PROCEEDINGS
ILLINOIS
THIRD SESSION
RECONVENED IN
WORKSHOP SESSIONS
September 28, 29, 3O,
^October 1,2, 197O.
Chicago, Illinois
Vol. 4,
Pollution of Lake Michigan
and Its Tributary Basin
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR . . . FEDERAL WATER QUALITY ADMINISTRATION
-------
WORKSHOP SESSION FOR THE THIRD SESSION OF
THE CONFERENCE IN THE MATTER OF POLLUTION
OF LAKE MICHIGAN AND ITS TRIBUTARY BASIN
IN THE STATES OF WISCONSIN, ILLINOIS,
INDIANA, AND MICHIGAN VOLUME IV
Bal Tabarin Room
Sherman House
Chicago, Illinois
October 1, 1970
-------
11
Page
John R. Brough 1392
John T. Dunn 1407
Winfred L. Ettesvold 1419
Philip F. Gustafson 1456
Ewald L. Moerke, Jr. 1491
H. W. Poston 1515
James C. Vaughn 1529
Jacob D. Dumelle 1594
Frank Haragody 1605
Raymond E. Anderson (presented by Paul A. Kuhn) 1643
David Schwarz 1559
Charles F. Riefstahl 1704
Byrd F. Parmelle 1712
Virginia F. Hubbard 1715
Russell C. Mallatt 1716
-------
Ill
Workshop Session for the Third Session of the
Conference in the Matter of Pollution of Lake Michigan and
Its Tributary Basin, in the States of Wisconsin, Illinois,
Indiana, and Michigan, held in the Bal Tabarin Room of the
Sherman House, Chicago, Illinois, on Thursday, October 1,
1970, at 9:00 a.m.
PRESIDING:
MURRAY STEIN, Assistant Commissioner for
Enforcement and Standards Compliance,
Federal Water Quality Administration, U.S.
Department of the Interior, Washington, D.C.
CONFEREES:
CLARENCE W. KLASSEN, Director, Illinois
Environmental Protection Agency, Springfield,
Illinois.
BLUCHER A. POOLE, Technical Secretary, Stream
Pollution Control Board, Indiana State Board
of Health, Indianapolis, Indiana.
PERRY E. MILLER, Assistant Director, Stream
Pollution Control Board, Indiana State Board
of Health, Indianapolis, Indiana.
-------
IV
CONFEREES (Continued):
RALPH W. PURDY, Executive Secretary, Michigan
Water Resources Commission, Lansing, Michigan.
THOMAS J. FRANCOS, Administrator, Division
of Environmental Protection, Wisconsin
Department of Natural Resources, Madison,
Wisconsin.
FRANCIS T. MAYO, Regional Director, Federal
Water Quality Administration, U.S. Department
of Interior, Chicago, Illinois.
ALTERNATE CONFEREES:
RICHARD NELLE, State Sanitary Engineer,
Illinois Environmental Protection Association,
Springfield, Illinois.
DAVID P. CURRIE, Chairman, Illinois Pollution
Control Board, Chicago, Illinois.
CARLOS FETTEROLF, Supervisor, Water Quality
Standards Appraisal, Michigan Water Resources
Commission, Lansing, Michigan.
DONALD J. MACKIE, Assistant Secretary,
Division of Environmental Protection,
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources,
Madison, Wisconsin.
-------
ALTERNATE CONFEREES (Continued):
JEROME McKERSIE, Acting Chief, Water Quality
Evaluation Section, Division of Environmental
Protection, Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources, Madison, Wisconsin.
ROBERT P. HARTLEY, Director, Office of
Enforcement and Cooperative Programs, Federal
Water Quality Administration, U.S. Department
of Interior, Chicago, Illinois.
PARTICIPANTS:
John R. Brough, Director, Air and Water Control,
Inland Steel Company, East Chicago, Illinois.
John T. Dunn, Pollution Control Engineer,
Bethlehem Steel Corporation, Chesterton, Indiana.
"Winfred L. Ettesvold, Chairman, Michigan Grand
River Watershed Council, Lansing, Michigan.
Philio F. Gustafson, Coordinator, Argonne Great
Lakes Research Program, Argonne National Laboratory,
Argonne, Illinois.
Ewald L. Moerke, Jr., Attorney, Milwaukee,
'Wisconsin,
-------
vi
PARTICIPANTS (Continued):
Chester Grobschmidt, Mayor, South Milwaukee,
Wisconsin.
H. W. Poston, Commissioner, Department of
Environmental Control, Chicago, Illinois.
James C. Vaughn, Engineer of Water Purification,
Chicago, Illinois.
Benjamin F. Willey, Director, Water Purification
Laboratory, Chicago, Illinois.
Jacob D. Dumelle, Member, Illinois Pollution
Control Board, Chicago, Illinois.
Robert V. Bowden, Sanitary Engineer, Federal
Water Quality Administration, Chicago, Illinois.
Frank Harangody, Mayor, Whiting, Indiana.
Raymond E. Anderson, General Manager, North Shore
Sanitary District, Waukegan Sewage Treatment Plant,
Waukegan, Illinois (by Paul A. Kuhn).
David Schwarz, Director, Corporate Environmental
Control, Abbott Laboratories, North Chicago, Illinois.
Charles F. Riefstahl, Skokie, Illinois.
Byrd F. Parmelee, Sales Engineer, Technicon.
Industrial Systems, Tarrytown, New York.
Virginia F. Hubbard, City Clerk, Petoskey,
Michigan.
Russell C. Mallatt, Lake Michigan Thermal Study
Committee,
-------
1391
Murray Stein
PROCEEDINGS
MR. STEIN: Let's reconvene and start with Mr.
John R. Brough's statement.
May I ask the conferees if they see anyone coming
in who they want to put on, who is ready to make statements
to let the Chair know and we will get these statements
moving as rapidly as we can. I know a lot of people have
indicated they wanted to make statements.
Our original announcement was that the meeting
was to start at 9:30. The municipal and industrial people
may not have been here late last night when we announced
we were going to reconvene at 9:00, so I suspect that they
may be in here later.
Now, again, in the field of water pollution
control, I think this is really an historic occasion this
morning, and I guess we don't pause in our business for
these historical occasions, but today is the day when the
gentleman on my right, Mr. Perry Miller, takes over as
Executive Secretary of the Indiana Commission, Since
I have been in the business — and this has been a long
time — we have been dealing with Blucher Poole, and this
is a very, very significant personnel change, and I might
say that I have known Mr. Miller about the same time as
-------
1392
J. R. Brough
we all have and, Perry, congratulations,. I think the
best indication is the way Perry is spending his first
day in office and that is working on one of the most
difficult problems we have. Thank you very much.
Mr. Brough.
STATEMENT OF JOHN R. BROUGH, DIRECTOR
OF AIR AND WATER CONTROL, INLAND STEEL
COMPANY, EAST CHICAGO, INDIANA
MR. BROUGH: Thank you, Mr, Stein.
Mr. Chairman, honored conferees, ladies and
gentlemen. I am John R. Brough, Director of Air and Water
Control for Inland Steel Company.
Inland Steel Company has a vital interest in the
protection of Lake Michigan for a variety of uses, including
swimming, boating, fishing, and public water supply. We
recognize our responsibility to do our part in preserving
the lake for these uses by protecting the lake from damage
which may be caused by the use of the lake for industrial
processing, cooling, and transportation.
Certainly the use of the lake for recreation,
commercial fishing, and public water supply is in the
public interest. The industrial use of Lake Michigan is
-------
1393
J. R. Brough
also in the public interest.
The proposal of the PWQA to prohibit any
discharge to the lake which is more than 1 degree above
ambient would, in its effect, prohibit the use of Lake
Michigan water for industrial purposes, for the only way
to comply with such a restriction is to discharge no
water to the lake.
I agree with the following statement contained
in the Fish and Wildlife Service publication, "Physical
and Ecological Effects of Waste Heat on Lake Michigan."
"Everyone concerned with the problem agrees
that not enough is known about the ecological effects
of massive heated effluents and that a great deal of
research is needed on this problem. Unfortunately, the
information is needed now. Since it is not available
however, interim standards must be set for Lake Michigan
on the basis of existing knowledge."
I do not agree, however, that it is necessary
to establish standards that are so restrictive that they
prohibit the use of the lake for all uses other than
aquatic life, recreation, and public water supply.
The arguments for no significant heat additions
contained in the Pish and Wildlife Service publication
are heavily dependent upon a projection of waste heat
-------
1394
J. R. Brough
input into the lake in the year 2000. The predicted level
of waste heat 30 years from now cannot logically justify
the elimination of effluents which have long existed
without any known adverse effects due to heat.
The projection of waste heat discharges for
the steel industry in the next 30 years contained in the
Pish and Wildlife publication is inconsistent with our
recent experience at Inland. New steelmaking processes,
as well as processes for converting molten steel into
solid semi-finished products, require far less water
than the older processes which they replace. As a result,
additions in steelmaking and steelrolling facilities
which have been made in our plant since 1966 have not
resulted in any increase in the quantity of waste heat
discharged.
The publication on "Physical and Ecological
Effects" indicates that even though present and
projected waste heat discharges have a small Impact upon
the average temperature of the lake as a whole, there
is a great impact from heated effluents in the beachwater
zone. If this were true, then surely it would be
apparent at the Inland Steel Company main water intake.
This intake receives water from the surface adjacent to
-------
1395
J. R. Brough
the plant in that portion of the lake classified as
the beachwater zone. To the west of this intake Is the
Indiana Harbor Ship Canal which undoubtedly carries a
significant portion of the waste heat entering the lake
from Indiana. Further west, but still within 6 miles, are
heated effluent discharges from oil refineries, chemical
plants, powerplants, and steel mills. To the east,
within 6 miles, is a large powerplant as well as a
large steel plant and other plants which discharge heated
effluents. For many years, we have recorded the
temperature every 8 hours at this intake. We have retained
these records for several of the past 36 years. In
figure 1 (See P. 1395), the average monthly temperatures
of our intake water for the year 1969 are plotted together
with the same data for 1939. In figure 2 (See P. 1396),
the monthly maximum and minimum temperatures recorded
in these years are plotted.
You will note from figure 2 that the maximum
temperature measured at Inland's main intake did not
exceed the maximum temperature of 82 degrees which
the Fish and Wildlife publication indicates may be
expected from natural forces in inshore water.
You will note from these figures that in 30
years there has been no noticeable change in temperature
-------
1396
-------
1397
z <
UJ
13 m
a u
a z
D x
o°
-------
1398
J. R. Brough
patterns even though the growth rate in waste heat
additions in this area was probably as great during the
past 30 years as has been projected for the entire lake
in the next 30 years. These data appear to be in conflict
with the assumption made by the Pish and Wildlife
publication that waste heat is retained in the beachwater
zone.
As I said before, I agree that a great deal of
research is needed in order to enable a better understanding
of the ecological effects of massive heated effluents.
I agree that interim standards must be set for Lake
Michigan on the basis of existing knowledge.
Existing knowledge does not indicate measurable
impact upon water quality or the general aquatic life of
Lake Michigan from the existing discharges of heated
effluents; and, therefore, does not indicate that
prohibition of present and planned additional discharges
will be beneficial.
Existing knowledge does indicate that there
are many known causes of pollution of the lake which
are correctable with known technology. There are
many opportunities for expenditure of funds for
furthering the cause of pollution abatement which do
have measurable benefit. We should direct our resources
-------
1399
J. R. Brough
to those areas which we know will produce benefits and
continue our research and study to establish an
intelligent plan for the regulation of lake water uses
including its use for receiving waste heat.
I suggest that a technical committee be
established to evaluate existing knowledge with regard
to the effects of heated discharges and to recommend
reasonable interim standards which will assure the
preservation of the lake for all legitimate uses. The
technical committee should include competent technical
personnel representing a broad range of water users
and interested citizens' groups.
Thank you, Mr. Stein.
-------
1400
J. R. Brough
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Brough.
Are there any comments or questions?
Mr. Brough, do you really believe that if we
establish the technical committee now — let*s suppose
we are going: for this — and adopted your
suggestion on interim requirements, that a technical com-
mittee would be able to give us any more information than
we are adducing at this workshop?
MR. BROUGH: Mr. Stein, you have a great deal of
information except that you have this information, as I
see it, represented at widely differing positions. I am
not suggesting that this conference isn't capable of
sifting this information and of reaching a reasonable
position. However, I think their efforts might be
facilitated if you did have this committee get together
who represented a broad range of interest and who could
then make recommendations which would assist you in this
effort.
The idea for this, I think, came from the 1965
conference on Lake Michigan between Illinois and Indiana
and the Federal Government. A technical committee was
used at that time to recommend standards, and these stan-
dards were adopted by the States of Illinois and the State
of Indiana. They were approved by the Federal Government,
-------
1401
J. R. Brough
and I have heard of no challenge to these standards with
the exception of the one, and that is the one pertaining to
temperature criteria which is under challenge today.
MR. STEIN: Mr. Brough, I think you have raised
a point, a very interesting point. As you know, I have
pushed that technical committee. As a matter of fact, I
was chairman of the panel that was responsible for appoint-
ing that committee, encouraged and made the funds available
•for them for the secretarial and other travel services,
clerical services, and was instrumental in getting the
report published, etc.
But here was one difference, and this is an
essential difference. In order to get a committee that
you say we should have, we have to have a real support in
working at least on some basic assumptions by the govern-
mental agencies, municipalities, and industries involved.
I think the governmental agencies all agreed
there was a problem on pollution of Lake Michigan. I
think the reason we are at this meeting is we — at least
the governmental agencies agree that there is a problem
possibly of heat coming into the lake; and the municipali-
ties agreed there was a problem before we set up the
technical committee, and the two major industries con-
cerned — the oil and the steel industry — both agreed
-------
1402
J. R. Brough
there was a problem. They never contended that they
weren't contributing a pollutant into the lake. They
never suggested the material they were putting there was
not causing harm.
However, as I understood the power companies'
view they contend what they are doing is fine and we just
go ahead.
Now, I think we have to assume that if we are
going to set up a technical committee to set up a standard,
we have to get this on the assumption that all of the
parties to it agree there is a problem and something has
to be done. This is not meant to be criticism of the
power industry, because certainly under our form of govern-
ment and under our Constitution and under both State and
Federal lawrwe have every right to say that they are not
causing the problem^and they have every right to handle
this by the process of confrontation rather than adjust-
ment to the technical committee. But until we get that
I don't know that we have a basis for moving forward in
that direction.
MR. BROUGH: Yes, Mr. Stein, I am well aware of
the things that you pointed out particularly with regard
to the 1965 conference and your being the leader in getting
this technical committee formed and all that.
-------
1403
J. R. Brough
I am sure that I agree with you that if the power
companies won't participate in such an activity, then the
technical committee would serve no useful purpose. How-
ever, although I didn't hear all the testimony that was
given in the last three days, I did hear a great deal of
it, and it seemed to me that there was a middle ground
that represented a place that a compromise could be worked
out.
For example, the gentleman from the Fish and
Wildlife Service — and I don't recall who made the state-
ment — but they made the statement that the reason we
used the year 2000 for estimating the impact on Lake
Michigan is that we were sure that we could establish
that damage would be done in the year 2000.
So that would indicate to me that between now
and the year 2000 there might be some point at which you
might say that we had reached a level that we couldn't
tolerate.
Now, this may be true. I am not saying it is and
I don't want to misquote anybody. I do understand that
nearly everyone in the Fish and Wildlife Service said
that there would be some harm to some organisms, but I
didn't hear anyone from the Fish and Wildlife Service say
that there would be intolerable harm from one nuclear
-------
1404
J. R. Brough
power station or from one powerplant or anything like this.
What I am saying is that there is some point where
you would do substantial damage to the lake and some point
where you perhaps would do insignificant damage to the lake.
MR. STEIN: I am not arguing with you on the
theoretical position, but I think we have a very practical
position the way the conference proceeds to work it.
As you know, there is a little time differential
between here and Washington, and during lunch time and in
the morning we have other duties out here to perform. Just
this morning before I came down here I was on the phone with
the offices back East. We have cases involving power companies
and heated water. We are in court. The question was
whether we could work out a stipulation and an order to work
our way out of that.
The difficulty was we couldn't do that, as we are
here when we sit down with the power company. We had to
go to court first. Then the problem is that you don't
have the flexibility. Once you are in court, you don't
have the flexibility in the sense that we had in that
technical committee.
I don't know that we can get an agreement. But
if we are going to do this at all, it looks as if we are
going to have to get a precisely developed stipulation
that will be entered as an order by the Federal Court.
-------
140$
J. R. Brough
This, it seems to me, may be the hard way to do this.
But I, again, want to make this clear, that it takes two
parties at least to make the bargain. If anyone considered by
some governmental agency to be a polluter feels that way,
it is his absolute right and privilege to do this through
the judicial process.
Now, your judgment may be that we are not cir-
cumscribe, but I did not get the feeling from the presen-
tations I heard from the power industry that they were ready
to utilize any other process, other than this, to come to
this agreement.
Now, if we have to get the people together, I
think, Mr. Brough, your approach might be a feasible one.
Now, I am not sure we are going to get any more information
under this technical committee than we have here. But
we may get a feeling in dealing with people from say the
steel industry, the 6il industry — and I know Mr. Mallatt
had to leave but he was here with a statement yesterday —
and possibly the power industry, as well as the cities and
States here if we are going to take an interim step of what
we all might agree to.
But I think we have to have the major industries
ready to sit down, and recognize there is a problem that
-------
1406
J. R. Brough
we have to face in order to do that, because without that
assumption all we are going to have is a disagreement,
MR. BROUGH: Well, I think, Mr. Stein, in order
to get into that sort of thing, you have to have an agree-
ment among the parties involved that there is room for
compromise. If either one of the parties feels that we
have a position and we are going to stick with it — in
other words, we know the solution and we will compromise
with you as long as you come all of the way to my posi-
tion, then there isn't any point/. I agree with you
that the only way to settle this sort of issue is to go
to court.
MR. STEIN: I didn't see a scintilla of evidence
in the past several days that anyone had the position
that: We have the position and ours is right. If there
was an indication of that — maybe there were a few —
maybe Dr. Ayers indicated that — but I didn't see much
else.
Are there any other comments or questions?
If not, thank you very much, Mr. Brough.
MR. BROUGH: Thank you very much.
MR. STEIN: Is anyone else here now who is ready
to make a statement?
Yes, would you come up?
-------
1407
J. T. Dunn
STATEMENT OP JOHN T. DUNN, POLLUTION
CONTROL:ENGINEER, BETHLEHEM STEEL
CORPORATION, CHESTERTON, INDIANA
MR. DUNN: Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen,
my name is John Dunn. I am the Pollution Control
Engineer for the Burns Harbor Plant of the Bethlehem
Steel Corporation which is located in Chesterton, Indiana.
I am speaking on behalf of the corporation.
Since the start of construction of our Burns
Harbor Plant, Bethlehem Steel has been a leader in
providing the most advanced pollution control systems
available for the protection of Lake Michigan. The
corporation has cooperated with the regulatory agencies
to the fullest extent, both with respect to operational
matters and by supporting reasonable legislation in all
areas of environmental control. Over $50 million has
been spent to install pollution control facilities at
Burns Harbor and additional millions are being spent
yearly for the operation and maintenance of these systems.
This money was spent with a purpose, that is, it was
spent to protect our environment from the effects of
toxic or nuisance substances in the waste products g«n«r»t«d
-------
J. T. Dunn
in our steelmaking processes. The benefits to Lake
Michigan, as a result of proper treatment of these
wastes, is clearly defined and it was in this light that
Bethlehem Steel committed itself to such a comprehensive
control program.
Bethlehem Steel supports reasonable and
necessary standards to protect water quality; however, we
oppose the promulgation of what we believe to be needlessly
strjjtgent effluent temperature standards for the following
reasons:
1) The effect of thermal discharges is not
fully understood at this time.
2) Thermal pollution is not a problem in Lake
Michigan at this time nor is it expected to be within the
period of time that would be required to complete field
research into this matter.
3) The personnel, equipment and the technology
are available for comprehensive research into the
ecological effects of thermal discharges.
*0 The technology and equipment for the control
of thermal discharges are presently available, thus, if
research indicates the need for such control, reasonable
standards could be implemented in a short period of time.
5) It is unreasonable to demand immediate
-------
1409
J. T. Dunn
adoption of standards designed to adequately protect the
lake against a projected thermal input of 431 billion
B.t.u./hr. in the year 2000 when the 1980 projected heat
load is only 105 billion B.t.u./hr.
6) To attempt to halt eutrophication of Lake
Michigan by the control of temperature without proper
control of nutrients, which is now the more critical and
proven problem, is a backdoor approach that is destined
to fail regardless of the control of thermal discharges.
7) To spend the amount of money required to
achieve the stringent "interim standards" that are being
proposed without the proof of need or benefit would
detract money from other more beneficial pollution
control projects.
In the "white paper" entitled "Physical and
Ecological Effects of Waste Heat on Lake Michigan,"
released by the Department of the Interior, an attempt
is made to establish a case for Interim standards" for
thermal discharges to Lake Michigan. Yet the paper
notes on the first page that: "Not enough is known about
the ecological effects of massive heated effluents and
that a great deal of research is needed on this
problem." In addition, this paper extrapolates the heat
input to the year 2000 and uses this figure to predict the
-------
1410
J. T. Dunn
direst results in statements that are qualified with words
such as "may," "could," and "possibly." It then takes
these questionable predictions for the year 2000 and
implies that these consequences of thermal discharge
to Lake Michigan are just a few years away. Previous
statements by respected members of the academic community
before this conference indicate that the question of
thermal discharges and its effect on the ecology of Lake
Michigan is not as clearly defined as the Department of
the Interior would imply. To review these items would be
redundant, but it must be stressed that much work must be
done in this area before reasonable legislation can be
written.
Bethlehem Steel Corporation would propose the
following approach to the development of thermal dis-
charge standards:
1) Interim standards should be developed in
conjunction with the State regulatory agencies that
reflect the presently defined need for control.
2) A Federally-sponsored research project
investigating both the ecological effects of various
levels of temperature increase and the factors of heat
plume dispersion and other physical factors should be
initiated immediately. This work would be field-oriented
-------
J. T. Dunn
with a minimum dependence on mathematical models, etc.,
and should be conducted over a period of at least 2 years
to properly evaluate the effects of the winter freeze.
3) Maintain a policy of continuing field research
and evaluation of the acquired data to provide for the
periodic revision of thermal discharge standards if the
need is so indicated.
*J) Continue the established program to reduce
the nutrient discharge to the lake especially in the
area of municipal treatment plants.
It is only through a comprehensive program
such as this that the people of the Lake Michigan area
will receive the proper return on the dollars spent for
environmental control. It is a mistake to develop
regulations on the premise that the amount of money
available for pollution control is unlimited Just as it
is a mistake not to get the maximum benefit from the
dollars spent. To promulgate an Interim regulation1"that is,
in effect, as stringent a regulation as could be written
is totally Irresponsible in light of the existing
situation. I thank you for your consideration and hope
that this conference can lead to realistic legislation with
respect to this aspect of our environment.
-------
1412
J. T. Dunn
MR. STEIN: Thank you very much, Mr. Dunn.
Any comments?
As I sense it, I think your suggestion, at least
your recommendations are probably what the conferees may
want to very seriously consider. I am not sure we would
have any problem in a philosophic sense with any of your
approaches. Tou raise several points. One I am not sure
of — do you think that the suggestion of the Fish and
Wildlife people in their paper was the most stringent
regulation that could be written? I don't think they would
be the most rigid ones if I were writing them. How about
a completely closed system, no discharge?
MR. DUNN: In effect, a thermal heat input is
a closed system. I don't see —
MR. STEIN: Well, I don't know that that could
be equated. But if you wanted to be more stringent you
just would put that out as a closed system.
MR. DUNN: Well, that may be, but we were
referring strictly to the thermal aspect of the thing.
MR, STEIN: Right, and I am not sure, as I
pointed out, that that isn't an aspect which we may not
have to consider.
But there is one other question that you raise
-------
1413
J, T. Dunn
here, I would like to go over this with you because on
page 2 of your report, No. 6, you say — and I read this:
"To attempt to halt eutrophication of Lake Michigan by
the control of temperature without proper control of
nutrients, which is now the more critical and proven
problem, is a back door approach that is destined to fail
regardless of the control of thermal discharges."
Then you refer to this again. I remember when
we first embarked on that program and we had a conference
such as this. There were the same kinds of allegations
and there was improvement, then, just as we are getting
now on heat, because you get that all of the time.
The question I have: We have a program for re-
duction of phosphates on an #0 percent basis, on a State-
wide basis. Now, do you believe — are you implying that
this isn't enough, we have got to do some more on nutrients
and we have to put extra restrictions on cities?
MR. DUNN: The reason this was put in the paper
was because the paper tends to imply that it is easier to
control the heat than it is to control the nutrients, and
maybe we should not place as much stress on the nutrients.
If there are two sides to the see-saw let's attack one
side. We think it has to be a balanced approach.
I can't say from my position that 80 percent is
-------
1414
J• T. Dunn
or is not enough. What we are trying to bring out here is
that it has to be a whole attack on the thing,
MR. STEIN: I understand that, but we do have a
program and a pretty significant program, a new one and a
pretty drastic one for the cities to put in phosphate
control.
Now, as one from industry are you suggesting
that we take another look at our municipal control program
and probably put more restrictive requirements on the
cities?
MR. DUNN: No, I am not saying that. This wasn't
the intent. The intent here was to say -- or at least
referring back to the "white paper," was that — the "white
paper" attacks it from the point of view that there are
two problems: nutrients and temperature. It gives no
credit for the fact that we are in a nutrient control
program, and it tends to gloss over the fact that we are in
this nutrient control program, and in this area in 5 or 10
years we hope to be in a lot better position than we are
now. This is the one thing we were intending to bring out
here,
MR. STEIN: I am glad to have that clarified
because the way it was written one would think you were
implying that the industry was trying to turn it toward
the municipalities so we would let up on the industry.
-------
1415
J, T. Dunn
MR, DUNN: No, but at the same time we do think
that the municipalities are the biggest source of nutrients.
MR. STEIN: Right.
MR. DUNN: We don't mean to be beating them
with a club.
MR. STEIN: As I say, we all recognize the deficiency
in our program of not really coming to grips with the
nutrients going into the water from municipalities.
Mr. Mayo.
MR. MAYO: Mr. Dunn, Mr. Lee of Commonwealth
Edison, I think, in substance suggested that if we permit
power companies to go ahead with the plants, at least
those presently under construction, that the power industry
would go along with something in the form of "a moratorium",
I suppose might be a good word, with respect to any additional
new plants and related waste heat discharges for some reason-
able period of study.
Do you have any idea how the steel industry or
any of the other industrial people would feel about a
so-called moratorium on heated waste discharges into Lake
Michigan for a period of serveral years perhaps?
MR. DUNN: Well, first let me say that I do not
-------
1416
J. T. Dunn
speak for the industry in general. Our position is kind
of particular. We are in kind of a crossfire in that we
don't discharge all of our waste directly to Lake Michigan;
we do discharge some of our waste to the Little Calumet
River which, of course, runs into Burns Ditch and then
into Lake Michigan.
Mr. Miller is aware of the problems that we
are having there where we are talking about bringing
relatively cold water from Lake Michigan at certain times
of the year, running it through our system and discharging
it to the Sound, to the Little Calumet River.
So what happens here is that the Department of
Natural Resources in Indiana is attempting to control the
thermal shock to the stream both from high temperature and
low temperature, and here we are working toward the end
now of being able to discharge this effluent at a temper-
ature that is comparable with the conditions existing in
the Little Calumet River. So we may at times be attempt-
ing to hold the temperature of our effluent up, which is
what seemed to be in direct opposition to what we are
talking about here. But this situation exists, and the
thing is pretty complex. It is not a clearcut attack on
the thing. From our point of view, it would just really
be hard to say.
-------
1417
J. T. Dunn
The second thing is with respect to our dis-
charges, as opposed to the utilities, one, we do not
normally have as large a temperature pickup through our
cooling systems. Quite often in, say, furnace cooling
application we may have no more than a l--degree rise across
the furnace. Some application some places it is higher.
We do generate up to 80 megawatts in the plant now and we
also have high pressure turbines that we use for supplying
power to the blast furnace so we do have some conditioning
application. But a lot of our applications are strictly
once-through cooling on a rather low temperature rise
across the cooling member.
As far as waging a moratorium on this, I really
don't know. I just couldn't say offhand. It would require
a great deal of studies, and I think as a result of the
increased activity in this area, we are surely looking at
everything with this in mind, but I could not make a state-
ment of corporate policy on this.
MR. STEIN: Are there any other comments and
questions?
Any public questions?
If not, thank you very much.
May we have Winfred Ettesvold? Mr. Ettesvold,
before you begin, I would like to remind you that we
-------
W. Ettesvold
try to emphasize thermal application here, and while we
don't want to cut anyone off, our main thrust at this
workshop session is to consider the question of thermal
pollution•
MR. ETTESVOLD: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I am afraid that this statement which I have,
which is fairly brief, is on the general subject of
pollution rather than specifically on thermal pollution,
MR. STEIN: All right.
Continue.
-------
1419
W. L. Ettesvold
STATEMENT OP WINPRED L. ETTESVOLD,
CHAIRMAN, MICHIGAN GRAND RIVER
WATERSHED COUNCIL, LANSING, MICHIGAN
MR. ETTESVOLD: I am Winfred Ettesvold.
My profession is as Director of Environmental Health
of the Kent County Health Department, Grand Rapids,
Michigan. I also serve as chairman of the Grand River
Watershed Council, and I appreciate the opportunity
to make a brief statement to the assembled conferees
about what we believe to be a very unique organization
which is attempting to bring the local units of government
together on this broad problem of pollution.
The Michigan Grand River Watershed Council is
a statutory entity composed of, and representing the local
government units in the Grand River basin. According
to the Local River Management Act, its functions are:
"To enable local units of government to cooperate in
planning and carrying out a coordinated water management
program in the watershed."
The Watershed Council is comprised of the
grassroot elements of the communities including townships,
villages, cities and counties. Through the Council,
-------
1420
W. L. Ettesvold
the representatives have the opportunity to become
involved in the planning aspects of a water management
program and to continue their involvement by assisting
the communities in the implementation of the programs.
The key role of the Council is to coordinate
the concerns and efforts of the communities to develop
programs on a regional basis. This is particularly
important to the million people in the basin because
of the multiplicity of governmental units. In an area
exceeding 5,500 square miles there are 19 counties, 29
cities, 43 villages and 158 townships that have all or
part of their respective areas in the Grand River basin.
The abatement of water pollution is a police
power of the State. However, the State of Michigan
strongly endorses the right of home rule by the
communities, and encourages them to exercise police powers
at the local level. The State further encourages local
government to provide preventive measures before the
necessity of enforcement occurs.
The Grand River Watershed Council is actively
involved in assisting local communities in the
development of pollution abatement programs. The
following programs demonstrate the emphasis on
regional promotion and development of water and land
-------
W. L. Ettesvold
management programs, to enhance and preserve the quality
of the water.
First is the stream monitoring program.
A major emphasis of the Watershed Council has
been the implementation of a systematic stream
monitoring program. This program started in June 1968.
Today the following communities are voluntarily working
together in this effort: Grand Haven, Coopersville,
Grandville, Grand Rapids, Lowell, Ionia, Portland, Grand
Ledge, Lansing, East Lansing, Eaton Rapids, Jackson,
Hastings, Nashville, Belding.
The Center of Environmental Studies, Jackson
Community College is also participating in the program
by testing specific locations on the streams and lakes
in Jackson County. Approximately one hundred stations
are sampled monthly by the waste water treatment plant
technicians. The. basic parameter at all stations
include temperature, dissolved oxygen, biochemical
oxygen demand, pH and total conforms. In addition
to the basic parameters, the larger cities also test for
one or more of the following: chlorides, total phosphate
ortho phosphate, total soluble phosphate, total chromium,
cyanide, nickel, ammonia nitrogen, copper, zinc and
suspended solids.
-------
1422
W. L. Ettesvold
I might add in addition to my prepared statement
that the work that we have accomplished through the Grand
River Watershed Council and this procedure has resulted
in a much more uniform approach on the part of the
laboratory technicians at various wastewater treatment
plants. We feel that this has been a very significant
contribution to developing a pattern for the entire river.
In addition to the cooperative efforts of the
local governmental units, the Institute of Water Research,
Michigan State University, performs all data card punching
for storing the data in the Storet computer, available
through the services of the Federal Water Quality
Administration. Retrieval and analysis assistance is
provided by the Water Resources Commission, Michigan
Department of Natural Resources.
Some of the benefits of the stream monitoring
program include: standard methods for testing,
centralized storage of data, convenient retrieval of
data, and a regional analysis of the water quality
characteristics.
It is becoming apparent a more intensive
program is necessary to assure that the water quality
standards of the State are being satisfied. This can be
accomplished through expansion of the present program by
-------
1423
W. L. Ettesvold
Increasing the number of parameters being tested
and the frequency of these tests, or to consider a more
sophisticated testing program with automatic sensoring
units connected to a centralized storage center such as
has been developed by the Ohio River Sanitary Commission,
The Watershed Council is endeavoring to expand
its monitoring program by encouraging other local units
to participate. The attached paper "Monitoring Streams
and Lakes" has been developed to show the value of the
program and the possibilities for involvement.
(The paper above referred to follows in its
entirety.)
-------
MONITORING STREAMS AND LAKES
MICHIGAN GRAND RIVER WATERSHED COUNCIL
609 Prudden Building
Lansing, Michigan H8933
JOHN H. KENNAUGH
Executive Secretary
-------
1*125
INDEX
Page
INTRODUCTION ............................................ 1
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS ................................. 2
STREAM AND LAKE MONITORING .............................. 3
WATER PARAMETERS
AUTOMATIC TESTING UNITS ................................. 6
DATA STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL .............................. 6
INFORMATION ............................................. 7
TABLE I ................................................. 8
BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................ 9
-------
1426
MONITORING STREAMS AND LAKES
INTBODUCTION
Availability of water is a major problem in many parts of the country; but
in Michigan, water ^pollution is the critical issue. Large quantities of water
seem to be our richest resource. However, with the limitation of approximately
thirty (30) inches of precipitation each year, and the increasing and multiple
demands on this resource, water quality controls become necessary to preserve
its continued use.
Domestic demands on water have increased from five (5) gallons per person per day
in 1900 compared to one hundred fifty (150) gallons .per person per day in I960.
During this same period, the population has increased three (3) fold. Between
I960 and 2000, the population is projected to double in numbers and the water
demand will triple. During the same period, the recreational demand on the water
resources will also triple. These geometric trends are signals that effective
management programs to preserve and develop our water resources are essential to
satisfy our own foreseeable needs and the needs of future generations.
Assured water quality is essential to long range planning of water use, both
for the public and private sectors. Adoption and enforcement of water quality
standards are the key factors to provide this assurance. Enforcement of water
quality ctandards can be best approached with a continuous surveillance of the
streams and lakes to observe trends that may occur as a result of increasing
intensified use and changing demands on the water resource.
Water quality preservation is not simply a local issue, but rather, is a
Regional concern including all the area within the hydrologic boundary of the
river basin.
-------
1427
-2-
It becomes essential for the multiple governments in the basin including counties,
cities, villages and townships to work with the state in a coordinated and
continuous program.
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
STATE PROGRAM - Preservation and enhancement of the water resources results
from adoption and effective enforcement of water quality standards. Water
quality standards for all surface waters of the state were established by the
Michigan Water Resources Commission for the following uses:'
Water Supply
Domestic
Industrial
Recreation
Total Body Contact
Partial Body Contact
Fish, Wildlife and Other Aquatic Life
Agricultural Use
Commercial and Other Uses
For each of these uses,-/'.eleven (ll) standards (parameters) were established to
designate the maximum and/or minimum level of acceptance. These parameters are:
Coliform
Dissolved Oxygen
Suspended, Colloidal & Settleable Materials
Residues
Toxics & Deleterious Substances
Total Dissolved Solids
Nutrients
Tasfee& Odor Producing Substances
Temperature
Hydrogen Ion
Radioactive Materials
-------
1428
-3-
The water use designations with the standards for each were then applied to all
the surface waters of the state.
LOCAL PROGRAM - Local governmental units may also adopt water quality regulations
to protect the receiving waters in their area providing the standards are equal
or higher than the standards adopted by the State.
The City of Grand Rapids has adopted an ordinance to regulate the discharge of
wastes into sanitary and combined sewers. Section 2.66 identifies fifteen (15)
categories of wastes that are being regulated. One of these sections specifics
maximum quantities of discharge for zinc, chromium, cadmium, copper, cyanide,
nickel and phenol.
Through this type of local effort the water resources within the enforcement area
are protected, the downstream waters are enhanced, and the need for state agency
enforcement has been minimized.
STREAM AND LAKE MONITORING
PURPOSE - Monitoring the water resources is an action program involving a systema-
tic surveillance of the water characteristics to observe conditions and detect
changes. The program should be continuous and each phase of the program should
be conducted in a consistant manner in order to develop valid conclusions.
PROCEDURES - Standard procedures are eseential to effective monitoring. Location,
frequency and methods of sampling are key elements to a monitoring program.
Documentation of the sampling site, and the water quality data is important. When
the documentation is accomplished through the computerized program sponsored by the
Federal Water Quality Administration, convenient and efficient retrieval is possible
for review and analysis.
-------
1429
-k-
The data collected has value only if it is used. Following the retrieval,
review and analysis, periodic reports to the governmental units and the general
public are necessary to assure them that the water quality is consistent with
the standards that have been adopted. If the standards are not being satisfied,
each governmental unit will need to determine what type of water and/or land
management programs are needed to upgrade the quality of the water.
WATER PARAMETERS
The Storet computer program operated under the auspices of the Federal Water
Quality Administration identifies over seven hundred (?00) parameters for water
analysis. It is not practical, or possible for a single governmental unit to
test for each of these parameters. Less than five per cent (5$) of these para-
meters are used to study the characteristics of surface waters and many communities
have the capability to test only about one per cent
The Grand River Basin Stream Monitoring Program will be used as a basis for
suggesting the parameters that can be tested by communities. The parameters will
be grouped according to standard equipment and capability of the community de-
pending on its respective physical and technical resources.
GROUP 1^ - Communities that do not have testing laboratories, or organizations
that would like to participate in a continuous monitoring program, can acquire
portable testing equipment to test basin parameters of a stream or lake. Portable
tcrt lute can be purchased to examine various combinations of parameter:' . The
Hach Chemical Company has a Fish and Stream Kit thai wdll tesU for carbon dioxide
p), dissolved oxygen (DO), free and total acidity, phenol phthale in and total
-------
1430
-5-
alkalinity, hardness and hydrogen ion (pH). The equipment is contained in a
solid oak carrying case (12 x 6 x 8), weighs 8 Ibs. and costs about fifty dollars
($50). These tests can be incorporated in a monitoring program providing it
follows the standard operating procedures. The tests have accuracy limitations
but they can be used in the Storet Computer Program with qualifications.
GROUP II - Fourteen (lU) governmental units in the Grand River Basin are partici-
pating in the stream monitoring program. The basic parameters tested by these
units are temperature (F ), dissolved oxygen (DO), biochemical oxygen demand
(BOD), hydrogen Ion (pH) and one of the coliform (Coli) parameters. All governmental
units with a population exceeding 2,000 people, and discharging treated wastes
into the streams will also be testing for phosphate (PO^), by 1972 according to
the water quality enforcement program of the State.
GROUP III - Communities that provide secondary waste treatment or have testing
capabilities in their laboratories, include additional parameters in their
testing program. These tests are chloride (Cl), ammonia (NH^-N), nitrate
-N), residue and turbidity.
GROUP IV - Some laboratories are also able to test for toxic materials and heavy
netals. Parameters being tested in this category by Grand River Basin communities
arc cyanide (CN), chromium (Cr), copper (Cu), iron (Fe), nickel (Ni), and zinc
(Zn).
Table I lists all the parameters in their respective groupings for convenient
review.
-------
-8-
1433
TABLE I
PARAMETER CHECK LIST
FOR GOVERNMENTAL UNITS
PARAMETER
Carbon Dioxide (COo)
Dissolved Oxygen (BO)
Free Acidity
Total Acidity
Phenophthale in
Total Alkalinity
Hardness
Hydrogen Ion (pH)
Temperature (F°)
Bio-Chemic.al Oxygen Demand (BOD)
Coliform Imedendo
Coliform Les-Agar
Coliform MPN Conf .
Coliform Fecal
Coliform MPN Pres.
Chloride (Cl)
Turbidity
Residue Total
Residue Volatile
Ammonia (WHo-N)
Nitrate (N03-N)
Phosphate (POi/) Total
Phosphate (POlJ Soluble
Phosphate (PO^) Poly
Phosphate (POj.) Ortho
Cyanide (CN)
Chromium (Cr)
Chromium (Cr) Hex
Copper (Cu)
Iron (Fe) Total
Nickel (Ni)
Zinc (Zn)
CODE
00300
001+36
99^35
001+10
00900
ooi+oo
00011
00310
31501
31501+
31505
71205
0091+0
00700
00530
00535
00610
00620
00650
00653
00655
00660
00720
01030
01032
oioi+o
0101+5
01065
01090
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
GROUPS
II III
IV
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-------
-9-
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Comprehensive Water Resources Planning Study, Grand River Basin Coordinating
Committee, Box 1027, Detroit, Michigan.
2. Ordinance No. 68-66, City of Grand Rapids, Michigan.
3. Stream Monitoring Control Program, Michigan Grand River Watershed Council,
609 Prudden Building, Lansing, Michigan 1&933.
k. The Storage and Retrieval of Data for Water Quality Control, U. S. Department
of Interior, Federal Water Quality Administration, Washington, D. C. 202^2.
5. Use Designation Areas for Michigans ' Intra-state Water Quality Standards ,
Water Resources Commission, Department of Natural Resources, Lansing, Michigan
6. Water Analysis Catalogue, Hach Chemical Company, P. 0. Box 907, Ames, Iowa.
-------
W. L. Ettesvold
Soil Erosion Guidelines
One of the most critical pollution problems
of the Grand River and its tributaries is sedimentation
caused by soil erosion. An accelerated land treatment
program in rural and urban areas is essential. To this
date there is no governmental unit in the basin that
can claim it has an effective soil erosion control program.
The Watershed Council has accepted the leadership role
to encourage local governmental units to incorporate soil
erosion control measures in their local regulations.
A technical committee was created to develop an informational
booklet for public officials and the general public. The
booklet "Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Program"
is attached as a part of this report.
(The paper above referred to follows in its
entirety.)
-------
MICHIGAN
GRAND RIVER
WATERSHED
COUNCIL
SOIL EROSION &
SEDIMENTATION
Control Program
609 PRUDDEN BUILDING • LANSING, MICHIGAN 48933 • PHONE: 517 489-0552
-------
14:?
CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION
The Problem, Source and Cause of Erosion, The Result, The Future,
What We Can Do 3
II. STATEMENT OF POLICY 4
III. SEDIMENT DAMAGE -THE PRICE WE PAY
Crops and Cropland Suffer, - Road, Railroad and River Channels are
Silted, Floods are more Frequent, Sediment Hurts Recreation and
Public Health, Sediment is a National Problem 4 - 5
IV. WHERE DOES SEDIMENT COME FROM
Farmland, River Banks, Urbanization 6
V. WHAT WE CAN DO
What Builders Can Do, Stabilize Steam Channels, Farm the Conservation
Way, Control Other Sediment Sources 7
VI. BASIC PRINCIPLES 8
VII. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL MEASURES
Controlling Quantity of Run-off, Controlling Ground
Area Subject to Erosion, Controlling Slope of Ground 9-11
VIII. MODEL SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL RESOLUTION 15
IX. INFORMATIONAL AND EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS 15
X. TECHNICAL REFERENCES AND SOURCES 16
OTHER WATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS BY MICHIGAN GRAND
RIVER WATERSHED COUNCIL 16
MEMBERS, SOIL EROSION CONTROL COMMITTEE
James Biener Michigan Grand River Watershed Council
Richard Drullmger Soil Conservation Service
Frank Evans Ingham County Road Commission
Raymond Guernsey City of Lansing
Robert Halstead Soil Conservation Service
John H. Kennaugh Michigan Grand River Watershed Council
Paul Koch Soil Conservation Service
A. E Matthews Michigan State Highway Department
BillG Rowden Tn-County Regional Planning Commission
Palmer Skalland Soil Conservation Service
Ralph Swemberger Michigan Grand R iver Watershed Council
William Walsh Michigan Walter Resources Commission
"The fourteen So11 Conservation Districts in the Grand River Basin
are legal units of government charged to assist landowners in the
control of soil erosion and sedimentation problems. The districts
are committed to be of service to the people and communities of
the basin "
R G Hill
"Photos Courtesy of U S D A. Soil Conservation Service"
-------
1438
I. INTRODUCTION
The Problem
It seems incredible that Michigan, the Water Wonderland
State, should have a water problem. To some extent the
problem is one of quantity,—but more importantly, one
of quality. Michigan citizens are becoming sensitive to
the fact that pollution in some of our lakes and streams
is limiting the human use and enjoyment of our most
valuable resource. It is a serious problem. It deserves our
careful consideration.
