Skip to main content

New SRF Affordability Criteria Development

Image of Active Construction on a new Wastewater Treatment Plant
Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy

New SRF Affordability Criteria Development

Timeline for SRF overburdened criteria updates:

  • January – Statistics from FY24 and FY25 will be posted to provide an overview of program outcomes.
  • May - EGLE will be scheduling two virtual public meetings in May where additional details on prior statistics and/or data on how criteria changes would have affected prior scoring will be shared. Both meetings will have the same content and those interested will be asked to attend the one that fits their schedule best. After these meetings EGLE will begin to start accepting public comments on the SRF overburdened criteria.
  • June – A draft release of criteria will be posted to this site and EGLE will continue to accept public comments.
  • July – A public hearing will be held regarding the draft criteria followed by an additional month-long period to continue receiving public comments.
  • September - Updated overburdened criteria will be posted for Fiscal Years 2027, 2028, and 2029 so applicants will have time to see and review them prior to submitting an ITA for Fiscal Year 2027.

Overview Statistics from Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 and 2025

The following statistics were compiled from projects on the FY24 and FY25 Intended Use Plans. It is not intended to be an exhaustive list or imply if and what changes EGLE may propose for the overburdened qualification  criteria for FY27, FY28, and FY29.

Summary of FY 24-25

  • Number of projects that applied for overburdened status: 612
  • Number of projects that qualified for overburdened status: 431
  • Number of projects that qualified without calculation either by being in the lowest 20% of Michigan’s population in taxable value per capita (TVPC) or by having a median annual household income (MAHI) below 125% of the federal poverty level for a family of 4: 149
  • Number of projects that qualified as overburdened or significantly overburdened and did not receive funding (fell outside of the fundable range): 251
  • Number of regional systems that qualified as overburdened: 137
  • Number of non-regional systems that qualified as overburdened: 294

Average MAHI and TVPC

  • FY24 average MAHI of applicant qualifying as overburdened: $44,378.86
  • FY24 average TVPC of applicant qualifying as overburdened: $28,994.36
  • FY25 average MAHI of applicant qualifying as overburdened: $51,784.27
  • FY25 average TVPC of applicant qualifying as overburdened: $31,914.30

Average Resident Equivalent User Cost

  • FY24 average applicant cost per REU: $973.92
  • FY25 average applicant cost per REU: $1271.42
  • FY24 and FY25 - Regional systems average cost per REU: $923.29
  • FY24 and FY25 - non-regional systems average cost per REU: $1233.80

FY24 and FY25 projects mapped and compared to the Climate and Economic Justice Screening tool.

EGLE mapped FY24 and FY25 projects in the fundable range and compared them to the most recent version of The Council on Environmental Quality’s (CEQ) Climate and Economic Justice Screening Tool (CEJST) which was used to determine progress towards the Environmental Justice 40 policy.

CEJST used indicators of burdens in eight categories: climate change, energy, health, housing, legacy pollution, transportation, water and wastewater, and workforce development and from that determines if a community is classified as disadvantaged, partially disadvantaged, or not disadvantaged. When comparing the methods in how CEJST and EGLE SRF classify communities, CEJST classified 60% of the projects in Michigan’s fundable range as disadvantaged. Using EGLE’s overburdened criteria, which use median household income, taxable value per capita, and cost of service per residential equivalent unit, 87% of projects in the fundable range qualified as overburdened. While EGLE uses fewer complex criteria to define an overburdened community, it resulted in more projects qualifying as overburdened.

Click to view the SRF and CEJST comparison map

Flow of Projects in FY24

  • Projects on the FY24 CWSRF and DWSRF Intended Use Plans: 271
  • Projects that qualified as overburdened: 136
  • Projects that qualified as significantly overburdened: 70
  • Projects that did not qualify as overburdened: 65
  • Projects funded in FY24: 105
  • Projects that were not funded in FY24 that reapplied in FY25: 123
  • Projects that qualified as overburdened: 60
  • Projects that qualified as significantly overburdened: 19
  • Projects that did not qualify as overburdened: 44
  • Projects of the 123 that reapplied in FY25 that were still not able to be funded: 105
Click to expand the flow of projects diagram