TRANSCRIPT OF CONFERENCE
Conference on Pollution of the Interstate Waters
of the
Raritan Bay and Adjacent Waters, Second Session
Called by the Surgeon General, Public Health Service,
Under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
The Public Health Service, U. S. Dept. of Health, Education, and Welfare,
the Interstate Sanitation Commission and the
State Water Pollution Control Agencies of
New Jersey and New York
New York, New York May 9, 1963
-------
I
-------
I
I
CONTENTS
PAGE
• List of Participants
_ U. S. Public Health Service vi
™ Federal Agencies vii
• State and City Agencies vii
Other Participants viii
• Summary of Conference xi
Opening Statement
• by Mr. Stein 1
General Discussion lj.2
I
I
I
I
Summary
By Mr. Stein
Statement of:
Earl J. Anderson li
I Harold F. Clark 6
• Paul DeFalco, Jr. 16
Roscoe P. Kandle, M.D. 17
• Hollis S. Ingraham, M. D. 26
Stanley Pinel 32
I Edward W. Montanari 33
• Natale Colosi, Ph. D. 35
Elizabeth M. Wallace 39
8 Charles Callison ill
Mitchell Wendell, Ph. D. U5
Jack Marshall 52
James Pfafflin
iii
-------
CONTENTS
Statement of:
Martin Feldman
Norma Cirella
EXHIBITS
GOVT. EXHIBIT
NUMBER
1
2
3
U
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
N.Y. EXHIBIT
NUMBER
1
TITLE
Map, Sampling Station Locations
Map, Confirmed Coliform Densities
Map, Fecal Coliform Densities
Bacteriological Profiles - New York - New
Jersey State Line
Bacteriological Profiles - Raritan Bay Channel
Bacteriological Profiles - Eastern Extreme of
Bay
Map, Dissolved Oxygen - Average Percent
Saturation
Map, Dissolved Oxygen - Average Percent
Saturation
Bacteriological Profiles - Staten Island Shore
Bacteriological Profiles - New Jersey Shore
Map, Dispersion and Current Studies
Biological Sampling Stations
Map, Dispersion and Current Studies
Borough of Richmond, Department of City
Planning, The City of New York
Location of Special Stations
iv
PAGE
55
57
AFTER
PAGE
6
7
7
8
Q
O
8
8
9
9
9
10
11
11
33
33
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX A
Table A-l. Summary of Bacteriological Data - Bay Stations
Cable A-2. Summary of Bacteriological Data - Shore Stations
I Table A-3. Summary of Chemical Data - Bay Stations
Table A-l;. Summary of Bacteriological Data - Entrant Waters to the Bay
Table A-5. Summary of Chemical Data - Entrant Waters to the Bay
Table A-6. Summary of Bacteriological Data - Sewage Treatment Plants
APPENDIX B
Page
I METHODOLOGY B-l
Table B-l. Location of Sampling Stations
m BIOLOGICAL STUDIES B-k
• Table B-2. Dominant Phytoplankton Types
* Table B-3. Phytoplankton Genera and Species
Figure B-l. Biological Data - Station I
I Figure B-2. Biological Data - Station II
Figure B-3. Biological Data - Station HI
Figure B-J4. Biological Data - Station IV
I Figure B»5> Biological Data - Station V
Figure B~6, Biological Data - Station VI
Figure B-7. Benthic Populations
_ Table B-l;. Descriptions of Bottom Stations
I Table B-5. Benthic Populations
BIBLIOGRAPHY B-ll
APPENDIX C
I
Table 1. Bacteriological Data for Stations in Shellfish Area
• Table 2. Sewage Treatment Plant Performance
Table 3* Sewage Treatment Plant Data - 2l;-Hour Surveys
APPENDIX D
List of Attendees
-------
Dr. Paul W. Kabler, Chief of Microbiology, Basic and Applied,
Sciences Branch, Division of Water Supply and pollution Control
I
I
Conference in the Matter of Pollution of The Interstate Waters of
Raritan Bay and Adjacent Waters Involving the States of New York and New
Jersey, convened at 10:10 a.m., on Thursday, May 9, 1?63, in the Banquet
Hall, Carnegie International Center, 3^ East i;6th Street, New York, New York. m
PRESIDING:
Mr. Murray Stein, Chief, Enforcement Branch, Water Supply and •
Pollution Control, Public Health Service, Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, Washington 25>, D. C. •
PRESENT: .
REGION II OFFICE, NEW YORK, NEW YORK:
Earl J. Anderson, Regional Program Director, Water Supply and •
Pollution Control
Dr. Harald M. Graning, Regional Health Director |
Paul DeFalco, Jr., Director, Raritan Bay Project _
Sylvan C. Martin, Associate Regional Health Director for
Environmental Health Services
I
ROBERT A.TAFT SANITARY ENGINEERING CENTER, CINCINNATI, OHIO:
Francis W. Kittrell, Chief, Pollution Evaluation Unit, Technical |
Services Branch, Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control
Ralph Porges, Deputy Chief, Technical Advisory and Investigations •
Section, Technical Services Branch, Division of Water Supply and ™
Pollution Control
Harold F. Clark, Bacteriologist in Charge, Water Quality Studies, •
Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control
I
ENFORCEMENT BRANCH, PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE, WASHINGTON, D. C.:
Rheta Piere, Conference Coordinator •
Peter G. Kuh, Chief, Interstate Enforcement Section, Technical
Services Branch, Public Health Service •
vi
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
K. E. Biglane, Chief, Eastern Operations Division, Environ-
mental Engineering and Food Protection
William A. Felsing, Chief, Field Operations Section, Shellfish
Sanitation Branch
REPRESENTATIVES OF OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES:
William H. Weehter, Sanitary Engineer, First Army Engineers, r
Governor's Island, New Tork
S. Allan Betts, U, S. Naval Ammunition Depot, Earle
Richard W. Sherman, Special Assistant for Sanitary Engineering,
Third Naval District, New Tork
Commander W. C. Dahlgren, Third Coast Guard District, New Tork
Stanley Wechsler, Hydraulic Engineer, United States Army Engineer
District, New Tork
Warren S. Landers, United States Bureau of Commercial Fisheries,
Fish and Wildlife Service, Department of the Interior
REPRESENTATIVES OF STATE AGENCIES:
Roscoe P. Kandle, M.D., Commissioner of Health, New Jersey
State Department of Health
Hollis S. Ingraham, M.D., Commissioner of Health, New Tork State
Department of Health
• Natale Colosi, Ph. D., Chairman, Interstate Sanitation Commission
Mitchell Wendell, Ph. D., Interstate Sanitation Commission
• Thomas R, Glenn, Director, Interstate Sanitation Commission
Stanley Pinel, representing Mayor Wagner and Maxwell Lehman,
First Deputy City Administrator, City of New Tork
Edward W. Montanari, Assistant Commissioner for Water Resources,
State Conservation Department, representing H. G. Wilm, Commissioner
of Conservation and Chairman of the State Water Resources Commission
William O'Leary, representing Peter Reidy, Commissioner of Public
Works, New Tork City
Deputy Commissioner Wild, representing Peter Reidy, Commissioner
of Public Works, New Tork City
vil
-------
I
Mr. Warren, representing the Commissioner of Parks, Newbold II
Morris, of New York City •
Mr. Dappert, Chief, Bureau of Water Resources, New York State m
Health Department p
Dr. George James, Commissioner, New York City Department of Health
viii
I
OTHER WITNESSES:
Elizabeth M. Wallace, Director of the Oyster Institute of North 9
America
Martin Feldman, representing North Jersey Commercial Fishermen's •
Association
Jack Marshall, Ekroth Laboratories •
Norma Cirella, Private Citizen
James Pfafflin, representing a citizens group in New Jersey |
Charles Callison, Assistant to the President, National Audubon M
Society, member of the President's Water Pollution Control Advisory •
Board
Elaine Kovessy, Legislative Assistant, Hon. John M. Murphy, •
Member of Congress from the State of New York (Staten Island) ™
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I (SECOND SESSION)
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SUMMARY OF CONFERENCE
POLLUTION OF INTERSTATE WATERS
of the
RARITAN BAY
AND ADJACENT WATERS
I (NEW YORK - NEW JERSEY)
MAY 9, 1963
-------
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
SUMMARY OF CONFERENCE
(SECOND SESSION)
POLLUTION OF INTERSTATE WATERS
of the
RARITAN BAY
AND ADJACENT WATERS
(NEW YORK - NEW JERSEY)
MAY 9, 1963
The second session of the Conference in the Matter of Pollution of Inter-
state waters of the Raritan Bay and Adjacent Waters (New York-New Jersey) was
held on May 9, 1963 in the Banquet Hall, Carnegie International Center, 3U5 E.
U6th Street, New York, New York under the provisions of section 8 of th^.
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. U66 et seq.). The first ses-
sion was held on August 22, 196l in New York City.
The Raritan Bay and adjacent waters which are the subject of the confer-
ence include a portion of the Narrows, the Lower Bay, and Sandy Hook Bay, the
Raritan Bay, the tidal portions of the Raritan River, the Arthur Kill, and
the other smaller tributaries to the named Bays.
The Lower Bay and Raritan Bay, along with Sandy Hook Bay, combine to form
a triangular body of tidal water that extends inland for about 10 miles be-
tween Staten Island, New York, to the northwest, and the New Jersey shoreline
to the south. The boundary between the two States passes approximately from
eaist to west through the middle of the Lower Bay and Raritan Bay to the
weistern end of Raritan Bay where it swings to a northerly direction and con-
tinues up the middle of the Arthur Kill. The Arthur Kill is a narrow body of
water connecting Raritan Bay, at its southern end, with Newark Bay at its
northern end. The Arthur Kill forms the western border of Staten Island and
the eastern border of the adjacent sector of New Jersey. The water area in
question comprises approximately 30 square miles, which is about equally divi-
ded between the two States. These waters form a substantial part of the New
York Harbor complex.
The following conferees representing the State Water Pollution Control
Agencies of New York and New Jersey, the Interstate Sanitation Commission and
the U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, attended the second
session:
Dr. Roscoe P. Kandle New Jersey State Department of Health
Dr. Hollis S. Ingraham New York State Department of Health
Dr. Natale Colosi Interstate Sanitation Commission
Earl Anderson U.S. Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare
New York, New York
xi
-------
Murray Stein, Chairman
U. S. Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare
Washington 25, D. C.
The following also participated in the Conference:
Charles Callison
Norma Cirella
Harold F. Clark
Paul DeFalco, Jr.
Martin Feldman
Jack Marshall
Edward ¥. Montanari
James Pfafflin
Stanley Pinel
Elizabeth M. Wallace
Mitchell Wendell
Audubon Society and President's Water
Pollution Control Advisory Board
New York, New York
Staten Island, New York
U. S. Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare
Cincinnati, Ohio
U. S. Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare
New York, New York
North Jersey Commercial Fishermen's
Association
Ekroth Laboratories
Brooklyn, New York
New York Water Resources Commission
and State Conservation Department
New York, New York
A New Jersey Citizens Group
Administrator's Office
New York, New York
Oyster Institute of North America
Interstate Sanitation Commission
New Yorkj New York
The Chairman of the Conference pointed out that:
1. Under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. U66 et seq.),
pollution of interstate waters which endangers the health or welfare
of persons in a State other than the one in which the discharge
originates is subject to abatement under the procedures prescribed in
section 8 of the Federal Act.
2, The first step of this procedure is the calling of a conference.
3. The purpose of the conference is to bring the States and the
xii
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Interstate Agency and the U. S. Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare together to review the situation, to lay a basis for future
action by all parties concerned and to give States, the Interstate
Agency and localities an opportunity to take any indicated remedial
action under State and local law.
1;. At the first session of the Conference on Raritan Bay and adjacent
waters, held on August 22, 1961, in Room 110!?, U. S. Court House,
Foley Square, New York, New York, the Department of Health, Education
and Welfare agreed to undertake in cooperation with the States, the
Interstate Sanitation Commission, and other Federal agencies an in-
vestigation and study to define the type of interstate pollution
problems that exist in the interstate waters of Raritan Bay and adja-
cent waters, to include, among other things, a determination of
specific pollutants and their concentration, and methods of securing
the best possible water quality.
In the light of Conference statements and discussions, the conferees at
the second session agreed to the following conclusions and recommendations:
I. The States of New Jersey and New York and the Interstate Sanitation
Commission have active and effective programs for the control and
abatement of pollution of the waters of Raritan Bay and adjacent
waters as evidenced by:
A. With respect to waters other than those originating in the Arthur
Kill and coming through the Narrows, the New Jersey communities
have been steadily improving treatment since the 19HO's. At the
present time, all domestic waste from New Jersey discharging into
the Hudson River and upper New York Bay area have been intercepted
for treatment except for a portion of Weehawken and Union City,
where the construction of needed facilities is nearihg completion.
On the New York side, New York City, pursuant to a consent order
of the Interstate Sanitation Commission dating from 19$7 has been
engaged in a large program of construction. The Hunts Point and
Coney Island projects have been completed. Under construction are
the pollution control projects of Newtown Creek and Jamaica Bay.
Scheduled for early construction, pursuant to the consent order,
are projects at Red Hook, Port Richmond, North River and Ward's
Island. On these projects as well as those mentioned subsequently
the work is done pursuant to the approval of plans and specifica-
tions by the New Jersey and New York State Health Departments.
B. Entrant waters from the Raritan River were improved by completion
in 19^8 of the Middlesex County Sewerage Authority Treatment
Plant. The New Jersey Health Department and the Authority have a
continuing program on further abatement of pollution of the Rari-
tan River.
C. In the Arthur Kill intensive research and investigations by New
York, New Jersey and the Interstate Sanitation Commission have
xiii
-------
been underway since 1957. As a result of this effort, informa-
tion has recently become available which has formed the basis for
the issuance of eight orders by the State of New Jersey as fol-
lows: Elizabeth Joint Meeting, Rahway Valley Sewerage Authority,
Linden-Roselle Sewerage Authority, Borough of Carteret, Wood-
bridge Township, Humble Oil and Refining Company, American Cyana-
mid, General Aniline and Film Company; and three by New York
authorities as follows: Procter and Gamble, Nassau Smelting and
Refining Company and the Willowbrook State School.
D. In Raritan Bay, pursuant to an administrative order and a time-
table agreement with the Attorney General of the State of New
Jersey, construction of needed works at Keyport was already under-
way prior to the first session of this conference, and was com-
pleted in 1962. At Atlantic Highlands, Highlands, Keansburg,
Union Beach, Borough of Matawan and two industrial installations,
steps of either engineering or a legal nature are in progress.
The Borough of Highlands is installing an automatic chlorine re-
sidual analyzer and recorder with an alarm system arid is also
planning to repair the outfall line which would take the effluent
from Raritan Bay and discharge it to the Atlantic Ocean. The
Borough of Atlantic Highlands has hired an engineer to prepare
preliminary studies to enlarge the present facilities by 50 per-
cent and has applied for Housing and Home Finance Agency plann-
ing funds. In addition the Borough is planning to install a
chlorine residual analyzer and recorder with an alarm system.
The Borough of Keansburg has planned for additions and altera-
tions to this plant and they have been approved by the State De-
partment of Health. The Borough plans to advertise for bids soon.
In Union Beach a certificate of necessity has been issued to al]ow
this community to exceed bonded indebtedness limitations. Pre-
liminary plans have been approved by the State Health Department
for a sewage system and treatment plant. The Borough of Ifctawan
has completed construction of a new plant which was placed in
operation during the last week of April 1963. Construction of a
new treatment plant by the Madison Township Sewerage Authority
is nearing completion with a scheduled completion date of May
1963. Plans for proposed expansion to increase the capacity of
the Middlesex Sewerage Authority plant are scheduled to be com-
pleted by the latter part of 1963. The International Flavor and
Fragrances Company hired an industrial waste engineer to develop
treatment facilities. A feasibility report has been furnished.
Pollution sources of the B. Zura Chemical Company have been elim-
inated by the closing of the plant.
For the New York waters concerned, the State Department of Health
has completed classification studies and reports covering the
subject waters. Arrangements are now being made for public clas-
sification hearings to be held in New York City during the months
of June or July. Actual classification will be made by the Water
Resources Commission of New York State. The classifications of
xiv
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
the Interstate Sanitation Commission for these waters have been
in force for over twenty years.
II. The Public Health Service, in collaboration with the New Jersey State
Department of Health, the New York State Department of Health, and
the Interstate Sanitation Commission will continue and complete the
investigation and study of the Raritan Bay and adjacent waters in ac-
cordance with the recommendations of the conferees at the first ses-
sion of the conference held on August 22, 1961.
-------
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TRANSCRIPT OF CONFERENCE
Pollution of Interstate Waters
of the
_ Raritan Bay and Adjacent Waters, Second Session
* May 9, 1963
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
PROCEEDINGS
OPENING STATEMENT BY MR. MURRAY STEIN
MR. STEIN: The Conference is open.
This second session of the conference on pollution of the interstate
waters of Raritan Bay and adjacent waters involving the States of New York and
New Jersey is being held under the provisions of the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act. Under Section 8 of that Act pollution of interstate waters which endan-
gers the health or welfare of persons in a State other than that in which the
pollution occurs is subject to abatement.
The purpose of this conference is to bring together the States, the inter-
state agency, and the Federal representatives, to lay a basis for future action
and to appraise what has been done. It is also to give States and localities
and industries an opportunity to indicate what action they have taken under
State and local law, and to take whatever action may be appropriate under State
and local law.
I think the area to be covered will be particularized in the technical re-
ports which follow.
A first session of this conference was held on August 22, l?6l, in New
York City. In the light of the conference suggestions and recommendations, and
so forth, the conferees unanimously agreed at the first session to the following
conclusions and recommendations:
1. The Raritan Bay and adjacent waters which are the subject of the con-
ference are interstate waters within the meaning of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act.
2. There is pollution of these waters.
3. Scientific data, taking into account a wide range of factors and tech-
nological problems, including health, conservation, water policy and uses, and
industrial processes are urgently needed, and are the critical issue in further
control of pollution of these waters.
U. The Public Health Service, in collaboration with the New Jersey State
Department of Health, the New York State Department of Health, and the Inter-
state Sanitation Commission, will undertake an investigation and study of these
waters to accumulate these data.
5. Cognizance is taken of the programs and the administrative machinery
of the agencies of the State of New York and the State of New Jersey, and the
Interstate Sanitation Commission to control pollution of these waters.
6. There has been, and continues to be, progress under plan, in abatement
- 1 -
-------
I
of pollution of these waters.
7. The conferees welcome and appreciate the interest, support aad collabo-
ration of the,Public Health Service in the collective efforts to preserve the ^
Raritan Bay and particularly in solving the scientific problems. I
8. The conferees are willing to report to the Public Health Service at
appropriate intervals and the Public Health Service will report to the other I
conferees periodically. ll
9. The conference will oe reconvened on the call of the Chairman one year •
from the present date in order to evaluate the progress made by the study and J|
investigation and to receive the recommendations of the conferees as to further
action. _
Well, it is a little more than a year. This is the call of the second ™
session of the conference, pursuant to that recommendation made at the first
session. This is a conference between the Federal Government, the States of New fl
York and New Jersey, and the Interstate Sanitation Commission. I
Under the law, all of these parties can bring to the conference whomever •
they wish and invite them to speak at the conference. •
The conferees have been designated as follows: ^
Dr. Hollis S. Ingraham, Commissioner of Health, New York State Department »
of Healthj
Dr. Roscoe P. Kandle, Commissioner of Health, New Jersey State Department £
of Healthy
Dr. Natale Colosi, Chairman of the Interstate Sanitation Commission; •
Mr. Earl J. Anderson, Regional Program Director of the Public Health Ser-
vice, Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control] •
and my name is Murray Stein, and I am from headquarters in Washington.
In past conferences it has been found most helpful in developing conclu- £
sions and recommendations for a summary to follow a specified procedure, and I
am going to suggest we do it here. Under the law we are required to prepare a «
summary of the conference for distribution at its conclusion. All the conferees I
will be invited to make statements. At the conclusion of any statement, the *
conferees may ask questions or make comments. The conferees will also be asked
to call on their invitees, if any, and have the invitees make statements. I
In addition to the summary, we are having a verbatim transcript of the
conference made by Mr. Jack Rund^ a Certified Shorthand Reporter. This trans- •
cript, as well as the summary, will be available at the conclusion of the con- Q
ference, or as soon as it is printed after the conclusion of the conference,
through the State Health Departments or the Interstate Sanitation Commission. If —
any of you wish copies of the summary, we suggest you may wish to get in touch •
- 2 -
I
-------
I
I
with these people.
I would suggest that, other than the conferees, all who wish to make a
• statement come up to the table facing me here, where we have a microphone.
With that we will proceed with calling on the Federal conferee for the
_ conference. Mr. Anderson.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
STATEMENT OF EARL J. ANDERSON, REGIONAL PROGRAM •
DIRECTOR, REGION II OFFICE, NEW YORK, NEW YORK, •
DIVISION OF WATER SUPPLY AND POLLUTION CONTROL
MR. ANDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Stein.
Conferees, Ladies and Gentlemen: I am Earl J. Anderson, Regional Program •
Director, Water Supply and Pollution Control, New York Regional Office. ™
It is a pleasure to be here today as a conferee. I believe that this con- ft
ference will prove beneficial toward preserving a most valuable water resource U
in our country's largest metropolitan area.
At this time I would like to make several introductions. •
First I would like to introduce Dr. Harald M. Graning, Regional Health _
Director, Public Health Service, Region H. •
Mr. Sylvan C. Martin, Associate Director for Environmental Health Services.
Mr. Ralph Forges, Deputy Chief, Technical Advisory and Investigations Sec- |
tion, Technical Services Branch of the Division of Water Supply and Pollution
Control. g|
Mr. Francis W. Kittrell, Chief, Pollution Evaluation Unit, Technical Ser-
vices Branch, Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control.
Mr. Paul DeFalco, Jr., Director of the Raritan Bay Project. •
I
First, the United States Department of the Interior. •
MR. LANDERS: My name is Landers. I am from the Shellfish Laboratory at
Milford, Connecticut, here as an observer. •
MR. ANDERSON: First United States Army Engineers.
MR. WECHTER: Mr. Wechter, Governor's Island, New York. £
MR. ANDERSON: Thank you, Mr. Wechter. —
United States Army Engineer District, New York City. *
MR. WECHSLER: Stanley Wechsler. •
MR. ANDERSON: Thank you, sir.
I
We have also invited representatives from other interested Federal agencies
to attend this session. As I call off each agency, will its representative
please stand and introduce himself?
- k -
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The Third United States Coast Guard District.
MR. ALBURN: Leonard Alburn.
MR. ANDERSON: The United States Naval Ammunition Depot, Earle, New Jersey.
MR. BETTS: Betts.
MR. ANDERSON: We also have with us this morning Miss Kovessy from Congress-
man Murphy's office on Staten Island.
Miss Kovessy, would you stand, please?
MISS KOVESSY: I am here as an observer.
MR. ANDERSON: Are there any other Federal agencies represented here I may
have missed?
MR. SHERMAN: I represent the District Public Works, Third Naval District.
Ky name is Sherman, Sanitary Engineer.
MR. ANDERSON: Thank you. I think that is all.
MR. STEIN: Do you want to proceed with the presentation of the Public
Health Service Progress Report? I think one of the main purposes here, after a
year of work, is going to be the exchange of progress reports. Mr. Anderson?
MR. ANDERSON: Fine. Following the first session of the conference con-
cerning pollution of Raritan Bay, and at the direction of the conferees, the
Public Health Service established a laboratory and project office at the Raritan
Arsenal in Metuchen, New Jersey, in the spring of 1962. The laboratory facili-
ties were obtained in February 1962, and rehabilitated, equipped and staffed to
allow the undertaking of field studies in June 1962. A full-scale sampling
program has been conducted from June 1962 through the present.
The progress report that will be presented today covers a period from the
initiation of these studies through December 31, 1962. This report was mailed
to the conferees on March lit, with a notice of the calling of this second con-
ference .
I should like at this time to call on Mr. Harold F. Clark, Bacteriologist
in Charge of Water Quality Studies, Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control
of the Sanitary Engineering Center in Cincinnati, to present a summary of the
Public Health Service report.
Mr. Clark.
-------
I
STATEMENT OF HAROLD F. CLARK, BACTERIOLOGIST IN CHARGE, •
WATER QUALITY STUDIES,, DIVISION OF WATER SUPPLY AND ' •
POLLUTION CONTROL, ROBERT A. TAFT SANITARY ENGINEERING
CENTER, CINCINNATI, OHIO •
MR. CLARK: Mr. Chairman, I should like to present the summary of our re- a
port. It has been divided up into several topics, and I will cite each topic •
as I present it, and I will read the report, which is essentially the same re- *
port that was sent out to all the conferees. This report was sent out to all
the conferees over thirty days ago for their review. 0
STUDY PROGRAM AND PROCEDURES
The size of the Raritan Bay Study area (more than 90 square miles) required •
segmentation of the investigations to permit thorough coverage of the problems'
many aspects. The required basic data included; _
(l) characterization of the water quality and waste effluents; *
(2) the effect of tributary bodies of water: •
(3) effect of environmental factors;
(1|) other transient effects such as storm water runoff; and m
(5) wastes from small and large vessels.
The study was divided into a series of efforts, each designed to the sequential ™
solution of each of these problem areas.
During the first year, studies were directed toward discovering the effects ff
of water movements within the bay, and of entrant waters from the tributaries.
Bacteriological, chemical and biological characterization of the bay waters was M
also a first-year objective—as was the characterization of the major treatment •
plant effluents directly tributary to the bay.
The bacteriological and chemical investigations undertaken in the bay con- •
sisted of weekly samplings at a grid of stations in the bay and along the shore- •
line. Simultaneous investigations were made of treatment plant effluents.
Additional samplings were made at the treatment plants on a 2i;-hour basis to •
determine plant efficiencies. £
I would like to submit Government Exhibit No. 1, titled "Sampling Station
Locations."
MR. STEIN: All these exhibits will be accepted, without objection, and we
hope to reproduce them as part of the transcript. I do not know if any of them
are in color, but, as you know, we only reproduce in black and white.
MR. CLARK: All of these are in black and white, Mr. Chairman.
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
MR. STEIN: Fine.
Procedures
Bay Waters
- 7 -
I
I
(The document referred to, a map entitled "Sampling Station Locations" was
marked for identification Government's Exhibit 1.) «
MR. CLARK: The sampling program and locations are detailed in a separate
appendix; station locations are shown in Exhibit 1.
At this time, Mr. Chairman, I would like to introduce Appendices A, B and ™
C as part of the official record, without presentation. That appendix consists
of all the data upon which this summary was based, and since it involves some •
fifty to sixty pages of material, I do not think it is proper for presentation |
except in summation form.
MR. STEIN: All right. Thank you. |
MR. CLARK: Standard sampling procedures and laboratory methods were used
Hithin the recommendations of Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and •
Wastewater, llth Edition. Sampling procedures and laboratory procedures are 9
detailed in the appendix, which has been submitted.
I
Three procedures were used to describe the bacteriological quality of bay «
waters: the "Confirmed Test" for coliforms by the multiple tube method; tests •
for fecal coliform group by transfer from the positive primary fermentation
media to selective media at elevated temperature; determination of fecal strep-
tococcus by use of membrane filter procedures. Random colony picks of the or- •
ganisms were identified by appropriate biochemical tests in accordance with m
standard practices.
