FOR THE

           Milwaukee Area, Wisconsin
                   June 1966
Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
  Great Lakes-Illinois River Basins Project
                   Region V

               Chicago, Illinois


       The Department of the Interior welcomes the opportunity
afforded by the Honorable Warren P. Knowles, Governor of the great
State of Wisconsin, to present this portion of our comprehensive
water pollution control program for the Lake Michigan Basin at
Milwaukee, Wisconsin on June 28, 1966.

       The action program set forth in this document, when implemented,
will protect and enhance the quality of the waters of the Milwaukee
area and the adjacent waters of Lake Michigan.  It will increase their
usefulness for recreational purposes.  It will provide a more suitable
environment for fish and aquatic life and add to the value of this
resource.  It will improve the quality and usefulness of the area's
waters for municipal and industrial purposes, esthetic enjoyment and
many other beneficial uses.

       Working together as a team, the agencies concerned with the
control of water pollution at all levels of government can, and will
bring this program to fruition for the benefit of the people of
Wisconsin and the Nation.

                        TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter No.                                             Page No.

               SUMMARY                                    i

               RECOMMENDED ACTIONS                       iii

    1.         INTRODUCTION

                    Purpose                               1-1
                    Scope                                 1-1
                    Great Lakes-Illinois River
                    Basins Project                        1-1

    2.         DESCRIPTION OF AREA

                    Geography                             2-1
                    Population                            2-4
                    Area Economy                          2-5


                    Water Uses                            3-1
                    Water Quality Goals                   3-5

    4.         WASTE SOURCES

                    Municipal                             4-1
                    Industrial                            4-3
                    Combined Sewers                       4-4
                    Agriculture and Land Runoff           4-5
                    Federal Installations                 4-5
                    Phosphates                            4-6
                    Ships and Boats                       4-7
                    Dredging                              4-8

    5.         LAKE CURRENTS

                    Background                            5-1
                    Findings                              5-1
                    Summary                               5-2


                    General                               6-1
                    Summary                               6-1
                    Milwaukee Harbor                      6-2
                    Study Area Streams                    6-6

                TABLE OF CONTENTS   (Continued)

Chapter No.                                             Page No.


                    General                              7-1
                    Municipal Waste Treatment             7-1
                    Industrial  Wastes                     7-2
                    Combined Sewers                      7-2
                    Reduction of Nutrients                7-3
                    Alert Procedures                     7-4
                    Treatment Plant Operation             7-5
                    Monitoring                            7-6
                    State Water Pollution Control
                    Program                              7-6

    8.         PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION                     8-1

    9.         BENEFITS                                  9-1


                        LIST OF TABLES
Number                      Title                      Page No.

 1-1            GLIRBP Lake Michigan Basin Reports
                Tentative Program Reports                1-1

 1-2            Technical Committee to the Great
                Lakes-Illinois River Basins Project      1-2

 2-1            Major Streams                            2-1

 2-2            U.S.G.S. Gaging Stations                 2-2

 2-3            Streamflow Records - Milwaukee
                River Basin                              2-2

 2-4            Normal Temperature and
                Precipitation - Milwaukee                2-4

 2-5            Estimated I960 Population -
                Milwaukee Study Area                     2-5

 2-6            Projected Population -
                Milwaukee Study Area                     2-5

 2-7            Manufacturing Employment in
                Counties of the Milwaukee R. Basin       2-6

 2-8            Value Added By Manufacture in Counties
                of the Milwaukee River Basin             2-7

 3-1            Major Water Uses - Milwaukee Area        3-1

 3-2            Total Water Intake - Municipal
                Water System - Milwaukee Area            3-1

 3-3            Major Municipal Water Demand
                Projected 1980-2020                      3-2

 3-4            Self-Supplied Industrial Water
                Demand Projected 1980-2020               3-2

 3-5            Acreage of Irrigated Land in
                Farms - Milwaukee Area                   3-3

 3-6            Water Quality Criteria                   3-5

 4-1            Major Municipal Waste Load
                Projections 1980-2020                    4-3

                   LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Number                       Title                     Page No.

 4-2            Major Industrial Waste Sources -
                1964                                     4-3

 4-3            Major Sources of Phosphates
                Milwaukee Study Area                     4-6

 5-1            Histogram of Current Direction
                December to April at Milwaukee           5-2

 6-1            Milwaukee Harbor and Adjacent
                Waters of Lake Michigan
                Numbers of Samples, Averages and
                Ranges - mg/1                            6-3

 6-2            Coliform Densities in Milwaukee
                Harbor - 1962                            6-5

 6-3            Coliform and Fecal Streptococci
                Densities Milwaukee Harbor 1963          6-5

 6-4            Milwaukee River Water Quality
                1961-1964 Averages                       6-6

 7-1            Municipal Waste Treatment Needs
                Milwaukee Study Area                     7-1

                         LIST OF FIGURES
Number                         Title                      Page No,

 1-1            Milwaukee Area Location Map                 1-1

 1-2            Great Lakes-Illinois River Basins
                Project                                     1-1

 5-1            Generalized Long Term Movements Near
                Milwaukee - September-March                 5-2

 5-2            Generalized Long Term Movements Near
                Milwaukee - April-August                    5-2

 6-1            Milwaukee Harbor - Ammonia Nitrogen
                1962-1964                                   6-3

 6-2            Milwaukee Harbor - Phosphates
                1962-1964                                   6-3

 6-3            Milwaukee Harbor - Phenols - 1962-
                1964                                        6-3

 6-4            Benthic Fauna Populations - Lake
                Michigan Near the Milwaukee River
                1962-1963                                   6-5

 6-5            Phytoplankton Populations - Lake
                Michigan Near the Milwaukee River           6-5

 6-6            Distribution of Coliform Bacteria
                per 100 ml - Milwaukee Harbor               6-5


       The waters of the Milwaukee area, particularly, the lower
Milwaukee River within Milwaukee County, Milwaukee Harbor and the
adjacent waters of Lake Michigan are seriously degraded in quality.
Swimming, boating, fishing and esthetic enjoyment are among some of
the water uses adversly affected by this degradation of water
quality.  Biological, chemical, microbiological and physical
parameters analyzed by the Great Lakes-Illinois River Basins Project
indicate this fact.  Further evidence of pollution cited in this
report included the frequent closing of City beaches due to bacterial-
contamination, the presence of objectionable algal blooms and the
general appearance of the waters of the area.

Sources of Pollution

       Municipal waste treatment plants of the Milwaukee area serve
a present population of 1,080,000.  These plants receive an
additional industrial waste load population equivalent (in terms of
oxygen consuming capacity) of 1,570,000.  The combined effluents from
these municipal waste treatment facilities discharge a total of
60,000 pounds per day of BOD^ to the waters of the area.  Municipal
waste effluents represent the largest source of pollution in the
Milwaukee area.

       Other significant waste sources include those industries
which discharge wastes directly to the waters of the area (25,000
pounds of BODc; per day), intermittant discharges from combined sewer
overflows, wastes discharged from commercial and private vessels and
urban and rural runoff.

       In addition to the organic load imposed by these waste
sources other contaminants of significance in the area include
phosphates, phenols, ammonia nitrogen and bacterial contamination.

Future Conditions

       Growth projections made by GLIRE Project economists indicate
that the Milwaukee study area I960 population of 1,10A.,000 will
increase more than two-fold by 2020.  Industrial activity is
projected to increase more than six-fold over the same time period.
Taking into account these and other related factors it is con-
sidered that the untreated waste load handled by all Municipal
sewerage systems in the study area will increase to approximately

8 million PE by 2020.  Compare this with the present estimated
untreated load of 2,700,000 PE.

Need for Comprehensive Program

       The present impairment of certain water uses in the area plus
the increasing waste loads which will be imposed on the waste
treatment facilities point out the need for the development of a
comprehensive program for water pollution control in the Milwaukee
area.  The program of necessity must emphasize construction of new
sewerage facilities, proper operation of new and existing facilities,
and intensive and continuous monitoring of operation, waste treat-
ment efficiency and water quality.

       The following recommendations represent the initial
requirements of a comprehensive pollution control program for the
Milwaukee Area.

                      RECOMMENDED ACTIONS
     1.  All municipal waste treatment facilities should be designed
and operated to provide secondary (biological) waste treatment and
to achieve an overall reduction in untreated BOD^ of 90 percent or
higher, on a continuous basis.

     2.  To provide maximum protection to the quality of Milwaukee
Harbor waters the Jones Island treatment plant should be continuously
operated at maximum efficiency.  The Milwaukee Sewerage Commission
should also consider the addition of some form or tertiary treatment.
The new South Shore plant and the South Milwaukee plant both need
improvement so as to provide secondary waste treatment and proper
operation to achieve 90 percent BODc removal.

     3.  Continuous disinfection should be provided for all
municipal waste treatment plant effluents in the study area.  The
Jones Island treatment plant in the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage
District has a critical need for disinfection of the plant effluent
prior to discharge to Milwaukee Harbor waters.

     4.  All separately discharging industrial wastes should receive
the equivalent of secondary treatment, as described above.  Where
practicable, industrial wastes should be discharged to municipal
sewerage systems so as to receive final treatment at properly de-
signed and operated municipal treatment plants.

     5.  The Peter Cooper Corporation at Oak Creek, Wisconsin should
complete negotiations with the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage
District to provide adequate secondary treatment of the industry's
waste at the new South Shore treatment plant.  The secondary
facilities recommended for the South Shore Plant (see 2) should be
so designed as to adequately treat this additional  industrial waste

     6.  Maximization of phosphate removal, through modification in
the operation and/or design of existing and newly constructed
secondary waste treatment facilities should be an immediate objective.
Records of phosphorus  removal at the treatment plants of the study
area should be carefully evaluated after one year to determine if
significant phosphorus removals have been achieved.   If such removals
are not achieved,  consideration should be given to  the possible in-
stallation of chemical precipitation facilities at  such plants.

     7.  Combined sewers should be strictly prohibited in all newly
developed urban areas and should be separated in coordination with
urban renewal projects.  Existing combined sewer systems, particularly
in the Milwaukee area, should be patrolled and overflow regulating
devices should be adjusted to convey the maximum practicable amount
of combined flow to treatment facilities.

     8. All industries and municipalities and other agencies dis-
charging wastes into the waters of the stud;-/ area should submit
within six months, to the appropriate State agency, a report con-
taining a time schedule for completion of any new construction,
modifications to any existing structures, process changes or operating
procedures necessary to meet the above recommendations.

     9.  The Wisconsin State Board of Health should conduct municipal
waste treatment plant inspections at least once a year for small and
medium-sized plants, and at least twice annually for the larger plants.

     10.  Monthly reports covering the operation of municipal waste
treatment plants should be submitted to the Wisconsin State Board of
Health for review and evaluation.

     11.  The adoption of a mandatory sewage treatment plant
operators' certification program in Wisconsin is recommended. Operator
training courses should be offered annually.

     12.  The water quality monitoring program of the Wisconsin
Committee on Water Pollution in the study area should be strengthened.
The program should be geared to indicate changes or trends in water
quality and the need for additional quality improvement measures,
such as chemical precipitation for phosphate removal.  The monitoring
program should be supplemented by monthly reports covering the quan-
tity and quality of all significant municipal and industrial wastes
discharged in the study area.

     13.  It is recommended that the water pollution control activities
in Wisconsin be strengthened in terms of staffing and budget.  With
additional resources and the support available from the Administration
the implementation of the program outlined herein and similar programs
in other Basins throughout the State can be accelerated to meet the
growing need for clean water in Wisconsin.

                            CHAPTER 1


       The purpose of this report on the Milwaukee Area, Wisconsin
is to present information concerning sources of municipal and
industrial wastes, projected future waste loads, present water
quality conditions, present and anticipated future water uses and
recommended actions to provide the water quality necessary to
accommodate those water uses.
       The area within the scope of this report includes the
Milwaukee River Basin and all other areas within Milwaukee County.
(See Figure l-l).  Water quality conditions in the adjacent waters
of Lake Michigan are of particular importance.

Great Lakes-Illinois River Basins Project

       This report is one in a series of 7 proposed documents (Table
l-l) being prepared by the Great Lakes-Illinois River Basins (GLIRB
Project at Chicago, Illinois.  When completed these 7 reports, taken
together, will present a comprehensive program for water pollution
control in the entire Lake Michigan Basin.  In addition to the Lake
Michigan Basin, GLIRB Project with program offices currently
located at Cleveland, Ohio, Rochester, New York and Detroit,
Michigan, is developing similar programs for the watersheds of Lakes
Erie, Ontario, Huron and Superior and the Illinois River Basin
(Figure 1-2).


