17. projetos e regulação de reúso de Água nos estados unidos

Water Reuse Regulations and Case

Studies in the USA

James Crook, Ph.D., P.E.

Environmental Engineering Consultant

Boston, Massachusetts

USA

International Symposium on Water Reuse

Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil

19 October 2012

Water Reuse Regulations/Guidelines

Guidelines vs. Regulations

• Guidelines (in most states) are:

• Advisory

• Voluntary

• Non-enforceable

• Regulations are:

• Legally-adopted

• Enforceable

• Mandatory

• There are no federal regulations for water

reuse in the U. S.

– U.S. EPA has guidelines for water reuse, revised in

2012

Guidelines vs. Regulations

• Guidelines – Can lead to inconsistent decisions by regulators

– Proponents may be unsure of requirements to meet

– May become de facto regulations

• Regulations – Provide definitive requirements that must be met

– Often take extensive periods to develop and adopt

– May not be as flexible as guidelines

– May hamper approval of new or innovative treatment processes not included in regulations

– May increase public acceptance

Regulations and Guidelines Vary Depending

on Type of Reuse

Potable reuse

Irrigation of food crops

Unrestricted recreational impoundments

Unrestricted urban irrigation

Restricted urban irrigation

Restricted recreational impoundments

Industrial reuse

Environmental reuse

Irrigation of non-food crops

Most Stringent Regulations

Least Stringent Regulations

Water Reuse Criteria

• Generally include:

– Water quality requirements

– Treatment process requirements

– Treatment reliability requirements

– Monitoring requirements

– Operational requirements

– Cross-connection control provisions

– Use area controls (signs, color-coded pipes,

setback distances, etc.)

Water Quality Monitoring

• Subjective and inconsistent among states

• Generally conservative

• Total or fecal coliforms usually used as

indicator organisms

• Sampling frequency varies among states

– Most require daily sampling

• Monitoring for pathogens not required (with a

few exceptions)

Typical Monitoring Frequency Requirements

Parameter Frequency

BOD Daily – weekly

Coliform Daily

Turbidity Continuous

Total suspended solids Daily

Chlorine residual Continuous

Treatment Reliability

• Standby power supply

• Alarms

• Multiple or standby unit processes

• Emergency storage/disposal provisions

• Provisions for continuous disinfection

• Non-design features

– Qualified personnel

– Monitoring

– O & M program

Use Area Controls - Examples -

• Setback distances

• Confinement to authorized use area

• Protection of drinking fountains

• Signage

• Cross-connection control

• Prohibition of hose bibbs

• Worker protection

• Surveillance activities

Cross-Connection Control (California Criteria)

• Air Gap

– Potable water used to supplement reclaimed water

• Reduced Pressure Principle Device

– Premises receiving both potable and reclaimed water

• Double Check Valve

– Residences using reclaimed water for irrigation

• Double Check Valve

– On potable water fire protection systems in buildings

where reclaimed water used

Reclaimed Water Valve Cover

Pop-up Spray Irrigation Head

Lockable Vault for Controlled Access

Residential Irrigation – Lockable Vault

Color-coded Pipe

Color-coded Tape

Sign at Park

Cross-connection Control Device

EPA Water Reuse Guidelines - Urban Reuse -

Type of Reuse Treatment Reclaimed Water Quality

• Unrestricted:

nonpotable applications

in municipal settings

where public access is

not restricted.

• Secondary

• Filtration

• Disinfection

• pH = 6 – 9

• ≤ 10 mg/L BOD

• ≤ 2 NTU

• No detectable fecal

coli/100 mL

• ≥ 1 mg/L Cl2 residual

• Restricted:

nonpotable applications

in municipal settings

where public access is

controlled or restricted

• Secondary

• Filtration

• Disinfection

• pH = 6.0-9.0

• ≤ 30 mg/l BOD

• ≤ 30 mg/l TSS

• ≤ 200 fecal coliform /100 ml

• 1 mg/l Cl2 residual (min.)

EPA Water Reuse Guidelines - Crop Irrigation -


• Food crops consumed

raw: surface or spray

irrigation

.

• Secondary

• Filtration

• Disinfection

• pH = 6 – 9

• ≤ 10 mg/L BOD

• ≤ 2 NTU


coli/100 mL


• Processed food crops:

commercially processed,

surface or spray irrigation

• Non-food crops: fodder,

fiber, and seed crops,

pastures, commercial

nurseries, and sod farms

• Secondary

• Disinfection

• pH = 6.0-9.0

• ≤ 30 mg/l BOD

• ≤ 30 mg/l TSS



EPA Water Reuse Guidelines - Impoundments -


• Unrestricted: no

limitations are imposed

on body-contact

.

