Overview/Status of Potable Reuse Nationally and Internationally Guy Carpenter, WRA President and aquaTECTURE Senior VP Strategic Operations October 27, 2016 SAWUA Water Forum

2

The Hydrologic (Water) Cycle with Human Influence Graphic credit:

Home & Business Wastewate r Treatment Plant Nature Water Treatment Plant Traditional Urban Water Cycle 20 th Century Water Cycle 4

Direct Potable Reuse Wastewater Treatment Urban Water Use Water Treatment Environmental Buffer Advanced Water Treatment

IPR model DPR model

Home & Business Wastewater Treatment Plant Advanced Water Treatment Plant Next Generation Urban Water Cycle Advanced Technology Replaces Nature to Produce Potable Water 7

Advanced Technology 8

Transformational Technology 9

Direct Potable Reuse Safe Reliable Locally-Controlled Environmentally-Friendly Research Technology Sound Science Innovation 10

California enacted SB 918 which required California to develop the “feasibility of developing criteria for Direct Potable Reuse.” WateReuse launched an initiative to conduct research and outreach to support this goal. WateReuse funded 34 projects on a range of topics, including reliability of treatment trains, microbial and chemical water quality, monitoring, and operations, bioassays, and critical control points The research results have produced the science to guide the Expert Panel in meeting the legislative mandate. A $6 million investment has produced $24 million in research. The Catalyst for Change 11

Research Overcoming Concerns 12 How do we achieve treatment and process reliability through redundancy, robustness, and resilience? 23 Projects Regulatory Concerns Community Concerns How to we increase public awareness of the water cycle and illustrate the safety of DPR to lead to acceptance? 6 Projects Utility Concerns How do we address the economic and technical feasibility of DPR? How do we train operators to run these advanced systems? 19 Projects

Research Addressing Technical Issues 13 Demonstration of reliable, redundant treatment performance Critical control points Operations, maintenance, training/certification Pathogens: surrogates and credits Pathogens: rapid/continuous monitoring Failure and resiliency Removal and risk of constituents of emerging concern Evaluation of potential DPR trains Source control

Framework for DPR 14 Purpose: To provide an overview of the key elements that make up a DPR program and a framework for assessing the specific topics and issues that need to be addressed in the development of future DPR Guidelines.

Synthesis of Findings Potable Reuse Research Compilation: Synthesis of Findings (15-01) This project summarizes and synthesizes the research results, pulling from outside research where needed, and package this information by topic into a cohesive document. 15

“ The Expert Panel is impressed by the research that has been funded by the WRRF and supports the continuation of such research.” - June 30 letter to DDW from Expert Panel Chairs 16

Report to CA State legislature released just last month 17

In California, there were two groups involved in evaluating the feasibility of developing uniform criteria for DPR Expert Panel Advise on public health issues and scientific and technical matters, assessing the need for additional research on DPR, and recommending an approach for completion of needed research. Advisory Group Advise the Expert Panel and the State Water Board on relevant topics such as practical considerations for DPR criteria that are protective of public health and achievable by project proponents. 18

It is technically feasible But, DPR does not have benefits of environmental buffer Storage Attenuation Response time Enhance reliability of mechanical systems and performance No need for additional research, but made six recommendations for acceptability of DPR (which involve research) What did they determine? 19

1.Improve on source control and final water quality monitoring, identify new compounds 2.Implement a probabilistic method (Quantitative Microbial Risk Assessment, QMRA) to confirm the necessary removal values for pathogens 3.Require monitoring of pathogens in raw wastewater to develop better empirical data on concentrations and variability. 4.Investigate the feasibility of collecting raw wastewater pathogen concentration data associated with outbreaks of disease. 5.Identify treatment processes that can provide some “averaging” with respect to potential chemical peaks 6.Develop more comprehensive analytical methods to identify unknown contaminants, that may not be removed by advanced treatment. Expert Panel Recommendations 20

Develop criteria for DPR “Reduced environmental buffer” Delivery to surface water treatment plant Delivery to the potable water distribution system Pursue Expert Panel recommendations “Blue Ribbon Panel” to assess potential health risks of CECs in recycled water that present serious harm to health Draft criteria and then challenge them with all imaginable proposals to make sure they will always assure safe DPR projects No timeline provided So, now what? 21

But that’s just the technical stuff… 22

Public Perception 23

What’s going on everywhere else?

Reuse Regulations in the U.S. 25

History of Potable Reuse 1962: Montebello Forebay Spreading Grounds, Los Angeles, CA 1968: Goreangab DPR Plant I, Windhoek Namibia 1976: Water Factory 21, OCWD, CA 1978: UOSA, VA 1985: Hueco Bolson Recharge Project, El Paso, TX & Clayton County, GA 1993: West Basin Water Recycling Plant, CA 1999: Gwinnett County, GA & Scottsdale Water Campus, AZ 2002: Toreele Reuse Plant, Belgium 2003: NeWater Bedok, Kranji Singapore 2007: Chino Basin Recharge Project, CA 2008: Groundwater Replenishment Project, CA 2009: Arapahoe & Cottonwood, CO 2010: NeWater, Changi, Singapore; Prairie Water, CO; Groundwater IPR Trial, Perth Australia 2011: Beaufort West, South Africa 2013: Big Spring, TX 2014: Wichita Falls, TX 26

Potable Reuse Internationally Singapore PUB three key strategies: Collect every drop of water Reuse water endlessly Desalinate more seawater 27

Singapore PUB 28

Questions? Guy Carpenter