S.Hrg.119-296

1[Senate Hearing 119-296]2[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]34                                                        S. Hrg. 119-29656             BUILDING ON THE IIJA'S SUCCESSES: IDENTIFYING7                   OPPORTUNITIES TO STRENGTHEN WATER8                        INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMS910=======================================================================1112                                HEARING1314                               before the1516                              COMMITTEE ON17                      ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS1819                          UNITED STATES SENATE2021                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS2223                             FIRST SESSION24                               __________2526                             April 30, 202527                               __________2829  Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works3031                 [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]3233        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov34                               ______3536                 U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE373862-895                    WASHINGTON : 20263940               COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS4142                    ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS4344                             FIRST SESSION4546             SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia, Chairman47            SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island, Ranking Member4849KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota           BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont50CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming           JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon51JOHN R. CURTIS, Utah                 EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts52LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina    MARK KELLY, Arizona53DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska                 ALEX PADILLA, California54PETE RICKETTS, Nebraska              ADAM B. SCHIFF, California55ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi         LISA BLUNT ROCHESTER, Delaware56JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas               ANGELA D. ALSOBROOKS, Maryland57JON HUSTED, Ohio5859               Adam Tomlinson, Republican Staff Director60                  Dan Dudis, Democratic Staff Director6162                            C O N T E N T S6364                              ----------65                                                                   Page6667                             APRIL 30, 202568                           OPENING STATEMENTS6970Capito, Hon. Shelley Moore, U.S. Senator from the State of West71  Virginia.......................................................     172Schiff, Hon. Adam, U.S. Senator from the State of California.....     37374                               WITNESSES7576Dreyfuss-Wells, Kyle, Chief Executive Officer, Northeast Ohio77  Regional Sewer District, on behalf of The National Association78  of Clean Water Agencies........................................     579    Prepared statement...........................................     880    Responses to additional questions from:81        Senator Markey...........................................    1082        Senator Blunt Rochester..................................    1383Goulette, Tom, City Administrator/Utility Superintendent, West84  Point, Nebraska, on behalf of The National Rural Water85  Association....................................................    1686    Prepared statement...........................................    1887    Responses to additional questions from Senator Blunt88      Rochester..................................................    3089Oswald, Eric J., President, Association of State Drinking Water90  Administrators.................................................    3391    Prepared statement...........................................    3692    Responses to additional questions from:93        Senator Markey...........................................    4194        Senator Blunt Rochester..................................    469596                          ADDITIONAL MATERIAL9798Letter to Senator Capito and Senator Whitehouse from:99    Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies...................    63100    California Association of Sanitation Agencies................    72101Letter to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works102  from the Community Water Center................................    73103104             BUILDING ON THE IIJA'S SUCCESSES: IDENTIFYING105                   OPPORTUNITIES TO STRENGTHEN WATER106                        INFRASTRUCTURE PROGRAMS107108                              ----------109110                       WEDNESDAY, APRIL 30, 2025111112                                       U.S. Senate,113                 Committee on Environment and Public Works,114                                                    Washington, DC.115    The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m. in116room 562, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Shelley Moore117Capito (chairman of the committee) presiding.118    Present: Senators Capito, Sullivan, Ricketts, Boozman,119Husted, Padilla, Schiff, Blunt Rochester, Alsobrooks.120121        OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO,122          U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA123124    Senator Capito. Good morning, everybody. We are in our new125temporary hearing room for several months, maybe as much as a126year, while they remodel our hearing room. I think most of us127would admit who have to walk behind the dais of our regular128hearing room, it needs some readjustments. We are trying to get129back to the way it was historically. We will be meeting here,130and actually, this is a little bit larger than ours, so it is131quite nice.132    I want to thank everybody for being here. I think Senator133Whitehouse is unable to come today. I know he is very134interested in this topic, but he is not going to be here.135Senator Schiff is going to kind of run the show for his side,136and we will be in and out. I do not want the witnesses to take137any offense that people are in and out. There is lots going on138today in various committees.139    I will give my opening statement, then Senator Boozman is140going to take the gavel while I run out and over to Commerce. I141am sure you have other meetings as well, too; everybody does.142    Welcome to the witnesses. Welcome to today's hearing to143examine the policies to strengthen our Nation's water144infrastructure. Again, I want to thank the witnesses for145joining us, and the important work that you do every single day146to deliver safe, reliable water and sanitation services in your147various communities.148    This is our first hearing to discuss how we can build on149the successes of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act150(IIJA), the IIJA, the water infrastructure provisions, as we151prepare bipartisan legislation to reauthorize those programs.152In November 2021, Congress passed the IIJA, which included the153Drinking Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Act, a bipartisan154bill that was developed, negotiated, and championed by this155committee. It is one of the bases of the IIJA.156    That legislation represented the largest Federal investment157in water infrastructure in our Nation's history, delivering158more than $50 billion for drinking water, wastewater, and159stormwater programs. Since then, thousands of projects have160started, including projects to upgrade treatment plants,161replace aging systems and support the needs of our small162communities. In short, this law is moving our Nation's water163infrastructure systems forward.164    Despite this progress, the historic investment of the IIJA165expires next year. We must get to work now to build on that166progress, while addressing any concerns with its167implementation.168    As we work together to reauthorize the IIJA water programs,169I will prioritize policies that strengthen underserved170communities' abilities to deliver water projects, reinforce the171cooperative federalism principle embedded in our laws, and172focus our outcomes on outcomes that prioritize safe water and173sound infrastructure.174    I can say anecdotally in my small State of West Virginia175there are still pockets of our communities that do not have the176access to clean water or drinking water that they should, and177deserve to have. Achieving those goals requires us to take a178clear-eyed look at the challenges communities face and ensure179the tools we are provided are as effective and as accessible as180possible.181    First, we must seek to simplify the delivery mechanisms for182water infrastructure funding. This is a repeating theme in just183about everything that we have been looking at. Many small and184underserved communities continue to face barriers to access to185Federal money.186    Communities may struggle with capacity, technical187complexities and long Federal timelines of dispersing the188funding. This can lead to communities giving up before they189even get a shovel in the ground.190    We can fix these issues by providing targeted technical191resources and assistance to help utilities and local192governments navigate complex funding applications and193simplifying the Environmental Protection Agency's processes.194    Second, our reauthorization should reinforce what works,195including honoring the foundational principle of cooperative196federalism. For decades, the Clean Water Act and Safe Drinking197Water Act have recognized that States, not Washington, are best198positioned to understand the infrastructure needs of our199communities. Federal funding and oversight are important, but200implementation must be led by the States.201    The Biden Environmental Protection Agency, EPA, shifted202away from that balance that Congress intended between Federal203support and State leadership by pushing one-size-fits-all204mandates and layering on new criteria that go far beyond what205Congress has authorized.206    We have also seen the increased emphasis on environmental207justice initiatives. While the goal of supporting all208underserved communities regardless of background is