ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZAAAB
1
Drinking Water SRF Financial Terms, Conditions, Definitions, and Other Application Information
Last Updated - 9/11/24
2
StateAgenciesProgram Website and InformationProgramRate BenchmarkRate TypeRate StructureLoan Term Length30-Year Loan ConditionsAnnual FeesPredevelopment Submittals (via Program Website)Application DeadlinesDisadvantaged Community (DAC) DefinitionPrincipal Forgiveness (PF) AllocationProject Ranking and Scoring for Principal Forgiveness (PF)Eligible BorrowersEligible Projects and ExpensesSet-AsidesState Statutory or Regulatory Authority for ProgramProgram Intended Use Plan (IUP) Links For Base/Supplemental/LSL/Emerging Contaminants:
3
AlabamaAlabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM)https://adem.alabama.gov/programs/water/srf.cntDWSRFMarket RateVariable1-1.5% lower than prevailing muni bond rate for 'AAA' rated localities20 years30 years only considered under special circumstancesnot available1. Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) 2. Copies of last three (3) years of audited financialsNone - rolling basisAlabama’s DWSRF program determines principal forgiveness ranking based on four criteria. A community is defined as disadvantaged if the sum of the criteria for population, coverage ratio, or Justice 40 map coverage results in a value greater than 1 point or the ratio of water bill to median household income is greater than 1. The disadvantaged rank will be determined based on the sum of the categories above, when possible. Points for the criteria are assigned according to the following:

Criteria
Size (<10,000 population)
Points: 1
Applicant’s financial position (<1.1x coverage ratio)
Points: 1
Project location considered disadvantaged on Justice40 Map
Points: 1
Ratio of water bill/MHI
Actual number
Of the FFY22 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients.

In the funding cycle analyzed here, Alabama has allocated $3,036,894 (approximately 34%) of its base grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less.		To the maximum extent possible, the DWSRF gives priority for the use of funds to projects that address the most serious risk to human health and are necessary to ensure compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act. The criteria for ranking projects give priority to projects that:
1. Provide the highest nature of benefit;
2. Benefit the most people per dollar expended;
3. Assist systems most in need on a per household affordability basis as required by the SDWA.
4. Use consolidation with other systems to correct existing deficiencies and improve management.

These considerations are addressed by the Priority Ranking Criteria found in ADEM Administrative Code R. 335-11-2-.04 and in the DWSRF Pre-Application provided in Attachment 3.

Projects are ranked for the distribution of principal forgiveness based on how they are ranked according to the state’s disadvantaged community ranking system described above, and principal forgiveness is distributed to projects in rank order until principal forgiveness funds are exhausted. Projects for DACs at the top of the list are likely to receive some principal forgiveness, but projects for DACs lower on the list are less likely to receive any principal forgiveness. 		Towns, Cities, Counties, and systems owned by Boards, Authorities, or other public corporationsEligible projects include the planning, design, and construction of improvements to: *Rehabilitate or develop water sources to replace contaminated sources; *Install or upgrade treatment facilities if the project would improve the quality of drinking water to comply with primary or secondary standards; *Install or upgrade water storage tanks to prevent microbiological contaminants from entering the water system; *Install or replace distribution pipes to prevent contamination caused by leaks or breaks in the pipe. *Consolidate water supplies when customers have an inadequate quantity of water, the water supply is contaminated, or the system is unable to maintain compliance for financial or managerial reasons; and *Other projects meeting the priority objectives of the program. There are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Alabama is reserving $1,540,660 in set aside funds from the base capitalization grant, and $5,204,780 from its supplemental capitalization grant for use in SFY24. More information on Alabama’s use of set aside funds can be found on pp.10-11 in the SFY24 Base IUP and pp. 9-10 in the SFY24 Supplemental IUP.		https://adem.alabama.gov/alEnviroReglaws/files/Division11.pdfhttps://adem.alabama.gov/programs/water/srf.cnt
4
AlaskaAlaska Department of Environmental Consevation (ADEC)https://dec.alaska.gov/water/technical-assistance/state-revolving-fund/ADWFMarket RateFormulaBond Buyer's Municipal Bond Index - Bond rate less than 4%: 0.5% for <1-year, 1% 1-5-year, 1.5% 6-20-year, 2% 20-30-year; Bond rate greater than 4%: 0.5% <1-year, 1% + (0.5 x (bond rate - 4)) for 1-5-year, 1.5% + (0.625 x (bond rate -4)) for 6-20-year, 2% + (0.75 x (bond rate - 4)) for 20-30-year<1-year to 30-yearnone; variable rate for higher term loan0.5% of balance1. Attorney certification 2. Assembly/Council resolution 3. Lobbying certification (EPA 6600-06) 4. Disclosure of lobbying activities 5. Environmental Review Checklist 6. Engineer’s detailed construction cost estimate example 7. Useful Life Certification 8. Green Project Assessment 9. Technical, Managerial, Financial Capacity Worksheet 10. Cost and Effectiveness Assessment 11. Fiscal sustainability plan certificationNone - rolling basisDisadvantaged community status is determined by considering four factors: household burden, socioeconomic indicators, rural community status and priority projects. Points are assigned for each factor. Each loan recipient is assigned a DAC “tier” based on the point system that is then used to determine the maximum loan forgiveness that system or community is eligible for. This is a new approach adopted by Alaska in 2023. For more information see pp. 15-17 and Appendix 3 of the SFY24 Base and Supplemental IUP. Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients.

Alaska plans to offer approximately 30% of the capitalization grant as additional subsidy in the form of principal forgiveness to disadvantaged communities

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Alaska scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Appendix 1 of the SFY24 Base and Supplemental, LSL, and EC IUPs.

In the event the SRF Program does not have sufficient funds available to offer loans to all projects that are ready to proceed, ADEC will work with water systems with the highest ranked projects on the PPL to ensure that those projects are given a chance to be funded first. However, the final funding selection of projects from the PPL will be based primarily on the projects’ readiness to proceed.

To the extent that additional subsidy funds are available, DACs may receive loan forgiveness associated with the base and supplemental capitalization grants based on the tier assigned to the project, up to a maximum of $3,500,000 per borrower. See pp. 15-16 of the SFY24 Base and Supplemental IUP.

For LSL projects, the loan forgiveness per project will be provided at 58.33% of the funds disbursed. EC projects are 100% loan forgiveness.

Subsidy allocations for Micro Loan projects will range from 50% to 90% of the total project cost.

In addition, Alaska’s SRF Program offers up to $75,000 in principal forgiveness per borrower for Sustainable Infrastructure Planning Projects (SIPP). See pp. 16-17 of the SFY24 Base and Supplemental IUP for more information. Alaska will allocate $1 million in subsidy funding for SIPP during SFY24.
Publicly-owned systems or utilitiesPlanning and Design of Facilities, Water Source Rehabilitation, Water Treatment Facilities, Water Storage Facilities, Water Transmission and Distribution SystemsThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Alaska intends to make full use of the available set asides from the base and BIL supplemental funding. Alaska’s set aside work plan is at pp. 13-14 of the SFY24 Base and Supplemental IUP.

Of the FFY22 BIL emerging contaminants funding, Alaska intends to make use of the 2% small system technical assistance set aside, the 4% administration set aside, and the local assistance set aside, but plans to decline the program management set asides. Alaska’s set aside work plan for funds from the FFY22 EC grant is described on pp. 8-9 of the SFY24 EC IUP.

Of the FFY22 BIL LSL funding, Alaska intends to make use of the 2% small system technical assistance set aside, the 4% administration set aside, and the local assistance set aside, but plans to decline the program management set asides. Alaska’s set aside work plan for funds from the FFY22 LSL grant is described on pp. 10-11 of the SFY24 LSL IUP.		https://www.akleg.gov/basis/aac.asp#18.80https://dec.alaska.gov/water/technical-assistance-and-financing/state-revolving-fund/intended-use-plans/
5
ArizonaArizona Department of Environmental Quality, Water Infrastructure Finance Authority of Arizonahttps://www.azwifa.gov/programs/funding-type/dwsrfDWSRFMarket Rate70-95%Formula to determine rate: Combined Interest and Fee Rate (CIFR) - Fee (1.5% governmental, 3% non-govermental) = rateup to 30 yearsloan terms cannot exceed useful asset life of project1.5% governmental, 3% non-governmental1. Project Identification 2. Screening Application 3. Debt Authorization 4. Project Finance ApplicationNone - rolling basisArizona’s DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as an applicant that satisfies one of the following:
The community is a designated “colonia” community through the federal government.
The community received 50 or more Local Fiscal Capacity points on the DWSRF PPL.
The community has a Local MHI of 90% or less of the State MHI.

WIFA’s Disadvantaged Policy also allows for extended term, reduced interest or a combination. In addition to principal forgiveness, under WIFA’s Additional Subsidy Procedure, Arizona provides up to 100% forgivable principal for disadvantaged communities who are resolving public health threats and project costs are $250,000 or less (p. 4 of the SFY24 IUP). 		Of the FFY22 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). In the funding cycle analyzed here, Arizona opted to allocate 35% of its base grant as Principal Forgiveness (PF) for DACs.

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. Arizona will use this amount for additional PF.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less.

Total principal forgiveness funding available for distribution in SFY23 is $49,684,290. Although the PPL identifies a principal forgiveness eligibility level for each loan, the actual principal forgiveness that will be offered is not determined until the loan is awarded.		Arizona scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described at Section 8 of the SFY24 IUP, p. 4.

The Fundable Range process is used to bypass projects that are not ready to proceed. If sufficient funds are not available to fund all projects that are ready to proceed, WIFA will use tie breaking procedures established in administrative code (A.A.C. R18-15- 304). The Fundable Range List is ranked separately and published separately from the PPL.

Arizona caps the amount of principal forgiveness each borrower can receive in accordance with its forgivable principal policy, which can be found here. It is unclear whether this policy applies to projects funded with BIL supplemental funding. The Water Infrastructure Finance Authority’s (WIFA) awards principal forgiveness on a "first-come, first-serve" basis. Estimates provided by WIFA are not guaranteed until the loan proceeds to the board and the loan agreement is issued.		Cities, Towns, Special Districts, Tribal Entities, Arizona Corporation Commission (ACC) regulated private community water systems, Non-profit non-community water systems that meet DWSRF requirements and are regulated by the ACCTreatment, Transmission and Distribution, Source, Storage, Consolidation, Creation of New Systems, Land Acquisition, Refinance Debt of Publicly Owned SystemsThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Arizona is making partial use of these set-aside funds. Requested set aside amounts and Arizona’s set aside work plan can be found in Section 10 of the IUP, pp. 6-8.		https://casetext.com/regulation/arizona-administrative-code/title-18-environmental-quality/chapter-15-water-infrastructure-finance-authority-of-arizonahttps://azwifa.gov/component/content/article/26-public-notices-wifa/196-public-notice-sfy-2024?Itemid=226
6
ArkansasArkansas Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Divisionhttps://www.agriculture.arkansas.gov/natural-resources/divisions/water-development/DWSRFFixed RateTiered2.5% for 10-year, 3% for 20, 3.5% for thirty 10-, 20-, 30-year1.5% rate for 30 year loans for regionalization, 0% interest for lead (and no fee)1% 'fee' included in all those loans which is separate from the 4% admin fee cap1. WWAC Pre-Application 2. ANRC Funding Application and Current Signatory Authority Resolution 3. DWSRF Project Priority List FormNone - rolling basisIn Arkansas, a disadvantaged community has been defined as any community that meets either of the following criteria:
The current utility rates or proposed utility rates for 4,000 gallons of water on an annual basis is at least 1.5% of the Median Household Income (MHI) for the project area*
51% of the customers who benefit from a project are either low or moderate income as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Developments’ Community Block Grant (CDBG) Program; and have 1.25% of Median Household Income.
*Project area MHI is the average of the most recent three years of available data on the ACS five-year estimates provided by the University of Arkansas at Little Rock (UALR). 		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). In the funding cycle analyzed here, Arkansas opted to allocate 35% of its base grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. Arkansas is prioritizing this portion of additional principal forgiveness for DACs, projects addressing PFOS/PFAS, and projects directly connected to the planning, design, and replacement of lead service lines.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Arkansas’s priority rating system is outlined in Appendix A of the SFY23 IUP and includes factors for projects that:
a) address the most serious risk to human health;
b) are necessary to ensure compliance with the requirements of the SDWA; and
c) assist systems most in need on a per household basis according to state affordability criteria.

Projects that are ready to proceed are added to the Fundable Project Priority List (Chart 3) and bypass those projects that are not on schedule. It is Arkansas’s intent to offer funding to all of the projects listed on the Priority List. The Fundable List simply shows those projects that expect to receive assistance from the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund in this fiscal year.

To be eligible to receive additional subsidization from the fund, a borrower must show that it meets the definition of a DAC or that its project addresses emerging contaminants or lead service line replacement. Once a project has been determined to be eligible for additional subsidization from the DWSRF, additional priority will be given to projects that meet the Regionalization or Green standards set by the Arkansas Dept. of Ag. Natural Resources Division (NRD). 		Not readily availableDistribution & Storage Tanks, Tank Upgrade & Rehabilitation, Water Meters, Line Replacement, Treatment Plant ImprovementsThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Arkansas is making partial use of the available set aside amounts. For detail, see Section VIII. of the SFY24 IUP, pp. 16-19.		https://law.justia.com/codes/arkansas/2020/title-15/subtitle-2/chapter-22/subchapter-11/https://www.agriculture.arkansas.gov/natural-resources/divisions/water-development/
7
CaliforniaCalifornia State Water Control Boardhttps://www.waterboards.ca.gov/drinking_water/services/funding/SRF.htmlDWSRFMarket Rate50%50% of CA average GO bond rate for previous calendar year5-10-year terms for planning projects; lesser of 30 years or useful life of assetlesser of 40 years or asset useful life for SDAC communitiesNTE 1% of balance1. General information package 2. Technical Application Package 3. Environmental Package 4. Financial Security PackageNone - rolling basisCalifornia’s DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
“Disadvantaged Community” means the entire service area of a Community Water System, or a community therein, in which the Median Household Income (MHI) is less than 80 percent of the statewide annual MHI. Notwithstanding the definition of “disadvantaged community” in the DWSRF Policy Document, the disadvantaged community definition in the Lead Supp IUP allows a project for a disadvantaged area served by a larger non-disadvantaged community water system to be eligible for LSLR PF funding.		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). In the funding cycle analyzed here, California opted to allocate35% of its base grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. California is using this amount as additional PF funding.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less.

The State Water Board will provide 30 percent (30%) of its ASADRA grant as PF to eligible recipients with the remaining funds provided as loan at zero percent.		California scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described at Section VI. B. and C., pp. 7-11 of the DWSRF Policy Document.

To the maximum extent practicable, priority for funding and placement on the Fundable List will be given to projects which: 1) address the most serious risk to human health, 2) are necessary to ensure compliance with the requirements of the SDWA, and 3) assist systems most in need on a per household basis. California also gives preference to consolidation projects.

Appendix D and Appendix E of the Base and Supplemental IUP (pp.93-94) outline the guidelines for principal forgiveness for planning and construction grants for an eligible PWS.

For lead projects, DACs are eligible for funding with up to 100% principal forgiveness.

A DAC system project or a project that serves a population under 25,000 is eligible for EC funding up to 100% of the project cost. A non-DAC system that serves a population of 25,000 or greater is eligible for EC funding up to 50% of the project cost. EC funding is 100% PF and is capped at $5,000,000. If an EC eligible project would be eligible for a higher PF amount based on the criteria in Appendix E of the Base and Supplemental IUP, then the EC funding limit can be increased to match the amount specified in Appendix E, and potentially paired with other funds as appropriate to meet other needs as part of the same project. The Deputy Director of DFA may further increase the maximum EC grant for water systems serving DACs on a case-by-case basis for good cause.

A project must be on the Fundable List to receive financing but placement on the Fundable List does not guarantee financing. A financing agreement will be executed for a project on the Fundable List only if the project meets all applicable eligibility requirements and sufficient funds are available
Publicly and privately owned community water systems and non-profit, non-community water systemsFeasibility studies and project reports, plans and specifications, financial analyses, engineering and design documents, environmental review, legal costs, TMF assessments and documents, capital improvement plans, asset management plans, water rate studies, planning financing application, test wells, temporary easements for planning purposes, treatment facilities, water sources, consolidation project costs, appraisals, pipelines and water mains, installation/replacement of private laterals, implementing measures needed to comply with TMF requirements, equipment, water meters, backflow prevention, contingencies for change orders, construction/bid document preparation, environmental review documents, insurance related to constructionThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/drinking_water/services/funding/documents/srf/dwsrf_policy/dwsrf_policy_final.pdfhttps://www.waterboards.ca.gov/drinking_water/services/funding/DWSRFIUP.html
8
ColoradoColorado Department of Public Health & Environment, Colorado Water Resources and Power Development Authorityhttps://cdphe.colorado.gov/state-revolving-fund-informationDWRFMarket Rate70%70% market rate of AAA-rated drinking water revenue bonds sold by state financing authorityup to 30 yearslesser of 30 years or useful life of assetNTE 1.25% of balance1. Eligibility Survey 2. Pre-Qualification Form 3. Pre-Qualification Meeting and Preliminary Credit Determination 4. Project Needs Assessment 5. Environmental Assessment/EIS 6. Basis of Design Report 7. Project Plans & Specifications 8. Loan ApplicationThe fifth of each month to correspond with each upcoming Authority Board Meeting (except December)Colorado’s DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
Communities having a population of 10,000 or less and by meeting certain primary or a combination of primary and secondary factors - Primary: Median Household Income (MHI), Median Home Value (MHV), unemployment rate (county 24-month unemployment rate OR county 10-Year Change in Jobs); Secondary: County Median Household Income (MHI), 10-year Population Change, Assessed Value/Household, Current and Projected System Debt per Tap to MHV, System Full Cost per Tap to MHI or Required Revenue per Tap to MHI. If a community does not meet the criteria, it may present a business case to the authority board for a DAC eligibility determination. See p. 10-12 of the IUP for more information.		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. Colorado’s 2024 IUP states that the authority board determines the additional subsidy amount based on the capitalization grant conditions, guidance from the EPA and alignment with program needs. Colorado provides additional subsidies to eligible DACs in the form of PF. Colorado issues a portion of the additional subsidy for the design and engineering phase of projects.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less.
Colorado scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Attachment I (p. 21) of the IUP. Prioritization occurs at the loan application deadlines. In the event two or more applications tie based on priority scoring, the highest total Affordability score will be used to break the tie. If a tie remains, the total score for Drinking Water Quality & Public Health will be used. If further tiebreakers are required the remaining categories of the priority scoring model will be used systematically until the tie is broken. Loan applicants that do not receive funding due to their rank may be considered at the next applicable loan application date at the applicant’s request.

Colorado caps the amount of each direct loan at $3 million per year. Larger loan amounts may be approved by the authority board, if market conditions allow. Leveraged loans are used for investment-grade borrowers with projects over $3 million.

Additional subsidization is awarded to projects as a percentage of the total loan principal based on points the project receives under the additional subsidization scoring criteria. Additional subsidization in the form of PF may range from 20% to 80% of the loan principal. No one project can receive more than 50% of the total amount of funds that have been allocated for additional subsidization for that fiscal year. See Attachment II, p. 24 of the IUP for more information.		Municipalities, water districts, private and non-profit water systemsTreatment Improvements, Distribution System Improvements, Source Water Protection, Consolidation or Restructuring of Water Systems, Compliance with Drinking Water Standards, Water Efficiency and Conservation, Emergency Preparedness and ResiliencyThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% local assistance and other state programs set aside.

Colorado is only requesting the 4% program administration set aside from the base capitalization grant for 2024. The remaining activities will be funded by BIL set asides as needed. Set aside activities for the base capitalization grant are described at pp. 15-20 of the IUP.

Colorado is requesting the full 31% from the BIL supplemental capitalization grant for set aside activities, and anticipates using these funds to supplement set aside activities as needed due to cuts that may happen to the base capitalization grant. See pp. 29-33 for the set aside work plan for the BIL supplemental capitalization grant.

From the BIL Lead and Emerging Contaminants funding, Colorado is requesting 16% for set aside activities, and declining the 15% set aside for local assistance and other state programs. See pp. 33-37 for a description of the set aside activities associated with these grants.		https://www.sos.state.co.us/CCR/GenerateRulePdf.do?ruleVersionId=2883https://cdphe.colorado.gov/state-revolving-fund-information
9
ConnecticutConnecticut Department of Public Healthhttps://portal.ct.gov/dph/drinking-water/dws/drinking-water-state-revolving-fund-programDWSRFMarket RateVariable "An eligible drinking water project shall bear an interest rate not exceeding one-half the rate of the average net interest cost as determined by the last previous similar bond issue by the state of Connecticut as determined by the State Bond Commission" CGS 22a-478up to 20 years generally; 40-year terms for DACsqualification as disadvantaged community under Table 1 of IUP; loan terms up to 40 yearsfees covered by administrative set-aside for fund1. Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) 2. Financial Assistance Application 3. Environmental Assessment None - rolling basisConnecticut’s definition of “disadvantaged community” (DAC) is explained in Attachment K to the SFY24 Draft IUP. A community is be considered a DAC if one of the following conditions are satisfied:
The community meets the Connecticut Department of Economic and Community Development’s definition of “distressed municipality” during the year in which they enter into a DWSRF financial assistance agreement or at any point within 5 years prior.
The community has a median household income (MHI) less than the statewide MHI.
If the applicant water system serves less than 1,000 people and it does not meet the affordability criteria above, an income survey may be conducted to include each residential ratepayer for the purpose of determining the MHI of the residential ratepayers. If ratepayers’ MHI is less than the statewide MHI, or if the average annual residential ratepayer’s water bill equals or exceeds 1% of the ratepayer’s MHI (or 1.5% if sewerage is included in the water bill), the PWS qualifies as a DAC.

In addition to principal forgiveness, Connecticut provides $50 million or more in loan funds available to DACs for loans with extended loan terms in excess of 20 years.		States are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base FFY23 DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). In the funding cycle analyzed here, Connecticut opted to make 35% of its base grant available for subsidies for DACs.

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. All federal subsidization that Connecticut is authorized to provide to loan recipients from its federal capitalization grant will be provided as principal forgiveness. Connecticut is prioritizing this portion of additional subsidies in the following manner:
Small PWSs (those serving a population of 10,000 or under) and PWSs with more than one system, but whose largest system serves 10,000 or under, will be eligible to receive PF of up to 25% of each fixed contract cost associated with the project, not to exceed a total of $1 million per project.
Large PWSs will be eligible to receive PF of up to 10% of each fixed contract cost associated with their project, not to exceed a total of $750,000 per project. Large PWSs are eligible to receive PF of 10% up to a total of $1,000,000 per project for certain LSL projects, projects that include consolidation of one or more small community water systems, or projects that include an extension of water service to existing residential property owners served by private wells with impaired water quality or insufficient quantities of water.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. Of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA, 100% must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Connecticut scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Attachment B to the SFY24 Draft IUP. In SFY24, Connecticut changed its priority ranking system to allow PFAS and emerging contaminant activities to be counted along with those to address Maximum Contaminant Level violations in private wells. In addition, for purposes of determining priority ranking of the BIL EC PPL, only those activities and points associated with addressing an EC and affordability are considered.