Pollution by sewage and human waste, industrial waste,
chemicals and toxic materials are sources which are
readily discernable to the average citizen. What is
probably less understood is the fact that soil erosion and
sedimentation contribute to, and are equally a part of
the pollution problem. And indeed, it is so recognized
by experts.
The Michigan Water Resources Commission classify
suspended, colloidal or settleable material as a pollutant
and in their "Water Quality Standards for 'Michigan
Waters" state that such materials "shall not be present in
sufficient concentration to be objectionable or to
interfere with normal treatment processes."
Source and Causes of Erosion
Farms and rural areas, while large in acreage, open in
character and potentially vulnerable to erosion, do not
pose as great a problem as the expanding urban areas.
There are two significant reasons rural erosion is less
critical than urban erosion. Firstly, the private farmer or
land holder has an economic interest in the proper
management of his own land. Secondly, there are public
agencies (Soil Conservation Service of the U.S.D.A.,
Michigan Department of Natural Resources, Soil Con-
servation Districts, State Soil Conservation Committee,
Michigan Department of Agriculture, etc.) who care for
and are responsible for good management of open public
lands. For many years these agencies have offered their
technical skills and expertise to private farmers. There is
common interest in a common cause by people who care.
No such situation exists in our exploding urban areas.
The private capital which makes a city grow has but little
regard for the natural resources it destroys. At the same
time, regrettable to say, our public official until now has
displayed a similar lack of interest, despite a high degree
of organization existing in many of our forms of munici-
pal and county governments.
The Result
Massive urbanization creates untold damage through soil
erosion and sedimentation. The deposition of sediment
obstructs sewers and ditches, silts valley land and
reduces the capacities of our streams and lakes. It blocks
and eventually closes navigation channels, limits
recreational opportunities and contributes greatly to the
general unsightliness of our streams.
The Future
The rapid land use transition from a tranquil setting to
that of a highly specialized urban atmosphere does not
augur well for the future. A glance at the land use trends
in the Grand River Basin shows that urbanization with
its exploitation of natural resources will continue at
accelerating rates.
1950 I960 1970
MICHIGAN LANO USE TRENDS
What We Can Do
Erosion and sediment control measures are relatively
simple and inexpensive. Conceived and developed within
the framework of the U.S.D A. Soil Conservation Service
with the technical assistance of the state agencies. Agri-
cultural Research Program and Cooperative Extension
Program of Michigan State University, the measures as
outlined in this report can be readily adapted to the
urbanizing areas of Michigan.
While the responsibility for controlling erosion lies
clearly with individual units of government, the Grand
River Watershed Council as an agency concerned with
water management within the Grand River Basin
proposes to coordinate erosion control on a regional
basis.
Responsible governmental officials within the Grand
River Basin are urged to review the material herein
presented and to follow through with an erosion control
program designed for their own particular area. The
Grand River Watershed Council and associated agencies
listed in this booklet stand ready to assist governmental
units in developing effective soil erosion control
programs.
-------
1439
II. STATEMENT OF POLICY
In view of the need for erosion and sediment control
measures, the attached model resolution (page 15) to be
adopted by individual units of government within the
Grand River Basin area states its support of the program
of the Grand River Watershed Council in providing a
regional soil erosion and sediment control program for
this part of the state.
III. SEDIMENT-DAMAGE-THE PRICE
WE PAY
Soil erosion affects everyone. But many city dwellers
give it little thought because it appears to them to be a
problem only for fai mers. Not so. And to illustrate, let's
take a close look at one of the results of soil
erosion—sediment or "silt."
flow
harmiana loses top soil.
Crops and Cropland Suffer
Some sediment affects the farmer directly and the city
dweller only indirectly. Rain and wind spread sediment
over farmland, not only destroying crops but also
making the land less suitable for crops. Drainage and
irrigation ditches quickly silt up. Stream channels clog
and soon swamp productive farmland. The result is that
more and more farmland is abandoned. Sediment
damage to farmland in this country adds up to many
millions of dollars every year.
Road, Railroads, and River Channels are Silted
You have probably seen road graders scraping out
roadside ditches. But did you realize that most of this
work would not be necessary if soil erosion was
controlled? Sediment fills ditches along roads and
railroads and plugs culverts; it clogs stream channels so
badly that some bridges have to be raised.
The sediment dredged each year from streams,
navigation channels, estuaries, and harbors is estimated
to exceed one-half billion cubic yards. The cost of
removing this sediment is tremendous. This cost is paid
for largely through Federal taxes.
Sediment damage to all our transportation facilities,
including roads, railroads, and navigation channels,
amounts to many millions of dollars every year.
Temporary erosion control measures during construction can
avoid damage like this.
-------
1440
Floods are More Frequent
More rivers are flooding more frequently each year
because stream channels are choking with sediment.
Also, many streams are carrying increasingly heavier
loads of sediment. In the Los Angeles area, flows from
newly burned-over hillsides consist of as much as 85
percent mud by volume and only 15 percent water.
So, in addition to the damage by f loodwater there is the
damage by sediment to streets, houses, machinery,
automobiles, sewer lines, and wells.
Sediment Hurts Recreation and
Public Health
Sediment greatly reduces the attraction of many lakes
and reservoirs for swimming, boating, fishing and other
water-based recreational activities.
It destroys the spawning beds of game fish, ruins their
eggs, and reduces their food supply. Fish eat the worms,
insect larvae, and other small aquatic animals that feed
on microscopic plants, but muddy water shades out
light, interfering with the growth of the microscopic
plants.
In many small streams, sediment fills the deep pools that
provide a refuge for fish during the dry season.
Most streams and lakes no longer have as many game fish
as they once had. Less desirable species, such as carp
that thrive in turbid waters are replacing the game fish.
An attempt is being made to implant game fish in the
Grand River, but results so far are inconclusive.
Sedimentation is a difficult obstacle to overcome.
Commercial fisheries also have been affected. In the
broad, shallow bays of western Lake Erie, fishing for
yellow perch, cisco and whitefish was an important
industry when clean, gravelly bottoms and abundant
vegetation favored spawning and early growth. Today,
sediment from nearby Ohio, Michigan and Indiana farms,
urbanizing areas and channel dredging have contributed
to the greatly reduced number of these fish.
Sediment is a National Problem
Thus it is apparent that sediment affects every citizen.
To every citizen it means higher taxes, railway fares,
electricity and water bills; higher food and clothing
prices; and more frequent requests for disaster funds.
Floods causes damage and inconvenience.
Sedimentation destroys recreational value.
_
Shopping plaza drainage causes bank erosion.
-------
IV. WHERE DOES SEDIMENT COME FROM
1441
FARMLAND
Erosion on farmlands in the Grand River Basin does not
pose as serious a problem as the urban areas.
Nevertheless, cultivated land is still a source of much
sediment. This erosion usually results from growing
crops on steep land, from straight-row farming areas
which should be contour-farmed or terraced, and from
too frequent cultivation of land that needs alternating
row crops and gress crops.
Pastures may be eroded due to overgrazing and farm
woodlands may be eroded due to over cutting.
URBANIZATION
By far the largest contributors to the problems of
erosion in the Grand River Basin are the rapidly
expanding urban areas. In the process of converting
farmland to highly developed urban areas, the land is
exposed to erosion hazards during the process of
construction.
Construction sites are highly susceptible to erosion.
Roadways, subdivisions, shopping centers and large
housing developments may keep an area bare and
vulnerable for one to three years. Trees and natural
vegetative cover along the riverbanks are frequently torn
up, and gouged out to permit installation of storm sewer
interceptors with no provisions for repairing the damage
or maintaining stability.
Contractors and builders have not been required to
provide erosion control measures in the performance of
their work. As a result, relatively small areas of land
under construction are causing massive erosion problems
affecting the entire area.
RIVERBANKS
The first white settlers in this country cleared the
bottom land along rivers. With no trees to offer
resistance, rivers and streams began to erode their banks
and to meander with a freedom never known before.
When the waters overflowed onto the flood plains, the
freshly plowed fields were easy marks for floodwater
erosion.
Wheat field could have been protected by strip cropping.
Urbanized areas create erosion hazards.
Storm sewer placed with no regard for erosion.
-------
144:
V. WHAT CAN WE DO?
Control Measures and Community Planning
Any disturbance of ground cover and soil will give
opportunity for erosion. Vegetation of any kind should
be left until just before construction begins, and only
the minimum area required for operations should be
disturbed at one time. Bare spots need to be covered as
soon as possible.
When extended periods of exposure are unavoidable,
temporary cover should be provided. Annual grasses,
small grains, or sod make a quick cover. Mulch, burlap,
and plastic also protect the soil.
Contour diversions can be used to intercept runoff and
channel it to waterways that lead it by means of
meanders or drop structures to safe outlets.
Some erosion is inevitable during periods of active dis-
turbance. Dams or basins can prevent sediment damage.
Communities—towns, townships, cities, and counties-
can help prevent erosion and sediment damage by plan-
ning the development of their land and water resources
and making their plans binding through zoning regula-
tions. Already many communities require that builders
and planners adhere to specific regulations in clearing an
area for building. Some require that urban planning be
based on a scientific soil survey.
Community land use plans need to suggest how private
and public improvements and land uses can be carried
out in the best interests of all the people.
Raw streambanks can be managed by sloping and shap-
ing, establishing vegetation, or the use of ro^k or other
stabliztng materials. Flood plains subject to scouring by
floodwater can be protected by grass or other means.
Erosion can be stopped by dams or drop structures.
Such structures usually require action by a group of
landowners. Downstream interests, dependent on sedi-
ment-free water, may assist with these structures as may
the State and Federal governments.
Contour farming, as compared to straight-row farming,
sharply reduces soil loss. Terracing does also. Experi-
ments have shown that terracing cropland will reduce
soil loss as much as 85 percent as compared to straight-
row farming. These concepts can also be used in com-
munity layout and development. Technical assistance is
available from the Soil Conservation Service through
locally organized soil and water conservation districts.
Controlling run-off in urbanizing area—seeding, sodding,ditchmg-
—paved flume
,-**•
-/.f?*.
Farming the conservation way—terracing, strip crops, contour
cultivation.
Controlling Other Sediment Sources
Many highway departments and railroads are finding it
pays to plan road cuts and fills so that erosion will be
minimal and, further, to protect them with grass, vines,
or shrubs.
Wind erosion can be controlled by such farming methods
as stubble mulching, improved cropping systems, wind
stripcropping, and shelterbelts. Severe "blow" areas may
need to be planted by trees or dune grasses.
-------
1443
VI. BASIC PRINCIPLES
The sediment control program for the urbanizing area will involve the following basic principles:
A. Sediment Control in the urbanizing area should be-
come a stated policy of the county government and
all concerned public agencies operating in or having
jurisdiction in the county. All departments and
divisions should cooperate in implementing the pro-
gram.
B. Sediment control provisions should be incorporated in
the planning stage for most effective application in
the construction stage of development.
C Competent technical personnel, workable procedures
and regulations, and enforcement are essential for
successful sediment control.
D. Practical combinations of the following technical
principles will provide effective sediment control
when skillfully planned and applied:
I.The smallest practical area of land should be
exposed at any one time during development.
2. When land is exposed during development, the
exposure should be kept to the shortest practical
period of time.
3. Temporary vegetation and/or mulching should be
used to protect critical areas exposed during
development
4. Sediment basins (debris basins, desilting basins, or
silt traps) should be installed and maintained to
remove sediment from run-off waters from land
undergoing development.
5. Provisions should be made to effectively
accommodate the increased run-off caused by
changed soil and surface conditions during and
after development.
6. The permanent final vegetation and structures
should be installed as soon as practical in the
development.
7.The development plan should be fitted to the
topography and soils so as to create the least
erosion potential.
8 Wherever feasible, natural vegetation should be
retained and protected.
E. A public information and education program on
sediment control is necessary to obtain public and
industry support.
F Research, evaluation studies, and observations should
be conducted to provide needed information for
improvement of the program.
-------
VII. EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL THIS?
MEASURES
Rainfall and run-off travelling over inadequately
protected land causes erosion The amount of damage
depends on three variables 1) the quantity and velocity
of run-off 2) the nature of soil and 3) the slope of
the ground.
The illustration below shows how these variables affect
erosion under a wide range of differing conditions.
The example shows that the same amount of run-off will
erode a rather flat slope on barren soil, but will cause no
damage on a much steeper slope providing the ground is
covered with grass.
Let us consider how we may control each one of these
three variables; run-off quantity, character of ground,
slope of ground.
1. Controlling Quantity of Run-Off
In any given drainage area, while we have no control of
the total rainfall discharged upon that ground, we can,
indeed, control its distribution and disposal. In so doing
we can protect the most vulnerable areas from damage.
Following are some of the techniques which have proven
to be effective:
a) Diversions - Diversions are intercepting ditches and
berms or ridges placed laterally along the contour on
sloping ground to divert water before scouring can
occur. Their spacing depends upon slope, soil, and
run-off. The water is collected and conveyed laterally
at slow velocity and discharged into a protected area or
outlet channel.
Wheat tteld erosion on long slope
OR THIS?
3B$$&$i6ii!*&3S*f
Jr ' •' **•* "-^,,'
* - : e^tfr'" * f"^$""c-~~=- •
Successful farming on long moderate slope
E XAMPLE 1 — Moderate Runoff-*-— Nearly Bare Soil—*- Gentle Slope = Serious Erosion Damage
U.
u.
o
DC
O
2
small ^ " "
bare
^'''
-.*•
moderate moderate
"^ ^
dense
^ "^
ui
u
o
(">
^^^
m^
large "~~ \
"^^^ none
^^-^ /"
Ul
Uj 0.
3 v>
\- o
o z
>• 3
a °
^
level ^ -^
moderate ^- ^^-^ moderate
steep
/ ^
^ severe
Ul
a
^
^
<
a
z
o
lo
O
BC
UJ
EXAMPLE II — Moderate Runoff— Dense Soil Cover-*- Moderate Ground Slope = Very Slight Erosion Damage
-------
1445
b) Bench Terraces - Bench terraces are relatively flat
areas constructed on sloping land to planned dimensions
and grades. These areas are applied along the contour
with the length and width controlled by the natural
terrain and the required erosion limitations.
Contour benches may be installed across the slope and
designed for widths which will permit construction of a
row or tier of housing units on flat areas which generally
follow natural contours. Diversions may be used to
transport water to a designed outlet.
THIS?
Diversion under construction
c) Outlet" Channels - This measure consists of the
construction of designed channels for the disposal of
storm run-off from diversions, bench terraces and other
structures. The design is based on the run-off from
predicted storms and includes the vegetative or
structural measures required to protect the channel from
erosion.
Farmland at 2% gradient is subject to erosion.
OR THIS?
But not with contour farming
THIS?
Unregulated, unprotected water channel
OR THIS?
Channel outlet protected by vegetation and control structure.
Controlled protected channel.
10
-------
1446
d) Waterway Stabtization Structures
Erosion control methods include structural devices to
dissipate the energy of flowing water by holding the
waterway slopes and velocities within non-scouring
limits. Drop structures, concrete or other lining could be
utilized in an open waterway.
THIS?
-j-ar-Bt - if -»"-.-_-',
'- -*-:_--*y - --», c- ,-w.-
^ -_J---,^--&vfjii-_,,»*,, /™fr
- - -. _- --js^-^^v-^ •_- -j*» .. _
--=^= =***^ ^_^^J""
i,'-- *fl - -fi*»
Structural devices dissipate the energy ot flowing water.
e) Bank Erosion Structures - The control of bank
erosion in main stream channels can be accomplished by
riprap, rock cribs, groins, jetties, fencing, piling, etc. The
purpose of bank control measures is to install a barrier
that will withstand the erosive forces exerted by flowing
water or create a bank roughness that will reduce the
erosive power by dissipating energy of the water as it
moves along the bank line.
Uncontrolled run-oft.
OR THIS?
Device for controlling run-off.
THIS?
Showing bank erosion uncontrolled.
OR THIS?
Steel jacks used to prevent further bank erosion
Sodding and rip-rap prevent erosion
11
-------
1447
River bank erosion control.
f) Sediment Basins - The sediment basin may be
considered as a safety valve. It is an admission that the
mechanics and scheduling of new construction cannot
possibly eliminate a certain amount of erosion during
the period of construction. Strategically placed, a
temporary earth fill type dam downstream from a
development area serves to regulate run-off and trap
sediment. The sediment can be removed mechanically as
the storage space behind the dam becomes filled. The
whole structure can be removed after stability is reached
in the development area or it can be retained and
maintained to enhance the area.
g) Stream Channel Construction - To relieve flooding or
poor drainage conditions, it may be necessary to enlarge,
deepen or reconstruct existing channels to designed cross
section and grades. In doing this, however, the danger
exists of creating a new erosion cycle. The design must
include considerations regarding the stability of the bed
and banks of the proposed channel under the predicted
run-off conditions.
Cribbing, planting make steep slopes erosion free
Sodding, seeding, mulching, blends with natural vegetation.
Portion of sediment control basin.
12
-------
11-13
2. Controlling Ground Area Subject to Erosion
As seen on the diagram, the nature of the soil cover is
tremendously important in controlling erosion. Overland
flow is most destructive on barren soils, less destructive
on soils covered with vegetation. In most cases
vegetation can be established quickly and inexpensively.
Nowhere does the erosion control dollar go further than
with the prompt and careful covering of open soil with
natural vegetation.
Following are some of the methods recommended to
control ground areas subject to erosion:
a) Limit Extent and Duration of Exposure - Where new
construction occurs, every attempt should be made to
reduce the size of the area and the duration of exposure.
Asphalt-Straw Mulching Provides Temporary Protection.
b) Protecting Soils with Vegetative Cover - I n areas of
good soils on moderate slopes, the establishment and
maintenance of good vegetative cover are relatively
simple as compared to "critical areas." The non-critical
areas can usually be stablized by utilizing standard plants
and seed mixtures recommended by local agencies or
landscaping services. Soil tests should be made as a basis
for adding the plant food necessary for plant
establishment and maintenance.
Critical Area Stablization - In addition to the disruption
due to heavy equipment on construction sites, there are
other conditions which may be equally as "Critical."
Acidity, low fertility, compactness, dryness or wetness
often prevail and are unfavorable to plant growth.
Excessively long slopes and steep grades may be
encountered or created. Water disposal structures are
normally subjected to hydraulic forces requiring special
techniques and grasses resistant to scouring. Information
to handle these difficult sites is readily available.
Steep critical slopes at bridges require special attention.
Temporary Measures - Where the life of a construction
contract extends over a considerable period of time, it is
highly desirable to establish a temporary cover with
annual rye or sudan grass. This technique can also be
used where jobs are completed at a season not favorable
for permanent vegetation. The temporary grass is later
worked into the soil when it is prepared for permanent
seeding.
An alternative method is the application of mulch for
immediate protection. Areas brought to final grade
whatever the season should be mulched and then
overseeded at the proper season with permanent grass
and legume species.
Mechanical Method of Applying Mulch.
13
-------
144 9
Permanent Vegetation - For both sodding and seeding,
there is a fairly wide choice of grasses, legumes, and
other plants for use on critical areas. The final choice of
species should be determined by weighing such factors as
adaptability, use, aesthetic requirements, degree of
maintenance that can be expected and other special
considerations.
Slope protected by sodding
Plants should be selected that will provide long-lived
stabilization with little subsequent management where a
"manicured" look is not required. Some species provide
excellent protection against scour in waterways and
outlets, but most require periodic mowing and
fertilization. Where a reasonably high level of
management can be expected, the choice of plants is
broader. Often, techniques of seedbed preparation and
establishment are as important as the selection of the
species.
3. Controlling Slope of Ground
Areas which are excessively steep, where the topography
is rugged or where unusual conditions suggest that the
land is "unbuildable," should not be intensively de-
veloped. The land use master plan should specify proper
restrictions, and no ambitious entrepreneur should be en-
couraged to develop a site where erosion is sure to be a
problem.
%?$&m&-*
Some land should be classified as "unbuildable."
This is not to suggest that critical areas are to be
avoided. Huge areas cannot be, and should not be
leveled. Steep slopes in localized areas may be reduced
by retaining walls, terracing and channeling as previously
described, but such development should be carried out
with adequate planning and careful supervision.
Seeded Banks Protect This Channel.
Steep slopes localized and well handled on residential lot.
Technical references and sources for assistance in
planning for erosion control are listed on page 16 of this
bulletin.
14
-------
145J
VIM. MODEL SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENT
CONTROL RESOLUTION
The following model resolution, when adopted by all
authorized planning bodies within the Grand River
Basin, can lay the ground work for easier control on a
regional basis. Precise working may be altered to meet
local conditions.
WHEREAS, the Grand River Watershed Council has
been authorized by act of the Michigan State Legislature
to conduct water resource studies in the Grand River
Watershed, and to advise local governments of the
Council's view of the problems, and
WHEREAS, the shifting of land use in the watershed
basin from agriculture to urban and suburban
developments has substantially increased silt and
sediment problems on the lands and, in the streams and
lakes in the region, and
WHEREAS, the people of the State of Michigan have
indicated by popular vote their approval of the Clean
Water Bond Issue proposal in 1968, and
WHEREAS, sediment from developments has been
declared a pollutant by the Water Resources Commission
of the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, and is
recognized under the adopted Water Quality Standards
for Michigan Waters, and
WHEREAS, soil erosion and sedimentation cause
unreasonable damage to private and public property and
diminish the public use and enjoyment of our streams
and lakes.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED:
I.The Legislative body of (township, city, county)
• endorses and supports the Grand River Watershed
Council Soil Erosion and Sediment Control Program,
2. That it is a policy of the (township, city, county) to
provide control of soil erosion and resulting
transported sedimentation, through its exercise of the
review and approval authority for subdivision and
commercial developments or any development where
such control is considered proper and relevant,
3. That the same policy shall be implemented through
the Public Works Departments (township, city,
county) in development and maintenance of park
lands, recreation sites, streets, and other Public owned
properties,
4. That it shall be the policy of the authorized planning
body of the (township, city, county) to seek
comments and/or recommendations from the Grand
River Watershed Council, the Michigan Water
Resources Commission, the U.S.D.A. Soil Conserva-
tion Service, the Soil Conservation District, or other
agencies recommended by the Council with respect
to processing of any preliminary developmental plans
as in the judgement of the authorized planning body
of the (township, city, county) that will require soil
erosion measures to be carried out by public and
private interests during the construction of such
developments.
IX. INFORMATIONAL AND EDUCATIONAL
PROGRAM
To enlist public awareness and support, an informational
program will be conducted by the Grand River
Watershed Council, Soil Conservation Districts, Soil
Conservation Service and the Cooperative Extension
Service.
Included in the program will be:
1. Publications - such as an illustrated issuance of this
Soil Erosion Control Booklet, copies of standards and
specifications for urban and rural soil erosion control
practices, suggested ordinance for municipal adoption,
etc.
2. Publicity about the program.
3. Informational program for developers and engineers.
4. Recognition of outstanding soil erosion control work
by individual developers and engineers.
5. Preparation and distribution of study reports.
6. Assistance to local communities in the
implementation and management of a soil erosion
program.
___.-,.
Ul.fi
15
-------
1451
X. TECHNICAL REFERENCES AND SOURCES
Technical Guide (Standards and
Specifications)-U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service
Standard Specifications For Road and Bridge
Construction—Michigan Department of State
Highways
Community Action Program For Sediment Control-
National Association of Counties
Sediment Is Your Problem—U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation
Service Bulletin A1B 174
Additional technical data as well as complete informa-
tion for specific problems are available from the U.S.D.A.
Soil Conservation Service through the Soil Conservation
District. Other sources of information are available from:
Bureau of Water Management,
Department of Natural Resources
Cooperative Extension Service
Grand River Watershed Council
Michigan Department of State Highways
OTHER WATER MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS
BY THE
MICHIGAN GRAND RIVER WATERSHED COUNCIL
Stream Monitoring Program
Stream Appreciation Month
Water Supply Study
Implementation of Flood Plains Study
Preservation and Utilization of Flood Plain Areas
Grand River Basin Federal Comprehensive Water Resources Planning Study
-------
1452
W. L. Ettesvold
The Watershed Council provided one of the
two participants to review the "Community Action
Guidebook for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control"
developed by the National Association of Counties Research
Foundation,
Neither of these booklets will have any value
unless the recommendations are implemented. The best way
to assure their u?e is to conduct seminars, conferences
or other types of informational meetings to identify the
problems, present the tools for solutions, and assist the
local governmental units in the implementation of proper
guidelines and control measures. To accomplish this
end, the Watershed Council is again accepting-the leader-
ship role by coordinating the interests and concerns of
the local Soil Conservation Districts and the Michigan
Association of Counties to co-sponsor with the Michigan
Grand River Watershed Council a series of conferences for
public officials. Through these efforts we expect to
reduce one of our most critical pollution problems in the
basin.
Flood Plain Control Regulations
Development of flood plain areas is another
pollution factor that can be controlled through local
police powers. Installation of septic tanks and drain
-------
1453
W. L. Ettesvold
fields, open storage of solid wastes, and the open storage
of usable materials in the flood plain can all have a
deleterious effect on the stream during flooding periods.
Zoning laws, health codes, building codes and
subdivision control regulations are all tools that can be
used to protect the flood plain. Adoption and effective
enforcement of these regulations will require technical
studies to accurately identify the flood plain.
Flood Plain Information Studies conducted
by the Corps of Engineers, and Flood Plain Hazard Studies
conducted by the Soil Conservation Service are designed
to provide the technical data for ordinance enforcement.
Unfortunately, these programs are inadequately funded
to conduct the necessary studies in the rapidly urbanizing
areas.
The Watershed Council has initiated action for
studies along fourteen stream stretches in the basin.
Two of these streams are scheduled for completion this
winter. The need for these studies in our basin only
partially represent the need for studies across the state.
When a stream study has been completed, the Watershed
Council presents its publication, "Preservation and
Utilization of Plain Areas" to each governmental unit
to encourage adoption of local regulatory measures.
-------
W. L. Ettesvold
Local Water Quality Control Regulations
The State has the responsibility of water
quality enforcement. However, funding of the
enforcement agencies is not adequate for the State to
enforce the comprehensive programs needed. Cities and
counties need to become more actively involved to
supplement the State's efforts and to retain the home
rule philosophy. An example of local enforcement is
an ordinance adopted by the city of Grand Rapids.
Through this ordinance regulatory limits have been
placed on industrial waste discharges to protect the stream
quality. These limits are being enforced by the city
to protect their wastewater treatment plant and to reduce
pollution of the Grand River.
The Michigan Grand River Watershed Council
is serving the regional interests of the governmental
units in the Grand River Basin. Several programs
have been initiated that will benefit, not only the local
unit and the State, but will also result in a national
benefit.
The following suggestions are offered for your
attention, your consideration and hopefully, your
endorsement:
1) Greater assistance to local communities
-------
W. L. Ettesvold
for developing adequate stream monitoring programs.
2) Funding to regional governmental entities
for conducting information and educational programs on
needed water and soil management programs.
3) Additional funding for hydrological studies
to assist local communities in developing proper land
use for protection of flood plain areas.
4) Provide funding to local communities to
enable them to determine the method and cost for removing
stream-laden sediment to renew the streams for more
effective use.
The Watershed Council is organized to serve
its constituent governmental units. We also stand
ready to serve our State and the Federal Government in
whatever way we can. We realize our problems are not
unique to our area. We believe if we can solve our
problems we will be helping other governmental units
by establishing guidelines which they may follow to
achieve success.
-------
1456
P. F. Gustafson
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. STEIN: Thank you. Are there any questions
or comments? If not, thank you very much.
Philip P. Gustafson.
May I suggest that those making statements,
that we are largely interested in the thermal problem.
We would appreciate any other aspects of pollution either
submit a statement for the record or summarize it, if
possible.
STATEMENT OP PHILIP P. GUSTAPSON,
COORDINATOR ARGONNE GREAT LAKES
RESEARCH PROGRAM, ARGONNE NATIONAL
LABORATORY, ARGONNE, ILLINOIS
MR. GUSTAFSON: Mr. Stein, conferees, ladies
and gentlemen, I am Philip F. Gustafson, Coordinator
of the Argonne Great Lakes Research Program, Argonne
National Laboratory here in Argonne, Illinois, just
outside of Chicago.
I might Just make a couple of statements as to
what Argonne is and why we are interested and concerned
with Lake Michigan problems. Argonne, as many of you may
know, is subcontracted with the Atomic Energy Commission
-------
1457
P. P. Gustafson
by the University of Chicago and some 31 other
universities in the midwest area, and has been the center
of research and development over the years and has also
been a center for the study of radiation problems -
Since reactors emit also thermal discharges as well as
radioactive ones, it is not totally unreasonable that the
laboratory was requested by the Atomic Energy Commission
to look at the influence of thermal discharges.
I do have a statement which I have handed
to the workshop, and I would like to read Just a few
portions of it and make a few comments, if I may,
at the end.
MR. STEIN: Mr. Gustafson.
MR. GUSTAPSON: Yes.
MR. STEIN: If you wish, we will put the
entire statement in the record as if read, even though
you summarize it.
MR. GUSTAPSON: I would appreciate that very
much,
MR. STEIN: Without objection, that will be
done.
(Whereupon, the paper above referred to
follows in its entirety.)
-------
1458 -1470
P, F. Gustafson
MR. GUSTAFSON: At the present time the States
bordering upon Lake Michigan and the Federal Government
are wrestling with the questions raised by discharging
waste heat into the lake. The deliberate release
of waste waters at temperatures above that of the lake
at the point of input is not a new practice; it has been
part and parcel of human occupation of the land along
the lake and has increased at a rate commensurate to or
exceeding that of population growth. What is new,
however, is the fact that the wisdom of this practice is
now being questioned, and indeed being subject to regulation
by the appropriate agencies. This questioning and probing
is a healthy sign, a further indication of the awareness
on the part of a growing number of citizens that our
resources are not endless; that the natural environment,
be it air, land, or water, does not have a limitless
capacity to absorb wastes and other forms of insult and
assault.
The matter of thermal discharges into Lake
Michigan has been brought to the fore by the construction
of six large nuclear powerplants (a total of ten
individual reactors tp be in operation by 1978) which
intend to use Lake Michigan water for condenser cooling,
and discharging this water directly back into the lake.
-------
1471
P. P. Gustafson
The sheer magnitude (volume) of water involved, coupled
with the rise in temperature over the condenser, tends
to stagger the imagination and perhaps to blur reason.
About 4,600,000 gallons per minute or 10,000
cubic feet per second will be required for cooling
purposes by the nuclear plants now under construction.
This figure does not include the Bailly nuclear units now
being considered. The cooling water will gain an average
of 20.5 degrees P. across the condenser. Cooling water
for the nuclear plants will be taken from some
distance offshore, and in most cases from near the lake
bottom. Hence, the cooling water will usually be below
the ambient temperature of the surface waters when it
enters the plant, and as a result the temperature
difference between discharge water and lake surface
temperature will be significantly less than the Delta
T across the condenser. The objective of this statement
is to attempt to place the cooling water discharged from
nuclear powerplants in a reasonable perspective, to discuss
what is known and what is unknown concerning thermal
parameters in Lake Michigan, to explore the alternatives
to direct lake discharge, and finally, to suggest a
course of action to answer pertinent scientific questions,
to alleviate economic and operational stress, and to
-------
1472
P. Fo Gustafson
provide adequate electric power to residents of the Lake
Michigan region.
Perspective
Lake Michigan is the fifth largest body of
freshwater in the world. It is of sufficient depth that
it is thermally stratified during the summer (roughly
May to November), and is thermally mixed from top to
bottom each spring and fall. The primary source of
heating of the lake is direct solar and atmospheric radia-
tion, with river and surface water runoff providing a
relatively minor additional natural heat input to the
lake proper. Major manmade sources of warm water dis-
charges include industrial discharges, municipal sewage
treatment plant effluent, and cooling water from steam
generating facilities.
The waste heat from this latter category is
most readily documented because of the rather direct
relationship between electrical output and heat loss
across the condenser. In addition, detailed records
of power generation make it possible to determine not
only annual heat discharge but to break it down into
daily or even hourly segments. The present electrical
generating capacity situated on Lake Michigan, and
using lake water for cooling is about 8,000 MWe? Except
* 8,000 megawatts electrical, term describing generating
capacity.
-------
1473
P. F. Gustafson
for 75 MWe which comes from the Big Rock nuclear plant
at Charlevoix, Michigan, all this power comes from
coal- or oil-burning plants. Older fossil fuel plants
such as these have an efficiency of about 30 to 35
percent (although fossil fuel plants built recently achieve
about 40 percent efficiency) for converting heat into
electrical energy. Of the 65 to 70 percent waste energy,
as it were, about 15 percent is lost up the stack.
Thus, from the 8pOO MWe from fossil fueled power generation,
there is between 17,000 and 19,000 MW of waste heat
produced, of which 13,000 to 15,000 MW is released
to the condenser cooling water.
The present type of nuclear power reactors have
a conversion efficiency of about 33 percent (heat to
electrical energy), and effectively (a few percent may
be lost directly to the atmosphere in the plant) all of
the waste heat (67 percent) is released to water across
the condenser system. Therefore, we see that for each
unit of electricity actually generated (per kilowatt, for
example), 20 to 35 percent more heat (50 percent more
when compared to the most modern fossil plants) is
discharged to cooling water from a nuclear plant than
from a conventional fossil fuel installation.
It is also true that the present trend in power-
-------
P. F. Gustafson
plant construction is in terms of blocks of 500 to 1,000
MWe per generating unit. This means that the heat
released is concentrated in a localized area and is
somewhat more aggravated in the case of nuclear plants
because of the greater aqueous heat loss per unit of power
produced as discussed above.
In terms of heating of the entire lake, the
discharge from generating plants makes an insignificant
input. Calculations show that if none of the heat
from present powerpflLants and those proposed through
1978 were to leave the lake over an annual cycle, the
temperature increase would be a few hundredths of a degree
centigrade throughout the entire lake. Of course, such a
situation does not exist in nature, as there is continual
heat loss to the atmosphere by evaporation and
nonsyaporative processes. It is also true that the
discrete thermal disCharges from powerplants do not
mix throughout the entire lake, but are essentially
localized entities of warm water. It is because
of this phenomenon of relatively restricted volumes of
warm water, present in one general location near shore,
that raises questions about biological effects and other
aspects relating to water quality.
Except at times during fall and spring when the
-------
1475
P. P. Gustafson
lake is thermally mixed, the temperature is not
uniform throughout the lake. In summer, the mixed surface
layer (which may extend down to depths of 60 to 70
feet) is appreciably warmer (10 to 25 degrees P.) than
the underlying waters. Conversely, in the winter, surface
waters may actually be colder than those at greater
depths. Furthermore, there are variations in surface
water temperatures over fairly short distances (less
than a mile) and/or short time intervals (less than an
hour.) These variations are particularly evident near
the shore, and are due to the upwelling of cooler water,
warm surface water being blown onto the shore, and other
wind and current phenomena. These variations make the
term ambient temperature somewhat ambiguous other
than in a general or average sense.
As mentioned earlier, there are already
a number of generating plants situated on Lake Michigan
which draw cooling water from the lake and return the
heated effluent to the lake. Three of these begin to
approximate the generating capacity and thermal discharge
of the nuclear stations now under construction. These
larger plants now in operation are Waukegan (1108 MWe),
Oak Creek (1670 MWe), and State Line (964 MWe). A feeling
for the magnitude and the environmental effects of
-------
1476
P. P. Gustafson
thermal discharges may be obtained by looking at and
around these plants which have been in operation for a
number of years. The initial impression is that these
plants have not had a very profound or obvious effect
on the lake, certainly not an adverse effect as appears
to have been the case with some other discharges such as
sewage and chemical discharges.
Determinations of the lateral extent and the
depth of the warm water discharges (called thermal
plumes in analogy to smoke plumes) have been made by
infrared over-flight techniques and by making direct
temperature measurements in the water. A thermal
discharge is warmer than ambient lake water and tends to
float because it is less dense, spreading out as it
floats in a manner dictated by wind, current, and the
velocity of the discharge itself.
The lake thermal plumes studies are a few
feet (6 to 8 maximum) thick and have temperatures which
are measurable above ambient (about 1 degree centigrade) out
to a mile or so from the discharge point. The initial
decrease in water temperature from the outfall to the
measurable edge of the plume occurs primarily through
mixing with the cooler water surrounding the plume, with
some loss directly to the atmosphere as well. Over a
-------
1477
P. P. Gustafson
matter of a day or so the bulk of the heat is lost to the
atmosphere. Other than providing a warmer region for
swimming, and a more ice-free region of limited extent
during the winter, and occasional periods of local fog,
there are no obvious physical effects from the thermal
discharge.
Biological effects are equally hard to discern.
Pish are noted to congregate near the outfall, particularly
in wintertime, but increased algal blooms, differences (or
lack of) in bottom organisms and other indications of
biological change have not been documented. Bottom
organisms probably are not truly good indicators of the
thermal situation because of the surface-floating
character of the warm water. The fact that changes have
not been documented in part implies they are difficult
to see, or are slight if not nonexistent. On the other
hand, it must be said that not a great deal of research
has been devoted to looking for thermally-induced changes.
So we are faced with a situation in which obvious changes
have not been observed, but secondary, more subtle,
effects at some distance from the point of input may
take place.
Additional information as to possible thermal
effects can be obtained from examining stream and river
-------
P. P. Gustafson
plumes in the lake. The prime example as far as Lake
Michigan is concerned is the Grand River which has an
average flow of between 1,500 and 7,700 c.f.s. depending
upon the time of year. This compares with the flow rates
of 3,260 and 3,500 c.f.s. specified for the Zion and
Donald C. Cook plants, respectively. The Grand River is
also warmer than the average surface temperature of the
lake, varying from 5 degrees P. above lake surface
temperature in March and September to as much as
19 degrees P. in July. During part of the year the
actual heat carried into the lake by the Grand River in
B.t.u./day, for example, closely approximates that which
would be released from the largest nuclear plants now
under construction on the lake. From March through July
the Grand River dumps between 200 and 340 billion B.t.u./day
into the lake, whereas if run at peak capacity for 24
hours a day the Donald C. Cook and Zion plants would
discharge 390 and 340 billion B.t.u./day respectively.
It is interesting to observe that the Grand River is not
generally thought of as a source of thermal pollution.
Alternatives
On the basis that adverse effects may be taking
place now from the presence of thermal Inputs or the mode
of introduction, or that such changes may occur if the
-------
1479
P. P. Gustafson
inputs increase, one must consider other means of disposing
of waste heat. This can be done in several ways; through
increased volume of cooling water, diffuser systems
which increase mixing, cooling ponds, cooling towers,
or combinations of these. It is also apparent that in the
main the summer months are the more critical time; hence
the time when more elaborate cooling measures should be
taken.
There is, of course, a further option open
and that is not to site powerplants or other heat
sources along the lake at all. This is a solution for
future siting, but hardly helps in present circumstances.
From a strict economic sense, direct cooling is least
expensive in terms of initial investment and annual
operating costs. It may, in fact, turn out in the end
to be the most reasonable use of a. natural resource,
namely the Great Lakes.
Each of the various alternatives will be
considered in terms of their advantages and disadvantages.
1) The condenser discharge could be mixed
with additional water before entering the lake. This would
serve to reduce the difference in temperature between
the plant discharge and the lake itself; however, it
would not reduce the total heat input to the lake. Such
-------
1480
P. P. Gustafson
a procedure involves the expenditure of energy in pumping,
and the larger volume of relatively high velocity water
might produce both physical and biological effects such
as scouring of the lake bottom, or influencing fish
movements. The advantage would be that modifications to
present facilities could be done at or near the lake shore
in most instances, and would not require the use of
additional land.
2) Diffuser systems. Multiple nozzle or
aspirator systems will allow rapid mixing with cooler
surrounding water, and when spray devices are used, direct
heat loss by evaporation is achieved. Such systems will
represent some expense, and the durability and maintenance
of such devices has not been field tested on a large
scale. Where actual sprays are involved the water loss
from the lake system will increase due to evaporation.
3) Cooling ponds. These would require
considerable land adjacent to the plant to be used for
this purpose, approximately 2 acres per MWe is a rough
figure for cooling pond size. The loss of water from
evaporation would be comparable to or somewhat greater than
if the heat were put directly into the lake itself.
Confined bodies of warm water such as this may become
algal beds, and require attention to prevent their being
-------
1431
P. P. Gustafson
a source of odors. The quality of cooling pond water
will decrease with time as solids left behind by
evaporation accumulate.
*0 Cooling towers. Wet or dry cooling towers
for powerplants in the 500-1,000 MWe range represent a
sizeable capital investment. The Davis-Besse Plant in
Ohio is spending $9 million on cooling towers for a
872 MWe facility. They will also consume power in their
operation, and require periodic maintenance.
Such towers are faily large in size, both height
and base area. Wet towers will be more wasteful of water
in that they depend heavily upon evaporation for heat
removal. Solids left behind in evaporation must be
removed, as must slime and algal growths, usually by
back-flushing into the lake. Such a procedure will
produce periodic inputs of concentrated chemicals into
the lake. The evaporation may lead to fog and icing
under appropriate meteorological conditions. Dry cooling
towers do not waste water, but are limited in their
cooling abilities by the ambient air temperature as cooling
is done by exchange to the air passing over the cooling
colls. Experience with dry towers is limited to fairly
small (200-300 MWe) installations. In some locations,
objections have been raised concerning the appearance of
-------
1482
P. P. Gustafson
cooling towers and their effect on the landscape*
Combinations
A combination of methods might prove most
acceptable in the long run. Direct discharge except in
warm seasons, when cooling towers could be used, is one
possibility. This would also avoid the fog and ice
problem during the winter months. A cooling pond-direct
discharge is also in this category.
It should be emphasized that from the standpoint
of water conservation, direct discharge of heat in the lake
is most conservative of this resource. As demands for
lake water increase, the diversion of water for
cooling towers and ponds may be regarded as an
unacceptable use of water.
Field Program to Determine Best Options
Two things seem apparent:
1) That demonstrable physical and/or biological
effects from present thermal discharges are hard to find
on the Great Lakes or elsewhere.
2) There is a need for well-planned intensive
and extensive field work to determine what effects, if any,
do exist. It would also seem reasonable to not be
overly restrictive on thermal discharges in light of
present observations. In reality we will never know
-------
1483
P. P. Gustafson
what reasonable thermal standards are until adequate
field work is done, and to do this it will be necessary
to have thermal discharges to study. Otherwise an unwise
alternate, the consequences of which are, in fact, less
clearly understood, may be chosen. There are environmental
costs to be borne in any event, and what must be done
is to minimize these costs in conjunction with
their socio-economic impact. This should be the prime
objective of regulation.
There is a conservation principle involved here
related to the conservation of energy principle. In fact,
energy is the real culprit. Feasible methods of steam
electrical generation are inherently limited to maximum
efficiencies of the order of 40 to 50 percent. This means
that half or more of the heat produced must be discarded,
and the name of the game is to discard this heat in
the manner least offensive to the environment or to use
it beneficially in some manner. There is a feeling,
based upon plenty of evidence to be sure, that whatever
man does in terms of waste disposal is probably wrong.
It is possible that in the case of heat, discharge to Lake
Michigan is an appropriate, and acceptable use of a
natural resource. It remains to be proven, however, and
the natural capacity of the lake to receive and to eliminate
-------
1484
P. P. Gustafson
heat must be determined.
