THE UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGEJMCY
Statutes and Legislative History
Executive Orders
Regulations
Guidelines and Reports
I
55
\
\
01
-------
THE UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Statutes and Legislative History
Executive Orders
Regulations
Guidelines and Reports
I
55
\,
\
LU
o
JANUARY 1973
WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS
Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region V, Library
230 South Dearborn Street
Chicago, Illinois 60604. „,$$
-------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington, D.C. 20402 • Price $27.25 per 7-part set. Sold in sets only.
Stock Number 5500-0068
-------
FOREWORD
It has been said that America is like a gigantic boiler in that once
the fire is lighted, there are no limits to the power it can generate.
Environmentally, the fire has been lit.
With a mandate from the President and an aroused public concern-
ing the environment, we are experiencing a new American Revolu-
tion, a revolution in our way of life. The era which began with the
industrial revolution is over and things will never be quite the same
again. We are moving slowly, perhaps even grudgingly at times, but
inexorably into an age when social, spiritual and aesthetic values
will be prized more than production and consumption. We have
reached a point where we must balance civilization and nature
through our technology.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, formed by Reorganiza-
tion Plan No. 3 of 1970, was a major commitment to this new ethic.
It exists and acts in the public's name to ensure that due regard is
given to the environmental consequences of actions by public and
private institutions.
In a large measure, this is a regulatory role, one that encompasses
basic, applied, and effects research; setting and enforcing standards;
monitoring; and making delicate risks—benefit decisions aimed at
creating the kind of world the public desires.
The Agency was not created to harass industry or to act as a shield
behind which man could wreak havoc on nature. The greatest dis-
service the Environmental Protection Agency could do to American
industry is to be a poor regulator. The environment would suf-
fer, public trust would diminish and instead of free enterprise,
environmental anarchy would result.
It was once sufficient that the regulatory process produce wise and
well-founded courses of action. The public, largely indifferent to
regulatory activities, accepted agency actions as baing for the "public
convenience and necessity." Credibility gaps and cynicism make it
essential not only that today's decisions ba wise and well-founded
but that the public know this to be true. Certitude, not faith, is
de rigueur.
In order to participate intelligently in regulatory proceedings, the
citizen should have access to the information available to the agency.
EPA's policy is to make the fullest possible disclosure of information,
iii
-------
iv FOREWORD
without unjustifiable expense or delay, to any interested party. With
this in mind, the EPA Compilation of Legal Authority was produced
not only for internal operations of EPA, but as a service to the public,
as we strive together to lead the way, through the law, to preserving
the earth as a place both habitable by and hospitable to man.
WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS,
Administrator
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
-------
PREFACE
Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1970 transferred 15 governmsntal units
with their functions and legal authority to create the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency. Since only the major laws were cited
in the Plan, the Administrator, William D. Ruckelshaus, requested
that a compilation of EPA legal authority be researched and published.
The publication has the primary function of providing a working
document for the Agency itself. Secondarily, it will serve as a re-
search tool for the public,
A permanent office in the Office of Legislation has bsen established
to keep the publication updated by supplements.
It is the hope of EPA that this set will assist in the awesome task
of developing a better environment.
LANE WARD, J.D.,
Assistant Director for Field Operations
Office of Legislation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The idea of producing a compilation of the legal authority of EPA
was conceived and commissioned by William D. Ruckelshaus, Admin-
istrator of EPA. The production of this compilation involved the
cooperation and effort of numerous sources, both within and outside
the Agency. The departmental libraries at Justice and Interior were
used extensively; therefore we express our appreciation to Marvin
P. Hogan, Librarian, Department of Justice; Arley E. Long, Land &
Natural Resources Division Librarian, Department of Justice; Fred-
eric E. Murray, Assistant Director, Library Services, Department of
the Interior.
For exceptional assistance and cooperation, my gratitude to: Gary
Baise, formerly Assistant to the Administrator, currently, Director,
Office of Legislation, who first began with me on this project; A. James
Barnes, Assistant to the Administrator; K. Kirke Harper, Jr., Special
Assistant for Executive Communications; John Dezzutti, Administra-
tive Assistant, Office of Executive Communications; Roland O. Soren-
sen, Chief, Printing Management Branch, and Jacqueline Gouge and
Thomas Green, Printing Management Staff; Ruth Simpkins, Janis
Collier, Wm. Lee Rawls, James G. Chandler, Jeffrey D. Light, Randy
Mott, Thomas H. Rawls, and John D. Whittaker, Peter J. McKenna,
Linda L. Payne, John M. Himmelberg, and Dana W. Smith, a beauti-
ful staff who gave unlimited effort; and to many others, behind the
scenes who rendered varied assistance.
LANE WARD, J.D.,
Assistant Director for Field Operations
Office of Legislation
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
VI
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
The goal of this text is to create a useful compilation of the legal
authority under which the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
operates. These documents are for the general use of personnel of
the EPA in assisting them in attaining the purposes set out by the
President in creating the Agency. This work is not intended and
should not be used for legal citations or any use other than as ref-
erence of a general nature. The author disclaims all responsibility
for liabilities growing out of the use of these materials contrary to
their intended purpose. Moreover, it should be noted that portions
of the Congressional Record from the 92nd Congress were extracted
from the "unofficial" daily version and are subject to subsequent
modification.
EPA Legal Compilation consists of the Statutes with their legisla-
tive history, Executive Orders, Regulations, Guidelines and Reports.
To facilitate the usefulness of this composite, the Legal Compilation
is divided into the eight following chapters:
A. General E. Pesticides
B. Air F. Radiation
C. Water G. Noise
D. Solid Waste H. International
WATER
The chapter labeled "Water" and color coded blue contains the
legal authority of the Agency as it applies to water pollution abate-
ment. It is well to note that any law which is applicable to more than
one chapter of the compilation will appear in each of the chapters;
however, its legislative history will be cross referenced into the
"General" chapter where it is printed in full.
SUBCHAPTERS:
Statutes and Legislative History
For convenience, the Statutes are listed throughout the Compila-
tion by a one-point system, i.e., 1,1, 1.2, 1.3, etc., and Legislative His-
tory begins wherever a letter follows the one-point system.
Vll
-------
viii INSTRUCTIONS
ThUsly, any l.la, l.lb, 1.2a, etc., denotes the public laws comprising
the 1.1, 1.2 statute. Each public law is followed by its legislative his-
tory. The legislative history in each case consists of the House Report,
Senate Report, Conference Report (where applicable), the Con-
gressional Record beginning with the time the bill was reported from
committee.
Example: 1.4 Amortization of Pollution Control Facilities, as
amended, 26 U.S.C. §169 (1969).
1.4a Amortization of Pollution Control Facilities,
December 30, 1969, P.L. 91-172, §704, 83 Stat.
667.
(1) House Committee on Ways and Means,
H.R. REP. No. 91-413 (Part I), 91st
Cong., 1st Sess. (1969).
(2) House Committee on Ways and Means,
H.R. REP. No. 91-413 (Part II), 91st
Cong., 1st Sess. (1969).
(3) Senate Committee on Finance, S. REP.
No. 91-552, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. (1969).
(4) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No.
91-782, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. (1969).
(5) Congressional Record, Vol. 115 (1969):
(a) Aug. 7: Debated and passed House,
pp. 22746, 22774-22775;
(b) Nov. 24, Dec. 5, 8, 9: Debated and
passed Senate, pp. 35486, 37321-
37322, 37631-37633, 37884-37888;
(c) Dec. 22: Senate agrees to conference
report, p. 40718;*
(d) Dec. 22: House debates and agrees
to conference report, pp. 40820,
40900.
This example not only demonstrates the pattern followed for legisla-
tive history, but indicates the procedure where only one section of a
public law appears. You will note that the Congressional Record
cited pages are only those pages dealing with the discussion and/or
action taken pertinent to the section of law applicable to EPA. In the
event there is no discussion of the pertinent section, only action or
passage, then the asterisk (*) is used to so indicate, and no text is
reprinted in the Compilation. In regard to the situation where only
one section of a public law is applicable, then only the parts of the
report dealing with same are printed in the Compilation.
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
IX
Secondary Statutes
Many statutes make reference to other laws and rather than have
this manual serve only for major statutes, these secondary statutes
have been included where practical. These secondary statutes are
indicated in the table of contents to each chapter by a bracketed cite
to the particular section of the major act which made the reference.
Citations
The United States Code, being the official citation, is used through-
out the Statute section of the compilation. In four Statutes, a parallel
table to the Statutes at Large is provided for your convenience.
TABLE OF STATUTORY SOURCE
STATUTES SOURCE
1.1 River and Harbor Act of 1899, 33
U.S.C. §§403, 407, 411 (1899).
1.2 Federal Water Pollution Control
Act, as amended, 33 U.S.C. §1151
et seq. (1970).
1.3 Pollution of the Sea by Oil, as
amended, 33 U.S.C. §1001 et seq.
(1966).
1.4 Advances of Public Moneys, Pro-
hibition Against, as revised, 31
U.S.C. §529 (1946).
1.5 Public Contracts, Advertisements
for Proposals for Purchases and
Contracts for Supplies or Services
for Government Departments; App
Application to Government Sales
and Contracts to Sell and to Gov-
ernment Corporations, as amended,
41 U.S.C. §5 (1958).
1.6 Courts of Appeals, Certiorari;
Appeal; Certified Questions, as
amended, 28 U.S.C. §1254 (1948).
1.7 Davis-Bacon Act, as amended, 40
U.S.C. §276a-275a-5 (1964).
1.8 Per Diem, Travel and Transporta-
tion Expenses; Experts and
Consultants; Individuals Serving
Without Pay, as amended, 5 U.S.C.
§5703 (1966).
1.9 1909 Boundry Waters Treaty Be-
tween Canada and the United
States, and the Water Utilization
Treaty of 1944 Between Mexico and
the United States, 36 Stat. 2448
(1909),59Stat. 1219 (1944).
E.O. 11574 sets out EPA's function under
this Act.
Transferred to EPA in Reorg. Plan No. 3
of 1970.
Implements the Convention of
Referred to in the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act at §1155(g) (3) (A).
Referred to in Federal Water Pollution
Control Act in §1155 (g) (3) (A).
Referred to in the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act at §1157 (g) (2).
Referred to in the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act at §1158(g).
Referred to in the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act at §1159 (a) (2) (B),
1160 (c) (4), (i).
Referred to in the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act at §1160 (d) (2).
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
STATUTES
SOURCE
1.10
1.11
1.12
1.13
1.14
1.15
1.16
1.17
1.18
1.19
1.20
1.21
Disclosure of Confidential Infor-
mation Generally, as amended, 18
U.S.C. §1905 (1948).
Convention on the Territorial Sea
and the Contiguous Zone, Article
XXIV, 5 U.S.T. 1612, 1613 (1958).
International Convention for the
Prevention of Pollution of the Sea
by Oil, 1954, Article IV, as
amended, 17 U.S.T. 1528 (1954).
Granting Clearances, as amended,
46 U.S.C. §91 (1951).
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act,
as amended, 43 U.S.C. §1331 et seq.
(1953) .
Administrative Procedure Act, as
amended, 5 U.S.C. §§551-559, 701-
705 (1968).
Higher Education General Provi-
sion, Definitions, as amended, 20
U.S.C. §1141 (1970).
National Environmental Policy Act
of 1969, 42 U.S.C. §4321 et seq.
(1970) .
Public Health Service Act, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. §§241, 243, 246
(1970).
The Water Resource Planning Act,
as amended, 42 U.S.C. §1962 et seq.
(1970) .
Appalachian Regional Develop-
ment Act of 1965, as amended, 40
App. U.S.C. §§212, 214 (1971).
1.22
The Disaster Relief Act, 42 U.S.C.
§4401 et seq. (1970).
Department of Transportation Act,
49 U.S.C. §1653 (f) (1968).
Referred to in the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act at §§1160 (f) (2), (k),
(1), 1163 (g) (3).
Referred to in the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act at §1161 (a) (9).
Referred to in the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act at §1161 (b) (2) (A).
Referred to in the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act at §1161 (b) (5).
Referred to in the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act at §1161 (i) (2).
Referred to in the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act at §§1162(b), 1163(e).
Referred to in the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act at §1169(1) (B).
Direct reference in the Reorg. Plan No. 3
of 1970.
Directly cited in Reorg. Plan No. 3 of
1970.
E.O. 11613.
All functions of the Secretary of the
Interior and the Department of the Inte-
rior administrative to the Federal Water
Quality Administration, all functions
which were transferred to the Secretary
of the Interior by Reorg. Plan No. 2 of
1966, and all functions vested in the Sec-
retary of the Interior of the Department
of the Interior by the Federal Water Pol-
lution Control Act were transferred to
the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency by Reorg. Plan No. 3
of 1970.
Direct reference made to the Water
Quality Administration at the Depart-
ment of the Interior by E.O. 11490,
§§703(3), 1102(1), 1103(2), etc., this
administration being transferred to EPA
through Reorg. Plan No. 3 of 1970.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act
in section 1153 regarding the preserva-
tion of fish and wildlife.
-------
INSTRUCTIONS
XI
STATUTES
SOURCE
1.23
1.24
1.25
1.26
Federal Aid Highway Act, as
amended, 23 U.S.C. §109 (h) (1970).
Amortization of Pollution Control
Facilities, as amended, 26 U.S.C.
§169 (d) (1)(B), (3) (1969).
Airport and Airway Development
Act, 49 U.S.C. §§1712(f),1716(c)(4),
(e) (1970).
Interest on Certain Government
Obligations, as amended, 26 U.S.C.
§103 (1969).
1.27 Fish and Wildlife Coordination
Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C. §§661-
666c (1965).
The Act at §109 (h) requires the Secre-
tary of Transportation to consult with
the appropriate agency dealing with
water pollution, in this case, the Admin-
istrator of EPA, before promulgating
guidelines for any proposed project on
any federal aid system.
The section cited in the Act refers di-
rectly to the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act and the Federal certifying
authority requirement filing to the Sec-
retary of the Interior in the case of
water pollution, both functions being
transferred through Reorg. Plan
Direct reference made to water pollution
and the appropriate agency to deal with
same in the Act.
The sections of the Act provide a tax re-
lief on industrial development bonds for
sewage or solid waste disposal facility
and water pollution control facilities, at
the section cited.
E.O. 11574, Administration of Refuse Act
Permit Program.
Executive Orders
The Executive Orders are listed by a two-point system (2.1, 2.2,
etc.). Executive Orders found in General are ones applying to more
than one area of the pollution chapters.
Regulations
The Regulations are noted by a three-point system (3.1, 3.2, 'etc.).
Included in the Regulations are those not only promulgated by the
Environmental Protection Agency, but those under which the Agency
has direct contact.
Guidelines and Reports
This subchapter is noted by a four-point system (4.1, 4.2, etc.). In
this subchapter is found the statutorily required reports of EPA, pub-
lished guidelines of EPA, selected reports other than EPA's and
inter-departmental agreements of note.
UPDATING:
Periodically, a supplement will be sent to the interagency distribu-
tion and made available through the U.S. Government Printing Office
in order to provide an accurate working set of EPA Legal Compilation.
-------
-------
CONTENTS
C. WATER
VOLUME I
1. STATUTES AND LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
Page
1.1 River and Harbor Act of 1899, U.S.C. §§403, 407, 411
(1899) 3
l.la River and Harbor Act of 1886, August 5, 1886, P.L. 49-929,
§§2, 3, 24 Stat. 329. 6
(1) House Committee on Rivers and Harbors, H.R. REP.
No. 1448, 49th Cong., 1st Sess. (1886). 7
(2) House Committee on Rivers and Harbors, H.R. REP.
No. 1565, 49th Cong., 1st Sess. (1886). 8
(3) Senate Committee on Commerce, S. REP. No. 1391,
49th Cong., 1st Sess. (1886). 9
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 17 (1886):
(a) May 6: Amended and passed House, pp.
4243-4247; . 9
(b) July 16: Amended and passed Senate, pp. 7035,
7037; 14
(c) Aug. 3: Conference report agreed to by Senate,
p. 7906; 15
(d) Aug 3: Conference report agreed to by House,
p. 7934. . 15
lib New York Harbor Act of 1888, June 29, 1888, P.L. 50-469,
§1, 25 Stat. 209. 15
(1) Senate Committee on Commerce, S. REP. No. 224,
50th Cong., 1st Sess. (1888). 16
(2) House Committee on Commerce, H.R. REP. No. 1963,
50th Cong., 1st Sess. (1888). 16
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 19 (1888):
(a) March 21: Debated, amended and passed Senate,
p. 2300; . 16
(b) June 4: Debated, amended and passed House,
pp. 4889-4890; 17
(c) June 14: Senate concurs in House amendments,
p. 5239. 19
l.lc River and Harbor Act of 1890, September 19, 1890, P.L.
51-907, §6 26, Stat. 453. 19
(1) House Committee on Rivers and Harbors, H.R. REP.
No. 1488, 51st Cong., 1st Sess. (1890). 20
(2) Senate Committee on Commerce, S. REP. No. 1378,
51st Cong., 1st Sess. (1890). 21
(3) Committee of Conference, 51st Cong., 1st Sess., Con-
gressional Record, Vol. 21 (1890), p. 9558. 21
xiii
-------
xiv CONTENTS
Page
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 21 (1890):
(a) May 28: Passed House, p. 5412; . . 23
(b) Aug. 15, 16: Amended and passed Senate, pp.
8607, 8684-8685; 23
(c) Sept. 6: House agrees to conference report, p.
9822; .... 29
(d) Sept. 8: Senate agrees to conference report, p.
9830. ... 29
l.ld River and Harbor Act of 1894, August 18,1894, P.L. 53-299,
§§6, 7, 8, 9, 28 Stat. 363. . . . . . 29
(1) Damage to Harbor Improvements, Letter from the
Acting Secretary of War, House Committee on Rivers
and Harbors, H.R. EX. DOC. No. 123, 53rd Cong., 2d
Sess. (1894). 31
(2) House Committee on Rivers and Harbors, H.R. REP.
No. 639, 53rd Cong., 2d Sess. (1894). 34
(3) Senate Committee on Commerce, S. REP. No. 519,
53rd Cong., 2d Sess. (1894). 35
(4) Committee of Conference, 53rd Cong., 2d Sess., Con-
gressional Record, Vol. 26, (1894), pp. 8173-8175. 35
(5) Congressional Record, Vol. 26 (1894):
(a) May 4: Amended and passed House, p. 4430; 35
(b) July 13: Amended and passed Senate, p. 7414; 35
(c) Aug. 6: Senate agrees to conference report, p.
8230; . ... 35
(d) Aug. 6: House agrees to conference report, p.
8251. 35
lie River and Harbor Act of 1899, March 3, 1899, P.L. 55^25,
§§10, 13, 16, 30 Stat. 1151. . 36
(1) House Committee on Rivers and Harbors, H.R. REP.
No. 1826, 55th Cong., 3rd Sess. (1899). 38
(2) Senate Committee on Commerce, S. REP. No. 1686,
55th Cong., 3rd Sess. (1899). 38
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 2815-16,
55th Cong., 3rd Sess. (1899). 39
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 32 (1899) :
(a) Feb. 1, 2: Debated, amended and passed House,
pp. 1350; 1354; 1356-1357; 1410; 39
(b) Feb. 23, 24: Debated, amended and passed Sen-
ate, p. 2297; 41
(c) March 3: Senate agrees to conference report, pp.
2815-2816; 2843; 44
(d) March 3: House agrees to conference report, p.
2923. 44
l.lf Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1971, January 8,1971,
P.L. 91-685, 84 Stat. 1981. 45
(1) House Committee on Appropriations, H.R. REP. No.
91-1668, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970). 46
(2) Senate Committee on Appropriations, S. REP. No.
91-1430, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970) 47
-------
CONTENTS xv
Page
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 91-1794; 91st
Cong., 2d Sess. (1970). 49
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 116 (1970):
(a) Dec. 10: Passed House, p. 40926; 50
(b) Dec. 14: Amended and passed Senate, pp. 41317,
41322^1323, 41330; 50
(c) Dec. 22: House agrees to conference report, p.
43391; 52
(d) Dec. 28: Senate agrees to conference report, pp.
43706, 43709. 53
1.2 The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, 33 U.S.C.
§1151 etseq. (1970). ' 55
1.2a The Water Pollution Control Act, June 30, 1948, P.L.
80-845, 62 Stat. 1155. 132
(1) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No. 462,
80th Cong., 1st Sess. (1947). 141
(2) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP. No.
1829, 80th Cong., 2d Sess. (1948). , 151
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 2399, 80th
Cong., 2d Sess. (1948). 172
(4) Congressional Record:
(a) Vol. 93 (1947), July 16: Amended and passed
Senate, pp. 9032; 9034-9035; 175
(b) Vol. 94 (1948), June 14: Amended and passed
House, pp. 8192; 8195-8203; 176
(c) Vol. 94 (1948), June 15: Senate disagrees to
House amendments and demands conference, pp.
8295-8296; 196
(d) Vol. 94 (1948), June 16: House agrees to confer-
ence, p. 8458; 196
(e) Vol. 94 (1948), June 18: House agrees to confer-
ence report, p. 8864; 196
(f) Vol. 94 (1948), June 18: Conference report sub-
mitted in Senate, p. 8772; 198
(g) Vol. 94 (1948), June 19: Senate agrees to confer-
ence report, pp. 9002-9003. 199
1.2b Reorganization Plan No. 14 of 1950, May 24, 1950, 15 Fed.
Reg. 3176, 64 Stat. 1267. 200
1.2c Water Pollution Control Act Extension, July 17, 1952, P.L.
82-579, 66 Stat. 755. 200
(1) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP. No.
1990, 82nd Cong., 2d Sess. (1952). 201
(2) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No. 2092,
82nd Cong., 2d Sess. (1952). 205
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 98 (1952):
(a) June 12: Passed House, pp. 6364-6365; 211
(b) July 4: Passed Senate, p. 9317. 213
1.2d Water Pollution Control Act of 1956, July 9, 1956, P.L.
84-660, 70 Stat. 498. 213
(1) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No. 543,
84th Cong., 1st Sess. (1955). 227
-------
xvi CONTENTS
Page
(2) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP. No.
1446, 84th Cong., 1st Sess. (1955). 250
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 2479, 84th
Cong., 2d Sess. (1956). 272
(4) Congressional Record:
(a) Vol. 101 (1955), June 17: Amended and passed
Senate, pp. 8623, 8627; . 292
(b) Vol. 102 (1956), June 13: Amended and passed
House; House insists on its amendments and
asks for conference, pp. 10278, 10281; 293
(c) Vol. 102 (1956), June 14: Senate disagrees to
House amendments and agrees to conference, pp.
10323, 10327; 293
(d) Vol. 102 (1956), June 27: Conference report sub-
mitted in House and agreed to, pp. 11149, 11154; 295
(e) Vol. 102 (1956), June 27: Conference report sub-
mitted in Senate, and agreed to, pp. 11075-11076. 296
1.2e Alaska's Water Pollution Control Act Amendments, June
25, 1959, P.L. 86-70, §28 (a), (b), 73 Stat. 148. 297
(1) House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs,
H.R. REP. No. 369, 86th Cong., 1st Sess. (1959). 297
(2) Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, S.
REP. No. 331, 86th Cong., 1st Ssss. (1959). 300
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 105 (1959):
(a) June 1: Debated, amended and passed House, p.
9478; 302
(b) June 3: Amended and passed Senate, pp. 9676; 302
(c) June 11: House concurs in Senate amendments,
with amendment, p. 10570; 302
(d) June 12: Senate concurs in House amendments,
p. 10594. 302
1.2f Hawaii's Water Pollution Control Act Amendments, June
12, 1960, P.L. 86-624, §23 (a), 74 Stat. 417. 302
(1) House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs,
H.R. REP No. 1564, 86th Cong., 2d Sess. (1960). 303
(2) Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, S.
REP. No. 1681, 86th Cong., 2d Sess. (1960). 305
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 106 (1960) :
(a) May 16: Passed House, p. 10355; . 307
(b) June 28: Amended and passed Senate, p. 14684; 307
(c) June 29: House concurs in Senate amendments,
p. 15009. . 307
1.2g The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1951, July 20,
1961, P.L. 87-88, 75 Stat. 204. 307
(1) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP. No.
306, 87th Cong., 1st Sess. (1961). 316
(2) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No. 353,
87th Cong., 1st Sess. (1961). . 368
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 675, 87th
Cong., 1st Sess. (1961). .... 398
-------
CONTENTS xvii
Page
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 107 (1961):
(a) May 3, Debated in House, pp. 7140-7162;
7165-7172; 415
(b) May 3: Amended and passed House, pp.
7195-7196; 483
(c) June 22: Amended and passed Senate; Senate
insisted on its amendments and asks for confer-
ence, p. 11074; 484
(d) July 13: Conference report submitted to House
and agreed to, pp. 12471; 12475-12496; 485
(e) July 13: Conference report submitted to Senate
and agreed to, pp. 12565-12567. 528
1.2h The Water Quality Act of 1965, October 2, 1955, P.L.
89-234, 79 Stat. 903 533
(1) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP. No.
215. 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965). 544
VOLUME II
(2) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No. 10,
89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965). 579
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 1022, 89th
Cong., 1st Sess. (1965). 622
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. Ill (1965) :
(a) Jan. 28: Considered and passed Senate, pp.
1503-1519; 1521; 1525-1545; 638
(b) April 28: Considered and passed House,
amended, pp. 8652-8690; 8736-8737; 703
(c) Sept. 21: House and Senate agree to conference
report, pp. 24560-24562; 24583; 24587-24592. 790
1.2i 1966 Reorganization Plan No. 2, May 10, 1966, 31 Fed. Reg.
6857, 80 Stat. 1608. 805
(1) Interdepartmental Agreement Concerning Consulta-
tion on Health Aspects of Water Pollution Control,
Secretary of the Interior, Secretary of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare, July 1, 1966. 809
1.2j The Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966, November 3,
1966, P.L. 89-753, 80 Stat. 1246. 812
(1) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP. No.
2021, 89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966). 824
(2) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No. 1367,
89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966). 944
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 2289, 89th
Cong., 2d Sess. (1966). 1005
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 112 (1986):
(a) July 13: Considered and passed Senate, pp.
15585-15603; 15605-15620; 15624-15633; 1033
-------
xviii CONTENTS
Page
(b) Sept. 30: Considered and passed House, pp.
24546-24547; 24592-24619; 24622-24624; 24629; 1124
VOLUME III
(c) Oct. 17: House and Senate agree to conference
report, pp. 27131; 27137-27141; 27244-27247. 1195
1.2k The Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970, April 3,1970,
P.L. 91-224, 84 Stat. 91. 1212
(1) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP. No.
91-127, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. (1969). 1247
(2) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
91-351, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. (1969). 1324
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 91-940, 91st
Cong., 2d Sess. (1970). 1470
(4) Congressional Record:
(a) Vol. 115 (1969), April 15, 16: Considered and
passed House, pp. 9015-9052; 9259; 9264-9292; 1611
VOLUME IV
(b) Vol. 115 (1969), Oct. 7, 8: Considered and passed
Senate, amended, pp. 28947; 28953-29008; 29046-
29065; 29089-29102; 1762
(c) Vol. 116 (1970), March 24: Senate agreed to con-
ference report, pp. 8975; 8983-8984; 9003-9008; 1964
(d) Vol. 116 (1970), March 25: House agreed to con-
ference report, pp. 9325-9334. 1976
(5) Message from the President of the United States
"Conservation and Water Management," H.R. REP.
Doc. No. 273, 90th Cong., 2d Sess. (1968). 1997
1.21 Rivers and Harbors Act of 1970, December 31, 1970, P.L.
91-611, Title I, §§120, 123, 84 Stat. 1823. 2017
(1) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP. No.
91-1665, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970). 2020
(2) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
91-1422, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970). 2023
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 91-1782,
91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970). 2024
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 116 (1970):
(a) Dec. 7: Passed House, pp. 40139; 40143; 40145-
40147; 40149; . 2029
(b) Dec. 9: Amended and passed Senate, pp. 40594,
40598 2033
(c) Dec. 18: House agreed to conference report, pp.
42509, 42512; .. . . 2034
-------
CONTENTS xix
Page
(d) Dec. 19: Senate agreed to conference report, pp.
42724. ... . 2035
1.2m Extension of Authorized Funds for Federal Water Pollu-
t;0" Control Act of 1971, July 9, 1971, P.L. 92-50, §§2, 3,
85 Stat. 124. 2035
(1) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
92-234, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971). 2036
(2) Congressional Record, Vol. 117 (1971):
(a) June 23: Considered and passed Senate, p. S9807; 2037
(b) Julyl: Considered and passed House, pp. H6229-
H6230. 2038
1.2n Extension of Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1971,
October 13, 1971, P.L. 92-137, 85 Stat. 379. 2040
(1) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
92-383, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971). 2041
(2) Congressional Record, Vol. 117 (1971):
(a) Sept. 29: Passed Senate, p. S15406; 2042
(b) Sept. 30: Passed House, pp. H8939-H8940. 2043
1.2o Extension of Certain Provisions of Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act of 1971, March 1, 1972, P.L. 92-240, 86
Stat. 47. 2044
(1) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
92-602, 92d Cong., 2d Sess. (1972). 2045
(2) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP. No.
92-812, 92d Cong., 2d Sess. (1972). 2046
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 92-834, 92d
Cong., 2d Sess. (1972) . 2051
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 118 (1972):
(a) Feb. 3: Considered and passed Senate, pp. S1165-
S1166; 2054
(b) Feb. 7: Considered and passed House, amended,
pp. H801-H808; 2055
(c) Feb. 16: House agreed to conference report, pp.
H1056-H1057; 2069
(d) Feb. 16: Senate agreed to Conference Report, p.
S1901. 2072
1.3 Pollution of the Sea by Oil, as amended, 33 U.S.C. §1001, et seq.
(1966). 2073
1.3a The Oil Pollution Control Act of 1961, August 30, 1961,
P.L. 87-167,75 Stat. 402. • 2080
(1) Senate Committee on Commerce, S. REP. No. 666,
87th Cong., 1st Sess. (1961). 2087
(2) House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries,
H.R. REP. No. 838, 87th Cong., 1st Sess. (1961). 2099
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 107 (1961):
(a) Aug. 14: Amended and passed Senate, pp. 15663-
15665; 2108
(b) Aug. 21: Passed House, pp. 16520-16521. 2109
1.3b 1966 Amendments to the Oil Pollution Act of 1961, Sep-
tember 1,1966, P.L. 89-551, 80 Stat. 372. 2109
-------
xx CONTENTS
Page
(1) House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries,
H.R. REP. No. 1620, 89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966). 2113
(2) Senate Committee on Commerce, S. REP. No. 1479,
89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966). 2136
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 112 (1966):
(a) June 20: Considered and passed House, p. 13839-
13640; 2158
(b) Aug. 19: Considered and passed Senate, p. 19991. 2158
1.4 Advances of Pubi.c Moneys, Prohibition Against, as revised,
31 U.S.C. §529 (1946). 2158
[Referred to in 33 U S.C. §1155 (g) (3) (A) ]
1.4a Act of January 31, 1823, January 31, 1823, Chapter 9, §1,
3 Stat. 723. 2158
(1) House Committee on Public Expenditures, H.R. REP.
No. 100,17th Cong., 1st Sess. (1822) .1 2159
(2) Semite Committee on Finance, 17th Cong., 2d Sess.
(1823).2 2159
(3) Annals of Congress (1822-23):
(a) Dec. 9, 17: Debated, amended, passed House, pp.
336-338, 391-394; 2159
(b) Jan. 21, 23: Amended and passed Senate, pp.
147-150; 2163
(c) Jan. 27: House concurs in Senate amendments,
pp. 699-700. 2163
1.4b To Authorize Certain Administrative Expenses in the
Government Services, and for Other Purposes, August 2,
1946, P.L. 79-600, §11, 60 Stat. 809. 2163
(1) Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Depart-
ments, H.R. REP. No. 2186, 79th Cong., 2d Sess.
(1946). 2163
(2) Committee on Expenditures in the Executive Depart-
ments, S. REP. No. 1636, 79th Cong., 2d Sess. (1946). 2165
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 92 (1946):
(a) June 3: Amended and passed House, p. 6166; 2166
(b) June 17: Amended and passed Senate, p. 9190; 2166
(c) July 26: House concurs in Senate amendments,
p. 10186. 2166
1.5 Public Contracts, Advertisements for Proposals for Purchases
and Contracts for Supplies or Services for Government Depart-
ments; Application to Government Sales and Contracts to Sell
and to Government Corporations, as amended, 41 U.S.C. §5
(1958). 2166
[Referred to in 33 U.S.C. §1155 (g) (3) (A) ]
(See, "General 1.14a-1.14c(2) (b)" for legislative history)
1.6 Courts of Appeals, Certiorari; Appeal; Certified Questions, as
amended, 28 U.S.C. §1254 (1948). 2167
[Referred to in 33 U.S.C. §1157 (g) (2) ]
1.6a An Act to Codify, Revise and Amend the Laws Relating to
1 Document in Dept. of Interior Library, but in nonreproducible condition.
2 Report unpublished.
-------
CONTENTS xxi
Page
the Judiciary, March 3, 1911, P.L. 61-475, §§239, 240, 36
Stat. 1157. 2168
1.6b Act to Amend the Judicial Code and to Further Define
the Jurisdiction of Circuit Courts of Appeal and of the
Supreme Court and for Other Purposes, February 13,1925,
P.L. 68-415, §1, 43 Stat. 935-939. 2168
(1) Senate Committee on the Judiciary, S. REP. No. 362,
68th Cong, 1st Sess. (1924). 2174
(2) House Committee on the Judiciary, H.R. REP. No.
1075, 68th Cong., 2d Sess. (1925). 2178
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 66 (1925):
(a) Feb. 2: Amended and passed House, p. 2880; 2188
(b) Feb. 3: Amended and passed Senate, p. 2928; 2188
(c) Feb. 4: House concurs in Senate amendments,
p. 3005. 2189
1.6c An Act in Reference to Writs of Error, January 31, 1928,
P.L. 70-10, §1, 45 Stat. 54. 2191
(1) House Committee on the Judiciary, H.R. REP. No.
370, 70th Cong., 1st Sess. (1928). 2191
(2) Congressional Record, Vol. 69 (1928):
(a) Jan. 14: Passed Senate, p. 1486; 2192
(b) Jan. 25: Passed House, p. 2040. 2192
1.6d 1934 Amendments to 1893 Act, June 7, 1934, P.L. 73-298,
48 Stat. 926. , 2192
(1) Senate Committee on the Judiciary, S. REP. No. 917,
73rd Cong., 2d Sess. (1934). 2193
(2) House Committee on the Judiciary, H.R. REP. No.
1748, 73rd Cong, 2d Sess. (1934). 2194
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 78 (1934):
(a) May 10: Passed Senate, p. 8479; 2196
(b) June 5: Passed House, p. 10537. 2197
1.7 Davis-Bacon Act, as amended, 40 U.S.C. §§276a-276a-5 (1964). 2198
[Referred to in 33 U.S.C. §1158 (g) ]
(See, "General 1.13a-1.13h" for legislative history)
1.8 Per Diem, Travel, and Transportation Expenses; Experts and
Consultants; Individuals Serving Without Pay, as amended, 5
U.S.C. §5703 (1966). 2202
[Referred to in 33 U.S.C. §§1159(a) (2) (B), 1160(c) (4), (i) ]
(See, "General 1.15a-1.15d (3) (c)" for legislative history)
1.9 1909 Boundary Waters Treaty Between Canada and the United
States and the Water Utilization Treaty of 1944 Between Mexico
and the United States, 36 Stat. 2448 (1909), 59 Stat. 1219 (1944). 2203
[Referred to in 33 U.S.C. §1160(d) (2) ]
1.9a Congressional Record, Vol. 91 (1945), April 18: Senate
advises and consents to treaty and supplementary proto-
col, pp. 3480-3492. 2247
1.10 Disclosure of Confidential Information Generally, as amended,
18 U.S.C. §1905 (1948). 2273
[Referred to in 33 U.S.C. §§1160 (f) (2), (k) (1); 1163 (g) (3)]
(See, "General 1.16a-1.16a(3) (c)" for legislative history)
-------
xxii CONTENTS
Page
1.11 Convention on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone,
Article XXIV, 15 U.S.T. 1612, 1613 (1958). 2274
[Referred to in 33 U.S.C. §1161 (a) (9)]
l.lla Congressional Record, Vol. 106 (1960), May 26: Ratifica-
tion Advised by Senate, pp. 11187, 11189-11192. 2274
1.12 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the
Sea by Oil, 1954, Article IV, as amended, 17 U.S.T. 1528 (1954). 2278
[Referred to in 33 U.S.C. §1161 (b) (2) (A)]
1.12a Congressional Record, Vol. 110 (1964), Feb. 2: Ratifica-
tion Advised by Senate, pp. 3471-3472, 3496. 2294
1.13 Granting Clearances, as amended, 46 U S.C. §91 (1954). 2295
[Referred to in 33 U.S C. §1161 (b) (5) ]
1.13a Customs Enforcement Act of 1935, August 5, 1935, P.L.
74-238, Title II, §209, 49 Stat. 526. 2297
(1) House Committee on Ways and Means, H.R. REP. No.
868, 74th Cong., 1st Sess. (1935). 2297
(2) Senate Committee on Finance, S. REP. No. 1036, 74th
Cong., 1st Sess. (1935). 2300
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 78 (1935):
(a) June 11: Amended and passed House, p. 9077; 2302
(b) July 26: Passed Senate, p. 11939. 2302
1.13b 1938 Amendments to §§91, 92 of Title 46 U.S.C., June 16,
1938, P.L. 75-656, §1, 52 Stat. 758. 2302
(1) House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries,
H.R. REP. No. 2521, 75th Cong., 3rd Sess. (1938). 2304
(2) Senate Committee on Commerce, S. REP. No. 2020,
75th Cong., 3rd Sess. (1938). 2306
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 83 (1938):
(a) June 6: Passed House, p. 8226; 2308
(b) June 13: Passed Senate, p. 8492. 2308
1.13c 1946 Reorganization Plan No. 3, §§101-104, May 16, 1946,
11 Fed. Reg. 7875, 60 Stat 1097. 2308
1.13d Customs Simplification Act of 1954, September 1, 1954,
P.L. 83-768, Title V, §501 (a), 68 Stat. 1140. 2310
(1) House Committee on Ways and Means, H.R. REP. No.
2453, 83rd Cong., 2d Sess. (1954). 2310
(2) Senate Committee on Finance, S. REP. No. 2326, 83rd
Cong, 2d Sess. (1954). 2312
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 100 (1954):
(a) July 26: Passed House, p. 12036; 2312
(b) Aug. 12: Amended and passed Senate, p. 14264; 2312
(c) Aug. 16: House concurs in Senate amendments,
p. 14631.1 2312
1.14 Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, 43 U.S.C. §1331 et seq.
(1953). 2313
[Referred to in 33 U.S.C. §1161 (i) (2) ]
1.14a Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, August 7, 1953, P.L.
82-212, §§2-15, 67 Stat. 462. 2328
(1) House Committee on the Judiciary, H.R. REP. No.
413, 83rd Cong., 1st Sess. (1953). 2340
-------
CONTENTS xxiii
Page
VOLUME V
(2) Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, S.
REP. No. 411, 83rd Cong., 1st Sess. (1953). 2349
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 1031, 83rd
Cong., 1st Sess. (1953). 2434
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 99 (1953):
(a) May 13: Amended and passed House, pp. 4881-
4895; 2450
(b) June 26: Amended and passed Senate, pp. 7250-
7265; 2481
(c) July 29: House agrees to conference report, p.
10420; 2514
(d) July 30: Senate agrees to conference report, pp.
10471-10476, 10478-10482, 10488-10490, 10492-
10500. 2514
1.15 Administrative Procedure, as amended, 5 U.S.C. §§551-559, 701-
705 (1968). 2556
[Referred to in 33 U.S.C. §§1162 (b), 1163 (e) 1
1.15a Act to Enact Title 5, United States Code, September 6,
1966, P.L. 89-554, 80 Stat. 381-338, 392-393. 2570
(1) House Committee on the Judiciary, H.R. REP. No.
901, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965). 2581
(2) Senate Committee on the Judiciary, S. REP. No. 1380,
89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966). 2591
(3) Congressional Record:
(a) Vol. 112 (1965), Sept. 7: Passed House, p. 22954; 2600
(b) Vol. 113 (1956), July 25: Amended and passed
Senate, p. 17010; 2600
(c) Vol. 113 (1966), Aug. 11: House concurs in Sen-
ate amendments, p. 19077. 2600
1.15b To Amend Section 552 of Title 5, United States Code, June
5,1967, P.L. 90-23, §1, 81 Stat. 54 2601
(1) House Committee on the Judiciary, H.R. REP. No.
125, 90th Cong., 1st Sess. (1967). 2604
(2) Senate Committee on the Judiciary, S. REP. No. 248,
90th Cong., 1st Sess. (1967). 2611
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 113 (1967):
(a) April 3: Passed House, pp. 8109-8110; 2620
(b) May 19: Amended and passed Senate, pp. 13253-
13254; 2621
(c) May 25: House concurs in Senate amendments,
p. 14056. 2621
1.15c Act to Amend Title 5, 10, and 37, United States Code to
Codify Recent Laws, October 22, 1968, P.L. 90-623, §1(1),
82 Stat. 1312. 2622
(1) House Committee* on the Judiciary, H.R. REP. No.
1721, 90th Cong., 2d Sess. (1968). 2622
(2) Senate Committee on the Judiciary, S. REP. No. 1624,
90th Cong., 2d Sess. (1968). 2623
-------
xxiv CONTENTS
Page
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 114 (1968):
(a) Sept. 16: Amended and passed House, pp. 26929-
26930; 2624
(b) Oct. 11: Passed Senate, p. 30832. 2624
1.16 Higher Education General Provisions, Definitions, as amended,
20 U.S.C. §1141 (1970). 2625
[Referred to in 33 U.S.C. §1169(1) (B) ]
1.16a Higher Education Act of 1985, November 8, 1965, P.L.
89-329, Title XII, §801, 79 Stat. 1269. 2627
(1) House Committee on Education and Labor, H.R. REP.
No. 621, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965). 2628
(2) Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, S.
REP. No. 673, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965). 2629
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 1178, 89th
Cong., 1st Sess. (1965). 2630
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. Ill (1965):
(a) Aug. 26: Debated, amended and passed House,
p. 21925; 2632
(b) Sept. 2: Debated, amended and passed Senate,
pp. 22714-22717; 2633
(c) Oct. 20: House agrees to conference report, p.
27678; 2633
(d) Oct. 20: Senate agrees to conference report, pp.
27595-27596. 2633
1.16b Higher Education Amendments of 1968, October 16, 1968,
PL. 90-575, Title II, §§251, 293, 294, 82 Stat. 1042,1043, 1050,
1051. 2633
(1) Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, S.
REP. No. 1387, 90th Cong., 2d Sess. (1968). 2636
(2) House Committee on Education and Labor, H.R. REP.
No. 1649, 90th Cong., 2d Sess. (1968). 2644
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 1919, 90th
Cong., 2d Sess. (1968). 2647
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 114 (1968):
(a) July 15: Amended and passed Senate, p. 21272; 2651
(b) July 25: Amended and passed House, p. 23374; 2651
(c) Sept. 26: House agrees to conference report, pp.
28329, 28336-28337, 28339; 2651
(d) Oct. 1: Senate agrees to conference report, pp.
28975, 28982, 28983, 28985. 2651
1.16c Higher Education Act Amendments of 1970, April 13,1970,
P.L. 91-230, Title VIII, §806 (b), 84 Stat. 192. 2651
(1) House Committee on Education and Labor H.R. REP.
No. 91-114, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. (1969). 2652
(2) Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, S.
REP. No. 91-634, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970). 2653
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 91-937, 91st
Cong., 2d Sess. (1970). 2654
(4) Congressional Record:
(a) Vol.115 (1969), April 23: Considered and passed
House, p. 10098; 2655
-------
CONTENTS xxv
Page
(b) Vol. 116 (1970), Feb. 19: Amended and passed
Senate, p. 4141; 2655
(c) Vol. 116 (1970), April 1: Senate agreed to con-
ference report, p. 9999; 2655
(d) Vol. 116 (1970), April 7: House agreed to con-
ference report, p. 10623. 2655
1.17 National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. §4321 et
seq. (1970). 2656
[Referred to in 33 U.S.C. §1165a(a), (b)]
(See, "General 1.2a-1.2a(4) (e)" for legislative history)
1.18 Public Health Service Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §§241, 243, 246
(1970). 2663
(See, "General 1.12a-1.12ae(3) (c)" for legislative history)
1.19 The Water Resource Planning Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. §1962,
etseq. (1971). 2681
1.19a Water Resources Planning Act, July 22, 1965, P.L. 89-80,
79 Stat. 244. 2705
(1) House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs,
H.R. REP. No. 169, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965). 2709
(2) Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, S.
REP. No. 68, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965). 2736
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 603, 89th
Cong., 1st Sess. (1965). 2748
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. Ill (1965):
(a) Feb. 25: Passed Senate, pp. 3621, 3626; 2764
(b) March 31: Amended and passed House, pp. 6406,
6412; . 2766
(c) April 9: Senate request conference, p. 7676; 2766
(d) April 13: House appoints conferees, pp. 7926; 2766
(e) July 13: House agrees to conference report, pp.
16540, 16553-16554; 2767
(f) July 14: Senate agrees to conference report, pp.
16733-16735. 2769
1.19b Rivers and Harbors Act of 1970, December 31, 1970, P.L.
91-611, Title II, §§209, 221, 84 Stat. 1829, 1831. 2773
(1) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP. No.
91-1665, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970). 2774
(2) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No. 91-
1422, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970). 2777
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 91-1782, 91st
Cong., 2d Sess. (1970). 2778
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 116 (1970):
(a) Dec. 7: Amended and passed House, p. 40148; 2780
(b) Dec. 19: Amended and passed Senate, pp. 40593-
40599, 40613, 40619-40620; 2782
(c) Dec. 18: House agrees to conference report, pp.
42509-42510, 42513-42514; 2782
(d) Dec. 19: Senate agrees to conference report, pp.
42724, 42727, 42728. 2786
1.19c Water Resources Planning Act Amendments of 1971, June
17, 1971, P.L. 92-27, 85 Stat. 77. 2787
-------
xxvi CONTENTS
Page
(1) House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs,
H.R. REP. No. 92-197, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971). 2787
(2) Ssnate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, S.
REP. No. 92-139, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971). 2791
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 117 (1971):
(a) May 17: Considered and passed House, pp.
H3981-H3982; 2795
(b) June 7: Considered and passed Senate, pp.
S8377-S8378. 2796
1.20 Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965, as amended,
40 App. U.S.C. §§212, 214 (1971). 2798
1.20a Appalachian Regional Development Act of 1965, March
9, 1965, P.L. 89-4, §§212, 214, 79 Stat. 16, 17. 2800
(1) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No. 13,
89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965). 2802
(2) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP. No.
51, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965). 2807
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. Ill (1965):
(a) Feb. 1: Amended and passed Senate, p. 1715;* 2809
(b) March 3: Passed House, p. 4030.* 2809
1.20b 1966 Reorganization Plan No. 2, May 10, 1966, 80 Stat.
1608. 2809
1.20c To Revise and Extend the Appalachian Regional De-
velopment Act of 1965, and to Amend the Public Works
and Economic Development Act of 1965, October 11, 1967,
P.L. 90-103, Title I, §§114,116, 81 Stat. 262, 263. 2812
(1) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No. 159,
90th Cong., 1st Sess. (1967). 2814
(2) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP. No.
548, 90th Cong., 1st Sess. (1967). 2820
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 706, 90th
Cong., 1st Sess. (1967). 2829
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 113 (1967):
(a) April 26, 27: Debated, amended and passed Sen-
ate, p. 10964; ' 2831
(b) Sept. 13, 14: Debated, amended and passed
House, pp. 25286, 25288-25290, 25316-25317, 25578-
25579, 25618-25620; 2832
(c) Sept. 28: House agrees to conference report, p.
27183; 2832
(d) Sept. 29: Senate agrees to conference report, pp.
27327-27328. . . 2832
1.20d 1969 Amendments to the Appalachian Regional Develop-
ment Act, November 25, 1969, P.L. 91-123, Title I, §107,
83 Stat. 215. 2833
(1) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP. No.
91-336, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. (1969). 2834
(2) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No. 91-
291, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. (1969). 2835
* Denotes pertinent section is not discussed—page number provided only as complete
legislative history.
-------
CONTENTS xxvii
Page
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 91-614, 91st
Cong., 1st Sess. (1969). 2837
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 115 (1969):
(a) July 8: Passed Senate, p. 18556;* 2838
(b) July 15: Amended and passed House, p. 19607;* 2838
(c) Nov. 5: Senate agrees to conference report, p.
33031;* . 2838
(d) Nov. 19: House agrees to conference report, p.
34890.* 2838
1.20e Airport and Airway Development and Revenue Act of
1970, May 21, 1970, P.L. 91-258, Title I, §52 (b) (5), 84 Stat.
235. 2838
(1) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, HR. REP. No. 91-601, 91st Cong., 1st Ssss.
(1969). 2839
(2) Senate Committee on Commerce, S. REP. No. 91-565,
91st Cong., 1st Sess. (1969). • 2840
(3) Senate Finance Committee, S. REP. No. 91-706, 91st
Cong., 2d Sess. (1970). 2840
(4) Committee of Conference, H R. REP. No. 91-1074,
91st Cong , 2d Sess. (1970). 2841
(5) Congressional Record:
(a) Vol. 115 (1969), Nov. 6: Passed House, p. 33312;* 2841
(b) Vol. 116 (1970), Feb. 26: Amended and passed
Senate, p. 5083;* 2841
(c) Vol. 116 (1970), May 12: Senate agrees to con-
ference report, p. 1513S;* 2842
(d) Vol. 116 (1970), May 13: House agrees to con-
ference report, p. 15297.* 2842
1.20f Appalachian Regional Development Act Amendments of
1971, August 5, 1971, P.L. 92-65, Title II, §210, 85 Stat. 171. 2842
(1) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No. 92-
273, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971). 2843
(2) House Committee on Public Works, H R. REP. No.
92-372, 92d Cong., 1st Sess. (1971). 2844
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 117 (1971):
(a) July 21: Passed Senate, p. S11769;* 2846
(b) July 28: Passed House, p. H7328;* 2846
(c) July 30: Senate agrees to House amendments, p.
S12558.* 2846
1.21 The Disaster Relief Act, 40 U.S.C §4401, et seq. (1970). 2847
(See, "General 1.8a-1.8a(4) (f)" for legislative history)
1.22 Department of Transportation Act, 49 U.S.C. §1653 (f) (1968). 2867
(See, "General 15a-1.5a(3) (f)" for legislative history)
1.23 Federal Aid Highway Act, as amended, 23 U.S.C. §109 (h) (1970). 2868
(See, "General 1.6a-1.6d(3) (f)" for legislative history)
1.24 Amortization of Pollution Control Facilities, as amended, 26
U.S.C. §169(d)(l)(B), (3) (1969). 2871
(See, "General 1.4a-1.4a(5) (c)" for legislative history)
1.25 Airport and Airway Development Act, 49 U.S.C. §§1712(f),
1716(c) (4), (e) (1970). 2875
(See, "General 1.7a-1.7a(4) (d)" for legislative history)
-------
xxviii CONTENTS
Page
1.26 Interest on Certain Government Obligations, as amended, 26
U.S.C. §103 (1969). 2878
(See, "General 1.9a-1.9d(4) (d)" for legislative history)
1.27 Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, as amended, 16 U.S.C.
§§661-666c (1965). 2880
1.27a To Promote the Conservation of Wildlife, Fish and Game,
and for Other Purposes, March 10, 1934, P.L. 73-121, 48
Stat. 401. 2889
(1) Senate Special Committee on Conservation of Wild-
life Resources, S. REP. No. 244, 73rd Cong., 2d Sess.
(1934). . 2891
(2) House Committee on Agriculture, H.R. REP. No. 850,
73rd Cong., 2d Sess. (1934). 2892
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 78 (1934):
(a) Feb. 6: Passed Senate, pp. 2010-2011; 2893
(b) March 5: Passed House, pp. 3725-3726. 2895
1.27b Reorganization Plan No. II, §4(e), (f), 53 Stat. 1433. 2899
(1) Message from the President of the United States,
H.R. DOC. No. 288, 76th Cong., 1st Sess. (1939). 2900
1.27c 1940 Reorganization Plan No. Ill, §3, 54 Stat. 1232. 2901
(1) Message from the President of the United States,
H.R. DOC. No. 681, 76th Cong., 3rd Sess. (1940). 2902
1.27d To Amend the Act of March 10, 1934, August 14, 1946,
P.L. 79-732, 60 Stat. 1080. 2903
(1) House Committee on Agriculture, H.R. REP. No. 1944,
79th Cong., 2d Sess. (1946). 2907
(2) Senate Committee on Agriculture, S. REP. No. 1698,
79th Cong., 2d Sess. (1946). 2912
(3) Senate Committee on Agriculture, S. REP. No. 1748,
79th Cong., 2d Sess. (1946). 2916
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 92 (1946):
(a) May 7: Passed House, pp. 4580-4561; 2920
(b) July 17: Senate recommits, p. 9205; 2923
(c) July 29: Amended and passed Senate, p. 10349; 2924
(d) July 30: House concurs in Senate amendments,
p. 10489. 2925
1.27e To Amend the Act of March 10,1934, as amended, June 19,
1948, P.L. 80-697, 62 Stat. 497. 2926
(1) House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries,
H.R. REP. No. 504, 80th Cong., 1st Sess. (1947). ' 2927
(2) Senate Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, S. REP. No. 1448, 80th Cong., 2d Sess. (1948). 2934
(3) Congressional Record:
(a) Vol. 93 (1947), June 16: Passed House, pp. 7086-
7087; . 2938
(b) Vol. 94 (1948), June 10: Amended and passed
Senate, p. 7693; 2940
(c) Vol. 94 (1948), June 11: House concurs in Senate
amendments, p. 7889. 2940
-------
CONTENTS xxix
Page
1.27f To Amend the Act of March 10, 1934, as amended, August
12,1958, P.L. 85-624, §2, 72 Stat. 563. 2940
VOLUME VI
(1) House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries,
H.R. REP. No. 2183, 85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958). 2947
(2) Senate Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, S. REP. No. 1981, 85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958). 2958
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 104 (1958):
(a) July 21: Passed House, pp. 1440-1442; 2979
(b) July 31: Passed Senate, p. 15713. 2979
1.27g Federal Water Project Recreation Act, July 9, 1965, P.L.
89-72, §6 (b), 79 Stat. 216. 2979
(1) Senate Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, S.
REP. No. 149, 89th Cong., 1st Sass. (1985). 2980
(2) House Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs,
H.R. REP. No. 254, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965). 2983
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 538, 89th
Cong., 1st Sess. (1965). . 2984
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. Ill (1965):
(a) April 13: Amended and passed Senate, p. 7891; 2985
(b) May 18: Amended and passed House, p. 10881; 2985
(c) June 23: House agrees to conference report, p.
14464; 2985
(d) June 25: Senate agrees to conference report, p.
14814.* . . . 2985
1.28 Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965, 42 U.S.C.
§3136 (1965). . 2986
1.28a Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965,
August 26, 1965, P.L. 89-136, §106, 79 Stat. 554. 2986
(1) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No. 193,
89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965) .* 2987
(2) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP. No.
539, 89th Cong., 1st Sess. (1965) .* 2988
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. Ill (1965):
(a) June 1: Debated, amended and passed Senate,
p. 12183;* 2988
(b) Aug. 12: Debated, amended, and passed House,
pp. 20250-20251; 2988
(c) Aug. 16: Senate concurs in House amendments,
p. 20571.* 2988
1.28b Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1966, 80 Stat. 1608. 2989
(1) Message from the President of the United States, H.R.
DOC. No. 388, 89th Cong., 2d Sess. (1966). 2991
1.29 River and Harbor Act of 1910, 33 U.S.C. §421. 2994
[Referred to in 33 U.S.C. §1371 (b) ]
1.29a River and Harbor Act of 1910, June 23, 1910, P.L. 61-245,
36 Stat. 593. . 2995
-------
xxx CONTENTS
Page
(1) House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce, H.R. REP. No. 1120, 61st Cong., 2d Sess.
(1910). 2996
(2) Committee on Conference, H.R. REP. No. 1613, 61st
Cong., 2d Sess. (1910) .* 3003
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 45 (1910):
(a) May 2: Amended and passed House, p. 5672;* 3003
(b) May 12: Amended and passed Senate, p. 6119;* 3003
(c) June 16: Senate agrees to conference report, p.
8219;* ... . 3003
(d) June 17: House agrees to conference report, p.
8439.* 3003
1.30 Supervisory Harbors Act of 1888, as amended, 33 U.S.C. §§441-
451 (1958) 3003
[Referred to in 33 U.S.C. §1371.]
l.SOa. New York Harbor Act of 1888, June 29, 1888, P.L. 50-496,
25 Stat. 209. 3010
(1) Senate Committee on Commerce, S. REP. No. 224,
50th Cong., 1st Sess. (1888). 3012
(2) House Committee on Commerce, H.R. REP. No. 1963,
50th Cong., 1st Sess. (1888). 3015
(3) Congres:ional Record, Vol. 19, (1888):
(a) March 21, April 6: Debated, amended and
passed Senate, pp. 2300-2301, 2775;* 3015
(b) June 4: Debated, amended and passed House,
pp. 4889-4890; 3015
(c) June 14: Senate concurs in House amendments,
p. 5239.* 3018
l.SOb River and Harbor Act of 1894, August 18, 1894, P.L.
53-299, §§3, 5, 28 Stat. 360 3018
(1) House Committee on Rivers and Harbors, H.R.
REP. No. 639, 53rd Cong., 2d Sess. (1894) .* 3923
(2) Senate Committee on Commerce, S. REP. No. 519,
53rd Cong., 2d Sess. (1894).* 3023
(3) Committee of Conference, 53rd Cong., 2d Sess., Con-
gressional Record, Vol. 26 (1894), pp. 8173-8175.* 3023
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 26 (1894):
(a) May 4: Debated, amended and passed House,
pp. 4376,4430; . ... . 3023
(b) July 13: Amended and passed Senate, p. 7414;* 3024
(c) Aug. 6: Senate agreed to conference report, p.
8230;* 3024
(d) Aug. 6: House agreed to conference report, p.
8251.* 3024
1.30c 1908 Amendments to 1894 Act, May 28, 1908, P.L. 60-
152, §8, 35 Stat. 426. 3024
(1) House Committee on the Merchant Marine and
Fisheries, H.R. REP. No. 1672, 60th Cong., 1st Sess.
(1908). . 3028
(2) Senate Committee on Commerce, 60th Cong., 1st
Sess., Congressional Record, Vol. 42 (1908), p. 6963.* 3030
-------
CONTENTS xxxi
Page
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 42 (1908):
(a) May 25: Considered and passed House, pp.
6901-6905; . . 3030
(b) May 26: Considered and passsd Senate, pp.
6963-6972.* 3034
l.SOd 1909 Amendments to 1908 Act, February 16, 1909, P.L.
60-231, 35 Stat. 623. 3034
(1) House Committee on the Merchant Marine and
Fisheries, H.R. REP. No. 2102, 60th Cong, 2d Sess.
(1909). 3035
(2) Congressional Record, Vol. 43 (1909):
(a) Feb. 10: Amended and passed House, p. 2149;* 3036
(b) Feb. 11: Passed Senate, pp. 2195-2196.* 3036
l.SOe Repealing Certain Obsolete Provisions of Law Relating
to the Naval Service, June 29, 1949, P.L. 81-144, 63 Stat.
300. 3036
[No Relevant Discussion]
l.SOf 1952 Amendments to the New York Harbor Act of 1888,
July 12, 1952, P.L. 82-526, 66 Stat. 596. 3036
(1) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP. No.
2260, 82d Cong., 2d Sess. (1952). 3037
(2) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
2088, 82d Cong., 2d Sess. (1952). 3039
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 98 (1952):
(a) June 25: Passed House, p. 8079;* 3040
(b) July 4: Passed Senate, p. 9317.* 3040
1.30g 1958 Amendments to Act of 1888, August 28, 1958, P.L.
85-802, §1, 72 Stat. 970. . 3040
(1) House Committee on Public Works, H.R. REP. No.
2233, 85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958). . 3042
(2) Senate Committee on Public Works, S. REP. No.
2383, 85th Cong., 2d Sess. (1958). 3050
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 104 (1958):
(a) Aug. 4: Amended and parsed House, pp. 16021-
16022.* 3052
(b) Aug. 18: Passed Senate, p. 18033.* 3052
1.31 Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act, as amended,
16 U.S.C. §1005 (1972). 3052
1.31a Rural Development Act of 1972, August 30, 1972, P.L.
92-419, §201 (g), 86 Stat. 669. 3053
(1) House Committee on Agriculture, H.R. REP. No.
92-835, 92d Cong., 2d Sess. (1972). 3055
(2) Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, S.
REP. No. 92-734, 92d Cong, 2d Sess. (1972). 3062
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 92-1129,
92d Cong, 2d Sess. (1972). 3068
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 118 (1972):
(a) Feb. 23: Considered and passed House;* 3068
(b) April 19, 20: Considered and passed Senate,
amended, in lieu of S. 3462,* 3068
(c) July 27: House agreed to conference report;* 3068
-------
xxxii CONTENTS
Page
(d) Aug. 17: Senate agreed to conference report.* 3068
1.32 Reefs for Marine Life Conservation, 16 U.S.C. §1220 (1972). 3069
1.32a Commerce Department Maritime Programs, August 22,
1972, P.L. 92-102, §3 (b), 86 Stat. 617. . . 3069
(1) House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fish-
eries, H.R. REP. No. 92-934, 92d Cong, 2d Sess.
(1972).* 3070
(2) Senate Committee on Commerce, S. REP. No. 92-
841, 92d Cong., 2d Sess. (1972).* 3071
(3) Congressional Record, Vol. 118 (1972):
(a) April 11: Considered and Passed House;* 3071
(b) July 26: Considered and passed Senate,
amended, S11935-S11937; 3071
(c) Aug. 14: House concurred in Senate amend-
ments.* 3077
1.33 Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972, 16 U.S.C. §1451 et seq.
(1972). 3077
1.33a Marine Resources and Engineering Development Act of
1966, Amendments, October 27, 1972, P.L. 92-583,
§307 (3) (f), 86 Stat. 1286. 3087
(1) Senate Committee on Commerce, S. REP. No. 92-
753, 92d Cong, 2d Se-s. (1972). 3099
(2) House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fish-
eries, H.R. REP. No. 92-1049, 92d Cong., 2d Se=s.
(1972). . 3104
(3) Committee of Conference, H.R. REP. No. 92-1544,
92d Cong, 2d Sess. (1972). 3111
(4) Congressional Record, Vol. 118 (1972):
(a) April 25: Considered and passed Senate, pp.
S6654-S6673; 3112
(b) Aug. 2: Considered and passed, House, amended,
in lieu of H.R. 14146;* 3142
(c) Oct. 12: House and Senate agreed to conference
report.* 3142
2. EXECUTIVE ORDERS
2.1 E.O. 11490, Assigning of Emergency Preparedness Functions to
Federal Agencies and Departments, October 30, 1969, 34 Fed.
Reg. 17567. 3145
2.2 E.O. 11507, Prevention, Control, and Abatement of Air and
Water Pollution at Federal Facilities, February 4, 1970, 35 Fed.
Reg. 2573. 3197
2.3 E.O. 11514, Protection and Enhancement of Environmental
Quality, March 5, 1970, 35 Fed. Reg. 4247. 3203
2.4 E.O. 11548, Delegating Functions of the President Under the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, July 20, 1970,
35 Fed. Reg. 11677. 3207
2.5 E.O. 11574, Administration of the Refuse Act Permit Program,
December 23, 1970, 35 Fed. Reg. 19627. 3211
2.5a Statement by the President on Signing an Executive
Order Providing for the Establishment of a Federal Permit
-------
CONTENTS xxxiii
Page
Program to Regulate the Discharge of Waste into the
Waters of the United States, Weekly Compilation of Presi-
dential Documents, December 23, 1970, p. 1724. 3212
2.5b Congressional Record, Vol. 117 (1971), Feb. 4: House dis-
cussion of the Refuse Act Permit Program, pp. 1754-1763. 3213
2.5c Congressional Record, Vol. 117 (1971), Feb. 4: Senate dis-
cussion of the 1899 Refuse Act, pp. 1673; 1679-1684; 3233
2.6 E.O. 11575, Administration of the Disaster Relief Act of 1970,
December 31,1970, 36 Fed. Reg. 37. 3244
2.7 E.O. 11578, Ohio River Basin Commission, January 13, 1971, 38
Fed. Reg. 683. 3246
2.8 E.O. 11613, Membership of Environmental Protection Agency
on the Established River Basin Commissions, August 2, 1971,
36 Fed. Reg. 14299. 3248
2.9 E.O. 11331, Establishment of Pacific Northwest River Basins
Commission, March 6, 1967, 32 Fed. Reg. 3875, as amended by
E.O. 11613, Aug. 2, 1971, 36 Fed. Reg. 14299. 3249
2.10 E.O.11345, Establishment of the Great Lakes Basin Commission,
April 20, 1967, 32 Fed. Reg. 6329, as amended by E.O. 11613,
Aug. 2, 1971, 36 Fed. Reg. 14299; E.O. 11646, Feb. 8, 1972, 37
Fed. Reg. 2925. 3251
2.11 E.O. 11359, Establishment of the Souris-Red-Rainy River Basin
Commission, June 20, 1967, 32 Fed. Reg. 8851, as amended
by E.O. 11613, Aug. 2, 1971, 36 Fed. Reg. 14299; E.O. 11635, Dec.
9, 1971, 36 Fed. Reg. 23615. . 3253
2.12 E.O. 11371, Establishment of the New England River Basins
Commission, September 6, 1967, 32 Fed. Reg. 12903, as amended
by E.O. 11528, Apr. 24, 1970, 35 Fed. Reg. 6695; E.O. 11613,
Aug. 2, 1971. 3255
2.13 E.O. 11658, Establishment of the Missouri River Basin Commis-
sion, March 22, 1972, 37 Fed. Reg. 6045. 3257
2.14 E.O. 11659, Establishment of the Upper Mississippi River Basin
Commission, March 22, 1972, 37 Fed. Reg. 6047. 3259
3. REGULATIONS
3.1 Grants for Water Pollution Control, Environmental Protection
Agency, 18 C.F.R. §§501.1-601.125 (1971). 3261
3.2 Certification of Facilities, Environmental Protection Agency, 40
C.F.R. §§20.1-20.10 (1971).
3.3 Water Pollution Control Planning, Environmental Protection
Agency, 40 C.F.R. §§35.001-35.002, 35.150 (1972).
3.4 Water Quality Management Planning Grants, Environmental
Protection Agency, 40 C.F.R. §§35.200-35.240 (1972).
3.5 Water Pollution Control and Interstate Program Grants, Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency, 40 C.F.R. §§35.551-35.575 (1972).
3.6 Grants for Construction of Wastewater Treatment Works,
Environmental Protection Agency, 40 C.F.R. §§35.800-35.850
(1972).
3.7 Grants for Construction of Treatment Works—Federal Water
Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, Environmental
Protection Agency, 40 C.F.R. §§35.910 (1972).
-------
xxxiv CONTENTS
Page
3.8 Standard Setting Conferences, Hearings and Notification of
Alleged Violators of Water Quality Standards, Environmental
Protection Agency, 40 C.F.R. §§104.1-104.24 (1972).
3.9 Public Hearings Under Federal Water Pollution Control Act,
Environmental Protection Agency, 49 C.F.R. §§106.1-108.13
(1972).
3.10 Filing of Reports with the Administrator by Persons Whose
Alleged Activities Result in Discharges Causing or Contributing
to Water Pollution, Environmental Protection Agency, 40 C.F.R.
§§107.1-107.7 (1971).
3.11 Criteria for State, Local, and Regional Oil Removal Contingency
Plans, Environmental Protection Agency, 40 C.F.R. §§109.1-
109.6 (1971).
3.12 Discharge of Oil, Environmental Protection Agency, 40 C.F.R.
§§110.1-110.9 (1971).
3.13 Water Quality Standards, Environmental Protection Agency,
40 C.F.R. §§120.1-120.11 (1972).
3.14 Revision of Water Quality Standards, Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, 40 C.F.R. §§122.1-122.14 (1971).
3.15 State Certification of Activities Requiring a Federal License
or Permit, Enrivronment Protection Agency, 40 C.F.R. §123
(1972).
3.16 Marine Sanitation Device Standards, Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, 40 C.F.R. §§140.1-140.5 (1972).
3.17 Control of Pollution by Oil and Hazardous Substances, Dis-
charge Removal, Department of Transportation, 33 C.F.R.
§§153.01-153.105 (1970).
3.18 Corps of Engineers Regulations Under Refuse Act, Permit for
Discharge or Disposal Into Navigable Waters, 33 C.F.R. §§209.10-
209.13 (1971).
3.19 Drinking Water Standards, Public Health Service, 42 C.F.R.
§§72.201-72.207 (1971).
3.20 Financial Responsibility for Oil Pollution Cleanup, Federal
Maritime Commission, 46 C.F.R. §§542.1-542.9 (1971).
3.21 Delegation of Authority With Respect to the Administration of
Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970, Department of Trans-
portation, 49 C.F.R. §1.46 (1971).
4. GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
4.1 EPA Annual Report on National Requirements and Costs of
Water Pollution Control, as required by 33 U.S.C. §1175 (a) as
amended (1970). ... . . 3267
4.1a Cost of Clean Water, Vol. I, Municipal Investment Needs,
Vol. II, Cost Effectiveness and Clean Water, Environ-
mental Protection Agency, March 1971. 3267
4.1b Economics of Clean Water, Vol. I & II, Environmental
Protection Agency, February 1972. . 3391
4.2 Selected Reports:
4.2a Federal Laws Affecting Rivers and Harbors Works, A
Lecture Given by Judge G. W. Koonce, O.C.E. Before the
Company Officers Class, the Engineering School, Ft.
Humphreys, Va., April 23,1926. 3517
-------
CONTENTS xxxv
Page
VOLUME VII
4.2b Our Waters and Wetlands: How the Corps of Engineers
Can Help Prevent Their Destruction and Pollution, Com-
mittee on Government Operations, H.R. REP. No. 91-917,
91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970). 3533
4.2c Qui tarn Actions and the 1899 Refuse Act, Citizen Law-
suits Against Polluters of the Nations Waterways, House
Subcommittee on Conservation and Natural Resources of
the Committee on Government Operations, 91st Cong.,
2dSess. (1970). 3556
4.2d Clean Water for the 1970's, a Status Report, U.S. Depart-
ment of the Interior, Federal Water Quality Administra-
tion, June 1970. 3592
4.3 National Oil and Hazardous Material Pollution Contingency
Plan, Council on Environmental Quality, August 20, 1971. 3706
4.4 Guidelines for Litigation Under the Refuse Act Permit Program,
Department of Justice, April 7, 1972. 3720
4.5 Water Quality Standards Summaries:
4.5a "Standards for Temperature," Environmental Protection
Agency, Division of Water Quality Standards, March 1971. 3722
4.5b "Standards for Disinfection," Environmental Protection
Agency, Division of Water Quality Standards, May 1971. 3732
4.5c "Standards for Mercury and Heavy Metals," Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Division of Water Quality
Standards, May 1971. 3739
4.5d "Standards for Radioactive Materials," Environmental
Protection Agency, Division of Water Quality Standards,
May 1971. 3747
4.5e "Standards for Phosphates," Environmental Protection
Agency, Division of Water Quality Standards, June 1971. 3750
4.5f "Standards for Mixing Zones," Environmental Protection
Agency, Division of Water Quality Standards, September
1971. 3767
4.5g "Standards for Radioactive Materials," Environmental
Protection Agency, Division of Water Quality Standards,
November 1971. 3775
4.5h "Standards for Nitrates," Environmental Protection
Agency, Division of Water Quality Standards, November
1971. 3782
4.5i "Standards for Antidegradation," Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, Division of Water Quality Standards,
April 1972. 3813
4.6 Memorandum of Understanding Between the Environmental
Protection Agency and the Department of Transportation, 36
Fed. Reg. 24080 (1971). 3831
4.7 Discharges of Oil for Research Development and Demonstra-
tion Purposes, Guidelines, Environmental Protection Agency, 36
Fed. Reg. 7326 (1971). 3834
4.8 Memorandum of Understanding Providing for Cooperation in
the Investigation of Violations of the Refuse Act Between Ad-
-------
xxxvi CONTENTS
ministrator of the Environmental Protection Agency and the
Secretary of the Army, 36 Fed. Reg. 3074 (1971). 3836
4.9 Report to Congress on Water Pollution Control Manpower De-
velopment and Training Activities, Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Water Programs, March 1972. .. . 3839
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3533
4.2b OUR WATERS AND WETLANDS: HOW THE CORPS OF
ENGINEERS CAN HELP PREVENT THEIR DESTRUCTION
AND POLLUTION, COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT
OPERATIONS
H.R. REP. No. 91-917, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970)
OUR WATERS AND WETLANDS: HOW THE CORPS OF
ENGINEERS CAN HELP PREVENT THEIR DESTRUCTION
AND POLLUTION
MARCH 18, 1970.—Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. DAWSON, from the Committee on Government Operations,
submitted the following
TWENTY-FIRST REPORT
BASED ON A STUDY BY THE CONSERVATION AND NATURAL
RESOURCES SUBCOMMITTEE
On March 17, 1970, the Committee on Government Operations
approved and adopted a report entitled "Our Waters and Wetlands:
How the Corps of Engineers Can Help Prevent Their Destruction
and Pollution." The chairman was directed to transmit a copy to the
Speaker of the House.
The natural environments of our Nation's bays, estuaries, and
other water bodies are being destroyed or threatened with destruc-
tion by water pollution, alteration of river courses, landfilling of the
shallow and marshland areas, sedimentation, dredging, construction
of piers and bulkheads, and other manmade changes. Many of these
water areas, including some located near densely populated urban
areas, serve public needs for recreational opportunities and provide
feeding, habitat, and nesting or spawning grounds for migratory
waterfowl, fish, shellfish, and other wildlife. Many Federal agencies
participate in, or authorize work and activities which contribute to,
the destruction of these water areas, and some agencies have specific
responsibilities for preventing such pollution and destruction.
This report examines several aspects of the Corps of Engineers'
-------
3534 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
role in carrying out its responsibilities for protecting the Nation's
water areas, and recommends how the Corps can stop or minimize
this pollution and destruction.
[p. 1]
1. THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS, WHICH IS CHARGED BY
CONGRESS WITH THE DUTY TO PROTECT THE NATION'S
NAVIGABLE WATERS, SHOULD, WHEN CONSIDERING
WHETHER TO APPROVE APPLICATIONS FOR LANDFILLS,
DREDGING AND OTHER WORK IN NAVIGABLE WATERS,
INCREASE ITS CONSIDERATION OF THE EFFECTS WHICH
THE PROPOSED WORK WILL HAVE, NOT ONLY ON
NAVIGATION, BUT ALSO ON CONSERVATION OF NATU-
RAL RESOURCES, FISH AND WILDLIFE, AIR AND WATER
QUALITY, ESTHETICS, SCENIC VIEW, HISTORIC SITES,
ECOLOGY, AND OTHER PUBLIC INTEREST ASPECTS OF
THE WATERWAY
The River and Harbor Act of 1899 (act of March 3, 1899, c. 425,
30 Stat. 1151), authorizes the Corps of Engineers to regulate or
prevent the filling of land submerged by water at high tide. That act
forbids the creation of "any obstruction not affirmatively authorized
by Congress to the navigable capacity of any of the waters of the
United States" (sec. 10; 33 U.S.C. sec. 403), or the discharge or deposit
in navigable water or its tributaries of "any refuse matter of any kind
or description whatever other than that flowing from streets and
sewers and passing therefrom in a liquid state" (sec. 13; 33 U.S.C.
407), unless such work, discharge or deposit is done under a permit
from the Corps of Engineers approved by the Secretary of the Army.
For many years, the Corps of Engineers administered the River
and Harbor Act of 1899 with primary or exclusive emphasis on how
the proposed structure or fill would affect navigation. Indeed, until
about 2 years ago, the Corps' public notices announcing the filing of
applications for permits to fill, dredge or construct works in navigable
waters, defined the Corps' interest as being confined to issues of
navigation, and requested comments from the public only on such
issues.
That restricted view of the 1899 act, however, was not required by
the law. As early as 1933 the Supreme Court ruled that under the
1899 act the Department of the Army may properly deny a permit to
erect a structure (or to make a fill) in the Potomac River, if such per-
mit would interfere with the public interest in having a parkway or
recreation area. United States ex rel. Greathouse v. Dern, 289 U.S.
352 (1933).
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3535
The scope Of the 1899 act was further amplified by the Fish and
Wildlife Coordination Act (as amended by the act of August 12, 1958,
72 Stat. 563, Public Law 85-624; 16 U.S.C. 661). This act enunciates
a national policy of "recognizing the vital contribution of our wildlife
resources to the Nation, the increasing public interest and significance
thereof due to expansion of our national economy and other factors,
and to provide that wildlife conservation shall receive equal considera-
tion and be coordinated with other features of water-resource devel-
opment programs. * * *" (Sec. 1; 16 U.S.C. 661.)
To carry out that policy, section 2(a) of the act (16 U.S.C. 662(a))
directs that "whenever the waters of any stream or other body of
water are proposed * * * to be impounded, diverted, the channel
deepened,
[p. 2]
or * * * otherwise controlled or modified for any purpose what-
ever * * * by any public or private agency under Federal permit
or license * * * such * * * agency first shall consult with the United
States Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior * * *
with a view to the conservation of wildlife resources by preventing
loss or damage to such resources * * *."
Subsection 2(b) of the act further provides that the "reports and
recommendations of the Secretary of the Interior on the wildlife as-
pects of such projects * * * based on surveys and investigations con-
ducted by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service * * * for the
purpose of determining means and measures that should be adopted
to prevent the loss of or damage to such wildlife resources, as well as
to provide concurrently for the development and improvement of such
resources, shall be made an integral part of any report prepared or
submitted * * * to any agency * * * having the authority * * * to au-
thorize the construction of water-resource development projects. * * *
Recommendations of the Secretary of the Interior shall be as specific
as is practicable with respect to features recommended for wildlife
conservation and development, * * * the results expected, and shall
describe the damage to wildlife attributable to the project and the
measures proposed for mitigating or compensating for these dam-
ages." The section further requires that "full consideration" must
be given to the Secretary's report and recommendations "on the wild-
life aspects."
The Corps' obligation to consider all facets of the public interest
in protecting estuaries, rivers, lakes, and other navigable waters also
arises from the national policy and directives expressed in many other
statutes and Executive orders designed to minimize pollution, maxi-
mize recreation, protect esthetics, preserve natural resources, and
-------
3536 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
promote the comprehensive planning and use of water bodies to
enhance the public interest rather than private gain.1
This national policy is emphasized and more fully expounded in
the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Public Law 91-190,
83 Stat. 852), signed by the President on January 1, 1970. In section
102 of that act, Congress mandates (1) that "the policies, regulations,
and public laws of the United States shall be interpreted and admin-
istered in accordance with the policies" of the National Environmental
Policy Act, and (2) that "all agencies of the Federal Government
shall" develop procedures which will "insure that presently un-
quantified environmental amenities and values" be given "appropriate
consider-
1 Some of these statutes and orders are:
Federal Water Power Act of 1920, as amended (16 U.S.C. 791, et seq.);
Oil Pollution Act of 1924, as amended (33 U.S C. 431, et seq.);
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 466, et seq.) as amended by Water
Quality Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-234; 79 Stat. 903) and Clean Water Restoration Act
of 1966 (Public Law 89-753; 80 Stat. 1246);
Delaware River Basin Compact Act of September 27, 1961 (Public Law 87-328; 75
Stat. 688);
Bureau of Outdoor Recreation Act of May 28, 1963 (Public Law 88-29, 77 Stat. 49;
16 U.S.C. 460 1);
Section 212, Appalachian Regional Development Act of March 9, 1965 (79 Stat. 5, 16;
Public Law 89-4; 40 U.S.C. App. sec. 212);
Water Resources Planning Act of July 22, 1965 (Public Law 89-80; 79 Stat. 244; 42
U.S.C. 1962a) ;
Section 702, Housing and Urban Development Act of August 10, 1965 (79 Stat. 451, 490;
Public Law 89-117; 42 U.S.C. 3102);
Section 106, Public Works and Economic Development Act of August 26, 1965 (79
Stat. 552, 554; 42 U.S.C. 3136; Public Law 89-136);
Estuarine Study Act of August 3, 1968 (Public Law 90-454; 82 Stat. 625; 16 U.S C. 1221);
National Water Commission Act of September 26, 1968 (Public Law 90-515; 82 Stat.
868; 42 U.S.C. 1962a, note);
Executive Order 11288 of July 2, 1966 (3 C.F.R. 423); superseded by Executive Order
11507 of February 4, 1970 (35 F R. 2573), (prescribing requirements for control and
abatement of air and water pollution at Federal installations).
Executive Order 11472 of May 29, 1969 (34 F.R. 8693), as amended by Executive Order
11514 of March 5, 1970 (35 F.R. 4247), (prescribing responsibilities of Federal agencies
and the Council on Environmental Quality under the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969, supra).
[p. 3]
ation in decisionmaking along with economic and technical
considerations." Section 102 also requires "all agencies of the Federal
Government" to prepare a "detailed statement" to be included in
"every recommendation or report" concerning "Federal actions
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment." That
detailed statement must include each of the following matters:
(i) The environmental impact of the proposed action;
(ii) Any adverse environmental effects which cannot be
avoided should the proposal be implemented;
(iii) Alternatives to the proposed action;
(iv) The relationship between local short-term uses of man's
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3537
environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term
productivity; and
(v) Any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of re-
sources which would be involved in the proposed action should
it be implemented.
The act, following the precedent of the consultation requirement in
the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act, also requires that the Federal
official making the detailed statement must first "consult with and
obtain the comments of any Federal agency which has jurisdiction by
law or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact in-
volved." Copies of such statement and comments "shall accompany
the proposal through the existing agency review processes." (Sec.
102.)
The combined effect of the 1899 statute, the Coordination Act, the
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, and the many other
statutes and executive orders concerning the protection of our waters
and other natural resources, is to charge the Corps of Engineers with
a responsibility that is analogous to that of the Federal Power Com-
mission in considering an application for a hydropower license. In
such cases, the Commission "must include as a basic concern the
preservation of natural beauty and of national historic shrines, keep-
ing in mind that, in our affluent society, the cost of a project is only
one of several factors to be considered." Scenic Hudson Preservation
Conference v. Federal Power Commission, 354 F. 2d 608, 624 (C.A.
2, 1965), cert, den., 384 U.S. 941 (1966).
This broad scope of the Corps' duty arises from its power to permit
the alteration or destruction of a navigable river or waterway (which
Justice Holmes memorably described as "more than an amenity, it is a
treasure").2 The breadth of that duty was further emphasized in
1967 by the Supreme Court of the United States in Udall v. Federal
Power Commission, 387 U.S. 428 (1967). In that case, the Court, in
reversing the Commission's grant of a hydropower license, stated
(at p. 450):
The question whether the proponents of a project "will be able
to use" the power supplied is relevant to the issue of the public
interest. So, too, is the regional need for additional power. But
the inquiry should not stop there. A license under the Act
empowers the licensee to construct, for its own use and benefit,
hydroelectric projects utilizing the flow of navigable waters and
thus, in effect, to appropriate water resources from the public
domain. The grant of authority to the Commission to alienate
Federal water
' New Jersey v. New York, 283 U.S. 336, 342 (1931).
[P- 4]
-------
3538 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
resources does not, of course, turn simply on whether the
project will be beneficial to the licensee. Nor is the test
solely whether the region will be able to use the additional
power. The test is whether the project will be in the public
interest. And that determination can be made only after an
exploration of all issues relevant to the "public interest," in-
cluding future power demand and supply, alternate sources of
power, the public interest in preserving reaches of wild rivers
and wilderness areas, the preservation of anadromous fish for
commercial and recreational purposes, and the protection of
wildlife.
It is clear that the 1899 act must be read, as the Supreme Court
of the United States said in United States v. Republic Steel Corp.,
362 U.S. 482, 491 (I960), "charitably in light of the purpose to be
served" and not with "a narrow, cramped reading."
Increasing public awareness of the devastation being wrought
through indiscriminate filling, dredging and other work in our Na-
tion's waterways has caused the Corps to reexamine and give greater
recognition to its responsibilities for the protection of bays, estuaries,
and other waterways and to acknowledge that its duty goes beyond
simply the question of whether a proposed fill or other work will
adversely affect navigation.
On July 13, 1967, the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of
the Interior entered into a memorandum of understanding, establish-
ing procedures whereby the Corps would obtain advice from the
Interior Department concerning all effects on fish and wildlife, recrea-
tion, pollution, natural resources, or the environment which may
arise from dredging, filling or other work authorized by the Corps
under the 1899 act.3
In 1968, the Corps revised its regulations to state that the Corps,
in considering an application for a permit to fill, dredge, discharge or
deposit materials, or conduct other activities affecting navigable
waters, will evaluate "all relevant factors, including the effect of the
proposed work on navigation, fish and wildlife, conservation, pollu-
tion, esthetics, ecology, and the general public interest." 33 CFR
209.120(d) (I).4 The Corps applied this policy when it recently re-
jected the efforts of land developers to fill in a major part of Boca
Ciega Bay, near St. Petersburg, Fla. See Zabel v. Tabb, 296 F. Supp.
764 (D.C. M.D. Fla., Tampa Div., Feb. 17, 1969), now on appeal to the
U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, No. 27555.
The committee commends the Corps for recognizing its broader
responsibilities to protect against unnecessary fills and other altera-
tion of water bodies. However, the committee is concerned whether
the Corps carries out in practice what its new regulations so properly
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3539
state. There have been recent instances where there appeared to be
a substantial gap between promise and performance. E.g., see the
committee's report of March 24, 1969 (H.Rept. 91-113), entitled "The
3 The Memorandum of Understanding is reprinted in 33 CFR 209.120(d) (11) and H. Rept.
91-113, pp. 61-62.
* This regulation, which became effective December 18, 1968, revised the Corps regulation
of December 7, 1967, which had read (sec. 209.330 (a)) :
"The decision as to whether a permit will be issued will be predicated upon the effects
of the permitted activities on the public interest including effects upon water quality,
recreation, fish and wildlife, pollution, our natural resources, as well as the effects on
navigation. ...
[p. 5]
Permit for Landfill in Hunting Creek: A Debacle in Conservation."
The committee therefore recommends as follows:
The Corps of Engineers should instruct its district engineers
and other personnel involved in considering applications for fills,
dredging, or other work in estuaries, rivers, and other bodies of
navigable water to increase their emphasis on how the work will
affect all aspects of the public interest, including not only navi-
gation but also conservation of natural resources, fish and wild-
life, air and water quality, esthetics, scenic view, historic sites,
ecology, and other public interest aspects of the waterway.
The committee also believes that the Corps of Engineers must make
an about-face in its handling of applications for new landfills, dredging,
or other work in navigable water. The Corps has often routinely
approved such applications unless the opponents of the permit clearly
showed that substantial damage to the public interest will result. The
committee believes that the Corps should place on the applicant the
burden of proving that the filling, dredging, or other work is indis-
putably in accord with the public interest. The Corps should be sure
that the environment will not be substantially harmed; or that there
is no feasible and prudent alternative to such work and that all
possible measures will be taken to minimize the resulting harm. In
arriving at such judgment, the Corps should evaluate the relationship
of the proposed work to the entire waterway and the total environ-
ment. Therefore the committee recommends as follows:
The Corps of Engineers should permit no further landfills or
other work in the Nation's estuaries, rivers and other waterways
except in those cases where the applicant affirmatively proves
that the proposed work is in accord with the public interest, in-
cluding the need to avoid the piecemeal destruction of these
water areas.
-------
3540 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
II. THE "HARBOR LINE" PROCEDURES HERETOFORE
FOLLOWED BY THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS DID NOT
ADEQUATELY PROTECT AGAINST THE FILLING OF SUB-
STANTIAL AREAS OF SUBMERGED LANDS SHOREWARD
OF THE HARBOR LINES, AND VIOLATED THE FISH AND
WILDLIFE COORDINATION ACT
Section 11 of the River and Harbor Act of 1890 (33 U.S.C. 404)
authorizes the Secretary of the Army to establish "harbor lines,"
whenever he deems them "essential to the preservation and protec-
tion of harbors." The same section states that "beyond" such lines
"no piers, wharves, bulkheads, or other works shall be extended or
deposits made, except under such regulations" as he prescribes.
The Corps of Engineers and the Secretary of the Army have
established three types of harbor lines:
(1) Pierhead lines, to mark the limits of open-pile work;
(2) Bulkhead lines, to mark the limits of solid fill;
(3) Pierhead-bulkhead lines, shoreward of which either open
or solid construction is permissible.
[p. 6]
The Corps' regulations state that the establishment of such harbor
lines "implies consent to riparian owners to erect structures to the
line without special authorization * * * " 33 CFR 209.150 (i).5
There are large areas of submerged lands which are shoreward of
established bulkhead lines and pierhead-bulkhead lines. For exam-
ple, the committee's hearings on San Francisco Bay disclosed that the
area of such lands in the bay exceeds 19 square miles. Under the
Corps' regulation the owners of these 19 square miles are apparently
at liberty to fill them without seeking a permit from the Corps of
Engineers.
The committee believes that the Corps' largely laissez-faire policy
concerning landfills and construction on submerged lands and tide-
lands landward of harbor lines violated its statutory responsibility to
protect all aspects of the public interest in those lands. Furthermore,
the Corps' failure to consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service on all
proposed work which modifies or affects those lands violated the
intent of the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act. That act, as
amended in 1958, requires the Corps to review and consult with the
Federal and State agencies having jurisdiction over wildlife resources
"whenever the waters of any * * * body of water are * * * to be
impounded, diverted * * * or * * * controlled or modified for any
purpose whatever * * *" and makes no exception as to submerged
lands shoreward of harbor lines. (16 U.S.C. 662 (a)).
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3541
In areas of navigable waters where harbor lines do not exist the
Corps has announced its intention to comply with the policies and
procedures enunciated in this act and in the 1967 Memorandum of
Understanding which the Secretary of the Army and the Secretary of
the Interior entered into to better effectuate those policies.
Large sections of the submerged lands shoreward of established
harbor lines have characteristics which, hydrologically and ecologi-
cally, are substantially similar to those of many areas of submerged
lands where harbor lines do not exist. Hence, it seems incredible
that the Corps has not followed the same procedures with respect to
all submerged lands regardless of harbor lines.
The committee questions whether the Corps' practice of allowing
anyone to fill or construct structures landward of harbor lines without
a permit has been valid since 1890.
Congress first provided for the establishment of harbor lines under
Federal authority in section 12 of the act of August 11, 1888 (25 Stat.
425),6 which read as follows:
Where it is made manifest to the Secretary of War that the
establishment of harbor lines is essential to the preservation and
protection of harbors, he may, and is hereby, authorized to cause
such lines to be established, beyond which no piers or wharves
shall be extended or deposits made except under such regulations
as may be prescribed from time to time by him.
B However, the Corps' regulations also warn that the harbor lines do "not imply consent
to operations of every kind landward of the line," and mention dredging work as an ex-
ample of operations which "will ordinarily require the authorization of the Department to
insure that operations are conducted under proper restrictions." 33 CFR 209 150(1) (1). In
addition, the regulations direct the district engineers to "keep informed * * * of operations
landward of harbor lines" and to require advance submission of plans where "proposed
structures are to touch or closely approach the harbor line." Ibid, subparagraph (2).
6 An earlier law (act of Aug. 5, 1886. c. 929, sec. 2, 24 Stat. 329, 33 U.S.C. 407a) authorized
the Secretary of War "in places where harbor lines have not been established" to establish
lines limiting dump grounds for "debris of mines or stamp works" in navigable water. The
"harbor lines" referred to in this statute were those established under State or local law.
See Engs v. Peckham, 11 R.I. 210, 224 (1875).
[P- 7]
The legislative history of the 1888 act shows than Congress enacted
section 12 to overrule the Supreme Court's ruling in Willamette Iron
Bridge Co. v. Hatch, 125 U.S. 1 (March 19, 1888), that existing
Federal law did not prohibit obstructions to navigable waters within
a single State. It was intended to provide Federal legal protection for
the open harbors which the Supreme Court had held to be lacking.
It did not grant any legal right to owners of land shoreward of a
harbor line to fill or erect structures. It simply did not deal with the
areas shoreward of a harbor line.
In 1890 Congress went further, and reversed the Willamette Iron
-------
3542 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Bridge rule completely, by providing, in section 10 of the River and
Harbor Act of September 19, 1890 (26 Stat. 454) ,7 as follows:
That the creation of any obstruction, not affirmatively author-
ized by law, to the navigable capacity of any waters, in respect of
which the United States has jurisdiction, is hereby prohibited.
[Emphasis supplied].
Sections 6 and 7 of the 1890 act authorized the Secretary of War to
issue permits for certain proposed structures, or for depositing refuse,
in any navigable water, irrespective of where a harbor line might be.
However, instead of repealing section 12 of the act of 1888, Congress
reenacted it in section 12 of the 1890 statute, adding a criminal
penalty.
Nine years later, Congress codified the Federal laws relating to
navigable waters as sections 9 to 20 of the River and Harbor Act of
1899 (act of March 3, 1899, 30 Stat. 1151-1155). Despite their appar-
ent incongruity, both the section of the 1890 law forbidding "any ob-
struction not affirmatively authorized" and the harbor line section
(which does not give "affirmative" authorization for obstructions
shoreward of the harbor lines) were incorporated, with revisions, as
section 10 and section 11 of the 1899 act, respectively. Both these
sections are still in force. (33 U.S.C. 403, 404).
The 1899 act was infelicitiously drafted and its ambiguities and
overlapping language have caused much litigation and required much
judicial creativeness.8 The incongruity of the harbor lines language,
insofar as concerns the validity of landfills or structures landward of
the harbor lines, caused at least one court of appeals to say:9
The argument is not without force that while this authorization
to the Secretary of War is negative in form, yet when it is taken
in connection with the power conferred on him to grant permis-
sion, under regulations prescribed by him, to erect structures
beyond the harbor line, it implies affirmative authorization to the
riparian owner to erect structures to the harbor line without
special authorization.
Nevertheless, the court rejected the contention that such authoriza-
tion gives the riparian owner a vested right to keep his fill or struc-
tures where he has placed them or to demand compensation from the
Government if the harbor line is changed. The rule was stated by the
Attorney General as follows (22 Ops. Atty. Gen. 501, 510, June 8,
1899):
[p. 8]
It is doubtless true that the establishment by the Government
of a harbor line, within and out to which wharves, docks, et
cetera, may be built by riparian owners, is an invitation and
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3543
authority by the Government for the erection of such structures
in aid of commerce. But, in view of this continuing power and
duty of Congress to regulate this detail of commerce, it must be
taken that such structures are erected in view of, and subject to
the exercise of, this power at some future time. And, in view of
the frequently changing conditions which require changes of
harbor lines, it cannot be claimed that the establishment of such
a line gives to anyone a vested right in its permanent continu-
ance. Doubtless the existence of such structures under such
circumstances and by such authority, their cost, size, character,
and sufficiency, and the effect upon them of the establishment of
a different line, are important factors to be considered and
balanced against the needs of commerce for such change in
determining whether such change shall be made.
But this does not affect the power, and if, after looking at both
sides, it is deemed that the needs of commerce require such
change, I cannot doubt the power to make it, even though its
exercise should affect injuriously riparian owners and their
property.
It is therefore quite clear that the establishment of a harbor line
does not constitute an abandonment of the Federal interest in the
water area shoreward of the harbor line.
The committee does not believe it is necessary to explore fully the
ambiguities of this "implied authorization," because the Corps has
ample power, under section 11 of the 1899 act (33 U.S.C. sec. 404) to
revise its harbor line regulations.
The Corps of Engineers has, over the past 80 years, established
harbor lines primarily to identify existing and prospective needs of
navigation and to aid the orderly development of port facilities. In
most instances, particularly those where harbor lines were established
many years ago, the Corps emphasized navigation and port uses, and
gave little or no attention to such matters as fish and wildlife, air and
water pollution control, esthetics, ecology, conservation of natural
and scenic resources, recreation needs, and other matters of public
interest. The increasing impairment and degradation of the environ-
ment which is affecting our country has brought an increasing aware-
ness that the mounting pressure for fills and construction of structures
in water areas landward of established harbor lines may result in
pollution, adversely affect fish and wildlife, change the ecology of
the waters, impair the esthetic values of the area, and otherwise
result in harm to the public interest.
The harbor lines themselves serve the useful purpose of showing
the outer limits beyond which no bulkheads or piers will be allowed
and thus aid in the planning of future developments of waterfront
-------
3544 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
property and in protecting the harbor. However, these purposes do
not require continuation of the Corps' general practice of allowing
all fills and construction shoreward of the harbor lines without a
' The legislative history of sec. 10 is reviewed in United States v. Republic Steel Corp.,
362 U.S. 482 (1960), and United States v. Standard Oil Co., 384 U.S. 224 (1966).
8 See e.g., United States v. Republic Steel Co., 362 U.S. 482 (1960); United States v. Standard
Oil Co., 384 U.S. 224 (1966); Wyandotte Transportation Co. v. United States, 389 U.S. 191
(1967). The 1899 act was drafted in the office of the Chief of Engineers (see H. Doc. 293,
54th Cong., second sess.).
•Garrison v. Greenleaf Johnson Lumber Co., 215 F. 576, 580 (CCA 4th, 1914), aff'd. 237
U.S. 251 (1915).
[p. 9]
permit from the Corps. The Corps' witnesses testified as follows
at the committee's San Francisco Bay hearings:
Mr. REUSS. I am still puzzled. While it is entirely proper
for the Corps to grant a fill permit for dock or pier purposes
shoreward of the harbor line, it would seem to me the Corps
is not doing its ecological job if it does not even ask that people
come in and ask for a permit for housing, a non-waterborne
industry, a junkyard, or whatever else somebody wants to build.
Colonel BOERGER. Yes, sir; that is an inconsistency. (Hear-
ings, May 15, 1969, p. 119.)
*******
Mr. REUSS. * * * Referring just to the area shoreward
of the harbor lines, both in the San Francisco Bay and every-
where else within the jurisdiction of the Corps of Engineers, why
doesn't the Corps immediately abandon its present self-imposed
rule that it will have nothing to say about what happens shore-
ward * * * of a harbor line * * *?
Why cut yourself off from a complete review simply by reason
of the fact that in certain areas you happen to have erected harbor
lines in the past for good and sufficent reasons?
Colonel MEANOR. I follow your line of questioning. I think
it is something that we have got to start doing. * * * (Hearings,
May 15, 1969, pp. 131-132.)
*******
Mr. REUSS. At any rate there is a tremendous area back
of the bulkhead lines, much of it of great ecological significance.
And it seems to me vital that the Corps in San Francisco Bay
and nationally assert its power to weigh and consider and protect
the public environmental interest and not permit fills—whether
they are back of a harbor line or not back of a harbor line—which
are going to ruin the environment. Would you not agree?
General GLASGOW. I would, Mr. Chairman. (Hearings, Au-
gust 20, 1969, p. 63.)
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3545
The committee does not believe it is necessary for the Corps to
abolish all existing harbor lines, or even to go through a procedure
(which would necessarily be lengthy and time-consuming) of reexam-
ining and, after public hearings, revalidating, the existing harbor
lines. Instead, the committee believes, and recommends as follows:
The Corps of Engineers should revise its regulations to (a)
make harbor lines merely guidelines defining the offshore limits
of bulkheads, fills, piers, and other structures, and (b) require
anyone planning to do any work (including filling) shoreward
of a harbor line to apply and obtain a permit for such work, sub-
ject to such conditions as the Corps deems necessary to protect
the public interest. In reviewing all applications for such per-
mits, the Corps should comply with the same interdepartmental
review and consultation procedures as are used in considering
applications for permits for similar work in waters where harbor
lines are not established.
The committee understands that the Corps is now proceeding to
amend its regulations in conformity with the foregoing recommen-
dation.
[p. 10]
III. THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS HOLDS PUBLIC HEARINGS,
WHENEVER THERE IS SUFFICIENT PUBLIC INTEREST, ON
APPLICATIONS FOR PERMITS TO FILL, DREDGE OR CON-
STRUCT STRUCTURES IN NAVIGABLE WATERS, BUT
AVOIDS SUCH HEARINGS IN CONNECTION WITH APPLI-
CATIONS TO ESTABLISH OR MODIFY HARBOR LINES
WHICH, UNDER PRESENT CORPS PRACTICE, CAN RESULT
IN LANDFILLS OR CONSTRUCTION OF STRUCTURES
LANDWARD OF THE HARBOR LINE WITHOUT FURTHER
CORPS REVIEW
The Corps has an eminently sound policy concerning public hear-
ings on applications for landfills, dredging, and other proposed work
in navigable waters. Its regulations state (33 CFR 209.120 (g) (1)):
" (g) Public hearing. (1) It is the policy of the Chief of
Engineers to conduct his civil works program in an atmos-
phere of public understanding, trust, and mutual cooperation,
and in a manner responsive to public needs and desires. To
this end, public hearings are helpful and will be held when-
ever there appears to be sufficient public interest to justify
such action. In case of doubt, a public hearing will be held.
(Emphasis added).
-------
3546 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Oddly, however, the Corps' regulations enunciate a contrary posi-
tion with respect to the establishment of harbor lines. Although
subparagraph (1) of the Corps' regulation (33 CFR 209.150 (e)) re-
quires that public notices of applications for establishment or modi-
fication of harbor lines must be issued "to all known interested
parties," subparagraph (2) specifies as follows:
Public hearings in connection with harbor lines will be kept
to a minimum and will be the exception rather than the rule.
A hearing will be held at the discretion of the district engineer
only if he deems a public hearing essential, as in a known
controversial case or when response from the public notice indi-
cates that a public hearing should be held. (Emphasis added.)
If a public hearing is warranted in cases where there is demon-
strated public interest over the issuance of dredging or fill permits
(and the committee believes it is), then it is equally important to hold
such hearings when harbor lines are established or changed. The
importance of such a hearing is especially evident in view of the fact
that, as the Corps regulation expressly notes, "the establishment of
a bulkhead line has been frequently followed by solid filling to the
limit and by requests thereafter from riparian owners to push the
limit farther toward the channel" (33 CFR, sec. 209.150 (a) (5)).
The impact of the Corps' grudging policy concerning public hear-
ings when harbor line changes are involved is illustrated by the
Corps' treatment of protests against the proposal by the Port of
Oakland in 1965 that the Corps modify the bulkhead lines on the east
side of the San Francisco Bay. Such modification would have enabled
the Port of Oakland to fill 140 acres of bay to expand its Seventh
Street Marine Terminal.
The California State Department of Fish and Game and over 80
other organizations and persons filed protests against the proposed
[p. 11]
harbor line revision and fill. The Fish and Game Department partic-
ularly urged that the fill would adversely affect fish and wildlife
resources and that further harbor development should be consistent
with a comprehensive bay plan. Later, the Governor designated the
California Resources Agency as his spokesman on this harbor line
application. The director of that agency informed the Corps "that it
was in the best interest of the public to construct the terminal" on the
filled area. The district engineer's letter to the division engineer on
this project noted that all differences were resolved, but did not men-
tion the protest of the State Fish and Game Department.
In response to a question by Chairman Reuss in his letter of July 31,
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3547
1969, the Corps stated that "because of the resolution of these differ-
ences, it was not considered necessary that a public hearing be held."
(Hearings, Part 2, August 20, 1969, pp. 7-8.) The Corps apparently
simply ignored the other 80 protests which, the Corps said, were "of
a general nature * * * primarily from individuals interested in
conservation." General Glasgow testified as follows at the subcom-
mittee's San Francisco Bay hearings (hearings, ibid, pp. 73-74):
General GLASGOW. These letters, as I stated, were primarily
from persons who had interests in conservation, many of whom
were opposed to fill of the Bay for any reason or any purpose.
These views, we felt, were also considered in the views of the
State of California Resources Agency, and you will recall I
stated that we also met with them, that the director of the
Resources Agency had been designated by the Governor of the
State to represent fish and game as well as other interests of the
State. We felt that when the State of California Resources
Agency then withdrew their objection that we then were aware
of the opposition of people. We were aware of the basis of their
opposition
Mr. Moss. How?
General GLASGOW. and that the State had determined,
in balancing these concerns against economic advantages to the
State and so forth, and they told us to proceed in favor of the fill.
Mr. Moss. They couldn't tell you to proceed, they could
merely indicate that their objections
General GLASGOW. They withdrew their objections, that is
right, sir.
*******
Mr. Moss. The 80 letters you regarded as being so biased
as not to constitute a basis for public hearing?
General GLASGOW. No, sir. No, sir.
Mr. Moss. Well, you have stated there was a clear—it was
quite clear, that the majority were opposed to a fill for any
reason. Therefore, you were inferring that there was a bias.
General GLASGOW. I would hesitate to use that term. I was
saying that in our judgment the concerns of those 80 letters
or protests were considered and reflected in the concern of the
California State Department of Fish and Game, and that in
balance it was the State's judgment that they would withdraw
their objection, and we accepted that withdrawal of the objection.
The Corps thus accepted the State Resources Agency's judgment
concerning the needs of the public as superior to that of 80 individual
-------
3548 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
protestors who, the Corps apparently believed, were "opposed to
[p. 12]
fill of the bay for any reason or any purpose." The Corps gave them no
opportunity to air their views in a public hearing. As Congressman
Moss stated during the hearing (ibid, p. 75):
* * * I think there is a matter of transcendant importance
here; namely, the public right of protest, and the right to have
the protest heard with reasonable impartiality.
The absence of a public hearing was compounded by the district
engineer's failure to include in his letter to the division engineer any
mention of the protest by the California State Fish and Game Depart-
ment, thus further submerging the fish and wildlife interest when the
harbor line proposal was reviewed by the district engineer's superiors.
The committee believes that the protection of the Nation's estuaries
and other bodies of water requires that public hearings be held and
encouraged whenever there is sufficient public interest in the estab-
lishment or modification of a harbor line, and that any doubts as to
the sufficiency of the public interest in the harbor line procedure be
resolved in favor of holding a hearing. The committee also believes
that the Corps officers who must decide these problems should have
the full record before them. The committee therefore recommends
as follows:
a. The Corps of Engineers should promptly revise its regula-
tions to require and encourage public hearings on proposals to
establish or modify harbor lines whenever there is sufficient pub-
lic interest in such proposals.
b. The Corps of Engineers should make sure that the record
on each application for a permit, harbor line change, or other
action contains all recommendations and objections received by
the Corps.
This recommendation is in accord with the President's recent
Executive Order (No. 11514, March 5, 1970, 35 F.R. 4247) directing
all Federal agencies to develop procedures for public hearings on
activities affecting the quality of the environment. Sec. 2(b).
IV. AT THE COMMITTEE'S BEQUEST, THE CORPS OF ENGI-
NEERS IS AMENDING ITS REGULATIONS TO REQUIRE
THAT APPLICANTS FOR PERMITS TO CONSTRUCT SEWER
OUTFALLS INTO NAVIGABLE WATERWAYS MUST FUR-
NISH INFORMATION ADEQUATELY DESCRIBING THE
EFFLUENT TO BE DISCHARGED THROUGH THE OUTFALL
The Corps' present regulations state that every application for a
permit to fill, dredge, or do other work in navigable waters will be
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3549
evaluated in light of "all relevant factors, including the effect of the
proposed work on navigation, fish and wildlife, conservation, pollu-
tion, esthetics, ecology, and the general public interest." 33 CFR
209.120 (d). However, applicants for permits to construct sewer out-
falls "which may affect the navigable capacity of a waterway" have
not been required to furnish adequate information concerning the
effluent to be discharged from the proposed sewer outfall. The pres-
ent regulation has required only information on the amount of sand or
sediments to be discharged. 33 CFR 209.130 (b) (18) (iii). Such infor-
mation would enable the Corps to evaluate the possibility that such
sediments will silt up the navigation channels. But it would hardly
enable the Corps to fully evaluate the potential effect of the sewer
outfall on fish and wildlife, pollution, esthetics, ecology, and other
[p. 13]
public interests which may be affected by nonsedimentary effluents
(such as chemicals) discharged through the proposed outfall, or
whether vessels would be corroded, or seamen's lives endangered, by
corrosive or inflammable chemicals.
In the fall of 1969, Dr. Joel W. Hedgpeth, director of the Marine
Science Center, Oregon State University, Newport, Oreg., complained
to this committee that he had been unable to obtain information con-
cerning the chemical wastes that would be discharged from a proposed
sewer outfall which Virginia Chemicals, Inc., desired to construct in
the Columbia River. Chairman Reuss thereupon wrote to the Chief
of Engineers pointing out that the Corps' regulation governing the in-
formation required from the applicant was inadequate for both the
Corps' evaluation of the application and the public's right to know the
composition and amount of wastes to be discharged into the public
waterways through the proposed sewer outfall. On December 17,
1969, the Acting Chief of Engineers acknowledged that "an applicant
is not specifically required to identify the effluent that will be dis-
charged," and stated that the Corps' regulation would be revised to
"eliminate this imprecision" and "particularize the requirement."
The committee commends the Corps on this progressive step to
assure that it will more effectively carry out its responsibilities to
evaluate the potential effects which new sewer outfalls may have on
water quality, fish and wildlife, esthetics, ecology, and other public
interests in the waterways receiving waste discharges from such
outfalls. The information which will be required under the revised
regulation will also enable Federal and State water pollution control
agencies to do their job more effectively.10
The committee recommends as follows:
Before granting a permit to construct a sewer outfall, the Corps
of Engineers should:
-------
3550 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
(a) require the applicant to furnish full information concern-
ing the nature, composition, amount and degree of treatment of
the wastes which will be discharged from the outfall, and to dem-
onstrate that such discharges will not adversely affect the quality
of the receiving waters;
(b) consult with the appropriate Interior Department agencies
(Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, Fish and
Wildlife Service, etc.) as to whether, and under what conditions,
the permit should be granted; and
(c) specify in the permit that the permittee shall furnish, upon
the Government's request, full information from time to time
concerning the wastes discharged through the outfall and comply
with all requirements concerning protection of the quality of the
receiving waters.
V. THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS CAN SUBSTANTIALLY HELP
TO PREVENT POLLUTION OF OUR NATION'S WATERS BY
VIGOROUSLY ENFORCING THE REFUSE ACT OF 1899
WHICH PROHIBITS DISCHARGE OF REFUSE INTO NAVI-
GABLE WATERS, AND DEPOSIT OF POLLUTING MATE-
RIALS ON THEIR BANKS
Section 13 of the River and Harbor Act of 1899 (30 Stat. 1151,
33 U.S.C. 407), although enacted nearly three quarters of a century
10 See this committee's report entitled "The Critical Need for a National Inventory of
Industrial Wastes (Water Pollution Control and Abatement)," H. Kept. 1579, 90th Cong.,
June 24,1968.
[p. 14]
ago, constitutes a potentially powerful, but only sporadically used,
weapon for combatting the pollution of our Nation's navigable waters.
Section 13, commonly called the Refuse Act, states:
It shall not be lawful to throw, discharge, or deposit, or cause,
suffer, or procure to be thrown, discharged, or deposited either
from or out of any ship, barge, or other floating craft of any kind,
or from the shore, wharf, manufacturing establishment, or mill of
any kind, any refuse matter of any kind or description whatever
other than that flowing from streets and sewers and passing
therefrom in a liquid state, into any navigable water of the United
States, or into any tributary of any navigable water from which
the same shall float or be washed into such navigable water; and
it shall not be lawful to deposit, or cause, suffer, or procure to
be deposited material of any kind in any place on the bank of
any navigable water, or on the bank of any tributary of any
navigable water, where the same shall be liable to be washed
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3551
into such navigable water ... whereby navigation shall or may
be impeded or obstructed .. .u
Judicial interpretation over the years has enhanced the usefulness
of the Refuse Act in controlling and abating pollution of our water-
ways. Thus, the courts have ruled that the offense of discharging
refuse into navigable waters is not limited, as is the offense of deposit-
ing material on the banks of navigable waters, by the language
"whereby navigation shall or may be impeded or obstructed." 12
The prohibition against depositing "refuse" in navigable waters
has been held to apply to industrial fuels or chemicals which were
commercially valuable at the time they were deposited into the
navigable waters.13 The Supreme Court in 1966 stated flatly:
The word "refuse" includes all foreign substances and pollutants
apart from those "flowing from streets and sewers and passing
therefrom in a liquid state" into the watercourse. (Emphasis
supplied.) 14
Furthermore, the latter exception has been narrowly construed.
Thus, the Supreme Court, in holding that the Refuse Act was violated
by a discharge through non-municipal sewers of industrial wastes
containing suspended solids which settled into navigable waters,
said: "Refuse flowing from 'sewers' in a 'liquid state' means to us
'sewage' ",15
Moreover, the Refuse Act has been used successfully against
companies whose employees dumped garbage from a ship,16 or allowed
oil to spill from shore storage tanks and flow "indirectly" (i.e. over
land by force of gravity) into navigable waters.17 The violation occurs
11 A proviso of Section 13 authorizes the Secretary of the Army to permit deposit of mate-
rial In navigable water "under conditions to be prescribed by him," If the Chief of En-
gineers advises that "anchorage and navigation will not be injured," and specifies that
"whenever any permit is so granted the conditions thereof shall be strictly complied with,
and any violation thereof shall be unlawful."
"The La Merced (United States v. Alaska Southern Packing Co.). 84 F. 2d 444, 445-446
(C.A. 9, 1936).
11 The La Merced, supra (oil discharged from a ship); United States v. Bollard Oil Co. of
Hartford, Inc., 195 F. 2d 369, 372 (C.A. 2, 1952) (oil overflowing from an on-shore tank Into
the Connecticut River); United States v. Standard Oil Co., 384 U.S. 224 (1966) (accidental
discharge of commercially valuable 100 octane aviation gasoline Into the St. John's River,
Florida). Similar rulings were made in The Albania, 32 F. 2d 727 (D.C. S.D. N.Y. 1928) and
The Columbo, 42 F. 2d 211 (C.A. 2, 1930), with respect to the discharge of oil, under the Act
of June 29, 1888 (25 Stat. 209, 33 U.S. Code 441), which prohibits discharge of "refuse" Into
New York Harbor.
» United States v. Standard Oil Co., 384 U.S. 224, 230 (1966).
15 United States v. Republic Steel Corp., 362 U.S. 482, 490 (1960).
16 The President Coolidge (Dollar S.S. Co. v. United States), 101 F. 2d 638 (C.A. 9, 1939)
(garbage dumped from ship by employee in disregard of company's orders and without
knowledge of ship's officers).
« United States v. Bollard Oil Co. of Hartford, Inc., 195 F. 2d 369 (C.A. 2, 1952); United
States v. Esso Standard Oil Company of Puerto Rico, 375 F. 2d 621 (C.A. 3, 1967).
[p. 15]
-------
3552 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
even though the discharge was not done intentionally, negligently or
knowingly.18
It is apparent that the Refuse Act, which prohibits the discharge or
deposit into navigable waters of "all foreign substances and
pollutants," as the Supreme Court put it—including oil but not
sewage—is a broad charter of authority and a powerful legal tool
for preventing the pollution of all navigable waters.
Its present usefulness is not reduced by more recent water pollution
control legislation. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act specifi-
cally states (33 U.S. Code sec. 466k) that it "shall not be construed as
(1) superseding or limiting the functions, under any other law—of any
other officer or agency of the United States, relating to water pollu-
tion, or (2) affecting or impairing the provisions of... sections 13
through 17 of the" River and Harbor Act of 1899, as amended (i.e.,
the Refuse Act).19
The Federal Water Pollution Control Act authorizes the Secretary
of the Interior to promote the control and abatement of water pol-
lution by a wide variety of methods, including encouraging interstate
cooperation and uniform State laws; sponsoring research, training
and development of means of pollution control; studying estuarine
areas; granting funds to the States for research and development,
and administration of pollution control programs, and to munici-
palities for construction of water treatment facilities; approving and
enforcing State water quality standards for interstate waters; holding
conferences and public hearings for abating pollution; and, in certain
circumstances, requesting the Attorney General to bring injunction
suits against polluters.
However, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act contains vari-
ous limitations on its scope and enforcement powers. For example,
it requires water quality standards only for interstate waters. Fur-
thermore, it provides that discharges of wastes into interstate waters
which reduce their quality below established water quality standards
are subject to abatement only after notice and a waiting period of
at least 180 days. The abatement proceedings may be instituted
only upon the Governor's consent unless the pollution "is endanger-
ing the health or welfare of persons in a State other than that in which
the discharge or discharges .. . originate". Moreover, the court in
such abatement proceedings need not confine itself to examining the
issues of law and facts, but is authorized to give "due consideration
to the practicability and to the physical and economic feasibility of
complying" with the established water quality standards as well as
reviewing the standards themselves.20
Similarly, the Oil Pollution Act, 1924,21 specifically provided that
it "shall be in addition to other laws for the preservation and protec-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3553
tion of navigable waters of the United States and shall not be
construed as repealing, modifying, or in any manner affecting the pro-
visions of such laws." (33 U.S. Code, Supp. IV, sec. 437). This Act
is a narrowly drawn criminal statute prohibiting, with certain excep-
tions,22 only the "grossly negligent, or willful" discharge of oil from
a boat or vessel into navigable waters. Violators of the statute must
clean up their oil spills or pay the United States for the cost of doing
"United States v. Interlake Steel Corp., 297 F. Supp. 912 (B.C., N.D. 111. E.D. 1969); The
President Coolidge, supra.
" United States v. Interlake Steel Corp., supra, at 916.
20 33 U.S.C. 466g (c) (5) and (g). On February 10, 1970, the President proposed legislation
that would partially modify this enforcement procedure. See H.R. 15872, 91st Cong.
!1 Oil Pollution Act, 1924, as amended by the Clean Water Restoration Act of November 3,
1966 (Sec. 211, Public Law 89-753; U.S. Code, Supp. IV, sec. 431 et seq.).
" See 33 U.S. Code, sec. 433.
[p. 16]
so. They are subject to a $2,500 fine or one year's imprisonment or
both, and the master of the vessel may have his license revoked. The
Corps of Engineers, Coast Guard, and Bureau of Customs assist the
Department of the Interior in enforcing the statute.
The proposed Water Quality Improvement Act now being consid-
ered by House-Senate conferees (H.R. 4148) will enact new sections
in the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to govern oil pollution
and hazardous substances and repeal the Oil Pollution Act, 1924.
The Refuse Act, which prohibits discharges of all foreign material
except sewage into any navigable water of the United States,23 is not
subject to many of the limitations present in the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act and the Oil Pollution Act, 1924, and therefore
provides protection against pollution of waterways in many circum-
stances where the other acts are more circumscribed.
The committee therefore recommends:
The Corps of Engineers should vigorously enforce the Refuse
Act of 1899 which prohibits discharge of refuse into navigable
waters and deposit of polluting materials on their banks.
There are several methods which the Corps can utilize under
the Refuse Act to prevent pollution of waterways:
1. Violations of the Refuse Act are subject to criminal prosecu-
tion and penalties of fine not exceeding $2,500 nor less than $500,
or imprisonment for not less than 30 days nor more than one year,
or both such fine and imprisonment (33 U.S. Code 411). Officers and
employees of the Corps of Engineers are authorized "to arrest and
take into custody" and request prosecution of, and it is "the duty
of United States attorneys to vigorously prosecute all offenders"
of the Refuse Act. (33 U.S. Code 413.24) The law further specifies
-------
3554 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
that "one-half of said fine" shall be "paid to the person or persons
giving information which shall lead to conviction." This provision
buttresses the Corps' efficacy in carrying out the Refuse Act in two
ways:
(a) The informer payment provides a monetary incentive to
citizens to furnish information to the Corps concerning violations
of the Refuse Act.
(b) The Supreme Court has ruled that where a statute pro-
vides for a reward to the informer, the statute authorizes him, if
the Government has not previously instituted a prosecution
against the violator,25 to institute his own suit in the name of
the United States (a qui tarn action) to collect his moiety of the
penalty.26 Such qui tarn statutes, vesting in an informer the
right to recover a moiety of a penalty for a violation in which
he otherwise would have no financial interest, "have been in
existence for hundreds of years in England, and in this country
23 The Courts have held that navigable waters Include waterways which either in their
natural or Improved condition are used, or can be used, for floating light boats or logs, even
though the waterway may be obstructed by falls, rapids, sand bars, currents, etc., and even
though the waterway has not been used for navigation for many years. United States v.
Appalachian Electic Power Co., 311 U.S. 377, 407-410, 416 (1940); Wisconsin. Public Service
Corp. v. Federal Power Commission, 147 F. 2d 743 (CA 7, 1945), cert. den. 325 U.S. 880; Wis-
consin v. Federal Power Commission, 214 F. 2d 334 (CA 7,1954), cert. den. 348 U.S. 883 (1954);
Namekagon Hydro Co. v. Federal Power Commission, 216 F. 2d 509 (CA 7, 1954);
Puente de Reynosa, S.A. v. City of McAllen, 357 F. 2d 43, 50-51 (CA 5, 1966); Rochester Gat
and Electric Corp. v. Federal Power Commission, 344 F. 2d 594 (CA 2, 1965).
M The Coast Guard assists the Corps in detecting and reporting violations of the Refuse Act.
The duty of the U.S. Attorney to prosecute offenders under the Refuse Act is not dependent
on whether the prosecution is requested by the Corps of Engineers, or by any other Federal
agency or employee, or whether the alleged offense was contrary to any water quality
standards set by a State agency under the Water Quality Act of 1965. United States v. Inter-
lake Steel Corp., supra, pp. 914, 916.
"Francis v. United States, 72 U.S. (5 Wall.) 338 (1866).
*> Adams, qui tarn v. Woods, 6 U.S. (2 Cranch) 336 (1805); United States ex rel. Morcua v.
Hess, 317 U.S. 537, 541 (1943).
[P- "I
ever since the foundation of our Government." 2T By making
the violator subject to action by private persons stimulated by
the hope of a reward, such provisions help to insure against laxity
by public officials in enforcing statutes effectuating important
public policies.
2. The Supreme Court has ruled that the Federal Government may
obtain injunctions requiring a polluter, who has discharged into a
navigable waterway a foreign substance or pollutant prohibited by
the Refuse Act, to cease future discharges and to remove the polluting
substance already discharged.28 The Federal Government has rarely
sought injunctions as a method of controlling or abating pollution.
However, the committee believes that the Nation's fight against water
pollution would be greatly strengthened and advanced by more
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3555
frequent use of this authority under the Refuse Act which is not
subject to the limitations of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
The committee therefore recommends:
Both the Corps of Engineers and the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration should request the Attorney General to
institute injunction suits against all persons whose discharges or
deposits (except minor ones) violate the Refuse Act and are not
promptly cleaned up or stopped by the polluter.
3. In addition to using criminal sanctions to punish for past dis-
charges, and injunctions to preclude future discharges and remove
pollutants already discharged, the Government can protect the Na-
tion's navigable waters from pollution or degradation by calling upon
the polluter to clean up the discharge voluntarily. If the polluter
does not do so, the Government can itself do the clean up work and
then, if the polluter's discharges were willful or negligent, bill the
polluter for the Government's costs in doing such clean up work.29
The use of this remedy, of course, entails expenditure of Govern-
ment funds to perform clean up work. The Corps may sometimes find
it difficult to perform such clean up promptly, because of limited ap-
propriations. Furthermore, any reimbursement received by the Gov-
ernment would be covered into the Treasury instead of replenishing
the funds available to the Corps. However, in many cases clean up by
the Corps may be the only way to achieve prompt removal of pollut-
ants discharged into a waterway or deposited on its banks.30
The committee therefore recommends:
The Corps of Engineers should proceed to increase its capa-
bility, including seeking the necessary contingency funds, to en-
able it to promptly remove or clean up pollutional discharges
and deposits and to seek reimbursement of the costs thereof from
persons who willfully or negligently made or caused such dis-
charges or deposits.
" Marvin v. Trout, 199 U.S. 212, 225 (1905); United States ex rel. Marcus v. Hess, 317 U.S.
537,541 (1943).
» United States v. Republic Steel Corp., 362 U.S. 482 (1960); Wyandotte Transportation Co.
v. United States, 389 U.S. 191, 203-204, ftnt. 15 (1967).
MWyandotte Transportation Co. v. United States, 389 U.S. 191 (1967)).
30 The proposed Water Quality Improvement Act (H.R. 4148), now being considered by
House-Senate conferees, would establish a revolving fund to finance the Government's
clean up and removal of oil and hazardous substances from waterways, and would require
polluters to reimburse the fund.
[p. 18]
-------
3556 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
4.2c QUI TAM ACTIONS AND THE 1899 REFUSE ACT
Citizen Lawsuits Against Polluters of the Nations Waterways, House Subcom-
mittee on Conservation and Natural Resources of the Committee on Government
Operations, 91st Cong., 2d Sess. (1970)
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
CONSERVATION AND NATURAL RESOURCES SUBCOMMITTEE
OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS,
Washington, D.C., August 13,1970.
Hon. CHET HOLIFIELD,
Acting Chairman, Committee on Government Operations,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: On March 18, 1970, the Committee on
Government Operations issued its twenty-first report entitled "Our
Waters and Wetlands: How the Corps of Engineers Can Help Prevent
Their Destruction and Pollution" (H. Rept. 91-917). This report,
particularly that part discussing the possible use of a qui tam action
to implement the Refuse Act of 1899, has generated tremendous
interest among both Members of Congress and private citizens.
In response to inquiries from Members of Congress the subcommit-
tee staff has prepared memorandums discussing more fully the nature
of the qui tam action and its applicability to the Refuse Act. The
subcommittee believes that these memorandums will substantially
aid Members of Congress, as well as private citizens, in gaining
fuller understanding of, and performing additional research and
investigation into, the qui tam action as a basis for implementing
the Refuse Act of 1899. We therefore recommend that you approve
publication of these memorandums as a committee print.
Sincerely,
HENRY S. REUSS,
Chairman, Conservation and Natural Resources Subcommittee.
[p. IH]
PREFACE
On March 18, 1970, the Committee on Government Operations is-
sued a report entitled "Our Waters and Wetlands; How the Corps of
Engineers Can Help Prevent Their Destruction and Pollution"
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3557
(House Report No. 91-917). This report analysed how the Corps of
Engineers might more adequately fulfill its responsibilities under the
River and Harbor Act of 1899 (act of March 3, 1899, c. 425, 30 Stat.
1151), including those statutory provisions more commonly known as
the Refuse Act (33 U.S. Code 407, 411, 413). In discussing the latter,
the report stated as follows:
"1. Violations of the Refuse Act are subject to criminal prosecution
and penalties of fine not exceeding $2,500 nor less than $500 or im-
prisonment for not less than 30 days nor more than 1 year, or both
such fine and imprisonment (33 U.S. Code 411). Officers and em-
ployees of the Corps of Engineers are authorized "to arrest and take
into custody" and request prosecution of, and it is "the duty of United
States attorneys to vigorously prosecute all offenders" of the Refuse
Act. (33 U.S. Code 413.) The law further specifiies that "one-half
of said fine" shall be "paid to the person or persons giving information
which shall lead to conviction." This provision buttresses the Corps'
efficacy in carrying out the Refuse Act in two ways:
(a) The informer payment provides a monetary incentive to
citizens to furnish information to the Corps concerning violations
of the Refuse Act.
(b) The Supreme Court has ruled that where a statute pro-
vides for a reward to the informer, the statute authorizes him, if
the Government has not previously instituted a prosecution
against the violator, to institute his own suit in the name of the
United States (a qui tarn action) to collect his moiety of the
penalty. Such qui tarn statutes, vesting in an informer the right
to recover a moiety of a penalty for a violation in which he other-
wise would have no financial interest, "have been in existence
for hundreds of years in England, and in this country ever since
the foundation of our Government." By making the violator
subject to action by private persons stimulated by the hope of a
reward, such provisions help to insure against laxity by public
officials in enforcing statutes effectuating important public
policies." l
1H. Rept. 91-917—"Our Waters and Wetlands: How The Corps of Engineers Can Help
Prevent Their Destruction and Pollution," pp. 17-18.
The committee's report, particularly that part quoted above, has
generated tremendous interest. Since its publication numerous
Members of Congress and thousands of citizens have asked the sub-
committee for additional information concerning the nature of the
qui tarn action and how it can be used to effectuate the Refuse Act.
The subcommittee staff prepared two memorandums on these sub-
-------
3558 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
jects. These memorandums will undoubtedly be helpful to Members
of Congress and the public interested in further research into the
origins,
[p. V]
judicial precedents, and scope of the qui tarn action, and its
possible use in implementing the Refuse Act of 1899.2 These
memorandums amplify and complement the legal analyses upon which
the committee based its views in House Report 91-917, supra, con-
cerning the qui tarn cause of action in connection with the Refuse
Act. However, the details of the memorandums do not necessarily
embody any judgments of the committee, or any of its Members,
beyond the views expressed in that report.3
'The staff memorandums here reprinted are equally applicable to the Act of June 29,
1888 (25 Stat. 209, sees. 1, 3:33 U.S.C. 441, 444), prohibiting discharge of refuse in New York
Harbor and adjacent waters, which has provisions similar to those of the Refuse Act.
'The committee's report was cited, quoted, and relied on by the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit in Zabel v. Tabb, F.2d , 1 Env. Rep. 1449 (No. 27555; July 16,
1970) to "judge the ebb and flow of the national tide" of concern about the degradation of
our Nation's waterways.
[p. VI]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3559
CONTENTS
Page
Letter of transmittal in
Preface v
Staff Memorandum A: The qui tarn action and its possible use in imple-
menting the Refuse Act of 1899 1
I. Corporations or persons who violate the Refuse Act are guilty
of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of $500 to $2,500.
Persons are also subject to the alternative sanction of im-
prisonment. Informers are entitled to one-half of any fine
imposed 1
II. May a citizen who finds a violation of the Refuse Act bring a
qui tarn civil action against the violator? 1
III. Qui tarn actions are civil actions brought by citizens under
penal statutes whose sanction is a fine, penalty or forfeiture
of which citizens are entitled to a share 1
IV. English Governments from the 14th through the 19th centuries
frequently relied upon citizen participation in law enforcement
by passing criminal statutes authorizing qui tarn actions 2
V. In this country Congress has often expressly given citizens the
right to bring qui tarn actions to implement the criminal laws 3
VI. Citizens can bring qui tarn actions to collect fines or penalties
imposed by criminal statutes where the statutes do not ex-
pressly authorize or forbid the citizens' suits 4
VII. English statutes not specifically authorizing or forbidding
citizens to bring qui tarn actions have been understood to
authorize such actions 7
VIII. Section 413 of title 33 of the United States Code does not specifi-
cally forbid the informer from instituting a qui tarn action
under the Refuse Act 8
IX. Public policy arguments strongly favor the right of the private
citizen to bring a qui tarn action under the Refuse Act 9
X. At a time when the Federal courts are increasingly willing to
allow citizens to act as private attorneys general to enforce
policies of various Federal statutes bearing on environ-
mental questions, the courts should not hesitate to allow
citizens to bring qui tarn actions under the Refuse Act 12
XI. The Pressprich case 13
XII. Outline of citizen action under the 1899 Refuse Act 14
Staff Memorandum B: Issue 1—Whether qui tarn action can be used to
implement a penal statute which gives a share of the penalty to the in-
former but does not specifically authorize his suit to collect that share .... 16
I. Cases supporting qui tarn action 16
A. Cases holding qui tarn action can be brought 16
B. Other cases supporting qui tarn action 17
II. Distinguishable case containing unfavorable language 21
III. Cases holding qui tarn action does not lie 22
Staff Memorandum B: Issue 2—Whether the informer's qui tarn action is
barred because 33 United States Code 413 states that "The Department
-------
3560 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Page
of Justice shall conduct the legal proceedings necessary to enforce the
[Refuse Act]" and "It shall be the duty of U.S. attorneys to vigorously
prosecute all offenders against the same * * *" 23
I. Case supporting argument that section 413 does not bar the qui
tarn action 23
II. Cases which bar qui tarn action but which are distinguishable 24
[p. VII]
STAFF MEMORANDUM A
The Qui Tarn Action and Its Possible Use in Implementing the Refuse
Act of 1899
I. CORPORATIONS OR PERSONS WHO VIOLATE THE REFUSE ACT ARE
GUILTY OF A MISDEMEANOR PUNISHABLE BY A FINE OF $500 TO
$2,500. PERSONS ARE ALSO SUBJECT TO THE ALTERNATIVE SANC-
TION OF IMPRISONMENT. INFORMERS ARE ENTITLED TO ONE-HALF
OF ANY FINE IMPOSED
Corporations or persons who discharge or deposit refuse matter
onto the banks of or into the navigable waters of the United States or
their tributaries, without a permit, or in violation of the terms of a
permit, from the Corps of Engineers, violate section 407 of the Refuse
Act. 33 United States Code section 411 provides that such persons or
corporations:
* * * shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction thereof shall be pun-
ished by a fine not exceeding $2,500, nor less than $500, * * * or by imprisonment
(in the case of a natural person) for not less than 30 days nor more than one year,
or by both such fine and imprisonment, in the discretion of the court, one-half- of
said fine to be paid to the person or persons giving information which shall lead
to conviction.
II. MAY A CITIZEN WHO FINDS A VIOLATION OF THE REFUSE ACT
BRING A Qui Tarn CIVIL ACTION AGAINST THE VIOLATOR?
A qui tarn action is a civil action brought by a citizen to collect a
fine, penalty, or forfeiture, a share (usually one-half) of which he is
allowed to keep for himself by the statute imposing the fine or penalty.
The action's name is derived from the Latin, "qui tarn pro domino
rege quam pro se ipso sequitur," meaning "who brings the action as
well for the king as for himself."
The issue is whether a citizen who possesses information of a viola-
tion of the act sufficient to lead to conviction, can bring a qui tarn
action to impose the fine on the violator and collect one-half thereof.
III. Qui Tarn ACTIONS ARE CIVIL ACTIONS BROUGHT BY CITIZENS
UNDER PENAL STATUTES WHOSE SANCTION Is A FINE, PENALTY
OR FORFEITURE OF WHICH CITIZENS ARE ENTITLED TO A SHARE
Bouvier's Law Dictionary (3d ed.) defines "qui tarn" to mean:
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3561
An action under a statute which imposes a penalty for the doing or not doing
an act, and gives that penalty in part to whomsoever will sue for the same, and
the other part to the commonwealth, or some charitable, literary, or other insti-
tution, and makes it recoverable by action. The plaintiff describes himself as
suing as well for the commonwealth * * * as for himself * * *. [Emphasis in
original.]