Chemical and physical tests used to characterize bay waters were dissolved J[
oxygen, conductivity, chloride content and temperature. These test results were
converted, by standard tables, to percent saturations of dissolved oxygen. ^
RARITAN BAY STUDY RESULTS *
I
Results of the bacteriological and chemical analyses are summarized for the
present reporting period (June-December, 1962) in appendix tables; they are fur- •
ther summarized in a series of figures and charts similar to those used in the •
first conference report. All bacteriological data are presented as geometric
means unless stated otherwise. Chemical data are summarized by arithmetic _
averages . I
I would like to submit Government Exhibit No. 2, titled "Confirmed Coliform
Densities," and Exhibit No. 3, titled "Fecal Coliform Densities," at this time. •
(The documents referred to, maps entitled "Confirmed Coliform Densities"
and "Fecal Coliform Densities" were marked for identification Government's •
Exhibits 2 and 3 respectively.)
I
-------
-------
-------
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MR. CLARK: Exhibits 2 and 3 present the confirmed and fecal coliform data
in a series of iso-intensity lines (lines of equal density of bacterial orga-
nisms). Exhibit 2~if you will point out Exhibit 2—shows that high densities
of organisms—over 1,000 per 100 milliliters—extend from the Narrows to a line
running from above the Great Kills beach to the tip of Sandy Hook. High levels
are also seen in the area of the junction of Arthur Kill and the Raritan River.
Exhibit 3 shows substantially the same overall pattern for fecal coliforms, but
in a slightly lower order of magnitude.
Would you please submit Government Exhibit No. k> titled "Bacteriological
Profiles—New York-New Jersey State Line"; Government Exhibit No. 5, titled
"Bacteriological Profiles—Raritan Bay Channel"; and Government Exhibit No. 6,
titled "Bacteriological Profiles—Eastern Extreme of Bay" for the record?
(The documents referred to entitled "Bacteriological Profiles—New York-
New Jersey State Line", "Bacteriological Profiles—Raritan Bay Channel", and
"Bacteriological Profiles—Eastern Extreme of Bay" were marked for identifica-
tion Government's Exhibits k, 5 and 6 respectively.)
MR. CLARK: Exhibits U, $ and 6 are graphical presentations of the follow-
ing cross-sections: the bay along the New York-New Jersey State line; the
Raritan Bay channel; the north-south profile of the eastern extreme of the bay
from Staten Island to Sandy Hook. These figures include the geometric means
of the confirmed and fecal coliforms, and of fecal streptococcus. All graphs
indicate relatively high levels of organisms at the two extremities of the bay,
and decreasing densities toward the center of the bay. The lowest observed
levels were in the area east of Seguine Point and west of Great Kills, Staten
Island. This area closely approximates the original open shellfish area.
Thirteen of the %k stations sampled lie within the area of the original
open shellfish beds. These stations do not meet the levels of water quality
recommended for shellfish waters by the United States Public Health Service.
Levels of fecal coliform and fecal streptococcus observed in this area would
also make questionable the harvesting of shellfish from these waters for direct
marketing.
The high levels of bacterial contamination (Exhibits k, 5 and 6) indicate
that the major effects on Raritan Bay are in the area of the Narrows and the
area of the junction of tne Raritan River and Arthur Kill. This parallels re-
sults shown in Exhibits 2 and 3. Exhibit 6 in particular indicates material
coming from the Narrows with the highest levels adjacent to the Narrows, demon-
strating the significance of this source of pollution on bay waters.
Please enter Oro/eminent Exhibit No. 7 at this time, titled "Dissolved
Oxygen."
(The document referred to entitled "Dissolved Oxygen - Average Percent
Saturation" was marked for identification Government's Exhibit 7.)
MR. CLARK: Dissolved oxygen studies were also made, concurrently with the
bacteriological studies discussed above. The results are shown as arithmetic
- 8 -
-------
RARITAN BAY PROJECT
BACTERIOLOGICAL PROFILES
NY — H.J STATE LINE
SAMPLE DEPTH »'
CONFIMIED COLiroRH
FECAL COLIFOMM
FECAL STREPTOCOCCI
DISTANCE In MILES
: s
A A*
s
HILC*
IT EXHIBIT
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RARITAN BAY PROJECT
BACTERIOLOGICAL PROFILES
RARITAN BAY CHANNEL
SAMPLE DEPTH 5'
CONFIRMED COUPM*
FCCAL COLIFORM
FICAL STREPTOCOCCI
DISTANCE III MILES
IT--) /
If
-------
RARITAN BAY
BACTERIOLOGICAL
PROJ EOT
PROFILES
10000
EASTERN EXTREME OF BAY
SAMPLE DEPTH 5'
CONratMCO COLIFOKM
FICAL COLIFORM
PCCAL STREPTOCOCCI
DISTANCE in MILES
GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT 6
-------
-------
averages of all samples collected during the period of studies (Exhibit 7).
two problems are closely interrelated.
Shoreline Waters
. 9 _
I
Would you submit Government Exhibit No. 8, titled "Dissolved Oxygen -
Average Percent Saturation"? »
(The document referred to entitled "Dissolved Oxygen - Average Percent
Saturation" was marked for identification Government's Exhibit 6.)
MR. CLARK: A profile of the dissolved oxygen pattern observed during the ™
survey of August 22, 1962 — the week during which the peak water temperature was
observed — is shown on Government Exhibit 8. This approximates the minimal con- •
dition of dissolved oxygen observed generally in the bay; however, local areas •
revealed more critical conditions during September and October. The dissolved
oxygen data are summarized in an appendix table. •
The considerable influence of flows from the Narrows, and from the areas
of the Junction of Arthur Kill and the Rarltan River, on the waters of Raritan
Bay proper is shown in Exhibits 7 and 8. These profiles indicate substantially •
the same patterns of influence shown by the bacteriological data. ™
Exhibit 8 shows an area in the eastern end of the bay where observed levels •
of dissolved oxygen were lesa thiu 50 percent. Levels less than 75> percent pre~ £
vailed throughout tue extern coid of the bay; a large area of the western end of
the bay also showed ci^turatioii levels of approximately 5>0 percent. The oxygen ^
levels observed approach, and in some cases are less than, the standards of the •
Interstate Sanitation Commission of not less than 50 percent saturation during
any week of the year. Low dissolved oxygen levels and high bacterial densities
parallel one another throughout a. major portion of the bay, indicating that these V
0
I
Analyses were also conducted on samples, taken on a weekly basis, from a
series of shore stations on both the Staten Island and New Jersey shorelines. .
Would you submit Government Exhibit No. 9, titled "Bacteriological Profiles - *
Stamen Island Shore" and Exhibit No. 10, titled "Bacteriological Profiles - New
Jersey Shore"? •
(The documents referred to entitled "Bacteriological Profiles - Staten
Island Shore" and "Bacteriological Profiles - New Jersey Shore" were marked for •
identification Government's Exhibits 9 and 10 respectively.) £
MR. CLARK: All three bacteriological indicators are summarized as graphical _
profiles in Exhibits 9 and 10. The Staten Island shoreline (Exhibit 9) exhibits •
the same general pattern of high levels of bacteriological organisms already ™
noted in the Narrows area; lower levels occur in the central area of the bay, in
the vicinity of Great Kills. The New Jersey shoreline (Exhibit 10) reveals •
essentially lower levels than are found on the Staten Island shoreline at the •
eastern extremity—but shows higher levels than the western extremity.
I
I
-------
-------
JOOOO
RARITAN BAY
BACTERIOLOGICAL
PROJECT
PROFILES
STATEN ISLAND SHORE
_!P-P_0_
CONFIRMED COLIFORM
FECAL COLIFORM
FECM STREPTOCOCCI
DISTANCE in MILES (ALONG SHORE)
i § i § * i
STATEN ISLAND
'EXHIBIT 9
-------
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
RARITAN BAY PROJECT
BACTERIOLOGICAL PROFILES
NEW JERSEY SHORE
CONFIIWCD COUFORM
FECAL COLIFORM
FICAL ITREPTOCOCCI
tit
DISTANCE In MILES (ALON* SHORE)
E i I ? £ ? f
GOVERNMENT EXHIBIT 10
-------
I
A beach with a count of 1,000 or less organisms per 100 ml is classified •
as "approved" according to the standard used by the New York City Department 9
ui' Health. Four of the sampling, stations at the pastern end of Staten Island
yielded counts exceeding this approved level. The bathing beach at Perth Amboy, M
Station 716, also exceeds this level. •
It must be recognized that, in addition to the observed high coliform counts,
high orders of fecal coliforms and fecal streptococcus were also encountered— •
in many cases of the same order of magnitude as the confirmed coliform counts. *
Ihe sanitary significance of the presence of organisms, known to be from feces
(•£ warm-blooded animals and humans, is that this represents actual pollution of •
•inese waters either by untreated or inadequately treated sewage. |
Current and Dispersion Studies_ «
¥ould you submit Government Exhibit No. 11, titled "Dispersion and Current
Studies"?
(The document referred to entitled "Dispersion and Current Studies" was »
marked for identification Government's Exhibit 11.)
MR. CLARK: A current and dispersion study was conducted in the western end; |
of Raritan Bay; dye was released at high water slack, on August 15, 1962, in the
aieji of the Ward Point secondary channel. Dispersion of the dye was monitored ^
visually and photofluorometrically over a period of four days. The dye moved as •
a fairly well defined mass; the outer limits were readily discernible during the
first day.
During the second and third days the dye became progressively more diffused; m
1t was distributed laterally, longitudinally and vertically throughout the
inner bay (Exhibit 11). tt
At the end of this three-day period the dye was still discernible throughoui
the area at the following locations: ^
(1) The Raritan River at Victory Bridge; ™
(2) Arthur Kill at Tufts Point; H
(3) Raritan Bay at Seguine Point, Staten Island;
(li) Raritan Bay off Keyport, New Jersey. g
After five tidal cycles, peaking was still discernible just east of the original _
dye release area. The net movement of the dye mass had been approximately one- •
half mile seaward over five tidal cycles. This indicates a net seaward movement ™
of the dye at a rate of approximately one-tenth mile per tidal cycle.
This dye study—together with previously developed information—indicates •
that pollutants released anywhere in the western end of the bay can diffuse
through this area of the bay and through the lower ends of Arthur Kill and the •
- 10 -
I
-------
b
-------
toons"?
(The document referred to entitled "Biological Sampling Stations" was
marked for identification Government's Exhibit 12.)
Entrant Waters
At the end of four days the dye was dispersed uniformly throughout the
- 11 -
I
Raritan River. Moreover, if this material is released on a continuous basis, •
it is retained in the area with a net seaward movement of only one-tenth mile 9
per tidal cycle.
Biological Studies •
Would you submit Government Exhibit 12, titled "Biological Sampling Sta-
1
MR. CLARK: Preliminary biological analysis of phytoplankton and benthos
on the bottom organisms were made at six stations. The organisms found at Sta- «
tion II were similar to those reported by other biological investigators to be •
associated with areas polluted by domestic sewage. Bacteriological and chemical
data confirm this area is influenced by entrant waters from the Narrows.
Phytoplankton found in the eastern end of the bay appeared to be in a V
normal, healthy physiological condition. Those found in the western end were
in very poor physiological condition, based on these observations. This indi- fl|
cates that conditions adverse to the growth of phytoplankton populations exist £
in the western part. The concentrations of phytoplankton found existent in the
bay are of much lower order than are found in other bays of similar size—al- ^
though nutrient levels in Raritan Bay appear to be large enough to sustain a •
greater population.
I
Will you submit Government Exhibit No. 13, titled "Dispersion and Current
Studies"? •
(The document referred to entitled "Current and Dispersion Studies" was
marked for identification Government's Exhibit 13.) ^
MR. CIARK: The effect of entrant waters on the quality of Raritan Bay "
waters has already been discussed. To explore this problem further, a current
and dispersion study was conducted to determine the dispersion of dye within 8
the waters of Arthur1 Kill in order to determine the path of-flow of these waters. 9
Dye was released in Arthur Kill just below Outerbridge Crossing at low-water
slack on October 17, 1962. The release was timed to enable observation of the •
outward (down-Kill) movement of the dye under the most adverse conditions of •
current movement. Under these conditions, the dye must first transit upstream
with the incoming current, then reverse at the turn of tide. and run downstream
out of the Kill. •
The dye was monitored visually and photofluorometrically during a period
of four days. The dye dispersed throughout the entire Kill area as far north •
as the Goethals Bridge. K
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
o
a
cr
<
03
z
o
O
CO
z
< _J
I- <
- o
* o
2 °
_J
o
CD
CM
H
EH
2 3
I i
£ *
j < £
ul m Q
5 Q £
5 i S
XT O O It O
»ee
-------
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
H
pq
O
C3
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
entire western end of Raritan Bay—in the same areas and in approximately the
same concentrations that were found after the dye release was made in the bay
on August 15>. For that you can refer back to Exhibit 11 for that data. The
peak of the dye concentration (after four days) was located in the deep water
anchorage southeast of Perth Amboy. The net seaward movement of the dye mass
was about nine miles in a period of eight tidal cycles—approximately one mile
per tidal cycle.
The entrant waters of Raritan River, Arthur Kill and the Narrows were
sampled bacteriologically and chemically during the course of the project stu-
dies .
Coliform concentrations of 20,000 per 100 milliliters were found in the
Narrows which were previously shown to be one of the major factors affecting
the quality of water in the eastern end of Raritan Bay. The bacterial concen-
trations result from the release of raw or inadequately treated sewage, dis-
charged into the waters of the upper harbor, which transit seaward through the
Narrows. Currents in the Narrows displace, westward, a portion of these waters
originating in the upper bay.
Low levels of dissolved oxygen were found in the Raritan River and in the
southern end of Arthur Kill. These result from the discharge and decay of
oxygen-consuming materials in the tributary waters.
Sewage Treatment Plants
The operations of the treatment plants tributary to the bay waters were
studied by spot sampling} also 2l;-hour sampling was done at each of the major
(over 0.25 million gallons per day) plants in the area.
Sampling sought to determine the removal efficiencies of the major treat-
ment plants in terms of bacteriological, suspended solid and biochemical oxy-
gen demand contents. Chlorine residuals of the effluents were also measured in
order to determine disinfection effectiveness.
The results of sampling show that the Atlantic Highlands and Keansburg
treatment plants failed to meet the Interstate Sanitation Commission's coliform
standard of 100/100 milliliters, during 2i|.-hour surveys, for more than 5>C per-
cent of the samples collected. The Keansburg and Atlantic Highlands plants
failed to meet this standard during spot sampling checks.
The Interstate Sanitation Commission's standard for Class A waters is 60
percent reduction of total suspended solids. The Keansburg, Atlantic Highland^
and Highlands treatment plants failed to meet this standard on each of the
campling occasions.
There are presently no standards existing for the discharge to Raritan Bay
of biochemical oxygen demanding materials. However, Perth Amboy and Middlesex
County Sewerage Authority plants contributed ?5> percent of -he tor.al biochemical
oxyge.1 demand loadings from the municipal treatment plants & .vveyed. These two
i-laiu-e Contribute to the depressed dissolved oxygen conditions existing in the
- 12 -
-------
tion.
SUMMARY
they were highest in the vicinity of the Narrows, the Raritan River and Arthur
Kill.
- 13 -
I
area of the junction of the Raritan River and Arthur JCill. Biochemical 0x7- ft
gen demand reductions at the Perth Amboy and Middlesex plants average 19 per- 9
cent and lli percent respectively. Considering the suspended solids reduction
accomplished by these two plants, the majority of the biochemical oxygen demand •
is believed to be due to the dissolved and colloidal materials not ordinarily ft
removed by primary treatment processes.
I
Untreated Discharges
A survey of the. untreated sewage discharges to Raritan Bay disclosed two
sources: toilet facilities' on loading piers of the Earle Ammunition Depot , £
and sewers serving the Tottenville area of Staten Island. ft
The pier facilities of the Earle Ammunition Depot of the U. S. Navy M
(Leonardo, New Jersey) serve work gangs -which may, at peak operations, amount ft
to approximately 300 men on an' eight-hour shift. This situation has been dis-
cussed with the Engineering Officer, Third Naval District. Chemical toilets ^
are being installed by October 1963, which will eliminate discharge of pollution •
to the bay. ft
The other source of untreated sewage is seven sewers serving the Totten- •
ville area of Staten Island. The drainage area of each of these outlets was ft
determined by field investigation. The estimated tributary population is about
3,000 persons. Sewage treatment facilities for this area are under considera- «
tion by the City of New York. ft
I would now like to proceed to present the summary of this brief presents-
I
I
High densities -of fecal bacteria were found in the waters of the bathing
beaches at the northern end of Staten Island and in the Perth Amboy area.
Low dissolved oxygen was observed in the waters of Raritan Bay at the ft
confluence of Arthur Kill and the Raritan River. These dissolved oxygen levels
were below the standards (50 percent saturation) set by the Interstate Sanita- •
tion Commission. ft
Current and dispersion studies, using dye, showed that waters of Arthur _
Kill have an effect on the waters of the western end of Raritan Bay. Further., ft
dye released in the wafers of the western end of Raritan Bay were found to be *
dispersed uniformly in this area after a period of five days.
Pollution-tolerant biological organisms were observed in the area of the ft
bay adjacent to the Narrows. Phytoplankton concentrations, found existing in
the bay, are lower than those normally found in waters of good quality. A
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Three treatment plants failed to meet the Interstate Sanitation Commission
standard for suspended solids and coliform removal.
Approximately ninety-five percent of the total biochemical oxygen demand
discharged directly to bay waters by treatment plants originates from effluents
of the Perth Amboy and Middlesex County Sewerage Authority treatment plants.
This load contributes to the low dissolved oxygen conditions observed in the
western end of Raritan Bay.
Raw sewage from three thousand persons in the Tottenville area of Staten
Island was found to be discharging to the bay.
This leads to the following conclusions:
CONCLUSIONS
These studies have demonstrated that pollution interfering with the legiti-
mate water uses of Raritan Bay comes from:
(1) direct discharges into the bay of inadequately treated sewage;
(2) pollution from the upper New York Harbor entering the bay through the
Narrows;
(3) pollution entering the bay from Arthur Kill; and
(ij.) pollution entering the bay from the Raritan River.
Current and dispersion studies indicated that pollution entering the
water anywhere above the Outerbridge in Arthur Kill, or in the bay west of
Seguine Point, could diffuse in an approximately uniform manner throughout the
western end of the bay, the Raritan River and Arthur Kill.
The high densities of coliform bacteria and low dissolved oxygen satura-
tions found in the bay waters indicated conditions of pollution were present
at the same levels that had existed during the 1961 outbreak of hepatitis whicn
was traced to consumption of raw shellfish taken from these bay waters. There-
fore, it can be assumed that these conditions still remain a health hazard at
bathing beaches; preclude the operation of a safe shellfish industry; and,
interfere with other recreational uses, including fishing and boating, of the
waters of Raritan Bay.
Therefore, all four principal sources of pollution (direct discharges to
the bay, the Narrows, the Raritan River and Arthur Kill) must be brought under
control before the waters of Raritan Bay can be restored to their full legiti-
mate uses for swimming, shellfish harvesting, boating, fishing, and other
miscellaneous recreational purposes.
More effective treatment of present sewage discharges into the bay must
be provided. All sources of pollution in the upper New York Harbor, Arthur
Kill and the Raritan River, which may have deleterious effects on the waters
of Raritan Bay or the use of these waters, should be identified and brought
- 11; -
-------
I
under control. •
That, Mr. Chairman, constitutes the statement.
MR. STEIN: Before we ask for comments and questions, I have one clarify- 9
ing question to ask you for the record.
In your second paragraph of the conclusions where you said, "Current and •
dispersion studies indicated that pollution entering the water anywhere...,"
is the next word "below" the Outerbridge, or did you change that? ^
MR. CLARK: "...anywhere below the Outerbridge..." '
MR. STEIN: Let the record so indicate. I think you said, "above" and ft
that might be important. •
MR. CLARK: I apologize for that. M
1
MR. STEIN: Are there any comments or questions? Dr. Kandle?
DR. KANDLE: No, sir. B
MR. STEIN: Dr. Ingraham?
DR. INGRAHAM: No comments at this time, I will read a statement later. jf
MR. STEIN: Do you have any comments or questions, Mr. Anderson? •
MR. ANDERSON: No. *
MR. STEIN: Is this going to complete the presentation of the project? M
MR. ANDERSON: Yes. This concludes our presentation of the project.
MR. STEIN: Just a moment, Mr. Clark. I do not know whether Mr. Clark ||
or the Project Director is the man to answer this. I know you did have a
charge from the conferees at the first conference to do this, and we have .
budgeted for that and gone ahead. I wonder if we can briefly indicate just ft
what is being done for the information of the people here.. I know we have a *
resident group. I wonder if we can outline how many people we have, the budget.
we have, the men on duty, and roughly the space and the equipment. I
MR. CLARK: May I refer that question to Mr. DeFalco?
MR. STEIN: Yes. |
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
B
I
I
I
STATEMENT OF PAUL DEFALCO, JR.,
DIRECTOR, RA.RITAN BAY PROJECT
MR. DEFALCO: In answer to your question, we have a laboratory and office
facility down at the Raritan Arsenal. There 'are budgeted positions for thirty
persons, more than half of these scientific personnel in laboratory and field
work, and all phases of the sciences, such as bacteriology, biology, chemistry,
and some of them involved in the hydrology of the area.
We are operating under a budget of $2^0,000 per year.
The studies of the bay are approximately half-way completed at the present
time. We operate a fairly intensive sampling program to develop the information
that Mr. Clark has reported.
Are there any other points?
MR. STEIN: Mr. DeFalco, as I understand it, when you started this study
together with the Technical Committee, you put in a time schedule on about what
the study would take, and I understand you are about at the midway point in
your study now?
MR. DEFALCO: That is correct,
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. DeFalco.
May we call on Dr. Kandle of New Jersey? Dr. Kandle.
- 16 -
-------
I
STATEMENT OF ROSCOE P. KANDLE, M.D., •
COMMISSIONER OF HEALTH, STATE OF |
NEW JERSEY
DR. KANDLE: This is a statement presented by the Commissioner of Health ™
for the State of New Jersey and for the several State agencies,, the municipali-
ties, the local and regional agencies and the industries concerned. The pttrpose I
of the conference according to the Introduction of the Progress Report for this *
Second Session of April, 1963, is "in order to evaluate investigational progress
and to consider recommendations for further action." A
Progress continues, as it has for more than five years, in the control and
abatement of pollution of the Raritan Bay; in spite of the spurting increase in _
population and in industrial growth of the area. For perspective it must be •
reemphasized that problems of pollution are directly related to numbers and •
density of the people in the area and to their industrial, recreational and
domestic activities. The Raritan Bay, as reemphasized by studies of the past •
year, is influenced importantly and directly by a large part of the massive New m
York City-New Jersey metropolis of some seven to eight million people, who con-
tribute to this influence. Progress must be achieved over and above this growth •
and demand for this heavily used body of water. Now, in specific reference to M
the purpose of this conference, that is, to evaluate investigational progress,
we believe that substantial progress has been made in the investigational as- ^
pects which are of such vital technical complexity. •
USES
The issue of the many uses of the Raritan Bay, of the different uses for |
different parts of the bay and the direct influence of uses on standards and
methods of control continues to require major attention, study and appraisal m*
against continuing industrial and residential economy. Decisions regarding fl
uses are responsibilities of State and local authorities. The maintenance of
a part of Sandy Hook Bay for shellfishing is encouraging. The waters of the ^
New Jersey bathing beaches on the southern border of the bay continue to be •
safe, well within quality standards, and have not been otherwise, except for •
temporary, local conditions.
TECHNICAL STUDIES AND TOOLS |
Major advances have been made in the knowledge of these waters, the pollu- ^
tion problems and in the development of practical standards and technical tools •
of abatement. These have come about through sustained studies of the New Jersey
State Department of Health, of the local agencies concerned, by the cooperative
major studies with the Interstate Sanitation Commission, all supplemented by A
the work during the past year of the Public Health Service. There have been V
good cooperation and joint endeavors between the staff of the Health Department
and Interstate Sanitation Commission staffs and the Public Health Service •
surveyors. The studies of the State Health Department and Interstate Commission j|
have included detailed surveys with respect to shellfishing, intensive studies
of the Arthur Kill including the Vicksburg Model Studies, detailed chemical and _
- 17 -
I
-------
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
engineering studies by the Middlesex Sewerage Authority, sanitary surveys and
reviews of engineering plans of local areas, etc.
Major technical breakthroughs were achieved in the 1962-63 fall and winter
which have enabled the State, the industries and the local agencies to proceed
more rapidly on the basis of technically sound, practical long-range abatement.
plans and work. The technical report of the Interstate Sanitation Commission
.Issued in 1962 in relation to the Arthur Kill provides a new base ILn*-, £01
sound evaluation cf the pollution load on the Arthur Kill and for actions i<-'.>j_,
£ary for further improvement and abatement of these waters. The repcn ±i- j«..?- ,
on studies which began in 1957-
ABATEMENT
A. ARTHUR KILL
Using the Interstate Sanitation Commission report as a guide forrr,£.I
orders were issued in January 1963 against eight sewerage authorities, niui,ic:i.
palities and industries on the Arthur Kill. Substantial progress in agreement
on details of abatement and active construction programs is being made. Tne
expenditures will involve many tens of millions of dollars and may exceed $1 •>,:
million. Progress will proceed during several years.
Plants discharging sanitary sewage into the Lower Arthur Kil .>. no*'
chlorinate their post-treatment effluent throughout the year.
The current program is designed not only to accomplish the obje^ j»-r-
of the Interstate Sanitation Commission report, but also to provide for nc •••
tinued vigilance so as to meet problems which may develop in the Arthur Kl L'~
Additional orders may be necessary as studies proceed.
B. RARITAN RIVER
The New Jersey State Health Department issued a new statement of policy
on November 13., 1962, in relation to the control of pollution of the Lower
Raritan River. It is presented as Appendix A.
Based on this action, the Department has established a working agree-
ment with the Middlesex County Sewerage Authority in relation to existing con-
tinuing sources of industrial pollution in the Lower Raritan River. This agree-
ment provides that the Authority will, to the limits of its resources, endeavor
to resolve any remaining pollution problems which can be attributed to partici-
pants in the Middlesex County Sewerage Authority project. These activities by
the Authority are supported by the Department and, in any situation where the
Authority finds itself unable to cope with a problem, resort is made to the State
Department of Health. The State Department of Health acts directly in relation
to any alleged polluters of the Lower Raritan River who are not participants in
the Middlesex County Sewerage Authority project. The Department is supported
in these activities by the Middlesex County Sewerage Authority.