The source of support to do the necessary
research is always a problem. But consider the manner
in which moneys are now being spent. For example, the
Davls-Besse nuclear plant on Lake Erie is going to
spend $9 million on cooling towers, plus operating and
maintenance expenses annually. This exceeds the total
amount spent annually on research in the Great Lakes which
is at all relevant to the pollution question, and
greatly exceeds the annual support of thermal research on
the Great Lakes. The point is that more money could
be reasonably spent to determine whether or not cooling
towers are a) necessary and b) desirable, rather than
going ahead and building them without further consideration.
The money involved could go a long way toward answering
some of the uncertainties, without irreversibly harming
the lakes, and perhaps would even save expenditures
in the long run.
Lake Michigan Plan
A suggested plan for determining thermal
effects and thermal capacity is to allow present
facilities and those under construction to operate, but
to conduct sound scientific investigations of the
environmental effects of such operation. At present,
-------
US 5
P. F. Gustafson
theory is inadequate to predict the consequences; only
experiments will do. This does not mean a license to
operate indefinitely in the face of evidence of deleterious
effects. If such effects manifest themselves, corrective
action must be taken. Such a procedure could be conducted
under a Lake Michigan Environmental Agreement between
the public (through their representatives) on the one
hand and thermal dischargees on the other. The results of
field investigations should be reviewed by a commission
composed of Federal, State, and local representatives,
industrial representatives, and members of the concerned
public such as conservation groups, environmental
committees and the like. If the findings indicate
environmental change, the commission must make a judgment
as to its seriousness and recommend that corrective
action be taken promptly, and may even recommend what
corrective action be taken. The details of this approach
must, of course, be worked out. The main point is, however,
that some reasonable course be followed which does not
blindly trade one environmental situation for another
which is even worse.
-------
P. F. Gustafson
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
Are there any comments or questions?
Mr. Gustafson, thank you for your paper.
MR. GUSTAFSON: You are welcome.
MR. STEIN: You know, in a way, you are one firm
— I have a little principle here, the Stein Principle of
Presentations of Papers. When on the second or third page
we get into a discussion of all of the alternatives
including dilution, I can predict that when we get to the
conclusions we are going to come in with a recommendation
for further study.
MR. GUSTAFSON: Well, I guess a research
organization has to be that way.
MR. STEIN: By the way, this isn't a criticism.
You know, in your field, you try to be objective about
looking for things — the indicators of what is going to
happen in prediction.-
MR. GUSTAFSON: Right.
MR. STEIN: And in this field, I think we have
a few indicators,
MR. GUSTAFSON: Indicators, yes.
MR. STEIN: Mr. Mayo.
MR. MAYO: You have indicated that the Argonne
National Laboratory has done some plume studies —•
-------
1437
P. F. Gustafson
MR. GUSTAFSON: That is correct.
MR. MAYO: — on Lake Michigan.
MR. GUSTAFSON: On Lake Michigan.
MR. MAYO: Which plumes specifically have you
worked with?
MR. GUSTAFSON: The Waukegan plume and the plume
at Big Rock.
MR, MAYO: Is this part of a current cooperative
study effort at Waukegan?
MR. GUSTAFSON: Well, we are indeed a part of the
group consisting of EPRO from DePaul, the Bio-Test Laboratory
of Commonwealth Edison, the Metropolitan Sanitary District
and ourselves. But; this was really instigated quite
independently of these people. It happens that we are all
working with the same area so that we have been exchanging
data, yes.
MR. MAYO: In connection with the studies that
you have conducted so far, do you have any feel for the
conclusions that were expressed yesterday, I believe, by
Dr. Pritchard? Were you here at the time?
MR. GUSTAFSON: No, unfortunately I was at the
laboratory yesterday.
MR. MAYO: Perhaps much of the gist of Dr.
Pritchard's statement was that if properly defined in
-------
P. F. Gustafson
terms of an outlet facility, both in terms of placement,
configuration, and I think also the velocity, that the
heated water would essentially remain at the surface.
MR. GUSTAFSON: Yes.
MR. MAYO: And if the depth was in excess of 10
or 15 feet, that little or no heat would be available to
impact the lake bottom.
MR. GUSTAFSON: Yes.
MR. MAYO: How does this square with the findings
that you folks have so far?
MR. GUSTAFSON: This certainly is the sort of
thing that we have observed, Mr. Mayo. We have made some
15 or 16 surveys at the Waukegan plant under various cir-
cumstances, and I believe that the discharge canal
depth is something on the order of 8 to 10 feet at the
mouth and we have not seen demonstrably warm water below
a 9-foot depth. But this I worry about, and really the
purpose of our field measurements is so that we may plug
them into models which now exist and which the laboratory
is working on, including those of Pritchard and some of
the people who have been in this for a long time. We are
trying to get field data to verify these models.
But one problem which bothers us is that you have
a natural bias in the days when you do get data because
-------
P. F. Gustafson
you don't go out when the lake is too rough because it is
hazardous to the people involved, and what really happens
when there is a lot of turbulence and upwelling and down-
welling, we don't know ourselves, and I have a hunch that
there aren't many people who go out in that kind of weather
either, so that unfortunately the field data suffer a bias
in that sense.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
Are there any further questions?
MR. CURRIE: Yes, Mr. Chairman, one.
MR. STEIN: Yes, Mr. Currie.
MRo CURRIE: Mr. Gustafson, there were predictions
in Dr. Pritchard's paper regarding the residence time of
any particular molecule or organism at elevated temperatures
inside of a plume. I take it you haven't attempted to
evaluate his particular calculations, but have you calcula-
tions of your own on the same subject?
MRo GUSTAFSON: We do have some calculations of,
say, the time course of temperature in a body of water that
has gone through the condenser and out into the plume,
and what we are now doing is integrating the total temper-
ature that this thing says, say, in degrees, ourselves
and we really don't have this thing completed yetc But
it certainly gets down to within a degree centigrade of
-------
1490
P. F. Gustafson
ambient, within a matter of a few hours.
MR. CURRIE: Thank you.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
Any other questions?
If not, thank you very much, Mr. Gustafson.
May we have Mr. Moerke of the city of Milwaukee?
-------
1491
E. L. Moerke
STATEMENT OP EWALD L. MOERKE, Jr.,
ATTORNEY, MILWAUKEE, WISCONSIN
MR. MOERKE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and
members of the Great Lakes Water Conference.
My name is Ewald L. Moerke, Jr., and I am
associated with the law firm of Schroeder, Gedlen, Rlester
and Moerke with offices at 108 West Wells Street,
Milwaukee, Wisconsin. I am here representing the
Metropolitan Sewerage District of the County of Milwaukee
and its two component agencies, the Sewerage Commission
of the city of Milwgwkee and the Metropolitan Sewerage
Commission of the county of Milwaukee.
I appreciate the opportunity afforded me to
present, on behalf of the district, the views of the
Commissioners of the Metropolitan Sewerage District with
respect to the application of the city of South Milwaukee
for approval of plans for secondary treatment for their
sewage treatment plant. My commissioners feel that this
is a matter of great importance not only to the citizens
living in the Greater Milwaukee area but to all persons
who value the continued high purity of the waters of Lake
Michigan and its tributary streams. We are very concerned
-------
1492
E. L. Moerke
about the continuation of a potable water supply for all
users on Lake Michigan. We are afraid that events which
have recently transpired may impair the quality of Lake
Michigan water.
As many of you know, the city of South
Milwaukee, a community of approximately 23,286 people
located on the shores of Lake Michigan, has for many years
operated a primary treatment plant for the citizens of that
community. The city of South Milwaukee elected in
I960 not to come into the Metropolitan Sewerage District
and now is the only community in the cooncy of Milwaukee
which is not a part of the district.
Here may I state the city of South Milwaukee
is completely surrounded by property under district
control.
Within the last few years, the city of South
Milwaukee has seen fit to prepare plans for secondary
treatment of their facilities and has forwarded such plans
to the Department of Natural Resources of the State of
Wisconsin, together with an application for Federal and
State assistance. Such plans involved an expenditure
based on 1968 figures of about $1.6 million. If Federal
and State grants were approved to the fullest extent
possible, the city of South Milwaukee would recover about
-------
1*93
E. L. Moerke
$1.2 million. These plans were approved by the Department
of Natural Resources of the State of Wisconsin early in
1970, but, as we understand it, the State grant under
the ORAP 200 program of the State of Wisconsin has not,
as yet, been approved. Recently, however, the PWQA
did approve the granting of Federal funds for the project
in South Milwaukee.
The city of South Milwaukee lies immediately
north of and its boundaries adjoin the district property
upon which the district's new South Shore Treatment Plant
has been built and recently placed in operation. The city
of South Milwaukee could be served by this plant with the
construction of a sewer down South Fifth Avenue to the
main interceptor leading to this plant. A stub has already
been built into our main interceptor to provide for the
South Milwaukee flow. It is estimated by our engineer that
this main sewer would cost approximately $1.7 million and
if the city of South Milwaukee would elect to be served
by the district, the cost to South Milwaukee for their
share of this main would be approximately $3^,000.
This, however, does not tell the whole story.
The Metropolitan Sewerage District, through its two
component commissions, has the power to improve water-
courses within the district. The commissions' attorneys
-------
E, L, Moerke
have advised the commissions that there is no duty to
improve any stream outside of the district.
There is a watercourse which originates in the
cities of Milwaukee and Franklin known as Oak Creek which
has been partially widened, deepened and enlarged in the
city of Milwaukee to carry away storm drainage from that
watershed. However, the outlet of Oak Creek into Lake
Michigan is in the city of South Milwaukee.
It is estimated by the district engineers that
it would cost $2.8 million to widen, deepen, and enlarge
Oak Creek in the city of South Milwaukee so as to provide
an adequate outlet for this watershed, Thus, any
reckoning of total costs must involve the watercourse
improvement cost for, if the city of South Milwaukee should
come into the district, the district would absorb this
charge as well as the charge for the main sewer. If
the city of South Milwaukee stays out of the district and
is permitted to build its own secondary treatment plant,
then the taxpayers of the city of South Milwaukee will have
to shoulder this cost alone. The two commissions have
jointly adopted a resolution following their counsels'
advice that they would not entertain a request from the
city of South Milwaukee to improve Oak Creek in the city
of South Milwaukee.
-------
1495
E. L. Moerke
The Metropolitan Sewerage District of the county
of Milwaukee now serves the entire Bounty of Milwaukee
except the city of South Milwaukee, and by contract serves
many adjacent municipalities within the same watershed.
This includes the city of New Berlin, the village of
Elm Grove, the city of Brookfield, the village of
Menomonee Palls, the village of Butler, city of Muskego,
and the city of Mequon. In addition, we are now engaged
in discussions with a sanitary district in the county of
Racine for the reception of their sewage into our system.
The district serves its customers through a
system of main and intercepting sewers which, between
the two commissions at the end of 1969, totaled 216.7
miles. The treatment of sewage is carried on at two
plants: one located at Jones Island, which is the older
plant; and the other one is located in the city of Oak
Creek on Lake Michigan at the foot of East Puetz Road.
The latter plant has just been recently completed and put
into operation and is probably the most modern plant
in operation to date in the United States if not in the
world.
In our plants, the effluent is constantly
monitored to determine the quality and effectiveness of
our treatment plants and we believe that we have achieved
-------
1*96
E. L. Moerke
operating results as good as any plant in existence. The
Jones Island plant is a full treatment plant consisting
of coarse screening, grit chambers, fine screening,
aeration tanks, settling basins, and we are now planning
and have under contract post chlorination of all effluent
The South Shore Treatment Plant, at the present time, is
a primary treatment plant with chlorination, but we are
planning and have under contract the installation of
secondary treatment.
The laboratory facilities maintained by the
district consist of a staff of approximately twenty
people and all of the latest and most modern facilities
are provided.
The dry weather flow through the Jones Island
plant results in a parity of effluent of 96 percent to
98 percent (coliform removal). Chlorination should bring
the quality even higher. We fully expect that our South
Shore wastewater treatment plant, when secondary and full
chlorination is applied, will achieve the same excellent
results.
The Jones Island plant has in the past
achieved spectacular results with regard to the removal
of phosphates. As a matter of fact, the United States
Government has given us a grant to study the removal of
-------
E. L. Moerke
phosphates that we achieved and we have a second grant
to assist in the process of running plant scale tests to
see whether we cannot achieve even better results.
MIR. MAYO: Excuse me. You make a comment that
the South Milwaukee construction grant has been approved
by PWQA. I think you are advised that it has not been
approved.
MR. MOERKE: In a phone conversation I had with
you, that is correct, Mr, Mayo, you so advised me. But
I am informed that in a previous conversation we were told
that it had been approved. Now, I stand corrected if I am
wrong on that.
MR. MAYO: You are wron&.
MR. MOERKE: All right.
We submitted a report to this body on March 31,
1970, relating to the removal of phosphates and we have
some additional data to submit with respect to this
matter.
(The reports above referred to follow in their
entirety.)
-------
1498
Proposed addition #1 to follow summary of the "Statement for March 31, 1970
Lake Michigan Conference"
(copy included)
Additional data collected since completion of the statement for the
3-31-70 Lake Michigan Conference indicates that the use of iron from waste
pickle liquor continues to enhance phosphate removal without adversely af-
fecting purification or plant equipment.
On July 30, 1970 Mr. R. D. Leary advised the F.W.Q.A. project officer
that the Commission was therefore ready to proceed with iron addition to the
85 M.G.D. West Plant as soon as formal F.W.Q.A. approval was obtained in
conformance with the original grant approval dated December 13, 19&9. We
understand that the project officer has recommended approval of the project
extension and forwarded the material to the Washington Office of the F.W.Q.A.
o
Lawrence A. Ernest
Director of Laboratory
-------
1409
March 21^ 1970
Statement for i-!arch 31, 1970
Lake Michigan Conference
The Sewerage Commission of the City of Milwaukee, the A. 0. Smith
.Corporation and the F. W. P. C. A. have a joint demonstration project
underway to demonstrate the removal of phosphorus from sewage utilizing the
•Iron in waste pickle liquor from the sulfuric acid pickling of steel as the
cation source. The project was proposed in late 1969 and placed on stream
on January 5, 1970.
Waste pickle liquor is being added to the 115 H!gd East plant while
the 85 mgd West Plant receives the same screened sewage and acts as the control^
Two 30*000 gallon waste pickle storage tanks have been installed
and the instrumentation required to automatically provide constant iron
.addition to the mixed liquor is being installed by the A. 0. Smith Corporation,
The automatic system will monitor mixed liquor flow and waste pickle liquor
iron concentration and. adjust the waste pickle liquor flow to maintain the
desired rate of iron addition.
. «
The major objective of the iron addition to the East Plant is to
maintain an effluent total phosphorus concentration of 0.5 mg/liter (as P.) or
less. Other objectives include:
•A. A comparison of the efficiency of the two plants in removing
BOD, COD, nitrogen and suspended solids.
B. Determination of optimum iron requirement to maximize phosphorus
Jtemovalr
C. Determination of the effects of iron addition on the mixed liquor
biota and its settling characteristics.
D. Observation of possible effect of iron addition on the plant
i H f •? = «
-------
1500
Lake Michigan Conference — 2 — March 24, 1970
£. Determine the effect of iron addition on waste sludge conditioning
requirements.
At the present time the spent pickle liquor is being trucked froa
the A. 0. Smith Corporation and added to the raw sewage at a rate that is
manually varied asto iron concentration determined by specific gravity. The
iron is added 24 hours a day and five days a week.
• — During the first week of the project (January 5th through January 12th)
problems with waste pickle liquor handling were encountered due to cold weather
and the subsequent crystallization of Ferrous Sulfate in trucks and feeding
. equipment .
The following total phosphorus data has been accumulated for the
period from January 12, 1970 through February 28, 1970.
Total Phosphorus in
Screened Seivage 10.1
East Plant Effluent 0.7?
West Plant Effluent 2.?
% Removal East Plant #2.4
% Removal West Plant 73»3
Iron Addition Data
Average Ibs. iron/day = 11,004
Average iron concentration = 12.5
In 'mixed liquor due to
addition in m
The range of total phosphorus concentration in the East Plant
effluent was 0.35 to 1.9 mg/l-P with the high value occuring on a Sunday
and Monday, (no iron was added on Saturdays and Sundays) Of the 48 days
-------
1501
lake Michigan Conference - 3 - March 24, 1970
in the period, 15 days had East Plant total phosphorus residues of 0.50
Bg/l-P or less.
In closing I would like to point out the substantial contributions
of the A. 0. Smith Corporation in both money and engineering expertise. The
A. 0. Smith Corporation has .been responsible for the supply and addition of
the waste pickle liquor and in spite of weather and equipment problems, they
have met their difficult assignments. In addition to the day to day iron
addition, they are proceeding to provide the storage and handling facilities
-needed to maintain and control continuous iron addition.
-------
1502
E. L. Moerke
In order to understand the cost to South
Milwaukee to provide its own secondary treatment as
opposed to coming into the district, it is necessary to
understand the basic financing of the district. The
district has two budgets: one is a capital budget, and
the other is an operating budget. Let me first discuss
the capital budget and how it operates.
The two commissions each year meet jointly
and prepare a district budget for capital improvements.
This budget is transmitted to the County Board of
Milwaukee County and under the law, the county must
approve such budget. The county, however, has the option
to decide whether to provide the money by a general tax
levy payable in the next year or whether they will bond
for all or part of the cost. Generally speaking, the
county outlay for district purposes averaged about $10
million per year since I960, which includes financing
of the current budget by bonds and cash and debt service
and bond retirement from previous years' budgets.
This, then, is distributed to the towns, cities and
villages lying within the county, except for the
city of South Milwaukee, on the basis of the equalized
valuation of all assessable property within such town,
city or village. Thus, for example, the taxpayers of the
-------
1503
E. L. Moerke
city of Milwaukee bear about 75 percent of the capital
budget and the city of South Milwaukee, if they were in
the district, would bear 1.9315 percent.
The second budget prepared is the operating
budget. This budget is certified to the towns, cities,
and villages directly by the district, based on the sewage
contribution of each town, city, and village. If South
Milwaukee came into the district, they would annually
provide about 1.3 billion gallons of sewage out of a
total estimated gallonage of 70 billion gallons put through
our two treatment plants, or roughly 2 percent.
We would now like to give you our analysis of
the relative costs between South Milwaukee coming into
the district and South Milwaukee staying out of the
district and providing its own secondary treatment.
We have included the cost of watercourse improvement
because we feel that this must enter into the total
picture since it will be a cost which is either assumed
by the district or assumed by South Milwaukee.
If South Milwaukee should come into the district
and no Federal or State grants would be given, then the
cost breakdown would be as follows:
Cost of sewer $1.7 million
Watercourse improvement $2.8 million
-------
1504
E. L. Moerke
Total costs of the sewer and
watercourse improvements $4.5 million
South Milwaukee's share of the
sewer and watercourse improve-
ment at 2 percent $90,000
Operating costs annually $100,000
However, the expense to South Milwaukee in
the first year they would be in the district would be
approximately $200,000 on the capital budget and $100,000
on the operating budget for a total of $300,000.
If South Milwaukee stays out of the district
and receives maximum Federal and State grants, the
cost breakdown would be as follows:
Cost of secondary treatment $1.6 million
Recovery of State and Federal
grants totaling 75 percent $1.2 million
Net cost to South Milwaukee for
secondary treatment $400,000
Watercourse improvement $2.8 million
Total cost to South Milwaukee
for watercourse improvements
and secondary treatment $3.2 million
Operating costs $100,000
Total costs to South Milwaukee $3.3 million
These figures speak for themselves and it is
obvious that the cost of providing treatment and improving
Oak Creek in South Milwaukee could be better achieved if
-------
1505
E. L. Moerke
South Milwaukee came into the Metropolitan Sewerage
District. We are here talking about taxpayers' dollars
from whatever source and if South Milwaukee came into the
district, the costs of providing service would be under-
written by the taxpayers of the district and no Federal
or State grant money, which also comes from taxpayers,
would be required. Let me add: If South Milwaukee
should come into the district, there would be no back
charge or entrance fee of any kind for South Milwaukee.
While we have not analyzed the plans of the
city of South Milwaukee, because they have not been
submitted to us, we seriously question the ability of
the city to keep their operating costs under $100,000.
They have estimated their operating costs at $9^,000 in
the application submitted. However, one process control
engineer or chemist will cost between $12,000 and $15,000
a year and they will need at least five operators to operate
this plant and supervise its operation. We estimate that
for the five men this will cost at least $10,000 per man
per year. Then there is the question of maintenance,
repairs, and chemicals needed to keep this plant operating
at top efficiency. Therefore, we question, without even
examining the plans, the operating budget of $9^,000 per
year.
-------
1506
E. L. Moerke
Costs, however, are not the only criteria for
judging the wisdom and feasibility of the plans of the
city of South Milwaukee. We believe that good municipal
waste control can only be acquired with large sewage
treatment facilities and an adequate transmission system
which serves all or a large portion of an entire watershed,
This idea is not of our origination and we do not wish
to take credit for it, for it has been made the policy of
the Great Lakes Water Conference.
When you contrast what South Milwaukee proposes
to do with the limited personnel available to them to that
which is provided by the district, it is readily apparent
that better service can be provided by a metropolitan
district as opposed to a small plant which cannot
economically afford the type of treatment facilities and
laboratory control that we provide. We believe that the
actions of the Department of Natural Resources of the
State of Wisconsin and the proposed action, if I might
say, of the Federal Water Quality Administration are
contradictory to the policy of nonproliferation, which
policy is for the purpose of improving and protecting the
quality of the waters of Lake Michigan and its tributary
areas and for the purpose of ensuring a potable water
supply for all water users of the highest maximum quality
-------
1507
E. L. Moerke
possible.
You should also be made aware of the fact that
the SEWRPC Is studying and preparing a regional sanitary
sewer plan for the seven southeastern counties of the
State of Wisconsin. These counties are Walworth, Kenosha,
Racine, Milwaukee, Waukesha, Ozaukee, and Washington.
We expect that this study will be forthcoming in the
near future and that it will lay the groundwork for many
policy determinations by the Department of Natural
Resources and the legislature of the State of Wisconsin
in dealing with the ever-growing problem of the reduction
of municipal waste and the preservation of our natural
water resources. We envision this report to deal with
the problem of sewage treatment on the basis of natural
watershed boundaries rather than artificial political
boundaries which bear no relationship to the direction
in which waters flow.
This indepth study, which has not as yet
been presented to the public, will undoubtedly
precipitate new legislative considerations due to the
fact that this study was not in existence at the time
the city of South Milwaukee made its application. The
SEWRPC had no power to interject itself into this
controversy because their authority is based only on an
-------
1508
E. L. Moerke
interference with an adopted overall regional plan of
which there was none at that time. We are sure, however,
that if the plans of the city of South Milwaukee were
presented to the SEWRPC after their intensive study
becomes public, that that agency would disapprove of such
plans.
Gentlemen, I know that this discussion has been
long and in some cases very detailed. I have prepared my
remarks and reproduced them so that you may have them and
read them at your leisure. We would ask that you use
your best efforts to reverse some of the decisions that
have been referred to with respect to the city of South
Milwaukee's plans for secondary treatment and we are sure
that you will agree with us that those plans are not in
the public interest. We are certain that there are better
methods for handling the problems of the city of South
Milwaukee with respect to sewage treatment. Again, I
wish Jbo state that I appreciate the time you have given
me and the kind and courteous attention you have rendered
to my discussion. If there are any questions I can
answer, I will be happy to do so.
MR. STEIN: Thank you very much, Mr. Moerke.
I guess this shows that the problem which you
have described, which we are finding all over the
-------
1509
E. L. Moerke
country — and that is the determination of how the
political subdivisions can best handle their wastes in
either a coordinatored or separate effort — is one
that probably at least produces as much heat as the
discharge from a powerplant.
Any comments or questions?
MR. MAYO: Mr. Moerke, I have just a couple of
brief questions with regard to the South Milwaukee
Sanitary District situation.
As I understand, at least the brief
financial comparison that you made here, from the standpoint
of cost to the Federal Government, whether it was in the
form of a $1.5 million grant to South Milwaukee for a
sewage treatment plant englargement, or whether it was a
grant to the Milwaukee Sanitary District for roughly
$1.5 million for an interceptor line, it would be
essentially the same.
MR. MOERKE: I don't know what the Federal grant
would be, or what a State grant would be for the sewer. I
have been told that the chances of getting a Federal or
a State grant would be good for that sewer.
MR. MAYO: Well, the percentage of Federal
participation would be the same whether it was a treatment
plant or whether it was an interceptor.
-------
1510
E. L. Moerke
MR. MOERKE: I am not familiar with the details
of that. You would be the judge of that, but I assume you
are correct.
MR. MAYO: I think another couple of problems
that we are obliged to address ourselves to — perhaps
we will have an opportunity to discuss these in more
length this evening — is the question of whether
or not the South Milwaukee discharge, as it is
contemplated in its current plans, will in fact meet
water quality standards. And, as I understand the State
position, at this time, the discharge would be expected
to meet water quality standards, and whether or not the
general impact upon the environment would be the same
or essentially the same, whether the discharge goes
through the Milwaukee Sanitary District facilities, or
whether South Milwaukee went it alone. So these are
fairly important considerations for us to keep in mind.
One of the hazards that we are faced with in
the Federal Government review of these construction grant
applications, when there is a controversy between a
municipality and a district as to who should provide
the service, is the degree to which we permit ourselves
to become embroiled in the question of the appropriateness
of the costs that a municipality chooses to assume for
-------
1511
E. L. Moerke
itself by following a preferred method of doing something,
and whether we should or can really judge it is
appropriate for a municipality to do under those
circumstances, when, in fact, there is the element of
self-determination.
So I would just offer those as some observations
in connection with the problems we are faced with as we
review construction grant applications when this kind of
a controversy surfaces.
MR. STEIN: Any other questions?
MR. GROBSCHMIDT: I wonder if I could make —
MR. STEIN: I am sorry. You will have to come
up to the microphone and identify yourself.
MR. GROBSCHMIDT: Mr. Chairman, members of
the conference who are in attendance this afternoon and
this morning. Thank you for the opportunity to be able to
say a few words here.
My name is Chester Grobschmidt, and I presently
serve as the Mayor of South Milwaukee. Now, I appreciate
the remarks as stated by the attorney for the Metropolitan
Sewereg System. We have not, at this particular time, a
prepared statement to release to you, but I do have
with me the technical and legal people of our community
who are attending this conference here this morning and
-------
1512
E. L. Moerke
today for the purpose of wanting to be apprised of our
commitment to quality.
The city of South Milwaukee's plant is not a
small plant; it is not a proliferated plant. We advanced
the detail plans for our plant from its infancy to every
proper agency — to the State and to the Federal water
quality people. We had an opportunity to meet with the
Washington officials to explain to them the plight that
the city of South Milwaukee had been faced with.
What Mr. Moerke alludes to in his report
contains several discrepancies, and I think the first
and foremost which your group should take into
consideration is that the $2.8 million costs which
reflect channel improvement actually have nothing to
do with the application as submitted by the city of South
Milwaukee. These costs should not be part of any sewage
treatment and commitment to quality that the city of
South Milwaukee is expected to have.
The watercourse that Mr. Moerke alludes to
happens to fall under the jurisdiction of the Milwaukee
County Park Commission. We have, through the years, given
up lands which were on our tax base. We have removed our
utility, sewer, and water lines to allow for the eventual
widening and deepening of that channel. We have no
-------
1513
E. L. Moerke
Jurisdiction whatsoever of that channel course. This
falls entirely within the responsibility of the Milwaukee
County Parks Commission of which we share in a budget
which is annually assessed to each municipality and
Milwaukee County.
At this particular time, I would like to ask
that your group give me an opportunity to formulate a
rebuttal to the Metropolitan Sewerage Commission's remarks,
sir.
MR. STEIN: Yes. Well, do you want to submit
it for the record?
MR. GROBSCHMIDT: I do not have the remarks
prepared. I do have a group with me — the knowledgeable
people.
MR. STEIN: When can it come in because — you
know, I am involved in innumerable controversies such as
this, and you certainly will have this, and this forum is
open, and I have one observation to make and I ask both
groups to consider this.
I understand you are meeting with Mr. Mayo and
the State officials this evening. You have this kind of
judgment to make on this whether a resolution of this
problem can best be served by utilizing a forum such as
this, to put yourselves on record, or whether you want to
-------
E. L. Moerke
sit down and try to negotiate this without the various
parties concerned.
But certainly the record is open to do whatever
you wish.
MR. GROBSCHMIDT: Sir, I would rather sit down
and talk to responsible parties and resolve this as we
have in the past.
MR. STEIN: Right. But if you want to put
rebuttal in or any other statement, we will keep the record
open for a week and you can put it in.
MR. GROBSCHMIDT: I made my initial remarks
for the benefit of those of the audience who will not
be able to be in attendance at that particular meeting,
so I want to see that the people in the audience are not
disillusioned as to the plant as it exists in the city of
South Milwaukee and the inferences made.
I will accept your suggestion to reasonably iron
this out at a meeting set forth by Mr. Mayo.
Thank you, sir.
MR. STEIN: Thank you very much.
Mr. H. W. Poston, Commissioner of the Department
of Environmental Control, city of Chicago.
-------
1515
H. W. Boston
STATEMENT OP H. W. BOSTON, COMMISSIONER,
DEPARTMENT OP ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL,
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
MR. POSTON: Mr. Stein and members — conferees.
I am very happy to appear before you today. I note that
Perry Miller now has taken over for the State of Indiana,
and I wanted to congratulate Perry in his new position.
MR. STEIN: I made that announcement, Wally,
before when we had a large group here, but this is the
first day that Mr. Miller, on my right, has assumed
the job and office of Executive Secretary of the Indiana
Commission, and he is replacing Mr. Blucher Poole, who we
all know and have worked with through the years . We
all would like to give our best to Perry and well
appreciate the fact that he is spending his first day in
office with us here.
Wally.
MR. POSTON: There is an ever-increasing concern
for the conditions of our lakes and waterways. We in
Chicago are especially concerned about the condition of
our closest and greatest body of water — Lake Michigan.
Although the primary concern of this conference
-------
1516
H. W. Poston
is focused upon the problems related to thermal discharges
in surface waters, I think it appropriate to cite two
other problem areas in which the city of Chicago is
taking positive action on behalf of the environment.
Mr. Vaughn of the Chicago Water Department,
will add to the information from the city of Chicago in
a presentation of chemical data resulting from numerous
studies which the Department has made — that is, the
Water Department — and it will serve as a continuation
of previous reports which he has given to this Board.
During the past boating season Chicago enforced
the harbor pollution control ordinance of the municipal
code which prohibits the discharge of all forms of sewage
into the lake and surrounding waterways. This code
further states that all vessels with toilets must be
equipped with a waste retention tank or incineration
device. Fines ranging from $100 to $500 can be levied
against offenders.
The continued discharge of nutrients, especially
phosphates, into our lakes and waterways causes massive
algal blooms. These growths can contribute substantially
to the degradation of our lakes and other surface waters.
Although the city of Chicago discharges no
sewage — treated or otherwise — into Lake Michigan, masses
-------
1517
H. W. Poston
of decaying algae whose growth was stimulated by nutrients
in sewage from neighboring communities in Illinois and the
States of Michigan, Indiana, and Wisconsin are adding
greatly to the eutrophication of the lake.
A recent conference such as this one called
attention to the need for reducing the amount of phosphorus
reaching our surface waters. To this end, the city of
Chicago has proposed legislation limiting the phosphorus
in detergents by weight to 8.7 percent effective
February 1, 1971. It further proposes that phosphorus
be reduced to zero by June 30, 1972.
This ordinance now pending before the city council
would eliminate about 60 percent of the phosphates in
municipal sewage and should bring about an immediate and
substantial reduction in the phosphorus discharged to the
surface waters downstream from Chicago. We think this
action is warranted for the following reasons:
1) Chicago's primary objective is to protect
Lake Michigan by maintaining the highest level of water
quality, keeping it available for the full complement of
uses for this land and future generations.
2) Chicago desires to improve its rivers and
to be a good neighbor to downstream communities on the
Illinois River system. Chicago wants to limit additions
-------
H. W. Poston
of phosphates to its rivers, thus minimizing water quality
problems now. We do not want to put unnecessary phosphates
in surface waters, and we do not want other communities to
put unnecessary phosphates into Lake Michigan.
3) The aesthetic quality of Chicago's water
supply is at times adversely affected by the presence of
tastes and odors due to algae and diatoms in the raw lake
waters. In addition, these organisms increase Chicago's
water treatment costs. The growth of these algae and
diatoms is stimulated by the presence of phosphates
in the lake.
4) To remove phosphates by advanced waste
treatment methods would mean an additional cost to the
Chicago area residents estimated to be in excess of
$20 million per year. These are figures from the
Metropolitan Sanitary District.
In recent years the calefaction or warming of
bodies of water has posed a possible threat to the
populations of fish and other aquatic life now in
existence. There is no doubt that the balance of aquatic
life will be harmed when water temperatures are raised
to limits beyond a certain toleration level.
Great concern has been expressed by competent
persons in their statements before this conference
and the recent hearings of the Illinois Environmental
-------
1519
H. W. Poston
Control Board regarding the magnitude of the problem and
how it may be effectively controlled. Numerous
investigations now in progress are aimed at assessing
the effects of thermal discharges into Lake Michigan.
One significant achievement concerning calefaction is the
attention being focused on the problem in its infancy
rather than waiting until a crisis proportion has been
reached.
The major problem is not that all of Lake
Michigan will be affected by heat but rather that the
shoreline would become the prime victim of thermal
discharges; thus destroying the values now present —
fish and other aquatic life, recreational resources for
our citizens and a general source of beauty for all of us.
Waste heat addition in coming decades could
significantly raise the temperature in extensive areas
of the inshore waters, particularly the beach water zone.
Waste heat from individual shore discharges are capable
of thermally influencing many miles of lake shore. If
the frequency of discharges along the shore Increased,
many heat plumes would eventually be so close together
that their effects would merge. With the magnitude of
projected waste heat, it is not difficult to envision a
very sizeable portion of the beach water zone and certain
-------
1520
H. W. Boston
adjacent waters physically affected by artificial
temperature increases.
The aggregate influence of waste heat from
increasing numbers of plants around the perimeter of the
lake would proportionately magnify the unnatural effects
on fish and other aquatic organisms caused by a
single plume. Where several powerplants would exist
close together, ecological problems would be intensified
because of the proximity of their thermal zones of
influence.
Under such warmed conditions and in those areas
where nutrients are approaching critical levels, changes
toward increased eutrophication would be expected,
The increased eutrophication would be evidenced by
dramatic increases in blue-green algae.
We think it is possible to realize the full
range of uses of Lake Michigan as a natural resource
by employing imaginative technology to serve human beings
living in an urban setting, whereby the quality of life
is enhanced aesthetically and the functiona, practical
needs are met as well.
Rather than thinking in terms of having to
dissipate the heat developed during the production of
electric power, perhaps we should think in positive terms
-------
1521
H. W. Boston
and find means to utilize this heat. For example:
Heated effluents from nuclear power stations
could be used to some extent to improve the operation of
domestic waste treatment facilities.
Other uses to which the low-grade heat in effluents
might be put include providing irrigation for fruit
orchards, for the raising of fish, keeping the Great
Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway open longer during the year,
extending the swimming season at public beaches, for
heating buildings in high density areas, for the
distillation of salt water or sewage, and using canals to
transport heated water to new, self-supporting metropoli-
tan areas.
As Commissioner of the Department of Environmental
Control, one of our concerns is the quality of our lakes
and waterways. We are noting closely the current research
efforts being conducted by various agencies and individuals.
Wherever possible, my cooperation and that of my staff
is available to prevent any deterioration of Lake
Michigan.
Thank you.
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Poston.
Any comments or questions?
Mr. Poston, I note that you talked about w... warmed
-------
1522
H. W. Poston
conditions and in those areas where nutrients are approach-
ing critical levels, changes toward increased eutrophica-
tion would be expected,"
I think the record will show that you were a
member of this group when determinations were made in
Lake Michigan that nutrients were placed on the critical
list, isn't that correct?
MR. POSTON: That is correct.
MR. STEIN: And that your program presumably in
Chicago limiting phosphorus and detergents, by the way,
to #.7 percent, effective February 1, 1971> is to implement
this. It is designed to help reduce the nutrient discharge
impact on Lake Michigan, is that correct?
MR. POSTON: The impact of this ordinance would
have the effect of encouraging similar ordinances in other
cities that are around the lake. The city of Chicago
itself discharges its waste to the Metropolitan Sanitary
District system, which goes down to the Illinois River.
MR. STEIN: That is correct. But you are
talking in terms of reducing the nutrient problem wherever
it exists, and that Illinois waterway is a slack water
course where you are apt to have these nutrient problems,
too.
MR. POSTON: Where they do have these nutrient
-------
1523
H. W. Poston
problems, too.
MR. STEIN: I didn't want to talk that definitively
about an intrastate situation.
Now, what I am saying is: Given these factors or
these positions you have, if you believe that warming
the nutrients can create eutrophication, would you think
a suggestion would be in order to the conferees — and I
know, as I read your recommendations, you have been
elevated to a statesman status now — to adopt the specific
figure of 8.7 on the phosphates that you, in your role in
Chicago came up with.
MR. POSTON: This is a steep increase, Mr.
Stein, in that by June in 1972 it would be down to zero.
MR. STEIN: Now, what do you think — what
would you suggest to the conferees on temperature? Do
you think we have an obligation to get a specific on
temperature increases as you have on phosphates?
MR. POSTON: 'I would like to very much, Mr.
Stein. I am not privy to all of the information which
has been used in granting permits for construction of
these new works. I haven't been able to digest all of
the information that you, as a conference here, have had
presented to you.
I am sure of a couple of things, and one is that
-------
1524
H. W. Poston
Lake Michigan should not be permitted to depreciate its
quality in any extent and the city of Chicago, I think,
is firm in this conviction. I also am of the decided
opinion that the degradation of Lake Michigan should not
be permitted. As to the exact figure, I am not ready
at this moment to tell you.
MR. STEIN; No, I am not asking you for an exact
figure, but you did come up with a specific program and
a specific figure on phosphates. You have come up with
a specific program and a specific figure on discharge of
various substances into Lake Michigan in your capacity in
the past.
Now, as you view the question of the heat
problem in Lake Michigan, do you think that this panel has
an obligation to come up with specifics, as you have had
in the past with other substances in Lake Michigan, and
specifics as you have in dealing with your phosphate
problem in Chicago?
MR. POSTON: Well, I think certainly that this
would be very desirable and I think that you should. I
think this is a problem that is going to be increasing
rather than decreasing, and I would like to see this panel
come forth with a decision.
MR. STEIN: Are there any other comments?
-------
1525
H. W. Poston
Mr. Miller,
MR. MILLER: Mr. Poston, I have a question that
relates to your ordinance, and my concern is how this
ordinance may speak to substitutes that may replace the
phosphorus and whether they may have just as much or
more of a deleterious effect than phosphorous compounds,
and does your ordinance speak to this?
MR. POSTON: We do not say what the content of
any detergent should be or any soap should be. We are
concerned with the phosphate that we know is deleterious.
We have Carson Pirie Scott, Sears and Roebuck, Marshall
Fields, all advertising and selling detergents wHich
have low phosphate and zero phosphate. They are national
companies which indicate that they can supply adequate
quantities of phosphate to meet the demand, and some of
those with the same ingredients that are already in —
or some of the ingredients that are already in the
detergents.
I recognize that one of the milder substitutes
for phosphates is NTA and I recognize that there have been
clouds cast on the effect that NTA may have* I know
that studies are going on relative to what these effects
are,* But I feel that we can come up with substitutes
that do not have to have this nutrient which is the only
-------
1526
H. W. Poston
nutrient, we feel, that can be controlled, and which does
provide a stimulus or a stimulant to algal growths and
eutrophication of our lake.
MR. MILLER: I don't disagree. I think that
we need to come up with substitutes. But I wonder if
there isn't a need also for showing that the substitutes
are safe and aren't going to have a deleterious effect,
and just limiting the phosphorus may not accomplish this.
And this was my concern,,whether you were also in the
ordinance requiring a showing that the milder or the sub-
stitutes would not cause any deleterious effects.
MR. POSTON: We have not stipulated this in
the ordinance. I would be glad to send you a copy of
the proposed ordinance.
MR. STEIN: Mr. Miller, who do you think should
show that the substance is safe, the public agency or
the manufacturer?
MR. MILLER: I think the manufacturer should
show it is safe.
MR. POSTON: I would agree with that.
MR. STEIN: Would you apply the same principle
to every industry, including the power industry?
MR. MILLER: Well, I think this is really a
question, and it comes down to one that you know — of
the many toxic compounds that you deal with, I think
-------
1527
H. W. Poston
there is an incumbent responsibility on the manufacturer
in the production of products to show that it does not
have an adverse effect.
MR. STEIN: Are there any —
MR. POSTON: I think that when you know that
something is harmful to the lake — and we have such high
regard for this thing — that we need to do something,
and I don't think that that includes waiting for something
else to be proven beyond all shadow of a doubt.
MR. STEIN: Well, Mr. Poston, you know, I have
relied in the past on your valuable advice in the various
jobs you have had throughout the country. While you are
here, I would like to ask you one question. I have been
listening to testimony here for several days. Part of
the testimony is that since we don't know possibly what
the thermal effects of a discharge of heat should be, we
should let this go on in the lake, have some studies made,
not do anything now, but wait until these studies are
completed before we put in a control measure.
What do you think of that approach?
MR. POSTON: Well, I think that there are many
ways to avoid action, and you can get many technical
answers to any particular problem — the reasons for doing
and reasons for not doing. I think you must not forget
-------
H, W. Poston
your goal, which is to prevent eutrophication in the lake, and
that you should move towards that end as fast as you can.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
MR, PURDY: Just one comment. I don't think our
problem is quite that easy. For example, I think that the
city of Chicago adds fluorides to their drinking water supply
for a beneficial purpose. Fluorides in excess concentrations
are harmful, and in the same vein we have to weigh on what
is the harmful level of heat into the lake, and it is just
not that easy.
MR. STEIN; I fully agree with what you say, Mr.
Purdy. I thought we talked about that. As I understand the
story, whether you have an outboard motor or whether you have
a municipal1 ;°wage everyone has added heat to the lake.
I think the question here is one of standards
which are supposed to be met, as contrasted
to a situation where we just move in and abate it after the
damage occurs.
MR. PURDY: Sometimes I think we might have to
reput this because although we are not changing up here
our audience is.
MR. STEIN: Are there any other comments or ques-
tions for Mr. Poston from the audience? If not, thank
you very much, Mr. Poston.
Mr, James Vaughn.
-------
1529
J. C. Vaughn
STATEMENT OF JAMES C. VAUGHN,
ENGINEER OF WATER PURIFICATION,
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
MR. VAUGHN: Mr. Chairman, conferees, and
ladles and gentlemen.
This is a progress report on Lake Michigan water
quality as related to Chicago water treatment plants.
This fourth report to the Four-State Enforcement
Conference on Pollution of Lake Michigan and its Tributary
Basin will be similar in most respects to the one
presented earlier this year at Milwaukee. In general, the
story is one of continuing improvement in water quality
at Chicago. However, increases in concentration of
certain constituents sound an ominous note for the future.
On the whole, the record as summarized here suggests
that gains have been made in improving water quality of
Lake Michigan, permits one to infer that further gains
are possible, and at the same time points out the directions
in which gains in quality are necessary. It provides
grounds for hope but not for complacency.
Several of the tables in this report have been
abbreviated, to avoid undue repetition. Examination of
-------
1530
J, C. Vaughn
the record of earlier sessions of this conference will
provide the data not present here.
For orientation, Figure 1 (See P. 155&) locates
Chicago with respect to major features of the southwest
part of Lake Michigan. The city, its intakes, and its
treatment plants are located between the Calumet industrial
area and what is often called the North Shore. Reference
will be made to both areas later.
The next several figures describe certain
parameters important, to operation of the South Water
Filtration Plant (SWFP). Figure 2 (See P. 1559) demonstrates
that the bacteriological quality of the raw lake water
continued to improve during the first half of 1970.
