Q. WASTE TREATMENT WORKS

DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM

Under section 6 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1956, as amended (33 U.S.C.A. 466 (d)–(e)), and delegations of the authority given by that act to the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, the Public Health Service (PHS) makes grants of up to 30 percent of the cost of constructing waste treatment works, which will provide abatement or control of water pollution in the following types of situations as described in the PHS Manual:

(a) Interstate, navigable, coastal and Great Lakes Waters. -Whether the project is required to control pollution of interstate or navigable waters, coastal waters of the Great Lakes (including tributaries contributing materially to the pollution of such waters), and such pollution is inimical to public water supplies, propagation of fish and aquatic life and wildlife, recreational purposes, or agricultural, industrial, or other legitimate water uses.

(b) International treaty obligations.-Whether the project is required to control pollution in meeting international treaty obligations or agreements.

(c) Federal impact.-Whether the project involves a pollution problem substantially and adversely affected by (1) Federal installations conrtibuting to the total municipal waste loadings; (2) a water use requirement involving national defense; (3) a Federal water resource development; or (4) an influx of population to carry out Federal activities.

(d) Public health necessity.-Whether the project involves treatment works required to abate a serious public health hazard.

(e) Financial burden.-Whether the municipality can demonstrate that the construction of needed sewage treatment works involves an extraordinary and excessive financial burden in relation to its economic resources. (Sec. 43-1.2 of the "Public Health Service Health Grants Manual.")

Section 6(c) enumerates a number of other factors to which the Secretary is required to give "consideration" in "determining the desirability of projects for treatment works and of approving Federal financial aid in connection therewith." These factors are (1) the public benefits to be derived by the construction, (2) the propriety of Federal aid in such construction, (3) the relation of the ultimate cost of constructing and maintaining the works to the public interest and to the public necessity for the works, and (4) the adequacy of the provisions made or proposed by the applicant for such Federal financial aid for assuring proper and efficient operation and maintenance of the treatment works after completion of the construction.

Eligible treatment works are those which will prevent the discharge of untreated or inadequately treated sewage or other waste into any waters. By definition in the act, "treatment works" means the various devices used in the treatment of sewage or industrial wastes of a liquid nature, including the necessary intercepting sewers, outfall sewers, pumping, power, and other equipment, and their appurtenances, and includes any extensions, improvements, remodeling, additions, and alterations thereof. Grants made for the construction of waste treatment works in fiscal year 1963 amounted to about $96 million.

COORDINATION WITHIN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

All Federal programs related to the use and development of water resources (including pollution control) are subject to a common set of "Policies, Standards, and Procedures in the Formulation, Evaluation, and Review of Plans for Use and Development of Water and Related Land Resources," approved by the President in 1962. The objective of these guidelines is to assure a maximum of cooperation and accommodation between the various Federal, State, and local agencies involved in planning for the total use and development of water resources. Page 4 of "Policies, Standards, and Procedures * * *" (published as S. Doc. 97 of the 87th Cong.) sets forth in general terms the requirement for exchanges of information and consultations between the agencies involved. Project reports must include statements of the extent to which coordination was achieved. Coordination within the Federal Government is well provided for.

EFFECTS ON THE ORGANIZATION OF GOVERNMENTS IN AREAS RECEIVING

AID

17

Types of units affected.-The Federal law authorizes grants for the construction of waste treatment works to be made to "any State, municipality, or intermunicipal, or interstate agency" capable of carrying out the proposed waste treatment project. The act's definition of "municipality" includes counties as well as cities, towns, boroughs, parishes, districts, and other public bodies created by or pursuant to State law and having jurisdiction disposal of sewage, industrial wastes, or other wastes.18

Area of jurisdiction. The geographic area of jurisdiction of the project applicant, as implied above, is quite variable, according to which of the various eligible agencies is being dealt with. It may range anywhere from a group of States down to a single small municipality. The applicant may have a jurisdiction overlapping the jurisdictions of other units of government.

Cooperation between jurisdictions. The language of the act specifically recognizes "intermunicipal" agencies in section 6(a) and goes on in section 6(b) to provide that grants to separate municipalities may be pooled for use on a single, larger project which will serve the contributing municipalities. These are significant encouragements for joint action by municipalities, because an individual municipal project can receive a grant no larger than $600,000, while the total proj

17 Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1956, sec. 6(a). 18 Ibid., sec. 11(f).

ect under a pooling arrangement can receive a grant as high as $2,400,000. This incentive is enhanced by the fact that the larger facilíties are often more efficient and provide more treatment per dollar. These same incentives can work across State borders under this act, although there is some organizational complication in getting planning and project eligibility certifications from more than one State.

EFFECTS ON STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTAL PLANNING PROCESSES

Functional planning.-Each project must conform to a State water pollution control plan, prepared and adopted by the State water pollution control agency with the assistance and approval of the Federal Government. This consistency is required by section 6 (b) (4) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, while the preparation and content of the plan is described in section 5(f). The program plan is statewide and may even reflect larger-than-State considerations because of the necessity for Federal approval and because of the Federal water pollution enforcement measures provided in section 8 of the act. The State plan is revised and reapproved each year. Where interstate water pollution control agencies exist, they may also be federally assisted in making an annual plan for water pollution control, and these plans also introduce considerations broader than those of a single State.

