BTS Navigation Bar

NTL Menu


A State & Local Government Guide to Enviorment Program Funding Alternatives Jan 1994





Click HERE for graphic.




Click HERE for graphic.


                Environmental Program Funding Alternatives

Implementation of environmental protection programs at the state
and local levels often requires nonfederal government funding. 
Traditionally, funding for environmental programs has come from
general revenue funds.  Now that federal, state, and local govern-
ments are facing fiscal constraints, alternative sources of funding
are becoming important options for implementing nonpoint source
pollution controls and other environmental protection measures. 
Traditional sources of funding, such as taxes and bonds, are being
supplemented by innovative funding sources like special license
plates and income tax checkoffs.

There are four basic ways to fund public programs and facilities:
current revenues (pay as you go), borrowing (bonding), intergovern-
mental transfers/assistance (fees or taxes collected by one level
of government and passed on to another in the form of loans or
grants), and public-private partnerships (private sector
involvement in historically public sector activities).  Since not
every financing source or mechanism is appropriate for every state
or local program, legal, administrative, and political aspects of
financing must be taken into consideration when selecting funding
alternatives.

This booklet provides an overview of traditional funding mechanisms
and introduces state and local governments to innovative
alternatives to traditional funding.  The focus is on nonpoint
source pollution, but funding sources and mechanisms can be applied
to environmental programs in general.  A list of contacts and
references is included at the back of the booklet to answer
questions and provide additional information.





                                 Contents


    What Are State Revolving Funds? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

    What Are Leases?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

    What Are Grants?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

    What Are Public-Private Partnerships? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

    What Are Taxes? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

    What Are Fees?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

    What Are Bonds? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

    Look to the Future ... Pollutant Trading. . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

    Be Creative!. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

    Comparing Your Options. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

    For Further Information ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

    Additional Information on Selected
    Reference Materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26

    Document Distribution Centers . . . . . . . . . . . Inside Back Cover



                                                                         1

       California Uses State Revolving Fund to Control NPS Pollution

California uses part of its State Revolving Fund (SRF) for nonpoint
source pollution control.  The fund is administered by the State
Water Board.  The State Water Board has separated the
administration of the fund from the wastewater treatment facilities
program and has developed a flexible program that will evaluate and
select for funding a wide variety of nonpoint source pollution
control projects.  Eligible projects include construction of dem-
onstration projects, retention/detention basins, wetlands for
stormwater treatment, and a variety of best management practices to
reduce or remove nonpoint source pollutants.  The nonpoint source
program for the SRF also permits the establishment of substate
revolving funds that can provide funding to private individuals to
finance new onsite septic systems, mound systems, leach fields,
etc.

What Are State Revolving Funds?

State Revolving Funds (SRFs) provide long-term, low-interest loans
to local governments or individuals for capital investments.  The
repayment of these loans over time allows the fund to revolve its
lending Ability continuously.  In other words, through repayments
the number of available loans is increased.  Established by the
Clean Water Act Amendments of 1987, SRFs are intended to be
administered and operated by the states to provide a financing for
state and local government water quality projects.  SRF assistance
can be used for the construction of wastewater treatment plants,
the implementation of approved state nonpoint source management
programs and ground-water protection strategies under section 319
of the


2

Clean Water Act, and the development and implementation of estuary
conservation and management plans under section 320 of the Clean
Water Act.

What Are Leases?

A lease is a contract that allows another party to use land or a
building for a specified time, usually in return for repayment. 
Leasing obligations aren't considered debt in most states, and
voter approval for financing is not required.

A lease-purchase agreement (municipal lease) grants the party
holding the property lease (the lessee) the option of applying
lease payments to the purchase of the facility.  The lessee is
responsible for paying taxes.  These agreements can be used to
finance the purchase of environmentally sensitive areas, land for
wetlands restoration, or other projects.

           Georgia Leases Shellfish Beds to Commercial Fisherman

Georgia promotes oyster management through its innovative Shellfish
Program.  Georgia does not allow open shellfishing.  Recreational
harvesting by the general public takes place in designated public
grounds, and commercial harvesters must obtain a lease for
harvesting shellfish from the Georgia Department of Natural Re-
sources, Coastal Resources Division.  Leases are awarded on the
basis of bids for a specific shellfish harvesting area.  The bid is
awarded to the most preferable combination of lease payments and
the strongest management plan.  The shellfish resource management
plans are judged on the basis of certain criteria, such as shell
deposition methods.  Funds gained from the lease program are used
to manage the shellfish program.

                                                                         3

A sale-lease back arrangement allows the owner of a facility to
sell it to another entity and subsequently lease it back from the
new owner.  Under a tax-exempt lease, for example, Town X sells a
sewage treatment plant to Y Corporation in order to finance
upgrades and repays Y Corporation's investment with lease payments. 
These arrangements can provide alternative financing for a facility
and may limit a government's liability.

What Are Grants?

Grants are sums of money awarded to state or local governments or
nonprofit organizations that do not need to be repaid.  Grants are
awarded for the purpose of financing a particular activity or
facility.