       Comprehensive water pollution control studies were authorized
by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1956, as subsequently
amended.  Initiation of the comprehensive program activity followed
an appropriation of funds by the 86th Congress late in I960.  In
accordance with the provisions of the Act the Secretary of Health,
Education, and Welfare delegated the responsibility for the study to
the Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control of the Public
Health Service.  Passage"of the "Water Quality Act of 1965" gave the
responsibility for these studies to the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration (FWPCA) of which the Great Lakes-Illinois

                             TABLE 1-1



                              FOR THE

                       LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN
                    Tentative Program Reports

Green Bay Area, Michigan and Wisconsin

Milwaukee Area, Wisconsin

Grand River Basin, Michigan

Kalamazoo River Basin, Michigan

St. Joseph River Basin, Indiana and Michigan

Calumet Area, Illinois and Indiana

Lake Michigan and Tributary Areas (Summary Report)

                                                         VICINITY MAP
                                            Milwaukee  Study Area boundary — — —-
                                            Lake Michigan watershed boundary	
                                            County lines
                                            State lines
                  20 miles
                                                 GREAT  LAKES  8  ILLINOIS
                                                   RIVER  BASINS PROJECT
                                                US DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
                                             FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMIN
                                                                  FIGURE-  l-l


River Basins Project is now a part.  As a result of Reorganization
Plan No. 2 of 1966 the FWPCA was transferred from the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare to the Department of the Interior
effective May 10, 1966.


       Following the initial appropriation of funds by Congress in
I960, a task force designated the GLIRE Project was organized to
conduct the comprehensive study.  The Project headquarters are
located at 1819 West Pershinc Road, Chicago, Illinois.  Its
permanent staff includes specialists covering a broad gamut of
professional skills, including sanitary and hydraulic engineers,
chemists, biologists, bacteriologists, radiochemists, oceanographers,
and economists.  The Project has drawn freely on the resources of
the Robert A. Taft Sanitary Engineering Center at Cincinnati, Ohio.
Valuable counsel and advice have been received from a Technical
Committee appointed by the Surgeon General of the Public Health
Service.  This Committee is composed of men in responsible posi-
tions in State water resource and water pollution control agencies,
municipal water and sewer departments, private research organizations,
conservation groups; industry.  Table 1-2 gives the names and
positions of the Technical Committee Members.

                         Cooperative Program

       As required by the authorizing legislation the GLIRB Project
has worked closely with other Federal, State and local agencies to
develop a comprehensive water pollution control program.  A list of
the principal agencies which have participated through preparation
of special reports or through their release of supporting informa-
tion is as follows:


            State Sanitary Water Board
            Department of Public Health


            Stream Pollution Control Board
            State Board of Health


            State Water Resources Commission
            Department of Health


            State Committee on Water Pollution
            State Board of Health


                             TABLE 1-2
Norval E. Anderson
Consulting Engineer
The Metropolitan Sanitary District
  of Greater Chicago
100 East Erie Street
Chicago, Illinois 6o6ll

Burton H. Atwood
National Treasurer
Izaak Walton League
Crystal Lake, Illinois

Albert G. Ballert
Acting Executive Director and
  Director of Research
Great Lakes Commission
Rackhara Building
Ann Arbor, Michigan

K. W. Bauer
Executive Director
Southeastern Wis. Reg. Plann. Comm.
Old Court House
Waukesha, Wisconsin  5318?

R. M. Billings
Assistant to Vice President
Research and Engineering
Kimberly-Clark Corporation
Lakeview Mill
Neenah, Wisconsin  5^-957

Dr. C. S. Boruff
Technical Director
Hiram Walker & Sons, Inc.
Peoria 1, Illinois
James A. Kelly
Waste Control Department
628 Building
The Dov Chemical Company
Midland, Michigan

C. W. Klassen
Technical Secretary
State of Illinois
Sanitary Water Board
Springfield, Illinois  62706

B. J. Leland
Engineer in Charge of Chicago
Illinois Sanitary Water Board
1919 West Taylor Street
Chicago, Illinois  6o6l2

Edward C. Logelin
Vice President
U. S. Steel Corporation
208 South La Salle Street
Chicago, Illinois  60690

R. C. Mallatt
Technical Service Superintendent
American Oil Company
2831 Indianapolis Blvd.
Whiting, Indiana  4639^

P. J. Karschall
Vice President in Charge of
Abbott Laboratories
lUth and Sheridan Road
North Chicago, Illinois

                          TABLE 1-2 (Cont'd.)


Horace R. Frye
Supt. Water and Sewer Department
City of Evanston
Evanston, Illinois

H. H. Gerstein
Chief Water Engineer
Bureau of Water
City Hall
Chicago, Illinois  60602

Ross L. Harbaugh
Assistant to the Vice President
Manufacturing and Research
  for Environmental Technology
Inland Steel Company
Indiana Harbor Works
East Chicago, Indiana

R. A. Hirshfield
Staff Engineer
Commonwealth Edison Company
Chicago, Illinois 60690
0. J. Muegge
State Sanitary Engineer
The State of Wisconsin
Board of Health
State Office Building
Madison 2, Wisconsin

Loring F. Oeming
Executive Secretary
State of Michigan
Water Resources Commission
200 Mill Street
Lansing, Michigan  48912

B. A. Poole
Technical Secretary
Indiana Stream Pollution Control
1330 West Michigan Street
Indianapolis 7, Indiana

U. S. Federal Power Commission

U. S. Department of the Army

     Corps of Engineers

U. S. Department of the Interior

     Bureau of Commercial Fisheries
     Bureau of Outdoor Recreation
     Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife
     Geological Survey

U. S. Department of Commerce

     Weather Bureau
     Office of Business Economics

                         CHAPTER  2

                    DESCRIPTION OF AREA

       As described in Chapter 1, the study area of this report
includes the entire Milwaukee River Basin, all other area within
Milwaukee County, and the adjacent waters of Lake Michigan
(Figure 1-1).

       The Milwaukee River drainage basin has an area of 845 square
miles and is located in southeastern Wisconsin.  The principal axis
of the watershed extends in a north-south direction for approx-
mately 65 miles, roughly parallel to the western shore of Lake
Michigan.  In the east-west direction the watershed has a maximum
dimension of approximately 25 miles in the upper reaches of the


       The Milwaukee River originates in the southeast corner of
Fond du Lac County approximately 5 miles north of the small commu-
nity of Campbellsport.  The stream flows south to West Bend and
then makes a right-angle bend to flow east to the Waubeka area
where it is joined by the North Branch of the River, its largest
tributary.  The stream then flows south through Czaukee County into
Milwaukee County and to its outlet to Lake Michigan at Milwaukee.

       The major streams in the Milwaukee River Basin are described
below in Table 2-1.

                         TABLE 2-1
             Major Streams-Milwaukee River Basin

Stream                 Drainage Area     Length of Stream  Average
                         (Sq.mi.)            (mi.)         Slope

Milwaukee River            845                99            5.3
North Branch Milwaukee
  River                    140                24            7.1
Cedar Creek                125                32           11.3
Menomonee River            128                32            8.5

       Other minor streams tributary to the Milwaukee River in-
clude the VJest Branch and East Branch of the River, Lincoln Creek
and the Kinnickinnic River.

       The southwestern corner of Milwaukee County is drained by the
Root River which discharges to Lake Michigan at Racine.  The south-
eastern corner of Milwaukee County, including the South Milwaukee
Area, is drained by Oak Creek which discharges to Lake Michigan at
South Milwaukee.

       The U. S. Geological Survey maintains 6 stream gaging sta-
tions within the study area.  These stations are described below in
Table 2-2.

                            TABLE 2-2

Milwaukee River
Cedar Creek
Menomonee River
Oak Creek
Root River
Root River Canal
   U.S.G.S. Gaging Stations
       Milwaukee Area


Milwaukee(Port Washington Rd.Bridge)
2 miles North of Cedarburg
Wauwatosa (70th St. Bridge)
South Milwaukee (near 15th Ave.Bridge)
Near Franklin (near Highway 100)
Near Franklin (3.5 mi.above Root R.)
                                                        Period of
       The mean and pertinent ranges of streamflow as observed at
the Milwaukee and Cedar Creek (long-term) stations during the avail-
able periods of record are listed in Table 2-3.

                          TABLE 2-3
                    Streamflow Records
                 Milwaukee River Basin(l,2)

Milwaukee R. at
                 Drainage     Minimum    7-day, l-in-10 yr.
                  Area         Flow         Low Flow         Mean Flow
                (sq. mi.)     (cfs)           (cfs)	    (cfs)
                   686         0              21             379
Cedar Creek near

                      Topography and Soils

       The topography of the area has been largely determined by
the various glaciations to which the lands have been subjected.
Various advances and recessions of the ice sheets, particularly
the last glacial advance during the Wisconsin Ice Age, have endowed
the area with numerous ridges, intervening lowlands, and extensive
areas where depressions called kettles alternate with kames or
small hummocks in lending great diversity to the terrain.

       The relative relief of the area is moderate to rolling. The
highest elevation is approximately 1200 feet above sea level in
Fond du Lac County.  Southward, the area becomes flatter and
gradually decreases in elevation until it reaches Milwaukee where
the elevation is about 580 feet.

       The landscape adjacent to Lake Michigan and inland for
approximately 4 miles is gently undulating to nearly level, inter-
spersed with swales and depressions.  The area west to the "Kettle
Moraine" and to the southwest boundary of the watershed is rolling
to nearly level.  Also to be found are drumlins, kames, and kettles,
with some lakes in the area.  The area known as the "Kettle Moraine1'
is rolling to hilly with the depressions occupied by lakes and peat
bogs.  The remaining area west of the "Kettle Moraine" is rolling
to nearly level.

       In the Milwaukee River Basin adjacent to Lake Michigan and
extending inland to approximately Thiensville, Cedarburg, Fredonia
and Random Lake soils of light colored silty clay loam and shallow
silt loam surfaces are prevalent.  Extending farther inland to West
Bend and the "Kettle Moraine" soils are usually of a brownish gray
color.  In the depressions are peat deposits or dark colored mineral
soils.  In the "Kettle Moraine" the ridges and hills consist of
gravels locally capped by loams having light colored surfaces.  The
depressions are occupied by lakes, peat bogs and marsh-border soils.
In the remaining area to the northwest of the "Kettle Moraine"
soils are similar to the ones adjacent to the east of the "Kettle
Moraine," as previously described.


       The climate of the area is largely influenced by the waters
of Lake Michigan.  The area is astride the main cyclonic storm
tracks along which a series of high and low pressure centers move
across the continent from west to east.  The pressure areas provide
a varied climate and are the major influence in relation to pre-
cipitation.  In Table 2-4 the normal temperature range and precipi-
tation distribution are shown for the Milwaukee weather station.



           TABLE  2-4

Normal Temperature and Precipitation

         Milwaukee (3)

           Precipitation (in.)    Temperature (°F)
       Most of the streams are ice-covered from late November to
late March.  Snow covers the ground during practically all of the
winter months.


       The study area had a I960 population of approximately
1,104,000.  It is estimated that 99 percent of the area population
is municipal.  The total population includes the City of Milwaukee
which had a I960 population of 741,234.  Other large cities and
centers of industrial activity include West Allis (68,157),
Wauwatosa (56,923) and several other communities over 15,000 in
population.  More than 90 percent of the study area population is
located in Milwaukee County.

       The I960 population was distributed over the study area as
shown in Table 2-5.

                           TABLE  2-5

            Est. I960 Population - Milwaukee Study Area

County                Municipal Population      Total Population

Milwaukee                1,036,000                 1,036,000
Ozaukee (pt.)               21,300                    29,000
Washington (pt.)            14,200                    19,900
Sheboygan (pt.)              1,700                     5,500
Waukesha (pt.)              10,500                    10,500
Fond du Lac (pt.)            1,800                     4,200
      TOTAL              1,086,000                 1,104,000

NOTE:  A very minor portion of Dodge County is also in the
       study area.

       The population of the Milwaukee study area has been pro-
jected to the year 2020 as shown below in Table 2-6.

                          TABLE  2-6

            Projected Population - Milwaukee Study Area

                I960             1980                 2020

Municipal     1,086,000        1,500,000           2,560,000

Total         1,104,000        1,520,000           2,580,000
       As shown in the above table, the projected population of the
study area remains essentially municipal in the future.  A non-
municipal population of about 20,000 lives in the upper part of the
study area and it is assumed that this non-municipal population will
remain approximately the same in the future.

Area Economy

       Milwaukee County, '//aukesha County and the lower part of
Ozaukee County are highly urbanized.  The major communities are
served by the Chicago and Northwestern Railway and by the Chicago,
Milwaukee, St. Paul and Pacific Railroad.

       Milwaukee is a leading Lake port.  A large part of port
activities consists of bringing in raw materials needed in manu-
facturing and coal needed for fuel and power.  A variety of products
handled by the port enter into trans-oceanic as well as Great Lakes
commerce.  In 1963 the net tonnage in Lake and overseas commerce
was 7.1 million tons.  The transshipment of commodities is an im-
portant function of the Milwaukee area and provides linkage between
the city and outlying areas.

