WaterWired

CRS Report: 'Inland and Intracoastal Waterways - Primer and Issues for Congress'

Nicole T. Carter and John Frittelli produced this CRS InFocus (2-pager) report (7 July 2020): 'Inland and Intracoastal Waterways - Primer and Issues for Congress'.

Fascinating topic! WaterWonks like me sometimes forget about the significance and importance of our inland and intracoastal waterways. I do know enough to think about the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers!

Download CRS_InFocus_Waterways_Congress_7July2020

Summary
The federal government improves and maintains a system of 12,000 miles of inland and intracoastal waterways with over 200 lock and dam chambers. This system facilitates the interstate movement of commercial cargo by barge. Commercial navigation on these waterways annually moves over 500 million tons of commodities, including petroleum products, farm inputs (e.g., fertilizer), coal, and grains—accounting for 4% to 5% of total commercial tonnage shipped in the United States. High-value cargo in containers rarely moves on the inland or intracoastal waterways.

Most of the waterways are rivers (e.g., Mississippi River and its tributaries) or along coasts located in the central and eastern half of the conterminous United States. Although these waterways are a relatively small part of the nation’sfreight transportation network, they are an important transportation route in some regions. Other waterway stakeholders include recreational boaters (the dominant traffic on the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway), entities that have special equipment transport needs (e.g., nuclear power facilities), and municipal water suppliers with water withdrawals near locks and dams. Policy issues for Congress include options for paying for inland and intracoastal waterways work and the effectiveness of investments for sustaining system reliability.

Now to the end...

Issues for Congress
As Congress considers federal investments in infrastructure, it may consider a variety of options and alternatives, including the preferred type and amount of user fees. Related policy questions may include the following:

 Does Congress support the sequencing and relative spending on new construction and rehabilitation in the Capital Investment Strategy? Does Congress have data that assess the performance that might be achieved under alternative investment or contracting strategies?

 Do current policies and planning approaches favor new lock infrastructure at the expense of investing in major rehabilitation or other investments? Could a shift toward system-based planning alter the preferred alternatives developed by USACE for inland waterway investments?

 How has USACE addressed the deferred maintenance issues raised by GAO? Does Congress supportUSACE’s use of O&M funds (e.g., level of funding used on waterways with primarily recreational users)?

Enjoy!

“The greatest strategy is doomed to failure if there is no army to follow it.” -Anonymous

CRS InFocus Report: 'WaterSense® Program - Congressional Authorization'

Elena H. Humphreys wrote this CRS InFocus two-pager about the EPA WaterSense® program: 'WaterSense® Program: Congressional Authorization'.

Download CRS_InFocus_WaterSense_25June2020

From the report:

WaterSense is a voluntary labeling program created by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to encourage the development and use of water-efficient products and services. Through WaterSense, EPA develops water efficiency specifications for products, certain services, and homes; licenses third-party certification bodies; and maintains a registry of WaterSense-labeled products and certified services.

EPA initially established WaterSense in 2006. The 115th Congress authorized and expanded WaterSense in America’s Water Infrastructure Act of 2018 (AWIA; P.L. 115-270), Section 4306 (42 U.S.C. §6294b).

The Trump Administration has proposed to eliminate funding for the WaterSense program in FY2018, FY2019, FY2020, and FY2021. The Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020 (P.L. 116-94), included FY2020 appropriations for EPA and other federal agencies: FY2020 funding for WaterSense is the same as the FY2019 enacted funding level of $4.5 million, according to the joint explanatory statement that accompanied P.L. 116-94. AWIA does not include an authorization of appropriations for WaterSense.

A description of the WaterSense program, authorization, and revisions follows.

Cutting to the chase...

Water and Energy Savings
Depending on the product or service type, EPA uses different models to estimate water savings from data provided by their partners. From 2006 to 2018, EPA estimates that the program saved 3.4 trillion gallons of water. EPA also calculates energy savings attributed to WaterSense. EPA estimates that the WaterSense program has saved 462.5 billion kilowatt hours through reduced energy use in all phases of water delivery, use, and disposal.

EPA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) reported on the WaterSense program in August 2017. The 2017 OIG report found that consumers saved $1,100 for every federal dollar spent on the WaterSense program. OIG found that sufficient internal controls were in place to support the program’s water and energy savings claims but that EPA could improve tracking the number of partners working to improve water efficiency. OIG recommended that EPA require WaterSense partners to periodically recommit to the program.

Enjoy!

"Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell the truth." - Oscar Wilde (quoted in @TheTimes via @TheWeek)

CRS InFocus_Report: 'U.S. Environmental Protection Agency FY2021 Appropriations'

Robert Esworthy and David M. Bearden produced this CRS 2-pagerreport (8 June 2020): 'U.S. Environmental Protection Agency FY2021 Appropriations' . 

Download CRS_InFocus_USEPA_FY2021_Appr_8Jun2020

Click on the graphics to enlarge them.

