CA GW Standard Stakeholder Input Survey

1. Your information (note--your e mail will not be published, the rest will be):

Your information (note--your e mail will not be published, the rest will be): Name:
Organization:
Email:
Website (if any):
Please describe your expertise in public health, water quality, geology or soils, residential plumbing, home building, and/or environmental stewardship

2. The new CA standard would ideally be most like (check one):

The new CA standard would ideally be most like (check one): Chapter 16 2009 (IAPMO's just released model code)

Appendix G of 2007 CPC (California's current code)

AZ tiered approach

3. Appendix G UPC is the current greywater standard. The new standard would ideally take this approach to permits (check one):

Appendix G UPC is the current greywater standard. The new standard would ideally take this approach to permits (check one): Make permit compliance requirements much more stringent than they are now.

Make permit compliance requirements more stringent than they are now.

Make permit compliance requirements the same.

Make permit compliance requirements easier.

Require no permit for Tier 1 systems that meet requirements (as in AZ, NM, TX, MT), make permit requirements for Tier 2 systems much easier.

4. In the UPC model code Ch 15 and the process that led to it, health concerns were (check one):

In the UPC model code Ch 15 and the process that led to it, health concerns were (check one): drastically overstated

somewhat overstated

accurately reflective of reality

understated

drastically understated

5. Rate the truth of each of these statements:

	completely true	mostly true	neither true nor false	mostly false	completely false
The homeowner compliance rate with the current CA greywater standards is almost zero.	Rate the truth of each of these statements: The homeowner compliance rate with the current CA greywater standards is almost zero. completely true	mostly true	neither true nor false	mostly false	completely false
Licensed professionals are dissuaded from installing simple greywater systems by the current standards.	Licensed professionals are dissuaded from installing simple greywater systems by the current standards. completely true	mostly true	neither true nor false	mostly false	completely false
More permissive greywater standards could greatly expand greywater business opportunities.	More permissive greywater standards could greatly expand greywater business opportunities. completely true	mostly true	neither true nor false	mostly false	completely false
There are millions of unpermitted greywater systems in the U.S., mostly built by homeowners without aid of licensed professionals or reference to government standards.	There are millions of unpermitted greywater systems in the U.S., mostly built by homeowners without aid of licensed professionals or reference to government standards. completely true	mostly true	neither true nor false	mostly false	completely false
Unpermitted greywater systems are getting people sick in large numbers.	Unpermitted greywater systems are getting people sick in large numbers. completely true	mostly true	neither true nor false	mostly false	completely false
More permissive greywater standards would pose a significant health threat.	More permissive greywater standards would pose a significant health threat. completely true	mostly true	neither true nor false	mostly false	completely false

6. Specifics
Current California law calls for supply lines to be buried 8", drip emitters 9", and mini-leachfield lines 11". Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas do not require emitters to be buried, instead specifying only that greywater not pond or run off.
There are no burial requirements for freshwater or reclaimed water irrigation.
Mulch 2" deep is specified in some best management practices; mulch over 4" deep is not recommended in high fire areas.
A survey of stakeholders present at the 4/27/2009 meeting yielded 20 in favor of zero emitter depth requirement, 2 in favor of 2 inches, none in favor of anything deeper.
Please help out HCD by entering the number of inches (zero to ?) you recommend for each of these proscriptive standards

Specifics Current California law calls for supply lines to be buried 8", drip emitters 9", and mini-leachfield lines 11". Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas do not require emitters to be buried, instead specifying only that greywater not pond or run off. There are no burial requirements for freshwater or reclaimed water irrigation. Mulch 2" deep is specified in some best management practices; mulch over 4" deep is not recommended in high fire areas. A survey of stakeholders present at the 4/27/2009 meeting yielded 20 in favor of zero emitter depth requirement, 2 in favor of 2 inches, none in favor of anything deeper. Please help out HCD by entering the number of inches (zero to ?) you recommend for each of these proscriptive standards Minimum inches for how far emitters should be below the surface:
Inches below the surface supply lines should be required to be buried:
Minimum depth in inches for mulch in mulch basins:

7. Please answer Yes or No to the following:

	Yes	No
The legacy Appendix K septic system disposal language in the greywater code should be removed and replaced with greywater/ reuse language; generally a requirement that greywater not pond or run off.	Please answer Yes or No to the following: The legacy Appendix K septic system disposal language in the greywater code should be removed and replaced with greywater/ reuse language; generally a requirement that greywater not pond or run off. Yes	No
The legacy drawings in the code should be removed or replaced with new drawings.	The legacy drawings in the code should be removed or replaced with new drawings. Yes	No
Though it is not common in the plumbing code, the greywater appendix should start with a statement of purpose, in order to: make the underlying intent explicitly clear; help the standard remain useful in the face of rapidly evolving technology and new science; and provide big picture guidance to regulators for the use of the alternative materials and methods option.	Though it is not common in the plumbing code, the greywater appendix should start with a statement of purpose, in order to: make the underlying intent explicitly clear; help the standard remain useful in the face of rapidly evolving technology and new science; and provide big picture guidance to regulators for the use of the alternative materials and methods option. Yes	No

8. HCD plans to close the window for substantial changes to their current draft on April 27th. What do you think about this (check ANY that apply):

HCD plans to close the window for substantial changes to their current draft on April 27th. What do you think about this (check ANY that apply): This is fine, there's been plenty of time.

HCD should bend its internal process as far as possible to make more time for substantial changes (September 4 th is the deadline for the draft to get to the California Building Standards Commission in time for the January 2011 timeline).

It is ok to miss this deadline if it means that standards can be improved more.

The drought emergency justifies taking more time to get more effective standards, even if it means turning them in to the Building Standards Commission late.

The drought emergency justifies the Building Standards Commission fast-tracking the effective date of greywater standards.

9. HCD stakeholder responsiveness:

HCD stakeholder responsiveness: HCD should be less responsive.

HCD should stay the same.

HCD should be more responsive.

10. Please write anything else you'd care to share. Thank you for taking the time to answer this survey.

Please write anything else you'd care to share. Thank you for taking the time to answer this survey.

1. Stakeholders Survey