-------
170
£




•"*


_

S9AP, PE£
/MONTH
Mf&lMOM Q OT 1 1 1 K i /- Q n">/~i i rnDi/rv
nHlHIMft BERCH SUKvEY
MEOiftN ^J.
MlNlMU/A
20,000.
/o,coo.


'25
ex.

a:
J
I
CL
LLJ
O.
^
00
-2.
cr
^£
on
P













L_^









5,000.







/jOOO,



5oo.






/Oo



fl
iflUTfll/GUfl fOOMTY
LIGUST I^ToS

COLIFOS?M COUNTS CM.F.)



*R


16
3)5o *n




-4
HC



C-
GO

VP
2
0,
(/)
UJ
Q-
G.
















245













cO
CD

^/
C2
o_
1-
2
o
o-

2
0



>•••





















4-toO 4700


^40O


1300
8
F^I
JP u-
Ni
H
mmmf





•««





37









r
315








u*itm
«o , ? i

(J 0 h
« 345 ^ a v>
"" cj 2
£


Gi ??<5 ^" f-"v3 ^ ' ^ i
2 ^ 2 v i ' 'A >
J o w u i : -z '
O \- i-  U Q. 31
i
«?MI |
^^ •«»«(
K>j


j




•)











to
?
1-
U)
(^
z
^^
(r>



^^^p*














320








4-7 1
















3700;






. •
-^ y
; ^|_ ii
CC
n





>
i
i

|
•j- \
u|
UJ ?
CD
«
2- H-'l
Qi !' 5 1
x! ^*



••sv^^.



^



I OCATtOM

-------
                                                               171
    S9MP,
    //\ONTVi
    MlNlAUJ/U
               flUGUS
                   JTftugjR rOUMTY
               f Oil FOEM COUNTS  (f/A.R)
    2q,ooo..
    /o,ooo..
ft
__l
o.
<{
c:
 8
 UJ
 0.
 CC
 (3
 c£
 0
    5^000..
5oo..
     /CO..
     3375
            700
POINT GRA7JOT
                  K
                  s
                          3250—
                               1255

                                             Z40O
v

ui
                                            2
                                        /J?o
                                             V
                                             X
                                             lw

                                             I
                                             ?:

-------
                                                        172
                       G. H.  Eagle




          MR. STEIN:  Thank you.




          Are there any comments or questions?  If not,




thank you very much for the presentation.




          I think we have raised some real points, and we




will, in the discussion, try to resolve the phosphate ques-




tion.  As a matter of fact, the way the* statements are coming




in, I think we are remarkably close together at this point,




and unless something develops, I don't now anticipate too




much difficulty, but I would suggest tb-.t the Conferees




keep that in mind as we proceed.




          We will now call on Ohio, Mr. Eagle, and, Mr.




Eagle, we would ask you to manage your own time, but if we




run into the lunch period, if you can find a convenient




time to split or break, we would appreciate your letting




us know when that could be.




          MR. EAGLE:  All right, sir.




          MR, STEIN:  Thank you.






          STATEMENT OF GEORGE H. EAGLE, CHIEF




          ENGINEER, OHIO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,




                     COLUMBUS, OHIO






          MR. EAGLE:  Mr. Chairman, Conferees, ladies  and




gentlemen.  My name is George H. Eagle.   I am the  Chief




Engineer of the Ohio Department of Health.  The Division of

-------
                                                        173
                       G.  H.  Eagle




Engineering serves as the  technical staff of the Ohio Water




Pollution Control Board.  On behalf of the Board and the




Department, I wish to submit this report in its entirety




for the record.




          I1R. STEIN:  Without objection, it will be done.




          MR. EAGLE:  This report is a progress evaluation




of the Ohio program for compliance with the conclusions and




recommendations of the Lnke 3rie Pollution Enforcement




Conference of August 1965, as directed in a letter under




date of June 6, 19&9* from the Secretary of Interior.




          WATER QUALITY STANDARDS




          Since the June 4f 196$, meeting of this conference,




the Ohio Water Pollution Control Board adopted stream water




quality standards for the Rocky, Cuyahoga, Chagrin, and




Grand River intrastate tributaries of Lake Erie.




          The standards, as well as the schedule of corrective




measures for their implementation, are presented in Appendix




I.  The implementation schedules are generally in accordance




with those adopted by the Conferees; however, some schedules




have been changed so as to be consistent with more recent




developments.  In a few cases, the treatment requirements




necessary to meet local water quality standards are more




stringent than the recommendations of the Conferees.

-------
                                                         174
                       G.  H.  Eagle

          SECONDARY SEWAGE TREATMENT

          Following is the status of secondary sewage

treatment facilities in the Ohio portion of the Lake Erie

Basin:  (See Appendix II - Table 1, for listing),

                                             6/69    5/63

(1)  Total number of facilities in Lake
     Erie Basin                               132
(2)  Number of adequate secondary sewage
     treatment facilities                      59

(3)  Number of secondary sewage treatment
     facilities constructed or improved
     since August 1965                         36
(4)  Number of inadequate secondary sewage
     treatment facilities                      73     $5
     va)  Under construction - completion
          in 1969                              12     66*
     (b)  Construction to be completed
          in 1970                              14     15
     (c)  Construction to be completed
          in 1971                              34      3
     (d)  Construction to be completed
          in 1972                              10      1
     (e)  Construction to be completed
          in 1973                               3

* Includes ten scheduled for completion in 196$.

          Since May 1963, five secondary sewage treatment

plants were completed for communities that previously did

not have treatment facilities; one sewer system was

connected to another community's system; two primary plants

were provided with secondary treatment; and, one secondary

treatment plant was enlarged.

          Facilities under construction include secondary

treatment for:  five communities not having any facilities;

-------
                                                         175
                      G. H. Eagle



five communities connecting to other communities having



facilities; eight enlargements of existing secondary treat-



ment facilities; and, one new secondary treatment plant to



replace two small plants.



          Detailed construction plans have been completed



for twelve new or enlarged secondary treatment plants and



for connection of one community system to another system.



Several of these should be under construction in 1969.



          You will note that many schedules have been



extended from 1969 and 1970 to 1971 and 1972.  Each of



these extensions was given careful consideration by the Ohio



Department of Health staff and the Water Pollution Control



Board, and the only extensions granted were considered



necessary for legitimate reasons.  Problems in completing



financing and engineering arrangements and services were



the common reasons.  Several are under orders of the Board



and must report progress at continued show cause hearings



before the Board.



          INDUSTRIAL WASTES



          Following is a summary of the status of the



required industrial wastes treatment or reduction facili-



ties.  (See Appendix II, Table 2 for listing).

-------
                                                        176
                      G.  H.  Eagle

                                             6/69    5/63

(1)   Total number of facilities required
     as of May 1963                            33      90

(2)   Total number of adequate facilities
     completed since August  1965               25*     23

(3)   Number of inadequate facilities           63*     62

     (a)  Under construction - completion
          in 1969                              31

     (b)  Construction to be completed in
          1970                                 25

     (c)  Construction to be completed in
          1971                                  7

     * Additional requirements adopted by the Ohio Water
       Pollution Control Board for several industries.

    ** Includes 30 scheduled for completion in 1963.

          The reason for extending the schedules for

completion of 32 of the facilities from 1969 to 1970 and

1971 are many.  Plant changes, engineering services, equip-

ment availability, new requirements and Water Pollution

Control Board hearings are some of them.  Here again, as

with the municipal dischargers, each extension was given

careful consideration by the staff and the Board and only

granted where considered necessary.  There should be very

few delays in the future in completing this program.

          PHOSPHORUS REMOVAL

          Following the October 4, 1963, session of the

Conference, it was reported that the Conferees agreed that:

-------
                                                        177
                      G. H. Eagle



          "The policy of maximum phosphate removal from



municipal and industrial waste sources to protect Lake



Erie's water quality is reaffirmed.  At the present  time,




it is believed that the States can best move this phosphate



program forward by providing a minimum of BO percent  reduction




of total phosphate loadings from the respective  States.



          "Each State water pollution control  agency and



the Department of the Interior shall list its municipalities,



industries, and the Federal installations which  discharge




nutrients into the Lake Erie Basin and indicate  which dis-




charges have a deleterious effect on water quality.   The



list and detailed plans for treating these wastes shall




be submitted to the Conferees within six months0 The



decision as to how much phosphorus is to be removed at small




sources is the responsibility of each State agency as long



as the total loading reduction is met.*1



          In accordance with this agreement, I wish  to



report the following resume.  Detailed listings  of the



wastewater treatment plants where phosphate removal



facilities will be required are included in Appendix II -




Table 3.



          Now, just in summary, the total 1963 estimated



population in the Ohio portion of the Lake Erie  Basin is



3,400,000.

-------
                                                        178
                      G.  H.  Eagle



          The total 196tf  estimated phosphate load (total P)



from the Ohio portion of  the Lake Erie Basin on the basis



of 0.01 Ibs/day/capita is 34*000 Ibs./day,



          Discharges Direct to Lake Erie.  The total 1963



estimated phosphate load  (total P) from the population



served with public sewers along the Ohio shoreline of Lake



Erie is 20,000 Ibs./day (0.01 Ibs./ day/ capita).



          The expected phosphate removal at 14 plants along



the Ohio shoreline of Lake Erie serving a population of



1,795»000 at this time  we estimate to be not less than



90 percent, or a total of 16,155 Ibs./day.  All except two



of these fourteen plants  will be of the activated sludge



and chemical treatment type.  The Rocky River plant will



be of the carbon filter type and the Cleveland Westerly



primary treatment plant is proposed at this time to be



converted to chemical treatment.  It is our understanding



that a full-scale study of chemical treatment will be



undertaken in the near future at Cleveland Westerly.  A



representative of Cleveland will report on this in more



detail a little later.



          The schedules for completion of the phosphate



removal facilities at twelve of these fourteen plants



range from 1970 to 1972.  At the two Cleveland plants



schedules of completion in late 1973 are tentatively

-------
                                                        179
                      G. H. Eagle



proposed.  These advanced schedules are now being consid-



ered by the Ohio Water Pollution Control Board, in speaking



of the ones at Cleveland.



          Discharges to Tributary Streams.  The total 1963



estimated phosphate load (total P) from the population



served with public sewers discharging to the Ohio tributar-



ies of Lake Erie is 14,000 Ibs./day,  (0.01 Ibs./day/capita)



          The expected phosphate removal at nineteen plants



in the basin serving 1,272,575 people is not less than 90



percent, or a total of 11,450 Ibs./day.  All except four



of the nineteen plants will be of the activated sludge and



chemical treatment type.  Three — Bedford, Bowling Green,



and Norwalk — will be of the trickling filter-chemical



treatment type; and one, Painesville-Fairport, will use



carbon filters.



          The schedules for completion of the phosphate



removal facilities at these nineteen plants discharging



to the Ohio tributaries of Lake Erie range from 1970 to



1975.  Studies are now underway at many of the existing



secondary sewage treatment plants, and it is quite possible



that phosphate removal facilities can be designed and



installed at several of the plants before 1975.

-------
                                                       180
                      G.  H.  Eagle

          Summary

          Total phosphate load to  Lake Erie
          from Ohio municipalities (196£)     34,000 Ibs./day

          Total expected  removal from shore-
          line population by 1973             16,155 Ibs./day

          Total expected  removal from tribu-
          tary streams by 1975          	11,450 Ibs./day
                            Total  removal     27,705 Ibs./day

          Expected removal 27,705/34,000 equals Si.4
          percent of total

          Mi s c e1lande ous

          The Ohio programs requiring disinfection of

sewage effluents, reduction of bypassing and combined sewer

discharges, sampling and  reporting of industrial waste

discharges and stream water quality surveillance, which

were reported upon in some detail at the Fourth Session

of this Conference, are progressing.

          All of the principal sewage treatment plant

effluents discharged to Lake Erie are continuously

chlorinated during the bathing season.  Chlorination is

also practiced at many of the plants discharging to the

tributary streams and several more are installing

disinfection facilities in connection with plant improve-

ments and enlargements.  It is Ohio's policy to require

disinfection facilities at all new or enlarged sewage

treatment plants of significant size in the Lake Erie

Basin.

-------
                                                      181
                      G.  H.  Eagle



          Increased emphasis is being given to the bypass-




ing and combined sewer discharge problems.  We are insisting




that effective programs for the prohibition of the connection



of foundation drains to sanitary sewers in new construction



be   carried out by every municipality, county and other




responsible agency.  This has caused quite a furor in some



areas, particularly among the home builders.



          The plans and programs for the three major trunk



sewers in Cleveland which will take the sewage from the



outlying areas out of the combined sewers and convey it




direct to the treatment plants are moving along fairly



well.  Much of this work should be under construction next




year.  The estimated cost, as of about three years ago,



for these three trunk sewers was $66 million.




          It has been reported that the city of Cleveland




is developing a comprehensive plan and program for necessary



rebuilding of the Big Creek interceptor.  This sewer broke



again recently and is discharging about 25 M.GeD. of un-



treated sewage to the Cuyahoga River,,  I presume the



Cleveland representative will cover this matter in his



report.




          The stream and lake surveillance programs are



being implemented.  Additional automatic water quality



monitoring stations are recommended for inclusion in the

-------
                                                        162
                      Edward Martin



Northeast Ohio Water Development Plan which is scheduled




to be completed in fiscal 1970 and implemented as rapidly




as possible thereafter.



          Now, I would like to call on Dr. Edward Martin,



who is chairman of the task force group here in Cleveland




on water pollution control, to make some comments with



regard to the Cleveland program.  Dr. Martin.






          STATEMENT OF DR. EDWARD MARTIN, DIRECTOR,




          CLEAN WATER TASK FORCE, CLEVELAND, OHIO
          DR. MARTIN:  Mr. Chairman, Conferees, ladies




and gentlemen.



          First of all, on behalf of the Mayor of the city



of Cleveland, Carl Stokes, I would like to welcome you



here to Cleveland for this progress meeting of the Lake



Erie Enforcement Conference.  The Mayor, although wanting



to be here, could not make it this morning.




          Last summer, in June of 196$, when this meeting




was held, the Mayor promised a rather unprecedented step



for the city of Cleveland, namely that a $100 million bond



issue would be placed on the ballot.




          As most of you know, we have been successful in



this regard.  The bond issue was approved last November

-------
                                                       183
                      Edward Martin



by the voters, and we now have, I think, a significant



amount of money with which to begin our program.



          In February of this year, the Administration took



a second rather unprecedented step with the creation of



the Clean Water Task Force to put together the necessary



technical expertise to come up with what I believe to be



one of the Nation's number one programs in water pollution



control.



          The objectives that were developed by this



Conference in 1965, we feel, are as applicable and as



necessary then as they are now.  These objectives, I think,



all of you will agree, are to secure and maintain an ade-



quate quantity and quality of water necessary for the



promotion and protection of our public health and safety



in this community:  public water supply, industrial water



supplies, and recreation.



          The city of Cleveland has, in the past, and



continues now with a very active program to meet these



objectives.



          New construction has been under way for several



months at both the Easterly and Southerly wastewater



treatment plants, and this construction will increase the



secondary treatment capacity of these plants by five to



thirty percent.  We believe that this will lead to

-------
                                                       134
                      Edward Martin



improvements in the quality of the final treated wastewater



as well as decrease the amounts of wastes which must be




bypassed during peak load periods.



          The construction at both of these facilities



should be completed sometime early next year.  Since 196$,




we have spent a total o:P about $16.5 million in additional




plant construction at these facilities.




          There are three completely new thrusts to the



Cleveland efforts which I would like to discuss very



briefly here this morning.



          In 1966, the city created a Bureau of Industrial




Wastes for the first time as a part of its water pollution




control effort.  Within the past few weeks, the City Council



has approved a quarter of a million dollar program for the



preliminary design of an industrial waste program for



this city.  I would like to point out that this is a



unique step on the part of the city, probably the first



time in our history that we have specifically allocated




funds at the municipal level for the treatment and control




of industrial wastes0  This program is getting under way



now.




          The objectives are to develop both joint treatment



facilities for industrial wastes, which the Westerly plant




will be one — and I will talk about that later — and also

-------
                                                        ids
                      Edward Martin



individual treatment facilities for those industrial wastes



which lend themselves to collection and disposal at a central



facility such as oil wastes and plating wastes, and some




others.