Under this working agreement the Middlesex County Sewerage Authority
- 18 -
-------
I
already has entered into an active program dealing with its participants who
are alleged, to be continuing to add to the industrial pollution load of the
Lower Raritan River. Specific negotiations have been carried out with four _
industries. I
Also pursuant to this working agreement, the State Department of Health
has made investigations of sources of alleged substantial pollution and three B
orders have been issued. Even more importantly, nine other problems have been m
and are being resolved without orders. These orders are being followed up in
the usual manner and will be enforced to effect their intended purposes. |A
The Middlesex County Sewerage Authority has continued to conduct ex-
tensive studies of its own. They have participated in cooperative projects _
with the State Health Department including the abatement procedures outlined. •
Plans for proposed expansion are expected to be completed by November 1963. A ™
detailed statement of the operation of this Authority is presented as Appendix B.
C. RARITAN BAY |
The Department, in cooperation with the Interstate Sanitation Commis- H
sion, is continuing its routine program of observations of the operations of •
sewage treatment plants discharging more or less directly into the waters of
the Raritan Bay. As usual, the Department will continue to take appropriate
actions whenever findings of the Department and the Commission, separately or •
jointly, indicate that actions are necessary or desirable. Examples of current »
local activities resulting from this continuing control program are as follows:
1. Borough of Keyport; New sewage treatment facilities have been in |
operation since October of 1962.
2. B. Zura Chemical Company (Keyport); This previous source of pollu- •
tion has been eliminated by the closure of the industry.
3. Madison Township Sewerage Authority; It is expected that the con- •
struction""of" the new sewage treatment plant serving the Laurence Harbor- •
Cliffwood Beach area will be completed approximately May 1!?, 1963.
li. Borough of Matawan; Construction of new sewage treatment facili- j}
ties has been completed and they were placed in operation April 2£, 1963.
5. Borough of Union Beach; This presently unsewered Borough has sub- •
mitted preliminary plans for a collection system and treatment facility. *
These preliminary plans have been approved by the Department and an Order
of Necessity has been issued permitting the Borough to exceed its bonded V
indebtedness. The design includes provision for more complete, secondary •
treatment.
6. International Fragrance & Flavors (Union Beach): This industry has g
engaged industrial waste treatment consultants to develop a program to
abate its present pollution problems. A feasibility report has already _
been completed covering the results of certain laboratory and pilot plant •
experiments. ™
I
-------
I
I
I
E
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
7- Borough of Keansburg: Plans for additions and alterations to the
existing sewage treatment plant were approved by the State Department of
Health. Advertising for bids covering the necessary construction is con-
templated within the next couple of months. This is interim construction
•until a long-range, intermunlrtlpal plan is further developed.
8, Borough of_Highlands; Chlorination has been intensified under order.
The new municipal budget contains appropriations for an automatic chlorine
residual analyzer and recorder together with an alarm system. The Borough
also has under active consideration the repair of the existing outfall
line which, when completed, will result in the discharge of treated effluent
into the Atlantic Ocean.
9. Borough of Atlantic Highlands; The Borough has under order engaged
a consulting engineering firm. A preliminary study has been completed
proposing to add to the capacity of the existing sewage treatment facility
by 5>0 percent. The Borough presently has an application to the Housing
and Home Finance Agency for planning, monies. In addition, the Borough is
considering installation of a chlorine residual analyzer and recorder to-
gether with an alarm system.
10. U.__S._Naval Ammunition Depot, Earl_e (Pier at Leonardo); Tou have
heard a more recent report on the United Stated Ammunition Depot at Earle,
but I want to record that our negotiations, together with the help of the
Public Health Service, have brought us the report that the funds have been
budgeted for the fiscal year 196k for modification of the sewage disposal
gvTs-tem and the elimination of the discharge of raw domestic sewage into
ib:- Bay.
It is respectfully suggested that the conference agree:
1. That there is experienced, effective, State and interstate machinery
to deal with prevention and abatement of pollution in the Raritan Bay.
2. That there continues to be good, sustained, further progress under
plan in the abatement and control of pollution of the Raritan Bay by the
State and Interstate agencies.
3. Knowledge about the bay and its problems have been enhanced by the
studies of the State agencies, the Interstate Sanitation Commission, local
[agencies and by the studies of the Public Health Service. There is need
still for additional research on such problems as the influence of algae,
practical methods of abatement, refinements of enforcement standards. /
Collaborative efforts of the Public Health Service and the conferees could
be effective in this type research.
- 20 -
-------
I
(Appendix A attached to the statement of Dr. Kandle is as followsi •
It is the policy of the New Jersey State Department of Health to:
1. Cooperate fully with the Middlesex County Sewerage Authority in •
controlling the pollution of the waters of the lower Raritan River and its
tributaries within the District of the Authority. •
2. Exercise the police powers vested in the Department by the laws
of this State (particularly R. S. 58:12-1 et seq.) so as to restore and «
preserve the quality of said waters for as wide a spectrum of uses as •
reasonably possible.
3. Execute a program which will have as its objective the maintenance I
of water quality in the lower Raritan River such that the River will con- •
tribute dissolved oxygen to "the Raritan Bay and such that fish life will
be sustained as an indicator of River water quality. •
U. Prohibit the discharge into said waters of effluents causing or
threatening to cause heavy oxygen demands, extreme pH values, excessive _
loads of organic or inorganic materials or other unlawful pollutions! M
effects upon the River. ™
5. Effect an end to the current uneven and inequitable assumption, •
among the municipalities and industries of the valley, of responsibility •
for pollution control in order that the burden for the protection of the
public health and the conservation of the River may be distributed fairly.) ••
- 21 -
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
(Appendix B attached to the statement of Dr. Kandle Is as follows:
APPENDIX B
Statement of
MIDDLESEX COUNTY SEWERAGE AUTHORITY
for
THE SECOND SESSION
THE CONFERENCE ON POLLUTION OF' RARITAN BAY AND
ADJACENT INTERSTATE WATERS
May 3, 1963
-x- -* -s;-
The Middlesex County Sewerage Authority has provided and operated treat-
ment facilities tc produce an effluent 'which has met, now meets, and will con-
tinue to meet the requirements of its permit from the New Jersey State Depart-
ment of Public Health.
The Authority will provide additional facilities, if necessary, to produce
an effluent which will meet all the requirements of its.permit. To that end,
the Authority has authorized engineering and is planning to construct as soon
as possible two clariflocculators which will increase its treatment plant
cayacit^ to ?8 m.g.d. Because of unexpected growth, it is providing these
additional facilities approximately 11 years ahead of schedule, without urging
action by any pollution control agency, in accordance with its policy to pro-
vide treatment which will meet all of its obligations for pollution control.
The Authority maintains careful operation control and continuous labora-
tory surveillance of its effluent. The resulting data, which are filed at the
Authority and available to any authorized person, are summarized below:
1. Effluent chlorine residuals - 2£,280 samples per year.
In 1962, these averaged 0.90 mg/1. In 1962, chlorine residual control
was improved with the result that chlorine residuals of 0.0 value were reduced
from 5 percent of residuals to approximately 1/2 percent. Theoretically, 20
percent of the samples could have no residuals and still meet permit require-
ments for coliforms in the plant effluent.
2. Effluent coliform concentrations - 2,190 samples per year.
In 1962, 90 percent of the samples contained less than 22 coliforms
per 100 ml. This is much better than the N. J. permit requirement. Effluents
with coliform concentrations of 22 per 100 ml is bacteriologically suitable
for swimming and edible shellfish harvesting.
- 22 -
-------
I
3-. Influent and effluent suspended solids - 2,555 samples per year. I
In 1962, the percent reduction of suspended solids averaged 68 percent,
;. percent better than permit requirements. •
Some of the data which are part of the average were better and some worse.
The large number of samples analyzed by the Authority gives a true picture for M
the year. The smaller number of samples which were collected by the U. S. I
Public Health Service for the Progress Report distort the true picture. For
example, the Progress Report, in reporting suspended solids gives the Authority
•;rfcdit for higher than actual removals and in reporting coliforms in the plant I
effluent does not give the Authority proper credit for removals. •
The Raritan Bay has been legitimately used for the ultimate purification •
of pollution reaching it, boating, swimming, fishing, wildlife, and shellfish |
iiarvesting in the past.
Shellfish harvesting is now prohibited in most of the bay because of I
bacteriological pollution as evidenced by coliform concentrations. These coli-
form concentrations in the western end of the bay are under the dominant
influence of the Raritan River. I
The legitimate use of the bay for the dilution and disposal of pollution
reaching it and for recreation by boating, swimming, wildlife and fishing has •
Continued and probably will in the future even though balancing such uses will jj
ultimately require a higher 'degree of treatment for the increased volumes of
sewage and industrial wastes which will then be discharged to Raritan Bay and _
other metropolitan New York-New Jersey waters. More treatment will probably I
be required to maintain the balance between the legitimate bay uses" of puri-
fication of pollution and recreation.
The Raritan Bay receives the treated chlorinated effluent from the Authority I
sewage treatment plant and legitimately uses some of its purification capacity
to complete the purification of the residual pollution left in the effluent, m
It also received and purifies pollution from the Raritan River, the Arthur Kill, |
the Narrows and from many direct discharges from treatment plant effluents,
such as from Perth Amboy and South Amboy and from a few untreated sanitary _
sewer systems, such as the one at Tottenville on.Staten Island. •
At present stream pollution control programs are being pushed in the Rari-
tan River Valley, along the Arthur Kill and by the City of New York to clean •
up waters outside Raritan Bay. These programs when completed will reduce the |
pollution load on the bay and will result in a lower level of pollution and a
higher level of oxygen, the only pollution parameter which has been near the •
minimum level permitted for boating, swimming, wildlife and fishing. •
Some idea of the effect of the Arthur Kill on Raritan Bay can be seen by
comparing the 38 percent dissolved oxygen saturation of waters discharging to •
the Raritan Bay during ebb tides and the 60 percent saturation of waters being •
received into the Arthur Kill from Raritan Bay during flooding tides. The
effect of low oxygen concentration discharged into the Raritan Bay from the •
- 23 -
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Raritan River Is illustrated by the fact that a relatively small Increase in
oxygen saturation of two parts per million would supply approximately 10,000
more pounds of oxygen to the bay each day.
The dissolved oxygen picture in the bay has been distorted by the effect
of algae and other chlorophyll-bearing phytopl'ankton. Tnfhen growing, they
increase the oxygen content of the waters, sometimes to super-saturation but
when they die and begin to decay exert large oxygen demands. The pattern of
oxygen concentrations in the bay indicates that algae oxygen demand may have
been a major contributor to the lower levels which were reached. The Progress
Report shows marked die-off of phytoplankton in the west end of the bay in
September and October 1962, the time of year when minimum dissolved oxygen con-
centrations have occurred. Although primary sewage plant effluents contain
nutrients which will support algae growths, nutrients also come from natural
river flow and are also present in large amounts in highly purified treatment
plant effluents, often in a form such as nitrates which are more easily used
by algae. The role of algae in the Raritan Bay oxygen levels, its source of
nutrients and the effect of higher degrees of treatment on the algae must be
determined before serious consideration can be given in the future to more
sewage treatment to maintain dissolved oxygen levels.
The Authority and several municipalities discharging directly into the
Raritan Bay have completed their pollution control programs. Other municipali-
ties and industries on the Raritan River, the Arthur Kill and the Metropolitan
New York-New Jersey area are now embarked on pollution control programs which
are required to reduce pollution in other waters and which will have the double
beneficial effect on Raritan Bay of reducing the pollution and increasing the
oxygen discharged into it. These programs should and will improve the oxygen
saturation in the bay. ¥ith the incidental effects from these other programs,
the oxygen saturation in Raritan Bay should be satisfactory for several years
in the future with less need for the Authority or other municipalities dis-
charging treated effluents directly to the bay to provide a higher degree of
treatment.
The Authority which completed its present pollution control program in
1°!?8 should not have to start on a new pollution control program until comple-
tion of the existing pollution control programs in the waters discharging
into Raritan Bay.)
-------
I
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Dr. Kandle. •
Are there any questions or comments?
I
DR. INGRAHAM: Not at this time.
MR. STEIN: If not^ we will call on Dr. Ingraham of New York.
•
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
STATEMENT OF HOLLIS S. INGRAHAM, M. D.
COMMISSIONER OF HEALTH, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
DR. INGRAHAM: Mr. Stein and members of the conference: The State Health
Department has invited as participants, Mr. Wilm, who is the Commissioner of
Conservation and Chairman of the State Water Resources Commission. He is re-r
presented here by Mr. Montanari. Mr. Montanari.
We have also invited Mayor Wagner and certain of his Commissioners as par-
ticipants. Mayor Wagner, T believe, is represented by Mr. Pinel, who will read
a statement later. Mr. Pinel.
Also there have been invited the Commissioner of Health, Dr. George James,
the Commissioner of Public Works, Mr. Peter Reidy, who, I believe, is represen-
ted by Mr. William O'Leary.
MR. O'LEARY: Deputy Commissioner Wild.
DR. INGRAHAM: And Deputy Commissioner Wild.
Also we have invited the Commissioner of the Department of Parks, Mr. New-
bold Morris, who is represented by Mr. Warren.
Also, representing my Department, is Mr. Dappert, who is Chief of the Bu-
reau of Water Resources.
Mr. Stein, I have here a statement on behalf of the State Health Depart-
ment, which I shall read for the record.
I am Hollis S. Ingraham, Commissioner of Health, New York State Department
of Health. The statement is as follows:
The Progress Report for the Conference on Pollution of Raritan Bay and Ad-
jacent Interstate Waters, Second Session, prepared by the U. S. Public Health
Service, under "INTRODUCTION" refers to the conference held on August 22, 1961,
states certain conclusions, and announces the purpose of this second session of
the conference by stating:
"The conferees also agreed to reconvene in approximately one year
on the call of the Chairman, in order to evaluate investigational pro-
gress and to consider recommendations of further action."
At the time of the previous conference held on August 22, 1961, I presen-
ted a statement on behalf of the then State Commissioner of Health, Dr. Herman
E. Hilleboe. That statement was fairly detailed, outlined the interest, acti-
vities, and progress of the various New York State and New York City agencies
in relation to the water pollution problems of the New York Metropolitan Area,
and discussed some of the more troublesome problems or factors militating
against any 100-percent abatement of pollution from these waters. Dr. Hille-
boe 's statement readily admitted that it was possible to effect improvements,
but expressed some doubt as to whether it would be possible to effect
- 26 -
-------
shellfishing.
The statement I present to you today will:
I
sufficient improvements to permit reopening of certain areas of Raritan Bay to •
shp.T 1 f ifiMnf?. B
(l) bring you up to date concerning certain matters which were dis-
cussed in Dr. Hilleboe's original statement; M
(2) make some comments concerning the Progress Report which is
under consideration today; and,
(3) give you my thoughts as to the direction in which all of the ™
agencies which are concerned with the problem and involved in this con-
ference should proceed in the immediate future. •
PROPOSED CLASSIFICATION OF WATERS WITHIN NEW YORK CITY
BY THE NEW YORK STATE WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION •
Dr. Hilleboe's original statement discussed this matter to some extent.
At this time, it is pertinent to point out that the former State Water Pollu-
tion Control Board was abolished, effective January 1, 1962. The functions of •
the former Board are now divided between the State Commissioner of Health and •
the Water Resources Commission, but coordinated, so far as policy matters are
concerned, by the latter agency, of which the State Commissioner of Health is •
a member. Essentially, the Water Resources Commission is now responsible for |
classifying and reclassifying waters of the State and for assignment of quality
standards thereto; and the State Commissioner of Health is responsible for en- •
forcement of the law and for bringing pollutional discharges into compliance •
with the established standards. .
Actually, the State Department of Health carries on all activities related I
to the classification phase of the State water pollution control'program in m
practically the same fashion as in the past; it performs for the Water Re-
sources Commission all of the work necessarily incidental and leading up to the •
adoption of "official classifications" by the Water Resources Commission, such |
as surveys, preparation and publication of reports, conduct of classification
hearings in behalf of the Commission, and preparation of recommended official .
classifications for consideration of the Commission. •
After the waters are officially classified by the Water Resources Commis-
sion, the next step is the development of a comprehensive water pollution fl
abatement plan for the classified waters, which requires the approval of the I
Water Resources Commission. It should be pointed out that the Interstate Sani-
tation Commission has jurisdiction over the control of pollution in these ti- m
dal waters of the New York Metropolitan Area and that the-State Commissioner |
of Health serves as a member of this Commission.
Any classification of and assignment of standards for waters in the met- •
ropolitan area by the Water Resources Commission must be consistent with those ™
established under the Interstate Sanitation Compact; they may be higher, but
not lower, than Interstate Sanitation Commission standards. Furthermore, the Ij
- 2? -
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
State Commissioner of Health, once the waters are classified, will have au-
thority to require abatement of pollution entering tributary fresh-water
streams of the area, whereas the Interstate Sanitation Commission does not
have such authority. Thus, in the abatement phase of the program, once the
waters are classified by the Water Resources Commission, the efforts of the
State Commissioner of Health will complement those of the Interstate Sanita-
tion Commission in working for the abatement of pollution in the New York Met-
ropolitan Area waters. In this respect, there will be close coordination be-
tween the State Commissioner of Health and the Interstate Sanitation Commis-
sion.
Preclassification studies have been made by the State Department of Health
and reports published covering:
(1) The Arthur Kill and Kill Van Kull;
(2) West Lower Bay and Raritan Bay;
(3) Upper Bay and East Lower Bay;
(10 Harlem River;
(5) Lower East River;
(6) Atlantic Ocean opposite New York City; and
(7) The Hudson River below the Westchester-Rockland County lines.
All of these reports include the entire drainage area (New York portion) trib-
utary to the specifically designated waters.
Studies are now in progress covering the remaining water areas within New
York City and Westchester County. (Jamaica Bay and Upper East River-Long
Island Sound Drainage Basins)
Arrangements are now being made for public classification hearings to be
held in New York City during the months of June and July in relation to classi-
fication of waters covered by the above seven published reports. In connection
with these hearings, two special classes, I and II, with appropriate standards'
specifications are being proposed for application to certain of these water
areas. Actual classifications of these waters, of course, will be finally de-
termined by the Water Resources Commission.
NEW YORK HARBOR MODEL STUDIES
Undoubtedly, the New York City Department of Health and the Interstate
Sanitation Commission will comment upon these studies which were carried on by
contract with the Corps of Engineers and financed jointly by the Interstate
Sanitation Commission, the City of New York, and the New Jersey and New York
State 'Departments of Health. Much work has already been done using this model
and much more is in progress. After the results of these studies have been
- 28 -
-------
COMMENTS CONCERNING PROGRESS REPORTS
OF IT. S. PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
I
evaluated, it is expected much additional information will he available, •
I
¥e have reviewed this report in the light of the announced purpose of
this second session of the conference: "to evaluate investigational progress •
and to consider recommendations of further action" •
1. On Page 2, the Progress Report outlines the studies carried on _
by the U. S. Public Health Service following the conference held on August 22, •
1961. •
To a considerable degree, studies along the lines listed have been •
carried on by several official interstate, State and city agencies. As a re- |
suit, a considerable body of knowledge concerning the problems of the pollution
of Raritan Bay and adjacent interstate waters has been amassed over a period of A
years. I
The studies as made by the U. S. Public Health Service during the
past year have added somewhat to this body of knowledge, but in the main have •
served to confirm much of what has already been known concerning these prob- •
lems. It is suggested that any further studies along the same lines as those
listed on page 2 of the Progress Report are not essential, with the exception, •
perhaps, of further biological investigations. These might furnish a back- |
ground of information that could serve as a means for reflecting the improve-
ments in water quality as progress is made in the treatment of sewage and M
wastes in future years. •
It is suggested that cooperative studies by the various local agen-
cies and the U. S. Public Health Service of the pollution from boat traffic I
aiight be productive of valuable information bearing on the question as to when •
it may be possible to reopen such areas to shellfishing.
It is suggested also that similar cooperative studies related to the |j
pollution contributed by the numerous combined storm-sewer-relief overflows
might be productive of much valuable information bearing on the problem of what, M
if anything, can be done to reduce or alleviate the pollution from these •
sources.
2. Page 3 of the Progress Report gives a summary of the findings re- I
suiting from the U. S. Public Health Service studies. ¥e concur in general with •
this summary, subject only to any comments that may be made by other agencies
which have been invited to appear as participants in this conference. •
3. Page k gives the conclusions reached by the U. S, Public Health
Service as a result of its studies. Subject to such comments as may be made by _
other agencies which are appearing as participants in this conference, we raise •
no questions at this time.
Two significant parts of the total problem of the pollution of Raritan B
- 29 -
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Bay constitute the pollution which is contributed by boat traffic ar-d numerous
storm-water-relief overflows from combined sewer systems.
In time, the problem of pollution from boats mo,y be solved to seme
degree. However, the problem of pollution from combined sewer-storm-water-
relief-overflows seems to be incapable of any real solution unless completely
new sanitary sewer systems and treatment plants are built to replace the com-
bined sewer systems as the vehicle for conveyance of all sanitary sewage, and
all premises are reconnected to the separate sanitary sewer systems. In any
such scheme the costs would seem to be both astronomical and prohibitive.
Of course, where space is available, it is possible to devise sys-
tems of storm-water-relief-overflow basins which would provide for a reason-
able solution of this problem in specific situations,
SUGGESTED COURSE OF FUTURE ACTION
This conference, the first session of which was held on August 22, 1961,
was called on the basis of the authority vested in the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare by one sentence contained in Section 8(c)(l) of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, which reads:
"The Secretary shall also call such a conference whenever, on the
basis of reports, surveys, .or studies, he has reason to believe that
any pollution referred to in Subsection (a) and endangering the health
or welfare of persons in a State other than that in which the dis-
charge or discharges originate is occurring."
It is to be noted that the conference was called solely upon the initia-
tive of the Surgeon General and not as a result of any request of any State or
vater pollution control agency.
Section 8(b) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act seems to have been
overlooked to some extent. This reads:
"Consistent with the policy declaration of this Act, State and
interstate action to abate pollution of interstate or navigable waters
shall be encouraged and shall not, except as otherwise provided by or
pursuant to court order under Subsection (g), be displaced by Federal
enforcement action."
Section 8(c)(3) and Section 8(d) of the Act indicate the direction that
this proceeding should take at this point. These read:
"(3) Following this conference, the Secretary shall prepare and
forward to all the water pollution control agencies attending the
conference a summary of conference discussions including (A) occur-
rence of pollution of interstate and navigable waters subject to
abatement under this Act; (B) adequacy of measures taken toward abate-
ment of the pollution; and (C) nature of delays, if any, being en-
countered in abating the pollution, (d) If the Secretary believes,
- 30 -
-------
I
"upon the conclusion of the conference or thereafter, the effec- •
tive progress toward abatement of such pollution is not being made
and that the health and welfare of any persons is being endan-
gered, he shall recommend to the appropriate State water pollution •
control agency that it take necessary remedial action..." •
It seems, therefore, that the time has arrived when the Secretary should
conclude this conference. And in consideration of the extensive water pollu-
tion abatement programs which are being carried on by the various agencies
participating in this conference, he would have a very justifiable reason for «
concluding it and leave to the responsible and competent State and local agen- •
cies and the Interstate Sanitation Commission the responsibility of carrying ™
these programs forward. Any other course of action would be distasteful to
these various agencies which have demonstrated that they are competent to B
carry out their presently operative and planned programs.
In summary, my suggestions for the future course of action are along the
following lines:
1. Bring this conference to a conclusion. _
2 . Allow the existing agencies to carry out their programs of pollu- ™
tion abatement without interference or compulsion upon the part of the
Federal Government, but rather within the intended framework of coopera- •
tion and support. •
3. With reference to investigational progress which is under con- a
sideration at this meeting, I believe — with the exceptions of some fur- •
ther investigations relating to biology, the pollution from boat traffic,
and pollution from combined sewer-storm-water-relief overflows — no fur- _
ther extensive investigations are needed. These studies should be carried •
out by close collaboration of the various agencies and the U. S. Public •
Health Service.
U. The various State and local agencies and Interstate Sanitation
Commission will consult periodically with the U. S. Public Health Service
to keep it advised as to the progress which is being made with respect to
abatement of pollution from Raritan Bay and_ adjacent interstate waters.
«
•
This is the conclusion of my statement. I should like to call upon the
New York City Administration to present a statement on their behalf. •
MR. STEIN: Would you like to entertain questions or comments now, or wait?
DR. INGRAHAM: I would prefer to wait until all of the statements are read.
MR. STEIN: Surely.
DR. INGRAHAM: Mr. Pinel.
I
I
- 31 -
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
STATEMENT OF STANLEY PINEL
REPRESENTING MAXWELL LEHMAN, FIRST DEPUTY CITY ADMINISTRATOR
CITY OF NEW YORK
MR. PLNEL: My name is Stanley Pinel. I am representing Mr. Maxwell
Lehman, who is the First Deputy City Administrator of the City of New York.
This statement has been prepared in conjunction with the several Depart-
ments of New York City involved in this problem. This is a statement of the
City of New York at the second session of the conference on pollution of Rari-
tan Bay and adjacent waters, May 9, 1963.
The city recognizes its obligation in relation to the raw sewage dis-
charges at Tottenville and 'is prepared to proceed with the design of a treat-
ment plant and collecting sewers .to handle this small pollution load.
The City of New York is proceeding with its commitments to build all
needed facilities to treat the raw sewage entering the boundary waters. Fi-
nancial commitments in the year 1962 exceeded $80,000,000. The Newtown Creek
Project is scheduled for operation in 1966 and preliminary plans for North
River are complete. Preliminary plans for the Red Hook Project are well
along and we will start preliminary design of the Port Richmond facilities as
soon as negotiations with the State of New York are completed under the State
Aid Program.
The Department of Health has investigated the discharges from the Mt. Lo-
retto Home, the Marist Novitiate, Richmond Memorial Hospital, S. S. White
Dental Company, and St. Joseph's Home on Staten Island. The discharges of in-
adequately treated sewage have been eliminated or will be eliminated before
the end of the year.
Orders were recently issued to four industrial plants and one hospital
which have effluent lines discharging into Arthur Kill.
The Department of Health is continuing with its program of surveying the
shorelines of all New York City waters to detect discharges of sewage. When
violations of Article lli5> of the Health Code are found, abatement orders are
issued and are followed up until the condition is corrected.
Under sponsorship of the Health Research Council of New York City, ex-
tensive studies have been made on the Model of New York Harbor located at the
U. S. Army Engineers Waterways Experiment Station at Vicksburg, Mississippi.
Experiments have been conducted to show the effect of extending jetties from
shoreline at Fort Wadsworth to Hoffman and Swinburne Islands in protecting
Staten Island beaches and on extension of a jetty from Sea Gate. These jetty
locations are shown on the attached map.
There are two maps attached to this statement.
A comprehensive analysis has been made on the movement of water from storm
water overflow and treatment plant sources into the harbor — data are being
- 32 -
-------
I
reduced and analyzed. When the analytical report is available, there should •
be much information contributing to assessment of the harbor pollution prob- V
lem and pointing the way to additional work that may be done by the City of
New York and others to improve harbor water quality and protect beaches and
recreational areas of the city.
