Chapter 7
Codes and Regulations
Understanding your local greywater code is important for a few reasons.
If your project requires a permit, understanding the perspective of your regulatory agency will help you work together. If you’re working on policy change, you’ll need to figure out how to have a functional code that simultaneously addresses concerns of health and safety officials. In this chapter you’ll read about the diverse ways greywater is regulated around the country and learn some tips to improve your local codes from code-changing pioneers Greywater Action for a Sustainable Water Culture and Rob Kostlivy. You’ll also hear perspectives from two water utilities that are promoting greywater.
In this chapter:
State of California Public Health Department Supports Greywater Reuse
Public health officials supported California’s revised greywater code. At the public hearing for adopting the 2009 greywater code (which eased permitting barriers for simple greywater systems), Dr. Linda Rudolph of California’s Department of Public Health spoke in favor, “We believe that the proposed standards are adequately protective of public health and may provide substantial water conservation benefits and decrease demand on existing water supplies. We think this guidance will improve public health protection . . .”
A Brief History of Greywater Plumbing Codes
Historically, plumbing codes did not distinguish between greywater and blackwater (from toilets). Greywater was required to be collected together with blackwater and sent to the sewer or septic systems, and reusing greywater was illegal. This began to change in the early 1990s when drought-prone California realized this potential source of irrigation water was being wasted. The state plumbing code changed to allow legal reuse. Greywater advocates from that time will tell you how this code, though a positive first step, was practically useless. It treated greywater like septic water, requiring a small septic-type system to dispose of it deep underground (with a tank and gravel filled leach lines). People interested in irrigating with greywater still had to build illegal systems. California alone had an estimated 1.7 million unpermitted systems. States like Arizona, which followed California’s example code, had a similar experience.
Arizona Breaks New Ground
In 1998 greywater pioneer Val Little, director of Water Conservation Alliance of Southern Arizona (Water CASA), conducted a survey in southern Arizona and found that 13 percent of residents used greywater, all illegally. The overly restrictive code prevented her from teaching people how to reuse greywater properly, so she worked to change the regulations. The end result was a performance-based code that outlines health and safety requirements (see Greywater Codes: Performance and Prescriptive). Residential greywater systems that follow the guidelines are legal — without permits, fees, or inspections — so long as the system produces fewer than 400 gallons per day. Now water departments, NGOs like Water CASA, and the state environmental health department can offer advice, brochures, classes, and financial incentives to encourage safe, legal greywater reuse.
Arizona’s success was emulated by other states, including New Mexico and Wyoming. Eventually (in 2009), California upgraded its state code to remove some permitting barriers for irrigation systems.
The Current Situation
Greywater codes still don’t exist in many parts of the country. At the time of writing, some states regulate greywater like septic water and require a septic disposal system for it. Others, like West Virginia and Massachusetts, allow greywater systems only in houses with a composting toilet. Florida bans outdoor greywater use but allows it for flushing toilets. Georgia allows you to carry greywater in buckets to the plants, but you can’t get a permit to build a simple greywater irrigation system. Washington state’s code allows very small systems built without a permit (following performance guidelines), but all other systems have quite stringent requirements. Oregon requires an annual permit fee.
Many barriers still exist for legal greywater systems around the country, but the tendency is toward better, friendlier codes. To find out how greywater is regulated in your state, refer to the state’s plumbing codes or contact your local building department or environmental health department. Greywater is usually regulated by either the plumbing code (building department) or the environmental health department (or department of the environment). You can also contact the water district or environmental groups, though they may not be up to date on the code if a recent change has taken place.
The Environmental Health Perspective
Rob Kostlivy
Environmental health directors have a big job.
They regulate food production, solid waste, water supply, vector control, hazardous materials, milk and dairy products, air sanitation, noise control, rabies and animal disease — the list goes on. Greywater often falls under their charge, though most receive no formal training in it.
At the very first California Greywater Conference, Rob Kostlivy, Director of the Tuolumne County Environmental Health Department, gave the keynote welcome speech. He explained why environmental health departments have often blocked legal greywater reuse, and how he’s working to change that. I spoke with Rob about his work in Tuolumne County. (Note: Environmental health departments have different names state by state, including variations such as Department of Ecology, and Department of the Environmental Quality.)