          The second major thrust is with regard to nutrient




removal from the municipal wastes themselves, particularly




the removal of phosphorus.  The Enforcement Conference has




made recommendations with regard to improved phosphorus



removal, and the city of Cleveland plans to meet these




recommendations in its treatment plants, all three of our



facilities.




          For the whole period of this summer, 1969» we



will be by chemical treatment means removing about &0



percent of the phosphorus from the Westerly sewage treatment



plant, which, as you know, is a primary facility.  We are



doing this to remove nutrients from the entire flow of the



Westerly plant for the period of the summer.  This is ex-



pected to get under way within the next two weeks.




          Along with this, we expect to achieve high degrees



of removals of other contaminants as well, and I would



point out that we are doing this now in order to kind of




close the gap between being able to construct a full-scale




plant at Westerly, At the same time, congruent with this,



we are proceeding with a new preliminary design for this

-------
                                                        186
                      Edward Martin



plant.  The new design will incorporate chemical physical



separation techniques, and we will probably not use the



conventional means of activated sludge treatment.



          The first phase construction of this plant will



begin later this year, and it will proceed in various



phases until we finally have the entire plant constructed



in 1963, probably by the fall of 1973.



          We are investigating phosphorus removal partic-



ularly at the other two waste treatment facilities which



we operate, both Easterly arid Southerly,,



          The third major thrust of the water pollution



control program here in the city is associated with the



regional handling and management of wastes which you have



heard something about this morning from other presenta-



tions.



          The city of Cleveland, as you know, operates a



system which goes far beyond our boundaries.  We are attempt-



ing, in active negotiations, at this time, to incorporate



IB new suburbs into the Cleveland system, the wastes from



which will ultimately end up at the Southerly plant, and



receive both good secondary treatment, and in accordance



with the schedules which we will submit here this morning,



phosphorus removal as well.



          This project has been discussed in some detail

-------
                                                        187



                      Edward Martin




with the suburbs involved, and the Ohio Water Development



Authority has in a preliminary way at least favorably




received this for funding.



          Presently the communities involved either do not




have any waste treatment facilities operating a small



waste treatment plant, or are about to construct, or had




preliminary plans for construction of new waste treatment




facilities.



          We believe, as has been discussed here this



morning, that this is probably the most significant step



that we can take in a water pollution control program,



namely, to make it an area-wide or regional program  and




do a good job with treating effluents.




          We believe that this program will result in




lower costs both to the residents of the city of Cleveland



and to the suburbs involved, and at the same time result



in very much more effective pollution control.



          During the summer of 196$, we concluded the



Waite City beach project.  This area was cordoned off from




the rest of the lake and chlorinated so that we could use



it for swimming.  This summer we have almost completed the



construction of the new swimming facility at Edgewater



Beach, and if the gentlemen would like to come back in a




week or two, we will invite them to take a swim with us at



the Edgewater Beach project.

-------
                                                      IBB
                      Edward Martin




          MR. STEIN:  Are you going to provide coliform




counts first?




          DR. MARTIN:  Yes, sir.



          As we stand right now, we believe that we have



made a very significant commitment in terms of funds




and the technical resources  to make the most significant



attack on water pollution control anywhere in the Great



Lakes area.



          I would like to say that, however, we cannot do



this job alone, and. the primary lack  at this particular



point in time  as far as the city of Cleveland is concerned



are funds to match the funds which are available both from



the city of Cleveland and from the State of Ohio  to




completely accomplish the objectives and goals that we



have in mind.



          We have submitted written schedules on treatment



plant construction to the Conferees  and to the Ohio Water



Pollution Control Board, through Mr. Eagle, this morning.




          The schedules for the construction of plants, as




you will note, relate to all three of the wastewater



treatment plants.




          I would like to point out that if there are any



detailed questions which you may have with regard to the



program we would be happy to answer them.  There is a

-------
                      Edward Martin




diagram over here with regard to the Westerly plant which




we invite all of you to look at.  This is the first step




of the preliminary design of this plant.  There are a




number of various significant technical results from




proceeding in this way.




          Number one:  There is a very much reduced land




requirement for the kind of a plant which we have proposed




here; and, number two, there is a very much reduced capital




expenditure required for the construction of this kind of




a plant, although the plant will require increased total




operating and maintenance costs.




          Thank you, gentlemen.




          MR. STEIN:  Thank you.  Would you just wait, Dr.




Martin?  I think there may be some questions,




          MR, EAGLE:  Could we defer until one more speaker,




then we will have questions?




          MR. STEIN:  Delighted.




          MR, EAGLE:  Okay.  Don't go away, please.




          DR. MARTIN:  Okay.




          MR. EAGLE:  I have one more person I would like




to have participate in this progress report and, as you




heard here this morning, one of the major problems, if not




the major problem in this whole program, is financing, and




certainly Ohio is not any different from any other States

-------
                                                        190
                      Ned Williams



in this respect, so I would like to have Mr. Ned Williams,



who is the Executive Director of the Ohio Water Development




Authority, explain his program which is now getting under way




in this State.  Mr. Ned Williams.






          STATEMENT OF NED WILLIAMS, EXECUTIVE




          DIRECTOR, OHIO WATER DEVELOPMENT




          AUTHORITY, COLUMBUS,  OHIO






          MR. WILLIAMS:  Mr. Chairman, Conferees, ladies




and gentlemen.  The Ohio Water Development Authority war;




created about a year and a half ago by the 107th General




Assembly.  In May of 1968, we had a seven-member authority




appointed which we were fortunate to have Mr. Sharon Bresler,



Utility Director of Lima, as the Chairman of the Authority.



Two members of the Board are ex officio, Dr. Emmett Arnold



of the Ohio Department of Health, and Director Morr of the



Department of Natural Resources.



          OWDA was set up primarily As a financing,




construction, and if need be an operating agency.  The




6121 statutes,  .01 to  .27, cover our legal aspects and




give us broad powers in financing, constructing, almost




anything in the way of water or sewerage systems.




          We have the power to issue notes, sell bond




issues for projects, the two major aspects which we feel

-------
                                                       191
                      Ned Williams



can be of great help in the pollution problem on Lake Erie




and also throughout the State of Ohio, and this is with



industry and also with what we call our five-year program.



          With industry — and, as you know,  a great many




of them are on permits from the Water Pollution Control




Board — OWDA can finance one hundred percent and construct




wastewater facilities for the treatment of their wastes.



          FROM THE FLOOR:  Can't hear you.




          MR. WILLIAMS:  Is this better?  Can you hear me




in the rear?



          I would like to divert just a couple of seconds  and




tell one story that did happen to me.  I was using a PA



system.  As you know, PA systems vary from system to system




and from room to room, and quite often when you are speaking,



it is quite difficult to tell if the people in the back can



hear you or not.



          At one time I thought that you could stand just



to one side of the microphone and hear it bounce off the



back of the room, and if you heard something, the people



could hear your words.




          So I was speaking one day and I asked a gentleman



in the back of the room if he could hear me.  I explained




that I was standing to one side of the mike and I could not



hear my words coming back.  And there was an old gentleman

-------
                                                        192
                      Ned Williams



down in the front row spoke up and said, "Don't worry




about it, son, you haven't missed a thing so far."




(Laughter)



          For those of you who have missed some of the



words up to now, I will try to get more to the meat of




the subject.



          With industry, we can finance and construct and




even operate the waste treatment facilities needed for




industry.



          There are several advances to industries for




cooperating with OWDA.  Number one, they do not have to tie




up their funding capabilities in the cost of the structure



which, in some of the plants — for instance, in the



Cleveland area — could run eight, ten and twelve million.



OWDA can sell the bond issue to finance these, and we



would enter into an agreement with them for the payback of



one hundred percent of the construction cost of the



facility.  Industry, then, would make annual payments to




retire the principal and the interest on the cost of the



facility to OSDA, and this, of course, is similar to




leasing equipment as a direct writeoff, as well as not



having their funds tied up, as I mentioned before.




          The other program that I mentioned was a five-year



program, and the five-year program came about, as has been

-------
                                                        193
                      Ned Williams



mentioned a number of times by several States this morning,



that unfortunately funding for the Public Law 660 program,




the 30 percent grant-in-aid through FWPCA for the sewage




treatment facilities, has been below the expectations, I



am sure, of both the State and also, of course, the people




in FWPCA.



          Last year, Ohio received some $9.4 million on



a 30 percent grant-in-aid program for the sewage treatment




facilities.  In March of this year, we compiled a list




of some 229 communities, on orders of the Ohio Pollution



Control Board, with an estimated construction cost of



$459 million.




          Now, obviously, the $9.4 million was an aid,



but $9.4 million was not reaching the $450 million figure



that we are in deficit of as of March of this year.



          So we have put together a program which we



are proposing to reach this $450 million figure.  It works



briefly like this:  There is a House Bill 882 in the Legis-



lature at the present time, and the House Finance Committee,



being heard, appropriating $100 million from the last State




bond issue to the Ohio Water Development Authority.




          Now, we are proposing to take the $100 million



and start on this list of 229 potential customers  who




need sewage treatment facility improvement   and start

-------
                                                       194
                      Ned Williams



constructing, financing one hundred percent the cost of



the construction of these facilities with this $100




million.




          At the same time, we will enter into an agreement



with the communities involved for the repayment of 70 percent




of the project costs.  The project costs will be construc-



tion costs plus the interest rate on the 70 percent of the




project cost.  This money is to be repaid in yearly incre-



ments, and these projects can be financed up to a period



of 40 years.  It is optional with the municipalities



involved if they would like a shorter financing period.




          We are proposing, after the $100 million is



exhausted on these projects, to use the income from the



70 percent repayment on the $100 million to secure



additional bond financing.  This bond financing will then



be rolled back into additional construction, and, of



course, there will be 70 percent of this repaid.



          With $100 million to be appropriated of the



State funds, hopefully $10 million per year for the next




five years, which would be $50 million of the FWPCA Federal



funds, selling $300 million bond issues secured by this




70 percent repayment, we can get to approximately $500



million in construction on sewage treatment facilities



for the municipalities in the State of Ohio.

-------
                                                       195
                      Ned Williams



          This is our program,,  Once again, I think the



two areas, although we can finance almost anything in the



way of wastewater treatment facilities, the two big pro-




grams are, or two areas that we feel we can do the best



job is with industry on industrial needs, and with




extending the 30 percent grant-in-aid program to all




municipalities within the State of Ohio.



          We are planning to distribute PWCA funds




throughout all of the projects, so that if hopefully in



the future there is some reimbursement or additional



Federal funds to come back to the State of Ohio, that




these projects will be eligible for reimbursement.



          Thank you, Mr. Chairman.




          MR. STEIN:  Thank you, Mr. Williams,



          Now, let's have questions, either to — is



that all right?



          MR. EAGLE: Yes, Mr. Chairman and Conferees, this



concludes our presentation, so far as progress of



facilities  is  concerned.




          MR. STEIN:  Right.




          MR. EAGLE:  And, if you have any questions, we



will be glad to try to answer them, either to me or to




the other two gentlemen.



          MR. METZLER:  I have several questions I would

-------
                                                      196
                      .Ned Williams
like to ask Dr. Martin,  but since Mr. Williams is up
here, I have a question I would like to ask him perhaps
before he pets away from the microphone, George.  I don't,
at the moment, have any questions about your presenta-
tion.
          MR. EAGLE:  Okay.
          Mr. Williams.
          MR. METZLER:  I am very much interested in your
approach — and this is novel so far as I know, other
than our own State which also has some somewhat similar
legislation.
          My question:  Have you attempted to sell this
approach to any groups of industries, and have you had any
good experience with their buying it?
          MR. WILLIAMS:  Yes, sir, we have fortunately.
We are an infant organization, as I mentioned before, in
that we did staff in March of this year.
          We are now, I am very glad to say,  cutting the
stencils on our first industrial project.  I  think the
first one is a major hurdle or a milestone for us in that
industry, I am sure, has been watching OWDA to see what
impact we will have, whether vie are actually  a working
organization,  or just one more State agency.
          I think also there has been a little reluctance
on the part of industry to look at  State agencies, and,

-------
                                                       197
                       Ned Williams
of course, Federal also — a little askance as to more
controls and just what impact we would have.
          Our first one, as I say, we are now cutting
stencils.  We hope to advertise about the first of
August.  We are in contact with a number of other indus-
tries and we feel after we get a few of these going, and
we demonstrate we can do a job, we have constructed some-
thing, that others will fall in line, and we sincerely
believe and know that we do have something to offer
industry as an aid in getting waste treatment facilities
constructed.
          MR. METZLER:  I \^ant to point this up because I
think you have made a great deal of progress considering
the youth, how recently you have gotten started here.  But
you have made proposals to industry, and industry has
accepted.  You have an example or two of this, is that
right?
          MR0 WILLIAMS:  Yes, sir.
          This first one, the one that we are preparing
to advertise now, is well down the road of the final
plans and specs are being prepared; our agreement with
them  for the financing and the repayment is under way.
We hope within a couple weeks to wrap this one up, and
we hope to follow this with many more.
          MR. STEIN:  Any other comments?

-------
                                                       193



                      Ned Williams




          Is this in Lake Erie Basin,  by the way?



          MR. WILLIAMS:   Unfortunately the first one



isn't,  but we are in contact with several that are.




          MRe POOLE:  You sell water development bonds




for these industrial projects?



          MR. WILLIAMS:   Yes, sir»  If, for instance,




there was a million-dollar project, we would have the



bond issue sell a million dollars for the project.  We



would then go ahead and  construct it under the law.  We




would advertise for the  construction, construct it, enter



into an agreement with them for the payback of, in this



case, one hundred percent of the project cost, which




would be, of course, the principal, the going or the




interest rate on the money, the engineering fees, and the



other incidentals.  It does relieve them the necessity



of going to the market and tying up their capacity to



finance.



          MR. POOLE:  That is separate and apart from



this hundred million, then, that you described for the



municipalities ?




          MR. WILLIAMS:   Yes, sir, this is right,



          MR. POOLE:  Over and above that, we have the




statutes and the power now to proceed with this program.



Our hundred million will be hopefully appropriated within




the next month so we can go with this, but they are two

-------
                                                      199
                      Ned Williams
distinct programs.
          MR» STEIN:  Are there any other comments or

questions?
          Mr» Purdy.

          MR. PURDY:  Initially on the hundred million

program, will this again be one hundred percent financing?

          MR. WILLIAMS:  This is right.  We are proposing

to finance one hundred percent of the project cost.  The

political entity will pay back 70 percent, and this, of

course, is a 30 percent grant-in-aid program that we are
extending.

          Also, here again, OWDA would be financing the

project rather than the municipalities.

          Now, we propose to do this in the manner that

the largest cities will not be penalized; the smaller

cities will probably accrue a little more benefit on inter-

est charges on this program.  In all events, all munici-
palities get the benefit of a 30 percent grant-in-aid.

          MR. PURDT:  You described a scheme where the
repayment moneys now would be used to finance additional

bonds, and you anticipated blowing that program into a

$500 million program.

          MR. WILLIAMS:  Yes, sir, roughly mathematically

we take $100 million State funds, $50 million Federal

funds, the $10 million for over five years, and equate

-------
                                                      200



                      Ned Williams



this to the hundred percent, as opposed to 30, of course,



we come up with $500 million.  Obviously the $150 million




eventually is used up in the 30 percent grant, but it



enables us to sell $300 million more, and this is the




70 percent paid back.




          MR. POOLE:  Well, the 30 percent grant, then,




is actually a combination State and Federal grant, is that




correct?



          MR. WILLIAMS:  That is right.  We would have one



hundred State, hopefully $50 million or — and, here



again, we have a program.  If we had no Federal funds,




obviously it would cut back dollar amount.  If the Federal



aid increases, we would go beyond the $500 because it



would go into the pool also for construction.




          MR. PURDY:  What is the $50 million based on —



$50 million of Federal funds — how is this arrived at?



          MR. WILLIAMS:  This is just an extension of the



fact that we have got approximately $10 million last year;




we anticipate $10 million this year.  Hopefully, over the




five years, we would get at least $10 million Federal



funds.




          MR. STEIN:  Are there any other comments or



questions?




          Thank you very much for that statement, Mr.



Williams.