Previous improvements have often been followed, one can
see, by deterioration, but the fact that the most recent
improvement has continued for 2-1/2 years provides ground
at least to hope that it will be permanent.
Figures 3, 4, and 5 (See Pp. 1560-1562) illus-
trate the data in Table 2. (See P. 1551) Here again is
continued improvement. As Figure 3 shows, during half of
1970, both the number of "oil refinery" odor days and of
odor periods are much less than half of the corresponding
values for 1969.
Similarly, in Figure 4, one can see clearly
-------
1531
J. C. Vaughn
that the ammonia nitrogen concentrations associated with
hydrocarbon odors have continued to decline. These two
parameters (odor and ammonia nitrogen) are important
for their effect on plant and operating costs, since they
profoundly affect the amounts of activated carbon and of
chlorine required for proper treatment of the water.
It will come as no surprise by now to see
that Figure 5 demonstrates that in fact the maximum
activated carbon dosage required for treatment of
hydrocarbon odors decreased during the first half of
1970 to a value below any previous one shown on the
figure.
Figures 6 through 9 (See Pp. 1563-1566)
contain selected data related to water quality in the
Calumet industrial region, south of Chicago. Figure 6
is a map on which are indicated water system intakes,
standard sampling points, and the principal waterways
which connect to Lake Michigan.
On Figure 7 one sees annual values for average
collform MPN at the mouth of the Indiana Harbor Ship
Canal (IHSC) and the mouth of the Calumet River. Here again,
coliform MPN's have been decreasing for 2 years, and in
both cases the MPN has continued to decrease so far in
1970.
-------
1532
J, C» Vaughn
The picture in Figure 8 is somewhat different.
The annual average ammonia nitrogen at the mouth of
the Calumet River was near its 20-year peak in 196?
and 1968, but has decreased significantly so far in 1970.
In the upper curve, the ammonia nitrogen at the mouth of
the IHSC, which had actually been above the scale on the
chart in 1968 and 1969, has decreased noticeably. The
values so far in 1970 are far higher than most historical
ones, and certainly far higher than one would wish to
see, but at least there has been a relative Improvement.
In Figure 9 one notices that phenol concentra-
tions at the mouth of the IHSC have increased somewhat
so far in 1970. However, the increase is not so large
so as to suggest any reversal of the general downward
trend which began in 1964, and cannot as yet be called
significant.
Figures 10,- 11, and 12 (See Pp. 1567-1569)
illustrate, in part, those changes in water quality
which should cause unease. As Figure 10 demonstrates,
nutrient concentrations are and have long been high enough
to permit nuisance algae growths. The data collected
in 1969 suggested that numbers of plankton might be
starting to decline, but the data for the first half of
1970 contradict this interpretation. As the eye looks
-------
1533
j. c. Vaughn
over this bar chart, it automatically tends to see
two continuous curves. The annual averages would lie
along a curve which tends to increase towards the
right, at first gradually, then more steeply. Examination
of the bars for the maximum day produces an effect which
is generally similar but much more pronounced. One is
strongly tempted to conclude that the decrease in 1969
was merely a statistical randomness of the kind one should
expect in a curve which is increasing at an exponential
rate.
On examining determinations of phosphate in Lake
Michigan water at Chicago, one finds a possible explanation
for the difference between 1969 and 1970 data. Tabulated
below are selected points from distribution of total
phosphate for the last 3 years:
PERCENTAGE POINTS OF DISTRIBUTION
Year 5% 50% (median) 95%
1968 0.01 ppm 0.05 ppm O.lM ppm
1969 0.01 0.04 0.12
1970 0.02 0.05 0.12
(Jan-June)
A few other statistics are significant. The
arithmetic average concentration for total phosphate in
1969 was 0.05 p.p.m.; in 1970 so far it has been 0.06
p.p.m. In 1969, 60 percent of determinations were
-------
1534
J . C. Vaughn
above 0.04 p.p.m.; in 1970, 70 percent have been above
this value.
When one compares the data with the value of
0.03 p.p.m. which is often quoted as the threshold abovt
which nuisance algal blooms may occur, an even more
depressing set of figures emerges. In 1968, 80 percent
of determinations were above this limit. In 1969, 70
percent were higher. In January to June 1970, 90 percent
were higher.
Either the reduction in phosphate observed
in 1969 was illusory and merely a product of chance,
or the ground gained in 1969 has been lost, and more
along with it. Whatever interpretation is correct, data
collected at Chicago provide no basis at present for
asserting that any improvement, i.e., reduction, in
phosphate levels of Lake Michigan has occurred.
One peculiar aspect of these data becomes
evident when one plots their size distributions. In 1968
and 1969 the distributions were skewed to the right;
i.e., there were more high values than would be expected
from sampling in a lake at equilibrium with respect to
phosphate concentration. This could be caused by irregular
large inputs, by inadequate mixing of waters receiving
constant inputs, or perhaps for other reasons. In the
-------
1535
J. C.. Vaughn
1970 data, this skewness has nearly disappeared. If this
means that major phosphate inputs have been eliminated,
and that the lake is approaching an equilibrium at
its present level of phosphate, there is reason for
concern certainly for the immediate future, and perhaps
for the long term. This would imply that nuisance algal
growths should be expected until mixing with the deeper
waters plus whatever processes may cause deposition in
sediments have reduced the concentration of dissolved
phosphate below whatever level is critical for Lake
Michigan.
Surveys of Lake Michigan near Chicago
Figure 11, taken from the city's third report
to this conference, represents the trend of chloride and
sulfate concentrations over the period 1860-1960. It
is worth noting that it shows the same sort of exponential
increase in concentration as was suggested earlier in the
discussion of plankton numbers.
Portions of these curves, together with
straight-line trends based on a simpler method of
interpretation are shown in Figure 12. As suggested in
the third report, the sulfate concentrations continue to
lie between the two projections, while the chloride
concentrations remain near the straight line. Both have
-------
1536
J. C. Vaughn
increased. Perhaps more significant, however, is the
fact that here again the variation has begun to resemble
more closely that which one would expect in sampling from
an equilibrated system. In part this can be attributed
to the fact that the points for 1970 represent only half
a year, but it is unlikely that this is a complete
explanation.
Figure 13 (See P. 1570) based principally on
data in Table 4 (See P. 1553)» may appropriately conclude
our discussion of data collected at Chicago waterworks
intakes. It illustrates, in terms of raw water odors
and carbon usage, the improvement that has taken place
in one importrnt characteristic of Lake Michigan at
Chicago.
During the first half of 1970, odors were less
frequent and less severe. On only 1 day, April 20, 1970,
was it necessary to feed more than 30,000 pounds of carbon.
This contrasts with 10 days in 1969> and an average of 17
days per year for the last 10 years. Further confirmation
of improvement in raw water quality will be noted if one
examines Tables 3, 5» and 6 (See Pp. 1552, 1554, 1555).
Whatever may be in store for the future, there
is no denying that from the plant operator's point of
view, there has been improvement recently in the quality of
-------
1537
J. C. Vaughn
raw water.
I might depart from the text at this point to
say that from the first of July we have enjoyed the lowest
coagulate requirements in the history of either plant.
Never before have we been able to produce satisfactory
water with a coagulate slightly in excess of 6 p.p.m.
We enjoy our pleasures when we have them and we hope to
continue.
MR. STEIN: By the way, Mr. Vaughn, while you are
interrupting, the schedule indicates now that you are going
on after lunch.
Will you continue?
MR. VAUGHN: Turning now to measurements over a
larger area, let us consider in Figures 14-17 (See Pp.
1571-1574) some of the data collected in our lake sampling
program. As in earlier figures, data for 1970 cover only
the period from January to June. For lack of time to
redraw the entire figure, data for 1970 in Figure
14 have been fitted between those for 1968 and 1969. The
limits on the chart are those set by the Illinois Sanitary
Water Board for the open waters of Lake Michigan, and
have received the approval of the Federal Government.
Clearly, at nearly every location covered by these
surveys, the phosphate concentration increased above the
-------
J. C. Vaughn 1538
concentrations found in 1969. At one point (3N) no change
was observed. Clearly, too, concentrations at all points
were above the annual average concentrations in the
relevant ISWB standard.
In Figure 15, plotted in the same manner and
showing average ammonia nitrogen concentrations, there
has been a small decrease in general compared to 1969
measurements, although concentrations in general are
above the maximum annual average permitted by the
Federally-approved ISWB standards.
Figure 16 compares data for 1969 and 1970 on
total and fecal coliform organisms at the same locations.
Obviously, even taking the logarithmic nature of the
scale into account, there has been a sharp decrease at
every point, as there have been decreases at locations
mentioned earlier.
Figure 17 Illustrates average phosphate
concentrations for surveys during the first half of the
year, along the shore of the lake south of the area
shown in Figures 14, 15, and 16. Here phosphate
concentrations at two points (6s and 73) have declined
slightly, but at all other points they have remained
at 1969 levels or increased somewhat. All are above the
maximum annual average concentration of ISWB standard, and
most of the averages are above the higher limit for daily
values.
-------
1539
J. C. Vaughn
Table 8 (See P. 1557 ) summarizes results of
tests made for 5-1/2 years on seventeen of the parameters
in the ISWB standard for open waters of Lake Michigan.
For each fraction, the numerator is-the number of days
on which the standard was exceeded; the denominator, the
number of days for which tests were made.
Data for 1965-3969 have been reduced to annual
averages; data for 1970 represent the period January to
June. The increases in permissible concentration for
chloride, sulfate, and filterable residue incorporated
into the ISWB standard were assumed to take effect.at the
start of 1970.
In the main, these data confirm what has been
said earlier. Changes in bacteriological and most chemical
parameters so far in 1970 suggest improvement in water
quality in the lake. It is interesting to note that
chloride concentration which exceeded the 1965-1969
standard only once in 5 years, has exceeded the more
generous 1970 standard twice in half a year. Sulfate
concentration, which never exceeded the 1965-1969 maximum
daily concentration, has exceeded the larger permissible
maximum daily concentration seven times so far in
1970. Filterable residue, which exceeded the 1965-1969
permissible concentration only three times in 5 years,
-------
J. C. Vaughn
has exceeded larger permissible concentration thirty
times in 1970, so far. And, of course, total phosphate,
whose permissible concentration remains unchanged at .04
milligrams per liter for daily samples, and which
exceeded this concentration nearly half the time in
1965-1969, is now exceeding that concentration about
two-thirds of the time.
At this time, Mr. Chairman, I would like to read
the addendum which was provided for the conferees
and the Secretary, and prepared by Mr. Benjamin Willey,
Director, Water Purification Laboratory, city of Chicago.
And, if you have any questions, I will ask Mr. Willey to
answer them.
Suggestion has been made that alternate methods
of cooling are available for waste heat disposal, such as
dry and wet type cooling towers and spray ponds. In view
of this report in which we have shown increasing trends
in both chloride and sulfate concentrations in water at
the southern end of Lake Michigan, we could only view
with alarm the use of wet cooling systems. These would
Inherently provide for concentration of dissolved solids
which would have to be disposed of in large measure
by blowdown.
Since calcium carbonate deposition can be a
-------
J. C. Vaughn
major problem in both condensers and cooling towers
it is most likely that alkalinity reduction and pH
readjustment would be required with conversion of most
or all of the alkalinity to sulfate ion.
Dissolved solids in Lake Michigan water are
approximately 150 milligrams per liter, with about 110
milligrams per liter of alkalinity, 25 milligrams per liter
of sulfate and 8 to 10 milligrams per liter of chlorides.
Assuming evaporative cooling and recirculation of condenser
cooling water under conditions frequently encountered
in the Great Lakes area, a concentration of 10 times the
raw water would be expected as an average high dissolved
solids in the recirculating water, to be maintained by
blowdown plus a nominal draft. This would mean blowdown
solids of approximately 1, 500 milligrams per liter
tol,SOO milligrams per liter (12,500 to 14,000 ibs./million
gallons) with most of it present as sulfate. Chlorides
would approach 80 to 100 milligrams per liter. To return
this water to Lake Michigan would further materially
increase the sulfate content in the local area and
eventually add to the already significant rate of rise in
sulfate as well as chloride in the lake water. Addition
of wastewater of this dissolved solids magnitude would be
in violation of SWB-7 and would probably be equally
-------
J. C. Vaughn
objectionable to other wastewater courses affecting streams
or rivers in the area.
Although question has been raised concerning
whether the effects of thermal pollution could be con-
sidered reversible in some instances, there can be no
question that sulfate and chloride ion pollution from cooling
water blowdown would be both harmful and irreversible.
I will proceed with the main text.
Following the report of finding mercury in the
Lake St. Glair, Port Huron and Sarnia area, Government,
State, and municipal laboratories began testing in various
areas of the Great Lakes system. At the present time a
total of 453 tests have been run by the city of
Chicago Water Purification Laboratory covering samples
taken from Lake Michigan from the Wisconsin line to the
Michigan line. The surveys included the North Lake
Survey, South Lake Survey, North Harbor Survey,
mouth of the Chicago River, Navy pier and the Calumet-
Indiana Harbor Ship Canal Survey. In addition, many raw
water samples were tested at Central, South, and Hammond
intakes and outlet (treated) waters were tested from
Hammond, 73rd and 79th Street outlets of SWFP, and
north and central outlets from CWFP. All samples were
below the detectable limit for mercury.
-------
1543
J. C. Vaughn
Tests prior to August 21, 1970, were reported on
a detectable limit of -p.;, p.p.b. Tests on and after August
22, 1970 (275 determinations), reported mercury below 0.1
p.p.b., which is less than .01 microgram per liter. There-
fore, based on our tests, the southern end of Lake Michigan
can be stated to be free of mercury contamination at the
present time.
MR. STEIN: What kind of test did you use, Mr.
Vaughn?
MR. VAUGHN: Our method was modified, and the
thing that is shocking about the whole mercury story, if
I may ad lib on it, is the fact that mercury is a very
heavy material, settles at the bottom of the lake and
probably would remain inactive, but it combines with the
organic materials in the lake, in the sediments, to make
soluble and volatile compounds. So this method is a new
method that involves the use of an atomic absorption unit
in which I add the proper reagents to convert the mercury
to a volatile or soluble compound and run a stream of air
through that at a fixed rate through a quartz cell through
which a cathode ray tube suitable for mercury goes, and
then you write it on the chart.
MR. STEIN: In other words, it is what we would
call "fLameless atomic absorption?"
-------
1544
J, C. Vaughn
MR. VAUGHN: Yes.
MR. STEIN: The low parts per billion, how far
down —
MR. VAUGHN: Well, the limit is supposed to be
0.5 p.p.b., but the standard will come out very clearly
as low as 0.1 p.p.b.
MR. STEIN: Let me try to reframe the question.
We are consistently getting results from our
laboratory down to 1 part per billion on the production-
line basis. Do you mean to say in your testing when you
say, Hbelow detectable limits" that means below 1 part
per billion or below 0.5 parts per billion?
MR. VAUGHN: Well, we look below 1, in fact we
look below a half.
MR. STEIN: That is right.
Well, if we don't run it too fast and we take
our time, we can get down to 0.2 p.p.b., but for practical
purposes, we are using 1 part. I assume that you are
using that as a cutoff point to talk about — no?
MR. MATO: One.
MR. VAUGHN: Well, Mr. Stein, we will let Mr.
Willey explain briefly that. He is in direct charge of that,
-------
1545
B. F. Willey
and much more familiar with it than I am.
MR. WILLEY: I am Ben Willey, Director of the
Water Purification Lab for the city.
Our methodology has improved to the point where
we are getting low detectable limits of 0.1 p,p.b. Of
course, the proposed standard is ,5 p.p.b., or 5 micrograms
per liter is the Russian standard and the one which we are
presently using as a proposed limit.
MR. STEIN: Who is using that?
MR. WILLEY: I understood that the U. S. Public
Health Service put this in there about March or April of
this past year. There is something in the record on this
that they proposed that we take this over.
Anyway analytically we started out with the
flameless atomic absorption method being very easily
detectable down to a half oart per billion. We have
since twice step-wise impi-oved the accuracy to where we
now can read one-tenth of a p.p.b. and know that it is
there. All of our tests in southern Lake Michigan thus
far have been well below that detectable limit.
MR. STEIN: Thank you. I think you have a good
program here but I want to make one thing pretty clear:
I don't want anyone going away with the notion that you
are going to have a standard foi * half part per billion
-------
1546
B. J. Willey
and that is the standard we are looking for. I don't know
that we have any numbers yet, but so far we are talking
about trying to reduce mercury down pretty much to back-
ground levels if we can. We are coming pretty close.
The plants have responded really famously on this. Plants
which were putting out 20, 30, 40, 60 pounds of mercury
a day are almost all down to below a pound and the vast
majorities, I think, are down below a half pound. Of
course, when you have to scrabble for inches or ounces that
is when the problem becomes more difficult.
But I don't want anyone to get the impression
that there is a numerical tolerable standard of mercury
that the governmental agencies have put out or agreed upon.
MR. WILLEY: That is right. I think that this
could be mentioned in this sense. In our early work when
mercury was found, we went to the wet method. We aimed to
find out how to get it. Obviously, the wet method did not
give us the answer on the basis of the Russian standard,
and certainly we shouldn't go any higher than that standard,
So we went from that to atomic absorption flame
method. This also was not suitable, and finally when we
got the flameless method we were well under any previously
talked about limits.
-------
1547
B. J. Willey
MR. STEIN: Mr. Purdy.
MR. PURDY: While we are talking about detectable
limits, I think we also ought to talk about detectable limits
in what? And are you speaking now of the detectable limit
at the water, and do you have that same detectable limit
in bottom muds and on fish?
MR. WILLEY: No, we have a much lower detectable
limit in water. We have a higher accurate detectable limit
— half a p.p.b. in mud — rather in fish. In muds,
the detectable limit is much higher. I understand it is 5.
This is the most difficult thing we have to do.
MR. STEIN: We also have a problem. I guess,
Mr. Vaughn, according to your testimony you possibly don't
have it. But what happens with us is when we take the
material from an industrial discharge, it often has a lot
of other gunk in it. When we run it through the flameless
atomic absorption method, it just puts the machine out of
commission for days. As you can appreciate, in order to
do this in the Federal operation, we have taken laboratory
equipment and turned that into a production line device,
which has given us a lot of problems. But when we get these
industrial samples, we have to run them twice through a
pretesting system to be sure that it won't wreck our flameless
atomic absorption system and disable our production line.
-------
J. C. Vaughn
By the way, the response we have gotten from
the industry in this reduction program of mercury, has
been as rapid as any that I have ever experienced. We have
really cut the mercury discharges, at least from those
sources which were pouring it into the water courses, very,
very rapidly within the past several months.
Would you continue, Mr. Vaughn?
MR. VAUGHN: I would like to add one thing, the
estimate — that is Lake St. Glair, the St. Glair River
— it was estimated that 565>000 pounds of mercury have
been discharged to that area over the last 20 years. That
is a figure that sort of keeps me awake nights.
MR. STEIN: That is right.
Did you ever figure out how much this mercury
costs? I am frequently asked that question. I am not
necessarily asking it here. But consider the cost per pound
of mercury and how many pounds were being discharged daily.
I don't think we have any disagreement on the figures that
we had, with those industries involved. This was
never an area of disagreemart — their measures equaled our
measures. But when you consider the cost of mercury and
the amount of mercury which was discharged into the
wastewater each day, a lot of the people have asked me how
-------
1549
J. C. Vaughn
the industry in this country could have afforded to put
that much stuff out in their waste. I don't know what
the answer to that is.
MR. VAUGHN: I think the cost is $7.50 a pound.
MR. STEIN: Go ahead.
MR. VAUGHN: Conclusion. From the plant
operator's viewpoint there has been a measurable and
continued improvement in water quality of Lake Michigan
at Chicago. This improvement started in 1969 and has
continued in 1970, resulting in considerable reduction
in difficulty and cost of water treatment. Most of the
measured parameters of water quality have shared in this
improvement.
Two sorts of water quality parameters, however,
do not fit this pattern. One group, related to the burden
of dissolved solids, has showed a continuous increase in
concentration, perhaps even at an increasing rate. The
other group, consisting of algal nutrients, shows no
improvement. In the case of phosphate, there is evidence
that the improvement observed in 1969 has been lost, and
that further increases in phosphate concentration have
occurred in 1970. Furthermore, it may at least be
-------
1550
J. C. Vaughn
conjectured that concentrations of phosphate in the
relatively shallow waters of Lake Michigan from which water
supplies are drawn are tending toward an equilibrium con-
centration which is well above the threshold concentration
for nuisance algal growth.
For these reasons, while the outlook for the
recent past and the short-term future permits optimism,
the outlook for the longer term is badly clouded. Clearly
'considerable effort is still required to improve and pro-
tect the quality of Lake Michigan's waters. Without effec-
tive control of its water quality, Lake Michigan could
deteriorate to the level of Lake Erie.
The tables and charts are arranged in the back
of the book.
MR. STEIN: Without objection, they will be
included in the transcript, Mr. Vaughn.
(The tables and charts follow on pages 1551
through 1574.)
MR. STEIN: Mr. Miller.
MR. MILLER: Mr. Vaughn, I am interested in the
comments that you made particularly on the sulphates
because I know that there have been large quantities of
sulphates that have been reduced or eliminated from waste
discharges "in the Indiana area. What time of year did
-------
1551
CM
W
h-I
3
H
W
P H
O 2
H < X
H H O
|-~i r*-»
r O ON
W CO r-l
H 1
oo O O
<3 EH in
13 ON
^ 2
pi P-I
W PH
M OO
pZH
S W
H
l~1 S;
hH £2
p
< &
-l i-l
J3 0) IT)
CO P-I
0)
^i bO
X! (3 0
EH M m
S ^3 7-H
3 P CM
E3
•H OT
cS O CN
g -o i
0 -*
to
n)
P
j-j
o
O
r 1
cd
4-1
O
H
CO
O
"H
M
01
P-i
jj
O
X)
O
^
ca
cu
oovo ovo \OON inm COCM
in *cr ON VD in r^ ( — i CN o i— i
i— i •* incM COCM «a~(n mi-~
i-i
1-41 II II II II
CO Kf i-4 1 i-l 1 r-l 1 i-l CM
^o ^o ^o vo i-~i m CM oo VD r^^
1— 1 i— 1 i— 1 i— 1 r-l i—li—l i— 1 I—I
vo ^ O OO ro vo CO ON CO O
i— I
OO r-. cMin coco r— ON
rHCM i— 1 i— 1 rH i— 1 i— 1 i— 1 i— 1 i— 1
O i — 1 CM CO ^J" in vD 1^* OO ON
inin inm inin inin inin
ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON
i— 1 i— 1 i— 1 i— 1 i— 1 i— 1 i— 1 i— 1 r-4 i— 1
-*oo oo mo m i-» i-i r-- co
c^ oo r^*- oo *^ c^i oo Lf^ f~~^ LO i™~t
£T) ff) fsj ^Q f^, ff) pT) LT^ xj" LO ^4
II II r-l 1 II II 1
i-l I 1 i— 1 | i— 1 i— 1 i— 1 i-l i— 1 |
O co co r — r*^ *3~ in o r^ co in
CMCM CMCM CNr-l CMCM i-4t-4
^j1 ON r*^ r^^ oo *J* ON oo in *^t" i~-i
I-HCO cooo com vDr—i cMin in
CMCM CNCM CMrH CMCxl CMr-l
O)
C
^
*~5
i
u
n)
*->
o i— i c^ co ~^~ m **o r^ oo ON co
vO **O vO VD **O VO ^D *sO *«O ^O f^
ON ON O*> ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON
i— 1 i— 4 i— 1 r-l i— 1 •— 1 r-4 i— 1 rH i— 1 rH
O
bO
Cfl
O
•H
rC
U
4-1
o
>-.
4J
°H
o
*\
co
M
0)
0)
X)
c
n
O)
4-1
cd
£2
14H
O
4-1
c
01
S
4-1
M
CtJ
(X
O)
p
^
U
cu
4-1
ex)
13
o
CTJ
0)
^-1
^3
PQ
-------
1552
n
W
cq
H
P
O
W
PH
a
0
P M
3
«t hJ
>H O
iJ PH
PH
PH PH
POO
c/} P r^
O ON
PH r-l
W hJ 1
H
W H
H
O
^
i— i
0) CC
C OJ
'd r-(
O i-
r-l B
U f
B *^«^
p
B /-
tfl 60 r-
K* CO C^
•H CO £>C
W O
0 P r-l
C 1
P iO ^C
E M Cl
x u
CO
2
Cfl ^^
•H E
C P
§ ^
§ ^^
^3 c
a
S C
B £
«H -P
X -H
M
n
a)
^*
o in r~) *^~ CXD n *^~ oo
^H^- ^j^ |y"^ |j-j f~^ «H^ ^^ y^
00 cr\ c^>
i— 1 i— 1 r-l t— 1 i— 1 i-H rHi— 1
-l CMOO r^OO vtCM OOin t-lin r-l
in r^ n co n vo f*^ n n tn
1
C
CO
^3
oo ON o r—^ CN co ^^* in ^o r*^ oo c^ co
in in vo *«o vo **D vo **o vo v^ vo *o i — •
CJ> CTN 0"i CT* ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON ON
I— 1 I— 1 T— 1 i— 1 I— 1 I— 1 t— It— 1 t— 1 i— 1 i— 1 r-l i— 1
O
60
cO
•1-1
(-J
O
M-l
O
^*»
4J
°ft
o
•*
W
0)
OJ
t/D
*T^
c
cd
M
a)
cO
JZ
M-l
O
a
a)
B
4J
^
ctf
CU
P
(J"
OJ
4-1
CO
&
<4-t
0
3
CU
V,
3
«
-------
1553
w
o
M W
h4 H H
^ ^ 3
<5 ^
W PH
z w
o < a
pq i-J O
Pi H
<3 a E-i
C_> M O m
M PS ON
H PK Ed i-i
U O H
< <|
fe ^3
O > ffi
O H
f£ W O
• CO
<3 co
0
p
X—*
to
|Q
^O '""'
cu ^-^
4J
C^ T3
> CU
•H '<-<
O p
<< p
"td G
4J 0
O ,f"*
H s-i
cfl
U
^
cfl
CU
oovoovovooNinincocsi^t'OOOOinoinr^i— ir^c^1)
m 4-l
3
cfl
(U
3
PQ
-------
1554
TABLE 5
Annual Consumption of Activated Carbon,
Coagulants (Alum, Ferrous Sulfate), and Chlorine
1965-1970
Year
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
Activated
Total lb.
3,094,606
4,678,661
4,455,273
4,876,309
2,542,600
1970 880,900
(Jan- June)
Carbon
Ib /ml leal
23
33
32
33
18
13
Coagulants
Total Ib,
14,279,870
16,445,820
15,778,872
15,907,820
14,701,900
6,708,100
Ib /mi leal
104
116
112
109
104
99
Chlorine
Total lbn
2,797,986
3,518,720
3,388,261
3,215,810
2,969,600
906,400
Ib/milgal
20^4
24.8
24.0
21-3
16,1
13c4
Total Water
Treated
(mi leal)
136,895
142,084
141,107
146,166
141,779
67,508
Total 20,528,349 83,822,312 17,796,777 775,539
Average 3,732,427 26 15,420,433 108 3,235,778 22-9
Bureau of Water, Department of Water and Sewers, City of Chicago
-------
1555
TABLE 6
Summary of Costs: Activated Carbon,
Coagulants (Alum, Ferrous Sulfate), and Chlorine
1965-1670
Activated Carbon Coagulants Chlorine
Year Total $/milgal Total $/milgal Total $/milgal
1965 $ 243,055c45 $1,78 $ 268,806.52 $1,96 $122,776*01 $0.90
1966 361,222,18 2,54 303,788-28 2,14 162,470.73 1,14
1967 368,913.81 2,61 293,547,31 2,08 167,047,76 1,18
1968 415,789.00 2.86 304,206,00 2,07 146,122,00 1,00
1969 224,134,00 1,58 263,900,00 1.86 143,098.00 1,01
1970 77,749.00 1-15 131,071,00 1.94 41,800,00 0.62
(Jan-June)
Total $1,690,863,44 $1,565,319,11 $741,932,50
Average $ 307,429.72 $2,18 $ 284,603,,47 $2,01 $134,896.82 $0.96
Bureau of Water, Department of Water and Sewers, City of Chicago
-------
1556
TABLE 7
CONTRACT PRICES PER TON
Central & South Water Filtration Plants
1965-1970
Chemical
Year
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
Alum (Soln)
$39.07
40,55
41-85
43,45
43,75
44,05
Carbon
$156,18
156,70
166,60
178,00
173,00
178,00
Chlorine
$96,74
95,20
97o20
93.40
95,40
95,40
Bureau of Water, Department of Water and Sewers, City of Chicago
-------
1557
ca
w
^
3
13
bJ
O
JO
1
W
-J >— *
pa 2:
<; —i
M O
j-i
k-j
0
05
25
O
U
..
Q
W
O
w
-J
c <
*d o
01 O
— * 1
~T— ^g LQ
>>0
ai en c^
t4 f-t — i
H -—I
2 oo
:ri °^
i — i
<^3
0
~> '^
— 1 — 1
H
c3
Q
0{
00 >
d TJ Ci
S •" S
,-j
^ _ ai
on <;
z a CM
AV
—1
00
— 1
0
_n
-sj
J .
(T^L
rr
00 •
> oc
^
C "
<; p
^3
-—i
•^-^
— i
-^.
rvj
,•*-
O"1
r^j
"-V
~^-
j
— 1
oo
-j
^.
o
o
-T
'^1
--^
O
— ,
00
— 1
^,
o
'-O
sO
rO
-•-»,
~^
— t
;
. — i
OO
--,
1 -O
1 .O
^
i ^"^
-O
cs
A
A
/ r
^3
C
OJ
— i
b£
C
^
U
'j
t _
3 e
_j
a o
Oj O
u ~~
CO -
-. ^
i 2:
U-, —
i-O uO
—i
^
^sj
oo
« -t
~^
0
^o
J"l
"^
•^,
0
-
oo
—J
J
r*
"Nl
•"^
o,'
o
~— !
_J
'"•j
X)
-„
0
_r*
O^-
•-.,
O
— 1
X3
"1
i
O
•oo
- J
-
Nl
>T^
00
c~-0
"-.
."\J
o
'---
*M
,
O
CO
M
o
1
i
oo
—i
•v.
o
•~r\
_,
r{ — i
•> cfll T) Ot
>
1 <*
— t QJ 1 Clj
T5 -. -4 >.
3 00 -J3 ^
C C! C -
t~' —
_'
o
— 1
o — •
U -0
B ci
-H ^
^j O
XJ
O
XJ
o
-a
—
— i
"5
OJ
-0
Q
Of
d
-j
00
N
^
— '
0.'
i.-l
1j
^J
."?
'-
Fi
i'
rrji
H
0
i
d- O
oo a>
I !
: 1
00 •--
i'
aO a.
d oi
"3 C1
o5 "o
fy!
.15 >,
d -.
d T)
•f^ Q
--^
o, •--•
o o
ON OO
U*/
—J
JO
— 1
-^
0
-<~;
OO
rsj
~^
0
;
|
1
1
J™1
O
r^
"--,
"01 •> art > T5
< c <: ^
j <
3 oil 3 ^
d d] d -
C — • I dl ^0
^ o
yj t-J
c -J
00
*T3
QJ -'
^
— '• JJ
0
J'J *-
>c
W)
~
V
J-J
-^
^
T
C —
F b£
^ e
< o
11
~ —«
< -O
••
CJ
<^ ~~-
^
a si
— J £^
CQ — '
-J U
C ,
a- c
i u
-Tl J>
a; "1
1> "0
^C C^1
— 1 J)
T ~
1
1
£
00 s*
0 1 ^ t^
00
-
— 1
0
"0
^o
r-j
-^
O
xD
ro
*-^.
: 1
-^,
"--
*-•-.
o^
CN
^^.
0
i
1
1
I
|
•_n o
— 1 "O
O O
— -O
o o
o o
10 o
&A _ A '
^^JT^jA^ a
IJT^TT
-JJ =-
> CO
<• n
I
CJ
*
C
< C/)
'Jt
^
T3
"• '^
C- f:
-^
-- CL'j -- 'D
<: Q
-J QJ
3 00
c a
£! --1
^_
^
C7^
C^
(N
— .
^d"
rfl
-O
CN
« — 1
~-^
c
CO
^J-
I — 1
-^
o
o
•*- \
J^
^D
-^
^— s
rsi o
^c ^3
"•"H CNI
-A ^A
IVTr
v^« »
00 ^
< 0
-J CU
3 Ot
d d
d -i
-
> cfl
< 0
— 1 QJ
^T) —1
3 Ot
d a
d -i
1 Jr-J
n3 c_?
•a
•J-i cn
O ^J
QJ
M ^
01 0)
J3 CO
§ ^
S d
-^ rt
03
-H H
>-i a)
<1J 4-1
4-1 Ol
•H |3
S-l
u m
o
00
C 4-1
•^ a
^ QJ
QJ 2
CU 4-1
O l-l
X n)
ai a
QJ
tn Q
03 •*
'3 SH
QJ
q_j ( i
O 0)
^
i_j
QJ 4-1
-Q 0
e
3 3
S3 n)
ai
M
3
-------
FIGURE I
1553
WISCONSIN
ILLINOIS
WEST SHORE OF SOUTHERN PORTION OF LAKE MICHIGAN,
SHOWING DISTANCES BETWEEN MOUTHS OF INDIANA
HARBOR SHIP CANAL AND CALUMET RIVER AND
VARIOUS WATERWORKS INTAKES.
WAUKEGAN
NORTH CHICAGO
GREAT LAKES
LAKE FOREST
FORT SHERIDAN
HIGHLAND PARK
LAKE COUNTY
COOK COUNTY
51 MILES
LAKE
MICHIGAN
OLD TWO-MILE CRIB
CWFP
68th ST
DUNNE CRIBS
S.W.F.P
N
DEPARTMENT OF WATER 8 SEWERS
BUREAU OF WATER
CITY OF CHICAGO
JANUARY 31- I9BB
-------
1559
UJ
on
o: K-
o <
LL C
R
i
o
in
0)
"I
UJ
-o
$
o
o
If)
o
in
O
O
O
fl
o
o
o
IT)
1^001 H3d SNSINVOUO
UJ
£
O
O
o:
UJ
a.
(£
E
O
O
.UJ
01
UJ
iO
en
10
O
o o
o o
fO
10
CM
co
<0
10
CM
C0
IO
(0
CM
S
CM
<6
O>
on
en
FIGURE 2
-------
1560
ABNORMAL "OIL REFINERY11
TYPE ODOR PERIODS
SOUTH WATER FILTRATION PLANT INTAKE
1950 - 1970
125
CO
O 100
O
cr
UJ
a.
a:
2
75
u.
o
a:
LU
CD
50
25
TOTAL DAYS ODORS
OCCURRED EACH YEAR
ODOR PERIODS EACH YEAR
*JAN.-JUNe ,1970
I9501
I 'IOKK'
1955'
'i960
T|965'
'I9701 I
DEPARTMENT OF WATER A SEWERS
BUREAU OF WATER
CITY OF CHICAGO
YEAR
FIGURE 3
-------
1561
FIGURE 4
MAXIMUM AMMONIA NITROGEN
DURING ABNORMAL "OIL REFINERY"
TYPE ODOR PERIODS
SOUTH WATER FILTRATION PLANT INTAKE
I960 - 1970
0.7r
0.6
£ 0.5
QL
Q.
Ld
§0.4
o:
ro
z
S
0.3
O.I -
'JAN.-JUNE ,1970
1950
i I i
'1955'
'i9601
'1965'
VroT
DEPARTMENT OF WATER » SEWERS
BUREAU OF WATER
CITY 0? CHICA60
YEAR
-------
FIGURE 5
1562
MAXIMUM ACTIVATED CARBON
DOSAGE DURING ABNORMAL
"OIL REFINERY" TYPE ODOR PERIODS
SOUTH WATER FILTRATION PLANT INTAKE
S.
UJ
o
O
o
o
oo
CC
<
o
o
UJ
I
o
CL
^
o
X
<
I960 - 1970
I200r
1100-
1000-
900-
800-
700-
600-
50O-
400-
300-
200
100 -
'JAN.-JUNK, 1970
I95O
DEPARTMENT Of WATER ft SEVERS
PUMEAU OF WATER
CITY Of CHICA80
'I9951
I960'
19*5'
1970'
YEAR
-------
1563
WEEKLY POLLUTION SURVEYS - LOCATION OF SAMPLING POINTS
O 66 +h ST. CBIB
O
79th ST.
SAMPLING POINTS
tint ST.
SOUTH MATER FILTRATION HANT
CITY OF CHICAGO
OEPARTMiNT OF WATER AND SEWERS
FIGURE 6
JUNE IW D-P.
-------
1564
O
Q
ir
LJ
a.
O
O
LJ
DC
LJ
ANNUAL AVERAGE COLIFORM
ORGANISMS PER 100 ml.
6r
4h
WEEKLY SANITARY SURVEYS
1950 "1970
MOUTH OF INDIANA HARBOR
SHIP CANAL-DICKEY RD. BRIDGE
MOUTH OF CALUMET
RIVER-92nd ST BRIDGE
I95O1
DEPARTMENT OF WATER A SEWERS
BUREAU OF WATER
CITY OF CHICAGO
YEAR
' '
* JAM- JUNE l»70
FIGURE 7
-------
ANNUAL AVERAGE AMMONIA NITROGEN
WEEKLY SANITARY SURVEYS
1950-1970
1565
7.46
5.0 r
E
a.
CL
Ld
8
o:
to
x
LU
2
<
4.0
30
2.0 -
1.0 -
MOUTH OF INDIANA HARBOR
SHIP CANAL-DICKEY RD. BRIDGE
MOUTH OF CALUMET
RIVER-92nd ST BRIDGE
(_,
DEPARTMENT OF WATER a SEWERS
BUREAU OF WATER
CITY OF CHICAGO
YEAR
* JAN.-JUNE l»70
FIGURE 8
-------
1566
ANNUAL AVERAGE PHENOL
WEEKLY SANITARY SURVEYS
1950-1970
©INDIANA HARBOR SHIP CANAL SAMPLING AT CANAL ST.
BRIDGE (1950-1959) AND DICKEY RD. BRIDGE (1960-1967)
©CALUMET RIVER SAMPLING AT 92 nd ST BRIDGE
(1950-1967)
0.25
0.20
0.
QL
I
_]
o
X015
CL
UJ
0.10
UJ
_l
Z>
2
Z
<
0.05
0.00
MOUTH OF INDIANA HARBOR
SHIP CANAL ©
MOUTH OFv CALUMET RIVER
I I
1950
DEPARTMENT OF WATER a SEWERS
BUREAU OF WATER
CITY OF CHICAGO
T"
T I
YEAR
I I I
•f JAN-JUNE 1970
FIGURE 9
-------
1567
a:
LU
a.
(Tt
5
c/2
z
<
CD
ft
O
O
01
O
PLANKTON '
MICROORGANISMS PER ml
SOUTH WATER FILTRATION PLANT INTAKE
16,000 r
15,000
14,000
13,000
12,000
11,000
10,000
9,000
I960 - 1970
.MAXIMUM DAYv,
1950
DEPARTMENT OF WATER S SEWERS
BUREAU Of WATER
CITY OF CHICAGO
1955
ANNUAL DAY
JLftJJLJL
I960
YEAR
JAN.-JUNE ,1970
FIGURE 10
-------
• *v%.
LJ
go
8 a-
_LU 5?
9
O)
0)
3
to
(M
*>
$
00
S
00
o
K
00
s
00
FIGURE ||
-------
45 YEAR RECORD OF CHLORIDE AND SULFATE
INCREASE AT DUNNE CRIB
— MAX. MONTHLY AVG.
X AVG. FOR YEAR
— MIN. MONTHLY AVG.
30
25
E 20
Q.
Q.
I
15
h-
Z
UJ
o
o
10
o °o
1569
1920 1930 1940 I960
YEAR
I960
1970
FIGURE 12
-------
1570
35-
MAX!MUM ACTIVAI'ED CARBON USAGE
SOUTH WATER FILTRATION PLANT
1958 7J970
-NO Of DA^fS OVER 30,000 Ibs USAGE
-800..--MAXIMUM CARBON DOSAGE
•»»* MAX-'MUM THRESHOLD ODOR.
^-700
ST.
UJ
£
Jg
O
O
Q.
o
fO
Cd
Id
§
^o
Lc
O
O
30-
25-
20-
1.0
isss"7"" """^oV)
PEPAR1MENT OK VATE** 9. 5FWERS
BURF.,*!J Of-' W\Tf.«
CITY OF CHICAGO
FIGURE 13
-------
WAUKEGAN
NO«TH CHICAGO/
SREAT LAKES ij
NAVAL TRAINING 77 05N
CENTER r r
LAKE BLUFF
LAKE FOREST
NORTH SHORE LAKE SURVEY
ANNUAL AVERAGE
1968-1969-1970*
PHOSPHATE
PPM.
1571
1 0.30
LAKE_ COUNTY
COOK TOUNTY
J04O
I I I I I
O6 07 06 O9 10 II 12 |3 .|4 15
ISINGU DAILY VALUE
ANNUAL OR AVERAGE uMIT
AVFSAGE
. MIT
LEGEND
I /
( \
/ WILSON AVE
CRIB
MAXIMUM
NUMBER
CHICAGO
/py.
STATUTE MILES /, /
?
DEVER
4?N '/CRIB
iRTHMETu:]
^vERAGE 1
I '
!96877'7-7-7'-7-7-
AR,
ivE
1970
1969
.v^wvww
*|9TO DATA- JAN JUNE
FIG-14
WATER QUALITY SURVEILLANCE SECTION
-------
rJ
WAUKEGAN VC
/
NORTH CHICAGO/
/ /
CHEAT LAKES
NJMAL TRAINING
CENTER
LAKE BLUFF
LAKE WEST
NORTH SHORE LAKE SURVEY
ANNUAL AVERAGE
1968-1969-1970*
AMMONIA NITROGEN
PPM
1572
_LAKE_ COUNTY_ _
COOK
4N
RESTRICTED
AREA
HOWARD
WOODS
KCNILWOHTH
WILMCTTC
0 02-MAX.« AVO.
I I I I I I I
O5 06 07 08 09 10 II .12
SINGLE DAILY VALUE
OR AVERAGE LIMIT
ANNUAL
AVERAGE
1968
1970
1969
STATUTE MILES
* 1970 DATA- JAN.' JUNE
ff*
FIG. 15
WATER QUALITY SURVEILLANCE SECTION
-------
NORTH SHORE LAKE SURVEY
ANNUAL AVERAGE
TOTAL COLIFORM 9 FECAL COL1FORM
NO/ 100 m
1969-1970*
rc fc
<— * 1968 ANNUAL AVERAGE
' 1970 ANNUAL AVERAGE
TC' TOTAL COLIFORM M.F.
FC = FECAL COLIFORM M-F
SINGLE DAILY VALUE
OF TRAVEL
•*• 1970 DATA - JAN - JUNE
FIG. 16
WATER QUALITY SURVIILL*NCt SECTION
-------
SOUTH SHORE LAKE SURVEY
ANNUAL AVERAGE
1968-1969-1970*
PHOSPHATE
PPM.
SINGLE DAILY VALUE
OR AVERAGE LIMIT
•*• 1970 DATA JAN-JUNE
FIG.-I7
WATT* JOALITY SUHVIILLAKCI »ICTK>*
-------
1575
J. C. Vaughn
these seven that exceeded the daily maximum occur in 1970?
Do you know?
MR. VAUGHN: I will ask Mr. Reed who tabulated
this material for me to answer that. His name appears on
the front of the report.
MR. REED: I can't tell you offhand. I can send
the data in to the conferees if you like.
MR. MILLER: Well, I was just curious as to
whether there might be connection with the ice salt or
ice control and runoff and this type of thing.
MR. REED: I don't believe so. They were a
little later in the year than one would expect that to
happen.
MR. MILLER: There certainly have been massive
reductions of sulphate in Indiana.
MR. REED: Still the tests we run are daily
and those averages are very stable and reliable and for
that reason do indicate an undeniable increase.
MR. STEIN: Are there any — yes, Mr. Currie.
MR. CURRIE: I think, Mr. Chairman, that the
statement of Mr. Vaughn as well as that of Commissioner
Poston suggests very strongly the desirability that this
conference very soon address itself again to the question
of phosphates.