Blackstone in his "Commentaries," vol. Ill, writes:
But, more usually these forfeitures [meaning forfeiture of goods, fine, or penalty]
created by statute are given at large, to any common informer; or, in other words,
[p-1]
to any such person or persons as will sue for the same: and hence, such actions
are called popular actions, because they are given to the people in general. Some-
times one part is given to the king, or to the poor, or to the public use, and the
other part to the informer or prosecutor; and then the suit is called a qui tarn
action * * V
Henry Stephen, in his "New Commentaries on the Laws of England,"
vol. Ill (1844), elaborated as follows:
We have now sufficiently considered the injuries which affect such things in
action as arise out of contracts, but there are some things in action which cannot
properly be said to have that origin, and the withholding of which will nevertheless
constitute a wrong or injury, viz. such debts as result from the obligation to pay
money pursuant to a sentence of the law, or an enactment of the legislature; as
when in a court of law, judgment is obtained by one man against another, for a
specific sum of money; or when by an act of parliament, of that class called penal
statutes, a pecuniary forfeiture is inflicted for committing some specified offense,
and such forfeiture is made recoverable, as it usually is, by the crown, or the party
aggrieved, or a common informer, as the case may be. This obligation or liability
to pay a specific sum of money constitutes * * * a debt, so that the party against
whom the judgment is obtained is immediately considered as owing to his adver-
sary the amount awarded, and the party who transgresses the penal statute is
immediately owing to the crown, the party aggrieved, or the common informer,
as the case may be, the amount of the penalty. The remedy for the recovery of
such debt, or chose in action, when withheld, is by action of debt on the judgment,
or on the penal statute respectively; and in the latter case this remedy is generally
designated as a penal action, or, where one part of the forfeiture is given to the
crown, and the other part to the informer, a * * * qui tarn action because it is
brought by a person qui tarn pro domino rege quam pro se ipso sequitur.2
IV. ENGLISH GOVERNMENTS FROM THE 14m THROUGH THE 19TH
CENTURIES FREQUENTLY RELIED UPON CITIZEN PARTICIPATION IN
LAW ENFORCEMENT BY PASSING CRIMINAL STATUTES AUTHORIZING
Qui Tarn ACTIONS
Because of the absence of adequate professional police forces and
an adequate prosecutorial administration3 until well into the 19th
century and, during certain periods, because of Parliament's lack of
confidence in the Crown's intentions to enforce the law,4 citizens in
-------
3562 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
England were frequently given the right to enforce criminal statutes.
Sir William Holdsworth writes in his "History of English Law":
We have seen that in the Middle Ages [14th and 15th centuries] it was a com-
mon expedient to give the public at large an interest in seeing that a statute was
enforced by giving to any member of the public the right to sue for the penalty
imposed for its breach, and allowing him to get some part of that penalty. This
expedient was largely used by the legislature in [the 16th and 17th centuries]
both in the case of * * * statutes dealing with trade, and in the case of statutes
dealing with many other subjects * * *.
1 Blackstone, Commentaries, vol. Ill, at p. 160. (Emphasis In original.)
1 At pp. 535-6.
• Viscount Simon, In presenting the common Informers bill to the House of Lords for second
reading, stated (Parliamentary debates (Lords), Apr. 3-June 7, 1951, vol. 171, at p. 1052) :
If we go back to the old days when there was no efficient police force, when, indeed, in
some parts of the country there was no police force at all, and consider the importance of
enforcing the law against criminal offenses, it would seem that It was not altogether un-
natural for our ancestors * * * to set up the system of common Informers * * *
1 Viscount Simon in the same speech stated (Ibid., at p. 1052):
There may be another class of case where it [the system of common informers] would have
been justified. If we lived in an age when the authorities could be suspected of refusing, out
of favouritism or fear, to prosecute a particular kind of person, it might be a very useful
thing to have this machinery of the common informer to secure that in proper cases a man
would be brought to book * * *.
Mr. Hollis, in the debate during the second reading of the common informers bill before
the House of Commons, stated (Parliamentary Debates (Commons), Jan. 23-Feb. 9, 1951,
vol. 483 at p. 2098):
The second historical reason [for the common informer suit] is this. The reason for such
legislation as the Act of Uniformity was because at a certain time, during the reigns of the
last two Stuart Kings, Parliament had very little confidence in the will of the Executive
to enforce the law that It had seen fit to pass. The Government were thought to be less keen
on enforcing the Act of Uniformity than Parliament wished them to be.
[p. 2]
The number of statutes, old and new, in which the public at large was encour-
aged to enforce obedience to statutes by the promise of a share of the penalty
imposed for disobedience was very large.5
Professor Radzinowicz writes of a later period:
Throughout the 18th century, and in the early years of the 19th, a number of
statutes were passed, which so widened the activity of common informers that
an important section of criminal law came to depend upon them for its enforce-
ment. It was hoped to extend their usefulness and vigilance to all the lesser in-
fringements of the law * * *.6 [Emphasis added.]
* • * * * # *
Much reliance was placed upon common informers to secure the enforcement
of laws affecting public order and safety * * *.7
*******
[T]he common informer, stimulated by his share in the penalty, was expected to
play a considerable part in setting the machinery of justice in motion with regard
to lesser infringements of the law. Thousands of these were committed every
day, and although most of them were nonindictable offences or misdemeanors, they
had nevertheless considerable social significance * * *. [Emphasis added.]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3563
The incentive of the "moiety of the appointed penalty" was not confined to a
few isolated penal statutes selected at random. It formed part of the deliberate
and consistent policy of the legislature and pervaded the entire body of the criminal
law. It acquired the character of a regular system in process of continual expan-
sion. The result was a social situation in which the common informer was expected
to act as a policeman, and a protector of the community against a vast mass of
delinquency.8 [Emphasis added.]
Even during the later years of the 19th century, as police admin-
istration became more sophisticated in England, the common
informer's "status as an adjunct of criminal justice was so generally
accepted that * * * laws still continued to be enacted giving [him]
powers and privileges * * *".9
V. IN THIS COUNTRY CONGRESS HAS OFTEN EXPRESSLY GIVEN
CITIZENS THE RIGHT To BRING Qui Tarn ACTIONS To IMPLEMENT
THE CRIMINAL LAWS
The Supreme Court of the United States observed in 1905:
Statutes providing for actions by a common informer, who himself has no in-
terest whatever in the controversy other than that given by statute, have been in
existence * * * in this country ever since the foundation of our Government.10
Still later, in 1943, the Court, in rejecting the view of the third
circuit court of appeals that informer actions "have always been
regarded with disfavor," stated:
Qui tarn suits have been frequently permitted by legislative action .. .n
Among the Federal statutes authorizing a qui tarn action by the
common informer are the following:
Act of September 2, 1789, 1 Stat. 65, 67 (sec. 8), now 31 U.S.C.
section 155, 163, 1003 (re abuse of office by Treasurer, or Secretary of
Treasury);
• Sir William Holdsworth, "A History of English Law," vol. IV, at pp. 355-6.
• Leon Radzinowicz, "A History of English Criminal Law and its Administration," from 1850,
vol. 2, at p. 142.
1 Ibid., at p. 143.
«Ibid., at pp. 146-147.
»Ibid., at p. 155.
» Marvin v. Trout, 199 U.S. 212, 225 (1905).
» U.5. ex. rel. Marcus v. Hess, 317 U.S. 537, 541 (1943).
[p. 3]
Act of March 3, 1791, 1 Stat. 199, 209 (sec. 44) (re collection of
duties on liquor);
Act of March 22, 1794, 1 Stat. 347, 349 (sec. 2, 4), now 46 U.S.C.
sections 1351-1356 (re slave trade);
Act of June 30, 1834, 4 Stat. 729, 733 (sec. 27), now 25 U.S.C.
section 201 (re trade and intercourse with Indian tribes);
Act of August 30, 1852, 10 Stat. 61, 75 (sec. 41) (re regulation of
steamboats);
-------
3564 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Act of August 5, 1861, 12 Stat. 292, 296 (sec. 11) (re collectors of
revenue);
Act of March 2, 1863, 12 Stat. 696, 698 (sec. 4), now 31 U.S.C. 231,
232, 233 [re defrauding the Government];
Act of July 8, 1870, 16 Stat. 198, 203 (sec. 39), later 35 U.S.C.
section 50 (now repealed) [re falsely marking article as patented];
Act of February 26, 1885, 23 Stat. 332, 333 (sec. 3) [re importation
of alien labor];
Cj Act of June 17, 1930, 46 Stat. 590, 758 19 U.S.C. section 1619 [re
enforcement of customs and navigation laws].
VI. CITIZENS CAN BRING Qui Tarn ACTIONS To COLLECT FINES OR
PENALTIES IMPOSED BY CRIMINAL STATUTES WHERE THE STATUTES
Do NOT EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZE OR FORBID THE CITIZENS' SUITS
The Refuse Act of 1899 states that "one-half of [the] fine [imposed
for violation of the Act is] to be paid to the person or persons giving
information which shall lead to conviction." The issue is whether
Congress by the use of this language has allowed citizens the right to
bring qui tarn actions to enforce the Refuse Act. The Act does not
explicitly state that citizens have such a right. But, it does not
explicitly deny to citizens this right.
There is American case law which supports the proposition that
where a statute providing for a reward to informers does not specifi-
cally either authorize or forbid the informer to institute a qui tarn
action, such statute is to be construed as authorizing such suit.
In U.S. ex. rel. Marcus v. Hess, 317 U.S. 537 (1942) an informer
brought an action under R.S. 5438 and R.S. 3490-93, 31 U.S.C. 231
et. seq., the Informer's Act (prior to its 1943 amendments). Section
5438 made certain efforts to defraud the Government a crime punish-
able by fine and imprisonment. Section 3490 separately provided
that whoever committed "any" of the prohibited acts should "forfeit
and pay to the United States the sum of two thousand dollars, and in
addition, double the amount of damages * * * sustained * * *; and
such forfeiture and damages [should] be sued for in the same suit."
Under sections 3491 and 3493, the suit for the fine and double damages
could be instituted by "any person" in behalf of the Government, and,
when successfully brought, the person instituting suit could keep one
half the judgment.
The Supreme Court held in this case that an informer could bring
suit under R.S. 3491 against certain parties, which had defrauded the
Government by engaging in collusive bidding on PWA projects in
Allegheny County, Pa., even though the informer relied for his in-
formation on an indictment filed by the Department of Justice in a
previous uncontested criminal action. In reaching its result the
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3565
Court rejected the view of the Court of Appeals, Third Circuit, that
the statute (31 U.S.C. 231, et seq.) should be construed "with utmost
[P-4]
strictness" as qui tarn actions "have always been regarded with
disfavor" (127 F. 2d at 233). The Supreme Court retorted: "Qui tarn
suits have been frequently permitted by legislative action, and have
not been without defense by the courts" (at p. 541).
The Supreme Court further stated: 12
Statutes providing for a reward to informers which do not specifically either
authorize or forbid the informer to institute the [qui tam] action are construed to
authorize him to sue, Adams v. Woods, 2 Cranch 336. (Italics added.)
In Adams, qui tam, v. Woods, 6 U.S. (2 Cranch) 336 (1805) an
informer brought an action of debt under the second section of the act
of Congress of 22d March 1794, "to prohibit the carrying on the slave
trade from the United States to any foreign place or country," 1 U.S.
Stat. 347. This section provided that violators "shall forfeit and pay
the sum of two thousand dollars; one moiety thereof to the use of the
United States, and the other moiety to the use of him or her who
shall sue for and prosecute the same." The issue in the case was
whether the 2-year statute of limitations period set out in section 32
of the act of Congress of April 30, 1790, 1 U.S. Stat. 119, applied not
only to indictments and informations but also to the informer's debt
action to enforce a criminal statute. Section 32 of 1 U.S. Stat. 119
provided:
* * * nor shall any person be prosecuted, tried or punished for any offense not
capital, nor for any fine or forfeiture under any penal statute, unless the indictment
or information for the same shall be found or instituted within two years from the
time of committing the offense, or incurring the fine or forfeiture * * *
In holding the above statute applicable to the informer's civil action,
Chief Justice Marshall stated:
[I]n the statute under consideration, a distinct member of the sentence, de-
scribing one entire class of offenses [i.e., ones where the sanction is fine or for-
feiture], would be rendered almost totally useless, by the construction insisted on
by the attorney for the United States. Almost every fine or forfeiture under a
penal statute, may be recovered by an action of debt, as well as by information;13
and to declare that the information was barred, while the action of debt was left
without limitation, would be to attribute a capriciousness on this subject to the
legislature, which could not be accounted for; and to declare that the law did not
apply to cases on which an action of debt is maintainable, would be to overrule
express words, and to give the statute almost the same construction which it
would receive, if one distinct member of the sentence [i.e., "no person shall be
prosecuted, tried or punished"] was expunged from it. In this particular case, the
statute which creates the forfeiture does not prescribe the mode of demanding it;
consequently, either debt or information would lie. It would be singular, if the one
remedy should be barred and the other left unrestrained.14 (Emphasis added.)
-------
3566 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Thus, although the 1794 act did not specifically either authorize
or forbid the informer to institute a qui tarn action, Chief Justice
Marshall construed it to authorize such a procedure.
In United States v. Laescki, 29 Fed. 699 (D.C., N.B. 111., 1887), the
United States sought an indictment under sees. 5188 and 3708 of the
revised statutes which stated:
It shall not be lawful to design, engrave, print or in any manner make or execute
or to utter, issue, distribute, circulate, or use, any business or professional card,
» 317 U.S. at p. 541, footnote 4.
" At common law the informer could bring either a civil action of debt qui tarn or an
Information qui torn. Edward Deacon stated in A Digest oi The Criminal Law oi England,
vol. 1 (1831): "Informations are of two sorts; first, those which are partly at the suit of the
king, and partly at that of a subject; and secondly, such as are only in the name of the king.
The former * • * are usually brought before justices of the peace upon penal statutes, which
inflict a penalty upon conviction of the offender—one part of the use of the king, and another
to the use of the informer—and are, in fact, a sort of qui tarn, action, only carried on by a
criminal, Instead of a civil, process" (at p. 671).
"6 U.S. at p. 341. Justice Marshall also held that the 1790 statute applied to prosecutions
under criminal statutes enacted after, as well as before, the act of limitations was passed.
[p. 5]
notice, placard, circular, hand-bill or advertisement, in the likeness or similitude
of any circulating note, or other obligation or security, of any banking association
organized or acting under the laws of the United States, which has been or may
be issued under this title, or any act of congress, or to write, print, or otherwise
impress upon any such note, obligation, or security, any business or professional
card, notice, or advertisement * * * of any matter or thing whatever. Every
person who violates this section shall be liable to a penalty of one hundred dollars,
recoverable, one-half to the use of the informer. (Emphasis added.)
In sustaining defendant's motion to quash the indictment the
court stated:
It is well settled that when a statute makes it unlawful to do an act, and a
penalty is given for doing such act, and no special mode of enforcing the penalty
is provided, such penalty may be recovered in an action of debt, or by indictment
or information; but when the statute creates the offense, prescribes the penalty,
and the mode of enforcing it, it would seem that the penalty can only be enforced
in the mode provided by the statute (at p. 699).
These statutes, in effect, say to all persons: "If you print or stamp upon a
United States note or bond, or a national bank-note, any business card or adver-
tisement, you are liable to a penalty of one hundred dollars, recoverable at the
suit of an informer,"—and do not say that the offender can be indicted by a
grand jury, and tried as a criminal (at p. 701).
Although the word "recoverable" might suggest a civil proceeding
was intended for the collection of the $100 penalty,15 nevertheless,
the statute did not specifically or explicitly authorize the informer to
initiate that civil proceeding. The Cort construed the statute to
authorize a qui tarn action despite the absence of language expressly
giving such authorization.
In United States v. Stocking, 87 Fed. 857 (D. Mont., 1898), the
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3567
United States brought an indictment to enforce R.S. 2148, the act
of August 18, 1856, 11 Stat. 80, sec. 2, which read:
That if any person who has been removed from the Indian country under the
provisions of the tenth section of the act of Congress approved the 30th of June,
1834 * * * shall thereafter at any time return or be found within the Indian
territory, such offender shall forfeit and pay the sum of one thousand dollars.
Under the same title (28) as R.S. 2148 was R.S. 2124, formerly the
act of June 30, 1834, 4 Stat. 733, sec. 27, which stated:
That all penalties which shall accrue under [this title] shall be sued for and
recovered in an action of debt in the name of the United States before any court
having jurisdiction of the same in any state or territory in which the defendant
shall be arrested or found, one half to the use of the informer, and the other half
to the use of the United States; except where the prosecution shall be first instituted
on behalf of the United States, in which case the whole shall be to their use.
The defendant argued that an indictment did not lie to enforce R.S.
2148, as R.S. 2124 only authorized a civil debt action for the penalty.
In rejecting this argument the court stated:
In order to justify a court in holding that congress has by any act narrowed the
rights of the United States in any particular as to any remedy, that intention
ought to clearly appear. The cases of U.S. v. Payne, 22 P. 426, and In re Seagraves,
(Okl.), 48 P. 272, are based upon the view that section 2124 applies only to an
action by the United States, and does not establish the rights and remedy of an
informer, and that the United States alone can maintain the action named therein.
I do not believe a correct interpretation of that section will support this view.
The first clause of that section evidently refers to what is termed a "qui tarn
action," and the government does not maintain qui tarn actions (at p. 862).
Earlier in the opinion the court stated.
Upon the examination of title 28, I find no express provisions that an informer
would be entitled to any portion of the penalties named therein. Under the provi-
» United States v. Atlantic Fruit Co., 206 Fed. 440 (1913).
[p. 6]
sions of said section 2124, an informer is entitled to one-half of the penalty sued for,
unless the action is first prosecuted by the United States. Any words of a statute
which show that a part of the penalty named therein shall be for the use of an in-
former will entitle him to maintain an action therefor if he complies with the
conditions of the statute * * *. While there is no express provision of the Revised
Statutes * * * which gives an informer any part of the penalties named in title
No. 28, yet I think the provisions of section 2124 impliedly give him one-half of the
said penalties. If he has this right, then this section gives him, in my judgment,
the right to sue therefor in the name of the United States. * * *. If an informer is
given no right, under * * * section 2124, it is difficult to discover its meaning (at
pp. 861-2).
Although the language in Rev. Stat., sec. 2124 "except where the
prosecution shall be first instituted on behalf of the United States"
might imply that another mode of prosecution was available under
-------
3568 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
the statute, and the court found this language helpful in construing
the statute to authorize an informer action, nevertheless Revised
Statutes 2124 did not specifically authorize or prohibit a qui tarn
action. The opinion supports the Supreme Court's position in U.S. ex
rel. Marcus v. Hess, supra.
In Chicago and Alton R.R. Co. v. Howard, 38 111. 415 (1865), the
Supreme Court of Illinois sustained a lower court ruling that plaintiff
Howard could sue qui tarn to collect a $1,000 penalty for defendant's
violations of an act requiring a railroad to blow a whistle or ring a
bell at and near railroad crossings. One section (38) of the act in
question provided for payment of "a penalty of $50 for each neglect
to be paid by the corporation owning the railroad, one-half thereof
to go to the informer, and the other half to the State" (sec. 38, act
of Nov. 5, 1849). Another section (42) stated that "all penalties
imposed by this act may be sued for by the District Attorney." In
upholding the qui tarn suit the court stated:
If the 42d section had contained the only provision for bringing suit, then it
would have to be brought by the State's attorney, and in the name of the people.
But under the 38th section a common informer may sue, in the common law
mode, in his own name, as well as on behalf of the people (at p. 418).
Here also, although the statute in question did not specifically
authorize an informer's qui tarn action, the court construed it to
authorize such an action.
VII. ENGLISH STATUTES NOT SPECIFICALLY AUTHORIZING OR FOR-
BIDDING CITIZENS To BRING Qui Tarn ACTIONS HAVE BEEN UNDER-
STOOD To AUTHORIZE SUCH ACTIONS
In England, also, statutes, like the Refuse Act, which neither
specifically authorize nor forbid informers to bring qui tarn actions,
have been understood to authorize such actions.
For example, the Apothecaries Act of 1815, 55 Geo. 3 c. 194 (Hals-
bury's "Statutes of England," 2d ed., vol. 15, pp. 3-66), which
prohibited persons from practicing as apothecaries without a license,
provided (sec. 26):
All penalties and forfeitures * * * shall [if greater than £5] be recovered by
action * * * in the name of the master wardens, and society of the art * * * of
apothecaries of the city of London * * * [or, if less than £5], * * * by distress and
sale of the goods and chattels of the offender.
It further provided (sec. 25):
All sums * * * arising from convictions and recovery of penalties * * * shall
be * * * disposed of in manner following: one-half thereof to the informer or
informers, * * *
[P-7]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3569
This statute has been understood to authorize a qui tarn action by
the informer.16
Another example is the Universities (Wine Licenses) Act of 1743,
17 Geo. 2. c. 40 (Halsbury's "Statutes of England," 2d ed., vol.
13, at p. 118), which prohibited the sale of liquor on the campuses
of Oxford and Cambridge Universities without a license from the
chancellor of either university. Violation of the act subjected one to
a forfeiture of "five pounds, one moiety to the use of his Majesty * * *
and the other moiety to the informer" (sec. 11).
Section 11 further provided:
all persons offending against this Act shall * * * be prosecuted * * * in the courts
of the chancellors * * * of the said universities * * * in a summary way * * *
The summary enforcement procedures set forth in the act make no
reference to participation by informers. This statute also has been
understood to authorize qui tarn actions by informers.17
VIII. SECTION 413 OF TITLE 33 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE DOES
NOT SPECIFICALLY FORBID THE INFORMER FROM INSTITUTING A
Qui Tarn ACTION UNDER THE REFUSE ACT
It has been assumed so far in this memorandum, without discussion,
that the Refuse Act does not specifically forbid a qui tarn action by
the informer. Is this the case ?
Section 413 of 33 U.S.C. states in part:
The Department of Justice shall conduct the legal proceedings necessary to
enforce the provisions of sections 401, 403, 404, 406, 407, 408, 409, 411 * * *, and
it shall be the duty of United States attorneys to vigorously prosecute all offenders
against the same whenever requested to do so by the Secretary of Army or by any
of the officials hereinafter designated * * *
This section quite plainly says that the Department of Justice shall
conduct the criminal proceedings to enforce the act. It does not pro-
hibit the informer from conducting civil qui tarn proceedings to
recover his moiety of the penalty. Thus, in United States v. Griswold,
5 Sawy. 25, Fed. Cas. No. 15,266 (D.C., D. Oregon, 1877), an informer
sued to enforce the Informers Act of March 2, 1863, 12 Stat. 696,
later set forth as R.S. 5438, 3490-3493, cited above as one of numerous
Federal statutes authorizing qui tarn actions.18 The Informer Act
established two modes of prosecuting those who filed false claims or
otherwise committed fraudulent acts against the United States Gov-
ernment. One mode was a criminal action prosecuted by the Govern-
ment for fine and imprisonment. The second mode was an informer
action for a monetary forfeiture of $2,000 plus double the damages
sustained by the United States. R.S. 3491 specifically stated that
suit "to recover the forfeiture and damages may be brought and
carried on by any person, as well for himself as the United States."
-------
3570 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
The informer could keep one-half the amount recovered.
In United States v. Griswold the court denied defendant's motions
to (a) strike the complaint because not properly subscribed, and (b)
M See schedule of statutes attached to the Common Informers Act, 14 and 15 Geo. 6, c. 39,
22d June 1951, Halsbury's Statutes of England, 3d ed., vol. 8, at p. 391. See also Radzlnowlcz,
vol. II, at p. 145, set forth in footnote 17, infra.
17 See schedule of statutes attached to the Common Informers Act, cited in note 16, supra.
See also Radzinowicz, vol. II, at p. 145; "Common informers were also empowered to bring
an action against anyone who * * * retailed wine within the precincts of the Universities of
Oxford and Cambridge without a license from the Chancellor or the Vice Chancellor (citing
17 Geo. 2, c. 40, s 11) * * * or practised as an apothecary without the necessary certificate
(citing 55 Geo. 3, c. 194) ."
18 See pt. V, supra.
[p. 8]
vacate the writ of arrest because improperly issued. In ruling on the
first motion the court observed that, as a private citizen could bring
the action in the name of the United States, his attorneys were the
attorneys for the United States and proper subscription of the
complaint merely required their, and not the district attorney's,
signature (s). After noting that the action was one qui tarn, the court
stated (26 Fed. Cas. at p. 44):
When, as in this case, a statute imposed a penalty for the commission of an
act, and also gave such penalty in part to whoever would sue for it, and the re-
mainder to the king or other public use, the action to recover such penalty, if
brought by a private person, was brought in his own name and subject to his
control. Although a judgment obtained therein was for the benefit of the king or
other public use as well as the plaintiff, yet the action was, to all intents and
purposes, the private action of the latter. 3 Blackstone, Commentaries 160.
The court also stated (Id., p. 44) :
For all purposes, except the discontinuance of the action, the attorney employed
by the informer to commence and conduct the same is the attorney of the United
States therein. Neither does the fact that the district attorney is required to be
diligent to enforce the statute against persons violating it, make him the attorney
of the United States in that action * * * [WJhichever—the informer or the district
attorney—first commences an action for a particular violation of the statute,
thereby excludes the other from so doing. (Emphasis added.)
The court concluded (Id., p. 44):
Neither does the provision in section 771 of the Revised Statutes 19 which makes
it the duty of the "district attorney to prosecute in his district * * * all civil actions
in which the United States are concerned," authorize or require him to act as at-
torney for the plaintiff in this action. This section is general in its terms and
necessarily qualified and restrained by the sections above cited [i.e., the Informer
Act], which relate to the commencement and conduct of this particular action.
For that matter the United States is concerned in all qui tarn actions, whether
brought in its own name or that of a private person, because it is entitled to a
share of the penalty or forfeiture that may be recovered therein. But the rule of
law is, and the practice always has been, that a qui tarn action is the action of the
party who brings it, and the sovereign, however much concerned in the result
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3571
of it, has no right to interfere with the conduct of it, except as specially provided
by statute. [Emphasis added.]
Section 5 of the Informers Act instructed the U.S. attorneys "to be
diligent in inquiring into any violation of the provisions of this act
* * * and to cause [persons liable to suit] to be proceeded against." 20
The court, nevertheless, held that the private citizen could bring a
qui tarn action to enforce the act and that the U.S. attorney could not
interfere with this action.
Thus, in light of the Griswold opinion, section 413 of the Refuse Act
of 1899, directing the U.S. attorneys "to vigorously prosecute all
offenders," does not bar the private citizen from hiring his own
counsel and bringing a qui tarn action. Nor does this language of
section 413 authorize the U.S. attorneys to assume control of civil
litigation begun by the citizen to recover the penalty provided in
section 411.
IX. PUBLIC POLICY ARGUMENTS STRONGLY FAVOR THE RIGHT OF THE
PRIVATE CITIZEN To BRING A Qui Tarn ACTION UNDER THE REFUSE
ACT
The Refuse Act of 1899 prohibits the discharge or deposit into the
navigable waters of the United States of "refuse matter of any
kind * * * other than that flowing from streets and sewers and
'» Provision in current law similar to R.S. 771 Is sec. 4 (c), 80 Stat. 618, 28 U.S.C. 547 (2).
20 Sec. 5,12 Stat. 696 (emphasis added).
[p. 9]
passing therefrom in a liquid state," unless such discharge or deposit
is done in accordance with a permit from the Corps of Engineers.
The Supreme Court has defined "refuse" as including "all foreign
substances and pollutants" apart from municipal sewage.21 Other
language of the act has been interpreted with similar broad scope.22
The usefulness of the Refuse Act has been substantially increased
by liberal judicial interpretation over the years together with the
passage of many statutes and the issuance of Executive orders de-
signed to minimize pollution, maximize recreation, protect esthetics,
and preserve natural resources to enhance the public interest rather
than private gain.23 It is apparent that the Refuse Act is a broad
charter of authority and a powerful legal tool for preventing the
pollution of all navigable waters.
Its present usefulness is not reduced by more recent water pollution
control legislation. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act spe-
cifically states (33 U.S.C. 466k) that it "shall not be construed as (1)
superseding or limiting the functions, under any other law, of * * *
any other officer or agency of the United States, relating to water
-------
3572 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
pollution, or (2) affecting or impairing the provisions of * * * sections
13 through 17 of" the River and Harbor Act of 1899, i.e., the Refuse
Act.
However, the executive branch of the Federal Government has
indicated it does not intend to enforce the Refuse Act against many
polluters. In response to inquiries to Attorney General John Mitchell
from Congressman Henry S. Reuss, chairman of the House Conser-
vation and Natural Resources Subcommittee, Assistant Attorney
General Shiro Kashiwa wrote on June 2, 1970:
In our opinion, it would not be in the genuine interest of the Government to
bring an action under the Refuse Act to secure a criminal sanction against a com-
pany which admittedly is discharging refuse into the navigable waters of the
United States, but which, pursuant to a program being conducted by the Federal
Water Quality Administration, is spending significant amounts of money to secure
the abatement of that pollution. (Emphasis added.)
The Justice Department has formalized this position in a directive
to all U.S. attorneys entitled "Guidelines for Litigation Under the
Refuse Act" adopted July 10, 1970.
21 See United States v. Standard Oil Co., 384 U.S. 224, 230 (1966) and United States v. Re-
public Steel Corp. 362 U.S. 482, 490 (1960).
"See "Our Waters and Wetlands: How the Corps of Engineers Can Help Prevent Their
Destruction, and Pollution," H. Rept. 91-917, 91st Cong , 2d sess., pp. 15-16; Zabel v. Tabb,
F. 2d , 1 Env. Rep. 1449, No. 27555 (U.S. Ct. of App., 5th Circ., July 16, 1970).
23 Some of these statutes and orders are:
Federal Water Power Act of 1920, as amended (16 U.S.C. 701, et. seq );
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 466, et seq.) as amended by Water Quality
Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-234; 79 Stat. 903); Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966 (Public
Law 89-753; 80 Stat. 1246); Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-224; 84
Stat. 91);
Delaware River Basin Commission Act of Sept. 27, 1961 (Public Law 87-328; 75 Stat. 688);
Bureau of Outdoor Recreation Act of May 28, 1963 (Public Law 88-29, 77 Stat. 49; 16 U.S.C.
460 1);
Section 212, Appalachian Regional Development Act of Mar. 9, 1965 (79 Stat. 5, 16; Public
Law 89-4; 40 U.S.C., App., sec. 212);
Water Resources Planning Act of July 22, 1965 (Public Law 89-80; 79 Stat. 244; 42 U S.C.
1962a);
Section 702, Housing and Urban Development Act of Aug. 10,1965 (79 Stat. 451, Public Law
89-117; 42 U.S.C. 3102);
Section 106, Public Works and Economic Development Act of Aug. 26, 1965 (79 Stat. 552,
554; 42 U.S.C.: 3136; Public Law 89-136);
Estuarine Study Act of Aug. 3, 1968 (Public Law 90-454; 82 Stat. 625; 16 U.S.C. 1221);
National Water Commission Act of Sept. 26, 1968 (Public Law 90-515; 82 Stat. 868; 42 U.S C.
1962a, note)
National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (Public Law 91-190; 83 Stat. 852);
Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956, as amended (16 U S.C. 742a-742j);
Migratory Bird Conservation Act, as amended (16 U S.C. 715, et seq).
Executive Order 11288 of July 2, 1966 (3 C.F.R. 423); superseded by Executive Order 11507
of Feb. 4, 1970 (35 F.R. 2573) (prescribing requirements for control and abatement of air and
water pollution at Federal installations).
Executive Order 11472 of May 29, 1969 (34 F.R. 8693), as amended by Executive Order 11514
of Mar. 5, 1970 (35 F.R. 4247), (prescribing responsibilities of Federal agencies and the Coun-
cil on Environmental Quality under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, supra).
[p. 10]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3573
The Justice Department's position is contrary to the mandate of
the 1899 act which forbids discharges without a Corps permit.
If the U.S. attorney fulfills his duty to vigorously enforce the Refuse
Act, the polluter who wants to continue discharging refuse will have
to obtain a permit from the Corps. Section 21 (b) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, as amended by the Water Quality
Improvement Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-224; 84 Stat. 91, 108),
specifies that the applicant for such permit must first obtain a
certification from the appropriate State agency that the applicant
will conduct this activity "in a manner which will not violate ap-
plicable water quality standards." Thus, proper enforcement of the
Refuse Act is essential to, rather than in conflict with, the Federal
Government's water pollution abatement program under the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act.
As noted above one reason why English Parliaments established
criminal statutes authorizing qui tarn suits was their lack of con-
fidence in the Crown's willingness to enforce the statutes passed.
Viscount Simon pithily expressed this reason during debate in
Parliament in 195124:
If we lived in an age when the authorities could be suspected of refusing, out of
favouritism or fear, to prosecute a particular kind of person, it might be a very
useful thing to have this machinery of the common informer to secure that in
proper cases a man would be brought to book * * *
In this country today, when the Justice Department is apparently
reluctant to vigorously enforce the Refuse Act, the citizen informer
who brings a civil qui tarn suit under that Act performs a very useful
and essential function.
Even if the Department of Justice did "vigorously prosecute"
violators of the Refuse Act, as it is directed to do by section 17 of
the act, the citizen informer could substantially aid the Government.
For the Corps of Engineers, which investigates alleged violations of
the Refuse Act, and the Department of Justice, which prosecutes
violators, do not have the funds and personnel to do battle in court
with the thousands of industries in this country which are unlawfully
discharging wastes into our navigable waters without a permit from
the Corps of Engineers. The Corps has testified before Congress
regarding its lack of funds and personnel.25 Qui tarn statutes were
first passed in circumstances such as this, where the police and
prosecutorial forces of the government are inadequate to secure
proper enforcement of the law.
The active participation of America's citizenry can help to bring a
-------
3574 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
halt to the degradation and irrevocable alteration of our waters and
environment.
» See footnote 4.
25 See Corps of Engineers fact sheet of Aug. 4, 1970, set forth In Cong. Rec. of Aug. 24, 1970
(p. S 13993), and referred to in Senator Hart's letter of Aug. 7, 1970, appended to speech of
Congressman Henry S. Reuss in Cong. Rec. of Aug. 14, 1970 (p. H 8362 at p. H 8364).
[p. 11]
X. AT A TIME WHEN THE FEDERAL COURTS ARE INCREASINGLY WILLING
To ALLOW CITIZENS To ACT AS PRIVATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL To
ENFORCE POLICIES OF VARIOUS FEDERAL STATUTES BEARING ON
ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS, THE COURTS SHOULD NOT HESITATE To
BRING Qui Tarn ACTIONS UNDER THE REFUSE ACT
In recent years the Federal courts have shown an increased willing-
ness to allow suits by private citizens interested in seeing that the
policies of various Federal statutes bearing on environmental ques-
tions are properly carried out.
In Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference v. FPC, 354 F. 2d 608
(C.A. 2,1965), several conservation organizations, together with three
towns, petitioned the second circuit court of appeals to set aside orders
of the Federal Power Commission authorizing Consolidated Edison
Company of New York to construct a pumped storage hydroelectric
project on the west side of the Hudson River at Storm King Mountain
in Cornwall, N.Y. The court, in allowing the citizen organizations the
right to challenge the FPC's decision that construction of the pumped
storage plant was consonant with the policies of the Federal Power
Act, stated:
In order to insure that the Federal Power Commission will adequately protect
the public interest in the esthetic, conservational, and recreational aspects of
power development, those who by their activities and conduct have exhibited a
special interest in such areas, must be held to be included in the class of "ag-
grieved" parties under sec. 313 (b) [of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S. Code sec.
825 (b)]. We hold that the Federal Power Act gives petitioners a legal right to
protect their special interests.86
Subsequently, in Road Review League, Town of Bedford et al v.
Boyd, 270 F. Supp. 650 (S.D.N.Y., 1967), a Federal district court
upheld the right of the Road Review League, a nonprofit association
concerned with community problems (primarily those involving the
location of highways), the town of Bedford, and others to challenge
the location of an interstate highway. In allowing the citizens and
citizen groups the right to question whether the Secretary of Trans-
portation had followed the directive in the Federal Highways Act
(23 U.S.C. 138) to "use maximum effort to preserve Federal, State,
and local government parklands and historic sites and the beauty
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3575
and historic value of such lands and sites," the court stated:
towns, local civic organizations, and conservation groups are to be considered
"aggrieved" by agency action which allegedly has disregarded their interests. I
see no reason why the word "aggrieved" should have a different meaning in
the Administrative Procedure Act from the meaning given to it under the Federal
Power Act.27
In Gandt et al. v. Hardin (N.D. Mich., N. Div., Dec. 11, 1969),
civil action 1334, the Federal district court followed the Scenic
x Scenic Hudson Preservation Conference v. FPC, 354 F. 2d 608, 616 (C.A. 2, 1965), cert.
denied, 384 U.S. 941. In Association of Data Processing Service Organizations, Inc. v. Camp,
397 U.S. 150, 153, 90 S. Ct. 827, 830 (Mar. 3, 1970), the Supreme Court, citing the Scenic
Hudson case, noted that the legal interests of a person aggrieved by agency action within
the meaning of a relevant statute to whom the Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S. Code
702) grants the right of judicial review "may reflect aesthetic, conservatlonal, and recrea-
tional as well as economic values." See also Kenneth Culp Davis, "The Liberalized Law of
Standing," 37 Univ. Chi. L. Rev. 450 (Spring 1970); Environmental Defense Fund v. Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare, F. 2d (No. 23,812, C.A. D.C. May 28,
1970), 1 Env. Rep. 1341; Enuironmentel Defense Fund v. Hardin, •— F. 2d (No.
23,813, C.A. D.C. May 28, 1970), 1 Env. Rep. 1347; Citizens Committee for the Hudson Valley
v. Volpe, 425 F. 2d 97 (C.A. 2d Apr. 16,1970).
17 270 F. Supp. at p. 661. The court also pointed out (p. 661) that the "plaintiffs were not
[as in Scenic Hudson] previously parties in a formal sense to any administrative proceedings,
although as a practical matter they participated actively in attempting to secure an adminis-
trative determination favorable to their interest."
[p. 12]
Hudson and Road Review League precedents, holding that conserva-
tion organizations and private citizens (nonabutting landowners)
could challenge the Forest Service's decision to change the Sylvania
portion of the Ottawa National Forest in Michigan from a primitive
forest area into a managed recreation area.
In Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. et al. v. Volpe, et al., 309
F. Supp. 1189 (W.D. Tenn., W.D., Feb. 26, 1970), citizens of Memphis
organized as the Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc., together
with two national conservation organizations and two individual
residents of Memphis, sought to enjoin the Secretary of Transporta-
tion from releasing Federal funds to the highway department of the
State of Tennessee for construction of part of an expressway in the
city of Memphis through Overton Park, a zoological garden and
recreational area. The court held that the plaintiffs had the right to
question whether the Secretary's planned action accorded with
policies and procedures set forth in the Department of Transportation
Act, 49 United States Code 1653 (f) and 23 United States Code 128,
138, and a memorandum of the Bureau of Public Roads.28
Given the Federal courts' recent willingness to entertain civil suits
by citizens acting as private attorneys general to enforce the policies
of Federal statutes applicable to projects significantly affecting this
Nation's natural environment, the courts should readily allow citizens
-------
3576 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
to bring civil qui tarn actions to implement the prohibitions of the
Refuse Act.
XI. THE Pressprich CASE
In United States ex rel. Pressprich Son Co. v. James W. Ewell & Co.,
250 Fed. 939 (CA 2d, 1918), a suit in admiralty was instituted to
recover a penalty for violation of sec. 5 of the Carriage of Goods by
Sea Act (Harter Act, 49 U.S.C. 194), which provided:
For a violation of any of the provisions of sections 190-193 of this title the
agent, owner, or master of the vessel guilty of such violation, and who refuses
to issue on demand the bill of lading provided for, shall be liable to a fine not
exceeding $2,000. The amount of the fine and costs for such violation shall be a
lien upon the vessel, whose agent, owner, or master is guilty of such violation,
and such vessel may be libeled therefor in any district court of the United States,
within whose jurisdiction the vessel may be found. One-half of such penalty shall
go to the party injured by such violation and the remainder to the Government
of the United States.
Judge Learned Hand, speaking for a unanimous court of appeals,
stated (250 Fed. at p. 941):
We think that the District Court had no jurisdiction in admiralty over the collec-
tion of a penalty by proceedings in personam. * * * Nevertheless, we have no doubt
that the fine might be collected by a qui tarn action in the District Court * * * and
that the jurisdiction of the District Court over the subject-matter was, therefore,
complete. It is quite true that an indictment will also lie under the Harter Act
* * *, but our decision in United States v. Atlantic Fruit Co. * * * is to be taken as
holding that the United States has the option in such cases of suing in what would
have been in earlier times an action of debt, despite the unliquidated character of
the recovery. We see no reason to make a distinction between an action by the
United States to collect the fine and an action qui tarn like that at bar.
The language of section 5 entitling the informer to sue qui tarn for
one-half the penalty is essentially the same as in the Refuse Act.
18 A similar case Is Nashville 1-40 Steering Committee v. Ellington, 387 F. 2d 179 (C.A. 6,
1967), cert, denied, 390 U.S. 921, 88 S. Ct. 857 (1968). See also Izaak Walton League v. Hardin,
F. Supp. . 1 E.R. 1401 (No. 5-69 Civ. 70; June 1,1970).
[p. 13]
XII. OUTLINE OF CITIZEN ACTION UNDER THE 1899 REFUSE ACT
1. What is Prohibited and Where.—The 1899 Refuse Act is a power-
ful, but little used, weapon in our Federal arsenal of water pollution
control enforcement legislation. Section 13 of the act (33, U.S. Code
407) prohibits anyone, including any individual, corporation, munici-
pality, or group, from throwing, discharging, or depositing any refuse
matter of any kind or type from a vessel or from a shore-based build-
ing, structure, or facility into either (a) the Nation's navigable lakes,
rivers, streams, and other navigable bodies of water, or (b) any tribu-
tary to such waters from which the refuse floats or is washed into the
navigable water, unless he has first obtained from the Corps of Engi-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3577
neers a permit to do so. Courts have held that streams and bodies of
water which are sufficient, at high water, to float boats, canoes, or
rafts of logs in commerce are navigable waters. This section of the
Act applies to inland waters, coastal waters, and waters that flow
across the boundaries of the United States into Canada and Mexico.
The term "refuse" has been broadly defined by the Supreme Court
to include all foreign substances and pollutants. It includes solids,
oils, chemicals, and other liquid pollutants. The only materials ex-
cepted from this general prohibition are those flowing from streets,
such as from storm sewers, and from municipal sewers, which pass
into a waterway in liquid form.
In addition, the section prohibits anyone, without a corps permit,
from placing on the bank of any navigable waterway, or of any tribu-
tary to such waterway, any material that could be washed into
waterways by ordinary or high water, or by storms or floods, or other-
wise, and would result in the obstruction of navigation.
2. Permits to Discharge.—Section 13 of the act authorizes the Secre-
tary of the Army, acting through the Corps of Engineers, to permit
the deposit of material into navigable waters under conditions pre-
scribed by him. Regulations governing the issuance of permits are
published in title 33 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 209.
3. Penalty for Violations.—Violations of the Refuse Act are subject
to criminal prosecution and penalties of a fine of not more than
$2,500 nor less than $500 for each day or instance of violation, or
imprisonment for not less than 30 days nor more than 1 year, or
both a fine and imprisonment (33 U.S. Code 411). A citizen who
informs the appropriate U.S. Attorney about a violation and gives
sufficient information to lead to a conviction is entitled to one-half
of the fine set by the court.
4. Procedure for Citizen to Seek Enforcement of the Refuse Act.—
A. The citizen having information about any discharge of refuse
into navigable waters or tributaries thereof should first ascertain
whether the discharge is authorized by corps permit. If a permit is
in effect, the citizen should ascertain whether the permittee is com-
plying with its terms. This information can be obtained from the
appropriate office of the Corps of Engineers with jurisdiction over
the particular waters into which the discharge occurs. Such informa-
tion is available under the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.
Code 552; Public Law 90-23).
B. The Refuse Act specifically directs that the appropriate U.S.
attorney shall "vigorously prosecute all offenders" (33 U.S.C.
413). In order to do so he needs adequate information to prove that
the discharges were made and that they violated the law or the condi-
[p.14]
-------
3578 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
tions of the permit. Furthermore, the statute specifies that the
citizen's right to one-half of the fine is conditioned on his providing
to the U.S. attorney information sufficient to lead to a conviction
of the violator.
In providing information to the U.S. attorney, the citizen should
make a detailed statement, sworn to before a notary or other officer
authorized to administer oaths, setting forth:
1. The nature of the refuse material discharged.
2. The source and method of discharge.
3. The location, name, and address of the company, person, or
persons causing or contributing to the discharge.
4. The name of the waterway into which the discharge
occurred.
5. Each date on which the discharge occurred.
6. The names and addresses of all persons known to the citizen,
including himself, who saw or knows about the discharges and
could testify about them if necessary.
7. A statement that the discharge is not authorized by corps
permit. If a permit was granted, the statement should set forth
facts showing that the alleged violator is not complying with one
or more of the conditions of the permit.
8. The navigability of the waterway at the area of discharge.
If the waterway into which the discharge occurred is not com-
monly known as "navigable," or is a tributary to a navigable
waterway, the statement should set forth facts to show its status
as a navigable waterway or tributary thereof.
Where possible, photographs should be taken, and samples of the
pollutants or foreign substance collected in a clean jar which is then
sealed. These should be labeled with information showing who took
the photograph or sample, where, and when, and how, and who re-
tained custody of the film or jar.
Where the material is liable to float or to be washed into the water-
way from its bank, in violation of the act, similar information should
also be provided to the U.S. attorney.
C. When a citizen furnishes information to the U.S. attorney for
the purpose of aiding in the prosecution of violators of the Refuse
Act for past discharges, the citizen may also point out to the U.S.
attorney that injunctions may be sought under the same act (i) to
preclude future discharges; (ii) to require the dischargers to remove
pollutants already discharged; and (iii) to require the discharger to
apply to the Corps of Engineers for a permit unless he promptly
ceases all discharges.
5. Qui tarn suits.—As shown in this staff memorandum, the
informer has a financial interest in the fine and therefore can institute
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3579
a qui tarn suit to recover it. The U.S. district courts have exclusive
jurisdiction to hear and decide such a suit, 28 U.S.C. 1355. In such
suit, the citizen plaintiff must prove that the alleged violator did, in
fact, violate the Refuse Act. Since the suit is a civil action, the proof
of such violation need be only by a preponderance of the evidence,
rather than beyond a reasonable doubt as is required in a criminal
case. United States v. Regan, 232 U.S. 37 (1914); Hepner v. United
States, 213 U.S. 103 (1909): United States v. Zucker, 161 U.S. 475
(1896).
If the citizen loses his qui tarn suit, he would have to bear his
lawyer's fees and costs, and may be required to pay all court costs,
including such costs of the defendants as the judge may include within
the taxable court costs.
[p.15]
STAFF MEMORANDUM B
Issue 1: Whether Qui Tarn Action Can Be Used To Implement a Penal
Statute Which Gives a Share of the Penalty to the Informer but
Does Not Specifically Authorize His Suit To Collect That Share
I. CASES SUPPORTING Qui Tarn ACTION
A. CASES HOLDING Qui Tam ACTION CAN BE BROUGHT
1. United States v. Laescki, 29 F. 699 (N.D. 111., 1887). Indictment
by United States to enforce R.S. 5188.
Statute construed: (R.S. 5188): "It shall not be lawful to design,
engrave, print or in any manner make or execute, or to utter, issue,
distribute, circulate, or use, any business or professional card, notice,
placard, circular, handbill or advertisement, in the likeness or
similitude of any circulating note, or other obligation or security, of
any banking association organized or acting under the laws of the
United States, which has been or may be issued under this title, or any
act of congress, or to write, print, or otherwise impress upon any such
note, obligation, or security, any business or professional card, notice,
or advertisement of any matter or thing whatever. Every person who
violates this section shall be liable to a penalty of one hundred dollars,
recoverable, one-half to the use of the informer." (Emphasis added.)
Holding: Penalty set forth in Rev. Stat., sec. 5188 is recoverable
only by a qui tarn action, so indictment by United States does not lie.
Reasoning: "[W]hen the statute creates the offense, prescribes the
penalty, and the mode of enforcing it, it would seem that the penalty
-------
3580 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
can only be enforced in the mode provided by the statute." *
"These statutes, in effect, say to all persons: 'If you print or stamp
upon a United States note or bond, or a national bank-note, any
business card or advertisement, you are liable to a penalty of one
hundred dollars, recoverable at the suit of an informer,'—and do not
say that the offender can be indicted by a grand jury, and tried as a
criminal." 2
2. Chicago and Alton R.R. v. Howard, 38 111. 415 (Sup. Ct. 111.
1865). Informer's action under statute requiring railroads to blow
whistle or ring bell at or near crossings.
Statute construed: A bell of at least 30 pounds weight, or a steam
whistle, shall be placed on each locomotive engine, and shall be rung
or whistled, at the distance of at least 80 rods from the place where
the said road shall cross any other road or street, and be kept ringing
or whistling until it shall have crossed said road or street, under a
penalty of $50 for each neglect, to be paid by the corporation owning
the railroad, one-half thereof to go to the informer, and the other half
to the State, and also be liable for all damages which shall be sustained
by any person by reason of neglect. (Sec. 38, Illinois Act of Novem-
ber 5, 1849) (emphasis added). "All penalties imposed by this act
may be sued for by the District Attorney, and in the name of the
people of the State of Illinois * * *" (Sec. 42, Illinois Act of November
5, 1849) (emphasis added).
'29 Fed. at p. 699.
= 29 Fed. at p. 701.
[p. 16]
Holding: Informer can bring qui tarn action to collect penalties for
alleged violations of section 38.
Reasoning: "It is declared by the 42d section that all penalties
imposed by the act may be sued for by the State's Attorney, and in
the name of the people of the State. It is insisted that the word may
in this act must be construed to mean shall. That such is its meaning
in all cases where the public, alone, have an interest, or the duty is
imposed upon a public officer, there seems to be no question * * *
*******
"If the 42d section had contained the only provision for bringing
suit then it would have to be brought by the State's attorney, and
in the name of the people. But under the 38th section a common
informer may sue, in the common law mode, in his own name, as
well as on behalf of the people." 3
B. OTHER CASES SUPPORTING Qui Tam ACTION
1. U.S. ex rel Marcus v. Hess, 317 U.S. 537 (1943). Informer's
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3581
action under R.S. 5438, 3490-3493.
Statutes construed: R.S. 5438. "Every person who makes or causes
to be made, or presents or causes to be presented, for payment or
approval, to or by any person or officer in the civil, military, or naval
service of the United States, any claim upon or against the Govern-
ment of the United States, or any department or officer thereof,
knowing such claim to be false, fictitious, or fraudulent [or who
commits other fraudulent acts against the Government] shall be
imprisoned at hard labor for not less than 1 nor more than 5 years, or
fined not less than $1,000 nor more than $5,000."
R.S. 3490. "Any person not in the military or naval forces of the
United States, or in the militia called into or actually employed in
the service of the United States, who shall do or commit any of the
acts prohibited by any of the provisions of section [5438] shall forfeit
and pay to the United States the sum of $2,000, and, in addition,
double the amount of damages which the United States may have
sustained by reason of the doing or committing such act, together
with the costs of suit; and such forfeiture and damages shall be sued
for in the same suit."
R.S. 3491. "* * * Such suit may be brought and carried on by any
person, as well for himself as for the United States; the same shall be
at the sole cost and charge of such person, and shall be in the name of
the United States, but shall not be withdrawn or discontinued without
the consent, in writing, of the judge of the court and the district
attorney, * * *." (Emphasis added.)
SEC. 3492. "It shall be the duty of the several district attorneys of
the United States for the respective districts, for the District of
Columbia, and for the several territories, to be diligent in inquiring
into any violation of the provisions of section 3490 by persons liable
to such suit, and found within their respective districts or territories,
and to cause them to be proceeded against in due form of law for the
recovery of such forfeiture and damages. And such person may be
arrested and held to bail in such sum as the district judge may order,
not exceeding the sum of $2,000, and twice the amount of the damages
sworn to in the affidavit of the persons bringing the suit."
"38111. at pp. 417-18.
[p. 17]
SEC. 3493. "The person bringing said suit and prosecuting it to
final judgment shall be entitled to receive one-half the amount of
such forfeiture, as well as one-half the amount of the damages he
shall recover and collect; and the other half thereof shall belong
to and be paid over to the United States; and such person shall be
entitled to receive to his own use all costs the court may award
-------
3582 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
against the defendant * * *: Provided, That such person shall be liable
for all costs incurred by himself in the case, and shall have no claim
therefor on the United States."
Holding: Collusive bidding for P.W.A. contracts with local govern-
mental units in Allegheny County, Pa., constituted violation of R.S.
5438. Informer could bring civil suit under the statute, even though
he relied for his information on an indictment previously filed by the
Federal Government wherein the defendants pleaded nolo contendere.
Reasoning: "Statutes providing for a reward to informers which do
not specifically either authorize or forbid the informer to institute the
action are construed to authorize him to sue. Adams v. Woods, 2
Cranch 336." 4
2. United States v. Stocking, 87 F. 857 (D. Mont., 1898).
Indictment by United States to enforce R.S. 2148.
Statutes Construed: R.S. 2148 (Act of August 18, 1856): "That if
any person who has been removed from the Indian country under the
provisions of the tenth section of the act of congress approved the
30th of June, 1834 * * * shall thereafter at any time return or be
found within the Indian territory, such offender shall forfeit and pay
the sum of one thousand dollars."
Under the same title (28) as R.S. 2148 was R.S. 2124, formerly the
act of June 30, 1834, sec. 27, 4 Stat. 733, which stated:
"That all penalties which shall accrue under [this title] shall be sued
for and recovered in an action of debt in the name of the United
States before any court having jurisdiction of the same in any state
or territory in which the defendant shall be arrested or found, one
half to the use of the informer, and the other half to the use of the
United States; except where the prosecution shall be first instituted on
behalf of the United States, in which case the whole shall be to their
use." [Emphasis added.]
Holding: Indictment valid. R.S. 2124 did not limit United States
to civil debt action to recover penalty set forth in R.S. 2148.
Reasoning: Act of August 18, 1856, prior to incorporation into the
Revised Statutes, was enforceable by action of debt, information, or
indictment. Inclusion of act of June 30, 1834, together with act of
August 18, 1856, under title 28 of Revised Statutes and change of
language of act of June 30, 1834, from "That all penalties which shall
accrue under this act * * *" to "That all penalties which shall accrue
under this title" did not result in limiting the remedies available to the
United States for recovery of the penalty provided by R.S. 2148.
In revising and consolidating the laws, Congress here did not clearly
express an intent to change the procedures for enforcement of R.S.
2148 (act of August 18, 1856).
The court noted that R.S. 2124 not only refers to civil actions by the
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3583
United States, but also authorizes qui tarn actions by informers.
4 317 U.S. at p. 541, footnote 4. See also 28 U.S.C. 2461 (a): "Whenever a civil fine, penalty
or pecuniary forfeiture is prescribed for the violation of an Act of Congress, without specify-
ing the mode of recovery or enforcement thereof, it may be recovered in a civil action." In
adding sec. 2461 (a) to the Judicial Code in 1948, the code revisers cited U.S. ex rel. Marcus
v. Hess, supra.
[p. 18]
"Under the provisions of said section 2124, an informer is entitled to
one-half of the penalty sued for, unless the action is first prosecuted
by the United States. Any words of a statute which show that a part
of the penalty named therein shall be for the use of an informer will
entitle him to maintain an action therefore if he complies with the
conditions of the statute." 5
3. Bradlaugh v. Clarke, 8 App. Gas. 354, 1 Eng. Rul. Gas. 667
(1883). Informer's suit for penalties imposed by the statute 29 and
30 Viet., c. 19 upon a member of House of Commons sitting and voting
without having taken the oath prescribed by the statute.
Statute construed: "If any member of the House of Peers votes * * *
in the House of Peers, or sits as a Peer during any debate in the said
House, without having made and subscribed the oath hereby ap-
pointed, he shall for every such offense be subject to a penalty of
£500, to be recovered by action in one of Her Majesty's superior
courts at Westminster; and if any member of the House of Commons
votes as such in the said House, or sits during any debate after the
Speaker has been chosen, without having made and subscribed the
oath hereby appointed, he shall be subject to a like penalty for every
such offense." (29 and 30 Viet. C. 19)
Holding: Informer had no right of action under this statute. (It
should be noted that the statute says nothing about any part of the
penalty being payable to the informer.)
Reasoning: "It was acknowledged [by the lower court], as an in-
contestable proposition of law, that "where a penalty is created by
statute, and nothing is said as to who may recover it, and it is not
created for the benefit of a party grieved, and the offense is not
against an individual, it belongs to the Crown, and the Crown alone
can maintain a suit for it. * * * It rests on a very plain and clear
principle. No man can sue for that in which he has no interest; and
a common informer can have no interest in a penalty of this nature,
unless it is expressly, or by some sufficient implication, given to him
by statute. The Crown, and the Crown alone, is charged generally
with the execution and enforcement of penal laws enacted by public
statutes for the public good, and is interested, jure publica, in all
penalties imposed by such statutes, and therefore may sue for them
in due course of law, where no provision is made to the contrary.
-------
3584 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
The onus is upon a common informer to show that the statute has
conferred upon him a right of action to recover the particular penalty
which he claims.
"I do not agree * * * that for such a purpose express words are
necessary. If an intention to confer such a right ought to be implied
from what the legislature has said, upon any sound principle of con-
struction, that implication cannot, in my opinion, be excluded by
reasons derived from the special prerogatives of the Crown.
"Express words, giving a right of action to anyone who may sue
for the penalty, are certainly not found in this statute. Nor is there
anything from which, upon ordinary principles of construction, such
a right of action can be implied * * *." 6
4. Colburn v. Swett, 42 Mass. 232 (1840). Informer's action under
Mass. Stats. 1833, ch. 151, as amended by Mass. Stats. 1837, ch. 99.
Statute construed.—"Any person, who shall keep, have or possess
any gunpowder within the city of Boston, contrary to the provisions
5 87 Fed. at p. 861 (emphasis added).
" 1 Eng. Rul. Cas. at pp. 670-671 [emphasis added].
[p.19]
of the [1833 act] or to the rules and regulations of the board of en-
gineers therein mentioned, or who shall sell any gunpowder in said
city, without having a license therefor * * * shall forfeit a sum not
less than $100, and not exceeding $500, for each offense." (Sec. 1,
Mass. Stat. 1837, ch. 99.)
"The several fines, penalties, and forfeitures, mentioned in this
act, and in the [1833 act] shall enure to the sole use of the board of
engineers of the fire department of said city of Boston * * *." (Sec.
2, Mass. Stat., 1837, ch. 99.)
Holding.—Informer cannot bring action to collect the penalty
provided in above statute.
Reasoning.—A section of the 1833 statute giving a moiety of all
fines, penalties, or forfeitures "to the use of any person or persons
who shall prosecute for the same" had been repealed by the 1837
statute, thus destroying the basis for an informer action.
"Whether an action would lie in the name of the engineers [of the
city of Boston] we give no opinion. It seems to be held, that when a
penalty is given wholly to one or more persons, an action will lie for
it in the name of those persons, although no express authority to sue
for it is contained in the statute." 1
5. Adams, Qui tarn v. Woods, 2 U.S. (2 Cr.) 336 (1805). This
case was cited in footnote 4 of U.S. ex rel. Marcus v. Hess, 317 U.S.
537, 541 (1942), which stated: "Statutes providing for a reward to
informers which do not specifically either authorize or forbid the
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3585
informer to institute the [qui tarn] action are construed to authorize
him to sue." The Adams case involved a qui tarn civil action by an
informer under section 2 of the act of Congress of March 22, 1794 (1
Stat. 347).
Statute construed.—"Sec. 2. That all and every person, so building,
fitting out, equipping, loading, or otherwise preparing, or sending
away, any ship or vessel, knowing or intending that the same shall be
employed in such [slave] trade or business, contrary to the true
interest and meaning of this act, or any ways aiding or abetting
therein, shall severally forfeit and pay the sum of $2,000, one moiety
thereof to the use of the United States, and the other moiety thereof
to the use of him or her who shall sue for and prosecute the same."
[Emphasis added.]
"[N]or shall any person be prosecuted, tried or punished for any
offense not capital, nor for any fine or forfeiture under any penal
statute, unless the indictment or information for the same shall be
found or instituted within 2 years from the time of committing the
offense, or incurring the fine or forfeiture aforesaid * * *." (Sec. 32,
act of Congress of April 30, 1790, 1 Stat. 119.)
Holding.—Section 32 of act of April 30, 1790, barred a qui tarn
civil action under section 2 of the act of March 22, 1794, not brought
within the 2-year period of limitations.
Reasoning.—"Almost every fine or forfeiture under a penal statute,
may be recovered by an action of debt, as well as by information;
and to declare that the information was barred, while the action of
debt was left without limitation, would be to attribute a capricious-
ness on this subject to the legislature, which could not be accounted
for; and to declare that the law did not apply to cases on which an
' 42 Mass, at pp. 234-235. [Emphasis added.)
[p.20]
action of debt is maintainable, would be to overrule express words,
and to give the statute almost the same construction which it would
receive, if one distinct member of the sentence [i.e., "no person shall
be prosecuted, tried or punished"] was expunged from it. In this
particular case, the statute which creates the forfeiture does not pre-
scribe the mode of demanding it; consequently either debt or informa-
tion would lie* It would be singular, if the one remedy should be
barred and the other left unrestrained".9
The 1794 act discussed in the Adams case did not specifically
indicate whether the informer's suit should be a civil action or a
criminal information. Chief Justice Marshall read the act to author-
ize either procedure.
-------
3586 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
II. DISTINGUISHABLE CASE CONTAINING UNFAVORABLE LANGUAGE
Wheeler v. Goulding, 79 Mass. 539 (1859). Petition by informer to
be admitted as party to carry forward suit initiated by treasurer of
city of Worcester against alleged violator of Mass. Stat, 1843, ch. 98.
Statute construed.—"If any shareholder shall fraudulently transfer
any share in either of the corporations mentioned in the first section
of this act, for the purpose of avoiding taxation, he shall forfeit one-
half of the par value of the shares thus transferred, to be recovered
in any court of competent jurisdiction, by the treasurer of the city or
town in which such shareholder may reside; one-half of the amount
so recovered for the use of the town, and the other half for the use
of the person or persons furnishing the necessary evidence in the
case." (Sec. 3, Mass. Stat, 1843, ch. 98). (Emphasis added.)
Holding.—Informer cannot join as party to prosecute violation of
Mass. Stat., 1843, ch. 98. Only treasurer of city of Worcester can
sue for penalty provided by the statute.
Reasoning.—"It is perfectly clear * * * that no other person but
the treasurer of the city of Worcester could sue for this penalty. We
are all of opinion that, except so far as he may be bound to act under
such orders and directions of the city government, or is disposed to
exercise his discretionary power, in subordination to such directions,
not only the right to institute such suit is vested in such treasurer, but
the right to prosecute and discontinue it * * *. The right of the
petitioner does not arise until some penalty has been recovered." 10
Dicta.—"This action is quite distinguishable from a qui tarn. That
is a well established remedy, known to and regulated by the common
law, as a mode of securing the execution of penal laws, where it is
expressly given by statute, * * * But it can be used only in cases
where it is expressly given." J1
8 At common law an informer could bring either a civil action or criminal information qul
tarn. See Edward Deacon, A Digest of the Criminal Law of England, vol. 1 (1831): "Informa-
tions are of two sorts; first, those which are partly at the suit of the king, and partly at that
of a subject; and, secondly, such as are only in the name of the king. The former * * *
are usually brought before justices of the peace upon penal statutes, which inflict a penalty
upon conviction of the offender—one part to the use of the king, and another to the use of
the informer—and are, in fact, a sort of qui tarn action, only carried on by a criminal, Instead
of a civil process" (at p. 671).
• 2 U.S. at p. 341 (emphasis added).
10 79 Mass, at pp. 542-543.
11 79 Mass, at p. 542 (emphasis added).
[p. 21]
III. CASES HOLDING Qui Tarn ACTION DOES NOT LIE
1. Omaha and Republican Valley Railway Co. v. Hale, 45 Neb. 418
(1895). Informer's qui tarn action under section 104, Compiled
Statutes of Nebraska (1893).
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3587
Statutes construed.—"A bell of at least 30 pounds weight or a steam
whistle shall be placed on each locomotive engine, and shall be rung
or whistled at the distance of at least 80 rods from the place where
the said railroad shall cross any other road or street, and be kept
ringing or whistling until it shall have crossed said road or street,
under a penalty of $50 for every neglect * * * one-half thereof to
go to the informer, and the other half to this state * * *" (Sec. 104,
ch. 16, Compiled Statutes of Nebraska, 1893).
"If any informer, under a penal statute, to whom the penalty, or
any part thereof, if recovered, is given, shall dismiss his suit or pros-
ecution, or fail in the same, he shall pay all costs accruing on such
suit or prosecution, unless he be an officer whose duty it is to com-
mence the same." (Sec. 617 of Nebraska Code of Civil Procedures.)
Holding.—Informer cannot bring qui tarn action under above
statute.
Reasoning.—"[The] authorities, we think, without serious conflict,
recognize this rule, an informer cannot maintain an action in his own
name to recover a penalty unless authorized so to do by statute. The
statute on which this action is based does not expressly authorize the
penalty denounced by said statute to be sued for and recovered by an
informer, nor does the statute contain any language from which such an
authority may be inferred. The act provides that the penalty shall be
paid by the corporation owning the railroad. Paid to whom? We
think, paid to the State" * * * 12
The court further held that section 617 of the Nebraska Code of
Civil Procedures provided no independent basis for the informer's
qui tarn action.
2. Smith v. Look, 108 Mass. 139 (1871). Informer's qui tarn action
under Mass. Stat., 1869, ch. 384.
Statute construed.—"One-half of the money recovered as a penalty,
in any case arising under the laws relating to inland fisheries, shall be
paid to the person making the complaint in the case in which the same
is recovered, and the remainder to the Commonwealth." (Sec. 33;
Mass. Stat., 1869 ch. 384.)
Holding.—Informer cannot maintain qui tarn action under above
statute.
Reasoning.— (After reviewing numerous Massachusetts statutes):
"In the few cases in which any special provision is made for * * *
disposition of * * * forfeitures [to someone other than the Com-
monwealth], the language is explicit, and the phraseology is, 're-
coverable in an action of tort to the use of the party suing therefor,'
or 'to the use of any person suing for the same,' or 'recoverable in
an action of tort by selectmen to the use of the town or city,' etc.
We find no case in which a right of action to any private person in
-------
3588 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
his own name is given in terms less explicit * * *."
"The statute in question does not in express terms give a right to
any private prosecutor to bring an action in his own name, nor does
it, in our judgment, by any necessary implication. * * * A qui tarn
" 45 Neb. at p. 423.
[p. 22]
action is a well established remedy, which is to be resorted to only
in cases where it is expressly given." 13
3. O'Kelly v. The Athens Manufacturing Co., 36 Ga. 51 (1876).
Informer's qui tarn action under Act of December 9, 1862, Georgia
Laws.
Statute construed: Section 1: "That all companies chartered under
the laws of this State for the manufacture of cotton or woolen goods,
or cotton yarn or thread, shall be required to have published twice
during each year, in a public gazette nearest to their respective places
of business, a list containing the names of each and every stockholder,
with the amount of stock owned by him or her.
Section 2: "Any such corporation failing to have such publication
made, shall forfeit, for each failure to have published, the sum of
$5,000, to be recovered by action in the superior court of the county
in which the business of said company or companies may be located,
one-half to go to the informer, and the other half to go to the county
where suit may be instituted." (Act of Dec. 9, 1862, Georgia Laws.)
Holding: Qui Tarn action does not lie under above statute.
Reasoning: "[W]e have a distinct statutory provision in our code,
section 3178, which prescribes that in penal actions allowed in pur-
suance of public justice under particular laws, if no special officer is
authorized by such particular laws to be the plaintiff therein, the
State, or the Governor,14 or the Attorney or Solicitor General, may be
the plaintiff * * * The suit here was instituted since this enactment.
Neither the pleading nor testimony show O'Kelly to be such an
officer, or to be authorized by the act which imposed the forfeiture
sued for, to be the plaintiff in the suit." 15
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3589
Issue 2: Whether the Informer's Qui Tarn Action Is Barred Because
33 U.S.C. 413 States That "The Department of Justice Shall
Conduct the Legal Proceedings Necessary To Enforce the [Refuse
Act]" and "It Shall Be the Duty of U.S. Attorneys To Vigorously
Prosecute All Offenders Against the Same * * *"
I. CASE SUPPORTING ARGUMENT THAT SECTION 413 DOES NOT BAR
THE Qui Tarn ACTION
United States v. Griswold, 5 Sawyers 25, Fed. Cas. No. 15,266 (D.
Oregon, 1877). Informer's suit under Informer's Act of March 2,
1863, R.S. 5438, 3490-3493.
Statutes construed: See R.S. 5438, 3490-93, set forth in discussion of
U.S. ex rel. Marcus v. Hess, supra.
Holding: Plaintiff/informer's complaint did not have to be signed
by the U.S. attorney. Statutory direction to the U.S. attorney to be
diligent in enforcing the Informer's Act and to prosecute all civil
actions in which the United States is concerned did not authorize the
U.S. attorney to interfere with informer's action.
Reasoning: "When, as in this case, a statute imposed a penalty for
the commission of an act, and also gave such penalty in part to
whoever would sue for it, and the remainder to the king or other
13108 Mass, at p. 141 (emphasis added).
14 The Governor was allowed under sec. 3178 to sue on behalf of the Informer and the
county school fund In McDaniel, Governor v. The Gate City Gas Light Co., 79 Ga. 58 (1887).
15 36 Ga. at p. 53 (emphasis added).
[p. 23]
public use, the action to recover such penalty, if brought by a private
person, was brought in his own name and subject to his control.
Although a judgment obtained therein was for the benefit of the king
or other public use as well as the plaintiff, yet the action was, to all
intents and purposes, the private action of the latter. 3 Blackstone,
Commentaries 160".16
The court also stated: "For all purposes, except the discontinuance
of the action, the attorney employed by the informer to commence and
conduct the same is the attorney of the United States therein.
Neither does the fact that the district attorney is required to be dili-
gent to enforce the statute against persons violating it, making him the
attorney of the United States in that action * * * [WJhichever—the
informer or the district attorney—first commences an action for a
particular violation of the statute, thereby excludes the other from
so doing"."
The court concluded: "Neither does the provision in section 771 of
the Revised Statutes which makes it the duty of the 'district attorney
to prosecute in his district * * * all civil actions in which the United
-------
3590 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
States are concerned,' authorize or require him to act as attorney for
the plaintiff in this action. This section is general in its terms and
necessarily qualified and restrained by the sections above cited [i.e.,
the Informer Act], which relate to the commencement and conduct
of this particular action. For that matter the United States is con-
cerned in all qui tarn actions, whether brought in its own name or that
of a private person, because it is entitled to a share of the penalty or
forfeiture that may be recovered therein. But the rule of law is, and
the practice always has been, that a qui tarn action is the action of the
party who brings it, and the sovereign, however much concerned in
the result of it, has no right to interfere with the conduct of it, except
as specially provided by statute".18
II. CASES WHICH BAR Qui Tarn ACTION BUT WHICH ARE
DISTINGUISHABLE
1. Williams v. Wells Fargo Co., 177 Fed. 352 (C.A. 8, 1910), In-
former action under R.S. 4059.
Statutes construed: "Unless a different disposal is expressly pre-
scribed, one-half of all penalties and forfeitures imposed for violations
of law affecting the [Post Office] Department, its revenues or prop-
erty, shall be paid to the person informing and prosecuting for the
same * * * (R.S. 4059).
"[A]ll suits arising under the postal laws, shall be brought in the
name of the United States. (R.S. 919) (emphasis added).
"The Sixth Auditor [of the Treasury] shall superintend the collec-
tion of * * * all penalties and forfeitures imposed for any violation
of the postal laws * * * and take all such other measures * * * to
enforce * * * the recovery of such penalties and forfeitures" (R.S.
292). (Emphasis added.)
Holding: R.S. 919 and 292 evince congressional intent that only
the United States can bring actions to enforce the postal laws. In-
former's qui tarn action, therefore, does not lie.
Reasoning: "[W]hile the language employed in section 4059, 'one-
half to the use of the person informing and prosecuting for the same,"
would, in the absence of any statutory provision to the contrary, by
" 26 Fed. Cas. at p. 44.
« 26 Fed. Cas. at p. 44 (emphasis added).
18 26 Fed. Cas. at p. 44 (emphasis added).
[p. 24]
necessary implication, authorize the informer to bring and maintain
this action as a private citizen in his own name and to the use of
himself and the government, yet, as has been seen, this is beyond all
peradventure a suit to recover a penalty arising under the postal
laws as provided in section 919 above quoted, and as that section
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3591
forms a part of the procedure .act in the federal courts, and as it in
express terms commands that all such suits shall be brought "in the
name of the United States," we are inclined to the opinion no other
person than the United States may bring and prosecute an action to
recover the penalty prescribed * * *."
* * *
"[T]he lawmaking power, in its wisdom, deemed wise that the law-
fully constituted authorities of the government should act on their
official responsibility in cases of violation of the postal laws, as would
seem to be indicated by the terms of section 292 above quoted." 19
2. Rosenberg v. Union Iron Works, 109 Fed. 844 (B.C., N.D.
Calif., 1901). Informer's action (suing for self alone) under Alien
Contract Labor Law of February 26, 1885, (23 Stat. 332), as amended.
Statute construed: "That * * * it shall be unlawful for any person,
company, [etc.] * * * to prepay the transportation, or in any way
assist or encourage the importation or migration of any alien or
aliens * * * into the United States * * * under contract * * *
made previous to the importation * * * (Sec. 1, 23 Stat. 332).
"That for every such violation of any of the provisions of section
one of this act the person, [etc.] * * * shall forfeit and pay for every
such offense the sum of one thousand dollars, which may be sued for
and recovered by the United States or by any person who shall first
bring his action therefor * * * as debts of like amount are now
recovered in the circuit court of the United States; the proceeds to be
paid into the Treasury of the United States * * * And it shall be
the duty of the district attorney * * * to prosecute every such suit
at the expense of the United States." (Sec. 3, 23 Stat. 332) [Empha-
sis added.]
"[The Secretary of the Treasury shall] pay to an informer who
furnishes original information that the law has been violated such
share of the penalties recovered as he may deem reasonable and just,
not exceeding fifty per centum, when it appears that the recovery
was had in consequence of the information thus furnished." [25 Stat.
565, 567.]
Holding.• Only the United States can enforce 23 Stat. 332 as
amended. The informer's action does not lie.
Reasoning: "The act provides that the penalty therein given 'may
be sued for and recovered by the United States, or by any person
who shall first bring his action therefor.' If this language stood alone,
the right of the plaintiff to recover the judgment sought would be
clear * * *; but it does not, and is qualified by the clause immedi-
ately following, which provides that any penalty recovered shall be
paid into the Treasury of the United States, and by the further pro-
vision making it the duty of the district attorney * * * 'to prosecute
-------
3592 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
every such suit at the expense of the United States' * * *. The
statute is highly penal, and it was the evident intention of congress
that no prosecutions should be had thereunder unless commenced by
18177 Fed. at p. 356.
[p. 25]
the United States district attorney * * *. [T]he only interest which
any person can have in the penalty which may be recovered in an
action under this act * * * is that given by the [1888 amendment
which] authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury 'to pay to an in-
former who furnishes original information * * * such share of the
penalties recovered as he may deem reasonable and just,' * * *".20
»109 Fed. at p. 846.
[p. 26]
4.2d CLEAN WATER FOR THE 1970's,
A Status Report, U.S. Department of the Interior, Federal Water Quality
Administration, June 1970
FOREWORD
"America, the Beautiful" is not just a song. It is an ideal that
Americans have long cherished—and taken for granted. During the
1960's, we realized with growing alarm that this ideal was being
threatened by pollution from an increasing number of sources. We
began to understand that the benefits of technology would hold little
value unless they could be enjoyed in decent and healthy surround-
ings. President Nixon expressed the national concern for environ-
mental quality when he declared that "the 1970's absolutely must be
the years when America pays its debt to the past by reclaiming the
purity of its air, its waters and our living environment. It is literally
now or never."
Awareness of the danger to our way of life has created a climate for
constructive action by all levels of government, industry and private
citizens. The Department of the Interior is the agency of the Federal
government charged with the major responsibility for managing and
conserving our Nation's natural resources. Department programs en-
compass a wide range of environmental concerns and directly affect
fish and wildlife, water, minerals, land, parks and other resources.
Increasing population and growing per capita demands on these nat-
ural resources call for careful and imaginative management.
Among Interior's varied missions, water pollution control is one of
the most important and demanding. Over the past year, much of the
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3593
Department's efforts and my own energies have been devoted to
meeting this responsibility. We have been involved in formulating
the President's legislative program; in working with student organiza-
tions concerned about environmental enhancement; in mapping out
protective programs for the Great Lakes; and in controlling oil spills.
We have focussed on important environmental issues across the
Nation to prevent further damage to our national heritage. The De-
partment has had a major role in reviewing the development of
Alaska's vast petroleum resources, and in assuring that proper mea-
sures will be taken to protect the sensitive tundra and other environ-
mental values. At the other end of the Nation, the Department is
studying ways to protect the South Florida environment as increasing
development occurs and to preserve the State's unique Everglades in
the face of construction of a large jetport. Water quality protection
and enhancement has been of central concern in all these issues.
Even greater challenges for enhancing water quality will face the
Department of the Interior and the Federal Water Quality Admin-
istration in the years ahead. We must continue to revamp existing
programs to make more effective use of our present authorities. We
must prepare to implement the Water Quality Improvement Act of
1970 and to carry out the Department's responsibilities under the Na-
tional Environmental Policy Act of 1969. We must also be ready to
respond to new responsibilities stemming from the President's legisla-
tive proposals.
This status report of the Federal Water Quality Administration
describes the agency's past activities and future plans. The entire
field of water pollution control is changing so rapidly that some as-
pects of the report may be outdated almost before printing is com-
pleted. It is a snapshot of the situation at this point in time, of a
situation which is dynamic and fluid. Nevertheless, I believe this re-
port will be of great use to the Congress and the American people in
describing the point of departure from which we are moving to rescue
our water resources in the decade of the 1970's.
WALTER J. HICKEL.
[p. iii]
CONTENTS
iii Foreword
iv Introduction
1 Water Pollution and the Environment
4 Municipal Wastes
5 Industrial Wastes
6 Thermal Pollution
8 Oil and Hazardous Substances
9 Mine Drainage
-------
3594 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
10 Sedimentation and Erosion
12 Feedlot Pollution
13 Other Agricultural Wastes
13 Wastes from Watercraft
15 A Water Pollution Control Program for the 1970's
15 Better Financing of Municipal Treatment
16 Better Standards and Enforcement Authority
16 Better Assistance to the States
17 Better Programs for Pollution from Federal Activities
17 Programs to Deal with Emerging Problems
19 Programs for Water Pollution Control
19 Regulatory Programs
19 Water quality standards and enforcement
24 Control of oil pollution
28 Control of vessel wastes
29 Control of pollution from federal activities
31 Control of pollution from federally licensed and supported activities
34 Assistance Programs
34 Assistance to municipalities
38 Assistance to industry
39 Assistance to state and interstate programs
41 Technical Assistance
43 Planning and Basic Studies
43 Environmental planning
46 Basin and regional planning
49 Estuarine and coastal studies
52 Data and information
54 Economic studies
55 Research, Development, and Demonstration Programs
57 Municipal pollution control technology
59 Industrial pollution control technology
60 Agricultural pollution control technology
60 Mining pollution control technology
61 Control of pollution from other sources
62 Water quality control technology
63 Waste treatment and ultimate disposal technology
64 Water quality requirements research
64 The Human Element
65 Informing the American public
66 Working with youth
68 Training and manpower development
72 International Activities
75 Organization, Resources, and Facilities
75 Organization
77 Personnel
77 Facilities
78 Budgetary Resources
[p-v]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3595
INTRODUCTION
Many signs point to the 1970's as the "environmental" decade—
when the American people and their institutions begin to take full
stock of the precious environmental resources of this Nation and to
measure some of the cost of the Nation's economic and social growth
in terms of the destruction of those resources. The challenge of the
1970's will be to demonstrate that society can have the benefits of
urban and industrial growth without necessarily having to live with
the destruction.
This challenge is one which is uniting increasing numbers of Amer-
icans—old and young, rural and city dwellers. As President Nixon
has said, "The environmental problems we face are deep-rooted and
widespread. They can be solved only by a full national effort em-
bracing not only sound, coordinated planning, but also an effective
follow-through that reaches into every community in the land."
Water pollution control is one of the major aspects of environmental
protection and enhancement. Congressional recognition of the im-
portance of water quality protection was reflected in the passage of
the first permanent Federal legislation, the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, in 1956 and the subsequent strengthening amendments in
1961, 1965 and 1966. Since 1966, the primary responsibility for carry-
ing out the Federal programs in water pollution has rested with the
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, operating under
comprehensive legislation embodied in the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, as amended. Originally part of the Public Health Ser-
vice and subsequently a separate office in the Department of Health,
Education and Welfare, in 1966 the program was transferred to the
Department of the Interior. This added new vitality to the ties of
water pollution control with other resource management programs
in the Department of the Interior and with the effort to provide
greater opportunities for all Americans to enjoy outdoor recreation,
fishing and parks. Passage of the Water Quality Improvement Act of
1970 resulted in a new name for the agency, the Federal Water Qual-
ity Administration (FWQA), which stresses the more positive aspects
of the program.
Secretary Walter J. Hickel has stressed his commitment to cleaning
up polluted waters and preventing further pollution as one of the pri-
mary tasks facing the Department of the Interior. In an appearance
before the Committee on Public Works, House of Representatives, in
March 1969, the Secretary stated that, with "improved legislation,
effective and imaginative administration, adequate financing and
tough enforcement, the objectives as outlined by Congress (to achieve
positive protection and enhancement of the Nation's waters) can and
-------
3596 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
will be attained." The Secretary also promised to the Committee that
he would direct FWQA to prepare a report to be submitted to the
Congress each year outlining the progress that had been made by the
Federal government working in cooperation with its partner agencies
in the States and localities.
The purpose of this first annual progress report is to provide a
groundwork for understanding the nature of the Federal and State
water pollution control programs, to detail the progress which has been
made during the first year of the Nixon Administration, and to assess
the measures which will be required to fulfill the challenge of the
1970's.
An important part of this assessment is the impact of the significant
new water pollution control legislation that has been proposed by
President Nixon, as well as that of the recent enactment by the Con-
gress of the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970. This new and
proposed legislation will greatly increase the capability and respon-
sibilities of the Federal water pollution control program.
In many ways, the first year of the Nixon Administration may be
considered a time of analyzing progress and capabilities—of taking
stock of the Federal water pollution control program and determining
what significant new measures or legislation would be needed. This
process resulted in several major proposals aimed at strengthening
the Federal program and improving the quality and scope of Federal
assistance to the States and localities, which President Nixon de-
scribed to the Congress in his 1970 Environmental Message. These
proposals reflect the major new thrusts needed in the Nation's effort
to abate and prevent pollution in the coming decade.
[p. vii]
WATER POLLUTION AND THE ENVIRONMENT
Almost any day, in the waters near any large population center in
the United States and, increasingly, in the countryside, we can see the
signs of water pollution. It comes from many sources and exists in
many forms to assail the eyes and the nose and the taste buds. Stand-
ing by the banks of an urban river—if one can actually get past the
warehouses and wharfs and weeds to see the river—pollution may ap-
pear as surface oil slicks, in which old tires and debris and some-
one's picnic remnants are trapped and float sluggishly by, or as the
public health notices warning the citizen not to swim or wade in the
water at his feet. Pollution may be manifested in less obvious ways
by masses of aquatic weeds and bad taste in the drinking water supr
plies. Even more subtle will be the—often unseen—changes in the
aquatic life of the river, the loss of sport fish and the ascendence of
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3597
sludge worms and other "tolerant" life-forms such as carp.
This urban example is repeated throughout the Nation. As our so-
ciety and economy have grown, the wastes generated by our popula-
tion and our technology have caused staggering amounts of pollution.
Use of our waters to receive and carry away wastes has seriously dam-
aged our ability to enjoy other water uses, such as swimming and
boating, sport and commercial fishing. Other water uses, such as do-
mestic, agricultural and industrial water supply, are possible, but
often only after considerable advance treatment. Growing public
awareness and concern with mounting pollution of the Nation's
streams, lakes and coastal waters have stimulated a vast and vigorous
national effort to control and abate water pollution.
Water quality problems caused by pollution are prevalent in every
region of the country. The two areas where water quality and uses
have been most seriously damaged are in the Northeastern States and
the Great Lakes. In the Northeast, tremendous urban and industrial
growth occurred during the 19th and early 20th centuries when little
or no provision was made to control municipal or industrial waste
flows to surface waters; the water was expected to "purify itself" and
the wastes would float on downstream to become someone else's
problem. The result was a legacy of pollution. The Northeastern
States have the largest amount of untreated municipal and industrial
waste discharges and the largest backlog of waste treatment facility
needs.
In the Great Lakes, the discharge of large volumes of wastes, prin-
cipally from municipal and industrial sources, has greatly accelerated
the natural aging process of lakes. The most
[p-l]
seriously affected of the lakes, Lake Erie, is now in a state of ad-
vanced eutrophication or aging—choked with plants, algae and other
organic material. Although Lake Erie is not, as some experts have
asserted, "dead," it is certain that very great expenditures for water
pollution abatement are necessary to restore the fishery of the lake
and reopen beaches closed because of pollution.
There are a number of other pollution problems caused by certain
industries and sectors of the economy which have led to serious water
quality damage in other parts of the country. Animal wastes from
feedlots or runoff from irrigated and fertilized fields and areas where
pesticides are used are an increasing cause of pollution, particularly
in the Midwest and Southwest. The Colorado River becomes more
saline every year as a result of irrigation return flows full of salts
leached from the fields. The Annual Federal Water Quality Ad-
ministration (FWQA) report on Pollution Caused Fish Kills
-------
3598 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
chronicles the tremendous aquatic life mortality from agricultural
pollution in Kansas and Missouri.
Acid drainage from abandoned mines has destroyed life in many
streams in Appalachia and the Ohio Basin generally. Domestic and
vessel wastes have polluted many coastal waters where sensitive shell-
fish were harvested; each year more areas are closed to private and
commercial harvesting. Oil spills from vessels and leaks from off-
shore oil drilling facilities have resulted in several spectacular oil pol-
lution incidents in the last few years, among them the TORREY
CANYON and OCEAN EAGLE spills, the Santa Barbara offshore
well leaks and the recent fire and oil leaks from drilling in the Gulf
of Mexico. Less spectacular oil spills are occurring almost daily in
navigable waters across the Nation.
HOW HAS ALL THIS POLLUTION HAPPENED?
Population growth is one major factor. In 1967, the Nation's pop-
ulation passed the 200 million mark. This number of people is ex-
pected to double in the next 50 to 60 years. Staggering demands will
be placed on our natural resources to support this population. Waters
are needed for consumptive purposes, such as public water supply,
food production and processing, and some industrial uses, as well as
for non-consumptive uses, such as reaction, industrial cooling, and
sport and commercial fishing. At the same time that demands for
water will increase, so will production of wastes that threaten the
environment.
Not only the rate but the pattern of population growth concentrates
and magnifies pollution. Urban and suburban sprawl covers green
spaces and reduces clean environment in the very areas where people
most need it. Intensive development has occurred particularly along
the Nation's coastline, in the very estuarine areas that are most
sensitive to environmental degradation.
Higher individual incomes and expectations have led to increasing
demands for food and consumer goods, for better housing and high-
ways, for a whole range of conveniences. In most cases, production of
wastes is "built in" to our technology; as industrial production in-
creases, with attendant demands for water, so does the per capita
production of wastes. The public's demand for "throw-away" con-
tainers and other convenience items, as well as the tendency toward
planned obsolescence, further accelerate this trend.
Consumer use and production of goods have greatly increased the
demand for electric power—power production has doubled every ten
years since World War II and this rate is expected to increase. Great
amounts of water are used in producing electricity, and waste heat
from both fossil fueled and nuclear generating plants constitutes a
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3599
serious, and increasing, threat to the Nation's waters. For example,
the famous salmon runs of the Pacific Northwest are threatened by
thermal pollution.
Not only is the volume of industrial production increasing, but the
very complexity of the products and wastes creates severe challenges
for waste treatment technology. New chemical products are coming
on the market every day, most often without sufficient research into
the environmental consequences of using them. Widespread use of
detergents has led to great increases in the release of phosphate nu-
trients to the waters, stimulating tremendous and noxious growths of
aquatic weeds which cause severe problems in many areas. Radio-
active and physiologically-active chemicals, which pose vexing prob-
lems, can only increase. Effects which cannot be predicted may be
profound and irreversible.
Mining and transporting natural resources also pose increasing
dangers for the environment. Greater use of supertankers and pipe-
lines to transport oil and other materials, as well as increasing use of
offshore and underwater mining, will greatly increase the dangers of
accidental oil pollution and other hazards.
The growing popularity of deep well disposal of wastes presents yet
another serious threat to our water resources. Although in some
cases carefully controlled deep well injection may contribute to
groundwater management, im-
IP.2]
properly carried out, this method of disposal may result in the
contamination of groundwater or interconnected surface water sup-
plies. The greatest problem in dealing with subsurface disposal is
that the effects of underground pollution and the fate of the injected
materials are uncertain with the limited knowledge available today.
Production of greater quantities of better quality food for American
citizens has caused increasing pollution problems. Higher agricul-
tural productivity has been based on irrigation and use of chemical
fertilizers and pesticides. Runoff carries salts and chemicals, many of
which are highly toxic and have long-lasting environmental effects,
into streams. These diffuse waste sources are most difficult to control
or treat. The possibility of irreparable and disastrous ecological con-
sequences, particularly from persistent pesticides, has led to increas-
ing demands for controlling or eliminating their use; no one can
predict with certainty the impact of such a move on agricultural
productivity.
Population growth and greater prosperity have brought a rising
demand for beef and other meats. To increase productivity and
profits, the trend has been toward raising heavier livestock and
-------
3600 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
concentrating animals in large feedlots, thereby increasing and con-
centrating the agricultural waste problems.
In summary, neither the institutions nor the technology of our so-
ciety has been effectively utilized to prevent widespread pollution
from occurring. To provide a better understanding of the specific
challenges that control of pollution involves, the sources of pollution
are discussed in greater detail in the following sections. These dis-
cussions will provide some indication of the magnitude of these
sources of pollution and the estimated dimension and costs of
clean-up.
[p. 3]
MUNICIPAL WASTES
The two largest sources of waste discharges to the Nation's waters
are sewered municipal wastes and industrial wastes. Besides being
a large source of organic material, which lowers the dissolved oxygen
content of water and increases the concentration of bacteria, munici-
pal waste also contains nutrients that fertilize algae and thus accelerate
eutrophication of lakes.
Today, the number of sewered communities in the United States is
just under 13,000; 68% of the Nation's population lives in such com-
munities. Raw or inadequately treated sewage from millions of peo-
ple still flows into our streams. Fortunately, we have the technological
knowledge to deal effectively with municipal wastes. However, this
technology has not been applied to the extent needed to prevent pol-
lution. Although many communities have been installing and im-
proving their waste treatment facilities, over 1000 communities
outgrow their treatment systems every year.
The economic analyses contained in the FWQA's annual report
to the Congress on the costs of clean water indicate that only about
40% of the Nation's treatment systems are adequate. An estimated
46% of the sewered population is now served by treatment plants that
are overloaded or in need of major upgrading. Seven percent of the
sewered population lives in communities which provide no treatment.
Generally speaking, the greatest municipal waste problems exist
in the areas with the heaviest concentrations of population. Past
neglect, however, has led to a greater backlog of waste treatment
facility needs in the Northeast than in other parts of the Nation.
The six New England States, New York, and Pennsylvania contain
just over 20% of the Nation's population but 52% of the sewered
population that is not provided with waste handling facilities.
The cost studies indicate that a major investment, totalling about
$10 billion, will be necessary over the next five years to overcome this
legacy of neglect and achieve adequate levels of treatment for the
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3601
Nation's municipal wastes. After that, significant annual investments
will still be necessary to expand and replace plants as population
growth continues. Treatment of domestic-type wastes from Federal
facilities will also require significant expenditures by Government
agencies; the waste treatment needs for sanitary and other wastes
generated by Federal sources have been estimated at $246.5 million.
The waste loads from municipal systems are expected to increase
nearly four times over the next 50 years. Even if municipal and in-
dustrial
[p. 4]
waste loads are substantially reduced through treatment, pollu-
tion problems may continue to exist in densely populated and
highly industrialized areas where the assimilative capacity of re-
ceiving waters is exceeded. In these areas, higher and higher levels
of treatment, approaching 100%, will probably be necessary, and
water supply demands will lead to ever increasing use of renovated
wastewaters.
Other municipal waste problems that will become more apparent
as conventional treatment reduces the load of organic wastes are
those caused by storm or combined sewers and by nutrients which
are not removed by conventional treatment. Many cities have com-
bined sewers which discharge raw sewage along with street runoff
directly to streams when sewer overloads occur during storm or thaw
periods. Although combined sewer problems exist to some extent in
most regions of the country, the distribution of severe problems is
heaviest in the Northeast, Midwest and, to some degree, in the Far
West. In the older cities of the Northeast and Midwest, principally
New York, Rochester, Detroit, Cleveland, Chicago and Boston, which
have high population densities and are heavily industrialized, the
problems are the most difficult and the most costly to solve. Even
where sewers are separated, pollution may result from storm sewer
discharges carrying a variety of wastes from the streets.
The most vexing problem in water quality management is the con-
dition that results from the addition of excessive amounts of nutrients,
principally nitrogen and phosphorus compounds. Although these el-
ements are needed in small quantities to produce food for aquatic an-
imals, excess amounts result in overfertilization and alteration of the
aquatic system. The resulting algae blooms are particularly notice-
able in lakes and in streams where water moves slowly.
Although some nutrients reach waters from agricultural runoff,
municipal wastes contribute the major load. Already nutrient pollu-
tion has led to the imposition of very high treatment requirements for
waste discharges to the Great Lakes and several other areas; the cost
-------
3602 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
of meeting these requirements is included in the investment totals
noted above. In future years, the need for nutrient removal at other
cities will greatly increase the costs of waste treatment.
INDUSTRIAL WASTES
Industries discharge the largest volume and most toxic of pollut-
ants. Industrial waste discharges are the source of an enormous
variety of materials found in our water. Our 1969 report, The Cost
of Clean Water and Its Economic Impact, listed a total of fifty-one
agents being introduced into our Nation's waters as a result of in-
dustrial processes—and the list is known to be partial rather than
comprehensive. For purposes of quantification, the common sub-
stances can be reduced to two general classes of materials, settleable
and suspended solids and oxygen demanding organic materials.
Major water-using industries are believed to discharge, on the av-
erage, about three times the amount of each class of waste as is dis-
charged by all of the sewered persons in the United States.
There are over 300,000 water-using factories in the United States.
Although there is as yet no detailed inventory of industrial wastes,
general indications are that over half the volume of the wastes dis-
charged to water comes from four major groups of industries—paper
manufacturing, petroleum refining, organic chemicals manufacturing
and blast furnaces and basic steel production.
The areas where the greatest quantities of industrial wastes are
discharged to water are the Northeastern States, the Ohio River
Basin, the Great Lakes States and the Gulf States. Lesser, but sig-
nificant, volumes of industrial wastes are discharged in some areas
of the Southeast and in the Pacific Coast States. Like municipal
wastes, industrial waste sources are concentrated in certain areas,
for factories, like people, tend to be found in clusters.
The volume of industrial wastes is growing several times as fast as
that of sanitary sewage as a result of the growing per capita output of
goods, declining raw materials concentrations and increasing degrees
of processing per unit of product. Given the necessary expenditures,
a large percentage of this volume can be treated efficiently, much of it,
after pre-treatment in some cases, in the municipal treatment system.
Whereas factories which used large volumes of water traditionally
discharged wastes directly back to the stream, more stringent pollu-
tion control requirements and cost factors have led to increasing use
of public treatment systems by a variety of industries. Most wastes
from food-processing industries can be treated in public plants, and
wastes from paper and pulp mills, chemical, pharmaceutical, plastics,
textile and rubber plants have successfully been treated in municipal
plants. Some combinations of municipal and industrial wastes ac-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3603
tually improve the treatment process by, for instance, reducing the
nutrients in waste discharges.
Increased use of joint municipal-industrial treatment systems will
facilitate abatement of industrial pollution, and feasible treatment
[p. 5]
processes have been developed for many types of industrial wastes.
Although the lack of an industrial waste inventory makes estimates
difficult, the increasing level of investment in industrial treatment
facilities appears indicative of progress towards meeting water quality
standards. FWQA's economic studies have estimated the annual in-
vestment need for manufacturing industries at $650 million for each of
the next five years.
Although, overall, this continued level of investment for treatment
of present industrial pollution is encouraging, certain types of in-
dustrial pollution present much more complex abatement problems.
The trends towards increasing production and use of complex chem-
ical products and radioactive materials have greatly increased the
possibility of releasing exceedingly dangerous wastes to the environ-
ment. Many of the new chemicals are a challenge to detect, much
less control. There is fear that too little caution and study precede
the processing or marketing of these materials.
THERMAL POLLUTION
The growing demands for electric power will require a tremendous
expansion of power generating facilities. Water is used in the pro-
duction of almost all electric power now generated—whether by hy-
droelectric, fossil fueled or nuclear power plants. Two of these
generating methods, fossil and nuclear fueled steam electric plants,
produce large amounts of waste heat.
As the amount of waste heat from steam electric power plants dis-
charged to water bodies has increased, concern over thermal pollution
and its effects has increased. As usually defined, thermal pollution
means the addition of heat to natural waters to such an extent that it
creates adverse conditions for aquatic life; accelerates biological proc-
esses in the streams, reducing the dissolved oxygen content of the
water; increases the growth of aquatic plants, contributing to taste
and odor problems, or otherwise makes the water less suitable for
domestic, industrial, and recreational uses. Not the least important
of the effects of heated wastewater is the reduced utility of the water
for further cooling. An increasing number of authorities are begin-
ning to believe that this waste heat may be the most serious con-
temporary source of water pollution.
The electric power industry is one of the most dynamic industries
-------
3604 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
in the United States, and it has had a growth rate which has exceeded
that of the gross national product for a number of years. The tech-
nology of electric power generation and distribution is changing
rapidly. Larger-sized units have become economically feasible be-
cause of load growth and the increasing inter-connection and co-
ordination of power systems via extra high voltage transmission
facilities. In recent years, a large number of nuclear fueled plants
have been planned and put under construction.
The principal use of water in steam electric generating plants is for
condenser cooling purposes. The amount of water required for con-
denser flows depends upon the type of plant, its efficiency, and the
designed temperature rise within the condensers. The temperature
rise of cooling water condensers is usually in the range of 10° to 20° F,
and the average rise is about 13° F. Currently, large nuclear steam
electric plants require about 50% more condenser water for a given
temperature rise than fossil fueled steam electric plants of equal size.
It is estimated that by 1980, the electric power industry will use the
equivalent of one-fifth of the total fresh water runoff of the United
States for cooling.
Both fresh and saline water are used for
[p. 6]
cooling; in some cases, sewage effluents are used. Water for con-
denser use may be withdrawn from rivers, lakes, reservoirs, canals,
tidewater, or groundwater. When adequate water supplies are
available and allowable discharge temperatures permit, the water
is usually passed through the condensers once and returned to the
source body of water. The economic desirability of once through
cooling has traditionally been a factor in locating power plants.
Sites have usually been selected where large quantities of water
were available for cooling at all times. Such sites in inland areas,
however, are limited in number, and the increasing density of power
plants on rivers and estuaries will require utilities to find effective
means of controlling thermal discharges. Two factors can limit the
adverse environmental effects of new power plants: better selection
of sites and improved design of plants and equipment to reduce the
discharge of heated wastewaters.
With the tremendous pollution potential of projected power pro-
duction, it is exceedingly fortunate that waste heat from power gen-
eration is amenable to treatment or control at a reasonable cost. The
amount of waste heat discharged to waterways can be reduced by im-
proving the efficiency of the thermal plants, by making productive
use of heat, or by using cooling towers, cooling ponds or spray ponds.
The impact of thermal pollution control on the consumer cost of
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3605
electricity is relatively minor.
The selection of appropriate sites for locating power plants so as to
minimize environmental damage poses a significant challenge to both
the industry and government. Environmental concerns will neces-
sitate the consideration of many more factors in the planning of power
production facilities than has been the practice in the past. In ad-
dition to thermal pollution control, a number of other critical selection
factors make siting very complicated—aesthetic impact, availability of
water supply, safety (for example, potential of earthquakes), air pol-
lution control, access to transportation and others. These factors com-
pete in some ways, and the tendency in the past was to give primary
attention to producing power at low cost to the consumer rather than
to environmental considerations. Installation of facilities, such as
long discharge lines or cooling towers to control thermal pollution will
affect cost factors and require more space for the plant and may make
it more difficult to meet aesthetic goals. The increasing use of nuclear
power adds another potential hazard to the environment—radiation.
Siting is likely to become an increasingly difficult and controversial
factor in the continued growth of power production.
tp.7]
OIL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
Dumping and accidental spilling of oil and other hazardous ma-
terials continue to increase each year and constitute major pollution
threats to the water resources of the Nation. Pollution by oil and
other hazardous substances may occur in any of our waterways and
coastal areas, or on the high seas as a result of deliberate dumping,
accidental spills, leaks in pipelines, drilling rigs and storage facilities,
or the breakup of transportation equipment.
Damages caused by oil pollution are both significant and diverse.
Such pollution can destroy or limit marine life, ruin wildlife habitat,
kill birds, limit or destroy the recreational value of beach areas,
contaminate water supplies, and create fire hazards. Damages caused
by other hazardous substances can be just as significant and diverse as
those caused by oil pollution. The sheer volume of oil transported or
used, however, makes oil the largest single source of pollution of this
type.
The majority of oil spills exceeding 100 barrels involve discharge
from vessels. Approximately one-third of the incidents involve pipe-
lines, oil terminals, bulk storage facilities, etc.
-------
3606 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Reported Oil Spills In U.S. Waters
Vesse Is
Shore facilities
jnidentified
Total
Over IOC
1968
347
295
... . 72
714
1 barrels
1969
532
331
144
1007
Oil pollution may come from several different sources. Gasoline
service stations dispose annually of 350 million gallons of used oil.
Two hundred thousand miles of pipelines carry more than a billion
tons of oil and hazardous substances. The pipelines cross waterways
and reservoirs and are subject to cracks, punctures, corrosion, and
other causes of leakage. Offshore oil and gas exploration and produc-
tion occur mainly in the Gulf of Mexico, Southern California coastal
waters, Cook Inlet in Alaska, the Great Lakes, and the East Coast.
The blowout of wells, the dumping of drilling muds and oil-soaked
wastes, and the demolition of offshore drilling rigs by storms and
vessel collisions are significant potential pollution sources. In 1969
a massive oil spill occurred off Santa Barbara, California, with severe
damage to the coastline, waterfowl and beaches. More recently a fire
and subsequent oil blowout on an offshore production well in the
Louisiana Gulf presented a serious threat to our marine environment.
Vessel casualties, too, are a prime source of oil pollution, and the
damage can be extensive when several million gallons of oil enter the
water at one time. The largest spill to date was over 30 million gal-
lons in 1967 from the TORREY CANYON. England, alone, spent $8
million on clean-up following this casualty. In Tampa Bay on Feb-
ruary 13, 1970, the tanker DELIAN APOLLON ran aground and
spilled over ten thousand gallons of fuel oil into the bay, and some
100 square miles of area were contaminated as a result. Discharge of
either oily ballast water or "slop oil" recently occurred offshore of
Alaska, causing extensive
[p. 8]
waterfowl mortalities and contamination of fur seals and sea lions.
Hazardous substances can enter our waters in many of the same
ways as oil. Spills caused by accidents or ruptures of containers are
important sources. For example, a train wreck on January 2, 1968,
at Dunreith, Indiana, spilled a cyanide compound into Bucks Creek,
a tributary of the Big Blue River. The cyanide moved with the flow
of the stream and an estimated 1,600 pounds passed the town of
Carthage on the Big Blue River, downstream from the site of the ac-
cident. The cyanide caused fish kills in the affected streams; more
than 25 cattle were reported killed; at least one industrial plant
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3607
temporarily ceased operations; and groundwater supplies were
contaminated.
Incidents similar to the cyanide spill are not uncommon and can
cause serious consequences in the affected areas. Presently, an es-
timated 10,000 spills of oil and hazardous materials occur annually in
the navigable waters of the Nation. With the increasing volumes of
these materials being transported, the number of spills may grow.
Some increase in the number of spills reported can be expected since
discovery and notification systems are improved continually and
spills, that heretofore have gone unreported, will now be recorded.
Unfortunately, the potential magnitude of each individual spill will
increase as the size of the carrier increases. For instance, the
UNIVERSE IRELAND, a ship launched in August, 1968, has a cargo
capacity of over 90 million gallons of oil. The construction of even
larger ships is under consideration. The potential pollution from a
ship of that capacity is about three times greater than that resulting
from the TORREY CANYON spill.
MINE DRAINAGE
Mine drainage, one of the most significant causes of water quality
degradation and destruction of water uses in Appalachia and the
Ohio Basin States, as well as in some other mining areas of the United
States, degrades water primarily by chemical pollution and sedi-
mentation. Acid formation occurs when water and air react with
the sulfur-bearing minerals in the mines or refuse piles to form sul-
furic acid and iron compounds. The acid and iron compounds then
drain into ponds and streams. About 60 percent of the mine drain-
age pollution problem is caused by mines which have been worked
and then abandoned. Coal mines idle for 30 to 50 years may still
discharge large quantities of acid waters.
Although acid pollution is usually limited to coal field areas, sus-
pended solids and sedimentation damage can extend much further
downstream. Mine drainage pollution may degrade municipal and
industrial water supplies; reduce recreational uses of waters; lower
the aesthetic quality of waterbodies and corrode boats, piers and
other structures. During 1967, over a million fish were reported
killed by mine discharges, ranking mine drainage as one of the pri-
mary causes of fish kills in the United States.
Total unneutralized acid drainage from both active and unused coal
mines in the United States is estimated to amount to over 4 million
tons of sulfuric acid equivalent annually. Although about twice this
amount of acid is actually produced, roughly one-half is neutralized
by natural alkalinity in mines and streams. In Appalachia alone,
where an estimated 75 percent of the coal mine drainage problem
-------
3608 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
occurs, approximately 10,500 miles of streams are reduced below
desirable levels of quality by acid mine drainage. About 6,700 miles
of these streams are continuously degraded; the remainder are de-
graded some of the time. Acid mine drainage problems also occur
from other types of mining throughout the Nation, such as phosphate,
sand and gravel, clay, iron, gold, copper and aluminum mines.
It is estimated that 3.2 million acres of land in the United States
had been disturbed by surface (strip and auger) mine operations
prior to January 1, 1965. Of these 3.2 million acres, approximately 2
million acres are either unreclaimed or only partially reclaimed. An
additional 153,000 acres have since been disturbed each year, only
part of which are reclaimed annually. In addition to contributing to
the acid pollution problem, surface mines also contribute large quan-
tities of sediment to the Nation's streams.
Sediment yields from strip-mined areas average nearly 30,000 tons
per square mile annually—10 to 60 times the amount of sedimentation
from agricultural lands. At this rate, the 2 million acres of strip-
mined land in need of reclamation could be the source of 94 million
tons of sediment a year.
In addition to mine drainage, refuse piles, tailings ponds and wash-
ery preparation residues are also important indirect sources of pol-
lution from mining. For many minerals, such as phosphate, the
pollution from processing operations exceeds that resulting directly
from the mining operation. The pollution from coal mines in Indiana
and Illinois, for example, stems primarily from refuse piles, tailings
ponds and preparation plants. No national estimates are available,
however, which show the volume or relative importance of pollution
from these sources.
[p. 9]
Prevention of acid and sediment drainage from surface mines can
be accomplished through renovation of the mined area. Regrading
and revegetation can be very effective means of mine drainage con-
trol, and reclaimed mining areas can be used for recreation and other
beneficial uses. Other methods of control may involve sealing mines,
diversion and/or control of underground drainage and use of chem-
icals or biological inhibitors to reduce the formation of acid. Neu-
tralization is the most common method of treating acid drainage.
Although many methods have been applied and others are being
tested, the problems of mine drainage have been very difficult to deal
with, largely because of the costs involved in achieving significant
levels of control. Recent cost estimates for pollution control and land
reclamation in the mining States total as much as $7 billion. More-
over, the distribution of the mine pollution problem is such that a
large percentage of this investment would have to be made in some
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3609
of the most economically depressed areas in the Nation, involving
mines that are no longer operating or producing any revenues.
SEDIMENTATION AND EROSION
Sediments produced by erosion are the most extensive pollutants
of surface waters. It is estimated that suspended solids loadings
reaching our waters are at least 700 times the loadings from sewage
discharge. The dirty brown or gray appearance of a river or res-
ervoir after a rainstorm is due to sediments washed in from crop-
lands, unprotected forest soils, overgrazed pastures or the bulldozed
"developments" of urban areas. The presence of sediment generally
increases the cost of water purification and reduces the value of water
recreation, and nutrients adsorbed on sediment particles contribute
to undesirable conditions in lakes.
Sediments adversely affect commercial and game fish habitats, power
turbines, pumping equipment and irrigation distribution systems.
Deposited during floods, sediments damage crops and, if coarse-
textured, may reduce the productivity of the soil. Channels and
drainage facilities may be impaired, and the clean-up and removal of
sediments from residential and other developed areas is costly. Sed-
iments are also depleting the capacity of artificial reservoirs in this
country, and potential storage sites to replace these depleted res-
ervoirs are limited.
Erosion rates of lands are increased 4 to 9 times by agricultural
development, and may be increased as many as 100 times by con-
struction activities. Paving and drainage facilitate flushing of urban
areas. The 470,000 miles of rural and secondary roads in the United
States also contribute significantly to sediment pollution. Erosion
is a serious problem on at least 300,000 miles of the Nation's stream
banks and along many of the 470,000 miles of rural and secondary
roads. As has been discussed, sedimentation from stripped mining
lands is also considerable.
Construction is a large contributor to the sedimentation problem
if erosion control is not provided. According to the 1969 report,
The Cost of Clean Water and Its Economic Impact, the average sedi-
ment yield during a rainstorm at highway construction sites is about
10 times greater than that for cultivated land, 200 times greater than
for grass areas, and 2000 times greater than for forest areas, depend-
ing upon the rainfall, land slope and the exposure of the bank. Sim-
ilar rates of sediment production occur from commercial and
industrial construction in urban areas. The Potomac River Basin
discharges about 2.5 million tons of sediment a year into the Potomac
estuary, a large share due to disturbance of land surfaces by con-
struction in urban areas.
-------
3610 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Sources of sediment are diffuse and therefore often difficult or
costly to control. Where fea-
[p. 10]
sible, erosion prevention provides the most effective method for
sediment control. In certain remote arid areas of United States,
however, such measures would be extremely expensive, and on
certain construction sites, completely impractical.
With regard to agricultural land, erosion control by such means as
contour cultivation or crop rotation may achieve many benefits—re-
duction of sediment pollution of streams and damage to water uses,
and conservation of productive soil and vegetation resources. Gully
erosion may require costly measures of filling, seeding or damming.
Excessive sediment runoff from highway construction can be con-
trolled by reducing the amount of time ground is exposed and/or
using measures such as grassing or channeling to prevent sediment
from reaching streams. Similar control measures can be used to pre-
vent erosion at other types of construction sites.
Erosion control practices may add about $1000 to the cost of each
mile of new highway and $1000 per highway construction project for
overhead. For the 470,000 miles of secondary and rural roads which
need erosion control measures, costs may range from $275 up to
$15,000 per mile, with an additional $50 per mile per year required for
maintenance. In total, the initial costs to control erosion from roads
may range from $130 million to $7 billion, with annual maintenance
thereafter costing $23 million. Much of the construction costs and
all the maintenance costs would be non-Federal.
Control of erosion at urban construction projects could cost from
$100 to $1000 per project depending on size and location. Thus pre-
venting water pollution from construction activities may add some-
what to the cost of buying a house.
Control of streambank and streambed erosion may require con-
struction of special stabilization structures, riprap of streambanks and
sloping and vegetating eroded banks. These measures, however, may
not be compatible with other water uses. Estimates of the cost of
renovating the eroded streambanks in the United States range from
$200 million to $3 billion.
In summary, the sources of water pollution from sedimentation
are exceedingly diverse and diffuse. Much can be done to reduce
this cause of pollution, but control and prevention will be very costly.
[p. 11]
FEEDLOT POLLUTION
Both the increasing number of animals raised and the modern
methods of raising these animals contribute to the increased pollution
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3611
of waters from animal wastes. Beef cattle, poultry and swine feeding
operations, along with dairy farms, are the major sources of actual or
potential water pollution from animal wastes.
In the past two decades production of animal products has been
increasing rapidly. The technology of this increasing production re-
quires that animals be confined in a minimum space and fed a con-
centrated ration, both of which increase the pollution potential of
animal wastes. The heavy concentration of wastes precludes their
natural decomposition and assimilation on pastures as is the case
where animals are more dispersed. The heavy concentration also
makes it difficult to find nearby farmland that can use manure as an
economical source of fertilizer. In addition to being heavily concen-
trated in small areas, wastes from concentrated feeding operations
have a high oxygen demand when they are being degraded, and they
may contain a high proportion of roughages.
When animal wastes find their way into water, they can contribute
to pollution in several ways. Heavy concentrations of animal wastes
in water may: add excessive nutrients that unbalance natural ecolog-
ical systems, causing excessive aquatic plant growth and fish kills;
load water filtration systems with solids, complicating water treat-
ment; cause undesirable tastes and odors in waters; add chemicals
that are detrimental to both man and animals; increase consumption
of dissolved oxygen, producing stress on aquatic populations and
occasionally resulting in septic conditions; and add microorganisms
that are pathogenic to animals and to man.
The magnitude of the livestock pollution problem is primarily de-
pendent upon the number of animals that are needed to meet the de-
mand for their products. The average population increase in the
United States is about 2.5 million people per year. At 1966 consump-
tion rates, each additional million people will require another 172,000
beef cattle, 24,500 dairy cattle and 433,000 hogs. Thus, it can be seen
that if these consumption rates continue, the amount of animal wastes
will continue to increase significantly. In addition, the trend toward
increased use of confined feeding and concentrated rations will con-
tinue to add to the pollution potential of the animal wastes.
Agricultural waste sources are scattered across the country, with
large amounts of cattle being produced in the Midwest, West and
[p. 12]
Southeast; poultry in the South and some of the Middle Atlantic
States; and hogs in the Midwest and South. Although there have
been few detailed assessments of the distribution of agricultural waste
problems, feedlot pollution appears to be a particularly severe water
pollution problem in certain parts of the States where large cattle
-------
3612 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
feedlots are located.
A number of waste handling and control methods are available,
which vary widely in complexity and cost. Many States are just be-
ginning to survey feedlot operations and other agricultural operations
to determine the pollution potential and necessary measures to deal
with the problem.
OTHER AGRICULTURAL WASTES
Other pollution problems are caused by farming operations, in ad-
dition to those related to erosion and animal wastes which have been
discussed. There is increasing concsrn about the short- and long-term
environmental effects of runoff from farmlands which contains a va-
riety of chemicals including pesticides, herbicides, insecticides and
fertilizers. The soil conservation methods discussed earlier in rela-
tion to sediment control also help to control runoff. A number of
Federal agencies are cooperating on research devoted to the search
for chemicals, or biological control methods, which will sustain ag-
ricultural productivity while reducing the possibility of environ-
mental damage and destruction of aquatic life and wildlife.
In some areas, serious water quality degradation has occurred as a
result of runoff from irrigated lands. Water returned from irrigated
areas usually has a much higher concentration of dissolved solids than
does streamflow, because the diverted water leaches additional solids
from the canals and fields, and because evaporation from the soil and
transpiration by the crops concentrates these dissolved solids into a
smaller flow of water. Thus, as the concentration of dissolved solids
in surface water increases with each irrigation diversion and drainage
return, the quality of the water deteriorates and its suitability for
further irrigation diversion or other beneficial uses is impaired. This
degradation of water quality is evident in many of the river basins
where irrigation is practiced and must be taken into account in con-
sideration of any further development.
Particular problems have been encountered in the Colorado River
Basin. While agricultural productivity in parts of the Basin has been
impressive as a result of irrigation, the Colorado River is becoming
more saline every year. Its agricultural usefulness in parts of the
lower basin has been seriously impaired.
Some methods to control leaching by irrigation, such as lining
canals, are available, and in some areas the possibility of using de-
salination plants is being studied. Overall, however, the water qual-
ity problems caused by irrigation return flows are difficult and
expensive to control. Degradation by agricultural practices of the
water resource on which that agricultural development depends may
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3613
place previously unconsidered limitations on the extent to which
further massive irrigation schemes are practicable.
WASTES FROM WATERCRAFT
The problems of water pollution incidents, often spectacular, caused
by vessel accidents which release oil or other hazardous materials
has been discussed. But vessels (and marinas) also contribute to
pollution of the Nation's waters in a number of other ways. It has
been determined that approximately 46,000 Federally registered com-
mercial vessels, 65,000 unregistered commercial fishing vessels, 1600
Federally owned vessels and 8 million recreational watercraft use the
navigable waters of the United States. The potential pollution from
sewage from these vessels is estimated to be equivalent to just over
500,000 persons, comparable to a city the size of San Diego. In major
harbors such as the Hamptom Roads, Virginia area, sewage discharges
from vessels contribute significantly to water pollution, damaging
shellfish harvesting and recreation.
At the present time, a very small percentage of watercraft are
equipped with sewage treatment devices. Sewage equipment for use
aboard watercraft is available in the form of holding tanks which
collect sewage for disposal onshore, incinerators and biological treat-
ment facilities. Estimates of the costs to install control devices on
vessels to prevent sewage pollution come to about $660 million.
Other significant pollution from vessels is often evident where ships
discharge bilge and ballast water containing oils and a variety of other
substances. Poor "housekeeping" practices may cause a good deal of
environmental degradation. Even if vessels go beyond the territorial
waters to discharge bilge and ballast and solid wastes in the open
ocean, aesthetic and other damages often result, as witnessed by Thor
Heyerdahl and his crew aboard the RA.
[p.13]
A WATER POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAM FOR THE 1970's
Water pollution control has traditionally been a multi-agency,
multi-program effort with the localities and industries having the
principal responsibility for installing and operating pollution control
facilities; the State water pollution control agencies having the basic
regulatory programs; and the Federal government backing up the
localities with treatment facility grants and backing up the States
with additional enforcement authority, technical, financial and plan-
ning assistance, training and research and development. These basic
arrangements have provided for a valuable division of effort and
responsibility to build on and strengthen for the future. In looking
to the future, it is necessary to keep in mind this wide basic under-
-------
3614 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
pinning of pollution programs and intergovernmental relations that
has been established over the years. These ongoing activities, which
will be fully described in this report, provide the basis and the back-
ground for the areas of acceleration—those major program thrusts—
which are now necessary to meet the challenge of the 1970's.
These major program thrusts are aimed at immediate implementa-
tion of the technology available today to substantially reduce munici-
pal and industrial pollution over the next few years. While research
and technical studies must continue on methods of dealing with other
complex pollution problems, immediate emphasis must be given to
the regulatory and financial assistance programs needed to abate
urgent municipal and industrial problems without further delay.
Thus, far-reaching proposals to strengthen both of these basic pro-
grams within the context of the existing Federal-State-local partner-
ship represent the keystone of the Nixon Administration's water
pollution control program.
BETTER FINANCING OF MUNICIPAL TREATMENT
The proposed legislative program for the 1970's calls for strengthen-
ing the present construction grants program with a major new in-
vestment in municipal waste treatment facilities, providing a strong
and guaranteed program of Federal waste treatment works construc-
tion grants. Economic estimates by the Federal Water Quality Ad-
ministration (FWQA), have pointed to a need for at least $10 billion
worth of investment in municipal facilities to achieve the treatment
goals contained in the water quality standards all across the Nation.
The proposed Federal share would be $4 billion—$1 billion over each
of the next four years. The States would be encouraged to share the
total cost of projects with the Federal government and the localities
in the present grant program, through continuation of the incentives
that allow projects to receive a larger Federal share if the States con-
tribute funds, and through new provisions in the proposed formula for
allocating funds.
In addition to providing for more Federal funds for waste treatment
works construction, the proposals would also strengthen the capacity
of the construction grants program to assure that facilities are built
according to the best designs and in accordance with basin and re-
gional planning requirements. The formula for
[p.15]
allocating grant funds would be revised to permit more funds to be
spent for plant construction in areas where the need is greatest and
where the greatest improvements in water quality will be realized.
The Secretary of the Interior has recently published proposed reg-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3615
ulations in the Federal Register, which will help assure that the treat-
ment plants constructed with Federal assistance will be well-built and
well-maintained through more stringent requirements for design,
operation and maintenance. Moreover, the regulations will require
comprehensive river basin programs that would relate construction of
treatment facilities to the magnitude and types of other pollution
problems. In other words, the aim would be to assure that municipal
treatment plants are built in areas where there is a positive program
to clean up other kinds of water pollution. In line with this kind of
comprehensive approach, the grants program would encourage de-
velopment of regional treatment facilities that handle municipal and
other wastes on an area-wide basis and which provide for treatment
of many kinds of industrial wastes, as well as municipal sewage.
BETTER STANDARDS AND ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY
One of the chief mechanisms for achieving an accelerated pollution
abatement program is effective use of regulatory powers. The Fed-
eral government has had an enforcement program since 1956; its
accomplisments will be discussed in this report. The present author-
ity, however, is limited, and the procedures under present law are
time-consuming. Although Federal-State water quality standards
have been set which contain abatement requirements for all municipal
and industrial waste sources on interstate waters, the Federal govern-
ment does not have jurisdiction to enforce standards without the per-
mission of the Governor if pollution occurs in only one State.
Legislation has been proposed to apply the regulatory provisions of
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act expressly to boundary
waters, as well as to interstate and navigable waters, the tributaries
of these waters, ground-waters, the waters of the Contiguous Zone
and, under certain circumstances, the high seas. Water quality stand-
ards, which now consist of water quality criteria and a plan for their
implementation and enforcement, would include a third element:
water quality requirements controlling discharges, or effluent re-
quirements. The abatement authority would be made directly ap-
plicable to discharges which violate water quality standards in any
or all of their three elements. A Governor's consent would no longer
be required in cases of intrastate standards violations, nor in cases of
enforcement conferences and postconference court action involving
intrastate standards violations, nor in cases of enforcement con-
ferences and postconference court action involving intrastate pollu-
tion. The court could impose a penalty on violators in both types of
actions of up to $10,000 a day, and the second stage in the present
three-stage enforcement process, the public hearing, would be elim-
inated. In addition, the Secretary of the Interior could seek an im-
-------
3616 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
mediate injunction in an emergency situation in which there is an
imminent and substantial danger to the health or welfare of persons
or possible irreparable damage to water quality or the environment.
The Administration's proposal would also provide other new enforce-
ment tools.
The proposed legislation is not meant to override the responsibility
of the State agencies to enforce pollution control regulations; rather,
it is intended to provide a backstop to the States' authorities. The Fed-
eral government will continue to encourage the States to carry out
their responsibilities by providing better financial and technical as-
sistance to the States, in addition to the promise of Federal involve-
ment when the States fail to act.
BETTER ASSISTANCE TO THE STATES
The challenge of carrying out an accelerated pollution control pro-
gram and implementing water quality standards has placed increased
responsibilities for monitoring, enforcement and technical activities on
the States, as well as on the Federal government. The responsibilities
of the States will further be increased by the recently enacted legisla-
tion which requires State certification on Federally-licensed activities;
and acceleration of waste treatment works construction will place yet
another heavy burden on State pollution control agencies.
For some years, the Federal government has assisted in supporting
the administrative expenses of the State and interstate water pollu-
tion control programs through program grants, which are now at a
$10 million level. To aid the States in expanding their programs, the
proposed legislation would increase the authorization for State pro-
gram grants each year on a sliding scale from $12.5 million in FY 1971
up to $30 million in FY 1975. Emphasis for using the augmented
grant funds would be placed on certain program improvements, such
as establishing effective waste discharge permit systems, improving
sewage treatment facilities programs, and setting up programs for
training and developing water pollution control personnel.
[p.16]
Besides providing financial assistance, the Federal government will
continue to help the States through joint water quality monitoring
activities, technical support and training programs for State personnel.
BETTER PROGRAMS FOR PREVENTION AND ABATEMENT OF POLLUTION FROM
FEDERAL FACILITIES
One of the primary tasks of the Federal government in pollution con-
trol is to assure that the facilities owned by the government and ac-
tivities carried out or licensed by the government do not contribute to
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3617
water or air pollution. In a move to strengthen the Federal com-
mitment to pollution control, President Nixon issued a new Executive
Order on pollution control from Federal facilities on February 4, 1970.
This Order requires that all projects or installations owned or leased
by the Federal government be designed, operated and maintained in
conformance with present and future water quality standards. The
Executive Order provides for strict compliance and establishes a
deadline by which existing facilities must comply with environmental
standards. This comprehensive plan for pollution abatement includes
control, not only of water pollution, but also of air pollution by Fed-
eral facilities.
In a subsequent Executive Order issued on March 7, implementing
the landmark National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, the Pres-
ident set forth additional procedures to assure that Federal programs
will meet national environmental goals. He directed that attention be
given to Federal policies, including administration of loans, grants,
contracts, and licenses, to minimize their pollution impact.
Enactment by the Congress of the Water Quality Improvement Act
of 1970 adds further force to this effort by requiring that applicants
for Federal permits, for activities such as construction of nuclear
facilities or reservoirs, meet applicable water quality standards.
PROGRAMS TO DEAL WITH EMERGING PROBLEMS
At the same time that a massive effort to employ present technology
to clean up municipal and industrial water pollution is being initi-
ated, the water pollution control program for the 1970's looks to ex-
panding its capacity to deal with other complex pollution problems.
One of the most significant emerging programs is in oil pollution con-
trol, where substantial expansion of Federal prevention, control and
enforcement activities is called for under the 1970 Act. In conjunc-
tion with development of plans to prevent and control oil spills,
planning has been undertaken to handle accidents of other hazardous
substances.
Increased attention has been given to methods of preventing and
controlling pollution caused by vessels. The Water Quality Improve-
ment Act provides for Federal performance standards for water
pollution control equipment on commercial and private vessels.
With the greatly increased growth of electric power producing
facilities, thermal pollution control has emerged as a major pollution
problem. The water pollution program for 1970's anticipates much
more stringent controls on the discharge of heated effluents, a greater
research effort to improve thermal standards and abatement tech-
nology, and an active participation in planning studies to locate power
facilities in areas where environmental damage would be minimized.
-------
3618 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Another problem which is becoming increasingly significant is that
of pollution caused by persistent pesticides. Under the 1970 Act,
the FWQA will be developing, within the next two years, the scientific
knowledge necessary for the development of water quality criteria
for pesticides. This will require increased research on the effects
of pesticides and the search for less harmful pesticides, expanded
monitoring and investigation to identify critical areas and closer
interagency coordination with the Departments of Agriculture and
Health, Education and Welfare to assure full utilization of regulatory
authorities to achieve environmental protection.
The expanded use of deep-well and other subsurface waste disposal
practices poses a new challenge, particularly for protecting the purity
of groundwater supplies. Meeting this challenge will require in-
creased research on groundwater quality and movement and on the
effects of wastes, investigations of present disposal sites and tighter
regulation of subsurface waste disposal practices.
The activities and problems just described will receive increasing
emphasis in the coming months. How these areas fit into the full
water pollution control program will be described in greater detail
below. As noted at the beginning of this section, the financial assist-
ance and regulatory programs must rest upon a broad base of plan-
ning and research, technical studies, manpower development and
other programs. It must also be clear that the Federal program is
but one aspect of a nationwide network of State, local and, increas-
ingly, regional activities. The greatest challenge of the 1970's may
well be intergrating these programs to form a comprehensive nation-
wide attack on pollution of our environment.
[p. 17]
PROGRAMS FOR WATER POLLUTION CONTROL
REGULATORY PROGRAMS
Strong, effective, and equitable regulatory activity is the most
essential element in the nationwide pollution control effort. President
Nixon in his environmental message has declared that "strict stand-
ards and strict enforcement are necessary—not only to assure compli-
ance, but also in fairness to those who have voluntarily assumed the
often costly burden while their competitors have not." Such effective
nationwide enforcement requires a complementary State-Federal
regulatory effort.
From the initiation of the Federal water pollution control program,
the Congress has recognized the basic role of the States in implement-
ing and enforcing water pollution control regulations. The Federal
Act, however, asserts broad jurisdiction for the application of Federal
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3619
regulatory authority to back up the States and to assure effective
pollution control. Over the years, this Federal regulatory role has
been expanded and strengthened to include: water pollution enforce-
ment authority on interstate and, under certain circumstances,
navigable waters; authority to establish and enforce water quality
standards on interstate waters; and administration of the Oil Pollu-
tion Act of 1924. In addition, there has been a growing emphasis on
control of pollution from Federal facilities.
Through its role in administering or participating in these pro-
grams, the Federal Water Quality Administration (FWQA) has
emerged as the principal water pollution regulatory agency in the
Federal government. Recently enacted and proposed legislative
changes will further strengthen FWQA's regulatory authority. Pas-
sage of the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 adds significantly
to Federal authority to control vessel and oil pollution and to require-
ments for control of water pollution from Federally licensed activities.
Equally significant, the Administration's legislative proposal would
result in far-reaching improvements designed to provide a compre-
hensive, swift and equitable regulatory authority. These measures
will vastly strengthen the Federal government's capacity to control
water pollution.
Water Quality Standards and Enforcement
Federal enforcement authority on interstate and navigable waters
has been strengthened over the years since initial enactment of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act in 1956. The most significant
increase in these authorities stemmed from the Water Quality Act of
[p. 19]
1965, authorizing the establishment and enforcement of water quality
standards for interstate waters, including coastal waters.
Today, action to abate pollution of interstate or navigable waters
which endangers the health or welfare of persons may be taken at
State request or on Federal initiative. The Governor's request is
required in cases of intrastate pollution of such waters. However,
action may be taken on Federal initiative to abate pollution, whether
inter- or intrastate, of such waters which impairs the marketing in
interstate commerce of shellfish or shellfish products. Action to abate
international pollution may be taken under certain circumstances.
Two abatement procedures are provided in the Act. A three-stage
enforcement procedure is set out in the law—conference, public hear-
ing, court action—the succeeding stage to be reached only if adequate
progress is not made at the previous stage. In a case of violation of
water quality standards, direct court action may be sought 180 days
from the date of notification of violation: the 180-day period is to be
-------
3620 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
used for obtaining voluntary compliance if at all possible.
The water quality standards authorized by the 1965 legislation are
the keystone of America's clean water program. The Act called
upon the States to establish standards for their interstate waters.
These State standards could then be accepted as Federal standards by
the Secretary of the Interior. To set standards, the States had to
make crucial decisions involving the desired uses of their water
resources, the quality of water to support these uses and specific
plans for achieving such levels of quality. The standards are, in
effect, blueprints for the national program.
Water quality standards are composed of two parts: the criteria
designed to protect present and future water uses of interstate waters
through establishment of quality levels which must be maintained,
and a plan of implementation which outlines the pollution abatement
measures which will be required to meet those criteria. First re-
sponsibility for implementing and enforcing water quality standards
rests with the States. But, once accepted by the Secretary of the
Interior, the standards become Federal standards and are subject, if
necessary, to Federal enforcement. In the absence of timely and
acceptable action by a State to adopt water quality standards on
interstate streams, the Secretary of the Interior can initiate action to
establish Federal standards.
The standards of all of the States have now been approved by the
Secretary of the Interior. With the establishment of these standards,
there is for the first time a specified set of conditions for the enhance-
ment and protection of the water quality of interstate waters through-
out the country to which waste dischargers must adhere. The goal
of providing nationwide, systematic and comprehensive water quality
standards, however, which are tailored to the particular use and
quality of the specific waters, is far from being accomplished.
The Secretary excepted from initial approval portions of the
standards of over half the States, where certain aspects of the
standards were not stringent enough to assure adequate water quality
protection. For example, the temperature criteria of a number of
States have been excepted, because they did not provide adequate
safeguards against thermal pollution. In other cases, implementation
plans have not received approval because the abatement measures
required or schedules established were deemed inadequate.
During the past year, heavy emphasis has been placed on resolving
these exceptions so that State standards can be fully approved.
Negotiations have been underway with the States concerned and a
number of States have agreed to improve their standards. In two
instances,
[p. 20]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3621
where such agreement could not be reached, the Secretary has
taken initial action toward direct establishment of Federal stand-
ards, under procedures specified by the Act. A conference to
consider the establishment of water quality standards for certain
interstate waters of Iowa convened at Davenport on April 8 and at
Council Bluffs on April 15, 1969. Regulations setting forth the
Federal standards have been published in the Federal Register and
will be adopted if the State does not adopt acceptable standards within
the specified time period. A conference to consider the establishment
of water quality standards for Virginia's interstate waters was called
for December 9-11, 1969, and subsequently postponed when the State
Water Control Board indicated it would act on the Secretary's recom-
mendations. During the year ahead, a principal objective will be
elimination of the exceptions from the standards of all the States, by
agreement or direct Federal action.
Even where standards have been approved, there is a need to refine
and improve certain of the water quality criteria to assure that the
criteria applied will adequately protect the intended water uses.
Coninued emphasis must be given to improving our knowledge of
water quality characteristics and requirements and incorporating this
information in approved criteria.
Towards this end, FWQA, the Atomic Energy Commission and the
Department of Health, Education and Welfare are working together
to develop standard radiological criteria for natural waters. The
radiological criteria currently established in water quality standards
possess certain shortcomings insofar as providing complete coverage
of all radioactive pollutants and maximum protection for all water
uses. These established criteria do provide reasonably adequate
protection from the sources of radiological wastes currently in place,
but with the expected growth of the nuclear power industry, the
nuclear fuel reprocessing industry and other peaceful uses of nuclear
materials, such as those being developed through Operation Plow-
share, much more precise and restrictive criteria for water will be
required. The radiological criteria being developed are aimed at
this objective. Also, they will complement the radiological effluent
and emission standards presently set by the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion for nuclear power plants and other users of nuclear materials.
The increasing impact of pesticides on the environment has pointed
to the need for both stricter regulation of pesticide uses and the es-
tablishment of specific, quantified pesticide criteria for natural waters.
Under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, the
authority to regulate the uses and labeling of pesticides resides with
the Secretary of Agriculture. An interdepartmental agreement has
recently been established among the Departments of Agriculture,
-------
3622 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Interior and Health, Education and Welfare through which environ-
mental, fish and wildlife, and public health interests in pesticide uses
are factored into the Department of Agriculture's registrations. With
respect to pesticide criteria for interstate waters, this responsibility
and authority rests with the Secretary of the Interior under the Fed-
eral Water Pollution Control Act.
General criteria on all toxic materials have been incorporated in all
of the water quality standards adopted and approved pursuant to the
Act; however, specific quantified criteria for the various pesticides in
current use have not been made a part of these standards. Under a
provision of the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970, FWQA will
be developing specific and quantified information on pesticides to be
subsequently incorporated into water quality standards.