       Manufacturing is the predominant economic activity in the
Milwaukee study area.  Leading industries include machinery, food
and kindred products, fabricated metal products, primary metal
industries, transportation equipment and printing and publishing.
Generally, total manufacturing activity has not kept pace with the
national rate of growth since 1947; also the growth of water-using
industries in the study area has not kept pace with the growth of
these industries in the East North Central States.

       Figures on manufacturing employment and value added by manu-
facture are presented in Tables 2-7 and 2-8 for the counties which
lie entirely or partially within the study area.

                            TABLE  2-7

                  Manufacturing Employment in Counties
                              of the         (4)
                        Milwaukee River Basin
1947    |B     1954    |B     19 58    |B     1963
Fond du Lac
            214,141  100   213,003  100   211,541   100  223,686   100
NOTE:  %E = percent county manufacturing employment is of the total
            of the six counties in the Basin.

                                TABLE  2-8

                   Value Added by Manufacture in Counties
                                 of the         (4)
                            Milwaukee River Basin
              (Thousands of Dollars)

1947     gB      1954      £B     1958
$B      1963
Fond du Lac
            1,495,300  100   1,864,400  100   1,987,500  100   2,535,000  100

NOTE:  %B = percent county value added by manufacture is of the total
            of the six counties in the basin.
            Milwaukee County also ranks ninth among the nation's indus-
     trial areas and is one of the largest consumers of steel.   Milwaukee
     County does about 30 percent of Wisconsin's retail trade and about
     50 percent of the wholesale trade.  Jobs in trade, service, finance,
     government, and transportation are increasing more rapidly than

            Agriculture consists primarily of dairy and livestock farming.
     In the central  and western areas of the Milwaukee River Basin,  large
     areas are used  for the production of onions,  mint, corn and truck
     crops.  The "Kettle Moraine" land area is used for dairy farming,
     woodlands and recreation.

            Based upon projections of population,  manufacturing employ-
     ment and productivity increases,  manufacturing activity in the  study
     area as a whole is expected to increase six-fold by the year 2020.

                            CHAPTER  3

Water Uses

       The principal water uses in the Milwaukee study area include:

            1.  Municipal Water Supply
            2.  Self-supplied Industrial Water
            3.  Recreation
            4.  Irrigation
            5.  Fish and Aquatic Life
            6.  Commercial Shipping
            7.  Waste Assimilation
            8.  Esthetics

       Present and anticipated future water uses have been determined
for the main stem of the Milwaukee River, Milwaukee Harbor, and the
open waters of Lake Michigan adjacent to Milwaukee County.  The major
uses are presented below in Table 3-1.  The principal water uses in
the study area are discussed in detail in the following sections of
this chapter.

                          Municipal Water Supply

       As of 1962, twenty-five communities within the study area
were served by municipal water supply systems.  The total population
served is approximately 98 percent of the study area population.
Table 3-2 summarizes the available data for the study area.

                               TABLE 3-2

                           Total Water Intake
                        Municipal Water Systems
                          Milwaukee Area (6,7,8)

Surface Water
Ground Water


Water Intake

Per Capita Water
Intake (gal/day)

       Approximately 96 percent of the present municipal water demand
in the study area is supplied by surface water from Lake Michigan.

                               TABLE  3-1
                    Major Water Uses - Milwaukee Area (5)

                        Lake         Milwaukee    Milwaukee River Sectors
Water, Use               Michigan     H§lb°r _    _!„       2        3
Municipal Water Supply     P           -           -
Industrial Water Supply    P           -           P        P        A
Recreation-Whole Body
           Contact         P-;;-          -                             P
Recreation-Limited Body
           Contact         P*          P---                   P        P
Irrigation                 -           -           -        P        P
Fish and Aquatic Life-
           Tolerant        P           P           P*       P        P
Fish and Aquatic Life-
           Facultative     -P           P                    P        P
Fish and Aquatic Life-
           Intolerant      P           -                             P
Wildlife and Livestock
           Watering        P           P                             P
Hydroelectric Power        -           -           -        -        P
Commercial Shipping        P           P           P        -        -
Cooling                    P           P*          P        P        P
Waste Water Assimilation   P           P           P        P        P
Esthetics                  P*          P*          P*       P        P
    NOTE:  Sector 1 - Mouth to North Ave. Dam.
           Sector 2 - North Ave. Dam to Milwaukee Co.  Line.
           Sector 3 - Milwaukee Co. Line to Source.
            (-)     - Insignificant present and  future use.
             A      - Anticipated future use.
             P      - Present and anticipated future use.
             -;;-      - Use presently adversely effected by water

       Projections of the municipal water demand for the major water
service areas have been made to the years 1980 and 2020 and are
presented in Table 3-3-  The projections are based upon considerations
of population growth, anticipated industrial expansion and industrial
water use efficiency factors.

                     Self-supplied Industrial Water

       The major demand for self-supplied industrial water in the
study area is confined to Milwaukee County.  Based upon County data
provided by the U. S. Bureau of the Census in a special tabulation for
the GLIRB Project, it is estimated that in 1959 a total of 36 billion
gallons of water were used by the industries located in Milwaukee
County.  Using a 365 day working year, a total of about 100 mgd were
used in 1959.  Of this total, approximately 44 mgd were supplied by
industrial water systems.  In Table 3-4 projections of self-supplied
industrial water demand are presented for the Milwaukee County
industrial service area.  Both industrial output and water use efficiency
factors have been utilized in developing the projections.

                              TABLE 3-4

                      Self-Supplied Industrial
                         Water Demand (mgd)
                      Projections, 1980-2020

Service Area               1959             1980            2020

Milwaukee County            44               70              120


       Moving south from the Kettle Moraine region in the upper part of
the study area, stream frontage is highly developed with a large number
of small towns bordering the Milwaukee River.  In the Kettle Moraine
region and in the vicinity of West Bend the River is a popular recrea-
tional spot for thousands each summer.  Boating, fishing and swimming
are the most popular activities.  The upper reaches of the River provide
spawning ground for small-mouth bass and walleyes.

       A recent fishing license sales summary indicates that 90,000
licenses were sold in Milwaukee County.  Most of the fishing takes
place outside the County since limited fishing opportunities exist in
the County and licenses are not required to fish in the Great Lakes.
Portions of the Milwaukee River provide the only inland waters with
public fishing opportunities in the County.  There is a relatively
small amount of lake fishing from boats although perch are easily
caught and are a desirable fish. (9)

                                TABLE  3-3
                      Major Municipal Water Demand(mgd)
                           Projections, 1980 - 2020
Service Area                    1962                1980           2020

   Milwaukee Co.                163.1              250            470

      Brown Deer                  0.7
      Cudahy                      3.0
      Fo;: Point                   1.0
      Gi-eendr.le                   -»-
      Greenfield                  *
      Milwaukee                 152
      Oak Creek                   0.5
      So. Francis                 -»-
      Shoreirood                   #
      South Milwaukee             3.8
      Wauwatosa                   #
      West Allis                  ---
      West Milwaukee              -»-
      !Jhitefish Bay               2.1
   VJashington Co.
      West Bend                   1.5                2.4            5.3
   Waukesha Co.^
      Menomonee Falls             0.9                5.3           14

   "-'Serveci by the Milwaukee Water Works.

       In the Milwaukee County area few swimming opportunities exist
because of poor water quality.  Those who want swimming are dependent
upon pools and Lake beaches.  Even beaches are not an assured
opportunity for swimming, primarily because of pollution carried
along the shore by Lake currents.  Swimming use in Milwaukee County is
provided by parks which have 2.25 miles of beach (7.8 percent of the
County shore).  The Lake front beaches include Doctors Park, Big Bay
Park, Bradford Beach, McKinley Beach, South Shore Park, Bay View Park
and Grant Park.

       It is estimated that 29,000 boats are located in Milwaukee
County and about 11.5 percent are moored in yacht basins.  Outside of
the harbor area, the Milwaukee River, and lagoons having boat
liveries, Lake Michigan offers the primary opportunity for boating.
Milwaukee Harbor and associated breakwaters now furnish the only
protected areas.  Sailing has been a favorite activity and it is
estimated that about 900 sailboats are located in the County. (9)

       The Milwaukee County Park System is considered to be one of
the finest systems in the Nation.  All the major drainage systems
within the County have their immediate floodplains within the park

       In the 1959 Census of Agriculture data were provided on irrigated
land in farms.  The data are summarized in Table 3-5 for the principal
counties of the study area.  Using a straight line projection it is
estimated that some 800 acres could possibly be under irrigation by
1980.  There is insufficient information to project this data beyond
1980.  Because of the proximity of the entire area to metropolitan
Milwaukee, however, the number of acres under irrigation is not
expected to increase beyond the I960 figure of 800.  It is assumed
that some 6 inches of water per acre per year will be required for
irrigation purposes.  The amount of water necessary, therefore, will
reach some 130 million gallons per year.  The average water use over a
160 day growing season is now approximately .6 MGD.  This could
increase to .8 MGD by 1980.  Irrigation water use of this magnitude
does not represent a significant threat to water quality in the
Milwaukee area.
                               TABLE 3-5

           Acreage of Irrigated Land in Farms  - Milwaukee Area

               Acres Reported (10)           Acres Projected
 County        1954            1252               1280


     Totals     267             420                800


                        Fish and Aquatic Life

       The waters of Lake Michigan support a wide variety of fish and
wildlife.  Important fish species include among others the lake perch,
walleyed pike, lake trout, smelt, herring and whitefish.   Many streams
in the upper part of the study area support a fair size fishery
consisting of panfish, several species of bass, pike, and walleye.
There are a number of trout streams and three lakes,  Big Cedar Lake,
Silver Lake, and Moldenhauer Lake where the conditions of water
temperature, depth, bottom conditions, and public access have
warranted trout stocking by the Wisconsin Conservation Department.
However, an increasing population orientated toward recreation has
begun to put heavy pressures upon the available water areas for other
competing uses, (ll)

                          Commercial Shipping

       Commercial shipping is confined to the Milwaukee Harbor area.
The Milwaukee, Menomonee, and Kinnickinnic Rivers are navigable for
deep-draft vessels for 2.9, 1.9 and 1.8 miles above their mouths,
respectively.  These channels, together with the South Menomonee and
Burnham Canals and the Kinnickinnic Mooring Basin, constitute the
inner basin of the Milwaukee Harbor, which is one of the principal
Great Lakes Harbors.  The Harbor is used by vessels moving to and
from Great Lakes ports as well as by vessels moving to and from
overseas ports via the St. Lawrence Seaway.  From 6,000 to 7,000
major cargo ships call at Milwaukee each year, giving it a total
vessel movement figure in the range of 12,000 to 14,000 major
vessels per year. (12)  Harbor vessel traffic has averaged 7.9
million tons for the period 1954-1964.  In 1964 the traffic was 6.4
million- tons.  By 1980 through 2020 this tonnage may be expected to
increase somewhat, however, the actual number of ship movements may
be expected to remain approximately the same due to an anticipated
increase in vessel size.

                          Waste Assimilation

       See Chapters 4 and 6.


       The use of water for esthetic enjoyment is an intangible
benefit which is directly related to the availability of clean
water.  The Milwaukee County Park Commission maintains parks and
parkway areas along the stream banks of the Milwaukee, Menomonee
and Kinnickinnic Rivers in Milwaukee County.  The streams thus have
esthetic value in relation to those utilizing park and parkway
facilities.  The proximity of Lake Michigan and the  lakefront de-
velopment which includes numerous parks and beaches also offers many
opportunities for esthetic enjoyment of the Lake Michigan waters
adjacent to Milwaukee County.


Water Quality Goals

       The establishment of water quality criteria for the significant
water uses of the lake Michigan Basin was accomplished through the
organization of four water quality work groups chaired by a member of
the Technical Committee shown in Table 1-2.  These work groups
consisted of representatives of the States, municipalities and
industries of the lake Michigan Basin.

       These four work groups, The Municipal Work Group; The Industrial
Work Group; The Fish, Aquatic Life, and Recreation Work Group; and the
General Work Group considered water quality needs to support eleven
specific water uses, namely:

                       Municipal Water Supply
                       Industrial Water Supply
                       Recreation - Whole and Partial Body Contact
                       Fish and Aquatic Life
                       Wildlife and Stock Watering
                       Commercial Shipping
                       Cooling Water Supply
                       Waste Assimilation

The criteria developed by the four work groups give maximum or
minimum desirable concentrations of various water quality parameters,
above or below which the stated water uses would be adversely
affected.  Limits were not set for all water quality parameters but
rather for those parameters which are generally most significant in
the Lake Michigan Basin.  The findings of the water quality work
groups are summarized in Table 3-6.  Minimum dissolved oxygen require-
ments and maximum coliform, phosphate, phenol, and ammonia nitrogen
concentrations are most pertinent to water quality problems within
the study area.

