Federally Supported Water Supply and
Wastewater Treatment Programs
Claudia Copeland, Coordinator
Specialist in Resources and Environmental Policy
Betsy A. Cody
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
Mary Tiemann
Specialist in Environmental Policy
Nicole T. Carter
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
Megan Stubbs
Analyst in Agricultural Conservation and Natural Resources Policy
March 19, 2010
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RL30478
CRS Report for Congress
P
repared for Members and Committees of Congress

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Summary
Although the federal government has played a significant role in developing water quality
regulations and standards for municipal and industrial (M&I) water use, it historically has
provided a relatively small percentage of the funding for construction of water supply and
treatment facilities for M&I uses. Yet, several programs exist to assist communities with
development of water supply and treatment projects, and it appears that Congress is more
frequently being asked to authorize direct financial and technical assistance for developing or
treating water supplies for M&I use.
This report provides background information on the types of water supply and wastewater
treatment projects traditionally funded by the federal government and the several existing
programs to assist communities with water supply and wastewater recycling and treatment. These
projects and programs are found primarily within the Department of Agriculture (USDA),
Department of Commerce, Department of Defense (DOD), Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD), Department of the Interior (DOI), and the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
The focus of some programs has been enlarged over the years. The Department of the Interior’s
Bureau of Reclamation was established to implement the Reclamation Act of 1902, which
authorized the construction of water works to provide water for irrigation in arid western states.
Congress subsequently authorized other uses of project water, including M&I use. Even so, the
emphasis of Reclamation’s operations was to provide water for irrigation. Similarly, the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (Department of Defense) constructed large reservoirs primarily for
flood control, but was authorized in 1958 to allocate water for M&I purposes. Over the past 30-
plus years, Congress has authorized and refined several programs to assist local communities in
addressing other water supply and wastewater problems. These programs serve generally
different purposes and have different financing mechanisms; however, there is some overlap.
Federal funding for the programs and projects discussed in this report varies greatly. For example,
Congress provided $1.4 billion in FY2010 appropriations for grants to states under EPA’s State
Revolving Fund (SRF) loan program for drinking water facilities and $2.1 billion for EPA’s SRF
program for wastewater facilities; funds appropriated for the USDA’s rural water and waste
disposal grant and loan programs are $551 million for FY2010; HUD Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) funds (used partly but not exclusively for water and wastewater projects)
are $3.95 billion for FY2010. Congress also provided $140 million for municipal wastewater and
drinking water treatment environmental infrastructure projects of the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers. In contrast, Reclamation’s Title 16 reclamation/recycling program received a total of
$13.6 million for FY2010.
For each of the projects and programs discussed, this report describes project or program
purposes, financing mechanisms, eligibility requirements, recent funding, and the
Administration’s FY2011 budget request.

Congressional Research Service

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1
Background ................................................................................................................................ 1
Department of the Interior ........................................................................................................... 5
Bureau of Reclamation..........................................................................................................5
Traditional Multi-purpose and Rural Water Supply Projects............................................. 6
Title 16 Projects .............................................................................................................. 7
Department of Defense ............................................................................................................... 9
Army Corps of Engineers (Civil Works Program).................................................................. 9
Environmental Infrastructure......................................................................................... 11
Department of Agriculture......................................................................................................... 12
Rural Utilities Service (Water and Waste Disposal Programs) .............................................. 12
Natural Resources Conservation Service (Small Watershed Program) .................................. 15
Environmental Protection Agency ............................................................................................. 19
Clean Water State Revolving Fund Loan Program ............................................................... 19
Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Loan Program .......................................................... 22
Department of Housing and Urban Development....................................................................... 24
Community Development Block Grants .............................................................................. 24
Department of Commerce ......................................................................................................... 26
Economic Development Administration (Public Works and Economic Development
Program).......................................................................................................................... 26

Tables
Table 1. Federal Water Supply Program/Project Financing........................................................... 3

Contacts
Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 28

Congressional Research Service

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Introduction
Although the federal government has played a significant role in developing water quality
regulations and standards for municipal and industrial (M&I) water use, it historically has
provided a relatively small percentage of the funding for construction of water supply and
treatment facilities for M&I uses. Yet, several programs exist to assist communities with
development of water supply and treatment projects, and it appears that Congress is being asked
more frequently to authorize direct financial and technical assistance for developing or treating
water supplies for M&I use. Recent proposals include “rural water supply projects” to be built
and funded by the Bureau of Reclamation in the Department of the Interior (hereafter referred to
as Reclamation), water recycling projects built and partially funded by Reclamation, and
programs for water supply and wastewater treatment projects to be largely funded by the U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). Interest also has been growing in expanding the size and scope
of the State Revolving Fund loan programs under the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking
Water Act, as well as support for individual wastewater and drinking water projects through
congressionally earmarked grants in appropriations legislation.
This report provides background information on the types of water supply and wastewater
treatment projects traditionally funded by the federal government and the several existing
programs to assist communities with water supply and wastewater treatment. Projects developed
by Reclamation and the Corps typically require direct, individual project authorizations from
Congress. In contrast, projects funded by other agencies are funded through standing program
authorizations. These programs are found primarily within the Department of Agriculture
(USDA), Department of Commerce, Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD),
and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The key practical difference is that with the
individual project authorizations there is no predictable assistance, or even guarantee of funding
after a project is authorized, because funding must be secured each year in the congressional
appropriations process. The programs, on the other hand, have set program criteria, are generally
funded from year to year, and provide a process under which project sponsors compete for
funding.
For each of the projects and programs discussed, this report describes purposes, financing
mechanisms, eligibility requirements, and recent funding. The report does not address special
projects and programs aimed specifically at assisting Indian Tribes, Alaskan Native Villages, and
Colonias,1 or other regional programs such as those associated with the Appalachian Region or
U.S. Territories.
Background
The federal government has built hundreds of water projects over the years, primarily dams and
reservoirs for irrigation development and flood control, with M&I use as an incidental project
purpose. Most of the nation’s public municipal water systems have been built by local
communities under prevailing state water laws.

1 Colonias typically are rural, unincorporated communities or housing developments near the U.S.-Mexico border that
lack some or all basic infrastructure, including plumbing and public water and sewer.
Congressional Research Service
1

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) was established to implement the Reclamation Act of
1902, which authorized the construction of water works to provide water for irrigation in arid
western states. Congress subsequently authorized other uses of project water, including M&I use.
Even so, the emphasis of Reclamation’s operations has been to provide water for irrigation. This
emphasis is evidenced in part in the different payment mechanisms that evolved to finance
projects (described below). Similarly, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) constructed
large reservoirs primarily for flood control, but was authorized in 1958 (Water Supply Act of
1958, 72 Stat. 320; 43 U.S.C. § 390b) to allocate water for M&I purposes. In this act, Congress
emphasized the primacy of non-federal interests:
It is declared to be the policy of the Congress to recognize the primary responsibilities of the
States and local interests in developing water supplies for domestic, municipal, industrial,
and other purposes and that the Federal Government should participate and cooperate with
States and local interests in developing such water supplies in connection with the
construction, maintenance, and operation of Federal navigation, flood control, irrigation, or
multiple purpose projects. (43 U.S.C. § 390(b))
Over the past 30-plus years, Congress has authorized and refined several programs to assist local
communities in addressing other water supply and wastewater problems. The agencies that
administer these programs differ in scope and mission. For example, the primary responsibilities
of the Corps of Engineers are to maintain inland navigation, provide for flood and storm damage
reduction and restore aquatic ecosystems, while EPA’s mission relates to protecting public health
and safeguarding the national environment. Others, such as HUD and the Department of
Commerce, focus on community and economic development. Likewise, the specific programs
discussed in this report—while all address water supply and wastewater treatment—differ in
important respects. Some are national in scope (those of USDA, EPA, and the Department of
Commerce, for example), while others are regionally focused (Reclamation’s programs and
projects). Some focus primarily on urban areas (HUD), others on rural areas (USDA), and others
do not distinguish based on community size (e.g., EPA, the Corps). In addition, these programs
serve generally different purposes and have different financing mechanisms (some provide grants,
others authorize loans); however, there is some overlap. For example, the rural water and waste
disposal program of the USDA typically authorizes “water delivery” assistance to improve
community water systems and water quality, while EPA’s drinking water infrastructure program is
driven primarily by “end of the pipe” water quality requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act
(SDWA). Similarly, while the Clean Water Act sets performance standards for discharges of
municipally treated sewage, it also provides financial assistance to municipalities for constructing
and improving treatment facilities in order to comply with the law.
Federal funding for the programs and projects discussed in this report varies greatly. For example,
for FY2010, Congress provided $1.4 billion in appropriations for grants to states under EPA’s
State Revolving Fund (SRF) loan program for drinking water facilities and $2.1 billion for EPA’s
SRF loan program for wastewater treatment facilities; funds appropriated for the USDA’s core
rural utilities programs total $551 million for FY2010; HUD Community Development Block
Grant funds (used partly but not exclusively for water and wastewater projects) are $3.95 billion
for FY2010. Congress also provided $140 million for wastewater and drinking water treatment
environmental infrastructure projects of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In contrast,
Reclamation’s Title 16 reclamation/recycling program received approximately $13.6 million for
FY2010—funding for all of Reclamation was $1.1 billion for FY2010. Collectively,
congressional funding for these programs in recent years has been somewhat eroded by overall
competition among the many programs that are supported by discretionary spending, despite the
continuing pressure from stakeholders and others for increased funding. However, each also
Congressional Research Service
2