-------
1576
J. C. Vaughn
I think that when we have a statement such as
in Mr. Vaughn's presentation that concentrations of phos-
phate in the shallow waters are tending toward an equil-
ibrium concentration which is well above the threshold
concentration for nuisance algal growths, that we may be
in serious trouble, I welcome the city of Chicago's
attempt to deal with this problem. I would also like to
report that the Illinois Pollution Control Board has
before it at present a proposal to strengthen the phosphate
standard of water quality for Lake Michigan from its
present annual average value of, 0.03 to 0.02 p.p.m., and
I would also like to suggest that Mr. Dumelle, one of my
colleagues on the Pollution Control Board, has a statement
which he would like to make relevant to the subject of
phosphate inputs to the lake, and I hope that he will have
an opportunity to make that.
MR. STEIN: We will put him on right after Mr.
Vaughn.
Are there any other comments or questions?
Mr. Vaughn, I would like to call your attention
to page 7 . I am going to say before I go into this
question that we have indeed had a great service here by
Mr. Vaughn^ and before him by Mr. Burstein,, in providing
us with this information. All too often we have had
-------
1577
J. C. Vaughn
remedial programs that we didn't know — really in the
detailed sense that we have had from Mr. Vaughn — what
the conditions of the water were before we started. After
these millions of dollars worth of works went into effect
we really didn't know whether we had an improvement or not.
I think Mr. Vaughn now, and Mr. Burstein through
the years, as a watchdog provided for us this one area in
which we have "before1* and "after" result and really look
.at what we are having in water quality. I don't think
there is any other situation like this. I say to Mr. Currie
and some others that we should not despair on this, because
the first few years that Mr. Vaughn gave us in this report
I think were dismal indeed.
We have had the program going and we just couldn't
see any improvement in water quality. Then we began to
get a few glimmers. As Mr. Vaughn points out, in some
areas we have a trend. But I thoroughly agree with you
that when Jim Vaughn points up a danger signal it is time
for the conferees to investigate and explore it.
But may I go back to page 7? You
talk about chloride concentrations, sulfate concentrations,
-------
1573
J. C. Vaughn
and filterable residue which increased. And what has
happened? We presumably have more generous requirements
for, say, the residue and the chlorides and you have
had more violations.
Now, the question, I think, Mr. Vaughn — I
wonder if this is maybe a correlation between relaxing
the requirement and your getting more violations of the
relaxed requirement than you did of the more stringent
requirement because once you relax it, people might
think they can get by with a little more.
MR. VAUGHN: The Technical Advisory Committee
that began with the — they began with the old GLIiiB
Project. They spent many hours discussing whether they
should stagger those results in chlorides from filterable
residue,which is a direct reflection of the other two*
And the consensus was that we should so stagger them
because if we are going to increase anyway, we had no
real reason for trying to set up standards that you
couldn't enfcree i—because once it is above that level you
are stuck with it whatever it is; they aren't going to
take it out. And some of us felt that those relaxed stan-
dards — staggered standards were really — we always were
constantly fighting the Drinking Water Standards, which
would permit 250 parts per million or less and —
-------
1579
J. C. Vaughn
MR. STEIN: I would ask the Technical Committee
and particularly the conferees to look at this. I take
Mr. Vaughn's views seriously. We had some relatively rigid
standards and they were violated a number of times. Not
too many instances, but when the standards were relaxed,
we had a much greater percentage of violations. Before
considering relaxation of the standards now, I believe the
Technical Committee and the conferees would be well advised
to think very carefully of more than the technical defense
of the regulatory program. They should be more concerned with
the defense, or lack thereof, of the discharge itself, when
it automatically would not deteriorate the water quality
much more than you would do with your relaxation.
I think that is a very interesting observation,
Mr. Vaughn.
MR. MILLERj I would like to respond a little
bit to that, Mr. Chairman, in that I served on the
Technical Committee that developed those standards, I
don't think that — at least to me — the terra "relaxed"
is the right terminology, in that these standards were
designed, based upon curves, to take into account the
increases that are going to continue to occur. So that,
as far as application to a discharger, there has been no
-------
1530
J. C. Vaughn
relaxation to the one who is discharging; that these
standards were to take into account naturally-occurring
increases into play.
MR. PDRDY: The only comment I have, Mr. Chairman,
is that I think we would be leaving the wrong impression
if we left the impression that we would have expected to
have seen a change in phosphate concentration at this
point in time.
The program that has been developed by this
conference has not really unfolded, and I would have been
extremely surprised to have seen a change.
MR. STEIN: I think that is a good point.
Our phosphate reduction date is set for the end
of 1972.*
Again, I am not sure, once the phosphates are
in the lake, they are going to be in the ecocycle and the
ecosystem. Unless they find the abyss of Lake Michigan — if
there is one, and I guess there might be — and it is so
far buried, they are not going to come out, and that is
going to take a little time. So I think Mr. Purdy's state-
ment is very pertinent concerning the notion that until the
phosphate reduction programs go into full effect, we probably
can expect an increase in the phosphate loading of the lake.
*By December 1972 - See Lake Michigan Summary of Conference
(First Session), dated January 31, February 1-2, February
5-7, March 7-3 and 12, 1968.
-------
1581
J. C. Vaughn
I think possibly — I will just put this out —
maybe the significance is that with the kinds of loadings
we are having of phosphates now, that the rate of increase
might be a little more significant or a little more
alarming than we have considered. But, again, I would
think that the Technical Committee and the group will
have to consider t;j"iis rather closely . I would suggest,
again, at least one of the things in addition to the
thermal considerations that we are talking about, I think
if the conferees are agreeable^, we can discuss Mr. Currie's
proposal of how we deal with the nutrient problem and
particularly the phosphate question and see if there is
time for a reappraisal.
MR. CURRIE: Mr. Chairman.
Two additional points: I have great difficulty
in reconciling the increasing concentrations of dissolved
solids which are permitted by the current regulations with
the nondegradation principle which is incorporated in all
of the standards. Secondly, with regard to phosphate
dates, I quite agree that the current date for doing
anything about our most serious Lake Michigan problem
is set too far in the future. For that reason, I have
suggested in a letter which I sent to the members of the
conference before it began that the conference consider
-------
J. C, Vaughn
accelerating the date of phosphorus removal from 1972 to
1971.
MR. STEIN: We will be happy to take that up.
You know that as in all bodies like this some
people are for moving faster and some for moving more
slowly. I think that was the most equitable agreement
we could get when we arrived at that determination, but
we will be glad to reopen that question if you wish.
MR. PURDY: Again, Mr. Chairman, I would hate
to leave the impression that we have set 1972 as a date
at which phosphorus treatment is to come into effect,
without having it also understood that this conference
set this as an outside date and that there are facilities
that will be coming into play yet this year, and so this
is an outside date and not a date at which time no progress
will be made prior to it.
MR. STEIN: That is correct.
Are there any other comments?
MR. FRANCOS: Mr. Chairman, I just have three
questions to ask of Mr. Vaughn, and if he doesn't have the
data with him maybe he could give it to us a little later.
But the first: At what depths are the intakes
from which the phosphorus analyses are made?
MR. VAUGHN: The South Plant, from which most of
-------
1533
J. C. Vaughn
the phosphorus analyses are taken has two intakes: one
is the crib, at a depth of some 35 feet in the water, the
center line of the gates are 17 feet below datum*— Chicago
datum, and the shore intake has a center line of about minus
22 feet. Since we use varying quantities of shore and
greater, according to the daily demand, it was decided in
the Technical Advisory Committee that when we made a control
point that the header which represents a varying mixture of
the crib and shore waters, of which the percentage of each
is not easily determinable, that we would use the header
sample, so those are the official phosphate values.
At the Central Plant, we have the shore intake
only and, again, the central line of the shore gate is
about 13 feet below datum,
MR. FRANCOS: What would be the average height?
I was trying to get a feel of how close you are to the
bottom.
MR. VAUGHN: Well, at the crib intake we are
roughly 17 — the bottom line of the gate would be about
14 feet above bottom of the crib, and at the shore end
gate, that is only about 2 feet above water.
MR, FRANCOS: Well, you have answered the second
question I had already„ But the other one, then: Have you
done any sampling in the upper zones at all?
*fiasic iaice level
-------
J. C. Vaughn
MR. VAUGHN: We have not had the time or the
manpower to sample at varying depths. I believe we
consistently sample 5 feet below the surface when we make
surveys.
MR. FETTEROLF: I would like to ask either you
or Mr. Willey whether the figure — your figure 14 is for
soluble orthophosphate as PO^.
MR. VAUGHN: Mr. Reed can answer that. He
prepared the data for us.
MR. REED: It is an easy one. Yes.
MR. STEIN: Are there any other comments or
questions?
Mr. Nelle, did you want to ask a question?
MR. NELLE: Could I, Mr. Chairman? I have been
pretty quiet here. I too served on this committee to
develop the standards and, as I recall, the information
relative to the presence of phosphorus in the lake 5 years
ago was rather sparse and unless a lot more information
is gotten we have as much as 20 and 30 times the difference
in certain areas in Lake Michigan in phosphorus. I don't
think it is a simple problem, and if you stop phosphorus
today, it is very possible there will be phosphorus there
for a long sustained period and floating all over the lake.
So let's don't think of
-------
J. C. Vaughn
it as a constant amount spread out through the lake or
even existing in various quarters. I think we have a prob-
lem just like this thermal water problem, so let's don't
make it too simple and think that somebody can come up
with an answer right now.
MR. STEIN: If we made these problems too simple,
Mr. Nelle, they wouldn't need people like us.
Mr. Dumelle.
MR. DUMELLE: I thought as long as we were talking
mercury I would like to make a few comments on it. As
I understood Mr. Willey — and I stand corrected if I am
wrong — he said that most of the values on the testing of
Lake Michigan were below a tenth of a part per billio~: .
And this is at variance with the Federal tests which were
conducted while I was Director of the Lake Michigan Basin
Office. There most of the values seemed to fall below
1 p.p.b.;in eluding the last date I looked at before I
left there at the end of July.
So from that, I deduced that this was probably
the background level, at least for the Illinois portion
of Lake Michigan, and this incidentally included a lot of
data from Wisconsin and Michigan from the water intakes,
and the average seemed to fall below about 1 p.p.b.
So based on that, we have proposed a mercury
-------
1566
J. C. Vaughn
standard of 1 p.p.b. feeling that this is the background
level which you alluded to, Mr. Stein, and also an effluent
standard of 1 p.p.b., so that no one would add anything
to the water he was using from the lake. So all I am
saying is that I would like to have the Federal data
entered in the record about flameless AA so that we could
all know whether we are talking the same.
MR. STEIN: I would like to ask: Mr. Dumelle,
are you saying that the water the plants take in from
Lake Michigan contain 1 p.p.b. mercury in them now?
MR. DUMELLE: Or less. I say we had some values
of — as I recall it — 1.0 or 1.4.
MR. STEIN: I want to get with you on this. Also
I think while we are here we might resolve it. But here
is the theory we are using: we check the water intake of the
various plants, then we check the discharge water, and then
we check the mercury content at both ends. We don't want
to charge any plant with a discharge of mercury which
they have taken in with their intake water. But we have
found that with the addition of relatively small amounts
of mercury when multiplied by the effluent flow results
in substantial amounts of mercury being deposited. We have
found that these have increased. To our dismay and surprise,
even when there are very small amounts going in, they have
-------
1537
J. C. Vaughn
been concentrated in the fish, which concentrate mercury
at a rate of about 3»000 to 1. As you get older fish
and bigger fish, we find surprising concentrations in fish
roes.
Really when we have dealt with the gross mercury
problem, I think we are pretty well on our way to pushing
that back now. So I think it behooves us, if we are
talking in terms of a definitive program and future control
of mercury, we have to think whether there is going to be
any tolerable limit, that is, any tolerable limit over what
a plant has taken in in its intake water. I don't know
whether you people have thought about that, but this is the
problem we are wrestling with now.
Let me repeat this very, very fast. I think
we can get a plant and from their large amount of mercury
discharges, we are down now to 1/2 Ib. per day. I can see
within the tuxt 2 oc 3 ~a.jnt.hs we will na
-------
1588
J. C. Vaughn
MR. DUMELLE: I might say we are having these
hearings on the proposed mercury standards on October 8
in Springfield and October 14 in Chicago, and any of
the conferees would be welcome to attend or to send
observers. We have also asked through Commissioner
Dominick that perhaps you could furnish from your staff
Mr. Sidio or someone else who is conversant with the
mercury situation.
But the point I am trying to make is: I think
there is a difference here as to what is the background
level in Lake Michigan. We are in agreement that we ought
to hold the level at background, and if the background
is coming from air pollution and the burning of fossil
fuels that is another problem that we will have to get
at, too. But I think we are agreed on that, but we want
to know what that is.
MR. FETTEROLF: Mr. Dumelle, I am not sure what
form of mercury you would be wanting to set your standards
on, and I am not sure that Mr. Sidio would be aware of
data recently developed by Dr. Mount in his laboratory at
Duluth which shows that for metal mercury a half a part
per billion in the water is toxic to minnows in from 30
to 40 days, so I think you might ask Dr. Mount to parti-
cipate in your public hearings if he has any information.
-------
J. C. Vaughn
MR. DUMELLE: We would be very glad to.
MR. STEIN: May I make a suggestion to the
State people? The best way to do this, I think, is to
get in touch with the Regional Director Mr. Mayo, and you
will get in touch with the appropriate people, and we
will give you what support we can.
MR. DUMELLE: We have kept him informed, Mr.
Stein.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
MR. DUMELLE: One other comment, and that is I
appreciate Mr. Vaughn's data, but I know the Lake Michigan
Basin Office also conducts a Calumet area sampling program
and sampled many in June of this year . and has material
going back for the last few years, and I would ask that
that be incorporated into the record.
MR. STEIN: Could that be made available to us?
MR. VAUGHN: The Lake Michigan Basin?
MR. STEIN: Tes.
Jake, would you come up?
MR. DUMELLE: I am sorry.
MR. STEIN: Does he have this material you are
asking for?
MR. DUMELLE: No, I don't think you would have it.
I think it would have to come from the Lake Michigan Basin
Office unless they have interchanged it.
-------
1590
J. C. Vaughn
MR. MATO: Would you be a little more specific
about which data you want introduced here?
MR. DOMELLE: On the water quality data on Lake
Michigan somewhat comparable to Mr. Vaughn's data; whatever
is out in that area from the regular sampling program at
the basin office. Mr. Bowden has conducted this program,
and we recently cut it back because of the limitations of
when I was there — limitations of manpower — to a June
and January sampling — but it had been going on weekly
as I recall it.
MR. STEIN: Do you have that?
MR. BOWDEN: I am Robert V. Bowden. I am with
the FWQA Lake Michigan Basin Office.
The data that Mr. Dumelle is referring to has —
MR. STEIN: Will you talk up, sir?
MR. BOWDEN: The data that Mr. Dumelle referred
to has been used as the basis for a report to the Two-State
Conference in the Calumet area, and it has been prepared
by a technical committee appointed by that conference for
presentation to that conference.
If it is desirable that that data be placed on
the record at this conference, it is available and can be
made available within a short period of time.
-------
1591
J. C. Vaughn
MR. STEIN: How thick is it?
MR. BOWDEN: The report, I believe —
MR. STEIN: The data. How many pages would it
encompass?
MR. BOWDEN: The raw data would be quite
voluminous.
MR. STEIN: Let's say this, for the time being:
We will keep that data as an exhibit and as part of the
record, and it will be made available to Mr. Dumelle for
his inspection and the other conferees, and after looking
at that if you still want this in the record or a subsequent
record, I think we should examine that before we give the
green light because of the printing cost.
(The above mentioned data, marked Exhibit 2, is
on file at Hq FWQA, Washington D. C., and the Great Lakes
Regional Office, Chicago, Illinois.)
Thank you very much.
MR. WILLEY: Speaking to Mr. Dumelle's comment
relative to the 1 part per billion or the one-tenth of
a part per billion analytical data or background, I think
that we were at the 1 part per billion point at one time,
too. Whether that is decided as background, this is
-------
1592
J. C. Vaughn
something other than an analytical problem. We faced it
as an analytical problem and we watched, as I pointed out,,
half a part per billion was the point that we set as our
limit. We could say it would be below that point. We can
clearly state that it is below a tenth of a part per
billion now because on samples, some standards on waters
which we have run that would run 0.15 or 0.1&, we can
detect this very readily now, and so we are reporting our
results as l/iO as the base limit of our analytical
accuracy.
One of the ways we did this, by the way, is
to increase the length of the tube through which the gas
passes, and this increases the accuracy somewhat. There
might be one other aside that 1 might mention, just as a
sort of a favor. We checked a couple of swimming pools
and the organo-mercury compound used in swimming poo In.
We got a report on one that was 18 parts per billion. So
somebody might do something about that some day. It is
not in our area of activities.
MR. STEIN: Mr. Dumelle.
MR. DUMELLE: I think we are sti'l confused here.
I have no quarrel with the tenth of a part per billion as
a sensitivity level. What I am asking Mr. Willey is what
is his background level that he is finding in Lake Michigan
-------
1593
J. C. Vaughn
water.
MR. STEIN: I understand this0 By the way, let me
make clear to the group and the audience: We are dealing
with what in a regulatory program is one of the most diffi-
cult problems we have, and that is the question of zero
tolerance. I don't know that we are going to resolve that
with mercury or any other item that we run into here, and
this is another subject in itself. If you want to talk to me
privately, I will be glad to give you the theoretical problems
we have with the zero tolerance, but this is common to all
regulatory programs when we get down to one of these very low
limits, and I suggest we leave that at this conference at
this point.
Are there any other questions for Mr. Vaughn? If
not, thank you very much.
Did you want to make a statement, Mr. Dumelle, now?
MR. DUMELLE: Yes.
MR. STEIN: How long will that be?
MR. DUMELLE: Five minutes. I won't read the paper
and, of course, I would like it included in the record, Mr.
Stein.
MR. STEIN: Without objection, this will be done.
(The document above referred to follows in its
entirety.)
-------
1594
STATEMENT BY JACOB D. DUMELLE
MEMBER, ILLINOIS POLLUTION
CONTROL BOARD
to the
LAKE MICHIGAN ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE
September 28 - October 2, 1970, Chicago, Illinois
My main point in speaking to the Conference is to assert
that published phosphate loadings into Lake Michigan are probably
far too low and that a greater proportion of phosphate is being
generated from land runoff than has been realized.
Two ways exist to indicate that phosphate loadings have been
underestimated. First, is the comparison of Lake Michigan data
to Lake Erie data. Second, is the use of Vollenweider's charts
of "admissible" and "dangerous" levels of phosphorus loadings
to lakes.
Lake Erie Comparison
Using the International Joint Commission report on Lake Erie
(Vol. 2) of June, 1969 a total of 6,740 tons of phosphorus (P)
is generated annually from 29,650 sq. miles of land (p. 260).
Converting to phosphate, the gross land runoff for Lake Erie is
1,365 Ibs./sq. mi. annually.
For Lake Michigan, using the 5,000,000 Ibs. of phosphate
(PO.) said to be generated by land runoff annually (Proceedings,
Lake Michigan Conference, Vol. 2, February 1, 1968, p. 703) and
the 45,500 sq. mi. of land area, results in a comparative phosphate
runoff of HO Ibs./sq. mi., per year or one-twelfth of the Lake
Erie figure.
I do not have available to me a detailed breakdown of these
gross land areas by agriculture, forest and urban uses but the
12.4:1 difference in phosphate runoff rates seems far too great.
-more-
-------
1595
And since the IJC report is the later of the two estimates and a
great deal of work went into the Lake Erie phosphate figures I
feel that it is more reliable than the Lake Michigan figures.
If the Lake Erie gross land runoff figure of 1,365 lbs./sq.
mi. is applied to Lake Michigan's larger drainage area, then
62,100,000 Ibs. of phosphate are generated from this source
annually. Adding this to the 10,000,000 Ibs./yr. from municipal
treatment plants results in a total estimated annual phosphate
loading to Lake Michigan of 72,100,000 Ibs./yr. The 72,100,000
Ibs./yr. of phosphate is 4.8 times the published 15,000,000 Ibs./
yr. phosphate figure for Lake Michigan.
Analysis of Vollenweider Chart
The IJC report reproduces Vollenweider's chart of "admissible"
and "dangerous" limits of phosphorus loading to lakes (p. 241).
Using Lake Michigan's mean depth of 84.2 meters the chart gives
"admissible" loadings of 0.36 g/m2 yr. and "dangerous" loadings of
0.7 g/m^ yr. The chart is reproduced and attached.
Using Lake Michigan's area of 5.82 x 1010 m2 and converting the
15,000,000 Ibs. of phosphate estimated input per year to phosphorus
(2.27 x 109 g) a supposed annual loading of 0.039 g/m2 yr. is
occurring. This loading is only 11% of the "admissible" level
from Vollenweider's chart and would indicate that Lake Michigan is
in no danger from eutrophication caused by phosphorus.
Dr. A.F. Bartsch, head of the FWQA National Eutrophication
Research Program, has termed eutrophication Lake Michigan's
"most pressing problem" (1968 Proceedings, pp. 737-738). His
opinion would be completely at variance with conclusions to be
drawn from Vollenweider's chart.
The new Federal report "Physical and Ecological Effects of
Waste Heat on Lake Michigan" quotes Schelske and Stoermer (pp. 79-80)
as stating
"The evidence compared with data
from Lake Erie and Lake Superior
suggests that accelerated eutrophica-
tion in Lake Michigan is rapidly
approaching the point of a severe
environmental change in which the
diatom flora will be reduced or
replaced by green and blue-green
algae."
-2-
-------
1596
It seems obvious that the estimated phosphorus input to Lake
Michigan as previously published (5,000,000 Ibs. per year as
phosphorus or 15,000,000 Ibs. per year as phosphate) is far too
low. If the loadings were in fact only 11% of "admissible" loadings
these authorities cited would not be sounding alarms about eutro-
phication and delineating physical changes which are taking place.
Furthermore, the conference program of 80% phosphorus removal
from municipal treatment plants would not be necessary.
Revised Estimate of Phosphorus Loading
If the "dangerous" level as indicated by Vollenweider for
Lake Michigan is used, a revised estimate of phosphorus loading
can be computed. Using this level (0.7 g/m yr.) and multiplying
by Lake Michigan's area of 5.82 x IQQ m results in a phosphorus
loading of 4.07 x 1010 g/yr. This is equal to 89,800,000 Ibs. of
phosphorus per year or almost 18 times the old figure of 5,000,000
Ibs./yr. As phosphate, the figures would be three times higher or
269,400,000 Ibs. per year compared to the old figure of 15,000,000
Ibs./yr.
If the municipal contribution of phosphate is correct at the
old level of 10,000,000 Ibs. per year, then the balance, 259,400,000
is the land runoff figure. Put another way, the munrcipal-to-land
ratio of phosphate contributions changes from 2:1 (10 million
Ibs./yr. : 5 million Ibs./yr.) to 1:25.9 (10 million Ibs./yr.:
259 million Ibs./yr). These figures indicate that the critical
factor in saving Lake Michigan will be control of land runoff.
Possible Defects in Revised Estimate
The figures estimated above are extremely high and almost
double those of Lake Erie's estimated 154,000,000 Ibs./yr. input
of phosphate (IJC, p. 205) . The revised estimate may be too
high because:
a.) Vollenweider ' s "dangerous" level
may not apply to Lake Michigan
because of its extremely long
flushing rate.
b.) The inshore water in which the
phosphorus is added, may function
largely as a body of water separate
from the open waters (those beyond
100 ft. in depth and generally more
than 3 miles from shore) .
Eutrophication may be occurring in
-3-
-------
1597
the limited volume of the
inshore waters (4% of the
lake) at loadings below the
"dangerous" level for the
entire lake but at or above
it in this separate zone.
Recommendation
It is recommended that the conferees set up a technical
committee to thoroughly review phosphate inputs to Lake Michigan
and to report back by January 1, 1971 with their best estimate
of the source and amount of phosphate. The methods and techniques
used in compiling these same types of data for the International
Joint Commission's report on Lake Erie should be examined.
-4-
-------
1593
6-
4-
2-
.E
2
a.
.5-
.2-
W. Erie
Norrv.
• Mo
A Norrv.
•(Nat.)
• Seb.
f*vT¥ff
• Gr
•Erie
• Ba
• Wash «Zu
>Ma
• Ha
.,..
Va
• Ae
Michigan
A
"t
Bo
Le
Tahoe
10
I ' ' I ' 'r"!
20 50 100
MEAN DEPTH (m)
I
200
I
500
Fig. 3. 3. 1 Phosphorus loading versus mean depth for various lakes.
Abbreviations: Ae (Aegerisee), Ba (Baldeggersee), Bo (Bodensee,
Obersee), d'Ann (Annecy), Fu(Fures?i), Gr (Greifensee), Ha
(Hallwilersee), Le (Leman), M'a (Malaren), Mend (Mendota),
Mo (Monona), Norrv (Norrviken), Ont (Ontario), Pf (Pfdffikersee),
Seb (Sebasticook), Tu (Turlersee), W. Erie (western basin, Lake
Erie), Wash (Washington), W (Vanern), Z\i (Zurichsee), The value
for Bodensee is twice the value for orthophosphate-P (Alter .Vollenweider,
1968).
-------
1599
J. D, Dumelle
STATEMENT OF JACOB D0 DUMELLE, MEMBER,
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD,
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
MR. DUMELLE: It seems to me that if the major
problem of Lake Michigan is eutrophication, and if the
major solution to this problem is phosphate that we ought
to keep a continuing surveillance on the phosphate inputs
to Lake Michigan, and so while I was Director of the Lake
Michigan Basin Office, I took a look at the inputs and came
up with these discrepancies which I put down here. I have
put all of the numbers down so that anyone can check my
arithmetic, and that is another reason for not reading them
off.
But just to summarize, if we take the Lake Erie
data in terms of land runoff phosphates, as reported in the
International Joint Commission Report,and convert that to
pounds per square mile, and do the same thing for Lake
Erie — excuse me — Lake Michigan on the basis of the figures
previously announced at this conference, we come up with a
difference of 12.4:1. In other words, Lake Erie's runoff
figure is 12.4 times that of Lake Michigan on a gross
basis.
-------
1600
J. D. Dumelle
I realize probably more of Lake Michigan's B.asin
is forested than the Lake Erie Basin and this may make a
difference, but it just doesn't seem to me it ought to be
12.4 times different.
And I go through the computation and show that
when you add municipal contribution, the total loading then
to Lake Michigan could be 4.8 times what we thought it was.
And then I do the same thing using Vollenweider's Chart
which is in the IJC Report and which is attached to my
paper, and under the assumption which can be questioned, but
under the assumption that Lake Michigan is receiving a
dangerous input of total phosphorus. If you look at the
chart which is attached you will see I have drawn in a
line at the #4«2 meter level which is the average depth of
Lake Michigan, and somewhere along this line is whatever
total phosphorus is going into Lake Michigan.
I take the intercept at the top of the shaded
band and, as you can see, that is .7 grams per square
meter per year. Incidentally, right next to it you can
see Lake Ontario, that little dot there, which is in the
mesotrophic zone. The upper zone, where you can see the
dots for Lake Erie and the West Basin of Lake Erie are the
eutrophic zones and the bottom zone where Lake Tahoe is
indicated are the oligotrophic zones.
-------
1601
J. D. Dumelle
Somewhere along that line must be Lake Michigan,
and if we take the .7 and take that postulate that Lake
Michigan is getting a dangerous input of the phosphates
and we work through the numbers, we come up with a very, very
large amount of total phosphate to Lake Michigan, something
in the order of 25.9 times what we thought it was.
All I am saying is that somewhere between the 4.3
and the 25.9 is probably the right figure and you can argue
•that you know it really doesn't matter what the number is,
the algae are responding to it, whatever is coming in.
But I think it is very important as far as this conference
is concerned because if land runoff is contributing much
more than we thought, perhaps we are chasing the wrong
source of pollutants in our priority order and maybe in a
sense we are doing what they did in Los Angeles where they
tried to suppress sulphur dioxide from the refineries only
to find out it was the. automobiles and was an entirely
different chemical equation.
In a sense, we may be going after the wrong source
faster and leaving the other one alone. So what I am sug-
gesting is that the conference set up a eutrophication
committee to look at these numbers and to look at all of
the monitoring data on the tributaries, and to either verify
or come up with a better figure so we can be guided in our
-------
1602
J. D. Dumelle
control measures. There are some reasons perhaps why Lake
Michigan does not respond the way Vollenweider says, and
perhaps this goes back to the difference between the inshore
waters and the offshore waters. I mentioned this in the
paper, but I really don't know where we are on it. I
think it is confused enough that it would permit a great
deal of attention.
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Dumelle.
I think you raised these questions when we
started out with our discussions on phosphorus control.
Like zero tolerance, when you get down to that point you
start defining these things. Then I guess we have this
second problem you raise, which is indigenous to whatever
we do, and I felt rather sympathetic when I was charged
with still having that mercury program.
Here is what we are doing. We have an active
enforcement program for all of the people who are discharging
a significant amount of mercury into our waters. But I am
not sure we are getting at the big source of mercury in
doing that. There may be mercury in fossil fuels or other
yet to be discovered places which are getting in. Some of the
companies have come in — and I guess the power companies are
here, and this is a quote, not mine — and they say, "We are
-------
J. D. Duraelle 1603
putting in 12 pounds of mercury and you are getting us
down. But there is a power company up the road that is
probably putting out 50 or 60 pounds a day through its
stack. Why don't you get them?"
You know, the stack isn't my business.
I am not talking about the validity of that, but
everything we do has this kind of limitation.
MR. DUMELLE: Mr. Stein, you are going into a
new Agency next week and it will be part of your business.
MR. STEIN: Let me clarify that. Really the new
Agency i-s supposed to go into effect next week, but we
have a 60-day grace period. They are even giving grace
periods now for establishing new Agencies, so we are going
to have to wait another 2 months.*
Are there any other comments?
MR. PURDY: Mr. Stein, while we are talking
about setting up committees, I hope you do leave me one
or two people as an enforcement staff to carry out the
recommendations of the committees. But with respect to
the phosphorus loading to the lake, I think that there is
some information on this in the present record.
In our report to this first conference, January
1968, we did report on the basis of stream flows and
sampling at the mouths of the rivers the phosphorus loading
* By law t-he Environmental Protection A-jency becomes
effective oecem"her ">, 1970.
-------
160/4-
J. D. Dumelle
from Michigan, and this does total to be about 90 pounds
phosphorus as P per square mile of drainage basin. So you
do have some concrete information in the record, I would say,
MR. STEIN: Are there any other comments?
MR. DUMELLE: Let me just comment on that — two
things: If it is 90 pounds as phosphorus per acre — per
square mile, and we trim that to convert it to phosphate,
it becomes 270, and I think the figure I quoted was 110
which, again, shows that it is too low; and, secondly, your
data, Mr. Purdy, showed a very great increase because of
rainfall. I think a 54 percent increase from one year to
the next. And it may be that these old figures were
collected in a dry year, or incorrectly collected, and
that may be one reason why they are so very low.
MR. STEIN: Are there any other comments?
If not, thank you. We will consider that, too.
I do sympathize with Mr. Purdy's comment.
You know, the policeman's lot in not a happy one.
I think if you will look right at the Federal Agency and
see the support troops and the people that are on the line
in Enforcement, we don't have as good enforcement as even
the modern armed services.
Are there any other comments or questions now?
We will stand recessed for lunch until 2:00 o'clock.
(Noon recess.)
-------
1605
AFTERNOON SESSION
MR. STEIN: Let's reconvene.
May we have Mayor Prank Harangody of the city
of Whiting.
STATEMENT OF FRANK HARANGODY, MAYOR,
CITY OF WHITING, INDIANA
MR. HARANGODY: Mr. Chairman, conferees, ladies
and gentlemen.
The conferees are assembled at this conference
to consider setting a standard of 1-degree rise at point
of discharge in order to abate thermal pollution. The
city of Whiting is concerned that a 1-degree rise will
place an undue hardship on municipal governments.
You are aware that the Lake Michigan Basin is
an area where people heat their homes in the winter and
cool their homes in the summer. The water supplied by
municipalities to homes stands in piping systems, toilet
tanks, and flush bowls and absorbs heat from the homes
in the winter. In the summer, much municipally-supplied
water is used to cool air conditioner systems which also
add heat to the water. It is very questionable whether
enough dilution will take place that a municipality can
-------
1606
F. Harangody
return the water in keeping with a 1-degree rise without
the installation of costly cooling equipment.
The State of Indiana held a hearing on May 6,
1970, that was attended by the city of Whiting. The water
quality standard that was adopted by the State of Indiana
concerning water temperature increases allows a 5-degree
rise. The city of Whiting believes the standard adopted
by the State of Indiana to be reasonable.
I am also here to present a report concerning
the efforts of the city of Whiting to abate pollution of
Lake Michigan consistent with applicable water quality
standards.
The city of Whiting is a body politic and
corporate, organized and existing under and by virtue of
the laws of the State of Indiana, under and by the authority
of which it exercises the powers of local administration
and government as a political subdivision of the State of
Indiana. The records show that in 1938 the city of
Whiting attempted to build a sewage treatment plant in
order to stop the flow of raw sewage into Lake Michigan.
Application was made under the P.W.A. and the W.P.A.
program and the city raised $200,000 for its share of the
project.
In the years prior to 19^3, there was not enough
-------
1607
F. Harangody
Federal money to accomplish the project. The 2-percent
debt limit placed on municipalities by the Constitution
of the State of Indiana prevented the city of Whiting from
accomplishing the project without Federal financial
assistance. Subsequent to 191*!, during the war years,
a shortage of materials prevented the commencement of
construction of the sanitary sewage treatment facility.
In 19^3, the State of Illinois filed a lawsuit
in the Supreme Court of the United States suing the city
of Whiting as one of the many municipal and industrial
defendants. As a result of this lawsuit, the city of
Whiting had three choices. These choices were:
1) Constructing and placing in operation an
adequate sewage disposal plant, or
2) By delivering and continuing to deliver all
of Whiting's sanitary sewage and domestic wastes to the
sanitary district of Hammond for treatment and disposal
pursuant to said agreements of February 19, 19^5, and
August 5, 19^6, or
3) By any other feasible method acceptable to
Illinois and Indiana which will eliminate, discontinue and
terminate the discharge of sanitary sewage and domestic
wastes directly or indirectly into Lake Michigan.
The city of Whiting, at that time, elected the
-------
1608
P. Harangody
second option to discharge its sewage to the city of
Hammond's treatment facility. The $200,000 was used to
construct the tie-in and to pay the legal fees incurred
as a result of the lawsuit.
The contract for sewage treatment was signed
between the city of Whiting and the Sanitary District of
the city of Hammond on February 19, 19^5, prevailing for
a charge of $40 per million gallons. Since that time, the
dry weather flow and as much of the wet weather flow as
the city of Hammond could handle has been treated by the
city of Hammond. The treatment cost from 19^5 to 1962 was
gradually increased from $^0 to $60 per million gallons.
Prom 1962 to 1970, the treatment cost has skyrocketed
from $60 to $130 per million gallons. This is a yearly
cost over which the city of Whiting has no control since
it is subservient to the dictates of the city of Hammond.
The escalating cost is placing an excessive burden on
our taxpayers while we have no recourse but to pay.
Since this tie-in was made, the wet weather
flow which the city of Hammond cannot accept due to plant
limitations is being diverted into Lake Michigan by the
city of Whiting at the Atchison Avenue and Front Street
outfalls. This condition has caused the city of Whiting
to be cited in both the First and Second Sessions of the
-------
1609
P. Harangody
Conferences in the Matter of Pollution of Lake Michigan
and its Tributary Basin.
I took office as mayor of the city of Whiting
in 1968. The condition of Lake Michigan was of great
concern to me since I have been a resident of Whiting
all of my life. My administration has been devoted since
1968 to accomplish everything it could do to save the
city of Whiting's most priceless asset, Lake Michigan.
An application was filed in 1968 requesting
financial assistance in the form of Federal funds to
construct a separate sewer system or equal. This
application was approved by the Lake-Porter Counties
Regional Transportation and Planning Commission, the
Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission, and the Indiana
Stream Pollution Control Board. Whiting's application for
Federal funds was approved by Cincinnati and then referred
to Chicago where it was assigned File Mo. WS-IND-82. We
were not able to proceed because of the Indiana constitutional
2-percent debt limit placed on municipalities which
prevented the city of Whiting from being able to
provide the necessary local funds.
The cJty of Whiting then caused to be prepared
House Bill No. 1808 which was Introduced in the 1969
session of the Indiana General Assembly. This bill
-------
1610
P. Harangody
provided that any city or town contiguous to a second-
class city could form a first-class sanitary district.
Indiana law allows a statutory debt limit of 10 percent
of assessed valuation for a first-class sanitary district.
House Bill No. 1808 received bi-partisan support and was
passed by the Legislature and signed by the Governor
becoming Chapter 248 of the Acts of the 1969 Indiana
General Assembly.
The Common Council of the city of Whiting then
duly adopted and passed Ordinance No. 1118 which created
a first-class Sanitary District for the city of Whiting.
After adoption and approval of this ordinance, I appointed
the Board of Sanitary Commissioners.
The first order of business of the Board of
Sanitary Commissioners was to interview numerous engineering
firms for the purpose of hiring a competent engineer to
prepare a feasibility study In order to determine a means
of ending the city of Whiting's sewer and pollution
problems. They selected the firm of Russell, Schubert,
Hamilton and Associates, Inc., of 1^03 North Delaware
Street, Indianapolis, Indiana. The contract was signed
and preliminary work began.
The Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board, on
January 20, 1970, ordered that a hearing be held in
-------
1611
F. Harangody
Indianapolis on February 10, 1970, concerning the city of
Whiting's combined sewer overflows at Atchison Avenue and
Front Street. The city was represented at this hearing
by Leroy L. Young, Secretary of the Board of Sanitary
Commissioners; Board Attorney Donald L, Gray; Ernest R.
Hamilton, and myself. The evidence presented at this
hearing was taken under advisement.
The Board of Sanitary Commissioners filed with
the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board on April 15,
1970, an application for applying for State and Federal
funds for the proposed water pollution control facilities.
On June ?2, 1970, Ernest R. Hamilton presented
to the Board of Sanitary Commissioners Plans A, B, C, and
D as possible alternative solutions to the sewer and
pollution problems. Plans A and B were two rrethods of
installing separate systems in the city of Whiting. Plans
C and D provided that the city of Whiting build their own
sewage treatment facility. None of the plans were accepted
as such; however, the Board of Sanitary Commissioners
tentatively approved Plan C with variations. After further
research, Ernest R. Hamilton prepared Plan E.
By letter dated June 19, 1970, B. A. Poole,
Technical Secretary of the Indiana Stream Pollution Control
Board, notified Donald L. Gray, Attorney for the Whiting
-------
1612
P, Harangody
Sanitary District, that A. C. Offutt, M.D., Hearing Officer,
had filed the hearing officer's recommended findings of
fact and suggested order of the Stream Pollution Control
Board versus the city of Whiting, Indiana, in C?se No.
B-76.
Leroy L. Young, in behalf of the city of
Whiting, by letter dated July 6, 1970, objected to these
findings of fact in the report of the hearing officer
since these recommended findings of fact contained
statements that were not factual, were inaccurate, and
were highly argumentative. It was requested that the
Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board not enter the
recommended action of the hearing officer until the city
of Whiting had the additional time needed to present a
workable plan. Preliminary Plans A, B, D, C, And E,
together with drawings as prepared by the consulting
engineer, were delivered to the Indiana Stream Pollution
Control Board on July 21, 1970.
The Board of Sanitary Commissioners approved
Plan E and sought the approval of the Indiana Stream
Pollution Control Board. Indiana law requires that all
such installations, as we propose to build, must be
approved by the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board.
This approval is an absolute prerequisite before
-------
1613
F. Harangody
the Board of Sanitary Commissioners could authorize their
engineer to proceed to Phase II, which Includes prepnrr.tion
of detailed plans and specifications.
A 137-page report entitled, "Sanitary Sew.erage
System and Water Pollution Control Facilities," prepared
by the consulting engineer, delineates in Plan E a complete
solution to the sewage and pollution problems of the
city of Whiting which the city of Whiting can accomplish
with limited financial assistance.
Plan E provides for:
1) A treatment facility of the very latest
design with the most effective equipment now known to the
engineering profession. It would provide primary, secon-
dary and tertiary treatment of all sanitary, storm and
industrial wastes. Here I wish to emphasize that we
propose to treat all of the wastewater of the city of
Whiting, including both wet weather and dry weather flow.
The capacity of the treatment facility is sized so it
will handle the dry weather flow plus an average daily
amount.of storm water in excess of the daily average for
the heaviest month of rainfall since 1885.
2) A retention basin large enough to handle
the entire storm runoff of the heaviest month of rainfall
since 1885.
-------
1614
F. Harangody
3) The outfalls at Atchison Avenue and Front
Street that connect the sewer system of the city of WMting
to Lake Michigan would be removed and sealed.
4) The completely treated effluent from the new
facility would be discharged into the Indiana Harbor Canal
near Indianapolis Boulevard depending on the route approved.
The Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board, at
its meeting on July 21, 1970, adopted and recommended
findings of fact and suggested order of the hearing
officer and summarily overruled the objections filed by
Leroy L. Young. This was done without notice to the city
of Whiting and the opportunity to be present as required
by Indiana law.
The city of Whiting received a letter from B. A.
Poole, dated July 27, 1970, which reads as follows:
"Re: Application for State and Federal Grant
Funds for Sewage Work Project, Whiting
"A review has been made of your project
application. It is noted that a Federal grant of $1,^36,250
and a State grant of $718,125 are requested to help finance
the construction of a new treatment plant, intercepting
sewers, outfall sewers, pumping station, detention basins,
etc. An engineering report has not been submitted.
-------
1615
F. Harangody
"The proposal to construct a new sewage treatment
plant and to discontinue the discharge of dry weather sewage
flow to the Hammond Sanitary District for treatment at the
district sewage treatment plant is at variance with Federal
Water Quality Administration requirements which place
additional emphasis on the requirement that treatment works
be included in a metropolitan or regional plan for
pollution abatement.
"In view of the preceding, no priority rating
is recommended for the Whiting project as described by
your application. It is recommended that the city proceed
with a project to abate the discharge of combined sewer
overflow to Lake Michigan, to provide adequate disinfection
of all storm water discharge to Lake Michigan and to make
Improvements to the sewer system as necessary to assure
that all sewage and wastes from the city of Whiting is
discharged to the Hammond Sanitary District for treatment.
"Very truly yours, B. A. Poole, Technical
Secretary"
Many phone calls were made to the staff of the
Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board between July 27
and September 8, 1970, requesting a conference to discuss
Plan E. Finally, on Septeberm 8, 1970, the Board of
Sanitary Commissioners consisting of Joseph A. McDonald,
-------
1616
P. Harangody
Edward D. Harbin, and Leroy L. Young, Board Attorney Donald
L. Gray, Ernest R. Hamilton and two of his associates, and
myself, met with Perry Miller, Acting Technical Secretary,
and Oral Hert, Director of the Division of Water Pollution
Control of the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board
staff.
They stated that Plan E was unacceptable to them
for the following reasons:
1) They would have to monitor another treatment
facility.
2) Mr. Perry Miller stated he has principles
which would not allow him to recommend that the city of
Whiting build its own sewage treatment facility.
3) The plan would be unacceptable to the Federal
Water Quality Administration.
4) Perry Miller could not recommend approval of
the Whiting project even if it had been proposed 10 years
ago because of the 19^3 lawsuit.
5) They were opposed to Whiting hairing a new
outfall which would not flow westward in the Illinois
waterway system.
After questioning, it become obvious that these
members of the staff had not studied the report and that
they were unaware of what we proposed to build in Plan E.
-------
1617
F. Harangody
Yet they made a judgment that we should not be allowed to
build a sewage treatment plant of the most advanced design
that would include tertiary treatment.
This session was completely fruitless. The
staff members present from the Indiana Stream Pollution
Control Board were, in their words "principled." However,
we must solve a city's problems and we consider this
attitude to be the typical dogmatic bureaucratic attitude
which is the subject of editorials. They assume dictatorial
powers and attempt to make everyone appearing before them
bend to their wishes.