       In the study area there are certain areas in which specific
uses are being jeopardized.  The affected uses are indicated on Table
3-1 by means of an asterisk.  In these areas, where pollution is
adversely affecting water quality to the extent that the established
water quality criteria are not met, the criteria become the water
quality goals of water quality improvement measures.  Further dis-
cussion of the water quality problems in the study area is contained
in Chapter 6.  These areas will be protected through the comprehensive
water pollution control action program for the Milwaukee Area outlined
in Chapter 9.

jit ions For Any One Sample
(Maximum or Minimum Concentr?
I /Bra (rein)
(''Tos) sq-isjins
I/Sni (xran)(1roj]
siqnios 'SOU.J
(•on PloqsajUji)
(x"Bia) sjopo
(xmtt) asau-eSirej'i
I/Bra (xisra)
(++s£) uoii
I/Sot (xretn)
I/Bra (xrem)
SPTT°S pa.rtossfc
I/Bra r
(x-Bui) fl-tHH
•t/SrafjrBtrO ^nm
(XBDI) (-M
apjn£) uuojtioc
sq.Tun -IOTOO
£0 a-mq/Riadmsj
sq.jun ^q.TpTqjnji
(x^) SWW
x ~t/§tn
(XBUI) spTJomo
(xrera) soxiouaqj
(agu^H) Hd
^o-pq.'Bjnq.BS ^ Jo
I/Bai (ujra) oa




1>- O
• •
t— ^
Municipal Water



vO O>
0 -H
•H -P
Co 4^
< c
•rt Ji
C l
C3 CL>
a o
                        TABLE 3-6 (Continued)
(l)  Colifonn Guides

       Colifom Guide A - Recreational whole body contact use.  The
water uses for which this guide is intended are those that entail
total and intimate contact of the whole body with the water.  Examples
of such use are swimming, skin diving, and water skiing, in which the
body is totally immersed and some ingestion of the water may be
expected.  Recommended guide value for coliforms is 1,000 per 100
milliliters (1,000/100 ml).  For all waters in which coliform levels
are below the guide value of 1,000/100 ml, the water is considered
suitable provided there is proper isolation from direct fecal con-
tamination as determined by a sanitary survey.  Situations may arise
wherein waters having coliform counts somewhat higher than the guide
value can be used, provided supplemental techniques are used to
determine safe bacterial quality.  The analysis for fecal streptococci
is more definitive for determining the presence of organisms of
intestinal origin, and is suggested as the supplemental technique to
be employed.  Based on a very limited amount of information, a limit
for fecal streptococci of about 20/100 ml is suggested providing there
is an accompanying limit on the coliform level.  As a provisional
limit, it is suggested that a coliform level of 10,000/100 ml be
permitted provided the fecal streptococcus count is not more than
20/100 ml, and provided also that there is proper isolation from
direct fecal contamination as determined by a sanitary survey.

       Coliform Guide B - Recreational, limited body contact use and
commercial shipping (barge traffic).  The water uses for which this
guide is intended are those that entail limited contact between the
water user and the water.  Examples of such uses are fishing, pleasure
boating, and commercial shipping. Recommended guide value for coliforms
is 5,000/100 ml.  For all waters in which coliform levels are below
this guide value, the water is considered suitable for use, provided
there is proper isolation from direct fecal contamination as determined
by a sanitary survey.

       For waters which have coliform levels above the guide value and
such levels are evidently caused primarily by organisms of other than
fecal origin, the limiting count may be as high as 50,000/100 ml,
provided the fecal streptococci count is not more than 100/100 ml.
The provisional coliform limit of 50,000/100 ml is based on an
examination of reported and measured data for the Illinois River Basin
streams.  It is believed to be an acceptable limit for taking into
consideration, and providing for the occurrence of, background coliform
levels.  With the accompanying limit on fecal streptococci, it is
reasonable to expect that the danger of infection by enteric organisms

                       TABLE 3-6 (Continued)
will be remote.  It is understood that the provisional limit would
be subject to modification as more analytical data are accumulated
and critically reviewed.

       Coliform Guide C - Applies to Municipal Water Source.  Where
municipal water treatment includes complete rapid-sand filtration
or its equivalent, together with continuous postchlorination, source
water may be considered acceptable if the coliform concentration
(at the intake) averages not more than 5,000 per 100 ml in any one
month, and the count exceeds this number in not more than 20  percent
of the samples in any one month.  Samples should be tested at least
once daily.

       Coliform Guide D - Applies to Industrial Process Water at the
source.  Although the requirements of this use will vary widely with
the processes of a particular industry, Coliform Guide C, for
municipal source, is considered generally applicable.  As covered by
food and drug acts and other regulations, water incorporated into
products for human ingestion should, of course, meet finished
drinking water standards.

(2)  Odors, Threshold Number

       The differences in type of odors makes it difficult to assign
numbers for water quality goals with respect to this parameter.  For
some types of odors the difficulty of removal is greater than for
others.  To reach acceptable treated levels, experience has shown
that it is more difficult to reduce a "hydrocarbon" type odor of 6
threshold units than an algae-type odor of 15 units.  It is therefore
felt that a maximum limit on hydrocarbon odors be 6, and the average
daily odor be less than 4 units.

                          CHAPTER  4

                         WASTE SOURCES

       Based on a 1962 inventory of municipal waste discharges com-
piled by the GLIRB Project in cooperation with the State of Wisconsin
it has been determined that a population of approximately 1,080,000
are served by the municipal sewerage systems within the study area.
This population, which includes about 95 percent of the study area
population, resides in thirty-four communities which are served by
municipal systems.  Nineteen of the thirty-four communities, in-
cluding the major city of Milwaukee, are served by the Milwaukee
Metropolitan Sewerage District, hereinafter referred to as the
District.  Within the District both the Sewerage Commission of the
City of Milwaukee and the Metropolitan Sewerage Commission of the
County of Milwaukee are responsible for the collection and treatment
of sewage.

       There are nineteen municipal water pollution control instal-
lations in the study area.  Primary waste treatment is provided at
2 installations and secondary treatment is provided at 17 installa-
tions.  It is estimated that an untreated waste Population Equivalent
(PE)* of 2,6^7,000 is discharged to the municipal sewerage systems
of the study area.  After treatment an estimated PE of 361,000 is
discharged to the streams of the study area and Lake Michigan.  This
amounts to an overall average removal efficiency of about 86 percent.

       As of 1963 the District treated the wastes of the following
communities in Milwaukee County;  Bayside, Brown Deer, Cudahy, Fox
Point, Glendale, Greenfield, Milwaukee, River Hills, St. Francis,
Shorewood, Wauwatosa, West Allis, West Milwaukee and Whitefish Bay.
The District also serves the communities of Brookfield and Elm Grove
in Waukesha County and operates separate waste treatment plants in
Greendale, Hales Corners and Oak Creek.(13)  The City of South
Milwaukee constitutes the only area within Milwaukee County re-
maining outside the limits of the District.
#As determined by the 5 day biochemical oxygen demand (8005)
analysis, one pound of BOD^, is equivalent in oxygen-consuming
capacity to a Population Equivalent of 6.

       The present major municipal waste discharge in the study
area originates from the District's Jones Island treatment plant.
The plant provides secondary treatment for the- wastes originating
from an estimated population served of 1,020,000 and discharges the
treated effluent to Milwaukee Harbor within the breakwater.  During
1963 the plant discharged an average of 162 mgd and an average BOD5
load of 56,600 pounds per day.  The plant BOD5 removal efficiency
was approximately 87 percent.

       The District is constructing a new South Shore waste treat-
ment plant.  The new plant is located in the City of Oak Creek
approximately 1 mile south of the South Milwaukee sewage treatment
plant on the shore of Lake Michigan.  The plant will discharge
treated wastes direct to Lake Michigan by means of an outfall sewer
which will discharge at a point approximately 1800 feet offshore.
The new plant is designed to provide primary treatment and disinfec-
tion and will have a maximum capacity of 320 mgd for periods of
heavy storm runoff.  The primary plant will not have a by-pass and
is rated to handle 60 mgd and an untreated PE of approximately
300,000.  The plant is designed for expansion in the future to in-
clude activated sludge treatment with a rating of 120 mgd and a
maximum capacity of 200 mgd.  Waste flows in excess of 200 mgd will
receive primary treatment and disinfection only.

       The municipal waste discharge from the South Milwaukee Sewage
Treatment Plant is also considered to be of significance in the
study area.  During 1962 the Plant served an estimated population of
20,300 and discharged an average of 2.7 mgd and an average BOD5 load
of 2,300 pounds per day.  The Plant BODj removal efficiency was
approximately 50 percent.  After providing primary waste treatment
the plant discharges to Lake Michigan at South Milwaukee via a
minor stream.

       The GLIRB Project has made projections of the municipal
waste loads and flows for the major sewerage service area to the
years 1980 and 2020.  These are presented in Table 4-1.  The projec-
tions cover total waste discharges from municipal sewerage systems.
It is assumed that 90 percent BODc removal will be provided in 1980
and 95 percent will be provided by 2020.  Where existing removal
efficiencies are greater than those indicated, it is assumed they
will continue to operate at the higher levels.

                           TABLE  4-1

                Major Municipal Waste Load Projections

                           19SO - 2020
                  1962 Effluent          1980 Effluent      2020 Effluent

                Flow   BOD5(#/day)     Flow   BODr(#/day)  Flow   BOD .(///day)
Service Area    (mgdj  	     (mgd)     J_	  (mgd)	

Milwaukee Area*   16?     59,000        260     68,000      490     63,000
•"'The Milwaukee Area is defined to include the combined service areas
 of Milwaukee County, New Berlin, Elm Grove, Brookfield, Menomonee
 Falls, Butler, Thiensville and Kequon.

       A 1964 inventory of direct industrial waste discharges in the
study area was compiled by the GLIRB Project in cooperation with the
.State of Wisconsin.  A total of 4 significant direct plant discharges
have been identified with a total waste flow of about 4 mgd.  The
total waste load discharged from the 4 plants is estimated to be
25,000 Ibs./day.  The major industrial waste sources are listed in
Table 4-2.

                           TABLE  4-2

                   Major Industrial Waste Sources
                        (Direct Discharge)

Industry                                      Effluent       Waste Flow
(Product)             Location    Treatment   BOD^lbs/day)    (mgd)	

Peter Cooper Corp.
  (Glue & Gelatin)    Oak Creek   Primary        25,000          3.7
Western Condensing Co.
(Condensed Kilk Prod.)  Adell     Aerated
                                  Lagoon             40          0.1

Libby, KcKeil & Libby             Lagoon,
 (Canned Veg.)        Jackson     Screening,        150          0.2
                                  Spray Irrig.
Krier Preserving Co.              Lagoon,
 (Canned Veg.)        PLandom Lake Screening,         70          0.1
                                  Spray Irrig.
           TOTALS                                25,260          4.1


       As may be noted above, the major direct industrial waste
source in the study area is the Peter Cooper Corporation in Oak
Creek.  This plant uses rejected tannery hides as raw materials
to produce gelatin and glue products.  The plant provides primary
waste treatment and discharges to Lake Michigan at Oak Creek.  The
plant has been under orders of the State Committee on Water Pollu-
tion for a number of years to provide adequate waste treatment.(14)

Combined Sewers

       Of the 34 sewer systems in the study area, 21 are of the
separate type.  That is, they have been designed to receive only
sanitary sewage and industrial wastes.  Milwaukee, Cudahy, West
Allis, West Milwaukee, South Milwaukee, Whitefish Bay, and
Shorewood have both separate and combined sewers.(15,16)  It is
estimated that approximately 85 percent of the study area popula-
tion served by sewerage systems is served by systems with both
separate and combined sewers.  It should be noted that each of the
seven communities cited above are within Milwaukee County.

       Problems relating to overflows from combined sewer systems
are complex and have been adequately documented.(17)  The particular
problems of combined sewer overflows in the Milwaukee Metropolitan
Sewerage District have been described in previous reports.(16,18,19)
In summary, there are about 240 overflow devices for storm water
and sanitary sewage in the Milwaukee area.  Most of these devices
are on combined sewers and permit the discharge of combined storm
water and sewage to Lake Michigan and tributary streams.  The over-
flow of sewage and industrial wastes together with large amounts
of storm water constitutes a major source of pollution in the
streams draining Milwaukee County and the adjacent waters of Lake

       The GLIRB Project has made estimates of the waste loads dis-
charged to Milwaukee Harbor as a result of storm water runoff and
overflows from combined sewers.

       It is estimated by the GLIRB Project that an average BOD5
load of 9,800 pounds per day reach the Harbor from combined sewer
overflows during periods of overflow.  This estimate has been
developed on the basis of studies of such overflows in Chicago.
Consideration has been given to differences in raw sewage character-
istics between Chicago and the Milwaukee area.

       For storm water runoff in separate sewer areas, it is also
estimated by the GLIRB Project that an additional average BOD^
load of 8,800 pounds per day are discharged to the Harbor.  This
estimate is based upon previous studies by the Public Health
Service in the Cincinnati area.

