Legislative Water Commission Meeting - April 1, 2019

1. Legislative Water Commission April 1, 2019 Co-Chairs: Representative Peter Fischer Senator Bill Weber Jim Stark, Director

2. Agenda • Approval of Minutes-February 11 & March 18, 2019 • Welcome to new member: Senator Michael Goggin • Issue Presentation: Lori Blair, MN Rural Water Association • Update: Section 404 Assumption – Clean Water Act • History of proposed changes to specific conductance standard • Discussion: Progress and next steps – LWC bills • Discussion: Bill – Consolidated Water Agency • Proposed field tour with CWC, LCCMR, LSOHC ~ Summer • Status of other introduced water legislation • Scheduling meetings during session • Adjourn

3. 12 Appointed Members • Representative jeff brand dfl district 19A st. peter • Senator rich draheimgop Madison lake • Senator chriseatondfl district 40 Brooklyn center • Senator kentekendfl district 4 twin valley • Representative peter fischerdfl district 43a Maplewood • Senator Michael Goggin gop district 21 red wing • Representative josh Heintzeman gop district 10a Nisswa • Representative todd Lippert dfl district 20B northfield • Representative john postongop district 9a lake shore • Representative paul Torkelson gop district 16b hanska • Senator bill weber gop district 22 luverne • Senator chuck wigerdfl district 43 Maplewood

4. Minnesota rural water association Lori blair presenting

5. Update: section 404 assumption clean water actAdapted from MN inter-county association • Simplifies the wetland permit process • One permit for projects with wetland impact • One regulatory agency • Should save time & money • Little reduction in the protection and retention of wetlands • Clean water act and the state wetland conservation act will continue in effect and require appropriate mitigation of adverse wetland impacts

6. challenges • Wetlands conservation act (wca) and section 404 need to be harmonized so that they can be administered together • Mapping of waters assumed will need to be completed

7. Legislation to begin the process of assumption has been introduced • SF 962, Mathews • Hf 1170, Ecklund • While the bills will lay the groundwork for assumption, a final application for assumption will require additional legislation sign off • Delays in legislative action may allow other states to get ahead of Minnesota in the queue for section 404 assumption

8. Next steps in the process • Interagency coordination (bwsr, dnr, pca) • Negotiations with epa • Stakeholder outreach and coordination • Specific and targeted statute and rule changes • Funding for application development and program implementation • Budget and staffing impact analysis needed • If legislation is not passed – potential lwc recommendation topic?

9. History of proposed changes to the specific conductance standardspecific conductance water quality standard • Conductivity is a measure of water’s capacity to pass electrical current • Specific conductance (sc) is a measure corrected to 25 degrees C • Sc is used to compare waters • Changes are an indicator of changes in quality of water • Significant changes may be detrimental to water quality and to aquatic organisms

10. Specific conductance • No universal standard in water • Sc standard, for most rivers, is 1,000 microsiemens per centimeter • Some approximate values for specific conductance: • Waters of Minnesota are grouped into classes • Within classes, standards exist for use and benefits • Sc standard applies to class 4 waters • Relates to water for irrigation • Class 3 and 4 standards were adopted in the 1960’s

11. Specific conductance water quality standard (part II) • Cwa requires reviews of standards • 2008-2012 review – mpca contracted um • Um recommended updates to the class 3 & 4 • The um report was completed in 2010 • Based on those recommendations, and other factors, mpca is considering a change process to rules • A change in the sc standard is proposed • Mpca completed a preliminary comment period • Comment process is used to obtain input • Mpca has provided ideas and sought feedback for rulemaking • That process is complete • Mpca now has a request for comments • The formal rulemaking process begins thereafter

12. 13 recommendations • Inflow and infiltration – wastewater • Healthy soil/healthy water • Water infrastructure • Peer review of wastewater standards • Reducing excess chloride • Continuation of the legislative water commission • Keeping water on the land • Data, information, education, and public awareness • Preserving and protecting our lakes • Expanded source water program • Increase drinking water protection fee • Statewide water policy • Educational curriculum – water – k-12

13. Status of lwc bills • Most have been introduced • Progressing in the house • One bill heard in the senate

14. discussion • Concerns • Commission’s guidance to the legislature is not adequate • Commission bills do not contain background needed by the legislature • Guidance on major issues is not being provided

15. Interim topics • Effectiveness of water management • One water agency – a positive change? • Permits: is there a way to create efficiency, interagency – regional facilitators • Erosion of general funds for water • Environmental funding compared to other states. Are we a leader? • Is 404 wetlands assumption a good idea? • Are we planning for an uncertain future? • Minnesota’s most important water priorities • Others?

16. Sf 2102: creation of a department of water resources • Combines agency water responsibilities • Proposes new laws and statutes • Abolishes bwsr, eqb • Background on framework – 2011 • Um and partners addresses water governance • Water agencies: 20 federal, 7 state, many local evolved independently over time • Policy development in an additive manner • Recognize inefficiencies and disconnections • Lack of integration over natural water and political boundaries

17. Framework makes recommendations • Increase coordination across agencies • Increase legislative capacity better coordination with local agencies • Better coordination with local agencies • Systems (watershed and aquifer) management rather than on political boundaries • Increase ability to manage long term issues (water sustainability and climate change) • Water congress to review, assess statutes, rules crossing agencies and to suggest changes • Create a water sustainability act • More authority to watershed organizations • Increase agency and local coordination • develop an interagency data/information portal

18. Mpca led governance evaluation - 2013 • Reported to legislature • Create interagency water-management “system” – improve lateral coordination • Agencies: use resources more efficiently • Improved customer service (regional interagency customer advocate?) • Improve sustainable water management – implement 1 water/1 plan • Simplify the permit process • Increase the ability to manage long-term issues (climate change)

19. Some things to consider • Some recommendations are implemented • Super agency • Could be more efficient • Could create a simplified permit process – regional permit advocates? • Might reduce organizational silos • Many laws/rules would need revision • In some agencies, water is a component of a larger mission (Health and agriculture, for example) • Some agencies are constrained by delegated federal authority – complicated and potential loss of federal funds? • Wisconsin DNR is an example – regional silos

20. Discussion and next steps • If bills are not passed, this could be a topic for LWC review and recommendations • discussion

21. Closing thoughts • Proposed field tour with cwc, lccmr, lsohc – summer • Spring flood update • Next meeting: ? Thanks!