• Secondary

• Filtration

• Disinfection

• pH = 6 – 9

• ≤ 10 mg/L BOD

• ≤ 2 NTU


coli/100 mL


• Restricted: body contact

is restricted

• Secondary

• Filtration

• Disinfection

• ≤ 30 mg/l BOD

• ≤ 30 mg/l TSS



EPA Water Reuse Guidelines - Environmental Reuse -


• Environmental Reuse:

create wetlands, enhance

wetlands, or sustain

stream flows

• Variable

• Secondary

and

disinfection

(min.)

Variable but not to exceed:

•≤ 30 mg/l BOD

• ≤ 30 mg/l TSS



EPA Water Reuse Guidelines - Industrial Cooling Water -


• Once-through cooling

.

• Secondary

• Disinfection

• pH = 6.0-9.0

• ≤ 30 mg/l BOD

• ≤ 30 mg/l TSS



• Recirculating cooling

towers

• Secondary

• Disinfection

(chemical

clarification

and filtration

may be

required)

Variable, depends on

recirculation ratio

• pH = 6.0-9.0

• ≤ 30 mg/l BOD

• ≤ 30 mg/l TSS



EPA Water Reuse Guidelines - Groundwater Recharge - Nonpotable Reuse -


• Recharge aquifers which

are no used as a potable

dinking water source

• Site specific

and use

dependent

• Primary (min.)

for spreading

• Secondary

(min.) for

injection

• Site specific and use

dependent

EPA Water Reuse Guidelines - Indirect Potable Reuse -


• Groundwater recharge

by surface spreading

into potable aquifers

• Secondary

• Filtration

• Disinfection

• Soil aquifer

treatment

Includes but not limited to the

following:

• No detectable fecal coli/100 mL


• pH = 6.5 – 8.5

• ≤ 2 NTU

• ≤ 2 TOC of wastewater origin

• Meet drinking water standards

after percolation through the

vadose zone

EPA Water Reuse Guidelines - Indirect Potable Reuse -


• Groundwater recharge

by injection into

potable aquifers

• Augmentation of

surface water supply

reservoirs

• Secondary

• Filtration

• Disinfection

• Advanced

wastewater

treatment

Includes but not limited to the

following:

• No detectable fecal coli/100 mL


• pH = 6.5 – 8.5

• ≤ 2 NTU

• ≤ 2 TOC of wastewater origin

• Meet drinking water standards

The 2012 U.S. EPA Guidelines for Water

Reuse can be downloaded from the following

website:

http://www.waterreuseguidelines.org/images/

documents/2012epaguidelines.pdf

State Standards for Pasture Irrigation with

Reclaimed Water (Milking Animals Not Allowed)

State Quality Limits Minimum Treatment

Required

Arizona ≤ 1000 fecal coli/100 mL Stabilization ponds

California None specified Secondary

Florida

≤ 200 fecal coli/100 mL

≤ 20 mg/L BOD

≤ 20 mg/L TSS

Secondary

Disinfection

Texas

≤ 200 fecal coli or E.

coli/100 mL

≤ 35 Enterococci/100 mL

≤ 20 mg/L BOD

≤ 15 mg/L CBOD

None specified

State Standards for Landscape Irrigation with

Reclaimed Water (Restricted Access)


Required

Arizona ≤ 200 fecal coli/100 mL Secondary

Disinfection

California ≤ 23 total coli/100 mL Secondary

Disinfection

Florida

No detectable fecal coli/100 mL

≤ 20 mg/L CBOD

≤ 20 mg/L TSS

Secondary

Disinfection

Texas

≤ 200 fecal coli or E. coli/100 mL


≤ 20 mg/L BOD

≤ 15 CBOD

Not specified

Why Specify Water Quality Limits and

Treatment Processes?

