Volume 5
Chicago, Illinois
 Ian.31,  Feb.1-2f Feb.5-7196|
Executive Session
March 7, 8 and 12,1968
                I L L I N 0 I S
CONFERENCE
                                 INDIANA
PoSfiuf'cn of
Lake Michigan and its tributary basin
            U. S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

    FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION

-------
                                          	2188

 1                 TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6,  1968


 2                     MORNING SESSION


 3                                               9:30 a .in.


 4                 MR. STEIN:  Let's come to  order.


 5                 We will now hear from Michigan.   I


 6       would like to call on Mr. John  Vogt.



 7
                     MICHIGAN PRESENTATION

 8


 9                 MR. VOGT:  Mr. Chairman, for  the  record


10       I will be Michigan's Conferee today  and tomorrow


11       as designated by Mr. George Liddle,  the Chairman


12       of the Michigan Water Resources Commission.   I am


13       the Chief of the Division of Engineering of the


14       Michigan Department of Health and Vice  Chairman


15       of the Michigan Water Resources Commission.


16                 Alternate Conferees will be Mr.  Liddle,


17       and also Mr. Ralph Purdy, Chief Engineer of the


18       Michigan Water Resources Commission.


19                 The Michigan Presentation  today,  Mr.


20       Chairman, will involve a presentation of a  joint


21       report prepared by the-Michigan water Resources


22       Commission and the Geological  Survey Division of


23       the Department of conservation  and the  Michigan


24       Department of Health.


25                 We also have appearances by people who

-------
   	2189
 I                         J. E. VOGT

 2        have requested opportunity to make statements.

 3        Since we have previously informed those who have

 4        requested an opportunity to make appearances that

 5        they would be put on this morning, I plan on call-

 6        ing these people first, because some of them have

 7        other commitments and need to leave.   So, there-

 g        fore, we will hold our State Report until after

 9        the appearances have been made.

19                  We also have some statements that have

11        been presented to us which I will merely enter

12        into the record, with your permission.

13                  MR. STEIN:  As I understand  it, we have

14        just two other commitments and that is Mr. Klassen

15        has Mr. Egan, President of the Metropolitan Sani-

16        tary District of Greater Chicago,  when he comes

17        we will put him on.  And when Governor Knowles

18        comes, we expect him about 2 o'clock,  we will make

19        arrangements for the Governor to make  his statement

20        and try to fit in with the Governor's  schedule.

21        With the Governor, I imagine, we would have to

22        find the closest breaking point and put him on as

23        soon as we can to accommodate his schedule.

24                  MR. VOGT:  We will certainly do that.

25                  Now, upon the announcement or the calling

-------
                                       	2190
 1                            J . E . vOGT

 2           of the Conference by Secretary Udall, we sent out

 3           a letter to several hundred people in Michigan

 4           who we knew would be interested in this Conferenc

 5           and I would like to introduce into the record a

            copy of this letter, a copy of the news release

 7           which the Michigan Water Resources Commission put

 g           out, and also a list of the people who received

 9           this letter.

10                     KR. STEIN:  Without objection, that

11           will appear in the record as if read.

12                     MR. VOGT:  A copy of that is being
            x
13           distributed to the Conferees.

14                     (Which said material is as follows:)

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

-------
                                                         2191

 1                           J. E. VOGT

 2

 3                       STATE OF MICHIGAN

 4                    GEORGE ROMNEY, GOVERNOR

 5                  DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION

 6                 RALPH A. MAC MULLAN, DIRECTOR

 7

 8          CONSERVATION COMMISSION        WATER RESOURCES
                                              COMMISSION
 9
            CARL T. JOHNSON                GEORGE P. LIDDLE
10             Chairman                        Chairman
            E. M. LAITALA                  JOHN E. VOGT
11          ROBERT C. MCLAUGHLIN               Vice Chairman
            AUGUST SCHOLLE                 R. DALE BALL
12          HARRY H. WHITELEY              GERALD E. EDDY
                                           JAMES W. MURRAY
13                                         LYNN F. BALDWIN
                                           JIM GILMORE
14

15
                                  300 MILL ST., LANSING 48926
16
                                       Tel.   373-3560
17

18                        December  29,  1967

19
            Subject:  Federal Conference  on Pollution of Lake
20
                      Michigan and  its  Tributary Basin
21
                      The  Secretary of  the Interior of the
22
            United  States  has called a  conference on the
23
            pollution of Lake Michigan  and its tributary basj
24
            (Wisconsin-Illinois-Indiana-Michigan) under the
25
            provisions of  the Federal Water pollution Contro

-------
   	2192
 !                          J.  E.  VOGT

 2        Act  (P.L.  84-660,  as amended).   The conference  is

 3        called  on  the basis  of  a  request from Governor

 4        Otto Kerner  of  Illinois,  dated  November 22,  1967,

 g        and on  the basis  of  reports,  surveys or studies

 6        available  to the  secretary.   Applicable portions

 7        of the  Federal  Act are  quoted herewith:

 8                   Section 10

 9                 " (a)   The pollution  of interstate or navic[
                                                 j
10                   able  waters in  or adjacent to any  State

11                 (  or states  (whether  the matter causing or

12                   contributing  to such  pollution is  dis-

13                   charged directly into such waters  or

14                   reaches  such  waters after discharge into
                                                        \

15                   a  tributary of  such waters),  which en-

16                   dangers  the health  or welfare of any

17                   persons, shall  be subject to abatement

18                   as provided in  this Act.

19                                *****


20                 " (d)   (I)   Whenever  requested by the

21                   governor of any State .  . .  ,  the  Secre-

22                   tary  shall, if  such request refers to

23                   pollution  of  waters which is endangering

24                   the health or welfare of  persons in a

25                   State other than that in  which the

-------
  	2193

 j                          J .  E . VOGT



 2                   discharge  or discharges (causing or con-



 3                   tributing  to such pollution) originates,



 4                   give formal notification thereof to the



 ,                   water pollution control agency ... of


                    the state  or States where such discharge



 _                   or discharges originate and shall call


 a                   promptly a conference of ... the state
 <»                                        ,


 9                   water pollution control agency . . .of


10                   the state  or states, if any, which raay,b<



jj                   adversely  affected by such pollution . .



12                   The secretary shall also call such a con-



13                   ference whenever, on the basis of reports


14                   surveys or studies, he has reason to



15                   believe that any pollution referred to



10                   in subsection (a) and endangering the


17                   health or  welfare of persons in a State



13                   other than that in which the discharge ox



19                   discharges originate is occurring; . .



20                   The conference will convene at 11:00 a.m.



21         Wednesday,  January 31,  1968,  at the Sherman House,



22         Chicago,  Illinois.



23                   Secretary  Stewart L. Udall of the U. S.



24         Department of the interior will serve as chairman


25         of the  conference.  The Michigan water Resources

-------
                               	219*1

 t                          J. E. VOGT



 2         Commission has designated its Executive Secretary,



 o         Loring P. Oeroing, to participate in the conference



 A         as the State's conferee, with its chief Engineer,
 4


 5         Ralph W. Purdy, and its Chairman George P. Liddle




 6         or his representative as alternates.



                    Under the law, the purpose of the con-




 8         ference is to ascertain:



 9                   l.  whether pollution of Lake Michigan



10                   is occurring that is subject to abatement.



n                   under the Federal Water Pollution Contro],




12                   Act-



13                   2.  The adequacy of measures taken toward




14                   abatement of the pollution.



15                   3.  The nature of delays, if any, being



I6                   encountered in abating the pollution.



17                   This announcement constitutes an invita-




18         tion for you to attend or be represented at the



19         Lake Michigan conference, and to inform you that



20         the opportunity is available to you to make a




21         ment.  For accuracy of the record, any facts or



22         views you wish to present should be submitted  in



23         writing.  Your statement may be forwarded to this




24         office before January  26 or may be filed with  me



25         at the time of the conference.

-------
   	2193

 1                         J. E. VOGT

 2                  If you desire to present  a  statement for

 3        the record, please notify roe not  later  than  January

 4        19, 1968.

 5                              Very truly  yours,

 6                              WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION

 7                               (Signed)  LORING  F.  OEMING

 8                              Loring F. Oeming
                                Executive Secretary
 9

10                           -  -  -

11
          NEWS FROM MICHIGAN WATER RESOURCES  COMMISSION
12

13                                     January  11, 1968

14
                    Michigan will be represented  at  the
15
          Federal conference on pollution of  Lake Michigan
16
          and its tributary basin by Loring F.  Oeming,
17
          executive secretary of the state  water  Resources
18
          Commission.  The conference will  convene at  11 a.m
19
          Wednesday, January 31, at the  Sherman House,
20
          Chicago, Illinois.  Called by  Secretary of the
21
          Interior Udall who will serve  as  chairman, the
22
          conference also involves Wisconsin, Illinois and
23

          Indiana.
24

25                  Under the law, the purpose  of the

-------
   	2196
 I                          J. E. VOGT
 2         conference is three-fold.  The conferees must
 3         determine (1) whether pollution of Lake Michigan
 "4         is occurring that is subject to abatement under
 5         the Federal water Pollution Control Act. (2) the
 6         adequacy of measures taken toward abatement of the
 7         pollution and (3) the nature of delays, if any, be
 g         ing encountered in abating the pollution.
 9                   The conference is open to the public and
10         persons attending will be given an opportunity to
H         make statements.  For accuracy of the record, how-
12         ever, any facts or views to be presented should be
13         submitted in writing.  Statements may be mailed to
14         the water Resources, commission, 200 Mill Street,
15         Lansing 48926, prior to January 26 or filed with
16         the commission's executive secretary at the time
17         of the conference.
18                   Over 450 notices of the Lake Michigan
19         conference have been mailed by the Water Resources
20         Commission to local units of government, Industrie^
21         conservation groups and other organizations and
22         interested citizens.
23
24
25

