Reclamation. Corps. Federal and Selected State Agencies Collect Information on Water Infrastructure Needs through Surveys, Program Administration, and Studies

The eight federal agencies and the six selected states identify drinking  water and wastewater infrastructure needs through surveys, the  administration of programs, and studies. For the six states we selected to review, EPA  estimated a total of approximately $123 billion in drinking water and  wastewater infrastructure needs. Corps. FEMA. Four of the six states we selected for review—New Mexico, New York,  North Dakota, and Tennessee—have collected data on drinking water  and wastewater infrastructure projects or needs through their own  surveys of communities or statewide studies, in addition to participating in  EPA’s assessments. Federal Agencies Provide Technical Assistance and Funding to Support State and Local Planning for Future Drinking Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Needs

Of the eight federal agencies we reviewed, three—the Corps,  Reclamation, and FEMA—provide technical assistance and funding to  support planning efforts in the selected states for future conditions that  may affect drinking water and wastewater infrastructure needs. The remaining five federal agencies have at  times been involved in long-term planning for such conditions and may  provide grant funding to help support such work, but they do not have  established programs that offer technical assistance or funding for such  purposes. Agencies Have Taken Certain Actions to Coordinate Project Funding While Facing Some Challenges

Federal and state agencies in the six selected states have taken certain  actions to coordinate funding for drinking water and wastewater  infrastructure projects. In three of the selected  states—California, New York, and North Dakota—federal and state  agencies developed written agreements for their coordinating groups. For  example, agencies in Alaska shared information on projects for small  Alaska villages, and in California agencies shared information on  jointly funded projects. Several Challenges to Funding Projects Make It Difficult for Agencies to Provide All Available Federal Funds in Selected States

In the selected states, four key challenges can make it difficult for federal  and state agencies to provide all federal funds available for drinking water  and wastewater infrastructure projects: limited community demand for  loan funding, limited technical or financial capacity of some communities,  differing requirements among federal and state funding programs, and  difficulty developing a set of projects ready for funding. For  example, USDA state offices in the selected states did not have enough  applicants with projects that were ready to fund, and the offices did not  lend a total of about $193 million in loan funding available for drinking  water and wastewater infrastructure projects from fiscal years 2012  through 2016 to communities in those states. Finally, agencies have shared information and conducted  joint outreach to help address difficulties with developing a set of projects  ready for funding. Most recently, to help improve state-level coordination between state SRF  programs and USDA state offices on drinking water and wastewater  infrastructure project funding, EPA and USDA issued a joint  memorandum in February 2017 that outlined five coordination practices  that states’ SRF programs and USDA state offices are encouraged to  use. These practices include participating in a statewide coordinating  group, conducting joint marketing or outreach, adopting common  application materials, adopting a common environmental review process,  and periodically reexamining internal processes to identify opportunities  for streamlining and increasing coordination. New Mexico had technical comments that we incorporated  as appropriate. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

The objectives of our review were to describe (1) how federal agencies  and selected states identify drinking water and wastewater infrastructure  needs; (2) how federal agencies have supported selected states in  planning for future conditions that may affect such needs; and (3) the  extent to which federal and state agencies have coordinated in funding  drinking water and wastewater infrastructure projects, and any challenges  they face in funding these projects. We reviewed our previous reports to  identify the agencies that provide funding or planning assistance to states  or communities for drinking water and wastewater infrastructure and  identified eight agencies: the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the  Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Rural Utilities Service, the  Department of Commerce’s Economic Development Administration, the  Department of Defense’s Army Corps of Engineers, the Department of  Health and Human Services’ Indian Health Service, the Department of  Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency, the  Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and the  Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation. North Dakota.
Why GAO Did This Study

Events such as the discovery of lead in drinking water in Flint, Michigan, and the overflow and damage to the spillway at the Oroville Dam in California have drawn attention to the condition of the nation's drinking water and wastewater infrastructure. Conditions such as population growth or drought may further affect a community's needs and plans for such infrastructure.
GAO was asked to review federal programs that provide funding for drinking water and wastewater infrastructure. This report describes (1) how federal agencies and selected states identify drinking water and wastewater infrastructure needs; (2) how federal agencies have supported selected states' planning for future conditions that may affect needs; and (3) the extent to which federal and state agencies have coordinated in funding projects, and any challenges they faced. GAO reviewed eight federal agencies that provide assistance for drinking water and wastewater infrastructure and selected a nongeneralizable sample of six states—Alaska, California, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, and Tennessee—on the basis of federal infrastructure funding amounts and geography. For the six states, GAO reviewed infrastructure planning and program documents and interviewed federal and state officials.

What GAO Found

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and other federal and selected state agencies collect information to identify drinking water and wastewater infrastructure needs through surveys, the administration of agency programs, and studies. EPA's most recent surveys estimated approximately $655 billion of drinking water and wastewater infrastructure needs nationwide over the next 20 years. The seven other agencies GAO reviewed—the departments of Agriculture (USDA) and Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Economic Development Administration, Indian Health Service, Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)—collect information on these needs by administering their programs. For example, the Corps collects information on congressionally authorized water projects. Of the six states GAO selected for review, all but Alaska and California had collected data on their needs such as through surveys of communities. For example, North Dakota biennially collects information on drinking water projects from its communities.
The Corps, Reclamation, and FEMA provide technical assistance and funding to support efforts in the six selected states to plan for future conditions that may affect drinking water and wastewater infrastructure needs. For example, the Corps helped Minnewaukan, North Dakota, identify alternatives for reducing flood risks to the city's drinking water and wastewater infrastructure, and Reclamation worked with Santa Fe, New Mexico, to study its projected water supply and demand. The remaining five agencies have at times been involved in long-term planning but do not have established programs for such purposes.
Federal and state agencies in the six selected states have taken actions to coordinate funding for projects while facing several challenges. For example, agencies in most of the selected states had established interagency coordinating groups that reached out to communities needing funding for projects. In some cases, agencies developed written agreements for their coordinating groups, with such goals as simplifying the application process and encouraging agencies to fund projects together. However, agencies in the selected states faced challenges, such as difficulty in developing a set of specific projects that were ready for funding, despite having infrastructure needs. For example, in the six selected states, USDA did not have enough applicants with projects that were developed to the extent needed to receive funding; therefore, USDA did not loan a total of about $193 million in available loan funds for fiscal years 2012 through 2016 to communities in those states. GAO found that federal and state agencies within selected states had taken some actions to help address challenges they faced in funding projects; these actions included conducting joint outreach to develop a set of projects ready for funding. EPA and USDA also have taken actions. For example, in February 2017 in response to a GAO recommendation in a prior report, EPA and USDA issued a joint memorandum outlining five practices to help improve interagency collaboration at the state level on drinking water and wastewater infrastructure projects; these practices include using common application materials and conducting joint marketing or outreach.

What GAO Recommends

GAO is not making recommendations in this report. Federal agencies and states provided technical comments on a draft of this report that GAO incorporated as appropriate.