DEP's principle that "when public contact or consumption is involved there must be some dilution provided by a fresh water source."

DEP is not relenting in its opposition to the installation of a water recycling system at the cabin on 207 olean Road near Templeton.  They claim it is there policy that "when public contact or comsumption is involved there must be some dilution by a fresh water source (email from Don Leone, 8/19/08)."   Several questions beg for an answer:

What is fresh water

Does this apply to all levels of quality of recycled water?

If the quality of the recycled water is higher than the fresh water, does this still apply?

What if the water is at a private residence where no public access occurrs?

How much dilution is needed?

Is the amount of spring water entering the system to replace evaporation considered dilution?

DEP's adamant rejection of residential water recycling seems very ironic to me.  About 20 years ago DEP was ramming recycling down Pennsylvanian's throats.  They demanded that its citizens recycle to save the environement and become better stewards.  Millions of dollars were spent on developing recycling processes, infrastructure, markets and attitudes.  Recycling and reuse became very important ingredients in our sustainable society.  Now, when i mention recycling water, you'd think I was some kind of lunatic.

DEP makes It seem like recycling and reusing water is some kind of criminal act.  God has been recycling water since time began.  Water is the most recyclable material this planet.  Recycling of water happens quickly and efficiently, whether we want it to or not.  Why not try to harness the process to our benefit more effectively?  The possibilities seem so limitless and alluring.   No, DEP would have us ignore the opportunities, and opt for the dilution of contaminated waters with more or less contaminated waters.

I liken DEP's position on dilution, whether it be from recycled waters or from the effluent from septic systems as much like advocating more littering on rural highways as a method of reducing littering on main highways.

I'd love to see the document that outlines DEP's official policy on water recycling and reuse.

Might the concept of concentration be sometimes better than dilution (some contend that instead of moving pollution away from its source toward greater dilution, we need to concentrate it at the source - the old debate between centralization and decentralization)? 

As a leading recycler in Pennsylvania, I also find it a bit offensive when I'm told that recycling or reuse in any venue is a bad idea. or worse yet, illegal.  What has it come to when DEP refuses to let you recycle.

John Hang, the incoming Secretary of DEP was CEO of PennCulture prior to his appointment by Governor Rendell.  A quote from the PennCulture website is, "Pennsylvania's water problems come from a variety of sources, which means we must use a variety of approaches to solve these problems."  Recycling may be an interesting and valid option in many situatuions.  What's the matter with trying a little water recycling at a rustic cabin in one of the remotest parts of Western Pennsyllvania?  What could it hurt?

The commercial possibilities are being ignored by DEP in this matter.  What if this project leads to the development of new commercial products?  What if some well-paying jobs were created?  What if Pennsylvania showed some real leadership in solving pressing water problems, and became a hub for water innovation?  Sorry, i guess I'm thinking too much.

Actually, i must be honest and apologize to Mr. Leone.   At first, i thought he is talking about DEP preferring dilution to recycling for all waste water.  I eroneously sent back a critical email chastizing DEP for supporting diluting our streams with effluent, rather than recycling it.  However, after rereading, I realized that he was referring to reusing the water in the cabin;  the DEP policy is that reused water must have some dilution with fresh.  However, after further rethinking this point, i found DEP's position to be untenable in our case, because we are diluting the water in the recycling system with fresh water.  The system is a zero-discharge system we are proposing, not zero-input.  With evaporation and other dead-end usage, some of the greatest new water on this planet is constantly needed and added.  There is constant and continuous dilution with near-perfect water.  How much you want to bet that DEP will now say it's not the proper ratio of dilution?

A final question, "what do you get hen you dilute fecal matter with fecal matter?"