-------
         	2197
 j                          J.  E. VOGT

 2        News Release  re Federal conference on  pollution of

 3        Lake Michigan and its tributary basin  sent to:

 4        (listed  by municipality)	

 5        Capitol  Building Press corps   (20 copies)

 6        MUCC Board of Directors  (12 copies)

 7        THE BENTON HARBOR NEWS PALLADIUM
            Benton Harbor
 8
          CHARLEVOIX COURIER  (weekly)
 9          charlevoix

10        ESCANABA DAILY PRESS
            Escanaba
11
          BENZIE COUNTY PATRIOT   (weekly)
12          Frankfort

13        DELTA REPORTER  (weekly)
            Gladstone
14
          GRAND HAVEN DAILY TRIBUNE
15          Grand  Haven

16        THE WEEKLY WAVE  (weekly)
            Hessel
17
          HILLSDALE DAILY NEWS
18          Hillsdale

19        HOLLAND  EVENING SENTINEL
            Holland
20
          KALAMAfcOO GAZETTE
21          Ka lama zoo

22        THE STATE JOURNAL
            Lansing
23
          MICHIGAN-OUT-OF-DOORS   (MUCC monthly)
24          Lansing

25        LEELANAU ENTERPRISE-TRIBUNE   (weekly)
            Leland

-------
                                                           2198
                            J. E.  VOGT
 2        LUDINGTON DAILY NEWS
             Ludington
 3
          MANISTEE NEWS ADVOCATE
 4           Manistee

 5        MANISTIQUE PIONEER TRIBUNE  (weekly)
             Manistique
 6
          THE  HERALD -LEADER
 7           Menominee

 8        THE  MUSKEGON CHRONICLE
             Muskeg on
 9
          NEW  BUFFALO TIMES   (weekly)
10           New Buffalo

11        NILES DAILY STAR
             Niles
12
          PETOSKEY NEWS -REVIEW
13           Petoskey

14        NORTH WOODS CALL   (weekly)
             Ros common
15
          THE  ST. JOSEPH HERALD-PRESS
16           St. Joseph

17        ST.  IGNACE REPUBLICAN NEWS AND
             ST. IGNACE ENTERPRISE  (weekly)
18           St. Ignace

1*>        SAUGATUCK COMMERCIAL-RECORD   (weekly)
             Saugatuck
20
          SOUTH HAVEN DAILY TRIBUNE
21           South Haven

22        MENOMINEE COUNTY JOURNAL  (weekly)
             Menoxnine
23
          THREE RIVERS COMMERCIAL
24           Three Rivers

25        THE  RECORD EAGLE
             Traverse city

-------
                                                        2199
 1

 2

 3

 4

 5

 6

 7

 8

 9

10

11

12
 C
13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
                 J. E. VOGT

WHITEHALL FORUM-WHITE LAKER
  Whitehall

WOOD NEWS   (radio/TV)
  Grand Rapids
               (weekly)
         TOTALS
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
Radio/TV
Others
18
11
 1
 1
32
63
                MAILING  LIST
          LAKE MICHIGAN CONFERENCE
International, National and  Interstate  Commissions
Leonard J. Goodsell, Executive  Dir.
Great Lakes Commission
2200 N. Campus Boulevard
Ann Arbor, Michigan  48105
Hon. Matthew E. Welsh, Chairman
United States Section
International Joint Commission
1711 New York Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C.   20440
John P. Kavanaugh, Governors Alternate
Upper Great Lakes Regional Commission
Office of Economic Expansion
Department of Commerce
Lansing, Michigan             (I.D.)

-------
                           	  2200
                           J. E. VOGT
 2         Norman S. Baldwin, Executive secretary
          Great Lakes Fishery Commission
 3         1451 Green Road
          P. O. Box 640
 4         Ann Arbor, Michigan   48107

 5
          Raymond F. Clevenger, Chairman
 6         Great Lakes Basin Commission
          2200 North Campus Boulevard
          Ann Arbor, Michigan   48105

 8

 9         Michigan state Agencies

10

11         R. G. Rice, M.D., Acting Director
          Department of Public Health
12         3500 North Logan Street
          Lansing, Michigan   48914    (I.Do)
13

14         George Romney, Governor
          Office of the Governor
15         The state Capitol
          Lansing, Michigan            (I.D.)
16

17         Michigan Natural Resources council
          Department of Conservation
18         Lansing, Michigan   48926    (I.D.)

19
          Herbert Dejonge, Director
20         Department of commerce
          Lansing, Michigan            (I.D.)
21
22         B. Dale Ball, Director
          Department of Agriculture
          Lewis Cass Office Building                         j
          Lansing, Michigan   48913    (I.D.)
24
25

-------
 1
                           	2201
                           J. E. VOGT
 2         Keith Wilson, Director
          Waterways Division
 3         Michigan Department of Conservation
          1004 Cadillac Square Building
          Detroit, Michigan   48226
          William T. McGraw, Director
          Tourism Division
          Michigan Department of Conservation
 7         Lansing, Michigan            (I.D.)

 8
          Kenneth Dorman, Sec.-Mgr.
          Upper Michigan Tourist Council
          Box  1188
10         Iron Mountain, Michigan   49806

11
          Henrik stafseth. Director
12         Department of state Highways
          Lansing, Michigan            (I.D.)
13

14         cletus Courchaine, Eng.  in charge
          Northern Peninsula Office
15         Department of Public Health
          305  Ludington street
16         Escanaba, Michigan   49829

17
          Aurey strohpaul,  Sec.-Mgr.
18         west Michigan Tourist Association
          107  Pearl Street, N.E.
19         Grand Rapids, Michigan   49502

20
          R. G. Hill,  Executive Sec.
21         State Soil Conservation  committee
          Room 324 Natural  Resources  Building
22         East Lansing, Michigan   48823

23
          Ralph A. Mac Mullan, Director
24         Department of Conservation
          Lansing, Michigan           (I.D.)
25

-------
                                                        2202

 1                          J.  E.  VOGT

 2        Members  of  Water  Resources Commission

 3

 4        George F. Liddle   (Chairman,  representing
                             Municipal  Groups
 5        John  vogt,  for  Director of Public  Health
          Gerald E. Eddy, for  Director  of  Conservation
 6        Stanley  Quackenbush,  for Director  of Agriculture
          James V. Murray,  for State Highway commission
 7        Lynn  F.  Baldwin,  for Conservation  Groups
          James Gilmore,  Jr.,  for Industrial' Groups
 8

 9
          Michigan Legislators
          Secretary of  Senate

11        Senators

12
          Harold w. Hungerford
13        Gordon Rockwell
          Emil  Lockwood
14        Robert vanderlaan
          Milton Zaagman
15        Oscar E. Bouwsma
          John  F.  Toepp
16        Thomas F. Schweigert
          Joseph S. Mack
17        Gilbert  E.  Bursley
          James G. Fleming
18        Harry A. DeMaso
          Anthony  Starom
          Charles  O.  Zollar

20
          House of Representatives - Cleric of  the House
21                    *

22        Frederic J. Marshall
          DeForrest strang
          Don R. Pears
          Lionel J. stacey
24        James H. Heinze
          William  V.  Weber
25        Cyril H. Root

-------
                                                       2203

 I                         J. E. VOGT

 2        House of Representatives   - Cleric  of  the  House
                           Continued
 3

 4        Edson V. Root, Jr.
          James s. Parnsworth
 5        Dale Warner
          Thomas L. Brown
 6        Phillip O. Pittinger
          Thomas 6. Ford,  Sr.
 7        Stanley J. Davis
          Peter Kok
 3        Johannes C. Kolderman, Jr.
          Melvin Destiger
 9        Francis W. Beedon
          Edgar A. Geerlings
10        Nelson G. Tisdale
          Robert W. Davis
11        Dominic J. Jacobetti
          Blair C. Woodman
12        Lester J. Allen
          Stanley M. Powell
13        Martin D. Buth
          Dennis O. Cawthorne
14        Donald E. Holbrook, Jr.

15        Russell H. Strange
          Arnell Engstrom
16        Charles H. Varnum
          Jack L. Gingrass
17
          James N. Folks
18        Hal W. Ziegler
          Thomas G. Sharpe
19        Charles J. Davis

20

21        5.  Legislative committees

22

23        senate Special committee  to study  Problems  concern
          ing the Great Lakes and Their Tributaries.   Chair-
24        man - Sen. Charles O. Zollar.

25        senate Special Committee  on Fishing  in  the  Great
          Lakes.  Chairman - Sen. John F.  Toepp

-------
                                    	    2204
  n	              J.  E.  VOGT
1
           Legislative committees   (Continued)
2

3          Joint Legislative Committee on Water Resources
           Planning
4            Co-chairman  -  Representative Raymond J. Baker
             Co-chairman  -  Senator Gordon Rockwell
5
           senate committee on  conservation and Tourist
           Industry.
             Chairman  -  senator  Gordon Rockwell
7
           House Committee on Conservation and  Recreaton.
8            Chairman  -  Representative Raymond J. Baker

9

1U          ^*  Congressmen

11
           United States Senators
12          	

13          senator Phillip A. Hart
           Senate Office Building
14          Washington, D.C.

15
           Senator Robert P. Griffin
16          senate Office Building
           Washington, D.C.
17

18
           United states Representatives


20
21          Representative Marvin L. Esch
           House Office Building
22          Washington, D.C.

23
           Representative Garry Brown
24         House Office Building
           Washington, D.C.
25

-------
                           	2 205
                            J.  E.  VOGT

 2         United states  Representatives  (Continued)

 3
           Representative Edward Hutchinson
 4         House Office Building
           Washington,  D.C.
 6         Representative Gerald L. Ford
           House Office Building
 7         Washington,  D.C

 8
           Representative Charles E. Chamberlain
 9         House Office Building
           Wa shington,  D.C.
10

           Representative Guy Vander Jagt
           House Office Building
12         Washington,  D.C.

