WaterWired

CRS In Focus Report: 'Regulating Drinking Water Contaminants - EPA PFAS Actions' (Updated: 18 June 2019)

Mary Tiemann and Elena H. Humphreys penned this updated (18 June 2019) this CRS In Focus report: Regulating Drinking Water Contaminants: EPA PFAS Actions. 

Download CRS_InFocus_Report_EPA_PFAs_18June2019

Summary
Detections of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in drinking water supplies and uncertainty about potential health effects associated with exposure to PFAS have increased congressional attention to the U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency’s (EPA) efforts to address these substances in public water supplies. Over the past decade, EPA has been evaluating several PFAS under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) to determine whether national drinking water regulations may be warranted. EPA has not issued SDWA regulations for any PFAS but has taken various actions to address PFAS contamination.

In the 116th Congress, bills have been introduced to direct EPA to issue drinking water regulations for PFAS and to take other actions to address these emerging contaminants.

In February 2019, EPA issued a PFAS Action Plan (EPA 823R18004), which identifies EPA’s actions to address PFAS under multiple environmental statutes. This In Focus outlines the agency’s PFAS-related actions using SDWA authorities, with particular focus on the process for evaluating contaminants for regulation under SDWA.

Enjoy!

"Being powerful is like being a lady. If you have to tell people you are, you aren't." - Margaret Thatcher quoted in@UPI via @TheWeek

CRS Report: 'Central Valley Project - Issues and Legislation' (Updated: 18 June 2019)

Here is the latest updated (18 June 2019) version of the CRS report: Central Valley Project: Issues and Legislation. The author is Charles V. Stern. 

Always great stuff on the CVP!

Download CRS_Report_CVP_Issues_18June2019

Summary
The Central Valley Project (CVP), a federal water project owned and operated by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), is one of the world’s largest water supply projects. The CVP covers approximately 400 miles in California, from Redding to Bakersfield, and draws from two large river basins: the Sacramento and the San Joaquin. It is composed of 20 dams and reservoirs and numerous pieces of water storage and conveyance infrastructure. In an average year, the CVP delivers more than 7 million acre-feet of water to support irrigated agriculture, municipalities, and fish and wildlife needs, among other purposes. About 75% of CVP water is used for agricultural irrigation, including 7 of California’s top 10 agricultural counties. The CVP is operated jointly with the State Water Project (SWP), which provides much of its water to municipal users in Southern California.

CVP water is delivered to users that have contracts with Reclamation. These contractors receive varying levels of priority for water deliveries based on several factors, including hydrology, water rights, prior agreements with Reclamation, and regulatory requirements. The Sacramento and San Joaquin Rivers’ confluence with the San Francisco Bay (Bay-Delta or Delta) is a hub for CVP water deliveries; many CVP contractors south of the Delta receive water that is “exported” from north of the Delta.

Development of the CVP resulted in significant changes to the area’s natural hydrology. However, construction of most CVP facilities predated major federal natural resources and environmental protection laws. Much of the current debate related to the CVP revolves around how to deal with changes to the hydrologic system that were not significantly mitigated for when the project was constructed. Thus, multiple ongoing efforts to protect species and restore habitat have been authorized and are incorporated into project operations.

Congress has engaged in CVP issues through oversight and at times legislation, including provisions in the 2016 Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation (WIIN Act; P.L. 114-322) that, among other things, authorized changes to operations in an attempt to provide for delivery of more water under certain circumstances. Although some stakeholders are interested in further operational changes to enhance CVP water deliveries, others are focused on the environmental impacts of operations.

Various state and federal proposals are currently under consideration and have generated controversy for their potential to affect CVP operations and allocations. In late 2018, the State of California finalized revisions to its Bay-Delta Water Quality Control Plan. These changes would require that more flows from the San Joaquin and Sacramento Rivers reach the Bay-Delta for water quality and fish and wildlife enhancement (and thus would further restrict water supplies for other users). The changes have generally been opposed by the Trump Administration. At the same time, the Trump Administration is pursuing efforts to increase CVP water supplies for users, including changes to CVP operations under an October 2018 White House memorandum on western water supplies. Efforts to add or supplement CVP storage and conveyance are also being considered: The state is proposing a new water conveyance project (known as the California WaterFix) that would bypass the Bay-Delta and, under certain conditions, increase exports from north to south for some users. Additionally, new storage projects are under study by federal and state entities; these projects would aim to increase CVP and/or SWP water supplies.

In the 116th Congress, legislators may consider bills and conduct oversight on efforts to increase CVP water exports compared to current baselines. Congress is considering whether to approve funding for new water storage projects, and may also consider legislation to extend or amend previously enacted CVP authorities (e.g., WIIN Act authorities that are expiring or have exceeded their appropriations ceiling).

