Elaine Dietz MD Water Quality Financing Administration

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
creating a sustainable world The Chesapeake Bay TMDL A Policy Model for Nutrient Pollution Reductions James Noonan October.
Advertisements

Fayette County Wastewater Management Plan October 6, 2005.
Howard County, MD Phase II Watershed Implementation Plan October 6, 2011 Howard Saltzman Howard County Department of Public Works.
Wakulla County Sewer Project Eutaw Utilities Presentation April 7, 2011.
Stormwater Management/ MS4 Permitting International Municipal Lawyers Association 2014 Annual Conference Baltimore, Maryland Gene Tanaka
Berkeley Charleston Dorchester Water Quality Management (208) Program Vonie Gilreath, Regional Planner, BCDCOG Coastal Community Workshop February 7, 2006.
Community Water Supply Resources Implementation Strategy Lane Auditorium Albemarle County Office Building September 13, 2007.
COOPERATIVE Border To Border Broadband Conference February 5 th, 2014 Fiber to Homes, Farms and Businesses.
GALENA WASTEWATER TREATMENT UPGRADES Informational Presentation for the Sassafras River Association Presented by Ryan J. Rangel, PE April 23, 2015.
Fairview Township, York County May 28, 2015
Prioritization of Drinking Water and Wastewater Projects Project Application – Region 6.
Imagine the result Impact Study on MSD Rate Payers of Proposed Consolidation/Merger Phase II – Towns of Biltmore Forest, Montreat and Weaverville Presentation.
What’s New with the STATE REVOLVING FUND
1 NG KIH / I Way UK Analytics & Technologies Service Showcase 2015 August 6, 2015 Presented by Finance and Administration Cabinet Commonwealth of Kentucky.
MARYLAND CDBG RURAL INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING COLLABORATION.
1 “ Understanding the Local Role of Improving Water Quality” Virginia Association of Counties November 14, 2011 Virginia Association of Counties November.
Sustainable Infrastructure Presented by, Kristi Jackson Community SRF Specialist Department of Natural Resources.
Regional Grant Funding Coordination for Implementation of Watershed Management Plans Project Clean Water Summit July 15, 2004 David W. Gibson SDRWQCB
Project History Town of Newport Population: 550 Vermillion County Seat.
Department of the Environment Maryland’s Nutrient Trading Program Phase I- Trading between point sources and trading involving connecting on-site septic.
Chesapeake Bay Policy Committee Meeting Bay Program Water Quality Goals: Focus on Funding Presented to COG Board of Directors September 10, 2003.
Suzanne Trevena EPA Water Protection Division Chair Milestone Workgroup December 4,
Orange County Board of County Commissioners Update on USEPA Rulemaking for Numeric Nutrient Criteria Utilities Department January 26, 2010 Utilities Department.
Texas Water Development Board Financing Programs Presentation by Ignacio Madera, Jr. Office of Project Finance & Construction Assistance December 2, 2003.
Prepared for: Prepared by: Nutrient TMDLs and Their Effect on Dredging Operations in the Chesapeake Bay 24 October 2012 William J Rue- EA Engineering,
Preserving York County 2010 Municipal Educational Series January 28, 2010 Rick Keister, Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay Jake Romig, York County Circuit.
Metropolitan Council Environmental Services Proposed Capital Program and the 2010 Capital Budget Presented to The Environment Committee August.
Fayette County Wastewater Management Plan February 14, 2006.
Road Map to the Future: The Consolidation of Sewer Infrastructure in Rutherford County, NC November 16 th, 2015.
Maryland Association of Counties Conference August 12, 2009 Bob Koroncai USEPA Region III The Chesapeake Bay TMDL.
Caroline County Pilot Watershed Implementation Plan (WIP) Katheleen Freeman, AICP, Director Caroline County Department of Planning & Codes Leslie Grunden,
Using New Jersey’s State Revolving Fund to Reduce Combined Sewage Flooding in Camden City Andrew Kricun, P.E., BCEE Executive Director / Chief Engineer.
Presented by: Brenton McCloskey, MD DNR Associate Director for Restoration Financing and Policy Watershed Restoration in Maryland Helping Advance Restoration.
Showcase cost-saving practices, scale- appropriate technologies, and economic development opportunities and case studies from Idaho communities. Provide.
Progress and challenges of a transboundary cooperation Dr. Adam Kovacs International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR) Status of.
Mary Apostolico Potomac Watershed Manager. Current Authorities for TMDL Process Federal Clean Water Act, § 303(d) - TMDL List & TMDL Development §303(e)
Status Update on USEPA Compliance Sausalito City Council February 26, 2013 SMCSD Directors Raymond Gergus, President Bill Ring, Vice President Ann Arnott.
Integration in Urban Planning Processes Trikala
Intergovernmental Collaboration
New York’s Chesapeake Bay WIP
CONGAMOND ROAD ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT INFORMATIONAL MEETING

Sustainable Water Infrastructure through Innovative Financing
Financial Needs for Water and Wastewater Infrastructure (2015)
It’s The Final Countdown To The Mid-point Assessment:
SEWER SERVICE FEE RATE STRUCTURE ALTERNATIVE
Local Government Engagement and Communication Strategy
Local Government Engagement and Communication Strategy
Land Use Challenges In Maryland Today
Moving to Phase II: Watershed Implementation Plans
MACo Winter Conference
Building a Phase III WIP for Wastewater, Stormwater & Septic Systems
Funding from the Local Perspective
Watershed Implementation Plan
Funding from the Local Perspective
Creating Partnerships: EPA R8, NRCS, and States
Department of Environmental Quality
Local Partners Engagement and Communication Strategy
Commonwealth of Virginia
Funding at Record Levels
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
MDE’s Phase III WIP Inventory 2018 Fall Regional WIP Meetings
Maryland’s Phase III WIP Planning for 2025 and beyond
Approach to Setting Local Planning Goals
Water Quality Trading Advisory Committee MDA Headquarters
Jim Edward Acting Director Chesapeake Bay Program Office May 23,2018 EPA’s Draft Final Phase III WIP Expectations.
A progressive but still unfinished business
Watershed Restoration, Chesapeake Bay
EAST MESABI JOINT WATER SYSTEM A JOINT VENTURE BETWEEN THE east range communities REQUEST A $6 million request for State Funding in 2019 to build a comprehensive.
VIRGINIA MUNICIPAL LEAGUE OCTOBER 7, 2019
Presentation transcript:

Co-Funding to Encourage Regionalization - The Greensboro/Goldsboro MD Example Elaine Dietz MD Water Quality Financing Administration CIFA 2016 SRF National Workshop Thank you to Steve Grossman for inviting Maryland to participate in this discussion. Best wishes from Jag, who hopes everyone has a good conference and a great time at the social event this evening.

Regionalization is a good thing Regionalization is a good thing. Jim McGoff of Indiana Finance Authority made the case for regionalization case at last year’s conference, but it is not without its challenges - there are many pieces that need to come together to create a viable project, not the least of which is financing. Co-funding to make the project affordable to the communities involved is often the way to complete the picture. Today, I’ll share one example of a successful regionalization project in MD that the MWQFA is co-funding with CDBG and USDA.

Regionalization in Maryland Septic decommisions/sewer extensions to public WWTP Motivated by Chesapeake Bay TMDL to reduce nutrients from all sectors. Along with reductions in the point source and agriculture sectors, eliminating septics is an “easy” way to achieve required load limits: Septic  Secondary WWTP = 9.5 lb/yr TN reduction per EDU Septic  BNR WWTP = 17.1 lb/yr TN reduction per EDU Septic  ENR WWTP = 20.9 lb/yr TN reduction per EDU Scoring system revised to prioritize such projects. SRF and State’s Bay Restoration Fund (BRF) Grant So, “regionalization good” – in MD, regionalization projects are most often sewer extensions are being run to provide public sewer to communities currently on septic systems. MD TMDL assumes TN from standard septic system = 23.2 mg/l TN

Regionalization in Caroline Co MD Goldboro had 125 homes on marginal septic systems, which are blamed for high fecal coliform levels in a nearby recreational lake (since closed). + State under pressure to “do something” regarding the lake and failing septics. Caroline County required by Maryland’s Watershed Implementation Plan to find ways to reduce nutrients to meet the Chesapeake Bay TMDL (as were all MD counties). Possible for BRF to fund upgrade of minor WWTPs, like the one in Greensboro = REGIONAL WASTEWATER SYSTEM On Maryland’s Eastern Shore – Caroline Co is bounded on the east by Delaware. No County owned/operated WWTPs – either municipal WWTPs or septic systems. So what was going on here that motivated regionalization? (Review listed circumstances). The original concept was a “Northern County Regional Wastewater System” to include towns from Greensboro north thru Templeville. These are small (Greensboro is largest at pop = 2,000; down to Templeville = 120 pop) disadvantaged towns and ~$25M project was too expensive, so was scaled back to…

Greensboro Regional WW System Four phases ($15.89M): 1- Replace Greensboro WWTP w/new regional 0.332 MGD ENR WWTP in Greensboro with capacity for Greensboro and Goldsboro ($9.62M) 2 – Construct a new pump station and conveyance line to convey flow from old to new WWTP ($1.63M) 3 - Construct ~5 mile force main sized to convey flow from Goldsboro (and further north) to Greensboro ($1.75M) 4 – Construct a new collection/conveyance system in Goldsboro for flow to Greensboro WWTP $2.89M) Future – Possible WWTP expansion and new collection/conveyance to serve towns further north. Project is scaled back to the Greensboro Regional Wastewater System, which is focused on the southern area of the region (Greensboro and Goldboro), with Caroline County serving in a coordination role. Phase 1 and 2 will be completed in early 2017. Phase 3 should be completed by mid-2017. Phase 4 – including connection of homes on septics - is expected to be completed in Fall 2017.

Greensboro Regional WW System (cont) MDE Grant CDBG Grant USDA Grant USDA Loan Phase 1 $5.78M $0.91M $0.45M $2.48M Phase 2 --- $0.14M $0.56M $0.93M Phase 3 $1.5M $0.09M $0.16M Phase 4 $1.07M $1.53M $0.3M TOTAL $7.28M $2.21M $2.7M $3.71M Co-funding with package made mostly of grants made the project possible. Even so, rate ~$700 per home per year. MDE Grant was substantially BRF. Although MDE has SRF funding, none was used for this project. USDA was only lender, which was advantageous: 1) simpler for borrower to cut one loan with one agency and 2) USDA has 40-year terms.

Greensboro Regional WW System (cont) Regional system can be funded in phases, which is more feasible to the funding agencies (esp. regarding grant resources) Project results in nutrient reductions toward meeting Chesapeake Bay TMDL Replace secondary WWTP w/ENR = 12,785 lb/yr TN Connect 125 homes on septics to ENR = 2,612 lb/yr TN

“All for one and one for all” Cooperation is the key to success with projects such as these. This is the motto Greensboro, Goldsboro, and Caroline County adopted and it has served them well. Greensboro really went above and beyond: not only did they agree to serve Goldboro, the Town has assumed the entire project debt for entire project on its books (charging Goldboro as customer, with MOU mechanism whereby uncollected bills become responsibility of Goldsboro).