STATEMENT OF HON. EDITH GREEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OREGON

Mrs. GREEN. That is right, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, I am grateful for the opportunity to submit this statement in support of the legislation introduced by the distinguished and able gentleman from Minnesota, Mr. Blatnik, who has so long led the fight for the reclamation and protection of our essential water

resources.

It is my privilege to join with Mr. Blatnik and with other Members of the House, including my colleague, Mr. Ullman, in cosponsoring this legislation. All of the provisions of H.R. 4036 are of importance to the people and the economy of Oregon.

Economically dependent as we are in such large part on the waters of the Columbia, the Snake, the Willamette and their tributaries, the availability of a constant supply of pure water is an absolute necessity for Oregon. In this regard, all the provisions of H.R. 4036 are of importance.

There are, however, two sections which are of particular interest. I refer to section 3 and section 7.

Section 3 provides for the establishment of several field laboratories, including one in the Pacific Northwest. Professor Merrifield from Oregon State College will appear before you testifying as to the availability of facilities well equipped to serve as the basis for such a laboratory in the Pacific Northwest. Research is something that it is difficult, perhaps impossible, to overdo. As the uses to which we put our rivers become increasingly complex, new pollution problems will certainly arise. New methods of abating pollution must be developed and experimented with. In many ways, section 3 may turn out to be the major contribution made by the enactment of this legislation.

Section 7 would establish an enforcement construction grant fund, from which assistance could be forthcoming to communities required to construct remedial facilities at a result of conferences, hearings, or court orders. My own city of Portland, and the neighboring community of St. Helens, Oreg., have been requested to construct such facilities. While these communities are straining their own resources to the hilt, assistance of this nature, to help these two communities meet a problem with interstate implications, would be of substantial help. The fact that pollution on the Columbia River is as grave a concern for the State of Washington as for the State of Oregon; the fact that pollution arising in Idaho can diminish the value of water flowing through Oregon; the fact that our great rivers are often State boundaries, and hence difficult to assert as being the responsibility of one particular State; all these factors speak strongly for the enactment, not only of section 7 and section 3, but of the full bill.

As I stated, we have two people from Oregon who are here to give testimony today.

Professor Merrifield is one who is highly knowledgeable in this particular area, a professor of engineering at Oregon State College, who will present his own statement later on in the day, and will also present a statement for the Governor.

The next witness, I believe, is the county commissioner from Portland, Oreg., who is also on the board of the National Association of

County Officials. Mr. Gleason has long studied this problem, and he is certainly familiar with the area from which I come, and the problems which we have, not only in Oregon, but also in the adjoining States. Mr. Gleason represents officially the National Association of County Officials, and is also chairman of the subcommittee on natural resources of that organization.

I am very delighted to present him to the committee, and I know he will have information that will be valuable to you as you consider this legislation.

Mr. BLATNIK. Thank you, Mrs. Green.

Mr. Gleason, will you take the witness chair?

The next witness is speaking on behalf of the National Association of County Officials. He is Mr. M. James Gleason, Commissioner of Multnomah County, Oreg., and chairman of the Tri County Sanitary Authority.

It is a pleasure to have Mr. Gleason with us. He has been here in the past and I know the Chair expresses in behalf of the committee our appreciation for your continued interest and your effective participation and the contribution you made on the part of better understanding of this problem.

Mr. Gleason, I see you have a prepared statement and it is not a long one. Would you prefer to read it or would you want to make a summary so we do not duplicate those statements that have already been presented by the previous witness?

STATEMENT OF M. JAMES GLEASON, COMMISSIONER, MULTNOMAH COUNTY, OREG., AND CHAIRMAN OF THE TRICOUNTY SANITARY AUTHORITY

Mr. GLEASON. With the chairman's permission, I believe a summary, and then with your permission I would like to illustrate one or two of the points with some of the experiences we have had in our own locality, purely because I am more familiar with that, and because they represent the problem of every growing metropolitan area. If that would be all right, with the chairman's permission?