Conclusion
The CVP is one of the largest and most complex water storage and conveyance projects in the world. Congress has regularly expressed interest in CVP operations and allocations, in particular pumping in the Bay-Delta. In addition to ongoing oversight of project operations and previously enacted authorities, a number of developing issues and proposals related to the CVP have been of interest to congressional decisionmakers. These include study and approval of new water storage and conveyance projects, updates to the state’s Bay-Delta Water Quality Plan, and a multipronged effort by the Trump Administration to make available more water for CVP water contractors, in particular those south of the Delta. Future drought or other stressors on California water supplies are likely to further magnify these issues.

Enjoy!

"Where your talents and the needs of the world cross, there lies your vocation." - Aristotle

Jason King AWRA Presentation: 'Groundwater Management in Nevada - The Good, The Bad and The Ugly'

Jason King, P.E., former Nevada State Engineer, was yesterday's luncheon speaker at the AWRA Summer Specialty Conference. His excellent presentation (PPT and PDF) - Groundwater Management in Nevada - The Good, The Bad and The Ugly' is provided below:

PPT: Download AWRA_GW_Management_Nevada

PDF: Download AWRA_GW_Management_Nevada

Description
Jason King, P.E.,  will be speaking about the development of
groundwater in the driest state in the Nation. Like most
western states, Nevada’s water law was developed during a
different era; Nevada’s water law provided a comprehensive
process for appropriating water in the state but was not
always harmonized with science. He will be highlighting its
strengths and weaknesses.

Biography
Jason King retired from the Nevada Division of Water Resources in January of 2019 after working for the Division for more than 27 years and served as State Engineer for his final 9 years.   As State Engineer, he oversaw the appropriation, management and regulation of both groundwater and surface water in the driest state in the Nation.  King has negotiated on Nevada’s behalf on numerous interstate water disputes, was a member of the State Environmental Commission, the Colorado Salinity Control Council and served on Governor Sandoval’s Drought Forum.

Diamond Valley
Jason was asked about the 'unbundling' of water rights in Diamond Valley and I told him I would post information on this interesting experiment. Click here. He extended this program for five more years on his last day on the job.

Enjoy!

"Civilization has been a permanent dialogue between human beings and water." - Paolo Lugari

Jerry Sehlke Presentation: 'Developing Conceptual Models for Implementing Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM)'

Gerald (Jerry) Sehlke presented the following material as a webinar yesterday. The webinar is presented here - just the PPT/PDF and written material.

PDF: Download Conceptual Model Webinar_Sehlke_Final

PPT: Download Conceptual Model Webinar_Sehlke_Final

The description and learning objectives follow.

Description

To develop effective Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) programs, we need to understand and integrate our knowledge concerning the hydrologic inputs/outputs (hydrologic cycle), the physical, socioeconomic, legal and environmental constraints, and water use associated with the water resources of interest. In addition, we need to develop water policies and laws that are scientifically-based such that they comport with the physical laws that govern the movement and storage of water. This information should be utilized to help design, develop and implement holistic approaches that integrate and harmonize water resources governance, socioeconomic policies and goals, and the institutional,
scientific, and operational capacities necessary for efficiently and effectively managing our water resources. Finally, to the extent possible, IWRM programs should inventory, develop, and manage all hydrologically interconnected water resources as a unitary source from within a “competent hydrologic unit,” at the appropriate basin, sub-basin or “catchment” (watershed) scale. 

Most IWRM programs will benefit from the development and use of conceptual models for identifying, delineating, and linking these issues, resources and activities within the competent hydrologic unit of interest, in a more systematic and comprehendible manner. This webinar provides an idealized, conceptual model that demonstrates the linkage between the various aspects discussed above, within a competent hydrologic unit. 

Learning Objectives

Participants of this webinar will be introduced to:

1. why conceptual models should be developed for IWRM program in order to help better visualize, plan, monitor, and manage hydrologically interconnected water resources and their associated data/information;
2. the basics about how IWRM conceptual models can be designed to help stimulate decision makers, managers, researchers, and water users to better understand, manage and govern our water resources in a more holistic, systematic, and integrated manner; and
3. basin information, factors needs, activities and impacts that should be included in IWRM conceptual models.

The Presenter

Gerald (“Jerry”) Sehlke has 33 years’ experience in various energy, natural and water resources-related areas. Water-wise, he has primarily focused on conjunctive management of surface water/groundwater, water rights, water quality, adaptive management, and their integration through IWRM. This includes helping the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers design an Adaptive-Integrated Water Resources Management (A-IWRM) Framework for the U.S. Jerry’s professional passion has been developing a nexus between policy, law and science. That is, ensuring that ongoing environmental and natural resources related science can support our state’s/nation’s policy and legal needs and evaluating whether environmental and natural resources policies/laws are scientifically sound. Jerry is a past-President of the American Water Resources Association (AWRA) and a past-Chair of the Laws and Institutions Committee of the Environmental and Water Resources Institute (EWRI). He has written or co-written over 50 peer-reviewed and technical publications.

