Predicting De Facto Reuse Impacts on Drinking Water Sources at Small Public Water Systems

De facto potable reuse (DFR) occurs when surface water sources at drinking water treatment plants (DWTPs) contain treated effluents from upstream wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs). Contaminants of emerging concerns (CECs) originate from treated effluents (e.g., unregulated disinfection by-products, pathogenic microorganisms as Cryptosporidium oocyst, Giardia cyst, and Norovirus) can be present in surface water and pose human health risks linked to CECs. Previously developed De facto Reuse Incidence in our Nations Consumable Supply (DRINCS) model predicted DFR for the national largest DWTPs that serve >10,000 people (N = 2,056 SW intakes at 1,210 DWTPs). The dissertation aims to quantify DFR at all surface water intakes for smaller DWTPs serving ≤10,000 people across the United States and develop a programmed ArcGIS tool for proximity analysis between upstream WWTPs and DWTPs. The tested hypothesis is whether DWTPs serving ≤10,000 people are more likely to be impacted by DFR than larger systems serving > 10,000 people.The original DRINCS model was expanded to include all smaller DWTPs (N = 6,045 SW intakes at 3,984 DWTPs) in the U.S. First, results for Texas predicted that two-thirds of all SW intakes were impacted by at least one WWTP upstream. The level of DFR at SW intakes in Texas ranged between 1% to 20% under average flow and exceeded 90% during mild droughts. Smaller DWTPs in Texas had a higher frequency of DFR than larger systems while < 10% of these DWTPs employed advanced technology (AT) capable of removing CECs. Second, nationally over 40% of surface water intakes at all DWTPs were impacted by DFR under average flow (2,917 of 6,826). Smaller DWTPs had a higher frequency (1,504 and 1,413, respectively) of being impacted by upstream WWTP discharges than larger DWTPs. Third, the difference in DFR levels at smaller versus larger DWTPs was statistically unclear (t-test, p = 0.274). Smaller communities could have high risks to CECs as they rely on surface water from lower-order streams impacted by DFR. Furthermore, smaller DWTPs lack more than twice as advanced unit processes as larger DWTPs with 52.1% and 23%, respectively. DFR levels for DWTPs serving > 10,000 people were statistically higher on mid-size order streams (3, 5, and 8) than those for smaller DWTPs. Finally, DWTPs serving > 10,000 people could pose risks to a population impacted by DFR > 1% as 40 times as those served by smaller DWTPs with 71 million and 1.7 million people, respectively. The total exposed population to risks of CECs served by DWTPs impacted by upstream WWTP discharges (DFR >10%) was estimated at 12.3 million people in the United States. Future studies can use DRINCS results to conduct an epidemiological risk assessment for impacted communities and identify communities that would benefit from advanced technology to remove CECs.