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 1999-07-29 monographic deposited born digital 16 p. GA 1.13:T-RCED-99-252 https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-99-252 P0b002ee18039aa5d f:rc99252t DGPO 2010-08-12 2011-03-23 GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-99-252 machine generated eng fdlp REPORT GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-99-252 T-RCED-99-252 Water supply management Rural economic development Potable water Regional development programs Water resources development Federal aid programs Economic analysis Cost effectiveness analysis Economically depressed areas Lewis and Clark Rural Water Project (IA/MN/SD) Sioux Falls (SD) South Dakota Iowa Minnesota Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Testimony RCED Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO discussed the Lewis and Clark Rural Water Project, focusing on: (1) federal assistance criteria for rural water projects and; (2) potential benefits of rural water projects such as Lewis and Clark.<p/>GAO noted that: (1) regarding federal assistance criteria for rural water projects, GAO's work looked at three programs; (2) these were the Rural Utilities Service Program of the Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) of the Department of the Interior; (3) GAO found that the USDA and EPA programs had specific criteria that a proposed water project must meet to be considered for funding and that none of the three projects GAO examined, including the Lewis and Clark project, had characteristics that met all of the criteria of any one of the programs; (4) GAO further found that while BOR did not have a formal program and, thus, did not have formal criteria, it did have a long-standing policy on reimbursement for its contributions to projects with which none of the three proposed projects-again including Lewis and Clark-could comply; (5) regarding potential benefits of rural water projects, GAO's work, using Lewisand Clark as the example, found that the local water users, such as households and business would receive most of the benefits of the project, which could include higher personal incomes and improved lifestyles; and (6) while the federal government would realize only minimal financial benefits, the project would benefit the federal government to the extent that it will be a means of achieving public policy objectives. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-99-252/html/GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-99-252.htm https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-99-252/pdf/GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-99-252.pdf GAO/T-RCED-99-252 https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-T-RCED-99-252 Testimony GAO/T-RCED-99-252; Rural Water Projects: Federal Assistance Criteria and; Water supply management Rural economic development Potable water Regional development programs Water resources development Federal aid programs Economic analysis Cost effectiveness analysis Economically depressed areas Lewis and Clark Rural Water Project (IA/MN/SD) Sioux Falls (SD) South Dakota Iowa Minnesota Drinking Water State Revolving Fund Public Law 104-182