential ownership by West Virginia Department of Environmental
Protection).
Section 2.2—Coordinate and Integrate Federal, State, Tribal, and Local Water Programs
and Policies
• Produce "go-to" best management practices for specific reuse applications for states' use. Other
similar ideas (some may be redundant):
o Develop federal permitting and total maximum daily load guidance to facilitate reuse.
o Federal agencies should provide clarification on where reuse falls with respect to the Clean
Water Act (CWA) and the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA)—NPDES permitting, etc.
o The EPA should develop a "how-to" on regulations and identify where there is flexibility.
o Work with state and local water districts on permitting issues.
o Provide guidance on regulatory flexibility applicability.
o Provide guidance on navigating non-compliance events related to reuse operations,
o Add clarity to "gray zones" between the CWA and the SDWA.
o The EPA can assist local governments with source control efforts using its authority under the
CWA; the Toxic Release Inventory under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to Know
Act; the Toxic Substances Control Act; the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act;
and other environmental statutes that may be applicable.
o Utilize the NPDES pretreatment program to achieve source control, especially for "difficult-to-
treat" industrial pollutants before they get into wastewater collection systems.
• Add to source-control action:
o Develop comprehensive source control plans, to be part of any comprehensive master plans, to
eliminate pathways of pollutants and emerging contaminants, including well head protection
and pollutant source control for urban and agricultural runoff.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | D-2
-------
• Create an integrated permitting process that addresses all applicable regulatory processes in a more
streamlined way for reuse.
o Create a unified regulatory/permitting framework so that there are not conflicting or duplicative
requirements resulting from potential reuse entities having to deal with two or more different
regulatory frameworks.
• Develop national standards and regulations, explicitly, to sustain water reuse through time,
operations, maintenance, and staffing.
o For onsite reuse, standardized regulations can lead to standardized technologies across states.
o For potable reuse, national water quality requirements for direct potable reuse (DPR) (as
authorized under SDWA), rather than state-specific water quality requirements, will avoid
confusion.
o Support state efforts on enforcement/compliance of operating or proposed potable reuse
systems.
o For agriculture, national and state overview of water quality requirements and guidance for
reuse water.
o Identify agency roles and authority in setting standards and regulating reuse,
o (A few stakeholders said do not develop national standards/regulations.)
Section 2.3—Compile and Refine Fit-for-Purpose Specifications
• Identify and champion additional/increased testing requirements that would promote public
understanding of potable reuse projects. Promote work to define critical control points.
o Develop a list of pathogens and currently unregulated contaminants that need to be monitored
in finished drinking water, and what levels are acceptable.
o Develop national guidance for contaminants of emerging concern (CECs), as many do not have
health guidance to provide a basis for regulations and/or permitting.
• The EPA should recommend a viral indicator (coliphage) to ensure a cleaner effluent for reuse
projects using municipal effluent.
o Develop federal guidance or expanded CT-tables to determine log treatment values to address
wastewater effluent rather than just surface water effluent.
• Develop federal guidance on how states can efficiently study and approve pathogen treatment
credits for log treatment values.
o Develop updated pathogen removal and inactivation tables or guidance on how the existing
information can be applied.
o Compile information on fit-for-purpose requirements across states for different end uses.
Section 2.4—Promote Technology Development, Deployment, and Validation
• Create a certification for treatment technologies so that they do not have to be re-piloted/tested in
every project/state.
o Federal partners should revive new technology review/validation processes for filter/membrane
systems, real-time sensors, and groundwater infiltration media.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | D-3
-------
• Develop a process to allow pilot studies to validate treatment technologies. New contaminant risk
thresholds are needed (no Maximum Contaminant Level for CECs).
o Establish industry best practices in the area of monitoring—what to monitor (surrogates and
constituents), where to monitor, and how often would be helpful, particularly within the
potable reuse area.
• The DOE/EPA should champion the first modular challenge (Grand Water Security Challenge—Goal
5) focused on monitoring systems to ensure that the systems are working (ramp up, ongoing
ops/maintenance) with minimal onsite operator involvement.
• More R&D needs:
o R&D of improved monitoring tools.
o R&D of real-time sensors (and response systems, as well as event detection systems),
o R&D of brine management technologies,
o R&D for CEC monitoring and evaluation,
o R&D onsite farm water treatment options,
o R&D bioassays/assays for norovirus infectivity.
o R&D of the effectiveness soil systems in filtering emerging contaminants.
Section 2.5—Improve Availability of Water Information
• Create a portal that improves data sharing of information among states and allows for data sharing
among stakeholders (as well as access to water quality data), including criteria for acceptable water
quality. This could include sharing case studies and reuse planning frameworks.
• Identify ways to share information on sensor technology and data analysis methods to work on high-
volume data.
• The EPA and the U.S. Geological Survey will coordinate to identify water use and availability/data
needs.
• Create interactive maps of where water reuse is in place across the states, regions, and the nation.
Section 2.6—Facilitate Financial Support for Water Reuse
• Identify, align, and publicize funding options other than the Water Infrastructure Finance and
Innovation Act (WIFIA) and State Revolving Funds (SRFs)—e.g., FEMA and the USDA—to fund the
construction of new reuse projects and maintenance of existing projects.
o Use Water Smart Innovation Funds and Environmental Finance Centers (EFCs) to provide
financial support and assistance for reuse projects.
• Create an action related to SRFs: Assess use of SRF funds for reuse; restore SRFs ("low SRF funds are
single-most barrier to states") to fully fund state water programs, so states interested in
promulgating a particular reuse regulation can hire and procure support.
o Make developing an integrated water plan a precondition for receiving WIFIA or SRF funding,
o Clarify eligibility for hybrid state water projects for SRF/WIFIA funding,
o Explore ways to better leverage SRF and WIFIA funds; more state loan forgiveness,
o Tribal set-asides for innovation and water reuse.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | D-4
-------
o Change resource allocations in other EPA programs to more fully staff this priority area.
o Develop more SRF capitalization and provide guidance on how to be effective in competing for
SRF loans.
• Identify ways to incentivize decentralized peri-urban smaller systems' sale of effluent to/for
agriculture applications.
o Engage the U.S. Green Building Council; encourage them to give credits for decentralized reuse
applications.
• Increase funding/resources to allow state entities to further DPR regulatory framework
development efforts (specific to DPR).
Section 2.7—Integrate and Coordinate Research on Water Reuse
• The EPA (or an Agency workgroup?) to provide expertise and serve as a technical resource to states
for evaluating variable source waters for reuse projects (loglO reduction target (LRTs), risk
assessment).
o Change resource allocations in other EPA programs to more fully staff this priority area.
o Develop standards development frameworks tailored for stormwater capture and comparisons
of current state implementation practices.
• Conduct/initiate targeted workshops/convenings/workgroups for various types of reuse applications
(already have stormwater/produced water actions for this).
• Suggested research needs—opportunity to use STAR Grants:
o Review the public health implications of indirect and DPR.
o Evaluate the long-term effects, costs, and environmental implications of disposal of the
concentrate and brine waste product/discharge capacity effects; explore environmentally
acceptable alternatives for concentrate and brine management.
o Evaluate minimum instream flows and impacts associated with nutrient-related ocean
acidification.
o Understand the risk of unregulated chemicals using bioanalytical tools for a range of health
endpoints.
o Use non-targeted analyses to identify unknown chemical compounds in recycled water to assist
with technology validation.
o Expand research of salt-tolerance among landscaping flora in addition to agricultural products.
o Research the eco-effects of using reused water for artificial snowmaking, both for recreation
and to generally increase/delay snowpack/runoff.
o Collect national stormwater quality data (pathogen loads).
Section 2.8—Improve Outreach and Communication on Water Reuse
• Develop a curriculum to educate public health professionals, medical professionals, and others in
the public health community about reuse generally and potential health risks associated with water
reuse. This will strengthen communication with stakeholders and promote water reuse to the
public.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | D-5
-------
o Develop practical tools to assist in public and decision-maker risk communication and building
consumer confidence in recycled water.
• The federal family could convene to envision ways to advance fit-for-purpose applications of water
reuse on federal land or facilities within these organizations' purview.
o Example: The EPA could work with the General Services Administration in reviewing the
federally owned portfolio of buildings to identify candidates for onsite non-potable water
systems, particularly in water-stressed areas.
• Create national-level messaging around reuse benefits and successes in tandem with discussion of
the public health and environmental protection safeguards. Use examples of case studies for public
outreach in order to "open peoples' eyes" to reuse and the multiple benefits.
• The EPA and other agencies to attend and/or hold national- and regional-scale convenings with a
small number of attendees. Or initiate state convenings to discuss water reuse at Association of
Clean Water Administrators, Association of State Drinking Water Administrators, and WateReuse
Association events.
• Create outreach opportunities to educate buyers of produce grown with recycled water, third
parties, and commodity groups.
• Foster mobile pilots and demo facilities (trailers).
Section 2.9—Support a Talented and Dynamic Workforce
• Establish certification program for operator training for reuse facilities. This is specifically needed for
potable reuse (wastewater treatment plant/drinking water treatment plant nexus) and onsite non-
potable reuse.
• Establish increased training opportunities for state staff facing the challenge of addressing new
technologies. For example:
o If chemical monitoring is to be completed at the system level, additional operations and
sampling training will be needed, including clarification on methods for data integrity and
reporting.
o If monitoring is to be completed by the state, additional resources, funding, and staff time
would be required.
Section 2.10—Develop Water Reuse Metrics that Support Goals and Measure Progress
• Conduct a volumetric survey in all or many states to help individuals understand the potential
volumes re-routed for beneficial reuse, and volumes already being reused elsewhere.
• Establish consistency and consensus on baselines across the various reuse applications and
industries. This would facilitate more reuse and would assist in developing public
understanding/awareness/acceptance.
• Identify metrics to track permitted reuse activities.
Other Potential Ideas
• Water rights:
o Develop a compendium of water rights issues and solutions.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | D-6
-------
o The EPA or another federal agency should develop tools such as user-friendly digital interfaces
that help water users/suppliers navigate complex water rights/trading issues—trade water
quantity for quality (a Utah example).
o Clarify how state water rights authorize/impede types of reuse (inclusive of stormwater capture,
reuse), and collect and share examples of how states do this and handle the water rights
elements of this.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | D-7
-------
Appendix E: Compilation of Public Comments
from the Docket
NATIONAL WATER REUSE
ACTION PLAN
DRAFT
-------
Appendix E: Compilation of Ideas/Actions from the Public Docket and
List of Commenters
The EPA opened a public docket (EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174) to collect early input and ideas to inform
development of the draft Action Plan. The Agency posted a document titled Discussion Framework for
Development of a Draft Water Reuse Action Plan (Appendix A) to provide context and details for
reference during the comment period.
This appendix provides an index to navigate public comments; it also provides a high-level overview of
ideas and actions from public input. To gain a full appreciation for the depth of thinking behind each
input, readers are encouraged to review the relevant comment in the docket. The full comment
submittals are available for review online at the following location:
https://www.regy lations.gov/docket?D=EPA-HQ-OW-2Q19-01?4.
Disclaimer
The actions included below are not listed in order of significance and are not necessarily presented
verbatim. The list of actions is not intended to be exhaustive.
Index of Comments from the Public Docket
The public docket, which was open from April 18 to July 1, 2019,1 received 55 submissions,2 many of
which were very thoughtful and detailed. On aggregate, 530 pages of material were shared, averaging
more than nine pages per submission.
The comments received represent the opinions and ideas from a broad set of organizations and entities.
For example, the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators (ASDWA) and the Association of
Clean Water Administrators (ACWA) submitted joint comments that reflect the interests of the state
Clean Water Act (CWA) and Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) authorities, while the National Association
of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA) submitted comments in representation of the wastewater
community. As well, the WateReuse Association (WRA) submitted a convening report (Appendix F),
signed by the heads of six water and wastewater associations, that presents key outcomes from two
WRA-led workshops on the draft WRAP with more than 100 total participants. Representatives from
communities, industry, academic institutions, and individuals also contributed comments to the public
docket.
The following table presents public comments in order by docket ID number (small to large). Each full
comment can be accessed by clicking the docket ID number.
Docket ID Number
Date Posted
Commenter
Affiliation
5/10/2019
Anonymous
—
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0004
5/10/2019
Zohreh Movahed
WATEK Engineering Corporation
1 Submissions shared following the closing of the docket were manually uploaded by the EPA with permissions from the
entities.
2 The docket tally indicates that 56 comments were received; however, one was a test submission and was therefore not
published.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | E-l
-------
Docket ID Number
Date Posted
Commenter
Affiliation
5/10/2019
D.ivid Kujnwski, Vice
President, Process
Engineering
Refinery Wastewater Associates
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0006
5/10/2019
David Kujawski
(continuation from 0005)
Refinery Wastewater Associates
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0007
5/21/2019
Abril Herrera
Rio Plaza
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0008
5/21/2019
Nitesh Dullabh
2POD VENTURES
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0009
5/21/2019
Emily Remmel, Director
of Regulatory Affairs
NACWA
EPA-HQ-QW-2019-0174-0010
5/28/2019
Mark Millan
Data Instincts
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0011
6/11/2019
Kim Dirks, Senior
Director, Environmental
Services
Tyson Foods, Inc.
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0012
6/12/2019
Anonymous
U.S. Chamber of Commerce
Business Task Force on Water
Policy
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0013
6/12/2019
Matt Sigler, Technical
Director
Plumbing Manufacturers
International
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0014
6/12/2019
Anonymous
Sustainablewater.com
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0015
6/21/2019
David Sedlak, Deputy
Director
National Science Foundation's
Engineering Research Center for
Re-inventing the Nation's Urban
Water Infrastructure (ReNUWIt)
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0016
6/25/2019
Diane VanDe Hei, Chief
Executive Officer
Association of Metropolitan
Water Agencies
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0017
6/25/2019
A.R. Rubin
NCSU-BAE, A. R. Rubin and
Associates
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0018
6/25/2019
Anonymous
—
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0019
6/26/2019
Pinar Balci, Assistant
Commissioner, Bureau of
Environmental Planning
and Analysis
New York City Department of
Environmental Protection
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0020
7/2/2019
Natalie Mamerow
American Society of Civil
Engineers
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0021
7/2/2019
Anonymous
—
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0022
7/2/2019
Evelyn Rivera Ocasio,
President
American Association of Sanitary
and Environmental Engineering
(AIDIS-Puerto Rico)
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0023
7/2/2019
Lori Traweek
Gulf Coast Authority
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0024
7/2/2019
Anonymous
—
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0025
7/2/2019
Sandeep Burman,
Manager, Drinking Water
Protection Section,
Environmental Health
Division
Minnesota Department of Health
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | E-2
-------
Docket ID Number
Date Posted
Commenter
Affiliation
7/2/2019
G.irl.md Erbele, St.ite
Engineer
North D.ikot.i Office of the St.ite
Engineer
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0027
7/2/2019
Bruce Thompson,
President
American Exploration and
Production Council
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0028
7/2/2019
Brian A. Perkovich,
Executive Director
Metropolitan Water Reclamation
District of Greater Chicago
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0029
7/2/2019
Cynthia Koehler,
Executive Director;
Clarence E. Anthony,
Executive Director
WaterNow Alliance; National
League of Cities
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0030
7/2/2019
Siva Sarathy, Senior
Scientist, Research and
Development
Trojan Technologies
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0031
7/2/2019
Anonymous
Clean Water Action and Clean
Water Fund
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0032
7/2/2019
Pat Sinicropi, Executive
Director
WateReuse Association et al.
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0033
7/2/2019
Martha Tremblay,
Department Head,
Technical Services
Department
Sanitation Districts of Los
Angeles County
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0034
7/2/2019
Kelley Gage, Director of
Water Resources
San Diego County Water
Authority
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0035
7/10/2019
Ben Perlman, President
Smart Water Group
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0036
7/10/2019
Stan Hazan, Senior
Director, Regulatory
Affairs
NSF International
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0037
7/10/2019
Scott Thompson,
Executive Director
Oklahoma Department of
Environmental Quality
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0038
7/10/2019
Nichole Saunders, Senior
Attorney
Environmental Defense Fund
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0039
7/10/2019
Edward A. Clerico, CEO
Emeritus
Natural Systems Utilities
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0040
7/10/2019
Anonymous
Florida Department of
Environmental Protection
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0041
7/10/2019
J. Alan Roberson,
Executive Director; Julia
Anastasio, Executive
Director
ACWA; ASDWA
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0042
7/10/2019
Peter DeMarco
Plumbing Industry Leadership
Coalition
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0043
7/10/2019
Darren W. Gore, Assistant
City Manager
Murfreesboro, Tennessee, Water
Resources Department
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0044
7/10/2019
Amy Emmert, Senior
Policy Advisor
American Petroleum Institute
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | E-3
-------
Docket ID Number
Date Posted
Commenter
Affiliation
7/10/2019
Wenonah Hauter,
Executive Director
Food & Water Watch
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0046
7/10/2019
Daniel Cole
International Association of
Plumbing and Mechanical
Officials
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0047
7/10/2019
Peter DeMarco
(same comment as 0049,
with additional signatory)
Plumbing Industry Leadership
Coalition
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0048
7/10/2019
G. Tracy Mehan, III,
Executive Director
American Water Works
Association
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0049
7/10/2019
Anonymous
Metropolitan North Georgia
Water Planning District
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0050
7/10/2019
Julia Wiener, Ph.D.
Candidate
Purdue University
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0051
7/10/2019
Mark Pestrella, Director
of Public Works; Daniel J.
Laferty, Deputy Director
County of Los Angeles; Los
Angeles County Flood Control
District
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0052
7/10/2019
Anonymous
Pacific Institute
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0053
7/10/2019
Gabe Maser, Vice
President, Government
Relations
International Code Council
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0054
7/10/2019
Nick Weigel; Regina
Hirsch; Tony Madrone;
Laura Allen (Board of
Directors)
California Onsite Water
Association
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0055
8/1/2019
Maria Cahill
Recode
EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0056
8/1/2019
James D. Herberg
Orange County Sanitation District
Examples of Ideas/Actions from the Public Docket by WRAP Strategic Objective
The following sections are intended to serve as a high-level sampling and summary of suggested actions
submitted through the public docket. Actions are arranged by the most relevant strategic objectives
outlined in the draft Action Plan (Sections 2.1 through 2.10).
Section 2.1—Enable Consideration of Water Reuse with Integrated and Collaborative Action at
the Watershed Scale
• Examine what, if any, regulatory restrictions may impede or disincentivize water reuse and
formulate rules and guidelines that would instead promote such practices.
• Provide summaries of applicable state and local ordinances addressing water reuse; develop
guidance for state and local water planning efforts to include water reuse in comprehensive water
plans.
• Incentivize jurisdictions at the state and local levels to adopt codes and standards that promote
water efficiency and reuse, including ICC's IPC, IRC, IgCC, the CSA B805-2018/ICC 805-2018
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | E-4
-------
Rainwater Harvesting Standard, the ASABE/ICC 802-2014 Landscape Irrigation Sprinkler and Emitter
Standard, and the BSR/RESNET/ICC 1101-201x Water Rating Index Standard.
• Develop guidance and suggested options for integrated planning portfolios, where each option
meets the critical end-use needs but also includes distinct benefits (e.g., water reuse and
groundwater replenishment).
o Recognize and support local and state efforts that consider social, environmental, and financial
benefits and are sustainable in the long run.
• Create onsite reuse targets (e.g., percentage goals) for onsite non-potable supplies, such as
rainwater or graywater.
• Create a taxonomy for alternative water sources with respect to their reuse potential, treatment
requirements for intended use, risk, and affordability to help local jurisdictions assess what is their
"low-hanging fruit" for reuse.
Section 2.2—Coordinate and Integrate Federal, State, Tribal, and Local Water Programs and
Policies
• Federal agencies should integrate and harmonize federal policies that have the potential to impact
the quality of reclaimed water.
• Create a voluntary participation program to encourage the development and use of reclaimed
water. Could be modeled after the Green Power Partnership Program and provide resources and
recognition for various categories of producers, purveyors, and users of reclaimed water.
• Develop guidance on different sampling requirements based on type of reuse (e.g., direct vs.
indirect), type of source water (e.g., municipal wastewater vs. industrial) and intended use of water
(e.g., drinking water vs. agriculture).
• Integrate water reuse into USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) farm support
programs. Opportunities for increasing water reuse may include additions or revisions to
conservation practice standards, Conservation Stewardship Program enhancements, conservation
activity plans, and scenarios in cost calculations.
• Advance salinity management nationally for agricultural-sector as well as other types of water
reuse. Actions might include WaterSense labeling, discouraging use of cation exchange water
softeners, promoting federal programs that reduce the salinity in source water, ensuring adequate
federal funding for these programs, and supporting states and municipalities that develop control
and pretreatment programs.
• Develop state policies to promote agricultural reuse, including policies that have enabled use of
recycled water for irrigation of food and non-food crops, as well as those that have enabled
drainage authorities to operate their systems for multiple benefits (e.g., storage, water quality
practices, downstream flood reduction) beyond just drainage.
• Engage with the states to develop resources for states and water systems regarding public
notification, procedures for returning to compliance, and planning for major disruptions to the
water supply if the multi-barrier approach fails and how these practices may differ from traditional
water system supervision.
• Require states to develop permit programs (via NPDES Phase I and II water quality permits) based on
guidance from the National Blue Ribbon Commission for Onsite Non-potable Water Systems.
• Investigate and provide guidance to states and other stakeholders on ways in which to integrate
MS4 permit compliance with water reuse.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | E-5
-------
• Coordinate or support the coordination of regional, multi-stakeholder research consortia to scope
and/or execute studies and pilot projects aimed at addressing identified knowledge gaps regarding
oil and gas wastewater reuse risk and risk mitigation.
Section 2.3—Compile and Refine Fit-for-Purpose Specifications
• Compile fit-for-purpose thresholds for different end uses across states into one central location.
o Provide guidance to state regulators on how these fit-for-purpose specifications can be applied
to address "low-hanging fruit."
o Define water reuse categories by pathogen removal requirements.
o Actively update existing pathogen removal and inactivation tables as new information becomes
available.
• Evaluate and expand fit-for-purpose risk-based approaches for multiple source waters beyond
municipal wastewater, including industrial wastewater, oil and gas produced water, and
stormwater.
o Develop and assess risk-based log reduction targets for a range of onsite, non-potable water
treatment system types.
• Develop national guidance on how to test for and treat unregulated contaminants and contaminants
of emerging control (CECs) in various source waters and what levels are acceptable.
• The EPA, the USDA, and other federal agencies should partner with the water sector and oil and gas
industry to assist those considering the reuse of produced water to develop informational
guidelines. This could be assembled into a compendium and be readily accessible to potential users
and interested stakeholders.
• Develop a national, minimum standard based on existing work done in states like California and
Arizona to support the rapid adoption of safe water reuse systems (from simple, permit-exempt
rainwater and graywater systems to complex, monitored, large-building-scale systems).
• Develop user-friendly and cost-effective guidelines that can be referenced in national plumbing
standards and water quality standards for alternate water that protect public health, protect the
plumbing system and installed components, and foster the installation of water reuse systems.
• Contact-time tables and other tools used to determine log treatment values for addressing viruses
need to be expanded to include wastewater as a source in the case of DPR projects.
Section 2.4—Promote Technology Development, Deployment, and Validation
• Develop national guidance and standardization of water quality testing and technology verification
practices relevant to reuse.
o Diversify national grants available for technology verification and water quality testing
programs.
o Provide national guidance to state and local drinking water systems by reviewing, evaluating,
and providing discussion forums on mobile treatment units.
o Use existing data to validate treatment log-reduction target models for onsite non-potable
water systems.
• Leverage ongoing water research efforts of organizations such as the Water Research Foundation,
the National Blue Ribbon Commission for Onsite Non-potable Water Systems, and the DOE to
promote technology development and validation.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | E-6
-------
• Promote a standard national understanding of environmental buffers; the demarcation between
direct and indirect potable reuse; and related aspects including minimum retention time, dilution
factors, and physical attributes if counting on aquifers for treatment.
• Work through ACWA and ASDWA to develop recommendations for pilot testing parameters, sharing
lessons learned from states that have existing reuse projects, and key elements to look for in pilot
testing results for validation.
• Federal agencies such as the EPA and the DOE should issue a "call to action" for technology
providers to develop "plug and play systems" that can be easily incorporated into building design.
Emphasis should be placed on developing systems to address multiple source waters, end-uses, cost
effectiveness, energy efficiency, operability, and small footprint.
• Develop a pilot project to demonstrate cost-effective management systems for monitoring, control,
and automation of agricultural water reuse systems, including a decision support framework to help
farmers integrate and interpret information.
Section 2.5—Improve Availability of Water Information
• Construct a national database of private, public, and municipal water reuse systems that tracks
system usage and performance to increase stakeholders' understanding of the costs and benefits of
using reclaimed water. It could include information on the quality and resource recovery efficiency
of water systems, including water, nutrients, and energy.
• Establish industrial reuse benchmarks, fit-for-purpose information, and a data clearinghouse. This
may involve setting a research agenda for industrial reuse, compiling current knowledge, and
soliciting research projects. A way to further this concept is to establish an interactive survey or tool
that enables users to input site or industry-specific information, related to challenges, limitations, or
opportunities, and receive feedback that provides a set of options for implementing reuse.
• Encourage widespread sample and data sharing of oil and gas wastewater and make research
publicly accessible.
• Establish industry best practices in monitoring.
• Establish list of chemical constituents/surrogate for monitoring.
Section 2.6—Facilitate Financial Support for Water Reuse
• Develop financial incentives to encourage industry to consider water reuse. A range of options exist
for providing financial incentives for industrial reuse, including tax credits, private foundation
funding, utility incentives, and trading. Possible examples include Texas (HB 2545) and New Mexico
(HB 546).
• Support development of financial models to evaluate and implement integration of onsite non-
potable water systems into communities where it is appropriate. Action should involve
Environmental Financing Centers, the Water Finance Clearinghouse, infrastructure financers
including bond issuers, other financial services firms, State Revolving Fund (SRF) programs, and
water sector associations.
• Clarify that water reuse projects are eligible expenses for SRFs and which SRF—clean water or
drinking water—should fund which pieces of a project. Offer bonus points for reuse projects to
incentivize consideration.
• Collaborate with the NRCS, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
other relevant federal partners, and the water sector to develop informational guidelines to clarify
federal funding eligibility for environmental restoration projects using recycled water and what
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | E-7
-------
federal regulations would apply to various types of restoration projects that are using recycled
water.