13
           Representative Blford A. cederberg
14         House Office Building
           Washington,  D.C.
15

16         Representative Philip E. Roppe
           House Office Building
17         Washington,  D.C

18

19         7.  Townships

20

21         Joseph A. Paris!,  Jr., Exec. Dir
           Michigan Townships Association
22         712 south Holmes
           Lansing, Michigan   48912
23

24

25

-------
                           	2206
                            J.  E.  VOGT
           8.   Municipalities


 3

           Robert E.  Fryer,  Director
           Michigan Municipal League
           205 South State Street
           Ann Arbor, Michigan   48104

 6

 7
           9.   Planning Commissions

 8

 9
           Bruce Brown, Exec. Sec.
           Michigan society of Planning Officials
           1937 Cromwell Drive
n          Holt, Michigan   48842

12

13          10.  watersheds

14

           John H. Kennaugh, Exec. Sec.
           Grand River watershed Council
16          609 Prudden Building
           Lansing, Michigan   48933
17
18
19
           11.  conservation - Recreation
20          Merrill Petoskey, Secretary
           Michigan Association of Cons . Ecologists
21          408 Kalamazoo Plaza
           Lansing, Michigan   48914
22

23          James L. Rouman, Exec. Dir .
           Michigan United Conservation Clubs
24          P. O. BOX 2235
           Lansing, Michigan,   48911
25

-------
                                                         2207
                                                        	1
 \                          J. E. VOGT

 2         conservation - Recreation  (Continued)

 3
           Charles Welch, secretary
 4         Michigan Outdoor Writers Assoc.
           P. O. BOX 128
 5         500 Lake Avenue
           Roscommon, Michigan   48653
 6

 7         Norn Spring, President
           Michigan steelheaders Assoc.
 8         1416 Lake Street
           Grand Haven, Michigan   49417
 9

10         Howard Brown, President
           Upper Peninsula sportsmens Assoc.
11         Newberry, Michigan   49868

12
           American Power Boat Association.
13         Whittier Hotel
           415 Burns Drive
14         Detroit, Michigan   48214

15
           Tudar ApMadoc, Chairman
16         Michigan Council - Trout Unlimited
           2526 State Street
17         Saginaw, Michigan   48602

18
           Miss Olga Madar, Director
19         U.A.W. Recreation Department
           8000 East Jefferson Avenue
20         Detroit, Michigan   48214

21
           David H. Rathbun, Outstate chairman
22         Ducks Unlimited
           1109 Security Bank Building
23         Battle Creek, Michigan   49014

24

25

-------
                            	2208
                            J. E. VOGT
 1

 2         conservation - Recreation (Continued)

 3
           Mrs. Harry H. Geitgey
 4         D.A.R. Conservation Chairman
           3995 Berry Road
 6         Plymouth, Michigan   48170

 6
           John R. Spyker
 7         Michigan Salmon Anglers
           Box 192
 8         Grandvilie, Michigan   49148

 9
           Mr. Fred Lefton, Executive Director
           Outboard Boating Club of America
           333 North Michigan Avenue
11         Chicago, Illinois   60601

12

13         12. ^ AGRICULTURE

14

15         Daniel E. Reed, President
           Michigan Farm Bureau
16         P.O. BOX 96
           Lansing, Michigan   48925
17

18         Grover Grigsby, Master
           Michigan State Grange
19         314 North Walnut
           Lansing, Michigan   48933
20

21
           13.   Industrial and Commercial
22

23
           John C. McCurry, General Manager
24         Michigan Manufacturers Association
           1590 First National Building
25         Detroit, Michigan   48226

-------
                            	2209
                            J. E. VOGT
 2
 3
                Organizations
 4          Harry Hall, Exec. Vice President
           Michigan State chamber of commerce
           215 South Washington Avenue
           Lansing, Michigan   48925
 6

 7          John J. Carey, President
           Michigan Society of Professional Eng
           Electrical Engineering Department
           University of Michigan
 g          Ann Arbor, Michigan

10
           Miss Sadie Jones
           Michigan Federation of womens club
           416 North Clinton, Box 30
12          Grand Ledge, Michigan   48837

13
           League of women voters of Michigan
14          4612 Woodward
           Detroit, Michigan   48201
15

16          Donald M. Pierce, secretary
           Michigan water Pollution Control Assoc
17          Michigan Department of Public Health
           3500 North Logan Street
18          Lansing, Michigan           (Z.D.)

19
           Roy Jensen, Executive Secretary
20          Michigan Fish Producers Association
           Route 62
21          Escanaba, Michigan

22

23                             "                              i

24

25

-------
                                       	2210

 1                           J.  E.  VOGT

 2

 3               LAKE MICHIGAN ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE

 4

 5          MunicipaIjties

 6

 7          1.   Mayor and Council
                City  of  Albion
 8              112 West Cass Street
                Albion,  Michigan   49224
 9

10          2.   Mayor and Council
                City  of  Allegan
11              112 Locust Street
                Allegan, Michigan   49010
12

13          3.   President and Council
                Village  of Alpha
14              Alpha, Michigan   49902

15
            4.   President and Council
                Village  of Bangor
                Pine  street
17              Bangor,  Michigan   49013

18
                Mayor and Commission
19              City  of  Battle Creek
                E.  Michigan Avenue at
20               E.  Division street
                Battle Creek, Michigan   49014
21

22

23

24
6.  Mayor and Council
    City of Belding
    Belding, Michigan   48809
            7.   Mayor and Commission
25               City of Benton Harbor
                200 Wall Street .          ^««oo
    	Benton  Harbor,—Michigan	A9022

-------
   	2211

 1                           J .  E .  VOGT

 2          8.   President and Council
               Village of Berrien  Springs
 3              123  west Ferry Street
               P.O. Box 182
 4              Berrien Springs, Michigan   49103

 5
           9.   President and Council
 6              Village of Beulah
               7228 Commercial  Avenue
 7              Beulah, Michigan   49617

 8
          10.   Mayor and Commission
 9              City of Big Rapids
               226  North Michigan  Avenue
10              Big  Rapids, Michigan   49307

11
          11.   Mayor and Commission
12              City of Boyne City
               100  State Street
13              Boyne City, Michigan   49712

14
          12.   Mayor and Commission
15              City of Bridgman
               582  Lake street
16              Bridgman, Michigan    49106

17
          13.   Mayor and Council
18              City of Bronson
               114  East Chicago Street
19              Bronson, Michigan   49028

20
          14.   Mayor and Commission
21              City of Buchanan
               107  west Front Street
22              Buchanan, Michigan    49107

23
          15.   Mayor and Commission
               City of Cadillac
               201  North Mitchell  street
25              Cadillac, Michigan    49601

-------
                                       	2212

 1                           J. E. VOGT

 2         16.  President and Council
               Village of Caledonia
 3              Caledonia, Michigan   49316

 4
          17.  Mayor and Commission
 5              City of Caspian
               340 Caspian Avenue
 6              Caspian, Michigan   49915

 7
          18.  President and Council
 8              Village of Cassopolis
               120 North Disbrow Street
 9              Cassopolis, Michigan    49031

10
          19.  Mayor and Council
11              City of cedar Springs
               66 south Main street
12              Cedar Springs, Michigan  49319

13
          20.  Mayor and Council
14              City of Charlevoix
               210 State Street
15              Charlevoix, Michigan    49720

16
          21.  Mayor and Council
17              City of Charlotte
               146 south Bostwick Avenue
18              Charlotte, Michigan   48813

19
          22.  Mayor and Council
20              City of coldwater
               5  south Monroe street
21              Coldwater, Michigan   49036

22
          23.  Mayor and Commission
               City of coloma
               144 North Church  Street
24              Coloma, Michigan   49038

25

-------
                            	2213
                            J. E. VOGT

 2
          24.  Mayor and Council
 3              City of coopersville
               289 Dandorth
 4              Coopersville, Michigan    49404

 5
          25.  Delhi Township, Inghaxn County
 6              Township Hall
               Holt, Michigan
 7              Attention:  Mrs. Enid M.  Lewis,  Clerk

 8
          26.  Delta Township, Eaton County
 9              Route 2
               Lansing, Michigan
10              Attention:  Mrs. Dorothy  I. Staley,  Clerk

11
          27.  Mayor and Council
12              City of Dewitt
               Dewitt, Michigan   48820
13

14         28.  Mayor and Council
               City of Dowagiac
15              241 South Front
               Dowagiac, Michigan   49047
16

17         29.  Mayor and Commission
               City of East Jordan
18              201 Main Street
               East Jordan, Michigan   49727
19

20         30.  Mayor and Council
               City of East Lansing
21              410 Abbott  Road
               East Lansing, Michigan    48823
22

23         31.  Mayor and Commission
               City of Eaton Rapids
24              Corner Main and Harolin  streets
               Eaton Rapids, Michigan    48827
25

-------
    ^__________	2214
    ||                                   9  n   w^^m
  1
  2


  3


  4


  5


  6


  7


  8


  9


10


11


12


13


14


15


16


17


18


19


20


21


22


23


24


25

32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
J. E. VOGT
President and Council
Village of Edmore
Edraore, Michigan 48829
President and Council
Village of Elberta
Elberta, Michigan 49628
President and council
Village of Elk Rapids
131 River Street
Elk Rapids, Michigan 49629
Mayor and Council
City of Escanaba
121 South llth Street
Escanaba, Michigan 49829
Mayor and Council
City of Evart
101 North Pine Street
Evart, Michigan 49631
Mayor and Council
City of pennville
117 North Maple street
Pennville, Michigan 49408
President and Council
Village of Fowler
South Main Street
Fowler, Michigan 48835
President and Council
Village of Fowlerville
105 Power Street
Fowlerville, Michigan 48836

-------
                                               _ 2215
                            J. E. VOGT
 2
           40.   Mayor and  Council
 3              City of  Frankfort
                412 Main Street
 4              Frankfort,  Michigan   49635