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

received FY2009 supplemental appropriations in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
(ARRA, P.L. 111-5),2 and higher funding levels in FY2010, as shown in Table 1.
It is also important to note that state and local contributions are a significant source of total funds
available to local communities for drinking water and wastewater improvements. For example,
from FY1991 through FY2000, states contributed about $10.1 billion to match $18.0 billion in
EPA capitalization grants for drinking water and wastewater SRFs and made about $13.5 billion
available for these activities under state-sponsored grant and loan programs and by selling general
obligation and revenue bonds.3
The following table summarizes financial and other key elements of the projects and program
activities discussed in this report.
Table 1. Federal Water Supply Program/Project Financing
Agency and
Project/
Type of
Federal/
Average
FY2010
FY2011
Projects or
Program
Financial
Non-
Amount of
Funding
Program
Purposes
Assistance
Federal
Funding
Cost Share
Assistance
Request
USDOI Bureau Multi-purpose
De facto loan 0%/100%,
Not applicable Not readily
(Total
of Reclamation projects,
with interest
available
agency
which may
for M&I usesb
approps.
include M&I
(Total agency
a
request is
approps. are
$1.0
$1.1 billion)
billion)
USDOI Bureau Wastewater
De facto grant Up to
$2.1 million
$13.6 million
$29.0
of Reclamation reclamation
(see
25%/75%;
(includes $3
million
(Title 16 of
and reusea
discussion on dollar limits
million in Title
P.L. 102-575)
pages 5-9)
may apply
16 funds for
another
Reclamation
program,
CALFED)
USDOI Bureau Indian and
De facto grant Non-Indian
$15.0 million
$121.3 million $62.0
of Reclamation non-Indian
(see
projects:
million
rural water
discussion on average of
supplya
pages 5-9),
64%/26% ;
plus loan
Indian
projects:
average of
100%/0%
US Army
Multi-purpose
Loans
0%/100%,
Not applicable $5.0 million
$4.0
Corps of
water
with interestb
million
Engineers
projects,
(general)
which may
include M&Ia

2 For information, see CRS Report R40216, Water Infrastructure Funding in the American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act of 2009.
3 U.S. General Accounting Office (now Government Accountability Office), Water Infrastructure: Information on
Federal and State Financial Assistance, November 2001, GAO-02-134, p. 18. Hereinafter, GAO Water Infrastructure.
Congressional Research Service
3

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Federal/
Agency and
Project/
Type of
Average
FY2011
Projects or
Program
Financial
Non-
Amount of
FY2010
Funding
Program
Purposes
Assistance
Federal
Funding
Cost Share
Assistance
Request
U.S. Army
“Environ-
Technical/
75%/25% Planning
and
$140 million
None in
Corps of
mental
planning and
design: $0.5
FY2011
Engineers
infrastruc-
design
million to $25
(multiple
ture”a
services or
million; design
sections of
grants; design
and
WRDAs and
and
construction:
select Energy
construction
$0.2 million to
and Water
services or
$180 million
Development
grants
Approps. acts)
USDA Rural
Municipal
Loans and
0%/100% for
Grants:
$551 million
$535
Utilities
water supply
grants
loans
$702,000
million
Service, Water and waste
and Waste
disposal
Up to
Direct loans:
Disposal
75%/25% for
$1.424 million
Program
grants
(FY2008
average)
USDA Small
Multiple
Project
0%/100%
Average
$70.2 million
$40.5
Watershed
activities, but
grants and
authorized
($30 million
million
Program
generally must technical
Varies
federal
for Watershed total, all
include flood
advisory
according to
assistance for
and Flood
for
control
services
purpose of
new FY2009
Prevention
rehabili-
measures
improvement
projects: $2.3
Operations
tation
activity
million
and $40.2
projects
million for
rehabilitation
projects)
EPA, Clean
Municipal
Grants to
80%/20% for
Average
$2.1 billion
$2.0
Water State
wastewater
states to
grants to
capitalization
billion
Revolving Fund treatment,
capitalize
states to
grant to state:
(SRF) Loan
nonpoint
loan funds
capitalize SRFs $26 million
Program
pollution
management,
SRF loans to
0%/100%
Average
National
local project
(Project loans assistance
Estuary
sponsors
are repaid
from SRF:
Program
100% to
$2.87 million
implemen-
states)
(FY2008)
tation
EPA, Drinking
Public water
Grants to
80%/20% for
Average
$1.387 billion
$1.287
Water State
supply:
states to
grants to
capitalization
billion
Revolving Fund projects
capitalize
states to
grant to state:
(SRF) Loan
needed to
loan funds
capitalize SRFs $16.1 million
Program
meet federal
(FY2009c)
drinking water SRF loans to
0%/100%
standards and
local project
(Project loans Average
to address
sponsors
are repaid
assistance
serious health
100%)
from SRF:
risks
$2.27 million
(FY2006)
Congressional Research Service
4

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Federal/
Agency and
Project/
Type of
Average
FY2011
Projects or
Program
Financial
Non-
Amount of
FY2010
Funding
Program
Purposes
Assistance
Federal
Funding
Cost Share
Assistance
Request
HUD,
Multi-purpose
Grants, 70%
100%/0% Not
readily
$3.95 billion
$3.94
Community
community
of which are
available
billion
Development
development
reserved for
Block Grant
projects,
urban areas
Program
which may
include water
and waste
disposal
EDA, Public
Multi-purpose
Project
Generally
Average grant
$158.3 million $67.8
Works and
economic
grants
50%/50%
$1.32 million
million
Economic
development
(FY2008)
Development
projects,
Program
which can
include non-
rural, non-
residential
water and
sewer
a. These projects generally must be authorized by Congress prior to construction.
b. Although the ultimate federal cost-share may be 0%, unless otherwise stated, the federal government may
provide 100% of initial construction costs allocated to M&I use, to be repaid over the life of the loan via
repayment contracts (typically 40-50 years).
c. Excludes FY2009 supplemental appropriations under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA,
P.L. 111-5).
Department of the Interior
Bureau of Reclamation
The Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) was established to implement the Reclamation Act of
1902, which authorized the construction of water works to provide water for irrigation in arid
western states. Reclamation generally manages numerous municipal and industrial water supply
facilities as part of larger, multi-purpose reclamation projects serving irrigation, flood control,
power supply, and recreation purposes. Overall, these facilities serve approximately 31 million
people, delivering a total of approximately 28.5 million acre-feet of water (an acre-foot is enough
to cover one acre of land one foot deep, or 325,851 gallons). Reclamation-funded municipal and
industrial water deliveries total approximately 2.8 million acre-feet and have more than doubled
since 1970. Reclamation is authorized to construct projects only in the 17 western states, unless
otherwise directed by Congress.
Reclamation M&I water deliveries are generally incidental to larger project purposes. However,
since 1980, Congress has individually authorized construction of several “rural water supply”
projects and more than 40 reclamation wastewater and reuse/recycling projects (at least one
recycling project has been undertaken pursuant to general authorities). The recycling projects,
discussed below, are known as Title 16 projects because they were first authorized in 1992 under
Title 16 of P.L. 102-575. Title 16, the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Studies and
Congressional Research Service
5

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Facilities Act, also authorized Reclamation to undertake specific and general feasibility studies
for reclamation wastewater and reuse projects and to research, construct, and operate
demonstration projects.
Historically, Reclamation constructed projects with federal funds, then established a repayment
schedule based on the amount of total construction costs allocated to specific project purposes.
Reclamation project authorizations typically require 100% repayment, with interest, for M&I
water supply facilities; irrigation facilities are generally repaid without interest. In some cases,
Congress has authorized other reimbursement terms. For example, for the non-Indian portion of
some Reclamation rural water supply projects, Congress has authorized 15%-25% repayment
levels (85% and 75% federal cost-share, respectively), and in at least one case (the Perkins
County Rural Water Supply System), a grant of 75% of total project costs. The federal share of
costs for the Indian portion of Reclamation rural water projects is typically 100%. The federal
share of costs for Title 16 projects is generally much lower than non-Indian and Indian rural water
projects; it is limited to a maximum of 25% of total project costs or, for projects authorized since
1996, a maximum of $20 million. The federal share for Title 16 projects is non-reimbursable,
resulting in a de facto grant to local project sponsors.
Traditional Multi-purpose and Rural Water Supply Projects
Unlike many other programs described in this report, Reclamation undertakes projects largely at
the explicit direction of Congress. Local project sponsors may approach Reclamation or the
Congress with proposals for project construction and funding; however, a project must be
authorized by Congress before construction may begin. Because there is no “program” per se,
there are no clear and concise eligibility or program criteria. Two exceptions to this generality are
(1) the statutory authority for the Title 16 projects (Title 16 of P.L. 102-575; see discussion
below), which outlines items to be considered during development of feasibility studies, and (2)
statutory authority for creation of a rural water supply program (P.L. 109-451) and an interim
final rule establishing criteria for the program. Yet, even for these projects, Congress must
authorize construction before it is to begin.
Project Purposes
Individual authorization statutes establish project purposes. Generally, M&I projects are part of
larger, multi-purpose projects such as those built for irrigation water supply, flood control, and
hydro power. This is not necessarily so for rural water supply projects, although nearly half of the
rural water supply projects authorized to date are somehow connected to previously authorized
irrigation facilities under the Pick-Sloan Missouri Basin Program (PSMBP), or otherwise related
to water service anticipated but not received under earlier PSMBP authorizations.
Financing Mechanism
Projects are financed and constructed up front by the federal government, and costs for M&I
portions of such projects are generally repaid 100%, with interest, via “repayment contracts.”
Congress generally has authorized more favorable repayment terms for rural water supply
projects. The federal cost-share for these projects has averaged 64%, but ranges from 15% to 80%
for non-Indian rural water supply projects.
Congressional Research Service
6