Connecticut caps the amount of principal forgiveness each borrower can receive as follows:
Project Category
Non-DCAP PF (% of loan)
Non-DCAP Max PF per loan
DCAP PF
(% of loan)
DCAP Max PF per loan
Emergency Power Generator Program or Small Loan Program
25%
$25,000
50%
$50,000
Small (≤ 10,000) - all other projects
25%
$1,000,000
50%
$2,000,000
Large - all other projects
10%
$750,000
50%
$1,500,000
Large - Consolidation/extension/LSLs
25%
$1,000,000
50%
$2,000,000


Projects are ranked for the distribution of principal forgiveness based on the project’s ranking under the state’s project scoring system. Principal forgiveness is distributed to projects in rank order until principal forgiveness funds are exhausted. Projects for DACs at the top of the list are likely to receive some principal forgiveness, but projects for DACs lower on the list are less likely to receive any principal forgiveness. PF for SFY24 has not been allocated to specific projects in the SFY24 Draft IUP.		Municipalities, authorities, non-profit community and non-profit non-community water systemsTreatment Works, Storage Tanks, Water Mains, System Improvements, Water Quality, Water Quantity, PWS Acquisition or Consolidation, Source ProtectionThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Connecticut is making full use of the allowed set asides for the base and supplemental grants. Work plans for the set-asides can be found under Section VII, pp. 46-52 of the SFY24 Draft IUP.		https://portal.ct.gov/dph/drinking-water/dws/call-for-projects-review-and-ranking-of-projects
10
DelawareDelaware Department of Health and Social Serviceshttps://dhss.delaware.gov/dhss/dph/hsp/dwsrf.htmlDWSRFFixed RateFixedInterest rates plus fees shall be set at 2% per annum. up to 30 yearsgenerally 20 years; must qualify as small community (10,000 or less population) to be eligible for 30-year loan termNTE 1%; fee waivers possible1. Notice of Intent 2. Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) 3. Capacity Assessment 4. Environmental Information 5. Project Category Type Form 6. Environmental ScreeningNotice of intent submitted annually in February - rolling basis afterDelaware’s DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
A disadvantaged community is one that:

Meets the Affordability Criteria (water rates exceed 1.5% MHI for single wastewater or drinking water residential user rate or 3.0%MHI for combined wastewater and drinking water rates);
Is identified by EPA’s EJScreen tool at 90% (USA) percentile or higher for Environmental Justice Indexes or for “Low Income” under the Socioeconomic Indexes;
Is identified as disadvantaged by the White House Climate and Economic Screening Tool; or
Is underserved, as defined in SDWA Section 1459A.
In addition to principal forgiveness, Delaware offers lower interest rates and extended repayment terms to DACs.		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. Delaware’s IUP states only that it will meet the minimum subsidy requirements.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Delaware scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in its ranking criteria, available separately, here.

Delaware will meet minimum subsidy requirements by providing principal forgiveness or grants to:
Communities identified as Disadvantaged.
The next most ‘in need’ communities as identified by the financial review and affordability criteria mentioned herein and based on project priority
Applicants who meet the 2022 Additional Subsidy Provisions, Part 1) Congressional Additional Subsidy Authority Provisions.

A community considered for the DWSRF Disadvantaged Community Program may receive additional subsidies to the extent that that subsidy is available and within programmatic structure. 		Public water systems (municipalities, authorities), private community water systems, non-profit non-community water systemsWater Treatment Plant Improvements, Distribution System Upgrades, Source Water Protection, System Consolidation and Restructuring, Compliance Projects, Water Conservation and Efficiency, Resilience and SustainabilityThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Delaware is making full use of available set asides from its base and IIJA supplemental capitalization grants, and partial use of set asides from IIJA lead and emerging contaminants funding. See pp. 12-21 and Appendix E of the FFY23 IUP for details and a set aside work plan.		https://dhss.delaware.gov/dhss/dph/hsp/dwsrfintendeduseplans.html
11
FloridaFlorida Department of Environmental Protectionhttps://floridadep.gov/wra/srf/content/dwsrf-programDWSRFMarket RateFormulaPercentage of weekly average yield in Bond Buyer 20-Bond GO Index; Median Household Income variable in formula to determine rateThe term of planning and design loan agreements is 10 years and a construction loan agreement is 20 years, with an option for 30 years for unique circumstances.must qualify as "financially disadvantaged community"2% admin fee assessed in first two repayments1. Request for Inclusion Form 2. Loan Application None - rolling basisFlorida’s DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
A financially disadvantaged community is defined as a municipality, county or agency (such as a county-wide department) thereof, franchised area, or other entity with a defined public water system service jurisdiction having a median household income of less than the statewide average.

The State definition of a small community is a municipality or unincorporated community or other identifiable entity with a total service area population of less than 10,000. The FY22 Lead IUP also states that a larger community (of more than 10,000) may use the Climate & Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST) to identify pockets of disadvantaged communities in order to allow for additional subsidy eligibility for larger communities. Further, considering the costs of LSL inventory and replacement to water systems and the benefits of the projects to the served communities, additional communities may be designated as financially disadvantaged for the purposes of the Lead IUP as described on p. 13 of that document.		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. Florida has allocated 43.5% of its base capitalization grant as additional subsidy and has designated this additional subsidization as principal forgiveness for DACs.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs.

One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less.		Florida scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described at Appendix B to the FFY23 Base & Supplemental IUP.

The principal forgiveness subsidy percentage received by projects will be determined using a linear equation based on the MHI and population of the service area.

Qualifying financially disadvantaged community water systems will compete for available principal forgiveness funds based on priority score. The principal forgiveness percentage received by projects will be determined using a linear equation that includes MHI and population of the service area as the variables. Projects with service area populations of less than 10,000 will get preference for the grant funds. That is, if there are grant funds available after the projects with small service areas have all been funded, the projects with service areas of 25,000 or less will receive subsidization. See p. 15 of the Base & Supplemental IUP for DAC scoring criteria and more information. 		Cities, Counties, Special Districts, Private Water SystemsInfrastructure Improvements, Compliance with Health Standards, Drinking Water Treatment, Distrubition System Upgrades, Source Water Protection, Storage Facilities, Consolidation of Water Supply Systems, Implementation of Water Conservation/Efficiency Initiatives, Emergency Water Supply, Technical Assistance/Planning/AdministrationThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Florida does not propose to use set asides from its base capitalization grant and proposes to use about 8.8% of the available set asides from its general supplemental capitalization grant. Set aside amounts and activities are discussed in detail in Section 25, pp. 15-20 of the Base & Supplemental IUP.

Florida does not intend to use any set asides from the EC or Lead Supplemental funding.		https://www.flrules.org/gateway/ChapterHome.asp?Chapter=62-552https://floridadep.gov/program-content/WRA/SRF?page=1
12
GeorgiaGeorgia Department of Environmental Protection, Georgia Environmental Finance Authority (GEFA)https://gefa.georgia.gov/drinking-water-state-revolving-fundDWSRFMarket Rate50%True interest cost (TIC) of state's general obligation bond issue, 50% below benchmark rateyears, with an option for 30 years for unique circumstanceslesser of 40 years or useful life of asset; only for communities designated as disadvantagednot specific; one-time origination fee based on total financing1. Pre-Application Meeting 2. Project Notification Form 3. Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) 4. Environmental Assessment 5. Financial/Cash Flow Model InformationJune 1 for August Board Meeting, September 1 for November Board Meeting, November 1 for January Board Meeting, March 1 for May Board MeetingGeorgia’s DWSRF program determines principal forgiveness eligibility based on a composite score of 10 economic and social factors (“affordability criteria”), described in Attachment 7 t0 the FY23 Base and Supplemental IUP.

In addition to principal forgiveness, Georgia offers extended loan terms of up to 40 years to state-defined DACs.

Project Ranking for Distribution of Loans and Principal Forgiveness
Georgia scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Attachment 8 to the FFY23 Base and Supplemental IUP.

Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. Georgia will provide up to 49% of the base capitalization grant in principal forgiveness, based on eligibility and distribution procedure described below.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Georgia scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Attachment 8 to the FFY23 Base and Supplemental IUP.

The Georgia Environmental Finance Authority (GEFA) will be allocating PF based on three criteria.
The community’s affordability score.
The Project Score, which is determined by health compliance needs and benefits.
The community’s financial position, which will be determined by an initial underwriting of the proposed loan amount to evaluate how much debt your community can maintain.

If a community has multiple projects on the DWSRF comprehensive list, only one project can receive principal forgiveness

Following the evaluation of these items, Georgia will reach out to the community with a PF offer, going down the list (Attachment 1) until the PF amount has been expended. The first round of communities to receive this evaluation are listed as primary in the table and the next round of communities (based on PF remaining) are listed as alternate. This table will be updated with the PF amounts once the awards have been made.		Public Water Systems (municipalities, counties, other local government entities), Privately Owned Water Systems, Non-Profit Organizations, Tribal Governments, Special Districts and AuthoritiesWater Treatment Improvements, Distribution System Upgrades, Storage Facilities, Source Development, Consolidation of Systems, Emergency Preparedness, Health Standards Compliance, Green InfrastructureThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Georgia’s anticipated use and work plan for set aside funding for FFY23 can be found in Attachments 5 and 6 to the FFY23 Base and Supplemental IUP and the FFY23 Lead IUP. Georgia is not taking any set aside amounts from its IIJA emerging contaminants capitalization grant.		https://rules.sos.ga.gov/gac/267-13https://gefa.georgia.gov/water-resources/intended-use-plans
13
HawaiiHawaii State Department of Healthhttps://health.hawaii.gov/sdwb/drinking-water-state-revolving-fund/DWSRFFixed RateTieredMunicipal project-based: .65%; Programmatic Financing: .25%; Private Systems: 2.75%; rates established unless market rates are lower up to 30 years; DACs eligible for up to 40must qualify as DAC to be eligible for greater than 30-year term1.5% for municipal and programmatic financing projects, up to $1,000 flat fee for private; fees added to interest rates for total annual rate1. DWSRF Capacity Evaluation Form 2. Loan Application Form 3. Borrowing Resolution 4. Construction Plans & SpecificationsNone - rolling basisHawaii’s DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:

A DAC is a public water system’s community with a total affordability score of 251 or greater (out of 100), based on the DWSRF Priority Scoring Model and as demonstrated in the 2021 Hawaii Water Rates Dashboard and Hawaii 2015‐2019 American Community Survey 5‐year Estimates by Census Tracts & Legislative Districts. Additionally, the program is expanding DAC designation to areas that are considered disadvantaged on the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool that would otherwise not meet the original DAC criteria of the DWSRF Priority Scoring Model.
Amendment 1 to the SFY24 IUP proposes to add the following to this definition: Recent natural disasters have brought awareness on the significant hardship facing communities impacted; therefore, DAC now also includes systems recovering from natural disasters, including hurricane, flood, wildfire, lava flow, and earthquake.

In addition to principal forgiveness, Hawaii provides extended loan terms of up to 40 years to all state-defined DACs. 		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients.

Hawaii will provide all additional subsidies in the form of zero percent interest loans with principal forgiveness.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Hawaii scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Appendix B to the SFY24 IUP. Projects that are eligible under the BIL EC or BIL LSL capitalization grants will be ranked on separate priority lists for each respective funding category. These projects will still follow the same project ranking criteria.

For SFY24, Hawaii will primarily award additional subsidy to small community water systems or DAC, as required per funding type. A secondary consideration will be to cover the increased cost for meeting DWSRF equivalency and BIL requirements. If needed, a tertiary prioritization for awarding additional subsidy will be implemented. The Hawaii DWSRF program will assess disbursement activity in SFY 2023 to determine which borrower most consistently submitted regular monthly payment requests. Any remaining additional subsidy for SFY 2024 will go to that borrower’s next executed loan. This incentivizes the borrowers to ensure the timely disbursement of their loan funds		Existing privately owned and existing publicly owned community water systems, non-profit non-community water systems, new community water systems that represent cost-effective solutions to existing public health problemsTreatment, Transmission and Distribution, Source, Storage, Consolidation, Creation of New Systems, Water Security Projects, Energy Efficiency ProjectsThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Hawaii is making partial use of set asides from the base and supplemental capitalization grants in SFY24, and is banking a portion of the available set asides for future use. See Section IV, pp. 15-19 of the SFY24 IUP for details.		https://health.hawaii.gov/opppd/files/2015/06/11-65-2015.pdfhttps://health.hawaii.gov/sdwb/drinking-water-state-revolving-fund/
14
IdahoIdaho Department of Environmental Qualityhttps://www.deq.idaho.gov/water-quality/grants-and-loans/construction-loans/DWSRFFixed RateVariableCeiling rate 2%, floor rate 1.25%NTE 20 years; 30-year terms for DACsmust qualify as DAC for 30-year term1% of loan balance1. Letter of Interest/Intent to Apply 2. Pre-Application Meeting 3. Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) 4. Environmental Review 5. Financial InformationJanuary 12, 2024 for FY 2025 Letters of InterestIdaho's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
To initially qualify for a disadvantaged loan, a loan applicant must have an annual cost of drinking water service for residential customers that exceeds 2.0% of the median household income. The annual cost includes all operating, maintenance, replacement, and debt service costs, both for the existing system and upgrades being financed with state debt. If the applicant's service area is not within the boundaries of a municipality, the applicant may use census data for the county in which it is located, or may use a DEQ-approved income survey (which details the community's median household income).

In addition to principal forgiveness, Idaho provides reduced interest rates and extended loan terms to state-defined DACs, with the goal of achieving an annual user charge of less than 2.00% of MHI. See pp.8-9 and Attachment VI of the SFY24 IUP for details.		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. Idaho is providing 26% of its FFY23 base capitalization grant for principal forgiveness.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. Of its IIJA general supplemental funding, $1,025,740 of PF is allocated for emergencies and lead remediation.

One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less.		Idaho scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described on pp. 16-18 of the SFY24 IUP.

Principal forgiveness is based on the pool of qualifying DACs in need of emergency assistance. To the extent entities on the Fundable List exceed user rates of $100 per month, up to 50% of the available principal forgiveness will be allocated proportionally. After the allocation of the initial 50% PF, all DACs will share equally, on a project cost pro-rata basis, in the remaining 50% PF that is available.

Principal forgiveness may not be used to lower a community’s annual average water rates to below 1.50% of MHI.

The Lead Service Line Replacement funding will utilize the existing SRF principal forgiveness criteria and additional criteria to fully utilize the funding to address this significant health hazard. To accomplish this, DEQ is waiving on a case-by-case basis, IDAPA 58.01.12.21 for communities applying for this funding that do not currently meet the disadvantaged criteria due to lead being a known health hazard as well as a significant source of water contamination (IDAPA 58.01.12.995). DEQ plans to use additional criteria to establish disadvantaged status to maximize the use of the funding.

For additional details on allocation of principal forgiveness, see pp.8-12 and Attachment VI of the SFY24 IUP.		Local communities, counties, water districts, and non-profit associationsTreatment Plant Improvements, Distribution Upgrades, Storage, Source Development, Consolidation, Water Meter Installation, Resilience and Sustainability, Compliance with Health StandardsThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Idaho plans to make full use of the set aside allotments for its FFY23 base and supplemental capitalization grants, and partial use of set aside allotments (21%) of its FFY22 lead capitalization grant. See pp.12-15 of the SFY24 IUP for details on Idaho’s use of available set aside funds.		https://regulations.justia.com/states/idaho/58/58-01-12/https://www2.deq.idaho.gov/admin/LEIA/api/document/download/16852
15
IllinoisIllinois Environmental Protection Agencyhttps://epa.illinois.gov/topics/grants-loans/state-revolving-fund.htmlDWSRFFixed RateFixed1/2 the mean interest rate of the 20 GO Bond Buyer Index from July 1 to June 30 in preceeding state fiscal year; small and hardship communities qualify for lower fixed ratesgenerally 20; up to 30 years for DACsmust qualify as DAC for 30-year term; lesser of 30 years or useful life of assetNone; administrative costs supported by outside Loan Support Program (LSP)1. Funding Nomination Form 2. Loan Application 3. Bid DocumentsFunding Nomination Forms (FNFs) due March 31; Final Application Form and Bid Package due June 15Illinois's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
A disadvantaged community is a local unit of government that qualifies for either the Small Community Rate or Hardship Rate as defined in Section 662.210 of the loan rules (Section 662.210 is also reproduced on pp. 15-16 of the SFY24 IUP.)		Of the FFY22 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). In the funding cycle analyzed here, Illinois opted to allocate up to 35% of its base capitalization grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. In SFY24, Illinois is dividing a portion of this PF from its base capitalization grant into two segments:
$1,048,950 available for Small System Compliance Assistance PF
$1,048,950 available for One Well Critical Review
These segments are described on pp. 13-15 of the SFY23 IUP.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs.		Illinois scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the loan priority score, in accordance with 35 Illinois Administrative Code, section 662.345.

In FY24, Illinois will impose a funding cap, whereby no more than 25% of the funds available to traditional DWSRF projects ($64,117,737) will be reserved for any one loan applicant. Should excess funds remain available at the end of FY2024, an applicant may be provided additional funds even if it results in the funding cap being exceeded, provided no other applicants have met the requirements to obtain funding.

For SFY23, all loan recipients that meet the definition of a DAC qualify for DAC PF. The maximum amount of DAC PF provided to any loan recipient will be equivalent to 50% of the initial loan amount (exclusive of costs related to LSLR PF) up to a maximum of $1,650,000.

For LSLR funding in SFY24, there will be an initial cap of $2,755,000 per loan recipient for PF. Additional loan funding will initially be capped at $2,027,000 per loan recipient.

For emerging contaminants, Illinois anticipates prioritizing projects that address Manganese as well as PFAS. Once all projects eligible for EC funding are scored and ranked, EC Principal Forgiveness will be allocated using a two-pass process, starting at the top of the scoring list.
Pass 1: All projects can receive up to $2 million in Emerging Contaminants funding in FY2024. Once all eligible projects are awarded the first-round allocation, additional EC funding will be allocated in EC priority score order as described in Pass 2 below.
Pass 2: Emerging Contaminants Principal Forgiveness will be allocated in an amount equal to 75% of the total project cost, up to a total EC Principal Forgiveness cap per project of $6 million.

In addition to principal forgiveness, Illinois offers reduced loan interest rates and extended loan terms to qualifying DACs. 		Public or private applicantsNew Drinking Water Infrastructure, Upgrading Existing InfrastructureThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Illinois is making partial use of set aside allowances from its FFY23 base and supplemental capitalization grants, and FFY22 lead capitalization grant. For details, see pp. 9-10 of the SFY24 IUP. 		https://casetext.com/regulation/illinois-administrative-code/title-35-environmental-protection/part-662-procedures-for-issuing-loans-from-the-public-water-supply-loan-programhttps://epa.illinois.gov/topics/grants-loans/state-revolving-fund/postings.html
16
IndianaIndiana Department of Environmental Management, Indiana Finance Authorityhttps://www.in.gov/ifa/srf/drinking-water/DWSRFMarket Rate90%Rates at or below 90% of average 20-year AAA rated GO bond municipal market data; further discounts for applicant's median household income and local user rates; additional discount of .5% if Green Project Reserve or nonpoint source project features; reduction to 0% for qualifying lead line projectsgenerally 20; up to 35 or 40 years for qualifying projectsmust qualify as DAC; special EPA approval of 35-year terms for all Indiana public utilities for aging infrastructure in 2017; small rate increases for loan extensions beyond 20 yearsFlat $1,000 fee for loan closing1. DWSRF Loan Application 2. Capacity Development Assessment 3. Project Planning Meeting 4. Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) 5. Due Dilligence Packet 6. Construction Plans and SpecificationsNone - rolling basisIndiana's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows in the program project priority list (PPL):
A Disadvantaged Community is an eligible Participant that meets one of the following criteria:
A project area with an MHI below 80% of the State MHI, as established by 2016-2020 American Community Five Year Survey.
Projects that have a positive, direct impact on a census tract(s), or other targeted project area, which has an MHI below 80% of the State MHI may also receive Additional Subsidization.
An estimated post project user rate greater than $45.00 per month.
An average annual residential post project user rate that would exceed one (1%) percent of the Participant’s Median Household Income (MHI).
Schools that serve 50% or greater number of kids that qualify to receive free and reduced meals. Applicable to the Indiana Lead in Public Schools and Childcare program.

In addition to principal forgiveness, Indiana provides extended loan terms and reduced interest rates (based on the participant’s MHI) to state-defined DACs. 		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). In the funding cycle analyzed here, Indiana opted to allocate up to 35% of its base grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. Indiana indicates an intent to provide this additional subsidization in the form of principal forgiveness.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Indiana’s DWSRF Loan Program uses a Base Interest Rate, which is re-set on the first business day of each January, April, July, and October. The Base Rate is calculated by using 90 percent of the daily average 20-year AAA-rated, general obligation bond Municipal Market Data (MMD) composite index for the most recent calendar month. The Base Rate is discounted further based on the Participant’s median household income (MHI) from the 2016-2020 American Community Five Year Survey and projected post-project monthly user rates.

In SFY23, the DWSRF Loan Program will continue to offer loans with extended term financing. Participants that qualify for and opt to close a loan with extended term financing will receive an increased interest rate as shown:
21-25 year loan: +0.1%
26-30 year loan: +0.2%
31-35 year loan: +0.3%

Indiana assesses participants a Loan Closing Fee of $1,500 to offset loan processing costs incurred by the DWSRF Loan Program. The fee may be waived for communities receiving additional subsidization, LSLR, or emerging contaminants funds,or meeting other priorities of the DWSRF . The DWSRF Loan Program may also assess a Non-Use Fee on funds not used for project costs two years following the loan closing in order to encourage prompt use of funds. Participants must use non-SRF monies to fund payment of these fees, thus these funds are non-program income.		Political subdivisions (cities, towns, counties), regional water districts, privately owned and non-profit systemsSource Intake Structures and Wells, Treatment Plant Facilities, Water Storage Facilities, Transmission and Distribution MainsThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Indiana is making partial use of set asides (6% of the base grant, 7.5% of the IIJA supplemental grant, 4% of the FFY23 IIJA lead grant, 4% of the FFY24 IIJA lead grant, and 4% of the IIJA emerging contaminants grant) in SFY24. Details on Indiana’s proposed use of set asides can be found on pp. 11-13 and Exhibit G to the SFY24 IUP.		https://law.justia.com/codes/indiana/2022/title-5/article-1-2/chapter-10/https://www.in.gov/ifa/srf/reports-and-ppls/
17
IowaIowa Department of Natural Resourceshttps://www.iowasrf.com/drinking-water-loan-program/DWSRFFixed RateTiered0% interest for planning and design loans (max 3 year terms); 1.75% for standard and DAC loans (up to 30 years); 2.75% for non-DAC extended loans (up to 30 years) and taxable loans (up to 20 years)generally 20; up to 30-year terms based on useful asset lifelesser of 30 years or useful life of asset.5% origination fee; additional .25% servicing fee for construction loans1. Project Planning Meeting 2. IUP Application 3. Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) 4. Viability Assessment 5. Agency Technical and Environmental ReviewsDue Quarterly - March 1, June 1, September 1, December 1The DWSRF Program historically focused on low-to-moderate income metrics to identify borrowers that would experience a significant hardship raising the revenue necessary to finance a drinking water project. In SFY 2023, the Iowa SRF Program began using a SA Tool with a broad range of metrics to evaluate a community or service area’s underlying socioeconomic and demographic condition. For SFY24, applicants with a Socioeconomic Assessment (SA) score of at least 11 points meet the affordability criteria of the DWSRF Program and are identified as a “Disadvantaged Community” for the Program purposes. See p. 8 and Appendix A, pp. 15-16 of the SFY24 Amended IUP for more information.Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). In the funding cycle analyzed here, Iowa opted to allocate 12% of its base grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. Iowa has allocated this subsidy as additional principal forgiveness.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Iowa scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Appendix C in the SFY24 Amended IUP.