 5
           41.   Mayor and  Commission
 6              City of  Fremont
                101 East Main  street
 7              Fremont, Michigan    49412

 8
           42.   Mayor and  commission
 9              City of  Qaastra
                Main Avenue
10              Gaastra, Michigan    49927

11
           43.   Mayor and  Commission
12              City of  Gladstone
                1100 Delta Avenue
13              Gladstone,  Michigan   49837

14
           44.   Mayor and  Council
15              City of  Grand  Haven
                519 Washington street
16              Grand Haven, Michigan   49417

17
           45.   Mayor and  Commission
18              City of  Grand  Ledge
                120 South  Bridge Street
19              Grand Ledge, Michigan   48837

20
           46.   Mayor and  commission
21              City of  Grand  Rapids
                35 Lyon  Street, N.W.
22              Grand Rapids,  Michigan   49502

23
           47.   Mayor and  Commission
24              City of  Grandville
                3063 Wilson Avenue, S.W.
                Grandville, Michigan   48418

-------
                                       	2216

 1                            J. E. VOGT

 2
           48.  President and council
 3               Village of Grant
                Grant Michigan   49327
 4

 5          49.  Mayor and Council
                City of Greenville
 6               401 South Lafayette Street
                Greenville, Michigan  48838
 7

 8          50.  Harbor Point Association
                Harbor Point, Michigan   49740
 9

10          51.  Mayor and Council
                City of Harbor Springs
11               349 East Main Street
                Harbor Springs, Michigan  49740
12

13          52.  Mayor and Council
                City of Hart
14               218 Washington street
                Hart, Michigan   49420
15

16          53.  Mayor and Council
                City of Hartford
17               7 East Main Street
                Hartford, Michigan   49057
18

           54.  Mayor and Council
                City of Hastings
20               102 south Broadway
                Hastings, Michigan   49058
21

22          55.  Mayor and Council
                City of Hillsdale
                Corner Broad and I
                Hillsdale,  Michigan   49242
23               Corner Broad and Hillsdale streets

24

25

-------
                            	2217
                             J.  E.  VOGT
           56.   Mayor and council
                City of Holland
                270 River Avenue
 4               Holland, Michigan   49423

 5
           57.   President and Council
                Village of Homer
                112 west Adams Street
 7               Homer, Michigan   49245

 8
           58.   Mayor and Council
 9               City of Ionia
                114 North Kidd Street
10               Ionia, Michigan   48846

11
           59.   Mayor and Commission
12               City of iron River
                106 West Genessee street
13               Iron River, Michigan   49935

14
           60.   Mayor and Council
15               City of iron Mountain
                206-208 East Ludington Street
16               Iron Mountain, Michigan   49801
           61.  Mayor and Commission
18               City of Jackson
                132 west Washington Street
19               Jackson, Michigan   49201

20
           62.  Mayor and Commission
21               City of Kalaroazoo
                241 west south Street
22               Kalamazoo, Michigan   49006

23
           63.  Mr. John F. Meacham, Director
24               Kent county Board of Aeronautics
                3206 Madison Avenue, S.E.,
25               Grand Rapids, Michigan

-------
                                       	2218
 1                           J. E. VOGT

 2
           64.  President and Council
 3              Village of Kent City
                Kent City, Michigan   49330
 4

           65.  Mayor and Council
                City of Kingsford
 6              305 South Carpenter Avenue
                Kingsford, Michigan   49802
 7
 8         66.  President and counsil
                Village of Lake Odessa
 g              Page Memorial Building
                Lake Odessa, Michigan   48849

10              /
H         67.  President and council
12               Lincoln Avenue
13
Village of Lakeview
Lincoln Avenue
Lakeview, Michigan   48850
14          68.  Mayor and Council
                City of Lansing
15               111 West Michigan Avenue
                Lansing, Michigan   48933
16

17          69.  President and council
                City of Lawrence
18               Lawrence, Michigan   49064
           70.  President and Council
20               City of Lawton
                South Main Street, Box  399
21               Lawton, Michigan  49065

22
           71.  President and Council
23               Village of Leslie
                107 East Bellevue street
24               Leslie, Michigan   49251

25

-------
                             	      2219

                             J. E. VOGT
 2
           72.  Mayor and Council
 3              City of Lowell
                301 East Main Street
 4              Lowell, Michigan   49331

 5
           73.  Mayor and Commission
 6              City of Ludington
                205 south William  street
 7              Ludington, Michigan   49431

 8
           74.  Mayor and Commission
 9              City of Manistee
                78 Maple street
10              Manistee, Michigan   49660

11
           75.  Mayor and Council
12              City of Manistique
                East Lake Shore Drive
13              Manistique, Michigan    49854

14
           76.  Mayor and Commission
15              City of Marshall
                323 West Michigan  Avenue
16              Marshall, Michigan   49068

17
           77.  Mayor and Council
18              City of Mason
                137 West Maple  Street
19              Mason, Michigan    48854

20
           78.  Mayor and Council
21              City of Menominee
                711 First Street
22              Menominee, Michigan   49858

23
           79.  President and council
24              Village of Middleville
                High street
25              Middleville, Michigan   49333

-------
                                        	2220

 1                            J.  E.  VOGT

 2
           80.  Mayor  and  Commission
 3               City of  Muskegon
                208 West Clay Avenue
 4               Muskegon,  Michigan    49443

 5
           81.  Mayor  and  Council
 6               City of  Muskegon Heights
                2724 Peck  Street
 7               Muskegon Heights, Michigan   49444

 8
           82.  President  and Council
 9               Village  of Nashville
                Nashville,  Michigan   49073
10

11          83.  Mayor  and  council
                City of  New Buffalo
12               224 West Buffalo Street
                New Buffalo, Michigan   49117
13

14          84.  President  and Council
                Village  of Newaygo
15               Community  Building
                Newaygo, Michigan   49337
16

17          85.  Mayor  and  Council
                City of  Niles
18               506 East Main  Street
                Niles, Michigan  49120
19

20          86.  Mayor  and  Council
                City of  North Muskegon
21               1502 Ruddiman Avenue
                North  Muskegon,  Michigan  49445
22

23          87.  Mr. Ronald w.  Ruscett
                Director of water Utilities
24               Ottowa county  Road  commission
                616 North  6th  Street
25               Grand  Haven, Michigan

-------
                                       	2221
 1                            J. E. VOGT

 2
           88.  Mayor and Commission
 3               City of Otsego
                117 East Orleans
 4               Otsego, Michigan   49078

 5
           89.  Mayor and Commission
 6               City of Parchment
                650 South Riverview Avenue
 7               Parchment, Michigan   49004

 8
           90.  President and Council
 9               Village of Paw Paw
                111 East Michigan Avenue
10               Paw Paw, Michigan   49079

11
           91.  President and Council
12               Village of Pentwater
                Pentwater,.Michigan   49449
13

14          92.  Mayor and council
                City of Petoskey
15               200 Division Street
                Petoskey, Michigan   49770
16

17          93.  Mayor and Council
                City of Plainwell
18               323 East Bridge Street
                Plainwell, Michigan   49080
19

20          94.  Mayor and Council
                City of portage
21               7800 Shaver Road
                Portage, Michigan   49081
22

23          95.  President and Council
                Village of Portland
24               259 Kent  Street
                Portland, Michigan   48875
25

-------
                                        	2222

 1                            J. E. VOGT

 2
           96.  President and council
 3               Village of Quincy
                17-19 West Chicago Street
 4               Quincy, Michigan   49082

 5
           97.  Mayor and Council
 6               City of Reed City
                201 west Upton Street
 7               Reed City, Michigan   49677

 8
           98.  Mayor and Council
 9               City of Rockford
                8 East Bridge Street
10               Rockford, Michigan   49341

11
           99.  Mayor and Commission
12               City of St. Johns
                121 East walker Street
13               St. Johns, Michigan   48879

14
          100.  Mayor and Commission
15               City of St. Joseph
                616-620 Broad Street
16               St. Joseph, Michigan   49085

17
          101.  President and Council
18               Village of Saugatuck
                201 Butler Street
19               Saugatuck, Michigan   49453

20
          102.  Mayor and Commission
21               City of Scottville
                105 North Main Street
22               Scottville, Michigan   49454

23
          103.  Mayor and Council
24               City of South Haven
                529*5 Phoenix Street
25               South Haven, Michigan   49090

-------
                                              	2223
                             J. E. VOGT
 2
          104.  President and Council
 3               Village of Sparta
                156 East Division Street
 4.               Sparta, Michigan   49345

 5
          105.  President and Council
 6               Village of Spring Lake
                102 West savidge street
 7               Spring Lake, Michigan   49456

 8
          106.  Mayor and Commission
 g               City of starabaugh
                208 Third Street
10               Starabaugh, Michigan   49964

11
          107.  President and Council
12               Village of Stephen son
                Stephenson, Michigan   49887
13

14         108.  Mayor and commission
                City of sturgis
15               124 N. Nottawa Street, P.O. Box 280
                Sturgis, Michigan   49091
16

17         109.  President and council
                Village of Suttons Bay
18               Suttons Bay, Michigan   49682
          110.  Mayor and Commission
20               City of Three Rivers
                29 North Main Street
21               Three Rivers, Michigan   49093

22
          111.  Mayor and commission
23               City of Traverse city
                160 East State street
24               Traverse City, Michigan   49684

25

-------
                              	222*1
                               J.  E.  VOGT
 1

 2
           112.   President and Council
 3                Village of Union City
                 Union City,  Michigan   49094
 4

           113.   President and Council
                 Village of vicksburg
 6                202 South Main Street
                 Vicksburg, Michigan   49097
 7

           114.   Mayor and Commission
                 City of Watervliet
 9                Corner Pleasant & First Streets
                 Watervliet,  Michigan   49098
10

           115.   Wequestonsing Association
                 Ind. Br. Harbor Springs
12                Harbor Springs, Michigan   49740

13
           116.   Mayor and Council
14                City of Whitehall
                 405 East :colby Street
15                Whitehall, Michigan   49461

