Evening star., 1950-12-11

STUDY is maze, cost estimates for
treating Virginia wastes in the
District plant. and of the costs of
constructing pipe line under the
river point toward substantial
savings over the plan to build
separate plants.
1t also has been pointed out that
the District plant will be enlarged
to provide complete treatment Of
all wastes. This could not be &C
complished by the several pro-
posed Virginia plants without a
considerable capital outlay.
Cost Estimates Given.
Harold A. Kemp, District sani-
tary engineer, said it has been es-
timated. as of 1852, Virginia sew
age could be treated at the Blue
Plains plant at a cost to Virginia
Of $6.10 per million gallons. He
said that the cost after 1860, when
complete treatment will be pro-
vided, has been estimated at SLABS
per million gallons.
These figures, Mr.. Kemp said,
include all capital, operating and
maintenance charges and land
costs. He emphasized. however,
that the estimates are made on
today's costs.
Mr. Kemp said that estimates
also have been made of the cost
of laying a pipe line under the
river. A 48-inch line, which would
be capable of up to so million gall
Ions of sewage a day, would cost
approximately $1.2 million, he
said. A 54-inch line capable Of
handling as much as 10 million
gallons a day would cost about
$1,475,000. These estimates in
clude the cost of the line to the
District plant.
20 Million Gallons Now.
The present flow from all Vir-
ginia communities amounts to
about 20 million gallons a day.
Thus. 48-inch line under the
river would provide capacity for
more than twice the present dis
charge.
No estimates are available on
the costs Of constructing inter-
ceptor lines on the Virginia side
that would tie Arlington, Alex
andria and Fairfax into a central
pumping station where the sew
age would be forced under the
Potomac.
While it has been stated that
such lines would be costly, engi-
neers believe that the total cost
would be considerably less than
the cost of two new treatment
plants and proposed enlargement
of the third.
Costs Estimated.
Arlington's latest estimate Of
the cost of enlarging its present
plant is $2,250,0OO. Alexandria
estimates the cost of its proposed
plant at SIS per cent of a 81 million
project, or 50 million. The bal
ance of the funds would be spent
for interceptor lines to bring all
city sewage to a central point.
Fairfax County estimates that it's
plant will cost $1.1O5 900.
Thus, if two new plants are
constructed and the third en-
larged, the capital outlay would
amount to $685. 900. At a 3 per
cent rate. interest alone would
amount to $166,650 a year. and
in addition there would be amor
tization charges and maintenance
and operating costs. Some engi-
neefs have estimated that it might
cost Virginia three times as much
to treat it's sewage under these
conditions as it would cost in
the District plant.
There also is the long-range
view to be taken into considera-
tion. The District now is enlarg.
ing its present plant, and funds
have been appropriated for plans
for a secondary plant to cost about
So million.
Work Schedule.
1t is expected that work will
begin on the secondary plant in
1852, and that by 1857 about IS
per cent of the pollution will be
removed. BY 1860 the plant prob
ably will be completed allowing
complete treatment to sewage
wastes.
While both the proposed plants
for Alexandria and Fairfax pro-
vide for more than primary treat
ment. the Arlington plant when
enlarged, still will only provide
primary treatment, or the removal
OF about 80 per cent of the pollu-
tion from the sewage.
1t is likely that in years to come
control authorities may demand
a higher degree of treatment in
the Washington area, and this
would force additional outlays Of
money by Virginia communities.
Objections Voiced.
Some objections to the District
treatment plan have been voiced
in Virginia. It has been pointed
out that if Virginia relies COM
pletely on the District, there is
no assurance of the attitude of
Congress in the future.
There is some doubt, too, on the
part of Virginia officials that in
terceptor lines could be built as
cheaply as could the several treat
ment plants.
The first objections may be
answered by the record of the
Districts relations with Maryland.
A law. passed in 1917, gave the
District authority to handle near
by Maryland sewage in the inter-
est of cleaner streams in the
Metropolitan area. Since then CO.
operation between gashington
and Maryland has sroYA stronger.