EPA Guidelines for Water Reuse Document Update and a new NRC /NAS Report on Water Reuse: Potential for Expanding the Nation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 62
About This Presentation
Title:

EPA Guidelines for Water Reuse Document Update and a new NRC /NAS Report on Water Reuse: Potential for Expanding the Nation

Description:

Bob Bastian U.S. EPA, Office of Wastewater Management Washington, D.C. * * * * * * * * * * * 12 BGD = 6 percent of the estimated total U.S. water use or 27 percent of ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:703
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 63
Provided by: epa67
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: EPA Guidelines for Water Reuse Document Update and a new NRC /NAS Report on Water Reuse: Potential for Expanding the Nation


1
EPA Guidelines for Water Reuse Document Update
and a new NRC /NAS Report on Water Reuse
Potential for Expanding the Nations Water Supply
Through Reuse of Municipal Wastewater
  • Bob Bastian
  • U.S. EPA, Office of Wastewater Management
  • Washington, D.C.

2
(No Transcript)
3
History-EPA Guidelines For Water Reuse
  • First Guidelines for Water Reuse-1980 Research
    Report by CDM for EPA/ORD
  • 1992 Guidelines update format-purple
  • design manual series
  • 2004 Guidelines incorporated
  • 3 National Academy studies
  • UV disinfection alternative
  • Emerging contaminants
  • Case studies
  • intended for state regulatory use

4
1980 Guidelines Objective
  • To Make Water Managers and Resource Planners
    Aware of the Proven Possibilities of Water
    Reclamation

5
1992
1992
6
1992 Update to the Guidelines
  • A Major Rewrite (increased from 106 to 254
    pages)
  • Water Resource Driven
  • Level of Treatment Guidelines
  • International Issues
  • Major Changes from 1980 to 1992 Guidelines
  • Inventory of State Regulations
  • Expanded Case Studies
  • Included a Section on International Reuse
  • Truly Provided Treatment Guidelines

7
2004 Guidelines for Water ReuseEPA 625/R-04/108
August 2004http//www.epa.gov/ord/NRMRL/pubs/625r
04108/625r04108.pdfhttp//www.epa.gov/ttbnrmrl/
8
2004 Update
  • Updating the Inventory of State Regulations,
  • Adding State Contacts
  • Expanded Discussion of Potable Reuse Issues
  • Emphasizing Recent Studies and Projects
  • Emerging Pathogens RD/Issues
  • Emerging Chemical Constituents (NDMAs,
  • Endocrine Disrupters, etc.)
  • Updating USGS Data on National Water and Reuse
    Practices
  • New Case Studies

9
What the 2004 Guideline Wasnt
  • A Design Manual
  • A Treatment Manual
  • A Scope of Work for Reuse Projects
  • A Land Application/Effluent Disposal Manual

10
2004 Chapters
  • 1. Introduction
  • 2. Technical Issues in Planning Water Reuse
    Systems
  • 3. Types of Reuse Applications
  • 4. Water Reuse Regulations and Guidelines in the
    U.S.
  • 5. Legal and Institutional Issues
  • 6. Funding Alternatives for Water Reuse Systems
  • 7. Public Information Programs
  • 8. Water Reuse Outside the U.S.

11
Who Was the Intended Audience?
  • Municipal Wastewater and Water Supply Agencies
  • International, State, Regional and Local
    Regulatory Agencies
  • Reclaimed Water Users (Public and Private)

12
States with Reuse Regulations and Guidelines in
1992
Alaska
Hawaii
Regulations Guidelines
13
Status in 2003
Alaska
Hawaii
Guidelines Regulations
14
Reuse Categories
  • Unrestricted Urban Reuse
  • Restricted Urban Reuse
  • Agricultural Reuse for Food Crops
  • Agricultural Reuse for Nonfood Crops
  • Recreational Impoundments
  • Intrusion Barrier
  • Environmental e.g., Wetlands
  • Industrial Reuse
  • Groundwater Recharge
  • Indirect Potable Reuse
  • - Spreading Basins
  • - Injection
  • - Surface Water Augmentation

15
(No Transcript)
16
(No Transcript)
17
(No Transcript)
18
Suggested Guidelines for Water Reuse
19
(No Transcript)
20
Projected Growth in the U.S.
2015
2001
2004
21
2012 Update Effort
  • Cooperative Research and Development Agreement
    (CRADA ) CDM-EPA/OWM-EPA/NRMRL
  • Federal Cooperators
  • EPA
  • U.S. AID
  • USDA/NIFA
  • Participate on Project Management Committee,
  • Steering Committee and TRC Review

