Difference between Monetary Cost Share and Program Income in
FY22 Supplemental Funding Instructions

During the RLF Listening Session on March 11, 2022, a current RLF CAR asked what is meant by
monetary cost share vs program income in A and B of the fillable PDF (Appendix B) of the FY22
Supplemental Funding Instructions. The CAR thought there was duplication across cost share and
program income, and asked for clarification, which is provided below.

Program income for an RLF is defined as the gross income received by the recipient, directly
generated by the cooperative agreement award or earned during the period of the award. Program
income includes principal repayments, interest earned on outstanding loan principal, interest
earned on accounts holding RLF program income not needed for immediate lending, all loan fees
and loan-related charges received from borrowers and other income generated from RLF operations
including proceeds from the sale, collection, or liquidations of assets acquired through defaults of
loans.

The term monetary cost share, as used in the fillable PDF, is the monetary value of both cash and in-
kind services that contribute to the CAR's 20% cost share requirement.

o In A of the fillable PDF, total monetary cost share equals the CAR's cost share requirement
across all open and closed RLF grants the CAR has received. This would typically be 20% of EPA
funds for all open and closed RLF grants. Keep in mind that the total award amount for each
grant is considered to be the EPA funds + the CAR's cost share requirement, not just the EPA
funding amount. In A, the Total RLF Funds = Total EPA funds + Total Monetary Cost Share
(monetary value of total cost share requirement) + Program Income generated by open/closed
RLF grants.

o In B of the fillable PDF, total unspent (unmet) monetary cost share for all open RLF grants equals
the cash value of whatever the CAR still owes to meet the 20% cost share requirement. For
example, if the CAR's cost share amount was originally $150,000, but the CAR has already spent
$50,000 of cost share on eligible expenses or received or provided in-kind services that equal
$50,000, then this value in B would be $100,000.

It is important to note the following differences between cost share, leveraged funds, and program
income when a borrower or subgrantee contributes to cleanup for a site:

o If the CAR is not directly receiving funds from the borrower/subgrantee and the contribution is
applied to eligible expenses for the cleanup (e.g., if the borrower/subgrantee makes a
contribution of eligible services for the site or direct payment of a contractor such as the QEP),
then the borrower's/subgrantee's contribution amount should be counted towards the CAR's
cost share. If the CAR has already met their 20% match or for some other reason doesn't want
it counted as cost share, then the borrower's/subgrantee's contribution amount should be
counted as leveraged funds,
o If the CAR is directly receiving funds from the borrower/subgrantee for the cleanup (e.g., the
CAR charges a processing fee or mandatory contribution that is equivalent to a fee), then the
borrower's/subgrantee's contribution amount should be counted as program income, which
can either be added to EPA funds as program income or used as cost share.

Based on above, there should be no duplication of monetary cost share vs program income in A and
B of the fillable PDF. If using program income as cost share, for the purposes of the supplemental
funding request, only count it as cost share in A and B and not as program income.


-------