From the report....

Since FY2006, Congress has funded the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations bills. Released February10, 2020, the President’s budget for FY2021 requested $6.66 billion for EPA. The adequacy of funding for EPA to effectively carry out its mission and provide associated grants to support authorized state and tribal implementation of federal pollution control laws has been a perennial issue. Trends in requested and enacted appropriations for EPA since FY2008 are shown in Figure 1. FY2021 appropriations have not been enacted to date.

The FY2021 request for EPA is $2.71 billion (28.9%) less than the total $9.37 billion FY2020 enacted appropriations. Congress provided FY2020 enacted appropriations in the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, FY2020 (P.L. 116-94, Division D, Title II); the United States-Mexico- Canada Agreement Implementation Act (P.L. 116-113, Title IX); and the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (P.L. 116-136). The FY2021 request was $435.6 million above the FY2020 request of $6.22 billion.

The FY2021 request includes a $159.1 million “cancellation of funds” (rescission of unobligated balances of prior year appropriations) for EPA across the board. The FY2020 request had proposed a $377.0 million cancellation of funds. For FY2020, P.L. 116-94 did not rescind any unobligated balances for EPA, a departure from annual appropriations for some prior fiscal years. For FY2019, P.L. 116-6 included a combined $210.5 million rescission of unobligated balances from three of EPA’s 10 appropriations accounts.

As indicated in Figure 1, the President’s requestedreductions in total EPA funding annually since FY2018 have not been adopted by Congress in annual appropriations.

Authorization of Appropriations
Funding appropriated to EPA supports the agency’s primaryresponsibilities authorized under several federal pollution control statutes and carried out in coordination with states and tribes. EPA also awards grants to assist delegated states, tribes, and local governments to support implementation and compliance with federal requirements to control pollution.

The statutory authorization of appropriations for many of the programs and activities administered by EPA has expired, but Congress has continued to fund them through the appropriations process. Authorization of appropriations is a procedural mechanism. Congress may appropriate funding for a program or activity for which the authorization of appropriations has expired if no Member raises a point of order or the rules are waived for consideration of a bill. Congress has typically done so to continue appropriations.

Just oe more page to read...

Enjoy!

"Never underestimate the therapeutic power of driving fast with the top down listening to very loud rock 'n roll music." - Unknown

From AWWA: 'Protecting Drinking Water at the Source - Information for Our Agricultural Partners'

G. Tracy Mehan III, executive director for government affairs at the American Water Works Association, just sent me this neat little 4-pager that he calls "A succinct guide to source water protection and Farm Bill opportunities."

Download Protecting Drinking Water at the Source

Download Protecting Drinking Water at the Source

Good work!

Enjoy!

"It's ugly and dirty and slow - but it works." - comment on placed-based planning by an Oregonian community member

CRS InFocus Report: 'WIFIA Program - Background and Recent Developments' Updated: 2 June 2020

Elena H. Humphreys penned this update (2 June 2020) CRS InFocus report: WIFIA Program - Background and Recent Developments' .

Download CRS_InFocus_WIFIA_BG&Recent_Devel_2June2020

Summary
The Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 authorized the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) program to promote development of and private investment in water infrastructure projects (33 U.S.C. §§3901-3914). Initially established as a five-year pilot program, WIFIA authorizes the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to provide credit assistance in the form of secured or direct loans for a range of water infrastructure projects.

Capital improvements for drinking water and wastewater systems protect public health and support local economies. They typically require major investments. Based on its most recent surveys, EPA estimates that the wastewater and drinking water infrastructure capital investment needed to meet Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act objectives exceeds $744 billion over 20 years. This amount does not include costs to extend services to accommodate population growth or to repair infrastructure not linked to compliance and related health and environmental goals.

Communities generally pay for water projects through debt financing (e.g., municipal bonds) and revenue from user fees. In 2017, state and local resources accounted for more than 96% ($108.8 billion) of the public spending on water utilities, while the federal contribution accounted for the remaining 4% ($4.2 billion), according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO Publication 54539).

WIFIA complements two EPA-administered programs: the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) and the Drinking Water SRF. For FY2020, combined appropriations for the SRF programs totaled $2.77 billion. In both programs, EPA provides grants to states to capitalize their SRF loan programs. States, in turn, use their federal grant, state match, and sources of borrowed funds (e.g., bonds) to provide assistance (primarily subsidized loans) to help communities afford water infrastructure. Eligible entities for Clean Water SRF include municipalities, state agencies, and private and nonprofit entities. Clean Water SRF assistance can support a range of projects needed for constructing or upgrading (and planning and designing) publicly owned treatment works, among other purposes. The Drinking Water SRF provides assistance to public water systems—which may be publicly or privately owned—for projects intended to facilitate Safe Drinking Water Act compliance or further health protection objectives.

Enjoy!

"Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed. Everything else is public relations." - George Orwell