       In summary approximately 18,600 pounds of BOD^ per day are
discharged to Milwaukee Harbor from combined sewer overflows and
storm water runoff during periods of heavy runoff.(19)

Agriculture^ and Land Runoff

       Present estimates of  fertilizer use (nitrogen and phosphate)
for the Milwaukee River Basin show that approximately 630 tons of
nitrogen and 1,600 tons of phosphate have been used annually.  The
largest total volume of fertilizer is applied to the corn acreage.
However, the heaviest applications per acre are applied to fruit and
vegetable crops.

       During 1963-1964 the  GLIRB Project conducted a rural land
runoff sampling study to assess the relative amounts of phosphate
and other substances transported to streams by rural runoff in the
Lake Michigan Watershed.  Based upon the results of this study, it
is estimated that there is an annual total soluble phosphate runoff
from rural land of about 11,000 pounds per year in the Milwaukee
River Basin.(20)

       Pesticide contamination of streams is a matter of growing
concern.  Agricultural usage is considered to be the major source
of pesticides found in water.  In the study area the principal
chemicals used are DDT, EPII, Halathion, Parathion and Sevin. There
have not been any reports of field evaluations of actual problems
resulting from the use of pesticides in the study area.  These
wastes are particularly difficult to evaliiate and control because
of their wide distribution over the study area.

Federal Installations

       The Federally-owned or Federally-leased installations listed
below discharge waterborne wastes in the Milwaukee area.  Installa-
tions that discharge to municipally-operated sewerage systems have
not been listed since the Federal Government does not control the
treatment provided.

                    Milwaukee Breakwater Light Station,
                         Milwaukee, l.'isconsin

       This U. 5.  Coast Guard Station, located in the outer
Milwaukee Harbor discharges approximately 150 gallons per day (gpd)
of raw sewage to Lake Michigan from a complement of 3 men.

                     Department of Army Housing

       Milwaukee Defense Area housing consists of scattered housing
units leased by the Army for use by Defense Area personnel.  Most of
these housing units are connected to municipal sewer systems.  Those
units in the Milwaukee area not served by a municipal system are as

       l)  Milwaukee DA Housing at Brown Deer:

           Five housing units at various locations in Brown Deer,
           Wisconsin reportedly discharge 1,000 gpd of sanitary
           wastes.  Treatment facilities consist of septic tanks
           and tile drain fields.

       2)  Milwaukee DA Housing at 3. W. Bay Shore Estates:

           One housing unit located at S. W. Bay Shore Estates,
           Wisconsin reportedly discharges 200 gpd to a septic
           tank system.


       Each of the waste sources discussed in this Chapter are
potential causes of phosphate pollution.  Such pollution can result
in uncontrollable production of algae followed by decay of this
organic matter in lakes and streams.  The decay in turn produces
oxygen depletion in the waters effected.  The algae are also ob-
jectionable for many water uses because of unsightly appearance,
odors, interference with water treatment processes, and other

       The major sources of phosphates in the study area are land
runoff and municipal waste discharges.  Estimates of the quantities
of phosphate contributed to Lake Michigan by the above sources have
been made by the GLIRB Project and are presented in Table k-3*

                            TABLE  4-3
                    Major Sources of Phosphates
                        Milwaukee Study Area

                                   Est. Total PO^ Discharged

	                             to Lake Michigan (ibs/day)

Milwaukee Metropolitc a Sewerage
District (Jones Island Plant)                6600

Milwaukee River and Tributaries              2700
             Total                           9300


       The above figure of 9300 pounds per day represents an estimate
of the total amount of phosphate discharged to Lake Michigan at
Milwaukee Harbor.  This total may be compared with the relatively
insignificant total soluble phosphate input to the Milwaukee River
and tributaries as a result of rural runoff which amounts to 11,000
pounds per year or about 30 pounds per day.

Ships and_Bpats

                         Commercial Ships

       The large number of vessels plying Milwaukee Harbor repre-
sents a considerable potential for pollution of the Harbor waters.
Among the possible sources of pollution are cargo spillage, dunnage,
bilge waste, ballast water, fuel spills, garbage and sanitary wastes.
Uncontrolled discharges of these wastes can result in serious pollu-
tion problems to beaches, shore property, recreational waters, fish
and aquatic life, and municipal and industrial water supplies.

       Commercial shipping has increased significantly since the
opening of the St. Lawrence Seaway in 1959.  While all new vessels
built since 1952 specifically for use on the Great Lakes have been
equipped with waste treatment facilities, ocean-going ships generally
have no provision for waste treatment.  The majority of these ocean-
going vessels are designed to discharge sanitary wastes from multiple
outlets making onboard waste collection and treatment an expensive
and complex installation.

       The U. S. Public Health Service has established regulations
governing vessel waste discharges in the Great Lakes based upon
their legal responsibility for the interstate control of communicable
diseases.  Restricted areas have been established in which the dis-
charge of sewage, or ballast or bilge water, from vessels is pro-
hibited.  Restricted areas include the water within a three mile
radius of domestic water intakes.  These restrictions apply to the
waters within a three mile radius of the water intakes for the
North Shore Water Utility, Milwaukee Water Works, Cudahy, and South

                           Recreational Boats

       In addition to the commercial traffic, a large number of
recreational boats use the Harbor.  It is estimated that approx-
imately 700 boats are presently based at the Harbor.  The Milwaukee
County Park Commission is developing a marina which will ultimately
accommodate an additional 1,500 boats.  Many of the larger recrea-
tional craft are equipped with galley and toilet facilities which may

discharge untreated wastes to the Harbor or Lake waters.  Oil and
gasoline wastes, as well as garbage and sewage from onboard cooking
and toilet facilities, are the major potential sources of pollution.

       Section 30.71 of the Wisconsin Statutes prohibits the dis-
charge of sewage from boats on inland waters, but does not include
the waters of Lake Michigan.  The Wisconsin State Board of Health
has jurisdiction over all of the area of Lake Michigan within
Wisconsin, but has exercised controls over pollution from onshore
facilities only.  The Board has cooperated with interstate efforts
to control vessel pollution.(22)

       Dredging.  Maintenance dredging is done by the Corps of
Engineers to maintain authorized navigation depths in Milwaukee

       Legislation passed in 1962 provided for increased depths to
accommodate deep-draft vessels using the St. Lawrence Seaway.
Deepening of the Harbor was started by the Corps last year, and is
scheduled to be completed this year.  Dredged materials are disposed
of in deep waters of Lake Michigan.

       Water quality surveys made in 1962 oy Great Lakes-Illinois
River Basins Project, showed significant evidence of pollution
material in the bottom deposits of Milwaukee Harbor.  Transfer of
this pollutional material to Lake Michigan via the dredging process
creates an additional zone of pollution in the Lake.

                            CHAPTER 5

                          LAKE CURRENTS

       The GLIRB Project studied currents in Lake Michigan adjacent to
the Milwaukee area from 1962 through the summer of 19&4.  Instruments
used in this 33 month continuous study included automatic recording
current meters, anemometers and thermographs.  The objectives of the
study were to obtain information relative to the fate and movement of
pollutants discharged to Lake Michigan.

       Prior to the field effort certain previous Lake Michigan
current studies were reviewed.  These included the work reported by
Harrington in 1895, Johnson in 1955, and Ayers and others in 1955
(23,24,25).  Methods used by these workers utilized drift cords and
bottles floating at the surface.  Unfortunately these earlier efforts
dealt with summer currents only.


       It was found that the primary factors which influence Lake
Michigan currents adjacent to Milwaukee are the winds and the con-
figuration of the shore line.  Winds represent the principal energy
source for putting the waters in motion while the shore line main-
tains the north-south orientation of currents in the area.  Generally
speaking, water movements tend to parallel the shore as the water
depth decreases.  Movement patterns of the current flow in Lake
Michigan at Milwaukee were typical of this phenomenon.

       Density also plays a role in the movement of pollutants
entering the Lake.  During the summer stratification a pollutant,
depending on its initial density, will rise, sink or come to rest on
the thermocline.  Under winter iso-bhermal conditions in the Lake
the pollutant, being of lower density than the Lake water, would
normally rise toward the surface.

       Water motion, such as transport or the net movement of a water
mass, can also affect the discharge of a pollutant.  If the current
is extremely small then a pollutant may build up into a nearly
stationary mass.  If the existing currents are strong a pollutant will
be diluted by the moving water.  The initial dilution depends on the
rate of discharge of the pollutant and the speed of the current.
mixing is another type of water motion which refers to the rate of
dilution of a pollutant.

       Lake Michigan as a whole has a calculated flow-through time of
100 years.  This assumes continual mixing and a constant rate of out-
flow.  However, thermal stratification during both summer and winter
and thermal barrier conditions in the spring and fall act to increase
the flow-through time two to threefold.

       Water transport adjacent to the City of Milwaukee was to the
north or the south depending on the wind stress prevailing at the
time of study.  The net flow or the residual current appears to be
variable at Milwaukee.  The net flow during 1962-64 in the fall and
winter was to the north.  In late spring and summer the total net
flow was to the south.  This is shown on Figures 5-1 and 5-2.

       These figures represent in summary nearly 20,000 current meter
observations from the station adjacent to the City of Milwaukee.  Table
5-1 describes the variability of flow in the area shown from December
to April.  Figure 5-2 shows that a large percentage of the flow moves
toward the north during the summer period.  As can be seen, the flow
direction during the spring-summer period is highly variable and not
as clearly defined as in the fall-winter period.

       The prevailing offshore winds at Milwaukee do not produce a
strong effect on the currents adjacent to the city.  Onshore winds,
such as those from the northeast produce a strong influence on the
currents.  The greatest flow occurred during September 1963 when the
dominant wind was from the northeast.  The strongest flows during
1962-64 occurred in spring and early fall which coincides with the
period of strong winds.  Almost without exception, the general flow
patterns fit the mean monthly wind regime.  It can be shown from the
data collected that during any one-day period that the currents flow
against the wind in the Milwaukee area.  Since water movements depend
on long term large-scale forces over a great area, flows against the
apparent wind direction are not uncommon.


       The general flow in spring and summer is highly variable with
a small residual flow to the south.  During fall and winter the flow
is definitely to the north with a minimum of variability.  Flows
occur against the wind frequently in this region because of more
dominant forces over other parts of Lake Michigan.  The effect of
current movements in relation to water quality problems are discussed
in Chanter 6.

                                                     87 52 I Linwood Water Punficotion
                                                         •^- Plant      I
                             Jones Island
                                                        Vicinity of Texas
                                                        Ave.Water Intake
                                 % OF FLOW

                            0      10      20
                                                         GENERALIZED LONG TERM

                                                       MOVEMENTS NEAR MILWAUKEE
                                 SCALE IN MILES
                                                       U S DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
                                                    FEDERAL WATER POL LUTION CONTROL ADMIN
                                                                               FIGURE 5-1

 10     20
                                                     GENERALIZED LONG TERM
                                                   MOVEMENTS NEAR MILWAUKEE
                                                   U S DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
                                                FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMIN
                                    GPO 826—512-7
                                                                         FIGURE  5-2

                           TABLE 5-1

                          1962 -
Direction of Flow                            Percent of Time

(North)         0                                  20.2

               30                                  13-3

               60                                   5.8

               90                                   3-9

              120                                   3.If

              150                                   5-2

(South)       180                                   7.8

              210                                   7.2

              2^0                                   6.0

              270                                   5.7

              300                                   8.2

              330                                  13.3

                            CHAPTER 6


       The information and interpretations presented in this dis-
cussion are based on water quality data collected by the GLIRB
Project during its water quality studies of the Lake Michigan Basin
(1962-1964).  The GLIRB Project studies have been supplemented by
data obtained from the State of Wisconsin and regional and local
       The chemical, biological and bacteriological data presented in
subsequent pages are the basis for the following conclusions with
respect to water quality effects :

                           Milwaukee Harbor Area

       1.  The waters of the Milwaukee Harbor area were found to
           be polluted from waste discharges of the immediate area.

       2.  High concentrations of nutrients, phosphate and ammonia,
           were found in the Harbor area, and in the areas adjacent
           to the Harbor.
       3.  Minimum dissolved oxygen levels of 5.3 mg/lj  indicated the
           effects of organic loadings discharged to the Harbor waters.

       4.  Phenol concentrations, as high as 9.B micrograms/1,
           indicated the presence of industrial wastes in the Harbor

       5 .  Other chemical parameters indicated that the  waters in the
           Milwaukee Harbor area vary considerably from  the water of
           the Lake.

       6.  Biological studies of the bottoms showed heavy organic
           deposits dominated by high populations of pollution
           tolerant sludgeworms.  Only a few clean water organisms
           were found in the Harbor area.  Degraded benthic
           conditions extended as far as seven miles into Lake

       7.  Variations in the kinds and numbers of phytoplankton found
           jn Lake waters adjacent to the Harbor indicated that the
           nutrient-rich waters from the Harbor moved into the Lake.