Mr. BLATNIK. Will you please proceed?

Mr. GLEASON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is M. James Gleason. I am commissioner for Multnomah County, Oreg., and chairman of the Tricounty Sanitary Authority, comprising the Oregon counties of Multnomah, Clackamas, and Washington. I am a member of the National Association of County Officials. I appreciate your kind invitation to testify this morning on behalf of nearly 9,000 elected county officials from 47 States, who compose the membership of NACO.

Over the years, county government has become increasingly aware and vitally involved in the subject this committee is now considering. Consistent with the National Association of County Officials' official policy statement, we have supported previous congressional efforts to accomplish the aims of H.R. 4036. Having personally seen the many accomplishments that would not have been possible without. the present Water Pollution Control Act, and equally being apprised

of the increasing difficulties and problems county governments are facing in this field, I strongly urge enactment of this legislation, without which success in this struggle is certainly in doubt.

We have become increasingly aware of the vital need of becoming involved in and working with and moving toward the control of water pollution. We recognize that water pollution control and clean water and palatable water are the most important commodities we have in our areas. Our growth and our industrial expansion is completely tied up in this.

For many years it was considered that sewers ended at city limits. But new thinking came in the last three decades, 1930-60, as experience showed that population was moving into counties outside incorporated cities-thus forming large metropolitan areas.

I think it is interesting to note that nearly two-thirds of the Nation's growth in the last 10 years has been in the metropolitan areas outside of their central cities, causing a great pollution problem in this metropolitan area. The county government has had to change its thinking to provide the services that are needed for this metropolitan area, including such things as streets, schools, water distribution, and sewers and treatment plants.

I bring these facts to the committee's attention inasmuch as many people are unaware of the reasons resulting in county government being so vitally interested and involved in the problem of water distribution and water pollution control.

It has taken nearly the first third of the century to eliminate cesspools and septic tanks out of the congested areas of the United States. In the past 12 years we have put in more cesspools and septic tanks than we have taken out the rest of the century. This demonstrates that there has been a haphazard growth without proper planning and without proper control.

In control of water pollution, all local government units must work together and they must come up with a unified system, because only with a unified system can you bring adequate control and bring fair and equitable rates which will provide for the construction, maintenance, and expansion of the system as it is needed in the growth of the community. Only such unification will properly serve the population in the districts and the industries as they come into the metropolitan areas.

I think this is very important. The rates throughout this entire metropolitan area should be uniform, so that no individual or no one industry will have a trade advantage in its home market. I think this is extremely important as we talk about bringing new industries into a metropolitan area.

We think that sections 5(a) and 5(b), or that section 5, is of the greatest importance, because we have found that under the present law-and it is the law under which we are operating now-that the Federal grants have tended to encourage small, uneconomic systems which due to their small size and due to the rigidity of the local municipal financing has made it almost impossible up to now to enlarge or consolidate the small units into a large metropolitan unit to serve a growing metropolitan area.

At this point I would like to talk some about our own experiences to illustrate the problems in the metropolitan areas.

In our metropolitan area there are some 10 cities, 10 incorporated cities, or there are at the present time, and this is within the drainage area that is contemplated in the metropolitan sanitary system of some 150 square miles. There are in these 10 incorporated cities at the present time some 15 or 18 organized sanitary districts, and in between all of these already organized districts is much open land that will need to come in when the growth of the community and the population that moves into it needs to come into a unified plan.

In this entire metropolitan area there is one logical site for one plant that will handle the entire 150 square miles with a gravity system, which, certainly, on a per capita cost basis and a per capita maintenance basis is much more economical than 50 different systems with 50 different plants. Certainly one is large enough to have adequate help and adequately trained help, and it will provide the means for doing the job for controlling water pollution as our problem grows, and as our population grows, and will be able to move ahead as and where the growth continues.

