Dinner in DC With Jim and Valentina: The Unveiling of a Plan for a Comprehensive Integrated Water Policy (CIWP)

I just returned from a delightful, information-laden dinner with good friend and filmmaker Jim Thebaut of Running Dry fame and Valentina J. Valenta, Legislative Director for Rep. John Linder (R-GA), author of H.R. 135, the bill to establish a 21st Century Water Commission.

Over the past year or so I have traded emails with Valentina and heard her speak, but had not formally met her till this evening. She said she'd been intimately involved with water only since 2005, something that left me on the verge of speechlessness. I should have such a grasp of water issues, and I've been 'doing water' for almost 40 years.

Jim and Valentina are the movers-and-shakers behind the National Water Policy Event, to be held tomorrow night on Capitol Hill. They have assembled an all-star group of panelists and attendees (300!). It promises to be THE water event.

But we didn't have dinner solely to catch up on things. Valentina told me that H.R. 135 is done, as in 'kaput'. But what will take its place is something indeed: Jim and Valentina provided me with a sneak preview of what will be unveiled tomorrow night: a plan to develop a Comprehensive Integrated Water Policy (CIWP) for the USA. Ten to fifteeen million dollars will be sought for this effort, to be channeled through the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).

This is impressive. Valentina emphasized that she wants stakeholders (states, et al.) involved in developing the CIWP; it's not going to be some back-room type of thing. And it has to be bipartisan.

If you want to keep up with this process, bookmark Water Policy; this site will be used for posting updates, anouncements, etc. You can sign up for updates.

Following is what Jim and Valentina provided (the emboldening is not mine). Keep in mind it's a working abstract - not a finished product.

******

WORKING ABSTRACT FOR COMPREHENSIVE INTEGRATED WATER POLICY

Purpose:
This Act would provide funding ($10-15 million) for the Executive Office of Science and Technology Policy Research (OSTP) account for FY2011 to carry out the initial development of a comprehensive integrated water policy (CIWP).   

Coordination and Entities Involved:
The intent is for OSTP to develop and implement a comprehensive, integrated water policy (CIWP) in coordination with the following Federal entities:

·      Council on Environmental Quality;

·      Environmental Protection Agency's Science and Technology Office;

·      Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Division of Parasitic Diseases and Drinking Water;

·      U.S. Geological Survey;

·      U.S. Department of Interior;

·      U.S. Bureau of Reclamation;

·      U.S. Department of Energy;

·      U.S. Department of Agriculture;

·      National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration;

·      U.S. Army Corps of Engineers;

·      Bureau of Indian Affairs;

·      U.S. Department of Homeland Security Office of Infrastructure Protection;

·      U.S. Department of State; and

·      jurisdictional U.S. Congressional Committees

Duties:

This Act specifically directs OSTP to coordinate a study of current water management
program with the President of the United States and listed Federal entities, while seeking input from each of the relevant Congressional Committees and major entities responsible for:

• water resource management, water-borne illnesses, and national security at the State and regional (watershed) level;
• international water management and national governance and security-related entities in countries throughout the world. 

Each of the Federal entities involved will be directed to perform a systems analysis study coordinated with OSTP and recommend ways to increase water supplies and improve the availability, reliability, and quality of freshwater resources to meet critical municipal, industrial, agricultural, Energy, Security and Environmental needs, in consultation with the States, Tribes, and local public and private entities responsible for water management. 

·      The study shall identify common principles of operation that if applied bring cohesion to national water policy.

·      OSTP shall include in this study a comprehensive assessment of future water supply and demand needs of Native American communities;

·      Also, as part of this systems study, OSTP with its partner organization shall seek methods to expand U.S. water supplies to help adapt to climate variation, population growth and other large-scale stresses including conducting a study of existing and possible future sustainable water supply facilities, above and below ground.  When appropriate, non-structural elements should be recommended over structural elements in order to safeguard the environment. 

·      Recommendations for planning should occur within the framework of watershed management, and not State-by-State, not project-by-project, and not contrary to the natural boundaries of the watershed; and

·      Finally as part of this systems study, OSTP is directed to develop a process for evaluating the feasibility of creating an office in the White House that would be tasked with implementing the CIWP.

Report and Implementation:
OSTP is directed to furnish a final report to the President of the United States and the respective authorizing Committees in Congress within one year of the program's enactment.  Upon completion of the report, OSTP is authorized by the President of the United States and the respective authorizing Committees in Congress to establish an office in the White House to coordinate with the President and relevant Federal entities responsible for water resource management and research of and prevention of water-borne illnesses, to carry out the implementation of the recommendations furnished in the report for a comprehensive integrated water policy at the domestic and international level.     

Additional Funding and Duties:
Congress would also appropriate funding/reprogram money to all relevant Federal agencies involved in coordination, research and study, development of report, and implementation of recommendations.  OSTP would be provided with a full-time staff dedicated to the development and implementation of a CIWP.  Upon completion of the report, the President may choose to appoint someone from the public or private sector to spearhead the CIWP program.  

*******    

Here is a downloadable version of the above.

Download CIWP_Working_Abstract 27_July_2009

This is going to be big. Could it be that we have finally turned the corner?

"Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." -- Margaret Mead

Comments

[Michael]

Hi, Tim.

Thanks for your excellent comments - duly noted.

Thirty or forty years ago, when someone said 'expand supply" it generally meant 'build a dam, pipeline, or drill more wells'. Not any longer. 'Expand supply' for a municipal water purveyor can mean "find more M & I water' whether by conservation, recycling, or whatever. Ditto for an irrigation district manager: finding more irrigation water may mean going to drip irrigation, canal lining, or piping to conserve water.

Look at this portion of the emboldened text and note that 'environmental' needs are specifically listed:

"...recommend ways to increase water supplies and improve the availability, reliability, and quality of freshwater resources to meet critical municipal, industrial, agricultural, Energy, Security and Environmental needs, in consultation with the States, Tribes, and local public and private entities responsible for water management."

I would say it'd be hard to meet environmental needs if you are taking more water out of a stream, building a dam, or lowering groundwater levels.

Then look at the last sentence of the third bullet below the emboldened text:

"When appropriate, non-structural elements should be recommended over structural elements in order to safeguard the environment."

This tells me that 'soft path' approaches will receive priority.

If I thought this were about expanding water supplies solely in the traditional engineering sense (more wells, pipelines, dams, etc.) I would not sign on. Neither would a lot of powerful people/groups, including some MCs. This thing would be DOA.

Limiting growth is another issue. I don't see any support in Congress for this. Non-mandatory approaches could be used, such as providing financial incentives for people to move from dry areas to wet areas - if the wet areas want them! But then you have placed the Federal (or state?) government in the position of picking winners and losers, and that won't fly.

[Tim]

Reading this after the more recent post ("Been there, haven't done that") highlights the flaws in this proposal. It is, or undoubtedly will become, all about expanding supply. Not a word or hint about constraining growth, conservation, etc. It is BAU (SOS). This gives it a good chance of getting funded, and perhaps some good will accidentally arise, but all I foresee is more Cadillac Desert.