TWCA MID-YEAR CONFERENCE HORSESHOE BAY RESORT HOTEL JUNE 11-13, 2014 The Texas Water Conservation Association (TWCA) Mid-Year Conference is scheduled for June 11 -13, 2014 at Horseshoe Bay Resort Hotel. As usual at TWCA’s mid-year event, spouses and guests are invited to enjoy this popular Hill Country venue. TWCA’s Membership and Services Committee has put together an outstanding program that will begin Thursday afternoon, June 12th, and end at 12:15 pm on Friday, June 13th. Highlighting Thursday afternoon’s general session will be State Representative Jason Isaac and remarks by the Texas Water Development Board’s newest member, Kathleen Jackson. The session will also include a presentation on civil works infrastructure strategies by Robert Slockbower, Southwestern Division, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, a drought update, and a panel discussion on brackish groundwater development. On Friday morning, Richar d Hyde, Executive Director of the Texas Commission on
Environmental Quality (TCEQ) will provide an update on TCEQ activities. The session will also include a presentation on potable reuse, a Water Laws forecast, and a panel discussion on ethics to help with ethics requirements for both engineers and attorneys. The TWCA Risk Management Fund will sponsor the Thursday evening reception featuring an elaborate spread of heavy hors d’oeuvres in lieu of dinner to provide additional time for families and fellowship. A meeting of the Federal Affairs Committee has been scheduled to consider providing comments on the rules proposed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers defining the scope of waters protected under the Clean Water Act. WEDNESDAY ACTIVITIES The Association will offer 6 hours of investment training on Wednesday, June 11 th (8:00 am – noon and from 1:00 pm – 3:00 pm) toward the requirements of the Public Funds Investment Act. Investment officers who only need the 4 hour “refresher” course should attend the session from 8:00 a.m. – noon. New enrollees will have the additional 2 required hours from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. The University of North Texas, Center for Public Management, will present this course. Please confirm your attendance plans for this program. The 8TH Annual Jim Adams Memorial Golf Tournament will be held on Wednesday, June 11, 2014, beginning at noon at the Ram Rock Golf Course. The tournament will be a four (4) person Florida Scramble. The golf registration fee includes green fees, shared golf cart rental and a cooler of beverages on each cart. Players should check in at the golf course by 11:30 AM. A Welcome Reception will be held Wednesday evening in the Salons ABC F oyer , sponsor ed by Inter a on beh a lf of the Membership Services Committee. A full program will be available at the
NOTE: we have applied for 6.25 hours of CLE credits from the State bar. 2
Messa ge from the Presiden t
First of all, let me say it is truly an honor to be asked to serve as president of the Texas Water Conservation Association. I have been involved with TWCA for over 30 years and I know what an important organization it is when it comes to water in Texas. I am looking forward to working with the Association’s membership and staff over the next year to address water issues facing all of us and to advance the Association’s participation in the water affairs of the State of Texas. The Association has a strong track record and it is my intention to do what I can to continue in that regard. As seems to be the norm in the water resources business, we are faced with significant challenges, many of which the Association can be effective in addressing and helping to resolve. With the upcoming 84th Legislative session scheduled to convene in January, the Association has engaged a special Groundwater Committee to undertake a review of existing laws and regulations to formulate recommendations for consideration for legislative action. This committee, comprised of over 50 members of the Association, has organized into nine (9) sub-committees, which include: Permitting Terms and Renewals, Consistency of Groundwater Conservation District Rules Brackish Groundwater Aquifer Storage and Recovery Desired Future Condition Appeals Oil and Gas Contested Case Hearings and Administrative Procedures Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation/ Water Well Drillers Modeled Available Groundwater/Regional Water Planning Groups Clean-up The subcommittees are working diligently and the Committee as a whole has convened several times. The Association appreciates the leadership and efforts of this committee. The TWCA Board anticipates that they will have recommendations to be considered at the meeting of the Board during the Fall Conference in October. With the passage of Proposition 6 last fall and the transfer of $2 billion from the Rainy Day Fund to the State Water Implementation Fund
Robert J. Brandes, TWCA President for Texas (SWIFT), the availability of significant affordable State funding for water development and conservation projects is rapidly becoming a reality. The Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) is on schedule to produce its rules for implementing the SWIFT program later this year, with actual funding for new water projects likely to be available by mid-2015. The TWDB has conducted several meetings across the State with the stakeholders and interested parties to develop the proposed rules for the program. Tom Ray, Chair, TWCA Federal Affairs Committee, has established a Task Force of this Committee to help formulate TWCA comments on the proposed rule that will revise the definition of “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS) under the Clean Water Act. The Task Force will help in a number of ways, but principally to: 1) Review comments from other water supply/ quality associations and agencies on the WOTUS and identify comments or positions that would be appropriate for TWCA consideration; 2) Help draft or review a draft TWCA comment letter that will be presented for further consideration at the June 12th Federal Affairs Committee meeting during the Mid-Year Conference at Horseshoe Bay; and, importantly, 3) Provide examples and help solicit examples from other TWCA members on how the WOTUS rule will impact Texas water agencies. The TWCA Water Quality Committee has recommended and the Board has approved establishing a sub-committee relative to native mussels in Texas waters. The committee will develop recommendations on how to compile data 3
Continued on page 4
Presidentâ€™s Message Continued from page 3 being collected by TWCA members as part of the process being undertaken by the Texas Parks & Wildlife Department (TPWD) for the designation of endangered native mussels. The concerns are twofold: (1) TPWD requiring mussel surveys on projects impacting aquatic habitat, and (2) the potential listing of certain native mussels as endangered species on the federal Endangered Species Act list. The Association also is undertaking a review of the TWCA Bylaws to ensure that they reflect the current needs and activities of the Association. A committee of members representing a broad spectrum of interests is being appointed to undertake this task and to develop recommendations for consideration by the Board. We look forward to our committeesâ€™ continued work and the products of their endeavors. As I noted above, we are faced with many challenges in the water arena, and I am confident the Association will be effective in addressing these challenges through our collective efforts. As president, I look forward to being a part of that process.
