[ca-gw] Graywater and water table issue
Golden Love
goldenlove at cruzio.com
Sat Oct 24 06:45:15 PDT 2009
I am finding that there are many people that need to be educated (government
officials, plumbers, citizens, landscapers, geologists, etc.) about the new
code and graywater in general. We all need to keep the conversation going.
Once people find out the facts, they usually say "Yes" to this abundant
resource. The public will be the ones that move this forward and we need to
keep them informed!
Golden Love
Love's Gardens
"Your neighborhood solar-powered gardener" (TM)
California Licensed Contractor C27 363672
127 National St.
Santa Cruz, CA 95060-6516
Phone (831) 471-9100
Fax ( 831) 471-9200
goldenlove at lovesgardens.com
www.lovesgardens.com
_____
From: ca-standard-bounces at graywater.org
[mailto:ca-standard-bounces at graywater.org] On Behalf Of elizabeth dougherty
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 2:32 PM
To: Steve Bilson; ca-standard at graywater.org
Subject: Re: [ca-gw] Graywater and water table issue
Well, we could have another impending battle with the County of Santa Clara.
I just spoke directly with Gerry de la Piedra in SCVWater District's
graywater working group, and have offered some links to HCD reports and
Oasis Design regulator info, as well as giving him the contact for Art, John
Russel, SteveB, Bill Wilson and Laura A. Also an offer to organize a panel
for the education. In my conversation with the working group guy, he
sounded very determined to require a graywater system tracking tool and to
require some sort of permit about ground water table separation.
But this is the entire email I just got from Santa Clara's climate change
and sustainability manager. Very disturbing. I did write her back, since
I've been working her for a number of years on climate change (I used to do
governmental and industrial energy effiiciency work for the State), but I
don't imagine she'll love my response which applauds SF's decision.
"Yes,
It is a working group / ad hoc subcommittee (?) of the water conservation
retailers committee that is run out of SCVWD. It's a good group of folks who
are looking at what balance is needed with the grey water code. I have not
been going personally to these meetings, but Phil Smith of the County
Environmental Health is going.
There were some legitimate concerns that did not get heard in Sacramento and
so this group is looking at what the real concerns are and will address this
with a local model grey water ordinance. For instance, I know that
environmental health and the water district was concerned about the fact
that a grey water system could be installed with only a 3 foot buffer to the
water table.
Phil Smith can be reached at
Phone: (408) 918-3400 (I don't have his direct line but they should connect
you).
I recommend you speak with him. He is quite good, very reasonable and would
be able to answer your questions. It's too bad that SF took such immediate
action as it will empower the naysayers to speak more loudly. I am hopeful
that our shared process will have different results.
Jill"
So, more battles to fight right around the corner. Especially if you live
in the Santa Clara area, let's strategize.
E.
"For after all, the best thing one can do when it is raining, is to let it
rain."
HW Longfellow
***********************************************************
elizabeth dougherty, phd
director, whollyh2o
sf bay area, ca
whollyh2o: www.whollyh2o.org
norcal arcsa: www.wiserearth.org/group/arcsanorcal
home page: www.elizd.com
_____
From: Steve Bilson <stevebilson at rewater.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 14:00:51 -0700
To: 'elizabeth dougherty' <elizd at elizd.com>, <ca-standard at graywater.org>
Subject: RE: [ca-gw] Graywater and water table issue
Groundwater depth was extensively discussed "in Sacramento". There are many
jurisdictions that allow a 3' separation between groundwater and septic tank
effluent. 3' for greywater was an easy call. Whoever thinks anything even
vaguely related to the greywater code wasn't discussed "in Sacramento"
simply wasn't part of the nearly year-long discussion.
I personally attended 3 public meetings "in Sacramento" chaired by DHCD and
read over 1,200 pages of comments, not including the hundreds of pages of
studies that some of the comments referenced.