I
The New York City Department of Parks has plans for placing almost the _
entire waterfront along the easterly shore of Staten Island in public owner- •
ship for utilization as parks and arterial highways. This is the second map. ™
Locations of the various projects are shown on the second map attached to
this statement. •
Present status of progress on the plan is as follows:
1. Great Kills Park Addition — Title to the property was vested on •
12/27/62. *
2. Lemon Creek Park — Map approved and acquisition authorized witn. •
title to vest on date of final decree. •
3. Wolfe's Pont Park Addition and Conference House Park Addition — •
Maps and acquisition before Board of Estimate for approval. |
U. Shore Drive between Great Kills Park and Outerbridge Crossing — «
Map under preparation. •
5. South Beach Extension — Construction of third and last stage to
be started in 1963. •
Improvements for the new acquisition will be progressed as soon as funds
become available to do so. •
The above statement was prepared with the concurrence of all agencies con-
cerned — City Administrator's Office, Bureau of the Budget, Department of Pub- ^
lie Works, Department of Health, Department of Parks. •
I submit the two maps which show the park projects and the jetty loca-
tions and the harbor model.
(The maps referred to, entitled "Borough of Richmond, Department of
City Planning, The City of New York, August 1956" and "Location of
Special Stations" were marked for identification New York Exhibits
1 and 2 respectively.)
DR. INGRAHAM: I believe Mr. Montanari has a statement.
I
I
STATEMENT OF EDWARD W. MONTANARI, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER
OF WATER RESOURCES AND THE STATE CONSERVATION DEPARTMENT •
MR. MONTANARI: Mr. Chairman, I am E. ¥. Montanari, Assistant Commissioner
of Water Resources and the State Conservation Department. m
- 33 - ™
I
-------
BOROUGH OF RICHMOND
DEPARTMENT OF CITY PLANNING
THE CITY OF NEW YOKK
tp
r
':/ I l- -,•;, Will tit i -V AiX;, > >/ix_X T^ ,i s.--Vi
— • ^_, t ~- - ^ n—i^..
-- ,•(•?-*—~^k~£ ^~^w /tJir >.'
r~">'-'5!fe^fr1:. ,!
SOUTH BEACH EXTENSION
SOUTH BEACH
SOUTH SHORE ARTERIAL HIGHWAY
NEW YORK EXHIBIT 1
-------
CM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I would like to make a statement on behalf of Dr. H. G. Wilm, Conserva-
tion Commissioner and Chairman of the ¥ater Resources Commission.
Consistent with the enunciated philosophy of water resources of New York
State, and the policy of the Water Resources Commission, the statement made
by Dr. Hollis Ingraham, our State Commissioner of Health, represents also our
views.
The Conservation Department, through the Water Resources Commission, par-
ticipated in and endorses these views. Our Conservation Department, of
course, is concerned and vitally interested in the development of all of our
natural resources and the marshaling of the forces which can bring this about.
Actually, the resources of the waters around New York and their associated
aquatic resources, plus the recreational values, indeed are important. We are
convinced that a healthy situation of progress exists. We are further con-
vinced that there are mechanisms, both State and interstate in character,
which are capable of bringing about the accomplishment of the goals which the
people desire in the form of better and cleaner waters.
So we heartily endorse Dr. Ingraham's statement. That is all I have to
offer at this time.
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Montanari.
DR. INGRAHAM: I believe this concludes the formal statements.
MR. STEIN: Thank you, sir. Are there any comments or questions? Dr. Co-
losi?
DR. COLOSI: I have no questions.
MR. STEIN: Do you want to make a statement for the Interstate Sanitation
Commission?
DR. GOLOSI: Tes, Mr. Chairman.
- 3U -
-------
I
STATEMENT OF DR. NATALE COLOSI •
I
I
CHAIRMAN, INTERSTATE SANITATION COMMISSION
DR. COLOSI: The Interstate Sanitation Commission and the State and local
water pollution control agencies of New York and New Jersey were engaged in
active and effective programs prior to the calling of this conference on the
waters of Raritan Bay and tributaries thereof. In the time since the first «
session of the conference these agencies have continued the pursuance of their I
programs vigorously. It is the purpose of this statement to present a report
of the work of the Interstate Sanitation Commission relative to the waters
concerned. In so doing, it will be necessary to make some reference to the •
program of the other conferees. On the whole, however, it seems more appro- •
priate for the statements submitted on behalf of the States of New Jersey and
New York to deal with the'ir respective activities and for the Commission to
concentrate on a presentation of its own work.
The Commission's statement for the first session of this conference re- «
ported on the activities which had been conducted at an intensive level since I
1957 in the Arthur K^.11 area. This work has continued with the Interstate
Sanitation Commission cooperating closely with local and State Departments of
Health, municipalities and industries. Joint investigations and sampling of •
the discharges from the municipalities and industries have been a part of this •
program. This pollution has resulted in a dissolved oxygen problem within the
Arthur Kill which has been of concern to this Commission as well as the State •
Health Departments for some time. Efforts of these agencies to rectify the |
situation have been underway for years but no method was known for determining
the assimilative capacity of the waterway so that treatment requirements could ^
be set to meet the standards of this Commission, However, in November 1962 •
such treatment requirements on the Arthur Kill were made possible by a new ™
procedure developed by the Commission staff for determining the assimilative
capacity of a tidal waterway. A report on the treatment requirements in the A
irthur Kill was issued by the Commission which iirectly affected twenty-four •
industries and six municipal plants discharging wastes directly into the
Arthur Kill. These municipalities have already expended "large sums of money •
u" provide primary treatment for their wastes which consist of large quantl- f
ties of industrial wastes as well as domestic sewage* Our plant investiga-
tions indicate that these plants have consistently prc\dded effective primary _
treatment. These requirements specify full secondary treatment for all muni- •
cipal plants, and similar treatment for industrial wastes which contain bio- *
chemical oxygen demand. All other industrial wastes would have to receive any
treatment necessary to meet the other standards of the Interstate Sanitation •
Commission. The complete report on Treatment iiequireraents in the Arthur Kill •
may be found on pages 17-UO of the 1962 Annual Report of this Commission. The
New Jersey State Department of Health has issued orders against five municipal m
plants and three industries which account for over 95 percent of the wastes •
having an effect on the dissolved oxygen in the waterway. The New York City
Department of Health has issued orders against two industries and a hospital _
on the New York State side of this waterway, requiring the degree of treatment •
set by this Commission. This program of abatement will not only improve the ™
waters of the Arthur Kill, but also will improve the quality of adjacent
waters. •
- 35 -
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
The United States Army Corps of Engineers conducted a study on their hy-
draulic model which they constructed to scale, of the waterways of this met-
ropolitan area. The study was co-sponsored by the New York State Water Pollu-
tion Control Board, New Jersey State Department of Health, New York City De-
partment of Health, and this Commission, with the latter acting as coordinator.
The report on this study was received recently. Data received on dye releases
made at points which would have an effect on the Raritan Bay are now being
analyzed by this Commission's staff. The Model Study has already confirmed
some of the previous water area studies made by the Commission and should pro-
vide important information on the movement of the pollution in the waterways
of thi-" area.
The Commission has been sponsoring two studies at Rutgers University.
Since there is a large concentration of industry in the Arthur Kill area, these
studies were made to determine the possible effects of industrial pollution on
fish life. Although only the 'first of these studies has been completed, there
is evidence that industrial wastes do affect fish of this area. The action
taken on the Arthur Kill is expected to remove these materials. These studies
on pollutional effects on fish will be continued.
The Commission has installed a continuous monitoring system which is lo-
cated on the Arthur Kill near the Rahway River. Water quality data will be
telemetered continuously to a recorder located in the Commission office. It
will not only provide information on the condition of the waterway at any time
of the day and night, but will alert the staff if illegal discharges are made.
This should be of great benefit in controlling and improving the quality of
these waters. In 1957 the Interstate Sanitation Commission took a Consent Or-
der against New York City. This Order provides a specific time schedule for
the construction of treatment facilities and the abatement of pollution. The
recently expanded and reconstructed plants at Hunts Point and Coney Island
were projects required by this Consent Order. During the past year New York
City committed more than $80,000,000 towards the construction of new sewerage
facilities. A large portion of this was the final installment on Newtown
Greek Pollution Control Project (total cost $l59,5l43>000) which will'remove ap-
proximately 300,000,000 gallons a day of raw sewage and improve the waters
passing through the Narrows and into the bay area. Tha schedule also calls for
construction projects during the next several years at Port Richmond, Red Hook
Section of Brooklyn, and North River, which will further improve the waters
discharged through the Narrows. The Consent Order also contains provisions for
the interception and treatment of sewage discharged from ^he Tottenville area
of Staten Island.
Pursuant to an administrative order by the State 01" New Jersey, the plant
at Keyport was required to make extensive improvements w^-ich were already under
construction at the time of the first session of this coherence. The work at
Keyport was completed in 1962. Atlantic Highlands, Highlands and Keansburg
were notified during 1962 that they were not meeting the standards of this Com-
mission. Atlantic Highlands and Keansburg have each engaged consulting en-
gineers to make studies of their treatment facilities. It was pointed out at
the first session that the Middlesex County Sewerage Authority completed trunk
sewers, pumping stations and treatment plants at a cost of over $31,000,000 in
- 36 -
-------
I
1958. This plant treats over 1^3,000,000 gallons per day of wastes. This has I
brought about a remarkable improvement in the Raritan River. The New Jersey ™
Health Department and the Authority have a continuing program of further
abatement of pollution on the Raritan River beyond the limits of our District. M
From information obtained through studies by other agencies during 1962,
it was found that there is a dissolved oxygen problem in the Raritan Bay area •
during some periods of the year. There is an indication that there may be •
other factors affecting the dissolved oxygen besides the biochemical oxygen de-
mand of the treatment plant discharges. One of the factors is believed to be _
algae growing in the waters. The Commission has already started a study to •
further determine the cause of this dissolved oxygen problem. If the dissolved ™
oxygen problem is found to be caused by discharges of biochemical oxygen demand
from treatment plants, all necessary steps can and will be taken to correct •
this condition. j§
Examination of pollution sources in the Raritan Bay area reveals that the mm
following items contribute matter which affects water quality adversely: •
l) Effluent from several municipal treatment plants whose discharges
do not meet the standards of the Interstate Sanitation Commission; •
2) Discharges of raw sewage from New York City;
3) Discharges along the Arthur Kill; j§
It) Pollution attributable to various forms of marine life. M
The programs of the Interstate Sanitation Commission, and of the States of
New York and New Jersey, are dealing actively and forcefully with the first
three of these items and to some extent with the fourth. The activities are as •
follows:
I
1) The several improperly functioning plants have been detected and
in each case notified to take any steps necessary to correct the condi-
tion.
2) Enforcement action against improper discharges from New York City •
has been taken by the Interstate Sanitation Commission. The current
second phase of this program is in the form of a Consent Order of the Com-
mission against New York City taken in 1957 and prescribing a time sched- I
ule on new construction, plant expansion, and cessation of below standard •
discharges. The Consent Order deals not only with discharges in Raritan
Bay and vicinity, but those from all New York City locations as well. •
Actual construction under the Consent Order is now passing the halfway J|
point. The completion of work under the Consent Order will stop the dis-
charge of all raw sewage. ^
3) Discharge of wastes into the Arthur Kill has posed a most vt'Al.u, *
problem as previously described in this statement. The programs of the
local, State and interstate agencies are dealing energetically with "*rris B
- 37 -
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
problem.
1;) At the present time, pollution from the activity of marine life
indigenous to Raritan Bay is not subject to abatement by administrative
or judicial process. Research to determine the effects of such marine
life on water quality and the method for its control would be useful.
Some of it is being done by the Interstate Sanitation Commission, and un-
doubtedly could be done by other agencies as well.
The information developed by the conferees makes it clear that the State,
interstate and local authorities have had an active and effective set of pro-
grams for pollution control and abatement in the waters forming the subject of
this conference for a number of years and that such programs are continued.
Taken together they provide the means for dealing with all the waste dis-
charges affecting the water in question. Consequently there is no reason for
the continuation of the conference, except to the extent that such continuance
may be desirable as a means of authorizing the completion of certain research
studies undertaken by the Public Health Service pursuant to the agreed recom-
mendations of the first session of the conference.
The Federal ¥ater Pollution Control Act (33 U. S. C. Sec. ii66 et seq.)
establishes the Government policy to be that:
"In connection with the exercise of jurisdiction over the water-
ways of the Nation and in consequence of the benefits resulting to
the public health and welfare by the prevention and control of water
pollution, it is hereby declared to be the policy of Congress to re-
cognize, preserve, and protect the primary responsibilities and
rights of the States in preventing and controlling water pollution.."
At the first session of this conference, Chairman Murray S+-ein said:
'We close these things out, and we don't expect to stay here
forever, but certainly at this point it is our job, and I think
that these people who have watched this throughout the country
have recognized that our job is to turn this over to the state
and local authorities and the interstate agencies and get out of
this as fast as possible. One of our hard jobs, and something
you at this stage might not realize, is terminating the case and
getting out. This is something that sometimes is difficult to
do." (Transcript, p. 116).
The activities of the State and interstate pollution control agencies as
detailed by them at the first session of this conference and during the cur-
rent session have been and continue to be matters of public record. If the
Public Health Service had not become familiar with them prior to the decision
of the Surgeon General to call the conference, the year and one half of the
study has certainly afforded the Public Health Service and the Secretary of
Health, Education and Welfare full opportunity to become conversant with these
programs. It should not be difficult to terminate this proceeding and permit
the States and the interstate agency to continue to exercise "the primary
- 38 -
-------
I
responsibility and rights" that it is the declared intent of Congress to pre- •
serve. •
To this end, we propose the following as the agreement to which the con- M
ferees should come: B
1) The States of New Jersey and New York and the Interstate Sanita- M
tion Commission have active and effective programs for the control and •
abatement of pollution in the waters which have formed the subject of the
conference. —
2) There is no use for a continuation of the conference, and said •
conference is hereby terminated.
3) The undertaking and continuation of basic and applied research |
into scientific and technical problems of pollution control and abate-
ment is essential to the promotion of more satisfactory water quality M
programs in the waters which have formed the subject of this conference •
as well as elsewhere. Consequently, the Secretary of Health, Education,
and Welfare, acting under the research provisions of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act (33 U. S, C. Sec. U66c) and the other conferees I
should be encouraged to engage in research activities designed to secure ™
information and improve techniques useful in the further control and
abatement of pollution in such waters. •
Thank you very much.
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Dr. Colosi. Are there any comments or questions? •
We will try to recess for lunch at about twelve o'clock and reconvene at
one-thirty, but, in order to conserve as much time as we can, I would like to •
ask, have any of the conferees had any other invitees that they think they •
can put on now?
MR. ANDERSON: Mr. Chairman, we have Mrs. Wallace from the Oyster Insti- |
tute here. She has a statement she would like to present and I would like to
call on her at this time. Mrs. Wallace. «
STATEMENT OF ELIZABETH M. WALLACE, DIRECTOR ™
OF THE OYSTER INSTITUTE OF NORTH AMERICA
MRS. WALLACE: I am Elizabeth M. Wallace, Director of the Oyster Insti- •
tute of North America, and, as such, represent the shellfish industries of our
country. Our organization represents the growers and dealers of shellfish of g|
the United States. Some of our members handled clams from Raritan Bay prior •
to closure of the bay by the States of New York and New Jersey.
We applaud your efforts. We urge you to continue. Your efforts determine I
our existence, because our product is sold only because of public confidence.
We hope that your efforts are so successful that Raritan Bay will become a model
for similar problems existing all over this country. A
- 39 -
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Raritan Bay is the source of a valuable resource of clams. We estimate
that the value at present is around $1|0 million, with an annual crop of about
$2-| million to the industry. This is a minor factor in your consideration,
to be sure, but this resource does exist.
The potential economic importance of this area in clams alone should be
realized.
We seem to be an index by which you can judge how you are doing, because
an incident seems to have precipitated these various meetings. Two of the
industry members are with us today. They are the flesh and blood of what we
are dealing with. They are Mr. Parsons, John Parsons, and Mr. Stanley Cot-
trell, who are sitting over here, who are clam dealers and processors in the
State of Mew Jersey.
These resources should be available. At one time there was a thriving
oyster business which the encroaching pollution eliminated. The potential is
tremendous for our industry. We hope to be able to take advantage of it.
It is our position that a program of pollution abatement in this area
should have as its goal the achievement of a standard of water quality suffi-
ciently high to permit the direct harvesting and marketing of these shellfish.
As long as these resources cannot be used they are as a pistol to the heads of
our whole industry, because should these shellfish be taken and get to the
markets, it destroys the industry all over our country.
We urge the participating agencies to establish as their goal in this
pollution abatement program the criterion of the achievement of a standard of
water quality sufficiently high to permit the direct harvesting and marketing
of these shellfish. Rapid realization of this goal will improve the economy
of both New York and New Jersey by the utilization of these clam resources,
which can be considered as an economic loss under the present conditions.
Moreover, as I said before, they represent an ever-present threat to the shell-
fisheries of the entire country, with the possibility of these clams illegally
entering the market.
Our industry hopefully looks to you to effectuate a program in Raritan Bay
that would serve as a model for pollution abatement in similar areas throughout
the nation.
Again let me say we deeply appreciate the privilege of appearing before
you. We wish you well and hope this will serve as a model to other great tri-
butary systems that have similar problems.
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mrs. Wallace. Are there any comments or questions?
MR. CALLISON; Mr. Chairman, I wonder if I might have the privilege of
presenting a very brief statement, because I am not certain I can return after
lunch?
MR. STEIN: Would you identify yourself, sir?
-------
It came as a little bit of, not a little shock, but a tremendous shock, to
me to hear the defensive and negative statements that were presented by the New
Jersey and New York Authorities today.
I
STATEMENT OF CHARLES CALLISON, ASSISTANT TO THE PRESIDENT, •
NATIONAL AUDUBON SOCIETY, MEMBEE OF THE PRESIDENT'S |
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADVISORY BOARD
MR. CALLISON: My name is Charles Callison and I am Assistant to the •
President of the National Audubon Society. I did not come here intending to
make a statement. No one invited me to appear today. You, Mr. Stein, in-
formed me that this conference was going to be held, the day before yesterday. •
I came as an observer, but I am strongly moved now to make a statement. m
MR. STEIN: May I identify you a bit further? Mr. Callison is also a mem- •
ber of the President's ¥ater Pollution Control Advisory Board, and, as such, he £
is an overseer of the general Federal program.
Mr. Callison. •
MR. CALLISON: Thank you. I do not pretend to consider myself an overseer
of the Federal program, but I am one who is deeply interested in it.
I
It seems to me there has been a rather remarkable acceleration of effort
since the first conference on the Raritan Bay problem was held some twenty-one •
months ago. It is my impression as an interested citizen observer that the in- |
tervention of the Public Health Service has been a stimulus or a help in this
effort, and perhaps both. It is also my strong belief , based on reports of the ^
polluted condition of the waters of Raritan Bay that have appeared in the •
press, and which have been reported here and elsewhere, that the problem is ™
such a colossal one that only a small beginning, at best, has been made in ac-
tual abatement. I question that anyone here really knows or is in a position •
yet to know if there has been any measurable improvement in the heavily pol- •
luted parts of Raritan Bay.
The United States Public Health Service cannot escape its responsibility I
in this area, despite the invitation heard today for them to get out. In my
opinion the State and interstate agencies should welcome the help of the
Federal Government. It would be a serious mistake in the public interest for •
the Public Health Service to withdraw at this time. ™
I
Thank you.
(Applause.)
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Callison. Are there any comments or questions? •
DR. KANDLE: I would like to make one point, and I would like to stress •
this particularly: That most of the money that is going into the control of V
pollution is going into it from local dollars, and industrial dollars, and
State dollars, and very little Federal dollars. The Federal Government is not im
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
abating the pollution of these waters. It is the local and State agencies and
the local industries that are doing it.
MR. CALLISON: I wonder if the action that has resulted mostly in investi-
gations — and I was interested in the emphasis on the words "intensive" and
"comprehensive" every time the word "studies" or the word "investigations" was
used this morning — I wonder perhaps if these have not actually been accelera-
ted not by the great amount of money put into this effort by the Federal Gov-
ernment, but by its presence and by its enforcement authority which is in the
background, and which I think is extremely important in this area of interstate
waters.
ME. STEIN: Thank you.
DR. KANDLE: I would just make one comment: One cannot quarrel about ad-
jectives like acceleration, because it can be a little or a lot.
MR. CALLISON: No, you cannot. My point was that your statement was re-
plete with emphasis on intensification of studies and investigations, but we
have yet to see the results of abatement action in this area.
DR. KANDLE: I do not agree with you.
MR. STEIN: Are there any further comments or questions again?
(No response.)
MR. STEIN: If not, we will recess to one-thirty.
(Whereupon, at 12:05 o'clock p.m., the conference was recessed until 1:30
o'clock p.m. of the same day.)
AFTERNOON SESSION
MR. STEIN: May we reconvene?
I think unless the conferees have any more people to call on, or want to
amplify- their statements any more, we are probably ready for a discussion. I
also think that the issue has been fairly accurately and completely presented
this morning.
I think the elements of the facts in this situation, in the Federal-State-
interstate relationships, are relatively clear. We did have a conference under
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act in August of 1961. 'Secondly, I think
it is pretty generally agreed that the States and the interstate agencies, un-
der their programs, have been making considerable progress.
I think the third issue here, and possibly the vital issue for discussion,
is what the role of the Federal Government is in this matter, and particularly
the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, through the Public Health
- U2 -
-------
Service's survey.
I am not sure in listening to the presentation of all concerned that we
have an entirely consistent viewpoint of both States and the interstate agency.
I think all their statements are relatively .clear.
I
I
One, I think the Federal position is a relatively simple one. At the .
conference in August of 1961 all parties agreed that there was to be a survey I
and investigation of the river. The survey program was outlined in general *
terms, but with considerable particularity by the conferees at the first ses-
sion of the conference. As I understand it, the Project Director, Mr. DeFalco, M
has attempted to carry out these directives. In accordance with these sugges- V
tions, we have provided an annual budget for this project until completion,
and we intend to give this as high a priority as we have to, or as we had in- >|
tended to, a budget of about $200,000 a year. J|
¥e have a resident scientific investigation group investigating Raritan _
Bay as a result of that first conference. I might point out that in many •
cases we have a sort of transient group coming out from our Cincinnati labo- *
ratories to do the relatively short-term study. This group then reports and
goes home. B
Because of the complex nature of this problem which everyone recognized,
in August of 1962 we set up a resident investigation group with a Project Di- m
rector, Paul DeFalco, with headquarters at the Raritan Arsenal, and a relative- •
ly large laboratory has been set up. We have three boats with twenty-five
people. We, or the Public Health Service people, have proceeded in good faith
with this study. The study, according to the agreed position unanimously •
taken in August of 1961, was to gather "scientific data, taking into account a ™
wide range of factors and technological problems, including health, conserva-
tion, water policy and uses, and industrial processes." tt
In setting up this project, Mr. DeFalco and the States and interstate
Agencies and others concerned set up a technical committee. M
As I understand it, it was further agreed that this project would have a
time schedule of about two years. About one year has elapsed.
As I further understand it, the Project Director has indicated to us that «•
he feels he has to have another year to go — he is in midstream and at mid-
point — in order to get the technical answers which would enable us in the •
Federal Government to make a determination of what our posture would be in the 0
Raritan Bay case.
In the absence of our technical advisers' statements as to the adequacy •
of the information, I do not know that we would be in a position to make any
recommendations to the Surgeon General or to the Secretary concerning this case
in a definitive manner. •
I think we have proceeded in good faith and we owe it to ourselves, the
States, the interstate agencies, and, most importantly, to th,e people and the •
-1*3 -
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
residents of this area, to proceed in good faith with an agreement that we
have made.
On the basis of this agreement made in August 1961, we have made represen-
tations to the Executive Department through the budget process, and to the
Congress, for funds to pursue this study. These funds have been forthcoming.
Again we are at the halfway point. I think we are under an obligation, or our
people indicate they are under an obligation, to complete this.
Now, as far as I understand it, the New York group thinks that the study
is about completed. They feel we should conclude the conference and revert
perhaps to certain bacteriological studies on a limited basis.
The New Jersey group and the Interstate Sanitation Commission believe we
should confine ourselves to research.
I think in this field particularly, all three agencies concerned are rela-
tively sophisticated. The proceedings we are dealing under here and the por-
tion of the Federal budget we are proceeding under here is an enforcement bud-
get. ¥e have another section of the Act dealing with research. There are two
methods by which research funds are available. One is for someone to make an
application for a grant or a contract for research. The other is for us to go
into direct research ourselves. As far as I know, there has not been an appli-
cation for a grant or a contract for research in this area, but the criteria
and the system for doing that are very, very clear.
An application is made and must come before a study committee, and then
the Surgeon General's National Advisory Health Committee, for review. If this
research project stands up, it will get a grant. That avenue is always open.
The other problem is whether we are going to do direct research. Again,
research budgets are dealt with very, very carefully before the Congress.
The budget, as you know, for this coining fiscal year, starting on July 1, has
been submitted to the Congress. The budget in no way, manner or means pro-
vides for Federal research for the Raritan Bay project-as proposed here, and,
as far as I know, it has never been proposed, and I do not know whether it
would survive the searching budget process if it were proposed in competition
with the other projects. However, if we were to assume direct Federal re-
search, obviotisly unless the Congress would vote some money which was not
asked for, all the funds for direct Federal research are spoken for, and, as
far as I know, there is no application in for a grant.
I think these are the positions we have. I think the position of the
Federal technical staff is that they have to complete the study which they
started with complete acquiescence of the States and interstate agencies in
good faith before they can come up with the technical answers. We recognize
that there are other views here.
Our function here is twofold: First it is to summarize what we come up
with here. I would hope we can come up with a unanimous agreement whereby we
can go back to the Secretary and suggest a summary to him. If we do not come
- w* -
-------
I
•up with this unanimous agreement, then I think we can just present the diver- •
gent points of view presented here, and, of course, the Secretary will make ™
the decision.
Dr. Ingraham in a large sense was right in his statement when he points •
out that the Secretary has to make the determination when the conference is
concluded. As I see it, this conference is recessed; it is not concluded. I m
don't know from the point of view of the Federal technical people whether •
they feel they have enough information. It seems clear to me from what they
indicated to us that they do not feel they have enough technical information _
right now to make technical recommendations which will conclude the confer- •
ence. However, if this is the conclusion or the considered judgment of some '
of the conferees, we will certainly present these views to the Secretary.
It would seem to me from a personal point of view that we had arrived at |
an agreement in August 1961. I think the cause of pollution control would be
best served and the cause of the Federal-State and interstate relations would M
be best served, if we would adhere to our original agreement entered into, I •
hope, in good faith, by all parties concerned, and follow that agreement to its
logical conclusion, and let our technical people come up with a definitive re-
port. •
Are there any comments or questions?
DR. WENDELL: Mr. Chairman.
DR. COLOSI: Dr. ¥endell of the Interstate Sanitation Commission.
MR. STEIN: Yes.
I
I
DR. WENDELL: Mr. Chairman, I think that while there were some differences,
naturally, in the presentations among the conferees, that basically they do re- •
present a very wide area of agreement, and I am wondering whether those things
that appear to be dissimilar in them are really basically dissimilar. •
From the point of view of the Public Health Service, it seems as though
many of the questions with respect to the adequacy of the State programs, which _
may have been in the Surgeon General's mind at the time a year and a half ago, I
have in that year and a half been afforded the opportunity to be resolved in *
the sense that you have had people looking at the Raritan Bay area and a study
is underway now since the last session of this conference. So it would seem to B
me as though the Public Health Service would now be in a position to say very V
much more definite things about the substance and the nature of the State and
interstate programs for pollution control and abatement which exist, and which M
have existed, prior to the calling of the first session of the conference; and j^
also with respect to those steps which have been taken since August of 1961.
