United States
                       Environmental Protection
                       Agency
                                              January-April 1978
                       208
                       Bulletin
Clean Water Act  of
1977  Becomes  Law
   The mid-course corrections to
   the Water Pollution Control
Act Amendments of 1972 were
passed into law on December 27,
1977. Called the Clean Water Act
of 1977, these corrections will
result in numerous changes that
will impact the Water Quality
Management Program. The in-
formation below summarizes sec-
tions of the new Act pertaining
to the following subjects:

•  Funding of Pollution Control
   Programs and WQM Planning
   106, 205(g), 208(f)(3)
•  Three Year Planning Period
   208(b)(1)(B)
•  Open Space and Recreation
   208(b)(2)(A)
•  Irrigation Return Flows
   208(b)(2)(F)
•  Dredge and Fill Regulatory
   and Permit Programs
   208(b)(4), 404
•  Cost Sharing for Rural Water
   Quality Management
   208(j)
•  Interagency Agreements for
   WQM Implementation
   304
-------
Old  Blood   Brings
New  Life  To  State
Environmental
Agencies
                                                     Manpower Shortage?
                                                     New  Legislation
                                                     Provides  Possible
                                                     Alternative
    Anew program is being run
    by the Administration on
Aging (AOA) that may prove
beneficial to State environmental
agencies. The Senior Enviorn-
mental Employment Program
(SEE) is designed to take advan-
tage of the knowledge and
talents older Americans possess
and to help alleviate some of the
difficulties seniors have in finding
jobs.
  This three year trial program
will allocate $1 million a year for
10 pilot projects which will place
individuals over 55 in the field of
enviornmental protection. Ap-
proximately 20 people will be
placed within each project, and
projects are located in Connec-
ticut, New Jersey, Pennsylvania,
Arkansas, Kansas, Kentucky, Il-
linois,  South Dakota, California,
and Washington. Assignments
may range from onsite inspection
to bookkeeping, and the training
for those positions is usually
completed within a month.
  The benefits to State environ-
mental agencies are quite prom-
ising. The most obvious is that
the agencies are able to make
                           needed personnel additions for
                           which they would otherwise not
                           have the funds. Another is that
                           State agencies are able to in-
                           crease the public awareness of
                           key programs through the use of
                           more personal contracts. For ex-
                           ample, the Arkansas Department
                           of Pollution Control and Ecology
                           reported that in the first quarter
                           of the SEE project, more than
                           300 personal contacts with
                           business, civic and government
                           leaders have been made on 208
                           alone. Additionally, some 60
                           presentations of the 208
                           slide/tape program "About Your
                           Clean Water" were made.
                             Perhaps the biggest asset lies
                           in utilizing the knowledge and
                           talents of seniors. Their en-
                           thusiam for the project (and 208
                           in particular) has been so great
                           that it is felt that seniors could
                           infect the younger generations to
                           take the time to care for our en-
                           vironment.
                              For further information on
                           SEE, contact your regional EPA
                           Manpower office, your regional
                           AOA office, or your State agen-
                           cy on aging.
The passage of the Economic
Stimulus Act of 1977 may pro-
vide an opportunity for 208 agen-
cies to secure additional funds
for labor intensive projects. The
legislative action provides for the
creation of as many as 400,000
additional jobs in fiscal years 77
and 78. With appropriate man-
agement and coordination, it has
been estimated that environmen-
tal projects and tasks could ef-
fectively use 10-20% of these
jobs.
  The EPA's efforts in environ-
mental work force development
have been greatly enhanced by
interagency activities with the
Employment and Training admin-
istration under the Department
of Labor. As a continuation of
this cooperative relationship be-
tween DOL and EPA, it has been
suggested that the two agencies
embark on a series of model proj-
ects which would serve to meet
immediate cyclical unemploy-
ment problems, and which could
be transitioned into a response
to structure unemployment prob-
lems at a later date. These sub-
jects would have four basic
characteristics:
1. Projects will be conducted for
a definite period of time consis-
tent with CETA Public Jobs Pro-
gram regulations.

2. Project will be supportive of
environmental legislative man-
dates and will,  therefore, have a
public service objective.

3. Projects will be designed to
result in a specific product ser-
vice objective.

4. Projects will be undertaken
which would otherwise be done
with existing funds.

  These projects will permit the
hiring of unemployed profes-
sionals as well  as subprofes-
sionals. The size and scope of
the overall program should be
determined by  mutual agreement
between DOL and EPA based on
most recent available data which
deals with unemployment and
personnel needs and require-
ments  of State and local environ-
mental agencies.
  For further information,  con-
tact the 208 Coordinator or Proj-
ect Officer in your Region.
Quality of Life
Continued from page 1

