Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05.d.1) (Handout) Report by Board President Williams of Feb. 24-26 CASA Washington, DC ConferenceCASA WASHINGTON DC CONFERENCE REPORT OF ACTIVITIES February 24 -26, 2014 Monday 24th �d CH b �lou� y David w;aams Congressional Roundtable (speakers: Sr. Policy Advisor & Sr. Clean Water Act Counsel to Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works; Majority Counsel & Staff Director /Sr. Counsel to the House Subcommittee on Water Resources & Environment for the House T &I Committee) - concerns about EPA's underground Rule Making -draft rule coming out on jurisdictional waterways -WRDA bill is moving forward, maybe a month to get it wrapped up, Senate version has a WIFIA provision, House version does not -key issue is funding of wastewater infrastructure, trying to move SRF funding reauthorization forward -GAO is doing a study on the sustainability of the SRF program - Integrated Planning, still waiting to see concrete examples where this EPA approach to prioritizing regulations has resulted in benefits to communities - Congress generally endorses the Utility of the Future concept and supports POTWs on energy generation, resource recovery, and recycling of materials -when asked about 3rd party lawsuit abuses, panel advise was to let individual citizens know what was happening and have them write their members of Congress. - Congress is in somewhat of a gridlock situation and moving legislation has been difficult -big issues are money and earmarks - concern about private financing alternatives hindering SRF reauthorization Martin Kady II, Managing Editor of POLITICO (a Washington Insider newspaper) Predictions for remainder of Obama's term -there will be no job benefits extension -no tax reform - Democrats will lead on fund raising - Obamacare will not hurt Dem's in Mid -Term elections -Jeb Bush will run in 2016 -GOP will not win the Senate - Keystone pipeline will get approved -all trade deals will collapse - Hillary will make announcement after mid -Term -Mitch McConnell will win easily Alternative Energy and Water Infrastructure Financing Panel -lot of new technology being explored and coming on market - Financing is key to moving new technology forward - traditional SRF loan program being funded at low levels - borrowing directly from the US Treasury, i.e. WIFIA program, is getting a lot of attention -not a lot of private "at risk" capital. being used in the US February 25, 2014 The Utility of The Future Panel Speakers: EPA, DOE, Algae Systems, NACWA EPA's priorities Nutrients: cost is a big issue, need to recover resources Stormwater: major source of pollution Wet Weather: SSOs, CSOs over 100 Long term Control Plans for CSOs still need to be completed, public health is a concern -Aging Infrastructure: - Affordable Financing: SRF funded $7B across the country in 2013 - Integrated Planning: helps to prioritize what are the most important regulations to meet, would like to see more pilots being done Green infrastructure DOE - understands the importance of the energy /water nexus -role of DOE is generally in R & D, but research has been fragmented - invited input and suggestions on the direction of DOE - exciting new technologies; anaerobic secondary, membranes, anammox, etc. Algae Systems Discussed new technology for growing algae and harvesting its energy Hill Visits Visited the following: Office of Senator Boxer Staff to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Office of Senator Feinstein Office of Congressman Miller Office of Congressman Salwell Office of Congressman Thompson Described the joint water recycling project with CCWD and the need for funding under WRDA. Explained how the project could be built in 4 phases with each phase at 5 MGD and the first phase costing $25M could be ready in just over 3 years. Explained the multiple benefits of the project: drought proof supply, reducing ammonia discharges to Suisun Bay, less fresh water diversion from the Delta, jobs creation, use of existing pipelines, and more cost effective than irrigation projects. Received unanimous interest in the project and explained we are looking for funding within the COE environmental works authorization within the WRDA bill currently in joint conference with the Senate and House. We were urged to discuss and coordinate with the local congressional office staff and the Sacramento District of the COE Wednesday 25, 2014 Presentation by the Honorable Timothy Bishop, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of Representatives Mr. Bishop presented his views on the state of the water and wastewater infrastructure in the country and the dire need for closing the infrastrucre gap. He is supporting the reauthorization of the SRF as well as a trust fund which would provide a reliable source of funding for infrasturce. He explained the bill has is supporting would create a trust fund but then turn over the task of finding a source of funding to the Congressional Budget Office. When asked about the inequality of funds paid by Californians vs. what they get back via the SRF allocation formula. Mr. Bishop indicated that the formal needs to be updated. A Nutrient Roadmap: Clear Passage or Bumpy Road Ahead? Dr. Steven Hamburg, PhD. discussed the "gap in vision" in how we deal with waste material. Emphasized the need for recycling and resource recovery as well as energy generation using advances in technology and engineering. Tom Wall, Director Assessment Watershed Protection Division, U.S. EPA Discussed the need to address nutrients in our waterways given that 12,000 are listed as being impaired for nutrients. EPA supports flexibility utilizing tools such as trading, variances, and TMDLs. He noted that the Clean Water Act does not provide the ability for the Federal Government to regulate non -point sources other than encouraging voluntary efforts and thus it is up to states to regulate non -point sources. Chris Hornback, Senior Director of Regulatory Affairs at NACWA discussed examples of how costly nutrient regulations can be and inappropriate used of technical documents to set nutrient limits. He cited the case of DC Water where it cost $16m to reduce nutrient effluent concentrations from 14 mg /I to 7.5 mg /I; $130M to reduce from 7.5 to 5 and $1 B to reduce from 5 to 4, while point sources in the Chesapeake are only 17% of the nutrient loads and DC Water is on 2 %.