I get so annoyed by those who don't fully participate then claim everyone
who did missed something. I'm referring to the inspectors who think they're
smarter than everyone else, BTW.
From: ca-standard-bounces at graywater.org
[mailto:ca-standard-bounces at graywater.org]
<mailto:ca-standard-bounces at graywater.org%5d> On Behalf Of elizabeth
dougherty
Sent: Friday, October 23, 2009 10:35 AM
To: ca-standard at graywater.org
Subject: [ca-gw] Graywater and water table issue
Folks:
There is a graywater working group discussing at the Santa Clara Valley
Water District that will make recommendations to cities (such as El Dorado
that held off on an ordinance until hearing back from this working group).
Here is something they brought up. I don't know enough about the water table
issue to address this. Is there any instance of graywater that is 3 feet
away from the water table contaminating the groundwater? That seems hard to
believe.
> There were some legitimate concerns that did not get heard in Sacramento
and
> so this group is looking at what the real concerns are and will address
this
> with a local model grey water ordinance. For instance, I know that
> environmental health and the water district was concerned about the fact
that
> a grey water system could be installed with only a 3 foot buffer to the
water
> table.
> It's too bad that SF took such immediate action
> as it will empower the naysayers to speak more loudly. I am hopeful that
our
> shared process will have different results.
Any insights for me?
Thanks,
Elizabeth
"For after all, the best thing one can do when it is raining, is to let it
rain."
HW Longfellow
***********************************************************
elizabeth dougherty, phd
director, whollyh2o
sf bay area, ca
whollyh2o: www.whollyh2o.org
norcal arcsa: www.wiserearth.org/group/arcsanorcal
home page: www.elizd.com
_____
From: Sherry Bryan <sherry at ecoact.org>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2009 14:32:17 -0700
To: John Russell <john at watersprout.org>
Cc: <ca-standard at graywater.org>
Subject: Re: [ca-gw] [Ca-standard] state wide registration system
Hello all,
Laura Allen of Graywater Action, Ecology Action, and the Monterey County
Business Council have been researching the cost of creating a graywater
notification or registration database over the past three months. I confess
that our research was motivated to create a bargaining chip with local
jurisdictions who wish to restrict Chapter 16A. True, a non-profit
organization could write a grant to create such a statewide database, but
the ongoing administration and maintenance of the database would still
require funding from the public agencies who would benefit from the data it
collects, thus the financial burden is back on those agencies to fund the
non-profit to do the work.
Ideally, a registration system would interface with a potential graywater
installer before the installation occurred to capture the opportunity to
educate that installer on how to create a code compliant graywater system.
In this situation, the registration system would only capture the intent to
install. The only incentive I can think of that would trigger someone to
provide online "notification" of an installed system is a rebate on the cost
of materials, administered by the corresponding water agency. It is my
opinion that a voluntary registration with a tangible incentive to register
will provide the best data.
I'd be happy to share the information we've researched on registration
database software. Please contact me directly at sherry at ecoact.org.
Best Regards,
Sherry Lee Bryan
Senior Program Specialist
Ecology Action of Santa Cruz
PO Box 1188
Santa Cruz, CA 95061-1188
(831) 426-5925 x114
On 10/15/09 10:02 AM, "John Russell" <john at watersprout.org> wrote:
> Hi Steve
>
> The idea of the registration system would be that a non-profit entity runs
> it so there is no financial or personnel burden upon the cities. Laura
> Allen from Graywater Action (formerly Graywater Guerrillas) would be a
> natural candidate to take this on of she is willing. Her description of
> the system is as follow:
>
> Grant funding would support the creation of a data
> base held on a non-profit type site- local cities or counties could sign
> up and then would have a tab on the site. Local jurisdictions would send
> residents to the site to fill out info on their permitless systems (and
> permitted systems?). Water districts could get reports of water savings
> from greywater in their service area. Cities would know where the
> greywater systems are and would not have to do extra work to collect that
> data.