to herself. 'This developer
proposes to build a tennis-
condominium-restaurant com-
plex between a woodland and
marsh. By tomorrow morning
I am expected to sum up all
the environmental  conse-
quences and turn in a report.
I'm not sure that's possible."
   Now, Ms. Planningperson
is no dummy.  She has a col-
lege degree in government. In
her career she is motivated
not only by salary, but by
sincere concern for the
natural world.  Nor is she
unique.
   But our Ms. Planningper-
son has one advantage. She
works for Chambers County,
                            Texas. She takes some notes
                            across the hall to a small room
                            containing an instrument
                            much resembling a large
                            typewriter. She flips a switch.
                            Taps a few keys. Takes her
                            fingers from the keyboard.
                            The machine springs to life,
                            and prints:
                             Chambers County Phase
                            Three Environmental Assess-
                            ment Program.  Good morn-
                            ing, Pam. Do you want a
                            detailed description?
                             "Yes," types Ms. P.
                             Enter project name.
                             "The Creole Tennis,
                            Chowder, and Elocution
                            Club."
                             How many acres?
                             "One hundred and fifty."
                             Give the latitude and
                            longitude.
 Shrimp and oyster boats
 gathered at Double Bayou, on
 Trinity Bay, are part of an
 economy that depends on the

   "Oops. I don't have that in-
 formation."
   Do you have a cell number?
environmental health of
Chambers County as a marine
nursery.
  "Sure. Here it is."
  How many dwelling units
 per acre.

-------
What's   Your

WQ    IQ?
The information from a survey,
combined with results from three
sets of water quality workshops,
committee meetings,  and public
hearings, will aid Gateway staff,
consultants, and Board members
to select a water quality plan
that reflects public sentiment in
the region.
   To obtain a copy of the
Survey Analysis, contact  the
Gateway Council. Ask for
analysis of an Opinion Survey on
Water Quality Issues in the St.
Louis 208 Designated Area.
      Who knows more about
      water pollution —people
living in urban areas or people
living in rural  areas? Are people
willing to pay for a cleaner en-
vironment? Who should  be
responsible for the clean-up?
These and more questions were
answered —sometimes with sur-
prising results—when Gateway's
Water Quality Program con-
ducted a public opinion survey
this summer.
The results were often
discouraging:
   • Only about one-fourth of
those surveyed felt that they
were in any way affected by
water pollution. Of those who
did perceive problems, the most
commonly felt effect was that
the water "looks bad." Few peo-
ple felt that there were health
hazards present.
  • Almost half were unwilling
to pay more than $3 per month
for clean water. Of these, 11%
said they were unwilling to pay
anything.
  • Only 15% knew of any
group that was doing anything
related to water quality prob-
lems.
Other answers were  more
positive.
  • Over half said they were
willing to change their water
usage habits in order to improve
water quality.
  • More than any other group,
"the individual" was recognized
as being responsible for a clean
environment both by preventing
pollution and  by paying for
prevention and clean-up efforts.
  • Governments at all levels
were clearly recognized as hav-
ing a responsiblity to protect the
environment.
Some of the questions yielded
unexpected results:
  • People in rural  areas were
much more aware of pollution
problems than those in urban
areas.
  • People with higher incomes
wre generally not willing  to pay
higher rates for clean water.
Areas with lower average income
had a higher percentage  of peo-
ple willing to pay higher  rates.
  As interesting as  these facts
may be, they are also useful in
the water quality planning pro-
cess.  Elected officials and agen-
cies can use the information to
make decisions. They know, for
instance, that their constituents
believe that all levels of govern-
ment have a responsibility to
provide for a clean environment.
They know that if they select
plans that will result in some in-
convenience to individuals, most
people seem willing to make
such changes. They know that
most people feel a personal
sense of responsibiity for en-
vironmental action and are will-
ing to make a monetary commit-
ment to clean-up efforts. These
feelings seems to be shared even
by those who do not feel that
they are affected by pollution.
Reprinted with permission from: "East-
West Directions, " a publication of the
East-West Gateway Coordinating Council.
   "Help! I forgot the
 classifications!"
   The various density
 classifications are . . .
   And so it will go, more or less,
 for a half-hour or so. The ma-
 chine in the Chambers County
 building is tied by telephone lines
 to a large computer on the  Rice
 University campus in the middje
 of Houston. The central com-
 puter contains literally millions of
 bits of data — representing vir-
 tually eveything known about a
 Gulf  Coast county of 600 square
 miles. Organized are some 75 en-
 vironmental factors such as wild-
 life habitat, water quality, current
 land  uses, vegetation, and hur-
 ricane risk. Also programmed in-
 to the Rice University computer
 are electronic routines by which
 it swiftly addresses such ques-
tions as: Will site grading
degrade marshlands nearby? Will
automotive traffic increase and
pollute the air? What kinds and
amounts of solid waste will re-
quire disposal? Will construction
noise disturb the red wolf, a rare
and endangered species?
   "Well, will it?" Ms.  Planning-
person asks.
   "/ could draw you a map of
red wolf distribution.
   "By all means."
   The machine rattles on for a
few minutes. Typed characters
strike and overstrike lines to pro-
duce a shaded-effect map of the
range and habitat of the red wolf
in Chambers County.
   Pleased,  Ms. Planningperson
reaches for the off  switch.
   Wait. May I now write your
detailed project description?
  "That would be lovely.  Please
do."
  More minutes of automatic
tapping. A report temerges. It
precisely discusses environmental
consequences in straightforward
style, sometimes in prose,
sometimes as charts, sometimes
with lists.  Then the machine
signs off with:
  Your total computer time cost
is $6.45. Thank you and good-
bye.
  In much this way the Quality
of Life Computer will be
operating  in Chambers County
later this year, the answer to
many a beleaguered planner's
dream. No magical black box,
the system was laboriously con-
trived, fact by fact, by innovative
scientists under the direction of
a remarkable  nonprofit copora-
tion, the Southwest Center for
Urban Research.
  In its  ninth year, the
Southwest Center is a consor-
tium sponsored by the University
of Houston, Rice University,
Texas Southern University, the
Baylor College of Medicine, and
the Texas Health Science
Center,  all of Houston. As con-
ceived in 1968, the center's goals
were three-fold: identify urban
problems, involve academic ex-
perts, and stimulate graduate
study of community headaches.
  Numerous fund grants and
programs later, the Southwest
Center has today grown to
oversee a diversity of projects.
One has to do with public health
planning for a five-state region.
Among  others proposed,  one
            Continued to page 4