Welcom e to the Horseshoe Ba y Resort TWCA 2014 MID-YEAR CONFERENCE
MARK YOUR CALENDAR TWCA 2014 Fall Conference October 15-17, 2014 Wyndham San Antonio Riverwalk Hotel TWCA 2015 Annual Convention |March 4-6, 2015 Sheraton Austin Hotel at the Capitol 4
SWIFT and SWIRFT Rules
at the Texas Water Development Board By Todd Chenoweth
interest in the excess capacity of the project. The financing can be with incremental repurchase terms, or repurchase of principal and interest with the ultimate repurchase of the entire state interest in the facility using a simple interest calculation, or a combination of these two methods. Under the legislation, not less than 10% of the funding is to go towards rural communities and agricultural water conservation. Not less than 20% of the funding is to go towards water conservation and reuse projects. Funding for those categories can exceed those percentages. The Board often uses the expression that the percentages are a floor and not a ceiling in explaining our understanding of the statute. By law the SWIFT monies are invested by the Texas Treasury Safekeeping Trust Company, an entity under the control of the State Comptroller, until the monies are needed to support a particular financing. The TWDB has been working diligently to develop proposed rules to administer the SWIFT/ SWIRFT program. Individual Board members have spoken to numerous regional water planning
With the passage of House Bill 4 (HB 4) and Senate Joint Resolution 1, the 83rd Legislature took a historic step toward funding a major portion of the Texas state water plan. On November 5, 2013, voters approved Proposition 6, which allowed the transfer of two billion dollars from the state’s “Rainy Day Fund” to the State Water Implementation Fund for Texas or SWIFT. HB 4 also created the State Water Implementation Revenue Fund for Texas or SWIRFT. Leveraging SWIFT funds with revenue bonds proceeds in the SWIRFT will provide the opportunity to provide much more funding at more attractive rates than the use of either one of those funds separately. As passed by the Legislature, the SWIFT/ SWIRFT program is designed to provide loans on attractive terms to political subdivisions, including non-profit water supply corporations, to finance water strategies in the state water plan. Loans can have a reduction in interest rates of up to 50% of the interest rate the Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) paid for the funds; terms can be up to 30 years; and principal or interest can be deferred. The SWIFT/SWIRFT program can also provide financing where the state acquires an ownership 5
Continued on page 6
SWIFT and SWIRFT Rules Continued from page 5 groups, the TWCA, and civic groups in an effort to engage with Texas on the future of the TWDB and the SWIFT/SWIRFT program. The Board has held three work sessions, in part to gather early input of the program and the rules. The Executive Administrator also held three stakeholder meetings, and solicited written comments to obtain additional input before drafting a proposed rule. Currently the Board is on a schedule to consider a proposed rule for publication at a work session on June 26 th at 8:15 am, in Room 170 of the Stephen F. Austin building in Austin. Backup for the work session, including the Executive Administrator’s recommended draft rule, will be posted on the Board’s website: www. twdb.state.tx.us, starting on June 18. Once the Board approves publication, the proposed rule will be published in the Texas Register, posted on the agency website, and notice of the availability of the proposed rule will be e-mailed to all persons that asked to be placed on the SWIFT e-mail list. The Board is planning an extended comment
period for this rule. The exact length of the comment period will depend on when the proposed rule is published. The comment period is likely to exceed 45 days. The exact end of the comment period will be announced at the time of publication. During the comment period, the Board is planning on holding three work sessions that will also serve as public hearings on the rules. Interested members of the public will be able to come to the work sessions and make oral comments on the rule. However, the Board will not be taking questions on the rule or the program during these sessions. Currently the plan is to have public hearings in San Antonio, San Angelo, and Cleburne, in July and
August. Staff is working on dates, times, and specific locations for those public hearings. Those details will
also be announced at the time of publication. In addition to the comments that the TWDB receives from members of the public through the comment process, the TWDB anticipates receiving comments from the State Water Implementation Fund for Texas Advisory Committee in accordance with Water Code §15.438(g). The Board will carefully consider those comments before adopting a final rule. Once the comment period closes, the Executive Administrator will summarize the comments received; prepare draft responses to those comments, and prepare a recommended final rule. The current schedule is for the Board to take up consideration of the recommendations and adopt a final rule by December of this year. Todd Chenoweth, J.D. is currently a Senior Advisor at the Texas Water Development Board.
CRMWD’s Raw Water Production Facility CRMWD’s Raw Water Production Facility in Big Spring
By Hugh F. Wynn
Local communities of all sizes across the Texas landscape are confronting a challenging new era of water planning – a task exacerbated by rapid population growth and persistent dry weather. Decades ago, the historic 1950s drought spurred to action many of these same communities, resulting in more than 100 new Texas reservoirs and an increased reliance by many on groundwater resources. Recent history reminds us that extended dry weather and evaporation-prone lakes can leave population centers exposed to a risky dependence on available groundwater resources, which are sometimes plagued with problems of depletion, subsidence and regulation. For these compelling reasons, today’s water planners must consider innovative new supply solutions: conservation, sea and brackish aquifer water desalination, aquifer storage and recovery, and potable reuse. Creative thinking and advanced water treatment technologies are encouraging these shifts in approach on how to best exploit this increasingly limited resource over the next decades. A case in point: the Colorado River Municipal Water District’s Raw Water Production Facility in Big Spring and their developing effort to “Reclaim 100% of the Water, 100% of the Time.” But innovative new approaches are not without opposition. To risk creating a headline or two in local water precincts, simply raise the topic of blending reclaimed water (potable reuse) into the public water supply. Most providers have avoided such potential hornets’ nests by implementing nonPhotos courtesy of Freese and Nichols
potable reuse programs (where reclaimed water is transported directly from a wastewater treatment plant for uses such as landscape irrigation, power plant cooling and manufacturing). For reasons briefly discussed below, the Colorado River Municipal Water District (CRMWD) was persuaded to do otherwise…to pursue potable reuse as a means of combating looming water shortages due to population growth and to a series of persistent and recurring droughts. A Bit of History Big Spring, the seat of government in Howard County since 1882, is strategically located at the crossroads of U. S. Highway 87 and Interstate 20 in semi-arid West Texas. Its 27,000-plus citizens represent the largest collection of people east of Midland, west of Abilene, south of Lubbock and north of San Angelo. Named for a once-prolific fountainhead that, in the 1880s, gushed an estimated 100,000 gallons of precious water daily from a small aquifer, the cold, clear spring was of major importance to the surrounding area…a primary watering hole for early man and wildlife indigenous to the region. The arrival of the Texas & Pacific Railroad (whose gluttonous steam boilers required large volumes of water to propel big locomotives down the tracks) and the corresponding development of Big Spring contributed to the spring’s demise in the early 20th century; a depletion that further complicated an unrelenting struggle in the region to supply the local populace with sufficient drinking water. Throughout recorded history, inhabitants of
