3. ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS WHICH CANNOT BE AVOIDED 



Although this proposal is directed toward water quality enhancement, we 

 anticipate that the construction of additional treatment facilities may increase 

 the potential for adverse environmental effects associated with the movement of 

 soil as plant sites are readied and facilities are placed into operation. The place- 

 ment of such facilities could potentially interfere with recreational, residential 

 and aesthetic land use considerations. To identify such conflicts, grantees will 

 be obliged to provide the Administrator with an environmental assessment of 

 the project so that such adverse effects can be eliminated or minimized. Further, 

 through the river basin, regional, and metropolitan plans that would be sup- 

 ported by this proposal, we will have an effective tool whereby any adverse 

 environmental effects associated with a project will be identified and eliminated 

 or minimized. It will be incumbent upon Federal, State, and local environmental 

 protection authorities to monitor the construction and operating plans and activi- 

 ties of each jurisdiction to ensure compliance, to the extent possible, with all 

 environmental protection requirements. 



4. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED BILL 



Financial studies conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency, includ- 

 ing the Water Quality Office's Cost of Clean Wate); point to the need for an 

 additional Federal financial support for waste treatment facility construction. 

 This proposal is thought to be the most workable solution to this problem of 

 financial need, providing for State, local and Federal sharing of costs, and pro- 

 viding for the achievement of water quality standards goals by 1974. 



5. RELATION BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT-TERM USES AND LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY OF 



THE ENVIRONMENT 



Both in the short and long term, this proposal is directed toward environ- 

 mental enhancement and protection. Local short-term adverse impact associated 

 with by-passing of existing treatment works during the construction of additions 

 of alterations of the plant will no longer be tolerated. Grantees will be required, 

 pursuant to regulations, to provide for the same level of treatment during con- 

 struction as that which was obtained prior to the initiation of construction. 



6. IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES 



Although this proposal involves a large commitment of financial resources, we 

 expect the benefits to be derived from such investment in terms of water quality 

 improvement to be more than commensurate. 



Proposed Amendments to Section 10 of the Federal Water Pollution Control 

 Act, as Amended, Relating to Enforcement and Water Quality Standards 

 (Prepared in Compliance With Section 102(2) (C) of the National Environ- 

 mental Policy Act of 1969 (PL 91-190), February 8, 1971) 



1. nature of proposed BILL 



The proposal would amend section 10 of the Federal Water Pollution Control 

 Act to strengthen and clarify the authority of the Administrator in the establish- 

 ment and enforcement of water qualify standards, and would add new authorities 

 relating to monitoring, surveillance, citizens' suits, and abatement of pollution 

 from hazardous substances. 



The Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 provided important new author- 

 ities for the enhancement of water quaUty. These new authorities will assist in 

 controlling water pollution caused by oil and hazardous substances, in carrying 

 out an important new State-Federal program for the prevention of water pollu- 

 tion from federally licensed or permitted activities, and in other areas. How- 

 ever, strengthening of the Act is now necessary to enable the Environmental 

 Protection Agency to play a more active role in working with State and local 

 governments to prevent and abate pollution of our Nation's waters. 