broadly209supported, implementation of these environmental justice210initiatives has at times departed from the statute's original211direction and strayed from that broader goal.212    Directing resources to underserved communities was a shared213goal when we wrote the IIJA and the commitment remains. We did214not write a law that allows agencies to introduce new215eligibility standards or funding formulas that may216unintentionally overlook real infrastructure needs or second217guess shared priorities and State priorities. That approach is218not only counterproductive; it risks leaving behind the very219communities that these programs were designed to help.220    Across the Country, many low-income and underserved221communities continue to grapple with major water infrastructure222needs, yet rigid eligibility requirements in recent funding223programs have left some of them behind. That runs counter to224the bipartisan goals that we set when this law was written, to225ensure all communities have a fair opportunity to benefit from226these important programs. That is why we dedicated funds for227systems of different sizes, and why we provided State Revolving228Funds the flexibility for each State to meet their individual229needs.230    This committee worked in a bipartisan way to craft these231programs, and going forward, implementation must remain true to232the intent, not drift into interpretations that complicate233access or confuse applicants.234    My third guiding principle is that a successful bill and235implementation of EPA water programs must be focused on236outcomes. Enacting policies that are not consistently driven by237successful outcomes will help ensure that every American, no238matter where they live, can count on the basic services that239they deserve. That is what the committee has always focused on240and it is what I will continue to prioritize as the Chair.241    I look forward to hearing from our witnesses, and to kick242up our work to reauthorize and improve our Nation's water243infrastructure programs.244    I will now recognize Senator Schiff, the Ranking Member of245the Fisheries, Water, and Wildlife Subcommittee, and as I have246said earlier, he will give an opening statement in lieu of247Ranking Member Whitehouse's absence.248    Senator Schiff, you are recognized. Thank you.249250            OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ADAM SCHIFF,251           U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA252253    Senator Schiff. Thank you, Chair Capito, for your focus on254improving community water infrastructure and for your hard work255on the water provisions in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law256that we are talking about today.257    I want to thank the witnesses for being here to discuss258this important topic. As the Chair mentioned, Senator259Whitehouse could not be here today, and I am happy to step in260for him in my role as Ranking Member on the Fisheries, Water,261and Wildlife Subcommittee.262    Reliable access to safe drinking water is a right, not a263privilege. We all understand that we cannot survive without a264safe and reliable supply of water. Yet there are far too many265communities in my home State of California and across the266Country that struggle with old, dilapidated water267infrastructure and lead pipes. These systems need to be brought268into the 21st century.269    We do not use lead in our water service lines any more,270because we know that there is no safe level of lead in our271water. Lead can cause fertility problems for men and women,272high blood pressure, nervous system disorders, memory issues,273and decreased kidney function. Lead exposure is especially274dangerous for children. It can cause children to suffer from275lowered IQ, behavioral problems, slowed growth, and hearing276issues.277    We have known all this for a while now. It is why the U.S.278Government has invested so much on a bipartisan basis on lead279abatement. Yet more than nine million lead service lines run280through communities across America. These pipes are not cheap281to find, remove, and replace. I can tell you this: it remains282absolutely necessary that we do so.283    This is not optional; it is not something that we can284minimize or defund.285    Water systems across America are also grappling with the286pervasive challenge of Per- and Polyfluoroalkyl substances287(PFAS), contamination. Yorba Linda, California, is home to the288largest PFAS water treatment plant in the Country, and289California's water utilities have been ahead of the curve when290it comes to investing in PFAS filtration.291    Our utilities, especially the ones in California's rural292areas, desperately need Federal support to address PFAS and293other contaminants. Aging water infrastructure not only294threatens our public health, it also threatens our national and295economic security.296    According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),297there are more than 150,000 public drinking water systems in298America. The U.S. Government Accountability Office has warned299us they are all facing increasing cybersecurity related risks.300These water systems tell Congress all the time that they are301having to defend against consistent cybersecurity threats, and302attacks from nation states like China and Iran, as well as from303rogue cybercriminals. A successful large scale attack could304have tragic and catastrophic results.305    Californians know that the United States is currently the306global leader in Artificial Intelligence (AI), innovation and307development. We want to keep it that way. It takes hundreds of308billions of gallons of clean water, not to mention a lot of309energy, to run data centers and manufacture microchips in the310U.S. each year. If we do not provide the necessary support to311ensure America has a water infrastructure system, a modern one,312we risk ceding our economic and technological dominance to313China.314    Much of the Nation's drinking water infrastructure is in315need of repair or replacement. The EPA estimates that we will316need to address at least $625 billion over the next 20 years to317bring it up to par. Wastewater and stormwater systems will need318another $630 billion.319    The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law invested over $50 billion320in our water. Thanks to this committee's work, communities are321able to access financial support for water infrastructure that322was previously out of reach through mechanisms like principal323forgiveness or grants.324    Finally, I would be remiss if I did not emphasize that this325is why we need a high functioning EPA. The current326Administration has fired hundreds of EPA employees without327cause, and is reportedly trying to fire potentially thousands328more. The administrator has also clearly stated his intent to329submit a huge budget cut to Congress.330    We need experts at EPA to implement funding for water331infrastructure, to write reasonable science-based protective332standards that keep contaminants out of our water, and to work333with States and communities to ensure our water systems are334ready to face modern challenges, especially as the changing335climate puts added stress on water systems across the Nation.336    The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law was a great start in337providing needed investments to our community water systems. It338must be just that: the start. To support healthy, thriving339communities and global economic leadership, we must come340together as we have before to deliver on this fundamental need.341    With that, I yield to the Chairman.342    Senator Boozman. [Presiding.] Thank you, Senator Schiff.343    We will now turn our attention to the witnesses for their344opening remarks. Our first witness is Kyle Dreyfuss-Wells,345Chief Executive Officer of the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer346District. In this role, Ms. Dreyfuss-Wells works to provide347regional sanitary and stormwater management services to more348than one million residents in 63 communities across the Lake349Erie Watershed.350    This morning, Ms. Dreyfuss-Wells is testifying on behalf of351the National Association of Clean Water Agencies.352    I will now recognize Ms. Dreyfuss-Wells for five minutes353for her opening statement.354355  STATEMENT OF KYLE DREYFUSS-WELLS, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,356   NORTHEAST OHIO REGIONAL SEWER DISTRICT, ON BEHALF OF THE357          NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CLEAN WATER AGENCIES358359    Ms. Dreyfuss-Wells. Good morning. Thank you, Chairman360Boozman, Senator Schiff, and members of the Committee on361Environment and Public Works. I am Kyle Dreyfuss-Wells, Chief362Executive Officer of the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer363District, a public utility serving Cleveland, Ohio and 62364surrounding communities.365    We are also members of the National Association of Clean366Water Agencies (NACWA), and I am NACWA's Treasurer.367    Thank you for inviting me to testify this morning about the368importance of the Clean Water State Revolving Fund and the369Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. The Northeast Ohio370Regional Sewer District is one of the largest wastewater371treatment and stormwater management utilities in Ohio, serving372one million customers across 363 square miles of the Lake Erie373watershed. We do this in 2025 with a $191 million annual374operating budget and a $276 million capital program.375    The Clean Water State Revolving Funds (SRF), is an376essential financing tool that helps us, and our member377communities, to maintain the clean water infrastructure378necessary to protect public health and the water quality on379which the economic vitality of Northeast Ohio depends. Through380my work with NACWA, I know that Northeast Ohio is not alone:381the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF), is critical for382utilities and communities across the Country.383    IIJA's increases accelerated clean water investment, and384NACWA strongly supports the Clean Water SRF reauthorization385with IIJA funding levels as the baseline. As one of the largest386users of the Clean Water SRF in Ohio, Northeast Ohio Regional387Sewer District (NEORSD), has financed 111 wastewater projects388to date. Our decision, beginning in the 1990's, to use the389Clean Water SRF over other funding sources has resulted in390significant savings.391    For example, our Shoreline Storage Tunnel is a $220 million392project