Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutNWRI CDPH Panel Report Vol II for Meeting 1 FINAL 061214NATIONAL WATER RESEARCH INSTITUTE Volume II Final Report of the March S, 2014, Conference Call Meeting of the Expert Panel for the California Department of Public Health (Agreement No. 13- 21041) on Development of Water Recycling Criteria for Indirect Potable Reuse through Surface Water Augmentation and the Feasibility of Developing Criteria for Direct Potable Reuse June 12, 2014 Fountain Valley, California www.nwri- usa.or /g ca- panel.htm ABOUT NWRI A 5010 nonprofit organization, the National Water Research Institute (NWRI) was founded in 1991 by a group of California water agencies in partnership with the Joan Irvine Smith and Athalie R. Clarke Foundation to promote the protection, maintenance, and restoration of water supplies and to protect public health and improve the environment. NWRI's member agencies include Inland Empire Utilities Agency, Irvine Ranch Water District, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, Orange County Sanitation District, Orange County Water District, and West Basin Municipal Water District. For more information, please contact: National Water Research Institute 18700 Ward Street P.O. Box 8096 Fountain Valley, California 92728 -8096 USA Phone: (714) 378 -3278 Fax: (714) 378 -3375 www.nwri-usa.org www.nwri-usa.org/ca-panel.ht Jeffrey J. Mosher, Executive Director Gina Melin Vartanian, Editor Publication Number: NWRI- 2014 -05 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Expert Panel on "Development of Water Recycling Criteria for Indirect Potable Reuse through Surface Water Augmentation and the Feasibility of Developing Criteria for Direct Potable Reuse" (Panel) was formed at the request of the California Department of Public Health (CDPH). Financial support for the Panel is being provided by CDPH through Agreement No. 13- 21041. The Panel would like to thank CDPH staff for the information, materials, and suggestions received from CDPH as part of the first Panel Meeting, which is the focus of this Panel Report. In particular, the Panel thanks Mr. Randy Barnard, Mr. Mark Bartson, Mr. Brian Bernados, Mr. Bruce Burton, Mr. Robert Hultquist, and Dr. David Spath of CDPH for their assistance. The Panel also appreciates the support of Mr. Bruce Burton, Chief of the Northern California Drinking Field Operations Branch, who serves as the CDPH project representative on this effort. In addition, the Panel thanks the National Water Research Institute for administering and organizing the Panel's efforts. The Panel would also like to recognize the WateReuse Research Foundation, WateReuse California, and Water Research Foundation for participating in the first Panel Meeting and providing valuable information on current and future potable reuse research projects. DISCLAIMER This report was prepared by an NWRI Expert Panel (Panel), which is administered by the National Water Research Institute (NWRI). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this report were prepared by the Panel. This report was published for informational purposes. CONTENTS Volume I 1. Purpose and History of the Panel .................................................................. ............................... l 1.1 Project Background .......................................................................... ..............................1 1.2 Panel Members ................................................................................. ..............................2 2. Panel Meeting ................................................................................................ ..............................3 2.1 Background Material ....................................................................... ..............................3 2.2 Meeting Agenda ............................................................................... ..............................3 2.3 Meeting Attendees ........................................................................... ..............................4 3. Comments ...................................................................................................... ..............................5 3.1 General Comments ........................................................................... ..............................5 3.2 CDPH Mandate and Panel Process .................................................. ..............................6 3.3 Comments about the Research Plan ................................................. ..............................6 3.4 Panel's Response to Research Plan Questions ................................ .............................13 Appendix A: Panel Background ....................................................................... .............................14 Appendix B: Panel Member Biographies ......................................................... .............................16 AppendixC: Meeting Agenda .......................................................................... .............................22 Appendix D: Meeting Attendees Volume II 1. Presentation Slides from the March 5, 2014, Web - Enabled Conference Call Meeting of the Expert Panel 2. California Direct Potable Reuse Initiative Research Plan 3. California Water Code Section 13560 -13569 ITEM 1: PRESENTATION SLIDES FROM THE MARCH 5, 2014, WEB - ENABLED CONFERENCE CALL MEETING OF THE EXPERT PANEL NWRI Expert Panel Development of Water Recycling Criteria for IPR through Surface Water Augmentation and the Feasibility of Developing Criteria for DPR for the California Department of Public Health Conference Call Meeting 'job R NWRI March 5, 2014 ! COPH 9:00 am to 1:00 pm (PST) t. W..— D:p....... PublicHeelth Welcome (9:oo,io.m) Welcome and Introductions • Jeff Mosher, NWRI i Proposed ground rules: • Mute phone if possible • In GoToMeeting use "chat" to ask questions • Q &A after the presentations E 1 Attendees Expert Panel Members • CHAIR: Rhodes Trussell, Trussell Technologies • Michael Anderson, UC Riverside • Dick Bull, MoBull Consulting • Jorg Drewes, Technische Universitat Munchen Attendees Expert Panel Members • Chuck Haas, Drexel University • Walter Jakubowski, WaltJay Consulting • Perry McCarty, Stanford University • Kara Nelson, UC Berkeley i 4 L Attendees Expert Panel Members • Adam Olivieri, EOA, Inc. • Joan Rose, Michigan State University • David Sedlak, UC Berkeley • Tim Wade, US EPA f 0k; 41? 5 Attendees CDPH Staff: Bruce Burton, Chief, Northern California Drinking Field Operations Branch e Randy Barnard, RW Treatment Specialist Mark Bartson, Chief, Technical Operations Section Brian Bernados, Technical Specialist Bob Hultquist, Drinking Water Program Expert Dave Spath, Drinking Water Program Expert 0 I Attendee` WateReuse Representatives • Stefani McGregor, WateReuse Research Foundation • Julie Minton, WateReuse Research Foundatio • Justin Mattingly, WateReuse Research Foundation • David Smith, WateReuse California • Mark LeChevallier, American Water (WRRF RAC Chair) Water Research Foundation • Chris Rayburn, Water Research Foundatio NWRI Staff Jeff Mosher, txecuuve uirecior Brandi Caskey, Events Manager Gina Vartanian, Communications Manager Pro g ra m (9:10 — 9:20 am) Review Purpose of Meeting and Meeting Agenda OF Rhodes Trussell, Panel Chair i m _ 1 II LE Meeting Objectives Provide an overview of the CDPH's mandate regarding the Expert Panel. Review the Panel's scope of work. Review DPR research efforts to date and future research needs. Agenda Overview of Panel Process CDPH Perspective • Statuary Mandates and Specific Tasks of the Panel • Briefing on Potable Reuse in California Review of DPR Research • WateReuse DPR Initiative and "Research Plan" Overview • Overview of Current DPR Research Projects • Discussion on DPR Research Closed Panel Discussion 9 IN A !)CDPH PublicHeakh CDPH Perspective and Panel Overview CDPH Perspective (9:20 -9:35 am) Statuary Mandates and Specific Tasks of the Panel • Bruce Burton, CDPH OCDPH Cali Forma Dcparrmcnc of PublicHealth 12 0 Expert Panel Assess DPR Research Needs Advise on Development of IPR through Surface Water Augmentation (SWA). Make a Determination as to Whether Proposed Criteria for SWA are Adequately Protective of Public Health Advise on the Feasibility of Developing Uniform Criteria for Direct Potable Reuse I1 California Department of Public Health Adopt Groundwater Replenishment Regulations by December 31, 2013 Adopt SWA Regulations by December 31, 2016 Report to the Legislature by December 31, 2016 on the Feasibility of Developing Uniform Water Recycling Criteria for Direct Potable Reuse Advisory Group Advise the Expert Panel on the development of uniform water recycling criteria for DPR criteria Advise the Department on the feasibility of developing uniform water recycling criteria for DPR X Panel Overview (9:35 -9:50 am) Description of Expert Panel Process • Jeff Mosher, NWRI i Expert Panel - Areas Areas of Expertise: • Chair • Toxicologist • Wastewater treatment engineering • Water treatment engineering • Epidemiology • Microbiology • Chemistry • Multi- barrier system reliability • Microbial risk assessment • Limnology 18 I Expert Panel Charge (Tasks): �. Assess what, if any, additional areas of researcr. are needed for establishing criteria for DPR 2. Advise CDPH on public health issues and scientific and technical matters regarding the development of surface water augmentation (IPR) criteria 3. Advise CDPH on public health issues and scientific and technical matters regarding the feasibility of developing criteria for DPR 19 Phase 1 - Approach Review Research Plan(s) (Task 1) • DPR research is ongoing and more research is planned • To ensure funds are focused on critical knowledge gaps, the panel will be asked to review research plans Surface water augmentation criteria (Task 2) • Review initial CDPH draft criteria (and rationale) • Review: City of San Diego efforts, research, monitoring data, demonstration studies, epi studies, risk assessments, state reports, NRC study, etc. • Guiding principal: protection of public health 20 10 Phase 2 (DPR) — Approach Review and evaluate feasibility of criteria for DPR (Task 3) • Goal: Protect public health • To determine feasibility review: • Treatment technologies • Multiple barriers needed • Information on health effects • Failure of treatment systems (how to react) • Monitoring • Other scientific or technical issues • Additional research needed • Concerns raised by Advisory Panel? 21 Expert Panel - Schedule Phase 1 • Review DPR Research Plan(s) (Task 1) • No legislated schedule • Address surface water augmentation criteria (Task 2) • By December 31, 2016 Phase 2 • Review and evaluate feasibility of criteria for DPR (Task 3) • Product: Report to legislature • Draft Recommendations Report — June 30, 2016 • Public review draft — September 1, 2016 • Final Report — December 31, 2016 22 11 Panel Process NWRI coordinates with CDPH and Panel Chair 1. CDPH will develop "scope of work" 2. NWRI and Chair: Develop proposed approach Review approach with Panel (at first meeting) • Finalize approach General: • Use of Panel meetings (open and closed sessions) • 5 meetings in first phase • Use of web - enabled conference calls • Make assignments for between meeting efforts • "Advisory Panel" input 23 Panel Outcomes "Panel reports" representing a consensus of the panel By Task: 1. Review of DPR research — letter /memo report 2. Review of "Surface Water Augmentation Criteria" — Panel Report 3. Review of "Feasibility of Criteria for DPR" — Panel Report 24 12 Advisory Committee on DPR At least 9 representatives in these areas: • Water and wastewater agencies • Local public health officers • Environmental organizations • Environmental justice organizations • Public health nongovernmental organizations • CDPH • State Water Resources Control Board • U.S. EPA • Ratepayer or taxpayer advocate organizations • Business community 25 Advisory Committee Representatives Ray Tremblay Jim Fiedler Marsi Steirer Mike Wehner Al Lau Keith Solar Traci Minamide Garry Brown Andria Ventura Conner Everts Shahla Farahnak Alisa Reinhardt Charles Mosher Bruce Macler Mark Bartson LACED Santa Clara Valley Water District City of San Diego Orange County Water District Padre Dam Municipal Water District San Diego County Taxpayers Association LA Bureau of Sanitation Orange County Coastkeeper Clean Water Action Environmental Justice Coalition for Water SWRCB San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce Mariposa County Health Department U.S. EPA CDPH 26 13 Advisory Committee (CDPH) Charge: • Advise the Expert Panel regarding investigation of the feasibility of developing criteria for DPR • Consult in selecting members of the Expert Panel • Review the Panel's draft report Open meetings • Bagley -Keen Meeting Act Requirements • Public participation encouraged Schedule • Initial meeting: February 21 • Discuss organization /operation of Advisory Group 27 CDPH Perspective (9:50 to 10:20 am) Briefing on Potable Reuse in California • Bob Hultquist and Brian Bernados, CDPH ON 4. Assoc Kposition 28 14 REGULATING POTABLE REUSE CALIFORNIA SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT • Pure, wholesome, potable, and healthy water • Evaluate and permit each source • Chemical Standards (MCLs) • For surface water augmentation and direct potable reuse - Surface Water Treatment Rule (SWTR) • A water system "using an approved surface water shall provide multibarrier treatment necessary to reliably protect users from the adverse health effects of microbiological contaminants ..." • Organism log reductions are determined as part of source approval process 15 TRANSITION: CWA to SDWA when "Approved Source" INDIRECT POTABLE REUSE REGULATORY SCHEME • Clean Water Act regulators: • Regulate the reuse project to assure no impairment of the receiving groundwater of surface water • Groundwater recharge regulated in recycling criteria • Drinking Water Regulators: • Enforce standard provisions of the SDWA • For SWA much of the regulation will be in the SWTR IR .9 Surface water reservoir (for SWA) Drinking Water , a INDIRECT POTABLE REUSE REGULATORY SCHEME • Clean Water Act regulators: • Regulate the reuse project to assure no impairment of the receiving groundwater of surface water • Groundwater recharge regulated in recycling criteria • Drinking Water Regulators: • Enforce standard provisions of the SDWA • For SWA much of the regulation will be in the SWTR IR A POSSIBLE REGULATORY SCHEME FOR DPR • Clean Water Act regulators could regulate what they have the authority, expertise, and operator certification program for: • Source control for the collection system • Treatment through secondary or tertiary • Disposition of inadequately treated wastewater Drinking Water Regulators could: • Approve secondary or tertiary effluent meeting the CWA regulators permit as the "approved" surface water source • Specify advanced treatment and monitoring in the water system permit as they would for