I PRELIMINARY REPORT
-------
-------
CONTENTS
I. Introduction Page 1
II. Explanation of the Survey Page 1
III. Results of the Survey Page 3
IV. Comparison of Results of the 1973
and 1974 Surveys Page 4
V. Comparability of State Reported Needs Page 4
VI. Conclusion Page 5
VII. Tables of Reported Needs Page 5
Appendix A. January 31, 1974 Letter to
States from EPA Page A-l
Appendix B. Survey Methodology Page B-l
-------
-------
STATE ESTIMATES OF COSTS OF CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLICLY-OWNED TREATMENT WORKS
1974 "NEEDS" SURVEY
I. INTRODUCTION
This preliminary report presents State estimates of the cost of
construction of publicly-owned treatment works needed to meet the
1983 goals of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments
(FWPCA) of 1972. The report is submitted in compliance with Sections
516(b)(2) and 205(a) of the FWPCA, as further amended by Public Law
93-243. These provisions of the law had the dual purpose of obtaining
a comprehensive estimate of the cost of meeting the goals of the
FWPCA, and of'estimating these costs State by State as a possible
basis for allocation of construction grant funds authorized after
Fiscal Year 1975. I
/ I
Public Law 93-243 requirea that these estimates be obtained
by a Nation-wide survey utiliz/ing a modified version of the
survey questionnaire prepared for the 1973 "Needs" Survey. To
comply with the legislative purpose of obtaining a comprehensive
estimate of all the costs of meeting the 1983 goals of the FWPCA,
the guidelines for the 1974 Survey were far less constraining than
those utilized in the 1973 Survey, which was restricted to documented
needs necessary to meet the 1977 requirements of the FWPCA.
II. EXPLANATION OF THE SURVEY
The 1974 Survey asked the States to report their cost estimates in
the five major categories used in the 1973 Survey. Two of these
categories were divided for the 1974 Survey. The categories are
briefly described below:
Category I - This includes costs for facilities which would
provide a legally required level of "secondary treatment," or "best
practicable wastewater treatment technology (BPWTT)." For the
purposes of the Survey,,BPWTT and secondary treatment were to
be considered synonymous.
Category II - Costs reported in this category are for treatment
facilities that must achieve more stringent levels of treatment.
This requirement exists where water quality standards require removal
of such pollutants as phosphorous, ammonia, nitrates, or organic
substances.
-------
-------
Category IIIA - This includes costs for correction of sewer
system infiltration/inflow problems. Costs could also be reported
for a preliminary sewer system analysis and for the more detailed
Sewer System Evaluation Survey.
Category 11 IB - Requirements for replacement or major rehabilitation
of existing sewage collection systems are reported in this category.
Costs were to be reported if the corrective actions were necessary
to the total integrity of the system. Major rehabilitation is
considered extensive repair of existing sewers beyond the scope
of normal maintenance programs.
Category IVA - This category consists of costs for construction
of collector sewer systems designed to correct violations caused by
raw discharges, seepage to waters from septic tanks and the like,
and/or to comply with Federal, State or local actions.
Category IVB - This category consists of costs of new interceptor
sewers and transmission pumping stations necessary for the bulk transport
of wastewaters.
Category V - Coi-ts reported for this category are to prevent
periodic bypass"!r.g ot untreated wastes from combined sewers to an
extent violating water quality standards or effluent limitations.
It does not include treatment and/or control of stormwaters.
States were also asked to make a rough cost estimate in a sixth
category, "Treatment and/or Control of Stormwater." This includes
the costs of abating pollution from stormwater run-off channelled
through sewers and other conveyances used only for such run-off. The
costs of abating pollution from stormwater channelled through combined
sewers which also carry sewage are included in Category V. Category
VI was added so the survey would provide an estimate of all eligible
facility costs, as explicitly required by Public Law 93-243.
The estimates were to be reported in June 1973 dollars, and
are therefore comparable to the costs in the 1973 Survey. Estimates
were also to be based on the projected 1990 population as in the
1973 Survey.
The 1974 Survey was initiated January 31, 1974, when a letter
with a general outline of how the survey would be conducted was
distributed to each State along with a copy of the questionnaire.
A copy of the letter is included as Appendix A.
-------
The States assumed responsibility for seeing that the Survey
questionnaires were completed. They had the option, as in 1973, of
completing a Survey questionnaire for each facility themselves, or
forwarding a questionnaire to each local sewerage authority for completion.
A more detailed description of how the Survey was conducted is included
as Appendix B.