under our $3 billion federally mandated program to393reduce combined sewer overflow. It is one of seven deep tunnels394we are constructing, is 14,500 feet long, 23 feet in diameter395and will eliminate 350 million gallons of Lake Erie pollution396each year.397    It took us 5 years to construct, and we financed it through398the Clean Water SRF at very favorable terms, 40 years at 1.57399percent interest, while also deferring principal payments for40020 years. If we compare this to realistic financing through401bonds with less advantageous terms, 40 years at 3 percent402interest over the length of this one loan alone, we estimate403that this equates to $50 million in savings.404    Beyond these savings, we have found that the flexibility405provided under the Clean Water SRF program brings great value406to our ratepayers and customers as part of our overall effort407for long-term rate control and stability. These flexibilities408include below-market interest rates, deferred principal,409extended terms, no need for offering documents or official410statements, and no bond rating and bond counsel costs.411    It is these features of the Clean Water SRF program that412set it apart and are particularly helpful for smaller, less413sophisticated borrowers with limited exposure to debt414financing.415    We are also grateful for the IIJA's inclusion of416supplemental grant funding through principal forgiveness. This417brought the Clean Water SRF to the attention of many of our418member communities as they work to address the $3.4 billion in419local clean water infrastructure needs impacting the quality of420life of their residents.421    However, over the last 2 years working with our member422communities, we have found that it is still difficult for them423to access the fund. This is largely due to local governments'424hesitancy to absorb additional debt, staffing capacity, and425competing community priorities.426    To mitigate these barriers, in 2023 we began assisting our427member communities. Maple Heights, Ohio is one example of a428community that has received more than $875,000 in principal429forgiveness since 2023 to address basement flooding and failing430local infrastructure. They addressed 50 flooded basements and431replaced 56,000 linear feet of sewers.432    As I close, I would also like to emphasize that our work in433Northeast Ohio would not be possible without the commitment and434innovation of Ohio EPA and the Ohio Water Development435Authority. Together, these agencies implement the Ohio Clean436Water SRF, and are continually working to make the program more437accessible and usable for Ohio communities.438    The Clean Water SRF is an important and highly successful439Federal, State, and local partnership that we can see is440accelerating critical clean water investment.441    I appreciate the opportunity to testify and I look forward442to the discussion.443    Thank you, Senator.444    [The prepared statement of Ms. Dreyfuss-Wells follows:]445446[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]447448    Senator Boozman. Thank you.449    Our next witness is Tom Goulette. Mr. Goulette is the City450Administrator and Utility Superintendent for the city of West451Point, Nebraska. He has more than 40 years of experience in the452utility industry and has served as Nebraska Rural Water's453National Director since 2005.454    This morning, Mr. Goulette is testifying on behalf of the455National Rural Water Association.456    Mr. Goulette.457458   STATEMENT OF TOM GOULETTE, CITY ADMINISTRATOR AND UTILITY459SUPERINTENDENT, CITY OF WEST POINT, NEBRASKA, ON BEHALF OF THE460                NATIONAL RURAL WATER ASSOCIATION461462    Mr. Goulette. Good morning, Chairman Boozman, Senator463Ricketts, Senator Schiff, and members of the committee. My name464is Tom Goulette, I am the President of the Nebraska Rural Water465Association, which represents 467 rural water utilities, about46692 percent of all systems serving under 10,000 people in467Nebraska.468    I am here today on behalf of the National Rural Water469Association, where I serve on the executive committee as470treasurer. National Rural Water Association (NRWA), is the471Country's largest utility association with over 31,000 members472dedicated to drinking water, environmental protection, and473public health in all 50 States.474    I come from the city of West Point, Nebraska, a rural475community of about 3,500, roughly 30 miles north of Omaha,476where there are more cattle than there are people. I serve our477community as City Administrator and Utility Superintendent478responsible for our water, wastewater, and electric utilities.479We operate about 1,600 water meters, 1,900 electric meters, and480employ 32 full-time staff. Four employees work in the water481department.482    I started municipal work in the early 1980's as a483maintenance laborer at a wastewater plant and worked my way up,484gaining experience operating and evaluating facilities across485the Country. Since then, I have spent the last 30 years helping486small communities like mine address infrastructure challenges.487    In rural America, we do not have the luxury of passing the488buck. During my time in West Point, we completely reconstructed489our wastewater treatment plant with State Revolving Fund490assistance, a loan we are close to paying off. Today, we are491preparing to update that facility once again, using SRF492financing.493    Most recently, we faced a serious problem with our water494system. Our aging filters failed to remove iron and manganese,495leading to discolored water across the community. Restaurants,496schools, and our hospital had to install additional filtration497or switch to bottled water. High levels of manganese can pose498real public health risks, especially to the nervous system.499    Thanks to a low-interest drinking water SRF loan, 1.5500percent interest plus a small administrative fee, and $553,000501in principal forgiveness, we secured $2.76 million to replace502our filters, piping, valves, controls, and install a backup503generator. Without that assistance, our residents would be504facing bills they simply could not afford.505    It is an honor to small, rural community perspective on the506water provisions contained in the Infrastructure Investment and507Jobs Act. For towns like West Point, the IIJA will make508historic investments possible with funding that respects local509leadership and helps us to be better public servants.510    Without meaningful grant assistance, the price of water and511wastewater services would become unaffordable for working512families. This assistance is imperative to prevent rural513depopulation and a shrinking customer base, which in turn514drives up the cost per household, especially as repairing and515replacing aging infrastructure is getting harder every year,516and the regulatory compliance landscape continues to grow more517complex.518    That is why the technical assistance provisions you519included in the IIJA are so important. Many small communities520simply do not have the financial, managerial or technical521capacity to access Federal programs on their own. Rural water522has built a trusted network of local experts who help small,523rural, disadvantaged and tribal communities meet EPA compliance524standards, avoid penalties, and access SRF infrastructure525funding.526    Without this technical assistance offered by each State527rural water association, many communities would be left behind.528    Another major concern is PFAS regulation. Water systems529across rural America support the removal of these harmful530substances from the water supply. However, we did not put PFAS531into the environment, and we should not be penalized for it.532That is why we strongly support the Water Systems PFAS533Liability Protection Act. This legislation upholds the polluter534pays principle of the Superfund law while protecting water535systems and their customers from devastating fees and cleanup536costs.537    Last, the water sector work force crisis is growing. Over538half of our skilled operators are expected to retire within the539next decade. Thanks to the committee's leadership and Chairman540Capito's longstanding support, rural water launched the first541federally approved apprenticeship program for water and542wastewater operators.543    Today, 34 State rural water associations have earned544Federal approval of their apprenticeship programs. We have545enrolled or graduated over 900 apprentices nationwide, and so546far are actively training the next generation of operators who547will be on the front lines of the public health protection in548small and rural communities across the Country.549    Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thank you for the550opportunity to testify today.551    [The prepared statement of Mr. Goulette follows:]552553[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]554555    Senator Boozman. Thank you.556    Our final witness this morning is Eric Oswald, the Director557of Drinking Water and Environmental Health Division of the558Michigan Department of Environment Great Lakes and Energy. In5592017, Mr. Oswald retired as a Colonel from the U.S. Air Force560with 28 years of experience in construction, repair and561maintenance of critical infrastructure. Mr. Oswald also serves562as the President of the Association of State Drinking Water563Administrators, and is testifying on their behalf today.564    Mr. Oswald.565566STATEMENT OF ERIC OSWALD, PRESIDENT OF THE ASSOCIATION OF STATE567                 DRINKING WATER ADMINISTRATORS568569    Mr. Oswald. Thank you, members of the Environment and570Public Works Committee, my name is Eric Oswald. I am the571President of the Association of State Drinking Water572Administrators (ASDWA), whose 57 members include the 50 State573drinking water programs, five territorial programs, the Navajo574Nation, and the District of Columbia, referred to in the575remainder of this testimony as States.576    ASDWA's members work on the front lines every day to577protect public health and ensure safe drinking water through578the implementation of the Safe Drinking Water Act.579    I am also the Drinking Water Administrator for the State of580Michigan; however, I would like to make it clear that my581testimony today is on behalf of ASDWA, and that I am not582testifying on behalf of the State of Michigan.583    Thank you for this opportunity to provide the perspective584of ASDWA on this historic investment in drinking water585infrastructure provided through the Bipartisan Infrastructure586Law, or