Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wastewater Needs Assessment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State Water Board hears update on statewide wastewater needs assessment, warns of data gaps
Summary
Staff and UCLA researchers told the State Water Resources Control Board that a statewide assessment has identified systems that may be inadequate and outlined a plan to publish solutions and cost estimates by May 2027, while flagging major data gaps on facility locations, compliance records and affordability that could understate needs.
The State Water Resources Control Board on July 7 received an update on the California Wastewater Needs Assessment, a multiyear project led by UCLA to identify sanitation and wastewater infrastructure needs and potential solutions across the state. Danielle Jimerson, a senior engineer with the board’s Division of Water Quality, said the project has produced an advisory group, a statewide review of more than 2,100 facilities and an “inadequate systems” list that will be used to inform a solutions-and-cost analysis.
Greg Pierce, lead investigator and UCLA professor, said the assessment applies a mix of criteria to classify systems as inadequate or at risk and that the team will send notification letters to facilities deemed inadequate to explain the review and the petitions process. He described a three-part approach: an inadequacy assessment already completed, a parallel risk-screening to flag systems likely to become inadequate, and a forthcoming solutions-and-cost model that will estimate engineering fixes and capital needs.
Why it matters: Pierce said the work will help state officials and local partners prioritize scarce funding and plan statewide responses, including septic-to-sewer conversions, rehabilitation of treatment plants and regionalization options. The project’s goal is to produce an at‑risk systems list this year and a final solutions-and-cost assessment by May 2027, with a comprehensive public report by June 2027.
Board members pressed investigators on several practical points. Chair Joaquin Esquivel and board member Nicole Morgan asked whether the project can incorporate known, project-level engineering estimates and master plans submitted by local systems; Pierce and Maureen Korner (Office of Water Programs) said the team will try to pull existing, higher-quality cost data into the model where available and to use known funding to develop a realistic funding-gap estimate. The presenters warned that the solutions are statewide, high-level planning estimates and do not replace site-level engineering reports.
Data gaps and limitations: Staff repeatedly flagged missing or inconsistent data as a chief limitation. Jimerson and Pierce said location data (shape files) and compliance/enforcement records are incomplete for many facilities, especially WDR‑permitted sites, forcing some facilities to be classified as “insufficient data.” That gap, they said, may lead to undercounting the true need and could bias the statewide cost estimate downward.
Community comments: Public commenters welcomed the assessment but urged the board to use it to get funding to communities sooner. Debbie Mackey of the Central Valley Clean Water Association said the model “rewards noncompliance” unless paired with compliance assistance for small systems. Jared Voskal of CASA urged staff to re-examine some automatic thresholds — for example, a 75th-percentile cutoff that can sweep otherwise well-run systems into a flagged list — and recommended careful, site-by-site review before funding decisions are final.
Next steps: Pierce said the team is finalizing the risk criteria, will continue iterative engagement with the advisory group, and expects to send direct notifications to facilities currently identified as inadequate. The board thanked staff and researchers and encouraged the team to refine location and enforcement datasets so that the final cost model better reflects local realities.
