clean
water
REPORT
TO
COHGRE//1975-76
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20460
-------
Dear Mr. President
Dear Mr. Speaker:
I am pleased to transmit to the Congress, as required by section 516(a) of the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act, the third of a series of annual reports covering measures taken to implement the
objectives of the Act. This is a consolidated report covering calendar year 1974 and 1975,
Highlights of the report include:
• By December 31, 1975, EPA had obligated over $8.2 billion dollars for municipal wastewater
treatment works construction. Estimated needs, however, greatly exceed these amounts, and a
strong Federal-State effort will be needed to accelerate obligations of the remaining authorized
funds.
• The issuance of the first round of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits was
virtually completed for major sources—over 45,000 permits were issued by the end of December,
1975. The major focus in the permits area must now shift to assuring compliance with the permit
conditions, if the potential of the program is to be realized.
• State planning and management agencies have completed a majority of the scheduled waste load
analyses: over 1700 segment analyses were reported complete by June 30, 1975. In addition, the
areawide waste treatment management planning program under section 208 was initiated during
the year. Timely completion of plans and the use of plan outputs for related program manage-
ment actions must now be emphasized.
• The States have assumed increasing responsibilities in the national water quality program. By the
close of 1975, 27 States were participating in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Sys-
tem, and the number continues to rise. The State role in construction grants administration was
also expanded. Other important areas of Federal-State cooperation include the national compli-
ance monitoring system, water quality reporting, the State program under section 106, involve-
ment in wastewater treatment operation and maintenance inspections and evaluations, and atten-
tion to the training and development of waste water treatment plant operation and maintenance
personnel. Limitations on State resources will be a continuing restraint in this aspect of the pro-
gram.
• Water quality studies were continued, addressing problems such as lake eutrophication and the
potential impact of revised water quality criteria being prepared by the Agency. Work has pro-
ceeded on the Water Quality Inventory Report, to be completed in early 1976.
• An approach to State and local management of nonpoint sources of pollution was developed, to
be carried out as an important part of the State and areawide water quality management process,
under EPA guidance. Various problems are foreseen, but these should not deter proceeding with
a program in localities where it is needed.
• Methods to reduce the total flow of sewage were reviewed, and several promising devices and
techniques were analysed.
• Research studies investigated health effects, ecological processes and effects, municipal, industri-
al and nonpoint source pollution control, and other areas of program or data management impor-
tance.
The water quality program under the 1972 Federal Act remains a relatively new effort. Although
problems will continue to be encountered in many areas of the program, the significant accomplishments
to date are highly encouraging.
Sincerely,
RUSSELL E. TRAIN
iii
-------
Introduction
Clean water, the title of this Report, is the goal
of the national water quality program. More than
three years have passed since the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act ("the Act") was amended
on October 18, 1972, to add major new programs
directed toward this purpose. It has been a time
for learning, deciding, and acting—learning more
about current water quality and its protection;
deciding the basic questions inherent in the devel-
opment of major new programs; and acting to
carry out the important initiatives of the Act.
EPA has wrestled with countless problems dur-
ing this time. Nor is this a solitary undertaking.
The Act reaches into every corner of the land. No
individual who uses water can fail to be affected,
directly or indirectly, by the pervasive scope of
the 1972 law.
This report summarizes and highlights EPA's
actions during 1974 and 1975. Progress in many
areas is noted; where there are problems, these
are also described. Together, the photographs,
charts, and narrative attempt to present a compre-
hensive overview of EPA's myriad activities per-
formed to implement the Act and move toward its
objective.
Protecting existing high quality waters is an important policy in the Nation's water quality program. (Canoeing on the
Wisconsin River.)
-------
-------
CHAPTER ONE
Water Quality -
Monitoring
Standards and
Coals
Knowledge of existing water quality is expand-
ing, although the informational base remains im-
perfect. Enough is known to recognize that a
great deal of water quality improvement remains
to be accomplished.
Water quality standards define specific water
uses and criteria for individual waterways. They
are an important part of the Federal/State regula-
tory scheme for pollution abatement.
A further goal—restoration, preservation and
maintenance of water quality—is also a major
component of the system. Its purpose is to assure
that existing water quality will not deteriorate in
contravention of the Act.
WATER QUALITY MONITORING—
THE PRESENT PICTURE
Collection and analysis of current water quality
data is the first step in developing national water
quality requirements, goals and expectations. Dur-
ing 1974 and 1975, EPA's attention was directed
both to reviewing water quality data and to devel-
oping new information.
Reviewing Current Information
Studies of water quality are conducted through-
out the country by EPA, other Federal agencies,
and State and local organizations. During 1975 the
States for the first time prepared and submitted to
EPA their own reports on water quality and relat-
ed programs. These reports, along with a national
summary and analysis by EPA, have been trans-
mitted to Congress as called for under Section
305(b). In total, the report provides the most
comprehensive nationwide review to date of:
Current water quality and recent trends
Current and projected uses of the water
Costs of meeting water quality objectives
Nonpoint source pollution problems
The States generally confirm the findings of the
1974 National Water Quality Inventory report to
Congress that, despite recent improvements in the
levels of pollutants which had received wide-
spread control efforts, such as bacteria and oxy-
gen-demanding organic loads, significant problems
from these pollutants still exist in many areas,
especially near population centers.
Furthermore, several States reported worsening
trends for nitrogen and phosphorus, the nutrients
most often blamed for eutrophication. These
trends were also noted in the 1974 report. Signifi-
cant problems were also caused by toxic sub-
stances such as dissolved metals, industrial chem-
icals, pesticides, and other harmful compounds.
The 1975 305(b) report also contains two sec-
tions describing special analyses done by EPA:
The National Water Quality Surveillance Sys-
tem CNWQSS)-The NWQSS, established un-
der Section 104(a), consists of 188 monitoring
stations located upstream and downstream of
selected areas across the country (Figure 1-1).
The areas were chosen to reflect a cross-section
of the different types of streams and land use
characteristics found in the United States. The
analysis of the first year's data focused on de-
termining the relationships between water quali-
ty parameters and the differing uses of the
land. It was found that bacteria and nutrient
levels were strongly related to municipal/in-
dustrial activity and, to a lesser degree, to agri-
-------
cultural activity. Oxygen-demanding loads and
total solids loads were not as strongly related to
levels of land use activity.
The National Eutrophication Survey—EPA's
reseach laboratories in Corvallis, Oregon and
Las Vegas, Nevada have been studying lakes
throughout the country to determine the extent
of the nation's eutrophication problem. The
survey found that phosphorus is the element
which usually needs to be controlled to slow
the rate of eutrophication. Of the 298 lakes
surveyed in 22 States east of the Mississippi, 73
percent have phosphorus concentrations high
enough that they would be expected to exhibit
eutrophication symptoms.
Developing New Information
Additional water quality information is needed
for many aspects of the national water quality
program. Data can indicate areas for future priori-
ty attention and reveal the appearance of new
problems, as well as showing the consequences of
past efforts.
Several programs are currently under way. The
National Eutrophication Survey is completing its
coverage of the nation's lakes and should have its
final results available by the end of 1976. State
monitoring programs are being improved to pro-
vide greater capability for studying all areas with-
in a State. For example:
• In FY 76, the majority of states were oper-
ating primary monitoring networks. This is
a vast improvement over FY 75.
• Intensive surveys have been improved
greatly in FY 76. However, many states
still need to expand and intensify their
efforts in this area.
• Approximately one half of the states oper-
ate programs specifically designed to moni-
tor lakes and reservoirs.
Figure 1-1.
NATIONAL WATER QUALITY SURVEILANCE SYSTEM
-------
• Most of the states have NPDES authority
and therefore operate compliance monitor-
ing programs.
• Quality assurance programs have shown
much improvement over FY 75. Most of
the states have now developed quality as-
surance programs and are in the process of
implementing these plans.
• Approximately one half of the states are
now operating some type of biological
monitoring program.
For the 1976 National Water Quality Inventory
report, the States will be focussing on an analysis
of the projected effects of the Act's effluent limi-
tations on water quality and water uses. The
NWQSS analysis will attempt to determine the
relative magnitude of pollutant loadings from
point source discharges and from nonpoint
sources for different types of pollutants.
The National Commission on Water Quality.
formed under section 315 of the Act to "make a
full and complete investigation and study of all of
the technological aspects of achieving, and all
aspects of the total economic, social, and environ-
mental effects of achieving or not achieving, the
effluent limitations and goals set forth for 1983"
has completed its regional assessment studies and
its staff draft report. The final report is expected
early in 1976.
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS—
THE CURRENT RULE
Water quality standards, section 303, establish
and define water quality requirements for specific
waters. Through standards, all waters are classi-
fied in terms of their uses, such as swimming,
aquatic life or drinking water supply. Standards
also set the specific criteria needed to protect the
uses.
Standards are a two-pronged weapon in the pol-
lution fight. They both mandate current abatement
activities and set goals for longer-range planning.
Regarding abatement, individual sources must
meet existing standards, even where this results in
tougher discharge limitations than those demand-
ed by the Act's technology-based requirements.
As to planning, standards underlie the manage-
ment actions which define an overall control strat-
egy. For example, standards supply a baseline to
assess progress, identify problems, establish priori-
ties and allocate an area's total acceptable pollu-
tant load among present and future point and
nonpoint sources.
Since the public has an opportunity to partici-
pate in standards development, critical standards
decisions can represent the people's views and
enjoy their support. EPA views this safeguard as
a key element in the nation's clean water cam-
paign.
Status.—During 1975, the initial standards re-
view requirements (section 303(a)(b)) were essen-
tially completed. (See Table 1-1). As of Decem-
ber, 1975 EPA-approved standards were effective
in 55 States and other jurisdictions. In 11 States,
Federal promulgation actions have been needed.
The present standards define criteria necessary
to maintain various beneficial uses of the waters.
With few exceptions, all waters are now classified
for protection of fish and wildlife and for recrea-
tional activities on the water. In addition, all
States have classified many of their waters for
swimming.
Water quality standards have been used in
some segments to determine individual point
source controls. To use standards in setting per-
mit conditions, waste load analyses are conducted
and total allowable loads are allocated to indivi-
dual sources and reflected in the permits. Initial
waste load analysis has concentrated on oxygen
demanding materials in order to define pollutant
reductions needed to meet dissolved oxygen cri-
teria, although various other critical parameters
have also been included in a number of the ana-
lyses. Waste load analyses will be expanded to
cover many additional parameters that affect wa-
ter quality.
Standards Review.—During FY 76 and FY 77,
water quality standards will be reviewed and if
necessary revised, as provided by section 303(c).
The revised standards should be adopted by the
State and approved by EPA as the national water
quality program moves into the next round of
planning and permitting and also implements an
expanded program of nonpoint source control.
Revised standards will consist primarily of wa-
ter use classifications and related criteria. A spe-
cific revisions policy will be established during
1976.
-------
TABLE 1
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS STATUS REPORT
State Adoption and EPA Approval Under 303 (a & b), and/or Promulgation Action Initiated and in the Federal Register
State
Date of EPA
approval
Promulgation
F R. notice
Comment
Alabama 1-29-74
5-23-74
Alaska 8-30-73
American Samoa 10-4-73
Arizona* 8-1-74 (Partial)
12-30-75
Arkansas 10-24-73
California* 6-20-74 (Partial)
Most basins ap-
proved as of
12-31-75
Colorado* 8-13-74
Connecticut 12-19-73
Delaware 5-9-75
District of Columbia 8-28-73
Florida 12-20-74
Georgia 3-23-74
6-12-74
8-18-75
Guam 6-4-74
Hawaii 5-14-74
Idaho 8-28-73
4-17-75
Illinois 6-6-74
Indiana 8-9-73
Iowa 3-26-74
Kansas 8-2-73
5-29-74
Kentucky 2-22-74
Louisiana 9-17-73
Maine 12-17-73
Maryland 7-2-73
Massachusetts 7-18-74
Michigan 11-26-73
Minnesota 11-6-73
Mississippi 3-6-75
Missouri 7-13-73
Montana 9-23-74
Nebraska 7-23-73
Nevada* 6-7-74
New Hampshire 12-11-73
New Jersey 4-25-75
Proposed 7-17-74
Final 11-26-74
Nutrient Proposed 10-15-74
Salinity Proposed 6-13-74
Salinity Final 12-12-74
Promulgated Fish and Wildlife
classification for all waters.
State changed WQS after 1-29-74
approval.
EPA will be publishing final
nutrient standards in 1976.
Salinity Proposed 6-13-74 State has adopted and EPA has approved
Salinity Final 12-18-74
Salinity Proposed 6-13-74
Salinity Final 12-18-74
Proposed 6-11-74
Final 1-6-75
Proposed 11-28-73
Withdrawn 10-24-74
Proposed 9-26-74
Final 12-2-74
F. R. Notice 11-1-74
Salinity Proposed 6-13-74
Salinity Final 12-12-74
Proposed 12-20-73
Withdrawn 7-24-75
interstate WQS. Intrastate WQS are
being revised through basin planning
process.
Promulgated aquatic life criteria
for coastal waters and bioassay
procedures for toxics.
State adopted EPA requests.
Definitions were adopted in the
form of emergency regulations.
Promulgation action was required
as original WQS submitted did not
include all waters of the State.
F. R. notice was a clarification of
previous approval. The "no discharge'
provision on the Big Piney River was
made exempt from consideration.
State adopted EPA requests.
-------
TABLE 1
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS STATUS REPORT—Continued
State Adoption and EPA Approval Under 303 (a & b), and/or Promulgation Action Initiated and in the Federal Register—cont'd
State
Date of EPA
approval
Promulgation
F R. notice
Comment
New Mexico* 10-3-73
New York 5-8-74
2-23-75
North Carolina 11-6-74
8-26-75
North Dakota 3-12-74
Ohio 5-14-75
Oklahoma 10-24-73
Oregon 7-30-73 (Partial)
Pennsylvania 8-10-73
6-28-74
10-30-74
6-23-75
Puerto Rico 6-26-74
Rhode Island 12-18-73
South Carolina 1-15-73
3-7-73
South Dakota 7-18-74
Tennessee 5-14-74
9-2-75
Texas 10-25-73
7-2-75
T.T. of Pacific 10-26-73
Utah* 12-13-73
Vermont 1-18-74
Virginia 8-3-73
Washington 3-18-74
West Virginia 7-11-74
Wisconsin 4-15-74
Wyoming* 8-23-73
1-30-75
6-25-75
Virgin Islands 11-15-73
Salinity Proposed 6-13-74
Salinity Final 12-12-74
Proposed 12-20-73
Withdrawn 7-24-75
Proposed 5-3-74
Withdrawn 8-7-75
Proposed 2-4-74
Withdrawn 12-10-74
Proposed 9-21-73
Withdrawn 7-24-75
Final approval excepted from
consideration certain portions
of the thermal WQS.
State adopted EPA requests.
F. R. notice on dissolved gas WQS
withdrawal was signed 12-10-74
State adopted EPA requests.
Salinity Proposed 6-13-74
Salinity Final 12-15-74
Proposed 9-19-73
Withdrawn 12-27-74
Salinity Proposed 6-13-74
Salinity Final 12-18-74
State adopted EPA requests.
*A salinity control policy and standards procedures was proposed jointly for these seven States. It was signed in final form on 12-18-74
Totals
1. Standards revisions completely approved or promulgation action initiated—55 states or jurisdictions
2. Complete approval or initiation of promulgation action pending—None
3. Total promulgation actions initiated to date—18$
a. Promulgations final—10
b Promulgations pending—1 (Arizona)
c Promulgations withdrawn—7
$ 17 States have had promulgation action initiated. Arizona had 2 separate promulgation actions initiated, therefore 18 promulgation actions have been initiated.
-------
Water quality standards should provide for many different
uses of water. (Calumet Park beach, Chicago, Illinois, with
power plant in the background.)
RESTORATION, PRESERVATION AND
MAINTENANCE OF WATER QUALITY
The objective of the Act is "to restore and
maintain the chemical, physical, and biological
integrity of the Nation's waters." The State's an-
tidegradation policy, an integral part of its water
quality standards, determines the extent to which
this objective will be achieved. At a minimum,
each State's antidegradation policy must assure
the following:
• Water uses currently being achieved instream
will be maintained and protected.
• Waters with water quality exceeding the min-
imum level necessary to support the FWPC
Act's water quality goal uses will be main-
tained unless the State decides, after ade-
quate public participation and intergovern-
mental coordination, to lower the quality
because the resulting social and economic
development would be necessary and justifia-
ble. In no case, however, could the lowering
of water quality impair any existing beneficial
water use.
• Waters considered to be an outstanding na-
tional resource will not be degraded.
Antidegradation policies have been in effect since
before enactment of the 1972 amendments to the
FWPC act. The revised water quality management
process (see Chapter VI) will include increased
emphasis on implementation. Techniques which a
State may select to implement its antidegradation
policy include:
• Reducing the discharge of pollutants from
existing sources and restricting any new dis-
charge of pollutants from new and existing
sources.
• Requiring land disposal for new municipal
projects.
-------
CHAPTER TWO
The Basis for
Water Quality
Controls
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS
Introduction
Effluent limitations for a point source discharg-
ing to navigable waters derive from two principal
FWPCA components: technology-based effluent
limitations and water quality standards. An
NPDES permit, issued to the discharger, will es-
tablish its effluent reduction responsibilities. Nor-
mally, technology-based limitations in keeping
with EPA guidelines indicate a base level which
the source must meet regardless of receiving wa-
ter quality. If a discharge at that level would
nonetheless violate water quality standards, the
source's limitations will be made as stringent as
necessary to end the violation.
This chapter focuses on EPA's progress and
problems in developing technology-based effluent
limitations. Water quality standards have been
discussed previously. (See Chapter 1.)
In addition, this chapter discusses another regu-
latory control requirement which qualifies the ba-
sic format of national technology limits plus local
water quality concern: toxic pollutant discharge
standards. When toxic pollutant standards are set
by the Administrator, every affected point source
must comply.
Municipal effluent limitations
1977 Requirements.—The 1977/78 effluent limi-
tation required by the Act for publicly owned
treatment works (POTW's) is secondary treat-
ment. EPA's definition of secondary treatment
limits the discharge of biochemical oxygen de-
mand (BOD), suspended solids, and fecal coli-
form bacteria and delimits an acceptable pH range
for the secondary effluent. EPA has proposed an
amendment to the definition of secondary treat-
ment (Federal Register August 15, 1975, v. 40 p.
34522) to exclude fecal coliform bacteria, relying
on disinfection requirements incorporated into
water quality standards.
1983 Requirements.—By 1983, publicly owned
treatment works must provide for the application
of "best practicable waste treatment technology"
(BPWTT). EPA's definition of BPWTT was pro-
posed during 1974 and promulgated October 25,
1975.
Three alternative wastewater management tech-
niques are specified in the regulation, addressed
to the three possible modes of wastewater dispos-
al. The disposal options are:
• Treatment and discharge into navigable wa-
ters.
• Land application techniques and land utiliza-
tion practices.
• Reuse.
POTW's providing treatment and discharge into
navigable waters must continue to achieve a mini-
mum of secondary treatment in 1983. Where fac-
tors such as water quality standards or availability
of cost-effective technology warrant, the munici-
pality must also provide additional treatment or
include the use of other waste management tech-
niques.
A treatment works that employs land applica-
tion techniques or land utilization practices which
result in a discharge to navigable waters must
-------
meet the same criteria as works discharging di-
rectly into the water. If a POTW land treatment
results in wastewater entering the ground water, it
must provide protection for any existing or poten-
tial drinking water supply use of the underground
source. Ground water criteria for any other uses
will be determined on a case-by-case basis, taking
into account the present and potential use of the
ground water.
In the case of wastewater reuse, BPWTT limits
the allowable quantity of any pollutant in the
effluent from the reuse project which is directly
attributable to the effluent from the POTW. The
attributable portion of the project's effluent may
not exceed the amounts which would have been
allowed under the POTW's other two alternative
disposal options.
Industrial Effluent Limitations
EPA establishes technology-based effluent limi-
tations and standards by promulgating regulations
under the combined authorities of sections 301,
304, 306, and 307. These regulations define ef-
fluent limitations for industrial sources. Although
clearly more binding than "guidelines" in the tra-
ditional sense of that word, regulations are gener-
ally referred to as effluent limitation guidelines;
accordingly, that term is used here.
Effluent limitation guidelines are developed for
categories of industries. For the sake of fairness
and to prevent unsound geographic variation in
environmental safeguards, guidelines for similar
sources should establish similar requirements. At
the same time, real differences among generally
similar sources must be recognized. Distinguishing
factors recognized in the law include the age and
size of the plant, raw materials, manufacturing
processes, the products produced, available treat-
ment technology, energy requirements, and cost.
In response to these conflicting needs, EPA has
subcategorized industries. The guidelines are uni-
form for subcategories, but sources within a
broad industrial category may be subject to dis-
tinct requirements. To date, the agency has identi-
fied approximately 500 subcategories within 45
major industrial categories.
EPA defines three levels of treatment technolo-
gy for each industrial category (or subcategory):
best practicable control technology currently
available (BPT) for existing sources to be applied
by 1977; best available technology economically
achievable (BAT) for existing sources to be ap-
plied by 1983; and new source performance stand-
Effluent regulations and guidelines define permissible ef-
fluents for classes and categories of industrial point sources.
(Kanawha River.)
ards (NSPS) to be applied by all new sources. In
addition, pretreatment requirements are specified
for both new and existing plants discharging into
municipal treatment facilities. As a result, five
essentially different treatment levels must be es-
tablished for each of the 500 subcategories that
EPA has identified. Thus, EPA's effluent guide-
lines will in effect include some 2,500 complex,
technical regulations.
Progress in Guidelines Development.—In ad-
dressing the enormous guidelines development
job, EPA turned first to the 28 industrial catego-
ries which the Act expressly requires to be ad-
dressed. These categories, known as Group I,
have now all been subcategorized. In addition,
EPA has identified 18 additional industrial catego-
ries that need effluent guidelines. These indus-
tries, not specifically mentioned in the Act, have
been designated Group II industries.
10
-------
Guidelines development for Group I has been
conducted in two phases. Phase I industries repre-
sent those subcategories the Agency felt should
have been developed first. Limited resources and
the significance of particular subcategories in
terms of pollution loads were prime factors in
choosing Phase I industries. Effluent guidelines
for all Phase I industries were promulgated during
1974. By the end of calendar year 1975, guidelines
for eight Phase II categories were promulgated,
ten Phase II categories were proposed as interim
final, two were proposed, and two were noticed
for proposed rulemaking. (See Table II-l).
The magnitude and importance of the effluent
guidelines effort has inevitably retarded EPA's
ability to complete all of the needed guidelines
within the time frame contemplated by the Act.
EPA has been sued over the delays and is now
subject to a court-ordered schedule for comple-
tion. Current activity is focussing on the eight
categories still under court-ordered deadlines and
on revisions to guidelines which have already
been published.
Problems
The concept of national technology-based limi-
tations covering all dischargers is a major innova-
tion of the 1972 amendments. These limitations
are the foundation for safeguarding the nation's
waters from point source pollution. They repre-
sent a critically important aspect of the national
water quality program, and their economic im-
pact, both on industrial sources and as a regional
or national question, can be significant. Effluent
guidelines development has unavoidably raised
some serious problems.
Technical Problems.—The sheer size of the
effluent guidelines development effort has strained
the limited resources within the Agency and in the
field of qualified technical consultants. Finding a
good technical contractor for the work is often
difficult. The contractor must be familiar with the
field, technically competent, and free from any
conflict of interest that could affect its effort.
Unfortunately, familiarity and competence often
go hand in hand with conflict, making the search
difficult. For some categories, very few contrac-
tors have knowledge of the field: in these cases
the choices become even more limited.
The development of the effluent limitations
guidelines involves the following progressive tasks:
• Categorize the industry.
TABLE II-l
EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS GUIDELINES REGULATIONS
GROUP I
Industry
Insulation fiberglass
Beet sugar
Feedlots
Glass
Cement
Phosphate
Rubber
Ferroalloys
Asbestos
Meat products
Poultry
Inorganic chemicals
Cane sugar regining
Grain mills
Fruits and vegetables
Electroplating
Plastics and synthetics
Non-ferrous
Fertilizer
Leather tanning
Soap and detergent
Timber products
Insulation bd. seg
Organic chemicals
Petroleum refining
Builders paper
Dairy
Pulpandpaper
Seafood
Ironand Steel
Foundries
Carbon and alloy
Textiles
Steam Electric
(
Industry
Paving and roofing
Paint and ink
Wood furniture
Oil and gas extraction ...