any impaired or extremely impaired source SOURCE QUALITY 1 Extremely Impaired Chemical Contamination Impaired .. Pathogen Contamination --- ON. 17 POTABLE REUSE REGULATION PRINCIPLES • Make a "safe" drinking water • Low tolerable risk • 10 -4 annual risk of infection • Drinking water standards • Unregulated chemical controlled to match good conventional supplies • Low risk of failure • Multiple barriers for contaminants • Appropriate monitoring 35 TRACE ORGANIC CHEMICALS • The advanced treatment in the IPR draft regulation is effective where 100% reclaimed water reaches a drinking water source and should be good for DPR -The IPR advanced treatment is RO and AOP -Treatment alternatives may be allowed if they assure the same level of health protection • Chronic risk -Have time to react to a treatment problem -IPR - provided by travel time •DPR -does the risk from a failure justify additional measures? in PATHOGENIC MICROORGANISMS Acute risk Set a log reduction treatment requirement Raw sewage to finished drinking water • 12 -log Virus • 10 -log Giardia • 10 -log Cryptosporidium • Based on high sewage levels and USEPA drinking levels for a 10 -4 risk 37 PATHOGEN CONTROL APPROACHES We could assure safe water by providing: • Real -time monitoring of organism reduction for the required barriers, or, possibly • Best available monitoring and redundant barriers to provide extra log reduction capacity to compensate for monitoring limitations 19 PATHOGENS CONTROL QUESTIONS • Is the available monitoring sensitive and rapid enough to tell us when the organism reduction goal is not being met? • How do we measure the overall reliability of the treatment scheme? • How consistently must the treatment meet the organism log- reduction goal? • Multiple redundant barriers minimize the chance of a complete failure of treatment - how do we determine the necessary number and capability of the redundant barriers? SUMMARY A POSSIBLE DPR SCHEME • Regulate the critical treatment under the SDWA • Focus on acute risks (pathogens) • Continuously verify treatment performance • Provide sufficient barriers with: • Real -time organism reduction verification monitoring or • Best available monitoring with redundant barriers to strictly restrict the chance of inadequately treated water • Provide a fail -+safe response to a system problem 20 RESEARCH TO SUPPORT REGULATION Clarity in Rulemaking It must be clear whether or not a project is in compliance with the criteria. The criteria should rely on specific, objective measures To support regulation - research into treatment should correlate contaminant reduction performance with readily measured, enforceable, performance indicators. Questions & Research Issues Adenovirus Reliability Engineered storage buffer Pathogen surrogates Is it Safe? March 5, 2014 Brian Bernados, P.E. Technical Operations Section Brian.bernados @cdph.ca.gov 21 Adenovirus and Public Health • Adenovirus are often a question, especially involving UV treatment • Is the high concentration of adenoviruses in sewage a concern? • Since there are various adenoviruses, should enteric adenoviruses AD40 and 41 be the focus? Adenovirus or MS -2? • Question - "... 6 -log credit for virus through UV (after RO), do I ... target 6 -log of polio or do I ... target 6 -log adenovirus ? ?" • My Response: In the EPA UVDGM, adenoviruses needs 186 mJ /cm2 for 4 -log ... recent studies have shown high concentrations of adenovirus in wastewater. • If FAT, the UV should be operated at a very, very high dose. • AOP is generally monitored via EE /0, but current FAT projects are not directly tracking UV dose. 22 engineered storage buffers • Surface water treatment plants typically have clearwells • For DPR, the ESB replaces the natural barrier • It is assumed that treatment processes failure is inevitable, and ESBs address this through monitoring and storage time. • Some experts consider ESB important • Should ESB be required? ESB Three tanks? • Would a three -tank process as proposed in the WRRF 11 -10 be recommended? Testing �.._ ---a 2nd 12 Hours 3 12 Hours 23 Reformation of N DMA and other DPBs • Could long contact times with free chlorine cause reformation of NDMA? • What about other regulated DPBs? • Would potential future DBP contaminants be a problem for DPR? Online monitoring for pathogens • The status of online monitoring for pathogens • Current sensitivity is inadequate • Cannot directly monitor pathogens at the levels deemed safe for human consumption. • Therefore, what makes a suitable surrogate? • What alternative surrogates should be considered and /or developed? M. Resolution & Sensitivity Issue • As an example, EPA LT2 SWTR defines: • Resolution: the size of a breach from a direct integrity test (DIT) • Resolution for Cryptosporidium = 3 µm. • Sensitivity: max LRV reliably verified by the DIT • The sensitivity of a DIT must => Cryptosporidium removal credit awarded • Virus resolution = 0.01 µm vs. 3 µm. • Need a test pressure => 4,000 psi ( + / -) vs. 15 psi • In general, for any contaminant, what is the resolution & sensitivity needed for an instrument? Safety of DPR • What techniques / methodologies can be used for the assessment of DPR water safety • Water are the proper metrics for "safety "? • That is how can you measure safety? 25 AOP & By- products • Is there is the concern over their AOP metabolites or by- products of treatment. • For DPR, should GAC or biological treatment follow to ensure AOP degradates are removed? • For DPR, is another removal barrier, besides AOP is necessary compounds that are not easily oxidized? PHGs • Since DPR is bridging the gap to drinking water, what is the relevance of CA's Public Health Goals? • If contaminants > PHGs must be in annual Consumer Confidence Reports. • Some must provide a report about health risks if > PHG and cost to meet the PHG, and hold a public hearing. W Other Research Needs • A direct integrity test (DIT) for RO should be developed — online sensor with sensitivity and resolution of viruses • Adequate real -time online monitoring pathogens • How many sensors are needed • Do we need new epidemiological studies? Review of DPR Research WA DPR Research (10:20 -10:35 am) WateReuse DPR Initiative and "Research Plan" Overview • David Smith, WateReuse California F WATE FUSE CALIFORNIA �/►. 55 S i Why APR? ■ State recycling goal State's Goal for Requires Additional Recycling -*- Recycled Water Use 3.0 .-. LL i 2.5 2.0 1.5 3 O 1.0 v 0.5 0.0 1960 1980 2000 MAF= million acre - feet =326 billion gallons Total Water Use 50 45, 40 a 35 30 25 20 0 153 10 0 5 ~ 0 2020 2 140. Why DPR? • State recycling goal • Legislation — SB 565 would have capped ocean discharge — SB 918/SB 322 require DPR regulation feasibility review, and expert panel Why DPR? • State recycling goal • Legislation — SB 565 would have capped ocean discharge — SB 918/SB 322 require DPR regulation feasibility review, and expert panel • Energy and cost Recycled Water Is Cost - Competitive $2,500 o $2,000 0 LL m $1,500 U Q a $1,000 $500 $0 Non - potable Recycled Potable Projected Ground- Ocean Recycled Imported water Desal Energy Conservation Benefits of Potable Reuse 3.5 3.0 2.5 E 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 Typical Energy Intensity by Water Source . I 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 x 2,500 s 2,000 v n 1,500 1,000 500 0 ! M � 'O Y �_ O U >� p N r Cef 7 -0p C 0 O ) f�6 7 d O m O O d 6 Q a-� (n (P (7 U Source: Pacific Institute analysis regarding SDCWA data 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 x 2,500 s 2,000 v n 1,500 1,000 500 0 DPR Initiative ■ Partnership of WRRF and WRCA ■ Goals — Rigorous research (WRRF) — Stakeholder awareness 4 acceptance (WRCA) — Regulations for DPR (DPH /SWRCB) ■ Initiative Budget: $8 -10 million over three years DPR Initiative Status • Business Plan developed • Research — Plan developed, Expert Panel review needed — Research projects in progress ■ Education and outreach activities DPR Research (10:35 -11:30 am) Overview of Current DPR Research Projects • Julie Minton, WateReuse Research Foundation • Stefani McGregor, WateReuse Research Foundation • Justin Mattingly, WateReuse Research Foundation WATE LASE RESEARCH Questions for Panel on "Research Plan" Does the Research Plan appropriately define the needed DPR research? Is the framework (Section 2) presented in the Plan appropriate (i.e., regulatory, utility, and community concerns)? Can the Panel identify any substantial gaps in the research framework, including the current research (Appendix B) and proposed future research (Section 4)? Does the Panel have other comments for WateReuse as it implements the Plan? How would the Panel like to be updated in the future on the status of the research efforts? 66 33 Overview of Current DPR Research CDPH Expert Panel Conference Call March 5, 2014 WATE EUSE RESEARCH Research Path to Achieve DPR Initiative Goal To overcome the regulatory, scientific, technical, and attitudinal barriers to DPR by undertaking three main tasks: • Conduct rigorous scientific research • Communicate the research findings through public awareness programs • Work with regulatory authorities to facilitate DPR implementation by local water utilities WATE EUSE RESEARCH 34 WRRF DPR Program • DPR Specific Research Initiated in 2011 Based off of: • DPR: A Path Forward (2010) • NRC Report (2012) • DPR Workshop (12/12/12) DIRECT POTABL F R REUSF a Y WAr= W E WATE EUS HFSFAHCt� Research Framework 1. Regulatory Concerns — How to achieve treatment and process reliability through redundancy, robustness, and resilience 2. Utility Concerns — Address economic and technical feasibility 3. Community Concerns — Awareness, Education, and Acceptance WATE EUSE RESEARCH 35 Solid Foundation of DPR Research Project# Research PrcjectTiitle Principal Irwestigator ReseadiFoa.Fs K/bnitorirg for REIialiIity and Process Control ofPcabl E Ian Pepper, Univesityof Regulatory - Process MRF -11 -01 ReiiseAoications. Arizona Reliability \AFFF -13-02 Equivalency ofAdvanced TreatmaitTrains for Potable NiodesTrussdl,TrussElI Ca n-runity VARRF -11 -02 Acceptance 'es Regulatory- Treat rrert Rase Technol De r onstrati rig the Berie#its of DV neared Di rest Potabl e Troy Walke-, Fazes& Rtgulatory - Process VbRRF13-03 and reliabilityofmitipletreatiTent barriers ofDPR Gen Boyd, ConTninity, MRF-11-05 Reuse ve-sus Ur ntenti onaI I rd rest Potabl a Rase The Cadms Croup I nc Regulatory Systerrs Eval skReJucti anPrinciples for Drect Andy�Ivson, Card Io lJb l i � ty, l atory VARRF -11 -10 �e�e �latory - Treatn-Ent Devel opnrTt of Opeati on and Mai nta-mnce PI an and VMRRF -1313 Ciai del i na for Figi nee-ed Stoiagefor Di rest Pcitabl e Andy Salvaon, Card I o Unity \APP,F-12-06 Reuse S terns u taY I a Treatment VvOT -13-15 Rase nears Utility V,RF4536 Fo.seTreatrrart Fad Iiti a bv amatory - Process VARRF -12 -07 Nletliods for lntegity Test rig ofNFandlDMm rbrares JoeJacargdo,NVM �VnlVbrch(rranaged Reliability WATERQEUSE RESEARCH = over $3.8 million 2013 DPR Program Project# Resead-iProjectTitle Principallnuestigator ReseachFoas Mark M I I an, Data Model Publ i c Corrrruni cat on Pi an for Advand ng DPR I nsti acts; Patsy \AFFF -13-02 Ca n-runity Acceptance Te TVson, Katz & Associates Critical Control Pdntassess —, tocluantifyrobustnas Troy Walke-, Fazes& Rtgulatory - Process VbRRF13-03 and reliabilityofmitipletreatiTent barriers ofDPR scherre Sawyer Reliability C-val uati on of Source Water Control Opti ors and the lBD lJb l i � ty, l atory I npact of SEA ected StratEg es on DPR Devel opnrTt of Opeati on and Mai nta-mnce PI an and VMRRF -1313 Trai ni ng and Cerdfi cab on Fran vo'k for Di rect Potabl a 1BD Unity Reuse S terns VvOT -13-15 BIecli rig Requirerrets for Water from Drect Potabl e lBDinMbrch(nanaged Utility V,RF4536 Fo.seTreatrrart Fad Iiti a bv Assessrre'rt of Techrii ques to lval uate and Derrvnstrate �VnlVbrch(rranaged �Safety of Water frarnDirectPo tableRaseTreatrrart �Iity,Rt�ulatoy (V"413-14 VVRF4508 Facilities by VVF'fl WATE USE RESEARCH _ $1 million invested by VIRTT, $600,000 by WRF 36 Research Focus: Regulatory Concerns Treatment & Process Reliability Reliability • Develop concepts that draw upon the existing regulatory framework for drinking water to establish the definition of reliability in potable reuse • Define treatment requirements for chemicals and pathogens of health significance • Develop on -line monitoring strategies for each unit process and demonstrate application Redundancy • Define the benefits of the multi- barrier concept to ensure public health protection • Describe the balance between redundancy, monitoring, and storage, and how they work together to ensure reliability • Define what level of redundant (supernumerary) treatment is necessary to ensure reliability, particularly for CDPH Path 2 Design of Engineered Buffers Robustness • Develop guidelines for an acceptable DPR source water • Determine robust treatment schemes that are best suited to address unknown challenges • Develop strategy to determine how to quantify the sense of the WATEREUSE unknown with CECs RESEARCH Resilience • Determine appropriate resilient strategies to ensure reliabil� extreme events J- .74 37 2014 DPR Program Principal Project # Research Project Title Research Focus 4M A Investigator Integrated Management of Sensor Data for Regulatory - Process WRRF -14 -01 TBD Real Time Decision Making and Response Reliability WRRF -14 -02 Establishing additional log reduction credits TBD Regulatory - Treatment for WWTPs Develop Methology of comprehensive ( fiscal /triple bottom line) analysis of WRRF -14 -03 TBD utility alternative water supply projects compared to DPR WRRF -14 -04 DPR Rapid Response Messages TBD Community Screening high risk chemicals potential of WRRF -14 -05 assagethrou h RO /AOP TBD Regulatory- Treatment E _ $1.2+ million investerrM7T0''RRF RESEARCH .7 Research Focus: Regulatory Concerns Treatment & Process Reliability Reliability • Develop concepts that draw upon the existing regulatory framework for drinking water to establish the definition of reliability in potable reuse • Define treatment requirements for chemicals and pathogens of health significance • Develop on -line monitoring strategies for each unit process and demonstrate application Redundancy • Define the benefits of the multi- barrier concept to ensure public health protection • Describe the balance between redundancy, monitoring, and storage, and how they work together to ensure reliability • Define what level of redundant (supernumerary) treatment is necessary to ensure reliability, particularly for CDPH Path 2 Design of Engineered Buffers Robustness • Develop guidelines for an acceptable DPR source water • Determine robust treatment schemes that are best suited to address unknown challenges • Develop strategy to determine how to quantify the sense of the WATEREUSE unknown with CECs RESEARCH Resilience • Determine appropriate resilient strategies to ensure reliabil� extreme events J- .74 37 Regulatory Track 1: Treatment and Engineered