In my opinion H. R. 2711, a bill to create a division of water pollution control in the United States Public Health Service, is the type of legislation that will further the cooperation between all of the governmental agencies that are interested in the correction of stream pollution conditions. I am especially interested in stressing the benefits to be obtained from close cooperation between municipalities, their respective State governments, and the Federal Government through a definite interstate cooperation. I am also impressed by the value of financial help to the local political subdivisions that must shoulder the major burden of the expense of constructing remedial works for controlling stream pollution. The Federal aid that has already been in effect during the past 3 years has been shown to have a marked stimulus upon the construction of sewage treatment works in Ohio; and I am certain that other States have experienced similar stimulus. I am firmly of the belief that a cooperative effort such as is proposed in H. R. 2711 and which contains the essential features of financial assistance and Federal guidance under the United States Public Health Service, will make possible even greater accomplishments in this State, especially with reference to the problems that are of interstate character. Yours very truly, WALTER H. HARTUNG, M. D., MEMORANDUM RE PROGRESS OF CONSTRUCTION OF SEWAGE TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL WORKS FOR CORRECTING STREAM POLLUTION CONDITIONS IN OHIO DURING THE PAST 10 YEARS, 1928-37, INCLUSIVE, BY F. H. WARING, CHIEF ENGINEER, OHIO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH The Ohio statutes place with the State department of health jurisdiction over the control of stream pollution. This control is exercised in two ways-(a) it is necessary for a municipality to obtain the approval of the department for all plans for sewerage and sewage disposal works with respect to both new works and improvements to existing works, and (b) the statutes establish a police power in the hands of the State department of health whereby property owners and public bodies through petition may seek to compel the correction of stream pollution. Although these statutes have been in effect for more than 30 years real progress in the correction of stream-pollution conditions has been confined to the past 10 or 15 years and especially the last 3 years. A State-wide survey of the stream conditions was undertaken by the department about 14 years ago. One of the objects of this survey was to learn the conditions attending the operation of existing sewage treatment and disposal works, and a secondary object was to learn the true facts of stream pollution conditions and to make recommendations concerning the remedy for pollution conditions. This survey established the fact that about 400 miles out of the 12,000 miles of streams in Ohio were badly polluted; that although industrial wastes were a factor, by far the greater proportion of pollution was found to be caused by municipal sewage; that although there were some 60 sewage-treatment works serving municipalities, less than half of them were giving what might be called satisfactory results; that the failures noted were due largely to neglect and lack of proper maintenance and operation of devices that had been constructed, because the municipalities were for the most part unable to finance such maintenance and operation. Following the above-mentioned survey, the Ohio Legislature enacted a statute permitting municipalities to charge for sewer service and set 1 For presentation at hearing before Rivers and Harbors Committee, U. S. Congress, on H. R. 2711, Mar. 17, 1937. up "sewer funds" which funds must first be used for proper maintenance and operation of sewage disposal works and the surplus therefrom might be used for sinking fund charges or bonds for constructing new works. The effort was made in this enabling act to permit the municipality to establish its sewer system as a utility and to operate the same accordingly in similar manner to common practice in municipally owned water works systems. As a result of this enabling act, there are now more than 40 municipalities financing the satisfactory operation of sewage treatment and disposal works; some of these municipalities are financing from the service charges portions of the bonds necessary for constructing or reconstructing the sewage works; and a few of the municipalities have financed in this manner the entire bond issue for the building of new sewage treatment and disposal works The largest city in the State to finance the operation and a portion of the construction costs of the sewage treatment and disposal works in the city of Dayton with a population of over 200,000. It was apparent from the original survey and it is still true that one of the greatest stumbling blocks to construction and satisfactory