          I think the  kind  of  thing we have heard about

-------
                                                      201
                     Ned Williams
from Mr. Williams in Ohio is one of the more interesting
developments in this field.  It goes even beyond water
pollution control because it may be an answer for the
question of what kind of services,  real services can
State Government perform in our society today, and this
deals with the entire Federal, State, and municipal rela-
tionship.
          I know similar programs have been developed
with variants in New York, that Maryland is considering
a variant of this program, and several other of the
States are doing thisj  and this may well provide one of
the most effective ways we have of State Governments giv-
ing this coordination  and the impetus to move forward
to getting treatment works built  and preserving the
quality in the water.
          Are there any other questions or comments?
          Let's go on with Dr. Martin.
          Mr. Metzler.
          MR0 METZLER:   Doctor, I have a few questions I
would like to ask.
          The first one deals with the design of this
physical chemical treatment plant,  and I am interested
in — is this based on some pilot plant work that either
you or others have done, or is this based on full-scale
treatment, or based on theory?

-------
                                                       202



                      Edward Martin



          DR. MARTIN:  This is based on pilot plant work —




two things:  pilot plant work that has been done at both




Lake Tahoe, and in Washington, D.C», and our own pilot




plant work which we will do here.



          MR. METZLER:  And I assume that the results of



that are available to Conferees.




          DR, MARTIN:  Of which, sir?




          MR. MSTZLER:  Of yours.



          DR. MARTIN:  We are beginning to do the pilot



plant work right now.  This was the second part of the



Westerly plant program which I mentioned in my presenta-



tion.




          MR. METZLER:  Do you anticipate any help from



this forward-looking legislation of Ohio, the Ohio Water



Development Authority?



          DR. MARTIN:  Yes, sir.  As a matter of fact,



two of the major thrusts which I mentioned are designed



deliberately to coincide with the Ohio program.  The



first of these is the industrial waste program which I




mentioned.  After we have a good idea of what our industrial



waste problem is, which we do not have at this time, we



plan to work together with the industries in our area to



assist them in both  our point of view and from the point



of view of the Ohio Water Development Authority to make



use of the State plants.

-------
                                                      203
                      Edward Martin
          The second part is the regional attempt which
I mentioned.  I believe, and I think it is a general
engineering conclusion,  that one can do things cheaper by
putting various effluents together rather than by building
a series of small waste  treatment plants, so that we can
get funding from the Ohio Water Development Authority
much more readily by having regional or area-wide designed
programs rather than by proceeding with this on an
individual basis.
          So both of these parts of the Cleveland program
are specifically designed to coincide with the State's
program.
          MR. METZLER:  Do I understand, from your
comments, that you still really don't know the size of the
industrial waste problem, though having toured the river
— it must have been three years ago, it was in June of
1966, a little boat trip of the river with Congressmen and
other top officials.  This was pointed out, and you still
don't know the size of it?
          DR. MARTIN:  Yes.  Let me clarify that.  I made
the comment, for example, that we have established a
Bureau of Industrial Wastes.  Up to this time, this has
been a very minor effort, and we have, over the course of
the past three years, been able to take a look at a number
of specific industrial waste problems, but not, of course,

-------
                                                      204



                      Edward Martin




at the whole range of problems which we have here,  and



are rather significant,  I think, in our industrialized



area.  So we will proceed in more detail to get this




over the coming six to ten months.



          MR. METZLER:  The schedule that you submitted —




is financing at hand  o r available for this, or does this




depend upon some unknowns yet in the equation?



          DR. MARTIN:  On our scheduling plan for what




we have — in other words, additions to Easterly,



additions to Southerly,  and construction of the Westerly



plant — depend on State funds.  It depends on working




with the Ohio Water Development Authority and through




the OWDA to get some  of the rather small — a rather



small fraction, but some of the Federal funds which will



be forthcoming through that program.



          Additional  funds, in  our case, from the Federal



Government, will help us accelerate the program which



we have, achieve complete nutrient removal  a lot quicker, and




also permit us to get much more serious about the industrial




waste effort.




          MR. METZLER:  One other question.  You mentioned



the open lake chlorination.  I  would be interested in a



one- or two-sentence  evaluation of whether  this was



effective, and if so  in making  some of the  data available




to some of the rest of us that  have similar problems.

-------
                                                      205




                      Edward Martin



          DR. MARTIN:  Yes, sir.  We have a very short



report which was prepared by our people on the Waite City



program last summer.  This is available.  We calculated




that there were approximately 10,000 people used this



facility during the course of last summer.  We expect more




people to use it this summer, and the Edgewater facility




as well.  There are some data available, and we can make



these available.




          MR. METZLER:  One other point.  If I am allowed



a personal privilege, Mr. Chairman, I would like to




compliment Mayor Stokes and the city of Cleveland for



having gone out and recruited a top-notch professional




to really see that this program is carried through.  It



is very heartening.




          MR. STEIN:  I would concur.  I am not sure he



had him recruited.  Our loss is Cleveland's gain,,



          MR. POOLE:  So is mine.  He has just recruited



one of my engineers as water commissioner.



          MR. METZLER:  Things are tough all over.



          FROM THE FLOOR:  When are you going to fix the



Big Creek sewer?




          MR. STEIN:  Let's wait.  I think that question



will be coming up.  Let's wait in order for the Conferees



to handle this.,




          Mr. Purdy?

-------
                                                      206
                      Edward Martin
          MR0 PURDY:  Yes.  In Mr» Eagle's report,  he
made reference to the Big Creek interceptor, and that it
is now discharging 25 million gallons per day of untreated
sewage to the Cuyahoga River, and that he presumed he
would cover this.
          I am wondering when this break occurred,  and has
some immediate action been taken to correct it, or when
is correction scheduled?
          DR. MARTIN:  Is Mr. Wolfs here?
          The Commissioner of Engineering and Construction
who deals with the design of our sewer program is not
here at this moment.  We are planning to submit — along
with our schedule for treatment, planning construction —
to the Ohio Water Pollution Control Board  schedules for
the construction of the sewers as well.  This is being
prepared literally at this moment, and we plan to have
this available later in the day  with regard to Big
Creek.
          MR. STEIN:  Dr. Martin, could we have that when
we reconvene after lunch?
          DR, MARTIN:  I would hope so.
          MR. STEIN:  Yes.
          DR. MARTIN:  With regard to the Big Creek
interceptor, construction is under way now, at this
moment.  It  began about a week ago, to repair the Big

-------
                                                      207
                      Edward Martin
Creek interceptor problem.
          The reason for the delay, with regard to Big
Creek, is associated with the fact that the design of
that whole sewer system in the southwest area is proceed-
ing along at the same time.    We  are working with this
in conjunction with the State Highway program for the
construction of new freeways, and we believe that we can
arrive at a considerable savings in money by proceeding
in this fashion.
          We will repair the Big Creek interceptor.
Again, as I mentioned, this is going on right at this
moment, and we hope that we can.
          MR. PURDY:  When did the break occur?
          FROM THE FLOOR:  This was May the nineteenth.
          DR0 MARTIN:  This was early in May, middle of
May.
          MR. STEIN:  And when is it going to be completed?
          DR0 MARTIN:  We expect this construction to be
completed within the next month or two, I think.  I am
not sure on all these details.  I would have to have Mr.
Wolfs answer these questions.
          MR0 STEIN:  I think for everyone's benefit it
might be well to get the dates.
          DR0 MARTIN:  Yes, sir, we plan to.
          MR. STEIN:  So everyone can make a judgement as

-------
                                                    20$



                      Edward Martin




to whether this is on schedule or not.  Again, I can




appreciate the position of moving ahead with the highway




program, but my experience is when we always coordinate



the sewer building program with the highway building pro-




gram, we begin compounding delays in both the programs,



and I hope this doesn1^ occur.




          DR. MARTIN:  We plan to have the schedule for




the Conferees.



          MR. PURDY:  You mentioned that at the Cleveland



Westerly plant, the primary treatment plant, that you have



converted this over foi- this summer to chemical treatment




for removal of the phosphates»



          DR0 MARTIN:  Yes.




          MR. PURDY:  Will this continue now until you



have built the new additional facilities?



          DR. MARTIN:  No0  We plan to continue during



the critical period of the summer months.  At that time,



we will  reevaluate what we have been able to do in terms



of chemical treatment  and make another decision at that




point about whether to continue on with this.




          MR. PURDY:  Are you saying that, in your



opinion, the critical time for Lake Erie is only during



the summer months?




          DR. MARTIN:  Well, it is for us in this



particular case because the discharge is so near the

-------
                                                      209
                      Edward Martin
Edgewater project.  The discharge relationships of
phosphorus to Lake Erie and its effects, I think, are
another question,
          MR. PURDY:  Now, in the report  it mentions that
the two Cleveland plants  schedules of completion in late
1973 are tentatively proposed.  This is for phosphate
removal?
          DR. MARTIN:  Yes.
          MR. PURDY:  What is meant by "tentatively
proposed"?
          DR. MARTIN:  Let me ask Mr. Eagle to answer
that.
          MR. EAGLE:  It has been proposed to the Ohio
Water Pollution Control Board, but they still have it
under consideration and have not taken any action.
          MR. PURDY:  Proposed by who?
          MR. EAGLE:  The city of Cleveland, in connection
with the renewal of their permit, and this is under con-
sideration by the Water Pollution Control Board at this
time.
          MR0 PURDY:  In the report  it mentions advanced
waste treatment construction 1975  in the one case.  What
is meant here?
          MRo EAGLE:  Advanced or phosphate removal?
          MR. PURDY:  On page nine, Cleveland Southerly

-------
                                                      210



                       Edward Martin



area —



          MR. EAGL.":  Oh, this is tertiary treatment.



          Mo PURDY:  That is tertiary.  It does not refer




to the phosphate removal?



          MR. EAGLE:  No, this is to go ahead before




then.  I believe this is correct.



          DR. MARTIN:  I am sorry, sir?




          MR0 EAGLE:  Phosphate removal at Southerly is



to go forward before advanced waste treatment?




          DR. MARTIN:  We will go forward at pretty much




the same time0  In other words, the contractor and the



consulting engineer for the Easterly project was advised



yesterday, for example, to include phosphorus removal in




the design for expanded facilities at Easterly.  They will



go forward at the same time.



          MR. PURDY:  And you expect those to be in



operation in 1973 at the present schedule?



          DR. MARTIN:  Yes, sir.



          MR. PURDY:  Now, on your Westerly plant, this




chemical physical treatment — could you be slightly more




specific about the time of facilities that are proposed



there?




          DR. MARTIN:  Ygs.  The Westerly Plant will




consist of chemical treatment with lime or ferric chloride.



This has not been determined yet.  Or a combination  of

-------
                                                      211
                     Edward Martin
lime and ferric chloride, or a combination of lime and
ferric chloride and  polyelectrolites, followed by carbon
treatment for the removal of the residual refractory
organics, followed by phosphorus removal with activated
alumina columns.
          Now, we also have, in the preliminary design —
this will be piloted — the removal of nitrogen by ion
exchange.     Since the nitrogen question is still some-
what open to discussion, this will either — let's say
at the point two years from now or 18 months from now,
when this information is concluded — will either be in-
cluded in the full-scale design or not included, depending
on more technical information which we hope to have at
that time about the effects of nitrogen upon the lake,
So that this is a project which is not just an attempt
to meet the phosphorus removal requirements, but to go
beyond this in terms of assessing — if it is concluded
that nitrogen removal is necessary, for example — this
nitrogen removal, we will be in a position to put this
on stream at the Westerly plant.
          MR. PURDY:  That is all.
          DR. MARTIN:  And that is a brief summary of
the Westerly thing.  There are more details on the
diagram over here, but I can go into it  or you can look
at it.

-------
                                                       212



                      Edward Martin




          MR,  LYON:  Dr.  Martin,  on page three of the




Ohio report, it indicates that the Easterly and the Westerly



phosphate removal plants will go into operation in 1973.




Is that correct?



          DR.  MARTIN:  Mr. Lyon,  this is the planned date




now, yes.




          MR,  LYON:  I see.  In other words, you will




not be meeting the same schedule as Detroit and the



others.



          DR.  MARTIN:  I don't know specifically what



Detroit's is.



          MR.  LYON:  It was my understanding that Detroit




would go in by 1971 or 1972.



          MR.  PURDY:  By late 1971 or mid-1972.



          DR0  MARTIN:  If that is the case, then, we



will not be meeting the same schedule.



          MR.  STEIN:  What schedule will you be meeting



specifically?  When are you going to get the work done?



There is a little  confusion — from 1973 or 1975?




          DR.  MARTIN:  I think the confusion here is what




was stated in the  Ohio report0  I think we can have Mr.



Eagle clarify this.




          MR. POOLE:  You referred two or three times



to him giving us a Cleveland schedule.  I haven't seen



any.

-------
                                                      213
                      Edward Martin
          MR. EAGLE:  He has a schedule but he hasn't
distributed it.
          DR. MARTIN:  T have three copies.
          MR, LYON:  I am not sure when Cleveland will
be doing phosphorus removal and why it would be done
later than the other major municipalities.
          DR. MARTIN:  I don't know about the other major
municipalities; I know with Cleveland's program, and
that is our proposed schedule.
          MR. STEIN:  How about the answer to the first
part of the question.  When will you be doing phosphate
removal in Cleveland?
          DR. MARTIN:  We will be doing phosphate removal,
in accordance with the schedule Mr. Eagle has indicate^,
by 1973 at all of our treatment plants; that is Easterly,
Southerly, and Westerly.
          MR. LYON:  There is one other question.  In
your discussion, you mentioned participation by the Ohio
Water Development Authority.
          DR0 MARTIN:  Yes, sir.
          MR. LYON:  And I am not sure whether there
was some uncertainty about that or not.  It is my general
recollection that when Mayor Stokes came to our hearing
sometime ago, he indicated that this program would move
whether or not there would be Federal funds.  I don't

-------
                                                       211+
                       Zdward Martin
think he mentioned State funds  at the time.  Has the city
changed its position?
          DR. MARTIN:  No, it has not.
          MR. LYON':  In other words,  this program will  go
ahead whether or not there are Federal or State funds
available?
          DR. MARTIN:  3fesf sir.
          MR0 LYON:  In accordance with this schedule?
          DR. MARTIN:  Yes, sir.
          MR. STEIN:  Are there any further questions?
          Mr. Poston.
          MR. POSTON:  I don't like to beat this matter of
the Big Creek sewer to death, but I wonder:  Are there any
plans, investigations  of that sewer  to prevent breaks
in the future?
          It is my — well, I don't remember it and know
exactly how many years, but every year for quite a few in
the past, the Big Creek sewer has broken  and we have this
25 million gallons of sewage going eventually to the lake,
and I wonder what is being done to give some assurance
that this will not recur next spring.
          DR. MARTIN:  In the meantime, as I mentioned be-
fore — Mr. Wolfs has  just arrived, and we now have more
detailed information with regard to our large interceptor
sewers which are available.  I would  like to have Mr. Wolfs

-------
                                                       215
                       J. R.  Wolfs




make additional comments, if I may, if it is acceptable




to the Conferees, with regard to the Big Creek interceptor.




          Mr0 John Wolfs is the City Engineer, Commissioner




of Engineering and Construction for the city of Cleveland.






          STATEMENT OF JOHN R0 WOLFS, CITY




          ENGINEER, COMMISSIONER OF ENGINEERING




          AND CONSTRUCTION, CLEVELAND, OHIO






          MR. WOLFS:  Mr. Chairman, Conferees, I am John




R. Wolfs, City Engineer for the city of Cleveland.




          In particular response to the question of the




Big Creek sewer, this is one of three intercepting sewers




that we have invested in excess of a million dollars for




design services through three consulting engineering




firms,     I will only summarize this because it is a




matter which I will turn over to the Secretary in full




detail, specifically for the Heights sanitary trunk sewer,




Broadway sanitary trunk sewer, and the Southwest suburban




sanitary trunk sewer which in part will replace the Big




Creek sewer.  This work is under way at the present time




in terms of design, detailed design, and we are in the




process of receiving final printed copies of the preliminary




plan for further implementation for determination of exact




right-of-way, property ownership, and the design for

-------
                                                        216
                       J. R. Wolfs
construction purposes.
          The Big Creek sewer has been a cause of consid-
erable concern to the city of Cleveland.  It is the only
sewer that we have of this size that has been subject to
failures such as we have experienced, principally because
most of it is in an area subject to slides and in soil
conditions that are subject to movement.
          Part of the sewer — the failure section —
has been where the transition has occurred where it goes
underground to an aerial sewer traversing several valleys.
This sewer is in an easement.  The easement is such that
we do not have good control over the land's usage.
          In particular,, at the present time, this sewer
has a contractor working on it to correct the present
deficiency for the purpose of putting it back in service.
          Complicating the city's ability to plan intelli-
gently and with a definite  timetable, has been a
so-called Jennings Freeway which is a non-interstate
project and must in itself coordinate with interstate
projects.  Accordingly, we have been working with the
Ohio Department of Highways, who have expedited what is
known as a drainage and grading contract for this section
so that we may put this particular piece of sewer that has
been broken due to failures on permanent fill and in
advance of the freeway project over which the right-of-
way must of necessity make some modifications in the

-------
                                                       217
                       J. R. Wolfs




sewers.