Storage Current Research Questions Focus on: —Treatment Train Reliability — Design of Buffers and Engineered Storage Systems — Regulatory Requirements — Identifying Unknown Health Risks WATE EUSE RESEARCH Research Focus: Treatment Train Reliability Equivalency of Advanced Treatment Trains for Potable Reus(- WRRF -1 1-02: Trussell Technologies Research Questions • What criteria should be used to judge the equivalency of potable reuse trains? • What treatment trains are capable of meeting these criteria? Projected Outcomes • Determine what modifications are necessary to treatment trains to satisfy the more stringent public health criteria for DPR. • Project will result in a computer model (toolbox) that delivers information on integrated water reuse treatment trains for DPR. • Using initial findings from the toolbox several treatment trains have been identified for near - full -scale direct potable reuse testing WATE EUSE • Final result will be a report summarizing the results RESEARCH from the large -scale validation of the potable reuse treatment trains. Research Focus: Treatment Train Reliability Equivalency of Advanced Treatment Trains for Potable Reuse WRRF -1 1-02: Trussell Technologies Preliminary Findings • One - size - fits -all treatment approach not effective • Public health protection = primary goal • Needs addressed by WRRF 11 -02: — Develop criteria to evaluate treatment trains — Utilize criteria to identify PR alternatives • Multiple treatment trains can provide equivalent public health protection Work is expected to be complete in July 2014 with publication in 2015' Research Focus: WA= III I QW41ad ireatmeal it RID TGOIDO l po loblo IOV Yin 1T3'R Treatment Train Reliability valuation of Risk Reduction Principles to Direct Potable Reuse WRRF -1 1 -1 0: Andy Salveson, Carollo Engineers Objective: To identify how risk reduction and response concepts developed in other industries can be adapted and applied to DPR systems. The project evaluated the value of the environmental buffer and investigated ways of replacing it (for example, through multi- barrier or redundant treatment). "The primary benefit of an environmental buffer is to DIRECT provide time to react should woraeIF REUSE treatment be inadequate due '71 ' " "' to process failure or other 4 factors" w WATE EUSE — Direct Potable RESEARCH Reuse, A Path Forward 39 Research Focus: Treatment Train Reliability Evaluation of Risk Reduction Principles to Direct Potable Reuse WRRF -1 1 -10: Andy Salveson, Carollo Engineers Risk Focus on eliminating acute risk due to treatment failures. Design & Operation Other process trains besides "FAT" should be considered. Focus on the goal and not specific processes. Monitoring Push to develop better monitoring tools. Human Element Need motivation, training, and focus. WATE USE. Cost RFSFARCH i Driven by treatmen orage. Research Focus: Design of Buffers any► Engineered Storage Systems Guidelines for Engineered Storage Systems WRRF -1 2 -06: Andy Salveson, Carollo Engineers • Objective: To develop recommendations for optimizing engineered storage systems for direct potable reuse, through examining current practices and existing research to generate a guidance document and report. — Designing Engineered Storage • Examining parameters such as retention time, response time, and costs — Task 3 — Examining Public Perception • What does the public know /think about the engineered storage buffer and DPR? — Task 4 — IPR to DPR Transition Case Studies WATE USE RESEARCH .30 I ' Research Focus: Design of Buffers and Engineered Storage Systems Guidelines for Engineered Storage Systems WRRF -1 2 -06: Andy Salveson, Carollo Engineers Basic Framework for Sizing Engineered Storage System: Failure Response Time For each individual process: Identify Failure Respond Sampling - • - System Minimum Interval Reaction Storage Time Failure Response Time (FRT) Research Focus: Regulatory Requirements Establishing Pathogen Log Reduction Credits for WWTPs WRRF -1 4 -02 Objectives: • Obtain more accurate picture of the microbial treatment requirements by addressing the major source of uncertainty —the concentration of pathogens in raw wastewater and secondary effluent • Establish if there is any correlation between the number of pathogens in raw wastewater and secondary effluent • Establish removal credit for biological treatment provided (e.g., activated sludge) for protozoa, bacteria, and viruses • Determine validity of pathogen log- removal requirements identified by CDPH for potable reuse projects. WATE USE RESEARCH 41 Research Focus: Identifying Unknown Health Risks Screening High Risk Chemicals Potential Passage Through RO/AOP WRRF -1 4 -05 The final report will summarize the screening process aimed at identify potential for registered chemicals to pass RO- UV /HZO, barriers in a DPR system, including identification of potential compounds (inorganic and organic) that are likely to occur, pass treatment, pose health risk or pose aesthetic risks to consumers. WATE EUSE RESEARCH Regulatory Track 2: DPR Process Reliability Current Research Questions Focus on: • Reliability of "systems" /multiple barriers • Reliability of existing unit processes • Operational barriers including sensors • Monitoring WATE EUSE RESEARCH WIA Research Focus: Reliability and Monitoring Monitoring for Reliability and Process Control of Potable Reuse Applications WRRF -1 1 -01: Ian Pepper, Shane Snyder — U of Arizona Objective of identifying, evaluating, testing, and validating monitoring systems to assure the public safety and reliability of potable reuse. Project is specifically focused on real -time or near real -time monitoring for the removal of trace organics and biological contaminants. The ultimate goal is to advance smart water reuse systems that are self - monitoring and self - healing, and gain public trust through demonstrated reliability and security. Treatment Efficiency Quality Assurance Removal of Sensor -based monitoring contaminants of contaminants Advanced and smart water reuse with self- monitoring and sel T f- hegli���l E USE iRESEARCH Research Focus: Reliability and Monitoring Standard Methods for Integrity Monitoring and On -line Monitoring of NF and RO Membranes WRRF -1 2 -07: Joe Jacangelo, MWH Reason for the project: • NF and RO integrity can be compromised at several system locations during manufacturing, transport, installation and operation. There are no integrity monitoring methods for NF and RO systems employed at the full -scale that directly demonstrate microorganism removal. • Several integrity testing methods have been evaluated for NF and RO membranes but with limitations. It is important to develop a method that is not only practical but is also cost effective WATE USE RESEARCH 43 Research Focus: Reliability and Monitoring Standard Methods for Integrity Monitoring and On -line Monitoring of NF and RO Membranes WRRF -1 2 -07: Joe Jacangelo, MWH Project Goal and Significance • Develop a scientifically proven method for integrity monitoring of NF and RO membranes for a 4 log validation of microorganisms. • The development of such a method and protocol will assist in its adoption as an industry standard for approval by regulatory agencies to provide microbial removal credits for NF and RO systems. Work Completion date — January 2016, Publication end 2016 WATE USE RESEARCH Research Focus: Operational Barriers Critical Control Point Assessment to Quantify Robustness and Reliability of Multiple Treatment Barriers of DPR Scheme WRRF -1 3 -03: Troy Walker, Ben Stanford — Hazen & Sawyer Objectives • Conduct hazard assessment for key unit operations for two or more direct potable reuse (DPR) treatment trains, including the following: • MF /UF — RO — UV /H2O2 —Cl2 — Engineered Storage • 03 — BAC — GAC — UV—C12— Engineered Storage • Develop best design, monitoring, and operational practices by evaluating critical process control points in each of the DPR treatment trains evaluated to meet overall system robustness and reliability. • Develop standard design approaches and response str SE operations plan and standard operating procedures) to� . events to strive towards 'fail--s—are —o—peration of a DPR plant. .. Research Focus: Operational Barriers Critical Control Point Assessment to Quantify Robustness and Reliability of Multiple Treatment Barriers of DPR Scheme WRRF -1 3 -03: Troy Walker, Ben Stanford — Hazen & Sawyer Preliminary Results: The first Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HACCP) workshop was held on 2/25 — 2/26 • First determination of critical control points and monitoring options determined. • Critical Control Points (CCP)for both processes (FAT membrane treatment and Ozone /BAC /GAC /UV) identified. • Key items for utility data gathering identified and actions for collection. WATE USE RESEARCH • Detailed water quality risk assessment to be undertak separately (more value o e'fearn on CCP selection). Research Focus: Sensors and Monitoring Integrated Management of Sensor Data for Real Time Decision Making and Response WRRF -1 A -01 Objectives • Develop an operation support tool that integrates diverse sensors within the treatment process for immediate feedback /alerts. Integrate existing sensors as an early warning system for a Direct Potable Reuse (DPR) treatment process to provide: — Real time sensor network for tracking system performance and key quality parameters, — A tool for early detection of system anomalies prior to any compromise in water quality. Projected Outcomes • A decision support tool will be developed to integrate the sign I r • The tool will be applied to a full scale or pilot scale plant to de RESEARCH operational challenges and validate- eutrmt. . ®o 45 Research Focus: Utility Concerns, Economic and Technical • Identify methods to reduce the cost (and energy intensity) of DPR treatment • Identify alternative treatment trains that meet public health criteria • Identify non -RO DPR treatment options to eliminate need for brine disposal • Develop DPR training and operational plans • Product water aesthetics: taste and odor WATE EUSE RESEARCH Research Focus: Utility Operations Evaluation of Source Water Control Options and the Impact of Selected Strategies on DPR WRRF -13 -12 Objectives: • Evaluate upstream wastewater treatment impacts (e.g. Biological treatment through nitrification /denitrification and other means, chemical treatment, industrial source control) on DPR source water quality and DPR process • Evaluate impact of hydraulic control mechanisms (e.g. flow equalization and source water storage buffers) on influent water quality and flow variations that "stress" the DPR process WATEREUSE Proposals currently under review by Project Advisor)Pn ., Research Focus: Utility Operations and Trainintj Development of Operation and Maintenance Plan and Training and Certification Framework for DPR Systems WRRF -13 -13 Objectives • Develop a standard operations and maintenance plan for various DPR treatment processes, including appropriate portions of the upstream secondary wastewater treatment processes providing feedwater to the DPR processes. • Develop a DPR Training and Certification framework for DPR system operators Projected Outcomes • Operations and maintenance protocols will be developed for appropriate portions of collection system, secondary treatment processes, the following DPR advanced water treatment (AWT) processes: MF /UF — RO — UV /H202— Engineered Storage—C12 03 — BAC — GAC — UV— Engineered Storage—C12 WATEREUSE • Training and Certification curriculuS.WALdaIwloped along with RESenacr recommended DPR system staffing Proposals currently under review by Project Advisorvlaraswk!!�e Research Focus: Blending Requirements Blending Requirements for Water from Direct Potable Reuse Treatment Facilities Collaboration with the Water Research Foundation (RFP #4536) Objectives: This project will develop requirements and guidelines for integrating water from direct potable reuse (DPR) treatment facilities with existing water supplies to meet water quality and operational performance goals. Proposals have been submitted and an award is expected to be finalized in March WATE USE 47 Research Focus: DPR Product Water Safety Assessment of Techniques to Evaluate and Demonstrate the Safety of Water from Direct Potable Reuse Treatment Facilities Collaboration with the Water Research Foundation (RFP #4508) Objectives: • Identify key criteria by which water providers and regulators would assess the safety of direct potable reuse (DPR) product water • Evaluate known techniques /methodologies for the assessment of DPR water safety using the identified criteria • Evaluate the effectiveness of DPR treatment trains for the production of DPR water using the developed techniques • Compare benchmarks to other water sources and bottled water Proposals have been submitted and an award is WATE USE expected to be finalized in March RFSFARCH Research Focus: Economics of DPR Develop Methodology of Comprehensive (Fiscal /Triple Bottom Line) Analysis of Alternative Water Supply Projects Compared to DPR WRRF -14 -03 Objectives • To develop and demonstrate an assessment method (spreadsheet, database, or other) to provide information to decision makers in considering the full economic, social, and environmental impacts of a DPR water supply versus other alternative supplies. Projected Outcomes — A user - friendly assessment tool that can be used to compare DPR and non -DPR water supply options — Assigned values (monetary or non - monetary) for the various TBL components that can be used in the comparisons bas�d�� ESE USE Studies (and industry standards RESEARCH — Demonstrated applicabilite assessment methodology range of alternative water supplies in California Research Focus: Community Concerns • Identify and clarify health and safety concerns related to DPR • Identify concerns about reliability (What happens if something goes wrong ?) • Develop communication tools to address emotional and intellectual concerns • Develop a public outreach framework and messages that can be adapted by utilities for a variety of community audiences. WATE EUSE RESEARCH Research Focus: Community Concerns Demonstrating the Benefits of Engineered DPR Versus de facto Reuse Systems WRRF -1 1 -05 Glen Boyd, The Cadmus Group Objective: To obtain a more quantitative assessment of the water quality impacts associated with unintentional indirect potable reuse and demonstrate how more fully engineered approaches to direct potable reuse will result in water quality benefits Findings • An increasing awareness of de facto reuse may help change the public perception of DPR as a regular practice for augmenting public water supplies. • Engineered potable reuse systems produce finished water quality that is much more consistent than what is received at the influent of a surface water treatment plant from a natural water body. ���,�T • Effective outreach is proactive, rather than reactive and EUSE benefits of the reuse project to the community and the e1 \F6 H .