16
           117.   Mayor and Council
17                City of white cloud
                 1020 Wilcox Avenue
18                White Cloud, Michigan   49349

19
           118.   Mayor and Council
20                City of Williamston
                 161 East Grand River Avenue
21                Williamston, Michigan   48895

22
           119.   Mayor and Commission
23                City of Wyoming
                 1155 28th Street, West
24                Wyoming, Michigan   49509

25

-------
                             	2225
                             J. E. VOGT

 2
          120.  Mayor and Council
 3               City of zeeland
                21 south Elm Street
 4               Zeeland, Michigan   49464

 5
          121.  Kent County Department  of  Public Works
 6               1500 Scribner Avenue, N.W.
                Grand Rapids, Michigan   49504
 7

 8         122.  Mr. Frank W. Bouma
                Kent County Drain Commissioner
 9               1500 Scribner Avenue, N.W.
                Grand Rapids, Michigan
10

11
                           MAILING LIST
12
                      LAKE MICHIGAN CONFERENCE
13

14         Industries

15

16         Albion  Malleable  Iron  Company
          601 North Albion  street
17         Albion, Michigan   49224

18
          Allegan Metal  Finishing Company
19         Allegan, Michigan    49010

20
          Allied  paper Corporation
21         Monarch Division
          1608 Lake  street
22         Kalaraazoo, Michigan    49001

23
          Lakeshore  Division
24         Bendix  Corporation
          U.  S. 12
25         st. Joseph, Michigan   49085

-------
                             	2226
                              J.  E.  VOGT
 2
             Bill-Mar Poultry
 3           Borculo, Michigan   49464

 4
             Bissell,  Incorporated
             Box 1888,  2345 Walker,
             Grand Rapids,  Michigan   49501
,           Box 1888,  2345 Walker,  N.W.
o
 6
 _            Bohn Aluminum and Brass Company
             365  West 24th street
 g            Holland, Michigan   49423

 9
             Brooks and Perkins,  inc.
10            Cadillac Manufacturing Division
             101  Haynes Street
n            Cadillac,  Michigan   49601


             Brunswick corporation
13            2605 Kilgore,  Box 2111
             Kalamazoo, Michigan    49003
14

15            Burnette Farms Packing Company
             Lawrence,  Michigan   49064
16

17            Burnette Farms packing Company
             805  Griswold Street
18            Hart,  Michigan   49420
             Campbell,  Wyant and  Cannon Foundry Company
2Q            Roosevelt  Park
             Henry Street
21            Muskegon,  Michigan   49444

22
             Campbell,  Wyant and  Cannon Foundry Company
23            Muskegon Heights,  Michigan   49444

24
             Carnation  Milk company
25            Sheridan,  Michigan   48884

-------
                                                       2227
                             J. E. VOGT
 2
            Central concrete Products company
 3          15151 Mill Pond Road
            Big Rapids, Michigan   49307
 4

 5          chase Manufacturing
            Division of Gulf and western
 6          {Scott's incorporated)
            281 Chase Road
 7          Douglas, Michigan   49406

 8
            Chef Pierre,  inc.
            Box 544, Cass Road
            Traverse City, Michigan   49684
10

            Allied  Paper  corporation
            King Division
12          1608 Lake Street
            Kalaraazoo, Michigan    49001
13

14          Alpha,  incorporated
            Eau Claire, Michigan   49111
15

16          Aluminum Extrusions,  Inc.
            Charlotte, Michigan    48813
17

18          American Aggregates corporation
            Box  728, 8600 North westnedge
19          Kalamazoo, Michigan    49001

20
            American Motors  corporation
21          Kelvinator Division
            1545  Clyde Park,  S.W.
22          Grand Rapids, Michigan   49509

23
            Amway corporation
24          7575  East  Pulton
            Ada,  Michigan   49301
25

-------
 1

 2
            Ashley Corporation
 3           P.O.  Box 245
            Ashley, Michigan   48806
 4

 5           ASP & Manufacturing Company
            702 North 6th Street
 6           Grand Haven, Michigan   49417

 7
            Attwood Corporation
 8           1016 North Monroe
            Lowell, Michigan   49331
 9

10           Aunt Janes' Foods
            Division of Borden Company
            Edraore, Michigan   48829

12
            Chemical processes of Ohio
13           Northport, Michigan   49670

14
            Cherry Growers, inc
15           709-715 East Front street
            Traverse City, Michigan   49684
16

17           Clark Equipment Company
            324 East Dewey
18           Buchanan, Michigan   49107

19
            Clark Equipment Company
20            1300 Falahee Road
            Jackson, Michigan   49204
21

22           Clark Equipment Company
             Pipestone Road
23            Benton Harbor, Michigan   49022

24

25
                             	2228
                              J.  E.  VOGT

-------
                             	2229
                             J. E. VOGT
 2
            Coloma cooperative  Canning  company
 3           west  Street
            Coloma,  Michigan    49038
 4

 5           Columbia poods  Division
            Michigan Fruit  Canners,  Inc.
 6           Main  and Ash  Streets
            Ellsworth, Michigan   49729
 7

 g           Constantino Paperboard Division
            The Davey company
 9           Centerville Road
            Constantine,  Michigan   49042
10

            Consumers power company
            Big Rock point
12           Box 338
            Charlevoix, Michigan    49720
13

14           Consumers power Company
            P.O.  Box 6
15           Comstock, Michigan    49041

16
            William  Reid
17           Consumers power company
            Jackson, Michigan   49203
18

19           Consumers power Company
            Port  Sheldon, Michigan
20

21           Continental Motors  corporation
             205 Market  street
22           Muskegon, Michigan    49443

23
            Continental Motors  Corporation
24            76 North Getty  Street
            Military Division
25           Muskegon, Michigan    49443

-------
                                         	2230
 1                             J. E. VOGT

 2
             Clark Equipment
 3            24th street
             Battle Creek., Michigan   49015
 4

 5            Corning Glass Works
             North and Clark Streets
 6            Albion, Michigan   49224

 7
             Crystal Refining company
 8            901 North Williams
             Carson City, Michigan   48811
 9

10            Crystal Pure vinegar
             fielding, Michigan   48809
11

12            Daggett Cheese Factory
             Daggett, Michigan   49821
13

14            Detroit Gasket and Manufacturing Company
             Extruded Metal Division
15            fielding, Michigan   48809

16
             The Dow Chemical Company
17            Madison and 7th Streets
             Ludington, Michigan   49431
18

             E. I. Dupont de Nemours and Co., Inc
             P. O. Box A
20            Montague, Michigan   49437
21
             Donnelly Mirrors
             49 West Third St]
             Holland, Michigan   49423
22            49 west Third street

23

24
             Du-wel Decorative company
             P.O. Box 307
25            Bangor, Michigan   49013

-------
                             	2231
                              J.  E.  VOGT
 2
             Eagle-Ottawa Leather Company
 3            200 North Beechtree Street,  Box 308
             Grand Haven, Michigan   49417
 4

 5            East Jordan Canning Company
             East Jordan, Michigan   49727
 6' "

 7            Eaton,  Yale and Towne,  Inc.
             Fuller Transmission Division
 8            222 East Mosel Avenue
             Kalamazoo,  Michigan   49001
 9

10            Eaton,  Yale and Towne,  Inc.
             Valve Division
11            462 North 20th Street
             Battle Creek,  Michigan   49016
12

13            Eaton,  Yale and Towne,  inc.
             West Hanover Street
14            Marshall, Michigan   49068

15
             Eau Claire  Packing Company
16            Box 152
             Eau Claire, Michigan   49111
17

             Elberta Packing Company
             100 Frankfort Street
19            Elberta, Michigan   49628

20
             Electro chemical Finishing Company
21            Middleville, Michigan   49333

22
             Elk Rapids  Packing Company
23            BOX 128, 701 U.S. 31
             Elk Rapids, Michigan   49629
24

25

-------
 1

 2
             Elk Rapids Packing Company
 3            Lake Leelanau, Michigan   49653

 4
             Evart Products company
 5            601 West 7th Street, Box F
             Evart, Michigan   49631
 6

 7            Faas Foods, Inc.
             Central Lake, Michigan   49622
 8

 9            Federal Mogul Corporation
                 East Grove
10            Greenville, Michigan   48838

11
             French Paper Company
12            100 French Street, BOX 214
             Niles, Michigan   49120
13  "

14            Fresh-Pale corporation
             1790 Second Street
15            Martin, Michigan   49070

16
             Frigid Foods, Inc.
17            Suttons Bay, Michigan   49682

18
             Frigo Brothers
19            Carney, Michigan   49812

20
             General Foods corporation
21            275 Cliff Street
             Battle Creek, Michigan   49017
22

23            General Poods Corporation
             Liberty Dairy
24            North River Street
             Evart, Michigan   49631
25
                              	2232
                              J. E. VOGT

-------
                             	2233
                              J. E. VOGT
 2
             General Motors corporation
 3            Fisher Body Plant No. 2
             2060 Voorhies, N.W.
 4            Grand Rapids, Michigan  49504

 5
             Gerber Products Company
 6            445 State street
             Fremont, Michigan   49412
 7

             Gibson Refrigerator company
             515 west Gibbon Drive
 9            Greenville, Michigan   48838

10
             Gibson Refrigerator company
11            122 North Ashfield
             Belding, Michigan   48809
12

13            Grand Haven Brass Foundry
             230 North Hopkins Street
14            Grand Haven, Michigan   49417

15
             Grand Trunk Railroad Company
16            Car Shops
             Battle Creek, Michigan   49014
17

18            Hanna, M. A. Ore company
             Iron River, Michigan   49935
19

20            Harbison-Walker Refractories company
             U.S. 31, Box 189
21            Ludington, Michigan   49431