EPA grants provide funding for state and local governments to meet
national environmental quality goals.  EPA establishes criteria to
receive grant funds, which applicants must meet before using the
funds for a specific activity or program.  Section 319 of the Clean
Water Act allocates federal funds to states for implementing
approved nonpoint source management programs.  Grant money can also
be used for post-implementation monitoring and groundwater
assessment as part of an approved NPS pollution control program.


                       Sea Grant Funded through NOAA

   The Sea Grant College Chesapeake Bay Studies Program is funded
   through an environmental research grant financed and ad-
   ministered by NOAA.  The program provides a focal point for all
   of NOAA's Chesapeake Bay efforts.  It funds research on fish
   populations,toxic substance transport, fate and effects, and
   remote sensing,and it coordinates directly with the
   state/federal Chesapeake Bay Program on issues related to living
   resources, habitat restoration, and coastal zone management.





4

Section 604(b) of the Clean Water Act requires an allotment of
funds to provide grants to states to carry out water quality
management planning.  Section 314 of the Clean Water Act provides
funding for project grants to states for assessing the water
quality of publicly owned lakes, developing lake restoration and
protection plans, implementing the plans to restore and preserve a
lake, and performing post-restoration monitoring to determine the
longevity and effectiveness of the restoration.  Section 106 of the
Clean Water Act provides state and interstate agencies and Indian
tribes with funding to administer programs for the prevention,
reduction, and elimination of water pollution, for example the
prevention and abatement of surface water pollution.  Other grant
programs under the Clean Water Act include section 604(b) (Water
Quality Management Planning), section 320 (National Estuary
Program), section 104(b)(3) (Water Quality Cooperative Agreements),
and section 104(g) (Small Community Outreach).  Section 6217 of the
Coastal Zone Act Reauthorization Amendments of 1990 (CZARA)
requires states to establish Coastal Nonpoint Source Programs,
which must be approved by both NOAA and EPA.  Approved programs
will be implemented through changes to the state nonpoint source
management program approved and funded by EPA under section 319 of
the Clean Water Act and through changes to the state coastal zone
management program approved by NOAA under section 306 of the
Coastal Zone Management Act.

What Are Public-Private Partnerships?

Public-private partnerships can be defined as private sector
involvement in what historically have been public sector
activities.  Private sector investment in capital facilities
reduces the burden on public budgets.  For example, a developer
could build a stormwater facility large enough to also treat the
runoff from nearby public roads.  Partnerships can be used to pay
for capital and/or operating costs, when neither the public nor the
private entity can afford to fund the project alone.  Capital
arrangements involve private ownership and operation





                                                                         5

of a public facility.  Private construction and operating costs are
often lower than public costs.

                      Wetlands Mitigation Partnership

   The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issued a permit to some Florida
   developers to restore a degraded 345-acre wetland on land owned
   by the city of Pembroke Pines.  These entrepreneurs, who call
   themselves the Florida Wetlands bank, sell credits to other
   developers who have impacted degraded wetlands elsewhere and
   have gained approval to satisfy the state's wetlands mitigation
   requirements through offsite mitigation.  The Florida Wetlands
   bank will transform the land into a public park.

Private sector wastewater treatment programs have been 15 to 20
percent more cost-efficient than public programs (USEPA, The Clean
Air Act of 1990: A Guide to Public Financing Options).  Public-
private partnerships often result in higher-quality service and
shorter implementation time, according to a 1991 survey of state
officials.  However, statutory or regulatory changes needed to
arrange public-private partnerships may delay implementation of a
program.  Other issues that may need to b e considered include
government concern over loss of control in a partnership, political
opposition from government workers, and negative public opinion.

What Are Taxes?

A tax is a charge against income, property, or the sale of goods
and services.  Most jurisdictions do not require that a tax be used
for a specific purpose but instead use the funds to provide a
variety of public services, such as solid waste management, public
safety, education, and environmental programs.  However, taxes can
be targeted to raise funds for a specific activity.





6

Property and sales taxes are charged as a percentage of property
value or gross sales and are imposed at the state and local levels. 
Revenue from a property or sales tax can be used to fund projects. 
Dare County, North Carolina, for example, has an economy dominated
by seasonal tourism.  The county uses sales taxes on lodging,
meals, and entertainment to obtain funds to finance public
facilities that must accommodate the infrastructure needs of
sudden, but temporary, population increases.  Similar local sales
taxes could be used by a state or local government to fund nonpoint
pollution control programs at the local level.

                          Annual NPS Control Tax

   A proposal has been developed to charge Puget Sound, Washington,
   landowners an annual nonpoint source pollution control tax based
   on property size and land use.  Owners with onsite sewage
   systems, livestock, and parcels in areas required to develop
   comprehensive stormwater management plans would be assessed a
   surcharge if land uses are not managed to reduce nonpoint source
   pollution.