• Research Focus: Community Concerns Guidelines for Engineered Storage Systems WRRF -1 2 -06 Research Goals 1) To explore if messaging about water supply delivery mechanisms influence attitudes 2) To better understand what is most important — the safety of the water or history of the water? WATEFtEUSE RESEARCH low Research Focus: Community Concerns Model Public Communication Plan for Advancing DPR Acceptance WRRF -1 3 -02 Mark Milian, Data Instincts Three Phases for Gaining Public Acceptance: - Develop Strategic Communication Plans II - Develop Messaging Material and Methods III - Implement, Evaluate and Refine Plan WATE EUSE RESEARCH 50 Research Focus: Community Concerns Model Public Communication Plan for Advancing DPR Acceptal , h.....a� e. n.. —W —d .H.m awes nal fdw,rhy r w+>:, er.r..pe oeverapa.ent +I*a•+.+w• r rhw MNnpaenf el eaeh f rape LanQll4ilWi ^ Tni lNta. ,hs Ilnt%PRlnlsnl.w -nl jyp�} snd Mn+lwes K / audixNRi: Anypy A.i • ionu fitaup 1 •lplslntan carienunitfee •i—G pl "p'p"irt"" [alYlanJ+ •Innuen(err d.Wa,.pW. +Eu Frudlnps w1V1 An used rp tleeelvp fanurernlrarlan PV.ps: Sr.Nwlde Med. nea.munfry MaMI GuIY>tes• far 4ammunlry U+dtn I ` 1 SPes'ity aPJ�AfTare aquensisW eF _ ..=h 1:1.11— fur Phases If end !!1 1 Feb Mar A• iterature Review I Jul Aug AgencylDls Legislature IDIs Health Official IDIs Listen Engag® Learn pew \q%N6 Special Interest Groups Focus Groups Pbl' S May Jun u is urveys ivill Statewide Comm. Plan Local Comm. Plan Guidance for Leaders 51 Research Focus: Community Concerns DPR Rapid Response Messages W RRF -1 4 -04 This project will create a repository of template responses that include clear, concise, simple messages to use when responding to a range of scenarios including, but not limited to: • Misinformation campaigns within the community • Science debate regarding efficacy of treatment process and safety • Broad -based illness in a community that gets water supply from a DPR plant — unspecified reason, but media is pointing to the reuse plant • Plant under construction or operational and now it is raining — why support for potable reuse is still needed WATE USE RESEARCH Is our Current Research addressing the Regulatory, Utility, and Community Barriers /Concerns? What are the gaps to be further studied? WATE USE 1 .104 52 Research Focus: Regulatory Concerns - Treatment & Process Reliability Reliability • Develop concepts that draw upon the existing regulatory framework for drinking water to establish the definition of reliability in potable reuse WRRF- 11 -02, 14 -02: Define treatment requirements for chemicals and pathogens of health significance I1 -01, 14 -01: Develop on -line monitoring strategies for each unit process and demonstrate application Redundancy • I1 -02, 11 -10, 13 -03: Define the benefits of the multi- barrier concept to ensure public health protection • 13 -03 : Describe the balance between redundancy, monitoring, and storage, and how they work together to ensure reliability • I1 -10, 13 -03: Define what level of redundant (supernumerary) treatment is necessary to ensure reliability, particularly for CDPH Path 2 • 12 -06: Design of Engineered Buffers Robustness 13 -12: Develop guidelines for on acceptable DPR source water I1 -02, 14 -05: Determine robust treatment schemes that are best suited to address unknown challenges • 14 -05: Develop strategy to determine how to quantify the sense of the unknown with CECs Resilience WATE USE • 11 -10, 13 -03: Determine appropriate resilient strategies to ensure reliability in RESEARCH extreme events Research Focus: Utility Concerns Economic and Technical • WRRF- 14 -03: Identify methods to reduce the cost (and energy intensity) of DPR treatment • 11 -10, 14 -02 : Identify alternative treatment trains that meet public health criteria • Identify non -RO DPR treatment options to eliminate need for brine disposal • 13 -13: Develop DPR training and operational plans • WRF4508: Product water aesthetics: taste and odor WATE USE .10G 53 Research Focus: Community Concerns WRRF- 13 -02: • Identify and clarify health and safety concerns related DPR • Identify concerns about reliability (What happens if something goes wrong ?) • Develop communication tools to address emotional and intellectual concerns • Develop a public outreach framework and messages that can be adapted by utilities for a variety of community audiences. WATE EUSE RESEARCH Potential Future Research Identified by RAC Future Research Project Title Source Budget Evaluation of Policies Integrating DPR and other 2014 RAC B I i st $200,000 Reuse Strategies into Comprehensive Water Project to support CA DPR Initiative Effort 2014 RAC B list $50,000 document'process', concerns, etc as learning White Paper: State of the Science Report on 2014 RAC B list $25,000 Antibiotic Resistance in potable reuse WATE EUSE RESEARCH 54 Potential Future Research Source Identified by Current Pls WRRF -11 -01 Monitoring for Reliability and Process Control of Proposed to 2014TC $$0,000 Potable Reuse Applications Expansion: Real -time Detection Extension of $60,600 of Viruses in Water current project WRRF -11 -01 Monitoring for Reliability and Process Control of Workshop (DPR -OP- TBD Potable Reuse Applications Expansion: Real -time Detection Extension of $98,475 of Fluorescence current project WRRF -11 -02 Equivalency of Advanced Treatment Trains for Extension of $200,000 Potable Reuse Expansion: Additional in vitro bioassay suite current project WRRF -12 -06 Guidelines for Engineered Storage Systems 12/12/12 DPR $300,000 - Expansion: Performing real -time emergency response to Extension of $40,000 treatment process or water quality failures current project Evaluate the Feasibility of Using Odor compounds as surrogates DPR for monitoring low molecular weight particles that may pass Workshop OA Workshop (YDP TBD through MF & RO and Using Flavor Profile Analysis (FPA)as part of /R 1201) AT US this feasibility analysis. RESEARCH Future Research Project Title Source Budget WRRF -11 -01 Monitoring for Reliability and Process Control of Proposed to 2014TC $$0,000 Potable Reuse Applications Expansion: Real -time Detection Extension of $60,600 of Viruses in Water current project WRRF -11 -01 Monitoring for Reliability and Process Control of Workshop (DPR -OP- TBD Potable Reuse Applications Expansion: Real -time Detection Extension of $98,475 of Fluorescence current project WRRF -11 -02 Equivalency of Advanced Treatment Trains for Extension of $200,000 Potable Reuse Expansion: Additional in vitro bioassay suite current project WRRF -12 -06 Guidelines for Engineered Storage Systems 12/12/12 DPR $300,000 - Expansion: Performing real -time emergency response to Extension of $40,000 treatment process or water quality failures current project Potential Future Research Identified by DPR Workshop Future Research Project Title Source Budget Performance Testing of the Colorado Municipal Water District's Proposed to 2014TC $$0,000 Raw Water Production Facility in Big Spring, TX program, TBD 12/12/12 DPR Dealing with reverse osmosis brine in applications with non - Workshop (DPR -OP- TBD ocean discharge 12 -01) 12/12/12 DPR Reducing Energy Intensity of Advanced Treatment Methods for Workshop (DPR -TT- $1,000,000 Recycling Water 12 -01) Establishment ofO A Requirements for Alternative DPR 12/12/12 DPR $300,000 - Treatment Schemes Workshop (DPR -QA- $350,0000 12 -03) Evaluate the Feasibility of Using Odor compounds as surrogates DPR for monitoring low molecular weight particles that may pass Workshop OA Workshop (YDP TBD through MF & RO and Using Flavor Profile Analysis (FPA)as part of /R 1201) AT US this feasibility analysis. .110 55 Questions, Comments, Ideas for Future Research? WATE FUSE RESEARCH Discussion: DPR Research 11:30 am to 12:00 noon Closed Panel Discussion a ITEM 2: CALIFORNIA DIRECT POTABLE REUSE INITIATIVE RESEARCH PLAN CALIFORNIA DIRECT POTABLE REUSE INITIATIVE RESEARCH PLAN February 25, 2014 Prepared by: WateReuse Research Foundation WATE ELISE RFSEARCH WateReuse California WATE ELISE CALIFORNIA Version 3.0 Section 1: Background, Drivers, and Participants of the DPR Initiative Goal of DPR Initiative The WateReuse Research Foundation (WRRF) and WateReuse California (WRCA) have launched the CA Direct Potable Reuse (DPR) Initiative to establish DPR as a water supply option that is protective of public health and can be regulated by state agencies, can be implemented by water utilities in a safe and cost - effective manner, and is acceptable to the public. Purpose of Research Plan The purpose of this document is to guide the research of the DPR Initiative so that it can provide information for regulators, utilities, and communities as they consider the implementation of potable reuse in the State of California. The plan can be used as a model nationally and internationally for regions considering DPR. What is DPR? DPR is the introduction of highly treated reclaimed water directly into the raw water supply immediately upstream of a water treatment plant, or into the distribution system downstream of a water treatment plant. To date, proposals have been to introduce DPR water into a water treatment plant intake rather than into the distribution system. While identical in many aspects to indirect potable reuse (IPR) with full advanced treatment, DPR eliminates the passage of the treated water through an environmental buffer —such as a groundwater aquifer or a reservoir (below). The direct passage of treated water to the drinking water system is the main characteristic distinguishing it from the indirect path of IPR. A. Indirect Potable Reuse Advanced Water Treatment Facility Environmental buffer (aquifer or reservoir) I B. Direct Potable Reuse WTP or Distribution system Advanced Water WTP or Engineered Treatment buffer Distribution Facility system Despite the similarities between the two systems, DPR presents significant new benefits and challenges. By eliminating the environmental buffer, DPR can significantly reduce the energy 2 Version 3.0 and cost requirements, maintain the high water quality of the advanced treated water, and remove the need for a suitable aquifer or reservoir, which are not available in all locations. Eliminating the buffer also poses important new challenges. DPR loses the benefits from the environmental buffer, namely (1) decreased contaminant removal, (2) decreased blending and dilution, and (3) shortened time period to detect and respond to treatment failures. Determining how to design and operate DPR systems to overcome these challenges represents an important technical and regulatory hurdle. The public health risks from DPR may differ from IPR, and the system must adapt to meet these differences. Beyond health considerations, DPR must also be cost - effective and acceptable to the public, the ultimate consumers of DPR. These issues become more complex when considering the fact that DPR also exists in various forms. DPR product water can either be added to the influent of a drinking water treatment plant or pumped directly into a treated water distribution system. Given that these two scenarios provide different levels of treatment, the requirements for different DPR configurations should also be appropriately adjusted. For DPR to move forward, research must address the needs of the three main groups of stakeholders: (1) regulators, (2) utilities, and (3) communities. Each group (and its consultants) has its own set of issues, though significant overlap exists between the groups. For regulators, the key concern is ensuring that DPR regulations are protective of public health. In their presentations, the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) has discussed two paths to achieving safe DPR systems. In Path 1, they discuss the use of (1) multiple barriers to minimize the chance of a complete treatment failure and (2) infallible treatment verification monitoring. In Path 2, they discuss the use of redundant barriers to provide supernumerary (i.e., above the minimum) log reduction capacity to compensate for any lack of reliability in the treatment, monitoring, or failure response component of the scheme so that the risk of inadequate treatment is miniscule. In both cases, the end goal is the same —a reliable DPR system, i.e., one that protects public health. Reliability is therefore the key concept for regulators. Of the three groups, the utilities need to address the broadest range of concerns for DPR. Not only are they beholden to regulatory requirements, but they must ensure that DPR can be accomplished in a cost- effective manner while also being acceptable to the communities that they serve. Research needs for the utilities therefore spans regulatory issues, economics, and public acceptance. Finally, the consumers of DPR water —the communities —must also be involved for the success of DPR. Communities are aware of the wastewater origin of DPR water, and are rightfully concerned about safety. Research is also needed therefore to understand what obstacles communities face in accepting DPR as a new drinking water resource. Drivers for California DPR Initiative The California DPR Initiative was developed to address the obstacles to DPR and to move it forward as a viable means to expand our water supply. The Initiative sees that DPR has the potential to provide a sustainable and cost - competitive water supply option that is less energy - intensive than many alternative options. This new path forward is very timely given the decline in traditional water supply sources along with growing demand. 