III. RESULTS OF THE SURVEY
The States tabulated and reported to EPA the totals of the questionnaires
filled out in their jurisdiction. The last of the State estimates have
just been received and are included without alteration of any kind in
the tables in Section VII. The total of all State estimates and their
comparison with the 1973 totals are summarized by category as follows:
Category
I. Secondary Treatment
II. More Stringent Treatment
Required by Water Quality
IIIA. " Correction of Sewer
Infi1trati on/1nf 1 ow
11 IB. Major Sewer
Rehabilitation
IVA. Collector Sewers
IVB. Interceptor Sewers
V. Correction of Combined
Sewer Overflows
TOTAL
(Millions of 1973 Dollars)
1973
1974
Change
16,639 11,679 -4,960
5,650 21,311 +15,661
691 5,355 +4,664
7,070 +7,070
10,825 23,090 +12,265
13,621 19,932 +6,311
10,825 26,070 +15,245
60,123 114,607 +54,384
Included in the 1974'figures above is $53 billion for Categories I,
II and IVB that reflect the costs for the traditional Water Quality
Program of treatment plants and interceptors. The State estimates for
the new Category VI (treatment and/or control of stormwaters) are $235
billion. Total costs for all categories reported in the Survey therefore
came to $350 billion.
The Agency believes the total estimates reported in the Survey
greatly overstate the cost of meeting the 1983 goals of the FWPCA.
Category VI in particular exaggerates the cost of abating pollution from
stormwater overflows. States reporting large requirements in this
category assumed that a stringent level of abatement for very large
geographical areas would be necessary to meet water quality standards.
The state of the art is not such that the Agency can provide an alternative
estimate for this category, but the few studies which have been conducted
-------
-------
to assess the impact of stormwater on water quality, and the costs of
abating such impact, indicate that the actual requirements in this
category will be only a fraction of the total reported by the States.
IV. COMPARISON OF RESULTS OF THE 1973 AND 1974 SURVEYS
The costs reported in 1974 for the traditional Water Quality
Program of treatment plants and interceptors (Categories I, II and IVB)
are $17 billion greater than the $36 billion reported in the 1973 Survey.
The costs reported in 1974 for Categories I - V are $55 billion greater
than the $60 billion reported in the 1973 Survey. The primary reasons
for the increase were the elimination in 1974 of most of the reporting
constraints included in the 1973 Survey and apparent over-estimation of
the needs.
Estimates for treatment plants and interceptors (Categories I, II
and IVB) could be based on water quality standards anticipated by the
States for the future and were not limited to those already established
in the past, as in 1973. Estimates for Category III could be reported
for major rehabilitation of sewer systems as well as correction of
infiltration and inflow. Major rehabilitation costs of $7 billion were
reported which were not eligible in the earlier Survey. These estimates
did not have to be documented with an analysis and detailed evaluation
of the problem as in 1973. Many States reported costs in Category IVA
for collector systems for new communities, which were ineligible under
the 1973 Survey guidelines because they would not qualify for Federal
grant assistance. Estimates reported for correction of combined sewer
overflows in Category V were not limited in 1974 by the previous requirement
that they be based on an evaluation of the most economical and/or effective
alternative.
V. COMPARABILITY OF STATE REPORTED NEEDS
The Agency has conducted a preliminary assessment of the comparability
of the State reported estimates after monitoring the progress of the
Survey in the States, conducting a limited review of questionnaires, and
evaluating State reports on the Survey. Major variations have been
identified in the criteria and methodology used by the States when
making their estimates. For example, some States reported costs for
collector sewers for new qommunities, and others did not. The study of
technologies for correcting combined sewer overflows (Category V) and
treatment/or control of stormwaters (Category VI) is in the very early
stages, and many of the States' estimates are based only on a preliminary
judgment as to what solution would be most appropriate for a particular
facility.
-------
-------
The Agency also found indications of variations from the 1974
guidelines. Examples of such variations are:
Use of State-wide population trends substantially
higher than the authorized Census Bureau Series "E"
projections for 1990.
Use of design years further into the future than 1990,
the design year adopted for the Survey.
Increase of 1973 reported estimates without a change
in degree of treatment, size, capacity or other substantiation.
\
These variations are reflected in large differences in per capita
costs as shown in tables 4 and 5.
VI. CONCLUSION
The Agency has serious reservations about using the preliminary
estimates reported in the 1974 Survey for future allocation of construction
funds 'among the States.
VII. TABLES OF REPORTED NEEDS
Attached are five (5) tables, as follows:
Table 1 - Shows the distribution of cost for each State, Categories
I - V.
Table 2 - Reflects cost and percentage comparison between 1973
and 1974 of combined Categories I, II, III, IV and V.
Table 3 - Shows cost and percentage comparison between 1973 and
1974 of combined Categories I, II and IVB.
Table 4 - Shows a comparison of per capita costs between 1973 and
1974 for Categories I through V based on 1972 population
figures.
Table 5 - Shows total and per capita costs reported for Category VI
by State.