Principal forgiveness is described in Appendix B of the SFY24 Amended IUP:
For projects funded by base and supplemental funding, loan forgiveness of up to 60% of construction costs will be offered based on affordability criteria and project type. Funding for individual projects is capped at $2 million per project.
For projects funded with emerging contaminants funding, loan forgiveness of up to 75% of construction costs will be offered based on priority project status and socioeconomic assessment scores. Funding for individual projects is capped at $2 million per project.
For projects funded with lead service line replacement funding, loan forgiveness of 49% may be offered to any applicant for eligible construction costs necessary to replace the privately owned portions of lead service lines in qualifying DAC census tracts within their service area. Costs related to replacement of system-owned lead service lines, and lead service line replacements completed in census tract areas that do not meet the DAC criteria are not eligible for PF. Special interest rates or other incentives may be offered for costs not eligible for PF.

For projects designated with a project award on the PPL and determined to be eligible for PF, PF will be awarded to projects on a first-ready, first-served basis based upon the project’s readiness to proceed at the time the award is finalized. Once PF funds from each category have been exhausted, no further PF will be awarded for this funding cycle. 		Public and private community water systems (for profit or non-profit), Nontransient noncommunity water systems (publicly owned or non-profit), Transient noncommunity systems if they are owned by government entitiesTreatment, Transmission and Distribution, Source, Storage, Consolidation, Creation of New SystemsThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Iowa intends to reserve the full amount of set aside allowable from each grant in SFY24. Iowa’s intended use of set asides in SFY24 are detailed on pp. 12-14 of the SFY24 Amended IUP.		https://www.legis.iowa.gov/law/administrativeRules/chapters?chapterDocID=854393https://www.iowasrf.com/drinking-water-loan-program/
18
KansasKansas Department of Health and Environmenthttps://www.kdhe.ks.gov/516/ApplicationsDWSRF/KPWSLFMarket Rate60-80%60-80% of previous three months' average of Bond Buyers 20 Year GO Index: up to 20 years - 60%, 20-30 years - 70%, 30-40 years - 80%up to 40 yearsnonerolled into gross interest rate: first four years of repayment - interest rate minus .35%; remainder fee .35%1. Pre-Application Form 2. Loan Application 3. Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) 4. Outstanding Debt List 5. List of Water Rates 6. Documentation of Public Hearing and Resolution for Application 7. Environmental Review Documentation 8. Lobbying Certification Form 9. Capacity Development Survey 10. Previous Three Years of Audited Financial StatementsNone - rolling basis; June 30 for Small Water and Sewer Infrastructure Assistance Grant ProgramA Disadvantaged Community is defined as:
(1) a public water supply system that serves a population of 150 or less. Population for cities will
be determined by the most current data certified by the Kansas Division of Budget and
population for rural water districts will be determined by multiplying the number of residential
meters by 2.5. Residential meter counts for water districts are confirmed by KDHE sanitary
survey reports. Municipalities that qualify under this tier will receive up to $500,000 of loan
forgiveness for projects under the Base Program Project Priority List and the Lead Service
Line Replacement Project Priority List.
OR
(2) a municipal public water supply system that has a percentage of population that is below the
poverty level which is equal to or greater than the state-wide percentage of population that is
below the poverty level (11.5% of the statewide population is below the poverty level for the
2024 IUP). Values will be determined using the 2021 U.S. Census Bureau’s American
Community Survey 5-year estimates. A water district’s poverty percentages will be
determined on a prorated basis according to meters per county subdivision in their service
area. Municipalities that qualify under this tier will receive 30% loan forgiveness up to a
maximum amount of $1M for projects on the Base Program Project Priority List. If a project
is large and KDHE decides to fund it over multiple loan agreements, the maximum principal
forgiveness amount will be still be $1M and the project will not be eligible for additional
principal forgiveness in future loans. Disadvantaged Communities will receive 49% of the
loan amount for projects on the Lead Service Line Replacement Project Priority List as funds
allow.		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs).

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. Kansas will award this subsidy as principal forgiveness for the following project types, described in more detail on p. 6 of the SFY23 IUP:
Projects that return a non-compliant public water supply system to compliance with MCL requirements.
Projects for systems that are under a KDHE Consent Order (as long as the project will satisfy the requirements of the Consent Order),
Projects that would result in system consolidation.
Projects that would allow the creation of a Public Wholesale Water Supply District or facilitate additional membership to such a District.
The congressionally mandated additional subsidy can also be used for Disadvantaged Community principal forgiveness if funds are not exhausted using this eligibility criteria.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Kansas scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Attachment C to the SFY24 IUP.

Kansas anticipates it will have limited capacity to fund new executed loans for each of PPLs. Funding lines will be used to determine which systems get first availability to apply for project financing and application deadlines will be set. Any project above the funding line that did not meet the application deadline will be bypassed and those funds will be made available to the next highest ranked projects on the PPL. The Base program PPL will have a funding line that includes all projects with a priority rank of 12 and above. The Emerging Contaminants PPL will have a funding line that includes all projects with a priority rank of 23 and above. The Lead Service Line Replacement PPL will have will not have a funding line because Kansas can fund all projects listed.

The funding order of projects may not be identical to the priority ranking found in the PPLs (Appendix A). Readiness to proceed is also an important factor, and so the general order of project ranking will be followed to the extent that the loan applicant is ready to proceed.

DACs are categorized in a tiered system for the purpose of allocating PF. The tiered allocation system is as follows:
If DAC status is based on population of the system, the municipality will receive up to $500,000 of loan forgiveness for projects under the base and lead PPLs.
If DAC status is based on the poverty level of the population of the municipality, the municipality will receive 30% loan forgiveness up to $1 million for projects on the base PPL, and 49% of the loan amount for the lead PPL as funds allow.
If DAC status is based on a project area that is benefitting specific census tracts with above-average poverty levels, the municipality will receive 30% loan forgiveness up to $1 million for projects on the base PPL, and 49% of the loan amount for the lead PPL as funds allow.

For projects eligible for congressionally-mandated principal forgiveness described above, the principal forgiveness will be calculated at 30% of the disbursed loan amount associated with the qualifying portion of the project, up to a maximum principal forgiveness amount of $1,000,000. Principal forgiveness will only be available to qualifying loans as funds remain available. Qualifying loans that are executed after Kansas has met its requirement for additional subsidy, may not receive any principal forgiveness or may receive principal forgiveness in an amount less than 30% of the qualifying disbursed loan amount. 		Publicly owned water systems, rural water districts, non-profit water systems, other public institutions, coopoeratives, tribal governments, special districts, private water systemsWater Treatment Facilities, Distribution Systems, Water Storage, Source Water Development and Protection, System Consolidation, Water Meter Installation, Resilience and Sustainability, Regulatory Compliance, Green InfrastructureThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.https://www.ksrevisor.org/statutes/chapters/ch65/065_001_0063d.htmlhttps://www.kdhe.ks.gov/518/Loan-Fund-Public-Hearings-Supporting-Doc
19
KentuckyKentucky Infrastructure Authorityhttps://eec.ky.gov/Environmental-Protection/Water/Funding/DWSRF/Pages/default.aspxDWSRFMarket RateTieredTiered system based on 20 Bond GO Index; 2.5% standard rate for applicants with Median Household Income of >$46,535; 1.5% non-standard rate for MHI $37,227-$46,534; .5% non-standard rate for DACs with MHI < $37,228; flat 2.5% rate for all planning and design loans5 years for planning/design; construction generally 20, discretion for up to 30, up to 40 for DACsup to 30 at DWSRF Board's discretion; up to 40 for DACs; term cannot exceed useful life of asset.25% on outstanding loan balance, semi-annual payments1. Submission of Project Profile to Area Development District Call for Projects open between October and December annuallyKentucky’s DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as a community that meets at least one of the following criteria:
1. A system wide MHI less than the state’s median household income (MHI) ($55,454) as calculated by the Water Resources Information System (WRIS).
2. A project area MHI less than the state’s MHI ($55,454) as calculated by the WRIS or by using census tract information.
3. An affordability index ratio of 1.0 or greater calculated as the annual 4,000 gallon water rate divided by the system MHI rounded to the nearest tenth. 		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. Kentucky reserved a total of approximately 30% of its base capitalization grant for principal forgiveness for DACs.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Kentucky scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described at Appendix B to the SFY24 Draft IUP. Consolidation projects,projects to meet public health criteria, LSL inventories, and LSL replacement projects are heavily weighted. For SFY24, Kentucky’s funding limit is $7.5 million per borrower.

For SFY24, each borrower can receive the following amounts of principal forgiveness based on the invited loans in the SFY24 Draft IUP
For qualifying loans funded by base and supplemental funding, approximately 52% of the loan.
For qualifying loans funded by the LSL replacement program, approximately 57% of the loan.
For qualifying loans funded by the emerging contaminants program, 100% of the loan.		Municipal corporations, cities, agencies, commissions, authorities, associations, districtsPlanning/Design/Construction of Drinking Water Intake/Treatment/Distribution Systems, Purchase of Water Systems, Storage Tanks, Drilled Wells, Security Activities, Emergency Measure for Protection of Public Health, Refinancing Debt Obligations of a Public Water System, Any Other Structure or Facility Necessary for Efficient and Sanitary OperationsThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Kentucky will set aside 31 percent of all of the 2023 capitalization grants. Any set-aside funds that are not taken in one year or that are transferred into the construction account will be reserved for use in a future year. Required set-aside work plans are included as Appendix D to the SFY24 Draft IUP.		https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=10568https://kia.ky.gov/FinancialAssistance/Pages/Intended-Use-Plans.aspx
20
LouisianaLouisiana Department of Healthhttps://ldh.la.gov/page/drinking-water-revolving-loan-fund-program-dwrlfDWSRFMarket RateVariableRates from 0% to market; currently 2.45% and set by Secretary of Louisiana Dept of Healthup to 30 yearsunknown.5% of outstanding balance, semi-annual payments1. DWSRF Application 2. Engineering Contract 3. Capacity Development Plan 4. System Improvement Plan 5. Plans and SpecificationsNone - rolling basisA disadvantaged community project is one for which assistance is necessary to correct an imminent threat to public health as a result of a noncompliance issue with the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) resulting in an Administrative Order. This determination will be made by the Louisiana Department of Health (LDH) utilizing one of the following requirements: 1. The public water system is located in a state where the median household income is below the national median household income of the United States according to the U.S. Census Bureau. 2. Assistance is necessary to resolve noncompliance issues with the SDWA that have resulted in an Administrative Order being issued against the water system. 3. The public water system serves a community with a population under 10,000. n/aWe will provide low-interest loans to public water systems and principal forgiven loans in the order of
priority determined by the DWRLF Project Priority System with the three BIL FFY23 grants listed below.
* General Supplemental Fund: $28,744,000 (10% state match required)
* Emerging Contaminants Supplemental Fund: $10,430,000
* Lead Service Line Replacement Supplemental Fund: $65,497,000
The total funding available for loans from the FFY23 grant is $107,545,400. (This includes $104,671,000
Federal dollars for loans plus $2,874,400 State match) The DWRLF finance charge and administrative
charge on loans from the General Supplemental Funds for eligible projects is set by the Secretary of LDH
and results in below-market rate loans. The rates will be reviewed periodically by the DWRLF staff and if
an adjustment is deemed appropriate, will be requested from the Secretary of LDH. The DWRLF staff
members are in contact with the responsible parties of water systems on a continual basis. They question
them about the market rates that are available to them. Their responses have ranged from 4% to 12% with
variables such as credit worthiness, corporate structure, size, existing debt, etc. as the reasons for the
variations. DWRLF staff members also attend the monthly bond commission meetings at the state
legislature to glean the market rates of bond issuances for similar type projects. Finally, the DWRLF is
contracted with bond attorneys who advise them as to the current market rates and make
recommendations therein. As a result, the rates are reviewed monthly by the staff, and the date of the last
review was August 2023. Loans are made for up to 100% of the eligible costs with long-term financing of
up to thirty years. Note that the Louisiana DWRLF is not applying for the Lead Service Line Replacement
Supplemental grant at this time because of the lack of application received for these funds but hopes to
apply in the future. Louisiana scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described at pp. 19-21 and Attachment 4, pp. 33-34 of the SFY24 IUP. Single projects will be limited to a total of 30% of the capitalization grants available unless adequate projects are not available to commit all available funds. The LDH may waive this maximum amount depending upon the number of applications.
The principal elements addressed by the project priority system are:
Elimination of adverse public health effects
Unacceptable/undesirable physical conditions
Environmental criteria
Affordability criteria

To the extent that funds are available, principal forgiveness for DACs will be at least 30% of the loan principal, with a maximum amount of 100% loan principal forgiveness per project.

Consolidation projects are eligible for up to 100% forgiveness. Projects funded by the emerging contaminants capitalization are eligible to receive 100% PF.

Principal forgiveness will be specified in the DWRLF Loan & Pledge Agreement for the amount forgiven. Priority for these funds will be given to projects that resolve Administrative Orders for noncompliance with the SDWA and consolidation projects across the state that would eliminate public water systems that are not in compliance with the SDWA requirements and pose a threat to public health. Principal forgiveness will be specified in the DWRLF Loan & Pledge Agreement for the amount forgiven.

Projects are ranked for the distribution of principal forgiveness based on how they are ranked according to the state’s project scoring system, and principal forgiveness is distributed to projects in rank order until principal forgiveness funds are exhausted. Projects for DACs at the top of the list are likely to receive some principal forgiveness, but projects for DACs lower on the list are less likely to receive any principal forgiveness. 		Public and private entitiesTreatment Plant Improvements, Distribution Main Replacement, Storage Facilitieshttps://law.justia.com/codes/louisiana/2014/code-revisedstatutes/title-40/rs-40-2823/https://ldh.la.gov/page/dwrlf-loan-program
21
MaineMaine Department of Health and Human Services, Maine Municipal Bond Bankhttps://www.maine.gov/dhhs/mecdc/environmental-health/dwp/pws/srf.shtmlDWSRFMarket RateVariableLoans eligible for up to 200 BP (2%) subsidy below MMBB cost of tax-exempt funds with floor rate of 1%generally 20 years; 30 years for DACsqualification as DACone-time 1% project management fee on principal, up to 5% administrative fee1. DWSRF Application 2. Financial Information 3. Preliminary Engineering ReportNone - rolling basisMaine's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
A Financially Disadvantaged Community Public Water System (PWS) is defined as any PWS that serves a community and can demonstrate that its year-round residential water consumers have a median household income (MHI) of $58,924 per year or less or when the ratio of average annual water bill to median household income is 0.8 or greater.

An “Environmentally Disadvantaged Community” PWS is a non-transient or community PWS that is: affected by environmental pollution, naturally occurring contaminant(s) and/or has lead contamination in the water supply or lead materials in the service line materials; and is at risk for negative health effects due to contamination and/or there is water supply or lead service lines containing lead. DWSRF Disadvantaged Community PWS Assistance will only be allowed where the disadvantaged water consumers will directly benefit from the assistance.		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. Maine’s IUP does not mention the additional 14% subsidy requirement but states that it has targeted 18% of the base capitalization grant to be offered as PF for any project.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Maine scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Section 6H, pp. 34-41 of the IUP.

Assistance subsidies in the form of principal forgiveness available to eligible DACs will be at levels of 10, 30, 40, 50 and 75 percent based on community Median Household Income and Residential Water User Rates as detailed in Section 8E. In special cases the Program may determine the maximum expense the PWS may affordably pay back and apply the Principal Forgiveness appropriately.

Due to the availability of subsidy funds, the 2022 DWSRF will offer some subsidization to all qualified projects at levels of 0-6%, 10%, & 50% based on the following criteria:
0-6% Projects on the Backup List to progress design and other preconstruction tasks.
10% PWS [that] serve Non-Disadvantaged Communities.
50% Select Regional Projects

Projects are ranked for the distribution of principal forgiveness based on how they are ranked according to the state’s project scoring system, and principal forgiveness is distributed to projects in rank order until principal forgiveness funds are exhausted. Projects for DACs at the top of the list are likely to receive some principal forgiveness, but projects for DACs lower on the list are less likely to receive any principal forgiveness. Additional information on DAC and PF can be found in Section 8. of the FFY23 IUP, pp. 46-48.

All LSLR funds are offered for eligible projects at 55% PF and 0% interest loans for a maximum of 20 years.

Emerging contaminant (EC) funding is available at the following levels:
Community PWSs and schools and child care facilities with water that exceeds the state maximum contaminant level (MCL) for PFAS will qualify for up to $1 million in EC funds, with 100% PF. DACs are eligible for additional DWSRF funding with PF, while funding is available.
Community PWSs and schools and child care facilities with water containing PFAS compounds PFOS/PFOA at levels above detection will qualify for 100% EC funds, up to $500,000. DACs may receive additional DWSRF funding with PF for needs greater than $500,000.
Small grants (up to $60,000) are available for systems serving a population of approximately 100 or less with water that exceeds the MCL for PFAS, applied for on a rolling basis.
EC funds can be used to address private well contamination with PFAS greater than the state MCL for extensions of public water systems to address the problem - 50% EC funds up to $1,000,000. DACs are eligible for additional DWSRF funding with PF for needs greater than $2,000,000.		All public and private water systemsPublic Health Projects, Treatment Facilities, Aging Infrastructure, Main Replacement, SDWA Compliance, Land AcquisitionThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Maine is making partial use of the set aside amounts. See Tables 3-1, 3-1A, and 3-1B for amounts. Maine’s work plan for these set aside activities is detailed in Section 4 of the FFY24 IUP, pp. 8-22.		https://www.maine.gov/sos/cec/rules/10/144/144c230.dochttps://www.maine.gov/dhhs/mecdc/environmental-health/dwp/pws/srf.shtml
22
MarylandMaryland Department of the Environment, Maryland Water Infrastructure Financing Administrationhttps://mde.maryland.gov/programs/water/wqfa/pages/drinking_water_fund.aspxDWSRFMarket Rate25-50%Standard rate = 50% of market; DAC rate = 25% of market; market benchmark is average of Bond Buyer 11-Bond Index for month preceding loan closinggenerally 30; up to 40 for DACsmust qualify as DAC; loan term cannot exceed asset useful life5% of aggregate debt service divided by number of annual payments; roughly .5% increase for 20-year loan and .35% increase for 30-year1. Name and Contact Information of Borrower 2. Location of Project 3. Type of Project 4. Project Budget 5. Funding Request 6. Project DescriptionNone - rolling basisMaryland's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as meeting at least two of the of the following criteria:
[The] project is physically located [in] and benefits a community with a poverty level above 110% of the statewide poverty rate.
[The] project is physically located [in] and benefits a community with median household income (MHI) less than 80% of state MHI.
[The] project is physically located [in] and benefits a community with an unemployment rate above 120% of the state unemployment rate.
[The] project is physically located [in] and benefits a community with a population [growth] trend of less than 1.2%.

Or, if 50% or more of project cost or project scope serves, protects, or benefits an Environmental Justice or overburdened community as identified by a Socioeconomic Score (Distribution Across Maryland) of 75 or more using MDE’s Environmental Justice Tracking Tool at https://mdewin64.mde.state.md.us/EJ/.

In addition to above criteria, if the statutory limit for additional subsidy has not been reached, up to 25% of the loan amount as loan principal forgiveness may also be provided to projects in priority ranking order with readiness to proceed where the water user rate would increase by more than 20% to achieve financial capacity as determined by MDE.

In addition to principal forgiveness, Maryland provides reduced interest rates and up to a 40-year loan term to all state-defined DACs.		Of the FFY22 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. In the funding cycle analyzed here, Maryland opted to allocate 31% of its base grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Maryland scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Appendix B to the IUP.

DAC projects are eligible to receive up to 50% of the DWSRF financing as loan principal forgiveness, up to $1.5 million per project and/or applicant. 		Public and Private Community Water SystemsWater Treatment Plant Construction and Upgrade, Development of Source Water Protection Plans, Raw Water Intake, Water Storage, Distribution System Rehabilitation, Consolidation of Water Systems, Planning/Design/Construction of Eligible ProjectsThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Maryland is making partial use of the set aside allowances (27% of each cap grant allocated in the IUP). The IUP indicates that MDE will provide a separate work plan to EPA for its set aside activities.		https://law.justia.com/codes/maryland/2022/environment/title-9/subtitle-4/part-ii/https://mde.maryland.gov/programs/water/wqfa/pages/index.aspx
23
MassachusettsMassachusetts Department of Environmental Protectionhttps://www.mass.gov/info-details/drinking-water-state-revolving-fund-srf-programDWSRFFixed RateFixed2% standard rate; some eligble projects for PFAS remediation at 0%5 for asset management planning loans; 20 years constructionnoneorigination fee: NTE $5.50/$1,000 for cost of bond issuance; .15% of loan principal annual admin fee 1. Project Evaluation Form (PEF) 2. IUP Placement 3. Loan Application 4. Construction Plans and SpecificationsProject Evaluation Forms (PEFs) due annually in August for Project Solicitation window, notification of IUP placement in December, secure local borrowing authorization by June 30 of following year, Completed Loan Applications and Construction Plans and Specifications due by Mid-OctoberMassachusetts's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:

Massachusetts has established an affordability criteria to calculate and distribute loan forgiveness. The assignment of communities to an affordability tier is based on an adjusted per capita income (APCI) calculation described on its website. Tier rankings are calculated annually by comparing a community’s APCI as a percentage of Massachusetts’s APCI.

