City Council

Newport News City Council Work Session May 9, 2017  Treats waste water treatment plant effluent to drinking water quality  Injects the highly treated water into the Potomac aquifer, which provides a majority of local ground water usage  Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) credits = savings of up to $55 million for Newport News  Injection may reduce or even reverse ground subsidence • Previous over-withdrawals from aquifer • May reduce impact of sea level • rise  By August, sign a new MOA accepting TMDL credits and regionally supporting the concept  Current estimate HRSD Projected Cumulative Fiscal Year Rate Increase Increase is in the range of 2018 9.0% 9.0% 2019 9.0% 18.8% 2020 9.0% 29.5% $1.5 billion 2021 9.0% 41.2% 2022 9.0% 53.9%  Paid for by HRSD 2023 9.0% 67.7% 2024 7.0% 79.4% through their 2025 2026 7.0% 7.0% 92.0% 105.5% rates 2027 2028 7.0% 6.0% 119.8% 133.0%  Source: HRSD Annual Budget for FY Ended June 30, 2017 2029 6.0% 147.0% 2030 6.0% 161.8% 2031 6.0% 177.5% 2032 6.0% 194.2% 2033 6.0% 211.8% 2034 6.0% 230.5% 2035 6.0% 250.4%  Technical feasibility studies first task for HRSD  New MOA includes exit strategies if not feasible  2015 Regional Memorandum of Agreement • consolidates overflows reduction work • costs about $2 billion vs $3 billion for locality plans  Savings come from best regional analysis versus individual locality requirements  HRSD to work on the locality systems at HRSD expense over about 15 years ( thru 2030)  HRSD becomes responsible for “capacity” related overflows upon plan implementation Do SWIFT now Delay locality work under the MOA •Limited work until 2038 •Completion in 2053  NEW OBLIGATION TO CITY  G/h/d  Reduced Capacity = Regulator Risk Implementation Delays Reductions in HRSD Planned Work “Capacity” 70% of $120 million? Definition Tightened  SWIFT = NO TMDL Costs • Caveats  Needs to be proven viable  Regional support – Hampton already signed  Current Program • $55 million over 15 years Cost/Revenue Projection After Removing TMDL Costs = $55 million Cost growth reflects inflation and committed costs only  SWIFT itself is generally favored • Eliminates TMDL and related costs • Helps with subsidence/sea level rise • Reduces pollutants to local waters • Handled 100% by HRSD  Stormwater cost reductions will be offset somewhat by wastewater cost increases  Staff will present the MOA for City Council authorization to execute in June  Clean Water Act is driving costs for all three major water components in the US Drinking Water Storm Water Waste Water  US EPA recognizes the issue  Allows consideration of “affordability”  National guideline = 4.5% of Median Household Income for all 3 combined  NN MHI about $51,000 (NOTE: Regional MHI is higher, and is used by HRSD)  HRPDC presented last week to the Chief Administrative Officers on this concern  Monthly bill calculated for $192 a family of four using 100 gallons Hampton Roads per person per day. How to keep “Water Bill” affordable? Reduce Reallocate Use Cash Costs Costs Capital where Reduce Low-income Several customer possible services rates assistance programs are Economies of available in Lifeline Rates SWIFT financing scale Hampton Roads thru Virginia but they may not Resources be robust enough Authority Refinance Fund external debt organizations for future needs. Integrated Planning Prioritize Customer (Wastewater, assistance spending Stormwater, programs Water Supply) 19  Regulation is continuing to drive regional “water” services rates higher  Even so, we are continuously evaluating how to keep water services affordable  As a relatively low MHI locality in the region, we are especially aware that MHI does not capture all of our population