• Prioritize and expand (where possible) funding opportunities for water reuse projects, and distribute
a list of current/upcoming funding opportunities to interested parties.
• Link funding (106, PWSS, DWSRF) through workplan mandates to water reuse requirements;
otherwise efforts may be stymied.
• Address disincentives to reuse that currently exist in water utility billing practices, such as the
linkage between water and sewer, which presumes that water supplied equals water discharged to
public sewer systems.
Section 2.7—Integrate and Coordinate Research on Water Reuse
• Engage federal agencies, water sector stakeholders, and institutions (i.e., colleges and universities)
that have conducted studies on water reuse subject matter to assess the current state of research
and developed informed research agendas.
o Create a national research plan specific to agriculture (potential for and drivers of increased
capture and reuse, costs, nutrient benefits and energy savings/costs, benefits, and scale).
• Water sector should collect, collate, and disseminate case studies demonstrating the successful use
of recycled water for environmental restoration. This should include a consideration of
environmental economics.
• Support state- and national-level research targeted at advancing reuse applications and
understanding implications:
o Analyze chemical interactions and long-term effects that occur following injection of
groundwater recharge.
o Assess cost impacts of water scarcity and the monetary benefits of water security.
o Develop strategies for reducing the oil and gas industry's reliance on fresh water resources
through increased wastewater reuse.
o Identify choke points in the current water reuse market.
o Assess what changes in water quality occur during storage of treated non-potable water and
what best management practices can be used to maintain microbial stability, with minimal
reliance on maintaining a chlorine residual.
o Categorize the constituents of stormwater to better understand treatment needs for various use
applications (e.g., irrigation, industrial uses, graywater applications) and in varying climates.
o Assess the potential impacts of stormwater harvesting on downstream water quantity and in-
stream flows.
o Investigate the impacts that water conservation can have on recycled water quantity and
quality.
• Coordinate in-person expert workshops to develop standardized and technically precise terminology
and definitions.
• The federal family can "lead by example" by piloting reuse projects at federal facilities and by
incorporating water reuse practices throughout the federal government where possible.
• Assess market opportunities for reclamation of brines and brainstorm solutions for any potential
litigation risks associated with reuse of residual solids.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | E-8
-------
• Consider the entire life cycle of chemicals introduced through commerce before those chemicals are
approved for production or import. Engage the chemical industry and the water sector to facilitate
identification and focus attention on problematic chemicals, based on sound science; support
development of a sound, multiple-barrier risk management strategy including enhanced CWA
pretreatment programs.
Section 2.8—Improve Outreach and Communication on Water Reuse
• Educate and inform the public about water reuse to help inform the public's understanding of costs,
benefits, and tradeoffs in water resources management. Efforts should focus on various use
applications and be conducted in the short and long term; messages should be appropriate for the
user type and scale of systems.
• Improve messaging and language used to talk about water reuse (e.g., national messaging, talking in
terms of "proper treatment," use of symbols, use of neutral or scientific language).
• Use oil and gas wastewater research as an opportunity for public engagement and education.
• Increase public awareness of potable reuse through federal leadership. Statements by the EPA, the
DOE, the USBR, the USDA, the DOD, and other authoritative federal voices should be aligned to help
provide continuity in messaging from the federal government.
• Develop and provide an outreach and education portal focused on water conservation, water reuse,
and source control for use by state agencies and local governments.
• Develop resources for states and industry on reuse communications plans and effective public
outreach, such as webinars with water systems and states that have already implemented reuse
projects, case studies with repeatable actions and communications plans, sample or template plans,
and other resources.
• Leverage existing recognition programs or create new recognition programs for exceptional water
reuse projects.
• Water associations and utilities should form partnerships with producer associations, USDA
extension programs, and others to conduct outreach to farmers and the food supply chain to discuss
the benefits of and typical concerns related to using recycled water for irrigation, and to promote
the use of reclaimed water.
Section 2.9—Support a Talented and Dynamic Workforce
• Promote a skilled workforce through workforce development efforts, including training and
transitioning to address an aging workforce, and creating opportunities for state-to-state knowledge
transfer related to water reuse.
• Encourage and assist in developing worker training programs for operator certification to ensure
that operators have the knowledge and skills needed to preside over water reuse projects.
• Promote new partnerships and leverage existing partnerships for peer-to-peer engagement on
water reuse, which will help elevate performance of the sector.
• Water sector associations, state and federal certification programs, universities, and vocational
training schools should develop operator training and design and permitting training for onsite non-
potable water reuse systems.
• Work with states and other training providers to develop and execute water reuse training programs
for state and federal staff, including permit writers and inspectors. An example topic would be how
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | E-9
-------
to evaluate treatment technologies for reuse with a focus on innovative technologies or existing
technologies that are being used in a new way.
• Encourage the use of the Capacity Development program under the drinking water SRF to
encourage technical, financial, and managerial capacity to operate in a sustainable manner.
• Partner with entities on efforts like the National Green Infrastructure Certification Program to
develop training expertise to enhance stormwater capture and reuse.
Section 2.10—Develop Water Reuse Metrics that Support Goals and Measure Progress
• Develop trackable goals.
• Be clear on expectations as to how success is measured.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | E-10
-------
Appendix F: WaterReuse Association
Convening Report
NATIONAL WATER REUSE
ACTION PLAN
DRAFT
-------
Appendix F: WateReuse Association Convening Report
Appendix F comprises a joint set of comments from the WateReuse Association (WRA), Association of
Metropolitan Water Agencies (AMWA), American Waterworks Association (AWWA), National
Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA), Water Environment Federation (WEF), and Water
Research Foundation (WRF) submitted to the public docket. The WRA hosted two convenings of water
reuse experts from across the spectrum of interests to help develop their input to the National Water
Reuse Action Plan. The EPA recognizes the effort of the WRA in hosting the convenings. The EPA, along
with other federal representatives (e.g., USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service, Food and Drug
Administration) participated in the convenings, which were held on April 18 and May 9, 2019. Neither
the EPA nor its federal partners had involvement in the compilation, analysis, or review of the final
report and recommended actions. The resulting comments contained in this appendix were prepared
and submitted by the WRA and other water sector partners through the public docket. They are
provided in this appendix unaltered and in their entirety.
Disclaimer
The content of this appendix is for information only and does not imply that the draft Action Plan
endorses, approves, or otherwise supports the opinions contained. The water reuse convenings were
attended by numerous water sector stakeholders with varied views on the draft Action Plan and its
contents. The views in this appendix solely reflect the positions of their authors and not that of any
federal agency.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | F-l
-------
^WateReuse
NACWA4)
Water
Research
THE
METROPOLITAN
WATER AGENCIES
American
Water Works
Association
FOUNDATION
Water Environment
L Federation
the water quality people®
July 1,2019
The Honorable David Ross
Assistant Administrator for Water
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20460
RE: Docket No. EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174
Dear Assistant Administrator Ross,
The WateReuse Association, Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies, American Water Works
Association, National Association of Clean Water Agencies, Water Environment Federation, and Water
Research Foundation appreciate the opportunity to comment on the development of a national Water
Reuse Action Plan. We are pleased to jointly submit the following comments, which emerged from an
extensive process of collecting, discussing, and compiling feedback from experts around the country.
When the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced the development of a national
Water Reuse Action Plan (WRAP), our organizations, recognizing the importance of water reuse as part
of the concept of integrated water resource management, organized a broad-based effort to inform
the WRAP development; the results of which are incorporated into this document. As a result, this
document reflects a broad range of perspectives and viewpoints from the water sector.
A facilitated expert process compiled and prioritized input from a diverse group of technical experts
from the sector, including water utilities, utility associations, local, state and federal agencies,
academia, engineering firms, private sector technology developers, and trade associations. The
process also incorporated stakeholders from important groups outside the water sector, such as
agriculture, oil and gas producers, and environmental advocates.
In April and May of 2019, we convened two workshops, which brought together more than 100
participants from around the country. Prior to, during, and following these meetings, workgroups
defined challenges and developed proposed actions for each water reuse application, drawing from
the conversations at the workshops. In parallel, the national water associations solicited input from
-------
experts within their membership. The criteria below were used to evaluate whether specific actions
should be recommended. The recommended actions herein:
• Fill a critical need
• Have a high potential for success and lasting impact
• Are nationally relevant
• Leverage available knowledge and experience
The key ideas and suggested actions resulting from this effort are synthesized in the attached
recommendations document. Neither the sections nor the proposed actions within each section are
organized according to priority.
We appreciate your leadership in focusing policy development on an important approach to water
resources management.
Sincerely,
Pat Sinicropi
Executive Director
WateReuse Association
G. Tracy Mehan, III
Executive Director - Government Affairs
American Water Works Association
John Albert, MPA
Chief Research Officer
Water Research Foundation
Diane VanDe Hei
Chief Executive Officer
Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies
Tim Williams
Deputy Executive Director
Water Environment Federation
Adam Krantz
Chief Executive Officer
National Association of Clean Water Agencies
2
-------
COMMENTS ON DEVELOPMENT OF A
NATIONAL WRAP
Water reuse, or water recycling, has been practiced in the U.S. for more than 50 years. Communities
across the country have incorporated water reuse into their water management strategies as a proven
method for ensuring a safe, reliable, locally controlled water supply—essential for livable communities
with healthy environments, robust economies, and a high quality of life. Additionally, many states
have included water reuse as part of their statewide and regional comprehensive water plans.
Water reuse is employed across a variety of sectors for many applications. For example, municipalities
are actively engaged in reusing water for irrigation. In 2011, EPA estimated that nearly half of all
recycled effluent in the U.S. was used to irrigate farms (29 percent) and landscapes such as golf
courses and parks (18 percent).1 Reuse is also occurring in industrial sectors, both internal, onsite reuse
for industrial processes and municipal delivery of reclaimed water to industry for uses such as
industrial cooling at power plants.
Our recommendations focus on seven reuse applications where reuse is growing or growth is
anticipated and action today would have lasting impact: water reuse for potable supply, reuse
through on-site non-potable water systems, industrial applications of water reuse, agricultural
applications of water reuse, reuse for environmental restoration, reuse of "produced water" from oil
and gas production, and stormwater capture and reuse.
These recommendations are grounded in a set of seven guiding principles that cut across all of these
water reuse applications. These principles are:
Integrated water resource management (IWRM). A fundamental principle for a sustainable and
reliable water portfolio in the U.S. is an IWRM strategy, and making recycled water a key part of it at a
community and watershed scale. Consequently, a national WRAP must similarly be based on the
principle of IWRM. This approach can help communities develop tailored water supply portfolios that
meet their unique needs and assure safe, sustainable, and resilient water supplies to support
economic development and achieve environmental benefits.
Focus on sustainable solutions. Water reuse is just one source of water within the water supply
portfolio for an individual company, individual community, watershed, or industrial sector.
Sustainable solutions are those that are cost-effective within a triple-bottom line accounting
framework. When making water supply decisions, by evaluating social and environmental
considerations alongside financial ones, entities can weigh long-term benefits and move beyond
decisions based solely on immediate cost-of-production. Similarly, the national WRAP should
recognize and support local and state efforts that consider social, environmental, and financial
benefits and are sustainable in the long run.
Partnerships to build on existing strengths. An effective WRAP should recognize water reuse as an
element of an integrated water supply portfolio that builds on years of research and practical
1 Water Environment Federation. Baseline Data to Establish the Current Amount of Resource Recovery from
WRRFs. September 2018.
3
-------
experience across a number of different sectors. The national WRAP must also build on existing
expertise. The most effective means of leveraging this knowledge is through collaborative
partnerships. These could take the form of coordination within the water sector as well as
collaboration between the water sector and non-governmental organizations, state and federal
agencies, and the private sector. In drafting the WRAP, EPA should set the stage for effective
collaboration with key partners.
Strong and sustained support for research. Advancing water reuse requires innovation within the
water sector and other sectors that use water (e.g. oil and gas production, industrial reuse, etc.), along
with broader cross-cutting research to address issues that cannot be adequately supported by a single
research investment alone. An essential element of building consensus within the technical and policy
communities will be an authoritative research portfolio focused on providing science-based data for
decision-making. EPA's Office of Research and Development should coordinate with other state and
federal agencies, the Water Research Foundation, and the university and private research community
to develop a coordinated research agenda to efficiently meet identified needs. Such coordination
could also establish a much-needed central clearinghouse of information to help inform reuse
applications across all sectors.
Effective communications. Regardless of the progress in science and engineering for water reuse,
public trust can be a challenge for accelerating the adoption of water recycling strategies. This is often
compounded by a belief that there exist abundant, cheap, and natural supplies of water. Effective
communications must be employed to advance the public's understanding of costs, benefits, and
trade-offs in water resources management. Doing so will better position communities to extract
benefits from water reuse projects.
Role of the federal family. Federal agencies can play a crucial role in accelerating the adoption of
water reuse. For example, they can help communicate the importance and value of water reuse for the
nation's water supply by developing and employing effective messaging for multiple audiences,
including the general public. In addition, the federal family can "lead by example" by piloting reuse
projects at federal facilities and by incorporating water reuse practices throughout the federal
government where possible.
Clear and supportive policies based on sound science. Policies grounded in science, particularly at
the state and municipal levels, can facilitate the adoption of successful water reuse across all use
applications. Effectively constructed federal, state, and local policies can provide actors with
confidence and certainty needed to innovate and advance water recycling. Education and
communication across states, federal agencies, associations, and local communities will be key to
ensuring that sound reuse policies are implemented. While this coordination can enhance the
development of effective policies, it is also crucial that regulatory entities such as EPA remain
independent to ensure that public trust in the water supply is maintained.
Using these principles as our foundation, we recommend the following actions be included in the
national WRAP. For each proposed action, we describe the challenge that the action is intended to
address, and where possible, we suggest potential lead actors to help advance each action.
4
-------
Suggested Actions to Advance Water Reuse
A. Potable Water Reuse
In 2017, recycled water supplied at least 430 million gallons per day of the U.S.' potable water supply.2
Advancements in treatment technologies and state and local policy have facilitated the expansion of
current and anticipated levels of potable water reuse. However, the policy development process can
differ substantially across communities and advancements in research are continually needed to
improve practice, lower costs, and better understand potential health risks. The following
recommendations identify specific actions that are best undertaken at a national scale to support
utilization of recycled water for drinking purposes.
Challenge 1: A more thorough consideration of the life cvde of chemicals introduced through
commerce is needed.
Action 1: Federal regulatory agencies should take steps to more fully consider the entire life cycle of
chemicals introduced through commerce prior to those chemicals being approved for production or
import.
A key aspect of reuse is the treatment processes to remove recalcitrant contaminants that are
potentially toxic at low concentrations. Some of these compounds can also impair water treatment
processes, especially those processes that are biological in nature. In order to address this challenge,
federal agencies should:
1. Engage the chemical industry and the water sector to facilitate identification and focus attention
on problematic chemicals, based on sound science; and
2. Support development of a sound, multiple-barrier risk management strategy including enhanced
Clean Water Act (ONA) pre-treatment programs.
A life-cycle analysis of a new chemical intended for commerce would potentially reduce the need for
advanced water treatment processes to remove such chemicals, and help assuage public concerns
over the potential presence of chemicals that pose health risks in recycled water.
There are several steps that EPA can take to advance this action, including:
• Convening a federal working group on source control strategies to protect water
sources (including treated wastewater) for reuse. The working group should consider
the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide
Act (FIFRA), pretreatment programs under the CWA as well as other authorities (e.g.,
Food and Drug Administration (FDA)). This working group should build on existing
research as well as best practices currently being implemented on a state and local level.
The core members of the work group should include EPA, FDA, U.S. Department of
2 EPA, Water Reuse Guidelines, Potable Reuse Compendium. 2017
5
-------
Agriculture (USDA), U.S. Geological Service (USGS), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
(USACE), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), and the White House
Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ).
• A technical working group to support the work of the federal members, should also be
convened to facilitate action. This would be composed of stakeholder organizations
with relevant expertise (e.g., water sector associations, pollution prevention experts, the
private sector, states, etc.).
• Adapting TSCA new chemical reviews (15 USC 2604) and review of existing chemicals
(15 USC 2605) to place controls on chemicals in commerce to reduce the potential for
toxic substances to enter wastewaters, and by extension, source waters.
• Utilizing the FIFRA to reduce introduction of toxic substances into wastewaters, and by
extension, source waters.
Undertaking these actions now is timely, as EPA is currently revising TSCA work flows in response to
the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21 st Century Act. EPA should identify and engage
stakeholders in the relevant practitioner communities (e.g., water treatment, pretreatment program
implementation, chemical manufacturing, etc.) to take advantage of this opportunity.
Challenge 2: Current research to fully support IWRM is siloed and disconnected.
Action 2: Develop a robust and targeted national research strategy to inform development of potable
reuse across the U.S.
EPA's draft Safe and Sustainable Water Resources National Research Program Strategic Research
Action Plan, 2019 - 2022 includes research relevant to potable reuse. There is an opportunity to
capitalize on this effort to (1) address specific research needs for potable reuse; (2) integrate work
funded through other organizations (e.g., U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), the Water Research
Foundation, Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), CDC, National Science Foundation (NSF), state-level
initiatives, academia, etc.); and (3) ensure that research coordination leverages existing expertise to
best advantage.
Research planning should be an ongoing and iterative process, where planning is informed by
successful execution and emerging information. Research is essential to inform risk assessments
(including sound health risk characterizations) and guide processes to set chemical and pathogen
treatment performance objectives to protect public health. Research must be coupled with effectively
communicating research results, as the results of this research should inform science-based policy
development.
Near-term steps that EPA can take to advance this action include:
• Engage federal partners (e.g., NSF, USBR, USDA, DOE), states pursuing research, and
relevant research organizations like the Water Research Foundation to coordinate and
leverage ongoing research efforts relevant to potable reuse. Such coordination could,
for example, inform which constituents are the highest priority for developing improved
monitoring tools, treatment efficacy studies, or additional health effects
characterization.
6
-------
• When appropriate, use new information on health effects to inform risk assessment
methodologies and best practices for chemicals and pathogens.
• Summarize research results and communicate actionable information to decision-
makers, project developers, and regulators at the local, state, and federal level (e.g.,
utility managers, local governing boards, state regulators, etc.).
• Integrate potable reuse information needs into related research agendas to support the
practice of IWRM and broader visionary efforts (e.g. smart cities).
Effectively organizing a potable reuse research strategy through an inclusive process that engages a
cross-section of subject matter experts and potential funders will take time. More immediate
opportunities include engaging with DOE's forthcoming Energy-Water Desalination Hub, other Water
Security Grand Challenge priority issues, and USBR's WaterSMART Title XVI - Water Reclamation and
Reuse Title XVI Research Studies. Similarly, a coordinated effort to better summarize and communicate
the findings of completed research in a form that is helpful to local government and state decision-
makers could be initiated quickly. While the current EPA Water Reuse Guidelines are helpful, to be
more valuable for decision-makers this information needs to be further refined and updated based on
more recent research and experiences.
Challenge 3: Information sharing between EPA, state governments, associations, and other
relevant stakeholders could be improved upon.
Action 3: Establish partnerships between state and federal regulatory agencies to foster a dialogue on
potable reuse policy and funding.
Implementing potable reuse involves state policy discussions over a wide range of topics including
pre-treatment authorities, wastewater treatment, discharges to surface waters and minimum flow
requirements, groundwater replenishment, underground injection, drinking water treatment, water
withdrawal permits, water rights, environmental consequence evaluation (e.g., state equivalents to
the National Environmental Policy Act), and other state-specific statutes. The interconnected network
of state laws, regulations, policies, and practices must be evaluated on a state-by-state basis because
each state's policy context is unique.
There is an opportunity for state policy makers to leverage the experience of states that have already
taken steps to create policy frameworks for potable reuse. As illustrated by EPA's Water Reuse
Guidelines and summaries available through the WateReuse Association, a number of states are
already actively setting regulatory requirements and guidelines for potable reuse. Consequently,
potable reuse is advancing by building upon existing state leadership and state-EPA relationships
within the framework of cooperative federalism.
Steps that states and EPA can take in collaboration with the water sector to advance this action
include:
• Support an ongoing dialogue with state agency partners to identify state needs for
federal leadership through a partnership between EPA and state water programs;
• Facilitate information sharing between the water sector and state and federal regulatory
communities; and
7
-------
• Support the development of tools, resources, and decision frameworks to support state
potable water reuse policy development and implementation.
The first step in advancing helpful resources in a timely manner is organizing the available information
and building a forum for dialogue. The Association of State Drinking Water Administrators is currently
engaging its members, EPA, and the Association of Clean Water Administrators to establish such a
dialogue. This forum could serve as a central point of information exchange where research findings
and other information from the sector could be shared with the interested stakeholders.
Challenge 4: There is limited messaging from the federal government about how potable reuse
can appropriately be part of an integrated water supply portfolio.
Action 4: Increase public awareness of potable reuse through federal leadership.
Concurrently with the actions listed above, the federal government can raise awareness of the viability
of potable reuse as part of an IWRM portfolio. Statements by EPA, DOE, USBR, USDA, Department of
Defense (DOD), and other authoritative federal voices should be aligned to help provide continuity in
messaging from the federal government. While there are many federal agencies to engage in this
effort, it is especially important for EPA, CDC, FDA and USDA to coordinate and align messaging on
potable reuse.
Steps that federal agencies can take to advance this action include:
• Make clear that potable reuse can be a viable element of an IWRM supply portfolio that
is supported by the federal government;
• Work with federal, state and local partners to demonstrate and bring to full
implementation water reuse projects at federal facilities or lands (e.g. DOD facilities) to
demonstrate federal commitment by leading by example;
• Provide resources to communities and states to inform and support effective public
education and communication on potable reuse; and
• Support development of case studies, including from the private sector, to describe the
potential benefits and costs of implementing potable reuse from a triple bottom line
perspective.
EPA could begin this action immediately by incorporating statements from its Potable Reuse
Compendium into existing and new communications tools such as factsheets, short videos, and other
materials, to demonstrate how potable reuse can be an essential part of IWRM. Similarly, EPA and
other federal agencies can highlight the current practice of potable reuse in municipal facilities and
federal reuse projects, particularly from USBR projects and federal facilities that are supplied by
recycled water. More specifically, by using available agency materials together with those developed
by the water sector, a focused collaboration by CDC and EPA could address both (1) proactive
communication on potable reuse, and (2) community-level responses if there is a failure in a water
reuse system.
8
-------
B. Onsite Non-Potable Water Systems
Onsite non-potable water systems (ONWS) can collect and treat blackwater, graywater, stormwater,
and rainwater for reuse in buildings, campuses, and districts for non-potable needs. The use of ONWS
originally began as a response to drought-driven conservation needs, as these systems can decrease
potable water consumption up to 70%. However, integrating ONWS with centralized infrastructure is
becoming increasingly prevalent as an element of community IWRM. As with other forms of reuse, a
community-specific evaluation of ONWS implementation is needed and should occur in the context of
state law. Such an evaluation should include an assessment of potential impacts on other community
infrastructure, including centralized treatment infrastructure.
The recommendations offered below are designed to facilitate the adoption of ONWS as part of
communities' IWRM portfolios.
Challenge 1: There are a limited number of off-the-shelf packaged treatment systems
containing appropriate technologies to treat gravwater. blackwater. rainwater, stormwater and
nuisance groundwater designed to meet risk-based water quality standards.
Actions can be taken to establish ONWS as "just another appliance" for new buildings and districts to
drive greater adoption of ONWS in growing communities. Such systems would (1) assure a reliable
level of treatment; (2) ensure reliable performance with continuous remote monitoring; and (3)
simplify integration into building design.
Standard specifications for effectiveness, cost, ease of use, and small footprint design are needed to
drive private sector innovation, sufficient market development, adoption at scale, and third-party
verification of technology performance.
Action 1: DOE and EPA should issue a "call to action" for technology providers to develop "plug & play
systems" that can easily be incorporated into building design. Emphasis should be placed on
developing systems to address multiple source waters, end-uses, cost effectiveness, energy efficiency,
easy operability, and small footprint. This "call to action" should include funding to encourage
research and development with the private sector and a third-party verification process. Lead actors
include DOE via its Water Security Grand Challenge Prize, along with EPA. The call to action should
leverage current water sector programs that provide market exposure for new technologies and
facilitate pilot and demonstration projects such as the Leaders Innovation Forum for Technology,
among others.
Challenge 2: Lack of a national approach for risk-based water quality standards and
inconsistent plumbing codes for ONWS has created uncertainty and barriers to wide-scale
implementation of ONWS throughout the U.S.
Efforts to establish consistent risk-based water quality standards are already underway in several
states, including California, Hawaii, Washington, Oregon, Colorado, Washington D.C., and Minnesota.
Consistency among remaining states and concurrence by EPA would provide more certainty to
technology developers, increase public confidence in ONWS approaches, and facilitate integration of
ONWS.
9
-------
Action 2.1: EPA, International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials (IAPMO), International
Code Council (ICC), WateReuse Association, and others with relevant expertise should offer assistance
to states to develop risk-based water quality standards and best practices for ONWS. IAPMO and ICC
prepare regular updates to the Uniform Plumbing Code and International Plumbing Code; inclusion of
ONWS would facilitate state implementation.
Action 2.2: Develop federal procurement guidelines for General Services Administration (GSA) to
install ONWS in federal facilities.
The federal government can lead by example by facilitating the adoption of ONWS at federal facilities.
As with the broader adoption of ONWS, the guidelines should be set within the context of IWRM
planning and should urge community-specific assessments of potential impacts on centralized water
treatment systems.
Challenge 3: No governmental or non-governmental entity is currently responsible for ongoing
validation of ONWS treatment log-reduction models.
The Risk Based Framework for the Development of Public Health Guidance for Decentralized Non-
potable Water Systems report established log reduction targets for the removal of pathogens such as
viruses, protozoa, and bacteria for a limited number of alternate water sources and end uses.3
Additionally, data collection on pathogen concentrations in stormwater, graywater, blackwater and
rainwater is occurring throughout the U.S. There is an opportunity to use these data to validate
existing models to ensure accurate log reduction targets are established. Additionally, an opportunity
exists to expand the risk-based framework to help define log reduction targets for new types of
alternate water sources and end uses for onsite water reuse.
