ENFORCEMENT GRANT CONSTRUCTION FUNDS

Municipalities subject to Federal enforcement proceedings have a full opportunity to request a State priority for a Federal grant under present legislation. With the increased grant authorizations proposed in the amendments under consideration, they will have even more of an opportunity to secure a grant. Therefore we believe that these special grants are neither needed nor desirable.

RESEARCH AND DEMONSTRATION FACILITIES

S. 120 would provide for the establishment, equipment, and maintenance of research and field demonstration facilities, and would authorize a badly needed expanded program in water pollution research, including the development of much more effective waste treatment methods. We welcome recognition of this very important need.

We believe that these research and demonstration facilities, and the expanded research program outlined, get at the very heart of many major problems in water pollution. This expanded research program should provide many needed answers and the demonstrations would provide the best means of putting new knowledge into actual practice, quickly and widely.

Research and field demonstration facilities would form a practicable partnership with the field laboratories proposed in S. 861. Field laboratories would support expanding Federal programs, more effective technical services to State and local agencies and industry, and close cooperation with field operations of other Federal water resources agencies. The research and field demonstrations would provide the new knowledge needed by these technical field programs, making them much more effective. We regard the two kinds of facilities as complementary and both kinds of approaches to the water pollution problem are necessary.

WATER QUALITY CONTROL FEATURES IN FEDERAL IMPOUNDMENTS

We e concur in the desirability of incorporating water quality control features in federally initiated plans for reservoirs and other water impoundments on interstate waters as proposed in S. 120. We regard flow augmentation for water quality improvement purposes as a supplement to, and not a substitute for, adequate treatment or other methods of controlling wastes at their source. As indicated in our report, however, we are not prepared at this time to offer recommendations on those provisions of the proposal relating to Federal participation in the financing of such impoundments.

ADMINISTRATION OF THE ACT

We recognize the importance of providing an appropriate organizational status for this important program, and we plan to take steps toward this end at an early date. We, the Department, request an opportunity to evaluate the alternative possibilities.

Mr. Chairman, the national Federal-State-local program is well underway. We believe it to be established at a point where it is now ready for further strengthening and improvement.

If there are questions, sir, I would be very happy to try to answer them.

Senator RANDOLPH. Dr. Porterfield, the subcommittee and the members of the committee as a whole, will find in your statement much information, much encouragement, and much challenge. I have noted that in the beginning of your statement you indicated that the chairman of this subcommittee, Senator Kerr, was one of the principal speakers at the national conference on water pollution, which was held here in Washington last December.

I recall reading the remarks made by Senator Kerr at the time. I think they were significant in that they indicated his sincere desire to move forward with this program. Those who favor legislation to improve the program, believe it is one that must be carefully considered and one that needs to be enacted, based upon the facts which we are sure this hearing will help to produce.

Dr. Porterfield, you have referred to S. 120 and to S. 861 in your excellent statement. I believe you will recall that H.R. 4036 and S. 861 are identical in their language.

The House amended H.R. 4036 and substituted H.R. 6441. I believe it would be helpful if you will state your position on H.R. 6441 and S. 120, thinking in terms of S. 120 as amended and indicated by the mimeographed sheet.

You may check it, if you have not already done so.

Dr. PORTERFIELD. In answer to your question, sir, with respect to H.R. 6441 as passed by the House, the Department has not yet had the opportunity to offer any departmental opinion on this to the committee, but we testified very much along the same lines in the House as we have here in the Senate.

We have observed the amendments which the House saw fit to enact, and we find nothing to object to, and feel that the program would be quite well served by the provisions contained in H.R. 6441.

As we look at the changes that have recently been proposed to S. 120, which, as I see it, refer principally to this question of the use of regulation of stream flow for water quality control, we feel, as I indicated in my statement, that this is a very desirable adjunct to water pollution control measures in the country, and we do feel that this is a desirable authorization to have.

On the question of the reimbursable or nonreimbursable features proposed, our reaction to this would require a little more time for study in conjunction with other agencies of the Federal Government. The implications of this proposal are of concern to several other agencies as well as to ourselves.