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Eligibility Requirements
Generally, local governments and organizations such as irrigation, water, or conservation districts
may approach Reclamation and/or Congress for project support. All construction project funding
must be appropriated by Congress. As noted earlier, Reclamation only works on projects located
in the 17 western states (32 Stat. 388; 43 U.S.C. §391 et seq.), unless specifically authorized.
Reclamation published an interim final rule, which establishes criteria for developing new rural
supply projects.4 The rule does not apply to previously authorized projects.
Funding
Funding information for the M&I portions of multi-purpose projects is not readily available. Total
regular Reclamation appropriations for FY2010 were $1.1 billion (P.L. 111-85). The total FY2011
appropriations request for Reclamation was $1.0 billion. Funding for rural water supply projects
in FY2010 was $121.3 million; the Administration requested $62 million for these projects for
FY2011. The Administration developed its FY2011 request for rural water supply projects by
prioritizing operations and maintenance (O&M) needs first and then prioritizing construction
funding for projects serving tribal needs and those nearing completion. The average funding
allocated for rural water supply projects in FY2010 was $15.0 million (ranging from $1.0 million
to $57.0 million); however, funding under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009
was $200 million. Requested project funding for FY2011, to be divided among seven projects,
was $62.0 million.
Statutory and Regulatory Authority
Reclamation carries out its water supply activities in 17 western states as authorized by the
Reclamation Act of 1902, as amended (32 Stat. 388; 43 U.S.C. §391 et seq.). The rural water
supply program is authorized by the Rural Water Supply Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-451, Title I; 120
Stat. 3345; 43 U.S.C. 2401 note).
Title 16 Projects
Title 16 of P.L. 102-575 directs the Secretary of the Interior to develop a program to “investigate
and identify” opportunities to reclaim and reuse wastewater and naturally impaired ground and
surface water (e.g., desalination of brackish groundwater). The original act authorized
construction of 5 reclamation wastewater projects and 6 wastewater and groundwater
recycling/reclamation studies. The act was amended in 1996 (P.L. 104-266) to authorize another
18 construction projects and an additional study, and has been amended several times since,
resulting in a total of more than 50 projects authorized for construction. Water reclaimed via Title
16 projects may be used for M&I water supply (non-potable and indirect potable purposes only),
irrigation supply, groundwater recharge, fish and wildlife enhancement, or outdoor recreation.

4 For information, see http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/E8-26584.pdf.
Congressional Research Service
7

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Project Purposes
The general purpose of Title 16 projects is to provide supplemental water supplies by
recycling/reusing agricultural drainage water, wastewater, brackish surface and groundwater, and
other sources of contaminated water. Projects may be permanent or for demonstration purposes.
Financing Mechanism
Partial grants. Project construction costs are shared by the federal government and a local project
sponsor or sponsors. The federal share is generally limited to a maximum of 25% of total project
costs and is non-reimbursable, resulting in a de facto grant to the local project sponsor(s). In
1996, Congress limited the federal share of individual projects to $20 million in 1996 dollars (P.L.
104-266). The federal share of feasibility studies is limited to 50% of the total, except in cases of
“financial hardship;” however, the federal share must be reimbursed. The Secretary may also
accept in-kind services that are determined to positively contribute to the study.
Eligibility Requirements
Reclamation carries out water supply activities in 17 western states as authorized by the
Reclamation Act of 1902, as amended (32 Stat. 388; 43 U.S.C. §391). Hence, the water
reclamation and wastewater recycling program is limited to projects and studies in the 17 western
states unless otherwise specified. Authorized recipients of program assistance include “legally
organized non-federal entities,” such as irrigation districts, water districts, and municipalities.
Construction funding is generally limited to projects where (1) an appraisal investigation and
feasibility study have been completed and approved by the Secretary; (2) the Secretary has
determined the project sponsor is capable of funding the non-federal share of project costs; and
(3) the local sponsor has entered into a cost-share agreement with Reclamation.
Unlike other water supply or wastewater treatment programs administered by the EPA, USDA, or
HUD (discussed below), Reclamation’s Title 16 projects are statutorily authorized construction
projects. While Reclamation has the authority to undertake general appraisal investigations and
feasibility studies, it generally has interpreted the Title 16 language as requiring specific
congressional authorization for the construction of new projects.
During the 108th and 109th Congresses, several oversight hearings were held on the Title 16
program; however, no legislation updating the overall program authorization has been enacted
since the 1996 amendments. Reclamation issued an internal “Directives and Standards” document
(October 2007) to increase the consistency and effectiveness of the program. The Directives and
Standards did not establish a mechanism for prioritizing authorized projects; however, the agency
has drafted new criteria for use in allocating Title 16 funding in the future.
Funding
The total regular appropriation for the Title 16 program in FY2010 was $13.6 million (P.L. 111-
85). The Administration’s FY2011 request was $29.0 million. Prior year program funding ranged
from a high of $47.2 million in FY1998 to a low of $12.6 million in FY2007. Projects authorized
prior to the 1996 amendments ranged in size from $152 million ($38 million for Reclamation’s
share), to $690 million ($172 million for Reclamation’s share). Post-1996 project authorizations
Congressional Research Service
8

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

have been much smaller in size, ranging from $10 million ($2 million for Reclamation’s share) to
$280 million ($20 million for Reclamation’s share).
Statutory and Regulatory Authority
The statutory authority for the reclamation wastewater and reuse program is the Reclamation
Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act, Title 16 of P.L. 102-575, as amended (43
U.S.C. 390h et. seq.); the Reclamation Recycling and Water Conservation Act of 1996 (P.L. 104-
266); the Oregon Public Land Transfer and Protection Act of 1998 (P.L. 105-321); the 1999 Water
Resources Development Act (P.L. 106-53, Section 595); the Consolidated Appropriations Act for
FY2001 (P.L. 106-554, Division B, section 106); a bill amending the Reclamation Wastewater
and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act (P.L. 107-344); the Consolidated Appropriations Act
for FY2003 (P.L. 108-7, Division D, section 211); the Emergency Wartime Supplementals Act of
2003 (P.L. 108-11); the Irvine Basin Surface and Groundwater Improvement Act of 2003 (P.L.
108-233); a bill amending the Reclamation Wastewater and Groundwater Study and Facilities Act
(P.L. 108-316); the Hawaii Water Resources Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-70); the Consolidated Natural
Resources Act of 2009 (P.L. 110-229); the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (P.L. 110-161);
and the Omnibus Public Land Management Act of 2009 (P.L. 111-11; Title IX, Subtitle B).
Reclamation published program guidelines in December 1998 and internal Directives and
Standards for the program’s feasibility study review process in October 2007; formal regulations
have not been promulgated.5
[This section prepared by Betsy A. Cody and Nicole T. Carter, Specialists in Natural Resources
Policy, Resources, Science, and Industry Division (707-7229) and (707-0854), respectively.]
Department of Defense
Army Corps of Engineers (Civil Works Program)
Under its civil works program, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps, Department of
Defense) operates water resources projects throughout the country to meet the agency’s three
principle missions—navigation, flood damage reduction, and aquatic ecosystem restoration.
Many Corps activities also provide other benefits, such as municipal and industrial (M&I) water
supply, hydroelectric generation, benefits for fish and wildlife, and recreation.
Congress has given the Corps limited authority for M&I water supply. The Water Supply Act of
1958 (Title 3 of P.L. 85-500) authorized the Corps to recommend economically justified M&I
water supply storage space in new or existing reservoirs. More than 153 Corps reservoirs store
9.5 million acre-feet of M&I water. M&I water supplied from Corps reservoirs generally is
incidental to the reservoir’s primary purposes. The provision of M&I water from Corps reservoirs
is subject to availability, and the associated costs are 100% a local, nonfederal responsibility.
Otherwise, the Corps’ general direct involvement in providing water supplies is limited to
emergency/disaster relief, including during drought conditions or following natural disasters.

5 For information, see http://www.usbr.gov/pmts/writing/guidelines/ and http://www.usbr.gov/recman/DandS.html.
New program criteria have also been drafted and can be found at http://www.usbr.gov/WaterSMART/title.htm.
Congressional Research Service
9

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Additionally since 1992, Congress has enacted more than 400 authorizations allowing the Corps
to provide designated communities, counties, and states with design and construction assistance
for drinking water and wastewater infrastructure and source water protection and development.
As with Reclamation’s rural water supply and Title 16 projects, implementing these
authorizations has the potential to create a new mission for the Corps.
Project Purposes
As previously noted, in the Water Supply Act of 1958 Congress authorized the Corps to use its
multi-purpose reservoirs to allocate storage at Corps reservoirs to local governments or
organizations for municipal and industrial use. The act neither authorized the Corps to
significantly modify its projects in order to provide for M&I water supply, nor did it authorize the
Corps to sell or allocate quantities of water. Instead, Corps M&I contracts are for space in a
reservoir and provide no guarantee of a fixed quantity of water to be delivered in a given year.
The Corps delivers water if it is available in the storage space and if delivery does not
significantly affect the other authorized purposes of the Corps project.6
Financing Mechanism
Projects are financed up front by the federal government, and costs for M&I project purposes are
repaid 100%, with interest, via long-term (typically 30-50 years) repayment contracts.
Eligibility Requirements
Existing law and agency policy require that (1) water supply benefits and costs be equitably
allocated among multiple purposes; (2) repayment by state or local interests be agreed to before
construction; (3) the water supply allocation for anticipated demand at any project not exceed
30% of the total estimated cost; (4) repayment shall be either during construction (without
interest), or over 30 years (with adjustable interest rates); and (5) users reimburse the Corps
annually for all operation and maintenance or replacement costs. Occasional exceptions to the
Corps’ general authority have been enacted by the Congress. Some short-term sales of “surplus”
storage, as well as seasonal water storage (conservation) can be made adjunct to normal project
operating procedures.
Funding
The Corps’ water supply expenses are largely funded via repayments, with annual appropriations
requests generally around $5 million and enacted appropriations generally less than $25 million.
For FY2010, Congress appropriated $5 million (P.L. 111-85). For FY2011, the President’s budget
requested $4 million.