The Board of Sanitary Commissioners requested a
hearing before the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board
at their next meeting that was being held on September 15,
1970.
The Board of Sanitary Commissioners, Board
Attorney Donald L. Gray, Ernest R. Hamilton, Charles
Schubert, and two of their associates, and myself,
appeared before the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board
on September 15, 1970.
I presented the following statement:
"In Re: City of Whiting, Water Pollution
Abatement
"Gentlemen:
-------
P. Harangody
"As Mayor of the city of Whiting, Indian*, T can
only view with disfavor the condition of Lake Michigan.
The citizens of Whiting have been deprived of the full
use of their park and beach facilities for many years and
it is my sincerest wish that the pollution of lake
Michigan be abated. Physically the city of Whiting has
more shoreline than either Hammond or East Chicago and
our citizens have as much or more to gain per capita from
stopping the pollution of Lake Michigan than the citizens
of any other city in the State. Therefore, we are pledging
our best efforts to work towards alleviating this problem
and our citizens are ready to sacrifice for a complete
solution to the problem.
"I cannot accept the thought that we should buy
a partial solution when a full solution is possible.
"I disagree that the city of Whiting should
continue to pump storm and sanitary overflows to Lake
Michigan with only disinfection as ordered by the Indiana
Stream Pollution Control Board on June f9> 1970.
"The sewage treatment charges of the city of
Hammond have increased from $60 per million gallons in
1962 to $130 per million gallons in 1970. This escalating
cost of treatment prohibits the city of Whiting from
committing itself to a future program of complete
-------
1619
F. Harangody
dependence on the city of Hammond and prohibits pumping all
storm and wastewaters to the Hammond Sanitary District
on the basis of economics.
"We have caused to be prepared a 137-page report
entitled, "Sanitary Sewerage System and Water Pollution
Control Facilities," copies of which have been delivered
to the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board staff.
"We have also caused to be prepared a fact
sheet which summarizes said report and is attached to
this statement.
"The analysis and evaluation of the five alterna-
tive plans in this report by the city administration of
the city of Whiting in conjunction with the consulting
engineer leads me to the conclusion that Plan E is the
complete solution that we have sought.
"We are therefore asking this Board to do the
following:
"1) Order that the city of Whiting be rated.
"2) Determine the priority of the city of
Whiting's application for sewage treatment project
construction grant.
"3) Modify the Board's order of June 19, 1970,
to allow evaluation of the five alternative plans submitted
by the city of Whiting.
-------
1620
P. Harangody
"•4) Modify the Board's order of June 19, 1970,
to approve Plan E of the city of Whiting as an effective
project for pollution abatement consistent with applicable
water quality standards.
"Respectfully submitted, Prank Harangody,
Mayor, City of Whiting."
Mr. B. A. Poole, Technical Secretary of the
Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board made many state-
ments throughout the course of the meeting of September
15, 1970. Some of these statements were made in the
presence of the city of Whiting and some were not. The
city of Whiting has procured a tape of this entire meeting
and I must admit that Mr. B. A. Poole used his influence
in the form of half truths and innuendoes to the utmost
to influence the Board's decision that the city of Whiting
not be rated and that Plan E not be approved. At one
point in these tapes Mr. B. A. Poole said, and I quote,
"I scanned their report last night." (Emphasis supplied)
His statements made during the course of the day
prove that he had not given the report any consideration
and did not understand its content.
The reasons given by the staff of the Indiana
Stream Pollution Control Board have caused several inquiries
by the city of Whiting. The following are our conclusions
-------
1621
F. Harangody
based on these Inquiries:
1) The record of the lawsuit originated by the
State of Illinois in the Supreme Court in 19^3 shows that
the city of Whiting submitted three alternatives to cease
pollution of Lake Michigan. The first of these alterna-
tives was that the city of Whiting build their own sewage
treatment facility. This we have proposed since 19^5 and
we are still asking that we be allowed to do so at the
present time.
2) Regarding the allegation of Mr. Perry Miller
and Mr. B. A. Poole that the Federal Water Quality
Administration would not allow the city of Whiting to build
a treatment facility, Mr. Holloman of the Federal Water
Quality Administration for the Lake Michigan Basin stated
that he was not aware of any such ruling or prohibitive
policy. It was requested of Mr. Holloman that he transmit
any and all Federal policies, rules, regulations, etc.
concerning the city of Whiting to me as soon as possible.
3) I was truly amazed by the statement of the
Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board staff that an
Indiana treatment facility ciuld not be built unless It
could discharge its effluent into a waterway draining
westward Into Illinois. I have not been able to determine
that the Federal Government is in collusion with the State
-------
1622
F. Harangody
of Indiana against the State of Illinois and I am quite
sure the State of Illinois would not agree to this
arrangement. Gentlemen, I believe pollution must be
abated.
4) The Board of Sanitary Commissioners of the
city of Whiting has retained an attorney to investigate
the possibility of seeking relief in the courts by
obtaining an injunction against the Indiana Stream
Pollution Control Board whose actions against the city
of Whiting have been arbitrary, capricious, and detri-
mental to the best interests of the city of Whiting,
The city of Whiting as of today does not have
the necessary approval of the Indiana Stream Pollution
Control Board for its water pollution abatement project.
In effect, the Indiana Stream Pollution Control
Board has patted the city of Whiting on the back and nent
them home with instructions to come back next year.
It is my understanding that it is the avowed
Federal policy to save Lake Michigan and not let it
deteriorate to the same fate as Lake Erie.
It has been reported that Congress is going to
appropriate billions of dollars for water pollution
control projects.
The present public awareness of the environmental
-------
1623
F. Harangody
ecological problems in the United States makes it seem
incongruous that all of the good intentions of the Federal
Government and municipalities such as the city of Whiting
can be so easily frustrated by a staff decision to postpone
action by a State water pollution control agency.
It is a paradox of our time that when you have
Federal and State laws to compel municipalities and
industries to institute water pollution abatement control
projects that the city of Whiting comes forward seeking
approval and financial assistance to voluntarily construct
a sanitary treatment plant of the latest engineering
design providing tertiary treatment to eliminate the
discharge of raw sewage in Lake Michigan and to maintain
water quality standards, that they are summarily rejected.
Let's face it, gentlemen, no action is tantamount to
rejection.
If this is true, this means that the 1968, the
1969, as well as this conference being held in Chicago
this week is nothing more than window dressing that attempts
to fool the people that live in the Lake Michigan Basin.
You have a conferee present who by his actions has denied
the city of Whiting the opportunity to solve its sewer and
pollution problems and, on the other hand, insists that
the discharge from combined sewers must be stopped. He
-------
1624
P. Harangody
knows that this is not possible.
Gentlemen, the people of Whiting, Indiana, would
like to be convinced that what you are doing in these
conferences concerning water pollution abatement is more
than a mental exercise for the purpose of getting publicity.
It is within the power of those present here to
insist that the city of Whiting be allowed to proceed with
Its water pollution abatement project.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to
present this statement.
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Do you have any comments or questions?
Do you want to stay at the podium?
MR. HARANGODY: I will stand up here if you don't
mind, Perry.
MR. STEIN: You don't mind, do you?
MR. HARANGODY: No, I dont mind.
MR. MILLER: I think I must respond on behalf
of the Stream Pollution Control Board to this presentation
by the mayor of the city of Whiting, and I certainly would
say that there are many things that I disagree with which
he has included in what he has presented* But I think the
real important thing for the conferees to consider is that
the staff and the Board In its actions were considering
-------
1625
F. Harangody
that the request of Whiting was for a new discharge that
would go into Lake Michigan.
To understand this, I think you must know that
the city of Hammond, which is currently treating the wastes
for the city of Whiting, discharges into the Grand Calumet
River which during most all of the time flows westward into
Illinois and does not come back to Lake Michigan. And any
plant discharging for the city of Whiting into the Indiana
Harbor Canal would be tributary to Lake Michigan and not to
the Grand Calumet River.
This new source of pollution is contrary to the
recommendations and findings of the conferees of this
conference of the Calumet area conference. Further we
believe also that there is some implications at least in
the new regulations adopted by FWQA requiring regional
types of programs . It. was on the basis also that the
Board does have an order that was issued and one of the
findings, as the mayor said, is that — and recommendations
— is that they continue to discharge to the city of Hammond,
and we believe that proper procedures were followed in the
issuance of this order*
So it was on this basis that we — and I say "we,"
the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board — came to a
decision that it would not rate the Whiting project, that
-------
1626
F. Harangody
we would explore the possibilities with FWQA as to the
compliance with their regulations, as to compliance with
the findings of the conferees of this conference, and if
they were agreeable, then we would rate the project next
year • I think that this was a Justifiable conclusion,
and one that is based upon fact, that is not arbitrary,
and it is in keeping with the policies of the State of
Indiana and of the conferees.
MR. STEIN: Are there any other comments or
questions?
Do you want to respond to that, Mr. Mayor?
MR. HARANGODY: In the Federal Register, there
is a requirement that you have a central disposal unit.
However, this is not in the immediate future. Mr. Miller
would not tell us if the plant he wishes us to implement
would be valid in the next 5 years. He couldn't guarantee
anything. There is no such regional plan as of now and
none in the foreseeable future. There are no laws on the
books to implement such plan,and we must stay at a stand-
still until such thing has been permitted by State statute,
etc., etc. That is all I have to say.
MR. STEIN: Any other comment or question?
Mr. Mayor, let me tell you, you have presented
the last three or four pages as a fact. What do you think
-------
162?
F. Harangody
of those facts? Do you agree that that is a fact sheet?
MR. MILLER: No, I don't agree this is a fact
sheet. There are many facts pointed out in this presen-
tation which, so help me, are not factual.
MR. STEIN: One of these things relates — I
think maybe I better clarify that. You say it Is within
the power of tnose present here to insist that the city of
Whiting be allowed to proceed with its water pollution
abatement project.
Now, I know we have in the Federal statute —
it is rather complex — but we have the primary rights
and responsibilities to abate water pollution resting with
the State, and we set up certain requirements at this
conference, and we turned it back to the States to admin-
ister this under State laws and regulations. Th!s is the
Federal statute procedure. Therefore, your problem, as
you pointed out here — and if there is a problem and I
am sure there is — relates to your relationship with yur
State government, Isn't that correct?
J.R. HARANGODY: Jf you put It that way, but they
refer us to the Federal Government.
MR. STEIN: Right. Now, we cannot, as far
as I read the Federal law, require any St.ite government to
issue or not issue a permit that it is
-------
1623
F. Harangody
taking under its laws and procedure. Not only can't we
do it, but I don't think the other States can do it for a
neighboring State.
However, the city of Whiting presumably is
still discharging storrawater contrary to the standard
requirements, as I understand it, and the requirements
of the conference.
Now, we do have a procedure under the Federal
Government whereby we can get this resolved one way or
the other. That is, we can file a 180-day Notice apainst
the city of Whiting and see what you are going to do. If
you don't do it, we can go to court and-the Federal
Court can decide what is going to happen.
Now, I think the alternatives that the conferees
here have should be borne in mind, because I do not think
we have the power by any law that I know of to change or
direct the State of Indiana to change its law, change
its procedure, or adjust its orders. This is a State
matter over which none of the people at this table, other
than the Indiana representatives, have any authority.
While I appreciate what you are saying and what you are
asking us to do, I am not sure that is within our powers.
MR. HARANGODY: Our city attorney would like to
speak.
-------
1629
P, Harangody
MR. GRAY: In reply to Mr. Stein's comment, I
would like to direct your attention to my understanding
of the law and that is this: The Federal Government has
the most powerful weapon called the purse strings. It
is my understanding that the Government provides under
Public Law 600 funds which can be used in two methods:
one by direct construction grants on a 30-percent basis
without State participation; the other is where you have
the 50 percent — 25 percent State participation and 25
percent by the local government.
Our application was filed in keeping with the
Indiana rules to try to secure a grant of the 75 percent
moneys. My theory, and our thinking in the city of
Whiting is this: that we cannot get this type of funding.
The engineering report shows an alternative,
which is to apply for Federal funds on a 30 plus a possible
10 percent increase for a total of MO percent funding.
This is within your bailiwick as I understand the PWQA
Act. And it is our impression that we have been informed
by the State that if the Federal Government says that it
is permissible to create or construct a water treatment
plant, teritary phases of the most advanced design, we
would not be discharging pollution into Lake Michigan^ we
would be discharging an effluent that would be clean and
-------
1630
F. Harangody
clear enough to drink.
The Federal law says that you are to maintain
the quality of the water of Lake Michigan and you are to
do everything within your power to maintain and set the
standard for good quality water.
MR. STEIN: Let me clarify that. While there
may be some differences in what you have said and this,
I don't think that is the operating point. Whether you
get 30 percent money, 33 percent money, 55 percent money,
the same limitation prevails.
Let me give you this limitation. When this law
was passed, there were various points of view taken about
primacy of State, Federal, or local rates. One of the
things that the Congress put forth as a prerequisite to
any grant — any grant, whatever the money is, and this
is the point — was that the priority listing for that
grant would be in the hands of the State agency, not the
Federal Government. The Federal Government was not given
the authority to select projects within the State. All
we can do is make allocations of the grant funds.
Now, it is true that the State priority system
must meet certain Federal criteria, and the project also,
once it achieves a State priority, must meet certain
other Federal requirements. But I repeat: Under the
-------
1631
P. Harangody
Federal law, no one in the Federal Government
selects the priority of a project within a State. That Is
up to the State Government, and until we get a certification
from the State, we can't give you any construction
grants. The law is very clear on that. The Congress was
very clear on that. And I think even with the newer
members, no one is proposing changing this.
But this is not, sir — if you don't like the
way this works — and I know there are differences of
opinion — this is not the right forum. We can use it
as a sounding board, but if anyone is going to change
that it has to be the Congress and not UP..* A.s far as
I know there has been no serious proposal to change that
feature of the Federal law.
MR. GRAY: Mr. Stein, I am cognizant of what you
are saying and I recognize that the Federal law does
provide that it must be with "the approval" of the
State pollution control agency. This we are not
quarreling about.
However, what we are saying is that when we in
a small community go to the State agency, we are told of
the existence of certain Federal policies which are
prohibitive in nature. We come to you and say, "Well,
now, if these are a matter of Federal policy, this
-------
1632
F. Harangody
certainly should be within your jurisdiction, and therefore
you would have the ability to determine what your own
policies are and whether they would prevent Whiting from
doing what it is attempting to do."
This is the information and the impression — I
use that word "impression" — that we have received is
that Federal policy is adverse to the city of Whiting,
and we say to you gentlemen sitting here dictating or
creating or establishing Federal policy: Is this true?
And, if so, please be aware of our problem and take this
into consideration in establishing your Federal policy.
MR. STEIN: By the way, I fully understand
that. I think we have something here that has to be solved.
But again in reading your report, there are a lot of
other things beyond the Federal policy. I am not making
a judgment; obviously we cannot do that. But there are
allegations here whether the State is seriously considering
your project, whether they understood it, whether they
even read your proposal, etc.
MR. GRAY: This is a matter for the State court.
MR. STEIN: I understand that.
But it seems to me, sir, that before we get even
-------
1633
F. Harangody
to the Federal issue, we have to get these things resolved
with the State, because we are not proceeding in an orderly
way. In other words, I have known the people in Indiana
State Government for many years, and I know all of the
people including Dr. Offutt, the hearing officer, that you
mentioned here. It has been my experience through the
years that these people are among the most knowledgeable
people in water pollution. They are aware of the Federal
and State law and State regulations. As I understand it,
when they have certain prerogatives under the Federal
Act, they have to make that initial determination.
I would suggest if the issue gets narrowed down
to the point that there are no allegations on either side
but the sole difference between you and the State might be
a question of Federal policy, that is the time perhaps that
you may want to direct your inquiry. But the way this case
sits now, there seems to be a good deal to be done between
the municipality and the State to get the project squared
away. The answer is if there is a Federal question;
if we are dealing with a clear Federal question and if
that is the only impediment to the project. As I read
it there seems to be a lot more than that.
-------
1634
F» Harangody
MR. GRAY: Well, the record — the 16-page
presentation by the mayor was an attempt to present an
actual chronological sequence of events which have occurred
which have led us to be at this meeting today.
In all fairness to Mr. Offutt for whom I have
great respect, at the time of the hearing on the 15th of
September, there were only four members in actual attendance
when Whiting made its presentation, including Mr. Offutt.
Mr. Perry Miller — he was physically present but he did
not become vocal and make any comments either for or in
opposition to Whiting's request. The opposition was from
Mr. Blucher Poole, and the recommendations of the staff
and the technical secretary were accepted by the four
members who constituted a quorum at that meeting.
We have requested the opportunity to be present
at the next meeting on — I believe it is scheduled for
October 20, because we do sincerely and earnestly feel
that they obviously did not understand or fully realize
what we were trying to propose to them.
What we were concerned about is the fact that
we are under order from the Board as well as a prior
order from 196? from the Federal Government to do some-
thing by the end of 1970, and were in effect told to go
home and come back next year. That puts us in kind of a
-------
1635
F. Harangody
limbo.
MR. STEIN: I think it does. I think if you
don't do anything by 1970 you are going to be in violation
of a Federal directive, and we are going to be around to
see you.
MR. GRAY: So all I can say, gentlemen, is "help."
MR. STEIN: I don't know if the cities appreciate
it when we knock on their door, but we will be there.
Now, I suggest you sit down once more with the
State of Indiana and try to get this resolved.
I am making this suggestion to both the Indiana
representatives and you. Now, if you both feel, after your
next meeting — the city, the State, just yourselves get
together — that there are issues which cannot be resolved
because of unclarity or some doubt or disagreement on what
the Federal requirements are and you both agree that the
Federal people would be useful, I would suggest that you
get in touch with Mr. Mayo. I am sure his office or we
would be glad to provide all of the assistance we can.
The reason I suggest that you get together
again is that it will narrow the issue before you get
the Federal people in it — the Federal questions. Because
I don't think it will be helpful at all if the Federal
people get involved in some of the differences which you
-------
1636
F. Harangody
apparently have between you and the State. This is in the
nature — and I don't like to make an analogy — of a family
quarrel and you get a third party in. You are not going to
solve the situation, you are just going to complicate it.
And a good portion of these questions are whether you
understand the project and what you want to go for are
really not Federal questions.
MR. MAYO: Frequently it is the third party that
ends up in the hospital.
MR. STEIN: That is right.
MR. GRAY: I want to thank Mr. Stein and the
other conferees for listening, and I like Mr. Stein's analysis
and recognition of the problem. I do concur with the
thought that perhaps we should and we would be receptive
to sitting down with Mr. Perry Miller who has now assumed
the position and title and the power of Mr. Poole, and I
would hope he would do this with an open mind. What we
were concerned about is to be foreclosed for one full year,
and this was the impression that we received when we
walked out of Indianapolis.
MR. MILLER: First of all, I want to say that we
-------
1637
F. Harangody
are aware, and we have studied this report, and the comments
of Mr. Poole at the Board represented the staff's viewpoint
and that there is no question about this.
I think there is another problem that Whiting
has that we don't need to go into as far as eligibility for
funds in this fiscal year, even if they were rated. But
we certainly, I think, have viewed this with an open mind.
And our thought, as far as the requirement in the regula-
.tions and of this conference, is that the State of Indiana
is involved in interstate conferences — this is in the
interstate waters — that we are adding a new source of
pollution, and admittedly it is small, even with tertiary
treatment. But these are issues that have to be resolved,
I think, before we can come to grips. And I firmly believe
that since Whiting's sewage has been treated since 1945
by the city of Hammond, that it can continue to be treated
there and that Whiting can treat stormwater as well.
MR, GRAY: I think that could become involved
in a two-way discussion which won't be fair to the con-
ferees. So I will follow Mr. Stein's admonition that this
is a matter that should be handled within our local State
government. I assume Mr. Perry Miller is aware of the
fact that the city of Whiting does wish to be in attendance
at the next regularly scheduled Board meeting on October
-------
1633
F. Harangody
20. This was so stated on September 15.
And as to what other course of action we will
take, I should like to suggest, in trying to define and
narrow the issues — and if there is a Federal question,
and there is a Federal question or more than one question,
we would like to anticipate the assistance of your Federal
Regional Office here in Chicago.
MR. STEIN: Yes. By the way, we are not limited
to that. Although I think this can be resolved in the Chicago
office, if you ask us a Federal question regarding your
operation, we will commit the whole Federal resource if
there is a Federal question to help solve this problem.
MR. GRAY: Thank you, Mr. Stein.
MR. STEIN: I have one more. I think you raise
a rather interesting question here. If you say reduction
of heat is a burden, it may be a burden on the municipality
or we have a problem of heat in the lake.
You know, from reading this, I get the idea that
you are committed. I don't think there is any question
of your commitment to provide as clean water to the lake
as you can regardless of the permits of the plant.
I am not getting into that because that is between you
and the State. You are talking about coming up with
-------
1639
F. Harangody
tertiary treatment and even treating the storrujater, and
that is furtner than what I think most cities have gone .
So I think on its face, the end results of what you are
trying to do in the program are commendable.
If we have the heat problem, I think we have to
really look at this. I am not sure that we can ask the
cities — and you may have a point —to reduce the heat
fromtfte'ir water. Some of the cities particularly may use
water from wells,which in the winter when it starts out
is warmer than the surface water. But if we have a heat
problem in the lake and we set up categories and the cities
are out, and we are not going to have too many restrictions
on them, and based on an assumption which we haven't made
yet that we have to control the heat, this may lead us to
even more stringent requirements on industrial users.
And you recognize the implications of what you
are doing, because if we are going to make this kind of
classification, and you have powerplants and other indus-
tries putting out heat and we have to keep that heat down,
and we are going to recognize that the problems of munici-
palities may be a little more lenient, this may require us
possibly to require more stringent requirements on the
other dischargers to the lake if we have to control it.
MR. GRAY: While our written report doesn't
cover this — and I am not an expert and I am not an
-------
1640
F. Harangody
engineer — the observation I wanted to make was the fact
that I was aware that some of your industrial users in the
Lake Michigan Basin — their attorneys have called me and
pointed out that this conference was significant} that
if they wish to establish thermal heating plants or plants
using that type of heat, they might be discharging an
effluent that would have a 14-degree rise.
Now, some of these same industrial users were
in attendance at that meeting we had in Indianapolis on
May 1 at which I was present, and the State of Indiana —
if I am wrong, Mr. Miller, correct me — we had an 8-degree
input-output rise permissible and they wanted to reduce
this down to 5 degrees, and I assume that the Board will
act accordingly.
Now, with reference, however, to Lake Michigan,
we are in a position that we have a water intake from
Lake Michigan, So we are vitally concerned, because our
source of raw water is from Lake Michigan, so we need to
have it clean, too.
Then, also I have talked to the consulting
engineers, I am informed that we do have the problem
that with municipal discharge of water into a lake, that
it is going to be in the wintertime below ground and, there-
fore, at a temperature higher than freezing, and the
probability is that your shore front where the outfall
-------
1641
F. Harangody
would be located is freezing. So the paradox would be
that we have to discharge ice cubes to maintain the same
degree of temperature as the surface of the water. I
don't mean to be funny but it did cross my mind.
So, therefore, the municipalities are perhaps
in a special category which would mean they could be
excluded entirely or else could be made, as you put it,
more lenient — the thought being that because we increase
it 2 degrees, I think the point was we will have to make
the industries more restrictive, isn't that right?
MR. STEIN: That is right.
MR. GRAY: Okay.
MR. STEIN: If we make these categories enough
to preserve the waters of the lake that you use as your
water intake, you see the basic job we have — and you
hit this firmly here — is not to have this water resource
deteriorate because this is one of our most important
national assets. But if the water resource deteriorates,
you are going to have a heck of a time with your water
supply. I know Mr. Vaughn from Chicago who spoke this
morning, and is still here maybe can translate this. Before
we had this program under way and — this comes from a
1943 case — there were times that the city of Chicago
water intake had taste and odor problems from the
-------
1642
F. Harangody
phenols and other substances which presumably were traced
to petroleum operations in your area. This I think we
have knocked down considerably due to this program.
What I am saying is that if heat, in fact, is
a problem or anything is a problem in the lake, people who
have to use the water for their water intake like Hammond
and Chicago are going to be the first —
MR. GRAY: And Whiting.
MR. STEIN: — and Whiting, I am sorry — and
Whiting are going to be the first ones to suffer because
you are right on the line, dependent on that water for
your water supply.
MR. GRAY: That is correct, and I think you have
hit the button on the head, too. Only in relation to the
question is heat increase a contributing factor to further
degradation of the lake, this is what you must initially
decide. Once you make that decision, then you implement
it, and I am not the authority on that.
I have read the comments last night in the papers
of some professor that appeared here and said that Lake
Michigan in substance is the largest mixing basin in the
world and added heat really won 't make that much difference
-------
1643
R. E. Anderson
on aquatic life, etc., etc.
I was in attendance at a hearing on May 6 when
we had that professor from the University of Minnesota
working under a Federally-funded project on research. He
came to Indianapolis and presented a written report, which
Mr. Miller should have available in his file, in effect,,
saying that heat increase does not adversely affect
aquatic life. But I won't take any posture or position
pn that because I am not the authority. That is up to you
gentlemen to decide.
MR. STEIN: Thank you very much.
May we have Paul A. Kuhn for Raymond E. Anderson?
STATEMENT OF RAYMOND E. ANDERSON, GENERAL
MANAGER, NORTH SHORE SANITARY DISTRICT,
WAUKEGAN SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT, WAUKEGAN,
ILLINOIS (PRESENTED BY PAUL A. KUHN)
MR. KUHN: My name is Paul A. Kuhn, Associate in
the consulting firm of Greeley and Hansen. We are the
consulting engineers for the North Shore Sanitary District.
Chairman Stein, I want to apologize for Mr.
Anderson. He is laid up with a virus and is unable to
present the. paper himself, and as we helped him prepare
-------
1644
R, E. Anderson
it, he asked me to present it. This is a statement on Lake
Michigan thermal pollution standards.
We understand that the principal concern of the
hearings on thermal pollution standards for Lake Michigan
has been standards for heated cooling water discharges to
the lake. We believe that attention should also be given
to the following discharges which are governed by thermal
pollution standards which now exist or may be established,
1, Discharges of treated municipal wastewater.
2, Discharges of treated municipal combined
sewage overflows.
The North Shore Sanitary District is now discharg-
ing treated municipal wastewater to Lake Michigan. Our
present program envisions the ultimate diversion of all such
discharges from Lake Michigan, The Sanitary District, how-
ever, lacks sufficient financing to forecast with certainty
the time at which the discharge from the Waukegan Sewage
Treatment Plant will be diverted from the lake. If necessary
financing is made available to the Sanitary District through
the passage of the proposed $750 million Anti-pollution Bond
Issue, and from other sources, we can expect to accomplish
the Waukegan diversion before the end of 1973.
The Sanitary District's project includes facili-
ties for the treatment of combined sewage overflows at the
-------
1645
R. E. Anderson
North Chicago and Waukegan Sewage Treatment Plants. It is
expected that the discharge of such treated wastewater to
the lake will continue during periods of wet weather for
the foreseeable future.
We will direct our remarks concerning thermal
pollution standards to the discharge of treated municipal
wastewater at the Waukegan Sewage Treatment Plant, as this
is the only municipal sewage treatment plant in Illinois
which will discharge treated municipal wastewater to Lake
Michigan following completion of the first phase of the
Sanitary District's current construction program. The
data available on thermal effects of the discharge of
treated wastewater at Waukegan are as follows:
1. Waukegan Water Treatment Plant raw water
temperature records.
2. Waukegan Sewage Treatment Plant raw sewage
temperature records.
No data are available on the thermal effects of
treatment of combined sewer overflows, as facilities for
the treatment of such wastewaters have not yet been con-
structed. We would expect some difference in temperature
between effluent from a combined sewage overflow treatment
facility and the receiving lake water. Furthermore, wo
would expect that such discharges could meet any thermal
-------
1646
R. E. Anderson
pollution standard attainable by the effluent from a
municipal wastewater treatment plant.
Municipal sewage is principally water from the
public water supply system plus the waste materials added
to it as the water is used by the public. Heat is added to
the water supplied for public use through the discharge of
such heated waters as laundry, bathroom and kitchen wastes0
Some of the heat added to the sewage by the public may be
lost to the ground as the sewage flows to the treatment
plant. Such heat losses are, however, insufficient to
offset the heat gain through public use of the water,
No data are available on the•change in temperature
of the sewage through the sewage treatment process as
effluent temperatures have not baen measured and recorded.
Attention is, therefore, directed towards a comparison of
raw sewage and raw water temperatures.
The regional Waukegan Sewage Treatment Plant was
put into operation in 1937. The outfall of the Waukegan
Sewage Treatment Plant is approximately 5,500 feet from
the original Waukegan waterworks intake, A new waterworks
intake was recently completed which is approximately B,500
feet from the outfall. The Waukegan Water Treatment Plant
began operation in 1930,
The monthly average raw water temperatures at the
-------
1647
R. E. Anderson
Waukegan Water Treatment Plant for the years 1930 to 1969
are shown on Exhibit A. (See Pp. 164S-1653) There is no
substantial difference in monthly average raw water
temperatures over the 40 years of record and, significantly,
no discernible difference since the sewage treatment plant
was placed in operation.
In Exhibit B (See P. 1654), the monthly average
raw water temperatures at the Waukegan Waterworks for the
period 1965 to 1969 are compared with the monthly average
raw sewage temperatures at the Waukegan Sewage Treatment
Plant. The maximum recorded water and sewage temperatures
are also compared. The difference in temperature between
the raw sewage and raw lake water varies substantially
depending upon the season of the year. In the summer, the
average sewage temperature is generally about 5 to 1$ degrees
Fahrenheit warmer than the average lake temperature. In
the winter, the sewage may be more than 20 degrees Fahren-
heit warmer than the lake. The difference between annual
average Sewage and water temperatures is about 15 degrees
Fahrenheit for the 5 years reported in Exhibit B.
Waukegan beach water temperatures, reported in the
Lake Michigan beach surveys by the Illinois Sanitary Water
Board, were as follows: (See P. 1655)
-------
1648
*C U3
E-< rH
H
H
tc
X
w
1
2
6-t
^ H
;^
iy
s
rr (
CO
P-t TtT
.-M w
^ n'.
h-"! '''
a, nq
O
H HH
D-,
£! <~O
DH ^C
p M
<
|>H
""T1
*-U
H
f ^
•"":
-3
5
1
M
"
J^
H
-O
r-H
V^
o^
!
'^.
rH
m
C^
i — 1
(•V
, — |
PO
O •
rH
CM
a
, — ^
H
G
r-
o
Q
rH
T1
f-
£_i
C
?"
^O rOONcO ^O J" ^^J- C\] O-C^- OJ
—i O '"O C^-CO t — 1 rO C^*- C\l \O O liXD
rO no i ^\ r-H O- f O O rO rH r\| rO HT
mm-uh.t^ovoo^m
»./j CM CM \O '^~^'JJ O^'X) 1-f^ O H vO
f 0 < \i h O 'JO O O- rO rH rH C\J ^O
roron"»J- J- 1J'^ if \MJ\U '-f J- r'l
r— ) Q o^ OJ Vf^ , 'J Lr\ [; --. co ON ^"^ CO
CM rO CX,H; CJN CM <.-O ror\j \£),Th J"
""^J:"""""J""
^OJ- ^OvD O POCO J- r\j xO OrO
C\j CM ro C) C^ r^l •}• rO i — 1 r\j O CM
rom ("O^i J* Xf\uSxQ sQ ^^J" rO
rOO-^O C\]OOr"^OOOOO
rj.Hf OC^rH l^\s,ocO tN H O CM
OJ I'M ITN ONITN + ITS k>J- r^^rH jf
rOt^~) ^^rnj" U"'\LJ 'ij ^O Vi'Nj' rO
O •j- ro O O 'Lr^ O O "^ LrN -i" C\l
Vrs.'pOrH QU>CC) I>-CM O rOCM O-
OJ OJ [>- rH O- ON ON O O CM J- o~>
rO rO rO J" J~ ^dr ^-^ ^O ^O ^\ J" c*"!
f\J v£) ''-O J" O O J" O O O»J O C\l
O- rO Ovj XT N r^~}\r\ oj oO vO CM O-^N
CM OJ fOH 0^,4- ^-T\O(XJ rOrOJ-
rOrO on j- J- lTN\jO S.Q \i \VP\_j- rO
IsO C"> VD ^'v>,~t' O O rO rood O"\ O
CM OrH o~iO GNOD ^^-00^,0
rO 00 -J- rH vTJ O "LO* ^ ^^ OJ CN 1-^
rO rO fO J" J" U^s xQ \O ^O ^~^ rO r*~)
C\J vO ^" CM O ^~^,± "IJ>VO O CM \O
rOrHOjl-^.d-vOCMsiJOOCM[>~CM
\O J" 1-^ rOCO 'J3 ^O rO C\j CM rH rO
f"j rO r^i J- J" ^-*~N- ^"^ ^-D v O i-C^^i" r^
vOCMOOOOOOOOOJl-^
0> J- I.TN O" .ou m O 0^ .^ CO Uj CN
r^)U"N O i~oO ••vO O -aj co ,d" oo CA
(f i rO n^i^j" ^r ^ r~^ ^\ vj tr\ lo u % ro
J- [N O O O O O ^ O -O
I | rH rH U'v OJ rH O OJ O rH CjN
1 1 ^O rH IN CM ^-O O"1 O- t>- C\J rrj
rOJ- J- L^, ir\U"> LT->^H- J- m
>* CD F-! r-t
>. f-t rU r-H 0) 0)
£_i fl 4J C QJ ^ ^
CTir^XlrH t^OrO^B
^3rHO'iH (D>iC3-Pi^CDCL)
d ,U ^H ?H >. G r- tO P- -K > O
ct!Ci)cdP-.r5przSri)GJCJ|'">Ci)
t-sfiH^^USr^r^oi^osQ
ON
vO
xO
J-
o
xO
J-
c^
xO
J-
J-
UN
J-
CO
m
[xl
J-
00
CO
UN
J-
0
J-
CN
J-
rH
IN-
xD
J-
J-
rH
rx!
J-
CO
H
0".
J-
o
IN
J-
0)
M
^
f-
1i
^
ft.
O
CM
IN-
m
(-^
xD
O
CM
O
•
oO
CM
rO
UN
UN
O-
CM
CM
j-
•
O
sO
•
^
GO
&*•
xD
O
K*^
Cti'
»
X
n3
;•-
CO
r-l
1 "
t— 1
fj'i
O
cc
',->
'f-'\
M
w
l^_
[H
W
PQ
ro
W
@
ji
cd
w
'-"r
H
H
fa
O
CO
p
fc^
M
O
M
PH
>H
.<
O
fa
o
K
ri)
e
5
'&
M
^
•H
^d
rt
cu
cC
CD ON
CT5 1
_j j
J I
^ r\)
T! r^
GN
G>
r-l
CO
r-H
IN—
G^
!
xO
ON
( —
UN
O*^
, — )
J-
CJ-
, — ,
rO
ON
OJ
CN
; 1
H
a
r—
*
O
C7
-(J
•i-H
a
en i
o c
o a
^ f-
w^:
CD cr
act
xO xO ,± C M
^O O O G * Cj
CM X) 1--J rH
-OlfXi-lGNI.^
rO O r ^-^J~
r-l
m L^ r^"N o
i — 1 O^cG t-f^
rH
r"")^-P\ oj vO rO
n'"i-CO
1 1 1 1 1
00 O 0 O I/
[^
*
•I)
l"r>
o
^-O
CM
rO
O
m
rH
'_Ps
ro
xO
J-
ro
O
'M
nn
H
c^
l_p\
C^
OJ
[\.
1 — 1
CM
\o
OJ
i — i
to
Cj
Q
, — t
r^
-t-3
£
EH
>*
7^
"j
CD
O
0)
01
G
•r-i
m
CD
0
i
OJ
Q*1
e'
0
C
i — 1
o
CN
, — .
*
-------
1649
£J
fe
w
EH M
12; M
«1 K
iJ O
IX M
O
?^ r^*i
IH M
tS ra
(X g
j >
Q H
<; K
?z a,
o a
M M
E-i EH
•a!
K K
H W
M CC
CM ".>
< 5
O K
t^~ pr.
S O
f"H
dr
rH
rO
ON
rH
CvJ
GX
rH
H-
-j
r-l
0
J
1
rC
-V"
c
0
a
\
vO UNCO ON ro J- CM rH UV^ O rO ^*
OJ CM J" i— t O- H CO rO^D P»rOj" ^O
CO J- J- H C\J i-f ONOvOxOrOOO O- rn
rOpr^rOt'Oj" UNU/NsO \D UN^ ro J- \Q
\O C^ ON UN c\J sD fH C\J IN- ONCO C^- CM C^-
^CMJ- CM CO i-H CM CN-J- O rH nO ^O UN CO
rO i"*") rOj~ J" UN\O \QuNUN__j- rO j- c^. EH
M
M
CM^OpHUNCMHrHCOrHUNCNO ^O UN
CM OJ UN rOC^CMOrHONCM^OxO ^O rH £>
rOrOrOJ* J" UN^Q \Q XTNLTN + ro J~ O- O
M
«
j>
J-vOOfN-OCMOxDl>- ONOO UN rH UN
CM ro J- O CN- O O rH J- Ox J- m lr\ ro 63
^>
r£|
CQ
^cNOj OxONrO1^^ ^h rH CM rH J- C*- Ox o
rOCM IN J-* IN H OO XT\Cv rol^sO vD ro H
rororo.j- ^ U"xliS\DXi^XrxJ- ro J" C^- g
^5
EH
O CM rO^-fx CNJ" OO xO ^°x Cx-OO CN- Ox O r^P
CM CMCONOxO O J- J" J" CM J- rO XTN rH a
rororo J-^f XTNITX-^O uMrxJ- ro .Jr CN ^1
EH
fr,
O
CNO^J* C\j J- rO^XOXrHOO CN-xO O O
CM rorOOOl^CNtNCO H J-xO J- J- O O
rorororoj- J- UMrxir\\rxJ- ro J- IN- 3
§
M
CMOO CM CNxO rOrHCM rOrOrOON J- O K
CM CM J- CM C^CO (NO CM CM O rO J- rO >H
rororo^ J~ ^J" ^TN\D l^xXrx^H" ro J" r>- <£
Q
PL,
O
COCMOO^'CNO-IN-CMOCOrNOx o O
C\JC\|NOO^O'-C'VDrJCrxrHrOCM xO rH P3
rOrOf^lJ- J- XTsUN^D lr\U^,J- rO j- tN [Q
1
VfNCVJ CN-xOCM rO IN. xO tN
ro rO ro^t" J" l^xOxO ^^ _J- ^ rO J" CN
j O CM CO rO'>O i — 1 ^*xj" Ox^O IN Ox Qx Q
CM CM CM O IN CM tr-> r-1 CO [N CM CM Xf\ H
roro rO_dr j" ^-r\lr\\£) xrj vrx. j- ro J~ CN
f-,
>> to t* f-t >>
J>iPn ,£2fHCUCUCUCdCijD
^tcXj -PSQ),£a^D LDQC
cfl3^!H t/)CU,aEE n) -H
^3 F-t o *tH Q) f^> ^3 -t-3 o CU Q) ^t * 'O
C,a£H^,>,c!r-ition,-p>o CD Xn)
CdCUcdftcd^^^CDOOCD t> cflCU
t-3ri,aci!ai^!|~3 o
o
rH
OX
Ox
H
Ox
rH
f1^
-V-
^-J
rH
xO
a.
•CTN
rH
Irs
ON
H
J-
J"
O
rH
+
^j
rH
CM
-4_
^-T
rH
a-
'Ox
rH
0
"Ox
rH
+J
-H
Q)
W £
CD C
Q) CD
^4 f 1
bC ^1
0) ec
Q fc
Ox rH C\] xO EN Vrx
rH rH rO
CN^O xD rO 1 >J^
rH 1 ro
O CO CN'-O CM U"x
J CM ^N i — 1 \0
rH rH rO
UNrOQlTNCM UN
r\\ i (-r\ jf , n
t \j i i kJ«j ,_j ^j
rH rH ro
roO rororo rH
rH rH rO
INxOtQINtN. U>
rH H rO
CNrH H CM rH CM
rH J~ C*** rO ^O
r-l rH rO
XfNrOOXi — ' 1 CO
^H" i — 1 \O rO 1 ^x
rH rH 1 rO
rOCNrH OX,H rH
j~ CM \O CM xO
rH rH rO
-O OtrxrH CO ^rx
rH r-H rO
rH rO ro J- J- ^<
H rH ro
rHOLTXCDJ- O
i-l rO
CO
^
(^
o p c o o i>
^^
1 I I 1 I r!
4-i
CM O O O O O
rOJ- LTXvO fN EH
-------
NSSD - EXHIBIT A
WAUKECrAN FILTRATION AND PHMPING- PLANT
: ON7TKLY AVERAGES OF RAW WATER TEMPERATURES IN...DEGREES FAHRENHEIT , , rn
' -" ' ' ' - ' " ' • - ..--.-••• 1650
Konth
Jan. 32.2 32.10 33.66
Feb. 32.6 32.94 32.99
1 -oh 33.8 33.94 36.11
April 40.3 40.73 42.66
Kay 46.1 48.99 47.31
June 53.0 51.29 52.39
July 55.2 46.32 5^.20
Aug. 61.2 56.83 66.53
Sept. 57.2 56.99 56.56
Oot. 49.0 51.08 56.13
Nov. 38.2 44.50 47.44
Deo. 33 J. 35.58 36.29
Ave. 44.1 44.27 46.88
Max. 66.7 68.50 72.50
NUMBER OF DAY READINGS OF TEMPERATURES BETWEEN VARIOUS LIMITS
Degrees
Fahrenheit 1951 1952 1951
32 - 40 160 134 111
40 - 50 80 116 116
50 - 60 80 69 92
60 - 70 45 47 31
70 - 80 0_ 0 15
Total Days 365 366 365
-------
WAUKEGAN FILTRATION AND PUMPING FLANT
. . , , 4-V
Jr.;..
Feb.
Ma roll
April
Kay
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Avg.
Max .
Degrees
Fahrenheit
32 - 40
4o - 50
50 - 60
60 - 70
70 - 80
To-cal Days
;or;?iiLY AVLRAJES OF RAW
1954
32.49
33.78
34.78
43.02
47.82
49.80
58.60
68.92
67.98
56.06
46.41
36.44
48.00
68.92
NUMBER OF DAY READINGS
1954
135
97
60
4i
J£
365
WATER TEMPERATURES IN DEGREES FAHREi^EIT T
195J.
33.30
32.58
34.56
41.31
43.05
52.29
60.12
68.33
59.85
51.65
41.12
32.39
45.92
68.33
OF TEMPERATURES
1955
141
84
82
29
.22
365
1956
32.40
32.57
34.72
42.56
47.00
50.50
61.30
62.87
55.72
54.02
•43.68
45.95
62.87
BETWEEN VARIOUS
1956
138
95
87
44
2
366
i25Z
32.34
33.18
35.05
40.63
47.85
48.91
57.57
67.31
62.14
55.84
44.89
35.09._
46.72
67.13
LIMITS
1957
135
88
64
66
12
365
4/6
-------
NSSD - EXHIBIT A
•J'./i,
3 •.':••.
;:.-«*
.\-i-il
i'r.-7
Jure
July
••'•'J*
r^:!;.
Oc c-»
i;ov.
AV.
JCiT^-Vt
32 • I/)
10 - 50
5o - 60
60 - 70
70 - 00
• t-ol Days
— — ••-"--'- •-
32. uO
32.1:3
36.19
ij3. 2-'*
u7.?6
51.^7
a.27
60.13
53.57
Itf.SXL
U.8!»
31.65
•kttVK-M *•*»»
7*0.^0
!?=•::, r. fi:1
J25L
123 /^
133 ((
60 -N
20
....6
365
;.-." •-.-•• : rn,. -•;,;-;
. ..'• i 0 tv/« f<£
5li.87 5Ji.6l
5U.12 60.60
57.21* 62.63
58.56 63.15
52.92 57.69
39.03 1*5.13^
3.3.9JI ^'JlOs
15.05 13+ZL
63.50 X>^T3»Q^.
D.\Y Pi:Anj//s o? •iv.Ty.il'V
^,« c ^
lid. 13U
>«
102 M 78
,_y// 76
"~~29 7U
^ 0 __^
365 356
A:M n. ;-r i r> • :.