BIL. The provision of safe drinking water and587investment in our Nation's drinking water infrastructure is588paramount to economic development and public health protection.589This testimony will highlight the nationwide State Drinking590Water Program successes of the BIL investment and will provide591recommendations that can streamline future infrastructure592project implementation.593    BIL provides an unprecedented and much-needed investment in594our Nation's drinking water infrastructure. This funding is595stimulating long-overdue infrastructure projects that would not596have otherwise been possible. These projects address a wide597range of needed improvements and range in size from $43,000 to598$65 million. Projects include basic upgrades to address599longstanding needs to full-scale infrastructure overhauls, lead600service line inventories and replacements, improvement of601distribution systems and installation of treatment for PFAS and602other emerging contaminants.603    In addition to the infrastructure projects, several States604use portions of the funding for staff for both implementation605of BIL projects and to address regulatory requirements that606have been unfunded through a stagnant Public Water System607Supervision (PWSS) grant and a decreasing Base, Drinking Water608State Revolving Fund (DWSRF), capitalization grant.609Importantly, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), creates610visibility and momentum around water infrastructure needs, and611reinforces the role of DWSRF programs as trusted partners in612long-term infrastructure resilience.613    The PWSS grant program is a critical funding source for614State programs, but has not kept up with inflation and the615costs associated with maintaining a State drinking water616program. PWSS grants are used to support staff salaries,617including inspectors, support staff, and engineers. With the618expected end of bill in Fiscal Year 2026, States will619experience major funding cuts, and without full restoration of620State Revolving Fund based capital grants, States will have to621begin cutting important programs and services.622    While the BIL funding is a historic investment in drinking623water infrastructure, the needs dwarf the available funding.624According to EPA's most recent needs survey, $625 billion is625needed over the next 20 years to maintain and upgrade drinking626water systems, underscoring the importance of continued Federal627investment.628    Our recommendations, waivers. While BIL funding has been629immensely beneficial, State programs have faced several630challenges. Flexibility with future funding will be critical to631achieving the goal of helping citizens and communities that632need the funding the most. States and EPA must continue to work633together to make funding applications streamlined, efficient,634and simple.635    ASDWA recommends the development of waivers in limited636circumstances for the requirements of the Buy America, Build637America, and Davis-Bacon Acts to make these funds simpler to638obtain for those most in need.639    Greater flexibility in how States meet subsidy requirements640is essential. Current funding requires exact percentages for641principal forgiveness, which creates administrative challenges.642For example, 49 percent of funding for lead service line643replacement must be provided as additional subsidy through644principal forgiveness or grants. Allowing a range of up to a645percentage rather than a fixed threshold would ease646implementation.647    Future investments should allow States more discretion over648project eligibility and priority. While dedicated funding for649lead service line replacement and emerging contaminants is650critical, the prescriptive nature of some bill funding limits651the ability of States to fund projects that address more urgent652local needs.653    An extended timeframe, ideally longer than 5 years, would654also be beneficial for the States. A 5-year timeframe is not655feasible for complex projects and the detailed funding656requirements.657    The current funding approach results in a resource strain658on States to administer and separately track multiple grants,659each with unique requirements. To improve long-term success,660future funding should be accompanied by streamlined Federal661guidance and simplified reporting.662    Sustainability is critical for Federal and State funding663programs as well. While the additional subsidy provided through664BIL is essential, there may be unintended consequences of an665over-reliance on grant funding. While BIL funding is666substantial, we need to ensure the public water systems667successfully operate and maintain their infrastructure. Systems668using BIL funds should not view DWSRFs as a long-term financial669strategy.670    The BIL funding should be viewed only as a first step in671addressing the current and future needs of our drinking water672infrastructure.673    Cybersecurity, again, is an important and challenging674issue, due to limited resources and the lack of detailed675knowledge across the sector. Federal oversight and leadership676is needed to make the most efficient and impactful steps677forward.678    Cybersecurity accountability must be approached679holistically, recognizing that responsibility does not rest680solely with the water sector.681    In closing, ASDWA and its members remain deeply committed682to safeguarding our Nation's drinking water. We greatly683appreciate BIL funding and have suggestions to maximize its684impact nationwide, and look forward to working together to685continue to protect the public health of all Americans.686    On behalf of ASDWA's members, I want to sincerely thank you687for your continued investment in America's public water688systems, and the people they serve. I would be happy to answer689any questions you may have, and again, thank you for inviting690me to speak today.691    [The prepared statement of Mr. Oswald follows:]692693[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]694695    Senator Boozman. Let's begin the questioning phase of the696committee.697    Senator Padilla.698    Senator Padilla. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I very much699appreciate the opportunity to chime in on the subject at hand.700    In 2021, one of the first things we did in this committee,701and you may recall, was pass the Drinking Water and Wastewater702Infrastructure Act, which became the foundation for the703Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. I am especially proud that the704BIL included provisions and it championed both water re-use and705stormwater management, replaced lead service lines, and to706prioritize technical assistance, which, Mr. Goulette, you spoke707to this a minute ago, technical assistance for small systems708that oftentimes struggle to be able to provide that for709themselves.710    I am proud that the committee's bipartisan efforts became711the largest single Federal investment in water infrastructure712in history.713    Thanks to the IIJA, small water systems in Tulare County,714for example, Senator Schiff and I both represent Tulare County,715California, they can now treat pervasive contaminants in716drinking water. Farmworker communities like those in Pajaro who717can now rebuild their water systems after historic storms left718the town completely underwater. The community of Colusa was719able to install water meters and fire hydrants to prepare for720inevitable western drought conditions.721    Whether they face fire, floods or droughts, or aging722infrastructure and emerging contaminants, water systems and the723customers they serve are now facing more than $1.2 trillion in724infrastructure needs over the next two decades. As the725witnesses today know better than most, ratepayers will bear the726brunt of those costs, especially in small communities, rural727communities, and tribal communities. By nature, they have much728smaller rate bases.729    For many rural communities, including the tribal730communities, farmworker communities that have spoken up and731communities near sites of legacy industrial contaminants end up732paying twice, in reality: once for the contaminated water that733is flowing through their pipes, and once again for the much734costlier bottled water that they are forced to rely on.735    It is hard to believe that in Fresno County, a typical736family has to pay $280 a month for water that fails to comply737with our Clean Drinking Water standards. It is one of the738reasons I have been pushing for years for a permanent national739water assistance program, just like we do for energy bills.740    My question, frankly, is for all of you, starting with Ms.741Dreyfuss-Wells. As we examine the different ways to improve742administration of the SRFs, bolster technical assistance, how743could a permanent water assistance program help cushion the744impact of infrastructure upgrades for water systems and the745people that they serve?746    Ms. Dreyfuss-Wells. Thank you, Senator. Yes, very important747to make sure that we bring all of our customers along with us.748As you point out, low-income water assistance is very important749to make sure that those folks who do have difficulty paying750their bills have the support to be able to pay their bills.751    I will say that that at the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer752District, our leadership has taken this seriously since 2009.753We have had our own affordability programs. We work very hard754to make sure that we connect eligible customers with those755programs, which is another significant barrier.756    Low-income household water assistance is important to make757sure that you bring all of your customers along with you and758can keep the cost low for your utility across all of your759ratepayers.760    Senator Padilla. I would like to hear from each of you.761    Mr. Goulette. To go along with that, many small communities762already stretch their dollars. They are being forced to shelve763projects just to make ends meet. We do not want them to become764more disadvantaged because they feed us, they feed us into765other systems, other programs.766    You know, keeping the rates competitive while making them767reasonably desirable and affordable, I think that is the key.768    Mr. Oswald. Yes, I think those types of programs are769incredibly important. I know they lessen the burden of770regulatory authorities by providing technical and financial771assistance to these smaller communities. We have many regional772systems that do these programs on their own