Action 3: In the near term, EPA should seek to advance the following research in coordination with
the Water Research Foundation, the broader research community, and the private sector:
• Validate existing Qualitative Microbial Risk Assessments (QMRAs) developed in the risk-
based framework with additional rainwater, stormwater, blackwater and graywater
pathogen concentration data;
• Expand the risk-based framework to create Log Reduction Targets (LRTs) for additional
alternate water sources and end uses. Maintain and update an LRT matrix;
• Provide guidance on and recommend LRTs for ONWS to protect public health; and
• Develop predictive models for stormwater to develop more site-specific LRTs.
Challenge 4: While ONWS can reduce a building's water footprint and ease the burden on
stormwater and wastewater systems, reduced water consumption is raising concerns about
revenue impacts and/or down stream flows in sewer systems for existing centralized treatment
facilities.
3 Risk Based Framework for the Development of Public Health Guidance for Decentralized Non-potable
Water Systems. Water Research Foundation. 2017, Available online:
https://www.werf.org/a/ka/Search/ResearchProfile.aspx?ReportId=SIWM10C15.
10
-------
ONWS offer many potential benefits to communities, including fostering community resilience,
diversifying and stretching water supplies, managing stormwater, meeting policy and regulatory
requirements, deferring capital costs for additional water and/or wastewater infrastructure,
generating new revenue streams for utilities, creating opportunities for public-private partnerships,
and generating environmental and community amenities.
However, it also poses potential challenges. Reduced water flows resulting from ONWS must be
considered. Other potential impacts include: lower community water and wastewater system
revenue, degraded drinking water quality, and impacts on function and longevity of wastewater
facilities.
Action 4: Support development planning approaches and financial models to evaluate and
implement integration of ONWS into communities where it is appropriate. Such approaches and
models would provide a framework for efficient long-term capital investment decisions. Models and
planning strategies should include:
• Evaluating the optimal scale for ONWS to produce measurable benefits for a community's
centralized water infrastructure;
• Assessing the impacts of integration for financial sustainability, energy use, greenhouse gas
emissions, water use, drinking water quality, wastewater characteristics, and other impacts on
a community's centralized water systems and operations;
• Developing decision-support tools that can assist centralized systems with long-term planning
analysis;
• Assessing financial impacts and how they might be managed over time; and
• Addressing volumetric analysis for CSO control and Long-Term Control Plans.
This action should involve Environmental Financing Centers, Water Finance Clearinghouse,
infrastructure financers including bond issuers, other financial services firms, State Revolving Fund
(SRF) programs, and water sector associations.
Challenge 5: Additional research is needed to develop an operator training program to support
implementation of ONWS.
Implementing a risk-based water quality standard for ONWS requires enhanced operator capacity and
new skills for utilities and public health agencies to evaluate treatment systems designs. Strong
training programs for permit-writers, managers and operators of ONWS would build public confidence
in system operations and ensure system capacity for proper functioning. The Risk-Based Framework
for the Development of Public Health Guidance for Decentralized Non-potable Water Systems and the
National Blue Ribbon Commission's Guidebook for Developing and Implementing Regulations for
Onsite Non-potable Water Systems provide an initial starting point for developing a training program.
Action 5: Water sector associations, state and federal certification programs, universities, and
vocational training schools should develop operator training and design and permitting training for
ONWS. ONWS involve the use of multiple pathogen barriers with continuous online monitoring and
verification of performance goals. Operators of these systems will need specific training to ensure
both the proper functioning of treatment processes and the protection of public health from relevant
11
-------
pathogens. The training should include an overview of common treatment processes and examples of
continuous monitoring methods to ensure water quality standards are met. The training materials that
are developed should be applicable to any ONWS program.
Challenge 6: Operators need more information on how long treated non-potable water can be
stored, taking the potential risk posed by microbial growth in the distribution system into
account.
Opportunistic pathogens such as Legionella can be found in non-potable water distribution systems
and storage facilities. Additional research is needed to inform operators on how long treated non-
potable water can be stored and still be appropriate for particular applications (e.g., toilet flushing,
irrigation, etc.). Existing research demonstrates that microbial regrowth in reuse water can be
problematic if not managed appropriately.
Action 6: The research community in partnership with water associations should conduct research to
assess what changes in water quality occur during storage of treated non-potable water, and what
best management practices can be used to maintain microbial stability, with minimal reliance on
maintaining a chlorine residual.
C. Industrial Water Reuse
Industrial water usage accounts for a significant portion of overall water usage in the U.S. This
provides both an opportunity and challenge for water reuse. Water used in industrial applications is
often provided by a municipal utility or withdrawn from a surface or groundwater source and directly
used by the industrial user. Water scarcity, lack of reliability, and strict water quality requirements are
drivers of water reuse for many industrial sectors.
Reuse in industrial sectors can be considered in a variety of ways:
• Use of recycled water supplied by a municipal utility, or other entity, to supplement or replace
other industrial water supplies, such as potable water or raw surface/groundwater; and/or
• Reuse of water within the industrial facility itself, for example treating waste process water to
enable its reuse within the facility.
The water used for industrial applications encompasses a broad range of processes, including boiler
makeup water, sanitation, and cooling water. Due to the significant variability between industrial
water applications, there is also significant variability in water quality and quantity requirements for
any given sector and facility. This means that there is no "one size fits all" solution or set of actions that
will apply universally to all industrial sectors. Flexible guidance with some level of segmentation of
industrial applications may be mechanisms to more practically address the degree of variability that
exists. Several of the most significant challenges associated with industrial water reuse include
financial incentives, policy and regulatory uncertainty, and the need for increased knowledge-sharing
to inform decision-making.
12
-------
Challenge 1: Need for financial incentives
Where conventional water supply is relatively plentiful and inexpensive, it can be difficult for industrial
users to make the business case for water reuse. Corporate social responsibility initiatives are often
helpful in spurring the adoption of reuse, but there are also other financial incentives that could be
effective in doing so.
Action 1: Develop financial incentives to encourage industry to consider water reuse. A range of
options exist for providing financial incentives for industrial reuse, including the following:
• Tax Credits - Federal, state, and local governments could provide an investment tax credit for
industries meeting certain, incremental water reuse targets. Targets could be based on
baseline data collected for a specific sector. Long-term, this could be coupled with other
sustainability elements, such as emissions. Best practices may be gleaned from other sectors
(e.g. solar energy).
• Utility Incentives - Utilities can explore providing incentives to industries to use recycled
water, especially where there are direct benefits for the utility in doing so. A metropolitan
water utility in Colorado offers an illustrative example, focused on water conservation. During
a period of drought, the water utility reimbursed its largest industrial water users for selected
capital expenditures, contingent on the ability to meet a specific water savings target.
Similarly, flexible reimbursement policies, lower availability charges, and competitive rates
allowed one Virginia utility to enroll more than 30 data centers into its reclaimed water
program. The collective demand from these industrial customers shaves 5% off of the utility's
potable water peak demand, significantly lowers nutrient discharges to local waterways, and
saves each data center approximately $2.5 million in life-cycle facility costs.
• Private Foundation Funding - Engage private foundations to prioritize industrial water reuse
among their project funding portfolio. Water associations could engage with foundations by
providing education to increase understanding of water reuse and its benefits. Industrial reuse
can play a significant role in helping foundations advance broader watershed-based
conservation goals.
• Trading - EPA can help create a market for water quality and quantity trading for industrial
reuse, for both discharge and consumption, by developing appropriate context, stakeholders,
and success factors, and providing case studies to illustrate success. Markets may be
established across industries, watersheds, or organizations to allow for increased flexibility in
reuse treatment at potential sites. Coordination with state Water Quality Standards programs
will be important. EPA can facilitate discussions and assist in program development where
watersheds cross state boundaries.
Challenge 2: Need for sector-specific knowledge sharing to inform decision-making
Sharing information in a sector-specific context can help build awareness of the benefits of reuse and
encourage stakeholders not yet engaged in reuse to consider options for implementation.
Action 2: Establish industrial reuse benchmarks, fit-for-purpose information, and a data
clearinghouse.
13
-------
EPA, the water sector, and industry-specific associations should work towards developing baseline
data, with a goal of establishing benchmarks for areas such as water efficiency and reuse. Due to the
variability inherent in industrial water use applications and the variations in the source of the water to
be reused, this recommendation to establish baselines and benchmarks is made with recognition that
some degree of segmentation will be required, based on factors such as sector, geography, and local
challenges.
Regarding fit-for-purpose considerations, industry-specific associations and the research community
should compile a body of research that provides evidence-based information that enables industries
to more accurately match water uses with the source and quality of water. This may involve setting a
research agenda for industrial reuse, compiling current knowledge, and soliciting research projects.
These data and research results could be housed in a data warehouse/clearinghouse, which also
includes case studies and a robust search function. One way to further this concept is to establish an
interactive survey or tool that enables users to input site or industry-specific information, related to
challenges, limitations, or opportunities, and receive feedback that provides a set of options for
implementing reuse.
Challenge 3: Perceived lack of economic drivers for industrial reuse.
It can be challenging to encourage voluntary changes from industry. By leveraging corporate
sustainability and its marketing/branding potential, water reuse can be accelerated in the industrial
space.
Action 3.1: Create a federal-level recognition award program for exceptional water reuse projects in
industry.
Competition exists within many industries, as companies seek to differentiate themselves and gain an
advantage in the market. Increasingly, this may include incorporating a triple bottom line approach to
operations, with consideration of sustainability - of which reuse is one component - in corporate
decision-making. Accordingly, a recognition program for exceptional water reuse projects in a given
industry or across several industries could help a company distinguish its brand and ultimately create
a competitive advantage. Such recognition need not be financial in nature, provided that the
recognition comes from a level that provides a high enough degree of prestige.
Action 3.2: Leverage the CEO Water Mandate4 and/or other similar programs to encourage industries
to take action.
Leveraging current water-related partnerships and/or recognition programs, such as the CEO Water
Mandate or Alliance for Water Stewardship resources, relies on peer-to-peer engagement to elevate
the performance of the sector. Leadership from the White House, DOE, EPA, industry associations, and
water utilities can all play a role in promoting these programs.
4 https://ceowatermandate.org/about/what-is-the-mandate/
14
-------
D. Agriculture Water Reuse
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Economic Research Service, agriculture
consumes roughly 80 percent of the water that is used in the United States.5 The sector's impact on
water, both in terms of ground and surface water withdrawals and in terms of drainage to water
bodies, is immense. Therefore, increased use of recycled water by the agricultural sector could have a
very significant impact on the water environment.
Water recycling relates to agriculture in at least two important ways. First, in areas where natural
supplies are limited (e.g., groundwater supplies are limited, or could become limited), using recycled
water for irrigation can help address water supply issues. In some states, recycled water is already
being used to irrigate tens of thousands of acres of farmland. For example, 92 percent of the recycled
water that Idaho produces is used to irrigate crops.
Second, agricultural capture and reuse of storm and drainage water can help reduce nutrient loading
and downstream flooding. The extent to which farmers are capturing and reusing drainage and storm
water across the U.S. is not clear. However, we do know that USDA has worked with some producers
to implement relevant conservation practices. For example, in 2017 and 2018, USDA's Natural
Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) entered into 449 contracts with farmers to support the
implementation of tail water recovery systems, irrigation reservoirs and catchment systems, and
constructed wetlands for biological treatment of water.
Challenge 1: Costs and benefits, including environmental benefits, of recycling drainage water
and of using highly treated municipal effluent for irrigation are not adequately quantified and
or understood bv farmers.
As with all business owners, economics play a major role in farmers' decision making. This is true
across a range of decisions, including what inputs to use (e.g. fertilizer). When considering whether,
when, and how to recycle water or use recycled water, farmers will compare costs and benefits to
business as usual, which in most cases involves sourcing irrigation water from the ground and letting
untreated drainage water leave farm fields into drainage ditches. In order to facilitate a significant
uptake of water recycling across farm country, research is needed to quantify the costs and benefits of
water recycling in agriculture, and those costs and benefits will need to be communicated to farmers
and other stakeholders.
Action 1.1: Create a national research plan for water reuse in agricultural production.
Where such information is not already known, EPA and USDA's research agencies should coordinate
with The Water Research Foundation, the research community, farm groups, and industry to conduct
research on the following topics:
• The costs and benefits of using recycled water for irrigation relative to groundwater
withdrawal;
5 USDA Economic Research Service. Irrigation & Water Use. Available online:
https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/farm-practices-management/irrigation-water-use/
15
-------
• The nutrient benefits and energy savings/costs of reuse water (both municipally treated
wastewater and recycled agricultural drainage water);
• The potential for and drivers of increased capture and reuse of agricultural drainage water in
the landscape to reduce downstream nutrient loading; and
• The scale at which capture and reuse of agricultural drainage water would have a tangible
impact on flood peak reduction and other downstream water quantity concerns.
Action 1.2: Facilitate information exchange to increase stakeholders' understanding of the costs and
benefits of using recycled water.
Water providers and researchers should communicate costs and benefits to farmers, agricultural
organizations and advisers, agency staff, and conservation groups. Where research is being conducted
in a university context, particularly at land grant universities, researchers can communicate results
directly to USDA extension. Municipalities and industries that have an interest in working with farmers
in their regions can reach out to farmer leaders and farm groups to share and discuss research results.
Researchers at the national level can provide research results to national associations, including farm,
water, and conservation associations.
Challenge 2: There are limited mechanisms to compensate farmers for the environmental
benefits that thev produce bv recycling drainage water or using highly treated municipal
effluent for irrigation.
The research outlined above in Action 1.1 can help elucidate the environmental benefits of water
reuse in agriculture, which include groundwater savings, flood mitigation, and reductions in nutrient
loading. The cost of water recycling for farmers, especially when technology is involved, can be
significant. Moreover, the cost of municipally sourced recycled water may exceed the cost of
withdrawing groundwater. Incentives could be put in place to help farmers transition to water
recycling.
Action 2.1: Integrate water reuse into USDA conservation and farm support programs.
USDA's Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) should review and assess its programs and
standards to determine opportunities for better supporting water reuse, including both the use of
highly treated municipal effluent for irrigation and the capture and reuse of drainage water.
NRCS provides federal cost-share assistance to farmers to install a range of conservation activities, and
therefore is highly influential in practice selection. Opportunities for increasing water reuse may
include additions or revisions to conservation practice standards, Conservation Stewardship Program
enhancements, conservation activity plans, and scenarios in cost calculations. For example, NRCS
could create a conservation activity to help farmers afford the cost of transitioning from groundwater
to municipally treated recycled water for irrigation. Other examples include adding the reuse of
drainage or runoff water to the Tailwater Recovery standard and adding scenarios with water reuse to
payment schedules.
16
-------
Action 2.2: Promote environmental service exchange partnerships.
USDA and EPA should encourage partnerships at the landscape, state, and local levels to facilitate
"services exchanges" whereby entities can pay farmers to provide certain services. More specifically:
• EPA, USDA, the research community, and the private sector should research the viability of a
mechanism by which downstream communities can pay farmers to store stormwater during
rain events, reuse the water, and recycle nutrients for supplemental irrigation;
• EPA and USDA should enter into a partnership to facilitate water quantity trading in the same
way that they have partnered on water quality trading.
• USDA should seek to partner with the ACE to facilitate the engagement of farmers in ACE
flood prevention efforts;
• Municipal wastewater agencies that have already formed partnerships and in-lieu exchange
programs with farmers should share their expertise and experience with other agencies; and
• On the water quality side, EPA should encourage entities developing water quality trading
programs to include agricultural drainage water reuse as an approved offset.
The environmental benefits of water recycling are significant. Farmers who transition from
groundwater and surface water withdrawal to highly treated municipal effluent for irrigation can
conserve a valuable natural resource. Farmers who recycle agricultural drainage and stormwater can
reduce nutrient loading and manage flooding. On both the quality and the quantity side, these
benefits can be monetized and captured as a tool to advance more water recycling across the country.
Challenge 3: Lack of technological innovation to enable water recycling
As outlined above, farmers are in a unique position to capture, manage, and redirect stormwater for
beneficial uses. While technology exists to manage stormwater in urban settings, additional
innovation, testing, and demonstration is needed before similar technologies can be applied to
agricultural landscapes.
Action 3: Develop a pilot project to demonstrate cost-effective management systems for monitoring,
control, and automation of agricultural water reuse systems, including a decision support framework
to help farmers integrate information.
New and emerging technologies allow us to more accurately forecast rainfall events and periods of
drought. We have the ability to monitor and model reservoir, stream and soil moisture levels and
quantify water volumes that are being reduced through various pathways to build better large-scale
water balance models. Companies are also developing technology that simplifies the management of
control systems through the use of swarm intelligence or other algorithms to open and close valves to
manage water levels and flow rates on surface and subsurface storage structures like reservoirs,
ditches and drainage systems. This stored water can be reused on the farm where the storage is
located or pumped or delivered to another farm or field. The control of the system can be based on
various inputs or triggers, but a cost-benefit pricing mechanism may prove to be the most efficient in
a market-based approach.
17
-------
Challenge 4: Increase consumer, farmer, and utility confidence in the safety of recycled water.
As mentioned above, using municipally treated wastewater effluent as an irrigation source is common
is some states. For example, in California, 30 percent of recycled water is used for agricultural
production.6 Despite the safety of the practice, farmers may be reticent to use it to grow crops, and
buyers may be reticent to source food that has been grown with it. This concern is often due to a lack
of knowledge about the processes used to treat wastewater for reuse and the results of such
treatment. More work can and should be done to form partnerships to educate the food supply chain
about the relative risks and benefits of using recycled water for agricultural production.
Action 4: Water associations and utilities should form partnerships with producer associations, USDA
extension programs, and others to conduct outreach to farmers and the food supply chain to discuss
the benefits of and typical concerns related to using recycled water for irrigation, and to promote
recycled water to achieve sustainability goals.
Beginning in 2022, federal food safety regulations will require irrigation water to meet certain risk-
based safety standards. Even now, however, it is not uncommon for buyers to require farmers to
undergo food safety audits. In other words, regardless of federal actions, the market drives food safety.
Farmers will not use recycled water for irrigation if they are concerned that doing so will get them
crosswise with federal, state-level, or market-based food safety requirements. Partnerships are
necessary to communicate the relative risks of using recycled water.
Challenge 5: State-level policies and strategies can help advance on-farm water recycling.
States can influence water reuse through enabling policies and also through their support of
conservation practices as part of various water quality initiatives. EPA, water associations, and state-
level stakeholders all have a role to play in connecting the dots for states that have not yet integrated
water recycling into their agricultural water management policies and strategies.
Action 5.1: Include agricultural water capture and reuse practices in state nutrient reduction
strategies.
States and regions across the U.S. are developing nutrient reduction strategies to reach water quality
goals, and some states have identified a list of practices that should be implemented to reduce
nutrient losses to receiving waters. EPA can encourage the inclusion of practices that reuse water as
part of these strategies to encourage states to include.
Action 5.2: Develop state policies to promote agricultural reuse.
EPA, water associations, and state regulator associations should collect and share examples of state-
level enabling policy, including policies that have enabled use of recycled water for irrigation of food
and non-food crops, as well as those that have enabled drainage authorities to operate their systems
6 Water Research Foundation. Project Number: Reuse-15-08/4775. Agricultural Use of Recycled Water:
Impediments and Incentives. 2019.
18
-------
for multiple benefits (storage, water quality practices, downstream flood reduction) beyond just
drainage.
Challenge 6: Salinity is a limiting variable to sustainable reuse
The increase of total dissolved solids and salt in recycled water can place significant limitations on the
viability and sustainability of recycled water programs. Actions should be taken to advance salinity
management on a nationwide scale.
Action 6: EPA should take the following actions to limit the amount of salt that enters the domestic
wastewater supply:
• Provide the WaterSense label only to products that do not degrade water quality. Products
that add salt to wastewater should not qualify;
• Discourage the use of cation exchange water softeners (self-regenerating water softeners), as
the discharges from these devices degrade recycled water quality. Our understanding is that
EPA has decided not to proceed with the development of a draft specification for water
softeners as part of the WaterSense program at this time;
• Promote existing federal programs that reduce the salinity in source water (e.g. Colorado River
Basin Salinity Control Forum), and to the extent that funding decisions can be made
administratively, ensure adequate federal funding for these programs;
• Support states and municipalities that want to develop source control and pre-treatment
programs to keep salts out of the wastewater stream.
While included here as a recommendation important to agricultural applications of reuse, the need for
advancements in salinity management applies to multiple types of water reuse.
E. Environmental Restoration Water Reuse
Water reuse can provide a dependable supply of water to create, enhance, or restore ecological
functions and sustain long-term environmental benefits. Innovative opportunities for environmental
restoration using recycled water include wetland restoration, groundwater injection for saltwater
intrusion barriers, riparian restoration, hydration of dewatered streams, treatment of impaired
groundwater, and water exchanges that can preserve critical habitat for endangered species.
Despite the clear benefits of water reuse for environmental restoration, significant barriers limit the
expansion of the practice. These barriers include a general lack of knowledge about the use of
recycled water for environmental restoration projects, and confusion around which federal programs
and policies are relevant to these activities. The actions outlined below aim to address these
challenges.
Challenge 1: Entities planning environmental restoration projects are generally not aware how
water reuse can advance their goals.
19
-------
Across the country, entities such as highway administrations, property developers, environmental
contractors, and local governments engage in a variety of environmental restoration efforts.
Oftentimes, these entities are unaware that recycled water can be used to advance their goals.
Moreover, water recycling for environmental applications requires consideration of a complex suite of
benefits and risks and engagement of multiple partners. A robust information gathering and
dissemination effort could help address these challenges.
Action 1: The water sector should collect, collate, and disseminate case studies demonstrating the
successful use of recycled water for environmental restoration.
The water sector should develop a compendium to support reuse applications for environmental
restoration. Ideally, the compendium would highlight case studies demonstrating the benefits of
reuse applications for a range of water environments, such as flow augmentation of low flow streams,
creation of saltwater barriers, and hydration of wetland systems. This should include a consideration of
environmental economics.
A compendium could provide examples of lessons learned, regulatory strategies, communication
approaches, and outcomes that can help project proponents overcome regulatory uncertainty and
catalyze projects. Innovative and effective projects can be shared to increase awareness and foster
growth. The water sector could partner with state agencies and their associations as well as with EPA
and interested organizations to implement this item. Collaboration with EPA would ensure broad
communication of information. The approach would build on progress by other champions, including
state regulatory agencies and local governments.
Challenge 2: Entities pursuing environmental restoration with recycled water mav be stymied
bv a lack of clarity regarding (1) whether or not their projects are eligible for federal funding,
and (2) how federal regulations mav or mav not apply to their projects.
A lack of clarity around federal funding eligibility and regulatory applicability has limited viable
restoration projects. Entities intersted in using recycled water for environmental restoration have been
told that they do not qualify for EPA funding. Similarly, potential project leads have been told that
existing regulations prohibit the use of recycled water for restoration.
Action 2: Issue informational guidelines to clarify (1) federal funding eligibility for environmental
restoration projects using recycled water, and (2) what federal regulations would apply to various
types of restoration projects that are using recycled water.
Because these types of projects relate to a variety of resource considerations (e.g. water quality,
wetlands protection, fish and wildlife habitat, and irrigation delivery systems), inter-jurisdictional
coordination can provide greater certainty, support more holistic planning, and better facilitate
implementation of projects. Therefore, in developing these guidelines, EPA should seek to closely
collaborate with NRCS, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), USACE, other relevant federal partners,
and the water sector.
20
-------
F. Non-potable Reuse of Oil and Gas Water
Produced water from oil and fracking wells is a new source of potential water that can be treated and
reused for beneficial non-potable water supply purposes, such as cooling industrial facilities. Given
that produced water in its raw form contains chemical constituents that are of concern to public
health and the environment, it is imperative that in developing standards for treating this water
source, potential risks to environment and public health are fully assessed.
In order to facilitate the reuse of produced water for beneficial non-potable purposes, fit-for-purpose
treatment technology and regulatory standards must be in place to ensure protection of public health
and the environment. EPA and other regulatory agencies, including state agencies, can help facilitate
the development of such standards where they do not exist.
Challenge 1: For some potential applications of produced water reuse, fit-for-purpose
standards and criteria have not vet been developed to ensure that public health and the
environment are protected.
Action 1.1: Develop standards to meet public health and environmental objectives.
Where there is an interest in and a potential market for recycling produced water for beneficial non-
potable uses, relevant regulatory agencies should develop fit-for-purpose standards. When treated
produced water is going to be discharged into surface waters, an evaluation of public health and
environmental impacts should be done as part of the development of proposed Effluent Limitation
Guidelines (ELGs). Standards must similarly be developed for non-potable reuse applications where
ELGs do not apply.
As part of this undertaking, regulators should work with oil and gas producers and the scientific
community to identify priority constituents, determine where meaningful detection levels can be
achieved, and ensure that fit-for-purpose testing and treatment requirements are sufficiently
protective. For some potential reuse applications of produced water, the water quality requirements
are unknown. These areas will require foundational research before appropriate standards can be
developed.
Action 1.2: Develop informational fit-for-purpose guidelines to help facilitate the beneficial and safe
use of produced water.
EPA, USDA, and other federal agencies should partner with the water sector and oil and gas industry
to assist sectors considering the reuse of produced water to develop informational guidelines that
reflect key reuse considerations, including (1) treatment, (2) quantity and timeframe for water delivery,
(3) appropriate hazard control points and monitoring checks, and (4) relevant constraints important to
the finished product.
This information could be compiled in a compendium of practice guidelines that are in use in each
state, including each state's regulatory framework for water quantity as well as quality, ground water
standards, and other appropriate and useful information. A compendium of criteria should be readily
accessible to potential users and interested stakeholders.
21
-------
Challenge 2: There are technological gaps that limit the use of produced water in new sectors.
There are many technologies available to treat produced water. As with all applications of water reuse,
treatment of produced water will need to be based on a characterization of the water and the specific
fit-for-purpose needs of particular use applications. Effectively applying existing technology solutions
and making further technological advancements will be important to producing cost-effective options
for producing reuse-quality water. Technology needs are complicated by the high variability in the
quantity and quality of produced water, as well as by the diverse needs of potential end users outside
of the oil and gas sector.
Action 2: EPA, other federal agencies, the water sector associations, oil and gas producers, and the
research community should partner to develop a research plan to address unresolved information
gaps and technological needs related to reuse of produced water. Information gaps relevant to reuse
of produced water include: (1) demonstrating treatment efficacy for technologies drawing on a robust
produced water characterization, (2) strategies to overcome transportation challenges resulting from
dispersed well sites as well as uncertainty in production levels, and (3) analytical methods and
management strategies to address challenging constituents like naturally occurring radioactive
materials (NORM) and technologically enhanced naturally occurring radioactive materials (TENORM)
resulting from produced water treatment.