-------
 Sewer  District  One-of-a-Kind   Success
  One of Mid-America Regional
  Council's main tasks in its 208
  water quality planning effort is  to
  develop effective, efficient
  management approaches. To do
  this, staff is working with local
  governments that have estab-
  lished successful water pollution
  control and wastewater manage-
  ment programs. The expertise
  and experience of those who
  have designed and who operate
  these systems is a valuable plan-
  ning tool.

     The headline in the May 31,
     1973 edition of the Raytown
  News read "Sewage Lagoons
  Doomed by Harvey's Pipes."
   The "pipes" referred to were
 the  interceptor sewers being laid
 in the construction of a unique
 type of water quality manage-
 ment system in the Kansas City
 region-the Little Blue Valley
 Sewer District.
   "Harvey" was Harvey Jones,
 chief enginer for the sewer
 district and one of the persons
 largely responsible for the crea-
 tion of the Little blue District —
 something he worked on
 diligently for more than  ten
 years.
   The Little Blue district is uni-
 que because it is a watershed
 approach to water quality
 management.
   The river basin is located in
 the eastern portion of Kansas
 City, Mo., in the central part of
 Jackson County. Part of the
 basin extends into  Cass County.
   There are eleven municipalities
 partially or entirely within the
 drainage area: Belton, Blue
 Springs, Grandview,  In-
 dependence, Lake  Tapawingo,
 Lee's Summit, Kansas City,
 Raymore, Raytown, Sugar
 Creek, and Unity Village.

 How It Began
 Jones said there were two major
 reasons for the creation of the
 watershed district.
   Because of a building boom
 that began in the mid-1950s, the
 existing sewerage system could
 not keep pace with development
 in the Little Blue Valley.
 Discharge into the  river was
 heavy, and the stream, which
 barely flows in dry  weather,
 could not handle the  volume of
 waste being dumped  into it.
   In the late  1960s, the state and
 the federal government said no
 waste could be discharged into
 the Little Blue River.
   Facing the clean-up problem
 before them, communities began
 looking at alternatives. It wasn't
 feasible for every community
 along the river to lay  separate
 sewer lines and build  their own
 treatment plants.
   Jones, working with the
 Jackson and Cass County
 courts, developed the watershed
 plan whereby the communities
 would share a common sewer
 line and treatment plant.
   This plan, because it had not
 been done before, needed
 special legislation.
   With help from the county
 courts and attorneys, Jones
 dratted the legislation that would
 allow creation of the special type
 of district.
   The political peculiarities-in-
 volved in the situation caused a
 few problems at first, Jones
 said. One in particular was deter-
 mining how trustees of the
 district would be selected and
 who they would be.
   It was finally agreed that the
 three Jackson County judges
 and the Cass County presiding
 judge would serve as the
 district's board of directors.
   Since then, Jackson County
 has changed its governmental
 structure and now Jackson
 County representatives are Coun-
 ty Executive Mike White and
 legislators Archie McGee and
 Fred Arbanas. The Cass County
 representative is Presiding Judge
 Weldon Jackson.
   Later, a council of mayors
 from the eleven  municipalities in
 the district was formed. The
 groups acts in an advisory
 capacity to the board.
Quality of Life
Continued from page 3