We think that section 5 will go a long ways to consolidate this into one overall system, instead of into innumerable small systems. The cost of these small treatment plants runs from $50 to $60 per capita, whereas the larger plants serving 100,000 or more people can be constructed for close to $30 per capita.

We think that with this section that the thinking on Federal grants will change from the small unconnected plants to the larger, more comprehensive metropolitan type plants, because under this proposed legislation it will become more economical and more feasible to plan and finance a larger plant, which will serve the entire drainage area, allowing the local authorities through cooperation and through contracts to plan an orderly financing for the growth of the entire area, and for continuity of its expansion as it expands.

Sections 5(a) and 5(b) of H.R. 4036 will go far to alleviate this problem by encouraging and making it possible to have this consolidation.

I would like to point out that there are approximately at the same time today the same number of people living within the central cities as there are in the metropolitan areas outside the central cities in the unincorporated areas.

We think, as covered in this bill with the Advisory Board, which provides for proper representation-and where the point of view is taken as between the urban or municipal and the more suburban territories that consideration should be given to equal representation of counties with the cities on the Water Pollution Control Advisory Board, as provided for in section 6 of the bill. That is something which we heartily recommend.

I would like to point out that the National Association of County Officials' American County Platform, section 8-3, recommends on stream pollution as follows:

Stream pollution is a national problem that has greatly reduced the amount of usable water available for agriculture, industrial, and local water supply purposes. In many cases this pollution is of an interstate nature and quite beyond the economic capacity of local governments to control. Therefore, we believe that there is justification for Federal assistance to counties and local agencies in the construction of local sewage treatment facilities, and we strongly recommend that the Congress and the Federal administration make available sufficient funds to implement this part of the Water Pollution Control Act.

Because of that, we think it is also equally important that this entire program be adequately policed; and that procedures to insure that good work by one community is not jeopardized by the lack of any work by an adjoining community should be instituted, or by a community a little bit farther upstream or a little bit farther down

stream.

We, therefore, can and do heartily endorse the provisions of this bill which provide for the strengthening of the Federal enforcement authority.

We also believe that with the different types of industrial complexes and the variation in rainfall and topography, and all of the other regional differences, that there are problems that are indigenous to particular areas.

We think section 3-D of the bill shows a great deal of foresight and understanding by locating the necessary research facilities in the various areas and localities, rather than in one central research unit. This will not only facilitate the work of the research units, but will focus local attention and assist in further acquainting the general public with a presently very dangerous situation.

I would like to say wherever a well-informed community exists, and wherever they are well informed as to the dangers of water pollution, immediately the community is one of the strongest backers and sees that there are not only facilities but finances to take care of the water pollution.

We think that the research centers locally located and in the area they serve will help properly to enthuse and educate the public in this area.

In my experience as Multnomah County commissioner and chairman of the Tricounty Sanitary Authority, I found that because of the staggering cost burdens financing is and will continue to be our most complex problem to the local authorities. Consequently, we think that H.R. 4036 is of the utmost importance to us on the local level. At the same time, I believe that local communities must provide the major financing, and I would like to say that all of the counties are working toward methods of providing the major financing.

In our own locality we have at the present time proposed to the Oregon Legislature a bill, which bill will come up this Friday, permitting revenue-bond financing to facilitate the building of needed sewage systems.

All of the counties in Oregon are unified in the request for this type of legislation to make possible a more rapid going ahead with control measures.

In conclusion, I would like to say that we think that H.R. 4036 is a vitally needed measure and should be enacted to insure the American people will no longer be confronted with the perils of contaminated water. Vigorous action must be taken to protect the public health and complete the job of water-pollution control.

The National Association of County Officials supports and recommends the passage of this bill.

I would like to say that I thank you on their behalf, and thank you for inviting me here and giving me this opportunity to add a few words to the thinking on water-pollution control here in the United States.