It seems to me as though on the State and the interstate side all of the •
presentations here indicate elements of those programs. Certainly each of the ™
conferees on the State and interstate side has presented a program which has
been characterised by all concerned as being, in the words of our own statement, A
- U5 -
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
for instance, active and effective. ¥e don't think there is much doubt on
that particular score.
Obviously, each conferee paid most attention to those elements of the com-
bined sets of programs which were being carried on by the particular agency or
government that was making the particular statement at the time. So such dif-
ferences as exist in that respect are, rather, differences in the area of
coverage of the individual reports, rather than differences in the sense of any
disagreement.
I think also that while the language may have been quite a bit different
from statement to statement as among the conferees with respect to the need for
continued investigatory research in the Raritan Bay area, that all of the
statements in one way or another, including those of the Public Health Service,
the State of New Jersey, the State of New York, and the Interstate Sanitation
Commission, recognize that we do not have all of the answers as to how best
from the scientific point of view to control and abate pollution; and that un-
doubtedly, if studies are permitted to continue, such information will become
increasingly available, undoubtedly, not only for the projected period of any
particular study, but into the future, as new technological processes and new
scientific discoveries become apparent.
So it would seem to us in the Interstate Sanitation Commission that if
these statements mean what they appear to mean, and, Mr. Chairman, if your words
in opening this afternoon's session in terms of your recognition of the effec-
tiveness of the State and interstate programs represent the actual position of
the Public Health Service as well, there are a very substantial number of things
that we can say.
I think we can recognize the factual situation which has persisted with
respect to pollution control and abatement on the Raritan Bay, and perhaps we
can do that in some detail.
We can also recognize, I think, that it is appropriate to continue to study
the situation along the lines recommended by the conferees back in August of
1961. It seems to me as though that would be a substantial and reasonably com-
plete set of agreements with respect to the proceedings that have occurred here
today. If there should be any other views, aside from the areas in which I have
indicated, it may very well be that there would be considerably more in the way
of difficulty in coming to any agreement, if indeed any agreement could be had,
on matters outside of these two. But basically I do not see any reason why any
additional matters but these two I have indicated are really within the purview
of the work that has been done both at the first and second sessions of the
conferences.
MR. STEIN: I think, as you pointed out, maybe the two States and the In-
terstate Agency are very much in agreement, but I don't think we have a substan-
tial disagreement with the States and the Interstate Agency. I think we are all
pretty much in agreement. I think if, as I understand Dr. Wendell, the con-
ferees could subscribe to what he just said — and we would have to ask all the
conferees — if the conferees could subscribe to that I think we might be in the
- U6 -
-------
I
position of trying our hand at an oral summary to see if all people would ag- •
ree with it, if we are agreed with what Dr. Wendell has said not only in
principle, but I think in words. I think he has stated it very well.
Is this agreeable to the conferees, or do you have any disagreement with •
Dr. Wendell's position?
DR. INGRAHAM: Would he just summarize it briefly again? ^
MR. STEIN: I think what Dr. Wendell has put down are two specific points. —
One, we would outline with considerable particularity the real strides that I
both States and the Interstate Agency have made. Two, we would indicate that ™
in accordance with the directives of the conferees in August of 1961, that the
study that the Public Health Service is doing be completed. ft
If I have misstated that, Dr. Wendell, please correct me.
DR. WENDELL: No, I think that is basically it — with respect to the con- p
tinuance of the present study, of course, to its conclusion, as projected,
which is now indicated to be perhaps a year or so off; and in the terms that —
were agreed to back in August of l|?6l. •
MR. STEIN: That is correct. Is that agreeable? Do you want me to try it
and let's see what happens? •
DR. KANDLE: Could I make one point, Mr. Chairman?
MR. STEIN: Yes. J
DR. KANDLE: I am not in disagreement, and I surely do not want to intro- ^
duce detail into this, but I think there is one point that we might try to •
clarify now, that is, it seems to me, there are three goals of the study. One, •
as I have heard Paul DeFalco point out, and correctly, that it started off
along the general lines we agreed to in l?6l. It does not seem to me that is
an irrevocable thing. As time passes, and we do the work, we understand we
might want to make some changes.
MR. STEIN: That is correct.
DR. KANDLE: You just stated a point which I had not thought of in such
MR. STEIN: Yes.
DR. KANDLE: — to make recommendations to the Surgeon General and the
I
I
clarity before, Murray, and that is you said you thought that two years were •
needed to enable us in the Federal Government — and I am trying to quote what •
you said —
I
Secretary in a definitive manner. That would be a somewhat more narrow set of I
goals for the study, if I understand it correctly.
MR. STEIN: No, I am sorry. Let me clarify this, I hope. V
- U7 -
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Dr. Ingraham raised this point, very properly, that the Secretary has to
come to a conclusion at some time when the conference is going to conclude.
By the way, that remark I made that we have difficulty in terminating this is
not because we do not want to terminate it, but in some other instances — not
this one — the States don't want us to leave. They want us to keep survey-
ing.
Now, the point I made is not in relation to the broad aspects of the sur-
vey, Dr. Kandle, but in relationship to our statutory duty, where we have to
make a recommendation to the Secretary in order eventually to get him to ter-
minate action in the case. Whatever interstate or State agency you are in —
and both of you are in the position of administrators therein — you have to
ask the same question that the Secretary or the Surgeon General would ask:
Will the technical people sign off on this? Obviously, he is going to ask
some very, very serious questions if they are not.
The sole point I made is, our technical people tell us they have designed
this study with a two-year time schedule from the beginning. The States and
the Interstate Agency were aware of this — that they would be in a position
to sign off when this was completed. This is not necessarily the scope or the
major impact of the study. This will just be to satisfy the bureaucratic
statutory obligation when we go up to the Secretary to tell him that the tech-
nical people were satisfied. I don't think we can get any definitive recom-
mendation or action by the Secretary without that, just as you probably would
not do in your own Departments.
DR. KANDLE: Just for clarity's sake, hopefully let me reiterate what to
me seemed to be three parameters of the survey, the laboratory, and the field
work. One was the point it started, which had in it some of the recommenda-
tions of the conferees and the goals of the Public Health Service. I see your
point, I think, with regard to the data necessary for the Secretary, but it
does seem to me that a large parameter of the continuing study is to gather
data for the use of the Secretary.
¥e in our statements, I think — and I think this is a point on which we
are quite close together — suggest that there are clear research problems.
Perhaps the word "research" is throwing us, but I didn't mean it in terms of
Federal bureaucracy, but rather in terms of goals.
MR. STEIN: Tes.
DR. KANDLE: Because if the goal is to seek new information which is
clearly related to abatement, that is one thing; or if it is descriptive with
regard to the degree of pollution, or whatever, that is another goal. Those
are the three parameters.
MR. STEIN: I would thoroughly agree with you, Dr. Kandle. As a matter
of fact, I think if you have seen and watched pollution cases in the country,
you would note the Federal Government and the States and interstate agencies
are very close together here.
- U8 -
-------
I
As far as I can determine, there is really no disagreement at all, even •
if you want to quibble, on scientific facts of what we have found. In essence, •
I think this is the key to a pollution case, because you are dealing with the
measurement of physical facts and physical phenomena. You are reasonable •
people. We have scientific people, and the Interstate Agency and the States jf
have just as competent scientific people. I do not think that reasonable men
can disagree on this, and this has been evident here. ' «
The second point is, I think the States and Interstate Agency have evi-
denced a very active interest in abating pollution. This is not an attitude
where there is any difference, I believe, in philosophy, or movement, or any- •
thing of that sort. I think both States and the Interstate Agency have indi- w
cated that where there is pollution interfering with what they would consider
a legitimate use of these waters, they will move to abate it. I think we have A
had plenty of statements here which will indicate that. So I really do think p
we are very, very close together on this, and there are no disagreements.
Let me try something and see if we more or less can agree on these two •
major points. *
The first point will be rather detailed because I think Dr. Wendell is B
right, that is, we should give due credit, and in detail, to the accomplish- •
ments of the States and the Interstate Agency.
We might start and say that the conferees agree to the following conclu- J|
sions and recommendations:
The States of New Jersey and New York and the Interstate Sanitation Com- •
mission have active and effective programs for the control and abatement of •
pollution of the waters of Raritan Bay and adjacent waters, as evidenced by:
With respect to waters other than those originating in Arthur Kill and 0
coming through the Narrows, the New Jersey communities have been steadily im-
proving treatment since the 19UO's. •
At the present time, all domestic wastes from New Jersey discharging into
the Hudson River and upper New York Bay area have been intercepted for treat- _
ment except for a portion of Weehawken and Union City, where the construction •
of needed facilities is nearing completion. ™
On the New York side, New York City, pursuant to a Consent Order of the •
Interstate Sanitation Commission dating from August 195>7, has been engaged in Jp
a large program of construction. The Hunts Point and Coney Island projects
have been completed and under construction are pollution control projects at mm.
Newtown Creek and Jamaica Bay. Scheduled for early construction pursuant to M
the Consent Order are projects at Red Hook, Port Richmond, North River and
Ward's Island. On these projects, as well as those mentioned subsequently,
the work is done pursuant to the approval of plans and specifications by the •
New Jersey and New York State Health Departments. •
I might add here parenthetically that even with the Federal construction M
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
grant program all the work is done pursuant to the plans of the State Health
Departments in this area. This is very properly what should be a job for the
States.
Two, entrant waters from the Raritan River were improved by completion in
1958 of the Middlesex County Sewerage Authority Treatment Plant. The New Jer-
sey Health Department and the Authority have a continuing program on further
abatement of pollution of the Raritan River.
Three, in the Arthur Kill intensive research and investigations by the
two States and the Interstate Sanitation Commission have been underway since
1957. As a result of this effort, information has recently become available
which has formed the basis for the issuance of eight orders by the State of
New Jersey, as follows:
1. Elizabeth Joint Meeting;
2. Rahway Valley Sewerage Authority;
3. Linden-Roselle Sewerage Authority;
i;. Borough of Carteret;
5. Woodbridge Township;
6. Humble Oil and Refining Companyj
7. American Cyanamid;
8. General Aniline and Film Company.
Also, three by New York Authorities as follows:
1. Procter and Gamble;
2. Nassau Smelting and Refining Company; and
3. The Willowbrook State School.
Four, in Raritan Bay, pursuant to an administrative order and a time-table
agreement with the Attorney General of the State of New Jersey, construction of
needed works at Keyport was already underway prior to the first session of this
conference, and was completed in 1962.
At Atlantic Highlands, Highlands, Keansburg, Union Beach and Borough of
Matawan, and two industrial installations, steps of an engineering or legal
nature are in progress.
The Borough of Highlands is installing an automatic chlorine residual
analyzer and recorder together with an alarm system and is also planning to re-
pair the outfall line which would take the effluent from Raritan Bay and
- 50 -
-------
I
discharge it into the Atlantic Ocean.
I
The Borough of Atlantic Highlands has hired an engineer to prepare preli-
minary studies to enlarge the present facilities by !?0 percent and has also _
applied for Housing and Home Finance Agency planning funds. In addition, the •
borough is planning to install a chlorine residual analyzer and recorder with
an alarm system.
The Borough of Keansburg has plans for additions and alterations to the •
existing plant, and they have been approved by the State Department of Health.
The borough plans to advertise for bids soon. •
In Union Beach a certificate of necessity has been issued to allow this
community to exceed its bonded indebtedness limitations. Preliminary plans .
have been approved by the State Health Department for a sewage system and •
treatment plant. *
The Borough of Matawan has completed construction of a new plant which B
was placed in operation during the last week of April 1963• 1*
Construction of a new treatment plant by the Madison Township Sewerage •
Authority is nearing completion, with a scheduled completion date in May 1963. |
Plans for proposed expansion to increase the capacity of the Middlesex —
Sewerage Authority plant are scheduled to be completed by the latter part of •
1963. *
The International Flavor and Fragrances Company hired an industrial waste fl|
engineer to develop treatment facilities. A feasibility report has been fur- V
nished.
The pollution sources of the B. Zura Chemical Company have been elimina- M
ted by the closing of the plant.
For the New York waters concerned, the State Department of Health has •
completed classification studies and reports covering the subject waters. Ar- ™
rangements are now being made for public classification hearings to be held in
New York City during the months of June or July of this year. Actual classi- •
fication of these waters will be made by the Water Resources Commission of 9
New York State. The classifications of the Interstate Sanitation Commission
have been in force for over twenty years. m
Now,, to get to the second portion or Roman Numeral II.
The Public Health Service, in collaboration with the New Jersey State De- •
partment of Health, the New York State Department of Health, and the Interstate ™
Sanitation Commission, will continue and complete the investigation and study
of the Raritan Bay and adjacent waters in accordance with the recommendations •
of the conferees at the first session of the conference held on August 22, 1961. J|
That concludes the summary.
- ^1 -
i
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Are there any comments, questions or statements?
MR. MARSHALL: Yes.
MR. STEIN: Pardon me. I do not think we can permit, under the rules of
the conference, people to come forward or speak from the floor now. If you
wish to speak and the States or the Interstate Agency as an invitee have
asked you to speak, we would be happy to have you speak. At the conclusion
of this, of course, if there is no objection from the conferees, I have no ob-
jection to anyone from the floor making a statement.
Are there any objections, or comments, or questions, on this? If not, I
think we can conclude, unless we hear something before the conclusion of
this, giving the conferees an opportunity to change their minds, that this is
about where we stand. I do think that we have made and there has been con-
siderable progress in this area. I'would like to emphasize this.
I thoroughly agree with Dr. Kandle that there is good progress, in es-
sence, and the progress is due to the activities of the State and local
authorities. They are the ones who put up the money and they are the ones who
moved ahead, and I think we are working ahead to progress on this. I-do think
that all of this work in this report can only benefit all concerned.
Is there anyone in the audience who would care to say anything and make a
remark now?
Yes sir. I will ask those who want to make their remarks, if they can,
to confine them to about five minutes, because some of the conferees have to
get an airplane out of here very, very shortly.
STATEMENT OF JACK MARSHALL
EKROTH LABORATORIES, BROOKLYN, NEW YORK
MR. MARSHALL: Jack Marshall, Ekroth Laboratories, Brooklyn, New York.
I would like to give a little different view from what has been given here
today. It is in line with what Mr. Callison said this morning.
A lot of |,he work that the Interstate Sanitation Commission and the State
of New York and New Jersey mentioned, that were offered here, has been done
fifty years-ago, and I believe there are a lot of misstatements in the Inter-
state Sanitation Commission's reports and the new reports. I would not have
time to give it in five minutes. However, I will challenge both States and
the Interstate Sanitation Commission, if they give me one half a day, surely a
day, I will take them out and show them a half a billion gallons of legal ef-
fluent that is building up at 20,000 most probable number in the Narrows.
These are plants that are run by New York City. And Mr. Pinel wants to tell us
what to do that Dr. Roper said could not be done fifty years ago. The Coast
Guard and the Geodetic Survey will.carry out this statement.
I do say that when this investigation stopped at the Arthur Kill it was
-------
I
not doing enough. New York State and New Jersey both should have gone up the •
Hackensack and the Passaic Rivers. There is at least UO million gallons a day 9
that is coming down into S tat en Island and is being dumped in that little cor-
ner there, which the books that we have here indicate will not get out fast. •
The Coast Guard and the Coast and Geodetic Survey, which is the Bible of all |
the engineers of New York City, will show that the tides cannot take that out.
So we are getting in a half a billion gallons of sewerage effluent that B
will not comply with New York State as to what effluent should be. They are
way up in the most probable numbers. Therefore, any time any of these agen-
cies, I will challenge them, want to spend a day, I will go with them in a car I
or boat and show them Ij.0 million gallons a day from each waterway, either at •*
Jamaica Bay, or up the East River, or down Staten Island, where this is going
A
I say now, Mr. Stein, Mr. Chairman, that the Federal Government should go
further than they are now. It should not simply agree with these agencies, m-,
but you have to police them. •
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Marshall.
Let me say cne thing. ¥e would appreciate, and we have an open mind on Wr
this, any information you want to give our technical people. We will be glad
to receive it. , M
MR. MARSHALL: It is too secretive.
MR. STEIN: It is not too secretive. The information is given here and •
I think the record speaks for itself. *
MR. MARSHALL: Did you know about the secret meeting yesterday afternoon M
of New York State and New York City? Nobody can listen in on those things. m
MR. STEIN: Mr. Marshall, I think it is anyone's privilege to have a •
secret meeting. You might do that with your wife sometimes. I don't know. •
I think in respect to this, we should, or the Chair should, set the record
straight. There may be some differences as to the scope of this study, or _
what we are doing. I have been in the Federal Service on this business for •
over twenty years, and as far as I know, there is no implication that the facts, ™
the figures, or the material we are getting from New York, New Jersey, and the
Interstate Commission are not complete and accurate in every respect and are •
not completely adhered to by our scientific and technical personnel. I don't V
think there is a shade of difference in the analysis of the material. Now,
there may be some gaps in the material, or decisions of where we should go, but mm
I think, as you can tell just by listening to this proceeding and reading the M
record here, I do not think that we have the slightest bit of difference as to
what is coming out and what is affecting the waters, that we can measure.
As I pointed out before, these are physical phenomena which can be measured. 9
Whatever differences any of us may have in philosophy with the technical people
in any of the agencies concerned — and I want this to be on record — as far as •
- 53 -
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
their professional integrity is concerned there has never been the slightest
doubt in anyone's mind as to the free exchange of scientific information, and
we have no problems with it in our dealings with the information from these
two agencies, just as I expect they do not have any problems in dealing with
our information.
I would say this: Again we have an open mind. If anyone has made a mis-
take, and if our technical people are wrong on their facts or scientific data,
anyone who can present evidence as to that, and not just set us off on a fro-
lic, and have a reasonable doubt as to what we or anyone else are doing, we
will be happy to receive that information.
Does anyone else want to say anything or make a statement?
STATEMENT OF JAMES PFAFFLIN
REPRESENTING A CITIZENS GROUP IN NEW JERSEY
MR. PFAFFLIN: Mr. Chairman. My name is Pfafflin. I represent a citi-
zens group.
MR. STEIN: ¥ould you give us your full name?
MR. PFAFFLIN: James Pfafflin — P-f-a-f-f-1-i-n. I represent a citizens
group in New Jersey.
We are quite disturbed concerning Raritan Bay. I submit it is impossibly
polluted with everything so far identified by science, and things that I am
sure have not yet been identified. I am very disturbed about this reclassifi-
cation that is apparently pending. Today we have been told by the various
State agencies we intend to clean up the bay. However, I was not too long ago
told by a high and quite competent State official that some day we will have
to face up to giving up the Outer Raritan Bay as a recreational area because
of its location in the middle of a great industrial complex.
That came, I shall only say, from a high State official for whom I have
the highest regard and respect. But there is a philosophy apparently some-
where in the background that is not at all in keeping with that stated today.
I think it should be brought before the conferees.
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Pfafflin. I think, one, in the August 196l
conference that all the conferees agreed there is pollution of these waters.
Secondly, again I think the record here speaks for itself.
I just want to make one point. We have heard the New York City represen-
tative come forward with maps and detailed plans for recreational use of Rari-
tan Bay, among others, aside from New Jersey and the beaches. I would think
if you are talking about a situation of an opinion from an anonymous official
that the bay was not to be used for recreation, I doubt whether New York City,
with all of its resources and the expertise they have, would really put for-
ward on a public record a plan for recreational use of the bay. It is clear
-------
STATEMENT OF MARTIN FELDMAN, REPRESENTING
NORTH JERSEY COMMERCIAL FISHERMEN'S ASSOCIATION
I
that New York City intends to make recreational use of the bay, and the record I
so states. Unless we can get any solid information to the contrary, I think ™
we have to go along with the record.
Are there any other statements? V
I
MR. FELDMAN: My name is Martin Feldman arid I represent the North Jersey _
Commercial Fishermen's Association. I have heard here today that since 1957 M
there have been surveys going on, and there has been a bettering of the bay, ^
arid things.
In 1961 the bay was in such a bad condition it was closed down, and we are J|
the people who are most immediately affected. Everyone was thrown out of work,
The bay has been cleaned up partly. ¥e would like to know when these men will «
be able to go back to work, or is it going to be caught in Government bureauc- I
racy and go on for ten, fifteen or twenty years?
Is there anything in the foreseeable future where these men will be able •
to go back to work soon? •
I
MR. STEIN: I don't know that I can answer that question. You may have to
ask the State and interstate people. However, as far as Government bureaucracy
going on for ten or fifteen years, you have heard the time schedule of our tech-
nical people, and the agreement here that we expect to take about another year «
to complete the survey. I don't know, unless the States and the Interstate I
Agency abruptly change their attitude, that they are really going to extend our *
invitation much longer.
So I would suspect that in about a year we will have our technical report m
lined up.
Now, as far as the Federal law and our system of government is concerned, £
the primary rights and responsibilities for water pollution control, and cer-
tainly the control of shellfish harvesting, rest with the States. We have to ^
take the law as it is, whether we agree with it or not, and some of us agree •
with it. *
My suggestion is, this should be directed to the States. I do not know I
what they will tell you. •>
DR. KANDLE: I would like to make this point, Mr. Feldman, for the record, •
that is, that the abatement program, as Mr. Stein pointed out, started long be- •
fore the Public Health Service conference, and will continue irrespective of
the Public Health Service conference. The abatement program is going on now. _
It is not being delayed, nor are we waiting for the results. ¥e will be glad •
to use them as they come along, but we are not standing still, and we are not ™
waiting for any results from the Public Health Service or anybody else. We are
working in a number of research problems, and not just research, but I mean t§
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
very practical problems, as you know.
To be specific, it would seem to me that in the most critical area you are
interested in, Mr. Feldman, it is clear that the action of Highlands and Atlan-
tic Highlands would speed things up faster than anybody else. Those decisions
are made by those municipalities. They put up the money and they vote the
bonds, and the rapidity with which they move will help to clean up that bay.
MR. FELDMAN: You brought up the question of Highlands. I don't think
Highlands is a very big contributing factor because the outfall of Highlands
goes out to the Atlantic Ocean, and the outfall pipe runs along under the river,
and that pipe has been cracked for years. Between that crack in the pipe and
Raritan Bay there is an open area that is not polluted. So I don't know if
Highlands is a big contributing factor. I mean, there are other factors along
the way. But what we are interested in is how long it will be in the immediate
future before we will have the use of that bay. Is there any idea?
DR. KANDLE: I cannot venture one, to be frank with you.
MR. STEIN: I think in a year, when the study is completed, we will be in
a much better position at least to give you a prognosis, or to say after the
study, we don't know and we can't tell you.
MR. FELDMAN: That's all we have been hearing.
MR. STEIN: No. Wait a moment. I don't think you have been hearing this.
This is what I wanted to point out. What you have to recognize here is that
the Raritan Bay situation, looking at this as a national pollution situation,
is a very, very difficult and complex one. There are two reasons for this:
One, we are dealing with tidal waters that our people do not know too much about
and it is very, very difficult to ascertain. You have heard some of the
studies. For the first time I have found out how material gets dispersed in
Raritan Bay. This was the kind of thing I asked about last year, and ho one
knew the answers to it.
Secondly, we do not have cities and industries in large measure pouring
wastes in raw. By and large they are providing some kind of treatment. The
question here is a very, very subtle, discreet and discriminatory one. I thu/iic
the study has ,to indicate the effects of the industrial and population explo-
sion in this area as indicated by Dr. Kandle in his statement, and the kind of
treatment you can expect, and what can be done with Raritan Bay. I can assure
you from our point of view that our objective is to preserve within the realms
of feasibility any legitimate water use that can be achieved. I am certain
that Dr. Kandle — and I have seen this in operation — has the same thing in
mind. As far as I know, he has never been arbitrary and capricious in closing
a shellfish area, and his objective is to keep open as many as possible.
I think at the end of this year we will be in a position at least, or I
hope our technical people will be -in a position, to provide some kind of answer
on this, and a prognosis.
- 56 -
-------
I
MR. FELDMAN: I just want to ask one more thing: Do you think that Rari- I
tan Bay will ever be open to shellfish again? •
DR. COLOSI: It is open now. •
MR. STEIN: Part of it. Can't you wait? I think I would like to answer
that, and the way I would like to answer that is to wait for our scientific M
data to come in and hear what our technical people have to say, and hear what •
the State and interstate people have to say after evaluating the technical
data before we can make a judgment on it. Isn't this a fair proposition?
MR. FELDMAN: That is very fair, but these men that work on the water and IP
live from day to day, they can't wait that year.
MR. STEIN: By the way Mr. Feldman, I can appreciate this. We have situa- p
tions in the Pacific Northwest which affect people in the same way. The prob-
lem that we have here is a tremendously difficult scientific problem. You need ^
the year in order to get the answer. By the same token, some people might say •
that we cannot wait the year to achieve parity with the Russians in acquiring *
the thrust to get a rocket or a satellite up into space. But research and de-
velopment have to take just so long, and this is a hard reality we have to deal I
with. m
Mr. Feldman, if we could give you the answers here today, we would be de-
lighted to.
MR. FELDMAN: So would I.
MR. FELDMAN: Okay. Thank you.
MR. STEIN: Are there any further comments or questions?
STATEMENT OF NORMA CIRELLA
PRIVATE CITIZEN
I
I
MR. STEIN: Our technical people do not have the answers today. They have
indicated in another year they will be in a better position to do so.
I
I
MRS. CIRELLA: Yes, sir. Mrs. Cirella. I am just a private citizen.
Mr. Stein, thirty years ago — •
MR. STEIN: May we have your first name?
MRS. CIRELLA: ,Norma. M
You are looking at someone who carries the scars from water pollution for
thirty years. I don't wish on a dog what I suffer every day in the week. •
Thirty years I am waiting for an answer and when is it going to come? Thirty •
multiplied by what before we get the answer? Can you tell me?
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
MR. STEIN: Again let me repeat —
MRS. CIRELLA: I would not put a dead dog in that water.
MR. STEIN: Let me repeat what I have told Mr. Feldman, that is, that
everyone would be delighted to give you an answer now. What we have in Raritan
Bay both the Federal Government, the States and the Interstate Agency — and
I don't care who else you put out there to study Raritan Bay — they will tell
you that in Raritan Bay you have one of the most difficult scientific problems
to crack. Until we can get the scientists to come up with an answer and be
able to give us the answer to that, we are not going to be able to provide it
to anyone.
We said that the scientists set up a study for two years. They all recog-
nize how long this will take.
I appreciate your impatience with this and I appreciate the fact that you
would like, and everyone would like to have it pristine water, or have the
thing cleared up tomorrow, or have a scientific answer tomorrow. The point is
that this is the kind of business where I think we are proceeding in a reason-
able and rapid fashion. We are not delaying. We are not procrastinating. We
have given this top priority on the Federal level and we are moving ahead as
fast as we can to get the answers.
MRS. CIRELLA: I say there should be a Federal investigation.
