|
|
|
|
The Water Resources Coalition was established in 2007 to promote the development, implementation and funding of a comprehensive national water resources policy. With member organizations representing state and local governments, conservation, engineering and construction, ports, waterways and transportation services, the Coalition works to ensure that a comprehensive, national water resources policy is developed, implemented and funded to provide a sustainable, productive economy; a healthy aquatic ecology; and public health and safety. For more information, visit the Water Resources Coalition Web site at www.waterresourcescoalition.org. | |
NRC Committee Hears Statements about the Principles and Guidelines
The National Research Council's Committee on Improving Principles and Guidelines for Federal Water Resources Planning met this week to hear statements from various agencies and associations in regard to the proposed revised draft on the Principles and Guidelines from the Council on Environmental Quality. The committee heard from representatives from the National Waterways Conference, several environmental groups, the National Association of Flood and Stormwater Management Agencies, the American Shore and Beach Preservation Association, the Association of State Floodplain Managers, the Western States Water Council, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration before opening the floor for public comments, which included a statement from the Brian Pallasch on behalf of the Water Resources Coalition.
The majority of the statements from those who presented to the Committee focused heavily on the use of structural vs. non-structural approaches and the use of cost-benefit analysis when selecting projects. While the environmental groups stressed the need for environmental benefits to take a front seat to economic or social benefits, other organizations stressed the need for public safety concerns to be the primary driver behind project selection and to balance the environmental and economic benefits. Similar debate centered around the use of cost-benefit analysis when selecting projects. The majority of groups stressed that such analysis is not a reasonable basis for decision making when attempting to balance environmental and economic concerns and that it could not be used properly throughout all Federal agencies that would eventually be affected by the revised principles and guidelines.
Some other items that were discussed throughout the day included a concern that the guidelines are far to restrictive and can be biased against certain projects. Some groups also stressed the need to states and local government to have a greater voice during water resources planning due to the level of cost-sharing in the draft.
A representative from CEQ was present during the day and notified the group that comments are still being sifted through and that workshops will be scheduled in the early fall to delve further into certain topics that are prevalent in most of the submitted materials. |
|
House Committee Approves Drinking Water Infrastructure Bill
The House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Environment approved the Assistance, Quality and Affordability Act (AQUA) (H.R. 5320) by a vote of 45 - 1. The bill would provide $14.7 billion in funding over the next five years to repair and replace the nation's aging drinking water infrastructure. During the hearing, subcommittee Chairman Edward Markey (D-MA) referred to ASCE's 2009 Report Card for America's Infrastructure that graded the nation's drinking water infrastructure at a D- as an essential reason for immediate Congressional action.
The Assistance, Quality, and Affordability Act (AQUA) of 2010 will authorize $100 million over five years for technical assistance to small community water systems to ensure that they can comply with federal primary drinking-water standards. In addition, the bill will authorize $5 million annually for five years to identify endocrine-disrupting substances in drinking-water, and it will seek to reduce the amount of lead in drinking-water.
The bill was sponsored by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, and Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA), chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment. Markey said the bill would ensure that the nation continues to receive "an abundant supply of clean water" in homes and businesses. "The reality is that the country's drinking-water infrastructure is rapidly aging," Markey said. "We cannot turn off the flow of federal funding for this essential infrastructure at a time when our water systems need it most."
The bill contains a provision requiring the use of the qualifications-based selection process (QBS) for SRF-funded projects in communities of 10,000 persons or more.
Because some committee members cautioned against raising government expenditures, the bill's price tag was reduced from $12.7 billion to $4.8 billion and the authorization time period was reduced from 5 years to 3 years. Throughout the debate, amendments were offered to further reduce the level of spending authorized in the legislation and to remove the Davis-Bacon requirements for a prevailing wage. These amendments were unsuccessful.
The bill is supported by the Water Resources Coalition to help address the significant upgrades needed to the nation's water infrastructure.
|
|
Senate Panel Explores Economic Benefits of WRDA 2010
The Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee this week heard testimony on the economic benefits of a new Water Resources Development Act (WRDA) in 2010. The proposed WRDA 2010 bill would seek to increase economic development and include new programs, such as the Levee Safety Program, left out of the last bill.
As the nation continues to work towards full economic recovery, the passage of WRDA would lead to job creation. This sentiment was expressed in Senator Boxer's opening statements when she said, "water infrastructure investment is a proven job creator. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers estimates that every $1 billion in federal investment in water resources projects creates approximately 26,000 jobs. Investments in the nation's water resources not only create and sustain jobs in the short term -- they help us with economic recovery."