3 Version 3.0 Another main driver for DPR is legislative action. The State of California's Recycled Water Policy established aggressive goals to increase recycled water production in order to help meet the State's overall water supply goal (by 2020, increase recycled water use by 1 million acre -feet per year over 2002 levels). Initially, the main tool to achieve this goal was the expansion of non- potable reuse, though it has become clear that the goal cannot be met through non - potable reuse alone. IPR has also provided a new opportunity for achieving this goal, though IPR itself has limitations that preclude its use in certain situations. Many communities without suitable groundwater aquifers or reservoirs, communities who have maximized their non - potable options, and communities that have exhausted all other water supply options could benefit from DPR. The most significant legislation pushing DPR forward has been SB 918. In addition to advancing regulations for IPR, SB 918 also requires the State to evaluate the feasibility of DPR by the end of 2016. The California DPR Initiative aims to contribute to this movement by providing information for regulators, utilities and communities as they consider the implementation of potable reuse in the State of California. The Initiative has identified seven strategies to achieve this goal: 1. Define the agenda for needed DPR research 2. Raise funds to support the research program 3. Commission DPR research studies 4. Use research findings to develop communication, education, and awareness programs 5. Recruit partners to disseminate the message and coalesce DPR support 6. Develop and education and outreach agenda and programs for key stakeholders 7. Establish practice and technical recommendations for utilities to adapt and adopt DPR The focus of this document is on the first of the seven strategies: defining the agenda for DPR research. The following sections provide a framework for meeting the research needs of the three main DPR stakeholders: regulators, utilities, and communities. Key Participants in DPR Initiative The WRRF and WRCA launched the California DPR Initiative in 2012 to provide leadership and direction in the field of DPR, a practical solution to water scarcity and water stewardship. The Initiative strives to provide needed information through both research and education & outreach. WRRF — Research The research side of the initiative is led by WRRF, whose mission is to conduct and promote applied research on the reclamation, recycling, reuse, and desalination of water. The Research Foundation is an educational, nonprofit public benefit 501(c)(3) corporation that conducts applied research on behalf of the water and wastewater community for the purpose of advancing the science of water reuse, recycling, reclamation, and desalination. The Foundation's research covers a broad spectrum of issues, including chemical contaminants, microbiological agents, treatment technologies, salinity management, public perception, economics and marketing. The Foundation's research supports communities across the United States and abroad in their efforts to create new sources of high quality water while protecting public health and the environment. 4 Version 3.0 In the context of the DPR Initiative, the main goal of WRRF is to support the Panel's evaluation of DPR feasibility per SB 918, and to support possible future draft regulations as appropriate. The selection and management of research projects, including those in the DPR program, in addition to the organization of the Foundation, are described in detail in the Foundation's Operating Plan ( http: / /www.watereuse.org/sites/ default / files /u8 /Operating_Plan_2010.pdf). In summary, research projects are determined on an annual basis by the Research Advisory Committee (RAC) and are approved by the Board of Directors. The RAC, comprised of 32 technical experts from around the world, meets in the beginning of each year to select and/or develop proposed research projects that reflect priority issues from the Foundation's research agenda. The RAC reviews a summary, completed by staff, of the collected information to date from research needs workshops (e.g. DPR workshop 12/12/12), Subscriber surveys /workshops, the Board, and other sources including the RAC members themselves. A list of priority projects for funding consideration under the Solicited Research Program is created and presented for approval by the Board. Once approved, an assigned Project Manager (PM) forms a Project Advisory Committee (PAC) of 4 -6 technical experts representing water and wastewater utilities, government agencies, consulting firms, etc. PACs are volunteers that provide expert peer review and technical oversight on Foundation research projects. The PM and PAC use the project description approved by the Board to develop a Request for Proposal (RFP). RFPs are posted for competitive bid on the Foundation's website and are promoted through news releases and by the WateReuse Association. PACs review proposals and come to a consensus recommendation for the project award. If there are any shortcomings of the selected proposal, award conditions are provided that the selected contractor must address in a revised scope of work. Once a funding agreement is negotiated between The Foundation and the project team, the project commences. Quarterly progress reports are submitted to the Foundation and reviewed by the PAC to ensure the project progresses as expected. The contractor is responsible for addressing any of the PACs concerns during the project. The research team, PAC, and PM typically meet in person at least once during the project for a workshop, kickoff meeting, or at the end of the project to discuss project scope and conclusions. At the end of the project, the team submits a final report in addition to any other deliverables as stated in the RFP, which goes through several reviews prior to publication. WRCA — Education and Outreach Education and outreach activities are led by WRCA. The purpose of these activities is to provide information about DPR to support decision - making by stakeholders at State, regional and local level, and to develop information to support the education and outreach activities undertaken by the utilities. 5 Version 3.0 Section 2: Research Path to achieve DPR Initiative's goal To achieve the 2016 goal of SB 918, regulatory, scientific, technical, and attitudinal barriers to DPR need to be removed and/or addressed. Overcoming these hurdles requires undertaking three main tasks: 1. Conduct rigorous scientific research 2. Communicate the research findings through public awareness programs 3. Work with regulatory authorities to facilitate DPR implementation by local water utilities To accomplish these tasks in the most effective manner, a research framework for ensuring the integration and complementarity of these tasks is needed. This framework is meant to provide a structure for determining important research focuses and to aid in assigning research priorities. All of the research must serve the principal goal of understanding the feasibility of the future of DPR in California. Given the varying needs of the main stakeholders, the research framework needs to be broad enough to cover the concerns of each group, while maintaining a global vision that allows the groups to achieve their shared goals. Research Framework 1: Regulatory Concerns To address the regulatory concerns, the research framework should focus on the ultimate goal of DPR systems — the provision of a safe and reliable potable supply. As stated above, reliability in the DPR setting is defined as the provision of a potable supply that is protective of public health at all times. To achieve reliability, a number of supporting concepts can be used including redundancy, robustness, and resilience. The DPR process (including source control, treatment, monitoring, operations, training, maintenance, etc.) can achieve reliability by incorporating these three factors into system design and operation. A reliable DPR process incorporates redundancy (i.e., the use of multiple barriers to control acute risks) and robustness (i.e., capacity to remove a wide range of contaminants) to control microbial and chemical risks under typical operation scenarios. In addition, DPR facilities must also be resilient to ensure reliability even during rare failure events. A resilient system is not a system that never fails, but a system that fails safely, meaning that it responds to failure by preventing the distribution (and consumption) of all water that does not meet requirements. In ensuring the provision of safe DPR water, redundancy, robustness, and resilience all contribute to reliability. The research plan can support the regulatory aspects of DPR by focusing on the reliability framework. Examples of specific research products that could be important guideposts toward this are raised in the following bullet points. It should be emphasized that this list of research products is not exhaustive. Reliability • Develop concepts that draw upon the existing regulatory framework for drinking water to establish the definition of reliability in potable reuse • Define treatment requirements for chemicals and pathogens of health significance 6 Version 3.0 • Develop on -line monitoring strategies for each unit process and demonstrate application Redundancy • Define the benefits of the multi - barrier concept to ensure public health protection • Describe the balance between redundancy, monitoring, and storage, and how they work together to ensure reliability • Define what level of redundant (supernumerary) treatment is necessary to ensure reliability, particularly for CDPHPath 2 Robustness • Develop guidelines for an acceptable DPR source water • Determine robust treatment schemes that are best suited to address unknown challenges • Develop strategy to determine how to quantify the sense of the unknown with CECs Resilience • Determine appropriate resilient strategies to ensure reliability in extreme events Research Framework 2: Utility Concerns The research needed to address utility concerns is the broadest of the three stakeholder groups, given their interaction with both regulatory issues (Framework 1) and community issues (Framework 3). Utilities also have a number of unique research needs that are specific to their issues, mainly focusing on the economic and technical feasibility of DPR systems. Research Framework 2 therefore focuses on overcoming the specific technical and economic obstacles that currently affect DPR implementation. Examples of specific research products that could be important guideposts toward this are raised in the following bullet points. It should be emphasized that this list of research products is not exhaustive. Economic and Technical • Identify methods to reduce the cost (and energy intensity) of DPR treatment • Identify alternative treatment trains that meet public health criteria • Identify non -RO DPR treatment options to eliminate need for brine disposal • Develop DPR training and operational plans Research Framework 3: Community Concerns Addressing community concerns represents a significant challenge in achieving the goal of widespread public acceptance for DPR. Research is needed to explore and assess the critical concerns among community members and survey attitudes about DPR. Activities would include gauging the general understanding of DPR, identifying the primary concerns, and developing educational and communication tools that support acceptance. Learning how members of the community respond to the idea of DPR emotionally and objectively — and focusing in on their main concerns are key pieces in understanding public perception and developing the tools and messages that will support acceptance. 7 Version 3.0 The emphasis of Research Framework 3 should be Awareness, Education and Acceptance. Research in this area would include various assessment, in -depth interviews, surveying, focus groups, and communication research (message testing and evaluation). The areas of research could include: • Identify and clarify health and safety concerns related DPR • Identify concerns about reliability (What happens if something goes wrong ?) • Develop communication tools to address emotional and intellectual concerns • Develop a public outreach framework and messages that can be adapted by utilities for a variety of community audiences. Version 3.0 Section 3: Current WateReuse Research Foundation DPR Research Projects In 2011, WRRF began its program specifically geared towards DPR with funding research identified by WateReuse's Direct Potable Reuse: A Path Forward, the 2012 NRC report on potable reuse, and the investors of the California DPR Initiative. These six projects (WRRF -11- 01, 11 -02, 11 -05, 11 -10, 12 -06, and 12 -07), representing over $3.8 million in research, created a solid foundation exploring the viability of DPR. Significant findings and conclusions will arise from these initial DPR projects and will help steer future DPR research. In the meantime, WRRF and WRCA hosted a DPR Research Needs Workshop at West Basin's Edward C. Little Water Recycling Facility in December 2012 to identify research gaps to be addressed in new research. Attended by more than 50 (Appendix A) international leaders in potable reuse, the workshop divided the experts in industry, academics, consulting, and regulators into four strategic breakout groups (Operations, Quality Assurance, Treatment Technology, and Public Acceptance). Descriptions for 22 projects resulted and were ranked by the workshop attendees. This ranked list was submitted to the Foundation's Research Advisory Committee (RAC) for review and selection at their January 2013 meeting. The RAC further developed four projects addressing regulatory, utility, and community concerns. This 2013 DPR research approved by the Board (WRRF- 13 -02, 13 -03, 13 -12, 13 -13) totals $1,000,000 and is funded by the CA DPR Initiative donors as well as Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. This program is further enhanced by collaboration with the Water Research Foundation (WaterRF), who is funding and managing an additional two projects at $600,000. The RAC again met in January 2014 and added more important research to address remaining gaps in DPR. The RAC built off of existing projects and recommended research to develop six new projects to be started in 2014 (pending Board approval in March). Those 2014 projects add another $1.15 million to the DPR program to address technical and public acceptance concerns with DPR. The Foundation's 17 DPR projects initiated in 2014 or before total over $7.2 million in research to evaluate and demonstrate the feasibility of DPR (Table 1). A detailed description of the current DPR research portfolio is presented in Appendix B. 9 Version 3.0 Table 1. WRRF DPR Research Program 2011 - 2014 Project # Research Project Title Principal Investigator Expected WRRF In Kind contribution Contribution WRRF -11 -01 Monitoring for Reliability and Process Control of Potable Reuse Ian Pepper, University of Arizona Dec -15 $400,000 $1,298,817 Applications WRRF -11 -02 Equivalency of Advanced Treatment Trains for Potable Reuse Rhodes Trussell, Trussell Jul -15 $375,000 $868,000 Technologies WRRF -11 -05 Demonstrating the Benefits of Engineered Direct Potable Reuse Glen Boyd, May -14 $49,558 $10,000 versus Unintentional Indirect Potable Reuse Systems The Cadmus Ground Inc WRRF -11 -10 Evaluation of Risk Reduction Principles for Direct Potable Reuse Andy Salveson, Carollo Engineers Jun -14 $73,407 $71,555 WRRF -12 -06 Guidelines for Engineered Storage for Direct Potable Reuse Andy Salveson, Carollo Engineers Jun -14 $100,000 $111,788 WRRF -12 -07 Methods for Integrity Testing of NF and RO Membranes Joe Jacangelo, MWH Feb -16 $300,000 $296,965 WRRF-13-02 Model Public Communication Plan for Advancing DPR Acceptance Mark Millan, Data Instincts; Patsy Feb 14 $300,000 $272,606 Tennyson, Katz & Associates WRRF-13-03 Critical Control Point assessment to quantify robustness and Troy Walker, Hazen &Sawyer Feb -16 $337,125 $238,969 reliability of multiple treatment barriers of DPR scheme WRRF-13-12 Evaluation of Source Water Control Options and the Impact of TBD Feb 16 $150,000 TBD Selected Strategies on DPR Development of Operation and Maintenance Plan and Training WRRF -13 -13 and Certification Framework for Direct Potable Reuse (DPR) TBD Feb -16 $250,000 TBD Systems