Real estate transfer taxes are assessed as a percentage of property
values when property is sold.  These taxes are imposed on property
buyers, sellers, or both.  Funds raised by such taxes could be
dedicated to help purchase environmentally sensitive lands or to
support resource conservation programs.

                 Tobacco Tax Used to Protect Water Quality

   A tobacco tax helps finance Washington State's water quality
   protection plan.  In 1986, the Washington legislature passed the
   Centennial Clean Water Act, which established a sales tax on
   tobacco products.  The law dedicates half of the funds raised to
   control of wastewater discharged directly into marine waters and
   the other half to water quality initiatives such as ground water
   protection.

Commodity taxes are charged on specific items (commodities) such as
gasoline, cigarettes, and hunting or fishing equipment.  The money
raised could be targeted for environmental programs or services. 
The federal gasoline tax, for example,




                                                                         7

finances highway improvements.  Since 1981, a tax on the diesel
fuel consumed by tugboats has helped to finance maintenance of the
Nation's system of inland waterways.

                  Duck Stamps Used to Propagate Waterfowl

   In 1974, the Maryland General Assembly enacted a bill requiring
   all who hunt waterfowl in the state to purchase a $1.10 stamp
   annually that must be signed by the hunter, affixed to his/her
   statewide license, and carried while hunting.  Funds from the
   sale of the stamps are used for the propagation of waterfowl in
   the state.  The cost of the stamp has since increased to $6.00,
   generating nearly $400,000 a year.  Similar programs can be used
   to generate funds for a variety of environmental programs such
   as the purchase of environmentally sensitive habitat.

Tax surcharges are fees added to established tax rates.  They are
often used for sudden unforeseen events.  A tax surcharge on
residential sewer bills, for instance, might be used to finance the
replacement of stormwater retention basins destroyed during a
hurricane.

                              Tax Incentives

   Road capacity can be allocated more efficiently by taxing its
   users during peak travel times.  This tax takes the form of a
   "congestion toll." It can be used as an incentive to travel
   before or after rush hour, take the bus, or carpools The
   resultant decrease in traffic could reduce capital outlays for
   highways by making many expansion projects unnecessary.  In
   regions facing severe transportation and air pollution problems,
   such as southern California, road-use tolls are being
   implemented.  A system of congestion tolls for drivers crossing
   the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge began in September 1993.

   Water can be allocated more efficiently by imposing higher
   prices during peak hours of use or an increased fee for water
   use above an allocated amount.  This economic incentive fosters
   conservation.

Tax incentives and disincentives.  A tax system can be set up to
encourage or discourage certain behaviors by offering tax
reductions or





8

increases.  Incentives often take the form of state tax credits,
deductions, or rebates.  A tax credit for the use of low-flow
plumbing fixtures, for example, can encourage water efficiency. 
Because of the desire to save money, disincentives often take the
form of fees, taxes, or price increases.  A tax or fee can
discourage the inefficient use of a product because of the
increased cost of using more of a product than needed.

Tax differentiation is a tax incentive used to promote the
consumption of environmentally safe products.  This financing
mechanism involves a surcharge added to the cost of a polluting
product to encourage the consumer to purchase a cleaner
alternative.

A selective sales tax can be levied either as a retail tax or as an
inspection fee.  Kansas, for example, charges a per-ton fertilizer
inspection fee, with proceeds going to support the State Water
Plan.  A, selective sales tax could fund remediation of
agricultural nonpoint source pollution or could fund research on
farming techniques to reduce environmental impacts.  This tax could
apply to pesticides, herbicides, automotive lubricants, etc.

         Tax Increment Financing Used to Redevelop Depressed Areas

   Tax increment financing is appropriate for areas where
   substantial new development is probable.  The City of Orlando,
   Florida, for example, created a Community Redevelopment Trust in
   1982 to establish a fund to redevelop depressed areas of the
   city.  The city created a series of revenue bonds to finance
   public housing, transportation, and other capital investment. 
   These bonds are not a general obligation of the trust or the
   City of Orlando;they are secured by an irrevocable lien on the
   increment in property tax revenues paid into the Trust Fund and
   interest earned by the Trust Fund.

Tax increment financing is the dedication of incremental increases
in real estate taxes to repay an original investment in improved
public facilities, such as stormwater facilities, that resulted in
increased real estate values.  Tax increment financing is
appropriate for areas





                                                                         9

where substantial new development is anticipated as a result of
public investment in roads, sewers, or other infrastructure.  A
cleaner watershed, for instance, could boost neighboring property
values.  The tax increment created could be used to support contin-
ued environmental protection programs.

What Are Fees?

Fees are charges for services rendered and are one way for
governments to recover the costs of providing certain services to
the public.  Although laws vary widely, many states require that
fees be set at rates that cover only the actual costs of the
services provided, including administrative services.


Plan review fees are assessed by a local government for conducting
a review of development plans to ensure that they meet certain
requirements.  This technical review is used to determine the
adequacy of storm water management facilities or erosion and
sediment controls and to ensure proper siting of structures or
onsite sewage disposal system These fees help cover the cost of
conducting plan reviews and inspections.