          I would like to — if that is in answer to




your question, Mr. Poston, or Mr. Stein —



          MR. STEIN:  Just a moment.  I didn't raise these




questions, and I want to summarize them as the chairman.




          There were two questions that were raised here:




One, is the sewer going — is the corrective work going



to be done?  I haven't heard a date yet, except there




are complications  and that we knew.



          Secondly is:  What is going to be done to see



that we don't have a reoccurrence?  Again, if you have




easement problems  and you can't control the sewer, I



am not sure that the assurance of that has come yet.




In other words, the two basic questions are:  When is



the Big Creek sewer going to be put back into operation



again; and, are we going to have assurances when it is



put into operation that we won't get these recurring



breaks?




          MR. WOLFS:  In response to the first question,



we have a contractor working on the sewer at the present




time.  He expects to be done with this in a matter of



two weeks.  Is this sufficient answer?




          MR. STEIN:  Mr. Poston?




          Would you repeat that, sir?  (Laughter)

-------
                                                       218
                       J. R.  V7olfs




          MR, WOLFS:  I probably gave the smartest answer




given this morning.



          I said it would be  — contractors engaged at the




present time expect to be done in tivo weeks 0



          Next question, and  the answer thereto:  I




indicated the State Highway Department has expedited a



drainage contract for this section of the Jennings Freeway




which they have assured me would probably be under contract



in March of 1970.




          We will participate in the construction cost of



that which is declared   noneligible and the State Highway




Department will run the  job.   That will take care of the




problem of this particular break, and the one that has



been the most recent.



          I referred, by allusion, to the fact that I



will turn over to the Secretary our  timetable  and our



construction procedure,  particularly for the Southwest



Suburban trunk sewer which will take care of the other




area that presently traverses a dump area.




          I would like to make a summary.  The city of



Cleveland has continued  to annually invest several million




dollars of local moneys  for new sewers and betterments.



Pursuant to  State of Ohio rules and regulations, separation



of combined  sewers  is being carried out on all new

-------
                                                      219
                       J. R. Wolfs



developments  and to the extent possible in urban renewal




projects.  One sewer alone is $1.2 million.



          We are proceeding with the detail plans for $30




million of trunk sewers serving the greater Cleveland



area which is to be funded from the $100 million bond




fund pending a rate increase and without any Federal




funding to date.



          Applications have been repeatedly rejected.  The



program cannot be finalized until matching State and




Federal funds are available, and I am particularly




addressing myself to the sewer program.  Dr. Martin was



addressing himself particularly to the plant program.




          Local governments do not have the benefit of



quick take for right-of-way, and the stated policy of




the American Association of State Highway Officials




virtually precludes the use of limited access right-of-



way for needed sewer routes.




          The Bureau of Public Roads is more liberal in



regard to limited access roads.  If meaningful pollution



measures are to be expedited, implementation of right-of-



way problems must be resolved.




          Finally, property tax rate plus equivalent local




income tax in Cleveland is now at ''$68.1+6 per thousand



dollars valuation based on 40 percent.  All pollution

-------
                                                       220
                       J.  R.  Wolfs



implementation is outside, and in addition to the property




tax.  Local rates must be  doubled to support the bond




issues.



          I thank you.  (Applause)



          MR. STEIN:  Any further comments or questions?



          MR. LYON:  I have a question, and I am not sure



to whom it would go, but it may go to Dr. Martin or to




Mr. Eagle.



          On Pages 10, 11, and 12, there are three pages




of industrial waste  discharges in the Cuyahoga River



Basin, and Dr. Martin indicated that a study was pending




concerning the industrial waste discharges.  This, then,




raises a question whether this list includes all of the




industrial waste discharges, and whether all of the



needed information concerning industrial waste pollution



abatement on the Cuyahoga River is available or whether



additional information still has to be collected.



          DR. MARTIN:  The industrial waste program which




I mentioned was not for the purpose specifically of




collecting data, but to design an industrial waste




treatment and control system.  The study will  at the



same time  include collecting additional data, but the




primary purpose of it is to begin to design a system for



the control of industrial waste, not specifically to collect

-------
                                                      221



                     Edward Martin



data.



          MR. LYON:  Is this design and its completion




to some extent assured by agreements by the industries




to connect to this system?



          DR. MARTIN:  At this time, no, it is not.  It



stands at very much the same point that the OWDA program




stands.  It is beginning.



          MR0 LYON:  In other words, we don't know yet how




these industries will abate their pollution.  They may




treat their wastes themselves or they may go into this



system.



          DR. MARTIN:  I think the final answer will be




a combination of these things.




          MR8 LYON:  Have schedules for either alternative



been submitted, or is that still unanswered?




          DR. MARTIN:  No, sir, because we don't know



what we are going to construct yet.



          There is another comment from Mr. Eagle on



that.




          MR. EAGLE:  Yes.  We do have schedules from



industry, and these schedules are indicated in the




report.  Up until now they have been going on their own,



providing their own facilities.




          If the city of Cleveland is going to offer some



service in this area, then the plans may be altered.  But

-------
                                                      222




                      Edward Martin




I would hope that the schedules would not have to be




advanced for the elimination of the pollution.




          MR. STEIN:  Does that satisfy the question?




          MR. LYON:  Well, just one question.  Suppose the




city comes along with a plan of collecting this, will this



delay the schedules that have presently been submitted?




          MRo EAGLE:  I can't answer that.  This would



be a matter that would have to be acted upon individually




by the Ohio Water Pollution Control Board in cooperation



with the city of Cleveland, and this would have to be




worked out to abate the pollution.  I would hope that



we would not have to advance these schedules, in any




instance.




          MR. STEIN:  I am going to say this, George,



just for clarification.



          As I understand this, there is a date that



the State has established for the abatement of pollution



by the industries discharging into the Cuyahoga River



Basin.  These are specified industry by industry from



the report they have given us.




          Now, with every industry, there are always two



choices of handling the wastes:  either you treat your



own and have your own outfall, or you join with a collection



system, usually a municipal system.




          What Mr. Eagle is saying is that these dates

-------
                                                       223
                       Edward Martin
are in force  and apply to these industries as individual
discharges.  However, if the industry and the city will
get together with a plan where the city will pick up
these wastes, Mr. Eagle and the Ohio authorities will
look at that proposal at that time to see if that is a
reasonable alternative both in terms of providing for
adequate treatment and meeting the time schedule.
          Is that a fair statement —
          MR. EAGLE:  Yes, sir.
          MR. STEIN:  — of the situation?
          Then, I think — this is something that is ob-
tained in other places and I think it has worked.
          Mr. Metzler.
          MR. METZLER:  My questions, at this point, would
be directed to Mr. Eagle, so if there are others to the
speaker, I defer.
          George, I have two.  I noticed the notations
aboiat deep well disposal.  Has the Department, or has
the State adopted rules and regulations  and have a policy
with respect to deep well disposal?  I recognize that this
is an intrastate problem primarily rather than interstate,
but I am asking for information.
          MR. EAGLE:  Yes, sir.  First of all, we have a
law authorizing this, and the Division of Oil and Gas
and the Department of Natural Resources have set up

-------
                                                       224



                       Edward Martin



requirements, regulations, and all of these facilities




must be reviewed and improved not only by the Division of




Oil and Gas and the Department of Natural Resources but




by the Division of Geology in the Department of Natural




Resources, and the Department of Health, Division of




Engineering.




          MR. METZLER:  How do you make the decision about




whether to go to deep well?  Is this an option of the



industry based upon costs, or is this because you have



told them that — representing the water pollution authority




of the State of Ohio — there is no other satisfactory



method of disposal?




          MR. EAGLE:  There is an option.  There are other



means, of course.  They can have it hauled away somewhere,



or they could perhaps  in some cases  burn it, and there



are other options.  But they have been ordered by the



V7ater Pollution Control Board to cease and desist the



pollution.




          MR. METZLER:  Well, I don't want to belabor this



point, but I did want to understand your philosophy




because ours has been that deep well disposal is a place



of last resort.  It is only to deposit mineralized brines



or wastes that can be safely contained and simply cannot



be treated and released in the environment any other way —



some of the high level radioactivity is an example.

-------
                                                      225
                      Edward Martin

          What I am asking is:  Do the people who go to

deep well disposal in Ohio do so as a last resort, or do

they do it because it is a more economical and alternate

method of handling?

          MR, EAGLE:  I would say the cost in itself makes

it a last resort, but I think these programs are carefully

reviewed and worked out with the industry and up to date,

I would say, Dwight, that it has been a means of last

resort,

          MR, METZLER:  One other quick question:  The

tabulation, Table II, Appendix 2 refers to,  in several

cases  acid wastes being hauled away,

          MR. EAGLE:  Yes, sir.

          MR. METZLER:  Where do they go?

          MR. EAGLE:  Well, I would be glad to give you

the details on that sometime.  We have a couple of approved

disposal areas in the State — in the northeast part of

the State — where these are hauled.

          MR. METZLER:  In what?  You mean they are disposed

on the land or —

          MR. EAGLE:  No, they are lagooned areas; in

contained areas.

          MR. METZLER:  Thank you very much.

          MR, STEIN:  Are there any other comments or

questions?

-------
                                                       226




                      Edward Martin



          Mr.  Poston.



          MR,  P03TON:   I note  that on Page 5  you have a




summary of phosphate removal,  and in essence this says




that by 1973 you will  remove 60 percent of the phosphate,



the total loads, 60 percent of the 34,000 total that is




put into Lake Erie fron the shoreline population.




          MR.  EAGLE:  That is  not exactly true, Mr.



Poston.




          You would have to refer to the tables for the



detail on this, but the shoreline — all of these




installations are to be completed by 1973.  We already



have some in operation, as a matter of fact, but all of




them are to be complet€'.d by 1973» and on the tributaries



all of them are to be completed by 1975.



          MR. POSTON:   I notice this is expected removal.



          MR. EAGLE:  We are saying 90 percent, and my



experts tell me that there is no  question about this 90



percent, and I think Dr. Martin here indicated that he



feels he can do considerably better than 90 percent, so



this is a minimum figure.




          MR. POSTON:   Well, I think I was concerned —



previously we had talked about tentatively proposed for



the Cleveland plants, and I wondered whether this  expected



meant that orders had been issued, or there were permits



up to that time.  What does this  word "expected" mean?

-------
                                                      227
                      Edward Martin
          MR. EAGLE:  In many cases,  this is true.  So
far as the permit conditions and orders of the city of
Cleveland is concerned,  this is indicated to be tentative,
in this report, and this has not been acted upon yet by
the Water Pollution Control Board, as indicated a little
while ago.  It will be,  however, within the next two or
three months  and firm dates set.
          MR. POSTON:  Well, could conceivably this 1973
or 1975 date be changed then?
          MR. EAGLE:  Oh, anything is possible, sure, but
not probable.
          MR. POSTON:  Well, I think that is all.
          MR. STEIN:  Mr. Poole.
          MR. POOLE:  I have got two brief ones.
          Dr. Martin, did I understand you to say that the
financing of the additions to the treatment works was not
dependent on Federal and State aid?
          DR. MARTIN:  The question was asked whether the
financing of the program depended on Federal aid, and my
answer was, "No, it does not."
          MR. POOLE:  May I assume, then, that your
financing does depend on the State aid as outlined by
Mr. Williams?
          DR. MARTIN:  Yes, sir.
          MR. POOLE:  As I understood that was a combination

-------
                                                       228



                       Edward Martin



of Federal and State aid — technicating a little bit




with you now,



          DR. MARTIN:  With the State of Ohio prepared to



spend $1+ 50-$500 million, and the city of Cleveland alone



$100 million, the contribution from the Federal Government




to the tune of $10 million per year is somewhat ludicrous.




(Laughter and applause)



          I think I can safely make the statement, sir,




that our program in this State and in this city does not



depend on Federal aid.




          MR. POOLE:  My second question is:  You have



mentioned eventually tertiary treatment or advanced waste




treatment at the Southerly Works.  What are you shooting



for in terms of B.O.D. removal?




          DR. MARTIN:  We have, at the Southerly Plant,



an activated sludge  secondary treatment plant.  As such,



we expect that the B.O.D. removals, at that plant, will



be what the conventional removals are from that kind of



a facility:  somewhere between $0 and &5 percent.




          MR. POOLE:  But the book here says advanced



waste treatment by a certain date.  That is what I am —




          DR. MARTIN:  The phosphorus removal, I believe,



is in the category of advanced waste treatment.  Any




treatment process, or any treatment advance which we make,



has been defined by the Federal Water Pollution Control

-------
                                                       229
                       Edward Martin
.Administration as advanced waste treatment if it is not
a part of  conventional primary and secondary treatment.
           MR. POOLE:  In other words, what you are think-
ing  of, then, as advanced treatment  is phosphate removal.
           DR. MARTIN:  Yes, at the Southerly Plant.
           MR. EAGLE:  I would like to elaborate on that,
Dr.  Martin.
           I think this came in the report as the result
of the Havens and Emerson report of a year ago, and I
think they did propose some form of advanced waste treat-
ment at the Southerly Plant.  I don't recall what it was,
but  it was tertiary  type treatment, and I guess you are
reconsidering this proposal at this time.
           DR. MARTIN:  Yes, sir.  The proposal in the
report was for lagooning.  We are considering other
alternatives because of the land requirements associated
with lagooning, and  we are considering specifically chemi-
cal  removal, either  by activating alumina or by lime
treatment.
           MR. LYON:  I hate to add to the confusion, but
earlier you said, or I think maybe George said, that this
advanced waste treatment listed on Page 7 under Cleveland
Southerly  area did not include phosphate removal because
that says  1975; and  you said earlier that your phosphate
removal would be in  by 1973.

-------
                                                       230




                      Edward Martin



          So I think it  would help us all if you could




clarify that date, because on Page 7» the Southerly area



advance waste treatment  facilities are listed as being




completed by 1975.



          DRo MARTIN:  Yes.  Let me make a general



explanatory comment here.  We are right in the middle



now of negotiating with  the Ohio Water Pollution Control




Board over a new permit, and this is the reason for some




of the apparent confusion.  There isn't any really.




          The 1975 date, which Mr. Eagle put in this



report, was the result of an engineering report which we



had previously done, which was primarily associated at




the Southerly Plant with the lagooning alternative.




Now, since we have taken a new look at this, we are



proposing to the State actually schedules at Southerly



and Easterly which are in advance of those previously



discussed schedules, and these are associated with 1973»



so that there are two things going on here at the same



time.




          Again, we are in the middle of discussing the




permit application — formal permit application from the



State of Ohio for the city of Cleveland with the Ohio




Water Pollution Control Board, and this has not been



acted upon at this point in time.  This is the reason why




it came up before — a tentative date of 1973.

-------
                                                       231






                       Edward Martin




          MR. LYON:  I think that clarifies.



          MR. STEIN:  Are there any other questions or




comments?




          If not, I should like to make just a last comment,




because I think we are in a phase here of trying to get to




the nuts and bolts of the pollution problem.  Sometimes the



kinds of statements we get from the people in the audience



reflect a shift.  But because we are just putting the pieces



together, and before we let the metaphysics assume the role



of reality — I know we have a lot of fun when we talk




about the small Federal contribution being ludicrous, as



one of the speakers said — let me state the real situation




here.  When I first went out, before there was Federal aid,




and looked at the Cuyahoga River, the condition of that



river was so ludicrous I could cry.  The law is very plain



on this:  The people responsible for their pollution have



to bear the expense and are legally and technically



responsible for cleaning it up.