WRRF -13 -15 Blending Requirements for Water from Direct Potable Reuse TBD in March (managed by WRF) TBD $325,000 TBD (WRF4536) Treatment Facilities WRRF -13 -14 Assessment of Techniques to Evaluate and Demonstrate the Safety TBD in March (managed by WRF) TBD $275,000 TBD (WRF4508) of Water from Direct Potable Reuse Treatment Facilities WRRF -14 -01 Integrated Management of Sensor Data for Real Time Decision TBD TBD $300,000 TBD Making and Response WRRF -14 -02 Establishing additional log reduction credits for WWTPs TBD TBD $400,000 TBD WRRF -14 -03 Develop Methology of comprehensive (fiscal /triple bottom line) TBD TBD $250,000 TBD analysis of alternative water supply projects compared to DPR WRRF -14 -04 DPR Rapid Response Messages TBD TBD $150,000 TBD WRRF -14 -05 Screening high risk chemicals potential of passage through TBD TBD $100,000 TBD RO /AOP 10 Version 3.0 The DPR research projects in Table 1 are identified into the three main research focuses, displayed graphically in the Venn diagram in Figure 2. All of this DPR research is highly complementary of each other and must be closely coordinated to share approach and results throughout the duration of the project work. WRRF coordinates biannual meetings with the project teams of these DPR projects to encourage communication and avoid duplication. Figure 2. Venn Diagram of Reliability Framework Repdtoiw 11 -01 11 -10 14 -02 13 -( 14 -01 13 -12 11 -0`- 12-06 13 -13 14 -04 1 11 -02 1 14 -05 14 -03 Utilitie s C; oilutnuuty 11 Version 3.0 As displayed in Figure 3, the 12 DPR projects that are underway are due for completion between the end of 2013 and 2016. The 2014 DPR projects will be added to the timeline once duration is provided by the awarded research teams in late 2014. Figure 3: Current DPR Research Timelines DPR Project 2013 2014 2015 2016 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 11 -01 Sensors 11 -02 Treatment Train 11 -05 DPR Benefits 11 -10 Risk Reduction 12 -06 Engineered Storage 12 -07 Membrane Integrity 13 -02 Communication 13 -03 CCP Assessment 13 -12 Source Water 13 -13 Operations Plan WaterRF 4536 Blending WaterRF 4508 DPR Water Safety 12 Version 3.0 Section 4: Future Research and Next Steps New DPR research will be initiated in 2015 and beyond to ensure gaps are filled to illustrate the feasibility of DPR. Several sources will be considered for this new research. After funding six projects in 2013 and incorporating /combining descriptions, nine out of the original 22 research projects proposed at the 12/12/12 DPR Workshop remain (Table 2). These will be candidate projects for the RAC in their annual consideration of research to fund. Additionally, the recommendations of the current 11 projects underway will come into clearer focus and will be considered. To take advantage of the evolving knowledge, future DPR Research Needs (through survey, panels, workshops, etc) will be considered to assess progress and redirect research priorities towards promising paths. Table 2. Remaining (unfunded) DPR Projects Future Research Project Title Source Budget Evaluation of Policies Integrating DPR and other Reuse Strategies 2014 RAC B list $200,000 into Comprehensive Water Supply Planning Project to support CA DPR Initiative Effort document 'process', 2014 RAC B list $50,000 concerns, etc as learning document White Paper: State of the Science Report on Antibiotic Resistance 2014 RAC B list $25,000 in potable reuse applications WRRF -11 -01 Monitoring for Reliability and Process Control of Extension of current Potable Reuse Applications Expansion: Real -time Detection of $60,600 Viruses in Water project WRRF -11 -01 Monitoring for Reliability and Process Control of Extension of current Potable Reuse Applications Expansion: Real -time Detection of $98,475 Fluorescence project WRRF -11 -02 Equivalency of Advanced Treatment Trains for Extension of current $200,000 Potable Reuse Expansion: Additional in vitro bioassay suite project WRRF -12 -06 Guidelines for Engineered Storage Systems Extension of current Expansion: Performing real -time emergency response to treatment $40,000 process or water quality failures project Performance Testing of the Colorado Municipal Water District's proposed to 2014 $80,000 Raw Water Production Facility in Big Spring, TX TC program, TBD Dealing with reverse osmosis brine in applications with non -ocean 12/12/12 DPR Workshop (DPR- TBD discharge OP- 12 -01) Reducing Energy Intensity of Advanced Treatment Methods for 12/12/12 DPR Workshop (DPR- $1,000,000 Recycling Water TT- 12 -01) Establishment of QA Requirements for Alternative DPR 12/12/12 DPR Workshop (DPR- $300,000- Treatment Schemes QA- 12 -03) $350,0000 13 Version 3.0 Evaluate the Feasibility of Using Odor compounds as surrogates 12/12/12 DPR for monitoring low molecular weight particles that may pass Workshop (DPR- TBD through MF & RO and Using Flavor Profile Analysis (FPA)as QA -12 -01 ) part of this feasibility analysis. 14 Version 3.0 Appendix A: Attendees of 12/12/12 DPR Workshop held at West Basin Municipal Water District Last Name First Name Affliation Bardowell Phylyp Office of Congresswoman Napolitano Barnard Randy CA Department of Public Health Bemados Brian CA Department of Public Health Bishop Jonathan SWRCB Brown Garry Orange County Coastkeeper Bunts Don Santa Margarita Water District Campos Carlos Suez Environment Cline Shonnie Water Research Foundation Cook Paul Irvine Ranch Water District Cotruvo Joseph Joseph Cotruvo & Associates, LLC Crozes Gil Carollo Drewes Jorg Colorado School of Mines Festger Adam Trojan Technologies Fiedler Jim Santa Clara Valley Water District Ghirelli Bob Orange County Sanitation District Haddad Brent University of California, Santa Cruz Hultquist Robert CA Department of Public Health Infurnari Mike WateReuse Research Foundation Jacangelo Joe MWH Jones Paul Eastern Municipal Water District LeChevallier Mark American Water Lovell Adam Water Services Association of Australia Macpherson Linda CH2M Hill McDonald Ellen Alan Plummer & Associates Millan Mark Data Instincts, Public Outreach Consultants Miller Wade WateReuse Association Minton Julie WateReuse Research Foundation Mosher Jeff National Water Research Institute Nagel Richard West Basin Municipal Water District Nellor Margie Nellor Environmental Associates, Inc. Owen Doug Malclm Pirnie, ARCADIS Pettijohn Dave LADWP Price Kevin USBR Provencher Lisette United Water Rayburn Chris Water Research Foundation Richardson Tom RMC Water and Environment Rossi John Western Municiapal Water District 15 Version 3.0 Ruiz Hector Trabuco Canyon Water District Salveson Andrew Carollo Smith David WateReuse California Snyder Shane University of Arizona Spivy -Weber Fran California State Water Resources Control Board Steele Bill USBR Trejo Reymundo Upper San Gabriel Valley MWD Tremblay Ray Los Angeles County Sanitation District Trussell Rhodes Trussell Technologies Trussell Shane Trussell Technologies Wehner Michael Orange County Water District Whitaker Robb Water Replenishment District of Southern CA Wildermuth Ron West Basin Municipal Water District Yamamoto Gary CA Department of Public Health Zornes Greta ConocoPhillips 16 Version 3.0 Appendix B. DPR Research Project Details 1. WRRF- 11 -01, Monitoring for Reliability and Process Control of Potable Reuse Applications (Contractor: University of Arizona) The objective of this project is to identify, evaluate, test, and validate monitoring systems that can be used to assure the public safety of potable reuse. The project is specifically focused on real -time or near real -time monitoring for the removal of trace organics and biological contaminants. The project is comprised of three tasks: 1) state of knowledge and initial workshop, 2) laboratory evaluation of monitoring control systems and 3) pilot and full -scale evaluations. Status: The project is on track; the team submitted their sixth progress report in January 2014 and will be submitting their seventh progress report in March 2014. Notable Update: Task 2 is is currently 85% complete. The purpose of this task is to identify correlations between treatment performance and sensor response. As part of this task the following will be performed: • Treatment train development: The following treatment trains will be evaluated at the lab- scale. The treatment trains were selected in consistence with project WateReuse 11 -02. From secondary treatment 4 MF/UF 4 RO 4 UV/AOP 4 To reuse application From secondary/ From tertiary treatment 4 MF/UF4 03 4 GAC/BAC 4 surface /groundwat er augmentation • Use of surrogates to predict trace organic compound (TOrc) removal by rah nular activated carbon: The purpose of this subtask is to develop correlations between bulk organic parameters (e.g. color, total organic carbon, UV absorbance and fluorescence excitation/emission spectroscopy) and TOrC removal during oxidation processes. Some preliminary testing has been performed. The project team is evaluating and analyzing the data. • Data Acquisition Software Development: The purpose of this sub -task is to develop a SCADA system for monitoring and controlling the water quality throughout the treatment train for water reuse • On -line Sensors for Real -Time Monitoring of Water Qualit. As part of this sub -task, 10 different online sensors were installed in the lab and are currently being evaluated (see Table 3). These sensors are capable of measuring 13 different surrogate parameters of water quality which can be divided into four categories: i) general (pH, temperature, conductivity, turbidity); ii) organic (UVT254, UVA254, TOC, DOC, 17 Version 3.0 fluorescence); iii) inorganic (chlorine, NO3 -N); and iv) microbial parameters (total cell count, microbial toxicity Table 3: Surrogate parameters and online sensors that will be analyzed as part of WateReuse -11 -01 Task 2 10, S::C8t1 xylem WET&abs .j.1�R Ir B' can b migouN Mitt id,ty =-T. 1oc To Cantrol Real UVT GuardlanSlue NICAVIS BwSCan Online TTurb r Event Monitor Armtyzrf 70S IQ Wire &o5tntry (RMS_w) Torridly a To date, the following has been accomplished: • Two Reverse osmosis units built • Development of treatment technologies for UV, 03, ± H2O2 • IQ SensorNet installed • LabView Software system installed for data stream collection from all sensors simultaneously • SAFire fluorescence online sensor evaluated as surrogate for dissolved organic matter • Instant BioScan evaluated as a real -time microbial sensor • Advanced oxidation via ozone evaluated for removal of contaminants 2. WateReuse- 11 -02, Equivalency of Advanced Treatment Trains for Potable Reuse (Contractor: Trussell Technologies) This project will clearly identify the benefits and tradeoffs of various treatment process trains for potable reuse. This project will consider and examine criteria needed to evaluate the adequacy of treatment for direct and indirect potable reuse. A model will be developed that can allow for comparisons of alternate treatment trains for potable reuse. At least one advanced treatment train will be tested for direct potable reuse at a scale large enough to give information on real operating conditions. Status: The project is on track. The National Water Research Institute (NWRI) coordinated an Independent Advisory Panel (Panel) to lead a 2 -day workshop to develop a set of criteria that are protective of public health to evaluate treatment technologies for DPR. This Panel Report entitled Examining the Criteria for Direct Potable Reuse has been released. Shane 18 Version 3.0 General parameters Organic parameters Inorganic parameters Microbial parameters � UVT 254 Chlorine aw Total cell i` pH w M . • W W ( a.. (mg /L) e•• =•.. t count ,�. •�... ars«� (colmisJ100mL) Temperature CJ�o UVA 254 xylem NO3 -N s::can xylem Toxicity ( °C)°�°� (cm- +) (mg /L) a.s« .. (yo) .+ Conductivity 9' DOC s::can xylem (NS /cm) (mg/L) s::can s::can Turbidity "°° "" TOC (NTU)M (mg /L) xylem M.w AIOC �� a.u. q[ rosq Fluorescence ­ oo (A.U.) To date, the following has been accomplished: • Two Reverse osmosis units built • Development of treatment technologies for UV, 03, ± H2O2 • IQ SensorNet installed • LabView Software system installed for data stream collection from all sensors simultaneously • SAFire fluorescence online sensor evaluated as surrogate for dissolved organic matter • Instant BioScan evaluated as a real -time microbial sensor • Advanced oxidation via ozone evaluated for removal of contaminants 2. WateReuse- 11 -02, Equivalency of Advanced Treatment Trains for Potable Reuse (Contractor: Trussell Technologies) This project will clearly identify the benefits and tradeoffs of various treatment process trains for potable reuse. This project will consider and examine criteria needed to evaluate the adequacy of treatment for direct and indirect potable reuse. A model will be developed that can allow for comparisons of alternate treatment trains for potable reuse. At least one advanced treatment train will be tested for direct potable reuse at a scale large enough to give information on real operating conditions. Status: The project is on track. The National Water Research Institute (NWRI) coordinated an Independent Advisory Panel (Panel) to lead a 2 -day workshop to develop a set of criteria that are protective of public health to evaluate treatment technologies for DPR. This Panel Report entitled Examining the Criteria for Direct Potable Reuse has been released. Shane 18 Version 3.0 and Rhodes Trussell attended the DPR Collaboration Meeting on 5/6/13 in Phoenix. In addition, a two -part webcast was conducted by the project team briefing attendants on the preliminary results of this project. The team submitted their sixth progress report in November 2013 and is expected to submit their seventh in February 2014. Notable Update: To date, the team has completed or nearly completed all of the work comprising Task 1 and has made significant progress on Tasks 2 and 3. Within Task 1, the project team completed Task I (Literature Review) and Task 1B (Review of Available Public Health Criteria). The deliverable from these tasks was a Literature Review document that was distributed to the Expert Panel and the PAC prior to the September workshop. To satisfy Task 1C (Develop Criteria that are Protective of Public Health to Evaluate Treatment Technologies for Direct Potable Reuse), the project team developed a set of "Strawman" criteriain the form of PowerPoint presentations —that were distributed to the PAC and Expert Panel prior to the workshop. Task 1C also included the August 29, 2012 workshop that was co -run with NWRI at the LA Department of Water and Power. The Expert Panel then refined these criteria in their Expert Panel Report; these treatment goals will serve as the final equivalency criteria for the evaluation of DPR treatment technologies. The PAC provided comments on the draft Expert Panel Report, and these comments were incorporated into the revised version of the Expert Panel Report that was included with a previous progress report. Finally, the project team created a State of the Science (SoS) Report for Task 1E that incorporates all of the information compiled in Task 1, including the literature review (Tasks I and 1B), the final set of public health criteria (Task 1 C), and the additional design criteria for potable reuse trains (Task ID). The draft SoS Report was revised based on comments from the PAC and included in a previous progress report. New science in potable reuse and proposals for new potable reuse projects are released frequently. We recommend the SoS Report be published as an independent WateReuse Research Foundation Report so that the information it contains can be timely and so that its contents can contribute to this active and dynamic dialogue. In Task 2, the project team has completed a draft of the digital Toolbox, which includes a wide range of treatment technologies and treatment performance. Toolbox users are now able to combine a series of technologies to meet specified levels of pathogen and pollutant treatment. Two further efforts are required on this toolbox: 1) costs of treatment must be assembled, and 2) modifications to the treatment credits will be implemented once pilot testing is complete. In conjunction with the initial findings from the Toolbox, potential treatment trains for near - full -scale direct potable reuse testing have been identified. The project team has developed a draft test protocol based on these treatment trains and the availability of pilot equipment (Task 3). Pilot testing at San Luis Obispo Water Reclamation Plant (WRP) was completed in March and follow up testing will be completed in July. Site modifications, including the installation of secondary containment to prevent runoff from potential pilot plant leaks from entering storm drains, were made at LACSD's San Jose Creek Water Reclamation Plant (SJCWRP) to accommodate pilot equipment at that location. The WEDECO ozone system, Leopold BAC pilot unit, Econity MF pilot unit, LACSD RO skid, and GE OF skid have been delivered to SJCWRP. The WEDECO and Leopold systems began operating in June, and the 19 Version 3.0 Econity, GE and RO skids began operating in September. All of those pilot units are currently operating as part of Phase 1 testing. 