Stormwater utility fees are imposed on property owners to pay for
stormwater management.  The charge can be based on the amount of
runoff generated from the property, the amount of impervious area
(hard surfaces) on the property, or the assessed value of the
property.

                          Stormwater Utility Fees

   There are more than 100 stormwater utilities in the United
   States.  Methods of determining stormwater utility charges vary
   considerably around the country, depending on local stormwater
   management goals and conditions.  In general, utilities are
   either publicly owned and operated enterprises or privately
   owned enterprises whose ability to profit from providing public
   services is regulated by a public agency.  Utility fees provide
   a more reliable source of funds for local stormwater management
   than do property taxes.





10

                      Impact Fees for New Development

   Carroll County, Maryland, charges an impact fee on new land
   development.  The amount of the fee depends on the type of
   development (i.e., a single-family home, commercial development,
   etc. ). These fees fund a variety of programs ranging from water
   supply protection to elementary school education.


Impact fees transfer the costs of infrastructure services (roads,
sewers, stormwater treatment, etc.) needed for private development
directly to developers or property owners.  Unlike user fees, which
recover costs over the life of a project, impact fees are usually
collected in one lump sum at the beginning of a project.  These
fees are particularly attractive to local governments because they
relieve up-front financing pressures on local budgets.  In
California, for example, several wastewater treatment plants have
been financed with fees paid by developers based on the projects'
anticipated treatment requirements.  Impact fees can be used to
fund the installation and maintenance of stormwater management
facilities on newly developed sites.

   Homeowners Pay Inspection and Operation and Maintenance Fees

   Otter Tail County, Minnesota, has developed an onsite utility to
   protect its lakes from contamination due to onsite sewage
   disposal system failures.  All onsite system owners pay a basic
   fee for inspections and ad ministration costs and have the
   option to pay an additional amount for additional services. 
   Operation an maintenance costs are financed by fees paid by
   homeowners.

Inspection fees are charged to cover the costs of making sure that
development plans are implemented.  These fees may defray the
program costs of erosion and sediment control, septic system siting
and installation inspections, and stormwater treatment facility
operation and maintenance.

User fees are the most common way to recover the costs of providing
a service.  These fees can be tied directly to the use of a
resource or facility


                                                                        11

(sports fishing and hunting license fees, park entrance fees,
etc.). User fees are particularly useful at the local level where
user groups are easily identified.

Product charges, similar to commodity taxes, are fees that can be
added to the price of products that could potentially cause
degradation of water quality, such as nonreturnable containers,
batteries, lubricating oil, fertilizers, and pesticides.  These
revenues can be earmarked for environmental programs.

Capacity credits are a form of financing in which private interests
(usually developers) purchase future capacity in a public facility
such as a stormwater treatment facility.  Applicants are guaranteed
future access to the excess capacity of that particular facility. 
Where project construction hinges on adequate funding, capacity
credits can contribute to project completion.

       Effluent Discharge Fees for Industrial and Municipal Sources

   Wisconsin has established an unusually comprehensive fee system
   for its water program to recover total direct and indirect
   program costs.  The state issues general permits and levies
   permit fees for discharges based on volume and type of
   pollutant.  Such pollutants are associated with various
   industrial sources or users, such as concrete products op-
   erations; sand, gravel, or crushed stone operations; swimming
   pools; petroleum storage terminals; water treatment plants; and
   dredging projects involving uncontaminated sediments.  This
   effluent discharge fee program generated more than $7 million in
   1993.

Effluent discharge fees are levied on an industrial facility by a
government authority, based on the volume of pollutants discharged
into water.  Under an effluent discharge fee system, a discharger
is required to pay a certain amount for every unit of pollution
discharged into surface water.  The system can be based on water
quality objectives, the costs for financing a pollution abatement
scheme, or effluent standards.  The system has several advantages:
it allows firms to reduce pollution at lower costs than those
incurred under a


12

command-and-control approach; it provides incentives to firms to
invest in pollution control technology; and it can generate revenue
that can be used to fund activities that promote environmental
quality.  The disadvantages of the charge system are the complex
planning, analysis, monitoring, enforcement, litigation, and
interjurisdictional negotiation required by local authorities.  In
addition, assigning monetary values to pollution damage may be
difficult.

What Are Bonds?

Bonds are a mechanism to borrow capital for a project and
distribute the burden of repayment over the life span of the
project among those who benefit from it Just as individuals borrow
to finance their homes through bank-issued mortgages, governments
borrow funds from investors by issuing debt in the form of bonds. 
Bonds usually finance capital facilities, such as erosion control
structures and stormwater treatment facilities.  Typically, bonds
are used only to finance projects that have both known and proven
life expectancies.

