Friday, July 19, 2024
62.2 F

    Latest Posts

    Goodbye Constitution Freedom America by Don Jans

    California Toilet-to-Tap: Public Meeting 3


    by Sheryl Hamlin

    The California DDW (Department Drinking Water) responded to the first publicly available comments from its Expert Panel which has been assembled to review and critique the new Direct Potable Reuse (DPR) ordinance. The most current draft may be read here.

    Previous sessions were reported here , here and here.

    The meeting was limited to one hour. The video may be viewed here with the slides here.

    Serious Issues

    The short duration of the meeting did not mask serious questions raised by the Expert Panel. Below are a few of the issues raised.


    Over-notification will saturate the public to the point notifications will be ignored, as they are in Prop 65, according to the Panel. The DPR notifications should be consistent with other public notifications involving water, although existing water notifications could be strengthened. One suggestion would be a table comparing existing notifications to proposed notifications. Close communication with major hospitals was noted by the Panel, but there was no elaboration.

    Chemical Controls

    There was a significant discussion about the placement of Ozone and BAC processes. The panel emphatically felt these should occur prior to Reverse Osmosis (RO) for effectiveness. Any deviation must be requested and proven on a case by case basis by the applicant. The panel recommended acetone and formaldehyde as BAC performance indicators. The concept is described here. The panel recommended carbamazepine and sulfamethoxazole as ozone performance indicators. Ozone wastewater treatment is discussed here.

    Engineering Criteria

    These recommendations relate to the real-time operation and monitoring of the plant. Specifically, the panel itemized these concerns: 1) Changing wastewater characteristics, 2) Climate change, 3) Influent flow and load equalization, 4) WWTP optimization to reduce energy and chemical use at AWPF, and 5) Equalization and treatment of return flows. There was strong language about unintended consequences:

    While the focus of this review is to determine if the proposed code provides “adequate public health protection” relative to the risk posed by the water being produced, there is a significant concern about unintended consequences — particularly related to energy consumption, excessive energy use, and carbon footprint.

    Other Topics

    Pathogen Controls and blending are two of the topic to be considered for the February 2022 meeting.

    Communicate to DDW

    To communicate to DDW use this email: DDWrecycledwater
    Bookmark the California DPR website.

    History of Water Reuse in California

    This fascinating history of California’s wastewater reuse shows the progress since the early 20th century. It was not discussed at the webinar but intended as background material as to how we arrived at this point.

    To read about the author click sherylhamlin dot com



    - Advertisement -
    0 0 votes
    Article Rating
    Notify of

    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments

    Latest Posts


    Don't Miss


    To receive the news in your inbox

    Would love your thoughts, please comment.x