Water Quality Grants and Loans

16 results

 Submitted By:  

Comment from: Nisqually Land Trust (JoeKane)
Please see attached comment letter.
6/07/17 3:57 PM   |  
 
 
Comment from: Municipal Coalition (Municipal CoalitionAnonymous)
6/07/17 12:00 AM   |  
 
 
Comment from: King County (DanielKaplan)
6/06/17 3:51 PM   |  
 
 
Comment from: Washington Environmental Counc... (LisaRemlinger)
RE: Proposed rule changes to WAC 173-98 under CR 102 17-09-078. Washington Environmental Council would like to submit the following comments regarding proposed amendments to WAC 173-98, Uses and Limitations of the Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund, under CR 102 17-09-078. We appreciate the opportunity to comment. We specifically want to comment on the eligibility criteria for using Clean Water State Revolving Fund loans for land acquisition. The proposed changes to WAC 173-98-100 (20) includes additions for siting of water pollution control facilities (b), for riparian area protection (d), and for drinking water source protection (e). We support these additions. However, we think that one category needs to be added: watershed protection. Recent research published by Perry and Jones (2017) and validated modeling conducted in the Nisqually Watershed (McKane et al., 2016), in which Washington Environmental Council participated with EPA and other partners, demonstrates that management at the watershed scale is important to prevent water quality issues. Modeling in the Mashel sub-basin of the Nisqually demonstrated that when entire forested watersheds, not just riparian areas, are comprised of forests 80 years old or older, they increase summer low flows by a factor of 5 compared to watersheds with forests that are 40 years old. Standard industrial rotations produce watersheds with young forests. Younger trees use more water than older forests thereby making less water available during critical times for salmon. Stream flow deficits in late summer and early fall contribute to other water quality impairments such as low dissolved oxygen and high temperatures. They are also an issue for drinking water availability. A healthy watershed and the ecosystem services it yields provide a steady stream of benefits to local communities creating a prosperous economy and healthy quality of life. The infrastructure provided by our forests includes benefits such as clean water and air, carbon storage, healthy fish, and timber. Other vitally important services include flood risk reduction, species habitat, and recreational values. Bridging these benefits with funding sources requires us acknowledging them and increasing access to funds. Allowing Clean Water State Revolving Fund loans for land acquisitions at the watershed scale is crucial for being able to secure better management of our forests. Adding this category will make investing in these 'green infrastructures' and the management practices that support them, more of a reality for local projects that bring together local governments, small forest landowners and other NGOs like land trusts. If these rule changes are successful, they could be one of the largest funding opportunities to elevate forests as infrastructure in our state. Please further amend WAC 173-98-100 (20) to include watershed-scale protection as an eligible category for land acquisition. Sincerely, Lisa Remlinger Evergreen Forests Program Director Paula Swedeen Forest Policy Specialist
6/06/17 12:31 PM   |  
 
 
Comment from: Group of individuals (Names collected by WA Environmental Council)
I would like to submit the following comments regarding proposed amendments to WAC 173-98, Uses and Limitations of the Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund, under CR 102 17-09-078. These comments relate to the eligibility criteria for using Clean Water State Revolving Fund loans for land acquisition. The proposed changes to WAC 173-98-100 (20) includes additions for siting of water pollution control facilities (b), for riparian area protection (d), and for drinking water source protection (e). I support these additions. However, one category needs to be added: watershed protection. Management at the watershed scale is important to protect water quality. Right now, standard industrial forest rotations produce watersheds with young forests. Younger trees use more water than older forests thereby making less water available during critical times for salmon. Stream flow deficits in late summer and early fall contribute to other water quality impairments such as low dissolved oxygen and high temperatures. They are also an issue for drinking water availability. Allowing CWSRF loans for land acquisitions at the watershed scale is crucial for being able to secure better forest management that improves drinking water, protects aquatic wildlife, and preserves water for recreational use. Please further amend WAC 173-98-100 (20) to include watershed-scale protection as an eligible category for land acquisition. Thank you, 986 Signatories FULL LIST OF NAMES CAN BE VIEWED IN THE ATTACHMENT
6/06/17 12:02 PM   |  
 
 
Comment from: Spokane Conservation District (TyMeyer)
The Spokane Conservation District formally submits the attached comments for the inclusion of a "Sponsorship Program" to be written into the Department of Ecology rules.
6/05/17 3:31 PM   |  
 
 
Comment from: City of Oak Harbor (DougMerriman)
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed rule changes. The rule changes propose the ability for applying entities to ask for loan terms up to 30 years in duration. For certain hardship entities, the proposed rule change incorporates a proposed interest rate benchmark for 21 to 30 year loans at 80% o market rate (WAC 173-98-300(5) Table 1). This reflects a 33% rte increase (80%/6%= .3333)over the rate benchmark for 6 to 20 year loans. For many hardship entities, although appreciative of the reduced rate structure, a 30 year loan is attractive as it reduces the rate impact to rate payers with the principal repayment being spread over a longer term. However, the recalibrating of the interest rate from 60% t 80% o market reduces the benefit, and potential affordability benefit, of going out to 30 years. In a sense, the proposed differential in rate benchmarks equates to a 33% pnalty for attempting to mitigate rate shock on an economically distressed community. Mathematically, the total life interest cost differential between 60% ad 80% o market rate increases the 30-year lifetime interest cost by 36.1% (ee attachment). For this reason, we respectfully request that the rule change retain the 60% o market rate benchmark, rather than the 80% bnchmark, for those loans maturing from 21 to 30 years. Sincerely, Dr. Doug Merriman City Administrator City of Oak Harbor
6/01/17 4:22 PM   |  
 
 
Comment from: Port of Moses Lake (JeffreyBishop)
5/31/17 12:00 AM   |  
 
 
Comment from: Legislative District 13 Repres... (Legislative District 13 RepresentativesAnonymous)
5/31/17 12:00 AM   |  
 
 
Comment from: Port of Moses Lake (JeffreyBishop)
5/31/17 12:00 AM   |  
 
 
Comment from: City of Pasco (ChelseaHagger)
5/31/17 12:00 AM   |  
 
 
Comment from: Trout Unlimited (CrystalElliot-Perez)
5/31/17 12:00 AM   |  
 
 
Comment from: Colville Confederated Tribes (Paul Wagner)
5/23/17 9:54 AM   |  
 
 
Comment from: Trout Unlimited (CrystalElliot-Perez)
5/15/17 2:28 PM   |  
 
 
Comment from: City of Bellingham (JasonPorter)
5/03/17 8:49 AM   |  
 
 
Comment from: Thomas Bradley
We would like to see Washington develop a sponsorship program under the CWSRF as a number of other states have done. Funding then could me made available to address NPS pollution through the use of conservation easements along tributaries. Thank you.
4/20/17 4:38 PM   |  
 
 

[ Previous Page / Next Page ]


Thank you for subscribing to the Water Quality Grants and Loans mailing list.