State agencies prepare for cuts in loans, grants

Many Republicans, including Trump, have argued the EPA under former President Barack Obama’s administration overstepped what it was allowed to do under the law to protect the environment.

President Donald Trump’s proposed budget would cut money from water and environmental programs used in Arkansas.

Trump’s budget calls for cuts at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of Agriculture, both of which provide money to two of Arkansas’ environmental agencies.

The proposed EPA budget exemplifies Trump’s desire to “ease the burden of unnecessary Federal regulations that impose significant roles for workers and consumers without justifiable environmental benefits,” the proposal reads.

Many Republicans, including Trump, have argued the EPA under former President Barack Obama’s administration overstepped what it was allowed to do under the law to protect the environment.

The Arkansas Natural Resources Commission receives money from the USDA’s Rural Development unit and the EPA to implement its drinking water and wastewater infrastructure loan and grant programs, Director Bruce Holland said. He said he wasn’t sure if any money came from any other agencies.

Under the proposed budget, $498 million would be cut from the USDA’s drinking water and wastewater loan and grant program.

“Rural communities can be served by private sector financing or other Federal investments in rural water infrastructure, such as the Environmental Protection Agency’s State Revolving Funds,” the budget reads.

The budget would increase the EPA’s critical drinking water and wastewater infrastructure program’s budget by $4 million, or 0.2 percent, from about $2.3 billion.

States and local governments apply for the USDA and EPA money, and the Natural Resources Commission, which is authorized to have as much as $40 million out in loans at a given time, can decide which municipalities or utilities can receive the money. Sometimes, Holland said, a community will receive money from USDA and apply for supplemental money through the Natural Resources Commission.

Grants have been used to repair or replace water or wastewater infrastructure in small towns with shrinking tax bases, and the loans have been used to give utilities and cities infrastructure assistance with low interest rates. The USDA money can only be used in communities of 10,000 or fewer people.

The Natural Resources Commission also receives EPA moeny through the Section 319 Grant Program for States and Territories, which pays for efforts to reduce pollution from sources that don’t directly send pollutants into a water body.

The Section 319 program wasn’t specifically mentioned in the EPA budget, which was outlined in narrative form on two sheets of paper.

Holland said it’s too early to tell what exactly will be cut and how it could affect Arkansas.

“It’s all really speculation right now from our agency’s

standpoint,” he said. “We’ll do what we can with what we have.”

The cut from an $8.3 billion budget to $5.7 billion for the EPA represents the largest percentage decrease — 31 percent — proposed for any federal agency in Trump’s 2018 budget.

The budget calls for eliminating more than 50 EPA programs, although only a

handful were named in the budget. One program named is the Energy Star energy efficiency program. Arkansas companies have participated in the program.

The Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality also uses EPA money to award grants to companies, cities or school districts to reduce diesel emissions each year, although the money wasn’t mentioned in the budget.

The proposed budget also calls for cutting enforcement

at the EPA where states have delegated oversight.

Department of Environmental Quality Director Becky Keogh said the department believes efficiencies could be gained in a future budget and supports “appropriate federal and state roles” according to law.

“We have been assured that our delegated programs to protect air quality, water quality and land resources will continue to receive adequate funding,”

Keogh said.

“We are seeking more information with respect to specific areas identified such as Superfund or Clean Power Plan to determine what impact, if any, reductions will have on [the department’s] programs and resources,” Keogh added, noting the department has been working for a couple of years to reduce its own spending, which she said would better equip the agency to approach “budget adjustments.”