Continued on page 8
CRMWD’s Raw Water Production Facility
1949, and the more recent Martin County well field. Consequently, in 1956 a preliminary “presentation” for a second Colorado River reservoir was filed with the Texas Board of Water Engineers. A permit was finally granted in 1965 after settling some sticky issues with downstream interests headed by the Lower Colorado River Authority. Construction of the resultant 21,500-foot Robert Lee Dam and E. V. Spence Reservoir was completed in 1969. Because of the delayed development of Spence Reservoir, available supply/demand ratios in the area reached an all-time low before the new reserve came on stream. For awhile, the District was forced to limit deliveries to lucrative oil field customers. To counter the shortfall to this important group of industrial users, the District leased land for a Ward County well field (known as the south well field) in 1971, and in six short months, completed engineering design, drilled 26 wells, and built three pump stations and 45 miles of pipeline to connect the new supply to the District’s facilities in Odessa. Today, the Ward County well field has 37 wells capable of delivering 28 MGD of water (the south well field can transmit only 16 MGD currently due to limitations in the pipeline from Wicket to Odessa). As its twenty-five county service area continued to flourish economically, the District applied for yet another permit to impound Colorado River water. Including the initial October 1977 application and after a predictable series of hearings, challenges and appeals, construction of the O. H. Ivie Reservoir was finally completed in March 1990, almost thirteen years later. Beginning in 1992, the District installed 157 miles of pipe and seven pump stations to deliver Ivie Reservoir water to the MidlandOdessa area. Providentially, the reservoir, named for
Continued from page 7 West Texas have wrestled with major water supply issues. The first individual to address the problem head-on was J. B. Thomas, chief engineer of the newly formed Texas Electric Service Company, which served several area cities including Big Spring, Midland, Odessa, Snyder and Colorado City. Thomas found the region woefully lacking in water infrastructure on which the area and Texas Electric’s future growth depended. Not one to sit idle after spotting a problem, he commissioned Simon Freese, a noted state water engineer, aided by Colonel E. V. Spence of the Texas Water Engineers, to address the issue. In 1946, after careful study, the two men honed in on an expensive Colorado River reservoir solution…$10 million worth…a mind-boggling cost estimate that flushed Midland, Colorado City and Snyder from the deal (Snyder later rejoined the effort). In 1949, progressive-minded Governor Beauford Jester signed a bill passed by the 51st Texas Legislature, creating the Colorado River Municipal Water District with Colonel Spence as its first General Manager and Freese, its consulting engineer. The District’s first projects, financed by a $11.75 million bond issue in 1951, included funding for the Colorado River Dam, a reservoir named for the visionary J. B. Thomas, a well field in nearby Martin County, water supply lines, terminal storage facilities, engineering and financing. Thanks to a major oil boom in the area, the District recognized that local development would soon outpace the water production capability of Lake Thomas, the three older well fields developed by Member cities prior to
CRMWD acquired its second Ward County well field (referred to as the North Ward County Well Field) from Luminant Generation Company, which developed the field in the 1950s to supply their Permian Basin Power Plant (since closed). Luminant retained sufficient reserves – whose source is the relatively small Pecos Valley aquifer – under terms of the agreement to meet future local demands. CRMWD acquired Luminant’s remaining reserves and well field infrastructure and estimates that this source would last the District for over a century based on current usage. As earlier mentioned, in normal times, CRMWD’s well fields are used primarily during periods such as the summer months when it is difficult to meet total demand from surface water supplies. This so-called “conjunctive use” of ground and surface water optimizes the utility of surface water before it evaporates, while at the same time, allowing for the natural recharge of underground supplies. 8
District General Manager Owen H. Ivie, was filled to capacity in 1992 by a virtually unprecedented pair of rainy years…preceding onset of the severe drought-of-record that plagues the region to this day. Without the Ivie Reservoir and CRMWD’s flexible transmission system, rationing of water in the service area would probably have been unavoidable. At this writing, the District’s three Colorado River reservoirs were virtually empty. As of May 12, 2014, their “percentage full” statistics were: Thomas (1.18%), Spence (2.23%), and Ivie (11.04%). Together, the combined full capacity of these reservoirs is 1.272 million acre-feet. On that date, they held a meager 75,097 acrefeet of water…5.90% of full capacity. In addition to the three reservoirs, the District owns five well fields. Four, developed prior to 1949 by Member cities (Odessa, Snyder, Martin County, and the O’Barr field near Big Spring), are not currently operated. The Ward County well fields (see Sidebar) are in use. These well fields were developed to “supplement surface water deliveries during the summer months”. Developing Alternatives Sources CRMWD also operates a “diverted water supply system” whose primary function is to prevent the highly mineralized low flow of the Colorado River and Beals Creek from reaching the District’s raw municipal water reservoirs. With its several water quality enhancement reservoirs the District can, when necessary, impound more than 100,000 acre-feet in its diversion system. This represents a potential “on-hand” supply of more than 33 billion gallons of water whose value to local communities may well improve along with demineralization technologies, bringing costs more in line with that of developing alternative sources of potable water. It is important to note, however, that in the foreseeable future, this highly salty water’s most economical use may not be for human consumption. It can be (and has been) used for oil field operations. In light of their constant struggle to outpace area growth and the ravages of persistent droughts, the CRMWD joined the advance guard of water suppliers who began to seriously consider various “alternative sources” of potable water. Its forward looking board initiated studies to examine the developing technologies of treating unused waste water effluent, committing almost a million dollars to the effort. Additionally, in 2005, the District received a generous
Texas Water Development Board (TWDB) grant to help defray costs of the ongoing study. That same year, public hearings regarding the issue began. Blending reclaimed water into drinking water supplies has long been and remains a continuing source of controversy within the water industry itself, and by extension, the general public. To avoid these controversial debates, many suppliers – particularly those geographically blessed with adequate sources of water – implement what is called non-potable reuse; supplying reclaimed water for landscape irrigation, industrial uses and the like. CRMWD headed in the potable reuse direction for reasons specific to their “not so climatically blessed” service area: specifically, one with a paucity of large nonpotable reuse customers (severely limiting potential volumes saved from reuse); the seasonality of nonpotable reuse (another volume limitation); arid local conditions which restricted landscape irrigation demand; and low-density development which exacerbated distribution expenses. On the positive side, the blending of a constant potable reuse stream offered year-round use, a measurable reduction in transmission costs, and improvement in raw water salinity due to the reverse osmosis technology involved.