For purposes of the IIJA capitalization grants, Massachusetts is expanding the Trust’s existing three-tiered affordability based Disadvantaged Community program for the DWSRF to include “Environmentally Disadvantaged Community” designation for eligible projects, as determined by MassDEP, under the following criteria:
An Environmentally Disadvantaged Community is a public water supplier that has lead in the water supply and/or lead service lines in the system.
That designation as an Environmentally Disadvantaged Community for a particular year will confer eligibility for additional subsidy provided only with funds made available by the IIJA for eligible projects on that year’s IUP that MassDEP has identified as mitigating the environmental factors detailed above. This designation will not confer eligibility for additional subsidy on any other projects by such Environmentally Disadvantaged Community.
The definition and designation of Environmentally Disadvantaged Communities shall be retroactive to the effective date of the IIJA thus MassDEP is amending the calendar years 2022 and 2023 DWSRF IUPs.
An Environmentally Disadvantaged Community is not eligible to receive loan forgiveness through the [affordability] tiered designation described above in addition to the Environmental Disadvantaged Community designation. 		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. In the SFY24 IUP, Massachusetts intends to award a minimum of $2.8 million (26.4%) of the base grant in additional subsidy.Massachusetts will provide additional subsidy in the form of loan forgiveness for communities that might otherwise be unable to afford to undertake a project. Massachusetts is also providing grants to communities to engage in Asset Management Planning (AMP).

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less.		Massachusetts scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria that can be found on the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (Mass DEP) website here.

Massachusetts places a limit on any one proponent receiving any more than 25% of the available financing each year. Because of the shortfall of available funds relative to the number of worthwhile projects, and to extend financial assistance to as many highly ranked projects as possible, MassDEP is implementing an applicant cap of $15 million for the 2024 financing period.

Massachusetts offers loan forgiveness based on its affordability criteria, described above. For PFAS projects in DACs, loan forgiveness percentages are reduced due to the increased demand for PFAS projects coupled with increasing costs associated with those projects. PFAS will continue to receive 0% interest rate loans, which equates to a 20% subsidy when compared to the SRF’s standard 2% interest rate. Each affordability tier receives loan forgiveness as described in this table (and on pp. 10-11 of the SFY24 IUP):

Tier
Percent of State APCI
Minimum Loan Forgiveness
(General projects)
Minimum Loan Forgiveness
(PFAS projects)
1
80% > 100%
6.6%
3.3%
2
60% > 80%
13.2%
6.6%
3
Less than 60%
19.8%
9.9%


MassDEP is also offering additional loan forgiveness for projects with a renewable energy component regardless of Disadvantaged Community status. Projects that have a renewable energy component will qualify as a Tier 1 community and receive loan forgiveness for the portion of the loan that is financing the renewable energy component.

Massachusetts Clean Water Trust (Trust) is offering grants to communities interested in developing asset management plans (AMPs) for one or more of their water utilities. In calendar year 2024, twenty AMP proposals, estimated at approximately $3.5 million, as shown in Table 2., are being offered grants totaling approximately $2 million. Public water suppliers will receive 60% of the project cost, up to $150,000, as a grant from the Massachusetts Clean Water Trust. The remaining costs may be funded by local contributions of cash, or a combination of cash and in-kind services. All or part of the local contribution may be financed by a loan from the Trust at the standard 2% interest rate for a term of up to five years.

Projects are ranked for the distribution of principal forgiveness based on how they are ranked according to the state’s project scoring system, and principal forgiveness is distributed to projects in rank order until principal forgiveness funds are exhausted. Projects for DACs at the top of the list are likely to receive some principal forgiveness, but projects for DACs lower on the list are less likely to receive any principal forgiveness. 		Public water systemsNew and Upgraded Drinking Water Treatment Facilities, Replacement of Contaminated Sources, New Water Treatment, Storage Facilities, Consolidation of Systems, Compliance with Health Standards, Installation and Replacement of Transmission or Distribution SystemsThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Massachusetts plans to make partial use of the set aside amounts of the FFY23 base (21%) and supplemental (9%) capitalization grants, and full use of the set aside amount for the lead capitalization grant. Massachusetts does not plan to make use of the set aside amounts from the emerging contaminants capitalization grant. For more information and a set aside work plan, see Appendix A of the SFY24 IUP.		https://www.mass.gov/doc/310-cmr-4500-the-drinking-water-state-revolving-fund/download https://www.mass.gov/lists/2024-final-srf-intended-use-plans
24
MichiganMichigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE)https://www.michigan.gov/egle/regulatory-assistance/grants-and-financing/drinking-water-state-revolving-fundDWSRFFixed RateTiered20-year loan: 2.50%, 2% overburdened, 1% significantly overburdened; 30-year loan: 2.75%, 2% overburdened, 1% significantly overburdened; 40-year DAC loan: 2% overburdened, 1% significantly overburdenedup to 40 years qualification as DACnone currently; utilization of 4% set-aside from fed cap grant to cover fees, but currently evaluating1. Submit Intent to Apply (ITA) 2. Project Planning Meeting 3. Preliminary Engineering Report (PER)/Alternatives Analysis 4. Schedule for Design and Construction 5. Cost SummaryITA Form due November 1 annually; project planning documents due June 1 the following yearMichigan's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
Michigan defines “overburdened community” and “significantly overburdened community” for the purposes of distributing principal forgiveness. These designations are based on the average household income and property values or water rates as a proportion of income. For more information, see Michigan’s Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy (EGLE) website.

In addition to principal forgiveness, Michigan provides reduced interest rates and extended loan terms to all state-defined DACs. 		Of the FFY22 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). In the funding cycle analyzed here, Michigan opted to allocate 17.7% of its base capitalization grant as subsidy as principal forgiveness for DACs.

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. Michigan will award all additional subsidization as principal forgiveness to DACs in SFY24.

In addition, Michigan is rolling over subsidy allocations from SFY23 in the amount of $26,635,597 from its emerging contaminants and lead service line replacement capitalization grants.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Michigan scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization scoring criteria, published separately on Michigan’s website.

The methodology listed below was used to allocate principal forgiveness and fundable ranges for FY2024. Funds were allocated in priority order until exhausted.
Significantly Overburdened applicants are awarded a 100% ARP grant or principal forgiveness combination up to a maximum of $20,000,000. Loan dollars are awarded to cover project costs greater than $20,000,000 where applicable.
Overburdened applicants are awarded 50% ARP grant or principal forgiveness combination up to a maximum of $20,000,000. Loan dollars are awarded to cover the remaining 50% of projects costs or those costs greater than $20,000,000 where applicable.
All other non-disadvantaged applicants within the fundable range will receive 10% ARP grant or principal forgiveness up to a maximum of $20,000,000.

Principal forgiveness allocations are detailed in the SFY24 PPL.		Community water system (municipal, political subdivision, manufactured housing community, or apartment building), non-community water system operated as non-profit entity, new systems (public or private) to address existing public health problemsSee specific eligibility guidance for detailsThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Michigan is proposing to make partial use of the set asides in FFY23. See the table on p. 6 for details. Set aside work plans are not included in the IUP. Michigan’s IUP indicates that set-aside workplans can be found on the DWSRF website.		https://www.michigan.gov/egle/regulatory-assistance/grants-and-financing/clean-water-state-revolving-fund/laws-and-regulations https://www.michigan.gov/egle/-/media/Project/Websites/egle/Documents/Funding/DWSRF/Guidance-Eligibility-2022.pdf?rev=43edf4cb8083465cb207269d31e5b5fc&hash=BD2D2AE6A583DDDE15E7AAADC018A89Ahttps://www.michigan.gov/egle/regulatory-assistance/grants-and-financing/drinking-water-state-revolving-fund/fiscal-year-reports
25
MinnesotaMinnesota Department of Health, Minnesota Public Facilities Authorityhttps://www.health.state.mn.us/communities/environment/water/dwrf/index.htmlDWRFMarket RateVariableAt or below market rates (including 0% interest for some loans)generally 20 years; 30 years for loan recipients with cost of project exceeding 1.2% of median household incomeloan recipient must have project cost exceeding 1.2% of median household income; no more than 30 year termnot available1. Project Cover Letter and Proposal (Project Owner Name, Contact Information) 2. Community Statistics 3. System Description 4. Need for Improvement 5. Alternatives Analysis 6. Cost Summary 7. Project Schedule 8. Status of Water Emergency and Conservation PlanProject Priority List Deadline - First Friday in May, IUP Submission Deadline - First Friday in June, Plan and Specification Deadline - 6 months from the day the IUP is finalized (typically late March), Loan Application Deadline - 6 months from day the IUP is Finalized (typically late March)Principal Forgiveness and/or Water Infrastructure Fund (WIF) funds may be granted to a DWRF project if the average annual residential drinking water system cost would otherwise exceed 1.2 percent of the median household income (MHI) of the project service area. n/aProjects are listed in priority order based on a point system established by the MDH in Minnesota Rules 4720 parts 4720.9015 to 4720.9040. MDH rules give funding priority to projects that: 1) protect public health; 2) provide adequate water supply; and 3) assist water systems most in need.

The amount of Principal Forgiveness (or WIF grant funding) is limited to 80 percent of the system costs over 1.2% of MHI, to a maximum of $5,000,000, or $20,000 per connection, not to exceed 80 percent of the total project cost.

Minnesota caps the amount of principal forgiveness each borrower can receive for emerging contaminants projects at 50% of the loan, up to a maximum of $3,000,000 per year.

If the costs for a lead service line replacement project are below the 1.2% MHI threshold, the PFA will discuss with the city targeting the LSLR project to specific census tracts and then using the census tract MHI to determine disadvantaged communities within the municipality that are above the 1.2% MHI threshold. A combination of State LSLR grant funds and DWRF LSLR loan funds will be used for those public water systems that do not meet the established affordability criteria.

Principal forgiveness is reserved and awarded to eligible projects based on their PPL ranking, beginning first with carryover projects (that received technical approval and certification in a prior fiscal year), followed by new IUP projects. If sufficient grant funds are not available, a project may remain on the IUP as a carryover project and eligible funding will be reserved and awarded when new appropriations are available.		Community water systems (publicly owned municipal, regional water systems, privately owned condominium and manufactured home park systems), nonprofit noncommunity systems (schools, daycare centers, churches, retreat centers, etc.)Replace or upgrade wells and treatment plants, water towers, distribution centers, consolidation of systems, water meters, computerized monitor and control systemshttps://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/446A.081https://www.health.state.mn.us/communities/environment/water/dwrf/index.html
26
MississippiMississippi State Department of Healthhttps://msdh.ms.gov/page/44,0,127.htmlDWSIRLFMarket RateFormulaLesser of 1.95% or 20-year AAA tax-exempt revenue bond yield published by FMSbonds, Inc.30 years; 40 years for DACsmust qualify as DAC5% of initial loan principal or total amount of interest due over life of loan, whichever is less1. Ranking Form 2. Complete Facilities Plan 3. Loan Application Ranking Form and Facilities Plan - by Oct 1, Complete Loan Application - by May 1, Submittal of Other Documents and Responses to Comments - by Aug 1, Loan Award Offer - by Sep 30Mississippi DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as a community with a median household income (MHI) less than the state MHI ($49,111 for FFY23). DACs with a lower MHI are eligible to receive a larger percentage of project costs as PF from the base grant. See the IUP at p.16. Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 26% and not more than 49% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). In the funding cycle analyzed here, Mississippi opted to allocate 26% of its base grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Mississippi divides projects into several categories, and scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described at Section VI, pp. 13-24 of the FFY23 IUP.

General projects are eligible for a portion of the loan based on the MHI of the population served by the loan recipient as follows:

MHI between 90-100% of statewide MHI - 15% principal forgiveness
MHI between 80-90% of statewide MHI - 25% principal forgiveness
MHI between 70-80% of statewide MHI - 35% principal forgiveness
MHI below 70% of statewide MHI - 45% principal forgiveness

Mississippi caps the amount of principal forgiveness each borrower can receive from base funds at $500,000 per year. In the event that the minimum allocated amount for principal forgiveness is not expended, the Local Governments and Rural Water Systems Improvement Board (“Board”) may vote to allow the limit to be exceeded. However, high-ranking projects serving DACs can receive up to 100% PF from the state’s IIJA general supplemental DWSRF grant, until PF funds are exhausted. See FFY23 Base & Supplemental IUP at pp. 17-18.

Principal forgiveness for lead projects is capped at 70% of the requested loan amount and EC projects and disaster relief funding are 100% principal forgiveness.

Projects are ranked for the distribution of principal forgiveness based on how they are ranked according to the state’s project scoring system, and principal forgiveness is distributed to projects in rank order until principal forgiveness funds are exhausted. Projects for DACs at the top of the list are likely to receive some principal forgiveness, but projects for DACs lower on the list are less likely to receive any principal forgiveness.

In addition to principal forgiveness, Mississippi offers an extended loan repayment program of up to 40 years for DACs, so long as the repayment period does not exceed the design life of the project.
Cities/Towns, Water Districts, Counties, State Agencies, Rural Water AssociationsWater Wells, Water Storage, Water Treatment Plants, Water Distribution, Facility Rehabilitation, Source Water Protection, Emergency Power, Water MetersThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside. Mississippi’s use of set-asides for each grant are described below:
FFY23 Base & Supplemental
Small system technical assistance (2%)
Administrative (4%)
State program management (10%)
Local assistance (15%)
FFY23 Base & Supplemental IUP Section V., pp. 12-13; Appendices E-G.
FFY22 Lead
Small system technical assistance (2%)
Administrative (4%)
State program management (0%)
Local assistance (15%)
FFY22 Lead IUP Section V., pp. 8-9; Appendix E.
FFY23 Lead
Small system technical assistance (2%)
Administrative (4%)
State program management (0%)
Local assistance (15%)
FFY23 Lead IUP Section V., pp. 8-9; Appendix E.
FFY22 EC
Small system technical assistance (2%)
Administrative (4%)
State program management (0%)
Local assistance (15%)
FFY22 EC IUP Section V., pp. 7-8; Appendix E.
FFY23 EC
Small system technical assistance (2%)
Administrative (4%)
State program management (0%)
Local assistance (15%)
FFY23 EC IUP Section V., pp. 7-8; Appendix E.
https://msdh.ms.gov/page/resources/7231.pdfhttps://msdh.ms.gov/page/44,0,127,324.html
27
MissouriMissouri Department of Natural Resourceshttps://dnr.mo.gov/water/what-were-doing/financial-assistance-opportunities/drinking-water-state-revolving-fund-dwsrf-loanDWSRFMarket Rate70%Bond Buyers 25-Revenue Bond Indx on 30-year revenue bond yield20 years30 years adds 0.25% to interest rate0.5% of balance1. Loan Application 2. Financial Information 3. Debt Information 4. Project Budget and Schedule 5. Documentation of Engineering ConsultantRolling basis, but must be received by March 1 to be considered in current year's loan cycleMissouri DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
The disadvantaged community eligibility determination is based on DWSRF affordability criteria which includes an applicant’s population, unemployment rate, Median Household Income (MHI), rates as a percentage of the MHI, households below poverty level, and population trends. Eligible applicants are those that meet the disadvantaged community criteria established in the Department’s guidance, attached as Appendix 6 to the SFY24 IUP.		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. Missouri provides two types of grants or PF as additional subsidization in combination with a DWSRF loan:
DWSRF affordability grants - for communities who would have difficulty financing drinking water infrastructure improvements without additional subsidization - up to $3 million per applicant, not to exceed 50 percent of the project cost.
Regional connection grants - available to PWSs proposing a regionalization and/or consolidation project. Grants of up to $3 million, not to exceed 50 percent of the total project cost.
Missouri will determine whether to award an applicant’s additional subsidization as a grant or PF based on the borrower’s disadvantaged status, amount of funding available, and the borrower’s existing bonding capacity.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less.

Missouri is also carrying over additional subsidization from prior capitalization grants (FFY 2019-2022).

Missouri is also offering small grants for engineering reports. Eligible applicants may receive an 80 percent grant with a 20 percent recipient match with a maximum grant amount of $30,000. Applicants qualifying as disadvantaged may receive a 100 percent grant with a maximum grant amount of $37,500. More information on these grants can be found in Appendix 7 to the SFY24 IUP.		Missouri scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Appendix 5 to the SFY24 IUP.

Missouri maintains three separate portions of its PPL - the Funded List, the Contingency List, and the Planning List. Projects on the Funded List are presumed to receive funding. This list is separated into three categories, based on community size. Projects on the Contingency List may be funded if a project on the Funded List is bypassed for any reason. Projects on the Planning List are determined to be not ready to receive funding (due to missing engineering report and/or acceptable debt instrument). Missouri works with communities on the planning list to assist them in meeting readiness-to-proceed criteria.

Missouri provides a mix of loan and grant funding, depending on the type of applicant and type of project. For more details on the types of funding, including caps and eligibility, see the chart on pp. 2-3 of the SFY23 IUP.

Projects are ranked for the distribution of principal forgiveness based on how they are ranked according to the state’s project scoring system, and principal forgiveness is distributed to projects in rank order until principal forgiveness funds are exhausted. Projects for DACs at the top of the list are likely to receive some principal forgiveness, but projects for DACs lower on the list are less likely to receive any principal forgiveness. 		Counties, Cities, Towns, Joint Municipal Utility Commissions, Regional Water Districts and Political Subdivisions, Non-Profit Corporations Providing Wholesale or Regional Water Supply, Investor-Owned Water Utility CorporationsTreatment Plants, Transmission and Distribution Mains, Supply Sources, Storage Facilities, Water Security Projects, Health Protection MeasuresThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Missouri plans to use the full set aside amount from its base capitalization grant, and a partial amount from its supplemental (12.04%) and lead (21%) capitalization grants. Missouri is not taking any set asides from the IIJA emerging contaminant grant. Details on Missouri’s use of set asides can be found in Appendix 3, pp. 48-51.		https://www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/missouri/10-CSR-60-13-020https://dnr.mo.gov/water/what-were-doing/state-revolving-fund-srf/plans-reports
28
MontanaMontana Department of Natural Resources & Conservation; Montana Department of Environmental Qualityhttps://dnrc.mt.gov/Conservation/Grant-and-Loan-Programs/Loans/State-Revolving-Fund-LoansDWSRFFixed RateFixedRates published by project priority list in IUP; webpage states 2.5% fixed rate 20 years; 30 years for DACsmust qualify as DACnot available1. DWSRF Survey Form 2. Uniform Application Form for Montana Public Facility ProjectsNone - rolling basisMontana's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
A community is considered economically disadvantaged when its combined annual water and wastewater or water only system rates are greater than the target rates established by the Montana Department of Commerce. Schools with more than 25% of students eligible for free or reduced lunch also qualify as DACs.

More information on subsidies to DACs can be found on pp. 5-6 of the SFY24 IUP.		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. In the funding cycle analyzed here, Montana opted to allocate 30% of its base grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Montana scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Section 7.0, pp. 10-11, and Appendix 1 to the SFY24 IUP.

In SFY24, Montana is providing DACs with 75% principal forgiveness of the loan amount, up to a maximum of $750,000. In addition, the DWSRF loan program will provide up to $1,000,000 in forgiveness to qualifying communities for projects that have a total project cost exceeding $3,000,000. Only one principal forgiveness subsidy will be allowed per project. Schools that qualify as DACs will receive 75% principal forgiveness of the loan amount, up to $750,000.

For purposes of the SFY23 Lead IUP, a community will be considered economically disadvantaged when its combined annual water and sewer system or water system only rates are within 60% of their target rates as established by the Montana Department of Commerce. Montana [may] also consider a subset of a community as disadvantage[d] if the project [is] in an area where customers meet the disadvantaged criteria. For SFY23, to assist these economically disadvantaged communities, the DWSRF loan program will provide to qualifying communities up to 60% principal forgiveness of the loan amount, up to a maximum of $2 million. See pp. 4-5 of the SFY23 Lead IUP for details.

Projects are ranked for the distribution of principal forgiveness based on how they are ranked according to the state’s project scoring system, and principal forgiveness is distributed to projects in rank order until principal forgiveness funds are exhausted. Projects for DACs at the top of the list are likely to receive some principal forgiveness, but projects for DACs lower on the list are less likely to receive any principal forgiveness. 		Community public water systems owned by private persoons or municipalities, non-profit organizations, and community water systemsDrinking water projects compliant with the Federal Safe Drinking Water ActThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Montana is making partial use of the set aside (21% of its base grant, 9.2% of its supplemental grant), See the SFY2024 IUP at See Table 4 (p. 13) for the base grant set-aside amounts and Table 5 (pp. 15) for the supplemental grant set-aside amounts. See Section 11, pp. 19-24 for details on Montana’s use of the set aside amounts.

The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) has the authority to set aside 4% or $400,000 (whichever is greater) of the FFY 2022 base and supplemental capitalization grants for program administration. DEQ has elected to set aside the greater amount for both the base grant ($400,000) and the supplemental grant ($719,680).		https://leg.mt.gov/BILLS/mca/title_0750/chapter_0060/part_0020/sections_index.htmlhttps://deq.mt.gov/water/Programs/eng#dwfund
29
NebraskaNebraska Department of Energy and Environment, Nebraska Investment Finance Authorityhttps://dee.nebraska.gov/aid/water-loans-grants-rebates/drinking-water-state-revolving-loan-fund (Copy and paste into the browser)DWSRFMarket RateFormula1/3 average of 10- and 30-year municipal bond rates; rate reductions available for eligble projects30 years; 40 years for DACsmust qualify as DACup to 1% on construction loans; up to .5% on planning loans1. Complete Biennial Combined Clean Water and Drinking Water SRF Needs Survey by December 31 2. Submit Joint Water/Wastewater Pre-Application 3. Hire a Professional Engineer Registered in Nebraska 4. Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) 5. Alternative Financing Sources Assessment 6. Develop Community SupportNone - rolling basisNebraska's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
Nebraska’s process for determining PF eligibility is outlined in Appendix E to the SFY24 IUP.

Additional assistance of loan terms up to 40 years will be available to communities which have a MHI less than or equal to 120% of the State MHI, using the 2016-2020 ACS data set published by the U.S. Census Bureau. The community may also complete an income survey and submit the results to the Nebraska Department of Environment and Energy (NDEE) for review or petition the Department for increased assistance based on additional eligibility factors noted in Appendix E to the SFY24 IUP.		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). In the funding cycle analyzed here, Nebraska opted to allocate 12% of its base grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less.

For the additional subsidization required by the Federal Fiscal Appropriation, the DWSRF will disburse the minimum 12% required but intends to provide the maximum of 49% in loan forgiveness funding from the FFY 2023 grant to maintain continuity with the BIL funding requirements of exactly 49%. Historical unused additional subsidization authority was established at $21,717,896. From that total, $7,500,000 will be blended with the BIL LSL Replacement funding to increase assistance for that effort from the required 49% up to 62%.

Forgiveness funds will be targeted primarily to the highest ranked eligible projects on the Priority Funding Lists. These include projects that address public health needs, are needed to address critical capacity development concerns, those that replace existing PWS infrastructure and which are GPR eligible. Forgiveness assistance will be provided at the time a disbursement request is processed.

