As California government and the public grapple with the implications of SB1258, intended to enable graywater permits to occur more readily, the waters are not necessarily clearing. Advocates are asking for a policy that would allow most residential users to direct graywater to planting areas with little or no oversight. This runs in direct contravention to concerns of Plumbing and Environmental Health Services staff, who fear unrestrained use of graywater will lead to health & human safety concerns.

The Soap & Detergent industry has released results of a poll (100,000 Californians) indicating that there are 1.7 Million graywater systems in California, only 200 of which have permits. This underscores the dramatic shortcomings of a code that has, on paper, allowed the use of legal graywater since 1992.

Clearly the public is ready to recover bath, shower, and laundry water for irrigation; and clearly there are some issues remaining. As of January 2009, the city of San Francisco will not even accept applications. “No graywater,” I was told this directly by a district inspector, and Plumbing Director Robert Farrow did not return any of my messages inquiring about the policy. As with many cities, a  State Plumbing Code is apparently insufficient to allow permits to be issued. What’s the deal?

The primary public voice seems to be clamoring for a nearly unregulated policy, using simple gravity-fed solutions that deposit soiled household water (not including toilets or kitchen drains) in the garden via sub-surface. While this is simple and accessible, I’m not convinced it’s the best use of the resource. On an internal study, we found it was possible to water no less than 10 times the number of plants using a subsurface drip irrigation system, which is legal but requires filtration and pressurization to perform correctly.

To preserve valuable water resources by maximizing the efficiency of graywater reuse, it is clear that delivering a precise quantity of water to each plant is a far better solution than allowing gravity flow to perforated drain pipes(essentially a leach field).

Once those steps have been taken to maximize the resource, it is not a terrific hardship to add an Ultraviolet light to kill pathogens and satisfy the Health Services folk. For these reasons, I would not be adverse to a new code that requires filtration, pressurization, and subsurface drip distribution.

This would satisfy regulatory concerns while ensuring the most efficient use of the resource. Over time, as the regulatory community catches up with technology and trends, I have no doubt it will become easier to gain permission to install less technological solutions.

For the moment, I would just be happy to see any code amendment that allows cities such as San Francisco to start accepting applications from licensed professionals.

Filed under: Information