• Home
  • Confluence Blog

Confluence News Blog

  • July 27, 2020 10:46 AM | Adeline Fox (Administrator)

    By Christine Arbogast and Patrick O’Toole

    The coronavirus crisis reminds those of us in the water world of the importance of the systems which sustain us.

    Our water systems are among the very most important. The need for effective planning, preparation and implementation of water policy and infrastructure is critical, as we manage the engines which drive our economy, our health and our safety. It is most certainly a primary focus of the Western water community, which develops and manages the water infrastructure so critical to every individual and every economic sector.

    Our organizations and other industry leaders have long anticipated the potential crisis if we fail to invest soon in the aging systems which store and deliver water for safe drinking, for agriculture production and for industry. We will face another crisis if we fail to invest in new water storage infrastructure to save water for use in dry years. Years of recurring drought conditions in Western states, and the economic and human impacts of drought, require us to look ahead.

    But as we have seen in the health crisis of the spring of 2020, anticipation on paper isn’t enough. We must prepare, and we must invest.

    An investment in water infrastructure is a powerful investment in our economy, our communities and our health. Since 1902, the investment in Bureau of Reclamation infrastructure has been about $20 billion. Annually, this infrastructure spurs $62 billion in direct and associated economic activity. Between 2010 and 2013, every dollar invested in Army Corps of Engineers civil works generated sixteen dollars in economic benefits. Every year, our economy recoups its investment in water infrastructure multiple times over.

    For the 17 Western states studied in a 2015 Family Farm Alliance economic report, the total household income impacts from irrigated agriculture, associated service industries, and food processing sectors was $172 billion annually. Irrigated farming and ranching is a huge economic driver in the West, particularly in rural communities. However, this economic force would virtually disappear, along with the rural American communities dependent on farming and ranching, if the water infrastructure that supports it crumbles.

    Infrastructure needs offer an immediate and long-lasting way to stimulate our deeply troubled economy. We saw the positive impact of such investment after the recession of 2008.

    Across the West, there are hundreds of small non-federal dams which store water for domestic and irrigation purposes in rural areas. Many are under state restrictions and cannot store water to capacity because they are not safe. In Colorado, for instance, the cost of many of these dam repairs is $1-3 million each. That infrastructure investment is one-time and would not require ongoing federal cost.

    Let’s do it.

    Many existing storage facilities, federally owned and provider owned, could easily be expanded to store more water when the semi-arid West is blessed with good precipitation. Enlarging existing facilities has a more immediate impact on supplies, is an affordable way to expand supplies, and enjoys significant public support.

    Let’s do it.

    We’ve seen technologies develop which increase the efficiency of water delivery for both domestic and irrigation purposes. Increasing the manufacture of these technologies and providing incentive for applying them to municipal water systems and agricultural production can conserve finite water resources. In this way, they can be made available in drought periods and can be used for economic development across the board.

    Let’s do it.

    And we know that, while we are unlikely to building another Hoover or Grand Coulee Dam, the long term value of developing more storage is certain. It must be done in an environmentally sensitive and strategic way. And it must be done cooperatively between the federal, state and local water agencies which ensure the water supply which absolutely is our lifeblood.

    Crisis—be it a health crisis, a drought crisis, a flood crisis—compels us to work together.

    Partnerships are a critical piece of infrastructure investment, and can reach beyond the three levels of government to private sector involvement as well. Policies on infrastructure investment would be most effective if a cooperative development and management structure were a requirement.

    The infrastructure investment conversation has been loud and clear in recent years. But the actual infrastructure investment has not been made.

    The time is now. Let’s do it.

    We understand the fiscal difficulty of a large infrastructure stimulus package. But we also understand the historical proof of its effectiveness

    If indeed our leaders are unable to reach consensus on a large-scale infrastructure investment plan, we have other specific opportunities for the Administration and Congress to invest in Western water infrastructure. Bills like S. 1932 the Drought Resiliency and Water Supply Infrastructure Act, and S. 2044 the Water Supply Infrastructure Rehabilitation and Utilization Act address needs long anticipated by Western water resource managers. The biannual Water Resources Development Act, currently teed up in the House and the Senate, affords the opportunity to anticipate and act on Western water needs if it includes a title for Bureau of Reclamation programs and projects, as it has in recent years.

    The importance of anticipating a potential crisis, and effectively preparing for it with solid planning and investment, can mitigate or even avert the crisis. We in Western water have done that. The federal government needs to be our partner.