Challenge 3: Treatment of produced water is likely to produce high levels of solids, which will
need to be managed.
Large quantities of salts would be produced from increased treatment of produced water for reuse. In
order to recover and manage these resources, there needs to be an understanding of the market
opportunities as well as any associated risks within receiving sectors.
Action 3.: EPA should support the development of methods to effectively manage residuals from
treatment of produced water.
The oil and gas industry, the water sector, and the research community should work together with
EPA, DOE, and other federal agencies to develop a plan for the management of residuals from the
treatment of produced water. The plan should include an assessment of market opportunities,
treatment options, disposal options for solids that are not marketable (or do not currently have a
market), an assessment of the quality of residuals slated for reuse and their appropriateness and safety
for that reuse. Alongside this effort, USGS should update its produced water database with more
available information and expand the scope of constituents analyzed and reported on.
G. Stormwater Capture
While some states and localities have enacted policies to guide non-potable reuse of stormwater,
those policies and regulations are fragmented from state-to-state and largely depend on water
availability and permissible uses. The slow rate of adoption is occurring in spite of research
demonstrating the potential benefits of greater stormwater harvesting.
22
-------
According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), neighborhood- and regional-scale stormwater
reuse projects can contribute significantly to urban water supplies.7 NAS estimates, for example, that
in Los Angeles, average stormwater runoff from medium-density residential developments, if
captured and stored, would be roughly sufficient to meet indoor residential water needs in those
areas (NAS, 2016).
In contrast to these urban stormwater capture efforts, USACE manages a different component of
stormwater management—flood control and coastal storm surges. While water reuse and harvesting
are not among its traditional missions, USACE carries out these types of activities under its broader
Civil Works and Environmental Restoration missions.
There are new opportunities to facilitate stormwater harvesting through IWRM. Legislation enacted in
the 115th Congress directed both USACE and EPA to pursue integrated planning and to coordinate
with states and localities. Federal, state, and local government entities, water resource managers, the
research community and other relevant actors can work together to facilitate the harvesting and
beneficial reuse of stormwater in a manner that enhances the environment and protects public health.
Challenge 1: There is a lack of information regarding the constituent parts, fit-for-purpose
treatment needs, and potential downstream impacts of stormwater harvesting and use.
Additional information is needed on the constituents of runoff and the potential impact of constituent
occurrence on reuse treatment design, as well as the implications of stormwater recycling on
achieving in-stream values. Communities may be unable to craft appropriate management plans for
harvesting and reusing stormwater. Additional research is needed on the impacts of stormwater
harvesting on downstream water quantity and in-stream flows. For both public health and
environmental considerations, research is needed on a macro scale and a project-scale.
Action 1.1: Research and categorize the constituents of stormwater to better understand treatment
needs for various use applications (e.g. irrigation, industrial uses, graywater applications, etc.).
The research community, in partnership with the water sector and EPA, should build on the NAS body
of work, peer-reviewed literature, and the extensive knowledge already gained in states looking to
better understand and implement water reuse through stormwater capture (e.g., Minnesota,
California, Oklahoma, Florida, New York, Ohio and others). Specifically, research should focus on
efforts to study the constituents of harvested rainwater as well as stored runoff. Better understanding
the actual composition of the water will help guide more appropriate risk analyses that will drive
responsible and effective policies. In addition, EPA and states can work to develop a compendium of
case studies to inform future projects. These case studies should document barriers and benefits to
using stormwater runoff for reuse, as well as evaluate how well the stormwater capture is integrated
into long-term local water supply planning.
Action 1.2.: Research is needed on the potential impacts of stormwater harvesting on downstream
water quantity and in-stream flows.
7 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine (NAS). 2015. Using Graywater and Stormwater to
Enhance Local Water Supplies: An Assessment of Risks, Costs, and Benefits. Washington, DC: The National
Academies Press, https://doi.org/10.17226/21866
23
-------
As states look towards stormwater capture as a source of water supplies, without proper guidelines
and carefully constructed policies, there could be water quantity impacts downstream. This will be
particularly relevant in areas where water rights dictate water use.
Challenge 2: Incorporate stormwater reuse in USACE planning and assessment projects where
appropriate.
As mentioned in the introduction to this section, USACE has almost two centuries of guidance and
laws governing their traditional mission areas but does not include water reuse and harvesting among
those mission areas. With the implementation of America's Water Infrastructure Act of 2018 (AWIA),
USACE's support for the practice is beginning to grow. The following recommendation is designed to
help incorporate stormwater harvesting activities into the planning and assessment of Corps projects,
where such activities are appropriate.
Action 2: Support water recycling as a key component of implementing SEC. 1164 of AWIA.
USACE's implementation guidance for Section 1164 of AWIA (dated April 18, 2019) supports the
inclusion of recycling features in feasibility studies. This provides an opportunity to link elements such
as water reuse to projects for flood damage reduction and aquatic ecosystem restoration. In
implementing Section 1164 of AWIA, USACE should actively encourage district offices to support the
integration of recycling features in feasibility studies, as detailed in its April 2019 implementation
guidance. USACE should also raise awareness among non-federal sponsors of nature-based and green
infrastructure alternatives for managing stormwater in feasibility studies.
Importantly, it is critical that USACE recognize state water allocation doctrines, as well as established
water allocation agreements between USACE and other parties. Integration of stormwater reuse into
USACE policy must guard against unintentionally endangering existing allocations of municipal water
storage in USACE reservoirs.
Conclusion
We submit these recommendations to inform the development of a national Water Reuse Action Plan.
We look forward to reviewing a draft of an Action Plan when it is available, and stand ready to partner
with EPA and other stakeholders to advance water recycling as part of an integrated water
management portfolio.
24
-------
Appendix G: Selected Internationa! Profiles
NATIONAL WATER REUSE
ACTION PLAN
DRAFT
-------
Appendix G: Compilation of International Profiles
Every country faces a domestic responsibility to ensure that its population has access to water. This is
especially important in arid regions and areas prone to drought. To help make sure that clean, safe
water is available, many countries have developed comprehensive water management strategies that
include water reuse. Australia, Israel, Namibia, Singapore, and South Africa incorporate water reuse into
their water management programs to support water availability, security, and sustainability. These
countries reuse wastewater that is treated to various levels for domestic, agricultural irrigation, and
industrial water use. Some have developed guidelines to address the use of graywater, stormwater, and
rooftop capture and reuse.
Countries on the leading edge of water reuse have experience with communication and outreach to the
public to address the perception of water reuse applications. Regulations, economics, and sustainability
are other barriers for reuse implementation that have been recognized and addressed. The summary
table below and the country-specific write-ups in this appendix provide more detail on international
experiences in implementing reuse.
Table G-l. Key International Leaders in Water Reuse
Australia
Israel
Namibia
Singapore
South Africa
Largely arid
Arid region,
Arid country,
Self-sufficiency
Arid country,
continent,
population
drought-ravaged
population
population
growth, and
growth, severe
Drivers
growth,
vulnerable
water supply,
and drought
constrained
systems
and prolonged
drought, and
poor
infrastructure
Reuse
Applications
Groundwater
Agricultural
Potable water
Industry and
Potable water
replenishment
irrigation
reservoir
augmentation
Established
Achieved water
Pioneered
Developed
Successfully
dedicated
security; Israel
potable
overwhelming
implemented
funding; set
can provide
reclaimed water
acceptance for
potable
Results
long-term
groundwater
water and new
water
and
international
potable
reclaimed water
reclaimed water;
replicated the
replenishment
technologies
benchmark for
project model at
and water reuse
innovation
other locations
targets
Disclaimer
The international case studies included within this Appendix are included for illustrative purposes only
and are not intended to be exhaustive. They were created to support development of the draft Action
Plan and were not reviewed or approved by the applicable country. Each case study is unique and site-
specific, and technology may not be as effective as demonstrated. Inclusion in this Appendix does not
imply that the draft Action Plan endorses, approves, or supports these actions in this or any other
location.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | G-l
-------
Leadership from Non-State Entities
The efforts of these pioneering nations are supplemented by many nongovernmental organizations.
Large environmental and multinational entities are raising water scarcity awareness and promoting
sustainable water management and reuse. Organizations that support water reuse efforts include the
World Health Organization (WHO), the World Resources Institute (WRI) and the European Union (EU).
The WHO is an agency of the United Nations. Its role is to
direct and facilitate global health. Safe water supplies are
fundamental to global health as well as economic growth,
education, and health care. The WHO has developed water
quality guidelines that include the safe use of wastewater.
These guidelines are just a sampling of the WHO's technical
information and resources on water.
The WRI is a global research organization. Its work focuses
on six issues (climate, energy, food, forests, water, and
cities and transportation) and how they intersect with the
environment and development. The WRI has complied
current and future water stress rankings.
The EU is a political and economic union of 28 members
states in Europe. Its water policy is to ensure water quality
and quantity. Through policy, the EU is moving toward
water efficiency and a water saving economy. Many EU
studies, lesson learned, and actions are publicly available.
International Profiles
According to the WHO: By 2025, half of
the world's population will face water
stress.
According to the WRI: More than a
billion people face water scarcity. The
WRI projects that 3.5 billion people
could face water scarcity by 2025.
According to the EU: As of 2007, 11
percent of Europe's population and
17 percent of its territory has been
affected by either water scarcity or
drought with further deterioration of
the water situation expected.
International profiles were created to support development of the draft Action Plan. Reuse activities for
the following countries are described below:
Australia
• Israel
• Namibia
• Singapore
• South Africa
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | G-2
-------
International Profile: Australia
Australia is the driest inhabited continent in the world, with the country's main water supply coming
from rivers and surface reservoirs that are vulnerable to evaporation and drought.1 The recognition of
water resource vulnerability prompted a review of water sources, water usage, and consideration of
alternate supply options.
Background
The climate in Australia varies significantly; the north is characterized as tropical (hot and humid) in the
summer and warm and dry in the winter, and the south is characterized as hot and dry in the summer
and cool/mild and wet in the winter.2 Some areas receive over 100 inches of rainfall annually, while
others go years without rainfall. For water resources, Australia relies on rivers, surface reservoirs, and
non-conventional water sources such as seawater desalination. Australia's "millennium drought" lasting
from 1996 to mid-2010 triggered major reform in water management throughout Australia.
Setting the Table
Australia is separated into six states: New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia, South
Australia, and Tasmania. Water in Australia is managed by state and local governments. The Australian
state governments have worked together to develop and implement the National Water Quality
Management Strategy (NWQMS) to manage water quality within their jurisdiction. The strategy seeks to
protect the nation's water resources by maintaining and improving water quality while supporting
dependent ecosystems, agricultural and urban communities, and industry. The NWQMS comprises 24
technical and guidance documents and is being rolled out in two separate phases. The Phase 1
Guidelines cover graywater and treated sewage reuse (residential garden watering, car washing, toilet
flushing, and clothes washing), irrigation (recreational and open space, agriculture, and horticulture),
fire protection and firefighting, and industrial uses, including cooling water. The Phase 2 Guidelines
cover recycled water to augment drinking water supplies, storm and roof water for purposes such as
irrigation, and managed aquifer recharge.
The states have shown desire and willingness to manage their water resources to better prepare for the
future. Queensland has developed a water security program to help manage its water resources and
growing population demands until 2040.3 In 2016, Victoria planned to invest over $370 million (USD)
toward its Water for Victoria Program. The program includes the integration of multiple water resource
projects including waterway and catchment health improvements, agriculture water efficiency projects,
and rural water system upgrades.4
Turning Vision into Action
Water recycling varies significantly between the states. South Australia recycles the largest volume of
water while the Northern Territories recycles the lowest volume of water. Western Water (a water
1 Australias Guide. (2019). Australia facts, just the facts. Accessed on 9 July 2019. https://www.australias.guide/facts/
2 WeatherOnline. (2019). Australia. Accessed on 9 July 2019. https://www.weatheronline.co.uk/reports/climate/Australia.htm
3 Australian Water Association. (2017). Queensland explores solutions to future water security issues. Accessed on 10 July 2019.
https://www.awa.asn.au/AWA MBRR/Publications/Latest News/Queensland explores solutions to future water security is
sues.aspx
4 Victoria State Government. (2016). Water for Victoria: Summary. Accessed on 10 July 2019.
https://www.water.vic.gov.au/ data/assets/pdf file/0034/58849/Water-Plan-summary.pdf
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | G-3
-------
authority in Victoria) recycles between 90 and 100 percent of its wastewater.5 The South Australia
Water Corporation has initiated a project titled the Northern Adelaide Irrigation Scheme (NAIS) to
deliver up to 3.7 billion gallons of reclaimed water suitable for commercial food production.6 The NAIS
infrastructure will treat, store, and transport climate and season independent water to the farm gate.
Weather in Perth: Summers are warm
and dry, and the winters are long, cool,
and wet. It is windy and clear year-
round.
Australia's major capital cities have set water recycling
objectives. The city of Perth (Western Australia's capital)
has set a 33 percent water recycling goal by 20257 and is
working to diversify its water supply. Perth gets its water
from desalination in combination with potable reuse or
groundwater replenishment. More specifically, the
Beenyup groundwater replenishment plant in Perth is operated by the state-owned Water Corporation.
The plant features a groundwater environmental buffer and incorporates ultrafiltration, reverse
osmosis, and ultraviolet treatment processes.8 After successful completion of the trial phase, the Stage 1
construction for the full-scale plant started in 2014 and operations commenced in 2016. Stage 2 is now
underway, with the goal of doubling the plant's capacity. A key factor in the scheme's success was the
early engagement of the community and key stakeholders. Australia's use of advanced water recycling
serves as leading example of indirect potable reuse through these groundwater replenishment efforts.
Weather in Toowoomba: Summers are
long, warm, and cloudy; winters are
short, cold, and clear. Rain typically
falls throughout the year.
In contrast with Perth, the city of Toowoomba
(Queensland) has said "no" to water recycling by
abandoning a potable reuse proposal in 2006.
Communications and public acceptance were noted as
major barriers to the proposal that could not be resolved;
the community believed they were experiencing short-term
water supply issues rather than long-term issues.
Australians have also embraced water conservation. In Sydney, smart meters were piloted to track
domestic water use and help consumers better manage their conservations practices as well as their
water purchases.9
Key Outcomes
Coming out of Australia's "millennium drought," the government invested over $12 billion (USD) over a
10-year period in water management through the Water for the Future Program.10 Other outcomes
5 Recycled Water in Australia, (no date). How much water is recycled in Australia? Accessed on 18 July 2019.
http://www.recycledwater.com.au/index.php?id=62
6 Southern Australian Water Corporation, (no date). Northern Adelaide Irrigation Scheme (NAIS). Accessed on 8 July 2019.
https://www.sawater.com.au/current-prolects/nais
7 Recycled Water in Australia, (no date). How much water is recycled in Australia? Accessed on 8 July 2019.
http://www.recycledwater.com.au/index.php?id=l
8 World Health Organization. (2017). Potable reuse: Guidance for producing safe drinking-water. Accessed on 8 July 2019.
https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/258715/9789241512770-
eng.pdf;isessionid=B63AC513250D43CDD3A0D7368BB40F10?sequence=l
9 Wallis-Lage, C. (2010,1 September). Overcoming the global barriers to water reuse. WaterWorld. Accessed on 27 June 2019.
https://www.waterworld.com/international/article/16201890/overcoming-the-global-barriers-to-water-reuse
10 Murray-Darling Basin Authority. (2016). Since the Millennium Drought—The River Murray System: Lessons learnt and
changes made. Accessed on 8 July 2019. https://www.mdba.gov.au/sites/default/files/pubs/Since-millennium-drought-
report O.pdf
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | G-4
-------
included development of potable reuse regulations including the Commonwealth Water Act 2007 and
the Basin Plan 2012.
Australians recognize the importance of behavior with respect to water usage. Every third week of
October is National Water Week, coordinated by the Australian Water Association. The theme for 2019
is "It's time to change the world." The goal is to introduce sustainable water-related practices to
children and get them to act. National Water Week includes events and competitions around the
country.
Looking Ahead
Groundwater replenishment is one of the many solutions that will help Perth and the Water Corporation
become more climate resilient and secure future water supply. Accordingly, the Water Corporation has
set a goal to recycle 30 percent of wastewater by 2030 and 60 percent by 2060, meaning up to 20
percent of Perth's drinking water needs could be supplied by groundwater replenishment by 2060.11
11 Water Corporation. (2019). Groundwater replenishment. Accessed on 8 July 2019. https://www.watercorporation.com.au/-
/media/files/residential/water-supplv/gwrt/gwr%20brochure februarv%202019.pdf
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | G-5
-------
International Profile: Israel
Israel, on the arid east coast of the Mediterranean Sea, has
historically faced challenges with water availability. As of
2015, the country now reclaims 87 percent of collected
wastewater, up from 10 percent in the 1960s.13 Israel's
evolving water reuse strategy, driven by careful planning
and efficient distribution, offers an example of how
thoughtful decision-making can lead to successful water
reuse.
Background
The dry climate gives Israel unequal and seasonal variability
of rainfall, with its modestly wetter north to a drier center and south, which include the main
agricultural areas. In the mid-20th century, Israel primarily relied on groundwater as its chief water
supply. Increased immigration in the 1980s strained existing water supplies and wastewater treatment
infrastructure. The increases in demand were further stressed by several consecutive years of drought.
After several outbreaks of infectious diseases were attributed to pollution from wastewater, public
pressure increased on improving wastewater treatment and
better monitoring the quality of reclaimed water.
Setting the Table
Israel's water policy history combines infrastructure
development and regulatory reform. In the early 1950s,
Israel enacted a national Water Law, rendering all water
sources as public property. Along with its small geographic
size, this enabled Israel to adopt centralized, integrated
planning across its water sector.
In the early 2000s, Israel established a national Water
Authority to integrate water management throughout the
country. Its national master plan encouraged changing
public perceptions to view effluent as a legitimate water
resource. In essence, water reuse became an inextricable part of the nation's water policy.
The plan further called for increasing water efficiency, including by reducing losses in municipal systems,
enhancing efficiency for irrigating public and private gardens, and using runoff to improve the urban
landscape. Treated wastewater was also widely used for agriculture. In addition, the plan addresses
Israel's potable water sources, and intentionally includes both traditional (surface water and
groundwater) and alternative sources (reclaimed water and seawater desalination).
12 Israel Water Authority. (2015). The wastewater and treated effluents infrastructure development in Israel. 7th World Water
Forum, Korea, 12-17 April 2015. Accessed on 26 June 2019.
http://www.water.eov.il/Hebrew/ProfessionallnfoAndData/2012/03-
The%20Wastewater%20and%20Treated%20Effluents%20lnfrastructure%20Development%20in%20lsrael.pdf
13 Marin, P; Tal, S; Yeres, J; Ringskog, K. (2017). Water management in Israel: Key innovations and lessons learned for water-
scarce countries. Washington, DC: World Bank.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | G-6
Water Reuse for Agricultural and
Other Purposes: Reclaimed
wastewater is primarily used for
agricultural irrigation. It accounts for 37
percent of the water provided for
agriculture and 7 percent of water
provided for all uses.12 Israel is aiming
to treat all wastewater to allow
unrestricted agricultural irrigation.
Leader in Water Reuse: "Today, nearly
90 percent of our waste water is
recycled. That's around four times
higher than any other country in the
world. It is a remarkable achievement
and this benefits not only Israel.
Israeli companies are helping save
water around the world, from Africa
to California to India."
— From the 2016 Israeli Corporate
Social Responsibility Conference.
opening remarks
-------
Case Example: Shafdan Treatment Plant
The Shafdan wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) is the largest water treatment facility in Israel
and considered a model plant by the United Nations. The plant currently treats 97 million gallons
per day of municipal wastewater. Shafdan's main goals are to minimize environmental pollution
and avoid health risks, prevent discharges of raw sewage, and treat wastewater for agricultural
reuse. Sewage from Tel Aviv and the surrounding area undergoes secondary biological and tertiary
soil aquifer treatment before being piped to the Negev Desert. More than 60 percent of the
agriculture in Negev is irrigated by water from the Shafdan facility.14
Turning Vision into Action
Israel employed integrated water resources management planning across the country, creating a
national water plan benefiting its citizens and its neighbors. The national policies called for replacement
of freshwater allocations to agriculture by reclaimed effluent. To facilitate the use of effluent, Israel built
a national water conveyance infrastructure that connected different water supplies (e.g., aquifers,
desalination, reclaimed water) with potential end users. Much like an energy grid, this national
infrastructure allowed Israel to convey water surpluses and address demand more flexibly.
Complementing improvements to its water infrastructure,
Israel simultaneously increased the standards for treating
wastewater (see inset box). The latest 2010 water quality
standards for effluents specify 37 different parameters that
are implemented to avoid potential adverse environmental
consequences. These standards facilitate use of reclaimed
water for a broad set of end uses. Israel's approach reflects
the interconnectivity of its water infrastructure and the
need to be able to move reclaimed effluent to a whole host
of potential end uses.
This broad-scale integration of water management practices
also leaned heavily on innovative approaches to treating
water. For instance, Israel recharges aquifers with treated
wastewater during low-demand months, capture of
occasional flash floods, and comprehensive monitoring and
control.
Israel implemented supportive communications and outreach programs to educate its citizens on the
importance of water conservation. This messaging is reinforced by pricing water at its actual cost. For
instance, drinking water supplies to residents are priced at an order of magnitude higher than the
reclaimed water used by farmers.16 The infrastructure and water management reforms have improved
Israel's own water security and allowed the country to provide water to the Palestinians and the
Kingdom of Jordan, as well as export water-intensive produce.
14 Marin, P; Tal, S; Yeres, J; Ringskog, K. (2017). Water management in Israel: Key innovations and lessons learned for water-
scarce countries. Washington, DC: World Bank.
15 A Zask, Israel Ministry of Environmental Protection, personal communication, 2019.
16 A Zask, Israel Ministry of Environmental Protection, personal communication, 2019.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | G-7
Timeline of WWTP Standards in Israel
Pre-1992: Primary treatment only
1992: Secondary quality standards for
biochemical oxygen demand and total
suspended solids
2010: Tertiary standards for nitrogen,
phosphorus, filtration, disinfection
Reclaimed water from WWTPs came
at no cost to users if it only received
primary or secondary treatment. A
small fee is charged for reclaimed
water that receives tertiary
treatment.15
-------
Key Outcomes
Since the 2000, Israel has invested over $750 million (USD) in large-scale reclamation efforts, which
added 37 billion gallons per year in capacity.17 It now has 67 large WWTPs, with the 10 largest WWTPs
treating more than 56 percent of the total wastewater generated.18 The nationwide piping
infrastructure has connected various parts of the country, allowing surplus water to be easily conveyed
as needed. To complement this connectivity, most wastewater has been undergoing tertiary treatment
since the 2010 standards have been in place. Additional requirements for treated wastewater quality
apply when there is a known agricultural irrigation use. The 2010 standards include, for the first time,
requirements for salinity and concentrations of toxic metals.19 These collective efforts have caused
Israel's reused treated sewage rate to rise from 10 percent of collected wastewater the early 1960s to
87 percent in 2015.20
By increasing the amount of reclaimed water, Israel has reduced its dependency on limited natural
water supplies and droughts have had little impact on end users. Wastewater reclamation replaces fresh
water draws for domestic and industrial purposes. About 85 percent of reclaimed effluent is used for
agricultural irrigation because it is more cost effective than desalinated water.21 Small amounts are used
for gardening and industry. As a result, Israel recognized treated wastewater as a resource and has
subsequently become a leader in water reuse.
Looking Ahead
Israel aims to continue the development of its water reuse infrastructure and the successful momentum
of the last two decades. The Water Authority's master plan targets reusing 100 percent of wastewater.
By emphasizing both treatment technologies and connectivity of water infrastructure, the nation is well
positioned to achieve that goal.
Israel's ability to efficiently reuse effluent anywhere across the country also increases the impact of
otherwise small-scale projects. For instance, Israel now has several initiatives to capture and reuse rain
water that would otherwise runoff to the sea. One such example is the Rainwater Harvesting Program.
This program focuses on capturing rain from school rooftops for reuse onsite in toilets and watering
gardens. This has resulted in a freshwater avoidance of more than 75 percent for participating schools.22
This program has a secondary benefit by fostering an awareness of water resources and water scarcity in
children. The program administrators seek to implement this approach more broadly across Israel.
17 Israel Water Authority. (2015). The wastewater and treated effluents infrastructure development in Israel. 7th World Water
Forum, Korea, 12-17 April 2015. Accessed on 26 June 2019.
http://www.water.gov.il/Hebrew/ProfessionallnfoAndData/2012/03-
The%20Wastewater%20and%20Treated%20Effluents%20lnfrastructure%20Development%20in%20lsrael.pdf
18 Marin, P; Tal, S; Yeres, J; Ringskog, K. (2017). Water management in Israel: Key innovations and lessons learned for water-
scarce countries. Washington, DC: World Bank.
19 A Zask, Israel Ministry of Environmental Protection, personal communication, 2019.
20 Marin, P; Tal, S; Yeres, J; Ringskog, K. (2017). Water management in Israel: Key innovations and lessons learned for water-
scarce countries. Washington, DC: World Bank.
21 A Zask, Israel Ministry of Environmental Protection, personal communication, 2019.
22 Vered, A. (2011, 26 January). Teaching water conservation to Israel's next generation. Jewish National Fund (press release).
Accessed on 27 June 2019. http://usa.lnf.org/about-lnf/news/press-releases/teaching-water-conservation.html.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | G-8
-------
International Profile: Namibia
Namibia is one of the most arid countries in Africa: the average rainfall is about 10 inches per year, but
the heat causes 83 percent to evaporate and only 1 percent of rainwater infiltrates into the ground.23
The country has experienced water stress and shortages throughout its history but has used water reuse
approaches to improve its water security.
Background24
Namibia's climate is characterized by hot and dry conditions and sparse and erratic rainfall. Namibia is
one of the world's most sparsely populated countries. It is highly dependent on neighbors South Africa
and Angola to sustain its water supply, as a large portion of its population lives near or along the banks
of rivers shared with these countries.
The current demographic explosion in Africa is projected to exacerbate water needs. By 2030, about
80 percent of the world's population will live on the African and Asian continents, regions likely to
experience continued water stress.25
Setting the Table
Namibia is a young country, having gained independence in March of 1990, and has inherited water
management policies that were designed before independence. Namibia has drinking water guidelines
but no comprehensive policy for treated wastewater.