• Indicator/surrogate parameters alone don’t

adequately characterize microbial or chemical

water quality

– Coliforms, turbidity, etc. not sufficient by themselves

• Specifying both treatment processes and water

quality limits obviates need to monitor for

certain constituents

– There is a lot of data documenting pathogen

concentrations (or lack thereof) in reclaimed water

based on a combination of water quality limits and

specific treatment unit processes

State Standards for Landscape Irrigation with

Reclaimed Water (Unrestricted Access)


Required

Arizona No detectable fecal coli/100 mL

≤ 2 NTU

Secondary

Filtration

Disinfection

California ≤ 2.2 total coli/100 mL

≤ 2 NTU

Secondary

Filtration

Disinfection

Florida


≤ 20 mg/L BOD

≤ 5 mg/L TSS

Secondary

Filtration

Disinfection

Texas



≤ 5 mg/L BOD or CBOD

≤ 3 NTU

Not specified

Why No Virus Limits?

• Health significance of low levels questionable

• Virus analyses complex and expensive

• Complete analyses can take 4 weeks

– Water sampled is long gone

• PCR technology detects genetic material

– Doesn’t determine concentration or viability

• Treatment requirements & water quality limits

(together) effective to indicate virus reduction

State Standards for Reclaimed Water Spray

Irrigation of Food Crops Eaten Raw (direct contact with edible part of crop allowed)


Required

Arizona No detectable fecal coli/100 mL

≤ 2 NTU

Secondary

Filtration

Disinfection

California ≤ 2.2 total coli/100 mL

≤ 2 NTU

Secondary

Filtration

Disinfection

Florida Use prohibited*

Texas Use prohibited*

* Irrigation of edible crops that will be peeled, skinned, cooked, or

thermally processed before consumption is allowed. Reclaimed

water quality and treatment requirements same as for

unrestricted access landscape irrigation.

State Standards for Industrial Cooling* with

Reclaimed Water


Required

Arizona Not covered Not covered

California

≤ 2.2 total coli/100 mL

≤ 2 NTU (24-hour avg.)

≤ 10 NTU (max.)

Secondary

Filtration

Disinfection

Florida


≤ 20 mg/L BOD

≤ 5 mg/L TSS

Secondary

Filtration

Disinfection

Texas


≤ 35 enteroccci/100 mL

≤ 20 mg/L BOD

≤ 15 mg/L CBOD

Not specified

* Cooling towers where mist is created that may reach populated areas

Potable Reuse

Indirect vs. Direct Potable Reuse

• Indirect potable reuse:

– Augmentation of a drinking water source (surface

water or groundwater) with reclaimed water followed

by an environmental buffer that precedes normal

drinking water treatment

• Direct potable reuse:

– Introduction of reclaimed water directly into a

potable water supply distribution system

downstream of a water treatment plant or into the

raw water supply immediately upstream of a water

treatment plant

Environmental buffer

• Environmental buffer:

– A natural water body (e.g., reservoir or river)

that physically separates product water from

a water reuse facility and the intake to a

drinking water plant or distribution system.

For groundwater recharge, an aquifer and/or

soil act as the environmental buffer that

separates product water from a water reuse

facility and a potable water extraction well

Wastewater

Treatment

Surface Water

or

Groundwater

City A

City B

Water

Treatment

Incidental or Unplanned Indirect Potable Reuse (“De Facto” Reuse)

Wastewater

Treatment

Water

Treatment

Surface wateror

Groundwater*

*Extracted Groundwater may

not receive further treatment

Indirect Potable Reuse

Definitions

Water

Treatment

Surface Water

or

Groundwater Wastewater

Treatment

Direct Potable Reuse (No environmental buffer)

Definitions

Water

Treatment

Surface Water

or

Groundwater Wastewater

Treatment

Direct Potable Reuse (Pipe-to-Pipe)

Potable Reuse - Major Concerns/Issues -

• Water Quality

• Treatment Reliability

• Unregulated chemical constituents

• Limited Health Effects Data

• Treatment process and water quality monitoring

– Real-time online monitoring

• Public Acceptance

• Lack of regulations

Draft California Department of Public Health (CDPH)

Regulations for Groundwater Recharge into Potable Aquifers

Quality Limits Treatment Required

• ≥12-log virus reduction

• ≥10-log Giardia cyst

reduction

• ≥10-log Cryptosporidium

oocyst reduction

• Drinking water MCLs

(except for nitrogen)

• Action levels for lead and

copper

• ≤10 mg/L total nitrogen

• TOC ≤0.5 mg/L/RWC

Spreading

• Secondary

• Filtration

• Disinfection

• Soil aquifer

treatment (SAT)