          Whatever you say about this other business —



and this is fine, and that is why we Feds are here, for



you to stick pins in us — but the point is:  just remember



what the basic law is.  If you are putting out that mess,



you are legally and technically responsible for cleaning



it up, and if this is an interstate pollution case, the

-------
                                                     232
                     Edward Martin

Federal regulatory agencies have a duty to see that this

is done, and if it is a State matter, the State regulatory

agencies have the same function.

          With that, I think we can all go back to our

fun and games.

          Are there any other comments?  If not, we will

stand recessed for lunch until 2:00 o'clock.

          (Noon recess.)

-------
                                                      233
                       Go  H.  Eagle




                    AFTERNOON SESSION








          MRe STEIN:  We will reconvene.



          Mr. Eagle, will you continue with the Ohio




presentation?



          MR. EAGLE:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Conferees.




          Ohio has a number of recommendations they




would like to make to the Conferees which are sort of over



and above and beyond what the progress report is.




          Starting on Page 7 of my report, I reported




at the October 4» 19&9, Session of the Conference that



the Division of Engineering of the Ohio Department of Health




had appointed an ad hoc Advisory Committee on Algae Control




in Lake Erie made up of experts in water supply, waste-



water treatment, analytical techniques, limnology, and



agriculture drainage.



          The division charged the committee with these



responsibilities:




          1.  vThat methods of reduction of phosphate are



available for municipal and industrial wastewater




treatment plants?  What are efficiencies and costs?




          2.  What reasonable demonstration projects




could be adopted which would determine the effectiveness



of such treatment projects in reducing or eliminating

-------
                                                      234
                       G.  H.  Eagle




algae?




          3.  What information is available on the role




of agricultural drainage in causing undesirable algal




growths in Lake Erie and what can be done to provide




controls, if necessary;, over such drainage?




          4.  What analytical program should be undertaken




to fully assess all factors involved in algal growths in




western Lake Erie?




          The committee divided up the work and gave




the subcommittees authority to contact outside experts.




Each of the subcommittees learned that while much has




been said in their respective areas, little has been




summarized  and evaluated in a form to permit easy




understanding by government officials and the public.




          The committee has emphasized the necessity to




provide effective controls and to this end has summarized




the information available in each of the four areas of




interest and has recommended specific guides for action.




          I wish to report the following progress and rec-




ommendations in each of these areas of interest:




          Phosphorus Removal.  The  committee has prepared




a  comprehensive manual of various phosphorus removal




processes listing applications and  cost  factors.  This




manual is intended as  an easy reference  for general

-------
                       G. H. Eagle



information for designing engineers and operators.  It




will be published and distributed by the Division of




Engineering in the near future.




          Demonstration Project.  (See Report)  The State



of Ohio urges the development of demonstration projects




such as those proposed by the subcommittee.  The States



and Federal Government should encourage and assist, as



much as possible, local initiation of the projects.  As




pointed out by the subcommittee, only in a few cases




has there been any observation of the relative effect of



treated effluent in stimulation of algal growth in the




receiving water.  It is imperative, in our opinion,




that several such observations be made in the Lake Erie



Basin.




          You do have, in your packet of stuff that I



gave you, a copy of this report on the Demonstration



Project.



          Now, I would like to call on Mr. James E.



Frook, who is the Superintendent of the Toledo Division



of Sewage Disposal, who was a member of the committee



which developed this report to explain the findings and




recommendations more fully.



          Mr. Frook.

-------
                                                      236






                       J.  E.  Frook






          STATEMENT OF JAMES  E,  FROOK,  COMMISSIONER




          OF SEWAGE DISPOSAL, TOLEDO,  OHIO






          MR. FROOK:  My name is James  E.  Frook,  and,



for the record, I would like  to make a small correction.




I am Commissioner of Sewage Disposal of the city of



Toledo, not the Superintendent.  I would like the record



to show this correction.




          MR, EAGLE:  Okay.



          MR. FROOK:  The committee has already copies




of this report for the Conferees.




          (Mr. Frook read the following report.)

-------
                                                                            237
                     PROPOSED DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS

                      FOR DETERMINING EFFECTIVENESS

                   OF WASTEWATER TREATMENT IN REDUCING

                        ALGAE IN LAKE ERIE WATERS
Prepared by:     SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEMONSTRATION PROJECTS
                     George D. Simpson, Chairman, Havens & Emerson
                                      Consulting Engineers, Cleveland

                     James E. Frook, Supt., Toledo Division of
                                         Sewage Disposal

                     James C. Haube, Chief Chemist, Toledo Division of
                                         Sewage Disposal

                     John E. Kinney, Consultant
                                      Ohio Department of Health
Presented to:


                       OHIO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

                    AD HOC COMMITTEE ON ALGAE CONTROL

                              IN LAKE ERIE
                              May 20, 1969

-------
                                                                               238
                         REPORT OF SUBCOMMITTEE ON A

                             DEMONSTRATION PROJECT


 INTRODUCTION

      Many  of  the  existing  studies on the relation of phosphate and algae have

 been  based on the assumption that phosphorus  is the critical element in the

 system,  and that  reduction  of phosphate content to low concentrations will

 effectively control  algae  growth.  Consequently, the data collected and the

 investigations made  to  date have concentrated on the mechanism of phosphate

 removal  in the treatment process, and  the relative merits of various processes

 under investigation  have been measured only by percent phosphate removal.

 Only  in  a  few cases  has there been any observation of the relative effect of

 the treated effluent in stimulation of algal  growth in the receiving water.

 Some  work  along this line  has been done in Wisconsin by  the University of

 Wisconsin  group,  and some  work has been done  in laboratory studies by Rand and

 Nemerow  at Syracuse  University.  These studies provide valuable guidance to

 techniques used in study of this question and to future  research and observa-

 tion.

      However, it  is  clear  that research and demonstration available to date

 is not adequate to permit  quantitative evaluation of the effectiveness of

 phosphate  removal in controlling algal blooms.  As stated by Rand and Nemerow,

 et. al.,*  "... the previous investigators worked with sewage treatment plant

 effluents  for coagulation  tests, and no one,  after determining removal effi-

 ciences  of the two coagulants, has ascertained whether or not the treated ef-

 fluent would  support algal growth.   It does not seem sufficient and complete
*"Rcmoval of Algal Nutrients from Domestic Wastewater,  Part II,  Laboratory
 Studies".  Research Report No.  1"..,  New York State Department of Health,
 prepared by Syracuse University, March,  1965.

-------
                                                                             239
to say that a certain type of treatment process will remove X percent of the



phosphorus and Y percent of the nitrogen without determining what effect the



removal has on receiving waters".




     Precise correlations of the effects of phosphate levels in the natural



environment are difficult to make.   Many variables are at work in natural




bodies of water which make it extremely difficult to distinguish the critical



factors governing algal growth at any given time.  For this reason it appears




that such an investigation in the main body of Lake Erie is not feasible ex-




cept over the entire Lake over a period of many, many years.



     One of the principles of scientific investigation is that experimental



work be designed to reduce the number of independent variables to the minimum,



if possible to a single variable.  Under such conditions, valid relationships



might be established for a series of variables in turn, which could subsequently



be combined in various ways.  The demonstration project proposed is an attempt




to set up conditions where phosphate concentration is the only significant in-



dependent variable and to observe the effects of algae population and growth



resulting therefrom.




     The Subcommittee first considered a demonstration project in which two




streams of effluent from a sewage treatment plant would be impounded in two



parallel storage basins or lagoons.  The treatment plant would practice a



split treatment process such that one effluent stream would be given a high



degree of phosphate removal in the treatment processes, while the other stream



would undergo normal sewage treatment without special phosphate removal.  The




concentration of phosphate in the treated stream entering one lagoon would be



controlled to desired levels by operating the treatment devices and/or by




diluting the treatment effluent in various proportions with Lake Erie water.
                                    - 2 -

-------
                                                                               2/-.0
Observations would be made in the two lagoons rcgaruiHg the algal growth rate




and total concentration of algao in relation to the concentration of phos-




phorus present, with the objective of determining the effect of from 80% to




possibly 99-6 removal of phosphate from sewage.




     This plan was considered in detail by the Subcommittee with the advice




of several outside experts in algology and nutrient control.  After thorough




consideration the Subcommittee believes that this plan holds very little




promise of producing fruitful results, and would probably not be capable




of developing the reliable cause and effect relationships desired.  There




are several defects to this plan, which may be generally categorized in




two groups as follows:




(1)  It would be difficult or impossible to reach sufficiently low concentra-




     tions of phosphate in either of the lagoons to prevent or control algae




     blooms.




(2)  Manipulation of the treatment plant processes and dilution of treatment




     plant effluent in order to achieve desired phosphate levels inevitably




     entails changes in other variables, such as pH, nitrogen levels, and




     other elements of the water chemistry which make it impossible to be sure




     that differences observed are due only to differences in phosphate level.




     For these and other reasons this demonstration plan is not recommended.





     A second and somewhat different plan was evolved which overcomes some




of these objectives and seems to offer sufficient promise of useful results




to warrant consideration.  It differs from the rejected plan in that natural




Lake Erie water would be tested as well as treated plant effluent.  This pro-




posed plan is detailed below.






OBJECTIVES OF PROPOSED DEMONSTRATION PROJECT




     The objectives of the project are:





                                    - 3 -

-------
                                                                             241
(1)  To establish conditions in which phosphate levels in Lake Erie water




     and in a treated sewage effluent can be varied in comparison with a




     control water containing very low normal phosphate concentrations.




(2)  To discharge the test streams and control stream into identical parallel




     impoundments or lagoons and to observe the difference in algal popula-




     tion and growth in each.




(3)  To observe the effects on algae growth of varying the phosphate input




     to the test lagoons, and to attempt to determine the critical phosphate




     levels at which algae blooms occur.  If the term "bloom" can not be




     adequately defined, then the observations would be expressed as rela-




     tive concentrations of algae corresponding with various levels of




     phosphate concentration.




(4)  To observe changes in algal species resulting from different phosphate




     concentrations.




(5)  To observe the effects of recycle of precipitated materials from the




     bottom sludge, due to seasonal or physical turn-over of the impoundment.




(6)  To observe the difference in chemical and physical characteristics of




     the water in the test and control impoundments brought about by differ-




     ences in algae population, such as alkalinity, carbon dioxide, dissolved




     oxygen, various forms of nitrogen, and so forth.





     It is recognized that the results may not correlate with great precision,




and that the validity of the results may be generally limited to water similar




to that tested under Lake Erie climatic conditions.  However, considering the




importance of the subject and the present condition of the lake, the potential




value of the project seems to warrant the effort and expense.






DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED DEMONSTRATION




1.   Select one or more treatment plants along the shore of Lake Erie at

-------
                                                                             242
     which phosphate removal  could  be  practiced  in  the  treatment process.
2.    Three test lagoons of identical  size  and  shape would be  constructed.



     (See attached diagram).   Lagoon  1  would receive  treatment plant  effluent,




     which may or may not be  diluted  by the addition  of natural  Lake  Erie



     water.  Lagoon 2 would receive natural Lake  Erie water enriched  to  the



     desired phosphate concentration  by the direct addition of chemical



     phosphate only.   Lagoon  3 would  receive only natural Lake Erie water,



     and would constitute the control lagoon.   Lagoons 2  and  3 would  provide




     a direct comparison of Lak3 Erie water without sewage effluent and  per-



     mit comparison of algae  growth at  different  and  precisely controlled  con-




     centrations of phosphorus.   Lagoon 1  would permit a  comparison of algae




     growth in treatment plant effluent at various phosphorus concentrations




     with growth in Lake water.   By this plan, phosphate  level in Lagoons  2



     and 3 could be brought to the level of the background concentrations



     phosphorus in Lake Erie, which at most times is  probably below the  criti-



     cal concentration necessary for  algae blooms.




3.    If it were found that levels of  nitrogen  or  other nutrients in Lagoons




     2 and 3 were deficient to support algae growth,  such nutrients could  be



     added equally to all lagoons without  changing the validity  of comparison




     of phosphorus.





4.    The algal growth rate and concentration would be measured by one or more



     of these techniques in each lagoon:




     (a)  Centrifuged solids  concentrations.



     (b)  Volatile suspended  solids.




                                    - 5 -

-------
                                                                            243
     (c)  Rcspirometcr test of growth rate.

     (d)  Light transmission or turbidity.

     (e)  Algal density by fluorometric determination of chlorophyll  A and  B.

5.   Changes in algal characteristics and species  should be  observed.

6.   All significant parameters of water quality should be measured on both

     influent and effluent and at different  depths within all  three lagoons,

     including but not limited to all forms  of phosphorus, nitrogen cycle,

     alkalinity, BOD, solids,  plankton counts, carbon dioxide,  and hardness.

     Monitoring'of chlorophyll A and B, DO,  pH and temperature  would  be in-

     cluded.  Trace elements would be determined on a low-frequency schedule.

     Periodic examination of the quantities  and characteristics of the bottom

     sediments would be made.

7.   The effects of recycle of precipitated  phosphorus from  bottom sediments

     or accumulated sludge could be controlled as  desired by sealing  the bot-

     tom from overlying water by use of plastic sheets or by placing  a layer

     of clean sand over the bottom at periodic intervals, or by sludge removal.

     At other stages of the experiments, the effects of mixing  and recycle  bot-

     tom sediments could be observed by artificial or natural mixing.

8.   The detailed study plan and design of the demonstration system should  be

     prepared with the advice of a board of  experienced algologists,  who should

     periodically review results and suggest modifications or  additions to  the

     test program.  For this reason, a detailed testing program has not been

     prepared.  The Subcommittee believes however  that the following  general

     principles would describe minima for the design:

     (a)  Flow rates should approximate .5 mgd to  each lagoon.

     (b)  In order to cover adequately the effects of cyclic changes  in the

          background lake characteristics, the project should be planned to

          extend for a minimum of three years.
                                    - 6 -

-------
                                                                              2U
     (c)  Detention period in each lagoon should be sufficient  to  minimize
          effects of rapid fluctuations  in lake water quality and  to permit
          the establishment of reasonably steady state conditions.   A mini-
          mum detention period of about  35 days in each lagoon  is  suggested
          for consideration.
     (d)  Testing should continue year-round to observe changes brought
          about by temperature and climatic conditions.
     (e)  Lagoon depths should be adequate to reduce the effects of mixing
          by wind and waves, and to simulate a natural lake condition in
          which a significant proportion of the water is not exposed to suf-
          ficient light for photosynthesis.

COST OF DEMONSTRATION
     Accurate estimates of cost cannot be prepared until the test  program is
designed in detail.  Preliminary estimates based on the Subcommittee's general
assumptions indicate that a 3-year demonstration program cost would be in the
range of $650,000 to $750,000.  These figures include construction, cost of
phosphate removal at the treatment plant, laboratory work, data evaluation,
and consulting services.  Costs do not include allowances for land.

CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL DEMONSTRATION ON STREAMS
     The proposed demonstration project described above is concerned with Lake
Erie water.  The Ohio Department of Health is also responsible for developing
policy on phosphate removal in intrastate streams not in the Lake Erie basin.
     The Subcommittee suggests that consideration should also be given to pos-
sible demonstration projects on selected streams, such as:
     1.  Diverting phosphate-rich flows (e.g. a treatment plant effluent)
         into a non-algae producing stream to observe the effects, or,
     2.  Diverting phosphate-rich flows away from a stream presently sub-
         ject to algae blooms, or,
                                    - 7 -

-------
                                                                              245
     3.  Split-flow treatment of half a stream flow for phosphate  precipi-

         tation, to observe the effects,  if any.


This subject has not been developed in any detail,  but  the Department  of

Health might consider various streams suitable for  demonstration projects,

so as to develop a basis for stream standards on  phosphates,  applicable  to

streams both within and outside the Lake Erie basin.   It should be recognized

that the proposed demonstration project on Lake Erie water would not evaluate

effects of phosphate levels on tributary streams, nor the effects  of nutrient-

rich streams on Lake Erie.  The importance of these subjects  is not to be mini-

mized, but the Subcommittee feels that these topics were outside the scope  of

considerations requested.