Additional loan forgiveness in an amount not to exceed 65% of the revenue from administrative fees collected in the prior fiscal year may be provided in SFY24 from the Administration Cash Fund, most notably if a state source of forgiveness funding is required for a project.

Lastly, additional loan forgiveness may be added to new or amended loans, wherein a past borrower agrees to amend existing DWSRF loan agreements and the Department’s prepayment requirements. The added forgiveness amount would be equivalent to the refinancing savings permissible under the SFY 2021/2022 CWSRF program		Nebraska scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Appendix A2 of the SFY24 IUP.

Forgiveness funds will be targeted to the highest priority eligible projects on the Priority Funding List until all designated funds are obligated. The SFY24 program will rely on the existing disadvantaged community forgiveness criteria, except that a policy change to a 60% forgiveness ceiling amount dependent in part on system population and project type, will be in effect for allocating all the FFY 2023 and 2024 funds to public health and infrastructure replacement projects, and if funds remain, to those in accordance with the bypass process. An exception to the above, up to a 75% forgiveness amount may be extended to those systems that need to implement projects that address emerging contaminants, as a result of an emergency or that intend to supply water to another system to address that system’s Administrative Order. 		Municipalities/Cities, Rural Water Districts, Public Water Suppliers (Community and Non-Community Systems), Non-Profit Entities, Tribal GovernmentsPlanning, design, and construction of drinking water facilities and infrastructureThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

The State intends to utilize the authorized set-asides as described in Section II-I (pp. 26-29) DWSRF Sources and Uses of Funds; see Section V (pp. 38-40) for additional narrative description. Set aside funding will be used for the following grant programs:
Security grants
Planning grants
Source water protection grants
New and innovative technology grants
Emerging contaminant baseline sampling		http://dee.ne.gov/RuleAndR.nsf/pages/131-Ch-2http://dee.ne.gov/NDEQProg.nsf/OnWeb/DWSRLF
30
NevadaNevada Division of Environmental Protectionhttps://ndep.nv.gov/water/financing-infrastructure/state-revolving-fund-loansDWSRFMarket Rate62.50%No direct loans - individual applicants must issue bonds via State Treasurer; 62.5% of Bond Buyer market rate for 20-year loans; refinancing loans rate equal to rate of current MMD AAA curve plus 25 BP; some short-term loans may qualify for special rate at or below marketgenerally 20 years; up to 30 years for DACsmust qualify as DAC; lesser of 30 years or useful life of assetnone currently; statutory authority exists to implement1. Project Proposal 2. Preliminary Engineering Report 3. Environmental ReportNone - rolling basisNevada's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
Nevada defines a disadvantaged community as an area in which, as compared to other communities in this State, residents disproportionately experience economic, environmental or health issues, including, without limitation, high rates of poverty or unemployment. NDEP will utilize a point system to determine if a system or project qualifies as disadvantaged. A minimum of 50 points must be obtained to be defined as disadvantaged. The point system is detailed on pp. 26-28 of the IUP.

In addition to principal forgiveness, Nevada provides extended loan terms of up to 40 years to all state-defined DACs. 		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). In the funding cycle analyzed here, Nevada opted to allocate 35% of its base grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. In addition to assistance for DACs, Nevada is offering forgiveness of 1.5% of the loan from this additional subsidization to traditional loan recipients who are willing to be an equivalency project for federal reporting purposes.

For details, see “Project Ranking for Distribution of Loans and Principal Forgiveness” section below, and Appendix B to the IUP.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Nevada scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Attachment A to the IUP.

Nevada awards principal forgiveness loans to satisfy the subsidy requirement in the grants. A borrower does not need to issue a bond if the loan is forgiven. Additionally, interest is also forgiven. Eligibility for principal forgiveness is outlined in Attachment B to the IUP.

For DACs, Nevada limits PF to $2,500,000 per construction project and $100,000 per planning project. For traditional loan recipients who are willing to be an equivalency project for federal reporting purposes, PF is available at 1.5% of the loan, up to $749,280 on a single project.

Projects are ranked for the distribution of principal forgiveness based on how they are ranked according to the state’s project scoring system, and principal forgiveness is distributed to projects in rank order until principal forgiveness funds are exhausted. Projects for DACs at the top of the list are likely to receive some principal forgiveness, but projects for DACs lower on the list are less likely to receive any principal forgiveness. 		Community water systems (publicly and privately owned), Non-community water systems (non-profit)Treatment, Transmission & Distribution, Source, Storage, Consolidation, Creation of New SystemsThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Nevada is making full use of set asides from its base and supplemental capitalization grants, and partial use of set asides from its lead (12%) and emerging contaminants grants (17%). Nevada’s set aside activities are described on pp. 12-18 of the IUP.		https://www.leg.state.nv.us/nrs/nrs-445a.html#NRS445ASec200 https://www.leg.state.nv.us/nac/nac-445a.html#NAC445ASec6751https://ndep.nv.gov/water/financing-infrastructure/state-revolving-fund-loans
31
New HampshireNew Hampshire Department of Environmental Serviceshttps://www.des.nh.gov/business-and-community/loans-and-grants/drinking-water-state-revolving-fundDWSRFFixed RateTiered.7925% 5 year loan; 1.585% 10 year loan; 2.3775% 15 year loan; 2.536% 20 year loan; 2.536% 30 year loan (DACs only); rates fixed annually using 11-Bond Index published by The Bond Buyerup to 30 yearsmust qualify as DAC for 30-year loan term2% outstanding principal balance1. Submit Pre-Application 2. Final Loan Application Applications solicited in the spring of each yearNew Hampshire’s DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as one that meets at least one of the following criteria:
Financially Disadvantaged Water Systems - Non-transient public water system or community that serves residents whose median household income (MHI) is less than the statewide MHI based on the most recent census data and/or income survey and if water rate increases resulting from the project would result in a water rate burden greater than .8% of the system or town MHI, based on water use of 71,996 gallons per household per year. For further details on how New Hampshire determines the water rate burden resulting from the proposed project, see the IUP at section 3.8.3. See also “Water Rate” “MHI” and “Affordability Index” columns on PPL. Furthermore, to qualify for disadvantaged program assistance, at least 50% of the residential units served by the water system must be occupied at least six months of the year. Additionally, to qualify as a financially disadvantaged water system, the population using the water system at least six months of the year must meet the disadvantaged income criterion.
Environmentally Disadvantaged Water Systems - Non-transient public water system or community that is: 1) Affected by environmental pollution, naturally occurring contaminant(s) and/or has lead in the water supply or service lines; and 2) Is at risk for negative health effects due to contamination and/or there is water supply or lead service lines containing lead.

In addition to principal forgiveness, New Hampshire offers extended loan terms of up to 30 years to all state-defined DACs, provided that the loan term does not exceed the useful life of the financed improvements. 		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. New Hampshire’s IUP indicates that these two subsidy requirements will be combined to provide at least 26% but no more than 35% of its base grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less.
New Hampshire scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described at section 3.2 of the 2023 IUP. In general, highest priority is given to projects in disadvantaged communities that facilitate compliance with national primary drinking water regulations. Projects in need of improved capacity will also be given priority.

In the 2023 IUP, only 17 out of 111 projects ranked on the PPL are expected to be funded.

Qualifying projects will be awarded principal forgiveness at a level to bring the resulting user rate closer to being considered “affordable.” The level of subsidy is determined by using an Affordability Index, which serves to measure the rate impact of a project on a disadvantaged community. The index is calculated by dividing the water rate by the community’s or community system’s MHI. See further details on pp. 17-18 and pp. 23-24 of the 2023 IUP.

New Hampshire caps the amount of principal forgiveness each borrower can receive from the emerging contaminants fund at $2,500,000 for financially disadvantaged systems and $1,000,000 for financially non-disadvantaged systems. New Hampshire notes that it reserves the right to increase the amounts of PF offered if needed to meet the minimum subsidy requirements of the law.		All publicly and privately owned community water systems and non-transient non-profit public water systemsReplacement of Aging Infrastruture, Installation of New Wells/Pumphouses/Treatment Systems, Interconnections, Storage TanksThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

New Hampshire is making full use of allowed set asides for base and supplemental funding, but is not using set asides from the emerging contaminant funds. See sections 4.4.. and 5.4. of the 2024 IUP for a discussion of how set asides will be used.		https://casetext.com/regulation/new-hampshire-administrative-code/title-env-dw-drinking-water-programs/chapter-env-dw-1100-drinking-water-state-revolving-loan-fund-programhttps://www.des.nh.gov/resource-center/publications?keys=IUP+&purpose=&subcategory=Drinking+Water
32
New JerseyNew Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, New Jersey I-Bankhttps://dep.nj.gov/grantandloanprograms/drinking-water-state-revolving-fund/DWSRFMarket RateTieredThree loan rate tiers: Affordability (DACs), 75% minimum interest free and principal forgiveness; Base Public, 50% interest free; Base Investor-Owned, 25% interest free; rate benchmark is I-Bank AAA market bond fundsup to 30 yearslesser of 30 years or useful life of assetfixed 2% fee on total project costs1. Submit Letter of Intent for Project Priority Listing 2. Submit Application for LoanNone - rolling basisNew Jersey's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
In New Jersey, a community’s DAC status is determined by whether the community meets the state’s affordability criteria, which are outlined in Appendix 3 to the SFY23 IUP. A community can meet this criteria in one of two ways:
Having a project affordability score of 80 or less; or
Having a project be eligible to receive 80 Environmental Justice Economic Overburdened Community Criteria DWSRF ranking points, per New Jersey’s Environmental Justice Law, N.J.S.A. 13:1D-157.

The project affordability score is based on MHI, unemployment, and population trends. See Appendix 3 for details.		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). In the funding cycle analyzed here, New Jersey opted to allocate the maximum amount allowable of its base grant as principal forgiveness (PF) for DACs. In addition, New Jersey will carry over any unallocated PF from prior years.

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less.

New Jersey anticipates allocating approximately $76.8 million in principal forgiveness in SFY24. See below for a description of the funding options available through New Jersey’s program.		New Jersey scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project ranking methodology outlined in Appendix 1 to the SFY24 IUP. The principal elements of the priority system are compliance and public health criteria, smart growth approvals, affordability, population, and established local employment program.

All projects that are in the fundable range as of the date of certification by DEP will be allowed to proceed to a short-term loan closing on a readiness to proceed basis. The Department establishes the fundable range by deducting and reserving estimated costs for projects listed in rank order on the current fiscal year Water Bank Project Priority List as amended until the available unobligated drinking water funds are exhausted. Note that the actual number of projects in the fundable range could expand or contract as loan construction bids are received, and total low bid allowable project costs are evaluated.

Projects in the fundable range that do not receive Authorization to Award by April 1, 2023 will be bypassed for the SFY2023 funding cycle and the fundable range will be extended accordingly.

Applications will be accepted any time of the year. There are no submission deadlines.

The total project cost financed per applicant per year is capped at $25 million.The remainder of the project costs may be financed by the I-Bank as capacity allows.		Publicly owned and privately owned community water systems, Non-profit non-community water systemsReplacement of Infrastructure, Source Development and Rehabilitation, Treatment to Comply with Drinking Water Standards, Water StorageThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

New Jersey’s SFY24 IUP does not detail its use of set-asides. In a response to a comment, New Jersey notes that drinking water set asides are reported in New Jersey’s biennial DWSRF report to USEPA.		https://advance.lexis.com/documentpage/teaserdocument/?pdmfid=1000516&crid=9fea741a-107e-422f-a598-617e99140731&config=025154JABiMmFjYzAxMy1hNjIyLTQ0YTctOTY0NS1iOGNlMTRiYzBkNGQKAFBvZENhdGFsb2flnvGwky16hNN9rcMfcun6&pddocfullpath=%2Fshared%2Fdocument%2Fadministrative-codes%2Furn%3AcontentItem%3A4HP0-9NB0-01XC-F4B7-00008-00&pddocid=urn%3AcontentItem%3A4HP0-9NB0-01XC-F4B7-00008-00&pdcontentcomponentid=235700&pdteaserkey=h1&pditab=allpods&ecomp=bs65kkk&earg=sr0&prid=524538a7-baa7-4c90-a60f-758503fc9dabhttps://dep.nj.gov/wiip/intended-use-plan-and-project-priority-lists/
33
New MexicoNew Mexico Environment Department, New Mexico Finance Authorityhttps://www.nmfinance.com/water-project-fund/drinking-water-state-revolving-loan-fund/DWSRFFixed RateFixed.01% public systems rate, 3% non-profit, 4% for-profit systems; 0% rate for DACsup to 30 yearsup to 30 years for all applicants1% fee built into principal upon closing; .25% ad,om fee assessed on outstanding principal balance1. Submit Project Interest Form (PIF) 2. Submit supplemental documentation for project priority ranking 3. Submit loan application within 45 days of publication of Fundable Priority List 4. Execute Binding Commitment LetterNone - rolling basis; Fundable Priority Lists are published three times annually (May/June, October, March)New Mexico's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
New Mexico provides two levels of disadvantaged entity status:

Disadvantaged Entities – to be considered a Disadvantaged entity, the applicant’s Median Household Income must be greater than 75% but less than 100% of the National* Median Household Income, based on the most recent 5-year average of Median Household Income from census data or through a survey acceptable to NMFA.

Severely Disadvantaged - to be considered a Severely Disadvantaged entity, the applicant’s Median Household Income must be 75% or less of the National* Median Household Income, based on the most recent 5-year average of Median Household Income from census data or through a survey acceptable to NMFA.

Applications for proposed regionalization projects may use the Median Household Income of the regionalized community to be incorporated into the water system’s service area for purposes of determining disadvantaged entity status.

In addition to principal forgiveness, New Mexico offers 0% interest loans to DACs.		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. In the funding cycle analyzed here, New Mexico anticipates offering up to 49% of its base grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less.

New Mexico estimated approximately $34.5 million available for total subsidy in SFY24.		New Mexico scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Appendices B-1, B-2, and B-3 to the SFY24 IUP. When two or more projects score equally under the project priority ranking system, a tie breaking procedure will be used. The project with the smallest number of existing customers served will receive the higher ranking.

New Mexico provides disadvantaged entities with PF of up to 50% of the loan and severely disadvantaged communities PF of up to 75% of the loan. For disadvantaged communities, NMFA will consider loans with 90% principal forgiveness for regionalization projects related to the provision of water to a regionalized community when all assets funded by the loan will be owned and maintained by the borrower.

“Green projects” include green infrastructure, water conservation, energy efficiency improvements, or other environmentally innovative activities. Green projects that are 100% green will be provided with an additional 25% principal forgiveness. Projects not considered “categorically green” (projects that clearly support the intent of the Green Project Reserve (GPR), such as water meters, rain gardens, green roofs, and alternative energies such as solar panels and other water and energy efficiency infrastructure for new facilities) will require a Business Case Explanation to support the need for the project and to describe how it meets the GPR requirement for water and/or energy efficiency.

No single applicant may receive more than 25% of the total additional subsidy available for DACs in any given year.

NMFA’s subsidy policy can be found on pp. 21-22 of the SFY24 IUP.

Projects are ranked for the distribution of principal forgiveness based on how they are ranked according to the state’s project scoring system, and principal forgiveness is distributed to projects in rank order until principal forgiveness funds are exhausted. Projects for DACs at the top of the list are likely to receive some principal forgiveness, but projects for DACs lower on the list are less likely to receive any principal forgiveness. 		Publicly or privately owned community water systems, non-profit water systems, and non-community water systemsRehabilitate/Develop Water Resources to Replace Contaminated Sources, Install/Upgrade Facilities to Improve Quality of Water, Install/Upgrade Storage Facilities, Install/Replace Transmission or Distribution Lines, Consolidate Systems, Create New System to Address Existing Public Health Problems Caused by Unsafe Drinking WaterThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

New Mexico will be taking full advantage of set aside allowances for SFY24. Details on New Mexico’s set aside activities for each capitalization grant can be found at pp. 15-19 of the SFY24 IUP.		https://codes.findlaw.com/nm/chapter-72-water-law/#!tid=N4F702EB0C21311E996B5AF82F213D287https://www.nmfinance.com/water-project-fund/drinking-water-state-revolving-loan-fund/
34
New YorkNew York State Department of Health, New York Environmental Facilities Corporationhttps://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/water/drinking/water.htmDWSRFMarket RateVariableBased upon terms of NY Environmental Facilities Corporation (EFC) issued bonds; current rate as of publication 2.44%; some subsidies available; 0% interest available for hardship loans according to policyup to 30 yearsup to 30 years or useful life of asset, whicher is lesservariable based upon loan type1. Submittal of Pre-Application to Department of Health (Description of Project) 2. Submittal of Financing Application Package to Environmental Facilities CorporationNone - rolling basisNew York's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
New York’s disadvantaged Community (hardship) criteria are described in Section 7.3 of the IUP. To be considered a DAC, a public water system must meet all of the following:
Must have a municipal population or project area with a population of less than 300,000. (Does not apply to BIL-LSLR funding)
Must meet one of the following:
The Median household Income (MHI) of the municipality is less than 80% of the regionally adjusted statewide MHI; or
For projects in communities with an MHI equal to or greater than 80% and less than 100% of the regionally adjusted statewide MHI, the community must have a poverty rate greater than the statewide family poverty rate; or
At least 50% of the project cost or project scope must serve, protect, or benefit an identified Environmental Justice (EJ) area.

In addition to principal forgiveness, New York provides extended repayment terms (up to 40 years) and reduced interest rates to state-defined DACs, including interest-free financing of up to $14 million/year. 		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. New York is allocating 26% of its base capitalization grant as grants or principal forgiveness to DACs.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		New York scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Attachment I to the final IUP.

New York offers a variety of types of financial assistance, described on pp. 11-13 and summarized here:
Short-term financing. Interest free and at market rate for terms of up to 5 years.
Short-term interest-free financing - provided to recipients that are developing projects eligible for long term DWSRF financing. Capped at one-third of the total project costs; no cap for DACs.
Short-term market rate financing - provided to projects with scores too low to be eligible for subsidized financing or projects eligible for interest-free financing but with financing needs of more than one-third project costs.
Leveraged financing - at market rate or with a one-third (33 ⅓%) interest subsidy.
Regular reduced rate direct financing - may include non-investment grade borrowers or small financing requests.
DAC (hardship) financing - Interest-free financing.
Additional subsidy - available to DACs.
Emergency financing - expedited financing to eligible public water systems for emergency situations as defined in Attachment I to the IUP.
SRF Bond Market Rate Program - Projects below the funding line on the Annual Project List may access the public market at preferred market rates.Projects funded with market rate 12 obligations will be retained on the Project Annual List of the IUP for 5 years. For projects with scores that rise above the subsidy funding line during that 5 year period (including through by-pass), subsidy assistance will become available at the then target rate for the remaining term of the recipient financing.

DWSRF hardship assistance includes grants/principal forgiveness and interest-free financing (see Section 7 of the IUP for more information, and in particular 7.3 and 7.4 on DAC eligibility).

For emerging contaminants projects, funds will be awarded first to projects that address PFAS, then to projects that qualify for EC funding that do not address PFAS.

Projects are limited to receiving no more than the $5 million maximum grant amount from any combination of NYS Water Infrastructure Improvement Act (WIIA), Base DWSRF, BIL-GS, and BIL-EC funding. (Note: A project addressing an emerging contaminant (EC) above the current State determined Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) may receive a NYS EC-WIIA grant award above the $5 million cap).

For lead projects, projects on the BIL-LSLR Eligible Project List will be awarded grant/PF and/or interest-free financing in public health priority score order until the available funds have been exhausted.
DACs are eligible for a BIL-LSLR grant/PF award of 70% of the project, up to $10 million.
Projects that receive BIL-LSLR grant/PF award also receive interest-free financing, subject to availability. DAC’s inventory projects are eligible for 100% project costs, up to $2 million.
Non-DACs are eligible for interest-free LSLR financing only.
Applicant communities are limited to $14 million in BIL-LSLR interest-free financing in any FFY.

Projects are ranked for the distribution of principal forgiveness based on how they are ranked according to the state’s project scoring system, and principal forgiveness is distributed to projects in rank order until principal forgiveness funds are exhausted. Projects for DACs at the top of the list are likely to receive some principal forgiveness, but projects for DACs lower on the list are less likely to receive any principal forgiveness. 		Community water systems (municipal and privately owned), non-profit non-community water systemsUpgrade/Replace Infrastructure for Compliance with Drinking Water Standards, Meet Treatment/Performance Criteria, Prevent Contamination, Provide Adequate Delivery Pressures, Replace Contaminated Supplies, Provide Public with Safe and Affordable Drinking WaterThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

New York intends to use only 16% of the base and BIL supplemental capitalization grants and 10% of the lead and emerging contaminants capitalization grants for set asides. New York’s set aside activities are described in Section 6.0, pp. 15-21 of the Final IUP.		https://www.health.ny.gov/environmental/water/drinking/dohregs.htmhttps://efc.ny.gov/dw-iup
35
North CarolinaNorth Carolina Department of Environmental Qualityhttps://www.deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-infrastructure/i-need-funding/drinking-water-state-revolving-fundDWSRFMarket RateFormula1/2 Bond Buyer's 20-Bond indexset by state statute and federal requirementsgeneral federal guidelines permit up to 40 years or useful life of asset, whichever is lesser2% of principal balance1. Application for Funding 2. Grant Eligibility and Affordability Form 3. Financial Information Form 4. Engineering Report/Environmental Information Document 5. Design & Bid DocumentsTwo application funding cycles annually - March and SeptemberNorth Carolina’s DWSRF program generally defines a disadvantaged community (DAC) as an entity with a service area with at least three of five Local Government Unit (LGU) indicators worse than the state benchmark, as well as other factors as described in section 5.3.2.2.2. of the FFY23 Base & Supplemental IUP.

The FFY23 Base & Supplemental IUP further allows an entity to receive principal forgiveness for projects for which at least half of the project costs are to benefit disadvantaged areas. A targeted project area will be considered a “disadvantaged area” based on factors that include:
affordability of water and sewer service rates relative to the income levels of residents of the targeted project area;
median household income of the targeted project area;
poverty rates of the targeted project area;
property values of the targeted project area;
employment rates of the targeted project area; and/or
additional relevant factors, as described in the IUP.
See section 5.3.2.2.3 of the FFY23 Base & Supplemental IUP for more information.		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). North Carolina will set aside $1,632,840-4,762,450 (12%-35%) of the base capitalization grant to provide additional subsidization in the form of principal forgiveness to disadvantaged communities.

