ACTION NEEDED — Update on PA Water Use Fee

According to a Legislative Budget & Finance Committee (LBFC) study last session on the “Feasibility of Establishing a Water Use Fee in PA” using House Bill 20 PN 1846 of 2017 (NOT REINTRODUCED and Agricultural, municipal, community, and non-community water systems, and not-for-profit entities were exempted in HB 20) a water use fee on public water supply withdrawals would generate about $17,689,577 (using the plan to generate $500 million), $10,613,746 (using the plan to generate $300 million); and $3,537,915 (using the plan to generate $100 million).

Where did the idea of a water use fee come from?

On page 23 of Pennsylvania’s Phase 3 Watershed Implementation Plan, which was presented by DEP at the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) & Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC) meetings on 5/22/19 & 5/23/19, a water use fee is one of the proposed funding sources for the Chesapeake Bay.  The rationale is that water customers should pay for clean water (i.e., the bay) – The bay advocates say that “they just care about clean water” and “a nominal fee on water usage that would raise millions if not billions of new capital, without undue burden on the providers.”

Action Needed

If you haven’t already done so, please reach out to your state legislators to make them aware that such a fee is being discussed and how it will impact your water system/ratepayers.  You can’t wait to make your voice be heard because, like Manganese, if it gets legs, it will run quickly with little time to respond.

1. Identify the state House and Senate members representing your water system:

• Click on the following link to identify your legislators: http://zipstickers.mypls.com/LookUp.aspx?cid=200030
• Simply type in your home and/or work address and this link will direct you to your legislators (both state and federal legislators are included, but you only need to contact your state legislators).  It provides contact information, including an e-mail address, for their Capitol and District offices.

1. Reach out to you House and Senate members and let them know how you feel about a water use fee.  Using the proposal from HB 20 of 2017 of 1/100 cent/gallon (.001 X MGD = daily fee X 365 = annual fee) as an example (not exact because we don’t know the formula that may be used or if they will subtract water returned):

• 4 MGD plant = $146,000/year
• 8 MGD plant = $292,000/year
• 9 MGD plant = $328,500/year
• 12 MGD plant = $438,000/year
• 18 MGD plant = $657,000/year
• 20 MGD plant = $730,000/year
• 32 MGD plant = $1,168,000/year
• 50 MGD plant = $1,825,000/year
• 60 MGD plant = $2,190,000/year

Talking Points

• Drinking water ratepayers should not be funding non-point source projects for others industry sectors to comply with their bay requirements.
• Drinking Water ratepayers, particularly low-income customers, will be adversely affected by a water use fee.
• Drinking water treatment should be the last line of defense, while the “polluter” should be at the forefront; responsible for cleaning up source water that they pollute.
• Wastewater systems met their required 2017 reduction goals 3 years early at a cost of $1.4 billion (see page 11 of Pennsylvania’s Phase 3 Watershed Implementation Plan).
• Drinking Water Systems were already required to pay new annual fees ($7.6 million) to fund DEP and they were also subject to increased permit fees.
• Drinking Water Systems are facing significant capital costs to pay for drinking water related regulations (i.e., Revised Total Coliform; Disinfection Residuals; and Chapter 109 General Update) and new federal regulations are in the pipeline (Perchlorate; Lead and Copper Revisions; and PFAS).

Erik A. Ross

Senior Associate

Milliron & Goodman Government Relations, LLC.

200 North 3^rd Street

Suite 1500

Harrisburg, PA 17101

Phone:  717-232-5322

Cell:  717-574-3963

[email protected]

Source:  PA Environmental Digest, 1/13/2020

Report: Sen. Yaw: Raising Enough Money to Implement PA’s Chesapeake Bay Clean Water Plan — Isn’t Going To Happen

After the Senate Environmental Resources and Energy Committee Chesapeake Bay briefing January 8 https://paenvironmentdaily.blogspot.com/2020/01/senate-environmental-committee-puts.html ,  Sen. Gene Yaw (R-Lycoming) who serves as Majority Chair of the Committee, told the PA Capital-Star– “raising that much money [$324 million a year to implement the recommendations in PA’s Clean Water Plan to meet its Bay obligations] through new fees or taxes “isn’t going to happen.”

     He added, even if the state generated more than $300 million in new taxes and fees by 2025, “I don’t know that we’d have the wherewithal to spend it.”

     In a final comment to PA Capital-Star, Sen. Yaw said: “The chances of us meeting the 2025 suggested [goals] are not likely.”

     Sen. Yaw said he thinks it’s more likely Pennsylvania will get a slap on the wrist from EPA for not meeting its Chesapeake Bay obligations — “nobody knows what the EPA will do.”

     During the Committee briefing, which included  representatives of the interstate Chesapeake Bay Commission, PA Farm Bureau, the Chesapeake Bay Foundation-PA, the departments of Agriculture and Environmental Protection and the State Conservation Commission which administers programs supporting county conservation districts, participants agreed:

• We Have A Credible Plan: The Phase III Chesapeake Bay Watershed Implementation Plan submitted to EPA showing how Pennsylvania would meet its water quality cleanup obligations was built from the ground up, based on significant local input and buy-in and represents the most credible plan ever developed by the state.

• We Need More Resources: Many more resources were needed to implement the stakeholder-backed recommendations in the Plan, including help for farmers to install conservation practices, for communities to deal with issues like stormwater and to provide incentives for installing riparian stream buffers.

• Momentum: As a result of the stakeholder process that was used to develop the WIP III Plan and other issues, there is now momentum and energy building to address clean water issues in the General Assembly and across the state.

     On January 24, 2017, Sen. Yaw and other Pennsylvania members of the Chesapeake Bay Commission wrote to all members of the General Assembly putting a spotlight on the need to address the state’s water pollution cleanup problem and suggested creating a dedicated Clean Water Fund for Pennsylvania.

     One proposal outlined in the letter was to raise $245 million a year through a fee on water use. And nothing was done.  Click here for more http://www.paenvironmentdigest.com/newsletter/default.asp?NewsletterArticleID=38575&SubjectID=202 .

     The General Assembly actually cut funding $16 million from the Environmental Stewardship (Growing Greener) Fund in FY 2019-20 that could have supported farm conservation and community stormwater pollution reduction projects.

     For more information on how Pennsylvania plans to meet its Chesapeake Bay cleanup obligations, visit DEP’s PA’s Phase 3 Watershed Implementation Plan webpage https://www.dep.pa.gov/Business/Water/Pennsylvania%E2%80%99s%20Chesapeake%20Bay%20Program%20Office/WIP3/Pages/Phase-III-WIP-(Watershed-Implementation-Plans).aspx .

     Click here for a summary of the steps the Plan recommends https://paenvironmentdaily.blogspot.com/2019/08/final-pa-chesapeake-bay-implementation.html .

Maryland to File Lawsuit

     On the same day as the Senate briefing, Maryland Gov. Larry Hogan directed Attorney General Brian Frosh to pursue legal actions against the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in order to protect Chesapeake Bay restoration efforts.

     “Pennsylvania, which is under ‘enhanced’ or ‘backstop’ federal oversight due to failed pollution reduction efforts, has proposed a draft Phase III Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) under which it would fall drastically short of its agreed-upon 2025 pollution reduction targets,” writes Gov. Hogan. “The EPA currently appears to have no intention of taking the necessary action to ensure Pennsylvania’s compliance with its commitments.”

     Click here for more https://paenvironmentdaily.blogspot.com/2020/01/maryland-governor-directs-attorney.html .

Source:  PA Environmental Digest, 1/13/2020