operation of sewage treatment and disposal works is adequate and proper financing. The progress in improving old works and building new works for municipalities in Ohio has consequently been slow, even though the statutory authority for adequate financing of such works was granted to the municipalities as early as 1923. Subsequent limitations of bond issues and tax levies by statutory and constitutional provisions have further delayed progress in constructing these improve ments. In spite of such delays due to difficulties in financing, municipalities in Ohio in the 6-year period from 1928-33 made a substantial showing in improving old sewage works and building new sewage treatment and disposal works. With the advent of Federal aid in financing public works, beginning in 1933 and fully effective in 1934, a very material increase in the construction program of new and improved sewage treatment and disposal works was observed. This impetus to progress in correcting stream pollution conditions is still going on in 1937. Evidences of the foregoing statements will be found in the tables appended to this memorandum. It is significant to point out the following pertinent facts relative to Ohio and its stream pollution problem. The State has a population, according to the 1930 census, of 6,646,697. The total number of municipalities having sewage treatment works in operation or under construction as of December 31, 1936, was 122. During the 6 years prior to any Federal aid in public works construction, that is 1928 to 1933, inclusive, 22 municipalities built sewage treatment and disposal works estimated to cost 10%1⁄2 million dollars and serving over 900,000 people. However, during the 3 years when Federal aid was available under the Public Works Administration and the Works Progress Administration, namely, 1934 to 1936, inclusive, 57 municipalities constructed sewage treatment and disposal works estimated to cost 25% million dollars and serving 24 million people. If Federal aid is granted for the projects now pending there will be constructed during 1937 sewage treatment and disposal improvements for 29 municipalities and estimated to cost 2% millions dollars and serving about 140,000 people. Thus, it will be seen that counting the 10 (c) year interval of 1928 to 1937, inclusive (assuming the works now pending Federal aid to be constructed in 1937), some 108 municipalities will have constructed sewage treatment and disposal improvements costing over 381⁄2 million dollars and serving 3,175,000 people. Conclusions. A study of the showing made during the past 10 years in Ohio in the construction of sewage treatment and disposal improvements leads to several definite conclusions: (a) Close cooperation accompanied by education is needed between State agencies having jurisdiction over control of stream pollution and municipalities where the particular problems of sewage treatment and disposal exist. (b) The financial part of the problem is the major one. An incentive to construct sewage treatment and disposal devices, such as the Federal grants in aid, have proved most effective in encouraging local political subdivisions to proceed in this sort of public works undertaking. (d) Intrastate activity in this direction must be supplemented by interstate activity under a Federal cooperative authority equally informed and constituted substantially as the public-health authority of the State, namely, the United States Public Health Service. (e) If the increased activity already noted in Ohio is to continue unabated in the control of stream pollution, the State health authorities must be given personnel assistance such as is contemplated in the bill now pending before Congress (H. R. 2711), or substantially similar thereto. (f) The exercise of control over stream pollution with its attendant supervision of construction and operation of sewage treatment and disposal improvements is a proper function of the public-health authorities and may best be carried on by and through such agencies. TABLE A.-Sewage treatment improvements in Ohio during 10 years interval, 1928–37, inclusive, Mar. 15, 1937 NOTES. Total number of municipalities in Ohio having sewage treatment works in operation or under construction on Dec. 31, 1936, was 122. Total population of State of Ohio, as of 1930 census, 6,646,697. TABLE B.-Sewage treatment improvements in Ohio during 10 years interval, 1928–37, inclusive, Mar. 15, 1937 TABLE C.-Sewage-treatment improvements in Ohio during 10-year interval, 1928– 37, inclusive, Mar. 15, 1937 TABLE 1.-Sewage-treatment improvements in Ohio constructed prior to Federal-aid programs and during 6-year interval, 1928-33 TABLE 2.-Sewage-treatment improvements in Ohio constructed under Federal-aid programs and during 3-year interval, 1934-36, Mar. 15, 1937 TABLE 3.-Sewage-treatment improvements in Ohio proposed under Federal-aid programs during 1937, Mar. 15, 1937 |