Turning Vision into Action26
Before the 1960s, Namibia's capital city of Windhoek received its water from local springs. After the
springs dried up, though, Windhoek became the first city in the world to reuse wastewater. It quickly
became known as a pioneer in implementing this water management strategy. The city's Goreangab
water reclamation plant commenced operation in 1969. The plant was upgraded five times over its
lifetime; in 2002, a new plant began operation. The New Goreangab Water Reclamation Plant (NGWRP)
uses treatment technologies with selected combinations of oxidation processes, activated carbon
filtration, biofiltration, and membrane filtration to transform secondary domestic effluent into high-
quality drinking water.
Absent standards for reusing treated wastewater, the plant
has adopted its own water quality standards, which are
largely based on existing guidance and standards including
those from the World Health Organization and the U.S. EPA.
The standards are enforceable per the plant's operating
agreement. Today, the NGWRP meets 35 percent of the city
23 Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. (2005). Namibia. Accessed on 9 July 2019.
http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/countries regions/NAM/
24 Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations. (2016). Namibia. Accessed on 9 July 2019.
http://www.fao.org/nr/water/aquastat/countries regions/NAM/
25 Haushofer, C. (2019, 6 April). Africa: The reuse of treated wastewater for drinking water. Afrik 21. Accessed on 10 July 2019.
https://www.afrik21.africa/en/africa-the-reuse-of-treated-wastewater-for-drinking-water/
27 World Health Organization. (2017). Potable reuse: Guidance for producing safe drinking-water. Accessed on 8 July 2019.
https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/258715/9789241512770-
eng.pdf:isessionid=B63AC513250D43CDD3A0D7368BB40F10?sequence=l
"Water should be judged by its
quality, not by its history."
— Dr. Lukas van Vuuren, a pioneer
associated with the Windhoek
reclamation plant27
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | G-9
-------
and its metropolitan area's drinking water needs, supplying high-quality drinking water for nearly
400,000 people.28
Key Outcomes and Looking Ahead
Windhoek has been relying on reused water to augment its drinking water supply for 50 years, and has a
record of delivering safe, clean water even during multi-year droughts. The NGWRP is considered a
model for reuse operations and is consistently studied/visited by experts, governmental personnel, and
foreign mission personnel. It is considered an international benchmark for water and reclamation
program innovation.
27 World Health Organization. (2017). Potable reuse: Guidance for producing safe drinking-water. Accessed on 8 July 2019.
https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/258715/9789241512770-
eng.pdf;isessionid=B63AC513250D43CDD3A0D7368BB40F10?sequence=l
28 Haushofer, C. (2019, 6 April). Africa: The reuse of treated wastewater for drinking water. Afrik 21. Accessed on 10 July 2019.
https://www.afrik21.africa/en/africa-the-reuse-of-treated-wastewater-for-drinking-water/
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | G-10
-------
International Profile: Singapore
Singapore, the island city-state at the southern tip of the Malay Penninsula, currently imports about 40
percent of its water. Its current water supply agreements with neighboring Malaysia are set to expire in
2061. Singapore is investing in technology and water management to meet its goal of water self-
sufficiency before the water agreements expire. To do this, Singapore's Public Utilities Board (PUB), the
national water authority, uses an integrated approach to manage water supply, water catchment, and
water use.29 PUB's overarching strategy is to collect every drop of water, reuse water endlessly, and
desalinate seawater.
Background
Singapore is one of the world's most "water-stressed"
cities: though it is on the Equator in a tropical environment,
it has no freshwater lakes or aquifers to help supply fresh
water.30 In 2014, Singapore experienced record-breaking
dry spells. A steady increase in population has only
exacerbated the strain on water resources. It is estimated
that by 2060, two-thirds of Singapore's water demand will
be industrial. These factors have driven Singapore to invest
in alternative and innovative water supply solutions.
Setting the Table
Since restructuring and consolidating its water authorities
in 2001, Singapore has integrated its water management to
focus on its current four sources of water, also called the "Four National Taps":31
• Locally managed catchment areas. Singapore's activities in this area include expansive rainwater
capture efforts and reservoir maintenance. Singapore's Active, Beautiful, Clean Waters (ABC Waters)
program uses "natural systems consisting of plants and soil" to hold and treat rainwater runoff, and
manage peak flow events.32
• Imported water. In 1962, Singapore signed the Johor Water Agreement, enabling it to draw and
import up to 250 million gallons per day from the Johor River until 2061.33
Timeline of Water Management in
Singapore
1961: PUB is formed to manage
Singapore's water, electric and gas
2001: PUB created as a board under
the Ministry of the Environment and
Water, managing water supply;
Singapore opens its first production
plant for recycled water
2005: First desalination plant
constructed
2008: Marina Bay reservoir
constructed
29 Singapore Public Utilities Board. (2018). Our water, our future. Accessed on 8 July 2019.
https://www.pub.gov.sg/Documents/PUBOurWaterOurFuture.pdf
30 Reig, P; Maddocks, A; Gassert, F. (2013,12 December). World's 36 most water-stressed countries. World Resources Institute.
Accessed on 8 July 2019. https://www.wri.org/blog/2013/12/world-s-36-most-water-stressed-countries
31 Singapore Public Utilities Board. (2019). Singapore water story. Accessed on 8 July 2019.
https://www.pub.gov.sg/watersupplv/singaporewaterstorv
32 Yau, WK; Radhakrishnan, M; Liong, S-Y; Zevenbergen, C; Pathirana, A. (2017). Effectiveness of ABC Waters design features for
runoff quantity control in urban Singapore. Water 9(8): 577. Accessed on 9 July 2019. https://www.mdpi.com/2073-
4441/9/8/577/htm
33 Singapore Public Utilities Board. (2019). Singapore water story. Accessed on 8 July 2019.
https://www.pub.eov.se/watersupplv/sineaporewaterstorv
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | G-ll
-------
Potable reclaimed water. Singapore uses the term
"NEWater" to describe potable water that comes
from reclaimed wastewater. It undergoes "a four-
stage treatment process (conventional treatment,
micro-filtration, reverse osmosis, and UV
treatment)" in order to meet drinking standards.34
Seawater desalination to produce potable water.
Engagement Case Study: NEWater is
potable (making up about 40 percent of
Singapore's water needs with plans to
increase to 55 percent by 2060), but
mostly used in industrial applications.
NEWater is also used to supplement
reservoirs. The blended water is
subsequently treated prior to distribution.
Turning Vision into Action
Foreseeing water availability challenges, Singapore has
devoted resources to maximizing the potential of the "Four National Taps." Today, two-thirds of
Singapore is served by a network of rivers, canals, and drains that convey rainwater to reservoirs.
NEWater serves as the main water reuse application. The country has five water reclamation plants
producing recycled water for potable and industrial applications. Combined, the plants treat about 157
billion gallons of water each year certified to the U.S. EPA and World Health Organization drinking water
standards.36 To supplement that supply, Singapore currently manages three water desalination plants
that can meet up to 30 percent of the total water demand.
Key Outcomes and Looking Ahead
Singapore's desire is to rely less on imported water and
become more self-sufficient with its water resources—but,
by 2060, Singapore's water use is expected to more than
double due to population and economic growth. Singapore
expects to meet the majority of this future demand using
NEWater and desalination. Accordingly, it has devoted $493
million (USD) in public funds to research and integrate
water management technologies over 15-years.
Leader in Water Reuse: "Singapore has
become a world leader in water
management firstly because of its
location as a densely populated city-
state on an island lacking freshwater
lakes. Thanks to the award-winning
holistic work of its public utilities
agency, the city currently receives more
than half of its water supply from the
unorthodox sources of rainwater
collection (20%), recycled water (30%)
and desalination (10%)."35
Singapore recognizes its largest current user of water is
industrial. By finding ways to reduce the water needed for
industrial operations, Singapore can reduce the increasing demand in that sector. Programs are already
in place to incentivize and educate firms on the importance of water reuse and water reduction.
An ongoing challenge for Singapore is to ensure that water demand does not rise at an unsustainable
rate. PUB has developed several outreach programs to foster conservation support in homes, schools,
and workplaces. The programs include water efficiency labeling, toilet replacements, and recognition for
individuals and organizations that champion water efficiency. A key outcome of this outreach is that per
capita household water consumption has gone from 43.5 gallons per day in 2003 to 38 gallons per day in
2017. Singapore has a household water consumption goal of less than 34.3 gallons per day by 2030.37
34 Jacobson, M. (2012). Singapore water management. World Wide Fund for Nature. Accessed on 8 July 2019.
https://wwf.panda.org/7204587/Singapore
35 Jacobson, M. (2012). Singapore water management. World Wide Fund for Nature. Accessed on 8 July 2019.
https://wwf.panda.org/7204587/Singapore
36 World Health Organization. (2017). Potable reuse: Guidance for producing safe drinking-water. Accessed on 8 July 2019.
https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/258715/9789241512770-
eng.pdf:isessionid=B63AC513250D43CDD3A0D7368BB40F10?sequence=l
37 Singapore Public Utilities Board. (2019). Singapore water story. Accessed on 8 July 2019.
https://www.pub.eov.se/watersupplv/sineaporewaterstorv
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | G-12
-------
International Profile: South Africa
South Africa, an arid country that relies mainly on surface water supplies, has suffered severe droughts
during its history. The Western Cape Province continues to experience the worst drought in 400 years;
without intervention, South Africa's national water deficit will likely be around 17 percent by 2030.38
Cape Town's water crisis in 2018, dubbed "Day Zero," threatened to turn off customer taps from the
municipal water supply. Water scarcity not only threatens drinking water supplies but ecological
conditions, the manufacturing sector, and the agricultural sector. South Africa has engaged in some
water reuse efforts and aims to include water reuse applications in its overarching strategy for water
security.
Background
The majority of South Africa's water and wastewater infrastructure is in poor or critical condition.
Though the National Water Act says that water is a natural resource that belongs to all people of South
Africa, many South Africans do not have access to fresh water and sanitary conditions. Formed in 2014,
South Africa's Department of Water and Sanitation manages the country's water resources and has
developed a master plan for water resources and infrastructure through 2030 and beyond.
Setting the Table
The country's water and sanitation master plan is built on five pillars of transformation (operational,
institutional, structural, systemic, and delivery model). Water sustainability for South Africa will require
moving from current water supplies—largely surface water—to increased groundwater use, reuse of
effluent from wastewater treatment plants, water reclamation, desalination, and treated acid mine
drainage.
Turning Vision into Action39,40
Direct potable reuse schemes are on the increase in South Africa. A leading example is the eMalahleni
water reclamation plant. eMalahleni is an industrial town with coal-producing mines, steel
manufacturing, and coal-fired power stations. The municipality, Anglo American Thermal Coal, and BHP
Billiton entered into a partnership agreement to build the eMalahleni water reclamation plant. Under
the agreement, the plant is owned by Anglo American Thermal Coal and the eMalahleni Municipality in
turn buys the water from the plant for use in its distribution network. The plant was built to reduce acid
mine drainage, so its source water comes from four different local mines, Greenside, Kleinkopje, South
Witbank, and Landa.
After evaluating various technologies as part of pilot studies, project leaders decided to use a high-
recovery precipitating reverse osmosis treatment process. The entire plant treatment system is
controlled using a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system that allows the plant to
operate automatically. Plant personnel are trained to operate all aspects of the plant if the SCADA
38 Water and Sanitation. (2018). National water and sanitation master plan. Volume 1: Call to action. Version 10.1.
http://www.dwa.gov.za/National%20Water%20and%20Sanitation%20Master%20Plan/Documents/NWSMP%20Call%20to%20A
ction%20vl0.1.pdf
39 World Health Organization. (2017). Potable reuse: Guidance for producing safe drinking-water. Accessed on 8 July 2019.
https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/258715/9789241512770-
eng.pdf;isessionid=B63AC513250D43CDD3A0D7368BB40F10?sequence=l
40 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. (2012). eMalahleni: Water Reclamation Plant | South Africa.
Accessed on 9 July 2019. https://unfccc.int/climate-action/momentum-for-change/lighthouse-activities/emalahleni-water-
reclamation-plant
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | G-13
-------
system fails and are also responsible for taking and analyzing samples to verify the online sensor and
probe measurements. The plant was commissioned in 2007 and continues to produce potable water for
eMalahleni as well as reduce environmental risk from uncontrolled discharges of acid mine drainage.
Key Outcomes and Looking Ahead
South Africans recognize the importance of a talented
workforce. Their plant operators must be familiar with
specific plant activities and functions and overall operations,
and (according to the National Water Act) must be certified.
While the government has a formal water management
plan that includes water reuse, it is not yet being applied on
a national or regional level. This has led to opportunities for
the private sector. For example, the eMalahleni water
reclamation project is being considered for replication by
Anglo American at six of its other operations and has been
replicated by other mining companies. The eMalahleni
model is also being considered for mines other than coal.
The South African insurance company
Old Mutual, based in Cape Town, is
no longer getting its drinking water
from the city's water supply system
and is providing potable water to its
employees through an "off grid"
system that recycles wastewater. As a
corollary effort, the company has
reduced its water consumption by 30
percent using electronic monitoring
of flows and consumption, installation
of aerators on taps, and savings on
toilet flushing.41
41 Haushofer, C. (2019, 6 April). Africa: The reuse of treated wastewater for drinking water. Afrik 21. Accessed on 10 July 2019.
https://www.afrik21.africa/en/africa-the-reuse-of-treated-wastewater-for-drinking-water/
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | G-14
-------
Appendix H: Selected Water Reuse Case Studies
NATIONAL WATER REUSE
ACTION PLAN
DRAFT
-------
Appendix H: Compilation of Water Reuse Case Studies
Several compendia of case studies have been published in recent years, including the 2017 Potable
ReuseCompendium and ZOlZGuidelinesforWaterReuse. Appendix H of the draft Action Plan is not a
comprehensive compilation, but includes a select number of water reuse case study summaries that
were provided in response to outreach during draft Action Plan development and from the public
docket. Along with the abbreviated summaries located in the main body of the draft Action Plan, these
examples illustrate the variety and complexity of water reuse projects happening around the United
States.
This Appendix demonstrates how information provided from interested stakeholders was integrated in
the draft Action Plan. It highlights specific water reuse applications, intended to spark interest and ideas,
forming the foundation for implementation of future water reuse projects. The table below identifies
the case studies presented in this Appendix and their source. The summaries below are as provided by
the responsible organization and unedited for inclusion in this report. They are presented in no
particular order.
Disclaimer
The case studies included within this Appendix are included for illustrative purposes only and are not
intended to be exhaustive. Each case study is unique and site-specific, and technology may not be as
effective as demonstrated. Inclusion in this Appendix does not imply that the draft Action Plan endorses,
approves, or supports these actions in this or any other location.
Title
Source
1. Pure Water Monterey
Monterey One Water
2. City of Roseville
City of Roseville
3. City of Altamonte Springs, FL
EPA Region 4
4. Emory University
EPA Region 4
5. Indiantown Cogeneration Facility
EPA Region 4
6. Water Conserv II
EPA Region 4
7. Wichita Falls, Texas
Docket EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0010
8. El Paso, Texas
Docket EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0010
9. San Diego Pure Water
Docket EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0010
10. Silicon Valley Advanced Water Purification Center
Docket EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0010
11. Orange County Water District Groundwater Replenishment
Docket EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0010
12. Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County Recycled Water
Docket EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0033
Information
13. Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County Stormwater
Docket EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0174-0033
Services Program
14. California's Reuse of Produced Water for Human
EPA Region 8
Consumption Crops
15. Denver Water
Denver Water
16. Water Reuse for Golf Course and Green Areas Irrigation at
EPA Region 2
Palmas del Mar Resort and Residential Development,
Puerto Rico
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | H-l
-------
3,500 ACRE FEET/YEAR
of Advanced Purified
Recycled Water
produced for injection into
the Seaside Groundwater Basin
g
^ M -22% of the
Monterey Peninsula's
water supply will be provided by
Pure Water Monterey
1,000ACRE FEET
potable water drought J
reserve to increase availability of
recycled water for ag use during dry years
m m New Source Waters
will help increase tertiary treated recycled
water for agricultural irrigation up to
4,400 ACRE FEET / YEAR
65 Pure Water Monterey
A Groundwater Replenishment Project
PURE WATER MONTEREY
Safe • Local • Sustainable
OThe Monterey Peninsula is situated along
California's picturesque Central Coast. With the
longest coastline of any California county, the
area's mild climate attracts more than 9 million
visitors annually and is home to diverse agriculture fields that
generate $4.4 billion for the county's economy.
As a region isolated from state or federal water projects, the
area must rely solely on its limited, local water resources.
For Monterey Peninsula residents and businesses, water has
historically come from two sources: 1) a local river (Carmei
River) and 2) the ground (Seaside Groundwater Basin), Due
to state and court-ordered reductions, these supplies are
about to become very limited. To help address this challenge,
Monterey One Water and its partners have come together
to create a new, drought-resistant, and independent water
supply: Pure Water Monterey (PWM).
Using a proven, advanced, multi-stage treatment process,
Pure Water Monterey will turn used water into a safe, reliable,
and sustainable water supply that complies with or exceeds
strict state and federal drinkingwaterstandards. The purified
water will then be used for groundwater replenishment.
WHERE DOES THE USED WATER COME FROM?
For decades, Monterey One Water has helped diversify the local water supply through recycled water
production for agriculture - helping irrigate 12,000 acres of freshly-edible food crops and prevent seawater
intrusion. To address both the non-potable and potable water demands, PWM has identified additional used
water sources to bring into its existing wastewater treatment system, including:
Secondary Treated Agriculture Agriculture Urban Storm
Wastewater Drainage Water Wash Water Water Runoff
-------
Pure Water Monterey
J A Groundwater Replenishment Project
ADVANCED PURIFICATION TECHNOLOGY
Indirect potable reuse occurs in many communities in the Southwest United States and around the world. Protecting
public health and safety is paramount, and PWM utilizes a four-step advanced purification treatment process to meet or
exceed all state and federal drinking water regulations.
O) _-jZ1_* jJGL
n
PROJECT COMPONENTS
PWM has four distinct project components. Overall project construction is nearing completion with water
delivery to the Seaside Groundwater Basin expected to occur in late summer / early fall of 2019.
Source
Waters
Monterey
One Water
MontereyPeninsula
W©T E R
Management District
SALINAS
F#RA
Fort Ord Reuse Authority
SEASIDE
CALIFORNIA
Advanced Water Conveyance Basin
Purification Facility Pipeline Injection Wells
COOPERATIVE SOLUTIONS
PWM is a multi-benefit, regional project. In
addition to creating a new drinking water
source for the Monterey Peninsula, the
Project also:
+ Increases available water for ag irrigation
+ Removes impaired waterways
(ag drainage water) from the environment
+ Restores river habitats by reducing
extraction from the Carmel River and
decreasing pollutants flowing to the
Salinas River
These regional benefits have created a
network of project partners helping make
PWM possible!
-------
Overview and Drivers
Roseville is an inland Northern California community of approximately
140,000 residents and has been recycling tertiary CA Title 22 water for
nearly 20 years. Roseville's primary source of drinking water is a federally
operated surface water reservoir designed and used primarily for flood
control. Presently 20% of all wastewater treated, about 1 billion gallons
per year, is recycled for irrigation and industrial needs. Roseville's
traditional surface water supply is challenged by significant past and
projected population growth as well as environmental demands, climate
change and periodic drought. Increasing water recycling is among the
strategies Roseville plans to meet this water supply challenge. However
all economically viable recycled water needs are being met presently
through a traditional purple pipe distribution system. In order to improve
recycled water utilization, significant changes to the recycled water
program are needed.
Roseville has successfully employed aquifer storage of potable surface
water which provides storage and groundwater management capability
when surface water is plentiful to ensure that groundwater is always a
viable backup water supply. A similar strategy is envisioned for recycled
water.
Process or Technology
To utilize its groundwater aquifer for seasonal storage of recycled water
and improve distribution options to new areas of the City, Roseville must
employ advanced treatment to create indirect potable reuse
opportunities. CA presently requires that reverse osmosis (RO) be part of
any advanced treatment process unless an alternative is shown to
provide equivalent water quality. As an inland community without access
to an ocean discharge, the brine waste generated by RO cannot be
disposed of economically thereby eliminating RO as a treatment option
for Roseville.
To meet this challenge, Roseville will pilot alternative advanced
treatment that incorporates ozone biologically active filtration (BAF), in
addition to other processes needed to meet water quality based criteria.
Benefits of including ozone-BAF in the treatment train include lower
energy requirements, no brine disposal and improved removal of certain
CECs.
Once treatment is proven, a system of injection and recovery
groundwater wells can be utilized to store and recover advanced treated
water in nearly all areas of the City.
Outcomes and Benefits
The ultimate goal of this effort is to fully utilize all available recycled
water to maximize the City's water supply reliability and ensure the
groundwater aquifer remains a healthy backup to the City's strained
surface water supplies. By maximizing storage opportunities, Roseville
believes that water shortages can be eliminated through management
strategies even when drought conditions exist. Through increased
Roseville reuse, more surface water remains to meet environmental and
Water Reuse Case Study
City of Roseville
Sector: Municipal Utility
Subsector: Wastewater
utility
Location: Roseville, CA
Water Source(s): Muncipal wastewater
Water Use(s): Irrigation, industrial, and
future groundwater augmentation
Technology: Tertiary wastewater
treatment and future advanced treatment
Water Recovered: 4 MGD annual
average
Project Costs: $25 million for advanced
treatment
Implementation Date: 2020
EPA-816-F-XXX September 2019
-------
human water supply needs elsewhere. Proving an alternative advanced treatment option also allows other
inland CA communities to benefit from increased water management options.
Challenges and Solutions
The key challenge for Roseville is to dramatically increase recycled water storage and use options. Roseville
understands that the proposed alternative treatment train does not conform to current CA regulations for
indirect potable reuse via groundwater replenishment. The first challenge is to demonstrate that an alternative
treatment technology can deliver the same water quality as the presently accepted FAT process.
With advanced treatment and storage, a network of groundwater injection wells would allow advanced treated
water to be stored in the aquifer when supply exceeds demand. The aquifer can then be used to "distribute"
stored recycled water to all areas of the City using recovery wells. This eliminates the need for a recycled water
pipe distribution network, allows the City to provide "recycled water" to areas that are not presently served,
and ensures that the aquifer's water is not depleted and remains available to backup surface water supply.
Acknowledgements
Kenneth Glotzbach, PE Marisa Tricas, MS
City of Roseville, CA City of Roseville, CA
kglotzbach(a)roseville.ca.us mtricas(a)roseville.ca.us
Todd Jordan, PE
City of Roseville, CA
tjordan(a)roseville.ca.us
References
Water Environmental Reuse Foundation (WE&RF), 2017. Final Report: Controlling Trace Organic Contaminants
Using Alternative, Non-FAT Technology for Indirect Potable Water Reuse.
WateReuse Research & National Water Research Institute, 2013. Examining the Criteria for Direct Potable
Reuse.
-------
City of Altamonte
Springs-Florida,
Project: pureAlta®
International and National Awards
Sector: Municipal
Subsector: Potable Pilot
project
Location: Altamonte Springs, Seminole County,
Florida
Water Source(s): Effluent from the City of
Altamont Springs WRF
Water Use(s): Proposed Potable
Technology: Advanced treatment
Water Recovered Currently able to treat up to
28,800 gpd, scale up to 500,000gpd.
Project Costs: pureAlta® is co-furided with the St.
Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD)
under its REDI Community & Innovative Cost-Share
program. SJRWMD is contributing 50 percent of the
$1 million construction cost for the project.
pureAlta® is one of two potable reuse projects to
be funded under this program.
Implementation Date on or about 1994
Overview and Drivers
City of Altamonte Springs proactively created pureAlta® to
address their community's future water needs and diversify
the City's water portfolio. The project utilizes cutting-edge
technology to purify reclaimed water to drinking water
standards. Due to population increases and dwindling
Floridan aquifer levels, experts have long predicted the state
will not have enough groundwater to satisfy the public's
drinking water needs.
Process or Technology
The advanced treatment process includes the following
components: ozonation and biological activated carbon
filtration (03/BAF), ultrafiltration (UF), granular activated
carbon filtration (GAC) and ultraviolet light with advanced
oxidation process (UV AOP) all coupled with advanced system
monitoring techniques.
The source flow used for this process comes directly from the
effluent train of the City of Altamont Springs WWTF/DPR,
operating under NPDES permit # FL0033251. It is currently
returned to the effluent discharge and released. This is only a
pilot project.
Outcomes and Benefits
The resulting purified water is tested to ensure it meets
drinking water standards and removes pharmaceuticals and
personal care products (PPCPs) which are not currently
regulated. The potable reuse pilot project will treat
approximately 28,800 gallons per day (gpd), which is less than
1 percent of the total water currently produced in the City (6
MGD). If the pilot project is successful, they might build a full-
scale treatment system with a capacity of 300,000 to 500,000
gpd (approximately 5 percent of the City's future water
demand, 9 MGD) to provide a purified water supply that
supplements the City's drinking water system.
The pilot project is operating in a testing phase. During this
testing, the purified water is blended with reclaimed water
from the Water Reclamation Facility and beneficially reused
for irrigation in the City's existing urban reclaimed water
system. In the future, based on the success of the pilot, the City
might build a full-scale treatment system to produce purified
water to supplement the City's drinking water system by up to
five percent.
Challenges and Solutions
Funding and design; regulatory rules (WO) criteria. Facility
space came from repurposed storage building on-site.
Component selection.
Acknowledgements
-------
EPA Region 4 staff (Pamala Myers) completed this template and acknowledges the City of Altamonte Springs
management and staff.
References
www.altamonte.org/754/pureALTA, EPA PQR draft-report 2018.
-------
Overview and Drivers
Emory stated: In the last decade, Atlanta has witnessed numerous
water related stresses, including: severe drought, EPA mandates
to resolve critical infrastructure failures and an extended political
dispute over water rights in the so-called "Tri-State Water Wars."
As a result of these challenges, Emory University set out to
explore ways to minimize its impact on community water
resources and the environment with a more strategic and
impactful water management solution: campus wide
water reclamation and reuse.
Process or Technology
Emory University,
Atlanta, GA
Project: WaterHub,
Hydroponic Reactor
Design
Sector:
Institution/Commercial
collaboration
Subsector: Non-Potable
Location: Atlanta, GA. Campus of Emory University.