Mineral mining
Coal mining
Ore mining
Phase I
Date
prom in
Fed. Reg
... 1-22-74
... 1-31-74
... 2-14-74
... 2-14-74
... 2-20-74
... 2-20-74
... 2-21-74
... 2-22-74
... 2-26-74
... 2-28-74
... N/A
... 3-12-74
... 3-20-74
... 3-20-74
... 3-21-74
... 3-28-74
... 4-5-74
... 4-8-74
... 4-8-74
... 4-9-74
... 4-12-74
... 4-18-74
... N/A
... 4-25-74
... 5-9-74
... 5-9-74
... 5-28-74
... 5-29-74
... 6-26-74
... 6-28-74
... N/A
... N/A
... 7-5-74
... 10-8-74
3ROUP II
Proposed in
Federal Registe
1/10/75
2/26/75
... 11/14/74
8/15/75*
... 10/16/75*
10-17-75*
11/6/75*
Phase II
Date Date
prom in prom in
Fed Reg. Fed. Reg
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
8-21-74 1-16-75
N/A N/A
1-27-75*
8-23-74 1-10-75
2-24-75*
8-29-74 1-09-75
8-28-74 1-03-75
4-24-75
5-22-75*
2-27-75*
9-17-74 1-03-75
10-21-75*
4-24-75*
9-20-74 1-23-75
2-27-75*
10-7-74 1-14-75
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
8-26-74 1-16-75
8-26-74
N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A N/A
N/A
1-30-75*
8-21-75**
8-21-75**
N/A N/A
N/A
Promulgated in
;r Federal Register
6/2/75
»interim final regulation.
"Advanced notice proposed rulemaking.
. Characterize the wastes resulting from dis-
charges within the industrial category and
each subcategory.
• Select appropriate pollutant parameters.
11
-------
• Identify the range of control and treatment
technology applicable to the discharges from
each subcategory.
• Evaluate the available technology with regard
to technical and economic factors.
• Select the three levels of technology required
by the Act.
• Evaluate the non-water quality environmental
impacts including energy requirements.
• Based on the selected technology recommend
effluent guidelines for BPT, BAT, NSPS and
pretreatment.
Each of these steps is exceedingly complex. Diffi-
cult engineering judgments and trade-offs are re-
quired to come up with sound guidelines.
Litigation.—When a new agency, working on a
new program, promulgates regulations that affect
millions of persons in a direct and costly way
(with civil and perhaps criminal penalties in the
background), an onslaught of lawsuits can well be
expected. To date, suits have been filed against
many of the industrial effluent guidelines. None of
these suits by January, 1976, had resulted in a
stay of a final regulation. The proceedings also
deflect technical expertise from the Agency's fur-
ther guidelines development work, thereby imped-
ing work on Phase II and Group II industries and
pretreatment. Thus, the litigation has further bur-
dened an already resource-stressed program.
Pretreatment Standards
Many industrial water users do not discharge
directly to a stream but rather to a publicly owned
treatment works (POTW). Pretreatment standards,
sections 307(b) and (c) of the Act are designed to
prevent the discharge into the POTW of any
substances which could cause fire, explosion,
damage to equipment, process upsets, or which
could pass through the plant untreated or inade-
quately treated.
Under EPA's approach, pollutants are classified
as either compatible or incompatible. Compatible
pollutants are those which are substantially re-
moved by the POTW treatment process; their dis-
charge into the POTW need not be limited. In-
compatible pollutants, those not substantially
removed by the POTW, will be regulated both
through general pretreatment standards and
through pretreatment standards developed for in-
dividual categories of dischargers.
Regulations promulgated November 8, 1973
(effective December 10, 1973) announce general
pretreatment requirements. They define compati-
ble pollutants and limit the discharge of incompat-
ible pollutants to levels prescribed by distinct pre-
treatment standards for specific industrial catego-
ries. As an exception to the limitation on incom-
patible pollutants, if the POTW is committed in
its NPDES permit to remove a specified percen-
tage of any incompatible pollutant, the pretreat-
ment standard applicable to users of such treat-
ment works will be correspondingly reduced for
that pollutant.
Both the definition of compatible pollutant and
the exception to the limitation in incompatible
pollutants have caused problems. Defining a com-
patible pollutant as one substantially removed by
the POTW is clear for certain pollutants but can
be ambiguous for a pollutant parameter whose
removal efficiency many fluctuate widely over
time and from subcategory to subcategory. In
addition, the exception allowing credits for incom-
patible pollutants can be impractical because
varying removal efficiencies may result in inade-
quate treatment at various times.
EPA is planning to revise its pretreatment regu-
lations. The concept of compatible vs. incompati-
ble pollutant will be further refined.
The industry which uses the POTW is not sub-
ject to NPDES requirements. EPA has authority
in sections 307(d) and 309 to enforce its pretreat-
ment standards directly against the point sources,
but with no permit and with often difficult techni-
cal problems of measurement and proof, this
route is cumbersome.
EPA will instead encourage enforcement of pre-
treatment standards at the municipal level. This
can be accomplished on a voluntary basis if the
municipality passes a local pretreatment ordi-
nance. An alternative, which has been used spar-
ingly to date and which may face legal obstacles
in the future, is to require in the municipal permit
that applicable pretreatment standards be met. In
this fashion pretreatment standards could be en-
forced in conjunction with municipal NPDES
permits.
In order for a State to receive NPDES authori-
ty, EPA must be assured that the State has au-
thority to enforce pretreatment standards in con-
junction with issuing permits to POTW's pursuant
to section 402(b)(9). Thus, States which issue
NPDES permits will assume authority to enforce
pretreatment standards if municipalities in those
States fail to do so.
12
-------
TOXIC POLLUTANTS
CONTROL PROGRAM
Virtually all substances, including those occur-
ring naturally, are potentially toxic to humans and
other organisms. This toxicity is dependent on
both the amount of the substance that the orga-
nism is exposed to and the length of time the or-
ganism is exposed. In some cases, toxic effects
occur only after exposure to large amounts of the
substance; in other cases, exposure to almost
immeasurable amounts result in serious, and of-
ten, lethal effects. Regulation of such substances
requires a number of alternative control options.
Some 30 Federal laws, under a number of sepa-
rate agencies, include regulation of toxic sub-
stances. Within the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act, toxic substance discharges may be controlled
in various ways. The program's regulatory bases
include effluent limitations guidelines, water quali-
ty standards, 307(a) standards, 307(b) and (c) pre-
treatment authorities, and control of hazardous
substances under section 311.
Some categories of effluent guidelines already
contain limitations on substances with toxic prop-
erties. The electroplating guidelines, for example,
limit heavy metals and cyanide, and the steam
electric power generating guidelines limit metals,
chlorine, and PCB's. During Phase II, guidelines
for all industrial categories will be reviewed, and
standards for those industries with substantial
toxic discharges of such substances will be re-
vised where necessary to include limitations on
those substances.
Regulations for hazardous substances were
proposed under the authority of section 311 on
December 30, 1975. These regulations designate
hazardous substances and specify removability,
harmful quantities, and penalty rates.
In 1973, EPA promulgated an initial list of nine
substances to be regulated by section 307(a) and
proposed effluent standards for selected source
categories. In April and May of 1974, public hear-
Dangerous toxic wastes can pose a threat to humans as well as to aquatic life. (Industry near Corpus Christ/, Texas.)
13
-------
ings on those standards were held. The lack of By integrating the regulatory provisions of
sufficient evidence in the record prevented pro- effluent guidelines, toxic pollutant effluent stand-
mulgation of those standards. During 1975, sub- ards in section 307(a), and hazardous substances
stantial reworking of the standards occurred and in section 311, EPA expects to develop a coordi-
additional information was collected. New stand- nated, Federal toxics control program for toxic
ards are scheduled to be proposed in 1976. water pollutants.
14
-------
CHAPTER THREE
The Application
of Controls
PERMITS
The national pollutant discharge elimination
system (NPDES) under section 402 remains the
principal vehicle for source by source control of
the discharge of pollutants into navigable waters.
In 1974, this program, together with construction
grant awards, held highest priority among EPA
water programs. Administrative responsibility for
the program was shared by States and the EPA
Regional Offices; the role of EPA Headquarters
was largely advisory.
By law, permits are issued for a term of up to
five years. They require point source dischargers
to comply with applicable FWPCA provisions in-
cluding technology- or water quality standards-
based effluent limitations, new source perform-
ance standards, toxic and pretreatment standards,
and ocean discharge criteria. They may also abso-
lutely prohibit the discharge of certain substances.
Finally, permits include conditions regarding mon-
itoring, recordkeeping, reporting, entry and
inspection.
Program Accomplishments During 1974-1975.—
The Act expected that all permits were to have
been issued by the end of 1974. In all, about 28,-
000 permits were issued by the end of the calen-
dar year. However, a substantial number of per-
mits, mostly for minor dischargers, had not been
issued by that date. Since EPA and the States
lacked the resources to process permits properly
for all of these sources, activities were prioritized
to maximize the program's effect. Highest priority
was assigned to issuing the remaining major and
new source permits; lower emphasis was given to
minor dischargers causing less serious water qual-
ity problems.
By the end of 1975, permits had been issued to
95% of all major municipal dischargers; 91% of all
major non-municipals; 78% of all minor munici-
pals; and 62% of all minor non-municipals. A total
By December 31, 1974, most major point sources and many
others had been issued discharge permits specifying effluent
limitations for their discharges. (Chemical company along
Kanawha River.)
of 45,865 permits had been issued by the end of
the year. (Table III-l—III-2). The small number of
major permits left unissued are tied up in pro-
tracted administrative procedures, primarily at the
State level.
15
-------
TABLE III - 1
MUNICIPAL & NON-MUNICIPAL PERMITS BY REGION (EPA & STATES)
December 31, 1975
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
Total
Major
Minor
Major
Minor
Major
Minor
Major
Minor
Major
Minor
Major
Minor
Major
Minor
Major
Minor
Major
Minor
Major
Minor
Major
Minor
Total
Permits
Issued
372
288
476
632
389
1,437
1,258
745
543
4,330
356
1,532
377
1,880
226
807
223
250
155
569
4,375
12,470
16,845
Municipal
Identified
Dischargers
372
353
517
1,537
416
2,785
1,412
1,343
567
5,039
359
1,531
364
1,784
227
840
214
250
156
598
4,604
16,060
20,664
Percent
Issued
100%
82%
92%
41%
94%
52%
89%
55%
96%
86%
99%
100%
104%
105%
99%
96%
104%
100%
98%
95%
95%
78%
82%
Permits
Issued
436
1,129
508
710
392
1,610
1,110
4,206
663
5,334
384
1,975
215
3,275
166
1,384
228
1,561
111
1,561
4,213
22,745
26,958
Non-municipal
Identified
Dischargers
437
1,568
644
1,809
545
4,156
1,199
6004
748
6,699
370
7,350
215
3,807
166
1,622
217
1,608
114
2,176
4,655
36,799
41 ,454
Percent
Issued
99%
72%
79%
39%
72%
39%
93%
70%
89%
80%
104%
27%
100%
86%
100%
85%
105%
97%
97%
72%
91%
62%
65%
TABLE III - 2
OVERALL STATUS REPORT
PERMITS ISSUED
December 31, 1975
TOTAL
Issued EPA and States**
Identified Dischargers**
Major*
8,814
9,485
Minor
37,051
54,695
Total •
45,865
64,180
Non-municipal
Issued EPA and States
Identified discharges
4,213
4,655
22,745
36,799
26,958
41,454
Municipal
Issued EPA and States
Identified discharges
4,375
4,604
12,470
16,060
16,845
20,664
*Major count includes "significant minors"
"Includes EPA-issued Federal facilities permits as follows:
226 major; 1,836 minor; 2,062 total
EPA has continued to encourage the States to
assume responsibility for the NPDES program.
By the end of 1975, 27 State NPDES programs
had been approved. (Table III-3).
Problems in the Municipal Area.—The scale
and public cost of the national municipal permit
effort, coupled with the tight requirements of the
FWPCA, have led inevitably to some serious
problems in connection with issuing municipal
permits. First, many municipal facilities will not
reach the 1977/78 secondary treatment require-
ment by the statutory deadline. It is estimated
that by 1977, 50 percent, or about 9,000, of the
municipal treatment plants will provide secondary
treatment or some higher level required by water
quality. However, less than 40 percent of the 1977
population will be served at the secondary treat-
ment level or better, principally because the large
cities will not have had time to complete con-
struction.
Failures to meet requirements may be traced to
both financial and physical barriers, and the re-
cently provided availability of the full amount of
construction grant monies called for by PL 92-500
will not wholly cure the problems. Due to these
uncertainties, many short-term permits were writ-
ten. During 1975, EPA has reexamined its posture
regarding these difficult cases. A significant effort
in modification and reissuance of permits is ex-
pected.
16
-------
TABLE m - 3
NPDES PERMIT PROGRAM
December 31, 1975
States and Territories
(alphabetical listing)
Approved
Not approved
1. California
2. Colorado
3. Connecticut
4. Delaware
5. Georgia
6. Hawaii
7. Indiana
8. Kansas
9. Maryland
10. Michigan
11. Minnesota
12. Mississippi
13. Missouri
14. Montana
15. Nebraska
16. Nevada
17. New York
18. North Carolina
19. North Dakota
20. Ohio
21. Oregon
22. South Carolina
23. Vermont
24. Virginia
25. Washington
26. Wisconsin
27. Wyoming
1. Alabama
2. Alaska
3. Arizona
4. Arkansas
5. District of Columbia
6. Florida
7. Guam and Trust Territories
8. Idaho
9. Illinois
10. Iowa
11. Kentucky
12. Louisiana
13. Maine
14. Massachusetts
15. New Hampshire
16. New Jersey
17. New Mexico
18. Oklahoma
19. Pennsylvania
20. Puerto Rico
21. Rhode Island
22. South Dakota
23. Tennessee
24. Texas
25. Utah
26. Virgin Islands
27. West Virginia
An Opportunity for Public Involvement.—The
NPDES provides important opportunities for the
public to participate in permitting decisions. Pub-
lic notices are issued for all permit applications,
and if sufficient interest is shown public hearings
are held. Formal adjudicatery hearings may also
be requested by the discharger or other parties.
Adjudicatory requests may be denied under cer-
tain circumstances. Issues may be untimely, not
subject to hearing or not within the purview of
the permit program. Also, the permitting agency
may find that the request concerns matters that
have been or will be adequately addressed in pub-
lic hearings.
By December 31, 1975, 1,880 adjudicatory hear-
ings had been requested. Of these, 458 cases were
settled prior to hearing, 52 requests were denied,
one was settled at the hearing and 1,069 requests
were still pending. Although there has been a de-
gree of public interest, the extent of public in-
volvement has often been disappointing.
Current Objectives.—In 1975, NPDES priorities
were shifted, since most permits had been issued.
Compliance monitoring and enforcement of the
issued permits have come to the fore as the logi-
cal successors to the past permit effort.
In preparation for the next round of permits,
the program is again emphasizing increased State
assumption of program responsibilities. Federal
and State permit processing is continuing, with
dischargers having the most critical effect on wa-
ter quality receiving the most attention. Permit
program areas which will receive highest priority
in the near future are: reissuance of municipal
permits; issuance, reissuance and modification of
major and new source permits, issuance of ocean
dumping permits, and preparation of environmen-
tal impact statements for new source permits.
Adjudicatory hearings on permits will also receive
major attention.
Judicial Decisions.—A recent judicial decision
calls for expansion of the EPA/State NPDES pro-
gram. This raises difficult program and policy is-
sues which EPA, and possibly the Congress, may
have to reexamine. The District Court for the Dis-
trict of Columbia has held that EPA incorrectly
exempted some point sources from the NPDES
program. NRDC v. Train, Civil Action No. 1629-
73, 396 F. Supp. 1393 (March 24, 1975).) Certain
feed lots, separate storm sewer outfalls, agricul-
tural and silvicultural discharges are covered by
the decision, as defined in the new EPA regula-
tions. EPA is appealing this decision.
COMPLIANCE MONITORING
AND ENFORCEMENT
The compliance monitoring and enforcement
program polices the EPA/State point source con-
trol effort. This program assumes an increasingly
central role as source discharge requirements are
defined and we move into the period of implemen-
tation.
An Important State Role.—The national policy
favoring increased State program participation is
keenly important in the enforcement area, where
appreciation of local circumstances may be partic-
ularly valuable. States with EPA-approved permit
programs have primary responsibility for monitor-
ing and enforcement of the permits they have
reissued or issued either alone or jointly with
EPA. In addition, some States without an EPA-
approved program have accepted partial responsi-
bility for monitoring. In all cases, Federal and
State activity is coordinated, and EPA maintains
backup enforcement authority.
17
-------
EPA or the States may initiate legal proceedings to abate excessive discharges. (Mining company plant on Lake Superior.)
The National Compliance Monitoring System.—
EPA and States have developed and are imple-
menting a national system for compliance moni-
toring. The system integrates three agency activi-
ties: review of self-monitoring reports, facility
inspections, and maintenance of quality assurance
activities. Fair and accurate performance is essen-
tial throughout the system, since these activities
may ultimately support enforcement proceedings.
During 1974, EPA/State resource limitations
prevented full review of all sources. Scrutiny fo-
cussed on dischargers having the greatest poten-
tial impact on water quality.
Mandatory self monitoring, comparable to the
national income tax system in terms of individual-
ly generated reports, is established through permit
conditions. All reports are logged for receipt. Fa-
cilities inspections may be prompted by violations
apparent on the face of a monitoring report or by
random or preselected audits. Inspections may
include examinations of production processes,
equipment and facilities and the taking of effluent
samples. Self monitoring report analysis is coordi-
nated with any inspection of the facility.
Municipal facilities inspections may also look
for areas where operations and maintenance activ-
ities (O&M) can be improved. Information gath-
ered from O&M inspections is used to upgrade
performance. Manpower training for municipal
personnel has also been developed to improve
performance. (See Chapter IV).
EPA has been developing a data system to as-
sist EPA and the States in conducting and direct-
ing monitoring and enforcement activities. Fur-
ther, a quality assurance program has been estab-
lished to assure that EPA/State and discharger-
related laboratory and field activities are in con-
formance with EPA guidelines and regulations.
This should help assure that the data reports are
both accurate and precise.
Enforcement.—Enforcement of permits pro-
ceeds under a variety of authorities. Section 309
of the Act (Federal enforcement) is supplemented
by section 311 (oil and hazardous substance spill
regulations), 307(a) and (b) (toxic and pretreat-
ment effluent standards), and section 404 (dredge
and fill requirements). Also, the Agency is em-
powered to take emergency action pursuant to
section 504.
18
-------
EPA and States with approved permit programs
are not the only parties with enforcement powers.
Interested citizens may also enforce against the
Government and other persons by commencing
civil actions under conditions prescribed in sec-
tion 505.
Enforcement action can also be initiated under
other laws. Proceedings begun before the enact-
ment of the Act and retained by the savings
clause have continued uninterrupted; other laws,
including the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and
Rodenticide Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Ocean
Dumping Act, and Refuse Act have also entrusted
EPA and the States with enforcement responsibil-
ities.
In 1974 the enforcement program emphasized
assistance to the permit issuance effort, including
proceedings against sources which failed to file
permit applications. As permit conditions, includ-
ing construction schedules, become fully effective
and enforceable, EPA has begun to place more
emphasis on enforcing these provisions.
In conducting enforcement activities primary
attention is directed towards those areas where
actions will have the greatest beneficial impact on
water quality. Priority is given to proceeding
against the chronic or recalcitrant violators and
others who critically affect water quality.
DISCHARGE OF DREDGED
OR FILL MATERIALS
The Army Corps of Engineers is authorized to
issue permits for the disposal of dredged or fill
materials in navigable waters and to specify dis-
posal sites (section 404). EPA is required to de-
velop guidelines in conjunction with the Corps
defining procedures for site specification and use.
On March 27, 1975, the U.S. District Court for
the District of Columbia ruled that the responsi-
bility and authority of the Corps to regulate the
discharge of dredged or fill materials extends to
"the waters of the United States." Therefore the
jurisdiction of the Corp's dredge and fill regula-
tions will be expanded in phases, from traditional-
ly "navigable" waters to all waters covered by
the FWPC Act. The Corps has published interim
final regulations with varying scopes of applica-
tion (Federal Register, July 25, 1975) for review
and public comment.
EPA published its section 404 guidelines in con-
junction with the Corps, also in interim final
form (Federal Register, September 5, 1975). The
Legal proceedings against alleged polluters may be brought
by private complainants. (Dead and dying oysters collected
as evidence, near New Orleans, La.)
19
-------
Figure III-l.
TOTAL ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS INITIATED IN 1974
280
240
200
160
120
80
40
REGION
I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X HO
guidelines are designed to minimize or prevent the
harmful effects of the covered activities in waters
of the United States, including inland navigable
waters.
A significant controversy surrounds coverage of
the inland wetlands. Congressional action may
resolve this issue.
The proposed guidelines contain safeguards to
prevent irreversible damage to waters covered by
the guidelines. At the same time undue restric-
tions must not be imposed on dredge and fill oper-
ations needed to maintain navigation, especially in
critical port and harbor areas.
EPA is committed to the development and im-
plementation, with the Corps of Engineers and
the States, of a realistic, manageable, environ-
mentally-protective, and minimally bureaucratic
program for the permitting of the discharge of
dredged or fill material. This will be a substantial,
ongoing program, to be carried out largely at the
Regional and State level.
OIL AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Section 311 of the FWPCA regulates spills and
similar discharges of oil and hazardous materials.
EPA's primary objectives are to prevent such dis-
charges and, where they do occur, to minimize
their environmental and economic impact through
containment and removal.
EPA's spill response, prevention and enforce-
ment programs further these objectives. In the
past year, program priority was given to response
to oil spills and development of remaining regula-
tions. Almost all oil regulations have been pro-
mulgated. Four key hazardous substance regula-
tions were proposed at the end of 1975.
Response and Removal.—EPA shares responsi-
bility for the response and removal program with
the Coast Guard under the National Contingency
Plan (40 CFR 1510). Activities under the Plan are
financed by a Federal Revolving Fund. Both the
Plan and the Revolving Fund provisions were re-
20
-------
1974
Figure III-2.
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS & NOTICES OF VIOLATIONS TO STATES
150
120
90
60
30
0
REGION
vised in 1974 to incorporate recent developments
in the spill program.
Notwithstanding the Revolving Fund, dischar-
gers who spill are expected to take immediate ac-
tion themselves to contain and remove the sub-
stance. If they fail to do so or need extra assist-
ance, the plan is implemented. In either case they
are financially responsible for all removal opera-
tions.
EPA and the Coast Guard provide Federal on-
scene coordinators for discharges to inland and
coastal waters, respectively. Each year there are
about 13,000 oil spills, 600 spills of hazardous
substances and 2000 spills of unknown sub-
stances. The number of hazardous substances spills
is based on voluntary notification, as mandatory
reporting is not yet required. Over the five years it
has existed, the Contingency Plan has been in-
voked over 5,000 times, primarily for oil spills. A
total of $18 million of the revolving fund has been
expended, part of which has been replenished
through the assessment of fines and reimburse-
ment from discharges for Federal clean-up activi-
ties.
Prevention. Oil.—The major elements of the oil
spill prevention program have been implemented.
Regulations which became effective in January
1974 require potential sources to develop and im-
plement Oil Spill Prevention Control and Counter-
measure (SPCC) Plans (40 CFR 112). Regional
personnel inspect facilities to assure that the re-
quired plans have been prepared and implement-
ed. Also, if a discharger has major or repeated
spills, its plans will be reviewed and, if necessary,
revised. Appropriate enforcement action may be
taken against sources with or without plans.
Hazardous Substances.—Proposed regulations
designating hazardous substances, determining
their removability, establishing harmful quantities
and establishing penalty rates were published
21
-------
Dredging operations must obtain a permit from the Corps of Engineers and meet the joint requirements of EPA and the
Corps. (Lake Pontchartrain, La.)
December 30, 1975. Final promulgation of these
four regulations is anticipated before the end of
CY 1977. A supplement to the hazardous sub-
stances regulations was issued to support the
selection of substances on the designation list.
The proposed designation regulation contains 307
hazardous substances which are subject to regula-
tion under section 311.
Enforcement.—EPA's objective is to encourage
preventative action, but enforcement measures
will be undertaken where necessary. Both the fail-
ure to report spills of a harmful quantity and the
discharge itself are subject to penalties under
Coast Guard administrative procedures. EPA
cites violators of the oil pollution prevention regu-
lations. Violations include failure to prepare and
implement the required SPCC plans and failure to
revise plans as required by facilities which contin-
ue to have spill problems. When non-removable
hazardous substances are discharged in excess of
the harmful quantity, EPA may also assess a civil
penalty. Under the proposed hazardous sub-
stances regulations, such discharges of non-remova-
ble hazardous substances will be subject to either
of two penalty provisions. Under one, the penalty
could be potentially very high ($500,000 for fixed
facilities and $5 million for vessels). Alternatively,
a penalty of from $500 to $5,000 per spill event
may be assessed.
The choice of penalty options is at the discre-
tion of the Administrator. The penalty rate regula-
tion proposes that gross negligence on the part of
the discharger be used as the criterion for decid-
ing which penalty option should apply. Gross neg-
ligence in either causing the discharge or in dam-
age mitigation activities may result in the $500,000
or $5 million penalty assessment. Where negli-
gence is not evident, the penalty will be assessed
in the range of $500 to $5,000.
The NPDES and section 311 programs both
apply to point source dischargers. Some spills
may violate both section 311 and an applicable
permit. In other instances, there is the potential
for a discharge from a fixed facility to exceed sec-
tion 311 limits for spills but not be in violation of
permit limitations for the substances. EPA has
22
-------
EPA's oil contingency plan regulations provide for quick response to oil spills. (New York harbor.)
proposed an exemption for hazardous substances
discharges under section 311 as long as they are
in accordance with an applicable NPDES permit.