Microfiltration treatment Available Sources Three feasible sources of treated wastewater discharged by population centers in the District were readily identified – Odessa and Midland as a potential combined project and Snyder and Big Spring as separate projects. A serious commitment to potable reuse began with the Preliminary Design Report for the Big Spring Regional Water Reclamation Project, which outlined a plan to recover surplus treated effluent from the City 9
Continued on page 10
CRMWD’s Raw Water Production Facility Continued from page 9 of Big Spring’s wastewater treatment plant. Factors favoring Big Spring as the initial project site included a ready destination for the reverse osmosis concentrate, short transmission distances and an available location within minutes of the District’s headquarters for optimal oversight. At that time (2007), treated water discharged from the Big Spring plant commingled with the highly mineralized local water in Beals Creek – losing volume to evaporation and seepage along the way – and was diverted to Red Draw Reservoir, a component of the District’s diverted water system. Reuse project economics benefited from avoiding these huge in-stream losses…and from capturing the surplus water before it flowed many miles downhill, significantly reducing pumping costs. The Raw Water Production Facility, which came on line in April 2013, takes treated water from the Big Spring wastewater treatment plant and processes it through a proven membrane water treatment sequence (microfiltration, reverse osmosis,
Overview of Plant and ultraviolet disinfection/oxidation) to purify the effluent water prior to its blending with raw water from other sources. Each of these treatment processes is energy-intensive, especially reverse osmosis. However, this expense must be placed in context with the high energy costs of existing and other potential supplies of water. After blending into the District’s raw water transmission system, the stream is again treated at the water treatment plants of the
CRMWD’s direct raw water blending mixes purified wastewater effluent into the municipal water supply.
District’s member cities and municipal customers. As an aside, entities like the North Texas Municipal Water District’s East Fork (of the Trinity) Wetland Project near the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex are turning to wetland water recovery systems which clean the water through a natural process before blending it back with raw water supplies. CRMWD chose to substitute a mechanical treatment for this natural process due to higher evaporation rates in semi-arid west Texas. The reverse osmosis process produces two liquid streams: the desalinated water (permeate) stream and the contaminated or reject stream, whose disposal can be problematic. Mostly liquid, the reject stream represents a significant percentage of the original water source and can be disposed of in multiple ways: either by discharge to a suitable location, by injection into disposal wells, by conjunctive use with oil field operations, through evaporation, or by additional water recovery from the desalination concentrate. Without question, dealing with brine disposal can be challenging and expensive. Big Spring is fortunate to have a place to dispose of brine rather inexpensively. CRMWD has a permit to discharge its effluent to the naturally brackish Beals Creek in the Colorado Basin. Not all utilities are so fortunate. The new Raw Water Production Facility is designed to produce about 2 MGD of treated water (with substantially reduced levels of chlorides or salt). “The new system could actually improve the taste of the region’s water by removing the minerals and salt that has historically given it a distinctive briny flavor,” John Grant, the District’s general manager, said in an Associated Press interview. The Raw Water Production Facility and the Luminant well field acquisition were financed at favorable rates through the TWBD Water Infrastructure Fund. Supplies from both the RWPD and the Luminant well field are considered “drought resistant” in arid west Texas. Public Acceptance and TCEQ Approval As mentioned earlier, the single biggest challenge to potable reuse projects is no longer technology, but rather, public acceptance. Expertise regarding the development of potable reuse plants is reliable…and relatively mature. Still, public acceptance remains fluid. CRMWD officials were very forthright in educating their public about the Big Spring project – using public meetings, newspaper articles, websites and radio spots to convey facts
about the severity of water supply problems in their service area and about the dependability of the technology. This straightforward approach proved to be effective. It helped that many longtime local residents were cognizant of the ravages inflicted by recurring droughts, the resultant water scarcity in the region, and an awareness of the difficulty of obtaining adequate supplies of water even in normal times. CRMWD’s education process occurred alongside recurrent consultations with the Texas Commission for Environmental Quality (TCEQ) to ensure the project would be given appropriate consideration in the absence of established rules for potable reuse. TCEQ’s primary guidance was that the finished water product would allow receiving systems to meet their Rules and Regulations for Public Water Systems (Primary Drinking Water Standards). To do so, CRMWD ensured that several specific regulatory requirements were met during project development. Initial approval prior to construction was followed by an intense production approval process – a course of action closely watched by the reuse community – when the facility was ready to go on line. Continued on page 12
CRMWD’s Raw Water Production Facility
oxidation – chemicals are added and ultraviolet light is used to eliminate very low concentrations of toxic or carcinogenic organic compounds that manage to breach the reverse osmosis process. This twice-treated water is then blended with surface water from one of the District’s reservoirs and treated yet again at Big Spring’s or other municipal drinking water treatment plants. In short, the water flows through three treatment plants before people drink it; consequently, the resulting reuse-based water being produced is extremely high quality water.
Continued from page 11 Summary The CRMWD project which blends reclaimed water directly into a raw water distribution pipeline is the first of its kind in the nation. Hopefully, it will serve as a successful example of the value of potable reuse as a high-quality source of drinking water in rapidly growing Texas…and that potable reuse technology can be a reliable way to reclaim 100% of the water, 100% of the time. Of note, several other concerned cities in Texas have pursued or are seriously considering potable reuse projects…Wichita Falls, Brownwood, El Paso, Abilene and Lubbock to name a few. To summarize, at CRMWD’s Raw Water Production Facility, wastewater is initially treated at a conventional treatment plant. The reclaimed water is treated a second time at the advanced treatment plant. This second facility adds three advanced processes to the conventional treatment method: microfiltration, reverse osmosis and advanced oxidation. Microfiltration removes essentially all particulates, including protozoan cysts that cause disease. Reverse osmosis removes dissolved materials and even smaller organisms such as bacteria and viruses, that could potentially be pathogenic. In the third process – advanced
The engineering, ar chitecture and environmental science firm, Freese and Nichols, Inc., managed permitting, completed the design, and provided construction and startup services for CRMWD’s unique facility. The District selected Freese and Nichols for a feasibility study to assess water supply augmentation with reclaimed water. Following the feasibility determination, Freese and Nichols was retained to navigate source-water approval by the TCEQ and to provide TPDES and Section 404 permitting, pilot testing, design, and construction phase assistance.
8TH Annual Jim Adams Memorial Golf Tournament Hole Sponsors Robert J. Brandes Consulting
San Jacinto River Authority
Tarrant Regional Water District
McCall, Parkhurst & Horton L.L.P.
