August.13.2021
Please see our follow-up Insight for further details following passage of the Act by the House of Representatives.
The following is a high-level summary of key components of the “Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act” that will meaningfully impact the infrastructure / public-private partnership (“P3”), renewable energy and public finance sectors. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act passed the United States Senate on August 10, 2021, and includes $450 billion in spending to renew existing programs and $550 billion in new federal spending allocated, in part, as follows:
Roads & Bridges |
$110 billion |
Electric Vehicles |
$15 billion |
Water Infrastructure |
$55 billion |
Railways |
$66 billion |
Ports and Waterways |
$17 billion |
Western Water Infrastructure |
$8 billion |
Airports |
$25 billion |
Reconnecting Communities |
$1 billion |
Broadband |
$65 billion |
Public Transit |
$39 billion |
Power Infrastructure |
$65 billion |
Resiliency |
$47 billion |
In addition to providing direct grant and credit programs to fund and finance the above sectors, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act also implements critical policy changes to improve the P3, renewable energy and public finance sectors. While passing the Senate on August 10th was a major hurdle, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act still requires approval by the House of Representatives and is politically expected to be passed only once a $3.5 trillion reconciliation bill is also fully passed in the House of Representatives.
Section # |
High-Level Summary |
Commentary |
Infrastructure / Public-Private Partnerships |
||
Sec. 11508(d) P3 Value for money analysis for federally assisted projects |
|
Generally these provisions are helpful to the P3 industry as the modifications will provide more funding and awareness of VfM analysis, which serves as the underlying foundation for P3 project implementation. However, the language could be improved to require a VfM for all federally assisted projects under 23USC106(h)(3) regardless of whether the project sponsor intends to carry out the project as a P3. This is consistent with the program described below in Sec. 70701. |
Sec. 70701 Value for Money Analysis for TIFIA or RRIF Funded Projects |
|
This section will now require that P3 be considered as an option for any project intending to use TIFIA or Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (“RRIF”). VfM analysis may identify P3 projects relative to design-build or design-bid-build delivery, in part, due to the anticipated long-term life-cycle savings delivered under a P3 model. Additionally, the best practices report required by Build America Bureau could be used as a basis for potential standardization of P3 contracting which could aid in accelerating the industry if implemented properly. |
Sec. 11404 Congestion Relief and Interstate Tolling |
|
Enabling interstate tolling for certain eligible projects is an expansion of the current federal prohibition on tolling of new interstate toll lanes. |
Sec. 11305 Alternative Contracting methods |
Enables the Secretary of Transportation to utilize alternative contracting methodology, including long-term concession agreements and any other method permitted by a State under Title 23, on behalf of any Federal land management agency that receives funding under Sections 203, 204 or 308. |
This should enable the Secretary of Transportation to procure a P3 project on behalf of certain federal land management agencies. Delivering P3s at the Federal level has been infrequent due to the challenges in scoring a P3 project relative to other delivery models under OMB Circular A-11, Appendix B scoring rules. Industry organizations are looking to expand this authority to other non-transportation related federal agencies and to also address the scoring challenges through a P3 pilot program. |
Sec. 21205 |
|
This Pilot Program, while focused on non-urbanized areas of 150,000 people or less, is an important initial step for the United States in further establishing a federal level P3 center of excellence similar to those in other jurisdictions, including Canada and Australia that take a more active role in P3 project implementation. Enabling Build America Bureau to engage and fund advisor costs on behalf of State and local governments should help enable jurisdictions without the human or financial resources to allocate resources to exploring the feasibility of the P3 method. This legislation can be improved in the House by increasing the funding substantially from the proposed $12 million. Alternative delivery projects typically require significant advisory services and therefore, this program will need more funding to move the needle across the industry. Eligible entities that may want to engage advisors directly with Federal grant money can utilize the Rural Surface Transportation Grant Program described below. |
Sec. 11311 Efficient Implementation of NEPA |
Allows for any Federal land management agency to rely upon an environmental assessment prepared by the Federal Highway Administration. |
This should streamline Federal environmental reviews by eliminating the need for more than one Federal agency to review the adequacy of an environmental impact statement. If enacted, this legislation can meaningfully accelerate the Federal environmental review process for land development projects. |
Sec. 12001 TIFIA Amendments / S. Amendment 2354 to S. Amendment 2137 |
|
These changes (1) broaden the accessibility of TIFIA to new asset classes like airports and transit oriented development and (2) generally could make TIFIA more user friendly by streamlining approval time periods and adding transparency around the entire process through real-time monthly and quarterly online public reporting. With respect to bonding, this amendment appears to make explicit a process which TIFIA presumably goes through when underwriting the credit worthiness of a typical P3 project to date, which is ensuring there is proper performance and payment security. |
Sec. 21301 RRIF codification and reforms |
|
