Rural and regional water systems know their customers rely on them to provide safe affordable water no matter what the circumstances. Unfortunately, the unexpected can and does sometimes happen. When a system does experience emergency conditions, it can be critical to move quickly to resolve the issue. That is why it is so important to know what can be done in an emergency to keep the water flowing. Generally, money is a key part of the solution, and systems should know there are a variety of grants available to help deal with emergency disruptions of service.

Generally emergencies include disruption of service, health hazards or damage to property. In some areas of the country, for example, rural and regional water systems have experienced emergency conditions when drought has lowered source levels below intake openings or natural disasters have caused power outages.

A variety of state and federal programs are available to help meet the financial needs to resolve the emergency. Every program is different, and requirements for obtaining grants vary from state to state, agency to agency, even office to office.

Most water systems are familiar with the State CDBG Programs (Community Development Block Grant) which are typically administered by special offices or agencies specific to individual states. Community Development Block Grant funds are usually limited in size (in a range of $100,000 to $200,000) and are awarded by criteria which allow weighting and preference to communities or systems facing health issues due to water quality or significant water shortage issues. Funds, if awarded, are done through a simple application process which usually will accommodate engineering and feasibility report formats of the USDA and other funding agencies. It is common for CDBG grants to be provided as part of a larger USDA or State funded project in an attempt to satisfy a local match requirement.

A very common program which most water utilities are aware of is the USDA Rural Development Water and Wastewater Facilities program. In past years this program has been in a position to allow grants up to 75percent of a qualified project. Typically a qualified project would involve a user base which had an income level below the State median income level, and would also represent a need to offset or prevent an adverse health effect due to the existing water source. In recent years, the grant amount has been only at a 45percent level for projects with the same issues---- and in future years there are indications that the level may further be decreased to an 18percent level. The continued decease of available grant funds through the USDA reflects ongoing budget issues on a federal level and the continued trend of the USDA to attempt to provide more of their funds through a loan process rather than through a grant process. To offset the lower grant amounts the USDA is considering a lower interest rate on the money they would loan; preliminary indications are that the loan rate would drop from approximately 4.5percent to approximately 3.1percent.

A recent program which has received attention throughout the Midwest is the USDA Program entitled the ECWAG (Emergency Community Water Assistance Grant) Program. This is a program specifically structured to address threatened water source or water
supply projects and can be used for both Tribal and non-Tribal projects. Grants through this program are limited to $500,000 per project, although a single applicant may make multiple grant requests if there are multiple and separate water source issues. An example of a successful pursuit of this program is an upper Midwest water supply and distribution system that has four intakes into Lake Sakakawea. All four intakes have had significant adverse effects due to the ongoing drought of the region and corresponding lower lake levels. This system made application for ECWAG funds for each of the four intake sites for projects to lower and extend such intakes, and was awarded the maximum of $500,000 on two of the four sites. The two sites not funded by ECWAG were funded by a special program entitled Tribal Set Aside as discussed below.

The Tribal Set Aside Program is an USDA program which provides grant funds to qualified Tribal governments in the amount of $1M per project. Such funds are granted under a criteria and selection process which compares needs of each applicant on a national competitive basis. For a particular applicant to receive funds from this program the applicant must demonstrate a need which exceeds applicants on a nationwide basis. Multiple applications can be made by any given applicant in any given year. A tribal client
in the upper Midwest was recently awarded two concurrent Set Aside grants, both within the same calendar year, for work needed to protect and enhance water source projects at two separate water treatment facilities.

Also available nationwide through the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are STAG grants (State & Tribal Assistance Grants). Usually under $1 million, State and Tribal Grants require the system to provide 45 percent of the cost of the solution. STAG grants
are difficult to obtain in any large amounts of money, although one successful applicant in the upper Midwest was able to obtain a grant in excess of $800,000 due to a health concern caused by arsenic in a community water supply. More typical would be grant amounts of $100,000 to $200,000. STAG grants have also been used by communities to pay hookup or connection fees to neighboring rural water systems if issues of health or water quality are present in the applicant water supply. Applicants seeking STAG assistance would direct their engineer to contact a congressional office of the State and make the application through that congressional office.

Recently, with the ongoing drought of the Midwest, there has been some increase in direct federal involvement with the granting of funds to resolve rural water and community water supply needs. For many tribal governments in the Midwest there is a legal trust responsibility between the tribe and the United States government for provision and protection of a water source to tribal entities and citizens. Typically these are trust responsibilities that were created by virtue of treaties or land purchase agreements. The most significant upper Midwest example of such an obligation is the lands along the upper Missouri River in Montana, North Dakota and South Dakota. As part of the “taking” process of the reservation lands for construction of the upper Missouri mainstem dams, the United States government made commitments of water supply and delivery projects for many of the affected tribes. One tribe, the Mandan-Hitasi-Arikara tribe of North Dakota released over 150,000 acres of river bottom land to the government based on this obligation of a water system. Many facilities funded or constructed by the government in an effort to fulfill this obligation have been affected by recent low water levels, which in turn has placed pressure on the government to provide funding for remediation of the facilities. Federal agencies which have been most involved in the use of federal money, all grant money, to resolve issues of this nature have been the US Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) and the Corps of Engineers (COE). Each applicant has specific circumstances on why they would or would not be eligible for federal assistance based on past commitments made or based on activity by a federal agency in contributing to the problem.

In recent years, blizzards in South Dakota resulted in a number of systems being without power to operate their systems.  In those instances, the systems turned to the State and ultimately to Federal Emergency Management Agency to help with funds to offset the
costs of maintaining service to their patrons.  The reimbursement involved careful tracking of costs in equipment, manpower, and supplies and coordination with the Governor’s Office of Emergency Management.  However, the funds received help offset the unanticipated costs in manpower and equipment necessary.

 In all cases, requirements and amounts vary. Systems can work with their engineers to determine conditions of each grant.