22
Goals For 2012 Guidelines Update
  • Total Water Management Approach
  • Reflect Integrated Water Resources Management
  • Recognize technology and regulations for higher
    quality uses
  • Utilize current knowledge base supplement with
    recent experience
  • Increased focus on international project economic
    benefits
  • International development standards and
    guidelines
  • (WHO, EU, IWA)

23
Drivers For 2012 Guidelines Update
  • Presidential Executive Order increased water
    and
  • energy efficiency at federal facilities
  • LEED certified facility criteria
  • Sponsor interest in updating Guidelines
  • National Academy Study-role of reuse in water
    supply
  • CWA/SDWA linkage to TWM
  • Wetland buffers to polish water
  • Advanced treatment technologies like OC-GWR
  • promote interest in IPR

24
Format for Updating the Guidelines
  • Forums/Workshops/Web meetings for input
  • International Forums
  • Jordan March IWA 6th Efficiency Conference
  • Singapore July International Water Week
  • Web-based e-Room for participants
  • Expanded contents, increased web linkage
  • Volunteer Authors/Reviewers

25
Contents Types of Reuse Applications
  • Increased agricultural use discussion federal
    food safety
  • Soil science / salinity issues
  • Wetlands polishing and stream augmentation
  • Groundwater augmentation (managed aquifers/ASR)
  • Indirect potable reuse (IPR) applications
  • Potable reuse applications
  • Public health considerations
  • Regional technical focus

26
Expanded International Chapter
  • Technical guide for U.S. AID mission staff
  • Roadmap for policy makers in foreign countries
  • Promote linkage between environmental, public
    health, and economic benefits of reuse
  • Cross-reference best practice case studies
  • Identify knowledge gaps in scale of application
  • Application of small scale onsite/decentralized
    options
  • Create reuse system development checklist
  • On-ramping water reuse globally

27
Schedule
28
Water Reuse Potential for Expanding the
Nations Water Supply Through Reuse of Municipal
Wastewater
  • National Research Council
  • Committee on the Assessment of Water Reuse as an
    Approach to Meeting Future Water Supply Needs

29
Committee Membership
  • RHODES TRUSSELL, Chair, Trussell Technologies,
    Pasadena, California
  • HENRY ANDERSON, Wisconsin Division of Public
    Health, Madison, Wisconsin
  • ED ARCHULETA, El Paso Water Utilities, El Paso,
    Texas
  • JAMES CROOK, Environmental Engineering
    Consultant, Norwell, Massachusetts
  • JÖRG DREWES, Colorado School of Mines, Golden,
    Colorado
  • DENISE FORT, University of New Mexico,
    Albuquerque, New Mexico
  • CHARLES HAAS, Drexel University, Philadelphia,
    Pennsylvania
  • BRENT HADDAD, University of California, Santa
    Cruz, California
  • DUANE HUGGETT, University of North Texas, Denton,
    Texas
  • SUNNY JIANG, University of California, Irvine,
    California
  • DAVID SEDLAK, University of California, Berkeley,
    California
  • SHANE SNYDER, University of Arizona, Tucson,
    Arizona
  • MARGARET WHITTAKER, ToxServices LLC, Washington,
    D.C.
  • DALE WHITTINGTON, University of North Carolina,
    Chapel Hill, North Carolina
  • NRC Staff
  • Stephanie Johnson (Study Director), Sarah
    Brennan, and Stephen Russell

30
Study Charge
  • Contributing to the nation's water supplies.
    What are the potential benefits of expanded
    water reuse and reclamation? What is the
    suitability of processed wastewaters for various
    purposes?
  • Focused on municipal wastewater.
  • 2. Assessing the state of technology. What is
    the current state-of-the-technology in wastewater
    treatment and production of reclaimed water? What
    are the current technology challenges and
    limitations?
  • 3. Assessing risks. What are the human health
    risks of using reclaimed water? What are the
    risks of using reclaimed water for environmental
    purposes? How effective are monitoring, control
    systems, and the existing regulatory framework in
    assuring the safety and reliability of wastewater
    reclamation practices?

31
Study Charge (cont.)
  • Costs. How do the costs (including environmental
    costs) and benefits of water reclamation and
    reuse generally compare with other supply
    alternatives?
  • 5. Barriers to implementation. What
    implementation issues limit the applicability of
    water reuse to help meet the nation's water needs
    and what, if appropriate, are means to overcome
    these challenges?
  • Research needs. What research is needed to
    advance the safe, reliable, and cost-effective
    reuse of municipal wastewater where traditional
    sources of water are inadequate? What are
    appropriate roles for governmental and
    non-governmental entities?
  • 15 sponsors, including EPA, NSF, USBR and 9 water
    utilities.