                    $75 Million Bond Passed to Protect
                      Environmentally Sensitive Lands

   Broward County, Florida, residents voted to pass a $75 million
   bond to purchase environmentally sensitive lands.  The money has
   been used to purchase more than 560 acres of wetlands, pristine
   uplands, endangered species habitat, and lands necessary for
   maintaining the integrity of the Everglades ecosystem.  Initial
   site maintenance (exotic plant removal, fencing, etc.) will be
   paid for with bond money.  Long-term maintenance will be funded
   as part of the county parks department's operating budget.

Short-term bonds are usually payable within I year.  Establishing
short-term debt provides interim funding of projects waiting to
receive long-term financing.  There are two categories of short-
term bonds: notes and

                                                                        13

tax-exempt commercial paper.  Notes are loans issued in
anticipation of grants, bonds, or taxes.  Tax-exempt commercial
paper is a form of unsecured debt backed by a letter or line of
credit.

Long-tenn bonds traditionally match the term of financing with the
life expectancy of the project.  A stormwater treatment facility,
for example, might be expected to perform adequately for 30 years;
therefore, the community could issue bonds that have a term of up
to 30 years.  There are two categories of long-term bonds.  Term
bonds are loans for which the entire loan amount and interest are
payable on the final maturity date.  Serial bonds are similar to
traditional home mortgages: the principal and interest are repaid
in periodic installments over the life of the bond.  Long-term
bonds can be issued as general obligation bonds or as revenue
bonds, as described below.

General obligation bonds are long-term municipal bonds that are
backed by the full faith and credit of the state or local
government.  This means that the state or local government pledges
to use all of its taxing and other revenue-raising powers to repay
bond holders.  Both state and local governments have used general
obligation bonds to finance capital projects related to
environmental programs, including purchases of environmentally
sensitive lands.

Revenue bonds are long-term municipal bonds guaranteed solely by
the dedication of project income or system funds (e.g., user fees
from the infrastructure where capital costs are covered by the
bond) rather than by a general tax.  Both state and local
governments have used revenue bonds to provide start-up capital for
stormwater utilities and to finance environmental projects,
including the renovation of wastewater treatment plants.

Bond banks, of which there are at least 11 across the country, are
financial institutions created primarily to provide smaller
communities access to the national bond finance infrastructure
projects.  Typically, a bond bank either sells bonds in the bond
market and uses the proceeds to purchase bonds from local
communities or buys bonds directly from local communities and pools
several small issues into one large bond

14

issue to be sold in the bond market.  Small communities could take
advantage of bond banks to finance environmental infrastructure
projects.

                      Pollutant Trading for Nutrients

   In a North Carolina watershed, the Tar-Pamlico Basin Association
   (a coalition of point source dischargers) and state and regional
   environmental groups have proposed a two-phased nutrient
   management strategy that incorporates point and nonpoint source
   pollutant trading.  The plan requires association members to
   finance nonpoint source reduction activities in the basin if
   their nutrient discharges exceed a base allowance.

Look to the Future... Pollutant Trading

Point and nonpoint source pollutant trading involves financing
reductions in nonpoint source pollution in lieu of undertaking more
expensive point source pollution reduction efforts.  A trading
program is intended to produce cost savings to point source
dischargers while improving water quality.  Implementing a trading
program requires a waterbody identifiable as a watershed or
segment, as well as a measurable combination of point sources and
controllable nonpoint sources.  There must be significant load
reductions for which the cost per pound reduced for nonpoint source
controls is lower than the cost for upgrading point source
controls.  Lastly, point source dischargers must face requirements
to either upgrade facility treatment capabilities or trade for
nonpoint source reductions in order to meet water quality goals.

Such a program allows the private sector to allocate its resources
to reduce pollutants in the most cost-effective manner, and it
encourages the development of a watershed-wide or basin-wide
approach to water quality protection.  Such a program also entails
cooperation between agencies, however, and requires a


                                                                        15

system to arrive at trading ratios between point and nonpoint
source controls.

                      License Plates to Save the Bay

   The State of Maryland has implemented a license plate program to
   fund its Chesapeake Bay Trust.  More than 400,000 "Treasure the
   Chesapeake" license plates have been sold, raising more than $4
   million.  In the Baltimore area, automobile dealers offered Bay
   license plates at no cost to their new car and truck customers
   by paying the $1 0 fee in June and July 1992, raising $20,000
   for the Trust.

        Tax Checkoff to Fund Restoration and Conservation Programs

   Maryland's tax checkoff for the Chesapeake Bay and Endangered
   Species Fund is included on the standard tax form.  Taxpayers
   can contribute a portion of their taxes to the fund, which
   yielded a record $1.1 million in 1992.  Divided equally between
   the Chesapeake Bay Trust and the Department of Natural Resources
   Endangered Species Fund, the checkoff funds a variety of Bay
   restoration and conservation programs.

Be Creative!

The State of Maryland has been imaginative in its acquisition of
funding to restore the Chesapeake Bay.  The Chesapeake Bay Trust
was created in 1985 bring the financial support of the business
community and private donors together with the many community
groups and education that need financial assistance for their Bay
projects.  Maryland's programs exemplify successful implementation
of innovative funding alternatives.