       8.  Very high concentrations of coliform and fecal streptococcus
           bacteria were found in the Harbor area.   These organisms are
           indicators of bacterial contamination and serve to warn that
           a health hazard may exist for anyone exposed to or consuming
           these waters.

       In general the polluted water conditions in Milwaukee Harbor
result from the discharge of wastes from sources described in Chanter
4 and summarized as follows:

       1.  Treated wastes discharged from the Jones Island sewage
           treatment plant.

       2.  Screened sewage which is bynassed by th-: Jones Island
           plant during wet weather when flows exceed the plant

       3.  Storm water overflow from the Milwaukee area combined
           sewer systems.

       4.  Organic material carried into the Harbor as a result of
           storm water runoff from those sections of the Milwaukee
           area served by separate sewers.

       5.  Sanitary waste discharges from vessels plying; the Harbor.

                             Study n.rea Streams

       1.  The Milwaukee River within Milwaukee County is polluted.
           The principal waste source causing pollution is the
           overflow from combined sewers in the area.

       2.  High concentrations of coliform bacteria and nhosphorous
           and low dissolved oxygen levels have been observed in the
           River within Milwaukee County.

       3.  Relatively high concentrations of coliform bacteria and
           phosphorous were observed in the Milwaukee River above
           Milwaukee County.  Waste discharges from municipal
           sewage treatment plants contribute to the high concen-
           trations observed.

Milwaukee Harbor

                          Physical and Chemical aspects

       Two studies of Milwaukee Harbor were made by the GL1RB Project;
one in the fall of 1962 and the second in the summer of 1963.  The

purpose was to determine the present water quality in Milwaukee Harbor
and the effect of these waters on adjacent Lake Michigan.  Table 6-1
presents the number of samples, averages and ranges of analytical
results for Milwaukee Harbor and waters adjacent to the Harbor.
Figures 6-1, 6-2, and 6-3 present sample station locations and concen-
tration variations observed in each area for ammonia nitrogen, soluble
phosphate and phenol, three of the more critical water quality

       In Figure 6-1 the highest ammonia nitrogen levels, 1.00-2.20
mg/1, are shown to be in the central area of the harbor and in the
Milwaukee River.  These concentrations extended about one mile north
of the mouth of the Milwaukee River and approximately three miles south
along the shore line.  Levels of 0.50-0.99 mg/1 were found in the south-
eastern portion of the Harbor and in the northwestern side of the
Harbor.  The very northern section of the Harbor had concentrations of
0.15-0.49 mg/1.  Waters adjacent to the breakwater from the center
opening to the southern end and with bands extending out into the Lake,
had levels ranging from 0.15 to 0.49 mg/1.  North of the breakwall
along the shore line, an area outside the Harbor and near the center
of the breakwater, and an area south of the Harbor the concentrations
were 0.05-0.14 mg/1.  All of the remaining waters adjacent to the
Harbor had concentrations of 0-0.05 mg/1, which is typical of the back-
ground levels found in Lake Michigan proper.

       As shown in Figure 6-2 the soluble phosphate values form a
similar pattern to that of ammonia nitrogen.  Concentrations of 0.49-
1.3 mg/1 extended generally from about one mile north of the Milwaukee
River mouth to the southern end of the Harbor.  A section in the
southeast portion of the Harbor had levels of 0.15-0.49 mg/1.  In the
northwestern,  area of the Harbor the concentrations were 0.15-0.49 mg/1
and in the northeastern section, 0.03-0.14 mg/1.

       In the waters adjacent to the Harbor at the southern end of the
breakwater, phosphate levels were observed ranging from 0.49-1.3 mg/1.
A band extending along the entire length of the Harbor with tongues ex-
tending out into the Lake had concentrations of 0.03-0.14 mg/1.  In all
of the remaining waters adjacent to the Harbor the levels ranged from
0-0.03 mg/1, which is the level found throughout the Lake where no local
phosphate inputs exist.

       Phosphate concentrations found are above the limit of 0.01 mg/1
recommended by Sawyer and associated with nuisance algal blooms. (26)

       Figure 6-3 presents the phenol concentrations observed in
Milwaukee Harbor and the adjacent waters of Lake Michigan.  The phenol
levels ranged from 4 to 8 micrograms/1 at the mouth of the Milwaukee
River and for one mile north along the western side of the Harbor, in
the very northern end and on the southeastern side of the Harbor.
Levels of 2-4 micrograms/1 were observed in a large area extending
from the eastern side of the Harbor one mile north of the river to
three miles south along the western side.  A band in the adjacent


                                    TABLE 6-1
                                  WATER QUALITY
                         October 1962 -  June  1963

                     Harbor	Water Adjacent to Harbor
No. of
Parameter Samples
Total Soluble
Dissolved Oxygen
% Saturated
Dis. Solids
Spec. Cond.**
Concentration (mg/1)
Average Range


No. of
Concentration (mg/l)
Average Range


  *Phenol expressed in micrograms/liter.
 **Specific Conductance expressed in micromhos/cm
***Logarithm of the reciprocal of the hydrogen-ion concentration.

                                         GREAT LAKES  8 ILLINOIS
                                          RIVER BASINS PROJECT
                                         MILWAUKEE HARBOR
                                      AMMONIA NITROGEN 1962-1964
                                        U S DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
                                     FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMIN
                                                          FIGURE e-i

;j;!;j| 0 00-0 029
                                             GREAT LAKES  8  ILLINOIS
                                              RIVER BASINS PROJECT
                                            MILWAUKEE  HARBOR
                                            PHOSPHATES ,1962- 1964
 •  Sampling Station
                                           U S DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
                                        FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMIN
                        GPO 826—512—6
                                                               FIGURE 6-2



||>-3 O-0.49

[J 1j 0.5-1.9


 • SamplingStotion
                         SCALE IN MILES
  PHENOLS.I962- 1964
                                            U S DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

                                         FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMIN

                                                                FIGURE 6-3

waters extending; from the north to the south along the shore lines and
the breakwater had phenol concentrations of 0.5-1.9 micrograms/1.
Opposite the center and northern openings in the breakwater, bands
extend out into the Lake with the same concentration range.  The levels
in the remainder of the adjacent waters of Lake Michigan ranged from
0-0.5 micrograms/1.

       The other parameters listed in Table 6-1 except for dissolved
oxygen, are higher in concentration than in the adjacent Lake waters.
The depressed levels of dissolved oxygen that were reported indicate
that loadings of organic wastes are entering the Harbor waters.

                         Biological Findings

       The kinds and numbers of aquatic plants and animals, inhabiting
a particular body of water, and the stream or lake bottom beneath it,
reflect the quality of water that has generally prevailed in the area
for an extended period of time.  Some plants and animals are capable,
by virtue of physiological features or living habits, of withstanding
polluted conditions.  They multiply rapidly when competition with less
tolerant forms is eliminated.  Examples of pollution-tolerant animals
are the sludgeworms, bloodworms, leeches, and pulmonate snails, that
exist in the decaying organic sediment which builds up from the settle-
able organic solids present in most waste discharges.  A benthic
(bottom-dwelling) population consisting of many kinds of organisms
with low numbers of each species is typical of unpolluted waters.  The
relative scarcities of pollution-sensitive organisms, such as scuds
(crustacea), and the concomitant abundance of pollution-tolerant forms,
usually sludgeworms, are considered reasonable indicators of lake
areas subjected to organic enrichment if all other conditions are

       Plankton algae are microscopic, chlorophyll-bearing plants
suspended in the water.  The density of algae in the water is de-
pendent upon several factors, including the concentration of nutrients.
All other factors being favorable, the higher the concentration of
nutrients, the greater will be the density of alpal growth.  To a
degree, they also indicate the quality of the water in that the kinds
and numbers of algae present depend on the chemical and physical
composition of the water in which they originated and in which they

       Biological samples collected in April and September, 1963 i-n
the Milwaukee, Menomonee and Kinnickinnic Rivers all exhibited extreme
biological degradation.  The predominant bottom animals in the
Milwaukee River were sludgeworms - over 1,000,000 per square meter.
The Kinnickinnic and Menomonee Rivers had populations of those organisms
ranging from 8,000 to 60,000 per square meter.  The bottom materials in
those areas were composed of ooze with sewage odors.

       Degraded biological conditions in the Milwaukee Harbor area in
1962 and 1963 were shown by the analyses of the benthic fauna as shown
in Figure 6-4.  Populations of sludgeworms as high as 165,000 per
square meter were found within the Harbor, and the bottom fauna was
composed of 94 to over 99 percent pollution-tolerant forms - mostly
sludgeworms.  In certain areas of the Lake as far as seven miles from
the breakwater outlet, the bottom animal communities continued to be
composed of pollution-tolerant forms.

       Further evidence of degradation was noted in the analyses of
phytoplankton samples collected during sampling operations in June,
1963.  In the Harbor area as shown in Figure 6-5, concentrations
ranging from 1,000 to 20,000 per ml were found with the dominant
forms present being centric diatoms, which are common to enriched
waters.  Samples collected from the Lake to the south of Milwaukee
were predominantly Cyclotella-Stephanodiscus. and Melosira, forms
typical of nutrient enriched waters, at levels of over 1,500 per ml.
The bulk waters of Lake Michigan remote from nutrient sources or other
pollutional discharges were found to contain less than 500 organisms
per ml, predominated by forms commonly associated with clean waters,
such as Tabelluria.

                        Microbiological Findings

       Coliform concentrations, found during the water quality exami-
nation of Milwaukee Harbor and adjacent waters in the fall of 1962,
are shown in Table 6-2 and are illustrated in Figure 6-6.  The table
shows that concentrations exceeded 1,000/100 ml in 38 percent of the
samples and 10,000/100 ml in 16 percent.  The distribution of these
high concentrations are in the immediate Milwaukee River and Harbor
area enclosed by the breakwater as shown in Figure 6-6.  The results
of a repeat study made in June, 1963 are shown in Table 6-3.  This
table shows that 97$ of the samples were found with coliform densities
in excess of 1,000 per 100 ml, 35$ in excess of 10,000 per 100 ml, and
£$ in excess of 100,000 per 100 ml.  Fecal streptococci concentrations
in excess of 100 per 100 ml were found in 90$ of the Samples.

       Since the shore line adjacent to Milwaukee contains beach areas
that are used for swimming and other water-oriented recreation the
high concentrations of bacteria found in the Harbor indicate the
possible existence of a health hazard to those using the beaches for
this purpose.  The Project sampled the beach waters of the Milwaukee
area for a brief period and found that at McKinley Beach the colifoim
concentrations exceeded 1,000 per 100 ml on four of the fourteen days
sampled.  In the Milwaukee Marina, the concentration exceeded 1,000
per 100 ml on three of the fourteen days sampled.  However, the
contamination and consequent potential health hazard to bathers of the
beach waters in the Milwaukee area has been of serious concern to the
Milwaukee Health Department, which prohibited the use of these waters

                                L A  K E   M 1C HI 6
   A  N

Nos of Organisms/Sq Meter





                                                         GREAT  LAKES   8  ILLINOIS
                                                           RIVER  BASINS  PROJECT
                                                      BENTHIC  FAUNA POPULATIONS
                                                          LAKE MICHIGAN-NEAR THE
                                                           MILWAUKEE RIVER.I962-I963
                                                    US  DEPT. OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, 8 WELFARE
                                                    FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION  CONTROL ADMIN
                                                                            CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
                                                                               FIGURE  6-4

                             LAKE   Ml CHIG

Phytoplankters Per ml

   T^ 1,000-5,000

   ^^ 5,000-10,000

   ^^ 10,000-20,000

      	I 	2

                                                       A N
                                                                       . 43°00'
                                                    8 7 ° 4 5
                                                   GREAT  LAKES  &   ILLINOIS
                                                    RIVER  BASINS  PROJECT
                                                PHYTOPLANTON POPULATIONS
                                                   LAKE MICHIGAN-NEAR THE
                                                    MILWAUKEE  RIVER-1963
                                                 U S DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
                                              FEDERAL WATER POL LUTION CONTROL ADMIN
                                                                      FIGURE  6-5

                 TABLE 6-2

Bacterial density
(Range of Coliform Colonies/100 ml.)
No. of Samples
Percent of
Samples Collected

Coliform Density Per 100ml



                             SCALE IN MILES
                                                 U S DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
                                              FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMIN
                                                                      FIGURE 6-6

               TABLE 6-3

         MILWAUKEE HARBOR,  1963
Bacterial Density
(per 100 ml)
Fecal Streptococci:
Wo. of Samples
Percent of
Samples Collected
                                             GPO 826—512—5

 for bathing  from  1959-1963.  The Milwaukee Health Department has
 recently  carried  out  extensive  studies of beach pollution and has
 concluded that the beaches became affected by combined sewer over-
 flows  during and  after  periods  of heavy rainfall.  It has also been
 found  that winds  from the northeast move polluted Harbor water
 through the  south breakwall opening to the southern beaches, which
 are also  protected by a breakwall.  These observations have led to a
 partial reopening of  the beaches for bathing use, geared to the
 rainfall  rate and volume experienced and wind direction and
 velocity.  (2?)  However, the lack of disinfection for the effluent
 of the Jones Island sewage treatment plant and overflows from the
 combined  sewers of the  area continue to present health hazards as
 indicated by the  high coliform  concentrations observed.

