Wastewater Infrastructure: Overview, Funding, and Legislative Developments

Congressional Research Service (CRS) | September 22nd, 2017

The collection and treatment of wastewater remains among the most important public health interventions in human history and has contributed to a significant decrease in

The collection and treatment of wastewater remains among the most important public health interventions in human history and has contributed to a significant decrease in waterborne diseases during the past century. Nevertheless, waste discharges from municipal sewage treatment plants into rivers and streams, lakes, and estuaries and coastal waters remain a significant source of water quality problems throughout the country. The Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes performance levels to be attained by municipal sewage treatment plants in order to prevent the discharge of harmful wastes into surface waters. The act also provides financial assistance so that communities can construct treatment facilities and related equipment to comply with the law. Although approximately $95 billion in CWA assistance has been provided since 1972, funding needs for wastewater infrastructure remain high. According to the most recent estimate by the Environmental Protection Agency and the states, the nation’s wastewater treatment facilities will need $271 billion over the next 20 years to meet the CWA’s water quality objectives. Meeting the nation’s wastewater infrastructure needs efficiently and effectively is likely to remain an issue of considerable interest to policymakers. The CWA authorizes the principal federal program to support wastewater treatment plant construction and related eligible activities. Congress established the CWA Title II construction grants program in 1972, significantly enhancing what had previously been a modest grant program. Federal funds were provided through annual appropriations under a state-by-state allocation formula contained in the act. States used their allotments to make grants to cities to build or upgrade categories of wastewater treatment projects including treatment plants, related interceptor sewers, correction of infiltration/inflow of sewer lines, and sewer rehabilitation. In 1987, Congress amended the CWA and created the State Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund (SRF) program. This program represented a major shift in how the nation finances wastewater treatment needs. In contrast to the Title II construction grants program, which provided grants directly to localities, SRFs are loan programs. States use their SRFs to provide several types of loan assistance to communities, including project construction loans made at or below market interest rates, refinancing of local debt obligations, providing loan guarantees, and purchasing insurance. In 2014, Congress revised the SRF program by providing additional loan subsidies (including forgiveness of principal and negative interest loans) in certain instances. The law identifies a number of types of projects as eligible for SRF assistance, including wastewater treatment plant construction, stormwater treatment and management, energy-efficiency improvements at treatment works, reuse and recycling of wastewater or stormwater, and security improvements at treatment works. In both FY2016 and FY2017, Congress provided $1.394 billion for the clean water SRF program. President Trump’s FY2018 budget proposal requests the same amount as provided for the previous two fiscal years. Although appropriation levels have remained consistent in recent years (in nominal dollars), policymakers have continued to propose changes to the funding program. Issues debated in connection with these proposals include extending SRF assistance to help states and cities meet the estimated funding needs, modifying the program to assist small and economically disadvantaged communities, and enhancing the SRF program to address a number of water quality priorities beyond traditional treatment plant construction—particularly the management of wet weather pollutant runoff from numerous sources, which is the leading cause of stream and lake impairment nationally.

Wastewater Reuse for Agriculture: Development of a Regional Water Reuse Decision-Support Model (RWRM) for Cost-Effective Irrigation Sources

American Chemical Society (ACS) | August 8th, 2016

Water scarcity has become a critical problem in many semiarid and arid regions. The single largest water use in such regions is for crop irrigation, which typically relie

Water scarcity has become a critical problem in many semiarid and arid regions. The single largest water use in such regions is for crop irrigation, which typically relies on groundwater and surface water sources. With increasing stress on these traditional water sources, it is important to consider alternative irrigation sources for areas with limited freshwater resources. One potential irrigation water resource is treated wastewater for agricultural fields located near urban centers. In addition, treated wastewater can contribute an appreciable amount of necessary nutrients for plants. The suitability of reclaimed water for specific applications depends on water quality and usage requirements. The main factors that determine the suitability of recycled water for agricultural irrigation are salinity, heavy metals, and pathogens, which cause adverse effects on human, plants, and soils. In this paper, we develop a regional water reuse decision-support model (RWRM) using the general algebraic modeling system to analyze the cost-effectiveness of alternative treatment trains to generate irrigation water from reclaimed wastewater, with the irrigation water designed to meet crop requirements as well as California’s wastewater reuse regulations (Title 22). Using a cost-minimization framework, least-cost solutions consisting of treatment processes and their intensities (blending ratios) are identified to produce alternative irrigation sources for citrus and turfgrass. Our analysis illustrates the benefits of employing an optimization framework and flexible treatment design to identify cost-effective blending opportunities that may produce high-quality irrigation water for a wide range of end uses.