MR. STEIN: There is. Haven't you been listening?
MRS. CIRELLA: You read the papers and all you hear is figures and statis-
tics and what not. That water is so polluted I wouldn't put a dead dog in it.
MR. STEIN: All right.
Are there any further comments or questions?
If not, we appreciate all of these, and we really thank you for coming.
You don't realize how pleasant this is to me because the sense you get from
listening and talking to the people out here is quite a little bit different
than that rarefied ivory tower atmosphere I have in Washington.
Thank you very much.
(Whereupon, at 2:U5 p.m., the conference was adjourned sine die.)
-------
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX A
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CM
•o
ON
H
P
i
1
H H -p O
•od PH nj H
EH CO S-t
g O
R ^
to
*
H
1
«aj
H
P3
EH
co
[3
o
o
o
o
o
EH
PH
PH
EH
CO
^
O
P^
^H
pH
O
h
L_^
0
0
H3
O
PH
jjS
O
H
i-3
O
O
P
S
H
fe
6
O
S
"d
CO
g
O
•H
-p d
(D cd
o g
0)
£^
e
'd
Co
^J
O
•H
p_|
-p d
CD 3
o g
(D
c5
S
I
3
5}
^
o
•rl
1 3
O S
0)
CD
^
d
o
•H
-P
nJ
-P
co
OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO
oooooooooo oooooooooo
OONO^OOOOOOH CMOOOt^OOvOOO
XAf^C^-OOOXAHOr*^ _^-O-^tOCMXAXACMOO
_-j XA XA ~j" ( — ( XA **O C3 C3 i — 1 ~J- ~LA
CM H H H H CM r^i
OxONVOONHOHOOOO OOOOCMOOCOOO
rH HH HC^HCM CMrH HCM
iJA ^O r*~- --~3 —^ C — C*— i — 1 OJ C^— VO i — I C5 vO r* — CM CM C"*— C" — r~H
CMHHCMCMrHrHCMCMH HCMCMHHCMCMHHCM
OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO
_H;XAXA-H^ OOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO
CM oa 0^ XA O-C — -j-CMj-O OOOOOCMOONCMO
rH rH XA ON XA^O ^O XA vO ^O vO ON rH -j' ON vO
H Hf^HHH rH rH
c~— c~— ON c — XA XACO ooo oooooooooo
CM m XA vo^ ro^ ON O^co _^f co CM ON r>-
H H H CM
cOONO-NOC^-vOC^-C^-^f-iA CMf^NONO o^ XA -^} -=f -Zt -^t
r~4 r~ ' t~~\ r~i t~~\ t ! i 1 r~\ r~i r~~i v~~\ i~"i r~l r~i r~i i ( i — 1 i t r~i . i~H
~t~ + + 4* ~J" +
oooooooooo oooooooooo
XACMOCMOOOOOO oooooooooo
c^ ONMD ONXAXA OCMCMO ooooooo -j' o o
i — 1 r^\ fA vQ CN CN NO -^d" XA xO NO O NO C~ — "LA NO NO
rH H XACYN,rHrH-d'rHrH HrH
o^\ c — NO i — IOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO
C^-O-l>-XANOO-NO-^fOO OOOOOOONOOO
rH i — 1 XA XA CN1 NO CA NO rH NO NO i — 1 ^^ NO -^t i — 1
H rH O^\ _rt m ro CM H rH CM CM
OOO ON O ON O ON C — • GO XA NO E — C^- XA r~- C — "LA NO NO
CMCMCMrHCMrHCNJHHrH HHHHrHHHHHH
COPCOPCOPCOPCOP COPCOPCOPCOPCOR
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
rH i— 1 CM CM O"\ r^,^- _JCf XAXA ^OMDC — C — GOCOONONO O
1 — | j (
-------
EH
W
£•3
o
ft;
PH
(H
CM
,-
*3
E-H
H
tf
pr~
^ — ,.
•
-p
a
O
o
^-^
CM
O\
H
O
I
H
S
P^
a^f
EH
O
H-l
^3
o
H
8
Q
g
EH
o
fTJ
fa
o
1
g
•
H
O
-H
-P C
-OOO!>-OO UAO'OCM-^JOOCOOOs
-H; H "LA CO "LA f^ CM _^J O\ -H; CM MO H H 'O H ^~^ O C*~\
H H H f^ CM
CM
OOO\O_H;OOHCOO MOOO^COCMOOOOO
O t^-Hf C^~ t~- "LA H MO _^ CM lA-J' MO f^ CM O 1A 1A D— MO
r^H HH H H HHHH
H [^ ,*_ H O C—CO O 0\1A -=S CA O MONACO O1AMO O
CMHHCMCMHHCMHH HHCMHHHCvlHHCM
+ * +
OOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOO
O O O O CM 1A CM CM r^_^ 'UA'LA OOOOOOOO
\A ^t vO MO Os CT\ Os O\ H "LA c^\ c^\ MO MO J "LA "LA O -Cf O
fr^cvjj—ir-i HHCMC^ir^MO "LA MO
H H
O O O O MO ^A "LA i — 1 i — 1 CM o^ OOOOOOOOO
o\ co co MO -^t -^t i — 1 CM i — I i — I i — 1 CM r^ ~3 i — 1 ON r — 1 O o\ MO
1A1AHH H H CM CM "LA 00 MO CO
HH-^O^OJCMO^O^OO\ CMCMCMCMCMCMOOHH
HHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHH
4* *t* ~^ "4* Hh *4"
oooooooooo oooooooooo
O O O O CM _^t O O O CM O -if OOOOOOOO
H H HHHH
OOOOOOCMf— _H;\A OCAOOOOOOOO
COOO_H;XAHH CMCMrr>MOOCO_j-MO
H H H CM"
HHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHH
COQCOOCOOCOQCOO COQCOQCOOCOQCOQ
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
HHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHCMCM
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
a
I
i
i
i
EH
C3
Q
Ps
PH
«3*
PQ
5
|fj
H
2
,, — -X
•
-P
a
o
0
^^
CM
H
8
o
1
1
i~> r> ft i~H
+ + + + +
OOOOOOOOOO
8OOOOOOOOO
OOCMCMOvOMDMDCM
H rH rH H
OOOOOOOOOO
D— O O^vOCO-CfrHXACM O
CO vO Ox f^\ f^ MD rH CM CM \A
•\ *s
H rH
p"\ c^ ...-."j* _zj cvj C\J r^ r*^ f^ c*~\
HHHHHHHHHH
COQCOPCOOCOOCOO
1 1 1 1 ! 1 l 1 1 l
H rH CM. CM f> t»^ _^- _^- XA XA
CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM
oooooooo
oooooooo
c^iMO OI>-OCO OCM
r^i c— c^- CM CM _H; O
MD
i — l MD r^ c^ c^\ co XA CM
-Hf \o c^- XA -^t £••— c — -^t
HrHHrHHHHH
OOOOOOOO
H cf\
O\O\_cjMD OsH H CM
rH m H
^5 ^\ GO oo o\ ON o\ o\
H
OOOOOOOO
H 1A f^i CM H
OOOOOOC^H
o^ C^- H CM H H
CM CM CM CM (*^\ Or\ r"^ C1^
HHHHHHHH
COPCOQCOpCOQ
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM
O O
O O
co o\
(T^ p_4
-CtMD
MD C —
XA o
H CM
Q O
C^CM
CVJ O^
H H
O O
r-T
H ON
CO O\
MD MD
H H
CO O
1 |
O O
(f\ C^i
-------
EH
£§
O
P^
PH
IH
PQ
§
EH
H
-OOOI>-I>-ONXAOO
CM CM XA 0*^\ OO VO C — CO ~f vO
H H r^
O XA -3 O O C^-XACO CO C^A
CMHHCMCMiHHiHHr-l
OOOOOOOOOO
O -^i OOOOOOOO
MOXACMvOCMOOvOOO
iH H CA H
VOOOOOOOOOO
vO -CT c — O -^i ON-J' CO o O
H H XA CM f— -^t J" H
•t *N
CM fA
r°\ CM c^ c^°v o^v CM CA CA i — I O
HHHHHrHHHHH
+ + +
OOOOOOOOOO
OCMOOOOOOOO
vOONCMOOOOOOO
H ON vo vO vO vO -d' ~3 l>-
H rH H H CM XA H
OOOOOOOOOO
MDHOvOOHOOOO
*\ r\ •% *% »s
CM H iH ON 0-
vQ vO C — C* — CO O— E~^ C — vO XA
HHHHHHHHHH
cooconcoocoQcon
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
-^t-Cf
80 o o
O O vO
O CM O iH
co XA
-^f CM
CO [~- CO CO CO
co r^ cs— CM o-
vO XAvO XA <^
ON O O ON
-3 H
r^\ o -^ CM c^-
H CM H H
XA *j" XA — cf CM
0 0 0 ON
-cf 0 XAIN-
CM rH f1^
r-T
D— H ONVO CM
vO C^-XA r°\ CM
XA-ZfXA-^ CM
CO CO CO CO CO
1 1 1 1 1
XAvQ C—CO ON
T
O O
c^ o
CM
-=t
o o o o o
ONVO CM _=t O
i — ( C*^ i — ( rH O^
^
i — |
CA m XA r^\ X A
0 O
CO r^i
CM H
\O CO ON (^ vO
H H
CM CM 1A CM XA
0 0
O XA
vO 0^
r-T
l>- C— XfN CM O
H
CM CM XA CM XA
CO CO CO CO CO
1 1 1 1 1
O H CM rO-^t
XA XA XA XA XA
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
E
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
EH
O
O
PH
^H
p2)
j..
<3
EH
H
5
fH
^
H
O
£*
O
o
OO
H
o
o
1
H
S3
5
^"D
*a*
EH
-=1!
f^
HP
<«!
0
H
8
^5
a
w
EH
O
w
iv.
O
§
S
§
CO
•
H
[VI
i |
9
EH
CO
o
Q)
cD
E
^
£
•H
8
s
§
0)
S
^
e
1
•H
CD
^
§
(D
s
^
g
1
•T1
3
§
-
-^t
+
O
s
r-T
-S
1A
^.
O
O
r-T
0
Q
^5
o
0
o
H
s
IA
XA
1-
O
O
vO
i-T
0
OO
H
IA
.f.
O
8
o
o
oo
i-T
m
o
0
H
*>
H
f^\
O
o
o
CM
o
0
ON
H
IA
o
**
CM
CM
g
XA
»v
H
IA
o
o
o
O O
O 0
O NO
•N *X
0 H
H
O 0
8-=f
CM
-3
NO O-
O 0
ON XA
O 0
CM CM
NO NO
O 0
88
v£) 1AXA CM
H
O
O
-J-1A
«\
CM
0
O
OO
w
CM
o^
g
o
o
H
f"\ ON
O 0
O O
l>- H
•N v\
C^\ C7^
\A r^MA XA "1-H fAXAlA MO
CO CO CO
1 1 1
1A MD OO
1AXAXA
CO
1
ON
IA
CO
o
NO
co
1
rH
NO
CO
CM
CO CO
1 1
J- XA
NO NO
CM
0\
H
o
Q
-P
o
o
T3
ID
W
IA
MD
O
-P
IA
-=t
^
-p
CO
*
-------
CM
M3
ON
H
O
O
1
S
£|
-3 H to H
o o a H
P3 o o e
Pi 1-3 -H
0 -P 0
H H ct) O
•a! ft! -P H
PQ p£| CO
EH h
S O ro
^ § ,g
1
H - OO c~— CO C —
CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM
OOOOOOOO
cn CM
T-AOOsOONCMOt— ON
p^ 1 — 1
0)
ra
^
0)
^^J
0) HHHHH^HHH
^^
+ -f
oooooooo
CMOOOOOOO
H H ON cn ONM3 NO
H H
•LAOMDOOOOO
\A-ZtONON-^CM H l>-
CM H H -Cf -r--c^-c~-r— r—
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
B
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
EH
MH
*"~D
O
P^
SH
PP
-OCM
_j- co H "UN. ON CO (^
CM CO
NO
OONONOCOCO OO
NO — ^* "Lf\ ~J ~j- vQ , — | £\j
CM H H H
-t-vn
CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM
OOOOOOOO
OOOOCMOONO
O O ONNQ ONNO-CfCM
^xK^*-^ H" °^
OOOOOO"LAO
CM OJ Mj NO ON ~^f ON 1A
NO IS- CM 1A H H H
.M
O
&
(D -H/MD o^ c-— C^iNO CM NO
^ HHHHHHHH
4*
OOOOOOOO
§0000000
O O O XTv CM NO O
O O — ^J NO f1^ CM ( — I NO
NO f-lA H H
H
§0000000
O O O Xf\CO -zJCO
ON ^-f\ f^\ r*~- NO f^ f\ ^^
*^ «x *\ *\
V^CM H H
HHOOONOONH
CMCMCMCMHCMHCM
H CM c"i_^- \r\NO c--co
OOOOOOOO
vO NO MO ^O NO VO ^O ^O
o
o
1A
ca
O
^^
H
-
H H
NO MD
-------
*
CM
NO
ON
H
O
pT~|
Q
|
|Vl
s
^
EH <]}
1 S
O ra
£ d §
m "^ u
O -H
pH 1 — 1 -P
«ari S Cd
H CO
go
EH PH cd
H O PQ
p-*.
3 ^
1
g
CO
i
3
1
C S
o d
•H £
J-j -H
cd
CO
-P
O
Q
rvi
g
O
CO
CO
H e
o 3
._i
*n
H S
M
CD
cd°
f-i
[>
<5J
0)
Q) Ti s—^
cS°ti\
^H 0 W>
S 'd 6
!> ^J ^^
[
0) 0) O
t> EH
•a)
C!
O
•H
-P
ctt
-p
CO
en m ON co
XA1AXAXA
0 _=f H 0
CO C — CO CO
o o en co
H en D~-_H^
-^•-Cf-H;^
MD H Oco
C** — O^ *LT\ [ —
^O ^O **O C*^
o o o o
o o o o
ON O ON O
H H H H
CM CM H tH
H H H H
--=t enoo
HHHHHHHHHM
^H^fenHNOHO (no
HHHrHHHHHHH
c\JCMCMfnmmcnenenm
CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM
copcopcoPcopcoP
1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
NO NO C-— c~— co CO ON ON O O
H H
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
fl
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
s
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
^ — s
•
-p
a
o
o
v~x
CNJ
NO
ON
H
O
O
1
1
§
w
L-fJ O
*^i U
0 iH
H -P
^ CtJ
H co
o
O pq
tH
jjj\
R
V
1
!3
PQ
r^J
fc-l
a e
o 5
•H E
"a '3
I s
cti
CO
-P
^jt
0)
M-H'H'
r-i o bp
Q^ r— i £3
^> ^rj v--*
«< O
(D
bO
flj Oj
o> E o5
t> p-t
«u
c
o
~p
o>
-p
CO
vO C\J r^x OA 1_r\ vo ON CM MD CM
X/"\ Xr\ NO NO c — NO NO NO NO NO
c^- ^-^ TJ* C^N, CM r — co — cf NO — - 3
r— D--COCO ONOO oco O ON
H H
ONNO"LAfr\OOOOOO
HOHHONOOCOCONOOO
J ^tlA 1A "LA XA "LA J 1A 1A
H fy CM r^\ o NO ON-^ H XA
-Cf CM OOONOCM C~-OOOOO
\ONO r~-NO r— c^- c-~ [--co c--
OOOOOOOOOO
oooooooooo
NO C- — ^ C^-XAOO m c^v ON ON
— ^ —3 --^ —^ --4° ~t -"j* ^ c\j (ir\
HHHHHHHHHH
f-C~-ONO OONH ONNOCO
c^-c^-^-coco c--co c^-c~-r^-
HHHr-'HHHHHH
OOOOOOOOOO
CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM
COQCOOCOQCOQCOQ
1 t I 1 1 1 i 1 1 1
H H CM CM r^\ c^\ _;t _it XA XA
HHHHHHHHHH
NO f*^N OO CO
NO XA vO NO
C\J ~~} -j" _Cf
O CO ONOO
H
O O O O
XAJXAXA
H -3 f~- r*^
XA H c^- O
CO D"~ C — C^~"
O O O O
o o o o
ON CM CM NO
f*"\ "H; ^3 _ "^
H H7H H
i>- o-oo o-
H H H H
ON ON H H
H H CM CM
CO d CO Q
1 1 1 1
NO NO C— C*-
H H H H
d5 i — i r — t — CM c^—
NO NO XA XA XA -3
d CO CD XA ~. t i — I
ON O- CO C"— C — -^
O XA F~\ C— NO ON
XA-J-_=f-^--^ ^\
CO (A r~--^'XA ON
— ^f XA c^ — t*^ ^\ co
C^— NO NO NO NO NO
80 o o o o
O O O 0 O
f^~\ ^ ^" ^^ ^^ _^" ^^*
HrH H H H r-1
CO ^"O f"\ f^\ -r^f '^f\
C^"~ C^~ ^"~" C^*" C1*" C^~
H H H H H H
O O 0\ ON O O
CM CM H H CM CM
CO O CO Q CO Q
1 1 1 1 1 1
H H H H CM CM
-------
'~^
-P
rt
o
o
CM
>sO
Os
H
O
(~^
'
§
t)
£3
H «aj
*^> Q
O CQ
("Y^ h-^ £^
Q. --* /-S
l-M ^*^ VJ
& 0 ^
?S fe ??
a 0 pq
EH
a
o
-P
a!
-P
CO
OJ xr\ co — ^ x/\ ^-T\ ^cj" (^\ co \o
IJA xr\ xr\ "LT\ \o ^JA ^"O ^O i-^ 1-0
C*— r — 1 CO — ^ CO "LPi ^C^" GO ^D ^*O
c— [>_ f~- ^ ^- H t^-
OHOOOOOOOO
_^~3--Cj-=t'l-A_H/l_rNlA--H/.--t
O ONC^-c^---^^) C^-H C— C--
O"\ vO i — 1 f^ ^O CM CM ~f CI5 CM
\O ~^A C — MO C" — MD CO ^O CO MD
OOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOO
CM CM rH ~^t rH fA i — I 1_T\ CD CM
~^ -j" -J ^^ ~+ *J* _"j- 1 — f- -^- ^_ H^-
i — 1 rH r*~{ rH rH i-H i — 1 rH i — 1 r~l
vO c^OC~-sO<^H C-OC-
COCO CNCOCOCO OsCO O\CO
HHHHHHHHHH
HHHHHHHHHH
COQCOQCOQCOQCOO
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCVJCMCM
o^\ ^— \^5 ^O r-H C^ O\ C5 1-f\ H;
vO l-fN MD 1-fN. MD ^O CM f^ r*"\ T"
— ^J ^«o CM CD Xf\ — -H/ CD co CM i_r\
^\ ^~~ CD CO O\ CO O\ C*— CO C*1—
H
C— OOOOOOOOO
1A_CflA_=J\A-CtCM CM f^fn
o\ o\ o\_zj\r\ rovO MO CM co
T-fNr^Hco\ocoCM c^\O-^f
C-- MD CO T-TN C— VO C--VO C— \O
OOOOOOOOOO
OOOOOOOOOO
i — 1 CM i — 1 CM O i — 1 O O C*~ ON
-Cf-^t — H; _JJ" __Hr ^H- ^j- _HJ- oO C^v
HHHHHHHHHH
VO-^CAVO^COCM Ov^H
CO CO CO CO ON CO Ox CO c — C —
HHHHHHHHHH
HHHHHHHHCMCvl
COOCOPICOQCOQCOPI
1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
^O ^*O C^~ C — CO CO O\ O\ ^D ^5
cvj c\i CM cvj cvi c\j cvj cvj ro co
I
a
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
x — N
*
"k
o
o
CM
SO
Os
H
C3
fr3
f-3
1
|
EH !
3
rf^
i-q
O
co
CO
H g
S
3
H
"lP
0)
2
>
•*!
0)
M-H 'PT
O) fn ^^
f-t O bp
[> C"| N^,^
< 0
0)
bp
^ &
0) 0) O
d
o
•H
43
-P
CO
C*~\ CM CM Os CM O -^ O CO \f\ O CO O C—
1A\A_^..^<^-=1T^C^CM CM XAXASOsO
-^t XfNsO CO sO ^JXf\ H Os">^ T-A CO <*> CO rH
CO c^~ C1 — sO sO sO sO SO ^-A "t-A ^O SO C — C^ — CO
O O O O O O O O O O O O "*-T\ O
-^f r~i "LA t — 1 "LA f^ Os -^ CM O ^-A Os Os C —
.Cf^r^CMmCMCMCMCM _--^^^
CO _ H* £\j f— \ fr^\ CO 0^ Os CO C" — XA CO CSJ C — CM
O _j-itcO so ^t-^t iH CM Os CSJ so Os f°i CM
C"— sO sO "LA "LA 1A 1-A 1 f\ ** f\ _ -^t sQ so SO r — CO
OOOOOOOOOO OOOOO
OOOOOOOOOO OOOOO
sOOsCMC^-OCMOIACMCSI OOsQCAH
HHHHHHHHHH HHHr-lH
-3 r-lOssOOO-CMOsOsH O^sOCOCMO^
C— C^ C — C~-CO t — CO r~-sO C — CM rH CM CM CO
HHHHHHHHHH HHHH
HHHHHHHHC--C"- so\AsOlA«n
CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMHH
COOCOQCOQCOOCOP COCOCOCOCO
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
^t-X *
r^ r^
sO -^
o^ "LA sO rH ~^A
CO CO C^OO sO
O C^-
-^ tA
\A 0^
C-- O CM O O
r^isO CM H C^
CO CO l>- CO sO
SO O O 0
O O O O
CA CM so r^ f^
r^ r^\ CM CM CM
H H H H H
co \A H H Os
CO CO CM Os H
H H
CO CO CO CO CO
1 1 1 1 1
O H CM OA.-31
-------
H
O
o
o
CM
ON
H
O
ti3
o
i
1
EH «3
O EH
H <3<
S O
O CO
gj h-3 fi
O -H
H H -P
<5 S fS
W CO
§ o
E-i PC< ttf
H O PQ
p-?
^C tH
s
£jrl
5P
El
i
0
CO
CO
H S
3
H
I5
0)
M
ctf
fn
^
X — '
•a) 0
CD
50
TO Cl,
CD CD O
> EH
j£^
G
O
•H
-P
0)
-P
CO
O oo _ct co co
-=t -^* -=t -=t <^
O co c^ \o ON
MD MD \O XA -^"
r«^ o XA co o
c^ r^ ON XANO
rA -^j" co co co
co MO r— XA ON
r^- O ro COM3
XA r— \O XA-4-
80 o o o
o o o o
OO D--OO O CM
CM CO CM CO CO
H H H H H
O cvj co O H
roco ON ro CO
H H H
XAXAMD XAXA
CO CO CO CO CO
1 1 1 1 1
XANO oo ON O
c^~ c^^- XA ^o
^t CM <^O CO
oo XA ro-^t
0 O O 0
CM _=f C>. O
_3- CM CM CO
ONXA co r--
CO CM —t CO
XA-^f xr\XA
o o o o
o o o o
0 C- 0 0
H CM CM CM
H H H H
\O NO NO CO
ON-=t H r-t
H H H
-^J — ^d" '****• C*"~
CO CO CO CO
1 1 1 1
H CM -CJ-XA
•
CM
NO
ON
O
P
-P
O
O
•8
rH
to
XA
NO
O
-P
XA
-=r
S
o
,i
*ii
-P
c«
-P
CO
*
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CM
ON
rH
1
1
^
EH
pj
EH h-H*
o S Pj
-P W
a (D
3 TH:
JH -P
-p -H
W c!
j *r~i
O TO
g ^
O 0
0 -r)
O -P g
K o g
R a)
fe ^
0
o
rt
0
•H
-p
cd
-p
CO
o o
o o
C — CO
o o
0- 1>-
MO MD
1A-.-J
o o
o o
o o
_-Hi._-j.
CM CM
88
^ •>
O\^-T\
vO ^O
88
o o
CM \A
§o
o
C-- ON
CM
£— !>-
CO O
1 1
O O
o o
H H
O O
O O
O O
ON l>-
ro CM
O O
O MD
NO -
ONCO
CM CM
o o
o o
CM NO
CM H
O 0
CO NO
CA CM
rH CM
CM CM
o o
o o
CM
O O
O CO
COCO
rH
c*~ co
CM CM
CO Q
1 1
CM CM
H H
O
ON
NO
O
NO
MO
0
O
<~o
o
ON
H
O
rH
O
O
XA
0
O
H
CO
1
NO
^^
8
rT
H
CO
MO
CO
O
XA
0
H
CM
O
H
O
O
O
H
0
H
ON
O
H
CO
[V
^O
^^
-------
CM
$
H
O
H
P
1
t=>
* 5?
w
C_i — it
tr^ ^*t
0 EH 0)
H •=< ^
R> P P
0
£ d 5
HH *=£J -P
o
IH H w
Ss ft f->
PQ M (1)
K-j jS
5 ° •*
g fa *
H O -P
c£ d
a H a
f2 « fn
*3d +5
*£ G
G
CO
»
"LA
•«;
1
1
EH
£ g
^ i
*n PS
P -H
co q
% i
5 s
cd
CO
P 0
PI M
0) cd
0 ^
^
S PH
«JJ
0)
0) t3 X-N
t»D-H r-(
Cd ?H \.
^i O bfl
^^
- OA
_zfl_A CM CM
sO H OsO
•LAsO "LA-^t
O O T-AT-A
OAsO sO -3
-3-3 CM OA
OAsO OA OA
_H;CO OACO
tAtA ^t OA
o o o o
o o o o
OAT-A CO OA
OA_^f O CM
H H H H
H 1-A CO~Lf\
O O ON ON
H H H H
O- C^- CM CM
H H
CO P CO P
II II
-3-3 OA OA
O O CM CM
H H H H
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
CM
NO
ON
H
O
P
1
W
j3
(=5
«dj
EH
*^1
P
1
H
O
O
K-J
O
H
PH
ptj
EH
o
^
PQ
^
:5i
1
CO
NO*
1
<^
JV~1
1—3
ppj
EH
CO
fn
CD
W -P
•P -H
C i — I
H H
PH H
P E
p3
CD O
e o
P H
cd
CD JH
fn CD
EH ft
CD CO
(JO CD
cd -H
£ -P
CD -H
CO CQ
CD
P
co
o
8
8
EH
1
EH
co
P£J
K^H
g
^
s
^H
O
ft
O
o
l__^
«aj
O
PlL|
£
K
S
Q
P"H
jjj
o
o
P
S
H
P1-*
*=5
O
o
CD
hO
cd
-
8O
o
O MD
O H
0
O
*,
CO
'
ONO
o
o"*
o
XA
-j-
O 00
(V\ (Vy
O O
o o
O CM
O ON
O
O
cT
CM
ON
O ON
O _cf
O
O*"
O
O
»\
XA
H
\o — ~ J
XANO
ss
tl
O ^J
O O
3 OS
^ CD
cd t* \
O
O 0
0 0
0 0
O 0
o o
0 (*\
0
H
H
0 0
o XA
C3 — ^J
v^
O
0
»,
H
H ON
O- |>_
0 0
O O
O XA
8
•^
00
O ON
0
O
*t
O
CO
f*\ C**\
C-- ON
0 0
0 o
O O
O ^O
O H
O
_H;
XA
O XA
8 ^
•s
0
8
•^
XA
ON ON
l>- ON
£§
^1
r^H O
"£ "i
C5 *i
PH
O O
O 0
0 0
0 O
o ~=t
O rr\
0
o
o
CM
O f^i
0 J
o
cT
o
CM
^
f-
CT\ O
O- CO
+
§o
0
O NO
O H
o
o
^
o
H
O ON
O
O
o"
O
CM
•N
H
C — f^\
!>-CO
O O
80
o
o o
0 O
0 0
O NO
CM H
CM
0 0
O CM
O H
o"
O
O
Xp^
r-\
H CO
CO CO
HH 4H
H P1^
W
CD
CQ $>,
0) -P
H g
Tj 3
•d o
•l_ 1 r^
s
o o
O 0
o o
0 0
O I>—
O [>-
*,
CO
0-
0 H
o XA
0
o"
0
ON
r-T
XA CM
MD C1 —
o o
O ON
o o
0 H
O
o
*x
(T^
^^o
ONO
O
O
a
0
XA
CM
CM O
NO CO
oi
88
O NO
o
cT
-cf
CM
O CM
O (^
o
CD"
o
NO
CO
CD ~j-
o-co
ss
^a
f£* O
S-g
O ^ti
co
0 0
88
O NO
O NO
o
•«,
XA
r^
O CM
O CO
O
•^
O
CN1
O-
l>--Cf
o^ 13"
+
O O
0 0
0 0
O NO
r\
O
CM
CM
o XA
0
0
o*
NO
H H
XACO
O 0
o o
O 0
O NO
O H
o
o"
XA
en
O en
O H
o
n
o
o
CM
CN?