MARINE POLLUTION
The primary objective of EPA's marine pro-
gram is to protect the quality of ocean waters by
regulating the disposal of materials. Almost all
intentional ocean discharges, whether in the terri-
torial seas, the contigious zone or the ocean wa-
ters beyond, are regulated by section 402, 403,
and 404 of the 1972 Amendments of the FWPCA
(PL 92-500) or by the Marine Protection, Re-
search and Sanctuaries Act ("Ocean Dumping
Act") (PL 92-532 as amended 93-254). Sections
311 and 312 of PL 92-500 regulate the discharge
of oil and hazardous materials and section 102 of
PL 92-532 regulates fish wastes.
Thus, all ocean dumping is now subject to per-
mit requirements. Only those dumping activities
which meet environmentally protective criteria or
which are part of an implementation schedule
leading toward compliance with such criteria will
be permitted.
A comprehensive report on ocean dumping,
addressing the implementation of Title I of the
Ocean Dumping Act, is submitted to Congress
annually.
Marine Sanitation Devices
An estimated 573,000 U.S. vessels and an un-
known number of foreign-flag ships may be sub-
ject to marine discharge standards. On June 23
1972, EPA promulgated a virtual no-discharge
standard, with certain incentive provisions appli-
cable to existing vessels. On January 30, 1975, the
Coast Guard promulgated a regulation addressing
the design, construction, installation and opera-
tion of marine sanitation devices to meet the EPA
standard. On October 10, 1975, EPA published a
proposed regulation that would modify the 1972
standard, and on January 29, 1976, EPA expects
23
-------
to promulgate final marine sanitation device stand-
ards early in 1976. Responsibility for enforcing
the standards is vested in the Coast Guard.
In addition, the FWPCA allows States with the
Administrator's concurrence, or the Administrator
upon request, to establish strict no-discharge
zones to protect or enhance the quality of particu-
lar State waters.
Clean Lakes
The FWPC Act authorizes EPA to provide
matching grant financial assistance to States to
carry out methods and procedures to control
sources of pollution and restore the quality of
publicly owned freshwater lakes (section 314) and
also to enter contracts with or make grants to var-
ious persons to develop and demonstrate lake pol-
lution control methods. (Section 104(h).)
Grants approved under the lake restoration pro-
gram are matched by equal amounts from State or
local governments. Initial Federal appropriations
were $4 million, about 10 percent of which has
been earmarked for use by EPA to evaluate the
results achieved. An additional $15 million has
been appropriated for Fiscal Year 1976.
EPA's program is directed toward restoring the
quality of publicly owned freshwater lakes that
have been degraded by pollution from urban or
stormwater run-off, chemicals leached from septic
tank fields, or run-off from farms and fields. Such
sources are contributing an ever greater percent-
age of the Nation's total water pollution load,
since most industrial plants and sewage treatment
facilities have already started cleaning up their
discharges under the other EPA water pollution
control programs.
The lake restoration program includes such ac-
tivities as diverting run-off from storms, farms
and feedlots, diking, controlling sedimentation,
street cleaning and sweeping to cut pollution from
urban run-off, dredging to remove major deposits
from plant decay, constructing sediment traps,
and promoting the growth of beneficial plants to
dispose of excess nutrients. Grant funds may not
be used for activities having only temporary bene-
ficial effects, such as weed cutting or chemical
treatment to limit the growth of algae.
Note: A series of tables indexing enforcement actions taken
under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments
of 1972 during 1974 and 1975 will be separately printed and
distributed.
24
-------
CHAPTER FOUR
Municipal
Construction
Publicly owned treatment facilities play an im-
portant role in determining the quality of the Na-
tion's waterways. They handle waste-water gener-
ated by 160 million persons—76 percent of our
population—plus the effluents from many indus-
tries. By 1990, plants are expected to provide
sewage treatment for at least 210 million persons.
Cities, towns, and special service districts sup-
ply waste treatment ranging from crude to sophis-
ticated for the sewered population. To assure that
every community has adequate treatment—sec-
ondary treatment plus more stringent treatment
where necessary—as rapidly as possible, EPA
provides funds for construction to municipalities,
supports needed manpower training, and pro-
motes good operation and maintenance practices
for new and old plants alike.
MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of
1956 initiated the program of Federal grants to
communities for waste treatment works construc-
tion. Since 1956, EPA and its predecessor agen-
cies have obligated over $14 billion for pollution
control projects. The total cost of these projects,
including State and local shares, was about $27
billion (See Table IV-1.)
In addition to the $18 billion for new treatment
works construction, the 1972 "Act also authorized
$2.75 billion to reimburse communities for the
costs of some treatment works construction com-
pleted prior to the Act. Subsequent legislation
added $600 million to the reimbursement fund. As
of June 30, 1975, $1.9 billion had been appropriat-
ed for reimbursement.
A Major State Rote.—The construction grants
program is included in EPA's high priority effort
to transfer major responsibility for program oper-
ation from EPA to the States. The sizeable man-
power requirements of the grants program, along
Advanced waste treatment technology is often needed to
meet standards in the receiving waters. (Carbon adsorption
system. EPA-supported facility at Pomona, Calif.)
with the program's high dollar value and clear
local impacts, underline the importance of this
transfer.
EPA supports an amendment to the 1972 Act
which would encourage delegation of grant func-
tions to capable States by allowing them to re-
serve up to two percent of their construction al-
lotments to finance administration of the grants
program.
EPA may delegate to States with the necessary
authority, responsibility, and capability a substan-
tial portion of the construction grants program. At
a minimum, EPA must carry out the provisions of
the National Environmental Protection Act
25
-------
TABLE IV-I
MUNICIPAL CONSTRUCTION
DECEMBER 31, 1975
Annual Authorizations, Allocations, Obligations & Expenditures
Fiscal
years
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
Transition
1977
Authorizations
$50,000,000
50,000,000
50,000,000
50,000,000
50,000,000
80,000,000
90,000,000
100,000,000
100,000,000
150,000,000
150,000,000
450,000,000
700,000,000
1,000,000,000
1,250,000,000
2,000,000,000
7,750,000,0001
6,000,000,000
7,600,000,0003
—
.... —
—
Actual
allocations
$50,000,000
45,657,000
46,816,000
46,101,000
45,645,260
80,000,000
90,000,000
90,000,000
90,000,000
121,000,000
150,000,000
203,000,000
214,000,000
800,000,000
1,000,000,000
2,000,000,000
3,900,000,0002
3,000,000,000
4,000,000,000
9,000,000,0004
—
—
Fiscal year
obligations
$50,000,000
45,657,000
46,816,000
46,101,000
45,645,260
80,000,000
90,000,000
89,642,425
88,225,123
120,946,373
150,000,000
203,000,000
214,000,000
437,635,609
1,167,505,913
872,462,638
2,926,230,179
2,669,119,938
4,149,461,347
4,500,000,000*
1,000,000,000*
6,400,000,000*
Actual
outlays
$844,000
16,844,000
36,429,000
40,295,000
44,085,000
42,103,000
51,738,000
66,432,000
69,755,000
81,479,000
84,476,000
122,109,000
134,530,000
176,377,000
478,366,000
413,407,888
684,400,479
1,553,421,169
1,937,574,981
2,350,000,000*
600,000,000*
3,770,000,000*
'Includes $2.75 billion for reimbursement under section 206.
Includes $1.9 billion appropriated for reimbursement.
Includes $600 million for reimbursement (P.L. 93-207).
"Release of $9.0 billion in FY73/74/75 authorizations.
*Estimate.
(NEPA) and other mandatory Federal require-
ments, monitor and audit grants, provide overall
management, make formal approvals of grants,
and distribute funds. The states can assume some
or all other grant-related functions.
The construction grants program for treatment
plants and sanitary sewers has five objectives:
• To manage the program in an efficient man-
ner with sufficient resources to ensure that
the effluent limitations and the water quality
standards required under the Act are achieved
at the least cost and in the minimum possible
time.
• To assure that planned facilities are environ-
mentally sound.
• To safeguard the integrity of the program by
detecting and deterring fraud and other irreg-
ularities in the awarding of grants and con-
struction of the facilities.
• To maintain reliable and efficient operation
and maintenance at all plants.
• To transfer from EPA to the States the basic
responsibility for the operation of the pro-
gram.
Three-step Program.—EPA uses a three-step
grants program to provide adequate planning, de-
sign, and construction. In general, each step must
be completed and approved before a grant can be
made for the next step. Step 1, Facility Planning,
governs the municipal facility investment decision
at the local level. Its goal is selection of the most
cost-effective and environmentally sound waste
management alternative for the planning area. An
environmental review, resulting in a negative dec-
laration or an environmental impact statement,
must be completed before Step 2 begins. Step 2
consists of preparation of detailed plans and spec-
ifications, and Step 3 is actual construction of the
project.
26
-------
Each construction grant represents a lengthy
effort by the grant applicant and EPA. Comple-
tion of a Step 1 Facility Plan may take six months
to a year or more, and preparation of plans and
specs under Step 2 can take another year. Both of
these steps must be completed before construc-
tion can begin.
The Soaring Needs.—Since 1969, EPA has
conducted several surveys of municipal facilities
to predict the costs of needed treatment works
construction in each State. The 1974 Needs Survey
was the first survey of projected needs associated
with the 1983 goals of the Act as well as the 19771
78 requirements—for many treatment plants, sec-
ondary treatment will satisfy the 1983 goals, but
special factors including more strict water quality
standards may toughen the requirements in some
cases. (See Chapter I.) In addition, many of the
reporting constraints on the 1973 Needs Survey
were removed in 1974, which broadened its
scope.
The 1974 Survey, despite certain corrections by
EPA, reported that meeting the 1983 goals of the
Act would cost the staggering sum of $342 billion.
In contrast, the 1973 Needs Survey, just one year
earlier, projected total needs of only $60 billion.
A major reason for this dramatic leap is the inclu-
sion in the 1974 Survey of a new category of
needs—treatment and/or control of stormwater—
totalling $235 billion. Also, for the 1974 Survey,
EPA accepted estimates of the cost of meeting
the 1983 goals, whereas the 1973 Survey was de-
signed to show needs for meeting only the 1977
goals, and such needs were to be reported only if
they were documented.
EPA does not consider the needs estimates for
the new stormwater category to be useful either
as an accurate indicator of long-term requirements
or for allocating grants among the States. Differ-
ent States used different assumptions and tech-
niques to estimate their stormwater abatement
needs. In some States, the estimate included not
only the costs of controlling existing stormwater
discharges, but also the costs of providing new
storm sewers and stormwater treatment facilities
in certain areas currently lacking storm sewers.
However, even when needs are limited to the
so-called traditional eligibilities, treatment plants
and interceptor sewers, the totals are immense.
The 1974 Survey for these components reported a
figure of $46 billion. This figure represents a $10
billion, or 28 percent, increase over the preceding
year's estimate. The increase resulted partly from
a new awareness that future water quality stand-
ards may be more stringent than the standards on
which the 1973 Survey was based. The presence
in the 1974 Survey of more needs for advanced
waste treatment in relation to simple secondary
treatment supports this explanation.
Awarding Grants for Priority Actions.—The
needs surveys are conducted to determine the
extent of the pollution problem and to enable
Congress to allocate Federal construction funds
among the States in proportion to the size of their
municipal treatment problems. Of the $18 billion
authorized for new treatment works construction
in the FWPCA of 1972, over $8.2 billion had been
obligated by December, 1975. In FY 1976, EPA
plans to award about 4,000 grants for planning,
design and construction, totaling about $4.4 bil-
lion.
TABLE IV-2
SUMMARY OF CONTRACT
AUTHORITY GRANT ACTIVITY UNDER
P.L. 92-500
Disposal of sludge from municipal waste treatment plants is
an increasing problem. (Chicago's sludge transported for
experimental use on Illinois cornfields.)
Fiscal
1973
1974
1975
1976
Transition
1977
Authorization
5,000,000
6,000,000
7,600,000
—
—
—
Allotment
(THOUSANDS
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
9,000,000
—
—
Obligations
-$)
1,591,000
1,384,000
3,616,000*
4,400,000*
1,000,000*
6,000,000*
Expenditures
...
160,000
880,000
1,467,000*
490,000*
3,370,000*
*Estimate
27
-------
TABLE IV-3
STATUS OF WWT CONSTRUCTION GRANT FUNDS
UNDER PL 92-500
AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1975
Region State
1 Conn.
Mass.
Maine
N.H.
R. I.
Vt.
Region totals
2 N.J.
N.Y.
P.R.
V.I.
Region totals
3 D.C.
Del.
Md.
Pa.
Va.
W. Va.
Region totals
4 Ala.
Fla.
Ga.
Ky.
Miss.
N.C.
S.C.
Tenn.
Region totals
5 111.
Ind.
Mich.
Minn.
Ohio
Wis.
Region totals
6 Ark.
La.
N. Mex.
Okla.
Tex.
Region totals
7 Iowa
Kans.
Mo.
Neb.
Region totals
8 Colo.
Mont.
N. Dak.
S. Dak.
Utah
Wyo.
Region totals
9 Ariz.
Calif.
Guam
Hawaii
Nev.
Trust
Territories
American
Samoa
Region totals
10 Alaska
Idaho
Ore.
Wash.
Region Totals
National Totals
Fiscal Year 1973, 1974,
Allotments
308,684,700
573,905,000
153,097,200
153,817,300
90,908,600
45,397,400
1,325,810,200
1,300,686,700
2,089,647,700
169,968,400
15,390,700
3,575,693,500
146,295,800
111,035,200
564,743,400
992,799,000
496,196,400
122,150,600
2,433,220,400
95,821,100
691,686,500
242,575,800
188,609,400
80,756,900
226,984,200
170,538,900
213,748,200
1,910,721,000
1,136,455,100
483,619,900
1,213,699,300
337,866,800
979,291,100
284,762,800
4,435,695,000
81,362,800
154,404,100
36,265,400
134,336,100
420,340,100
826,708,500
197,194,700
112,696,700
314,797,600
77,973,500
702,662,500
89,874,200
28,222,800
12,013,100
17,736,800
44,996,100
8,320,100
201,163,100
43,259,200
1,894,076,900
12,931,200
109,558,300
64,920,400
5,087,100
1,554,900
2,131,388,000
51,569,600
38,002,500
154,189,600
213,176,100
456,937,800
18,000,000,000
1975 and 1976
Obligations
119,768,607
248,037,826
123,786,074
75,683,301
53,461,612
15,265,585
636,003,005
662,087,945
773,747,685
57,685,014
5,024,250
1,498,544,894
112,449,640
46,723,995
247,757,280
409,982,341
271,382,613
41,320,532
1,129,616,401
51,418,104
426,027,809
74,896,286
86,112,818
39,971,008
91,719,127
61,748,223
81,777,569
913,670,944
484,895,773
190,574,247
537,640,712
170,894,947
458,605,770
141,318,507
1,983,929,956
40,288,711
71,096,954
16,004,763
41,370,200
225,929,191
394,689,819
92,282,799
34,999,109
174,553,477
38,834,142
340,669,527
56,026,536
18,321,755
7,736,871
8,130,107
29,849,895
4,507,152
124,572,316
33,394,146
761,012,076
9,883,352
93,148,350
55,958,345
2,957,555
240,000
956,593,824
32,588,274
22,135,371
93,309,072
118,711,350
266,744,067
8,245,034,753
Combined
Unobligated
188,916,093
325,867,174
29,311,126
78,133,999
37,446,988
30,131,815
638,598,755
1,315,900,015
112,283,386
10,366,450
33,846,160
64,311,205
316,986,120
582,816,659
224,813,787
80,830,068
44,402,996
265,658,691
167,679,514
102,496,582
40,785,892
135,265,073
108,790,677
131,970,631
651,559,327
293,045,653
676,058,588
166,971,853
520,685,330
143,444,293
41,074,089
83,307,146
20,260,637
92,965,900
194,410,909
104,911,901
77,697,591
140,244,123
39,139,358
33,847,664
9,901,045
4,276,229
9,606,693
15,146,205
3,812,948
9,865,054
1,133,064,824
3,047,848
16,409,950
8,962,055
2,129,545
1,314,900
18,931,326
15,867,129
60,880,528
94,464,750
Appropriate project priorities are an important
part of the program, to maximize the public ex-
penditure's impact on water quality and public
health hazards. Each year, the States develop
municipal project priority lists. Construction grant
awards go to identified priority needs, where they
can bring about direct improvements in water
quality.
EPA has set the goal of obligating the entire
$18 billion authorization by the end of FY 1977,
to assure that these funds are promptly used to
attack the problem of municipal pollution. To
achieve this goal, the rate of obligation of availa-
ble grant funds will have to be accellerated to
about $450 million a month, and vigorous, skillful,
and efficient grants management will be required.
The Administrator has established the principle of
having a single EPA project manager for each
grant during the entire three-step process, to
make sure that grants are processed carefully and
smoothly. Major commitments of Federal and al-
ready strained State resources will be needed if
the grant objectives are to be fully realized.
Greater involvement of State personnel is particu-
larly important.
The Agency recognizes that the pressures to
accelerate the grants program could lead to great
inefficiencies in the way the remaining $12 billion
is spent. However, by maintaining proper priori-
ties, by promoting better grants management, and
by delegating authority to the States, EPA is in-
suring against both financial waste and environ-
mental degradation.
TRAINING FOR
ASSOCIATED PERSONNEL
The rapidly-increasing rate of wastewater treat-
ment plant construction will seriously magnify
current shortages of adequately-trained operation
and maintenance personnel. A well-planned and
executed manpower planning, development and
training program is therefore a key factor in insur-
ing effective use of the billions of dollars being
invested in treatment works.
Estimates vary on the demand for and supply
of persons to operate and maintain wastewater
treatment works. Proposed studies should provide
much more accurate information on which to base
employment and training needs projections.
One limited survey conducted by EPA in 1974
and based on recommended staffing levels by size
and type of plant indicated that approximately
85,000 persons were needed for optimal operation
28
-------
and maintenance of then-existing facilities. This
estimated need was somewhat higher than posi-
tions actually budgeted by local governments, and
more than 25 percent above the estimated 67,000
full and part-time workers engaged in operation
and maintenance activities for municipal plants.
This numerical shortage is complicated by the fact
that a number of inadequately-trained and inexpe-
rienced personnel appear to be filling positions.
In an effort to alleviate this problem and assist
the States to achieve self-sufficiency, EPA con-
ducted eight instructor development courses dur-
ing 1975. A total of 117 persons, from 24 States,
were trained as instructors in these intensive, one-
week programs. Over three-fourths of those were
trained in the area of wastewater treatment. The
remainder received instruction in other environ-
mental fields, such as pesticides. Additional
courses are scheduled through 1976.
Programs to Meet Needs
A number of programs, not all under the Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency, are intended to
help meet these needs.
Sections 109-112.—The activities of EPA under
sections 109-112 of the Act are keyed to develop-
ment of undergraduate training programs and the
construction of state training facilities. EPA pro-
vides curriculum development program guidance
and support for States and educational institutions
desiring to offer undergraduate courses in treat-
ment plant operations and maintenance. Since
Fiscal year 1973, EPA has awarded under section
109(a) approximately $331,000 annually to assist
7-10 institutions per year. These grants have sup-
ported curriculum and pilot program development,
faculty training, student support and part-time
student employment within treatment facilities.
Under section 109(b), as of December 1975
EPA had made three grant awards of $250,000
each for the construction of State training facili-
ties to train operation and maintenance personnel.
Other States have indicated interest in developing
a State training center. These training centers are
funded out of the construction grant funds allo-
cated to a State under section 205.
EPA has made no grants under section 111,
award of scholarships for undergraduate study.
Section 104(g)(l).—EPA activities under section
104 of the Act represent the major portion of
EPA's investment in attempting to assist States
and local governments meet their needs for ade-
quately-trained operations and maintenance per-
sonnel.
In FY 75, EPA awarded $1.1 million in grants
to the States and training institutions under sec-
tion 104 (g)(l) to support operator training. In
addition, States receiving grants under section 106
in FY 75 budgeted approximately $3 million for
training purposes, including training for treatment
works operations and maintenance.
Section 104(g)(3).—During FY 75, section
104(g)(3)(A) training grants awarded to universi-
ties in support of post graduate training amounted
to $1.8 million. This program supported 640 pro-
fessional trainees at 52 universities. Over the past
four years, slightly more than one-third of stu-
dents supported by this program initially became
employees of Federal, State, and local govern-
ments. (See Tables IV-4, IV-5.) State and Local
Fellowships awarded under section 104(g)(3)(B)
amounted to $344,000 in FY 75 and supported 74
fellowships for undergraduate and graduate train-
ing. The same amount will be awarded in FY
1976, to assist about 55-60 trainees. No awards
are planned under this section after FY 76.
TABLE IV-4
SUPPORT FOR POSTGRADUATE TRAINING
(Section 104(g)(3) Program)
Fiscal
year
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966 . ..
1967
1968
1969 . ...
1970
1971
1972 .. .
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
104(g)(3)(A)
Training Training
appropriation awards
(thousands) to universities
$700
1,100
2,000
2,000
2,500
2,910
3,365
3,300
3,800
4,565
4,650**
2,800
2,770
2,105
1,200
None*
23
35
54
57
65
71
84
79
88
91
103
87
73
52
33
None*
Trainees
supported
83
177
291
364
391
509
633
792
1,243
1,295
962
845
640
425
None
104(g)(3)(B)
Fellowships
appropriation Fellowship
(thousands) awardees
$100
300
474
617
710
650
633
600
600
600
600
250
344*
344*
7
25
45
75
101
113
103
113
91
105
108
105
51
29*
53*
7
*Change from Research Fellows to State and Local Fellowships
**$! ,200 of FY 72 funds supplied in early FY 1973
Source: EPA Records
29
-------
TABLE IV-5
INITIAL EMPLOYER OF PERSONS SUPPORTED BY
TRAINING APPROPRIATIONS
(104(g)(3)(A))
In percent
Employer
1972
1975
(estimated)
Government
Federal
Consultant firms
Industries
unknown
43.8
25.3
18 5
32 0
9 2
14 9
33.0
11.9
21 1
39 0
11 0
17 0
38 1
14.3
23 8
36 8
9 5
15 6
360
10.7
25 3
34 8
90
20 2
Source: EPA sample of universities receiving grants
Other Federal Agencies' Programs.—EPA has
also attempted to impact other Federal human
resource development programs which could be
directed to help meet the needs for qualified per-
sonnel in the Water Pollution Control Programs.
Primary among these are the public employment
and training programs under the Comprehensive
Employment and Training Act of 1973 (CETA),
and the Vocational Technical Training Programs
under the Federal/State Vocational Education
System.
CETA provides primarily for entry-level train-
ing of unemployed persons and for upgrade train-
ing. Information currently available to EPA indi-
cates that over $81 million has already been allo-
cated by Prime Sponsors for CETA employment
and training in environmental occupations. A sub-
stantial percentage of this investment was direct-
ed toward the employment and training of 2,187
persons in the water and wastewater fields.
In addition, EPA has worked with the Office of
Education (HEW) in an effort to develop and
strengthen relationships between State pollution
control agencies and State vocational education
systems. These systems, if adequately financed
and staffed, can provide the needed training for
operations and maintenance personnel, and repre-
sent one element of a long-term solution to train-
ing needs. An EPA-OE interagency agreement
will formalize the Federal agencies' roles in en-
couraging mutual cooperation in the State agen-
cies.
The State Manpower Planning Response
Adequate manpower planning capability in
State and local water pollution control agencies is
an important part of the establishment of State
and local self-sufficiency in water quality pro-
grams, and a major EPA goal. Although there is
wide variation among States, on the average pres-
ent manpower planning capability appears to be
only about 30 percent of the needed, or optimal,
level. EPA has encouraged the use of section 106
grants to State water pollution control agencies
for manpower planning positions. During Fiscal
Year 1974, EPA trained more than 100 State and
local government personnel in manpower planning
for waste treatment works.
A recent Memorandum of Agreement between
the U.S. Department of Labor and EPA recom-
mended that if a State or local pollution control
agency did not possess the manpower planning
function, CETA Prime Sponsors should give con-
sideration to the establishment of an environmen-
tal manpower planning function within the Prime
Sponsor staff.
As manpower planning becomes better estab-
lished within State and local water pollution con-
trol agencies, these agencies should encourage
and support local efforts to provide for optimal
treatment plant staffing and appropriate salary
scales for persons engaged in waste treatment.
SLUDGE DISPOSAL
One of the most perplexing problems in waste-
water treatment concerns disposal of the resultant
sludges. Approximately 5 million dry tons of
sludge are generated annually from municipal
treatment works, and the amount continues to
increase. Further complicating disposal will be the
change in sludge composition. As more stringent
treatment techniques are increasingly employed,
sludges will contain a wider range of types and
greater concentrations of toxic substances such as
heavy metals.
Most popular disposal methods—ocean dump-
ing, incineration, land disposal—all have uncertain
or negative environmental impacts associated with
them. Ocean dumping has been constrained by
recent legislation (see Chapter III), and the
amount of sludge dumped in oceans is expected
to decline. Incineration consumes a considerable
amount of energy and may contribute to air pollu-
tion in some areas. Land disposal is inhibited in
some locations by citizens' attitudes or legal re-
strictions.