Water Source(s): Effluent from Emory
Water Use(s): Campus Chiller Plants, Steam Plant, Toilet
Flushing
Technology: Hydroponic w/ Submerged
Fixed-Film Reactors, Reciprocating Wetland
Water Recovered: The WaterHub has
processed over 150 million gallons
of water.
Project Costs:
Implementation Date: May 2015
Sustainable Water designed Emory's reclamation system, the
WaterHub, to integrate into the existing campus framework using
two small parcels near Chappell Park Field. Up to 400,000 gallons
of wastewater is mined directly out of the campus sewer system
daily. Water is cleaned to Georgia Reclaimed Water Standards
through an energy efficient, eco-engineered treatment process
supported by solar (PV) energy production. The system has
50,000 gallons of clean water storage capacity, providing N + i
redundancy for campus district energy systems. Recycled water is
distributed to multiple utility plants and select dormitories for
toilet flushing via a 4,400 linear foot "purple pipe" distribution
system. The system reduces Emory University's draw of potable
water by up to 146 million gallons annually.
Outcomes arid Benefits
The first system of its kind installed in the United States, the
WaterHub® is a decentralized, commercial-scale water
reclamation and reuse system serving Emory University's main
campus just outside of Atlanta, GA. Producing up to 400,000
gallons of reclaimed water per day, the WaterHub
mines wastewater directly from the campus sewer system and
utilizes ecological treatment processes to treat the wastewater for
beneficial reuse. The system recycles up to two-thirds of campus
wastewater for non-potable demands including heating, cooling
and toilet flushing. Moving the field of water reclamation
forward, the WaterHub serves as a model for commercial-scale
sustainable water management in urban areas.
The WaterHub enables the University to reduce its draw of
potable water by up to 146 million gallons annually - displacing
nearly 40% of total campus water demand. The system enhances
campus resiliency by providing a consistent, reliable and
redundant source of water for extensive non-potable demands
and critical heating and air conditioning needs. The WaterHub is
-------
designed to de-risk campus operations from potential water service disruptions resulting from drought and
aging municipal water infrastructure.
The WaterHub was made possible through an innovative Water Processing Agreement (WPA). The WPA
allowed Sustainable Water to fully design, construct and operate the WaterHub at no capital expense or
development risk to the University. The WaterHub creates lower cost water at a long-term stable rate and is
expected to save millions of dollars in water utility costs to Emory over a 20-year period. The WaterHub aligns
with the University's vision for a sustainable campus and reduces the overall water demand on one of the
smallest municipal watersheds in the United States.
Challenges and Solutions
The WaterHub reduces Emory University's draw of potable water by up to 146 million gallons annually.
WaterHub is designed to promote research and community outreach, enhancing the concept of the campus as
a "living laboratory." With built-in lab space and easy access ports for water quality testing, the facility enables
research in a variety of topics. The lower site also includes a demonstration reciprocating wetland system
(ReCip®) as a showcase to visitors interested in other sustainable treatment technologies. The WaterHub at
Emory University has earned 14 awards and has been featured in numerous publications such as District
Energy, Industrial WaterWorld, Sustainable Business Magazine, Georgia
Operator, Treatment Plant Operator and CE News.
Acknowledgements
EPA Region 4 staff (Pamala Myers) completed the template with information from The WaterHub @ Emory
References
http://sustainablewater.com/sw-overview/the-waterhub-at-emory/ http://sustainablewater.com/resources/frequently-asked-
questions/
-------
Water Reuse Case Study
Example Prototype Only
Iridiantown
Cogeneration
Facility
Sector: Industrial
Subsector:
Thermoelectric
Location: Iridiantown, Florida
Water Source(s): Surface water,
saline groundwater, and treated
municipal water.
Water Use(s): Reuse within facility.
Better water quality discharge.
Technology: Zero liquid discharge
with use of microfiltration and reverse
osmosis.
Water Recovered: Not available
Project Costs: not available
Implementation Date: 2012
Overview and Drivers
The Indiantown facility was using a zero-liquid discharge (ZLD) system
using two brine concentrators to process the cooling tower blowdown
water. These concentrators were expensive to maintain, used a load 1.4
Mega Watt Hour (MWI I) electricity, and produced a high-volume waste
water stream. Due to expensive maintenance, the facility decided to
replace the concentrators with ZLD system consisting of Microfiltration
(MF) and Reverse Osmosis (RO). The new ZLD system is less expensive
to maintain and has lower wastewater discharges which returned a
higher volume of filtered water back into the facility.
Process or Technology
In a typical application of MF, the incoming water passes through
several thousand spaghetti like hollow fiber polymeric membranes that
remove suspended solids and bacteria. For removal of dissolved solids,
the treated water from the MF unit passes through the spiral-wound RO
membranes. This technology is employed before the demineralizers.
The pores in the RO membrane are only a few angstroms in size and can
remove a majority of the dissolved salts.
The brine concentrators were replaced by MF/RO systems in the ZLD
system achieving higher quantities of filtered water.
Outcomes and Benefits
A typical cooling tower (500 ton, running 24 hours day,365 days per
year) will flush over 3.9 Million gallons of water each year. Through use
of ZLD systems, electric generation facilities can reuse a bulk of this
wastewater stream. The new ZLD system used by the Indiantown facility
helped increase the filtered water volumes, reduced maintenance cost
for the facility and saved on 1.4 MWH electricity used in the old system.
The new system was more effective in using briny groundwater from
aquifers which are not sources of drinking water reducing reliance on
fresh stream water.
Challenges and Solutions
The system encountered problems with microbiological fouling and
scaling in second stage RO. These were resolved by introducing
microbicide and lowering the pi I of water to 5.
Acknowledgements
EPA Region 4 staff (Khurram Rafi) completed the template based on
information from the following web references below,
References
https://www.waterworld.com/municipal/technologies/article/
16211541/zld-treatment-of-cooling-tower-blowdown-with-membranes
-------
Overview and Drivers
The Water Conserv II project..."was started in 1986 to stop discharge of
treated wastewater from Orlando and Orange County into Lake
Tohopekaliga, an important recreational bass fishing lake." (1)
Faced with a need to expand wastewater treatment service and a state
requirement to eliminate discharge to surface waters, the City of
Orlando and Orange County formed a long-term partnership to develop
an innovative water reclamation program. Following a lengthy and
detailed review of potential projects, a combination of the two most
promising was chosen and Water Conserv II was born. The project is
best described as "A Cooperative Water Reuse Project by the City of
Orlando, Orange County and the Agricultural Community"." (2)
"Water Conserv II is the largest reuse project of its kind in the world,
combining agricultural irrigation with aquifer recharge via rapid
infiltration basins (RIBs). The primary focus is agricultural irrigation. The
RIBs are used for recharge of Florida's primary drinking water source,
the Floridan aquifer, with daily flows that are not needed for irrigation
and excess flows during wet weather periods. Water Conserv II is also
the first reuse project in Florida permitted by the Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (FDEP) to irrigate crops produced for human
consumption with reclaimed water. The project's reclaimed water
meets FDEP's public access reuse standards and is permitted for use on
all public access sites including residences and golf courses, food crops,
foliage and landscape nurseries, tree farms, pasture land, the
production of soil cement, and can also be used for fire protection." (2)
Process or Technology
Reclaimed water is pumped from the City's McLeod Road and the
County's South Regional Water Reclamation Facilities through a 54-inch
diameter transmission main approximately 21.5 miles to the Water
Conserv Distribution Center in western Orange County. The water is
temporarily stored in four 5-million-gallon prestressed concrete flow-
equalization reservoirs and then distributed [for irrigation and] to the
RIBs through a network of distribution pipes...The entire process is
monitored and carefully controlled by computers housed at the
distribution center." (3)
The Water Conserv II Distribution Center spans "...approximately 65
square miles, serves over 3,250 acres [including 2,700 acres of citrus
groves], seven nurseries, two ferneries, three golf courses, a sand mine,
two landfills, several residential communities, and eight rapid infiltration
basin (RIB) sites that help replenish the regional drinking water aquifer."
(4)
"...[ I [he system consists of 63 RIBs, each made up of one to five cells,
for a total of 129 individual cells measuring approximately 350 feet long
by 150 feet wide. The facility is built over a natural sand ridge ranging in
thickness from 30 to 200 feet. Beneath these surficial sands is a dense
concentration of semipermeable clays known as the Flawthorn
formation...[which] acts as a barrier separating shallow groundwater
flow,..from deeper, confined flow in the Floridian aquifer..." (3)
Water Reuse Case Study
Water Conserv II
Sector: Agriculture and
And Irrigation,
Groundwater Recharge
Location: City of Orlando/Orange
County, Florida
Water Source(s): Highly treated
wastewater
Water Use(s): Agricultural, irrigation, &
groundwater recharge
Technology: 35 MGD water
reclaimed, pumped, stored for irrigation
and aquifer recharge through rapid
infiltration basins.
Water Recovered: >200 billion gallons
of water over 30 years
Project Costs: $180 million*6)
Implementation Date: 1986
-------
As of 2017, irrigation and commercial use customers use 60% of the reclaimed water, and the remain 40% in
excess of customer needs are used to recharge the Floridian aquifer. (5)
Outcomes and Benefits
Benefits realized by Water Conserv II have included: elimination of discharge to surface water; turned a liability
into an asset for beneficial use; proven, beneficial and cost effective year-round reclaimed water reuse; reduces
the demand on the Floridan aquifer by eliminating the need for well water for irrigation; helps to replenish the
Floridian aquifer through the discharge of reclaimed water to the Rapid Infiltration Basins (RIBs). (5) Established
a preserve within the RIB sites for endangered, threatened and concerned species of plants and animals. (5)
Benefits realized by the participating citrus grove owners: A dependable long-term source of irrigation; water
that is not subject to water restrictions during droughts; elimination of installation, operation and maintenance
costs for deep well or surface water pumping systems; increased crop yields; better tree growth; enhanced
freeze protection capabilities; detailed research at the Mid Florida Citrus Foundation. (5)
Challenges and Solutions
"When city and county officials approached growers with the proposal of providing free Reclaimed W that could
be used to irrigate their citrus groves, the growers initially rejected the idea. Even though the city and county
would provide the water free and nearly eliminate pumping costs, growers were wary of this "unknown" water.
There were concerns about heavy metals, salinity, disease organisms, or flooding from excessive water (Parsons
et al. 2001a). After much negotiation, nearly all of the grower demands were satisfied. Dr. Robert Koo of the
University of Florida established water quality standards that met most drinking water standards. Parsons et al.
(1981) had recently demonstrated that microsprinkler irrigation could provide some frost protection, and the
RW would provide additional water on freeze nights. The frost protection advantage convinced some growers
to start using the water, and eventually, other growers accepted the water. Because there have been no major
problems and the treatment facilities have consistently met water quality standards, most growers in the area
now understand that this is a good quality resource for year-round use." (1)
Acknowledgements
EPA Region 4 staff (Catherine York) completed the template based on information provided at the Water
Conserv II website in addition to various references cited below. The Water Conserv II Project Manager is Scott
Ruland (407-656-2332 ex.228, scott.ruland(5)waterconservii.com), additional information can be found at
http://www.waterconservii.com/contact-water-conserv-ii/
References
(1) Parsons, L.R. December 2018. Agricultural Use of Reclaimed Water in Florida: Food for Thought. Journal
of Contemporary Water Research & Education 165: 20-27. Also available at:
https://onlinelibrarv.wilev.eom/doi/full/10.llll/i.1936-704X.2018.03290.x
(2) Water Conserv II. 2019. History. Available at: http://www.waterconservii.com/. Accessed May 15, 2019.
(3) Water Conserv II. 2019. Anatomy of a RIB. Available at: http://www.waterconservii.com/wp-
content/themes/divi-child/dIs/rib anatomy0417.pdf. Accessed May 15, 2019.
(4) WSP. 2019. Water Conserv II. Available at: https://www.wsp.com/en-US/proiects/water-conserv-ii.
Accessed May 15, 2019.
(5) Water Conserv II. 2017. Water Conserv II Tour Materials. Available at:
http://www.waterconservii.com/wp-content/themes/divi-child/dls/Tour Pack.pdf. Accessed May 15,
2019.
(6) Florida Department of Environmental Protection. December 8, 2016. DEP Celebrates 30 Years of
Cooperative Water Reuse with Water Conserv II. Available at:
https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/FLDEP/bulletins/177elb4. Accessed May 15, 2019.
-------
Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence
Recycled water for drinking:
Direct potable reuse a temporary solution for Wichita Falls, Texas
In July 2014, the city of Wichita Falls, Texas, became one of the first in the United States to use treated
wastewater directly in its drinking water supply. The scheme is a temporary solution to the city's drought-
induced water crisis.
The drivers
Two lakes (Lake Chickapoo and Lake Arrowhead) have traditionally provided the water supply for Wichita
Falls. No groundwater or other water sources are available within about 130 kilometres.
In the late 1990s, the city experienced a severe multi-year drought, driving the decision to add a reverse
osmosis plant to the existing Cypress Water Treatment Facility to treat the brackish water from a third lake-
Lake Kemp. The plant was completed in 2008.
Again in 2010, the area experienced severe drought which, coupled with extreme temperatures of over 38 °C
(100 °F) for more than 100 days at a time, caused reservoir water levels to drop. In November of 2013, the
water shortage escalated to a state of emergency and the city entered a stage-4 drought disaster (on a scale
of 1-lowest to 5-highest), lowering production to about 65 million litres per day.
Evaluating the crisis, the city recognised that it was conveying 26 million litres of wastewater a day from its
wastewater treatment plant to other cities downstream and that this treated wastewater could instead be
further treated locally at the existing Cypress Water Treatment Plant and used to augment the public drinking
water supply.
The scheme at a glance
• Treated wastewater is disinfected and pumped to the Cypress Water Treatment Plant where it goes
through microfiltration and reverse osmosis before being released into a holding lagoon where it is
blended with lake water (50:50). The blended water goes through an eight-step conventional surface
water treatment process. The treated water is stored and then pumped to the distribution system.
• The scheme provides 19 million litres a day, satisfying one-third of the city's daily demand. Wichita
Falls has a population of about 160,000.
• The scheme is considered a temporary drought response and will be replaced by a $US35 million
permanent indirect potable reuse scheme whereby high quality effluent will be stored in Lake
Arrowhead. The permanent scheme will recycle 45 to 60 million litres a day and will take three to five
years to complete.
The path taken
Investigation
The City of Wichita Falls responded to the drought in 1999 by building a microfiltration/reverse osmosis plant.
The plant, completed in 2008, enabled them to bring a third lake online as a water source, providing an
additional 38 million litres of water per day.
-------
Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence
During the most recent drought, which started in October 2010, the city evaluated 22 strategies, looking at
quality, reliability and cost, before deciding in April 2012 to pursue both direct and indirect potable reuse
schemes.
Pilot
In lieu of a pilot for the direct potable reuse scheme, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ)
allowed the city to conduct a 45-day verification trial, discharging the treated water to the river. The city
already had a discharge permit for their reverse osmosis treatment plant at Lake Kemp, which speeded up the
process. Installation was completed in late December 2013 and was followed by the 45 days of extensive
quality testing by the city and the TCEQ. The TCEQ then requested an additional 30 days of tests, analysing
the results and meeting with city staff to discuss the findings.
Approval for full-scale implementation
The TCEQ approved a permit for the scheme on 28 June 2014.
Construction
The only construction required was a 21-kilometre pipeline connecting the wastewater plant to the existing
Cypress Water Treatment Plant where the water is purified for drinking.
Commissioning
The US$13 million scheme was launched on 9 July 2014.
Engaging the community
Engaging decision-ma
-------
Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence
Success factors
City and state government support
Policymakers at both city and state levels were very supportive during the process, particularly as it became
apparent there was no supply alternative and no groundwater reserves to draw upon as lake levels were
visibly falling.
High ! in wastewater utility
For 40 years, the city had operated a state-of-the-art wastewater system with a pre-treatment program. This
track record, and the wastewater utility's excellent regulatory history, helped make the scheme possible. At
the beginning of the proposal the utility staff strongly advocated for a high level of treatment to ensure the
public could be very confident in the safety of the scheme.
Extensive testing
Because this scheme was one of the first of its type in the US, permitting and regulating the new facilities
presented challenges. The state government required extensive testing, some of which required new
analytical methods to be developed.
Water quality not compmm
The wastewater is treated to a level that meets 97 percent of drinking water standards. It is then piped to the
Cypress Water Treatment Plant, where it is purified using reverse osmosis to a quality that exceeds the
current TCEQ drinking water standards.
The city created an extensive system of checks and balances to ensure quality, building a state-of-the-art
control room where state operators monitor quality daily.
Sustained community support
The city's rate-payers approved an 8.5 percent rate increase for the initial funding of the scheme. They have
shown their continuing support by approving an additional 10 percent rate increase to fund the proposed
indirect potable reuse scheme.
Lessons learnt
• Hiring a public information officer to execute the speaking campaign helped gather concerns and get
project information out to residents.
• The public needed to see the water levels drop in the city's reservoirs and know that all alternative
water sources had been exhausted before they accepted the concept of drinking purified wastewater.
• Demonstrating to the public that the quality of advanced treated water was adequate for drinking
water purposes was a challenge for the small staff at the City.
• Educating the public and policymakers on the cost difference of other options that may not produce
water to the same high quality as potable reuse, or may produce less water, was difficult.
• Getting academics and medical professionals on-board at the start, and working with the media from
the outset, helped develop credibility among the public and water users.
• Showing the need for the scheme and starting early with regulatory agencies reduced the approval
timeline.
-------
Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence
Recycled water for drinking:
The greater metropolitan area of El Paso, Texas
The greater metropolitan area of El Paso, Texas, is home to one of the first plants in the United States to
treat wastewater to drinking water standards. El Paso Water Utilities (EPWU) has met the challenges that
come with living in a desert city by diversifying its water supply. Water reuse is a very important part of the
water portfolio..
The drivers
El Paso is located in the Chihuahuan desert. The city gets its water supply from groundwater and from the Rio
Grande. Water from the Rio Grande is only available during spring, summer and early autumn and is further
limited in dry years. Extreme drought conditions over many years has shown a drying trend which has
continuously reduced river flows, leaving less water available for the city.
heme at a glance
• El Paso Water Utilities Department (EPWU) controls the water systems that supply nearly 90 percent
of all municipal water to more than 800,000 residents of El Paso County.
• EPWU uses groundwater and surface water for its potable supply, producing about 34 billion gallons a
year of potable water for its customers.
• EPWU operates an Indirect Potable Reuse (IPR) facility at the Fred Hervey Water Reclamation Plant
and recently expanded the plant. This plant treats wastewater to drinking water standards. The
treated water is then injected into the Hueco Bolson (an aquifer) through a series of wells and
infiltration basins to replenish the aquifer.
• The Fred Hervey Water Reclamation plant serves as a model and centre of learning for other inland
cities facing diminishing supplies of fresh water.
• Through an agreement with the El Paso County Irrigation District, EPWU treats wastewater at other
facilities and discharges it into the Rio Grande. EPWU plans to send some of the treated water directly
to a proposed Advanced Water Purification Facility rather than downstream for other users. The
facility will turn the treated water into drinking water and put it directly into the distribution system.
Purified water will be a new source of drinking water to augment the water supply.
path taken
Investigation
EPWU was one of the first departments in the U.S. to recognise the need to diversify its water resources and
reduce its reliance on groundwater. In 1991, it completed a 50 year Water Resource Management Plan (1991-
2040).
EPWU has been working with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) on its plans for the
Advanced Water Purification Facility for the past year. A possible site has been selected near the Roberto
Bustamante Wastewater Treatment Plant. There is sufficient effluent at this facility and there is a demand for
resources in this area of the city.
-------
Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence
Pilot
TCEQ has given EPWU the go ahead to build a pilot plant for the Advanced Water Purification Facility. The
pilot plant is being constructed and expected to be complete in July of 2015. EPWU will test the plant for 6-9
months before sending results to the TCEQ.
Approval for full-scale implementa tion
EPWU will need final approval from TCEQ to build the full scale facility. The facility is expected to go on-line in
2018.
Engaging the community
Engaging decision makers, regulators and politicians
In 1952, the El Paso City Council established a Public Service Board, a seven-member board of trustees that
manages and controls EPWU and its systems. Members are appointed by the El Paso City Council and have
expertise in financial management; general business management; engineering; environmental or public
health; consumer/citizen advocacy; and communications, public administration and education. The seventh
member is the mayor, who represents municipal government. The board reports to city and county
government on water-related activities and issues.
Engaging customers
Public outreach is a very important component of the Advanced Water Purification Facility project. A robust
communications strategy includes proactive media relations, a speakers bureau, and tours of the pilot plant.
In November 2013, EPWU surveyed its customers to determine their attitudes and information level about
water issues, in particular their perceptions of direct potable reuse. Interviews were conducted by trained,
bilingual telephone interviewers using a random sampling method. Based on the survey, about 84% of the
community supports direct potable reuse.
Along with the National Water Research Institute (NWRI), EPWU formed a panel of experts with different
expertise (e.g. engineering, public health, public affairs) to get their feedback on the technical and public
outreach portions of the project. Communications staff is publishing a video featuring interviews from the
panel of experts.
Success factors
Proven technology already in use in Texas
The proposed advanced water purification process of uses rigorous and proven technologies that the Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality had approved for similar plants in other parts of Texas.
Drought severity led to quicker approvals
Due to the severity of the drought, regulatory agencies have been supportive of EPWU in their efforts to get
the plant approved.
-------
Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence
Water quality not compromised
Drinking water regulations establish that surface and ground waters must be tested for inorganic chemicals.
Drinking water must also be tested for Organic Chemicals (pesticides and insecticides), disinfectants and
disinfection by-products, and microbial contaminants as specified by the State.
Sustained community support
Residents have continuing and increasing confidence and satisfaction with EPWU. Over a 22-year period,
confidence in the safety of drinking water has steadily increased from 60 percent in 1993 to 80 percent in
2015. Research also shows that EPWU customers express continued high satisfaction with the cost of water,
customer service, communication, and the management of water resources.
Lessons learnt
• Public acceptance will be one of the most significant challenges for the project. People want
reassurance in terms of water-borne disease and industrial contamination and wanted to know that
water from the purification facility will be the same quality as the water they are receiving.
• Talking to regulatory agencies as far in advance as possible is proving helpful. Once the concept was
developed, the EPWU started meeting with regulators who were very keen to ensure they developed
a relationship with the design team early on. EPWU is following the same strategy in regards to the
proposed Advanced Water Purification Facility.
• The extensive preparation exercised in order to proceed with the construction of the facilities —
studies, pilot plants, research, and the state / federal permitting processes — assured the success of
the project and the EPWU believes it is a good example for other communities looking to develop
inland desalination plants.
-------
Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence
Recycled water for drinking:
The City of San Diego, California: Pure Water Purification
Process
After a successful 5-year wastewater purification trial, the City of San Diego is planning to implement a full-
scale scheme as a local source of drinking water. The city is currently exploring options of storing the
purified water in an existing reservoir or distributing it directly to the city's 1.3 million residents. The
scheme is expected to be completed in 2035 and will supply one-third of the city's water needs.
The drivers
More than 85 percent of the San Diego region's water supply is imported, most of it being conveyed by
aqueducts from the California Bay-Delta and the Colorado River. The region's reliance on imported water
leaves the City of San Diego's water supply vulnerable to drought, competing demands, and rising costs of
imported water.
'Pure Water San Diego' is the city's 20-year program to develop a local source of drinking water to reduce its
dependence on imported water; keep up with population growth; and combat water supply challenges such
as recurring drought.
The scheme at a glance
• The City's long-term goal, targeted for 2035, is to produce 314 million litres (ML) of purified water per
day—one-third of San Diego's future drinking water supply.
• The City has successfully trialled a process that purifies recycled wastewater through membrane
filtration, reverse osmosis and UV advanced oxidation.
• While the state of California has yet to approve or develop regulatory frameworks for direct and
indirect potable reuse, San Diego continues to explore both options.
• If San Diego goes the indirect potable reuse route, the purified water would be conveyed 37
kilometres to the San Vicente Reservoir where it would be blended with imported water supplies in
the reservoir before going to a standard drinking water treatment plant.
• The City is also testing additional barriers that could potentially be used in lieu of the reservoir. This
direct potable reuse route could provide additional operational flexibility and reduce the need for the
costly pipeline needed to convey the purified water to the reservoir.
• When fully commissioned, the program will produce 314 ML of purified water per day for the city's
1.3 million residents.
• A separate project is underway to increase the capacity of the San Vicente Reservoir, where the
purified water could be stored.
-------
Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence
The path taken
Investigation
The City of San Diego began addressing the need for a new, locally controlled, drought-proof water supply in
the 1990s, when it first proposed purifying wastewater into potable water. The initial plans were met with
opposition—opponents adopted the phrase "toilet to tap" and raised the public's fear of the drinking water
quality.
In 2004-2006, a water reuse study stated that purifying water by adding it to a reservoir was the preferred
water reuse strategy for the area. The study recommended a project that would convey purified water to the
San Vicente Reservoir.
In 2009, the City partnered with several stakeholder groups, including the San Diego Coastkeeper and the San
Diego County Water Authority, to launch the Recycled Water Study. This study helped the City identify
opportunities for making more recycled wastewater available for both potable and non-potable uses and the
costs of implementing such projects. Groups also included trade unions and ratepayer advocates. It was
successful because of its diversity.
Pilot
In 2009, the City launched the Water Purification Demonstration Project to:
• determine whether advanced water purification technology could provide safe drinking water to
residents; and
• evaluate the feasibility of a full-scale scheme where the purified water would be added to the San Vicente
Reservoir.
The demonstration project produced 3.8 ML of purified water per day at the test Advanced Water Purification
Facility. One year of extensive testing determined that the test facility produces water that meets all federal
and state drinking water standards.
Approval for full-scale implementation
The two agencies with primary regulatory authority (California Department of Public Health and the San Diego
Regional Water Quality Control Board) evaluated the demonstration project and approved the City's concept
and approach to add the purified water to the San Vicente Reservoir.
California's State Water Quality Control Board is evaluating the feasibility of direct potable reuse and has yet
to establish the framework for regulating direct potable reuse schemes.
Construction
Pure Water San Diego components include the construction of water purification facilities and the continued
operation of the test facility.
A separate project is underway to increase the capacity of the San Vicente Reservoir, where the purified
water could be stored.
Commissioning
A 57 ML per day water purification facility is planned to be in operation by 2023.
The long-term goal of producing 314 ML of purified water per day—one-third of San Diego's future drinking
water supply—is targeted for 2035.