will assess the geothermal
resources of West Texas. Yet
another will investigate the
ecology of a typical Gulf Coast
wetland.
  But no project is more am-
bitious than the Quality of Life
Computer, the idea for which
originated in the mind of a
small town public official.
  He is Oscar F. Nelson, Jr.,
judge of the Commissioner's
Court.  In a Texas county, that's
the top administrator, elected at
large. Rugged and ruddy, Judge
Nelson serves his 15,000 consti-
tuents full time from  a modest
office on the second  floor of the
courthouse in the town of
Anahuac, population: 2000.
  A combat veteran of World
War  II and Korea, son of a rice
farmer  and school teacher,
Judge Nelson holds degrees
from two Texas universities. His
background as a successful
businessman he now combines
with nearly 15 years of ex-
perience as county judge.
There's a Southwestern word for
what he possesses: savvy.
  He smiles at that, then
responds,  "Let's say I do know
Chambers County. I was born
here, and followed a plow here,
and have spent nearly all my
years here. I care very deeply for
this land and its people. Some of
us began to realize in the early
1970's that a rural county,  such
as ours, adjacent to one of the
nation's fastest growing urban
areas, Houston, could rapidly
lose the qualities of life that we
so much enjoy."
  A 1972 comprehensive plan
reminded Chambers County
leaders of their environmental
bounties: wide open spaces,
wildlife refuges, sport and com-
mercial fisheries, oyster
nurseries, clean air, uncrowded
roads, lush rice farms, fat beef
cattle, quiet forests, and un-
spoiled beaches. If some
changes were inevitable, could in
some way the total county envi-
ronment be reduced to data to
be manipulated by a computer?
Wasn't there some shortcut in
preparing environmental impact
statements? Could the county
anticipate what kinds of services
it might be  required to provide
for future development? And in
so doing, could the county avoid
hiring an army  of land use
planners?
  In legion with Chambers
County, the Southwest Center,
with participation by the Rice
Center for Community Design
and Research, applied for
research funds  from the National
Science Foundation. The pro-
   In July 1967, Governor Warren
 Hearnes signed the bill authoriz-
 ing creation of the Little Blue
 Valley Sewer District. Jones said
 the bill also authorized state
 grants to the municipalities and
 sewer districts to construct in-
 terceptor sewers and treatment
 plants. However, he said no
 funds were appropriated at that
 time.
   After successful attempts to
 find available state and federal
 funding, it was up to the voters.
 They came through on two bond
 issues, Jones said. The first, for
 $9 million. The second,  a $45
 million issue,  passed by an 85
 percent majority.
   "The support for the Little
 Blue project," Jones said, "has
 been overwhelming.  We have
 had no opposition."
   Because of that support,  the
 entire project, which will cost
 more than the sports complex
 and Kansas City International
 Airport combined (an estimated
 $280 million),  has run smoothly
 and on schedule.

 Building Begins
 Construction began on
 September 22, 1972.
  As "Harvey's pipe" began
 snaking its way through the
 valley, the sewage lagoons that
 were spread throughout the area
           Continued to page 6
Above, Dr. Peter Rowe,
architect of the program's data
base, queries the computer from
his office at the Southwest
Center for Urban Research.

-------
Fight  City  Hall
      More stringent levels of
      treatment do not necessari-
ly mean 'cleaner' water", found
the North Central Texas Council
of  Governments (NCTOG), the
local 208 agency in Dallas-Fort
Worth, Texas. This conclusion
compelled the NCTOG to oppose
additional treatment levels for
waste flowing into Texas' Trinity
River.
  The Texas Water Quality
Board imposed extremely strin-
gent treatment levels at major
publicly-owned plants to meet
dissolved oxygen water quality
standards. The level of treatment
meant 98% removal of sus-
pended solids and BOD.
  NCTOG believed that treat-
ment plants presently con-
structed to meet 96% removal
levels (even more stringent than
national requirements for
secondary treatment) were suffi-
cient. NCTCOG believed that
facilities for nonpoint sources of
pollution should be additionally
considered along with the treat-
ment facilities for point sources.
NCTCOG also believed that costs
for additional 2% removal were
unreasonably high, considering
the questionable benefits from
the treatment removal.
  NCTCOG prepared its well-
organized and technologically
well-documented arguments
from a regional perspective, in-
volving local governments. The
public was involved in all stages
of preparation and delivery of
testimony before the Board.
  In its testimony, NCTCOG
questioned the reliability of com-
puter models and the inferences
drawn by the State from the
model. NCTCOG also stressed
the unreasonably high costs of
the 98% removal is almost the
same as the original cost to go
from no  removal to 92%
removal.
  In late July, the Texas  Water
Quality Board suspended its
earlier ruling and reimposed the
96% level.
  NCTCOG discovered that
regional  cooperation, along with
favorable public support, was
essential in convincing the Texas
Water Quality  Board to change
its position. The local 208 agency
found cost-benefit analysis per-
suasive in temporing demands
for unnecessary waste treatment.
  It is rare that a local 208
agency must oppose additional
levels of waste treatment, but
NCTCOG found that environ-
mental legislation must be
reasonable in its demands upon
public expenditures.
1978  Calendar  of
National   Meetings
Location
Boston

New Orleans

Annaheim
San Francisco
Cincinnati
Chicago
St. Louis
Organization
National Governors' Con-
ference
AIP Annual Meeting

WPCF Annual Conference
ULI Fall Meeting
ICMA Annual Conference
ASCE Fall Meeting
NLC Congress of Cities
Date
August 27-29

September 25 -
October 1
October 1-6
October 7-9
October 15-17
October 16-20
December 5-8
  The following item from the
December 13, 1977 issue of the
National Association of Conser-
vation Districts Tuesday (News)
Letter relates to implementation
of best  management practices.