3. WateReuse- 11 -05, Demonstrating the Benefits of Engineered Direct Potable Reuse versus Unintentional Indirect Potable Reuse Systems (Contractor: The Cadmus Group Inc) This project will obtain a more quantitative assessment of the water quality impacts associated with unintentional indirect potable reuse and demonstrate how more fully engineered approaches to direct potable reuse will result in water quality benefits. Status: The project has been completed and will be published in the Spring of 2014. Conclusions: The findings of this study indicate that predicted concentrations at intakes were largely dependent on dilution, background concentrations of contaminants in surface water, ambient temperature, and the residence time of the contaminants in the system. However, the impacts of effluent discharges on water quality at intakes were considered negligible. The selected analytical approach was appropriate for understanding system behavior in the selected Unintentional Indirect Potable Reuse (de facto reuse) cases and allowed for a consistent comparison of water quality impacts among different systems where data were limited. This approach may be adapted by other utilities that are located only a short distance downstream from the nearest wastewater treatment discharge point, have a limited number of non -point source discharges in that distance, and have adequate data on trace organics to assess the concentrations at the water intake. However, conclusions from this study were restricted by older source water quality data, limited data on emerging contaminants of concern, and asynchronous data collection efforts by different entities. 4. WateReuse- 11 -10, Evaluation of Risk Reduction Principles for Direct Potable Reuse (Contractor: Carollo Engineers) The goal of this project is to identify how fail -safe concepts developed in other industries (structural/bridge, aviation/NASA) can be adapted and applied to DPR systems. The resultant guidance and recommendations will be built in a stepwise fashion from the foundation of "what we know" up through "what we could do," to "the pros, cons, and costs of the identified DPR approach alternatives." Status: Project was submitted to the publication queue for copyediting. Anticipated publication date is May 1, 2014. Conclusions: DPR is without an environmental buffer such as a groundwater basin or a surface water reservoir. Potable reuse of highly treated reclaimed water without an environmental buffer is worthy of consideration as an alternative water supply. Understanding and replacing the value of the environmental buffer is a key component of this project. Concepts central to this work include: • Multi - barrier treatment. Treatment is provided by multiple unit processes so that no one process is responsible for providing the full level of public health protection. The 20 Version 3.0 treatment provided by each unit can be partially or completely duplicative to another process (i.e., provide redundant treatment). • Redundant treatment. Treatment that is provided in excess of the required minimum needed to maintain adequate public health protection. This is typically provided as a back -up in case another process fails to provide adequate treatment. • Process reliability. A measure of how consistently a treatment system can be depended upon to perform to specifications. The project team recognizes that this project represents the beginning of DPR guidance criteria. As such, a number of recommendations for setting treatment goals for reclaimed water as source water or as a potable source are suggested. In the absence of the environmental buffer, treatment processes need accurate, robust real -time, online monitoring of effluent quality. This monitoring ideally ensures process performance and alarms when process effluent quality changes. These improved monitoring techniques should be sensitive enough to pick up small changes and trends in treatment performance that could have a significant impact on the safety of the finished water. The monitoring techniques would focus on both microbes and trace pollutants. 5. WateReuse- 12 -06, Guidelines for Engineered Storage for Direct Potable Reuse Systems (Contractor: Carollo Engineers) The main objective of this project is to develop recommendations for optimizing engineered storage systems for direct potable reuse; this will be accomplished through examining current practices and existing research to generate a guidance document and report. Status: The second progress report was submitted during the quarter. The project is on schedule. Notable Update: Project Principal Investigator and Co -PIs have submitted several abstracts to present the work at conferences including ACE, WRRF Research Conference, and Texas Water. The public outreach work was also presented by Linda MacPherson as part of an NWRI workshop on Direct Potable Reuse Public Perception on February 25. 6. WateReuse- 12 -07, Standard Methods for Integrity Testing and On -line Monitoring of NF and RO Membranes (Contractor: MWH Global) The main goal is to create scientifically -based method(s) for the integrity testing of high pressure membranes, including nanofiltration (NF) and reverse osmosis (RO) membranes. Once developed, the goal is to have the methods adopted as industry standards and approved for higher pathogen removal credits by regulatory agencies. Status: The second progress report from MWH will be submitted in the next weeks. The project team is behind with this report. 21 Version 3.0 Notable Update: A project kick -off meeting was held on October 3rd, 2013 between the Foundation, project team, and PAC members. The literature review has been completed and reviewed by the PAC. A survey on NF and RO integrity monitoring utilized by water utilities, technology providers and membrane manufacturers has been sent to the project participants. The survey results will be discussed during two workshops in early 2014. 7. WateReuse- 13 -02, Model Public Communication Plan for Advancing DPR Acceptance (Contractor: TBD) The objective of this project is to establish a framework communication plan and develop an implementable, strategic communication plan to achieve DPR acceptance for the State of California. Status: The project was awarded to Data Instincts, and after negotiating the funding agreement, the project commenced on November 15, 2014. Notable updates: The work was presented by Mark Millan as part of an NWRI workshop on Direct Potable Reuse Public Perception on February 25. 8. WateReuse- 13 -03, Critical Control Point Assessment to Quantify Robustness and Reliability of Multiple Treatment Barriers of DPR Scheme (Contractor: Hazen & Sawyer) Objectives: 1. Conduct hazard assessment for key unit operations for two or more direct potable reuse (DPR) treatment trains, including the following: a. MF/UF — RO — UV /H2O2 — C12 — Engineered Storage b. 03 — BAC — GAC — UV — C12 — Engineered Storage 2. Develop best design, monitoring, and operational practices by evaluating critical process control points in each of the DPR treatment trains evaluated to meet overall system robustness and reliability. 3. Develop standard design approaches and response strategies (i.e., operations plan and standard operating procedures) to mitigate upset events to strive towards `fail -safe' operation of a DPR plant. Research Approach: 1. Conduct hazard assessment for key unit operations and determine critical control points 2. Conduct bench /pilot level challenge test studies 3. Conduct Monte Carlo risk analysis and develop standard design approaches, operational procedures, and response strategies Project Update: This project was awarded to Hazen & Sawyer in December 2013 with the project commencing shortly thereafter. The project team has assembled a multi - disciplinary 22 Version 3.0 Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points ( HACCP) team to assist in the delivery of project outcomes. The first of two workshops with the HACCP team has been scheduled for February 2014 to fully vet the water quality objectives, critical control points, and final list of chemical and microbial indicators and surrogates. The first progress report is due April 2014. 9. WateReuse- 13 -12, Evaluation of Source Water Control Options and the Impact of Selected Strategies on DPR (Contractor: TBD) The goals are to evaluate upstream wastewater treatment impacts (e.g. N /dN- nitrification/denitrification, industrial source control) on DPR source water quality and DPR process, and to evaluate impact of hydraulic control mechanisms (e.g. flow equalization and source water storage buffers) on influent water quality and flow variations that "stress" the DPR process. Project Update: The RFP was released on January 14, 2014. Four proposals were received, and they are currently being reviewed by the PAC to determine who the award will go to. This decision is expected to be made in March. 10. WateReuse- 13 -13, Operations Plan Development Standard (Contractor TBD) The object of this project is to develop a standard operations and maintenance plan for various DPR treatment processes, including appropriate portions of the upstream secondary wastewater treatment processes providing feedwater to the DPR processes. A DPR Training and Certification framework for DPR system operators will also be developed. Project Update: The PAC has been formed. Proposals for the RFP were due February 18, 2014 and the PAC is currently reviewing three proposals. An award should be issued in late March 2014. 11. WaterRF 4536, Blending Requirements for Water from DPR Treatment Facilities (Contractor: TBD; managed by Water Research Foundation) The objective of this project is to optimize with respect to water quality, the blending of DPR water with existing water supplies based on existing information. Phase II will conduct case studies of selected blending strategies Water Research Foundation will manage this project, through a process similar to WateReuse. Project Update: The RFP has been released and an award should be announced shortly. 12. WaterRF 4508, Assessment of techniques for evaluating and demonstrating safety of DPR product water (Contractor: TBD; managed by Water Research Foundation) The objectives of this project are to evaluate known techniques /methodologies (and potentially develop new technologies) for the assessment of DPR water safety (work with 23 Version 3.0 public outreach group to identify key criteria by which public would evaluate safety); to evaluate the effectiveness of currently accepted and alternative treatment trains for the production of DPR water using the developed techniques; to perform benchmarking to other water sources (e.g. surface water, bottled water, etc.); and to develop tools and methods for utilities to demonstrate water safety to the public, elected officials, etc. Water Research Foundation will manage this project, through a process similar to WateReuse. Project Update: The RFP has been released and an award should be announced shortly. 13. WRRF- 14 -01, Integrated Management of Sensor Data for Real Time Decision Making and Response (Contractor: TBD) The objectives of this project are as follows: Develop an operation support tool that integrates diverse sensors within the treatment process for immediate feedback/alerts. Integrate existing sensors as an early warning system for a Direct Potable Reuse (DPR) treatment process to provide: • Real time sensor network for tracking system performance and key quality parameters, • A tool for early detection of system anomalies prior to any compromise in water quality. Build on criteria developed in WRRF -13 -03 and 13 -13 for decision making based on established critical control points. Develop framework for sensor data integration based on above criteria. Project Update: This project was developed by the RAC in their January 2014 meeting and will be approved by the Board in late March. Once approved, a PAC will be formed and the RFP developed. 14. WRRF- 14 -02, Establishing additional log reduction credits for WWTPs (Contractor: TBD) The objectives are as follows: • Obtain more accurate picture of the microbial treatment requirements by addressing the major source of uncertainty —the concentration of pathogens in raw wastewater and secondary effluent • Establish if there is any correlation between the number of pathogens in raw wastewater and secondary effluent • Establish removal credit for biological treatment provided (e.g., activated sludge) for protozoa, bacteria, and viruses • Determine validity of pathogen log- removal requirements identified by CDPH for potable reuse projects. Project Update: This project was developed by the RAC in their January 2014 meeting and will be approved by the Board in late March. Once approved, a PAC will be formed and the RFP developed. 