Injection

• Secondary

• Filtration

• Disinfection

• Reverse osmosis

• Advanced

oxidation process

(AOP)

Control of Chemical Contaminants - Regulated Chemicals -

• Quarterly monitoring of recycled water for: – Primary drinking water MCLs for chemicals (except

nitrogen)

– Action levels for lead and copper

• Annual monitoring of recycled water for secondary MCLs

• Quarterly sampling at each monitoring well for: – Total nitrogen, nitrate, nitrite

– Secondary MCLs

– Other chemicals specified by CDPH

– Monitoring may be reduced to annually upon CDPH approval

Control of Unregulated Chemicals

• Total organic carbon (TOC) used as a surrogate for the unknown and unregulated organic chemicals

• RWC = recycled water contribution

• Recycled water compliance calculation: – TOC ≤ (0.5 mg/L) / (RWC)

• Example: If proposed RWC is 20% (0.20) – Allowable TOC of wastewater origin must be

≤ (0.5 mg/L) / (0.20), which is ≤ 2.5 mg/L

– I.e., dilution can be used to meet TOC requirement

• Sample Weekly

Response (Retention) Time

• No less than two months required between

recharge and extraction of the water

– Need sufficient time to allow for the identification

and effective response to any treatment failures

– GRRP’s response time must be approved by CDPH

– Longer response time may be required

• Tracer study required

Other Selected Requirements

• Industrial pretreatment and source control

program

• Operations plan

• Contingency plan

• Public hearings

• Monitoring well locations and sampling

requirements

• Review by an independent advisory panel

• Reports

Dual System (Several Nonpotable Uses)

St. Petersburg, Florida

Operational since 1976


• Dual water system in operation since 1977

– Focus at that time was on disposal, not conservation

– Objective was to achieve zero discharge

• Reclaimed water customers 10,600

• Reclaimed water uses:

– Landscape irrigation, including: residential lawns,

shrubs, and plants; parks, playgrounds,

schoolyards, golf courses, medians

– Industrial uses

– Air conditioner chiller water

– Backup source for fire protection

Residential Irrigation

Air Conditioner Chiller Water

Tennis Courts

Color-Coded Reclaimed Water Hydrant

Storage

Distribution System

• 100 miles (160 km) of trunk and transmission

mains

– 10 to 48 inches (25 to 120 cm) diameter

• 200 miles (320 km) of distribution piping

– 2 to 8 inches (5 to 20 cm) diameter

• Transmission mains from all 4 WRFs are

interconnected

• 9 booster pump stations (5 are City owned and

operated)

• System pressure monitored at key locations


• Wastewater flow = 33 mgd (125,000 m3/d) from 4

treatment plants

• Quantity reused = 17 mgd (64,000 m3/d)

– 40% of total water provided by City

• In-plant uses ≈ 1 mgd (3,800 m3/d)

• Deep well injection = 15 mgd (57,000 m3/d)

• Potable water pumped = 26 mgd (98,000 m3/d)

Florida Water Reuse Regulations - Nonpotable Uses -

Type of Use Water Quality Limits Treatment

Required

Restricted Public

Access Irrigation*

Industrial Uses

200 fecal coli/100 mL

20 mg/L TSS

20 mg/L CBOD

Secondary

Disinfection

Public access

irrigation

Food crop irrigation

Toilet flushing

Fire protection

Commercial laundries

Vehicle washing

No detectable fecal

coli/100 mL

5 mg/L TSS

20 mg/L CBOD

Secondary

Filtration

Disinfection

* Sod farms, forests, pasture land, areas used to grow trees, fodder, fiber,

and seed crops, and similar areas


• Reclaimed water quality (avg. from 4 WRPs):

– BOD = 2.6 mg/L

– TSS = 1.0 mg/L

– Turbidity = 2.4 NTU

– TDS = 580-1070 mg/L

– NO3 = 0.27 mg/L

– NO2 = 0.75 mg/L

– NH3 = 16.9 mg/L

– PO4 = 2.0 mg/L

– Chlorides = 441 mg/L

– Fecal coliforms < 1/100 mL

– Cl2 residual = 3.9 mg/L

Pathogens in Reclaimed Water (Tertiary Treatment) - St. Petersburg, Florida -

Enterovirus

(PFU/100 L)

Cryptosporidium

(oocysts/100 L)

Giardia

(cysts/100 L)

Helminths

(ova/L)