_ct f*"\
XACO
£§
-P
o
1
w
o o
0 0
0 0
0 0
O XA
O CM
*^
O
XA
0 H
O CM
O
cT
f*~\
^-j-CQ
XAXA
+
0 0
0 0
0 0
O NO
0 H
0
en
H
0 0
o p^
o
— ^d"
*y
H
CM O
XACO
0 O
O 0
0 O
O MD
0 H
0
_H;
XA
0 O
0 f^
O ON
•\
0
o
NO
__Hy
O C^—
^o -^o
ss
ClO
£,
H
^3
8
0)
o o
o o
0 0
0 0
o o
o o
•s *\
NO O
P~\ O
c—
H
O P^\
ONO
O
O
O
CO
CO XA
NO l>-
+
0 0
o o
o o
o o
O NO
O H
o
f—
O H
O H
0
CM
£ —
XANO
XACO
8O
o
0 0
O O
XANO
m H
O CM
8 ^
*X
O
3
ON ON
XACO
f.i ft j
to
T3
Q ci
•pi 3
_jj I
(H ^M
Co tiO
H -H
.jj> H^~J
<3^
8O
0
0 O
o o
o .jH;
O ON
v^
NO
— Cf
O XA
O ON
0
o"
0
•^
H
ON en
CO CO
+
O O
0 0
0 0
O NO
0 H
O
0
XA
0 l>-
O H
o
XA
.-}•
CM NO
o_ o
H
0 O
O 0
0 0
O NO
O H
O
O
NO
0 0
ONO
•^
0
o
o
f*~\
, — 1
O CM
CO H
H
CQ
•d
5
3
M
^H
ffi
-------
-------
APPENDIX B
-------
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
METHODOLOGY
Station Locations
A sampling program for the waters of Raritan Bay and its trib-
utary streams and sewage treatment plant effluents was based on an
extensive review of data collected, through 1961, by state and
interstate agencies in the area.
The network of Project sampling stations was designed to (1)
characterize the gradient of water quality within the bay and (2)
make maximum use of existing information. There is a station for
approximately every two square miles of water area; station desig-
nations and coordinate, locations are shown in Table B-l. This
table also indicates those stations sampled regularly by state and
interstate agencies.
A series of stations along the shores of Staten Island and New
Jersey were used to characterize the quality of waters in and along
the shorelines. The shoreline stations on Staten Island largely
duplicate those sampled by the New York City Department of Health.
Sampling Schedule
Frequency of sampling is as important as the location of sta-
tions. Changes in water quality characteristics in relation to
time were analyzed from previously accumulated data; this data sug-
gested that long term or seasonal characteristics have the more
important effects on water quality (because of the averaging effects
of the tidal embayment).
Therefore, the program was designed to provide consecutive,
equally-spaced samples over a period of one year—at Intervals of
approximately one week. This program consisted of weekly (Tuesday)
samplings of-: %k bay stations at surface; 35 bay stations at bot-
tom depth; 33 shoreline stations at surface; 8 major sewage treat-
ment plants. Certain practical limitations (e.g. weather problems,
mechanical failure of boats) forced occasional adjustment of this
schedule to Monday or Wednesday. This program has been maintained
since June 1962.
Other sampling is conducted to determine short term variations
in water quality. Each major treatment plant has been sampled hourly
over a 2li-hour period on two or more occasions. Cross-sections of
various entrant streams (including the Narrows, Arthur Kill and Rari-
tan River) have been studied for periods of six or more hours.
Sampling Methods
Bay Stations; Surface samples of bay water are collected five
B-l
-------
I
feet below the water surface; deep samples are collected five feet •
above the bottom—using a Kemmerer water bottle (standard oceano- B
graphic sampling unit for estuaria^ work). The Kemmerer bottle con-
tains approximately 2,200 ml of sample collected at a prescribed B
depth by a messenger-actuated closure device. B
The sample is drawn from the bottle, by means of a rubber tube •
and valve arrangement, into various sampling containers for specific B
analytical purposes. The first portion of the sample is used to
measure dissolved oxygen; the second portion to measure temperature
and conductivity; the third portion (approximately mid-volume of the B
sampling container) to determine bacteriological quality; the last B
portion is used for various other analyses as may be required.
Dissolved oxygen samples are fixed and titrated aboard the sam- B
pling vessel within about 30 minutes of collection. Bacteriological
samples are plated or planted within about ten minutes of collection. «
All MPN tubes and membrane filters—after innoculation aboard the B
sampling vessel—are returned to the laboratory within a maximum time
of six hours for incubation, counting and further differentiation.
Temperature and conductivity measurements are made aboard the B
sampling vessel immediately upon collection of the samples.
Analyses for biochemical oxygen demand (or other specific con- B
stituents) are made upon iced or fixed samples as the procedures in
Standard Methods prescribe; this is done after return of the samples ^
to the laboratory. B
Shore Stations: At all shore stations, sampling procedures are
carried to completion in station wagons equipped to operate as small B
field laboratories. Shoreline samples are collected in four-ounce B
ground-glass-stoppered sterile containers; the samples are collected
from the surf by wading out to points approximately two feet deep. •
Time of planting and analyses schedules are the same as aboard the |
boats.
Treatment Plants: Sampling procedures at the treatment plants B
closely parallel methods used in the bay and on the shores. There *
is one exception: bacteriological samples of chlorinated effluents
are held in the chlorinated state for a period of time equivalent B
to the time plant effluents require to pass from the point of collec- B
tion to the point of entrance into bay waters. After this time in-
terval the samples are dechlorinated. •
The holding time is estimated on basis of the flow and hydrau-
lic characteristics of the treatment plant contact chamber and out- _
fall. In any case, samples are not held longer than 30 minutes. B
Dechlorination is accomplished by addition of sterile thiosulfate ™
solution.
B-2
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RARITAN BAY PROJECT
TABLE B-l. LOCATION OF SAMPLING STATIONS
Shore Line
PHS N.I.C.
Number Health Dept.
New York Shore
601 South Beach, Field 5, Lane 1, foot Sand Lane 75
602 South Beach, Field U, Lane 8, by 14;5 Seaside Blvd. 79
603 South Beach, by 517 Seaside Blvd., Parking Gate k 79A & SB-1
60)4 South Beach, foot Seaview Ave, end of fence
605 South Beach, foot Lincoln Ave, Section A, Lane 1 81
606 New Dorp Beach, foot New Dorp Lane 83
607 Foot Fox Lane
608 Great Kills Park, north of bath house PD-2
609 Great Kills Park, Crookes Point, rock jetty CP-1
610 Great Kills Yacht Club GKH-1
6ll Annadale Beach, foot Lipsett Ave 85
612 Huguenot Beach, foot Huguenot Ave 87
613 Wolf Pond Park 90
6ll; Princess Bay, foot Sequine Ave 91
615 Mt. Loretto, front of bath houses 138
616 Tottenville, foot Manhattan St. 139
617 Tottenville, foot Hylan Blvd.
New Jersey Shore
701 Highlands, Shrewsbury River Bridge on Route 36
702 Highlands, Water Witch Beach, foot Central Ave
703 Atlantic Highlands, foot First Ave
701; Leonardo, Conover Beach, foot Leonardo Ave
705 Port Monmouth, E. Kay's Beach, 1/2 mile W. Wilson Ave
706 E. Keansburg, Ideal Beach, foot Hudson Ave
707 Keansburg, Main Street Beach, foot Maint St.
708 Keansburg, Beach, Grandvlew and Beachway
709 Keansburg, Belvedere Beach, foot Oakwood Place
710 Raritan, Union Beach, Florence Ave and Front St.
711 Keyport Beach, foot Cedar St.
712 Cliffwood Beach, foot Lakeshore Dr.
713 Madison Township Recreation Area
711; Morgan Beach, foot Cliffwood Way
715 Morgan, West side Cheesequake Creek
716 Perth Amboy Beach, foot State Street
Sewage Treatment Plants
803 Oakwood Beach Pollution Control Plant
8i;2 Perth Amboy Sewage Treatment Plant
851; Middlesex County Sewerage Authority
860 South Amboy Sewage Treatment Plant
875 Keyport Sewage Treatment Plant
878 Keansburg Sewage Treatment Plant
881; Atlantic Highlands Sewage Treatment Plant
887 Highlands Sewage Treatment Plant
-------
I
RARITAN BAY PROJECT I
TABLE B-l. LOCATION OF SAMPLING STATIONS (Cont.)
Bay Waters
P.H.S.
CODE
Bay
Stations
1
2
3
It
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Hi
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
2k
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
3k
7k°
LONGITUDE
MIN SEC
9
8
7
6
5
k
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
0
2
2
3
3
3
5
U
1*
k
5
5
7
8
9
11
12
13
15
15
52
38
21
6
17
5
U3
37
13
27
8
52
3k
17
59
19
5U
11
28
1*5
2
hk
27
10
32
U9
5
20
36
18
26
1*5
2
->9
_/ —
1*0°
LATITUDE
MIN SEC
30
30
30
30
32
32
32
32
31
31
30
29
28
27
26
26
28
29
30
31
31
30
29
28
28
29
29
29
29
30
30
29
29
30
1U
27
ia
51*
3
17
30
1*0
1*5
32
3k
37
39
k2
kk
30
25
23
20
18
It
7
10
12
58
56
111*
31
18
32
20
28
29
6
OTHER AGENCY CODE NUMBER
NEW YORK NEW JERSEY
CON. DEPT. HEALTH DEPT. I.S.C.
39
59
57
9
81
86
90
92
9k
88
87
82
83
11
13
15
17
38
36A
3k
26
3
12
78
101
80
1*5
5
7
1*7
82
1*9A
8A
10
11A
13
18
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RARITAN BAT PROJECT
TABLE B-l. LOCATION OF SAMPLING STATIONS (Concl.)
Bay Waters
P.H.S.
CODE
1*5
1*6
kl
1*8
k9
50
51
52
53
51*
55
56
58
59
60
61
62
6k
65
Bay
Entrance
Stations
66
67
100
101
102
103
101*
71*°
LONGITUDE
MIN SEC
10
9
8
6
5
3
1*
6
9
10
11
12
13
13
u*
U*
16
15
15
15
15
2
2
2
2
3
53
20
It
51;
11*
52
56
30
3
35
1*5
0
30
11
1*6
55
10
12
12
1*0
21*
25
36
1*7
58
10
U0° OTHER AGENCY CODE NUMBER
LATITUDE NEW YORK NEW JERSEY
MIN SEC CON. DEPT. HEALTH DEPT. I.S.C.
29
28
28
28
28
27
28
27
27
28
27
28
28
27
28
29
29
28
28
30
30
36
36
36
36
36
5 19
21
31*
1*5
2
15
5
1*9
25
7
57
51* 21
38 23
1*1
27
7 30
23
52
52
Arthur Kill
20
1*1*
Narrows
35
31
28
21*
21
ll*A
53
51A
50
83A
97A
97B
85
63A
51*A
56
16
18
58
20A
1-6
1-6
Raritan River
1*63
16 59 29 1*9
-------
I
Thermometers used for measuring temperatures were standard mer-
cury glass thermometers, calibrated to 1/10°C.
B-3
I
Temperature and pH measurements are made on collection. Iced B
samples are returned to the laboratory for analysis for suspended •
solids (volatile and fixed), and for biochemical oxygen demand.
Laboratory Procedures
In chemical and bacteriological determinations, the procedures M
recommended by the llth Edition of Standard Methods for the Examina- •
tion of Water and Wastewater were followed whenever applicable. *
Coliforms were determined by the multiple tube procedure; an H
additional test for the confirmation of coliforms (utilizing an ele- •
vated temperature of Uli..50C.) was added for the identification of
the fecal coliforms present. •
The streptococcal group was also determined routinely, using
KF media by membrane filter procedure. The validity of these counts _
was confirmed by adequate comparison of split samples, using both KF •
and M-Enterococcus Media, followed by the identification of random ™
colony picks from positive plates.
Chlorides were determined by using the mercuric nitrate proce- I
dure; confirmation was with a salinometer calibrated for sea water.
Biochemical oxygen demand was determined by the standard five- •
day, 20°C., incubation in a covered water bath.
All pH measurements were made in the field, using a portable •
pH meter standardized with standard buffer solution at regular in- •
tervals in the field.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
BIOLOGICAL STUDIES
Introduction. Industrial and domestic discharges into Rari-
tan Bay and adjacent waters impose another factor on the already
complex assay of the natural environment. The evaluation of the
effect of these discharges on the biology of the bayl, exclu-
sive of the natural ecology, is difficult. The history of shell-
fish, the former economic resource of the bay, is well documented
with evidence which relates its decline to both manmade and
natural causes (Nelson, I960). For the present at least, the
harvesting of shellfish is prohibited. Unfortunately, there are
no inclusive histories of other organisms to compare past popula-
tions with the present. Jeffries (19£9) and Patten (1959) studied
the plankton during the years 1957-1959, but their stations did not
exceed the outer limits of a line from Great Kills to Point Comfort.
Dean (unpublished data) conducted benthic surveys of the bay from
1956-1960. His sampling was limited to only short summer periods.
The present objectives of the biological program for this
project are to describe qualitatively and quantitatively the
biological populations of the bay, and to relate existing natural
and manmade environmental effects where possible. To carry out
the aim of this project, a survey of the biological populations is
being conducted of both the plankton and the benthos. Samples are
examined with respect to kinds, numbers, associations and changes
thereof. Although lagging behind the advances made in fresh-water
biology, there are accepted pollution tolerant organisms and
community structures which differentiate polluted from non-polluted
brackish waters (Braarud 1955, Gilet I960, Hartman I960, Hood 1958
I960, McKnulty et. al. 1959, Mohr 1959, Reish 1957 I960, Zo Bell
I960 and othersJ7 However, because the effects of natural causes
cannot be entirely separated, the use of laboratory experimentation
becomes imperative.
Field Methods. Initially, six sampling stations (I-VI) were
selected (Figure 12, Main Report). Choice was based upon previous
studies (New Jersey-New York 1961, Jeffries 1962) and personal ob-
servations and communications. Samples were collected at approxi-
mately two week intervals. Sampling time did not exceed eight
hours.
Phytoplankton. Water samples for subsequent phytoplankton
analysis were taken at a 2-foot depth with a Kemmerer bottle. Two
one liter amber bottles were filled and placed in' the shade. One
was kept under refrigeration overnight for analysis the next day.
The other was used the same day for chlorophyll determination.
1-Bay - to include both Raritan Bay, Lower New York Bay and adjacent
waters, unless specified otherwise.
B-l;
-------
I
A net sample was taken by towing a five inch diameter #20 net at •
slow speed for three minutes. The collected material was pre- m
served in %% formalin.
Benthos. Bottom samples were obtained employing a Petterson I
Dredge. The dredgings were placed in a large enamel tray. Odor,
color, stratification and other observations were noted. After
mixing, a one quart portion was preserved in 10$ formalin for •
laboratory analysis. •
Temperature. Surface temperatures were obtained from a •
bucket thermometer. A reversing thermometer was used for bottom |
temperatures. Bottom sediment temperatures were estimated by in-
serting a thermometer into the sediment immediately upon emptying •
the dredge. A battery operated field meter was used for measur- •
ing pH. *
Light and Salinity. Light penetration was estimated with a V
Secchi disc. Salinity values were read directly by inserting •
the probe of a salinometer (corrected for temperature) into a
bucket of sampled water. •
Laboratory Analysis. Qualitative and quantitative esti-
mates of phytopiankton were evaluated by counting in a Sedgwick- .
Rafter chamber. Taxonomy was determined from the net samples. I
Mr. A. Bleeker, Botany Dept., Rutgers University, obtained chlo- ™
rophyll a values after the method of Richards with Thompson (19??2).
Bottom materials were washed through eight inch diameter #1|, m
#18 and #30 screens. The organisms were then washed into trays,
picked out and sorted. Under low magnification, types, numbers •
and volumes of benthos were estimated. •
Results - Phytopiankton - Species Composition and Seasonal _
Variation. Two separate patterns of phytopiankton community com- I
position developed during the sampling period from September to ™
December. Generally, flagellates dominated the flora in the late
summer and early fall (Table B-2). Late fall began with two domi- •
nants, diatoms and greens, but diatoms later predominated. Be- •
tween the two periods, composition was not distinctive to any one
group. Protozoa occurred at all stations throughout the sampling M
period (Table B-2). |
Peridinium trochoideum, a dinoflagellate, characterized the
early pattern by being dominant at all stations except II and •
III (Table B-3). At these stations Skeletonema costatum, a diatom, •
was dominant. In the late fall, S. costatum, Coscinodiscus
subtilis, and Nannochloris atomus, diatoms and a green algae pre- •
dominated. |
The phytopiankton populations were mainly characterized by •
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
diatoms (Table B-3) yet flagellates and greens stand out at cer-
tain periods. From Table B-2, it is noted that more diatom
species are found at the outer stations (II and III) than at the
inshore stations (I, IV, V, VI). Station II appeared as having
the most varied composition, while Station I varied the least.
However, at this station dominance was shared by the greatest
variation of different organisms. Station IV had the smallest
variability among dominants.
On September 20, a distinct band of red water was observed
approximately one mile off shore from Pt. Comofrt. This band,
about 15>0-200 yards wide, ran NW-SE for approximately one-half
mile, then curved rather sharply to the west and ran out of
sight. The sharp delineation of the band from the surrounding
water was emphasized by S(ecchi disc readings; inside the band the
reading was i|.8 feet and less than three feet away the reading was
7.0 feet. The organism present which gave the water a red color
was tentatively identified as a species of Goniaulax, a dinofla-
gellate. Members of this genus have been associated with "fish-
kills" elsewhere. Patten (1961) observed red tides in the bay,
but they were characterized by Massarita rotundata, a flagellate.
Abundance in Temporal and Spatial Distribution. Figures
B-l - B-6 give concentrations of phytoplankton cells/ml. Counts
ranged from 10-8ii3 cells/ml. Generally, there was a greater
abundance in late summar, a sharp decline during October, and a
rise at all stations in late fall. Station I exhibited the
greatest abundance overall, while Station IV contained the fewest
numbers. Greater fluctuations in numbers occurred at Station VI
than at any other station (Figures B-l - B-6).
On the average, more phytoplaniton occurred in the waters
along the upper part of the bay than along the lower. Further,
there was generally greater abundance at the outer stations than
at the inner. These figures, along with observations, also indi-
cate that primarily the phytoplankton was recruited from areas
outside of the bay. Hence the forms are oceanic and/or neritic.
At certain times, however, populations indigenous to the inner bay
(Stations I, IV-VI) dominate this area. During the late summer,
Peridinium trochoideum, a dinoflagellate, occurred in more abun-
dance at the four inner bay stations while Skeletonema costatum,
a diatom, was most abundant at the outer stations (II, III).Dur-
ing December, an increase in abundance at the inner stations was
marked by a rapid rise in numbers of a green form Nannochloris
atomus. At the same time, S. costatum still dominated the outer
stations. Observations also" showed that while the inshore stations
were dominated by a single organism, the associated diatom members
of the population appeared in poor physiological condition, in-
dicated by very small ch-romatophores and weak silicification of
the frustules.
B-6
-------
CO
P3
PH
EH
S3
O
EH
t^ ^H
fj^ 1—3
*~3 P_, f\j
O O ^O
f£ EH ON
0-, £H H
PQ EH O
^ pq
£3 *=*» O
^4 J23 |
EH H
H jf'i P-t
§ Q CO
OJ
1
m
prl
H-3
m
rH
rH
O
CD
°
C—
CM
J>
O
S3
oo
£>
O
la
0
-P
o
o
(Y^
CM
•P
O
0
H
H
-P
O
o
__^j
-P
O
0
o
CM
CD
CO
\S}
ft
CD
CO
s
o
•H
-P
cd
-P
CO
CO
CD E
p! cd o
CD bO-P
CD rH cd
£H **! "rl
C5 Q
CO
E CD
o p; cd
-P CD bO
cd CD H
•H fn <
o o
CQ
E
0
-p
cd
•H
0
CO
-p
f^
cd
•H
E
0
O T)
S3
CQ
-P
PI
cd
PI
•H
E
o
O t3
S3
1
H CQ
a) CD
bO-P
cd cd
H H
fe
CO
1 CD
cti -P
i — I cd
% H
PI CD
•H bO
Q
CQ
1 CD
$-£
l—l CO
'H H
O H
a cu
•H bO
CO
1 CD
cd -P 1
H cti H co
CH H CD CD
0 H bO-P
Pi CD cd cd
•H bOH H
Q P-4
H
co to co w to
E E S E CD E CD
o o 5 OGcdOpicd
-P -P -P -PCDbO-PcDbO
Cd cd cd cdCDrHfdCDrH
•H *H *H *rH !H -s^
T^-t r^i 1 — I ^i
CO
•P
1 1 cti 1
1 1 S H CQ CD
1 1 -H CD CD fi cd
E bfl-p CD bO
0 cti cd CD H
O T3 fH rH rl > H
HUH >
H
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
-------
1
1
RARITAN BAY PROJECT
TABLE B-3. PHYTOPLAMTON GENERA AND SPECIES
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
September
Organism
Diatoms
Achnanthes sp.
Actinoptylus undulatus (cf.)
Asterionella japonic a
Biddulphia aurita
Chaetoceros curvisetus
decipiens
Chaetoceros sp.
Corethron hystrix
Coscinodiscus excentricus
subtilis
Grammataphora marina (cf.)
Gyrosigma acumlnatum
balticum
Leptocylindricus danicus
minimas
Licmophora sp.
Lithodesmium undulatum
Milosira salcata
Navicula sp. (cf.)
Nitzschia closterium
seriata
Nitzschia sp.
Pediastrum sp.
Rhizosolenia alata
delicatulata
hebetata semispina
Schroderella ap. (cf .)
Skeletonema costatum
Thalassionema nitzschioides
Tropidoneis lepidoptera
- December 1962
Station*"
I II IIA III IIIA IV V VA
X
X
X
X*
X
X X
XXX
X* X XXX
X* X X* X* X* X X* X*
X X
X XXX
X XXX
X* X
X
X X
X X X X XX
X X X X X X
X X
X X
X XX
X X
X
X
X X
X X
X* X* X* X* X* X* X* X*
x1 xx
X XX
VI
X
X
x#
X
X
X
X
X
X
x#
-------
RARITAN BAY PROJECT
TABLE B-3. PHYTOPLANKTON GENERA AND SPECIES (Concl.)
September - December
Organism
Dinoflagellates
Amphidimium fusif orms
Goniaulax sp.
Peridinum breve
trochoideum
Others
Anacystis sp.
Eutreptia sp.
Gomphosphaeria sp.
Green flagellate I
Green flagellate II
Nannochloris atomus (cf.)
(green algae)
Silicoflagellates
Protozoa
TOTAL
I II IIA
X
X*
X* X X
X* X X
X* X X*
X
X
X* X X
X* X* X*
X X
XXX
17 2k 29
1962
Station*
III IIIA
X
X*
X*
X
X X
X
X* X*
X
X X
20 6
IV
X
X*
X*
X
X*
X
X*
X
X
16
V VA
X*
X*
X
X*
X
X X
X X
X* X*
X
X X
19 15
VI
X*
X*
X*
X
X
X
X*
X
18
Station I-VI, samples beginning in September; station IIA, October; and
IIIA and VA, December.
* = dominants
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RARITAN BAY PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL DATA
STATION I
SECCHI DISC
CHLOROPHYL
PHYTOPLANKTO*
-------
RARITAN BAY PROJ ECT
BIOLOGICAL DATA
STATION I
SECCHI DISC
Wottl SufloO
CH1.CROPHYL 0
PHYTOPLANKrOM
-J M •
AVIHAOE IS2
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RARITAN BAY PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL DATA
STATION IE
SECCHI DISC
CHLOROPHYL 0
PHYTOPLANKTON
AVERA0C — HE
Figure B-5
-------
R A R I T A N BAY
BIOLOGICAL
PROJECT
DATA
STATION
SECCttl DIIC
Wour Suftoi
CHLOROPHYL 0
PHYTOPLANKTON
Figure B-4
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
RARITAN BAY PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL DATA
STATION
SECCHI DISC
WMW Burfoot
j
(j ,0
I
CHLOBOPMYU 0
PHYTOPLANKTON
Tigur. B-5
-------
RARITAN BAY PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL DATA
STATION
SfCCHI DISC
CHLOROPHYL 0
I -\
PMYTOPLANKTON
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
o *f>
uj Z
-> O
o —
K H
CL. <
D
>- DL
< O
CO Q_
Z i>
< X
i- H
- Z
a: uj
< DO
p s s i - ~ •
> s s s - ~ '
* t z ° S.