that try to give773back and make water more affordable. It is a very big challenge774for them.775    I know the Federal funding has made a huge impact for our776systems.777    Senator Padilla. Just a followup question for you, Mr.778Oswald. Correct me if I am wrong, but Federal investment in779water infrastructure has declined, if my numbers are correct,780by 77 percent since their peak in the 1970's. The Federal781Governments' share in new infrastructure upgrades, let alone782operations and maintenance, that is another whole conversation.783    How critical is Federal investment in water infrastructure784for supporting water affordability?785    Mr. Oswald. It is incredibly important. It offsets786ratepayer expenses; it can make more efficient investment787across the board in drinking water. It has to be followed up.788We have this incredible investment in infrastructure, we need789to make sure we maintain that investment as well, and not790ignore it as we go into the future, or we are going to be791facing this problem again in 20, 30 years.792    Senator Padilla. Thank you all. Thank you, Mr. Chair.793    Senator Boozman. I apologize; I woke up this morning with794some sort of allergy thing. Hopefully my voice will hold up for795a little bit.796    In Arkansas, we are finding ourselves in a position where797IIJA lead service line funding is simply not being spent, and798leftover funds will end up going to other States under current799law. This is not because there is not a need for water800infrastructure upgrades, but it is largely due to the801requirement of the 50 percent match to grant funds and many802small and disadvantaged communities simply can not come up with803the funding.804    In a recent survey, the Arkansas Natural Resources805Commission received over $5 billion in requests for water and806wastewater projects. In other words, we have this tremendous807need and could use any leftover lead service line replacement808funding for traditional water infrastructure projects. Simply809put, our needs are just different.810    Let's start with Mr. Goulette. You mentioned in your811testimony small communities in Nebraska are having a similar812program. Can you speak to your experience navigating the813matching requirement and how increased flexibility, whether in814eligible uses or match waivers, could help your community and815others like it better meet their water infrastructure needs?816    Mr. Goulette. Sure. One of the struggles was the matching817funds, as you mentioned, coming together for that purpose.818Those communities will be taking those funds from somewhere819else to bring that match to that water system.820    For us in West Point, we were fortunate enough where we did821some planning, we did some set-asides and we were able to822retire some debt early on, expecting the water project that we823just completed. That was one of the big I guess proactive824aspect of it. That is one of the things that we do on the rural825water side, is we try to remain proactive, plan in advance of826what the upcoming needs of the communities are as we did in827West Point.828    Senator Boozman. Very good.829    Ms. Dreyfuss-Wells.830    Ms. Dreyfuss-Wells. Yes, I think, Senator, to your point,831the way that communities are able to get projects done is832through long-term planning. Understanding the need in their833community and then to your point, being able to actually build834a project funding portfolio around any given project.835    What we have seen in Northeast Ohio is that our under-836resourced communities have actually been able to have the837funding to be able to put together a plan. We have supported838that at the sewer district. Then they can rely on IIJA839principal forgiveness as well as State funding, as well as some840funding from the sewer district, to put that together and meet841those match requirements.842    Any reduction in those match requirements would help843communities take advantage of this funding and get projects844done.845    Senator Boozman. Very good.846    Mr. Oswald.847    Mr. Oswald. Yes, I would agree with that. We need848flexibility. The prescriptive 49 percent or 50 percent subsidy849creates problems when actual construction costs come in and850they differ from what the estimates were. We have found that to851be an issue.852    It also prevents communities from doing a dig once, if they853have to defer those lead service line, or execute those lead854service line replacements apart from water main replacements,855and creates an unnecessary burden on the community to dig up856roads more than one time.857    Senator Boozman. Very good.858    For all of you, can you give us one or two examples from859your community where recent Federal or State investments made a860measurable difference in water or wastewater infrastructure?861Based on those experiences, what improvements could help ensure862funding reaches the communities that need it most and is used863as effectively as possible?864    Ms. Dreyfuss-Wells. Senator, I will give two examples. I865talked about Maple Heights, Ohio, which is a very typical866Cleveland first-ring suburb, under-resourced community that has867taken a very deliberate approach to deal with its financial868issues. They were able, through the Infrastructure Investment869and Jobs Act principal forgiveness, as I said, to address870basement flooding and failing sewers in their streets.871    When we are talking about basement flooding, we are talking872about sewage in people's basements, which is really the first873line of a public health issue that needs to be addressed. Maple874Heights, Ohio, has had significant success, Richmond Heights as875well, addressing flooded streets, basement flooding, through876the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. It has been a877wonderful resource for those communities.878    Senator Boozman. Very good.879    Mr. Goulette. Senator, I do not have a good answer for you880on that at this time. I would have to defer back to our State881primacy agency and get that information back to you.882    Mr. Oswald. I am going to use the example of Benton Harbor,883Michigan, where a cooperative effort between the local884citizens, the State of Michigan, and the Federal EPA resulted885in the elimination of all lead service lines in the community886over a year timeframe. That would not have been possible887without this infrastructure funding. That was a great example888of how cooperative federalism and everybody working in889partnership can make a huge impact on a community.890    Senator Boozman. Very good.891    Senator Schiff.892    Senator Schiff. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.893    Mr. Oswald, during the last Administration, EPA issued the894first-ever legally enforceable drinking water standard for895PFAS, forever chemicals. In California, many of our water896systems were already working on this issue and started897investing in PFAS filtration years before the regulation.898    Nevertheless, both in California and around the Country,899the need to continue focusing on getting PFAS out of our water900is overwhelming and it is expensive. How would you prioritize901the need to remove PFAS, that is given that the cost of removal902is extraordinary, the cost of not removing it is far greater?903    Nevertheless, how do we triage that problem? How do we904identify where we make those investments first?905    Similarly, the cost of getting all the lead out is906extraordinary. It is well beyond anything we put in the907Infrastructure Bill. How do we triage that problem as well?908    Mr. Oswald. For PFAS, we have been testing for PFAS for909over 5 years now. The first step is to know where it is at. We910take a balanced approach to systems that exceed Per- and911Polyfluoroalkyl substances Maximum Containment Levels, PFAS912MCLs. We first look at their source water to see if they can913change source water.914    We then look to see if there is a community near them that915they could hook up to that maybe does not have the PFAS issue916and foster a regional approach to PFAS.917    Then obviously, to treatment, which can be extremely918expensive. Then you have to deal with the waste product of that919treatment as well.920    Lead service lines, again, is a huge balancing act. It is921incredibly expensive. When we started in Michigan, I think the922average cost was $5,000 to remove a lead service line. It is923upwards of $8,000 to $10,000 now. You have to balance that924investment against investments in distribution systems and925water treatment plant upgrades.926    I think a balanced approach and a given timeline is the927best way to address that so we do not bankrupt the checkbook928with removing all these lead service lines at once, with929upgrading water treatment plants and doing things on that end930of the scale.931    Again, it is a balanced approach, and like you said, it is932triage. It is looking at what we can do in a reasonable manner933and a reasonable timeframe, not on the backs of ratepayers in934totality, but to use a balanced approach of funding.935    Senator Schiff. Opening up the question to the other936witnesses, what is the State of the treatment to remove PFAS?937Are we able to remove all PFAS chemicals or only certain PFAS938chemicals? How do we deal with the waste that is created as a939result? Can you shed some light on that?940    Mr. Goulette. For Nebraska and rural water systems, it941becomes an economy of scale as to what that financial impact942would be to the users. For example, we have a small community943just south of us, about 240 residents, that have a significant944PFAS showing up in their drinking water system. They have two945wells. Both of those wells were equal in showing up PFAS.946    It would be more economical for them to hook onto another947water system, or to find another water source, rather than go948through a treatment process and require the disposal and949everything else that goes along with the PFAS.950    Senator Schiff. If that water that is PFAS contaminated,951let's say they do not use it for drinking water, can that water952be used for anything else? If it is used for irrigation, does953that simply move the PFAS into the food that they eat?954    Mr. Goulette. Well, I think it moves it back into the food955chain. We are a farming community, there is a lot of956agriculture around there. I think that would absorb the PFAS957and we would have other issues.958    Ms. Dreyfuss-Wells. Senator, I would add two things. From959the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District's