Why are environmental health departments often a barrier to legal greywater reuse?
The fear of the unknown has been a driving force that has plagued environmental health departments across the state for many years. We were taught that greywater is blackwater, virtually the same standard as septic system waste. Without the proper training and education, most jurisdictions chose to fear greywater in lieu of trying to understand it or become educated in the subject.
Tuolumne County has permitted a lot of greywater systems and sponsored the first California Greywater Conference. Can you talk about how your department is promoting safe reuse of greywater?
I looked at the literature from other places using greywater, like Australia. When I read reports from their environmental agencies, it helped me become comfortable with greywater. As a result, we permitted the largest greywater project in California at Evergreen Lodge, over 50 interconnected and independent systems at that facility. We worked closely with a local installation company to ensure health and safety precautions were in place, while simultaneously educating ourselves about different types of systems and reasonable safety precautions; we didn’t want to force an over-engineered or overly costly system, but we still wanted to ensure that we protected public health. We’ve been monitoring the systems since 2009 to understand what is working and what needs to be improved. So far everything has been working well, and we’ve even permitted a kitchen sink system from the cafe.
To promote greywater, Tuolumne County partnered with Sierra Watershed Progressive to create California’s first greywater conference. My intentions were simple: I wanted the regulated to sit across from the regulators. I knew we had a lot to learn from each other and felt it was important that the curriculum at the conference be conducted by the experts in the field, the grassroots organizers, educators; I also wanted the greywater community to hear the regulator perspective as well. I felt that we needed to work together to help develop resolutions in solving our statewide water crisis. I received feedback from my environmental health colleagues that this conference was a success and that they will continue to learn and work at promoting a smart, sensible and scientific approach to permitting greywater. Since then we’ve hosted a second conference and are planning a third. In my humble opinion, this is a great turnaround in attitude by the regulators. It shows how with partnership we can accomplish great things!
Having Trouble Getting a Permit?
Getting permits is important to mainstream greywater reuse, as well as to keeping your home up to code. Unfortunately, it’s not always easy to get a permit, especially in places lacking precedent. Early adopters seeking permits work hard and often are forced to build a more costly and complicated system than necessary. Even in states lacking a greywater code, permits may be obtainable through the “alternative methods and materials” section of the code. Some homeowners have had success using their home as a “pilot” project that allowed local regulators to issue an experimental permit and then monitor and learn from that system.
Greywater Action
For a Sustainable Water Culture
Greywater Action (the group I helped start) educates about greywater, rainwater, and composting toilet systems through hands-on workshops and presentations.
Prior to 2009 our name was The Greywater Guerrillas, and all the greywater work we did was illegal, primarily due to an overly restrictive state code. After teaching hundreds of Californians how to install simple systems, we worked to legalize the practice. Responding to strong public support, millions of illegal systems, and a statewide drought, California changed its greywater law.
What advice do you have for other groups wanting to offer greywater education?
Start by gaining practical experience; install a system in your own home. People want to know what it’s like to live with a system. How do the plants respond? Do greywater-friendly detergents really get the clothes clean? It takes time to gain experience, so the sooner you can start the better. In the meantime, collaborate with experienced people, attend trainings, and find partners to combine skills (plumbers, handy-people, permaculturists, landscapers).
How can people promote greywater in places without a code?
Regardless of legality, firsthand experience and working local examples are critical. Many regulators have never seen a greywater irrigation system, which makes it challenging to get a good code in place. Install systems based on designs proven in other regions as demonstration sites. Invite regulators for an “unofficial” visit to see them. Policy change requires effort at both the state and local level. Local regulators are hesitant to allow something not sanctioned by the state. Also, you’ll need buy-in at the local level to accept a new state code and promote it.
Responding to strong public support, millions of illegal systems, and a statewide drought, California changed its greywater law.