State lotteries are becoming a potential source of revenue for
environmental programs.  For


16

example, Kansas and Minnesota use lottery receipts to help finance
natural resource management programs.

                             Lottery Revenues

   Kansas uses a portion of its lottery receipts to help finance
   its water resource management programs, including wetland
   protection activities.  Kansas created the State Water Plan
   Funding 1989,for which half" of the revenues are derived from
   the state general fund and state lottery funds.  The other half
   are derived from a system of fees on municipal water use,
   industrial water use, stockwater use, pesticides, fertilizers,
   and pollution fines and penalties.  In Minnesota,voters approved
   state constitutional amendments establishing the Environmental
   and Natural Resources Trust Fund and a state lottery to finance
   the fund.

Comparing Your Options

Several funding alternatives may be available for a particular
project For example, the following four funding strategies to
control solid waste could easily be adapted to fund nonpoint source
programs: property taxes, tax incentives/disincentives, user fees,
or tax surcharges.  Funding for regional stormwater management
facilities or a shoreline erosion control project could be obtained
in similar ways.

Capital and operating costs and cost-effectiveness must be
carefully analyzed before choosing a funding alternative.  Legal,
administrative, and political aspects and impacts of each
alternative need to be considered.  One must consider the legal
workability and political attractiveness of a financing mechanism;
the effort needed for implementation, including start-up costs and
costs for ongoing collection and management of funds; the fairness
of distribution of the funding burden among individuals; and the
public's willingness to pay or to make a particular sector pay.

                                                                        17

              Four Funding Strategies to Control Solid Waste

Tax Incentive/Disincentive
   Estherville, Iowa uses the pay by-the-bag approach to trash
   collection.  This system gives households an incentive to re-
   cycle, compost, and change their buying habits to reduce the
   volume of waste they generate.

User Fee
   Hollywood, Florida, charges residents a standard monthly 'lee'
   for solid waste management services.  This establishes a direct
   link between those who use the services and those who pay for
   them.

Property Tax
   Fairfax City, Virginia, uses Property taxes to finance trash
   collection.  Residents are charged a flat annual amount that is
   not related to the volume or type of trash they discard.

Tax Surcharge
   Oregon funds solid waste management through proceeds from the
   Bottle Bill, a law that requires consumers to pay a deposit on
   each container purchased.  The deposit is refunded when the
   container is returned for recycling.


18

For Further Information ...

BONDS

USEPA. 1992.  Alternative Financing Mechanisms for Environmental
Program.  Final. draft Environmental Finance Program, Office of
Administration and Resources Management

USEPA. 1988.  Financing Marine and Estuarine Programs: A Guide to
Resources. Office of Marine and Estuarine Protection.  EPA Document
No. 503-8-88-001.

For more information about Broward County Bond Issue, contact:
Broward County Administrator's Office, 115 South Andrews
Avenue, Rm 409, Ft.  Lauderdale, FL 33301, ph. (305) 357-7354.

BOTTLE BILLS

For more information on bottle bills, contact: The Public Interest
Research Group (PIRG) in your area, or PIRG National Headquarters,
215 Pennsylvania Avenue, SE, Washington, DC 20003, ph. (202) 546-
9707.

CONGESTION TOLLS

World Resources Institute. 1992.  Green Fees: How a Tax Shift Can
Work for the Environment and the Economy.

For more information on congestion tolls, contact: World Resources
Institute, 1709 New York Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20006, ph.
(202) 638-6300.

DUCK STAMPS

For more information on duck stamps, contact: Duck Stamp Program
Manager, Maryland Department of Natural Resources,



                                                                        19

Public Communications Office (D-4), Tawes State Office Building,
Annapolis, MD 21402, ph. (410) 774-2035.

EFFLUENT DISCHARGE FEES

Bernstein, J. Undated.  Alternative Approaches to Pollution Control
and Waste Management.  The World Bank, Urban Management Program.

USEPA. 1992.  Alternative Financing Mechanisms for Environmental
Programs.  Final draft Environmental Finance Program, Office of
Administration and Resources Management.,

Washington State Department of Ecology. 1993.  A Summary of Other
States Wastewater Discharge Permit Fees.  Document No.93-63.

For more information about Wisconsin's effluent discharge fee pro-
gram, contact: Fee Program Manager, Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources, P.O. Box 792 1, 101 South Webster Street, Madison, WI
53707, ph. (608) 267-7638.

FEES

USEPA. 1992.  Alternative Financing Mechanisms for Environmental
Programs.  Final draft Environmental Finance Program, Office of
Administration and Resources Management.

USEPA. 1992.  State and Local Funding of Nonpoint Source Control
Programs.  Office of Water.  EPA Document No. EPA-841 -R-92-003.

Zachmann, B. 1990.  A Nonpoint Source Pollution Control Fee
Proposal.

For more information on fees, contact: The Environmental Financial
Advisory Board, c/o USEPA, Office of Administration and Resources
Management (3304),401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460, ph. (202)
260-1020, fax (202) 260-0710.