-------
TABLE 1
SEPTEMBER 3, 1974
1974 COSTS* REPORTED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLICLY-OWNED WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
(CATEGORIES I-V)
('MILLIONS OF 1973 DOLLARS)
CATEGORIES
TOTALS
REGION I
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
Nev Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
TOTAL
n't, 507
1,620
597
3,375
876
517
220
I
TREATMENT :
SECONDARY/
11,679
181
130
721
165
68
36
II
TREATMENT :
MORE STRIN-
GENT LEVELS
21,311
85
5
222
95
30
61*
IIIA
CORRECTION
OF INFILTRA-
TION/INFLOW
5,355
23
1
36
26
1*
8
IltB
MAJOR
REHABILI-
TATION
7,070
36
3
31
0
1
3
IVA
NEW
COLLECTOR
SEWERS
23,090
328
112
902
218
193
37
IVB
NEW
INTERCEPTORS
19,932
265
11*9
597
181 '
131*
35
V
COMBINED
SEWER
OVERFLOW
26,070
702
197
866
191
87
37
REGION II
Nev Jersey
Nev York ••
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
REGION III
Delavare
Maryland
Virginia
Wsssf, Virginia
Pennsylvania
Dist.of Columbia
U.600
17.318
665
1*5
51*7
3,909
2J.82
l*,259
5,579
1,051*
1 ,061
6l6
177
13
67
9
1*78
115
1,028
0
666
2.593
0
0
32
1,705
381*
338
201
68
?T|
1*65
ll*
1
100
50
293
156
89
1*1
168
?.108
0
0
67
1,133
50
5
57
217
685
l*.l*67
21*5
12
65 .
ll*6
298
1.752
1,185
0
909
2.06S
211
19
101
839
1*72
1.698
625
2
909
5.001*
18
0
115
27
207
195
2,391*
726
REGION IV
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky *«
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
707
3,568
1,585
2.01U
'H33
1,1*31*
1,012
1,308
86
595
212
63
36
ll*9
3U7
121
168
633
500
319
170
516
1*7
285
92
1*1*
10
56
1*2
53
ll*
77
5
1*1*
2
68
28
0
0
12
187
1,326
269
1*56
57
331*
255
396
169
926
308
373
96
382
31*9
307
0
0
281*
679
2
0
0
110
REGION V
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Wisconsin
REGION VI
Arkansas
Louisiana
Nev Mexico
Texas
Oklahoma
i*,9i*5
3,OOU
5,323
1,31*7
7,61*6
2,311
1,338
1,521*
156
3,H5U
2,071
250
217
11*8
69
26
181*
0
232
52
0
0
1,832
378
653
1*07
1,508
1*21
519
120
8
2,162
576
181*
153
97
52
635
80
63
351
it
206
67
61*
187
1*59
lit
115
131
0
97
1
187
556
1*73
337
1,021
20U
626
1*27
1*1*5
1*38
53
713
176
1*1*9
303
1,009
233
01*6
1*1*7
309
285
38
1*68
696
1.693
1,1*29
Li936
368
3,790
621
2
1
0
118
0
REGION VII
lova
Kansas
Missouri
Nebraska
991
2. 518
2.36?
981*
157
263
1*6Q
193
216
71
88
12
126
587
219
^9
10
326
Q
1
i?U
861
^fl?
1*1
?^p
?<37
^ln
67
ipfi
n? .
878
fin
REGION VIII
Colorado
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Utah
Wyoming
REGIOH IX
Arizona
California
Havaii
Nevada
American Samoa
Guam
?ra»t Territories
713
129
201*
77
295
133
613
6,997
520
316
55
116
190
96
1*0
61
33
196
62
166
1,016
203
1*2
8
36
90
203
18
0
32
0
0
9
2,687
27
102
0
10
18
29
1*
1
1
ll*
0
1
353
0
1
0
1
2
21*
2
-1
0
2
0
I
1*5
0
0
1
0
0
123
?2
68
2
59
56
332
811
80
126
28
53
55
?i?
35
?1*
O
?1*
15
101*
1,181.
210
1*5
13
16
25
?6
8
sn
n
n
n
0
900
0
0
0
0
0
REGION X
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
299
1*77
1,11*1*
2,1*15
122
58
11*7
578
0
61*
0
1*1*
1*
23
57
95
z
16
325
1*65
98
180
192
558
6k
100
161
352
9
36
262
323
** The following additional needs, not included in this report, were received after the Survey closing date:
NEW YORK $592 MILLION
KENTUCKY $301 MILLION
-------
-------
TABLE 2 SEPTEMBER 3, 1971
STATE NEEDS AND PERCENTAGE OF NATIONAL COSTS* REPORTED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLICLY-OWNED
WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITIES
(CATEGORIES I-V)
('MILLIONS OF 1973 DOLLARS)
Costs
Percentage of national Totals
TOTALS
ION I
Connecticut
.iue
.ssachusetts
ev Hampshire
hode Island
'ermont
1973
60.12?