• ' : . ' * J J '] I
32.2? 32.63
33.57 32.1i9
r-ey> A.i6
Kl.GO Ij3.l6
l»7.20 i^.20
55.23 Slȣ0
57.3U ^»33
|
65.37 63.2o
56.!^--^frai
£53^ &'7-t2
\r7" irto
?5iop 69.50
i-!i'"« B;iV .J-JI VAit
/
1961 1>A1
12U H8
101 101
9k 66
36 CO
,10 _JL
3^5 355
•
__^£f. V_;v
1963 196U
31.60 32.57
31.60 32.61
35.28 35.68
Ii5.ll 1*2.1*8
U8.65 50.13
52.05 55.56
59.21 62.77
58.20 60.55
k 62.73 53.13
v\|9.!*5 1*7.77
1*9.50 1*5.U*
35.66 33.28
69^50 73^80
it';!J3 IT .ITS
1963 1961*
112 139
95 90
70 88
88 1*5
0 1*
365 366
5/6
1652
1965
32.73
32,09
33.19
1*0.62
ltf.01
52.U
69.11
53.06
55.W
1*9.96
W*.92
37.39
1*5.39
78.00
1965
133
102
95
32
3
365
-------
WA'JKEGAIJ FILTRATTOM AND PUIPIHG PLANT
NSSD - EXHIBIT A
6/6
KOTJTHLY AVERAGES OF RAW WATER TEMPERATURES IN DEGRESS FAHRENHEIT
1653
*'onth
Jan.
Feb.
"-rch
April
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Av.
Tax. Day
Degrees
Fahrenheit
32 - hO
10- 50
50-60
60-70
70 - 80
Total Days
1966
33.U9
33. &
37.05
la.21
17.19
51.52
6U.U8
65.63
52.0U
U2.93
3S.Uk
U7.93
73.20
1968
32.35
32.55
33.00
U7.17
51.77
1*9.7U
51.06
1^69
33.20
33 M
-•o. j ,'
J'3.32
36.33
39.83
68.00
L6.9).
|p?.6h
['7.B2
62.53
50.95
U3.78
35.02
L5.79
70.00
NHI3SR OF DAY READINGS CF TEMPERATURES BETWEEN VARIOUS LI11ITS
1966
lilt
99
70
71
11
365
1968
73
if 3
A-J
0
175
6k
12
366
196_9_
131
76
-------
a
EH
M
CQ
X
H
D
CO
1654
cd 3
3 w
01 cd
CO Vl
oi en
cd g o
Pi
-------
1655
R. E. Anderson
Temperature Degrees F«
1963 (1) Average Maximum
Waukegan-outer 62 70
Waukegan-inner 64 70
1969 (2) Average Maximum
Waukegan-north 62 73
Waukegan-central 6l 74
(1) Average for period 4-17-68 to 9-26-63.
(2) Average for period 4-7-69 to 10-14-69.
.The Illinois Sanitary Water Board, in 1966 in
SWB-7, established the present maximum allowable temperature
for Lake Michigan at $5 degrees Fahrenheit. This temperature
limit has not been exceeded by any discharge from the
Waukegan Sewage Treatment Plant, The implementation and
enforcement plan for SWB-7, adopted as Rule 1.06 of SWB-7
by the Illinois Sanitary Water Board, further states at
paragraph 4s
"4. Drastic or sudden temperature changes will
not be permitted. The Board will insist upon controlled
changes in temperatuere not to exceed 2 degrees Fahrenheit
per hour, nor more than a 5-degree cumulative change from
natural water degree temperature."
Although the temperature differential between
the treated Waukegan wastewater and Lake Michigan water is
-------
1656
R. E. Anderson
over 20 degrees Fahrenheit at certain times of the year,
the relatively small amount of heat added to the massive
volume of receiving lake water and the immediate diffusion
and mixing which occurs in the generally turbulent shore
waters result in a thermally controlled discharge which
creates no significant cumulative change from natural lake
water temperature.
Therefore, from the standpoint of the North Shore
Sanitary District, the &5 degree Fahrenheit maximum allow-
able temperature and requirements for controlled changes
in temperatures appear to be acceptable standards for Lake
Michigan water. Furthermore, it seems reasonable to set
the maximum temperature for any controlled wastewater dis-
charge into the lake at the maximum allowable lake temper-
ature .
It has been reported that the Federal Water
Quality Administration-may propose a thermal pollution
standard for Lake Michigan which would require that the
temperature of all wastewater discharges vary not more
than 1 degree Fahnrenheit from the'ambient lake water
temperature at the point of discharge. The imposition
of such a standard would generally require the cooling
of the treated Waukegan wastewater before discharge to
the lake. In some isolated instances, it would also require
-------
1657
R. E. Anderson
heating of the treated wastewater before discharge.
The data of Exhibit A demonstrate that the
treated wastewater discharges to Lake Michigan from district
facilities have not adversely affected the lake water
temperature in the Waukegan area. We consider it unreason-
able to require the cooling or heating of treated municipal
wastewater before discharge to meet a thermal standard
based upon a very small variation from ambient water temp-
erature in the receiving water.
During the period of record of Exhibit A, Lake
Michigan in the Waukegan area was receiving heated"dis-
charges from the Waukegan Electric Generating Station of
Commonwealth Edison Company and heated industrial cooling
waters in addition to the discharges from the North Shore
Sanitary District. The data of Exhibit A clearly indicate
that Lake Michigan may receive a substantial amount of heat
from wastewater discharges without changing the lake water
temperature. It is suggested, therefore, that comprehen-
sive studies be undertaken to establish the total amount
of heat which may reasonably be discharged to Lake Michigan
from all sources, and that the allowable total amount of
heat discharge so established be allocated among the four
lake States.
Each State could then, in turn, allocate its
-------
1653
R. E. Anderson
heat discharge allowance to the several users of Lake
Michigan waters in the State. It is suggested that in
each State's management of its heat allocation, emphasis
be placed on control of the large heat dischargers.
Moderate adjustments of large heat discharges will obviate
the need for any temperature adjustment of a small heat
discharge such as the Waukegan Sewage Treatment Plant.
Adoption of a comprehensive program of acceptable
heat discharges to Lake Michigan and reasonable management
of each State's allocation of heat discharges appears to
be in the best public interest and is u rged for your
consideration by the North Shore Sanitary District.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
Who do you suggest do the heat allocation of
the discharges to Lake Michigan?
MR. KUHN: I suggest that the Four-State Con-
ference come up with the local and then allocate the
portions to the four conferees.
MR. STEIN: Do you suggest this conference do
the allocation?
MR. KUHN: Yes.
MR. STEIN: Are there any other commonts or
questions?
Anyone from the audience have any questions?
-------
1659
D. Schwarz
If not, thank you very much,
MR. KUHN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
MR. STEIN: Could we have David Schwarz, Director
of Corporate Environmental Control, Abbott Laboratories?
STATEMENT OF DAVID SCHWARZ, DIRECTOR,
CORPORATE ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL, ABBOTT
LABORATORIES, NORTH CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
MR. SCHWARZ: Mr. Chairman, members of the con-
ference, ladies and gentlemen. My name is David Schwarz.
I am Director of Corporate Environmental Control for Abbott
Laboratories.
Abbott Laboratories is committed to doing every-
thing necessary to achieve compliance with all legal
environmental pollution control regulations. In most cases
this commitment to compliance means the continuing
expenditure of substantial sums of technical and monetary
resources to meet changing and more stringent regulations.
We have been able to interpret and live with all of the
regulations proposed to date. In the case of thermal
pollution, however, we at Abbott are concerned that a new
thermal standard will be adopted which cannot in practice
be met without extraordinary and unjustified expenditure
-------
1660
D0 Schwarz
of funds. We feel compelled to speak out to prevent the
unnecessary economic hardship not only to ourselves but
also to other industry and to society who will ultimately
have to bear the cost.
The Abbott plant at North Chicago uses between
12 and 20 million gallons of water each day in various
process and utility operations. This water is pumped
from Lake Michigan through the pumping facilities of the
city of North Chicago, whose water intake extends about
1 mile into the lake. Our usage varies directly with the
temperature of the water in the lake.
We have collected and plotted our inlet lake
water temperature for the years 196$ through 1969 in a
table appended. (See P. l66l) This temperature is
measured by a continuous temperature recorder within the
Abbott plant. Occasional spot checks have demonstrated
that the temperature measured at the Abbott recorder is
the same as measured at the North Chicago pumping station.
Both temperatures represent the temperature of the open
water at a point approximately 1 mile into the lake and at
a depth of 30 feet.
One of the proposed amendments to the present
thermal standards is known as the "State of Michigan
Concept." Included in this amendment is the following:
-------
1662
D. Schwarz
"Lake Michigan shall not receive a heat load which
would warm the therraocline or the hypolimnion, nor may any
waters be warmed greater than 3 degrees above natural lake
temperature nor above the maximum allowable temperature
shown in the temperature limitation table, whichever is
lesser,"
When we compare the inlet water temperature at
Abbott for the 5-year period with the Temperature Limitation
Table we see the following:
Temperature Limitation Table
Open Water
Shore Water
Number of Days
in 5 Years
Abbott Inlet That Inlet Temp.
Month
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
April
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
Temp. Limit,
°F
42
37
37
44
53
65
71
74
72
65
54
50
Temp. Limit,
°F
42
37
37
44
53
65
72
77
75
65
54
50
Mean Temp . ,
°F
32,9
33.2
35.1
42.7
47.7
53.2
60.3
60.9
61.2
57.7
39.9
36.2
Was Above
Shore Limits
0
0
55
85
4
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
In March and April with the temperature limits
as proposed, the temperature of the lake itself frequently
exceeds the limits. In February the water temperature is
often so close to the limit that any heat input would
frequently raise the discharge temperature above the limit.
-------
1663
D. Schwarz
We must, therefore, raise the following question:
Is there any logical basis for establishing temperature
limits which are sometimes less than the natural water
temperatures ?
We must also point out in our data the large
variation in daily water temperature in a given month.
Our daily temperature charts show that the water tempera-
ture often varies by more than 10 degrees Fahrenheit in a
24-hour period and occasionally varies by more than 15
degrees Fahrenheit in just a few hours. These variations
can be seen in the temperature charts appended. (See Pp.
l663a and l663b) We would expect that similar and perhaps
even wider fluctuations would be seen in the examination
of the inlet water data from other industries and municipal
water treatment plants on the lake.
We must also, therefore, ask the following
question: Why is there any concern with establishing
standards which limit temperature changes to 3 degrees
Fahrenheit or 5 degrees Fahrenheit when the organisms in
Lake Michigan are naturally and frequently subjected to
much greater temperature variation?
We have appended a report from Argonne National
Laboratory entitled, "Effects of Man-Made Thermal Discharges
on the Mass/Energy Balance of Lake Michigan." (See Pp.
-------
I663a
w O* *J
2 O fc
easw
•rf H t-t 2
is .B
S m <
2 a CM c3
H H i w
H Cd 00 P*
O f-i £
'
H
a
-------
I663b
3 S
M H
a§ g
ec3 en w
^ H ^ 2
l M H
wT.S j
w 6 <:
;c* /I
WED,,
&Sj
^
/-*.
^
\
^ft
U»
/
-------
1664
D. Schwarz
1665-1690) This report concludes that the lakewide effects
of manmade thermal discharges into Lake Michigan are
negligible and will continue to be so for the rest of this
century.
We have also appended a report entitled, "The
Calafaction of a River," by Daniel Merriman in which thermal
discharges into the Connecticut River were studied in
detail. (See Pp. 1691-1701) This report states that
industrial heating into this major river has so far had
no drastic biological consequences. The levels of heating
encountered may even turn out to have beneficial long-
range results.
We can appreciate and we share the concerns for
the protection of the lake. The data, however, existing
today, about the effects of thermal discharges on the lake,
are very sparse, very contradictory, and do not convey a
justified sense of urgency for change at this time. As
a corporation, we are committed to complying with the
thermal standards, whatever they raicht be. We must urge,
therefore, that we have an enforceable standard, with a
precise definition of what compliance is, that we can use
to design our equipment and measure our performance. We
do not see these qualities in the proposed amendments to
the existing standards.
-------
1665
ARGONNE NATIONAL LABORATORY
9700 South Cass Avenue
Argoime, Illinois 60439
Effects of Man-Made Thermal Disdiarges
on the
Mass/Energy Balance of Lake Michigan
.J. G. Asbury
May, 1970
Center for Environmental Studies
-------
1666
TABLE OF GONTEOTS
Page
1.0 Mass/Energy Balance 1
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Conclusions 1
1.3 The Study 2
1.3.1 Thermal Discharges 2
1.3.2 Mass/Energy Balance of Lake Michigan 3
1.3.3 Analytical Method 8
1.3.4 Future Research 21
References
FIGURES
TABLES
-------
-1- 166?
1.0 Mass/Energy Balance
Lake-wide physical effects of thermal discharges on Lake Michigan -
particularly as these effects relate to the mass/energy balance - have been
investigated.
The following is a summary of the philosophy, techniques, and conclu-
sions of this study. A more complete report is in preparation and will soon
be available.
1.1 Introduction
In the most general sense, the motivation for the study is the desire
to contribute to the understanding of the physical qualities of Lake Michigan
in order to improve their utilization and to insure their preservation by so-
ciety. This study was specifically concerned with the heat assimilative
capacity of Lake Michigan relative to present and projected man-made thermal
loads. The methods developed for the Lake Michigan study are now being used
in analyzing the heat assimilative capacities of the other Great Lakes.
The remainder of this report is divided into three sections:
Conclusions, The Study, and Future Research.
1.2 Conclusions
It has been concluded that the lake-wide effects of man-made thermal
discharges into Lake Michigan are presently negligible and will continue to
be so for the rest of this century.
The average annual increase in water surface temperature for the whole
lake has been determined to be 9.2 ± 2.0 x 10 ** °F per gigawatt of thermal
discharge; the associated annual average increase in evaporative water loss,
10 ± 2 cfs per gigawatt of thermal discharge. The indicated uncertainties
-------
-2-
represent reasonable estimates of possible computational error. The
most likely source of error is in the choice of the evaporation formula
1
used in the analysis. We selected the Lake Hefner formula, since it
has been used with apparent success by other authors in calculating
2,3,4,5
absolute rates of evaporation from the Great Lakes.
Man-made thermal discharges can also be compared with the lake
energy budget. A one-gigawatt advective input is equivalent to
0.13 BTU/(ft2-day); the naturally occurring average rate of increase of
lake content during the March-August warming season is 1100 BTU/(ft2.day) .
The existing and projected effects on the lake's mass/energy
balance are summarized in Table 4.
1.3 The Study
1.3.1 Thermal Discharges
The three principle man-made sources of thermal discharges are:
electric utility generating stations, steel plants, and municipal waste-
water treatment plants. With the exception of the treatment plants,
these sources have been inventoried.
The thermal load imposed by municipal wastewater discharges can
be shown to be less than 10% of that due to power generation on a per
capita water use basis.. The percentage is less for the Lake Michigan Basin
because the Chicago area discharges its wastewater into the Illinois River
System while generating a significant portion of its power on the shores of
-------
-3- 1669
the Lake. Treatment plant discharges have therefore been omitted from the
inventory.
Steel plant discharges have been determined from FPC records of in-
house power generation by steel companies and from estimates of heat rejec-
tion by other steel production processes. Steel mills in the Chicago-Gary
area (representing over 961 of the Basins's steel capacity) generated in-
house electrical power at an average annual rate of 320 megawatts during
1969. Total heat rejected by all processes is estimated to be 74 x 109 BTU/
day. This is considerably less than the 147 x 109 BTU/day attributed to
steel plants by H. G. Acres, Ltd. in its report "Thermal Inputs to the
6
Great Lakes 1968-2000."
Electric utility generating capacity has been inventoried and found
to be 7.85 gigawatts - vs. 7.75 Gw obtained by H. G. Acres. Total heat rejec-
ted by all utilities is estimated as 450 x 109 BTU/day = 5.3 Gw .
Figure 1 shows the locations of existing and proposed electrical generat-
ing stations on Lake Michigan, and Table 1 gives present and projected (assuming
a 71 per annum growth) generating capacities.
As is well known, nuclear plants are presently less efficient than fossil
plants and therefore waste more heat to the environment. Table 2 compares the
efficiencies and waste heat rates of fossil and nuclear plants. It should be
noted, however, that nuclear reactor technology is in a relatively early stage
of development. Nuclear plant efficiencies can therefore be expected to
improve at a more rapid" rate than fossil plant efficiencies.
1.3.2 Mass/Energy Balance of Lake Michigan
The man-made thermal discharge rate must be viewed in context with
the overall energy balance of the Lake. Figure 2 illustrates and defines
the various terms entering into the energy balance equation. The change in
lake heat content AH js seen to be the sum of the net heat exchange across
the surface and the advective input. Since the advective term is typically
-------
4-
1670
r"
2
mx*
in
2
O
u
ir>
SH
^3
cu
o
ro
s^_
g fcJ
o W
0 to
1"
Q
li>
^-
^7^™*.^.
fcd [o
^ 6
*a
— ;£g£r
ih'-Qfp, i
Sroo°J i
" .1
i
i
T •**
pa
'O(9
|88
|
-------
-5-
1671
w
7*
<£.
(JLJ
—
O
2
UJ
\£
3
c5
>~
i—
0
o.
o
CD
;y
. —
f-
<£
cc.
LJ
UJ
CD
a
UJ
1—
LJ ^
—j CD
^ vZx
oc
CL
_j ^^
•< in
i — r —
0 CT>
I— r-H
V- '
a
UJ s~>>
co in
cz> r--
0, CD
O r-{
ol
^
— —
i-
co
—
X
llJ
UJ
Q.
>—
I — •
O 0
CD OJ
CO
h- CD
h- CO
r- CD
CO
0 ^.
CD
v
(JJ
in
r- r-
r— CD
.- • •
r- o
ce
_J
-------
-6-
16?2
TABLE 2
NUCLEAR VS FOSSIL PLANT EFFICIENCIES
PLANT TYPE
NUCLEAR
FOSSIL
ENERGY
INPUT ELECTRICAL
100
100
33
LOSSES
IN-PLANT STACK WATER
0
10
63
PER UNIT ELECTRICAL ENERGY GENERATED, NUCLEAR PLANTS
WASTE (63/33) = 1.91 UNITS TO CONDENSER COOLING
WATER. CURRENT NUCLEAR PLANTS DISCHARGE (63/33)
-r(46/4-0) = 1.67 TIMES AS MUCH HEAT TO CONDENSER
COOLING WATER AS DO FOSSIL PLANTS.
-------
-7-
1673
LJ
O
-------
-8-
two orders of magnitude smaller ';han the surface exchange term, it is the
latter which mainly drives the h?at content. Figure 3 shows a Lake Michigan
heat content curve developed by Ihurch from his bathythermograph measurements.
(The BTU/ft2 sca}e has been addei to his figure to facilitate comparison with
the discharge rates presented in this report.) The heat content of a mid-
lake column is seen to increase by 50,000 cal/cm2 = 185,000 BTU/ft2 between
the March minimum and the August-Septomber maximum. During this period,
therefore, heat is added to the Lake at average rate of roughly 1100 BTU/ft2/day-
By way of comparison, a 1-Gw advective input corresponds to 0.13 BTU/ft2/day.
Increased evaporative losses can affect the water balance of Lake
Michigan. Figure 4 illustrates the various terms in the water balance and
Table 3 gives the annual average flows. The stated uncertainties in evapora-
tion and Straits outflow represent extremes in the determination of these
8,9,10,11
flows for Lake Michigan. Due to lack of data regarding net flow through the
Straits, evaporation rates determined from mass transfer formulae cannot be
readily compared with rates deduced from a water balance calculation. Water
balance methods can, however, be applied to the combined Lake Michigan-
Huron system.
As will be shown below lake-wide evaporation is increased only
10 ± 2 cfs per Gw increase in advective input to the Lake.
1.3.3 Analytical Method
Figure 5 summarizes the analytical technique used in developing a heat
exchange coefficient K . The excharge coefficient can be used to express,
in a simple way, the difference between the rate of heat transfer across a
water surface at temperature T' and one at T .
Hex CTs} * Hex PS* = K (Ts ' V &
-------
-9-
1675
t>jjO|0> |o OOO'I °!S 2
I I .
O
o
•<*
O
O
to
0
O
o
o
s ,nTiT s. nnn' T
-------
-10-
1676
W
U
Q
.^>
PQ
w
H
9
B
II
CO
-------
-11-
1677
TABLE 3
LAKE MICHIGAN WATER BUDGET
WATER LALANCE TERM
AVERAGE FLOW
(CFS)
INFLOW
i Precipitation
Runoff
50,000 ± 2,000
39,000 ± 1,000
Evaporation
OUPFLOV; ( Straits
Diversion
40,000 ± 5,000
46,000 ± 6,000
3,200
-------
Surface 1lea t Exchango EqUcTticm;
T Independent T Dependent
ex ^
H
R
Ts Dependent Terms:
He = (cs-ca)f(W)
[
•
rp
s a
X
Sfceo(460)4(l+
Subtraction:
HR
T
=HR- I(cs-ea) + .26(Ts-Ta)]f(W3 - coC460)4(l +
.26(r -Tg)]f 0\0
Let: es = 6 Ts • B = B (Tg)
= -[15.7
FIG; s
1673
-------
-13- 1679
The method summarized in Fig. 5 is essentially that of Kdinger and
• 12
Gyer. The water surface temperature dependent terms H , H , and H, have
6 C DT
been parameterized in the usual way with the sensible heat term related to
the evaporation term through theBoveJiRatio B. The wind speed function,
temporarily, is left unspecified.
The final form of the exchange coefficient is -
K = -[15.7 + pf(wj +0.26 f(w)] (2)
where the three terms represent, respectively: black body radiation,
evaporative heat transfer, and sensible heat transfer. 3 = 3(T ) is the
slope of the saturated vapor pressure curve evaluated at the water surface
temperature; the Bowen Coefficient has been set equal to 0.26 . The
units for the wind speed function f(w) are BTU/(ft2-day-ran H ) ; for K ,
O
BTU/(ft2'day °f).
Equation (1) above can be used to calculate the average annual in-
crease in water surface temperature due to an increase in advective input.
If q represents the annual average of the additional advective input,
(1 year), q = K (T' - Tjdt (3)
) * s
where (T1 - T ) is the water surface temperature increase required to dissi-
J J
pate the inci^eased heat load. Since K is nearly constant over the annual
cycle (see below) -
q * K = (r - Ts)
Once K is know, the annual average increase in water surface temperature
can be determined.
-------
-14- 1630
We have evaluated K according'to Eq. (2) using the Lake Hefner
wind speed function
f(W) = 11.4 W BTuy(ft2.d-mm H ) (4)
O
W in mph
We have chosen this particular formula because it has been used with
apparent success by other investigators in determining rates of evapora-
2,3,4 13
tion from the Great Lakes. Figure 6 shows a number of other wind speed formulae.
Substituting Eq. (4) into Eq. (2) gives
K = -[15.7 + (B+0.26) 11.4 W] (5)
Church's water surface temperatures (see Fig. 3) and wind data acquired from
the Illinois State Water Survey were used to calculate month-average values
of K . The wind data are presented in Fig. 7 where monthly wind speeds
from 6 weather stations have been averaged together and plotted. The sta-
tions are located in Chicago, South Bend, Escanaba, Muskegon, Sault Ste.
Marie, Green Bay, and Milwaukee. The smooth curve shown in Fig. 7 is an
eye-ball fit to the data. Before use in Eq. (5), these data were multiplied
14 15
by the wind speed correction factor of Lemire and Richards in order to take
into account the systematic monthly variation between lake and land wind
speeds.
Month-average values for the exchange coefficient are shown in Fig. 8.
The annual average value of K is 141 BTU/(ft2-day-°F) .
For an advective input of one Gw =0.13 BTU/(ft2*day), the average
annual increase in water surface temperature is (0.13) * (141) = 9.2 x 10 ** °F
This temperature increase is somewhat larger than the 8.5 x 10 ** °F given in
ANL Report No. 7679. The annual average value of K quoted in the latter report
-------
-15-
1631
r\ \\
\ \ *
O
•i-
^•J
O
CJ
•o
o
ll-
rj
l-
O
rj
s.
n
5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
< X
> z>
Uf U.
-------
-16-
1632
14
\
WIND SPEED
CMPH)
12
10
D
O
O
a
a
A
A
1952
1953
1954
1955
1960
1962
-I—I h
M
AMJJASOND
MONTH
FIG. 7 MONTH AVERAGE WIND SPEEDS
-------
1683
was 152 BTU/(ft2-day-0F) . This value was obtained using the Meyer Formula
for evaporation rather than the Lake Hefner formula.
The evaporative water loss can be obtained by separating the evapora-
tive contribution to K from those due to the other two exchange mechanisms,
K • Ke + Kc * "br '
Month average values for each of the terms on the right-hand side are
plotted in Fig. 8. The water loss Q due to evaporation is easily
calculated -
where L is the latent heat of evaporation. Since K = 70 BTU/(ft2.d-0F)
C
(= 0.5 K) , (L = 500 Ibs/sec = 8 cfs. This rate of water loss is somewhat
low because it is based on the lake -wide average value of the ratio K /K .
The actual loss is greater, because the ratio K /K increases slowly with
\s
water surface temperature and is therefore greater near the discharge
points. A more refined calculation, which will be reported later, takes
this factor into account and yields 0 = 10 ± 2 cfs per Gw of advective
input.
The above determinations for water surface temperature increase and
for evaporative water loss can be applied to present and projected rates of
thermal disdiarge. The results are summarized in Table 4. The Table 4
discharge versus generation rates for 1975 reflect the greater rate of heat
rejection to the condenser cooling water for those nuclear plants now under
construction (see Table 2) . The temperature increases reported here are
lower than those reported earlier: (1) because the lake/land wind speed
-------
-18-
1634
IffiAT KXQIANGE COEFFICIENT
3TU/(ft/
160
120
80
t 1 1 1-
M
M • J
1 - 1 - 1
N
-------
-19-
1635
•=t
w
&
1
C3
oo
t—<
n
3
I
£ j
w
r
<£
^
tin
O
t/3
b
e
rt.
MH
w
w
n
J~H
&
S3
5
to
0 M-l
ex o
x—-1
to /--»
H P-.
< 0
^
1
, W)
•P fn
•H rt ^->
S-83
4-j n ^ fj
^ Q
§
CD -H
rt5 ta
^ f-. S
0 o O
^> p^ s t
<, 0
bo
.5 ^
^_J
• • •
O rH (J»
OO O> **
O O rH
^O O"l
IT) rH LO
rH l^.
OO OO
* •
•<* r^ to
to
CTi VO
rH t
JH Oi LT) O
rt vo t>- o
O
. >-< i— 1 rH
-------
-20-
correction factor of Lemire and Richards was^applied to the wind speeds
and (2) because utility disdiarge rates were calculated from generating
rates rather than from generating capacities.
The degree of mixing between the North and South Basins of the Lake
over an annual cycle is not known. It is therefore useful to estimate the
surface temperature increase of the South Basin assuming no mixing. Taking
into account relative surface areas and present and projected distributions
of thermal discharges, we estimate the South Basin water surface tempera-
ture increases to be 1.8 times the whole-lake temperature increases given
in Table 4. The North Basin temperature increase is, of course, corres-
pondingly lower.
-------
1687
1.3.4 Future Research
The analytical method described above is immediately applicable to
the other Great Lakes. The data necessary for the analysis are all
available and are currently being acquired. Several inventories of
17
thermal discharges now exist and have been reported. Water surface tem-
peratures for the four other Great Lakes are available from the Canadian
Center of Inland Waterways. Results for the other lakes should be avail-
able by the end of fiscal year 1970.
The important problem of "interfacing" the far field region of
plumes with the main body of lake water is far from solved. The rate
of heat dissipation by the plume to atmosphere is known to be small.
The plume decay factor due to heat dissipation to the atmosphere is general
and simple: exp(-t/t^ where t = time and T = (dt p)/K is the "life-
time" of the heat content of the plume. For an average plume depth
d = 20 ft and exchange coefficient K = 141 BTU/(ft2-day.°F) , \ = ft .9 days!
•The current structure experiment recently proposed by Mortimer should
yield considerable information concerning the plume/lake-water interaction
in the far field region. One of the experiment's specific goals is to
determine whether or not a mixing inhibiting thermal bar is established at
the Oak Creek outfall during me winter months.
Mortimer's data may prove useful in another way. Palmer has recently
developed a methodology for constructing plume "dispersion patterns" from
a continuous history of current data at a particular location. We have
incorporated his method into a more general model which predicts average
concentrations (temperatures) at arbitrary points in the far field region.
The model, which is current data limited, could be tested at the Oak Creek
outfall.
-------
1688
-22-
In addition to studying the effects of man-made thermal discharges
on the lakes proper, it is also necessary to assess possible meteorological
and climatological effects. "While this amount [man-made discharges] of
heat is small compared to natural processes (sunshine, natural evaporation,
etc.), it d°es not necessarily follow that the meteorological consequences
18
(both long-term and short-term) will also be small." Progress in deter-
mining meteorological consequences of thermal discharges will, of course,
be very dependent upon progress in understanding the micrometeorology of
19
the Great Lakes' air-water interface.
-------
1639
References
1) U.S. Geological Survey, "Water Loss Investigations - Lake Hefner Studies."
U.S. G.S., Prof. Paper 269: 1-70 (1954).
2) Richards, T. L., and J. G. Irbe, "Estimates of Monthly Evaporation Losses
from the Great Lakes 1950 to 1968 - Based on the Mass Transfer Technique."
Proc. 12th Conf. Great Lakes Res. 1969.
3) Bruce, J. P., and G. K. Rodgers, "Water Balance of the Great Lakes System."
AAAS Pub. No. 71 (1962).
4) Bradley, IV. (private communication). Bradley has computed month-average
evaporation losses from Lake Michigan using mass transfer techniques with
the Lake Hefner evaporation formula. He finds rates of evaporation which
are consistent with those deduced from the water balance method applied
to the Lake Michigan-Huron System.
5) Richards, T. L., and J. P. Fortin, "An Evaluation of the Land-Lake Vapor
Pressure Relationship for the Great Lakes." Pub. No. 9, Great Lakes Res.
Div., Univ. of Michigan (1962).
6) Dennison, P. J., and F. C. Elder, "Thermal Inputs to the Great Lakes
1968-2000." Paper presented to 13th Conf. on Great Lakes Res. (1970).
7) Church, P. E., "The Annual Temperature Cycle of Lake Michigan - Spring
Warming and Simmer Stationary Periods, 1942." Univ.> of Chicago Misc.
Rep. No. 18 (1954).
8) Berstrom, P.. E., and G. F. Hanson, "Ground-Water Supplies in Wisconsin
and Illinois Adjacent to Lake Michigan." AAAS,Pub. No. 71 (1962).
9) Ownbey, C. R., and G. E. Willeke, "Long-Term Solids Buildup in Lake
Michigan Water." Pub. No. 13, Great Lakes Research Division, Univ. of
Mich. (1965).
10) U.S. Geological Survey. Annual. "Surface Water "Supply of the United
States." Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana and Illinois (1965)..
11) FWPCA, Lake Michigan Basin, "Lake Currents - A Technical Report Containing
Background Data for a Water Pollution Control Program," (1964),
12) Edinger, J. E., and J. C. Geyer, "Cooling Water Studies for the Edison
Electric Institute," EEI Pub. No. 65-902 (1965).
13) Brady, D. K., W. L. Graves, Jr., and J. .C. Geyer, "Surface Heat Exchange
at Power Plant Cooling Lakes." EEI Pub, No. 69-901 (1969)..
-------
1690
14) Lcmire, F., "Winds on the Great Lakes," Canada, Dept. Transport. Met. Br.
CIR. 3560, TEC. 380, (1961).
15) Richards, T. L., "Recent Developments in the Field of Great Lakes
Evaporation." Vcrh. Internal. Verein Limnol., 15:247-256, (1964).
36) Asbury, J. G., "Evaluating the Effects of the Thermal Discharges on
the Energy Budget of Lake Michigan." Report presented to AEC Review
Meeting, April 29, 1970.
17) See reference 6) and the Field Studies section of this Report:
Steam Electric Power Plants Sited on the Great Lakes and Interconnecting
Bodies of Water.
18) Carson, J., "Meteorological and Climatological Consequences of Thermal
Pollution from Nuclear Power Generating Stations," (to be published).
It should be pointed out that Carson, using a somewhat different
approach, has a]so concluded that thermal discharges will not signifi-
cantly affect the mass/energy balance of Lake Michigan.
19) Frenzen, P., (private communication). Frenzen.emphasizes that the
microinetcorology of the Great Lakes'air-water interface is not well
understood. As pointed out in the text, inacro-scale, long-term-average
rates of evaporation have been calculated with apparent success by
investigators using the Lake Hefner formula (see references (2), (3),
(4), and (5).) This is no guarantee, however, that this formula, or
any other, developed from studies of smaller lakes accurately reflects
the micrometeorology of the Great Lakes. Frenzen proposes to measure
such quantities as net radiation, Bowen ratio, and rate of evaporation
at a Lake Michigan site.
-------
1691
The Calefaction of a River
Calcfaction means warming, and the industrial warming of rivers
and other waters is a cause of concern. A study of the warming
of the lower Connecticut River, however, reveals no drastic effects
by Daniel Merriman
In recent years there has been much
concern that the waste heat being
discharged into rivers, lakes and seas
by industrial activities is having a cata-
strophic effect on the populations of fish-
es and other organisms that live in these
waters. This concern is eminently justi-
CONNECTICUT RIVER divides Vermonl
from New Hampshire, crofmcH MaBf>arhii*cttf>
and Connecticut and lli<*n rmplicf* into l.onft
Inland Sound. The Connrcllcut Yankee
Atomic Power Company's generating plant
(color) is one of six power plants on the
Connecticut that use it* water for cooling.
fied; clearly there is an upper limit to the
amount of heat that can be introduced
into such waters without harmful results.
It is now possible, however, to view the
biological effects of heating with some
degree of peispective. A long-term study
in which I am participating, for example,
has shown that industrial heating in a
major river of the northeastern U.S. has
so far had no drastic biological conse-
quences. The levels of heating we are
encountering may even turn out to have
beneficial long-range results. In such
circumstances the term "thermal pollu-
tion," which is currently in wide use, is
misleading because it suggests that any
amount of heating is harmful. A better
word is "calcfuction," which is simply
defined as the stale of being warmed.
The river being investigated in our
study is the Connecticut, which flows
generally southward some 400 miles
from its source in northeastern New
Hampshire, collecting the runoff from a
good part of central New England be-
fore emptying into the eastern end of
Long Island Sound. The study is focused
on a five-mile stretch of the river above
and below Iladdam Neck, a site 15 miles
fiom the mouth of the river where the
Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Com-
pany has built a nuclear power plant.
The steam condensers of this plant (not
the nuclear reactor) are cooled by water
from the river.
The study has been under way since
1965, and it will continue at least until
the end of 1972. It was undertaken at
the expense of the po-.ver company as
one of the conditions set by Connecticut
state authorities for appioval of the Had-
dam Neck plant's construction. Our in-
vestigations started about 30 months be-
fore the plant began lo return to the
river water that was 20 degrees Fahren-
heit warmer than when it was with-
drawn. As a result we can now begin to
compare conditions then with conditions
today, at the end of a roughly equal span
of plant operation.
The effluent from the Haddam Neck
plant is now discharged at an average
rate of 828 cubic feet per second (almost
372,000 gallons per minute). At this
point the Connecticut is a tidal river
with a maximum depth of 30 feet at low
tide and a maximum width of more than
2,000 feet. Flood tides in Long Island
Sound push water of diminishing salinity
upstream as far as East Haddam, a few
miles south of the plant, and raise the
level of the river as far north as Hartford.
45 miles inland. The difference between
high and low tide in the vicinity of the
plant is about 2!5 feet.
Seasonal variations in river tempera-
ture range from the winter low of freez-
ing to a summer high that seldom ex-
ceeds 88 degrees F. The flow of water in
the river is at its peak from March
through May, as the river is fed the run-
off from melted Winter snow. In summer
the river dwindles, even (hough the av-
erage monthly precipitation is about the
same throughout the year. (Monthly ptc-
cipilatiim at llaitfoul, for example, nv-
ciagcd between three and four inches
from 1900 through 1939 ) The summer
shrinkage of the river is the result of
evaporation and of the uptake of rainfall
by plants duiing the piouing season.
Over the past five decades the average
daily rate of flow of the Connecticut, as
recorded by the U.S. Geological Survey,
has been about 16,000 cubic feet per
second. During this period the maximum
flow was 282,000 cubic feet per second
(recorded on March 20, 1936); the mini-
mum was 968 cubic feet per second (re-
corded on October 20,1903), a scant HO
cubic feet more than is now diverted lo
the Iladdam Neck plant. These measure-
ments were made well above the zone of
tidal influence. In the vicinity of the
-------
1692
po«er plant the daily average tidal flow
lias a minimum rale of 15,000 cubic (eel
per second.
rPlie calcf action of U.S. rivers, lakes
-*• and coasts it certain to increase as
Ilie power industry meets the living na-
tional demand for electricity. The gen-
erating capacity of [lower plants in tlie
continental U.S. (Alaska excluded) is es-
timated by tlic Edison Electric Institute
to have been 315,000 megawatts at (lie
end of 1969 and if expected to reach
570,000 megawatts by 1980. Nearly 1.5
billion mega" all-hours of electric power
was produced in 1969; the Edison In-
stitute forecasts an output close to three
billion mcga«alt-hours in 1980 and be-
tween .six and 10 billion megawatt-hours
by the year 2000.
The average daily natural runoff of
water in the continental U.S. (again
excluding Alaska) is about 1.2 trillion
gallons. \V'e use perhaps 10 percent of
this amount, or 120 billion gallons, for
cooling the condensers of steam-turbine
power plants. These plants, whether
fired with fossil fuels or nuclear fuels, are
rapidly growing in number. It is possible
to forecast a daily requiiement of more
than 200 billion gallons of cooling water
by 1980 and of 600 billion gallons, or 50
percent of all the available water, by the
year 2000. If calefaclion is ecologically
harmful, quite a lot of harm lies just over
the horizon.
Haddam Neck is a low-lying tongue of
land on the east bank of the river just
above the point where a tributary, the
Salmon River, joins the Connecticut [sec
illustration on preceding ]M>ge]. The
Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Com-
pany completed acquisition of a 500-
acre tract at Haddam Neck in August,
1963. Hearings on the issuance of a final
construction permit were held before the
Connecticut \Vater Resources Commis-
sion in the summer and fall of 1964.
Earlier the U.S. Atomic Energy Commis-
sion hud pi anted I lie various approvals
that lie wilhin its jurisdiction, and Iho
U.S. Anny Coips of Engineers, which
oversees the navigability of the river, au-
thorized the dredging, necessary to allow
construction of a water-intake area up-
stream of the plant- and an effluent-dis-
charge area downstream.
The Water Resources Commission
hearings afforded an illuminating exam-
ple of the extent to which public con-
cern about environmental degradation
can be quite innocently misdirected.
After the first hearing, in July, 1964, I
received a number of telephone calls
from people who were ' genuinely
alarmed by the prospect of a flssion-
powcrcd generating plant being built in
their \ icinily. No amount of reassurance
I could offer them on the improbability
of radioactive pollution of the environ-
ment lessened their concern about a
neighboring atomic plant. Not until the
second hearing, in September, did at-
tention become focused more appropri-
ately on the effect on the ecology of the
river of the heated effluent from the
plant. Thereafter the fear of radioactive
pollution began to abate. I suppose,
however, there will always be those who
will point an accusing finger at the plant
when any tmustiiil natural phenomenon
occurs on the IOWCT Connecticut, in spite
of the fact that ladiological monitoring
of the river's water, its sediments and its
plant and animal life has revealed noth-
ing but the normal background radioac-
tivity in the 30-odd months since the
plant began operation.
On October 21, 1964, the Water
Resources Commission approved the
planned intake of river water for cooling
purposes and the return of the warmed
water to the stream on the condition
(among others) that the power company
finance a thorough study of the river en-
vironment throughout the start-up and
early operating stages of the plant and
for a period of five years after the level
of full operation was reached. A further
condition of approval was that, should
the study reveal adverse effects on the
river attributable to calefaction or other
aspects of plant operation, it would be
the company's responsibility to take
remedial action.
The Connecticut River Study was set
up in January, 1965, with myself as di-
rector and Lyle M. Thorpe, recently re-
tired as director of the State Board of
Fisheries and Came, as associate direc-
tor. We established our base at the Essex
Marine Laboratory, a nonprofit private
institution, and began a series of ecologi-
cal observations that extended from the
mouth of the Connecticut to the dam
an os.s the river it Enfield, some 60 miles
upstream neur lite- Massachusetts binder,
Our stall' has viried seasonally from 10
to 15, including technical and part-time
help. From its inception the study has
had the benefit of counsel from a five-
man advisory committee representing
several scientific disciplines; this com-
mittee has met with us at least twice a
year. We have made progress reports to
the Water Resources Commission at six-
month intervals, beginning in July, 1965.
The cost of our study to the power com-
pany for the five years through 1969 has
been approximately $750,000. Other
contributions of company personnel to
the study have been substantial. We
h.ive also had support from the U.S.
Bureau of Commercial Fisheries and the
Connecticut State Hoaid of Fisheries and
Came, and we have had the help of fac-
ulty members of the University of Con-
necticut, both at the Storrs campus and
at the university's marine rcscaich lab-
oratory in Noank. In addition specialists
at the British Museum (Natural History),
the Smithsonian Institution and the Mu-
seum of Comparative /oology at Har-
vard University have identified various
Invertebrate specimens for us. Other
specimens were identified by H, B. Her-
rlngton of Weslbrook, Ont., n student of
freshwater mollusks.
The river water that is used to cool
the steam condenser at the Haddam
Neck plant leaves the plant at a tempera-
ture 22.4 degrees F. above the tempera-
ture of the river water. It then flows
through a mile-long canal on the east
bank, where heat exchange with the at-
mosphere serves to reduce its tempera-
DISCHARGE OF WARM WATER from
the Hiddira Neck ciml is thown *t dif-
ferent lidil fliiet in these Iwo •erial ther-
-------
1693
«piwgis uii, lay
r • . v# x v. • Y•*>• • •-,,;,; ?,:,&• f\<.»^\ .vA -fe- ,*f-;^/>o. - *. --•-»
r '' •!'%.-v^;%'-:v. V :•'• V!':« :>;> ^uy ;:^\'y'^ ?K\^, \, , .. , -:
r -\VA ^v;.;;/.-,:;••,; v^'t-.-'.,^.;-.* v..-.-..-;'-v.:/»•;.,-,--<. j
l\ X^V'./'fi ! •-'„•-•!• ,".*•/-•',•'•, .f',„>;.- ••' , ,;''-•;•:<'•".,'••" . • . -,
!»••• • "^ ,,*•" M.i >/;';•-:-'-•'"'.''-;V>'^i '-v •; ^--. ,',.'•':=-»f-.v?/''it"«-^'--f' ^
-" tT . /*fcr^^W;V^>/f;-/^i,v J^. iv.,'"',^^:^"ri.f>.,':. 'i
t • 4 ^^i^^^^^--.r-^\-^'^^^ ••-• ;--;>- ^:'^.VjV>r,r^:r -I
^$||,;C: V- ^'^/^^M^ ^
*'%|4^|('%1 ivft"'"' '•'' """ • "'"*'** •'••** ** **"**'* "'**_^.l^»^»»«*^.,,fLi<»,^ ' '3
• '* f x<^%<^«* *4kt''"- , '" if" *' •f. " "«*'*'"'"> "* '*, •"" " ''.--'V'/J''"'"' : '"" ' *• - '*•' ' -"' ''•-
-•Vv :S6.;V•'.''¥•"•'•' S'i'i'fV;'r S-^.'/--':;'"'v^1
t., _ ,
' ''";*'" •"' '' • ~
y.^/fi^y^:.