Water & Power Rates Request 2016-2020 Frequently Asked Questions

Los Angeles Department of Water & Power (LADWP) | January 21st, 2016

Water Accounting in Western US, Australia, and Spain: Comparative Analysis

American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) | January 10th, 2020

Water Ages Explain Tradeoffs Between Long-Term Evapotranspiration and Ecosystem Drought Resilience

American Geophysical Union (AGU) | May 23rd, 2023

Water and climate: Recognize anthropogenic drought

Nature Portfolio (Springer Nature) | August 27th, 2015

Water and Energy Sector Vulnerability to Climate Warming in the Sierra Nevada: Simulating the Regulated Rivers of California’s West Slope Sierra Nevada

California Energy Commission (CEC) | August 7th, 2012

Climate warming is expected to affect the beneficial uses of water in the Sierra Nevada, impacting nearly every resident of California. This paper describes the developme

Climate warming is expected to affect the beneficial uses of water in the Sierra Nevada, impacting nearly every resident of California. This paper describes the development and results from an integrated water resource management model encompassing water operations and hydropower generation for the west slope Sierra Nevada spanning the Feather River basin in the north to the Kern River basin in the south at the weekly time step. This model application includes management of reservoirs, run-of-river hydropower plants, water supply demand locations, conveyances, and instream flow requirement. Model validation indicates that most major hydropower turbine flows were simulated well, with wetter years modeled more effectively than drier years. The results of this work indicated that hydropower generation will be reduced by approximately 8 percent with 6°C (10.8°F) warming, consistent with other studies, with a conservative parameterization of no change in precipitation. Reservoir operations adapt to capture earlier and greater runoff volumes that result from earlier and greater runoff due to climate warming. Seasonal compensation in operations is insufficient to overcome warming mediated losses.

Water and Energy Sector Vulnerability to Climate Warming in the Sierra Nevada: Water Year Classification in Non?Stationary Climates

California Energy Commission (CEC) | July 31st, 2012

This paper explores the sensitivity of water indexing methods to climate change scenarios to better understand how water management decisions and allocations will be affe

This paper explores the sensitivity of water indexing methods to climate change scenarios to better understand how water management decisions and allocations will be affected by climate change. Many water management decisions, such as environmental flow requirements and water supply allocations, are based on numerical “water year type” designations. Water year type designations vary by region and index, but most are defined by some measure of runoff in the current water year compared to average historical runoff, with numerical thresholds categorizing year types. Climate change is anticipated to alter the timing and volume of runoff, and change the relative frequency of water year types as presently defined. California’s Sacramento Valley and San Joaquin Valley Indices are used as a case study to examine climatic changes. These indices provide a framework for allocating and transferring water among users. Streamflow estimates for 1951–2099 from the climate-forced Variable Infiltration Capacity hydrologic model are used to estimate potential changes in runoff and water year type frequency, using six global circulation models for the A2 and B1 emissions scenarios. Results vary by emissions scenario and global circulation model, but indicate that critically dry water years in the Sacramento Valley and San Joaquin Valley are expected to be about 8 percent and 32 percent more likely by the latter half of the twenty-first century, respectively, if water year type definitions remain unchanged. If current water year type thresholds are maintained, more years will be classified as dry and less water will be allocated for environmental outflows, perhaps failing to provide adequate hydrologic variability to support species, habitats, and ecosystems. If thresholds are redefined to reflect the historical distribution of year types, the burden of climate change falls to consumptive users and water exporters. This case study illustrates how water policy and allocation frameworks were designed assuming climatic stationarity, and that adapting water policy (or maintaining the status quo) affects which users bear the burden of climate change.

Water and the California economy

Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC) | May 17th, 2012

California’s economy can grow and prosper despite droughts and water shortages caused by a changing climate—but only if threats to the water system are addressed now.

California’s economy can grow and prosper despite droughts and water shortages caused by a changing climate—but only if threats to the water system are addressed now. So far, innovative water management has supported the needs of a growing population but serious concerns remain, including water supply reliability and declining groundwater basins.

Water and the COVID-19 Pandemic Impacts on Municipal Water Demand

Pacific Institute | July 2nd, 2020