THE FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION-CONTROL"PROGRAM*
by
Paul J. Traina**
It is a pleasure to be with you today. Your Chairman has been most
kind in his introduction and, as he noted, I am associated with the Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration,.
This is one of the newest of the federal agencies and was born out
of the Public Health Service's Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control
last January by Congressional action. In May of this year, the President
went one step further and transferred this newly created agency from the
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare to the Department of the
Interior where we are presently located.
However, never let it be thought that we are "Johnny-come-Latelies."
In one guise or another, the Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control
of the Public Health Service was actively engaged in pollution control
activities for 17 years before it was transferred "bag and baggage" to create
the new Administration.
This reorganization and elevation of the Federal program reflect the
attention now being given to water pollution nationally. Your meeting
today, as well as countless others around the country with the same theme,
further emphasizes this. Today our country is "clean water conscious" and
all of us in this field have been given a charge not only to clean up our"
dirty waters but to assure that our clean waters remain that way.
" Presented to the Alabama Section, American Society of Civil Engineers,
Mobile, Alabama, on December 2, 1966.
** Director, Technical Assistance, Southeast Water Laboratory, Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration, Southeast Region, U.S. Department of
the Interior, Athens, Georgia.

-------
2
As civil engineers, a large part of this job will fall on us. We
should be aware of the magnitude of water pollution and the resources that
are available to attack it. In this regard it may be helpful to first
review the history of federal legislation in this field and then discuss
the various provisions of the law.
At the outset it should be understood that pollution control can best
be effected at the local level. Here is where the problems are and here the
decisions must be made in solving the problems. The federal role in water
pollution control is one of providing national leadership and technical
support and financial assistance to get the job done. Later in your program
you will hear from a representative of the Alabama Water Improvement
Commission, the agency primarily responsible for pollution control in this
State. It is in cooperation with this agency that our federal programs
are administered in Alabama.
Prior to 1948, water pollution control legislation at the federal
level was quite limited. There were obscure sections in three acts
relating to the dumping of refuse into navigable waters, the control of
the discharge of oil into coastal waters, and studies of stream pollution
as related to disease. The first two functions were administered by the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the third by the U.S. Public Health
Service. Federal water pollution legislation was introduced in 1936, 1938,
and 1940 but failed to pass.
In 1948, however, the first federal water pollution control legislation
was enacted by the Congress. Admittedly, it was experimental and limited
to a trial period of five years.... though subsequently extended to 1956.

-------
3
In 1956, after long deliberation, the Congress enacted the first permanent,
comprehensive Federal Water Pollution Control Act. Among its provisions
were grants to assist states in their water pollution control activities....
grants of 50 million dollars a year for assistance in constructing municipal
sewage treatment works....and a firmer federal enforcement procedure against
interstate pollution. This law was further expanded in 1961 when the
enforcement provisions were strengthened....increased federal assistance
to municipalities was provided....comprehensive river basin planning for
water quality control was more fully funded....and recognition was given to
research needs by authorizing accelerated activities and funds.
In 1965, the Federal Act was again amended. Referred to as the
Water Quality Act of 1965, the amendments were designed to improve the
administration of the present law....to establish a basis for adoption of
water quality standards for interstate waters....to provide grants for
research and development in connection with the separation of storm and
sanitary sewers....and to increase the grants for waste treatment works.
And finally, just last month, the Congress passed and the President signed
the Clean Water Restoration Act of 1966 which further expands and adds a
number of new provisions to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act.
This, then, is the history of the federal legislation to date:
Born in 1948; made permanent with the basic act of 1956; and three times
amended in the last six years. (It is also interesting to note that, along
with federal legislation, no less than 30 states, through their legislatures
voted improved water pollution control laws last year.)
What are the provisions of the present Federal Water Pollution Control
Act.... the tools, so to^speak.... that we have to work with? Let's look at
some of them.

-------
4
First, we have a federal program of new status and stature vested
in the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration.
Water pollution control is now in a much bette^r position to work
effectively with the numerous other agencies of the Department of the
Interior such as the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service that have important interests in water....and we expect that our
excellent past relationships with other government agencies such as the
Corps of Engineers and the Department of Agriculture will be enhanced by
this new position.
The law provides for the development of comprehensive programs for
eliminating or reducing the pollution of interstate waters and their
tributaries and improving the sanitary condition of surface and underground
waters. Data are collected on the physical, chemical, and biological
characteristics of the waters of the basin; and, together with information
on the water uses, waste loads, and economic and demographic projections,
a basin plan is developed that recommends the best course to pursue in
water quality management over a period extending up to 50 years. These
plans provide a basis upon which public officials can make policy decisions
involving water pollution control. At the present time there are 14 such
studies underway in the country. One of them, the Southeastern Comprehensive
Water Pollution Control Project, serves Alabama. This Project, headquartered
in Atlanta, began in October 1963, and is presently collecting, analyzing,
and interpreting physical and economic data for the three-state area of
Alabama, Georgia, and Mississippi and the northern portion of Florida. Its
findings for the Alabama basins are due by July 1969.

