United States Government Publishing Office publisher pbl distributor dst United States Government Accountability Office Resources, Community, and Economic Development Division author aut Government Organization text government publication eng GAOREPORTS Legislative Agency Publications gao legislative 2010-08-12 U.S. Government Printing Office 1998-06-18 monographic deposited born digital 11 p. GA 1.13:T-RCED-98-230 https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-98-230 P0b002ee180381316 f:rc98230t DGPO 2010-08-12 2011-03-24 GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-98-230 machine generated eng fdlp REPORT GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-98-230 T-RCED-98-230 Water supply management Economically depressed areas Eligibility criteria Federal/state relations Rural economic development Regional development programs Water resources development Federal aid programs Loan repayments Fort Peck Rural Water Project (MT) USDA Rural Utilities Service Program EPA Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Fort Peck Indian Reservation (MT) Testimony RCED GAO discussed selected rural water projects, including the Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water Project, focusing on: (1) the criteria for participation in specified programs of the Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) for funding rural water projects; (2) how the characteristics of the individual projects align with the criteria of the identified programs; and (3) the views of officials of the three agencies as to the appropriateness of their being tasked with these projects.<p/>GAO noted that: (1) both USDA and EPA have programs under which rural communities that meet specific criteria may receive grants or loans for the construction of rural water projects, but BOR has no established program for funding rural water projects and therefore has no eligibility criteria; (2) instead, BOR has undertaken such projects when tasked by Congress; (3) both USDA and EPA require, among other things, that recipients demonstrate the ability to repay the loans provided to them; (4) despite its lack of eligibility criteria, BOR, which has concentrated its activities in 17 western states, does have a long-standing policy on full reimbursement for its contributions to local projects; (5) the characteristics of the Fort Peck project do not meet some of the criteria for participation in either USDA's or EPA's program, nor BOR's long-standing reimbursement policy; (6) specifically, the project relies on grants rather than loans and thus does not meet the criteria for economic feasibility and repayment; (7) officials of the three agencies agreed that the project would meet real needs in the communities; and (8) however, they expressed concerns about project construction costs and noted that the project envisions the federal government's funding a higher percentage of the project than is allowed under agencies' policies. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-98-230/html/GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-98-230.htm https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-98-230/pdf/GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-98-230.pdf GAO/T-RCED-98-230 https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-98-230 Testimony GAO/T-RCED-98-230; Rural Water Projects: Federal Assistance Criteria Related to the Fort Peck Reservation Rural Water Project; Water supply management Economically depressed areas Eligibility criteria Federal/state relations Rural economic development Regional development programs Water resources development Federal aid programs Loan repayments Fort Peck Rural Water Project (MT) USDA Rural Utilities Service Program EPA Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Fort Peck Indian Reservation (MT)