24 Version 3.0 15. WRRF- 14 -03, Develop Methology of comprehensive (fiscal /triple bottom line) analysis of alternative water supply projects compared to DPR The objective of this project is to develop and demonstrate an assessment method (spreadsheet, database, or other) to provide information to decision makers in considering the full economic, social, and environmental impacts of a DPR water supply versus other alternative supplies. Project Update: This project was developed by the RAC in their January 2014 meeting and will be approved by the Board in late March. Once approved, a PAC will be formed and the RFP developed. 16. WRRF- 14 -04, DPR Rapid Response Messages (Contractor: TBD) The objective of this project is to ensure that messaging to members of the public, media and policy makers around DPR are consistent, accurate and readily available to water agencies. Project Update: This project was developed by the RAC in their January 2014 meeting and will be approved by the Board in late March. Once approved, a PAC will be formed and the RFP developed. 17. WRRF- 14 -05, Screening high risk chemicals potential of passage through RO /AOP (Contractor: TBD) The purpose of this project is to summarize the screening process aimed at identify potential for registered chemicals to pass RO- UV/H2O2 barriers in a DPR system, including identification of potential compounds (inorganic and organic) that are likely to occur, pass treatment, pose health risk or pose aesthetic risks to consumers. - Task 1 — Identify characteristics of inorganic and organic compounds that are not rejected by RO. - Task 2 — Develop a strategy and screen large numbers of registered inorganic and organic compounds for their ability to pass RO membranes. - Task 3 — Develop a strategy and screen compounds that pass RO to be oxidized by UV /1-12O2. - Task 4 — Project management, reporting, and outreach 25 Version 3.0 ITEM 3: CALIFORNIA WATER CODE SECTION 13560 -13569 WATER CODE SECTION 13560 -13569 13560. The Legislature finds and declares the following: (a) In February 2009, the state board unanimously adopted, as Resolution No. 2009 -0011, an updated water recycling policy, which includes the goal of increasing the use of recycled water in the state over 2002 levels by at least 1,000,000 acre -feet per year by 2020 and by at least 2,000,000 acre -feet per year by 2030. (b) Section 13521 requires the department to establish uniform statewide recycling criteria for each varying type of use of recycled water where the use involves the protection of public health. (c) The use of recycled water for indirect potable reuse is critical to achieving the state board's goals for increased use of recycled water in the state. If direct potable reuse can be demonstrated to be safe and feasible, implementing direct potable reuse would further aid in achieving the state board's recycling goals. (d) Although there has been much scientific research on public health issues associated with indirect potable reuse through groundwater recharge, there are a number of significant unanswered questions regarding indirect potable reuse through surface water augmentation and direct potable reuse. (e) Achievement of the state's goals depends on the timely development of uniform statewide recycling criteria for indirect and direct potable water reuse. (f) This chapter is not intended to delay, invalidate, or reverse any study or project, or development of regulations by the department, the state board, or the regional boards regarding the use of recycled water for indirect potable reuse for groundwater recharge, surface water augmentation, or direct potable reuse. (g) This chapter shall not be construed to delay, invalidate, or reverse the department's ongoing review of projects consistent with Section 116551 of the Health and Safety Code. 13561. For purposes of this chapter, the following terms have the following meanings: (a) "Department" means the State Department of Public Health. (b) "Direct potable reuse" means the planned introduction of recycled water either directly into a public water system, as defined in Section 116275 of the Health and Safety Code, or into a raw water supply immediately upstream of a water treatment plant. (c) "Indirect potable reuse for groundwater recharge" means the planned use of recycled water for replenishment of a groundwater basin or an aquifer that has been designated as a source of water supply for a public water system, as defined in Section 116275 of the Health and Safety Code. (d) "Surface water augmentation" means the planned placement of recycled water into a surface water reservoir used as a source of domestic drinking water supply. (e) "Uniform water recycling criteria" has the same meaning as in Section 13521. 13561.5. The state board shall enter into an agreement with the department to assist in implementing this chapter. 13562. (a) (1) On or before December 31, 2013, the department shall adopt uniform water recycling criteria for indirect potable reuse for groundwater recharge. (2) (A) Except as provided in subparagraph (C), on or before December 31, 2016, the department shall develop and adopt uniform water recycling criteria for surface water augmentation. (B) Prior to adopting uniform water recycling criteria for surface water augmentation, the department shall submit the proposed criteria to the expert panel convened pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 13565. The expert panel shall review the proposed criteria and shall adopt a finding as to whether, in its expert opinion, the proposed criteria would adequately protect public health. (C) The department shall not adopt uniform water recycling criteria for surface water augmentation pursuant to subparagraph (A), unless and until the expert panel adopts a finding that the proposed criteria would adequately protect public health. (b) Adoption of uniform water recycling criteria by the department is subject to the requirements of Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 11340) of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code. 13563. (a) (1) On or before December 31, 2016, the department, in consultation with the state board, shall investigate and report to the Legislature on the feasibility of developing uniform water recycling criteria for direct potable reuse. (2) The department shall complete a public review draft of its report by September 1, 2016. The department shall provide the public not less than 45 days to review and comment on the public review draft. (3) The department shall provide a final report to the Legislature by December 31, 2016. The department shall make the final report available to the public. (b) In conducting the investigation pursuant to subdivision (a), the department shall examine all of the following: (1) The availability and reliability of recycled water treatment technologies necessary to ensure the protection of public health. (2) Multiple barriers and sequential treatment processes that may be appropriate at wastewater and water treatment facilities. (3) Available information on health effects. (4) Mechanisms that should be employed to protect public health if problems are found in recycled water that is being served to the public as a potable water supply, including, but not limited to, the failure of treatment systems at the recycled water treatment facility. (5) Monitoring needed to ensure protection of public health, including, but not limited to, the identification of appropriate indicator and surrogate constituents. (6) Any other scientific or technical issues that may be necessary, including, but not limited to, the need for additional research. (c) (1) Notwithstanding Section 10231.5 of the Government Code, the requirement for submitting a report imposed under paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) is inoperative on December 31, 2020. (2) A report to be submitted pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (a) shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code. 13563.5. (a) The department, in consultation with the state board, shall report to the Legislature as part of the annual budget process, in each year from 2011 to 2016, inclusive, on the progress towards developing and adopting uniform water recycling criteria for surface water augmentation and its investigation of the feasibility of developing uniform water recycling criteria for direct potable reuse. (b) (1) A written report submitted pursuant to subdivision (a) shall be submitted in compliance with Section 9795 of the Government Code. (2) Pursuant to Section 10231.5 of the Government Code, this section is repealed on January 1, 2017. 13564. In developing uniform water recycling criteria for surface water augmentation, the department shall consider all of the following: (a) The final report from the National Water Research Institute Independent Advisory Panel for the City of San Diego Indirect Potable Reuse /Reservoir Augmentation (IPR /RA) Demonstration Project. (b) Monitoring results of research and studies regarding surface water augmentation. (c) Results of demonstration studies conducted for purposes of approval of projects using surface water augmentation. (d) Epidemiological studies and risk assessments associated with projects using surface water augmentation. (e) Applicability of the advanced treatment technologies required for recycled water projects, including, but not limited to, indirect potable reuse for groundwater recharge projects. (f) Water quality, limnology, and health risk assessments associated with existing potable water supplies subject to discharges from municipal wastewater, stormwater, and agricultural runoff. (g) Recommendations of the State of California Constituents of Emerging Concern Recycled Water Policy Science Advisory Panel. (h) State funded research pursuant to Section 79144 and subdivision (b) of Section 79145. (i) Research and recommendations from the United States Environmental Protection Agency Guidelines for Water Reuse. (j) The National Research Council of the National Academies' report titled "Water Reuse: Potential for Expanding the Nation's Water Supply Through Reuse of Municipal Wastewater." (k) Other relevant research and studies regarding indirect potable reuse of recycled water. 13565. (a) (1) On or before February 15, 2014, the department shall convene and administer an expert panel for purposes of advising the department on public health issues and scientific and technical matters regarding development of uniform water recycling criteria for indirect potable reuse through surface water augmentation and investigation of the feasibility of developing uniform water recycling criteria for direct potable reuse. The expert panel shall assess what, if any, additional areas of research are needed to be able to establish uniform regulatory criteria for direct potable reuse. The expert panel shall then recommend an approach for accomplishing any additional needed research regarding uniform criteria for direct potable reuse in a timely manner. (2) The expert panel shall be comprised, at a minimum, of a toxicologist, an engineer licensed in the state with at least three years' experience in wastewater treatment, an engineer licensed in the state with at least three years' experience in treatment of drinking water supplies and knowledge of drinking water standards, an epidemiologist, a limnologist, a microbiologist, and a chemist. The department, in consultation with the advisory group and the state board, shall select the expert panel members. (3) Members of the expert panel may be reimbursed for reasonable and necessary travel expenses. (b) (1) On or before January 15, 2014, the department shall convene an advisory group, task force, or other group, comprised of no fewer than nine representatives of water and wastewater agencies, local public health officers, environmental organizations, environmental justice organizations, public health nongovernmental organizations, the department, the state board, the United States Environmental Protection Agency, ratepayer or taxpayer advocate organizations, and the business community, to advise the expert panel regarding the development of uniform water recycling criteria for direct potable reuse and the draft report required by Section 13563. The department, in consultation with the state board, shall select the advisory group members. (2) Environmental, environmental justice, and public health nongovernmental organization representative members of the advisory group, task force, or other group may be reimbursed for reasonable and necessary travel expenses. (3) In order to ensure public transparency, the advisory group established pursuant to paragraph (1) shall be subject to the Bagley -Keene Open Meeting Act (Article 9 (commencing with Section 11120) of Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code). (c) On or before June 30, 2016, the department shall prepare a draft report summarizing the recommendations of the expert panel. (d) The department may contract with a public university or other research institution with experience in convening expert panels on water quality or potable reuse to meet all or part of the requirements of this section should the department find that the research institution is better able to fulfill the requirements of this section by the required date. 13566. In performing its investigation of the feasibility of developing the uniform water recycling criteria for direct potable reuse, the department shall consider all of the following: (a) Recommendations from the expert panel appointed pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 13565. (b) Recommendations from an advisory group, task force, or other group appointed by the department pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 13565. (c) Regulations and guidelines for these activities from jurisdictions in other states, the federal government, or other countries. (d) Research by the state board regarding unregulated pollutants, as developed pursuant to Section 10 of the recycled water policy adopted by state board Resolution No. 2009 -0011. (e) Results of investigations pursuant to Section 13563. (f) Water quality and health risk assessments associated with existing potable water supplies subject to discharges from municipal wastewater, stormwater, and agricultural runoff. 13567. An action authorized pursuant to this chapter shall be consistent, to the extent applicable, with the federal Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. Sec. 1251 et seq.), the federal Safe Drinking Water Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 300f et seq.), this division, and the California Safe Drinking Water Act (Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 116270) of Part 12 of Division 104 of the Health and Safety Code). 13569. The department may accept funds from nonstate sources and may expend these funds, upon appropriation by the Legislature, for the purposes of this chapter.