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. North Carolina is allowing this additional subsidy to also be used to provide principal forgiveness to any DWSRF-eligible recipient as initial financing to buy, refinance or restructure debt obligations for debt incurred after March 15, 2022 or for debt incurred prior to March 15, 2022 if the State and EPA Region 4 determine that such funds could be used to help address a threat to public health from heightened exposure to lead in drinking water

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		North Carolina scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance prioritizing projects according to the priority rating system outlined in Appendix D of the FFY23 Base & Supplemental IUP. In general, highest priority is given to projects that benefit disadvantaged areas, facilitate compliance with water supply regulations, and seek proactive system management. Projects eligible for DWSRF‐EC funds will also be prioritized using this priority rating system.

Criteria used to determine the amount of financial assistance communities are eligible for are outlined in Appendix E of the FFY23 Base & Supplemental IUP.

The State’s ranking system for lead service line replacement projects will be based on the BIL DWSRF-Lead Service Line Replacement Priority Rating System (Appendix D of the FFY22 Lead IUP).

North Carolina generally caps its loans at $25 million per applicant per round of funding and at $200 million of total outstanding DWSRF debt per applicant.

Awards for lead service line replacement funding are limited to $5 million per applicant per funding round for projects replacing known lead service lines, $2 million per applicant per funding round for find & replace projects, and $1 million per applicant per funding round for inventory projects. PF for lead is limited to $500,000 per project per round. PF limits may be exceeded if funding allows.

DWSRF-EC funding will be capped at $5,000,000 per applicant for each round of funding. This can be increased if funding is available. DWSRF‐EC funding will be provided with 100% principal forgiveness for the entire FY2022 and FY2023 capitalization grants, less the amounts used for set‐asides and administrative costs. Total amounts available for principal forgiveness is estimated to be $22,272,960 for FY2022 and $20,211,840 for FY2023.

A project is eligible for principal forgiveness pursuant to section 5.3.2.2. of the IUP if it qualifies under one of the following categories:
The project eliminates a non-viable system to benefit a disadvantaged community with financial need. An entity eligible for PF in this category may receive PF for the full amount of the loan, up to $3,000,000.
The project receives project purpose points due to affordability as described in section 5.3.2.2.2. of the IUP. An entity eligible for PF in this category may be eligible for PF of 25% to 100% of the loan up to $500,000 per applicant per funding round, with reduced interest rates as described under section 5.3.1.7. applied to the remaining portion of the loan.
At least 50% of the project costs are to benefit disadvantaged areas. An entity eligible for PF in this category may receive PF for 50% of the project costs that are related to benefiting disadvantaged areas, up to $500,000.

Projects are ranked for the distribution of principal forgiveness based on how they are ranked according to the state’s project scoring system, and principal forgiveness is distributed to projects in rank order until principal forgiveness funds are exhausted. Projects for DACs at the top of the list are likely to receive some principal forgiveness, but projects for DACs lower on the list are less likely to receive any principal forgiveness. 		Local government units (counties, cities, towns, sanitary districts), Non-profit water corporations, investor-owned drinking water corporationsSource, Treatment, Storage, Transmission & Distribution SystemsThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

North Carolina is taking the full amount of allowable set-aside funds from the base and BIL general supplemental capitalization grants. A description of the set aside activity can be found in Appendix A to the FFY23 Base & Supplemental IUP.

North Carolina is taking up to 4% of the FFY22 and FFY23 BIL EC capitalization grants for program administration. North Carolina does not intend to use additional set asides from the EC capitalization grant.		https://www.ncleg.gov/enactedlegislation/statutes/html/bychapter/chapter_159g.htmlhttps://www.deq.nc.gov/about/divisions/water-infrastructure/i-need-funding/drinking-water-state-revolving-fund
36
North DakotaNorth Dakota Department of Environmental Qualityhttps://deq.nd.gov/MF/DWSRF/DWSRFFixed RateFixed1.5% fixed rategenerally 30 years; up to 40 years for DACsmust qualify as DAC.5% annual feen the spring of each year, a letter of interest is sent to all potential DWSRF loan recipients asking for information regarding new drinking water projects for which they may be interested in pursuing DWSRF assistance. Systems that respond are provided a project ranking questionnaire. Eligible projects for which ranking questionnaires are returned are ranked and included on the PPL as part of the IUP development process. In the fall of each year, following public review and comment, the IUP is finalized and subsequently included in the grant application to the EPA.

Once the IUP is finalized, systems with projects on the PPL may apply for DWSRF assistance.

Depending on the complexity of the project, the NDDEQ and/or The North Dakota Public Finance Authority (PFA) may schedule a meeting to explain the program, answer any questions that the system may have, and assist the system as needed.

The NDDEQ assesses the applicant's technical and managerial capability and ensures that other programmatic requirements are met. The PFA reviews the financial information and assesses the applicant's financial capability. Loan application packets can be obtained from the PFA’s website here. All items in the loan application, including the DWSRF attachment, must be completed. One copy of the signed application must be submitted to the NDDEQ at the address listed on the instruction page of the application. The NDDEQ will send a copy of the loan application to the PFA for its review.		Initial Questionnaires for IUP placement due October North Dakota's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
North Dakota evaluates a community’s eligibility for DAC assistance based on the following criteria:
The average annual residential water user charge as a percent of the local or service area annual median household income
Percent of households with an income less than 200 percent of the poverty threshold
Percent unemployment
Percent of residents with less than a high school education

Each criterion is scored by assigning points based on the range of values established in the Affordability section of the priority ranking system found in Appendix C of the FFY22 BIL IUP. Projects may receive up to 20 points. Projects receiving 5 or more points are considered disadvantaged communities.

A water system that is undertaking a project in a portion of its service area may submit a census tract area for consideration as a disadvantaged community. If the water system receives additional subsidization, the water system must demonstrate that only the residential users in the census tract area will benefit from the additional subsidization.

In addition to principal forgiveness, North Dakota offers extended loan repayment terms to DACs.		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). In the funding cycle analyzed here, North Dakota opted to allocate 12-13% of its base grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. North Dakota is allocating this amount plus $100,000 in additional subsidization as principal forgiveness for DACs. This congressional subsidization for the base allotment will be provided to lead service line replacement projects at a rate of up to 75% and may be combined with additional subsidization from the Lead allotment to meet the maximum rate of 75% loan forgiveness.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		North Dakota scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Appendix E to the FFY23 IUP.

North Dakota caps principal forgiveness at 75% of the loan.

Additional subsidization for the Emerging Contaminants allotment will be provided to projects at a rate of up to 75% and may be combined with additional subsidization from other DWSRF allotments (Base and Supplemental) to meet the maximum rate of 75% loan forgiveness. The remaining 25% of the project costs will be combined with a loan through either the Base DWSRF program or the Supplemental allotment.

Additional subsidization for the Lead allotment will be provided to projects that meet the Disadvantaged Community criteria at a rate of up to 66%.

Loan forgiveness will only be used to finance new construction. DWSRF loan and loan forgiveness can be bundled together with funding from other sources to form funding packages for projects. The combined loan forgiveness and grant in a bundled funding package must be less than or equal to 90% of project costs.

Projects are ranked for the distribution of principal forgiveness based on how they are ranked according to the state’s project scoring system, and principal forgiveness is distributed to projects in rank order until principal forgiveness funds are exhausted. Projects for DACs at the top of the list are likely to receive some principal forgiveness, but projects for DACs lower on the list are less likely to receive any principal forgiveness. 		Public Water Systems - Community Water Systems (Publicly and Privately Owned), Non-Profit Non-Community Water Systems (Schools, Publicly Owned Campgrounds, Parks, Rest Areas)Projects that address present Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) exceedances Projects that prevent future SDWA exceedances (applies only to regulations in effect) Projects to replace aging infrastructure rehabilitate or develop drinking water sources to replace contaminated sources install or upgrade drinking water treatment facilities if the project would improve the quality of drinking water to comply with primary or secondary SDWA standards install or upgrade storage facilities, including finished water reservoirs, to prevent microbiological contaminants from entering the water system install or replace transmission and distribution piping to prevent contamination caused by leaks or breaks, or to improve water pressure to safe levels Projects to restructure and consolidate water supplies to rectify a contamination problem, or to assist systems unable to maintain SDWA compliance for financial or managerial reasons (assistance must ensure compliance) Projects that purchase a portion of another system's capacity, if such purchase will cost-effectively rectify a SDWA compliance problem Projects to construct a new system to serve homes with contaminated individual wells Land acquisition land must be integral to the project (i.e., needed to meet or maintain compliance and further public health protection such as land needed to locate eligible treatment or distribution facilities), and acquisition must be from a willing seller Note: The The cost of complying with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (the Uniform Act) is an eligible cost. Planning (including required environmental assessment reports), design, and construction inspection costs associated with eligible projectsThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

For details on North Dakota’s set-aside activities, see pp. 15-16 and Appendix F to the FFY23 IUP. North Dakota’s use of set aside funds includes issuing planning grants of up to 80% of the costs, capped at $15,000, for completion of a project-specific engineering report.		https://ndlegis.gov/cencode/t61c28-1.pdfhttps://deq.nd.gov/MF/Publications.aspx?expand=DWSRF#DWSRF
37
OhioOhio Environmental Protection Agency, Ohio Water Development Authorityhttps://epa.ohio.gov/divisions-and-offices/environmental-financial-assistance/financial-assistance/wsrlaWSRLAMarket RateTieredStandard rate calculated monthly using average of Municipal Market Data (MMD) Index and adding 30 basis points, discounts from standard rate based on tiered system: small systems .5% below standard; DACs 0%; planning/design 0%; generally 30 years; up to 40 years for DACsmust qualify as DAC1% admin fee from Ohio EPA, .35% admin fee from Ohio Water Development Authority; both fees due at time of loan award and eligible project cost1. Loan Application 2. Rate Legislation 3. Borrowing Authorization 4. Engineer's Estimate/Engineering Agreement 5. Capital Improvement Plan 6. Financial/Revenue AnalysisPre-Application Due March 1, Loan Application Due on Rollng Basis by 1st of Each Month to Ohio Water Development AuthorityOhio's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
A disadvantaged community candidate is a Public Water System (PWS) with a service population below 10,000, a nominated project with demonstrated health-related factors, and meets any three of the four socio-economic benchmarks:
MHI at or below statewide average ($61,938
Individuals with income below 200% of poverty level greater than or equal to statewide average (29.9%)
Unemployment rate greater than or equal to statewide average (5.26%)
Water and sewer rates compared to MHI greater than or equal to statewide benchmark (2.5%)
For program year 2024 Emerging Contaminant (EC) and Lead Service Line (LSL) funding, a disadvantaged community candidate is a Public Water System (PWS) with a nominated project remedying health-related factors (LSL or emerging contaminants) and which meets any three of the four socio-economic benchmarks identified above.

For more information, see Appendix E to the SFY23 IUP.

In addition to principal forgiveness, Ohio provides reduced interest rates (0-percent loans) and extended repayment terms (up to 40 years) to state-defined DACs. 		Of the FFY22 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. In the funding cycle analyzed here, Ohio opted to allocate up to 49% of its base grant ($5.4 million) as principal forgiveness and zero percent interest loans for regionalization projects and DACs.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Ohio scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Appendix D of the SFY24 IUP.

Ohio offers the following types of PF and loan discounts:

Funding Category or Type of Loan
PF/Interest discount
Regionalization
Up to 50% of project awarded in principal forgiveness up to $4 million. The balance at a 0% interest rate loan up to 30 years.
DAC loan program
Up to 50% of project awarded in principal forgiveness up to $4 million. The balance at a 0% interest rate loan up to 40 years.
Lead Service Line Funding
Up to 53% of the LSL replacement costs awarded in principal forgiveness. The balance at a 0% interest rate loan up to 40 years. Borrowers not eligible for LSL PF will receive 0% interest rate loan for LSL replacement costs.
Harmful Algal Bloom (HAB)/PFAS funding
0% interest rate for the portion of the project directly attributable to addressing HAB or PFAS
Small System Long Term
[Systems <10K population]
Small System Long Term Rate for a term up to 30 years.
Standard Long Term
[Systems >10K population]
Standard Long Term Rate for a term up to 30 years.
Planning or Design
A term up to five years with a 0% interest rate.
Supplemental Loan
The interest rate will be determined as appropriate rate in effect at the time of the Supplemental loan award.
Linked Deposit Loan
Linked Deposit Rate determined by commercial lender, rate will be discounted below the normal discount rate, as determined at time of loan, program stipulations, and system specifics.



Principal forgiveness funding is available for the highest ranking projects based on score and readiness-to-proceed. For projects with the same project score and readiness-to-proceed ranking, regionalization projects will be prioritized. As a tie-breaker, projects will be sorted by project cost (low to high). To maximize the availability of PF to as many eligible entities as possible, only one PF award will be allotted per eligible entity each program year.		Community water systems, Non-Profit Non-Community Public Water SystemsDevelopment/Acquisition of Potable Water Sources, Construction/Expansion of Water Treatment Facilities, Installation/Improvement of Water Distribution/Transmission SystemsThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Ohio is making partial use of set aside funds from its base, supplemental, and lead capitalization grants. Ohio is not taking any set asides from its emerging contaminants grants. Unused set asides are banked for future use. See Appendices H and I of the IUP for work plans associated with the set asides.		https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/chapter-6109https://epa.ohio.gov/divisions-and-offices/environmental-financial-assistance/financial-assistance/wsrla
38
OklahomaOklahoma Department of Environmental Qualityhttps://www.deq.ok.gov/water-quality-division/public-water-supply/dwsrf/DWSRFMarket Rate70%70% of MMD AAA scale spot rates plus .4-.76% to account for rate risk depending on loan termgenerally 30 years; up to 40 for DACsmust qualify as DAC.5% annual fee on unpaid loan balance; flat application fee of $100-$500 based on loan size1. Submit Project Priority List (PPL) placement request letter 2. Submit supporting documentation 3. Complete Financial Information FormsNone - rolling basisOklahoma's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
A “Disadvantaged Community” means those communities which serve a population whose Median Household Income (MHI) is greater than 80% but less than 90% of the national MHI according to the United States Census Bureau/American Community Survey. Communities serving a population whose MHI is less than 80% of the national MHI according to the United States Census Bureau/American Community Survey will be designated as “Severely Disadvantaged Communities” and hence will receive 60 priority points instead of the 40 points reserved for Disadvantaged Communities.

In addition to principal forgiveness, Oklahoma provides extended loan repayment terms of up to 40 years to state-defined DACs. 		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). In the funding cycle analyzed here, Oklahoma opted to allocate 12% of its base grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. Oklahoma’s primary focus for this subsidy will be public water supplies with health-based violations (HBV), followed by regionalization, consolidation, or other compliance issues. Additionally, during SFY 2024, DEQ plans to provide additional subsidization to all eligible projects seeking funding through the DWSRF program.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less.

Oklahoma has additional subsidization funds that it is rolling over from FFY22 capitalization grants - $426,823 from base funds and $16,459,830 of LSLR funds.		Oklahoma scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Appendix A to the SFY24 IUP.

Principal forgiveness will be allocated from each funding source as follows:
Base funding: The amount of loan forgiveness/grant per project will be $200,000 or 20%, whichever is less. Subsidy amounts for severely disadvantaged communities with a project under $400,000 will be determined on a case-by-case basis.
BIL DWSRF General Supplemental grant::
DACs serving 10,000 people or fewer will receive 100% loan forgiveness up to $800,000 for eligible project costs.
DACs serving more than 10,000 people will qualify for 25% of the loan amount or $1,000,000, whichever is less.
DACS and SDACs seeking funding for regionalization/consolidation may receive up to 100% loan forgiveness, if available.
Projects for Non-DACs benefiting areas of low income (below 90% of NMHI), minorities and/or people of color, will receive loan forgiveness of up to $800,000 or the cost of the project in that area, whichever is less.
BIL-LSLR grant: The LSLR PPL presented in Appendix E includes a total of 52 projects. Sources and uses of funds can be found in Table 5 on Page 22. The fundable list portion of this PPL includes 22 projects, which all meet the DAC definition. The amount of the loan forgiveness/grant provided is as follows:
DACs serving 10,000 people or fewer will receive up to 100% loan forgiveness for eligible projects and costs.
DACs serving more than 10,000 people will qualify for 33% of the loan amount, or $2.5M, whichever is less as loan forgiveness.
Projects under this category for Non-DACs benefiting areas of low income (below 90% of NMHI), minorities and/or people of color, will receive loan forgiveness of up to 100% of the cost for the project in that area.
For the BIL General Supplemental funds and the Base program, there is a maximum of $1,000,000 of loan forgiveness/grant per entity per fiscal year except for small and disadvantaged systems. The maximum amount for small and disadvantaged systems is $1,200,000, subject to availability of the loan forgiveness/grant funds. For health-based violations and and/or regionalization/consolidation projects, the maximum amount of loan forgiveness/grant will be determined on a case-by-case basis. Communities that have received loan forgiveness from the first year of the BIL will be considered secondary and priority will be given to communities that have yet to access these funds.
BIL-EC grant: As listed in Appendix F, the BIL-EC PPL includes a total of 6 projects, which all meet the DAC definition and all but one serve fewer than 25,000 people. Sources and use of funds can be found on Page 25. 100% of these funds will be provided as subsidy to all eligible recipients with a minimum of 25% of the funds awarded to communities that are DACs.

Projects are ranked for the distribution of principal forgiveness based on how they are ranked according to the state’s project scoring system, and principal forgiveness is distributed to projects in rank order until principal forgiveness funds are exhausted. Projects for DACs at the top of the list are likely to receive some principal forgiveness, but projects for DACs lower on the list are less likely to receive any principal forgiveness. 		Counties, Towns, Municipalities, Public Works Authorities, Water DistrictsDrinking Water Treatment Systems, New Intake/Raw Water Lines, Major Distribution/Storage System Rehabilitation, New Storage, Engineering Services, New Transmission/Distribution Systems, Wells, MetersThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Oklahoma is using the following amounts for set asides:
31% of its base capitalization grant
5.6% of its supplemental capitalization grant
26% of its lead capitalization grant
8.7% of its capitalization grant
Details on the use of set aside funds can be found on pp.3-6 of the SFY24 IUP. The IUP does not contain details on the use of LSLR and EC set aside funds.		https://www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/oklahoma/title-252/chapter-633https://www.deq.ok.gov/water-quality-division/public-water-supply/dwsrf/
39
OregonOregon Health Authorityhttps://www.oregon.gov/biz/programs/sdwrlf/pages/default.aspxDWSRFMarket Rate80%Base rate = 80% of previous quarterly municipal Bond Buyer 20 Index; DACs eligible for sliding scale rate between base and 1%up to 30 yearslesser of 30 years or useful life of assetnot available1. Project Proposal 2. Preliminary Engineering Report 3. Environmental ReportNone - rolling basisFor the purposes of federal reporting, a disadvantaged community is one that has a MHI below the state average. Regardless of MHI, a project that results in the elimination of a non-viable public water system is also considered disadvantaged. Borrower:
The maximum that an eligible borrower can receive per state fiscal year is $2,000,000.

This maximum amount of $2,000,000 applies to that borrower regardless of the number of active loans or projects the borrower has with the program.

Emerging Contaminants awards are not included in this $2,000,000 limit. See below.

Planning loans:
Borrowers eligible to receive principal forgiveness may receive subsidization for up to 100% of the loan but not to exceed $100,000.

Limit of one 100% forgivable loan per borrower per state fiscal year.

Design/construction loans:
Borrowers eligible to receive principal forgiveness for design and/or construction loans may receive up to 50% of the loan but not to exceed $2,000,000, over the life of the loan.
If the design and construction loans for a project are executed separately even if in different fiscal years, the combined subsidization cannot exceed the $2,000,000 limit. If the loan is implemented in phases, the combined subsidization cannot exceed the $2,000,000 limit.

Emerging Contaminants Awards
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law CWSRF funding to address Emerging Contaminants: The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provides for supplemental federal capitalization funding for CWSRFs to address emerging contaminants under the Clean Water Act. EPA's BIL Implementation Guidance Memo requires states to provide 100% of the emerging contaminants capitalization grant amount as additional subsidization in the form of principal forgiveness and/or grants.

Borrowers eligible to receive principal forgiveness for any project eligible under section 603(c) of the CWA that addresses emerging contaminants may be offered up to 100% principal forgiveness of the emerging contaminants funds.

An award of principal forgiveness under emerging contaminants funding may be in addition to principal forgiveness awarded under other criteria and may exceed the $2,000,000 limit for a project.

The amount of emerging contaminants subsidization is based on availability of funds.​

Oregon scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described on its website:

Each eligible project is rated, ranked, and placed on the Project Priority List. Rating points are assigned based on the five (5) rating categories listed below.


1. Risks to Human Health & Health Protection (40 points Max)
2. Compliance with Safe Drinking Water Act (30 points Max)
3. Consolidation of Two or More Systems (20 points Max)
4. Water System Size (5 points Max)
5. Community Affordability - includes community MHI, poverty and unemployment rate (25 points Max)


For emerging contaminants projects, the rating system is outlined in Appendix A to the EC IUPs.

Infrastructure projects that have been deemed by OHA to address a risk to human health and ensure compliance with the Safe Drinking Water Act receive the highest rating scores and are placed on the “Health/Compliance/Consolidation Projects” PPL. Non-health and compliance eligible projects are rated or ranked based on water system size and community affordability and are then placed on the “General Infrastructure & Resiliency Projects” PPL.

The projects ranked highest on the health and compliance PPL receive first funding priority with consideration given to readiness to proceed. Available funding, as it is administered by Business Oregon, may be limited for projects on the “General Infrastructure & Resiliency Projects” PPL. When program funds are sufficient any eligible project on OHA’s PPLs may proceed in the funding process regardless of rating or ranking, although currently there is a competitive amount of interest in the program limiting funding availability.

While there is no statutory maximum limit on the size of a funding award, the priority of the SDWRLF is to fund public health and compliance related drinking water infrastructure needs across the state. Based on fund availability and program demand, Business Oregon may offer a lower amount of assistance than requested. In those cases when a lower funding award is offered, Business Oregon staff may facilitate exploration of other state and federal funding opportunities. Awards of $3 million and above, or awards with increased forgivable loans are subject to review by the IFA Board.

Water systems with a service area MHI between 81-99% of statewide average MHI are eligible for a forgivable loan award of up to $500,000 or 50% of project cost (whichever is less). Water systems with a service area MHI of 80% or less of statewide average MHI are eligible for a forgivable loan award of up to $650,000 or 50% of project cost (whichever is less). BIL awards exceed these described limitations as there is more available forgivable loan under that appropriation.

Oregon has identified the amount of subsidy available to 2023 BIL General Supplemental projects, as shown on the table on p. 9 of the FFY23 IUP. An equal percentage of 52% forgivable loan to 48% loan is currently targeted for each BIL General Supplemental project.

Forgivable loan awards are available for nearly all funded projects. Increased amounts may be provided to eligible water systems to assist with water rate affordability, health/compliance projects, and water system consolidation. In addition to principal forgiveness offered to DACs, Oregon offers the following PF:
For projects serving a population of less than 10,000: Up to 10% of the total project cost or $100,000, whichever is less.
For health and compliance projects: Up to 25% of the total project cost or $150,000, whichever is less.