perspective, PFAS960has not emerged as a significant issue in our watersheds. We961are preparing for it as an emerging contaminant, and have been962able to access through the IIJA's Emerging Contaminants funding963some dollars to look at landfill leachate, as a treatment964process for landfill leachate, which can be a potential source965of PFAS.966    Then also some additional laboratory equipment to make sure967we can analyze the products coming to us.968    I will say from NACWA's perspective, we are very focused on969dealing with PFAS a is source, which are those companies that970are producing PFAS, as opposed to having that burden come to971public wastewater treatment facilities, where we are really the972end of the conversation, not the beginning.973    Senator Schiff. Do any of you have a sense of the State of974the technology? Is it capable of removing all the different975forms of PFAS? Or are we still not there yet?976    Mr. Oswald. We are there. I think we can remove all the977PFAS. You have reverse osmosis; you have activated carbon. It978is how you deal with that waste stream that you generate as979well, do you send it to a landfill, how do you deal with that980waste stream so you are not reintroducing it into the981environment and creating more problems?982    We can treat it, we can get it down. It is expensive and983you have to deal with the waste.984    Senator Schiff. Where is the research being done? Is that985something that Congress can further augment to determine what986is the most cost effective way, protective way to handle the987waste that results from that filtration process?988    Mr. Oswald. We rely heavily on EPA's Office of Research and989Development for that type of expertise to do that research and990inform us on what the best methodologies are and what the991impacts are.992    Senator Schiff. One last question on lead. In terms of993triaging the lead problem, I assume that the severity of the994problem in a particular venue depends on the degradation of the995pipe but also the acidity of the water. What should that tell996us if anything about how we triage that problem? Is it just a997matter of testing the water to see where the combination of998those factors produces the worst result? Or are there other999ways to do an analysis of the sort of the State of different1000pipes, so that we can identify which to replace first?1001    Mr. Oswald. We can study pipes, and we do that through pipe1002loop studies. There is a lot of research on that.1003    The bottom line is we have to get the lead out of the1004system. We can treat the water and make it non-corrosive, but1005you are just one instance away or one accident away from1006creating an issue where the water gets very acidic for a1007certain period of time and leaches or takes that protective1008coating off the lead pipes.1009    We can do a lot of treatment on the positive side for1010corrosion control treatment. Again, it is a band-aid on the1011problem. We have to get the lead out of the system, and we have1012to deal, to a certain extent, with premise plumbing, too,1013because you have a lot of lead inside houses in the form of1014solder or fixtures that can also create a problem. We have had1015systems that have absolutely no lead service lines and they1016still have lead action level exceedances because of this1017premise plumbing.1018    Senator Schiff. Got you. Thank you very much, Chairman.1019    Senator Boozman.1020    Senator Alsobrooks.1021    Senator Alsobrooks. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair, and thank1022you so much to our witnesses for being here today.1023    The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law has been really1024transformative for our water infrastructure across the Country,1025most especially in a place like Maryland. The funding Congress1026provided supports a range of key programs which finance1027critical upgrades to wastewater and drinking water systems,1028also enhances stormwater and flood resilience infrastructure1029and invests as well in lead pipe replacement and water system1030sustainability.1031    These programs have been absolutely transformative in1032Maryland. It has really helped Maryland to modernize its1033infrastructure, to reduce pollution and deliver clean, safe1034water to communities, especially those who have historically1035faced economic barriers.1036    I look forward to working with this committee to build on1037the success of the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. The few1038questions that I have, the first one will be for Mr. Oswald and1039Ms. Dreyfuss-Wells. The Bipartisan Law provided funding to1040solve longstanding water infrastructure problems and address1041some of the most pressing public health challenges in our1042communities. In Maryland, State Revolving Fund supports1043projects that improve drinking water, removed lead service1044lines in Baltimore and stopped sewer backups in basements to1045keep wastewater out of the Chesapeake Bay.1046    Now, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, as we know, was a1047critical down payment on upgrading our Nation's water1048infrastructure. What we know is that it was just that; it was a1049down payment. The question for you all is, let me just say1050first of all that if we do not reauthorize the Bipartisan1051Infrastructure Law programs that continue to provide funding,1052the gap in Maryland between resources and necessary investments1053would be about $125 million per year.1054    The question is, Mr. Oswald and Ms. Dreyfuss-Wells, would1055you both speak to what it would mean for your organizations and1056for drinking water and clean water systems across the Country1057if the Federal Government ceases to partner in this effort?1058    Mr. Oswald. I will tell you we have a tremendous backlog of1059deferred repair and maintenance and replacement in our drinking1060water infrastructure, similar to our highways. The tougher1061problem with drinking water is it is out of sight; it is out of1062mind.1063    We tend to let that infrastructure go until the point that1064it fails. We have systems that are over 80 to 100 years old in1065our distribution systems. Those need to be replaced. The1066Bipartisan Infrastructure Law is a mechanism to downgrade or1067down pay, get a down payment on that backlog and get that1068backlog reduced or eliminated, in most cases.1069    Personally, as a State and as State drinking water1070administrators, we have to do a better job with asset1071management. Once we get that backlog taken care of, and it is a1072huge backlog, we have to do a better job of making sure that1073our systems use proper asset management to make sure that1074investment does not go to waste, that we do not ignore it for1075the next 50 years, that we continue to maintain and operate it1076as needed so we can protect that investment.1077    Again, it is like your car. You can change the oil like you1078need to and it will last a long time. You run that car for107920,000 miles and then change the oil, change the engine, it1080gets a lot more costly. It is a combination of things. We need1081the Bipartisan Infrastructure funding to get rid of the1082backlog, and then we need to do a better job of maintaining1083that system.1084    Ms. Dreyfuss-Wells. Senator, what I would add to that, yes,1085obviously there is a huge backlog. You talked about Maryland's1086backlog. Communities have this across the Country. We need to1087have the funding to address those issues and to address the1088issues going forward.1089    I also want to highlight that the Clean Water SRF is a1090financing tool, that communities need that consistency, they1091need to know it is there, so that they can do their long-term1092financial planning, they can build a package of financing1093around a particular project. That is how we deliver projects1094efficiently.1095    I know it is a bit of a snooze, but project management is1096the silver bullet. The Clean Water SRF is essential to that1097project management, because it is the lowest cost of borrowing1098for utilities across the Country. That is essential.1099    Senator Alsobrooks. Okay. I see the time is gone. I will1100just ask quickly about the Chesapeake Bay. This is for Mr.1101Oswald.1102    As the largest estuary in the United States, the Chesapeake1103Bay is a critical source of drinking water. However, the Bay1104has been under stress for decades due to pollution and climate1105change significantly impacting water quality and affordability1106in the Bay. For this reason and many others, there are ongoing1107efforts to restore and protect the Bay.1108    Just quickly, would you discuss how protecting the1109Chesapeake Bay lowers the cost and increases the availability1110of drinking water in communities?1111    Mr. Oswald. Obviously, source water protection is1112foundational in the drinking water business. We try to be very1113protective of our water sources, be they surface water or1114groundwater. Protecting those surface waters lowers the bill1115for everybody, because you do not have to treat as much. You1116eliminate things like harmful algal blooms that can sicken a1117lot of people very quickly.1118    Investing in that with our Clean Water partners is huge to1119reduce nutrient loads on bodies of water like that, and reduce1120the pollution going into that from PFAS, microplastics or1121whatever other emerging contaminant you want to talk to.1122    Yes, source water protection is huge.1123    Senator Alsobrooks. Thank you.1124    Senator Capito. [Presiding.] Thank you. I am back, and1125ready to ask a couple of questions. Thank you all for your1126patience.1127    I mentioned, Mr. Goulette, this is for you, I mentioned in1128my opening statement several times the challenges of rural1129communities in facing these infrastructure challenges. Many of1130the systems, if there are existing systems, are so old. The one1131thing that has always bothered me about our systems in West1132Virginia is the leakage. I am sure that is from ancient and1133old, or not ancient, but very old technologies.1134    Anyway, based on your experience, what are the greatest1135challenges that rural communities face? What policies should we1136prioritize to provide additional support or technical tools to1137help people address these issues?1138    Mr. Goulette. The greatest thing we see in Nebraska1139specifically, and pretty much across the Nation, is the1140geographic isolation of those small systems. Being able to, for1141example, I have Nebraska rural water circuit