30
-------
EPA Actions.—The Agency currently is prepar-
ing a technical bulletin to assist in evaluating
sludge-disposal related aspects of wastewater
treatment works grant applications, and has pub-
lished a contemporary review of sludge process-
ing technology. In addition, the Agency has estab-
lished a Residual Sludge Working Group whose
mission is to coordinate Agency policy develop-
ment, program planning, and implementation for
residual sludges which include municipal, industri-
al, and pollution control sludges. The major out-
put of this group will be a strategy document for
the short and long term management of residual
sludges. The strategy will suggest Agency policy,
identify ongoing programs, and define gaps and
needs for future research.
As standards and regulations published under
recent environmental legislation begin to close off
water as a disposal medium, municipal sludge dis-
posers can be expected to turn increasingly to
land disposal as a means of solving their sludge
problems. The need for technical information and
regulations for land disposal will become increas-
ingly more acute.
31
-------
CHAPTER FIVE
Efficiency of
Treatment
Works
EPA and the States conduct periodic operation
and maintenance (O&M) inspections and evalua-
tions of existing wastewater treatment facilities.
These inspections are conducted primarily to as-
sure compliance with permit and grant conditions
on facilities constructed with Federal grant funds.
The resulting data are used to develop perform-
ance summaries and technical documentation.
Evaluations of publicly owned treatment works
(POTW) performance, compared with their design
efficiencies, and other related data serve the fol-
lowing purposes:
• They provide information to agencies respon-
sible for the POTWs.
• They assist planning agencies to make deci-
sions on treatment works construction or
upgrading.
• They help Federal and State program person-
nel to formulate monitoring and assistance
programs.
This survey, required by Section 210 of the
Act, is derived from O&M inspection reports dur-
ing 1973-1974. It summarizes the operational
status as of the end of 1974 of facilities construct-
ed with Federal assistance. Preliminary results for
1975 are reported at the end of this chapter. A
more complete report for 1975 will be published
during 1976.
SAMPLE DESCRIPTION
AND METHODOLOGY
The results of 960 inspections conducted during
calendar years 1973 and 1974 were received and
stored in the same way as in previous years, 1 but
'Clean Water: Report to Congress-1974, p. 55
32
the analysis of the data has been improved in this
year's report in several ways. More complete
sample statistics for removal efficiencies were cal-
culated, performance levels and distributions were
plotted, and indices of design versus actual per-
formance were used to allow more direct compar-
isons among all plant types.
The inspection reports in the final survey are
divided into the following groups (Tables V-l and
V-2):
No. of
Plants
Group A—Records with enough design and operational
data to allow comparisons 386
Group B—records without operational performance
data 484
Records disqualified for lack of design
data 84
Total 954
The plants in Group A represent waste treat-
ment processes of all sizes and types. The sample
contains records from 38 States, with as few as
one coming from one State and as many as 78
from another; the median is 15 records per State.
The plants in Group B also represent a full
range of treatment process sizes and types. This
group contains records from 40 States, with just
one coming from each of three States and a total
of 52 from one State at the other extreme. The
median is ten records per State.
The largest number of plants in Group B (no
operating data) were lagoons or stabilization
ponds, usually smaller than 1 mgd. Lagoons tend-
ed to fall into Group B because (1) the States of-
ten require no testing at lagoons; (2) lagoons are
seldom heavily staffed and staff personnel are of-
ten untrained; and (3) lagoons often have no
effluent, so that no testing is needed.
-------
TABLE V-l
NUMBER OF MUNICIPAL TREATMENT PLANTS IN SUR-
VEY GROUP A
Type of process
Lagoons
Trickling filters
Total
Percent
"Million gallons per da
Class
1
(15 +
mgd')
.. 7
. 6
8
21
5.4
y
Class
2
(5-15
mgd)
10
6
20
36
9.3
Class
3
(1-5
mgd)
10
1
60
61
132
34.2
Class
4
(0-1
mgd)
12
16
53
107
188
48.6
Class
5
(un-
knowi
_
5
1
4
10
7 5
i) Total
39
22
126
199
386
100.0
Percent
10.1
5.7
32.6
51.6
100.0
100.0
TABLE V-2
NUMBER OF MUNICIPAL TREATMENT PLANTS WITH
INSUFFICIENT OPERATIONAL DATA-GROUP B
Class Class Class
1 2 3
(15+ (5-15 (1-5
Type of process
Primary
Lagoons
Trickling filters
Activated sludge . .
Total
Percent
mgd*) mgd)
1
.. —
]
2
6
1
2
2
11
2.3
mgd)
17
12
23
17
69
14.3
Class
4
(0-1
Class 5
mgd) (unknown) Total
28
165
44
119
356
73.5
3
29
4
11
47
9.7
55
207
73
149
484
100.1
Percent
11 3
42 8
15 1
30.8
100 0
100.0
•Million gallons per day
GROUP A PLANT PERFORMANCE
As in previous years, plant operational daja col-
lected during inspections were analyzed for 5-day
biochemical oxygen demand (BODs) and total
suspended solids (TSS) removals. The perform-
ance of Group A plants with respect to these pa-
rameters is reflected in two measures: (1) devia-
tions from design parameters for BODs and TSS
removal; and (2) comparison of actual effluent
quality with the current secondary treatment defi-
nition. Additional information on removal BODs
and TSS efficiencies by size and type of treatment
plant is also presented.
In the analysis, it was found useful to classify
the plants based upon their performance record.
Good Plant performance requires constant attention to all aspects of plant operation, from highly complex operational con-
trol procedures to routine equipment cleaning and maintenance.
33
-------
Throughout this section, the following classifica-
tions are used:
S—Satisfactory
U—Unsatisfactory but marginal.
P—Poor.
Deviation from Design
Section 210 specifically requires a comparison
of actual performance of plants with their design
specifications. For this reason, TSS and BODs
removals have been converted from straight per-
centages to indices of deviation from design per-
formance. This method makes it possible to com-
pare the performance of plants over a wide range
of design criteria to arrive at more direct compari-
sons among the various types and sizes of treat-
ment facilities. Table V-3 presents results from
the analysis of performance for plants in Group
A.
Within Group A, roughly half of the plants
were operating at or above their design specifica-
tions. Only about 20% of the plants fell more than
ten percentage points below design levels for
BOD and/or TSS. In terms of achieving design
efficiencies, activated sludge plants performed
best in BODs removal, with 73% performing well
and only 10% performing poorly, as against 60%
and 19% for all of Group A. For TSS, activated
sludge plant performance closely paralleled over-
all Group A performance. Primary plants exhibit-
ed the best TSS performance, 60% performing
well and 31% performing poorly.
Discounting lagoons, of which there were only
28, trickling filter plants had the poorest perform-
ance record. Only 45% and 46% operated within
design specifications for BOD5 and TSS respec-
tively. Here again, however, unsatisfactory plants
were as often marginal as poor, indicating that a
substantial percentage could be brought to accept-
able levels by increased attention to operation and
maintenance activities. In general, all types of
plants appeared to have more trouble with TSS
removal than with BOD5 removal.
While the number of large plants (over 5 mgd)
included in the survey sample was relatively
TABLE V-3
DISTRIBUTION OF GROUP A PLANTS BY TYPE, SIZE, AND PERFORMANCE
Primary
Lagoons
Trickling filter
Activated sludge
Total
Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class Class
12345 12345 12345 12345
15 (5-15 (1-5 (o-l (un- (15+ (5-15 (1-5 (o-l (un- (15+ (5-15 (1-5 (0-1 (un- (15+ 5-15 (1-5 (o-l (un-
mgd* mgd) mgd) mgd) known) All mgd*) mgd)* mgd) mgd) known) All mgd) mgd) mgd) mgd) known) All mgd*) mgd) mgd) mgd) known) All
8
£
1
£
1
1
i
o
t
£
c/1
£
Sat.
(S)
Unsat.
(U)
Poor
(P)
Sat.
(S)
Unsat.
(s)
Poor
(P)
No.
Data
Total
4757
1131
3223
5467
- 3 1 4
322-
1 1
8 10 10 11
- 23 - - - 9 1 10 3 2 25 27 - 57 2 9 41 88 1 141 231
- 6 - - 1 6 3 10 3 2 17 11 1 34 1 7 9 14 1 32 82
- 10 - - 1 5 2 8 - 2 17 16 - 35 4 4 6 5 1 20 73
- 22 - - - 1 1 2 3 1 21. 22 - 47 1 7 27 49 1 85 156
- 8 - - - 2 - 2 2 1 14 9 - 26 1 4 13 18 - 36 72
- 7 - - - 1 - 1 - 3 15 12 - 30 5 7 10 15 2 39 77
2 - - 2 16 5 23 1 1 9 11 1 23 - 2 6 25 - 33 81
39 - 2 20 6 28 6 6 59 54 1 126 7 20 56 107 3 193 386
Million gallons per day
34
-------
small, there does seem to be a pattern of poorer
performance by these larger plants. Among acti-
vated sludge and trickling filter plants, only slight-
ly over 40% of the large facilities exhibited ac-
ceptable BODs removals as against 64% of the
smaller plants. Only in the case of primary facili-
ties did large plants perform as well as the sample
population in general. As with the smaller facili-
ties, large plants generally were less successful in
meeting TSS design criteria. By this latter meas-
ure, activated sludge plants operated most poorly,
with only 32% of plants over 5 mgd operating sat-
isfactorily.
Federal law, through NPDES permits, requires high quality
effluent. This can only be achieved through cooperation
among Federal, State, and local agencies concerned with
improving plant performance.
Removal Efficiencies Summary
Basic removal efficiency, presented as a per-
centage reduction of pollutants coming into the
plant, shows the plant's performance in absolute
terms, independent of its design efficiency. On the
average all Group A plants had a BODs removal
efficiency of 80% and a TSS efficiency of 79%. A
summary of sample statistics on removal efficien-
cies is shown in Table V-4. Figures V-l and V-2
show the distribution of plant performance in re-
lation to the measures presented in the table.
TABLE V-4
STATISTICAL SUMMARY OF BOD AND TSS REMOVAL
EFFICIENCIES
Percent removal
Type
plant
Number
Standard of plants
Mean deviation m sample
BOD
Efficiency
Suspended
Solids
Efficiency
Primary
Lagoons
Trickling
filter
Activated
sludge
All
plants
Primary
Lagoons
Trickling
filter
Activated
sludge
All
plants
35 39
— 81
84 81
92 89
80
56 55
Insufficient cases
82 79
89 83
79
1974
Figurr V-l
18.0
9.2
14.2
10.2
19.7
18.1
14.7
18.0
19.1
39
28
126
193
386
42
8
108
163
321
100
CUMULA- 80
TIVE FRE
QUENCY
(PO
E F
RP
C L
E A
N N
TT
70
50
BOD5 REMOVAL EFFICIENCY
(IN PERCENT REMOVAL)
35
-------
1974
Figure V-2.
CUMULA-
TIVE FRE.
QUENCY
IP O
E f
R L
C A
E N
N T
T S)
20
90 100
TSS REMOVAL EFFICIENCY
(IN PERCENT REMOVAL)
Compliance With
Secondary Treatment Requirements
Comparing the efficiency of plants to their own
design standards is an effective measure for de-
sign efficiency, but it does not indicate compliance
or noncompliance with Federal secondary treat-
ment requirements. Currently, these requirements
for BOD5 and TSS are as follows:
• Not more than 30 mg/1 for either parameter
where influent concentrations are greater
than 200 mg/1 or;
• Not less than 85% removal for plants with
influent concentrations less than 200 mg/1.
This section reviews compliance with the sec-
ondary treatment requirement for those trickling
filter and activated sludge plants where both
BODs and TSS data were available. As in previous
sections, a satisfactory classification of "S" was
assigned only if both BODs and TSS removals
were within the relevant limitations. If either or
both measures fell between 30 and 40 mg/1 or 75%
and 85% removal a "U" (unsatisfactory but mar-
ginal) classification was assigned. All others were
classified "p" (poor). Under this definition, some
42% of the plants were satisfactory; the remain-
der were unsatisfactory with the greater number
falling in the poor performance category. (Table
V-5.)
TABLE V-S
POTW COMPLIANCE WITH SECONDARY STANDARDS
FOR BOD AND TSS
Trickling
filter
Activated
sludge
Both
Number Number Number
plants Percent plants Percent plants Percent
S
U
p
Total
27
28
53
108
25
26
49
100
88
31
44
163
54
19
27
100
115
59
97
271
42
22
36
100
OPERATIONAL DEFICIENCIES
GROUPS A AND B
Satisfactory operation and maintenance of a
publicly owned treatment works is critical to the
plant's overall performance. General data on op-
eration and maintenance problems and deficien-
cies for plants in Groups A and B is shown in
Table V-6. Major problems include inadequate
laboratory testing, deficient management practices
and the incidence of substantial deficiencies re-
quiring follow-up action. While differences were
not statistically significant, the data trend shows
generally that the satisfactory Group A plants
have lower incidence of operation and mainte-
nance problems than the unsatisfactory Group A
plants and the Group B plants.
Laboratory testing, records keeping, and report-
ing are major problems, particularly in Group B
plants. From the plant size and type distribution
for Group B (Table V-2), it is apparent that the
laboratory testing and reporting failure remains
predominantly a characteristic of the small plants,
especially primary treatment plants and lagoons.
Many of these plants do not have the equipment
or trained personnel to conduct the necessary
laboratory analyses, and in many cases they have
not been required to report test results.
Only 29% of the Group B plants showed any
laboratory analysis at all. Where lab analysis was
indicated, most showed only dissolved oxygen,
chlorine residual, or settleable solids testing.
Laboratory deficiencies of Group B plants were
further summarized, based on available informa-
tion. This summary omits stabilization ponds
(which often have no effluent, so that no testing is
needed), other plants where no testing is needed,
and those plants where reasons for laboratory
36
-------
TABLE V-6
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PROBLEMS AND
DEFICIENCIES
Problems and deficiencies
Frequency of occurrence (%)
Group A Group A Group B
(Meeting (Not meeting
design criteria) design criteria)
Have inadequate laboratory 20 22 71'
facilities and/or inadequate
laboratory testing programs.
Have no O&M manuals designed 40 51 48
specifically for them.
Inadequate spare parts 21 26 27
inventories.
Inadequate records of 11 17 34
maintenance repairs and
replacement.
Inadequate routine maintenance 11 13 18
schedules.
Need follow-up actions to 36 37 83
correct operational, mechanical,
or manpower deficiencies.
Operations and other plant 16 14 36
personnel do not routinely
attend short courses, school,
or other training.
Infiltration/inflow, major or 75 74 55
minor.
Hydraulically overloaded. 18 25 182
'Most of these facilities are primary treatment plants and lagoons, smaller than 1
mgd
^Based on only Group B plants having both design and average daily flow rates
deficiencies were unknown. The reasons for inad-
equate laboratory testing are as follows:
• 69% (126 plants) have no testing program es-
tablished or infrequent current testing, or
need additional tests.
• 24% (43 plants) have no lab equipment, no
lab facility, or insufficient testing equipment
• 7% (12 plants) have inadequate manpower
and training for lab testing.
O&M management, as reflected by the percent-
age of plants that have inadequate spare parts
inventories, maintenance records, and mainte-
nance schedules, is better in the satisfactory
Group A facilities than in the unsatisfactory
Group A and the Group B plants. Group B plants
had the worst record for these three items.
The next most important item is the need for
follow-up action. While the percentage of Group
B plants requiring follow-up was more than dou-
ble that for either segment of Group A, the per-
centages were quite high for the entire sample.
Data available for this survey were inadequate to
provide a detailed analysis of the types and extent
of follow-up needs, but it is apparent that this
area should receive more emphasis.
The unavailability of O&M manuals was a
problem for a high percentage of all plants in the
survey. Here again, more plants in the unsatisfac-
tory category of Group A, and in Group B, lacked
specially prepared manuals. In addition, infiltra-
tion/inflow was present in a majority of all plants;
this appears to be a problem regardless of per-
formance. Finally, overloading also presents a
problem in about 20% of the cases.
The elements of treatment plant operation most
often cited for deficiencies in operation and main-
tenance of Group B are as follows:
1. Laboratory controls 268 cases
2. Flow meter and recorder 193
3. Records 90
4. Condition and appearance of grounds 71
5. Safety features 51
6. Pump station 47
7. Effluent chlorine 39
8. Chlorine contact tank 26
9. Chlorinators 25
10. Sludge drying beds 24
Deficiencies in laboratory facilities and analysis continue to
be a major problem in improving treatment plant perform-
ance.
37
-------
SUMMARY OF EFFICIENCY
IMPROVEMENT ACTIVITIES
The implementation of the comprehensive mu-
nicipal operations strategy, discussed last year,2
accelerated in 1974. The NPDES permit system is
now being more closely linked with the improve-
ment of the operational efficiency of plants. The
technical assistance program, an essential element
of the strategy, has seen some success and is re-
ceiving increasing emphasis.
The technical assistance activity is directed to
helping municipalities identify and solve operation
and maintenance problems which cause inefficient
plant performance, and to training State and local
personnel in procedures to improve plant per-
formance. Each project provides on-the-job train-
ing of the facility's operating technicians, enabling
the community to maintain consistently higher
pollutant removals. Depending on the situations
of individual plants, operations personnel are
taught how to respond to changes in hydraulic
and organic loadings, how to identify and elimi-
nate or reduce the effects of industrial discharges
into municipal systems, and how to improve their
laboratory testing programs.
In many cases, pollutant removals increase
dramatically. For example, EPA Region IV pro-
vided assistance at a 7.0 mgd activated sludge
plant, increasing the BODs removal efficiency
from 38 to 91 percent. The TSS removal efficien-
cy increased from 20 to 77 percent. These in-
creases, as well as internal plant process improve-
ments, brought the plant from poor to satisfacto-
ry.
Of particular importance in the development of
the technical assistance program is the increasing
involvement of State water pollution control agen-
cies. Several States have begun to develop inde-
pendent ability to provide operational assistance
to their municipal treatment facilities. This trend
must be encouraged. The U.S. EPA cannot pro-
vide all necessary technical assistance and there-
fore intends to guide and help the States in devel-
oping their own programs.
In addition to technical assistance, EPA has
undertaken a variety of other efforts to aid those
concerned with proper plant operation. The fol-
lowing are the most significant activities:
• Through the use of contracts, a series of
technical documents on O&M is being pub-
lished, to increase the amount of established
knowledge easily available to plant opera-
tions personnel.
A "mini-documentary" (two-minute public
information film) on O&M released to 100
selected television stations in late 1975.
A series of seminars for consulting engineers
and State and Federal personnel on the prep-
aration and review of O&M manuals for indi-
vidual plants has been conducted throughout
the country.
A continuing series of technical workshops
has been instituted to improve the capability
of EPA Regional personnel in dealing with
treatment plant operational problems.
Training courses are being developed and
presented for treatment plant inspectors and
performance evaluators and troubleshooters.
2Clean Water: Report to Congress-1974, pp. 60-61
Technical assistance to municipalities will help them im-
prove plant operations to meet permit conditions and reduce
the pollution load on receiving waters.
38
-------
CONCLUSIONS, 1974
The data collected for this report are consistent
with data collected for the two earlier reports
(Clean Water: Report to Congress-1973, 1974),
and are distributed by size and type much as is
the national population of plants. Therefore, from
the prior performance data review, it may be in-
ferred that significant improvement in operational
efficiency could be achieved by means of:
• Improved techniques, procedures, and guid-
ance for suspended solids removal (which
appears to be a problem for all types and siz-
es of plants);
• Improved inspection, evaluation, and techni-
cal assistance for larger plants, particularly
trickling filter and activated sludge plants,
and for marginal plants of all kinds where
only a few points of improvement could
bring performance to satisfactory levels;
• Increased attention to the problems of trick-
ling filter plants, with special attention to
identifying problems sensitive to improve-
ment through better O&M.
The above items are based on operational per-
formance. Several additional needs, based on
analysis of plant problems, have been identified.
• Inadequate laboratory testing is still the most
prevalent problem and presents a major diffi-
culty in assessing the operational efficiency
of plants.
• Special attention to means for encouraging
States and municipalities to improve labora-
tory controls and reporting is needed.
There is a consistent pattern reflecting higher
incidence of certain types of problems among
Group A plants not meeting requirements and
among Group B plants. For this reason, other
problems which merit special attention are:
• Substantial improvement is needed in O&M
management, particularly maintenance record
and supply inventory management.
• New and improved training delivery systems
must be provided; and State and municipal
agencies must be encouraged to ensure that
more personnel are given training opportuni-
ties. (See Chapter IV).
• Special attention must be given to inspection
follow-up activities, to determine more pre-
cisely what the impact of such actions has
been, and to identify more precisely the na-
ture of deficiencies and of needed assistance.
• More concentrated effort is needed to ensure
the availability of well-written and specially
prepared operation and maintenance manuals
at all plants.
• A special effort is needed to increase the lev-
el of public awareness of, and support for,
improved municipal treatment plant perform-
ance to protect the public's investment in
these facilities.
Preliminary Results on the Efficiency of Treatment
PRELIMINARY RESULTS ON THE
EFFICIENCY OF TREATMENT PLANT
OPERATIONS—1975
The preliminary results for 1259 inspections
conducted during the period January 1974 to May
1975 are reported below. These results provide
the design efficiency data required by Section 210
of the Act. More detailed analyses which parallel
and extend the 1974 results reported above are
being performed and will be published separately.
As in previous years, the 1975 survey, to be
reported during 1976, is divided into the following
groups: (Tables V-7 and V-8).
Table V-7
NUMBER OF MUNICIPAL TREATMENT PLANTS IN SUR-
VEY GROUP A
Tofe
Process
Primary
Lagoons
Trickling Filter
Activated
Sludge
TOTAL
PERCENT
Class
1
(15 +
MOD')
8
1
11
25
45
5.6
Class
2
(5-15
MOD)
11
2
36
67
116
14.5
Class
3
(1-5
MDG)
33
9
125
152
319
39.7
Class
4
(0-1
MOD)
12
60
65
178
315
39.2
Class
5
(Un-
known)
1
0
2
5
g
1.0
Total
65
72
239
427
803
100.0
Percent
8 1
90
29.8
53.2
100
*Million Gallons per day.
Table V-8
NUMBER OF MUNICIPAL TREATMENT PLANTS WITH
INSUFFICIENT OPERATIONAL DATA - GROUP B
Class
Type 1
of (15+
Class
2
(5-
Process MGD*) 15 MOD)
Primary
Lagoons
Trickling Filter
Activated
Sludge
TOTAL
PERCENT
0
0
2
1
3
0.7
3
4
4
3
14
3.1
Class
3
(1-5
MGD)
19
16
39
32
106
23.3
Class
4
(0-1
MGD)
18
134
56
95
303
66.5
Class
5
(Un-
known) Total
2
22
4
2
30
6.6
42
176
105
133
456
100.0
Percent
9 2
38 6
23.0
29 2
100 0
*Million gallons per day
39
-------
Group A—Records with enough design and operational
data to allow comparisons 803
Group B—Records without operational performance
data 456
TOTAL 1259
Group A contains records from 47 States, with
as few as 1 coming from two States and as many
as 96 from one State; the median is 14 records per
State.
Group B contains records from 41 States, with
just one coming from each of seven States and a
total of 52 from one State at the other extreme.
The median is eight records per State.
In the 1975 survey sample inspection emphasis
(as indicated by sample distribution) has shifted to
a greater proportion of large plants than in pre-
vious years.
Changes in grant funding and secondary treat-
ment requirements is evidenced by decreases in
primary and trickling filter plants this year versus
increases in activated sludge and lagoons.
Performance vs. Design Intent—Group A
The operational performance data for treatment
facilities in Group A were scanned to determine
plant performance compliance with original design
objectives. The main results of this preliminary
analysis indicate that 66% of all plants are meet-
ing their BOD5 design criteria. Also, 59% are
meeting their design criteria for total suspended
solids. The results by plant type are summarized
in Table V-9.
This year's data is consistent with results of
previous surveys.
Table V-9
SUMMARY OF OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY FACILITIES
MEETING DESIGN CRITERIA 1976
Type Of Process
BOD,
TSS
Primary
Lagoons
Trickling Filters
Activated Sludge
All Plants
78%
59%
52%
74%
66%
72%
50%
48%
64%
59%
40
-------
CHAPTER SIX
Program
Planning and
Management
A COMMITMENT
TO INTEGRATED PLANNING
From the earliest version of the legislation that
resulted in P.L. 92-500, Congress recognized that
achieving desired water quality may require more
effluent control than is attainable through base
level technology, and that incoherent and uncoor-
dinated planning and management is perhaps the
principal cause of inefficiency and poor perform-
ance in waste management, particularly in metro-
politan regions. EPA shares those beliefs. The
Agency, working with State and local authorities
and the public, has made major progress since
enactment of the 1972 Amendments toward the
formulation of an integrated national water quality
planning and management system.
Three tiers of government—Federal, State and
local—share the responsibility for carrying out an
adequate and efficient water quality control pro-
gram. Efforts at each level are being coordinated
to achieve meaningful and reasonable results.
Duties and opportunities under the FWPCA cut
across individual sections of the Act. For exam-
ple, State water quality management is based on
the State's planning process .called for by section
303(e), but the process merges various statutory
requirements. The State's process should satisfy,
at the least, requirements of areawide planning
(section 208), waste load analysis (303(d)) and water
quality reporting (305(b)).
For each type of planning, programs are devel-
oped in accordance with stated objectives. Manage-
ment actions must provide for:
• Assessing the problem.
• Defining priorities.
• Setting targets.
• Developing output commitments.
• Insuring that adequate management and regu-
latory actions are provided to carry out the
program.