22
             Hart cherry Packers, Inc.
23            100 Union Street
             Hart, Michigan   49420
24

25

-------
                                         	2234
 1                             J.  E.  VOGT

 2
             Hart  and Cooley Manufacturing Company
 3           500 East 8th street
             Holland, Michigan   49423


 6           Hartford Metal Protection company
             520 Heywood Street
             Hartford,  Michigan j  49057

 7
             Hastings Aluminum Products,  Inc
 8           Box 230, 429 South Michigan
             Hastings,  Michigan   49058
 9

10           Hastings Manufacturing  Company
             325 Hanover
11           Hastings,  Michigan ;  49058

12
             Hawthorne Paper Company
13           Box 2858 Kings Highway
             Kalaroazoo,  Michigan   49003
14

15           Heinz,  H.  J. Company
             431 west 16th street
16           Holland, Michigan   49423

17
             Hilfinger-Jackson Corporation
             654 Hupp Avenue    \
             Jackson, Michigan   49203

20
             Holland Suco color company
21           471 Howard
             Holland, Michigan   49423
22

23           Holland Die Casting  and Plating Co.,  Inc
             582 East Lakewood
24

25
             Holland, Michigan
49423

-------
                             	2235
                              J. E. VOGT


 2
             Honee Bear Syrup Canning Company, Znc
 3            RPD #2
             Lawton,  Michigan   49065
 4

 5            Hooker Chemical Company
             Whitebeck Road
 6            Montague, Michigan   49437

 7
             Howes Leather Company, Inc
 8            W. Front, P.O. Box 97
             Boyne City, Michigan   49712
 9

10            Hudsonville Creamery and Ice Cream company
             Burnips, Michigan   49314
11

12            Hudsonville Dairy
             3300 Van Buren
13            Hudsonville, Michigan   49424

14
             Huroboldt Mining Company
15            504 Spruce street
             Ishpeming, Michigan   49849
16

17            General Motors corporation
             Oldsmobile Division
18            1014 Townsend Street
             Lansing, Michigan   48921
19

20            Grand Rapids Brass Company
             Division Crampton Mfg. Co
21            420-50th Street, S.W.
             Box 1687
22            Grand Rapids, Michigan   49501

23
             Industrial Rubber Goods Division
24            St. Joseph, Michigan   49085

25

-------
                              	2236
                              J. E. VOGT
 2
             Inland Lime and Stone Company
 3            Gulliver, Michigan   49840

 4
             Inland Steel Company
 5            Sherwood Mine
             Iron River, Michigan   49935
 6

 7            jervis Corp.
             2900 Wilson, S.W.
 8            Grandville, Michigan   49418

 9
             Kalamazoo Paper Company
10            Mills  1-2-3
             Box  2738
11            Kalamazoo, Michigan   49003

12
             Kalamazoo Rendering Company
13            6300 East Main
             P.O. BOX 868
14            Kalamazoo, Michigan   49004

15
             Kawneer  company
16            1105 North Front  street
             Plant  #1
17            Niles,  Michigan    49120

18
             Kaydon Engineering Corp.
19            2860 McCracken  street
             Muskegon,  Michigan   49443
20

21            Keeler Brass Company
              State  Street
22            Middleville,  Michigan   49333
23
              Kellogg Company
              235 Porter Stre<
              Battle Creek, Michigan   49016
24             235 Porter street

25

-------
                              	2237
                              J. E. VOGT
 2
             Kingston Products Corp.
 3            Douglas Manufacturing
             141 Railroad
 4            Bronson, Michigan    49028

 5
             Kirsch Manufacturing Company
 6            309 North  Prospect  Street
             P.O. Box 391
 7            Sturgis, Michigan    49091

 8
             Brown Company
 9            KVP Sutherland
             Kalamazoo,  Michigan   49007
10

11            Lakeside Refining Company
             2705 East  Cork
12            Kalamazoo,  Michigan   49001

13
             Lamb-Knit  Goods
14            Elm Street
             Colon, Michigan   49040
15

16            Lamina Tool and  Die Corp.
             Lamina Bronze Products
17            Division of Lamina, Inc.
             Bellaire,  Michigan   49615
18

19            Leelanau Fruit Company
             Suttons Bay, Michigan    49682
20

21            Lefere Forge and Machine Company
             665 Hupp Avenue
22            Jackson, Michigan    49203

23
             Light Metals corporation
24            Prairie Avenue,  2740 Prairie s .W
             Grand Rapids, Michigan  49509
25

-------
                               _____ _ 2238
                               J. E. VOGT
 2
              Lortin Products Company
 3            East saugatuck, Michigan   49407

 4
              Manistee Salt works
 5            1501 Main street
              Manistee, Michigan  49660
 6

 7            Manistique Pulp and Paper Company
              P.O. Box 111
 8            S. Mackinac Avenue
              Manistique, Michigan   49854
 9

              Marathon Division
              American Can company
n            144 First Street
              Menomlnee, Michigan   49858
12

13            Marquette iron Mining company
              Republic Mine
14            Republic, Michigan   49879

15
              Mason County Cherry Packers
              Ludington, Michigan   49431

17
              Mead Corporation
18            Escanaba Division
              Escanaba, Michigan   49829
19

20            Mead, Johnson and company
              725 East Main Street
21            Zealand, Michigan   49464

22
              Menasha Corporation
23            Paperboard Division
              Box 155, N. Farmer Street
24            Otsego, Michigan ^  49078

25

-------
                                            .	   2239
 1                             J. E. VOGT

 2
             Meyer  Provision company
 3            Iron River,  Michigan   49935

 4
             Michigan  Consolidated Gas  company
 5            Six Lakes, Michigan   48886

 6
             Michigan  Fruit Canners,  inc.
 7            Pennville, Michigan   49408

 8
             Michigan  Milk Producers  Assoc.
 9            Ovid,  Michigan   48866

10
             Michigan  Mushroom  company
n            Niles,  Michigan    49120

12
             Midland wire corporation
13            616 Fourth
             Three  Rivers, Michigan   49093
14

15            Midway Packing Company
             926 South Main
16            Wayland,  Michigan    49348

17
             Midwest Timer Service,  inc.
18            Box 146
             Benton Harbor, Michigan    49022
19

20            Miles  Laboratories,  Inc.
             zeeland Plant
21            209 North Centennial
             Zeeland,  Michigan    49464
22

23            Millburg  Fruit Exchange
             Millburg, Michigan   49022
24

25

-------
                               	224-0
                               J. B. VOGT
 1
              Miller .Industries, Inc.
              Plant NO. 1
 ,             Reed City, Michigan   49677
 3

              Germay Division
              Miller Industries, Inc.
              P.O. Box 157
              Reed City, Michigan   49677
 6

 7
              Misco Precision Casting Company
              116 West Gibbs
              Whitehall, Michigan   49461
 9

              Morgan-McCool, inc.
              102 Grandview Parkw.
              Traverse City, Michigan   49684
12
              Morton Chemical company
              Foot of 6th
              Manistee, Michigan   49660

I4
15             Murch, A. F. & Co.
              R.F.D. NO. 1
              Paw Paw, Michigan   49079

17
              Murray Packing Company, Inc.
18             11-llth Street, Box 175
              Plainwell, Michigan   49080
19

20             Naph-sol Refining company
              North Muskegon, Michigan   49445
21

22             National Fruit Product company, Inc
              Kent City, Michigan   49330
23

24             National Gypsum Company
              Kings Highway, Box 2152
25             Kalamazoo, Michigan   ,,49001

-------
 1
                          J.  E.  VOGT
 2

 ,        Nelson Metal  Products Division
         Midland  Ross  Corporation
 .        2980  Prairie  street
         Grandville, Michigan   49418

 5
         New Era  Canning Company
         New Era,  Michigan    49446

 7
         New York Airbrake  company
         Galesburg,  Michigan   49053

 9

         New York central Railroad
         Jackson,  Michigan
11

 _        North American Extrusion Corp
         P. O. Box 406,  N.  Riverview  Drive
         Parchment,  Michigan   49004
13

14
         Northern Michigan  Electric Co-op
15        Boyne City, Michigan   49712

16
         Northport Cherry Factory, Inc.
17        Northport,  Michigan   49670

18
         Onekama  Canning Company
         Onekama,  Michigan    49675

20
         Ott Chemical  company
2i        500 Agard Road, Box  153
         Muskegon, Michigan   49445
22

23        Owens-Illinois Glass Company
         Charlotte,  Michigan   48813
24

25

-------
                                                        22^-2

                          J. E. VOGT
 2
         Packaging Corporation of America
 3       American BOX Board Division
         Filer City. Michigan   49634
 4

 5       Packaging Corporation of America
         American BOX Board Division
         Chicago Drive
         Grandville, Michigan   49418
 7

 g       Packaging Corporation of America
         Grand Rapids Caron Division
 9       1957 Beverly, S.W.
         Grand Rapids, Michigan   49509
10

11       Paris Gravel Company
         20151 coolidge Road
12       Big Rapids, Michigan   49307

13
         Parke-Davis and company
14       188 Howard
         Holland, Michigan   49423
15

16       Parsons Corporation
         Box 112
17       Traverse City, Michigan   49684

18
         Pearl Grange Packing Company
19       44 City Market
         Benton Harbor, Michigan   49022
20

21       Penn-Dixie cement corporation
         438 East Lake street
22       Petoskey,  Michigan   49770

23
         Pet Milk Company
24       118 Main
         Coopersville, Michigan   49404
25

-------
                          	22*13
                           J.  E.  VOGT
 2
          Pet Milk company
 3        652 Elm
          Wayland, Michigan   49348
 4

 5        pet Milk company
          Musselman Division
 6        32 Lakeshore Division
          St. Joseph, Michigan   49085
 7

 8        pet Milk company
          Musselman-Dwan Division
 9        S. Kalaroazoo
          Paw Paw, Michigan   49079
10

11        pet Milk Company
          pet-Ritz Pood Division
12        1121 Main
          Frankfort, Michigan   49635
13

14        petoskey Plating Company
          petoskey, Michigan   49770
15

16        pittsburg Forging company
          919 Amur Street
17        Jackson, Michigan   49203

18
          Plainwell Canning and Preserving Company
19        East Bridge street
          Plainwell, Michigan   49080
20

21        Quality Frozen Foods
          Lawrence, Michigan   49064
22

23        Quincy  Products Company
          Division Stubnitz-Greene corporation
24        50  South Main
          Quincy, Michigan   49082
25

-------
   	2244

 1                          J. E. VOGT

 2
          Ralston Purina Company
 3         Box 197, 150 South McCamly Street
          Battle Creek, Michigan   49014
 4

 5         Rapid River Cheese company
          Rapid River, Michigan'  49879
 6

 7         Remus cooperative Creamery Company
          Amble, Michigan   49329
 8

 9         Research Molding and Film Company
          RPD No. 1
10         Mendon, Michigan   49072

11
          Rex Paper Company
12         P.O. BOX 751, Kings Highway
          Kalamazoo,  Michigan    49001
13

14         Rockford Paper Mills,  Inc.
          7734 Childsdale  Road,  N.E.
15         Rockford, Michigan   49341

16
          Rockwell-Standard  corporation
17         Universal joint  Division
          1  Glass Street
18         Allegan, Michigan    49010

19
          Rudy Manufacturing Company
          415  East Prairie Ronde street
0,         Dowagiac,  Michigan   49047
ti\.