>
> Best regards,
>
> John Russell
> --
> WaterSprout
> 510.541.7278
> 879 Aileen St. Oakland, CA 94608
> http://watersprout.org
>
>> The problem with a "registration" process is that it's totally unique.
>> They'd have to create a new bureaucracy to implement it (receiving folks,
>> training, forms, computer input, IT support, etc.). That'd cost a
>> fortune,
>> and no city has extra money. The closest thing they have right now is
the
>> permit process. So, by asking for a tracking feature, you're really
>> asking
>> for a permit imposition, and there we are again, right back to where we
>> started 20 years ago.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ca-standard-bounces at graywater.org
>> [mailto:ca-standard-bounces at graywater.org]
<mailto:ca-standard-bounces at graywater.org%5d> On Behalf Of John Russell
>> Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2009 9:07 AM
>> To: laura at greywaterguerrillas.com
>> Cc: ca-standard at graywater.org
>> Subject: Re: [ca-gw] [Ca-standard] state wide registration system idea
>>
>> I would like to return to Laura's idea of creating a
tracking/registration
>> system for unpermitted graywater systems as outlined below. Now that SF
>> has fired the first shot across the bow, other cities may soon follow. I
>> think a registration system would be a great idea to address and
alleviate
>> fears from these cities.
>>
>> Please weigh in on this as I think we need to present something more to
SF
>> than just emails.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> John Russell
>> --
>> WaterSprout
>> 510.541.7278
>> 879 Aileen St. Oakland, CA 94608
>> http://watersprout.org
>>
>>> Hi Everyone,
>>> There seems to be a lot of interest in having some kind of tracking
>>> system
>>> for the washing machines and single fixtures (that don't require a
>>> permit). No permit is critical for this to be low cost and easy for
>>> homeowner, AND having info about these systems is important. Several of
>>> the stakeholders have been discussing the logistics of a tracking system
>>> that would be easy, not a barrier, and gather good data. We'd love your
>>> input.
>>>
>>> Tracking System Idea: Grant funding would support the creation of a data
>>> base held on a non-profit type site- local cities or counties could sign
>>> up and then would have a tab on the site. Local jurisdictions would send
>>> residents to the site to fill out info on their permitless systems (and
>>> permitted systems?). Water districts could get reports of water savings
>>> from greywater in their service area. Cities would know where the
>>> greywater systems are and would not have to do extra work to collect
>>> that
>>> data.
>>>
>>> This is the info we think would be important to collect. Please
>>> comment/add ideas.
>>> thanks,
>>> Laura
>>>
>>>
>>> Data
>>> 1.Address:
>>> 2.Water District:
>>> 3.Fixture (s) used for greywater:
>>> 4.Estimated GPD:
>>> 5.Date of installation:
>>> 6.Detergents used:
>>> 7. (check all that apply) Installed by:
>>> owner/renter/contractor/landscaper/plumber/certified greywater
>>> specialist/other
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ca-standard mailing list
>>> Ca-standard at graywater.org
>>> http://lists.graywater.org/mailman/listinfo/ca-standard
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ca-standard mailing list
>> ca-standard at graywater.org
>> http://lists.graywater.org/mailman/listinfo/ca-standard
>>
>> To unsubscribe, send a blank email to:
>> ca-standard-unsubscribe at graywater.org
>>
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ca-standard mailing list
> ca-standard at graywater.org
> http://lists.graywater.org/mailman/listinfo/ca-standard
>
> To unsubscribe, send a blank email to:
> ca-standard-unsubscribe at graywater.org
_____
_______________________________________________
ca-standard mailing list
ca-standard at graywater.org
http://lists.graywater.org/mailman/listinfo/ca-standard
To unsubscribe, send a blank email to:
ca-standard-unsubscribe at graywater.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.graywater.org/pipermail/ca-standard/attachments/20091024/dd17b815/attachment.html
More information about the ca-standard
mailing list