    Let’s do it.

    Christine Arbogast is President of the National Water Resources Association, which represents state water associations, irrigation districts, municipal water providers, end water users and their collective interests in the management of irrigation and municipal water supplies throughout the Western U.S. and portions of the South.

    Patrick O’Toole, a cattle and sheep rancher from Wyoming, is President of the Family Farm Alliance, which advocates for family farmers, ranchers, irrigation districts, and allied industries in sixteen Western states. The Alliance is focused on one mission – to ensure the availability of reliable, affordable irrigation water supplies to Western farmers and ranchers.

    The NWRA and the Alliance are organizations that represent the water users that are the cornerstone of western communities and their economies.

  • April 29, 2020 10:44 AM | Adeline Fox (Administrator)

    By Denis Qualls, Texas Water Day Planning Committee 

    Although Texas Water Day was canceled this year, providing information to the Texas Congressional Delegation and other federal interests regarding current, statewide issues affecting water resources in Texas is important. With the position papers prepared and consolidated, TWCA’s Priority Federal Issues - 2020 will be sent to both Texas Senators and each of Texas’ 36 Representatives. This year, TWCA members prepared ten issue papers. These issues were broken up into four categories: Key Issues, Continuing Issues, Emerging Issues, and Budget Issues. Below is a brief summary of this year’s issues. Although the following are brief summaries, I encourage everyone to take a few minutes to read the issue papers and their associated requests.

    Key Issues:

    • Clean Water Act: Improve Certainty and Efficiency in 404 Permitting. The Clean Water Act (CWA) Section 404 permitting process is lengthy, increases costs, and delays construction for needed projects. Additionally, through CWA Section 404, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) holds veto authority over water supply projects that can be used anytime (i.e. before a 404-permit application is filed through after a 404 permit is issued).

    • Flood Policy: Expand Collaborative Approaches to Flood Mitigation. Flooding occurs throughout the state and presents risks to public safety and economic growth. Federal funding for flood management while the needs in our communities have increased, funding has decreased and programs have grown more complex requiring more extensive local state and federal coordination.

    • Protected Species and Implementation of the Endangered Species Act. A species can be listed as endangered or threatened simply based on a lack of knowledge. Any listing of a species can have significant impacts on water rights; ongoing water, wastewater and hydroelectric operations; and the construction of new projects. It is imperative that sound science be the basis of a listing.

    • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Water Supply Rule. On March 23, 2020, the USACE withdrew the proposed Water Supply Rule, which TWCA supports. However, the USACE intends to generate policy on the topics they previously attempted to address through the Water Supply Rule. TWCA continues to closely monitor USACE policies, guidelines and rules.

    Continuing Issues

    • Invasive Species: Lacey Act – Limiting Liability on Interstate Water Transfers. The Lacey Act restricts interstate water transfers if those waters contain invasive aquatic species. Existing water supplies and future water management strategies that involve interstate transfers of water can be significantly impacted.

    • Waters of the U.S. (WOTUS) / Navigable Waters Protection Rule. On January 23, 2020, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of the Army finalized the Navigable Waters Protection Rule to define “waters of the United States” (WOTUS). The Navigable Waters Protection Rule more clearly identifies water bodies included and excluded from federal jurisdiction. TWCA supports this final rule and will closely monitor its implementation to ensure that the rule is applied as intended.

    • USACE Reallocation of Storage. Many Texas sponsors of existing multi-purpose USACE reservoirs are looking to increase available water supply storage through reallocation of storage from current purposes (mainly flood control). However, changes in approval and inadequate funding slow the completion of reallocation studies.

    Emerging Issue

    • Per- and Poly-fluoroalkyl Substances (PFAS). PFAS are a class of chemical compounds found in cookware, clothing, packaging, and firefighting foams that are not natural, but are found everywhere in the environment. The regulatory environment surrounding PFAS is rapidly evolving. If treatment standards are legislated and not established based on sound science water and wastewater management in Texas.

    Budget Issues

    • United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Streamflow Network Funding and Modernization. The USGS provides accurate and reliable information that assists with the management of water supply and helps inform responses to natural disasters. Over the years Federal funding for USGS Cooperative Agreements have decreased, forcing local partners to either increase their share or discontinue gauges. Additionally, the USGS’ stream gaging network is based on outdated technology and in need of modernization.

