Recent water sector safety concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic highlight the need for industry-focused reviews of emerging pathogens to support evidence-based utility decision-making. Between May 7 and August 20, 2022, more than 41 358 cases of human monkeypox were reported globally from over 87 countries in which the disease is not endemic. Given that the presence and persistence of monkeypox virus (MPXV) in feces, water, and wastewater has not been investigated, we summarize the available evidence on MPXV and related orthopoxviruses to provide sector-wide recommendations and identify knowledge gaps. On the basis of the information available to date, this outbreak is unlikely to pose an exposure and transmission risk from wastewater, biosolids, or water due to the absence of any evidence to date that suggests that infectious MPXV is present in wastewater or biosolids or has caused human cases, clusters, or outbreaks from exposure to these sources. In addition, remaining smallpox vaccine immunity in the population, availability of vaccines and treatments, susceptibility of poxviruses to disinfection (e.g., UV and chlorine), and evidence from health care confirming the efficacy of infection control measures all suggest that current treatment and recommended wastewater worker protection practices are sufficient to protect public and occupational health.

While researchers have acknowledged the potential role of environmental scientists, engineers, and industrial hygienists during this pandemic, the role of the water utility professional is often overlooked. The wastewater sector is critical to public health protection and employs collection and treatment system workers who perform tasks with high potential for exposures to biological agents. While various technical guidances and reports have initially provided direction to the water sector, the rapidly growing body of research publications necessitates the constant review of these papers and data synthesis. This paper presents the latest findings and highlights their implications from a water and wastewater utility operation and management perspective. Practitioner points Extrapolation from SARS-CoV-1 and MERS-CoV, as well as other surrogates, has helped predicting SARS-CoV-2 behavior and risk management. Data from treated wastewater effluent suggest that current processes are sufficient for SARS-CoV-2 control. Scientific evidence supports the possibility of fecal-oral transmission for SARS-CoV-2. Limited evidence supports the potential survival of infective SARS-CoV-2 on surfaces and in aerosols and the efficacy of control measures at reducing transmission. Protective practices and PPE can protect workers from SARS-CoV-2 and other pathogens found in wastewater.

Preamble On February 19, 2020, WEF published The Water Professional’s Guide to COVID-19. The Guide was meant to increase water sector awareness of COVID-19 virus and any water and wastewater-related issues and relevant resources. The content was reprinted in the April 2020 issue of Water Environment & Technology. Since then, the World Health Organization (WHO) has declared COVID-19 a pandemic and the disease has spread to more than 210 countries with more research on the virus being published every day.

A year-long sampling campaign at nine water resource recovery facilities (WRRFs) was conducted to assess the treatability and fate of bacterial indicators, viral indicators, and viruses. Influent concentrations of viral indicators (male-specific and somatic coliphages) and bacterial indicators (Escherichia coli and enterococci) remained relatively constant, typically varying by one order of magnitude over the course of the year. Annual average bacterial indicator reduction ranged from 4.0 to 6.7 logs, and annual average viral indicator reduction ranged from 1.6 to 5.4 logs. Bacterial and viral indicator reduction depended on the WRRF's treatment processes, and bacterial indicator reduction was greater than viral indicator reduction for many processes. Viral reduction (adenovirus 41, norovirus GI, and norovirus GII) was more similar to viral indicator reduction than bacterial indicator reduction. Overall, this work suggests that viral indicator reduction in WRRFs is variable and depends on specific unit processes. Moreover, for the same unit treatment process, viral indicator reduction and bacterial indicator reduction can vary. PRACTITIONER POINTS: A year-long sampling campaign was conducted at nine water resource recovery facilities (WRRFs). The treatability and fate of bacterial indicators, viral indicators, and viruses were assessed. Viral indicator reduction in WRRFs is variable and depends on specific unit processes. For the same unit treatment process, viral indicator reduction and bacterial indicator reduction can vary.