6 For issues related to reallocations of water storage to M&I use under the 1958 authority, see CRS Report R41092, Use
of Federal Water Projects for Municipal and Industrial Water Supply: Current Legal and Policy Issues Related to the
Water Supply Act of 1958 (WSA; 43 U.S.C. § 390b), coordinated by Cynthia Brougher.
Congressional Research Service
10

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Statutory Authority
Water Supply Act of 1958 (Title III of P.L. 85-500, as amended, 72 Stat. 320; 43 U.S.C. § 390b).7
Environmental Infrastructure
Project Purpose
Federal policy generally is that community water supply is largely a local responsibility.
However, communities, particularly rural and small communities, increasingly have sought
federal water supply assistance. Congress since 1992 has used the Corps to assist a number of
these communities with design and construction of drinking water and wastewater infrastructure
(including treatment, and distribution/collection facilities) and surface water protection and
development projects. At the Corps, these projects are broadly labeled “environmental
infrastructure” and are generally considered outside the agency’s main missions.
Financing Mechanism
Under most Corps environmental infrastructure authorizations, financing is typically 75% federal
and 25% nonfederal. The federal portion typically is provided by Congress to the Corps in annual
Energy and Water Development Act appropriations legislation. How the Corps and nonfederal
financing is managed varies according to the specifics of the authorization. Sometimes the Corps
is responsible and uses the funds to perform the work or contract out the work; under other
authorizations, the Corps uses appropriated funds to reimburse nonfederal sponsors for their
work.
Eligibility Requirements
Because environmental infrastructure activities are not part of a national Corps program per se,
there are no clear and/or consistent general eligibility criteria. Because the activities are not
traditional water resources projects, they are not subject to the planning requirements of most
Corps projects (e.g., a benefit-cost analysis is not performed).
Typically Congress has authorized the Corps to assist either an environmental infrastructure
project in a specific location (e.g., a small city), or created a program for a defined geographic
area (e.g., a county or a state). Consequently, an activity’s eligibility is evaluated by identifying
whether there is an authorization for the geographic area of the activity, and whether the type of
activity is eligible under that authorization.
Funding
Appropriations have not kept pace with Corps environmental infrastructure authorizations; only a
subset of authorized Corps environmental infrastructure projects receive appropriations annually.
The Clinton, George W. Bush, and Obama Administrations left environmental infrastructure
projects out of their Corps budget requests. However since 1992, Congress has provided the

7 For information on the Corps’ civil works program, see http://www.usace.army.mil/Services/Pages/Services.aspx.
Congressional Research Service
11

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Corps roughly $2 billion in funds for environmental infrastructure. The Energy and Water
Appropriations Act of FY2010 (P.L. 111-85) included $140.0 million for Corps environmental
infrastructure projects. The Administration requested no funding for these projects in the FY2011
budget.
Statutory Authority
Prior to 1992, the Corps generally was not involved with municipal drinking water treatment and
distribution and wastewater collection and treatment; the agency is now authorized to contribute
to more than 400 environmental infrastructure projects and programs. A Water Resources
Development Act (WRDA) is the typical legislative vehicle for Corps authorizations. Beginning
with Sections 219 and 313 of WRDA 1992 (P.L. 102-580), Congress has authorized the Corps to
assist local interests with technical planning and design and design and construction assistance for
environmental infrastructure projects. Subsequent WRDAs authorized new environmental
infrastructure projects, and raised the funding ceilings for many of the projects previously
authorized. Congress also has authorized Corps environmental infrastructure activities in
appropriations legislation.
[This section prepared by Nicole T. Carter, Specialist in Natural Resources Policy, Resources,
Science and Industry Division (707-0854).]
Department of Agriculture
Rural Utilities Service (Water and Waste Disposal Programs)
The USDA administers grant and loan programs for water and wastewater projects in low-income
rural communities whose residents face significant health risks because they do not have access to
water supply systems or waste disposal facilities. Eligibility is limited to communities of 10,000
or less. These programs are administered at the national level by the Rural Utilities Service (RUS)
at USDA. RUS allocates program funds to the Rural Economic and Community Development
(RECD) state offices through an allocation formula based on rural population, poverty, and
unemployment. District RECD offices actually administer the programs locally. In recent years,
approximately 65% of loan funds and 57% of grant funds have been obligated to water projects;
the remainder have been obligated to waste disposal projects.
Prior to enactment of the 1996 farm bill (P.L. 104-127), these grants and loans, as well as other
USDA rural development assistance, were authorized as separate programs. In P.L. 104-127,
Congress consolidated 14 existing rural development grant and loan programs into three
categories for better coordination and greater local involvement. This program is called the Rural
Community Advancement Program (RCAP). The three components are the Rural Utilities Service
(RUS, which includes water and waste disposal activities), Rural Community Facilities, and
Rural Business and Cooperative Development programs.8

8 RCAP is designed to give RECD state offices flexibility in targeting financial assistance to community and regional
needs. Thus, within the three components of RCAP, up to 25% of funds can be transferred between programs within
any state, as long as transfers do not result in changes in the national funding stream of more than 10%.
Congressional Research Service
12

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

There is heavy demand for water and waste disposal funds. At the end of FY2007, USDA
reported a $2.4 billion backlog of requests for 928 water and wastewater projects. In addition to
this, EPA’s 2007 drinking water infrastructure needs survey showed over $59 billion needed by
small water systems serving 3,300 or fewer people over the next 20 years to install, upgrade, or
replace infrastructure to ensure safe drinking water. The 2004 EPA wastewater needs survey
reported that small communities (those with a population under 10,000) need to spend $17 billion
for their wastewater facilities to meet water quality objectives of the Clean Water Act.
Program Purpose
The purpose of these programs is to provide basic human amenities, alleviate health hazards, and
promote the orderly growth of the nation’s rural areas by meeting the need for new and improved
rural water and waste disposal facilities. Funds may be used for installation, repair, improvement,
or expansion of rural water facilities, including costs of distribution lines and well-pumping
facilities.
Financing Mechanism
USDA provides grants and loans for water and waste disposal projects. USDA prefers making
loans; grants are made only when necessary to reduce average annual user charges to a reasonable
level. The split between loans and grants is about 70-30; the ratio of drinking water to sewer
projects has been about 60-40 in recent years. There is no statutory distribution formula. Funds
are allocated to states based upon rural population, number of households in poverty, and
unemployment. There are no matching requirements for states.
Water and Waste Disposal Loans. The Rural Development Act of 1972 authorized establishment
of the Rural Development Insurance Fund under the Consolidated Farm and Rural Development
Act. Among other activities, this fund is used for loans (direct and guaranteed) to develop storage,
treatment, purification, or distribution of water or collection, treatment, or disposal of waste in
low-income rural areas. Loans are repayable in not more than 40 years or the useful life of the
facilities, whichever is less. USDA makes either direct loans to applicants or guarantees up to
90% of loans made by third-party lenders such as banks and savings and loan associations.
Loan interest rates are based on the community’s economic and health environment and are
designated poverty, market, or intermediate. Poverty interest rate loans are made in areas where
the median household income (MHI) falls below the higher of 80% of the statewide nonurban
MHI, or the poverty level, and the project is needed to meet health or sanitary standards; by law,
this rate is set at 60% of the market rate. The market rate is adjusted quarterly and is set using the
average of a specified 11-bond index. It applies to loans to applicants where the MHI of the
service area exceeds the statewide nonurban MHI. The intermediate rate applies to loans that do
not meet the criteria for the poverty rate and which do not have to pay the market rate; by law,
this rate is set at 80% of the market rate.9 Interest rates on guaranteed loans are negotiated
between the borrower and the lender.
Water and Waste Disposal Grants. Grants for the development costs of water supply and waste
disposal projects in rural areas also are authorized under the Consolidated Farm and Rural