Sabine River Authority of Texas
NewGen Strategies & Solutions, LLC
How Low Can You Go? Spousal Experiments in Water Conservation by Robert E. Mace Due to an accidentally awesome real estate investment in our first house, a small inheritance from grandpa, being DINKs (double income, no kids), and a willingness to absorb massive amounts of debt (it’s the American way…), my wife and I were fortunate enough to help design, build, and move into a house last summer in north-central Austin. As you might have guessed, being a serious water geek (What? You didn’t know?!?!), I spent quite a bit of time researching, choosing, and installing fixtures and appliances to increase the efficiency of water use in our home. On the behavioral side, I’ve also experimented with water conservation on my spouse. Water savings have been substantial, but spousal behavioral results have been mixed… The average Texan uses 95 gallons of water per day at their home. We are currently using 33 gallons of water per person per day. We got there by choosing WaterSense fixtures for the inside and not using city water outside. Getting there has been relatively easy, but there have been some challenges along the way. Based on work by the Texas Water Development Board, an average Texan uses about 59 percent of their residential water inside. That equates to 66 gallons per person per day. Although a lot of people focus on reducing residential water use outdoors (and there’s nothing wrong with that…), the primary use of water for an average Texan is indoors. That 33 gallons per person per day that my “Photo by Patrick Y. Wong / AtelierWong.com; architecture by Element 5 Architecture”
wife and I achieved is half that of the average Texan, a water savings that’s greater than what an average Texan uses outdoors over the course of a year. And it was easy as peach pie to get there. All we did was choose WaterSense-rated fixtures and appliances, items that use at least 20 percent less water than today’s federal fixture standards. The only indoor behavioral change required was choosing which button to press when flushing a toilet, although I would like us to be more efficient in the shower. Speaking about showers, I think a lot about our shower head. It amply showers us with two gallons per minute. Our previous shower head at our apartment used 1.5 gallons per minute through one emitter (it spat at us like a hot sauce sipping monkey). Our current shower head has a Wall Street worthy field of 66 emitters. You read that right: 66!!! Compared to our previous monkey-spitting shower head, our current one is Niagara Falls. It’s hard to believe it only uses two gallons per minute. One morning this spring, on the way to a water meeting, I was thinking about our shower head again. At the meeting, I wound up sitting next to the engineer who designed our shower head (the world is truly a beautiful place!). He told me it took about two years to design our shower head and assured me that, indeed, it only uses two gallons per minute. I didn’t quite believe him. But when I did a bucket test, there it was: two gallons after one minute, a miracle of motivated water conservation engineering. 13
Continued on page 14
HOW LOW CAN YOU GO? Continued from page 14 According to the U.S. Department of Energy, an average American uses 17 percent of total indoor water use for showering, just behind toilets (27 percent) and clothes washers (22 percent). With toilets and clothes washing taken care of with efficient fixture choices, I’ve tried to increase shower efficiency by encouraging the bride to take shorter showers. To help things along, I picked up one of those TCEQ shower timers as an educational tool with the incentive to “beat the heck out of TCEQ!” For some reason, that shower timer goes unused or “disappears”. And my shower-based lectures on water conservation seem to have worn thin. If she’s particularly agitated she’ll say “You know how long my showers are when you are not here? Thirty minutes. Did you hear that? THIRTY MINUTES!!! SOMETIMES LONGER!!! Ultimately, I’ve had to choose between (1) shorter spousal showers or (2) cancelled conjugal visits with loud threats of bitterly expensive divorce proceedings. As in many decisions, I made an economic one. What we did outside required more dramatic behavioral changes. We thoroughly xeriscaped our yard with natives and drought tolerant plants and used lots of mulch and gravel. What little turf we have (9 percent of our yard, about 750 squarefeet) is drought tolerant (a billowing Aggie Zoysia in one place; a scrawny buffalo grass mixture in another). We grow vegetables in a series of wicking gardens, an efficient way to water-from-the-bottom to minimize evaporative losses. We also have a massive, for an urbanite, rainwater collection tank: 5,000 glorious gallons of cloud juice storage dedicated to outdoor use. The plants love rainwater compared to city water, and the time we save by not mowing grass or watering the garden leaves more time for arguing about showering. Win-win! My wife and I truly love to collect rainwater. We placed our tank where we can see it from our living room (it’s gorgeous…), so whenever it rains, we watch the float on that tank like hawks. However, sometimes it’s painful to use the liquid gold we collect. Me: “Honey! Why are you using city water to wash the picnic table?!?!” Honey: “I don’t want to waste the rainwater!!!” As a friend pointed out, she may be taking a wider more strategic position on water resources given how low the Highland Lakes
A watering tank that was turned into a wicking garden in the foreground and a rainwater harvesting tank in the back right. (Photo by Robert Mace) are right now. When designing the plumbing for the house, I asked for a central shut-off valve to keep the outdoor fixtures from freezing during harsh winters. That valve is also proving useful in discouraging the wife from using city water outdoors (at least until she figures out where that valve is [or finds the number for her divorce attorney…]). So there you have it: We decreased indoor usage by half and total usage of city water by two thirds by using WaterSense fixtures and no city water outside. While decreasing our outdoor use required a great deal of effort, cost, and behavioral modification, indoor savings were easy to obtain with little behavioral changes (once I gave up on changing significant-other showering habits). And most importantly, despite all the spousal experimentation, we’re still married! However, writing this article makes me think we can go lower. Anyone up for 25 gallons per capita per day? 14
The sun sets on the xeriscaping (Photos by Robert Mace)
OPENING SKIT (INVOLVES GIANT WATER GUNS!)
“Save The Planet’s Water” Fe Saving our planet’s water is serious business and each year the North Plains Groundwater Conservation District (NPGCD) recruits kids with the right stuff to make sure there is plenty of water for future generations. “We are always looking for ways to engage the young people to become stewards of our finite natural resources. As Water Rangers, they gain a sense of mission regarding water conservation,” explained Kirk Welch, NPGCD District Assistant General Manager for Outreach. The popular “Save The Planet’s Water Festivals” allow northern Panhandle fourth graders to learn more about water and other natural resources and getting all wet is part of the fun. “Each year, a new generation of Water Rangers are trained to protect and defend water resources everywhere,” said Welch. Over 900 students and their teachers attended the 2014 event’s three festivals in Dalhart, Dumas and Perryton. “Engaging our young people with their natural resources at this stage in their lives is important because they are forming their own opinions about the world around them right now,” said General Manager, Steve Walthour. “If we can show them they can make a difference and why they should want to, they’ll remember that when they are older.” Each year, these Festivals enjoy broad-based community support, with special thanks to 4-H, Texas AgriLife Extension, USDA-NRCS, West Texas A&M University, Texas Parks and Wildlife, City of Dalhart, Frank Phillips College-Allen Campus, Valero, Inc., and Xcel Energy. For more information about this program, contact Kirk Welch at firstname.lastname@example.org.
LOTS OF WATER!