Senator RANDOLPH. Dr. Porterfield, I understand that you are prepared to indicate specifically and have so done in your personal state

ment, an approval of the proposal for flow regulation in the revised S. 120. Would you say that you believe it may have administrative approval?

Dr. PORTERFIELD. I am not in a position to answer that sir, except as a personal opinion. From the program point of view

Senator RANDOLPH. Yes.

Dr. PORTERFIELD (continuing). We think it is a very desirable measure in an overall water pollution control program.

Senator RANDOLPH. Would you care to comment further in reference to the program of intensive research in sewage plant design as proposed in S. 120?

Dr. PORTERFIELD. Yes, sir. We think this is a very desirable feature. As you know, we have been able to carry out some research in the field of sewage treatment and plant design.

We think that the underlining of these beginning efforts is very desirable, and we can see as we go forward with the more complicated problems of water pollution in the country today, and the combination of growing contributions of municipal wastes and the growing complexity of industrial wastes, that research in this field for more comprehensive treatment and reconstitution of the quality of water is highly desirable.

Senator RANDOLPH. So that I may accommodate members of the subcommittee, keeping in mind our cutoff point, I would ask of Senator Moss, do you have any questions?

Senator Moss. Not at this time, Mr. Chairman.

Senator RANDOLPH. Senator Fong.

Senator FONG. Yes. Dr. Porterfield, this question embraces two aspects: one, relative to the pollution, abatement of pollution; and, second, the obtaining of potable water.

Now, in the State of Hawaii all of our drinking water is from the artesian basin, and we do not take any surface water.

Could you give us an idea of how much water in the States here, in the 50 States, is being taken from artesian basins as compared to taking it from surface basins?

Mr. MCCALLUM. Sir, offhand I could not give you a real good answer, but we will certainly supply it. The majority of our water is surface water as to quantity. But the number of communities that use ground water is very large.

Senator FONG. Has there been any consideration given to the securing of artesian water rather than taking it from the surface?

Mr. MCCALLUM. Oh, yes, sir.

Senator FONG. And the cost of such a project? Could you give us some idea as to what that would involve?

Dr. PORTERFIELD. I do not think we could give that, sir, in direct answer to your question, but we can supply some consideration for the record on this.

I know from my own experience in States that there has been community by community considerable study of alternate sources of water as between ground water and surface water, and, as Mr. McCallum has stated, in the majority of communities it appears that either the only or the more practical source is ground water; either there is no alternative within economic limits or other practical limits to consider

ground water as a source instead of surface water, but we will supply the details of this for the record.

Senator FONG. Thank you.

(The information referred to follows:)

DEVELOPMENT AND UTILIZATION OF GROUND WATER RESOURCES

Ground water resources provide a sizable and important supply of potable water to cities and towns in the United States. Figures derived from past reports and an inventory currently in progress indicate municipal water supplies to average 22 billion gallons per day. Approximately 7 billion gallons per day are taken from ground water reservoirs. These reservoirs consist of aquifers which hold water under water table condition and those which contain artesian water, which is under natural pressure. Using a very liberal application of the definition of artesian water, viz, artesian water is that water in an aquifer under pressure which will cause the water to rise in a well to a level above the aquifer; it has been estimated that a little over half of the municipal ground water supply comes from artesian reservoirs.

Estimates based upon figures collected from 25 States in 1958 and all States in 1948 indicate a breakdown, by type of water supply source, as follows:

Usually the larger supplies depend upon surface water sources or both surface water and ground water sources. Among the cities of over 100,000 in the United States, only 14 depend solely upon ground water supplies.