Report on Iowa's Cost-Sharing
Program. Since Iowa's state
cost-sharing program for soil
erosion control practices began
in 1973, approximately $8.5
million in funds has been ad-
ministered by local conservation
districts. Practices installed with
the cost-sharing funds include
3,090 miles of parallel grass
backslope terraces; 428 miles of
all other types of terraces;
1,875,000 lineal feet of grassed
waterways; and 1,230 erosion
control structures. Funds were
provided to 9,654 of the 16,000
landowners who requested
assistance.
  Since cost-share funds re-
quired by Iowa's Erosion Control
law became available, conserva-
tion districts have  received ap-
proximately 200 complaints from
landusers whose property was be-
ing damaged by sediment from
another's property. More than 80
percent of the complaints have
been settled by entirely voluntary
means and only two cases have
required court  action.
posal resulted in an initial grant
of $263,000, followed by sup-
plemental grants of $225,000 and
$125,000. The county con-
tributed $50,000. An unrestricted
grant of $45,000 in general sup-
port of the Southwest Center's
environmental policy activities
came from Exxon  Company,
U.S.A.
  The original investigator for
the Chambers County project for
its first two phases was Dr.
Ralph Conant, now president of
Shimer College in  Illinois. Its
director today is an affable, in-
tense, brilliant Australian ar-
chitect, Peter G. Rowe. Assis-
tant professor at Rice, Rowe's
specialties include urban and en-
vironmental planning. He is also
something of a whiz at gathering
up facts, arranging them in
meaningful orders, and making
them digestible to a computer.
  The computer, of course,
makes it all possible. Now taken
for granted, it was not invented
until  1946 at the University of
Pennsylvania. That first one
could add in the thousandths of
seconds. Yet at the time it was
considered no more than an  ex-
pensive, useless toy. By 1955
computers in the United States
numbered 244. Today 135,000
large data processing centers
worth $60 billion accomplish
tasks in microseconds that
would keep thousands of mathe-
maticians busy for centuries. The
Bank of America says without
data  processing, it would need
every adult in California to keep
its books. To handle today's
volume of telephone calls
without computers, every  work-
ing woman in America could be
a telephone operator.
  Peter Rowe is of a generation
which can't remember a world
without computers. The agonies
of algebra, logarithms, and
square roots are hurdled in
billionths of a second, leaving
Rowe and his colleagues to
          Continued to page 6
Millions of data points about
Chambers County's environment
await retrieval from hundreds of
reels of tape in Rice University's
Computer Tape Storage Center
in Houston.
                                                          ;  4

-------
 Sewer District
 Continued from page 4

 hooked up to the system and
 disappeared. Jones explained
 that the law required everyone in
 the area to join the system.
   Now, fourteen miles of pipe
 have been laid and an interim
 treatment  plant has been built
 near Highway 24 at the Spring
 Branch tributary.
   "It's a long way from being
 completed," Jones said.  But, the
 target date of 1985 should be
 met. There are six miles of pljiSl'
 still to be laid to reach the
 Missouri River where a perma-
 nent treatment plant will be
 built. Several more miles of pipe
 upstream need to be completed.
   The funding needed to com-
 plete the project is available,
 Jones said. There will be federal
 and state funds, and the
 necessary local matching funds
 have already been obtained.