1.1*09
36V
1,1*85
508
367
168
1971*
111*. 507
1.620
597
3,375
876
517
220
Change from
1973 to 1971*
+5U.381*
+211
+233
+1,890
+368
+150
+52
1973
100.0000
2.31*35
0.605!*
2.1*699
0.81*1*9
0.610U
0.2791*
1971*
100.0000
1.1*11*7
0.5213
2.9H71*
0.7650
0.1*515
0.1921
Change from
1973 to 197'*
+0.0000
-0.9287
-0.681*0
+0.1*771*
-0.0798
-6.1588
-0.0872
ION II
ev Jersey
ev York
uerto Hico
irgin Islands
101 III
elavare
" ryland
train!*'
tast V^r-flnia
^nn ?T! Yftu f *
ist.of Coluabia
IOH IV
labana
lorida
•eorttia
lentucky
iMinipDl
ortb Carolina
knrth C«f olina
'eoneseee
rIOH V
JUinois
.ndiaoa
lchi«n
innesota
hio
isconain
3.382
8.032
590
1*1*
329
681
1,31*5
6ll*
1*,210
1,081
1*1*1*
2.371
1.031
1.032
268
900
757
695
1*,089
1,01*0
3.325
1,065
2,833
787
1».609
17.318
665
1*5
51*7
3,909
2,182
1*,259
5,579
1,051*
707
3.568
1.581;
2.011*
1*33
1.1*31*
1.012
1.308
l*.9l*5
3,001*
5j.3_23
1,31*7
7,61*6
2.311
+1.227
+9.286
+75
+1
+218
+3,228
+837
+3,61*5
+1,369
-27
+26^!
+1.1Q7
+55U
+982
+165
+ 531*
+255
+613
+856
+1.96U
+1 ,398
+282
+1*,813
+1,521*
5.6251
13.3592
0.9813
0.0731
0.51*72
1.1326
2.2370
1.0212
7.0023
1.7979
0.738U
3.0.1*35
1.71U8
1.7161*
0.1*1*57
1.1*Q6Q
1.2590
1.1559
6.8010
1.7297
5.5303
1.7713
H.7120
1.3089
U.0250
15.1239
0.5807
0.0392
0.1*777
3.1*137
1.9055
3.719**
U.8721
0.92Q1*
0.63,7!*
3.1159
1.381*1
1.7S88
0.3781
1.2523
0.8837
1.11*22
I*.3l85
2.6231*
1*. 61*86
1.1763
6.6773
2.0182
-1.6000
+1.761*6
-0.1*005
-0.0338
-0.0691*
+2.2810
-0.3311*
• +2.6981
1-2.1301
' -0,8771*
-0.1 ?OQ
-0.8275
-0.3306
+0.01*23
-0.0675
-q. 21*1*5
-0.3752
-0.0136
-2.1*821*
+0.8936
-0.8816
-0.591*9
+1.9652
+0.7092
105 VI
irkaaoas
ouisiana
•v Mexico
If**
kliOuuiuj
?ss
1*51
115
888
621*
1,^8
Ii52l*
156
3,851*
2,071
+QR1
+1,073
+1*1
+2,966
+1,1*1*7
0.5901*
0.7501
0.1912
1.1*769
1.0378
1.1681*
1.3309
0.1362
3.3657
1.8086
+0.5779
+0.5807
.0. 05l*9
+1.8887
+0.7707
rIOIt VII
ova
lansaa
issouri
ebraska
502
671
972
1*01*
QQ1
2,518
2,369
98!i
+l*fiq
+1,81*7
+1,397
+ 580
0.831*9
1.1160
1.6166
0.6719
0.865"*
2.1989
2 . 0688
0.8593
+0.0301*
+1 . 0828
+0.1*521
+0.1873
,IOH VIII
.olorado
ontana
orth Dakota
>oatb Dakota
tab
fyapivf
IOH ff
irisom
^iftMMi*
•wi
^•ft
«fjc*n Sanoa
l"^f
*»ftit.' fmrltnl-l Of,
IOTX
a»*ka
dajko i )
ir«oon
fashiiurton
1*26
71*
1*6
1*3
225
1*0
238
6.050
523
227
8
22
' 8
205
112
568
1,080
71^1
129
201*
77
2Q5
133
613
6.997
520
316
55
116
190
299
1*77
1.11*1*
2,1*15
+287
+55
+158
+31*
+70
+93
+375
+91*7
-3
+89
+1*7
+9!*
+182
+2.1*
+365
+ 576
+1 , 335
0.708«i
0.123Q
0.076"5
0.0715
0.371*2
0.0665
0.3958
10.0627
0.8698
0.3775
0.0133
0.0365
0 . 0133
0.31*09
0.1862
O.Ql*l*7
1.7963
n.6??fi
0.1126
0 J.781
0.0672
0.2576
Q.lljgl
Q 5353
6.1105
0 1*51*1
0.2759
o.oi*8o
0.1013
04659
0 . 26^.1
o.l*i6s
0 QQQO
2.1090
-f> nSsfi
-0 0103
' +0 1 01 s
-O.OQlt?
-n 116s
+Q Ol*QS
+0 1^Q1*
-3.0S21
_Q Ul5(j
-n.ica^
+0 03l*6
+0.061*7
+0,1 S2C,
-0.0797
+p P30?