NUCI.EVR POWER PL \NT orcupiei the n>hl-rolorrd area near dun « Haddam Nerk to carry warmed river water hack to the
ihe renter of this aerial photograph, at the head of a canal that was Connecticut alter it hat been uted to cool the plant'l condemers.
43
-------
line lo .in r\lrnt dependent on (lie sea-
sonal temperature of llie iiir. Tlic canal
has a fan-shaped mouth that lowers-the
velocity of discharge into the river and
also tends to krep the effluent near the
suiface of llie river water. Depending on
the tide, the phnneof warm water moves
either upstream or down. On the ebb
tide the plume is indistinguishable from
other river water with respect to the
temperature of the first three feet of \va-
ter below the surface by the time it
reaches the East Haddum bridge, some
thiee miles downstream. On the flood
tide the plume becomes indistinguish-
able a little above Haddam Island, or
two miles upstream from the plant [see
illustration on next two \mgcs].
The shape of the warm plume, both
at the surface and at certain subsurface
levels, varies widely in response to vari-
ations in river flow between one high-
water stage and the next, and also in
response to differing weather conditions
and seasonal circumstances. The warm
water not uncommonly occupies the en-
tire surface of the river in trie vicinity
of the canal mouth, so that the effluent
reaches the west bank of the river. This
does not, however, produce a "thermal
block" in the river, because the warm
effluent does not extend to the bottom
of the river, which here lies some 15 to
30 feet below the surface.
T^aily in our study we decided to
establish five monitoring stations
along the river to record continuously
such data as rate of flow, temperature of
surface and subsurface water, variation
in electrical conductivity (which reflects
the relative salinity of the water), oxy-
gen content of the water and so forth.
Two of the stations were located well
outside the area that was to be influ-
enced by the effluent when the plant
began to operate; these served as con-
trols. A third station was set up on the
west bank of the liver opposite the plant
and the other two were situated some-
what upstream and downstream respec-
tively from the plant. The stations were
designed and their construction was su-
pervised by \Villi.im A. Boyd. director
of the Essex Marine Laboratory; all five
were in full operation by the end of
June, 1966.
In the period before plant operations
began we established a number of facts
about this section of the Connecticut.
Variations in water conductivity, for ex-
ample, showed that water from Long
Island Sound made its way above the
East Haddam bridge only at times when
high tides coincided with a low level of
river flow.
Tn October, 1967, the Haddam Neck
plant completed start-up procedures
and began to generate power at less than
full capacity. The instruments at our
monitoring stations promptly recorded
1694
mal-eunning images, which record the infrared radiation from tar-
lace areai at nrlont «hade> of gray. Aa the lide rliet (top) the warm
water ii carried aptlreim; •• it ebba (bottom) the neranent it re-
verted. The wanning effect of the plant effluent cannot be detected
beyond two miles upstream and 2.2 miles downstream. The team
wen nude for the VS. Geological Survey by HRB-Slnger, Inc.
At.
-------
1695
TKMI'F.RATURE INCREASES produrcd by the di»charie of warm
voter from the Haddant Neck canal were measured in September,
1968, when the Connecticut was near III seasonal low and the water
temperature was near iti Masonal high. Reading! were made at low
46
slack water la), nt mid-flood (6t. at hifli slnrk irl and al mid-rhh
(ill. Surfare temperatures are shown in the diagrams above, sub-
surface temperatures at far right. Shades of color indicate water
wanner than normal river water; numbers indicate temperature
-------
1696
above normal in degrees Fahrenheit. In the mibiurface diagram* light color indicate) water
op to five degree! F. warmer than normal, dark color more than fire degrees. No "thermal
block" w« formed at Haddam Neck, although warm water often covered the surface of
the rirer. The channel Is more than 10 feet deep; the water .below 12 feet was not heated.
the addition of the warm effluent to tlie
river. Hie station opposite the plant, for
example, logged increases in tempera-
ture that persisted from an hour to an
hour and a half before the plume was
carried away from the west hank by tin*
effect of rising or falling tide. On several
occasions the temperature of trie surface,
water near the west bank was raised by
10 degrees F. above the ambient tem-
perature of the river, and at a depth of
four feet the temperature rose four de-
grees. Similar (although smaller) effects,
together with a reduction in oxygen con-
tent, were recorded at the stations two
miles upstream and 1.8 miles down-
stream from the discharge canal. It was
apparent by October, 1968, 15 months
after start-up, that the plume of warm
water was quite sharply defined in terms
of temperature: it streamed downriver
during ebb tide, spiead across the river
during the reversal from ebb to flood,
streamed upriver during flood tide and
then spread across the river once more
at the reversal from flood to ebb.
At this stage the power company or-
dered an independent survey of varia-
tions in river temperature to determine
how calefaction under actual operating
conditions compared with the predic-
tions made by the engineering firm of
Stone & Webster before construction.
Temperatures were taken at mid-ebb, at
low slack water, at mid-flood and at high
slack water; while the sinvey was in
progress the flow in the Connecticut was
near its seasonal low and the water tem-
perature was near its seasonal high.
The survey confirmed the readings
made at our own .stations and provided
additional information. When the warm
plume reached the west bunk, for exam-
ple, the heating of the subsurface water
did not exceed two degrees F. at a depth
of 12 feet. The survey set the upstream
limit of the plume at two miles above
the canal (which agreed with our study)
and the downstream limit at 2.2 miles
(sevcial hundred yards below our moni-
toring station in that area). Last summer
we conducted plume studies of a rather
more complex design than the company's
1968 study, and we hope to conduct as
many as 10 more such studies this year.
From 1966 through 1968, in addition
to hydrological work in the immediate
vicinity of the discharge canal, we con-
ducted more than 24 surveys that ex-
tended from the mouth of the river to
a point well upstream from the plume.
Eighteen stations were established, and
at each station we recorded the tempera-
ture, salinity and oxygen content of the
river water near the surface, near the
bottom and at an intermediate level
-------
1697
under varying liilal ciicumstances ami
rates of river (lo\v. Over this three-year
period, which started before the plant
went into opeiation and ended nine
months after operation at the commer-
cial level had begun, the surveys have
shown essentially identical results.
T laving gencially established the na-
* * luie and extent of the thermal dis-
turbance in this niea of the Connecticut,
we now faced the question of its biologi-
cal elfect. In the realm of microbiology
we soon learned that a series of studies
was already in progress under the direc-
tion of John D. Duck and his associates
at the marine icscarcli lalwralory of the
University of Connecticut with the sup-
poi t of the Federal Water Pollution Con-
trol Admini.stiation. Sampling the river
water in the vicinity of the power plant
every three weeks or so, Duck's group
observed seasonal fluctuations in river
bacteria. They found no alterations that
appealed to be attributable to calefac-
tion except in the immediate vicinity of
the canal month. There the diatoms that
normally dominate the river phytoplank-
ton, the species Mclosira amhigua, yield-
ed that role to blue-green algae. This
change in flora does not seem to portend
obnoxious conditions either in the dis-
charge aiea or farther downstream, al-
though it is important to emphasize that
we are dealing here with short-term ob-
servations.
Because Muck's extensive microbio-
logical studies covered that area of re-
search, we turned to investigating the
river's bottom-dwelling fauna and its
populations of fishes, some of them resi-
dent and some transient. In order to
study the bottom community we estab-
lished 17 stations spaced along a zone
extending from four miles below the
point of effluent discharge to four miles
above it. At fortnightly intervals we sam-
pled the river bottom in as many as 10
places at each station over a period of
more than two years before the power
plant began operations. In 1969 we add-
ed 12 new stations to this bottom-study
netwoik, all of them within the canal
that carries the effluent to the river.
It had been < ur original plan that,
once the tedious task of identifying the
members of the liottom community was
complete, we would undertake to deter-
mine the presence or absence of the
more than 100 bottom-dwelling animal
species with respect to a range of water
temperatures from two degrees Celsius
(35.6 degrees F.) to 38 degrees C. (100.4
degrees F.), or roughly seven degrees F.
above the water temperature usually
considered fatal to fishes of the Tem-
perate Zone. It soon became clear that
considerations other than temperature.
among them the amount and velocity of
river flow and changes in the composi-
tion of bottom sediments, were of equal
concern with respect to the well-being
of these mainly sedentary animals.
The dominant animal species of the
Connecticut bottom sediments arc an
aquatic worm of the genus Limnodrilux
and, where the bottom is sandy, a fresh-
water clam of the genus PMdiiim. The
larvae of two insects—the midges Pro-
claditis and Cryplocliironomiis—are the
next most abundant animals under nor-
mal river conditions. Dining the first 11
months that the power plant was in op-
eration it became increasingly evident
that the areas adjacent to the effluent
discharge harbored a greater variety of
oiganisms than they had before. The
newcomers included the larvae of bee-
tles, dragonflies, damselflies and other
insects. This diversity has remained high
in the area where the canal water enters
the river. Both the degree of diversity
and the total numbers in the populations
of this area, however, have declined
sharply on several occasions. These
changes were apparently related to a
CONDENSER
COOLING
SYSTEM
TEMPERATURE of river water Is raised 20 degrees Fahrrn-
heit u it flown thronah a condenser (right) where the steam thai
drives the power-plant turbine IB cooled. At the seasonal prak of
rirer temperature, effluent temperature can exceed IDS degree* F.
-------
1698
shutdown of tltr plant in March, 1008,
which halted the flow of effluent, and to
tlir spring freshets in May of lite some
year.
j\Te;ir the water intake of the plant
conditions are the opposite. Here
both diversity and numbers show a sub-
stantial decrease. Evidently the velocity
of the water as it is pumped from the
river is high enough to wash away the
silt and sand of the river bottom, togeth-
er with the organisms dwelling in them.
The Iwttom in this area is now gravel
.nit!, iiWiiiMwe, wholly unsuitable for
tin- ur.ni>-, iinil cl.inis that formerly in-
lulitlrd it.
The rixor Imllom near the discharge
i-.in.il. which w.is formerly sand covered
bv a thin layer of silt, has beerr changed
to loosely consolidated silts that in places
an- sescr.il indies deep. This is a highly
sinl.ihlc habitat for the worms and also
for insect larvae; hence the abundance
and diversity of the newcomers. At the
same time it is not a good habitat for the
clams. l>cc.nise the silt tends to cover
their siphons; as a result the population
of clmis in the area has substantially
dfcre.iied.
Our interest in these bottom-dwelling
animals arises fiom their role as an in-
tegral link in the river's food chain. Most
of them are eaten by the fishes that live
in the river the year round (as opposed
to migratory fish populations): catfishes,
perches, pickerels and other species. In
any particular part of the river the den-
sity of the bottom-fauna populations in-
fluences the abundance of fish, not only
at certain seasons but also throughout
the year. The striped bass, for example,
is a seasonal inhabitant of these waters,
but it is known to spend the winter in
a number of northern localities where
warm effluents have made the winter
environment tolerable both for the bass
and for the bottom organisms they
eat. Since 1968 increasing numbers of
filliped buss have been taken In wiilei.i
I in 111 tin1 month of th« Iliiddiiin Neck
cllhient canal.
We arc now investigating which bot-
tom organisms are important as food for
which fishes. We are also assessing what
happens to organisms that are drawn
into the power plant with the cooling
wilier and involuntarily travel through
the condenser system. We know from
observations made early in 1909 thai in-
vertebrate organisms such as worms and
clams survive the 6,000-foot trip in spite
of a rise of more than 20 degrees F. in
water temperature. Live invertebrates
have also been found in the canal during
the summer when the water temperature
1.500-
1.200-
8
I
in
g 900 —
t,
Q
I
O 600-
o:
300—
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
NUMBERS OF SHAD that have entered the Connecticut to spawn in each of the past [our
years have not changed significantly since the Uaddam Neck power plant began start-up
procedures in July, 1967. The abundance of shad in 1965 is attributable to above-average
spawning success in 1960. Shad are the river*8 economically most important natural resource.
was alrove 100 degrees F., which is some
14 degrees alxive the maximum sum-
mer temperature of river water. Fur-
ther analysis of the bottom populations
in the canal should help to clarify the
picture.
Tn analyzing the fish populations of the
Connecticut we have w orked our way
from the mouth of the river to as far
north as Northampton, Mass., 90 miles
upstream. In the first three years of our
study, before the Haddam Neck plant
had gone into operation, we made collec-
tions with bag seines and trawls in three
depth zones: from the surface to five
feet, from three feet to 10 feet and from
20 feet In as much as 40 feet in places
wheni llie depth of I he river allowed
It. A total of 30-1 separate, collections
proved to contain representatives of 30
species of fish.
The most common resident fishes in
the Connecticut are the white and
brown bullhead catfishes (Ictaltmis ca-
ttix and /. nrbultaus), the white perch
(/lorriM amrrlcanus), the yellow perch
(Pcrca faucsccns), various sunfishcs
(Lcpomis), the spotlail shiner (Notropts
litidsonlus), the darter (Etheostoma olm-
stedi), the white sucker (Catoslomtu
commcnont) and the killifish (Fundulus
dlajihanus). The common eel (Anguillo
rottrata) is also an inhabitant of the riv-
er, but it spawns in the ocean and is
therefore not strictly a resident fish.
Sin.ee it spends most of its young and
adult life in fresh water, however, we in-
clude it among the river residents. Cen-
suses of the fish caught by fishermen dur-
ing 10 months of the year from 1965
through 1969 show that 85 percent of
the catch in the Haddam Neck area con-
sists of catfishes, perches, eels and sun-
fishes.
The operations of the Haddam Neck
power plant do not seem to have sig-
nificantly affected the small but rela-
tively stable catch of resident fishes. At
the mouth of the Salmon River, about a
mile below the mouth of the plant's dis-
chaige canal, however, the catch ralo
.showed mi Increase In 1001); ihN iiiny
bo correlated with the presence of the
warm-water plume nearby. Indeed, a
number of fishermen now prefer to fish
near the mouth of the canal.
In studying the catfishes and perches
we tagged more than 1,000 of these
fishes In 1968 and some 5,000 of them
In 1909. The object of the study Is two-
fold: to provide information on the
fishes' rate of growth and to trace the
movements of the fishes upstream,
downstream and in and out of the dis-
charge canal. Tag returns in 1969 ran
above 10 percent, and significant infor-
mation from this work is already emerg-
-------
1699
ing. For example, representatives of both
ciilfish species and of (lie yellow perch
IMVO been recaptured from 35 lo 40
miles upshc.im of lite power plant and
from .six- (o lo miles downstream.
Tlie fislios that have moved from the
river into the discharge canal are now
being studied intensively. A picliminaiy
estimate of their numbers indicates that
in winter lictween 12,000 and 21,000
brown catfish and between 3,000 and
7,000 while catfish are present in the
cait.il. In spite of the greater avail.ihility
of food in the raiiul urea the condition of
the canal catfishes is considerably poorer
than the condition of river catfishes liv-
ing beyond the influence of the plume.
The factors responsible for this appear
to include the fishes' higher rate of me-
tabolism in the warmer water, the in-
creased expenditure of energy required
to cope with the relatively high rate of
flow in the canal and the effects of
crow ding.
Young schooling fishes, such as shin-
ers and kitlifish, ha\e been taken in the
canal when the water temperature "'as
98.6 degrees F.; their condition ap-
peaicd to be pood. The upper limit of
water temperature tolerable for the
adult fish, on the other hand, is only
slightly above 93 degrees, a temperature
that is frequently surpassed in the canal
during the summer months. It is of in-
terest in this connection that observa-
tions made in 1968 and 1969 showed
that adult fish will move from the
cooler river back into the canal when the
temperature of the effluent has fallen
less than two degrees F. below the upper
limit. It may well be that the knowledge
gained in these studies will be useful in
fish farming.
The migratory fishes that ore domi-
nant in the Connecticut are three mem-
bers of the genus Alow: the glut herring
(A. flf-Wii'fl/i.s), a summer spawner; the
alewifc (A. furnrfn/iarnigm), basically
a spring sp.iwnor, and (he American
shad (A. viplitMina), also a spring
spawner and one of the most delectable
of nil fishes to eat. The three species are
not easy to tell apart when they are
adults, and it is even more difficult to
do so when they are juveniles. When
they are larvae, it is only possible lo dis-
tinguish them by counting muscle seg-
ments under the microscope.
f~\ f the three migrant species the shad
"is the most important economically.
The commercial shad fishery on the Con-
necticut has an annual capitalized value
of some $7.5 million and the sport fish-
ery an additional value of $14 million.
The fish spawn in fresh water and the
-
CENSUS OF FISHES found in the mile-Ion* effluent cmil it H.d- erie« md G.me «nd it equipped to etun fish with in elertrir «hork.
dim Neck nliliim • Uanrh that txlonn to the Stale Boud ol Fi.b- Netmen on the Iranch «nd on following crift retrieve the rtnnned
-------
1700
jn\ cuilcs go to sea some five months
later. They lematn al sea foi four lo five
veais, and little is known of their move-
ments and habits during this inters al.
\Vhcu they have reached maturity, they
irtnrn to spawn in ficsh water. They
tome luck lo the sttcam in which they
developed, apparently uith the same
high degree of precision exhibited by
the salmon of the Pacific. Some shad are
single-time spawneis; otheis are repeat-
el s. The fish that find their way back to
the sea again, knoun as "i miners," are
emaciated and debilitated.
One of the several shad studies we
undertook was to locate the areas in
the Connecticut River where the shad
spawn. This involved day and night vi-
sual observations from the shore, and
from lx>ats, and the collecting of eggs in
towed and stationary plankton nets. Be-
cause -shad swim in a characteristic cir-
4>W ,p-> J| , sNfeml
fish for examination and tagging. Census is
conducted by the Connecticut River Snnrey.
cular pattern when they are spawning,
with their fins and backs out of the wa-
ter, visual observations are not difficult.
In June, 1967, for example, we observed
shad swimming over a period of nearly
a week in a circular pattern 150 feet
from the west bank of the Connecticut
1!5 miles south of the Windsor Locks
bridge above Hartford. The spawning
area was a gravel lx>ttom at a depth of
from three to four feet. When we lowed
plankton nets in this area, \ve collected
numerous shad eggs in a relatively early
stage of development.
We rigged stationary bottom nets, at-
tached to buoys to allow for tidal chang-
es, at 31 points from Essex upstream to
Thompsonville, 18 miles above Hart-
ford. On the basis of the number and the
age of the eggs collected in these nets
we were able to conclude that the shad
spawning aieas were far more numerous
above Hatlfurd than below. We ob-
tained eggs both in May and in June,
when the temperature of river water
ranged from a low of 50 degrees F. to a
high of 73.4 degrees; the majority of the
eggs were collected when the water tem-
perature was at the upper end of this
range. Eggs were found in both fresh
and tidal water. We discovered that,
compared with the major shad spawning
areas north of Hartford, spawning in the
vicinity of the Haddam Neck power
plant was minimal.
One of the critical periods in the early
life of the shad is when the juvenile fish
move downstream en route to the sea.
This procession starts in the latter half
of August and continues into November;
the fish are from three to five inches
long. We wauled to learn something
about their ral.3 of movement down-
slieam and whelhoi or iiot their passage
would bo Impeded by the plume of
warm diluent Irom tins Haddam Nock
plant. As a first step w>: marked 18,000
juvenile shad by clippi ig their fins and
7,000 more by spraying them with a
fluorescent dye. Since we were unable
to recapture any of the'e fish, we rigged
gill nets that extended to a depth of 10
feet in the vicinity of the plume and
then checked the catch at intervals that
enabled us to compare the depths at
which the fish traveled by day and by
night. We found that the fish swim in
deep water by day aivl nearer the sur-
face at night. Even al night, however,
they apparently pass under the plume at
depths below four feet, the level where
a five-degree temperature rise is encoun-
tered. There is no evidence that the
juvenile shad suffer any detrimental ef-
fects in traversing the river region af-
fected by the effluent.
In an attempt In learn more about
how juvenile shad react to lapid changes
in water temperature we lonductcd a
series of experiments in I'lOO and I<)67
al the Essex Marine Laboratory. The
preliminary tests showed that an inslan-
tancous rise in temprialiuc lo 91 de-
grees F. (more precisely, a rise over a
range of from 16 degrees alxwe an am-
bient water temperature of 75 degrees
to nine degrees above an ambient 82
degrees) was lethal to the young shad
within five minutes. Later experiments
showed that the juvenile fish actively
avoided water characterized by such se-
vere temperature gradients. In this con-
nection, larval fishes appear to 1m e a
greater immunity to the effects of cale-
faclion than juveniles. A plankton-net
tow made in the discharge canal in July,
1968, when the water tempciature was
93.2 degrees F., yielded more than 650
Ahsa larvae; they were mostly at the
late yolk-sac stage, which suggests that
they were the product of upstream
spawning. They had apparently entered
the plant intake and passed through the
condenser unscathed.
Midsummer fish kills are not uncom-
mon in the lower i caches of the Con-
necticut. We have obseived three since
the beginning of our investigations, all
before the Haddam Neck plant went
into operation: on July 2 and July 13 in
1965 and on July 4 in 1966. The size of
the second kill in 1965 was estimated at
100,000 fish and the 1966 kill at 50,000
fish. In all three instances the principal
fatalities were glut herring (99.9 per-
cent of the kill in 1966) and alewives.
Shad, catfishes, white suckers, eels and
white perch were killed in far smaller
numbers. The kills were apparently the
result neither of toxic effluents nor of a
parnsilic mfcstiilion, Their most piob-
able cause appears to be the combi-
nation of low river flow, water tem-
peratures in excess of 80 degrees F.,
a depleted supply of dissolved oxygen
and, in the case of the summer-spawning
glut herring, the stress associated with
spawning activity. In many areas that
we sampled the watci contained less
than five parls of oxygen per million, a
level that is generally considered un-
favorable for fish life: Our samples were
taken in daylight; since the photosyn-
thetic activity of aquatic plants is re-
duced at night, the oxygen content must
have been even lower in the predawn
hours when spawning activity is greatest.
We needed to establish other facts
about the shad. What is the rate of the
upstream migration in the spring? How
many fish return each year to spawn?
Might the plume of warm water from
-------
1701
tlir plant keep the mature fislies from
traveling upstream to their usual spawn-
ing pounds? To answer these questions
we instituted another intensive shad-
tagging piogram. So far more than 18,-
000 migiating shad have been marked
by setting a "spaghetti dart"—a short
barbed rod with a long bright-colored
streamer—in the back muscles of the
fish. Another 200 fish have been "force-
fed" small sound transmitters so that the
details of their upstream movements can
lie monitored by hydrophone. We found
that the speed of upstream migration
ranged from less than a mile per day to
five miles or more once the shad had
moved upstream from brackish water to
fiesh. There seems to be no "normal"
speed of migration; instead the rate of
the fish's pi ogress appears to depend on
the temperature and salinity of the
\\ater.
It nppeuis that the effluent from the
plant has no significant retarding effect
on the shad's upstream progress. The
fish follow the river channel, which is
close to the west bank in the area affect-
ed by the plume, and sonic tracking
shows that within the channel they tend
to move along its west side. They either
pass through or under the plume with-
out apparent difficulty or significant hes-
itation. Under the environmental condi-
tions existing during the shad runs of
1968 and 1969, two years when the
power plant operated at nearly full scale,
there has been no thermal blockage of
the Connecticut. At the present level of
plant operation, assuming that environ-
mental conditions remain the same, no
blockage is anticipated.
The return of spaghetti lags, in com-
bination with other data, has provided
the basis for good estimates of how
many shad return to the Connecticut
each year. We estimate that in 1963 the
number was more than a million; this
appears to reflect an unusually success-
ful spawning 'eason five years earlier.
From 1966 thiough 1969, we estimate,
the number of returning shad has fluctu-
ated around tl e half-million maik [sec
illustration on page 49], The population
trend in future years remains to be seen.
The 'shad fishery is the Connecticut
River's only major economic resource at
present. The alewife and the glut her-
ring, however, are a resource that, al-
though it has suffered from mismanage-
ment in the past, could well be rehabili-
CATFISH FROM CANAL i« examined by Barton C. Marcy, Jr, of the Connecticut River
Survey staff. Because the higher temperature oj the effluent Increases the fishes' rate of me-
tabolism while the rate of effluent flow forces them to iwlra more vigorously than when In
the river, the condition of the canal catfish Is relatively poor in spite of more plentiful food.
tated given the proper incentives. Un-
der prudent control the stock of these
river herrings could uitMtand heavy
harvesting (as in fact it did in the earlier
part of the century, when the o\erall
catch along the East Coast of the U.S.
ranged from 30 to 60 million pounds per
season). When the problems besetting
the production and marketing of fish-
protein concentrate are surmounted,
these fishes should be exploitable in the
Connecticut and in other Eastern rivers.
T TOW can our studies of the Connecti-
* •* cut up to the present be summa-
rized? First of all, it is necessary to avoid
anticipating the final conclusions of the
comprehensive study; the collecting of
data for that report will not be finished
before the end of 1972. Anything we can
say at this stage must he accepted as a
short-term evaluation. Not only will sev-
eral more years of intensive research be
needed to lay a firm foundation for fu-
ture decisions about heating the river
but also continued testing and observa-
tion are necessary if we are to detect
subtle long-term ecological effects that
are not now even predictable. It is nev-
ertheless possible to rcpoit that the
operation of the Iladdam Neck power
plant and the consequent c.ilcfiiclion of
the Connecticut River in the vicinity
of the plant has had no significant del-
eterious effect on the biology of the riv-
er. There have been changes in the flora
near the plant, in the bottom fauna at
the point of effluent discharge and in
the condition of the bottom habitat near
the plant intake. Of the river's fishes, the
catfish that enter the discharge canal do
not fare as well as those that do not en-
ter. These effects can hardly be regarded
as being calamitous, and in the long run
the calefaction may even prove to be
beneficial in one way or another.
It is currently recalled that two cen-
turies ago Edmund Uurke declared that
"the public interest requires doing today
those things that men of intelligence and
good will would wish, five or Ion years
hence, had bcrn done." Wlicic the cale-
faction of streams, rivers and hikes is
concerned, what must he done is not
only to squarely face the ecological
problems that the rising demand for
power are creating but also to accom-
pany programs of construction with
programs of environmental research so
that the most favorable possible condi-
tions are achieved. Such a course re-
quires rational give-and-take and a will-
ingness of strong-minded people on both
sides of such problems to bend enough
to arrive at the optimum balance of
interests.
-------
1702
D. Schwarz
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Schwarz.
Any comments or questions?
While Mr. Fetterolf is getting set up, this is
just for clarification. I wish you were here the last
3 days when the Fish and Wildlife people were here because
I have heard the questions you asked, asked of them many
times . These are questions that were asked by several
people with thermal problems throughout the country..
I think they have considered these and they do have
answers to them.
I wouldn't like to, as Chairman, try to give you
a summary of the answers, but what I can say is that I have
heard these questions asked and answered many times.
MR. SCHWARZ: Thank you.
MR. FETTEROLF: Mr. Schwarz, relative to the
amendment which the staff submitted to the Michigan Water
Resources Commission on temperature standards, I don't
know what date was on the copy which you had, so that
you would include these figures. But I have a copy dated
September 1970 which we presented to our commission and
which they gave us permission to use on a written basis
with the other States and with the Federal Government,and
you will find that the figures have been adjusted.
MR. SCHWARZ: I will appreciate a copy of it.
-------
1703
D. Schwarz
MR. STEIN: Are there any other comments or
questions?
While you are hero I wonder if possibly you or
Mr. Klassen can indicate how does the Abbott Corporation
stand in meeting their other requirements for abatement of
pollution in Lake Michigan?
MR. SCHWARZ: Well, I could respond to that if
it is acceptable, Mr. Klassen.
MR. KLASSEN: It is all right with me. You are
under litigation. I would prefer that you would reply.
MR. STEIN: If that is the case I will withdraw
the question.
MR. SCHWARZ: Our suit with the Attorney General
has been settled, Mr. Stein.
MR. STEIN: Do you feel free to talk? If he
is under litigation — you know, I am often in the same
position myself. There are loads of cases I can talk
about and we have got cases filed that I don't talk about,
and if this is under litigation, I will withdraw the
question.
Are there any further comments or questions?
If not, thank you very much, Mr. Schwarz0
MR. SCHWARZ: Yes.
MR. STEIN: May we have Byrd F» Parmelee? Is
-------
1704
C. F. Riefstahl
Mr. Parmalee here? I guess not.
Do we have Mr. Riefstahl? Do you want to make
a statement?
While Mr. Riefstahl is coming up, I would like
to read a telegram sent to us today:
"I urge you to give serious consideration in
your deliberations at the Chicago Thermal Pollution
Conference to the views of Michigan citizens which are
scheduled for presentation Friday. The protection of Lake
Michigan's fragile aquatic and shoreline environment should
be the primary aim of this conference. The Federal
Department of the Interior and conservation organizations
in Michigan have spent much time and effort researching
and studying this problem. These views warrant the most
careful consideration during the conference." Signed
Senator Sander Levin.
Will you proceed, Mr. Riefstahl?
STATEMENT OF CHARLES F. RIEFSTAHL,
SKOKIE, ILLINOIS
MR. RIEFSTAHL: My name is Charles F. Reifstahl,
8132 Kolmar Avenue, Skokie, Illinois. I am a concerned
citizen and I wanted to make a statement here.
-------
1705
C. F. Riefstahl
I would like to relate to you a personal
experience at the consumer end of the electrical industry,
or at the convenience outlet in my house. A short time ago
I had occasion to use the drop cord in my shop and I found
that the 50-watt rough service bulb was burned out. I went
to the local utility replacement bulb outlet and requested
a 50-watt rough service bulb to replace the burned out
one. Imagine my consernation when I was told that the
50-watt bulb was no longer manufactured and I would have
to take a 75-watt rough service bulb. An item of informa-
tion like this is usually lost to the public and to the
regulatory bodies since they happen to be a member of the
silent majority. I am slowly finding my voice.
The electric utility industry has had some
comments about advertising and natural load growth. It
seems to me that it is another case of say it often enough
and people will believe it, and as for doubling electrical
demand every 10 years I can only say that my personal
expenditure for electricity over the last 23 years has
increased about 10 percent and I have all the things
that most households have but there is little waste. We
turn off lights and turn the television on when there is
a program we wish to see, then we turn it off.
Mr. Stein mentioned the seeming trend to the same
-------
1706
C. F. Riefstahl
conclusions as this meeting has progressed,.and I feel
obligated to display my ignorance and ask about the trend
to 1000 MWe turbines and generator sets. Why not 5-250
MWe turbine generator sets? It seems to me that at a load
factor of 65 percent as mentioned in one of the recent
papers, three of the sets could be operating and one idle.
The electric utility people no doubt have explored this
avenue of approach and decided that they can live with
the effects of a major interruption when one of the large
units inadvertently drops out of the power pool. I am
not as concerned with this problem as I am with one
which I read just last week.
Mr. Stein, I would like to interject that I was
reading my thermal pollution file and finally got to the
bottom and this article was on the bottom.
I continue. I would like to read to you Page 15
of a paper called "Thermal Pollution, Its Sources, Control
and Costs," by Dean E. Abrahamson, M.D., Ph.D., University
of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, presented at the
"Workshop on Eutrophication," University of Minnesota,
Duluth Branch, September 21, 196^, sponsored by the Minn-
esota Chapter of the Izaak Walton League of America and
the Sears Foundation.
On Page 15, the title is "Thermal Pollution of
-------
1707
C. F. Riefstahl
Lake Superior."
"At present there is relatively little thermal
pollution of Lake Superior at least from Minnesota. It
is not surprising, however, that Lake.Superior attracts
the attention of industries which require copious quanti-
ties of clean, cool water. It has been reported that the
Atomic Energy Commission is considering the construction
of a very large plant on the North Shore of Lake Superior.
This plant would produce uranium fuel for nuclear reactors,
and would require large quantities of cooling water. In
addition, the plant, which would be of the gaseous diffusion
type, would require electrical energy equivalent to approx-
imately 10 to 15 generating plants each the size of the
Monticello reactor plant or the Clay Boswell fossil-fueled
plant.
"If this gaseous diffusion plant and its
associated source of electrical power were the equivalent
.of fifteen reactor plants each the size of the Monticello
plant, then the total heat which could be discharged to
TO *(6)
Lake Superior would be approximately 1.5 x lO-^B.t.u.
per day or 10.5 x 1012 B.t.u. per week. This is suffi-
cient heat to raise the temperature of a cubic mile of
water by 1 degree Fahrenheit each week of operation.
12
*(6) 1.5 x 10 could be written as 1,500,000,000,000.
-------
1708
C. F. Riefstahl
The resultant effect on Lake Superior, which may be one
of the most sensitive bodies of water in the world and
which is a major cold-water fishery, can only be contem-
plated with considerable apprehension!
"The effects of this quantity of heat on Lake
Superior would depend on complex interaction of many
factors, and could not be predicted without considerable
study. It must also be remembered that Lake Superior is
classified as a cold-water fishery. The proposed standards
relating to thermal discharges is that 'There shall be no
material increase in temperature.' It would seem highly
unlikely that large thermal discharges would be permitted
by either State or Federal water quality regulations."
The facts concerning the environment are hard to
come by and the lack of any publicity in connection with
fuel for all the proposed reactors is glaringly absent,
The reason, I suppose, is defense security and the fear
that an unfriendly power could conceivably profit from the
knowledge of this country's capability. I had begun to
lose faith in some of our public officials when I dis-
covered just 2 years ago that the power industry and the
FEPC and well meaning men starting in 1933 built dams and
hydroelectric plants in such proliferation in the Columbia
River watershed that this once great river is now only a
-------
1709
C. F. Riefstahl
1200-mile long lake. This in 37 short years. (Reference
"Crisis on the Columbia" by Oral Bullard Library of
Congress Catalog Card No. 6S-57012.)
I sincerely hope that you, Mr. Stein, and the other
men on this panel and all persons truly concerned with
the preservation of Lake Michigan and, in fact, all the
Great Lakes do not lose your dedication.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak and I
hope that we all will be successful in our continuing
effort to preserve our priceless heritage.
Thank you.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
You know, I said just one thing, and I hope
people don't go away with the wrong impression. Do you
know what the cubic feet per second flow on the Columbia
River is? That is the fastest flow of any lake I ever
ran into.
MR. RIEFSTAHL: Well, that I will admit. How-
ever, I was concerned that from all indications these
dams for 1200 miles has had a very, very deleterious
effect on the salmon run . It has been documented and
there are prognostications that within 10 years the
salmon run will be immeasurable it will be so low.
MR. STEIN: By the way, I am not sure of that,
-------
1710
C. F. Riefstahl
but I think you do raise a point. I have done a con-
siderable amount of work on this. Perhaps our Fish
and Wildlife people who are here can assist us on the
Columbia River. Do we still have Mr. Tichenor here?
What is the rate of flow of the Columbia? Is it 200,000
feet a second? I hesitate to give the figure. Other than
the Mississippi, I don't know where we have a flow like that
anywhere in the country. But I think this is the question
that we have with the salmon runs.
We have fish passage devices which have cost
us a lot of money and a tremendous amount of research.
We have diseases appearing in the salmon — fungus diseases
and other problems that I don't think we realized were
there when we changed the regimen of that river. I think
while we have to deal with the Columbia River — and I
don't want to deprecate any of the water projects that we
have had there, and I don't think we are going to lose
the salmon run because I think the salmon are going to
increase going up the Columbia — but we have had to pay
quite a price to keep those salmon up. In fact, in some
places we find it easier not to have them go up a fish
ladder or passage device, but we put them in a tank car
and drive them up and then release them.
I believe what has happened in rivers like
-------
1711
C. F. Riefstahl
that is the kind of thing that gives purpose in not
authorizing tremendous changes in the environment, when
someone says, "Well, we are not sure," or "We don't know,"
and "Let's try it and see."
Now, again, I guess when we went to school years
ago in the thirties and we had a little different type
education than we have now, we used to study these
philosophic principles. One of the most famous and most
hoary ones I think was the principle that the simplest
explanation was likely the one to be the most correct.
Then we had another one that we studied in those days, at
least in the primitive stages of biology, that when you
tinkered with nature the results were rarely beneficial.
I think your analogy of the Columbia River
is one that I know I am keeping very much in mind when
we are thinking of changing what we are going to do to
Lake Michigan.
Are there any other comments or questions?
If not, thank you very much, sir.
Are there any other questions, or does anyone else
want to make a statement? This about exhausts the list
for today. I know tomorrow we are going to have a very
full day, from the look of it, and if anyone wants to
-------
1712
B. F. Parmelee
volunteer and make his statement today, he would be
welcome.
Do you want to? Come on up. This is Mr. Byrd
Parmelee.
STATEMENT OF BYRD F. PARMELEE, SALES
ENGINEER, TECHNIGON INDUSTRIAL SYSTEMS,
TARRYTOWN, NEW YORK
MR. PARMELEE: My name is Byrd Parmelee. I work
with Technicon Industrial Systems, a division of Technicon
Instruments Corporation, and I know how important your
time is so I will be very brief in explaining how these
terms are synonymous.
Recently it has become apparent to many people
that we have water quality problems. It has been sug-
gested that one solution to the problem is source moni-
toring. I don't know what you think about Technicon
Corporation. I don't know what you think about it as a
result of past experience with Technicon Corporation.
But we have now formed a new division called Industrial
Systems, We believe that it is a new ballgarae. We believe
our future lies in industry, and those of us involved with
this particular job are enthusiastic about the ability of
-------
1713
B. F. Parmelee
our company now to meet the needs for source monitoring.
A few examples where source monitoring has
shown the business man a cost reduction — a sugar-manu-
facturing plant in Brooklyn found by monitoring contin-
uously plant effluent for sugar loss that he was surprised
to find short-term sugar losses. By eliminating these
losses, he was able to save money.
An ammunition production facility in the United
States found by monitoring continuously for sulphate,
nitrate, and nitrite, they were able to detect intermed-
iate losses that created a cost reduction step.
I am here primarily to invite each of you to
participate and attend our congress in New York on
November 3 where the subject of how to solve our water
pollution problem by source monitoring will be discussed.
The meeting will take place at the Hilton in New York,
and it is, we think, a good opportunity to share with
those who want to solve problems some of the opportuni-
ties for continuing to solve these problemsa
MR. STEIN: Thank you very much.
You know, I thought I did my share for Technicon
by agreeing to coming up and speaking at your meeting,
but I am not sure we are available for commercial plugs
here in addition. Thank you very much.
-------
1714
Murray Stein
We have a statement here from the City Offices,
Petoskey, Michigan, from the City Clerk, which will be
entered into the record without objection.
And a statement from the Lake Michigan Thermal
Study Committee, by Russell C, Mallatt, whom you all know,
and I will put that in the record. Mr. Mallatt was here
to give this personally when we were supposed to have
these committees go on but, as you know, he has a very
demanding position in the petroleum industry and he had
pressing other business and he just left the statement
to be read. Without objection this will be put into the
record.
(The statements above referred to follow in
their entirety.)
-------
1715
CITY CLERK
VIRGINIA HUBBARD
Sept. 15, 1970
Ralph W. Purdy, Executive Secretary
Department of Natural Resources
Stevens T. Mason Building, .
Lansing, Michigan 48926
7 f
'"197Q
The following is a copy of a resolution adopted by the Petoskey City Council,
in Special Session Assembled, on the 14th day of September 1970.
the land area surrounding the Great Lakes is prime recreation land,
ana
ikes Basin
WHEREAS, the Great Lakes are vital resources of the area if the Groat
is to remain prime recreation land, and
WHEREAS, all reports indicate that the Great Lakes Basin is in great danger of
becoming irreversibly polluted unless sever and immediate action is caken, and
V.1-ISRSAS, the City of Petoskey, Michigan is a community located on the shoreline
of Little Traverse Bay on Lake Michigan and desires that all means and controls are
utilized to abate the pollution of Lake Michigan and the other Great Lakes,
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City of Petoskey hereby proposes:
1. That new and more stringent regulations be enacted covering the discharge
of effluent into the Great Lakes and its tributaries, requiring as a minimum the use
of tertiary treatment on all municipal and industrial discharges.
2. That equally stringent standards be established for all commercial vessels
operating on the Great Lakes and that these standards be rigidly enforced.
3. That all resort and subdivision development on the Great Lakes and its
tributaries be required to provide adequate sewage treatment facilities.'
32 IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that copies of this resolution be sent to the Governor
of the States of Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, and Indiana, the State Senators of
these four states and the Water Resources Commission, State of Michigan, for presen-
tation at the Federal Conference on Pollution of Lake Michigan and its Tributary
2asin, Third Session, convened in session at Chicago, Illinois, September 28 to
October 2, 1970."
Virg/nia F. fiubbard, City
-------
1716
STATEMENT OF THE LAKE MICHIGAN THERMAL STUDY
COMMUTES AT THE LAKE MICHIGAN FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE
SEPTEMBER 28, 29, 30, OCTOBER 1, 2, 1970
My name is Russell C. Mallatt and I am here to present a short statement
on behalf of the Lake Michigan Thermal Study Committee.
The Lake Michigan Thermal Study Committee consists of representatives of
a number of diverse industries located along the western shore of Lake Michigan
in Northwest Indiana. These companies have a mutual concern about the whole
question of thermal inputs to Lake Michigan and share the belief that there is
a definite lack of knowledge regarding the effects of thermal additions to the
lake.
This concern is precisely why the committee is prepared to initiate a pro-
gram of research. It will begin with the commissioning of Limnetics, Inc. of
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, to undertake a one year thermal study of that portion of
Lake Michigan which lies in the Calumet region of Indiana if the conferees
agree with the opinion of the committee that data to be derived from such a
study are necessary prior to the adoption of new regulations pertaining to
thermal discharges.
Until additional information is made available, members of the committee
believe that the present standards provide sufficient and necessary protection
for the Lake Michigan environment. We presently do not know of any basis in
fact that will support the Department of the Interior's proposed limitations of
1°F. above ambient. We believe this proposal to be most unrealistic. It might
thwart present progress towards improving valor quality. In fact, it might
make obsolete some recent investments in effluent treatment facilities. It
might also divert future funds awcy from other more beneficial effluent Duality
improvement projects.
Trie committee has organized cooperatively the proposed study to provide
information and the basis for reoom;;ieiiM«tionr- thai c?m affirm present water
-------
1717
— 2 —
quality standards or that vill suggest needed changes or new regulations.
To aid in the solicitation of study proposals from several interested
research and academic institutions, the committee formulated the following study
objectives, which outline the scope of the proposed research:
1. Review and summarize objectively the effects of thermal discharges on
the fresh water aquatic biota which is typical of southern Lake Michigan. It
is anticipated that this will require a comprehensive literature search and
will yield the information necessary to prepare a well-founded policy statement
on thermal pollution.
2. Determine and summarize existing thermal dispersion patterns in the
Calumet area of Lake Michigan under a variety of meteorological and hydrographi-
cal conditions. This will involve the collection of outfall inventory data and
data on surface and subsurface currents and dispersion patterns in the lake.
It is expected that the data collection will involve a combination of field
measurements and aerial thermal mapping surveys. The portion of Lake Michigan
which is of interest to the participating companies extends from the Indiana-
Illinois line up to the eastern boundary of Gary, Indiana. The area of study
is tentatively defined as being within l*r miles of shore.
3« Study the influence of natural effects, including daily and seasonal
variations in wind, cloud cover, sunlight, air temperature, and land runoff on
short- and long-term temperature variations in the lake. These natural effects
will be compared to the influence of the man-made heat discharges quantified
under item 2.
We are not in a position to present definitive recommendations in regard
to thermal standards at this time; however, we will be ready to present the
conclusions from our study to the state of Indiana upon its completion in
approximately one year. In addition, data from additional studies of which
-------
1713
- 3 -
committee members are aware should also be available by that time. It is our
conviction that meaningful revisions of the present water quality standards must
be predicated on need and based on fact. Since the standards now in effect
afford reasonable protection and since additional facts will be forthcoming, it
is our recommendation that the setting of new thermal standards for the southern
portion of Lake Michigan be held in abeyance for at least one year.
-------
1719
Murray Stein
MR. STEIN: Are there any other statements or
comments?
If not, I will thank you very much, and we will
stand recessed until 9:00 o'clock tomorrow, and I hope
you will tell everyone to keep their statements brief
tomorrow if we are going to get through.
We stand in recess.
(The conference adjourned at 3:40 p.m.)
* U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1971 O - 422-409 (Vol. 4)
------- |