Urging Caution to Florida Rule Makers on New Toilet-to-Tap Statutes

Suncoast Waterkeeper has been closely monitoring the rulemaking process that would allow Floridians to consume treated wastewater directly or indirectly. Due to its inherent risks, we strongly oppose direct potable reuse (DPR) and urge caution with indirect potable reuse (IPR), which requires stringent safeguards.  

The terms "direct" and "indirect potable reuse" have largely obscured this critical issue.  

In direct potable reuse, a wastewater utility uses advanced treatment methods and can pipe the treated sewage directly to the consumer or a drinking water plant for distribution. Indirect potable reuse is when the treated sewage is sent into the environment to increase contaminant removal.  For example, as the rules are currently written, if the City of Bradenton received a permit to offer indirect potable reuse, then it could pump its advanced treated wastewater directly to the Bill Evers Reservoir, where it would be taken up by the drinking water operation and run through the conventional treatment process and then piped to consumers.  If the City of Bradenton received a permit for direct potable reuse, it could distribute its advanced treated wastewater directly to customers or the drinking water plant for distribution.  Given the current regulatory framework, we find both scenarios concerning due to the inherent risks.

We have urged the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) to approach potable reuse (aka toilet to tap) cautiously and rationally. In particular, we raised the following critical concerns.

• Permit applications must demonstrate all reasonable measures were taken to reduce water waste and maximize beneficial non-potable reuse. A comprehensive approach to potable reuse and conservation has not been included to prioritize water conservation and maximize reclaimed water for irrigation and industrial uses. This should be required before considering potable reuse, which will be much more expensive than conservation measures. Also, the public health risks are much less for conservation measures. We believe a potable reuse permit application must include documentation that all reasonable steps were taken to reduce water consumption through conservation, reduce waste and unaccounted-for water, and maximize beneficial non-potable reuse.
  
  
• Systematic weaknesses in oversight and accountability for wastewater treatment facilities put Floridians at risk. The condition and reliability of wastewater treatment facilities have not been adequately addressed to ensure that the wastewater facilities can reliably deliver "advanced treated water." According to FDEP Notices of Pollution, so far in 2024, there have been over 2100 reported incidents. This level of failure does not support making these same wastewater facilities responsible for providing source water for public consumption. Bypasses from wastewater treatment facilities, which are currently prohibited, discharge into surface waters not used for drinking, causing unknown environmental harm and indirectly exposing the public to contamination. However, bypasses from Indirect Potable Reuse (IDPR) and Direct Potable Reuse (DPR) facilities pose a much greater risk, as they would directly contaminate Florida's potable water supply, endangering public health. This concern is heightened by numerous documented instances of delayed or non-reporting of bypasses by wastewater treatment facilities across the state, demonstrating systemic weaknesses in oversight and accountability.
  
  
• A full year of pilot testing must be required to ensure consistently safe potable water. The pilot testing program requirements in this draft still allow for a reduction in the duration or scope of pilot testing and, in some cases, eliminating pilot testing. Given the lack of operating data from existing potable reuse facilities, we believe the requirements for a full year of pilot testing should be required in all cases.
  
  
• The lag time and national focus of the Safe Drinking Water Act make conservative blending ratios critical for ensuring the health and safety of Floridians. The current draft amendments allow any blending ratio of primary source water to reclaimed advanced treated water. We believe the blending ratio is important to control the quality of finished water and public health. A more conservative approach would be to limit blending to 20% or 25%, with a provision that a utility could present several years of operating data to support a permit modification to increase the blending ratio.
  
  
• The lag time and national focus of the Safe Drinking Water Act allow harmful contamination in Florida drinking water. As stated previously in our July 26 letter, we believe that the public’s health and safety are not being adequately addressed, especially regarding emerging contaminants of concern, such as pharmaceuticals and PFAS, that are currently not regulated or are under-regulated within the Safe Drinking Water Act and Florida State Statutes.

We call on state regulators to prioritize public health and water safety by ensuring proper safeguards, accountability, and rigorous testing before permitting potable reuse projects. Potable reuse is a high-stakes endeavor that requires cautious, science-based decision-making.