Regulations and guidelines on water quality requirements for Managed Aquifer Recharge. International comparison

Abstract

Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) is a promising set of techniques to cope with a variety of water management-related issues. In recent years MAR implementations have witnessed an expansion and greater social acceptance. Nonetheless, there are still some gaps in the scientific, economic and governance dimensions of MAR which need to be addressed. One of these gaps is the lack in many countries of clear regulations addressing MAR. In this paper eighteen regulations and twelve guidelines on water quality standards from around the world have been reviewed to favour the advancement of the legal framework concerning MAR. The review has demonstrated that the existing MAR regulatory frameworks are implemented at different levels (i.e. from regional to international) and consider different aspects such as planning, permitting and monitoring as well as the risk assessment. Most regulations take into account some of these aspects, but seldom all of them. The detailed study and comparison of the water quality standards enabled to define conclusions regarding the differences in maximum allowable concentrations (MACs). Furthermore, this comparison made visible the different approaches to encompass the variability of MAR systems, and also the natural conditions prevailing in the receiving groundwater body. Based on the review of the selected regulations, their advantages and shortcomings, a series of recommendations are proposed for the development of future legal framework entailing the MAR technique.

A review on risk assessment in managed aquifer recharge

“…The absence of clear regulations and the need for several different licenses can make the planning procedure very time consuming and difficult, which may decrease the willingness to start a new MAR project (Nandha et al, 2015). Fernández Escalente et al (2020) emphasize that a clear approval system and clear water ownership rules must be defined prior to adapting regulations for MAR. Lee and Ji (2016) highlight that government policies can support environmental protection (e.g., by setting up protected natural areas), but may also cause environmental impacts (such as land use changes or urbanization): both can hinder MAR implementation.…”

“…Fernández Escalante et al (2020) and Page et al (2020) claim that the lack of regulatory frameworks often hinders the implementation of MAR schemes. Building trust in key regulating organizations, such as drinking water regulators, health agencies, and public water systems, can potentially help promote the use of MAR systems (Leviston et al, 2006; Mankad et al, 2015).…”

“…Rodríguez‐Escales et al (2018) summarized possible causes on a multidimensional level of MAR failure to establish a new fault tree‐based probabilistic risk assessment approach. Fernández Escalante et al (2020) reviewed the current state of MAR policies and identified a lack of risk assessment approaches, with the known exception of the Australian policies.…”

In-Channel Managed Aquifer Recharge: A Review of Current Development Worldwide and Future Potential in Europe

“…Within this plan, the implementation of in-channel modification in ephemeral streams have been considered as a possible solution to enhance natural recharge and thus, increase coastal aquifers resilience to drought and seawater intrusion. On the other hand, one of the reasons that may seem to create some resistance to the application of such methodologies is likely to be the lack of regulation and specific policy on MAR in Europe, which is limited to four EU countries at present [107],…”

Pumping and injection of surplus desalinated seawater as part of the new management of the groundwater resources in Israel

“…Using the aquifer as a temporary storage for the surplus water, injecting it through injection wells or in infiltration basins and afterward pumping it during high demand period, is part of the Managed Aquifer Recharge (MAR) method which is included in the Integrated Water Resources Management philosophy (IWRM); (Dillon et al 2019;Schüth et al 2019;Escalante et al 2020).…”