Partnering to Success – Leveraging Opportunities and Addressing Challenges Together

Gary DarlingGeneral Manager, Delta Diablo

US Water Alliance One Water Leadership Summit Kansas City, Missouri

September 2014

• 200,000 residential and industrial customers • 2013 “Platinum 10” NACWA Award • 2012 CWEA Mid-Size Plant of the Year Award• One of CA’s largest industrial RW facilities

San Francisco

Delta Diablo

San Francisco

California DroughtFolsom Lake

Source: www.jpl.nasa.gov

Snow cover in the Sierra Nevada mountain range in California in January 2013 (left) and January 2014 (right), compared in this combination of NASA satellite photos. (Reuters/NASA))

San Francisco

Potential for Water ReuseSource: Wade Miller, WateReuse

• About 7% of municipal wastewater effluent in the U.S. is reclaimed and beneficially reused

• Israel reuses more than 70%

• Singapore reuses 30%, up from 15% in recent years

• Australia, now at 8%, has a national goal of 30% by 2015

~7.3% Reclaimed

Western Recycled Water Coalition

• 22 members

• Representing 3.8 million residents

• $38M federal funding secured

• 25 projects

• 120,000 AFY (acre-feet annually) – reliable, dry year yield

Western Recycled Water Coalition

Congressional Staff Request

• Members of Congress want to help the development of recycled water projects…however, any help needs to be more than 1 project or 1 region or 1 state

• Determine where and how many “real” recycled water projects are in development across the U.S.

• Collaboration among five associations for nationwide survey

October 2013 Responses to Recycled Water Survey Received from 33 States

Alaska Hawaii

Recycled Water Development Actively Occurring in 14 States

ArizonaCaliforniaColoradoFloridaIllinoisMissouriNevadaNew MexicoNorth CarolinaPennsylvaniaSouth CarolinaTexasVirginiaWashingtonAlaska Hawaii

92 Project Locations (Qualifier: likely, many projects missed)

See CA Map(Next Slide)

ArizonaCaliforniaColoradoFloridaIllinoisMissouriNevadaNew MexicoNorth CarolinaPennsylvaniaSouth CarolinaTexasVirginiaWashingtonAlaska Hawaii

65 Projects in California

890,000 AFY Being Developed(Qualifier: some projects did not report AFY, some a range)

564,315

1,000

3,500

206,021

7,100

5,500

NR

8,900

5,696

NR

7,137

66,390

11,200

1,120

ArizonaCaliforniaColoradoFloridaIllinoisMissouriNevadaNew MexicoNorth CarolinaPennsylvaniaSouth CarolinaTexasVirginiaWashingtonAlaska Hawaii

$6.4 Billion Total Project Costs(Qualifier: some projects reported a cost range)

Note: do not divide $6.4b by 890K AFY

$ 5.7B

$2M

$2M

$173M

$30M

$700K

$450K

$40M

$12M

$1M

$72.9M

$240M

$12M

$12.8M

ArizonaCaliforniaColoradoFloridaIllinoisMissouriNevadaNew MexicoNorth CarolinaPennsylvaniaSouth CarolinaTexasVirginiaWashingtonAlaska Hawaii

Project Funding

• REAL PROJECTS: Over $600 million spent to date on planned projects over the next 10 years

• How Much Funding Assistance is Needed to complete the $6.4b of projects??o Approximately $450 million Federal & State funding secured

to date• $380 M SRF Loans• $34 M Title XVI Grants• $4 M Other WaterSMART Grants• $3 M Other Federal Grants• $28 M Other State Grants

How Much Project Funding Needed???

• Respondents say that $2.8 Billion = Financial Support Needed

• 34% are “unlikely or definitely not” going to move forward without financial assistanceo 29 of those in Californiao Represents over 200 TAF of yield

What Percent Outside Funding is Needed??

• Agencies need ~50% State and/or Federal partnership in order to build recycled water projects.

o With no outside assistance new water systems can take over 40 years to pay down the cost of the new infrastructure so that the total operational costs will equal the cost of operating an existing system (breakeven period)

o 50% partnership allows for payback period of 20 years or less

o It’s very challenging for local governing bodies to invest in infrastructure with payback periods >20 years

Example of Funding Importance: Antioch Urban Landscape Project

6 miles of pipeline and 1.1 MG storage reservoir (total project cost ~$12 M)

Funding Scenarios Payback

1. No Federal/State partnerships, City pays all 43 years

2. Federal Title XVI (25% project costs) and State grants (25% project costs) 22 years

3. Title XVI (25%), State grants (25%) and 50% ARRA Loan (0.077% interest) <1 year

$638/AF = No-project water supply cost (combination Delta water rights & blended raw & treated from local water district)

$306/AF = Post-project recycled water cost

Why Does a 50% Cost Share Makes Sense??

• Capitalizing on local agencies willingness to invest local dollars on at least a 1:1 basis for an investment that has state and federal benefits well beyond 20 years

• 1:1 partnership to move the wastewater industry towards tertiary treatment

• Reusing water supplies that have already been diverted through a fish screen

Why a 50% Cost Share Makes Sense (cont’d)

• Creating more reliable water supplies and regional self-reliance

• Recycled water projects are often less controversial than other supplemental supply development projects, resulting in quicker implementation

• Supporting jobs and economic development

Existing Federal Funding Programs

• Title XVI Challenges (from CVPIA)o Current ban on ear markso House Subcommittee on Water & Power NOT considering

new authorizations…NO ACTION IN 4 YEARSo USBR resistance to new projects

• Limited Use: WaterSmart Grantso Current interpretation = Title XVI construction cannot be

funded without authorization, which is currently not possible

o To date, appropriations have been very small dollars

Potential New Federal Funding Approaches • New: WIFIA (however, challenged with $20M

threshold, 49% limit in loans, and interest rate)o From survey, roughly a 50% split in projects at or over $20Mo Modify: RIFIA (WateReuse: modification of existing Bureau

of Reclamation loan program)

• Modify: CWSRF (NACWA: potential 30% set aside for technical innovation and resource recovery)

• Introduced: Water in the 21st Century (new grant & loan programs)

State Funding

• Previous: Propositions 13 and 50

• Existing: Proposition 84

• New: Water Bond (Prop. 1 on Ballot)

• Modified: CWSRF Loans (1% for 30 years)

Next Steps

• Educate – Many projects in development (65 projects in CA valued at $5.7B will provide over .5MAF), but need help to cross the finish line

• Speak as one voice – Continue to work together and invite others to join (ACWA, CASA, WateReuse, WRWC)

• Secure new funds – Identify and meet with electeds who would be most interested in supporting bond language or separate legislation to increase RW funding

• Solidify the “ask” – Come to an agreement amongst project developers (i.e. 50% of capital costs)

• Use language public understands : “purified” -v- “potable”• Could a Drought Emergency Declaration be an opportunity??

Change !!

Contact Me:

Gary Darlinggaryd@deltadiablo.org

(925) 756-1900

www.deltadiablo.org