-------
5
An important tool for comprehensive water quality management was
included in the 1961 amendments--the requirement that federal reservoir
planning include consideration of water storage for regulating stream flow
for the purpose of water quality control. Our agency works with the
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation in-carrying out
this responsibility.
The 1966 amendments added yet one more tool to comprehensive
planning for water pollution control. Federal grants are authorized to pay
up to 50 percent of the administrative expenses of a planning agency for a
period of three years for developing effective comprehensive water quality
control and abatement plans for entire river basin. Such an agency must
have adequate representation of appropriate state, interstate, and local
interests in the basin.
Research has always been part of the federal program and, under the
recent amendments, is going forward at an accelerated pace. The Cincinnati,
Ohio facility, together with new regional laboratories at Fairbanks, Alaska,
Corvallis, Oregon, Ada, Oklahoma....and to serve your own area....Athens,
Georgia, are now operational. Research on advanced waste treatment, residue
pollution, stream assimilation, and other pertinent areas are being carried
out at these facilities.
At the Southeast Water Laboratory in Athens, we will have a
complement of over 150 persons, including technical and scientific skills,
plus supporting personnel, when we are fully staffed next year. Included
in the public's three-million-dollar investment will be one of the finest
analytical . laboratories in the nation....and two environmental chambers
that will be the largest in the world. With these chambers we will, in essence,

-------
6
bring nature indoors and control it at our will to solve water pollution
problems and define relationships that cannot be done in the field.
In addition to research, the Athens Lab maintains programs of
technical assistance, pollution surveillance, and training which will serve
the specific needs of the Southeast.
The 1966 amendments to the Water Pollution Control Act authorized
a three year study of estuaries to define pollution problems and recommend
a comprehensive national program for estuarine preservation, use, and
development. Our technical assistance staff has already begun such a study
in Tampa Bay, Florida.
In addition to in-house research, the law provides grants and
fellowships for research, training, and demonstration. These are awarded
to public or private agencies, institutions, colleges and universities,
and in some cases to individuals.
Added by the 1965 amendments were demonstration grants to state or
municipal agencies to assist in the development of new or improved methods
of controlling pollution from storm sewers or combined storm and sanitary
sewers. Twenty million dollars per year was authorized for this purpose.
Also, for the first time, the 1966 amendments authorized research and
demonstration grants in the amount of 20 million dollars per year to assist
in the prevention of industrial waste pollution.
Grants to state and interstate agencies to assist them in meeting
the costs of operating their programs have long been a part of the federal
legislation. The 1966 amendments doubled the authorization for this purpose
from 5 million dollars to 10 million dollars per year. State allocations
are determined under a formula which considers population, the extent of the
water pollution problem, and the financial need of the respective states.

-------
7
Since the program began, Alabama has received a total of 840,378 dollars
in federal grants for this purpose.
Since 1956 the federal program has provided grants to aid in the
construction of municipal waste treatment facilities. This program can be
considered as one of the essential tools....the "brick and mortar" approach....
to pollution control. It began with an annual authorization of 50 million
dollars and individual grants were limited to 30 percent of project cost
or 250 thousand dollars, whichever was the smaller. Under this assistance
program, construction of facilities increased from about 266 million dollars
a year in 1956 to 430 million dollars in 1961.
While this had very beneficial effects in abating municipal pollution,
it did not go far enough. The 250 thousand dollar limitation was of small
aid in the large metropolitan projects and the statutory formula for
allotting funds among the states did not consider the great variation in
their water pollution problems.
The 1961 amendments (1) authorized gradually increasing appropriations
up to 100 million dollars for fiscal years 1964 through 1967; (2) increased
the 30 percent grant limitation to 600 thousand dollars for a one-community
project, and to 2.4 million dollars for a multi-community facility; and,
finally, (3) permitted reallocation of unused state allotments to states
having approved projects awaiting funds. From 1961 to 1964 annual construction
levels rose from 430 million dollars to 600 million dollars.
While these levels are impressive, we still have a long way to go.
As of January 1, 1966, there was a national backlog of over 5000 needed
projects which will cost an estimated 1.8 billion dollars. To eliminate
this backlog before 1970, replace obsolete treatment works, and provide for