-------
Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence
Engaging the community
Engaging decision makers, regulators and politicians
From past experience, project leaders of 'Pure Water San Diego' knew that engaging local government
officials, including their city council members and the mayor, would be critical for the success of the project.
Therefore, the City kept decision-makers, regulators and politicians involved in the program by engaging them
in presentations and tours and keeping them up to date on project developments.
Engaging customers
To inform and engage the public, the City developed a public outreach program that includes informational
materials and events; tours of the test facility; email updates; website content; presentations at city council
meetings and community meetings; press releases for newspaper, radio and TV; and blog posts.
Residents are notified of tours through a flier included as a bill insert, websites and other media. Public
surveys were conducted from 2004 to 2012 and have shown a significant increase in support from the
community.
The City also formed the Pure Water Working Group to capture diverse viewpoints and input on the city's
efforts to ensure a safe, reliable and cost-effective drinking water supply for San Diego. An invitation to join
the working group was sent to community planning groups, businesses, city council district offices, non-profit
environmental organisations and community leaders.
Success factors
High levels of trust in water authority
The role of the Water Purification Demonstration Project was to show the public that the water purification
process consistently produces water that meets all state and federal drinking water standards. The test facility
allows the community to see firsthand how this is technically possible.
Clear roles and responsibilities for developing poll ulation
By creating a partnership of stakeholder agencies (including San Diego Coastkeeper, Surfrider Foundation,
City of San Diego Independent Rates Oversight Committee, San Diego Metro Wastewater Joint Powers
Authority and the San Diego Water Authority) the City was able to open up the communication lines and
outline responsibilities of groups.
Water quat mpromised
During the pilot program, more than 9000 water quality tests confirmed the absence of contaminants in the
water. The water has met all federal and state drinking water standards.
Sustain im unity support
The test facility is still operating as the City conducts additional research, allowing for continued community
engagement. The City feels that "seeing is believing," and says that by the end of a tour of the test facility the
concerns of doubters are alleviated.
-------
Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence
Lessons learnt
• Working with the Water Reliability Coalition, an independent group of organisations partnering on
water reuse in the region, was helpful as the City began public outreach. This coalition had already
been making strides in educating the public on water supply.
• The City continues to study the potential of a direct potable reuse scheme so that it understands the
permit requirements and is ready to implement a project when regulations are approved by the
California state regulators.
• Information about recycled water projects is technical and complex, and distilling it down to a brief
message is difficult but important. Having a 15 to 20 minute presentation with clear points is a useful
tool when briefing elected officials and media.
• Having a well thought out and extensive public outreach plan is vital. It needs to be maintained
continually through the long cycles of environmental review, technical feasibility evaluations, and
local government approval. Audiences may vary through time, so gaining the public's understanding
and acceptance requires a continual and often costly effort.
• Having a demonstration facility where elected officials, regulators and the public can see the technical
processes in action has proven, by far, to be the most important component of the public outreach
process in gaining public support.
-------
Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence
Recycled water for drinking:
Purifying wastewater for replenishing groundwater in the
Santa Clara Valley California
The Silicon Valley Advanced Water Purification Center which opened in 2014 purifies up to 8 million gallons
of treated wastewater a day. The local Water District is now investigating the possibility of storing this
purified wastewater in local groundwater basins which are no longer being naturally replenished due to
population growth, and the ongoing drought.
The drivers
The Santa Clara Valley Water District is a water wholesaler providing water to 1.8 million residents in the
southern region of the San Francisco Bay Area including the well-known Silicon Valley. Currently, the Water
District is meeting its supply from the California State Water Project, the Central Valley Project (a regional
water supplier), local groundwater, local surface water (reservoirs), recycled wastewater (about 5 percent of
total supply), and conservation measures (10 percent).
More than 55 percent of the water consumed in the Santa Clara Valley is imported from surrounding
watersheds and stored in underground aquifers. Due to a reduction in rainfall over the past four years, very
little local water is flowing into the District's reservoirs and groundwater basin.
Combined with the California statewide water shortage, and a severe reduction in water available from both
federal and state water projects, the Water District has been forced to use its imported water for drinking
water, conveying it directly to its drinking water treatment plants, instead of storing it underground. As a
result, drawing water from underground is no longer sustainable and another source of water to replenish the
groundwater basin is needed. Purified wastewater is being investigated as an option.
The scheme at a glance
• To improve the quality of its recycled wastewater, the Water District designed the Silicon Valley
Advanced Water Purification Center which opened in 2014 and produces up to 30 million litres of
purified recycled water a day.
• The Water District is investigating the possibility of using this purified recycled wastewater to
replenish its groundwater basins. The project is currently in the pre-feasibility phase, and locations for
pipelines are being determined.
• Construction of a groundwater replenishment scheme would also establish the framework for
potential indirect potable reuse.
• The Water District developed an overarching recycled water and infrastructure master plan for the
entire County, which will incorporate individual plans by each of the four recycled water producers.
• The Water District's long-term goal is to save (through recycling and conservation) more than 145
billion litres of water a year by 2030.
• California's State Water Quality Control Board is establishing the regulatory framework for Direct
Potable Reuse schemes by late 2016.
-------
Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence
The path taken
Gaining public support for recycled water
Through community surveys conducted routinely over a period of years, the Water District found that
residents were not supportive of recycled water use initially, but that acceptance grew as more information
was provided. With the Silicon Valley Advanced Purification Center now open, the Water District provides
tours of the center, continues to survey visitors and believes the current level of support is high.
Pilot
The concept of a pilot project was included in the California Environmental Quality Act, and quality testing at
the Purification Center is now being performed. The District is currently examining whether it can perform the
engineering to get to a groundwater basin or use their existing recycled water pipe system to replenish
groundwater via existing percolation ponds.
Feasibility study
A feasibility study, including pilot research studies, will be conducted before a decision is made on whether to
use highly purified recycled water as a potable water supply option. The study, community acceptance, and
subsequent District Board approval, is anticipated to be achieved by 2020 (if not sooner, given current
drought conditions).
Construction/Commissioning
If a groundwater replenishment scheme using recycled water is selected as a water supply option, operation
of a fully built system would likely commence in 10 to 15 years.
Engaging the community
Engaging decision-makers, regulators and politicians
A water recycling subcommittee, including three City board members, was created.
The district provided hard-hat tours of the Silicon Valley Advanced Purification Center for major stakeholder
groups and the media, followed by an aggressive tour schedule for residents. A virtual tour is on the District's
website (http://purewater4u.org) which also includes discussing purified water in the context of the urban
water cycle. In addition the site provides information into the ways water is reused, provides information
about what experts are saying and also provides frequently asked questions.
Engaging customers
The District has a comprehensive strategic public outreach plan and has maintained an ongoing, award
winning, water educational program for grammar-school-aged children.
Educational materials were developed, including factsheets and age-specific books ranging from first-time
readers to college-aged readers. Materials are distributed at events, the plant is discussed at customer
workshops, a speakers bureau is available to make community presentations, and the Water District has an
active social media program. The Water District also partnered with an ethnic media organisation, and the
new professional football stadium uses recycled water and makes public service announcements for recycled
water at games.
-------
Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence
Success factors
Protecting fish and wildlife
The district works closely with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) to manage species
impacted by the scheme. CDFW is the state agency responsible for managing local fish and wildlife, issuing
permits and granting access to work in habitat areas.
Partnerships
Partnerships for both potable and non-potable reuse are important in Santa Clara Valley. A partnership
between the City of Sunnyvale (a District water customer), Cal Water (a local retail water company) and Apple
Inc. (a retail water customer) was established to allow the county to expand its recycled water programs and
help the Water District take a step closer to meeting their goal of increasing recycled water from 5 percent to
10 percent by 2025.
A partnership with the City of Sunnyvale was also created to share the cost of upgrading their water pollution
control plant and to develop an option to use most of the recycled water produced by Sunnyvale
(approximately 10 million gallons per day) for future potable reuse.
High levels of trust in water authority
Recent focus groups and telephone surveys conducted in 2014 have shown that residents in the District trust
the utility and are satisfied with water quality.
Challenges of moving to a potable reuse scheme
The District Board has been discussing and evaluating the potential for various potable reuse schemes. Since
they are a wholesaler, they have been working closely with their customers (surrounding cities) in sharing the
responsibilities for negotiating policies affecting their respective jurisdictions. They also anticipate potential
brine disposal challenges with regulatory agencies in the area.
Water quality not compromised
The District has three surface water treatment plants with ozone which help to eliminate any odour and taste
issues. The District also has a tasting room where people can sample and rate water.
Lessons learnt
• Cost comparisons for ratepayers, showing recycled water and other supply options, are important
and could be a driver for or against the project. The 10-year rate forecast includes the cost of the
recycled water project and the District has had to explain this to the retail agencies they sell to.
• Briefing and keeping elected officials informed is vital- different communities or areas may see things
in different ways. Gaining the support of respected opinion leaders can help influence others in their
community - people listen to these leaders.
• The Silicon Valley Advanced Water Purification Center has proven to be an excellent vehicle to
increase the public's understanding of the treatment process and technology, including elected
officials and regulators. The associated Visitor Center helps build public interest and trust in the
utility's capability by demonstrating quality treatment. The tours engage the community and make
them feel apart of the evaluation process for examining this new water supply.
-------
Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence
Recycled water for drinking:
Orange County: a role model for groundwater replenishment
Orange County's groundwater replenishment system is the world's largest water recycling system of its
kind. Treated water is purified to near-distilled quality and then piped to a location where it naturally
seeps into a groundwater basin that provides 60% of the potable water needs of 2.4 million residents.
rs
Orange County in southern California is a semi-arid region that receives on average 330 mm (13 inches) of
rain a year. The population of more than 3 million is projected to grow by more than 10% by 2035.
A large groundwater basin provides 60% of the potable water needs of 2.4 million residents in north and
central Orange County.
Water from the basin is also injected into a barrier on the coast to prevent seawater from intruding into
the basin.
The Santa Ana River was once the main source of water for replenishing the basin but increasingly
unreliable flows meant that the Orange County Water District was forced to import water from other
rivers to replenish the basin—an expensive option.
By the mid-1990s, demand had increased and there were continued problems with seawater intrusion. At
the same time, the county's increasing volume of wastewater had become a disposal problem for the
Sanitation District.
The two agencies saw the opportunity to use some of the wastewater to replenish the groundwater basin.
IIlit1 11" iii' >*i - 'lance
• Treated sewer water is purified to drinking-water quality standards using a three-step process
consisting of microfiltration, reverse osmosis and ultraviolet light with hydrogen peroxide.
• The purified water is stored in the Orange County groundwater basin. Half of it is pumped into a
string of wells to form a hydraulic barrier that prevents seawater from contaminating the county's
groundwater supplies. The other half is piped about 21 kilometres through the cities of Fountain
Valley, Santa Ana, Orange, and Anaheim, to recharge basins where, as a precautionary measure, it
is blended with other water (75:25), before it seeps underground.
• The quality of the purified water exceeds all state and federal drinking water standards.
• The system can purify up to 265 million litres (70 million gallons) of water a day—enough to meet
the needs of nearly 600,000 residents. By 2015, capacity will increase to 378 ML (100 million
gallons) a day, ultimately expanding to 492 ML (130 million gallons). The system recycles 35% of
the Sanitation District's wastewater and contributes about 20% of the water that refills the basin.
• The US$481 million project was jointly-funded by the Orange County Water District and the
Orange County Sanitation District.
-------
Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence
• The Water District manages and protects the groundwater basin. It is a special district, unaffiliated
with the County of Orange or any city government. It was created by the California State
Legislature in 1933 to protect Orange County's rights to Santa Ana River water and to manage the
groundwater basin. The Sanitation District supplies the Water District with the secondary treated
wastewater at no charge. The Water District, in turn, manages and funds the operations.
II III' I' ii li I II- III
Holding back the sea with treated wastewater
In the 1960s, so much water was extracted from Orange County's underground basin that the resulting
drop in water pressure allowed the Pacific Ocean to seep in through the sandy soil. The situation
prompted the Water District to investigate whether it could use treated wastewater to replenish the basin
and protect it from further seawater intrusion.
After a successful technology trial, in 1976 the Water District built the internationally-known Water
Factory 21, which treated wastewater, supplied by the Sanitation District, using a state-of-the-art
purification process that included reverse osmosis. The purified water was injected into a string of 23
wells to form a hydraulic barrier to seawater intrusion and its associated saltwater contamination.
Win win solution identified for waste disposal and water supply
By the 1990s, water demand was on the rise and there were continued seawater incursion problems. As
more water was extracted from the basin, the barrier required more water than Water Factory 21 could
produce.
At the same time, the volume of wastewater had increased so much that the Sanitation District was facing
a US$200 million price tag to build a second pipe to convey it into the Pacific Ocean.
The two agencies agreed to collaborate and co-fund the construction of an advanced water treatment
facility that would solve both problems—not only would it provide the additional purified water needed
to keep the ocean at bay, but also enough water of drinking-water standard to replenish the basin
groundwater.
Pilot
The first step was to pilot test the treatment processes. In 1995, the Water District began pilot testing
microfiltration, reverse osmosis and ultraviolet light with hydrogen peroxide to purify the Sanitation
District's already highly treated wastewater. Testing results proved that this technology could purify the
wastewater to near-distilled water quality.
In February 1997, the two agencies signed the agreement to plan and build the scheme.
p
In March 1999, the environmental impact report received final certification and preliminary design of the
scheme began in July 1999. Board approval to progress to final design was given in March 2001 and the
final design was completed in November 2003.
In March 2004, the California Department of Public Health and the Santa Ana Regional Water Quality
Control Board approved the system design.
Construction
The scheme consisted of seven separate construction projects including an expanded seawater barrier
and a 21-kilometre pipeline to carry purified water to recharge basins in Anaheim.
-------
Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence
In April 2004, the contract to build the advanced water purification facility was awarded.
By June 2004, the Phase 1 (1.9 ML/day, 5 million gallons a day) Advanced Water Purification Facility was
operational and Water Factory 21 ceased operations. This Phase 1 facility operated for two years while
the groundwater replenishment system was being built. While continuing to prevent seawater intrusion, it
also served as a training facility, enabling staff to become familiar with the treatment processes they
would operate at the groundwater replenishment system. New treatment processes were introduced,
resulting in increased energy efficiency and more effective removal of contaminants.
The Phase 1 facility ceased operations in 2006 and potable water was imported for injecting into the
seawater barrier until the groundwater replenishment system was completed in January 2008.
Regulatory approval
The system was reviewed, approved and permitted by the California Department of Public Health and the
Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board, to ensure public health, water quality and
environmental compliance. The permit establishes criteria for water treatment, total organic carbon
limits, and travel time and blending requirements. The groundwater replenishment system has been
operational since January 2008.
liii aging the com in in
A creative and proactive outreach campaign was designed to secure support for the project from:
• local, state and federal elected officials
• business and civic leaders
• health experts
• environmental advocates
• regulatory agencies
• media
• the general public.
The campaign's primary objectives were to:
1. secure positive media impressions
2. be prepared to address significant opposition
3. educate people to overcome the negative "toilet-to-tap" perception of recycling wastewater
4. start the outreach campaign nearly 10 years prior to the project's start-up and continue it
throughout the project's life to maintain support for future expansions
5. create a positive perception of recycling wastewater to increase support of indirect and direct
potable reuse.
An extensive range of strategies was employed, including forming relationships with media, briefing
elected officials, selecting respected community spokespeople, being transparent, offering facility tours,
securing commitment from supporters, and reaching out specifically to minority groups, women, mothers
and seniors.
-------
Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence
Success factors
i- • •.' inge County's water needs
The groundwater replenishment system gives the growing population of Orange County a locally-
controlled reliable source of safe, clean water which reduces the regions dependency on imported water.
Insistence on the highest water quality
The Board of Directors insisted that the purified water be of the highest quality. The purified water used
to replenish the groundwater basin exceeds all state and federal drinking water standards.
Engaging minority groups and health/met
Proactive face-to-face engagement garnered the support of minority groups and experts in the medical
field (health experts, doctors, hospitals, pharmacists and scientists).
tory of successful water reuse
Orange County Water District has been treating wastewater to drinking-water standards since 1976 when
they built Water Factory 21, and has earned a worldwide reputation for supporting a culture of
innovation. Its professionalism and increasingly sophisticated water analyses instilled confidence in the
health and regulatory community and the general public in allowing the Water District to continually push
the frontiers of water recycling.
The final destination is the basin, not the tap
The purified water is piped to two recharge basins in nearby Anaheim where it percolates through the
sand and gravel, and is naturally filtered, by the time it reaches the groundwater basin.
An outreach campaign that won over the public
From the project's outset, the boards of the water and sanitation districts recognised that public relations
would be critical to the success of the groundwater replenishment system. They knew they had to
overcome the negative public perception of recycling wastewater to drinking water.. Similar projects in
Los Angeles and San Diego were defeated because of this issue.
The two agencies decided the 'clean water' agency, the Water District, would manage and be the face of
an outreach campaign to earn and maintain support for the project. The campaign, which began 10 years
before construction started, is recognised as the main reason the public accepted the project.
High profile and credible speakers and tours of the facility were used to educate people from local
colleges, water agencies, international organisations and local residents.
The success of the campaign was demonstrated by the absence of any organised opposition, and strong
support from policymakers and politicians allowed the project to move forward, and secured $92 million
in state, federal and local grants. Letters of support were obtained from every city council and chamber of
commerce in the Water District's service area. The Governor of California was an important supporter.
Ongoing independent scientific review
The permit to operate requires that an independent advisory panel provide an ongoing periodic scientific
peer review of the groundwater replenishment system. The permit specifies minimum qualifications for
the panel members and requires that the panel meet annually during the first five years, and then every
two years thereafter. The panel is administered by the National Water Research Institute, and made up of
experts in toxicology, chemistry, microbiology, hydrogeology, environmental engineering, public health
and water treatment technology.
-------
Australian Water Recycling Centre of Excellence
Lessons learnt
• Extensively communicate and engage with the community about the problem, need and potential
solutions.
• Key messages must address health and safety.
• Proactively reach out to the media. Use language that is easy to understand; jargon generates
mistrust.
• Understand and use social media but don't discard traditional tactics.
• Have an open-door policy and tell the truth—have no secrets.
• Interact with people directly, face to face, including those who oppose the potable reuse.
• Understand that with social media the same things happen, only faster. Have a crisis management
plan and a social media protocol.
• Tours of the pilot/facility and taste tests are important to build public confidence.
• Embrace "toilet to tap". Be creative and have fun with it, especially with young people.
The GWRS website: http://www.gwrsvstem.com/
-------
Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County
Recycled Water Information
March 2019
Overview
The Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County (Sanitation Districts) were formed in 1923 to serve the
wastewater collection, treatment and disposal needs of the now approximately 5.6 million people in
78 cities and unincorporated areas within Los Angeles County. We currently operate 11 wastewater
treatment facilities (Figure 1), 10 of which are classified as water reclamation plants (WRPs). The
Sanitation Districts' original treatment plant, the Joint Water Pollution Control Plant (JWPCP) in
Carson, is an ocean discharge facility. Using these facilities, the Sanitation Districts operate one of the
largest wastewater recycling programs in the world, with a long history of providing affordable, high-
quality recycled water to public and private water suppliers to help meet the water supply needs
within our service areas. The 10 WRPs produce treated and disinfected recycled water, most of which
meets nearly all State and Federal drinking water standards. By the end of FY 17-18, the recycled
water was being used at approximately 900 sites for a variety of purposes, including indirect, potable
groundwater supply augmentation at the award-winning Montebello Forebay Groundwater Recharge
Project. This resource is a safe, affordable, and reliable supply of water for industrial, commercial, and
recreational applications; groundwater replenishment; agriculture; and the irrigation of parks, schools,
golf courses, roadway medians, and nurseries.
Figure 1: Location of Sanitation Districts' Wastewater Treatment Facilities
#4954185
-------
What is A Water Reclamation Riant?
Recycled water produced by all but one of the WRPs is filtered, disinfected tertiary effluent, the
highest quality currently regulated by the State of California Division of Drinking Water for direct,
non-potable application (a very small amount of our recycled water is treated to a disinfected
secondary level). A wastewater treatment plant is just like a natural river but in a concrete box (Figure
2). First, materials settle to the bottom of the primary settling tanks by gravity or float to the top and
are removed for further treatment. Second, microbes use air to breathe while they eat up the
remaining organic material in the aeration tanks, then the microbes settle out in the secondary
settling tanks. Third, sand and coal filter out leftover particles in the filters like the bottom of a river.
At the very end, the recycled water is disinfected with either chlorine or UV radiation to kill off any
remaining bacteria or virus prior to reuse or discharge into a local waterway.
Figure 2: Flow Schematic of a Water Reclamation Plant
PRIMARY
SECONDARY
TERTIARY
CHEMICAL
ADCWION
Am
COMPRESSOR
CHEMICAL
ADDITION CHLORINE
TRUNK
SEWER
SULFUR
DIOXIDE
WATER
FOR
+ REUSE
FILTER
BACKWASH
RECOVERY
TANK
JOINT WATER POLLUTION
control plant
History of Water Recycling Program
Rudimentary water recycling has taken place in Los Angeles County in various forms since the late
19th and early 20th centuries. However, the Sanitation Districts embarked on their modern water
recycling program in 1949 when it was determined that upstream WRPs would allow us to not only
handle wastewater generated by the burgeoning post-war development in our service area, but to
produce a useful by-product (i.e., recycled water), which would be a critical resource in a semi-arid
and chronically water short area. The Sanitation Districts' first WRP, Whittier Narrows, began
#4954185
-------
operation in August 1962 and nearly every drop of recycled water produced by that facility has been
put to beneficial use since then, mainly for groundwater replenishment and later also for irrigation of
nearby urban parks and green areas.
In the 1960s and 1970s, additional WRPs were constructed by the Sanitation Districts and were
located strategically to better handle locally produced wastewater. This network of facilities is known
as the Joint Outfall System (JOS), which is comprised of seven Sanitation Districts' treatment plants
that are part of the same wastewater collection system, which treats approximately 90% of the
Sanitation Districts' wastewater. Solids from the six upstream water reclamation plants are returned
to the collection system and conveyed downstream to JWPCP for further treatment (anaerobic
digestion and dewatering) prior to transport for reuse or disposal. This system design allowed the
Sanitation Districts to supply a greater number of communities with recycled water with less
distribution infrastructure and reduced energy usage (and therefore more cost-effectively), as
compared to what would have been required with a single, centralized wastewater treatment facility
located near the bottom of the watershed. These early decisions regarding upstream facilities
followed the Sanitation Districts' policy of prioritizing distributed recycled water production, while
still allowing for centralized solids processing. Figure 3 illustrates that the development of the WRPs
have allowed the increases in sewage flows in the JOS that have occurred as population has grown to
be recycled for potential beneficial reuse. However, it should be noted in recent years, overall flows
in the system have dropped to levels last seen in 1969, even with 1.4 million more people in the JOS
service area, mainly as a result of drought and water conservation. Thus, in the Sanitation Districts'
Los Angeles Basin service area, more wastewater is being recycled and less is being discharged to the
ocean even than had been anticipated when the JOS was conceived. Although there is less flow, it is
still 2-3 times as much as currently reused.
Figure 3. Joint Outfall System Flow Diversion to Reclamation, 1928-2018
a
O
600
500
400
300
200
100
i Recycled and Beneficially Reused
I Recycled and Discharged to River
Ocean Disposal
o
o
o
o
CN
o
CN
o
CN
YEAR
-------
As a result of prolonged drought conditions in 1976-77, a number of water purveying entities began
to see the value in adding recycled water to their supply portfolio to mitigate the effects of potable
water shortages during droughts. Recycled water distribution systems were developed in the ensuing
years by the Long Beach Water Department, Walnut Valley Water District, the Cities of Industry,
Cerritos, Lakewood, Palmdale and Lancaster, Central Basin Municipal Water District, Upper San
Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District, and Castaic Lake Water Agency (now called Santa Clarita
Valley Water Agency). The Sanitation Districts also operate a limited local recycled water distribution
system primarily to serve its own facilities; namely, the Puente Hills Landfill, the Puente Hills Energy
Recovery from Landfill Gas Facility, and the adjacent Rose Hills Memorial Park.
Initially, most recycled water use was for groundwater replenishment activities (known as the
Montebello Forebay Groundwater Replenishment Project), as this project could rely on existing flood
control and water conservation facilities owned and operated by Los Angeles County, along with
gravity for transport of tertiary-treated recycled water from the Whittier Narrows and San Jose Creek
WRPs to the point of reuse, which allowed for large amounts of reuse at reasonable cost. The
Sanitation Districts and their partner, the Water Replenishment District of Southern California (WRD),
have been working together to increase reuse even further. In mid-2003, WRD completed
construction of the Leo Vander Lans Advanced Treatment Facility (LVLATF) adjacent to the Sanitation
Districts' Long Beach WRP to augment and eventually replace imported water used to prevent
saltwater intrusion into the Central Basin Aquifer through Los Angeles County Department of Public
Works' Alamitos Seawater Intrusion Barrier. Deliveries to the barrier began in 2005, and in 2014 WRD
completed an expansion of the LVLATF. Approximately 80% of the injected water moves inland and
becomes part of the groundwater supply. It should be noted that the project was originally conceived
decades ago, but due to the high cost and regulatory barriers took many years to come to fruition.
Additionally, the permit for the Montebello Forebay Groundwater Replenishment Project was
modified in recent years by the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board to allow greater
amounts of recycled water to be used for groundwater recharge. Further, WRD, in conjunction with
the Sanitation Districts, have continued to design, construct, and implement modifications to the
existing recycled water delivery system to allow for greater quantities of recycled water to be
diverted into the San Gabriel Coastal Spreading Grounds. These efforts now allow for all of the
recycled water produced in the San Gabriel Valley not being delivered for direct uses to be captured
for groundwater recharge (excluding periods of heavy rainfall runoff).
Figure 4 shows the growth in the number of reuse sites receiving recycled water. To distribute
the recycled water, the Sanitation Districts partner with nearly three dozen water entities,
which have developed an extensive recycled water distribution system (roughly 265 miles of
transmission lines). The Sanitation Districts are not a water purveyor and, in fact, are not allowed to
compete with the distribution of potable water in other agencies' domestic water service areas (i.e.,
due to the Service Duplication Act (see CA Public Utilities Code, Div. 1, Part 1, Chapter 8.5)).
Therefore, the Sanitation Districts depend on the local water purveyors to incorporate the delivery of
recycled water in their water portfolio and to develop the infrastructure necessary to make use of the
recycled water we produce.