22
           Samary Pood Products
23          150  west Randall
           Coopersvilie, Michigan   49404

24

25

-------
                                      	2245
 1                          •!. E. VOGT

 2
          Sanders Packing company
 3         Ouster, Michigan   49405

 4
          Saranac Milk Company
 5         Saranac, Michigan   48881

 6
          Schaefer Manufacturing Company,  Inc
 7         101 North Broadway
          Union City, Michigan   49094
 8

 9         Schmidt Packing Company
          P.O. Box 227
10         Niles, Michigan   49120

11
          Scott Paper Company
12         Menominee Groundwood Mill
          Menominee, Michigan   49858
13

14         Sealed Power Corporation
          2001 Sanford Street
15         Muskegon Heights, Michigan    49444

16
          Shakespeare Corporation
17         241 East Kalaroazoo street
          Kalamazoo, Michigan   49006
18

19         Sill Farms Market
          Route NO. 1
20         Lawrence, Michigan   49064

21
          Silver Mill Frozen Foods, Inc.
22         old Pipestone Road, Box 155
          Eau Claire, Michigan   49111
23

24         Simplicity Pattern Company, Inc
          901 Wayne street
25         Niles, Michigan   49120

-------
                                      	2246
 1 I                         J. E. VOGT

 2
           Simpson Lee Paper Company
 3 ||        Vicksburg, Michigan   49097

 4
           Smeltzer Packing Company
 5 ||        BenzOnia, Michigan   49616

 6 „
           South Haven Chemical Company
 7 |        Foot of Broadway
           South Haven, Michigan   49090
   M
 8

 9 I        Speas company
           Fremont, Michigan   49412
   ii
10

11 I        Standard Lime and stone company
           Manistee, Michigan   49660
   ii
12

13 ||        Stokely-Van Camp, Inc
           605 East State street
14 ||        Scottville, Michigan   49454

15
           Stokely-Van Camp, Inc.
16 ||        409 Wood
           Hart, Michigan   49420
17

18 ||        Store-A-Way, Inc.
           Dewitt, Michigan   48820
-19

20 |        Traverse city Canning Company
           8th and Lake Avenue
21 I        Traverse City, Michigan   49684

22 „
           Union steel Products company
23 I        504 North Berrien
           Albion, Michigan   49224
24

25

-------
                           	2247

                           J.  E.  VOGT
 2
          Upjohn Company
 3        7000  portage
          Kalamazoo,  Michigan   49002
 4

 5        United Foods, Inc.
          Sodus Fruit Division
 6        Sbdus. Michigan  49126

 7
          Universal Metal Products
 8        Leigh Products,  inc.
          Main  street
 9        saranac, Michigan   48881

10
          Valley Metal  Products Co.
          800 East Bridge Street
          Plainwell,  Michigan   49080
12

13        Waldorf Paper Products company
          Mac Sim Bar Division
14        Box 187, 431  Helen
          Otsego, Michigan   49078
15

16        Wallace stone company
          Hersey, Michigan 49639
17

18        warren,  S.  D. Company
          2400  Lakeshore  Drive
19        Muskegon,  Michigan    49443

20
          Watervliet  Paper Company
          279 Paw  Paw
          Watervliet, Michigan   49098


23
          Welch Grape Juice company
24        Lincoln
          Lawton,  Michigan   49065

25

-------
                           	2248
                           J. E. VOGT
 1

 2
          Weyerhaeuser Company
 3         White  Pigeon, Michigan   49099

 4
          Weyerhaeuser company
 5         111  Mill
          Plainwell,  Michigan   49080
 6

 7         Whirlpool corporation
          Benton Harbor,  Michigan    49022
 8

 9         Whitehall Leather  Company
          Division  of Genesco
10         Whitehall,  Michigan   49461

11
          Whitehouse Milk company,  Inc.
12         Stephenson, Michigan   49887

13
          White  Products  corporation
14         Lafayette street
          Middleville,  Michigan    49333
15

16         wolverine Finishes Corp,
          836-50 Chicago  Drive,  S ,W
17         Grand Rapids, Michigan    49509

18
          Wolverine world Wide,  inc.
19          123 North Main
           Rockford, Michigan   49341
20

21          zeeland Poultry Processing Company
           406 West Washington
22          zeeland,  Michigan   49464

23
           Empire Iron Mining company
24          Cleveland-Cliffs Iron company
           504 Spruce Street
25          ishpeming, Michigan   49849

-------
                                                       2249
                         J. E. VOGT
 2
        Leslie Metal Arts,  Inc.
 3       3225  32nd  street,  S.E.
        Grand Rapids,  Michigan    49508
 4

 .       utilex Corporation
        425 Frank  street
 -       powlerville, Michigan    48836
 o

 7
        Withrow  Pickle company
 8       Sand  Lake,  Michigan  49343

 9
        Mr. Hereford Garland, Director
10       institute  of wood Research
        Michigan Technological  University
        Houghton,  Michigan

12


        western  Michigan  University
         Andre L. Caron, Regional Engineer
13        National council for Stream Improvement

14        Kalamazoo, Michigan   49001
15
         Mr. Buford Nash, General Manager
           & Vice President
         Chesapeake and Ohio Railway
17        3044 West Grand Boulevard
         Detroit, Michigan   48202
18

         Mr. John W. Demcoe, Vice President
           & General Manager
20        Grand Trunk Western Railroad
         131 West Lafayette Boulevard
21        Detroit, Michigan   48226

22
         Mr. C. L. Towle, President
23        Ann Arbor Railroad
         13530 Michigan Avenue
24        Dearborn, Michigan   48121

25

-------
                          	2230
                          J. E. VOGT


 2
         Mr. Ben J. Pederson, General
 3         Supervisor of Operations
         Mackinac Transportation company
 4       214 East Hewitt
         Marguette, Michigan
 5

 6

 7
                       STATE OF MICHIGAN
 8
                   PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
 9
         TO:  Bill Walsh                    RECEIVED
10                                          January 2,  1968
         From:  Otto Sonefeld               Hater  Resources
                                              Commission

12
                   Per our conversation,  I would suggest
13
         you contact the people on the attached list  for
14
         any hearings or meetings on Lake Michigan pollution
15
         problems
16
                   The Grand Trunk, C & O, and Ann Arbor
17
         all own and operate their own equipment.  so does

         Mackinac Transportation company  except that  it is
19
         jointly owned by soo Line, New York  Central  and
20
         Pennsylvania Railroads.     (Official office   of  MTC
21
         is in Detroit but Mr. Pederson is  still the  man
22
         to contact.)
23

24

25

-------
                                                       2251
 1

 2

 3

 4

 5

 6

 7

 8

 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
                 J. E. VOGT
Mr. Buford Nash, General
  Manager & Vice President
Chesapeake and Ohio Railway
3044 west Grand Boulevard
Detroit, Michigan   48202
Mr. John W. Demcoe, Vice
  President & General Manager
Grand Truck Western Railroad
131 west Lafayette Boulevard
Detroit, Michigan   48226
Mr. C. L. Towle, President
Ann Arbor Railroad
13530 Michigan Avenue
Dearborn, Michigan  48121
Carferry service
between Ludington
and Milwaukee,
Mani towac, and
Kewaunee
Carferry service
between Muskegon
and Milwaukee
Mr. Ben J. Pederson, General
  Supervisor of Operations
Mackinac Transportation Company
214 East Hewitt
Marquette, Michigan
Carferry Service
between Elberta
(Frankfort) and
Manitowoc, Kewaunee
Menorninee and
Manistique
Carferry service
between St. Ignace
and Mackinaw City
Mr.  peter  B.  Spivak,  Chairman
Michigan Public  Service  Commission
Lewis cass Building
Lansing, Michigan    48913
 Mr.  Otto  p.  sonefeld,  Director
 Railroad  Division
 Michigan  Public  Service commission
 Lewis  cass  Building
 Lansing,  Michigan   48913

-------
   	2232
 1                         J. E. VOGT

 2                  MR. VOGT:  The first person I would  like

 3        to call is Dr. MacMullan, who is the Director  of

 4        the Michigan Department of conservation.  We have

 5        copies of Dr. MacMullan's presentation which will

 6        be distributed very shortly to the Conferees.

