About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

B-166506 1 (1974-02-07)

handle is hein.gao/gaobaagro0001 and id is 1 raw text is: COMPTRIXLr GC-lY'.:-:'.F THE UNITCD STATES WAtMNGTON. O.C. 20543 P-160506 FE 7 1974 The IlonQraj~le Edumund S. Muskie 2 7e? Chairman, SuhCOmniLLec on Air and Water Pollution, - CoiMUittee on Public Works ' f lUIII IiIf IIII -0 United States Senate LM096766 Dear Mr. Chairman: ,As you requested on May 10, 1973 (see enc.), we have examined (i) the circumstances surrounding the EnvirorneQtal Protcction Agencyts (PA's) denial of agrant for constructing a waste treat- m~io~t for Fort Fairfield, Maine, and (2) the v~aitVQ EPA's agjrovat of rants for 12 other projects you cited. You expressed concern thaL LPA's selection of projects for funding was ~ not equitible, that the Fort Fairfield application was rejected on - the basis of criteria that were not applied to the other 12 projects, and that the Fort Fairfield project should have been funded under the same conditions as were applied to the other 12 projects. The Federal. Water Pollution Control Act t icndmcnts of 1972, dated October 18, 1972 (33 U.S.C. 1251 et srq.), provided that, effective March 2, 1973, the Adinistrator could not approve a grant for constructing waste treatment works unless the applicant had established a new. system of much higher charges to be paid by the industrial users of the project. To preclude a rush of applications before the March 2, 1973, deadline, EPA had established certain criteria on which to select projecLs for funding. EPA's priimary selection criterion was a requirement that the applicant have complete plans and specifIcatio:ns ready for bidding. The Fort Fairfield project was not funded befog,_, March 2, 1973, because the applicant had not submitted complete pians and specifications. As of March 2, 1973, applicants for 2 of the 12 projects--Lebanon, New Htup6hirc, and Erie County, NeW York--also had not submitted ;ub- stantially complete plans and specifications. EPA subse:quentLy terminated the Eric grant. We beli.ev the Lebanon grant should be terminatecl for the reasons EPA Lcnuilnatecd the Erie grant. In addition, although New 1iLOdsor, NCU York, subIuit ted plans and specifications, EPA did not consider thenm app rovable becaus-e, am,.ong other reasons, they did not appear to l.e.ut the mini-mumiil secondary trcatmt'nt criteria. We tLher(Iore believe that the Ncw Windsor grant should also be teriminated. US -7~E~

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most