• Tracking major milestone achievements and
water quality changes.
Preparation of complete and comprehensive
programs for all sources and concerns in a plan-
ning area may outrun the management agency's
resources. Hence, EPA and the other agencies
have prioritized objectives, to tackle the most
important needs first. Past objectives have empha-
sized completion of basic water quality standards,
development of initial basin plans, designation of
areawide planning areas and agencies, and initial
structuring of the management program. The com-
ing period will focus on revising water quality
standards during FY 1976 to reflect the Act's 1983
national water quality goal as specified in section
101(a)(2); conducting water quality planning to es-
tablish targets for Phase II permits where base-level
BAT will be inadequate to reach that goal; and im-
plementing areawide waste treatment management
planning by designated agencies and the States, in-
cluding coverage of nonpoint sources of pollutants.
THE COMPONENTS OF THE SYSTEM
From a broad perspective, the water quality
planning and management system includes three
major aspects. These are: the national strategy
and program guidance; individual State strategies
and program plans; and specific State or areawide
planning and management. Other associated plan-
ning has to date played only a minor role in the
overall effort.
41
-------
Careful planning and management is needed to protect eco-
logically valuable salt marshes from excessive developm-
ent. (EPA biologist studying marsh conditions near Pensa-
cola, Florida.)
Federal and State Strategies;
Federal Program Guidance
Each year EPA prepares two important docu-
ments:
• The Water Quality Strategy Paper, to provide
an overview of program objectives and indi-
cate developing national policies.
• The Management by Objectives Operating
Guidance, to describe individual program
priorities, outputs, narrative descriptions and
reporting requirements.
Each State prepares an individual State water
quality strategy that corresponds to the Federal
strategy and operating guidance. The State strate-
gy lists problems and geographical priorities, out-
lines the State's approach and establishes priori-
ties and schedules for specific actions. The State
strategy, updated annually, becomes an integral
part of the State program.
The State Program
Section 106 of the Act authorizes EPA to make
annual allotments to the States and interstate
agencies based on the extent of the pollution
problem in the several States. EPA grants supple-
ment State funding and strengthen the capacity of
State agencies to achieve the goals established by
the Act.
Federal expenditures have grown from $10 mil-
lion in FY 1968 to $48.5 million in FY 1975. At
the same time State expenditures have shown an
even greater increase, from $19 million in FY
1968 to $80 million in FY 1975.
A Growing State Effort.—One of the major
directives of the Act is the delegation for adminis-
tration of programs by the States. As of the end
of FY 1975, 24 States had been delegated permit
authority (NPDES); 35 States O&M manual re-
view authority; and 29 States POTW construction
plans and specification review authority.
The States provide, in their annual State pro-
grams, output commitments to be achieved for the
forthcoming year. These serve as milestones for
accomplishing the major water quality goals.
Output estimates and accomplishments for FY
1975 are presented in Table VI-I. Resources ap-
plied by the States to achieve the outputs are
shown in Figure VI-I. Table VI-2 shows the Fed-
eral share and total amount of planned FY 1975
State program expenditures by State.
In addition to the Table VI-1 activities, during
1975 States were active in certification and draft-
ing of permits; monitoring water quality; enforce-
ment; and training programs. Planned and/or ac-
tual outputs were dependent in some cases on
EPA actions (e.g., certification of permits based
on EPA issuance); therefore, no comparable na-
tional achievement rate was measured. In other
cases where no achievement rate is given, the
States were not asked for commitments due to
difficulty in establishing valid output measures
and/or validly projecting a "planned" figure.
Moving to the New System,—Several factors
affected the level of achievement of the planned
outputs for FY75: guidelines from EPA were still
being finalized well into the year; States in many
case directed their limited resources to high prior-
ity areas which in turn reduced staff of lower
priority programs (e.g., basin planning); vacancy
rates were high in some States, particularly in the
municipal facilities area, due partly to low salary
42
-------
TABLE VI-1
FISCAL YEAR 1975 OUTPUTS*
Program area
NPDES delegation
O&M manual
delegation
P&S review
delegation
WQL segment
analyses
Basin plans
completed
Major industrial
permits
issued
by States
Minor industrial
permits
issued by States
Major municipal
permits
issued by States
Minor municipal
permits
issued
by States
Construction grant
awards (Sbillion)
Planned FY 75
States 35
States 40
States 38
Analyses 2170
Basins 390
820
11892
875
6169
6.5
Percent
Actual FY 75 achieved
States 24
States 35
States 29
Analyses 1712
Basins 115
778
10804
782
5097
3.6
69
88
76
79
29
95
91
89
83
55
Figure VI-1.
FEDERAL-STATE EXPENDITURES
AND CONSTANT DOLLARS
*Figures obtained through EPA's Federal Planning and Reporting System and
Grants Activity Report
scales, and some areas lacked a clear-cut defini-
tion of EPA vs. State responsibilities (e.g., munic-
ipal facilities).
1975 did prove to be a productive year for the
water program at the State level, relative to 1974.
As it was the first full year of activity following
passage of PL 92-500, 1974 was basically a transi-
tion year for the States as they became familiar
with the new Federal/State program. 1975, how-
ever, showed expanded State activity and respon-
sibility in carrying out the short-term goals and
objectives of the program. Given limited re-
sources and significant staffing problems, the
States did a creditable job meeting output targets
and working in partnership with EPA in several
program areas.
State production increased significantly during
FY75, and it was apparent that both EPA and the
States has made most of the major adjustments
required by P.L. 92-500 and the new regulations
issued pursuant to the Act. Prospects for 1976 are
generally good, except in the area of funding,
where inflation and fiscal constraints on both EPA
and the States threaten the attainment of the ma-
jor milestones in the Act as well as the States'
capability to play the role envisioned from them
in the Act.
1970
1972 1973 1974 1975
FISCAL YEARS
The nation's environmental and energy needs must both be
met. (Barges transport coal to Ohio River power plant.)
43
-------
TABLE VI-2
PLANNED FY 1975 FEDERAL-STATE TOTAL
COMPARED TO FEDERAL CONTRIBUTION
State/Region
Region I
Conn
Maine
Mass
N.H
R.I
Vt
Region II
N.J
N.Y
P.R
V.I
Region III
Del
D C
Md.
Pa
Va
W Va
Region IV
Ala
Fla
C,n
Kv
Nc
s c
Tenn
Region V
111
Ind
Mich
Minn
Ohio
Wis
Total ($)
1912348
1383827
.... 1961126
1848800
570300
854656
3508925
9072416
1080548
446461
1324256
432622
3060057
6204233
5125140
870760
1077128
4651323
?ft^1478
1 S177SQ
11^7^78
78317S3
IQA'lf.^T,
1 867072
7415518
2439903
5049700
2072614
5199489
3371516
Federal
contribution ($)
710298
146900
951600
271800
342300
198900
1137035
2203382
651056
293155
705213
270029
674616
1790134
1006112
430940
931408
1030718
1246499
588288
595097
1468797
795947
795367
1499380
1303143
1933987
749367
1531484
1085316
Federal
share (%)
37
11
49
15
60
23
32
24
60
66
53
62
22
29
20
49
86
22
61
39
51
52
41
43
20
53
38
36
29
32
State/Region
Region VI
Ariz
La
N M
Okla
Tex
Region VII
Iowa
Kans
Mo
Nebr .
Region VIII
Colo
Mont
N. Dak
S. Dak
Wyo
Utah
Region IX
Ariz
Calif
Guam
Hawaii
Nev
American Samoa ..
Trust Territories ...
Region X
Alas
Idaho
Oreg
Wash
Total($)
987289
1155812
525604
694626
6372210
834851
1033211
1169406
898367
... 1153892
537120
.... 275800
231700
345730
542665
631976
.. 11025400
339899
649001
309782
151329
183040
260378
741618
... 1609218
... 1787286
Federal
contributions ($)
593675
686710
26293 1
442600
1477400
661682
421822
755190
502900
375242
317398
171530
173015
127830
246034
325900
2355848
248868
283263
139923
62228
134887
131039
347522
667700
872500
Federal
share (%)
60
59
50
64
23
79
41
65
56
33
59
62
75
37
45
52
21
73
44
45
41
74
50
47
41
49
National Total = $112,574,919
Federal contribution = $40,123,905
Federal share = 36%
Statewide Planning and Management
EPA, together with the States and numerous
advisors, have labored to flesh out the specific
planning mandates of the Act to form a meaning-
ful State management tool. The goal has been to
translate preexisting State efforts into a workable
new program in keeping with the 1972 Amend-
ments. The continuing planning process (section
303(e)) is the vehicle which integrates the various
related elements of the Act—Statewide, areawide,
local and facilities oriented activities—and acts as
the State's central management tool for adminis-
tering water quality programs. As of December
31, 1975, all 56 States and territories had an
EPA-approved continuing planning process. These
will be revised during 1976 in accordance with
revised regulations (40 CFR 130) promulgated
November 28, 1975.
44
-------
A Two-phased Program.—Statewide planning
involves essentially two phases. The first phase,
basin planning, accomplishes the transition from
pre-amendment planning into the more sophisti-
cated effort contemplated by the new Act. This
phase, scheduled for completion by July 1, 1976,
encompasses the following requirements:
1. Inventory and ranking of significant dis-
chargers.
2. Schedule of compliance or target dates.
3. Assessment of municipal needs.
4. Determination of total maximum daily
loads.
5. Established or targeted load allocations and
effluent limitations.
6. Assessment of nonpoint sources of pollu-
tion.
7. Residual waste controls.
8. Recommended water quality standards revi-
sions.
9. Planning relationships.
10. Appropriate monitoring and surveillance
programs.
11. Interstate/intergovernmental cooperation.
Phase II, termed State Water Quality Manage-
ment Planning, will fold the State's more complex
areawide planning efforts (see section 208) into
the completed Phase I basin plans. Essential man-
agement activities—establishing priorities, sched-
uling actions and assisting the direction of re-
source expenditures—operate in both phases.
The major change in Phase II will be the addi-
tion of nonpoint source control programs. Phase I
has provided preliminary qualitative evaluation of
the nature and extent of nonpoint source loading,
but Phase II plans should present a far more de-
tailed evaluation of these loadings and identify
control measures, regulatory programs and imple-
menting agencies. The Phase II process will also
produce information on urban stormwater sys-
tems, industrial waste treatment needs, and resid-
ual waste controls. A Federal district court has
ruled that Phase II plans, including section 208
requirements, must be completed no later than
November 1978.
The Early Results.—Although transition from
Phase I to Phase II is now in progress, specific
priority items are already completed and in use.
Significantly, a majority of total maximum daily
load determinations and wasteload allocations are
now available for use in setting the effluent limits in
NPDES permits.
According to EPA's formal reporting system,
1,712 water quality segment analyses, out of a
total 2,362 such segments, had been completed as
of June 30, 1975. Figure VI-2 shows the progress
toward completing the analyses for all water qual-
ity segments. Of those that do not yet have com-
pleted water quality segment analyses, most in-
clude significant nonpoint source control problem
areas (which will be further developed under
Phase II planning) or extremely complex urban/
industrial areas which demand more detailed anal-
ysis.
Figure VI-2.
NUMBER OF WATER QUALITY SEGMENT ANALYSES
2000 -
o
o
o
cr
uj
00
1600 -
1200 -
800 -
400 -
1973 1974 1975
CALENDAR YEARS
Overall, the Statewide planning programs appear
to be functioning at a passable level. As could be
expected, there have been many growing pains
associated with the developmental stages of the
program. Recent indications are, however, that
the program is functioning as a necessary and
viable part of the effort to clean our nation's wa-
ters.
Areawide Planning and Management
The Act provides local areas with a unique
opportunity to plan and manage a comprehensive
waste treatment control program for municipal
and industrial wastewater; storm and combined
sewer runoff, nonpoint source pollutants and land
use as it relates to water quality. This areawide
planning and management program concentrates
on metropolitan areas that have water quality
45
-------
problems requiring treatment levels beyond sec-
ondary for municipal wastes and best practicable
control technology for industrial wastes. It may
also involve areas that wish to preserve high qual-
ity waters or that have been or will be subject to
extensive energy development.
Beginning the Effort.—Initiation of the program
lagged somewhat because of the attention de-
manded by the permit program, construction
grants and Statewide planning. During 1974, how-
ever, this program was launched. Regulations
published September 14, 1973, and revised Nov-
ember 28, 1975, set forth specific criteria for area
and planning agency designation. They include:
• Areas—a preference for areas with urban-
industrial concentrations or with substantial
surface and/or ground water quality prob-
lems; and
• Agencies—an insistance that agencies possess
a coordinated waste treatment management
system or that the local governments intend
to plan and implement areawide waste treat-
ment management.
Generally, the State Governor designates the
areas as well as the agencies that will conduct the
work. He is responsible for assuring that the work
is completed and is consistent with the overall
State effort. In areas which are not designated
pursuant to section 208, the State's water quality
management plans and individual facility plans
will provide programs addressing the needs of the
area.
Most of the agencies approved are general pur-
pose regional planning agencies representing ur-
ban-industrial areas. Some agencies, in contrast,
will work in areas with substantial ground water
pollution problems, such as Nassau-Suffolk, New
York, other agencies will work in areas that are
subject to extensive energy development, such as
the Yellowstone-Tongue area of Wyoming, or
areas seeking to preserve existing high quality
waters, such as Jackson Hole, Wyoming. The
average 208 area contains 2,490 square miles and
has a population of 610,000.
Implementing the Plan—The areawide planning
agencies will develop comprehensive plans cover-
ing both point and nonpoint sources of pollution.
An essential ingredient of any plan is a manage-
ment system to insure plan implementation.
The primary importance of the agencies will be
realized when plans are carried out during 1977-
83—Phase II of the national water quality control
effort. At that time, permits in areawide planning
areas should begin to reflect plan targets and
directives.
However, planners must also show an ability to
produce usable interim outputs. These can be sig-
nificant early achievements of the plan and can
contribute to near-term State areawide discussion
and coordination as well as to specific manage-
ment actions.
Progress to Date
A few agency designations were made in FY
74, with fourteen area and agency designations
and eleven grant awards, totalling approximately
$13.5 million. However, FY 75 has marked the
real growth of the program, with the additon of
138 grants at $150 million bringing the total to 149
grants amounting to $163.5 million, (see Table VI-
3.)
By early June, 1975, applications nationwide for
grants totalled over $176 million. However, EPA
was only authorized to obligate $150 million for
Fiscal Year 1975. This resulted in 23 designations
submitted by Governors but not approved due to
lack of funds. The system for awarding 208 grants
was modified at the beginning of April 1975 by
means of funding allocations to each of EPA's ten
regions. From that point it was carried on a national
first-come, first-served basis.
ASSOCIATED PLANNING
Other planning efforts are authorized by the
Act. These include comprehensive planning for
water pollution control (Section 102) and Water
Resources Council basin planning of water re-
sources (section 209).
The 102(c) program was designed essentially as
a continuation of the 3(c) program established
under prior water quality legislation. Since pas-
sage of the 1972 Amendments to the law there
have been no new funding allocations authorized
in either the 3(c) program or the 102(c) program.
This year's budget request submitted by the
President included, for the first time, a proposal
for a Level B Water Resources Study to be fund-
ed under the authority of section 209 of the Act.
Previous Level B efforts have been funded under
other authorities.
46
-------
TABLE VI-3
SECTION 208
DESIGNATIONS APPROVED BY ADMINISTRATOR
BY STATE
DECEMBER 31, 1975
Designation
Region
IV
IX
IX
VIII
III
Ill
IV
XI
X .
'V
V
State
Alabama
California
Delaware
District of
Columbia
Florida
Guam
Idaho
Illinois
Area
Birmingham
Tuscaloosa
Mobile
Lake Tahoe (In-
terstate.)
Ventura Co.
San Diego
Monterey
San Francisco
Pueblo County
Colorado Springs
Rifle (Rio Blan-
co)
Northwest
Larimer-Weld
New Castle County
Sussex County
Washington-
Metro Area
Palm Beach
Orlando
Volusia Co.
Brevard Co.
Bay Co.
Pensacola
Sarasota/Ft. Myers
Broward Co.
Tampa Bay '
Dade Co.
Tallahassee
Polk Co
Pocatello
Panhandle
East St. Louis
Southern
Lake & Porter
Co.
South Bend
Madison-Muncie
Indianapolis
Terre Haute
Date
3-25-75
3-25-75
5-22-75
6-06-75
8-05-74
6-13-75
6-18-75
6-18-75
6-18-75
10-08-74
9-18-74
6-26-74
4-24-75
5-14-74
5-14-75
6-12-74
1-30-75
3-28-75
1-10-75
3-28-75
4-22-75
4-24-75
4-30-75
5-14-75
5-16-75
5-23-75
5-27-75
5-30-75
5-30-75
6-06-75
6-18-75
4-02-75
3-25-75
5-27-75
5-30-75
5-20-75
6-23-75
5-20-75
5-23-75
5-27-75
5-30-75
6-06-75
Region State
VII Iowa
VII Kansas
IV Kentucky
III Maryland
I .. .. Massachusetts
VII Missouri
VIII Montana
IX Nevada
I . New Hampshire
Area
Des Moines
Centerville
Kansas City
Louisville
Portland
Southern Maine
Northern Maine
Lewiston-Au-
burn
Augusta-Cob-
Baltimore
Pittsfield (Berk-
shire)
Lowell
Cape Cod
Martha's Vine-
yard
Brockton
Worcester
Fitchburg
Boston
Southeast
Detroit
Kalamazoo
Jackson
Flint
Tri County
Muskegon
Grand Rapids
Bay City
St. Louis
Joplin
Middle Yellow-
stone
Yellowstone
Tongue
Flathead
Gallatm
Carson River
Reno
Clark Co.
Salem
Lakes Region
Date
6-10-74
5-23-75
6-13-75
4-02-75
6-25-74
7-26-74
8-05-74
12-19-74
12-19-74
6-06-75
2-18-75
3-04-75
2-27-75
2-27-75
3-06-75
4-11-75
4-17-75
4-18-75
5-20-75
5-20-75
5-27-75
5-27-75
5-27-75
6-06-75
6-06-75
6-06-75
6-06-75
5-23-75
6-06-75
4-02-75
4-08-75
4-02-75
6-05-75
6-03-75
6-06-75
6-13-75
4-01-75
6-03-75
47
-------
TABLE VI-3
SECTION 208
DESIGNATIONS APPROVED BY ADMINISTRATOR
BY STATE
DECEMBER 31, 1975
(Continued)
Region
II
II
IV
VIII
v
VI
X
III
I
IV
State
New Jersey
New Jersey
New York
North Carolina
N Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
South Carolina
Area
Mercer
Middlesex
Camden
Ocean Co.
Nassau-Suffolk
Westchester
Erie-Niagara
So. Tier Cen.
(Corning)
New York City
Central NY
(Syracuse)
Raleigh-Durham
Asheville
Lewis & Clark
Toledo
Youngstown
Dayton
Cleveland
Akron
Tulsa
Oklahoma City
Portland
Salem
Eugene-Spring-
field
Medford
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh
Columbia
Greenville
Beaufort
Waccamaw
Date
5-12-75
5-14-75
5-14-75
6-03-75
4-24-75
6-03-75
6-03-75
6-05-75
6-05-75
6-05-75
3-08-74
6-23-75
5-22-75
6-12-74
6-25-74
6-28-75
6-25-74
5-27-75
5-23-75
9-18-74
10-25-74
11-18-74
11-18-74
11-18-74
6-03-75
6-18-75
6-23-75
6-23-75
4-17-75
3-25-75
5-09-75
6-03-75
6 06-75
6-06-75
Region State Area
VIII S Dakota Sioux Falls
Black Hills
IV . Tennessee Memphis
Knoxville
Chattanooga
Nashville
Kingsport-Bris-
tol
VI . Texas Dallas
Beaumont
Houston
San Antonio
Corpus Christi
Lower Rio
Grande
Texarkana
VIII Utah Provo
Uintah Basin
Salt Lake Coun-
ty
Ogden (Weber-
Davis Cos.)
Southeastern
Five Counties
III Virginia Hampton Roads
Richmond
Roanoke
Fredericksburg
Southwest Va.
X .Washington Clark County
Seattle
Snohomish
III West Virginia Charleston
V Wisconsin Southeastern
Area
Dane County
Green Bay
Green River
Jackson Hole
Date
5-23-75
5-16-75
6-25-75
6-28-74
10-10-74
11-11-75
6-05-75
4-17-75
4-18-75
4-22-75
5-10-75
6-06-75
6-06-75
6-23-75
1-21-75
1-10-75
3-06-75
4-02-75
4-17-75
5-14-75
6-25 74
6-25-74
6-25-74
1-07-75
1-30-75
4 09-75
4-20-75
6-03-75
6-06-75
12-26-74
5-22-75
6-06-75
4-04-75
5-14-75
6-04-75
48
-------
CHAPTER SEVEN
Nonpoint
Source
Program
The Evolving
Nonpoint Source Strategy
The legal mandate to protect water quality from
nonpoint source impacts is far more tenuous
than the Act's point source control provisions.
Perplexing technical problems confront this, as
any, area of pollution control. Furthermore,
sound regulatory moves to abate nonpoint source
problems may raise the red flag of Federal land
use control. Nonetheless, as Congress recognized
in passing section 208, the national water quality
effort can never succeed by addressing point
sources alone.
Until 1974, EPA did not emphasize nonpoint
sources management, but rather concentrated lim-
ited Federal and other resources on initiating
point source controls. Now that the first round of
NPDES permits is virtually complete, the Agency
as a part of its long term program plan is urging
the States and planning agencies designated under
section 208 to begin problem assessment and plan-
ning nonpoint source management. Under the
Act, designated 208 planning agencies and, in
their absence, the States are expressly responsible
for assessing nonpoint source control needs and
designing programs for pollution abatement.
These efforts will be integral parts of the areawide
planning and State water quality management
processes. (See Chapter VI.)
Some States are not only far along in the as-
sessment and planning stages of their programs,
but have passed legislation and are in the process
of implementing regulatory programs to control
certain categories of nonpoint sources. Whether a
program has been initiated or not, EPA is encour-
aging each State and local designated 208 agency
to move forward as rapidly as resources allow.
EPA issued regulations for State programs in
nondesignated areas in November, 1975 and is in
the process of developing guidelines, which will
be published during 1976. In addition, the Agency
will assist States and 208 agencies by providing
technical guidance manuals dealing with specific
nonpoint sources and the activities which cause
them. The States and local agencies will be en-
couraged to incorporate EPA's approach into
their programs.
EPA is also working closely with Federal agen-
cies that manage lands or impact land managing
activities. The goal is to achieve a coordinated
Federal/State/local approach to nonpoint source
problems.
Best Management Practices.—Severe technical
difficulties impede precise identification and meas-
urement of individual nonpoint source impacts.
EPA believes that sound land management prac-
tices, rather than after-the-fact treatment, may
best abate this type of pollution. EPA's guidance
therefore concentrates on describing preventative
measures, termed Best Management Practices
("BMPs").
The term "Best Management Practice" refers
to a practice or combination of practices that is
determined by a State after problem assessment,
examination of alternatives, and appropriate pub-
lic participation to be practicable and most effec-
tive in preventing or reducing the amount of pol-
lution generated by diffuse sources to a level
compatible with water quality goals.
Best Management Practices will be designated
to prevent or mitigate pollution normally associat-
ed with such land-disturbing activities as agricul-
ture, silviculture, and construction. Each BMP
will be tailored to the type of activity as well as
the prevailing physical factors at the source such
as slope, soil, rainfall, climate and vegetative
cover. These variables will to a great extent deter-
mine which control methods pertain in any area.
49
-------
New and existing sources may be handled dif-
ferently within a State or area. For a new land-
disturbing activity there are often more options
for highly effective management measures. These
more stringent practices will be considered in
State selection of BMP's for new sources.
UNRESOLVED ISSUES
AND PROBLEM AREAS
Administrative Obstacles.—A variety of admin-
istrative obstacles confront the fledgling national
nonpoint source program. First, a Federal district
court has recently maintained that EPA may no
longer exclude any point sources from the
NPDES permit program. Under this ruling, permit
program regulatory responsibilities are being rede-
fined in new regulations relating to feedlots, storm
sewers, irrigation return flows, and silviculture. In
the past, EPA claimed authority to exempt these
categories of sources from the permit program
and to deal with them as if they were all nonpoint
sources.
In the past, Federal financial support for State-
wide 208 planning has not been available. A re-
cent Federal district court decision has ordered
that section 208 designated area funds be made
available for State planning. Funds have been
made available for States in FY76.
Technological Problems.—Across the country,
the state of the art in respect to prediction and as-
sessment of nonpoint sources lags considerably
behind our understanding of the magnitude of the
problems and the need for prevention or control.
The best management practices approach has
been determined to be the most practical means
of assigning control responsibilities, but the BMP/
resulting-effects equation is at times uncertain.
For a number of land management practices, pre-
dictive techniques allow estimates of the expected
reduction of particular pollutants. However, non-
point source managers are often denied assur-
ance, usually available in point source effluent
control technology, that the result will match the
expectation.
Difficult as it is to predict the pollutant loading
that might result from a single nonpoint source
activity, it is more difficult to succeed in tracing
instream pollutants back to specific sites. Where
a large number of nonpoint sources operate side
by side, the problem is compounded.