    • United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Budget. Significant proposed budget cuts to USACE will impact the agency’s ability to meet the growing maintenance needs of its aging infrastructure in Texas, and potentially lead to additional dam safety issues.

    • U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Budget – Establishing a Strong Role in Texas. USBR programs that award funds to legacy projects, as opposed to competitive grant programs create inequities in program funding. The funding allocation for Texas is less than 1% of USBR’s budget despite the need for funds for water storage and delivery projects in Texas.



  • April 16, 2020 10:40 AM | Adeline Fox (Administrator)

    By Jeremy Wade, Loss Control Consultant, TWCARMF

    With the suddenness of the transition from working in the office to working from home due to the COVID-19 pandemic, many employers were unable to ensure employees had the best ergonomic set-up at home. Most employees took their laptops home; however, that was the only equipment they took with them. For an ideal ergonomic set-up at home you need a docking station, at least one monitor, an ergonomic office chair, a keyboard and a mouse.For many of you, your monitor is the laptop screen, the keyboard and mouse are on the laptop, and your office chair is at the kitchen table.It is okay if you do not have all the luxuries of your office at home. We are here to provide you with some best practices to help manage your work area at home until you can get back to the office.

    Keep your Work in Front of You.The most important thing I look for when conducting ergonomic assessments is if the employee is keeping all work in front of him/her. This is the most common mistake committed by employees regarding office ergonomics and is a major cause of muscle aches and strains. Monitors to the side and writing on a piece of paper to the left or right of the keyboard are the most prevalent culprits. If your work is off to the side, even a little, you will twist or turn in your chair to perform the task. That twist or turn causes your muscles to engage and eventually fatigue. When that happens, your muscles are susceptible to a strain or sprain.The key here is to keep everything in front of you. If you must write things down, move the keyboard to the side and have the notepad directly in front of you.Keep your monitor or laptop directly in front of you with the top even with your eyes. If you do not have a monitor and are using just the laptop, you will want to use boxes or books to raise it up to eye level. However, this now creates a problem with the keyboard and mouse.I suggest using or purchasing an external keyboard and mouse. 

    Maintain Good Posture.While working from home, especially from a laptop, you will be tempted to work from the comforts of your living room furniture. Another main contributor to muscle aches and strains is poor posture and working from the couch will create just that. Ideally you want to sit in an ergonomic chair but most of you will not have one at home. That’s okay. If you do not have an ergonomic chair, a table chair will work just fine, if you maintain a few ergonomic basics. These basics apply to any type of chair you sit in.First, you want to sit with your hips and knees at 90° angles or greater. If you are leaning forward in your chair, the angle of your hips will be less than 90° and you will be putting a strain on your lower back.Sitting with your knees bent at an angle of less than 90° will slow blood flow to your lower legs. Placing your feet flat on the floor or footrest will help maintain a proper angle.Second, sit with your shoulders and upper back against the chair. If sitting in a non-ergonomic chair, place a small pillow or folded up towel between the chair and your lower back. This will give you lumbar support. Last, you want to maintain a straight line with your torso ;shoulders above or slightly behind your hips and head in midline with your shoulders.

    Avoid Reaching.Now that you are sitting properly and keeping work in front of you, you want to avoid reaching.The most commonly happens when using the keyboard and mouse. Ideally, you want to sit as described above along with your elbows by your ribs. This next part may require adjustments, but you want to have your arm resting on the desk or table about an inch or two behind the wrist. With this placement, the keyboard and mouse should be close to the edge of the table or desk. You do not want your arm fully extended to use either items. This will cause the muscles to stretch and tighten. Over time they will fatigue and eventually lead to aches and strains. This is when you will experience neck and shoulder discomfort.The same applies to any other item you use often while working from home. If you have to reach, move it closer to you.

    Take Breaks and Stretch. Before you even start your day of working from home, you want to stretch. There are plenty of examples to be found through a Google search. You want to focus on your shoulders, neck and back. In addition to stretching to start your day, you will want to take periodic breaks. Do not sit in front of the computer all day long. Get up. Walk around. Relax on the couch for a little while, just not too long. During these breaks, stretch again. Get the blood flowing. You also need to exercise your eyes. Focus your gaze on items at different depths. The breaks and stretching will help keep your muscles loose and less susceptible to a strain or sprain.