9 For current interest rates, see http://www.usda.gov/rus/water/int-rate.htm.
Congressional Research Service
13

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Development Act. Only communities with poverty and intermediate rate incomes qualify for
USDA grants. An eligible project must serve a rural area that is not likely to decline in population
below the level for which the project was designed and constructed so that adequate capacity will
or can be made available to serve the reasonably foreseeable growth needs of the area.
Grant funds may be available for up to 75% of the development cost of a project and should only
be used to reduce user costs to a reasonable level. Grants are only made after a determination of
the maximum amount of loan that a community can afford and still have reasonable user rates.
Grants, which typically provide 35%-45% of project costs, may be used to supplement other
funds borrowed or furnished by applicants for project costs, and may be combined with USDA
loans when the applicant is able to repay part, but not all, of the project costs. Priority is given to
projects serving populations of less than 5,500.
Emergency and Imminent Community Water Assistance Grants. RUS also is authorized to help
rural residents where a significant decline in quantity or quality of drinking water exists or is
imminent and funds are needed to obtain adequate quantities of water that meet standards of the
Safe Drinking Water Act or the Clean Water Act. Grants, ranging from $10,000 to a maximum of
$500,000, are provided for projects to serve a rural area with a population of 10,000 or less that
has a median household income not in excess of the statewide nonmetropolitan median household
income. Grants for repairs, partial replacement, or significant maintenance of an established
system cannot exceed $150,000. Communities use the funds for new systems, waterline
extensions, construction of water source and treatment facilities, and repairs or renovation of
existing systems and may be awarded for 100% of project cost. Applicants compete on a national
basis for available funding. The 2008 farm bill (P.L. 110-246) authorized $35 million per year
through FY2012 for this program. Funding for it is mandatory through reservation of 3% to 5%
of appropriated water and waste disposal grant funds. Amounts provided through this program
have been quite variable over time, depending on need. In FY2008, $6.8 million was distributed
to projects in 12 states; in FY2009, $4.5 million was distributed in 10 states.
Eligibility Requirements
Eligible entities are municipalities, counties, and other political subdivisions of a state;
associations, cooperatives,10 and organizations operated on a not-for-profit basis; Indian tribes on
federal and state reservations; and other federally recognized tribes. USDA’s loan and grant
programs are limited to community service areas (including areas in cities or towns) with
population of 10,000 or less. To be eligible for assistance, communities must have been denied
credit through normal commercial channels. Also, communities must be below certain income
levels. Loans and grants are made for projects needed to meet health or sanitary standards,
including Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking Water Act standards and requirements. The 2008
farm bill (P.L. 110-246) authorized $10 million per year through FY2012 for USDA to make
grants to private nonprofit organizations for the purpose of providing loans to eligible individuals
for construction, refurbishing, and servicing of individually owned household water well systems.
Loans are limited to $11,000 per water well system. P.L. 110-246 also authorized $30 million

10 Rural electric cooperatives are private entities that build and manage rural utility systems. The 1990 farm bill (P.L.
101-624) authorized rural coops to expand from their traditional electricity and telephone services. An estimated 80 to
90 rural electric coops (less than 10% of the total number of coops nationwide) currently are involved in some aspect of
drinking water or wastewater management, with the majority dealing with drinking water management.
Congressional Research Service
14

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

annually through FY2012 in grants to nonprofit organizations to capitalize revolving loans for
water and waste disposal facilities.
Funding
Beginning with USDA’s FY1996 appropriation (P.L. 104-37), Congress consolidated the water
and waste disposal grant and loan appropriations in a single Rural Community Assistance
Program. Funds available through FY2010 appropriations for water and waste disposal grants and
loans are $551 million (P.L. 111-80). For FY2011, the President’s budget requested $535 million
in appropriations for these programs. According to the budget justification, this proposal will
support $1.6 billion in program activity, counting both appropriations and activities resulting from
direct and guaranteed loans. Out of the total FY2010 funds, USDA has available $993,000 for
grants to provide loans for individually owned water well systems and $497,000 to capitalize
revolving loans for water and waste disposal systems. The FY2011 budget requested the same
level of funding for these assistance activities.
Statutory and Regulatory Authority
Statutory authority for the water and waste disposal loan and grant programs is the Consolidated
Farm and Rural Development Act, as amended, Section 306, 7 U.S.C. 1926. Regulations for these
programs are codified at 7 CFR Parts 1778-1780.11
[This section prepared by Claudia Copeland, Specialist in Resources and Environmental Policy,
Resources, Science and Industry Division (707-7227).]
Natural Resources Conservation Service (Small Watershed
Program)
The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Watershed and Flood Prevention
Operations Program (often referred to as the Small Watershed Program) authorizes activities
under four closely related authorities that are administered by the Natural Resources Conservation
Service (NRCS). Two of these authorities, known as P.L. 566 and P.L. 534, authorize NRCS to
provide technical and financial assistance to state and local organizations to plan and install
measures to prevent erosion, sedimentation, and flood damage and to conserve, develop, and
utilize land and water resources. The other authorities are an emergency program and a newer
rehabilitation authority, enacted in 2000, that is discussed at the end of this section.
This set of activities is often referred to as the Small Watershed Program because the vast
majority of the projects have been built under the authority of P.L. 83-566, the Watershed
Prevention and Flood Protection Act of 1954. This act encourages smaller projects which are
authorized by the Chief of the NRCS. Larger projects must be approved by Congress. P.L. 566 is
called the Small Watershed Program because no project may exceed 250,000 acres, and no
structure may exceed more than 12,500 acre-feet of floodwater detention capacity, or 25,000 acre-

11 For additional information on RUS water and environmental programs, see http://www.usda.gov/rus/water/
index.htm. For program information and contacts, see https://www.cfda.gov/index?s=program&mode=form&tab=
step1&id=b7e858e64236703b5b63ecd136a83b95.
Congressional Research Service
15

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

feet of total capacity. The Senate and House Agriculture Committees must approve projects that
need an estimated federal contribution of more than $5 million for construction or include a
storage structure with a capacity in excess of 2,500 acre feet; and if the storage structure has a
capacity in excess of 4,000 acre feet, approval is also required from the Senate Environment and
Public Works Committee and the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.
Under P.L. 566, 1,750 projects had been authorized through FY2009. Of that total, 1,063 have
been completed, while 297 others are active. Also, 158 were subsequently deauthorized, 190 are
inactive, and 42 have reached the end of their project life. The number of projects grew slightly in
FY2009 with the addition of six new authorized projects. These are the first new authorized
projects since FY2005. The backlog of authorized projects awaiting funding remains substantial,
and is estimated to be $1.25 billion currently. The funding backlog decreased slightly because of
additional FY2009 funding appropriated in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009 (ARRA, P.L. 111-5), which provided an additional $145 million above the annual
appropriation.
Each P.L. 566 project is initiated by a local project sponsor. Project sponsors provide assistance in
preparing plans and installing whatever measures are needed to implement those plans. NRCS
works with the project sponsor to develop the plan, provides the necessary technical assistance,
and may assist in all aspects of planning and construction. Either NRCS or the local organization
may administer construction contracts.
The 11 projects that were specifically authorized under P.L. 78-534, the Flood Control Act of
1944, are much larger and more expensive then P.L. 566 projects. These projects, which
encompass a total of almost 37.9 million acres, an area slightly larger than Iowa, are divided into
component projects in sub watersheds. NRCS reports that 397 work plans for sub-watersheds
encompassing almost 30 million acres have been completed. With the exception of the two
smallest projects, the estimated federal costs for each of these projects range from more than $40
million to more than $330 million. Three of the projects have been completed, and work on the
remainder continues in one or more sub-watersheds.
Both P.L. 566 and P.L. 534 have similar objectives and are implemented following similar
procedures. Both programs fund land treatment, and nonstructural and structural facilities for
flood prevention, erosion reduction, agricultural water management, public recreation
development, fish and wildlife habitat development, and municipal or industrial water supplies.
Structural measures can include dams, levees, canals, pumping plants, and the like. Local
sponsors agree to operate and maintain completed projects. USDA estimates that benefits for both
agricultural and non-agricultural flood protection totaled almost $750 million in FY2009.
Agricultural and non-agricultural benefits not related to flood control totaled almost $1.3 billion.
As part of its lending responsibilities, the Rural Utilities Service (RUS) at USDA (see discussion
above) makes loans to local organizations to finance the local share of the cost of installing,
repairing, or improving facilities, purchasing sites and easements, and related costs for projects
authorized under both laws. Loans are limited to $10 million; they must be repaid within 50
years; and the cost-share assistance may not exceed the rate of assistance for similar projects
under other USDA conservation programs. NRCS and the local organization must also agree on a
plan of work before a loan is obligated. In 2009, an estimated 58 borrowers had loans with a total
outstanding value of $13.7 million. Congress did not appropriate funds for new loans in FY2009.
Over the life of the program, 495 RUS loans have been made at a value of almost $176 million.
Congressional Research Service
16

