Lessons Learned from ARRA GPR (SAIC)

Lessons Learned from ARRA GPR (SAIC)

This study reveals outcomes of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) allocating EPA funding considering Green Project Reserve (GPR) requirements. Targeting nearly $1.2 billion for green projects, the EPA with help from the Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) revealed a lack of documentation of environmental benefits from projects, but offer six case studies or “focus groups” for findings. They found the majority of programs nationwide involved the installation or replacement of water meters, rehabilitation or replacement of leaking pipes, the construction of wastewater treatment plants, or stormwater management. GPR requirements have had primary and secondary benefits, including: improved overall awareness of the environment, community pride, efficiency in water meter reading operations, cost savings to municipalities (reduction in energy consumption by water treatment activities), and increased innovative attitude of engineers to pursue future green projects.

2012 GPR Report

GPR Report

Protect clean water, preserve natural systems, reduce energy, and conserve valuable water resources. This report comes from the GPR establishing a minimum 20% of ARRA capitalization funding going to these four categories under GPR. It discusses what has resulted since, including eligibilities in CWSRF that have never been utilized, and addressing the innovative state approaches which have successfully implemented the GPR. Millions of kilowatt hours of energy will continue to be saved annually from ARRA-funded energy efficiency improvements at wastewater treatment plants. This is just one example of the improvements which make reduced operating costs and green house gas emissions also contribute to utility sustainability. Further highlighting done by the EPA and states will help attract new applicants and aid states in identifying future green projects. An example of environmentally innovative activities would be a project that adapts clean water facilities to climate change. Some states solicited GPR recipients to ensure education and awareness of the funding eligibility, establishing new partnerships, and coordinating on local and federal agency levels. Other times, states re-arranged the priority of projects, allowing GPR projects to be funded over previous ranking systems which would bypass GPR projects. To breakdown $1.1 billion in GPR funding, $606 million went to energy, $209 million to green stormwater, $153 million to water efficiency, and $160 million for environmental innovations. All states have met the 20% requirement, most exceeding.

CWSRF Eligibility Graphic

CWSRF Eligibility Graphic

Introducing the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, the nation’s solution for low-cost infrastructure financing since 1987! Read statistics and a bit about the EPA’s eligibility criteria. Through 2018 end of year, 39,948 loan agreements and a cumulative $133 billion in funding have been given. Apply for financing through your state’s CWSRF. The EPA funds eligible projects with an additional 20% funding coming from your state. CWSRF offers below-market average interest rates, around 1.5% with additional subsidies possible. Communities, private entities, nonprofit organizations, and citizen groups may all be eligible. Terms of state revolving funds typically last the life of the project if it doesn’t exceed 30 years, requiring repayment a year after completion of the project, and on average returning $3 to communities for every $1 of federal investment.

GPR Eligibility Guidance

GPR Eligibility Guidance

Federal goals for green infrastructure, energy efficiency improvements, water efficiency improvements, and environmentally innovative activities are outlined in the following details of the Green Project Reserve (GPR) for the Clean Water SRF program. Read the full report for examples of categorically eligible projects. GPR can be used for planning, designing and building activities, specifically targeting previously rejected or underfunded projects. State SRF programs should follow the criteria to find projects eligible to count toward GPR. Read a definition of green stormwater infrastructure on regional and local levels, followed by unacceptable projects, such as in-line and end-of-pipe treatment systems that only filter or detain stormwater. Water efficiency is the use of improved technologies and practices to deliver equal or better services with less water. Eight project examples are followed by projects that do not meet the criteria, such as agricultural flood irrigation. Energy efficiency, the aim to reduce energy consumption of water quality projects, could be collection system infiltration/inflow detection equipment, for example, but not facultative lagoons. The environmentally innovative section of the criteria include those demonstrating new or innovative approaches to delivering services or managing water resources in a more sustainable way. For example, an integrated water resource management plan likely resulting in a capital project, but not eligible would be air scrubbers to prevent nonpoint source deposition. Learn how to identify projects and write business cases for proof of “green” aspects of a project using the EPA’s guidelines and best practices.

Funding Water Efficiency via SRF Programs

Funding Water Efficiency via SRF Programs Use state revolving funds for water efficiency. This saves money in the long run, avoiding expensive future projects and reducing “lost water”. Water efficiency also helps withstand droughts by decreasing demand of limited quality water, rendering drastic water policies unnecessary. By reducing waste and consumption, allow your community to step towards a more environmentally conscious future. You’ll do this by reducing wastewater flows, sustaining aquifers, and lessening pollution from saltwater intrusion. CWSRF and DWSRF programs work like banks offering loans for infrastructure improvements to protect public health. Florida implements water audit and leak detection to avoid excess costs and water wasted unnecessarily. To receive funding, contact your state DWSRF or CWSRF representative, to hear your states’ annual Intended Use Plan (IUP). Use specific ideas like installing water meters, water-efficient devices, funding incentive programs, installing dual pipe distribution systems, and educating the public.