Most important, a vigorous State and Federal enforcement program
is needed to obtain compliance with water quality standards and to
assure that treatment schedules are being met. Development of
strengthened and accelerated enforcement efforts has been a major
objective during the past year. Where the States are prepared to
exercise their authorities, FWQA stands ready to provide any assist-
ance they may require. A number of States are moving aggressively
against polluters. Illinois has not hesitated to initiate proceedings
against the very giants of industry. Pennsylvania successfully
[p.21]
carried through on the first test of its Clean Stream Law. And, with
the passage of the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act in 1969, Cali-
fornia has vastly strengthened and stepped up its regulatory activity.
At the Federal level, the record of enforcement activity compiled
under the new Administration reflects a commitment to a vigorous
enforcement program equally and fairly applied.
In this same year, FWQA initiated the first enforcement actions to
abate violations of water quality standards under procedures provided
by the Water Quality Act of 1965. As mentioned before, the pro-
cedure provided in the law is direct court action, preceded by a
180-day notice to the alleged violator. On August 30, 1969, the
Secretary issued such 180-day notices to six alleged violators. The
first involved the Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc., whose mining opera-
tions resulted in discharges violating water quality standards estab-
lished for Spring River in Kansas and Oklahoma. The other five
actions were taken to abate violations of Lake Erie water quality
standards and involved the City of Toledo and Interlake Steel on the
Maumee River and Republic Steel Co., U.S. Steel, and Jones and
Laughlin on the Cuyahoga River. Hearings were held with all six
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3623
of the alleged violators. All six sources have indicated that they will
comply.
FWQA's enforcement conference activity under previously estab-
lished procedures has also been stepped up. The initiation of the
Biscayne Bay conference in February, 1970, brought to 50 the total
of such actions taken since 1956. Five of these—Lake Superior,
Escambia River Basin, Perdido Bay, Mobile Bay, and Biscayne Bay-—
have been held since January 1, 1969. In addition, eight conferences
were reconvened and three progress meetings held to put renewed
emphasis on progress in obtaining compliance.
The enforcement conference has been an effective mechanism for
the solution of complex and long-standing pollution situations. At the
recently reconvened Potomac River conference, for example, agree-
ment was reached on cooperative programs of remedial action which
include the most stringent waste treatment requirements yet fixed for
a metropolitan area. The Lake Michigan conference, reconvened in
1969 and again in March, 1970, has dealt with control of the more
diffuse wastes, such as nutrients, thermal pollution, and agricultural
wastes.
More recently, in February, 1970, a Federal-State enforcement
conference was held at Biscayne Bay, Florida, regarding local dam-
ages to aquatic plant and animal populations of lower Biscayne Bay
attributed to the heated effluent from the Turkey Point plant of the
Florida Power and Light Company. Because of the selection of the
site of the plant at Turkey Point, considerable technical difficulties
are being encountered in the disposal of the heated cooling water.
Present and proposed treatment measures were found to be inade-
quate and the conferees have recommended that the excessive
waste heat load being discharged from the Turkey Point power plant
be reduced to specified levels so that the quality of the waters,
including the biological balance of Biscayne Bay, will not be impaired
to the detriment of the full enjoyment and use of the Bay.
Subsequently, Secretary Hickel requested the Attorney General to
bring suit against the Florida Power and Light Company on the basis
of Section 13 of the River and Harbor Act of 1899, known as "The
Refuse Act," and other authorities for injunctions against discharges
contrary to the heat criteria of the applicable water quality standards,
and to restrain construction and operation of power plants which
would cause such discharges.
The character of the pollution situation governs the application of
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act's authorities and procedures.
The Mobile Bay conference of December, 1969, was called under the
"shellfish" authority of the Act. Shellfishing areas at Mobile have
been closed by the State of Alabama for eight of the past sixteen
-------
3624 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
years. Through this conference, a specific regulatory program for
control of municipal and industrial wastes polluting the Bay is being
developed.
The Refuse Act, administered by the Secretary of the Army through
the Corps of Engineers, extends Federal authority to intermittent
discharges of waste into navigable waters and provides a valuable
additional enforcement tool. FWQA and the Corps of Engineers
coordinate the enforcement of the Refuse Act with the enforcement
of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act. Through this coordina-
tion and the use of the Refuse Act, regulatory authority can be
extended to intrastate waters where no Federal water quality stand-
ards apply, as well as to interstate standards violations. The Refuse
Act has also been used effectively against "one-time" dumpings of
pollutants.
There are limitations in existing enforcement authority which pre-
vent the Federal government from playing a fully effective role. The
Federal government may act on its own or at State request to enforce
the abatement of pollution which is interstate. In the case of pollution
of interstate or navigable waters which occurs
[p. 22]
only in one State and has its effects only in that State, however, Fed-
eral enforcement assistance must be requested by that State. This
important distinction results in real complications. Enforcement ac-
tion on Lake Superior was initiated by the Secretary on his own
authority on the basis of interstate pollution which was occurring in
tributary border streams. The principal pollution source to Lake
Superior, however, was the Reserve Mining Company taconite opera-
tions at Silver Bay, Minnesota. To establish enforcement conference
jurisdiction over this source, it was necessary to show interstate effects
of the pollution from Reserve's operations. If the interstate effect
had not been established through FWQA studies, the enforcement
conference would have had no jurisdiction over the taconite dis-
charges.
The procedures for enforcement actions also present several limita-
tions on Federal authority. At the conference stage, no direct Federal
relation is established with individual polluters. Such parties may
not even be compelled to be present at the conference, as no sub-
poena authority is provided. The Federal authority deals directly
with the polluter at the public hearing stage, but, again, there is no
subpoena authority to compel the presence of witnesses.
During the post-conference and post-public hearing periods, the
States are directed to obtain compliance under their own laws and
authorities. The Act directs that a reasonable time, which cannot
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3625
be less than six months, must be provided to the States for obtaining
such compliance. This means that in bringing a recalcitrant polluter
to terms, the Federal government's hands initially are tied for at least
a whole year. This year stretches to a minimum of 18 months when
the time needed to prepare the filing of court action is taken into
account.
Despite the acceleration in Federal enforcement activity, deficien-
cies in the existing legislation have become increasingly apparent. To
further strengthen the Federal regulatory role, the Secretary of the
Interior has proposed legislative changes in the Act which would
provide substantial new authority for FWQA enforcement activities.
Specifically, water quality standards would be strengthened by the
addition of effluent requirements and by extending the applicability
of these standards to all navigable as well as interstate and certain
other waters. These discharge requirements would be established by
the States as were the original water quality standards. If the
Secretary of the Interior determined that these requirements met the
requirements of the Federal Act, they would be enforceable as an
element of the Federal, as well as the State standards. The extension
of the water quality standards program in terms of more specific
requirements and in terms of waters included is a logical progression,
building upon the water quality criteria and plans of implementation
already in force in all fifty States.
Another significant change would be the extension of geographic
coverage of enforcement authority to include all navigable and certain
other waters. As has been pointed out, under existing law an en-
forcement action may not be taken in the absence of an interstate
pollution effect without the request of the Governor of the State.
Under these circumstances, the availability of Federal enforcement
authority depends on the geographic accidents of pollution crossing
interstate boundaries. The Administration's proposal would remove
the distinction between interstate and intrastate waters and pollutional
effect. Federal enforcement authority would bs available in any case
where the Secretary of the Interior believes water quality standards
are being violated or the health or welfare of persons is being
endangered.
In addition, the new proposal would extend the coverage of the Act
to include the authority to set and enforce standards for ground-
waters and for ocean waters beyond the Territorial Sea, two im-
portant components of the water environment that need increasing
protection.
Furthermore, at the conclusion of an enforcement conference,
remedial measures could be required directly of individual polluters.
The hearing board phase of enforcement would be eliminated and the
-------
3626 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
government could proceed directly to court enforcement. Fines of
up to $10,000 a day for violation of water quality standards or enforce-
ment conference requirements would be authorized. Substantial
investigatory authorities would be provided to permit the Secretary
to subpoena records and witnesses, to enter and inspect plants and
installations and to require testimony. Further, the Secretary would
be authorized to request the Attorney General to bring suit under
a new injunctive authority to stop waste discharges immediately in
cases of serious damages, real or threatened.
Even though the proposed legislation would increase FWQA's
regulatory authority, it is intended to back up the enforcement
activity of the States, which continue to have primary responsibility.
Though at a much accelerated pace and with a much larger scope of
enforcement activity, FWQA and the States would continue to work
as partners to obtain cleaner waters.
[p. 23]
Control of Oil Pollution
With the grounding of the TOEREY CANYON in 1967, the breakup
of the OCEAN EAGLE in Puerto Rican waters in 1968, and the Santa
Barbara offshore oil well leak in 1969, oil pollution has become
recognized as a serious national and worldwide problem. These
incidents were spectacular in terms of the damages they caused, the
control and clean-up efforts and expenditures they necessitated, and
the public concern they generated. Of even greater significance,
however, is the fact that these major disasters are matched by the
aggregate of large and small incidents that occur every day through-
out the Nation's coastal and inland waters.
It is estimated that there are annually over 10,000 spills of polluting
materials into our Nation's waters. About three-fourths of these
spills are oil; the remainder are other hazardous materials, such as
chlorine and anhydrous ammonia. The sources of these incidents
are vessels, pipelines, rail and highway carriers, land- and water-based
storage tanks, refining and other manufacturing operations, the
jettisoning of fuel tanks by aircraft, on and offshore petroleum loading
and unloading terminals, on and offshore petroleum drilling and
production operations, and various other facilities and activities. The
problem of accidental spills of oil is further compounded by dis-
charges of oily ballast waters from tankers and other vessels. Pollu-
tion from oil and hazardous materials is an everyday occurrence and
affects all our waters.
Of particular significance are the potentially large and damaging
oil spill accidents that might easily result from the increase in ship-
ping and pipeline transport of oil. The emergence of supertankers
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3627
as the prime oceanic movers of crude oil imports, the construction
of a large pipeline, such as the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System from the
new Alaska North Slope oil fields, and the greater development of
offshore oil are all contributing factors to the oil spill problem. This
rapid increase of oil traffic and the expansion of the offshore produc-
tion of oil only intensifies the possibility of more frequent and larger
accidents and of significantly greater damage to the environment.
Presently, the technology for coping with oil and hazardous mate-
rials spills is woefully inadequate. Prevention of accidents is the
only sure way of protecting the environment. The Santa Barbara
incident and subsequent similar spill situations have shown conclu-
sively that no completely effective techniques are available to control
oil spills in the open ocean or lake waters. Wind and wave actions
neutralize the effectiveness of oil spill containment devices, such as
floating booms. Vacuum or scoop equipment to remove floating oils
from the water does not accomplish the job, being effective only in
rarely occurring calm seas. Chemical dispersants, sinking agents, and
other materials are often ineffective and frequently very toxic to
marine and wildlife. Common straw, which soaks up oil so that it
can be removed, is still the standard material for fighting and cleaning
up oil spills.
Compounding these technological shortcomings, the legal and insti-
tutional devices available for handling oil and hazardous material
spills have been less than adequate. The Oil Pollution Act of 1924, as
amended—the principal Federal legislation in this area of pollution
control—prohibited and provided penalties for only the "grossly
negligent and willful" spilling or discharging of oils and oily materials.
This restrictive legal language essentially precluded enforcement of
the Act. This has been rectified by passage of the Water Quality
Improvement Act of 1970, which repeals the 1924 Act and greatly
increases the regulatory controls for oil pollution incidents. Many
State and local governments, however, are still lacking in oil pollution
control authority.
In addition to lack of adequate legal tools, well-organized and
well-equipped governmental forces have not always been available
to respond in a timely manner to oil pollution incidents. Many of the
smaller incidents go undiscovered or ignored by local, State, and Fed-
eral agencies; only the larger incidents generally receive the type of
response necessary to assure adequate control and clean-up. The
usual procedure is to encourage or require the party responsible for
the spill to procure the equipment, materials and personnel and to
bear the expense of control and clean-up. In some cases, these re-
sources may not be available in the local area, adding yet another
problem.
-------
3628 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Since the TORREY CANYON incident, and particularly during the
aftermath of the Santa Barbara incident, FWQA has played a prin-
cipal role in organizing and coordinating the Federal, State, and local
effort in the control of oil and hazardous materials pollution. This
has included development of contingency plans and reporting and
response capabilities, pursuit of research and development of new
and improved technology, study of potential oil pollution threats—as
in the case of proposed exploration and production of oil in Lake Erie
—and participating in strengthening of the Federal regulations cover-
ing the drilling for and production of oil and gas on the Outer
Continental Shelf.
[p. 24]
During 1969 and early 1970, the National Multi-Agency Oil and
Hazardous Materials Contingency Plan was re-assessed and revisions
to strengthen it were undertaken. The first Plan was prepared in
1968, at the request of the President by the Departments of the
Interior, Transportation, Defense and Health, Education and Welfare
and by the Office of Emergency Preparedness. Together with the
supplementary regional contingency plans, the National Plan pro-
vides the organizational and communications mechanisms for welding
Federal, State and local efforts into a coordinated response to oil and
hazardous materials incidents. The Secretary of the Interior has been
responsible for the preparation and administration of the National
Plan, and FWQA has acted as the lead agency in carrying out this
responsibility. The National and regional plans provide for on-scene
commanders, operating teams, communication centers, lines of re-
sponsibility and other organizational features necessary to bring
about an immediate and effective response to major pollution disasters
and lesser incidents. The National and regional plans were put into
effect during the Santa Barbara incident and proved to be decidedly
important in the control and clean-up of that disaster. FWQA is
continuing to provide guidance in extending the coverage of contin-
gency plans, particularly in local areas, such as harbor and oil
on-loading/off-loading areas, where the threat of oil pollution is great-
est. The contingency plans have and are continuing to overcome the
institutional shortcomings for coping with spills; and they are
becoming increasingly more effective in ensuring that the supply of
equipment, materials and other resources, including communications
and technical advice, needed to combat oil and hazardous materials
accidents becomes immediately available.
In the implementation of the contingency plans in coastal waters,
the Great Lakes and the major inland navigable waters, the Coast
Guard has provided the on-scene commanders and the principal
operating resources, including personnel, ships, equipment and com-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3629
munications systems. FWQA participates by providing advice on
containment and clean-up techniques, including the use of dispersants
and other chemicals. In other waters of the Nation, FWQA has the
lead operating role.
Another important accomplishment during 1969 was the strength-
ening of the regulation covering the exploration and production of oil
and gas on the Outer Continental Shelf. The Secretary of the Inte-
rior is authorized to lease lands on the Shelf for oil, gas and mineral
extraction and is responsible for regulating these operations, which
are in the coastal waters outside of State jurisdiction. The Santa
Barbara incident clearly indicated that adequate consideration had
not been given to the environmental impact of offshore oil operations.
In recognition of this, Secretary Hickel ordered the suspension of
pending lease offerings and revisions of the Federal regulations appli-
cable to offshore leasing.
The revisions made call for, among other things, the evaluation of
potential environmental effects of offshore oil operations prior to
lease offerings. Under this feature, FWQA and other Federal agen-
cies concerned with the protection of marine resources are given the
opportunity to assess the impact of offshore oil and gas activities.
The Secretary of the Interior is authorized to make appropriate deci-
sions on leasing and lease requirements based upon these recommen-
dations. Other revisions of the regulations pertain to the inclusion
of the National Contingency Plan and to lessee's responsibilities for
pollution prevention, control and clean-up, for the reporting of spills
and for the provision of equipment, materials and resources to cope
with pollution incidents. The aim of the Department of the Interior
is to assure adequate water and environmental quality protection
in its management of the Outer Continental Shelf lands and waters,
and the strengthened regulations promulgated by Secretary Hickel
are directed toward this objective.
[p.25]
With regard to offshore oil and gas regulations, it is also important
to note that Secretary Hickel recently recommended to the Justice
Department that a grand jury be convened to investigate the violations
of Federal regulations by a lessee off the Louisiana coast. The re-
ported failure to provide storm chokes and other protective features
required by the regulations is believed to have led to the oil well fires
and the large oil discharge from several wells operated by the Chevron
Oil Company.
In the area of research and development, the Federal agencies have
divided among themselves the work necessary to find new and im-
proved technology to deal with oil and hazardous materials pollution.
FWQA has taken on the primary tasks pertaining to prevention, con-
-------
3630 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
tainment and clean-up in sheltered and inland waters, the fate and
ecological effects in these waters, and the technology for cleaning oil
contaminated beaches. The Departments of Transportation, Defense
and Health, Education and Welfare, as well as other agencies of the
Department of the Interior, are assuming primary responsibility for
other pertinent areas of research, including the combating of oil
pollution in open waters.
FWQA's research activities are being carried out under grants
and contracts, as well as through in-house work centered in its labora-
tory at Edison, New Jersey. One project consists of investigating the
use of gelling agents. These could be released into the oil cargo of a
tanker to form a semi-solid material when an accident causes a rup-
ture in the vessel. This material either would not leak out of the
ruptured tanks or, if released, could more easily be contained and
picked up. Other efforts are aimed at developing and demonstrating
oil containment and recovery equipment, barrier devices to protect
marinas and other water areas from incoming oil slicks, and techniques
for cleaning oil from, beaches and disposing of the material removed.
In its day-to-day operations, FWQA operates a teletype communi-
cations system covering the Headquarters and Regional Offices to
handle reports and information on oil and hazardous materials spills,
as well as other emergency situations, such as fish kills. Under the
contingency plan, to the extent possible, personnel in Regional and
field offices respond to pollution incidents by inspecting and collecting
samples and information on the situation, by providing technical
advice on control techniques, and by participating in the direction of
control activities. In these activities, particularly in coastal waters,
FWQA and the Coast Guard and/or the Corps of Engineers work to-
gether—each agency performing those tasks which it is best organized
and equipped to handle.
Although FWQA has not had the resources to respond to most spill
incidents, it has responded to all major episodes. Substantial on-
scene effort was put into the Santa Barbara disaster. This was
followed by responses to the many serious pollution problems result-
ing from Hurricane Camille; to the large release of oil from a ruptured
storage tank at Seawarren, New Jersey; to a number of oil spill
incidents in Alaska, including the recent oil disaster affecting 1,000
miles of shoreline along the coast of Kodiak Island; and to some 130
other incidents, about 40 of which were hazardous materials situations.
Although a considerable amount of attention is devoted to reporting
and response activities, a
[p. 26]
significant effort has been and is directed to other program activities.
These include contingency planning; evaluation of potential pollu-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3631
tion situations and impacts, including those associated with offshore
oil drilling and production; testing of hazardous materials and the
neutralizing or combating agents needed to deal with them when a
spill occurs; participation in international meetings on oil spill pre-
vention; and technical assistance to State and local agencies and
other groups.
Along these lines, several significant actions were undertaken in
1969. The bunker oil from the grounded motorship, NORDMEER,
which threatened to rupture and spill its contents into Lake Huron,
was removed to prevent a serious incident. This was the first effort
of its kind by FWQA.
In the case of the Kodiak Island incident, Secretary Hickel has
appealed to ten major oil companies to enter into a voluntary "no
discharge" agreement to halt the oil production caused by vessels
pumping their oily ballast waters into the high seas outside of the
50 mile limit. These areas are not addressed under international
controls. Investigations by FWQA have shown that the oil-contami-
nated ballast waters released by commercial tankers enroute to
terminal facilities in Cook Inlet were the most probable cause of the
Kodiak Island disaster, which involved the destruction of an estimated
10,000 waterfowl. The discharge of oily ballast waters on the high
seas is a frequent source of pollution. Many stretches of shoreline
along both coasts are affected by oil believed to have drifted in from
offshore ballast water pumping operations and it is the goal of the
Department of the Interior to prevent these incidents by proper
handling of ballast waters.
Proposed drilling for oil and gas in Lake Erie was studied, and,
as a result, recommendations were made to the State of New York
and the International Joint Commission opposing oil production and
encouraging the strictest regulation of gas production in order to
protect the valuable water supply, fishery and other uses of the Lake.
Considerable attention has also been devoted to a study of the Alaska
North Slope oil development and the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System
to assure that adequate consideration for maximum protection of the
unspoiled environment is taken in the design, construction and opera-
tion of these facilities. Along similar lines, technical assistance was
given to the State of Maine in its preparation of comprehensive
regulations for the prevention and control of potential pollution in
all types of oil operations.
These activities and others were essentially wholly aimed at pollu-
tion prevention, a goal which FWQA believes must be ultimately
achieved through fail-safe systems and practices if real control of oil
pollution is to be attained.
The recent passage of the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970
-------
3632 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
substantially strengthens the Federal law and authority to prevent
and control oil pollution. Most importantly, this new legislation
removes the restrictive definition of illegal spills and discharges and
provides notification requirements and substantial penalties and
liabilities for oil spills. These features, including the requirement for
the showing of financial responsibility—or liability insurance—will
promote greater care and effort on the part of the oil and oil trans-
portation industries in the prevention of spills. Other provisions
authorize greater effort by the Federal agencies in developing
strengthened contingency plans, directing or fully undertaking the
containment and clean-up of oil spills and providing a revolving fund
to cover the costs of the latter. FWQA recently created the Office of
Oil and Hazardous Materials and is expanding its staff to handle the
increased work load resulting from the new legislation.
[p. 27]
Control of Vessel Wastes
The discharge of wastes from ships, barges, houseboats, pleasure
craft and other types of watercraft has been receiving increased at-
tention in the nationwide effort to clean up polluted waterways and
preserve clean streams, lakes and coastal waters. Until recently, the
effect of vessel wastes has been obscured by the pollution resulting
from municipal and industrial waste discharges and other causes.
With the progress anticipated in abating municipal and industrial
waste discharges, the significant increase in the number of toilet and
galley equipped vessels—particularly pleasure craft—plying the Na-
tion's waterways and lakes, and the greater demands for high quality
recreation and sport fishery waters in those areas most used by both
commercial and non-commercial watercraft, vessel wastes have
emerged as significant source of water quality impairment. Ac-
cordingly, vessel waste discharges are currently a concern in the
navigable waters of this country, including even mountain lakes
where the intensity of vessel use is relatively low but the need for the
protection of the high quality water is great.
In June 1969, FWQA completed a report of its San Diego Bay
Vessel Pollution Study Project following intensive field and labora-
tory activity. The purpose of this project was to determine the mag-
nitude, extent and kinds of pollutional effects to be expected from the
discharges of shipboard sanitary wastes and the pollution abatement
measures required to reduce or eliminate these discharges. The find-
ings were illustrative of this problem: vessel waste discharges were
found to cause serious bacterial pollution, to be responsible for bottom
sludge deposits and floating waste material and to cause violations
of the water quality standards established for San Diego Bay. The
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3633
pollution was directly attributable to the high numbers of military,
commercial and pleasure vessels using the Bay.
Investigations by State agencies and FWQA have discovered sim-
ilar conditions in other bodies of water across the United States.
Bacterial pollution and the attendant impairment of recreational
water uses are the principal adverse effects of untreated vessel waste
discharges, but the occurrence of aesthetically displeasing floating
material follows close behind in pollutional importance.
It will not be an easy task to remedy vessel waste pollution. The
weight and volume of waste treatment devices or waste handling
tanks cause considerable installation problems, particularly on ex-
isting vessels, especially if they are military. The expense of control
devices, particularly to pleasure craft owners, is also a factor. A
considerable amount of research and development is underway by
Federal agencies including FWQA, the Navy and the Coast Guard to
find adequate and adaptable waste control systems. Consideration is
being given to incineration devices, modified versions of conventional
waste treatment methods, recirculation systems, chemical-toilets—
such as are used on commercial aircraft—and other devices. Good
progress is being made, and there appears to be little doubt that
American ingenuity can and will develop the technology required
to adequately handle vessel waste pollution problems.
Within recent years, many of the States have enacted or strength-
ened their legislation or regulations pertaining to the control of vessel
[p. 28]
wastes. Unfortunately, the non-uniformity of the waste treatment
and control requirements imposed by these States has presented some
significant compliance problems for vessels which travel between
States. Also, in many cases the State regulations do not apply to or
are ineffective in their coverage of interstate and international car-
riers and Federal vessels. In response to these basic problems, the
Congress recently enacted comprehensive Federal legislation—the
first legislation of this type—covering the control of vessel wastes.
The Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 provides for the estab-
lishment of performance or effluent standards for the sanitary waste
discharges from all classes of watercraft. These standards are to be
set by the Secretary of the Interior. The amendment further provides
for the establishment and enforcement of regulations to implement
these standards by the Secretary of Transportation, under whose ad-
ministration the Coast Guard comes. This Federal statute applies to
new and existing vessels and provides for penalties for the failure of
vessel owners and manufacturers to provide adequate shipboard
treatment or control of sanitary wastes. Importantly, this new legis-
-------
3634 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
lation provides for uniform, nationwide regulation of watercraft
waste discharges. This will promote a comprehensive attack on vessel
pollution problems by FWQA and the Coast Guard, who will join in
carrying out this task.
During the past year, FWQA has been preparing for its role under
the new legislation. Research, development and demonstration of
vessel waste treatment devices have been pursued and considerable
assistance has been given to other Federal agencies, including the
Navy, the Corps of Engineers and the Coast Guard, in the develop-
ment, testing and installation of treatment and control equipment on
Federal vessels. With the enactment of the new legislation, FWQA's
activities in the vessel wastes area will be expanded. FWQA is
planning to consult with the boating industry, the manufacturers, and
others concerned with treatment devices and will hold public hearings
prior to the establishment of standards. In addition, assistance will
be given to the Coast Guard in establishing both the regulations nec-
essary to implement the performance standards and an adequate
certification program. Finally, assistance will be provided Federal
agencies in equipping Federal vessels with adequate control equip-
ment. The new legislation provides the means to fully abate the pol-
lution arising from watercraft sanitary wastes, and FWQA plans to
move rapidly forward to meet this objective.
Control of Pollution from Federal Activities
The Federal government is involved in many activities which have
an impact on the quality of our Nation's waters. These operations
include the maintenance of Federal facilities, such as military bases,
lighthouses and post offices; management of Federal lands; and di-
verse activities, such as dredging, nuclear energy development, and
pest control. Today, in the United States, there are approximately
20,000 Federal real properties, many of which have an impact on the
environment. In addition, Federal lands comprise one-third of the
United States, and the use of these lands has a bearing on progress in
achieving national goals of clean water and a quality environment.
Abatement and prevention of pollution from these sources is a
major Administration goal. On February 4, 1970, the President is-
sued Executive Order 11507, establishing a new and aggressive ap-
proach to the problem of keeping the Federal house clean. The Order
superceded earlier Executive Orders on water and air pollution
control.
In issuing this Order, the President gave more specific direction to
Federal agencies in the conduct of their activities with regard to en-
vironmental protection than had any previous Order. To establish
the Federal government as a true leader in the battle to save the en-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3635
vironment, he required that all projects or installations owned by or
leased to the Federal government would have to be designed, operated
and maintained so as to conform with water and air quality standards.
For the first time, a conformance date for Federal compliance, De-
cember 31, 1972, was established and written into the Order. The
Presidential statement accompanying the Order set forth a $359 mil-
lion program for obtaining this objective. To insure that these funds,
once appropriated, were utilized for the purposes intended, the Order
contained a section which, in effect, prevented use of the appropriated
funds for purposes other than pollution control.
FWQA has an important role to play in working with the other
Federal agencies concerned to assure that the objectives of the Ex-
ecutive Order are met. FWQA has primary responsibility for re-
viewing and approving permissible limits of waste discharges from
such installations and for coordinating the water pollution control
activities of Federal, State, and local programs. The new order con-
tains important provisions to insure this role will be an effective one
and to correct some of the administrative problems brought about by
earlier Orders. Rather than have professional staff at all
[p. 29]
levels of government review plans and specifications for improved
abatement facilities, the Order requires that specific performance
requirements for each facility be set by the agency and approved by
the Secretary of the Interior. In evaluating the adequacy of the
performance requirements, the Secretary is to take into consideration
water quality standards where such standards exist. The Secretary
is also given, for the first time, the authority to issue regulations estab-
lishing water quality standards for the purposes of the Order where
such do not exist. More importantly, the Secretary is also authorized
to establish more stringent requirements for Federal facilities than
contained in existing standards. Both of these actions are to be taken
after consultation with appropriate Federal, State, interstate and
local agencies.
FWQA has taken a number of steps to meet these and related re-
sponsibilities. The staff assigned to work with the other Federal
agencies has been restructured and enlarged. Increased emphasis
has been placed on better channels of communication and cooperative
relationships with the other Federal agencies. Fruitful meetings and
seminars have been held at which Federal programs have been re-
viewed, information exchanged, and advice both sought and given.
FWQA conducts on-site inspections of waste-water treatment and
disposal practices at Federal installations to advise the agencies con-
cerned as to the adequacy and effectiveness of such measures. This
-------
3636 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
information is used by agency planners to develop and update plans
for corrective actions. Whenever possible, these inspections are con-
ducted jointly with State officials to promote better Federal-State
relationships.
From the information collected on such inspections, a system of
recording and reporting information on Federal installations and their
waste treatment needs and accomplishments was developed in 1969.
This system will be the basis for a comprehensive inventory of Fed-
eral installations, which will streamline the review process and pro-
vide better information on which to recommend nationwide priorities
to the Bureau of the Budget and Congress.
To facilitate budgeting for corrective measures, Federal agencies
are required to present to the Bureau of the Budget a plan for in-
stalling improvements needed to meet the target date. FWQA re-
views the agencies' plans and recommends priorities for funding to
the Bureau of the Budget. Each project is ranked in the order of its
priority to ensure that the most significant problems will receive first
attention.
Emphasis has been placed on conferences to ensure that informa-
tion on improvements in waste treatment technology would be avail-
able to Federal agencies. In this regard, a seminar was held for rep-
resentatives of other agencies on new advances in waste treatment
technology and was geared to problems routinely faced at Federal
installations. Attendance of agency personnel at seminars conducted
by FWQA's Research and Development program has been en-
couraged. A field trip was arranged for officials of the Department
of Defense in order to familiarize them with the new treatment tech-
nology being developed at the Blue Plains sewage treatment plant in
Washington. Reports of completed FWQA research projects are
being made available to the appropriate Federal agencies for their
consideration in the development of new facilities, and incorporation
of these newly developed techniques in remedial work is being highly
encouraged.
Correction of conventional municipal and industrial waste prob-
lems from Federal facilities is only a part of the job in ensuring that
the wide-ranging activities of the Federal establishment have a min-
imum impact on the environment. New opportunities for pollution
abatement are continually being brought to the attention of other
agencies. As the wastes from conventional point sources are brought
under control or eliminated, the wastes from nonpoint sources come
to the forefront as significant problems.
One such area receiving recent attention was related to manage-
ment practices on Federal lands. In the past year FWQA chaired a
Department of the Interior task force established to assess the effect of
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3637
Federal land management practices on water quality. A pilot review
study conducted in Oregon showed a major need and opportunity to
reduce water pollution associated with Federal land management
practices and conservation measures. The report, Federal Land Man-
agement Practices and Water Quality Control, found serious damage
to the environment stemming from long-established practices, as well
as from more recent practices involving pesticides, fertilizers, and
other chemical applications. The report specifically identified 12
kinds of land management practices and 22 conservation measures
having an impact on water quality. These would be reviewed by
agencies and altered whenever necessary to conform with national
environmental goals.
Operation Plowshare, the Atomic Energy
[p. 30]
Commission's program to develop peaceful uses of atomic energy,
represents another activity which must be carefully monitored and
controlled to avoid unwanted effects on the environment. This pro-
gram has and will involve nuclear explosions designed to stimulate
gas production in oil and gas bearing formations, to fracture mineral
formations to enable extraction by leaching, to develop storage for
water or other materials. To assure that the program, as planned,
provides adequate safeguards for water quality, FWQA provides re-
view and advice to the Commission concerning these experiments.
Careful planning of the program, as well as pre- and post-detonation
surveillance, is essential because of the potentially great hazards
involved.
The Corps of Engineers' dredging activities in the Great Lakes and
elsewhere are yet another cause for concern. For more than 100
years the Corps of Engineers has been dredging material from the
harbors of the Great Lakes and depositing most of the dredged mate-
rial in designated dumping areas in the open waters. Growing con-
cern over the resulting effect on the Lakes led to completion last year
of a Corps of Engineers' pilot program related to dredging and water
quality problems in the Great Lakes. Among the conclusions of the
Corps' study were that heavily polluted sediments when transported
to the open waters must be considered presumptively undesirable
because of their possible long-term effects on the ecology of the Great
Lakes, as evidenced by bio-assays of the effects on bottom organisms
and plankton, and that disposal in diked areas would be the least
costly effective method of withholding pollutants associated with
dredgings from the Lakes.
On April 15, the President sent a message to the Congress, pro-
posing legislation to discontinue open water disposal of polluted
dredge spoil in the Great Lakes. The legislation would authorize the
-------
3638 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Corps to construct and maintain contained disposal facilities, in co-
operation with States and other non-Federal interests. Dredge spoils
from Federal and non-Federal operations would be disposed of in
these enclosed areas under appropriate cost-sharing arrangements.
We also must be increasingly alert to the environmental impact of
such diverse activities as Forest Service timber sales in Alaska, use
of persistent pesticides for quarantine control at Federal airports, and
proposed development of oil shale lands in Colorado, Wyoming, and
Utah. FWQA will place increasing emphasis on working with the
agencies concerned to correct deficiencies and to prevent environ-
mental problems from arising in the future.
ControZ of Pollution from Federally Licensed and Supported Activities
Closely related to pollution resulting from direct Federal activities,
is the environmental impact of the various functions conducted under
loans, grants, contracts, leases and permits from the Federal govern-
ment. These diverse activities range from the nuclear power plants
receiving licenses from the Atomic Energy Commission to urban re-
newal projects financed by the Department of Housing and Urban
Development. Combined, these Federally supported and licensed
activities constitute a real and potential threat to the environment,
which cuts across the full spectrum of the Nation's economic life.
They also reflect an unusual opportunity for the Federal government
to extend the exercise of its responsibilities for pollution control.
Two landmark pieces of legislation and an implementing Executive
Order promise effective action. The National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 called for all agencies of the Federal government to give
full attention to environmental protection in their planning activities
and decision making. In furtherance of this legislation, the President
issued an Executive Order on March 5, 1970. This Order directed
the heads of all Federal agencies to review their statutory authority,
administrative regulations, policies and procedures, including those
relating to loans, grants, contracts, leases, licenses or permits, in order
that they might identify deficiencies and inconsistencies which keep
each agency from full compliance with the national
[p.31]
environmental goals established by the Act. The Order requires a
report to the Council on Environmental Quality on the results of
this review along with corrective actions taken and planned.
Recent enactment of the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970
gave further impetus to this trend. The Act provides that any appli-
cant for a Federal permit or license to construct or operate any facil-
ity which may result in any discharge into the navigable waters of the
United States shall provide certification from the State in which the
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3639
discharge originates that such facilities or related activities can be ex-
pected to comply with applicable water quality standards. The Act
further provides that no license or permit shall be granted without
such certification and such conditions as the State may reasonably
require, including but not limited to provision for suspension or
termination of any issued license or permit for failure to be in com-
pliance with applicable water quality standards. It also provides
special conditions under which the views of an adjacent State will be
obtained; or an interstate agency or the Secretary of the Interior, if
appropriate, may provide the certification.
The legislation is clear in its intent that the States are to exercise
primary responsibility for the administration of the water quality
standards for their waters and for the assurance that State-Federal
water quality standards are met by anyone who uses these waters,
and that FWQA is to cooperate with other Federal agencies, with
State and interstate agencies, and with water users in assuring that
appropriate control measures are applied to meet the water quality
standards. The legislation provides that the Secretary of the Interior
shall provide, upon the request of any Federal department or agency,
or State or interstate agency or applicant, any relevant information
on applicable water quality standards and comment on any methods
of complying with such standards.
The major and most significant activities to receive immediate
attention under this legislation are those of the Atomic Energy Com-
mission, which issues construction permits and operating licenses for
nuclear power plants; those of the Federal Power Commission which
licenses hydroelectric power plants and whose approval must be se-
cured before changes can be made in those projects, including use of
project waters and construction across project lands; and those of the
Corps of Engineers which issue permits for dredging and construction
in the navigable waters of the United States (except where hydro-
electric power production is contemplated and licensed by the Federal
Power Commission).
Prior to the enactment of recent legislation and the issuance of the
Executive Order, cooperative arrangements had been made with the
Atomic Energy Commission, the Federal Power Commission and the
Corps of Engineers to review materials submitted in request of Fed-
eral permits or licenses for activities which could result in water
pollution. These reviews have been conducted in coordination with
other Department of the Interior agencies concerned with environ-
mental protection. FWQA has reviewed these applications to deter-
mine the possible effects of the activity, as proposed, upon water
quality. Recommendations have been
[p. 32]
-------
3640 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
made as to the need for additional control facilities and any provisions
which should be included in the permit or license to ensure that
water pollution would be controlled. These activities have led to an
increasingly well-coordinated and cooperative effort to ensure that
water pollution control measures are considered in connection with
the issuance of a Federal license.
These arrangements have been satisfactory, however, only in part.
For example, there has been a serious inadequacy in procedures for
review of environmental factors in design and site selection for new
fossil fueled or nuclear power plants.
With respect to nuclear plants, the Atomic Energy Commission re-
ceives comments on environmental factors from the Department of
the Interior in accordance with established administrative procedures.
These comments are forwarded to the applicants for consideration.
The Atomic Energy Commission, however, has held that it lacks reg-
ulatory authority to incorporate in its licenses for nuclear plants re-
quirements for measures to protect the environment beyond radiation
safety hazards. This position has been supported by the Department
of Justice and also affirmed in a court decision.
Fossil fueled plants are licensed by State regulatory authorities and
require no Federal license whatever. With public concern about the
environmental impact of power developments running high, a number
of utilities have entered into voluntary discussions of projects under
consideration with concerned State and Federal agencies. There has
been, however, little or no opportunity for the Department of the In-
terior to require environmental protection measures in the plans for
power plants, both nuclear and fossil fueled, unless they used water
from the reservoir of a licensed hydroelectric project.
By contrast, there have been adequate procedures for environ-
mental review in the category of hydroelectric power plants. Over
the years, the Federal Power Commission prior to issuing a license for
the construction of hydro plants has increasingly incorporated en-
vironmental protection requirements. These have included, for ex-
ample, minimum flows for fisheries and water quality below licensed
dams, fish screens and spawning channels, and the making available
of project lands for public recreation.
Many proposals for incorporating these measures come from De-
partment of the Interior agencies. FWQA has the opportunity to re-
view license applications made to the Federal Power Commission and
to propose changes in construction and operation plans on behalf of
water quality improvement. It has received excellent cooperation
from the Federal Power Commission in incorporating recommended
measures in its licensing procedures.
A prime example of the application of this policy is the Blue Ridge
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3641
case on West Virginia's Kanawha River. Although this case is still
pending before the Federal Power Commission, the preliminary find-
ing provided for the development of a project which would require
the power company to provide flows for maintenance of water quality
in the downstream reaches of the Kanawha River.
The activities involving dredging and construction in navigable
waters of the United States and requiring permits from the Corps of
Engineers constitute another category of pollution. The discharge
of dredged materials into the Great Lakes by private dredgers is
directly comparable in effect to the discharge of dredgings from Corps
operations. This illustrates the importance of applying the same
stringent environmental controls to Federally licensed activities as
to the Federal agencies themselves.
FWQA and the other Interior agencies concerned review thousands
of applications for such permits annually. Comments to the Corps of
Engineers have resulted in inclusion of provisions to protect water
quality in some permits and in the withholding of other permits.
However, major difficulties have remained. The inclusion of specific
provisions relative to control of pollution in Corps of Engineers' per-
mits has been contested in the courts. A lower court decision that the
Corps of Engineers is not authorized to include such restrictions in its
permits is being contested by the Corps of Engineers.
Enactment of the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 repre-
sents a major improvement in procedures and methods. The Act's
emphasis on compliance with water quality standards as the basic
mechanism for ensuring water quality protection is of great signifi-
cance. Nevertheless to adequately ensure the effectiveness of these
new requirements, FWQA must place continued emphasis on de-
velopment of adequate standards. At present, there are no standards
that adequately ensure protection of water quality from the impacts
of dredging, and the temperature standards of many States remain
unimproved. In order to provide effective implementation of the
Water Quality Improvement Act, within the concepts outlined by the
Congress, FWQA must and will accelerate its efforts to obtain ad-
equate water quality standards.
[p.33]
ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS
From the very start of the water pollution control program, the
Congress has made it clear that the responsibility for preventing and
controlling water pollution begins at the State and local levels. And,
although the Federal government has been given an increasingly
greater hand in dealing with the problem, the States and communities
continue to bear a major share of the responsibility.
-------
3642 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
The job of controlling pollution, as indicated earlier, is an enormous
one both in terms of costs and in terms of manpower requirements.
Few, if any, State and local governments have revenues large enough
to meet the many and increasing demands, including water pollution
control, confronting them. The largest share of the Federal pro-
gram's resources are therefore spent for direct assistance to States
and communities—grants for treatment plant construction and pro-
gram development, technical assistance, and manpower development
—to help meet the national goal of clean water.
President Nixon has proposed in his program of "New Federalism"
that State and local governments play an increasingly important role
in meeting national needs. At the same time, he has recognized the
need for vigorous Federal leadership, through solid backup of State
and local actions, in restoring the environment.
To ensure more effective working relationships, the President has
directed nine Federal departments and agencies to work together to
modernize the management of their presently complex systems of
providing financial and technical assistance to State and local govern-
ments. The Department of the Interior is working to implement the
objectives and goals of the Federal Assistance Review (FAR) pro-
gram. One of the primary objectives sought is the simplification of the
Department's grant programs—streamlining of the application proc-
ess and organizational structure of assistance programs for efficiency,
economy, and responsiveness to State and local needs. The Federal
Water Quality Administration (FWQA) has responded to the chal-
lenge. A detailed analysis of the administrative requirements of the
Construction Grants and the State and Interstate Pollution Control
Grants programs is currently underway.
Secretary Hickel has also stressed the need to improve Federal
working relationships with the States. In order to improve com-
munications with States, FWQA representatives are attending public
meetings of the State water pollution control boards and other ap-
propriate meetings, such as those of legislative committees. Tech-
nical assistance is also being increased to make more of an effort to
meet State needs within available resources. Increasing emphasis
will be placed on coordinating State and Federal program planning
to ensure the most effective pooling of resources.
Assistance to Municipalities
Rapid growth of population and its continuous trend toward urban
centers has resulted in a tremendous increase in the volume of mu-
nicipal wastes and in the need for an enormous investment in waste
treatment facilities. National attention was focused on this problem
in 1956, when the Congress, in the first permanent Federal Water
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3643
Pollution Control Act, initiated the program to provide Federal grant
assistance to communities to improve or build sewage treatment facil-
ities. Amendments since that time have helped step up construction
activity by making more money available and on a more liberal basis.
Under today's legislation, a community can get financial help in the
construction of a municipal waste treatment plant with a Federal
grant of at least 30 percent of the construction cost. Under certain
conditions, such as matching State financial aid, approved water qual-
ity standards, and a comprehensive plan for approaching the problem,
the Federal share may be much higher.
Since 1957, the Federal government has provided nearly $1.5 billion
for construction and expansion of over 10,000 municipally owned and
operated sewage treatment facilities. These funds have assisted the
States and communities in the construction of $6.4 billion of treatment
works.
In the thirteen years in which such grants have been available, the
population served by some degree of waste treatment has increased
by more than 51 million persons. More than 92 percent of the popula-
tion served by sewers is connected to a waste treatment plant, as
contrasted with 57 percent in 1956. These represent significant
accomplishments.
Despite this progress, the Nation still lags far behind in providing
modern waste treatment for its cities. Many of the works constructed
were designed to provide levels of treatment which subsequently have
proved inadequate to protect receiving waters. Other works have
become overloaded and need major expansion. Improper operation
and maintenance of many of these plants has resulted in discharge of
wastes little
[p. 34]
reduced in polluting content and in breakdown and early obsoles-
cence of facilities. Other plants have been poorly located and
have resulted in fragmented, rather than systematic, regional solu-
tions. Population growth has added additional needs; during the
same years that the construction grants program was underway, the
population connected to sewers for which treatment must be pro-
vided increased by 37.5 million persons. Increasing standards of liv-
ing and the rising use of household chemicals and appliances, such as
garbage grinders, have added an additional dimension. In many river
basins, progress in treating the wastes from some of the communities
has been offset by failure to deal with other waste sources.
Construction needs have far outpaced Federal, State and local
funds and there have been recent efforts to increase available funds.
A number of States have enacted measures to financially assist their
-------
3644 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
communities. At the Federal level, the Congress this year appro-
priated a record $800 million to finance the Federal share of doing the
job. It will not be enough, however, to merely provide additional
funds under existing formulas and methods. A number of basic im-
provements are needed.
The FWQA has become increasing aware that major revisions in
this key program—its legislative structure, funding, regulations, and
administration—are necessary if the nationwide goals of providing
adequate waste treatment and meeting water quality standards are
to be accomplished efficiently and in the near future. A major ob-
jective over the past year has been to review the program in depth to
determine what changes were needed. The General Accounting Of-
fice has also had the program under review and has made a number
of recommendations for improvement.
Our review contributed to the formulation of the proposed new
legislation and regulations to administer the program on a more sys-
tematic basis. These are an essential element of the Administration's
environmental program. This review clearly indicated that there
were three basic objectives which should be met to achieve an equit-
able and fully effective Federal financing program. First, the level
of financing should be adequate to enable the Nation's communities
to get abreast of their pollution problems. Second, the method of
financing should be an assured one, in order to enable State and local
governments and the construction industry to plan and gear up for
the necessary effort. Third, the program must be designed to ensure
that the funds will be spent efficiently to achieve the best results in
cleaning up our waters.
The legislation proposed to the Congress by Secretary Hickel is
designed to provide funds adequate to do the job. The legislation
calls for a four-year Federal contribution of $4 billion in a construc-
tion program of $10 billion, the Federal share to be matched by $6
billion in State and local funds.
This is based on the determination, through FWQA's recently com-
pleted cost studies, that a $10 billion investment in waste treatment
facilities is needed to meet the country's municipal waste treatment
needs in the years immediately ahead. Although these cost studies,
the most comprehensive ever completed, indicate that $10 billion will
be enough, President Nixon has said more money would be available
if necessary. The proposed legislation provides for a reassessment in
1974 to evaluate needs for the following five years. The legislative
proposal would also revise the present method of allocating grants to
permit a higher degree of flexibility in directing funds to areas where
the need is greatest and where they can be most effectively used.
The proposed legislation also stresses measures to provide assur-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3645
ance to States and communities that Federal funding will be forth-
coming as planned. The lag between Federal authorization and
appropriations in the present legislation created a condition of con-
fusion and uncertainty that has hampered the engineering and con-
struction industry from gearing up for a sustained level of effort.
Ensured funding is a key component of the
[p. 35]
proposed legislation; it would enable the Federal government to enter
"grant agreements" with municipalities at the rate of $1 billion a year
for four years. Pursuant to these agreements, the Federal govern-
ment would be obliged to appropriate funds to satisfy obligations
under these grant agreements, just as the Federal government must
satisfy any other of its debt obligations. This change would assure
communities of full Federal support and allow planning and con-
struction to proceed without the traditional gap between funds au-
thorized and funds appropriated.
The Administration has further emphasized its intent to provide
assurance of funding and to alleviate State and local uncertainty by
resolving the reimbursement issue. To permit States and communi-
ties to move ahead with construction of waste treatment works before
full Federal funding became available, the 1966 amendments to the
Act provided that the allotments of a State could be used for reim-
bursement of projects which went ahead with less than the full Fed-
eral share and on which construction was initiated after June 30,
1966, provided that such projects met all other Federal requirements.
As a result of this provision, a number of the States went ahead with
bond issues or other provisions for prefinancing the Federal share on
those projects which proceeded with either no Federal funds or less
than the full Federal share. As of December 31, 1969, a total of 880
such projects had proceeded. The amounts earned for Federal reim-
bursement were $322 million. When all these projects are completed,
eligible reimbursements will be about $814 million.
Federal intentions with respect to repayment of these funds has
been one of the vexing problems facing States and communities which
had moved ahead on their own. In addressing the State Governors'
Conference in Washington this February, President Nixon expressed
his position regarding repayment of these funds. He stated that, "any
State that went forward after the Clean Water Restoration Act of
1966 relying on what the Federal government had indicated, went
forward in its own program, should not be penalized because it took
that initiative. As a matter of fact, is should be rewarded."
Under the proposed legislation, reimbursement would be accom-
plished through the larger appropriations; through improvements in
-------
3646 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
the reallotment procedure which would more quickly funnel funds to
areas of greatest need; and through use of discretionary authority,
which would permit the Secretary to assign a
[p. 36]
portion of each year's available funds to such areas.
An additional element of the Administration's program will help
assure that State and local bodies will be able to borrow the necessary
funds to do their share. The Department of the Interior's proposed
legislation would be supplemented by a Treasury Department pro-
posal to establish an Environmental Financing Authority (EFA).
EFA would have authority to buy the waste treatment bonds of those
municipalities who are unable to sell their bonds on the open market.
EFA would ensure the availability of local financing for construction
of waste treatment plants, so all communities would be able to par-
ticipate in the construction grants program.
Higher appropriations and revised legislation are only part of the
answer in accelerating the systematic construction of municipal waste
treatment plants to achieve effective results in cleaning up pollution.
Development of measures to ensure efficient use of funds to achieve
that result has been a key element of FWQA's new approach to the
administration of the program.
Secretary Hickel has said, "The job ahead will be costly. We want
to ensure that the Federal funds invested in the clean-up will be spent
effectively and fairly." Towards this end he has published proposed
regulations in the Federal Register. The proposed new rules are that:
—Comprehensive river basinwide programs for pollution abate-
ment must be developed, and new treatment works must fit in with
such programs, as well as with metropolitan and regional plans, to be
eligible for Federal aid.
—In evaluating new applications, the FWQA may demand detailed
data on all sources of pollution in the entire river basin, including the
volume of discharge from each source, character of effluent, present
treatment, water quality effect and other items.
—If some industrial wastes are to be treated as part of a municipal
system's operations, industry must pretreat those wastes if they would
interfere with efficient operation of the community system. Further,
a system of "cost recovery" must be required if some industrial wastes
are to be treated in a new plant built with Federal aid. Such cost
recovery by the municipality would assess the industries a share of
the operating costs and costs of amortizing the debt, in proportion to
their contributions to the cost of waste treatment.
—State water pollution control agencies must inspect new Fed-
erally-aided facilities for efficiency and economy at least once each
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3647
year for the first three years of operation and periodically thereafter
under standards set by FWQA.
—Design of any new Federally-aided treatment plant would have
to be approved in advance as being economical, efficient, and ef-
fective under FWQA requirements.
In addition to these changes in the substantive elements of the con-
struction grants program, FWQA has established a study project to
review grant procedures and to determine any changes necessary to
streamline those procedures to assure efficient and effective grant ad-
ministration. A task force including management consultants and
FWQA personnel is in the process of preparing a report concerning
needed improvements.
All together, the proposed legislation, the amended regulations and
the continued efforts to streamline administrative procedures will re-
sult in an overall improvement of the construction grants program
and will provide financial assistance to the Nation's communities,
which will be fully adequate to meet the needs of the years ahead.
[p. 37]
Assistance to Industry
With the acceleration of the Nation's clean-up program, industries
are faced with major pollution control expenditures. Although there
are no specific Federal assistance programs directly geared to provide
funds for industrial waste treatment equivalent to the Federal as-
sistance for construction of municipal treatment plants, there are
several Federal incentive programs which provide encouragement
and support for industries to meet their treatment requirements.
FWQA is encouraging and supporting the treatment of industrial
wastes in municipal treatment plants; municipal systems designed to
receive industrial wastes are eligible for support under the con-
struction grants program.
The practice of treating industrial wastes in municipal treatment
plants has a number of advantages. First and foremost, it provides
for more effective pollution control by encouraging regionalization of
the waste treatment system. A community that maintains effective
treatment of its sanitary wastes can still be a polluter if industrial
waste discharges from its borders are uncontrolled. Joint treatment
is effective too because it locates responsibility for operation and
maintenance within a single authority. In addition, complementary
characteristics of sewage and industrial wastes, if properly controlled,
can often permit more effective waste reduction within the plant.
Joint treatment facilities offer significant advantages to both com-
munities and industries in terms of lower treatment costs through
economies of scale. The inclusion of industrial wastes in municipal
-------
3648 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
plants also offers special incentives to industry, as these joint facilities
can be built with the help of a Federal construction grant. Industry
thus can pay for its waste treatment through operating costs, rather
than having to make the extensive capital investment involved in the
construction of treatment facilities.
Joint treatment of municipal and industrial wastes is increasing, as
is the development of technology to handle a variety of complex
wastes. For example, metropolitan Seattle has adopted an ambitious
program to provide treatment for all liquid wastes that occur within
its extended area of jurisdiction. More and more communities are
designing their facilities to accommodate a larger portion of the total
waste load that is produced by factories, with the cost of construction
shared by the community, industry and the Federal, and sometimes
State, government.
At the same time, as part of the overall reform of construction
grants requirements, FWQA is moving to eliminate certain abuses of
joint treatment and to ensure that municipal and industrial systems
will operate effectively. First, through pretreatment requirements in
the new regulations, the discharge of wastes which would make mu-
nicipal systems nonoperative or reduce their effectiveness will be
controlled. Second, industries are required to reimburse the mu-
nicipality concerned for the added cost which treatment of their
wastes imposes; this will ensure that the municipality will have
sufficient revenues to provide adequate waste treatment on a con-
tinuing basis.
FWQA also provides assistance to industry through its research
and development program. Since 1966, the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, as amended, has authorized grant support of industrial
demonstration projects aimed at improving waste management. Al-
though not intended as a direct form of assistance in defraying the
costs of constructing waste treatment plants, projects supported by
these grants have demonstrated methods of treating industrial wastes
more economically and of recovering certain portions of wastes for
reuse. Other grants have been used to show the feasibility of joint
treatment of municipal and industrial wastes.
Tax write-offs provide further assistance to industry. Although a
number of States have enacted tax measures designed to encourage
industrial waste treatment facilities, until recently
[p. 38]
there was no comparable measure in effect at the Federal level. In
enacting the Tax Reform Act of 1969, however, the Congress included
provisions for accelerated amortization of air and water pollution
control facilities for Federal income tax purposes.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3649
Under this law, a taxpayer is entitled to a deduction with respect
to the amortization of certified air and water pollution control facil-
ities. A certified pollution control facility is defined as a new, iden-
tifiable treatment facility which is used, in connection with a plant or
other property in operation before January 1, 1969, to abate or control
water or atmospheric pollution or contamination by removing, alter-
ing, disposing, or storing of pollutants, contaminants, wastes, or heat
... and which, in the case of water pollution control facilities, is cer-
tified by the State water pollution control agency as meeting State
water pollution control requirements and by the Secretary of the
Interior as meeting Federal water pollution control requirements.
The Secretary may not certify facilities to the extent that the cost of
such a facility will be recovered over its useful life.
Regulations are being prepared by the Department of the Interior
and the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare in consultation
with the Treasury Department to implement the Federal certifying
responsibilities.
Assistance to State and Interstate Programs
State agencies are the first line of defense in the national water
pollution control effort. Many States have been able to strengthen
their pollution control programs to meet the growing problems thrust
on them in the past several years. Others, however, have not had
adequate laws and resources to do the job. Federal program grants
are available to State and interstate agencies to help them bear the
costs of needed preventive and control measures. These grants are
intended as realistic incentives for the State and interstate agencies
to expand and improve their programs.
The program started in 1957 with an annual authorization of $2
million. The annual figure has grown to $10 million today, and the
State and interstate agency expenditures have increased more than
six times during that same timeframe. Many of the States have
substantially strengthened their programs. Funds have been used
for employing needed technical personnel, for purchasing special
laboratory and field equipment, for waste treatment plant inspection
programs, for more aggressive enforcement of State laws, for ex-
panded monitoring and surveillance programs, and for training.
Many States improved their programs in the last year by passing
new laws or strengthening existing authorities to provide for a more
vigorous clean-up effort. For example, in Oregon, water pollution
control became part of a newly created Department of Environmental
Quality. A feature of this new Department is its ability to conduct
an extremely successful enforcement program. With this new au-
thority, Oregon is carrying on an aggressive abatement program for
-------
3650 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
both industrial and municipal waste sources.
Also in the Pacific Northwest, the State of Washington's 1969 Leg-
islature inserted a requirement that after July, 1974, no applicant
can receive a Federal construction grant unless the project conforms
to a comprehensive drainage basin plan for water pollution control.
This requirement places a burden of urgency upon the State to give
planning a very high priority. This change is consistent in purpose
with the Secretary's recent proposals for a more systematic and com-
prehensive administration of the construction grants program.
In Connecticut, legislation enacted during FY 1969 furthered the
Connecticut Water Resources Commission's leadership role in several
ways:
1. Bonding authorization for pollution control facilities, including
pre-financing of Federal grants, was raised from $100 million to $250
million.
2. To promote regionalization, the Commission is authorized to is-
sue orders to polluters jointly after a determination that such pollu-
tion can best be abated by the action of two or more adjacent
municipalities.
3. New statutes were enacted, covering all phases of oil pollution
removal and prevention and containing a provision for strict liability
on spillage.
Two other highlights of State accomplishments in recent years are
found in New York and Pennsylvania. New York provides reim-
bursement to municipalities for 1/3 of the cost of operation and main-
tenance of sewage treatment plants when they are operated
according to established standards. Every municipal sewage treat-
ment plant is comprehensively inspected at least once each year by a
sanitary engineer and a chemist to evaluate operation and mainte-
nance and laboratory work and to determine quality parameters for
raw waste, treated effluent and receiving waters. In Pennsylvania,
the Department of Health regulates and administers annual payments
to municipalities of 2% of construction costs toward opera-
[p. 39]
tion of sewage treatment facilities. About 685 applications are now
being processed for payment of approximately $8.1 million in 1969.
Payment is toward the operation, maintenance, repairs, replacements,
and other expenses relating to sewage treatment plants.
New York and Pennsylvania are two of the States that have been
fortunate enough to have the resources to support their water pollu-
tion control programs. In many States this is not the case, and it is
perhaps here that the impact of Federal program grants is most
significant.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3651
As a basis for receiving a Federal program grant, each State and
eligible interstate agency must prepare a plan describing how the
grant will be used to strengthen its pollution control program. To
assure the most effective utilization of these funds, the Federal Water
Quality Administration (FWQA) has developed guidelines which
set forth the essential elements of an effective State and interstate
program plan.
In addition to constituting a request for grant assistance, the Pro-
gram Plan serves several other important purposes.
1. It provides the State's annual report on progress in implement-
ing water quality standards.
2. It provides information essential to FWQA in developing as-
sistance and coordinating other grants to the State or interstate
agency under other provisions of the Federal Act.
3. It identifies and discusses problems and issues in extending or
improving the State or interstate agency's water pollution control
program and helps in evaluation and program planning.
The FWQA has worked closely with the States in this planning
process. Several Regional Offices have, in response to State requests,
initiated joint review and evaluation studies of individual State pro-
grams. Last year such studies were completed in South Carolina
and Idaho; additional studies are planned this year. Through these
studies the Federal and State agencies work together in identifying
problems and needs and in proposing action programs. As a result
of the South Carolina study, the program was presented to the Gov-
ernor and the legislature for consideration by the General Assembly.
It is anticipated that these recommendations will result in additional
staff and resources for South Carolina's program and in general pro-
vide an improved program for the State.
In order to provide maximum assistance to the States, a new ap-
proach for analyzing and evaluating the effectiveness of State pro-
gram performance is being tested in cooperation with State water
pollution control agencies. The proposed new system will be oriented
to accommodate inclusion of such detailed information as necessary
to permit an objective evaluation of program performance. The State
program appraisal will form the basis for evaluating basic State pro-
gram resources, such as State policy, legislative authority, rules and
regulations, organization, staffing, and budget; performance in terms
of resource utilization; and accomplishments, such as stream miles
or estuarine acres brought into compliance with water quality
standards.
In addition, the system will identify State program needs and
translate those needs into priorities and objectives in pollution con-
trol. The appraisal procedure will define and identify the minimum
-------
3652 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
criteria governing Federal financial assistance to State programs. It
will provide for a continuous review of State programs in order to
enhance coordination of State and Federal activities and will permit
relating accomplishments to established goals. Finally, the appraisal
system will provide for a meaningful comparison of State program
performance among States.
The FWQA is also supporting a number of special activities which
demonstrate the utilization of advanced techniques by State and inter-
state agencies. For example, the agency is giving funds to Pennsyl-
vania to help develop a Statewide pollution information system
designed to handle all water quality data. This system will provide a
modern management tool to help the State systematically administer
its program. A modern, automatic monitoring system of water qual-
ity parameters and the telecommunicating of information to a central
processing location have been expanded by the Ohio River Valley
Water Sanitation Commission using FWQA support.
The accelerated drive for clean water stemming from strengthened
Federal regulatory and financing programs will also demand an in-
creased capability on the part of the water pollution control agencies
of many States. For this reason, proposed legislation to provide ad-
ditional grants to State and interstate agencies is an important element
of the Administration's program. The new legislation would increase
the authorization each year on a sliding scale from $12.5 million for
fiscal year 1971 up to $30 million for fiscal year 1975. Emphasis
would be placed on development, performance, and substantial im-
provements to State programs. The basic grant program contained
in the present Act would remain, but three new categories of grants
would be authorized: program develop-
[P. 40]
ment grants, program improvement grants, and special project grants.
The new amendments are essential to increase support to States
and interstate agencies to enable them to carry out and accelerate
programs of water quality standards enforcement and implementa-
tion, the implementation of the Department's proposed construction
grant requirements, and the accelerated construction of needed
treatment facilities.
From both a long and short-range viewpoint, the State program
grants are a good investment. National pollution control efforts can
move ahead only as fast as the State and interstate agencies respond
with imaginative and thorough programs to meet their responsibilities.
Technical Assistance
Technical assistance is another key program available to help States
solve pollution problems. A great many of the water pollution prob-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3653
lems facing the Nation call for technical study to determine the
sources or causes of the pollution and to find the most appropriate
abatement measures to remedy the situation. Often, the problem is
complex and requires extensive field and laboratory study. Acid
mine drainage, coastal and estuarine pollution, ground-water contam-
ination, and pesticide and toxic chemical pollution are examples of
pollution problems for which the most effective and appropriate cor-
rective action is frequently unknown and for which specific technical
study is necessary before abatement action can be pursued.
Federal Water Quality Administration (FWQA) assists the State
and interstate water pollution control agencies in developing their
technical capabilities and provides financial assistance for this pur-
pose through the program grants previously described. These
agencies conduct a great many of the technical investigations re-
quired to carry out an effective water pollution control program, but
frequently they find it necessary to call for outside assistance to
handle problems which exceed their capabilities. To meet these needs
FWQA provides technical assistance of various kinds ranging from
technical advice and consultation to extensive, long-term field and
laboratory studies. Within the limits of available resources, this as-
sistance is provided on request, primarily to the State and interstate
water pollution control agencies, but also to other public agencies,
including other Federal agencies.
During 1969, FWQA responded to over 300 major requests for tech-
nical assistance and numerous requests for advice, information, re-
views and comments on technical problems. The following examples
will serve to illustrate the program:
During the last quarter of 1969, FWQA conducted intensive water
quality and waste source surveys on Perdido and Escambia Bays and
tributary river basins. The study on Perdido Bay was requested by
the State of Alabama to determine the cause of the declining fishery
and of the occurrence of unsightly brown foam in many parts of the
Bay. The work on Escambia Bay was made in response to a request
by the State of Florida to determine the cause of the dozen or more
fish kills that occurred in the Bay during the summer of 1969. Both
studies identified offending waste sources and the remedial measures
required. Upon completion of the two studies, the respective State
governors re-
[p. 41]
quested Federal enforcement action, and, in response, enforcement
conferences were held early this year. These resulted in specific
abatement recommendations and time schedules. The State of
Florida has begun implementing these recommendations through
-------
3654 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
the issuance of clean-up orders, and FWQA is continuing to provide
technical assistance and support for these efforts.
In other cases, States have applied the findings of FWQA technical
assistance directly under their own authorities. The water quality
study of Hillsborough Bay, Florida, which was completed in 1969, is a
good example. This study was addressed to a long-standing obnox-
ious odor problem resulting from the death and decay of marine
algae. Discharges of municipal wastes from the City of Tampa and
industrial wastes from several chemical and fertilizer plants were
shown to be adding sufficient nutrients to the Bay to cause the en-
hanced growth of marine algae. The cause of the massive amounts of
dead and decaying algae giving rise to the odor problem was thus
traced back to the waste discharges. Other aspects of water quality
degradation were also identified together with their causes. The
findings of the study were presented in a public hearing held by
Florida Air and Water Pollution Control Board in February of this
year. The abatement recommendations of the study report were
adopted, and the State agency has begun issuing implementation di-
rectives. The affected companies, the City of Tampa and the other
local agencies have initiated the planning of remedial facilities and
practices, thus demonstrating positive follow-through action based on
FWQA's technical assistance study.
Another recent example of technical assistance is a field investiga-
tion of the James River below Springfield, Missouri, completed last
year. This study was conducted in response to a request from the
State of Missouri and was aimed at determining the causes of and
corrective measures for the severe water pollution and frequent fish
kills occurring in the River below Springfield. Several waste sources
were identified as the cause of the problem, and abatement measures
to be taken by these sources were recommended. On the basis of
these findings, the State and the polluters have initiated remedial
actions, some of which have been completed, and significant improve-
ments in water quality have already been achieved.
To aid the State of Wyoming in assessing the pollutional impact of
a uranium mining operation on Little Medicine Bow River, FWQA
developed a radiological monitoring network and schedule for the
State and performed the radio-analysis on the samples collected by
the State during the summer of 1969. Radio-analysis assistance will
be given again in 1970. The State intends to use the data collected
to determine the need for waste treatment or control by the mining
operation. This exemplifies a type of assistance widely provided by
FWQA—the performance of complex analytical and bioassay tests,
such as those for pesticides, organic chemicals, heavy metals, various
toxicants and radionuclides.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3655
As these examples illustrate, most of FWQA's technical assistance
is devoted to investigating specific problems and finding the ap-
propriate available corrective measures. These studies are not di-
rected to research or development of new and improved technology;
however, in some cases these studies indicate that corrective measures
are not apparent. Thus fruitful topics for research are often identified
and these are referred to FWQA's research and development pro-
gram for follow-up.
To carry out its technical assistance activities, FWQA relies on the
basic staffs of engineering, scientific and technical personnel and
support laboratory facilities and equipment in each of its nine
Regions. Each Region is equipped to conduct intensive field studies
involving chemical, biological, microbiological, hydrologic and other
disciplines. The coastal Regions are equipped to undertake oceano-
graphic investigations in addition to other types, and the Great Lakes
Region has special capabilities for performing lake investigations.
Requests for technical assistance can be expected to continue to
rise in the future, despite the expanding capability of many State
pollution agencies. The problem areas of subsurface and ocean waste
disposal; pesticide and radiological pollution; animal feedlot, sedi-
ments, salinity and other aspects of agricultural pollution; and the
complex interacting problems of environmental quality protection
will require much greater attention than they have had to date. For
many individual States these problems do not occur frequently
enough to justify maintenance of special skills and equipment on a
permanent basis. However, they arise often enough across the coun-
try to warrant attention at the national level, and the experience
gained in solving pollution problems in one part of the country can
be useful in dealing with similar problems elsewhere. FWQA is
prepared to give continuing help to State, interstate, and local
agencies so they can carry out their remedial programs.
[p. 42]
PLANNING AND BASIC STUDIES
Just as any structure needs a good foundation, the nationwide ef-
fort to control pollution requires a variety of supporting programs to
provide a sound basis for action. These basic support programs help
to ensure that our action programs are soundly conceived and will
yield clean water results adequate to meet present and future needs.
Planning, data systems, and economic studies, all play a supporting
role in the battle for clean water.
Need for such basic underpinning is clearly illustrated in the prob-
lem of assuring adequate environmental protection in connection with
location of major electric power generating facilities. Strengthened
-------
3656 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
procedures authorized by the Water Quality Improvement Act of
1970 to ensure that Federally-licensed power plants will meet water
quality standards have been discussed. Although these procedures
only apply to one aspect of the environmental impact of power pro-
duction, they represent major progress.
So long as such review takes place relatively late in the process of
designing a plant, however, it cannot be fully effective. There is still
a major need—recognized both by the Federal government and by
enlightened sectors of the electric utility industry—to provide for con-
sideration of environmental factors in the early stages of site selection.
More effective means of planning must be found, which will provide
the public with full assurance of environmental protection, and which
will enable the utility industry to meet growing power needs without
confusion and serious last-minute delay.
The Federal Water Quality Administration (FWQA) and other
Federal agencies with an interest in the development or regulation of
electric power have been working with the Office of Science and
Technology on a comprehensive study and evaluation of power plant
siting. In December, 1968, a report, Considerations Affecting Steam
Power Plant Site Selection, was published. Since that time, the
above agencies have been giving attention to the appropriate roles
of the Federal, State and other public agencies in the regulation of
power plant site planning.
At the Regional level, FWQA is participating with the New Eng-
land River Basins Commission (NERBC) in developing criteria for
siting power plants for New England. The NERBC power/environ-
ment program got off to a positive start in late 1969 with an in-depth
look at the environmental impact of the proposed Seabrook nuclear
power plant site in New Hampshire. FWQA assisted in preparing the
water quality impact section of the study. The Agency is participat-
ing in a similar activity in the Columbia River Basin.
Environmental Planning
Although a major part, water pollution control is but one facet of
the overall program for preserving and enhancing our environment.
One of the most significant occurrences during the past year has been
the greatly increased awareness on the part of public officials and
citizens of the interrelationships among programs to clean up air and
water pollution, to manage solid wastes and conserve natural re-
sources, and to provide parks and increased recreational opportunities.
[p. 43]
To focus on major environmental issues that may involve actions
of a number of interrelated Federal, State and local agencies, Pres-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3657
ident Nixon established on May 29, 1969, a Council on Environmental
Quality comprised of Federal Cabinet officers and Citizens' Advisory
Committee. Subsequently, the Congress enacted legislation giving
comprehensive expression to these concerns—the National Environ-
mental Policy Act of 1969. This Act authorized a new Council on
Environmental Quality, whose members have been recently ap-
pointed, and the former Council has been redesignated the Cabinet
Committee on the Environment. The Environmental Quality Im-
provement Act of 1970, just recently enacted, further provides for the
establishment of an Office of Environmental Quality to serve as staff
to the Council.
To strengthen its capability in environmental planning and to pro-
vide a focus for coordination with the new Council, as well as with
other agencies, the FWQA is establishing an Office of Environmental
and Program Planning.
Environmental planning concepts, with the emphasis on long-range
consideration of the effects of certain waste disposal practices, and the
realization that site location practices are as vital as pollution control
facilities, are increasingly incorporated in the policies and activities
of a number of FWQA programs. Through effective participation in
environmental planning, FWQA can best come to grips with such
difficult pollution issues as thermal pollution control, including the
previously discussed need for better selection of sites for power gen-
eration facilities to protect environmental values; protection of
groundwaters and control of underground disposal methods; reducing
the impact on waters of salinity resulting from irrigation practices and
water development projects; location of oil refineries and future off-
shore loading facilities relating to the prevention and control of oil
pollution; and decreased use of phosphates in detergents.
Other needs that have been identified include development of cri-
teria for evaluating potential airport and highway sites; studying ways
in which FWQA could help improve Federal, State and local mech-
anisms for land-use planning, particularly in critical estuarine areas;
and ways in which marshlands could be protected from indiscrim-
inate filling and development.
Development of policies on waste handling and treatment to avoid
water pollution must be
[p. 44]
carried out with the realization that, ultimately, effective waste dis-
posal must involve integrated consideration of air and water pollution
control and solid waste management. Water pollution control policies
must avoid creating air pollution or solid waste problems and seek,
instead, ways of combining methods for maximum reduction of waste
-------
3658 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
loads. Further emphasis must be placed on effective waste manage-
ment through recycling, recovery and reuse of the by-products of
our technology.
Continued thought and effort must be placed on developing means
of making so-called "technology assessment"—identifying the pos-
sible environmental consequences of new technology before they be-
come widespread problems to be cured after the fact. A major
challenge is finding the means whereby we will not have to wait until
products, such as the phosphate-based detergents or hard pesticides,
become a cause for major concern before we turn our attention to
safeguards or substitute methods.
To improve the system for identifying potential or existing en-
vironmental problems, Secretary Hickel established an "Environ-
mental Early Warning System" in the Department, clarifying the
channels through which any member of the Department can high-
light situations that need attention from government. FWQA has
established coordinating mechanisms to work with this System and
thus far has participated in studies of a number of issues.
FWQA is actively cooperating with the Forest Service and Bureau
of Outdoor Recreation in evaluating a number of rivers for inclusion
in the National Wild and Scenic Rivers System. This System affords
a mechanism for protecting waters of unusually high quality or
scenic value from degradation. Some rivers have already been des-
ignated for inclusion in the System, and measures for protecting the
quality of these rivers will involve both FWQA and the State water
pollution control agencies, as well as the Federal agencies which have
been designated to administer these areas (Bureau of Land Manage-
ment, National Park Service, Forest Service).
During the past year, FWQA has participated actively in several
interagency planning efforts aimed at studying the impact of develop-
ment on several areas and seeking measures to mitigate the effects
of that development on the environment. One of the most significant
involved plans for large-scale development of petroleum resources on
the North Slope of Alaska. FWQA made significant input into es-
tablishment of guidelines on practices which the oil companies would
have to use in construction of facilities, in use of pipelines and other
means for transporting the oil, and in carrying out production, so that
the resource could be developed without severely damaging the en-
vironment, particularly the sensitive and complex tundra areas.
Other issues have involved industrial and housing development in
areas along the Eastern Coast. There is increasing realization that
the harmful effects of poorly located developments on the quality of
coastal waters; on sensitive aquatic resources, such as shellfish; and on
marshlands and beaches are too high a price to pay for short-term
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3659
economic gains in coastal areas, and that many of these effects could
be avoided by better consideration of alternative locations and
methods of waste handling. In one case, serious shortcomings with
the location of an oil refinery near the Chesapeake Bay were brought
to light in FWQA investigations, and the company subsequently
changed its development plans.
A case currently being studied involves the location of a chemical
complex on the South Carolina coast in an area of extremely high
natural and recreational value. A German chemical company, BASF,
purchased land near Hilton Head, South Carolina, to construct a large
petrochemical plant; this project has received nationwide attention
and has caused considerable concern to environmental agencies.
After reviewing the company's proposal and the conditions of the
area, Secretary Hickel wrote to BASF on March 24, 1970, to express
his concern that waste dicharges from such a plant or transportation
of materials might damage the high quality waters and the shell-
fishery which are now protected by Federal-State water quality
standards, and that dredging of any navigation channels would destroy
very valuable aquatic habitat. He stated that the Department would
oppose any action which would result in degradation of that water
quality and would oppose any proposal for channel dredging which
would cause environmental damage. Subsequently, on April 7, 1970,
BASF announced suspension of its plans pending further considera-
tion of necessary measures to avoid these damages.
These and other issues point strongly to the need for better ways
of assessing public values and of planning development in consonance
with protecting the environment.
The Big Cypress Swamp is another significant issue where FWQA
resources are being used in conjunction with those of other agencies
to protect an area faced with development. This swamp is a vital
source of water for the Ever-
[p. 45]
glades National Park, and both the Everglades and Big Cypress form
a unique and very valuable natural resource. Proposed construction
of a jetport in the swamp has been halted; however, the larger chal-
lenge of controlling development in South Florida and providing
needed facilities for a rapidly growing population and economy while
still protecting the Florida environment is just beginning to be faced
by a variety of Federal, State and local agencies. In a sense, South
Florida is an early and compelling example of conflicts on the use of
resources which we may face in many parts of the Nation before long.
The beautiful Florida environment has attracted the very forces that
endanger the survival of that environment, and that survival must
-------
3660 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
depend, it appears, on effective long-range planning and control of
development.
The above examples have concerned areas where development is
threatening a high quality environment. Some of the greatest chal-
lenges and potential rewards for water pollution control are also in
areas which have been degraded and where pollution clean-up may
bring great recreational and other opportunities. This is particularly
the case in increasing the opportunities for inner-city residents to
swim, fish, picnic and enjoy the outdoors in urban areas. For ex-
ample, FWQA assisted the National Park Service and Bureau of Out-
door Recreation in planning for the proposed Gateway National
Recreational Area near New York City. Full use and enjoyment
of this area will depend on effective pollution control.
Other proposals of this kind have been or will be increasingly ex-
plored. One FWQA research plan is to clean up pollution from
combined sewers discharging to the Anacostia River within Washing-
ton, D.C., and develop a large inner-city swimming and boating area.
Yet another approach—Project Cure, developed jointly by FWQA
and the Bureau of Outdoor Recreation—is being considered for ap-
plication in some areas, based on experience in Santee, California,
with total wastewater renovation and use of the treated wastewater
for recreation. One of the features of the Santee project is a series
of five lakes which have been created below the treatment plant and
filled with essentially pure effluent. Because of the high quality of
treated wastewaters, these lakes are used for a host of recreational
activities such as boating, fishing, and picnicking.
Basin and Regional Planning
Basin and regional planning is an essential element in pollution
control. As President Nixon has pointed out: "A river cannot be
polluted on its left bank and clean on its right. In a given waterway,
abating some of the pollution is often little better than doing nothing
at all, and money spent on such partial efforts is
[p. 46]
largely wasted." Clean water results will only be achieved by sys-
tematically controlling pollution in entire river basins. Further, we
must be sure that these results are lasting ones, that our actions today
are adequate to meet the needs of the future, and that we make pro-
vision for future growth of waste loads, population, industry, and
water use. Otherwise, these future developments may more than
offset any gains that our action programs in the years immediately
ahead will achieve.
For these reasons, planning is an important element of the FWQA
program. FWQA is participating in basin and regional planning in
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3661
cooperation with State and other Federal agencies and is financially
supporting regional planning activities at the State and local level.
The long-term impact of river basin development will be a major
factor in keeping the Nation's rivers clean and useful. Changes in
stream flows cause temperature increases and other water quality
effects. Sustained stream flows are essential for maintaining water
quality even where a high degree of treatment is practiced. Irrigation
diversion and other developments often deplete these needed flows
and return them in lesser quantity and quality.
A major part of the planning responsibility is to ensure that water
pollution control and water quality are adequately considered in all
Federal water resource development activities, such as planning or
construction of reservoirs or irrigation projects. FWQA is partici-
pating in broad-scale water resource planning in association with
other Federal and State water resources agencies in basin planning
studies coordinated by the Water Resources Council. These inter-
agency studies result in comprehensive water and land related
resource plans, laying out a future framework for river basin develop-
ment. These plans are presented by the Water Resources Council to
the President and the Congress to be considered in authorizing Fed-
eral water resource development projects. FWQA participates in
these framework studies to ensure that water pollution control is an
integral part of the development and management of the Nation's
waters.
Last year, for example, a study of the White River in Arkansas and
Missouri completed under this program provided for an intensive
program of development and management of water and land resources
while emphasizing the continued protection and enhancement of the
environment. The plan provides for the clean-up of polluted sections
of the River and the maintenance of other sections at their present
high quality. In addition to specific treatment facilities at present and
anticipated waste sources, the plan provides for the inclusion of
storage in specific Federal reservoirs to regulate stream flows to assist
in the maintenance of water quality.
In addition to participation in these framework studies, FWQA is
involved in a number of more specific water resource planning activi-
ties. In the Central Valley of California, where agricultural develop-
ment threatens water quality in San Francisco Bay and the San
Joaquin Delta, FWQA is participating with the Corps of Engineers
and the Bureau of Reclamation in long-range planning studies to
determine the overall regional impact of continued water develop-
ment on the environment and the necessary measures to ensure
protection of future quality over the long run. In the Delaware
[p. 47]
-------
3662 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
River Basin, FWQA has participated with the Delaware River Basin
Commission in the development of a plan and program for the use
and upgrading of the highly polluted Delaware estuary. This pro-
gram has involved the development and utilization of pioneering
systems analysis techniques to model the Delaware and show the
most effective and systematic approach to achieving improved water
quality.
In addition to its basinwide resources planning activities, FWQA
reviews proposed water resource projects on an individual basis to
ensure that these projects do not have an adverse effect on water
quality and that, when it can contribute to the economical control
of pollution, storage for water quality is included in Federal reser-
voirs. As an example, plans for a Federally-assisted project on the
Alcovy River, Georgia, were changed considerably after it was shown
that the removal of vegetation along the stream channel would ad-
versely affect water quality and be detrimental to fish and wildlife.
Revisions made will result in maintaining much of the stream channel
and its present cover, greatly reducing the amount of dredging and
providing additional safeguards to minimize the removal of vegeta-
tion along the river bank.
FWQA also makes recommendations to Federal construction agen-
cies for inclusion of storage for water quality management in proposed
projects. Higher sustained streamflows are sometimes needed, in
addition to adequate treatment of wastes and other controls, to meet
water quality standards.
River basin planning can yield important results in developing
solutions to complex pollution problems that must be dealt with along
the lines of entire basins and that cannot be solved without a co-
ordinated effort by all parties involved. The information collected
and the plans developed under this program have served as a spring-
board for a number of State clean-up programs. For example, a mine
drainage study conducted as part of a comprehensive water pollution
planning effort in the Pennsylvania portion of the Susquehanna River
Basin has resulted in a substantial State program to abate mine drain-
age pollution. The study resulted in the locating of over 1,000 mine
drainage discharges causing gross water quality degradation in 1,200
miles of stream. It was found that restoration of streams polluted
with mine drainage could be accomplished through a program which
included mine sealing, neutralization, land treatment, and water
regulation and diversion. Selective implementation of action called
for by the water quality management study is underway with the aid
of a conservation bond issue adopted by the Pennsylvania legislature
which provides $150,000,000 for the reclamation of areas disturbed
by mining and the abatement of mine drainage pollution.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3663
In addition to direct planning activities, FWQA is supporting
regional planning through grants to planning agencies at the State and
local level. These grants are designed to stimulate the kind of State
and local planning which is important to the implementation and
improvement of water quality standards along river basin lines. This
program was initiated in 1967, and 12 studies are underway with total
Federal costs of over $2.5 million. The Federal share is limited to
50 percent of the costs of developing the plan. These grants afford
agencies at the State and local level a unique opportunity to partici-
pate in solving their pollution problems on a coordinated, long-range
basis.
Under this program, the Santa Anna Watershed Planning Agency
in California is developing a pollution control plan which will provide
for eventual reuse of the reclaimed water. In this watershed, avail-
able surface water flows are almost completely developed and large
quantities of Colorado River water are being imported. In areas
near the coast, because of heavy pumping, groundwaters are threat-
ened by salt water intrusion. The plan being developed will consider
both surface and groundwaters and provides for pollution control
and wastewater reclamation and reuse as an integral part of the
water supply program in the watershed.
The Miami Conservancy District in Ohio is also conducting a
planning study partially funded by an FWQA planning grant. The
study is utilizing an extremely sophisticated systems analysis tech-
nique to relate water quality, flood control, and other factors involved
in water quality management decisions in the basin. The plan will
consider the whole range of effects on water quality of such alterna-
tives as in-stream aeration, use of abundant groundwater supplies
to augment streamflow, and the regionalization of waste treatment
facilities.
FWQA is also assisting a planning effort in Puerto Rico. The
Commonwealth planning is aimed at developing programs to encour-
age industrial growth while maintaining and enhancing water quality.
The Island's development has centered around the recreation industry
for which water quality is obviously vital. The plan will provide for
the protection of these recreational amenities in the face of future
industrial development.
[p. 48]
The emphasis in the President's environmental message and Secre-
tary Hickel's recently published regulations on conformance of waste
treatment plant construction with basin programs and regional plan-
ning to ensure speedy and coordinated pollution abatement will re-
quire increased emphasis on the part of FWQA on implementing
-------
3664 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
effective short-term planning and appraisals. The new regulations
will require that, within a river basin, each treatment facility be part
of a basinwide plan for pollution abatement and within a given city,
each treatment plant be included in a metropolitan or regional waste
treatment plan. The Agency's planners are developing a procedure
to evaluate grant applications to help the States meet the require-
ments of the regulations and to better integrate planning and facilities
construction, so that in the near future planning can be used to effi-
ciently and effectively guide waste treatment installation. This will
place additional and immediate demands on FWQA's planning
capacity.
Towards this end, FWQA is increasing the emphasis upon quick
appraisals of the status of comprehensive and coordinated programs in
each river basin and preparing to make quick evaluations of the
adequacy of and need for planning within metropolitan areas. In the
latter regard, FWQA is working with the Department of Housing and
Urban Development. Last year FWQA's Northeast Regional office,
working with Housing and Urban Development, developed a joint
set of comprehensive guidelines for regional sewerage systems. These
guidelines can be used in preparing plans for metropolitan sewerage
systems and are sanctioned by both Housing and Urban Development
and the FWQA.
To assist in basin and regional planning, FWQA has developed a
highly sophisticated systems analysis capability. Models have been
developed to show the relationships between various stream flows,
waste loads, water uses, and other factors that influence water quality.
These models can handle up to fifteen sections of stream, fifteen
reservoirs, ten discharge points and natural pollutants. Although
relatively new, these models have been used successfully on the
Sabine River, Texas; Skunk River, Iowa; Scioto River, Ohio; James
River, Virginia; Broud River, South Carolina, and many others. For
a given river basin, the models can provide information to determine
how management practices influence water quality and what changes
in management could be expected to provide a certain water quality
and the cost of that quality.
Models have also been developed for the Delaware Estuary, and
these are now being applied to the Potomac River-Chesapeake Bay
system. These models help to relate tidal effects to water pollution.
The Delaware model has provided a tool for determining the needed
releases from upstream to protect Philadelphia's water intake from
excessive salinity intrusion during periods of drought.
Another systems technique was applied in the San Joaquin Master
Drain study in California. Here the model required inclusion of
economic information, as well as the waste sources. The model pro-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3665
vided the basis of measuring the impact of planned water resource
development on an inland agricultural area, as well as on San Fran-
cisco Bay. Of major concern was the impact of pesticides and nu-
trients resulting from agricultural drainage. Through the use of this
model, alternative locations of the drain outfall with consequent
economic costs were determined, as were the costs of alternative
treatment measures.
As planning for basinwide pollution abatement and regional waste
treatment moves ahead in the future, the systems capability devel-
oped by FWQA will become increasingly important in the Nation's
battle to achieve clean water.
Estuarine and Coastal Studies
For well over three and a half centuries, the estuarine and coastal
waters of our Nation were thought of primarily as conveniences—
places for the conduct of international commerce, locations for the
residential and industrial development that resulted in our great
cities, sites for mineral exploitation, and dumps for all kinds of wastes.
Although this thinking is still commonplace, times are changing, and
more and more people are becoming increasingly aware of the neces-
sity to change our behavior with regard to these waters. We can no
longer afford to treat our estuaries and the coastal waters over our
Continental Shelf as endless sewers.
Because estuarine and Continental Shelf waters are so closely inter-
related, pollution in one zone will affect the other. For example, hard
pesticides, which are carried down rivers from the agricultural up-
lands and tend to accumulate in waters near the mouths of rivers,
eventually spread into the surrounding oceanic •waters. Conversely,
an oil spill caused by the breakup of a tanker at sea will ultimately
spread to the coastline, there to foul beaches and kill wildlife and
waterfowl. Modification of the shoreline by dredging and filling will
have an effect on life far out to sea. Ocean outfalls, while disposing
of wastes at a distance from shore, are fre-
[p. 49]
quently responsible for water conditions which make a shoreline
area unfit for swimming or shellfishing. Sludge and solid wastes
that are barged out to sea for dumping can return to shore on the
currents and tides. Continental Shelf mineral development—ever
increasing in importance—has the potential for major environmental
damage.
The condition of the New York Bight area is a startling illustration
of disposal wastes into coastal and ocean waters. The dumping of
wastes near the New Jersey coast has recently come to the attention
-------
3666 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
of a shocked public. Sewage sludge, treated and untreated, and
various industrial wastes are a primary concern. A dumping area of
approximately 14 square miles has been damaged and its bottom
fauna severely impoverished. Even several species normally tolerant
to pollution are absent from this area and evidence of pollution has
been found on nearby beaches.
Not far away in the New York Harbor area, an outbreak of fish
diseases has occurred over a three-year period. Large numbers of
fish have neither tails nor fins, and there is some evidence that pollu-
tion may be at least partially responsible. Pish kills in the area are
numerous, and there is growing concern about the contamination of
shellfish—a threat both to the harvesting industry and to public
health.
Federal Water Quality Administration (FWQA) over the last sev-
eral years has strengthened its various programs, giving increasing
emphasis to estuarine and coastal pollution. Increased enforcement
activity along the
[p. 50]
coast—such as the recent conferences in Biscayne and Mobile Bays—
has already been highlighted. Added emphasis is being given to oil
clean-up activities. FWQA is now accelerating its work with the
Coast Guard to prepare plans for a more speedy reaction to oil pollu-
tion incidents. Research and training programs that have a relation-
ship to estuarine and coastal problems have also been increased.
More emphasis is being given to studying pollution effects and eco-
logical damages in the estuaries. More research chemists and marine
biologists are being trained in FWQA-funded programs.
Because of the long-term cumulative impacts on the estuaries and
coastal environment and because of the many interrelated actions
affecting these waters—dredging and filling of marshes and construc-
tion of navigation facilities—considerable emphasis must be given
to the overall planning and management of this valuable environment.
Planning to protect our estuaries and coastal waters is a clear-cut
example of the pressing need for environmental planning described
previously.
As a result of increased public awareness of estuarine and coastal
pollution problems, the Congress directed that a survey of estuarine
pollution be made. FWQA, in November, 1969, submitted the report
of this first comprehensive, definitive study of estuarine pollution to
the Congress. With this report, the National Estuarine Pollution
Study, proposed legislation for a comprehensive national management
program for the estuaries and coastal zones, based on the report's
recommendations, was submitted to the Congress.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3667
The Study sought to obtain detailed information on the biophysical,
socio-economic, and institutional aspects of estuaries from a variety
of sources. First, a series of 30 public meetings was held in the
various coastal States to obtain information and opinion from the
local citizens who are most directly affected by estuarine pollution.
Second, information was collected from the coastal States concerning
their laws and programs affecting estuarine uses and management.
Third, studies were contracted to provide needed background on
certain aspects of specific estuaries or on a restricted aspect of the
Nation's estuarine areas. These include studies on ecology, economic
and social values, sedimentation, and law. Reports on some of these
studies are being published as the Estuarine Pollution Study Series.
The first of these is entitled, Legal Perspectives of Chesapeake Bay.
Others to be published will include A Socioeconomic Analysis of
Narrangansett Bay, and The Social and Economic Values of Estuaries.
A major part of the study was the development of the National
Estuarine Inventory, an automated information system. This massive
compilation of coastal zone information is the basis for the develop-
ment of a continuing national Coastal Zone Management Information
System to satisfy the information requirements of States, Federal
agencies, and other entities for factual data on which to make
decisions.
The recommendations which were presented in the Study were
predicated upon the concept that the States should have the major
responsibility for managing the estuarine and coastal zones and that
the Federal role should be to provide coordination of the State pro-
grams within the national plan, to provide technical and financial
assistance to the States and their subdivisions and to arbitrate
conflicts between States.
Legislation to promote these aims is presently being considered by
the Congress. The bill, if enacted, will provide for Federal grant
support of State management programs. The prime objective will be
the management of the estuarine zones in such a way as to permit
maximum beneficial use with minimum damage.
Closely related to the National Estuarine Pollution Study (NEPS),
the Fish and Wildlife Service has recently completed the National
Estuary Study (NES). This study involved an intensive look at fish,
wildlife, and recreational values of the coastal zone for the purpose
of recommending a scheme for protection of extremely valuable areas.
FWQA assisted in this latter study by making the data bank of NEPS
available to the Fish and Wildlife Service as its base source of infor-
mation. The NES is a complementary effort to FWQA's broader
study of man's activities in the coastal zone and how pollution from
these activities causes environmental damage to coastal resources.
-------
3668 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
FWQA has also sponsored a major study, conducted by the National
Academy of Science and the National Academy of Engineering, to
determine the state of knowledge on ocean waste disposal. The find-
ings of the study are being used to help formulate approaches to the
problem. A report—Wastes Management Concepts for the Coastal
Zone—will be published later this year.
FWQA will continue to conduct and fund studies to increase our
knowledge of the estuaries, their resources, the damages done to them
by pollution, and their relationships to the surrounding land. In
addition, direct technical and financial assistance will be provided
to States for management and improvement of their estuaries.
[p. 51]
Data and Information
Effective implementation and enforcement of water quality stand-
ards, development of regional and basin plans, administration of
grants, and preparation of reports assessing costs of pollution control
and abatement progress require up-to-date, accurate fact-finding and
readily available data.
Several types of technical information are required to meet the
various needs: specific data covering the status and effectiveness of
municipal, industrial and Federal waste treatment and control facili-
ties; current economic data associated with construction activities;
and water quality data related to the water quality standards.
Collection, evaluation, and dissemination of data on chemical, phys-
ical, and biological water quality and other information relating to
water pollution discharges is an essential element of the Federal
Water Quality Administration (FWQA) program. Through effective
coordination with other Federal and State agencies, such data and
information are utilized at the national, regional and basin levels.
Collection and timely evaluation of reliable information on water
quality is vital to the effective management of a dynamic national
pollution control program. This has always been a requirement, but
the need has intensified with the establishment and implementation
of water quality standards and the resulting necessity of identifying
priorities in waste treatment facility construction. Regardless of the
number of treatment facilities constructed or the number of basin
management plans completed, in the final analysis, program effective-
ness can only be measured in terms of actual water quality improve-
ments. And, this can be achieved only through adequate monitoring
of water quality.
Thus, FWQA has been reorienting and expanding its data collection"
activities to identify compliance and noncompliance with water qual-
ity standards; improvements in water quality resulting from pollution
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3669
abatement measures, such as waste treatment facility construction;
and emerging water quality problems that should be corrected before
crises arise.
Key steps required in the development of an adequate nationwide
water quality surveillance system involve planning the system in
close coordination with State and other Federal water data collection
agencies and implementing the system by utilizing existing programs
of FWQA, State pollution control agencies and other Federal water
data collection agencies, principally the U.S. Geological Survey. Dur-
ing the past year, plans for integrated State-Federal water quality
monitoring systems have been developed for six of the nine FWQA
Regions and are now being implemented.
If a surveillance system is to be fully effective, thorough attention
must be given to its design as well as its operation. In recognition of
this, a systems analysis approach to the design of optimum water
quality monitoring programs is under development. This approach
will per-
[p. 52]
mit the monitoring subsystems, making up the nationwide integrated
State-Federal surveillance system, to be designed and updated as
necessary on a uniform basis in such a way as to ensure maximum
program effectiveness.
To ensure the reliability of data collected by the coordinated pro-
gram, an analytical quality control program, which is now under
development, will become an integral part of the overall system. All
cooperating agencies will be expected to participate in such a pro-
gram. Thus far, a manual entitled, Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes,
1969, has been published and distributed to all participating labora-
tories. Similar manuals covering standard biological and bacterio-
logical laboratory procedures are under development. Quality control
checks and procedures that will be employed on a routine basis in
participating laboratories are also being developed.
A portion of the coordinated network is already in operation. It
presently utilizes approximately 400 FWQA-funded and operated
stations, 260 FWQA-funded and U.S. Geological Survey-operated
stations, 200 stations jointly funded by the State and Federal agencies
and 500 State-funded and operated stations. Ultimately, the network
will encompass State and Federal stations numbering in the thou-
sands. Network data will be supplemented by the findings of the
many short-term intensive field studies of specific water quality
problems that are conducted by FWQA.
In addition to water quality data, detailed knowledge of waste
-------
3670 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
sources, treatment and discharges is also necessary to fulfill the needs
of FWQA programs. Municipal sewage and industrial wastes are the
two largest sources of pollutants. During 1969, the Pollution Surveil-
lance Branch completed the processing and analysis of data on munic-
ipal waste facilities collected in a cooperative Federal-State inventory.
This effort, the first since 1962, reflects conditions as of January 1,
1968. Because the need for timely and accurate data in this area is
so critical, procedures have been developed for bringing the 1968 in-
ventory up to date and for continually updating it to keep it current.
In addition, data from the implementation plan portion of the water
quality standards have been correlated to and integrated with the
inventory to show schedules for providing additional municipal waste
disposal facilities.
As for industrial wastes, plans have been made to initiate an inven-
tory of industrial manufacturing and processing plants. Initially, this
will be an in-house effort; eventually, it will be expanded to a joint
FWQA-State cooperative project. Here, again, data from the imple-
mentation plans of the water quality standards will be valuable in
planning and conducting the inventory. Once established, this
inventory, like that of municipal facilities, will be continuously
updated.
With the recent publication by the Secretary of new construction
grants regulations, data on waste sources and discharges have become
even more important. These regulations require the States to show
that a proposed municipal facility is a part of, and in conformity with,
a basin, regional or metropolitan pollution control plan before the
project is declared eligible for a construction grant. In addition,
regulations prescribe as a further condition for eligibility the provi-
sion of data on all waste discharges in the immediate proximity of a
proposed plant which may affect its design and operation. For these
reasons, additional data will be required on wastes characteristics and
strengths.
In addition to the municipal and industrial inventories, a new
collection effort has been planned and initiated to provide data on
thermal discharges from electric power generating plants. By agree-
ment with the Federal Power Commission, data for this inventory
will be collected by that agency through a questionnaire on environ-
mental control information.
To achieve the objectives of the coordinated data and information
program, it is essential that the data collected be evaluated in an expe-
ditious manner and made readily available to all users. Only in this
way can appropriate follow-up actions be taken. FWQA's existing
computerized data storage and retrieval system (STORET), coupled
with additional computer programs, will meet these requirements.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3671
All data collected by FWQA will be placed in STORET to be available
for analysis and use.
Using the most up-to-date computer technology, the data collected
are entered in a central computer on a daily and weekly basis by
remote terminals in all FWQA Regions. Similarly, questions can be
asked of the central computer from the remote terminal and receive
timely responses. This application is now being expanded to include
several Federal and State agencies.
Evaluation and dissemination of the large amounts of data and
information collected is assisted by the STORET system. Currently,
this system is being expanded to include water quality standards and
uses so that many questions can be asked, such as what facilities have
inadequate treatment, what type of treatment is provided or waste
contributed at any source, how
[p. 53]
many miles of streams are polluted, how many miles have been im-
proved, what is the number of violations of water quality standards
and where, and what uses have been affected and over how many
miles. It will be several years before all of these questions can be
accurately asked and answered for each individual basin, or region,
or for the Nation as a whole. However, those questions must be
answered to provide an effective overview of our rate of progress,
and FWQA is beginning to build towards that capability now.
A quantitative analysis of changing trends in water quality and of
the progress in abating pollution nationwide will be essential in
guiding the course of the national water pollution control effort. It
will also contribute to the assessment of national environmental con-
ditions and trends required under the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 by indicating whether we are gaining ground or falling
behind in pollution control.
Economic Studies
For the first time, the Nation stands on the threshold of a major
effort to reverse the heritage of neglect and to face the problems of a
deteriorating environment. Massive investments will be required for
environmental improvement and the expenditure of these funds will
have major impacts on the economy. Formulation of sound public
policy will require an increasing understanding of these costs, their
distribution throughout the economy, and their economic impact, both
on individual communities and firms and on the economy as a whole.
For three years the Federal Water Quality Administration
(FWQA) has been conducting a series of economic studies aimed at
gaining a deeper understanding of these factors and at assisting the
-------
3672 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Executive Branch and the Congress in formulating national policies
and legislation. These studies have included: analysis of the national
costs of treating municipal and industrial wastes and the impact of
these costs on State and local governments; studies of sewer user
charges as a means of financing local expenditures; studies of the
need for economic incentives for industrial waste control; and studies
to determine the extent of animal feedlot pollution and the costs of
abating it. Collectively, these studies represent the most intensive
and comprehensive effort ever made to understand the costs of water
pollution control.
The findings of FWQA's economic studies are submitted to Con-
gress annually. The first report projected municipal investment
requirements for the period 1969 to 1973 and assessed the impact of
funding required to meet municipal waste treatment needs on the
municipal governments and bond markets. The second report exam-
ined the influences that determine investment levels and concluded
that the critical factors were to be found in the dynamics of the
situation—in the interaction of investment with time-conditioned
growth, replacement, and demand for higher plant efficiencies. It was
also found that regional cost differences, transmission costs, and the
influence waste loadings were extremely important factors in analyz-
ing the economics of water pollution control.
During the past year, these cost studies have concentrated on in-
formation needed to reshape the funding of the construction grants
program to make it fully adequate to meet the Nation's needs. The
Secretary of the Interior's legislative proposal for a Federal, State,
and local investment of $10 billion over the next four years reflects
the findings of these studies. The 1970 report, The Economics of
Clean Water, defines the rate of investment needed to close the gap
for municipal waste treatment in the years immediately ahead. This
report provides the most thorough estimates ever developed for the
Nation's municipal sewage treatment needs and costs. Detailed
studies of the pollutional impact
[p. 54]
of the inorganic chemicals industry and concentrated animal popu-
lations were also completed as separate sub-reports.
Various aspects of the socio-economic problems of water pollution
are presented in the latest report. These include discussions and
conclusions about investment trends and needs, Federal cost sharing,
priority systems for grant funds, public treatment of industrial wastes,
and regional waste handling systems. In addition, several estimates
discussed in earlier reports were reviewed in view of the latest
available information. These included investment estimates for col-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3673
lecting sewers, separation of storm sewers, industrial waste treat-
ment and cooling facilities, and sediment control and acid mine
drainage reduction.
The Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 requires that a com-
plete investigation and study of all methods of financing the cost of
water pollution control, other than methods authorized by existing
law, be made and the results submitted to Congress by December 31,
1970. To meet this requirement, FWQA has structured a study
which will deal with pollution sources of all types including, but not
limited to, municipal, industrial, agricultural, land and acid mine
drainage, oil and accidental spills and debris. Questions of responsi-
bility, ability to pay and equity will be addressed in allocating poten-
tial funding requirements among the private sector and the various
levels of government. The study will examine the feasibility of a wide
range of financing possibilities in the light of the analysis outlined
above. Potential methods will include: conventional financing; loan
arrangements; user, influent and effluent charges; taxation; insurance-
type arrangements and others. In addition, potentials for reducing
financing requirements by means of structural policy alternatives will
be assessed.
Although considerable insight into and understanding of the eco-
nomics of water pollution control has been gained through past
studies, there are still many unanswered questions concerning the
costs of pollution abatement and the impact that efforts to cleanse
our environment will have on the national economy. The challenge
is clear, however: if the Nation's water resources are to be enjoyed
without the burden of increasing water pollution, now is the time to
institute prudent action to clean up our streams. The people and
their government have accepted the challenge. FWQA reflects their
determination and will give continuing emphasis to devising policies
and programs which will create a cleaner environment in the most
expeditious and economical manner.
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, AND DEMONSTRATION PROGRAMS
The search for new answers is an important part of the Federal
pollution control mission. Federal Water Quality Administration
(FWQA) is conducting a research, development, and demonstration
program which is a coordinated, problem-solving program dedicated
to exploratory research of new and imaginative pollution control
methods; the engineering development of these methods to solve the
practical problems associated with bringing an "idea" out of the
laboratory and into the real world; and the demonstration of this new
technology to go that extra, normally forgotten step of showing the
-------
3674 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
decision-makers that new answers, new technology have really ar-
rived and are available for use.
The program being conducted is highly mission-oriented. Each
project responds to an identified need for an answer. These needs
are specified and assigned priority primarily through imput from the
non-research elements of FWQA. In short, responsiveness to the
research needs of the Agency is a prime responsibility of this program.
There are really only two major categories of "answers" being
sought. First, how are the water quality goals defined? Second,
how are these goals reached with maximum effectiveness and at least
cost? With regard to quality goals, research is required on the effects
of pollution. What are they? How is the degree of effect related to
the amount of pollution? And, how can the level and type of effect
be predicted in advance? With this type of information we can im-
prove and extend the water quality standards now being established
and implemented for the Nation's waters. Simply knowing what
water quality is required is not enough, of course. In those cases
where we already have some ability to control pollution, new and
improved means for control are needed in order to reduce the cost of
pollution abatement to the very minimum possible. Beyond this, the
need to develop and demonstrate means for controlling that pollution,
which today is literally uncontrollable or untreatable at any cost, is
assuming a high priority. Corollary to and, in fact, inseparable from
this objective is the simultaneous upgrading of wastewater quality
such that used water may be reused again—a concept of major sig-
nificance in extending our relatively dwindling fresh water supply.
[p. 55]
To assist in managing this program and in setting priorities and
resource allocations, a problem-oriented project categorization is
utilized. Eight major categories exist: the first five relate to single-
source-related pollution problems from municipal, industrial, agricul-
tural, mining, and from other sources. The last three categories
relate to problems of a multiple-source nature, where the answers will
be applicable broadly to many different sources of pollution. In the
single-source category FWQA is working on such pollution problems
as combined sewer discharges, pulp and paper wastes, agricultural
runoff, acid mine drainage and oil pollution. In the multi-source cate-
gories FWQA has programs on eutrophication, thermal pollution,
removal of nutrients and refractory organics, and effects of pesticides
and other pollutants on fish and aquatic life. The mechanisms utilized
in carrying out this program are three-fold:
(1) In-house research and development at eight laboratory loca-
tions and a number of associated field sites.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3675
(2) Contract projects, primarily with industry.
(3) Grant projects with universities, industries, States and
municipalities.
Contract projects are funded entirely with Federal dollars and are
utilized primarily for laboratory investigations and pilot-scale re-
search projects which involve a high degree of uncertainty and which
are primarily aimed at determination of feasibility and development
of design requirements. These are not the types of projects that
municipalities and private corporations will readily sponsor with
matching funds because of the large degree of risk involved. The
work performed under contracts often requires highly-specialized
personnel, equipment and facilities, having a high value over a short
period of time, but limited value in the long term.
Grant projects require some level of matching support from the
grantee. Grants are employed in meeting objectives where it is
desirable to utilize State, municipal, academic or industrial talents
and expertise in carrying out research, development and, often, dem-
onstration efforts on a cost-sharing basis to the mutual benefit of both
the Federal government and the grantee.
FWQA's in-house activity forms the real foundation of an effective
overall program. In-house researchers must establish objectives and
plans of attack; they must review and evaluate the many, many
project proposals received by this Agency; and they must be the ones
to integrate the results of these efforts into a usable and applicable
form. To do this most effectively, in-house staff must be involved in
the work for which they are responsible.
FWQA's program is predicated on the assignment of specific areas
of technical responsibility to each of eight laboratories. In this way,
each laboratory functions as a national focal point for research on a
given set of problems, and duplication of facilities, staff and effort
among the various laboratories is avoided. Research laboratories are
located in Cincinnati, Ohio; Athens, Georgia; Ada, Oklahoma; Cor-
vallis, Oregon; College, Alaska; Duluth, Minnesota; Narragansett,
Rhode Island; and Edison, New Jersey. These laboratories are also
responsible for operating a number of field sites to carrying out pilot
plant work and necessary
[p. 56]
field studies. FWQA operates such field sites at Pomona and Fire-
baugh, California; Ely, Minnesota; Lebanon and Newtown, Ohio;
Norton, West Virginia; and Washington, D.C.
In addition to the in-house efforts carried on at agency laboratories,
FWQA is also involved in a number of joint efforts with the Bureau
of Reclamation, Atomic Energy Commission, Office of Saline Water,
-------
3676 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Office of Water Resources Research, Public Health Service, and
Tennessee Valley Authority.
Notable in the research, development and demonstration program
are the special authorities to support both pilot-scale and full-scale
demonstration projects on storm and combined sewer discharges,
advanced waste treatment and wastewater renovation, and industrial
waste treatment and control. These projects are particularly
significant in permitting FWQA to carry on research and development
findings into the demonstration phase, thereby literally showing what
can be accomplished through the use of new technology and at what
cost.
In order to effectively manage this program, communicate the re-
sults to users, and respond to special Administration, Congressional
and public requests, a computerized management information system
was instituted. As a result, up-to-date information is readily avail-
able on nearly 2,000 projects, on future needs, on priorities, on work
plans, and on necessary planning, programming and budgeting data
to effectively direct future efforts.
A supplementary project reports system has been established for
the acquisition, filing, indexing and, most importantly, dissemination
of research results. The final results in the form of reports and
publications are indexed into a technical library, distributed, and
made known to a wide range of users both inside and outside FWQA.
In Executive Order 11514, President Nixon directed that the results
of Federal research programs be made available for widespread use.
FWQA will continue to emphasize this important aspect of the
research, development and demonstration program.
The problems of water pollution, as previously described in the
"Water Pollution and the Environment" chapter of this report, are so
complex, so varied and so numerous that they have multiplied faster
than solutions. To ensure that our technology is improving and to
make existing control methods more effective in the overall effort to
make America's waters clean and useable, FWQA has intensified its
research programs. The Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970,
enacted and signed into law recently, added emphasis to research
programs in oil pollution, acid mine drainage, vessel pollution, and
pollution in the Great Lakes, and FWQA is moving to meet these
responsibilities.
The eight categories of research being conducted in FWQA's pro-
gram are directed at solving the problems already discussed. These
categories, the problems at which they are focused, and some of the
recent accomplishments of the research are discussed below.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3677
Municipal Pollution Control Technology
Municipal wastes, as indicated earlier, are a major source of pollu-
tion in the United States. Although a technology to treat these wastes
has already been developed and is being applied, FWQA is continuing
the search for better and more efficient ways of treating municipal
wastes in conventional systems. For example, significant improve-
ment and upgrading of treatment in overloaded plants has been
demonstrated using synthetic organic polyelectrolytes.
Another major concern is research on methods to control the more
complex municipal problems, such as combined sewer and urban
sediment control. Combined sewers carry both sanitary sewage and
urban runoff. During storms, the volumes in these sewers are often too
much for local treatment plants and wastes are discharged untreated.
Yet control of these discharges has largely been neglected until re-
cent years because the only method of solving
[p. 57]
the problem was separation of combined sewers, a costly and disrup-
tive process. Through the efforts of FWQA's research program, a
new technology for control of sewer discharges is being developed.
One of the alternatives being demonstrated is storage of excessive
flows until they can be released to the treatment plants. Full-scale
storage facilities under construction in Boston, Massachusetts;
Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Dallas, Texas; and Shelbyville, Illinois, have
determined the design criteria necessary for such facilities. Cost-
effectiveness evaluation will allow other communities to economically
design similar combined sewer pollution abatement facilities.
Another major alternative is treatment. Existing municipal and
industrial treatment processes cannot be utilized for combined sewer
overflow treatment because of the intermittent, widely fluctuating
high-flow rates and the dynamic quality changes of combined sewer
overflows. Screening and dissolved air flotation are two treatment
methods which are amenable to the above constraints.
The demonstration of a novel, rotating collar, vibratory base
screening treatment unit for combined sewer overflows was carried
out in Portland, Oregon, in 1969. The unit provided primary treat-
ment to normally bypassed sewage at a cost only slightly higher than
the equivalent conventional treatment. The space utilization of the
screens is one-tenth that of settling tanks.
Through these studies, a combination of control methods is being
developed which will be applicable to the different combined and
storm-water sewer problems throughout the country. Although
determinations of the cost of controlling these discharges by the new
methods being demonstrated are very preliminary, the total job may
-------
3678 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
cost only about one-third of the earlier estimates based on separation.
Erosion and sediment from urban areas cloud rivers and impair
their use. These waters generally are not confined to sewers, so the
above methods cannot be applied to solve the problem. The National
Association of Counties Research Foundation, in conjunction with
FWQA, has therefore developed a Community Action Guide for
Erosion and Sediment Control. This document will aid local officials
in developing erosion and sediment control ordinances to control
pollution from urban development construction projects. The control
programs would be based on the establishment of control ordinances
and on the use of present technology, such as vegetation control,
mulching, sediment traps and other common erosion control practices.
Adoption of effective control programs based on this guide will
substantially reduce the silt load to urban waters.
Of great importance is FWQA's research on joint treatment of
municipal and industrial wastes. As has been pointed out, the
benefits of joint treatment are considerable. Industry, while paying
operating costs, is spared the burden of the capital costs; and
regionalization of waste treatment and economies of scale help com-
munities achieve more effective pollution control.
The benefits of joint treatment are recognized. Certain industrial
wastes, however, have proved difficult to treat effectively in combina-
tion with domestic wastes. In this regard, our demonstration of the
feasibility of joint treatment of domestic sewage and semi-chemical
pulping waste from a paper mill in 1969 at Erie, Pennsylvania, was an
encouraging breakthrough.
In addition, a joint municipal-industrial wastewater treatment
engineering study of the Onondaga Lake watershed was also com-
pleted last year. Approximately 140 industries in the watershed
participated in the study by assisting in characterizing their wastes,
and it was recommended that a joint treatment system be im-
plemented by Onondaga County during the remaining phases of the
project.
The successful demonstration of joint treatment of industrial wastes
in municipal treatment systems holds great promise for the future.
FWQA is encouraging such joint treatment and numerous communi-
ties with significant industry within their jurisdiction are considering
such treatment.
[p. 58]
Industrial Pollution Control Technology
Industrial waste discharges, together with municipal wastes, com-
prise the two largest sources of pollution. Industrial wastes are
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3679
complex—a result of the wide variety of products manufactured—
and are discharged in enormous volumes. In order to effectively
control pollution, industries must often face the heavy financial burden
of installing waste treatment facilities. Current waste treatment
methods, while sometimes adequate, are expensive and in many
instances offer little hope of providing the type and degree of treat-
ment which will be required in the future. Because of the competitive
economic aspects, industries are continually searching for new means
of reducing their wastes at lower costs.
An effective attack on industrial pollution—wastes from metal,
chemical, petroleum, coal, paper and other product manufacture—
requires a cooperative industry-government effort to conceive,
develop, demonstrate, and install treatment processes, process modi-
fications, and water conservation programs. Already, research funded
by FWQA covers some industrial problems from almost all major
sources of industrial pollution.
A grant project with the American Oil Company at its Mandan,
North Dakota, refinery has demonstrated the feasibility of using a
commercially available fluidized-bed incinerator for the disposition
of refinery sludges. The project was initiated in May, 1968, and in-
quiries to date by others in the industry show a keen interest in the
utilization of this technique to resolve their sludge disposal problems.
Another oil company has indicated its desire to apply the method at
its own refinery. The American Oil Company is presently considering
the possible use of a much larger fluidized-bed unit at the Whiting,
Indiana, refinery in the near future.
The color of pulp and paper mill wastes has long been an aesthetic
nuisance, difficult to control. Interstate Paper Corporation at
Riceboro, Georgia, has demonstrated the lime coagulation process for
the removal of color from kraft pulping effluents. This installation is
the first full-scale operation of its type and has obtained color reduc-
tions greater than 90 percent throughout the experimental program.
The results of this grant have been utilized by both paper companies
and State agencies in selection of effluent treatment processes to meet
receiving water quality standards.
FWQA and the State of Vermont have jointly entered into a
demonstration project which provides an excellent illustration of the
side benefits of some industrial pollution control. A project initiated
in late 1968 on the conversion of cottage cheese whey into an edible
grade material has produced, on a pilot-scale, a high grade food
powder for human consumption. A plant for the full-scale demon-
stration of the developed process has been completed and will be
operable in 1970. The plant could ultimately have the capacity to
produce 20 million pounds per year of dried edible whey. Cheese
-------
3680 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
whey produced in this country represents pollution equivalent to that
produced by a population of 16 million people.
[p. 59]
With the expansion of both the population and the industrial sector
and the corresponding needs for water, conservation of water is be-
coming increasingly important. Much of today's research is directed
toward finding easy-to-treat and re-use water effluents. A project
with the Johns-Manville Products Corporation in Defiance, Ohio,
demonstrates that a wastewater treatment system using diatomite
filtration can effectively treat a waste stream, containing glass fibers,
caustic and phenols, to a quality suitable for process reuse. The
treatment facilities are operating on a 72,000 gallon-per-day basis with
effective pollution control a demonstrated success.
Agricultural Pollution Control Technology
The most difficult sources of wastes to control are those that do not
come out of pipes. Agricultural pollution is a good example of such
"diffuse" wastes. Major forms of pollution associated with agricul-
ture have already been identified as problems in earlier sections of the
report. They include: nutrients; pesticides; salts and other materials
in irrigation return flows; animal feedlot wastes; and silt and other
solids from logging operations. Most of these wastes are not col-
lectible and, therefore, cannot be treated in a conventional fashion.
New and imaginative solutions are being sought for these problems.
Projects with Cornell University, South Carolina State, and South
Dakota University are aimed at studying the addition of nutrients to
streams from cropping practices as related to their respective
geoagranomic areas. This is a precursor to the development of criteria
for new management concepts that include considerations for waste
management.
The quality of irrigation return flows is a major problem in the arid
sections of the country, primarily because of nutrients, silt, and salts.
Treatment of such flows has long been considered impractical. A
development program at Firebaugh, California, has developed two
techniques for removing nitrates from irrigation return waters. These
will be demonstrated on an engineering scale to obtain more defini-
tive operating and cost data that will be applicable to a complete
treatment system for the entire San Luis Drain.
Work is also under way with the Bureau of Reclamation to demon-
strate a technique of forecasting the effects of irrigation practices on
the quality of underground aquifers and surface streams before lands
are irrigated. This method will enable us to make better provision for
avoiding water quality damage in planning and developing new
irrigation projects.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3681
The tremendous load of animal wastes discharged from a rapidly
growing number of animal feedlots is an area of particular concern in
FWQA's research program. Projects have been initiated to demon-
strate available techniques for treating runoff from animal feeding
operations and for preventing its discharge to receiving waters. These
include activated sludge, oxidation ditch, anaerobic-aerobic lagooning
and management changes to control and collect the runoff. Coopera-
tive projects with the Department of Agriculture have also been
initiated to determine the quantity and pathways of nitrate addition
to surface streams and underground water formations from excreta
in beef feeding operations.
Mining Pollution Control Technology
Mine drainage, as noted in the discussions in "Water Pollution and
the Environment" is a major pollution problem, particularly in the
Appalachian Region. Past attempts to prevent or reduce such drain-
age have generally failed, and FWQA is emphasizing research to
demonstrate the technology necessary to control such wastes.
A new method of preventing the formation of acid mine drainage
has been proven through laboratory studies which have shown that
an inert gas atmosphere which displaces oxygen will prevent acid
mine drainage formation. This method is presently being field
tested in an
[p. 60]
abandoned underground mine and is also being studied for use in
operating underground mines. When applied to an operating mine
this technique might also reduce the fire and explosion hazards to
gassy mines.
Two methods of hydraulically sealing underground mines have also
been demonstrated in the field. The first method used quick setting
cementation materials placed near the mine portal; it was, however,
relatively expensive. The second method used lime and limestone to
eventually form an impermeable seal, also placed near the mine
portal. This method was less expensive than the former.
The passage of the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 adds
new emphasis to FWQA's program to demonstrate abatement
techniques which will contribute substantially to effective and
practical methods of acid or other mine water pollution control. As
a result of the mandate of the new Act, the Agency will be stepping
up its research in this area.
Control of Pollution from Other Sources
In addition to the pollutants already identified, there are a number
of very significant waste sources for which improved technology is
-------
3682 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
needed. These include recreational and commercial vessels, con-
struction projects and impoundments, salt water intrusion, dredging,
and oil pollution. Although some work has been done on all these
problems, emphasis was given to vessel and oil pollution. The Water
Quality Improvement Act of 1970 directs further attention to these
sources of waste.
Increasing amounts of wastes are discharged from the ever-growing
number of recreational and commercial vessels which use both inland
and coastal waters. Suitable on-board equipment for properly treating
or holding vessel wastes must be developed. In response to a request
for proposals to demonstrate the feasibility of various control and/or
treatment concepts for wastes generated on vessels, four projects were
undertaken in 1969. One system demonstrated holding tanks on
pleasure craft and an underwater storage bag for temporary storage
of the pleasure craft waste prior to disposal by trucking to a sewage
treatment plant. Other concepts are for holding tanks on large
vessels and treatment utilizing an electro-chemical flocculating
concept.
Closely related to vessel waste control, oil pollution has become
a problem of major proportions and of increasing concern. The effects
of drilling and tanker accidents, which release large quantities of
crude oil into our coastal waters, have been described in detail else-
where in the report. But the technology to avoid and to clean up
such "spills" is woefully inadequate.
Primary program emphasis last year was placed on development
of devices and techniques to restore oil contaminated beaches and to
harvest oil from the water surface without the aid of additives.
Fabrication of a unique centrifugal oil-water separator having high
capacity and efficiency and relatively low power requirements was
recently completed. An oil harvesting device for oil clean-up is also
being designed and fabricated. The two units will be combined and
tested at sea early in 1970.
Demonstration projects in progress under the direction of the Maine
Port Authority in Portland, Maine, and the City of Buffalo, New
York, developed valuable practical information on the effectiveness
of a variety of oil containment and clean-up devices and techniques
which were evaluated under actual conditions. In-sewer instrumenta-
tion for oil detection and oil traps was developed, demonstrated and
evaluated. Modification of the inverted siphon is indicated to be an
effective oil trap.
In order to use any of the above methods of treatment, the oil must
be contained in the local area of the discharge or spill. A system of
booms is generally used for containment, but the present systems
have not been effective. Model studies were therefore initiated to
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3683
develop criteria for effective design of booms for harbors, rivers and
estuaries.
An increasing amount of attention is being given to methods of
preventing oil pollution from tankers. For example, the purpose of
one project started in 1969 was to determine the
[p. 61]
feasibility of transporting oil in the form of a highly viscous emulsion,
created by using ultrasonic techniques and certain additives. The
thicker substance of the oil would prevent cargo loss in event of
accidents. The same principle is being applied in the development
of chemicals to rapidly gel oil within a tanker compartment after
leaks are developed.
A joint American Petroleum Institute-FWQA Conference on Pre-
vention and Control of Oil Spills was held in December, 1969. The
meeting attracted over 1,200 registrants and 42 equipment exhibitors.
Information developed in the course of industry and government pro-
grams in this country and the United Kingdom was exchanged, and
reports were made on experience with the clean-up of recent large
spills. The Conference summary pointed out some advances in oil
pollution control technology but strongly emphasized the need for
much greater effort in this area.
Water Quality Control Technology
This part of the research program includes all research, develop-
ment and demonstration directed toward: the prevention and control
of accelerated eutrophication and thermal pollution; the control of
pollution by means other than waste treatment (e.g. industrial manu-
facturing process change to eliminate a waste); the socio-economic,
legal and institutional aspects of pollution; the assessment and control
of pollution in extremely cold climates; and the identification, source
and fate of pollutants in surface, ground and coastal waters.
The accelerated aging (eutrophication) of our lakes, brought on by
the increased discharge of nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) from
municipal and industrial wastes and land runoff, has become a
problem of major proportions. Technology has rapidly developed to
effectively and economically control phosphorous discharges from
municipal treatment plants to alleviate a portion of the problem and
hopefully retard the aging process. Efforts are being made toward the
replacement of the phosphates in laundry detergents with environ-
mentally less harmful materials to eliminate this major source of
nutrients. Many and varied approaches are being considered and
new ideas sought to combat this extremely complex problem.
Another problem facing us results from the increased demand for
-------
3684 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
electrical energy and the attendant requirement to dissipate waste
heat to the aquatic environment. Significant effort is being expended
to determine the actual temperature requirements of our surface
waters and
[p. 62]
aquatic life and to discover means of preventing harmful effects of
heat.
Development of water quality control technology will become of
major and increasing importance as the pollution control payoff from
waste treatment becomes increasingly marginal. This involves
techniques other than conventional treatment systems, such as in-
dustrial process change or management of water resources to minimize
the effect of waste discharges. These techniques are applicable in
concert with or after high levels of waste treatment are provided.
Cold climate research has also proven to be of significant benefit.
Many problems which have been solved elsewhere have required re-
evaluation and investigation in Alaska because of the extremes of
arctic climate. Efforts are focused on studying pollution problems
specifically in regard to the arctic environment, such as determining
the impact on Alaskan streams of sewage and other wastes resulting
from a rapidly expanding population and industrial growth. An
extended aeration system to stabilize wastewater has proven effective
in arctic climates, and the use of physical-chemical techniques to
provide reusable water for North Slope development camps offers
promise.
The Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 contains a special
provision for demonstration of methods to provide central community
facilities for safe water and pollution control in Alaskan villages.
Today only eight percent of the native homes in Alaska have adequate
sanitation facilities. FWQA's research and development staff will be
working with the State of Alaska and the Department of Health,
Education and Welfare to implement this provision of the new Act
and to provide safe water and waste treatment for Alaskan natives,
using both conventional and innovative methods.
Waste Treatment and Ultimate Disposal Technology
Waste treatment and ultimate disposal technology focuses on the
development and demonstration of new processes and process modi-
fications to control pollution from any source.
There are actually two corollary objectives to be attained through
improved waste treatment technology. The obvious one is the
alleviation of the Nation's increasing water pollution problems through
removal of pollutants from waste effluents; the other is the renovation
of wastewaters for deliberate reuse as industrial, agricultural, recrea-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3685
tional, or, in some cases, even municipal supplies. These two objec-
tives cannot really be separated, for as our ability to cleanse
wastewaters increases, the resulting product water approaches closer
and closer to, and may even exceed, the quality of a water supply.
This concept, perhaps startling to the average citizen, will nonetheless
play a larger and larger role in water resource management, espe-
cially in water-short areas.
The need for and the degree of advanced waste treatment will vary
with the individual local needs for control of pollution and/or in-
creased water supplies. To meet the spectrum of needs, almost 100
different processes and process variations for treatment and disposal
of waterborne wastes have been considered. Some 85 of these
processes are under active study at this time at almost 150 different
locations throughout the United States. These studies are aimed at
determining the efficacy and the cost of the various unit processes
which may make up the advanced waste treatment systems of the
future.
The fruits of this program have become apparent with the emer-
gence of several advanced waste treatment systems into the demon-
stration plant phase. The methods being developed range across the
spectrum of physical, chemical and biological techniques. They range
from the "ordinary," such as filtration and gravity settling, through
the "novel," such as biological denitrification, to the "exotic," such as
reverse osmosis or ultrafiltration.
The government's investment in this effort has paid off handsomely.
First generation process technology, capable of achieving greatly
improved pollution control of municipal wastes, has already been
brought to the stage of full-scale demonstration and is now available
for use under many conditions.
An excellent example of the application of this technology was
announced March 24, 1970, by Secretary Hickel and Mayor Walter
E. Washington of Washington, D.C. The new process to be installed
at the District of Columbia Blue Plains wastewater treatment plant
will substantially reduce the pollution of the Potomac and is ap-
plicable to rivers and lakes throughout the Nation.
The new technique is the result of a series of research projects
conducted jointly by FWQA and the District at the Blue Plains plant.
Pilot plants have been testing the new system for two years. The
process couples advanced biological techniques with a new physical-
chemical treatment. The precipitation phase of the treatment process
employs a greater use of chemicals than current processes, and pure
oxygen, instead of air, is used in the biological phase of the treatment.
The new process appears capable of re-
[p. 63]
-------
3686 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
moving nearly 100 percent of the biological impurities, 96 percent
of the phosphates and 85 percent of the nitrogen in wastewater.
The results of this program have provided the necessary technology
to reduce the pollution from municipal sources to essentially zero.
The present cost is within economic feasibility, but further efforts are
needed to optimize both processes and economics. This breakthrough
will mean the development of effective, safe, and economical waste-
water systems, which, in effect, will amount to the same thing as
creating a new water supply.
Water Quality Requirements Research
This program provides information on the effect of pollution needed
to provide an improved scientific basis for determining the water
quality necessary for municipal, industrial, agricultural, and recrea-
tional uses and for the propagation of fish and other aquatic life. This
information is essential to the establishment and refinement of the
Nation's water quality standards. Because of the tremendous num-
ber of new chemical compounds being synthesized and finding their
way into our environment each year, intensive research investigations
must be conducted to develop a predictive capability that will allow
us to predict the potential pollutional impact of these compounds in
advance.
Far too little is known about the effects of pollution. The drastic
effects, such as the massive fish kill, can be easily recognized, but
quite often the true cause of such events cannot be defined even with
extensive investigation. To look ahead and to predict the occurrence
of such events is, unfortunately, well beyond our current capability
for any but the simplest stream systems under the least complicated
set of environmental conditions and pollution loads. There is also
the challenge of detecting, understanding and preventing the more
subtle, long-term effects of pollution, which could, even now, be
robbing us of valuable water resources. Such effects, as yet un-
known, may be just as severe as the sudden fish kill, the unpalatable
water supply or the condemned bathing beach. Because these prob-
lems are difficult to solve and the starting baseline inadequate, a
rapidly accelerated program has been initiated.
Extensive, background data has been acquired and new test
methods have been developed to better and more rapidly define the
requirements for many uses. For example, a comprehensive research
effort to develop sound information upon which to base temperature
standards is underway. A temporary field site at a power plant has
been established. A standard testing section to determine safe con-
centration of industrial waste in a natural waterway also continues
to show promise. Our research on water quality requirements will
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3687
continue its accelerated effort to provide the information necessary
for the establishment of scientifically sound water quality bases.
Although there are monumental problems still facing the research
program, the Agency and the Nation, there is much that is already
known; there are problems that have economical solutions. In the
future, considerable effort will be focused on putting the results of the
research, development and demonstration program in the hands of
those charged with implementing water pollution control in our
Nation.
THE HUMAN ELEMENT
In the final analysis, success or failure of the national pollution
control effort will depend primarily upon the human element.
It will depend upon an informed public, which can express its voice
intelligently and effectively in decisions affecting the quality of its
environment. The President's March 7 Executive Order, issued in
furtherance of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, placed
great emphasis upon the need of the American people to know. He
directed all Federal agencies to develop procedures for keeping the
public fully informed on the environmental impact of Federal plans
and programs and for enabling them to express their voice through
public hearings on these issues.
Our success will also depend upon training and motivating a skilled
work force to undertake the complex and technically demanding
tasks of pollution control. People of many diverse skills and back-
grounds will be needed to man the waste treatment plants, the labora-
tories, the offices of State and Federal regulatory agencies, industries,
universities and local governments.
For the long run, the course of pollution control will be dependent
most of all upon the attitudes and activities of the Nation's young
people. As a group they have perceived—perhaps better than anyone
else—that the quality of their lives in future years will depend on
what we do about the environment today.
For all these reasons, FWQA is placing heavy emphasis upon the
human element in
[p. 64]
pollution control—through informing the American public, through
working with youth and through training and manpower develop-
ment.
Informing the American Public
FWQA's public information program is founded on the firm convic-
tion that our agency has a major responsibility to meet the American
public's need and right to know.
-------
3688 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Public information involves much more than mere voicing of official
policy. It involves providing the public with full information on
efforts to clean up the Nation's waterways, even if such disclosures
may sometimes be controversial. This outlook recognizes that public
information is often in opposition to public relations, and that its
function is to serve the public first. As Commissioner Dominick
recently told a group of FWQA information officers, they "are going
to have to serve as the innovators, as the creative force, as the non-
bureaucratic force, as the force in the Agency which gives us stimula-
tion, new blood, new life, new challenges, new headaches—which
gives us all of the things that a Federal bureaucracy could do
without."
FWQA has received recognition for its information efforts. Senate
Minority Leader Hugh Scott said in the Congressional Record of
February 9,1970: "President Nixon, in his State of the Union message,
termed environment 'the great question of the 1970's.' It has become
a matter of survival. Yet, despite some encouraging signs, too many
Americans are still unaware of, or refuse to face up to, the danger.
Clearly, there is an informational challenge as well.
'With this in mind, I was particularly gratified to learn that the
Washington Chapter of the Public Relations Society of America has,
for the second consecutive year, presented its Toth Award for profes-
sional excellence to FWQA's Public Information Office. With imagi-
nation, inspiration, and ingenuity, they have been alerting America
to the multiplying dangers of pollution. Their message is crucial,
and they richly deserve this recognition."
The message is being given to the American public by mail, by
telephone, and in many other ways. Telephone requests from the
news media, students, parents, service and fraternal organizations,
and the general public have come from approximately 250 a week
last year to nearly 600 a week at present. Correspondence requiring
replies has risen from 4,000 a month last year to an average of 5,000 a
month so far. Over the past 30 months, the Public Information Office
has distributed over 2 million brochures, leaflets, and folders dealing
with such subjects as water quality standards, estuaries, heat pollu-
tion, acid mine drainage, a primer on waste water treatment, fish
kills, what citizens can do about water pollution, vessel pollution,
and manpower and training needs. FWQA exhibits and posters have
been used by the United States Post Office, the Water Pollution
Control Federation, the Izaak Walton League of America, the Audu-
bon Society, the National Rivers and Harbors Congress, the Boy
Scouts of America and numerous State fairs and schools.
FWQA's efforts to inform the public have shown particularly
gratifying results in television and radio campaigns. Eight film spots
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3689
have been distributed to television networks and stations coast-to-
coast. These spots were produced on what Variety Magazine de-
scribed as a "shoestring" budget and were good enough to "make
Madison Avenue shiver and shake." The Variety writeup continued:
"The chiller is that the FWPCA (sic) division of the USD of I
(United States Department of the Interior) did it on a production
budget totaling $31,000, without an ad agency—and with a producer
who had never turned out a blurb before." The International Broad-
casting Awards and the American Television Commercial Awards—
the advertising world's version of the Academy Awards—cited the
"Clean Water" television spots as outstanding in the Public Service
Category. Twenty-five radio "Clean Water" spot announcements
were produced by FWQA's public information program. Some were
interviews with prominent and average citizens, fishermen, conserva-
tionists and resort owners who had suffered as a result of water
pollution. Another radio series provided a recording of New Orleans
jazz by the Chicago Footwarmers, in which variations of popular
songs were adapted to the theme of water pollution control.
The television and radio campaign has produced results. Mail
addressed to "Clean Water, Washington, D.C.", solicited from viewers
and listeners has shown a sharp rise. These letters are answered
with literature which gives the correspondent an appreciation of the
problem and of means to rectify it through community action.
Of course there is a temptation, in the midst of the ecological furor,
to be overzealous. As a prominent columnist observed, "The environ-
ment issue lends itself to grandstanding." It is a situation in which
the fear words and the bright blue words come too easily. The public
must not only be alerted to hazards, but also apprised of progress—
progress being made in research, in clean-up agreements reached
with industry, and in successful new approaches to the
[p. 65]
task at hand. Of the some 200 FWQA press releases issued since
Secretary Hickel took office, many have dealt with new approaches for
turning wastes into usable products, for using sludge as a fertilizer
for crops, for new methods for controlling pollution from combined
storm sewers—as well as with the oil disasters, the dying lakes, and
the dangers posed by new contaminants.
The Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 also points to the
importance of adequately recognizing progress in pollution control.
The Act authorized a program of official recognition by the Federal
government to industrial organizations and local authorities which
have demonstrated outstanding technological or innovative achieve-
ments in their pollution abatement programs.
-------
3690 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Looking to the future, the public information program of FWQA
has produced a film entitled, The Gifts, which will be distributed to
citizens groups and television. The movie on water pollution and
its impact on the chain of life is narrated by Lome Green, with
original music by Skitch Henderson, and again sounds the theme
that we must act—now.