#4954185
-------
Figure 4. Growth in Number of Reuse Sites, 1970-2017
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0 4-th
1970
The JWPCP has not supplied recycled water in the past, as the salt concentration in its effluent has
been too high for any beneficial use, such as irrigation or industrial process water, without costly
advanced treatment to remove salt. However, advancements in technology have reduced these costs
and, for the past several years, the Sanitation Districts have been working in partnership with the
Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD), the regional importer of water for some
19 million people, on a potential advanced treatment facility to be located at the JWPCP. MWD and
the Sanitation Districts have recently completed construction of a 0.5 million gallon per day
demonstration plant, and MWD has finalized a Conceptual Planning Studies Report that presents a
path to implementation of project that would include building up to 150 million gallons per day
(which is equivalent to 168,000 acre-feet per year) of production capacity to be used to produce
recycled water for groundwater replenishment in Los Angeles and Orange.
Tables 1 through 3 and Figure 5 below provide details on the Sanitation Districts' recycled
water activities for Fiscal Year 2017-18.
Table 1: Sanitation Districts Recycled Water Facts (FY 17-18 Data)
Total Effluent Produced: 390 MGD (437,000 AFY) (Secondary and Tertiary)
Total Recycled Water Used: 94 MGD (105,000 AFY)
Total Reuse Since Inception: 3.20 million acre-feet (1.04 trillion gallons)
Transmission Lines: 1,401,220 linear feet (265 miles)
Acreage Served: 16,059 acres (direct non-potable use)
Jurisdictions Served: 33 (32 cities plus unincorporated Los Angeles County)
Recycled Water Purveyors: 34
Greenhouse Gas Reduction1: 237,000 tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent
iii I I I i
i ill
i
1980
1990
2000
2010
1 The use of locally produced recycled water eliminates the need to pump State Project water into the Los Angeles Basin
at a net energy cost of approximately 3,000 kWh/AF with the attendant C02 production.
#4954185
-------
Table 2: Recycled Water Produced and Reused at Water
Water
Reclamation
Plant
Nominal
Treatment
Capacity
(A FY)
Quantity
Recycled
(AFY)
Quantity
Reused
(AFY)
Percent of
Recycled
Water
Used
La Canada
225
90
90
100
Long Beach
28,015
10,931
5,667
52
Los Coyotes
23,330
23,001
6,630
29
Pomona
16,810
6,389
6,334
99.3
San Jose Creek
112,055
58,038
54,566
94
Whittier
Narrows
16,810
7,884
7,840
99
Valencia
24,205
15,041
493
3.3
Saugus
7,285
5,600
0
0
Lancaster
20,170
12,947
14,179
100
Palmdale
13,445
7,952
8,030
100
TOTAL
281,040
147,873
103,829
70
Reclamation Plants (FY 17-18)
Table 3: Categories of Recycled Water Usage (FY 17-18)
Reuse Application
No. of Sites
Area Applied
(acres)
Usage
(MGD)
Parks
125
3,682
5.07
Golf Courses
24
2,766
4.67
Schools
123
1,361
2.19
Roadway Greenbelts
133
709
0.917
Public Facilities1
34
500
1.73
Commercial Buildings2
266
562
1.24
Nurseries
19
112
0.161
Cemeteries
9
1,107
2.02
Residential Developments
24
186
0.301
Churches
14
19
0.055
Industrial3
110
378
3.30
Agriculture4
11
4,316
15.8
Environmental Enhancement
1
400
4.25
SUBTOTAL
892
16,094
41.7
Groundwater Recharge
4
646
51.9
TOTAL
896
16,741
93.6
NOTES:
1. "Public Facilities" includes police stations, libraries, post offices, city halls, government offices, landfills, etc.
2. "Commercial Buildings" includes offices, warehouses, retail, car dealerships, hotels, restaurants, etc.
3. Industrial processes receiving recycled water include carpet dyeing, concrete mixing, cooling towers, metal finishing,
oil field injection, toilet flushing, and construction applications such as soil compaction and dust control.
4. California Polytechnic University, Pomona, while technically a school, uses most of its recycled water for agricultural
purposes and is thus included in this category.
#4954185
-------
Figure 5: Distribution of Recycled Water Usage (FY 17-18)
#4954185
-------
Overview and Reuse Approach
The Sanitation Districts of Los Angeles County have a program to
assist local jurisdictions with development of stormwater
projects that promote MS4 compliance by improving water
quality, and where feasible, achieve co-benefits such as
enhancing water supply and resiliency. One type of project is a
controlled, permitted diversion from storm drains to storage
facilities with managed releases to the sanitary sewer system
owned by the Sanitation Districts and city and county satellite
sewer systems. In some cases, these projects can add to the
water reclamation facility's recycled water supply and assist the
region in meeting its local supply and water resiliency goals.
Reuse Drivers
-MS4 permit requirements include strict numeric limits based on
TMDLs and encourage capture and use or infiltration of runoff
and stormwater.
-Wastewater treatment plants have experienced 25% or more
decline in flows due to drought and water conservation,
providing available capacity in sewers and reducing available
supplies of recycled water.
-Drought and water conservation have increased demand for
recycled water.
Outcomes and Benefits
This program is in early stages, and each project is tailored to the
city's needs and local situation. Because many sanitary sewers
have some available capacity during dry-weather and significant
capacity during off-peak hours, use of existing infrastructure
presents an opportunity to achieve multiple benefits. Analysis of
several stormwater capture and infiltration project proposals has
demonstrated that, in many cases, adding a modest sewer
discharge component to the projects can help lower capital costs
by reducing the storage volume required to capture back to back
storms. A collaborative regional study being led by Las Virgenes
Municipal Water Districts is underway to assess the potential for
using existing sanitary sewers throughout Los Angeles County in
a similar manner.
Challenges and Solutions
Challenges include:
• Limited flow data for the sanitary sewer systems and for
storm drains;
• Lack of a dynamic sanitary sewer model to analyze
episodic inputs of stormwater to the sewer;
• Jurisdictional coordination between dozens of different
agencies with jurisdiction over sewers, water, and stormwater;
• Existing adjudications of local groundwater basins and
rivers may limit the ability to divert water to sewers; and
• Funding is needed for the diversion, storage and control
structures, which cost millions of dollars.
Water Reuse Case Study
Sanitation Districts of Los
Angeles County Stormwater
Services Program
[Los Angeles County, California]
Reuse Application:
Augmentation of municipal recycled water with
urban runoff!stormwater
Approach:
Where hydraulic capacity exists, divert, store and
control releases of urban runoff to the sanitary sewer
system.
Reuse Outcome:
• Improve water quality and promote MS4 compliance
• Increase recycled water supplies in flow-limited areas
Further information:
www.lacsd.org
Kristen Ruffell, Program Manager
kruffell@lacsd.org
(562) 908-4288, ext. 2826
-------
Carson Carriage Crest Stormwater Project (Carson, CA):
Hydrodynamic
Separator
Pretreatment
Unit
Subsurface
Storage Unit
13,5 AF (4.4 MG)
34 cfs
Pump
Station
-------
OIL sha,e:
About Us Contact Us Subscribe Settings
Contact Us
WATER BOARDS
Regional Board Programs News Room Board Decisions Public Notices Water Boards Search
Home Water Issues Oil Fields Food Safety
Oil Fields - Food Safety
Program Contact
Dale Harvey
Supervising Water Resource Control
Engineer
(559) 445-6190
Dale. Harvey@waterboards. ca gov
To contact us or submit comments please
email us at:
WaterboardFoodSafety@waterboards.ca.gov
• Web page problems:
Webmaster5@waterboards.ca.gov
Current Events
Past Events...
Irrigating Human Consumption Crops with Oilfield Produced Water
In California, produced water has been reused to irrigate human consumption crops in a region of the
Central Valley for decades. Near Bakersfield, particularly north and east of the city, petroleum is
extracted from relatively shallow formations containing groundwater with low concentrations of salts.
The resulting produced water is generally low in total dissolved solids. Following oil removal the water
is further treated by dissolved air flotation followed by filtration through a walnut shell filter. In the
interest of ensuring public safety and confidence in the practice, staff of Central Valley Regional Water
Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) convened a Food Safety Expert Panel to seek input from
epidemiologists, toxicologists and other experts on this topic. To understand chemical use in oil fields
that provide produced water for agricultural irrigation, livestock watering, and aquifer recharge, the
CVRWQCB ordered seven California oil and gas producers to provide information regarding their
chemical use in production and associated processes. The resulting disclosures included information
from oil and gas development operations from January 2014 to June 2016 and included the types and
amounts of chemical additives used in oil and gas development operations as well as the volume of
produced water provided for irrigation.
In a preliminary assessment by Shonkoff et ai. (2016)1, more than one third of the 173 different chemical
additives were not able to be sufficiently identified for preliminary hazard evaluation, largely due to
proprietary claims or the lack of disclosure of their Chemical Abstracts Services Registry Number
(CASRN). Over 100 chemicals (62%) were identified by CASRN for acute toxicoiogical properties and
environmental persistence using available data and toxicoiogical screening approaches. Of the chemicals
with a CASRN, the study found that 46 (43%) of them can be classified as potential chemicals of concern
from human health and/or environmental perspectives and require more thorough investigation. As a
result of this study, the CVRWQCB updated its discharge permits to include the requirement to monitor
for any chemical additives used in the oilfield that could be in the produced water. The CVRWQCB also
issued 74 informational orders to chemical suppliers and manufacturers. Based on the resulting
disclosures a list was compiled of 318 chemical constituents used in the oil fields that supply water for
irrigation. These chemicals are currently being evaluated.
The CVRWQCB also evaluated whether produced water constituents were present in food grown with
produced water. To date, crops that have been tested include: almond, citrus, garlic, grape, pistachio,
potato, carrot, cherry, tomato, and apple. Crop samples were tested for volatile and semivolatile
-------
organic compounds and 18 inorganic elements that were selected based on their association with oil
and gas production. Results did not show presence of these constituents; however, the analytical
methods used were not designed for sampling of food. Currently a CVRWQCB contractor is developing a
list of chemicals of interest and has been evaluating toxicity values for constituents on the additive list.
Many of the disclosed chemical constituents have no toxicity data and the contractor is using a variety
of methods to develop toxicity values for these compounds. The aim of these activities is to evaluate the
human health risk of consumption of crops that have been irrigated with oil and gas produced water
from these oilfields and to help to inform the CVRWQCB's approach to the issue in the future with
respect to other operators and water districts that may apply for discharge permits. An additional
question to be addressed is the produced water monitoring methods that can provide accurate and
comprehensive results. Given the complexities of produced water chemistry, reliance on individual
constituent monitoring may not be fully informative. Non-target and bioanalytical approaches may be
needed to understand the overall toxicity of the produced water. These approaches will likely be used
for the analysis of chemicals of emerging concern in recycled municipal wastewater in California based
on recommendations from a recent California State Water Resources Control Board expert panel report
(Drewes et al., 2018)2.
Website:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/water issues/oil fields/food safety/index.html
References:
1Shonkoff SBC, Domen JK, Stringfellow WT. 2016. Hazard Assessment of Chemical Additives Used in Oil Fields that
Reuse Produced Water for Agricultural Irrigation, Livestock Watering, and Groundwater Recharge in the San
Joaquin Valley of California: Preliminary Results. PSE Healthy Energy. September 2016.
2 Drewes, J. E., Anderson, P., Denslow, N., Jakubowski, W., Olivieri, A., Schlenk, D., & Snyder, S. (2018). Monitoring
Strategies for Constituents of Emerging Concern (CECs) in Recycled Water: Recommendations of a Science Advisory
Panel.
-------
Water Reuse Case Study
Denver Water's One Water Journey
Sector: Municipal
Subsector: Nonportable Pilot Project
Overview and Drivers
Colorado has unique features that makes water management in the state challenging. First, Colorado is
a headwaters state, meaning that while some rivers originate in or traverse Colorado, none of that
water stays in the state. Colorado is also subject to frequent and prolonged droughts. For water utilities
like Denver Water that rely on mountain snowpack to replenish water supplies annually, each year can
be boom or bust. A warming climate and unprecedented population growth are also challenging water
managers to ensure that supply meets demand.
To help deal with these challenges, the Colorado Water Conservation Board drafted the first Colorado
Water Plan in 2015. This plan called for actions across the water sector, including conservation and
efficiency, reuse and development of new supply. This holistic approach is needed to solve the complex
water problems facing Colorado in the coming decades, https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/cowaterplan
As the state's oldest and largest potable water
provider, Denver Water was highly involved in the
development of the water plan. Denver Water
serves 1.4 million customers, nearly 25 percent of
the state's population, with only two percent of
the water used in the state. And with already
limited water supplies being stretched thinner by
a warming climate and growth, Denver Water has
a responsibility to seek long-term solutions for a
sustainable, resilient water supply for its
customers.
That's where "One Water" comes in. This water
management strategy incorporates emerging
trends with traditional water management
strategies to ensure the right water source is put
to the right use.
The Project at a Glance
Currently Denver Water is piloting a One Water
strategy as part of its Operations Campus
Redevelopment, hoping to provide a path forward
for other developments wanting to manage on-
site water supplies holistically. In order to pilot
these water management strategies and provide a
template for future implementation, Denver
Addressing Challenges Posed by
Regulatory Constraints
At the time of design, the Colorado Department of
Public Health and Environment's regulation
governing reclaimed water treatment and use,
Regulation 84, did not allow for flushing toilets and
urinals with reclaimed water. So, Denver Water
took part in legislative and regulatory development
efforts with CDPHE to expand Regulation 84. After a
stakeholder process lasting more than a year,
CDPHE expanded Reg 84 in October 2018 to allow
the use of reclaimed water for toilet and urinal
flushing and developed the first state regulation
with criteria for utilizing smaller, localized
treatment systems to provide reclaimed water.
These criteria are based on quantitative risk
assessments which evaluate the risk of various
source, treatment and use combinations to ensure
the protection of public health. The basis for much
of the technical and management requirements in
Colorado's regulation came from the work of a
national blue-ribbon panel of experts convened by
the U.S. Water Alliance.
https://www.sos.state.co.us/CCR/GenerateRulePdf.
do?ruleVersionld=7824&fileName=5%20CCR%2010
02-84
-------
Water embarked on an ambitious mission to showcase what could be done when a development
focused on water from the start. The OCR project is revitalizing Denver Water's decades-old
headquarters in central Denver with a modern, sustainable, innovative operations complex.
In terms of water use on the redeveloped complex, project designers started with local water, in the
form of rainwater capture, to be stored on site in a 50,000-gallon cistern and used for irrigation. But
irrigating with rainwater depends on precipitation intensity and timing, and therefore would not
completely meet the irrigation needs of the complex in most years. So, Denver Water needed to look for
a more consistent water supply.
Wastewater turned out to be that supply, and a system to collect, treat and distribute reclaimed water
generated on site was designed. This treatment involves an anoxic and aerobic moving bed biofiim
reactor, clarifiers, indoor wetland polishing, cartridge filtration and ultraviolet and chlorine disinfection.
The water produced will be used for toilet flushing and comingled with rainwater for irrigation.
Outcomes and Benefits
Construction of Denver Water's new Administration Building and localized reuse system will conclude in
fall 2019. The project not only focuses on sustainability and water efficiency, but it also aims to be a
learning hub for developers, utilities and the public. Denver Water looks forward to sharing more
accomplishments and lessons learned as commissioning, permitting and validation activities wrap up in
the following months. To find out more about this model for efficient water use in Colorado, please visit
https://www.denverwater.org
(3>
0
r*—¦
|
eSI
luSJ
>nc
©
ADMINISTRATION BUILDING ONE WATER
-------
Moving Bed Biofilm
Reactor placement
-------
Water Reuse for Golf Course and Green Areas Irrigation at Palmas del Mar Resort and Residential
Development
Sector: Private non-profit
Location: Humacao, Puerto Rico
Water Source: Secondary treated wastewater
Water Use: Golf courses and green areas irrigation
Technology: Secondary treatment capacity of 1.2MGD using Stahlermatic technology and disinfected
with MIOX system
Project Costs: $7.65 M
Implementation Date: 1978
Overview and Drivers
Puerto Rico, like other regions in the world, drought events have been manifested more frequently due
to complex weather changes. In the last 25 years Puerto Rico has had two major drought events
triggering the Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority (PRASA) to take extreme measures by
rationing the water up to three consecutive days. With this in mind, it is highly essential to manage
efficiently the water sources for present and future generations and to consider water reuse as viable
alternative to achieve this goal.
Palmas del Mar is a resort-oriented community with approximately 2,750 acres of land dedicated to a
variety of residential, commercial, and resort uses. It is in the southeast coast of Puerto Rico,
approximately 35 miles from San Juan. This tourist residential complex has a year around population
around 6,000 and during high season it reaches approximately 10,000. It's composed of approximately
3,500 housing units, (2) hotels, (1) marina, (1) tennis court complex, two (2) golf courses, a private
school, approximately 20 restaurants, (1) equestrian center, among other amenities. For more than 35
years Palmas del Mar Utility, Corp. (PDMU) has provided the treated wastewater from the wastewater
treatment plant (WWTP) to irrigate its golf courses
and green areas. Furthermore, the digested and
dewatered sludge produced during the process in
combination with vegetative landscaping waste
form the community is used to manufacture
compost that is utilized for landscape soil
preparation projects inside the complex.
Process or Technology
In 1978, Palmas de Mar built its WWTP as secondary treatment plant and since its origin the plant was
conceptualized and operated under a zero-discharge permit from the Puerto Rico Environmental Quality
Board (PREQB). This plant is owned and managed by PDMU, a nonprofit corporation. This private utility
operates under a franchise agreement issued by the Puerto Rico Public Service Commission that allows
PDMU to buy potable water from PRASA and distribute it inside the complex on PDMU's piping
network. It also provides for the operation of the sanitary sewer collection system and a WWTP. In
1986, the WWTP was converted on an aerobic treatment / activated sludge facility, installing a
Stahlermatic technology which combines the biological contactor with the recirculating and activated
sludge process. In 2003, the WWTP increased its treatment capacity to 1.2MGD. Currently, the plant
manages between 400,000 to 500,000 gallons per day and during peak season flow can reach 750,000
-------
gallons per day. The plant effluent is disinfected using a system known as MIOX where a sodium
chloride solution (NaCI) goes through electrostatic plates. By electrolysis there is a separation of sodium
and chlorine being this last one
injected into the water and the
sodium solution (brine) is returned
to the WWTP for treatment. After
disinfection the effluent is
discharged into retention ponds
where Golf Operations Department
manages the volume to be irrigated
between the two (2) Championship
Golf Courses.
Outcomes and Benefits
PDMU produces enough reuse water to irrigate the golf courses and to keep them in optimal conditions.
It has kept the operation costs competitive by providing adequate operation and maintenance and
installing a high-end technology at a lower cost. The treated waters comply with PREQB parameters and
allow to fulfill the standards for a safe irrigation process. Other benefit is the use of de-watered sludge
mixed with vegetative gardening waste to produce compost that goes back to the community. This
vegetative material comes from the Palmas del Mar landscape contractor s daily maintenance work.
Once is received, is crushed using a Wood hog, leaving it as "mulch", ready to be mixed with the bio-
solids. PDMU has also incorporated in the compost mixture a measured volume (approx. 10% of Bulk
Mixing pile) of horse manure and Sargassum, a genus of brown macroalgae that reaches the coast and
becomes a public issue when it discomposes. The retention ponds of Palmas del Mar serve as habitat for
migratory birds, pelicans, turtles and fish species, and other wildlife.
Challenges and Solutions
'The correct reuse of wastewater for irrigation on golf courses complying with quality standards allows
the use of available water for irrigation of agricultural crops, being equally attractive and creative when
situations of high need for this precious resource comes." (Torrellas-Cruz et al. 2016)
Acknowledgements
EPA Region 2 staff (Evelyn Huertas) completed the template based on conference transcript cited bellow
and the phone conversation of Daniel E. Torrellas-Cruz, Operations & Engineering Manager of PDM
Utility Corp. (787-285-0202, pdmutorrellas@coqui.net).
References
(1) Torrellas-Cruz, D.E. June 2016, Irrigation Project for Golf Courses and Green Areas with Wastewater
in Palmas del Mar (conference transcript). Journal Perpectiva en Asuntos Ambientales, Volume 5:
76-82. Also available at: https://issuu.com/panorama pr/docs/p perspectivas 5
(2) Puerto Rico Department of Environmental and Natural Recourses. 2005. Plan for Water Reuse in
Puerto Rico. Available at:
http://www.recursosaguapuertorico.com/lnformeReuso Plan Aguas 22nov 04.pdf. Accessed
August 7, 2019
-------
Appendix I: Methodology
NATIONAL WATER REUSE
ACTION PLAN
DRAFT
-------
Appendix I: Methodology
The EPA facilitated the development of this draft National Water Reuse Action Plan through a
collaborative effort. It reflects input from a broad spectrum of expertise and experience from across the
water sector/user community. To maximize the potential for water reuse to expand the portfolio of
water availability, this draft plan is national in scope, representing input from all levels of stakeholders
across the water reuse sector. Ultimately, the actions in the final Action Plan will represent and be
informed by various leadership and collaboration roles. Most often, water reuse leadership and
collaboration will occur at the state, local, and/or watershed scale.
Water Reuse Discussion Framework
The EPA prepared a document titled Discussion Framework for Development of a Draft Water Reuse
Action Plan (Appendix A) and shared it across the water sector to ensure that stakeholders understood
how water reuse was being described, the intended scope and range of issues, and the extensive nature
of the literature and published works and experiences that the draft Action Plan would draw from. On
April 18, 2019, the EPA issued a press release, which opened the public docket and provided the
Discussion Framework to help inform thinking and comment on the potential content of the draft Action
Plan.
Sources Materials for the Draft Action Plan
The draft Action Plan has been informed from five different sources, which are summarized and
discussed in separate appendices. These sources include:
• Analysis and summary of the water reuse literature. Extensive technical, science, and policy
information has been published on water reuse over the past several decades. Over 150
publications were considered, from which hundreds of possible actions were identified (Appendix
C). These published resources informed the early work on the Discussion Framework and provided
an initial list of actions for consideration in the draft Action Plan.
• Outreach and dialogue through more than 20 existing forums with an estimated 2,300
participants. External interest in the development of the draft Action Plan, was considerable; the
EPA received many invitations to attend and participate in discussions at a variety of forums
established by external groups (e.g., conferences, meetings, webinars). These were an extremely
valuable and efficient way to engage large numbers of stakeholders with diverse interests and often
resulted in rich conversations. These also helped to generate dialogue and interest among groups
and through the public docket process. Since the draft Action Plan's development was announced
(February 27), the EPA participated in more than 20 external events and engaged an estimated
2,300 people in varying degrees of conversation. Appendix D contains a list of the external forums
and high-level action items identified during these outreach events.
• Public input submitted to the docket. The EPA opened a docket for public input on ideas and
considerations for development of the draft Action Plan from April 18 to July 1, 2019. The Agency
received 55 comments from the public, representing the opinions and ideas from a broad set of
organizations and entities. On aggregate, 530 pages of material were shared via the docket. A high-
level summary of the comments and proposed actions received through the docket is available in
Appendix E. The actual docket and access to all of the raw public input is available at:
https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=EPA-HQ-QW-2019-0174.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | 1-1
-------
• WateReuse Association expert convertings. Six water sector/utility organizations (WaterReuse
Association, National Association of Clean Water Agencies, Association of Metropolitan Water
Agencies, Water Research Foundation, American Water Works Association, and the Water
Environment Federation) convened a facilitated expert process to help inform development of the
draft Action Plan. This process prioritized input from a diverse group of technical experts. The two
workshops in April and May 2019 brought together more than 100 participants around the country
and produced a report explicitly intended to inform development of the draft Action Plan. The
convening report, which presents recommendations from these two sessions, was submitted as a
public comment and is available in its entirety in Appendix F.
• Review of selected international experiences. The EPA recognizes the critical and important
experiences of international partners in the realm of water reuse, particularly Israel, Singapore,
Australia, South Africa, and Namibia. Appendix G summarizes of their efforts, which served to
inform development of the draft Action Plan.
The Draft Action Plan's Organizing Framework
The draft's structure was largely informed by the early outreach conducted by the EPA and others. It
consists of 10 strategic objectives, which can also be viewed as broad outcomes that will advance
consideration of water reuse in the United States. The draft Action Plan identifies proposed actions that
directly support these strategic objectives. The intent was not to have an exhaustive list of ideas, but to
have examples of actions that would help stimulate interest in (and dialogue about) a narrow and
specific set of actions to be considered for the final Action Plan, following public comment.
Identification and Framing of Proposed Actions
The proposed actions contained in this draft Action Plan reflect the totality of the sources considered
and those that appear to have the greatest value and impact on the consideration of water reuse.
Example criteria used to assess the proposed actions and weigh them for inclusion in the draft Action
Plan include:
• Applicability. The action is related to water reuse.
• Results-orientation. The action is clearly articulated, using specific language and offering a
tangible outcome.
• Feasibility. The action appears to be feasible.
• Timeliness. The action can likely be completed within the next five years.
• Immediacy ("shovel-ready" vs. aspirational). The action prioritizes an immediately pursuable
task, as opposed to an aspirational goal.
• Broad downstream effects. The action promotes a range of potential outgrowths; it does not
represent a capstone or dead-end activity.
• Sector consensus. The action positively contributes to the water sector by capitalizing on areas
where there is general consensus.
• Frequency of suggestion. The action was suggested multiple times by different sources.
• Funding. The action has a potential or likely funding source.
• Leaders. The action has a likely champion and collaborating partners.
• Collaboration. The action facilitates and promotes local action and watershed-based
collaboration.
• X-factor. The action serves a source of inspiration, motivation, and continued momentum. It can
offer residual impacts over the next 10+ years.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | 1-2
-------
The final Action Plan will strive to present a balanced suite of actions across strategic objectives.
Example attributes that will be considered include:
• Number. Numerical balance across strategic objectives.
• Geography. Geographic distribution and potential impact over the entire Action Plan.
• Levels of adoption. Balance across the spectrum of experience levels across the states and
localities (i.e., actions should help promote water reuse not only for the pioneers but others that
may not be as advanced).
• Sub-sector balance. Representation of a cross-section of interests across the water sector and
use applications.
• Transformational quality. Inclusion of some actions that may be truly transformative.
Draft National Water Reuse Action Plan—September 2019 | 1-3
------- |