Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Srf Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State water board adopts SRF policy updates as communities press for more grants to meet new chromium-6 standard
Summary
The State Water Resources Control Board amended Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Fund policies after months of stakeholder talks. Local officials and water agencies urged more grant funding and scoring changes so medium and large systems serving disadvantaged communities can afford required chromium-6 treatment.
SACRAMENTO — The State Water Resources Control Board on May 6 approved amendments to the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (SRF) policies after nearly a year of stakeholder meetings and detailed debate over how to prioritize scarce federal and state funds. Board members adopted the policy amendments by roll-call vote.
The changes revise how loan applications are scored, add an affordability metric and a readiness tier for 50% design, and formalize incentives for projects that accept a standard SRF loan template. State staff said the updates were designed to manage higher demand and improve predictability as federal aid has increased.
Why it matters: Water agencies warned that new drinking-water mandates — in particular the state’s recent hexavalent chromium (chromium-6) maximum contaminant level — will require capital investments that could sharply raise rates in disadvantaged communities. Dozens of speakers from Coachella, Los Banos, Joshua Basin and other systems told the board their projects could impose very large bill increases unless more grant and principal-forgiveness funding is available.
What the board changed: DFA staff reinstated a “secondary score” and introduced an affordability score using household sewer rate as a percentage of median household income (MHI) plus a small-community size adjustment. They added a readiness point for projects with 50% plans and specifications and kept language allowing the deputy director some discretion when projects are delayed for reasons beyond applicants’ control. The policy also clarifies that repayment obligations are tied to funds actually disbursed, not the full eligible loan amount.
Local reaction: Mayors, council members and water-district managers urged the board to do more for communities with many impacted wells. City of Coachella officials said treatment to meet the chromium-6 MCL could cost their system about $70 million and would double residential bills; Los Banos officials said costs could reach $65–$85 million and raise rates by roughly $40 per household. Representatives of the Community Water Systems Alliance, Association of California Water Agencies and water-reuse groups supported the policy changes but urged continued work to ensure larger projects can be accommodated.
Next steps: The policy changes take effect for the next intended-use plan cycle; staff will apply the new scoring in the program’s annual fund recommendation and the IUP deliberations where grant and principal-forgiveness allocations are decided.
Board action: The board adopted the Clean Water and Drinking Water SRF policy amendments by roll-call vote. The vote recorded: Firestone, McGuire, Morgan, D’Adamo and Chair Esquivel voting aye.
Ending: Agency officials said they will continue to refine scoring language with stakeholders and track applications closely to ensure the scoring changes do not block projects that need combined grant and loan packages to comply with new drinking-water mandates.