In the publications field, a new booklet aimed at grade school
children is being planned. The booklet may use drawings done by
children because of their fresh charm and appeal.
Working with Youth
The quality of the environment is fast becoming the consuming
issue on our campuses. At least 500 colleges and 1,500 high schools
are expected to conduct environmental teach-ins on April 22, 1970.
FWQA has been invited to participate in many of these events.
Over 100 staff members are expected to serve as speakers and panel
members, and a large volume of literature and other materials is being
made available to individual campus sponsoring organizations.
As an agency whose mission is environmental protection and
preservation, FWQA since 1969 has been deeply involved with
students seeking to participate more effectively in the quest for
environmental quality improvement.
SCOPE (Student Council on Pollution and the Environment) was
created to serve as a two-way communication link between students
and government on the issue of environmental quality. For the
students it is an opportunity to obtain and apply governmental ex-
pertise and information to the process of formulating solutions to
environmental problems and a chance to discuss their proposals for
solving environmental problems with top-level government decision-
makers. For the government it is a means of getting fresh viewpoints
on environmental problems and solutions. Government agencies will
be able to request student study and recommendations on specific
points or issues.
SCOPE is composed of students at the college and high school
levels interested in the issue of environmental quality. A SCOPE
group was established in each of FWQA's nine Regions by
[p. 66]
December, 1969. The first meeting of national representatives elected
by each Regional organization was held in Washington on February
20-21, 1970. At the national meeting, Secretary Hickel committed a
large amount of his time to listening to SCOPE representatives' pro-
posals and answering penetrating questions that reflected their broad
concern for all facets of the environment.
SCOPE was initiated by FWQA in response to Secretary Hickel's
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3691
belief that improved communications would benefit both the Federal
government and concerned students. SCOPE is an innovative experi-
ment. Now that its basic feasibility has been demonstrated, the
possibility of broadening its sponsorship both within and outside the
Department of the Interior is being explored. Secretary Hickel
recently announced the formation of a "Task Force on Environmental
Education and Youth Activities" to act as a go-between for the De-
partment and young people concerned about the environment. The
Task Force's immediate projects include being the liaison group for
SCOPE and making recommendations for the creation of a National
Environmental Control Organization (ECO), proposed by the Secre-
tary and modeled after the Peace Corps. The Task Force is also
programmed to provide the focal point within the Department of the
Interior for its participation in future national student teach-ins.
Upon request, the group will provide assistance, information, and
speakers to colleges, high schools, and private organizations.
Perhaps the most basic point expressed by SCOPE members is that
mankind will have to change many of its attitudes and aspects of its
life-styles if we are to live within the earth's supply of natural and
recreational resources over the long term. They see the need for
general recognition that the earth and its inhabitants form a "closed
system" and that actions by any segment of its population generally
have an effect on other groups—or perhaps on the action-originating
group at a later date. Further, they believe that remedial steps
require changed attitudes and public acceptance and support for the
expenditure of vast sums to improve the quality of our environment.
Public awareness and attitudes are at the heart of all of these broad
concerns. In order to improve our understanding of the nature and
magnitude of the public education task that lies ahead and to under-
stand better what role organizations such as SCOPE can play,
FWQA is seeking the help of the Institute for Creative Studies.
[p. 67]
The Institute for Creative Studies is a private, nonprofit, educa-
tional corporation which attempts to use bright, imaginative, innova-
tive high school and college students to apply modern research
techniques and scientific methods to the resolution of policy problems.
The institute began as a pilot project in the summer of 1967. The
research projects are funded by government contracts and the Eugene
and Agnes E. Meyer Foundation.
The only controls on the individual students' research projects
are regular quality control review sessions, a formal interim report,
and a thorough review of each project by a panel of experts at the
end of the project period.
The Institute for Creative Studies will investigate in depth the
-------
3692 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
role and nature of public attitudes on water pollution control prob-
lems. Additional topics may also be considered by the Institute for
Creative Studies in connection with their work for FWQA.
FWQA has been involved in other work with young people. For
example, a program called "Operation Clean Waters" has been
conceived and organized by FWQA to involve youth directly in the
clean-up of water. Pilot projects have demonstrated that teams of
young men aged 16 to 21 can remove tremendous amounts of debris
from waterways, thereby improving their aesthetic appearance and
value for recreational use. These pilot projects have been carried
out in the District of Columbia, Chicago, and Puerto Rico. This
program will be expanded to a number of other cities. The new
projects will be supervised entirely by local governments, with
FWQA staff serving as advisors.
In another approach to young people, FWQA is developing a project
with the Boy Scouts of America that will be known as "Conservation
Good Turn." A Boy Scout Leader's Guide has been prepared out-
lining various projects which the Scouts can undertake, such as
checking to see whether their community has a waste treatment
plant; if the sources of pollution from industry are under control; and
where other trouble spots are developing. The Guide gives directions
for checking the quality of water in a stream or lake. We are anxious
to enlist the support of the five million Boy Scouts in this country
as another volunteer cadre for protecting the environment.
In addition to the involvement with these special youth programs,
FWQA has a number of on-going programs which involve youth
participation and offer young people an opportunity to work or study
in the field of water pollution control. These programs—to be dis-
cussed in the following section on training and manpower—include
traineeships and fellowships, grants to technical, professional, and
secondary schools, in-house short-term training, and part-time or
summer jobs.
Training and Manpower Development
Substantial expenditures for construction grants, research and de-
velopment, technical assistance, and similar endeavors are outlined
in various sections of this report. Effective utilization of these funds
and achievement of clean water results will basically depend on ade-
quate staffs of skilled and motivated people, from treatment plant
operators to research scientists. We must very substantially increase
both the number and proficiency of those employed in the water pol-
lution control effort and, accordingly, manpower development has
become a major program thrust within FWQA.
[p. 68]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3693
The objectives of manpower development programs are to assist in
attracting and preparing new professionals, technicians and operators
and to help prepare existing personnel to do a more effective job. To
meet these objectives, FWQA is pursuing a number of approaches.
These include support of and work with the universities to assure an
adequate flow of engineers, scientists, and other professionals into the
field; conduct of short-term training by FWQA staff, designed to up-
grade the skills of those already in the field; and a variety of ap-
proaches to the training of sewage treatment plant operators.
FWQA is working to increase the flow of highly trained profession-
als through training grants awarded to academic institutions to estab-
lish or extend the scope of advanced training in water pollution
control in their engineering, biological, physical and social science
departments. Under this program, institutions are encouraged to
develop the specialized and multidisciplinary training of scientists,
engineers, and administrators in water quality management. These
grants support expansion and improvement of facilities and equip-
ment, provide partial support of faculty salaries and offer stipends,
dependency allowances and tuition to trainees. In 1969 training
grants were awarded to 61 institutions. This type of grant will sup-
port 693 trainees in 1970, most of whom are working toward master's
degrees.
Research fellowships are also awarded to individuals for specialized
graduate and postgraduate research training involving investigations
particularly related to FWQA's mission. These awards provide funds
for institutional costs of education, stipends for the fellow and allow-
ances for supplies. Fellowships are generally awarded to persons
working towards the Ph.D. degree, the objective being to maintain the
future supply of research scientists and engineers and university pro-
fessors. A long training period is required to produce researchers
and teachers, generally at least three years of full-time study after the
bachelor's degree has been obtained. It is extremely important to
maintain a steady flow of persons under training so that there are no
major gaps in the supply of trained persons available to begin re-
search and teaching careers. About three-quarters of the Ph.D.
recipients who have received FWQA support through a fellowship
or training grant embark on research and university teaching careers.
In 1969, approximately 300 students supported by FWQA training
grants or fellowships received advanced degrees. They will make a
significant contribution towards filling the demand for new profes-
sional talent in the field.
Other steps are being taken to increase this flow of talent. FWQA
will be participating in intensified Federal efforts to improve the
quality of education available at black institutions in accordance
-------
3694 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
with declared Presidential support for a Black College improvement
program. FWQA training grants have already been awarded to two
such institutions. Predominantly Negro Delaware State College re-
ceived support for development of an undergraduate water chemistry
course to train baccalaureate candidates for pollution control-oriented
jobs in industry. More recently, a grant was awarded to Howard
University to support a Master of Science in Sanitary Engineering
program. In 1970, we expect to consider a proposal for training
pollution control microbiologists and biochemists at Tuskegee Insti-
tute. In the coming year, other black institutions will be investigated
to determine opportunities for and means of developing professional
training programs in water pollution control.
We are also exploring the need to encourage pollution control train-
ing at an earlier stage through increased emphasis in junior and
senior high school science curricula. As a start in this direction, the
Tilton School in New Hampshire was recently awarded a grant to
provide for the modification and re-writing of a previously developed
teacher's guide. The guide provides objectives, procedures and
teacher's plans for scientific analysis of water pollution problems
and consideration of social, legislative and historical factors. The
revision will be performed in the summer of 1970 by a group of teams
composed of a high school science or biology teacher and a student
from each of forty different schools. These teams, during the regular
school year, have gained experience in field and water laboratory test-
ing techniques and will base their revisions on this experience. The
teacher's guide is expected to become basic material for initiating
secondary school courses emphasizing water pollution control at
schools across the country.
We must not only attract and train new people for careers in pollu-
tion control; we must turn our attention to those already in the field.
Water pollution control technology and techniques are developing
rapidly. To be effective, pollution control personnel must be kept
up-to-date on the latest developments. One of the best means of ob-
taining such updating is through attendance at short-term training
courses. This type of training is also needed by the ever-increasing
numbers of trained people
[p. 69]
shifting from related fields to water pollution control. They need to
be acquainted rapidly with current knowledge and methods.
To meet these needs, specialized and advanced technical training
is offered at FWQA laboratories to government employees and others
working in pollution control. Special emphasis is given to training
courses or programs which assist the State and local agencies in
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3695
training their personnel, thus strengthening State and local effective-
ness in the water pollution control effort.
Trainees are drawn from the professional, technical and treatment
plant operator ranks across the Nation. In fiscal year 1969, more than
50 of these short-term courses were presented to approximately 1,300
persons at FWQA training facilities. The curricula included a variety
of technical courses in water quality management of one or two
weeks' duration. Also offered are orientation courses and short tech-
nical seminars to meet the special needs of particular Federal, State
and local agencies or academic institutions. For example, in 1969
FWQA presented a two-week "Water Quality Studies" course in Har-
risburg, Pennsylvania, to meet the needs of that State's employees.
Also, two courses were offered to assist Federal agencies in meeting
their increased responsibility to prevent water pollution: "Design and
Management of Sewage Treatment and Disposal for Federal Installa-
tion," and "Water Pollution Control for Federal Installations." A
special course was conducted for U.S. Geological Survey personnel
to enable them to participate fully in the accelerated water quality
monitoring program prescribed elsewhere in the report.
Training of sewage treatment plant operators has been an area of
special and increasing emphasis in the FWQA training program. The
fastest and cheapest way to significantly improve water quality in the
short run would be to operate existing treatment plants at reasonably
efficient levels. Too often today, multi-million dollar plants produce
unsatisfactory effluents which deny desired and obtainable water uses.
Usually the reason is that these expensive plants are turned over to
poorly trained personnel for operation and maintenance. Poor plant
operation can result in undue pollution of the receiving waters with
the resulting loss of water uses, such as closed swimming beaches.
Poor plant maintenance can be extremely costly in yet another way.
Most waste treatment plants are designed and constructed so as to
have a useful life of at least twenty years. Improper plant mainte-
nance can actually reduce that useful plant life to one or two years
in extreme cases.
The need for competent, well-trained operators in the Nation's
treatment plants is obvious. Traditionally, this has been viewed as a
responsibility of State and local governments. The Federal govern-
ment, and FWQA in particular, has taken a more active role in the
past few years for very basic reasons. The job was not being ade-
quately done at the State and local level: a large portion of existing
treatment plants were, and are, being poorly operated and maintained.
State and local governments often have had difficulty marshalling the
financial and staff resources needed to conduct adequate training
programs on their own. Therefore, FWQA has worked to provide
-------
3696 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
advice, consultation and financial assistance to State and local govern-
ments to carry out operator training.
Recently, improved operation and maintenance of treatment plants
has become more than a matter of Federal encouragement and assist-
ance; it will be required in order for States and communities to re-
ceive construction grant assistance. It would make little sense for
the Federal government to embark upon a major program to assist
construction of treatment works without assuring that, once built,
they will be adequately operated and maintained. Secretary Hickel's
recently published regulations to this effect have been described
elsewhere in this report.
FWQA is supporting operator training in several ways. First, and
foremost, FWQA has assisted State and local governments in qualify-
ing for funding for operator training under a variety of existing pro-
grams administered by other Federal agencies. This involves working
with State and local governments to identify training needs, to formu-
late training programs to meet those needs, including assistance in
such areas as curriculum development and instructor training, and
to obtain Federal financial assistance. FWQA then works with Fed-
eral agencies to gain acceptance for Federal support of this training
and to develop procedures to make funds available. Utilizing princi-
pally Manpower Development and Training Act (MDTA) funds
which are administered by the Departments of Labor and Health,
Education and Welfare, FWQA assisted projects that accomplished
the training of 981 operators in fifteen States and in Puerto Rico in
1969. The number of operators trained under this mechanism in
1970 will total approximately 2,800 in 30 States.
The present use of MDTA funds illustrates the successful applica-
tion of a multiple-purpose
[p. 70]
governmental program. FWQA-assisted projects utilizing Manpower
Development and Training Act funds not only produce trained op-
erators but also serve to enable persons classified as unemployed or
under-employed to obtain better jobs and participate more fully in
the economic life of the Nation. FWQA is further developing this
approach through the Department of Defense's "Project Transition"
which affords an opportunity to attract returning servicemen into
the pollution control field. The "Project Transition" program provides
enlisted military personnel with training for civilian jobs during their
last six months of duty. Training is funded by the Manpower Devel-
opment and Training Act and is administered by the Departments
of Defense, Labor, and Health, Education and Welfare. FWQA is
currently developing a pilot program to provide entry-level training
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3697
in wastewater treatment plant operations for approximately 300 serv-
icemen at Forts Belvoir, Virginia; Bragg, South Carolina; Hood and
Bliss, Texas; and at the El Toro Marine Air Base in California.
FWQA will use information gathered through a variety of programs
to assist successful trainees in obtaining jobs across the country in
waste treatment plants seeking qualified personnel.
We are moving forward in a number of other ways to upgrade
operator training. Correspondence courses may prove the most prac-
tical method of reaching many operators of one-man plants—of which
there are thousands. By late 1970 or early 1971 FWQA expects to
have three correspondence courses available to help meet this need.
The University of Michigan, under an FWQA grant, has developed
a course utilizing programmed learning on chemistry of water and
wastes for operators and technicians. Within FWQA's own short-
term training teaching staff, a course on membrane filter methods in
water microbiology has been developed. It will be aimed at operators.
Under another grant, Sacramento State College has developed a
course for improving the skills of operators in small and remote plants.
Efforts are also underway to better prepare those who will be
responsible for training operators. FWQA developed and first offered
a short-term training course for instructor development in April 1969.
We co-sponsored with Clemson University the first large-scale na-
tional conference on operator training in Atlanta in November, 1969.
This first-of-its kind meeting provided a forum for operator-trainers
to meet together and listen to and discuss presentations on the latest
instructional methods and teaching aids.
The President's February 4 Executive Order on control of Feder-
ally-caused pollution has established a vastly increased responsibility
for FWQA to assist other Federal agencies in training operators of
plants at Federal installations. The order requires Federal operators
to meet levels of proficiency consistent with those being required of
operators at the community level. To assist the Federal agencies, we
will provide increased training opportunities, using FWQA training
facilities and staff to present selective offerings of practical courses
in waste treatment plant operation, methods and procedure—both for
Federal operators and for personnel engaged in training Federal
operators. This program will also provide FWQA with an oppor-
tunity to develop and test training techniques and materials which
will ultimately be passed on to State and local governments for use in
training large numbers of operators.
Enactment of the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 will
further strengthen FWQA's activities and programs in training treat-
ment plant operators. The new legislation authorizes a combination
of grant, contract, and scholarship programs to attract and prepare
-------
3698 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
students for careers in the design, operation and maintenance of waste
treatment plants. Planning for implementation of new activities and
approaches under this legislation is now underway.
In summary, FWQA is very substantially accelerating its training
efforts, in concert with State, local and Federal agencies, with uni-
versities, and with others concerned. More effective manpower plan-
ning is needed to guide these efforts.
[p. 71]
FWQA's last overall study of manpower needs, Manpower and
Training Needs in Water Pollution Control, was submitted to the Con-
gress in 1967. A much more specific appraisal of where and when job
vacancies will occur and how they may best be met is now required.
In 1969, FWQA initiated development of a manpower planning system
which, when implemented, will define manpower demands, manpower
supplies, and criteria for judging whether manpower resources are
being effectively utilized. The system will provide carefully devel-
oped estimates of the total manpower needs in the water pollution
control field and improve the identification of particularly severe
manpower shortages. The system will also include more precise defi-
nition of occupations, manpower staffing guides, work force profiles,
and industrial planners.
This manpower planning system will enable FWQA to formulate
better action plans, through understanding the timing and nature of
State, local, industrial and academic training needs. Rapid and effec-
tive implementation of this system will be needed to help us meet the
training provisions of the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970.
INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES
Public concern for environmental quality has reached international
proportions in the last few years, and President Nixon has advanced
the participation of the United States in efforts to solve global pollu-
tion problems.
The Federal Water Quality Administration (FWQA) is active on
several major fronts of international activity in the environmental
field. Efforts are moving ahead to meet the increasing pressures for
an international leadership role in the environmental quality area.
The United States shares the North American continent with
Canada and Mexico. A significant part of the water resources of the
continent crosses or forms a part of the political boundaries between
the United States and its two neighbors. This is especially true along
the Canadian boundary where the Great Lakes system, constituting
the largest source of fresh water in the world, is shared equally.
An important part of FWQA's involvement in international activi-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3699
ties is the provision of technical support to the International Joint
Commission (IJC). The latter was established pursuant to the
Boundary Waters Treaty of 1909 between the United States and Can-
ada. This activity includes membership on a number of international
technical advisory boards which have been established by the IJC to
investigate and report on specific boundary water problems referred to
the Commission by the Governments of the two countries. At the pres-
ent time, there are seven technical advisory boards working on the
pollution problems of Lake Erie, Lake Ontario, the international sec-
tion of the St. Lawrence River, St. Croix River (Maine), Niagara
River, Detroit River, St. Clair River, St. Marys River, and Rainy
River of the North.
Because of the serious acceleration of pollution in the highly indus-
trialized areas of the Great Lakes, the work of the IJC and its advisory
boards has assumed an increasingly important role in coordinating
the remedial programs being carried on in the two countries to abate
pollution. This coordination has resulted in significant agreement
on the present levels of pollution in Lake Erie and Lake Ontario, the
sources and amounts of pollutants reaching the Lakes and recommen-
dations for an abatement program. In recent weeks, a comprehensive
report on these agreements has been submitted to the IJC by its
technical advisory board.
Other programs being coordinated through the IJC are oil contin-
gency planning for boundary waters, vessel pollution control and re-
view of off-shore drilling practices. In addition, the meeting of water
pollution control technicians of the United States and Canada on
boundary water problems has resulted in increasing cooperation in
several areas which have not been referred to the IJC for considera-
tion, such as Arctic pollution, exchange of scientific information, par-
ticipation in pollution seminars and consultation on handling of oil
spills.
Within the last year, meetings between higher levels of administra-
tive personnel on matters of policy have developed as a result of the
complexity of the pollution problems of the Great Lakes. Meetings
were held between Secretary Hickel and Assistant Secretary Klein
and their counterparts from Canada. As a result, the governments
of both countries are moving closer together in a coordinated ap-
proach to pollution abatement in the Great Lakes. Additional meet-
ings are being planned for FY 1970-71 involving White House level
officials of the United States Government.
Although a Water and Boundary Treaty was established between
the United States and Mexico in 1944, it contains no provision for
formal institutions for dealing with pollution problems
[p. 72]
-------
3700 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
as is contained in the treaty with Canada. However, informal ar-
rangements are established with the Water and Boundary Commis-
sion, and the FWQA does provide consultative services on border
pollution problems when requested. Consultative services have been
provided on border pollution problems stemming from domestic
wastes in the Brownsville-Matamoros, El Paso-Juarez, Nogales,
Yuma-Mexicali and Tijuana areas.
As the world's technicians turn to the task of controlling pollution
of global waters, the development of a reliable mechanism for the ex-
change of existing and developing scientific information becomes in-
creasingly necessary. As a result of this need the United States has
established or explored bilateral agreements with other countries to
exchange technical knowledge on water pollution control and re-
search. Such agreements have been in operation with Germany and
Japan for several years. Agreements to develop bilateral exchanges
are presently being negotiated with the Soviet Union, France and
Czechoslovakia. Requests for such agreements have been received
from Sweden, the United Kingdom, Iceland, Poland and Romania.
In negotiating these agreements, consideration is being given to in-
cluding cooperation in specific research projects in problem areas of
mutual interest, such as sludge disposal, the effects of pollution on
fish and aquatic life, eutrophication of lakes, effluent standards and
user charges.
The effect of detergent phosphate on the environment has been a
matter of public and scientific discussion for several years and has
recently come to the front as a major issue in the problem of accel-
erating lake eutrophication. As a result of the shared concern over
the nutrient enrichment of Lake Erie, a joint United States-Canada
team of scientists undertook a mission to Sweden in January, 1970,
to investigate and study the use of low phosphate-content detergents
in that country. Their findings will contribute to the development of
policies for phosphate reduction in both nations.
During the past year, over 100 foreign water pollution technicians
and scientists have visited the United States to study control pro-
grams and techniques which have been instituted in this country. A
number of these visitors have participated in the short technical
training courses offered in the FWQA Regional laboratories on vari-
ous aspects of water pollution control technology. This represents a
sharp increase over previous years and indications are that the
number can be expected to double in the next 12 to 24 months. This
increased number of foreign visitors is also expected to include
higher-level government administrative officials than in past years.
With the establishment by President Nixon of the Environmental
Quality Council and the concurrent structuring within the Depart-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3701
ment of State of an Office of Environmental Affairs, the Administra-
tion is gearing to meet increasing responsibilities in the international
area. Most, if not all, of the international, multi-lateral organizations
in the free world today are in some way engaged in carrying out
programs in environmental protection. These programs consist
mainly of establishing procedures and organizational arrangements
for the exchange of technical and scientific information and of pro-
viding a platform for the discussion between government officials of
member countries on environmental problems of general concern.
In recent months, however, increasing attention has been given to
the development of international policies for environmental protec-
tion. Many international conferences and symposiums are scheduled
for the next 12 to 24 months, including the international Water Pol-
lution Control Research Conference in San Francisco in September
1970; the Environmental Safety Conference in 1971 in Prague, Czech-
oslovakia, sponsored by the Economic Commission for Europe; and
the UN's major effort in this field in 1972 in Sweden. The conference
will bring together the world's leading scientists and political leaders
to discuss the environmental problems that beset the world.
FWQA has provided an increasing number of its technical and top
administrative personnel to support these developing activities. This
includes the appointment of agency representatives to environmental
technical and planning panels which have been established in the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization framework, the Economic Com-
mission for Europe, the Organization for Economic and Cultural De-
velopment, and others. Co-sponsorship of the biennial International
Congress on Water Pollution Research is a major undertaking of
FWQA, and the Agency will be active in the planning and conduct
of the next conference to be held in San Francisco in September, 1970.
The involvement of FWQA in the international field has been rela-
tively small in the past and restricted to specialized technical fields.
But sudden world concern for protection of the environment will
thrust upon us an increasing pressure to share our knowledge, prog-
ress and technical capability with all Nations. This is especially true
if the United States is to continue its present role as a leader in the
free world.
[p. 73]
ORGANIZATION, RESOURCES, AND FACILITIES
The capability of any agency to accomplish its mission is dependent
upon its resources—budget, staff, and facilities—and upon how effec-
tively those resources are organized and managed. During the past
year, substantial efforts have been directed towards the improved
organization and management of Federal Water Quality Administra-
tion (FWQA).
-------
3702 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Major improvements have been made in FWQA's personnel sys-
tems and organization structure. Added emphasis is bsing given to
systematic work planning—competing demands on the Agency's re-
sources have made of prime importance the identification and main-
tenance of priorities, schedules, and objectives to guide our work.
An Agency-wide accounting and management information system will
be operational by July 1, 1970. This system will generate electronic
data programs and develop reports which will aid top management
in their decision-making process.
A formal directives system has been established to assure rapid and
accurate communication of policy and instructions throughout the
Agency. Better systems of delegation of authority and other manage-
ment improvements are currently underway.
FWQA's mission is an increasingly complex one, and constant at-
tention to modern management methods is an essential part of its
overall job.
ORGANIZATION
FWQA is organized along functional lines, as outlined on the at-
tached organization chart.
During the past years, there have been a number of changes in
FWQA's organizational structure, at both Headquarters and field
levels, designed to marshall the Agency's resources most effectively
to meet its changing mission.
With increasing emphasis placed on securing compliance with es-
tablished water quality standards, the standards function has been
transferred from the jurisdiction of the Assistant Commissioner for
Operations to the jurisdiction of the Assistant Commissioner for En-
forcement. The current emphasis on the environment as a whole is
reflected by the proposed creation of the position of Assistant Com-
missioner for Environmental and Program Planning. The passage of
the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 prompted the creation
and staffing of an Office of Oil and Hazardous Materials.
The bulk of FWQA's activities is in the field. Of a present staff of
2,538 permanent and temporary employees, 592 are located in Head-
quarters, and 1,946 are assigned to the nine
[p. 75]
Regions. Regional boundaries are outlined on the attached map.
FWQA's Regions are organized along hydrologic lines to facilitate
the planning and implementation of the clean-up of entire river basins
and to aid our work with related water resource agencies. This
method of organization is considered most effective in terms of the
Agency's current program operations. It sometimes creates difficul-
ties, however, for States whose boundaries fall within more than one
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3703
Region. With the increased emphasis on effective working relation-
ships with the States, major attention is being given to adjustments
in responsibilities and lines of communication which will ease these
problems.
The Department of the Interior's participation in the President's
Federal Activities Review Program, which is designed to assure that
services to State and local government are of maximum effectiveness,
may lead to further adjustments in our Regional structure.
PERSONNEL
FWQA's most valuable resource is its staff—a staff comprised of
dedicated and experienced professionals, with backgrounds repre-
senting the many disciplines needed to operate in effective govern-
mental agency. Heavily represented on the staff, because of the
nature of the Agency's mission, are scientists and engineers with spe-
cialized experience in water pollution control, oceanography, and re-
lated fields. Lawyers, economists, public administrators, regional
planners, and others provide the needed balance of skills.
A major management improvement during the past year has been
initiation of an Agency career development system, designed to pro-
vide for planned intake of college graduates in entrance level
positions; training and development for each careerist; a career
counseling and appraisal system; and a centralized bank of data on
all employees in an occupational field. This system will cover all
scientific and engineering, technical support and administrative per-
sonnel by June 30, 1970. The Career Planning System will enable
management to obtain, develop and retain a highly qualified work-
force to meet mission goals and objectives in a timely and economical
manner.
In addition to this system, a Graduate Fellowship Program was
developed to provide a system to hire top quality graduate students
who have completed all requirements for their advance degree but the
thesis. They are hired on a temporary appointments for one year and
work on a special project selected by FWQA which can serve as the
basis for their thesis. These employees form a pool of outstanding
candidates for future employment with FWQA on a permanent basis.
Further in-house personnel management improvements were made
by the implementation of a personnel program evaluation and man-
agement advisory service designed to measure the effectiveness of
personnel management policies, practices and procedures. Lengthy
interviews with managers at all levels, non-supervisory attitude
questionnaire sessions, and discussions with Personnel Office staff
members have provided the data for evaluation. At the conclusions
of each survey, a report is made to management containing action
-------
3704 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
items or recommendations for improving working conditions, em-
ployee morale, and supervisory performance.
Another innovation is the automated personnel system which re-
sults in statistical reports prepared by computer which greatly
reduces the amount of time spent on this function at all levels of
management. It also provides management with instant feedback
of data needed for planning and other purposes. By the end of FY
1971, it is anticipated that all employee training records including
FWQA-wide training needs will be fully automated. Also, the skills
inventory file will be converted to an automated data bank to enable
the instantaneous referral of outstanding candidates for vacant posi-
tions and to provide data needed for the manpower planning function.
FACILITIES
In addition to its Headquarters and Regional Office locations,
FWQA conducts its work at 46 field stations and laboratories located
in the field. These facilities range from complex laboratories, de-
signed and operated to conduct sophisticated research, to small field
stations, studying special problems. A variety of physical facilities is
needed. At the Southeast Water Laboratory on the University of
Georgia campus at Athens, controlled environmental chambers, de-
signed to simulate varying conditions in the natural environment,
have been constructed. Work with these chambers is shedding new
light on basic pollution relationships in streams. In Newtown, Ohio,
an entire tributary has been protected and controlled with weirs and
other devices to test the long-term effects of low level toxic wastes
on biota under natural conditions. This unique facility has already
attracted the attention of scientists across the Nation. A small labora-
tory on a floating barge provides a
[p. 77]
base for a team of investigators studying pollution along the Florida
coast. The National Water Quality Laboratory at Duluth, Minnesota,
provides special facilities to conduct a wide range of studies designed
to determine environmental requirements of fresh water organisms.
During the past year, the Bears Bluff Laboratory on the South
Carolina coast was leased to FWQA by a non-profit educational insti-
tution. This facility will provide an invaluable opportunity to conduct
work on environmental requirements of southern waters marine life
—an important need in the establishment of improved water quality
criteria.
Currently, FWQA is completing a comprehensive review of the
need for additional facilities. A 5-year proposed facilities program
has been developed. It is designed to provide necessary facilities and
laboratory space for the future.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3705
BUDGETARY RESOURCES
FWQA's budgetary resources for the past, current and coming fiscal
years are shown below. These figures show a significant increase for
water pollution control, reflecting the high priority this program is
receiving from the President and Congress during a period of overall
budgetary stringency.
[p. 78]
-------
3706
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
4.3 NATIONAL OIL AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL
POLLUTION CONTINGENCY PLAN
Council on Environmental Quality, August 20, 1971
COUNCIL ON
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
NATIONAL OIL AND HAZARDOUS
SUBSTANCES POLLUTION CON-
TINGENCY PLAN
This National Contingency Plan as
revised August 1971, prepared at the
direction of the 91st Congress and Pub-
lic Law 91-224, provides a mechanism
for coordinating the response to a spill
of oil or hazardous polluting substance.
(This Plan supersedes the National Oil
and Hazardous Materials Pollution Con-
tingency Plan—June 1970.)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
100 INTRODUCTION
101 Authority.
102 Purpose and Objectives.
103 Scope.
104 Abbreviations.
105 Definitions.
200 POLICY AND RESPONSIBILITY
201 Federal Policy.
202 Federal Responsibility.
203 Non-Federal Responsibility.
300 PLANNING AND RESPONSE
ELEMENTS
301 Spill Response Activities and Coordina-
tion.
302 National Response Center.
303 National Response Team.
304 Regional Response Center.
305 Regional Response Team.
306 On-Scene Coordination.
400 FEDERAL RESERVE RESPONSE
OPERATIONS—RESPONSE PHASES
401 Phase I—Discovery and Notification.
402 Phase II—Containment and Counter-
measures.
403 Phase III—Cleanup and Disposal.
404 Phase IV—Restoration.
405 Phase V—Recovery of Damages and
Enforcement.
406 Procedures To Be Followed for the Pur-
pose of Water Pollution Control.
500 COORDINATING INSTRUCTIONS
501 Delegation of Authority.
502 Multiregional Actions.
503 Notification.
504 General Pattern of Response Actions.
505 Strike Force.
600 PROCEDURES FOR CHANGING THE
PLAN AND ANNEXES
601 Amendment of the Plan and Annexes.
602 Amendment of the Regional Plans.
LIST OF ANNEXES
Annex No.
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2500
3000
Distribution U
National Response Team ' II
National Response Center 1 III
Geographical Boundaries a IV
Communications and Reports a V
Public Information > VI
Legal Authorities "VII
Enforcement Procedures * VIII
Funding ' IX
Dispersant Schedule 1 X
Non-Federal Interests > XI
Technical Information ' XV
Regional Contingency Plans > XX
1 Annexes Nos. I-IX, XI, and XV were not
filed as part of the original document. Copies
may be obtained from Division of Oil and
Hazardous Materials, Environmental Protec-
tion Agency, Room 512, 1921 Jefferson Davis
Highway, Arlington, VA 22202.
100 INTRODUCTION
101 AUTHORITY
101.1 This National Oil and Hazard-
ous Substances Pollution Contingency
Plan has been developed in compliance
with the Federal Water Pollution Con-
trol Act, as amended, (33 U.S.C. 1151, et
seq.). The President, in section 4(a),
Executive Order 11548, July 22, 1970,
delegated authority and responsibility
to CEQ to carry out subsection (c) (2)
of section 11 of the Act, providing for
the preparation, publication, revision
and amendment of a National Contin-
gency Plan for the removal of oil.
102 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES
102.1 This Plan (including the An-
nexes) provides for a pattern of coordi-
nated and integrated response by
Departments and Agencies of the Fed-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3707
eral Government to protect the environ-
ment from the damaging effects of
pollution spills. It also promotes the co-
ordination and direction of Federal,
[p. 16215]
State, and local response systems and
encourages the development of local
government and private capabilities to
handle such pollution spills.
102.2 The objectives of this Plan are
to provide for efficient, coordinated and
effective action to minimize damage
from oil and hazardous substance dis-
charges, including containment, disper-
sal, and removal. The Plan, including
the Annexes and regional plans, pro-
vides for: (a) Assignment of duties and
responsibilities, (b) establishment and
identification of strike forces and emer-
gency task forces, (c) a system of no-
tification, surveillance and reporting,
(d) establishment of a National Center
to coordinate and direct operations in
carrying out this Plan, (e) a schedule
of dispersants and other chemicals to
treat oil spills, (f) enforcement and in-
vestigative procedures to be followed,
(g) directions on public information re-
leases and (h) instructions covering on-
scene coordination.
103 SCOPE
103.1 This plan is effective for all
U.S. navigable waters, their tributaries
and adjoining shorelines. This includes
inland rivers, Great Lakes, coastal terri-
torial waters, the contiguous zone and
high seas where there exists a threat to
U.S. waters, shoreface, or shelf-bottom.
103.2 The provisions of this Plan are
applicable to all Federal Agencies. Im-
plementation of this Plan is compatible
with and complementary to currently
effective joint International contingency
plans, assistance plans, agreements,
security regulations, and responsibilities
based upon Federal statutes and Execu-
tive orders.
104 ABBREVIATIONS
104.1 Department and Agency Title
Abbreviations
CEO—Council on Environmental Quality.
Commerce—Department of Commerce.
Corps—U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
DHEW—Department of Health, Education and
Welfare.
DOD—Department of Defense.
DOI—Department of Interior.
DOT—Department of Transportation.
EPA—Environmental Protection Agency.
Justice—Department of Justice.
MarAd—Maritime Administration.
NOAA—National Oceanic and Atmospheric
Administration
OEP—Office of Emergency Preparedness.
State—Department of State.
USCG—U.S. Coast Guard.
USGS—U.S. Geological Survey.
USN—U.S. Navy.
104.2 Operational Title Abbreviations
NRC—National Response Center.
NRT—National Response Team
OSC—On-Scene Coordinator.
RRC—Regional Response Center.
RRT—Regional Response Team.
105 DEFINITIONS (WITHIN THE
MEANING OF THIS PLAN)
105.1 "Act" means the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, as amended,
(33 U.S.C. 1151, et seq.).
105.2 "Discharge" includes but is not
limited to, any spilling, leaking, pump-
ing, pouring, emitting, emptying, or
dumping.
105.3 "United States" means the
States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Ca-
nal Zone, Guam, American Samoa, the
Virgin Islands, and the Trust Territory
of the Pacific Islands.
105.4 "Inland Waters" generally are
those navigable fresh waters upstream
from the coastal waters (see 105.5).
105.5 "Coastal Waters" generally are
those U.S. marine waters navigable by
deep draft vessels.
105.6 "Contiguous Zone" means the
entire zone established or to be estab-
lished by the United States under Article
24 of the Convention on the Territorial
Sea and the contiguous zone. This is
assumed to extend 12 miles seaward
from the baseline where the territorial
sea begins.
105.7 "Public Health or Welfare" in-
cludes consideration of all factors af-
fecting the health and welfare of man,
-------
3708
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
including but not limited to human
health, the natural environment, fish,
shellfish, wildlife, and public and private
property, shorelines, and beaches.
105.8 "Major Disaster" means any
hurricane, tornado, storm, flood, high
water, wind-driven water, tidal wave,
earthquake, drought, fire, or other
catastrophe in any part of the United
States which, in the determination of
the President, is or threatens to become
of sufficient severity and magnitude to
warrant disaster assistance by the Fed-
eral government to supplement the ef-
forts and available resources of States
and local governments and relief or-
ganizations in alleviating the damage,
loss, hardship, or suffering caused
thereby.
105.9 "Oil" means oil of any kind or
in any form, including but not limited
to, petroleum, fuel oil, sludge, oil ref-
use, and oil mixed with wastes other
than dredged spoil.
105.10 "Hazardous Polluting Sub-
stance" is an element or compound, other
than oil as defined in 105.9 which, when
discharged in any quantity, into or upon
navigable waters of the United States
or their tributaries, presents an im-
minent or substantial threat to the pub-
lic health or welfare.
105.11 "Minor Spill" is a discharge of
oil of less than 1,000 gallons in inland
waters, or less than 10,000 gallons in
coastal waters or a discharge of any ma-
terial in a quantity that does not pose a
threat to the public health or welfare.
Discharges that: (1) Occur in or en-
danger critical water areas; (2) generate
critical public concern; (3) become the
focus of an enforcement action; or (4)
pose a threat to public health or welfare,
should be classified as medium or major
spills depending on their degree of im-
pact.
105.12 "Medium Spill" is a discharge
of oil of 1,000 gallons to 10,000 gallons in
the inland waters or 10,000 gallons to
100,000 gallons in coastal waters, or a
discharge of any quantity of any mate-
rial that poses a threat to the public
health or welfare. See 105.11 for a defi-
nition of those spills which might be
classified as a major spill even though
their quantities conform to the defini-
tion of a medium spill.
105.13 "Major Spill" is a discharge of
oil of more than 10,000 gallons in inland
waters or more than 100,000 gallons in
coastal waters or a discharge of any
quantity of material or substance that
substantially threatens the public health
or welfare, or generates wide public in-
terest.
105.14 "Potential Spill" is any acci-
dent or other circumstance which
threatens to result in the discharge of
oil or hazardous polluting substance. A
potential spill shall be classified as to its
severity based on the guidelines above.
105.15 "Primary Agencies" are those
Departments or Agencies comprising the
NRT and designated to have primary re-
sponsibility and resources to promote
effective operation of this Plan. These
agencies are: DOD, DOI, DOT, and EPA.
105.16 "Advisory Agencies" are those
Departments or Agencies which can
make major contributions during re-
sponse activities for certain types of
spills. These Agencies are: Commerce,
DHEW, Justice, OEP, and State.
105.17 "Remove or Removal" is the
removal of oil or hazardous polluting
substance from the water and shorelines
or the taking of such other actions as
may be necessary to minimize or miti-
gate damage to the public health or
welfare.
200 POLICY AND RESPONSIBILITY
201 FEDERAL POLICY
201.1 Federal Policy. The Congress
has declared that it is the policy of the
United States that there should be no
discharge of oil into or upon the nav-
igable waters of the United States, ad-
joining shorelines, or into or upon the
waters of the contiguous zone (sec. 11 (b)
(1) of the Act). It must also be empha-
sized that this Nation, in November
1970, announced a goal of no intentional
discharges of oil from tankers and other
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3709
vessels to the seas by mid-decade.
201.2 The primary thrust of regional
plans is to provide a Federal response
capability at the regional level. The
OSC shall determine if the person re-
sponsible for the discharge of oil or haz-
ardous polluting substances has reported
the discharge in accordance with section
11 (b) (4) or section 12 (c) of the Act, or
in accordance with regulations promul-
gated under the Outer Continental Shelf
Lands Act, and is taking adequate action
to remove the pollutant or adequately
mitigate its effects. The OSC should, if
practicable, insure that the person re-
sponsible for the spill is aware of his
responsibility and is encouraged to un-
dertake necessary countermeasures.
When such person is taking adequate
action, the principal thrust of Federal
activities shall be to observe and moni-
tor progress and to provide advice and
counsel as may be necessary. In the
event that the person responsible for a
pollution spill does not act promptly,
does not take or propose to take proper
and appropriate actions to contain, clean
up and dispose of pollutants or the dis-
charger is unknown, further Federal re-
sponse actions shall be instituted as
required in accordance with sections 11
(c) (1) or 12(d) of the Act.
201.3 The Federal agencies possessing
facilities or other resources which may
be useful in a Federal response situation
will make such facilities or resources
available for use in accordance with this
Plan, as supplemented by the regional
plans, and as consistent with operational
requirements, within the limits of exist-
ing statutory authority, and within the
spirit of the President's intention to
minimize discharges and their effects
when they do occur.
201.4 Because Federal agencies other
than OEP, or the public or private agency
that caused the pollution spill, have pri-
mary responsibility and resources for
alleviating or eliminating the pollution
hazard, there appears to be little addi-
tional Federal assistance that could be
made available as the result of a major
disaster declaration. It appears, there-
fore, that a Presidential major disaster
declaration will rarely be involved in a
pollution spill.
202 FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITY
202.1 Each of the Primary and Ad-
visory Federal Agencies has responsibili-
ties established by statute, Executive
order or Presidential directive which
may bear on the Federal response to a
pollution spill. This Plan intends to pro-
mote the expeditious and harmonious
discharge of these responsibilities
through the recognition of authority for
action by those Agencies having the
most appropriate capability to act in each
specific situation. Responsibilities and
authorities of these several Agencies
relevant to the control of pollution spills
are detailed in Annex VII. In the devel-
opment of the regional plans, provision
shall be made to assure recognition of the
statutory responsibilities of all involved
Agencies.
202.2 The Council on Environmental
Quality is responsible for the prepara-
tion, publication, revision or amend-
ment of this National Contingency Plan
in accordance with section 4 (a) Execu-
tive Order 11548. The Council will re-
ceive the advice of the NRT on necessary
changes to the Plan and shall insure
that any disagreements arising among
members of the NRT are expeditiously
settled.
202.3 The Department of Commerce,
through NOAA and MarAd, provides
support to the NRT, RRT, and OSC with
respect to: Marine environmental data;
living marine resources; current and
predicted meterological, hydrologic and
oceanographic conditions for the high
seas, coastal and inland waters; design,
construction, and operation of merchant
ships; and maps and charts, including
tides and currents for coastal and ter-
ritorial waters and the Great Lakes.
202.4 The Department of Health, Ed-
ucation, and Welfare is responsible for
providing expert advice and assistance
relative to those spills or potential spills
-------
3710
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
that constitute or may constitute a threat
to public health and safety.
202.5 The Department of Defense,
consistent with its operational require-
ments, may provide assistance in critical
pollution spills and in the maintenance
of navigation channels, salvage, and re-
moval of navigation obstructions.
202.6 The Department of Interior,
through the USGS, supplies expertise in
the fields of oil drilling, producing, han-
dling, and pipeline transportation. Also
the USGS has access to and supervision
over continuously manned facilities
which can be used for command, control
and surveillance of spills occurring from
operations conducted under the Outer
Continental Shelf Lands Act. Addition-
ally, the Department of Interior will pro-
vide, through its Regional Coordinators,
technical expertise to the OSC and RRT
with respect to land, fish, and wildlife,
and other resources for which it is re-
sponsible DOI is also responsible for
American Samoa and the Trust
Territory.
202.7 The Department of Transpor-
tation provides expertise regarding all
modes of movement of oil and hazardous
substances. Through the USCG, the De-
partment services as vice chairman of
the NRT and supplies support and ex-
pertise in the domestic/international
fields of port safety and security, marine
law enforcement, navigation, and con-
struction, manning operation, and safety
of vessels and marine facilities. Addi-
tionally, the Coast Guard maintains
continuously manned facilities that are
capable of command, control, and sur-
veillance for spills occurring on the
navigable waters of the United States
or the high seas. The USCG is respon-
sible for chairing the RRT and for
implementing, developing and revising,
as necessary, the regional plans for
those areas where it is assigned the
responsibility to furnish or provide for
OSCs (sec. 306.2). EPA will provide
guidance to and coordinate with DOT
regarding pollution control and the
protection of the environment in the
preparation of such plans.
202.8 Environmental Protection Agency
is responsible for chairing the NRT.
In this capacity, it will assure that the
Plan is effectively and efficiently im-
plemented with optimum coordination
among Federal agencies and will recom-
mend changes in the Plan to CEQ, as
deemed necessary. EPA is also responsi-
ble for chairing the RRT and for devel-
opment, revision, and implementation,
as necessary, of regional plans for those
areas in which it has responsibility to
furnish or provide for the OSC (sec.
306.2). Through the resources of the
Office of Water Programs, EPA will pro-
vide technical expertise to NRT and the
RRTs relative to environmental pollu-
tion control techniques including assess-
ment of damages and environmental
restoration.
202.9 The Department of Justice can
supply expert legal advice to deal with
complicated judicial questions arising
from spills and Federal agency responses.
202.10 The Office of Emergency Pre-
paredness will maintain an awareness
of pollution incidents as they develop.
The normal OEP procedures will be fol-
lowed to evaluate any request for a major
disaster declaration received from a
Governor of a State. If the President
declares that a pollution spill constitutes
a major disaster under Public Law
91-606, the Director, OEP, will provide
coordination and direction of the Fed-
eral response in accordance with OEP
policies and procedures.
202.11 The Department of State can
provide leadership in developing joint
international contingency plans with
Canada and Mexico in concert with the
United States. It can also provide assist-
ance in coordination when a pollution
spill transects international boundaries
or involves foreign flag vessels.
202.12 All Federal agencies are re-
sponsible for minimizing the occurrence
of spills and for developing the capa-
bility to respond promptly in cases of
spills from facilities they operate or
supervise, and for making resources
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3711
available for National spill response op-
erations. Primary Agencies, however,
have the following additional respon-
sibilities: For leading all Federal agen-
cies in programs to minimize the number
of and environmental damage associated
with spills from facilities they operate
or supervise; to develop, within their
operating agencies, the capability for a
rapid, coordinated response to any spill;
for providing official representation to
NRT and RRT; for making information
available as may be necessary; and, for
keeping RRT informed, consistent with
national security considerations, of
changes in the availability of resources
that would affect the operation of this
Plan.
203 NON-FEDERAL RESPONSIBILITY
203.1 State and local governments,
industry groups, the academic commu-
nity, and others are encouraged to com-
mit resources for response to a spill.
Their specific commitments are outlined
by the regional plans. Of particular rel-
evance is the organization of a standby
scientific response capability.
300 PLANNING AND RESPONSE ELEMENTS
301 SPILL RESPONSE ACTIVITIES AND
COORDINATION
301.1 For spill response activities,
Federal on-scene coordination is accom-
plished through a single, predesignated
agent, the On-Scene Coordinator (OSC).
He reports to and receives advice from
an RRT composed of appropriate rep-
resentatives from the Regional and Dis-
trict offices of the Primary and Advisory
Agencies.
301.2 National level coordination is
accomplished through the NRT which
receives reports from and renders ad-
vice to the RRT. Activities are coordi-
nated through the National and various
regional response centers.
302 NATIONAL RESPONSE CENTER
302.1 The NRC, located at Headquar-
ters, USCG, is the Washington, D.C.,
headquarters site for activities relative
to pollution spills. NRC quarters are
described in Annex III, and provide com-
munications, information storage, neces-
sary personnel and facilities to promote
the smooth and adequate functioning of
this activity.
303 NATIONAL RESPONSE TEAM
303.1 The NRT consists of repre-
sentatives from the Primary and Advi-
sory Agencies. It serves as the National
body for planning and preparedness ac-
tions prior to a pollution spill and acts as
an emergency response team to be acti-
vated under conditions specified in 303.3.
303.2 Planning and preparedness
responsibilities of the NRT are:
303.2-1 Maintenance of a continuing
review of regional spill response opera-
tions and equipment readiness to insure
adequacy of regional and national plan-
ning and coordination for combating
spills of oil and hazardous substances.
303.2-2 Review of functioning of the
RRT's to insure that regional plans de-
veloped are fully coordinated among in-
volved agencies. It shall serve as a body
to which the RRT's may refer for settle-
ment of matters which they cannot
resolve.
303.2-3 Development of procedures to
promote the coordination of Federal,
State, and local governments, and private
agencies to respond to pollution spills.
303.2-4 Establishment and main-
tenance of a standing committee on
revision of the National Plan. This com-
mittee shall provide suggested revisions
to the NRT for consideration, approval
and publication by CEQ. The Primary
Agencies shall provide membership on
this standing committee. Advisory
Agencies shall participate whenever
revision or proposed amendments would
affect those Agencies.
303.2-5 Maintenance of the National
posture with respect to pollution spills.
Based on a continuing evaluation of
response actions it shall consider and
make recommendations to appropriate
agencies relating to training and equip-
ping response team personnel; necessary
research, development, demonstration
-------
3712
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
and evaluation activities to support
response capabilities; and equipment,
material stockpiling and other opera-
tional matters as the need arises. CEQ
shall be advised of any Agency's failure
to adequately respond to these rec-
ommendations. Committees shall be
established, as appropriate, to consider
various matters. Membership on these
committees shall consist of the represent-
atives from the Primary Agencies and
such Advisory Agencies that may have
direct involvement.
303.2-6 Establishment and mainte-
nance of liaison with the U.S. National
Committee for the Prevention of Pollu-
tion of the Seas by Oil in order to insure
a consistent U.S. posture regarding oil
pollution control. The NRT shall also
maintain awareness of international
coordination efforts in contingency
planning.
303.3 During pollution spills, NRT
shall act as an emergency response team
comprised of representatives from the
primary and selected Advisory Agencies
to be activated when the spill of oil or
hazardous polluting substances (a) ex-
ceeds the response capability of the re-
gion in which it occurs, (b) involves
national security, or (c) presents a ma-
jor hazard to substantial numbers of
persons or nationally significant amounts
of property. Any Advisory Agency may,
by request to NRT, have a representa-
tive present whenever the NRT is ac-
tivated for response to a spill. When
activated the NRT shall:
303.3-1 Monitor and evaluate reports
generated by the OSC insuring their
completeness. Based on this evalua-
tion, NRT may recommend courses of
action in combating the spill through
RRT for consideration by the OSC: NRT
has no operational control of the OSC.
303.3-2 Consider requesting other
Federal, State, local government or pri-
vate agencies to take action under their
existing authorities to provide resources
necessary for combating a spill or de-
ployment of personnel to monitor the
handling of a spill.
303.3-3 Coordinate the actions of re-
gions or districts other than those
affected by spills to supply needed
equipment, personnel, or technical ad-
vice to the RRT and OSC.
303.3-4 Act as the focal point for na-
tional public information releases and for
information transfer between the OSC
and the Washington, D.C. headquarters
of the Agencies concerned, so as to
minimize or prevent dissemination of
spurious and incomplete information.
Public information actions are discussed
in Annex VI.
304 REGIONAL RESPONSE CENTER
304.1 The RRC is the regional site for
pollution spill response activities. It
will be accommodated in quarters de-
scribed in each regional plan and will
provide communications, information
storage and other necessary personnel
and facilities to promote the proper
functioning and administration of re-
gional spill response operations.
305 REGIONAL RESPONSE TEAM
305.1 The RRT consists of regional
representatives of the Primary and se-
lected Advisory Agencies, as appropri-
ate. RRT shall act within its region as
an emergency response team performing
response functions similar to those de-
scribed for NRT. RRT will also perform
review and advisory functions relative
to the regional plan similar to those pre-
scribed for NRT at the National level.
Additionally, the RRT shall determine
the duration and extent of the Federal
response, and when a shift of on-scene
coordination from the predesignated
OSC to another OSC is indicated by the
circumstances or progress of a pollution
spill. Any of the Advisory Agencies, by
request to the RRT, may have a rep-
resentative present when RRT is
activated.
305.2 Boundaries of the standard re-
gions for Federal administration shall
be followed for the development of re-
gional contingency plans, where prac-
ticable. As a minimum, these areas shall
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3713
be defined to correspond to the areas in
which the Environmental Protection
Agency and Coast Guard are respec-
tively responsible for furnishing or pro-
viding for the OSC's.
305.3 The Agency membership on
RRT is as established by 305.1 above;
however, individuals representing the
Primary Agencies may vary depending
on the subregional area in which the
spill occurs. Details of such representa-
tion are specified in each regional con-
tingency plan.
305.4 The States lying within a region
are invited to furnish one observer each
to meetings of the RRT.
305.5 Activation of the RRT shall be
automatic in the event of a major or
potential major spill. Any Primary
Agency representative on the team may
request activation during any other spill.
Deactivation of RRT shall be by agree-
ment between EPA and USCG team
members.
306 ON-SCENE COORDINATION
306.1 Coordination and direction of
Federal pollution control efforts at the
scene of a spill or potential spill shall
be accomplished through the OSC. The
OSC is the single executive agent pre-
designated by regional plan to coordi-
nate and direct such pollution control
activities in each area of the region.
306.1-1 In the event of a spill of oil or
hazardous polluting substance, the first
Federal official on the site shall assume
coordination of activities under the Plan
until the arrival of the predesignated
OSC (or other appropriate person, pend-
ing the arrival of the OSC).
306.1-2 The OSC shall determine per-
tinent facts about a particular spill, such
as its potential impact on human health;
the nature, amount, and location of ma-
terial spilled; the probable direction and
time of travel of the material; the re-
sources and installations which may be
affected and the priorities for protecting
them.
306.1-3 The OSC shall initiate and
direct as required Phase II, Phase III
and Phase IV operations as hereinafter
described.
306.1-4 The OSC shall call upon and
direct the deployment of needed re-
sources in accordance with the regional
plan to initiate and continue contain-
ment, countermeasures, cleanup, resto-
ration, and disposal functions.
308.1-5 The OSC shall provide nec-
essary support activities and documen-
tation for Phase V activities.
306.1-6 In carrying out this Plan, the
OSC will fully inform and coordinate
closely with RRT to ensure the maxi-
mum effectiveness of the Federal effort
in protecting the natural resources and
the environment from pollution damage.
306.2 EPA and the USCG shall insure
that OSC's are predesignated for each
region and subregion, and for each Fed-
erally operated or supervised facility
within subregions in accordance with the
following criteria:
306.2-1 EPA shall furnish or provide
for OSC's on inland navigable waters,
and their tributaries.
306.2-2 The USCG shall furnish or
provide for OSC's for the high seas,
coastal and contiguous zone waters, and
for Great Lakes coastal waters, ports and
harbors.
306.2-3 The major consideration in
selection of the OSC for a particular area
or facility shall be based upon the
Agency's capability and resources to
provide on-scene coordination of pollu-
tion control response activities. If the
responsible Agency does not act
promptly or take appropriate action, the
EPA or USCG shall, depending on the
area in which the spill occurs, assume
the OSC functions. Pollution control
actions taken must be in accordance
with Federal regulations and guidelines,
EPA policies and this Plan.
306.3 Section 4 (a) (4) Executive Or-
der 11507, February 5, 1970, requires de-
velopment, by all Federal agencies, of
emergency plans and procedures for
dealing with accidental pollution. Plans
developed pursuant to that authority
shall be in accordance with and comple-
-------
3714
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
mentary to appropriate regional oil and
hazardous substances pollution contin-
gency plans.
306.4 In the event of a nuclear pollu-
tion spill, the coordination and response
procedures of the Interagency Radiologi-
cal Assistance Plan shall apply.
400 FEDERAL RESPONSE OPERATIONS—
RESPONSE PHASES
400.1 The actions taken to respond to
a pollution spill can be separated into
five relatively distinct classes or phases.
For descriptive purposes, these are:
Phase I—Discovery and Notification;
Phase II—Containment and Counter-
measures; Phase III—Cleanup and Dis-
posal; Phase IV—Restoration; and
Phase V—Recovery of Damages and En-
forcement. It must be recognized that
elements of any one phase may take
place concurrently with one or more
other phases.
401
PHASE I—DISCOVERY AND
NOTIFICATION
401.1 Discovery of a spill may be by
a report received from the discharger in
accordance with statutory requirements,
through deliberate discovery procedures
such as vessel patrols, aircraft searches,
or similar procedures, or through ran-
dom discovery by incidental observa-
tions of Government agencies or the
general public. In the event of receipt
of a report by the discharger, written
verification of such notification shall be
provided by the receiving Federal agency
within 7 working days. In the event of
deliberate discovery, the spill would be
reported directly to the RRC. Reports
from random discovery may be initially
through fishing or pleasure boats, police
departments, telephone operators, port
authorities, news media, etc. Reports
generated by random discovery should
be reported to the nearest CG or EPA
office. Regional plans should provide
for such reports to be channeled to the
RRC as promptly as possible to facili-
tate effective response action.
401.2 The severity of the spill will
determine the reporting procedure and
the participating Federal agencies to be
notified promptly of the spill. The se-
verity of the spill is determined by the
nature and quantity of materials spilled,
the location of the spill and the resources
adjacent to the spill area which may be
affected by it. Regional plans should
specify critical water use areas and de-
tail alerting procedures and communica-
tion links. All spills should be reported
to the OSC and the RRC. A major or
potential major spill shall immediately
be reported to the RRC and NRC via
telephone and teletype. Members of the
RRT and NRT shall be notified by the
appropriate response center depending
on the severity of the spill. Medium
spills shall be reported to the RRC and
the NRC as soon as practicable, utilizing
teletype whenever possible.
402 PHASE II—CONTAINMENT AND
COUNTERMEASURES
402.1 These are defensive actions to
be initiated as soon as possible after dis-
covery and notification of a spill. After
the OSC determines that further Federal
response actions are needed and depend-
ing on the circumstances of each partic-
ular case, various actions may be taken.
These may include, public health protec-
tion activities, source control procedures,
salvage operations, placement of physical
barriers to halt or slow the spread of a
pollutant, emplacement or activation of
booms or barriers to protect specific in-
stallations or areas, control of the water
discharge from upstream impoundments,
and the employment of chemicals and
other materials to restrain the pollutant
and its effects on water related resources.
Surveillance activities will be conducted
as needed to support Phase II and Phase
III actions.
403 PHASE III—CLEANUP AND DISPOSAL
403.1 This includes those actions
taken to remove the pollutant from the
water and related onshore areas such
as the collection of oil through the use
of sorbers, skimmers, or other collection
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3715
devices, the removal of beach sand, and
safe, nonpolluting disposal of the pollu-
tants which are recovered in the cleanup
process.
404 PHASE IV—RESTORATION
404.1 This includes those actions
taken to restore the environment to its
prespill condition, including assessment
of damages incurred, and actions such as
reseeding shellfish beds.
405 PHASE V—RECOVERY OF DAMAGES
AND ENFORCEMENT
405.1 This includes a variety of activ-
ities, depending on the location of and
circumstances surrounding a particular
spill. Recovery of Federal cleanup costs
and recovery for damage done to Fed-
eral, State or local government property
is included; however, third party dam-
ages are not dealt with in this Plan. En-
forcement activities under appropriate
authority such as sections 11 and 12 of
the Act, the Refuse Act of 1899, and
State and local statutes or ordinances
are also included. The collection of sci-
entific and technical information of value
to the scientific community as a basis
for research and development activities
and for the enhancement of our under-
standing of the environment may also
be considered in this phase. It must be
recognized that the collection of samples
and necessary data must be performed
at the proper times during the case for
enforcement and other purposes. En-
forcement procedures, including inves-
tigative requirements, are detailed in
Annex VIII.
406 PROCEDURES TO BE FOLLOWED
FOR THE PURPOSE OF WATER
POLLUTION CONTROL
406.1 The agency furnishing the OSC
for a particular area is assigned respon-
sibility to undertake and implement
Phase I activities in that area. Other
agencies should incorporate Phase I ac-
tivities into their ongoing programs
whenever practicable. Upon receipt of
information, either from deliberate or
random discovery activities, that a spill
has occurred, the OSC for the affected
area will be notified. Subsequent action
and dissemination of information will be
in accordance with the applicable re-
gional plan.
406.2 The OSC is assigned responsi-
bility for the initiation of Phase II ac-
tions and should take immediate steps
to effect containment or other appropri-
ate countermeasures.
406.3 The OSC is assigned responsi-
bility for conduct of Phase III activities.
406.4 The OSC is assigned responsi-
bility for the conduct of Phase IV activi-
ties utilizing techniques concurred in by
the RRT.
406.5 Phase V activities shall be car-
ried out by the individual agencies in
accordance with existing statutes, with
such assistance as is needed from other
agencies and from the OSC.
406.6 Environmental pollution con-
trol techniques shall be in accordance
with the applicable regional plan. In
any circumstance not covered by the
regional plan, the use of chemicals must
be in accordance with Annex X and
must have the concurrence of the EPA
representative on RRT; in his absence,
the concurrence of the appropriate EPA
Regional Administrator will be required.
500 COORDINATING INSTRUCTIONS
501 DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY
501.1 Delegation of authority or con-
currence in proposed or continuing water
pollution control activities may be either
verbal or written by the EPA represent-
ative on RRT.
502 MULTIREGIONAL ACTIONS
502.1 In the event that a spill or a
potential spill moves from the area cov-
ered by one contingency plan into an-
other area, the authority to initiate
pollution control actions shall shift as
appropriate. In the event that a pollut-
ing spill or potential spill affects areas
covered by two or more regional plans,
the response mechanism called for by
both plans shall be activated; however,
pollution control actions shall be fully
-------
3716
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
coordinated as detailed in the regional
plans.
502.2 There shall be only one On-
Scene Coordinator at any time during
the course of a spill response. Should
a spill affect two or more areas, the RRT
will designate the OSC, giving prime
consideration to the area vulnerable to
the greatest damage. NET shall desig-
nate the OSC if members of one RRT or
of two adjacent RRTs, if appropriate,
are unable to agree on the designation.
503 NOTIFICATION
503.1 Sections 11 and 12 of the Act
require that all harmful discharges of
oil and all discharges of hazardous sub-
stances into or upon the navigable waters
of the United States must be reported to
appropriate Federal authority. Designa-
tion of the Federal agents to receive such
reports are contained in Title 33, Part
153, Subpart B, Code of Federal Regula-
tions published by the U.S. Coast Guard
and are available through that Agency's
District Headquarters. In general, such
reports are to be made to the nearest
USCG or EPA office.
504 GENERAL PATTERN OF RESPONSE
ACTIONS
504.1 When the On-Scene Coordina-
tor receives a report of a spill, or poten-
tial spill, the report should be evaluated.
In most situations, the sequence of ac-
tions shown below should be followed.
504.1-1 Investigate the report to de-
termine pertinent information such as
the threat posed to public health or wel-
fare, the type and quantity of material
spilled, and the source of the spill.
504.1-2 Effect notification in accord-
ance with the applicable regional plan.
504.1-3 Designate the severity of the
situation and determine the future
course of action to be followed.
504.2 The result of the report prob-
ably can be categorized by one of five
classes. Appropriate action to be taken
in each specific type case is outlined
below:
504.2-1 If the investigation shows
that the initial information overstated
the magnitude or danger of the spill and
there is no environmental pollution in-
volved, it should be considered a false
alarm and the case should be closed.
504.2-2 If the investigation shows a
minor spill with the discharger taking
appropriate cleanup action, contact is
made with the discharger, the situation
is monitored and information is gathered
for possible enforcement action.
504.2-3 If the investigation shows a
minor spill with improper action being
taken, the following measures should be
taken:
a. Attempt should be made to prevent
further discharges from the source.
b. The discharger should be advised of
the proper action to be taken.
c. If, after providing advice to the dis-
charger and this advice is not followed,
the discharger shoud be warned of legal
responsibility for cleanup and violations
of law.
d. Information should be collected for
possible enforcement action.
e. The OSC should notify appropriate
State and local officials. He should keep
the Regional Response Center advised
and initiate Phase II and III activities
as conditions warrant.
504.2-4 When, a report or investiga-
tion indicates that a medium spill has
occurred or that a potential medium
spill situation exists, the OSC should fol-
low the same general procedures as for
a minor spill. Additionally, the OSC
should make a recommendation on con-
vening the RRT.
504.2-5 When a report indicates that
a major spill has occurred, that a po-
tential major spill situation exists, or
that a spill or potential spill which could
arouse wide public concern has oc-
curred, the OSC should follow the same
procedures as for minor and medium
spills. RRC and NRT should, however,
be notified immediately of the situation
even if the initial report has not been
confirmed.
505 STRIKE FORCE
505.1 A nucleus National level strike
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3717
force, consisting of personnel trained,
prepared and available to provide the
necessary services to carry out this Plan
has been established by the USCG. This
force, presently located on the east coast,
is being augmented and will be on site
at various locations throughout the
country. The National level strike force
will be made available if requested to
assist in response during pollution spills.
The National level strike force may be
requested through the appropriate
USCG District Commander, Area Com-
mander, or the Commandant, USCG.
The strike force will direct the operation
of any government-owned specialized
pollution cleanup equipment and will
function under the OSC.
505.2 Regional plans shall provide
the designation of local strike force
teams consisting of personnel from op-
perating units within the region. They
shall be trained, prepared, and available
to provide necessary services to imple-
ment the Plan. Regional plans shall
specify the location of the local strike
force teams. The services of the local
strike force teams will be obtained
through the appropriate Coast Guard
District Commander. These teams are
to be capable of merging with other
strike forces within the region, or of
being sent outside their own region.
They are to be capable of supplementing
the National level strike force. The local
strike force teams should be capable of
full independent response to all minor
spill situations and joint coordinative re-
sponse to medium or major spill
situations.
600 PROCEDURES FOR CHANGING THE
PLAN AND ANNEXES
601 AMENDMENT OF THE PLAN AND
ANNEXES
601.1 Recommended changes to this
Plan and Annexes shall be developed by
NET and submitted to CEQ for approval
and publication. Should disagreements
between agencies arise, recommenda-
tions of a majority of the NRT members
and the minority opinion shall be sub-
mitted to CEQ for decision.
602 AMENDMENT OF THE REGIONAL
PLANS
602.1 Regional plans may be
amended by EPA or the USCG in their
respective areas with the concurrence of
the Agencies affected by such changes.
Any disagreements will be referred to
NRT for resolution.
ROBERT CAHN,
Acting Chairman.
ANNEX X
2000 SCHEDULE OF DISPERSANTS AND
OTHER CHEMICALS TO TREAT OIL
SPILLS
2001 General. 2001.1 This schedule shall
apply to the navigable waters of the United
States and adjoining shorelines, and the
waters of the contiguous zone as denned In
Article 24 of the Convention on the Terri-
torial Sea and the Contiguous Zone.
2001.2 This schedule applies to the regu-
lation of any chemical as hereinafter denned
that is applied to an oil spill.
2001.3 This schedule advocates develop-
ment and utilization of mechanical and other
control methods that will result In removal
of oil from the environment with subsequent
proper disposal.
2001.4 Relationship of the Environmental
Protection Agency with other Federal agen-
cies and State agencies in implementing this
schedule: In those States with more strin-
gent laws, regulations or written policies for
regulation of chemical use, such State laws,
regulations, or written policies shall govern
This schedule will apply in those States that
have not adopted such laws, regulations, or
written policies.
2002 Definitions. Substances applied to an
oil spill are denned as follows:
2002.1 Collecting agents—include chemi-
cals or other agents that can gell, sorb, con-
geal, herd, entrap, fix, or make the oil mass
more rigid or viscous in order to facilitate
surface removal of oil.
2002.2 Sinking agents—are those chemical
or other agents that can physically sink oil
below the water surface.
2002.3 Dispersing agents—are those chem-
ical agents or compounds which emulsify,
disperse, or solubilize oil Into the water col-
umn or act to further the surface speadlng
of oil slicks In order to facilitate dispersal
of the oil Into the water column.
2003 Collecting agents. Collecting agents
are considered to be generally acceptable pro-
viding that these materials do not In them-
selves or in combination with the oil Increase
the pollution hazard.
-------
3718
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
2004 Sinking agents. Sinking agents may
be used only in marine waters exceeding 100
meters in depth where currents are not pre-
dominately onshore, and only if other control
methods are judged by EPA to be inadequate
or not feasible.
2005 Authorities controlling use of dis-
persants. 2005.1 Regional response team ac-
tivated: Dispersants may be used in any
place, at any time, and in quantities desig-
nated by the On-Scene Coordinator, when
their use will:
2005.1-1 in the judgment of the OSC, pre-
vent or substantially reduce hazard to human
life or limb or substantial hazard of fire to
property;
2005.1-2 in the judgment of EPA, in con-
sultation with appropriate State agencies,
prevent or reduce substantial hazard to a
major segment of the population (s) of vul-
nerable species of waterfowl; and,
2005.1-3 in the judgment of EPA, in con-
sultation with appropriate State agencies,
result in the least overall environmental
damage, or interference with designated uses.
2005.2 Regional response team not acti-
vated: Provisions of section 2005.1-1 shall
apply. The use of dispersants in any other
situation shall be subject to this schedule
except in States where State laws, regula-
tions, or written policies that govern the pro-
hibition, use, quantity, or type of dispersant
are in effect. In such States, the State laws,
regulations or written policies shall be fol-
lowed during the cleanup operation.
2006 Interim restrictions on use of dis-
persants for pollution control purposes. Ex-
cept as noted in 2005.1, dispersants shall not
be used:
2006.1 On any distillate fuel oil;
2006.2 On any spill of oil less than 200
barrels in quantity;
2006.3 On any shoreline;
2006.4 In any waters less than 100 feet
deep;
2006.5 In any waters containing major
populations, or breeding or passage areas for
species of fish or marine life which may be
damaged or rendered commercially less mar-
ketable by exposure to dispersant or dispersed
oil;
2006.6 In any waters where winds and/or
currents are of such velocity and direction
that dispersed oil mixtures would likely, in
the judgment of EPA, be carried to shore
areas within 24 hours; or
2006 7 In any waters where such use may
affect surface water supplies.
2007 Dispersant use. Dispersants may be
used in accordance with this schedule if other
control methods are judged to be inadequate
or infeasible, and if:
2007.1 Information has been provided to
EPA, in sufficient time prior to its use for
review by EPA, on its toxicity, effectiveness
and oxygen demand determined by the
standard procedures published by EPA (prior
to publication by EPA of standard procedures,
no dispersant shall be applied, except as noted
in section 2005.1-1 in quantities exceeding 5
p.p.m. in the upper 3 feet of the water column
during any 24-hour period. This amount is
equivalent to 5 gallons per acre per 24 hours);
and
2007.2 Applied during any 24-hour period
in quantities not exceeding the 96 hour TLso
of the most sensitive species tested as cal-
culated in the top foot of the water column.
The maximum volume of chemical permitted,
in gallons per acre per 24 hours, shall be cal-
culated by multiplying the 96-hour TL5o value
of the most sensitive species tested, in parts
per million, by 0.33; except that in no case,
except as noted in section 2005.1-1, will the
daily application rate of chemical exceed 540
gallons per acre or one-fifth of the total vol-
ume spilled, whichever quantity is smaller.
2007.3 Dispersant containers are labeled
with the following information:
2007.3-1 Name, brand, or trademark, if
any, under which the chemical is sold;
2007.3-2 Name and address of the manu-
facturer, importer, or vendor;
2007.3-3 Flash point;
2007.3-4 Freezing or pour point;
2007.3-5 Viscosity;
2007.3-6 Recommend application proce-
dure(s), concentration (s), and conditions for
use as regards water salinity, water tempera-
ture, and types and ages of oils; and
2007.3-7 Date of production and shelf life.
2007.4 Information to be supplied to EPA
on the:
2007.4-1 Chemical name and percentage
of each component;
2007 4-2 Concentrations of potentially haz-
ardous trace materials, including, but not
necessarily being limited to lead, chromium,
zinc, arsenic, mercury, nickel, copper, or
chlorinated hydrocarbons;
2007.4-3 Description of analytical methods
used in determining chemical characteristics
outlined in 2007 4-1, -2 above;
2007.4-4 Methods for analyzing the chem-
ical in fresh and salt water are provided to
EPA or reasons why such analytical methods
cannot be provided; and
2007.4-5 For purposes of research and de-
velopment, EPA may authorize use of dis-
nersants in specified amounts and locations
under controlled conditions irrespective of
the provisions of this schedule.
NOTE: In addition to those agents defined
and described in section 2002 above, the fol-
lowing materials which are not a part of this
schedule, with cautions on their use, should
be considered:
1. Biological agents—those bacteria and
enzymes isolated, grown and produced for
the specific purpose of encouraging or speed-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3719
ing biodegradation to mitigate the effects of
a spill. Biological agents shall be used to
treat spills only when such use is approved
by the appropriate State and local public
health and water pollution control officials.
2. Burning agents—are those materials
which, through physical or chemical means,
improve the combustibility of the materials
to which they are applied. Burning agents
may be used and are acceptable so long as
they do not in themselves, or in combination
with the material to which they are applied,
increase the pollution hazard and their use
is approved by appropriate Federal, State,
and local fire prevention officials.
ANNEX XX
3000 REGIONAL CONTINGENCY PLANS
3001 General. 3001.1 Regional Contin-
gency Plans have been developed for all U.S.
coastal and inland navigable waters.
3001.2 These plans are available for re-
view at the local District or Regional offices
or the USCG and EPA respectively.
3002 Cross references. 3002.1 State Stand-
ard Administrative Regions, USCG District
and EPA Regions are as follows:
States
Coast Guard
district
(coastal)
EPA region
(inland)
Region I:
Maine First Region I.
New Hampshire First Do.
Vermont Do.
Massachusetts First Do.
Connecticut Third Do.
Rhode Island First Do.
Region II:
New York:
Coastal Area Third Region II.
Great Lakes Area . Ninth Do.
New Jersey Third Do.
Region III:
Pennsylvania:
East Coast Third Region III.
Lakeside Ninth Do.
Maryland Fifth Do.
Delaware Third Do.
West Virginia Do.
Virginia Fifth Do.
Puerto Rico Seventh Do.
Virgin Islands Seventh Do.
Region IV:
Kentucky Region IV.
Tennessee Do.
North Carolina Fifth Do.
South Carolina Seventh Do.
Georgia Seventh Do.
Florida:
Atlantic and Gulf Seventh Do.
Coasts.
Panhandle Eighth Do.
Alabama Eighth Do.
Mississippi Eighth Do.
Canal Zone Seventh Do.
Region V:
Minnesota Ninth Region V.
Wisconsin Ninth Do.
Michigan Ninth Do.
Illinois Ninth Do.
Indiana Ninth Do.
Ohio Ninth Do.
Region VI:
New Mexico Region VI.
Texas Eighth Do.
Oklahoma Do.
Arkansas Do.
Louisiana Eighth Do.
Region VII:
Nebraska Region VII.
Iowa Do.
Kansas Do.
Missouri Do.
Region VIII:
Montana Region VIII.
Wyoming Do.
Utah Do.
Colorado Do.
North Dakota Do.
South Dakota Do.
Region IX:
California:
Northern Twelfth Region IX.
Southern Eleventh Do.
Nevada Do.
Arizona Do.
Hawaiian Islands Do.
Region X:
Washington Thirteenth .... Region X.
Oregon Thirteenth .... Do.
Idaho Do.
Alaska Seventeenth .. Do.
3002 2 Please refer to Annex IV for ad-
dresses and telephone numbers as appropri-
ate EPA and USCG offices.
-------
3720 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
4.4 GUIDELINES FOR LITIGATION UNDER THE REFUSE
ACT PERMIT PROGRAM
Department of Justice, April 7,1972
TO: All United States Attorneys
SUBJECT: Guidelines for Litigation Under the Refuse Act Permit
Program (33 C.F.R. Part 209 et seq.)
In view of (a) the signing by the President of the attached Execu-
tive Order 11574 which establishes a permit program under the
Refuse Act to regulate the discharges of pollutants and other refuse
matter into the navigable waters of the United States or their tribu-
taries, (b) the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding between
the Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency
with respect to the enforcement of the Refuse Act, and (c) the
consolidation within the Land and Natural Resources Division pur-
suant to Departmental Memo No. 725 of criminal as well as civil
responsibility for the administration of the Refuse Act, the Guide-
lines for Litigation Under the Refuse Act transmitted to the United
States Attorneys on June 13, 1970, are hereby withdrawn and the
following procedures are to be adhered to by all United States
Attorneys:
1. United States Attorneys are authorized to initiate any action,
either civil or criminal, referred to
[p. 1]
them for litigation by the District Engineer of the Corps of Engineers
or the Regional Representative of the Environmental Protection
Agency, pursuant to their Memorandum of Understanding.
2. All allegations of violations of the Refuse Act submitted to the
United States Attorneys from sources other than the District Engi-
neer of the Corps of Engineers or the Regional Representative of
the Environmental Protection Agency shall be referred to the District
Engineer of the Corps of Engineers and the Regional Representative
of the Environmental Protection Agency for investigation and recom-
mendations, in accordance with the procedures set forth in the
Memorandum of Understanding between the Corps of Engineers and
the Environmental Protection Agency, as to whether or not legal
action should be initiated.
3. The provisions of these guidelines shall not apply to actions
under the Refuse Act against vessels, which actions shall continue
to be handled in the manner set forth in Departmental Memorandum
376, dated June 3, 1964, and Supp. 1 thereto, dated May 24, 1966, and
shall continue to be under the jurisdiction of the Civil Division.
[P-2]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3721
4. All requests for instructions and guidance relating to the en-
forcement of the Refuse Act, whether of a civil or criminal nature,
excepting vessels, shall be referred to the Pollution Control Section
of the Land and Natural Resources Division, United States Depart-
ment of Justice, Washington, D.C. 20530 (202-739-2707).
5. No criminal or civil action under the Refuse Act shall be dis-
missed or settled without the prior authorization of the Assistant
Attorney General for the Land and Natural Resources Division.
6. Prior to the filing of civil complaints or criminal informations, or
the return of indictments in Refuse Act cases, the United States
Attorney shall advise the Land and Natural Resources Division, Pol-
lution Control Section (202-739-2707).
7. The United States Attorneys shall supply the Pollution Control
Section, Land and Natural Resources Division, copies of all pleadings,
motions, memorandums, etc., filed in Refuse Act cases.
8. United States Attorneys shall, no later than the fifth day of each
month, submit to the Pollution Control
[p. 3]
Section a report of Refuse Act activities for the previous month on
the attached form.
Dated: April 7, 1971.
SHIRO KASHIWA,
Assistant Attorney General,
Land and Natural Resources Division.
[p. 4]
4.5 WATER QUALITY STANDARDS SUMMARIES
The water quality standards program is directed by the Environ-
mental Protection Agency, an independent regulatory agency which
has responsibility for approving State-adopted standards, evaluating
adherence to the standards, and overseeing enforcement of standards
compliance.
Standards, the first nationwide strategy for water quality manage-
ment, contain four major elements: the use (recreation, drinking
water, fish and wildlife propagation, industrial, or agricultural) to be
made of the interstate water; criteria to protect those uses; imple-
mentation plans (for needed industrial-municipal waste treatment
improvements) and enforcement plans; and an antidegradation state-
ment to protect existing high quality waters.
Minimum water quality criteria, or numerical specifications of
physical, chemical, temperature, and biological levels, are stated in
the National Technical Advisory Committee report to the Secretary
of the Interior, Water Quality Criteria, dated April 1, 1968, and pub-
-------
3722 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
lished by the Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Unavail-
ability of the NTAC report before June 30, 1967—the date set by
the Water Quality Act of 1965 for formal adoption of State standards
—resulted in significant variations between the State-adopted and
the NTAC minimum criteria. Some standards were adopted and
approved before the NTAC report became available.
The Water Quality Criteria report is presently being updated in
light of new scientific and technical information, with schedule
publication in June 1972. These criteria compilations are issued
to provide information to the public on water quality standards.
As further information becomes available, they will be updated.
Water quality standards are subject to change when justified by
newly available technical and scientific information. For the latest
information refer to the existing approved water quality standards
which can be obtained from the individual State water pollution
control agency or EPA regional office.
4.5a "STANDARDS FOR TEMPERATURE"
Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Water Quality Standards, March 1971
Temperature standards are set to control thermal pollution, or the
amount of heated wastes discharged into the water. Thermal pollu-
tion creates adverse conditions for aquatic life; accelerates biological
processes in the streams, reducing the dissolved oxygen content of
the water; increases the growth of aquatic plants, contributing to
taste and odor problems; or otherwise makes the water less suitable
for fish and wildlife, domestic, industrial, and recreational uses.
[p. i]
Water Quality Criteria, used by EPA in evaluating State standards,
recommends a maximum water temperature of 90°F with a maximum
permissible rise above the naturally existing temperatures of 5°F in
streams and 3°F in lakes. It recommends that trout and salmon
waters not be warmed in order to protect these resources. Because
of the lesser temperature fluctuations in the marine and estuarine
environment, the NTAC report recommends that monthly maximum
daily temperatures recorded at any site, before the addition of
artificial heat, not be raised by more than 4°F from September
through May and by more than 1.5°F from June through August.
Individual State-adopted standards follow.
[p. ii]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3723
Key
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
MARCH 30, 1971
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS SUMMARY
TEMPERATURE CRITERIA
PWS—Public Water Supply
Rec.—Recreation
F & WL—Fish and wildlife propagation
Agric.—Agricultural water supply
Ind.—Industrial (also may include power and cooling) water
supply
Nav.—Navigation
Shell.—Shellfishing
*—not approved by Secretary
PWS—"With respect to cooling water discharges only, the am-
bient temperature of receiving waters shall not be increased
more than 10 °F. by the discharge of such cooling waters, after
reasonable mixing; nor shall the discharge of such cooling
waters, after reasonable mixing, cause the temperature of the
receiving waters to exceed 93 °F."
Rec.—same as PWS
Agric. and Ind.—same as PWS
Shell.—same as PWS*
F & WL—same as PWS*
PWS—below 60°F.; waste flows above 60°F. adjusted to ambient
receiving water temperature.
Rec.—numerical value not applicable
F & WL—may not exceed temperature of natural conditions by
more than 5% for salt water or 10% for fresh water. No change
permitted for temperatures over 60 °F. Maximum rate of change
—0.5°F./hr.
Shell.—less than 68°F.
Stock and Irrigation—between 60 °F. and 70 °F. for optimum
growth to prevent physiological shock to plants.
Ind.—less than 70 °F.
[P-I]
93°F. max; not more than 5°F. change.
Cold water fish.—Nov-March—55 °F. max. not more than
April-Oct— 70°F. max. 2°F. change
20°C.—max. in trout streams
30°C.—max. in smallmouth bass streams
35 °C.—max. in other streams
Smith River—the following maxima: 60°F., Sept.-Oct; 55°F.,
Nov.-May; 60 CF., June; 70°F., July-Aug.*
Klamath River—the following maxima: 60°F., Oct.; 55°F., Nov.-
May; 65°F., June; 70DF., July-Aug.; 65°F., Sept.*
Lake Tahoe—no criteria*, but prohibition of all waste dis-
charges
East & West Walker Rivers and Lake Topaz—22°C.*
East & West Forks Carson River and Truckee River—20°C.*
Goose Lake—the mean daily temperature shall not exceed 70 °F.,
or the mean daily ambient ah- temperature, whichever is
greater.*
-------
3724
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of
Columbia
Florida
Alamo & New Rivers—temperature change less than 2°F.*
All other waters—various narrative statements which state that
temperatures shall not adversely affect aquatic life or other
water uses.*
Class B, (cold water fish)—70°F. max. No controllable temper-
ature change will be permitted which will interfere with the
spawning and other aspects of fish life. Abrupt changes in tem-
perature must be avoided and the normal pattern of diurnal and
seasonal fluctuations must be preserved. The maximum allow-
able rise in temperature resulting from waste discharges in
streams and the epilimnion of lakes shall be 2°F. No discharge
permitted to the hypohmnion of lakes.
[p. 2]
Class B2 (warm water fish)—90 °F. max. No controllable tem-
perature change will be permitted which will interfere with
spawning and other aspects of fish life. Abrupt changes in tem-
perature must be avoided and the normal pattern of diural and
seasonal fluctuations must be preserved. The maximum allow-
able temperature increase due to waste discharge in streams
will be 5°F., and the maximum increase allowable from waste
discharges to the epilimnion of lakes is 3°F.
Class Bi and B2—In temperature measurement, allowance shall
be made for a mixing zone. Provisions shall be made for ade-
quate mixing and no thermal barrier to migration and free
movement of aquatic biota shall be permitted in any waters of
the State.
Class C—Temperature—The temperature shall not exceed 93 °F.
Class D—Temperature—No temperature criteria assigned.
Class A (PWS)—no increase other than natural origin
Class B (Rec.)
Class C (F & WL)
Class D (Nav. & Ind.)
Class SA (Shell.)
Class SB (Restricted Shell.)
Class SC (Shell. Habitat)
Class SD (Nav.)
No increase to exceed recom-
mended limits on most sensi-
tive water use, and in no case
to exceed 4°F. over natural
with a max. of 85 °F.
Ocean waters—shall not exceed 5°F. above normal for the area
or a max. of 75 °F.
Most rivers—shall not exceed 5°F. above normal for the section.
(For some rivers—a max. of 85°F. or 87°F.)
Not to exceed 90°F., 5°F. change limit; no sudden or localized
temperature changes which may adversely affect aquatic life.
All waters—temperature shall not be increased so as to cause
any damage or harm to the aquatic life or vegetation of the re-
ceiving waters or interfere with any beneficial use assigned to
such waters.
(Secretary has requested changes in criteria)
[p-3]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3725
Georgia PWS Not to exceed 93.2°F. at any time and not to be in-
Rec. creased more than 10 °F. above intake temperature.
F & WL In streams designated by the State Fish and Game
Shell. as trout waters, there shall be no elevation or de-
pression of natural stream temperature.
Ind. not to exceed 93.2°F. at any time and not to be increased
more than 10°F. above intake temperature.
Guam PWS—85°F. max., 5°F. change limit, 1.5°F. hourly change limit.
Rec —85 °F.
F & WL—1.5 °F. change limit from natural conditions.
Hawaii Classes AA, A, B (all uses of coastal and tidal waters)—tem-
perature of receiving waters shall not change more than 1.5°F.
from natural conditions.
Idaho No measurable temperature increase when stream temperature
is 68°F. or above, or more than 2°F. increase when river tem-
perature is 66°F. or less. (Except 70°F. and 68°F., respectively,
for Snake River—RM 407 to 247.)
Illinois PWS—90°F. max.
F & WL—not to exceed 90°F., April through Nov.; not to exceed
60°F., Dec. to April*
Ind.—90°F. max., except in SWB-8 where maximum is 93°F.
Lake Michigan—85 CF. max.
Indiana Industrial Classification—Temperature shall not exceed 95°F.
at any time.
Aquatic Life
1. Warm water species
a. There shall be abnormal temperature changes that affect
aquatic life unless caused by natural conditions.
b. The normal daily and seasonal temperature fluctuations
that existed before the addition of heat due to other than
natural causes shall be maintained.
[p. 4]
c. The maximum temperature rise at any time or place above
natural temperature shall not exceed 5°F. In addition, the
water temperature shall not exceed the maximum limits
indicated in the following table:
February
May
June
July
December
Ohio River
main stem
50
50
60
70
80
87
89
89
87
78
70
57
St. Joseph River
tributary to
Lake Michigan
50
50
55
65
75
85
85
85
85
70
60
50
Other Indiana
streams
50
50
60
70
80
90
90
90
90
78
70
57
-------
3726
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
2. Cold Water Species
a. In trout and salmon streams where natural reproduction
is to be protected, no heat shall be added.
b. In put-and-take streams, temperature shall not exceed
65°F. or a 5°F. rise above natural, whichever is less.
Warm water fish.—93°F., May-Nov.; 73°F., Dec-April*
Cold Water fish.—70°F. max.*
(Criteria only approved for Mississippi and Missouri Rivers)
[p. 5]
Maximum temperature 90°F.
Allowable rise for streams and rivers is 5°F.
Allowable rise for the epilimnion of lakes and reservoirs is 3°F.
Temperature measurement is at the outfall and with the maxi-
mum temperature allowed at the outfall reflecting a reasonable
mixing zone in the receiving waters so that the 5 F. or 3°F. rise
specified is not violated in the contiguous receiving waters.
Any barrier to migration and the free movement of the aquatic
biota is prohibited.
F & WL—not to exceed 93°F., May-Nov.; not to exceed 73°F.,
Dec.-April.
Ind— 95°F. max.
Min. daily allowable temperature change of 10 °F., and an hourly
rate not to exceed 2°F./hr. Temperature not to exceed 73°F.
in Dec., Jan., and Feb.—all waters.
Not to be raised more than 3°C. above normal ambient water
temperature, nor to exceed a max. of 36 °C.
A few rivers—2°C. rise, 35°C. max.
Freshwater (rivers, streams, and lakes)—84°F. max. for warm
water fish and 68°F. max. for trout and salmon waters. Rise of
5°F. from heated effluent of artificial origin allowed to rivers
and streams, and a 3°F. rise due to heated effluent for the
epilimnion of lakes.
Narrative Statement: No heated effluent allowed to be dis-
charged in the vicinity of, or so as to affect, waters designated
as fish spawning beds by the State.
Tidal Waters: No discharge of heated effluent that will raise the
monthly mean of the maximum daily temperature
[p. 6]
outside mixing zones of more than 4°F. or, where the necessity
therefor in any specific location is shown to exist, more than
1.5 °F. during the months of July, August, and September.
F& WL—
Nontidal waters:
Trout waters—not to exceed 72 °F. at any time. All other waters
—not to exceed 93°F., elevation of temperature not to exceed
20°F. or 10°F. depending whether the natural water tempera-
ture is below or above 50 °F., respectively, with a maximum of
60 °F. and 93 °F., respectively.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3727
Tidal Waters: 90°F. max.; same temperature change limit as
above with absolute max. temperatures of 60 °F. and 90 °F.
For all waters not classified for F & WL, no adverse temperature
change and max. of 100 °F.
Massachusetts Class A (excellent)—no increase other than natural origin.
Class B (Rec., F & WL)
Class C (F & WL)
No increase except where temper-
ature will not exceed the recom-
mended limit on the most sensitive
receiving water use and in no case
exceed 83°F. in warm water fish,
and 68°F. in cold water fish, or in
any case raise the normal temper-
ature more than 4°F.
[p. 7]
Class D (Ind.)—no increase to exceed limits on most sensitive
use and in no case exceed 90 °F.
All coastal and marine waters—no increase to exceed limits on
most sensitive water use.
Michigan PWS—10 °F. allowable rise above natural temperatures.
Ind.—same as PWS
Rec.—90°F. max.
F & WL—Cold water fish—70°F. max., 10°F. change limit*
Intolerant—85°F. max., 10°F., or 15°F. change limit*
Tolerant—87°F. max., 10°F., or 15°F. change limit*
Nav —same as PWS
Minnesota F & WL & Rec.—2A—no material increase
2B—86°F. max.
2C—90 °F. max.
Ind.—3A—75°F. max.
3B—86°F. max.
3C—90 °F. max.
Mississippi Shall not be increased more than 10°F. above the natural pre-
vailing background temperatures, not to exceed a max. of 93°F.
after reasonable mixing.
(Temperature change not approved for F & WL)
[p. 8]
Missouri Effluent shall not elevate or depress the average cross-sectional
temperature of the stream more than 5°F. The stream tem-
perature shall not exceed 90°F. due to effluents (for most
streams).
Trout waters—Effluents shall not elevate or depress the average
cross-sectional temperature of the stream more than 2°F.
Lakes and reservoirs—no temperature increase due to any dis-
charge which may be a source of heat.
Montana PWS—no allowable change to naturally occurring water tem-
perature.
Salmonid fish—(Classes Dl and D2)
increases—32°F. to 67°F.—2°F. max.; above 67°F.—0.5°F.
max.
-------
3728
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
decreases—over 55°F.—2°F. max./hr.; 55°F. to 32°F.—2°F.
max., provided that water temperature must be below 40 °F.
in the winter season and above 44°F. in the summer season.
Non-salmonid fish—(Class D-3)
increase—32°F. to 85°F.—4°F. max.; above 85°F—0.5°F. max.
decreases—same as Salmonid fish.
Ind.—no allowable temperature change in sufficient quantities
to adversely affect the use indicated.
Nebraska PWS—5°F. change limit, May-Oct.; 10°F. change limit, Nov.-
April; limit of 2°F./hr.
Rec— same as PWS
Trout Streams—65°F. max., 5°F. change limit
Warm water streams—90°F. max., change limits same as PWS
Missouri River (Gavins Point Dam to Sioux City, Iowa)—85°F.
max.; 4°F. change limit
[P. 9]
Nevada Max. summer values—30° C. to 20 °C. (varies with stream)
Max. winter values—14 °C.
New Hampshire Temperature criteria applicable to New Hampshire waters are
those set forth in Section 3, pages 28 through 110, of the Na-
tional Technical Advisory Committee Report "Water Quality
Criteria," and in the official standards of the New England
Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission.
New Jersey FW-1—preserve natural conditions
FW-2—(PWS)—5°F. change limit up to max. of 87°F. (unless
due to natural stream temperature)
FW-3—(F & WL)—same as FW-2
(change limits not approved for FW-2 & FW-3)
Coastal and Tidal waters—no increase that will adversely af-
fect biota*
Delaware Bay and Estuary—5°F. change limit above temper-
ature gradient (daily avg.) for 1961-1966, or a max. of 86°F.,
whichever is less.
New Mexico Warm water fish.—93°F. max., 5°F. change limit.
Cold water fish.—70°F. max., 2°F. change limit.
Allowable rise of 9°F. for the lower reach of the Pecos River.
New York Trout waters—no thermal discharge which will cause adverse
affects on trout.
Non-trout waters—90°F. max. within mixing zone; 86°F. max.,
and 5°F. change limit outside mixing zone, plus a 2°F. max.
change limit/hr., and/or 9°F. max. change limit for a 24 hr.
period, (fresh waters)
86°F. max. and 5°F. change limit outside mixing zone, plus a
1°F. max. change limit/hr. and/or 7°F. max. change limit for a
24 hr. period (tidal waters).
[p. 10]
North Carolina Class A-II (PWS); Class B; Class C. 5° change limit, maximum
of 84°F. for the mountains and upper piedmont, maximum of
90°F. for lower piedmont and coastal plain.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3729
Natural trout waters shall not exceed 68° and shall not be sig-
nificantly increased as a result of the discharge of heated
liquids. Put-and-take trout waters shall not exceed 70°F. and
may be increased 3°.
Class D. Not to exceed 5°F. above natural, maximum of 84° in
mountains and upper piedmont, and maximum of 90 °F. in lower
piedmont and coastal plain.
Class SA (Shell.) Allowable rise of 1.5°F. during June, July,
and August, 4.0°F. remaining months.
Not to exceed 90 °F. due to the discharge of heated effluents.
North Dakota 90 °F. maximum all waters.
Maximum allowable rise is 5°F. above natural.
Ohio Aquatic Life A—not to exceed 93°F., May-Nov.; not to exceed
73°F., Dec-April*
Aquatic Life B—not to exceed 95 °F.
Ind.—not to exceed 95 °F.
Oklahoma 5°F. change limit, provided the max. man-made temperature
does not exceed 70°F. in trout streams, 75°F. in smallmouth bass
streams, or 93 °F. in warm water streams.
Oregon General statement that no measurable increase in temperature
allowed when the receiving water temperature is 64°F. or above,
or more than 2°F. increase when the receiving water temper-
ature is 62°F. or less. The exceptions follow:
[p. 11]
Multnomah Channel and main stem Willamette River, from
mouth to Newberg (RM 50): 70°F. and 68°F., respectively.
Main stem Willamette River from Newberg to confluence of
Coast and Middle Forks (R. M. 187): 64°F. and 62°F. respec-
tively.
Main stem Columbia River, main stem Grande Ronde River,
Walla Walla River: 68°F. and 66°F., respectively.
Goose Lake. 70°F. or the daily mean ambient air temperature,
whichever is greater.
Klamath River: 72°F. and 70°F., respectively.
Marine waters: no significant increase above natural back-
ground temperature or water temperatures to be altered to a
degree which creates or can reasonably be expected to create an
adverse effect on fish or other aquatic life.
Pennsylvania Trout waters 58°F. max., 5°F. change limit.
Warm water fish.—5°F. change limit above natural or 87°F.
max., whichever is less; 2°F. change limit per hour.
Delaware River Estuary—same as warm water fish, but with
86 °F. max.
Mahoning River 93°F. max.; 2°F. change limit per hour.
Puerto Rico SA—no change
SB (Shell.)
SC (Rec.) 93°F. max., 4°F. change limit
SD (F & WL)
SE (Ind.)
-------
3730
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Class A (Excellent)—no increase from other than natural
origin.
Class B (Rec.) \ 68°F. and 83°F. max. for cold and warm
Class C (F & WL) ) water fish, respectively; 4°F. change
limit.
[p. 12]
Class D (Nav. & Ind.)—90°F. max., no increase to exceed limits
on most sensitive use.
Class SA (Shell.)
Class SB (Bathing)
Class SC
(Shell, habitat)
Class SD (Nav.)
No increase over the recommended
limits for the most sensitive use.
Class AA (PWS)
Class A (Red.)
Class B
(treated PWS)
Class C
(F&WL)
Class Ca
(fish survival)
Class SA (Shell.)
Class SB (Bathing)
Class SC
(Crabbing)
93.2°F. max. in mixing zone; 10°F.
change limit. Must be unheated zone
for fish passage.*
Fall, winter, spring, no more than 40 °F.
above natural; summer, no more than
1.5°F. above natural.
Cold water permanent fish.—68°F. max., 4°F. change limit.
Warm water permanent fish.—85°F. max., 4°F. change limit.
Warm water semi-permanent.—90°F. max., 8°F. change limit.
PWS
Rec.
Ind.
93°F. max., 3°F. change limit per hour; in no case
shall the temperature rise more than 10°F. above
natural—as measured at an upstream point.
F & WL—same as above but with 68°F. max. for trout*
Stock watering & Nav.—no increase other than from natural
origin.
Canadian River Basin—93°F. max., 5°F. change limit.
Tidal waters—fall, winter, and spring, not to exceed a 4°F. rise;
summer—not to exceed a 1.5°F. rise
All other waters—96°F. max., 5°F. change limit (until adequate
stream study is made)
[p. 13]
Cold water fish.—68°F. max., 2°F. change limit.
Warm water fish.—80°F. max., 4°F. change limit.
Class A (PWS)—No increase other than natural
Class B (Rec.) ) 68°F. and 83°F. max. for cold and warm
Class C (F&WL) ; water fish, respectively; no increase
over 4°F. (cold water criteria not ap-
proved)
Class D (Ind.)—90°F. max. or not harmful to assigned uses.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3731
Virginia Rules with General State-Wide Application:
The areas in lakes and impoundments of significance to aquatic
organisms shall not be raised more than 3°F. above that which
existed before the addition of heat of artificial origin. The
increase will be based on the monthly average of the maximum
daily temperature. Unless a special study proves that a dis-
charge of heated effluent into the hypolimnion (or pumping
water from the hypolimnion for discharging back into the
same water body) will not produce adverse effects, such prac-
tices shall not be approved.
Maximum temperature standards for these waters will be
consistent with those of areas upstream and downstream.
2.01 Primary Classification of Waters Within the State
Major
class
1
II
III
IV
V
VI
Geographical area or
other description of
waters
Open Ocean (Seaside of the
Land Mass).
Estuarlne (Tidal Water-
Coastal Zone to Fall Line).
Free Flowing Streams
(Coastal Zone and Piedmont
Zone to the Crest of the
Mountains).
Natural Trout Waters
Temperature of
Rise above
natural
4.0 (Sept.-May)
1.5 (June-Aug.)
4.0 (Sept.-May)
1.5 (June-Aug.)
5
5
Maximum
90
[p. 14]
87
70
70
Virgin Islands
Washington
Special Standards:
Temperature standard to be established for lakes and im-
poundments receiving thermal discharges:
In lakes and reservoirs, the temperature of the epilimnion,
in those areas where important organisms are most likely
to be adversely affected, shall not be raised more than 3°F.
above that which existed before the addition of heat of
artificial origin. The increase is to be based on the monthly
average of the maximum daily temperature. Unless a
special study shows that a discharge of a heated effluent into
the hypolimnion (or pumping water from the hypolimnion
for discharging back into the same water body) will be
desirable, such practice shall not be approved.
Portions of interstate streams shared with the State of West
Virginia not classified for trout would match the State's tem-
perature requirements of a maximum of 81 °F. and an allow-
able rise of no more than 5°F.
Class A (preservation of natural phenomena)—no change.
Class B (Rec. & F & WL)— 90°F. max.; fall, winter, spring—4°F.
allowable rise; spring 1.5°F. allowable rise.
Class AA (extraordinary waters)—No measurable increases
in temperature permitted within the waters designated which
-------
3732
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
result in water temperatures exceeding 60°F. (Fresh water) or
53°F. (Marine water) nor shall the cumulative total of all such
increases arising from nonnatural causes be permitted in excess
oft=75/(T-22) (Freshwater) ort=24/(T-39) (Marinewater);
for purposes hereof "t" represents the permissive increase and
"T" represents the resulting water temperature.
Class A (excellent waters)—65°F. and 61°F. max. for fresh
and marine waters, respectively. t=90/(T-19) and t=40/(T-35)
for fresh and marine waters, respectively.
[P-15]
Class B (good waters)—70°F. and 66°F. max. for fresh and
marine waters, respectively. t = 110/(T-15) and t=52/(T-32)
for fresh and marine waters, respectively.
Class C (fair waters)—75°F. and 72°F. max. for fresh and
marine waters, respectively. t = 125/(T-12) and t = 64/(T-29)
for fresh and marine waters, respectively.
Wisconsin F & WL—in waters where this use is of primary importance
—84°F. max., 5°F. change limit, 2°F. change limit per hour.
Where fishing is an additional use—89°F. max., 5°F. change
limit. In addition, authorization is required for proposed
installations where thermal discharges may increase natural
temperature by 3°F.
Trout streams—no temperature change that will adversely
affect trout.
Ind.—89°F. max.
West Virginia Class B2 (Ind.)—safe fish passage required
Class C (F & WL)—not to exceed 93°F. May-Nov.; not to ex-
ceed 73°F. Dec-April; 5°F. rise limit; 2°F./hr change rate.
Class D (cooling)—same as Class C
Class E (waste transport) —fish passage required
Wyoming Streams where natural temperatures exceed 70°F., 4°F. change
limit over natural.
Streams where natural temperatures are less than 70°F., 2°F.
change limit over natural.
(Until study is made, Max. temperature limit is daily average
plus allowable rise.)
[p. 16]
4.5b "STANDARDS FOR DISINFECTION"
Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Water Quality Standards, May 1971
Disinfection is employed to protect public water supplies, primary-
and secondary-body-contact recreational waters, shellfisheries
(because oysters, clams, and mussels can accumulate microorganisms,
including bacteria and viruses, and transmit them to consumers), and
agricultural waters for domestic animals. Disinfection reduces the
water-borne coliforms—organisms existing in feces, and other sources,
used as indicators of pathogen content of the disease-producing
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3733
potential of water. Inadequately disinfected sewage can contaminate
receiving waters with Salmonella, Shigella, Escherichia coli, Lepto-
spira, and Mycobacterium. Enteric viruses such as polio and hepatitis
can also be present.
Individual State-adopted standards follow.
[p-i]
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS SUMMARY
DISINFECTION
Alabama "All sewage discharged to waters of the State used as sources
of public water supply, used for the harvesting of oysters or
customarily used by the public for swimming and other whole
body water-contact activities shall receive a minimum of sec-
ondary treatment and, if necessary, disinfection."
Alaska Disinfection required where necessary.
Arizona Chlorination is required when wastes contain pathogenic
organisms.
Arkansas No specific requirement found in standards.*
* The State Water Pollution Control Commission has the authority to require whatever
treatment is necessary including disinfection of effluents.
California North Coastal streams only—Treated wastes which may indi-
rectly enter a North Coastal stream must be disinfected so as to
contain not more than a median MPN of 50/100 ml total
coliform.
Colorado "All wastes capable of treatment or control prior to discharge
into any waters of the State, shall receive secondary treatment
with disinfection or its industrial waste equivalent, as deter-
mined by the State Water Pollution Control Commission."
Connecticut All sewage treatment plant effluents must be disinfected before
discharged to any of the State's inland or coastal waters.
Delaware "All wastes (exclusive of storm water bypass) containing human
excreta or disease producing organisms shall be chlorinated."
Florida (No requirement found in standards.)
Georgia Secondary treatment or the equivalent with disinfection is a
basic requirement for all wastes discharged to Georgia waters.
Hawaii (No requirements found in standards.)
[P-1]
Idaho Communities and industries ... having primary treatment no
current waste treatment needs will be required to provide sec-
ondary treatment or its equivalent... Secondary treatment
with disinfection or the equivalent will be required for all new
domestic waste discharges.
Illinois Disinfection with up to 1 mg/1 of chlorine residual in the efflu-
ent to reduce coliform 5000 or less, where necessary (is re-
-------
3734
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
quired) . . . (least stringent criteria—most regulations have
stricter requirements). (Tertiary or other advance treatment or
modifications of conventional treatments will be specified for
all intermittent streams and small or low flow streams and shall
include effluent disinfection at least through the statements in
"Technical Release 20-22," April 1, 1967.)
Indiana Continuous disinfection is to be provided throughout the year
for all municipal wastewater treatment plant effluent in the Lake
Michigan Basin. "The Indiana implementation plan shows
disinfection specified for most sewage effluents."
Iowa "Where a significant coliform or other bacterial increase in a
designed Recreation Use Area can be identified with a control-
lable waste discharge, chlorination or other control procedures
to reduce the bacterial concentration below the guide limits
may be required."
Kansas "All treated wastes discharged to ephemeral streams which
flow through populated areas or are discharged in the vicinity
of body contact recreational areas must be chlorinated ..."
Kentucky Specific treatment requirements are not included in Kentucky
Standards.*
* The State Water Pollution Control Commission has the authority to require whatever
treatment is necessary including disinfection of effluents.
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
(No requirements found in standards.)
[p. 2]
"Effluent disinfection will be required on a year-round basis for
all effluent from sewage treatment plants as well as any other
waste treatment plant effluent containing fecal material or
other substances which without adequate disinfection would
be inimical to the public health. Such disinfection will be
required for all classes of water."
(No requirement found in standards.)
Freshwater—"All wastes shall receive appropriate waste treat-
ment which is defined as secondary treatment with disinfection
or its industrial waste treatment equivalent except when a
higher degree of treatment is required to meet the objectives
of the water quality standards, all as determined by the Division
of Water Pollution Control. Disinfection from October 1 to May
1 may be discontinued at the discretion of the Division of Water
Pollution Control."
Coastal or Marine Waters—"Appropriate treatment is defined
as the degree of treatment with disinfection required for the
receiving waters to meet their assigned State or interstate clas-
sification and to meet the objectives of the water quality stand-
ards. Disinfection from October 1 to May 1 may be discon-
tinued at the discretion of the Division of Water Pollution
Control."
Freshwater and Coastal or Marine Waters—"The amount of
disinfection required shall be equivalent to a free and com-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3735
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
bined chlorine residual of at least 1.0 mg/1 after 15 minutes
contact time during peak hourly flow or maximum rate of
pumpage."
"Year around disinfection of all final effluents from sewage
treatment plants is required."
"No treated sewage, or industrial waste or other wastes con-
taining viable pathogenic organisms, shall be discharged into
interstate waters of the State without effective disinfection.
Effective disinfection of any discharges, including combined
flows of sewage and storm water, may be required where nec-
essary to protect the specified uses of the interstate waters."
[p. 3]
(No requirement found in standards.)
(No requirement found in standards.)
The minimum treatment requirement for domestic sewage dis-
charged to the Missouri and Mississippi Rivers drainages is...
"Primary treatment and disinfection."
(No requirement found in standards.)
(No requirement found in standards.)
Section 311:3:1 of Chapter 311 Laws of 1967 states: "Insofar as
practicable, the initial objective of the control program will be to
obtain the installation of primary treatment (with adequate
disinfection where sewage discharges are involved) for all
discharges of sewage and industrial wastes."
"Year-round effective disinfection is an accepted method of
treatment required in New Jersey for most domestic wastes and
other wastewaters. Effective disinfection is hereby defined as:
(a) One (1) mg/1 combined chlorine residual after a thirty
(30) minute contact period based on design flow or a
twenty (20) minute contact period during peak hourly flow
or maximum rate of pumping.
(b) Coliform organisms not to exceed an MPN of 240 per 100
milliliters.
(No requirement found in standards.)
Continuous year-round disinfection of sewage treatment plant
effluents.
(No requirement found in standards.)
Effective disinfection of any treated discharges, whether sew-
age, industrial wastes, or other wastes, or overflow discharges
from combined storm water and sanitary discharge, if such dis-
charges constitute a potential or actual interference with the
intended usage of the waters of the Red River of the North, the
Boise de Sioux, and parts of the Sheyenne and Pembina Rivers
may be required by the State Health Department. Disinfec-
tion was not mentioned in standards for other interstate waters.
[p. 4]
-------
3736
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Secondary treatment and disinfection is required for effluents
discharged to the Ohio River. Disinfection that will maintain
coliform concentrations below 5,000 organisms per 100 ml at
public water supply intakes, and not to exceed 1,000 organisms
per 100 ml where and when the receiving waters in proximity
to the discharge point are used for recreational purposes are
required for the interstate waters of Lake Erie. All effluents
discharged to the Great Miami, Whitewater, and Wabash River
Basins will be satisfactorily disinfected to meet the criteria for
downstream water uses.
All sewage effluents discharged to the Mahoning River, Pyma-
tuning and Yankee Creeks, and Little Beaver Creek will be
satisfactorily disinfected to meet the stream-water quality
criteria. All municipal sewage effluents discharged to the Mau-
mee, Tiffin, St. Joseph, and St. Marys River Basins will be
disinfected in a manner that will maintain coliform concen-
trations not to exceed 5,000 organisms per 100 ml at public
water supply intakes, and not to exceed 1,000 per 100 ml where
and when the receiving waters in proximity to the discharge
point are used for recreational purposes involving bodily con-
tact. Municipal sewage treatment plant effluents discharged
to the Ashtabula River, Conneaut Creek, and Turkey Creek
including interstate waters of Ohio and Pennsylvania will be
disinfected in a manner that will maintain coliform concen-
trations not to exceed 5,000 organisms per 100 ml at public
water supply intakes, and not to exceed 1,000 organisms per
100 ml where and when the receiving waters in proximity to
the discharge point are used for recreational purposes involv-
ing bodily contact.
All interstate rivers and tributaries of same have the following
requirement: "... Waste discharges into waters used or capable
of being used for domestic water supplies or body contact
aquatic sports including skiing and swimming, shall receive
disinfection or equivalent treatment as necessary...."
[p. 5]
All sewage shall receive a minimum of secondary treatment or
equivalent (equal to at least 85% removal of 5-day biochemi-
cal oxygen demand and suspended solids) and shall be effec-
tively disinfected before being discharged into any public waters
of the State.
"Effective disinfection to control disease producing organisms
shall be the production of an effluent which will contain..."
included as part of definition of secondary treatment.
"All effluents from domestic wastes treatment plants and indus-
trial waste treatment plants accepting domestic wastes, are and
will be chlorinated at all times before their discharge to a water
South Carolina (No requirement found in standards.)
South Dakota Effective disinfection of any wastewater discharges, including
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3737
sewage, industrial wastes, other wastes and overflows from
combined storm and sanitary sewer systems, if these discharges
constitute an actual or potential interference with the intended
beneficial uses of these waters, may be required by the (South
Dakota) Committee (on Water Pollution).
Tennessee (No requirement found in standards.)
Texas It is the policy of the State of Texas, acting through the Texas
Water Quality Board, to require primary and secondary treat-
ment and disinfection (except for oxidation pond effluents) at all
facilities serving the general public and which treat domestic
sanitary wastes.
Utah While the standards described apply generally to receiving
stream flow, they can and must become effluent standards as re-
quired by lack of dilution water. Furthermore, because of the
public health ramifications of the standard for coliform bacteria,
it is presently an effluent standard by reason of the requirements
stated in Section 1-9 b, Exhibit 5, which limits coliforms to
5,000/100 ml. in any discharges not isolated from the public.
This requirement is given additional force by Section 111-82 b,
Exhibit 5, which recognizes the limited ability of chemical dis-
infectants, especially chlorine, to kill bacteria which are pro-
tected by layers of organic substance, through a requirement
for certain biological oxidation treatment prior to final disin-
fection."
[p. 6]
Part 111-82 of the Utah State Department of Health Code of
Waste Disposal Regulations explain their chlorination require-
ments which are:
(a) Treatment works effluents shall be chlorinated for reduc-
tion of bacteria and viruses as required by final conditions
of disposal and as stipulated by the Boards.
(b) In general, chlorination will be considered fully effective
for the purposes of these regulations when applied to
oxidized effluents retaining not more than 25 percent of
the raw wastewater BOD and containing not more than
50 mg/1 of BOD and not more than 50 mg/1 of suspended
solids.
(e) ... "For disinfection, the capacity should be adequate to
produce a residual of 1.0 mg/1 in the final effluent "
Vermont "Appropriate treatment shall be defined as secondary treat-
ment with disinfection or its industrial waste equivalent as
determined by the signatory State regulatory agency. Lesser
degrees of treatment or control will be permitted only where it
can be demonstrated that attainment of the specified water use
class criteria of quality can be effectuated."
Virginia Minute 59 states: "Chlorination facilities are to be operated
continuously during the entire year and a chlorine residual of
at least 2.0 ppm shall be maintained at all times... at sewage
treatment facilities that discharge effluent to Williams and
Upper Machodoc Creeks, King George County."
-------
3738
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
The Board requires that all treated discharges to the Nanse-
mond River (Suffolk area and Shingle Creek) "... containing
bacteria shall be chlorinated sufficiently and continuously
(100% of the time) to maintain a residual which will insure
substantially complete removal of coliform organisms. This
action is to be instituted immediately by all concerned owners."
Although disinfection is not specifically required for all State
interstate waters, the Board has the necessary authority to
require it in specific instances as they deem necessary.
(p. 7)
Washington Existing and new domestic waste dischargers shall provide
adequate secondary sewage treatment, disinfection and outfall
facilities. Where existing and new commercial, industrial or
domestic wastes discharge to salt water, secondary treatment
shall be required unless, after a review of existing data or an
engineering study, it can be demonstrated that a lesser degree
of treatment will provide for protection of present and future
water uses and the preservation or enhancement of existing
water quality. In no case, however, will less than primary
treatment with disinfection and adequate outfall be accepted.
West Virginia "Chlorination will be required for all installations and will be
employed for twelve months of the year."
Wisconsin Disinfection of sewage effluents is necessary for a fuller use of
our surface waters and in the protection of public health. Dis-
infection is to be used during the May 1, through October 31
period annually where recreational use is involved. The de-
partment will require year around disinfection where public
water supplies are involved.
Wyoming Required at sites determined by studies.
District of Although disinfection is not specifically mentioned as a require-
Columbia ment in the adopted water quality standards as submitted and
approved by the Secretary of the Interior, later enforcement
conferences have required it as a policy.
Virgin Islands Although disinfection is not specifically noted as a requirement
in the water quality standards, the power of the Commissioner
of Health to make it one is clearly indicated under the section
titled "Implementation and Enforcement Plan."
Guam No specific requirement found in standards.
Puerto Rico "Chlorination of treatment plant effluent will be required in
those cases in which it is necessary to maintain the receiving
body of water within the specified quality for its use."
[p. 8]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3739
4.5c "STANDARDS FOR MERCURY AND HEAVY METALS"
Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Water Quality Standards, May 1971
Mercury, silver, arsenic, cadmium, chromium, copper, lead, nickel,
and zinc are heavy metal compounds present in our waters and toxic
to man in varying degrees. They are serious pollutants because these
stable compounds have persistent and toxic effects for many years
following deposit. The heavy metal compounds chromium, cadmium,
mercury, and lead have no known biological function in animal life
and can act synergistically with other substances to increase toxicity.
Marine organisms, especially shellfish, readily take up and concen-
trate these heavy metals, which are thereafter ingested by man. Once
in the human system their toxic effects are cumulative and are harm-
ful to the degree that the dosages and resultant concentrations
approach a lethal threshold. The fishery industry has sustained
economic losses in recent years when unacceptable levels of mercury
or other heavy metals were discovered in fish from contaminated
waters, provoking government condemnation of the effected catches.
Fishing waters have been closed to fishermen, cutting them off from
their livelihood.
EPA generally recommends criteria in the NTAC report, Water
Quality Criteria, which cites the U.S. Public Health Service Water
Standards. These standards list "desirable criteria" as the minimum
detectable concentrations of the heavy metal compounds. In effect,
this sets the limit to near zero.
Individual State-adopted standards follow.
[p. i]
-------
3740
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
FEDERAL-STATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND USPHS DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
FOR MERCURY AND HEAVY METALS '
All States have been required to adopt statements as a part of general standards applicable to all
waters which require that those waters be free of substances attributable to discharges or wastes which
are toxic or which produce undesirable physiological responses in human, fish, and other animal life and
plants.
State
Metal
Criteria
values In mg/l
Use classification to
which applied
Alabama
.All Toxic materials,
Including metals.
Not to exceed 0.1 of the Shellfish Harvesting
48 hr. median tolerance Fish and Wildlife.
limit for fish, aquatic life
or shellfish, Including
shrimp and crabs
Narrative Statement. All Classes.
Alaska
.USPHS Standards
CCE (carbon
chloroform extracts) 0.1
USPHS Standards
All Toxic materials,
Including metals.
Class A Water Supply.
All Toxic materials,
Including metals.
Pesticide (heavy
metal constituents).
Narrative Statement Class B Water Supply.
Recreation.
Growth and Propagation of
Fish and other aquatic life.
Agriculture.
Industry.
Narrative Statement Shellfish.
0.001 of the LC50 for the
most sensitive organism
on 96 hr. exposure.
Arizona ..
Arkansas
.No Specific Criteria
[P- 1]
.All Toxic materials,
Including metals.
0.1 48-hr TLm » Fish and Wildlife.
California- Cadmium 0.01 Water Supply.
Sacramento-San Chromium 0.05 Water Supply.
Joaquln Delta. (hexavalent)
Copper 0.01 Water Supply.
Iron 0.3 Water Supply.
Lead 0.05 Water Supply.
Manganese 0.05 Water Supply.
Silver 0.01 Water Supply.
Zinc 0.1 Water Supply.
Colorado Cadmium 0.01 Water Supply.
Chromium .0.05 Water Supply.
(hexavalent)
Lead 0.05 Water Supply.
Silver 0.05 Water Supply.
Zinc 0.05 Water Supply.
Connecticut USPHS Standards Water Supply.
Delaware No Specific Criteria
Florida Copper 0.5 All Waters.
Zinc 1.0 All Waters.
Chromium 0.50 All Waters.
(hexavaient)
Chromium 1.0 in effluent All Waters.
(total) 0.05 after mixing All Waters.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3741
FEDERAL-STATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND USPHS DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
FOR MERCURY AND HEAVY METALS '—Continued
State
Metal
Criteria
values in mg/l
Use classification to
which applied
[p. 2]
Lead 0.05 All Waters.
Iron 0.30 All Waters.
Georgia No Specific Criteria
Hawaii No Specific Criteria
Idaho (Water Quality Criteria, published by the State
of California referenced as a guide)
Illinois Cadmium 0.01 Water Supply.
Chromium 0.05 Water Supply.
(hexavalent)
Chromium 1.00 Water Supply.
(trivalent)
Copper 1.0 Water Supply.
Iron (total) 0.3 Water Supply.
Lead 0.05 Water Supply.
Silver 0.05 Water Supply.
Zinc 5.0 Water Supply.
Cadmium 0.05 Aquatic Life.
Chromium 0.05 Aquatic Life.
(hexavalent)
Chromium 1.00 Aquatic Life.
(trivalent)
Copper 0.04 Aquatic Life.
Iron 1.00 Aquatic Life.
Lead 0.1 Aquatic Life.
Silver 0.05 Aquatic Life.
Zinc 1.00 Aquatic Life.
Illinois Cadmium 0.05 Water Supply.
River Basini Chromium 1.0 Water Supply.
1. Wabash Basin (hexavalent)
Lead 0.05 Water Supply.
Silver 0.05 Water Supply.
All Toxic materials, 0.1 of 48-hr, median Aquatic Life.
Including metals. tolerance limit.
2. Ohio and Cadmium 0.01 Water Supply.
Saline Basins Chromium 0.05 Water Supply.
(hexavalent)
Lead 0.05 Water Supply.
Silver 0.05 Water Supply.
All Toxic materials, 0.1 of 48-hr, median
Including metals. tolerance limit.
3. Mississippi Cadmium 0.01 Water Supply.
River between Chromium 0.05 Water Supply.
Illinois and (hexavalent)
Iowa. Lead 0.05 Water Supply.
Cadmium 0.05 Aquatic Life.
Chromium 0.05 Aquatic Life.
(hexavalent)
Chromium 1.00 Aquatic Life.
(trivalent)
[p. 3]
-------
3742
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
FEDERAL-STATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND USPHS DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
FOR MERCURY AND HEAVY METALS '—Continued
State
Metal
Criteria
values in mg/l
Use classification to
which applied
4. Mississippi
River between
Illinois and
Missouri.
Copper 0.02
Lead 0.10 ....
Zinc 1.0
All Toxic materials, max. 5.0
Including metals.
No Specific Criteria
.Aquatic Life.
.Aquatic Life.
.Aquatic Life.
.Aquatic Life.
5. Wabash River Cadmium 0.01 Water Supply.
and Tributaries. Lead 0.05 Water Supply.
Silver 0.05 Water Supply.
Chromium 0.05 Water Supply.
(hexavalent)
All Toxic materials, 0.1 of 48-hr, median Aquatic Life.
Including metals. tolerance limit.
6. Illinois River Cadmium 0.01 Water Supply.
and Lower Chromium 0.05 Water Supply.
Section of Des (hexavalent)
Plaines River. Chromium 1.00 Water Supply.
(trivalent)
Copper 1.0 Water Supply.
Iron (total) .0.3 Water Supply.
Lead 0.05 Water Supply.
Silver 0.05 Water Supply.
Zinc 5.0 Water Supply.
All Toxic materials, 0.1 of 48-hr, median Aquatic Life.
including metals. tolerance limit.
Cadmium 0.05 Aquatic Life.
Chromium 0.05 Aquatic Life.
(hexavalent)
Chromium 1.00 Aquatic Life.
(trivalent)
Copper 0.04 Aquatic Life.
Iron 1.00 Aquatic Life.
lead 0.1 Aquatic Life.
Silver 0.05 Aquatic Life.
Zinc 1.00 Aquatic Life.
7. Lake Michigan,
Little Calumet,
Grand Calumet,
Rivers, and
Wolf Lake:
(a) Lake Iron (Fe) Annual Av. All Classifications.
Michigan not more than
Open 0.15
Waters. USPHS Standards Water Supply.
(b) Lake
Michigan
Shore
Waters. USPHS Standards Water Supply.
[p. 4]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3743
FEDERAL-STATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND USPHS DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
FOR MERCURY AND HEAVY METALS'—Continued
State
Metal
Criteria
values in mg/l
Use classification to
which applied
(c) Little
Calumet
River.
(d) Wolf
Lake.
(e) Grand
Calumet
River.
No Narrative Statement
or Specific Criteria Assigned.
No Narrative Statement
or Specific Criteria Assigned.
No Narrative Statement
or Specific Criteria Assigned.
All Classifications.
All Classifications.
All Classifications.
8. Chicago River
and Calumet
River System,
and Calumet
Harbor Basin:
(a) Chicago Cadmium 0.05 Aquatic Life and Recreation.
River Chromium 0.05 Aquatic Life and Recreation.
from Lake (hexavalent)
Michigan Chromium 1.00 Aquatic Life and Recreation.
to Con- (trivalent)
fluence Copper 0.04 Aquatic Life and Recreation.
with the Iron 1.00 Aquatic Life and Recreation.
North Br. Lead 0.1 Aquatic Life and Recreation.
and the S. Silver 0.05 Aquatic Life and Recreation.
Branch, Zinc 1.00 Aquatic Life and Recreation.
the North All Toxic materials, 0.1 of 48-hr, median Aquatic Life and Recreation.
Shore Including metals. tolerance limit.
Channel.
[p. 5]
(b) Calumet USPHS Standards Water Supply.
Harbor
Basin.
9. Effluent Cadmium 0.05 Effluents.
Criteria Appll- Chromium 0.05 Effluents.
cable to all (hexavalent)
Illinois Chromium l.o Effluents.
Discharges. (trivalent)
Copper 0.04 Effluents.
Iron 10.0 Effluents.
Lead 0.1 Effluents.
Silver 0.05 Effluents.
Zinc 1.0 Effluents.
Indiana Cadmium 0.01 Water Supply.
Chromium 0.05 Water Supply.
(hexavalent)
Lead 0.05 Water Supply.
Silver 0.05 Water Supply.
All Toxic materials, 0.1 96-hr. TLm Aquatic Life.
Including metals.
Iowa Cadmium 0.01 Water Supply and Fish
and Wildlife.
Chromium 0.05 Water Supply and Fish
(hexavalent) and Wildlife.
Lead 0.05 Water Supply and Fish
and Wildlife.
Lead o.io Fish and Wildlife.
Chromium 1.00 Fish and Wildlife.
(trivalent)
-------
3744 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
FEDERAL-STATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND USPHS DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
FOR MERCURY AND HEAVY METALS '—Continued
Criteria Use classification to
State Metal values in mg/l which applied
Copper 0.02 Fish and Wildlife.
Zinc 1.0 Fish and Wildlife.
Kansas USPHS Standards Water Supply.
[p. 6]
Kentucky Cadmium 0.01 Water Supply.
Chromium 0.05 Water Supply.
(hexavalent)
Lead 0.05 Water Supply.
Sliver 0.05 Water Supply.
All Toxic materials, 0.1 48-hr. TLm Fish and Wildlife.
Including metals.
Louisiana All Toxic materials, 0.1 48-hr. TLm All Classifications.
Including metals.
Maine No Specific Criteria
Maryland No Specific Criteria
Massachusetts No Specific Criteria
Michigan Chromium 0.05 Water Supply.
(hexavalent)
Minnesota Copper 1.0 Water Supply.
Iron 0.3 Water Supply.
Manganese 0.05 Water Supply.
Zinc 5 Water Supply.
Cadmium 0.01 Water Supply.
Chromium 0.05 Water Supply.
(hexavalent)
Lead 0.05 Water Supply.
Silver 0.05 Water Supply.
Chromium trace Class A Fisheries
and Recreation.
Copper trace Class A Fisheries
and Recreation.
Chromium 1.0 Class B Fisheries
and Recreation.
Copper 0.2 Class B Fisheries
and Recreation.
Mississippi Cadmium 0.01 Water Supply.
Chromium 0.05 Water Supply.
(hexavalent)
Lead 0.05 Water Supply.
Silver 0.05 Water Supply.
[P- 7]
All Toxic materials, 0.1 48-hr. TLm Fish and Wildlife.
including metals.
Missouri No Specific Criteria
Montana All Toxic materials, 0.00 Above Water Supply Class A Closed.
including metals. Background
Levels.
USPHS Standards
All Toxic materials. Induced variation Water Supply Class A Open.
limited to a 10%
Increase of concentration.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3745
FEDERAL-STATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND USPHS DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
FOR MERCURY AND HEAVY METALS'—Continued
State
Metal
Criteria
values in mg/l
Use classification to
which applied
USPHS Standards .
All Toxic materials,
including metals.
Water Supply Class B.
Fish and Wildlife Classes D-l,
D-2, D-3.
Not to Exceed 0.1 96-hr.
TLm for residual mate
rials nor 0.01 of the
96-hr. TLm for pesticides
and organic materials
with a residual life ex-
ceeding 30 days.
All Toxic materials, Narrative Statement Agricultural Water Supply
Including metals. Class E.
All Toxic materials, Narrative Industrial Water Supply (other
Including metals. than food).
Nebraska USPHS Standards
.All Uses.
Nevada No Specific Criteria
New Hampshire No Specific Criteria
New Jersey No Specific Criteria
[P. 8]
New Mexico
.All Toxic materials,
Including metals.
Not to exceed 10%
of the 48-hr. TLm.
All Classes.
New York No Specif ic Criteria
North Carolina All Toxic materials,
Including metals.
0.0 Water Supply.
The maximum limits for toxic and other deleterious substances In receiving waters shall not exceed the
values recommended In the most recent edition of the "Report of the National Technical Advisory Com-
mittee on Water Quality" where stated and in cases where such values are not included in the report
bioassays will be conducted according to the standards techniques recommended therein to determine
safe levels for such substances on the basis of the discharge and characteristics of the waters under
consideration.
North Dakota Cadmium 0.01 All uses of the Red River of
Chromium (total) 1.0 the North, the Boise De
Chromium 0.05 Sioux, and parts of the
(trlvalent or Sheyenne and Pemblno
hexavalent) Rivers.
Copper 0.1
Lead 0.05
USPHS Standards Water Supply.
Ohio
.Cadmium 0.01 Water Supply.
Chromium 0.05 Water Supply.
(hexavalent)
Lead 0.05 Water Supply.
Silver 0.05 Water Supply.
Oklahoma
Iron (certain
Rivers on Ohio/Pa.
border only).
All Toxic materials,
including metals.
.All Toxic materials,
Including metals.
1.5 Water Supply.
0.1 48-hr. TLm Aquatic Life and Recreation.
0.1 48-hr. TLm Water Supply.
[p. 9]
-------
3746 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
FEDERAL-STATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND USPHS DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
FOR MERCURY AND HEAVY METALS '—Continued
Criteria Use classification to
State Metal values in mg/l which applied
Oregon: These criteria apply only to the Multnomah channel and the Main Stem Willamette River, the
Main Stem of the Columbia River from the eastern Oregon-Washington border westward to the Pacific
Ocean, the Main Stem of the Grande Ronde River, the Main Stem of the Walla Walla River, and the
Main Stem of the Snake River. The remaining Interstate streams and estuaries are protected by a
narrative statement.
Cadmium 0.01 All Uses.
Chromium 0.05 All Uses.
Copper 0.005 All Uses.
Iron 0.1 All Uses.
Lead 0.05 All Uses.
Manganese 0.05 All Uses.
Zinc 0.1 All Uses.
Heavy Metals 0.5 All Uses.
(Totals Including
copper, lead, zinc,
and others of non-
specific designation).
Pennsylvania: These specific criteria are applicable only to specific reaches of Interstate waters as
designated in Section 6 of the Pennsylvania Water Quality Standards.
Manganese 1.0 All Uses.
Iron (total) 1.5 All Uses.
Iron dissolved 0.3 All Uses.
Rhode Island No Specific Criteria
South Carolina All Toxic materials, 0.0 Water Supply.
Including metals.
South Dakota USPHS Standards Water Supply.
Iron 0.2 Fish and Wildlife.
Tennessee No Specific Criteria
Texas No Specific Criteria
[p. 10]
Utah USPHS Standards All Uses.
Vermont No Specific Criteria
Virginia No Specific Criteria
Washington No Specific Criteria
West Virginia Cadmium 0.01
Chromium 0.05
(hexavalent)
Lead 0.05
Sliver 0.05 All Classifications.
Wisconsin No Specific Criteria
Wyoming No Specific Criteria
District of Columbia .. .No Specific Criteria
Guam No Specific Criteria
Puerto Rico No Specific Criteria
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3747
FEDERAL-STATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS AND USPHS DRINKING WATER STANDARDS
FOR MERCURY AND HEAVY METALS '—Continued
Criteria Use classification to
State Metal values in mg/l which applied
Virgin Islands No Specific Criteria
' Heavy metals considered: Cadmium, Chromium, Copper, Iron, Lead Manganese, Silver, Zinc.
2 The TLm is the concentration of a toxic material which produced death to one-half of the test organisms
in a bioassay test within a specified length of time (e.g. 48 hours or 96 hours).
[p. 11]
4.5d "STANDARDS FOB RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS"
Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Water Quality Standards, May 1971
Since radioactive materials such as radium, strontium 90, and
tritium, are toxic to man as well as being cumulative in his system,
these pollutants are subject to control, monitoring, and measurement
whatever the contact medium. The total radiation in an individual's
environment—his job and medical treatments; the food and water he
consumes, and air he breathes—must be considered. Radiation enters
our environment from various sources: mining and processing of
radioactive ores; nuclear weapons testing fallout; power reactor
emissions; and medical, research, and industrial uses, as well as
natural emissions from stellar bodies and geological deposits.
The EPA recommended criteria limits on these materials in water
are:
pc/1
Gross Beta 500
Radium 1.0
Strontium-90 10.0
Tritium 3000.0
These criteria essentially duplicate or parallel the recommended
limits in the U. S. Public Health Service Water Standards, cited by
the NTAC report, Water Quality Criteria.
Individual State-adopted standards follow.
[p.l]
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS SUMMARY
RADIOLOGICAL CRITERIA
Of the 50 States and 4 other jurisdictions which established inter-
state water quality standards under the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, all but the following established specific radiological
standards: New Hampshire, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Tennessee,
the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. These
-------
3748
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
latter seven standards contain general narrative criteria restricting
the addition of toxic materials to interstate waters to concentrations
that will not impair the designated uses, and the term "toxic mate-
rials" is interpreted to include radioactive materials.
The water quality standards submitted by the States contain
several types of radiological criteria, which are briefly discussed in
the following items. These items are also referenced in the table
headings.
Item A. Narrative statements.
ItemB. Criteria which duplicate or reference the radiological
criteria of the U.S. Public Health Service Drinking Standards
(1962). These standards provide limits for two radionuclides,
strontium-90 (10 /^Me/liter) and radium-226 (3 ^c/liter, with a
screening limit of 1000 we/liter for gross beta concentrations).
Item C. Criteria which limit the concentration of specific radio-
nuclides to 1/30 of the maximum permissible concentrations
(MPCW) for a 168-hour week reported in the National Bureau
of Standards (NBS) Handbook 69.
Item D. Criteria equivalent to Item C except that a limit of 1/10
rather than 1/30 of MPCW is specified.
Item E. Other types of criteria.
[p. 1]
State
1/30 PHS 1/10
NBS Hbk. 69 Stnds. Narrative NBS Hbk. 69 Other
(Item C) (Item B) (Item A) (Item D) (Item E)
Additional Provisions
Alabama X PHS Shellfish Stnds.
Alaska X PHS Shellfish Stnds.
Arizona X X Narr.—protect aquatic
life; prevent concen-
trations of radioactive
material In aquatic life.
Arkansas X X
California X X
Note: limit not
approved by
Pacific South-
west Region
Colorado X X Narr.—minimize dis-
charge.