AND CREATIVITY! 16
estivals Recruit Water Rangers
RANGER RECRUITER KIRK
A sampling of the 2014 activity centers includes: The Incredible Journey - Students become water droplets in the water cycle as they throw giant dice to see where in the water cycle they will go next. Students make a bead bracelet that documents their journey. We All Live Downstream - Using a watershed model, students learn about point source and nonpoint source pollution as they add pollutants to a watershed and then “rain” on it with spray bottles to discover the effects of the pollution. Students also learn about their local watershed where they live and how their actions can affect their watershed. Texas Parks and Wildlife - Students learn more about the wildlife of the Panhandle from Texas Parks and Wildlife and even get to see an official TPW Game Warden’s boat up close and personal. What’s in the Pond? – Entomologists from West Texas A&M University show and talk about examples of aquatic organisms that can be found in area streams, ponds and lakes. Water Jeopardy – Students compete in a wild and
WHCRWA MOBILE LAB
COWBOY, KIRK AND BART
noisy game of Jeopardy where all of the questions involve water and the water resources of the Panhandle.
Learning From Our Past to Influence our Future -- The West Harris County Regional Water
“Thank you so much for the great Water Festival! As always, my kids had a wonderful time. Every year I think it can’t get any better, and it always does!! ” Follett, TX 4th grade teacher
Authority shared its new Mobile Teaching Lab and program materials with educators and students. The Lab exhibits include a Texas history diorama, a Sourcewater Protection scenario and waterfall, and interactive tablets with questions on conservation, reuse and future technologies.
DO YOU HAVE A PROGRAM TO SHARE WITH CONFLUENCE READERS? Please send information to email@example.com
Grand Finale -- an entertaining and educational water-focused program featuring Kevin Barnes, “The Green Magician.” 17
Texas Water Foundation Presents 2014 Rainmaker Award Honoring Representative Allan Ritter for His Service in the Texas House of Representatives Representative Allan Ritter of Nederland, Texas was honored by the Texas Water Foundation with the Rainmaker Award at a dinner celebration in early May at the Bob Bullock Texas State History Museum. The award -- presented by Honorable Speaker Joe Straus and Carole Baker, Executive Director, of the Texas Water Foundation â€“ recognizes Chairman Ritterâ€™s years of service in the Texas House of Representatives. As Chairman of the House Committee on Natural Resources, Ritter led the charge for the 83rd Texas Legislature to provide more than 8.3 billion acre-feet of water and finance $53 billion in water projects for Texas and its citizens. Chairman Ritter is a strong conservation proponent, and continues to emphasize its critical role in sustaining an adequate water supply for future generations. Representative Ritter has served in the Texas House of Representatives for 15 years. Last fall he announced that he is not seeking re-election and will be retiring from the Texas Legislature at the end of this year.
Photos by Alex Roszko
New Water Laws Chair Takes a Look Down the Winding Road Ahead... Jason Hill, Partner at Lloyd Gosselink Rochelle & Townsend just ugly, that’s a direct result of this drought.” While laws have been in place for years addressing the concepts of indirect and direct reuse, Hill says, it is only until relatively recently that those laws have been heavily relied upon by water suppliers. This new activity has prompted push-back by some interests, raising the specter of court rulings or policy shifts that weaken reuse laws or plague them with uncertainty. “[Water] systems need certainty to plan, to responsibly take care of their customers,” Hill contends, “so uncertainty in the law undermines their ability to do their jobs, which ultimately robs the public of confidence in the reliability of their drinking water supplies.” In other important areas of water resources planning and development, Hill suggests that there is perhaps no area of water law that is more riddled with uncertainty than Texas groundwater law. “It’s not a stretch to suggest that groundwater law today is what surface water law was before 1967,” said Hill, referring to the 1967 Water Rights Adjudication Act that transformed Texas surface water rights into the system in place today. “Our courts referred to the pre-1967 era of surface water law as ‘chaotic,’ and that’s exactly how I would describe the era of groundwater law we’re in today.” Hill is referring to what he calls the “tensions” between court-made law regarding
Change is nothing new in the world of Texas water law and policy. Home to some of the nation’s fastest growing communities, Texas is both blessed and cursed with the growing pains brought about by the 1,000 new residents on average that move into the state each day. As water attorney and incoming TWCA Water Laws Committee Chairman Jason Hill sees it, the failure to address such rapid growth by responsibly adapting existing law and policy where needed, is the legal equivalent of driving a truck without ever turning the steering wheel. “It won’t take long,” Hill says, “before your trip comes to an abrupt end.” Yet even in the dynamic world of Texas water law and policy, Hill sees an unusually winding road ahead. The partner at Lloyd Gosselink Rochelle & Townsend says that while drought has become part of the new normal for many Texans, its severity throughout the state in recent years is earning it legendary status. As a consequence, many communities are considering water supply strategies that were considered fantasy just a decade ago. Hill points to water recycling as an example. “Wastewater reuse is not a new concept, but the degree of seriousness that many water suppliers today are affording reuse as new strategy is definitely trending up. Good, bad, or
Continued on page 20
WINDING ROAD AHEAD...
to Hill, the use of the ESA by environmental advocacy groups along the Texas Gulf Coast and by property owners on the Texas High Plains to curb water use has only darkened the skies of the Texas water planning horizon. Hill predicts that this vacuum of uncertainty will inevitably get filled, either by lawmakers or by courts. “Otherwise, you can kiss the Texas miracle goodbye.” That is why Hill suggests the next 12 months will likely mark a period of unprecedented change to the Texas water policy landscape. “The lower Brazos basin is about to get a watermaster for the first time ever. The [Texas Water Development] Board is about to embark on prioritizing water development strategies.We’re talking about regulating brackish groundwater as a unique resource.The TCEQ’s drought rules for surface water diversions are tied up in the courts. And, oh yeah, we have two billion dollars to start lending to spur development of the resources we
Continued from page 19 protection of groundwater rights and legislative mandates to local groundwater districts to manage groundwater as something of a public resource. “We’ve been handed two different sets of priorities from courts and lawmakers,” noted Hill. “These priorities don’t necessarily have to be at odds with one another, but we’ve been told ‘you have to manage this resource the exact way [the Texas Legislature] says to manage it, and you have to protect property rights the exact way the courts say to protect them.’ But nobody has bothered to spell out in the law how that’s supposed to happen.”