    We have had to manage a lot of adjustment due to the COVID-19 pandemic, especially with work. Hopefully these quick hitting best practices will help you stay comfortable while you work from home at your improvised desk. Have a minimalist mindset when it comes to clutter, cords/cables and other items around your desk that can trip you up. Hang in there and when this is all over you can carry these best practices back to the luxuries of our office. 

    For more information regarding the Texas Water Conservation Association Risk Management Fund (TWCARMF) and its programs and services, please visit www.twcarmf.org or contact Micheon Balmer, Director of Pool Management, at (512) 427-2312.

  • April 09, 2020 10:35 AM | Adeline Fox (Administrator)

    By Sarah Kirkle

    TWCA This week TWCA staff surveyed members to better understand how organizations are implementing telework and personal protective equipment (PPE) protocols. We received 52 responses, 73% of which were government organizations. To obtain the raw data and full comments, contact Sarah Kirkle.

    All Respondents

    1. Which of the following best describes your type of organization:

    a. Government entity- 38

    b. Private business- 12


    2. Is your organization currently utilizing telecommuting or work from home?


    3. If yes for some staff, which staff must report to an office?

    a. Operational or field staff- 10

    b. Non-operational or office staff- 0 

    c. Other– 9 The respondents requiring some staff have jobs that cannot be performed at home. Respondents indicated use of skeleton crews or staggered shifts to minimize exposure to staff.

    4. If yes for some staff or no in #1, please elaborate why: 

    a. Essential personnel work in the field- 23

    b. Lack of broadband or other technical ability to perform job at home- 0 

    c. Other– 5 These respondents indicated use of skeleton crews or staggered shifts to minimize exposure to staff.

    5. Has your organization instituted protocols requiring personal protective equipment(PPE), such as masks or gloves?

    a. Yes - 18

    b. No – 32

    6. If yes, have you required masks for:

    a. Field staff- 9

    b. Office staff- 2

    c. All staff– 6


    7. If yes have you required gloves for:

    a. Operational or field staff- 9

    b. Non-operational or office staff- 3

    c. All staff– 2

    8. Has your organization had trouble obtaining PPE (masks or gloves)?

    a. Yes – 15

    b. No – 21

    c. Other -13These respondents indicated PPE is not necessary for the job or PPE is a little difficult to obtain but the organizations have been resourceful.

    For those struggling to obtain PPE, masks are by far the most difficult to obtain, followed by gloves and wipes.


    9. Does your organization have guidance or plans related to PPE use:

    a. in the retail space with utility and lab customers where in person contact and exchange of materials occur at an administrative and/or operations facility? 7

    b. internally where social distancing cannot be operationally achieved? 8

    c. for operations employees who may interact with the public in the field (engineering, inspectors, meter reader, etc)? 21

    Organizations’ overall approaches largely stick to CDC guidelines for social distancing, use of PPE, and minimizing interactions with the public and other employees, and disinfecting offices or shared spaces.

    Only Government Organizations

    1. Is your organization currently utilizing telecommuting or work from home?

    a. Yes, for all staff – 12

    b. Yes, for some staff - 17

    c. No - 9


    2. If yes for some staff, which staff must report to an office?

    a. Operational or field staff- 10

    b. Non-operational or office staff- 0

    c. Other- 7

    3. Follow up if yes for some staff or no in #1 (Multiple choice): Please elaborate why: 

    a. Essential personnel work in the field- 21

    b. Lack of broadband or other technical ability to perform job at home- 0 

    c. Other (comment box)- 3

    4. Has your organization instituted protocols requiring personal protective equipment (PPE), such as masks or gloves?

    a. Yes - 15

    b. No – 22


    5. If yes, have you required masks for:

    a. Field staff- 6

    b. Office staff- 2

    c. All staff– 6


    6. If yes have you required gloves for:

    a. Operational or field staff- 7

    b. Non-operational or office staff- 2

    c. All staff– 2


    7. Has your organization had trouble obtaining PPE (masks or gloves)?

    a. Yes – 14

    b. No – 16

    c. Other -6

    8. Does your organization have guidance or plans related to PPE use:

    a. in the retail space with utility and lab customers where in person contact and exchange of materials occur at an administrative and/or operations facility? 6

    b. internally where social distancing cannot be operationally achieved? 7

    c. for operations employees who may interact with the public in the field (engineering inspectors, meter reader, etc)? 15

  • April 08, 2020 10:33 AM | Adeline Fox (Administrator)


    1. Be on time – or early if the technology is new to you. This rule applies to any meeting. But with video conferences, being prepared to start the discussion at the designated time means already knowing how to use the features of the video conference platform (like finding the mute button!).

