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 [phone], ext 103 Fax [phone]
• Email sgasteyer_at_rcap.org

2
Basic InfrastructureUS 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
  worlds 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
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 difficultbecause
  of the decentralized nature of rural communities.
  
• Example--West Central Initiative, Minnesotafound
  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 combinedNeed
  upgrademinimum cost, over 1 million
• RCAP Intermediaries helped to facilitate
  loan/grant packagemaking upgrade possible

17
Household Cost of Water and Sanitation

• On AverageUS 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 requirementsWill 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
  shrinkingTown managers will need to build the
  capital and assets (human, social, physical,
  natural) to attract population and economic
  investment.

23
Capacity DevelopmentMoving Toward Mississippi

• Rural Water ManagersBoard 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 managementmanagement of municipal budgets
  and accounting, planning, facilitation
• Operation and management of water and wastewater
  systems
• Relatedgrant 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

• Federal Government

EPA
USDA
HHS
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 problemsand how utility planning can
  expand economic options
• ExampleAlexandria 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 publics 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
TAan 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 LeverageRCAP 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 fundingbut 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