Untreated WW

% Positive 100 67 100 33

Average 1,033 1,456 6,890 16.5

Maximum 4,450 12,200 12,500 111

Reclaimed Water

% Positive 8 17 25* 0

Average 0.01 0.75 0.49 ---

Maximum 0.133 5.35 3.3 ---

* All Giardia cysts in reclaimed water were determined to be nonviable

Deep Well Injection

• Excess reclaimed water and inadequately-treated reclaimed water are disposed of via injection wells

• Total of 10 wells at the water reclamation plants

• Wells penetrate a saltwater aquifer about 1,000 feet (305 m) below land surface

• Groundwater chloride level = 22,000 mg/L – Precludes its use as a potable source of supply

Deep Well Injection

Program Cost*

• Cost to date: $145,000,000

– EPA grant funding estimated to be $100,000,000

• Upgrade the four treatment plants

• Construct the distribution system

– City funded share $20,000,000 (contribution not

targeted for recover)

– The remaining $15,000,000 is recoverable through

the Voluntary Assessment Program

* 1 U.S. Dollar ≈ 2 Brazilian Reals

Operating Cost and Subsidy

• Operating cost = $5,300,000

• System revenue = $2,600,000

• Remaining operating cost of $2,700.000

subsidized by city’s water and wastewater

utilities

– Each utility pays half of that cost

St. Petersburg, Florida - Residential Irrigation with Reclaimed Water -

• Reclaimed water use is voluntary

• Residents pay cost of extending distribution

lines to serve them

– Ranges from $500 to $1,200 per customer

• Total connection charge = $435

– $242 tapping fee

– $168 for backflow preventer

– $15 inspection fee

Operating Cost and Subsidy

• Residential user fees

– Flat rate charge = $15.62 for first acre (0.4 ha) and

$8.95 for each additional acre (0.4 ha) or portion

thereof

• Commercial user fee

– Volume rate = $0.45/1,000 gallons ($0.12/m3)

Agricultural Irrigation

Salinas Valley Reclamation Project

(Monterey, California)


Monterey Wastewater Reclamation Study for

Agriculture (MWRSA)

• 7-year Demonstration Project

• Completed on 1987

• Cost = $7 x 106

• Goal: assess safety and feasibility of using tertiary

treated reclaimed water to irrigate crops eaten raw

– Artichokes, broccoli, cauliflower, lettuce, and celery

• Evaluated 3 types of irrigation water

– Tertiary treated reclaimed water receiving direct filtration

– Tertiary treated reclaimed water receiving chemical

coagulation-clarification prior to filtration

– Local well water (Control)

• Demonstration plots = 12 acres (5 ha)

Salinas Valley Reclamation Project - Operational in 1998 -

• Treatment plant capacity = 30 mgd (114,000 m3/d)

• Current flow = 20 mgd (76,000 m3/d)

• Treatment:

– Secondary (trickling filters)

– Rapid mix of coagulant and polymer added

– Flocculation

– Dual media gravity filtration

– Disinfection using gaseous chlorine

– Diurnal flow equalization storage

• Crops irrigated: artichokes, broccoli, cauliflower,

lettuce, celery, and strawberries

Irrigation Distribution System

• Distributes reclaimed water to 222 parcels of farmland

• Irrigate 12,000 acres (4,900 ha) of food crops

• Distribution pipelines = 46 miles (74 km) – Diameter = 8 to 15 inches (20 to 38 cm)

• 22 supplemental wells for peak demand

• 111 flow-metered turnouts

• Pressure and flow metering stations

• Centralized control system

• 3 booster pump stations

• Cathodic protection for ferrous metal piping

Supplemental Well

Grower turnout

Costs

• Capital costs

– Treatment facilities: $30 million (US dollars)

• Only includes cost of additional treatment

– Distribution system: $37 million

• O&M costs/year

– Treatment facilities: $3.9 million

– Distribution system: $1.5 million

• Repayment of loans/year: $1.8 million

• Cost to treat & deliver water = $0.86/1000 gallons

($0.22/ m3)

– Excludes secondary treatment costs

– Includes debt service and O&M costs

Salinas Valley Reclamation Project - Microbial Water Quality -

Organism Raw

Wastewater

Secondary

Effluent

Tertiary

Reclaimed

Water

Fecal coliform (MPN/100 mL) 7 x 106 –

30 x 106

230 x 106 –

800 x 103 ND

E. Coli 0157:H7 (MPN/100 mL) ND ND ND

Salmonella (MPN/100 mL) ND – 16 2.2 – 9.2 ND

Giardia (cysts with internal

structure/100 mL)

