A national map of water service area boundaries can support Justice 40 goals and other federal programs.
An interview with the Internet of Water.
In May, EPIC, the Internet of Water Coalition, and other key partners released a provisional national map of drinking water service area boundaries to support the design and implementation of water and climate programs at the federal, state, and community levels. Over the summer, EPIC will publish a series of blogs that explore why water service area boundaries are particularly important to individuals, communities, water system managers, and state and federal agencies. This blog post is the first of that series and focuses on how federal agencies could use service area boundaries to help fulfill the Justice40 promise to address environmental injustice.
EPIC: Should we start with the good or the bad news?
Internet of Water: Good news, please.
EPIC: Ok, the good news: Earlier this year, the White House Council on Environmental Quality released a draft version of the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool. This is an important step toward addressing environmental injustices, and with some improvements, it could help ensure that at least 40% of federal infrastructure investments go directly to frontline communities most affected by poverty and pollution - i.e. Justice 40.
But now the bad news - this new tool does not include drinking water metrics. What’s going on?
Internet of Water: You’re correct that the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool currently has no drinking water metric, an essential environmental justice metric for determining which communities are likely to be facing safe drinking water concerns.
This is in part because there is no national geospatial dataset for where the boundaries of one drinking water system ends and another begins. Despite the importance of water to health, safety, economic mobility, and overall well being, we do not have a comprehensive, accurate map of who those systems serve. There are nearly 50,000 community water systems in the United States that serve 90 percent of the population - no national resource exists to identify the people who are served by each of system. By contrast, we have maps of every public and private building in the United States. We have maps of national park boundaries. We even have maps of the entire electrical grid and all the primary and secondary roads across the US. We also have maps for many important indicators that are included in the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool, such as air pollution, traffic proximity, housing cost burden, hazardous waste facilities, and income, but we do not have the equivalent for water.
But I have some good news. It is possible to establish a national map that helps every person easily discover who is responsible for the water they drink at home, at work, at school, or at play. In just three months, EPIC, SimpleLab, and the Internet of Water Coalition developed an initial methodology for estimating water service area boundaries which led to the creation of the first provisional nationwide map that shows the boundaries of water service areas across the country.
EPIC: Why a provisional map?
IOW: The boundaries are more accurate in some places than others - and the data need to be improved. Rather than wait to improve the data, we decided to release the map, because in many instances, approximate data is better than no data. But we don’t want to stop there - daylighting the map will also encourage local, state, tribal and federal partners to work together to improve the accuracy of the data.
EPIC: So everyone has a part to play to improve upon this map. Today we are focusing on federal agencies - why should they get involved?
IOW: This data could help federal agencies assess water supply and use at regional and national scales, in building climate resilience for utilities, even in economic development by supporting analyses of water supply and growth for a given metropolitan area - and of course, where we started this conversation. This data set could help federal agencies incorporate drinking water metrics into the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool and improve the tool in doing so.
EPIC: Would the addition of drinking water metrics change the way the tool prioritizes disadvantaged communities?
IOW: We think so.
In our eleven-state example, 11% of census tracts (2810) receive drinking water from a system violating health standards. Roughly a third of these tracts (959) are also low-income, a requirement for Justice 40 prioritization, and 67 of these low-income census tracts are not currently identified by any other environmental metric used in the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool.
This provisional map shows how the addition of a provisional drinking water metric could identify new communities not currently identified by the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool and change the prioritization of already identified communities. The provisional drinking water metric used here is illustrative; federal agencies should work with communities to develop a drinking water metric.
EPIC: That makes sense, given how essential safe drinking water is to communities across the country. I can also imagine that there are many different approaches to creating a drinking water metric.
IOW: Yes, and we just used one example metric for this illustrative analysis. The federal government will need to build on existing dialogues both inside and outside federal agencies to develop a final drinking water metric as part of the Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool.
In the meantime, the federal government could take steps to improve the accuracy and availability of water service boundaries, as that data set will be an essential input to any drinking water quality metric.
EPIC: At EPIC, we are assessing different ways that the federal government could help improve this data set, perhaps as part of programs addressing climate and resilience planning, lead pipe removal, and consumer confidence reports. We are also tracking recent legislation introduced that would improve the access to important data about our water resources. What seems promising to you?
IOW: The Bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 contained an important new water data sharing pilot program that, if funded, would provide vital resources to states for expanding water data sharing at the state level. In addition, a new bill introduced in the House of Representatives, The Water Data Act, creates a new national framework for the sharing and exchange of water data across jurisdictions. If authorized and funded, The Water Data Act would significantly accelerate water data sharing to improve water outcomes, for safe drinking water, drought resilience, and many other purposes.
####
The Environmental Policy Innovation Center believes that technology can accelerate environmental progress and promote equity. To realize this promise, government agencies need the right people, policies, processes, and tools to solve environmental challenges. Water Service Area Boundaries are just one of these tools.
The Environmental Policy Innovation Center built a technology program to help government agencies who want to work at the cross-section of environmental outcomes and innovation. With our partners, we work to:
Strengthen government’s capacity to develop or use technology;
Improve technology policies and processes to accelerate environmental solutions, center community experience, and encourage co-creation processes; and
Create data and tools that enable community engagement.
Support for this work was received from the Bezos Earth Fund.