Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Challenges in the Rural United States

1. Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Challenges in the Rural United States Stephen Gasteyer RCAP, 1522 K St, NW #400 Washington, DC 20005 Tel: 888-321-7227, ext 103; Fax: 202-408-8165 Email: sgasteyer@rcap.org

2. Basic Infrastructure—US: Life is Good • Access to water and sanitation services in the US is among the highest in the world. • According to most international reports on access to water and sanitation, the US has 100 percent coverage • Water rates have been among the lowest in the world over the last 20 years (according to Cadmus Group and the American Water Works Association) • The number of impaired and badly polluted surface water bodies have diminished by 2/3 since the mid-1970s • Adoption of household water conservation practices has risen dramatically over the last decade

3. Not Quite Paradise… • Need a harder look at: • Access to water and sanitation • The depreciation rate of infrastructure • The cost of water and sanitation • Efforts to maintain or improve water quality • Implications for rural communities

4. Rural Communities and Water in the US • US citizens generally have access to some of the world’s best quality and most affordable water and sanitation • Low-income, rural communities often have greater challenges in accessing safe and affordable water and sanitation (the largest percentage of the 1.9 million still without access are in rural areas) • Rural communities face issues of: financing, technical knowledge, management capacity, and organization • These problems are likely to reoccur as conditions change and new problems arise • Community organization around infrastructure often opens the door to broader economic development potential (as documented by WaterAid and others)

5. Access to Water and Sanitation-US

6. US / State / Territory Total OHU lacking complete plumbing facilities (2000) Percent of OHU lacking complete plumbing facilities (2000) Total OHU lacking complete plumbing facilities (1990) Percent of OHU lacking complete plumbing facilities (1990) Percent change in total OHU lacking complete plumbing facilities, from 1990 to 2000 (base year = 1990) Percent change in total OHU from 1990 to 2000 (base year = 1990) United States 670986 0.64 721693 0.78 -7.03 14.72 Current US SituationHouseholds Lacking complete plumbing facilities

7. Distribution of those lacking complete plumbing facilities

8. Population Lacking Complete Plumbing Facilities, US

9. US Hot Spots Lacking Plumbing Facilities

10. States Ranked by Total OHU Lacking Complete Plumbing Facilities (2000)

11. Infrastructure Depreciation: Gap Analysis • There have been three major investments in water infrastructure in the US • Turn of the 20th Century (1890s-1910)-clay • 100 year life span • The 1930s (New Deal)-steel • 75 year life span • The 1950s-1970s-plastic… • 30-50 year life span • The Problem: Materials Depreciation Rates

12. Replacement cost = real money • Estimates of capital needs for clean water from 2000 to 2019 range from: • $331 billion to $450 billion with a point estimate of $388 billion. • Estimates of capital needs for drinking water […] range from: • $154 billion to $446 billion with a point estimate of $274 billion. • EPA. 2002. The Infrastructure Gap Analysis for Clean Water and Drinking Water. http://www.epa.gov

13. Growth in Sewerage Expenditures and GDP 1980-1999

14. Add Increasing cost to address growth

15. The Rural Portion of this Cost • While many rural communities are dealing with issues of failing infrastructure, calculations of the gap for rural America are difficult—because of the decentralized nature of rural communities. • Example--West Central Initiative, Minnesota—found a funding gap of $813 million to upgrade infrastructure installed in the 1930s.

16. Story of Donaldson, MN • Population 57 • MHI 1999 -- $15,000 • Annual operating budget – less than $15,000… • Sewer System and Storm Water System combined—Need upgrade—minimum cost, over $1 million… • RCAP Intermediaries helped to facilitate loan/grant package—making upgrade possible

17. Household Cost of Water and Sanitation • On Average—US citizens pay very little for water and sanitation services (on average, around 1 percent of HH income). • According US Census--the more rural, the higher the percent of HH income spent on water and sanitation. • Many rural communities pay more than $1000 per year for water and sanitation services.

18. Pressures on Water and Sanitation Expenditure • Cost of infrastructure replacement. • Emerging costs for management of municipalities generally. • Emerging requirements for treatment of water and wastewater.

19. Municipal regulations • Smart Growth reporting requirements—Will involve verification of growth rates and actions to mitigate problems such as habitat destruction, open space disappearance, farmland disappearance, etc. Implemented most famously in Maryland; but also in Oregon, New York, and Washington. • Small communities soon will have to comply with National Accounting Standards Board GASB 34 management and accounting standards. These will require communities to account not only for existing infrastructure assets, but also for depreciation of those assets

20. Wastewater Regulations • Increased scrutiny of decentralized wastewater systems to capture non-point source risks. • Communities in areas like the Chesapeake Bay basin are increasingly asked to prove they are not contributing to contamination to the Bay or to switch over to centralized sewer. • Septic or other decentralized systems are increasingly managed • Increased oversight of wastewater facilities in general. Emphasis on “system optimization” Increased operator certification required.

21. Drinking water regulations • A new suite of regulations, standards, and rules regarding community water system safety. Arsenic Disinfection Byproducts, Long Term Enhanced Surface Water Treatment, and the Groundwater Rule. • All of these will involve the development of operating and monitoring regimes that may well lead to force small communities to purchase water services

22. Increased Demands on Rural Community Managers • The Rural Community Context is Changing • Small Towns are grappling with growing populations in the metro-fringes • Rural Town managers will need to develop plans and strategies for encouraging economic growth while ensuring it is done in a way that maintains environmental and cultural assets • More isolated rural small towns are shrinking—Town managers will need to build the capital and assets (human, social, physical, natural) to attract population and economic investment.