Federal Funding Sources for Water Conservation

Federal Funding Sources for Water Conservation (Appendix E)

Why should we use water efficiently? How can CWSRF programs help systems use water more efficiently... and how do I get funded? How can systems and specific states harness SRF programs for improved water efficiency? What other federal resources are available for this efficiency? Water efficiency saves money, helps communities survive droughts, and reduces water and consumption to protect rivers and therefore wildlife. SRF programs operate like banks offering low or zero interest loans.

Sustainability and the CWSRF: A Best Practices Guide

Sustainability and the CWSRF: A Best Practices Guide

Get an overview of state policies and practices, forwarding the goal of sustainably developed communities. You'll find policies, their program requirements and incentives, guidance on the planning process, project priority system structure, financial planning, and technical assistance. In conjunction with the CWSRF, applicable Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) policies are included. The EPA recommends big picture direction, such as focusing on revitalizing existing communities and infrastructure, as well as detailed facts: "for every 10% increase in forest cover of the source area, chemical and treatment costs decrease by 20%". Emphasis has been placed on utility goals to align with community priorities. Projects are evaluated on the basis of water quality, fiscal sustainability, and social criteria to choose the best solution. The Oregon program sets aside $3 million for funding planning projects while others prioritize funding construction on planning loans completed within 3 years. This helps disadvantaged and small communities. Failing septic and decentralization are many rural issues; new treatment can lead to inefficient patterns and water quality issues. Learn from the Minnesota case study who uses a hierarchy to analyze the best approach to fixing failed wastewater treatment systems, ensuring all alternatives are considered. Read from states like Arizona who encourage coordination across funding sources by creating workshops engaging in the community needing funding, New York which has a centralized database to obtain funding, and Kentucky which creates policy to bring government agencies of water, transportation and housing together to best plan for future development. CWSRF programs will either require or assist communities in making capital improvement plans inclusing comprehensive alternatives analysis and asset management plans to ensure informed decisions. Looking towards a more financially stable wastewater system, CWSRF programs will limit growth the program is willing to fund, focusing on repairing, replacing, and upgrading infrastructure. Likewise, the polluted areas of urban Brownfields sites can be redeveloped by coordinating with Brownfileds RLFs to reach common goals.

Financing GI: Best Practices for CWSRF

Financing Green Infrastructure: A Best Practices Guide for the CWSRF

Use this "best practices guide" to take advantage of the CWRSF's resources for your program to benefit, whether you're working on a local scale rain garden or large scale floodplains to reduce stormwater. To prevent communities from shying away from green infrastructure solutions due to hurdles such as unfamiliarity, the EPA offers this easy to read guideline for financing. This report will go over the basics; best practices, how to access said projects, relevant financial incentives, and priorities to be aware of. One of many financing opitons, the CWSRF is a nationwide historically proven instrument for change. The Green Project Reserve is a requirement to invest in green infrastructure; any project mitigating stormwater runoff is eligible. Successful state programs to be emulated include the following. South Carolina hired a ful time marketing expert to plan workshops and meet with stakeholders. Oklahoma created a document to step by step guide users how to take inventory and determine when they need replacing. New Hampshire decided to award 20 of 100 points to GPR projects, using a ranking system to prioritize projects. California is a good example of "Set-asides". They approved low interest financing to incentivize water recycling projects.

Policy Memo to Promote GI

Policy Memo to Promote GI

Aiming to create healthier urban environments, this EPA policy memo by director Andrew D. Sawyers Ph.D. calls to attention the local and national limitations to our current green infrastructure state. Concerning stormwater and other causes of water pollution, since 2009 the EPA has used state revolving funds, currently running 51 CWSRF programs, to sustain long term financing of public and private infrastructure projects. Green infrastructure's reduction of stormwater discharges helps decrease water pollution. Additional benefits include reducing urban heat island impacts, decreasing energy use, and improvin air quality. CWSRF programs have been successful in implementing GPR prjects thus far, alotting $3.8 billion in water reuse, energy efficient equipment, and natural systems for mitigating storm surge since 2010. For best results, the EPA will track states' progress, and recognize high quality successful programs with awards. The EPA recommends incentivizing green infrastructure projects by offering additional subsidization and interest rate reductions, as well as utilizing the prioritization and marketing best practices stated. 

Environmental Benefits of CWSRF /GI

Environmental Benefits of CWSRF Green Infrastructure Projects

What are the goal and main benefits of green infrastructure? What do projects managing stormwater runoff look like? The EPA shares five case studies on CWSRF implementations for a taste of the environmental benefits of GI projects; despite their varying locations and problems, all make substantial differences in our national fight to prevent stormwater pollution.