riders go out and1142assist those programs, those systems, especially when there is1143that lack of economy of scale and untrained operators. We see1144so much turnover in that field also right now.1145    The other thing we are spending a lot of time with is1146educating the local governments in those small communities.1147There is such a significant turnover, and that ever changing1148regulatory environment also plays a part in that.1149    Senator Capito. Right. With your circuit riders, do you1150feel like they are stretched too thin? Or do they have enough,1151I mean, obviously everybody always wants more. Let's just say1152in a practical sense, are they able to cover the State of1153Nebraska sufficiently?1154    Mr. Goulette. Yes, I think we do an excellent job. We have1155three drinking water circuit riders that run around the State1156of Nebraska, they average about 30,000, 35,000 miles a year, 351157contacts a month. They are there, basically on an on-call basis1158also to assist those systems when they are in need of some type1159of help or environmental issues that impact their systems.1160    Senator Capito. Okay, good. Thank you.1161    Ms. Dreyfuss-Wells, I want to talk about the cooperative1162federalism principles that I outlined in my opening statement.1163From your experience, administering projects funded by State1164Revolving Funds, could you discuss that importance for the1165States to maintain their flexibility to prioritize what best1166meets their needs?1167    The other issue, and I do not know if you can address this,1168is the issue of financing large projects, a State Revolving1169Fund in many cases is only one portion of this. You could have1170other State sources or Federal sources or county resources, but1171also the ratepayer is always gone back to for rate increases.1172That is really difficult for communities as they try to face1173this.1174    First of all, talk about the importance of maintaining1175flexibility, and then any other kind of creative ideas that you1176have run into on the financing aspect.1177    Ms. Dreyfuss-Wells. Thank you, Senator. I think Ohio is1178such a great example of this flexibility. As I said, the Ohio1179EPA and the Ohio Water Development Authority run our clean1180water SRF. They have for years taken a very innovative approach1181to make sure that they understand the needs of communities, and1182that they are structuring financing packages to meet those1183needs.1184    As I said, we have worked with them since the 1990's and1185they have evolved every year, looking at our capital plan,1186looking at the capital plan of other communities like Columbus,1187what can they do to be flexible. This idea of structured loans1188with deferred principal payments, this is something that they1189came up with.1190    Your point is spot on in terms of States need to have that1191flexibility to implement their programs, to meet the needs of1192the communities.1193    Senator Capito. Right. Well, I'm certain that certain1194portions of Ohio are a lot like our more rural areas down in1195the southern part of Ohio, southeastern Ohio, it is probably1196very similar to West Virginia.1197    Ms. Dreyfuss-Wells. Absolutely. I will just say that is1198where the technical assistance is so important because as you1199know, we are talking about a township trustee. Maybe they have1200a township administrator. They probably have a consulting1201engineer if they are lucky.1202    That consulting engineer is going to have to put that1203funding package together and they need to have the technical1204support to write a project application that is going to get1205funded.1206    Senator Capito. Thank you.1207    I am not really sure who this question would be best1208addressed by, so I will throw it up to all three of you. In the1209water portion of the bill, there was some remediations for lead1210and lead pipes. Part of the issue, I believe, that we have run1211into is how far does that money go.1212    Does it go to the edge of the yard and then the homeowner1213is in charge of it? Does it go into the house? What have you1214found in that, and how can we--I think we acknowledge that we1215are not going to get to where we want it to go with the1216ambitious program that was put forward.1217    Does anybody have any experience with that that they would1218want to talk about?1219    Mr. Oswald. Yes, I can address that a little bit. There is1220a private side for lead service lines. Obviously usually at the1221curb stop, you have a valve you can shut off. In most cases,1222from the valve to the home is privately owned. The rest of it,1223up to the water main, is publicly owned.1224    To coordinate those two can be extremely difficult.1225    Senator Capito. Yes, because the homeowner could own the1226lead part of it.1227    Mr. Oswald. They could. They could refuse permission to the1228water system to come in and replace that. Most States have1229outlawed partial service line replacements, because it can1230create issues. If the homeowner declines, then you are stuck,1231you can not replace anything.1232    It is very, very problematic. That private and public1233ownership, that we do not run into, say, in the electricity or1234natural gas, it is just an oddity. In Michigan, we require the1235systems to replace the whole service line at their expense to1236eliminate environmental justice issues where a homeowner that1237could pay for their side gets the whole thing replaced, whereas1238a homeowner that can not afford that, they do not get any lead1239service line replacement. That is a huge challenge.1240    The States differ on what laws govern that, whether you can1241pay ratepayer funds to replace that private side.1242    Senator Capito. Right. Does anybody have another comment on1243that?1244    Ms. Dreyfuss-Wells. I am sorry, Senator, I am bouncing in1245my seat to comment on that. Very much an issue on the lead1246service line, not my area of expertise, but it is also an issue1247on the sewer side. Much of the infiltration, the inflow and1248infiltration that we have of leaking of sanitary and storm1249sewers, there is a big component on the private side.1250    The only thing I will add is that this is where trust comes1251in between utilities and their customers, making sure that1252folks know who you are before you come to their homes to ask to1253be able to do work on the private side. That is something that1254we very much focused on in Northeast Ohio.1255    Senator Capito. All right, thank you.1256    Senator Ricketts.1257    Senator Ricketts. Thank you very much. Appreciate it.1258    Welcome, everybody, to all of our witnesses today. I1259appreciate your taking the time. Tom, great to have you here,1260to be able to represent Nebraska.1261    Tom brings just a wealth of information to this committee.1262If there is a job involving water in the State of Nebraska over1263the last 40 year, Tom has done that job. He has been obviously1264currently in West Point, a great community there in Cumming1265County. Just the depth of expertise is amazing.1266    I am actually going to read off some of this stuff because1267it is pretty impressive. He served as chairman of the1268Governor's Advisory Council for Drinking Water, chairman of the1269Municipal Energy Agency of Nebraska, chairman of the League of1270Nebraska Utilities Section, and president of the Nebraska Rural1271Water, just to name a few. You are currently chairman of the1272League of Municipalities Small Cities Legislative Committee.1273Say hi to Lynn for me when you get back.1274    Mr. Goulette. I will do that.1275    Senator Ricketts. If you are not busy enough, you are1276engaged in very civic engagements, where you have served as the1277utility superintendent for the city of West Point sine 1993,1278and added City Administrator to your business card in 2001. You1279still have both those titles today, right?1280    Mr. Goulette. Yes.1281    Senator Ricketts. Yes, so it just shows, again, in small1282towns, people wear a lot of hats.1283    Before the committee today, your post is to Nebraska Rural1284Water Association. You have been on the board there since 20051285and are currently serving on the executive committee. Thank you1286again, Tom, for being here. We really, really appreciate your1287experience that you bring to this committee.1288    Mr. Goulette. Thank you, Senator.1289    Senator Ricketts. Welcome. What I would like to talk a1290little bit about is many small and rural communities face1291significant challenges in accessing and managing the Federal1292infrastructure dollars due to limited staffing and technical1293expertise. We saw this in other areas as well, like the1294Department of Transportation and so forth.1295    When we met in February, the Nebraska Rural Water1296Association shared some of these barriers. What types of1297resources or policy changes could Congress consider making to1298Federal programs to make them more efficient for small and1299rural communities?1300    Mr. Goulette. A lot of it comes down to simplifying the1301application requirements for those small communities. Typically1302they know best what their needs are going to be when it comes1303to upgrading their systems or changing the equipment and that1304type of thing, along with the assistance from the Nebraska1305Rural Water Association, our circuit riders are there lending1306assistance and quantifying that.1307    Then once they get to that point, once they can get to some1308type of formulation of what that community needs, that is when1309an application needs to go in. Then that should allow for some1310additional engineering, then, at that stage, once that product1311is identified and the community can have some buy-in, for lack1312of a better term.1313    The other thing is that reducing those match requirements,1314a lot of the small, rural communities, they stretch every1315dollar they have. When they are looking at this and they are1316looking at the match requirements to comply with that, it1317becomes difficult. Then they have to balance out where their1318priorities lie within the financial capabilities of that1319community.1320    Some of those projects get put on the shelf, then, at that1321point.1322    Senator Ricketts. [Presiding.] Yes, and that is not1323necessarily true for West Point, because West Point is really1324doing well, but what we see, is it fair to say in a lot of our1325rural communities we see that it as the younger people move1326away and you are left with declining population of older folks,1327that just adds