    2. Designate a host and test your technology. Manage your meeting by making sure your host is familiar with the technology platform (for example: understanding how to mute those who will not mute themselves or kick out an inappropriate attendee). If you are running a big or important meeting for the first time, test your technology and work out the kinks.

    3. Use an agenda. Another basic meeting management tip applies to videoconferences as well - prioritize your most important items and follow an agenda so everyone can keep up with the discussion.

    4. Mute your phone unless you are speaking to eliminate background noise.

    5. Be courteous to others. Try to avoid talking over someone or having side conversations.

    6. Speak loud and clear for all to hear.

    7. Adjust your visual. Find a neutral background with enough warm light to see your face. Set the camera or laptop an appropriate distance from your face, typically showing your head and shoulders.

    8. Make materials available. Send presentations ahead of time or if you’re presenting by sharing your screen, make sure your presentation is open and ready to share.

    9. Stay professional. Conduct yourself as you would during an in-person meeting. Dress appropriately, don’t slouch in your chair, and cut out background distractions as much as possible.

    10. Scared of being “zoom-bombed?” Add a password to your videoconference to keep outsiders from accidentally joining your call.

  • March 26, 2020 10:27 AM | Adeline Fox (Administrator)

    By Sarah Kirkle, TWCA

    Background. In 1944, the U.S. and Mexico signed a treaty governing the distribution of water that flows in the Rio Grande from Fort Quitman, Texas to the Gulf of Mexico. Under the treaty, the U.S. is allotted one-third of the water flow reaching the main channel of the Rio Grande from six tributaries: the Conchos, San Diego, San Rodrigo, Escondido, and Salado Rivers and the Las Vacas Arroyo. This one-third portion must be at least 350,000 acre-feet per year (1,750,000 acre-feet total) as an average amount in cycles of five consecutive years.

    The current five-year cycle began onOctober 25, 2015, and will conclude onOctober 24, 2020. The five-year cycle can be reset at any point that the U.S. conservation capacities in both international reservoirs (Amistad and Falcon)are filled with waters belonging to the U.S. Mexico has exceptions from the water delivery requirements of the treaty for extraordinary drought or an accident to their hydraulic system.

    The U.S. International Boundary and Water Commission (USIBWC) is the governmental entity responsible for overseeing, enforcing, and settling any differences in application of the various boundary and water treaties between the U.S.and Mexico. 

    Current Water Shortage. As of early March, Mexico has delivered 1,275,889 acre-feet (73%) of 1,750,000 acre-feet allotted to the U.S. in the five-year cycle, according to TCEQ. Mexico has another six months to make up the deficit of 474,111 acre-feet. Mexico is not experiencing extraordinary drought or hydraulic accidents that would prevent it from delivering on its water obligations to the U.S.

    Recent Events. As the end of the five-year cycle nears, U.S. IBWC Commissioner Jayne Harkins has begun discussions with Mexico about the water deficit. While Mexico informally agreed in a December 2019 meeting to provide 180,000 acre-feet to the U.S. by the end of February, Mexico delivered less than 16,000 acre-feet, well below the agreement. Last week, as Mexican officials began to release water to the U.S., Mexican farmers protested out of fear of not having enough water for their own crops. Mexico halted the water releases in response to the protests. This is not the first five-year cycle in which Mexico has fallen into a deficit in delivering water to the U.S. In fact, the preceding five-year cycle ended in a deficit. When a five-year cycle ends in a deficit, the deficiency must be made up in the following five-year cycle, in addition to water required for delivery in that cycle. Should Mexico fail to deliver the balance of the minimum water contribution to the U.S. by October 24, it would again be in violation of the treaty.

    Impacts. Stakeholders are concerned about the impact the water shortage has on the range of water users in the Lower Rio Grande Valley, from municipal drinking water to farming operations, as well as the continued violation of the treaty and what that means for future cycles. As a large portion of the Lower Rio Grande Valley is already experiencing drought, the impacts of this water shortage could be exacerbated through the coming months if drought continues.

    Next Steps. USIBWC will continue to monitor Mexico's actions and negotiate to satisfy Mexico's water obligations to the U.S. by the October deadline.

    Related: See USIBWC Commissioner Jayne Harkins’ presentation from the March 2020 TWCA Annual Convention.