 Economic Boost to Area
 In 1970, Midwest Research In-
 stitute prepared a report on the
 estimated economic impact of
 the project. The  report indicated
 that by 1990, when the bonds
 will be paid, the  area served by
 the district will show:
   More than  $900 million in busi-
 ness investments.
   More than $4 million in fixed
 annual investment spending by
 businesses.
   Increases of 130,000 residents
 and 42,000 homes.
   Retail sales totaling $275
 million.
   Area employment of 127,000.
   "I don't know of any operation
 that could have worked better
 than this one has," Jones said.
 The reasons for its success, he
 said, are the cooperation and
 support of many people, good
 enabling legislation, and its
 method of operation.
   "One of the things I was
 determined had to be before I
 would hive arty part of this was
 that the only ones who (laid for
 the project were the users,"
 Jones said.
   Although the sewer lines that
 are the basis for the project are
 fondly referred to as "Harvey's
 pipes," Jones is quick to point
 out that many people devoted a
 great deal of time and energy to
 the creation and continuation of
 the Little Blue district.
   Without the help of Governor
 Warren Hearnes, Sen. Jasper
 Brancato, Rep. (now senator)
 Mary Gant, Sen. Jack Gant and
 many other fine legislators, the
 project would not have made it,
 Jones said.
   He also gives much credit to a
 concerned, interested Jackson
 County Court, which then in-
 cluded Charles Curry, Dr.
 Charles Wheeler, and Alex
 Petrovic.
   "There were so many," Jones
 said. And, he remembers them
 all.
Rural  Wastewater
Guidebook   Being
Prepared
     Wastewater treatment and
     disposal systems for in-
dividual homes, rural communi-
ties and small developments will
be the topic of a guidebook be-
ing prepared  for developers,
builders and government agen-
cies as part of a study in the
State of California. Its major pur-
pose will be to highlight alterna-
tive waste management tech-
niques for areas not serviced by
conventional  sewer systems.
  Legislative  and regulatory ordi-
nances and procedures required
to obtain permits for design and
implementation of these systems
will be summarized by the
researchers at SCS Engineers,
the environmental engineering
firm in Long Beach which was
contracted with the California
Water Resources Control Board,
Sacramento, for preparation of
the manual.
  A technical and economic
evaluation of in-house water and
waste reducing fixtures, on-site
treatment and disposal systems,
and centralized treatment
systems available for homes and
rural communities will be
included.
  If it is difficult to imagine
developing a fondness for a
sewerage system, talk to Harvey
Jones.
  The walls of his Independence
office are a scrapbook of
memories related to the Little
Blue —pictures, resolutions,
newspaper articles, commenda-
tions.
  It is clear the Little  Blue Valley
Sewer District is one of Jones'
pets. He's been with it from con-
ception and will stay with it until
it's "grown." It will leave him
with memories he'll never forget.
Harvey Jones

Reprinted with permission from: remarc, a
publication of the Mid-America Regional
Council.
Quality of Life
Continued from page 5

worry with the "software," de-
fined as the  memories and pro-
cedures programmed for a given
assignment.  Over the past few
years with his Down Under
charm and Aussie manner of
speech, Rowe has won over Ca-
jun shrimpboat families, black in-
dependent farmers, and a majori-
ty population, many of whom
are descended from pioneer set-
tlers of Texas. Clearly, mutual
admiration is held by Rowe and
the Southwest Center on the
one side, and Chambers County
government  on the other.
  "Maybe that's because none
of us has ever lost sight of the
basic idea,"  says Rowe. That
was to devise a more efficient,
less expensive, faster, more ac-
curate, less duplicating method
of presenting environmental in-
formation to decision-makers in
A grove of oak trees shelters a
milk cow at a waterhole on the
Joe Lagow Ranch.
                              local government. "We emphati-
                              cally do not tell them what to
                              do," Rowe adds.
                                The dialogue with the com-
                              puter does confront decision-
                              makers with options, conse-
                              quences, and trade-offs. "The
                              computer says, okay, if you do
                              f/7/s.then this, this, this,  and  this
                              will  happen," Rowe explains.
                                Although fiercely independent
                              and  leery of invasions of pro-
                              perty rights, the people of
                              Chambers County fundamentally
                              were self-taught naturalists, says
                              Rowe. They touch the land, read
                              the signs of the seasons, hus-
                              band quail and squirrel and deer,
                              and  ponder upon the mysteries
                              of bay, shore, and marsh.
                              "Grass-roots conservationists,"
                              Rowe describes them. Yet:
                                "This very understanding of
                              natural processes allows them to
                              accept a degree of change, they
                              know that nature herself is con-
                              tinually changing  the environ-

-------
Clean Water Act
Continued from page  7

wide 208 programs, and manage-
ment of construction grants for
small communities. This provi-
sion (formerly referred  to as the
Cleveland-Wright amendment)
will provide substantial funds for
major portions of each State's
water pollution control effort.
We do  not view 205(g) funding
as being available to cover actual
planning tasks of the 208 pro-
gram, but rather as being  used
to cover administration and over-
sight of the program, much as is
supposed to be done under the
5% areawide set-aside  for the
States.
  EPA regulations and  guidance
regarding procedures for deter-
mining the division of 205  funds
between program elements and
the allocation of supplemented
State and 106 funds have  not yet
been completed.

Three Year Planning  Period
The Clean Water Act of 1977
amends the time requirements
for submission of water quality
management plans certified by
the Governor to the Adminis-
trator. The amendment,
§208(b)(1)(B), requires that for 1)
all areawide agencies designated
after 1975 and 2) all portions of a
State for which the state is re-
quired to act as the planning
agency, plans must be  certified
by the Governor and submitted
 to the Administrator not later
 than three years after the receipt
 of the first 208 planning grant by
 the agency. The new three year
 planning period supersedes the
 two year deadline and the
 November 1,  1978. deadline for
 these agencies. For those agen-
 cies designated prior to 1975,
 however, the amendment has no
 effect on their current deadlines:
 plans must be certified by the
 Governor and submitted to the
 Administrator not  later than two
 years after the planning process
 is in operation. The extension  of
 the time period should be ac-
 complished on a case-by-case
 basis by grant amendment. Each
 EPA region should determine the
 additional time which each state
 or areawide agency needs, in
 consultation with the agency,
 not to exceed the  maximum
 three-year period.  Separate ad-
 vice will  be provided concerning
 funding availability for additional
 needs, if any, which may arise in
 connection with the time exten-
 sion.
  Regulations will  be amended
 to reflect the provisions of the
 amendments.