+n osU?
+0.3126
-------
-------
TABLE 3 SEPTEMBER 3, 1974
STATE NEEDS AND PERCENTAGE OF NATIONAL COSTS* REPORTED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF TREATMENT PLANTS
AND INTERCEPTORS
(CATEGORIES I, II, IVB)
(•MILLIONS OF 1973 DOLLARS)
Percentage of National Totals
TOTALS
1973
35,910
197l(
52,922
Change from
1973 to 197l(
+17,012
1973
100.0000
1971*
100.0000
Change r,-,r<
1973 tc l-i 1.
+O.OuOG
REGION I
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
1*30
260
761
339
162
115
531
281*
1,51(0
1(1*1
232
135
+101
+2l*
+779
+102
+70
+20
1,1971*
0.721(0
2.1191
0.1*5_11
0.3202
1.003?
0.5366
2.9099
0.8333
0.1*383
0.2550
-0.19i,r,
-0.18? -.
+0.790 ,'
-0.11 Of'
-0.0127
-0.06M
REGION 11
New Jersey
New York
Puerto Rico
Vlrjtin Islands
2,630
I*,l65
391*
32
2.636
5,27l(
388
32
+6
+1.109
-6
+0
7.3238
11.5985
1.0971
0.0891
k Qfin9
9.0656
0.7331
0.0601*
-? ^,-,1
-l .63^0
-0 . ?fi2 /
-0.0266
HEGIOH III
Delaware
Maryland
Vir-CTln1»
W»«+. Virginia
P«nn=y1m*
2,151
1,851*
70
-1
+1,970
+336
+1,828
+299
+18
0.5597
1.6235
2.7792
0.8995
lt.3303
O.ll*l*8
0.3779
l*.82l*0
2.5206
3.5032
0.1322
-0.16:
-0.256
+3.1fctt
-0.82- -
-o.oi: -.
REGIOH IV
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
•orth Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
310
1.590
777
573
223
7l*9
569
1*67
1(23
2.15U
1.020
755
301*
1.01(7
7U3
713
+113
+561*
+21*3
+182
+81
+298
+17l*
+21*6
0.8633
1*. 1(277
2.1638
1.5957
0.6210
2.0858
1.581(5
1.3005
0.7992
1*.0701
1.9273
1.1*266
0.571*1*
1.9783
1.1*039
1.31*72
-O.UD"'..
-0.357;
-O.P361
-0.165?
-O.ol.f •
-0.107-
-o.:S -
+0.rAr '-
REOI;OH v
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Wisconsin
REGIOH VI
Arkansas
Louisiana
lev Mexico
Tfuaa
(JVJ.l™—,
REOIOH VII
low
Kansas
Missouri
Hebraska
HEGIOS VIII
Cojormac
Montana
Borth Dakota
Sfijf^h Dakota
tttaji
Wjuatnc
2,l67_
51*2
1,1*60
538
1.81*1
1*86
221*
251
66
656
1*85
1*21
332
780
lUl
310
59
30
1*0
170
30
2,531
898
1,810
709
2,1*80
1,052
828
637
98
2.630
1.272
605
631
889
272
511
93
85
71*
220
77
+361*
+356
+350
+171
+639
+566
+6ol*
+386
+32
+1.971*
+787
+181*
+299
+109
+131
+201
+3l*
+55
+31*
+50
+1(7
6.031(5
1.5093
1*.0657_
1.1*982
5.1267
1.3531*
0.6238
0.6990
0.1838
1.8268
1 3506
> .1721*
0.921*5
P.1721
0.?927
0.86??
0.161*3
0.0836
O.llll*
0.1*731*
0.0836
lt.7825
1.6968
3 . 1*201
1 . 3327
1* . 6861
1.9878
1.561(5
1 .?036
0.1851
1(.9695
?. 1*035
1.11*31
1.192?
1.6798
0.51?9
0.9655
0.1757
0.1606
0.1398
0.1*157
O.ll*5l*
-l.J;,
+0.1R"1.
-0.61 .,
-O.1 '''-
-O/ L. '
+0.'
+0.9',
+0 '/C> •
+0 . r.,(j
+?. Htt
+1 .J-,
-O.Ot-!
+n . p6 '
-0 U9< ;
+0.1:.
+01^"
+0 . 01-
+0.07^9
+0 . 02ft (
-0.05'r
+0.061"
i
%mk
ABer: SID Samoa
Gam*
?B||i Territories
WBIOTX
Alaska
Mlft° I'
Oreaon
Washington
15?
l*.7l*3
!*39
205
7
20
6
!">•}
76
536
?79
1*.887
1*1*0
189
26
62
133
iftfi
222
?n8
971*
+127
+l!*l*
+1
-16
+19
+1*2
+127
+33
+ll*6
+22
+1*38
0.1*?3?