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Some of the oldest Small Watershed projects that have exceeded their design life (the design life
is 50 years, and dams were constructed starting in 1948) need rehabilitation work to continue to
protect public health and safety by reducing any possibility of dam failure, and to meet changing
resource needs. In 2009 alone, 1,344 dams reached the conclusion of their design life. That
number will continue to grow each year, and by 2015 will total more than 4,300. In response to
that concern, Congress passed a new rehabilitation program in Section 313 of the Grain Standards
and Warehouse Improvement Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-472) as an amendment to the P.L. 566 law. It
appropriated $5 million in FY2001, increasing each year to $40.2 million in FY2010, to make
structural improvements to meet safety and performance standards and extend the life of the
project. NRCS may provide 65% of the total rehabilitation costs but no more than 100% of the
actual construction cost, and are prohibited from funding operation and maintenance expense.
Rehabilitation projects also provide an opportunity to modify projects to provide additional
benefits, including municipal water supplies.
Since FY2000, Congress has appropriated more than $325 million for rehabilitation projects,
including an additional $50 million in FY2009 through ARRA. By September 30, 2009, 200
rehabilitation projects had been funded, and 86 dams in 14 states had been completely
rehabilitated. In addition, project sponsors requested a total of $19.4 million to restore 82 high
priority dams in 21 states in FY2009. NRCS calculated the benefits of the 86 completed projects
to total more than $8.2 million in reduced monetary losses. It identified more than 205,000
individuals and more than 6,000 homes and businesses and 500 farms and ranches that benefit in
some way from the projects.
In 2002, Congress amended the dam rehabilitation program in Section 2505 of the 2002 farm bill
(P.L. 107-171) to provide increasing levels of discretionary funding up $85 million through
FY2007. Discretionary funding authority was sustained at $85 million annually through FY2012
under Section 2803 of the 2008 farm bill (P.L. 110-246). The 2002 farm bill amendment also
included mandatory funding for the program for the first time. The 2008 farm bill included an
additional $100 million in mandatory funding for FY2009 only. A total of $375 million in
mandatory funding has been authorized for the program between FY2003 and FY2009. Annual
appropriations acts have not allowed any mandatory funding to be spent.
Program Purpose
The purpose of the program is to provide technical and financial assistance to states and local
organizations to plan for, install, and rehabilitate watershed projects. Project purposes may
include watershed protection, flood prevention and control, water quality improvements, soil
erosion reduction, rural municipal and industrial water supply, fish and wildlife habitat
enhancement, and water conservation. Almost all projects address flood prevention and control.
Financing Mechanism
Partial project grants, plus provision of technical advisory services. Financing for water projects
under the small watershed program varies depending on project purposes. The federal
government pays all costs related to construction for flood control purposes only. Costs for non-
agricultural water supply must be repaid by local organizations; however, up to 50% of costs for
land, easements, and rights-of-way allocated to public fish and wildlife and recreational
developments may be paid with program funds. Additionally, sponsors may apply for USDA
Congressional Research Service
17

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Rural Utilities Service (RUS) Water and Waste Program loans to finance the local share of project
costs. Participating state and local organizations pay all operating and maintenance costs.
Eligibility Requirements
State agencies and qualified local organizations can apply to participate in this program and
sponsor or cosponsor an application. Qualified organizations include soil and water conservation
districts; municipalities; counties; watershed, flood-control, conservancy, drainage, irrigation, or
other special purpose districts; Indian tribal organizations, irrigation and reservoir companies,
water users associations, or similar organizations not operated for profit. Other organizations can
endorse project applications. To be eligible for funding, a proposed project must meet several
criteria, including (1) having an approved watershed plan, (2) having environmental, economic,
and social benefits that exceed project costs; and (3) having no critical environmental issues.
There are no population or community income-level limits on applications for the Small
Watershed Program; however, all projects must have flood control as one of their purposes and
must be located within small watersheds (250,000 acres or less).
Funding
The budget request for FY2011 sought no funding for Watershed and Flood Prevention
Operations and sought $40.5 million for the rehabilitation program—$336,000 above the FY2010
request. The FY2011 request was a decrease from FY2010 funding contained in P.L. 111-80,
which provided $30 million for Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations and $40.2 million for
Watershed Rehabilitation. In previous years, the Watershed and Flood Prevention Operations
appropriation had included numerous instances of congressionally designated funds for specified
projects; sometimes the total value of these designated grants approached the total appropriation.
In FY2010, $22.1 million of the $30 million (74%) appropriated for Watershed and Flood
Prevention Operations was congressionally designated for specified projects. Also in previous
years, limits had been placed on how funding could be spent by limiting the amount available for
technical assistance. In FY2010, appropriations language limited technical assistance to $12
million of the $30 million total.
In recent years, the Administration (regardless of which party has control of the White House) has
requested significant funding reductions that Congress has rejected. FY2006 was the first time, at
least in many years, that the Administration called for no funding of Watershed and Flood
Prevention Operations, and it has done so each year since then, including the FY2011 request. In
prior years, Congress had always responded by appropriating funds for these activities, usually in
amounts similar to the preceding year. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, for example, annual
appropriations averaged around $160 million, although the President’s budget often requested
lower amounts.
Historically, overall watershed funding ultimately has varied a great deal from year to year. Much
of this variation is the result of appropriations for the emergency component, which is enacted in
emergency supplemental appropriations and varies widely from year to year. Some consider the
overall watershed program to be a public works effort that supports local employment and
economic development (and therefore might support additional funding in the current economic
setting), while others consider it to be a “pork barrel” program that provides support to projects
that are frequently of limited merit.
Congressional Research Service
18

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Statutory and Regulatory Authorities
The Flood Control Act of 1944, P.L. 78-534, as amended, 58 Stat. 907 (33 U.S.C. 701b-1);
Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act of 1954, P.L. 83-566, as amended, 68 Stat. 666
(16 U.S.C. 1001-1006). Regulations are codified at 7 CFR Part 622 (Watershed and Flood
Prevention Operations) and 7 CFR 624 (Emergency Watershed Protection).12
[This section prepared by Megan Stubbs, Analyst in Agricultural Conservation and Natural
Resources Policy, Resources, Science and Industry Division (707-8707).]
Environmental Protection Agency
Clean Water State Revolving Fund Loan Program
The Clean Water Act prescribes performance levels to be attained by municipal sewage treatment
plants in order to prevent the discharge of harmful wastes into surface waters. The act also
provides financial assistance, so that communities can construct treatment facilities in compliance
with the law, which has the overall objective of restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical,
and biological integrity of the nation’s waters.
In historic terms, funding under the Clean Water Act has been the largest federal program for
wastewater treatment assistance. Since 1973, Congress has appropriated $85 billion in program
grants. Funds are distributed to states under a statutory allocation formula and are used to assist
qualified projects on priority lists that are determined by individual states. These funds are used to
assist states and localities in meeting wastewater infrastructure needs most recently estimated by
EPA and states at $236.4 billion nationally for all categories of projects eligible for federal
assistance under the law.
In 1987 Congress amended the Clean Water Act (P.L. 100-4) and initiated a new program of
federal capitalization grants to support State Water Pollution Control Revolving Funds (SRFs).
Prior to 1989 (when the SRF program became effective), states used their allotments to make
grants to cities and other eligible recipients. Since 1989, federal funds (grants of appropriated
funds) have been used to capitalize state loan programs, or SRFs, with states providing matching
funds equal to 20% of the federal funds to capitalize the SRF. All 50 states, plus Puerto Rico,
participate in the clean water SRF program. Over the long term, the loan programs are intended to
be sustained through repayment of loans to states, thus creating a continuing source of assistance
for other communities. Rural and non-rural communities compete for funding; rural areas and
other small communities have no special priority, nor are states required to reserve any specific
percentage for projects in rural areas. Nevertheless, rural areas are not shut out of the program.
EPA data indicate that since 1989, nationally, 63% of all loans and other assistance (comprising
23% of all assistance) have gone to assist communities with 10,000 people or fewer.

12 For information, see http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/programs/watershed/index.html.
Congressional Research Service
19

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Program Purpose
The clean water SRF program provides assistance in constructing publicly owned municipal
wastewater treatment plants, implementing nonpoint pollution management programs, and
developing and implementing management plans under the National Estuary Program.
Financing Mechanism
Clean water SRFs may provide seven general types of financial assistance: making loans; buying
or refinancing existing local debt obligations; guaranteeing or purchasing insurance for local debt
obligations; guaranteeing SRF debt obligations (i.e., to be used as security for leveraging the
assets in the SRF); providing loan guarantees for sub-state revolving funds; earning interest on
fund accounts; and supporting reasonable costs of administering the SRF. States may not provide
grants from an SRF. Loans are made at or below market interest rates, including zero interest
loans, as determined by the state in negotiation with the applicant. All principal and interest
payments on loans must be credited directly to the SRF.
Eligibility Requirements
Eligible loan recipients for SRF assistance are any municipality, intermunicipal, interstate, or
state agency.
Projects or activities eligible for funding are, initially, those needed for constructing or upgrading
publicly owned municipal wastewater treatment plans. As defined in Clean Water Act section
212, devices and systems used in the storage, treatment, recycling, and reclamation of municipal
sewage are eligible. These include construction or upgrading of secondary or advanced treatment
plants; construction of new collector sewers, interceptor sewers or storm sewers; and projects to
correct existing problems of sewer system rehabilitation, infiltration/inflow of sewer lines, and
combined sewer overflows. Operation and maintenance is not an eligible activity. All funds in the
clean water SRF resulting from federal capitalization grants are first to be used to assure
maintenance of progress toward compliance with enforceable deadlines, goals, and requirements
of the act, including municipal compliance. Following compliance with the “first use”
requirement, funds may be used to implement nonpoint source management programs and estuary
activities in approved State Nonpoint Management Programs and estuarine Comprehensive
Conservation and Management Plans, respectively. Since the clean water SRF program was
established in 1989, $2.6 billion has been used to assist 8,654 nonpoint management projects;
none has gone to estuary management plan activities.
Hardship Grants Program for Rural Communities
EPA also administers a small grant program to help small, disadvantaged rural communities with
fewer than 3,000 people address their wastewater treatment needs. A community can qualify for
hardship assistance if it meets certain criteria: it lacks access to centralized wastewater treatment
or collection systems or needs improvements to on-site treatment systems; a proposed project will
improve public health or reduce environmental risk; the community’s per capita income is less
than 80% of the national average; and its unemployment rate exceeds the national average by 1
percentage point or more. The hardship grants program is intended to complement the clean water
SRF program, because states assist eligible rural communities by supplementing an SRF loan
with hardship grant assistance. States have flexibility in how they manage the hardship grants
Congressional Research Service
20