 Study  Area Streams

       The Wisconsin  State Committee on Water Pollution maintains two
 monitoring stations on  the main stem of the Milwaukee River within
 Milwaukee  County.  Data concerning water quality in the River at the
 2 stations are presented in Table 6-/±.

       The above data indicate excessive bacterial pollution with
 average coliform  concentrations in excess of 20,000 per 100 ml at
 both stations.  The water has high color.  Phosphorous concentrations
 are high  in  relation to the limit 0.01 mg/1 of soluble phosphorous as
 recommended by Sawyer and associated with algal blooms in lakes. (26)

       During 1964 and  early 1965 the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional
 Planning  Commission (SEWRPC) conducted a water quality study of the
 Milwaukee  River Basin.  (28)  The results of the SEWRPC study have
 been discussed in a previous report which was prepared by the GLIRB
 Project for the U. S. Army Engineer District, Chicago. (29)  In
 general the GLIRB Project report concluded that the present major
water  quality problems  in the Basin are confined to the main stem of
 the Milwaukee River within Milwaukee County.  Problems associated
with high  concentrations of coliform bacteria, color, and phosphorous
were noted in the stream above Milwaukee County, but the critical
 stream quality problems are associated with combined sewer overflow
 and storm water runoff  in Milwaukee County.  High concentrations of
 coliform bacteria and phosphorous, and low dissolved oxygen levels
 have been  observed resulting primarily from such combined sewer

       During the summer of 1962 the Wisconsin Committee on Water
 Pollution  conducted an  investigation of surface water quality in
 southeastern Wisconsin, including the Milwaukee River. (30)  Samples
were collected at sixteen (16) stations from Kewaskum to Thiensville
during June, July and August.  Dissolved oxygen levels were above 6.0
mg/1 for each of 61 samples collected, except one sample below
 Kewaskum which indicated a concentration of 3.8 mg/1.

                               TABLE 6-4

                          1961-1961; Averages
                            Machinery Bay near      Brown Deer Rd.  near
Parameter                   Mouth in Milwaukee      Milwaukee Co. Line

Coliform Colonies (per 100 ml)


Chlorides (mg/l)

Color (S.U.)

Total Hardness (mg/l)

Org-W (mg/l)

NH3-N (mg/l)

NO - N (mg/l)


Total Phosphorous (mg/l)

Soluble Phosphorous (mg/l)

Total Solids (mg/l)

Suspended Solids (mg/l)

AES (mg/l)

D.O. (mg/l)
il) 23,400.

                         CHAPTER  7


       The problems of water pollution control in the Milwaukee
area are complex.  Solutions to these problems will of necessity
involve a comprehensive program which includes construction of
new sewerage facilities; proper operation of the new and existing
facilities; and continuous and intensive monitoring of operating
procedures, treatment plant efficiency, and water quality condi-
tions to determine necessary additional construction and operation
needs as they arise.  These phases of the comprehensive program
for pollution control in the Milwaukee area are discussed in the
following paragraphs.

Municipal Waste Treatment

       The immediate goal in the treatment of municipal wastes is
the provision of biological (secondary) treatment at each waste
treatment plant.  Such treatment is considered adequate in terms of
present technology and provides 85-90 percent BOD^ removal.
Adequate effluent disinfection is also considered to be a necessity
in the study area, particularly in the immediate Milwaukee area
where recreational use of the adjacent waters of Lake Michigan is
prevalent.  There is also a present need for increased phosphate
removal efficiency.  See "Reduction of Nutrients" below.

       Of the existing waste treatment plants located in the study
area all but two provide secondary treatment in the form of acti-
vated sludge treatment or trickling filters.  The South Milwaukee
and Oak Creek plants provide primary treatment only and need im-
provement to provide secondary waste treatment.  The new South
Shore plant of the Milwaukee Sewerage Commission is designed to
provide primary treatment and disinfection only.  This new plant
also needs improvement to provide secondary waste treatment.  The
municipal waste treatment construction needs of the study area are
presented in Table 7-1.  The needs are based on waste flow and load
projections to the year 1980.

       It is estimated that the cost of needed municipal plant
improvements in the study area, as listed above, but excluding
facilities specifically for phosphate removal, is $28,000,000.

                                    TABLE  7-1

                          MUNICIPAL WASTE TREATMENT NEEDS
                              MILWAUKEE STUDY AREA
Sewerage Service
Campbell sport

Milwaukee Area*-
Jones Island
South Shore

So. Milwaukee

Menomonee Falls




Random Lake



West Bend

(See Below)






Present Pop.









1980 Pop.










Gen. Expansion




# Only the major treatment facilities in the Milwaukee Area are listed.

#*-Cost estimates found in this report assume that chlorination facilities
  will be used to achieve disinfection of wastes.

       Even after the above control measures have been effected,
including a high degree of waste treatment, the discharge of waste
waters can still result in degradation of receiving waters unless
sufficient quantities of higher-quality water are available for
dispersal of the effluent.  In developing the program for the
Milwaukee Area, consideration was given to the desirability of ex-
tending the present waste outfall beyond the breakwater and re-
leasing the wastes from the Jones Island Sewage Treatment Plant
through a diffuser some two miles from shore.  In considering the
relative merits of such a proposal, an important factor is the
movement of lake waters in this vicinity.  Oceanographic studies
(Chapter 5) show that during seven months of the year the pre-
dominant movement of waters is north toward the Milwaukee and the
North Shore Utility water intakes.  This raises the possibility
that under certain conditions the quality of the lake water in the
vicinity of the intakes might be adversely affected.  On the other
hand, the present breakwater serves as a diffuser by mixing the
wastes with the harbor waters before permitting their release
through the various openings in the breakwater.  The effectiveness
of the present arrangement has been demonstrated by the fact that
the deterioration of water quality in the vicinity of the water
intakes has been minimal.  Accordingly, it has been concluded that
the present point of discharge provides the best protection for
the municipal water supply.

Industrial Wastes

       As described in Chapter 4, the Peter Cooper Corporation in
Oak Creek is the only significant direct industrial waste source
in the study area.  Two alternative solutions to the problems of
waste treatment at this industry are apparent.  Due to the prox-
imity of the new South Shore Treatment Plant of the Milwaukee
Metropolitan Sewerage District negotiations could possibly be made
whereby the industrial wastes could be discharged to District
sewers and treated at the South Shore plant.  Some type of pre-
treatment by the industry might be necessary prior to discharge to
the municipal facilities.  A second alternative would involve the
provision of adequate secondary waste treatment by the Peter Cooper
Corporation.  The waste waters from the plant are considered to be
amenable to biological waste treatment.

Combined Sewers

       The need for solutions to the problems caused by overflows
from combined sewer systems is pressing and is receiving much current
attention.(31)  The Water Quality Act of 1965 established a four-year

program of grants and contract authority to demonstrate new or
improved methods to eradicate the problems of combined sewer

       In 1956 the consulting engineering firm of Alvord, Burdick
and Howson submitted a report to the Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage
District on "Intercepting Sewers and Sewage Treatment in the Milwaukee
District Area."  The report included the subject of the separation
of storm and sanitary sewage in the area.  It was concluded that
the total cost for separation, including storm sewer construction;
roof and foundation drain separation; and interference with the
operation of commercial and industrial establishments, would be
about $250,000,000.  It was also concluded that such an expenditure
would be an uneconomic use of the taxpayer's money.

       Until economically feasible methods for solving the problems
are developed, existing combined sewer systems should be patrolled.
Overflow regulating structures should be adjusted to convey the
maximum practicable amount of combined flows to and through waste
treatment facilities.  Combined sewers should be prohibited in all
newly developed urban areas and urban renewal projects.

       Milwaukee is now constructing an interceptor sewer which
should significantly reduce overflows now affecting the southern
beaches.  It will also convey sanitary sewage to the new South
Shore Sewage Treatment Plant.

Reduction of Nutrients

       The increasing frequency and severity of algal blooms in
Lake Michigan is a clear indication of a rapid acceleration in the
concentration of nutrients which stimulate such growths and a clear
warning that unless appropriate steps are taken nuisance blooms will
become widespread and will interfere with, or inhibit, many im-
portant water uses.  Studies of this problem in Lake Michigan and
also in Lake Erie(32) have led to the conclusion that the best
approach to the control of nuisance algal blooms lies in the re-
duction of phosphorus inputs.  The Milwaukee area in general and
more significantly the waste effluents from Milwaukee itself are
major contributors to the phosphorus content of Lake Michigan
(Chapter 4).

       The Jones Island Sewage Treatment Plant is accomplishing
substantial removals of the phosphorus contained in the raw wastes
reaching the Plant.  According to recent Plant operating records,
approximately 80% of the total phosphorus arid $0% of the soluble

phosphorus is removed by the activated sludge process.  Research
now in progress on the mechanism by which phosphorus is removed
by the activated sludge process indicates that even higher removals
may be achieved.

       It is apparent from the conditions in Milwaukee Harbor and
the offshore areas (Chapter 6) in the vicinity of Milwaukee that
additional phosphorus removal must be achieved if nuisance algal
blooms are to be controlled.  Complete removal of phosphorus
through chemical precipitation can be achieved through the con-
struction of additional plant units with substantial increase in
operating costs.  It is proposed at this time that all sewage treat-
ment plants of the secondary type located in the area improve the
operation of their sewage treatment works to achieve the maximum
possible phosphorus removal.

       The determination of total and soluble phosphorus should be
added to the list of chemical parameters now analyzed in all waste
treatment plant laboratories.  Such determinations should be made
on the raw sewage entering the plant and the plant effluent as
well as at other suitable points in the plant process.  It is
proposed that in one year from this date the records of phosphorus
removal be carefully evaluated.  If significant improvement in
phosphorus removals have not been achieved, consideration should
be given to the possible installation of chemical precipitation
at all such plants to insure positive continuous phosphorus removal.

Alert Procedures

       In 1959 the Milwaukee County Park Commission, based upon
the recommendation of the City of Milwaukee Health Department,
closed for swimming the public Lake Michigan bathing beaches
known as South Shore and Bay View.  The beaches were closed due
to recurring high coliform bacterial pollution and remained closed
until 1963 (Chapter 6).  Analyses of past sampling data indicates
that a relationship existed between high coliform counts at the
beaches and wind direction and rainfall.  The relationship was
linked to overflows from the combined sewer system serving
Milwaukee.(27)  In February of 1963 a report was prepared by the
Milwaukee Health Department in which periodic opening and closing
of the South Shore and Bay View beaches was recommended in
accordance with a formula based on rainfall.  The development of
such alert procedures to cope with the problems of overflows from
combined sewers and subsequent beach pollution is commended.
However,  an overall solution to the problem is the only answer to
the constant health hazard posed by these overflows from the com-
bined sewers.

Treatment Plant Operation

       A review of the available inventory data relating to the
BOD^ removal efficiencies of the municipal waste treatment plants
in the study area indicates that the existing secondary plants at
Kewaskum, Fredonia, Saukville and Germantown need operational im-
provements so as to provide adequate waste treatment.  Overloading
of the plants at Thiensville, West Bend, Random Lake, Jackson and
Butler has contributed to low BOD,- removal efficiencies at these

       Proper plant operation must be coordinated with proper plant
design in order to efficiently reach the goals of water pollution
control.  The importance and value of proper plant operation must
be emphasized at all levels of public authority.  Effective opera-
tion can be encouraged by means of a routine inspection program.
The State Board of Health maintains responsibility for the super-
vision of municipal sewage treatment plant operation in Wisconsin,
The State Board of Health should conduct inspections on at least an
annual basis for the small and medium-sized plants, and at least,
bi-annually for the larger plants such as the Jones Island Plant
and the new South Shore Plant.

       The Wisconsin Sewage Works Operators Association administers
a voluntary sewage treatment plant operators' certification program
in Wisconsin.  A mandatory certification plan is under consideration.
The voluntary program is commendable and can provide definite in-
centive for the proper operation of waste treatment plants. However,
a mandatory program is preferrable to insure the proper qualifica-
tions of operators.

       State-sponsored operator training programs are also a useful
tool for elevating the level of overall plant performance.  The
existing training program in Wisconsin is a step in the right
direction and consists of a 3-day biennial course sponsored by the
State Board of Health, University of Wisconsin, and the League of
u'isconsin Municipalities.  However, the Wisconsin program does not
compare favorably with the frequency and duration of such training
sponsored by other states.  Today, with increasing activity in the
field of water pollution control at the Federal, State and local
levels, operator training courses should be conducted at least

       Annual reports concerning the operation of municipal waste
treatment plants are presently submitted to the Wisconsin State
Board of Health.  Monthly operational reports would provide the
                                                            GPO 826-512-4

State with more current information and would enable them to take
much quicker action concerning needed improvements.