Connecticut Gross alpha Narr.—protect aquatic
and beta life.
limits only
[p. 2]
Delaware Gross alpha and
beta limits
only
Florida X
Georgia X X
Hawaii X X Narr.—protect aquatic
life.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3749
Continued
State
1/30 PHS 1/10
NBS Hbk. 69 Stnds. Narrative NBS Hbk. 69 Other
(Item C) (Item B) (Item A) (Item D) (Item E)
Additional Provisions
Idaho X X Narr.—minimize dis-
charges; protect
aquatic life.
Illinois X
Indiana Gross beta
limit only
Iowa X X X Gross beta
limit only
Kansas Kansas Radia-
tion Protec-
tion Regula-
tion
[p. 3]
Kentucky X
Louisiana X
Maine X Narr.—protect aquatic
life; prevent concen-
trations of radioactive
material In aquatic life.
Maryland X
Massachusetts X Narr.—protect aquatic
life; prevent concen-
trations of radioactive
materials In aquatic
life.
Michigan X X
Minnesota X X
Mississippi X PHS Shellfish Stnds.
Missouri X
[p. 4]
Montana X Narr.—protect aquatic
life; A—Closed waters
—no allowable radio-
activity above naturally
occurring levels.
Nebraska Radiological
Health Regu-
lations, State
of Nebraska
Nevada X Has agreed to
adopt 1/30
Hbk. 69
New Hampshire General protec-
tion vs. toxic
materials
New Jersey Gross alpha and
beta limits
only
New Mexico .. X X Narr.—minimize dis-
charges; protect
aquatic life.
[p. 5]
New York X
North Carolina X PHS Shellfish Stnds.
North Dakota Gen. protec-
tion vs. toxic
materials
Ohio X
Oklahoma X X
-------
3750
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Continued
State
1/30 PHS
NBS Hbk. 69 Stnds.
(Item C) (Item B)
Narrative
(Item A)
1/10
NBS Hbk. 69
(Item D)
Other
(Item E)
Additional Provisions
Oregon X
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island X
South Carolina X X
South Dakota X
Tennessee
Texas X X
Utah X
Vermont X X
Virginia X
Washington X
West Virginia X
Wisconsin X
Wyoming X X
District of
Columbia
Guam X X
Puerto Rico Gen. protec-
tion vs. toxic
materials
Virgin Islands Gen. protec-
tion vs. toxic
materials
Gen. protec-
tion vs. toxic
materials
Narr.—protect fishes,
shellfishes, wildlife,
Irrigated crops, live-
stock, and dairy
products.
Narr.—protect aquatic
life.
[p. 6]
Gen. protec-
tion vs. toxic
materials
AEC Title 10
Narr.—prevent concen-
tration of radioactive
materials In aquatic
life.
Narr.—protect shellfish.
Narr.—minimize dis-
charges.
[p. 7]
Gen. protec-
tion vs. toxic
materials
Narr.—protect aquatic
life; prevent concen-
tration of radioactive
materials In aquatic
life.
[p. 8]
4.5e "STANDARDS FOR PHOSPHATES"
Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Water Quality Standards, June 1971
PHOSPHATE CRITERIA
Alabama There are no specific criteria or narrative statement limiting
phosphate or any other nutrient in the aquatic environment.
Alaska There is no specific criteria or narrative statement directed at
the limitation of such nutrients as phosphate. Unless the toxic
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3751
material standards or the taste and odor standards could be
applied to phosphate problems there is only one other possibility.
That is the following Policy Statement of the State of Alaska:
Alaska Statutes Title 46, Chapter 05, Section 46,05,010:
"It is the public policy of the state to maintain reasonable
standards of purity of the waters of the state consistent with
public health and public enjoyment, the propagation and pro-
tection of fish and wild life, including birds, mammals, and other
terrestrial and aquatic life, and the industrial development of
the state, and to require the use of all known available and rea-
sonable methods to prevent and control the pollution of the
waters of the state."
Arizona Policy statement: ... "Other methods and degrees of treatment
will be required, as appropriate, to remove nutrients, oily con-
stituents, and other polluting materials from waters before
discharge. All waters of the State shall be free from materials
attributable to domestic or industrial waste or other control-
lable sources in amounts sufficient to produce taste or odor in
the water or detectable off-flavor in the flesh of fish, or in
amounts sufficient to change the existing color, turbidity, or
other conditions in the receiving stream to such degree as to
create a public nuisance, or in amounts sufficient to interfere
with any beneficial use of the water."
Arkansas No phosphate statement or criteria.
California They define "Water Quality Control as the control of any factor
which adversely and unreasonably impairs the quality of the
waters of the State for beneficial use. (California Water Con-
trol Act, Section 13005.) Pollution control is an important part
of water quality control."
Goose Lake narrative statement regarding plankton indicates
that if nutrients including phosphates accumulated to the
degree that they cause plankton blooms they would
[p- 1]
be subject to control, "The Total Plankton Population Shall
Be Maintained Below Bloom Level: This objective is designed
to protect fishlife and recreational use of the lake by limiting
the concentration of plankton below the bloom level which is
defined as that plankton concentration which causes signifi-
cant nuisance conditions, or significantly affects desirable fish
population."
Sacramento-San Juan Delta no phosphate criteria or statement.
"Materials Stimulating Algal Growth." "Materials stimulating
algal growth shall not be present in concentration sufficient to
cause objectionable algal densities." "Plankton Blooms are en-
couraged by the presence, in sufficient concentrations of several
nutrient materials. Among these are nitrogen, phosphorus,
silica, vitamins, iron and other metals and dissolved salts.
Tidal Waters Inland From The Golden Gate Within The San
Francisco Bay Region. ... "In no case shall nutrients be present
in concentrations sufficient to cause deleterious or abnormal
-------
3752 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
biotic growths except when factors which are not controllable
cause greater concentrations. (Note A)."
West Fork Carson River: "Phosphates: A mean annual concen-
tration less than 0.05 mg/1 and a maximum, concentration not
to exceed 0.1 mg/1 at any time."
Truckee River: "Phosphates: A mean annual concentration less
than 0.1 mg/1, and a maximum concentration not to exceed 0.3
mg/1 at any time."
East Fork Carson River: "Phosphates: A mean annual concen-
tration less than 0.1 mg/1, and a maximum concentration not
to exceed 0.2 mg/1 at any time."
West Walker River and Lake Topaz: "Phosphates: A mean an-
nual concentration less than 0.2 mg/1, and a maximum concen-
tration not to exceed 0.3 mg/1 at any time."
East Walker River: "A mean annual concentration less than 0.5
mg/1, and a maximum concentration not to exceed 1.0 mg/1 at
any time."
New River: No narrative statement or specific criteria concern-
ing phosphates.
Colorado River in California: The only statement that might
be applicable to phosphate problems is the following
[p. 2]
narrative statement: "The waters shall be free from materials
attributable to domestic or industrial waste or other control-
lable sources, which may produce taste or odor in the water
or detectable off-flavor in the flesh of fish, that may alter the
water's existing color or turbidity, or that may adversely affect
other conditions in the river."
Lake Tahoe: Soluble Phosphorus: A mean annual concentra-
tion not greater than 7 micrograms per liter at any point in the
lake." A plankton count criteria related to nutrients including
phosphates and nitrates is included: "Plankton Count: A mean
seasonal concentration not greater than 100 per milliliter and
a maximum concentration not greater than 500 per milliliter at
any point in the lake."
Another plankton standard related to nutrients is: "Plankton
Growth Potential: A mean annual growth potential at any
point in the lake not greater than twice the mean annual
growth potential at the limnetic reference station."
They have stringent narrative statements on foreign materials
and taste and odor which would include phosphates and other
nutrients.
1. Foreign Material: None which impairs the natural
beauty, clarity, or purity of the lake."
2. Taste and Odor Causing Substances: None which im-
parts foreign taste or odor to the lake waters."
Coastal Waters, Point Pedras Blancas to Pescadero Point:
Phosphates and other nutrients are not covered by these
standards.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3753
Coastal Waters, Rincon Point to Point Arguallo: Phosphates
and other nutrients are not covered by these standards.
Coastal Waters, Point Auguello to Point Piedras Blancas:
Phosphates and other nutrients are not covered by these
standards.
Pacific Ocean Pescadero Point to Mouth of Tomales Bay, BoZinas
Lagoon, Drakes Estero, Limantour, Estero, Portions of Tomales
Bay and tidal Porti Ons of coastal streams: Nutrients which
include phosphates, nitrates and others are covered by the
following narrative statement: "None in concentrations suffi-
cient to cause deleterious or abnormal biotic growths except
when factors which are not controllable cause greater concen-
trations."
[p. 3]
Humboldt-Del Norte Coastal Waters: The following narrative
statement on Toxic or other Deleterious substances applies to
phosphates, nitrates, and other nutrients: "Toxic or Other
Deleterious Substances: There shall be no organic or inorganic
substances in concentrations . . . which cause deleterious
growths of algae or other plant life."
Pacific Ocean Coastal Waters, Rincon Point to San Gabriel
River: The only standard that might be applicable is the
following narrative statement. "Other Materials: Other ma-
terials shall not be present in concentrations that would be
deleterious to fish, plant or aquatic wildlife."
Mendocino Coast: The following narrative statement applies to
phosphates, nitrates, and other nutrients: "Toxic or Other
Deleterious Substances: There shall be no organic or inorganic
substances in concentrations which are toxic or detrimental to
human, animal, plant, or aquatic life, which impart undesirable
tastes or odors to species of commercial or sport importance, or
which cause deleterious growths of algae or other plant life."
Pacific Ocean San Gabriel River to Drainage Divide Between
Muddy Canyon and Moro Canyon: Under objective rationale
they state: "Nutrients . . . The research to date had not been
able to develop satisfactory criteria for nutrient levels in open
sea water that will not over-stimulate plankton production.
Thus, a standard for nutrients is omitted until a basis for such
can be found."
Humbolt Bay: The following narrative statement covers all
the nutrients including phosphate: "There shall be no organic
or inorganic substances in concentrations . . . which cause
deleterious growths of algae or other plant life."
Sonama-Marin Coast: The following narrative statement
covers all the nutrients including phosphate. "There shall be
no organic or inorganic substances in concentrations . . . which
cause deleterious growths of algae or other plant life."
San Diego Bay: The following narrative statement does not
specifically name phosphates but applies to all nutrients of
which phosphates are one of the important ones: "Nutrient
-------
3754 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
levels shall be limited to these levels necessary to minimize
phytoplankton blooms, thus preventing unsightliness, turbidity,
color and oxygen depression."
[p. 4]
Harbors, Marinas and Tidal Prisms in Los Angeles and Ventura
Counties: The following narrative statement does not specifi-
cally mention phosphates but applies to all nutrients of which
phosphates are one of the important ones. Nutrients: Nutrients
of other than natural origin shall not be present in concentra-
tions capable of causing proliferation of plankton or other
undesirable biotic growths.
Klamath River in California: The following narrative statement
does not specifically mention phosphate but applies to all
nutrients of which phosphates are one of the important ones:
"Concentrations of dissolved nutrients shall be maintained at
levels below those which may cause undesirable algae blooms,
slime or bacterial growth, or other undesirable biological
growths."
Tijuana River Basin in California: "Concentrations of nitrates
and phosphates of waste origin, by themselves or in combina-
tion with naturally occurring nutrients, shall be maintained at
levels below those which stimulate algae and emergent plant
growth."
Smith River: The following narrative statement does not spe-
cifically mention phosphate but includes all nutrients of which
phosphate is one of the important ones. "There shall be no
organic or inorganic substances in concentrations .. . which
cause undesirable algae blooms, lime or bacterial growth, or
other undesirable biological growths."
Mission Bay Including Tidal Prism of San Diego River and
Agua Hedionda Lagoon: "Nutrients: Concentrations of nitrates
and phosphates of waste origin, by themselves or in combina-
tion with naturally occurring nutrients, shall be maintained at
levels below those which stimulate algae and emergent plant
growth."
San Gabriel River Tidal Prism: Nutrients: of other than nat-
ural origin, shall not be present in concentrations capable of
causing proliferation of undesirable biotic growths."
Coastal Bays, Marinas and Sloughs Between the San Gabriel
River and the Drainage Divide Between Muddy Canyon and
Moro Canyon: "Nutrients: Nutrients (nitrogen, silicate, and
phosphate) shall not be present, except from natural conditions,
in amounts
[P. 5]
that will cause deleterious or abnormal growths to occur on
the substrate or to foster biotic growths that are harmful
to beneficial uses."
Colorado There are no specific criteria for any of the nutrients. The
narrative statement concerning toxic materials might restrict
phosphate at levels where damage to aquatic life occurred.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3755
This statement is as follows: "Toxic material: Free from bio-
cides, toxic or other deleterious substances attributable to
municipal, domestic, or industrial wastes, or other controllable
sources in levels, concentrations or combinations sufficient to
be harmful to aquatic life."
Connecticut The narrative statements concerning taste and odor and chemi-
cal constituents are the only standards that could apply to
phosphates. "Taste and Odor:" For water supply: "None other
than of natural origin." Class B and C waters: "None in such
concentrations that would impair any usuages specifically
assigned to this Class nor cause taste and odor in edible fish."
Class D: "None in such concentrations that would impair any
usages specifically assigned to this class." For coastal and
Marine waters: Class A: "None allowable."
Class SB, SC, SD: "None in such concentration that would
impair any usages specifically assigned to this Class and none
that would cause taste and odor in edible fish or shellfish."
Chemical constituents (freshwater): Class A, B, C, and D.
"Waters shall be free from chemical constituents in concen-
trations or combinations which would be harmful to human,
animal, or aquatic life for the appropriate, most sensitive and
governing considerations and approved limits have not been
established, bioassay shall be performed as required by the
appropriate agencies. For public drinking water supplies the
raw water sources must be of such a quality that United States
Public Health Service limits, or State limits if more stringent,
for finished water can be met after conventional water treat-
ment."
Chemical constituents (coastal and marine): Class SA: "None
in concentrations or combinations which would be harmful to
human, animal, or aquatic life or which would make the waters
unsafe or unsuitable for fish or shellfish or their propagation,
impair the palatability of same, or impair the waters for any
other use.
[p. 6]
"CJass SB, SC, and SD: None in concentrations or combinations
which would be harmful to human, animal, or aquatic life or
which would make the waters unsafe or unsuitable for fish or
shellfish or their propagation, or impair the water for any other
usuage assigned to this Class."
Delaware The following declaration of policy in 6301, Chapter 63, Title 7,
Part VII, Delaware Code is:
" (a) It is declared to be the public policy of the State to main-
tain within its jurisdiction a reasonable quality of water con-
sistent with public health and public enjoyment thereof, the
propagation and protection of fish and wildlife, including birds,
mammals, and other terrestrial and aquatic life, and the indus-
trial development of the State.
(b) It is the purpose of this chapter to safeguard the quality
of state waters against pollution by (1) preventing new pollu-
tion in such waters and (2) controlling any existing pollution."
-------
3756
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
The adopted standards approved by the Secretary with certain
exceptions and recommendations that could apply to phos-
phates are those concerned with toxic substances and taste,
odor and color causing substances: "Toxic Substances: None
in concentrations harmful (synergistically or otherwise) to
humans, fish, shellfish, wildlife and aquatic life. Taste, Odor
and Color Causing Substances: None in concentrations which
cause tastes, odors, colors, or impart tastes to fish and other
aquatic life."
There are no specific criteria for nutrients such as phosphate
and no narrative statement directly applicable to nutrients such
as phosphate. The only item in the water quality standards of
Florida, as approved, that might be used to protect that States
waters from excessive amounts of phosphates and there accom-
panying problems would be the anti-degradation statement.
There are no specific criteria for nutrients such as phosphate,
nor is there a narrative statement directly concerned with
phosphate or other nutrients.
"Nutrient Materials All Waters: Applicable to:
Total phosphorus, not greater than 0.020 mg/1. Class AA
Total phosphorus, not greater than 0.025 mg/1. .. . Class A
[P-7]
Total phosphorus, not greater than 0.030 Class B
The following revision of water quality standards regarding
nutrients was submitted in a letter dated December 26, 1967
prior to approval by the Secretary from Walter B. Quisenberry,
M.D., to Mr. William B. Schroeder; "Insert the following sec-
tion immediately preceding the section titled "Wastes from
Vessels and Marinas:"
"Control of Nutrients"
"Nutrient discharges were pointed out in testimony as being
a potential problem in several water areas such as Kaneohe
Bay and Pearl Harbor. The agency is cognizant of this potential
problem and nutrient limits have been included in the water
quality criteria. At present the Agency knows of no prac-
ticable methods for the control measures when the means to do
so become available."
Hawaii has never adopted and submitted for approval an anti-
degradation statement that also could be used for the protection
of its high quality waters from problems due to excessive nutri-
ents such as phosphates.
Under the section titled "GENERAL WATER QUALITY
STANDARDS FOR INTERSTATE STREAMS" is the narrative
statement Interstate waters shall not contain:
Excess nutrients of other than natural origin that cause visible
slime growths or other nuisance aquatic growths.
There is no specific criteria for nutrients such as phosphates
and Idaho does not have an approved anti-degradation state-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3757
ment to protect existing high quality waters from excessive
amounts of nutrients such as phosphate.
Illinois The water quality standards for the Interstate Waters, Wabash
River and Tributary Streams Crossing into Indiana, Interstate
Waters Mississippi River Between Illinois and Missouri, Inter-
state Waters Ohio River and Saline River, and the Interstate
Waters Mississippi River Common Boundary Between Illinois
and Iowa do not include specific criteria or a narrative statement
directly concerned with limits for phosphates and other nu-
trients. Specific criteria for phosphate concentrations was in-
cluded in the water quality standards for the following interstate
waters:
[P-8]
1. Interstate Waters Illinois River and Lower Section of Des
Plaines River:
a. Public Water Supply and Food Processing: "Not to
exceed 4.0 mg/1 Phosphate .. 45 mg/1."
b. There are no specific criteria or narrative statement
concerning limits for phosphates and other nutrients
assigned sectors of these waters classified for Aquatic
Life, Recreation, and Industrial Water Supply.
2. Interstate Waters Chicago River and Calumet River Sys-
tem and Calumet Harbor Basin: "Total Phosphorus,
Annual Average not more than 0.05. Single Daily Value
or Average, not more than 0.10.
3. Interstate Waters Lake Michigan and Little Calumet
River, Grand Calumet River and Wolf Lake:
a. Lake Michigan Open Water:
Total Phosphates (PO*):
Annual Average—not more than 0.03
Single Daily Value or Average—not more
than 0.04.
b. Lake Michigan Shore Water:
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.03 mg/1
Single Daily Value or Average—not more
than 0.04 mg/1.
c. Little Calumet River:
None
d. Wolf Lake:
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.03 mg/1
Single Daily Value or Average—not more
than 0.04 mg/1.
The following effluent criteria for phosphate and other nutrients
has been adopted by the State as part of their standards. "Phos-
phate—Discharge rate and concentration not to elevate the
stream, after reasonable admixture, above 4.0 mg/1." The State
has an approved antidegradation statement that could be used
-------
3758 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
to protect existing high quality waters from excessive phosphate
concentrations causing problems.
[p. 9]
Indiana There are no specific criteria or narrative statement limiting
phosphate or other nutrient substances in the Indiana water
quality standards for any of the interstate basins other than the
Lake Michigan drainages, unless the antidegradation statement
could be applied for existing high quality waters.
Indiana recently revised Official Regulation SPCIR-1 and
issued SPCIR-2 which limits the amount of phosphate discharge
into the Lake Michigan and Lake Erie basins.
The limitation is as follows:
"Phosphorus Removal In Great Lakes Tributary Basins:
The following municipalities will be required to provide at
least 80 percent reduction of total phosphorus on or before
the end of 1972:
a. Lake Michigan Basin—Angola, Elkhart, Kendall-
ville, Mishawaka Valparaiso, Chesterton, Gary La-
grange Nappanee, Crown Point, Goshen, Ligonier,
Portage, East Chicago, Hobart, Michigan City, South
Bend.
b. Lake Erie Basin—Auburn, Butler, Diversified Utili-
ties, Garrett, Berne, Decatur, Fort Wayne, New
Haven."
Phosphorus and other nutrient substances criteria for the Lake
Michigan Basins:
Lake Michigan Open Water:
Total Phosphates (PO4) mg/1:
Annual Average- -not more than 0.03.
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.04.
Lake Michigan Shore Waters:
Total Phosphates (PO4) mg/1:
Annual Average—not more than 0.03.
Single Daily Average or Value—not more than 0.04.
Lake Michigan Inner Harbor Basin:
Total Phosphates (PO*) mg/1
Annual Average—not more than 0.05.
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.10.
Indiana Harbor Canal:
Total Phosphates (PO-t) mg/1
Annual Average—not more than 0.05.
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.10.
Grand Calumet River:
No phosphate criteria or narrative statement.
[p. 10]
Little Calumet River:
No phosphates criteria or narrative statement.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3759
Iowa
Kansas
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Wolf Lake:
Total Phosphates (POi) mg/1
Annual Average —not more than 0.03.
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.04.
The following narrative statement could, in my opinion, be
used to limit the amount of phosphate and other nutrients in the
aquatic environment:
1. Public Water Supply. All substances detrimental to
treatment processes shall be limited to non-detrimental
concentrations in the surface water.
2. Aquatic Life. All substances detrimental to aquatic life
shall be limited to non-detrimental concentrations in the
surface waters.
The only standards regarding the limiting of phosphates in the
aquatic environment are as follows:
1. Antidegradation statement—Existing high quality waters
could be protected from damages resulting from the dis-
charge of effluent containing high phosphate concentra-
tions to the aquatic environment.
2. The general criteria assigned to all of Kansas Interstate
Basins—"Pollutional substances will be maintained be-
low maximum permissible concentrations which would
be detrimental for public water supplies recreation
requirements detrimental for public water supplies, rec-
reation requirements, . . . and other established bene-
ficial uses."
All interstate waters of Louisiana are assigned a general criteria
which could be used to protect such waters from excessive con-
centrations of phosphates or other nutrients. This statement
with slight variations of use classifications is:
Wastes after discharge . . . shall not create conditions which
will adversely affect public health or use of the water for
the following purposes: domestic or industrial water supply,
propagation of aquatic life, agricultural water, recreation,
and other legitimate uses.
[p. 11]
There are no specific criteria or narrative statement that limit
the amount of phosphate in the interstate waters of Maine.
There are no specific criteria or narrative statement that limits
the amount of phosphate in the interstate waters of Maryland.
Freshwater Interstate.
Class A (Public Water Supply) have no criteria or narrative
statement concerning phosphate or other nutrients.
Class B (Public Water Supply and Recreation) "Total phos-
phate not to exceed an average of 0.05 mg/1 as P during any
monthly sampling period."
Class C (Fish and Wildlife) Total phosphate not to exceed an
average of 0.05 mg/1 as P during any monthly sampling period.
-------
3760
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Class D (Power, Industry, Navigation) No specific criteria, or
narrative statement limiting concentration of phosphate in
Interstate water.
Coastal Waters:
Class SA (Recreation Shellfish) Total phosphate not to
exceed an average of 0.07 as P during any monthly sam-
pling period.
Class SB (Recreation, Industry, Shellfish) Total phosphate
not to exceed an average of 0.07 mg/1 as P during any
monthly sampling period.
Class SC (Boating, fish and aquatic life, industry) Total
phosphate not to exceed an average of 0.07 mg/1 as P
during monthly sampling period.
Mississippi The water quality standards have no specific criteria or narra-
tive statement directly limiting the concentration of phosphate
or other nutrients in interstate waters.
One of there Freedom Statements would cover nutrients, "Free
from substances attributable to municipal, industrial, agricul-
tural or other discharge producing color, odor, or other condi-
tions in such degree as to create a nuisance."
Mississippi has no specific criteria for phosphates.
[p. 12]
Montana Class Dl—Growth and propagation of Salmonid Fishes and
associated aquatic life, waterfowl and beavers.
Class D2—Growth and propagation of Salmonid Fishes and
associated aquatic life, waterfowl and beavers.
Class D3—Growth and propagation of Salmonid Fishes and
associated aquatic life, waterfowl and beavers.
Under the heading Esthetic considerations not covered under
other water quality criteria they state: ". . . No excess nutrients
which cause nuisance aquatic growths. . . ."
Nebraska The following narrative statement protects waters from exces-
sive nutrients including phosphates:
"...These waters shall be free of substances attribut-
able to discharge or wastes having . . . substances and con-
ditions or combinations thereof in concentrations which
produce undesirable aquatic life."
No specific criteria. Has approved antidegradation statement.
Nevada West Fork Carson River:
by Interstate Total Phosphates (PO4 mg/l)
Waters Annual Average—not more than .05
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than .10
Leviathan Creek:
No criteria or statement.
East Fork Carson River:
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than .1
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than .2
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3761
Carson River (At Muller Lane):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than .10
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than .15
Carson River (Highway 395, So. of Carson):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.5
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 1.0
Carson River (Near New Empire):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 1.0
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 2.0
[p.13]
Carson River (At Weeks):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.30
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.50
Lake Lahontan:
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.40
Single Daily Value or Average-—not more than 0.60
West Walker River (Above diversion to Topaz Lake):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than .2
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than .3
Topaz Lake:
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.2
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.3
West Walker River (Near Wellington):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than .2
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than .4
West Walker River (Above confluent with East Walker River):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.2
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.4
Sweetwater Creek:
No specific criteria. Has approved antidegradation state-
ment.
East Walker River (At State Line):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than .5
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 1.0
East Walker River (South of Yerington and above confluent
with W. Walker River):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.50
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 1.00
-------
3762 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Walker River (At J. J. Ranch):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.70
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.90
Desert Creek:
No specific criteria. Antidegradation statement approved.
[p. 14]
Chiatovich Creek:
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.15
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.20
Indian Creek:
Total Phosphates:
No specific criteria. Antidegradation statement.
Leidy Creek (Above Hydroelectric Plant):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.04
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.08
Virgin River:
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.04
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.08
Beaver Dam Wish (Above Schroeder Reservoir):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.03
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.04
Snake Creek (Above Fish Hatchery):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.03
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.04
Big Goose Creek (At Ranch):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.15
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.20
Salmon Falls Creek (Highway 93, South of Jackpot):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.05
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.10
Shoshone Creek:
No specific criteria. Approved antidegradation statement.
East Fork, Jarbidge River:
No specific criteria. Approved antidegradation statement.
Jarbidge River (Upstream from Jarbidge):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.03
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.04
[p. 15]
Jarbidge River (Downstream of Jarbidge):
Total Phosphates:
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3763
Annual Average—not more than 0.03
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.04
West Fort Bruneau (Diamond "E" Riad):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.06
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.10
East Fork Owyhee River (Above Mill Creek):
No specific criteria. Approved antidegradation statement.
East Fork Owyhee River (South of Owyhee):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.2
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.3
East Fork Owyhee River (State Line):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.06
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.10
South Fork Owyhee River:
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.15
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.20
Smoke Creek (Approx. 30 mi. East of Susanville, California):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.05
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.07
Bronco Creek (At Hirschdale Road):
No specific criteria. Approved antidegradation statement.
Gray Creek (At Hirschdale Creek):
No specific criteria. Approved antidegradation statement.
Truckee River (At Farad, California):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.1
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.3
Truckee River (At Idlewild):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.1
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.3
[p. 16]
Truckee River (At Boynton Lane):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.25
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.40
Truckee River (Lagomansine Bridge):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.5
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 0.6
Truckee River (At Cenrsola Ranch):
Total Phosphates:
Annual Average—not more than 0.75
Single Daily Value or Average—not more than 1.00
-------
3764
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Lake Tahoe (All points):
Soluahle Phosphorus:
Annual Average—not more than 7.0
Colorado River:
No specific criteria.
No specific criteria. No applicable narrative statement. Have
approved antidegradation statement.
No specific criteria. Have approved antidegradation statement.
No specific criteria. No narrative statement. Approved anti-
degradation statement.
No specific criteria. No narrative statement. Approved anti-
degradation statement.
The following narrative statement seems to cover almost any
waste including phosphates:
"Only such amounts, whether alone or in combination with
other substances or wastes will not render the waters un-
safe or unsuitable as a source for drinking, culinary or food
processing purposes, injurious to fish and wildlife or ad-
versely affects the palatability of same, or impair the waters
for any other but usage for this class."
No specific criteria. Section II, C promises such criteria as
follows:
"C. The maximum practical reduction of nutrients, in-
cluding nitrogen, phosphorus and sugars, in sewage, indus-
trial, and other wastes shall be accomplished as soon as a
practical method is developed."
[P. 17]
A narrative statement could be used on nutrient problems in-
cluding phosphates. It is: "None in concentrations or combina-
tions that interfere with, or prove hazardous to, the intended
water usage." This applies to all interstate waters.
No specific criteria. The following narrative statement could
be applied to problems due to phosphates:
"(3) Free from materials attributable to municipal, indus-
trial, or other discharges, or agricultural practices produc-
ing color, odor, or other conditions in such degree as to cre-
ate a nuisance;..."
Have approved antidegradation statement.
No specific criteria. Narrative statement for all interstate
river's tributary streams is as follows:
"The quality of tributary streams shall be controlled . . .
to prohibit the development of public health hazards or
nuisance conditions in such tributaries."
It appears that this statement would apply to nutrient problems
including phosphate. Have approved antidegradation state-
ment.
No specific criteria. The following narrative statement would
apply to phosphate related problems:
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3765
" (5) The creation of tastes or odors or toxic or other condi-
tions that are deleterious to fish or other aquatic life or
affect the potability of drinking water or the palatibility of
fish and shellfish."
Have approved antidegradation statement.
Pennsylvania Standard criteria that can be assigned to interstate waters or
sections of such waters at the discretion of the Sanitary Water
Board is as follows:
"P—Phosphorus (total soluble)—Not to exceed 0.10 mg/1
or natural levels, whichever is greater."
A brief inspection of criteria assigned to all or portions of inter-
state waters indicate that phosphate criteria were assigned to
very few.
No narrative statement. Do not have antidegradation state-
ment.
Rhode Island No specific criteria. Narrative statement for all freshwater
classifications:
"Waters shall be free from chemical constituents in con-
centrations or combinations which would be harmful to
. . . aquatic life."
[P. 18]
Narrative statement for coastal waters:
"None in concentrations or combinations which would be
harmful to human, animal, or aquatic life, or which would
resolve the waters unsafe or unsuitable for fish or shellfish
or their propagation, impair the waters for any other uses."
Approved antidegradation statement.
South Carolina No specific criteria. No narrative statement. No approved anti-
degradation statement.
Tennessee No specific criteria. The following narrative guide statements
by use classifications could be used to restrict phosphates in
problem areas:
"Domestic Raw Water Supply
K. Other Pollutants—other pollutants shall not be added
to the water in quantities that may be detrimental to public
health or impairs the usefulness of the water as a source of
domestic water supply."
"Industrial Supply
Other Pollutants—other pollutants shall not be added to the
waters in quantities that may adversely affect the water for
industrial processing."
"Fish and Aquatic Life
H. Other Pollutants—other pollutants shall not be added to
the waters that will be detrimental to fish or aquatic life."
"Recreation
I. Other Pollutants—other pollutants shall not be added to
the water in quantities which may have a detrimental effect
on recreation."
No approved antidegradation statement.
-------
3766
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wyoming
District of
Columbia
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
No specific criteria. A narrative statement that could be used
to protect waters from excessive phosphate concentrations is:
"Taste and odor producing substances shall be limited to
concentrations in the waters of the state that will not inter-
fere with the production of potable water by reasonable
water treatment methods, or impair unpotable flavor to food
fish, including shellfish, or result in offensive odors rising
from the waters or otherwise interfere with the reasonable
use of the waters."
Approved antidegradation statement.
[p. 19]
No specific criteria. Narrative statements:
Class A. "It shall be unlawful to discharge or place any
wastes or other substances in such a way as to interfere
with the stated Class "A" Water uses,..."
Class B. "It shall be unlawful to discharge or place any
wastes or other substances in such a way as to interfere
with the stated Class "B" water uses,..."
Class C. "It shall be unlawful to discharge or place any
wastes or other substances in such a way as to interfere with
the stated Class "C" water uses,..."
Have approved antidegradation statement.
No specific criteria. No narrative statement.
No specific criteria. The following narrative statement would
apply in limiting problem causing phosphate concentrations:
"All waters within this State shall at all times be free from
all substances attributable to sewage, industrial wastes, or
other wastes in concentration or combinations which con-
travene established standards or interfere directly or in-
directly with beneficial uses of such waters; . . ."
No specific criteria. Water use classifications AA, A, B, and C
leave a narrative statement that could be used to limit prob-
lem causing concentrations of phosphates. It states:
"Aesthetic Values shall not be impaired by the presence of
materials or their effects, including those of natural origin,
which offend the senses of sight, smell, touch or taste."
Have approved antidegradation statement.
No specific criteria. No narrative statement. No approved
antidegradation statement.
No specific criteria. No narrative statement. Approved anti-
degradation statement.
[p-20]
No specific criteria. The following narrative statement could
be used to limit problems causing phosphates going into natural
waters:
"Materials attributable to sewage, industrial waste, or other
waste which produce taste, odor, or appreciably change the
existing color or other physical and chemical conditions in
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3767
Guam
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
4.5f
the receiving streams to such degree as to create a nuisance,
or that interfere directly or indirectly with water
uses;..."
Have an approved antidegradation statement.
Specific criteria are:
1. Public or Domestic Water Supply
"Total phosphorus in surface waters shall be less than
0.025 mg/1.
2. None for other use classification.
Narrative statements:
1. "Free from substances and conditions or combinations
thereof attributable to sewage, industrial wastes, or other
wastes that will induce undesirable aquatic life."
2. "There shall be no discharge of treated or untreated sew-
age, industrial wastes, or other wastes into waters desig-
nated for public or domestic water supply."
No specific criteria. The following narrative statement would
provide powers to limit the concentrations of problem causing
phosphates:
1. "Class SA
Existing natural conditions shall not be altered."
2. "Class SB
e. Toxic wastes or deleterious substances alone or in
combination with other substances or wastes in sufficient
amounts... which in any way obviously affect the flavor,
color, odor or sanitary conditions of the waters . . ."
Have an approved antidegradation statement.
No specific criteria. No narrative statement. Have an approved
antidegradation statement.
[p. 21]
"STANDARDS FOR MIXING ZONES"
Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Water Quality Standards,
September 1971
Mixing zones are areas which are unavoidably and harmfully
polluted and which are allowed for mixing of the discharged waters
with the receiving waters. They have defined and identifiable
limits, and the waters outside of the zones must meet the standards
for that particular body of water. The Water Quality Criteria report
recommends when several mixing zones are located close together
that they lie on the same side of the stream to allow a continuous
passageway for aquatic organisms on the opposite side. The NTAC
report specifies that mixing zones be as small as possible and provided
only for mixing in order to preserve the "welfare of the aquatic life
resource." This is because mixing zones constitute barriers which can
harmfully block the spawning migration of anadromous and catad-
-------
3768
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
romous species and damage the plankton organisms and aquatic
invertebrates in the water flow. Adequate zones of passage (at least
75% of the cross-sectional stream area, according to NTAC) must be
maintained at all times for the fish, and adequate provision must be
made for the survival of the drift organisms. Mixing zones cannot
be considered a substitute for, or an extension of a waste treatment
facility. The EPA supports the NTAC recommendations.
Individual state-adopted standards follow.
[p-i]
SUMMARY OF MIXING ZONE STANDARDS
Alabama The ambient temperature of receiving water in degrees
Fahrenheit, after reasonable mixing shall not be increased
by more than 10 percent by the addition of domestic, indus-
trial or other wastes nor shall this waste cause the tempera-
ture of the receiving waters to exceed 90 °F for not more
than eight hours during any twenty-four hour period.
Alaska No reference to mixing zones.
Arizona No reference to mixing zones.
Arkansas No reference to mixing zones.
California No leference to mixing zones.
Colorado No reference to mixing zones.
Connecticut Connecticut's General Policy statement concerning Water
Quality Criteria has the following to say about mixing zones:
"2. In the discharge of waste treatment plant effluent and
cooling waters to the receiving waters, cognizance shall be
given both in time and distance to allow for mixing of efflu-
ent and streams. Such distances required for complete
mixing shall not affect the water usage Class adopted but
shall be defined and controlled by the Commission."
Delaware Delaware makes the following references to mixing zones in
item 3 (b), General Water Quality Standards For Interstate
Streams: "The standards proposed are based upon the abil-
ity of the Commission to measure and to determine com-
pliance. All measurements will be made at selected after
determining "representativeness" of the sample obtained
and the nature of the mixing at the station."
District of Columbia "Criteria shall apply to an entire stretch of the stream.
However, reasonable allowance shall be made for the mixing
and dispersion of approved discharges. Sampling frequency
shall provide a sound basis for computations. Within the
limits of field condition, sampling point locations will be
selected to permit the collection of representative sam-
ples. ..."
"There shall be No increase in natural water
temperature caused by artificial heat inputs shall exceed
5 degrees F. after reasonable allowance for mixing."
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3769
Guam
Florida
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Georgia
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
No reference to mixing zones.
[P.1]
No reference to mixing zones.
This class of waters is to be used as zones of mixing for the
assimilation of municipal, agricultural and industrial dis-
charges which have received the best practicable treatment
or control or such lesser degree of treatment or control as
will provide for a water quality commensurate with the
classified use of the waters outside the zone of mixing. In
addition to periodic reports on monitoring by dischargers,
samples of receiving waters will be taken both within the
designated zone of mixing and at the outer edges of the
zone.
No reference to mixing zones.
The discharge of heated liquids into interstate waters should
be prescribed so as to prevent barriers to fish passage and
minimize temperature increases inside and outside a reason-
able mixing zone.
No reference to mixing zones.
Sampling to determine conformance to these criteria shall be
done at sufficient distances down stream from waste dis-
charge points to permit adequate mixing . . .
No reference to mixing zones.
The measurement system to be used in each case should
provide for temperature measurement at the outfall and with
the maximum temperature allowed at the outfall reflecting a
reasonable mixing zone in the receiving waters so that the
5°F or 3°F rise specified is not violated in the contiguous
waters. Any barrier to migration and the free movement of
aquatic biota is prohibited.
". . . Further, the discharges into any of the main stems of
the rivers under consideration is not based on a dilution as
being the substitution for treatment. This Commission has
utilized the concept that the zone of influence of a discharge
must be maintained in satisfactory condition. In fact, waste
treatment by industry and municipality have been required
alike so that no adverse affect shall accrue in the zone of
influence shall occur in any constituent in the rivers as a
whole "
No reference to mixing zones.
[p. 2]
After adoption of any classification by the Legislature for
surface waters or tidal flats or sections thereof, it shall be
unlawful for any person, corporation, municipality, or other
legal entity to dispose of any sewage, industrial or other
waste, either alone or in conjunction with another or others,
in such manner as will, after due consideration for seasonal,
-------
3770 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
climatic, tidal and natural variations and after reasonable
opportunity for dilution, diffusion, mixture or heat transfer
to the atmosphere, within mixing zones reasonably estab-
lished by the commission in the manner provided by this
section, lower the quality of said waters, outside such zones,
below the minimum requirements of such classification and
notwithstanding any licenses which may have been granted
or issued under section 413 to 415.
The commission may establish a mixing zone with respect
to any discharge at the time application for license for such
discharge is made pursuant to section 414, and when so
established shall be a condition of and form a part of the
license issued. The commission may, after 30 days' notice to
and a hearing with the affected party, establish by order a
mixing zone with respect to any discharge for which a license
has heretofore been issued pursuant to section 414, or for
which no license is required by virtue of the last sentence of
section 413. Prior to the issuance of any order, or com-
mencement of any enforcement action to abate a classifica-
tion violation, the commission shall establish, in the manner
above provided, a mixing zone with respect to the discharge
sought to be thereby affected.
In determining the extent of any mixing zone to be by it
established under this section, the commission shall solicit
and receive testimony concerning the nature and rate of
the discharge; the nature and rate of existing discharges to
the waterway and their effect upon the ability of the water-
way to achieve its classification standards; the size of the
waterway and the rate of flow therein; any seasonal, climatic,
tidal and natural variation in such size, flow, nature and rate
and the effect of such variation upon the ability of the water-
way to achieve its classification standards; the uses of the
waterways in the vicinity of the discharge, and such other
and further evidence as in the commission's judgment will
enable it to establish a reasonable mixing zone for such dis-
charge. An order establishing a mixing zone may provide
that the extent thereof shall vary in order to take into ac-
count seasonal, climatic, tidal and natural variations in the
size and flow of, and the nature and rate of discharges to,
the waterways.
Where no mixing zones have been established by the com-
mission, it shall be unlawful for any person, corporation,
municipality or other legal entity to dispose of any sewage,
industrial or
[p. 3]
other waste, either alone or in conjunction with another
or others, into any classified surface waters, tidal flats
or sections thereof, in such manner as will, after reason-
able opportunity for dilution, diffusion, mixture or heat
transfer to the atmosphere, lower the quality of any signifi-
cant segment of said waters, tidal flats or sections thereof,
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3771
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
affected by such discharge, below the minimum require-
ments of such classification, and notwithstanding any licenses
which may have been granted or issued under section 413 to
415.
"For all water use categories other than IV, there must be
no temperature change that adversely affects fish, other
aquatic life, or spawning success. There must be no thermal
barriers to the passage of fish or other aquatic life. Maximum
temperature must not exceed 100 degrees F. beyond 50 ft.
from any point of discharge."
For NONTIDAL WATERS: "For the propagation of fish and
other aquatic life (Water Use Category IV) in all other non-
tidal waters, temperature must not exceed 93 degrees F.
beyond such distance from any point of discharge as speci-
fied by the Department as necessary for the protection of
the water use."
For TIDAL WATERS: used for the propagation of fish and
other aquatic life (Water Use Category IV), temperature
must not exceed 90 degrees F. beyond such distance from
any point of discharge as specified by the Department as
necessary for the protection of the water use."
"When an effluent is permitted to be discharged to the re-
ceiving waters, cognizance shall be given both in time and
distance to allow for mixing of effluent and stream. Such
distances required for complete mixing shall not affect the
water usage class adopted."
No reference to mixing zones.
The only thing relating to mixing zones is the following
statement: ". . . Reasonable allowance will be made for
dilution of the effluents in relation to the uses of the inter-
state waters into which they are discharged or other inter-
state waters which may be affected. . . ."
Temperature shall not be increased more than ten degrees
F (10°F) above the natural prevailing background tempera-
tures, nor exceed a maximum of 93 °F after reasonable mix-
ing.
No reference to mixing zones.
No reference to mixing zones.
No reference to mixing zones.
[p. 4]
New Hampshire has adopted the criteria of the New England
Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission with regard
to temperature which states, "... A heated discharge to a
lake shall not raise the temperature more than 3 degrees F
at the surface immediately outside a designated mixing
zone." New Hampshire had also adopted verbatim the entire
criteria pertaining to temperature and zones of passage con-
-------
3772
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
tained in Section 3 of the National Technical Advisory Com-
mittee Report on Water Quality Criteria dated April 1, 1968.
This report makes recommendation regarding mixing zones
and zones of passage on page 31.
Localized areas of surface waters, as may be designated by
the Department, into which wastewater effluents, including
heat, may be discharged for the purpose of mixing, dispers-
ing or dissipating such wastewater without creating nui-
sances or hazardous conditions.
Trout Maintenance Streams: No heat may be added which
would cause temperatures to exceed 2°F over the natural
temperatures at any time or which would cause tempera-
tures in excess of 68°F. Reductions in temperatures may be
permitted where it can be shown that trout will benefit with-
out detriment to other designated water uses. The rate of
temperature change in designated mixing zones shall not
cause mortality of the biota.
Non-Trout Waters: No thermal alterations, except in desig-
nated mixing zones, which would cause temperatures to
deviate more than 5°F at any time from natural stream tem-
peratures or more than 3°F in the epilimnion of lakes and
other standing waters. No heat may be added, except in
designated mixing zones, which would cause temperatures
to exceed 82 °F for smallmouth bass or yellow perch waters
or 86°F for other non-trout waters. The rate of temperature
change in designated mixing zones shall not cause mortality
of the biota.
The following policy guideline statement concerns mixing
zones: ". . . as samples taken for the regulation and enforce-
ment of these standards are to be collected at the mid-point
of the stream flow at locations a sufficient distance down-
stream
[p. 5]
from the point of introduction of wastewater inflow to
provide for reasonable mixing of the stream and the in-
flowing water. Sampling in reservoirs, and lakes for the
purposes of the general standards may be at any point in
the body of the water, but not closer than 250 feet from the
point of introduction of a water contaminant. A reservoir or
lake is considered to include all of the area flooded when the
water in the basin is at the spillway level.
Trout Maintenance Streams: No heat may be added which
would cause temperature to exceed 2°F over the natural
temperatures at any time or which would cause tempera-
tures in excess of 68°F. Reductions in temperatures may be
permitted where it can be shown that trout will benefit with-
out detriment to other designated water uses. The rate of
temperature change in designated mixing zones shall not
cause mortality of the biota.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3773
Non-Trout Waters; (1) Mixing Zones: The mixing zone
will be separately determined for each discharge so as to
minimize detrimental effects. Fish and other aquatic life
shall be protected from thermal blocks by providing for a
minimum fifty percent stream or estuarine cross-section
and/or volumetric passageway, or establishing artificial fish-
ways where considered necessary. Generally, the surface
water temperature shall not exceed 90 °F within the mixing
zone. Consideration will be given to effects of each discharge
based on hydrodynamics and other factors of re-
ceiving waters. (2) Outside Mixing Zone: Stream tempera-
ture in excess of 86 °F will not be permitted after mixing.
Further, no permanent change in excess of 5°F will be per-
mitted from naturally occurring background temperatures.
In multiple discharge situations stream capacity to meet
such criteria will be apportioned among the discharges. (3)
Outside Mixing Zone: Fresh Surface Water Classes: Tem-
perature change rate shall be limited to 2°F per hour, not to
exceed 9°F in any 24-hour period, further limited in that for
any seven day period the average change will meet the 5°F
change of background criteria stated in item 2 above. (4)
Outside Mixing Zone: Tidal Salt Water Classes: Discharges
shall not raise monthly means of maximum daily tempera-
tures more than 4°F from September through May, nor more
than 1.5 °F during June, July, and August. Temperature
change shall not be more than 1°F per hour, not to exceed
7°F in any 24-hour period at maximum, except when natural
phenomena cause these limits to be exceeded.
[P.6]
North Carolina In making tests or analytical determinations of classified
waters to determine conformity or nonconformity with the
established standards, samples shall be collected beyond the
boundaries of prescribed mixing zones in such manner and
at such times and locations as to be representative of the
receiving waters after reasonable opportunity for dilution
and mixture with the wastes discharged thereto. The
boundaries of such mixing zones will be determined for each
waste discharge after consideration of the magnitude and
character of the discharge, the size and character of the re-
ceiving stream or waters in question, and shall be restricted
to as small an area and length as possible. In streams or
other waters which support fish, a free passageway of at
least 75% of the cross-sectional area and/or volume of flow
shall be free of any barriers to and shall be maintained for
the migration and free movement of fish, drift organisms,
and other resident species of aquatic life. In free-flowing
waters, the passageway shall extend for a considerable dis-
tance along the same bank. In marine waters, lakes, ponds,
and reservoirs, a passageway shall be provided between
the shore and the zone influenced by the discharged waste-
waters.
-------
3774
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
"The distance of river flow to allow for a reasonable oppor-
tunity to mix and dilute wastes shall be at the discretion of
the State Department of Health and will be based upon
stream flow conditions at the time of sampling, except where
such discharges may adversely affect a beneficial water use
immediately downstream or in close proximity to the waste
point. In such instances, a change in the method of waste
discharge or other control measures may be required."
No reference to mixing zones.
No reference to mixing zones.
No reference to mixing zones.
No reference to mixing zones.
No reference to mixing zones.
The following statement on mixing zones is made under the
heading of "General Policy." In the discharge of waste
treatment plant effluents to the receiving waters, cognizance
shall be given both in time and distance to allow for mixing
of effluent and stream. Such distances required for com-
plete mixing shall not affect the water usage Class adopted
but shall be denned and controlled by the regulatory author-
ity."
[p. 7]
Not to exceed 93.2 degrees F at any time, after adequate mix-
ing of heated and normal water, as the result of the dis-
charge of heated liquids, nor shall the water temperature in
a zone of adequate mixing be more than 10 degrees F greater
than that of water unaffected by the heated discharge. PRO-
VIDED: That hydraulic conditions at the point of discharge
are arranged so that there is an unheated zone for fish pas-
sage between the point of discharge and the zone of adequate
mixing."
The following statement on mixing zones is concerned with
sampling procedures under Section III—Enforcement Pro-
visions: "4. In making tests or analytical determinations of
surface waters to determine conformity or non-conformity
with the established criteria, samples shall be collected in
such manner and at such locations, times and frequencies as
approved by the Committee. Every effort should be made
to make the samples representative of the receiving waters
after reasonable opportunity for dilution and mixture with
the polluting material discharged thereto."
Mixing zone refers to that section of flowing stream or im-
pounded waters necessary for effluents to become dispersed.
The Mixing zone necessary in each particular case shall be
defined by the Tennessee Stream Pollution Control Board.
"3. Sampling will be in accordance with fully recognized
procedures. Samples must be representative of the receiv-
ing waters allowing time and distance for mixing."
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3775
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
No reference to mixing zones.
"In assigning classifications to the waters of the State the
department may designate certain lengths or areas of such
waters as mixing zones provided that any such mixing zones
shall be only for the dispersal and dilution of wastes which
have been treated in a manner approved by the department,
shall be of no greater length or area than is required for
such purposes and may only be allowed if such wastes con-
form substantially with the technical and other require-
ments established for the receiving waters. Such a mixing
zone shall not constitute a barrier to the passage or migra-
tion of fish or produce adverse effects on any fishery or other
forms of wild or aquatic life."
No reference to mixing zones.
No reference to mixing zones.
No reference to mixing zones.
No reference to mixing zones.
No reference to mixing zones.
No reference to mixing zones.
[p. 8]
[p. 9]
4.5g "STANDARDS FOR DISSOLVED OXYGEN
Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Water Quality Standards,
November 1971
It is necessary for waters classified for the protection and propaga-
tion of fish and wildlife to contain sufficient Dissolved Oxygen to
support local biota, taking into consideration the requirements of the
desirable aquatic populations at all life-development stages. DO
criteria recommendations are made to assure that the oxygen does
not fall below certain minimum levels, which vary depending upon
natural conditions. In effect, DO standards limit amounts of bio-
degradable matter which can be artificially induced in the water to
tolerable, aquatic life-supportive levels.
Reduction in DO can have such detrimental effects as excess plant
growth (algal blooms and, in extreme cases, eutrophy); taste and odor
problems; and can otherwise make the water less suitable for fish and
wildlife, domestic, and recreational uses.
Water Quality Criteria, used by EPA in evaluating the State stand-
-------
3776 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
ards, recommends a minimum DO concentration for freshwater biota
of 5 mg/1 (milligrams per liter) for warmwater species (declining to
a lower limit of 4 mg/1 "for short periods of time, provided that the
water quality is favorable in all other respects"); and for coldwater
biota recommends no less than 5-6 mg/1 (7 mg/1 at spawning times).
Stringent limitations (6 mg/1) are recommended for small inland
lakes or large lakes which have insufficient or no mixing of con-
stituent layers. For saltwater organisms DO minimum levels of
5 mg/1 are recommended in the open coastal waters, and 4 mg/1 in
the estuarine and tidal tributaries, excepting waters with naturally
depressed DO.
Individual State-adopted standards follow.
[P-i]
DISSOLVED OXYGEN CRITERIA (Minimum)
State Cold water fishery Warm water fishery Miscellaneous
Alabama 4 mg/l« Shellfish—4 mg/1
Alaska Class A Drinking Water Supply
"Greater than 75% saturation"
Class B Drinking Water Supply and Food Processing
"Greater than 60% saturation"
Class C Bathing, Swimming, Recreation
"Greater than 5 mg/1"
Class D Growth and Propagation of Fish and Other Aquatic Life,
Including Waterfowl Furbearers, and Other Aquatic and Semi-
Aquatic Life.
"Greater than 6 mg/1 in Salt Water Minimum of 7 mg/1 In fresh water."
Class E Shellfish Growth and Propagation (Natural and Commercial
Growing Areas)
Greater than six (6) mg/1 saturation in the larval stage.
Greater than five (5) mg/1 in the adult stage.
Class F. Agricultural Water Supply, Including Irrigation, Stock
Watering and Truck Farming
"Greater than 3 mg/1."
Class G Industrial Water Supply (other than Food Processing)
"Greater than 5 mg/1 for surface water. Not limiting except as it affects
other parameters."
Arizona 6 mg/1 6 mg/1
Arkansas 5 mg/1 4 mg/1 or 50%
saturation
California Appropriate criteria were set for each Individual body of water. The fol-
lowing is a summary of these criteria and does not reflect all of the
variations found therein.
Freshwater streams and lakes—a mln. of 6 and 7 mg/1 with an additional
limit of 80 to 85% sat. for some streams. A min. of 90% sat. for Lake
Tahoe.
* Not approved by Secretary.
[P- 1]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3777
DISSOLVED OXYGEN CRITERIA (Minimum), continued
State
Cold water fishery
Warm water fishery
Miscellaneous
Estuarlne waters—a min. of 5 mg/l for most waters; mln. of 6 and 7
mg/l for other waters.
Coastal waters—a min. of 5 mg/l with additional limits on the annual
mean ave. which ranges from 6 to 7 mg/l.
Colorado 6 mg/l
Connecticut 5 mg/l*
5 mg/l
5 mg/l—16hrs.
per day*
3 mg/l—anytime*
Delaware 50% saturation* or
4 mg/l except
Delaware River—
daily ave. 3.5 mg/l
except April 1 to
June 15 and Sept.
16 to Dec. 31—
6.5 mg/l
District of Columbia 4/0 mg/l min.
5.0 mg/l daily ave.
Florida 4 mg/|
Georgia 5 mg/l 4 mg/l
* Not approved by Secretary.
Guam .
Hawaii
.6 mg/l
PWS—4 mg/l
Industrial—3 mg/l
SD—2 mg/l*
SC—5 mg/l—16hrs.
per dayj 3 mg/l
any time*
SCc—5 mg/l*
Atlantic Ocean—natural
Delaware Bay—daily
ave. of 6 mg/1
Other coastal waters—
50% saturation* or
4 mg/l
Chesapeake and
Delaware Canal—
D.O. selectively
assigned 3.0 mg/l
mln., 4.0 mg/l
dally ave. to
Anacostia River and
one specific zone
of the Potomac River.
Shellfishlng—4mg;/l
Industrial and
Navigation—2.5 mg/l
[p. 2]
PWS—6 mg/l
Saline waters—6 mg/l
Coastal Waters—
Class AA—6 mg/l
Class A—5 mg/l
Class B—4.5 mg/l
limited to docking
areas
Fresh waters used for
fish propagation—5
mg
Idaho
.75% saturation at
seasonal low; 100%
of saturation In
spawning areas
during spawning,
hatching and fry
stages of salmonid
fishes.
-------
3778
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
DISSOLVED OXYGEN CRITERIA (Minimum), continued
State
Cold water fishery
Warm water fishery
Miscellaneous
Illinois Lake Michigan not Industrial—3 mg/l—
less than 80-90% 16 hrs. per day
saturation. 2 mg/l—always.
Other waters 5 mg/l—
16 hrs. per day, 4 mg/l
any time.*
Indiana 6 mg/l daily 5 mg/l—16 hrs.
average per day
4 mg/l any time 3 mg/l—8hr./day*
Iowa 7 mg/l—16 hrs. 5 mg/l—16 hrs.
5 mg/1—any time 4 mg/1—any time
Kansas 5 mg/l Missouri R—4 mg/l*
Most waters—5 mg/l
Some 4 mg/1
[p. 3]
Kentucky 5 mg/l—16 hr./day*
3 mg/l—8 hr./day*
Louisiana 50% saturation* or
60-75% saturation
in some waters
Maine 5 mg/l for 16 hrs.* 4 mg/l for 16 hrs.* Class A—75% sat.*
4 mg/l any time* 3 mg/l any time* B-l—75% (16 hrs)*
5 mg/l (anytime)*
B-2—60% (16 hrs)*
5 mg/l (anytime)*
Industrial—2 mg/l*
(16 hrs.)
(D.O. present* always)
SA, SB-1, SB-2—6 mg
SC—5 mg/l
SD—3 mg/l
Maryland
.5 mg/l minimum
6 mg/l monthly
Average
Massachusetts 5 mg/1
Michigan 6 mg/l
Minnesota
.7 mg/l, Oct.l
through May 31
5 mg/l, other
times
4 mg/l minimum
5 mg/l monthly
Average
5 mg/l—16 hrs.
per day
3 mg/l—anytime
5 mg/l—Intolerant
species
4 mg/l—tolerant
species
Intolerant (Class B)
Tolerant (Class C)
Industrial—4 mg/l
Coastal—not less than
6.5 mg/l
Industrial—2 mg/l
Navigation
1) Interstate waters—
sufficient to prevent
nuisance
2) Intrastate waters—
average 2.5 mg/l, no
less than 2.
[P- 4]
6 mg/l April 1 through
May 31
5 mg/l, other times
5 mg/l, April 1 through
May 31
3 mg/l, other times
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3779
DISSOLVED OXYGEN CRITERIA (Minimum), continued
State Cold water fishery Warm water fishery Miscellaneous
Mississippi 4mg/l* PWS, Shellfishingand
Recreation—4 mg/l*
Agricultural and
Industrial water
supply—3 mg/l
Navigation and utility
use—3 mg/l
Missouri 6 mg/l 5 mg/l except Missouri R.—4 mg/l*
6 mg/l—lakes and
reservoirs
Montana 7 mg/l (D-l) 5 mg/l (D-3)
6mg/l(D-2)
Nebraska 6 mg/l 5 mg/l
Nevada .5.0-8.0 mg/l,
varies with stream
and season
New Hampshire Class B—75% sat. Class B—75% sat.
Class C—5 mg/l Class C—5 mg/l
New Jersey Trout Production Daily average of
Waters 5.0 mg/l. Not less
Not less than 7.0 than 4.0 mg/l at
mg/l at any time anytime.
Trout Maintenance
Water
Daily average not less
than 6.0 mg/l.
Not less than 5.0
mg/l at any time.
* Not approved by Secretary.
[p- 5]
Trout Maintenance
Lakes
Daily average not less
than 6.0 mg/l. Not
less than 5.0 mg/l at
any time. In eutrophic
lakes when stratifica-
tion is present, not
less than 4.0 mg/l
In or above the
thermocllne where
water temperatures
are below 72 degrees
F. At depths where
the water is 72
degrees F. or above,
daily average not less
than 6.0 mg/l and
not less than 5,0
mg/l.
New Mexico 50% sat.; 50% sat.;
6 mg/l mln. 5 mg/l min.
-------
3780
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
DISSOLVED OXYGEN CRITERIA (Minimum), continued
State
Cold water fishery
Warm water fishery
Miscellaneous
New York 5mg/l
North Carolina 5 mg/l*
4mg/l
4 mg/l*
North Dakota
Ohio
.6 mg/l
1 Not approved by Secretary.
Oklahoma 4 mg/l*
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Puerto Rico .
Rhode Island
.75% saturation at
seasonal low or
5-7 mg/l, by stream;
55% saturation in
spawning areas dur-
ing spawning,
hatching and fry
development.
.Min. dally ave.—
6 mg/l, no value
less than 5 mg/l
.5 mg/l*
South Carolina 4 mg/l
Mln. daily ave.—
5 mg/l, no value
less than 4 mg/l
.5 mg/l
5 mg/l—16 hrs.
per day*
3 mg/l—any time*
4 mg/l*
South Dakota
.6 mg/l or 5 mg/l
by stream
5 mg/l
* Not approved by Secretary.
Agriculture—3 mg/l
N.Y. Harbor—2.5
mg/l
Estuarine water 4.0
mg/l, swamp waters
3.0 mg/l, open ocean
water 4.0 mg/l.*
.Criteria based on "fish species native to the
area"—5 mg/l, or 5 mg/l—16 hrs. per day and
3 mg/l any time, by stream
Aquatic Life A—
5 mg/l—16 hrs. per
day, 3 mg/l any
time*
Aquatic Life B—
3 mg/l—ave., 2
mg/l mln. (applied
only where no higher
levels can be at-
tained with treatment)
[p. 6]
Smallmouth bass—
5 mg/l
all waters—4 mg/l
Marine—not less than
saturation
Estuarine—6 mg/l
Delaware Estuary—
varies with location
and season.
Navigation—2 mg/l
Sea Water—6 mg/l
Swamp waters 2.5
mg/r, fish survival
(Class Ca)3mg/l,
Salt water Class Sa
(shell) 5.0 mg/l,
Saltwater SB (bathing)
5.0 mg/l, Saltwater
Class SC (fish) 4.0
mg/l.
Big Stone and
Trauryse Lakes
Min. 6 mg/l April
and May
[p. 7]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3781
DISSOLVED OXYGEN CRITERIA (Minimum), continued
State Cold water fishery Warm water fishery Miscellaneous
Tennessee 6mg/l 5 mg/l except In
limited sections of
stream receiving
treated effluent—
3mg/l
Texas 4 to 6 mg/l, by Houston Ship Channel
stream 2 mg/l
Tidal 3 to 7 mg/l, by
stream
Utah 6 mg/l 5.5 mg/l PWS—B.O.D.—not
more than 5 mg/l
20% of the time-
not more than 10 mg/l
10% of the time.
Vermont Type I Waters
"Streams and rivers sustaining natural populations of brook trout, salmon,
rainbow trout, and brown trout. Dissolved oxygen content of these waters
at and near spawning areas shall not be less than 7 mg/l, and not less
than 6 mg/l In nonspawning areas, and normal seasonal, daily and diurnal
variations above these limits will be maintained."
Type // Waters
"Streams and rivers containing mixed populations of such fish as rainbow
trout, brown trout, and smallmouth bass. Dissolved oxygen shall not be less
than 6 mg/l and normal seasonal, dally and diurnal variations above these
limits will be maintained."
Type III Waters
"Streams and rivers having mixed populations of such warm water species
of fish as smallmouth bass, perch, and bluegllls, etc. Dissolved oxygen
shall not be less than 5 mg/l and normal seasonal, dally and diurnal varia-
tions above these limits will be maintained.
[P. 8]
Type IV Waters
"Oligotrophlc lakes, ponds and reservoirs, natural or artificial, supporting
natural populations of brook trout, salmon, lake trout and other associate
species. Dissolved oxygen levels for this class shall not fall below 6 mg/l
due to the addition of oxygen-demanding wastes and other materials.
Normal seasonal, dally and diurnal variations above 6 mg/l will be main-
tained."
Type V Waters
"Lakes, ponds and reservoirs, natural or artificial, or portions thereof,
not designated as Type IV. Dissolved oxygen levels for this class shall not
fall below 4 mg/l due to the addition of oxygen-demanding wastes and
other materials."
Virginia 5 mg/l* 4 mg/l* PWS—4 mg/l
Recreation—4 mg/l
Industrial—2 mg/l
Agricultural—2 mg/l
Virgin Islands Marine Life—5.5 mg/l
Harbors—5 mg/l
Washington Class AA—9.5 mg/l Marine Water-
Glass A—8.0 mg/l Class AA—7.0 mg/l
Class B—6.5 mg/1 or Class A—6.0 mg/1
70% saturation, Class B—5.0 mg/1 or
whichever is greater 70% saturation,
Class B—6.5 mg/l or whichever Is greater
50% saturation, Class C—4.0 mg/1 or
whichever is greater 50% saturation,
whichever Is greater
-------
3782 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
DISSOLVED OXYGEN CRITERIA (Minimum), continued
State Cold water fishery Warm water fishery Miscellaneous
West Virginia "Water Uses and Water Quality Criteria
"A." Water Contact Recreation.
Not less than 4 mg/l as a daily average."
"B." "Water Supply Public
No specific criteria
"B2" "Water supply, Industrial.
Not less than 2.0 mg/l at all times as a dally average nor less than 1 mg/l
at any time."
"B3" "Water Supply, Agricultural"
"C." Propagation of Fish and Other Aquatic Life
Not less than 5 mg/l for trout (cold water) waters
* Not approved by Secretary.
[p. 9]
and not less than 4 mg/l for warm water fish."
"D." "Water Transport, Cooling and Power"
No specific criteria.
"E." 'Treated Wastes Transport and Assimilation."
No specific criteria.
"GENERAL CONDITIONS NOT ALLOWABLE IN STATE WATERS... minimum
conditions allowable: Dissolved oxygen concentration to be less than 3.0
parts per million at the point of maximum oxygen deletion;"
"Oxygen criteria by Basin and Subasin:
All Interstate basins and tributaries except two must contain a minimum of
5 mg/l of oxygen. The requirements for the two exceptions are:
1. Tributaries to the Bluestone River rising In West Virginia and flowing
into Virginia shall not have less than 3.0 mg/l of oxygen at any time.
2. Bluestone River and all its tributaries from the Virginia-West Virginia
State line to the head of backwater of the Bluestone Reservoir shall not
have less than 4 mg/l of oxygen at any time.
Trout Streams
Trout streams must contain not less than 6 mg/l of dissolved oxygen at
any time.
Wisconsin 5 mg/l—16 hrs. Fish Life—80%
per day saturation or 5 mg/l
4 mg/l anytime
Wyoming 6 mg/l 6 mg/l
[p. 10]
4.5h "STANDARDS FOR NITRATES"
Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Water Quality Standards,
November 1971
This is a compilation of all nitrate criteria limitations within State-
adopted water quality standards.
Nitrate standards are set to control the amount of nitrates dis-
charges into the water. Nitrates and phosphates in wastes contribute
to excess amounts of nutrients in our water. Artificially nutrient-
enriched waters are over fertilized, altering aquatic systems. Quite
often algae blooms occur in lakes and slow-moving streams. Certain
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3783
algae can make public water supplies and fish flesh unpalatable.
Aquatic growths stimulated by nutrients can trap silt and organic
matter, providing ideal breeding spots for bacteria, and can choke up
streams. Such growths can reduce the oxygen concentrations in the
water, killing fish and greatly reducing the stream's ability to purify
itself. Organic enrichment is a primary factor in overaging or eutro-
phication, the process causing the "death" of Lake Erie.
The National Technical Advisory Committee in Water Quality Cri-
teria did not make specific fixed recommendations limiting nutrients.
However, nitrates were limited as follows: "The naturally occurring
ratios and amounts of nitrogen (particularly NO3 and NH4) to total
phosphorus should not be radically changed "by artificial means.
They recommended that phosphate levels in flowing streams should
not exceed "100 ug/1 or more than 50 ug/1 where streams enter lakes
or reservoirs."
Individual State-adopted standards follow.
[p. 1]
Alabama There are no specific criteria or narrative statements limiting
nitrate or any other nutrient in the aquatic environment.
Alaska There is no specific criteria and no narrative statement directed
at the limitation of such nutrients as nitrate. Unless the toxic
material standards or the taste and odor standards could be ap-
plied to nitrate problems there is only one possibility. That is
the following Policy Statement of the State of Alaska: Alaska
Statutes Title 46, Chapter 05, Section 46, 05, 010: "It is the public
policy of the state to maintain reasonable standards of purity of
the waters of the state consistent with public health and public
enjoyment, the propagation and protection of fish and wildlife,
including birds, mammals and other terrestrial and aquatic
life, and the industrial development of the state, and to require
the use of all known available and reasonable methods to pre-
vent and control the pollution of the waters of the state."
Arizona Policy statement: "Other methods and degrees of treatment will
be required, as appropriate, to remove nutrients, oily con-
stituents and other polluting materials from wastes before
discharge."
"All waters of the State shall be free from materials attributable
to domestic or industrial waste or other controllable sources in
amounts sufficient to produce taste or odor in the water or
detectable off-flavor in the flesh of fish, or in amounts sufficient
to change the existing color, turbidity or other conditions in the
receiving stream to such degree as to create a public nuisance,
or in amounts sufficient to interfere with any beneficial use of
the water."
Arkansas No nitrate statement or criteria.
California They define "Water Quality Control as the control of any factor
which adversely and unreasonably impairs the quality of the
-------
3784 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
waters of the State for beneficial use. (California Water Control
Act, Section 13005.) Pollution control is an important part of
water quality control."
Goose Lake narrative statement regarding plankton indicates
that if nutrients including nitrates accumulated to the degree
that they cause plankton blooms they would be subject to con-
trol. "The Total Plankton Population Shall be Maintained Be-
low Bloom Level. This objective is designed to
[p. 1]
protect fishlife and recreational use of the lake by limiting the
concentration of plankton below the bloom level which is
defined as that plankton concentration which causes significant
nuisance conditions, or significantly affects desirable fish popu-
lations."
Sacramento-San Juan Delta Nitrogen Criteria: "Total Nitrogen
Content of Delta Waters shall not exceed:
"A. 1.0 mg/1 in the Central Delta."
"B. 2.0 mg/1 in the Western Delta."
"C. 3.0 mg/1 in the Eastern Delta."
Nitrogen content, as used in this objective is considered to be
the sum of Nitrogen present in the water in all forms including
Nitrate (NO3), Nitrate (NO2), Ammonia (NHs or NH4), or-
ganically combined nitrogen.
"Materials Stimulating Algal Growth." "Materials stimulating
algal growth shall not be present in concentrations sufficient to
cause objectionable algal densities." "Plankton Blooms are
encouraged by the presence, in sufficient concentrations of
several nutrient materials. Among these are nitrogen, phos-
phorus, silica, vitamins, iron and other metals and dissolved
salts."
Tidal Waters Inland From the Golden Gate Within The San
Francisco Bay Region: "Total nitrogen concentration shall not
exceed 2.0 mg/1 as nitrogen at any point within the Region
easterly of Carquinez Strait; in no case shall nutrients be present
in concentrations sufficient to cause deleterious or abnormal
biotic growths except when factors which are not controllable
cause greated concentrations (Note A)."
West Fork Carson River: "Nitrates: A mean annual concentra-
tion less than 2.0 mg/1, and a maximum concentration not to
exceed 3.0 mg/1 at any time."
Truckee River: "Nitrates: A mean annual concentration less
than 1.0 mg/1, and a maximum concentration not to exceed 2.5
mg/1 at any time."
fp. 2]
East Fork Carson River: "Nitrates: A mean annual concen-
tration less than 1.5 mg/1, and a maximum concentration not to
exceed 2.0 mg/1 at any time."
West Walker River and Lake Topaz: "Nitrates: A mean annual
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3785
concentration less than 1.5 mg/1, and a maximum concentration
not to exceed 2.0 mg/1 at any time."
East Walker River: "Nitrates: A mean annual concentration less
than 3.0 nig/1, and a maximum concentration not to exceed 4.5
mg/1 at any time."
New River: No narrative statement or specific criteria concern-
ing nitrates.
Colorado River in California: The only statement that might
be applicable to nitrate problems is: "The waters shall be free
from materials attributable to domestic or industrial waste or
other controllable sources, which may produce taste or odor
in the water or detectable off-flavor in the flesh of fish, that may
alter the water's existing color or turbidity, or that may ad-
versely affect other conditions in the river." "Allowable limits
of annual average of analyses under the surveillance schedule
for Nitrate is 5.0 mg/1 and for Ammonia (NHs) 1.0 mg/1."
Lake Tahoe: "Total Soluble Nitrogen: A mean annual concen-
tration of the sum of soluble nitrate-N, nitrate-N, and
ammonia-N not greater than 24 micrograms N per liter at any
point in the lake."
A plankton count criteria related to nutrients including ni-
trates is included: "Plankton Count: A mean seasonal con-
centration not greater than 100 per milliliter and a maximum
concentration not greater than 500 per milliliter at any point
in the lake."
Another plankton standard related to nutrients is: "Plankton
Growth Potential: A mean annual growth potential at any
point in the lake not greater than twice the mean annual growth
potential at the limnetic reference station." They have strin-
gent narrative statements on foreign materials and taste and
odor which would include nitrates and other nutrients.
"1. Foreign Material: None which impairs the natural beauty,
clarity, or purity of the lake."
"2. Taste and Odor Causing Substances: None which im-
parts foreign taste or odor to the lake waters."
[P. 3]
Coastal Waters, Point Pedras Blancas to Pecadero Point: Ni-
trates and other nutrients are not covered by these standards.
Coastal Waters, Rincon Point to Point Arguello: Nitrates and
other nutrients are not covered by these standards.
Coastal Waters, Point Arguello to Point Piedras Blancas: Ni-
trates and other nutrients are not covered by these standards.
Pacific Ocean Pescadero Point to Mouth of Tomales Bay, Bolinas
Lagoon, Drakes Estero, Limatour, Estero, Portions of Tomales
Bay and tidal portions of coastal streams: Nutrients which in-
clude nitrates and others are covered by the following narrative
statement: "None in concentrations sufficient to cause deleteri-
ous or abnormal biotic growths except when factors which are
not controllable cause greater concentrations."
-------
3786 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Humboldt-Del Norte Coastal Waters: The following narrative
statement on Toxic or other Deleterious substances applies to
nitrates, and other nutrients: "Toxic or Other Deleterious Sub-
stances: There shall be no organic or inorganic substances in
concentrations... which cause deleterious growths of algae or
other plant life."
Pacific Ocean Coastal Waters, Rincon Point to San Gabriel
River: The only standard that might be applicable is the follow-
ing narrative statement: "Other Materials: Other materials shall
not be present in concentrations that would be deleterious to
fish, plant or aquatic wildlife."
Mendocino Coast: The following narrative statement applies
to nitrates, and other nutrients: "Toxic or Other Deleterious
Substances: There shall be no organic or inorganic substances
in concentrations which are toxic or detrimental to human, ani-
mal, plant, or aquatic life, which impart undesirable tastes or
odors to species of commercial or sport importances, or which
cause deleterious growths of algae or other plant life."
Pacific Ocean San Gabriel River to Drainage Divide Between
Muddy Canyon and Moro Canyon: Under objective rationale
they state: "Nutrients:... The research to date has not been
able to develop satisfactory criteria for nutrient levels in
open sea water that will not over-stimulate
[p. 4]
plankton production. Thus, a standard for nutrients is omitted
until a basis for such can be found."
Humboldt Bay: The following narrative statement covers all the
nutrients including nitrates: "There shall be no organic or in-
organic substances in concentrations... which cause deleteri-
ous growths or algae or other plant life."
Sonoma—Marin Coast: The following narrative statement cov-
ers all the nutrients including nitrates. "There shall be no
organic or inorganic substances in concentrations... which
cause deleterious growths of algae or other plant life."
San Diego Bay: The following narrative statement applies to
all nutrients including nitrates. "Nutrient levels shall be limited
to those levels necessary to minimize phytoplankton blooms,
thus preventing unsightliness, turbidity, color, and oxygen
depression."
Harbors, Marinas and Tidal Prisms in Los Angeles and Ventura
Counties: The following narrative statement applies to all nu-
trients including nitrates: "Nutrients: Nutrients of other than
natural origin shall not be present in concentrations capable
of causing proliferation of plankton or other undesirable biotic
growths."
Klamath River in California: The following narrative statement
applies to all nutrients including nitrates: "Concentrations of
dissolved nutrients shall be maintained at levels below those
which may cause undesirable algae blooms, slime or bacterial
growth, or other undesirable biological growths."
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3787
Colorado
Connecticut
Tijuana River Basin in California: "Concentrations of nitrates
and phosphates of waste origin, by themselves or in combination
with naturally occurring nutrients, shall be maintained at levels
below those which stimulate algae and emergent plant growth."
Smith River: The following narrative statement covers all
nutrients including nitrates: "There shall be no organic or
inorganic substances in concentrations... which cause unde-
sirable algae blooms, slime or bacterial growth, or other undesir-
able biolofical growths."
Mission Bay Including Tidal Prism of Son Diego River and
Agua Hedionda Lagoon: "Nutrients: Concentrations of nitrates
and phosphates of waste origin, by themselves
[P- 5]
or in combination with naturally occurring nutrients, shall be
maintained at levels below those which stimulate algae and
emergent plant growth."
San Gabriel River Tidal Prism: "Nutrients, of other than natural
origin, shall not be present in concentrations capable of causing
proliferation of undesirable biotic growths."
Coastal Bays, Marines and Sloughs Between the Son Gabriel
River and the Drainable Divide Between Muddy Canyon and
Moro Canyon: "Nutrients: Nutrients (nitrogen, silicate, and
phosphate shall not be present except from natural conditions,
in amounts that will cause deleterious or abnormal growths to
occur on the substrate or to foster biotic growths that are harm-
ful to beneficial uses."
There are no specific criteria for any of the nutrients. The nar-
rative statement concerning toxic materials might restrict ni-
trates at levels below where damage to aquatic life occurred.
This statement is as follows: "Toxic material: Free from bio-
cides, toxic or other deleterious substances attributable to mu-
nicipal, domestic, or industrial wastes, or other controllable
sources in levels, concentrations or combinations sufficient to be
harmful to aquatic life."
The narrative statements concerning taste and odor and chem-
ical constituents are the only standards that could apply to ni-
trates. "Taste and Odor:" For water supply: "None in such
concentrations that would impair any usages specifically as-
signed to this Class nor cause taste and odor in edible fish."
Class D: "None in such concentrations that would impair any
usages specifically assigned to this class." For coastal and
marine waters: Class A: "None allowable." Class SB, SC, SD:
"None in such concentrations that would impair any usages
specifically assigned to this Class and none that would cause
taste and odor in edible fish or shellfish."
Chemical Constituents (freshwater): Class A, B, C, and D.
"Waters shall be free from chemical constituents in concentra-
tions or combinations which would be harmful to human, ani-
mal, or aquatic life for the appropriate, most sensitive and
governing considerations and approved limits have not been
-------
3788
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
established, bioassay shall be performed as required by the
appropriate agencies. For public drinking water supplies the
raw water sources must be of such a
[p. 6]
quality that United States Public Health Service limits, or
State limits if more stringent, for finished water can be met
after conventional water treatment."
Chemical Constituents (coastal and marine): Class SA: "None
in concentrations or combinations which would be harmful to
human, animal, or aquatic life or which would make the waters
unsafe or unsuitable for fish or shellfish or their propagation,
impair the palatability of same, or impair the waters for any
other use." "Class SB, SC, and SD: None in concentrations or
combinations which would be harmful to human, animal, or
aquatic life or which would make the waters unsafe or unsuit-
able for fish or shellfish or their propagation, or impair the water
for any other usage assigned to this Class."
The following declaration of policy in 6301, Chapter 63, Water
Pollution, Title 7, Part VII, Delaware Code is "(a) It is declared
to be the public policy of the State to maintain within its juris-
diction a reasonable quality of water consistent with public
health and public enjoyment thereof, the propagation and pro-
tection of fish and wildlife, including birds, mammals, and other
terrestrial and aquatic life, and the industrial development of
the State, (b) It is the purpose of this chapter to safeguard the
quality of state waters against pollution by (1) preventing new
pollution in such waters and (2) controlling any existing
pollution."
The adopted standards approved by the Secretary with certain
exceptions and recommendations that could apply to nitrates
are those concerned with toxic substances and taste, odor, and
color causing substances: "Toxic Substances: None in concen-
trations harmful (synergistically or otherwise) to humans, fish,
shellfish, wildlife, and aquatic life.
There are no specific criteria for nutrients such as nitrates and
no narrative statement directly applicable to nutrients such as
nitrates. The only item in the water standards of Florida, as
approved, that might be used to protect that States waters from
excessive amounts of phosphates and there accompanying prob-
lems would be the antidegradation statement.
There are no specific criteria for nutrients such as nitrates nor
is there a narrative statement directly concerned with nitrates or
other nutrients.
"Nutrient Materials All Waters:
Total nitrogen, not greater than 0.10 mg/1
Total nitrogen, not greater than 0.15 mg/1
Total nitrogen, not greater than 0.20 mg/1
[p. 7]
Applicable to
. Class AA
Class A
. .. Class B
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3789
The following revision of water quality standards regarding
nutrients was submitted in a letter dated December 26, 1967,
prior to approval by the Secretary from Walter B. Quisenberry,
M.D. to Mr. William B. Schroeder: "Insert the following section
immediately preceding the section titled "Wastes from Vessels
and Marinas:"
"Control of Nutrients:
Nutrient discharges were pointed out in testimony as being a
potential problem in several water areas such as Kaneohe Bay
and Pearl Harbor. The Agency is cognizant of this potential
problem and nutrient limits have been included in the water
quality criteria. At present the Agency knows of no practicable
methods for the control of nutrients. The Agency will devise
and implement control measures when the means to do so be-
come available."
Hawaii has never adopted and submitted for approval an anti-
degradation statement that also could be used for the protection
of its high quality waters from problems due to excessive nutri-
ents such as nitrates.
Idaho Under the section titled "GENERAL WATER QUALITY
STANDARDS FOR INTERSTATE STREAMS" is the narrative
statement: "Interstate waters shall not contain Excess nu-
trients of other than natural origin that cause visible slime
growths or other nuisance aquatic growths."
There is no specific criteria for nutrients such as nitrates and
Idaho does have an approved antidegradation statement to pro-
tect existing high quality waters from excessive amounts of
nutrients such as nitrates.
[p. 8]
Illinois The water quality standards for the Interstate Waters, Wabash
River and Tributary Streams Crossing into Indiana, Interstate
Waters Mississippi River Between Illinois and Missouri, Inter-
state Waters Ohio River and Saline River, and the Interstate
Waters Mississippi River Common Boundary Between Illinois
and Iowa do not include specific criteria or a narrative statement
directly concerned with limits for nitrates and other nutrients.
Specific criteria for nitrate concentrations was included in the
water quality standards for the following interstate waters:
1. Interstate Waters Illinois River and Lower Section of Des
Plaines River.
a. Public Water Supply and Food Processing: "Not to exceed
45 mg/1 Nitrate (as NOs) ... 2.5 mg/1 Ammonia Nitro-
gen N.
b. There are no specific criteria or narrative statement con-
cerning limits for nitrates and other nutrients assigned
sectors of these waters classified for Aquatic Life, Recrea-
tion, and Industrial Water Supply.
Interstate Waters Chicago River and Calumet River System and
Calumet Harbor Basin:
-------
3790 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
a. Sectors 1-3: Not to exceed ... 2.5 mg/1 Ammonium Ni-
trogen (N).
b. Sectors 4-10: Ammonium Nitrogen-mg/l.
Annual Average not more than 0.05.
Single daily value or average not more than 0.12.
Interstate Waters Lake Michigan and Little Calumet River,
Grand Calumet River and Wolf Lake:
a. Lake Michigan Open Water:
Total Nitrogen (N)
Not more than 0.4 mg/1.
Ammonium Nitrogen (N)
Annual average 0.02 mg/1.
Single daily value or average 0.05 mg/1.
b. Lake Michigan Shore Water:
Ammonia Nitrogen (N):
Annual average not more than 0.05 mg/1.
Single daily value or average not more than 0.12 mg/1.
c. Little Calumet River:
Ammonium Nitrogen—Single daily value or average not
more than 1.5 mg/1.
d. Wolf Lake:
Ammonia Nitrogen (N):
Annual average not more than 0.03 mg/1.
[p. 9]
Single daily value or average not more than 0.12 mg/1.
The following Nitrate Standards by State effluent criteria for
nitrates and other nutrients has been adopted by the State as
part of their standards.
Nitrate (NOs): Not to exceed 45.0 mg/1.
Ammonia Nitrogen (N): Not to exceed 2.5 mg/1.
The State has an approved antidegradation statement that could
be used to protect existing high quality waters from excessive
nitrate concentrations causing problems.
Indiana There are no specific criteria or narrative statement limiting
nitrates or other nutrient substances in the Indiana water qual-
ity standards for any of the interstate basins other than Lake
Michigan drainages unless the antidegradation statement could
be applied for existing high quality waters.
Nitrate criteria applicable to Lake Michigan Basins.
Lake Michigan Open Waters:
Total Nitrogen (N)—mg/1 0.4
Lake Michigan Shore Waters:
Ammonia Nitrogen (N)—mg/1
Annual average not more than 0.05.
Single daily value or average not more than 0.12.
Indian Harbor Canal:
Ammonia Nitrogen (N)—mg/1
Annual average not more than 1.0.
Single daily value or average not more than 1.5.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3791
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Grand Calumet River:
Ammonia Nitrogen (N)—mg/1
Single value not more than 5.0.
Little Calumet River:
Single daily value or average not more than 1.5.
Wolf Lake:
Ammonia Nitrogen (N)—mg/1
Annual average not more than 0.05.
Single daily value or average not more than 0.12.
[p. 10]
Louisiana
The following narrative statement could in my opinion be used
to limit the amount of nitrates and other nutrients in the aquatic
environment.
1. Public Water Supply
All substances detrimental to treatment processes shall be
limited to non-detrimental concentrations in the surface waters.
2. Aquatic Life
All substances detrimental to aquatic life shall be limited to
non-detrimental concentrations in the surface waters.
Specific criteria for interstate waters classified for Aquatic Life:
1. Ammonia Nitrogen (N) mg/1 not more than 2.0.
They have approved antidegradation statement that could be
used to protect existing high quality waters.
The only standards regarding the limiting of nitrates in the
aquatic environment are as follows:
1. Antidegradation statement—Existing high quality waters
could be protected from damages resulting from discharge of
effluents containing high nitrate concentrations to the aquatic
environment.
2. The general criteria assigned to all Kansas Interstate Basins
—"Pollution substances will be maintained below maximum
permissible concentrations which would be detrimental for pub-
lic water supplies, recreation requirements, and other estab-
lished beneficial uses."
Interstate waters classified for livestock use:
Nitrates shall not exceed 45.0 mg/1.
Two of four freedoms narrative statements in Kentucky water
quality standards could be used to limit nitrates in interstate
waters. They are:
"Free from materials attributable to municipal, industrial or
other conditions in such degree as to create a nuisance."
"Free from substances attributable to municipal, industrial or
other discharges in concentrations or combinations which are
toxic or harmful to human, animal, plant or aquatic life."
[p. HI
All interstate waters of Louisiana are assigned a general criteria
which could be used to protect such waters from excessive
-------
3792
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Maine
Maryland
concentrations of nitrates or other nutrients. This statement
with slight variations of use classification is:
"Wastes after discharge . . . shall not create conditions which
adversely affect public health or use of the water for the follow-
ing purposes: domestic or industrial water supply, propagation
of aquatic life, agricultural water, recreation, and other legiti-
mate uses."
The following narrative statements could be used to limit nitrate
discharges to the interstate waters of Maine:
Class A Waters: "There shall be no discharge of sewage of other
wastes into water of this classification and no deposits of such
material on the banks of such waters in such a manner that
transfer into the water is likely ..."
Class B-l Waters: "There shall be no disposal of sewage, indus-
trial wastes or other wastes in such waters, except those which
have received treatment for the adequate removal of waste
constituents including, but not limited to, solids, color, turbidity,
taste, odor or toxic material, such, that these treated wastes will
not lower the standards or alter the usages of this classification,
nor shall such disposal of sewage or waste be injurious to
aquatic life or render such dangerous for human consumption.
Class B-2 Waters: Same as Class B-l.
Class C Waters: Same as Class B-l.
Class SA Waters: "There shall be no toxic wastes, deleterious
substances, colored or other waste or heated liquids discharged
to waters of this classification either singly or in combinations
with other substances or wastes in such amounts or at such
temperatures as to be injurious to edible or shellfish or to the
culture or propagation thereof, or which in any manner shall
adversely affect the flavor, color, odor or sanitary condition
thereof; and otherwise none in sufficient amounts to make the
waters unsafe or unsuitable for bathing or impair the waters
for any oother best usage as determined for the specific waters
assigned to this class ..."
Class SB-1: Same as Class SA.
Class SB-2: Same as Class SA.
[p. 12]
Class SC: Essentially the same as Class SA.
The following narrative statement could be used to limit exces-
sive nitrates affecting the uses of the interstate waters:
"Materials attributable to sewage, industrial waste, or other
waste which produce taste, odor, or change the existing color
or other physical and chemical conditions in the receiving to
such degree as to create a nuisance, or that interfere directly or
indirectly with water uses . . ."
The following narrative statement could be used to limit exces-
sive nitrates affecting the uses of the interstate waters: "Mate-
rials attributable to sewage, industrial waste, or other waste
which produce taste, odor, or change the existing color or other
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3793
physical and chemical conditions in the receiving to such degree
as to create a nuisance, or that interfere directly or indirectly
with water uses;..."
Massachusetts "Water quality parameters not specifically denoted shall not
exceed the recommended limits on the most sensitive and gov-
erning water class use."
Class A Waters: Chemical constituents: "None in concentra-
tions or combinations which would be harmful or offensive to
humans, or harmful to animal, or aquatic life."
Class B Waters: "Ammonia as (N) not to exceed an average of
0.5 mg/1... during any monthly sampling period."
Class C Waters: "Ammonia as (N) not to exceed 1.0 mg/1...
during any monthly sampling period."
Class D Waters: "Chemical constituents: "None in concentra-
tions or combinations which would be harmful to human, ani-
mal, or aquatic life for the designated water use."
Class SA Waters (Coastal and Marine): "Ammonia as (N) not
to exceed an average of 0.2 mg/1... during any monthly sam-
pling period."
Class SB Waters: "Ammonia as (N) not to exceed an average
of 0.2 mg/1... during any monthly sampling period."
Class SC Waters: "None in concentrations or combinations
which would be harmful to human, animal, or aquatic life or
which would make the waters unsafe or unsuitable for fish or
shellfish or their propagation, impair the palatability of same,
or impair the water for any other usage."
[P- 13]
Michigan Water Supply Domestic: "Nitrate (NOs) should not exceed 45
mg/1 at the intake."
Nutrients (Phosphorus, ammonia, nitrates and sugars)
"Nutrients originating from industrial, municipal or domestic
animal sources shall be limited to the extent necessary to pre-
vent adverse effects on water treatment processes or the stimu-
lation of growths of algae, weeds and slimes which are or may
become injurious to the designated uses."
Industrial Water Supply: Nutrients (Phosphorus, ammonia,
nitrates and sugars): "Nutrients originating from industrial,
municipal or domestic animal sources shall be limited to the
extent necessary to prevent the stimulation of growths of algae,
weeds and slimes which are or may become injurious to the
designated use."
Recreation: Nutrients (Phosphorus, ammonia, nitrates and
sugars): "Nutrients originating from industrial, municipal, or
domestic animal sources shall be limited to the extent necessary
to prevent the stimulation of growths of algae, weeds and slimes
which are or may become injurious to the designated use."
FisH, Wildlife and Other Aquatic Life: Same as for Recreation.
Agriculture: "Nutrients (Phosphorus, ammonia, nitrates and
sugars): "Nutrients originating from industrial, municipal, or
-------
3794
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
domestic animal sources shall be limited to the extent necessary
to prevent the stimulation of growths of algae, weeds and slimes
which are or may become injurious to the designated use. NOa
concentrations shall conform to USPHS Drinking Water
Standards."
Commercial Water Use: Same as Industrial Water Supply.
Minnesota Has approved antidegradation statement to protect existing high
quality wastes.
The following narrative statement would limit damaging
amounts of nitrates: "It is the intention of the Agency to require
removal of nutrients from all sources to the fullest practicable
extent whenever sources of nutrients are considered to be
actually or potentially inimical to preservation of enhancement
of the designated water uses."
Specific criteria limiting nitrates for certain class waters is as
follows:
[p. 14]
Domestic Consumption:
Class A (Public Water Supply): Nitrates (NOs) 45 mg/1
None for Class B, C, & D.
Fisheries & Recreation:
Class A: Ammonia (N) Not to exceed a trace
Class B: Ammonia (N) Not more than 1 mg/1
Class C: Ammonia Not more than 2 mg/1
Industrial, Agriculture & Wildlife, and Navigation & Waste
Disposal Classifications: None
Mississippi The only direct reference to nutrients in the State's water
quality standards is: "It is the plan of the Commission to work
with Soil and Wastes Conservation Districts to effect control of
nutrients .... pollution contributed by agricultural run off in-
crease where this is a problem.
Does not have an approved antidegradation statement.
One of the "Freedom" statements would limit nutrients: "Free
from substances attributable to municipal, industrial, agricul-
tural or other discharge producing color, odor, or other condi-
tions in such degree as to create a nuisance."
Missouri This State's water quality standards include no specific criteria
limiting nitrates.
One of the "Freedom" statements could be used to limit nitrates
in problem areas. It is applicable to all Missouri interstate
waters and states: "Substances attributable to municipal, in-
dustrial, agricultural, mining or other effluents shall not have
a harmful effect on human or animal life."
These are narrative statements included in early interstate
river basin standards that could be applicable in limiting ni-
trates. They are by River:
White River Basin—Interstate Stream Table Rock Reservoir,
Bull Sholes Reservoir, Norfolk Reservoir, Clearwater Reservoir.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3795
Lake Tanecamo, North Fosk River and Spring River, Eleven
Point River, Current River, & Black River (From the Head-
quarters to Clearwater Reservoir), Black River (Clearwater
Reservoir to Mo.-Ark. State Line)
[p. 15]
"Substances toxic to humans, fish and wildlife detrimental to
agricultural, mining, industrial, recreational or other legitimate
uses shall be limited to nontoxic or nondetrimental concentra-
tions in the Stream."
Grand and Chariton River Basin—Interstate Streams
Grand and Chariton Rivers
"d. Substances Potentially Toxic or detrimental Substances
toxic to humans, fish and wildlife or detrimental to agricul-
tural, mining, industrial, recreational or other legitimate
uses shall be limited to non-toxic or non-detrimental con-
centrations in the stream."
East Fork Grand, Thompson, Little and Weldon Rivers
"d. Substances Potentially Toxic or detrimental Substances
toxic to humans, fish and wildlife or detrimental to agricul-
tural, mining, industrial, recreational or other legitimate
uses shall be limited to non-toxic or non-detrimental con-
centrations in the stream."
Mississippi—Des Moines River Basin Interstate Streams
"d. Substances Potentially Toxic or Detrimental Substances
toxic to humans, fish and wildlife or detrimental to agri-
cultural, mining, industrial, recreational or other legitimate
uses shall be limited to non-toxic or non-detrimental con-
centrations in the stream."
Osage River Basin—Interstate Streams
Osage—Marais des Cygnes River and Marmaton River
"Substances toxic to humans, fish and wildlife or detrimental
to agricultural, mining, industrial, recreational or other legiti-
mate uses shall be limited to non-toxic or nondetrimental con-
centrations in the lake."
Lower Missouri River Basin—Interstate Streams
Nishnabotna River
"d. Substances Potentially Toxic or Detrimental Substances
toxic to fish or detrimental to industrial or other legitimate
uses shall be limited to non-toxic or non-detrimental con-
centrations in the stream."
Tarkio River, West Tarkio River, Nodaway River, Platte River
and One Hundered and Two River
"d. Substances toxic to humans, fish and wildlife or detrimental
to agricultural, mining, industrial, recreational or other
legitimate uses shall be limited to non-
[p. 16]
toxic or non-detrimental concentrations in the stream."
-------
3796 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Lower Mississippi River Basin—Interstate Streams
St. Francis River (Excluding Wappapello Reservoir), Wappa-
pello Reservoir, Little River, Buffalo Ditch (St. Francis River
Basin)
"d. Substances Potentially Toxic or Detrimental Substances
toxic to humans, fish and wildlife or detrimental to agricul-
tural, mining, industrial, recreational or other legitimate
uses shall be limited to non-toxic or non-detrimental con-
centrations in the stream."
Mississippi River
Mississippi River (Zone 1—Des Moines River to Alton Lock
and Dam, and Mississippi River (Zone 2—Alton Lock and Dam
to the Missouri-Arkansas State Line)
"Substances Potentially Toxic or Detrimental
d. Substances toxic to humans, fish and wildlife or detrimental
or agricultural, mining, industrial, recreational, navigational,
or other legitimate uses shall be limited to non-toxic or non-
detrimental concentrations in the stream."
Missouri River
"Substances Toxic or Detrimental
d. Substances toxic to humans, fish and wildlife or detrimental
to agricultural, mining, industrial, recreational, navigational,
or other legitimate uses shall be limited to non-toxic or non-
detrimental concentrations in the stream."
Grand (Neosho) River Basin
Spring River, Shoal Creek, Turkey Creek, Buffalo Creek, Lost
Creek
"Substances Toxic or Detrimental
d. Substances toxic to humans, fish and wildlife or detrimental
to agricultural, mining, industrial, recreational, navigational,
or other legitimate uses shall be limited to non-toxic or non-
detrimental concentrations in the stream."
[p. 17]
Missouri has an approved antidegradation statement which
could be used to protect existing high quality waters from
damaging amounts of nitrates.
The requirements for Class B, C, D, Dl, D2, and D3 are:
" No excess nutrients which cause nuisance aquatic
growths "
Montana Class A (closed) "None allowed in addition to concentrations
naturally present."
Class A (open) "Concentrations of chemical constituents shall
conform with the 1062 U.S. Public Health Service Drinking
Water Standards. Induced variations within these standards
shall be limited to an increase of not more than 10% of the con-
centration present in the receiving water."
Class B "Concentrations of chemical constituents shall conform
with the 1962 U.S. Public Health Service Drinking Water Stand-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3797
ards after treatment. No floating suspended dissolved or set-
table matter, creating nuisance conditions, not attributable to
natural cause. No excess nutrients which cause nuisance
aquatic growths "
Class C "Concentrations of chemical constituents shall be main-
tained below levels known to be (or demonstrated to be) of
Public Health Significance." ".... No excess nutrients which
cause nuisance aquatic growth...."
Class Dl "Maximum allowable concentrations shall be less than
acute or chronic problem levels as revealed by bio-assay or
other appropriate methods. No excess nutrients which cause
nuisance aquatic growths..."
Class D2 Same as Dl
Class D3 Same as Dl
Class E "Concentrations shall be less than those demonstrated
to be deleterious to livestock or plants or their subsequent-
consumption by humans."
Nebraska The following narrative statement protects waters from exces-
sive nutrients including nitrates:
" These waters shall be free of substances attributable to
[P. 18]
discharge or wastes having... substances and conditions or
combinations thereof in concentrations which produce unde-
sirable aquatic life."
There is specific criteria for Class C waters. It is:
"Same as Water Supply -4- Plus ammonia nitrogen concentra-
tions shall not exceed 1.4 mg/1 in trout streams nor exceed 3.5
mg/1 in warm water streams where the pH in these streams
does not exceed a pH value of 8.3. If the pH of the streams ex-
ceeds 8.3, the undiasociated ammonium hudroxide as nitrogen
shall not exceed one-tenth mg/1 in trout streams nor exceed
0.25 mg/1 in warm water streams ..."
Nevada (By West Fork Carsou River, Total Nitrates (NOs)—mg/l, Single
Interstate value-not more than 3.0.
Waters) Leviathan Creek, No criteria or statement.
East Fork Carson River, Total Nitrates (NOs)—mg/l, Single
value-not more than 2.0.
Carson River (At Mutter Lane), Total Nitrates (NOz), Single
value-not more than 2.0.
Carson River (Highway 395, So. of Carson), Total Nitrates
(NOs)—mg/l (Tentative), Single value-not more than 2.0.
Carson River (Near New Empire), Total Nitrates (NOs)—mg/l
(Tentative), Single value-not more than 2.0.
Carson River (At Weeks)
[p.19]
Total Nitrates (NOs)—mg/l, Single value-not more than 0.50.
Lake Lahontan, Total Nitrates (NOs)—mg/l, Single value-not
more than 4.0.
-------
3798 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
West Walker River (Above diversion to Topaz Lake), Total
Nitrates (NOa)—m.g/1, Single value-not more than 2.0.
Topaz Lake, Total Nitrates (NOs)—mg/l, Single value-not
more than 2.0.
West Walker River (Near Wellington), Total Nitrates (NOa)—
mg/l, Single value-not more than 2.0.
West Walker River (Above confluent with East Walker River),
Total Nitrates (NOa)—mg/l, Single value-not more than 1.0.
Sweetwater Creek, Has approved antidegradation statement.
Not to exceed PHS, Drinking Water Standards 1962.*
East Walker River (At State Line), Total Nitrates (NOa) mg/l,
Single value-not more than 4.5.
East Walker River (South of Yerington and above confluent
with W. Walker River.)
[p. 20]
TotaZ Nitrates (NOs)—mg/l, Single value-not more than 3.0.
Walker River (At J.J. Ranch), Total Nitrates (NOa)—mg/l,
Not to exceed PHS Drinking Water Standards 1962.*
Desert Creek, Antidegradation statement approved. Not to ex-
ceed PHS, Drinking Water Standards 1962.*
Chiatovich Creek, Total Nitrates (NOa)—mg/l, Single value-
not more than 1.0.
Indian Creek, Total Nitrates (NOa)—mg/l, Antidegradation
statement. Not to exceed 1962 PHS, Drinking Water Standards.*
Leidy Creek (Above Hydoelectric Plant), Total Nitrates (NOa)
—mg/l, Single value-not more than 1.0.
Virgin River, Total Nitrates (NOa)—mg/l, Single value-not
more than 1.0.
Beaver Dam Wish (Above Schroeder Reservoir), Total Nitrates
(NOa)—mg/l, Single value-not more than 1.0.
Snake Creek (Above Fish Hatchery), Total Nitrates (NOa)—
mg/l, Single value-not more than 1.0.
[P.21]
Big Goose Creek (At Ranch), Total Nitrates (NOa)—mg/l,
Single value-not more than 1.0.
Salmon Falls Creek (Highway 93, South of Jackpot, Total Ni-
trates (NOa)—mg/l, Single value-not more than 1.0.
Shosphone Creek, Approved antidegradation statement. Not
to exceed PHS, Drinking Water Standards 1962.*
East Fork, Jarbridge River, Approved antidegradation statement.
Not to exceed 1962, PHS Drinking Water Standards.
Jarbidge River (Upstream from Jarbidge), Total Nitrates
(NOa)—mg/l, Single value-not more than 1.0.
Jarbidge River (Doumstream of Jarbidge), Total Nitrates
(NOa)—mg/l, Single value-not more than 1.0.
West Fort Bruneau (Diamond "E" Road), Total Nitrates (NOz)
—mg/l, Single value-not more than 1.0.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3799
New Hampshire
New Jersey
East Fork Owyhee River (Above Mill Creek), Approved anti-
degradation statement. Not to exceed the 1962 PHS Drinking
Water Standards.*
[p.22]
East Fork Owyhee River (South of Owyhee), Total Nitrates
(NOs)—mg/l, Single value-not more than 1.0.
East Fork Owyhee River (State Line), Total Nitrates (NOz)—
mg/l, Single value-not more than 1.0.
South. Fork Owyhee River, Total Nitrates (NOs)—mg/l, Single
value-not more than 3.0.
Smoke Creek (Approx. 30 mi. East of Susanville, California),
Total Nitrates (NOz)—mg/l, Single value-not more than 5.0.
Bronco Creek (At Hirschdale Road), Approved antidegradation
statement. Not to exceed 1962, PHS Drinking Water Standards.*
Gray Creek (At Hirschdale Creek), Approved antidegradation
statement. Not to exceed 1962, PHS Drinking Water Stand-
ards.*
Truckee River (At Farad, California), Total Nitrates (NOz)—
mg/l, Single value-not more than 2.5. Annual average not
more than 1.0.
Truckee River (At Idlewild), Total Nitrates (NOsj—mg/l,
Single value-not more than 2.0.
Truckee River (At Boynton Lane)
[p. 23]
Total Nitrates (NOs)—mg/l, Single value-not more than 2.0.
Truckee River (Lagomansine Bridge), Total Nitrates (NOs)—
mg/l, Single value-not more than 5.0.
Truckee River (At Cenrsola Ranch), Total Nitrates (NOs)—
mg/l, Single value-not more than 5.0.
Lake Tahoe (All points), Total soluable inorganic Nitrogen
ug/L, Annual average-not more than 25.0.
Colorado River, No specific criteria.
* " 10 mg nitrate nitrogen (or 45 mg nitrate) per liter of
water is a limit which should not be exceeded."
No specific criteria. No applicable narrative statement. Have
approved antidegradation statement.
The narrative statement limiting toxic or Deleterious Substances
states the following:
"Toxic or Deleterious Substances Including But Not Limited
To Mineral Acids, Caustic Alkali, Cyanides, Heavy Metals, Car-
bon Dioxide, Ammonia or Ammonium Compounds, Chlorine,
Phenols, Pesticides, Etc.: None, either alone or in combination
with other substances, in such concentrations as to affect hu-
mans or be detrimental to the natural aquatic biota or which
would render the waters unsuitable for the designated uses.
None which would cause the Potable Water Standards of the De-
-------
3800
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
partment for drinking water to be exceeded after appropriate
treatment."
[p. 24]
New Mexico The following narrative statement under the heading of "Gen-
eral Standards" seems to offer a vehicle to use in limiting ni-
trates and other nutrients:
"Toxic Substances
Toxic substances such as, but not limited to, pesticides, herbi-
cides, heavy metals, and organics, shall not be present in receiv-
ing waters in concentrations which will change in the ecology
of receiving waters to an extent detrimental to existing forms
of life or which are toxic to human, plant, fish and animal life.
Toxcities of substances in receiving waters will be determined
by appropriate bioassay techniques, or other acceptable means,
for the particular form of aquatic life which is to be preserved
with the concentrations of the toxic materials not to exceed
10 percent of the 48-hour median tolerance limit."
New York New York does not have specific criteria limiting the amount
of nitrates in interstate waters. It does have a toxic substance
statement for each class of waters which is the same or similar
to the following example: Class AA (Public Water Supply):
"None alone or in combination with other substances or wastes
in sufficient amounts or at such temperatures as to be injurious
to fish life, make the waters unsafe or unsuitable as a source
of water supply for drinking, culinary or food processing pur-
poses or impair the waters for any other best usage as deter-
mined for the specific waters which are assigned to this class."
North Carolina North Carolina does not have specific numerical criteria to
protect its interstate waters from nitrates. It does have an
approved antidegradation statement that could be used to limit
nitrates in existing high quality waters.
Section II (Rules Applicable To Classes and Standards) con-
tains several narrative statements that could be used to limit
nitrates where damage is occurring as a result of their dis-
charge to interstate waters. These are:
1. "The quality of any waters receiving sewage, industrial
waste or other waste discharges shall be such that no impair-
ment of the best usage of waters in any other class shall occur
by reason of such sewage, industrial waste or other waste
discharges."
2. "The maximum limits for toxic and other deleterious sub-
stances in receiving waters shall not exceed the values
[p.25]
recommended in the most recent edition of the "Report of the
National Technical Advisory Committee on Water Quality Cri-
teria" where stated and in cases where such values are not in-
cluded in the report, bio-assays will be conducted according to
the standard techniques recommended therein to determine
safe levels for such substances on the basis of the discharge
and characteristics of the waters under consideration."
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3801
There are narrative statements for each class of water use that
could possibly be used to limit harmful amounts of nitrates.
These are:
Class A-l: In determining the safety or suitability of waters
in this class for use as a source of water supply for drinking,
culinary or food-processing purposes after approved disinfec-
tion, the Board will be guided by the physical, chemical and
bacteriological standards specified in the 1962 edition of the
"Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards" and the
requirements of the State Board of Health as set forth in Sec-
tion 5, "Protection of Unfiltered Public Water Supplies", of the
Rules and Regulations Providing for the Protection of Public
Water Supplies, as adopted October 6, 1960, and amended May
9,1962, August 26,1965, and October 12,1967." The 1962 "Public
Health Service Drinking Water Standards" recommend that
nitrates shall not exceed 45 mg/1.
Gloss A-ll: "Only such amounts, whether alone or in combina-
tion with other substances or wastes as will not render the
waters unsafe or unsuitable as a source of water supply for
drinking, culinary or food processing purposes, injurious to fish
and wildlife or adversely affect the palatability of same, or
impair the waters for any other best usage established for this
class."
Class B: "Only such amounts, whether alone or in combination
with other substances or wastes as will not render the waters
unsafe or unsuitable for bathing, injurious to fish and wildlife
or adversely affect the palatability of same or impair the waters
for any other best usage established for this class."
Class C: "Only such amounts, whether alone or in combination
with other substances or wastes as will not render the waters
injurious to fish and wildlife or adversely affect the palatability
or same, or impair the waters for any other best usage estab-
lished for this class."
Class D: "Only such amounts attributable to sewage, industrial
wastes or other wastes as will not render the waters unsuitable
for agriculture, industrial cooling purposes, navigation, or fish
survival, or cause offensive conditions."
Class SA Waters: Only such amounts, whether alone or in
[p.26]
combination with other substances or wastes as will not make
the waters unsafe or unsuitable for fish and shellfish or their
propagation, impair the palatability of same, or impair the
waters for any other best usage established for this class."
Class SB: "Only such amounts, whether alone or in combination
with other substances or wastes as will not make the waters
unsafe or unsuitable for bathing, injurious to fish or shellfish, or
adversely affect the palatability of same, or impair the waters
for any other best usage established for this class."
Class SC: "Only such amounts, whether alone or in combination
with other substances or wastes as will not render the waters
-------
3802
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
injurious to fish and shellfish, adversely affect the palatability
of same, or impair the waters for any other best usage estab-
lished for this class."
North Dakota No specific criteria. Section II, C promises such criteria as
follows:
"C. The maximum practical reduction of nutrients, including
nitrogen, phosphorus and sugars, in sewage, industrial, and
other wastes shall be accomplished as soon as a practical method
is developed."
North Dakota has an approved antidegradation statement that
should provide protection to existing high quality interstate
waters from harmful amounts of nitrates.
A narrative statement could be used on nutrient problems in-
cluding nitrates. It is: "None in concentrations or combinations
that interfere with, or prove hazardous to, the intended water
usage." This applies to all interstate waters.
Ohio Ohio has two narrative statements in their standards that could
be applicable in limiting nitrates to less than harmful or nui-
sance amounts. These are:
"1. Free from substances attributable to municipal, industrial
or other discharges in concentrations or combinations which are
toxic or harmful to human, animal or aquatic life."
"2. Free from materials attributable to municipal, industrial, or
other discharges producing color, odor or other conditions
[p.27]
in such degree as to create a nuisance"; Ohio has approved
antidegradation statement that could be used to protect high
quality waters.
Oklahoma No specific criteria limiting nitrogen compounds. Have an
approved antidegradation statement which could be used to
limit harmful amounts of nitrogen compounds being discharged
to interstate waters. The standards for each of the interstate
streams in Oklahoma contain four narrative statements that
could be used to limit harmful amounts of nitrogen compounds
being discharged into interstate waters. These are:
"All tributary streams and all waste effluents shall be in such
condition that when discharged to the stream reaches as defined,
and Interstate Tributaries, they shall not create conditions
which will adversely affect public health, or use of the water
for beneficial purposes."
"Taste and Odor Producing Substances—Taste and odor pro-
ducing substances shall be limited to concentrations that will
not interfere with the production of potable water by modern
treatment methods or impart off color or unpalatable flavor to
flesh or fish, or result in offensive odors in the vicinity of the
water, or otherwise interfere with beneficial uses."
"Toxic Substances—Toxic substances shall not be present in
such quantities as to cause the waters to be toxic to human,
animal, plant, or aquatic life. For aquatic life, using bioassay
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3803
techniques, the toxic limit shall not exceed one-tenth of the
48-hour median tolerance limit, except that other limiting con-
centrations may be used in specific cases when justified on the
basis of available evidence and approved by the regulatory
authority."
"Other Substances—The control of other substances not hereto-
fore mentioned will be guided by the U.S. Public Health Service
Drinking Water Standards of 1962, or latest revision thereof, and
accumulated scientific data on limits above which injury to use
occurs. Pollutional substances will be maintained below max-
imum permissible concentrations for public water supplies,
recreation requirements, agricultural needs and other beneficial
uses.(c)*"
Oregon Oregon has no specific criteria limiting nitrates. They do have
an approved antidegradation statement to protect existing high
quality interstate waters from damaging amounts of
[p.28]
nitrates. They have included two narrative statements in their
general standards for interstate waters that could be used to
limit the amount of nitrates in such waters should problems
arise. These are:
"No wastes shall be discharged and no activities shall be con-
ducted which either alone or in combination with other wastes
or activities will cause in any waters of the State:
(4) The development of fungi or other growths having a del-
eterious effect on stream bottoms, fish or other aquatic life
or which are injurious to health, recreation or industry.
(5) The creation of tastes or odors or toxic or other conditions
that are deleterious to fish or other aquatic life or affect
the potability of drinking water or the palatability of fish
or shellfish."
Pennsylvania Pennsylvania water quality standards do not contain specific
criteria for nitrates. Nor does this State have an approved
antidegradation statement to protect existing high quality water
from harmful amounts of nitrates. The narrative statement
contained under Section 4, General Criteria could be used to
limit nitrates in interstate waters where problems from such
nutrients occur. The statement is:
"The water shall not contain substances attributable to mu-
nicipal, industrial or other waste discharges in concentration
or amounts sufficient to be inimical or harmful to the water uses
to be protected or to human, animal, plant or aquatic life.
Specific substances to be controlled include, but are not limited
to, floating debris, oil, scum and other floating materials; toxic
substances; substances that produce color, tastes, odors or settle
to form sludge deposits."
Rhode Island No specific criteria to limit nitrates. Approved antidegradation
statement that could be used to protect existing high quality
waters from harmful amounts of nitrates. The water quality
-------
3804 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
standards assigned the freshwater classification of Class A, B,
C, and D each include the following narrative statement that
could be used in limiting the amount of nitrates being dis-
charged into interstate waters having nutrient problems:
"Waters shall be free from chemical constituents in concentra-
tions or combinations which would be harmful to human,
animal, or aquatic life for the appropriate, most sensitive and
governing water class use. In areas where fisheries are the
governing considerations and approved limits have not been
established, bio-assays shall be performed as required by the
appropriate agencies. For public drinking water
[p. 29]
supplies the limits prescribed by the United States Public
Health Service may be used where not superseded by more
stringent signatory State requirements."
The water quality standards assigned to saltwater classifications
SA, SB, SC, and SD have the following narrative statement
that could be used to limit where problems arise: "None in
concentrations or combinations which would be harmful to hu-
man, animal, or aquatic life or which would make the waters
unsafe or unsuitable for fish or shellfish or their propagation,
impair the palatability of same, or impair the waters for any
other uses."
South Carolina No specific criteria limiting the nitrate content of interstate
waters. They have an approved antidegradation statement that
could be used to protect existing high quality waters from
harmful amounts of nitrate. They also have the following
narrative statements that could be applicable in limiting nitrates
in problem areas:
"Source of water supply for drinking, culinary or food proc-
essing purposes shall mean any source, either public or private,
the waters from which are used for domestic consumption, or
used in connection with the processing of milk, beverages, food
or for other purposes which require finished water meeting
U.S. Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards."
"The waters of the State shall be free from: Materials at-
tributable to sewage, industrial waste, or other waste which
produce taste, odor, or change the existing color or other phys-
ical and chemical conditions in the receiving stream to such
degree as to create a nuisance, or that interfere directly or
indirectly with water uses; and high-temperature, toxic, cor-
rosive or other deleterious substances attributable to sewage,
industrial waste, or other waste in concentrations or combina-
tions which interfere directly or indirectly with water uses, or
which are harmful to human, animal, plant or aquatic life."
Class SA water quality standards contains the following nar-
rative statement that could be used to limit nitrates where
problems exist: "Toxic wastes, deleterious substances, colored
or other wastes. None alone or in combination with other sub-
stances or wastes in sufficient amounts as to be injurious to
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3805
edible fish or shellfish or the culture or propagation thereof,
or which in any manner shall adversely affect the flavor, color,
odor, or sanitary condition thereof
[p.30]
or impair the waters for any other best usage as determined
for the specific waters which are assigned to this class."
South Dakota The following narrative statement could be used to limit nitrates
for all classes of water other than Domestic Water Supply and
Recreation which have specific criteria:
"Toxic Materials. No materials shall be discharged to any
surface water or watercourse in the State which produce con-
centrations of chemicals toxic to humans, animals or the most
sensitive stage or form of aquatic life greater than 0.1 times the
96-hour median tolerance limit for short residual compounds or
0.01 times the median tolerance limit for accumulative sub-
stances exhibiting a residual life exceeding 30 days in the re-
ceiving waters."
"Median tolerance concentrations shall be based on the results
of the most recent research results for the material being studied
or, in case of disagreement, by bioassay tests simulating actual
stream conditions run in accordance with procedures outlined
in latest edition of 'Standard Methods for the Examination of
Water and Wastewater' published by the American Public
Health Association and using test animals or organisms specified
by the Committee."
"Concentrations specified for toxic materials shall be based on
daily averages, but the concentrations shall not exceed 125%
of the value specified at any time or in any section of the re-
ceiving water."
Waters classed for Domestic Water Supply and Recreation have
the following specific criteria limiting nitrates:
Domestic Water Supply
Nitrates not more than 10 mg/1 (as N) or 45 mg/1 as (NOs)
Recreation
Nitrates as (NOs) not more than 50 mg/1
Have approved antidegradation statement that could be used
to limit nitrates causing problems in existing high quality
waters.
Tennessee Does not have an antidegradation statement to protect existing
high quality waters from harmful amounts of nitrates. There
are no specific criteria limiting the amount of nitrates in inter-
state waters.
The following narrative statements under use classifications
could be used to restrict nitrates in problem areas:
"Domestic Raw Water Supply
K. Other Pollutants—other pollutants shall not be added
[p.31]
-------
3806 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
to the water in quantities that may be detrimental to public
health or impairs the usefulness of the water as a source of
domestic water supply."
"Industrial Supply
Other Pollutants—Other pollutants shall not be added to the
waters in quantities that may adversely affect the water for
industrial processing."
"Fish, and Aquatic Life
H. Other Pollutants—other pollutants shall not be added to the
waters that will be detrimental to fish or aquatic life."
"Recreation
I. Other Pollutants—other pollutants shall not be added to the
water in quantities which may have a detrimental effect on
recreation."
Texas No specific criteria. A narrative statement that could be used
to protect waters from excessive nitrate concentrations is "Taste
and odor producing substances shall be limited to concentra-
tions in the waters of the state that will not interfere with the
production of potable water by reasonable water treatment
methods, or impair unpotable flavor to food fish, including
shellfish, or result in offensive odors rising from the waters or
otherwise interfere with the reasonable use of the waters."
Approved antidegradation statement.
Utah No specific criteria. Narrative statements:
Class A
"It shall be unlawful to discharge or place any wastes or other
substances in such a way as to interfere with the stated Class
"A" Water uses,..."
Class B
"It shall be unlawful to discharge or place any wastes or other
substances in such a way as to interfere with the stated Class
"B" water uses,.. "
Class C
"It shall be unlawful to discharge or place any wastes or other
substances in such a way as to interfere with the stated Class
"C" water uses,..."
Have approved antidegradation statement.
[p.32]
Vermont Have an approved antidegradation statement to protect existing
high quality water from harmful amounts of nitrates.
Rules 8 and 9 of the Vermont water quality standards concern-
ing discharge requirements for Class A and B waters limit the
discharge of nutrients including nitrates as follows:
"RULE 8: Discharges Prohibited—Class A Waters
In accordance with the antidegradation provisions of Rule 2
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3807
there shall be no discharge of wastes into Class A waters that
does not meet or exceed the technical and other requirements
for such waters nor shall there be any new discharges of wastes
containing any form of nutrients which would encourage eutro- •
phication or growth of weeds or algae from the date of the
adoption of this rule.
RULE 9: Discharges Restricted—Class B Lakes and Ponds
In accordance with the anti-degradation provisions of Rule 2
there shall be no new discharge of wastes into any lake, pond
or reservoir, natural or artificial, lying wholly within the state's
boundaries, or into the tributaries thereto which does not meet
the technical and other requirements for Class B waters nor
shall there be any new discharge of wastes containing any
form of nutrients which would encourage eutrophication or
growth of weeds and algae from the date of adoption of this
rule. Any existing waste discharge containing soluble or other
nutrients, which would encourage eutrophication or growth of
weed and algae, shall be treated so as to remove such nutrients
to the extent that such removal is or may become technically
and reasonably feasible."
The narrative statement, Rule 12 of the Vermont water quality
standards, should be applicable to limit nitrates doing damage
to interstate waters, according to the interpretation made in
Martin L. Johnson's letter of July 27, 1971, to Mr. Klashman,
Acting Regional Director of Region 1. Mr. Johnson is Com-
missioner of Water Resources for the State of Vermont. The
statement and interpretation are as follows:
"RULE 12: Chemical, Radiological Constituents
Wastes shall be free of chemical and radiological constituents
which would be harmful to the governing water class use. In
areas where fisheries are the governing consideration and
[p. 33]
approved limits have not been established, bio-assays shall be
performed as required by the appropriate state agencies.
"The new regulations are very strict with regard to the dis-
charge of chemical or radiological constituents. In interpreting
the narrative criteria, we will not permit the concentrations of
these constituents due to effluent discharges to exceed those
numerical limits set forth in the Public Health Service Drink-
ing Water Standard."
Public Health Drinking Water Standards limit nitrates to less
than 45 mg/1.
Virginia "1.05 In addition to other standards established for the pro-
tection of public or municipal water supplies, the following
standards will apply at the raw water intake point:
Nitrates plus Nitrites 10 mg/1"
Has an approved antidegradation statement to protect existing
high quality waters from harmful amounts of nitrates.
-------
3808 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Have special standards applicable to specific waterstate waters
and or as assigned that limit the amount of nutrients in efflu-
ents, including nitrates.
Have special standards limiting nutrients, including nitrates in
specific interstate waters as assigned. They are:
"h. Objective for Nutrients—The cumulative total of nitrogen
as N from all sources in the effluent shall not be greater than
0.5 mg/1 at any time; phosphorus as P from all sources in the
effluent shall not be greater than 1.0 mg/l+ at any time.
i. The State Water Control Board has directed and/or ordered
the following:
1. That all existing discharges in accordance with h above shall
substantially remove the nutrients in their effluents on or before
such time as central facilities (The Hampton Roads Sanitation
District Commission Chesapeake-Elizabeth System) become
available or connect to central facilities, (i.e. The Chesapeake-
Elizabeth System).
2. That it will consider approving small discharges to this
watershed to facilitate the elimination of potential public health
hazards provided central facilities (Chesapeake-
[p.34]
Elizabeth System) are not available, and
3. That it will not allow additional significant new discharges
to this watershed, which do not provide for nutrient removal
facilities in accordance with h above.
j. The following, from Minute 73 of the proceedings of the
Board at its meeting on July 11-12,1966, will also apply:
For discharge to the Chickahominy River and its tributaries
below Bottoms Bridge, effluent quality obtainable with con-
ventional secondary sewage treatment plants with approved
plans is acceptable, except that the following specifications
shall be met:
Constituent
2 Inorganic
Nutrients.
Analysis Schedule
Once /week on a
composite
sample.
Concentration
Nitrate (as N) not
to exceed .5 ppm.
Total phosphate
(asPO4)notto
exceed 1.5 ppm.
In lieu of the above requirements, conventional secondary
sewage treatment plants may ordinarily be used anywhere in
the Chickahominy River Basin, provided holding ponds, capable
of retaining the entire plant effluent during low flow critical
conditions, are constructed. "Low flow" is construed to mean
less than 15 cubic feet per second in the main stem of the
Chickahominy River itself at the (1) point of waste discharge
to the main stem, or (2) confluence of a tributary below the
point of waste discharge to the tributary. Below Bottoms
Bridge, holding ponds with at least 60-day retention capacity
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3809
(August 14 to October 13) may be required, if in the opinion
of the Board's staff it is deemed necessary.
k. The following from Minute 73 of the proceedings of the Board
at its meeting on July 11-12,1966, will also apply:
Constituent Analysis Schedule Concentration
5 Ammonia Same as bio- Not to exceed 2.0
chemical oxygen ppm as N
demand on
specially pre-
served samples
Inorganic Once/week on a Nitrate (as N) not
Nutrients composite to exceed .3 ppm,
sample total phosphate
(asPO4)notto
exceed .6 ppm
(mean values in
the Chicka-
hominy)
[p.35]
In lieu of the above requirements, conventional secondary
sewage treatment plants may ordinarily be used anywhere in
the Chickahominy River Basin, provided holding ponds, capable
of retaining the entire plant effluent during low flow critical
conditions, are constructed. "Low flow" is construed to mean
less than 15 cubic feet per second in the main stem of the
Chickahominy River itself at the (1) point of waste discharge
to the main stem, or (2) confluence of a tributary below the
point of waste discharge to the tributary. Above Bottoms
Bridge the holding ponds are to retain the entire plant effluent
for at least 90 days (July 15 to October 13).
r. The following will also apply to the Occoquan Creek Water-
shed:
(1) It was willing to permit the discharge of treated sewage
effluent from an additional 25,000 persons with the stipulation
that:
(a) nutrient removal facilities be constructed in each case.
s. The following, from Minute 20 of the proceedings of the Board
at its meeting on January 16, 1969, will also apply to the Pow-
hatan Creek Watershed:
1. All proposals for treated waste discharges to the Powhatan
Creek Watershed will in the future be approved only after:
(a) Engineering data has been submitted indicating the capa-
bility of the proposed treatment facilities to remove all phos-
phorus and nitrogen compounds.
(b) Owners with facilities existing at the time of this action
will, in a period not to exceed 60 days, submit to the Board,
engineering reports and pollution abatement schedules indi-
cating the maximum concentrations of phosphorus and nitrogen
-------
3810 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
compounds which they can remove from waste waters prior to
discharge. No schedule providing a time period exceeding
three years will be approved. Modification or replacement of
existing treatment facilities may be necessary.
2. It will entertain from owners in the area a proposal for
development of:
[p. 36]
(a) A central facility to treat all wastes at a point outside the
Watershed, where phosphorus and nitrogen removal will prob-
ably not be necessary, or
(b) Treatment facilities inside the Watershed which include
complete removal of all phosphorus and nitrogen compounds."
Washington Have an approved antidegradation statement that could be used
to limit nitrates in existing high quality waters.
The Toxic, Radioactive or Deleterious Material Concentrations
and the Aesthetic Values statements for each water use classi-
fication could possibly be used to limit the amount of nitrates in
interstate waters. They are:
"Class AA
Toxic, Radioactive or Deleterious Material Concentrations shall
be less than those which may affect public health, the natural
aquatic environment, or the desirability of the water for any
usage.
Aesthetic Values shall not be impaired by the presence of
materials or their effects, excluding those of natural origin,
which offend the senses of sight, smell, touch or taste."
"Class A
"Toxic, Radioactive or Deleterious Material Concentrations shall
be below those of public health significance, or which may cause
acute or chronic toxic conditions to the aquatic biota, or which
may adversely affect any water use.
Aesthetic Values shall not be impaired by the presence of
materials or their effects, excluding those of natural origin,
which offend the senses of sight, smell, touch or taste."
"Class B
"Toxic, Radioactive or Deleterious Material Concentrations shall
be below those which adversely affect public health during
the exercise of characteristic usages, or which may cause acute
or chronic toxic conditions to the aquatic biota, or which may
adversely affect characteristic water uses.
Aesthetic Values shall not be reduced by dissolved, suspended,
floating or submerged matter, not attributable to natural causes,
so as to affect water usage or paint the flesh of edible species."
"Class C
[p. 37]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3811
"Toxic, Radioactive or Deleterious Material Concentrations shall
be below those which adversely affect public health during the
exercise of characteristic usages, or which may cause acute or
chronic toxic conditions to the aquatic biota, or which may
adversely affect characteristic water uses.
Aesthetic Values shall not be interfered with by the presence
of obnoxious wastes, slimes, or aquatic growths or by materials
that will taint the flesh of edible species."
West Virginia All of the interstate waters of West Virgina are assigned criteria
which limits nitrates to (NOs) to less than 45 mg/1. Have
approved antidegradation statement that could be used to
limit nitrates causing trouble in existing high quality waters.
Wisconsin Have an approved antidegradation statement that could be
used to limit nitrates causing problems in existing high quality
waters.
These are several narrative statements thaat could be used to
limit problems causing nitrates. These are:
1. "Minimum Standards. Regardless of the water quality stand-
ards and water use, untreated or inadequately treated wastes
may not impair a designated use nor may standards be inter-
preted to permit a lower quality within a water sector than
that existing or required by outstanding orders..."
2. "Substances in concentrations or combinations which are
toxic or harmful to humans shall not be present in amounts
found to be of public health significance, nor shall substances
be present in amounts, which by bio-assay and other appropri-
ate tests, indicate acute or chronic levels harmful to animal,
plant or aquatic life."
The only specific criteria is provided by a statement applying
to interstate waters used for public water supplies. That is:
"(d) The intake water supply will be such that by appropriate
treatment and adequate safeguards it will meet the Public
Health Service Drinking Water Standards, 1962 ..."
Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards state that
nitrate as (NOs) should not exceed 45 mg/1.
[p. 38]
Wyoming Have no specific criteria limiting nitrates in interstate waters.
Have no approved antidegradation statement that could be
used to limit nitrates causing problems in existing high quality
waters.
No narrative statement that could be used to limit nitrates in
interstate waters where such substances are causing problems.
District of Have no approved antidegradation statement that could be used
Columbia to limit nitrates causing problems in existing high quality
waters.
They have no specific criteria limiting nitrates in interstate
waters.
The following narrative statement from the District of Colum-
-------
3812
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Guam
Puerto Rico
bia water quality standards could be used to limit nitrates where
problems attributable to them exist in the interstate waters:
"Materials attributable to sewage, industrial waste, or other
waste which produce taste, odor or appreciably change the exist-
ing color or other physical and chemical conditions in the re-
ceiving streams to such degree as to create a nuisance, or that
interfere directly or indirectly with water uses..."
Have an approved antidegradation statement that could be
used to limit nitrates causing problems in existing high quality
waters.
The two following freedom statements could be used to limit
nitrates causing problems in interstate waters:
"Free from substances and conditions or combinations thereof
attributable to sewage, industrial wastes, or other wastes that
will induce undesirable aquatic life.
Free from substances and conditions thereof attributable to
sewage, industrial wastes, or other wastes toxic or irritant to
humans, animals, plants, and aquatic life."
Waters classed as Domestic Water Supply have both specific
criteria and a narrative statement. They are:
"Treated surface waters used for public or domestic water sup-
ply shall meet the recommendations of the Public Health Service
Drinking Water Standards."
They recommend not more than 45 mg/1 as (NOs).
[p. 39]
"Ammonia nitrogen shall be less than .01 mg/1 as N." Waters
classed for the Propagation of Fish and Other Aquatic Life
limit nutrients such as nitrates as follows:
"The naturally occurring ratio and concentrations of nitrogen
and phosphorus will be maintained in near shore waters and
fresh waters."
The water quality standards of Puerto Rico have no specific
criteria limiting nitrates in interstate waters.
Have an approved antidegradation statement that could be
used to restrict the amount of nitrates causing problems in ex-
isting high quality waters.
Contains a narrative statement that could be used to limit ni-
trates in interstate waters where problems arising from them
exist. It is:
"1. Class SA
Existing natural conditions shall not be altered."
"2. Class SB
e. Toxic wastes or deleterious substances alone or in com-
bination with other substances or wastes in sufficient
amounts ... which in any way obviously affect the flavor,
color, odor, or sanitary conditions of the waters...."
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3813
Virgin Islands Have no specific criteria to limit nitrates in interstate water.
Have no narrative statement that could be used to limit nitrates
in problem areas.
Have an approved antidegradation statement that could be used
to limit nitrates causing problems for existing high quality
waters.
[P. 40]
4.5i "STANDARDS FOR ANTIDEGRADATION"
Environmental Protection Agency, Division of Water Quality Standards, April 1972
This is a compilation of all Federally approved antidegradation
statements adopted in response to a policy directive issued by the
Secretary of the Interior on February 8, 1968. The purpose of anti-
degradation is to prohibit the deterioration of waters whose existing
quality is higher than established water quality standards.
At the time of this report, the following States do not have a Fed-
erally approved antidegradation statement: Alabama, Georgia, Missis-
sippi and Tennessee. Action is underway in all the States to adopt
an antidegradation provision in their water quality standards.
Individual State-adopted antidegradation statements, contained
within State standards, follow.
[p. i]
ALASKA
(Approved: October 4, 1971)
Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards as of the
date on which such standards become effective will be maintained at that high
quality unless it has been affirmatively demonstrated to the state that a change in
justifiable as a result of necessary economic or social development and will not
preclude present and anticipated use of such waters. Any industrial, public or
private project or development which would constitute a new source of pollution
or an increased source of pollution to high quality waters will be required to pro-
vide the highest degree of practicable treatment to maintain the high water quality.
In implementing this policy, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency will be kept advised in order to discharge his responsibilities under the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended.
[p- 1]
ARIZONA
(Approved: September 27, 1968)
Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards will not
be lowered in quality unless and until it has been affirmatively demonstrated to
the State Water Quality Control Council that such change is justifiable as a result
of necessary economic or social development and will not interfere with or become
injurious to any assigned uses made of, or presently possible in, such waters. Any
industrial, public or private project or development which could constitute a new
-------
3814 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
source of pollution or an increased source of pollution to high quality waters will
be required, as part of the initial project design, to provide the highest and best
degree of waste treatment practicable under existing technology. In implementing
the policy of this paragraph as it relates to interstate streams, the Secretary of
Interior will be kept advised and provided with such information as he will need
from time to time to protect the interests of the United States and the author-
ity of the Secretary in maintaining high quality of interstate waters.
[p. 2]
ARKANSAS
(Approved: November 19, 1969)
WHEREAS, the Arkansas Pollution Control Commission has heretofore promul-
gated Regulation No. 2, establishing water quality criteria for interstate streams
within the State of Arkansas, pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 of the Ar-
kansas Water and Air Pollution Control Act (Act 472 of the Acts of Arkansas for
1949, as amended; Ark. Stats., §82-1904), and in compliance with the requirements
of the Federal Water Quality Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-234, 33 U.S.V.A., §466g);
and
WHEREAS, said Regulation provides that "The criteria are designed to enhance
the quality, value, and beneficial uses of the water resources of the State of Ar-
kansas and to aid the prevention, control, and abatement of water pollution;" and
WHEREAS, said Regulation further provides that "It is the purpose of these
criteria to preserve and enhance the quality of this water so that it shall be reason-
ably available for all beneficial uses and thus promote the social welfare and
economic well-being of the people of the State"; and
WHEREAS, said Regulation further provides for a clear and unequivocal non-
degradation policy, to-wit:
"3. The water quality criteria herein contained shall not be construed as permit-
ting any waste amenable to treatment or control to be discharged in any water
of the State of Arkansas without reasonable treatment or control. The Arkansas
Water and Air Pollution Control Act provides, among other things, that it shall be
unlawful for any person to discharge any waste into any waters of the State with-
out having first obtained a written permit from the Commission. A disposal per-
mit may not be issued unless there is submitted to the Commission plans and speci-
fications for a disposal
[p. 3]
system adequate to treat or control the wastes so as not to cause water pollution
as defined in the Act. Such treatment or control must be consistent with the
state of the art and best practicable industry standards, the minimum require-
ment being secondary treatment or equivalent, giving due regard to quality and
flow of the receiving waters, the present, future and potential uses of such
waters, economic feasibility, and other relevant factors"; and
WHEREAS, the Water Quality Standards for Interstate Streams adopted by the
Commission, of which Regulation No. 2 is an integral part, were approved without
exception by the Secretary of Interior on August 7, 1967; and
WHEREAS, subsequent to such approval the Secretary of Interior and the
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration articulated a non-degradation
policy, which has been authoritatively construed and explained by responsible
officials of the Department of Interior as set forth in a Compendium, dated August,
1968; and
WHEREAS, the non-degradation policy incorporated in Regulation No. 2, mak-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3815
ing clear that waters of existing quality higher than the established standards may
not be degraded by untreated waste discharges even though the resulting water
quality might comply with the standards and that a waste disposal permit, as re-
quired by law, will not be issued by the Commission unless the treatment or con-
trol is consistent with the state of the art and best practicable industry standards
(the minimum requirement being secondary treatment or equivalent), is at least
as strong as that subsequently adopted by the Secretary of Interior and is fully
consistent therewith; and
WHEREAS, the Commission wishes to assure the Secretary of Interior and Fed-
eral Water Pollution Control Administration of its cooperation in implementing
the Arkansas Water Quality Standards in general and the non-degradation policy
in particular,
[p. 4]
including the furnishing of relevant information and data;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Arkansas Pollution Control
Commission, its agents, servants, and employees, shall cooperate with the Secre-
tary of Interior and the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration in imple-
menting the Arkansas Water Quality Standards and the non-degradation policy
incorporated therein. In connection with such implementation, the Secretary of
Interior and the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration will be kept
advised and will be provided with such information as they will need to discharge
their responsibilities under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Director of the Commission is hereby
authorized and directed to take such action as may be necessary or appropriate
to effectuate the foregoing.