2 6 ? " o
f „ f I. '
I
-------
I
Chlorophyll. Chlorophyll a values for the associated phyto- •
plankton counts are given in Figures B-l - B-6. That chlorophyll "
and plankton counts do not correlate well is not an unusual con-
dition in the estuary (Patten 1961). Chlorophyll a values ranged B
from 0.1 mg/1 - 0.5 mg/1. By referring to Figure 7 in Odum •
(1959) where he lists the amount of oxygen assimilated/unit chlo-
rophyll a/day for a "mixing environment" an estimate for 02 pro- •
duction at the six stations can be calculated. Odum's values of •
0.02 gm - 1.0 gm chlorophyll a produced 0.5 gm - 30 gm 02/day
when applied to chlorophyll amounts in the bay, give 02 production _
values of 0.025 gm - .180 gm/L/day. It must be realized however, •
and strongly emphasized, that these amounts are gross estimates ™
at best, because of fluctuations within the units themselves and
the differences between environments. •
Light Extinction. Generally, phytoplankton numbers and
Secchi disc readings did not correlate (Figures B-l - B-6). Ob- •
servations revealed that the low Secchi readings (averaging 5 feet) B
were caused by large amounts of detritus, usually resulting from
mixing after sustained high winds. Patten (1961) found the.depths
at which the Secchi disc disappeared ranged from U5 to 82 inches. •
Benthos. At all stations except I, a red deposit, probably
of iron origin, was found in the bottom sediments (Table B-it) . •
Actually, this material is fairly widespread in the Bay (H. H. |
Haskins personal communication). Oil in the sediments was found
also at Stations III, V and VI. Although not indicated in Table «
B-Uj a strong H^S odor developed in all samples after standing 2l± •
hours under refrigeration. The lowering pH levels at Stations V
and VI indicate slightly acid conditions of the bottom sediments.
One hundred per cent of all soil particles from each station •
passed through a #18 screen (1.00 mm mesh opening). Approximately
95$ of that material also passed through a #30 screen (.59 mm). •
This indicates the soil classification to be fine sand particles |[
and smaller silts or clays (Hough 195?)• It is the particle size
of bottom sediments which frequently determines the type of _
organisms living therein. I
A different animal community existed at each of the stations
sampled (Figure B-7). That four of these stations were dominated flj
by a single group of organisms suggests the bottom area to be I
fairly stable. However, in the bay different benthic communities
may exist at a distance of about 100 yards apart (H. H. Haskins •
personal communication). At each station 81$ or more of the en- |
tire animal community was composed of three or less groups of
organisms (Figure B-7). At Stations II, III and VI, a single _
group of organisms accounted for approximately 75$ of the entire I
population. ™
The most common group of animals to all stations were the I
B-7
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
polychaete worms (Figure B-7). Stations II and VI at opposite
ends of the sampling area, were dominated by polychaetes, although
the type of worm differed at the stations. It was observed that
the polychaetes at Station II were of the Capitellid type, while *
at VI the Nereis type predominated. Amphipods also were common to
all stations except VI. They accounted for 16% of the community
at Station III and were numerically the second in order of abun-
dance (Figure B-7).
At Station IV, a single organism Mya arenaria, the soft-
shell clam, accounted for 92% of the population found there, also
this was highest in abundance and density of any other organism
or group of organisms at all stations (Table B-5). As yet no ex-
planation can be given for the large density (U2,000/nr) at
Station IV. The clams found at Station IV - VI probably repre-
sent this year's (1962) growth. At Station IV clam size ranged
from 2-8 mm, while at V and VI it was 7-20 mm.
The greatest number of organisms were found at Stations III
and IV, the least at VI. There appeared to be little difference
among groups of organisms found at all stations (Figure B-7).
However, the bivalves (pelecypods) excluding Mya arenaria, were
excluded from the inner Stations IV and VI.
Abbiete (1957) found little or no macrophytic algae on
the bottom sediments in the bay. Some algae occurred on pilings,
buoy and lighthouse foundations and near shore substrates. The
numbers of species declined towards the river.
Discussion - Phytoplankton. The low concentrations of
phytoplankton in the bay during the sampling period (Figures B-l
thru B-6) suggests that factors separate from the natural environ-
ment may be responsible for the small amounts found. In compari-
son, in Narragansett Bay, Pratt (1959) found concentrations of
1,070-11,295 cells per ml during the late summer and fall. In
Long Island Sound, Riley (19U1) and Conover (1956) observed diatom
blooms occurring from June - October.
Nutrients appear to be in large enough concentration (Jeffries
1962) and light penetration seemed sufficient, at least during
October. At this time Secchi disc readings to 16 feet were re-
corded (Figures B-l - B-6). The water was well mixed, no strati-
fication was evident. Considering that phytoplankton composition
changes periodically is no strong reason to explain the low popu-
lations here. There appeared to be sufficient light, nutrients
and cells to sustain a much higher density. Further analysis of
bay water and environmental variables may help to elucidate this
matter.
At certain times extremely high turbidity resulted in low
light penetration. The shallow euphotic zone resulting tends to
B-8
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
I
reduce the amounts of chlorophyll and inhibits photosynthesis. B
The chlorophyll a content in bay waters is less than half found •
in other estuaries (Odum 1959). It appears to be advisable to
conduct primary production experiments to measure the relationship
among light, chlorophyll and photosynthesis here in the bay.
I
The occurrence during late summer of Peridinium trochoideum, _
a dinoflagellate, and in late fall of Nannochloris atomus, a green •
algae, as dominants at the inner stations, as opposed to Skeleto-
nema costatum at the outer stations suggests that factors peculiar
to the inner bay support the growth of these organisms almost to ft
the exclusion of others. In addition, the notable differences in •
dominants between the inner and outer bay at certain periods in-
dicate that the supporting water masses are different. Provasoli m
(I960) suggests that phytoplankton populations (growth of) may be £
affected by amounts of organic micro-nutrients present.
Station 17, which is in the path of outflowing river water •
and of ebbing tides which carry waters from Arthur Kill, sus- •
tained the overall lowest phytoplankton concentration (Figures
B-l - B-6). The concentration of cells per ml was generally •
less than half that of the other stations. |
The greatest fluctuation in phytoplankton density occurred M
at Station VI (Figure B-U) . This may be due to the river in- •
fluence.
Benthos. The most noticeable feature of the benthic com- I
munities was the domination of bottom associations by a single •
group of animals. The paramount example being the large abun-
dance (U2,000/m2) of Mya arenaria at Station 17. •
When species diversity decreases and numbers of a single
species increase, the ecosystem is regarded as developing toward «
a "climax" state. This climax condition means that the species •
present are the most tolerant or best "adapted" to the environment
in which they are living. The less tolerant organisms do not
survive. Usually in polluted or marginally polluted waters the •
bertthic community is developing to the climax state. However, B
the climax condition is also present in healthy areas. Concern-
ing the benthic fauna of the bay in regard to climax polluted •
conditions, no conclusions can be reached as yet. Further taxo- |
nomic study is necessary.
As with the phytoplankton, benthic fauna are signified as I
"indicator" organisms. It is well known that M. ftrenarla is ™
able to tolerate low oxygen concentrations an9) describing an area of San •
Francisco Bay, divided the bottom fauna into zones. Among the I
organisms found in his marginal polluted zone were M. arenaria
and various polychaetee. The aane group of an±»als~were found •
B-9
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
at Stations IV - VI in Raritan Bay (Figure B-7). It is well to
realize however, that this same assemblage.is found in healthy
bottoms to be sure, or there would be very little clam consumption.
It is not known if the large clam populations found at
Stations IV and V reach adult size. There are several reasons for
the doubt: (l) the large population competing for food in an area
of low phytoplankton concentration, (2) oil found in the sedi-
ments (Table B-lj.) and the occasional "accidental" oil spillage in
surrounding waters (oil clogs the feeding apparatus of the clam)
and, (3) H. H. Haskins (personal communication) reports that bot-
tom populations in the bay may shift location and change struc-
ture.
Reisch (1959) gives various accounts of investigators who
assigned the polychaete Capitella capitata to areas strongly af-
fected by domestic sewage"! In the bay at Station II, the
dominant group of animals were the polychaetes, many of which
belonged to the genus Capitella. The definite species are un-
known to the author at the present time.
Amphipods are commonly associated with shells and the tube
forming types are known to exist abundantly in turbid waters
(McKnulty et. al. 1959). The same conditions were found in the
bay (Table"~B"-l4, Figure B-7).
B-10
-------
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abbiete, . 1957. Macrophytic Algae of Raritan Bay, M.S. Thesis;
Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N. J.
I960. Measurement of Toxicity of Organic Wastes to
Marine Organisms. J. Water Poll. Cont. Fed.
Hough, B. K. 1957. Basic Soils Engineering. The Ronald Press Co.,
N. Y. 513 pp.
I
I
Braarud, T. 1955. The Effect of Pollution by Sewage Upon the M
Waters of the Oslo Fjord. Verhandlungen int. Ver. Limnology, •
12: 811-13.
Conover, S. 1956. Oceanography of Long Island Sound, 1952 - 195U. •
IV. Phytoplankton. Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll., 15; •
62-112.
Filicie, F. P. 1959. The Effects of Wastes on the Distribution of ||
Bottom invertebrates in the San Francisco Bay Estuary. Was-
manri Jour. Biol., 17: 1-17. ^
Gilet, R. 1959- Water Pollution in Marseilles and Its Relation *
with Flora and Fauna. In: Waste Disposal in the Marine Envi-
ronment, ed. E. A. Pearson, pp. 39-56. Pergammon Press, N.Y. fl
Hartman, 0. 1959. The Benthonic Fauna of Southern California in
Shallow Depths and Possible Effects of Wastes on the Marine •
Biota. In: Waste Disposal in the Marine Environment, ed. J[
E. A. Pearson, pp. 57-81. Pergammon Press, N.Y.
Hood, D. W. 1958. Waste Disposal in Marine Waters. Proc. Sixth I
Conf. Coastal Eng., p. 607. *
I
I
Jeffries, H. P. 1962. Environmental Characteristics of Raritan _
Bay, A Polluted Estuary. Liranol. Oceanogr. 1_: 21-31. •
McKnulty, et. al. 1959. Ecological Effects of Sewage Pollution in
Biscayne Bay, Florida: Distribution of Coliform Bacteria, •
Chemical Nutrients, and Volumes of Zooplankton. Biological |
Problems in Water Pollution. U.S. Department of Health, Educa-
tion and Welfare, Cincinnati, pp. 189-202. •
Mohr, J. L. 1959. Biological Indicators of Organic Enrichment in
Marine Habitats. Biological Problems in Water Pollution,
U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Cincinnati. I
pp. 237-238. •
I
1
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Nelson, T. 1959- Some Aspects of Pollution, Parasatism, and In-
let Restriction in Three New Jersey Estuaries , Biological
Problems in Water Pollution, U. S. Department of Health, Edu-
cation and Welfare, Cincinnati, pp. 203-211.
New Jersey-New York, States of. 1961. Data gathered by these
states and reported in a Transcript of Conference: Conference
on Pollution of the Interstate Waters of the Raritan Bay and
Adjacent Waters, First Session. U. S. Department of Health,
Education and Welfare, New York, N. Y.
Odum, H. T. et. al. 1959. The Chlorophyll "a" of Communities.
Inst. Mar. Sci. Univ. Texas, Port Aransas. , 65-96.
Patten, D. M. 1959. Phytoplankton Energetics of Raritan Bay.
Limnol. Oceanogr., 6: 369-38?.
Pratt, D. M. 1959- The Phytoplankton of Narragansett Bay.
Limnol. Oceanogr., k-
Provasoli, L. I960, Micronutrients and Heterotrophy as Possible
Factors In Bluum Production in Natural Waters. Algae and
MpT.rop."'] i t,an Wastes, U. S. Department of Health, Education
diul Welfare, Cincinnati, pp. l;8-55«
Reish, D. J. 195?. The Effect of Pollution of Marine Life,
Indus. Wastes, 2: llU-118.
_ I960. The Use of Marine Invertebrates as Indicators
of Water Quality. In: Waste Disposal in the Marine Environ-
ment, ed. E. A. Pearson, Pergammon Press, N.Y. pp. 92-103.
Richards, F. R., with T. G. Thompson. 1952. The Estimation and
Characterization of Phytoplankton Populations by Pigment
Analysis. II. A Spectrophotometric Method for the Estima-
tion of Plankton Pigments. J. Mar. Res., 11; 156-172.
Riley, G. A. 19Ul. Plankton Studies. III. Long Island Sound.
Bull. Bingham Oceanogr. Coll. ?: 1-93.
Ryther, J. 195U. The Ecology of Phytoplankton Blooms in Morisches
Bay and Great South Bay, Long Island, N.Y. Biol. Bull., 106:
198-209.
ZoBell, C. 1959. Marine Pollution Problems in the Southern Cali-
fornia Area. Biological Problems in Water Pollution, U. S.
Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Cincinnati, pp.
177-183.
B-12
-------
I
I
-------
APPENDIX C
I
f
1
I
t
-------
I
I
I
-------
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'£
§
.5
^i
•T1
CO
H
CO
a
CO
S3
E-i H
O H
pr] -? O (D
o j: c
8 | o
8 3
e
r- j 'H
w ®
^ a
M W
r"^ ^ Q)
^
S 0) 0
isi ^^ rz3
^G *^^
o
PH d
• i ^
8 «
^ a
S , s
W <» H
3 co
£5 °
fe ^ CM
s ^
S ° ®
o * °
ft ^ ^
§ §
o ^
&J Q)
B s
g W
^ fn Q)
U ® f~l
§ g
S3 CO
c
6
•iH
-p
CO
4-^
CO
NO H
H H
O 0
H CM
XACO
CM H
XA H
H
0 t-
CM CM
ON ON
H H
XA O
CM f\
ON O
r- ON
0 0
CM CM
co q
i-H r-i
O- ON
r^ CM
OXA
H tn
ON-^f
H CM
r-oo
H H
0 O
CM CM
co t^-
H H
XAXA
NOrH
O 0
CM CM
CO O
CM CM
HXA
CM -
CM H
CM XA
CM CM
XAXA
CO NO
H H
XA CM
— f _rf
O O
o^co
CM
O ON
CM H
CO Q
c^\ c1^
Jt ON
H CM
O O
H C-
-f- c*^
H H
CM 3
O O
r>^ CM
H CM
co ON
XA CM
-f yQ
o o
CM _=»•
CM CM
rH **"\
r-i H
CO «
CO CO
CM CM
CMO C~-XA XA f- t~- O
r-1 CM CM H CM
OO OO XAO O O
C^-XA XAO O XA NO XA
H H H CM CM H
OO ON c~- CO C~- O XA
H H H CM
CM 0^ 0°( O ONNO H CA
CM o^ f~\ rA _rt r*~v r-l iH
ONON HCM HCM XA -^
H H H H
f*~\XA ON f\ CO rH O XA
CMH HC^ C^t*^ CM CM
OON COO OON O C*\
XAC— NO H XAC— C>- <*\
H H
f*A r^ \o 'LfS ^O ^O "LT\ — ^
r^ r^ r^ n« r^ i™H
CO Q CO Q CO Q
ON O\ O O iHl rH ^\ *O
^^ ^U CO CO f*^ C^ «^f — ^
-------
EH
H
§
K
M
PQ
j3
*3
c^
S
f*;
*• — x
•
I__J
0
ti
o
o
**~^
*
W
CO
H
j "|
pa co
td JH
CO CD
-P
a x
•H
^^ Hi
H -TJ
^i
EH O
CO O
H
0 ^
Ct) 1)
p
«<
EH W
(4 -H
-p
H-J *rH
0 fl) 0
O PH ^Q
8 ^
a ^
EH T)
CO Q)
s
S Q^
0 CO
a co
o
PH f4 CM
S 4)
04)
S CD O
o c
O w
C3 »rt
3 4)
S
fe n
53 ^ 0>
O 4) H
3 CO
d
O
l
T1
15
45
CO
?- o o o
H CM CO
o o o o
1A r-1 MD O
H 0^
CM
vO -LA 1A XA
O O O O
CM
oo O t — -S
f\ I—I
•LA -^t IA ^t
O O O 1A
_=f CM CM
vO i~t f*^ 1f\
-3 -3 (r\ \f\
H
xr\ -3 IA _=j-
r~— oo CM _^t
_=f -=t tA XA
MD
ON
0)
a
w
o
-p
•d
4)
•9
«>
ja
fr
to
55
"a
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
-------
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
H
O
§
O
PH
PH
fi
EH O
EH 3 -H
CD H O*O
fe {>» 5
a) o
pq £>
e
o
O rd
fe -P
Vj £_(
W »
o
H ,£>
^ CQ i — 1
CD a) -P
CO O O O CM CO
CO O O O CO ON
H H H
CM co \r\i-r\ ON O
H MD c— -H; CM
O H ONCO coco
H -H/ CM CO
O O- ON O ONMD
CO H CM
O "LA CM O co o
H H
CO -HJ- HO H ON
-H;-^- tr\-^t UN.-H;
C — ^-H/
H
O^ [" —
H CM
ON CM
CM 1_C\
CO _g
g._i Q
A 0
' pi
— it co
CM
CO
•d
s
H
_{-]
bfl
•H
w
MD CO
ON ON
-^JMD
CM CO
CO CO
H H
CO H
H
l>- CM
^A-3
------- An error occurred while trying to OCR this image.
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
X~N
•
H
JJ
c!
O
o
CM
NO
ON
H
H
P
1
p£|
g
^5
CO
fcj
g
tD
CO
g
EH ffi
O 1
P^ ~~^
O CM
O 1
OH 1
PH 1
pi 0
-a! -a! 0
to
at
rl
W)
•l~(
jxj
o
•H
-P
C
CD
] — (
-p
•*!
E — e*~\ c — ON
C1^ "j- pr\ p^
_7f co XANO
NO -3 ON H
XA NO ON CM
r-T
O H -CtMD
ON H [>-\A
co ONXA m
*\ *v
CM H
ON C— CO
CM -3" C~~
O
CM -=t ON CO
en XA CM co
NO O CO CM
v^
H
o
NO CO XA ON
ON NO C-- O
oo co XA en
•\ *\
H rH
rrj TJ Tl5
ON -Ct-d-XA
C— -d'-d'XA
CD H H CD
CO
txt) cfl a}
^
pf 0 CD
cti
cd
-^f Cl -H
i~i *rn
NO T(
•• i3 0)
H 0) tJ
'B H
rH 0
•H
-p
-P O
rH Of!
NO ti
CM
CM NO
O -^
\. O
en r-i
co -\ -\
XA CO uD
XA
• •
^4 ^H
<3 «^
O XA
o ~3r
NO \O
CM O O
-3" -P .-P
•> CM CM
rH NO NO
CM ON
CO CO
—H/ • •
H S S
i — ( PH PH
O O
O -=f
CD .. ..
W) en r-l
CO
?H 1 1
CD
> W CO
o o
.£ ^
XA i>-
1 — 1 1 — 1
£-1 ?H
O 0
CD
G ri -p
• fn fn 6
H 'H
4j P R -p
cd O O CQ
PH P^ CQ ("f")
cd JD o -d
-------
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
f
I
I
I
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
APPENDIX D
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
I
i
i
i
i
i
i
-------
I
• State of New Jersey
Dr. Roscoe P. Kandle - Commissioner of Health
p Alfred H. Fletcher - Director, Division of Environmental Sanitation,
State Health Department
I R. S. Shaw - Chief, Bureau of Public Health, State Health Department
E. R. Segesser - State Health Department
C
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
L. G. MacNamara - State Department of Conservation & Economic Development
State of New York
Dr. Hollis S. Ingraham - Commissioner of Health
• A. F. Dappert - Director, Bureau of Water Resources Services, State
* Health Department
I. Grossman - State Health Department
E. ¥. Montanari - Assistant Commissioner for Water Resources, Conservation
• Department
David H. Wallace - Director of Marine Fisheries, State Conservation De-
partment
Harold F. Udell - State Conservation Department
Interstate Sanitation Commission
Dr. Natale Colosi - Chairman
Dr. Kitchen Wendell
T. R. Glenn, Jr. - Director and Chief Engineer
Louis J. Fontenelli - Vice Chairman
George T. Cowherd, Jr. - Assistant Chief Engineer
City of New York
• Stanley Pinel - Office of Administration
Murray Herman - Office of Administration
Pr. George James - Commissioner of Health
Jerome Trichter - Assistant Commissioner of Health
D-l
I
-------
City of New York (Cont'd)
merit
Meyer F. Wiles - Deputy Commissioner, General Manager, City Department
of Public Works
William A. O'Leary - Director, Bureau of Water Pollution Control, City
tions Section, Technical Services Branch
D-2
I
I
Harold Romer - Director, Bureau of Sanitary Engineering, City Health De-
partment B|
William T. Ingram - City Health Department
Raymond Siedlman - Senior Public Health Sanitarian, City Health Depart- •
m^TTf. ••
I
Department of Public Works •
Alexander Wirin - City Department of Parks
Charles Samowitz - City Bureau of Budget ™
Public Health Service - Washington, D. C. *
_ . |
Murray Stein - Chief, isrif'orcement Branch, Division of Water Supply and
Poll-ution Control M
Peter G. Kuh - Chief, Interstate Enforcement Section, Enforcement Branch,
Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control
Rheta Piere - Conference Co-ordinator, Enforcement Branch, Division of •
Water Supply and Pollution Control
K. E. Biglane - Assistant Chief, Eastern Operations, Technical Services ||
Branch, Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control
William A. Felsing - Chief, Field Operations Section, Shellfish Sanita- •
tion Branch
Robert A. Taft Sanitary Engineering Center, Public Health Service •
Dr. Paul W. Kabler - Chief of Microbiology, Basic & Applied Sciences Branch
Harold F. Clark - Chief Bacteriologist, Water Quality Studies, Basic & Ap- |
plied Sciences Branch
Ralph Porges - Deputy Chief, Technical Advisory & Investigations Section, I
Technical Services Branch *
F. W. Kittrell - Public Health Engineer, Pollution Evaluation, Field Opera- I
I
I
-------
I
• P-gblic Health Service - New York Regional Office
— Dr. Harald M. Graning - Regional Health Director
* Sylvan C. Martin - Assistant Regional Health Director, Environmental
Health Services
Earl J. Anderson - Regional Program Director, Water Supply & Pollution
Control
I
I
I
I
William H. Megonnell - Regional Program Director, Environmental Engineer-
ing & Food Protection
Thomas G. Frangos - Sanitary Engineer, Enforcement Section, Water Supply
& Pollution Control
James H. McDermott - Sanitary Engineer, Basic Data Section, Water Supply
& Pollution Control
I Donald S. Baker - Assistant Sanitary Engineer, Basic Data Section, Water
Supply & Pollution Control
Sidney E. Clark - Assistant Sanitary Engineer, Construction Grants Sec-
• tion, Water-Supply & Pollution Control
Ronald Macomber - Shellfish Program, Environmental Engineering & Food
flj Protection
Robert E. Linkner -^Assistant Sanitary Engineer, Shellfish Program, En-
vironmental Engineering & Food Protection
Aaron Englisher - Regional Public Health Representative for Grants
Management
I
Health Service - Raritan Bay Project
• Paul DeFalco, Jr. - Project Director
Juan M. Ramos - Chief, Laboratory Branch
• Stanley G. Monroe - Senior Sanitary Engineer
Kenneth H. Walker - Senior Assistant Sanitary Engineer
V Francis Brezenski - Bacteriologist
m John Bacharz - Bacteriologist
William E. Miller - Chemist
• Dale B. Parke - Assistant Sanitary Engineer
D-3
I
-------
I
Public Health Service - Raritan Bay Project (Cont'd) I
Ralph R. Wirth - Assistant Sanitary Engineer
Charles L. Brown - Marine Biologist •
Bernard R. Sacks - Assistant Sanitary Engineer •
Stuart F. Somers - Assistant Sanitary Engineer
Public Health Service - Delaware Estuary Comprehensive Study •
E. L. MacLeman - Project Director
I
Public Health Service - Northeast Shellfish Sanitation Research Center
Robert Campbell - Aquatic Biologist
Public Health Service Consultants
Dr. Warren Litsky •
Dr. Bernard Newman
Gerald Palevsky I
Federal Agencies m
Commander W. C. Dahlgren - U. S. Coast Guard
William H. Wechter - Sanitary Engineer, First Army Engineers •
Stanley Wechsler - Hydraulics Engineer, U. S. Army Engineers District,
New York •
Warren S. Landers - Fishery Biologist, Bureau of Commercial Fisheries
Shellfish Laboratory m
Richard W. Sherman - Special Assistant for Sanitary Engineering, Third
Naval District, New York
S. Allen Betts - U. S. Naval Ammunition Depot, Earle, N. J. •
President's Advisory Board (Water Pollution Control) •
Charles H. Callison - Member and Assistant to the President, National
Audubon Society mm
Raritan Valley Sewerage Authority
Walter J. Kling - Chief Operator ft
I
-------
I
• New Jersey Joint Sewer Commission
Edward P. Decher - Executive Director
( Matthew Krafte
m Middlesex County Sewerage Authority
Anthony J. Popowski - Chairman
• Sol Seid - Chief Engineer
Ariel A. Thomas
• Oyster Institute of North America
— Elizabeth M. Wallace - Executive Director
™ Stanley Cottrell
• John M. Parsons
North Jersey Commercial Fishermen's Association
• Martin Feldman
_ Civic Associations
• Dr. I. L. Small - League of Women Voters, Summit, N. J.
• Mrs. William H. Rossell - League of Women Voters, New York
J. H. Bennett - President, New Dorp & Grant City Taxpayers Association
• Mrs. Norma Cirella - Vice President, New Dorp & Grant City Taxpayers
Association
• Gwendolyn M. Compton - Raritan Anti-Pollution Association
Universities
I Dr. H. Heukelekian - Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N. J.
« R. Manganelli - Rutgers University, New Brunswick, N. J.
Harvey Lieber - Brooklyn College, Brooklyn, N. T.
• James Pfafflin - The Cooper Union, New York, N. Y.
W. Rowe - Student, The Cooper Union, New York, N. Y.
I
I
-------
Industries
Thomas Chinili - Ocean View Seafood Co.
Lloyd L. Falk - E. I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc., Engineering Depart-
ment
Robert G. Hand - Cities Service Oil Co.
J. S. Baum - Cities Service Oil Co.
Press
John J. Reilly, Jr. - World Telegram &. Sun
Anna Peterson - New York Times
D-6
I
I
W. L. Mann - Staff Assistant to Plant Manager, National Lead Co., Titan- —
iura Division •
A. W. Sitarski - Humble Oil & Refining Co.
Daniel P. Grace - Engineering Supervisor, Humble Oil & Refining Co. •
Fred Greene - Humble Oil & Refining Co. (Bayway Refinery) v
A. P. Dennis, Jr. - Humble Oil & Refining Co. (Bayway Refinery)
R. E. Thurn - Product Quality Coordinator, California Oil Co. I
Ralph Schmidt - American Cyanamid Co.
A. J. Gabaccia - American Cyanamid Co. |
M. H. Klegerman - Alexander Potter Associates (Civil Engineers) •
Francis Charles - Plant Manager, General Aniline & Film Corp.
Charles F. Bien - Pollution Control Engineer, General Aniline & Film Corp. •
J. H. Morris - Merck & Co., Inc.
E. E. Drapp - Engineer, Alcoa |
Robert C. Moore - Vice President, E. T. Killam Associates (RVSA) •
Jack Marshall - President, Ekroth Laboratories
Dale T. Mayrose - General American Transportation Corp. I
Lincoln Peschiera - National Lead Co., Titanium Division
I
I
I
-------
I
• Press
Ian E. McNett - Perth Amboy Evening News
• J. Ridgeway - Assistant Editor, New Republic Magazine
I
J. ¥. Ludlum - New Jersey State Chamber of Commerce
|| Eugene F. Craig - Executive Assistant, Borough President's Office
I Elaine A. Kovessy ~ Legislative Assistant to Congressman J, M. Murphy,
16th C. D.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
D-7
6PO 913-676
-------
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
I
------- |