-------
8
the continuing population growth in our urban areas, will require an
average expenditure of over 800 million dollars per year for waste treatment
works. Rising construction costs increase this figure to 865 million dollars.
The Water Quality Act of 1965, and especially the just-passed Clean
Water Restoration Act of 1966, have greatly increased this program. The
1965	law authorized annual appropriations of- 150 million dollars per year
for 1966 and 1967....the 1966 law authorizes 450 million dollars, 700 million
dollars, 1 billion dollars, and 1.25 billion dollars, respectively, for fiscal
years 1968 through 1971. The 1966 law eliminates all dollar ceilings on
projects and again authorizes a 30 percent federal grant. Further, the
1966	law authorizes a 40 percent Federal grant if the state agrees to pay
30 percent of che cost of all projects receiving Federal grants. A 50
percent Federal grant is authorized if the state agrees to pay at least 25
percent of the project cost and has established enforceable water quality
standards for the project's receiving stream. The law also provides a 10
percent grant increase for projects certified to be in conformance with a
comprehensive, metropolitan or regional development plan. Thus, under
optimum conditions, a municipal sewage treatment facility can receive in
both Federal and state grants as much as 85 percent of the project costs.
In addition to our FWPCA program, there are several other federal programs
designed to assist in the planning and/or construction of treatment facilities.
These are included in the Appalachian Act; Consolidated Farmers Home
Administration Act; Housing and Urban Development Act; and the Public Works
and Economic Development Act.
Since 1956 there have been approximately 130 offers of Federal grants
to Alabama communities totaling some 18 million dollars. This has resulted
in a total expenditure for municipal waste treatment works in the State of
over 77 million dollars. In addition, grants have been made under several

-------
of the other federal programs which have totaled over 5 million dollars.
Enforcement under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act covers
pollutional interferences with any legitimate water uses. Its application
is mandatory at the request of a governor, a state water pollution control
agency, or a municipality, in whose request the governor and state agency
concur, when the pollution crosses state lines to the detriment of the health
or welfare of persons in the receiving state. Enforcement action must also
be taken by the federal government without such request when on the basis of
reports, surveys, or studies, such inimical interstate pollution is found to
be occurring or when substantial economic injury results from the inability
to market shellfish in interstate commerce because of pollution. Enforcement
procedures may also be applied to abate intrastate water pollution upon the
request of the governor of the state in whose jurisdiction the pollution is
occurring.
The federal authority is asserted in three distinct stages: (1) the
conference, (2) the public hearing, and (3) court action. Steps 2 and 3
are taken only if the one preceding is unsuccessful in securing compliance
with recommended abatement measures. Throughout the procedures, state
action to abate the pollution is encouraged and is not displaced by federal
action until the court has issued an order and assumed jurisdiction in the
final step of the procedures. State and federal interests are thus fully
coordinated.
The conferences are presided over by a chairman representing the
Secretary of the Interior; the conferees represent the Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration and the involved states. To date some 40
enforcement actions have been initiated under the federal law.

-------
One of the recent cases was at Lake Tahoe in California and Nevada.
It is unique in that it deals with a situation in which the greatest damages
to the water are potential....not yet present....but nevertheless urgent.
Excess nutrients draining to the lake are accelerating the natural aging
processes in this recreational body of water. While it is much easier and
cheaper to stop pollution damages before they occur, it is sometimes more
difficult than usual, as we found there, to make the general public and
local officials understand pollution problems that are not yet visible.
The establishment of water quality standards has been consistently
recognized as a requisite to effective pollution control programs. Not
until the Water Quality Act of 1965, however, were water quality standards
required by federal law. Under the Act, the states have the first opportunity
to define and set their water quality standards in interstate waters. If
they fail to do so satisfactorily, the Federal Government must step in and
do the job for the state. All fifty of the states have filed letters of
intent to set their water quality standards, as required, by July 1, 1967,
and at the same time assert their plans for implementing and enforcing
the standards.
Immediately after the transfer of the pollution control responsibility
to the Department of the Interior, Secretary Udall issued formal guidelines
which express the spirit and purpose of the water quality standards
requirement. The guidelines quote the legislative history extensively and
make quite clear that the standards must be a tool for improving water
quality, never an excuse or a cover for delay or inaction.

-------
11
The establishment of water quality standards will mean that, for
the first time, we will be able to prevent pollution before it occurs, not
merely act to abate it after the damage is done.
Over the next several months your state water pollution control
agency will be-holding public hearings to develop a just and equitable set
of water quality standards for Alabama's interstate and coastal waters.
I am sure they will expect to hear from all the water-use interests....
industry, agriculture, recreation, fish and wildlife, water supply, public
health, etc....and I urge you to participate fully.
Finally, the law also recognizes the responsibility of all federal
agencies to provide leadership in preventing or controlling pollution
from their installations. In July 1966 the President issued Executive
Order 11288 which very clearly outlined the steps which all federal agencies
must take to abate pollution from their installations. The FWPCA is working
closely with these agencies in planning and reviewing their water pollution
control programs.
These, then, are briefly the major provisions of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act as it presently exists. As you can see, there are
many legislative tools available to meet our national goal of clean water.
But tools without the people to use them are useless. As civil engineers
working in either the public or private sector of the economy, you have
much to contribute to this program. Your collective knowledge and
experience touch on many, if not all, of the activities I have discussed.
Indeed, without your active support of and engagement in this program, the
struggle for clean water would be severely curtailed if not completely halted.
We know you are equal to the task.
Thank you.

-------