32
Study Process
  • 8 meetings (5 information gathering)
  • Irvine, CA - Dec. 2008
  • San Francisco, CA - Jun. 2009
  • Golden, CO - Jul. 2009
  • Orlando, FL - Oct. 2009
  • Washington, D.C. - Jan. 2010
  • Woods Hole, MA - Jun. 2010
  • Irvine, CA - Sept. 2010
  • Dallas/Ft. Worth, TX - Jan. 2011
  • Briefings/presentations from many individuals,
    agencies and organizations
  • Included original data analysis and survey of
    utilities for reuse costs
  • Peer-reviewed consensus report

33
Context for Wastewater Reuse
  • New water supplies and improved efficiency needed
    to meet demands of shifting populations and
    changing climate
  • US Population Growth trends
  • One block for each Co. in U.S.
  • Height of Block Population density
  • Color ?Pop between 1970 2030

34
Wastewater Reuse Potential
  • Out of 32 BGD wastewater effluent, 12 BGD
    discharged directly to ocean or estuary in U.S.
    Inland discharges may also be available for
    reuse.
  • Thus, reuse offers significant potential to
    increase total available water resources.

35
Water Reuse in Context
  • Reuse projects are estimated to be lt1 of total
    U.S. water use
  • Nonpotable reuse well established, generally
    accepted.
  • Potable reuse projects represent a fraction of
    all reuse

Florida Reuse In 2010
ADD FL HERE
36
Water Reuse in Context
  • De facto reuse is common
  • De facto reuse where reuse is practiced but not
    officially recognized or permitted as a reuse
    project

9
37
Water Reuse in Context
River Ouse, UK
  • De facto reuse is common
  • Updated analysis of extent of de facto reuse
    needed

From Johnson Williams, 2009
Sewage Treatment Works
Percentage Effluent 90th Percentile
0 5
6 15
16 25
26 50
gt 50
38
Water Reuse Treatment Technology
  • A portfolio of treatment options exists to
    mitigate microbial and chemical contaminants in
    reclaimed water.
  • Includes engineered treatment and natural
    processes
  • The lack of guidance for design and operation of
    natural processes is the biggest deterrent to
    their expanded use in engineered reuse systems.

39
Reuse Treatment Technology (cont.)
  • Treatment can be tailored to meet specific water
    quality objectives for intended applications.
  • Membrane-based processes are particularly
    attractive for reuse applications.
  • However, membranes are not a panacea

40
Environmental Buffers
  • Natural systems are employed in most potable
    water reuse systems to provide an environmental
    buffer.
  • May provide (1) retention time, (2) attenuation
    of contaminants, and (3) blending (or dilution)
  • But, the science required to design for uniform
    protection from one environmental buffer to the
    next is not available.
  • Engineered processes can be designed to achieve
    these same functions.
  • It cannot be demonstrated that such natural
    barriers provide public health protection that is
    not also available by other engineered processes.
  • The potable reuse of highly treated reclaimed
    water without an environmental buffer is worthy
    of consideration, if adequate protection is
    engineered within the system.
  • The distinction between indirect and direct
    potable reuse is not scientifically meaningful to
    product water quality.

41
Understanding the Risks
  • Health risks remain difficult to fully
    characterize and quantify through epidemiological
    or toxicological studies
  • However, well-established methods exist for
    estimating the risks of various water reuse
    applications.
  • The occurrence of a contaminant at a detectable
    level does not necessarily indicate a significant
    risk.
  • Risk assessment screening methods can be used to
    estimate human health effects where dose-response
    data are lacking.

42
Understanding the Risks
  • To quantify uncertainty in risk assessments, a
    better understanding of the performance of reuse
    systems is needed
  • including failures and variability of treatment
    and distribution system
  • The potential for unintended or inappropriate
    uses should be assessed and mitigated.
  • i.e., procedures to detect cross connections.
  • Guidance and user-friendly risk assessment tools
    needed.

43
Evaluating the Risks in Context
  • It is appropriate to compare the risk from water
    produced by potable reuse projects with the risk
    associated with the water supplies that are
    presently in use.
  • Committees Risk Exemplar
  • Original comparative analysis of three scenarios
    1 de facto example and 2 typical
    potable reuse projects

44
Risk Exemplar Scenarios
  • Scenario 1 De facto reuse
  • 5 effluent in pristine surface water, no
    degradation in stream

18
45
Risk Exemplar Scenarios
  • Scenario 2 Soil-Aquifer Treatment (SAT)
  • Secondary treatment, filtration, no disinfection,
    SAT, 6 mo retention in subsurface, no dilution,
    wellhead Cl2 disinfection.