1 3 ?080
0.5709
0.0195
0.0557
0.0167
n 1*261
0.2117
0 7961*
1.1*926
0 5271
Q ?3l*3
0.3571
0.01*91
0.1171
0.2513
0 35ll*
o 1*191*
0 5819
1 81*01*
+0.] Ojh
-3.97^'
-0.2137
+0.0295
+o.o6r-
+0.°3)^
Q .07U0
+0 . 20 i 6
-0 ^^^ I
+0 3.^7r
-------
-------
TABLE
SEPTEMBER 3, 1974
COrtPARATIVE PER CAPITA COSTS REPORTED FOR CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLICLY-OWNED TREATMENT FACILITIES
BASED ON 1972 POPULATION
(CATEGORIES I-V)
(•MILLIONS OF 1973 DOLLARS)
TOTALS
REGION I
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
REGION II
New Jersey
Nev York
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
1973
Costs*
60.123
1.1*09
361*
1.1*85
508
367
168
3,382
8,032
590
1.1*
1971*
Costs*
111*. 507
1,620
597
. 3.375
876
517
220
1*,609
17,318
665
1*5
1972
Population
(Thousands)
208.232
3,082
1.029
. 5,787
771
968
U62
7,367
18,366
0
0
1973 Costs
Per Capita
286
1*57
351*
257
659
379
361.
1*59
1*37
0
0
1973 Costs
Per Capita
51*9
525
580
583
1,136
531*
1*76
625
91*2
0
0
Change in
Per Capita
Costs
+263
+68
+226
+326
+1*77
+155
+112
+166
+505
+0
+0
REGIOH III
Delaware
Maryland
yirgl nl a.
««„+. v<»«1n<»
Pentmvl vo.nl a.
Dist.of Columbia
REGION IV
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
North Carolina
South Carolina
Tennessee
329
681
l.3i*5
6ll*
1*^210
1.081
1*1.1*
2.371
1.031
1.032
268
900
757
695
5l*7
3.909
2,182
1*.259
.5^572
1,051*
707
3,568
1,585
2, Oil*
1*33
1,1*31*
1,012
1.308
565
It. 056
1*,761*
1,781
11,926
7U8
3,510
7,259
U.7PO
3,?99
2,263
2,665
U.031
582
168
282
31.5
35 3_
1,1*1*5.. .
1 ?6
327
218
313
118
173
?8U
172
968
963
1*58
2.391
1*67
1,1*09
?m
1*91
335
610
191
275
37Q
32l*
+386
+795
+176
+2,01.6
+111.
-36
+75
+117
+297
+73
+102
+05
+152
REGION V
Illinois
Indiana
Michigan
Minnesota
Ohio
Wisconsin
1*.089
l.Ql*0
3.325
1.065
2.833
787
l*,9l*S
3.001*
5.323
1.31.7
7.6U6
2.311
11.251
5.291
9,082
3,896
10.78H
1*.520
363
197
366
273
263
171.
1*39
567
586
31*5
709
511
+ 76
+370
+??0
+72
+1.1.6
+337
REGION VI
Arkansas
Louisiana
New Mexico
TPVB.B
OV1 nhnmn
355
1*51
115
889
62k
1,338
1,521*
156
3,851*
2,071
1.978
3,720
1.063
11.61*9
2.631*
179
121
108
76
236
676
1*09
ll*6
330
786
+1*97
+288
+38
+25H
+550
REGION VII
Iowa
Kansas
Missouri
Nebraska
REGION VIII
Colorado
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
Utah
Wyoming
502
671
972
1*01*
1*26
71*
1*6
1*3
225
ltd
991
2,518
2,369
981*
713
129
201*
77
295
133
2,883
2j.25_8
1*,753
1,525
2,357
719
632
679
1,126
3lt 5
171*
297
205
265
181
103
73
63
200
116
3U3
1.115
1*98
61*5
30?
179
322
113
261
385
+169
+8l8
+293
+380
+1 ?i
+76
+21*9
+50
+61
+269
REGION DC
Arizona
California
Hawaii
Nevada
American Samoa
Gum
REGION X
Alaska
Idaho
Oregon
Washington
237
6.050
523
227
8
22
8
205
112
568
1.080
613
6,997
520
316
55
116
190
299
1*77
1.11.1.
2.1*15
1.91*5
20,1*68
809
527
0
0
0
325
756
2.182
3.1*1*3
122
?96
61.6
1*31
0
0
0
631
ll*8
260
311*
315
3l*l
61*2
599
0
0
0
9PO
630
521*
701
+193
+1*5
-1*
+168
+0
+0
+0
+?89
+1*82
+261.
+387
No population data are available for Puerto Rico and Territories for 1972.
-------
-------
TABLE 5 SEPTEMBER 3, 1974
PER CAPITA COSTS REPORTED FOR TREATMENT AND/OR CONTROL OF STORMWATERS
(CATEGORY VI)
TOTALS
BG10H I
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
Hev Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vunaont
4BGION II
Sew Jersey
He* York
"Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
KEG1UH III
Delaware
Maryland
Vureinis
Vest Virainia
PemrolTaala
Dlat.of Columbia
Total Costs
235.006
a. 667
299
3.121
212
92T
11.7
7.S5U
20.31*1 _
289
66
608
9.530
19.586
1.71.0
3,71*3
300
1990 Population
( thousands }
255,961.