Resolved the 25th day of October, 1968.
[p. 5]
CALIFORNIA
(Approved: January 9, 1969)
Whenever the existing quality of water is better than the quality established
in policies as of the date on which such policies become effective, such existing
high quality will be maintained until it has been demonstrated to the State that
any change will be consistent with maximum benefit to the people of the State,
will not unreasonably affect present and anticipated beneficial use of such water
and will not result in water quality less than that prescribed in the policies.
Any activity which produces or may produce a waste or increased volume or
concentration of waste and which discharges or proposes to discharge to existing
high quality waters will be required to meet waste discharge requirements which
will result in the best practicable treatment or control of the discharge necessary
to assure that (a) a pollution or nuisance will not occur and (b) the highest
water quality consistent with maximum benefit to the people of the State will
be maintained.
In implementing this policy, the Secretary of the Interior will be kept advised
and will be provided with such information as he will need to discharge his
responsibilities under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
[p. 6]
COLORADO
(Approved: March 4,1971)
Waters of the state, the quality of which exceeds the limits set in these standards,
will be maintained at existing quality unless and until it can be demonstrated to
-------
3816 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
the State that a change in quality is justified to provide necessary economic or
social development. In that case, the best practicable degree of waste treatment
to protect the current classification of such waters will be required. The appro-
priate Federal authority will be provided with information, from time to time,
required to discharge his responsibilities under the Federal Water Pollution Con-
trol Act, as amended.
[p. V]
CONNECTICUT
(Approved: April 21,1970)
Interstate waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards
as of the date which such standards become effective will be maintained at their
existing high quality. These and other interstate waters of the State will not be
lowered in quality unless and until it has been affirmatively demonstrated to the
Commission and the Department of the Interior that such change is justifiable as a
result of necessary economic or social development and will not interfere with or
become injurious to any assigned uses made of, or presently possible in, such
waters. This will require that any industrial, public or private project or develop-
ment which would constitute a new source of pollution or an increased source of
pollution to high quality waters will be required, if provided a permit, as part of the
initial project design, to provide the highest and best degree of waste treatment
available under existing technology, and, since for interstate waters these are also
Federal standards, these waste treatment requirements will be developed co-
operatively.
[p. 8]
DELAWARE
(Approved: July 30,1971)
It is the public policy of the State to maintain within its j urisdiction a reasonable
quality of water consistent with public health and public enjoyment thereof, the
propagation and protection of fish and wild life, including birds, mammals, and
other terrestrial and aquatic life, and the industrial development of the State.
Where conflicts develop between stated water uses, stream criteria or discharge
criteria, water uses shall be paramount in determining the required stream cri-
teria, which, in turn, shall be the basis of individual discharge limits.
Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards as of the
date on which such standards become effective will be maintained at such high
quality unless it has been affirmatively demonstrated to the State that a change
is justifiable as a result of necessary economic or social development, and will not
preclude uses presently possible in such waters. Any industrial, public, or private
project or development which would constitute a new source of pollution or an
increased source of pollution to high quality waters will be required to provide
the highest and best practicable means of waste treatment to maintain high water
quality. In implementing this policy the Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency will be kept advised and will be provided with such information
as he will need to discharge his responsibilities under the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act as amended.
[p. 9]
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
(Approved: January 17,1969)
There are no waters within the District of Columbia whose existing quality is
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3817
better than the quality indicated by the established standards. Accordingly, it
is the policy of the District of Columbia to improve the quality of all its waters as
reflected hi the standards. All industrial, public, and private sources of pollution
will be required to provide the degree of waste treatment necessary to meet the
water quality standards. In implementing this policy, the Secretary of the Interior
will be kept advised and will be provided with such information as he will need to
discharge his responsibilities under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended.
[p. 10]
FLORIDA
(Approved: January 17,1969)
The policy inherent in the standards shall be to protect water quality existing at
the time these water quality standards were adopted or to upgrade or enhance
water quality within the State of Florida. In any event where a new or increased
source of pollution poses a possibility of degrading existing high water quality,
such project development shall not be issued a Commission permit until the
Commission is satisfied that such development will not be detrimental to the best
interests of the State and necessary to its social and economic development. In
administering the policy, high quality receiving waters will be protected by re-
quiring as a part of the initial project design the highest and best practicable treat-
ment available under existing technology.
The Commission recognizes and will protect the interest of the Federal Govern-
ment in interstate and coastal waters in accordance with the Federal Water Pol-
lution Control Act, as amended. The Commission further shall consult with the
U.S. Department of the Interior on all matters affecting the Federal interest in a
cooperative effort.
[p.11]
GUAM
(Approved: June 12,1968)
Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards as of the
date on which such standards become effective will be maintained at their existing
high quality. These and other waters of the Territory will not be lowered in
quality unless and until it has been affirmatively demonstrated to the Territorial
water pollution control agency and the Department of the Interior that such change
is justifiable as a result of necessary economic or social development and will not
interfere with or become injurious to any assigned uses made of, or presently
possible in, such waters. This will require that any industrial, public or private
project or development which would constitute a new source of pollution or an
increased source of pollution to high quality waters will be required, as part of the
initial project design, to provide the highest and best degree of waste treatment
available under existing technology, and, since these are also Federal standards,
these waste treatment requirements will be developed cooperatively.
[P-12]
HAWAII
(Approved: June 28,1971)
"It is the public policy of this State to conserve the waters of the State, and to
protect, maintain and improve the quality thereof for drinking water supply and
food processing, for the growth and propagation of shellfish, fish and other marine
-------
3818 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
and aquatic life, for oceanographic research, for the conservation of coral reefs and
wilderness areas, and for domestic, agricultural, industrial, recreational and other
legitimate uses; and to provide that no waste be discharged into any waters of this
State without first being given the degree of treatment necessary to protect the
legitimate beneficial uses of such waters; and to provide for the prevention, abate-
ment and control of new and existing water pollution; and to cooperate with the
federal government in carrying out these objectives.
"Therefore, waters whose qualities are higher than established water quality
standards shall not be lowered in quality unless it has been affirmatively demon-
strated to the Director that such change is justifiable as a result of necessary
economic or social development and will not interfere with or become injurious to
any assigned uses made of, or presently in, such waters. Any industrial, public or
private project or development which could constitute a new source of pollution
or an increased source of pollution will be required, as part of the initial project
design to provide the highest and best degree of waste treatment practicable under
existing technology. In implementing the policy of this paragraph as it relates to
waters under federal jurisdiction, the Secretary of the Interior will be kept advised
and provided with such information as he will need from time to time to protect
the interests of the United States and the authority of the Secretary in maintaining
high quality of interstate waters."
[p. 13]
IDAHO
(Approved: June 7,1971)
"Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards as of the
date of which such standards become effective will be maintained at their existing
high quality. These and other waters of Idaho will not be lowered in quality unless
and until it has been affirmatively demonstrated to the Idaho Department of Health
and the Environmental Protection Agency that such change is justifiable as a re-
sult of necessary economic or social development and will not interfere with or
become injurious to any assigned uses made of, or presently possible in, such
waters. This will require that any industrial, public, or private project or de-
velopment which would constitute a new source of pollution or an increased source
of pollution to high quality waters will be required, as part of the initial project
design, to provide the highest and best degree of waste treatment available under
existing technology, and since these are also Federal standards, these waste treat-
ment requirements will be developed cooperatively."
[p. 14]
ILLINOIS
(Approved: January 27,1968)
Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards as of the
date which such standards become effective will be maintained in their present
high quality within the powers granted by the Illinois Water Pollution Control
Statutes. Such waters will not be lowered in quality unless and until it has been
affirmatively demonstrated to the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
that such change is justifiable as a result of necessary economic or social develop-
ment and will not interfere with or become injurious to, any appropriate beneficial
uses made of, or presently possible in such waters.
[p. 15]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3819
INDIANA
(Approved: January 20,1971)
Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards as of the
date on which such standards become effective will be maintained in their present
high quality consistent with the powers granted under the Indiana Stream Pol-
lution Control Law. Such waters will not be lowered in quality unless and until
it has been affirmatively demonstrated to the Stream Pollution Control Board that
such change is justifiable as a result of necessary economic or social development
and will not become injurious to, any assigned uses made of, or presently possible
in, such waters. In order to preserve, protect, and enhance existing high quality
waters, all waste discharges will receive a minimum treatment level of secondary
or higher as conditions necessitate. In implementing this policy as it relates to
interstate streams, the Secretary of the Interior will be kept advised and provided
with such information as is required to discharge his responsibilities under the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
[p. 16]
IOWA
(Approved: June 30,1971)
Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards as of the
date on which such standards become effective will be maintained at high quality
unless it has been affirmatively demonstrated to the State that a change is justifiable
as a result of necessary economic or social development and will not preclude
present and anticipated use of such waters. Any industrial, public or private proj-
ect or development which would constitute a new source of pollution or an in-
creased source of pollution to high quality waters will be required to provide the
necessary degree of waste treatment to maintain high water quality. (In imple-
menting this rule, the appropriate agency of the Federal Government will be kept
advised and will be provided with such information as it will need to discharge
its responsibilities under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended.)
[p.17]
KANSAS
(Approved: April 25,1969)
All waters of the State, whose existing quality is better than the applicable
water quality standards as established by the State of Kansas as of the date the
water quality standards become effective will not be lowered in quality until it has
been determined by the Kansas State Board of Health that the change is justifiable
as a result of necessary social and economic development and that all the beneficial
uses of waters affected will not be impaired. In no case shall the quality of waters
of the State be reduced below the quality standards as established by the State of
Kansas.
Any industrial, public, or private project or development which would constitute
a new or increased source of pollution to high quality waters will be required to
provide the best practicable degree of treatment available under existing tech-
nology.
The Kansas State Board of Health will furnish reports and information to the
U.S. Department of the Interior as the Secretary of the Interior may need to carry
out his functions under the Water Quality Act of 1965.
[P. 18]
-------
3820 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
KENTUCKY
(Approved: December 23,1971)
Waters within the public domain of the Commonwealth that possess a higher
quality than that established at the effective date of established standards will be
maintained at their present high quality consistent with the powers granted under
the Water Pollution Control Law of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Such high
quality waters will not be lowered in quality unless and until it is affirmatively
demonstrated to the Kentucky Water Pollution Control Commission that such a
change is justifiable as a result of necessary economic or social development and
will not adversely effect present uses and future uses to be made of such waters.
The most effective degree of treatment for wastes discharged into such high quality
waters consisting of a minimum treatment level of secondary or higher as con-
ditions necessitate will be required at the time of such permission. In implement-
ing this policy as it relates to interstate streams the Environmental Protection
Agency Administrator will be kept advised and provided with such information
as is required to discharge his responsibilities under the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act.
[p. 19]
LOUISIANA
(Approved: December 17,1969)
It is the policy of the Louisiana Stream Control Commission that all interstate
waters, portions thereof, and coastal waters whose existing quality exceeds the
approved water quality standards will be maintained at their existing high quality
unless and/or until it has been affirmatively demonstrated to the Louisiana Stream
Control Commission that such changes are justifiable as a result of desirable and
economic or social development, and further that such changes will not interfere
with or become injurious to the user of the waters as described in the water
quality standards. The Louisiana Stream Control Commission will disapprove any
waste discharge that will cause water quality degradation of interstate waters,
portions thereof, and coastal waters of Louisiana below the standards adopted by
the State of Louisiana and approved by the Federal Water Pollution Control Ad-
ministration without complying with the Federal and State of Louisiana laws
applicable to the amendment of water quality standards. Any industrial, public
or private project or development that would constitute a new source of pollution
or an increased source of pollution to any of the waters it; Louisiana will be
required, as part of the initial project design, to provide the highest and best
degree of waste treatment available under existing technology consistent with the
best practice in the area affected under the condition applicable to the project or
development. Consistent with the provision of the Federal Water Quality Act the
Louisiana Stream Control Commission will keep the Department of Interior in-
formed of its activities and will furnish the Department of Interior informational
reports, in such form as the Secretary of the Department of Interior may, from
time to time, reasonably require to carry out his function under the Federal Water
Quality Act of 1965. The Louisiana Stream Control Commission will consult and
cooperate with the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration of the De-
partment of Interior on matters that are a proper consideration of the Federal
Agency; the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration will reciprocate in
matters that are a proper consideration of the Louisiana Stream Control Com-
mission.
[p. 20]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3821
MARYLAND
(Approved: July 16,1971)
It is recognized that certain waters of Maryland possess an existing quality
which is better than the water quality standards established thereof. The quality
of these waters will be maintained unless and until it has been demonstrated to
the satisfaction of the Department of Water Resources that a change is justifiable
as a result of necessary economic and social development and will not preclude
uses made of or presently possible in such waters. To accomplish this objective
all proposed new or increased sources of pollution will be required to provide the
best practical degree of waste treatment to maintain these waters at this high
quality.
In addition, there will be furnished to the Federal Water Quality Office, En-
vironmental Protection Agency, such information as is needed to enable the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to fulfill his responsibilities
under the Federal law.
Water which does not meet the standards established therefor, will be improved
to meet the standards.
[p. 21]
MASSACHUSETTS
(Approved: November 25,1970)
Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards as of the
date on which such standards become effective will be maintained at such high
quality unless it has been affirmatively demonstrated to the state that a change
is justifiable as a result of necessary economic or social development and will
not preclude uses presently possible in such waters. An industrial, public, or
private project or development which would constitute a new source of pollution
or an increased source of pollution to high quality waters will be required to
provide the highest and best practicable means of waste treatment to maintain high
water quality. In implementing this policy, the Secretary of the Interior will
be provided with such information as he will need to discharge his responsibilities
under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended.
[p-22]
MICHIGAN
(Approved: April 17,1968)
Waters in which the existing quality is better than the established standards on
the date when such standards become effective will not be lowered in quality by
action of the Water Resources Commission unless and until it has been affirmatively
demonstrated to the Michigan Water Resources Commission and the Department
of the Interior that the change in quality will not become injurious to the public
health, safety, or welfare or become injurious to domestic, commercial, industrial,
agricultural, recreational or other uses which are being made of such waters,
or become injurious to the value or utility of riparian lands; or become injurious
to livestock, wild animals, birds, fish, aquatic life or plants, or the growth or
propagation thereof be prevented or injuriously affected; or whereby the value of
fish and game may be destroyed or impaired, and that such lowering in quality
will not be unreasonable and against public interest in view of the existing con-
ditions in any interstate waters of Michigan.
Water which does not meet the standards will be improved to meet the standards.
[p. 23]
-------
3822 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
MISSOURI
(Approved: June 26,1968)
"It is recognized that certain of the waters under consideration possess an exist-
ing quality which is better than the standards established herein. The quality of
these waters will be maintained unless and until it has been affirmatively demon-
strated through public hearings that other uses and different standards are justi-
fiable as a result of necessary economic or social development. It will be required
that the highest and best technology be employed to maintain the high quality of
the waters. Additional data and increased monitoring in cooperation with the
Federal Government and other states, will permit the improvement of these
standards. The interest of the Federal Government in interstate waters is rec-
ognized and this interest will be protected."
[p.24]
MINNESOTA
(Approved: November 26,1969)
Waters which are of quality better than the established standards will be
maintained at high quality unless a determination is made by the State that a
change is justifiable as a result of necessary economic or social development and
will not preclude appropriate beneficial present and future uses of the waters.
Any project or development which would constitute a source of pollution to high
quality waters will be required to provide the highest and best practicable treat-
ment to maintain high water quality and keep water pollution at a minimum. In
implementing this policy, the Secretary of the Interior will be provided with such
information as he requires to discharge his responsibilities under the Federal
Water Quality Act, as amended.
[p. 25]
MONTANA
(Approved: January 17,1969)
Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards as of the
date on which such standards become effective will be maintained at that high
quality unless it has been affirmatively demonstrated to the state that a change
is justifiable as a result of necessary economic or social development and will not
preclude present and anticipated use of such waters. Any industrial, public or
private project or development which would constitute a new source of pollution
or an increased source of pollution to high quality waters will be required to pro-
vide the necessary degree of waste treatment to maintain high water quality. In
implementing this policy, the Secretary of the Interior will be kept advised in order
to discharge his responsibilities under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended.
[p. 26]
NEBRASKA
(Approved: December 19, 1968)
Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards as of the
date on which such standards become effective will be maintained at this high
quality unless it has been affirmatively demonstrated to the State that a change
is justifiable as a result of necessary economic or social development. Any indus-
trial, public or private project or development which would constitute a new source
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3823
of pollution or an increased source of pollution to high quality waters will be re-
quired to provide the necessary degree of waste treatment to maintain high water
quality. In implementing this policy, the Secretary of the Interior will be kept ad-
vised and will be provided with such information as he will need to discharge his
responsibilities under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended.
[p- 27]
NEVADA
(Approved: June 27,1968)
"... to enhance water quality by upgrading waters that are at present affected
by pollution and to perpetually maintain the quality of waters that are at present
of high or suitable quality ...
"... It is the public policy of this State to conserve the waters of the State, and
to protect, maintain and improve the quality thereof for public water supply, for
the propagation of wildlife, fish, and aquatic life, and for domestic, agricultural,
industrial, recreational, and other legitimate uses; and to provide that no waste
be discharged into any waters of this State without first being given the degree
of treatment necessary to protect the legitimate beneficial uses of such waters; and
to provide for the prevention, abatement, and control of new and existing water
pollution; and to cooperate with other agencies of the State, agencies of other
states, and the Federal Government, in carrying out these objectives..."
Note: Nevada set the criteria for the high-quality waters at existing levels.
These criteria are the minimum values below which water cannot be degraded,
thus allowing no degradation of present levels.
[P- 28]
NEW HAMPSHIRE
(Approved: December 1, 1970)
In accordance with this explicit provision and all other pertinent statutes bear-
ing on the subject of water pollution control, it will be our purpose to cooperate
with the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration of the U.S. Department
of the Interior in maintaining existing high water quality in all interstate river
systems flowing to or from this State. We would further subscribe to the philoso-
phy that there should be no discharges of pollution allowed without the highest
and best degree of waste treatment available for such situations. In further con-
nection with the above-referenced legislative policy and in compliance with the
anti-degradation requirements of the Department of the Interior, it should be
emphasized that all waters with existing high quality will not be lowered in
quality unless and until it has been affirmatively demonstrated and established
to the complete satisfaction of the Commission and the General Court of the State
of New Hampshire, that such lowering in quality is of compelling necessity, in
the public interest, and will not interfere with or impair any legitimate uses
assigned to or proposed for such waters.
[p. 29]
NEW JERSEY
(Approved: March 13, 1968)
It is the primary objective of the Water Pollution Control Program in New
Jersey to protect and enhance the quality of all surface waters of the State includ-
ing those classified as FW-1 which are to be retained for posterity in their natural
state and which shall not be subject to any man-made waste water discharges.
-------
3824 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
The objective of protecting and upgrading our waterways will take precedence
over allowable minimal quality limits for surface waters established through
promulgation of rules and regulations.
In all situations where there may be an impingement of a lesser quality water
upon that of a higher quality, it is the objective of the New Jersey program to up-
grade the lesser quality water in order to protect or improve adjacent waters having
a more critical use. It is anticipated that the surface water classification and the
standards of quality for New Jersey waters will be subject to continual review
and revision to achieve our basic objectives.
The overriding consideration, however, regardless of the establishment of water
quality levels is that of wastewater treatment requirements. The minimum
degree of wastewater treatment now being permitted in the State of New Jersey
is that commonly identified as secondary treatment. In New Jersey this means
treatment necessary to provide as an absolute minimum 80% reduction of bio-
chemical oxygen demand and a maximum permissible biochemical oxygen de-
mand concentration of 50 parts per million. In most areas in New Jersey, this
standard is raised to require biochemical oxygen demand reduction of 85% and
90% with appropriate maximum permissible biochemical oxygen demand con-
centrations. At many inland locations where only small tributaries to streams
are available, the policy in New Jersey is either to prohibit the discharge of any
effluent to surface waters or to require so-called tertiary treatment which is the
reduction of biochemical oxygen demand of 95% as a minimum with a maximum
concentration of 15 parts per million. It has been and is presently the policy of
the Department that wastewaters prior to discharge into any fresh water streams
in the State must receive as a minimum at least 90% treatment.
[p.30]
NEW MEXICO
(Approved: November 19,1968)
Degradation of waters whose existing quality is better than the stream stand-
ards established by the New Mexico Water Quality Control Commission, unless
justifiable as a result of necessary economic or social development, is not reason-
able degradation and is subject to abatement under the authority granted the
Commission by the Water Quality Act of 1967. To protect the existing quality of
water the effluent standards established by the Commission under that act will
require the highest and best degree of effluent treatment practicable. In imple-
menting this paragraph, the Commission through the appropriate regional offices
of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration will keep the Secretary
of the Interior advised and provided with such information concerning the inter-
state waters of New Mexico as he will need to discharge his responsibilities under
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (PL 84-660), as amended.
[p. 31]
NEW YORK
(Approved: March 4,1971)
It is recognized that certain waters of New York State possess an existing
quality which is better than the classification standards assigned thereto. The
quality of these waters will be maintained unless and until it has been demon-
strated to the satisfaction of the Commission of Environmental Conservation that
other uses and different standards are justifiable as a result of necessary economic
or social development. To accomplish this objective all proposed new or increased
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3825
sources of pollution will be required to provide the best practical degree of waste
treatment to maintain these waters at this higher quality.
In addition, there will be furnished to the Federal Water Quality Adminis-
tration, U.S. Department of the Interior, such information as is needed to enable
the Secretary of the Interior to fulfill his responsibilities under the Federal law.
Water which does not meet the assigned classification will be improved to
meet the standards.
[p. 32]
NORTH CAROLINA
(Approved: January 20, 1971)
Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards as of the
date on which such standards become effective will be maintained at high
quality; provided that the State of North Carolina has the authority to approve
any project or development, which would constitute a new or an increased dis-
charge of effluent to high quality water, when it has been affirmatively demon-
strated that a change is justifiable to provide necessary economic or social
development, and provided further, that the necessary degree of waste treatment
to maintain high water quality will be required where physically and economically
feasible. Present and anticipated use of such waters will not be precluded under
the conditions of the aforesaid. In implementing this policy, the Secretary of the
Interior will be kept informed and will be provided with such information as he
will need in discharging his responsibilities under the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act.
[p. 33]
NORTH DAKOTA
(Approved: May 22,1970)
It is hereby declared to be the policy of the State of North Dakota to act in the
public interest to protect, maintain and improve the quality of the waters in the
State for continued use as public and private water supplies propagation of wild-
life, fish and aquatic life, and for domestic, agricultural, industrial, recreational
and other legitimate beneficial uses, to require necessary and reasonable treat-
ment of sewage, industrial, or other wastes.
The "quality of the waters" shall be the quality of record existing at the time
these standards were established. Waters whose existing quality is higher than
the established standards shall be maintained at the higher quality unless it can
be affirmatively demonstrated that a change in quality is justifiable to provide nec-
essary economic or social development and will not adversely affect the stated
beneficial uses of the water. Any industrial, public, or private project or develop-
ment which would constitute a new or increased source of pollution to high qual-
ity waters will be required to provide the highest and best practicable degree
of treatment available under existing technology. The Secretary of the Interior
will be kept advised and provided with the information needed to discharge his
responsibilities under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended.
[p. 34]
OHIO
(Approved: September 13,1968)
Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards as of
the date on which such standards become effective will be maintained at their
-------
3826 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
existing high quality, pursuant to the Ohio water pollution control statutes, so as
not to interfere with or become injurious to* any assigned uses made of, or
presently possible, in such waters. This will require that any industrial, public
or private project or development which would constitute a new source of pollu-
tion or an increased source of pollution to high quality waters will be required,
as part of the initial project design, to provide the most effective waste treatment
available under existing technology. The Ohio Water Pollution Control Board
will cooperate with other agencies of the state, agencies of other states, interstate
agencies and the Federal Government in the enforcement of this policy.
* The Solicitor's Office recommends the phrase "and will not interfere with—" as being
superior to the adopted and approved phrase "so as not to interfere with—" (lines 5 and 6).
[p. 35]
OKLAHOMA
(Approved: February 17, 1970)
The Water Quality Criteria for the Slat Fork of the Arkansas, Cimarron, North
Canadian and South Canadian Rivers, and interstate tributaries, are based on the
present and potential uses, and on existing quality data. The proposed criteria
shall serve as guidelines to control pollution and to maintain the best quality
which will result in an equitable balance of social and economic benefits to the
state. It is recognized that certain of the waters under consideration possess an
existing quality which is better than the minimum standards established. The
quality of those waters will be maintained unless and until it has been affirmatively
demonstrated to the state through public hearings that other uses and different
standards are justifiable as a result of necessary economic or social development.
It will be required that the highest and best technology be employed to maintain
the high quality of the waters. The interest of the Federal Government in inter-
state waters is recognized and this interest will be protected in accordance with
the provisions of the Oklahoma Statutes. In implementing these standards, the
Federal Government will be kept advised and will be provided with such
information as needed to discharge its responsibilities under the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, as Amended. It is realized that the criteria cannot be
considered as permanently fixed. Future changes in cultural activities, the devel-
opment of additional quality data, the enhancement of existing improvements in
waste treatment technology may necessitate revisions of the criteria. The pro-
posed criteria are applicable at all times and at all flows, except as otherwise
indicated.
[p. 36]
OREGON
(Approved: December 17,1968)
Notwithstanding the general and special water quality standards contained in
this subdivision, the highest and best practicable treatment and/or control of
wastes, activities and flows shall in every case be provided so as to maintain
dissolved oxygen and overall water quality at the highest possible levels and
water temperatures, coliform bacteria concentrations, dissolved chemical sub-
stances, toxic materials, radioactivity, turbidities, color, odor and other deleterious
factors at the lowest possible levels.*
* Approval contingent on stringent criteria set for high quality waters.
[p. 37]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3827
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
(Approved: October 7,1971)
ANTIDECRADATION POLICY
Waters having a better quality than the applicable water quality criteria as of
the effective date of the establishment of such criteria shall be maintained at such
high quality unless it is affirmatively demonstrated to the state that a change is
justified as a result of necessary economic or social development and will not
preclude uses presently possible in such waters.
Any industrial, public or private project or development which would con-
stitute a new source of pollution or an increased source of pollution to high
quality waters shall be required to provide the highest and best practicable
means of waste treatment to maintain high water quality.
In implementing the provisions of this policy, the Department shall keep the
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency advised and shall provide
him with such information to discharge his responsibilities under the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1151 et seq.).
ADOPTED: Environmental Quality Board, Pennsylvania Department of Envi-
ronmental Resources, August 11,1971.
[p. 38]
PUERTO Rico
(Approved: December 30, 1968)
Coastal waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards
as of the date on which such standards become effective will be maintained at
their existing high quality. These and other coastal waters of Puerto Rico will
not be lowered in quality unless and until it has been affirmatively demonstrated
to the water pollution control agency for Puerto Rico that such change is justifiable
as a result of necessary economic or social development and will not interfere
with or become injurious to any assigned uses made of, or presently possible in,
such waters. This will require that any industrial, public or private project or
development which would constitute a new source of pollution or an increased
source of pollution to high quality waters will be required, as part of the initial
project design, to provide the best practical degree of treatment available under
existing technology., and, since these are also Federal standards, these waste
treatment requirements will be developed in cooperation with the Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration.
rp. 39]
RHODE ISLAND
(Approved: January 20, 1971)
"Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards as of
the date of which such standards become effective will be maintained at such
high quality unless it has been affirmatively demonstrated to the State that a
change is justifiable as a result of necessary economic or social development and
will not result in a significant loss of a use presently possible in such waters.
Any industrial, public, or private project or development which would constitute
a new source of pollution or an increased source of pollution to high quality waters
will be required to provide the highest and best practicable means of waste treat-
ment to maintain high water quality. In implementing this policy, the Secretary
of the Interior will be kept advised and will be provided with such information
-------
3828 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
as he will need to discharge his responsibilities under the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act, as amended."
[P. 40]
SOUTH CAROLINA
(Approved: April 21, 1969)
Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards will not
be lowered in quality unless and until it has been affirmatively demonstrated to
the South Carolina Pollution Control Authority that such change is justifiable as
a result of necessary economic or social development and will not interfere with or
become injurious to any assigned uses made of such waters. Any industrial, public
or private project or development which could constitute a new source of pollution
or an increased source of pollution to high quality waters will be required by the
South Carolina Pollution Control Authority as part of the initial project design,
to provide the highest and best degree of waste treatment practicable under exist-
ing technology. In implementing the policy of this paragraph as it relates to inter-
state streams, the Secretary of the Interior will be advised and provided with
such information as he will need from time to time to protect the interests of the
United States and the authority of the Secretary in maintaining high quality of
interstate waters.
[p. 41]
SOUTH DAKOTA
(Approved: June 28, 1971)
"Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards as of the
date of which such standards become effective will be maintained at this high
quality unless it has been affirmatively demonstrated to the State that a change is
justifiable as a result of necessary economic or social development. Any indus-
trial, public or private project or development which would constitute a new
source of pollution or an increased source of pollution to high quality waters will
be required to provided the necessary degree of waste treatment to maintain high
water quality. In implementing this policy, the Administrator of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency will be kept advised and will be provided with such
information as he will need to discharge his responsibilities under the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, as amended."
[p.42]
TEXAS
(Approved: May 2, 1969)
In implementing the legislative policy expressed in the Texas Water Quality
Act of 1967 and subject to the foregoing, it is the policy of the Texas Water Quality
Board that the interstate waters in the State whose existing quality is better than
the applicable water quality requirements described herein as of the date when
these requirements become effective will as provided hereafter be maintained at
their high quality, and no waste discharges may be made which will result in the
lowering of the quality of these waters unless and until it has been demonstrated
to the Texas Water Quality Board that the change is justifiable as a result of de-
sirable economic or social development. Therefore, the Board will not authorize
or approve any waste discharge which will result in the quality of any of the
interstate waters in the State being reduced below the water quality standards
without complying with the Federal and State laws applicable to the amendment
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3829
of water quality standards. Anyone making a waste discharge from any industrial,
public or private project or development which would constitute a new source
of pollution or an increased source of pollution to any of the interstate waters in
the State will be required, as part of the initial project design, to provide the high-
est and best degree of waste treatment available under existing technology con-
sistent with the best practice in the particular field affected under the conditions
applicable to the project or development. In the spirit of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, the Board will keep the Department of the Interior informed
on its activities and will furnish to the Department such reports, in such form, and
containing such information as the Secretary of the Interior may from time to
time reasonably require to carry out his functions under the Act. Additionally,
the Board will consult and cooperate with the Department of the Interior on all
matters affecting the Federal interest.
[p. 43]
UTAH
(Approved: December 31, 1968)
Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards will be
maintained at high quality unless it has been affirmatively demonstrated to the
State that a change is justifiable as a result of necessary economic or social develop-
ment and will not preclude present and anticipated use of such waters. Any
industrial, public or private project or development which would constitute a new
source of controllable pollution or an increased source of controllable pollution
to high quality waters will be required to provide waste treatment to maintain
high water quality to the extent that such treatment is practicable. In imple-
mentation of this policy, the Secretary of Interior will be kept advised and will be
provided with such information as he will need to discharge his responsibilities
under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended.
[p. 44]
VERMONT
(Approved: August 24, 1971)
It is recognized that certain waters of Vermont possess an existing quality which
is better than the classification standards assigned thereof.
The quality of these waters will be maintained unless and until it has been
affirmatively demonstrated through public hearings that other uses and different
standards are justifiable as a result of necessary economic or social development.
To accomplish this objective all proposed new or increased sources of pollution
will be required to provide the best practical degree of waste treatment to maintain
these waters at this high quality.
In implementing this policy, the Administrator of the United States Environ-
mental Protection Agency will be kept advised and provided with such informa-
tion as he will need to discharge his responsibilities under the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, as amended.
[p. 45]
VIRGIN ISLANDS
(Approved: April 28, 1970)
Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards as of the
date of which such standards become effective will be maintained at their existing
high quality. These and other waters of the Virgin Islands will not be lowered in
-------
3830 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
quality unless and until it has been affirmatively demonstrated to the Territory's
water pollution control agency and the Department of the Interior that such
change is justifiable as a result of necessary economic or social development and
will not interfere with or become injurious to any assigned uses made of, or
presently possible in such waters. Any industrial, public or private project or
development which would constitute a new source of pollution or an increased
source of pollution to high quality waters will be required, as part of the initial
project design, to provide the highest and best practicable degree of waste treat-
ment available tinder existing technology, and since these are also Federal stand-
ards, these waste treatment requirements will be developed cooperatively.
[p.46]
VIRGINIA
(Approved: February 22, 1971)
Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standard as of the
date on which such standards become effective will be maintained at high
quality; provided that the Commonwealth of Virginia has the authority to approve
any project or development, which would constitute a new or an increased dis-
charge of effluent to high quality water, when it has been affirmatively demon-
strated that a change is justifiable to provide necessary economic or social de-
velopment, and provided further, that the necessary degree of waste treatment
to maintain high water quality will be required where physically and economically
feasible. Present and anticipated use of such waters will not be precluded under
the conditions of the aforesaid. In implementing this policy, the Secretary of
the Interior will be kept informed and will be provided with such information
that he will need to discharge his responsibilities under the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act.
[p. 47]
WASHINGTON
(Approved: January 22, 1968)
Regardless of the water quality criteria as herein established, wherever existing
receiving waters of a classified area are of a higher quality than the criteria
assigned for said area, the existing water quality shall constitute water quality
criteria. Likewise, existing water quality conditions shall constitute the criteria
for interstate and coastal waters not specifically classified herein.
[p. 48]
WEST VIRGINIA
(Approved: July 30, 1971)
"3.02 Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards
will not be lowered in quality unless and until it has been affirmatively demon-
strated to the Chief of the Division of Water Resources, Department of Natural
Resources, that such change is justifiable as a result of necessary development and
will not interfere with or become injurious to any present or future assigned uses
of such waters. In special cases where the facts warrant more stringent standards
or exceptions thereto may be established. In implementing the policy of this
paragraph as it relates to interstate streams, the Secretary of the Interior will be
kept advised and provided with such information as he will need from time to
time to protect the interests of the United States and the authority of the Secre-
tary in maintaining high quality of interstate waters."
[p.49]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3831
WISCONSIN
(Approved: January 24, 1968)
Regardless of the water quality standards and water use, untreated or inade-
quately treated wastes may not impair a designated use nor may standards be
interpreted to permit a lower quality within a water sector than that now existing
or required by outstanding orders.
[p. 50]
WYOMING
(Approved: November 27,1968)
Waters whose existing quality is better than the established standards as of
the date on which such standards become effective will be maintained at high
quality; provided that the State of Wyoming has the power to authorize any
project or development, which would constitute a new source of pollution or an
increased source of pollution to high quality water, when it has been affirmatively
demonstrated that a change is justifiable to provide necessary economic or social
development; provided further that the necessary degree of waste treatment to
maintain high water quality will be required where physically and economically
feasible. Present and anticipated use of such waters will not be precluded under
the conditions aforesaid. In implementing this policy the Secretary of the Interior
will be kept advised and will be provided with such information as he will need to
discharge his responsibilities under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended.
[p.51]
4.6 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND THE
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
36 Fed. Reg. 24080 (1971)
DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
Coast Guard
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTAND-
ING BETWEEN THE ENVIRON-
MENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
AND THE DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION
This memorandum establishes policies
and guidelines relating to the definition
of transportation and nontransportation
related onshore and offshore facilities
and the responsibilities of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency and the U.S.
Coast Guard with respect to the preven-
tion of oil discharges from vessels and
onshore and offshore facilities.
SECTION I—GENERAL
1. Section ll(j)(l)(C) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, as amended
authorizes the President to issue regula-
tions consistent with maritime safety and
with marine and navigation laws estab-
lishing procedures, methods, and re-
quirements for equipment to prevent
discharges of oil from vessels and on-
shore and offshore facilities.
2. This authority was delegated by the
President in Executive Order 11548.
Section 1 of that Executive order dele-
gates responsibility and authority to the
Secretary of the Interior to carry out the
provisions of subsection (j) (1) (C) of
section 11 of the Act after consultation
with the Secretary of Transportation re-
-------
3832
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
lating to procedures, methods and re-
quirements for equipment to prevent
discharges of oil from nontransportation
related onshore and offshore facilities.
The authority delegated to the Secretary
of the Interior was subsequently vested
in the Administrator of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency in Reorga-
nization Plan No. 3 of 1970 and section 9
of Executive Order 11548.
3. Section 2 of Executive Order 11548
delegates responsibility and authority to
the Secretary of Transportation in con-
sultation with the Secretary of the In-
terior, to carry out the provisions of
subsection (j)(l) (C) of section 11 of the
Act relating to procedures, methods and
requirements for equipment to prevent
discharges of oil from vessels and trans-
portation-related onshore and offshore
facilities. The Secretary of Transporta-
tion in turn redelegated this authority
to the Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard.
4. Although Executive Order 11548 di-
vided responsibility and authority into
transportation-related and nontrans-
portation-related facilities, no indication
of the extent of transportation relation
is given. In the broadest sense every
facility is transportation related. Any
activity that can possibly discharge oil
must transport materials to some extent
and have materials transported either
to, from, or by the facility.
5. In distinguishing between trans-
portation-related and nontransporta-
tion-related facilities, a systems approach
was utilized. It is recognized that the
life-cycle of oil is characterized by var-
ious operations conducted at many dif-
ferent types of facilities. Most facilities
necessarily engage in more than one type
of operation. These operations include
drilling, producing, refining, storing,
transferring, transporting, using and dis-
posing. To the extent possible and con-
sidering agency resource capabilities and
expertise, it is considered most practical
to assign one agency the responsibility
for regulating a complete operation at
any one facility. The Department of
Transportation will generally be respon-
sible for regulating the transferring of
oil to or from a vessel at any facility
including terminal facilities; the trans-
porting of oil via highway, pipeline, rail-
road, or vessel; and certain storing
operations. The Environmental Protec-
tion Agency will generally be respon-
sible for regulating drilling, producing,
refining, storing, disposing and certain
transferring operations at various types
of facilities.
6. While the following definitions are
intended to be as specific and inclusive
as possible, it is recognized that certain
problems concerning these definitions
will arise from time to time requiring
the cooperation and agreement of the
Department of Transportation and the
Environmental Protection Agency for
resolution.
SECTION II—DEFINITIONS
The Environmental Protection Agency
and the Department of Transportation
agree that for the purposes of Executive
Order 11548, the term—
(1) "Non-transportation-related on-
shore and offshore facilities" means—
(A) Fixed onshore and offshore oil
well drilling facilities including all
equipment and appurtenances related
thereto used in drilling operations for
exploratory or development wells, but
excluding any terminal facility, unit or
process integrally associated with the
handling or transferring of oil in bulk
to or from a vessel.
(B) Mobile onshore and offshore oil
well drilling platforms, barges, trucks,
or other mobile facilities including all
equipment and appurtenances related
thereto when such mobile facilities are
fixed in position for the purpose of drill-
ing operations for exploratory or devel-
opment wells, but excluding any
terminal facility, unit or process inte-
grally associated with the handling or
transferring of oil in bulk to or from a
vessel.
(C) Fixed onshore and offshore oil
production structures, platforms, der-
ricks, and rigs including all equipment
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3833
and appurtenances related thereto, as
well as completed wells and wellhead
equipment, piping from wellheads to oil
separators, oil separators, and storage,
facilities used in the production of oil,
but excluding any terminal facility, unit
or process integrally associated with the
handling or transferring of oil in bulk
to or from a vessel.
(D) Mobile onshore and offshore oil
production facilities including all equip-
ment and appurtenances related thereto
as well as completed wells and wellhead
equipment, piping from wellheads to oil
separators, oil separators, and storage
facilities used in the production of oil
when such mobile facilities are fixed in
position for the purpose of oil production
operations, but excluding any terminal
facility, unit or process integrally associ-
ated with the handling or transferring
of oil in bulk to or from a vessel.
(E) Oil refining facilities including all
equipment and appurtenances related
thereto as well as in-plant processing
units, storage units, piping, drainage
systems and waste treatment units used
in the refining of oil, but excluding any
terminal facility, unit or process inte-
grally associated with the handling or
transferring of oil in bulk to or from a
vessel.
(F) Oil storage facilities including all
equipment and appurtenances related
thereto as well as fixed bulk plant stor-
age, terminal oil storage facilities, con-
sumer storage, pumps and drainage
systems used in the storage of oil, but
excluding in-line or breakout storage
tanks needed for the continuous opera-
tion of a pipeline system and any ter-
minal facility, unit or process integrally
associated with the handing or transfer-
ring of oil in bulk to or from a vessel.
(G) Industrial, commercial, agricul-
tural or public facilities which use and
store oil, but excluding any terminal fa-
cility, unit or process integrally associ-
ated with the handling or transferring
of oil in bulk to or from a vessel.
(H) Waste treatment facilities in-
cluding in-plant pipelines, effluent
discharge lines, and storage tanks, but
excluding waste treatment facilities lo-
cated on vessels and terminal storage
tanks and appurtenances for the recep-
tion of oily ballast water or tank wash-
ings from vessels and associated systems
used for off-loading vessels.
(I) Loading racks, transfer hoses,
loading arms and other equipment which
are appurtenant to a nontransportation
related facility or terminal facility and
which are used to transfer oil in bulk
to or from highway vehicles or railroad
cars.
(J) Highway vehicles and railroad
cars which are used for the transport of
oil exclusively within the confines of a
nontransportation related facility and
which are not intended to transport oil
in interstate or intrastate commerce.
(K) Pipeline systems which are used
for the transport of oil exclusively within
the confines of a nontransportation re-
lated facility or terminal facility and
which are not intended to transport oil
in interstate or intrastate commerce, but
excluding pipeline systems used to
transfer oil in bulk to or from a vessel.
(2) "Transportation-related onshore
and offshore facilities" means—
(A) Onshore and offshore terminal fa-
cilities including transfer hoses, loading
arms and other equipment and appur-
tenances used for the purpose of han-
dling or transferring oil in bulk to or
from a vessel as well as storage tanks
and appurtenances for the reception of
oily ballast water or tank washings from
vessels, but excluding terminal waste
treatment facilities and terminal oil
storage facilities.
(B) Transfer hoses, loading arms
and other equipment appurtenant to a
nontransportation related facility which
is used to transfer oil in bulk to or from
a vessel.
(C) Interstate and intrastate onshore
and offshore pipeline systems including
pumps and appurtenances related
thereto as well as in-line or breakout
storage tanks needed for the continuous
operation of a pipeline system, and pipe-
-------
3834
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
lines from onshore and offshore oil
production facilities, but excluding on-
shore and offshore piping from wellheads
to oil separators and pipelines which
are used for the transport of oil ex-
clusively within the confines of a
nontransportation related facility or
terminal facility and which are not in-
tended to transport oil in interstate or
intrastate commerce or to transfer oil
in bulk to or from a vessel.
(D) Highway vehicles and railroad
cars which are used for the transport
of oil in interstate or intrastate com-
merce and the equipment and appurte-
nances related thereto, and equipment
used for the fueling of locomotive units,
as well as the right-of-way on which
they operate. Excluded are highway
vehicles and railroad cars and motive
power used exclusively within the con-
fines of a nontransportation related
facility or terminal facility and which
are not intended for use in interstate
or intrastate commerce.
SECTION III—COORDINATION AND
ENFORCEMENT
The above definitions have been de-
veloped to facilitate the development
and enforcement of regulations for pre-
vention of oil discharges and to corre-
spond as much as possible to the existing
responsibilities of the Department of
Transportation and the Environmental
Protection Agency. It is recognized,
however, that in some situations the De-
partment of Transportation may have
expertise that could be helpful to the
Environmental Protection Agency in the
development or enforcement of these
regulations and vice versa. Such a sit-
uation might arise in connection with
the regulation of the nontransportation
related facilities included within defini-
tions 1 (J) and (K) in section II above.
It is agreed that in such situations the
Department of Transportation and the
Environmental Protection Agency will
provide assistance to and coordinate
with each other in the development and
enforcement of the regulations to the
extent that existing resources permit.
Done this 24th day of November 1971
at the city of Washington.
For the Department of Transportation.
JOHN A. VOLPE.
For the Environmental Protection
Agency.
WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS.
[FR Doc. 71-18542 Filed 12-17-71; 8:48 am]
4.7 DISCHARGES OF OIL FOR RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT
AND DEMONSTRATION PURPOSES, GUIDELINES, ENVI-
RONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
36 Fed. Beg. 7326 (1971)
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY
DISCHARGES OF OIL FOK RE-
SEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND
DEMONSTRATION PURPOSES
Guidelines
Notice is hereby given of the guide-
lines to be followed in implementing
§610.8 of Title 18 of the Code of Federal
Regulations which permits the discharge
of oil into or upon the navigable waters
of the United States, adjoining shore-
lines, or into or upon the waters of
the contiguous zone, in connection with
research, demonstration projects, or
studies relating to the prevention, con-
trol or abatement of oil pollution.
1. Conditions to be fulfilled:
a. Discharge of oil for research, de-
velopment, and demonstration purposes
must be approved by the Administrator,
Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA), or his designee.
b. The need for attendance by a rep-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3835
resentative from EPA at research,
development, and demonstration opera-
tions shall be determined by the Ad-
ministrator.
c. The requesting person (including
an individual, firm, corporation, associ-
tion and partnership and hereinafter
referred to as the applicant) must dem-
onstrate that the proposed discharge
will be in the public interest and will
result in the acquisition of scientific in-
formation not previously available and
not obtainable through any other prac-
ticable means.
d. The applicant must assume all li-
ability for any personal injury, property
losses or environmental damages result-
ing directly or indirectly from any test-
ing or demonstration program, and for
all costs, incuding costs or damages re-
sulting from cancellation by the Admin-
istrator or failure by the Administrator
to cancel tests and demonstrations.
e. Results of any testing or demon-
stration program shall be made avail-
able to the Administrator.
2. Procedure for requesting permission
to discharge oil for research, develop-
ment, and demonstration purposes:
a. At least 30 days prior to any pro-
posed test or demonstration, the ap-
plicant shall provide the Regional
Administrator, EPA, of the EPA Region
in which the test or demonstration is
proposed, a written work plan including
the following elements:
(1) A description of the material,
equipment or technique to be tested or
demonstrated; and the justification of
the quantity and type of oil to be dis-
charged and the method and timing of
the discharge.
(2) A description of the site.
(3) An assessment of the environ-
mental damage that may result from
the test or demonstration.
(4) A copy of the notification pro-
vided to the U.S. Coast Guard which is
required whenever the discharge is to
be made into coastal and contiguous
zone waters or coastal and Great Lakes
ports and harbors.
(5) Contingency plans for coping with
oil which might escape from the system
being tested or demonstrated.
(6) Sufficient background technical
information to justify the need for con-
ducting the test or demonstration.
(7) Provision for technical documen-
tation to determine effectiveness and ef-
ficiency of equipment and materials
tested or demonstrated.
(8) The concurrence of the appropri-
ate State water pollution control agency
within whose jurisdiction the proposed
site of the test or demonstration is
located.
b. A proposal to test or demonstrate
any dispersant or other chemical that
distributes oil through the water column
must recognize and be made in accord-
ance with Annex X, National Oil and
Hazardous Materials Pollution Con-
tingency Plan, "Schedule of Dispersants
and Other Chemicals to Treat Oil Spills"
(35 F.R. 8511).
3. Test administration procedures to
be followed:
a. The minimum necessary quantity
of oil for test or demonstration purposes
shall be discharged, but in no case shall
discharges exceeding 1,000 gallons for
one or a series of tests or demonstrations
at the same site in one 24-hour period
be permitted.
b. The applicant shall furnish and pay
for all materials, equipment and trans-
portation necessary for execution of any
testing or demonstration program and
for restoration or mitigation of any con-
tinuing environmental damage. The
Administrator may at any time order
cancellation or postponement of a test
or demonstration because of adverse
weather or other conditions that would
pose safety or pollution problems. Re-
sults of any test or demonstration pro-
gram shall be provided to EPA within
30 days following completion of the test
or demonstration.
c. EPA representative (s) may accom-
pany the applicant on any vessels or
aircraft used by the applicant in con-
nection with any test or demonstration
-------
3836
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
program.
4. Review by EPA of technical back-
ground data and test or demonstration
results will be for purposes of determin-
ing the need for such tests or demon-
strations and in no way implies Federal
Government approval or endorsement of
equipment or materials used, test or
demonstration procedures used, or re-
sults obtained.
5. News releases made by the person
conducting the test or demonstration
program shall omit names and photo-
graphs of Federal representatives
present.
6. Any discharge of oil for research,
development or demonstration purposes
which does not comply with these guide-
lines may subject the person responsible
for the discharge to the penalties and
liabilities provided for in section 11 of
the Federal Water Pollution Act, as
amended.
4.8 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING PROVIDING FOR
COOPERATION IN THE INVESTIGATION OF VIOLATIONS
OF THE REFUSE ACT BETWEEN ADMINISTRATOR OF THE
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND THE
SECRETARY OF THE ARMY
36 Fed. Reg. 3074 (1971)
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army
ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ENVIRON-
MENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
AND THE SECRETARY OF THE
ARMY
Notice of a Memorandum of Under-
standing Providing for Cooperation in
the Investigation of Violations of the
Refuse Act
FEBRUARY 10, 1971.
Executive Order 11574 (35 F.R. 19627)
announced the establishment of a per-
mit program under the Refuse Act, 33
U.S.C. 407, Proposed Corps of Engi-
neers regulations governing the permit
program (35 F.R. 20005) and a proposed
memorandum of understanding con-
cerning the implementation of the pro-
gram (36 F.R. 983) have been previously
published in the FEDERAL REGISTER. The
following memorandum of understand-
ing which pertains to enforcement of
and investigations under the Refuse Act
rather than to the permit program it-
self has been executed by both the
Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency and the Secretary of
the Army:
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE
ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY AND THE SECRETARY OF
THE ARMY
The Administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency and the Secretary of the
Army, recognizing the interrelationship be-
tween section 13 of the Act of March 3, 1899
(33 US.C. 407) (the "Refuse Act") adminis-
tered by the Department of the Army and
the statutory responsibilities of the Environ-
mental Protection Agency under the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act, as amended (33
U.S C. 1151 et seq.), and further recognizing
their responsibilities under the National En-
vironmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C.
4321-4347), and their responsibilities under
Executive Order 11574 dated December 23,
1970, which directs the Federal Government
to implement a permit program under the
Refuse Act to control the discharge of pol-
lutants into navigable waters and their tribu-
taries, have entered into this memorandum
of understanding to delineate more fully the
respective responsibilities of said Agency and
Department for water pollution abatement
and control, and to establish policies and
procedures for interagency cooperation in the
enforcement of the Refuse Act.
I. Responsibilities for water pollution
abatement and control. A. At the Federal
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3837
level, the Environmental Protection Agency
has primary responsibility, pursuant to the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, for the
abatement and control of pollution of inter-
state and navigable waters of the United
States.
B. The Department of the Army has pri-
mary responsibility for the enforcement of
the Refuse Act.
C. Under Executive Order 11574, the Secre-
tary is directed to develop regulations and
procedures in consultation with the Adminis-
trator governing the issuance of discharge
permits under the Refuse Act, and, in con-
nection with the grant, denial, conditioning,
revocation and suspension of such permits,
to adopt determinations and interpretations
of the Administrator respecting water quality
standards and compliance therewith.
D. The Department of the Army and the
Environmental Protection Agency have in co-
operation undertaken to implement the per-
mit authority of the Refuse Act pursuant to a
memorandum of understanding dated Janu-
ary, the terms of which are incorporated
herein and made a part hereof.
II. The Refuse Act. A. The Refuse Act,
33 U.S.C. 407, provides that:
It shall not be lawful to throw, discharge,
or deposit, or cause, suffer, or procure to be
thrown, discharged or deposited either from
or out of any ship, barge, or other floating
craft of any kind, or from the shore, wharf,
manufacturing establishment, or mill of any
kind, any refuse matter of any kind or de-
scription whatever other than that flowing
from streets and sewers and passing there-
from in a liquid state, into any navigable
water of the United States, or into any tribu-
tary of the navigable water from which the
same shall float or be washed into such navi-
gable water; and It shall not be lawful to
deposit, or cause, suffer, or procure to be
deposited material of any kind in any place
on the bank of any navigable water, or on
the bank of any tributary of any navigable
water, where the same shall be liable to be
washed into such navigable water, either by
ordinary or high tides, or by storms or floods,
or otherwise, whereby navigation shall or
may be impeded or obstructed: Provided,
That nothing herein contained shall extend
to, apply to, or prohibit the operations in con-
nection with the improvement of navigable
waters or construction of public works, con-
sidered necessary and proper by the U.S. offi-
cers supervising such improvement or public
work: And, provided further, That the Sec-
retary of the Army whenever in the judg-
ment of the Chief of Engineers anchorage
and navigation will not be injured thereby,
may permit the deposit of any material above
mentioned in navigable waters, within limits
to be defined and under conditions to be pre-
scribed by him, provided application is made
to him prior to depositing such material; and
whenever any permit is so granted the con-
ditions thereof shall be strictly complied
with, and any violation thereof shall be un-
lawful. March 3, 1899, c. 425.
B. Criminal sanctions may be imposed
against persons or corporations found guilty
of violating provisions of the Refuse Act. As
prescribed in 33 U.S.C. 411, the penalty upon
conviction is "a fine not exceeding $2,500 nor
less than $500, or * * * imprisonment (in the
case of a natural person) for not less than 30
days nor more than 1 year, or both such fine
and imprisonment, in the discretion of the
court, one-half of said fine to be paid to the
person or persons giving information which
shall lead to conviction."
C. Civil proceedings may also be instituted
to enjoin conduct which would violate pro-
visions of the Refuse Act. United States v.
Republic Steel Corp., 362 U.S. 482 (1960) and
Wyandotte Transportation Co v. United
States, 389 U.S. 191 (1967).
III. Policy with respect to enforcement of
Refuse Act. The policy of the Environmental
Protection Agency and the Department of the
Army is to utilize the Refuse Act and the
authorities contained therein to the fullest
extent possible and in a manner consistent
with the provisions of the Federal Water Pol-
lution Control Act to insure compliance with
applicable water quality standards and other-
wise to carry out the purposes of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act. Persons wish-
ing to discharge into or place deposits in
navigable waters or tributaries thereof will
be required to apply for and obtain a permit
from the Department of the Army. Persons
without an appropriate permit who discharge
into navigable waters or tributaries thereof
or who discharge into such waters in violation
of the terms of a valid permit may be sub-
jected to legal proceedings under the Refuse
Act.
IV. Inter-agency cooperation. A. In recog-
nition of the expertise of the Department of
the Army and the Corps of Engineers in mat-
ters pertaining to the navigability of a water-
way, it is agreed that the Department of the
Army, acting through the Corps of Engineers,
has primary Federal responsibility for
identifying and investigating violations of
the Refuse Act which have an adverse impact
on the navigable capacity of a waterway.
Whenever a District Engineer has reason to
believe that a discharge has or may have oc-
curred having an adverse impact on water
quality, he shall so notify the appropriate
Regional Representative of the Environmental
Protection Agency and shall provide him with
all information, including, if the discharger
is the holder of a Refuse Act permit, a copy
of said permit and all of the conditions at-
tached thereto. The said Regional Repre-
sentative shall make such investigation as he
deems appropriate and shall advise the Dis-
trict Engineer in a timely manner whether
-------
3838
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
in his opinion a violation of the Refuse Act
having an adverse impact on water quality
has or may have occurred. If the Regional
Representative is of such opinion, he shall
make a report to the District Engineer as to
the following:
1. The nature and seriousness of the ap-
parent violation (including, if the discharger
is the holder of a Refuse Act permit, infor-
mation as to the conditions of such permit
which appear to have been violated).
2. The nature and seriousness of the im-
pact on water quality.
3. The measures, if any, taken or being
taken by the discharger to comply with ap-
plicable water quality standards or the con-
ditions of a Refuse Act permit, if any.
4. The existence and adequacy of State
or local pollution abatement proceedings.
5. The applicability of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, whether any admin-
istrative or judicial proceedings are being
taken or contemplated thereunder, and the
status of any such proceedings.
6. His recommendations as to the action,
if any, which should be taken under the
Refuse Act and his reasons therefor. If the
discharger is the holder of a Refuse Act per-
mit, such recommended action may include
in addition to or in lieu of prosecution under
the Refuse Act for one or more of the reme-
dies available thereunder, the suspension or
revocation of the permit. A recommendation
to suspend shall include a recommendation as
to the period and conditions of the suspension.
B. In recognition of the expertise of the
Environmental Protection Agency in matters
pertaining to water quality, it is agreed that
said Agency has primary Federal responsi-
bility for identifying and investigating cases
involving discharges into interstate or navi-
gable waters which have an adverse impact
on water quality. District Engineers shall
assist Regional Representatives of the En-
vironmental Protection Agency by providing
them with such information as may become
available concerning known or suspected dis-
charges which may adversely affect water
quality (including, if the discharger is the
holder of a Refuse Act permit, a copy of said
permit and all of the conditions attached
thereto), and, to the extent of available re-
sources, shall assist in the conduct of investi-
gations concerning such discharges. Regional
Representatives shall be responsible for noti-
fying District Engineers of known or sus-
pected violations of the Refuse Act and for
providing District Engineers with timely re-
ports of investigations conducted. Whenever
in the opinion of the Regional Representa-
tive a violation of the Refuse Act having an
adverse impact on water quality has or may
have occurred, such report shall include all
of the same information and recommenda-
tions called for in subparagraphs 1 through 6
of paragraph A with respect to reports sub-
mitted under that paragraph.
C. In connection with any remedial action
recommended or taken pursuant to this
memorandum of understanding, due regard
shall be given to the provisions of section
21 (b) of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act, and in particular the provisions of sec-
tions 2Kb) (4), 2Kb) (5), and 21(b)(9)(B)
relating to the revocation on suspension of
permits.
D. In any case in which a Refuse Act per-
mit is suspended, if the District Engineer has
reason to believe that the permittee has or
may have violated the terms of the suspen-
sion, he shall notify the appropriate Regional
Representative of the Environmental Pro-
tection Agency and provide him with all
available information. The Regional Repre-
sentative shall make such investigation as he
deems appropriate and shall make a report to
the District Engineer, such report to include,
to the extent relevant, the information and
recommendations called for in subparagraphs
1 through 6 of paragraph A with respect to
reports submitted under that paragraph.
E. If upon review of all reports and infor-
mation prepared pursuant to this memoran-
dum of understanding and any other available
evidence, it is determined by the District En-
gineer of the Corps or the Regional Repre-
sentative of EPA to request legal proceedings
under the Refuse Act, such District Engineer
or Regional Representative shall, in consul-
tation with each other, forward all available
evidence and information, including recom-
mendations, if any, of both the Regional
Representative and the District Engineer, to
the appropriate U.S. attorney. A copy of any
covering letter forwarding information and
evidence to the appropriate U.S. attorney
should be mailed, together with a brief sum-
mary of the factual background of the case,
to the Assistant Attorney General for Lands
and Natural Resources, Department of Justice,
Washington, D.C. 20530
WILLIAM D. RUCKELSHAUS,
Administrator,
Environmental Protection Agency.
STANLEY R. RESOR,
Secretary of the Army.
Dated: January 12, 1971.
For the Adjutant General.
R. B. BELNAP,
Special Advisor to TAG.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3839
4.9 REPORT TO CONGRESS ON WATER POLLUTION
CONTROL MANPOWER DEVELOPMENT AND TRAINING
ACTIVITIES
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water Programs, March 1972
SUMMARY OF REPORT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction 1
Manpower Planning 3
Manpower Recruitment, Retention, and Utilization 6
Manpower Training 8
Non-EPA Training Activities 8
EPA Training Activities 9
Professional Training Grants 9
Operator and Technician Training 14
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit 1. Water Pollution Manpower Development Process 4
2. Additional Manpower Required by 1976 5
3. Labor Force Growth 1971 to 1976 5
4. Forecasted Training Requirements 7
5. Summary of EPA Training Programs 10
6. Professional Training Grants Program Activities 1970-1972 11
7. Research Fellowship Program Activities 1970-1972 12
[p. i]
SUMMARY OF REPORT
INTRODUCTION
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administers a water
pollution control program in accordance with the provisions of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-224) .* This
program includes a broad spectrum of activities related to water pol-
lution control that are conducted in partnership with the States and
local governments, private organizations and other Federal Agencies.
Generally, the Federal legislation provides that the States and their
subdivisions have primary responsibility for conduct of water pollu-
tion control activities, with financial and technical assistance from
the Federal Government.
This report focuses on the manpower development activities of all
organizations, both public and private, that are concerned with water
pollution control. Educational institutions are added to indicate the
breadth of training resources and requirements.
The report finds that manpower demands are expected for a wide
-------
3840 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
variety of educational and skill categories from numerous sources
and types of organizations. Training activities extend over a broad
spectrum of occupational categories through a host of varied pro-
grams, both public and private. Given the broad scope of manpower
and training activities, several considerations and qualifications
should be noted before proceeding with a more detailed summary.
The report presents 5-year projections for increases in jobs in the
water pollution control field. These projections represent EPA's best
estimates of future job opportunities in water pollution abatement,
and have been drawn' from a variety of sources as explained in the
report. EPA believes that they indicate the order of magnitude of
the problem although they are subject to further refinement as addi-
tional information becomes available.
The report does not project the numbers of individuals who may
become available for these jobs. This is a difficult task owing to the
wide variety of professions and skills that will be recruited from an
even greater numbar of institutions, locations, and educational back-
grounds. As a consequence, it is not possible to estimate precisely at
this time what the training needs will be nor where they will origi-
nate. While many programs that provide training may be worthy of
expansion there has been insufficient analysis performed on present
personnel and how they gained their knowledge to know if these
sources will not continue to be sufficient in future years. Further-
more, to the extent that governmental programs are concerned, there
is insufficient understanding about what private resources will be
allocated to provide or acquire training to supplement public funding.
1 Hereinafter referred to as the Act.
[p. 1]
It should be noted that even with a rigorous program of construc-
tion of new plants, wastes may not be treated at planned levels due
in part to shortages of well trained personnel. This problem results
partly from the absence of adequate State certification standards gov-
erning the minimum acceptable skill levels of operators, and the gen-
eral level of salaries and wages for waste treatment operators. Often
these problems can be traced to the general structure and level of
wages and salaries among State and municipal governments.
To improve the ability of State and local governments to meet their
many needs and desires, the President has proposed a program of
revenue sharing. This program is designed to provide fiscal relief
to State and local governments and to strengthen these institutions
in dealing with complex problems and difficult situations.
With these considerations in mind, we may turn to the report and
the summary of results of this study. The report is in five parts in-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3841
eluding a short introduction. Part II discusses manpower planning;
Part III manpower recruitment, retention, and utilization; and Part
IV manpower training. In specific response to the requirement of
subsection 5 (g) (4) of the Act, setting forth the items to be covered
in this report, Part II includes a report on actions taken under sub-
section 5 (g) (2) to develop a forecasting system for manpower and
training needs and provides interim estimates of future needs. Also
responding to the statute, Part IV includes a discussion of EPA actions
taken under subsection 5 (g) (1) and (3) and comments upon the
extent and effectiveness of non-EPA training programs in the field
of water pollution control. Finally, Part V of this report sets forth
conclusions.
This "Summary of Report" parallels in structure the presentation of
the entire report.
[p. 2]
MANPOWER PLANNING
The size and complexity of the water pollution control manpower
universe is denned by a number of factors:
The current large number of jobs (1971 estimate 149,400).
The projected rapid growth in jobs (1976 estimate 254,200).
The large number of employers (1971 estimate 25,000 public
and private).
The geographic dispersion of jobs throughout the Nation.
The large number of different occupational categories that
constitute the universe of jobs (EPA had identified 144 different
occupations).
The changing technology that affects the nature of the work
performed by many employees.
In light of these factors, EPA is developing a manpower planning
program to meet the goals of the overall manpower development sys-
tem. The program has two primary components:
1. Forecasting
2. Action Planning
Exhibit I illustrates the relationships between the various elements
of the program. The forecasting component is used to estimate the
supply and demand for personnel and the need for additional training.
The action planning identifies opportunities or programs that may be
of benefit when it is determined the supply of personnel or training
will be insufficient to meet demand. Manpower forecasts are devel-
oped by occupation, labor market area and time frame while training
forecasts are developed to project entry, update and upgrade training
needs.
The planning program is intergovernmental and interagency in
-------
3842
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
nature with the States having an important role. EPA, which initi-
ated the program, is developing the planning tools and providing
technical assistance and training to the states and their subdivisions.
While the program is not yet operational, field installation has begun.
State and local personnel are now being provided with training and
technical assistance to build up their capabilities for manpower
planning.
[p. 3]
EXHIBIT 1
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL MANPOWER DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
O
w
g
H.
Development of Planning Tools:
Basic Terminology
, Staffing Guidelines,
Procedures
Dcrmination of Manpower
and Training Requirements
by Occupations:
Numbers Needed
Where Needed ^
When Needed
Determination of Manpower I
and Training Supply I
by Occupations: g
Numbers Available z
/Where Available 8
When Available o
Identification of Imbalances
Between Manpower and Training
ply and Demand,
ACTION
PROGRAMS
A
--/'-
Planning of.-^^
Programs to Improve
Recruitment, Retention,
and Utilization
"\
Planning of ^*^
.Training Programs to
Increase Work Force
Size and Effectiveness
[p. 4]
The report includes an interim forecast of water pollution control
manpower and training needs through 1976. Despite data limitations
which affects the reliability of the projections to some extent, the
forecast is indicative of the order of magnitude of the manpower
training needs. In summary, this estimate shows the following addi-
tional manpower required by 1976:
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3843
EXHIBIT 2.—ADDITIONAL MANPOWER REQUIRED BY 1967'
Personnel
category
Professional . . .
Operator
Technician
Other
Total 2 . .
Sector
nongovernmental
10,200
33 300
18,400
10 400
72,300
Local
1,300
8,900
1,200
11 700
23,100
State
3,400
400
800
4,600
Federal
(non-EPA)
1,300
1,400
200
400
3,300
EPA
600
200
600
1,400
Total 1976
16,800
43,600
20,400
23,900
104,700
The anticipated requirements represent a very rapid growth in the
water pollution control work force, as may be seen in Exhibit 3:
EXHIBIT 3.—LABOR FORCE GROWTH 1971 TO 1976 '
Personnel
category
Technician
Other
Total
1971 manpower engaged
25 400
49 300
. . 26 900
47 800
149 400
1976 manpower requirements Percentage increase
42 200 66
92 900 88
47 300 77
71 800 50
258 800 73
1 The bases for these figures are set forth In Part II-D of this report.
2 An undetermined portion of this total will be assigned on a part-time basis to water pollution control
activities.
tP- 5]
This growth in the work force, according to EPA estimates, will
result in a substantial demand for both entry-level and update train-
ing. The average annual training requirements are summarized in
Exhibit 4.
The five-year total training need is projected to approach 130,000
entry and 380,000 update training actions during the 1971-1976 period.
The largest increase indicated by the forecast is for more operators.
The increase projected in the number of waste treatment plants cou-
pled with the increased sophistication of treatment processes are ex-
pected to result in an increase in operator training requirements as
well. EPA observations and a report by the General Accounting
Office (GAO) indicate that the effectiveness and efficiency of existing
treatment plants is already impaired by understaffing and undertrain-
ing of operators.
With regard to professionals, there will be a need for more highly
trained sanitary engineers, primarily because of the increased tech-
nological sophistication of the water pollution control process. Fur-
ther, specialized water pollution control training is necessary in
substantial quantity for professionals of other backgrounds entering
the field. Also, from Exhibit 4, it is estimated that there will be a
substantial demand for update training for all professionals.
The report also notes that there will be an increased demand for
technicians with one or two years of college level training and that
-------
3844 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
substantial update training for the present work force will be re-
quired.
MANPOWER RECRUITMENT, RETENTION, AND UTILIZATION
Gross manpower and training requirements can be partially ful-
filled through personnel activities designed to:
Ensure that a sufficient supply of basically qualified persons
are available for recruitment;
Improve retention rates in the existing work force; and
Improve utilization of the existing work force.
Successful performance of these activities is crucial to achieving
the goals of the overall manpower development system. While pri-
mary responsibility for recruitment, retention and utilization of water
pollution control manpower rests with individual employers, there
are certain activities which EPA can undertake in this area for the
benefit of all employers of water pollution control personnel. For
example, in recruitment, EPA has produced a very successful movie,
"Talent Search," in English and Spanish versions. It has also pro-
duced recruitment brochures, and provides employment information
to servicemen pending discharge, and to veterans. In retention EPA
has supported the adoption of meaningful operator certification pro-
grams. In utilization EPA has developed guidance on the application
of industrial engineering techniques to wastewater processing.
[p. 6]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3845
,„
w
z
1 is
C3 en
LU i-H
i S
N
a —
uj g
II
bJ a>
a: bo
O ™
j. 3
I—
m
a
s
c
*~
S
2
LU
i
re
0)
o>
U_
0}
I
"re
o
5
—
1
u
3
tf
5
c
"c
cu
to
q
J
&
*
u.
|
b
c
UJ
i
Q.
3
£
UJ
i
Q.
b
5
S
re
T3
§
S
03
re
•a
Q.
u
fo o o
(O tO CM
in to^ oo
rC m" oo *t"
So o o
(O CM CM
O CM O> CM
in CM" if? e*f
(D OO
rH
SO 0
*t 00
§000
(O CO 00
^- Oi CM
CM" CM
O O Q O
in m -H
§ 2
*-J"
s §
00 t-i
o 2 o o
oo °Q o 10
^- o^ en CM
CM" £; oT «-T
o o o o
O OO OO O
CO"
o o o o
«3- CM (0 00
1-4 O 00 CM
of ID" ^ co
I-l «~4
§000
ID tO 00
a) CM *-^ in_
rsT DO" 10" CM"
: : •
i
5 — ; '
* o .
i
to
r*.
CM
m
to"
CM
o
s
§
I
.-
o
^
§
CM"
o
s
§
N
g
00_
§
o"
s
01
""*
s
o
»-
1
s
I
•s
3
t
£
c
i
s
s
0>
(U
1
£
^
QJ
%
0
^
o,
-------
3846 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
The subject of operator certification is considered an important
part of the recruitment, retention and utilization process. A review
of the current situation reveals that 47 States now have certification
requirements of some kind, including 31 where certification is man-
datory. Further, the standards for certification vary substantially
from State to State. Since the quality of operator certification pro-
grams has a substantial impact on the efficiency of waste treatment
plant operation in the States, EPA believes strongly that States should
establish mandatory, uniform certification laws based on national
criteria.
To meet this objective, EPA is providing technical and financial
support to the Water Pollution Control Federation, the American
Waterworks Association, and other interested organizations to estab-
lish a national certification board. It is anticipated that this board
will serve as an information center for certification activities, recom-
mend standards and guidelines, facilitate reciprocity between State
programs and assist authorities establish and update programs. To
facilitate States' adoption of certification programs based on national
criteria, technical assistance and training should be provided by EPA.
MANPOWER TRAINING
A substantial amount of training for the water pollution control
labor force is conducted by EPA and by others—including educa-
tional institutions (both four-year colleges and universities and two-
year colleges and technical schools), professional and trade associa-
tions, private industry, local government agencies, State government
agencies, and Federal agencies other than EPA—for three types of
water pollution control manpower: 1 Professionals, Operators and
Technicians.
NON-EPA TRAINING ACTIVITIES
Non-EPA organizations conduct a variety of training: Professional
training has been largely restricted to graduate-level entry programs;
lower-level operator training has concentrated in centralized locations
oriented primarily to the need for larger facilities; and training for
technicians and higher level operators which has been sporadic and
narrowly focused. A comprehensive strategy to focus programs on
particular and comprehensive needs has yet to be developed.
Current efforts are fragmented and lack coordination. As a result,
there may be some unnecessary overlapping and some inefficiencies in
these programs. Thus, mechanisms for achieving economies through
interagency coordination and subsequent channeling of resources to
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3847
priority needs in water pollution control training would strengthen
existing programs.
1 While the manpower planning program forecasts needs for a fourth category, Others,
these other personnel require little or no specialized water pollution control training and,
therefore, are not of concern for a discussion on water pollution control training.
[p. 8]
EPA TRAINING ACTIVITIES
The battery of EPA training programs which is outlined in Exhibit
5 is intended to contribute to fulfilling training needs which are unmet
by others. As indicated by the Exhibit, EPA's contribution may be:
Professional Training Grants for Graduate Programs
Research Fellowships
Direct Training
Technology Transfer
Operator and Technician Training
Undergraduate Scholarships
PROFESSIONAL TRAINING GRANTS
Pursuant to Subsection 5 (g) (3) (A) of the Act, EPA awards pro-
fessional training grants to institutions for the establishment, expan-
sion, and improvement of graduate-level programs in water pollution
control. This program is intended to produce a cadre of trained
professionals prepared to contribute to water quality management
through subsequent positions in teaching, research, consulting, or
direct operation in the public or private sectors. Renewable grants
are awarded annually for one year at a time as part of a training
project of five years duration. Grant funds may be used for student
stipends as well as to expand and improve staff, facilities, and equip-
ment. Recent program activities are summarized in Exhibit 6.
The cost per student trained in the Professional Grants Program
has decreased sharply, reflecting a payoff in earlier investment in
equipment and staff. It now costs approximately 50 per cent of what
it did in the early 1960's to train a water quality professional under
this program. Further, less than 3 per cent of the manpower trained
under the grants program has left the water quality field.
RESEARCH FELLOWSHIPS
Pursuant to Subsection 5 (g) (3) (B) of the Act, EPA awards fel-
lowships to graduate students for selected specialized research train-
ing in water pollution control. The purpose of this program is to
increase the number and competence of engineers and scientists quali-
fied to conduct independent research and advanced practice in con-
junction with teaching at the graduate level. Awards are made on
-------
3848
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
a competitive basis primarily to Doctoral candidates in engineering,
physical sciences, biological sciences, or socioeconomic disciplines.
Recent activities under this program are summarized in Exhibit 7.
[P. 9]
EXHIBIT 5.—SUMMARY OF EPA TRAINING PROGRAMS
Program
EPA Authority
EPA Contribution
Professional Training
Grants
Research Fellowship
Direct Technical
Training
Technology Transfer
MDTA
Coupled OJT
Institutional
Training
Public Service
Careers
Transition
PI lot Program
Undergraduate
Training Grants
Undergraduate
Scholarships
Subsection 5(g)(3)(A) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act
Subsection 5(g)(3)(B) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act
Subsection 5(g)(3)(C) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act
Subsection 5(g)(3)(C) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act
Agent for the Departments of Labor
(DDL) and Health, Education, and
Welfare (DHEW) under the Man-
power Development and Training
Act (MDTA)
Agent for DOL under MDTA.
Agent for DHEW and the Department
of Defense.
Subsection 5(g)(l) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act
Section 16 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act
Section 18 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act
Financial support to educational institu-
tions for graduate-level programs In
water pollution control.
Awards to graduate students for spe-
cialized research training in water pol-
lution control.
Direct training and training support for
others in technical matters relating to
the causes, prevention, and control of
water pollution.
Direct training to practicing profession-
als, public decision-makers, conserva-
tion groups, and the general public.
Program administration for entry-level
operator training.
Program administration for entry-level
operator training.
Program administration for entry-level
operator training.
Direct training, financial support, and
training support for update and up-
grade operator training.
Financial support to undergraduate In-
stitutions to conduct programs in
water pollution control; facilities de-
sign and facilities operation and
maintenance.
Awards to undergraduate students for
study leading to careers in the opera-
tion and maintenance of wastewater
treatment facilities.
[p. 10]
EXHIBIT 6.—PROFESSIONAL TRAINING GRANTS PROGRAM ACTIVITIES 1970-72
Academic year
1970-71
1971-72
788
1,028
88
43
72
Amounts awarded $3,781,756
Number of traineeships authorized ' ...
Number of trainees appointed '
Number of professional training grants
Number of States involved
Number of institutions involved
932
' 1,051
91
43
82
$4,562,682
1 "Number of Traineeships Authorized" refers to the number of traineeships slots authorized. Since
more than one trainee may occupy the same slot in a given year due to turnover, the "Number of Trainees
Appointed" logically exceeds the number of slots authorized.
1 Estimate.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3849
TRAINING DISCIPLINES—1971-72
Under these grants, training was provided in the following disciplines:
Environmental Engineering
Sanitary Engineering
Environmental Chemical Engineering
Environmental Systems Engineering
Agricultural and Environmental Engineering
Environmental Mining Engineering
Nuclear Environmental Engineering
Soils Environmental Engineering
Environmental Biology
Limnology and Aquatic Biology
Estuarlne Biological, Physical and Chemical Oceanology
Water Chemistry
Interdisciplinary Environmental Programs
Environmental Economics
[p. 11]
EXHIBIT 7.—RESEARCH FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM ACTIVITIES 1970-1972
Academic year
1970-1971 1971-1972
New research fellowships authorized '
Number of active fellows '
Number of States Involved
Number of institutions involved
Funds awarded
60
105
. . 149
... 29
51
. . $600 000
46
108
161
27
58
$600,000
1 "New Research Fellowships Authorized" refers to the number of new fellowships awarded in the
year. "Total Research Fellowships Awarded" refers to the sum of new fellowships awarded in the year
and preexisting fellowships renewed during the year. "Number of Active Fellows" refers to the total
number of active fellows during the year; this figure is derived by adding the "Total Research Fellowships
Awarded" for the year to the number of fellows continuing under fellowships awarded in the previous year.
[p. 12]
This program has proven to be the primary source of instructors
for university training of professionals and the primary mechanism
for building professional research capacity. Over 70 per cent of the
research fellows normally go into teaching or research.
DIRECT TRAINING
Under Subsection 5 (g) (3) (C) of the Act, EPA conducts a program
of direct technical training in water pollution control matters and
provides technical assistance to others similarly engaged. The pur-
pose of this program is:
To provide a continuing, comprehensive program of specialized
and advanced technical training generally unavailable elsewhere.
To research and develop instructional technology, and to pro-
vide an instructor development program for individuals re-
sponsible for and/or conducting environment training or related
activities.
To provide, on request, instructors and/or training materials
-------
3850 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
in support of the training programs of other Federal, State and
local agencies.
Students are drawn from the staffs of many water pollution control
employers, usually for short courses—two weeks or less—conducted
in EPA facilities by specialists from the EPA staff. Normally courses
are oriented to professionals, although they are also available to other
personnel categories.
The courses given provide either overview summaries of the con-
cepts, science, and techniques for abating and preventing pollution, or
detailed reviews of new technological developments, operational
methods, and research findings. They also address specific practical
features of wastewater treatment design and operation, water quality
evaluation in field and laboratory, and technical and administrative
aspects of water quality management and water pollution control.
In the FY 1972 program, EPA plans to improve delivery of direct
technical training courses by:
(i) Provision of learner-centered instruction.
(ii) Formation of mobile training teams to provide courses to
small isolated plants.
(iii) Initiation of correspondence courses.
[p. 13]
The following table summarizes recent program experience:
Year Courses Students
1969 45 1,297
1970 57 1,560
1971 59 1,630
These students came from at least 14 different occupational groups.
TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER
The Technology Transfer Program is new and is intended to speed
the utilization of new technology in the water pollution control field.
To date, the program has concentrated on technology transfer primar-
ily in municipal pollution control. The target groups for the program
listed in order of priority are:
(i) Design engineers.
(ii) Public decision makers.
(iii) Conservation groups and the general public.
Training is of both "general awareness" and "detailed knowledge"
types. Since the program was first initiated in 1971, specific activities
to date have been limited. They include:
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3851
Presentation of two-day technical workshop/seminar programs
for engineers designing wastewater treatment facilities
Developing design manuals for consulting engineers
Monitoring 60 demonstration grant projects
Developing visual presentations
Preliminary assessments of this program are favorable. The semi-
nars were well received, and a heavy volume of correspondence was
generated from public and private engineers involved in the design
process.
OPERATOR AND TECHNICIAN TRAINING
EPA has also been active in training for water pollution control
jobs below the professional level. This has been done first, as a pro-
gram manager for the Department of Labor, Health, Education and
Welfare, and the Department of Defense under training activities con-
ducted pursuant to the Manpower Development and Training Act
(MDTA). Second, it has been done under Subsection 5 (g) (1) and
Sections 16 of the Act.
[p. 14]
As program manager under MDTA, EPA has operated four types
of entry-level and/or upgrade operator training programs:
(i) Coupled OJT
(ii) Institutional training
(iii) Public Service Careers
(iv) Transition training
Training is conducted through subcontracts from EPA to units of
State governments, municipalities, special wastewater treatment
districts, vocational schools, community colleges, and universities.
Additionally, EPA works with State and local agencies to help them
qualify for MDTA support, arranges training for instructors, provides
teaching materials and curriculum development assistance, and other-
wise assists State and local governments in getting training projects
under way.
The programs, which are now continuing, have already enrolled
between 3,500 and 4,000 trainees, most of whom qualify as disadvan-
taged. Graduation rates have been high, as has been the rate of
successful employment.
These programs have been highly successful in meeting needs for
more skilled operators. In addition, they have proven that trainee
operators could be drawn from the disadvantaged—the unemployed,
the underemployed, and the minority groups—and be successfully
trained for a variety of water pollution control jobs. It has also
-------
3852 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
shown that the career ladder concept can be highly effective in im-
proving public service in this field. However, serving as program
manager has resulted in certain problems for EPA:
(i) It has been necessary to convince potential sponsors, e.g.,
municipalities, that the program can take disadvantaged persons
and train them adequately to perform effectively over an ex-
tended period.
(ii) It has been necessary for EPA to locate adequate facilities
and train instructors for the programs because of the absence
of an instructional framework.
(iii) It has been necessary to convince sponsor agencies, which
are only secondarily concerned with fulfillment of the goals of
the Federal Water Pollution Control Program, of the continued
high priority of these programs. Sponsor agencies are orientated
to counterpart State agencies rather than to pollution control
agencies and their specific needs and requirements.
[p. 15]
Generally, although not completely, the first two problems have
been overcome; the third has not. To obtain funding at expanded
levels to meet the requirements projected over the next five years, a
new mechanism is needed. One such approach would draw EPA,
DOL, and DHEW together to coordinate the use of MDTA-type funds
committed to water pollution control training.
To date, subsection 5(g)(l) of the Act, which authorizes a pilot
program for supplemental manpower development and training pro-
grams for persons entering into operations and maintenance of treat-
ment work and related activities, has been used in small part to
provide advanced instructor training for instructors serving in the
MDTA program. More importantly, it has been used to develop
specialized training courses in advanced wastewater treatment. (The
MDTA courses focus on entry- and low-level upgrade training.) The
bulk of the FY 1971 pilot program was used to fund grants for 24
grants to States (and one Region). The grants were made in response
to applications for innovative plans representing compelling needs
from the recipients. Twenty-two grants were awarded for training
and two for curricula and materials developed, to 20 different
jurisdictions. FY 1971 training under 5 (g) (1) is summarized below:
Program Total number of trainees Total amount of grant
Advanced Instructor Training 50 $39,174
Specialized Training in Wastewater Treatment .. 190 183,114
Grants for Special State Projects 2,945 734,416
Total 3,185 956,704
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3853
It is too early to evaluate the pilot program. However, enrollment
request far exceed capacity under present funding levels. The pilot
projects presently supported represent only a small portion of the
needs critical by the States.
The pilot program to date has:
Established a mechanism to immediately initiate the training
necessitated by an accelerated program
Provided an initial framework upon which the States can build
and for which they can eventually assume responsibility.
[p. 16]
The last of the EPA training programs are those funded under
Sections 16 and 18 of the Act. These provide grants and scholarships
at the undergraduate level for training of higher level operators,
technicians, and pre-baccalaureate engineers. Thus far, Section 16
training has been used primarily for training of qualified high school
graduates in junior colleges in the operation and maintenance of
waste treatment plants and related facilities. This training is in-
tended to fill the gap between lower level operator training and four-
or five-year professional training, particularly at the technician and
senior operator levels. Under this program, training grants have
been awarded to technical schools, junior colleges, and similar
institutions to develop and test new approaches to curricula develop-
ment. Only one grant has been directed toward bachelor degree
training in design, as the need for operations and maintenance training
resulting in an Associate degree was deemed much more critical.
The entire FY 1971 appropriation of $331,000 was used to award
grants to seven institutions for planning and design of curriculum
material, for initiating training programs, and for materials
development.
Meaningful assessment of the Section 16 program is precluded by
its newness. However, the grantees have made good progress, and
the initial training courses were initiated at the beginning of the 1971-
1972 academic year.
As the role and strategy of EPA at the national level require
strengthening, so do the roles and strategies of the State water pollu-
tion control agencies. Much of EPA's training strategy depends on
the assumption of greater and, indeed, parallel responsibilities at the
State level. The capacities of State agencies to do so are limited and
require immediate attention. They must be strengthened to assume
greater leadership, and coordinative roles and programs must be
tailored to the institutional arrangements peculiar to individual
States.
[p. 17]
-------
3854 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
PART I
INTRODUCTION
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for
the execution of the Federal Water Pollution Control program.
*******
This program is to be accomplished through a Federal partnership
with the States and their subdivisions, with the Federal Government
assuming its full responsibility while giving the first opportunity to
manage and solve the problems to the States and local governments.
More specifically, the goals of the program for the 1970's are:
(i) Acceleration of the program for construction of treatment
facilities.
(ii) Improved standards and enforcement.
(iii) Improved assistance to the states.
(iv) Better programs for prevention and abatement of pollu-
tion from Federal facilities.
(v) Development of programs to deal with emerging problems.
Achievement of these goals requires the people of the United States,
acting both privately and publicly at all levels of government, to apply
adequate resources—men, material, and money—to do the job.
This report focuses on men—the manpower needed to produce clean
water. This includes the manpower necessary to authorize the com-
mitment of resources; to set and enforce standards; to plan the
details of the programs; to develop, design, construct, operate, and
maintain facilities; and to provide administrative support for these
operations. The report examines manpower and training needs,
both present and projected, and discusses activities that have been
taken to meet these needs. Its emphasis is, of course, on the planning
and training that has been accomplished under subsection 5 (g) of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act. Further, it attempts to present
a comprehensive analysis of the water pollution control manpower
situation by discussing all its aspects.
Preliminarily, it should be noted that recently substantial attention
has been centered on the quantity and quality of manpower operating
[p. 1-1]
waste treatment plants. Observations of EPA indicate that under-
manned plants and underqualified personnel are too frequently
causing plants to operate well under design standards. A 1970 study
by the General Accounting Office (GAO) bears out these observa-
tions. In its report to Congress on a survey of 69 municipal waste-
water treatment facilities, GAO noted that 59 of these plants did not
fully meet the minimum provisions for personnel, laboratory controls,
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3855
or records recommended by the 1963 Conference of Sanitary Engi-
neers; of 12 that appeared to have serious operation and maintenance
problems, seven needed additional qualified plant-operating per-
sonnel.1 The report concluded:
A frequent cause of O&M [Operations and Maintenance]
problems at waste treatment plants is the lack of a sufficient
number of qualified personnel to operate the facilities. Waste
treatment plants must be staffed with an adequate number of
qualified personnel to achieve the designed level of treatment and
maintain and protect the community's investment in the physical
plant. Deficiencies in either the quantity or qualifications of the
operating staff can adversely affect a plant's operation.2
The GAO indicated that its conclusion was based on reports from
knowledgeable individuals in the Federal Water Quality Administra-
tion (EPA's predecessor organization), State water quality offices,
municipal wastewater treatment facilities, and consulting engineering
firms that a lack of qualified operators was a principal cause of plant
operation and maintenance problems.
Further, as reported below, there are substantial manpower and
training needs for other classes of manpower as well. These can cause
reduced effectiveness and efficiency in water pollution control.
The reasons for such problems are several—including failure to
anticipate manpower needs; handicaps to recruitment and retention
because of inadequate budgets, low salaries, or lack of advancement
opportunities; poor utilization of manpower; and the failure to
properly train employees in job skills. These reasons appear without
any necessary relation to the classification of the employees, the type
of employer, or the labor market area. However, they all do relate
to manpower management functions. In this respect, overcoming the
problems and developing a qualified and motivated work force re-
quires a comprehensive manpower program.
1 Comptroller General of the United States, Report to Congress: Need for Improved Oper-
ation and Maintenance of Municipal Waste Treatment Plants—Federal Water Quality Ad-
ministration, Department of the Interior B-166506, 1 September 1970, p. 18.
2 Ibid, p. 21.
[P. 1-2]
In this vein, EPA has conceived of a manpower development pro-
gram 3 to ensure fulfillment of water pollution control manpower
needs through three interdependent functional units, as follows:
-------
3856
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Water Pollution Control
Manpower Development
Program
Manpowe :
Planning
Manpower Recruit-
ment! Retention,
and Utilization
Manpower Training
Each unit is concerned with all manpower classes, types of em-
ployers, and labor market locations as they relate to the unit
management function.
The manpower development program includes both public and
private organizations. The public organizations include Federal,
State, and local governments. Within each level, government involve-
ment includes agencies that use water pollution control manpower as
well as those that provide training. This is also true on the private
side, the program including educational organizations as well as
product-oriented organizations. Thus, the program operates within
the general manpower development framework of the country.
The manpower development program concept provides the basis for
the organization of this report. Thus, Part II reports on the man-
power planning program, including the forecasting component au-
thorized by subsection 5 (g) (2) of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act, and offers interim estimates of manpower and training
needs. Part III is addressed to the recruitment, retention, and man-
power utilization activities undertaken by EPA. Part IV discusses
manpower training activities, including those authorized under sub-
section 5 (g) (1) and 5 (g) (3). A summary is presented in Part V
of this report.
3 The program Is administered by the Manpower and Training Division of the Office of
Water Programs of EPA.
[p. 1-3]
PART II
THE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL MANPOWER PLANNING PROGRAM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A. Introduction
B. The Manpower Planning System
Page
1
3
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3857
Page
1. The Forecasting Component 6
a. The Forecasting Process 6
(1) Development of Planning Tools 6
(2) Determination of Manpower and Training
Requirements 9
(3) Determination of Manpower and Training
Supply 11
(4) Identification of Imbalances Between Man-
power and Training Supply and Demand 12
b. Forecasting Program Implementation 12
(1) Accomplishments in the Development of
Planning Tools 12
(2) Accomplishments in the Determination of
Manpower and Training Supply and Demand 13
(3) Developments in Training for Manpower
Planning 14
2. The Action Planning Component 14
C. The Universe of Water Pollution Control Manpower 16
1. Professionals 16
2. Technicians 17
3. Operators 18
4. Others 19
5. Associated Occupations 19
[p. H-i]
Page
D. Preliminary Estimates of Current and Future Manpower
Requirements and Future Training Needs 21
1. Qualifications on Preliminary Estimates 21
a. Lack of Uniformity in Occupational Classification 21
b. Inclusion of Part Time Manpower 22
c. Lack of Uniformity in Work Organization 23
d. Lack of Consistency in Projection of
Manpower and Training Needs 23
e. New Technology 23
2. Methodology 23
3. The Nongovernment Sector 25
a. Industrial Firms That Discharge Wastewater 26
b. Educational Institutions That Train Water Pollution Control
Professionals and Technically Specialized Operators 28
c. Manufacturers of Wastewater Analysis and Treat-
ment Equipment and Chemicals 29
d. Consulting Engineers in Design and Operations 30
4. The Local Sector 36
5. The State Sector 41
6. The Federal Sector, Non-EPA 45
7. Environmental Protection Agency 51
8. Summary of Future Water Quality Manpower and
Training Needs 54
a. Factors Likely to Modify Manpower and
Training Projections 54
b. Manpower and Training Problems in Various
Occupational Categories 60
-------
3858
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Page
c. Focal Point for Future Manpower Development
Efforts in Water Pollution Control 66
E. Conclusions Regarding Planning for Manpower and
Training Needs 67
[p. H-ii]
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit II- 1 Water Pollution Control Manpower Planning P*9e
Process 5
Exhibit II- 2 Sample Staffing Guide for Wastewater
Treatment Plant 8
Exhibit II- 3 Nongovernment Sector—FY 1971 Manpower
Engaged in Water Quality Activities 32
Exhibit II- 4 Nongovernment Sector—Projected FY 1976
Manpower Engaged in Water Quality Activities 33
Exhibit II- 5 Nongovernment Sector—Estimated FY 1972-1976
Entry and Update Water Quality Training Require-
ments (Five-year Total and Average Annual) 35
Exhibit II- 6 Local Government Sector—FY 1971 and Projected
FY 1976 Manpower Engaged in Water Quality
Activities 37
Exhibit II- 7 Operator Distribution by Plant Capacity 38
Exhibit II- 8 Local Government Sector—Estimate FY 1972-
1976 Entry and Update Water Quality Training
Requirements (Five-Year Total and Average
Activities 40
Exhibit II- 9 State Government Sector—FY 1971 and Projected
FY 1976 Manpower Engaged in Water Quality
Activities 43
Exhibit 11-10 State Government Sector—Estimated FY 1972-
1976 Entry and Update Water Quality Training
Requirements (Five-Year Total and Average
Annual) 44
Exhibit 11-11 Water Quality Functions Performed by
Federal Organizations 46
Exhibit 11-12 Non-EPA Federal Sector—FY 1971 and Projected
FY 1976 Manpower Engaged in Water Quality
Activities 47
[p. II-iii]
Page
Exhibit 11-13 Non-EPA Federal Sector—Estimated FY 1972-
1976 Entry and Update Water Quality Training
Requirements (Five-Year Total and Average
Annual) 49
Exhibit 11-14 Non-EPA Federal Sector—Comparison of
FY 1976 Water Quality Training Plans and
Estimated Needs 50
Exhibit 11-15 Environmental Protection Agency—FY 1971
and Projected FY 1976 Manpower Engaged in
Water Quality Activities 52
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3859
Page
Exhibit 11-16 Environmental Protection Agency—Estimated
FY 1972-1976 Entry and Update Water Quality
Training Requirements (Five-Year Total and
Average Annual) 53
Exhibit 11-17 Total FY 1971 Manpower Engaged in Water Quality
Activities 55
Exhibit 11-18 Total Projected FY 1976 Manpower Engaged in
Water Quality Activities 56
Exhibit 11-19 The Manpower Mix FY 1971 and 1976 57
Exhibit 11-20 Total Estimated FY 1972-1976 Entry and Update
Water Quality Training Requirements 61
[p. H-iv]
PART II
THE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL MANPOWER PLANNING PROGRAM
A. INTRODUCTION
If the national goals for water pollution control are to be met,
manpower to operate the national water pollution control system must
be available in needed amounts, with the requisite skills, at the
proper times, and in the proper places. The manpower must also be
properly utilized by management, and the employees must be per-
sonally satisfied with their situations. The difficulties in meeting
this requirement become manifest when the combined effects of the
following factors are considered:
The current large number of jobs (1971 estimate—149,400).
The projected rapid growth in jobs (1976 estimate—254,200).
The large number of employers (1971 estimate—25,000, public
and private).
The geographic diffusion of jobs throughout the nation.
The large number of different occupational categories that
constitute the universe of water pollution control jobs (EPA has
identified 144 different occupations).
The changing technology that affects the nature of the work
performed by many employees.
These factors indicate the urgency for careful planning if current
and future manpower requirements are to be fulfilled. Clearly, an
effective water pollution control manpower planning program of
substantial nature is required to serve as a rational base for action
programs.
The Congress, in subsection 5(g)(2) of the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act, authorized EPA to develop and maintain a fore-
casting program and to publish the results of forecasts produced by
-------
3860 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
the program. In accordance with this statutory requirement EPA
has been working to create a comprehensive program which combines
a manpower forecasting activity with the planning of action programs.
Section B of this part of the report sets forth a description of the
forecasting program and a status report on its implementation and dis-
cusses action planning activities which complement and follow up on
[p. n-1]
manpower forecasts. Section C, below, describes the universe of
water pollution control manpower as a basis for the interim man-
power and training forecasts (Section D) which have been specially
developed to serve while implementation of the manpower planning
program is completed.
[p. H-2]
B. THE MANPOWER PLANNING SYSTEM
EPA is presently developing forecasting and action planning on a
nationwide basis for the major categories of water pollution control
manpower. Forecasting must be by occupation since training re-
quirements vary tremendously by occupation and thus cannot be use-
fully forecast without an occupational relationship. The program will
involve the accumulation and reporting of compatible data for each
occupation on a local, State, and national basis so that planning will be
possible on all of these levels.
A key premise of the program is that it depends upon information
from all levels of government and all types of commercial organiza-
tions. A second key premise is that planning for water pollution
control manpower cannot be conducted independently of planning
for other career fields since it draws from the same manpower pool
and has objectives overlapping with other manpower planning
programs.
In this respect, EPA supports the Cooperative Area Manpower
Planning Systems (CAMPS) mechanism. Utilizing broad Federal
planning guidelines, under CAMPS, it is intended that the states and
their local areas forecast manpower requirements for numerous
career fields and draw up action plans to meet many of these needs.
CAMPS was initiated in 1967 by the Department of Labor in order
to achieve cooperation and coordination in planning for all fields of
manpower. At this point in time, the CAMPS mechanism is pri-
marily concerned with training the disadvantaged. Capabilities have
not yet been established to deal in depth with the complexities of
manpower planning for the water pollution control manpower pro-
gram. Within the CAMPS mechanism, local coordinating committees
meet regularly to determine overall manpower and training needs for
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3861
their areas, including any identified in the water pollution field and
to outline a series of training courses. These determinations are ex-
pressed in an annual comprehensive manpower and training plan for
the area. State coordinating committees work out conflicts between
local plans and combine local plans to form a blueprint for the state.
Federal regional committees review and approve the state plans, and
at the national level, a coordinating committee representing six Fed-
eral departments and three agencies, including EPA, sets national
goals as a framework within which local and State committees pre-
pare their annual plans.
In addition to maintaining a planning relationship with other
agencies of the Federal government through its membership in the
CAMPS national coordination committee, EPA endeavors to coor-
dinate with and provide assistance to other Federal agencies having
planning interests that affect or require water pollution control man-
power. Illustrative of this is the technical assistance being provided
by EPA to the Bureau of Labor Statistics on a project sponsored by
the National Science Foundation to determine the impact of new
national programs on employment. Initial efforts of this project focus
on the national water pollution control
[p. II-3]
program. Through the use of an input-output simulation model, the
impact of Federal expenditures for water pollution control will be
traced through the involved public and private organizations. As
part of this study, BLS and EPA will utilize computer processes to
jointly calculate total employment by occupation that is produced by
various levels and types of expenditures for water pollution control.
This study is expected to be completed late in 1972.
Another example of coordination is the joint EPA/DOL survey of
municipal wastewater treatment plants which is described in sub-
section B-2-b, below. Unfortunately, adequate coordination has not
yet been completely established with other Federal agencies—such
as the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Census
Bureau, the Civil Service Commission, and the Office of Education
(Department of Health, Education, and Welfare)—whose programs
include water pollution control manpower planning aspects.
As shown in Exhibit II-l, the EPA manpower development proc-
ess is a continuing one; manpower forecasts provide the basis for
development of action plans, and the information generated by the
completion of action planning (and subsequently action plan im-
plementation) is fed back as data for the next planning cycle. The
purpose and scope of these two components of the water pollution
control manpower planning process are discussed below, together
-------
3862
LEGAL COMPILATION — WATER
with the activities conducted to implement both aspects of the
program.
[p. II-4]
Manpower Planning Program
EXHIBIT II-1
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL MANPOWER DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
w
Development of Planning Tools:
Basic Terminology
..Staffing Guidelines.
Procedures
Dermination of Manpower
and Training Requirements
by Occupations:
Numbers Needed
Where Needed,
When Needed
Determination of Manpower
and Training Supply
by Occupations:
Numbers Available z
, Where Available 8
When Available o ..
4J t-H
§;
Identification of Imbalances
Between Manpower and Training
^Supply and Demand,
Planning of >
Programs to Improve
Recruitment, Retention,
and Utilization
Planning of
Training Programs to
Increase Work Force
Size and Effectiveness
£ to
[p. II-5]
1. The Forecasting Component
The broad purpose of the manpower and training forecasting com-
ponent of the planning process is to provide time-phased information
about anticipated needs for water pollution control manpower and
training so that actions can be planned and implemented early enough
to ensure that the necessary trained manpower is available at the
time and places required.
a. The Forecasting Process. Fundamentally, the forecasting proc-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3863
ess is a comparison of probable manpower demand and supply to
identify probable imbalances. Perhaps the best way to describe the
forecasting component is through examination of its operational pro-
cess. As may be seen by an examination of Exhibit II—1, the fore-
casting process consists of four discrete elements:
Development of planning tools.
Determination of manpower and training requirements.
Determination of manpower and training supply.
Identification of imbalances between supply and demand.
Each of these activities is described below.
(1) Development of Planning Tools. Fundamental to the forecast-
ing process are three planning tools:
Basic Terminology.
Staffing Guidelines.
Procedures.
These tools must be available before forecasting can actually com-
mence and, therefore, the first task in the forecasting program is their
development, as discussed below.
Basic Terminology. The creation and dissemination of standard
terminology based on generally understood and accepted word or
phrase meanings substantially reduces the probability of misunder-
standings. Accordingly, an early step in the creation of the fore-
casting component is the development of a tool that may be called a
"program language."
Critical terms for definition in the forecasting component are the
basic structural categories of the planning system, the various oc-
cupations. For example, the label "operator" has historically been
applied to a variety of job descriptions. If the forecasts are to be
reasonably accurate, the term "operator" must mean literally the
same thing to persons who identify, aggregate, and analyze needs;
otherwise findings will
tp. n-6]
be distorted and invite an erroneous action. To provide for such
common understanding, the occupational definition will convey a body
of information, including:
(i) A statement of the tasks ordinarily performed by personnel
in the category.
(ii) A statement of qualifications for inclusion in the category
in terms of the general and vocational education, aptitudes, and
physical qualities necessary.
Because it is most economical to have only one effort to develop
-------
3864 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
the required terminology, it is appropriate that the terms ba defined
at the Federal level and then distributed to all other levels. There-
fore, EPA has the responsibility for developing, disseminating, and
subsequently maintaining definitions. Basically, this is done by
studying the tasks performed by a sample of water pollution control
employees and then constructing the definition around work tasks
commonly grouped into similar jobs, as revealed by industry practice.
The structure of the definitions follows that of the Department of
Labor's Dictionary of Occupational Titles in that occupations are
classified by job family and industrial category and are described by
tasks performed, requisite training, and aptitudes and physical qual-
ities required to perform the occupation.
Staffing Guidelines. As has been seen, the forecasting component
requires need identification by many different people. In determining
the needs, judgments are necessary; for example, does it require seven
or 17 operators (as defined) to operate a given plant? Although raw
judgments in reasonably similar situations may vary substantially
from individual to individual, the result of untempered judgment on
forecast input data could be outputs with unacceptable margins of
error, particularly at the local level where varying judgments would
ordinarily have little opportunity to offset each other.
To control this possibility, managers have developed the technique
of supplying guidelines to those making needs judgments. Commonly,
these guidelines relate staffing needs to ranges of units of production
for given facility arrangements. Thus, in the case of water pollution
control, for example, staffing needs of treatment plants can be gen-
erally related to plant capacity and type in terms of the number of
millions of gallons of waste per day that a particular type of plant is
designed to treat. A possible staffing for a primary treatment (sludge
digestion, sludge beds or lagoon) plant is shown in Exhibit II-2.
Thus another necessary tool for operation of the forecasting com-
ponent is staffing guidelines. They are appropriately developed at
the Federal level since it would be uneconomical to undertake a
number of separate efforts to produce them. The responsibility for
development is on EPA. The staffing guides are developed on the
basis of studies of standard practices in different types of production
units throughout the industry.
[p. n-7]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3865
EXHIBIT 11-2.—SAMPLE STAFFING GUIDE FOR WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
Type: Primary Treatment Sludge Digestion; Sludge Beds or Lagoons
OCCUPATION TITLE Plant average day capacity, mgd
10 20 35 50 65 80 100
Superintendent 0.5 0.5
Assistant superintendent
Clerk typist
Operations supervisor
Shift foreman
Operator II 1 1 2
Operator! 3 3 3
Automatic equipment operator
Maintenance supervisor
Mechanical maintenance foreman
Mechanic II
Mechanic 1
Electrician II
Electrician 1
Maintenance helper
Laborer 5 2 2
Painter
Storekeeper
Custodian
1 1
1
2 3
3 4
.. 1 1
1
5
1
2 2
1
.. 1
1
5
5
1
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
5
6
.. 1
1
1
1
.. 1
2
5
. 1
1
1
1
6
6
. 1
.. 1
1
2
1
1
1
2
5
. 1
1
1
1
2
7
7
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
3
6
1
1
1
1
2
. 1
,. 2
7
8
1
1
3
2
2
2
1
4
7
. .5
1
1
Chemist 5
Laboratory technician 1 1 2 2 2 2 2
Total staff 4.5 6.5 7.5 10 15.5 22 29 34 40 50
Note: Plant components included in this example:
Liquid treatment: Raw wastewater pumping, preliminary treatment, primary sedimentation,
chlorination.
Sludge treatment: Primary sludge pumping, sludge digestion; sludge drying beds (1, 3, 5 mgd
plants),* sludge lagoons (10 mgd and larger plants).*
Other plant components: Yardwork, laboratory, administration and general.
•Sludge removed and hauled from plant site by staff personnel.
[P. n-8]
Procedures. The third tool required in a forecasting process in-
volving far-flung multiple data inputs and analyses is a set of pro-
cedures. Again, the objective is to reduce forecasting error by
tempering the individual judgments that otherwise would be made
independently and, probably, inconsistently. A second objective is
to reduce the man-time required for operation of the forecasting com-
ponent by the development of one system for all to follow rather
than having each contributor take the time to develop his own pro-
cedures. The third objective of the development of standard pro-
cedures is to ensure that data are collected in a format that will be
accepted by EPA's national computerized system for the storage and
retrieval of water quality related data (STORET).
Procedures for use throughout the length and breadth of the fore-
casting process are most economically developed by the entity having
the overview of the entire system, the Federal Government. Ac-
cordingly, this responsibility is given to EPA. The procedures are
-------
3866 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
created by fusing the knowledge of planning specialists with that of
manpower and training specialists.
(2) Determination of Manpower and Training Requirements. In
order to identify the demand for water pollution control personnel,
it is planned to employ the following process. Manpower and train-
ing requirements which constitute demand, form one leg of the fore-
casting process. All Water pollution control employers,1 using the
planning tools described above, will determine their employee needs
in terms of net additions to their respective work forces by occupa-
tion (as defined in the tool-making process) for each year in the
planning spectrum. This is to be done by comparing the present work
force, by occupation (after adjustment for attrition and upgrade po-
tential), with that anticipated in each of the planning years and re-
porting the difference. To determine the anticipated work force, the
employer must first identify the expected work load by function in
each planning year. Fortunately, many water pollution control em-
ployees can do this with a high level of confidence because generally
major changes in work load are associated with major capital im-
provements whose activation dates can be predicted fairly accurately
several years in advance. Having anticipated the work load by func-
tion, the employer can use experience and/or standard guidelines to
anticipate accurately needed staff additions.
1 The forecasting program is designed to include the needs of both public and private
employers. To the extent that employers do not participate in the program, demand will be
understated.
[p. n-9]
Next, employers determine their training needs by occupation, by
numbers requiring training, and by time frame. Three types of train-
ing needs are identified:
(i) Entry Training—The specialized vocational training that
is required for occupational proficiency upon initial entry into a
career field. This training may be received before or immediately
after initial employment in the career field.
(ii) Upgrade Training—The training that current employees
will need in order to become proficient in a new occupation, usu-
ally in the same career field. This training is undertaken as a
result of or pending promotion.
(iii) Update Training—The training that current employees
need to maintain proficiency in their current occupations because
of technological or other changes in their jobs; in cases where
employees are currently performing below the established pro-
ficiency level, this includes the training necessary to bring them
to proficiency.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3867
Entry training will be largely determined by anticipated new hires,
upgrade by anticipated promotions, and update training by manage-
ment judgment based on performance reviews and anticipated
changes in the work environment.
Technical assistance for employers needing it to produce the train-
ing needs data required by the program will usually be provided by
local or State employees who are specialists in training related to
water pollution control.
The manpower and training needs of employers are then reviewed,
adjusted as appropriate, and aggregated by occupation and year
needed, initially for each labor market area, then for each State, and
finally, on a nationwide basis. The initial review, adjustment, and
aggregation will ordinarily be accomplished by local planning and
training specialists, who are best acquainted with the local peculiar-
ities which must be taken into account. However, in some cases local
planners and trainers will not be available, and the initial aggregation
will be done by State staff. In other cases local staff may be available
but not fully capable. In this situation, the State water pollution con-
trol staff will ordinarily provide technical assistance and/or training
to the local staff. Assignment of these functions to the states is a
primary reason why the states are considered the keystones of the
forecasting program. The State/local interface in this respect ordi-
narily will be closely related to State review of applications for cap-
ital grants and to State monitoring of operations in grant-in-aid
facilities.
[p. 11-10]
State review, adjustment and aggregation is to be accomplished by
the State staff specialists in water pollution control planning and
training, who will be able to bring a state-wide view and a very high
level of expertise to the demand determination. This again suggests
the key role of the states in the process. It also suggests that the
program will flounder without properly qualified personnel in the
State manpower planning and training staff. An important aspect of
the program then is technical assistance and training to the State per-
sonnel to ensure the level of performance required for program suc-
cess. The Federal Government, through EPA, is assigned the
responsibility of providing this technical assistance and training.
The final review, adjustment, and aggregation will provide a na-
tional picture of demand. To be developed by EPA, this calculation
will offer the opportunity for adjustments based on a national view,
such as anticipated changes in national economic or environmental
policies or adjustments for interstate overlaps in the labor market.
(3) Determination of Manpower and Training Supply. The second
-------
3868 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
leg of the forecasting program is determination of manpower and
training supply. The supply determination process runs concurrently
with demand determination. Many of the same individuals and in-
stitutions will be as deeply involved in shaping the supply leg as the
demand leg, but there are some differences in approach.
To determine the manpower supply is to determine the anticipated
numbers of available manpower by occupation, labor market area,
and planning year. Included in supply are:
(i) The anticipated training program graduates ready to begin
employment in the occupation.
(ii) The anticipated unemployed who have had entry training
or equivalent experience in the occupation.
The determination of the former requires an estimate of anticipated
entry training programs by occupation, number of training slots, labor
market area, and planning year. This information will be collected
from employers at the same time demand information is collected. It
must also be collected from other organizations that deliver entry
training. It is planned that this information will be aggregated at the
labor market area,2 State, and Federal levels, with the respective
staff specialists having responsibilities similar to those they hold for
demand determination.
Determination of the anticipated unemployment of entry-trained
personnel is a matter for the judgment of labor market specialists and
labor economists; their judgments are to be aggregated with the
entry-training output supply.
' A. complication that develops here is that entry training, particularly professional training,
occurs to some extent in locations unrelated to the local or State labor market. This
will be taken into account in the adjustment that accompanies aggregation.
[p. II-H]
(4) Identification of Imbalances Between Manpower and Training
Supply and Demand. The purpose of the forecasting component is to
provide estimates of manpower and training needs. In this step, the
supply and demand data are analyzed in their entirety, imbalances
are identified, and the estimates of needs are derived.
Analysis is to be conducted on the local, State, and Federal data
aggregations. Normally, local planning staffs will compare the de-
mand and supply figures, make adjustments as necessary, and develop
forecasts for their respective labor markets. The State water pollu-
tion control agency staffs will make comparable analyses and fore-
casts for the states, and the EPA staff will make the national analysis
and forecast. Technical assistance and training will be provided as
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3869
needed in analysis, as it is in the demand and supply determination
stages.
The manpower forecasts will be in terms of additional numbers of
employees needed, by occupations, labor market, and planning year.
The training forecast, in similar format, will indicate the additional
entry training needed to provide the needed additional employees.
b. Forecasting Program Implementation. Authorization by sub-
section 5(g)(2) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as
amended, for the establishment and maintenance of a manpower fore-
casting system resulted in acceleration of previous efforts in this di-
rection. A small staff has been established at EPA Headquarters.
Budget requests for FY 1972 provide for expansion of this staff and
establishment of forecasting capabilities in the EPA regional offices.
The actions taken to date, in addition to the efforts required for con-
ceptualization of the planning program, are described below.
(1) Accomplishments in the Development of Planning Tools.
Conventional Treatment Plants. A contract has been let to provide
for the development of occupational definitions and staffing guides
for conventional waste treatment plants.
The occupational definitions are following the format of the De-
partment of Labor's Dictionary of Occupational Titles. The oc-
cupational definitions will describe for each occupation category the
duties performed and the job qualifications in terms of general educa-
tion, specific vocational training, aptitudes and physical requirements.
The staffing guides will provide, for different types and sizes of
waste treatment plants, the number of employees in each occupational
category that are normally required for proper operation and main-
tenance. These guides are not intended to be precise standards;
rather, they can be used by design engineers, manpower planners, and
others as a frame of reference for planning the staffing of new plants
and evaluating the staffing patterns of existing plants.
[p. 11-12]
Similar definitions and guides have been developed for waste treat-
ment plants used in the inorganic chemical industry. This was done
as part of a research and development study on the technology and
economic aspects of water pollution control by this industry. A study
of this type is now also being conducted for the beverage industry.
New Water Quality Pollution Control Systems. Manpower and
training requirements are directly related to the work to be done,
which, in turn, is in large part a function of the systems employed by
water pollution control activities. Therefore, the development of the
required occupational definitions and staffing guidelines can be done
in coordination with the design of new systems. At the same time,
-------
3870 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
systems designers must take into consideration the cost and availabil-
ity of operational manpower when considering various alternatives.
To ensure that appropriate manpower information is generated and
that human factors are considered in the systems designs, a policy
directive and guidance manual are being developed. The manual
will specify the types of manpower and training information that
should be produced during the design of new systems and will also
provide guidance concerning the human engineering techniques that
can be employed during systems design.
Through this mechanism, occupation definitions, staffing guides,
manpower projections, and training materials can be developed si-
multaneously with the development of advanced waste treatment
processes and other technological advances. The availability of this
information will enable the timely development of the manpower re-
quired to permit full utilization of the new hardware and facilities.
(2) Accomplishments in the Determination of Manpower and
Training Supply and Demand.
Joint EPA/DOL Survey of Municipal Wastewater Treatment
Plants. A survey to determine the numbers and types of workers re-
quired to operate and maintain the nation's existing and planned
wastewater treatment plants was started in June 1971. The survey
is a joint effort of the Department of Labor's Manpower Administra-
tion, the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Water Pro-
grams, and the counterpart State and local employment service and
water pollution control agencies.
Over 3,000 plants and municipalities have been contacted to obtain
data on current employment, job vacancies, future manpower re-
quirements, labor turnover, and wages. The survey data are now
being tabulated by many State agencies, and a national tabulation and
analysis has been initiated at the Federal level. The resulting State
and national reports should be available by mid-1972.
[p. H-13]
The survey results can be used by water quality, education, and
employment service agencies at all levels of government to plan,
budget, and conduct manpower and training programs which will en-
sure proper staffing of wastewater treatment plants by qualified
superintendents, operators, laboratory technicians, maintenance
craftsmen, and other workers. The collected data will also provide
the basis for the creation of a manpower information system, which
is described below. The survey, to date, has been hampered by the
limited manpower resources available to some State water quality
agencies for this effort. However, the effort has fostered the develop-
ment of working relationships at the Federal, State, and local levels
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3871
among environmental and employment security agency staffs; and it
can be considered a fundamental establishment of coordinated man-
power planning capabilities in these agencies.
The results of this survey will be used as a basis for a manpower
information system that is being designed into EPA's national com-
puterized system for the storage and retrieval of water quality re-
lated data (STORET). It is planned to relate pertinent manpower
data to each existing and projected waste treatment facility and to
make these data and processing services accessible to State and Fed-
eral water quality staffs through remote terminals located in their
own offices (in the same manner as other water quality data and in-
formation services are now available.) The data will be continuously
updated and maintained through collection of data generated in EPA
and State programs for management of waste treatment plant con-
struction and monitoring of plant operation and maintenance.
(3) Developments in Training for Manpower Planning. In coop-
eration with the Office of Education, Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare, a contractor has been engaged to develop a
procedures manual and to train representatives of State and local
water quality, labor, and education agencies in the concepts and
methods of manpower planning. The first workshops were held in
December 1971.
The training will encompass information on the structure of the
national water pollution control program; the manpower development
process; the roles and relationships of Federal, State, and local labor
and educational institutions responsible for manpower development;
the state of the manpower planning art; and general instructions on
the methods and procedures to be applied in manpower planning for
municipal waste treatment plants.
2. The Action Planning Component
The second component of the water pollution control manpower
development process is the development of action plans upon com-
pletion of manpower and training forecasts. The forecasts state the
manpower and training needs, and action plans are developed to ful-
fill those needs and to improve the utilization of available manpower
and provide for employee satisfaction.
[p. 11-14]
As indicated in Exhibit II-l, action plans to provide manpower and
training can approach the goals from two directions: (i) planning for
management programs intended to improve utilization of the existing
labor force, for example, by the application of industrial engineering
techniques or actions to lower attrition rates by improved working
-------
3872 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
conditions or more competitive compensation; or (ii) planning to in-
crease the size and effectiveness of the work force by providing ad-
ditional training.
Action plans are in the first instance the responsibility of the em-
ployer. Thus, all public and private managers develop action plans
for their own spheres of activity. Naturally spheres of activity vary
from one type of organization to another.
The action plans of the managers who are building and/or operat-
ing water treatment facilities are concerned solely with personnel
engaged directly in water pollution control operations.
On the other hand, recruitment, retention, utilization and training
action plans of local nonoperating, State, and Federal agencies fre-
quently take on an additional dimension. Of course, these organiza-
tions will develop action plans designed to recruit, retain, and utilize
or train their own staffs. However, their missions are in part to
support the operating managers. Support involves assistance to op-
erating managers in action planning. Therefore, as a part of their
programs, these supporting agencies develop action plans to provide
technical assistance and training to operating managers to aid them
in development of action plans to improve manpower recruitment, re-
tention, and utilization. Further, since many operating managers are
not equipped or financed to provide all the training their staffs may
require, these supporting agencies often develop action plans for the
direct delivery of training to employees of operating managers in ad-
dition to their own employees. Planning for delivery of this technical
assistance and training may be done by local management and train-
ing specialists who perhaps have the best knowledge of local priorities
and specific needs. However, because of lack of local resources, such
planning is frequently conducted at the State level.
Under the water pollution control manpower development process
as currently conceived, EPA, in addition to planning for its own staff
needs, provides impetus and financial assistance for the programs at
the State and local levels. EPA also provides technical assistance
and training in action programming to other Federal agencies having
water pollution control activities. EPA engages in the action de-
velopment of direct-delivery training and other services only to the
extent that such training and services are required to fill identified
training gaps that will not be filled by others. Thus, for example,
EPA has and will continue in the immediate future to plan operator
training courses and short update courses for professionals. EPA
also develops action programs for the delivery of technical assistance
in training, as in the development of curricula and training materials
for the use of others in delivering training.
[p.11-15]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3873
C. THE UNIVERSE OF WATER POLLUTION CONTROL MANPOWER
As has been briefly noted, the water pollution control manpower
planning program is nationwide in scope and potentially covers all
water pollution manpower. An estimated 25,000 employers now
engage an estimated 149,000 employees to accomplish a broad variety
of activities relating to the achievement of the nation's water quality
goals. These activities, which provide a frame of reference for the
more detailed examination of the water pollution control manpower
universe that follows, include:
Establishment and enforcement of water quality standards.
Development and administration of basin plans.
Responses (on the part of polluters) to governmental im-
position of standards and to basin actions.
Management decisions on the part of polluters on acquisition
and design of water quality control facilities.
Operation and maintenance of facilities.
Government support activities (such as research and develop-
ment, technical assistance, and training).
Educational institution activities.
Consulting engineering.
Equipment design and supply.
Water quality personnel with a wide variety of skills are needed to
perform these functions. For purposes of this report, they are cat-
egorized into four overall groups: professionals, technicians, op-
erators, and others. Each of these groups is described in this section
of the report. Projections of manpower and training needs for each
group are presented in Section D, below.
1. Professionals
Into the professional category fall those jobs that require creative
problem-solving ability; the professional is expected to deal with
analysis and correction of unusual management or technical prob-
lems. Sanitary engineers are the predominant professionals in the
field. In addition to their engineering training, they are schooled
in life and physical sciences and are commonly employed as planners,
designers, administrators, or facility managers. The professional
category also includes civil, electrical, and mechanical engineers and
architects who
[p. 11-16]
design and construct facilities, chemical engineers who design and
modify treatment processes, and mechanical and electrical engineers
who design and operate the electrical and materials handling systems
-------
3874 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
in the larger wastewater treatment facilities and the sewage collection
systems. As a result of experience and continuing education, these
engineers frequently become specialists in water pollution control
activities.
In addition to engineers, the professional category includes sci-
entists who are involved in research, monitoring, and technical super-
vision. Chemists and microbiologists engage in water analysis in
facilities and in streams, while aquatic biologists analyze the effects
of pollution on water life. These scientists also participate in the
design and analysis of waste treatment processes and water quality
measurement systems.
Recently, as the interdisciplinary impact of water pollution control
has become more apparent, other professionals have become more
closely identified with the field. For example, lawyers, economists,
and political scientists are frequently involved in enacting and ad-
ministering water quality legislation, and management specialists and
computer specialists have joined with engineers and scientists to pro-
vide interdisciplinary teams to solve water quality problems.
Most professionals come to the water pollution field with profes-
sional degrees at the bachelor or higher level. Currently the first
professional degree for the sanitary engineer is the masters. The
other professionals coming into water pollution ordinarily require ad-
ditional specialized training in water-related subjects in order to
become fully effective in their jobs.
2. Technicians
The technician performs complex but routine analytical tasks which
require a knowledge of engineering and/or scientific techniques. This
category consists largely of wastewater treatment laboratory tech-
nicians who perform chemical and biological tests to analyze influents,
treatment processes, and effluent characteristics. They are respon-
sible to verify that the influent is processable and does not contain
toxic substances that might deactivate the biological treatment proc-
esses. In addition, their analyses enable identification of new pol-
lution sources and provide the basis for determination of treatment
charges to industrial polluters. Laboratory technicians monitor treat-
ment processes in various parts of the plant to ensure that the system
is working correctly, and they assess the effluent to ensure that the
plant is operating to the required minimum performance stand-
ards. Particularly large or sophisticated water and/or sewage util-
ities also utilize electronic technicians to work with telemetry and
automated control systems. Other technician level personnel include
the draftsmen and survey party personnel who work with the con-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3875
suiting engineering firms and large municipal departments.
[p. H-17]
Technicians are employed both by treatment facilities and by State
agencies charged with surveillance of water pollution.
Some technicians have an associate degree or two years of college,
but many technicians actually possess less training, having achieved
their positions through long experience and/or OJT. Those formally
trained in an academic program frequently require on-the-job train-
ing to familiarize them with wastewater treatment problems, and they
sometimes attend operator training programs as part of their orienta-
tion in order to gain an overall understanding of plant operations.
3. Operators
The operator manpower category includes several levels of per-
sonnel who are directly responsible for operation of equipment and
systems involved in treating wastewater. While there is considerable
confusion in the use of the term "operators," it is possible to identify
at least three possible grades of operators, depending on skill, level of
responsibility, and experience. The lowest grade of operator is an
entry-level job. These operators may have less than a high school
education and may have little mechanical experience. They may be
responsible for a very small segment of the operation and generally
perform both mechanical tasks (such as lubrication, cleaning, and in-
spection of equipment) and manual labor (such as cleaning out tanks,
pumps, and valves). Typically they work under close supervision
and normally have little or no particular knowledge of the plant
equipment.
The second grade of operators are more experienced and are re-
sponsible for operations of part of the plant, or possibly a small plant
in its entirety, including the indoctrination of new operators. This
level of operator must understand and be able to interpret the indica-
tions of the instrumentation in the plant, which reflects the status of
various processes; he must be able to diagnose and solve problems on
his own initiative and to anticipate the consequences of his actions
when problems occur.
The third level of operator includes supervisory personnel such
as shift supervisors and plant superintendents who have ultimate op-
erating responsibility for effectively running a plant. Job responsi-
bilities at this level would include the scheduling of operators, the
coordination of maintenance and operations tasks, participation in or
making final decisions on staffing levels, budgets, and purchases, and
so on. In some plants personnel with these duties will be engineers
and, if so, would be classified as professionals rather than operators.
-------
3876 LEGAL COMPILATION—-WATER
To complicate matters further, in small plants—those that process
under one million gallons per day (mgd)—operators frequently per-
form the duties of all three operator levels. Operators in these small
plants often work with only a few colleagues—and frequently no one
else—on duty
[p. 11-18]
at the same time. The very smallest plants, in fact, are believed
to be staffed generally by one part-time operator, leaving no one
in attendance the major part of the time. Ideally, these operators
should know everything that is going on in the plant and should be
able to set up the plant for more or less automatic operations and to
correct faulty conditions with a minimum of help. In such environ-
ments, the operator is a general supervisor, laborer, technician, main-
tenance specialist, and janitor, as circumstances dictate.
Experienced operators at all levels, but particularly at the highest
level, are rarely available on the job market, although a few have
come out of the military where they have operated treatment plants
on military installations. Most operators are initially hired at the
lowest level with little previous experience but definite mechanical
aptitudes, and they are trained on the job.
4. Others
Other job categories include the craftsmen (such as electricians,
mechanics, and machinists) who are required for maintenance of
wastewater treatment plants; the laborers who support the operators
and craftsmen; and clerical and administrative personnel.
Although the nature of plant operations gives maintenance jobs
a number of unique characteristics, personnel fulfilling the main-
tenance function generally require standard craft skills. By defini-
tion, craftsmen are already experienced in their trades, and their
skills are almost directly applicable to the water pollution control
field. In addition to craftsmen, skilled welders and electronics tech-
nicians may be employed for maintenance purposes, depending upon
the size and specific nature of plant operations. Heavy equipment
operators, mechanics, and bricklayers are needed for sewer collection
system operation and maintenance. Except for orientation to the job,
these personnel rarely receive specialized training. In most cases
they are already skilled and are obtained either from the military
services or from the local manpower pool.
Large numbers of laborers or related blue-collar workers are em-
ployed, predominantly in sewer collection system operation and
maintenance activities. They are recruited from the general labor
pool and pose a significant manpower development challenge be-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3877
cause of their large numbers and generally low scholastic achieve-
ment. These workers generally receive job indoctrination but no
formal training.
5. Associated Occupations
In addition to those categories discussed above that are directly re-
lated to water pollution control activities, other occupations have im-
portant supporting inputs into the water pollution control program.
Public officials must have an understanding of the wastewater pollu-
tion and
[p. 11-19]
processing cycle. For example, city managers, municipal utilities
managers, selectmen, councilmen, and other responsible public offi-
cials need to understand broadly what processes are going on in-
side the plant and the role that trained manpower plays in ensuring
plant effectiveness. These people are the sources of local planning
and training funds and must appreciate the complexities of and need
for funding both activities in addition to the more familiar operating,
maintenance, and capital funding programs that are routine.
Personnel in related water quality, water supply, and public health
agencies—especially those engaged in surveillance activities—must
possess the technical knowledge to recognize good and bad operation
of existing equipment. They must also be competent in anticipating
potential threats to water quality from accidents, natural phenomena,
and the like, and in recommending appropriate correctional measures.
Many former operators and technicians now serving in surveillance
functions, are capable of such activities, but EPA's estimates of State
agency staffing levels indicate that the current supply is insufficient
to meet future requirements.
Finally, State and local police, firemen, public utilities workers,
housing and industrial park developers, and other related parties
must understand the water quality aspects of their jobs. Just as a
housing development must be provided the information to control
erosion and protect waterways through preventive planning, public
workers must be able to administer appropriate corrective measures
when unforeseen circumstances threaten to jeopardize a water course
—as, for example, in the event that a toxic chemical load spills on a
highway near a stream at a point upstream of a municipal water
supply intake.
EPA is considering the use of short course orientation techniques
to heighten the awareness and competence of the community profes-
sionals mentioned above, to enable them to make the correct de-
cisions when faced with the infrequent but potentially catastrophic
-------
3878 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
situations they might someday have to handle.
[p. 11-20]
D. PRELIMINARY ESTIMATES OF CURRENT AND FUTURE MANPOWER
REQUIREMENTS AND FUTURE TRAINING NEEDS
Preliminary estimates of manpower and training requirements are
presented in this section of the report, with primary focus on:
Current (FY 1971) manpower requirements, by occupational
classification.
Anticipated (FY 1976) manpower requirements, by occupa-
tional classification.
Future entry and update training requirements, five-year
total (FY 1972-1976) and average annual, by occupational
classification.
These estimates will be refined as current research efforts are com-
pleted but must be viewed as subject to a number of qualifications at
this time. Subsection 1 below describes the qualifying factors which
affect all of the staffing and training inventories and projections, and
subsection 2 discusses the methodology used to develop the estimates.
Each of the major sectors requiring water pollution control manpower
—nongovernment, local, State, Federal non-EPA, and EPA—is de-
scribed and discussed in subsections 3 through 7; the overall future
manpower and training demand in the field of water pollution control
and factors that may modify these estimates of future needs are
summarized in subsection 8. Conclusions emerging from this analysis
appear at the end of this part of the report.
1. Qualifications on Preliminary Estimates
There are several factors that affect the confidence that should be
placed on the preliminary estimates that follow, as discussed below.
However, despite these qualifications, EPA places high confidence in
these estimates as a good reflection of the orders of magnitude of cur-
rent and future manpower and training needs.
a. Lack of Uniformity in Occupational Classification. In the waste-
water collection and treatment field, there is currently a lack of pre-
cision and uniformity in manpower terminology, occupational defini-
tions, and job requirements and qualifications. Reference has already
been made to the various meanings of the term "operator." Another
example is the term "laborer." So-called "laborers" in one agency
may be called sewer maintenance men, sewer servicemen, public
works maintenance men, or maintenance men in other jurisdictions
even though the functions of the jobs are substantially similar. The
situation is further complicated by nonstandard classification levels;
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3879
for example, a Sewer Maintenance Man I in jurisdiction A may per-
form duties similar or identical to a Sewer Maintenance Man II in
jurisdiction B. This lack of uniformity is the result of the multiplicity
of independent employers involved in water pollution control.
[p. H-21]
b. Inclusion of Manpower Assigned Part Time. In some cases part
or all of the water pollution control activities of employers may re-
quire the part-time rather than full-time application of skills of one
or more employees. This may be due to the small scale of the ac-
tivities or to the organizational structure of the particular employer.
Available data does not permit segregation by quantity of part-time
from full-time manpower requirements. However, all of these em-
ployees—assigned part or full time to water pollution control—must
be specially skilled in this field. Therefore, all manpower estimates in
this report include manpower assigned on a part-time basis to water
pollution control activities. Thus, for example, the manpower esti-
mates include employees working less than full time in the smaller
treatment plants where fulltime employment is not considered eco-
nomically justifiable; industrial plant employees of all classifications
whose routine duties include functions in addition to water pollution
control; and local government employees whose duties include work
in both water supply and waste water collection.
[p. 11-22]
c. Lack of Uniformity in Work Organization. Similar types of em-
ployers often organize for water pollution control activities in differ-
ent ways. For instance, in some states the water pollution functions
are largely centered in a water agency, while in others they may be
scattered between several agencies such as health, natural resources,
and public works. At the local level plants and sewers may be op-
erated as an entity or separately; sometimes management will be
plantwide, sometimes citywide, and sometimes regionwide.
d. Lack of Consistency in Projection of Manpower and Training
Needs. Many employers do not project manpower and/or training
needs; those that do do not necessarily use the same timeframes for
projection.
e. New Technology. All estimates are made on the basis of known
technologies. In this respect, it is known that wastewater treatment
technology is rapidly becoming more sophisticated. Discussion of
how some major technological thrusts may affect the manpower pic-
ture follows presentation of the data.
2. Methodology
The water pollution control manpower universe has been divided
-------
3880 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
into sectors to facilitate the collection and presentation of data. These
sectors are:
Nongovernmental.
Local government.
State government.
Federal Government, non-EPA.
EPA.
Within each of these sectors estimates are reported for the four gen-
eral manpower classifications:
Professional.
Technicians.
Operators.
Others.3
Within each of the sectors, estimates for subgroupings of classifica-
tions are shown when they are considered reasonably reliable, such
as the breakdown of the professional classification into engineers and
scientists. However, no summary analysis below the four general
categories can be attempted because of incomplete data.
3 The data available for this classification are incomplete. In instances where data are
lacking, no estimates of requirements are made in this preliminary forecast. Therefore, to
some extent, manpower and training requirements for "Others" are understated in this
forecast.
[p. 11-23]
The methodology for determining manpower needs varies from
sector to sector because of differences in the information available.
Accordingly, the data sources and methodology for each sector are
described as that sector is discussed.
Throughout the sectors training requirements were calculated in
terms of entry and update training needs; to the extent that it was
not possible to take account of future upgrade training needs,4 the
training estimates must be considered conservative. Training re-
quired was calculated for the number of personnel engaged, rather
than for full-time equivalents, on the assumption that a part-time
worker must also be trained.
In the "Others" category, no forecast of entry or update training
needs is made for the related blue collar and administrative sub-
categories since training for these categories is not related directly to
water pollution control but is more related to general blue-collar and
administrative functions.
Entry training needs were expressed in terms of expansion posi-
tions plus manpower hired to fill positions vacated through an esti-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3881
mated 5 percent turnover rate. No consideration could be given to
the proportion of people leaving one waste treatment facility to join
another; all of the 5 percent were assumed to be leaving the water
pollution control field. However, the 5 percent turnover estimate is
a conservative one derived from a consensus of non-EPA Federal
agencies that turnover in wastewater personnel is currently 5 to 10
percent.
A simple example serves to illustrate the method of calculation for
entry training. If the 1971 staffing for a certain class of manpower
is 4,200 and the FY 1976 projection for this same category of man-
power is 5,600, the projected five-year expansion is 5,600^4,200, or
1,400. The average population of this category over the 1971-1976
period is thus assumed to be the 1971 population of 4,200 plus one
half of the projected five-year expansion of 1,400—for a total of 4,900.