20

For more information about Maryland's impact fee, contact:
Director, Chesapeake Bay Local Government Advisory Committee, 777
North Capitol Street, NE, Suite 300, Washington, DC 20002, ph.
(800) 446-5422.

For more information about Minnesota's onsite utility fee, contact:
District Officer, Route 2, Box 319, Battle Lake, MN 56515, ph.
(212) 864-5533.

For more information about the State of Washington's nonpoint
source pollution control fee, contact: Shellfish Protection Team,
Washington Department of Ecology, P.O. Box 47600, Olympia, WA
98504-7600, ph. (206) 459-6836.

GRANTS

Government Printing Office. 1991.  Catalog of Federal Domestic
Assistance.

USEPA. 1993.  Watershed Protection: Catalog of Federal Programs. 
Office of Water.  EPA Document No. 841-B-93-002.

USEPA. 1992.  Alternative Financing Mechanisms for Environmental
Programs.  Final draft Environmental Finance Program, Office of
Administration and Resources Management.

For more information about the Chesapeake Bay Studies Program
grant, contact: Chesapeake Bay Division, National Marine Fisheries
Office of Habitat Protection, NOAA Chesapeake Bay Office, 410
Severn Avenue,, Suite 107A, Annapolis, MD 21403, ph. (410) 280-
1871.

LEASING/SELLING

USEPA. 1992.  Alternative Financing Mechanisms for Environmental
Programs.  Final draft Environmental Finance Program, Office of
Administration and Resources Management.


                                                                        21

USEPA. 1988.  Financing Marine and Estuarine Programs: A Guide to
Resources.  Office of Marine and Estuarine Protection.  EPA
Document No. 503-8-88-001.

For more information on leasing/selling, contact: The Environmental
Financial Advisory Board,, c/o USEPA, Office of Administration and
Resources Management (3304),401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460,
ph. (202) 260-1020, fax (202) 260-07 1 0.

For more information about Georgia's Shellfish Program, contact:
The Shellfish Program, Georgia Department of Natural Resources,
1200 Glynn Avenue, Brunswick, GA 31523-9990, ph. (912) 264-7218.

LOTTERY REVENUES

Apogee Research, Inc. 1990.  Financing State Wetlands Programs.
Office of Wetlands Protection, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency.

For more information on lottery revenues, contact: Wetlands
Strategies and State Programs Branch, Office of Wetlands, Oceans -
and Watersheds, Wetlands Division (4502), 401 M Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20460, ph. (202) 260-779 1.

PAY-BY-THE-BAG HOUSEHOLD COLLECTION

World Resources Institute. 1992.  Green Fees: How a Tax Shift Can
Work for the Environment and the Economy.

For more information about Iowa's system, contact: World Resources
Institute, 1709 New York Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20006, ph.
(202) 638-6300.

POLLUTION TRADING

USEPA. 1992.  Alternative Financing Mechanisms for Environmental
Programs.  Final draft.  Environmental Finance Program, Office of
Administration and Resources Management.


22

USEPA. 1992.  Incentive Analysis for Clean Water Act Reauthori-
zation: Point Source/Nonpoint Source Trading for Nutrient Discharge
Reductions.  Office of Water, Office of Policy, Planning and

Analysis.

PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS

USEPA. 1992.  The Clean Air Act of 1990: A Guide to Public
Financing Options.  Office of Air and Radiation.

USEPA. 1992.  Alternative Financing Mechanisms for Environmental
Programs.  Final draft Environmental Finance Program, Office of
Administration and Resources Management.

For more information on the wetland mitigation bank program in
Broward County, contact: Broward County Department of Natural
Resources Protection, 218 SW 1st Avenue, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301,
ph. (301) 519-1230.

SPECIAL LICENSE PLATES

Maryland Office of the Governor. 1992. 1992 Chesapeake Bay Progress
Report.

For more information on special license plates, contact: Office of
the Governor, Governor's Chesapeake Bay Communications Office,
State House, Annapolis, MD 21401, ph. (410) 974-5300, or Chesapeake
Bay Trust, 60 West Street, Suite 200A, Annapolis, MD 21401, ph.
(410) 974-2941.

STATE REVOLVING FUNDS

USEPA. 1992.  State and Local Funding of Nonpoint Source Control
Programs.  Office of Water.  EPA Document No. 841-R-92-003.



                                                                        23

USEPA. 1990.  Funding of Expanded Uses Activities by State
Revolving Fund Programs: Examples and Program Recommendations. 
Office of Water.  EPA Document No. 430-09-90-006.

USEPA. 1988.  SRF Initial Guidance.  Office of Municipal Pollution
Control.

For more information on state revolving funds, contact: Chief,
Nonpoint Source Loan Unit, Division of Water Quality, State Water
Resources Control Board, 901 P Street, P.O. -Box 100, Sacramento,
CA 95801, ph. (916) 657-1043.

STORMWATER UTILITIES

Maryland Department of the Environment. 199 1. Potential Revenues
From Stormwater Utilities in Maryland.