2,000 –

22,400 0.4 – 12.2

ND – 0.3

(empty

cysts)

Cryptosporidium (cysts with

internal structure/100 mL) ND – 200 ND – 1.8 ND – 0.41

Virus (MPN/L) -- -- ND

ND = Not detected

Acceptance of Produce Grown in Reclaimed water

• Acceptable to brokers, wholesalers, and store

managers

• Special labeling not required by regulatory

agencies

• Growers believe reclaimed water is as good as –

or better than – other irrigation water they use

– Reluctant to advertise source of water

– Concerned about perception issues

Indirect Potable Reuse

Orange County Water District (California)

Groundwater Replenishment System (GWRS)


Local Supplies

Groundwater & Recycling

L.A. Aqueduct

Colorado River Aqueduct

State Water Project

Transfers & Storage

Orange County

• One hour south of Los

Angeles

• Coastal community

• Dry, arid climate with

little rain

• Sources of water include

groundwater and

imported water

Typical OCWD Water Supply Sources to

Recharge the Groundwater Basin (m3/yr)

SAR Baseflows 126 x 106

SAR Stormflows 62 x 106

Natural Incidental Recharge 74 x 106

MWD Untreated Full Service

Water - 25 x 106

Other - 5 x 106

GWRS - 89 x 106

Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD): Wastewater Collection, Source Control, Treatment

and Disposal

Orange County Water District (OCWD): Manages and protects the Groundwater Basin, AWT

Primary

Treatment

Secondary

Treatment

Advanced Water

Purification Reuse Sewage

Source

Control OCSD OCWD

Joint Partnership

Partnership since 1972 for Wastewater Reclamation

GWRS Flow System 70 mgd (265,000 m3/d)

Ultraviolet

Light

(AOP)

Brine

OCSD Outfall

Backwash

OCSD Plant 1

Microfiltration

(MF)

Reverse

Osmosis

(RO)

Product

Water

with

hydrogen

peroxide

Enhanced

Source

Control

Secondary

Treatment

Ground-

water

Recharge

(injection &

spreading)

OCSD

Secondary

Effluent

Aerial View of GWRS Treatment Facility

Where Does GWR System Water Go?

• Water is returned to groundwater basin

– 35 mgd (132,500 m3/d) is sent to injection wells for

seawater intrusion barrier

– 35 mgd (132,500 m3/d) is sent to recharge basins in

Anaheim to augment groundwater aquifers

Orange County Water District Groundwater

Replenishment System (GWRS)

Ocean

Outfall

OCWD

Groundwater Basin

Santa Ana River

N

Pacific Ocean

Santiago Creek

OCSD

Facilities

Pumping

Facilities

SeawaterIntrusion

Barrier

Kraemer/Miller Basins

GWRS Pipeline

Future Mid-Basin

Injection/Recharge

Water Quality Produced by GWRS

• Meets all drinking water standards

• Total dissolved solids:

– Influent = 1,000 mg/L

– Product water = <30 mg/L

• Total organic carbon:

– Influent = 11-12 mg/L

– Product water <0.15 mg/L

• Pharmaceuticals removed to nondetectable levels

• Other chemicals also effectively removed by RO

• N-Nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA) destroyed by UV

• 1,4-dioxane removed by RO, AOP

• Trihalomethanes reduced to nondetectable levels

GWRS Project Funding

$481 Million Capital Cost

Federal Grant,

$20,000,000 State Grants,

$69,000,000

,

OCWD,

$196,000,000

OCSD

Contribution,

$196,000,000

Annual operating cost = $425/af ($0.34/m3)

Benefits of GWR System

• Higher quality than other water sources in Orange County

• Provides additional groundwater supply

• Uses 40% less energy than that needed for imported water

• Reliable, drought-proof source

• Protects basin from seawater intrusion

• Reduces salinity build up

• Decreases wastewater discharge to ocean

• Defers need for a new ocean outfall

• Provides needed water for Orange County

James Crook, Ph.D., P.E.

Environmental Engineering Consultant

E-mail: [email protected]

17. projetos e regulação de reúso de Água nos estados unidos

Documents

regulations regulations

water reuse curitiba

regulations guidelines

federal regulations

unsure of requirements

definitive requirements

public acceptance regulations

daily sampling monitoring