Witnesses included Janet Kavinoky of U.S. Chamber of Commerce, who stressed the urgency for a new WRDA this year that would authorize needed repairs on the nation's waterways to create jobs and improve the flow of goods through the system. Matt Woodruff, representative of the Kirby Corporation, the largest operator of inland tank barges, testified on the position that the use of water transportation increases efficiency in the shipment of goods. To encourage use of barge transportation and take advantage of its inherent efficiencies, Woodruff proposed creating economic incentives to "make it economically advantageous to take the most efficient route."
The push to pass the Act soon comes from the amount of work that needs to be put into water infrastructure. With the current WRDA in place, only 6 of the many projects needing funding can be completed in the next 20 years. With the passage of the new WRDA, 25 projects could be completed in the same amount of time. One proposed method of funding is a 30-45% fuel tax increase.
Visit the EPW committee's website for more details on the hearing. . |
|
Infrastructure Tax Provisions Considered Before Congress
This week Congress will consider sweeping tax legislation that includes provisions exempting water and wastewater projects funded with private activity bonds (PAB) from state bond volume caps.
PABs provide tax-exempt financing for a government entity such as a municipality or state that wishes to partner with a private entity to meet a public need. Because current tax law caps the amount of PABs each state can issue, water infrastructure projects are commonly not the highest priority for funding. The PAB provisions would significantly expand the availability for low cost financing for water infrastructure projects, providing communities with an important additional financing tool to address water infrastructure financing challenges.
The Senate Finance Committee estimates the PAB provision will cost $372 million over 10 years, while EPA has projected that the change in the tax code could drive as much as $6 billion annually toward addressing national water infrastructure replacement needs.
The legislation also extends the popular Build America Bonds program through 2012, providing an additional $4 billion in subsidies to support local infrastructure projects.
|
|
EPA Issues Guidelines for Dispensing Water Infrastructure Funds
Acting under orders from Congress, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has begun distributing funds from the Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act State Revolving Loan Funds (SRFs) in a way to promote sustainable communities.
In guidelines issued recently, EPA said it will distribute the SRF funds to states in order to ensure that they attempt to follow the administration's six-point "livability" agenda, which provides more transportation choices; promote equitable, affordable housing; enhances economic competitiveness; supports existing communities; coordinates and leverages federal policies and investment; and invests in healthy, safe, and walkable neighborhoods-rural, urban, or suburban.
EPA officials insist the guidelines do not attempt to establish rigid federal funding goals for wastewater and drinking-water infrastructure or to dictate what projects a state may fund with SRF revenues.
"Basically, it is about what are smart, sustainable water infrastructure investments, as it always has been," a senior EPA official said. "We [are] just trying to update the thinking based on the science and analysis of the last decade or so.
"[The program] certainly doesn't mandate anything. It is just urging [states to give] closer scrutiny and potentially lower priority for [infrastructure] projects that are likely to adversely affect water quality in the long run because they will induce overdevelopment and sprawl."
The FY 2010 Interior and EPA appropriations law required that, for FY 2010, at least 20 percent of funds made available to each state under the Clean Water and Drinking Water SRFs be used for "green infrastructure," water and energy efficiency improvements, or other environmentally innovative projects.
|
|
Senate Examines Response Efforts to Gulf Coast Oil Spill
The Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation convened held a hearing Tuesday on the Response Efforts to the Gulf Coast Oil Spill. The hearing was aimed at investigating the environmental and economic effects, and considering the planning and response of BP with respect to the spill.
Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL) presented maps of the Gulf region outlining the spread of oil over the past couple days. He showed that the effects of the loop current and Gulf Stream could continue to spread the oil throughout the gulf and up the eastern seaboard into the Atlantic Ocean. Admiral Thad Allen of the U.S. Coast Guard also spoke about the oil potentially coming ashore in the coastal regions and seriously damaging fragile ecosystems like marshes and wetlands, as well as local fishery based economies.
In one effort to control the oil, dispersants were emitted into the gulf to break up oil into smaller particles so that they can biodegrade faster. Dispersants, though less toxic than oil, are still a concern because they are not normally used in such large amounts, but at the moment are one of the better options to manage the spill. In addition to dispersants, mechanical surface cleaning and controlled burns are used to reduce the amount of oil on the surface, and exclusion booms are being placed around the coast to protect the shore line and sensitive regions.