Here are some ideas based on what we’ve found successful:
- Build a support base. In the two years leading up to our state’s code change we led hundreds of people through the installation process of diverting laundry and shower water to irrigate the landscape, as part of our one-day workshop model. It was fun and empowering, and it connected the home to larger water politics and left an enthusiastic homeowner with a greywater system. These were the people who flooded state policy makers with letters, emails, and calls demanding that greywater be legalized. Regulators commented that the code change meetings were the largest they’d ever seen with the most public comments.
- Find an influential ally to go through the permitting process (or pilot project if the codes haven’t changed yet): a city council member, water department employee, or someone in the building department. Find the perfect site: very simple to install, nothing tricky or questionable, a model system. Ideally this would be at the home of your influential ally, or your own home.
- Let the city monitor the system if it’s a pilot project. Get lots of press. Conduct tours.
- To influence state policy, first find out how greywater is regulated in your state. If the department in charge isn’t open to change, find a supportive politician. Though state legislation doesn’t write codes, it can require the responsible agency to rewrite the code.
- After the code changes, get permits for various types of systems and work with the building department to create a simple permit application and checklist for future permits. (And pressure the water district to incentivize greywater.)
Greywater Codes: Performance and Prescriptive
Performance-based codes describe health and safety requirements for greywater systems. Systems that meet the requirements are legal; those that don’t are not. Performance-based codes often don’t require inspections or fees for the lowest risk situations (for example, single-family, non-pressurized systems), yet provide legal grounds for a city to take action against a problem system. For example, “no pooling or runoff” is a common guideline that prevents exposure to greywater, but many codes don’t specify how to meet this requirement. Performance-based codes are written in simple, straightforward language. States and local jurisdictions can provide further guidance, such as how to size a system to avoid pooling and runoff, but the more specific details are left out of the code.
Prescriptive-based codes specify exactly how to build a greywater system, including what materials and parts can be used. Instead of stating, “No pooling or runoff allowed,” they may estimate greywater production based on the number of bedrooms in the house and size the irrigation area based on soil type.
A detailed code that spells out how to construct a greywater system will result in safer, better-built systems, right? Unfortunately, that’s not the case. Greywater systems are complex; they interact with the living world of soils and plants, and are influenced by water-use habits, fixtures, climate, and the physical layout of the house and landscape. Unless the code considers all these variables (and, in fact, it never does), it results in overly restrictive requirements, adding unnecessary cost, or it creates an inefficient irrigation system. When a code is out of touch with reality, people ignore it and build illegal systems, with no guidance. After all, since it’s common sense to reuse the water we already have, why should it be difficult to get a permit or the fees be expensive?
National Codes and Standards
Wouldn’t it be great if there were just one code for the whole country, so each state didn’t have reinvent the wheel around greywater law? The International Association of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials (IAPMO) writes codes that are adopted nationwide, and it has one on greywater. You can find it in the Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC) non-potable water chapter. Unfortunately, this code isn’t very good. States that adopt it will need to alter it — as California did for its 2013 plumbing code — or risk minimal compliance from the public.
The International Code Council (ICC) also writes codes adopted by many states. Its greywater code, found in the International Plumbing Code (IPC) non-potable water chapter, is even worse than the UPC. (States that use the IPC should write their own code instead of adopting the greywater chapter.)
National standards for indoor reuse systems are being developed. NSF International recently released water quality guidelines as part of its standard for non-potable indoor reuse (toilet flushing). NSF 350: On-site Residential and Commercial Water Reuse Treatment Systems is, according to NSF, “a revolutionary standard that sets clear, rigid, yet realistic guidelines for water reuse treatment systems.” By meeting these testing requirements and receiving certification, companies should find it easier to gain permits — a positive step for indoor reuse and large-scale commercial greywater systems.
Summary of Optimal Greywater-Friendly Regulations
- Easy to follow.
- Performance-based. Guidelines outline health and safety requirements. For example, no pooling or runoff, minimize contact with greywater, keep all greywater on the property where it’s generated, etc.
- Do not require a permit or fee for the safest situations; for example, single-family homes where all greywater is used for irrigation in the yard.
- Permit required only for more risky or complicated situations; for example, large flows, indoor reuse, or multi-family dwellings.
- Code is statewide with a mechanism in place to educate local regulators.