USEPA. 1992.  Alternative Financing Mechanisms for Environmental
Programs.  Final draft.  Environmental Finance Program, Office of
Administration and Resources Management.

USEPA. 1992.  State and Local Funding of Nonpoint Source Control
Programs.  Office of Water.  EPA Document No. 841 -R-92-003.

USEPA. 1992.  Storm Water Utilities: Innovative Financing for Storm
Water Management.  Draft final report

For more information on stormwater utilities, contact: Water Policy
Branch, Office of Policy Analysis, Office of Policy, Planning and
Evaluation, USEPA (2121), 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC
20460, ph. (202) 260-2756.

For more information on stormwater utilities, contact: The Environ-
mental Financial Advisory Board, c/o USEPA, Office of Adminis-
tration and Resources Management (3304), 401 M Street, SW,
Washington, DC 20460, ph. (202) 260-1020, fax (202) 260-0710.

24

TAX CHECKOFFS

Maryland Office of the Governor. 1992. 1992 Chesapeake Bay Progress
Report.

For more information on tax checkoffs, contact: Office of the
Governor, Governor's Chesapeake Bay Communications Office, State
House, Annapolis, NO 21401, ph. (410) 974-5300, or Chesapeake Bay
Trust, 60 West Street, Suite 200A, Annapolis, MD 21401, ph. (410)
974-2941.

TAXES

Government Accounting Office. 1993.  Implications of Using
Pollution Taxes to Supplement Regulation.  Document No. GAO/ RCED-
93-13.

USEPA. 1992.  Alternative Financing Mechanisms for Environmental
Programs.  Final draft.  Environmental Finance Program, Office of
Administration and Resources Management.

USEPA. 1992.  Protecting Coastal and Wetlands Resources: A Guide
for Local Governments.  Office of Water.  EPA Document No. 842-R-
92-002.

USEPA. 1988.  Financing Marine and Estuarine Programs: A Guide to
Resources.  Office of Marine and,Estuarine Protection.  Document
No. 503-8-88-001.

For more information about the State of Washington's tobacco tax,
contact: House Office of the Budget, Second Floor, House Office
Building, MS AS33, Olympia, WA 98504, ph. (206) 786-7107, or House
Ways and Means Committee, MS AS33, Olympia, WA 98504, ph. (206)
786-7136.


25

Notes

26

Additional Information on Selected
Reference Materials

USEPA. 1992. Alternative Financing Mechanisms for Environmental
Programs. Final draft.  Office of Administration and Resources
Management.

This report provides information to resolve two types of funding
shortfalls: state capacity (program personnel) and capital
infrastructure needs.  This comprehensive encyclopedia of
alternative financing mechanisms can be used as an information
resource for states and local governments.  It is intended to
provide information about principal features of alternative
financing mechanisms, their relative advantages and disadvantages
(with particular attention given to administrative considerations),
and some of the key questions and issues associated with their use.

For more information contact: U.S. EPA, Office of Administration
and Resources Management, Office of the Comptroller, Resource
Management Division (3304),401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC
20460,(202) 260-1020.

   U.S. EPA's Environmental Financing Information Network (EFIN)

   EPA's Environmental Finance Program manages the Environmental
   Financing Information Network (EFIN) to disseminate financial
   information to public entities.  This electronic on-line
   database provides information on financing alternatives for
   state and local environmental programs and projects.  You can
   use EFIN to search for environmental financing approaches,
   publications, and activities.

   For more information contact: U. S. EPA, EFIN Center,
   Environmental Finance Program, Office of the Comptroller (3304),
   401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC 20460, (202) 260-0420.


                       Document Distribution Centers

There are five national sources for the distribution of EPA
publications:

EPA's Public Information Center (PIC)
Phone: (202) 260-7751 Fax: (202) 260-6257
The PIC provides the main contact between the public and EPA with a
visitor's center featuring environmental videos, photographic
displays, and databases.

Center for Environmental Research Information (CERI) Phone: (513)
569-7562 Fax: (202) 260-6257
CERI is the focal point for the exchange of scientific and
technical environmental information produced by EPA.  It supports
the activities of the Office of Research and Development, its
laboratories, and associated programs nationwide.

National Center for Environmental Publications and Information
(NCEPI)
Phone: (513) 891-6561 Fax: (513) 569-6685
The central dissemination point for EPA is NCEPI, which has 4,200
current titles and more than 9 million copies of publications and
multimedia products.  NCEPI has an electronic ordering and
inventory system available on EPA's mainframe for EPA staff.  The
system links EPA regions, program offices, and field offices.

National Technical Information Service (NTIS),
U.S. Department of Commerce
Phone: (703) 487-4650 Fax: (703) 321-8547
U.S. Government Printing Office (GPO)
Phone:    (202) 783-3238 Fax:    (202) 512-2250



   EPA
   United States
   Environmental Protection Agency
   (4503F)
   Washington, DC 20460

   Official Business
   Penalty for Private Use
   $300

(322PFA.html)
Jump To Top