Inasmuch as municipal water supplies are generally produced at lowest possible cost commensurate with maintaining satisfactory quality of product, it can be assumed that the most economically developable sources are used first. With other factors being equal, ground water is usually selected over surface water for community supply because of the advantages of location of source with respect to site of use and the consistency of quality and quantity. Quite often, however, there is little or no alternative to the use of surface supplies to meet demands for large volumes of water. It is often necessary to use surface water because of mineralization or contamination of ground water supplies or the relative high cost of developing ground water supplies at the site of use, or at remote locations. During 1960 contracts amounting to $244.1 million were awarded by municipalities for construction of sources of supply and works for transmission of water from source to site of use. These contracts are broken down by type of source as follows:

Municipal water supply contract awards, 1960, for construction of source and transmission works

Water resources are replenishable. Although the total volume of ground water is much greater than surface water at any specific time, the rate at which ground waters can be used is much less than the rate surface waters can be used because replenishment of ground water is much slower. In many areas of the United States the rate of withdrawal of ground waters has exceeded the replenishment rate and waters which were accumulated over a period of thousands of years are being removed at the expense of declining water levels or replacement (or encroachment) by salt water. Much research has been conducted to develop

ways of increasing the productivity of ground-water resources. In at least 30 States special investigations have been conducted to develop ground-water recharge methods. In many areas intensive programs of water conservation and withdrawal control have been required to prevent waste or contamination of the ground-water reserves. The following examples illustrate these situations.

SAN FRANCISCO WATER SUPPLY

Messrs. Berry and Howlett, in speaking of the plans for supplementing San Francisco area water supply in the future, point out in 1957 that the local surfacewater resources of the San Francisco bay area were nearly fully developed and nearly all ground-water basins were either in full use or being overdrawn. Additional supplies would have to come from expansion of systems for importing water. "Supplemental Water for the San Francisco Area," by William L. Berry and Herbert A. Howlett (J-AWWA 50, 679, 1958).

LOUISVILLE, KY.

"At Louisville, Ky., industrial plants concentrated on the Ohio River plain early in World War II drew a large part of their water from wells. Serious interference between closely spaced well fields ensued, with excessive local unwatering of the underground reservoir. Investigation by the Geological Survey in cooperation with local and State agencies has delineated water-yielding characteristics over much of the reservoir, and principles under which pattern of withdrawal points and amounts of the several withdrawals could be adjusted rationally. New withdrawals have been dispersed, and the total withdrawal has been reduced; it is now about 40 percent as great as in 1942-44." 1

CHICAGO, ILL.-GREEN BAY, WLS.-EL DORADO, ARK.

1

Heavy pumping from closely spaced wells has lowered artesian pressures by hundreds of feet.2

HOUSTON, TEX.

A very heavy pumping has lowered artesian pressures markedly." Additional water supply has been developed by utilizing the San Jacinto River.

TAMPA, FLA.

Aquifer of very permeable limestone was overdrawn in a concentrated area and inflow of saline water caused abandonment of municipal wells. Surface water resources have been nearly fully developed and additional water supplies will have to come from development of remote sources (possibly ground water).

PEORIA, ILL.

Water supply for the city and industries at Peoria is obtained primarily from wells with supplemental water coming from a new plant which processes water from the Illinois River. The public supply owned by the Peoria Water Works Co., serves a population of about 150,000 an average of 17.3 million gallons of water per day. Water-using industries obtain water from the public system, their own well water and supplemental river water.

Peoria has realized for several decades that their ground water supply was limited and replenishment by artificial recharge would be required. The ground water table was lowered between 1934 and 1942 at the rate of 2 feet per year. Recharge experiments were commenced in about 1951 by the Illinois Water Survey. These experiments indicated the practicability of increasing ground water by recharge with Illinois River water. In recent years, recharge by the Peoria Water Works Co. and some of the water-using industries and strict conservation of water use, including water recirculation by industry, has about equalized ground water withdrawal and recharge. It has been concluded that future water supplies would have to come from outside the Peoria area or the Illinois River. A filtration plant was constructed and was put in operation during the summer of 1960. "Peoria Area Water Situation," Dr. C. S. Boruff, "What's Happening in Illinois," Illinois State Chamber of Commerce, August 22,

1 "IV-Subsurface Facilities of Water Management and Patterns of Supply-Type Area Studies." Interior and Insular Affairs Committee, House of Representatives, U.S. Cong., 1953.

2 "Physical and Economic Foundation of Natural Resources, III, Groundwater Regions of the United States-Their Storage Facilities."