Water Utility Perspective
Susie Murray, water resource specialist with the city of Santa Rosa, California, discussed the cost-effectiveness of promoting greywater:
“From a water utility perspective, offering an incentive for greywater is cost effective. In 2012 wholesale water cost approximately $700 per acre-foot (af), while buying it back from our account holders through a greywater rebate program costs about $450 per acre-foot. Greywater also works well in combination with other conservation incentive strategies.” In addition to greywater rebates, the city offers other incentives, such as for turf removal and switching to low-flow showerheads.
Ask your water district for an incentive! Water districts around the country offer financial incentives for reusing greywater. Tucson Water, in Arizona, offers a rebate for one-third the cost of a greywater system (up to $200) and offers free educational workshops and online resources (see Resources). In California, San Francisco’s water department has a free manual instructing residents how to build simple systems, offers free workshops, and subsidizes parts for constructing a washing machine greywater system. Other towns, including Pasadena, Santa Rosa, Santa Cruz, Goleta, and Monterey, offer rebates for installing a system.
Greywater Pioneer
San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC)
The SFPUC provides water to 2.6 million people in the San Francisco Bay Area, operates a combined sewer system, and treats more than 80 million gallons of wastewater a day. A leader in on-site reuse of alternate water sources, including greywater, rainwater, stormwater, blackwater, and foundation drainage, the SFPUC has developed technical assistance materials to help developers reuse water in large commercial and mixed-use residential properties.
Along with San Francisco’s Non-potable Water Ordinance, the SFPUC provides financial incentives to buildings over 100,000 square feet to reuse water for irrigation and toilet flushing. Its new headquarters, located at 525 Golden Gate Avenue, in the heart of downtown San Francisco, consumes 60 percent less water than similarly sized buildings. The on-site wastewater treatment system uses a “living machine” to clean greywater and blackwater to be reused for toilet and urinal flushing, treating 5,000 gallons a day to supply 100 percent of the non-potable building water needs. The building’s 25,000-gallon rainwater harvesting system provides irrigation around the building.
There are now 15 on-site water systems installed in San Francisco and 28 more in the design or construction phase, with an impressive overall water savings of 54.3 million gallons per year (this is the estimated savings).
Encouraging the reuse of nontraditional water supplies, such as greywater and blackwater, expands our options and decreases the potable water used for flushing toilets and irrigation.
I spoke with Paula Kehoe, Director of Water Resources with the SFPUC, about their sustainable water programs.
What advice do you have for other water agencies interested in promoting on-site water reuse in urban areas?
Cities are on the front line and can create pathways to encourage innovation in water use. Water agencies are working hard to increase water efficiency and to diversify their water supply. Encouraging the reuse of non-traditional water supplies, such as greywater and blackwater, expands our options and decreases the potable water used for flushing toilets and irrigation.
Water agencies can provide leadership to address concerns with these projects by engaging with local health and building departments to establish standards for local oversight that ensure public health protection. Consistent and ongoing communication with local agencies is the key to developing successful programs.
What are your goals for city water systems?
Our overall goal for San Francisco’s water use is to maximize efficiency and decrease potable water consumption. One strategy is to maximize the on-site reuse of alternate water sources on multiple scales in all new developments in San Francisco, including building, block, district, and neighborhood scales.
What aspects of the program do you think can be successfully replicated in other areas?
The Non-potable Water Program (2012) coordinated three City agencies to streamline the permitting process for on-site systems; it’s a great model for other municipalities. We worked with the City’s Departments of Building Inspection (SFDBI) and Public Health (SFDPH) to develop a regulatory pathway to approve alternate water source projects. The SFDBI oversees construction; the SFDPH prescribes water quality criteria and oversees operation (including permitting the treatment systems); and the SFPUC provides cross connection control services, technical guidance, and financial incentives up to $500,000 per project to encourage on-site reuse.
We’ve amended the program twice; first to allow buildings to share non-potable water, and then to require the installation of on-site water systems for toilet flushing and irrigation in new developments meeting specified criteria (projects over 250,000 square feet). Mid-sized developments (40,000 to 250,000 square feet) aren’t required to install an on-site system, but they do have to submit a water budget application to the SFPUC.