3.9U6
1.11*2
7.052
907
1,131*
536
... 8.822
21.799
^1,786
116
793
5,318
5_,958
1,81*5
13,332
76U
Per Capita Costs
918
676
262
1.1*3
231*
817
271*
856
933
76
567
767
1.792
3.287
9l*3
281
393
EGIOH IV
Alabama
Florida
Georgia
Kentucky
Mississippi
Sorth Carolina
t-rnth Carolina
Tennessee
3.332
. U.230
2,796
1,898
1.2!.
6.881
2,508
1*,097
3.850
11.728
5,667
3,71*1
2,359
5.880
3.023
1..800
866
161
1*93
507
180
T r!7n
830
851*
MSaiOM V
Illinois
Indiana
Minnesota
Ohio
VI sconain
2,225
2,397
3,630
1,885
6,570
l,9ll*
13,177
£.1*33
10,961
1*, 577
13j202
5,218
169
373
331
l*ll*
1.98
367
8KIQM VI
Arkansas
Louisiana
lew Mexico
Texas
"TUita1*
wwiofr vii
low
Kansas
Missouri
Nebraska
BJBIOB vin
Colorado
Montana
North Dakota
South Dakota
°*W
WnwinK
nJXJIOK DC
Ari*ona
California
Hwda^i
"^5*
Aaerican Samoa
iJaam
Trust Territories
KiJIOH X
Alaska
Idaho o
'-.-son
, As.-.ington
? 667
1..551
33
11,717
3.067
2,885
2 21.2
1,120
653
No Np^dn
625
3UU
206
1.55
No Heedl
No Needs
69.819
lit. 600
No Needs
1*2
2l*7
• No Needs
558
1^9
838
1,951
2.068
1*.15Q
1.232
13,666
2.91*2
3,053
2,509
5,1*88
1,562
2,81*8
711*
606
61*3
1,509
3l*8
3.381*
26.601
1.010
933
*0
275
205
1*08
758
2,9U3
U.19U
1.290
1 rOQli
27
857
1,01.2
9l*5
8Ql*
201*
1*18
_
875
568
320
302
_
_
?,6?s
ll*,l*55
_
1,039
898
1.368
6l 9
285
1*65
10
-------
-------
APPENDIX A
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
Ira L. Myers, M.D. OFFICE OF
Chairman, Water Improvement Commission AIR AND WATER PROGRAMS
State Office Building
Montgomery, Alabama 36104
Dear Mr. Myers:
Public Law 93-243 requires a new national survey of the costs
of needed publicly-owned treatment works. A preliminary report on
the survey results is due September 3, 1974.
Congress ordered this survey to obtain current information
for its deliberations this year on a possible new authorization of
construction grant funds and as a basis for making future allocations
among the States.
The conduct of this survey, like the 1973 "Meeds" Survey, will
depend on a close cooperative effort by the States, local communities
and the Environmental Protection Agency. The law requires use of the
1973 Survey Form again. A copy of that form is enclosed as an attach-
ment to this letter. The law also requires that we obtain a more
complete estimate of "needs" than was possible with the 1973 survey
questionnaire. We therefore plan to make some modifications and
additions to the 1973 form to meet this requirement. Additional in-
formation and guidelines for conduct of the survey will be provided
to you as soon as possible. I would like to take this opportunity,
however, to provide you a general outline on what will be required
so that you can make preparations and schedule requisite resources.
The 1974 survey will include the following information to
supplement needs reported in 1973:
1. An estimate of the additional costs anticipated to meet
the 1983 requirement in Public Law 92-500 for "best practicable
treatment technology";
2. An estimate of additional costs associated with new and
more stringent water quality standards adopted since June 1, 1973
(the cut-off point for the 1973 survey);
A-l
-------
3. Correction of errors made in the 1973 survey;
4. An estimate of any new costs which can be justified by
the detailed studies required under the 1973 survey guidelines
governing reporting of needs in category III (correction of infil-
tration and inflow into sewer systems), and category V (reduction
of pollution from combined sewer overflows);
5. An estimate of any additional needs in category III and
category V for communities where studies have not yet been completed
to document such needs. Also to be included is an estimate of needs
for reducing pollution from stormwaters which flow through separate
storm sewers. Heeds should be estimated for category V and separate
storm water flows only for sources that discharge into water quality
limited waters. The level of treatment will be defined in the guide-
line's for the conduct of the survey;
6. An estimate for each facility of the number of feet of and
acres served by combined sewers, and separate storrcwater sewers.
The short deadline established by Congress will requite our
concentrated attention. Your allocation of construction grant
funds will again depend on the survey results. The experience
gained from the 1973 survey should help us with this demanding task.