to the complication of being able to get these1328water projects done?1329    Mr. Goulette. It does, and along with that is our aging1330work force. We see a lot of operators aging out, those are one1331and two-man operations. Once that legacy leaves that community,1332they are difficult to replace. That makes the challenge even1333more difficult to help sustain that community.1334    Senator Ricketts. Again, is there something we can do in1335Congress to be able to help with some of those work force1336challenges?1337    Mr. Goulette. One of the things is the apprenticeship1338program that Senator Capito put in place a few years ago. We1339need to get hat moving in Nebraska. We need to get that funding1340moving in Nebraska, we need to get an apprenticeship program1341and start that process to engage those communities and show1342them options, bring trained operators to the facilities.1343    Senator Ricketts. Yes. Can you just give us briefly just1344how some of these Federal funding programs have made otherwise1345cost-prohibitive projects in small towns and rural communities1346possible?1347    Mr. Goulette. Yes, basically when you are looking at the1348projects themselves, you are looking at the market base on1349interest rates and that type of thing and the longevity, it1350makes it more economically feasible for those small1351communities. There is the grant basis that they also can1352qualify for, which also helps them.1353    Senator Ricketts. Can you give me an example of a specific1354project off the top of your head?1355    Mr. Goulette. The easiest example right now is the city of1356West Point. We did the water project here a few years ago where1357we had a $2.7 million water treatment plant. Of that $2.71358million, $553,000 of that was loan forgiveness. Then in1359addition to that was the 1.5 percent interest rate plus the1360administrative fee for the State.1361    It makes it very economically feasible to get those1362programs in place, rather than going out to the open market.1363    Senator Ricketts. All right, great. Well, oh, we lost our1364Chair. I guess I am in charge on the Republican side now.1365    [Laughter.]1366    Senator Ricketts. I am going to take a moment just to talk1367a little bit as well about an important project, not1368specifically related to drinking water, but access to water in1369general in our State is obviously important. We are the largest1370irrigating State in the Country.1371    I was just in Scotts Bluff last week, and the Gering-Fort1372Laramie Canal collapsed while I was Governor, and we worked to1373get some temporary repairs in place there. It is owned by the1374Bureau of Reclamation, but through a program they built the1375canal there 100 years ago, and when it collapsed, it cutoff1376about 55,000 acres of Nebraska farm land from getting1377irrigation water. That obviously is just huge for a State like1378Nebraska, where irrigation is big, but also agriculture is our1379biggest industry in the State.1380    We are going to be looking for opportunities to be able to1381have the Federal Government partner to be able to get the1382permanent repairs on that done, because right now it is1383operating at about 80 percent capacity. I was just talking to1384folks about it, again, just getting to this idea of like how1385expensive it is for these projects and how, with the drinking1386water and make it possible in West Point, but the cost it would1387be for those farmers to be able to pay the extra fees to be1388able to get those total repairs done would be really, really1389challenging.1390    That is another project, another example of how the Federal1391Government can help partner with States and local communities1392to be able to get these water projects done.1393    With that, Senator Schiff, you have already asked your1394questions, is that accurate or no?1395    Senator Schiff. I did, yes.1396    Senator Ricketts. I see we have now Senator Blunt1397Rochester. We will turn it over to you.1398    Senator Blunt Rochester. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you1399to the witnesses. Sorry I am in between hearings. I think a lot1400of people are running around, so hopefully none of my questions1401have been asked.1402    I really do believe this is such a critical hearing,1403particularly building on the successes of IIJA and I am1404grateful that we are also focusing specifically on water1405infrastructure. Many people might not know that Delaware, even1406though we are a small State, we are actually urban, suburban,1407rural and coastal. Our water issues are very much a microcosm1408of the Country.1409    In Delaware, we were really pleased, particularly for our1410rural communities to have places like Seaford, Delaware, where1411they were awarded a $2.1 million loan from IIJA to replace a141270-year old drinking water main line containing lead1413components. It has been critical to our communities, because of1414the removal of lead, the reduction of PFAS in drinking water,1415and also helping make water more affordable for families.1416    My first question is for Mr. Goulette. I understand that1417many water systems in your association serve fewer than 10,0001418people. Can you speak to how critical IIJA's infusion of1419Federal funding is to small systems?1420    Mr. Goulette. Yes, thank you for that. Basically it helps1421with the geographic isolation of the communities. That is one1422of the keys with the small, rural systems. We have people1423physically going out and providing help and technical1424assistance.1425    Once we get out there, we can expose them to the IIJA1426capabilities and what they can do for the communities. They1427have somebody that they can lean on to followup and put those1428programs into place for those small systems. That is the key.1429    Senator Blunt Rochester. I heard you mention work force. I1430think that is key as well, and the idea of apprenticeships and1431would love to followup with you after the hearing specifically1432on that issue.1433    Now I would like to switch to lead service lines. As some1434of my colleagues have noted, the replacement of lead service1435lines are major projects that the public may not be aware of. I1436think a lot of times people just hear lead in pipes, and they1437think of the pipes in their home.1438    These are pipes that are often deep under the property of a1439person's home or a roadway, and it requires excavation of1440streets and land to replace. These are expensive projects.1441    Mr. Oswald, based on your experience with the State of1442Michigan, how has IIJA funding helped accelerate the pace of1443lead service line replacement projects compared to pre-IIJA1444funding levels?1445    Mr. Oswald. IIJA BIL funding has been instrumental. We1446would not have a ghost of a chance at getting lead service1447lines out of the inventory without it, if we were just relying1448on State funds and ratepayer funds.1449    Again, the cost of lead service line replacement is not1450cheap. You are talking about $10,000 per lead service line. It1451is incredibly expensive. Without the Federal funds to get1452through this, and it is a one-time cost, that is the nice thing1453about it. Once we get rid of those, they are out of the system.1454We just have to buckle down and get them out of the system, and1455then move to other things.1456    Yes, the BIL funding, we are not going to get to our goal.1457In Michigan, we want to be lead-free by 2037. We are not going1458to get there without cooperative federalism and cooperation1459between the State, the locals, and the Federal Government. Just1460will not happen.1461    Senator Blunt Rochester. Yes, and I think that cooperation1462also makes me think of the ultimate goal of healthy families as1463well.1464    I am going to turn now to Ms. Dreyfuss-Wells. The National1465Association of Clean Water Agencies are strong advocates for1466water infrastructure dollars that support households struggling1467to make ends meet and avoid disconnection. I was able to get a1468program to address water affordability authorized in the IIJA.1469The study that I pushed for EPA to complete found that nearly147019 million households have trouble affording clean water. For1471families experiencing poverty, being able to afford the1472nationwide average of $42 a month for water utilities can be a1473struggle.1474    Can you discuss how the inability for customers to pay for1475water bills actually hurts the ability of utilities to serve1476the communities they are in?1477    Ms. Dreyfuss-Wells. Thank you, Senator. That is exactly1478right. The goal of any utility provider on water, wastewater,1479stormwater side is to make sure that you are bringing all of1480your customers along with you. Having the Low-Income Households1481Water Assistance program there to help folks pay some of those1482bills is very important.1483    Then also making sure that your own utility has a focus on1484that customer service, bringing your customers so that they can1485apply for and receive that assistance that is available. It is1486something that we are very focused on at the National1487Association and very focused on at the Sewer District.1488    Senator Blunt Rochester. Great. Thank you so much.1489    I have other questions I will submit for the record, but1490thank you, and I yield back.1491    Senator Capito. [Presiding.] Thank you. Senator Ricketts,1492did you have another question, or are you good?1493    Okay. I think we are all good. As I said, if is very busy1494here on Capitol Hill. Some folks had intended to come, I am1495sure you will hear from them.1496    With no further questions, I want to thank the witnesses1497and all my colleagues for their participation in todays1498hearing. I really look forward to writing the Drinking Water1499and Wastewater Infrastructure Act (DWWIA), bill coming up. I1500think we are starting early.1501    I think that is the smart way to do it. We could not do it1502without you all helping us. I really appreciate this.1503    Senators who wish to submit written questions for the1504record have until 5 p.m. on Wednesday, May 14th to do so. The1505witnesses' responses to those questions are due back to the1506committee no later than 5 p.m. on Wednesday, May 28th. They1507will be submitted for the record.1508    With that, this hearing is adjourned, and thank you all1509very much.1510    [Whereupon, at 11:17 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]15111512[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]15131514                               [all]