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

program and are responsible for selecting projects. For example, in addition to construction
projects, states may use hardship assistance to provide training, technical assistance, and
education programs on the operation and maintenance of wastewater treatment systems. The
program began with a $50 million appropriation in FY1996 (P.L. 104-134), and funds remain
available until expended. Through June 2008, $54 million in EPA rural hardship grants and state
matching funds had been awarded to 120 projects nationwide (no new EPA grants have been
awarded since FY2004). States also have awarded $69 million in SRF loan assistance to 82
projects, in combination with rural hardship grants.
“Wet Weather” Projects
In 2000, Congress authorized separate Clean Water Act grant funding for projects to address
overflows from municipal combined sewer systems and from municipal separate sanitary sewers.
Overflows from these portions of municipal sewerage systems can occur especially during
rainfall or other wet weather events and can result in discharges of untreated sewage into local
waterways. This program, contained in the FY2001 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 106-
554, Division B, section 112), authorized $750 million per year in FY2002 and FY2003. The
funds would only be available for appropriation if Congress also appropriated at least $1.35
billion in each of the years for the clean water SRF program. Under the program, grants to a
municipality or municipal entity could be used for planning, design, and construction of treatment
works to intercept, transport, control, or treat municipal combined and separate sewer overflows.
However, no funds were appropriated for this program either in FY2002 or FY2003; thus, wet
weather projects continue to compete with other water infrastructure projects for available Clean
Water Act funds.
Funding
Since the first appropriations for the clean water SRF program in FY1989, Congress has provided
$33 billion in grants to capitalize SRFs. For each of FY2008 and FY2009, Congress provided
$689 million through regular appropriations acts. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
of 2009 (ARRA, P.L. 111-5) included an additional $4 billion, for total FY2009 funding of $4.689
billion. Through June 2008, federal funds, together with state matching contributions, repaid
loans, and other funds, have been used for $68.8 billion in SRF assistance to support 22,717 SRF
loans and debt refinance activity. Most recently, Congress appropriated $2.1 billion in
appropriations for FY2010 (P.L. 111-88). For FY2011, the President’s budget requested $2.0
billion for clean water SRF capitalization grants.
Statutory and Regulatory Authority
Statutory authority for the clean water SRF program is the Clean Water Act, as amended, Sections
601-607, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1381-1387. Regulations are codified at 40 CFR §35.3100.13
[This section prepared by Claudia Copeland, Specialist in Resources and Environmental Policy,
Resources, Science and Industry Division (707-7227).]

13 For additional information, see https://www.cfda.gov/index?s=program&mode=form&tab=step1&id=
312e4abeea3cc908bc55deb5e07ec37f.
Congressional Research Service
21

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Loan Program
The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) requires public water systems to comply with federal
drinking water regulations promulgated by EPA. Through these regulations, EPA has set
standards to control the levels of approximately 90 contaminants in drinking water, and more
regulations are under development. To help communities meet these federal mandates, Congress
amended the SDWA in 1996 to establish a drinking water state revolving fund (DWSRF) loan
program. The program is patterned closely after the clean water SRF, and authorizes EPA to make
grants to states to capitalize drinking water state revolving loan funds. States use their DWSRFs
to provide assistance to public water systems for drinking water projects.
States must match 20% of the federal capitalization grant and develop annual intended use plans
that indicate how allotted funds will be used (including a project priority list). The law generally
directs states to give funding priority to projects that (1) address the most serous health risks; (2)
are needed to ensure compliance with SDWA regulations; and (3) assist systems most in need on
a per household basis, according to state affordability criteria. Additionally, states must make
available at least 15% of their annual allotment to public water systems that serve 10,000 or fewer
persons (to the extent the funds can be obligated to eligible projects). In recent years, roughly
72% of DWSRF assistance agreements and 37% of funds have gone to these smaller systems.
Capitalization grants are allotted among the states according to the results of the most recent
quadrennial survey of the capital improvements needs of eligible water systems. Needs surveys
are prepared by EPA and the states, and the most recent survey (2007) estimated that public water
systems need to invest a minimum of $334.8 billion over 20-years to ensure the provision of safe
drinking water and compliance with federal standards.
Program Purpose
This state-administered program provides assistance for infrastructure projects and other
expenditures that facilitate compliance with federal drinking water regulations or that promote
public health protection. The SDWA directs states to give funding priority to infrastructure
projects that are needed to achieve or maintain compliance with SDWA requirements, protect
public health, and assist systems with economic need. States may use a portion of the
capitalization grant for specified purposes, including programs for protecting sources of drinking
water and improving the managerial and technical capacity of water systems. Capitalization
grants are also available to each state under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
(ARRA) of 2009. This act requires that a portion of funding be targeted toward projects for green
infrastructure, water or energy efficiency improvements, or other environmentally innovative
activities.14
Financing Mechanism
States may use the DWSRF to make low- or zero-interest loans to public water systems, and loan
recipients generally must repay the entire loan plus any interest. DWSRFs may also be used to
buy or refinance local debt obligations, to guarantee or purchase insurance for a local obligation,

14 For information, see CRS Report R40216, Water Infrastructure Funding in the American Recovery and Reinvestment
Act of 2009, by Claudia Copeland et al.
Congressional Research Service
22

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

as a source of revenue or security for payment of principal and interest on state revenue or
general obligation bonds if the proceeds of the sale of the bonds are deposited into the DWSRF,
and to earn interest on DWSRF accounts. States also may use up to 30% of their annual DWSRF
grant to provide additional subsidies (e.g., principal forgiveness and negative interest rate loans)
to help economically disadvantaged communities of any size. (A disadvantaged community is one
in which the service area of a public water system meets state-established affordability criteria.)
Eligibility Requirements
Drinking water systems that are eligible to receive DWSRF assistance include community water
systems, whether publicly or privately owned, and not-for-profit noncommunity water systems.
Federally owned systems are not eligible to receive assistance from this program.
Projects eligible for DWSRF assistance include (1) capital investments to upgrade or replace
infrastructure in order to continue providing the public with safe drinking water; (2) projects
needed to address violations of SDWA regulations; and (3) projects to replace aging infrastructure
(e.g., source water improvement projects and treatment facilities, storage facilities, transmission
and distribution pipes, and consolidation with other systems). Assistance may also be available
for land acquisition, project design and planning, and for a range of security measures, including
vulnerability assessments and infrastructure improvements. Also eligible for assistance are
projects to consolidate water supplies (for example, in cases where individual homes or other
public water supplies have a water supply that is contaminated, or a system is unable to maintain
compliance for financial or managerial reasons).
Projects and activities not eligible for funding include projects primarily intended to serve future
growth or to provide fire protection, construction of dams or reservoirs (except reservoirs for
finished (treated) water), monitoring, and operation and maintenance. Ineligible systems include
those that lack the financial, technical or managerial capacity to maintain SDWA compliance and
systems in significant noncompliance with any SDWA regulation (unless the project is likely to
ensure compliance).
Funding
The act authorized appropriations for DWSRF capitalization grants at a level of $599 million for
FY1994 and $1 billion annually for FY1995 through FY2003, for a total appropriations authority
of $9.6 billion. For each of FY2008 and FY2009, Congress provided $829.0 million through
regular appropriations acts. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA, P.L.
111-5) included an additional $2 billion to be provided through the DWSRF program, for a total
FY2009 funding of roughly $2.83 billion. For FY2010, Congress approved $1.39 billion (P.L.
111-88), bringing cumulative program appropriations to approximately $14.5 billion. For
FY2011, the President requested $1.29 billion.
Through June 2009, the EPA had awarded $10.6 billion in capitalization grants, which, when
combined with the 20% state match, bond proceeds, loan principal repayments, and other funds,
amounted to $18.7 billion in DWSRF funds available for loans and other assistance. Through
June 2009, 6,905 projects had received assistance, 4,567 of which had been completed; total
assistance provided by the program reached $16.2 billion.
Congressional Research Service
23

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Statutory and Regulatory Authority
The statutory authority for the DWSRF program is the Safe Drinking Water Act Amendments of
1996 (P.L. 104-182, Section 1452, 42 U.S.C. 300j-12). EPA promulgated an interim final rule for
the program on August 7, 2000 (65 FR 48285), and adopted it as final on January 12, 2001 (66
FR 2823). Regulations are codified at 40 CFR §35.3500.15
[This section prepared by Mary Tiemann, Specialist in Environmental Policy, Resources, Science
and Industry Division (707-5937).]
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Community Development Block Grants
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) administers assistance primarily
under the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program. The program’s primary
objective is to develop viable urban communities by providing decent housing and a suitable
living environment, and by expanding economic opportunities, principally for persons of low and
moderate income. CDBG funds are used by localities for a broad range of activities intended to
result in decent housing in a suitable living environment. Water and waste disposal needs compete
with many other public activities for this assistance, including historic preservation, energy
conservation, housing construction, lead-based paint abatement, urban renewal projects,
recreation facilities, home ownership assistance, and others. Program policy requires that at least
70% of funds must benefit low- and moderate-income persons. The use of CDBG funds is
intended to reflect a balance between local flexibility and national targeting to low- and
moderate-income persons.
After subtracting amounts specified in appropriations acts for special-purpose activities, 70% of
CDBG funds are allocated by formula to approximately 1,175 entitlement communities
nationwide, defined as central cities of metropolitan areas, metropolitan cities with populations of
50,000 or more, and statutorily defined urban counties (the entitlement program). These funds are
not available for projects in rural communities. The remaining 30% of CDBG funds is allocated
by formula to the states for distribution to non-entitlement, smaller communities (the state
program) for use in areas that are not part of a metropolitan city or urban county, and these funds
may be available for rural community water projects. The 70/30 split and allocation formulas are
provided for in law. According to data from HUD, in recent years (2001-2007), water and sewer
improvement projects accounted for 9-10% of all CDBG funds disbursed nationally.16 From
FY1991 through FY2000, HUD provided over $4 billion in block grants, plus $39.9 million for
projects specified in appropriations laws, for drinking water and wastewater projects.17

