Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wastewater Needs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State wastewater needs assessment releases draft inadequate systems list; model, data gaps drive next steps
Summary
State staff and contractors updated the WQCC on a statewide wastewater needs assessment that will publish an early draft 'inadequate systems' list and mapping tools. The project identified many small, rural and WDR facilities with insufficient data and plans a solutions/cost analysis to estimate upgrades.
A multi‑year wastewater needs assessment presented its phase‑2 work to the Water Quality Coordinating Committee on May 14, reporting an early draft 'inadequate systems' list and describing data, modeling and planned cost analyses.
Board member Nicole Morgan, who introduced the item, said the assessment aims to be reproducible and to identify wastewater systems that lack capacity or monitoring — especially small land‑discharge, WDR and collection systems that serve underserved communities. “We want a system that is not a one‑time report but something we can reproduce year after year to understand statewide needs,” she said.
Analisa Kihara (Division of Water Quality) and Da Jimmerson (project lead) described a UCLA‑led contract (multiyear, $4 million) that subcontracted Sacramento State (Office of Water Programs) for solutions and costs, UMass for modeling, and UC Davis/UCNR for baseline surveys and field sampling. Phase one (completed in 2025) included baseline mapping; phase two focuses on publishing the inadequate and at‑risk lists, mapping tools and the solutions/cost analysis.
The assessment used a predictive sewer‑service model to find unsewered or underserved areas, but staff cautioned that the model underpredicted sewer parcels in town outskirts and rural mountain regions and missed pockets within large cities. Because of limited contract resources, further refinement was paused within the current scope; the team flagged many WDR facilities (waste discharge requirements) with insufficient data in Sewix and other systems.
“We identified a large number of WDR facilities with insufficient data,” the presenters said. The assessment will publish an early draft inadequate list for regional review (initial lists were circulated to regions beginning in January) and expects review to continue through the summer. An informational item on updated results is scheduled for July 7.
Solutions and cost work at Sacramento State will provide planning‑level estimates to bring inadequate systems into compliance; presenters stressed those are high‑level, not final engineering designs. The solutions analysis draws heavily on more than 200 engineering/feasibility studies submitted to the Division of Financial Assistance; it will estimate costs and general approaches (e.g., replacement, rehabilitation, centralization, technical assistance).
Why it matters: The assessment is the first statewide, reproducible mapping of sanitation needs that pairs an inadequate‑systems list with solutions and costs. It aims to inform SB 1215 implementation (septic‑to‑sewer projects) and to support statewide funding prioritization.
Unresolved issues: Significant numbers of WDR facilities lacked monitoring or enforcement records in Sewix, complicating automated identification. The screening model performs unevenly in rural and pocketed urban areas and will require additional refinement and regional verification before finalization.
Next steps: Regional boards have been receiving and commenting on draft lists; staff plan an early release this summer to support planning and funding alignment, continue regional consultations, complete the at‑risk list, and finish the solutions/costs analysis in the next fiscal year.