Obstacles to Texas water resources planning efforts don’t just emanate from Austin. Recent efforts to expand the number of species considered endangered or threated under the Endangered Species Act – or ESA – have clouded water planning assumptions across Texas. And according
determined are needed to bridge the supply-demand gap in this state.” Hill sees TWCA as a critical party in this time of change. “TWCA has always been a stalwart—maybe the stalwart—in Texas water policy development and lawmaking over the decades,” Hill observes. “In fact, TWCA may be one of the few constants in the Texas water law picture over the years.The positive influence of that organization is no secret. Neither is the need for the group’s leadership right now.” That steadiness has bred credibility that Hill says will be critical in the continual shaping of Texas’ water future. “This is TWCA’s ball field. These huge challenges that we’re wrestling with today are precisely the type of challenges that the TWCA membership is routinely called upon to tackle. My plan is to keep the Water Laws Committee as instrumental as it has always been in apprising the membership of these important developments in a timely manner.” Growing up working on his grandfather’s West Texas cotton and vegetable operation taught the Austin attorney a thing or two about change. “You could have spent an entire day plowing a field of beautiful, blooming cotton, only to wake up the next and be hailed-out,” recalled Hill. “Out there, if you don’t figure out a way to adapt, to rise to the occasion, you don’t survive.”
Our Sincere Thanks to The 2014 TWCA MID-YEAR CONFERENCE SPONSORS PLATINUM Lloyd Gosselink Rochelle & Townsend, P. C. Halff Associates Inc. Tarrant Regional Water District Trinity River Authority of Texas HDR Engineering, Inc. Klotz Associates, Inc.
GOLD First Southwest Company Ron Lewis & Associates Brown & Gay Engineers, Inc. Bickerstaff Heath Delgado Acosta LLP Sabine River Authority of Texas NewGen Strategies & Solutions, LLC San Antonio Water System
SILVER Robert J. Brandes Consulting Gulf Coast Waste Disposal Authority San Jacinto River Authority Alan Plummer Associates, Inc. Freese and Nichols, Inc.
“For us, today, we won’t get to grade ourselves on how well we adapted to all of these challenges. That job rests in the hands of a generation that hasn’t yet been born. So we only get one shot to get it right.” That’s a responsibility Hill says TWCA has never shied away from in the past, and he doesn’t see that changing now.
BRONZE Law Offices of Glenn Jarvis Law Office of Timothy L. Brown 21
By J. Tom Ray, Lockwood, Andrews, Newnam, Inc., Chair, TWCA Federal Affairs Committee Let’s all sing and be happy…there is a new WRRDA. The first water resources bill in seven years has moved through Congress like Texas tumbleweeds on a windy day. The last step came with another bipartisan vote in both Houses with wide margins of victory. Ranking Democrat member, Tim Bishop, on the House Transportation & Infrastructure subcommittee, reported that he couldn’t be happier, “WRRDA was great. It was bipartisan, it was collegial, it was productive, it was all good, and Billy Shuster deserves a ton of credit for it.” Get out the song books! The Conference Report to H.R. 3080 passed
and Nevada—states with key, well-positioned Members, but overall the bill authorizes projects that have moved through the process and have received a favorable USACE Chief’s report, including some important projects here in Texas. From a TWCA, Texas water perspective, the key provisions include streamlining of environmental reviews and permitting, limiting time requirements for feasibility studies, allowing greater non-federal participation, adding new financing options—like WIFIA, making improvements to SRF, and starting a new PPP program. There are many excellent summaries of the WRRDA available on-line. Here is a good rundown from the USACE on the overall features of the bill: The Conference Summary describes the conference agreement on HR 3080, Water Resources Reform and Development Act. The agreement authorizes 34 U.S. Army Corps of Engineers water-resource-related activities — including port dredging, inland locks and dams, and flood control projects — costing an estimated $12 billion, but requires the deauthorization of at least $18 billion in previously authorized projects. It significantly modifies the procedures for selecting,
the House by a vote of 412 to 4 on May 20, 2014; by a vote of 91-7 the Senate approved the Report on the following Friday. The WRRDA is now on its way to the President. The bill is considered “one of the most policy and reform focused measures of its kind in the last two decades.” In fact, the no earmarks rule in the House forced a strong policy slant. However, even with the earmark ban, the taxpayer will pay 85% of the cost for some major infrastructure projects in Kentucky, Illinois, Louisiana, 22
reviewing and building water projects by creating a new process for water project approval, limiting to three years the period in which feasibility studies must be completed and streamlining the environmental review and permitting process. The measure provides for increased expenditures from the industry-financed Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund in an effort to reduce the backlog of port and harbor projects, and requires a review of possible ways to increase revenue collections for financing projects on the inland waterways. It also creates two pilot programs intended to promote innovative financing of water projects and attract new non-federal investments. It is anticipated that President Obama will sign the bill and it will become law in very near future. The next step of interest to TWCA will be the Corps efforts in developing the Implementation Guidance. This guidance is extremely important in understanding how the Corps plans to carry-out the new WRRDA. TWCA will need to stay informed and, when available, take the opportunity to have input. Dam Optimization Provision Concerns and the Senator Cornyn Colloquy One of the most controversial provisions of the Senate version (S.601) was the section labeled “dam optimization.” While establishing a new program ostensibly to “optimize the operation” of Corps reservoirs, it created potential for changes in the reservoir operating rules to occur independently of the non-federal sponsors’ input and independently of water supply interest. In commenting on the Senate bill, TWCA pointed out its concerns with this provision: “Section 2014 would establish a program to allow the Secretary to potentially modify a reservoir Operating Plan to add to “other related project benefits” without expressed Congressional authorization. Adjusting the Operating Plan of a Corps reservoir, even on a short-term basis, can be detrimental to the water supply use of Corps reservoirs authorized for that purpose.” (TWCA, Comments on S. 601 and HR 3080, November 2013). The provision was not removed in the Conference Report passed by Congress, but with the efforts of Senator Cornyn, Chairman Hastings in House and others it was significantly modified to address water supply managers’ concerns. The program that was revised to require coordination with non-federal sponsor, not supersede or modify federal/ non-federal agreements, and not affect any existing water rights. Senator Cornyn stated emphatically in
his colloquy on the floor of Senate with Chairwoman Boxer and Ranking Member Vitter, “There is no new authority to modify reservoir operation granted to the Corps of Engineers.” Recognizing that the Secretary Continued on page 24