15 DWSRF program information, regulations, facts and statistics are available at http://www.epa.gov/safewater/
dwsrf.html. For further information and contacts, see https://www.cfda.gov/index?s=program&mode=form&tab=
step1&id=1fa58ab3aad3cbec5929ec0f5e88362b.
16 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, “Use of CDBG Funds by All Grantees.” See
http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/communitydevelopment/budget/disbursementreports/profiles/
National_Expenditure_FY07.xls.
17 GAO Water Infrastructure, pp. 11-13.
Congressional Research Service
24

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Program Purpose
The primary goal of this program is the development of viable communities by providing decent
housing, a suitable living environment, and expanding economic opportunities, principally for
low- and moderate-income persons.
Financing Mechanism
The entitlement communities and states receive a basic grant allocation each year and know in
advance the approximate amount of federal funds that they will receive annually. Grantees access
their CDBG funding through a consolidated plan process in which states and localities establish
their local priorities and specify how they will measure their performance. In the CDBG program
for smaller communities, grants are distributed out of state allocations to units of general local
government which implement approved activities. States may retain a percentage of funds to
cover the costs of administering the program and providing technical assistance to local
governments and nonprofit organizations.
Eligibility Requirements
Eligible CDBG grant recipients include states, local governments, the District of Columbia,
Puerto Rico, Guam, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern
Marianas. Eligible activities include a wide range of projects such as public facilities and
improvements, housing, public services, economic development, and brownfields redevelopment.
State grantees must ensure that each activity meets one of the program’s three national objectives:
benefitting low- and moderate-income persons (the primary objective), aiding in the prevention or
elimination of slums or blight, or assisting other community development needs that present a
serious and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community. Under the state program
which assists smaller communities, states develop their own program and funding priorities and
have considerable latitude to define community eligibility and criteria, within general criteria in
law and regulations. According to HUD, between 2003 and 2008, state governments collectively
committed 31.1% of CDBG allocations to water and sewer system projects, the largest major
category of funded public improvements.
Funding
For FY2010 appropriations (Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2010, P.L. 111-117), Congress
provided $3.95 billion for CDBG entitlement/non-entitlement formula funds, of which
approximately $1.2 billion is available for smaller communities under the state non-entitlement
program. For FY2011, the President’s budget requested $3.94 billion for this program, nearly the
same as for the previous year. The FY2011 budget declared that full funding for the CDBG
program is a top Presidential Priority for 2011, and it characterized CDBG as the largest and most
flexible community development program in the federal portfolio.
Statutory and Regulatory Authority
Statutory authority for the CDBG program is Title I of the Housing and Community Development
Act of 1974, as amended (42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.). Regulations are codified at 24 CFR Part 570.
Congressional Research Service
25

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Regulations covering the CDBG state program for non-entitlement communities are codified at
24 CFR Part 570, Subpart I (§570.480).18
[This section prepared by Claudia Copeland, Specialist in Resources and Environmental Policy,
Resources, Science and Industry Division. For additional CDBG program information, contact
Eugene Boyd, Government and Finance Division (707-8689).]
Department of Commerce
Economic Development Administration (Public Works and
Economic Development Program)
The Economic Development Administration (EDA), Department of Commerce, is authorized to
provide development assistance to areas experiencing substantial economic distress. Economic
development grants for community water and sewer projects are available through the Public
Works and Economic Development Program.
Under this federally administered program, public works grants are made to eligible applicants to
revitalize, expand, and upgrade their physical infrastructure. These investments are intended to
enable communities to attract new industry, encourage business expansion, diversify local
economies, and generate or retain long-term jobs in the private sector through improvements
needed for establishing or expanding industrial or commercial enterprises in distressed regions.
Grants may be used for a wide range of purposes, but frequently have a sewer or water supply
element. EDA’s FY2010 budget justification noted the linkage between water and sewer systems
and economic development and redevelopment:
Basic infrastructure in the downtown regions, particularly water and sewer systems, is often
over a century old. This infrastructure is not adequate to support the needs of growing
businesses. In rural regions, water management and coordinated planning and
implementation of water/wastewater infrastructure is key to unlocking economic
sustainability The inadequacy of basic public water and sewer infrastructure has proven to be
a significant impediment to the growth of new businesses.19
Types of projects funded include industrial parks, expansion of port and harbor facilities,
redevelopment of brownfields, and water and wastewater facilities primarily serving industry and
commerce. According to GAO, from FY1991 through FY2000, EDA provided $1.1 billion in
grants to local communities for drinking water and wastewater projects.20 Federal law requires
that units of government retain ownership of EDA-funded projects. Because EDA grants must
directly encourage employment generation, these grants generally are not available for rural
residential sewer and water supply development.

18 For more program information on CDBG entitlements grants, see https://www.cfda.gov/index?s=program&mode=
form&tab=step1&id=75c19bc34eb650c446c2c4a078500ba5. For information on the CDBG state program, see
https://www.cfda.gov/index?s=program&mode=form&tab=step1&id=8ebaec7fffe34667744cf0b8b70b4251.
19 U.S. Department of Commerce, Economic Development Administration, Fiscal Year 2010 Congressional Budget
Request, p. EDA-41.
20 GAO Water Infrastructure, pp. 13-14.
Congressional Research Service
26

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

Program Purpose
The purpose of the program is to promote long-term economic development and assist in the
construction of public works and development facilities needed to initiate and support the
creation or retention of permanent jobs in the private sector in areas experiencing substantial
economic distress.
Financing Mechanism
EDA provides grants directly to approved applicants. Generally, EDA investment assistance may
not exceed 50% of the project cost. Projects may receive an additional amount, not to exceed
30%, based on the relative needs of the region in which the project will be located, as determined
by EDA. In the case of certain Indian Tribes, non-profit organizations that have exhausted their
effective borrowing capacity, or a state or political subdivision of a state that has exhausted its
effective taxing and borrowing capacity, grants totaling 100% may be awarded. On average, EDA
grants fund 50% of project costs. Credit may be given toward the non-federal share for in-kind
contributions, including contributions of space, equipment, and services. No minimum or
maximum project amount is specified in law.
Eligibility Requirements
Public works grants may be made to states, cities, counties and other political subdivisions of
states, an institution of higher education or a consortium of such institutions, and private or public
not-for-profit organizations acting in cooperation with officials of a political subdivision of a
state. Under this program, the term “state” includes the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the U.S.
Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the
Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Federated States of Micronesia, and the Republic of Palau.
For-profit, private sector entities do not qualify.
Qualified projects must fill a pressing need of the area and: must (1) be intended to improve the
opportunities for the successful establishment of businesses, (2) assist in the creation of additional
long-term employment, and (3) benefit long-term unemployed or underemployed persons and
low-income families. Projects must also fulfill a pressing need and be consistent with the
comprehensive economic development plan for the area, and have an adequate share of local
funds. In addition, eligible projects must be located in areas that meet at least one of the following
criteria: low per-capita income, unemployment above the national average, or an actual or
anticipated abrupt rise in unemployment.
Funding
For FY2010, Congress provided appropriations totaling $158.3 million for EDA’s Public Works
and Economic Development (public works) grant program (Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2010, P.L. 111-117). For FY2011, the President’s budget requested $67.8 million for EDA’s
public works grant program, a $90.5 million decrease from FY2010. However, the budget
indicated that the reduction would be balanced by a commensurate $90 million increase for
EDA’s Economic Adjustment Assistance Program, which funds similar projects and has greater
flexibility, particularly in speeding assistance to communities suffering sudden and severe
economic dislocations, such as those associated with natural disasters and recession, according to
Congressional Research Service
27

---

Federally Supported Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment Programs

the budget justification. The Administration made a similar request for FY2010, which Congress
did not adopt.
Statutory and Regulatory Authority
The statutory authority for the Public Works and Economic Development Program is the Public
Works and Economic Development Act of 1965, as amended, P.L. 89-136 (42 U.S.C. 3131, 3132,
3135, 3171), and Title II, P.L. 105-393 (42 U.S.C. 3211). Regulations are codified at 13 CFR
Chapter III, Part 302, 305, 316, and 317.21
[This section prepared by Claudia Copeland, Specialist in Resources and Environmental Policy,
Resources, Science and Industry Division. For additional EDA program information, contact
Oscar R. Gonzalez, Government and Finance Division (707-0764).]

Author Contact Information

Claudia Copeland, Coordinator
Nicole T. Carter
Specialist in Resources and Environmental Policy
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
ccopeland@crs.loc.gov, 7-7227
ncarter@crs.loc.gov, 7-0854
Betsy A. Cody
Megan Stubbs
Specialist in Natural Resources Policy
Analyst in Agricultural Conservation and Natural
bcody@crs.loc.gov, 7-7229
Resources Policy
mstubbs@crs.loc.gov, 7-8707
Mary Tiemann

Specialist in Environmental Policy
mtiemann@crs.loc.gov, 7-5937





21 For more program information, see https://www.cfda.gov/index?s=program&mode=form&tab=step1&id=
5f149ff4e539aca8dc81b7f7fe57b118http://12.46.245.173/pls/portal30/SYSTEM.PROGRAM_TEXT_RPT.SHOW?
p_arg_names=prog_nbr&p_arg_values=11.300.
Congressional Research Service
28

---