The Water Resource Coalition will monitor any legislation that is introduced in the wake of the Gulf explosion and spill that might be of concern to the water resources planning community.
|
|
House Subcommittee Hold Hearing on Water Conservation and Efficiency
The House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Water and Power met on May 17th in Greeley, CO to discuss farmers' water needs and grant programs intended to promote conservation and water efficiency.
The hearing featured two panels made up of regional water and agriculture officials, as well as ranchers and farmers. A portion of the discussion revolved around innovative practices of farmers in the region, which has suffered a severe drought in the past decade, and an examination of ongoing water supply studies in Colorado. Additionally, Michael Ryan, Great Plains regional director from the Bureau of Reclamation, testified for the need for the roughly $35 million in grant money that the Obama Administration included in the FY 2011 budget for water conservation and efficiency programs in the region.
|
|
GAO Releases Report on Clean Water Projects Under the Recovery Act
The Government Accountability Office released a report on May 26th which reviews how 14 states, which received 50 percent of the total appropriated under the Recovery Act for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, have met requirements set by the legislation for implementation of the funds.
The 14 states reviewed managed to distribute nearly $2 billion in funds across 890 water projects through the Clean Water SRF program. Additionally, the report found that the 14 states did have all projects under contract by the 1 year deadline and also took steps to give priority to projects that were ready to proceed with construction on or before that 1 year deadline. Therefore, 87 percent of the Clean Water SRF projects were under way within 12 months of enactment of the Recovery Act and 29 percent of these projects meet the EPA criteria for being "green".
The one issue that the GAO found in its report was that in many cases the existing EPA oversight procedures may not have been sufficient. Due to the fact that all projects had to be underway within a year and that states and the EPA had little experience with some of the new requirements provided under the Recovery Act, many projects were completed before any site inspections occurred.
|
|
Grants for Desalination & Advanced Water Treatment Research Available
The Bureau of Reclamation recently announced there are available funds for research, studies and projects. Up to $1 million will be awarded. The funding will come from the Desalination and Water Purification Research and Development Program. The goals of this program are 1) increase the supply of usable water, 2) understand impacts of desalination and minimize these impacts, and 3) lower the financial cost of desalination so that it can be a probable alternative.
Individuals, institutions of higher education, commercial or industrial organizations, private groups, state and local governments and Indian tribal governments may apply for this funding.
There will be up to $150,000 available for each research and laboratory study for a duration of 13 month, $200,000 a year for each pilot scale project for a duration of up to 25 months, and $500,000 a year for each demonstration scale project for a duration of up to 37 months.
The Desalination and Water Purification Research and Development Grant Funding Opportunity, posted on May 21 at grants.gov, can be found by searching Funding Opportunity Number R10SF80251. The deadline for applications is Tuesday, July 7, 2010 at 3:00 p.m. MDT.
It is anticipated that awards will be made in September 2010, with an anticipated project start date on or around October 1, 2010.
|
|
Bay Planning Coalition to Hold Series of Workshops
The Bay Planning Coalition is holding a three part workshop series that will focus on "Keeping Bay Projects Moving." The first will be held on June 29, 2010 and will discuss dredging options.
|
|
Water Falls From Arizona's Top Priorities
Earlier this month Arizona's Department of Water Resources had its budget cut by 58%. The Department will loose 130 workers and will close all five regional offices. This is the third largest cut of any state agency. This cut was prompted by the state's huge budget deficits. State officials defended the cuts by saying water resources do not come before public safety or schools.
In an editorial in the Arizona Daily Star, the author felt this cut would deeply harm Arizona. Developers will need to travel to the single office in Phoenix to procure process permits and have the possibility of long delays due to a reduced staff. This budget could also have regulatory and economic effects. The lone office will have decreased oversight and enforcement capabilities that are meant to safeguard water resources. In an arid climate like Arizona, water regulations need to be enforced or businesses will not locate there. Phoenix will be setting water policy for the entire state. In a letter written by Sarah Evans, chair of Tucson's water advisory committee, she warned that this would create "a drag on economic development and revitalization of Southern Arizona that will result from inadequate and delayed accessibility."
|
|
|
|
|
Sincerely,
Brian Pallasch and Marco Giamberardino
Co-Chairs
Water Resources Coalition |
|
|