19
46
Risk Exemplar Scenarios
  • Scenario 3 Advanced Water Treatment
  • Secondary treatment, chloramination, MF, RO,
    UV/AOP, direct injection, 6 mo retention in
    subsurface, no dilution, wellhead Cl2
    disinfection.

20
47
Risk Exemplar Contaminants
  • Pathogens
  • Adenovirus
  • Norovirus
  • Salmonella
  • Cryptosporidium
  • Disinfection Byproducts  
  • Bromate 
  • Bromoform  
  • Chloroform  
  • Dibromoacetic acid (DBCA)  
  • Dibromoacetonitrile (DBAN) 
  • Dibromochloromethane (DBCM)  
  • Dichloroacetic acid (DCAA) 
  • Dichloroacetonitrile (DCAN) 
  • Haloacetic acid (HAA5) 
  • Trihalomethanes (THMs)
  • N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA)    
  • Hormones and Pharmaceuticals
  • 17ß-Estradiol 
  • Acetaminophen (paracetamol)
  • Ibuprofen
  • Caffeine
  • Carbamazepine
  • Gemfibrozil
  • Sulfamethoxazole
  • Meprobamate
  • Primidone
  • Others
  • Triclosan
  • Tris(2-chloroethyl)phosphate (TCEP)   
  • Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS)   
  • Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)

48
Risk Exemplar Methods (Detailed in
Appendix A)
  • Contaminant concentrations
  • Estimated initial concentration of contaminants
    in source waters based on literature review
  • Estimated removal efficiencies and fate
    assumptions for steps in 3 scenarios (based on
    literature review)
  • Microbial Risk Assessment
  • Used dose response equations shown in App. A.
    Assumed 1 L/d water consumption (unboiled).
  • Chemical risk assessment
  • Risk based action levels (RBALs) determined for
    chemicals based on 2 L/d consumption (Table A-12)
  • Margin of Safety RBAL / drinking water conc.
  • MOS gt 1 not considered to be a significant health
    risk
  • Verification

49
Risk Exemplar Results Pathogens
The risks for Salmonella and Cryptosporidium in
Scenario 3 were below the limits that could be
assessed by the model.
50
Risk Exemplar Results Chemicals
51
Risk Exemplar Conclusions
  • The risk from 24 selected chemical contaminants
    in the two potable reuse scenarios does not
    appear to exceed the risk in common existing
    water supplies.
  • With respect to pathogens, although there is a
    great degree of uncertainty, the committees
    analysis suggests the risk from potable reuse
    does not appear to be any higher, and may be
    orders of magnitude lower than currently
    experienced in at least some current (and
    approved) drinking water treatment systems (i.e.,
    de facto reuse).

52
Ecological Enhancement Via Reuse
  • Few studies have documented the environmental
    risks associated with the purposeful use of
    reclaimed water for ecological enhancement.
  • risk issues not expected to exceed those
    encountered with the normal surface water
    discharge of wastewater.
  • Trace organic chemicals have raised some
    concerns, because aquatic organisms can be more
    sensitive to trace organic chemicals than humans.
  • Sensitive ecosystems may necessitate more
    rigorous analysis of ecological risks before
    proceeding with ecological enhancement projects
    with reclaimed water.

53
Costs
  • Financial costs of water reuse are widely
    variable and dependent on site-specific factors
  • Distribution system costs can be the most
    significant component of costs for nonpotable
    reuse systems.
  • To determine the most socially, environmentally,
    and economically feasible alternative, water
    managers and planners should consider
    nonmonetized costs and benefits of reuse projects
    in their comparative cost analyses of water
    supply alternatives.
  • Example benefits
  • Improved supply reliability
  • Reduce dependence on imported water.
  • Example costs
  • Reuse projects may have a larger (or smaller)
    carbon footprint than existing supply
    alternatives.
  • Can reduce water flows to downstream users and
    ecosystems.

54
Social, Legal, and Regulatory Issues
  • Water rights laws, which vary by state, affect
    the ability of water authorities to reuse
    wastewater.
  • Enhanced public knowledge of water supply and
    treatment are important to informed decision
    making.
  • The public, decision makers, and media need
    access to credible scientific and technical
    materials on water reuse to help them evaluate
    proposals and frame the issues.
  • Public debate on water reuse is evolving and
    maturing as more projects are implemented.