The modifications made to the TIFIA program were also carried through in large part to the RRIF program. Critically, the RRIF program has been less utilized than TIFIA in part because of the requirement to pay the credit risk premium, which under TIFIA is appropriated and federally funded. Adding a feature that allows for the credit risk premium to be returned to the borrower, with interest, upon full repayment may increase the financial viability of certain projects which can qualify for RRIF loans. Additionally, the legislation’s clarification that if a RRIF loan is repaid with non-federal funding, such loan does not count towards the federal share portion for purposes of a State or local entity receiving other federal grants cures an ambiguity in the existing law that may be important for projects that rely on federal funding and state/local contributions to attract private investment or support construction costs. |
Sec. 71001 Technical Assistance for Asset Monetization Projects |
|
Providing up to $2 million per project to fund up-front advisory fees should incentivize less capitalized jurisdictions to explore P3 and asset monetization as an alternative delivery model. The State cap of $4 million over 3 years will potentially limit a State’s ability to initiate feasibility activities for multiple projects within the 3-year period. Additionally, the restriction on raising tolls to fund the project may also be a challenge for those projects that have dynamic or regularly adjusted tolling. |
Sec. 11132 Rural Surface Transportation Grant Program |
|
This program can help fund pre-development costs of State and local governments exploring various delivery models, including alternative delivery and P3. One expectation is that this additional funding will help enable jurisdictions to procure P3 projects where such jurisdictions would not otherwise have the funding necessary to initiate a P3 project. $25 million in funding per grant is significant and represents a meaningful contribution toward the costs necessary to take a P3 project from conception to procurement. Requiring projects to commence construction within 18 months of the obligation of funding may be too short, depending on the design of the project, permitting and stakeholder requirements, and other factors. Adherence to this requirement may require local and State governments to “commence construction” with preliminary site investigations and other pre-construction activities. |
Broadband |
||
Sec. 60102 Grants for Broadband Deployment Sec. 60401 Enabling Middle Mile Broadband Infrastructure |
|
Broadband P3 projects have historically been challenged due in part to the inability to generate independent commercial revenue from dark fiber. The additional federal money could provide the “gap funding” necessary to enable more economically feasible broadband P3 projects in jurisdictions outside of major commercial hubs across the United States. Additionally, providing funding for middle-mile infrastructure will help enable connectivity in areas that otherwise do not have the underlying commercial basis for such expansion. |
Public Finance |
||
Sec. 80401 Private Activity Bonds for Qualified Broadband Projects
|
|
Adding a program for broadband projects to be financed with private activity bonds, in addition to the federal grant programs described above, should facilitate the buildout of broadband infrastructure that otherwise could not be implemented without such federal assistance. However, the narrow definition of qualified broadband projects may reduce the overall impact of the program. |
Sec. 80402 Carbon Dioxide Capture Facilities |
|
This program can provide financing options for the carbon capture industry, which historically would not have access to tax-exempt debt capital. It should be noted that Section 45Q tax credit for carbon capture and sequestration is subject to reduction for projects that are financed with tax-exempt bonds. |
Sec. 80403 Increase in National Limitation Amount for Qualified Highway or Surface Freight Transportation Facilities |
Increases the current private activity bond cap on qualified highway and surface freight transportation facilities from $15billion to $30billion. |
Private activity bonds have been critical to reducing the cost-of-capital on P3 projects across the United States. The current $15 billion cap is almost entirely exhausted and therefore increasing this cap will unlock the opportunity for more qualified P3 projects to be financed over the next several years. |
Energy |
||
Sec. 11401 Grants for charging and fueling infrastructure |
|
This is critical funding for the electric vehicle industry while many original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) are expanding their footprint in the electric vehicle space. OEMs could use this funding to expand charging capacity at dealerships across the United States. |
Sec. 41001 Energy Storage & 41007 Renewable Energy Projects |
Authorizes appropriations of $740 million for research, development, grants, and implementation of energy storage, geothermal, wind and solar technologies, and technologies to recycle solar and wind assets. |
This funding can be utilized by the industry to advance research and development in the renewable energy sector and is a starting point for significantly more funding to be made available through the reconciliation. |
Carbon Capture |
||
Sec. 11403 Carbon reduction program |
Allows for States to utilize federal funds for projects to support the reduction of transportation emissions. |
These funds can be utilized for carbon capture projects that are implemented in connection with transportation infrastructure assets and help drive coordination and synergy between the carbon capture industry and the surface transportation sector. |
Carbon Utilization / Capture Sec. 40301 - 40308 & 41004 |
|
Significant funding is necessary for the development of comprehensive, national carbon capture program. The $2.5 billion in funding for the Commercialization Storage program will be critical seed capital for the industry. Presently, carbon dioxide capture must take place near the site of capture, so as to minimize the cost of transport. Federal government financing could expand the technology to capture carbon dioxide. Only a handful of Class VI wells has been permitted due to the lengthy permitting process. Funding for these permitting activities could help facilitate the delivery of these projects. $3.5 billion for the development of direct air capture hubs is significant as the use of hubs is widely considered necessary to the development of a national carbon capture program. The changes create the statutory framework required for the leasing of sites within the Outer Continental Shelf for carbon sequestration. |