There are no Federal requirements for local program plans unless such requirements are administratively promulgated as being necessary for an effective (and therefore approvable) State water pollution control plan. There is no formal mention in the Federal regulations of official programs at the local level.

Comprehensive planning.-There are no requirements in the Federal act or regulations which require or suggest that the State water pollution control plan or individual projects be consistent with local, State, or regional comprehensive urban development plans.

Relation between planning and action programs.-The applicant must get the approval of his State water pollution control agency before his application will be accepted by the Public Health Service.19 This approval is made only after a finding by the State agency that the project conforms to the State water pollution control plan which itself has been approved by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare. The State water pollution control plan must include implementing procedures.20 Thus it is an administrative and financial plan as well as a physical plan for pollution control.

No local reviews or approvals of planning by agencies with related responsibilities are required by the Federal Government. Approval by the applicant's own governing body is all that is required.

Federal review of planning.-The State water pollution control plan is closely reviewed for adequacy. The annual reapproval procedure and the concurrent Federal authority for enforcement of water pollution abatement bring constant pressure for improvement of State programs. The review procedure is somewhat similar in concept to HHFA's "workable program," except that it applies mainly at the State level and does not require comprehensive planning for urban development.

Ibid., sec. 6(b) (4).

Ibid., sec. 5(f).

32-58364

Local water pollution control plans are reviewed by Federal officials, but comprehensive development plans prepared by localities are not.

EVALUATION OF ORGANIZATION AND PLANNING REQUIREMENTS

Perhaps the greatest deficiency in the waste treatment works construction program is the lack of Federal requirements for coordination of aided projects with comprehensive urban development planning efforts in the area. The proper location and size of sewerage treatment plants, interceptor sewers, and outfall sewers are most likely to be achieved if comprehensive plans indicating the directions and magnitudes of urban growth and the pattern of open spaces are taken into account.

The Commission has previously recommended formal review, but not approval power, of applications for Federal aid for sewerage treatment projects by official metropolitan or areawide planning agencies. The justification for an area wide planning approach is particularly strong in the case of sewerage systems because of the unquestionable economy of having sufficient jurisdiction to follow the dictates of gravity flow wherever possible and because of the widespread effects of water pollution, which can result from even a relatively small municipality or industry acting autonomously because of its own desires or because it has been left out of cooperative planning for the larger considerations.

Recognizing that a sewerage system can change an area from rural to urban, the relationship of sewerage systems to the implementation of comprehensive land use plans is so vital that official planning agency review is essential. Federally aided sewerage systems could contribute positively toward the implementation of areawide urban development plans. This might appropriately be recognized in legislative policy.

An increase in the dollar limit for joint projects, and authorization of 10 percent greater Federal financial participation for those treatment works conforming to comprehensive metropolitan area plans, as previously recommended by the Commission, would also help to implement areawide planning.

DOCUMENTATION

U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, "Grants-in-Aid and Other Financial Assistance Programs Administered by the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare," 1961 edition. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1961.

U.S. Public Health Service, "Water Pollution Control Manual, Title IV of the PHS Health Grants Manual," Washington: October 3, 1962.

U.S. Public Health Service, "Protecting Our Water Resources: The Federal Water Pollution Control Program," Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1962.

R. SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION IN FEDERALLY IMPACTED AREAS

DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM

In cases where Federal activities, or the activities of private companies pursuing Federal contracts, result in a substantial increase in the number of schoolchildren in a community, and there is need for additional school facilities, Federal grants are available to the school authorities to help in supplying the needed elementary and secondary classrooms. The Federal payment is 95 percent of the cost of constructing additional facilities needed for pupils whose parents both live and work on Federal property, 50 percent of the cost for facilities where parents work on Federal property but do not live there, and up to 45 percent in other cases of Federal impact occurring directly as a result of Federal activities or through a non-Federal contractor. However, there is no requirement that the school district put up non-Federal funds on any particular construction project. School sites must be supplied by the local applicant and are not included in any part of the project cost shared by the Federal Government.

The program operates through the Office of Education, in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, under authority of Public Law 815 of the 81st Congress, as amended (20 U.S.C., secs. 631645). Impacted area school aid in fiscal year 1963 amounted to about $65 million.

COORDINATION WITHIN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

In carrying out the program of impacted school aid, the Office of Education is authorized to delegate any of its functions, except the making of regulations, to any other Federal agency, and to use the facilities and services of any other Federal agency 21 Accordingly, the review of construction plans has been delegated to the Community Facilities Administration. This agency not only reviews the adequacy of construction plans from the engineering point of view, but also works with local school officials assisting them in the preparation of plans and specifications. It reviews the bids and sees that contracts are awarded to the lowest responsible bidder, makes periodic inspection of the progress of construction, certifies construction progress to the Office of Education as a basis for periodic payments to the district and, finally, it reviews and accepts the completed project before it is turned over to and accepted by local school officials as being completed. All of these activities are in the nature of assistance in bringing the construction project to bid and to completion as rapidly as possible and have very little to do with planning for the orderly development

of an area.

In addition, the Office of Education is to be given, to the maximum extent practicable, all necessary information from other Federal de

20 U.S.C. 643 (a).