  • March 20, 2020 10:12 AM | Adeline Fox (Administrator)

    By Sarah Kirkle, TWCA

    Background. The North Texas Municipal Water District (NTMWD) provides water, wastewater, and solid waste services to 13 member cities who each appoint members to NTMWD’s governing board.  In December 2016, four of NTMWD’s member cities filed a petition with the Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC), alleging that NTMWD’s 2017 wholesale water rates were unreasonably preferential, prejudicial, and discriminatory. PUC is the state agency with jurisdiction to adjudicate appeals of wholesale water and wastewater rates.

    Under the District’s long-standing contract, member cities are charged costs to cover the infrastructure capacity and water to support the highest annual demand of each city.  Petitioners argue that the contract forces cities to pay for water they do not take, disincentivizing conservation.  These so-called “take-or-pay” contracts form the backbone for many regional water system financing arrangements. Additionally, the term “take-or-pay” is a misnomer, in that customers are actually paying for reserved storage of water, treatment, and delivery infrastructure costs that exist regardless of the amount of water or capacity used.

    The District’s non-petitioning cities argue that because each city’s charges are based on their highest annual demand, cities have a very strong incentive to conserve and keep their annual demand as low as possible. All parties acknowledge that the core dispute centers around how to allocate District costs among member cities. All 13 cities must agree to any contract change, and attempts to mediate a settlement have been unsuccessful to date.

    Findings. On February 27, 2020, PUC found NTMWD’s contracted wholesale water rates adverse to the public interest, but has yet to outline the basis for its decision.

    Significance. This case is significant because the state has never found a wholesale water rate adverse to the public interest since a 1994 major retooling of the process in response to a court decision in Texas Water Commission v. City of Fort Worth. In Fort Worth, the court found that the Texas Constitution’s prohibition against state impairment of contracts restricts the state’s exercise of jurisdiction over wholesale rates, and that rates set by contracts can only be reviewed where the public interest requires it.  In other words, the Texas Constitution sets a high bar for the state to interfere with a contract because such interference undermines agreements that two or more willing, sophisticated parties knowingly entered.  As such, the PUC’s decision to interfere in NTMWD’s contract sets a new and concerning precedent.

    Next Steps. PUC reviews wholesale water rates in a two-step process: 

    • Phase 1 determines whether wholesale rates are adverse to the public interest, and 
    • Phase 2, which occurs only if a rate is determined to be adverse to the public interest, determines the cost of service to inform what the wholesale rate should be.

    NTMWD’s case is now moving into phase 2, the cost-of-service hearing. PUC asked interested parties to submit a list of issues to be addressed in its order remanding the case to the State Office of Administrative Hearings(SOAH) for a cost-of-service hearing by March 13, 2020. The Commission did not place the item on its agenda for March 26 and has not yet indicated when it will hold further proceedings in the case.  

    TWCA Concerns. TWCA represents most - if not all - wholesale water suppliers in Texas.  The Association is concerned that the PUC’s recent decision in the NTMWD case threatens wholesale water providers’ ability to provide affordable water supplies to support a growing population and economy.  The case also sets a standard for PUC review that will likely create increased litigation, uncertainty in water planning, higher water costs, and potential impacts to the bond market.

    Impacts on Wholesale Contracts.  The PUC has yet to articulate its reasoning as to how NTMWD’s rates are adverse to the public interest, leaving uncertainty as to whether other wholesale water supplier contracts that are similarly structured to NTMWD’s are also at risk.

    Impacts to water supply planning and development. Increased litigation and unforeseen changes to contract provisions risks water developers being less likely to invest in long-term, regional, and non-conventional water projects. Stability is important for both buyers and sellers, as new water supplies can take decades to develop. 

    TWCA Action. Pursuant to Board authorization, TWCA submitted a letter brief to the PUC by its March 13th deadline to inform the list of issues as described above. TWCA’s recent brief, as well as its original amicus brief in response to SOAH’s May 2019 proposal for decision are posted on TWCA’s website.  

    The TWCA board also authorized TWCA President David Montagne to establish a PUC Rate Committee, chaired by TWCA Water Laws chairman Howard Slobodin. That committee will initially guide TWCA’s actions and comments related to the NTMWD case and then focus on interim legislative charges and potential legislation on these issues in preparation for next session.


TWCA

info@twca.org  I  (512) 472-7216

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software