23. Capacity Development—Moving Toward Mississippi • Rural Water Managers—Board Members are rewarded for volunteering often by being blind sided in realizing they have fiduciary responsibility for the water system • Mississippi Capacity Development Initiative involves • Annual water system capacity assessment • Mandatory training for water boards

24. The Issue • Small Rural Communities have traditionally managed their basic governance operations through voluntary activities. • Basic governance includes: • Town management—management of municipal budgets and accounting, planning, facilitation; • Operation and management of water and wastewater systems; • Related—grant writing, fund raising, project implementation.

25. The Times They Are A-Changin’ • Most small communities have part-time administrative and management employees. • Often these employees have minimal educations past a high school diploma or GED. • Modern laws and regulations have created a need for a better educated employee in the small community public sector. • Communities often are faced with foregoing management or services or paying outsiders to manage local systems.

26. Role of the intermediary • In response to an observed problem with access to safe drinking water in the 1970s, Congress appropriated funds for technical assistance (TA) services to assist rural communities with infrastructure development • Congress also allowed for the allocation of funds to Non Governmental Organization (NGO) TA providers to work with communities on organizing community capacity for water infrastructure development and management.

27. Leveraging Embedded Community Colleges Technical Assistance Providers Self-Determination for Rural Communities: Capacity Building for Economic Revitalization Empowering Communities through providing access to government, and networks to other NGOs, government agencies, communities Provide technical assistance to rural communities: • Facilitation for infrastructure development opportunities • Assistance in preparation of proposals, plans, and grants/loans • Assistance in selection of technology/contractors • Networking to provide political capital • Advice on water rights and responsibilities

28. THE RCAP NATIONAL NETWORK MISSION The mission of RCAP and its affiliates is to help rural Americans to improve the quality of life in their communities. Management of water resources and ensuring access to basic water services are the defining elements of our work. Self-Determination for Rural Communities: Capacity Building for Economic Revitalization

29. A Facilitating Role EPA USDA HHS Federal Government RCAP, inc. State Regulatory Authority State Development Agencies TA Providers (TAPs) TAPs TAPs Community Community interests TA Providers Implementing Private Sector

30. Intermediaries and Standards Civil Society and Intermediary organizations are key to the U.S. Regulatory System Civil Society DATA Intermediary Organizations Intermediary Organizations Civil Society Community

31. Increasing Public Education and Awareness TA Providers and its affiliates produce a diversity of publications that are reflective of regionally specific social and economic issues, policies, and programs. Examples include: • Pacific Mountain Review (West) • Community Water Bulletin (South) • Watershed to Well (Northeast) • Waterlog (Midwest) • Rural Matters (National)

32. Utility and Community Planning • Utility planning to meet population growth, or water problems—and how utility planning can expand economic options • Example—Alexandria Bay, NY. • Resolved wastewater problem through a regional approach that opened opportunities for economic development in this depressed part of upstate New York.

33. Community Organizing and Leadership RCAP assists low-income, rural communities to achieve self-sufficiency. To do so, we teach such basic skills as: • Community planning and team building • Training small water and wastewater systems operators and Board members • Ensuring the public’s health and environmental protection

34. Financing:Bartlett Village Water Precinct - Bartlett, New Hampshire • Assisted the community to look into options for system expansion and rate increases to pay for increased costs and loss of businesses who paid water rates.

35. Expanding and Upgrading Infrastructure • The TA Provider works with communities to assist them determine ways to expand and upgrade their existing infrastructure systems. This usually involves meetings with utility managers, town managers, and city councilors to assist them to understand options and to make decisions.

36. Consideration of Technology Options • Matching community needs with available options is a key role for the TA Provider • Engineering firms often recommend that small communities select more expensive, large pipe options • RCAP plays a key role in assisting communities choose appropriate technologies

37. INDIVIDUAL AND COMMUNITY SELF-DETERMINATION In Spring Hill, MN, population 120, with a median household income (MHI) of $11,000, RCAP assisted the community to utilize a wetland system for wastewater treatment that cost less and provided the community with benefits that attracted regional interest.

38. TA—an ongoing initiative • RCAP is committed to community capacity development • However, as times change, so does the meaning of community capacity • RCAP is still working with the community just outside Roanoke, Virginia where we began 30 years ago • We started assisting with access to safe water; we have since worked with them on other water upgrades, wastewater, solid waste, housing, and economic development issues.

39. Application of the US TA System to the International Crisis • The US TA process provides critical assistance to communities to link them with technical and financial resources to address ongoing issues related to water and waste services. • This is not, and should not be considered a purely technical endeavor. TA providers spend as much time on the social process as on the technical process. • In many countries either internal or external resources exist to address the issues of water availability. A TA program that is locally adapted to provide the brokering and Technical advise functions of the US system might well allow local communities to access the scientific, technical, political, organizational, and financial resources to address lack of water facilities. • Build on regional/national/local success stories.

40. Opportunities for Leverage—RCAP and Rural Community Colleges • Combined training for water and sanitation operators • Combined training for water boards • Ongoing coaching assistance

41. Questions • Is this a new growth area that should be developed? • a)      Do others believe that this meets a critical need in rural America? • If yes to the first question, what venue would best meet the goals of RCAP, the community colleges, and (most importantly) citizens in rural communities? • a)      Identification and research of various educational models • What would be the best process to achieve goal? • a)      A few regionalized centers, piggy-backing on other establishments • b)      Development of a national program

42. Critical Questions • What potential funding mechanisms are available? • a)      Expansion of existing programs • For instance, operator training could be funded under SRF capacity development funding—but states and communities would have to buy in. • Are there other existing community technical capacity management moneys available? • New appropriations? • Foundations?     What potential partnerships are available? • a)      Land Grant University system (extension service) • b)      Community College system • c)      Technical College system