The PA Municipal Authorities Association this week wrote to members of the Senate expressing its opposition to the Senate Bill 994 (Vogel-R-Beaver) nutrient reduction proposal saying it does not have a funding source to make the program work.

PMAA joins the Chesapeake Bay Foundation-PA and other groups opposing the legislation.

The text of the letter follows--

“The Pennsylvania Municipal Authorities Association (PMAA), at their recent annual conference, took a position opposing the current version of SB 994, P.N. 1209.  The biggest concern expressed by our members with SB 994 was the lack of a delineated funding source.

“In addition, they expressed concern over potential inequity if a funding source such as a “flush tax” would be implemented (as noted below).  Finally, they felt a minimum 10-year provision of credits from a sewage treatment plant would be too long, instead preferring a 3-5 year term. 

“PMAA represents over 720 authorities in Pennsylvania providing sewage treatment, drinking water, solid waste disposal, recycling and other services to over six million citizens.  In particular, PMAA represents many sewer authorities that invested millions of dollars to comply with EPA and DEP requirement to reduce nutrients to the Chesapeake Bay.

“In total, authorities and municipally-owned sewer plants are estimated to spend $1.4 billion to meet their mandated nutrient reductions for the Bay.

“Given the huge sums of money already invested by sewer authorities for Bay mandates, there is a valid concern that funding for this new program may eventually be authorized in a manner similar to a “flush tax.”  In that scenario, citizens would pay an additional fee on their sewer or water bill to underwrite the program.  In many cases these would be the same citizens already paying higher sewer bills to help clean the Bay.

“The inequity of this option has led our members to suggest that a more balanced approach to funding be negotiated and identified in the bill. 

“PMAA will continue to work with EPA, DEP, and other partners to preserve the Chesapeake Bay.”

A copy of the letter is available online.

Chesapeake Bay Foundation-PA

The Chesapeake Bay Foundation Pennsylvania Office has also expressed its opposition to Senate Bill 944 saying fundamental flaws in the bill have not been addressed.  In a letter to all members of the Senate in June, CBF-PA pointed out several fundamental problems--

-- Is Neither Cost-Effective nor Affordable: The alternative system proposed in this bill preferentially favors expensive, capital-intensive nutrient reduction technologies. Currently, DEP and PennVEST offer certified nutrient credits through a market-based online exchange and auction.

The most recent auction in March 2013, nitrogen credits were sold for $2.98 to $3.05 per credit. The technology promoted by Senate Bill 944 is not cost competitive unless the credits are sold at $8 to $10 per credit, its promoters have said.

A December 2012 report by the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee estimated the sustainable cost per credit for this technology at $11 per credit. And while the legislation doesn’t mandate the purchase of more expensive reductions, it threatens to manipulate the market to do so.

The choice is clear—$3 per pound of real certified nutrient credits or $11 per pound of future nutrient reduction?

-- Does Not Create Real, Marketable Credits: Senate Bill 994 does not require the “TMDL parameter credit” to meet the existing regulatory standards under 25 Pa. Code § 96.8 for a marketable nutrient credit and are inconsistent with USEPA nutrient trading guidance.

As a result, any reductions should be considered as imitation credits that have no real market value to the Commonwealth. They cannot be sold to community sewage treatment plants or developers because the reductions cannot be used as "credits" or "offsets" in meeting nitrogen or phosphorus NPDES discharge limits. And, they cannot be sold by the state to help offset the cost of this program which has no funding source.

-- Leaves Unnecessary Risk with Farmers: Family farmers will see no benefits from this bill. Under current state regulations, farmers in Pennsylvania have to meet basic regulatory compliance measures. In particular, farmers who till (plow) land and/or have an identifiable Animal Heavy Use Area disturbing more than 5,000 sq. ft., are obligated to have an erosion and sedimentation plan under Chapter 102 (Erosion & Sedimentation).

This bill promotes an approach that will not help farmers to come into compliance with existing Pennsylvania law. Importantly, farmers who ship manure to a large-scale treatment facility under this bill are not protected from shouldering the burden of transportation costs or tipping fees. And treatment facilities are not obligated to allocate any revenue with participating farmers.

With increased oversight by U.S. EPA and DEP, farmers statewide and in particular within the Chesapeake Bay watershed need all the financial and technical assistance they can get to achieve and maintain compliance.

-- Leaves Unnecessary Risk with the Commonwealth: By not funding this program, Senate Bill 994 could use unidentified sources of taxpayer money to subsidize the technologies promoted in this bill, although proposed amendments restrict funding from being taken from already appropriated conservation programs or monies to be used to reduce nutrients or sediments but does not list those by name.

Pennsylvania is particularly at risk by being forced to purchase so-called credits of pollution reductions under the promise they will occur years in the future. This threatens to derail detailed and regulatory timelines and milestones which require real and incremental reductions in pollution to meet Bay requirements.

If these reductions do not occur, the Commonwealth is at risk for "backstops" that include, but is not limited to, stricter permit limits for sewage treatment plants, expansion of the number of farms and communities regulated by DEP and EPA, the denial of certain new construction permits, and the withholding of water quality-related funding from the federal government.

Truly affordable Bay solutions are already being implemented to help farmers meet regulatory requirements and improve their bottom line. Communities and farmers are investing in improvement projects which drive revitalization, beautification, and meet a number of regulatory requirements for clean water, including local TMDLs and the Bay TMDL.

While technology has a role, long-term public investment in economically questionable private enterprises is not a benefit to the taxpayers of Pennsylvania. New technology can currently enter into a nutrient trading marketplace which allows verified credits to be purchased on the open market.

Given limited resources and thousands of Pennsylvania impaired streams, we believe that emphasis on established clean water programs and pollution reduction practices that provide a large number of additional benefits—like reduced flooding, drinking water protection and improvement, improved herd health, and community revitalization—must be the Commonwealth’s core focus.

Click Here for more background.

Status Of Chesapeake Bay Cleanup

The Chesapeake Bay Foundation PA Office just released a series of fact sheets outlining the water quality problems and solutions being implemented in the Pennsylvania portion of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed--

-- A Primer On Pollutants Of Concern-- outlines the contributions Pennsylvania’s portion of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed makes to nitrogen, phosphorus and sediment pollution to the Bay.

-- Nearly 20,000 Miles Of PA Streams Are Polluted-- details the fact there are thousands of stream miles and hundreds of acres of lakes all across Pennsylvania that are considered “impaired” under the federal Clean Water Act that either have or will require what is known as a Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL).

-- Cost Effective Solutions Are Known, Documented For The Chesapeake Bay-- notes cost effective pollution solutions have already made significant progress in reducing pollution going to the Bay, particularly in Pennsylvania.

In addition, Dr. Beth McGee, Senior Water Quality Scientist at CBF, this week gave a PowerPoint presentation on the status of the Chesapeake Bay Cleanup in Pennsylvania and the challenges that remain.

10/21/2013