Enjoy!

"Millions long for immortality who don't know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon." - Susan Ertz

G. Tracy Mehan III's AWWA Letter to EPA: Direct Hydrologic Connection Notice, NPDES, CWA

G. Tracy Mehan III, the executive director of government affairs at the American Water Works Association sent me a letter he sent (representing AWWA) to Scott Wilson of EPA. Tracy was an EPA official - Assistant Administrator for Water, 2001-2003.

Surface water - groundwater (or 'ground water' as EPA spells it - for legal reasons) interaction rears its ugly head!

It should be noted that allowing polluted surface water to flow through a groundwater reservoir before entering a stream or other surface water body can be employed as a remediation technique. But care must be taken not to degrade the quality of the groundwater to the degree that it becomes useless to the environment and humans alike. No free lunch. 

Download 20190607_AWWA_HydrologicConnectionNotice

Here is an excerpt from Tracy's letter:

June 7, 2019 

Scott Wilson
Office of Wastewater Management 
Water Permits Division (MC4203M) 
Environmental Protection Agency 
1200 Pennsylvania Ave NW 
Washington, DC 20460 

Re: Comments on “Interpretive statement on application of the Clean Water Act National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program to Releases of Pollutants from a Point Source to Ground Water” (EPA-HQ-OW-2019-0166).  

Dear Mr. Wilson: 

The American Water Works Association (AWWA) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s notice of availability titled “Interpretive statement on application of the Clean Water Act National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Program to Releases of Pollutants from a Point Source to Ground Water.” AWWA’s comments expand on our May 21, 2018 comments to the previous Federal Register notice on this issue (EPA-HQ-OW-2018-0063), and are meant to assist EPA develop a path forward on this matter. 

Summary of Comments 

AWWA continues to hold the concerns expressed previously. EPA is not appropriately balancing environmental protection with regulatory certainty. Given the “One Water” nature of all water resources, an important balance must be reached to help protect all water resources. This proposed interpretative statement inappropriately eliminates a potentially beneficial tool that could be used to protect sources of drinking water without consideration for the impacts of this decision. Moreover, this action contravenes the basic science of hydrology and the interaction between surface waters and groundwater. AWWA recommends that EPA not finalize this interpretive statement and instead proceed to rulemaking to clarify these issues in a balanced manner informed by science and state regulatory needs. Should EPA proceed with this interpretative statement, it should take a more balanced approach that weighs the benefits of source water protection against the benefits of eased permitting and regulatory certainty. 

Retain current practice 

EPA should retain the current practice of allowing NPDES authorities (EPA or delegated states and tribes) to regulate discharges from point sources with a direct hydrologic connection to Waters of the United states when it is appropriate and necessary to protect source waters used to create drinking water. EPA should not eliminate this regulatory tool. 

EPA could reduce regulatory burden while protecting sources of drinking water, through minor clarifications rather than substantially altering current practice. 

Continued need for NPDES permitting with direct hydrologic connections 

There is an important role for NPDES permitting under the direct hydrologic connection theory, as has been practiced in some states for decades. Current practice has received considerable support from EPA and a number of states under several administrations, in the federal courts, and across a number of stakeholders. The 2018 Federal Register notice included a discussion of permitting when there’s a direct hydrologic connection back to at least 1991. In recent Congressional testimony, at least 26 instances of precedent in relevant courts supporting the direct hydrologic connection methodology have been identified. Eliminating this permitting authority could allow added pollution of surface waters from which drinking water systems draw the majority of the nation’s potable water supply. Under this proposed interpretive statement, some discharges that would otherwise be regulated under NPDES could avoid permitting requirements by discharging instead into an adjacent groundwater system. In one pivotal case, the Northern District of California said: 

“[I]t would hardly make sense for the CWA to encompass a polluter who discharges pollutants via a pipe running from the factory directly to the riverbank, but not a polluter who dumps the same pollutants into a man-made settling basin some distance short of the river and then allows the pollutants to seep into the river via the groundwater.” 

Okay that's all from me - download the above PDF to read the entire letter.

By the way, here is another interesting tidbit involving WOTUS from @BCWaterNews:

In @EENewsUpdates: Streams could 'come in and out' of WOTUS with climate change. Click here. 

Enjoy!

"A person is smart. People are dumb." - Unknown (heard on@NPR)