 Open Space and  Recreation
 §208(b)(2)(A) is amended to re-
 quire 208 plans to identify  "open
 space and recreation oppor-
 tunities that can be expected to
 result from improved water quali-
 ty,  including consideration of
 potential use of lands associated
 with treatment works and in-
 creased access to water-based
 recreation".  §201(g)(6) imposes a
 similar requirement as a condi-
 tion for construction grants.
   Federal support for recreation
 is under continuing study by
 OMB "Office of Management
 and Budget" and the White
 House as part of the consolida-
 tion and reorganization of
 Federal planning requirements.
 The agreement between EPA
 and the Department of the In-
 terior (Fish and Wildlife Service,
 National park Service, and the
 Bureau of Outdoor Recreation) is
 being revised to incroporate
 Open space and Recreation.
   EPA  Regional input will be re-
 quested to resolve policy issues
 concerning the timing and em-
 phasis of this program, and to
 develop more specific criteria for
 approvable open space/ recrea-
 tion elements in 208 plans.

 Irrigation Return  Flows
 The Clean Water Act of 1977
 creates a new subsection (1) of
 Section 402 and amends Sec-
 tions 208(b)(2)(F) and 502(14) of
 the existing law. It exempts ir-
 rigation return flows from all per-
 mit requirements under Section
 402 of the Act and includes ir-
 rigated agriculture as a subject to
 be considered in water quality
 management  plans under Sec-
 tion 208. Irrigated- agriculture is
 no longer defined as a point
 source.
   The amendment to Section
 402 of the Act precludes EPA
 from requiring permits for irriga-
 tion return flows, and precludes
 EPA from requiring any State to
 require such a permit.  However,
 the States themselves  may still
 regulate irrigation return flows as
 a part of an approved State Sec-
 tion 402 permit program.

 Dredge and Fill Regulatory
 and Permit Programs
 The Clean Water Act of 1977
 amends Sections 404 and
 208(b)(4) to:

 1) authorize the  States to
 replace the Army Corps of
 Engineers' permit program with
 their own for certain navigable
 waters, when  EPA approves the
 States program;  (404)

 2) authorize the  States to
 establish regulatory programs for
 the control of  certain discharges
 or other placements of dredged
 or fill materials. After EPA ap-
 proves the BMPs which are to
 be applied to the dredge or fill
 activities regulated  under Section
 208, no Federal or State dredge
 or fill permit is necessary to con-
 trol these activities.  The Act also
 requires that the  regulatory pro-
 grams include  a process for
 coordination with the Fish and
Wildlife Service,  and State Fish
and Game agencies 208(b)(4).
 Section 404 is  a detailed and
            Continued to page  8
ment, and that sometimes things
have to change in order to stay
the same."
  Assisting Rowe in building the
data base have been a score of
scientists from support univer-
sities. They have included
economists, lawyers, political
scientists, geologists,
hydrologists, biologists,
chemists, and soils experts — an
interdisciplinary team whose
combined works fill more than
1,600 pages in seven volumes of
"Environmental Analysis for
Development Planning, Cham-
bers County, Texas." Soon there
is to be a briefer, more generally
useful, "Principles for Local En-
vironmental Management."
  The Chambers experiment is
attracting national attention. In-
deed, transferability of methods
to other localities was a goal in-
herent in the original  NSF
grants. Inquiries have reached
Judge Nelson and Peter Rowe
from throughout Texas, from
nearly all the coastal  and Great
Lakes states, from big cities like
A growing industrial base for
Chambers County includes oil
refining and petrochemical
processing.
Boston, Washington, and St.
Louis, from Congress, from
coastal zone managers and
regional commissioners.
  Apparently, our fictional Ms.
Planningperson holds kinship
with great numbers of civil ser-
vants who yearn to cut through
the maze of duplicating research
and repetitive reporting now
confusing and frustrating en-
vironmental planning on local
levels. They yearn to have their
own Quality of Life Computer -
one that even knows how to re
spond when a lady cries,
"Help!"

By Don Dedera

About The Author:
A veteran free lance, Don
Dedera works out of his home in
Del Mar, California.
                                Reprinted with permission from: 'Exxon
                                U.S.A.', a publication of Exxon Company.
                                                  U.S.  GOVERNMENT  PRINTING OFFICE:  1978-260-889/62

-------
United States
Envirnomental Protection
Agency
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300.
Washington DC 20460
                                           Third-Class Mail
                                           Postage and Fees Paid
                                           EPA
                                           Permit No. G-35
Clean Water Act
Continued from page 7
complex provision, and this is
not intended to be a complete
summary.