To the average population of 4,900, a five percent attrition rate is ap-
plied for each of five years; thus, the predicted five-year turnover is
4,900 X 25%, or 1,200. Total five-year entry training needs are the
sum of the projected five-year expansion of 1,400 and the estimated
five-year turnover of 1,200—a total of 2,600. In every case, the es-
timated five-year update training need is rounded to the nearest
hundred. The average annual training need over the 1971-1976
period is obtained by dividing the total five-year need by the number
of years (five) in the projection period (2,600 divided by 5 = 520).
4 It Is clear that as new facilities are constructed and as existing facilities become more
complex, there will be a pressing need to advance present workers.
[p. 11-24]
Update training needs were calculated using an apparent con-
sensus of non-EPA Federal agencies regarding the frequency with
which the various occupational categories of personnel should ideally
receive training in the face of a rapidly changing technology. No
distinction is made in these figures with regard to the necessary
duration of training or the sources of training (which may be from
academic institutions, State-run vocational schools, on-the-job train-
ing programs, or even equipment suppliers).
The example above may also be used to illustrate the method used
for calculating update training estimates. The average staffing level
of the category in the example above was 4,900 for the 1971-1976
period. To derive update training needs, this figure must be multi-
plied by the number of training instances in the forecast period for
that category of personnel—2l/z for professionals, operators, and tech-
nicians (on the assumption that training is delivered every second
year during a five-year period), and 1% for others (maintenance)
(assuming one training experience every third year during a five-
-------
3882 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
year period). Thus, if the 4,900 represents personnel in the profes-
sional, operator, or technician category, 4,900 X 2Vz = 12,250, the
five-year update training need. In every case, the estimated five-year
update training need is rounded to the nearest hundred; applying this
principle in the example above, the five-year update need is ex-
pressed as 12,300. The average annual update training need is cal-
culated by dividing the five-year training requirement by five, the
number of years in the forecast period (12,300 divided by 5 = 2,460,
the average annual update training need for this example).
3. The Nongovernment Sector
Water pollution control activities outside of the governmental
sphere are conducted by several types of institutions and organiza-
tions,5 including:
Industrial firms, many of which treat their waste material be-
fore releasing it into streams or wastewater (sewage) collection
systems.
Educational institutions that train the professional and tech-
nically specialized operators to design, build, and operate the
water pollution control facilities and equipment.
5 While it is recognized that other nongovernmental sectors such as power, mining, agri-
culture, and transportation employ personnel who are involved in water pollution control
activities, data are not presently available that will support definitive manpower estimates
for these sectors. Therefore, these sectors have not been included in this special preliminary
estimates of needs. The omission of these sectors will probably cause an overall underesti-
mate of manpower and training needs. These sectors are discussed in Appendix A.
[p. 11-25]
Consulting engineers, who design pollution control facilities
and assist facility operating personnel to obtain the best per-
formance from their plants.
Because each of these employers has unique manpower and training
requirements, they are discussed individually in the subsections
which follow. The discussion of nongovernmental manpower and
training requirements concludes with a set of composite exhibits
which display the employer's current manpower estimates (Exhibit
II-3), estimated FY 1976 manpower requirements (Exhibit II-4), and
estimated FY 1972-1976 total and average annual training needs
(Exhibit II-5).
a. Industrial Firms That Discharge Wastewater. Approximately
240,000 industrial concerns are discharging approximately 16 trillion
gallons of wastewater each year into our streams, lakes, and estuaries
—a volume rivaled only by the domestic household waste discharge.
Although not all of this discharge is adding foreign polluting sub-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3883
stances to the waterways, a significant proportion does so and con-
tributes tremendous heat loads to the environment. Eighty-five
percent of the annual wastewater discharge is attributable to four
major industry groups:
Primary metal industries.
Chemical and allied products.
Paper and allied products.
Petroleum and coal products.
The discharge of wastewater from manufacturing facilities is highly
concentrated. Approximately 60 percent of the industrial discharges
are located in five regions: the Delaware and Hudson River basins;
the Ohio River; the Eastern Great Lakes; the Western Great Lakes;
and the Western Gulf of Mexico. Establishments with an annual
withdrawal of 20 million gallons or more of water account for about
97 percent of water withdrawn for manufacturing purposes. How-
ever, these organizations represent only 4 percent—approximately
10,000 establishments—of the total number of manufacturing estab-
lishments and employ approximately 45 percent of all U.S. man-
ufacturing workers.
Water pollution control activities in industry consist largely of the
establishment and operation of internal wastewater treatment plants,
either to provide preliminary treatment of toxic wastes before effluent
is released into municipal sewage collecting systems or to treat the
effluent completely before its ultimate discharge into the waterways.
Personnel engaged for water pollution control functions consist pre-
dominantly of plant operators and technicians, although professional
personnel are used in ever-increasing numbers in treatment process
selection, plant design, supervision of operations and maintenance,
analysis of industrial effluents to establish treatment requirements,
and coordination with municipal utilities to negotiate pretreatment
processes and municipal treatment charges for wastewaters dis-
charged into municipal sewer systems.
[p.11-26]
Estimated current water quality employment in private industry
is based upon the number of plants as shown in the 1968 Census of
Water Use in Manufacturing for those industries providing some form
of wastewater treatment. This manpower total—over 30,000 persons
engaged who devote an average one third of their time, as shown in
Exhibit II-3, below—represent the estimated personnel employed by
those industries utilizing at least 20 million gallons of water per year
for which manpower data were available; it may be considered rep-
resentative of the order of magnitude of industrial employment in the
-------
3884 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
field, as these industries withdraw from the waterways approximately
94 percent of the water used for manufacturing and discharged in the
United States.
Information regarding future manpower and training needs of pri-
vate industrial concerns in the field of water pollution control was
obtained from discussion with the trade associations of the major
water users, such as the American Petroleum Institute, National
Council for Clean Air and Streams (pulp and paper), Manufacturing
Chemists Association, and the American Iron and Steel Institute. At
a later date, these estimates will be refined by two major sources of
information: an American Association of Professors in Sanitary En-
gineering (AAPSE) survey of industry representatives to determine
the effect of changes in standards and enforcement on their man-
power requirements, and an EPA poll of 10,000 industries to de-
termine their projected professional and technical manpower and
training requirements. Although neither of these surveys will be
complete before mid-1972, preliminary returns have been used in
compiling the best possible estimates which can be made at this time.
As shown in Exhibit II-4, below, manpower needs in all occupa-
tional categories are expected to rise considerably. The FY 1972-
1976 period will witness a continuation of the current trend of using
personnel actively engaged in some other production process of the
industry to supervise the personnel conducting industrial wastewater
treatment operations. Therefore, the increase in professional person-
nel will be largely in process functions, and people now devoting a
small portion of their time to handling water quality responsibilities
will allocate more time to wastewater concerns. While the profes-
sionals hired into the industrial wastewater treatment positions will
require training specifically focused on water concerns because of
their process-oriented responsibilities, little increased burden from
this sector is expected on those educational institutions that now
educate sanitary engineers. Rather it is reasonable to expect that
educational institutions will utilize an increasing portion of their re-
sources to deliver specialized short courses to accommodate the needs
of new industrial entrants and others in need of similar training.
Finally, with regard to the training of professionals to perform waste-
water functions in industry, representatives of the major water-using
industries believe that it is easier to train a man familiar with an in-
dustry to deal with wastewater problems than to train an environ-
mental
[p. 2-27]
specialist to familiarize him with the industrial process. In the
future, the largest plants may be expected to employ at the cor-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3885
porate level a specialist in process operation and control, as well as a
design group to provide internal plans for pollution abatement and
control; few environmental specialists will be required even at the
corporate level.
The greatest need for operators and technicians will be experienced
in industries affected by requirements to increase or improve their
water pollution control activities. The need will have to be met par-
tially by upgrading existing personnel and partly by hiring new per-
sonnel, who will receive intensive but brief training. As water
quality standards are refined and enforcement becomes more strin-
gent, the number of small treament plants and facilities will increase,
and the scale of effort in larger plants will be intensified.
Higher reliability requirements and the more sophisticated proc-
esses necessary to achieve higher treatment level may be expected
to have a great impact on the manpower and training needs of in-
dustries engaged in water quality activities. Increased automation
may reduce the total number of operators but will require higher
skills in the operators and technicians needed to calibrate and con-
trol the more sophisticated facilities. Such changes must be co-
ordinated with both trade unions and management if they are to be
implemented smoothly. Manpower planning in these industries must
be intensified to anticipate these needs and to program, increasingly
specialized training.
The most significant influence on the industrial water quality man-
power projections set forth in Exhibit II-4 is the possibility that the
imposition of Federal water quality standards on all industry—in-
cluding the 230,000 industries not included among the major water
users—will require every industrial concern to employ or have access
to at least one individual to assume water pollution control responsi-
bilities. Such an event would significantly increase the manpower
needs in total numbers, but it is not possible to determine the extent
of that increase or to anticipate the distribution of these requirements
among the various occupational categories of personnel.
In light of these considerations, it appears that industrial employers
of water quality personnel will experience sizable increases in the
need for trained personnel in the FY 1972-1976 period and that the
nature of training delivered will increase in technological sophistica-
tion at all levels. Estimates of the average annual industrial water
quality training load needed to maintain progress in the efforts to
control water pollution have been calculated in accordance with the
methodology described in subsection 2, above, and are presented in
Exhibit II-5, below.
b. Educational Institutions That Train Water Pollution Control
Professionals and Technically Specialized Operators. Of the educa-
-------
3886 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
tional institutions providing sanitary engineering curricula, over 60
percent—
[p. 11-28]
87 institutions—receive EPA grants in support of their sanitary engi-
neering programs. Manpower employed by these educational insti-
tutions consists almost entirely of engineers, scientists, and technicians
who perform activities in teaching, research, curriculum planning,
and advisory consulting to government agencies and consulting
engineering firms. The ratio of technicians to professionals in
this subsector is approximately one or two to one, and the total
number of technicians employed in these 87 institutions is under
1,000; most technicians hold bachelors' degrees and are respon-
sible to collect data and conduct laboratory experiments in research
areas, and few technicians teach. A number of graduate students also
serve as teaching fellows and research fellows, but they are not in-
cluded in the educational water quality manpower inventory because
they are still active students. The current inventory is included in
Exhibit II-3, below.
It is estimated that educational institutions are now operating at
two thirds of their capabilities to produce trained professionals and
that they would be able to produce 50 percent more if the job open-
ings existed to create the educational demand. However, realization
of this capacity would necessitate a complete diversion of current
staff from research to teaching—which is, of course, unrealistic. The
true expansion factor for the production of trained professionals using
only the existing teaching force is therefore something less than 50
percent. For this reason, educational institution manpower in water
quality is expected to experience little change between FY 1971 and
FY 1976, as shown in Exhibit II-4, below. Because personnel work-
ing in wastewater areas in educational institutions are generally in-
volved in research, Exhibit II-5 assumes (conservatively) that they
have no need for further training from sources outside their own
organizations.
c. Manufacturers of Wastewater Analysis and Treatment Equip-
ment and Chemicals. The wastewater equipment and chemical sup-
pliers represent the most diverse groups that employ professional and
technical water pollution control personnel. Services provided by
this group range from turn-key type operations, which provide every-
thing required for a completed treatment facility, to the sale of chem-
icals. The professionals performing the various functions possess all
types of academic backgrounds, and it would be essentially impos-
sible to use a general classification scheme for the entire industry.
However, the largest employers of professional and technical per-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3887
sonnel are the major equipment manufacturers, most of whom appear
to allocate a similar percentage of their effort to their various business
functions regardless of the size of their professional staff.
In the absence of a detailed census of the entire industry, estimates
of the current and projected manpower inventory for these major
manufacturers were derived on the basis of a number of calculations
and assumptions. The ratio of professional (engineers and scientists)
to sales volume—assuming that the majority of engineers and scien-
tists are employed in product engineering, sales, and research and
development activities—and the ratio of technicians to professionals
(2 to 1) were
[p. 11-29]
calculated on the basis of a representative sample of major equipment
manufacturers. On the basis of a 1968 survey of the market for
wastewater treatment equipment6 and the 1971 Water Pollution
Control Federation Yearbook, which lists the majority of the large
equipment manufacturers, it was determined that the total num-
ber of firms handling the majority of equipment sales has changed
very little in the past two or three years, even though the total num-
ber of manufacturing concerns has increased. Finally, past trends in
the proportion of water pollution control expenditures that were al-
located for equipment and projected total expenditures through FY
1976 were combined to provide the basis for the estimated expansion
in manpower needs.
As shown in Exhibit II-3, below, total FY 1971 water-quality-re-
lated manpower employed by major equipment manufacturers totaled
just over 4,000, entirely in the professional and technician categories.
This is a significant increase over the approximately 1,500 figure ex-
perienced in FY 1968. The rate of capital investment is expected to
grow between FY 1972 and 1976, increasing manpower requirements
in this subsector to over 5,000, as shown in Exhibit II-4. However,
it is not anticipated that the demand for environmental specialists will
increase significantly in this segment of the industrial market. In
addition, the industry will not require a significant amount of training
originating outside the individual firms, largely because it employs
personnel with previously established qualifications and provides in-
ternal training as necessary to perform its product engineering, man-
ufacturing, and marketing functions.
d. Consulting Engineers in Design and Operations. Consulting
engineering organizations represent one of the major types of em-
ployers of water pollution control specialists. Water quality per-
sonnel employed by such firms engage in such activities as water
resource planning, preliminary engineering studies, feasibility and
-------
3888 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
economic studies, process selection and evaluation, preparation of
plans and specifications, construction administration, resident engi-
neering supervision, plant start-up and consultation, and monitoring
of systems. In the smaller engineering firms, a staff of two or three
professionals are involved in all of these activities, while larger firms
will be more specialized, with professionals who are involved in only
segments of a project and a senior engineer assigned the task of
coordinating the various phases.
The current manpower inventory of the water pollution control
consulting engineering firms was calculated on the basis of a ratio
between staffing levels and receipts developed from data on 11,000
firms representing approximately 70 percent of the total receipts for
architectural and engineering services. Assuming that these ratios,
calculated
«K. L. Kollar and W. G. Youngwirth, "A Growing Market for Water and Wastewater
Treatment Equipment," Water & Sewage Works, 1970, pp. 319-325.
[p. 11-30]
on 1967 data, remained constant through FY 1976 in a field which
experienced little increase in total manpower, actual and projected
total capital expenditures for 1971 and 1976 were used to calculate
the current total manpower inventory and projected manpower
requirements. These figures are included in Exhibits II-3 and II-4,
respectively.
The majority of both large and small firms are engaged in both
water supply and water pollution control activities. Based upon the
fees received by consulting firms for water-related activities as re-
ported in the 1967 census reports,7 it appears that many of the 5,100
water pollution control specialists listed by the Water Pollution Con-
trol Federation Yearbook in 1967 were devoting much of their
professional efforts toward activities unrelated to water pollution con-
trol. This is further supported by the 1971 WPCF Yearbook, which
reported a total of only 5,600 professionals, although the expenditures
for water pollution control facilities had increased by a factor of 2%
since 1967.
Information provided by the Consulting Engineers Council also
tends to indicate that there has been little change in the number of
professionals employed by consultants engaged in water pollution
control activities since 1967. Instead, there has been a redirection of
effort on the part of water pollution control specialists within these
firms. The majority of the consulting firms contacted have indicated
that an increase in expenditures by a factor of two or even three
would have little impact on their manpower needs. Apparently
significant numbers of personnel were hired by the consulting firms
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3889
during the middle 1960's in anticipation of a boom in water pollution
control expenditures that never materialized. Most of these firms
have maintained the personnel hired during that period but have
until recently assigned them to other professional activities. Now
that the anticipated increase in funds for water pollution control facil-
ities is beginning to materialize, these firms have been able to re-
direct the efforts of these specialists back to water pollution control
activities and apparently have not yet reached full capacity. There-
fore, as shown in the appropriate columns of Exhibits II-3 and II-4,
only a modest increase is expected in the number of professional and
technical personnel employed by water pollution control consulting
firms between FY 1971 and FY 1976. Because the FY 1971 inventory
of manpower was calculated rather than directly counted, it may not
account for personnel who were laid off between 1968 and 1971. For
this reason, the current manpower inventory may be slightly high,
an error which should not affect the FY 1976 manpower projection.8
71967 Census of Business—Selected Services—Architectural and Engineering Firms, U.S.
Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, December 1970.
8 In order to develop a more definitive estimate of the need for consulting engineers in
water pollution control, the Consulting Engineers Council and the American Association of
Professors in Sanitary Engineering are presently conducting a survey of the industry for
EPA. The results of this survey should be available in 1972.
[P. n-3i]
EXHIBIT M-3.—NONGOVERNMENT SECTOR—FY 1971 MANPOWER ENGAGED IN WATER QUALITY ACTIVITIES*
Occupational
category
Professional . . .
Other:
Related blue collar
Administrative
[Subtotal]
Total .
Industrial 1
firms i
3,700
15,400
7,200
4,700
**
**
[4,700]
31,000
iducational
nstitutions
700
1,000
**
**
**
**
1,700
Equipment
manufacturers
2 000
2,300
**
**
**
**
4,300
Consulting
: engineers
6,800
10,000
**
**
**
**
16,800
Total
13200
15400
20,500
4,700
**
**
[4,700]
53,800
•Estimate includes manpower assigned on a part-time basis to water pollution control activities. See
I D.I, above.
**Data unavailable.
[p. 11-32]
-------
3890
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
EXHIBIT 11-4.—NONGOVERNMENT SECTOR—PROJECTED FY 1976 MANPOWER
ENGAGED IN WATER QUALITY ACTIVITIES*
Occupational
category
Professional
Technician
Other:
Maintenance
Related blue collar
[Subtotal]
Total . .
Industrial
firms
12,100
48,700
23,100
15,100
**
**
[15,100]
99 000
Educational
institutions
700
1 000
»*
**
**
**
1 700
Equipment
manufacturers
2 400
2 800
**
**
**
**
5 200
Consulting
engineers
8 200
12 000
**
**
**
**
20 200
Total
23 400
48 700
38 900
**
**
[15 100]
126 100
•Estimate includes manpower assigned on a part-time basis to water pollution control activities. See
II D.I, above.
•"Data unavailable.
[P. n-33]
The need for training in the consulting field will be concentrated in
short courses for update training to keep abreast of technology in
both professional and technical job categories and will represent a
relatively small effort, as illustrated in Exhibit II-5. Since the cur-
rent inventory of personnel in the consulting field is estimated to be
16,800 (Exhibit II-3) and since each of these will require update
training every other year, the training requirement will be sub-
stantial. Further, because of the diverse locations of consultants, the
training will be required at locations throughout the country. It is
desirable that planning activities include provision for training these
employees of consulting firms.
[p. H-34]
EXHIBIT 11-5.—NONGOVERNMENT EMPLOYERS—ESTIMATED FY 1972-1976 ENTRY
AND UPDATE WATER QUALITY TRAINING REQUIREMENTS
[Five-year Total and Average Annual]
Occupational
category
Professional:
Scientist*
[Subtotal]
Operator*
Other:
Maintenance**
Related blue collar
[Subtotal]
Total
Entry personnel
Average annual
5-year need need
14 500
300
[14,800]
41,300
25,800
12 900
[12,900]
94,800
2,900
100
[3,000]
8,300
5,200
2,600
[2,600]
19,100
Personnel for
update training
Average annual
5-year need need
44,000
2,200
[46,200]
80,100
74,000
16,500
[16,500]
217,000
8,800
400
[9,200]
16,000
14,800
3,300
[3,300]
43,300
•To receive update training every second year.
**To receive update training every third year.
[p.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3891
4. The Local Sector
Local agencies—under the authority of either municipal govern-
ments or collective groupings of local governments (such as sanitary
districts or metropolitan district commissions)—are the operators
and maintainers of sewage collection and wastewater treatment facil-
ities. Approximately 13,000 communities in this country have sewer
systems, either with or without wastewater treatment plants; there
are about 12,500 wastewater treatment plants currently in operation.
These facilities range from simple lagoons to advanced tertiary treat-
ment plants.
Water quality manpower at the local level is required to perform
several kinds of activities. In municipal agencies, for example, per-
sonnel who develop, manage, operate, and maintain sewage and storm
water collection and treatment systems engage in many tasks, in-
cluding overall system management, system planning, design, con-
struction inspections, maintenance, and utility billing. These broad
areas involve many detailed subfunctions, such as pumping station
design, operation, and maintenance; combined sewer overflow reg-
ulator facility design, operation, and maintenance; design, operation,
and maintenance of the various types of sewers, drainage channels,
and combined sewer overflow treatment or control facilities; catch
basin construction and maintenance; review of plans and inspection
of construction of sewer connections; enforcement of sewer use and
industrial waste disposal ordinances, including the elimination of
illicit connections; and infiltration control.
Within the local agency, the organization of these functions varies.
Sewage collection system maintenance personnel are often combined
with water distribution personnel because of the similar coverage of
the respective piping networks; on the other hand, wastewater treat-
ment plant operations and maintenance forces are sometimes sep-
arated organizationally because their functions require different skills
or because a municipality or district has centralized all maintenance
functions.
Estimates of current local agency manpower inventories were cal-
culated on the basis of available data; a complete local manpower
census is not yet available. An inventory of all existing wastewater
treatment plants was obtained through the EPA STORET computer
information system. The inventory was stratified by plant capacity,
and the average capacity within each stratum was calculated. Then
the preliminary results of a research effort into actual staffing levels
in wastewater treatment plants was applied to the total number of
plants within each stratum to derive the estimated current manpower
inventory at the local level. The current inventory estimate at the
local level is shown in Exhibit II-6.
-------
3892
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
In addition to overall manpower data, analysis of the STORET in-
formation revealed an important pattern of operator employment at
different sized plants. As indicated by Exhibit II-7, the smaller
plants, those of one million gallons per day or less capacity, serve 10
percent
[p. 11-36]
EXHIBIT 11-6.—LOCAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYERS—FY 1971 WATER QUALITY MANPOWER
INVENTORY AND PROJECTED FY 1976 MANPOWER REQUIREMENTS
Occupational
category
Professional:
[Subtotal]
Operator
Technician
Other:
Maintenance
Related blue collar .
Administrative
[Subtotal]
Total
Wastewater
treatment
1971
1,400
200
, [1,600]
29,700
3,200
2,100
, 9,200
400
. [11,700]
. 46,200
1976
1,800
300
[2,100]
38,600
4,200
2,700
12,000
500
[15,200]
60,100
Sewage
collection
1971
1,600
200
[1,800]
1,200
25,700
[26,900]
28,700
1976
2,000
300
[2,300]
1,600
33,400
[35,000]
37,300
Design and
administration
1971
600
300
[900]
800
100
[100]
1,800
1976
800
400
[1,200]
1,000
200
[200]
2,400
Total
1971
3,600
700
[4,300]
29,700
4,000
3,300
34,900
500
[38,700]
76,700
1976
4,600
1,000
[5,600]
38,600
5,200
4,300
45,400
700
[50,400]
99,800
[p. 11-37]
EXHIBIT II-7
OPERATOR DISTRIBUTION BY PLANT CAPACITY
13 -
12 -
I"'
I 10-
y
3 9-
0)
N
33 8 -
.S
S 7 -
O
is
u
'S 5 -
| 4 -
•a 3 -
2
o
H 2 -
1 -
5.4
0.7
1 V
12.3
4.3
X
3.9
6.0
X
2.4
6.7
X
1.7
8.9
X
46.6 _
X
32.5
X
21.4
17.2 18^8 X
10.9 13^' X ^__^
g
c
C
-90 g
n
-80 |
(H
-70 B.
-60 °
JS
-50 |
-40 |>
-30 |
-20
- 10
3.0 5.0 10.0 20.0 35.0 50.0 65.0
CAPACITY OF PLAN (mgd)
80.0 100.0 ?100.0
[p. IMS]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3893
of the total population tied into sewer systems and employ an esti-
mated 60 percent of all operators. At the other end of the spectrum
are large plants, those with a capacity of 100 mgd or more, which
employ about 5 percent of the operators and serve 30 percent of
the population using sewer systems.
Projections of future local agency manpower needs were derived
from initial returns of a questionnaire administered to local water
quality agencies by the Department of Labor. The projected FY 1976
manpower requirements should increase by approximately 30 percent
between FY 1971 and 1976 in all categories.
Calculated training needs—which include the training load caused
by newly created jobs, replacements for turnover, and requirements
for new skills—are presented in Exhibit II-8. The estimated entry
training needs were calculated on the basis of a 5 percent turnover
rate, which is particularly low for the local sector. Field research
in municipal wastewater treatment plants indicated that turnover
runs particularly high at the local level, and as high as 50 percent
or more in new facilities. Although top supervision is usually
brought in to the new plant from another location, the plant must be
staffed locally. Because the plant must be brought on line quickly
and because there is no excess supply of trained wastewater treat-
ment workers, plant supervisors must hire any interested local
personnel and train them rapidly. The new plants become opera-
tional under the guidance of the designers and engineering consultant
to ensure their effectiveness, but usually a short time after the plant
is turned over to its own operating force, a number of employees
leave their jobs. In many cases this is because inexperienced person-
nel had to be hired who had no previous exposure to the realities of
wastewater treatment; in other cases it is a result of misunderstand-
ings regarding required working hours (rotating shifts, 24 hour "on-
call" responsibility, and so on), pay, and other characteristics of the
job. Although employee tenure rises markedly after the first year,
with turnover in some cases falling almost to zero, the rapid expan-
sion of the total number of treatment facilities suggests that training
requirements caused by the need to replace turnover positions are
greater than indicated by use of the 5 percent turnover rate.
[p. n-39]
-------
3894 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
EXHIBIT M-8.—LOCAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYERS—ESTIMATED FY 1972-1976 ENTRY
AND UPDATE WATER QUALITY TRAINING REQUIREMENTS
[Five-year Total and Average Annual]
Occupational
category
Professional:
Engineer
Scientist
[Subtotal]
Operator
Technician
Other:
Maintenance
Related blue collar
Administrative
[Subtotal]
Total
Entry personnel
5-year need
2 000
500
[2 500]
17400
2 400
2,000
[2 000]
24 300
Average annual
need
400
100
[500]
3,500
500
400
[400]
4,900
Personnel for
update training
5-year need
10,300
2,100
[12,400]
85,300
11,500
6,300
[6,300]
115,500
Average annual
need
2,100
400
[2,500]
17,100
2,300
1,300
[1,300]
23,200
[p. 11-40]
5. The State Sector
Water pollution prevention, abatement, and control activities of
the states are the focal points for the effective accomplishment of
national goals and priorities in water quality. Because of their
critical role and the scope of their responsibilities, the functions of
the State agencies cover all activities necessary to ensure the protec-
tion of water quality within the State. These activities parallel and
expand upon the activities of the Environmental Protection Agency
as necessary to conduct a systematic program within the State.
Typical State water pollution control activities include:
Planning of State policies and programs.
Standard setting, surveillance, and enforcement.
Regulation of facilities installation and operation (including
waste discharge permit issuance, engineering reviews, facility
certification, inspection, grants administration, and certification
and/or training of operators. This activity normally does not
include actual management or operation of waste treatment
facilities).
Analysis of wastewater treatment facility needs, and establish-
ment of priorities and schedules.
Research and development as appropriate to the particular
problems and needs of each state.
Organization to accomplish these functions within the states ranges
from centralized water pollution control agencies to a diffusion of
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3895
responsibilities among several State agencies operating with relatively
unstructured coordination. Because of the nature of the State role
with regard to water pollution control, State water quality agencies
tend to require a higher proportion of professional personnel than are
needed at the local level.
Current water quality staffing at the State level was determined
on the basis of the State Program Grant Applications 9 for FY 1971.
Where available, appropriate sections of the FY 1972 grant applications
were reviewed to determine whether significant changes in staffing
levels had occurred or were anticipated. Concurrently, a manpower
model10 developed by the Office of State and Interstate Programs for
issuance as guidance to the states for preparation of plans, was applied
to the 1971 inventory
• State Program Grant Applications are submitted to EPA by the states pursuant to Section
7 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
10 W. H. Hager, Guidelines JOT Estimating Personnel Requirements for State Water Quality
Control Agencies, Environmental Protection Agency, December 1970.
[P. n-41]
estimate. This model uses the program authority, functions, and
activities of each State as reflected in its plan, and, without reference
to existing staffing levels, it applies work-load factors to establish
gross man-year estimates for each major function. The figures
obtained in this way represent the man-loading considered to be
essential to the maintenance of an effective program.
The review of the 1971 State staffing plans yielded a current total
of 2,936 full-time equivalent positions covered by actual positions.
The calculations from the model generated a current need for 8,333
full-time equivalent positions (which cannot be translated into actual
positions). Although the need represented by the difference be-
tween 8,333 and 2,936 positions is current, practical considerations
prevent immediate acquisition of personnel to satisfy needs because
the required staffing is approximately 2.5 times the current levels.
The ratio of actual State manpower to manpower requirements as
projected by the model is are not uniform from state to state, some
states having 20 percent or less than the amount of full-time equiva-
lent manpower necessary to perform current functions. The nine
states with the greatest combined need appear to have only 30 percent
of the manpower needed to perform required functions, while the
nine states with the smallest combined needs appear to have man-
power equal to 255 percent of the needs. Because FY 1976 man-
power projections from the states were not available, the manpower
estimate derived from the model was used for the purposes of this
report to represent a reasonable goal for 1976 staffing.
The current manpower inventory and 1976 manpower projection
-------
3896 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
for State agency manpower requirements are shown in Exhibit II-9.
It must be emphasized that both of these figures represent man-years
actually applied toward and needed for performing required func-
tions, not positions to be filled, and therefore should be viewed as
estimates of full-time equivalent staffing. In addition, both of these
estimates rest on the assumptions that the current estimate of overall
occupational mix, as calculated from the State grant applications, is
accurate and that major changes in the required occupational mix
will not occur during the five-year manpower projection period.
On the basis of the projected manpower increase that will be
required at the State level between FY 1971 and 1976, estimated entry
and proficiency water quality training requirements were calculated,
as shown in Exhibit 11-10. It is particularly important, of course, for
the states' personnel to receive the necessary training because of their
role in surveillance, enforcement, and—potentially—troubleshooting
the operation of substandard treatment plants. Competent personnel
at the State level, to be produced largely through short-course train-
ing involving surveillance methods and technology updates, will be
relied upon to maintain satisfactory national water quality.
[p. 11-42]
EXHIBIT 11-9.—STATE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYERS—FY 1971 WATER QUALITY MANPOWER INVENTORY AND
PROJECTED FY 1976 MANPOWER REQUIREMENTS
Occupational category
Professional:
Engineer
Scientist
Fiscal year
1971 staffing
1,500
gOO
Fiscal year
1976 projection
3,900
1 600
Subtotal 2,100 5,500
Operator
Technician 300 700
Other:
Maintenance
Related blue collar 100
Administrative 1,200 2,000
Subtotal 1,200 2,100
Total 3,600 8,300
[p. 11-43]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
EXHIBIT 11-10.—STATE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYERS—ESTIMATED FY 1972-1976 ENTRY
AND UPDATE WATER QUALITY TRAINING REQUIREMENTS
[Five-year Total and Average Annual]
3897
Occupational category
Professional:
Scientist
Subtotal
Other:
Subtotal
Total
Entry
5-year need
2,600
1,300
3,900
500
1,200
1,200
5,600
personnel
Average annual
need
500
300
800
100
200
200 ... .
1,100
Personnel for
update training
5-year need
6,000
3,000
9,000
1,300
10,300
Average annual
need
1,200
600
1,800
300
2,100
[p. n-44]
6. Federal Sector, non-EPA
A significant number of Federal agencies, bureaus, and depart-
ments have primary and secondary missions, tasks, and functions that
are directly or indirectly related to the water quality effort of the
Environmental Protection Agency. The water pollution control
functions in which these agencies engage are indicated in Exhibit
11-11. In addition, Executive Order 11507 requires all Federal
organizations to be exemplary in the abatement and control of water
pollution arising from their respective facilities.
Because of the wide variety of missions among these Federal
organizations, Federal water pollution control activities are con-
ducted in or impact upon every State, territory, and possession.
Specifically, water quality personnel in such agencies perform a
broad spectrum of pollution control functions, including policy formu-
lation, development of quality standards, monitoring and surveillance,
research, hygiene, training, design, construction of facilities, and
operation and maintenance of water supplies, sewage collection sys-
tems, and wastewater treatment plants. These agencies operate and
maintain a total of 9,320 wastewater treatment facilities, ranging in
capacity from under 1,000 to over one million gallons per day. (A
summary of Federal wastewater treatment facilities by size and type
is included in Appendix B.) Most Federal treatment facilities are
for primary or secondary treatment of sanitary wastes, and nearly
200 plants provide tertiary treatment.
According to the results of a July 1971 EPA (Office of Water
Programs) survey of 40 Federal agencies, bureaus, and departments,
24 were identified as currently employing personnel who devote 25
percent or more of their time to water pollution control activities.
-------
3898 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
On the basis of a 100 percent response, it appears that a total of almost
13,000 personnel are currently employed by Federal agencies outside
of EPA to perform water quality functions. As shown in Exhibit
11-12, this employment is projected to approach 16,000 by 1976—
an increase of over 25 percent. This figure is probably conservative
in that it represents projected employment, rather than needs.
Operators make up the largest employment category in the Federal,
non-EPA water quality work force, and they are expected to con-
tinue to do so in FY 1976. The operator category is projected to
experience the greatest rate of growth (approximately 36 percent)
during the FY 1972-1976 period, with the increase in engineers fol-
lowing closely (35 percent).
The survey data indicate that employment varies considerably
among the non-EPA Federal organizations, with current water pollu-
tion control personnel ranging from one to more than 3,700. Pro-
jected FY 1976 agency manpower requirements range from one to
more than 4,100. Seventeen of the 24 agencies reporting manpower
requirements indicated that their needs would increase between
FY 1971 and FY 1976, while the others remain relatively constant.
[p. H-451
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3899
§
d
Z
O
o
z
0
§
D.
£
5
I x
K Z
1 i
X O
z
s
I
1
0-
O
^
IT
tli
a
£
1
QC
0)
„ |
EY: X = Function Perfonn
0 — Organizational Co
a
uoijounj
ON
uoijBjinsuoo
uoi)Euiwassi(]
UOIJBUJJOJUI
8UIUIBJ1
UOIIEAJ8SUOO
swajs
"«
"•
O
O
o
o
o
o
0
0
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
0
o
0
o
0)
1
a
o
I
a.
o
o
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Army Commands
x
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
CO
z
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
o>
Si
s.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
u
&
o
V)
o
u
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
x
epartment of Agriculture
a
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
a>
u
a>
I
bO
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
x
X
x
o
o
0)
0)
£
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
0
o
o
0
0
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
epartment of Commerce
a
x
x
X
Maritime Adm.
x
X
X
X
Nat. Oceanic & Atmos.
x
Nat. Bureau of Standards
x
x
X
X
£
Vt
-------
3900
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
tontinuec
I
UJ
u.
g
h-
Z
O
o
o
s
1 £
& <
H
1 -
-* tf)
i 1
3 z
£
^
0
1
3
o
Q
•o
I
£
1
C
1 1
I1 1 x = Function Perfo
0 = Organizational
g
uoijaunj
ON
uoiminiuo3
uojjeujuiassiQ
UOIlBAJdSUOl
ja/was mo
suia)sA"s X|ddns
jajeM mo
^uaui^eajl
3}se/v\ mo
UOI}B|'B)SU|
S 'JISUOQ
5 U3IS9Q
8ua|8A-H
}UaiUdO|3A9(]
spoqjaw
UOJ59S9W
SJUBJ3
SPEJJUOQ
5 juauajnoojd
jusmaojojua
SUOIJB3IJS3AUI
* ''auiJojTuow
8u'7iM
1 Suisuson
'suoi}E|n33y
)U3UldO|3A3Q
spjepuB)s
enuijo
A3!|0d
leral Activities
£
x
X
1
M
1
i
X
X
i
z
z
v>
£
UJ
z
O
O
o
o
o
0
o
o
0
o
o
0
0
0
o
0
o
o
S
partment of the Inter
S
x
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
e
i
e
ra
1
X
x
x
X
X
X
X
X
Land Management
x
x
x
x
x
X
VI
I
X
X
X
X
X
X
c/)
s
a.
i
X
X
X
x
X
X
Reclamation
x
X
Sport Fish & Wildlife
x
X
X
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
X
Geological Survey
o
0
o
o
o
o
0
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
0
0
o
o
o
0
partment of Justice
Q
X
x
Prisons
x
x
=.
X
1
•K
£
x
lithsonian Institute
5
x
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
nnessee Valley Auth.
.2
o
o
o
o
o
0
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
0
o
pt of Transportation
Q
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3901
I
•o
<
8
£
-------
3902 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
EXHIBIT 11-12.—NON-EPA FEDERAL SECTOR—FY 1971 AND PROJECTED FY 1976
MANPOWER ENGAGED IN WATER QUALITY ACTIVITIES
Occupational category
Professional:
Engineer
Scientist
Subtotal
Technician
Other:
Maintenance
Related blue collar
Administrative
Subtotal
Total
Fiscal year
1971 staffing
2,300
2,300
4,600
4,200
1,600
800
1,100
1,900
12 500
Fiscal year
1976 projections
3,200
2 700
5,900
5,600
2,000
900
1 400
2,300
15 800
[p. H-4V]
On the basis of a consensus of the reporting from other Federal
agencies, EPA derived estimates of the frequency with which water
quality personnel employed by those agencies should ideally receive
update training to ensure that they are aware of the most current
technological advancements. The projected training needs of these
agencies, on the basis of their own manpower projections and fre-
quency-of-training consensus, is presented in Exhibit 11-13 in terms
of the total five-year need and the average annual need. Because
these activities also provided information regarding the number of
personnel planned to receive training in FY 1976, the non-EPA
agencies' FY 1976 training needs were also calculated by the above
method. Comparison of the stated training plans and calculated
training needs, as in Exhibit 11-14, indicated that even though the
agencies had not expressed their training projections by type of
training (entry, upgrade, and update), their plans would reach far
fewer employees than might legitimately benefit from receiving water
pollution control training during FY 1976. The gap between training
needs and training plans would be even greater were the total FY
1972-1976 period to be examined in this way. The agencies' training
plans to show inclusion of water quality training in the plans of 16
of the 24 non-EPA Federal water quality employers, and it is promis-
ing to note that a 50 percent increase in training volume is anticipated.
[p. 11-48]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3903
EXHIBIT 11-13.—NON-EPA FEDERAL SECTOR—ESTIMATED FY 1972-1976 ENTRY AND UPDATE
WATER QUALITY TRAINING REQUIREMENTS
[Five-Year Total and Average Annual]
Entry personnel
Occupational category
Professional:
Engineer
Scientist
Subtotal
Other:
Maintenance
Related blue collar ....
Administrative
Subtotal
Total
5-Year need
1,600
1,000
2,600
2,600
700
300
300
6,200
Average annual need
320
200
520
520
140
60
60
1,240
Personnel for update training
5-Year need
6,900
6,300
13,200
12,300
4,800
1,400
1,400
31,700
Average annual need
1,380
1,260
2,640
2,460
960
280
280
6,340
[p. 11-49]
EXHIBIT 11-14.—NON-EPA FEDERAL SECTOR—COMPARISON OF FY 1976 WATER QUALITY
TRAINING PLANS AND ESTIMATED NEEDS
Occupational category
Professional:
Scientist
Subtotal
Technician
Total number
year 1971
300
200
500
500
200
Total number to be
year 1976
320
200
520
520
140
Calculated annu;
Entry
400
100
500
500
100
)l training needs
Update
1,380
1,260
2,640
2,460
960
Other:
Maintenance
Related blue collar
Administrative
100
60
100
280
Subtotal .
Total
100
60
100
280
1,300
1,240
1,200
6,340
[p. 11-^50]
7. Environmental Protection Agency
The Environmental Protection Agency is the lead agency in the
Federal Government's program of water pollution research, abate-
ment, and control. The Office of Water Programs of EPA is respon-
sible for ensuring a coordinated and effective Federal effort to protect
and enhance the quality of the nation's water resources. Because the
role of EPA in water quality requires a variety of financial adminis-
tration, research, standard-setting, surveillance and enforcement,
technical assistance, manpower development, and planning activities,
its current water quality manpower inventory is comprised largely
of technicians, scientists, engineers, management, and administrative/
-------
3904
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
clerical personnel. As shown in Exhibit 11-15, the current (FY 1971)
manpower inventory is projected to increase by over 50 percent, to
4,200, by 1976 as a result of current EPA program plans. Exhibit
11-16 projects the estimated FY 1972-1976 update training require-
ments that will be created by such rapid growth in the EPA water
quality program.
[p. 11-51]
EXHIBIT 11-15.—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY—FY 1971 AND PROJECTED FY 1971
AND PROJECTED FY 1976 MANPOWER ENGAGED IN WATER QUALITY ACTIVITIES
Occupational category
Professional:
Engineer
Scientist
Subtotal
Operator
Technician
Other:
Maintenance
Related blue collar
Administrative ,
Subtotal
Total
Fiscal year
1971 staffing
600
600
1,200
300
1,300
, . 1,300
2,800
Fiscal year
1976 projections
900
900
1 800
450
1,950
1950
4200
[p. 11-52]
EXHIBIT 11-16.—ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY—ESTIMATED FY 1972-1976 ENTRY
AND UPDATE WATER QUALITY TRAINING REQUIREMENTS
[Five-year total and average annual]
Entry personnel
Occupational category
Professional:
Scientist
Subtotal
Technician
5-Year need
400
400
800
200
Average annual need
80
80
160
40
Personnel
5-Year need
1,900
1,900
3,800
1,000
for update training
Average annual need
380
380
760
200
Other:
Maintenance
Related blue collar
Administrative
Subtotal
900
180
900
180
Total
1,900
380
4,800
960
[p. II-53]
8. Summary of Future Water Quality Manpower and Training Needs
As illustrated in Exhibits 11-17 and 11-18, which present composite
estimates of current and future manpower needs by occupational
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3905
category for all sectors, total water quality manpower requirements are
projected to rise by FY 1976 to more than 170 percent of FY 1971
levels. Comparable increases will be experienced in all job cate-
gories, with the greatest numbers of people to be needed in the
Operator and Other categories, assuming that current technology and
management concepts remain the same. Exhibit 11-19 portrays
graphically the wastewater manpower mix anticipated for the period.
There are, however, several factors which might affect both the
occupational mix and the skill requirements that will characterize
the expanded wastewater work force. The following subsections of
this part of the report discuss the factors likely to modify the man-
power and training needs during the five-year projection period,
comment upon the manpower and training needs that appear to exist
for that period, and identify the apparent focal point for future
manpower development efforts in water pollution control.
a. Factors Likely to Modify Manpower and Training Projections.—
The most significant factors which should be considered in interpret-
ing future manpower and training needs include:
Rapidly developing technological advances.
Tendencies to build larger treatment facilities.
Initiation of regional and basin planning for water pollution
control.
Requirement for increased reliability in treatment plant
operations.
Technological developments have affected all sectors and all occupa-
tional categories markedly in recent years and will continue to do so
through the FY 1976 projection period. In the industrial component
of the nongovernment sector, for example, new manufacturing proc-
esses and techniques will pose numerous highly specialized waste-
water treatment problems to complicate the already difficult problem
of analyzing and treating industrial pollutants. It is possible that
those responsible for the control and treatment of industrial waste-
water will be forced to advance the state of the art in order to respond
to governmental water quality standards and to public pressures for
a clean environment. The technology of industrial wastewater treat-
ment could therefore change very rapidly and drastically and could
present the most dynamic manpower and training challenge.
[p. 11-54]
-------
3906 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
EXHIBIT 11-17.—TOTAL FY 1971 MANPOWER ENGAGED IN WATER QUALITY ACTIVITIES
Occupational category
Professional .
Operator .
Technician
Other
Total
Non-Government
13200
15,400
20,500
4,700
53,800
Local
4,300
29 700
4,000
38,700
76,700
State
2,100
300
1,200
3,600
Federal
(non-EPA)
4,600
4 200
1,800
1,900
12,500
EPA
1,200
300
1,300
2,800
Total
25,400
49,300
26,900
47,800
149,400
[p. 11-55]
EXHIBIT 11-18.— TOTAL PROJECTED FY 1976 MANPOWER ENGAGED IN WATER QUALITY ACTIVITIES
Occupational category
Professional
Operator .
Technician
Other
Total
Non-Government
23,400
48,700
38,900
15,100
126,100
Local
5,600
38,600 . .
5,200
50,400
99,800
State
5,500
700
2,100
8,300
Federal
(non-EPA)
5,900
. . . 5 600
2,000
2,300
15,800
EPA
1,800
500
1,900
4,200
Total
42,200
92,900
47,300
71,800
254,200
[p. 11-56]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3907
EXHIBIT 11-19
" THE MANPOWER MIX
FY 1971 and 1976
1976 » 254,200
PROFESSIONAL
[p. 11-57]
At the local government level, automation of plants and/or more
widespread instrumentation of sewer collection systems could
significantly change the role of the operator from that of performing
certain activities to one of monitoring a number of mechanical,
electronic, and information processing activities. The design of
technological advances into new facilities may cause a more rapid
increase in the numbers of operators and maintenance craftsmen
required and a less rapid increase in unskilled labor. A heavier
-------
3908 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
complement of electronics and computer technicians will be needed,
as well as a larger investment in repair equipment and preventive
maintenance for increasingly sophisticated instrumentation. In addi-
tion, more extensive use of automated chemical analysis equipment
will facilitate control of plant operations, requiring more specialized
and sophisticated technicians in the areas of chemical analysis and
instrumentation. It is also inevitable that the upgrading of plants to
secondary and tertiary treatment levels will increase operator
specialization and, thus, training requirements. Finally, demands for
increased reliability in wastewater treatment may require round-the-
clock operations, substantially increasing the demand for trained
personnel.
Developments in surveillance technology could affect State-level
operation, i by introducing automated sampling and chemical analysis,
altering tie nature of the surveillance/enforcement function. Con-
current upgrading of skill levels of personnel at the State levels would
be required to introduce specialists in electronics, statistical sampling
procedurts, remote reading, instrumentation, and so on. State per-
sonnel wcoild need an increasingly sophisticated background against
which to assess and monitor the increasingly sophisticated operations
of wastewater treatment facilities.
The Environmental Protection Agency itself may become more
involved in the management aspects of wastewater treatment plant
operations at the local level and the operations of surveillance pro-
grams by State agencies because it is a central source of information
on activities in all of the municipalities and states. The agency will
be in a position to develop increasingly sophisticated management
concepts and to disseminate them, both through direct training and
through the information channels of the water quality manpower
planning system.
[p. 11-58]
The ultimate effect of technological development on the future
manpower requirements in wastewater treatment will be an increase
in technical specialization and an upgrading of entry requirements in
all sectors and all occupational categories. In turn, this will un-
doubtedly increase training requirements. It is also possible that
new functions or job categories will emerge and that new principles
of manpower utilization will affect the manpower mix in as yet
undefined ways.
As wastewater treatment plant construction increases, economies
in capital investment and operations will be sought through increases
in the size of treatment facilities. The immediate impacts of such a
tendency will be an increase in the number of personnel employed in
large plants, increased specialization of workers (especially operators
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3909
and technicians), and vastly more complicated management problems
with regard to preventive maintenance, determination of staffing
needs, manpower utilization, standards determination, and so on.
Regional and basin planning concepts are just beginning to be
implemented, with full EPA support and encouragement. Such new
management and planning concepts involve the creation of agencies
which may conduct both planning and surveillance on an interstate
basis. Although these concepts will not involve large numbers of
people, they will probably require a heavier component of professional
personnel and may require coordination with land use planners,
forestry administrators, agricultural specialists, housing developers,
zoning authorities, and so on. Regional and basin planning will rely
upon interdisciplinary cooperation to further the accomplishment of
Federal water quality standards.
It is likely that public demands will require more reliability in the
treatment of wastewater. Currently sewage bypasses caused by plant
downtime are a major contributor to the fouling of watercourses.
One way to improve reliability is to schedule around-the-clock opera-
tion of treatment plants. If significant numbers of plants adopt this
policy, it will result in a substantial increase in the requirement for
manpower and training.
In addition to these four major factors which impact upon any
numerical projections of manpower and training requirements, a
number of other influences will affect future growth, including:
Future policy decisions regarding enforcement of water quality
standards on both industry and public facilities. If more strin-
gent legislative standards are enacted, it would increase industrial
water quality manpower requirements and create a more severe
training need in both the local and industrial sectors. In addi-
tion, increased numbers of trained surveillance and enforcement
personnel would be needed in each State or basin area.
[p. 11-59]
Levels of appropriations made available for construction of
municipal wastewater treatment facilities. Needless to say, if
the rate of capital investment in wastewater processing were to
decrease, water quality manpower requirements would decrease
accordingly.
Economic incentives for private industry to control water
pollution. Again, if such incentives are provided (over and
above the compulsory surveillance and enforcement pressures),
industrial water pollution control manpower requirements
could be expected to rise, and industry might be expected to
contribute significantly to the effort to develop means of treating
its waste products.
-------
3910 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Levels of appropriations for Federal and State regulatory and
technical assistance staffs. Clearly, if the decision is made to
enforce water quality standards but no funding is available for
regulatory staff personnel or for provision of technical assistance
to those municipalities or industries striving to comply, the
momentum of facility construction and methods development
will lag.
Ability of the construction industry to respond to higher de-
mands for treatment facilities.
Although it is not possible at this time to determine the quantitative
impact of these factors, many of which are of uncertain probability, on
the preliminary manpower and training projections provided above,
they must be considered in identifying probable future manpower
and training gaps. Further, it is reasonable to expect that these
factors will have substantial effects on the manpower utilization and
employment practices and patterns of practically all water pollution
control employers. As these factors become manifest to the employers
and employers obtain a better view of what is to be done and how
it is to be done, they will undoubtedly be acting to:
Change recruiting practices.
Change employment qualifications.
Modify employee mix.
Modify training requirements.
b. Manpower and Training Problems in Various Occupational
Categories. In light of the previous discussion, on the basis of a
projection of current trends regarding training needs—as portrayed
in Exhibit 11-20 at the end of this subsection—and in consideration
of the most probable future developments in wastewater technology,
management, funding, and administration, a number of manpower
and training problems appear to exist. They are discussed below in
terms of the manpower supply and demand and the depth of required
training.
[p. 11-60]
EXHIBIT 11-20.—TOTAL ESTIMATED ft 1972-1976 ENTRY AND UPDATE WATER QUALITY
TRAINING REQUIREMENTS
A. Entry Training
A/erage annual load
Occupational category
Professional
Operator
Other
Total
Non-Government
2,960
8,260
5,160
2,580
18,960
Local
500
3,480 . .
480
400
4,860
State
880
100
980
Federal
(non-EPA)
520
520 ...
140
60
1,240
EPA
160
40
180
380
Total
5,020
12,260
5,920
3,220
26,420
[p. 11-61]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3911
EXHIBIT 11-20.—(Continued)
B. Update Training
Average annual load
Occupational category
Professional ....
Operator
Technician .
Other
Total
Non-Government
9,140
16,020
14,860
3,280
43,300
Local
2,480
17,080 , .
2,300
1,260
23,120
State
1,920
260
2,180
Federal
(non-EPA)
2,640
. . 2 460 .
960
280
6,340
EPA
760
200
960
Total
16,940
. 35 560
18,580
4 820
75,900
[P. n-62]
(i) Professionals
The professional category includes personnel with both engineering
and scientific backgrounds. In water pollution control, the profes-
sionals' professional is the sanitary engineer. EPA believes that
many of the new professional positions can best be filled by sanitary
engineers, particularly in view of the increasing technological
sophistication of water pollution control. Therefore, the supply
should be increased.
At the same time, EPA recognizes that many new professional
positions will be filled by those trained in disciplines other than
sanitary engineering. Likewise, many existing positions will con-
tinue to be filled by those trained in other disciplines. This points
up the desirability of planning and delivering update and upgrade
training for these professionals as well. For those already in the water
pollution field, this would be training to broaden and sharpen their
skills. For those initially entering the water pollution field, this
would be specialized water pollution training which, when added
to their basic engineering or scientific skills, would enable them to
function effectively and efficiently in water pollution occupations.
Many engineers and scientists in water pollution control function
as administrators as well as technical specialists. Currently very few
engineers and scientists exist who are knowledgeable and experienced
in the field of wastewater equipment maintenance management, com-
munity relations, negotiation of industrial wastewater processes and
charges, and management of a highly varied and uniquely skilled
manpower population, all of which are required at the management
level. Specific training will be required to provide these skills and
build the managerial confidence and competence necessary to deal
creatively with the problems of an ever-changing operational
environment.
(ii) Operators
As stated in Section A of this part of the report, experienced
operators are rarely available on the job market, largely because of
-------
3912 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
the unique and specialized nature of their responsibilities. Few of
the skills have counterparts in other segments of our economic system,
yet the job is critical to any effort to attain satisfactory treatment of
[p. 11-63]
wastewater. The current supply of trained operators is barely ade-
quate for current operations, and the only manpower pool is currently
employed in the wastewater field. Therefore, the future supply of
operators must be created at a faster rate than the demand is growing
in order to simultaneously meet past deficiencies, and satisfy future
needs and account for turnover. Large quantities of update as well
as entry training are required. Operators represent a serious prob-
lem, both in terms of manpower and training requirements.
(iii) Technicians
An increasing number of technical positions in the wastewater
field will require personnel with associate or bachelor of science
degrees, often with specialization in laboratory analysis, computer
applications, or electronic systems. The projected high demand for
various technicians in the projection period may become more urgent
as technological developments increase the sophistication of sewage
collection and wastewater processing systems. Further, the growing
specialization of wastewater treatment processes is increasing the
proportion of technicians of various types of professionals (engineers
and scientists) as facilities attempt to reduce their manpower needs
by improving manpower utilization. A substantial amount of update
training is also required.
(iv) Other categories
Among the "Other" categories, the maintenance function probably
presents the biggest problem. Although there is a significant supply
of skilled craftsmen whose skills might be directly applicable to waste-
water maintenance problems, future manpower projections indicate
a rapidly growing need for more specialized and higher skilled
maintenance personnel as a greater number of larger, more sophisti-
cated wastewater treatment facilities are constructed and begin
operations. The critical need for improved maintenance in municipal
treatment plants was highlighted in a 1970 Report of the Comptroller
General to Congress and will become even more pressing in future
years. Although update training requirements for maintenance
personnel may not occur as frequently as for other occupational
categories, wastewater employers may face some difficulties in re-
cruiting and providing entry training to a sufficient number of such
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3913
craftsmen to meet the need that is anticipated between now and
FY 1976.
[p. 11-64]
Because no specialized water quality training is required to per-
form administrative and clerical functions in a water pollution control
agency, there appears to be neither a supply/demand imbalance nor
an anticipated training gap in the five-year projection period.
Similarly, there are generally no educational or experience require-
ments for related blue-collar workers and no specialized training is
required, so there appears to be neither a supply/demand imbalance
nor an anticipated training gap for this group in the five-year projec-
tion period.
[p. 11-65]
c. Focal Point for Future Manpower Development Efforts in Water
Pollution Control. Clearly, on the basis of Exhibits 11-18, 11-19,
and 11-20, and the previous discussion, the greatest manpower need
in terms of quantity will be in the operator and technician categories
and the greatest training need will affect operators, technicians, and
engineers. At the same time, the most rapid manpower growth is
projected to occur in the local and nongovernment sectors. These
projections indicate that the fastest growing activities will be plant
construction/operation/maintenance in municipalities and industrial
firms, accompanied by an increase (although less rapid) in State
planning/surveillance/monitoring of installation and operations and
EPA grant administration and technical assistance related to opera-
tions. Undoubtedly, the bulk of the training will be operator-
oriented. However, just as critical, if smaller in quantity of workers
affected, is the need to produce additional sanitary engineers. Of
equally critical nature is the need to update present professionals
and to provide specialized water pollution training to professionals
entering the field with a basic engineering or scientific background
but without adequate preparation in water pollution control.
[p. 11-66]
E. CONCLUSIONS REGARDING PLANNING FOR MANPOWER
AND TRAINING NEEDS
The goals of the water pollution manpower development system
are:
(i) To have manpower available in the needed numbers, with
the requisite skills, at the proper times and proper places.
(ii) To use available manpower effectively and efficiently.
Because of the magnitude and complexities of the industry, a care-
fully designed manpower planning system is necessary to meet these
goals. Such a system has been conceived and partially implemented
by EPA. It is an intergovernmental and interagency system and in-
-------
3914 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
eludes both public and private employers, with the states being
pivotal. Basically the system consists of two components:
Forecasting (as authorized by subsection 5(g) (2) of the
Water Pollution Control Act).
Action Planning.
When in full operation, the forecasting component will project
water pollution control manpower requirements and entry, update,
and upgrade training needs by occupation on a national, State, and
labor market basis. Presently, as the system conceptualizer and
coordinator, EPA is well along in the process of developing the tools
and base data for the waste treatment plant portion of the system.
EPA has also recently begun preparing for training of the personnel
who will implement the system.
The action planning portion of the system produces a variety of
action plans at all levels. These are plans to fulfill the manpower
and training requirements in accordance with the forecasts and to
ensure effective manpower recruitment, retention, utilization, and
personal satisfaction. Action plans are of two basic types:
Plans for recruitment, retention, and utilization programs.
Plans for training programs.
EPA provides technical assistance to others in action planning in
addition to developing its own action plans to fill in the gaps left after
actions planned by others are accounted for.
[p. 11-67]
The planning program development to date has been accomplished
on a very limited budget; many of the efforts to date have been
awkward because they had to be "piggybacked" onto other DOL and
EPA programs. However, since the program is now conceptualized
and the basic tools are in process, the program can soon be installed
in the field. Manpower planning is a new function for most State
and local governments, and these units presently have a very limited
capacity to conduct such planning. Full implementation will require
a higher level of expenditure since the states and localities will re-
quire substantial technical assistance and training to accomplish
their planning responsibilities. This requirement for additional tech-
nical assistance is reflected in the EPA FY 1972 budget.
Pending the completion of the implementation of the water pollu-
tion control manpower planning system, EPA has developed by
means of a variety of techniques an interim estimate of the current
manpower inventory and five-year sector-by-sector forecasts of man-
power and training needs for the major manpower categories (pro-
fessional, technical, operator, and others).
These forecasts are based on data that are subject to a number of
qualifications. However, EPA places high confidence in these figures
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3915
as indicators of the order of magnitude of manpower and training
needs.
Forecasts indicate that the needs for additional professionals over
the next five years will be about—25,000 entry positions over five
years. This indicates a need for the universities to continue to
produce these professionals. These professionals fall into two broad
categories: sanitary engineers who are trained as water pollution
control specialists and other professionals who have basic scientific
and engineering skills but require additional specialized water pollu-
tion control training to function effectively in the field.
Experts in the field point to a need for increasing the portion of
sanitary engineers, thus pointing up the need for increased production
of this group. There is also a critical need for the specialized water
pollution control training necessary to make fully effective producers
of the general group of professionals. In addition, there is an esti-
mated need for technical update training—17,000 trainees being the
estimated annual load over the five-year period. Further, there is a
need for management training for those many professionals who have
assumed administrative duties in addition to their technical respon-
sibilities, but who have never received training in the sophisticated
management techniques they must apply.
[p. IMS]
The requirement for new technicians is moderate, approximately
30,000 new entry-level positions in five years. However, due to the
increasing technological complexity of the field, there is a general
requirement to upgrade the formal educational background of the
technicians. More and more technicians will be requiring at least
one year, and many two years, of college level preparation. Further,
particularly for those technicians already on the job but under-
educated, there will be a need for update training, 18,500 trainees
being the estimated average annual load.
Perhaps the most critical need is for additional operators and
operator training. As has been pointed out by EPA, the General
Accounting Office and others who have examined the situation,
undermanned plants and undertrained manpower are a major jeop-
ardy to the entire control program and the large capital investment
that has been made in facilities. In the next five years, it is estimated
that 41,000 entry-level positions in private industry and 20,000 in
public agencies will need filling. There are almost no trained but
unemployed operators so that essentially the entire requirement
must be produced from scratch. Likewise, the need for update train-
ing of the existing force is estimated at 35,560—average annual need
over the next five-year period.
[p. 11-69]
-------
3916 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
PART III.—MANPOWER RECRUITMENT, RETENTION, AND UTILIZATION ACTIVITIES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
A
B
r
r>
V,
Introduction
Manpower Recruitment Activities
1. "Talent Search"— A Movie
2. Recruitment Brochures
3. Articles and Reprints
4. Veterans Recruitment
Manpower Retention Activities
Manpower Utilization Activities
Summary and Conclusions
Page
1
2
2
2
3
3
4
8
10
[P. m-i]
PART III.—MANPOWER RECRUITMENT, RETENTION, AND
UTILIZATION ACTIVITIES
A. INTRODUCTION
Gross manpower and training requirements can be partially ful-
filled through activities designed to improve effectiveness and effi-
ciency of the existing labor force, as well as through activities
designed to train additional members of that force. EPA considers
that such activities will make a significant contribution to the achieve-
ment of water pollution control manpower objectives: the availability
of personally satisfied and properly utilized manpower in the needed
amounts, with the requisite skills, at the proper times and in the
proper places. Accordingly, EPA has undertaken a number of activi-
ties in this area. For reporting purposes these activities are broken
down into three categories:
Manpower recruitment.
Manpower retention.
Manpower utilization.
A discussion of each of these categories follows. Some of the activi-
ties may have ramifications under two or even three of the categories.
However, below they are discussed under the category of their
primary thrust.
[P. m-1]
B. MANPOWER RECRUITMENT ACTIVITIES
The primary responsibility for recruitment rests upon the esti-
mated 25,000 independent water pollution control employers scattered
throughout the country. Accordingly, there is no necessary assur-
ance, especially during a labor sellers' market caused by rapid ex-
pansion of the industry, that these employers will have an adequate
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3917
supply of interested and basically qualified manpower from which to
recruit. The existence of such a supply is fundamental to adequately
staffed operations and, therefore, at least in part, to efficient and
effective water pollution control. Further, without such a supply,
recruiting standards tend to be forced below the reasonable minimum,
thereby increasing training requirements.
Therefore, EPA has taken actions, largely as a delegate of the
Department of Labor, to increase the size of the pool by development
and widespread dissemination of information regarding careers in
water pollution control, as discussed below.
1. "Talent Search"—A Movie
EPA has produced and now distributes a 16 mm color-sound movie
depicting the work, training, and importance of wastewater treatment
plant operators. The purposes of "Talent Search" are:
To encourage people, particularly young people, to enter the
wastewater treatment field.
To dispel erroneous ideas held by many persons about the
work of the wastewater treatment plant operators.
To enhance the self-image of the operators, thus helping them
to take pride in and appreciate the importance of their jobs.
This movie, which won a top award from the National Visual Com-
munications Association, has been shown to numerous groups of
high school students, unemployed workers, placement groups, and
environmental organizations. A Spanish language version of the
movie is being used to reach Puerto Rican, Cuban, and Mexican
American audiences where Spanish is the first language in the home.
Recently, prints of "Talent Search" have been released for showings
in Latin American countries, and in Mexico, the movie has been
shown on nationwide television.
2. Recruitment Brochures
EPA has developed and now distributes recruitment brochures in
both English and Spanish that summarize the challenges, tasks, op-
portunities, and rewards that are offered by employment in the
wastewater treatment field. EPA also distributes an attractive
descriptive recruitment
[p. III-2]
brochure published jointly by the Texas Water Utilities Association
and the Texas Water Pollution Control Association. This brochure
—entitled, "Water... the Growth Industry; What's in It for You?"
—stresses the importance of water to human habitation, the pay, job
security training, and the intangible feeling of rendering needed
services, all of which flow from a career in water.
-------
3918 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
3. Articles and Reprints
From time to time, EPA staff members prepare articles for publica-
tion in general circulation periodicals related to the need for waste-
water treatment manpower. A recent example is an article entitled,
"A Critical Need—Training for Wastewater Treatment Plant
Operators." As the title implies, the article sets forth the need for
operators and then proceeds to discuss present training programs.
EPA also obtains and distributes reprints of articles applicable to
waste treatment manpower recruitment. For example, recently re-
printed and distributed was an article from the Occupational Outlook
Handbook and Quarterly entitled, "Training, Upgrading, Reinforcing
Water Pollution Control Workers."
4. Veterans Recruitment
Recognizing that recent veterans are a very important recruitment
source, EPA has established a mail-order recruitment and referral
system for new veterans and servicemen pending discharge. The
principal components of this system are various types of outreach
information concerning careers in wastewater treatment and—in
answer to specific inquiries from veterans or "short-timer" service-
men—the provision of specific information identifying wastewater
treatment employers offering job and/or training opportunities
throughout the country.
[p. III-3]
C. MANPOWER RETENTION ACTIVITIES
Once satisfactory personnel have been recruited, the next concern
is the retention of these newcomers so that the recruitment and train-
ing investments they represent will not be wasted. A high turnover
rate portends inefficient and ineffective operation and a continual
demand for more recruits and more training. Conversely, improve-
ments in retention rates will reduce manpower and training demands.
As with recruitment, retention is the primary responsibility of the
employers. However, since retention affects the attainment of na-
tional water pollution control goals, EPA takes an active interest in
the subject.
To date, the primary EPA focus on retention rates in water pollu-
tion control has been on operators. As was noted in Part II, retention
rates for operators have been quite low, particularly in the first year
of employment. This has caused general concern among water
pollution control managers.
The basic prerequisites for high retention of productive employees
are several. Among the primary ones are:
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3919
Good working conditions.
Good job image.
Good pay.
Opportunity for advancement.
The operators' working conditions are not the most pleasant, by the
nature of the job, and the operator's job is not held in high esteem
or appreciation by his community. In a recent study of operator
trainees conducted for EPA1 only 4 percent expressed complete
satisfaction with public appreciation of their work. Fifty-two per-
cent were generally not satisfied, and 19 percent were completely
unsatisfied. Confirmation of this problem regarding operator image
comes from another finding in this same study. The trainees were
asked which job title they preferred for their occupation as operator:
(i) Sewage Treatment Plant Operator.
(ii) Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator.
1 Sewage Treaters or Pollution Controllers—Trainees View Their Jobs, Environmental Pro-
tection Agency, Office of Water Program, Division of Manpower and Training, by Longino,
Green and Kauffman.
[p. III-4]
(iii) Waste Treatment Plant Operator.
(iv) Water Pollution Control Specialist
Most often, the trainees chose the last named.
While no hard data are available,2 pay rates for operators are
generally acknowledged, by those familiar with the industry, to range
from very low to very high, but on the average to be at most no more
than barely adequate. Further, while there have been opportunities
for career advancement of operators, they have not been over-
whelming.
One possible way to positively effect all of these retention factors
and also improve manpower utilization is through operator certifica-
tion. It is necessary to understand the background and current status
of certification in order to appreciate its full significance and to
understand EPA activities in this regard.
Interest in certification of operators has been growing among the
states in the hopes that ensuring minimum personnel qualifications
will improve the operational effectiveness of wastewater treatment
facilities. The President supported this trend in his 10 February 1970
Message to Congress, in which he announced a policy that will re-
quire future Federally assisted treatment plants to be operated only
by State-certified operators. Further, the President has issued
Executive Order 11507 which requires operators of Federal waste
treatment plants to be certified in accordance with the requirements
of the state in which the plant is located.
-------
3920 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Currently 47 of the states require some form of operator certifica-
tion, and in 31 certification is mandatory. Yet considerable variation
exists among the states in educational prerequisites, experience
requirements, duration of certification, and applicability of the pro-
gram. The term "State-certified" on an operator's resume does not
have a uniform meaning.
Formal education of some kind is required by 62 percent of the
certification programs, but even this requirement varies among the
states from eighth grade level to completion of a four-year college
program. In addition, 84 percent of the states permit experience
to be credited instead of education and a number credit special train-
ing, weakening the effectiveness of the educational parameter to
determine the quality of the work force. Experience requirements
are equally varied, with different states requiring from one to 12
years of experience for the highest class of operators and from three
months to four years for the lowest level. Further, many states do
not require a written examination as a
2 Wage data for treatment plant personnel will be available upon completion of the EPA/
DOL survey now under way. This survey is discussed in subsection II-B-l-b-(2), above.
[p. m-5]
certification requirement; 15 percent use an oral examination, and
four states require only a statement of qualifications—and no exami-
nation of any kind.
Variations in the duration of certification also confuse the State
certification picture. While a majority of the states require annual
renewal, a number have renewal periods as long as five years, and
even more issue permanent certification. Unfortunately, these states
cannot have meaningful visibility over the skills of their operational
personnel.
Applicability of certification varies among the states, both in the
categories of wastewater treatment manpower who may be certified
and in the extent to which mandatory certification is being achieved
in those states where it is required. Some programs certify only
wastewater treatment plant personnel, but others will certify em-
ployees concerned with collection systems. Only seven of the manda-
tory certification programs are known to apply solely to treatment
facilities. The waiver of examinations and required training and
education under "grandfather clauses" for operators employed before
certification was instituted tends to defeat the purpose of certifica-
tion in a number of states. Under such provisions, untrained workers
are sometimes allowed to operate plants; in one state with a manda-
tory certification program, 380 of the 391 certified plant operators
were qualified under the grandfather clause.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3921
Classification systems for certified operators include from two to 11
categories, and many states do not specify limitations on the type
of facility to which a worker's certification is applicable. In fact,
in more than 19 states, approved certification will allow an operator
to operate any type of wastewater treatment process. Finally, a
Water Pollution Control Federation survey reported in 1970 3 indi-
cated that of all the wastewater facilities identified as requiring
certified operators in 12 selected states which have mandatory
certification programs, only 80 percent were being staffed by certified
personnel—regardless of the adequacy of the requirements under
which they were certified.
Sound operator certification standards can benefit operators, em-
ployers, and the public. The assurance that wastewater treatment
plant operators are competent reduces the need for strict surveillance
of plants that is otherwise required of the responsible State agency.
Further, an effective certification program can be productive to
prevent and reduce pollution. Employers benefit through the protec-
tion of their capital investment, resulting in maximum plant utiliza-
tion and reduced repair and maintenance expenses. Finally,
employees benefit from salary increases, increased status and respon-
sibility, improved job security, and increased opportunity for career
advancement.
* WPCF Personnel Advancement Committee, "Survey of Wastewater Treatment Plant
Operator Certification in the U.S.," Water Pollution Control Federation Journal, Vol. 42, No.
4, April 1970, p. 516.
[P. m-8]
The Water Pollution Control Federation and the American Water
Works Association have recently addressed themselves to the prob-
lems of certification and have made significant contributions toward
their resolution. EPA views these efforts with favor. Yet, if State
certification is to be meaningful, practices must be standardized and
training opportunities proliferated, for more stringent certification
requirements will greatly inflate the size and complexity of the
operator training problem. Such an effort on a nationwide effort
will require the resources of the Environmental Protection Agency.
EPA believes strongly that states should establish mandatory
uniform certification laws based on national criteria. To meet this
objective EPA is providing technical and financial support to the
Water Pollution Control Federation, the American Waterworks
Association and other interested organizations to establish a national
certification board. This board will serve as an information center
for certification activities, recommend standards and guidelines,
facilitate reciprocity between State programs and assist authorities
-------
3922 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
to establish and update programs. To facilitate states adoption of
national certification programs based on national criteria, technical
assistance and training should be provided by EPA.
There will be difficulty in establishing uniform criteria for certifica-
tion because of the variations in present practices. Further, at
present there is not a sufficient understanding of the operational
tasks performed in the industry as a whole. Since certification
criteria must be directly related to the tasks operators perform,
uncertainty about tasks means uncertainty about criteria. The
studies under way to develop planning tools [discussed in subsection
B-l-b-(l) of Part II] will also yield task information. Additional
studies will likely be required. Also, it will be necessary to solicit
the views of the states and other interested parties in the process of
developing the national certification criteria.
As a prelude to State adoption of a program based on the national
certification criteria, it will be necessary for the states, with technical
and financial assistance from EPA, to design transition programs
which will take into account the additional training and other effects
which will flow from the new certification requirements. To design,
establish, and subsequently operate these certification programs, the
states will be called upon to take new administrative and legislative
tacks.
[p. m-7]
D. MANPOWER UTILIZATION ACTIVITIES
More productive use of available manpower will also lead to a
reduction in gross manpower requirements, and hence, in training
requirements. In this respect, perhaps the most attention has been
devoted to manpower utilization as one important portion of the
proper operation and maintenance of treatment plants. Here, once
again, the employer is basically responsible for optimum manpower
utilization. However, because of the national interest in the protec-
tion of Federal investment in new facilities, EPA has taken direct
actions to ensure proper operation and maintenance. This includes
the following actions to assure appropriate manpower utilization.
In response to a recommendation of the Comptroller General, EPA
has issued a document, "Federal Guidelines, Design, Operation, and
Maintenance of Wastewater Treatment Facilities." The guidelines
require applicants for facility construction grants to include in their
applications a list of the numbers and types of personnel needed to
operate and maintain the proposed plant. This list must be updated
at the completion of 50 percent of the construction. Thirty days prior
to plant start-up, another update must be reported to the cognizant
State agency. Further, the guidelines require that the chief operator
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3923
must be employed by the time construction is 50 percent complete
in order to ensure his full familiarity with the plant. Finally, the
guidelines require the designer to consider manpower utilization
factors in design and to furnish an operations manual to the owner
which sets forth operation and maintenance requirements and
procedures.
To provide designers with basic data and concepts for use in
development of operation and maintenance manuals, EPA has also
let a contract to develop improved concepts and methods by which
(i) wastewater treatment plant designers can better reflect opera-
tion and maintenance considerations and (ii) managers can more
realistically determine staffing requirements and establish effective
maintenance management programs. The basic principle in this
effort is the application of the techniques developed for analyzing
the operation, maintenance, and reliability of complex naval propul-
sion systems to wastewater treatment plants. Sewage treatment
processes are being broken down into subgroups for detailed analysis,
and special attention is being devoted to operations, maintenance,
staffing, and quality assurance. Upon completion, this project is
expected to produce a model for determining the classification and
skill levels required of operation and maintenance personnel and
recommendations regarding alternative staffing concepts. It is ex-
pected that this work will provide a base for future work by the
Environmental Protection Agency in the application of advanced
industrial engineering and maintenance management techniques in
the wastewater treatment field.
Once new plants become operational, evaluation of their per-
formance becomes the responsibility of the cognizant State agency.
[p. III-8]
However, EPA is presently considering the establishment of a Federal
audit, to include the manpower aspects of plant operation, one year
after operations have commenced. Meanwhile, EPA has let a con-
tract for the development of a manual to be used to train State
inspectors. The contract also calls for the development of a training
plan for inspector training, and it is anticipated that such a course
will be developed and offered in the near future.
EPA has approached improvement in manpower utilization through
one other channel. As an adjunct to its Public Service Careers
(PSC) training program (discussed more fully in Part IV of this
report), EPA has been using Department of Labor funds to provide
financial and technical assistance to PSC subcontractors for job re-
structuring. The concept of job restructuring calls for a task analysis
of jobs for the purpose of rearranging and recombining tasks in
-------
3924 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
packages that require skills of similar rather than mixed levels.
For example, many jobs are presently made up of tasks requiring a
mixture of professional, paraprofessional, and even lower level skills.
Since some of these tasks are professional, professional level persons
must fill these jobs. To the extent that professional employees are
required to perform paraprofessional and lower level tasks, there is
a gross underutilization of manpower. In restructuring a job, the
objective is to rearrange the tasks so that to the maximum feasible
extent, professionals do work requiring professional skills, para-
professionals do work .requiring paraprofessional skills, and so forth.
The result of a productive restructuring should be the accomplish-
ment of the tasks at the most economical level of labor and training
costs.
Also, since the more homogeneous stratification of tasks means
that the proportion of jobs at the lower end of the skill spectrum will
increase, more of the jobs can be filled by workers of lesser qualifica-
tion, broadening the recruitment base. Further, many of the addi-
tional potential recruits would be the disadvantaged.
[p. III-9]
E. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
It is possible to reduce water pollution control manpower and
training requirements through the application of manpower recruit-
ment, retention, and utilization techniques. While the application of
these techniques is in the first instance the responsibility of the em-
ployers, their application or lack thereof also bears directly upon the
success of the Federal water pollution control program. Therefore,
EPA has taken a number of actions to further their adoption.
Most of these actions have been undertaken as an agent of the
Department of Labor or as an adjunct to the construction grants
program. Taken together, they only scratch the surface of the
activities that could be undertaken by EPA to provide management
assistance and/or training to employees in the application of such
techniques. Further, taken together, they probably only begin to
reap the benefits in terms of reductions in manpower and training
requirements that could be obtained by the systematic and widespread
application of such techniques by all water pollution control
employers.
[p. 111-10]
PART IV.—WATER POLLUTION CONTROL TRAINING ACTIVITIES
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
A. The Environmental Education Process 1
B. Non-EPA Water Pollution Control Training Activities 3
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3925
Page
1. A Frame of Reference for Roles in Training the Manpower for
Water Pollution Control 3
2. Training Activities of Nongovernmental Organizations 6
a. Training Activities of Educational Institutions 6
(1) Training Activities of Universities and Four-Year Colleges .... 6
(2) Training Activities of Two-Year Colleges and Technical
Schools 8
b. Training Activities of Associations 10
c. Training Activities of Private Industry 13
3. Training Activities of Non-EPA Governmental Organizations 15
a. Training Activities of Local Agencies 15
b. Training Activities of State Agencies 16
c. Training Activities of Non-EPA Federal Agencies 19
(1) Direct Training 20
(2) Financial Support for Training 22
4. Assessment of the Training Activities of Non-EPA Organizations 30
a. Assessment of Roles 30
b. Assessment by Occupational Needs 35
(1) Training for Professionals 35
(2) Training for Operators and Technicians
5. Conclusions Regarding the Training Activities of Non-EPA
Organizations 42
[p. IV-i]
Page
C. EPA Water Pollution Control Training Activities 43
1. EPA Training for Professionals 46
a. The Professional Training Grants Program 46
(1) Scope and Activities of the Professional Training Grants
Program 46
(2) Assessment of the Professional Training Grants Program 51
b. The Research Fellowship Program 56
(1) Scope and Activities of the Research Fellowship Program 56
(2) Assessment of the Research Fellowship Program 59
c. The Direct Technical Training Program 60
(1) Scope and Activities of the Direct Technical Training Program 60
(2) Assessment of the Direct Technical Training Program 64
d. The Technology Transfer Program 66
(1) Scope and Activities of the Technology Transfer Program 66
(2) Assessment of the Technology Transfer Program 69
e. Conclusions Regarding EPA Training for Professionals 70
2. EPA Training for Operators and Technicians 71
a. National MDTA-Funded Contracts 71
(1) Coupled On-the-Job Training 72
(2) Institutional Training 78
(3) Public Service Careers 79
(4) Transition Training 80
(5) Assessment of National MDTA-Funded Contracts 82
[p. IV-ii]
Page
b. The Pilot Program 84
(1) Advanced Instructor Training 85
-------
3926 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Page
(2) Specialized Training in Advanced Waste-water Treatment 86
(3) Grants for Special State Projects 86
(4) Assessment of the Pilot Program 90
c. Technical Training Grants and Scholarships for Undergraduate
Study 91
(1) Scope and Activities of the Undergraduate Technical Training
Grants and Scholarships Program 91
(2) Assessment of the Undergraduate Technical Training Grants
and Scholarships Program 93
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit IV-1 Synopsis of Primary Roles and Limitations of Others in Their
Training Activities in Water Pollution Control (WPC) 34
Exhibit IV-2 Synopsis of Unmet Needs in Water Pollution Control Training 41
Exhibit IV-3 Summary of Professional Training Grants Awarded During
FY1970 and FY 1971, by State 50
Exhibit IV-4 Comparison of the Rate of Growth of Professional Training
Grant Program Costs with the Rate of Growth of Number of Trainees Sup-
ported (1967-1972) 52
Exhibit IV-5 Professional Training Grants Program Activities, 1962-1973 .... 54
Exhibit IV-6 Job Destination of EPA-Supported Professional Trainees (FY
1963-FY1970) 55
[p. IV-iii]
Page
Exhibit IV-7 Summary of Research Fellowships Awarded During FY 1970
and FY 1971, by State 57
Exhibit IV-8 Research Fellowship Program Activities, 1962-1973 58
Exhibit IV-9 Number of Persons Trained Under EPA Direct Technical
Training Program, by WPC Sector and Occupation (Apr. 1970-Sep. 1971) .. 62
Exhibit IV-10 Percentage of Persons Trained Under EPA Direct Technical
Training Program by WPC Sector, Education Level, and Occupation FY
1969-FY1971) 63
Exhibit IV-11 Summary of National MDTA-Funded Contracts 75
Exhibit IV-12 Number of Grants Awarded for Special State Projects by
Program Coverage 89
[p. IV-iv]
PART IV.—TRAINING ACTIVITIES
A. THE ENVIRONMENTAL EDUCATION PROCESS
The concern of the Federal Government for environmental educa-
tion was manifested in the congressional enactment of the Environ-
mental Education Act of 1970. This act (P.L. 91-516) authorized
the U.S. Commissioner of Education to make grants to establish
educational programs intended to encourage public understanding
of policies and activities in support of environmental quality. In FY
1971, the Office of Environmental Education of the Office of Education,
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, awarded 74 grants
totaling $1.7 million for projects in 31 states and the District of
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3927
Columbia. The grants support several types of education projects,
including community education, curriculum development, establish-
ment of environmental education centers, training of public em-
ployees other than teachers, and dissemination of information to the
public.
Because people at various ages and stages of life need different
kinds and degrees of environmental information, an EPA Task Force
on Environmental Education is currently considering the specific role
EPA should play in general environmental education and how it
should interface with other concerned agencies. EPA's current
programs include a variety of technical training grants to promote
public interest and knowledge. For example, one such grant was
made to the Tilton School (Tilton, New Hampshire) to develop a
curriculum guide and teaching materials designed to introduce water
pollution control illustrations and examples into general science and
biology courses in secondary schools. These materials encourage
active participation of both teachers and students in solving environ-
mental problems. The project, involving 40 schools throughout the
northeast, is a follow-on to a program EPA supported at the Uni-
versity of Massachusetts during the summer of 1969 and a program
which the Ford Foundation initiated during the same period at the
Tilton School. Negotiations are currently under way to accelerate
the distribution, acceptance, and use of the Tilton program on a
nationwide basis.
Other representative grants awarded by EPA for general education/
awareness purposes include one to the District of Columbia League
of Women Voters Education Fund to develop schools for citizens on
water use, an award to the Washington (D.C.) Ecology Center to
promote environmental education and awareness for youth, and a
grant to the Institute of Environmental Education (Cleveland
Heights, Ohio) to develop a national program in environmental
education.
EPA also sponsors SPARE, which began operations in 1971, is
funded by the Department of Labor (as an offshoot of the Neighbor-
hood Youth Corps Program) and is operated by EPA. Since its
inception, SPARE has provided a combination of jobs and prevoca-
tional environmental training for approximately 9,000 low-income
youths, ages 14 to 20, in 50 communities
[p. IV-1]
across the country. Typical of these projects was one involving 11 high
school students in Coos Bay, Oregon. With the necessary supervision
and counseling, the students executed a carefully conceived series of
dye flow tests to trace the source of sewage badly fouling Coos Bay
-------
3928 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
to 29 residences not tied into the sanitary sewer system and, more im-
portant, to two breaks in the sanitary sewer line. Action has been
taken to remedy these defects as a result of the students' finds and
the enthusiastic support of city officials and citizens
These are only a few examples of EPA's efforts to cooperate with
all interested parties in promoting public awareness and support for
environmental programs. The balance of this part of the report
relates to that portion of the environmental education process that
pertains directly to jobs in the water pollution control field. Most
water pollution control jobs begin with a period of intensive "entry"
training related immediately to the functions of the particular job.
Such training may be formal or informal, or a combination, and may
be classroom-oriented, on-the-job training, or a combination. As the
career of the water pollution control employee progresses, he will
almost inevitably need additional training, usually of a highly spe-
cialized nature and of relatively short duration, either to "update"
his skills to keep current with technology or to "upgrade" them to
permit career advancement.
Section B, below, describes the activities of those non-EPA agencies
concerned with water quality by sector—nongovernmental, local
government, State government, and non-EPA Federal Government.
It also assesses those activities in terms of the agencies' roles in water
pollution control training and the adequacy of their activities to
satisfy the most compelling current training needs—by occupational
category (professional, operator, and technician, as established in
Part II) and type of training (entry or update/upgrade). Conclu-
sions are presented regarding the extent to which the needs identified
in Part II of this report are being satisfied by the activities of these
employers.
Section C describes the efforts of the Environmental Protection
Agency to address those needs left unsatisfied by other water quality
employers and to fulfill its role as a focal point for water pollution
control manpower and development information and activities.1 The
EPA program is discussed in terms of the two most general cate-
gories of training recipients—professionals and operators/technicians.
Each of the agency's major programs for these categories is described
and assessed against the unresolved need, and conclusions are drawn
regarding the past adequacy of the programs and the future support
needed to meet an ever-expanding training need.
1 In order to present a complete and comprehensive picture of EPA training activities in
response to identified needs, this part of the report describes both those activities for which
Congress has requested a report [subsection 5 (g)] and those supplementary activities
authorized elsewhere in the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
[p. IV-2]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3929
B. NON-EPA WATER POLLUTION CONTROL TRAINING ACTIVITIES
1. A Frame of Reference for Roles in Training the Manpower for
Water Pollution Control
To initiate a manpower training program, two intangibles must
exist: a need for the training and a motivational commitment on the
part of the beneficiaries of water pollution control services to satisfy
that need. The need for water pollution control training at all occu-
pational skill levels is well recognized (and documented in Part II
of this report). A commitment among interested parties in all sectors
to establish that training, or to improve and expand that which exists,
and to use the training, is long-standing.
Commitment connotes action, however, and action requires three
types of tangible resources:
The capacity to train, by means of:
Requisite and accessible facilities.
Available and qualified instructors.
The information with which to train, including:
Tailored curricula.
Effective and responsive materials.
The funds to enable the training to be initiated and conducted:
To build the capacity.
To develop the information.
To bring together the provider and recipient.
To present the program.
The roles of the various non-EPA agents in water pollution control
training are defined by the resources which they contribute to the
training "action." Those who provide the capacity to train may be
said to play a direct role in training because they are the primary
points of contact with the trainee. Those who develop course infor-
mation or provide enabling funds are engaged in a more supportive
role. Some organizations play a catalytic role in encouraging the
direct or supportive activities of others. Roles are rarely distinctive
and are frequently interdependent. However, predominant orienta-
tions can be ascribed to the primary participants in the training
process.
Educational institutions generally have the capacity and develop
or possess the information to provide for the basic educational
requirements of their students for entry into occupational fields at
various
[p. IV-3]
levels. Support is normally required to develop the capacity and
information needed to respond to the specific vocational require-
ments of their students, particularly for occupations, such as water
pollution control, whose missions or skill shortages require extraordi-
-------
3930 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
nary action. Stimulation from others is frequently required, espe-
cially financial assistance (through grants or fellowships) to
supplement normal sources of funds.
Associations, whose memberships frequently include academicians
and employer representatives, assume a catalytic role in encouraging,
helping organize, and cosponsoring programs. When voids exist, they
sometimes provide the capacity or information or the financial
support for others to do so.
Employers of manpower hold primary responsibility for orienting
each entrant to the peculiarities of his work environment and pro-
viding requisite transitional skills to ensure his adequate job per-
formance. They also must ensure that employees maintain their
proficiency within the current state of the art and that employees
receive opportunities to upgrade their skills to qualify for promotion.
Private industry employers generally provide orientation and in-
formal training on the job. Normally only the larger employers
develop and present formal programs for updating and/or upgrading
their employees. More typically, they rely on the resources of others
to organize and present such programs.
Government agencies at the local, State, and Federal levels act in
a similar capacity, but with broader purpose and, consequently, on
a larger scale. Indeed, their stimulative function sometimes extends
to the imposition of mandatory training requirements with which
others must comply.
Local government agencies bear primary responsibility for pro-
viding adequate public wastewater treatment facilities and ensuring
their effective operations. In fulfilling this responsibility, they mirror
the private employer's job of recruiting, training, developing, and
retaining the manpower needed. They plan and administer man-
power development programs to satisfy local requirements.
State agencies establish standards, criteria, regulations, and other
guidelines to promote statewide uniformity and to further objectives
which transcend those of local jurisdictions. They also plan and
administer manpower training programs to satisfy statewide needs
and help build the capacities of their state educational institutions
to assist in this effort. Their primary role is supportive, through
provision of financial, technical, and planning assistance. They also
provide direct services, singly or collaboratively, when others are
unable to do so.
[p. IV-4]
Federal agencies perform a similar role, but from a national
program view point and in response to national priorities. Two
distinctions are noteworthy, particularly when related to programs
of national urgency. With the revenue systems of State and local
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3931
governments and their educational institutions already strained in
attempting to provide traditional service, the Federal Government
provides the principal financial resources to stimulate or facilitate
these programs (as is manifestly evident in water pollution control).
Secondly, the orientation of the Federal planning financial and tech-
nical assistance is to build the capacity of others to more effectively
plan, organize, administer, and deliver the requisite services.
The interrelationship of the roles of these various agents is evident
—and vital—in order to build and maintain the capacity and to de-
velop and improve the information with which to train the manpower
for water pollution control. This section (IV-B) of the report de-
scribes the training activities of the non-EPA nongovernmental and
governmental organizations in the exercise of their respective training
roles.
[p. IV-5]
2. Training Activities of Nongovernmental Organizations
Nongovernmental organizations engaged in water pollution control
training include educational institutions, associations, and private
industry, as discussed below.
a. Training Activities of Educational Institutions. Educational in-
stitutions orient their water pollution control training activities to
degree programs for students who potentially may pursue careers in
the field. These institutions may be distinguished into two groups in
terms of the duration of courses of study and the occupational cate-
gories for which students are being prepared:
Universities and four-year colleges, which concentrate their
program activities on the professional, primarily at the graduate
level.
Two-year colleges and technical schools, which focus their
programs on the operator and the technician.
Each of these types of educational institutions is discussed below.
(1) Training Activities of Universities and Four-Year Colleges.
Many universities and four-year colleges offer degree programs in
disciplines which relate indirectly to water pollution control. Within
the natural sciences, the disciplines of engineering and the physical
and biological sciences offer the most direct relevancy to the field of
water pollution control; degrees projected J for these disciplines are as
follows:
Degrees
1970-1971
1975-1976
Bachelor's and first-professional
Master's
Doctor's
102,540
34,120
12,530
119,060
43,890
20,840
Total 149,190
183,790
-------
3932 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Few programs are oriented directly to water pollution control,2 sug-
gesting the need for supplementary training for those professionals
recruited into the field after obtaining generalized degrees.
EPA estimates that approximately 100 universities and four-year
colleges offer degree programs oriented specifically to water pollution
control. The major thrust of their involvement is in providing degree
1 Projections of Educational Statistics to 1970-80, National Center for Educational Statistics,
1970 Edition.
2 See subsection IV-C-l-a for a discussion of the EPA Professional Training Grants
Program.
[p. IV-6]
programs for students at the graduate level. These institutions have
been relatively inactive in independently sponsoring or conducting
training other than their formal degree programs. In particular, these
institutions have not played a significant role in providing special
short courses or supplementary programs to update or upgrade the
skills of those professionals previously recruited into the field of
water pollution control.
Universities and their staffs, however, have supported the man-
power training activities of non-EPA organizations in a variety of
ways. Facilities have been provided, faculty members have partici-
pated as instructors, and assistance has been given to others in devel-
oping curricula and training materials.
These institutions are the primary source for preparing profes-
sionals for entry into the field of water pollution control. Through
their research and instructional capacities, their potential contribu-
tion to the training of manpower already working in the field is sub-
stantial. Two noteworthy programs demonstrate the potential impact
that can be made by universities, when providing support to and
receiving support from other sectors. Illustrative activities of Clem-
son University are highlighted in this subsection; those of Texas
A & M are discussed with those of the State of Texas in subsection
IV-B-3-b, below.
Clemson University has conducted annually a three-day operator
school since the mid-1930's. Trainees who successfully completed an
end-of-course examination were granted certification by the South
Carolina Water and Pollution Control Association. Passage of a
mandatory certification law effective in 1968 increased course enroll-
ment by 50 percent.
Since 1952 the General Assembly of South Carolina has appropri-
ated $10,000 annually (increased to $20,000 in 1967) as a direct and
continuing appropriation to Clemson University for the preparation
and administration of correspondence courses for the operators of
treatment plants in the State. Correspondence courses in the form
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3933
of manuals were developed by the University faculty for both water
and wastewater treatment plant operators at four levels. The man-
uals offer opportunity for self-education during the elapsed time be-
tween the annual operator training schools, and they are also used as
preparation for the certification examination. The additional funds
appropriated since 1967 were intended for revision of these manuals
and the hiring of a person to visit plants and offer on-the-job advice.
The revisions were accomplished with participation from university
faculties in several other states to reduce sectional influence and to
increase the potential for nationwide replication.
Clemson University also prepared a videotape designed to alert
operators to the training opportunities available to them from the
local to the national level. The tape has been presented on the South
Carolina statewide educational television network as well as at State
and national operator training meetings.
[p. IV-7]
The University sponsored a National Conference on Wastewater
Treatment Plant Operator Training in 1969 in cooperation with the
Water Pollution Control Federation and the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration. The presentations and discussions of oper-
ator training activities and needs mirrored the widespread concerns
that led to the passage of the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970
and its emphasis on operator training. Since then, Clemson Univer-
sity has continued its active interest in this field. Its contributions
under EPA support are noted in Section III-C below.
(2) Training Activities of Two-Year Colleges and Technical
Schools. A 1964 survey of technical education offerings in the
nation's schools revealed only one program to educate water and
wastewater technicians—a newly begun program at the Fayetteville
Technical Institute in North Carolina. Under contract with the Office
of Education's Vocational and Technical Education Division, the
Institute produced a review draft of a curriculum guide in July 1966.
Several institutions initiated programs based on that guide, the final
version of which was printed in May 1969 as a joint interdepartmental
publication (Office of Education and Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration), entitled, Water and Wastewater Technology, A Sug-
gested 2-Year Post-High-School Curriculum.1
In 1969,17 schools representing 11 states offered programs for train-
ing environmental technicians. Currently, there are 55 junior colleges
and other institutions in 23 states offering courses in environmental
technology. Twenty-one additional institutes have programs in the
planning stage. Most of these programs terminate with an Associate
of Arts degree in environmental technology, but many offer special-
-------
3934 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
ization in wastewater treatment technology. Additionally, a number
of these institutions have joined with other sectors in providing
non-degree programs for operators and technicians.
Two of these institutions—Charles County Community College and
the Atlanta Area Technical School—offer good illustrations of this
type of training activity. The Charles County Community College in
La Plata, Maryland, offers a two-year Associate of Arts degree in
Pollution Abatement Technology, a program centered on water pol-
lution control.2 It also offers a one-year Solid Waste Management
Certificate program and week-long seminars on selected subjects.
From 1967 to 1969, it joined with three other community colleges and
the Maryland State Departments of Health and
' Criteria for the establishment and maintenance of two-year post-high school wastewater
technology training programs were developed by Clemson University in 1970, under an EPA
grant. Details of this activity and its impact on technician training activity are covered in
subsection IV-C-2-c, Technical Training Grants and Scholarships for Undergraduate Study.
2 This program has been funded by an EPA grant (see subsection IV-C-2-c, Technical
Training Grants and Scholarships for Undergraduate Study).
[p. IV-8]
Natural Resources in presenting an annual training program for mu-
nicipal and industrial wastewater treatment plant operators and super-
intendents. This program consisted of instruction in basic science and
unit operations for three hours, one night per week, for 32 weeks. A
sanitary engineer from the college faculty visited each student's plant
during that period to give on-site technical assistance. Three federally
funded 1 (MDTA) operator training programs are presently conducted
by the college:
A 44-week on-the-job training program coupled with classroom
instruction to upgrade the skills of presently employed operators.
An Institutional Training Program for (new) entry-level oper-
ators.
Training for military personnel scheduled for separation from
the service under the Transition Training Program.
A science and technology center with classrooms and laboratories
was specifically designed at Charles County Community College to
support these programs. A wastewater treatment plant designed as
a teaching facility was also placed into operation. Teaching aids were
developed in the absence of any textbooks published on the technical
level in wastewater treatment.
The Atlanta Area Technical School, the second example, was built
in late 1967 as a joint endeavor between the Atlanta Public School
System and the Georgia Department of Vocational Education. The
school offers a two-year program in sanitary engineering technology
for high school graduates, with a curriculum based essentially on that
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3935
developed by the Fayetteville Technical School. Through guidance
from an advisory committee of practitioners, the Atlanta Area Tech-
nical School emphasizes practical application. First-year scholarships
are offered to high school seniors who participate in the school on a
full-time basis, receiving credit toward high school graduation in
substitution for elective courses they otherwise would be taking.
The school's in-plant division, which works closely with the indus-
try in developing tailor-made courses to meet its particular needs,
offers short courses for wastewater treatment plant operators and
laboratory technicians. Under an EPA grant, it conducted a three-
week pilot program in wastewater technology, designed exclusively
to enhance the technical capabilities of experienced operators and to
establish within these students a recognition of the worth of advanced
education.
1 As further reported below in subsection IV-C-2-a, National MDTA-Funded Contracts.
[p. IV-9]
The Atlanta Area Technical School also administers an MDTA
Institutional Training Program, under a subcontract with EPA, to
train entry-level operators similar to the program offered by Charles
County Community College.1
Technical courses are also offered for technicians and laboratory
workers in the water and pollution control laboratories in the greater
metropolitan Atlanta area. A more comprehensive program is con-
ducted jointly with the Georgia Water Quality Control Board, the
Manpower division of the State Department of Vocational Education,
and the wastewater treatment plants in the area. This program cou-
ples three weeks of classroom training with 26 weeks of on-the-job
training.
b. Training Activities of Associations.—Historically, associations
have played an important role in the water pollution control move-
ment. Traditionally established for special and frequently differing
purposes, their individual and joint contributions and impact on
training of water pollution control personnel have been significant.
At the risk of excluding a number of associations whose direct or
indirect contribution has been important, the training activities of
four leading examples will serve to demonstrate the vital role that
they serve.
The Water Pollution Control Federation (WPCF), as indicated by
its title, is most pointedly involved in water pollution control activi-
ties. For over four decades it has promoted the advancement of
knowledge concerning the nature, collection, treatment, and disposal
of domestic and industrial wastewaters, and the design, construction,
operation, and management of facilities for these purposes. It con-
-------
3936 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
sists of 58 member associations representing approximately 20,000
individuals from the public and private sectors.
The WPCF has provided unique leadership in disseminating tech-
nical knowledge through its publications and its sponsorship and en-
couragement of training activities. For most of its existence, the
WPCF has provided leadership and continuing support of certification
and training of treatment plant operators. Its encouragement of the
adoption and implementation of mandatory certification laws and
regulations and its annual surveys of certification activity are high-
lighted in Part III of this report. Among the federation's publications
is a series of Manuals of Practice (on subjects such as sewer design,
construction, and maintenance and plant operation and design) and
operator training courses with visual aids.
For a number of years the WPCF has conducted surveys of oper-
ator training programs of its member associations and states. The
1969 survey
1 See subsection IV-C-2-a, National MDTA-Funded Contracts.
[p. IV-10]
(of 1968 activities), conducted by the WPCF's Personnel Advance-
ment Committee, provided the source for the state activities data
reported in subsection B-3-b of this part of the report.
In only a few cases was the federation involved in these programs
independently of any member association. The WPCF does not pro-
vide training programs directly but does conduct annual conferences,
seminars, and workshops. More typically, it supports the training
activities of its member associations and others in indirect ways. Its
operator training course outlines and visual aids have been distributed
widely.
To provide pointed focus to its support of manpower and training
activities, the WPCF established a manpower program called MAN-
FORCE (an acronym formed from the phrase, MAJVpower FOR a
Clean Environment). Generally, this program is directed at the
problems of recruitment, training, certification, and retention of treat-
ment plant operators and collection system personnel. One current
MANFORCE project is the development of a central source of infor-
mation on training and job opportunities. The training survey pro-
jected for 1971 will be a collaborative effort among MANFORCE, the
federation's Personnel Advancement Committee, the proposed na-
tional association of boards of operator certification, and the American
Waterworks Association. The survey is expected to produce not only
a status report (as was done in 1969) but also a catalog of operator
training programs and resources by states. Another MANFORCE
project envisions an expanded role in developing and publishing
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3937
instructional materials for nationwide use.
The American Waterworks Association (AWWA) is to the water
supply field what the WPCF is to the field of water pollution control.
Its membership exceeds 20,000, about half of whom are utility execu-
tives. AWWA has collaborated with the WPCF in many endeavors:
preparation of the model law and regulations for mandatory certifica-
tion of operators of water and wastewater treatment plants; co-spon-
sorship of conferences and workshops; co-endorsement of the
proposed association of State certification boards; the 1971 WPCF
survey of operator training; and joint publications of the laboratory
manual, Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Waste-
water.
The AWWA has been active for many years in the implementation
of water resources training programs, through its national office as
well as through its many local sections. Aimed at all levels of opera-
tion up through management, AWWA courses relate closely to similar
concerns in water pollution control.
Over the past few years, the AWWA has also sponsored a number
of seminars and workshops conducted throughout the country. These
include management seminars, treatment plant operator workshops,
and a seminar on negotiating labor contracts.
[p. IV-11]
Recently, the AWWA prepared course outlines for training oper-
ators of distribution systems and three levels of treatment plant
operators. The association also recently published a training manual
for the first level of plant operations.
The American Public Works Association (APWA) has a member-
ship of over 12,000 top-ranking public works officials, primarily from
public agencies and utilities. The APWA Education Foundation pro-
vides a variety of education and training programs. Many are in-
directly related to water pollution control due to their generalized
nature (such as in-service training courses in public works adminis-
tration, management seminars for top public works executives, fellow-
ships leading to degrees of Master of Public Works, and sponsorship of
public works engineer management trainee programs). Of 10 work-
shops on specific public works functions presented to administrative
and supervisory personnel, one is oriented specifically to water pollu-
tion control: a two-day workshop on Sewage and Urban Drainage
Systems, presented in cooperation with the WPCF. Eight sessions of
this workshop have been or are scheduled to be presented in 1971.
The National Sanitation Foundation (NSF) is a private, nonprofit
institution engaged in standard development, environmental research,
testing, and education. Some of its activities are directly related to
-------
3938 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
water pollution control. The foundation is most widely known for its
role in developing standards and criteria for products, equipment,
and services.
The NSF's programs in environmental education are noteworthy.
Their primary focus has been on the environmental technician. Un-
der a five-year grant from the Kellogg and Statler Foundations, NSF
established a Program of Training and Education in Environmental
Technology (POTEET). The program consists of:
Encouraging the incorporation of environmental subjects in
education for industry.
Providing an information clearinghouse concerning curricu-
lum.
Teaching courses on subjects in which the NSF is expert (in-
cluding in-service training of NSF staff).
The clearinghouse function is performed through the development
and widespread dissemination of a current informational packet re-
lating to curricula for the environmental technician. It is distributed
to educational institutions, environmental agencies, and individuals
seeking assistance in curriculum initiation. The packet consists of
technician job descriptions, manpower information on the environ-
mental technician, a categorized bibliography, a current listing of
post-secondary institutions with curricula in environmental tech-
nology, and sample curricula currently in use.
[p. IV-12]
The NSF also provides scholarship support for junior college teach-
ers in environmental education. It currently provides support to
more than 60 colleges.
Direct NSF training activities for industry and public agencies are
in the pilot planning stage and will be funded initially from grant
sources. The program is expected to include training input to satisfy
industrial needs for the environmental technician, inputs to water
and wastewater plant operator training courses, and expansion of the
ongoing information clearinghouse for the environmental technician.
c. Training Activities of Private Industry. Virtually no data are
available on the water pollution control training activities of private
industry. Indeed, little detailed information is available even on the
training activities of those industries most closely associated with
the design, operation, and maintenance of municipal and industrial
water pollution control facilities: consulting engineers, suppliers of
chemicals and equipment, and industrial manufacturers involved in
industrial wastewater treatment.
Industrial manufacturers employ professionals, technicians, and
process operators. Professionals are hired with sufficient training to
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3939
enable them to handle their job assignments. Orientation to the spe-
cific industry and its water pollution control activities generally is
accomplished through informal on-the-job training (OJT). Techni-
cians and operators similarly receive OJT, although frequently in a
more structured fashion. A number of major firms have developed
or sponsor formal OJT programs, sometimes with federal assistance
or approval. These and other programs developed by the larger firms
are normally for their own internal use. As is true with smaller
municipal plants, most of the smaller industrial firms have virtually
no formal training programs and rely exclusively on external re-
sources for any formal training for their employees.
Technological advancement and the potential impact of enforce-
ment guidelines and standards promise to create a surge in require-
ments for continuing education and short courses for updating,
upgrading, and reorientation of industrial manpower engaged in
water pollution control.
Consulting engineers and suppliers of chemicals and equipment
follow basically the same pattern of OJT for their professionals and
technicians. Their formal training activities for personnel in other
categories are limited, but they do play an important, however infor-
mal, role in training other water pollution control personnel. In their
frequent contacts with operators and administrators, representatives
of these firms disseminate important information on operational prob-
lems, new processes, and new techniques. In effect, this represents an
informal channel for transfer of technological innovations from re-
search and development into practice.
[p. IV-13]
Major equipment manufacturers provide training seminars for
operators and maintainers of their equipment. Generally, their rep-
resentatives who conduct these seminars are highly trained and effec-
tive teachers who represent a potentially valuable instructional
resource for training activities conducted by others in other settings.
[p. rv-14]
3. Training Activities of Non-EPA Governmental Organizations
The public agencies have been very active in water pollution
control training as enablers, as collaborators, and as recipients.
Training activities at the local, State, and Federal levels vary by
agency, as described in turn below.
a. Training Activities of Local Agencies.—As described in subsec-
tion III-C-3 of this report, local government agencies are basically the
operators and maintainers of sewage collection systems and public
wastewater treatment facilities. As they vary in structure, size, or-
-------
3940 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
ganization, and budgetary constraints, so they differ in their ap-
proaches to training.
As public employers, local government agencies bear ultimate
responsibility for the development of their manpower. Required
training for new entrants or to update or upgrade the skills of the
current workforce can be provided in a variety of ways:
By the employer (without assistance from others).
By the employer ( with assistance from others).
By others (without assistance from the employer).
By others (with assistance from the employer).
Being at the point of operation of water pollution control activities,
local agencies are the targets, and, hence, the beneficiaries, of train-
ing or training assistance provided or sponsored by other sectors.
Little or no training, beyond OJT, is sponsored or provided inde-
pendently at the local level, with the exception of the larger juris-
dictions whose workforce size and concentration and whose budgets
would warrant such activity.
Training needs and consequent training activities vary according
to the two major manpower functions in local water pollution control:
(i) staff activities of administration, planning, enforcement, and de-
sign; and (ii) operation of sewer collection systems and wastewater
treatment plants.
Most of the personnel in or entering staff or chief operating posi-
tions already possess the basic technical or administrative skills re-
quired for these positions (either through work experience or
as graduates of formal educational programs at universities, colleges,
or technical schools). Entrants learn the unique feature of the sys-
tems and operations through informal orientation and on-the-job
training. Little or no upgrade training in management or technology
is sponsored or provided independently by local governments.
[p. IV-15]
Operators generally receive informal orientation and OJT from
their employers in the form of informal "apprenticeship" (working
under the guidance of one or more experienced operators), job rota-
tion (short supervised tours in different parts of the plant), or "chalk-
talks" (briefings from senior personnel on operations, equipment,
procedures, and so forth). Few jurisdictions independently sponsor
or provide entry or upgrade training programs. Indeed, no patterns
exist for tuition assistance, travel, or subsistence allowances or work-
release policies.
A few large municipalities and sanitation districts have inde-
pendently provided formal training courses for their operators. For
example, the Philadelphia Water Department developed an In-Service
Training Program and Operator's Guide. The operator's manual is
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3941
oriented specifically for treatment plants in Philadelphia, describing
plant operation, equipment, and procedures in terms of that environ-
ment. Also, the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago
developed a four-phased, eight-month in-plant training program
conducted by their own technical personnel, with guidance from a
local university.
One of the most ambitious programs initiated at the local level is
the well-publicized apprentice program conducted by the Orange
County Sanitation District in California, which operates the third
largest wastewater quality control system on the West Coast. An
Apprentice I program was initiated in July 1967 for mechanically
inclined entrants, newly graduated from high school. Covering a
two-year period, the Apprentice I program provides general training
covering all operational and maintenance activities of a wastewater
treatment agency, with three-month tours spent in each of its depart-
ments. Graduates of the program are expected to become familiar
with overall operations but would not have spent sufficient time in
any given area to develop a journeyman skill. Consequently, a
two-year Apprentice II program for these graduates was initiated in
July 1969 to provide advanced and specialized training in one of five
occupational areas (engineering, mechanical maintenance, electrical
maintenance, laboratory, or operations). Outside schooling, equiv-
alent to 30 college semester units, is required to supplement this OJT,
at the employee's own expense and on his own time.
b. Training Activities of State Agencies.—Agencies bearing pri-
mary responsibility for the water pollution control activities in their
states vary considerably in their organizational orientations and their
involvement in training activities. The 54 designated water pollution
control agencies receiving state program grants in FY 1971 represent
all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the
Virgin Islands. Their organizational orientations are as follows:
Within health organizations 23
Within water (or natural) resources agencies 7
Separate pollution control agencies 24
[p. IV-16]
Data1 extracted from the FY 1971 State Program Plans depict the
following levels of involvement in training by the 50 State agencies: 2
A total of more than 104 staff man-years are assigned to train-
ing, averaging nearly 2.1 man-years per state and ranging from a
high of 10.0 to a low of 0.1 man-years. When compared to total
state agency staff activities, the average proportion of staff as-
signed to training is 4.7 percent, ranging from a high of 27 percent
to a low of 0.8 percent.
-------
3942 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
A total of $1,393,514 is being expended for training, an average
of $27,870 per state. State expenditures for training range from
a high of $146,000 to a low of $1,800. This investment in training
represents 7.6 percent of the total expenditure budgets for those
agencies, with individual states allocating from a high of 33 per-
cent to a low of 0.6 percent of their budgets to water pollution
control training activities.
Such figures may be misleading when one considers that much
training that takes place in a state typically is sponsored or provided
by other state agencies (such as state employment services or voca-
tional education agencies), universities, associations, or Federal agen-
cies. Indeed, the role of the state water pollution control agency is
frequently collaborative or catalytic in nature, particularly so in
recent years.
Until recently, the main sponsor of training for treatment plant
operators (other than on-the-job training) has been the states through
provision of short courses, ranging from one or two days up to five
weeks. In its last survey 3 of operator training programs in the states,
the Water Pollution Control Federation found that 44 states had
active training programs in 1968, providing at least 100 courses in
over 300 actual training sessions that were attended by more than
16,000 persons. These courses were and continue to be made avail-
able in collaboration with colleges, vocational schools, associations,
and other state agencies.
1 Digest of FY 1971 State Program Plans, prepared by the Water Quality Office of the
Environmental Protection Agency, August 1971.
2 The District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands are excluded from
the following calculations because their programs are substantially funded by the Federal
Government and their inclusion would distort state averages.
3 See subsection B-2-a-(2), above.
[p. IV-17]
Attempting to further expand the scope and increase the penetra-
tion of operator training, a number of state agencies have joined with
other sectors in a variety of new ways. One significant breakthrough
was the establishment in 1967 of the Cooperative Area Manpower
Planning System (CAMPS), which is discussed in Part II of this
report. CAMPS is a planning, not a funding, mechanism. However,
it does provide a great potential, through persuasion and agreement,
for channeling Federal assistance to states and localities for training
in water pollution control. Through this mechanism, a number of
states have been successful in attracting Federal financial support of
state and local water pollution control training projects, primarily
through program funding authorized under the Manpower Develop-
ment and Training Act (MDTA), discussed more extensively in sub-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3943
section C-2-a, below. Projects for institutional training, on-the-job
training, and on-the-job training coupled with classroom instruction
have been funded directly to the states and localities in the following
approximate magnitude:
Contract period
Cost
Number of
operators trained
1969-1970
1970-1971
1971-1972
$1,162,000
1,110,000
2,712,000
980
1,355
2,795
4,984,000
5,130
Most of this activity has taken place in the Middle Atlantic States
and Southeast, South Central, and Northwest regions of the country.
Current state training activities are focused primarily on operator
training and mirror this collaborative approach as illustrated in the
examples described below for Pennsylvania, Texas, and New England.
The Pennsylvania Public Service Institute is the recognized training
agency of the State of Pennsylvania for water pollution control oper-
ators. The Institute is funded equally by the State and the Federal
Governments (under the Vocational Education Act of 1966, described
more fully in section 2-b- (3)). The Institute provides the instructor
and training materials and presents staggered evening classes (usu-
ally three hours per night, one night a week for 10 to 15 weeks) at
various locations throughout the State. It also conducts 44-week
training programs supported by MDTA funding.1 in collaboration
with the Pennsylvania Department of Health.
Operator trainings in Texas is provided as a joint activity by the
Texas State Department of Health, the Texas State Water Quality
Board, Texas A & M University (and its Engineering Extension
Service, the Texas
1 This program Is conducted under a subcontract with the EPA. (See subsection IV-C-2-a,
National MDTA-Funded Contracts.)
[P. rv-i8]
State Technical Institute), in cooperation with two statewide operator
associations. An annual short school is held on the campus of Texas
A & M, with sponsoring agencies assisting in planning, organizing, and
conducting the class sessions. Regional short schools, geographically
distributed among towns in which college facilities are available, are
conducted by members of the State Division of Sanitary Engineering
and faculty from the Engineering Extension Service. To reach op-
erators of small plants, the Engineering Extension Service presents
short courses throughout the state by traveling field instructors.
Sixty to 80 of these courses are conducted annually (two and one half
-------
3944 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
hours nightly, four nights a week for two weeks). For wastewater
laboratory technicians, an annual 40-day course is held on the Texas
A & M campus, and one- and two-year programs are available at
Texas State Technical Institute, the latter culminating in an Associate
of Science degree in water and wastewater technology. All of these
programs are supported by fees, state appropriations (amounting to
about 25 percent of the total), and Federal funds.
Finally, the New England region provided a unique and varied
approach to operator training in FY 1971. The New England Inter-
state Water Pollution Control Commission sponsors entry-level train-
ing at the New England Regional Wastewater Institute in South
Portland, Maine. Its Wastewater Treatment Plant Operators course,
an ongoing program of 35 weeks of full-time classroom, shop, and OJT,
is offered to all of the New England States (by either open or MDTA
referrals). In addition, individual states in the region provide waste-
water treatment training at the intermediate and advanced levels.
In one of these states, Connecticut, wastewater treatment training
is conducted by four different state agencies. The State Department
of Health and the Water Resources Commission conducted entry and
upgrade training in basic principles of sewage treatment and upgrade
training in secondary treatment theory and practice (40 enrollees
each). The Division of Vocational Education offers entry training for
waste treatment plant operators (15 enrollees) and part-time entry
and upgrade training for sewage plant operators (65 enrollees). Both
of these programs are MDTA-sponsored coupled OJT programs. The
Department of Labor also conducts a 34-week coupled-OJT program
for wastewater treatment plant operators (40 enrollees).
c. Training Activities of Non-EPA Federal Agencies.—As pre-
viously indicated in subsection II-C-5, other Federal organizations en-
gage in activities that relate directly or indirectly to water pollution
control. Of the 40 other Federal organizations surveyed by EPA,
seven reported that they conduct internal training programs related
to water pollution control. Eight additional Federal organizations
which were not included in the survey reported the availability of
various funding mechanisms to support the educational activities of
others involved in water pollution control. All of these organizations,
including those which provide their own internal training programs,
participate in courses, workshops, seminars, and correspondence
courses provided by other sectors.
[p. IV-19]
The subsections below discuss the direct training and financial sup-
port for training provided by non-EPA Federal agencies in the field
of water pollution control.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3945
(1) Direct Training. The following summarizes the internal train-
ing programs reported by the other Federal organizations.
Department of the Army
A course for sanitary engineers at the Army Medical Field Serv-
ice School.
A course for environmental and sanitary engineers by the Army
Environmental Hygiene Agency of the Office of the Army
Surgeon General.
A water supply specialist course for enlisted personnel at Fort
Belvoir.
A water supply course for NCO and supervisory candidates at
Fort Belvoir.
An environmental training course for headquarters personnel
at Washington, D.C.
A course in facilities engineering management at the Army
Engineering School, Fort Belvoir.
Department of the Navy
A program for waste treatment operators and maintenance per-
sonnel at the Naval Facilities Engineering Command Technical
Training Center.
Correspondence courses and workshops on basic and interme-
diate water and sewage treatment for engineers, operators,
scientists, and laboratory personnel.
Department of the Air Force
A course in waste processing for wastewater treatment plant
operators at Sheppard Air Force Base.
Courses for bio-environmental engineers on water hygiene and
other health aspects of water and wastewater at the Aerospace
Medical School.
[p. IV-20]
U.S. Geological Survey (Department of the Interior)
Courses and workshops on ground water, surface water, hydro-
logics, hydrochemistry, environmental quality, and water
quality.
Department of Agriculture
Courses and workshops in water systems and sewage treatment
systems design and treatment plant operation by the Forest
Service.
Educational programs (seminars, publications, media programs)
in agriculturally related pollution control and rural community
-------
3946 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
resource development (for example, sewage disposal and water
systems) by the Cooperative Extension Service.
Atomic Energy Commission (AEC)
A program to introduce college and university faculty and others
to analytical techniques for monitoring, measuring, and
evaluating water quality by the Division of Nuclear Education,
in cooperation with the Special Division of Oak Ridge Asso-
ciated Universities. (Three courses for 67 attendees were
conducted in FY 1971 at a cost of $17,000 out of AEC's educa-
tional budget of $6.8 million.)
U.S. Civil Service Commission (CSC)
A seminar in environmental engineering and ecology by the
Dallas Regional Training Center. (Seventy-seven engineers
and scientists, mainly from the Federal Government, attended
in FY 1971.)
Management training programs for Federal, State, and local
government personnel.1
1 The CSC is authorized, under the Intergovernmental Cooperation Act of 1968, to assist
state and local governments in training professional, administrative, and technical personnel
to increase their capability for mission accomplishment. Through a nationwide network
of training centers, the CSC offers a broad range of courses in executive development, gen-
eral and personnel management, communications and office skills, automatic data processing,
management sciences and financial management, and labor-management relations. The CSC
reports that 7,200 state and local employees attended their programs in FY 1971 (out of a
total of 77,000 attendees). No specific breakdown was available to distinguish
[p. IV-21]
(2) Financial Support for Training. Eight Federal organizations
reported that they administer various funding mechanisms to support
the educational activities of others. These activities relate directly
or, in some cases, rather indirectly to water pollution control. These
mechanisms are described below by the occupational category (that is,
professional and technician/operator) for which the supported pro-
grams are primarily intended.
Financial Support of Training Programs for Professionals. Four
organizations provide funding assistance oriented primarily to profes-
sionals—the National Science Foundation, Office of Water Resources
Research, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, and
U.S. Civil Service Commission—as discussed below.
The National Science Foundation. Under authority of the National
Science Foundation Act of 1950 (P.L. 81-507), as amended, the
Foundation attempts to strengthen research and education in the
sciences. Among its activities that relate potentially to the environ-
ment, the National Science Foundation supports a number of training
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3947
programs with an environmental orientation. Graduate predoctoral
fellowships and traineeships in the mathematical, physical, medical,
biological, engineering, and social sciences are the largest single
element. In FY 1971, the Foundation invested $28 million to support
3,500 predoctoral candidates. Its Office of Training estimates that
about 30 percent of these awards were environmentally oriented. In
its support of teacher upgrading and curriculum and materials devel-
opment, the Foundation invested approximately $11 million in FY
1971, of which 20 percent is estimated to have been related to the
environmental sciences. Specific breakdowns for those activities
related to water quality control were not available. However, the
Foundation estimates, in the aggregate, that 13 research and training
projects relating to water quality control were supported during
FY 1971 at a budget cost of $1.7 million.
The Office of Water Resources Research (OWRR), Department of
the Interior. The OWRR, under authority of the Water Resources
Research Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-379), as amended, administers a pro-
gram of water resources research and training. Through its sponsored
research, it helps develop new technology and more efficient methods
for resolving local, state, and nationwide water resource problems.
It also helps to train water scientists and engineers through their
on-the-job participation in research work.
Having no internal research facilities, OWRR supports state uni-
versity water resources research and training institutes. It also
the functional areas represented (such as water pollution control), their occupational cate-
gories, or the specific programs they attended.
[p. IV-22]
provides grants and contracts for support of urgently needed water
resources research. In FY 1971, the OWRR supported 675 projects
at a cost of $11.6 million, with an orientation toward the supply,
rather than the quality, of water.
The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS),
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The NIEHS conducts,
fosters, and supports research and research training relating to the
environmental impact on man. It is oriented to the health aspects
of environmental pollutants, with particular emphasis on biological
effects. The NIEHS supported 158 projects in FY 1971 at a cost of
$13.5 million. The Institute estimates that roughly 5 to 10 percent
of these relate to various aspects of water improvement (such as
water toxicology).
The U.S. Civil Service Commission (CSC). The CSC develops
and administers programs under the Intergovernmental Personnel
Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-648). It administers a grant-in-aid program to
-------
3948 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
help state and general local governments improve their personnel
administration and employee training programs. Among other things,
the Act provides grants for the training of personnel, for government
service fellowships, and for intergovernmental assignment of per-
sonnel and cooperation in recruiting and examining. Appropriations
for FY 1972 totaled $10.4 million. Guidelines for grantees were
distributed in July 1971, and grant applications are expected to start
in FY 1972 at an accelerated pace.
The CSC also provides technical assistance on personnel adminis-
tration to state and local governments. At the request of state and
local governments, the Commission assists these jurisdictions in
assessing their training needs and in establishing, operating, and
evaluating their own training programs.
Financial Support of Training Programs for Technicians and Opera-
tors. Four organizations provide funding assistance oriented
primarily to technicians and operators: the Division of Vocational
and Technical Education and the Division of Manpower Development
and Training of the Office of Education (Department of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare), Manpower Administration (Department of
Labor), and Veterans Administration, as discussed below.
Division of Vocational and Technical Education, Office of Educa-
tion, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The Vocational
Education Act (P.L. 90-576), as amended, authorizes funds to be
used primarily by the states in promoting vocational education for a
variety of unemployed or underemployed individuals. It is intended
to assist secondary and post-secondary students, dropouts, high school
graduates, and those with educational, socioeconomic, and other
handicaps.
The vocational educational program is guided by a National Ad-
visory Council, consisting of 21 Presidentially appointed members
from
[p. IV-23]
the fields of labor and management, manpower administration, educa-
tion, adult education and vocation, the general public, and those
trained or knowledgeable in the special areas of the handicapped or
the socioeconomically disadvantaged.
Approximately $427 million in total appropriations were available
in FY 1971. The number of enrollees supported by this appropriation
approximates 10 million. Most of the Federal funds require matching
with state or local funds, and the states traditionally have over-
matched such Federal funds four- to fivefold.
The states are allocated basic grants to provide opportunities for
persons to become skilled workers, technicians, or paraprofessionals
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3949
in recognized occupations. Funds generally can be allocated to sup-
port training programs; facilities construction; guidance and counsel-
ing; ancillary activities; research, experimental, and demonstration
programs; and curriculum development. Funds are generally ad-
ministered through the State Director of Vocational Education in
each state, with the advice of required State Advisory Councils
(mirroring the national membership representation from educational,
vocational, and technical fields). Federal funds for basic grants in
FY 1971 approximated $322 million. Mandatory set-asides were
established for post-secondary programs and programs for the dis-
advantaged and the handicapped.
Additionally, special vocational education programs may be funded
to support additional activities such as:
Exemplary programs and projects which broaden occupational
aspirations and create job opportunities for young people through
activities such as career opportunity familiarization, work ex-
perience, and job placement ($16 million available in FY 1971).
Cooperative vocational education programs ($18.5 million
available in FY 1971) and work study programs ($5.5 million
available in FY 1971).
Curriculum development activities1 ($4 million available in
FY 1971).
The Division of Vocational and Technical Education reported that
approximately 10 states provided vocational education programs re-
lated to water quality treatment or improvement (such as training in
1 The joint interdepartmental publication, Water and Wastewater Technology, A Suggested
2-Year Post-High-School Curriculum (1968), was developed from materials prepared under
a grant to the Fayetteville Technical Institute in 1965. [Discussed in subsection 2-a-(l),
above.]
[p. IV-24]
water and wastewater technology) during FY 1971 for approximately
2,500 enrollees at a budgeted cost of approximately $750,000.
Division of Manpower Development and Training, Office of Educa-
tion, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The Secretary
of Health, Education, and Welfare is given responsibility for providing
all institutional training required for referrals under the Manpower
Development and Training Act (MDTA) of 1962, as amended. The
Act generally authorizes the expenditure of Federal funds to reduce
the level of unemployment, offset skill shortages, and increase the
productivity and earning power of the nation's work force. These
objectives are accomplished by offering diverse skill training op-
portunities to the unemployed and underemployed in occupational
areas with immediate manpower needs. The institutional training
-------
3950 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
component of the MDTA programs includes basic education and em-
ployment orientation and supportive services. Distinctively, institu-
tional training is oriented to the classroom, rather than the work site.
Funds for institutional training are either administered through
interagency agreement with EPA or channeled directly through
appropriate state education agencies to public or private educational
agencies or institutions, multi-occupational projects, and manpower
skill centers. Federal funds granted directly through the states are
matched by state funds on a 90/10 sharing basis.
Approximately $131 million was available in FY 1971 to provide
institutional training for approximately 149,000 enrollees under the
MDTA program. No breakdowns were available to distinguish that
portion of the institutional training appropriation related directly to
water pollution control through direct grants. Those MDTA institu-
tional training programs provided under agreement with EPA are
discussed in subsection C-2-a (2) of this part of the report.
The Manpower Administration, Department of Labor (DOL).
Two programs administered by the Secretary of Labor pursuant to
the Manpower Development and Training Act of 1962, as amended,
have direct relevance to and have been significant sources of funding
for training in water pollution control: the Coupled On-The-Job
Training (OJT) Program and the Public Service Careers (PSC)
Program. MDTA funds are also expended in support of the Transi-
tion Program of the Department of Defense. Part of each of these
programs is administered under interagency agreement with EPA;
these arrangements are discussed in subsection C-2-a, below. The
MDTA programs are discussed in general terms below.
(i) The Coupled OJT Program
The Secretary of Labor is authorized to expend Federal funds for
the provision of programs for on-the-job training. Through contracts
with the Department of Labor, public and private employers provide
supervised work at the
[p. IV-25]
job site for entry employees hired from the ranks of the disadvantaged
or for those employees requiring skills upgrading. Upgrade training
is oriented to low-skilled workers trapped in low-paying jobs (the
"working poor") and to occupational positions with skills shortages.
Projects which include related supplementary classroom instruction
are referred to as coupled institutional and on-the-job training or,
more commonly, coupled OJT. (When so combined, joint DOL and
HEW funding is provided under interagency agreement, although the
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3951
separate funding channels are maintained for administrative pur-
poses.)
No statistics regarding funding and enrollment for OJT or coupled
OJT programs or for those specifically related to water pollution
were available. EPA involvement in the Coupled OJT program is
discussed in subsection C-2-a- (1) of this part of the report.
(ii) The Public Service Careers Program
The PSC Program was launched in FY 1970 under the authority
of the MDTA and the Economic Opportunity Act. The program is
designed to provide permanent jobs in government service agencies
for disadvantaged workers and also to assist in upgrading employees
in dead-end, low-paid positions. Based on a "hire first, train later"
concept, the PSC Program helps defray part of the costs of OJT and
intensive supportive services for disadvantaged workers hired by
public agencies and also helps finance upgrading activities. It is the
counterpart program to JOBS (Job Opportunities in the Business
Sector).
The program has four major plans, two of which have potential
relevance to manpower training in water pollution control:
Plan A provides for the award of contracts directly to State,
county, and local government agencies and independent special
districts for entry and upgrading of disadvantaged workers.
Although the workers' salaries and fringe benefits are paid from
the employing agency's regularly budgeted funds, PSC funds are
intended to defray the extraordinary costs of training. The up-
grading phase, restricted to agencies that have an entry project,
is focused on the underutilized, low-income employee.
Plan B provides for entry employment and upgrading in Fed-
eral grant-in-aid programs. The Department of Labor negotiates
agreements with other Federal agencies to
[p. IV-26]
build arrangements into their grant-in-aid programs with State,
county, and local government agencies and independent special
districts. The Federal grant agency negotiates and awards con-
tracts or provides grants to these sponsors. The basic concepts
of Plan B are identical to those of Plan A.
No figures were available on the funds provided under Plan A
which were related to water pollution control. Activity under Plan
B is discussed in subsection C-2-a- (3) of this part of the report.
(Although no data were available at the time of final preparation
of this report, the Emergency Employment Act of 1971 (P.L. 92-54) 1
may provide additional funding assistance opportunities for employ-
ment and training in water pollution control.)
-------
3952 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
(Hi) The Transition Program of the Department of Defense (DOD)
The DOD has estimated that about 20 percent of servicemen about
to separate from the military lack the educational
1 The Emergency Employment Act of 1971 authorizes the Secretary of Labor to provide
public employment for unemployed workers by entering into arrangements with:
units of Federal, State, and general local government;
public agencies and institutions which are subdivisions of state or general local gov-
ernment, and institutions of the Federal Government; or
Indian tribes on Federal or State reservations.
The purpose of the Act is to provide unemployed and underemployed persons with
transitional employment in jobs providing needed public services during times of high un-
employment and, wherever feasible, to provide related training and manpower services to
enable such persons to move into employment or training not supported under this Act.
The Secretary of Labor is authorized until 30 June 1973 to obligate funds when the unem-
ployment rate equals or exceeds 4.5 percent for three consecutive months. The mechanism
is automatic and provisions in the law were activated when signed by the President on 12
July 1971, since the unemployment rate had been above 45 percent for the requisite time
period. This Act represents a possible source of funds for transitional employment for the
unemployed to work in public agencies concerned with water quality. It provides for the
payment of 90 percent of wages and salaries in public employment, up to a total Federal
share of $12,000 per year per employee. The Act authorized the appropriation of $750 mil-
lion in FY 1972 and $1 billion in FY 1973.
[p. IV-27]
or civilian job-related skills required for transition to civilian employ-
ment. The Transition Program was established to provide occupa-
tional training to provide marketable skills, educational reinforcement
to upgrade to secondary or high school equivalency levels, counseling
to determine career desires and educational and training choices, and
job placement assistance to locate employment opportunities or to se-
cure jobs during the six-month period immediately prior to separation.
Both classroom and on-the-job training are provided by cooperating
public and private organizations. OJT programs are arranged with
public agencies or private employers, while institutional training
programs are scheduled on or near military bases. During FY 1970,
approximately $4 million in MDTA funds were used to train about
12,000 servicemen in a variety of occupational areas, including water
pollution control.
The Veterans Administration (VA). Under authority of the
Veterans Readjustment Benefits Act of 1966, as amended (more
commonly considered the "GI Bill"), the VA provides rehabilitation
and education benefits for veterans of post-Korean conflict service.
Among those benefits are the following which have particular
relevance to preparation and training for water pollution control
activities:
First priority for veterans for referral to and selection for
federally sponsored manpower training programs. (In FY 1970,
over 20 percent of new enrollees in MDTA institutional and OJT
programs were veterans.)
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3953
Remedial educational benefits for veterans without high school
diplomas or equivalency, without reducing their entitlements
for college or vocational allowances.
Monthly allowances ($175 minimum) for attendance at uni-
versities or two-year colleges or in approved OJT programs.
(Nearly 10 percent of Vietnam era veterans who have received
educational training benefits have been enrolled in apprentice-
ship or other OJT programs.)
Simultaneous payments of training allowances under both the
GI Bill and the MDTA.
The President's Committee on the Vietnam Veteran recommended
that the VA use provisions of the GI Bill to develop additional OJT
courses that serve a public need. An approved OJT program requires
an employment commitment and may last from six to 24 months.
Water pollution control was one major area specified in the
recommendation.
[p. IV-28]
To fulfill this and other recommendations of the Committee, the
Jobs for Veterans campaign was launched in late 1970. Additionally,
the President's Veterans Program, announced in mid-1971, provides
further emphasis on the coordination and utilization of Federal re-
sources and programs for the returning veteran. Participation of
veterans in federally assisted programs is expected to increase sub-
stantially. Those federally sponsored programs discussed above
which provide training opportunities for veterans (and which can be
targeted to water pollution control activities) are illustrated below:
ALTERNATE CAREER PROGRESSION FOR TRANSITION GRADUATES
Military Service
Civilian Skills
Transition
12 Kecks
/
/
, /
/
Training
22 Weeks
OJT Program
44 Weeks
Direct
Fmployment
i —
Work Experience
VA- Approved
OJT Pro gram
.
\v
\^
^ Operator
+ Certitication
S
/
-Approximately 1 Year-
[p. IV-29]
4. Assessment of the Training Activities of Non-EPA-Organizations
Against the frame of reference established at the beginning of this
-------
3954 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
section, the roles played by the non-EPA organizations and the
orientation and the contribution of their training activities in meeting
the current and evolving training needs of water pollution control
professionals, technicians, and operators will be assessed in terms of:
Their capacity to train manpower for water pollution control
(facilities and instructors).
Their development of information with which to provide that
training (curricula and materials).
Their financial support provided to others to enable the train-
ing to be initiated and conducted.
Broad measures of training effectiveness, in terms of the compre-
hensiveness, coordination, responsiveness, and overall economic value
of these activities, underlie both the assessment of roles and the
assessment of contributions in responding to occupational needs.
a. Assessment of Roles. The primary role of four-year colleges
and universities has been the direct provision of entry training for
professionals. Formal degree programs offer the potential capacity
to fulfill that role, but in spite of the financial support received from
other Federal agencies, these programs have not been oriented point-
edly to water pollution control. Although the four-year colleges and
universities have great potential for extending their capacity to train
professionals already working in this field, they have not been suffi-
ciently active in doing so. Capabilities for transferring technology
developed in research have not been fully established, and financial
support is required.
Two-year colleges and technical schools, despite their relatively
recent attention to water pollution control, represent the primary
resource for entrants at the technician or upper-operating levels. The
capacity of these institutions needs to be increased substantially.
These institutions also have the capacity for providing remedial or
transitional education for the unemployed or for those in the work
force whose educational deficiencies prevent their upward mobility.
This capacity has been tapped to a limited extent under programs
funded under the Manpower Development and Training Act. How-
ever, two-year college and technical school entry programs require
expansion and distinctive orientation to water pollution control, in
general, and wastewater treatment technology and operations, in
particular. Curricula must be standardized, and basic training mate-
rials need to be developed and refined or reoriented.