Acid mine drainage degrades streams once depended upon
for sport fishing and municipal drinking waters. (Mine near
Rico, Colo.)
Significant nonpoint sources will be required to employ best
management practices to minimize their pollution eff-
ects. (Holding pond near Uravan, Colo.)
50
-------
An efficient nonpoint source program should be
limited to control of significant sources. However,
technically, and ultimately administratively, it is
difficult to determine a uniform cut-off point at
which a substance will begin to cause in-stream
damage and should be cited as significant.
In applying solutions such as Best Management
Practices to nonpoint source pollution, water
quality management officials must often rely on
insufficient information. Gaps may result from a
lack of necessary research, from the inherent
complexities of the pollution problem, or—most
likely—from both. For example, control of acid
mine drainage from abandoned mines is extremely
difficult, as it is too late for preventative manage-
ment practices. While perhaps one half of the
drainage problems could be corrected with suffi-
cient funds, the solutions to the remainder are
unknown.
For other complex nonpoint sources, technolog-
ical solutions may be perceived but not proved.
Full scale use of promising techniques cannot be
advocated until after adequate testing.
Administrative Problems at the State Level.—
Even given technical answers to a State's non-
point source pollution problems, existing laws,
traditions, and State and local politics will often
prove serious obstacles to their implementation. It
is not clear how these problems can be overcome,
particularly in the absence of adequate sanctions.
Finally, the nonpoint source program bluntly
faces the Act's ever present deadline problem.
Success should be achieved by 1983—but before
that, a number of sequential efforts are necessary.
In many States, legislation must be passed; insti-
tutions must be established or redirected; regula-
tory measures must be defined and applied; and
individual nonpoint source managers must imple-
ment their responsibilities. For some States to
accept and carry out these comprehensive tasks
may take many years. In such States, it is unlike-
ly that the 1983 goals can be achieved for all wa-
ters.
Excessive pulping wastes interfere with aquatic life by de-
pleting the water's oxygen and adding excessive nutrients
and, in some cases, toxic chemicals. (Foamy pulping waste,
Port Angeles, Wash.)
51
-------
CHAPTER EIGHT
Research
and
Development
INTRODUCTION
A strong scientific and technical base is crucial
to EPA's success in formulating policy, setting
standards, implementing programs and pursuing
necessary enforcement. The Agency is conducting
a research, development, and demonstration pro-
gram focussed on developing new or improved
pollution control technology, improving monitor-
ing instrumentation and methods, increasing un-
derstanding of pollution processes and their ef-
fects on public health and aquatic ecosytems,
developing more effective methods to utilize sci-
entific, technical, and socio-economic data for
environmental decision-making. Together, these
interrelated programs provide technical support to
EPA and other agencies responsible for improving
the Nation's waters.
This chapter outlines the actions taken and re-
sults achieved during 1974 and 1975 in EPA's re-
search, development, and demonstration pro-
grams.
HEALTH EFFECTS PROGRAM
The health effects program concentrates on two
major activities: assessing the effects of water
pollutants on health, and developing criteria and
standards to ensure safe supplies of drinking wa-
ter.
Health Effects.—The water quality health ef-
fects research and development program embod-
ies: (1) health effects research dealing with the
development of valid criteria for the safe treat-
ment and disposal of wastewaters and sludges and
(2) the development of health-related criteria for
fresh and marine recreational and shellfish grow-
ing waters.
Studies are being conducted on the health ef-
fects of land application of wastewaters and
sludges and on the transport of toxic substances
and pathogens (especially virus) from wastewater
and sludge to man's food chain and drinking wa-
ter. Such studies require extensive monitoring of
waste components and waste breakdown products
in water, food, and air.
At present, under the fresh recreational water
program, the etiology of amoebic meningoence-
phalitis is being investigated. Broad epidemiolog-
ic-microbiological studies will be initiated to refine
fresh recreational water quality criteria based on
scientific health effects data.
The marine recreational water program deals
with epidemiological studies of marine beaches in
temperate climates. It may be extended to tropical
climates as well during FY 1977. Epidemiologic-
microbiological studies are being conducted in
recreational waters to relate health effects to var-
ious quantitative indices of pollution. Moreover,
modest research programs will be initiated to im-
prove microbial water quality guidelines for ma-
rine shellfish-growing waters.
Recent accomplishments include the following:
• Studies have been initiated to determine aero-
sol transport from conventional wastewater
treatment plants. In addition, the transport of
microbiological contaminants and chemical
compounds from spray irrigation of wastewa-
ter and sludge application to land will be de-
termined. Pathogen transport through sludge
application to land will be investigated.
• Statistically significant differences were iden-
tified between the illness rates at two marine
beaches—one of barely acceptable water
quality, the other relatively unpolluted. An
additional pair of beaches in the vicinity of
New York City will be investigated during
the 1976 swimming season.
52
-------
• Attempts are being made to determine the
frequency, distribution and cause of amoebic
meningoencephalitis. This almost invariably
fatal disease is believed to strike following
swimmming in fresh or brackish waters.
Water Supply Research.—Funding for the Wa-
ter Supply Research Program is provided under
the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974. Since these
activities are related to those of the FWPC Act,
they are included here for the sake of complete-
ness.
The objective of the Water Supply Research
Program is to provide the scientific knowledge
necessary to refine standards for organic, inorgan-
ic, and microbiological contaminants of drinking
water. These standards will then be incorporated
into primary drinking water regulations under the
Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974. Treatment proc-
esses for the removal and/or inactivation of con-
taminants are being developed, as are control
techniques to protect water supplies at the source
and in the distribution system.
Major research activities include:
• Nationwide surveys to determine the extent
of contamination of water supplies by virus-
es, organic and inorganic chemicals—espe-
cially those suspected of having carcinogenic
properties.
• The isolation and identification of organic
compounds present in drinking water.
Toxicological studies are being carried out on
organic residues isolated from tap water by
reverse osmosis techniques. Results of toxi-
cological studies will assist in the design of
corroborative epidemiological studies.
• Studies to establish criteria based on health
effects for the inorganic chemical contami-
nants of drinking water.
• Investigation of occurrence of water-borne
diseases. The objective is to determine what
diseases are or may be transmitted by drink-
ing water, and the conditions that allow this
to occur. This knowledge will indicate what
improvements in technology or operating
practices are needed by the water-works in-
dustry.
• Development and evaluation of various wa-
ter-treatment processes for the removal of
trace organics and taste- and odor- producing
substances. Current work involves the use of
activated carbon and oxidants such as ozone
for the removal process.
• Evaluation and improvement of methods for
the inactivation of microorganisms in drink-
ing water. Studies are being conducted on the
interference of turbidity with the disinfection
process and on the chlorine-resistance of
naturally occuring viruses.
• Evaluation of water-treatment processes for
the removal of a variety of inorganic contam-
inants (arsenic, asbestos, barium, cadmium,
chromium, lead, mercury, selenium, radium).
Studies of the chemical and bacteriological
water-quality deterioration that can occur
during storage and distribution of drinking
water. Methods are being developed to moni-
tor the quality of water in the distribution
system and to minimize any such deteriora-
tion in quality.
• Determination of the amounts of asbestos
and vinyl chloride leached respectively from
asbestos-cement and PVC pipes.
Recent accomplishments include the following:
• A review was made of the incidence during
the last decade of water-borne disease out-
breaks. Causes of outbreaks were investigat-
ed so that the deficiences in water-supply
systems and operation practices can be cor-
rected, thus preventing the recurrence of
such outbreaks.
• The first phase of the nationwide drinking
water survey has been completed.
• A breakthrough in virus quantification.
• A new sampling device, the "mini-sampler,"
has been devised for capture of total organics
on activated carbon.
• A water quality monitor has been developed,
through contract, to measure physical proper-
ties as well as to detect trace metals at low
concentrations. Measurements include cop-
per, cadmium, lead, flouride, nitrate, chlo-
ride, residual chlorine, turbidity, tempera-
ture, dissolved oxygen, pH, conductivity,
hardness, alkalinity, and corrosion potential.
Arsenic has been shown to be removable
from water supplies by coagulation with fer-
ric sulfate. Removals in excess of 95 percent
can be achieved.
• Reverse osmosis has been analyzed as a po-
tential mechanism for the concentration of
organics from drinking water and appears to
be promising.
• The use of cell cultures as test organisms has
been demonstrated to be a valuable rapid
53
-------
technique to determine the toxicity of inor-
ganics and organics found in drinking water.
ECOLOGICAL PROCESSES
AND EFFECTS PROGRAMS
Ecological studies are directed primarily toward
development of criteria to be used in setting water
quality standards. Two major study areas are es-
tuaries and the Great Lakes.
Marine and Estuarine Research.—The objec-
tives of the marine and estuarine research pro-
gram include developing (1) scientifically and le-
gally defensible water quality criteria; (2) informa-
tion for assessment of damage to marine ecosys-
tems from acute and chronic exposures to pollu-
tants; (3) criteria for ocean disposal of pollutants
on marine ecosystems.
The following studies were initiated or contin-
ued in 1974 in response to section 104:
• Description of pollution stress in arctic and
sub-arctic estuarine ecosystems.
• Ecological impact of petroleum substances,
heavy metals, and synthetic organic com-
pounds on coastal ecosystems.
• Ecological requirements essential for the pro-
tection of estuarine ecosystems.
• Development of biological response models
indicating the reaction of estuarine ecosys-
tems to pollutional stress.
• Ecological impact of ocean waste outfalls and
ocean dumping activities.
• Ecological impact of chlorinated effluents
from sewage treatment plants and chlorinated
power plant cooling waters.
Freshwater Ecological Research.—EPA's fresh-
water ecological research program at present is
focused on five principal areas: (1) effects of pol-
lutants or other stresses on aquatic organisms,
including the determination of environmental re-
quirements and limits; (2) the source, transport,
transformation, ultimate fate, and ecosystem-level
effects of pollutants in freshwater ecosystems
generally and in the Great Lakes specifically, in-
cluding the impact of water quality control meas-
ures; (3) the eutrophication of lakes, methods for
evaluating the trophic status of natural waters,
and methods for reversing or redirecting the un-
desirable effects of cultural eutrophication; (4)
the effects of man-induced stresses on arctic eco-
systems as screening tools for toxic substances
and as standardized systems for indicating poten-
tial ecosystem-level effects. All of these activities
have either evolved in response to Agency needs
for a data base upon which to develop water qual-
ity criteria and standards, or have been initiated
in direct response to section 104.
Recent accomplishments in freshwater ecologi-
cal research include the following:
• Developed freshwater aquatic life criteria for
chlorine and chlorination products produced
by the use of chlorine in the sterilization of
sewage effluents and as an antifoulant in
condenser cleaning for power generating sta-
tions. These data have helped identify poten-
tial problems regarding disinfection of
wastes.
• Developed the test procedures and protocol
for biologically testing freshwater organisms
for toxicity of new chemicals. These proce-
dures are being incorporated into registration
requirements for pesticide and other toxic
substances.
• Developed data used by the Agency to estab-
lish criteria for many elements and com-
pounds including PCB's, heavy metals, pesti-
cides, ammonia, hydrogen cyanide, hydrogen
sulfide, temperature, oxygen requirements
and many other organic and/or inorganic
chemicals.
• Assisted various local, State, Federal, and in-
ternational agencies in the development and
review of proposed regulations relating to
water quality and effluent standards.
• Developed fluid dynamic plume models of
thermal discharge. These models have been
used by EPA throughout the nation in court
actions involving application of the provi-
sions of S. 316(a) of P.L. 92-500.
• Demonstrated applicability of advanced
waste treatment as a lake restoration tech-
nique. This finding substantiates Agency .poli-
cy that eutrophication may be controlled on
an individual case basis and that nationwide
curatives, such as banning phosphates from
detergents, are not required.
Great Lakes Research.—EPA's research pro-
gram on the Great Lakes provides a scientific ba-
sis for assessing the source, fate, effects, and
importance of pollutants in large lakes in general,
with particular emphasis on the Great Lakes. As
an integral part of this program, predictive mathe-
matical models for lake water quality management
are being developed and improved.
54
-------
EPA's research program includes studies of ecological pro-
cesses and effects. (Dead carp floating in algae, Wiscon-
sin.)
Among the specific pollution problems being
addressed are:
• Eutrophication (or nutrient enrichment) and
its effects.
• Thermal pollution and related problems asso-
ciated with power production.
• Hazardous materials source, fate, and ef-
fects.
• Disposal of dredging spoils, and ecological
effects on wetlands of shoreline construction,
canal digging, road construction, and hydro-
logic modifications.
As an outgrowth of the International Field Year
for the Great Lakes (IFYGL) program, a working
mathematical model of Lake Ontario is now oper-
ational and is being tested. Work is under way to
develop similar mathematical models of Lakes
Erie and Huron so that within approximately one
year there will be available a 3-lake system of
predictive models capable of simulating not only
eutrophication effects within each lake, but also
interactions between lakes.
In support of the above predictive development
and of the International Joint Commission (IJC)
Upper Great Lakes Reference Study, field re-
search continued in Saginaw Bay and southern
Lake Huron.
MUNICIPAL POLLUTION CONTROL
Sludge Program.—With improvement of the
quality of wastewater treatment, sludge process-
ing, utilization, and disposal has become a greater
problem. Utilization of sludges for beneficial pur-
poses has also received new emphasis, due to the
potential value of the material as a soil condition-
er, low-grade fertilizer and as an alternative ener-
gy source.
As more municipalities upgrade facilities to
improve effluent quality, the quantity of sludge
will continue to increase. Table VIII-1 compares
sludge production in 1972 with the estimated pro-
duction in 1985. The amount of secondary sludge
will be almost doubled, and chemical sludges will
be produced in far greater quantities. Processing
costs will increase more than proportionally be-
cause the biological secondary sludges and several
types of chemical sludges are unusually difficult to
de water.
TABLE VIII-1
TRENDS IN PRODUCTION AND DISPOSAL OF MUNICIPAL
WASTEWATER SLUDGE IN THE U.S.
Sludge type
1972
Popul. Dry tons**
(mill.) per year
1985
Popul Dry tons
(mill ) per year
Primary (0.12 lb/cap-day)* 145 3,170,000 170 3,720,000
Secondary (0.08 Ib/cap-day) ... 101 1,480,000 170 2,480,000
Chemical (0.05 lb/cap-day) 10 91,000 50 455,000
Disposal methods
Landfill
Utilized on land
Incineration
Ocean (Dumping and outfalls)
Percent
40
20
25
15
Percent
40
25
35
0
* Ib x 0 454 = kg
** ton x 0 908 = metric ton
Reference "Overview of Sludge Handling and Disposal", J. B. Parrel!, National
Conference on Municipal Sludge Management, June, 1974
One of the primary objectives of the municipal
pollution control research, development, and
demonstration program is to advance the technol-
ogy for processing, utilization and disposal of the
sludges resulting from wastewater treatment and
to improve the cost factors associated with appli-
cation of the technology.
The early thrust of the research program exam-
ined the physical problems and costs of dewater-
ing sludges, since dewatering capability is critical
55
-------
to final disposition. Moisture content, for exam-
ple, must be minimized for sludges destined for
incineration in order to keep energy requirements
and costs as low as possible.
Direction of the program is now toward the
application of technologies which offer new po-
tential for formulating and applying sludge man-
agement systems in a cost/effective manner, in-
cluding full consideration of environmental ac-
ceptability.
Beginning in 1974 and for the immediate future,
the program is focusing on the development and
demonstration of pyrolysis, co-incineration with
municipal solid waste, and wet-oxidation. These
methods will require little or no supplemental
fuel; will produce usable fuel gas and char; and
will eliminate the microbiological problems asso-
ciated with municipal sludge, such as bacteria,
virus, and intestinal parasites. Certain methods,
such as wet-oxidation, offer the potential of recla-
mation of trace metals, and all offer the potential
for utilization of waste heat for a variety of bene-
ficial purposes.
A major effort is also being conducted to obtain
the necessary data for the development of guide-
lines for the application of sludge to land. With
the increase in the cost of fertilizer the use of
sludge as a soil conditioner/fertilizer is receiving
renewed interest. Municipalities are interested in
more cost-effective methods of final disposal of
the wastewater sludges. However, potential health
hazards related to the microbiological and heavy
metal constituents in sludge have been identified.
Consequently, present efforts are being directed
to the collection of information from existing sys-
tems, evaluation of new full-scale facilities utiliz-
ing the newest technology, and basic research
studies.
Wastewater Disposal.—A second area within
the Municipal Pollution Control program receiving
increased attention is the land application of mu-
nicipal wastewater.
The disposal of municipal wastewater to the
land has been practiced around the world for cen-
turies. In the United States, the practice began in
about the late nineteenth century. The objective
of most such systems, until recent years, was
simply to dispose of a community's wastewater.
Little consideration was given to treatment effi-
ciency, environmental consequences, or reuse
potentials.
The past few years have witnessed a renewed
interest in land treatment of wastewaters. Factors
accounting for the trend include concern for reuse
of water and nutrients and for more ecologically
compatible waste management, emphasis on ener-
gy and resources conservation, and a search for
more cost-effective waste treatment systems.
The 1972 Amendments to the FWPC Act recog-
nized land treatment of municipal wastewaters as
a viable alternative for best practicable waste
treatment. A major portion of the municipal pollu-
tion control research and development effort has
therefore been devoted to developing the data
base required for the design and successful opera-
tion of land treatment systems to help attain our
national goal of protecting our environment
through effective wastewater management.
To achieve these objectives, present efforts are
directed to:
• Collecting information from existing systems
to help predict long-term effects.
• Conducting full-scale evaluation projects to
establish system operation and cost data.
• Conducting research to develop the technolo-
gy of the three basic modes of land treat-
ment.
• Conducting basic studies to ascertain the im-
plications of land treatment related to un-
known factors such as health effects, long-
term effects on the soil, and other environ-
mental consequences.
Some major land treatment demonstration and
development projects currently funded by the Soil
Treatment Systems Program are listed in Table
VIII-2.
TABLE VIII-2
MAJOR SOIL TREATMENT SYSTEMS
EVALUATION PROJECTS
Location
Belding Mich
Tallahassee Fla
Lake George N Y
Pauls Valley Okla
El Paso Tex
Barnstable County,
Mass
Type of system
Irrigation
Irrigation
Irrigation
Infiltration-
Percolation
Infiltration-
Percolation
Overland-Flow
Overland-Flow
Irrigation
Infiltration-
Percolation
and Irrigation
Expected
completion
12/31/77
04/01/77
12/12/75
08/31/77
10/31/76
06/15/76
06/31/75
04/30/80
06/10/76
56
-------
INDUSTRIAL POLLUTION CONTROL
Point source discharges of water pollutants are
primarily from the manufacturing industry. Based
on water use and pollution loads, U.S. industry
accounts for up to 60% of the use of the nation's
water and also discharges a like percentage of the
man-made pollution load to our streams. In addi-
tion to volume and discharge loads, the industrial
water problem is complicated by the physical and
chemical complexity of the wastes discharged, the
extremely diverse characteristics of industrial
classification, and a growth rate of about four
times that of the population.
The Research and Development program, con-
tinuing in 1974, is primarily oriented toward estab-
lishing a technical basis for best available technol-
ogy (BAT) regulations for industry. By law-; the
requirements are based on economic achievabili-
ty. (See Chapter II.)
EPA's industrial research, development and
demonstration program is directed toward innova-
tive, efficient, and economical methods to control
the pollution from industrial sources. This pro-
gram provides:
• Demonstration technologies to verify the
achievability of BAT for industrial wastewa-
ter treatment.
• An expanding data base for establishment of
technically and economically feasible effluent
guidelines.
• Definition of pretreatment parameters for
discharge of industrial wastes to sewer sys-
tems.
• Alternative methods for control of pollutants,
including process modification or reuse of
water, waste heat, and residual materials.
In 1974, alleged inconsistencies and questiona-
ble technical-economic achievability of some of
the new standards came under judicial review. As
these problems are ironed out and the standards
become established, the Agency will have utilized
all the current storehouse of technology upon
which the regulations must be based. EPA's R&D
efforts in this area must therefore proceed with
the development of new technologies. This effort
will be a continuing development process to refine
existing technology as well as seeking completely
new solutions.
The EPA industrial R&D program results to
date, in combination with on-the-shelf practiced
technology, have provided the primary basis for
all the promulgated regulations. Current projec-
tions indicate a strong EPA R&D technology role
will be a necessity to move the regulations toward
the objective identified by P.L. 92-500.
Environmental controls were coupled with in-
dustrial manufacturing facilities in a cost-effective
manner in 1974. This was accomplished by the
development of pollutant recovery and reuse sys-
tems as well as by optimization of manufacturing
process changes in lieu of end-of-the-pipe treat-
ment technology. As a result, economic benefits
were realized in the form of reduced treatment
costs, savings in energy, raw material purchases,
and overall reduced costs of manufacturing. In
addition, significant reduction or elimination of
toxic wastes using new treatment technologies
which have industry-wide applicability achieved
indirect cost-effectiveness.
Examples are macroreticular ion exchange/
spent organic solvent regenerations and reductive
degradation as applied to toxic materials such as
endrin, heptachlor, chlordane, toxaphene, PCB's,
DDT, aldrin/dieldrin, etc.
It was determined in 1973 and confirmed in
1974 that treatment technology state-of-the-art, as
reflected by EPA's best practical technology
(BPT) standards, falls substantially short of elimi-
nating the discharge of pollutants to the aquatic
environment. Serious issues have been raised
concerning the economics of controlling toxic
materials as well as proper disposal of residuals
wastes. In 1974, efforts addressed some of the
most environmentally critical areas which would
have a significant economic impact on U.S. indus-
try. The areas of highest environmental-economic
impact are:
• The economic achievability of the proposed
1983 BAT guidelines.
• Adequate technology for pretreatment and
areawide waste treatment management.
• The control of toxic discharges by industry.
• Marked reduction/elimination of residuals
from pollution control systems.
• Establishing cost effectiveness of total envi-
ronmental control systems wherein multi-
media pollution processes are made compati-
ble with each other.
Table VIII-3 indicates the diversity of industrial
pollution control programs completed by 1974.
The cost-sharing information is representative for
this program area.
57
-------
EXAMPLES OF CURRENT AND PAST COST-EFFECTIVE DEVELOPMENT AND
SORED BY THE INDUSTRIAL POLLUTION CONTROL
DEMONSTRATION ACTIVITIES SPON-
PROGRAM
Grantee
EPA Cost/Total cost
Objective
Results
City of Buffalo—N.Y 60K/250K
Onondaga County—N.Y 350/510K
Volco Brass and Copper
Co.—N.J
Diamond Shamrock
Corp. —Ohio
124K/178K
. 35*K/35K
(USDA Analytical
Support)
10*K/10K
American Enka Co. —N.C. .. 283K/980K
Farmers Chemical Co.—Tenn.l54K/220K
Del Monte Corp. —Calif.
. Dev. 18K/20K
Demo 50K/71K
GoldKist, Inc. —Ind 198K/283K
Institute of Paper
Chemistry — Wis. .
. 40K/150K
Pacific Egg & Poulty
Assoc. — Calif
. 99K/151K
Establish methodology for most cost-ef-
fective manner to achieve compliance
with EPA regulations for municipalities
handling industrial wastes.
Establish baseline criteria for post-con-
struction evaluation of environmental
benefits resulting from an area-wide
wastewater management program.
Development and Demonstration of man-
ufacturing process change, and end-of-
pipe treatment for recovery of product
and reuse of water.
Evaluation and assessment of exhaustive
chlorination as cost effective resource
recovery and reuse technique through
chemical alteration/conversion of po-
tentially toxic/hazardous chlorinated
still bottom residues from organic chem-
ical manufacturing.
Dev.and Demo, on effective and econom-
ically achievable technique to control
the discharge of zinc from viscose rayon
manufacture. Technique involved zinc
recovery.
Dev. and Demo, of recycle technology for
nitrogenous fertilizer plants. Previously
no technology was available for suitable
control of NH3 wastes.
Demo, of process modification to mini-
mize waste generation resulting from
fruit peeling operations.
Optimization of water and waste manage-
ment by in-plant controls in poultry
processing.
Developmental assessment of steam strip-
ping and activated carbon process to
reduce BOD from sulfite pulp liquor
evaporation condensates with accompa-
nying by-product recovery.
Pilot scale recycle of chiller wastewater to
reduce BOD output, water use and re-
frigeration requirements.
On-going project will set a precedent as to
the validity and workability of pre-
treatment standards.
1. Criteria established.
2. Control implementation is under con-
struction.
3. Results show economic advantage for
industry and municipality to join in
effective control within a basin.
1. Criteria established.
2. Annual savings of the pollution abate-
ment effort: $2.61 per ton of finished
wire.
Conversion of USAF Herbicide OR-
ANGE, via chlorinolysis, to carbon te-
trachloride, carbonyl chloride, and hy-
drogen chloride marketable products
shown to be feasible. Teratogen "diox-
in" destroyed/converted to below de-
tectable limits (10 ppt). Toxicology of
product CC14 negative. German process
variant can also process at semi-works
scale.
For a 2500-ton production plant the proc-
ess demonstrated cost savings ranging
from $116,000 to $465,000 depending
upon the ratio of zinc used.
Demo, shows that NH4NO3 recovery and
water reuse can be achieved with mod-
est cost at 80% closed-cycle. Future
efforts will be aimed at reducing net cost
to zero. Currently recover 6,000 tons/yr
NH4NO-, at $40-60/ton.