                                        Respectfully submitted,
                                        Demonstration Subcommittee:
                                        P.J.  Weaver*
                                        James E.  Frook
                                        James C.  Haube
                                        John  E.  Kinney
                                        G.D.  Simpson
*Served on the subcommittee until December,  1968.
                                    -  8 -

-------
•X
                                                                                246
-k
                                                                                 Q:
                                                                                 o
                                                                                 5
  fo
!
I
      r
SO
   $
                         $
                      0
CM
                         •
                         *s.


                         ^K
                      Cl
                      o
                  e*

                                      ^-
                                          !
                                   5-k

                                   &  <0
                                                         CJ Qj
                                                         .0 V
                                                               \
                                                                      •*•
                                                                                   H.
                                                                                   0
                                                       K5
                                                       In
\l

-------
                                                       247
                       G. H. Eagle




          MR. EAGL3:  Thank you, Jim.




          Does anybody have any questions of Mr. Frook




before he leaves, as far as his report?




          I want to make it clear that we are not talking




about deJaying anything until these studies are made, but




we think that these studies are very important, and that




they should go along concurrently with improvements that




are being made in regard to algae control in Lake Erie.




          MR. STEIN:  Mr. Lyon.  Just a moment.




          MR. LYON:  Mr. Chairman, I think this is a




very worthwhile project.




          George, have these gentlemen been in touch




with the Ontario Water Resources group and the others




who have also had some studies in this field?  I don't




think any of them have been as thorough as this one




proposes to be, but it probably would be well worthwhile.




          MR. EAGLE:  I am going to ask Mr. Frook if he




knows.




          I think Mr. Simpson, who was chairman of this




committee and unfortunately couldn't be here today —




I think that he has had contacts with Ontario, but how




extensive I don't know.




          Do you know, Jim?




          MR. FROOK:  No, I do not know, and the only

-------
                                                      2/4-8
                       G. H.  Eagle




other member of the committee here today in Jim Haube.




Do you know at all, Jim?




          MR. HAUBE:  He is aware.




          MR. LYON:  The Canadians have done quite a bit




of work, and it might be well worthwhile to exchange




notes, but this certainly looks like a real fine project.




          MR, EAGLE:  Now, with regard to our agricultural




drainage — and you have a copy of our report in your




packet from Ohio.




          Ohio is urging the agricultural interests in




the State through the Director of Agriculture, who is a




member of the Ohio Water Pollution Control Board, to




study the land runoff of silt and nutrients, particularly




phosphates, and to develop or expand such programs as are




necessary to reduce this runoff.  For your information




and use, if you so desire, I am submitting a report




prepared by the committee to you.  I think you will all




agree that much more work needs to be done in this area




in the future.  I sincerely hope Ohio can move forward




with a meaningful program.




          Certainly, if  the municipalities and other




discharges in the Lake  Erie Basin in Ohio are to spend




$6 to $7 million  a year, or possibly more, for phosphate




removal, they have a right to know how much good they are

-------
                                                      249
                       G. H.  Eagle



doing in improving the water quality.  Further, only by




continuing sampling and surveillance can a predictive




model for water quality management in Lake Erie bo



refined to meet the needs of the times,



          The data collection and surveillance program




recommended by the committee and by the Ohio Department



of Health and Water Pollution Control Board is considered




to be a minimum program,.  The estimated cost of about



$2 million the first year and somewhat less the following



year is not unreasonable, in our opinion, for providing




this essential data.  Such a program should be started at




once and should be funded mostly by the Federal Government




in accordance with the Lake Conference Recommendations




and Conclusions.



          I am now going to ask Mr. James C. Haube,



Chief Chemist of the Toledo Division of Sewage Disposal,



also from Toledo, who was chairman of this committee, to



give you a more detailed explanation of the recommenda-



tions contained in this report.



          Mr. Haube.

-------
                                                     250
                       J.  C,  Haube






          STATEMENT OF JAMES C0  HAUBE, CHIEF



          CHEMIST, TOLEDO DIVISION OF SEWAGE



               DISPOSAL, TOLEDO, OHIO






          MR. HAUBE:  I would like to project two




transparencies of the Western Basin and the Lake as an



entire system.




          I hope you will excuse the confusion we will



have in the next few minutes while we get this projector



set up.




          (Mr. Haube read the following portion of



his prepared report.)

-------
                                                                       2.51
       PROPOSED DATA COLLECTION AND SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM

          FOR WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT IN LAKE ERIE
Prepared by:

     Subcommittee on Data Collection and Surveillance.

            James C. Haube, Chairman
                  Chief Chemist, Toledo Division of Sewage Disposal

            Ernest Neal, Eng.Tech - Biologist
                  State of Ohio Department of Health

            John E. Kinney, Consultant
                  State of Ohio Department of Health
Presented to:

     State of Ohio Department of Health
     Ad Hoc Committee on Algae Control in Lake Erie
                       May 20, 1969

-------
                                                                      252
INTRODUCTION


     The program for data collection and surveillance in Lake Erie,  as

proposed by the Subcommittee on Data Collection and Surveillance and

outlined later in this report, has been designed after logical consideration

to the following guidelines which it feels are fundamental to the success

of any stream surveillance program:
            1.  The program must be responsive to the needs of
                decision makers; needs which frequently vary in
                time and character.  Likewise, the decision maker
                must provide pro'npt response to newer methods of
                surveillance and changing surveillance needs.

            2.  The program must be, above all, comprehensive enough
                to meet the need and include both continuing and
                dynamic surveillance systems which will acquire
                conclusive chemical, biological, and physical water
                quality data sufficient to establish factual inter-
                relationships raiher than general trends.

            3.  The program must provide for a planned acquisition
                of factual information which is commensurate with
                cost and effort involved.

            A.  The program must be capable of being continued over
                an indefinite period of time and further, be capable
                of withstanding nodifications without interruption of
                system efficiency.

            5.  The program must allow for constant critical evaluation
                to ensure a valid choice of information sought and best
                procedures to obtain it.

            6.  The program must provide for minimum delay in data
                processing through optimization of'all data management
                systems so maximum use of acquired data can be realized.

-------
                                                                     253
PROGRAM OBJECTIVES


     The data collection and surveillance program outlined later in

this report has been designed to achieve the following six objectives:
            1.  Establish phosphorous (as well as other related
                water quality parameters) concentrations and
                distribution throughout Lake Erie and at the
                points of discharge of major tributaries.

            2.  Establish phytoplankton population densities
                and their distribution throughout Lake Erie
                and at points of discharge of major tributaries.

            3.  Record instances of phytoplankton "bloom"  growths
                as to location, composition, extent,  and duration
                in Lake Erie and to appraise chemical and  physical
                conditions preceeding, during, and following "bloom"
                growths so as to permit development of interrelationships
                and suggest control measures.

            A.  Appraise major tributary loads and flow to Lake Erie
                with consideration to composition, distribution,  and
                ecological changes effected by such.

            5.  Appraise effects of siltation in Lake Erie and determine,
                on a quantitative basis, the rate of siltation in Lake
                Erie with consideration given to composition and the
                distribution of bottom deposits.

            6.  Obtain sufficient multiparametric data of  a factual
                nature to permit development of models for Lake Erie.

-------
                                                                         254
THE DATA COLLECTION AND SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM


     The combined data collection and surveillance program outlined in this

report calls for the intergration of three separate and distinct subprograms.

Each subprogram should be incorporated into the vhole for best efficiency.

The three subprograms are as follow:

             1.  In-Lake Automated Monitoring
             2.  Manual Sampling and Examination
             3.  Additional Data Acquisition


     It is not considered likely, for financial reasons, that both an

Intensive and comprehensive study of the entire Lake Erie is possible at

this time or in the foreseeable future.  Attempts to apply a budget limited

study to the entire lake would tend to be self-defeating as factual, multi-

parametric data could probably not be realized.


     To overcome this inherent difficulty, the proposed Data Collection and

Surveillance Program calls for the direction of major investigative effort

to those sectors of Lake Erie which have been most effected by processes of

pollution and eutrophication ( i.e., Western Basin ).  However, considerable

attention has been provided by the Data Collection and Surveillance Program

for the remaining sectors of Lake Erie.  Although this practice is not beyond

scientific reproach, it is considered probable that the majority of data

acquired,  as well as interrelationships which are developed,  through intense

study of the Western Basin would apply to the remaining sectors of the lake.

-------
                                                       255
                       J. C.  Haube



          MR. STEIN:  Pardon me.  Do you intend to read




this whole paper?



          MR. HAUBE:  Do you intend to listen to this




whole paper, Mr. Stein?



          MR. STEIN:  If you intend to read it, we sure




intend to listen to it.




          MR. HAUBE:  Okay0



          MR. STEIN:  Well, do you care to answer the




question?



          MR. HAUBE:  I think you are letting the page




numbers frighten you.  There are eighteen pages here, but




it is in outline form, and it is going to move very



rapidly.  There are some sections I intend to leave out.



I certainly think it is worthwhile.



          MRo LYON:  Mr0 Chairman, may I suggest that



we be given a chance to review this paper at our own



leisure?  It has got a lot of detail Jn it.  I am sure



it is very worthwhile, but we have a number of other



items on the agenda.  I wonder if we couldn't have this



paper summarized.




          MR. STEIN:  Well, I am not going to cut anyone



off, and this is up to Ohio and Mr. Eagle to proceed in




their own way.  In other words, any material that you



think is relevant, we are going to accept.

-------
                                                     256
                      J.  C.  Haube



          Will you just go ahead and, in view of these




comments, proceed in the way you think best?



          MR. HA.UBE:  Okay,  fine,,  I will just attempt



to, then, in five minutes, sum up this paper, and hope




that it is reviewed in detail before the next reconvening




of the conference.



          The in-lake automated monitoring system which.



we have called for has been deemed necessary for the



following reasons:




          To appraise the flow patterns throughout Lake



Erie especially with the flows communicating between the




Central and Western Basins, and between the Central and



Eastern Basins.



          We also are interested in monitoring to



appraise the zones wifriin Lake Erie which are signifi-



cantly influenced by tributary discharges.



          In this report, we have called for a maximum



of 22 monitoring sites in the Western Basin of Lake Erie,




eight monitoring sites in the Central Basin, five



monitoring sites in the Eastern Basin.




          Parameters for automated monitoring which we



consider critical are dissolved oxygen, temperature, pH,



specific conductance, solar intensity, chlorophyll,



apparent turbidity.

-------
                                                     257
                       J. C.  Haube



          We also consider carbon dioxide, ammonia




nitrogen, nitrite nitrogen, nitrate nitrogen, alkalinity,



and phosphorus as critical paramaters.  However, we




realize automated monitoring systems, sophisticated



enough to analyze for these parameters, are not currently



available.  We do recommend that once these systems are



available that they be implemented into the program.



          The second sub-program, Manual Sampling and



Examination, as I have mentioned before, the major




empnasis has been placed on the Western Basin for obvious




reasons.



          We call for a series of from 50 to 70




surveillance stations to be located in the Western



Basin along a grid having intervals initially of five



miles.




          In the Central Basin, we have also called for



constructing 22 sites for manual sampling and examination,



          In the Eastern Basin, likewise, we have asked



for eight sampling stations to be set up.



          Without workable flow models, chemical and



biological models of Lake Erie, it is very difficult to




accurately define where surveillance stations should be



located.  As a result, we felt it necessary to set up




these obviously numerous surveillance sites to obtain

-------
                                                        253
                       J.  G.  Haube



the data which would in turn enable construction of highly




accurate model systems which in turn will supplement the



data and surveillance program and suggest ways of improving



the surveillance program,  perhaps eliminating, changing



position, or actually increasing the number of surveillance




stations.



          The prograr. for manual sampling and examination —




we have suggested bi -dkiily sampling at each of the proposed




BO to 100 surveillance stations, with a maximum sampling



of three times per seven-day week, at a depth representing




surface waters.



          V7e also recommend once weekly at one-half of the



40 or 40 to  50 of the proposed surveillance stations



sampling of  the depth representing the mid-depth and



bottom waters.



          We are also recommending that all manual sampling



be conducted by or from helicopter, as well as all trans-



portation of all the collected water specimens.  We feel



that the use of helicopters is required because sampling




must be direct and concurrent at all of the surveillance



stations for development of actual or accurate data.




          Such frequent and concurrent sampling cannot be



achieved by  surface  craft.  We also feel the use of



helicopters  is indicated in order to delay or to eliminate

-------
                                                       259
                       J. C, Haube



delays in sampling in examination, to reduce the effects of



change in the Lake Erie environmental system, and maintain




integrity of the data.  Also, it is obvious that adequate



number of surface craft are not available to meet the




needs and the demands of this particular surveillance




program.



          Further, surface craft are limited to the




factors of speed, navigability, cost, maintenance, and




so on.




          It is recommended that the following parameters



be determined on all water samples collected at these



surveillance stations:  air and water temperature, wind




direction and velocity, water surface characteristics,




solar intensity, barometric pressure, dissolved oxygen,



turbidity, conductivity, chlorophyll A plus B, pH.  These



parameters could and would be tested at the time of sample



collection to determine at the base laboratory the



following parameters:  phosphorus  series, nitrogen



series, total organic carbon [lu lieu of BOD and COD),



total solids, suspended and/or dissolved solids, chloride,



sulfate, fluoride, silica, hardness (total), buffer




capacity (potentiometric titration of alkalinity), sodium,




potassium, plankton (total and differential counts), carbon



dioxide.

-------
                                                      260
                       J, C.  Haube



          We also recommend that portions of all water




samples collected be centrifuged and filtered through



membranes with an average porosity no greater than 0.8



microns, and that these be cataloged and stored in a



surveillance bank.




          The provisions of such a surveillance bank would



allow the investigator to look back in time to observe




constituents present in. the samples taken which at the



time were not on his list of required analyses.



          It is further recommended that, on a less



frequent basis — perhaps on a once monthly basis —




that selected samples be analyzed for trace elements:



zinc, cadmium, arsenic, boron, iron, molybdate, manganese,



aluminum, berylium, copper, silver, nickel, cobalt, lead,



chromium, vanadium, barium, strontium.



          V/e feel this is necessary because past data to



date has not adequately defined the role of trace



elements as possible sources of micronutrients for



phytoplankton.




          In addition to the sub-programs of in-lake



monitoring, and sampling and examination, we suggest




additional data acquisition systems.  Under this program,



we recommend provision of a surface  vessel for surveillance



purposes.  Such a vessel is indicated and could be used

-------
                                                       261
                       J, C. Haube



for extended in-depth study of physical, chemical o.nd



biological parameters at areas where automated monitoring




systems are not available or feasible.  Such a vessel would



also allow i_n vivo and in. situ analyses of parameters not



able to be automatically monitored.  It would also extend



the flexibility of the sampling and examination program.




          Two problems considered as possible assignments



for this surveillance vessel:



          1.  Define the nutritional status of phytoplankton




in Lake Erie and at points of discharge of major tributaries,




          2.  Define the rate and ecological effects of



sediment deposition in Lake Erie and at points of discharge




of major tributaries with special emphasis on the problem



as it exists in the Western Basin.




          With regard to the surveillance vessel, we also



indicate a need for the staff of such research or surveil-



lance vessel to utilize bioassay techniques to determine



physiological effects of algae and metabolic systems in



algae.




          Such procedures, bioassay procedures as




nitrogen uptake rate by NH^-N absorption, nitrogen




fixation rate, orthophosphate extraction for determination




of limiting or surplus phosphorous content, and alkaline



phosphatase activity as a measure of surplus phosphorous

-------
                                                       262
                       J.  C.  Haube




content is surely indicated.



          These techniques have been developed and have




been used both in the laboratory and in the field with




success.



          Also, a possible assignment for the surveillance



vessel is a quantitative appraisal of the problem of




siltation in the lake.  We have several approaches outlined,



I don't want to take too much more time.  We can skip over




this, and go to a next possible program for acquiring



additional data.




          This would be the Water Intake Surveillance



System.  Perhaps one of the simplest and yet most highly



effective methods of acquiring water quality data for



Lake Erie could be realized by enlisting the assistance



of water treatment facilities which are located along the



perimeter of Lake Erie.  This assistance could be both



in the form of provision of water samples from the intake,



chemical and biological analyses of water samples from the



intake, or both.




          A cooperative program such as this has been and



is in effect in the State of Ohio, in cooperation with



the FWPCA.




          Another possible source of additional data



acquisition would be Tributary Stream Surveillance Systems.

