Now let's recall the biggest threat to groundwater identified by the Oregon Department of Human Services, the Oregon rules regarding Underground Injection Control, and the greywater guru, Art Ludwig, are poorly constructed wells because the idea is to discharge greywater diffusely on the ground surface rather than more focused in the subsurface through a septic tank or UIC well. Pits and borings that are improperly abandoned come to mind as there are no standards for plugging and abandoning borings less than 10 feet deep.
And now let's consider that greywater is spread diffusely on the ground surface as opposed to injected into a well or septic tank. When one examines Oregon's rules regarding exploratory holes under 690-240-0030 Other Holes: General Performance and Responsibility Requirements where "other holes" are constructed using a wide variety of equipment and are not typically designed to access water in order to collect subsurface information. The landowner of the property where the "other hole" is constructed is ultimately responsible for the condition and use of the other hole. That also means the landowner must abandon the "other hole" in such a manner that "...water cannot move vertically in them with any greater facility than in the undisturbed condition prior to construction of the other hole". With respect to the suggested site evaluation process using On-site or UIC standards, the problem becomes immediately apparent - we have breached the structural, microbial, and chemical integrity of the soil and geology that we rely on to treat waste. The "other hole" used for testing and evaluation of protecting the state's groundwater now becomes the threat to the chemical integrity of the groundwater.
Now consider the issue of costs associated with treatment, say using a commercial treatment system like the Nubian Water Systems profiled as the Greywater Gadget of the Week.
Is all of the fuss over site evaluation and permitting for greywater reuse really "protecting the public" or just "Ponzi schemes"?