       The maintenance of water quality on a continuing basis calls
for a routine monitoring program covering the significant water
quality parameters at strategic points.  In the Milwaukee area the
V/isconsin Committee on Water Pollution maintains two monitoring
stations on the Milwaukee River at Brown Deer Road near the Milwaukee
County Line and at Machinery Bay in Milwaukee (See Chapter 6).  The
Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District also monitors water quality
in the streams within District boundaries, Milwaukee Harbor and the
adjacent waters of Lake Michigan.

       The monitoring program of the V/isconsin Committee on Water
Pollution should be strengthened and coordinated with other agencies
at the Federal, State and Local levels.  The Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration will cooperate and assist the Committee to
the fullest extent of its resources and personnel in expanding its
monitoring program.  In particular the monitoring program should be
expanded to include sampling points at strategic locations on the
Milwaukee River and tributaries, Milwaukee Harbor and the adjacent
waters of Lake Michigan.  In addition to the analyses presently
performed, phenol determinations should be made of the samples col-
lected, particularly in Harbor waters and adjacent waters of the

       The industries, municipalities and other agencies, dis-
charging wastes within the study area, should submit monthly reports
to the appropriate state agency concerning the quality and quantity
of the wastes discharged.  These reports could, in many cases, be
combined with the monthly operational report which was discussed
under "Treatment Plant Operation."

       The overall monitoring program should be geared to provide
an adequate picture of all wastes being discharged to the waters of
the area and serve to indicate changes or trends in water quality or
the need for additional water quality improvement measures.

State Water Pollution Control Program

       The Federal ',,'ater Pollution Control Act recognizes the pri-
mary responsibility of the States in the control and prevention of
water pollution.  The effectiveness of a State program, however, is
dependent upon adequate funds and personnel with which to accomplish
this mission.  The State of .Wisconsin has achieved commendable

success in the control of water pollution, with the staff and funds
available.  Recent State legislation which will enable the State to
direct efforts toward the prevention of water pollution is an im-
portant step toward avoiding water pollution problems in the

     Although much has been accomplished by the State in controlling
pollution, much remains to be done.  In 196/», the Public Administra-
tion Service prepared a survey report for the Public Health Service
concerning the budgeting and staffing of State programs.(31)  This
report, containing suggested guidelines for use in evaluating the
adequacy of State water pollution control programs, may be of assis-
tance to Wisconsin in evaluating its present water pollution control

     In view of the water pollution control problems still existing,
consideration should be given by the State to an accelerated program
to match the needs of the State for clean water for all legitimate
uses.  An accelerated State Water Pollution Control program utilizing
fully the resources and programs of the Administration will insure
the earliest possible accomplishment of our common goal - the
elimination of existing pollution and the prevention of pollution in
the future, thereby providing more effective use of our water

                          CHAPTER  8

                     PROGRAM D1PLEMENTATION
       The implementation of the Comprehensive Water Pollution
Control Program for the Lake Michigan Basin will involve the com-
bined efforts of the water pollution control agencies at all levels
of government.  Specific recommendations for implementing the Lake
Michigan Comprehensive Water Pollution Control Program, and for
coordinating the subbasin programs will be contained in the Summary
Report for Lake Michigan, which will be the final report in the
Lake Michigan series.  The recommendations contained in this report
will in no way conflict with recommendations contained in the
Milwaukee Area water pollution control program, nor will it inter-
fere in any way with any steps taken to implement those

       Accordingly it is recommended that the Wisconsin Committee
on Water Pollution consider the Comprehensive Water Pollution Con-
trol Program contained herein as the basis for improvement of the
quality of the waters in the Milwaukee Area.  The Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration will cooperate with and assist
the Committee to the fullest extent of its resources and personnel
in each action taken to achieve objectives consistent with the

                           CHAPTER   9

        Implementation of the  recommendations which comprise the
 above action program will  result in substantial improvement in the
 quality of the waters in the  study area.  The program objectives,
 hoivever, are more specific and have been developed to provide water
 of  satisfactory quality for both present and planned uses as shown
 on  Table 3-1.  Accomplishment of program objectives will result in
 both tangible and intangible benefits to the people of the Milwaukee
 area in particular, and to the people of Wisconsin and the Nation
 as  a whole.  As the waters of Lake Michigan serve many States and
 are of  National importance, all will share in the benefits result-
 ing from the enhancement and protection of these waters for both
 present and future needs.

        Residents of the study area will benefit from the assurance
 of  a safer, more palatable water supplied to their homes, business
 establishments, industries, schools and public buildings.  Owners
 of  property adjacent to and near bodies of water will derive in-
 creased esthetic enjoyment and enhanced property values fron the
 elimination of ugliness and unsightly conditions resulting from
water pollution, including nuisance algal blooms stimulated I "

       Wisconsin residents and visitors from out-of-state who use
the area streams and lakes for swimming, water skiing, boating and
other water-oriented sports will be protected against infectious
diseases which can be spread as a result of water pollution.  The
sports  fisherman will find additional fishing areas to challenge
his skill and improved fishing as a benefit of enhanced water

       AS a return on their investment in improved water qualit",
industry will share in the benefits through assurance of consis-
tency in the quality of process water it needs for many of its
products and other water needs.

       In addition to these immediate and direct benefits resulting
from the control of pol]ution, the preservation and protection of
the quality of the waters of Lake Michigan and the Great Lakes is
an important benefit and essential to the Nation's continued growth
and prosperity.   This immense fresh water resource, the greatest
in the world,  is beginning to show the effects of man's carelessness.


Lake Erie is a clear demonstration that size is no protection
against pollution and that man has the capability of destroying
the usefulness of even a major water resource.

       The Calumet, Milwaukee and Green Bay areas of Lake Michigan
are already affected adversely by pollution.  Should the Lake as a
whole reach critical levels of nutrients or other persistent con-
taminants, it would require many decades before remedial measures
could result in restoration of satisfactory water quality.  The
beneficial effects of phosphorus removal from wastes originating in
the Milwaukee area could result in a very significant benefit in
protecting and enhancing the quality of the waters of Lake Michigan,

 1.  Surface Water Records of Wisconsin,. 1964.  U. S. Department
     of the Interior, Geological Survey District Office, Madison,

 2.  Flow Characteristics of Wisconsin Streams.  U. S. Department
     of the Interior, Geological Survey District Office, Madison,
     Wisconsin (November, 1963).

 3.  Climatological Data. Wisconsin Annual Summary, 1964. U. S.
     Department of Commerce, heather Bureau, Asheville, N. C.  (1965).

 4.  U. S. Census of Manufactures;  1947. 1954, 1958, 1963.  U. S.
     Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, U. S. Government
     Printing Office, Washington, D. C. (1949, 1957, 1961, 1965).

 5.  Water quality Criteria,  appendix No. 8, Lake Michigan Basin
     Report, U. S. Department of the Interior, FWPCA, Great Lakes-
     Illinois River Basins Project, Chicago, Illinois
     (To be published).

 6.  The__Public Utilities of Southeastern Wisconsin.  Planning
     Report No. 6, Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning
     Commission, Waukesha, Wisconsin (July, 1963).

 7.  Municipal Water Facilities, 1963 Inventory.  Public Health
     Service Publication No. 775, Vol. 5.  U. S. Government
     Printing Office, Washington, D. C. (1964).

 o.  Milwaukee Water Works. 1964 Annual Report.  Milwaukee, Wisconsin
     (April 1, 1965).

 9.  Surface Water Resources of Milwaukee County.  Wisconsin
     Conservation Department, Madison, Wisconsin (1964).

10.  U. S. Census of Agriculture: 1959.  U. S. Department of
     Commerce, Bureau of the Census.  U. S. Government Printing
     Office, Washington, D. C. (1961).

11.  The Natural Resources of Southeastern Wisconsin.  Planning
     Report No. 55 Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning
     Commission, Waukesha, Wisconsin (June 1963).

12.  Port of Milwaukee.  Board of Harbor Commissioners, Milwaukee,
     Wisconsin (1962).

                       BIBLIOGRAPHY (Cont'a.}
13 .  Sewerage Commission of the City of Kilwauk ee, 1963 Annual jieport.
     Milwaukee, Wisconsin (January 2, 1964).

14.  Report on the Waste Disposal Facilities at the Peter Cooper
     Corporation, Carroll vi lie, j.'isconsin.  Wisconsin Committee on
     Water Pollution, Madison, Wisconsin (December 16, 1963).

15.  Municipal_V.a.ste Facilities, 1962 Inventory.  Public Health
     Service Publication No. 106$, Vol. 5-3 U- S. Government Printing
     Office, Washington, D. C. (1963).

16.  Report on_. Stream Pollution, Drainage Areas 4 and $.  Wisconsin
     State Committee on Water Pollution, Madison, Wisconsin
     (March 12,
17.  Pollutional Effects of Stormwater and Overflows from Combined
     Sewer Systems.  Public Health Service Publication No. 1246.,
     U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C.
     (November 1964).

18.  Report on Intercepting Sewers and Sewage Treatment. Milwaukee
     Metropolitan Area. 1956.  Alvord, Burdick and Howson, Engineers,
     Chicago, Illinois (1956).

19.  Memorandum Report - Wastes Discharged to_Milwaukee Harbor.
     U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health
     Service, Great Lakes-Illinois River Basins Project, Chicago,
     Illinois (June 1963).

20.  Runoff as a Source of Phosphate in the Waters of Streams and
     Lakes.  Preliminary Report prepared by H. Hall, U. S. Department
     of Health, Education and Welfare, F.tfPCA, GLIRB Project, Chicago,
     Illinois (February 1966).

21.  "Discharge of Vessel Wastes in Fresh Water Rivers and Lakes -
     The Great Lakes and Connecting Waters."  Public Health Service
     Interstate -quarantine Regulation, Federal Register (September 16,

22.  Lake Michigan Pollution.  Wisconsin Department of Resource
     Development, Madison, Wisconsin (January 3> 1963).

23.  Surface Currents of the Great Lakes, as Deduced from the
     Movements of Bottle Papers During the Seasons of 1892 ^ 1893.
     and 1894 •  U. S. Department of Agriculture, Weather Bureau.
     Bulletin B, Revised Edition (1895).
                                                           GPO 826—512—3

                         BIBLIOGRAPHY  (Cont'd.)
24.  Surface Currents in  Lake Michigan,  1954  and  1951.   U.  S.  Fish
     and Wildlife  Service Special  Scientific  Report,  Fisheries
     No. 338 (I960).

25.  "Currents and Water  Masses of Lake  Michigan."  J.  C. Avers  et al.
     Great Lakes Research Institute Publication No. 3,  Ann  Arbor,
     Michigan (1958).

26.  "Some New Aspects of Phosphates in  Relation  to Lake Fertiliza-
     tion."  C. N. Sawyer,  Sewage  and Industrial  Wastes,  Vol.  2L.,
     No. 6 (June,  1952).

27.  Effects of Storm Water on Bathing Beaches in Separate  and
     Combined Sewer Area.   Presented by  L.  A. Ernest  at the 38th
     Annual Meeting of the  Central States Water Pollution Control
     Association,  Albert  Lea, Minnesota  (June 10, 1965).

28.  "A Study of Water Quality and Flow  of  Streams in Southeastern
     Wisconsin" by R. Ryling.  Technical Record,  Vol. 1,  No.  6
     Southeastern  V/isconsin Regional Planning Commission, Waukesha,
     Wisconsin (August-September,  1964).

29.  Water Supply  and Water ^juality Control. Study, Waubeka
     Reservoirv Milwaukee River Basin. Wisconsin. U.  S«  Department
     of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health  Service,  Great
     Lakes-Illinois River Basins Project, Chicago, Illinois
     (October, 1965).

30.  Report on a Field Investigation of  Surface Water Duality in
     Southeastern  Wisconsin Conducted in the  Summer of  1962.
     V/isconsin Committee  on Water  Pollution,  Madison, Wisconsin
     (January, 1963).

31.  "Storm Water  Control Looks Like Costliest Pollution Fight Yet."
     Engineering News-Record, New  York,  N.  Y. (March  31,  1966).

32.  Report on Pollution  of Lake Erie and Its Tributaries.   U. S.
     Department of Health,  Education and 'Welfare, Public  Health
     Service, Division of Water Supply and  Pollution  Control
     (July 1965).

33.  "Wisconsin Pollution Rx:  Prevent It."   Engineering News-Record,
     New York, New York (January 27,  1966).

34.  Staffing and  Budgetary Guidelines for  State  Water  Pollution
     Control Agencies.  Public Administration Service,  Chicago,
     Illinois (1964).
GPO 826—512-2