-------
                                                       263
                       J. C. Haube



It is recommended that surveillance systems be designed



to characterize wastewater and land runoff loadings to



streams tributary to Lake Erie and further, that data




generated from such surveillance systems be made available



to the proposed Data Collection and Surveillance Program




staff.  Such data are required if flow pattern and sediment



deposition studies are to be effective.



          Thank you.  That is all I am going to say about



this.




          (The remainder of Mr. Haube's report in toto



follows.)

-------
                                                                    264


OUTLINE FOR THE PROPOSED PROGRAM OF DATA COLLECTION AND SURVEILLANCE



I.  In-Lake Automated Monitoring
             A.  It is recommended that an in-lake automated monitoring
                 system be established throughout Lake Erie to collect,
                 on a continuous basis, water quality and physical data.

                 Selection of automated monitor installation sites, as
                 well as parameters to be automatically monitored, has
                 been done under the assumption that neither a workable
                 flow model nor a comprehensive infra-red thermal mapping
                 of Lake Erie currently exists.  Such a model and/or
                 thermal mapping would eliminate much of the trial and
                 error approach inherent in estimation of required sites
                 and parameters.

                 Stations selected for installation of automated monitors
                 should permit the following:

                      1.  Appraisal of flow patterns throughout Lake Erie
                          with emphasis on flows communicating between the
                          Western Basin and Central Basin and between the
                          Central Basin and Eastern Basin.

                      2.  Appraisal of flow patterns through the three
                          major passages of the Western Basin ( i.e.,
                          Pelee, Middle, and South Passages ) and around
                          the Lake Erie Islands.

                      3.  Appraisal of zones within Lake Erie which are
                          significantly influenced by tributary discharges
             B.  The following sites are considered suitable for installation
                 of automated monitoring systems:

                 WESTERN BASIN

                      1.  Pelee Point  (Canada)
                      2.  Pelee Island (Canada) at Mill Point
                      3.  Pelee Island (Canada) at Fish Point"
                      4.  Pelee Island (Canada) at Lighthouse Point
                      5.  Pelee Island (Canada) at Sheridan Point

-------
                                                                        265
    I.   In-Lake Automated Monitoring,  cont'd.


                          6.  Middle Island  (Canada)
                          7.  Kelley's Island (Ohio) at northeastern point
                          8.  Kelley's Island (Ohio) at northwestern point
                          9.  Kelley's Island (Ohio) at Carpenter Point
                         10.  Kelley's Island (Ohio) at southeastern point
                         11.  Marblehead Light (Ohio)
                         12.  Catawba Island (Ohio) at Scott Point
                         13.  South Bass Island Light (Ohio)
                         14.  North Bass Island (Ohio)
                         15.  Green Island (Ohio)
                         16.  Rattlesnake Island (Ohio)
                         17.  West Sister Island (Ohio)
                         18.  Middle Sister Island (Ohio)
                         19.  East Sister Island (Ohio)
                         20.  Toledo Harbor Lighthouse (Ohio)*
                         21.  Point aux peaux (Michigan) at Stoney Point
                         S22.  Detroit River Light  (Michigan)*
                        t"^~~) 1   I  '—/
                   -e?\  f- ( A-fe  /
                 Installation of automated monitors at the above proposed sites
                 vould allow for stationary installations at areas where, with
                 only two exceptions, power is currently available.  Data from
                 the  automated monitors (stationary) could be retrieved manually
                 or telemetered to the central laboratory.

                 CENTRAL BASIN  (approximate locations)

                          1.  41°50'  N. Lat.  82°25'  W. Long.
                          2.  41°35'  N. Lat.  82°25'  W. Long.
                          3.  42°05'  N. Lat.  81°40'  W. Long.
                          4.  41°45'  N. Lat.  81°40'  W. Long,
                          5.  42°20'  N. Lat.  81°00'  W. Long.
                          6.  42°05'  N. Lat.  81*00'  W. Long.
                          7.  42°25'  N. Lat.  80°10'  W. Long.
                          8.  42°18'  N. Lat.  80°00'  W. Long.

                 Installation of automated monitors at the above proposed sites
                 in the Central Basin would,  by  necessity, be of a temporary
                 nature such as the telemetered  buoy monitors developed for the
                 F. W.  P.  C.  A.

                 EASTERN BASIN  (approximate  locations)

                          1.   42°35'  N.  Lat.  79°55'  W.  Long.
                          2.   42°30'  N.  Lat.  79°30'  W.  Long.
                          3.   42°46'  N.  Lat.  79°15'  W.  Long.
                          4.   42°38'  N.  Lat.  79°10' W. Long.
                          5.   42°46''N.  Lat.  79°00' W. Long.

more than one automated system required.

-------
                                                                    266
I.  In-Lake Automated Monitoring  cont'd.
            C.  Wherever Indicated and physically possible,  automated
                monitoring systems should be installed and programmed
                in a manner permitting sequential examination of:

                         1.  Near-shore (shallow) vaters
                         2.  Off-shore (deep) waters
                                    a.  phototrop)(!ic zone
                                    b.  subphototrop^ic zone

                Such examination is considered necessary as  present data
                on Lake Erie, especially the Western Basin,  do not define
                possible stratification of intralake and tributary streams,
                Examination of water at different depths will provide data
                for development of vertical profiles.
            D.  The following parameters have been considered for automated
                monitoring at all installation sites:

                         1.  Dissolved oxygen  ( automated monitor available )

                                    a.  to measure diurnal changes which are
                                        indicative of  phytoplankton activity.

                                    b.  to measure oxygen reduction at shore
                                        areas; such may be coincident with or
                                        following "bloom" growths.

                                    c.  to assist in mapping flow patterns.
                         2.   Temperature  ( automated monitor available )

                                    a.   to measure level and duration of
                                        water temperature;  generally
                                        considered a probable "bloom"
                                        triggering factor.

                                    b.   to measure influence of warmer shore
                                        waters and discharges.

                                    c.   to evaluate suceptibility of shallow
                                        water areas to increased algal activity,

                                    d.   to assist in mapping flow patterns.

-------
                                                                        26?
I.  In-Lake Au toma ted Mon1 tor ing  cont'd.


            D.  cont'd.
                         3.   pH  ( automated monitor available )

                                    a.  to measure secondary effects of algal
                                        activity.

                                    b.  to assist  in detection of "slug"
                                        discharges from tributary streams.

                                    c.  to assist  in evaluating the role of
                                        carbon dioxide in triggering "bloom"
                                        growths when correlated with data
                                        for alkalinity and buffer capacity.

                                    d.  to assist  in mapping of flow patterns.
                         4.   Specific conductance  (automated monitor available )

                                    a.  serve as a relative measure of dissolved
                                        solids content.

                                    b.  serve as a. relative measure of suspended
                                        solids content when correlated with data
                                        for turbidity.

                                    c.  assist in determination of a correlation
                                        to "bloom" growths.

                                    d.  assist in locating surveillance stations
                                        and as an indicator for increased  study
                                        need.

                                    e.  assist in mapping of flow patterns.
                         5.   Solar  intensity   (  automated  monitor  available  )

                                    a.   provide  a  better definition  of  the role
                                        of  light in  triggering  and/or sustaining
                                        "bloom"  growths when correlated with
                                        data  for chlorophyll and temperature.

-------
                                                                      263
I.  In-Lake Automated Monitoring  cont'd.


            D.  cont'd.
                         6.  Chlorophyll A + B  ( automated monitor available )

                                    a.   provide a relative measure of algal
                                        population density.

                                    b.   provide growth rate and generation time
                                        data _in situ.

                                    c.   record development of "bloom" growths
                                        and intensity  and duration of such
                                        growths.

                                    d.   assist in developing relationships of
                                        phytoplankton  to solar intensity etc.

                                    e,   may assist in  mapping of flow patterns.
                         7.  Apparent turbidity  ( automated monitor available )

                                    a.   serve as a relative measure of suspended
                                        solids content when correlated with
                                        conductivity.

                                    b.   serve as indicator of sediment transfer
                                        and resuspension.

                                    c.   assist in development of the role of
                                        light in the production of "bloom" growth;
                                        when correlated with solar intensity.

                                    d.   assist in mapping  of flow patterns and
                                        areas of turbulence.
            E.  The following parameters are both physiologically critical to
                all microbiota and subject to frequent  changes.   Accordingly,
                these parameters  have been considered for continuous  automated
                monitoring.   However, capital investment, size,  and maintenance
                requirements prohibit use of such automated  systems at  present.
                It is recommenced that as such systems  are further developed
                that they be implemented in the data collection  and surveillance
                program.

-------
                                                                       269
I.  In-Lake_Automated Monitoring  cont'd.


             E.  cont'd.

                      a.  Carbon dioxide

                      b.  Ammonia nitrogen

                      c.  Nitrite nitrogen

                      d.  Nitrate nitrogen

                      e.  Alkalinity

                      f.  Phosphorous



II.  Manual Sampling and Examination

             A.  It is' recommended that surveillance stations,  in addition to
                 the In-Lake Automated Monitoring,  be established throughout
                 Lake Erie and at the points of discharge of all major
                 tributaries to the lake for the purpose of manual sampling
                 and examination of water.   Such surveillance stations vould
                 serve to:

                      1.  Provide additional water  samples, representitive of
                          the entire Lake Erie,  for analysis and later
                          development of accurate isopleths for a variety of
                          of significant parameters.

                      2.  Provide data required for development of models for
                          Lake Erie.

                      3.  Indicate areas requiring  intensified  examination.

                      A.  Permit modifications  to the data collection  and
                          surveillance systems  to ensure acquisition of only
                          beneficial data.

-------
                                                                       270
II.  Manual Sampling and Examination  cont'd.
                It is recommended that a flow .model for the entire Lake Erie
                be prepared as data permit so that surveillance stations
                could be located at the most adventageous sites.   Location
                of surveillance stations based  upon model findings would
                eliminate much of the error and effort wasted by  estimation
                of surveillance sites.
            C.  The following sites are recommended for location of manual
                stations:  ^^

            WESTERN BASIN

                It is recommended that fron fifty (50)  to seventy (70)  surveillanc
                stations be located in the Western Basin of Lake Erie along a
                grid network having intervals,  initially, of five miles.   Interval
                and station number would be increased or decreased as data indicat
                                 CO+E.tV Pk-KJ
            CENTRAL BASIN

                It is recommended that manual sampling  be done at fourteen (14)
                surveillance stations and each of eight (8) automated monitoring
                sites located in the Central Basin of Lake Erie.  Such would
                provide a total of twenty two surveillance stations (22)  for the
                Central Basin.   Location of proposed surveillance stations are:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
?1.
22.
42°
41°
41°
41°
41°
42°
42°
41°
41°
41°
42°
42°
42°
42°
42°
41°
42 c
42°
42°
42°
42°
/.2°
00"
50'
43'
35'
28'
15'
05'.
55'
45'
35'
30'
30'
20'
13'
05'
56'
06'
30'
25'
23'
18'
15'
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
N.
Lat
Lat
Lat
Lat
Lat
Lat
Lat
Lat
Lat
Lat
Lat
Lat
Lnt
Lnt
Lat
Lat
Lat
Lat
Lat
Lat
Lat
Lnt
,
.
,
•
.
•
.
^
•
•
,
*
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
82°
82°
82°
82°
82°
81°
•81°
81°
81°
81°
81°
81°
81°
81°
81°
81°
80°
80°
80°
80°
80°
79°
25'
25'
25'
25'
25'
40'
40'
40'
40'
40'
15'
00'
00'
00'
00'
00'
22'
15'
10'
05'
00'
57'
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
W.
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long .
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.
Long.

(monitor

(monitor


(monitor

(monitor



(monitor

(monitor



(monitor

(monitor


site)

site)


site)

site)



site)

site)



site)

site)

-------
                                                                        271
II.  Manual Sampling and Examination  cont'd.


            C.  cont'd.

            CENTRAL BASIN  cont'd.

               Surveillance stations have been positioned in the aforementioned
               locations so as to permit examination of flows communicating
               between the Western Basin and Central Basin and between the
               Central Basin and Eastern Basin.  Such positioning also should
               permit examination of Central Basin waters streaming adjacent
               to the South shore.

            EASTERN BASIN

               It is recommended that manual sampling be done at three (3)
               surveillance stations and at each of five (5) automated monitor
               sites located in the Eastern Basin of Lake Erie.   Such would
               provide a total of eight (8) surveillance stations for the
               Eastern Basin.   Location of proposed surveillance stations are:

                         1.  42°38' N. Lat. 80°05'  W. Long.
                         2.  42°35' N. Lat. 79°55'  W. Long,  (monitor site)
                         3.  42°34' N. Lat. 79°40'  W. Long.
                         4.  42°30' N. Lat. 79°30'  W. Long,  (monitor site)
                         5.  42°48' N. Lat. 79°35'  W. Long.
                         6.  42°46' N. Lat. 79°15'  W. Long,  (monitor site)
                         7.  42°38' N. Lat. 79°10'  W. Long,  (monitor site)
                         8.  42°46' N. Lat. 79°00'  W. Long,  (monitor site)

              Surveillance stations have been positioned in  the  aforementioned
              locations so as  to permit examination of flows communicating
              between the Central and Eastern Basins of Lake Erie and flows
              discharged to the Eastern Basin from the Grand,  Buffalo, nnd
              Cnttaraugus tributary streams.   Such positioning also permits
              evaluation of waters exiting the Eastern Basin of  Lake Erie
              via the Niagara  River.

-------
                                                                      272
II.  Manual Sampling and Examination  cont'd.
             D.  The following program for manual sampling at surveillance
                 stations is recommended until such time as data indicate
                 otherwise:

                      1.  Bidaily,  at each of the proposed 80 - 100
                          surveillance stations (maximum of three
                          samplings per station per seven day week),
                          at a depth representitive of surface water.

                      2.  Weekly,  at one-half ( 40 - 50 ) of the proposed
                          surveillance stations, at a depth representitive
                          of mid-depth and bottom waters.


STATIONS VISITED
NO. SAMPLES
0 N
Day
80
100
80
100
E
1
min.
max.
min.
max.
W E
Day
40
50
80
100
E K
2
min.
max.
min.
max.
I
Day
80
100
80
100
N T E R V A
3
min.
max.
min.
max.
Day 4
0
0
0
0
L
Day
80
100
80
100

5
min.
max.
min.
max.

Day 6
0
0
0
0

Day 7
0
0
0
0
             E.   It is recommended that manual sampling at  surveillance  stations
                 be conducted from helicopter as  well as transportation  of  all
                 collected water specimens.   Such a practice  is  considered
                 necessary as:

                      1.   Sampling must be frequent and concurrent  at  surveillanc
                          stations for development of accurate  isopleths which
                          represent the Lake Erie system as a whole.   Such
                          frequent and concurrent sampling  cannot be achieved
                          by surface craft.

                      2.   Delay in sampling  and examination must be minimized
                          in order to reduce the  effects of change  in  the Lake
                          Erie  environmental system and maintain the integrity
                          of developed data.

                      3.   Adequate number  of surface craft  are not  available
                          to meet  the demands of  the surveillance program.
                          Further,  such craft are limited due to factors of
                          speed, navigability, cost,  maintenance etc.

-------
                                                                      273
II.  Manual Sampling and Examination  cont'd.
             F.   It is recommended that the following parameters  be determined
                 on all water samples collected at the surveillance stations:

                      1.  To be determined at the time of sample  collection:

                               a.   Air temperature - water temperature
                               b.   Wind direction and velocity
                               c.   Water surface characteristics
                               d.   Solar intensity
                               e.   Barometric pressure
                               f.   Dissolved oxygen
                               g.   Turbidity
                               h.   Conductivity
                               i.   Chlorophyll A + B
                               J.   PH

                          The above parameters can be analyzed, or observed,
                          immediately upon collection of water samples.   Use
                          of compact and highly accurate instrumentation  allovs
                          for such analyses.   Limited analysis of water samples
                          at the time of collection also reduces  the burden
                          placed on the base laboratory staff.