Emerging contaminants projects are ranked separately and the procedure for offering funding to these projects is outlined on pp. 21-22 of the FFY23 EC IUP.		Public and private entitiesWater Wells, Water Storage, Water Treatment Plants, Water Distribution, Facility Rehabilitation, Source Water Protection, Emergency Power, Water MetersThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

https://secure.sos.state.or.us/oard/displayDivisionRules.action?selectedDivision=172https://www.oregon.gov/oha/ph/healthyenvironments/drinkingwater/srf/pages/iup.aspx
40
PennsylvaniaPennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, Pennvesthttps://www.pa.gov/agencies/pennvest/about-us.html#accordion-6cffe629b2-item-2c921d817cDWSRFMarket RateFormulaMinimum rate 1%, maximum calculated by comparing unemployment rate of applicant's county to statewide average; if county unemployment rate > state average by 40% or more, maximum rate is 1% for first five years of term and 25% of state's rate for bonds issued to finance program for remainder of loan term; if county rate > state average by less than 40%, max rate is 30% of state bond rate for first five years and 60% for remainder of term; if county rate < state average, max rate 60% state bond rate for first five years and 75% for remainder of termgenerally 20; 30- and 40-year terms in special circumstancesgenerally 20 years; up to 30 or 40 years based upon formula (see IUP)No fees1. Funding Application 2. Planning Meeting 3. Cost-Effectiveness Analysis 4. Alternatives Analysis 5. Engineering Cost Estimates 6. Financial Information Form 7. Financial Planning MeetingApplications due quarterly to correspond with Pennvest Board MeetingsPennsylvania's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
Pennsylvania utilizes a financial capability analysis that compares various community specific demographic data to similarly situated communities across the Commonwealth to determine a percent of the community’s adjusted median household income (MHI) that should be available to pay for water service. The amount that should be available to pay for water service by residential customers will range from 0.5 to 1.25 percent of the community’s adjusted MHI dependent upon the specific socio-economic factors that are provided by the Pennsylvania DCED. See the SFY24 IUP, pp. 16-17 for details.

For lead service line replacement projects, Pennsylvania may consider rate impacts on a specific area or neighborhood within a larger system when determining eligibility for DAC status.		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). In the funding cycle analyzed here, Pennsylvania opted to allocate up to 35% of its base grant as grants and principal forgiveness for DACs.

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Eligibility for grants or principal forgiveness depends on the type of entity and its financial status. See pp. 15-16 of the SFY24 IUP for details.

Pennsylvania uses an affordability methodology to determine distribution of PF and grants. Pennsylvania determines affordability status on a case-by-case basis. Each applicant is evaluated against several demographic factors to measure the local economic circumstances of the community. Then a “target percentage” is established for the applicant’s community. This is the percentage of annual income that the users of a project are reasonably expected to be able to pay for either drinking water, wastewater, or storm water service. This percentage is constrained to be between .5 and 1.5 percent of the adjusted median household income. If the resulting user rate exceeds the target rate, the community may be eligible for grants, PF, reduced interest rates, or extended repayment terms.

In some cases, Pennsylvania may offer only part of the funding that an applicant requests, particularly if there is a much greater demand for funding than can be met. This can occur when the resulting user rate is below the affordable rate. In such cases, typically 50 percent of the needed funding is offered, and the borrower is expected to obtain the other 50 percent from some other source (e.g. a bank or a bond issue). The resulting user rate that is calculated and compared with the affordable rate includes the debt service on this other borrowing. See pp. 12-14 of the SFY24IUP for details.

No grant or Principle Forgiveness Loan funds will be invested into a project if the resulting user rate reduction is less than $15 on an annual basis.

Grants or Principle Forgiveness Loans may be prorated over eligible recipients. That is, once the projects to be funded and the amount of available grant/principle forgiveness funding is identified, the available grant/principle forgiveness loan funds may be pro-rated to the eligible projects in proportion to the unconstrained amounts that the affordability analysis determines for each recipient. 		Community water systems (municipal and privately owned), non-profit non-community water systemsTreatment Plants, Transmission and Distribution Mains, Supply Sources, Storage Facilities, Water Security Projects, Health Protection MeasuresThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Pennsylvania is making partial use of set-asides in SFY23:
19% from its base capitalization grant
15.3% from its general supplemental capitalization grant
4% from its lead capitalization grant
6% from its emerging contaminants capitalization grant
For details on Pennsylvania's use of these funds, see Attachment 3 to the SFY24 IUP		https://www.pacodeandbulletin.gov/Display/pacode?file=/secure/pacode/data/025/chapter961/chap961toc.html&d=reducehttps://www.dep.pa.gov/Business/Water/CleanWater/InfrastructureFinance/Pages/State-Revolving-Fund.aspx
41
Rhode IslandRhode Island Department of Health, Rhode Island Infrastructure Bankhttps://health.ri.gov/programs/detail.php?pgm_id=127DWSRFMarket Rate75%1/4 off individual borrower's market rate, determined by financial advisors of applicant and Rhode Island Infrastructure Bankup to 20 yearsnone1% loan origination fee, .3% annual service fee on outstanding principal balance1. Pre-Application Meeting 2. Project Notification Form 3. Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) 4. Environmental Assessment 5. Financial/Cash Flow Model InformationNone - rolling basisRhode Island’s DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
Rhode Island has established an Affordability Criteria for determining subsidy eligibility. Entities with an Affordability Index less than the statewide average may qualify for additional subsidization such as principal forgiveness. Indexed entities are grouped into tiers, with tiers further below the statewide average qualifying for increased levels of subsidization.

The Affordability Index is calculated using the following formula:
Affordability Index = Median Household Income * Employment Rate * Population Ratio
For more information, see pp. 21-25 of the SFY24 IUP.		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). In the funding cycle analyzed here, Rhode Island opted to allocate 12% of its base grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. Rhode Island will provide this subsidy to DACs in the form of principal forgiveness or grants.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less.

Attachment G to the SFY24 IUP (PDF p. 54) shows the subsidy requirements for FFY22 and FFY23 Base and BIL capitalization grants.		Rhode Island scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described at. Rhode Island utilizes a point system to rank the order in which eligible drinking water projects will receive funding from the Program. Projects which address acute public health issues will receive highest priority. The next priority is given to projects that address chronic and long-term public health issues. The ranking criteria also consider issues related to compliance with the Act, infrastructure upgrading and replacement, and the need for assistance based on affordability. Rhode Island’s priority point system can be seen in Attachment A., PDF pp. 39-41 of the SFY24 IUP.

Rhode Island details its allocation of principal forgiveness on pp. 23-25 of the SFY24 IUP, including lists of applicants that are expected to receive principal forgiveness in SFY24. Priority for principal forgiveness or grants will be given to small drinking water system projects that are on the PPL list, have a certificate of approval, and are ready to proceed. “Emergency” water quality projects will be given priority regardless of PPL ranking. Further, additional subsidization is given to disadvantaged water systems per the State’s Disadvantaged Community Program.

Principal forgiveness amounts are contingent upon funding availability and readiness to proceed. The Bank strives to accommodate all borrowers and, for financial applications not received by the priority date or not ready-to-proceed, shall allocate principal forgiveness in the order in which ready-to-proceed financial applications are received.		Publicly owned and privately owned community water systems, Non-profit non-community water systemsTreatment Improvements, Distribution System Improvements, Source Water Protection, Consolidation or Restructuring of Water Systems, Compliance with Drinking Water Standards, Water Efficiency and Conservation, Emergency Preparedness and ResiliencyThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Rhode Island’s use of set-asides for all FFY24 capitalization grant funding is detailed in the IUP. Rhode Island is making partial use of its set asides from FFY23 funding and reserving the remainder of the set-aside funding for future use.		https://rules.sos.ri.gov/regulations/part/216-50-05-6https://health.ri.gov/programs/detail.php?pgm_id=127
42
South CarolinaSouth Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, South Carolina Rural Infrastructure Authorityhttps://scdhec.gov/bow/stateDWSRFFixed RateTiered1.4% standard rate, 1.2% small system rate, 1.2% green rate (meeting EPA Green criteria); certain basis point reductions available depending on loan termup to 30 yearslesser of 30 years or useful life of assetyes; not specifically listed1. Pre-Application Form 2. Loan Application 3. Preliminary Engineering Report (PER) 4. Outstanding Debt List 5. List of Water Rates 6. Documentation of Public Hearing and Resolution for Application 7. Environmental Review Documentation 8. Lobbying Certification Form 9. Capacity Development Survey 10. Previous Three Years of Audited Financial StatementsPre-Application Form/Project Questionnaires due March 15South Carolina’s DWSRF definition of “disadvantaged community” (DAC) is a small system (population less than 10,000) with an MHI less than the State MHI that cannot qualify for a DWSRF loan.

In addition, the following entities may be eligible for PF under the DAC program:
A sustainable system owner willing to assume ownership or receivership of an unsustainable or abandoned system.
For emerging contaminants funding, a sustainable system owner willing to provide drinking water service to homeowners with private wells with emerging contaminants that exceed health-based levels.
For lead funding, a “disadvantaged area” is demonstrated by a demographic study that shows that the latest 5-year average MHI is less than the state average. Disadvantaged areas for the purposes of the lead program are not limited to small systems.

In addition to PF, South Carolina offers a reduced interest rate to small systems, DACs, and borrowers that do not have an underlying revenue credit rating in at least “A” category on utility system.		Of the base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined DACs. States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. SC uses Principal Forgiveness Assistance to satisfy the additional subsidy requirement.

South Carolina allocated approximately 26.6% of its base capitalization grant funds for principal forgiveness, focused on the priorities described below.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Principal forgiveness (PF) is available for projects that are funded through base or supplemental capitalization grant funding to encourage the following priorities:
Correct violations of primary drinking water standards and potential health concerns, preferably through consolidation or regionalization;
Enable a viable system owner willing to assume ownership or receivership of a nonviable or abandoned system;
Assist small systems (population less than 10,000) with achieving compliance with state and federal drinking water regulations; and
Enhance the sustainability of small systems by fixing existing infrastructure.

To make maximum benefit of PF funds for SFY24, applicants typically will be limited to no more than $1,500,000 for subsidy unless PF funds remain unassigned or are not committed to an identified project as expected.

Projects receiving funding from South Carolina’s IIJA LSLR grant are eligible to receive PF as follows:
SRF loan must be taken out for the portion of the project not funded through SRF principal forgiveness. The project cannot be co-funded or self-funded.
At least 67% of the work (by construction cost) must be in disadvantaged areas. This must be demonstrated by a demographic study that is included in the Preliminary Engineering Report (PER). Disadvantaged criteria is the latest 5-year average MHI of less than the state average and is not limited to small systems.
Before the final draw request is approved, the sponsor must confirm that at least 67% of the actual work performed (by construction cost) was in disadvantaged areas.
The lead service line must be replaced up to the building inlet (this will include work on the private side). If the replacement is not completed up to the building inlet, that replacement work is not an eligible expense.

For emerging contaminants funding, PF is available for projects that are ready to proceed to encourage the following priorities:
Address emerging contaminants in drinking water with a focus on PFAS;
Address potential health concerns of emerging contaminants, preferably through consolidation or regionalization; and
Provide public water to address emerging contaminants and related health concerns in private wells.

For projects designated with a project award on the PPL and determined to be eligible for PF, PF will be awarded to projects on a first-come, first-served basis based upon the project’s readiness to proceed at the time the award is finalized. Once PF funds from each category have been exhausted, no further PF will be awarded for this funding cycle. 		Public and Private Community Water SystemsTreatment Plant Improvements, Distribution Upgrades, Storage, Source Development, Consolidation, Water Meter Installation, Resilience and Sustainability, Compliance with Health StandardsSouth Carolina describes how it plans to use the set-asides for IIJA funding in Section VII.D-G of the SFY24 Base IUP (p. 12-13) and Section VII. C-F of the SFY24 Supplemental IUP (p. 12-13). South Carolina did not plan to take the set-aside from the or IIJA EC or LSLR funds.https://law.justia.com/codes/south-carolina/2022/title-48/chapter-5/section-48-5-55/https://scdhec.gov/bow/state/environmental-loans-grants-businesses-communities-5
43
South DakotaSouth Dakota Department of Agriculture and Natural Resourceshttps://danr.sd.gov/Funding/EnviromentalFunding/DWRevolvingFunding.aspxDWSRFMarket RateTieredBase rate of 2.5% to 3% depending on loan term; DAC rate of 1.75%-2.75% for 10- to 30-year term based on MHI; 0% rate available for DACs with MHI less than 60% of state average; market benchmark according to bond rating indexesup to 30 yearslesser of 30 years or useful life of asset.25% admin fee1. Loan Application 2. Most Recent Audited Financial Statements 3. Financial Information Form 4. Drinking Water Facilities Plan 5. Capacity AssessmentApplications must be received on or before the first day of January, April, July, and OctoberSouth Dakota's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
To be eligible for loan subsidies a community must meet the following criteria:
(1) For municipalities and sanitary districts:
(a) the median household income is below the state-wide median household income; and
(b) the monthly residential water bill is $30 or more for 5,000 gallons usage.
(2) For other community water systems:
(a) the median household income is below the state-wide median household income; and
(b) the monthly water bill for rural households is $55 or more for 7,000 gallons usage.

In addition to principal forgiveness, South Dakota provides reduced interest rates and fees and extended loan repayment terms to state-defined DACs.		Of the FFY22 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). In the funding cycle analyzed here, South Dakota provided additional subsidy (up to 35%) as principal forgiveness for DACs.

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. South Dakota provided this as principal forgiveness for communities not eligible for principal forgiveness.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		South Dakota scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria outlined in administrative rule (ARSD 74:05:11:06). The general objective of the priority system is to assure projects that address compliance or health concerns, meet certain affordability criteria, or regionalize facilities receive priority for funding.

When determining the amount of principal forgiveness, South Dakota considers the following decision-making factors, which are set forth in alphabetical order:

(1) Annual utility operating budgets;
(2) Available local cash and in-kind contributions;
(3) Available program funds;
(4) Compliance with permits and regulations;
(5) Debt service capability;
(6) Economic impact;
(7) Other funding sources;
(8) Readiness to proceed;
(9) Regionalization or consolidation of facilities;
(10) Technical feasibility;
(11) Utility rates; and
(12) Water quality benefits.

DACs are eligible for the following assistance based on their MHI:
80-100% of statewide MHI: Extended loan repayment term, up to 30 years.
60-80% of statewide MHI: up to 1.0% reduction in interest rates
Less than 60% of statewide MHI: 0.0% interest rate.		Governmental entities with authority to generate revenues or repay general obligation bonds, non-profit corporations with authority to generate revenuesTreatment Works, Storage Tanks, Water Mains, System Improvements, Water Quality, Water Quantity, PWS Acquisition or Consolidation, Source ProtectionThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

South Dakota is making partial use of set asides in FFY23. South Dakota identifies the following amounts for set asides from its FFY22 capitalization grants:
Base & supplemental combined: 4.2%
Lead: 0%
Emerging Contaminants: 0%
See the IUP and addendum for details.		https://www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/south-dakota/title-74/article-74-05/chapter-74-05-11https://danr.sd.gov/Funding/EnviromentalFunding/DWRevolvingFunding.aspx
44
TennesseeDepartment of Environment and Conservationhttps://www.tn.gov/environment/program-areas/wr-water-resources/srfp/srf-home/drinking-water-state-revolving-fund.htmlDWSRFMarket RateFormulaBased on applicant's Ability to Pay Index and Market Rate (variable from 40-100% of Bond Buyer Indices and MMD GO Yieldsup to 20 yearsnot available; 20 years or useful life of asset, whichever is shorter0.08% admin fee1. Project Description/DWSRF Questionnaire 2. Cost Estimates 3. Engineering Reports 4. Environmental Reviews 5. Financial Information 6. Public Participation Documentation 7. Compliance Documentation 8. Capacity AssessmentProject DWSRF Questionnaires due February 29Tennessee's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) with an Ability to Pay Index (ATPI) lower than 50 points. The index is derived from a database of socioeconomic and financial data. The Index is also used to determine how much assistance a small or disadvantaged community is eligible to receive in the form of reduced interest rates or principal forgiveness. Communities with greater economic need are given a higher priority ranking.Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. In the funding cycle analyzed here, Tennessee allocated approximately 33% of its base grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. 		Projects are prioritized based on the number of priority points awarded to them on the SFY24 PPL. The projects with the highest number of priority points and that are ready to proceed are given preference for funding, particularly the FFY23 base allotment and BIL supplemental capitalization grant funding. This prioritization emphasizes projects that are prepared to proceed with planning or construction, including those from small and disadvantaged communities, green and resilient infrastructure projects, and projects with subsidies. The scoring system is not detailed in the SFY24 IUP.

Tennessee caps the amount of principal forgiveness each borrower can receive at 50% PF for DACs, with a maximum amount of $5 million per project from IIJA supplemental capitalization grant funding. Once PF funds from the IIJA supplemental capitalization grant are exhausted, PF from the base capitalization grant will be distributed on a first come, first serve basis. See SFY24 IUP pp.18-20 for more information.		Cities/Towns, Water Districts, Counties, State Agencies, Rural Water AssociationsProjects that address water quality issues, Leakage Problems,
Source water or capacity challenges, Pressure Issues,
Water Storage, Water Supply Line Replacement and Rehabilitation		There are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside. Tennessee is using 12.7% of its base capitalization grant, 26.5% of its general supplemental capitalization grant, and 10.5% of its IIJA lead capitalization grant for set aside activities. Tennessee’s use of set asides from all FFY23 capitalization grants is detailed on pp. 25-39 of the SFY24 IUP.https://swefcsrfswitchboard.unm.edu/resources/tennessee/Tennessee%20DWSRF%20Legislation.pdfhttps://www.tn.gov/environment/program-areas/wr-water-resources/srfp/srf-home/drinking-water-state-revolving-fund/drinking-water-intended-use-plan.html
45
TexasTexas Water Development Boardhttps://www.twdb.texas.gov/financial/programs/DWSRF/index.aspDWSRFMarket Rate65-70%30-35% reduction (65-70%) of Thomson Reuters Municipal Market Data (MMD) rate applicable to borrower's ratingup to 30 yearsqualification as DAC2% origination fee at closing1. Submit Letter of Intent for Project Priority Listing 2. Submit Application for LoanNone - rolling basisTexas's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
An eligible disadvantaged community consists of all of the following:

The service area of an eligible applicant, the service area of a community that is located outside the entity’s service area, or a portion within the entity’s service area if the proposed project is providing new service to existing residents in unserved areas; and
Meets the following affordability criteria:
Has an Annual Median Household Income (AMHI) that is no more than 75 percent of the state median household income using an acceptable source of socioeconomic data, and
The Household Cost Factor (HCF) that considers income, unemployment rates, and population trends must be greater than or equal to 1 percent if only water or sewer service is provided or greater than or equal to 2 percent if both water and sewer service are provided.

In addition to principal forgiveness, Texas provides interest rate subsidy and an extended loan repayment term to all state-defined DACs.

For emerging contaminants funding, an entity is considered a DAC if it:
May have emerging contaminants, and
51 percent or more of the proposed project beneficiary area based on household connections has an Annual Median Household Income (AMHI) level that does not exceed 150 percent of the state’s AMHI level, and
The unemployment rate for the project beneficiaries is greater than 50 percent of the state unemployment rate or the population has declined or the utility is a small system with 25,000 or fewer connections for the applicable utility service. Small Systems is defined as public water systems serving fewer than 25,000 people.
This funding option offers 100 percent principal forgiveness.

See Appendix D in each IUP for details.		Of the FFY22 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). In the funding cycle analyzed here, Texas proposes to allocate 17.9% of its base grant as principal forgiveness (PF) for DACs.

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. In addition to PF for DACs, Texas is providing PF for green projects, emergency preparedness-severe weather, and urgent needs.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Texas scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Appendices C (Rating Criteria) and D (Criteria to Determine Disadvantaged Community Eligibility) of each IUP.

The maximum loan/bond commitment amount a project may receive under the SFY24 IUP is $49 million (15% of loan/bond capacity). Zero interest loans are capped at $10 million.

Texas provides the following amounts of principal forgiveness based on project type:
70% of project costs remaining after subtracting other DWSRF Principal forgiveness/additional subsidization for DACs
Up to $1,000,000 in PF per project/entity for Small or Rural DACs
Up to 15% of DWSRF-funded green costs for Green Project Reserve projects.
Up to $400,000 per project for very small systems
Up to $75,000 per entity for emergency preparedness
See the table on p. 9 and Section VI, pp. 11-17 for additional details.

For emerging contaminants grants, projects that address any contaminant listed on any of EPA’s contaminant candidate lists are eligible, but Texas is prioritizing PFAS.

Projects must meet the disadvantaged criteria to receive LSLR funding.		Cities/Towns, Water Districts, Counties, State Agencies, Rural Water AssociationsNew Drinking Water Infrastructure, Upgrading Existing InfrastructureThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Texas is making partial use (9.5% of the combined base and supplemental capitalization grants) of set aside allowances in SFY23. See pp. 31-32 for details. Texas’s Sources and Uses table (p.46) indicates that it will also draw upon previously reserved set asides in the amount of $14.3 million. Set-aside work plans are filed separately.

Texas indicates it will draw 4% administrative and technical assistance set-asides from the FFY 2022 lead and emerging Capitalization Grants.		https://texreg.sos.state.tx.us/public/readtac$ext.TacPage?sl=R&app=9&p_dir=&p_rloc=&p_tloc=&p_ploc=&pg=1&p_tac=&ti=31&pt=10&ch=354&rl=3https://www.twdb.texas.gov/financial/programs/DWSRF/index.asp
46
UtahUtah Department of Environmental Qualityhttps://deq.utah.gov/drinking-water/federal-state-revolving-fund-srf-program-drinking-waterDWSRFMarket RateVariableSet upon project priority ranking based upon Revenue Bond Buyer Index (RBBI) as base rategenerally 30 years; up to 40 years for DACsqualification as DAC for 40-year term (lesser of 40 years or useful asset life)1% loan origination fee1. Project Identification 2. Screening Application 3. Debt Authorization 4. Project Finance ApplicationNone - rolling basisThe Board has defined disadvantaged communities as those communities located in an area which has a median adjusted gross income which is less than or equal to 80% of the State’s median adjusted gross income, as determined by the Utah State Tax Commission from federal individual income tax returns excluding zero exemption returns, or where the established annual cost of drinking water service to the average residential user exceeds 1.75% of the median adjusted gross income. n/aUtah scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described under the B-2 Loan Program (pp. 21). The Safe Drinking Water Board may modify a project’s priority ranking in accordance with Utah Administrative Code Rule R309-705. Table 2 in UAC R309-705-6 is used to determine the reduction of the interest rate (or other rate) which potentially may be reduced to zero percent.

In the SFY24 IUP Table 4, only 11 out of 45 projects ranked on the PPL are designated for assistance through principal forgiveness.