Sincerely yours,
Robert L. Sansom
Assistant Administrator
for Air and Water Programs (AW-443)
Enclosure
A-2
-------
APPENDIX B. SURVEY METHODOLOGY
A. Major 1974 Survey Policies:
The following key procedures were adopted to carry out the
expanded scope of the Survey:
1. The five categories of needs as reported in the 1973 Survey
were retained but with format changes as indicated:
(a) Costs for Category I or II were to be reported in either
one of the Categories, but not in both.
(b) Category III was split so that needs were reported in
two (2) new categories: Category Ilia deals with
"Infiltration/Inflow Correction," Category IIIB
deals with "Major Sewer System Rehabilitation."
Major sewer system rehabilitation needs were not
allowed in the 1973 Survey unless they were related
to infiltration/inflow correction and based on a
completed study. Reporting was allowed in this
Survey in Category IIIb for major rehabilitation or
replacement of deteriorated sewers necessary to the
total integrity and performance of the system.
(c) Category IV was separated into Category IVa for "New
Collectors" and Category IVb for "New Interceptors."
This change also combined the cost of appurtenances
into the appropriate Category.
2. A new category VI was established to allow reporting of costs
for the treatment and/or control of stormwaters. The costs were to be
based on corrective actions which when completed would solve actual
or anticipated water quality problems in meeting the objectives of
P. L. 92-500. The States were allowed to report these costs on
either a facility-by-facility, or a State-wide basis, but were
encouraged to use the latter method.
3. Survey instructions that limited reporting of needs in 1973
were removed, such as skip instructions that restricted cost reporting.
Also, State water quality standards did not require EPA approval
by a specified date in order to justify a reported need. However,
query questions were retained which would display the status of
completion of applicable studies.
4. Needs disallowed in 1973 as a result of one or more of the
restrictive guidelines, and any newly identified facility requirements,
could be reported in the 1974 Survey.
B-l
-------
5. Changes in the 1973 cost data base were to be reported for such
causes as imposition of additional effluent limitations, designation of
water quality limited segments, or receipt of a grant award for a previously-
reported need. As a result of the changes, 1973 cost data would either
increase, decrease or be deleted.
6. Wherever reference was made in the Survey form to terms relating
to "secondary treatment" they were to be considered for the 1974 Survey
synonymous with the term "Best Practicable Waste Treatment Technology
(BPWTT)." Also for the purposes of this Survey, BPWTT was to mean
secondary treatment under the treatment and discharge alternative,
unless higher levels of treatment were required by water quality standards
or other requirements. Nothing in these definitions affected the
July 1, 1977 secondary treatment requirements of the Act.
7. States had the option of reporting on needs in places of less
than 10,000 population outside Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas
(SMSA's) by either using the same sample group used in the 1973 Survey,
or reporting this year on a 100 percent basis.
8. For compatibility, all costs in the 1974 Survey were required
to be reported in June, 1973 dollars.
9. Costs were to be based on the design of facilities which will
serve the projected 1990 resident population.
B. Conduct of the Survey:
The Agency initiated the Survey on January 31, 1974, with the
presentation to each of the States of the general outline and the
basic survey form.
P. L. 93-243 required that Form EPA-1 used in 1973 be used again
for the 1974 Survey. Adjustments to the Form were necessary, to.add one
new cost category and to eliminate previous reporting restrictions. In
addition, improvements were made to lessen the respondent burden. The
Survey was designed with the advice of an ad hoc group consisting of EPA
Regional Office and State Officials.
As with the 1973 Survey, the State Agency had the option of completing
the Survey questionnaires itself, or forwarding them to individual
sewerage authorities for completion.
The 1974 Survey Plan retained the concept that the costs reported
for all needs must indicate the basis on which the cost estimate was
developed. Where available, the States were required to provide data to
support their reported needs. Cost estimating guidelines were provided
to assist the States in the absence of more valid sources.
B-2
-------
A draft copy of the revised questionnaire and guidelines was
mailed to the States on March 29, 1974 so that they could commence
detailed planning for the conduct of the Survey. Instructional
seminars were conducted for the States in the EPA Regional Offices.
The official copies of the Survey questionnaire were mailed to the
States on April 29, 1974, with instructions that by July 26, 1974,
the Forms should all be completed and into the EPA Regional Office.
The States were also requested to provide EPA with a report
summarizing the costs for each Category of needs, and information
relating to the rationale behind any reported needs that were
affected by abatement requirements that either they or EPA had
not formally approved.
The EPA Regional Office Staff conducted an initial screening
of all questionnaires. As these Regional evaluations are completed
the questionnaires are processed for keypunching. The Bureau of the
Census is accomplishing the keypunching operation and will provide EPA
with a tape of the transcribed data from each questionnaire which will
be used for further analysis. A comprehensive survey evaluation is
planned for the February 10, 1975 Final Report.
B-3
-------
Due
------- |