                      2.  To be determined at the base laboratory:

                               a.   Phosphorous series
                               b.   Nitrogen series
                               c.   Total organic carbon ( in  lieu of BOD  and COD
                               d.   Total solids
                               e.   Suspended and/or dissolved solids
                               f.   Chloride
                               g.   Sulfate
                               h.   Fluoride
                               i.   Silica
                               j-.   Hardness ( total )
                               k.   Buffer capacity ( potentiometric titration  of
                                                     alkalinity )
                               1,   Sodium
                               m.   Potassium
                               n.   Plankton ( total and differential counts )
                               o.   Carbon dioxide

-------
                                                                      274
II.  Manual Sampling and Examination  cont'd.
             G.  It is recommended that samples collected for determination
                 of phosphorous content be refrigerated at temperatures  above
                 the freezing point and further,  that no chemical additives
                 be used for the purpose of preservation as such have been
                 shown to alter phosphorous equalibrium.
             H.  It is also recommended that portions of all water samples
                 collected be centrifuged and filtered through membranes having
                 an average porosity no greater than 0.8 microns and following
                 this, be cataloged and stored in a surveillance "bank",
                 Provision of such a surveillance "bank" would allow the
                 investigator to look back in time to determine constituents
                 present in samples taken which at the time were not on his
                 list of required analyses.
                 It is recommended that periodic examination of stored samples
                 from the surveillance "bank" be conducted to determine trace
                 constituents.   Such is considered necessary as present data
                 for Lake Erie  do not adequately define the role of trace
                 elements as sources of micronutrients for phytoplankton.  The
                 movement of such trace elements from one area of the lake to
                 another has not, at present, been adequately defined.  The
                 following trace elements are suggested for periodic ( i.e.,
                 monthly ) examination:

                               1.  Zinc
                               2.  Cadmium
                               3.  Arsenic
                               4.  Boron
                               5.  Iron
                               6.  Molybdate
                               7.  Manganese
                               8.  Aluminum
                               9.  Berylium
                              10.  Copper
                              11.  Silver
                              12.  Nickel
                              13.  Cobalt
                              14.  Lead
                              15.  Chromium
                              15.  Vanadium
                              17.  Barium
                              13.  Strontium

-------
III.  Additional Data Acquisition
     In addition to the sub-programs of In-Lake Automated Monitoring and
Manual Sampling and Examination, it is recommended that supplemental systems
be incorporated into the Data Collection and Surveillance Program.  Such
would serve to acquire data of a detailed and corroborative nature.

THE SURVEILLANCE VESSEL

             A,  It is recommended that a surface vessel, equipped with
                 laboratory and technical staff, be provided for the
                 purpose of further off-shore surveillance.  Such a
                 vessel would also permit:

                      1.  Extended, in-depth study of physical,  chemical,
                          and biological parameters at areas for which
                          automated monitoring systems are not available.

                      2.  Analyses, in vivo and in situ,  of parameters not
                          able to be automatically monitored.

                      3.  Flexibility in sampling and examination practices.

                      4c  Assistance in maintenance of automated monitoring
                          systems and retrieval of automatically monitored
                          data.


             B.   Two problems  requiring study beyond the  scope of routine
                 sampling  and  examination have been considered as possible
                 assignments  for the surveillance vessel  staff.   They  are:

                      1.   Define the nutritional status of phytoplankton in
                          Lake Erie and at  points of discharge of major
                          tributaries.

                      2.   Define the rate and ecological  effects  of sediment
                          deposition in Lake  Erie and at  points  of discharge
                          of major  tributaries  with special  emphasis on the
                          problem as  it exists  in the Western Basin.

-------
III.  Add i t iona1 Data Acqu1s1tion  cont'd.


THE SURVEILLANCE VESSEL  cont'd.
                 With regard to the nutritional status of phytoplankton,  it
                 is suggested t:hat consideration be given to the application
                 of the following bioassay techniques:

                      1.  Nitrogen uptake rate by NH.-N absorption.

                      2.  Nitrogen fixation rate

                      3.  Orthophosphate extraction for determination of
                          limiting or surplus phosphorous content.

                      4.  Alkaline phosphatase activity as a measure of surplus
                          phosphorous content.

                 Such techniques may assist in determination of which nutrients
                 (inorganic) are required for growth of phytoplankton and further,
                 which nutrients can be stored in excess of their immediate
                 requirements.   The bioassay techniques suggested for possible
                 application in this program have been developed and practiced
                 in both laboratory and field studies with success.

                 With regard to defining the rate of sediment deposition  in
                 Lake Erie and at the points of discharge of major tributaries,
                 the following approaches are suggested for consideration:

                      1.  Insertion of weighted cylinders for collection  of
                          sediment at all surveillance stations with retrieval
                          at three month intervals.

                      2.  Insertion of weighted cylinders for collection  of
                          sediment at all surveillance stations with retrieval
                          of cylinders and adjacent bottom deposits  at three
                          month intervals.  Collection of bottom deposits
                          adjacent to the cylinders would provide a  gross
                          appraisal of cylinder data integrity and  significance.

                      3.  Insertion of weighted cylinders for collection  of
                          sediment at fewer,  selected surveillance  stations
                          with  retrieval of cylinders at weekly intervals.
                          As sediment collected in cylinders is not  subject
                          to natural forces causing scour of the lake bottom
                          and resuspension of deposits, there is an  inherent
                          error in the cylinder technique which can  be reduced
                          significantly by more frequent retrievals.

-------
                                                                       277
 III.  AdditionalDataAcquisition   cont'd.


 THE SURVEILLANCE  VESSEL   cont'd.
                 All  approaches  are  thought  to permit  quantitative  appraisal
                 of sediment  deposition  rate.  In  selection of  the  actual
                 approach,  consideration muet be given to:

                       1.  The inherent error involved  in  sediment collection
                          techniques.

                       2.  The time and effort required for completion of such
                          studies.

                       3.  The number of  stations and sampling frequency required
                          for development  of factual,  quantitative  data.

                 Samples  of bottom deposits  should be  subjected  to  examination
                 in a manner  which is consistent with  previous  studies.  It is
                 recommended  that portions of all bottom  deposit samples be
                 dried, sterilized,  cataloged, and stored for future reference
                 in the surveillance "bank".
WATER INTAKE SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM
     Perhaps one of the simplest, yet highly effective me.thod of acquiring
water quality data for Lake Erie could be realized by enlisting the assistance
of water treatment facilities vhich are located along the perimeter of Lake
Erie.  This assistance could be in the form of (1) provision of water samples
from the intake, (2) chemical and biological analyses of water samples from
the intake, or  (3) both.   ( A cooperative program involving the F.W.P.C.A.,
State of Ohio Department of Health, and seventeen water treatment plants on
the Ohio shores of Lake Erie now exists.)

     It is estimated that approximately forty to fifty major water intakes
exist on the perimeter of Lake Erie.  As intakes for water treatment plants
are generally not located beyond a mile into the lake, waters received from
such intakes can be regarded as being shore waters.  The proposed Data
Collection and Surveillance Program does not provide for intensive examination
of shore waters in the Central and Eastern Basins of Lake Erie.  Supplemental
information realized through the assistance of these water treatment facilities
could prove to be invaluable in maintaining data integrity throughout the
entire lake.

     Therefore,  it  is  recommended that wherever such water intake surveillance
systems have not been  established,  that such be implemented and incorporated
into the Data Collection and Surveillance Program should it be adopted.

-------
                                                                       273
III.  Additional Data Acquisition  cont'd.
TRIBUTARY STREAM SURVEILLANCE SYSTEM

     It is recommended that surveillance systems be designed to characterize
wastewater and land runoff loadings to streams tributary to Lake Erie and
further, that data generated from such surveillance systems be made available
to the proposed Data Collection and Surveillance Program staff.  Such data
are required if flow pattern and sediment deposition studies are to be
effective.

-------
                                                                           279
     DATA COLLECTION AND SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM COST BRSAKDOTT


FIELD  OPERATIONSt

        In-Lake Automated Monitoring Program:

            35 monitors © 520,000.00 each  (F.7PCA Estimate) -           5  700,000.00
            Cost of helicopter rental -                                   455,000.00
            Salaries for 8 sample handlers -                               29,120.00
                                                         SUBTOTALt      1,1(34,121.00


LABORATORY  OPERATIONS*

        Chemistry & Biologyt

            Salaries for 19 chemist-biologists -                       S  171,000.00

       Data Processing!

            Salaries for 5 data handlers  (F.7PCA Estimate) -                28,500.00

        Administrative t

            Salary for Project Director  (F»7PCA Estimate)  -                15,000.00
            Salary for La"b Director  (F-7PCA Estimate)  -                    15,000.00
            Salary for Data Supervisor (FJPCA Estimate)  »                 10,000.00
                                                          SUBTOTALt    3  239,500.00

EQUIPMEOTt  (F77PCA Estimate)
                                                          SUBTOTALt    5  160,000.00

SUPPLIBSi   (F7TPCA Estimate)
                                                          SUBTOTALt    5   10,000.00

MISCELLANEOUSt  (PTPCA Estimate)

            Utilities -                                                5    1,000.00
            Rental of laboratory space O 54.00/ft  x 100,000 ft^ .        400,000.00
                                                          SUBTOTAL!    0  401,000.00
                                               GRAND  TOTAL  1ST  YEAS 51,994,620.00

-------
*t" -— - --.'1i-".']_tJr' --'• ~~'^-'-"- V'j ''T' *"i"U " •/ "
%"^"^ ^"££,~ .^Tl^*  • \» i   « /  •
 ..-
                                                        w-^yjf/ > ?":i!"r?-:-'Mi
                                                        ^mf^f^,^m/^ '•;}'
     ,v", ''<*'!" 1  'V'/-  j   vn'tV• . E-'*u.  I v  ' ,J •7->¥«n I I »»' !il!
    ^rr: _ ^^. ^    ,  ^^^dj^  {! I,,


    ^•^^t-vl, :.. ij ^ :\^« r>Wf    Sj|, 1
     X ,ui-*^—.~rt ..T^,^^^.j.,  i'.  u. I*  !-.*,»  v's- '1  */^  *-* t«N-4----—t      **E* ti;
     xV"n^T/  oi/7 T-y^-v.j |.;.*...<>—	ra~*rf*Hr-f>—F^—^-*iv i   v     •*• *•»! f
    ^.^^•NV !' :-.^SVK^ !  o        li!
     ^ fev^ ^iM^Hr^; Vf J-rl5 Mfe'ST-ri- Hi!!!!!!  !!K!! i.
        ^^l^r^.^itiv^}

        ^S^|6^^^J:|gJ
        "  ^'i />.»'>,!•«• -, -.. . -J: ,A-!>,&'.•+ ,

-------
                                 s\
                                |»tj>!  Jij    Jill
                                 353* P !}H! ijii! i :l|,i 'ff
                                 i               11
                                                     283
                                                III!!
I ?f>'S
! Si
i is!l
!-ii
I ¥%
1 M
 iitlll
ItaprMil; \  fil p J| 11 '

%5li;W^%^tAi ^'1 1ISIJ!
      •|. \\%.-\\w-\'^fk-
      '.}.'• '.y\\ •'. •'•V."-'t'4vTu
      1 .]• • \ V?': •". fc^\.v"Mi

      ']'.'•.'-\\)^^'^V^!zi!J!P'slVl''-'"V^r—
,'OY~>^ • ', -'.\'V \'\ •!' • )'-i'.'rf. •'S>c %v 1 • U •  '.'j \ 'N
 :,?¥
                      ^>" •'.'•'.•„.;., j. ]. \i" .^•l-..?.i;..'?X;^/ \,'k 'frj '^.


                      W-"^W^
                      \i(\)h • • • t'\^v1 ^•f-y-f'v?f-^H-/\
 .V.-.-V.-- - -'^i J -N, >u-^^f! ^  \Sv\^\%- • • !• '. V^-j-^.^-y. V/^

"/: •:---s^u>^M-%^:-- '•'•• ^^V^^<
,..;-,«,-->iiVi^'i'' f**'-^»'M ^r^v^^V  (G)'^"'- •• -.'•#-• "-1 • "•?' !i--\!^/
"*—rT W V'\ ! *>; Y/Ts'>'.v!!'^x-!\r-^-' •.-; Vi— vaX >-—>•*-"/t-»i~^^»^zij,.». • Y\ /_
L=2^^:->tf/V J ?^i • 1' •('• \C ^"--\v ,,fw • * ;-:.^.^
^ TWfl^l/M:5^ r>^^:rfe^:^;-fe>l^::^?!^^H-
             :*^.i;, ,  . ",v ; [  * — y- -r^^ " . • ., i- ) •",,."i )O-v'l?,- ."IT^J •  t*
             ^t^S.^r^ ^^'.^IJ^-^S
              r777l\^  T'; '.»V \>^;"'." - .'r-Kf . tjt> -.VV;.'\\ \\
             -^i^^^^^^       ;^#^£L
               ^^m&Q&,-'&$.^
              - ^ ^:?j^^^s^wc
                  \M^i* ^^^>'^M>X
                  ^,1 .^*. v^-'-'AV^&Qy ,"A; J-;1 V t/V
                                   iff
                                   IU
                                   " t
                                   i;   '

                                   EiL-i
                                   «!': i !
                                   tfV, j
                                   . ^. .1.

                                   [!,,'!
                                   ^fl.
                                     11 P
                                     Ell
                             •X ¥ .J^-i;''

-------
                      G. H. Eagle




          MR0 STEIN:  Are there any comments or questions?




          MR. LYON:  Mr,, Chairman,  I think this report




makes a very important point„   It says that the people



who will be going to spend money on cleaning up Lake Erie



pollution are entitled to know what is happening to the




lake as a result, and I think this is important.



          But I think the report seems to ignore the fact



that we already have large masses of data that the Depart-



ment of Interior has spent several million dollars



collecting — past data — and are continuing to collect



data.  The Canadian Ministry of Energy, Mines and




Resources has a large data collection system.  The




Ontario Water Resources Commission — for example, the



report says we need  50 to 70 stations in the Western




Basin.  The Ontario Water Resources Commission alone has



some 50 stations in the Western Basin.



          Certainly we need to collect more data, but



I think any monitoring program we have should carefully



consider what is now going on, so we don't  collect data




that already have  been collected by somebody else.  We




certainly need to  collect data, but let's not collect



unnecessary data.




          MR. STEIN:  Any comments or questions?



          MR. EAGLE:  Yes.  May I respond to that?



          MR. STEIN:  Yes.

-------
                                                      233
                      G. H.  Eagle
          MR.  EAGLE:   I  would submit that this committee
very carefully investigated all of this:  the various
sources of information,  the type of detailed information,
and so on, that they are talking about is not available,
is not currently being obtained,     I would just like to
apologize to the conferees  if we have bored you in any
way with this detailed proposed scientific analysis or
diagnosis of the so-called  illness of Lake Erie.  We
think that is extremely important, and I can assure you
that this information in this detail is not available,
and is not currently being obtained, and if you can show
us where it is, Mr. Lyon, I would very much appreciate
having it.
          MR. LYON:  All I  would suggest, Mr. Eagle, is
that if we have a report of this type that it ought to
include a description of what the other data collection
agencies — and there are many of them — what they are
doing.  This report does not include that.  My suggestion
would be that we — and we  do need to take a comprehensive
look at \vhat data should on a continuing basis be collected
but we ought to consider all of the other agencies that
are collecting it  and if they did  in fact  study all
of these things, as you suggest, and let's put it in the
report.  It is not in the report.
          MR. BAGLE:  Well, we didn't want to drag it out

-------
                                                        284
                       G. H. Eagle



for another couple of hoursf you know.



          You have already objected to this.  You objected




even before you heard the report.  This is what amazes me.




          MR. STEIN:  No one objected.  I raised the



question as chairman.  You know, as chairman, I raise




questions to get a consensus of the conferees.



          I think it is fair to"say here that we do have



very important information.  The reason I raised the



question — and I responded to several inquiries made to



me by several of the conferees as they were going through



this — this is a very detailed proposal.  Probably and



undoubtedly I think this should be considered very care-




fully by the conferees and probably by their technical staffs.




          The question that we have here, George, is just a



q u estion of if we are going to go ahead with a program



of this magnitude as a salesmanship operation to get this



thing going and considered.  The question is whether we



go through all of the details of the report now, when




they first have seen this, or with such detailed comments




where we have metes and bounds of where sampling stations



should be, or precisely whether we get alkalinity or phos-



phate, etc.  I would think that all of the conferees would




probably want to have their technical staffs examine this



in some detail before they make a commitment.