FEDERAL AFFAIRS... Continued from page 23 of the Army “…has always had the authority to review operations of reservoirs and improve their efficiency,” the colloquy further clarifies that the “… the Secretary must ensure that all recommendations… are consistent with state water plans, and do not affect any authority to manage water resources within that State.” State water laws must be followed and the non-federal sponsor is to be consulted. The support of TWCA membership in clarifying the concern and pulling together support to bring those concerns to the Conference committee were acknowledged. We appreciate the diligence and hard work of Senator Cornyn and his staff in the successful effort to modify the dam optimization language in the Conference Report. From Failed Legislation to Withdrawn Guidance to Formal Rulemaking: Waters of the US In 2010, after two milestone Supreme Court decisions that reined-in the spread of federal jurisdiction over water of the U.S., you may recall that Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Oberstar introduced the “Clean Water Restoration Act” to “…restore the authority of the Clean Water Act after the law was ‘handcuffed’ by U.S. Supreme Court decisions.” Recall also the failure of the CWRA to pass through Congress and on-theheels of this failure, the closed-door effort of EPA to develop and publish its “Clean Water Act Guidance” in April 2011. Three years later, in April 2014,EPA and USACE published notice of the proposed “waters of the U.S.” (WOTUS) rule. One positive from this CWA jurisdictional legislative, administrative and regulatory history is that the current rulemaking must be done with the opportunity for public input. We anticipate literally tens-of-thousands of comments—pro and con. Within this massive number, TWCA’s input will be unique and needed. The WOTUS rule will be a significant expansion of the historical scope of federal water jurisdiction: all tributary and adjacent waters will now be subject to federal jurisdiction. If there is a key concern among the many water managers that have reviewed the proposed rule, it would be EXPANSION. Definitions of key terms such as “tributary” and what is “adjacent” means will simply be expanded. “Many of the dry arroyos, washes,
ditches and ephemeral or intermittent water bodies so common in the arid West could become the subject of federal oversight,” according to recent testimony prepared by Mark Pifher of Colorado. The rule adds the term “neighboring waters” to the test of jurisdiction. As Mr. Pifher points out, this rule will be the final step in efforts to reverse the Supreme Court decisions, it will stretch federal jurisdiction, and will make the term “navigable” a thing of the past. Many associations and agencies are now in the process of compiling comments—that includes TWCA. The Federal Affairs Committee has recently established a WOTUS Task Force for the purpose of helping to develop TWCA-oriented comments on the WOTUS rule. If you want to join the effort, please let me know. At the June conference the Federal Affairs Committee will take up the Task Force’s work on an outline to identify and organize the TWCA comments. We will join with other water associations and agencies throughout the West and the nation in a concerted effort. In its comments on the WOTUS proposed rule and efforts with the Texas Congressional delegation, TWCA will work against the expansion of federal jurisdiction and to preserve Texas jurisdiction and primacy over its waters. Tom Ray, of Lockwood, Andrews & Newnam, has followed national water issues for more than 20 years. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org. 24
TWCA 70TH ANNUAL CONVENTION MARCH 5-7, 2013 THE WOODLANDS, TEXAS
Are you a new TWCA member...or is this your first TWCA meeting? Watch for the red badge ribbons -- the wearers are your meeting guides to welcome and assist you!
Left to right â€“ Dean Robbins, Leroy Goodson, TWCA, with Representative Trent Ashby.
Carolyn Ahrens, Booth, Ahrens & Werkenthin, P.C., with Robert Eckels, Gulf Coast Community Protection and Recovery District.
Dean Robbins, TWCA, Kathleen Jackson and Jennifer White, Texas Water Development Board. 25
TWCA MARCH 2014 ANNUAL MEETING, THE WOODLANDS
Presidentâ€™s Award Recipients...(left to right)Heather Cooke, Austin Water Utility; 2013 TWCA President Phil Ford; Bech Bruun, Texas Water Development Board; and Jim Parks, North Texas Municipal Water District.
Bob Brandes (right), 2014 TWCA President, presents a TWCA plaque to outgoing President Phil Ford thanking him for his leadership and service.
(Left to right) TWCA General Manager Leroy Goodson, Bech Bruun, Texas Water Development Board, and Kevin Ward, Trinity River Authority.
Mike Turco, Harris-Galveston Subsidence District with Mark Evans, North Harris County Regional Water Authority.
NEW LIFETIME MEMBERS...(left to right) Sam Scott; Ron Neighbors; Mike J. Mahoney; 2013 TWCA President Phil Ford; Jim Parks; James C. Conkwright; and Jerry W. Chapman. 26
TWCA 2013 President Phil Ford presents the Presidentâ€™s Award to Heather Cooke, Austin Water Utility, City of Austin.
(Left to right) 2013 TWCA President Phil Ford, State Representative Eddie Lucio, III, TWCA General Manager Leroy Goodson, and Assistant General Manager Dean Robbins.
Conference speakers Al Rendl (left), North Harris County Regional Water Authority, and Mark Loethen, P.E, City of Houston.
After his presentation on the Texas Weather Outlook, Jeff Lindner (left), Harris County Flood Control, visited with Ivan Langford, Coastal Water Authority. 27
You are Cordially Invited to a
Welcome Reception hosted by the
Membership Services Committee Wednesday, June 11th 6:00 to 7:00 pm Salons ABC Foyer Generously sponsored by INTERA HORSESHOE BAY RESORT
Our Appreciation and Thanks to the Following Sponsors:
Risk Management Fund
For Sponsoring the Thursday Evening Reception
For Sponsoring the Name Badges 28
TWCAâ€™s Confluence Newsletter Gratefully Acknowledges The 2014 Sponsors Who Make This Communication Among Members Possible PLATINUM
Lavaca-Navidad River Authority
Bickerstaff Heath Delgado
Lone Star Groundwater Conservation District
Lower Neches Valley Authority
Brown & Gay Engineers, Inc.
Northeast Texas Municipal Water District
Freese and Nichols, Inc. Halff Associates, Inc.
North Harris County Regional Water Authority
HDR Engineering, Inc. Lloyd Gosselink Rochelle & Townsend, P. C.
Nueces River Authority Red River Authority of Texas
McCall, Parkhurst & Horton L.L.P.
Sabine River Authority of Texas
MWH Americas, Inc.
San Jacinto River Authority
North Texas Municipal Water District
TWCA Risk Management Fund Upper Neches River Municipal Water Authority
Leidos Texas Oil & Gas Association
Trinity River Authority of Texas
Alan Plummer Associates, Inc.
Barton Springs/Edwards Aquifer Conservation District
Brazoria Drainage District No. 4 Brazos River Authority Chambers-Liberty Counties
Canadian River Municipal Water Authority
Franklin County Water District
Colorado River Municipal Water District
NewGen Strategies & Solutions, LLC
Guadalupe-Blanco River Authority
Blanton & Associates, Inc.
Gulf Coast Waste Disposal Authority
GDS Associates, Inc.
Harlingen Irrigation District
Klotz Associates, Inc.
Cameron County #1
Mandell and Associates
Harris-Galveston Subsidence District
McManus & Johnson
IDS Engineering Group
Jefferson County Drainage District #6
Plum Creek Conservation District
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
The Woodlands Joint Powers Agency 29
Welcom e to the Horseshoe Ba y Resort TWCA 2014 MID-YEAR CONFERENCE
Texas Water Conservation Association's June 2014 issue of Confluence Newsletter