Cost Sharing for Rural Water
Quality Management
Section 208(j) of the Act directs
the Secretary of Agriculture to
develop, with the Administrator's
concurrence, a national program
of technical and financial
assistance for rural water quality
management. Regulations setting
forth program requirements must
be promulgated by September
30, 1978. The major provisions of
this section are:

(1) An approved 208 plan is re-
quired before a project within
the area/State can be approved.

(2) Only those BMPs certified by
the designated management
agency to be consistent with the
approved 208 plan are eligible for
cost-sharing.

(3) The Secretary of Agriculture
will enter into long term con-
tracts with individual land-
owners. The contracts will be of
5-10 years duration and will be
based on a plan approved by the
-Soil Conservation  District where
one exists.

(4) Priority will be given to those
areas and  sources that have the
most significant effect on water
quality. Note the importance of
this requirement. Funds will be
apportioned  based on  water
quality effect and not on a
predetermined allocation for-
mula.

(5) The Secretary of Agriculture
may utilize soil conservation
districts. State soil and water
conservation agencies or State
water quality agencies to assist
in program administration.

(6) The management agency
must assure that an adequate
level of participation will occur in
a proposed priority area before
contracts are entered into in that
area.

17) Funds authorization is $200
million, FY79 and $400 million,
FY80.

(8) Any funds appropriated will
be through the USDA budget.

USDA and EPA have agreed that
the development of regulations
will be a joint process.
  Where State/areawide 208
agencies have identified agri-
culture as a  nonpoint pollution
source, regional 208 project of-
ficers and nonpoint source staff
should provide 208 agencies with
the information noted above so
they may develop plans which
will be useful in meeting the re-
quirements of this section.

Interagency Agreements for
Water Quality Management
EPA must enter into agreements
with the Secretary of Agricul-
ture, Interior, the Army and
other appropriate agencies to
provide for the maximum utiliza-
tion of other Federal laws and
programs in implementing 208
plans.  EPA is authorized to
transfer funds to these agencies.
$100,000,000 is authorized to be
appropriated per fiscal year for
the fiscal years 1979-1983.

BEST Management Practices
for Industry
Section 304(e) of the Clean
Water Act of 1977 authorizes the
Administrator to publish regula-
tions supplemental to Federal ef-
fluent limitations for "any
specific pollutant which the Ad-
ministrator is charged with a
duty to regulate as a toxic or
hazardous pollutant under
307(a)(1) and 311." The regula-
tions are to  control plant  site
runoff, spillage or leaks, sludge
or waste disposal,  and drainage
from raw material storage that is
associated with or ancillary to an
industrial manufacturing or treat-
ment process and which  may
contribute significant amounts of
toxic or hazardous pollutants to
navigable waters. These regula-
tions will be suplemental  to ef-
fluent limitations and must be in-
cluded in NPDES permits to sup-
port Sections 301, 302, 306, 307
or 403, as the case may be. Prior
to promulgation of these  regula-
tions, BMPs may be imposed on
discharges pursuant to 402(a)(1).
   NPDES states must have ade-
quate authority to  regulate toxic
pollution from runoff, spillage,
drainage, and sludge or waste
disposal associated with point
sources, as  well as adequate per-
sonnel and funding support to
enforce that BMP.

Federal Facilities Compliance
Section 313, Federal  Facility Pol-
lution Control, has been amended
by the Clean Water Act of 1977.
Each Federal agency with juris-
diction over any property or
facility or engaged in any activity
resulting, or which may result in
the discharge or runoff of perfor-
mance of his official duties  must
comply with all Federal, State,
interstate, and local require-
ments, administrative authority,
and process and sanctions
respecting the control and abate-
ment of water pollution in the
same manner, to the same  ex-
tent as any nongovernmental en-
tity. This requirement applies to
1) any requirements whether
substantive or procedural. 2) the
exercise of any federal, state, or
local administrative authority,
and 3) any process and sanction,
whether enforced in federal,
state or local  courts or in any
other manner.
   Executive Order 11752, which
sets out a process for federal
agency compliance with state
pollution control requirements,
will be revised to  reflect this
amendment. The  Office of
Federal Activities  is responsible
for revising the Executive Order;
the Water Planning Divison will
participate in  drafting and
reviewing the revised Executive
Order.
   After agency policy has been
developed, existing interagency
agreements developed  by EPA
regional offices regarding section
208 planning and  plans must also
be revised to reflect the new
amendment. This revision will be
carried out by the Regional Of-
fices and proposed agreements
will be submitted  to Head-
quarters for concurrence. The
revision of these agreements
should be coordinated  with the
drafting of Section 304(k) inter-
agency agreements.

-------