Whereas the water supply was developed through the efforts of the city on its own behalf, steps to improve the sanitary sewer system had consistently been encouraged from higher level governments, often in the form of legislation. The laws of the 1970's significantly affected the direction of the sewer utility.

Until the 1970's, the laws and regulations controlling water pollution in the United States were sporadic and ambiguous. Previous federal laws prevented certain applications to localities; consequently, states assumed a large role in establishing the requirements. The state of Kansas had been responsible for pressuring Wichita to construct sewage treatment plants. It was the Kansas State Board of Health that issued regulations establishing stream standards for cities to follow in their sanitation systems.

New stream standards took effect January 1, 1968, in a series of regulations from the Kansas State Board of Health titled, River Basin Water Quality Criteria. These presented the river basin water quality criteria for Kansas, and included limits on fecal coliform content, the amount of dissolved oxygen in sewer discharges, and the specification that the river be free of visible oil and grease and any unnatural turbidity increases. Supplemental requirements added in January, 1971, established minimum effluent standards of secondary treatment and 85 percent biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) removal, as well as continuous disinfection of treated wastes, to be met by 1975.

The federal government also provided standards through the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which was established on December 2, 1970, to consolidate previously fragmented federal programs. New guidelines made effective for January 1, 1971, required the consideration of the environmental compatibility, sludge and solid waste disposal, infiltration and the elimination of bypassing. EPA standards had to be met to obtain federal funds.

All of these regulations covered a variety of areas and served to maintain control over Wichita's sewerage system. These standards presented problems in that they were often too general and unenforceable, especially without sufficient funding for localities to afford the necessary improvements. Without adequate federal supervision, there was no guarantee that states would respond to the need. It was the norm for states to work on compliance based more on compromises than enforced legal remedies because of a desire to circumvent the lack of cooperation from local officials.

With the problems in regulation, attention began to focus on the pollution problem in the nation. The U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) reported in 1970 that potentially harmful levels of chemicals existed in one-third of the nation's drinking supplies. President Richard M. Nixon emphasized the need to combat pollution in his January 1, 1970, State of the Union Address: "The 1970's must be years when America pays its debt to the past by reclaiming the purity of its air, its water, and our living environment. It is literally now or never." (U.S. Environmental Policy; A Legislative History of 1972 Acts, 1972, U.S. Comptroller Report, 1974).

This attitude prevailed in Congress and resulted in the passage of major new legislation. After two years of work, the Water Pollution Control Act, Amendments of 1972, was passed. Ironically, considering the aggressive tone in his State of the Union Address, Nixon vetoed the bill, but on October 18, 1972, the veto was overridden and it became law.

The act was a significant endeavor to clean up the pollution problem. The Congressional Research Service published A Legislative History of the Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972, in December of 1972. It stated, "The recently enacted Federal Water Pollution Control Act, Amendments of 1972, is one of the most significant pieces of legislation enacted by the 92nd Congress. It is a major revision of existing water pollution control laws."

It went on to quote Representative John Blatnek, then chairman of the House Public Works Committee, on the significance of the act. "In this measure," Blatnek asserted, "we are totally restructuring the water pollution control program and making a far reaching national commitment to clean water, much as our space program was restructured a decade ago when the late President Kennedy committed America to a landing on the moon before the end of the 1960's."

Public Law (PL) 92-500, as the act is labeled, differed significantly from previous pollution control legislation as it went the extra distance to provide enforceability. According to the U.S. National Commission on Water Quality, the act expanded the federal government's role in water pollution control through increased federal funding and wastewater treatment works construction; elevated water pollution control planning to significantly higher levels; allowed for new avenues of public participation; and established regulatory mechanisms to implement uniform technology-based effluent standards. In addition, these standards were set so as to bring about possible criminal charges if severe violations occurred, as well as loss of federal funds.

The stated objective of the act was to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation's waters. Specific goals were outlined to meet the objective, according to the U.S. Comptroller's Report on Water Quality in January, 1974. First, to reach, "wherever attainable," a quality of water that "provides for the protection and propagation of fish, shellfish, and wildlife," end "for recreation in and on the water" by July 1, 1983. And second, by 1985, to eliminate the discharge of pollutants into navigable waters.

The goals and objectives of PL 92-500 would be accomplished in two phases. Phase I required industry to install the "best practicable control technology currently available" (BPT), and for all publicly owned treatment plants to have secondary treatment by July 1, 1977. Phase II called for industries to install the "best available technology economically achievable" (BAT) in order to move toward the national goal of the elimination of the discharge of pollutants, and for all publicly owned treatment works to achieve BPT by July 1, 1983. Overall, the statutory provisions specified a program to reduce and eventually eliminate discharge wastes into the nation's water while building up self-sustaining publicly-owned pollution control facilities.

While Congress had repeated many of its previous goals of stopping water pollution, it went further in PL 92-500, by providing the aid necessary to accomplish its goals. This included the appropriation of $600 million for basic research, development, and training, $18 billion for construction of wastewater treatment facilities, and $275 million to reimburse qualified localities for facilities initiated after 1956. As a result of the latter provision, Wichita was reimbursed for a portion of the cost of constructing secondary treatment works in 1959. The act also was intended to help with the development and implementation of area-wide waste treatment management planning, the encouragement of public participation in the execution of the act, and the reduction in paperwork and red tape at all levels of government.

In order to enforce the provisions of the new law, the EPA acted as administrator, with many new responsibilities. The ones which affected localities the most included: 1) the review and approval of water quality standards, and setting effluent limitations; 2) taking enforcement actions against those violating permits in the discharge of pollutants; 3) establishing and administering the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES); 4) approval of state water pollution control programs, and allowing states to disburse money; and 5) development of comprehensive programs to prevent and eliminate pollution through research, demonstrations, and the like relating to the cause, extent, prevention, and abatement of water pollution.

The effect of PL 92-500 on states and municipalities, including Wichita, has been significant. Major improvements in sewer collection and treatment have been realized, but at the same time considerable time