For a 20T/hr dry caustic peeling unit, a net
saving of $7.82/hr was realized.
Achieved up to $21,600/month reduction
of sewer charges.
Economic feasibility established. Value of
recovered products and savings in treat-
ment costs exceed wastewater treat-
ment cost by just under 6%.
Preliminary reports on this pilot effort in-
dicate an expected reduction (approxi-
mately 60%) in chill water usage, about
30% savings in energy requirements for
refrigeration, and about 6% reduction in
fresh water.
58
-------
NONPOINT SOURCE
POLLUTION CONTROL
The research and development program for
nonpoint source pollution focuses on the genera-
tion of management tools and source control tech-
nology for activities such as agriculture, construc-
tion, mining, and spills.
Evaluation of the status of knowledge relative
to the magnitude and impact of land-originating,
diffuse pollutants has indicated certain deficien-
cies. Studies are now under way to answer these
questions. Specific projects include:
• Development of mathematical expressions
to permit estimates to be made of the relative
pollutant contributions to surface waters
from various land use activities in water-
sheds.
• Utilization of these expressions to make a
nationwide assessment of the severity of
nonpoint pollution.
• Further development of management tools to
evaluate the quantities of agricultural chemi-
cals polluting surface waters as influenced by
changes in climatic, edaphic, and land man-
agement factors.
• Evaluation of the pollution potential attend-
ant with increased land application of animal
wastes and with runoff from pasture and
rangeland.
These studies are aimed at providing tools to
the decision makers, such as areawide planning
agencies or State pollution control agencies. The
information should help them to evaluate the rela-
tive importance of nonpoint pollution within their
jurisdictions and to establish reasonable control
programs where necessary.
A second phase of activity on the nonpoint
problem is the development of the techniques to
be applied to those areas where control will be
required. Evaluations of the effectiveness of var-
ious agricultural practices, such as cropping and
soil disturbing methods, and animal waste man-
agement, to conserve soil and avoid water pollu-
tion are being made.
For further information on the nonpoint source
control program, see Chapter VI.
EQUIPMENT AND TECHNIQUES
PROGRAM
Research efforts have been directed to develop-
ing test procedures required under various sec-
tions of the Act. New and improved analytical
methods for determining chemical, and microbio-
logical pollutants have been or are being devel-
oped for use both in the field and laboratory.
Specific developments and major activities
through 1974-1975 include:
• Revision of the Methods for Chemical Analy-
sis of Water and Wastes manual.
• Revision of the biological methods manual.
• Development of a microbiological methods
manual.
• Completion of a demonstration project on
computer automation of laboratory instru-
ments to provide high efficiency analytical
systems for water quality evaluation.
• Development of improved techniques for
identification and quantification of indicator
microbiological organisms.
• Development of improved fluorescent anti-
body techniques for the identification of mi-
croorganisms.
• Development of improved analytical tech-
niques for the determination of pesticides
and other organic and radiochemical pollu-
tants.
• Improvement of the mass spectroscopic pro-
cedure for the identification of 25,000 poten-
tial water pollutants.
• Completion of evaluation of a hydrogen sul-
fide sensor for application to water quality
measurements.
QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM
An Agency-wide quality assurance program is
being implemented to improve environmental data
used by EPA to ensure the validity of the data.
Key elements of the program are laboratory quali-
ty control and methods standardization.
Achievements and major research activities ini-
tiated through 1974-1975 include:
• Full implementation of the regulation for test
procedures for the analysis of pollutants in
wastewater discharges, implementing sec-
tion 304(g) of the Act.
• Proposed revisions for the regulation for test
procedures for the analysis of pollutants (40
CFR Part 136).
• Ongoing development and distribution of
standard reference samples for demand anal-
ysis, nutrients, minerals, and trace metal
analyses for internal quality control.
59
-------
• Continuing methods validation studies for
minerals, nutrients, oxygen demand analysis,
trace metals, cyanide, and petroleum hydro-
carbons.
• Completed evaluation of all EPA Regional
laboratory and field monitoring support ef-
forts and initiated similar evaluation studies
of State laboratories involved in wastewater
and water quality analyses.
• Completed a formal EPA laboratory certifica-
tion feasibility study and initiated guidelines
development for laboratory certification, in-
ter-laboratory comparisons, on-site laborato-
ry inspections, and laboratory survey proto-
cols.
• Initiated development of guidelines for sam-
pling and sample preservation and for data
handling systems.
A Federal-State quality assurance program helps ensure the
validity of environmental data used by EPA. (EPA biolo-
gist prepares pesticide sediment sample.)
DATA AND INFORMATION
RESEARCH PROGRAM
Remote Sensing.—Efforts have been directed
toward demonstration of environmental applica-
tions of existing remote sensing technology.
Significant achievements over the past year in-
clude:
• Providing technical support to the Agency in
the remote sensing of oil spills and the cata-
loguing of environmental conditions and land
uses.
• Development of a demonstration program for
application of aerial multi-spectral techniques
in surveys of waterbodies.
• Demonstration of operational aerial photo-
graphic and isothermal infrared capabilities
for Regional outfall detection.
• Development of an environmental photo-
graphic interpretation system.
Lake Eutrophication.—The eutrophication
threat to selected fresh water lakes and reservoirs
in the United States is being assessed in conjunc-
tion with State water pollution control agencies
and the National Guard. The Survey is aimed at
developing lake water quality criteria and infor-
mation concerning point and nonpoint sources of
lake eutrophication and identifying possible resto-
ration measures.
Major accomplishments during the past year
include:
• Completion of all field work in the eastern
U.S.
• Reporting of significant study findings for
north central to northeastern U.S.
• Initiation of lake watershed sampling/analy-
ses in mid-to-far-western States.
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
RESEARCH PROGRAM
Engineering, economics, and the physical, bio-
logical, and social sciences, in conjunction with
systems analysis techniques, are brought together
in an interdisciplinary effort to develop improved
environmental quality management methods. The
program's goal is to provide decision-makers with
data and techniques to improve the cost-effec-
tiveness of local, regional, and national pollution
control programs. Research areas include environ-
mental quality forecasting and analysis, compre-
hensive planning, procedures to set and imple-
ment standards, cost and benefit analysis, and
60
-------
envionmental impact analysis procedures. While
the program focuses on managing the environ-
ment considered as a whole, it also provides man-
agement assistance directly applicable to water
problems. Recent accomplishments include:
• A series of projects investigating alternative
concepts for financing the various provisions
of the Act.
• Development of procedures for States to use
in designing a cost-effective permit compli-
ance monitoring system.
• Demonstration of comprehensive metropoli-
tan water quality planning.
• Analysis of the comprehensive management
of phosphorus water pollution.
• Report on the use of environmental analysis
of wastewater facilities by local government.
• Demonstration of a State water quality man-
agement information system.
• Demonstration of an assessment methodology
for the environmental impact of water re-
source projects.
• Preparation of a bibliography of water pollu-
tion control benefits and costs.
• Development of procedures for meeting relia-
bility and maintainability goals in ambient
water quality monitoring networks.
• A cost-effectiveness analysis of control
methods for agricultural nonpoint sources of
pollution.
Other water quality management projects ini-
tiated or continued include:
• Preparation of a comprehensive Report to the
Congress on the costs of implementing the
Act (section 516(b)).
• Techniques for minimizing the intermedia
impact of industrial residuals through reuse.
• Analysis of a wide range of standards options
for control of groundwater quality.
• Analysis of the secondary impact of transpor-
tation and wastewater treatment investments.
• Development of a handbook to assist States
in implementing optimal compliance monitor-
ing procedures.
• Handbook to assist State and local planners
in the selection of water quality models.
• Economic evaluation of implementation strat-
egies for control of agricultural nonpoint
sources of water pollution.
• An evaluation of current and potential eco-
nomic incentives for land use control.
• Systems for wastewater reuse in metropolitan
areas together with a methodology for alloca-
tion of limited water resources.
• Handbook to assist State and local planners
in evaluating secondary impacts of wastewa-
ter systems.
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
Technology Transfer bridges the gap between
research and full-scale operational use by evaluat-
ing newly developed successful technologies and
transferring this knowledge to consulting engi-
neering firms; municipal, industrial, and State de-
sign engineers; city managers; directors of public
works; industrial managers; laboratory directors,
conservation groups; and others concerned with
design, construction, operations, and monitoring
of pollution control facilities.
This program has completed additional design
manuals and handbooks in the on-going series
which now includes design manuals for carbon
adsorption, upgrading existing wastewater treat-
ment plants, phosphorus removal, suspended sol-
ids removal, sulfide control, nitrogen control, and
sludge treatment and disposal, and handbooks for
analytical quality control, monitoring industrial
wastewater, and chemical methods of analysis.
These major comprehensive publications have
been widely distributed and used and are having a
significant effect on environmental pollution con-
trol facilities. Additional manuals are currently
under preparation for both the industrial and mu-
nicipal areas.
The wastewater treatment seminar series con-
tinued in 1974 with the total cumulative attend-
ance at the sessions now totaling over 10,000 engi-
neers and plant managers. Eighteen publications
evolving from the seminar series are now being
distributed on a national basis to those unable to
attend the seminar.
61
-------
CHAPTER NINE
Waste Flow
Reduction
The high cost of treating wastewater, and the
environmental impact of treated wastewaters on
the receiving waters, are major concerns of EPA.
These, in addition to the needs of providing new
water supplies and curtailing energy demands,
make water conservation and sewage flow reduc-
tion measures an important consideration in water
supply and wastewater treatment planning.
The Act calls for EPA to conduct research on
devices and policies for reducing water consump-
tion and the total flow of sewage. (Section 104
(o).) EPA's first investigations (reported in June,
1974) found potentials for reduction in water con-
sumption and sewage flow in the home, in indus-
try, and through infiltration/inflow control. Re-
search has continued in all three of these areas.
THE CURRENT QUANTITY OF FLOW
Current withdrawals from the nation's waters
exceed 370 billion gallons per day (bgd). Of this
total, direct industrial withdrawals constitute 47
bgd and public water supply is 27 bgd. This report
focuses on means for reducing this 74 bgd volume
of water. Withdrawals for irrigation (130 bgd),
livestock and rural uses (4.5 bgd) and steam-elec-
tric power plant cooling (170 bgd) are excluded
from the discussion. While these categories are
major ones (see Table IX- 1), they do not involve
Table IX- 1
TOTAL WATER WITHDRAWALS BY PURPOSE, 1970 (bgd)
Public water utilities .................................................. 27
Industrial and commercial .................................. 9
Domestic, municipal & losses ............................. 18
Industrial and miscellaneous ....................................... 47
Rural, domestic &Hvestock ....................................... 4.5
Irrigation [[[ 130
Steam-electric utilities ............................................... 170
public water supplies or require municipal or in-
dustrial wastewater treatment.
Industrial and commercial water supplies are
primarily withdrawn directly (47 bgd); a smaller
portion is obtained from public water supplies (9
bgd). Similarly, most industrial and business dis-
charges go directly to the receiving waters, with
only a small portion discharged to sewers (7.3
bgd.) (Table IX-2.)
Domestic users obtain about 18 bgd from public
water supplies. Deducting the portions going to
septic tanks, outdoor sprinkling, and other losses,
domestic and municipal flows to sewers are esti-
mated to be 10.6 bgd. Total municipal treatment
plant flows are estimated to be 24.0 bgd. Deduct-
ing the above estimates of domestic and industrial
TABLE IX-2
ALLOCATION OF PUBLIC WATER SUPPLIES AND
AMOUNTS DISCHARGED TO SEWERS, 1970 (bgd)
Industrial — large users
— small users
Commercial
Domestic municipal and losses
Losses (10%)'
Municipal (10%)2 ....
Residential with septic tank (10%)3
Sprinkling (25%)4
Domestic (in-house) use and sewage
Water 1
supply
9 0
4 5*
1 3***
.... 3 2**
18 0
1 8
1 6
1 5
3 3
98
teaching
sewers
7 3
28*
1.3
3.2
10 6
-------
discharges, the residual infiltration and storm flow
is estimated at 6.1 bgd.
TABLE IX-3
BREAKDOWN OF MUNICIPAL WASTEWATER FLOW
Total flow in wastewater facilities
Industrial and commercial
Domestic
Residual: infiltration and storm flows
Flow
(bgd)
24.0*
7.3
10.6
6.1
Percent
100
30
44
26
* Flow from municipally owned wastewater facilities in 1974 is estimated at 27 bdg
(Municipal Waste Facilities Directory, 7/9/74, total of 24 7 bgd, adjusted for plants
with no flow data) Three percent annual growth rate is assumed to estimate 1970
flows
In an effort to reduce the total quantity of
wastewater generated and the demand for treated
public water supplies, EPA is conducting research
in the areas of sewer infiltration/inflow and in-
dustrial and home water conservation.
INFILTRATION AND INFLOW
Infiltration and inflow refer to water which gets
into the sanitary sewer system through leaks in
sewer lines, or from drains on buildings being
connected to sanitary sewer systems. It is esti-
mated above that infiltration/inflow accounts for
up to 25% of total treatment plant flows; other
estimates have been up to 30%.
The Act requires all new applicants for treat-
ment works grants to demonstrate that each sewer
system discharging into the proposed treatment
works is not subject to excessive infiltration/in-
flow (I/I). EPA's construction grant regulation (40
CFR 35.927) and supplemental Guidance for Sew-
er System Evaluation (March 1974) implement the
Act's mandate. The publications recognize that
some infiltration/inflow costs more to correct that
it does to treat. For these cases they insure that
the I/I flows are reduced to the extent it is cost-
effective to do so.
Basically, the grant regulations call for the fol-
lowing:
• I/I analysis: An in-depth study of the past
records, rainfall and other pertinent informa-
tion relative to the sewer system, to deter-
mine whether excessive I/I may exist.
• Evaluation Survey: When excessive I/I ex-
ists, a physical survey of the sewer system
followed by detailed cost-effectiveness analy-
sis.
• Rehabilitation: Physical correction of all I/I
sources that are previously determined to be
cost-effective to repair.
Of the 640 projects currently under I/I study,
only 27% have excessive I/I. These projects,
ranging in size from .04 to 200 million gallons per
day flow, are presently under evaluation survey
(task 2). Techniques for I/I study and correction
are relatively new and complex. Therefore EPA is
preparing a new technical bulletin describing I/I
methodology for use as a guide by designers and
municipalities. In addition, the National Environ-
mental Research Center in Cincinnati, Ohio, is
directing several projects on analytical methods
and technologies relating to infiltration and inflow
control, as follows:
Analysis of Practices for Preparing An Economic
Analysis and Determining Infiltration
The American Public Works Association has
received a grant to report on and prepare a man-
ual of practice on the practices used to determine
infiltration and inflow in sanitary and combined
sewers, and develop a framework for economic
analysis to determine whether or not infiltration
should be reduced or pipe/plant size increased.
The economic analysis will develop a manual of
practice for unit costs of repair, replacement, or
corrective action required to minimize infiltration
and for the unit costs of the affected wastewater
treatment facility.
Demonstration and Evaluation of The Use of
Impregnated Concrete Pipe and other Methods of
Infiltration Control
The Texas Water Quality Board has received a
research grant from EPA to perform a demonstra-
tion and evaluation of impregnated concrete pipe.
Corrosion of concrete sewer pipe is a major cause
of leakage and failure in sewer pipes which re-
sults in infiltration. A method of impregnation to
increase the corrosion/erosion resistance, im-
permeability and strength of concrete pipe has
been developed under another EPA-funded study.
This study will further evaluate the performance
of the new method.
Trenchless Sewer Construction And Sewer Design
Innovations
EPA has funded a research project in the town
of Bethany Beach, Delaware, to evaluate trench-
less sewer construction. The project will demon-
strate a new sewer construction method which
promises to be less costly and more rapid than
conventional construction and will overcome the
problems of high water table, unstable soil, asso-
ciated infiltration and expensive manhole con-
struction. A thorough two year post-construction
evaluation is to be included.
63
-------
HOME WATER CONSERVATION
Public water supply, the major source of the
homeowner's water, is responsible for only about
7% of total U.S. withdrawals. At first glance,
therefore, home water use does not seem very
significant. However, water for public supplies is
costly to provide. Often it must be conveyed for
long distances. Before use, it must be treated to
potable quality, and after use it must be treated
again before being returned to the environment.
Thus, public water supplies and municipal treat-
ment are important both economically and envi-
ronmentally. Individual households account for an
estimated 60% of delivered water and generated
sewage.
Interest in home water conservation is growing.
Particularly where public water supplies are di-
minished to critical levels or where sewage treat-
ment capacity is limited, public discussions and
other activities are increasing. Because water
supplies and sewage treatment capacity remain
readily available and inexpensive in many areas of
the country, however, this interest is not univer-
sal.
The major ways to reduce household water use
and sewage flows are through water saving de-
vices and user charge policies.
Water Saving Devices
A considerable amount of research has been
and is being conducted on water-saving devices.
From individual inventors to major plumbing
manufacturers, industry is responding to the flow
reduction objective.
A number of devices have been developed that
can be retrofitted to existing plumbing fixtures and
appliances. Tests show that many of the devices
perform acceptably, are simple to install, and
save enough water to make them worthwhile.
Many of these home water saving devices are
commercially available.
Other research, conducted for the most part by
manufacturers, has concentrated on the develop-
ment of completely redesigned water saving
plumbing fixtures and appliances. These fixtures
generally perform better than conventional retro-
fitted fixtures, but their higher cost makes them
practical principally for new installations or re-
placement of non-working units. A number of
water-saving plumbing codes, such as that insti-
tuted by the Washington (B.C.) Suburban Sani-
Figure IX-1.
Damming devices, which hold back some of the water in a
toilet tank, reduce the amount used in flushing and thus
save water.
tary Commission, require the use of water-saving
fixtures for new or replacement installations.
Much of the credit for the rising interest in
home water conservation goes to the efforts of
concerned public utilities. The Washington Subur-
ban Sanitary Commission, for example, has been
extremely active in promoting conservation by its
customers. Beginning in 1970, the WSSC has run
public education programs, tested and demon-
strated water saving devices, revised its plumbing
code, distributed displacement bottles for toilet
tanks and shower flow-restricters to its customers,
and more recently has begun an extensive educa-
tion program in the elementary schools. This pro-
gram has served as a model; other utilities, such
as the Marin County (California) Municipal Water
District have instituted a program similar to the
WSSC's. The adoption of these devices depends
to a large extent on whether or not the savings in
water and wastewater bills, generally rather low,
provide an incentive for the homeowner to incur
the cost of capital outlay for aquisition and instal-
lation. Some data on water savings and costs of
such devices have been specified in previous pub-
lications of EPA, and further guidance is being
prepared.*
*Federal Water Quality Administration, A Study of Flow
Reduction and Treatment of Waste Water from Households.
James R. Bailey,et. al, Washington, D.C. 1969 NTIS PB 197-
599.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Demonstration of
Waste Flow Reduction from Households, Report No. EPA-
670/2-74-071. National Environmental Research Center, Cin-
cinnati, Ohio. 1974. NTIS PB 236-904/AS.
64
-------
SAVING WATER IN THE HOME
The most promising areas for inside the
house water saving with devices appear to
be the toilet and the shower. Toilet flushing
and bathing account for approximately 39%
and 34% respectively of inside water use. A
number of workable methods have been
developed to reduce the amount of water
used in toilet flushing. The simplest devices
are displacement or damming devices which
hold back some of the water in a conven-
tional toilet tank and thus reduce the amount
of water used in a flush. Slightly more com-
plicated are dual or regulated flush devices
which allow the user to select a small flush
for liquid waste and a larger one for solid
waste. Another alternative is a completely
redesigned toilet which uses less water for a
flush. Toilets which use water more effi-
ciently are now readily available to consum-
ers and are in fact required in some places
for new installations or replacements. Other
toilets have been designed which use little or
no water at all. These include vacuum toi-
lets, chemical toilets, incinerator toilets and
composting toilets. The expense, complexity
and in some cases the inconvenience of
these units make them practical primarily in
extremely water short areas or in areas
which do not have public water supplies and
sewers.
Second to the toilet, the largest controlla-
ble in-house water use is the shower. Con-
ventional shower heads use between 5 and
15 gallons per minute. In a leisurely shower,
the high flow can use large amounts of wa-
ter, all of which goes into the sewer. Rede-
signed shower heads can reduce flows to
three gallons per minute or less and provide
even a sybarite with a pleasurable shower.
These shower heads are usually not expen-
sive and can pay for themselves in water
savings to the consumer (when the consumer
pays for water on the basis of use). Other
devices, which are more expensive, allow
the user to shut off the shower flow at the
shower head while soaping up then turn it
back on without disturbing the temperature
adjustment. A simple, cheap and easily in-
stalled device, designed by Virginia Poly-
technic Institute, consists of a plastic insert
which, when installed in a showerhead, re-
duces the flow to 3.5 gallons per minute.
These devices were distributed by the WSSC
to all of its customers who wanted them and
they appear to be performing acceptably. A
similar device has been developed to reduce
flow in other types of household faucets.
Pricing Policy and Rate Structure
The Flow Reduction Potential.—Basic to the
efficient use of resources is the idea that consum-
ers should pay a price that reflects the cost of the
good or service being provided. Pricing policy and
rate structure for water and sewage service can
help in achieving a cost-efficient level of conser-
vation.
EPA is directly involved in the question of
municipal pricing policies. In order to qualify for
a construction grant under the 1972 Act, grant
applicants must agree to adopt a policy of user
charges for sewage service. The main purposes of
such user charges, according to EPA guidelines,
are (1) to distribute the cost of operation and
maintenance of publicly owned treatment works
to the pollutant source, (2) to achieve self-suffi-
ciency of treatment works with respect to opera-
tion and maintenance costs, and (3) to provide for
recovery of capital costs for the portion of capac-
ity funded by the Federal government and utilized
by industry.
A fourth purpose which a user charge system
can fulfill is that of encouraging the conservation
of water and reduction of wastewater flows.
However, the Act does not require that this func-
tion be served by the user charge system institut-
ed by grant applicants. Rather, it is designated in
section 104(o) as a matter to be studied. Whether
or not the fourth purpose is achieved hinges on
two questions: are charges based on flows, and
are charges set to reflect incremental costs?
Metering and Billing—To encourage conserva-
tion through the user charge system, users must
65
-------
be metered and the user charge system must in-
clude a cost component based on individual flows.
For example, a "flat-rate" monthly charge per
dwelling unit might serve the purpose of allocat-
ing treatment costs among users, but it would not
reward a householder for producing less wastewa-
ter—or penalize him for producing more—than
the average. If his water and sewage use rises, he
essentially pays a zero price for the added
amount: he has no incentive to conserve.
In some situations, it may not be worth at-
tempting to achieve conservation through the
price system: the savings in terms of water and
wastewater costs may be less than the required
expenditures in terms of other resources—e.g.,
the cost of metering and billing. However, de-
mand elasticities suggest that pricing is a generally
promising approach (see "The response to incre-
mental costs," below).
Analysis of pricing requires consideration of
both water and sewage, for two reasons. First,
although the outdoor (sprinkling) use of water
does not affect wastewater flow, the in-house
(domestic) use of water and sewage are, in eco-
nomic terms, complementary services—consumer
use depends on the prices of both. Secondly, the
two are related in terms of measurement tech-
nique. Meters to measure sewage flow directly are
expensive and seldom used, but such flows can be
estimated from the metered use of water. Where
sprinkling use of water is substantial, for exam-
ple, water use during winter months has been
used to provide an estimate of domestic water use
(and hence sewage flow). Thus, the availability of
water meters permits sewage charges also to be
based on flow.
Metering and billing for water supply is wide-
spread. Perhaps 75-80% of the public water sup-
ply through-put in the U.S. is metered. A large
part of the unmetered use occurs in several large
cities—New York, Chicago, St. Louis, Denver
(now undergoing metering) and Portland, Ore-
gon—where large commercial and industrial users
tend to be metered, but single family residences,
and sometimes apartment houses, are not.
Where water meters are used, sewage bills are
frequently based on flows, either through a charge
directly related to flow or through calculating the
sewage bill as a fraction of the water bill. A sur-
vey taken for EPA indicates that either form of
sewage flow charge is used by about 67% of the
agencies for residences and even more frequently
for multifamily dwellings (72%), commercial
(85%) and industrial (87%) users.
In general, it seems that water bills are higher
than sewage bills. Though there is considerable
variation with city size, etc., for water the typical
monthly residential bill indicated in 1970 data is
over $4, for sewage about half as much. The typi-
cal flow charge for water for that date is on the
order of 400 per thousand gallons in the last price
block; for sewage charges data is not available.
Improving the Techniques.—The figures indi-
cate that, in a majority of municipalities, billing
gives some incentive for water conservation and
waste flow reduction. However, most utilities are
required to set their rates in terms of average, his-
torical costs. In contrast, to promote the efficient
use of water and sewer services, prices at the
margin (the last block rate) would be equal to the
incremental cost of providing the service.
The implications of this approach for water and
sewer pricing are far from thoroughly developed,
but would frequently imply that prices at the mar-
gin should be higher than at present. For exam-
ple, in many areas, incremental unit costs of new
water supplies are greater than average historical
costs.
For many waste treatment plants unit costs de-
cline as capacity increases, because of economies
of scale. Here, the incremental costs might be
less than average costs. However, as many as
half of all treatment plants are located on water
quality limited streams, where an increase in sew-
age flows requires progressively higher levels of
treatment—and, very likely, increasing unit costs.