[p. IV-30]
Two-year colleges and technical schools have been virtually in-
active in providing upgrade training for technicians and operators at
the higher levels. Upgrade training programs need to be expanded
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3955
considerably, and financial support from non-EPA Federal agencies,
which has not been pointed specifically to these needs, should be
applied to improve the capabilities of these institutions.
.Associations have been extremely active—and successful—in invit-
ing enlightened attention to the dificiencies in manpower training,
especially for wastewater treatment plant operators. They have
encouraged the improvement of operations through their support of
mandatory operator certification, their promotion of increased capa-
cities for training of operators and technicians, and their sponsorship,
through local units, of short courses. Their catalytic and enabling
roles are limited, to large degree, by their size and financial con-
straints. Associations require support for their special areas of
interest and expertise. Collaborative efforts with government agen-
cies should be increased.
Employers in the private sector (industrial manufacturers, con-
sulting engineers, and suppliers of chemicals and equipment) have
generally attended to the training needs of their own employees.
Only the larger firms have developed formal programs; only suppliers
and, to a limited degree, consulting engineers appear to offer formal
training programs for use of others. Programs need to be developed
to respond to the anticipated expansion of industrial wastewater
treatment activities. Governmental and nongovernmental roles in
this endeavor need solidification.
Local governments and agencies have been constrained severely in
their training activities by their size and their budgetary limitations,
but they have been the beneficiaries of considerable support from the
state and Federal sectors. Only the larger jurisdictions have con-
ducted independent training activities beyond the scope of informal
orientation and on-the-job training. A number have been the direct
or indirect recipients of Federal funds, primarily under one of the
MDTA-sponsored programs. Local government agencies should play
a greater role in shaping the nature of their training to their own
particular environment. Encouragement and financial support are
needed to make better use of training and manpower resources avail-
able to fill their needs.
State water pollution control agencies traditionally have sponsored
short courses for operators, frequently in collaboration with others.
These agencies have suffered with inadequate staffing and funding
to perform fully their enabling roles. They also have operated
fragmentally in pursuit of common goals with their sister agencies
(employment, education, health) whose categorically distinctive
orientations frequently inhibit, rather than encourage, collaborative
action. When collaboration has been evident, striking results have
been achieved. Collaboration has been most noteworthy in the states'
-------
3956 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
involvements with short courses. Indeed, the state's most active
role has been collaborative sponsorship of short-course
[p. IV-31]
upgrade training for operators and participation in MDTA-funded
entry and upgrade programs, of longer duration, for lower level opera-
tors. Independent support of the direct training activities of others has
been limited.
State water pollution control agencies need strengthening by in-
creased staffing and financial support to build their capacity for plan-
ning, organizing, administering, and conducting training programs.
Closer cooperation and coordination among agencies within a state
are required to maximize the potential of the resources they collec-
tively can marshall for water pollution control training. Additionally,
their independent efforts require general coordination and guidance
to ensure reasonable consistency among the states and to capitalize
on opportunities for widespread replication of individual efforts on
a regional or national scale.
The roles of non-EPA Federal agencies have been varied. A limited
role has been played in the provision of direct training for those
engaged in water pollution control. Limited internal training activity
has been reported by those Federal agencies which operate their own
treatment facilities.1 These programs apparently have been planned
and developed independently. The management training provided
by the Civil Service Commission is designed for general purposes
and is presented to heterogeneous groups at the Federal, state, and
local levels.
Substantial Federal financial support is provided to educational
institutions. Funds provided by the National Science Foundation
support the basic sciences and are generalized in orientation. Simi-
larly, vocational educational support by the Office of Education is
generalized (about 0.2 percent of the program funds were reported
to have been directed specifically to water and waste treatment tech-
nology). Support provided by the Office of Water Resources Re-
search and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
is related only tangentially to water pollution control (the former
primarily to water supply and the latter to the environment's impact
on man).
The MDTA-funded programs administered by the Manpower Ad-
ministration and the Office of Education have been used actively and
productively in some of the states. Expanded use is required to
realize their full potential. The Institutional Training Program and
the Transition Program offer a source of entrants prepared to assume
lower level operator positions. Their maximum effectiveness is
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3957
achieved when oriented directly to water pollution control. The
Coupled-OJT and Public Service Careers programs offer potential
for both entry and upgrade training for lower level operator positions.
Plan A of the PSC program offers funding of water pollution control
training projects directly to state and local governments;
1 Executive Order 11507 requires compliance of Federal installations to water quality
standards for Federal facilities by the middle of FY 1973. It also requires that all Federal
operators meet or exceed the state operator qualification standards for their locale.
[p. IV-32]
yet little activity has been reported. Finally, pointed use of veterans'
benefits under the GI Bill has potential for increasing the reservoir of
trained manpower for entry into water pollution control activities.
Like the states, potentials for assistance from non-EPA Federal
agencies are great, efforts have been fragmentary, and pointed orien-
tation and coordination of resources toward water pollution control
have been inadequate.
As evidenced in the foregoing assessments, the roles played by
others have been varied and closely interrelated. Certain limitations
and requirements for supplementation have been evident. These are
synopsized in Exhibit IV-1.
[p. IV-33]
-------
3958
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
5-
5.
g
fe
o
o
z
o
&-
FRAINING ACTIVITIES IN WATER POLI
cz
LU
S
•c
w
1
o
LL.
O
g
g
^
S
_J
i
<
2
£
tr
fe
DC
<
E
Eg
0.
LL.
O
CO
CO
>-
^
1
^
h-
ffl
X
2
w
c
c
'i
1
t
re
_E
ol
o
L)
QJ
CO
c
o>
•o
3
TJ
c
ra
I
E
a.
o
s
o
•o
d program
Financial support for WPC-oriente
incentives is limited.
u>
«3
C
,°
vt
*2?
e
D.
S
s
c
<5
S
"c
0)
+^
u
£
o
•o
c
ra
S
00
— ta
0 S
Is C
*|
3 H
3
bO
C
Irt
5
S
•o
£
"
1
O
c
activities i
Technology developed in research
professionals.
Upgrade activities insufficient.
>TJ
1 s
'•s g
.= °
« i
s •=
Financial support for programs not
eral, or wastewater treatment tei
Curricula not standardized.
Training materials inadequate.
Upgrade activities insufficient.
g
CO
£
O
s
u
&
3
•o
C
ra
t*»
£
BO
c
'c
'TO
4=
•£
•5
S
5
•O
C
« 0)
S §
5?o
= CO
O
" .S
« 'E
> u
i "
i-
c
o
'o
™
3
l/i
C
«
u
1
s
"re
'o
c
ra
_c
•o
c
ra
1
ra bb
E c
si
= M
•c_ +3
f 03
ta T3
11
5 §•
ifS
S 0.
°l
0 0
Sc
0
1»
^3 (D
0 >
CO &
M 2
!i
E -5
*• s
1 =
r s
°.l
b. 4^
as
11
.E «>
ll
nt
o
:
•
•
VI
c
_o
.2
*G
°
^
c
I
15
CO
0>
to
$
o>
"5
bo
.ra
K
s
3
Q.
15
i
cu ,£
C Q}
™ £
5 "o
5 —
o TI:
o
!=
c .2
'i= "o
55
•§.£
•° <5
O> 43
S ..
' O
5
73
s
bO
ra
"g
5
c
o
'u
v>
Staffing and financial resources in
Interagency collaboration limited.
Coordinative focal point absent.
Capacity to train inadequate.
•
e
s
CO
S.
o
£
V>
Q>
3
O
u
t
o
J=
^
o
to
1_
o
to
1
g
re
i
o
o
;
'•
«
*G
c
ra
«
S5
S
•o
_o>
c
(O>
o
o
c
0
•o
o>
"w
0>
c
Q>
bO
t
s
Direct training very limited.
Support of educational institutions
wpn
fr
w
L.
O
c
_o
3
£
£
"ra
c
.2
(0
^
•o
^_
o
o
a
a
«
c
0)
u
s
V)
s .
ra M
15 2
"o bo
c p
«2 ^
c **
LI
e
0}
^
w
2 3
£1
2!
S
MDTA funding limited in scope.
Interagency collaboration limited.
Coordinative focal point absent.
S
1
J
a>
,e
^j
re
e
s
2
Q.
L.
^
bo
c
1
V
s
bO
Q.
a
•g
ra
t
1
"o
I
E
bo J»
•- S
= 1
3
LL.
r— i
^
g
£j
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3959
b. Assessment by Occupational Needs.—The focus of manpower
training ultimately must be on the man—the target and immediate
beneficiary of the training. An assessment of training activities is
incomplete without examining the orientation and contributions of
those activities in meeting the needs of the major occupational cate-
gories of manpower for water pollution control:
Professionals
Operators and Technicians
For each of these categories, activities will be assessed in terms of
their orientation (entry or upgrade training) and their contribution
(needs satisfied and needs unmet).
(1) Training for Professionals. As the complexity of water pol-
lution control increases, so do the number of professional disciplines
involved and the extent of training required to cope with its problems.
The distinctive entry and upgrade orientations necessary in profes-
sional training provide a valuable tool for assessing the adequacy
of current activities in the training of professionals for water pollu-
tion control.
Entry Training for Professionals. Water pollution control pro-
grams require a wide range of professional talents. Technical prob-
lems are increasingly complex; management demands offer substantial
professional challenge. Clearly, higher levels of formal education,
in depth within the technology and in breadth across disciplines, are
required. A pointed orientation to water pollution control is neces-
sary, but attention must be given to the management of technology
as well as to the technology itself.
Direct entry training for professionals has been provided largely
by four-year colleges and universities, who have provided the capac-
ity and have developed the information necessary to prepare pro-
fessional entrants through degree programs, primarily at the graduate
level. Programs have been scientifically oriented, with limited
emphasis on practical operations and managerial considerations. As
suggested by Professor John H. Austin of Clemson University,
"Design and operation of plants are two sides of the same coin and
graduates of university programs must have an understanding of the
necessity for proper operation and ways this might be effected; this
is not believed to be the case at present." *
1 Conference Proceedings, Educational Systems for Operators of Water Pollution Control
Facilities, Atlanta, Georgia, 3-5 November 1969, sponsored by Federal Water Pollution Con-
trol Administration In cooperation with Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina, pp.
137-140.
[p. IV-35]
Financial assistance for university efforts has come primarily from
the Federal sector. The impact of funds provided by other Federal
-------
3960 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
agencies has been positive in increasing the total professional labor
pool. Its direct impact on water pollution control has been limited,
since most of the support has either been generalized or oriented to
subjects only tangentially related.
Update and Upgrade Training for Professionals. Short courses
offer the best potential for updating the skills of professionals in the
field and for developing transitional skills in those recruited from
allied fields. The rapid rate of technological change mandates the
need for transfer of technology to practitioners. The complexity of
the technology and i,ts management dictates the need for a broad
range of subjects, from basic scientific skills to the sophistications of
advanced technology of the management sciences.
Little update or upgrade training has been directly provided for
professionals by the universities, the private sector, or by state or
local government agencies. Programs of other Federal agencies are
limited in number, generalized in scope, and relatively inaccessible
to water pollution control professionals in the field.
(2) Training for Operators and Technicians. Operators comprise
a wide range of personnel, from the lower level operator who requires
a rudimentary knowledge of wastewater treatment processes and
operational techniques, to the chief treatment plant operator who
manages a large and complex advanced wastewater treatment facility
and who supervises a number of operational personnel. Each level
of skill within this range requires a correspondingly specialized level
of training.
The educational requirements of a technician are reasonably com-
patible with those of operators at higher levels of skill or organiza-
tion. Assessments of training activities and, indeed, the formation of
training programs should recognize this commonality of needs as
quite distinctive from those of the lower level operator. Therefore,
the needs of lower level operators and those of technicians and upper
level operators are discussed separately below as parameters for
assessing current training activities.
Lower Level Operators
Entry Training for Lower Level Operators. Jobs in the lower
portion of the operator structure generally require lower educational
qualifications and involve less sophisticated types of job responsibili-
ties than do jobs in the upper levels. The high school graduate or
those whose educational skills can be raised to that level are the
prime candidates for entry to these jobs. Vocational orientation for
the high school graduate can be and generally is provided by on-the-
job training programs, either.
[p. IV-36]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3961
informally or formally structured. Repair of academic deficiencies and
concomitant requirements for vocational preparation generally neces-
sitate a more structured and lengthy program.
This type of training requirement suggests a set of conditions
compatible with various national social programs designed to assist
the disadvantaged, particularly those programs funded under the
Manpower Development and Training Act. Pretechnical programs to
repair academic deficiencies, such as institutional training, permit
the potential entrant to reach a degree of productivity, once in a job,
much earlier than if he were to enter the job without such training.
Programs which combine institutional training with OJT (such as
Coupled OJT, Public Service Careers, and the Transition Program)
offer even more potential for acceleration. The most effective form
of job-related training is at the field level, where entrants are able
to work with and ask questions of practitioners.
MDTA-funded programs have been arranged directly with some
agencies to help prepare entrants for lower level operator positions.
The scope of states and localities covered and the level of funding
have been inadequate. For the most part, programs have been
centralized at the larger facilities or in urban locations where large
numbers of the disadvantaged are concentrated. Qualified instruc-
tors have been difficult to recruit and train; of the alternatives of
either teaching the teacher about operations or teaching the operator
to teach, the latter has been considered preferable but not enough
instructional programs have been available. Curricula and materials
for these programs require focus and standardization. The absence of
centralized coordination at the national level raises potential and
inevitable questions of quality control and economies of resources.
Dozens of separate, uncoordinated programs dilute the potential for
economic attainment of national objectives.
Unmet needs include:
Expansion of MDTA-funded programs in coverage (to more
states and localities), location (accessible to smaller facilities),
and funding levels (beyond that currently provided directly to
states and localities).
Programs to equip operators with requisite teaching skills to
instruct in entry-level programs.
Curricula and training materials tailored to the comprehensive
needs of entry-level operators at the lower echelons.
Alternative entry-level programs to reach that portion of the
available entrant pool who do not meet the requirements as
"disadvantaged" for MDTA program eligibility.
[p. IV-37]
-------
3962 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Update and Upgrade Training for Lower Level Operators. Updat-
ing the skills of those already employed at lower levels and upgrading
those employees to higher level positions has traditionally been
accomplished informally, on the job, through contact with those who
possess the advanced knowledge or skills. Few formal programs had
been developed prior to 1968, when operator training began to re-
ceive intensive emphasis by all sectors.
State-supported programs, presented independently or in collabo-
ration with associations, have been of relatively short duration.
Those programs that extend over a period of weeks have been
limited in quantity. Comprehensive approaches, such as that illus-
trated in Texas, have been the exception rather than the rule. Some
of the MDTA programs funded directly with states and localities
(Coupled OJT or Public Service Careers, Plan A) have included
components to upgrade existing employees in lower level positions
who are disadvantaged ("the working poor") or whose advancement
would help to alleviate occupations with skills shortages. The same
limitations apply to this component as were described previously for
the entry component (limitations in coverage, location, funding, in-
structors, curricula, materials, and coordination). In particular,
upgrade programs for lower level operators must be responsive to
the needs of local personnel and offered in locations that will provide,
not deny, opportunities for convenient attendance. Problems in
reaching smaller communities are compounded by the costs of travel
and the necessity to provide relief operators.
Unmet needs are the same as those outlined for entry programs for
lower level operators.
Technicians and Upper Level Operators
Entry Training for Technicians and Upper Level Operators. Tech-
nicians, by their very title, may require very specialized technical
training—ranging from computer technology to the operation of
sophisticated analytical equipment. Their close working relationships
with professionals and operators suggest expanded educational prepa-
ration to include a basic appreciation of those functions as well.
Most technicians currently engaged in water pollution control ac-
tivities are experienced plant personnel promoted through the ranks.
Those in specialized positions may require degrees at the associate
level, although the orientation of programs of two-year colleges to
water pollution control technology has been too recent to produce a
substantial number of graduates already in the field. A number of
current technicians hold bachelor's degrees, although many consider
them to be underemployed. Technicians require post-secondary
training, either in one-year or two-year programs at community col-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3963
leges or technical schools. Associate degree programs particularly
oriented to water pollution control technology are required for spe-
cialized laboratory work.
[p. IV-38]
Personnel for the higher echelons of the operator structure have
correspondingly higher entry requirements than those at the lower
levels. Their jobs characteristically include supervisory responsi-
bilities, necessitating a much more comprehensive understanding of
the plant's various processes and their interrelationships. To perform
effectively, the upper level operator must obtain a thorough under-
standing of the complete technology of the entire plant system and the
scientific principles that govern the effectiveness of wastewater treat-
ment. Higher level operators require a balanced education to compre-
hend the principles (the basic sciences), apply them practically (the
treatment process), and supervise their activities (the management
of technology). The educational preparation required for these posi-
tions is no less demanding than that required for the entrant tech-
nician. (Indeed, many jurisdictions require a bachelor degree or
higher for their superintendents or chief operators; many argue that
an associate degree, properly tailored, is sufficient.) Certainly, the
movement toward larger and more complex plants suggests the
desirability of high educational levels. This educational background
should be provided at least at the two-year college or technical school
level.
Substantial amounts of Federal, state, and local funds are poten-
tially available for the education of skilled operators and technicians,
primarily through the two-year colleges and technical schools. How-
ever, financial support from these levels and stimulation from other
Federal agencies, for the most part, has been generalized without
pointed focus to water pollution control. Graduates of these pro-
grams should be prepared for employment in upper level operator
positions or as technicians (in research and development, industrial
sales and service, design and construction, regulatory agencies, and
larger treatment facilities).
The development and implementation of programs in wastewater
treatment technology in two-year institutions have not kept pace with
the need for adequately prepared entrants. Programs generally have
been inadequate, both in quantity and quality. Curricula have been
varied and require standardization. Training materials and an in-
structional cadre have been slow in development.
Unmet needs include:
Development of criteria for the establishment, maintenance,
-------
3964 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
and improvement of programs at two-year colleges and technical
schools.
Refined curricula and tailored training materials.
Expansion of the available instructional cadre.
[p. IV-39]
Upgrade Training for Technicians and Upper Level Operators.
Increasing the skills of technicians in the work force offers a sub-
stantial potential to increase the productivity of the professionals
with whom they work and some of whose responsibilities they can
assume. A wide range of updated and expanded skills is required
to realize this potential. Many operators at the higher levels have
been promoted through the ranks. Updated and upgraded skills are
required, particularly in advanced treatment and the management
sciences. Generally, state agencies in collaboration with others have
been most active in sponsoring short courses. The type and number
have varied substantially. The states have been restricted in these
activities by inadequate resources and capacity.
MDTA-funded programs are not designed primarily for this level
of employee. Direct training programs of other Federal agencies
have not focused on wastewater treatment technology or its
management.
Universities have been involved sporadically. Technology transfer
opportunities have not been fully exploited.
Two-year colleges and technical schools have not had limited
involvement; their major orientation, however recent, has been in
long-term resident programs. Once the institutional capacity is in
place, they represent a logical source for development and expansion
of upgrade training programs.
Unmet needs include:
A comprehensive program of direct training oriented specifi-
cally to the updating and upgrading of skills required by tech-
nicians and operators at the higher levels (particularly those
skills related to expanding technology).
A formal mechanism for technology transfer to these prac-
titioners.
Tailored curricula and training materials and improved in-
structional capabilities.
Training programs in management and supervision, oriented
to the specific environment of the operator and technician.
Increased capacity and resources in the states to initiate,
develop, administer, and present innovative and responsive train-
ing (for this and other purposes).
The contributions of others is satisfying the training needs of the
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3965
major occupational categories of manpower in water pollution con-
trol have been substantial, but a number of needs remain. Unmet
needs are synopsized in Exhibit IV-2.
[p. IV-40]
-------
3966
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
C3
Z
Z
^
»-
o"
1
z
o
U
z
o
p
J
o
Q.
£
1
z
s
LJ
z
te
E
z
U.
o
E;
o.
o
*f
7
~
ffi
a
•a
c
3
U.
c
0
re
£
C
s
11.
Is
CL _
0 £ •
_ o w
'II
£ *£ tj
t ~ ft
§.? •£
§• ™ a>
"TO 'o ^
1*6
I S*
E
C w «? "5
SE g|
C £ .0 g>
f o S |
IIIJ
TO o
.1 I o TO
Slsl
E - c 2
"S g t °
'c o o 12
•— s a>
i» £• • t5 22
- 42 o 2 |
£-~ttE
i
c
a.
X
o
V)
OJ
a-
aT
U
JO
a.
c
:
*
i
&
UJ
"TO
c
o
(0
£
S
l_
"w
(O
o
o
c
I
fe
i s
c tf3
TO ~
E a
se
<
S? s
•| TO a.
*= — ^
o ^ >^
V Q. A
' « S
i^l
sl?I
| « M~
2 li l
E" £ M '"
<
•
•S
2
bO
1
1
=
11 M*
•- M c "° -0
TO o „ TO X
el -S
*3
& S S S *
'w — •— *~ oT c «
111 I g ™ |
** c TO £• """ « W)
t « 'o c" " .£
o -a -g * S 5 TO dJ
^ ^ T3 •>
•5 u s S S - "
1 | £ S « S |
| S 5 fe S .» &
O _J J-
> w *«
1? 11
:= £ £
|I 1 I
£ TO — 0>
E£ «5 u
MB S
.52 g c ^
•- £ ~ " =
2 o ^ go
^ ° f f tj
™ *s « ^ &
TO TO££2^"~5— o1 '^^ .E.2"c
UJ L < O UJ £
•§ : -S •
2 -25
g : g 2
3 ; 3 M
la : is =
II S li I
c c c Q.
Ul UJ UJ 3
"QJ
•3 C ^1 S
ZS .2 •- °
te S. 1 «•£.
SO 0 X O
o „
1— 1
&:
d
L_J
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3967
5. Conclusions Regarding the Training Activities of Non-EPA Organi-
zations
The needs for training water pollution control manpower are gen-
erally recognized and the multiplicity of needs has suggested a multi-
plicity of approaches from all sectors concerned. As a result, the
basic institutional framework for developing and delivering the train-
ing is generally established.
Efforts of others have been constrained in numerous ways, how-
ever. Capacities have been established but are insufficient to meet
the expected demand for manpower oriented specifically in water
pollution control. The training information which has been devel-
oped is not sufficiently tailored to meet the comprehensive and
diversified needs of the potential or existing work force. Financial
support potentially available to develop both these capacities and the
requisite information has not been provided outside EPA in sufficient
amounts and has not been effectively channeled to meet the demon-
strated needs.
Programs that have been implemented have been parochial in
their orientation: professional training has been largely restricted to
graduate level entry programs; lower level operator training has
been concentrated in centralized locations, oriented primarily to the
environments of the larger facilities; and training for technicians and
higher level operators has been sporadic and narrowly focused. A
comprehensive strategy to focus programs on particularized and
comprehensive needs has not been developed by the independent or
collaborative efforts of others.
These efforts have been fragmented and have suffered from a
conspicuous lack of coordination. As a result, programs have prolif-
erated, overlapping and competing for scarce resources. These scarce
resources have not been allocated either efficiently or effectively,
thereby reducing the return on their investment. Mechanisms for
achieving economies, through interagency coordination and conse-
quent channeling of resources to priority needs in water pollution
control training, have not been fully developed.
Responses by others to the evolving training needs of professionals,
technicians and operators have been incomplete. The Environmental
Protection Agency, through its Office of Water Programs and its
predecessor organization, the Federal Water Quality Administration,
has attempted to overcome these limitations, supplement these roles,
and satisfy these unmet needs, as reported in Section C, below.
[p. IV-42]
C. EPA WATER POLLUTION CONTROL TRAINING ACTIVITIES
The Environmental Protection Agency has undertaken the develop-
-------
3968 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
ment of a multifaceted training program to supplement the roles
played by others, to help overcome the limitations of their activities,
and to attempt to satisfy the unmet training needs of the professionals,
technicians, and operators in or entering the field of water pollution
control.
The skills and abilities of these personnel represent an essential
resource in the nation's effort to restore and protect the environment.
As established in Part II of this report, the qualified manpower pool
in water pollution control is insufficient to meet the expanding de-
mand in both the private and public sectors. Additionally, many of
those employed in the field are undertrained, have skills too narrowly
focused, or possess educational backgrounds and experience that are
dated in terms of an expanding technology.
Under its charter, EPA has attempted to help respond to these
deficiencies through the conduct and support of training activities
designed to expand the number and improve the abilities of personnel
engaged in water pollution control. In doing so, EPA has shaped its
training activities according to a fundamental three-step training
strategy:
Determination of the various training needs and their order of
priority.
Development of carefully tailored training approaches making
maximum use of existing resources.
Implementation of approaches in a cost-effective manner.
EPA activities in determining training needs have been reported
in Part II above. Of most significance is EPA's intention to help
develop this capacity in other sectors, particularly in the States.
The EPA strategy for developing effective and comprehensive
approaches to training again relates to the essential ingredients of
any manpower training program: requisite capacity, information, and
financial support. Once a need has been identified, capacities must be
identified or developed and supported to respond to that need. It is
EPA's policy to work within the existing institutional framework
and to develop and encourage the use of new mechanisms for the
delivery of training at the point closest to the source of the need.
EPA's strategy is to help build this capacity and to supplement, rather
than supplant, the activities of others
[p. IV-43]
only when they are unable to respond in a timely fashion. EPA is
attempting to ensure that a sufficiently wide range of facilities and
accessible, qualified instructors are available to respond to the full
variety of training needs.
Once capacities are identified or developed, the information with
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3969
which to train must be available to respond to the identified need.
Given EPA's knowledge of the latest technology in water pollution
control and its focus on matters of national concern, the Agency is in
a position to encourage the development of information most respon-
sive to the needs of water pollution control manpower. Accordingly,
EPA's strategy is to encourage and support or to help build the capac-
ity of others to develop curricula and training materials tailored to
the variety of needs that exist or are evolving. As noted previously,
a full complement of information (formal courses of varying duration,
correspondence courses, training aids, programmed instruction) may
frequently be needed to respond comprehensively and at differing
stages and levels of need.
To help build these capacities and develop the requisite information,
EPA provides technical and financial support to others and helps
channel the support and resources that can be provided by others, all
specifically pointed to training in water pollution control. To accom-
plish this objective, EPA must coordinate closely with others, partic-
ularly with other Federal agencies whose support, resources, and
programs share compatible objectives. EPA must also help coordi-
nate the efforts of others and encourage parallel coordination among
others to promote optimum allocation of resources.
In implementing this strategy and in supplementing the roles of
others, EPA has focused its programs to:
Support universities and individual students, mainly at grad-
uate levels, in programs leading to professional careers in water
pollution control.
Provide a direct mechanism for continuing training of these
and other personnel, conveying through this mechanism the re-
sults of technological advancements in the field.
Expand the coverage of programs of other Federal agencies
to channel their resources more effectively to the manpower
training needs in water pollution control.
Build the capacities of the states and two-year educational
institutions to help provide an adequately trained corps of treat-
ment plant operators and water pollution control technicians.
[p. IV-44]
In shaping its training programs, EPA has attempted to satisfy
the unmet needs of the professionals and the operators and tech-
nicians who constitute the existing or potential manpower required
to control water pollution. The EPA activities in water pollution
control training are described and assessed in this section of the
report.
[p. IV-45]
-------
3970 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
1. EPA Training for Professionals
EPA has long been a vital source of training support for profes-
sionals preparing for or engaging in the water pollution control effort.
As authorized by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1956
and its subsequent amendments, EPA has attempted over the years to
respond to the entry, update, and upgrade training needs of these
professionals through the following programs:
Professional Training Grants:1 Awards to educational institu-
tions for the establishment, expansion, and improvement of
graduate level programs in water pollution control, including
traineeships for participating students (principally masters de-
gree candidates).
Research Fellowships:2 Awards to individuals, primarily pre-
doctoral students, for selected specialized research training in
water pollution control.
Technical Training:3 Training in technical matters relating to
the causes, prevention, and control of water pollution, including:
Direct training in specialized and advanced subjects, not
generally available elsewhere.
Activities in support of technical training.
Additionally, EPA has recently established a program to facilitate the
transfer of new technology from its developers to those who bear
responsibility for operational applications.
Actions taken under these programs will be summarized and
assessed in this subsection of the report; conclusions then will be
drawn concerning their responsiveness in satisfying the needs for
professional training left unmet by others.
a. The Professional training grants program.
(1) Scope and Activities of the Professional Training Grants Pro-
gram. EPA is authorized4 to make grants for training projects
1 Authorized and administered under subsections 5(a) (2) and 5(g) (3) (A) of the Act.
2 Authorized and administered under subsections 5 (a) (4) and 5(g) (3) (B) of the Act.
3 Authorized and administered under subsections 5(a) (5) and 5(g) (3) (C) of the Act.
4 Subsections 5 (a) (2) and 5(g) (3) (a) of the Act.
[p. IV-46]
to, and to provide for the conduct of training by contract with, public
and private agencies and institutions and individuals. The concentra-
tion of awards has been for graduate level training programs, consid-
ered for a number of years to be the area of greatest need. The
Professional Training Grants Program has focused on the develop-
ment of and the support of students in graduate level programs
(primarily at the masters level) in areas relevant to water pollution
control. A program, for undergraduate training grants and scholar-
ships oriented to the design, operation, and maintenance of treatment
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3971
plants was initiated recently and is reported in subsection III-C-2-c,
below.
Professional training grants are designed to stimulate the develop-
ment and improvement of graduate programs relating to water pollu-
tion control and to support, through traineeships, the graduate
students participating in these programs. In this way, the programs
produce a cadre of trained professionals prepared to contribute to
water quality management through subsequent positions in teaching,
research, consulting, or direct operation in staff capacities in the
public or private sectors.
Institutions are encouraged to develop specialized and interdiscipli-
nary training programs in order to produce the following kinds of
professionals:
The environmental engineer who is qualified to work in the
fields of construction, design, planning, or maintenance of water
pollution treatment plants.
The biologist who is qualified to provide the data needed in the
maintenance of approved water quality standards.
The chemist and the chemical engineer who can improve and
devise processes for the more economical treatment of pollutants.
The lawyer, the economist, and the social scientist who will
contribute to the efficient management and planning of water
pollution control efforts.
As a general rule, grants are awarded to initiate new and needed
programs or to support the expansion of a well-developed program
where expansion is warranted on the basis of known major national
needs. The grants are used to provide stipends and allowances for
full-time preparation for a graduate or postgraduate degree, as well
as to expand and improve staff, facilities, and equipment where the
training programs are offered.
Grants are awarded annually for one year at a time as part of a
training project. The planned project duration is limited to five
years and may be renewed subject to application and review, as with
the initial application.
[p. IV-47]
All grant awards are based on the following criteria:
Mission orientation of program and potential number and
orientation of graduates.
Response to EPA needs and objectives and to overall national
manpower requirements.
Scientific and technical excellence of proposed training
program.
Status of other federally supported institutional programs.
-------
3972 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Probable effectiveness of proposed program.
Extent of program need in geographic area.
Adequacy of staff and facilities.
Competency of staff to teach and conduct research in water
pollution control areas.
Extent of innovation in approaches to curricula development
and teaching methods.
Budget justification for requests.
Contribution of the institution to facilities and general support
of the proposed program.
To ensure that programs will continue to respond to the latest
trends and priorities in water pollution control, EPA awarded a grant
in FY 1971 to the American Association of Professors in Sanitary
Engineering (AAPSE) to help develop revised criteria and guidelines
for professional training programs.
An annual review of all projects is made by the EPA Office of
Water Programs (EPA/OWP) staff to determine program effective-
ness in meeting project objectives. Review of proposed and existing
programs is performed jointly by EPA/OWP staff and outside con-
sultants (academicians and research personnel well-known and re-
spected in the field, selected on the basis of their professional and
academic standing). This approach has injected new ideas and en-
sured objectivity in the review process. As part of the review of
existing programs, project sites have been visited periodically (ap-
proximately every three years) to determine overall effectiveness.
[p. IV-48]
Traineeships a supported by Professional Training Grants during
FY 1970 to FY 1972 are as follows:
Academic year Numtrr awarded Amount awarded
1970-71 788 $3,781,756
1971-72 932 4,562,682
The grants were awarded to institutions and agencies which have
ongoing programs in water pollution control and which have been
consistently producing graduates to satisfy manpower and training
needs in the water pollution control field. Exhibit IV-3 provides a
summary of these awards for FY 1970 and FY 1971 by State.2
Under these grants, training was provided in the following
disciplines:
Environmental Engineering.
Sanitary Engineering.
Environmental Chemical Engineering.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3973
Environmental Systems Engineering.
Agricultural and Environmental Engineering.
Environmental Mining Engineering.
Nuclear Environmental Engineering.
Soils Environmental Engineering.
Environmental Biology.
Limnology and Aquatic Biology.
Estuarine Biological, Physical and Chemical Oceanology.
Water Chemistry.
Interdisciplinary Environmental Programs.
Environmental Economics.
EPA has encouraged the institutions receiving grants not only to
develop water pollution control courses within multidisciplinary
curricula, but also to consider total environmental needs which may
cross
' Tralneeships represent the number of trainee-year stipends (that is, full-time, year-long
trainee positions). Given a trainee appointment covering an academic year of approximately
nine months, the number of students supported generally exceeds the number of traineeshtps
by approximately 30 percent.
2 A complete listing of these awards by State, institution within the State, and amount
awarded appears in the EPA publications, Water Quality Control Training Grants, 1970 and
1971 Grant Awards.
[p. IV-49]
EXHIBIT IV-3.—SUMMARY OF PROFESSIONAL TRAINING GRANTS AWARDED DURING FY 1970
AND FY 1971 BY STATE
Number of institutions
State
Alabama
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
District of Columbia . . .
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
New Jersey
and agencies
FY 1970
2
1
1
3
2
1
1
1
1
1
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
4
3
1
1
2
1
1
1
FY 1971
2
1
1
5
2
4
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
5
3
1
1
2
1
1
2
Number of awards
FY 1970
2
1
1
4
2
1
1
1
1
1
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
5
3
2
1
2
1
1
1
FY 1971
2
1
1
6
2
1
1
1
1
1
4
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
6
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
Amount awarded
FY 1970
$60,787
25,763
44,666
213,768
109,126
27,974
43,606
47,278
47,944
27,139
156,465
111,076
81,211
37,187
6,447
38,076
25,602
52,782
218,161
264,907
20,834
34,863
39,748
69,582
42,426
47,737
FY 1971
$103,729
46,513
54,861
380,086
116,621
44,264
33,236
106,962
37,653
33,157
245,041
113,363
99,204
41,368
47,249
38,597
36,036
105,118
317,325
83,415
32,831
44,150
99,628
60,339
40,608
97,372
-------
3974
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
EXHIBIT IV-3—SUMMARY OF PROFESSIONAL TRAINING GRANTS AWARDED DURING FY 1970
AND FY 1971 BY STATE—Continued
State
New Mexico . .
New York
North Carolina
Ohio
Oklahoma
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Washington ,
West Virginia ,
Wisconsin
Total
Number of institutions
and agencies
FY 1970
1
4
2
3
2
1
3
1
1
1
. . 1
. . 4
2
1
2
1
2
72
FY 1971
1
6
2
4
3
1
3
1
1
1
2
4
2
1
2
1
2
83
Number of awards
FY 1970
1
6
3
3
3
4
3
1
1
1
1
4
3
1
3
1
6
88
FY 1971
91
Amount awarded
FY 1970
$3,623
296,991
97,586
100,493
117,343
94,531
79,178
19,166
99,656
23,143
65,816
268,409
116,683
62,866
96,492
16,687
327,938
3,781,756
FY 1971
$43,152
286,621
92,622
223,719
151,173
86,592
127,847
30,938
116,713
33,750
45,487
145,336
138,878
10,149
207,696
28,475
334,808
4,562,682
Number of active professional training grants
FY1970 FY1971
States 43 43
Institutions and Agencies . 72 82
Grants 89 103
[p. IV-50]
and combine a number of traditional disciplines. In addition, it en-
courages them to propose programs in areas of particular local con-
cern; for example, in FY 1971 EPA awarded a grant for develop-
ment of a program on coastal and estuarine pollution. Similar pro-
grams are expected to be introduced in other institutions in the
future.
In academic year 1970-1971 (FY 1970 funds), 1,028 individuals
received support from professional training grants; in addition, over
2,000 other students took courses that were developed under funding
provided by these grants. Renewed and continued Professional
Training Grants in the same year supported the participation of 878
trainees, an increase of 19 percent over FY 1969. This increase in-
volved only a 13 percent increase in the amount of funds programmed.
This relatively inexpensive increase in trainee participation was
achieved largely because the largest portion of investment in faculty,
equipment, and curriculum development had been met in previous
years.
In FY 1970, 12 new professional training grants were awarded, 72
awards were continuations of grants originally awarded within the
previous four years, and four were renewals of programs initiated
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3975
five or more years previously. It is within this latter group that the
economy previously mentioned can most often be obtained—increas-
ing the number of trainees with a less than proportional increase in
cost.
In academic year 1971-1972 (FY 1971 funds), 91 professional train-
ing grants were continued, renewed, or initiated, with emphasis
placed on trainee support. These are expected to support a total of
1,051 trainees as compared to 1,028 trainees in FY 1970.
(2) Assessment of the Professional Training Grants Program. The
overall effectiveness of the EPA Professional Training Grants Pro-
gram can be measured by the economies it has produced. The
experience of EPA Professional Training Grants Program directors,
as well as on-site observation of virtually all of the 103 programs
supported at 83 institutions through FY 1971, indicates that initial
assistance in faculty support, equipment, acquisition, facilities adapta-
tion, and similar expenditures are essential to provide the base for a
new productive training program. The increase in trainee participa-
tion has been achieved because the largest part of the investment in
faculty, equipment, and curriculum development costs have been met
in previous years. (Over 79 percent of the EPA water quality pro-
grams are five years old or older.) Expenditures for non-student
support over the last six years have been gradually reduced, and
presently well over half of the EPA-supported programs spend less
than 20 percent on non-student-support items.
Exhibit IV-4 compares the rate of EPA growth of expenditures
for program costs with the corresponding rate of growth in number of
trainees supported and projected for the six-year period from 1967
through 1972. It demonstrates vividly the multiplier effect resulting
from the
[p. IV-51]
-------
3976
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
S83
ee
u. r>
GL O
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3977
initial investment and maturation of the supported programs. A more
comprehensive view of professional training grant activities over the
last decade appears in Exhibit IV-5.
As a result of this buildup of training capability and the maturation
of the EPA-financed Professional Training Grant, it now costs ap-
proximately 50 percent what it cost in the early 1960's to train a
water quality professional. Further, a significant number of students
not requiring outside support have been attracted to the field.
Another measure of program effectiveness is the number of grad-
uates who seek and obtain jobs in water pollution control. Less than
3 percent of the manpower trained under these grants have left the
field of water quality management. The following table illustrates
the broad range of water pollution control sectors entered by 869
graduate trainees whose present position is known:
Graduate trainees
Sector of employment
Private industry
Consulting engineering
Federal government
TOTAL
Percent
19
17
27
.... 5
13
19
100
Number
166
150
232
42
112
167
869
A detailed breakdown of job designations of trainees for FY 1963
through FY 1970 appears in Exhibit IV-6.
Finally, the EPA Professional Training Grants Program has pri-
marily national, rather than statewide or even regional, implications.
Almost three fifths of the programs draw more than half of their
students from outside the State, and about one third draw more than
half of their students from outside the region. In over 85 percent of
the programs, more than half of the graduates find jobs outside the
State, and in 50 percent of the programs the majority of graduates
find jobs even outside the region.
[p. IV-53]
-------
3978
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
EXHIBIT IV-5.—PROFESSIONAL TRAINING GRANTS PROGRAM ACTIVITIES 1962-1973
Academic year
1972-1973
1971-1972
1970-1971
1969-1970 .. ..
1968-1969
1967-1968
1966-1967
1965-1966
1964-1965
1963-1964
1962-1963
i Estimate
2 Not Available
Number of
traineeships
authorized
'1,015
932
788
. ... 633
509
391
323
250
192
114
67
Number of 1
trainees
appointed
(2)
1 1,051
1,028
607
522
493
422
336
256
147
79
Number of
professional
training
grants
(2)
91
88
79
75
71
67
57
54
35
23
Number of
states
involved
(2)
43
43
39
38
37
36
32
30
19
13
Number a
institution
involved
(!)
82
72
61
60
58
51
42
39
24
16
f
s Amount
awarded
1 $4,650,000
4,562,682
3,781,756
3 201 543
3,064,997
2 908 842
2 499 998
2 000 000
2 016 290
1 100 000
693 102
[p. IV-54]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3979
CO
UJ
UJ
^
0£
1—
-J
O
CO
U-
O
UJ i-l
'•>= te
O <0
• EPA-SU
3-Fiscal
o S
1 NATION '
cal Year
S£
Q
m
0
T
^
h-
O3
a
n
nil
••is
l&
e
i
Social
science prog
E
co'wi o.
** d>
o o
'o
"sfeb
SS&-
0 u
1
ental
programs
gcg
Sg
^.£
oo
c
5
•2
C
0)
0.
|
Z
c
<1»
0
Q_
eu
E
c
V
o
o.
J3
fc
C
«
E
=j
Z
Percent
0)
"E
+-
c
u
cu
Q_
1
o
M
^ CO r-t OQ CO ID CJ^iHCOO
S : : :§ : :8 : :S
i-l ^ | CM «-t ^ *^
co oo m co o oo mro
?H CM f
1-1
<-* CM COO)CA
vi-ItocoiniDfOrH^cocnrx
rH i-H C4 i-l f-i t-4 rl
:::::•& s : : : •
: : 1 1 »
: M .1 " =
cec= oS?E & S
IIIl sls|l 1
sll^ e.s.ES-5 |
fa si tiff ™1 1 S
IllllllliSll
0
CO
CT>
CM
(O
O
|
0
I-t
1
1-
co
^
co
-------
3980 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
b. The Research Fellowship Program
(1) Scope and Activities of the Research Fellowship Program.
EPA is also authorized 1 to establish and maintain research fellow-
ships. These fellowships are provided primarily to increase the
number and competence of scientists and engineers qualified to con-
duct independent research and advanced practice in water pollution
control problems, in conjunction with teaching at the graduate pro-
fessional level. The awards, which are nationally competitive, are
made primarily to candidates for the doctoral degree in the engi-
neering, physical sciences, biological sciences, or socioeconomic dis-
ciplines. (About 75 percent of the research fellows normally go into
teaching or research.)
Fellowship awards are based on the following criteria:
Purpose of the study and objectives to be achieved; research
method.
Relevance of training background to water pollution control.
Academic standing.
Credentials of the institution and sponsor under which the
study is to be performed.
Applications for this program are reviewed with the objective of
selecting the most promising students. The stringency with which
applications are reviewed is reflected in the fact that, in recent review
sessions, only about one third of those applications submitted were
considered acceptable by EPA.
In both FY 1970 and FY 1971, the EPA Research Fellowship Pro-
gram was funded for $600,000. In FY 1970, it provided 105 fellow-
ships at 51 institutions and agencies in 29 states and in four foreign
countries; in FY 1971, it provided 108 fellowships at 58 institutions
and agencies in 27 states and six foreign countries. Exhibit IV-7
provides a summary of these awards, by state.2 A view of research
fellowship activities over the last decade appears in Exhibit IV-8.
Expectations for FY 1972 are that 44 to 55 new fellowships will be
awarded, 45 to 60 will be renewed, and 50 to 60 will be continued.
1 Subsections 5 (a) (4) and 5(g) (3) (B) of the act.
"A complete listing of these awards by State, institution within the State, and amount
awarded appears in the EPA publications, Water Quality Control Training Grants, 1970 and
1971 Grant Awards.
[p. IV-56]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3981
EXHIBIT IV-7.—SUMMARY OF RESEARCH FELLOWSHIPS AWARDED DURING FISCAL YEAR 1970
AND FISCAL YEAR 1971, BY STATE
Number of institutions
and agencies Number of awards
Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year
1970 1971 1970 1971
California
Colorado
Connecticut
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Louisiana
Maine
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina . ....
Ohio .
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania ,
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Foreign
Total
' Continued with no additional funds.
NUMBER
States
Institutions and agencies
2
2
1
1
2
3
2
1
4
4
1
1
1
1
1
1
4
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
3
2
4
51
OF
I
4
2
1
2
3
2
1
4
2
1
2
1
1
1
5
2
2
1
4
1
1
2
2
1
2
1
6
58
5
2
2
n ••••
6
3
4
5
12
1
3
3
2
6
9
2
1
I
8
1
1
5
4
1
3
12
3
1
9
3
3
3
6
4
1
3
8
2
5
3
1
2
14
3
2
2
5
2
3
5
3
1
2
8
4
105 108
Amount awarded
Fiscal year
1970
$27,257
11,400
12,600
(')
35,800
16,600
29,086
(')
26,564
63,911
5,100
19,134
17,000
12,816
32,053
40,437
16,150
7,100
5,889
41,886
5,600
6,660
29,800
21,400
5,100
20,162
60,515
29,980
600,000
Fiscal year
1971
$6,600
52,412
12,440
17,000
6,433
30,100
22,067
5,100
24,355
39,108
10,400
24,250
18,200
5,367
8,000
66,743
18,124
12,400
10,400
24,350
11,768
17,800
36,945
19,467
5,300
14,100
51,073
29,698
600,000
ACTIVE RESEARCH FELLOWSHIPS
Fiscal year 1970
29
51
149
Fiscal
year 1971
27
58
161
[p. IV-57]
-------
3982
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
EXHIBIT IV-8.—RESEARCH FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM ACTIVITIES 1962-1973
New research
fellowships
Academic year authorized
1972-73
1971-72
1970-71
1969-70
1968-69
1967-68
1966-67
1965-66
1964-65
1963-64
1962-63
'50T
46
60
46
53
47
39
48
48
40
25
Total research
fellowships
awarded
'105
108
105
91
113
103
113
101
75
45
25
Number
of active
fellows
'155
161
149
168
155
147
115
145
102
64
25
Number
of States
involved
128
27
29
29
28
24
29
28
24
25
16
Number of
institutions
involved
'56
58
51
51
48
46
55
51
38
37
18
Funds
awarded
'$600,000
600,000
600,000
592,094
632,991
622,411
709,999
616,715
472,096
269,019
97,938
' Estimated
[p. IV-58]
(2) Assessment of the Research Fellowship Program. Overall
effectiveness of the Research Fellowship Program is reflected by its
function as the primary source of instructors for university training
of professionals and the primary mechanism for building the capacity
for research and training for professionals.
[p. IV-59]
c. The Direct Technical Training Program
(1) Scope and Activities of the Direct Technical Training Program.
In addition to its other programs, EPA is authorized x to "provide
training in technical matters relating to the causes, prevention, and
control of water pollution to personnel of public agencies and other
persons with suitable qualifications." Under this authority, EPA
provides its own program of direct training and related supportive
activities to supplement the technical activities of others.
The EPA Direct Technical Training Program is directed to key
Federal, State, local, and private personnel who hold responsibility
for evaluation, prevention, abatement, and control of water pollution.
Its purpose is fourfold:
To provide a continuing, comprehensive program of specialized
and advanced technical training generally unavailable elsewhere.
To research and develop instructional technology, and to
provide an instructor development program for individuals re-
sponsible for and/or conducting environment training or related
activities.
To provide, on request, instructors and/or training materials in
support of the training programs of other Federal, State, and
local agencies.
To develop new training delivery methods, curricula, and
materials, such as for use in correspondence courses.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3983
Most direct training consists of short-term seminars, workshops,
and courses of one- to two-weeks' duration. These courses are con-
ducted by a highly trained and experienced staff of EPA profes-
sionals 2 at four regional centers and one national training facility:
Robert S. Kerr Water Research Center; Ada, Oklahoma.
Southeast Water Laboratory; Athens, Georgia.
National Training Center; Cincinnati, Ohio.
Pacific Northwest Water Laboratory; Corvallis, Oregon.
Edison Water Quality Laboratory; Edison, New Jersey.
1 Subsections 5(a) (5) and 5(g) (3) (C) of the Act.
1 Some instructors are drawn from elsewhere, including universities.
[p. iv-eo]
A limited number are also given in field locations by special agree-
ment with EPA.
The training programs are primarily oriented to professionals,
although they are also available to subprofessionals in the water
pollution control field. Specific training objectives include:
Broadening or improving the professional skills of experienced
personnel.
Providing specialized and basic skills for professional and
technical personnel recruited into water pollution control from
other fields.
Assuming rapid application of new research findings in the field
of water pollution control.
At present, a major problem in fully achieving the designed efficiency
and effectiveness of existing pollution control facilities is that many
of the operating personnel are underskilled and undertrained. Many
of the short courses conducted under the Direct Technical Training
Program concentrate on upgrading the skill levels of these employees,
thus improving the operations of present abatement systems.
The courses given provide either overview summaries of the con-
cepts, science, and techniques for abating and preventing pollution, or
detailed reviews of new technological developments, operational
methods, and research findings. They also address specific practical
features of wastewater treatment design and operation, water quality
evaluation in field and laboratory, and technical and administrative
aspects of water quality management and water pollution control.
In FY 1971 the OWP conducted 37 scheduled short-course training
programs. Additionally, it provided 22 special, unscheduled courses
or workshops to satisfy specific training requirements of local, State,
or Federal agencies. The total number of persons trained between
April 1970 and September 1971 is shown in Exhibit IV-9 by water
pollution control sector, occupation, and training site. The percent-
-------
3984
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
age of persons trained between FY 1969 and FY 1971 is shown in
Exhibit IV-10 by water pollution control sector, educational level,
and occupation.
In 1972, EPA plans to expand its Direct Technical Training Pro-
gram in water pollution control in three specific areas:1
1 Courses to be presented In 1972 are listed In the catalog. Education and Training Programs,
EPA, OWP, July 1971-June 1972.
[p. IV-61]
EXHIBIT IV-9.—NUMBER OF PERSONS TRAINED UNDER EPA DIRECT TECHNICAL TRAINING PROGRAM,
BY WPC SECTOR AND OCCUPATION
[April 1970-September 1971]
EPA training facility
Clnn.
Ada
Athens
Corvallls
Edison
Tottl
1. Number by WPC sector:
EPA
D. Defense
Other Federal
State
Local
Foreign government
University faculty
University student
Industry
Consultant
Regional agency
Other
Total
2. Number by occupation;
Administrator
Biologist
Chemist
Conservationist
Educator
Engineer
Geologist
Microbiologlst
Oceanographer
Pharmacist
Sanitarian
Statistician
Technician
Treatment plant operator . .
Other
Total
... 228
... 80
... 87
... 157
... 114
... 43
... 40
... 11
... 141
... 39
... 11
, 16
967
... 34
... 86
... 154
1
... 22
... 374
2
... 20
2
0
... 17
5
... 79
... 38
160
... 967
6
8
8
48
2
2
2
0
4
0
0
1
81
9
18
7
1
1
22
5
3
0
0
1
0
6
0
8
81
44
10
63
92
28
0
12
5
10
6
0
2
272
13
52
43
0
1
88
11
0
2
0
9
1
9
9
34
272
33
41
237
108
81
11
33
24
24
6
4
8
610
16
85
42
9
11
157
8
22
4
1
27
1
61
60
106
610
31
43
48
33
17
5
3
2
14
6
4
0
206
55
14
20
0
2
67
2
1
2
0
7
1
13
0
22
206
[p.
342
182
443
438
242
61
90
42
193
57
19
27
2,136
127
255
266
11
37
681
28
46
10
1
61
8
168
107
330
2,136
IV-82]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3985
EXHIBIT IV-10.—PERCENTAGE OF PERSONS TRAINED UNDER EPA DIRECT TECHNICAL TRAINING
PROGRAM, BY WPC SECTOR, EDUCATIONAL LEVEL, AND OCCUPATION
[Fiscal year 1969-Fiscal year 1971]
Total students
1.
2.
3.
WPC sector:
Federal
State-local
Educational Institutions
Industry-consultants
Foreign ,
Others
Educational level:
Less than college
College, nongraduate
College, graduate (B.S., B.A.)
Masters
P/I.D
Occupation:
Engineer
Biologlst-mlcroblologlst
Chemist
Technician ,
Treatment plant operator
Administrator
Sanitarian
Other
Fiscal
year 1969
1,297
Percent
48
32
4
11
4
1
10
10
51
23
5
38
16
14
8
8
4
3
9
Fiscal
year 1970
1,480
Percent
40
36
7
9
4
4
8
10
50
26
5
32
17
17
8
4
4
8
10
Fiscal
year 1971
1,630
Percent
47
32
8
11
7
2
11
11
49
24
5
30
14
12
8
7
6
3
20
[p. IV-63]
Development of self-sufficient training facilities, within the five
training centers, to provide learner-centered instruction. Train-
ing facilities will ultimately contain 20 to 30 individual booths,
each with its own audiovisual equipment, manuals, workbooks,
programmed teaching slides, tapes, and filmstrips.
Formation of mobile training teams to provide training courses
to reach small, isolated treatment plants nationwide.
Initiation of a correspondence training program. The develop-
ment of material for this program will complement the materials
for learner-centered training and will provide a wide variety of
subject matter for individual study.
Additionally, the number of short courses will be expanded, and
courses will be offered in regions that lack a permanent training
facility. Federal personnel who will be working with programs
related to State and local agency activities will form the single
largest group of participants. State and local agency personnel will
form the next largest group.
EPA estimates that the breakdown between classroom students and
those participating in correspondence courses will be as follows:
-------
3986 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Number of students
Classroom
Total
1972
2,000
370
2 370
1
1973
2,330
450
2,780
Fiscal year
1974
2,800
520
3320
1975
2,820
530
3,350
1976
3,000
600
3,600
EPA also supports State training programs for professionals, tech-
nical, and operator personnel—on request—through technical con-
sultation on the planning and development and dissemination of
training courses. In addition, the agency arranges for guest appear-
ances of instructors and provides instructional materials such as
training manuals, course plans, and audiovisual training aids.
(2) Assessment of the Direct Technical Training Program. The
ultimate measure of effectiveness of a training program, of course,
is the degree of increased productivity of the trainees upon return to
their work environment. This factor has been particularly difficult
for EPA to determine because of staffing limitations for follow-up and
evaluation activities.
[p. IV-64]
The effectiveness of the Direct Technical Training Program can
be measured in other ways, however. First, the training provided
through scheduled and unscheduled (special) workshops, seminars,
and short-term courses has increased in volume during the last three
years. This increase has been accomplished within restrictive fund-
ing and an actual reduction in available instructor man-hours. The
increase in the number of courses presented and the number of
students attending since 1969 is as follows:
Year Courses Students
1969 45 1,297
1970 57 1,560
1971 59 1,630
Second, there has been a steady increase in requests by local,
State, and Federal agencies for professional assistance and instruc-
tional materials to satisfy their specific training needs. As indicated
above, over 22 of these special courses were presented during FY 1971.
Third, several training innovations have been introduced. During
1971, EPA produced and pilot-tested a correspondence course on
"Membrane Filter Techniques." It also prepared other innovative
training materials (including course manuals, films, and videotapes)
for use by its regional training facilities and by others outside EPA.
[p. IV-65]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3987
d. The Technology Transfer Program.
(1) Scope and Activities of the Technology Transfer Program. In-
vestment in research and development over the past few years has
realized significant improvements in water pollution control tech-
nology. One of EPA's major concerns has been the development of
programs which will permit maximum utilization of these advances.
EPA recently launched a Technology Transfer Program intended to
bridge the gap between research, development, and demonstration
and implementation of results. Although its scope extends to all
media and categorical programs, its orientation to water pollution
control has been to make known the potential of both technology
presently available and new technology as it is developed, in order
to influence (i) prevention, detection, and clean-up techniques and
(ii) design, installation, and operation of old and new wastewater
treatment facilities. To date, the program has been primarily geared
to transferring newly developed technology in the field of municipal
water pollution control.
The primary objective of the municipal water pollution control
technology transfer effort has been to have an immediate impact on
the Construction Grants Program to prevent a major national invest-
ment in traditional wastewater treatment facilities that no longer offer
the effectiveness, efficiency, or flexibility to meet present and future
water quality standards and requirements. A longer term objective
is to establish firmly the newly emerging technologies as practical
and feasible alternatives, on a national basis, to be routinely consid-
ered and evaluated in the planning of wastewater treatment facilities.
This objective encompasses the future inclusion of these technologies
in the undergraduate and graduate curricula of our educational
institutions.
To achieve its immediate primary objective, the Technology Trans-
fer Program has been directed to the following target groups, listed
in order of their importance:
Municipal, State, and private consulting design engineers.
Public administrative decision-makers with water pollution
control policy responsibilities (such as mayors, councilmen, di-
rectors of public works, and city managers).
Conservation groups and the general public.
Each of these groups is discussed below.
(i) Design Engineers. Because the design engineers will put
the new technology on the drawing boards, they have been
identified as the priority target audience. The actual type of
technology to be used in treatment facility design emanates in
almost all instances from the municipality's
[p. IV-66]
-------
3988 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
consulting engineers. Review and acceptance of the design is nor-
mally a function of government staff engineers at both the munici-
pal and State levels. All of these engineers must be effectively
convinced that the new technologies are now practical and feasible
—economically and technically—and ready for immediate full-
scale use. Without acceptance by the engineering profession, the
delay in bridging the gap between research and demonstration
and full-scale implementation will stretch over many years.
(ii) Public Decision-Makers. Public decision-makers have
traditionally relied almost completely on their consulting en-
gineers for selection of appropriate wastewater treatment proc-
esses. They must now have knowledge as to the new treatment
alternatives and economics that are rapidly becoming available.
This knowledge will then become a key factor in evaluating rec-
ommendations by consulting engineers and overcoming the re-
luctance of both engineers and public officials to initiate new
treatment technology. In many smaller municipalities, a gen-
eralized knowledge of available technology by public officials will
be the only factor to overcome reluctance of smaller, less ad-
vanced consulting engineering firms to make a commitment to
new technology.
(iii) Conservation Groups and the General Public. A non-
technical knowledge of available technology by these groups al-
lows more informed decisions by the public for bond issues, tax
increases and other issues.
The transfer of technology is a complex process requiring close
coordination and collaboration among all elements of the EPA/OWP
organization, and particularly between the research and development
and the manpower training and development functions. The tech-
nology must first be researched and extracted, then structured for
dissemination to varying audiences with varying needs, and finally
actually disseminated. The EPA Technology Transfer Program ap-
proaches the dissemination of technology in two ways:
Through "general awareness" training (that is, making known
the fact that the technology is available) accomplished by means
of briefings, seminars, newsletters, and so forth.
Through "detailed knowledge" training (for those who will
need to apply the technology) accomplished by short-course
training.
[p. IV-67]
So far, EPA has established mechanisms for providing general tech-
nological awareness training which are summarized below. It also
intends to develop mechanisms for introducing detailed knowledge
training into its Direct Technical Training Program and into the
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3989
curricula of existing programs outside EPA.
Major activities to date in the municipal wastewater treatment area
include:
Presentation of two-day technical workshop/seminar programs
for State, municipal, and private consulting engineers involved
in the design of wastewater treatment facilities. Design sem-
inars emphasizing the practical application of new technology
(design criteria and parameters, capital and operating costs, re-
sults of research demonstrations, and experience and problems)
were held between February and September 1971 in six EPA
regions. Format of the program varied according to regional
needs, determined in cooperation with the State water pollution
control agencies. Future seminars are scheduled on a monthly
basis, with each EPA region having at least one seminar before
the end of 1971.
Development of design manuals for consulting engineers. All
of the technical experience, data, and criteria evolving from the
research and demonstration programs are being extracted from
research reports and consolidated into design manuals which will
enable the consulting engineer, for the first time, to receive com-
plete and comprehensive design information. The lack of such
publications in the past has been a major factor hindering wide-
spread use of technology. Four design manuals (on phosphorous
removal, granular carbon adsorption, upgrading existing treat-
ment plants, and suspended solids removal) have been completed
thus far and will be distributed nationally.
Monitoring of approximately 60 demonstration grant projects
throughout the country for technology transfer applicability,
timing, and methods.
Development of visual media presentations. Technical video-
tape presentations have been planned for use by EPA regions
in introducing newly available technologies. One (on granular
carbon adsorption) has been completed and three more are cur-
rently under way. In addition, a brief, nontechnical motion pic-
ture on phosphorous removal, intended for showing to public
officials and conservation groups, is nearly completed, as is a
motion picture exploiting an EPA phosphorous removal dem-
onstration project at Richardson, Texas, to be used during both
technical and semitechnical presentations. Another motion pic-
ture featuring a relocatable advanced waste treatment plant is
under way.
[p. IV-68]
A technimated display booth describing the Technology Trans-
fer Program is currently being used in various areas of the coun-
-------
3990 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
try. Additional booths on phosphorous removal, upgrading
existing plants, and physical-chemical treatment have also been
completed.
Many publications, in addition to the design manuals discussed
above, are now available, under preparation, or being planned. These
include technical brochures, newsletters, and a wide variety of tech-
nical publications prepared for the design seminars.
Plans are under way to conduct regional seminars for administra-
tive decision-makers in water pollution control (such as city man-
agers, public works directors, city councilmen, county commissioners,
and heads of municipal and State water pollution control agencies).
These workshops will be aimed at convincing responsible admin-
istrators that new technology is available for full-scale application
and that it can be used effectively to meet water quality standards.
As in the design seminars, these workshops will be slanted toward
the specific technology needs of each region. EPA will also conduct
a campaign to create public awareness through special programs di-
rected toward students, conservation associations, civic groups, and so
forth. Further, technical bulletins will be issued to supplement the
Federal Design Guidelines published in October 1970.
(2) Assessment of the Technology Transfer Program. While re-
sults of this program can be assessed only over the long term,
preliminary indications of program effectiveness are favorable. For
example, the seminars for consulting engineers involved in the design
of wastewater treatment facilities have been well received by the
engineering community and by various professional organizations.
EPA has received a flood of correspondence from consulting engi-
neering firms, industries, and State and municipal engineers request-
ing technical information since the publication of several articles in
technical journals briefly describing the Technology Transfer Pro-
gram. Further, EPA technical personnel have made on-site visits in
response to municipal and State requests for information on new
technologies. These requests undoubtedly will increase as the pro-
gram expands and becomes more widely known, thus establishing
an effective dialogue between EPA and the engineering community.
The need for the Technology Transfer Program is obvious, and its
value can be recognized as the initial mechanism for transferring the
Federal Government's research investment to the practitioner. How-
ever, this program is only the first step in the transfer of new
technologies. The technology presented to selected target groups pro-
vides the base for specific training courses designed to accommodate
a more varied audience with needs for greater detail in both concepts
and techniques.
[p. IV-69]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3991
e. Conclusions Regarding EPA Training for Professionals. The
Professional Training Grants and Research Fellowships Programs
provide a nucleus of trained professional manpower in many disci-
plines at many degrees of professional competence to be applied to
the control of water pollution. Over the years, these programs
"... largely have been responsible for the reservoir of scientific and
engineering manpower now available in the field of water pollution
control." 1
Indeed, virtually all of the graduate-level programs related to water
pollution control are supported by EPA. This support has been
pointedly oriented to water pollution control, as distinct from the
more general orientation of support from other Federal agencies.
Programs have been developed, wherever possible, to deal with the
practical problems of operations and management.
The Professional Training Grants Program is the primary source
of funding for the preparation of professionals entering the field of
water pollution control. Since most of the recipients under the Re-
search Fellowship Program continue thereafter in research or teach-
ing, EPA, in a sense, is making a capacity-building investment to
produce future graduate professionals to enter the field of water
pollution control.
The Direct Technical Training Program is essentially the only
existing program that provides updating courses for professionals
(and others) and thereby fills a major gap in professional training
activities. It supplements the rather limited upgrade training activi-
ties of others. With the Technology Transfer Program, it provides a
mechanism for transmitting rapidly the results and application of
new research findings. EPA's supportive activities offer the potential
to broaden the coverage of technical update and upgrade training
and to improve the capacity of others to increase their penetration
and coverage.
In sum, these programs help satisfy two distinct needs for profes-
sional training that are not otherwise satisfied by the other sectors:
(i) primary financial support for entry training and (ii) direct pro-
grams and support for update and upgrade training. Nevertheless,
as indicated in Part II, the quantitative needs exceed the capacity of
EPA and others to respond.
1 Robert A. Canham, Executive Secretary, Water Pollution Control Federation, Statement
to the Subcommittee on Agriculture Environmental and Consumer Protection of the House
Appropriations Committee, 5 May 1971.
[p. IV-70]
2. EPA Training for Operators and Technicians
As discussed in Section III-B, above, it is meaningful to distinguish
among those elements of the work force who are in positions at the
-------
3992 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
lower levels of operations as opposed to those at the higher levels.
This distinction is maintained in the following report on EPA training
activities for operators and technicians.
For entry and upgrade training of lower level operators, EPA has
collaborated with the Department of Labor (DOL) and the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW), in negotiating and
administering national MDTA-funded contracts and has encouraged
the states and localities to do likewise.
To overcome the limitations of these and other programs, to provide
an alternate mechanism for the upgrading of existing operators and
technicians, and to help build the capacity of others to do likewise,
EPA initiated a Pilot Program 1 of projects designed for this purpose.
Finally, to respond to the undercapacity of educational institutions
to prepare undergraduate students to enter the water pollution con-
trol field as technicians or upper level operators, EPA initiated an
Undergraduate Training Grants and Scholarship Program.2
Each of these programs is designed to overcome the limitations of
others whose training activities have not fully met the entry or up-
grade training needs for water pollution control operators and tech-
nicians. The following report and assessment of EPA's activities
will be followed by conclusions as to EPA's responsiveness to these
unmet needs.
a. National MDTA-Funded Contracts. During the last two years,
EPA established, in cooperation with the Departments of Labor and
Health, Education, and Welfare, four training programs in waste
treatment plant operations intended to fill the gap in lower level
operator and technician training at the State and local levels. These
programs, which are designed to bring trainees into the water quality
field or to develop and increase their existing skills, include:
Coupled On-the-Job Training;
Institutional Training;
Public Service Careers;
Transition Training.
All four are supported by funds available under the Manpower De-
velopment and Training Act and are administered through Inter-
agency Agreements by
1 Authorized by subsection 5 (g) (1) of the Act.
1 Authorized by sections 16 and 18 of the Act.
[p. rv-71]
the EPA Office of Water Programs. Subcontracts are awarded by
EPA to units of State government, municipalities, special wastewater
treatment districts, vocational schools, community colleges, and uni-
versities. These programs, which are summarized in Exhibit IV-11
are discussed below.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3993
Additionally, EPA works with State and local agencies to help
them qualify for MDTA support, arranges training for instructors,
provides teaching materials and curriculum development assistance,
and otherwise assists State and local governments in getting training
projects under way.
(1) Coupled On-the-Job Training
Scope and Activities of the EPA Coupled OJT Program. This pro-
gram offers entry-level and upgrade operator training for the unem-
ployed and underemployed in wastewater treatment plants through
combined classroom and on-the-job training tailored to meet opera-
tional realities. Unlike traditional DOL programs, which provide
training in a single facility, the national Coupled OJT Program estab-
lished by EPA uses a twofold approach to training. Twenty-five per-
cent of the subcontracts were awarded directly to large municipal
wastewater treatment plants for the provision of centralized training;
the balance were awarded to cities, community colleges, or councils of
government to serve a number of treatment plants within the sur-
rounding communities for the provision of decentralized training.
Under the decentralized approach, classroom instruction is given
in one plant—during or between working hours, depending on the
plant environment. Over-the-shoulder OJT is provided by the class-
room instructor (who must have operational knowledge) in the plant
where the trainee is employed. To eliminate gaps in coverage, two
correspondence courses and audiotapes are available for self-study at
home.
As noted in subsection III-B-3-c, similar MDTA-funded programs
were managed by a number of State water pollution control agencies
in FY 1971. The national program sought to assist those states with-
out OJT programs and to supplement the existing programs, which
were just under way and on a much smaller scale.
Initially, the program focused on improving the skills of operators
already in place and, in turn, upgrading plant operations. Its objec-
tives were to help trainees meet certification requirements and to
reduce turnover and stabilize the existing work force. The first
national contract (effective January 1969-October 1970) required
that 10 percent of all trainees be new entrants and that the remainder
be employed in a treatment plant prior to attending the program.
The length of the training course was 44 weeks and consisted of
330 hours of classroom instruction and at least 70 hours of over-the-
[p. IV-72]
shoulder OJT for each trainee. The first 100 hours of classroom
instruction were normally devoted to basic courses in varied subjects
such as mathematics, biology, and chemistry, which would help the
-------
3994 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
trainee during the following 230 hours of job-related courses and 70
hours of over-the-shoulder OJT.
The initial program was able to demonstrate that the MDTA fund-
ing mechanism works. Out of 1,055 trainees, 936 successfully com-
pleted the course. As a result of the program, the average trainee's
salary increased from $7,600 to $8,600. The average increase was 13.2
percent, with the maximum individual trainee increase being 35.2
percent. Ninety-seven percent of all trainees in the program received
some type of salary increase.
Of the 1,055 trainees enrolled, 81.2 percent successfully completed
the course, with 93 percent of those passing the certification examina-
tion at the certification level for which they were permitted to test.
Because a number of State certification agencies were persuaded to
evaluate the course and to allow credit for completion, many trainees
also received a higher level of certification and thus had a more
advantageous position in the labor market. California and Iowa, for
example, allowed the equivalent of one year's experience toward a
higher level of certification. In addition, many trainees gained high
school equivalency diplomas. The State of Washington granted one
year of college equivalency, and the Metropolitan Sanitary District
of Greater Chicago granted four years' experience credit for com-
pletion of the 44-week course.
The training was well received and highly praised by State and
local officials and by plant operators, who indicated that motivation
on the job was noticeably increased among operators who had partici-
pated in the training. At the start of the program, the employers
were asked to rate the trainees' motivation. The results showed that
only 15.3 percent were highly motivated at the beginning of the train-
ing. Upon completion of the training, the employers indicated that
65.4 percent were highly motivated.
The trainees themselves have given the program a high rating,
according to a study recently completed by the University of Virginia
and the Office of Water Programs under the auspices of EPA.1 The
study team surveyed operators at more than 80 percent of the ongoing
training centers between June and December 1970. It reported that
97 percent of the respondents felt that the training was "worth it,"
98 percent felt that the course should be continued, and 92 percent
felt that they could improve or assist in improving the efficiency of
their plants as a result of the training.
1 Sewage Treaters or Pollution Controllers?: Trainees View Their Jobs, C. F. Longlno, Jr.,
and C. S. Green III, University of Virginia; C. F. KaufEman, Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Water Programs, undated.
[p. rV-73]
Not only do the trainees rate EPA programs as excellent, but in
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3995
the annual State Program Plans, the State agencies speak very well
of them. California, for example, stated, "There should be more and
larger programs such as the one EPA has just sponsored here in
California," The California subcontract was administered by the
Water Quality Board for entry and up-grading of wastewater treat-
ment plant operators.
Based on the success of the initial program, which cost $1,031,775,
the second national coupled OJT contract (effective November 1970-
April 1972) was awarded to train 1,000 persons at a cost of $1,260,000.
The program under this contract represents a refinement of the initial
training course in two major ways:
To increase the labor pool of wastewater treatment plant per-
sonnel 30 percent of the enrollees are new entrants (rather than
the 10 percent originally required).
To be responsive to local conditions and needs, training time
is optional. Duration of training varies from 24 weeks (two
courses with 10 trainees each) to 48 weeks (one course with
20 trainees), but all trainees receive essentially the same number
of hours of classroom instruction and OJT.
As of September 1971, 480 persons had completed training under the
second contract, and 558 are presently enrolled.
Summaries of the first and second national coupled OJT contracts
are included in Exhibit IV-11.
Assessment of the EPA Coupled OJT Program. As discussed pre-
viously, many graduates of the first national Coupled OJT Program
received promotions, earned higher salaries, and passed certification
examinations. In addition, many earned high school equivalency
certificates and college credits. The second national program is still
under way, but monitoring reports indicate an even higher level of
success for the second program.
A major strength of the program has been its mobility in reaching
out to the small wastewater treatment plant through decentralized
OJT and its introduction of the classroom instructor into the treat-
ment plant for program coordination and continuity. One problem
encountered with this approach has been the resistance of some em-
ployers to the provision of OJT by the classroom instructor—an
"outsider"—rather than by a representative of the plant. These em-
ployers have expressed concern that the OJT instructor's role would
be one of a critic—without knowledge of or sensitivity to the particu-
lar plant environment. For the most part, this resistance has been
overcome through demonstration of the instructors' capability to pro-
vide objective training and through their in-depth knowledge of
wastewater treatment plant operations.
[p. IV-74]
-------
3996
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
EXHIBIT IV-11.—SUMMARY OF NATIONAL MDTA-FUNDED CONTRACTS
A. Summaries of First and Second National Coupled OJT Contracts
Resume of the First National Coupled OJT Contract
Date contract was signed 21 January 1969
Termination date 31 October 1970
Total Amount of Contract $1,031,775
DDL portion 645,640
HEW (Office of Education) portion 386,135
Total Number of Trainees starting program 1,055
Total Number of Trainees completing program 936
Training started in Butler, Pennsylvania, in May 1969
Trainees Trainees
Sponsor/Subcontractor entered completed
Pennsylvania (State) 78 70
St. Louis MO (Metro Dist) 26 18
Detroit, Ml (Metro Dlst) 39 36
Des Moines, IA (City) 23 23
North Central Texas (C.O.G.) 52 52
Indianapolis, IN (Voc School) 20 15
South Bend, IN (Voc School) 22 18
Omaha, NB (City) 28 17
Lexington, KY (Univ. of KY) 42 40
Seattle, WA (City) 20 19
Lafayette, IN (Voc School) 42 25
West Virginia (University) 49 41
Ft. Lauderdale, FL (City) 20 15
Southern Illinois University 24 22
Louisiana (State) 23 23
California (State) 142 133
Northwest Arkansas (C.O.G.) 23 23
Maryland (State) 55 52
Denver, CO (Metro Dist) 24 21
Houston, TX (University) 38 30
Chicago, IL (Metro Dist) 44 33
Portland, OR (City) 42 41
Cleveland, OH (City) 28 26
Gary, IN (Voc School) 24 21
Ann Arbor, Ml (Community College) 23 23
New York, NY (City) 20 17
Rockland County, NY (Sewer Dist) 18 18
Pensacola, FL (City) 28 28
St. Louis, MO (City) 38 36
Training location
Phila., Penn Hills,
Bethel Park, Butler,
and Meadville.
St. Louis.
Detroit.
Des Moines.
Houston and Dallas.
Indianapolis.
South Bend.
Omaha.
Lexington.
Seattle.
Lafayette.
Charleston and Athens.
Ft. Lauderdale.
Edwardsvllle, III.
New Orleans.
Sacramento, Santa Barbara,
Santa Rosa, Orange County.
Fayetteville.
Charles County, Hagerstown.
Denver.
Houston.
Chicago.
Portland.
Cleveland.
Gary.
Ann Arbor.
New York.
Rockland County.
Pensacola.
St. Louis.
[p. IV-75]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
3997
Resume of the Second National Coupled OJT Contract
Effective date 2 November 1970
Termination date 30 April 1972
Total Amount of Contract $1,260,000
Total Number of Trainees under Contract 1,000
No. of
Sponsor/ Subcontractor trainees
Omaha, NB (City) 40
Southern Illinois University 20
California State Water Resources ControJ Board .. 100
South Carolina Pollution Control Authority 20
Hippevia Regional Institute 20
Charles County Community College 60
North Central Texas C.O.G 40
Northwest Arkansas Regional Planning Commission 20
Mallory Technical Institute 20
University of Kentucky 60
Metro. Planning Commission 20
Portland, OR (City) 40
North Dakota State Dept. of Health, Div. of Water 40
Supply & Poll. Control.
North Carolina State Dept. of Water & Air 40
Resources.
Utah Division of Health 20
Florida Division of Health 20
Northwest Technical Institute 20
Louisiana Dept. of Health 20
West Virginia University 20
St. Joseph Valley School 20
DC Dept. of Sanitary Engineering 20
New Mexico Health and Social Services Dept 20
Metro. Sewer Board 20
Rockland County Sewer Dlst. #1 20
Mississippi Air & Water Pollution Control 20
Commission.
Nevada Dept. of Health, Welfare and Rehabilitation 20
Connecticut Department of Labor, Employment 40
Service.
Community College of Denver 20
Metro. Sewer District of Greater Chicago 40
Dept. of Public Works, VI 20
S.T.A.T.E., College of Engineering, Brookings, SD. 20
State Dept. of Health, Helena, MT 20
PSI, Dept. of Education 20
Miami-Dade Junior College 20-25
Junior College District of College, Newton and 20
McDonald Cos.
Starting
date
111 2/70
ll/ 2/70
ll/ 2/70
7/ 1/71
ll/ 2/70
ll/ 2/70
ll/ 2/70
12/ 1/70
ll/ 2/70
2/18/71
12/ 7/70
ll/ 9/70
I/ 4/71
6/ 1/71
I/ 4/71
1/15/71
ll/ 2/70
3/15/71
4/19/71
31 2/71
4/ 1/71
4/19/71
31 3/71
3/15/71
3/15/71
6/28/71
6/ 1/71
6/ 1/71
5/24/71
7/12/71
7/ 1/71-
1/27/72
10/31/71-
4/30/72
10/ 4/71
7/19/71
Training location
Omaha, NB.
Edwardsville, IL.
Santa Barbara, Visalla,
Santa Rosa, Orange Coast.
Greenville, SC.
Lafayette, IN.
Cumberland, La Plata,
Baltimore, MD.
Arlington, TX.
Fayetteville, AR.
Indianapolis, IN.
Lexington, KY.
Kansas City, MO.
Portland, OR.
Devils Lake, Minot,
Bismarck, ND.
Salt Lake City, UT.
Ft. Walton Beach, Miami, FL.
Gary, IN.
New Orleans, LA.
Parkersburg, WV.
South Bend, IN.
Washington, D.C.
Las Cruces, Sliver City, NM.
St. Paul, MN.
New City, NY.
Hattiesburg, MS.
Carson City, NV.
Denver, CO.
Chicago, IL.
Virgin Islands.
Helena, MT.
Harrisburg, PA.
Miami, FL.
Neosho, MO.
[p. IV-76]
-------
3998
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
B. Summary of Institutional Training Program
No. of
trainees
Sponsor/ Subcontractor
Charles County Community College 40
Klrkwood Community College 60
Atlanta Area Technical School 40
Delaware State College 40
Columbus Technical Institute 40
Brevard Community College 40
Delgado Junior College 40
Penn Valley Community College 40
Miami Dade 20
C. Summary of Public Service Careers Program
Starting
date
1/25/71
2/ 1/71
2/22/71
2/ 1/71
5/ 3/71
6/21/71
6/21/71
6/22/71
9/ 7/71
Training location
La Plata, MD.
Cedar Rapids, IA.
Atlanta, GA.
Dover, DE.
Columbus, OH.
Cocoa, FL
New Orleans, LA.
Kansas City, MO.
Miami, FL
Sponsor/ Subcontractor
North Central Texas Council of Governments
Texas Water Quality Board
Pollution Abatement Div. .
Wisconsin Board of Vocational, Technical
Adult Education.
No. of
trainees
100 upgrade
. . 90 entry
71 upgrade
. . . 100 entry
100 upgrade
23 upgrade
. . . 50 entry
50 upgrade
& 50 entry
50 upgrade
Starting
date
12/70
11/70
iy/1
1/71
1/71
1/71
Training location
Columbia, SC.
Arlington, TX.
Austin, TX.
St. Thomas, VI.
Richmond, VA.
Madison, Wl.
0. Summary of Transition Training Program
No. of
Sponsor/Subcontractor trainees
Charles County Community College, La Plata, MD. . 70
Fayetteville Technical Institute, Fayetteville, NC. . 70
El Paso Independent School District, El Paso, TX.. 70
Central Texas College, Killeen, TX 70
Orange Coast Community College, Costa Mesa, CA. 30
Contra Costa Community College District, Mar- 40-48
tinez, CA
Sinclair Comm. College, Dayton OH 40-48
Clover Park Voc. Tech. Inst, Tacoma, WA 30
San Dlega Community College District, San 40-48
Diega, CA
Sumter Area Tech. Ed. Center, Sumter, CS 40-48
Starting
date Military Installation
ll/ 9/70 Ft. Belvolr, VA.
12/ 7/70 Ft. Bragg, NC.
12/ 1/70 Ft. Bliss, TX.
1/18/71 Ft. Hood, TX.
1/11/71 El Toro Marine Base.
9/ 7/71 Treasure Island, NAS, CA.
9/ 7/71 Wright-Patterson AFB.
7/12/71 McCordAFB.
8/16/71 San Diego NAS.
7/26/71 Shaw AFB.
[p. IV-77]
(2) Institutional Training
Scope and Activities of the EPA Institutional Training Program.
Another potential source of manpower for wastewater treatment
operation is provided through institutional training. This type of
training is often referred to as "train now, employ later." Although
a number of these programs (such as the Concentrated Employment
Program) have been available to the unemployed, their orientation
has been generalized and multioccupational. EPA/OWP administers
a national institutional water pollution control training program with
funds being provided by interagency agreement with DOL and HEW.
This agreement was negotiated in FY 1971 to initiate nine pilot re-
gional manpower training centers.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 3999
Traditionally, institutional training provides basic education in the
classroom for the unemployed. A distinctive feature of the EPA
program is that half of the instruction is practical "hands-on" training
in a wastewater treatment plant, even though the trainee is not em-
ployed by the plant. The program is still in the first year of opera-
tion, and each local sponsor is showing improvement in the system of
recruiting trainees, conducting courses, and providing employment
opportunities for graduates.
The program is conducted by community colleges or vocational
training schools and currently provides for a total enrollment of 360
persons. Each institution enrolls 40 trainees referred by the State
Employment Service (20 during the first 22-week training cycle and
the balance during the second 22-week cycle). Cooperative arrange-
ments are effected between the training institutions and publicly
owned local waste treatment facilities for the "hands-on" portion of
the program.
Trainees receive 440 hours of classroom instruction covering basic
education related to plant operations, operating theory and technique,
and 440 hours of hands-on training in a treatment plant. State Em-
ployment Services are urged to recruit Vietnam veterans whenever
possible. The training costs approximately $734,000, plus an addi-
tional $700,000 allotted by the DOL for training and subsistence
allowances.
The second section of the program will enroll the balance of the
trainees, who will complete training early in 1972. A summary of
program activities is included in Exhibit IV-11.
Assessment of the EPA Institutional Training Program. The In-
stitutional Training Programs are providing an excellent source of
supply for trained personnel at the entry level. Trainees referred
to the program through local Employment Service Offices meet
MDTA eligibility guidelines, and a substantial number are Vietnam
war veterans. All are seeking vocational training and career job
opportunities.
[p. IV-78]
Although the program is not yet 50 percent complete, a review of
the first graduating classes indicates a high degree of trainee com-
pletion and job placement. Of the 174 enrollees in the first phase of
the program, 51 had completed training as of 15 September 1971, and
100 were still in training. While 45 of the 51 graduates have been
referred to job opportunities, it is too early to determine the actual
number accepting job offers; however, it is thought to be substantial.
There are numerous representative examples of the success of the
program. Five trainees from the Virgin Islands completing the course
-------
4000 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
conducted by the Atlanta Area Technical School received immediate
employment with the Department of Public Works in the Virgin
Islands. All of the first section (16) from the Kirkwood Community
College in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, passed the entry-level State Certifica-
tion Examination. Job recruiters were contacting the trainees prior
to their completion of the course, and all of the trainees were referred
to jobs in Illinois, Iowa, and Minnesota. The City of Dubuque, Iowa,
hired three graduates, one as a laboratory technician and two as plant
operators.
EPA/OWP is now disseminating information about the availability
of trained graduates from these programs so that personnel recruiters
in need of such manpower can schedule visits to the campuses of
sponsoring institutions. As information on the availability of such
graduates reaches proper officials, it is expected that the demand will
far exceed the current supply.
A second institutional training program is now being discussed
with officials of DOL and HEW to continue and expand current
efforts.
(3) Public Service Careers (PSC)
Scope and Activities of the EPA Public Service Careers Program.
With the initiation of the Public Service Careers Program, and speci-
fically its Plan "B," which is tailored to channel funds from Federal
to State and local agencies, EPA negotiated an interagency agreement
with DOL to train 922 disadvantaged persons newly or previously
employed in wastewater treatment plants. Four states—Texas, Vir-
ginia, South Carolina, Wisconsin—and the Virgin Islands were
awarded contracts to participate in the EPA program, which began in
November 1970 and will cost $1,700,000.
EPA has approached the PSC program with the overriding thought
that men are poor because they are disadvantaged, and that if the
disadvantage can be removed, they will be able to overcome poverty
now and in the future. In keeping with this approach, employers
participating in EPA's PSC program have been encouraged to develop
vacancies for disadvantaged persons by moving presently employed
persons upward and releasing their former jobs for new entry-level
trainees. Almost all sponsoring agencies have subscribed to the the-
ory of upward mobility for current employees and have secured
agreement for employers to furnish vacancies for entry-level jobs.
[p. IV-79]
This approach has resulted in an initial disproportion of entry
to upgrade training. Agreement between DOL and the EPA/OWP
called for a total of 490 entry-level trainees and 432 upgrade trainees.
As of 31 August 1971, total enrollment of the program was 876, of
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 4001
whom 354 were at the entry level and 522 were being trained for
upgrade positions.
In addition to providing training and supportive services, program
sponsors are responsible for finding existing job vacancies within
their jurisdictional limits and for cooperating with regional, county,
and municipal governments in filling these positions.
A summary of PSC program activities is included in Exhibit IV-11.
Assessment of the EPA Public Service Careers Program. As pre-
viously discussed, the overall objective of the Public Service Careers
Program is to provide, through training, permanent employment for
disadvantaged persons in governmental agencies at all levels and to
stimulate the upgrading of current employees.
EPA's PSC Program has been extremely successful. As of 31
August 1971, a total of 876 trainees had been enrolled. Although con-
tract commitments call for a total of 922 trainees, it appears this will
be exceeded by 40 percent upon contract termination date, 30 June
1972. Terminations have been at a minimum, with only 7 percent
reported as of this date.
Great emphasis has been placed on recruiting young persons for
training in entry-level positions. Currently approximately 51 percent
of the entry-level candidates are under 30 years of age. Projects
report a total of 130 black enrollees and 82 with Spanish surnames.
There are 15 female enrollees, with 11 receiving upgrade training.
Thirty-three of the entry-level enrollees are handicapped, and 246
have less than a high school education.
(4) Transition Training
Scope and Activities of the EPA Transition Training Program.
Recognizing the potential manpower for water pollution control rep-
resented by returning servicemen who already have basic skills as a
result of their military experience and training, EPA negotiated an
interagency agreement with the Departments of HEW and Defense to
establish a program of transition training in entry-level operator posi-
tions. The purpose of the Transition Training program is to provide
veterans with marketable skills for employment in wastewater treat-
ment plants through retraining before discharge from the service.
Over 500 servicemen will be trained in this program, which began
during November 1970. Basic education and OJT are provided by 10
joint facilities (military institutions with or near wastewater treat-
ment plants and nearby academic institutions). Duration of the
course is determined
[p. IV-80]
by each service. Trainees at Army bases are given 240 hours of
coupled OJT and those at Air, Navy, and Marine bases are given 480
-------
4002 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
to 640 hours. Total cost of the program—including the cost of instruc-
tors, supplies, equipment, program administration and supervision,
and job location assistance—is $470,807. EPA Transition Training
Program activities are included as part of Exhibit IV-11.
In addition to managing the national contract for Transition Train-
ing, EPA performs several other related functions. First, it coordi-
nates efforts to place successful trainees in water pollution control
plant jobs upon their separation from military service. (About 70
percent of the servicemen who have already completed the Transition
Training Program have gone directly into operator trainee jobs in
wastewater treatment plants or into advanced water pollution control
training programs.)
EPA also has a responsibility to provide job counseling for veterans
with whom they come in contact or who contact EPA. As shown on
the chart at the end of subsection III-B-3-c, several options are open
to veterans for training in water pollution control. In the future,
EPA intends to encourage veterans to further their training—either
by enrolling in an Institutional Training Program or a junior or com-
munity college offering a one- and two-year curriculum in water and
wastewater technology or by seeking employment in a treatment
plant offering EPA- or State/local-sponsored coupled OJT—in order
to qualify for higher level jobs.
Second, EPA—through direct contact with VA offices—encourages
the Veterans Administration to channel veterans into water pollution
control occupations and training programs. For example, it has
distributed guidelines to VA State agencies which approve waste-
water treatment plant operator training programs, recommending the
following:
Option I: Enrollment in an EPA-sponsored operator training
program if the trainee is within commuting distance of one of
EPA's training projects.
Option II: Enrollment in a training project equivalent to the
EPA-sponsored program, which may be sponsored by a State or
local water pollution control agency, if the trainee is within
commuting distance of the training project.
Option III: Enrollment in a correspondence course which could
be administered by the State water pollution control agency
and/or EPA's Manpower and Training regional and headquarters
organizations if no training projects are available or accessible
under Options I and II.
[p. IV-81]
Under Option III, basic education and operator theory training
could be provided by a correspondence course manual for wastewater
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 4003
plant operators prepared by Clemson University or Sacramento State
University. On-the-job training in plant operating techniques could
be provided in accordance with an OJT-apprentice-type training
schedule prepared by EPA. The schedule covers a 13-month program
for graduates of the Transition Training Program and an 18-month
program for veterans who did not receive transition training. OJT
instruction would be provided by an experienced, qualified waste
treatment plant operator who would also coordinate and relate the
correspondence course training with the on-the-job training.
Third, EPA encourages employers to develop in-house OJT pro-
grams for waste treatment plant operators and provides guidelines
for curriculum and training materials.
Assessment of the EPA Transition Training Program. Of the 277
enrollees in programs to date, 108 are still in training. One hundred
fifty-three have completed the program, with 145 given opportunities
for employment. Eight are seeking additional training. Three gradu-
ates were provided job opportunities but decided to return to civilian
employment in various jobs outside the field of pollution control.
Several trainees have excelled in their jobs, due to the high level
of training they received under EPA Transition Programs. One
trainee, a graduate of a 240-hour course at Fort Bliss, Texas, scored
the highest grade among 50 applicants for a position in the El Paso
Public Utilities System. Included in the 50 applicants were men
with as much as two years' previous experience.
In addition to the high degree of satisfaction expressed by the
trainee is the even greater appreciation of various employers through-
out the United States, Puerto Rico, and Canada. Several employers
have commented on the maturity, dependability, and competence of
the trainees graduating from this program. The application of these
highly trained personnel guarantees a superior level of performance
in water pollution control activities.
(5) Assessment of National MDTA-Funded Projects. The four
national operator training programs funded by DOL under MDTA
have had a positive impact, demonstrating that the disadvantaged—
the unemployed, the underemployed, and the minority groups—can
be successfully trained for a variety of water pollution control jobs
and that application of the career ladder concept can be highly effec-
tive in improving public service in this area. The establishment and
implementation of these programs, however, has inevitably posed
certain problems for EPA. First, given the funds for program de-
velopment, it has been necessary to convince potential sponsors that
such training will satisfy an unmet need and that it will be feasible.
For example, can the disadvantaged be trained for entry-level
operator jobs? Will employers—leery of the connotations of "dis-
-------
4004 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
advantaged"—resists programs for their training and
[p. IV-82]
employment? Experience with the programs thus far, particularly
coupled OJT and Public Service Careers, has demonstrated to the
State and local agencies both need and feasibility. Indeed, they have
been vital in supplementing the independent and collective efforts of
the states and localities to provide entry and upgrade training for lower
level operators.
A second area of concern has been how to find and train instructors
for the programs once they have a sponsor. In all cases, the emphasis
has been on seeking out high-level operators who can be trained to
be educators, rather than educators who must be trained in opera-
tional theory and technique. The advantages of such an approach
are obvious: instructors with successful experience in the field are
well-grounded in waste treatment plant operations and qualified to
perform OJT, thus ensuring program continuity through coordina-
tion of basic education and theory with practical application.
Initially, EPA headquarters staff used selected portions of the Area
Manpower Instructor Development System (AMIDS) to train in-
structors for the MDTA-funded operator training programs. Using
the AMIDS package as a generalized base, the EPA staff subsequently
developed its own tailored program, referred to as Phase I Instructor
Training. The Phase I program essentially represents a refinement of
AMIDS tailored to the water quality environment. It is now offered
as the basic education course for instructor development under the
EPA Technical Training Program.
Continuation of the four MDTA-funded operator training pro-
grams depends on annual funding by DOL and HEW. If program
funding does not continue at existing or expanded levels through the
mechanisms provided, then some other mechanism must be sought
—either through a set-aside or an interagency agreement—to obtain
the funds required by EPA. Without the assurance of continued and
expanded funding, uncertainties will exist and planning for meeting
future operator training needs will be hampered.
[p. 1V-83]
b. The Pilot Program. Because the focus of MDTA has been on
basic education and entry-level skills for the disadvantaged entering
the wastewater treatment field and on skills improvement for the
underemployed at the lower operator levels, certain training needs
of operators and technicians remain unmet by the DOL programs.
These needs include:
Alternative entry and upgrade programs for lower level opera-
tors who do not meet the eligibility requirements of or who are
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 4005
not reached accessibly by the MDTA programs.
A comprehensive program for upgrading and updating the
managerial and technological skills of technicians and higher
level operators and to increase the capacity of others to do so.
In addition, the MDTA programs do not address a number of peri-
pheral concerns such as innovative techniques and approaches to
operator training, advanced instructor training, and curriculum de-
velopment. They also do not address the more immediate need for
qualified technicians and higher level operators.1
To provide a more comprehensive approach to training in waste-
water treatment plant operations, subsection 5(g)(l) of the Act
authorized EPA to develop:
"a pilot program, in cooperation with state and interstate agen-
cies, municipalities, educational institutions, and other organiza-
tions and individuals of manpower development and training and
retaining of persons in, or entering into, the field of operation and
maintenance of treatment works and related activities."
The Pilot Program is intended to supplement—not supplant—other
manpower training programs such as those funded under MDTA. Its
purpose is to demonstrate that with the use of innovative techniques
and approaches, management training and advanced training in
wastewater treatment operations will satisfy a need presently unmet
at the State and local levels in order to accomplish these objectives:
Provide an adequate supply of trained personnel to operate
and maintain existing and future wastewater treatment works
and related activities.
Enhance substantially the proficiency of those engaged in such
activities.
1 Grants and Scholarship Programs, discussed subsequently, will provide benefits only over
the long term, and funding for these programs has been limited.
[p. IV-84]
Using funds from the FY 1971 supplemental appropriation, EPA
initiated three programs under the pilot program: (i) advanced in-
structor training, (ii) specialized training in advanced wastewater
treatment, and (iii) grants for special State projects. The first two
programs represent compelling national needs; the third represents
the most compelling needs of individual states.
The total number of trainees to be supported under each project
and the approximate cost (amount of grant) of each project is as
follows:
-------
4006 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
Program
Advanced Instructor training
Specialized training In advanced wastewater treatment
Grants for special state projects
Total . .
Total number
of trainees
50
190
2,945
3,185
Total amount
of grant
$39,174
183,114
734,416
956,704
Summary descriptions of each program appear in Appendix B.
(1) Advanced Instructor Training. Instructors of the basic op-
erator training courses also required upgrade training in advanced
teaching techniques to instruct these and higher level training pro-
grams. A pilot project was initiated to satisfy this compelling need.
This project, referred to as Phase II Instructor Training, provides
advanced education techniques to operator training instructors who
have already learned basic education skills. It represents a refine-
ment of the basic Phase I training course currently offered under
EPA's Technical Training Program. The course emphasizes motiva-
tion, sensitivity training, design of effective instructional techniques,
and evaluation and utilization of learning resources.
A grant of $39,174 was awarded to Drake University to develop and
conduct the Phase II training, which began in June 1971. Between
40 and 50 instructors have enrolled in the course, and two sessions
have been completed. Participation in the course provides the ad-
vantages of contact with professional educators, more sophisticated
education skills, and the opportunity for both college credit and up-
grading of instructor credentials.
[p. IV-85]
(2) Specialized Training in Advanced Wastewater Treatment.
When the Pilot Program was authorized, few programs on advanced
wastewater treatment operations were offered at the State and local
levels. EPA awarded two grants under the Pilot Program for
development of two advanced experimental and demonstration proj-
ects to provide intensive technical training in the operation of waste-
water treatment processes for advanced waste treatment operators,
treatment plant supervisory personnel, public works department per-
sonnel, and others with a need for such training. Both recipients of
these grants, the Tennessee Department of Public Health and the
Texas Engineering Experimental Station, were selected on the basis
of the unique contribution they could make to the program. Both
contractors have well-qualified staff personnel capable of conducting
the programs. The total cost of the two advanced wastewater treat-
ment programs, including trainee subsistence and travel, will be
approximately $183,000. Each of these programs is discussed briefly
below.
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 4007
Tennessee Program. The State of Tennessee is in an area currently
moving from primary to secondary treatment, and the State Depart-
ment of Public Health was in the process of establishing a training
laboratory, usable for such courses, at the time the grant was awarded.
The program is regional in concept and is designed to reach 60
trainees from states in the southeast region of the United States. En-
rollees receive four weeks of classroom instruction, followed by on-
site plant visits. Participants from the State of Tennessee will receive
additional on-the-job training over a four-week period following the
classroom phase of the program. The pilot program will be used to
develop a blueprint for similar regional and State programs.
Texas Program. The Texas Engineering Experimental Station,
with a large research and development investment, is in one of several
states moving from secondary to tertiary treatment; it already had a
training laboratory at the time of the grant award. The Texas pro-
gram was regional in concept at inauguration but was designed to
become national as it developed. The program will provide training
in advanced wastewater treatment to 130 participants from several
sections of the nation, especially for plant personnel from systems
utilizing (or soon to utilize) advanced treatment processes. Courses
will be conducted in several locations throughout the nation and at
the Texas Experimental Station.
(3) Grants for Special State Projects. A wide range of operator
training needs had been identified by State water pollution control
and other public agencies across the country. Given the availability
of funds under the Pilot Program, the states were asked to suggest
innovative projects representing their most compelling needs. Each
EPA region then selected at least one training project for develop-
ment and implementation, based on the following criteria:
Replicability.
Geographic diversity.
[p. IV-86]
Potential for problem-solving.
Coverage (for example, management training for decision-
makers, electrical and instrumentation courses, correspondence
study programs, and so forth).
Final selection of projects for award was made by EPA/OWP head-
quarters staff, based on (i) regional recommendations, and (ii) the
project's potential for filling a recognized void in training activity.
Further, consideration was given to the overall potential of the proj-
ects to demonstrate comparative approaches to training.
Twenty-four grants were awarded to 18 states, one region (New
England), and Puerto Rico for development of operator or operations-
-------
4008 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
related training and information programs. These projects cover the
following major areas of need among the states:
(i) Management training for first-line supervisors to expand
and upgrade administrative skills of persons involved in opera-
tion and maintenance of wastewater treatment facilities to im-
prove overall plant efficiency and personnel performance.
(ii) Phosphorus removal training programs. These programs
must assist in demonstrating feasible removal processes as states
are now legislating for removal by the end of 1972.
(iii) Electrical and instrumentation courses for plant person-
nel to provide expertise in preventing plant shut-down as a
result of minor electrical and instrumentation problems. In other
words, preventive maintenance training in these critical areas.
(iv) General skill improvement training for higher level plant
personnel (operators and technicians) that cannot be trained
under U.S. Department of Labor programs.
(v) Information and orientation seminars for local officials and
policy decision-makers to demonstrate their unique function in
the solving of pollution problems in their own sectors.
(vi) Correspondence study programs to reach plant person-
nel in rural (and hard to reach) areas unable to participate in
[p. IV-87]
ongoing training programs. For this purpose, the Environmental
Protection Agency has, through a grant with Sacramento State
College, developed a correspondence field study program and is
making it available (at no cost) to 2,000 enrollees.
Exhibit IV-12 provides the number of grants awarded for the develop-
ment of programs to meet these needs.
[p. IV-88]
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 4009
EXHIBIT IV-12.—NUMBER OF GRANTS AWARDED FOR SPECIAL STATE PROJECTS BY PROGRAM COVERAGE
Number of
grants
Program coverage awarded
Training
Skills improvement and upgrade of operator personnel 10
Proficiency Improvement of operators and personnel engaged In operator-related activity .... 1
Training of entry-level personnel and existing operators; skills improvement of laboratory
personnel 1
Training in laboratory techniques 1
Training in phosphorous removal techniques 1
Mobile laboratory for skills Improvement of operators and personnel engaged In related
activity 1
Field training unit for operator training 1
Training In planning and supervision of OJT, In-service and external training for operators
and supervisors; training of instructors, teachers, and plant supervisors In the conduct of
training courses; instruction for health department and other regulatory Inspectors In
conduct of operations and maintenance inspections 1
Supervisory training 1
Management training 2
Information-oriented seminars for State and local officials; training for regulatory personnel 1
Orientation seminars for local officials and citizens 1
Curricula and materials development
Development and Implementation of curricula for water pollution control personnel 1
Development of standard operating procedures and technical training materials 1
[p. IV-89]
Each state conducts its own training programs or contracts for its
performance. EPA provides technical assistance, particularly for de-
veloping curricula and training materials.
Approximately 2,945 persons will be trained under these programs,
for a total cost of about $734,416. Program development began during
May 1971; training began during the first quarter of FY 1972.
(4) Assessment of the Pilot Program. It is too early to evaluate
the Pilot Program, as projects were not initiated until the end of
FY 1971. The EPA regional offices are presently developing criteria
for assessment of each project, which will be monitored and reviewed
monthly. There are early indications that requests for enrollment far
exceed the funded capacity to provide training. The pilot projects
presently supported by funds authorized under Sections 5(g)(l)
represent only a small portion of the needs termed critical by the
states.
The limited nature but significant potential of the program was
recognized when it was initially proposed. Senator Muskie, in a state-
ment to the Senate in October 1969 indicated:
The [Public Works] Committee recognizes that a great deal
more than a pilot program will be required if Federal funds for
sewage treatment plant construction are invested wisely, but it
believes that experience with a pilot program would provide a
sound base for expanded legislation in the near future.1
The Pilot Program is an important step in encouraging, guiding,
-------
4010 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
and financially assisting the states to meet the substantial training
needs generated by the accelerated wastewater treatment plant con-
struction program. Because the states have not had, nor do they
presently possess, the resources (funds, instructional staff, or training
programs) to properly assume this responsibility, the Pilot Program
represents the primary vehicle through which the states can build
their capacities to help provide an adequately trained work force to
protect and effectively utilize this investment.
Toward this objective, the Pilot Program has:
Established a mechanism to immediately initiate the training
necessitated by the accelerated program.
Provided an initial framework upon which the states can build
and for which they can eventually assume responsibility.
1 Congressional Record, 7 October 1969, S. 12038.
[p. IV-90]
c. Technical Training Grants and Scholarships for Undergraduate
Study.
(1) Scope and Activities of the Undergraduate Technical Training
Grants and Scholarships Program. Entry training programs to
prepare students for positions as technicians or higher level opera-
tors have been woefully inadequate. To help expand programs for
preparation of students to enter positions relating to the design,
operation, or maintenance of treatment plants and other related facil-
ities, EPA initiated the Undergraduate Training Grants and Scholar-
ship Program.
Section 16 of the Act authorizes the award of:
... grants to or contracts with institutions of higher education
... to assist them in planning, developing, strengthening, im-
proving, or carrying out programs or projects for the preparation
of undergraduate students to enter an occupation which involves
the design, operation, and maintenance of treatment works and
other facilities whose purpose is water quality control.
The objectives of this section are:
To plan, develop, or expand training programs at this level.
To train and retrain faculty.
To support innovative and experimental programs of coopera-
tive education.
To develop and research teaching materials and to plan cur-
riculum.
Section 18 authorizes the award of "scholarships for undergradu-
ate study by persons who plan to enter an occupation involving the
operation and maintenance of treatment works."
Although a limited appropriation has precluded initiation of the
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 4011
scholarship program, two areas of training have been addressed under
Section 16:
Training of qualified high school students at two-year institu-
tions in the operation and maintenance of waste treatment and
related facilities.
[p. IV-91]
Improvement of the training of junior and senior bachelor de-
gree engineering students in the design of waste treatment facil-
ities at four-year colleges.
Training to meet the first area will produce qualified entrants for
senior operator and technician positions. This training compliments
that performed under the Pilot Program (for skill improvement of
currently employed operators and technicians) and MDTA training
(entry and upgrade training for lower level operators). It is intended
to fill the gap between lower level operator training and four- or
five-year professional training, particularly at the technician and
senior operator levels. Under this program, training grants have been
awarded to technical schools, junior colleges, and similar institutions
to develop and test new approaches to curricula development.
In the past, and even still in many jurisdictions (units of govern-
ment), plant supervisors must have a B.S. degree. There is, however,
a shortage of personnel with this qualification, particularly in me-
dium-sized wastewater treatment plants where salaries may be too
low to attract baccalaureate professionals. Further, often the job
responsibilities of plant supervisors do not require the B.S. degree.
The State of New York, for example, recently downgraded the edu-
cational requirements for certification of plant supervisors to a two-
year Associate of Science degree.
In anticipation of other jurisdictions adopting similar requirements,
EPA has used the funds appropriated under Sections 16 and 18 of the
1970 Water Quality Improvement Act to assist educational institu-
tions and students involved in technician-oriented training programs.
Both sections of the act are intended to alleviate a critical shortage
of skilled engineering aides, scientific technicians, and senior treat-
ment plant operators. Grants and contracts with two-year technical
schools and community colleges will prepare high school graduates for
supervisory or senior level operator or technician positions in waste-
water treatment plants, advanced treatment systems, and regulatory
agencies.
Sections 16 and 18 have not been fully implemented as a result of
budgetary constraints. Although $12 million was authorized for FY
1970 and $25 million for FY 1971 and FY 1972, no funds were appro-
priated for 1970, only $331,000 was appropriated for 1971, and $346,000
for 1972.
-------
4012 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
In order to save a year in initiating its program of financial assist-
ance, EPA in FY 1971 awarded Clemson University, Clemson, South
Carolina, a grant of $54,017 out of FY 1970 Professional Grant monies
—originally scheduled for support of more advanced training. The
purpose of the grant was twofold:
To help establish criteria for the selection of undergraduate
institutions offering design, operation, and maintenance training.
[p. IV-92]
To develop curricula guidelines for two-year post-high-school
wastewater technology training programs.
Clemson subsequently received a supplement of $12,737 to develop
criteria for the design of engineering curricula pertaining to under-
graduate programs oriented to the design of wastewater treatment
plants.
The $331,000 appropriated for FY 1971 was used to award grants
to seven institutions for further planning and design of the curricu-
lum material and for initiating training programs and/or materials
development. Award was based on capability to develop the under-
graduate programs and on the availability of trainees to enroll in
them.1
Three of these institutions (Charles County Community College,
Linn-Benton Community College, and the Greenville Technical Edu-
cation Center) have completed development of program curricula
based on the guidelines prepared by Clemson University and have
opened their degree programs this fall. Curricula will vary among
the institutions but will essentially cover wastewater treatment opera-
tions, including classroom theory and "hands-on" training in a nearby
cooperating wastewater treatment plant, as well as algebra, chemistry,
general biology, ecology, microbiology, hydrolics, practical physics,
and several liberal arts courses. About 20 students will attend each
program. Graduates will receive an Associate of Science degree and
will be eligible—under voluntary or mandatory state certification
programs—to be superintendents (plant chiefs) of medium-sized
wastewater treatment plants.
(2) Assessment of the Undergraduate Technical Training Grants
and Scholarships Program. It is too early to provide a meaningful
assessment of effectiveness, as the undergraduate programs are just
getting started.
As the shortage of manpower for water pollution control becomes
more acute, the importance of senior-level entry training increases
because of the entrant's ability to assume responsibilities previously
reserved for the professional level. However, budgetary constraints
will severely limit the number of undergraduates who will be trained
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 4013
in FY 1972 in the design, operation, and maintenance of water treat-
ment works and related facilities. With construction grants presently
funded at $2 billion annually (which may be increased to $3 billion),
and with a growing manpower requirement to service these facili-
ties, as established in Part II, the monies for activities conducted
under Section 16 and 18 must be increased.
1 These awards are listed by State, institution within State, and amount awarded in the
EPA publication, Water Quality Control Training Grants, 1971 Grant Awards.
[p. IV-93]
PART V.—CONCLUSIONS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Summary of Conclusions
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit V-l Additional Manpower Required by 1976 3
Exhibit V-2 Labor Force Growth 1971 to 1976 4
Exhibit V-3 Forecasted Training Requirements 5
Exhibit V-4 Summary of EPA Training Programs 7
[p. V-i]
PART V.—CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS
Acting pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, EPA
administers the Federal Water Pollution Control program. This
program includes a broad spectrum of activities related to water
pollution control that are conducted in partnership with the states
and local governments, private organizations, and other Federal
agencies. Generally, the Federal program provides that the states
and their subdivisions have primary responsibility for conduct of
water pollution control activities, while the Federal Government
provides financial and technical assistance to support their efforts.
Only when performance gaps are apparent will the Federal Govern-
ment assume primary responsibility.
All of the program activities require the application of manpower
for their accomplishment. Accordingly, one aspect of the Federal
program is activities designed to ensure that manpower in adequate
numbers and with requisite skills will be available at the times and
places needed, that available manpower are effectively and efficiently
utilized, and that the members of the labor force find personal satis-
faction from their jobs.
This report has focused on these manpower activities. In doing
so it has followed the EPA concept of a water pollution control
-------
4014 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
manpower development program with three interdependent units:
[
Planning
Water Pollution Control
Manpower Development
Program
Manpower Recruit-
ment, Retention,
and Utilization
J
Manpower
The report responds to the requirement of subsection 5 (g) (4) of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act requiring a report to the Con-
gress on manpower and training actions taken under subsection 5 (g)
and comments
[P- V-l]
on the effectiveness of other training programs in the field. It also
provides estimates of future manpower and training needs.
In summary, Part II of this report points out that EPA has con-
ceptualized a method for forecasting the supply and demand for water
pollution control manpower. This method is one component of the
overall manpower planning program. As conceptualized, the planning
program is intergovernmental and interagency, with the states
having the pivotal role. It includes the needs of both private and
public employers. The system forecasts manpower and enters up-
date and upgrade training needs by occupation, labor market location,
and time frame. Under the other planning program component,
action plans are then developed at all levels to fulfill these needs.
EPA has initiated the development of the planning tools and base
data necessary to operate the program. The program is not yet fully
operational but is approaching the stage of field installation. This
necessitates providing State and local personnel with substantial
training and technical assistance in its application, since presently
the State and local governments have limited capacities for man-
power planning. The report concludes that EPA should complete
implementation of the planning program since its outputs are neces-
sary as a basis for rational manpower and training actions in this
sprawling and institutionally complex industry.
The report goes on to set forth an interim forecast of manpower
and training needs through 1976, which has been specially developed
for this report pending full implementation of the manpower planning
system. While this interim forecast is subject to some questions
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 4015
because of data qualifications, EPA believes it is a good indicator of
the order of magnitude of the manpower and training needs. In
summary, this forecast is presented in Exhibit V-l. The anticipated
rapid growth of the water pollution control work force is shown in
Exhibit V-2. The forecasted training requirements are set forth
in Exhibit V-3.
The largest increase indicated by the forecast is for more operators.
The increase projected in the number of waste treatment plants
coupled with the increased sophistication of treatment processes are
expected to result in an increase in operator training requirements
as well. EPA observations and a report by the General Accounting
Office (GAO) indicate that the effectiveness and efficiency of existing
treatment plants is already impaired by understaffing and under-
training of operators.
The report further concludes that there will be a need for more
sanitary engineers, primarily because of the increasing technological
sophistication of the water pollution control process. Further, it
concludes that specialized water pollution control training is neces-
sary in substantial quantity for other professionals entering the field.
Also there is a substantial demand for update training for all
professionals.
tP- V-2]
EXHIBIT V-l.—ADDITIONAL MANPOWER REQUIRED BY 1976*
Personnel
category
Other
Total**
Sector Nongovern-
mental
10,200
. 18,400
33 300
10,400
. . . 72,300
Local
1,300
1,200
8 900
11,700
23,100
State
3,400
400
800
4,600
Federal
non-EPA
1,300
200
1,400
400
3,300
EPA
600
200
600
1,400
Personnel
category
total 1976
16,800
20,400
43,600
23,900
104,700
"The bases for these figures are set forth in Part II-D of this report.
**An undetermined portion of this total will be employees assigned on a part-time basis to water
pollution control activities.
[p. V-3]
EXHIBIT V-2.—LABOR FORCE GROWTH 1971 TO 1976
Personnel
category
Operator
Other
Total
1971 manpower
engaged
25,400
49,300
26,900
47,800
149,400
1976 manpower
requirements
42,200
92,900
47,300
71,800
254,200
Percentage
increase
Percent
66
88
77
50
70
[p. V-4]
-------
4016
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
o CD o o
*}•<£> 10 CM
^- IT) to 00
rC in co •*
r-» CO «-t
o o o o
?3 to c«i CM
g CM &_ CM_
in CM in co
gs
* s
2&
I!
u «
go
OO
a
S :
I s|s
(O ^- O> CM
CM CM"
• o a
i 3 S
:§
:§ :
o o o o
oo oo o to
^ O ^ CM
CM |C CM rH
i O O
I 00 O
(O to to 00
CP CM i-t IO
CM « in CM" I »
i "
gfr
111-
• s
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 4017
With regard to technicians, the report notes that there will be an
increased demand for upper level, highly trained technicians and
that substantial update training for the present work force will be
required.
Part III of the report addresses the recruitment, retention, and
manpower utilization activities undertaken by EPA to fulfill man-
power and training needs. It notes that these activities have been
largely adjuncts of programs financed by the Manpower Develop-
ment and Training Act or by EPA research and development funds,
rather than by funds authorized under subsection 5 (g). The report
concludes that when these programs are taken together, they probably
only begin to reap the benefits in terms of reductions in manpower
and training requirements that could be obtained by the systematic
and widespread application of such techniques by all water pollution
control employers.
Of special note, Part III examines operator certification. In a
review of the current situation, it notes that 47 states now have
certification requirements of some kind, but in only 31 is it mandatory.
Further, the standards for certification vary substantially from state
to state. It also notes that operator certification is of benefit in various
ways to the operators, to the employers, and to the public. Therefore,
EPA intends to encourage mandatory certification by all states.
Part IV of the report reviews the water pollution control training
activities of EPA and of others—including educational institutions,
associations, private industry, local agencies, State agencies, and
Federal agencies. The non-EPA organizations carry on this training
for all classes of personnel in a random pattern that defies brief
summarization. However, as the report makes clear, in total these
non-EPA sources do not conduct sufficient training to meet overall
manpower and training needs. Further, in respect to "one-time
educational efforts"—such as the development of curricula and train-
ing materials—the non-EPA organizations tend to be inefficient
because of overlap of efforts and results.
As Part IV goes on to detail, under the authority of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act [particularly subsection 5 (g) and
Section 16] and, with regard to operator training, as an agent of
other Federal departments, EPA has mounted programs in coopera-
tion with State water pollution control agencies to fill the training
gap for all categories of personnel. Exhibit V-4 outlines these pro-
grams and shows EPA's contribution to each program.
The report concludes that generally these programs have been
successful in providing well trained manpower for water pollution
-------
4018
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
control. Collectively, they represent a functioning mechanism thrust-
ing in the right direction.
tp-V-6]
Program
Professional Training
Grants.
Research Fellowship..
Direct Technical
Training.
Technology Transfer
MDTA
Coupled OJT
Institutional
Training
Public Service
Careers
EXHIBIT V-4.— SUMMARY OF EPA TRAINING PROGRAMS
EPA authority EPA contribution
Subsection 5(g)(3)(A) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act.
.Subsection 5(g)(3){B) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act.
Subsection 5fg)(3)(C) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act.
.Subsection 5(g)(3)(C) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act.
Agent for the Departments of Labor
(DOL) and Health, Education, and
Welfare (DHEW) under the Man-
power Development and Training
Act (MDTA).
Agent for DOL under MDTA.
Transition
Pilot Program
Undergraduate
Training Grants.
Undergraduate
Scholarships.
.Agent for DHEW and the Department
of Defense.
.Subsection 5(g)(l) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act.
Section 16 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act.
Section 18 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act.
Financial support to educational institu-
tions for graduate-level programs In
water pollution control.
Awards to graduate students for special-
ized research training in water pollution
control.
Direct training and training support for
others in technical matters relating to
the causes, prevention, and control of
water pollution.
Direct training to practicing professionals,
public decision-makers, conservation
groups, and the general public.
Program administration for entry-level
operator training.
Program administration for entry-level
operator training.
Program administration for entry-level
operator training.
Direct training, financial support, and
training support for update and upgrade
operator training.
Financial support to undergraduate insti-
tutions to conduct programs in water
pollution control; facilities design and
facilities operation and maintenance.
Awards to undergraduate students for
study leading to careers in the operation
and maintenance of wastewater treat-
ment facilities.
[p. V-7]
APPENDIX A.—MANPOWER AND TRAINING NEEDS
RESULTING FROM OTHER SOURCES OF
WATER POLLUTION
THERMAL POLLUTION
The growing demands for electric power continues to require a
tremendous expansion of power-generating facilities. Water is used
in the production of almost all electric power now generated—
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 4019
whether hydroelectric, fossil-fueled, or nuclear-powered plants. Two
of these generating methods, fossil- and nuclear-fueled steam electric
plants, produce large amounts of waste heat that causes thermal
pollution.
Installation of facilities such as long discharge lines or cooling
towers to control thermal pollution will affect cost factors and require
more space for the plant. The increasing use of nuclear power adds
another potential hazard to the environment—radiation.
More stringent controls on the discharge of heated effluents and
a greater research effort to improve thermal standards and abatement
technology are expected to ensure compliance with water quality
standards. Additionally, today EPA, the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion, and the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, are
working together to develop standard radiological criteria for water.
Presently there are nearly 2,000 private power plants, 1,000 municipal
plants, 140 power distribution and State plants, 170 Federal plants,
and 1,480 public and cooperative plants, for a total of nearly 4,800
power plants. Future environmental efforts in this area will un-
doubtedly require additions to engineering departments and scientific
research staffs. Nevertheless it is conservatively estimated that
presently, 3,000 professional and 3,000 blue-collar workers require
varying degrees of in-depth thermal pollution control training and
thousands of others require short-course training.
FEEDLOT POLLUTION
Both the increasing number of animals raised and the modern
methods of raising these animals contribute to the increased pollu-
tion of waters from animal waste. Feeding operations for beef cattle,
poultry, and swine, along with dairy farms, are the major sources
of actual or potential water pollution from animal wastes; they
contribute approximately 1.7 billion tons of waste per year, a good
percentage of which reaches our waterways. A number of waste
handling and control methods have recently become available which
vary widely in complexity and cost. Many States are just beginning
to survey feedlot and other agricultural operations to determine the
pollution potential and necessary measures to deal with the problem.
Projects have been initiated with the Department of Agriculture to
demonstrate available techniques for treating runoff from animal
feeding operations and for preventing its discharge to receiving
waters.
[p. A-l]
Presently there are 3,400 feedlots of sufficient size to warrant a
minimum of one individual full-time per feedlot, fully cognizant and
-------
4020 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
totally responsible for implementation of effective methods and
techniques to control water pollution. Additionally, many thousands
of other agricultural personnel directly or indirectly involved in
animal raising on intermediate (33,000) and small (105,000) feedlots
will require short-course training in effective measures to prevent
water pollution. Most training will be conducted by the agriculture
extension services of the Federal and State governments.
OTHER AGRICULTURAL WASTES
There is an increasing concern about the short- and long-term
environmental effects of runoff from farm lands which contains a
variety of chemicals, including pesticides, herbicides, insecticides,
and fertilizers. Although soil conservation methods have made some
in-roads in controlling runoff, much is left to be done. A number
of Federal agencies, in cooperation with State and local authorities,
are working on research projects devoted to the search for chemical
or biological control methods which will sustain agricultural pro-
ductivity while reducing the possibility of environmental damage
and destruction of aquatic life and wildlife. Such methods to control
leaching by irrigation, such as lining canals, are becoming available,
and in some areas the possibility of using desalination plants is being
studied. Overall, however, the water quality problems caused by
irrigation return flows are difficult and expensive to control.
The Office of Pesticides Programs in EPA is developing the
scientific knowledge necessary for the development of water quality
criteria for pesticides. This requires increased research on the effects
of pesticides and the search for less harmful pesticides, expanded
monitoring, investigation to identify critical areas, and closer inter-
agency coordination with the Departments of Agriculture and Health,
Education, and Welfare. However, with over 30,000 agricultural
businesses presently in the U.S., much needs to be done to educate
these people in the causes of and solution to agricultural water
pollution. Scientists and engineers experienced and educated in
abatement and control techniques will make up the backbone of the
technology transfer to these businesses.
MINE DRAINAGE
Mine drainage, one of the most significant causes of water quality
degradation and destruction of water uses, degrades water primarily
by chemical pollution and sedimentation. Acid formation occurs
when water and air react with the sulfur-bearing minerals in the
mines or refuse piles to form sulfuric acid and iron compounds.
Prevention of acid and sediment drainage from mines can be accom-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 4021
plished through renovation of the mineral area. Regrading and
revegetation can also be effective means of mine drainage control.
Other methods of control may involve hydraulically sealing mines,
diversion and/or control of underground
[p. A-2]
drainage, and use of chemicals or biological inhibitors to reduce the
formation of acid. Neutralization is the most common method of
treating acid drainage. In addition, laboratory studies have shown
that an inert gas atmosphere which displaces oxygen will prevent mine
acid formation. Mining, civil, and chemical engineers, geologists, and
hydrologists are now required to turn their attention to mine pollu-
tion control. With an estimated 8,000 operating mines employing
nearly 125,000 people, and a similar number of inoperative or closed
mines, it is conservatively estimated that short-course, technology-
transfer-type training is required for approximately 9,000 mining en-
gineers, inspectors, superintendents, and related professional and blue-
collar personnel.
OIL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
Dumping and accidental spilling of oil and other hazardous ma-
terials continue to increase (with presently approximately 10,000
spills each year), and constitute major pollution threats to the water
resources of the Nation. Pollution by oil and hazardous substances
may occur in any of our waterways and coastal areas, or on the high
seas as a result of deliberate dumping, accidental spills, leaks in pipe-
lines, leaks in drilling rigs or storage facilities, or the breakup of
transportation equipment. Federal prevention, control and enforce-
ment activities are provided for under the 1970 Water Quality Im-
provement Act. In conjunction with development of plans with the
Department of Transportation and other Federal agencies to prevent
and control oil spills, planning has been undertaken to handle acci-
dents of other hazardous substances. There is a substantial body of
conventional, "good common sense" preventative technology and
operating practices currently available which are not being fully
used. Nevertheless, the technology for containing, removing, dis-
posing of, and cleaning up the damage from spills must be classed
as primitive and requires a considerable research effort. Today
there are over 125 fully integrated oil companies, 7,000 independent
crude oil companies, 250 refineries, and over 30,000 bulk plants em-
ploying over 425,000 people.
As the state of the art develops, petroleum and chemical engineers,
geologists, hydrologists, and operational and maintenance personnel
totalling conservatively between 10,000 and 20,000 in the refining,
-------
4022 LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
drilling, and production of oil will require short-course and in-depth
types of training over the next five years.
SEDIMENTATION AND EROSION
Sediments produced by erosion are the most extensive pollutants
of surface water—contributing approximately 2 billion tons of sedi-
ment per year. The dirty brown or gray appearance of a river or
reservoir after a rainstorm is due to sediments washed in from crop-
lands, unprotected forest soils, overgrazed pastures, or the bulldozed
"developments" of urban areas. Sources of sediment are diffuse and
therefore often difficult
[p. A-3]
or costly to control. Where feasible, erosion prevention provides the
most effective method for sediment control. However, abatement and
control will be achieved through improved technology and manage-
ment practices for controlling this type of pollution, and by State and
local enactment of permit and inspection measures at construction
sites. Although it is known that in order to control sedimentation and
erosion, soil engineers, soil conservationists, farm operators, irrigation
engineers, construction personnel, and similar types of people will re-
quire skill improvement and update training, a realistic estimate of
their numbers is not yet obtainable.
WASTES FROM WATERCRAFT
It has been determined that approximately 46,000 Federally
registered commercial vessels, 65,000 unregistered commercial fishing
vessels, 1,600 Federally owned vessels, and 8 million recreational
watercraft use the navigable waters of the U.S. The potential pollu-
tion from just the sewage from these vessels is estimated to be
equivalent to the sewage produced by just over 500,000 persons. At
the present time, a very small percentage of watercraft are equipped
with sewage treatment devices. Other significant pollution from
vessels is often evident when ships discharge bilge and ballast water
containing oil and a variety of other substances.
The Water Quality Improvement Act provides for Federal per-
formance standards for water pollution control equipment on com-
mercial and private vessels. In addition, procedures to certify the
marine sanitation devices to ensure their compliance with the estab-
lished standards will be required. Federal agencies—including the
EPA, the Navy, the Corps of Engineers, and the Coast Guard—are
presently developing, testing, and installing packaged treatment and
control equipment on Federal vessels. In some cases, this will
necessitate pump-out on shoreside treatment facilities. It is conserva-
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS 4023
tively estimated that between 10,000 and 20,000 vessel operators will
require formal orientation training in the operation and maintenance
of inboard sewage treatment plants and that an additional 2,500 Coast
Guard personnel, marine engineers, power squadron leaders, and
various State and local marine authority personnel will require
varying degrees of advanced training.
[p. A-4]
-------
4024
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
o m i-i IH oo | in
(DO ^
rt ^
CM CM CM W
to o 8 "
o o o o o
O PI 1C o O
in CM o> rt rt
•-* in o> o ^-i
oT o> -
'
6 S
SgS
E § o
a
1
* £
: E " E
"111
2 E
II £-
§ II,
E a.;
S3 t
g ™
? t:
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
4025
ILOT PROGRAM
Q.
g
Ul
&
|j
s
f
u
z
1
Summary of training program
0 u
'•S
0} Ot
fl
Z*'
I*
I'
O
I|
1
a>
ttt
c
t
n
on motivation, s
and evaluation
lining
prove the instructional skills of trainers; emphasis
training, designing effective instructional practices,
zation of learning resources.
™ .§
,.
a o
£ m
i
I|
— to
a
S"
i
£
i
0
E
co
0}
Q
£,
e
u
_>
c
S
c
'c
'(3
1
•i
a>
Q.
="
.i T3 BO
.Sec
1 « a
E w 2
. o> a>
C « >
o jn ,p
ii:
155
if!
£ S Z
i .a
[/>
monstrate Innovating and unique training procedure:
tenance, and control of advanced biological waste
facilities. These pilot program training methods will
if
0)
f .—
^
i
1
P
"C ^
£±i
0,|
O I
S £
C *f-
e o
•2
regional or national programs.
!{!!!
llfli
n ~ S " "-
•- ~ " .E J3
^ •= 1 5 1
^ > .- " to
e-year training program including: S-day courses ir
treatment processes utilizing a pilot plant for pro
experience. Three such courses offered to twice as
and two other locations. Special operational instru
and AWT maintenance and control to 20 commuting
Ft. Worth area.
§
*"*
r-l
^
S
o
1
73 *
o> *£=
!*=
5 g
(A (/>
— £
I
0
IS
o> *"
11
£ -c
0.
5 £
V
t)
•«.
'g1
0>
s
CO
To
'o
8
S
I
ll!4
§ i s |
W 0. £L f
|3S»
related activity
ng, maintaining,
•oblem-oriented"
elude an operati]
aining of wastewater treatment plant operators and
to improve substantially their proficiency in operati
ing, designing, and managing facilities through a "pi
to environmental enhancement. Training site will in
L^
1—
in
~
~
in
§
o"
•
,t
5
8
ra
S
s
1-
* c
Is
A) fi
"c a -d
Is s
£££
3
ci
£
'o
«2
c
I
u
1
•a i J2
S * «
-------
4026
LEGAL COMPILATION—WATER
PROGRAM— Continued
3
ol
o:
£
3
T
d
X
a
z
Ul
fc
<
Summary of training program
0 v>
»_ «
(U U
S c
IE
z ^
bO
— S
TO -O
«3
O
tr c
§ 2
i "
Ol
cfl
bC
c:
2
t~
1
c
t
c
1
us in
2 — , ha . — 2
Project A— Seminars for State and local elected officials to provide infom
concerning water pollution control programs, legislation, regulations, am
damentals of wastewater plant operations and maintenance, Includini
need for well-trained personnel to operate the plants.
Prefect B— Training program for State and local regulatory personnel or
plant personnel concerning practical aspects of water pollution contra
plant operation and maintenance, including WPC plant inspection and e'
e
a.
Is
55 *•*
13
1
«° -
s~
**- r+
|3T
B
— 1-H
*H
in"
o c ^ 0
Have a trained coordinator who will organize and conduct a training pn
for scattered wastewater treatment plant operators utilizing classroor
OJT instruction for 20 trainees. The coordinator will work with the State
tional Education Department and Community Colleges to assist the pr
and provide additional training opportunities.
S
K
C.
8
a"
s
&
i
'•S
|
•o
U)
e
o
1
£g
** ^
§•5
i!
°S
3
| § s 1
Improve the skills and upgrade present wastewater treatment plant opei
The trainee will receive basic education in areas of math, commumcs
science and plant unit operations with the goal of adding substantially
proficiency of persons employed at all levels of waste treatment opera
R
rH
r-.
(0
s
o>
3
8
s
c.
n
H
£
S-a
" S
TSo
"Z —
^ O
to i
•5 c
Is
0)
o
Iff! ?
» * 9 *- r i
3 > o- o ^J
This training program, designed for supervisory personnel employed by
water treatment facilities, will serve to increase the theoretical Knov
level of the participants, increase their understanding of supervisory res
bilities, and help develop training programs in the Individual plants
Piedmont area of South Carolina.
[P.
a
*-l
r*.
,-4
I*.
S
00
to
t-t
0
en
—
">
o
£
u
Si
c -g
Is
r- c
O
U ™
li
S3
0
gs"2
s °
rt ^ S
S m +*
Improve the skills and upgrade present wastewater treatment plant ope
The trainee will receive basic education in areas of math, commumc
science, and plant unit operations with the goal of adding substantially
proficiency of persons at all levels of waste treatment operations.
3
r-x
t-H
r*.
o
(O
cn_
cT
CM
T S C
£ o 3-
OJ
a E g B
2 E •"
S «3 £ C
. J= cq 0
Educate municipal officials and "decision-makers" as to the importance of
quality control in view of new standards. Students would be shown t
portance of well-trained operating personnel in their wastewater tre
facilities in order to meet their obligations in the field of water quality c
S
v«
r-*
?^
1
r>«
2
£
S
$
5-
U
3
*i
Q>
2£
i
**
a!
c °
® "c
2t 3
o> S
f
-------
GUIDELINES AND REPORTS
4027
™ S 2
w
c = « a T: =
as < -g g ™
o«2 . s sr c
.E S S S ' .2
= •= o „ j= to
2 ,,-li 5 5 I
^ i- e _ a) 9-
^ ° -x E 'E S
it
TO
C
a>
E
(O
V
P
=3
.0
0
O
ra
CD
JC
(Q
E
t
%
a>
o
M
c
£
*-•
(U
wastewa
c
1
o
E
>,
.a
•o
O)
(/i
=i
V)
£
.
o
c
|o
"S
J£
?
O
1A
S
M
1
i
o
•o
S
Q.
O)
s.
^
c
ra
8
Q.
e/5
|
o
c
O)
fZ
U
s
«/r
1
1
0
b0
c
'E
V)
(U
;o
1
a
3
O
U
bO
c
'c
2
s
c
o
U
c
0
3
0}
1
"o
c
spectors
.E
£•
S
ni
1
V
.c
•o
c
c
tu
E
or)
U
OJ
Q.
n
3
.t~
'w
E
c j= i^ ^: <-j 2: -o
S n- .. - H °-g
t« S
•= ,
training on operation, contro
m sanitary wastewater. Two-pf
alf day) classroom instruction
5-day week on lab instructio
the process. Each section w
a with the class
e area. All lab t
ining facilities.
unty
he
ser
an
of
ro
ha
a
of
c
to
s.s-s™
III
tivit
tme
ills
e
"I
2
S *; jj
si §
C C o
« "S -S
E S 2
E o>
?£
ro "ro
S °>
o 35
1 =
°a rf
III
c 2 'o
0 tJ J2
M C
e — b»
.2 T> .5
« w ~o
fP
a> "c -o
OJ 0 C
So™
* g I
o E E
2 S S
S ~
s£s
•£ ° 1
ls«
*j a> w
c o E
QJ ~ QJ
P **- *^
^ (U M
s»&
*^ +j c
^ ra 0
.2 S U
| g » .
£| 8S
g ~ 0 0
5 S M a.
•- S S c
o aj 3 t:
il to a»
M (J « j_.
.E E _ c
c _ ^ «
•s s SB.
^ S S
a) QJ a.
h- M *-
. S £
cu *" E
1=3
0) ,j, >-
M -D '"
« ra J^
s<3 -2
-0 i
— (O a>
a» -o J5
?raS
C3 _w —
ils
&7 2
"S = «>
.*
Ill
ra«-
I
it
11
J"
-------
4028
r PROGRAM— Continued
3
O_
£
LU
O
>.
rr
«t
5
S
"i
\
O
X
0
5
a.
a.
4
Summary of training program
5 M
11
1 2
z
M
c a
1'
•8
*e c
§&
1
c
'c
bfl
(
|
t-
<
jects — Continued
Increase operating efficiency of existing wastewater treatment facilities through
upgrading skills of present plant employees and training that will lead to cer-
tification of personnel employed as wastewater treatment operators. (44-week
course at community colleges and technical schools.)
3
L
•S Q
2 8
n
u
«
*R
•s:?
IR
o
=* 2
g
in"
«-
M
M
£
S
vt
3
.O
S
*'
North Carolina Depar
ment of Water and
Resources (water
quality division).
330 hours of classroom and 70 hours of over-the-shoulder training designed to
improve skills of present plant employees in order to obtain optimum opera
in
CM
1H
r*
s
«D
in
a
•a
E
ra
o
*j
3
Southwest Technical
Institute.
S3
*«
Is
ll
Q. °
^S
•D =
C ^
a ^
I|
c £•
g S
1:
e» £
11
&E
M£
e *-
« a
Ȥ
I|
9 e
S u
ll
Hi
rH
rx
S
w
ri
£
e"
S
~
j
4?g
University of Kentuc
Research Foundatii
Series of 1-day seminars to orient local officials and citizens regarding the
State-local-Federal responsibilities for wastewater management
0
S
r-.
5
<0
rH
°l
£
•
o
S
5
E
3
5~
_
j
University of Missou
Intensive training in standard sewage plant laboratory techniques and theory
for wastewater personnel charged with the responsibility for testing and
reporting procedures. Program to be presented at sewage treatment plant labs,
o
r^
rs
*H
r^
g
o
in
<-H
t/t
&
2
s
n
K
V)
3
.2
(Q
>
Virginia State Water
Control Board.
6 hours per week for 10 weeks.
>
O
&
•tt U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1974 O-469-516 (Vol 7)
-------
'US. Environmental Protection Agency
Chicago, Pn
-------
------- |