55
Social, Legal, and Regulatory Issues
  • Risk-based federal regulations for nonpotable
    reuse would provide nationwide minimum acceptable
    standards of health protection
  • could facilitate broader implementation of reuse.
  • Modifications to the structure or implementation
    of the SDWA would increase public confidence in
    the potable water supply and ensure the presence
    of appropriate controls in potable reuse
    projects.
  • SDWA does not include specific requirements for
    treatment or monitoring when source water
    consists mainly of municipal wastewater effluent.
  • Such requirements could enhance public health
    protection and provide nationwide consistency
    when planned or de facto potable reuse is
    practiced.

56
Social, Legal, and Regulatory Issues
  • EPA should fully consider the advantages and
    disadvantages of federal reuse regulations to the
    future application of water reuse to address the
    nations water needs while appropriately
    protecting public health.
  • Application of legislative tools to
    effluent-impacted water supplies could improve
    the protection of public health. These could
    include
  • Updates to the National Pretreatment Programs
    list of priority pollutants.
  • Increased designated use of surface waters for
    public water supplies.

57
Research Needs
  • Health, Social, and Environmental Issues
  • Quantify the extent of de facto reuse in the U.S.
  • Address critical gaps in the understanding of
    health impacts of human exposure to constituents
    in reclaimed water.
  • Enhance methods for assessing the human health
    effects of chemical mixtures and unknowns.
  • Strengthen waterborne disease surveillance,
    investigation methods, governmental response
    infrastructure, and epidemiological research
    tools and capacity.
  • Assess the potential impacts of environmental
    applications of reclaimed water in sensitive
    ecological communities.
  • Quantify the nonmonetized costs and benefits of
    potable and nonpotable water reuse compared with
    other water supply sources to enhance water
    management decision making.
  • Examine the public acceptability of engineered
    multiple barriers compared with environmental
    buffers for potable reuse.

58
Research Needs
  • Treatment Efficiency and Quality Assurance
  • Develop a better understanding of contaminant
    attenuation in environmental buffers.
  • Develop a better understanding of the formation
    of hazardous transformation products during water
    treatment for reuse and ways to minimize or
    remove them.
  • Develop a better understanding of pathogen
    removal efficiencies and the variability of
    performance in various unit processes and
    multibarrier treatment and develop ways to
    optimize these processes.
  • Quantify the relationships between polymerase
    chain reaction (PCR) detections and viable
    organisms in samples at intermediate and final
    stages.
  • Develop improved techniques and data to consider
    hazardous events or system failures in risk
    assessment of water reuse.
  • 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.
  • Analyze the need for new reuse approaches and
    technology in future water management.

59
Federal and Nonfederal Roles in Research
  • Addressing the research needs will require the
    involvement of several federal agencies as well
    as support from nongovernmental research
    organizations.
  • Improved coordination is needed.
  • If national water reuse regulations are
    developed, a more robust research effort will be
    needed with enhanced coordination among federal
    and nonfederal entities.
  • Such an effort would benefit from the leadership
    of a single federal agency.

60
Overall Summary
  • Expanding water reuse could significantly
    increase the nations water resource,
    particularly in coastal communities.
  • Available technology can reduce chemical and
    microbial contaminants to levels comparable to or
    lower than those present in many current drinking
    water supplies.
  • Modifications to the CWA and SDWA could ensure
    public health protection for both reuse projects
    and de facto reuse while increasing public
    confidence in water reuse.
  • Improved coordination among federal and
    nonfederal entities could more effectively
    address key research needs.

61
Future Studies Greywater?
  • A follow-up NRC study could address
  • Quantity and suitability. How much greywater use
    occurs in the U.S. and for what applications?
    What is the suitabilityin terms of water quality
    and quantityof greywater for various purposes?
  • Treatment. What types of treatment are available
    at a household level, and how do these treatment
    methods compare in terms of cost and energy use?
    What research should be pursued to produce
    improved technologies?
  • Assessing costs and benefits. What are the costs
    and benefits of greywater use (including
    nonmonitized costs and benefits, such as impacts
    on wastewater infrastructure and effects on water
    and energy conservation)?
  • Assessing risks. What are the human health and
    environmental risks of using greywater for
    various purposes? What existing state and
    regulatory frameworks address greywater use, and
    how effective are they in assuring the safety and
    reliability of greywater use practices?

62
Bob Bastian
  • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
  • Office of Wastewater Management
  • Washington, D.C. 20460
  • tele 202-564-0653
  • e-mail bastian.robert_at_epa.gov
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com