Therefore, unit sewage charges greater than aver-
age costs may frequently be appropriate. In these
cases, where incremental unit costs are increasing
(in constant dollar terms), the policies generally
followed by utilities fail to discourage excess use
of water and sewage.
As a dramatic example, Southern California is
an extremely arid area with large water demands.
New water supplies have to be brought great dis-
tances at great cost, yet unit charges for water
appear to be no greater than in the rest of the
country. Because a large part of the cost of water
supply is covered by a property tax, water rates
do not even cover average costs, let alone incre-
mental cost.
Response to Incremental Costs.—The feasibility
of flow reduction through metering and pricing
depends to a large extent, of course, on the re-
sponsiveness of users to increased charges — the
66
-------
elasticity of demand. In the most thorough analy-
sis of this question to date, the elasticity of de-
mand for water used for sprinkling was fairly
large; for domestic (in-house) use, the elasticity of
demand was smaller, though still significant.
The elasticity estimates are:
• Sprinkling use in dry western areas: .7% use
decrease per 1% price rise
• Sprinkling use in humid areas: 1.6% use de-
crease per 1% price rise
• Domestic users overall: .23% use decrease
per 1% price rise
These elasticity estimates apply to small price
changes. For larger changes, of the magnitude
often called for, the effect must be calculated
from the demand equations. Illustrative cases of
doubling the flow charge from 200 per 1000 gal-
lons to 400 per 1000 gallons might result in a 40%
reduction in sprinkling use in the west and a 10%
reduction in domestic use. Hence, the elasticity of
demand for water appears sufficient to warrant
careful attention to pricing policy.
Summary.—Legislation and regulation of user
charges is directed primarily toward an equitable
allocation of costs, and toward self-sufficiency of
wastewater agencies. For example, the Agency
has proposed that ad valorem charges be permit-
ted to continue where these goals can be met (Ap-
pendix C). However, EPA is also studying user
charge policies designed to encourage the eco-
nomic use of water supply and wastewater services.
INDUSTRIAL WASTE FLOW REDUCTION
Industry is, of course, one of the primary
sources of water pollution, directly withdrawing
and discharging massive amounts of water, as
well as being a significant user of public facilities.
(Tables IX-1, IX-2, and IX-4) Because of this
importance, EPA maintains a broad program to
develop industrial pollution control technology.
Many of the projects are specifically related to
internal recycling, a primary technique in reducing
industrial waste flow. For many industries, the
high cost of end-of-pipe treatment, the economies
of treating more concentrated waste, and rising
water supply costs have made recycling and other
methods of improved water management econom-
ically attractive.
The latest census of water use in manufacturing
indicates that recycling has increased rapidly in
recent years. The extent of recycling is indicated
TABLE IX-4
WATER USE IN MANUFACTURING, 1973 (BCD)*
Fresh
Brackish
& salt
Total
Intake by source
Public water systems ....
Company water systems
4.5
4.5
Surface . .
Ground
Tidewater
Total
Discharge by type
Public utility sewer
Streams and rivers
Ocean
Ground
Total
Purpose of intake
Process
Steam electric power generation ...
Air conditioning
Other cooling and condensing
Sanitary service
Total
23.8 1 2
42 04
1.0 6.1
33.4 7.7
Flow
(bgd)
2.8
24.9
3.3
6.2
0.5
0.6
0.5
38.8
Flow
(bgd)
10.8
7.5
0.8
19.8
0.6
1 8
41.2
25 0
4 5
7.1
41.2
Percent
7.3
64.2
8.6
16.1
1.2
1.5
1.2
100.0
Percent
26.3
18.1
1.8
48.1
1.4
4.3
100.0
*Water Use in Manufacturing, 1972 Census of Manufactures, Bureau of the Cen-
sus Data cover establishments using over 20 million gallons per year, estimated to
account for 97% of water use Details in some cases do not add to totals because
of rounding The water withdrawals given here are less than those in Table IX-1,
because mining is excluded here and perhaps because of other differences in the
method of estimation. Power generation here refers to that in industrial plants
TABLE IX-5
WATER INTAKE AND RECYCLING IN MANUFACTURING*
1954 ..
1959
1964
1968
1973
Water
intake
(bgd)
31 7
33 2
38 3
42 3
41 2
Gross Water
use
(bgd)
57 6
71 9
81 6
97 5
128 7
Ratio
gross use/
intake
1 O-J
-JIT
7 7. 1
Change in
ratio
-1.4%
35.5%
•Water Use in Manufacturing, 1973, p SR4-7
by the ratio of gross water use (intake plus recy-
cled water) to water intake. This ratio was 2.31 in
1968 and 3.13 in 1973—indicating a 35% increase
in water use per gallon of intake over the 5-year
period. This increase is greater than that in earlier
inter-census periods and may account for the fact
67
-------
that in the 1973 census, for the first time, water
intake in manufacturing declined (Table IX-5).
A number of research projects related to water
conservation and waste flow reduction were dis-
cussed in the last Report to Congress. Those dis-
cussed here are those which are presently under
way, or were completed in 1975.
Research being conducted in the food and kin-
dred products industry is of particular interest in
terms of wastewater flow reduction. It is estimat-
ed that over 21% of the total national manufac-
turing pollution load is contributed by this group
of industries. More importantly from a waste flow
reduction standpoint, in 1973, 30% of the wastes
of this industrial group was discharged to munici-
pal sewer systems. Thus, while other industrial
groups use more water, this group discharges
more wastewater to municipal systems. Clearly,
the studies done in the food and kindred products
industry offer significant potential for lowering
industrial wastewater flows to municipal systems.
These studies, which illustrate the type of re-
search being carried out in the industrial area, are
the following:
Tomato Cleaning and Water Recycle
National Canners Association
Washington, D.C.
This study will demonstrate low water use cleaning of toma-
toes and recycling of the tomato transport water. Water use
for cleaning should be reduced from the present 700 gal/ton to
6 gal/ton. In combination with the recycle system the water
use for receiving and cleaning should be reduced from 930 ga/
ton to 120 gal/ton.
Reuse of Treated Fruit Processing Wastewater Within a Can-
nery
Snokist Growers
Yakima, Washington
This study will evaluate the feasibility of reclaiming end-of-
pipe process wastewater for reuse within a fruit cannery.
Reuse of the reclaimed water will be evaluated for a variety of
different uses within the plant including cleaning, cooking and
cooling.
Integrated IOB Vibratory Blanch Cooler for Reducing Pollu-
tion Caused by Blanching of Vegetables
American Frozen Food Institute
Washington, D.C.
This study will evaluate on a proto-type scale, a new type of
system in which the steam condensate from the vegetable
blancher (IOB) will be utilized for spray cooling of the product
prior to freezing. Significant reductions in liquid effluent vol-
ume (90%), and in the organic (70%) contained therein should
be demonstrated when compared to current industrial prac-
tices.
Poultry Processing Wastewater Reuse Effects on Product and
Water Safety
Maryland State Dept. of Health
Baltimore, Maryland
This project is to evaluate the safety for human consump-
tion of poultry processed in a plant utilizing reclaimed waste-
water in a closed loop water system. The poultry plant will
recycle about 50% of their own processing wastewater. Safety
will be determined by relative amounts of contaminants before
and after recycling begins.
Egg Breaking and Processing Wastes
Cornell University
N.Y. State College of Agriculture and Life Sciences
Ithaca, New York
This project intends to determine the magnitude of the shell
egg and egg breaking and processing waste problem and to
explore waste management methods that are applicable to
these wastes. One of the major objectives of this project is
identify opportunities for in-plant waste reduction and water
reuse.
Ecostatic Cane Processing System
C. Brewer and Co., Lmt
Hilo Coast Processing Co.
Pepeekeo, Hawaii
This project involves a full-scale demonstration of sugar
cane harvesting and processing with water reuse and solid
waste recovery which will result in major reductions in wastes
discharged.
Characterization and Reduction of Specific Wastewaters from
In-Plant Hog Processing Units of the Meat Industry
University of Wisconsin
Madison, Wisconsin
This project will characterize wastewater from critical unit
operations in hog slaughtering and associated cleaning process-
es, and will develop and demonstrate methods and equipment
for reduction of the flow and waste load from these unit oper-
ations.
Minimization of Water Use in Leafy Vegetable Washers
Dulaney Foods Inc.
Eymore, Virginia
This project involves the installation of a full-scale experi-
mental leafy green vegetable washer on a commercial process-
ing line. Performance of the experimental, water saving unit
will be monitored and compared with that of conventional
vegetable washers.
Shrimp Cannery Wastewater Treatment Demonstration Project
American Shrimp Canners Association
New Orleans, Louisiana
An in-plant water conservation and management program
will be instituted along with several possible process modifica-
tions. The resulting effluent will be treated (plant scale) by
screening and dissolved-air flotation with chemical addition.
Screening and sludge will be processed for ultimate disposal.
Other industrial groups where studies are being
conducted in the water conservation and waste
flow reduction area are the chemicals and allied
products industry; the pulp, paper, paperboard,
lumber and wood products industry; the textile
mill products industry; and the metal and metal
products industry. Most of the studies in these
industries that relate to waste flow reduction con-
centrate on recycling the water used in the plant.
68
-------
For each of the industrial groups mentioned
above one representative study will be discussed.
Treatment of Petrochemical Wastewater for Reuse
Union Carbide Corporation
New York, New York
This project will develop feasibility, design, and economic
data on petro-chemical wastewater upgrading and subsequent
reuse by testing a pilot-scale system comprising an integrated
sequence of the most promising treatment steps for upgrading
bio-treated petrochemical effluents for use in pilot-scale heat
transfer systems.
Aircraft Factory Waste Water Recycling, Pilot-Scale Demon-
stration
Boeing Commercial Airplane Co.
Seattle, Washington
The objective of this program is a pilot-scale demonstration
of treatment and recycle of four dilute wastewater streams
resulting from aircraft manufacture. Both recurring and non-
recurring costs of a full-scale recycling plant will be deter-
mined.
Pollution Controf Facilities, Textile Mill
J.P. Stevens & Co. Inc.
Greensboro, North Carolina
One objective of this project is to produce an effluent from
a synthetic fabric finishing plant which will have a 5-day BOD
and suspended solids of 5 mg/1 or less and minimum dissolved
oxygen of 5 mg/1 using multi-media filtration. A second objec-
tive of the project is to determine the feasibility of wastewater
reuse in the manufacturing process.
Water Reuse in a Paper Reprocessing Plant
Big Chief Roofing Company
Ardmore, Oklahoma
This project is concerned with the treatment of paper repro-
cessing wastewater in a facility designed for water reuse. The
economic feasibility of wastewater recycle and various treat-
ment alternatives will be determined from lab and full-scale
tests.
69
-------
CHAPTER TEN
Public
Participation
and Advisory
Groups
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION—
"THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT
INGREDIENT"
EPA is unique among Federal agencies in the
scope of its public participation responsibilities.
No Agency has received a broader Congressional
mandate to encourage public involvement in a
program than did EPA in section 101(e) of the
1972 FWPC Act amendments. The Act requires
that the Agency encourage, assist and provide for
public participation in virtually every significant
aspect of the water program.
This commitment to public involvement, which
EPA Administrator Russell E. Train has called
"the single most important ingredient in the envi-
ronmental management process," requires much
more than traditional forms of public involve-
ment. Imaginative new programs which actively
promote public activism are essential. If reaching
the public by tape cassette— a creative, success-
ful approach developed in EPA Region V— is
more effective than the printed word, then tapes
should be used. Furthermore, more innovative pro-
grams should be attempted. Unfortunately, while
several new programs have been created, much
remains to be done.
Continuing Programs.—Some agency public
involvement activities, though traditional, are still
essential to a sound public participation program.
Through its Public Affairs Offices, the Agency dis-
tributes more than fifteen booklets and pamphlets
explaining the water program and informing citi-
zens about means for involvement. The Agency
and the States have conducted numerous public
hearings, as required by law or requested by citi-
zens, dealing with all major programs in the Act.
During 1974, public meetings included:
• State Program Plans (in seventeen States).
• The Construction Grants Program (all States).
• The State Basin Plans (sixty meetings across
the nation).
• The Areawide Waste Treatment Plans (twen-
ty-seven hearings).
• Industrial Permits (approximately one hun-
dred hearings).
EPA also utilizes a wide range of advisory
committees to promote continuing consultation
between its program officials and public or private
interests affected by the water program. Among
the most active of these is the Committee of Ten,
formed in 1972 to bring together State water
planning officials with Regional Administrators,
Deputy Regional Administrators and senior EPA
Headquarters staff for discussion of water pollu-
tion programs. Committee members, each repre-
senting an EPA Region and selected by constitu-
ent States in each Region, consult with State offi-
cials before and after Committee delibe'rations.
The Committee, working also through numerous
subcommittees dealing with each major program
in the Act, assures continuing communication
between EPA officials at all levels and local inter-
ests affected by Agency activities.
A New Direction.—Publications, public hear-
ings and advisory committees, however, are not
enough to satisfy the requirements of section
101(e). In an effort to communicate directly with
the public and activate its interest in water pro-
grams, several more innovative public participa-
tion activities in addition to the tape cassette pro-
gram were planned and implemented during 1974.
70
-------
Among the most successful was a three-phase
public involvement program begun in 1974 with
"Water Quality Training Institutes" conducted in
each Region by the Conservation Foundation
under an EPA grant. The Institutes, attended by
863 individuals representing a variety of public
and private groups, informed participants about
the goals and procedures of the water program in
great detail and with particular attention to meth-
ods of citizen influence. To intensify the Insti-
tutes' impact, follow-up "Workshops", organized
by Institute participants, were held in each State;
more than 8,000 individuals attended 105 Work-
shops. The final phase, an Awareness/Information
Program, will bring the activity to local communi-
ties.
During 1975, forty-six program leaders and 36
groups will work to stimulate local interest in the
Act. This program is aimed especially at non-en-
vironmental groups—those commonly least at-
tuned to water pollution control activities. Lead-
ers in the Awareness/Involvement Program accept
a responsibility to speak formally to at least twen-
ty such organizations within their area of geo-
graphical responsibility.
Despite such useful programs, much more
should be done. The public is vitally affected by
the program but often cannot readily understand
its complexities. In particular, "translating" the
program into layman's terms and involving the
public in the early planning stages of policy—as
the Act requires—involve sustained, face-to-face
contact between the public and program officials.
More Must be Done.—What more could be
done? Special participation activities tailored to
specific programs could be organized as such pro-
grams assume particular national importance.
Within the next two years, for example, extensive
planning for areawide waste treatment programs
will be conducted across the United States, and
public participation will be a major program
objective.
EPA is currently encouraging designated 208
agencies to seek out actively the publics affected
by their program and to explain its implications in
terms readily understandable to laymen. About
7.5% of the $163 million granted to these agencies
for areawide waste treatment planning will be al-
located for public involvement activities—a poten-
tially important source of funding for such a pro-
A concerned public is essential to the nation's clean water goal. (Fly fishing in salmon stream below paper plant east of
Bangor, Maine.)
71
-------
gram. The innovative programs so far accom-
plished suggest the constructive possibilities in
public participation as envisioned by section
101(e). The challenge is to bring these activities
closer to the objectives of the Act in quality and
variety.
ADVISORY COMMITTEES
ES +WQIAC
The Effluent Standards and Water Quality In-
formation Advisory Committee (ES -I- WQIAC) is
a statutory committee created under section 515
of the FWPCA and rechartered under section 9(c)
of the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
The legislative mandate of the Committee was
to provide and evaluate scientific and technical
information on industrial point source discharges
and toxic effluents, and to transmit this informa-
tion to the Administrator for his use in fulfilling
the obligations of sections 304(b), 306, and 317(a)
of the FWPCA.
During the fiscal year the committee has:
• Continued an ongoing review of effluent limi-
tations for possible review and updating.
• Conducted a series of meetings with public
interest groups on the economic implications
and environmental impact of FWPCA.
• Made recommendations to the Assistant
Administrator for Research and Development
on ways to improve agency capability to
meet the requirements of FWPCA.
• Published special reports on toxic substances,
information utilization by EPA, and a report
to the House Committee on Public Works on
ES + WQIAC's first year activities.
• Made available to EPA, Federal agencies,
individuals, law firms, and public interest
groups information developed by the above
activities and other committee research, hear-
ings, conferences, and seminars.
Water Pollution Control
Advisory Board
The Water Pollution Control Advisory Board
was created by section 503 of the FWPCA. The
Act mandates that the Board advise the Adminis-
trator on policy issues arising under the FWPCA.
The Board held its final meeting from July 16-
19, 1974, in Seattle. Based on the meeting and
presentations by interested persons and represent-
atives of private industry, trade associations and
public interest groups, the Board made the follow-
ing recommendations:
• That EPA adopt more flexible effluent guide-
lines: the Board concurred with ES +
WQIAC's recommendation that a matrix ap-
proach be adopted.
• That EPA speed up processing of construc-
tion grant applications, thus reducing con-
struction cost increases pending grant ap-
proval.
• That EPA make a special effort to increase
the efficiency of information transfer to pri-
vate industry.
• That EPA transfer enforcement of FWPCA
to the States as soon as possible.
• The Board opposed adoption of any Federal
land use plan amounting to a Federal zoning
law.
The Water Pollution Control Advisory Board
was not rechartered under the Federal Advisory
Committee Act. The Board terminated as of Janu-
ary 1975.
72
-------
APPENDIX A
Compliance
Through
Federal
Procurement
Activities
INTRODUCTION
Section 508 of the Federal Water Pollution Con-
trol Act, "Federal Procurement," is designed to
utilize the contract, grant and loan authorities of
all agencies of the Federal government as a means
of encouraging private citizen compliance with the
Act. The section requires the President to submit
an annual report to the Congress on measures
taken in compliance with the purpose and intent
of this section. This Appendix is submitted in
response to that directive.
LEGAL AUTHORITY
Section 508 provides two distinct mechanisms
for promoting compliance by private citizens with
the provisions of the FWPC Act. First, section
508(a) prohibits any Federal agency from entering
into any procurement contract with any person
who has been convicted of a criminal offense
under section 309 of the Act, if the contract is to
be performed at any facility at which the violation
giving rise to the conviction-occurred and if the
person owned, leased or supervised the facility.
In addition, section 508(c) directs the President
to issue an Executive Order requiring each Feder-
al agency to utilize its contract, grant and loan
processes to effectuate the purposes of the Act
and to set forth procedures, sanctions, penalties
and such other provisions as the President deter-
mines necessary to carry out the section. The
President is empowered (section 508(d) to exempt
any contract, loan or grant from the provisions of
the section on the basis of paramount national
interest.
Section 508 is comparable to the language of
section 306 of the Clean Air Act, as amended (40
U.S.C. 1857 et seq.).
EXECUTIVE ORDER 11738
AND IMPLEMENTING REGULATIONS
The President issued Order 11738, mandated by
section 508(c), on September 10, 1973. This order
supersedes E.G. 11602, issued under the Air Act.
It uses the same language as the prior Order but
is applicable to both the Air and Water Acts.
Section 5 of Executive Order 11738 requires the
Administrator to issue implementing rules and
regulations. Regulations implementing the air re-
quirements were promulgated in the Federal Reg-
ister on December 27, 1973 (40 C.F.R. part 1538,
F.R. 35310). On April 16, 1975, EPA promulgated
regulations to revise the previously promulgated
air regulations and incorporate appropriate provi-
sions of section 508 and Executive Order 11738.
These regulations essentially repeat the require-
ments of the December 27, 1973, air regulations
but make them applicable to both the Air and
Water Acts. The regulations provide for the es-
tablishment of a List of Violating Facilities. This
list will identify any facilities that are ineligible
for use in a Federal contract, grant, or loan for
reasons associated with the Clean Air Act or the
FWPC act.
The regulations' bases for listing a facility are
not limited to Federal criminal convictions. (See
73
-------
Description of Program, below.) EPA believes
that both section 508(c) of the Act and sections 1,
5, and 7 of the executive Order call for expansion
of the bases for listing beyond that narrow
ground.
First, section 508(c), which calls for the execu-
tive order, is independent of section 508(a): it re-
fers to both contracting and assistance activities
and vests the President with broad authority to
carry out the purposes of the section. In contrast,
section 508(a) refers only to one, non-discretionary
basis for listing i.e., a Federal criminal conviction,
and it pertains only to contracts.
The Executive Order is also consistent with the
wider approach. Section I defines the purposes of
section 508 broadly as "to assure that each Feder-
al agency . . . shall undertake procurement and
assistance activities in a manner that will result in
effective enforcement of the Water and Air
Acts." Section 5 directs the Administrator to is-
sue rules and regulations as he deems necessary
and appropriate to carry out the purposes of the
order, and section 7 further authorizes the Admin-
istrator to take appropriate action in cases of
noncompliance.
Thus, both section 508(c) of the Act and var-
ious sections of the executive order authorize the
Administrator to go beyond the one mandatory
basis of listing facilities which violate the Act.
The Administrator's regulations reflect the broad-
er reach of the program.
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
EPA is required by its regulations to publish in
the Federal Register and periodically revise the
List of Violating Facilities. The program estab-
lished in the regulations published on April 16,
1975, was made effective to contract, grant and
loan activities of all Federal agencies as of July 1.
The listing relates strictly to the facility, not to
the entire company. Only the specific facilities
listed by EPA will be ineligible for Federal con-
tracts, grants and loans.
Facilities will be listed upon a determination by
EPA of continuing or recurring noncompliance
with clean water (or air) standards. Any facility
giving rise to a Federal criminal conviction must
be listed, in keeping with section 508(a) of the
Act. Facilities may also be listed as a result of
State or local criminal conviction or Federal,
State or local civil adjudication or administrative
finding.
The program applies to any contract, subcon-
tract, grant, subgrant, or subloan in excess of
$100,000 as well as any contract of a lesser
amount involving a facility listed on the basis of a
Federal criminal conviction.
When Federal criminal conviction is the basis
for listing, removal will not occur until the Ad-
ministrator certifies that the condition which gave
rise to the conviction has been completely cor-
rected. For State and local criminal convictions
and Federal, State and local civil adjudications or
administrative findings, removal will not occur
until EPA enters into an approved plan of compli-
ance which will ensure the condition which gave
rise to the listing has been corrected.
In order to insure due process, no facility will
be listed until its representatives have been af-
forded an opportunity for a Listing Proceeding, at
which time the representatives may confer with
and present information to the Director of the
Office of Federal Activities, EPA. If a request to
de-list is denied, representatives of the facility
will be afforded a hearing before an EPA hearing
officer, with a fair opportunity to present evidence
and cross-examine witnesses.
It must be emphasized that this program is an
additional arm of the EPA enforcement effort. It
is primarily designed to encourage voluntary
compliance, not to penalize a facility.
IMPLEMENTATION WITHIN THE
FEDERAL ESTABLISHMENT
Each Agency of the Executive Branch is obli-
gated under section 4 of the Executive Order to
implement the listing program through its con-
tract, grant and loan activities. Implementation
involves amending the Federal Procurement Regu-
lations (FPR), the Armed Services Procurement
Regulations (ASPR), and any supplemental or
comparable regulations, as well as maintaining
close coordination with EPA to insure that re-
quirements of the program are fully carried out.
The FPR (which guides civilian agencies),
ASPR and NASA and ERDA procurement regula-
tions have now been amended. Various agency
grant and loan provisions have also been amended
to carry out the requirements of the program.
Contact points within each Federal agency have
been identified to receive EPA's List of Violating
Facilities. The list will be distributed periodically
and, to insure prompt implementation, every time
a new facility is added to the list.
74
-------
Under the FPR and ASPR contract provisions
each bidder must certify when bidding on a par-
ticular contract that he is not on EPA's List of
Violating Facilities and that he will promptly noti-
fy the contracting officer of the receipt of any
communication that he is under consideration for
listing. If a particular basis for listing has been
identified against a facility but the facility is not
on the EPA list, the Director of the Office of
Federal activities, EPA, may request that an
award of a particular contract be withheld for a
period not exceeding fifteen days pending comple-
tion of an investigation.
The contract provisions also require that con-
tractual provisions be inserted in every non-ex-
empt Federal contract. The contractor must agree
that no portion of the work will be performed at a
facility on the EPA list; that he will comply with
the clean water (and air) standards issued prior to
the contract award as well as with the record-
keeping and inspections requirements under the
Air and Water Acts; that he will use his best ef-
forts to comply with clean water (and air) stand-
ards where the facility has not been listed prior to
award; and that the contractor will insert these
same requirements in any non-exempt subcon-
tract. This last provision illustrates the reach of
the program to cover all subcontractors.
These same requirements have been inserted in
various agency regulations covering grants and
loans.
It is emphasized that the awarding agency must
determine whether the solicitation and contract
provisions are being followed, and that each agen-
cy of the Federal government can assist in the
effectiveness of the program by encouraging con-
tractors to comply with clean water and air stand-
ards. Also the head of each agency has a respon-
sibility to ensure that all officers and employees of
his agency involved in the contract, grant, or loan
process be familiar with the regulations. To fur-
ther assist EPA in implementation, the head of
each agency has a responsibility to report prompt-
ly to EPA any conditions in a facility which may
involve noncompliance with water or air stand-
ards.
•ft U S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE-1977 O—593-021 75
------- |