Utah’s priority list operates on a rolling application system, where projects are assigned a priority rating that can be later modified by the Safe Drinking Water Board based on conditions codified in R309-705. Because of the quick pace of the rolling application system it is possible that a water project fails to be included in any IUP. 		Community public water systems owned by private persoons or municipalities, non-profit organizations, and community water systemsTreatment, Transmission and Distribution, Source, Storage, Consolidation, Creation of New SystemsThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

https://regulations.justia.com/states/utah/environmental-quality/title-r309/rule-r309-705/https://deq.utah.gov/drinking-water/federal-state-revolving-fund-srf-program-drinking-water
47
VermontVermont Department of Environmental Conservationhttps://dec.vermont.gov/water-investment/water-financing/dwsrfDWSRFFixed RateFixedCurrently offered at 0% interestup to 20 years; up to 40 years for DACsqualification as DAC; 40 years or asset useful life, whichever is lesser0-2.75% administrative fee (1.5% reduction for DACs)1. Project Identification 2. Screening Application 3. Debt Authorization 4. Project Finance ApplicationNone - rolling basisVermont defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as by statute in 24 V.S.A. § 4752 (12). The definition reads as follows:
Disadvantaged municipality” means a municipality or the served area of a municipality that:
(A) has a median household income (MHI) below the State average MHI as determined by the Secretary and that, after construction of the proposed water supply improvements, will have an annual household user cost greater than one percent of the MHI as determined by the Secretary; or
(B) has an MHI equal to or greater than the State average MHI as determined by the Secretary and that, after construction of the proposed water supply improvements, will have an annual household user cost greater than 2.5 percent of the MHI as determined by the Secretary.

For the purposes of LSL, “disadvantaged community” means a municipality or served area of a municipality that has an MHI less than or equal to 120% of the statewide MHI.

In addition to principal forgiveness, Vermont provides extended loan repayment terms of up to 40 years or the life of the project to state-defined DACs. 		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). In the funding cycle analyzed here, Vermont opted to allocate 35% of its base grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. Vermont is using this amount to provide subsidies for planning projects.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less.

This IUP also distributes unallocated PF funds from prior years, including the following:
$450,000 in funds previously transferred from the CWSRF to the DWSRF under the 2019 Water Infrastructure Fund Transfer Act (WIFTA). These funds are distributed in the form of principal forgiveness for lead-related projects.
$9,876,951 in Disadvantaged Community subsidy from the 2022 Lead Service Line Grant		Vermont provides the following amounts of principal forgiveness:
Loan type
Eligibility
PF amount
General planning projects
Any loan recipient
25% loan forgiveness, up to $70,000 per project
LSL planning (including inventories)
DAC
100% loan forgiveness up to $100,000, 50% loan forgiveness for portion over $100,000 (or more depending on availability of funds)
Emerging contaminants - planning
Any loan recipient
100% loan forgiveness, up to $50,000.
Construction – general
DAC
50% loan forgiveness, up to an amount needed to meet affordability criteria. If the project also receives EC funding, general grant is limited to $1 million. (No cap on EC portion)
Construction - LSL replacement
DAC
50% loan forgiveness, no cap


Construction - EC
Any loan recipient
100% loan forgiveness; caps specified on p. 28


Principal forgiveness is allocated to projects on a first-come, first-served basis in Vermont.		All publicly and privately owned community water systems and non-transient non-profit public water systemsDistribution & Storage Tanks, Tank Upgrade & Rehabilitation, Water Meters, Line Replacement, Treatment Plant ImprovementsThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Vermont intends to use 31% of its base capitalization grant for set asides, 29% from its supplemental capitalization grant, 26.7% from its lead grant, and 10% from its emerging contaminants grant. Details on the use of set aside plans can be found in the FFY24 IUP.		http://legislature.vermont.gov/statutes/chapter/10/055https://dec.vermont.gov/water-investment/water-financing/srf/intended-use-plans
48
VirginiaVirginia Department of Health, Virginia Resources Authorityhttps://www.vdh.virginia.gov/drinking-water/dwsrf/DWSRFMarket RateVariableCeiling rate - 100 to 150 basis points (1-1.5%) below MMD yield (muni bond rates); for DACs, look at demographics/income statistics for 0% loans and principal forgivenessup to 30 years; 40 years for DACslesser of 30 years or useful life of asset; up to 40 years for DACsup to 1.5% administration fee1. Proposed Financing 2. Project Information 3. Project Description 4. Project Issues 5. Project Schedule and Readiness to Proceed Documentation 5. Technical, Managerial, and Financial Review Section 6. Project Budget 7. Sustainability (Asset Management Plan) Construction Application Materials - May 3 2024; LSLI - March 31, 2024; LSLR - May 3, 2024; Fluoridation Grant Applications - June 30, 2024; Planning & Design Applications - Rolling BasisVirginia’s DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged waterworks” as those who currently have or will have after project completion, user rates that meet or exceed the target rate (1% of MHI) or are willing to adjust/raise rates in accordance with a VDH approved schedule. Additionally, Virginia has adopted the use of the White House CEJST tool and EPA’s EJ Screening Tool to expand criteria to identify “disadvantaged waterworks” in order to comply with IIJA requirements.

In addition to principal forgiveness, Virginia provides extended loan terms and below market rate loans to all state-defined DACs. 		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. In the funding cycle analyzed here, Virginia allocated at least 26% of its base grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Virginia updated its scoring criteria in 2023, moving from a tiered system to a system based on total points. The largest point values are assigned to projects addressing public health, followed by infrastructure, compliance, consolidation, and, finally, other considerations. Under the revised Manual, lead “LEAP” projects are scored and ranked separately, as described in Attachment D to the Manual.

In an effort to accelerate the removal of lead exposure to drinking water, the DWSRF Program has made funding available for the complete removal of the public and/or private portion of LSLs. The funding package under this special program is 100% as principal forgiveness, up to $500,000 per applicant, per funding year for replacement work and up to $250,000 for inventory development.

Principal forgiveness amounts are listed on the FFY23 PPL for all projects.		Political subdivisions (cities, towns, counties), regional water authorities, privately owned community systems and non-profit non-community systemsWater Treatment Plant Improvements, Distribution System Upgrades, Source Water Protection, System Consolidation and Restructuring, Compliance Projects, Water Conservation and Efficiency, Resilience and SustainabilityThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Virginia is requesting a portion of set aside funding from its FFY23 base and supplemental capitalization grants, and is banking the remainder of available set asides from these grants for use in a future year. Virginia is not requesting any set aside funding from its IIJA lead or emerging contaminants funding. See FFY23 IUP, PDF pp.10-14 and Attachment 4 for more information.		https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacodefull/title62.1/chapter23/https://www.vdh.virginia.gov/drinking-water/drinking-water-state-revolving-fund-program/
49
WashingtonWashington State Department of Healthhttps://doh.wa.gov/community-and-environment/drinking-water/water-system-assistance/drinking-water-state-revolving-fund-dwsrfDWSRFFixed RateFormulaAffordability Index formula (MHI, monthly water rate, loan amount, total connections): 1.25-1.75% rate range; loan fee waivers availableup to 10 years for preconstruction; up to 20 years for construction30 year terms not available2% origination fee for preconstruction loans, 1. Submit Pre-Application 2. Final Loan Application None - rolling basisWashington’s IUP does not contain a definition of “disadvantaged community.” Subsidy eligibility for SFY23 appears to be based primarily on the affordability index, described on p. 18 of the IUP.

Washington Administrative Code section 246-296-020 (9) defines “disadvantaged community” as: "Disadvantaged community" means the service area of a proposed project within a public water system where the project will result in: (a) Water rates that are more than one and one-half percent of the MHI of the service area; or (b) Restructuring, when one or more public water systems are having financial difficulties.

Revising the state’s disadvantaged community definition is listed as a short-term goal of the program. The 2023 Construction Loan Guidelines, linked in Appendix A of the Base, Supplemental, and EC IUP, appear to have a robust discussion of DACs. It is unclear whether this section existed in the 2022 version of this document or whether the 2023 document will apply to the loans in this Base, Supplemental, and EC IUP.

In addition to principal forgiveness, Washington provides reduced interest rates and waives loan fees for qualifying DACs.		Of the FFY22 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. In the funding cycle analyzed here, Washington opted to allocate a total of 39% of its base grant as principal forgiveness for DACs.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less.		Washington scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the eligibility criteria described on pp. 14-20 of the Base, Supplemental, and EC IUP and the project prioritization ranking system established in separate Drinking Water State Revolving Program Construction Loan Guidelines. Appendix A of the IUP provides a link to these guidelines.

Washington determines eligibility for subsidy based on an affordability index, determined using a formula that considers an applicant’s water rates and median household income. Starting with the highest scoring applicants, the program awarded subsidy using the following criteria:
Water systems with an affordability index of 2.01–3.50 percent will receive 30 percent principal forgiveness on their loan.
Water systems with an affordability index of 3.51 percent or more will receive 50 percent principal forgiveness on their loan.
Restructuring and consolidation projects that involve acquiring other noncompliant, failing, or struggling public water systems that have water quality problems or deteriorated infrastructure will receive 50 percent principal forgiveness on their loan. Note that in future years, all consolidation projects will need to meet the affordability criteria to receive subsidy.
In order to meet the grant subsidy requirements, all eligible subsidy recipients received greater than a 50% subsidy in SFY24.

Projects are ranked for the distribution of principal forgiveness based on how they are ranked according to the state’s project scoring system, and principal forgiveness is distributed to projects in rank order until principal forgiveness funds are exhausted. Projects for DACs at the top of the list are likely to receive some principal forgiveness, but projects for DACs lower on the list are less likely to receive any principal forgiveness. 		Community water systems (municipal and privately owned), non-profit non-community water systemsTreatment Plant Improvements, Distribution Upgrades, Storage, Source Development, Consolidation, Water Meter Installation, Resilience and Sustainability, Compliance with Health StandardsThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Washington will utilize the full 31% of its federal base and BIL supplemental capitalization grants for set-aside activities. For details of Washington’s use of set aside funds, see pp. 8-12 of the IUP.		https://www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/washington/title-246/water-systems/chapter-246-296https://doh.wa.gov/community-and-environment/drinking-water/water-system-assistance/drinking-water-state-revolving-fund-dwsrf
50
West VirginiaOffice of Environmental Health Serviceshttps://oehs.wvdhhr.org/eed/infrastructure-capacity-development/west-virginia-drinking-water-treatment-revolving-fund-dwtrf/DWTRFMarket RateVariableRates based below AAA Municipal Yield Market rates as benchmark; 2.75% for non-disadvantaged systems, .5-1.25% for DACs based upon Affordability Standard of annual water rates20 years non-disadvantaged; up to 30 years for DACs; possible extension to 40-year term qualification as DAC; lesser of 40 years or useful asset life.25% unpaid loan balance paid evenly over life of loan1. Complete Preliminary Application 2. Apply for Inclusion in next Project Priority List (PPL) None - rolling basisWest Virginia’s DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
West Virginia’s DAC determination is based on points assigned in the categories of affordability, unemployment, population trends, consolidation and regionalization, and poverty rate. See pp. 10-11 of the SFY24 IUP for details.

In addition to principal forgiveness, West Virginia offers extended loan repayment terms (up to 40 years), reduced interest rates, and deferred principal repayments to state-defined DACs.		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. West Virginia plans to use 49% of the base capitalization grant as principal forgiveness.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less.		Projects requesting DWSRF funding assistance are prioritized using the DWSRF Project Priority Ranking System. Three categories (public health, regulatory compliance, and affordability) are used to determine project scoring. The ranking system allows for higher public health ranking for utilities that have multiple violations as reflected in the Enforcement Targeting Tool (ETT). The ranking system allows coordination of projects funded with consideration of the enforcement agency. The project scoring and ranking system is not provided in the SFY24 IUP.

For applicants that receive at least 40 points in the DAC eligibility calculation, the project is eligible for the lesser of 50% of the total eligible DWTRF project costs or $1,000,000 in principal forgiveness. For applicants that receive at least 70 points, the project is eligible for the lesser of 100% of the total eligible DWTRF project costs or $1,500,000 in principal forgiveness. The final amount of the subsidy will be determined after receipt of bids and after a formal application is submitted.

Additional loan subsidization is a last resort for disadvantaged communities and will only be provided when other funding options within the DWTRF program are not practical to make the project financially affordable (i.e. 40-year loan terms, deferred principal repayments, reduced debt service coverage, etc.).

Applicants do not need to qualify as a DAC in order to receive emerging contaminants funding.		Cities, Counties, Special Districts, Private Water SystemsWater Treatment PLants, Distribution and Storage Systems, Extensions of Existing SystemsThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

West Virginia is making partial use of set aside allowances. See details of West Virginia’s use of set aside funds on p. 10 of the SFY24 IUP. Set-aside work plans are not included in the SFY24 IUP.		https://code.wvlegislature.gov/22-36/https://oehs.wvdhhr.org/eed/infrastructure-capacity-development/intended-use-plans/
51
WisconsinWisconsin Department of Natural Resourceshttps://dnr.wisconsin.gov/aid/EIF.htmlSDWLPMarket Rate33-55%Rates at 33-55% of state market rate (rate would have been paid if fixed-rate revenue bond issued at time loan is originated)generally 20 years; up to 30 years for certain eligible projectslesser of 30 years or useful life of asset; asset cost-weighted average design life must be documented.25% loan service fee included in interest rate1. Identify Problem and Contract with Engineering Consultant 2. Notice of Intent to Apply (ITA) and Priority Evaluation & Ranking Formula (PERF) 3. Loan ApplicationJune 30 - Financial Assistance Application for Upcoming Fiscal Year Funding Cycle, Sep 30 - Loan Closing Deadline for Prior Year's Funding Cycle, Oct 31 - Notice of Intent to Apply (ITA) for Following Fiscal Year Funding CycleWisconsin's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
Wisconsin determines PF eligibility for DACs based on a score calculated based on the following attributes of the municipality:
Population
Median household Income (MHI) as compared to statewide MHI
Poverty rates
Population trends
County unemployment rates
Lowest quintile household income upper limit
Municipalities are assigned points for each attribute and the total points determine what percentage PF the municipality can qualify for, ranging from 0% to 65% of the loan. See pp. 15-17 of the SFY24 IUP for details. Lead projects are subject to a modified DAC determination that removes population and population trends and allows up to 100% PF for private-side lead service line replacements. See p. 23 of the SFY24 IUP for details.

In addition to principal forgiveness, Wisconsin provides a reduced interest rate to state-defined DACs with populations less than 10,000 and median household incomes (MHIs) less than or equal to 80% of the state’s MHI.		Of the FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients In the funding cycle analyzed here, Wisconsin opted to allocate 26% of its base grant as principal forgiveness.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less.

In addition, $7,205,193 of unallocated PF from FFY 2022 is being rolled forward to SFY 2024. 		Wisconsin scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the priority evaluation and ranking system for the SDWLP that is detailed in Subchapter III of ch. NR 166, Wis. Admin. Code as modified by the annual IUP. Priority scoring criteria can be found at Wis. Admin. Code NR 166.23 and relevant modifications can be found in Section X of the SFY24 IUP, pp. 13-15.

Wis. Stat. 281.61 (8) (bL) mandates that in any biennium, no applicant may receive more than 25% of the amount of financial assistance planned to be provided for projects for that biennium. For the 2023-2025 biennium, the 25% limit is $55,600,000.

Wisconsin provides principal forgiveness each borrower can receive at rates ranging from 10%-65% of the loan. Green Tier legacy communities are eligible for an additional 10% PF. Projects that are providing disinfection where it was not previously provided are also eligible for an additional 10% PF. PF is capped at 70% of total project costs and $1,600,000 per municipality per year.

Projects are ranked for the distribution of principal forgiveness based on how they are ranked according to the state’s project scoring system, and principal forgiveness is distributed to projects in rank order until principal forgiveness funds are exhausted.

Principal Forgiveness amounts may shift between projects within the fundable range on the Final Funding List. If any PF remains after all projects in the fundable range have closed their loans, this PF will be moved forward to the next year’s funding list. No PF will roll down past the last project identified in the fundable range for PF on the Final SFY 2024 Funding List.

Lead-specific scoring and PF eligibility can be found on pp. 21-23 of the SFY24 IUP. Lead projects are eligible for up to 100% PF.

For emerging contaminants projects, priority scores are determined based on the risk to human health, financial need, and system capacity. The scoring system is described on pp. 1-2 of the FFY22 EC Amendment for SFY23 grants and on pp. 28-28 of the SFY24 IUP for SFY24 grants.

Once all projects eligible for EC funding are scored and ranked, EC PF will be allocated for SFY23 grants using a two-pass process, starting at the top of the scoring list:
Pass 1 - Water systems receive 70% of total project costs as EC PF up to a cap of $500,000. Once all eligible projects are awarded the first-round allocation, additional EC funding will be allocated in EC priority score order to all projects that have not reached 70% of total project costs in Pass 1.
Pass 2 - EC PF allocated for 70% of remaining eligible project costs, up to a total EC PF cap per water system of $5,000,000.

For SFY24 grants, EC PF will be allocated using a two-pass process, starting at the top of the scoring list:
Pass 1 - Water systems receive 50% of total project costs as EC PF up to a cap of $500,000. Once all eligible projects are awarded the first-round allocation, additional EC funding will be allocated in EC priority score order to all projects that have not reached 50% of total project costs in Pass 1.
Pass 2 - EC PF allocated for 50% of remaining eligible project costs, up to a total EC PF cap per water system of $3,500,000.
Exception: For any water system that qualifies for more than 50% of general PF, the general PF percentage will be used during Pass 1 and 2.
EC projects that qualify for general PF that are not fully funded by the EC PF allocation methodology described here, will receive priority when allocating general PF.

A lifetime EC PF cap may be imposed at a later date.

Due to the proximity of the application deadlines of the SFY 2023 and SFY 2024 EC programs, municipalities that are allocated EC PF in SFY 2023 that also apply for SFY 2024 will have the opportunity to accept either their SFY 2023 or their SFY 2024 EC PF allocation. The SFY23 EC program was set up to meet demand as quickly as possible, and the PF allocation methodology is different between the two funding years. This will allow applicants in both years the flexibility to accept the award that is most favorable to their needs. Any applicant choosing to utilize this option will have to choose which allocation they are using before the final SFY 2024 funding list is posted. Any unallocated or unused EC PF from SFY 2023 will be rolled over into the next year’s EC PF funding cycle.		Cities, Towns, Villages, Counties, Sanitary Districts, Other Qualifying MunicipalitiesPlanning/Design/Construction of Drinking Water Treatment, Storage, Distribution, Transmission, and Sourcing InfrastructureThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Wisconsin is using the following amounts of its capitalization grants for set aside activities:
31% of its base capitalization grant
18% of its supplemental capitalization grant
17.4% of its FFY23 lead capitalization grant
1.5% of its emerging contaminant capitalization grant.
See Section V of the SFY24 IUP for a discussion of set-aside banking and Section XII.B, XIV.E, and XV for planned uses of the set-asides. 		https://casetext.com/regulation/wisconsin-administrative-code/agency-department-of-natural-resources/environmental-protection-general/chapter-nr-166-safe-drinking-water-loan-programhttps://dnr.wisconsin.gov/aid/projectListsIUPs.html
52
WyomingWyoming Department of Environmental Qualityhttps://deq.wyoming.gov/water-quality/water-wastewater/state-revolving-loan-fund/DWSRFMarket RateVariableCurrent rates from .5-2.5% based upon Range of Yield Curve Scales for 20-year BAA rated bonds; 0% loans available in some instancesgenerally 20 years; 30 years available for DACsqualify as DAC.5% loan origination fee at closing1. Project Proposal 2. Preliminary Engineering Report 3. Environmental ReportNone - rolling basisWyoming's DWSRF program defines “disadvantaged community” (DAC) as follows:
Wyoming determines if an applicant is disadvantaged by awarding points based on population trend, income data, unemployment data, enterprise system rate management, and the prior year’s property tax and four percent (4%) sales tax collections, as described in Wyoming Administrative Code s. 060-16-3, Section 4. A community who scores at least three points under Wyoming’s criteria is considered disadvantaged.

In addition to principal forgiveness, Wyoming provides reduced interest rates and extended loan repayment periods (up to 30 years) to state-defined DACs.		Of the FFY22 and FFY23 base DWSRF funds, states are required by federal law to allocate a minimum of 12% and not more than 35% of their base DWSRF grant as additional subsidies for state-defined disadvantaged communities (DACs). States are further required to provide an additional 14% of the federal capitalization grant as additional subsidies to eligible recipients. Wyoming provides additional subsidization, up to 49% of its base capitalization grants, in the form of principal forgiveness.

Forty-nine percent of general supplemental and lead funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as principal forgiveness (PF) or grants to state-defined DACs. One hundred percent of emerging contaminants funds appropriated through IIJA must be provided as PF, with at least 25% of this to state-defined DACs or systems serving a population of 10,000 or less. 		Wyoming scores and ranks projects for DWSRF assistance according to the project prioritization criteria described in Appendix [3] to the SFY24 IUP.

Principal forgiveness eligibility is determined based on the number of points received under Wyoming’s disadvantaged community criteria:
9 points or more = up to 75% PF
6-8 points = 50% PF
3-5 points = 25% PF
Under 3 points = not considered disadvantaged and not eligible for additional subsidies.
The rules also allow eligibility based only on income criteria in cases where Principal Forgiveness does not need to be linked to disadvantaged community criteria.

Projects are ranked for the distribution of principal forgiveness based on how they are ranked according to the state’s project scoring system, and principal forgiveness is distributed to projects in rank order until principal forgiveness funds are exhausted. Projects for DACs at the top of the list are likely to receive some principal forgiveness, but projects for DACs lower on the list are less likely to receive any principal forgiveness. 		state agencies, counties, municipalities, joint powers boards, and other entities constituting a political subdivision under the laws of the state (such as various types of special districts)New Drinking Water Infrastructure, Upgrading Existing InfrastructureThere are four set asides that a state may take from each DWSRF capitalization grant including: a 2% small system technical assistance set aside, a 4% DWSRF Program administration set aside, a 10% Public Water Supply Program management set aside, and a 15% source water protection/capacity development set aside.

Wyoming is making use of set aside allowances. See table on pp. 6-7 for details on total amounts taken. See details on Wyoming’s use of set asides on pp. 11-13 of the SFY24 IUP.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/regulations/wyoming/agency-060/subagency-0003/chapter-31https://lands.wyo.gov/grants-loans/loans/drinking-water-state-revolving-funds
53
54
Rate BenchmarkNumber of States
55
Market Rate33
56
Fixed Rate17
57
Total50
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
Rate StructureNumber of States
71
Market - Formula7
72
Market - Tiered4
73
Market - Percentage14
74
Market - Variable10
75
Fixed - Fixed7
76
Fixed - Formula1
77
Fixed - Tiered6
78
Fixed - Variable1
79
Total50
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100