2 minute read
IN THIS ISSUE
Construction Outlook Magazine, and this space in particular, uses every opportunity possible to promote and advocate for adequate funding for drinking water, wastewater, and the need for underground utility infrastructure construction projects to go forward. It is a core element of UCANE’s mission. While we have been successful over the years, the level of success can be determined by several factors, including economic conditions and the political will of our elected officials. There is no doubt that the pandemic has presented significant challenges this past year, however, it may now provide an opportunity to help fund much needed infrastructure projects as there is a very real possibility that a long-awaited infrastructure bill will be approved by congress.
By now most of us have seen or heard news as stand-alone measures instead of one comprereports about the President’s $2 trillion in- hensive bill, so the water infrastructure compofrastructure proposal. With a bill of this size, nent could be one of the first to be considered. there will no doubt be much debate and scrutiny There is certainly little argument about the over where and how to spend federal dollars as need for this investment. In the most recent “Rea way to stimulate the economy post-pandemic. port Card for America’s Infrastructure,” the AmerHowever, one aspect of the bill that may provide ican Society of Civil Engineers, gave wastewater for bipartisan agreement is its plan to upgrade our a D+, drinking water a C-, and stormwater a D. drinking water and wastewater infrastructure. Over recent years, the federal government has
The Administration’s Plan proposes a $111 bil- not done its part. lion investment to improve our water infrastructure. In the late 1970s, the federal government proThe recommendation is that $56 billion go toward vided over 60 percent of the total water infrastrucwater and sewer projects. Another $45 billion ture spending in the United States. It now contribwould help eliminate lead pipes and service lines. utes less than 5 percent. The burden too often And finally, the plan includes $10 billion in funding falls on state and local officials, which makes it to monitor and remediate PFAS in drinking wa- all too easy to delay and “kick the can down the ter, and to improve small rural water systems and road” on critical projects, simply because the unhousehold wells and wastewater systems. derground infrastructure is “out of sight and out of
Most of this funding would be distributed mind.” The federal government must do more. through the existing State Revolving Fund (SRF) The latest federal proposal can go a long Loan Program. (See article on page 33). This wa- way to restoring an equitable balance beter funding proposal is very similar to bipartisan tween federal, state, and local officials to bebills in Congress already moving through both the gin to close the water infrastructure funding House and Senate. There have been discussions gap. It is imperative that this proposal cross to move smaller portions of the infrastructure bill the finish line. n