 7                  DR. MAC MULLAN:  Thank you, Mr. VOgt.

 8
                STATEMENT OF DR. RALPH A. MAC MULLAH
 9
                DIRECTOR, MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OP CON-
10
                SERVATION TO FEDERAL CONFERENCE ON
11
                POLLUTION OF LAKE MICHIGAN AND ITS
12
                TRIBUTARY BASIN, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS,
13
                         FEBRUARY 6, 1968
14

15                  OR. MAC MULLAN:  Mr. Secretary, conferees

16        Ladies and Gentlemen:

17                  j; am Dr. Ralph A. MacMullan, Director of

I8        the Michigan Department of Conservation.  My depart

19        ment is responsible for the management of the

20        natural resources of Michigan--its fish, its wild-

21        life, its forests, its water, all its varied recrea

22        tion resources.  In the Department is the water
oo
          Resources Commission.  Mr. Loring F. Oeming is

          Executive Secretary to the Commission and functions

25        also as head of the Department   water Resources

-------
   	:	22 53
 1                      R. A. MAC MULLAN
 2        Division.  He is Michigan's  designated  official
 3        conferee at  this conference.
 4                   In our Water Resources Commission, we
 8        have an effective  instrument  for pollution  control.
 6        Its seven  members  include  the directors of  the
 7        Departments  of Conservation,  Public  Health,  state
 8        Highways and Agriculture,  plus  individuals  repre-
 9        senting the  interests of industry, municipalities
10        and conservation organizations.   Thus,  a broad
11        spectrum of  interests is brought to  bear on pollu-
12        tion problems and  on commission decisions with
13        respect to those problems.   The system  works very
14        well.
15                   We believe we have  one of  the best water
16        pollution  control  programs in the Nation.   Quite
17        frankly, we  think  it is the  best.  Abetted  by a
18        strong pollution control law  and backed by  a public
         increasingly aware of and  aroused about the impor-
20
   |      tance of clean water, Michigan  is keeping abreast
21
         of its water problems,  we have not  solved  all of
no
         them, of course.   in particular, our cities have
23
         not yet been able  to finance  all of  the needed
2        treatment  facilities, although  there is new hope
         in proposals, now  before our  Legislature, for

-------
            	225*1
                     R. A. MAC MULLAN

       substantial bond issues.  However, we know what  the

       needs are  and where they are, and  I  am  confident we

       will meet  them with increasing  speed.

                  Michigan   pollution  control  program has

       been described in detail in  our report  presented to

       the conferees earlier  in this conference.  it is not

       my purpose to discuss  the technical  aspects  of our

 9      pollution  problems in  Lake Michigan  and the  steps

10      being taken to control them.  Mr.  Oeming and his

11      assistants most certainly can do this with much

12      greater  expertise and  depth  of  knowledge than I  could

13      Rather,  I  would like to present to this conference sojrne

14      broad considerations of the  importance  of Lake Michigan

15      as a recreation resource.  I will  also  briefly discusjs

16      three specific problems which are  of special concern

17      to me as a natural resources administrator.

18                 Michigan   automobile license plates bear

19      the slogan, "The Great Lake  state,"  and our  state is

20      indeed in  the center of the  Great  Lakes region,  we

21      exercise jurisdiction  over 41 percent of all the

22      Great Lakes, and over  58 percent--well  over  half--of

23      the specific subject of this conference, Lake Michigan.

24      In all, we "own" some 38,575 square  miles of Great Lakes

25      surface  or, as former  Michigan  Governor Chas S.  Osborn

-------
 1                     R.  A.  MAC  MULLAN




 2       once so aptly put it,  "two square miles of fresh,




 3       sweet water to every three square miles of land."




 4       About one-third,  or  13,037 square miles, of that




 5       Michigan Great Lakes water is in Lake Michigan.




 6                 Michigan is one of the leading tourist




 7       states.  In fact, tourism is our second-largest




 g       industry, topped only by manufacturing.  It generates




 $       a business volume of at least a billion dollars




10       annually.  Thirty-five to 40 percent of our tourist




H       traffic comes from out of state; indeed, much of it




12       comes from our sister states represented at this




13       conference.  Michigan's standing as a tourist state




14       is solidly based on her recreation attractions.




15       people come to have fun and enjoy themselves in the




16       out-of-doors.  It is just plain good business, if




17       nothing else, for us to keep our outdoors clean and




18       attractive.  And, of course, there are even more




19       important reasons, as we all well know.  Ultimately,




20       the very existence of the human race depends upon a




21       fit and habitable natural environment.



22                 Some 4*5 million visitors use our 15 state




23       parks along the Lake Michigan shore each year.  Un-




24       told other numbers avail themselves of the 214 miles




25       of beaches and shoreline in public ownership.  The

-------
   	2256
 1                     R. A. MAC MULLAN

 2       volume of use of the 800 miles of privately owned

 3       shoreline is impossible to calculate.

 4                 Late last summer and fall. Lake Michigan

 5       took on an important new recreation role, which you

 6       will be hearing a  lot more about in the years to

 7       come—that of a sportfishing center for coho salmon.

 8       I am sure you are  at least generally aware of our

 9       salmon program, the truly remarkable initial success

10       we have enjoyed, and the enthusiastic, almost crazy

11       response of the public to this new recreation

12       resource.
13                 In Lake  Michigan the tremendous population

14       explosion of alewives is a symptom of  the imbalance

15       of present fish populations.  The attendant massive

16       alewife die-offs brought into focus the need to re-

17       establish a proper balance of prey and predator

18       species.  It might be said that  our salmon program

10       developed out  of a pollution  problem.  Those of you

20       here  in Chicago who have been exposed  to  the sight

21       and  stench of  millions of dead alewives  littering

22       your  beaches and clogging your water  intakes will

23       know  what  I mean when  I call  the alewife  a  pollution

24       problem.  We have  it  in Michigan,  too, on a  massive

25       scale.   It  cost our  tourist  industry  an estimated

-------
   	   .  	;	2257
 j                     R. A. MAC MULLAN

 2       55 million dollars in lost business last year alone.

 3       People just couldn't stand the stink, and went else-

 4       where.

 5                 A substantial alewife die-off may occur

 g       again next summer.  Governor Romney has requested

 7       a supplemental appropriation from the Michigan

 g       Legislature to provide standby funds for a coopera-

 9       tive state-local alewife control and clean-up prograjn

10                 While dead alewives are obviously a

11       serious nuisance problem, live alewives can be an

12       extremely valuable resource.  This is particularly

13       true if they can be converted through the food chain

14       into more valuable and desirable game fish species.

15                 The coho and also the chinook salmon we

16       are stocking in Lake Michigan, along with lake trout

17       and other species, feed on alewives.  Once a proper

18       ecological balance between these predators and their

19       alewife prey is established, the alewife problem

20       will come under control.  That should happen in the

21       relatively near future, if all continues to go well.

22       it is unfortunate that more solutions to pollution

23       problems cannot be achieved with such happy and pro-

24       ductive fringe benefits.

25                 It is belaboring the obvious for me to

-------
   	2238
 j                      R.  A.  MAC MULLAH

 2        state that most outdoor recreation today is water-

 3        oriented,  and that water for recreation must be

 4        clean water.  We  are fond of saying that water which

 5        is suitable for all  types of recreation, including

 6        swimming,  is by definition suitable for all other

 7        types of use.  we firmly believe that it should be

 8        our objective to  preserve the quality of Lake

 9        Michigan water up to recreational standards,  we

10        recognize that there are and will continue to be

11        difficulties in meeting those standards in certain

12        parts of the lake, particularly in the vast urban-

13        industrial complex at the south end.  Nevertheless,

14        we are convinced  that this is the goal we should be

15        shooting for.

16                  Lake Michigan lies within a day's drive

17        of more than 50 million people, and it draws them lijke

18        a  magnet.   As its sportfishing potential increases,

19        as the proposed Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lake-

20        shore is established (and I am convinced it must be)

21        as its other recreation potentials are more fully

22        developed, it will draw more and more visitors.

23                  Already, a significant number of our Lake

24        Michigan swimming beaches have moderate to severe

25        algae problems during the summer months.  it is

-------
   	2259



 1                     R. A. MAC MULLAN




 2       hypothesized that the recently  reported  phenomenon




 3       of an outbreak of diatoms and filamentous  algae in




 4       the  lower half of the lake  is related  to an influx




 5       of nutrients—phosphates and nitrates — flowing  into




 6       the  lake from tributary streams,  as  well as from




 7       wastes discharged directly  into the  lake.   The




 8       methods of  sewage treatment in  general use today




 9       do not remove these nutrients.  Here is  an instance




10       where we must apply better  technology  to solve  a




11       problem which meanwhile is  likely to become increas-




12       ingly serious.




13                 Now, I would like to  address myself to




14       three specific problems which cannot be  cured simply




15       by better methods of sewage treatment.




16                 The first of these is thermal  pollution.




17       Production  of thermonuclear electric power in the




18       United states is expected to increase  by more than




19       60 times--60 times--in the  next twelve years.   The




20       Wall street Journal reported recently  that "Lake .



21
        Michigan alone may have at  least  10  giant  nuclear




22       stations on its shore by the mid-1970•s."   There is



23
        one plant in operation, one under construction,  and




24       one on the  drawing boards--a11  on Lake Michigan--at




25       the present time.  Thermonuclear  plants  require

-------
       .	2260
 l                      R.  A.  MAC  MULLAN

 2        enormous  volumes  of  water  for cooling,  and in the
 3        process  that water is  heated to high temperatures
 4        before  it is discharged.  One moderate-sized plant
 5        presently under investigation would use half a
 6        billion  gallons each day and elevate the temperature
 7        28 degrees (F).
 8                  What will  be the effect if we permit the
 9        equivalent of 10  hugh  hot-water rivers  to flow into
10        Lake Michigan?  we frankly don't know.   I suggest
11        that we  ought to be  finding out, and we ought to be
12        aware of the probable  consequences before we go any
13        farther  with this kind'of  development.   Otherwise,
14        we may find out the  hard way--after it  is too late.
15                  There seems  to be some question whether
16        or not such massive  inputs of heat will mean an
17        increasing elevation of annual lake temperature.
18                  And I see  after  I prepared this manuscript
19        that in your report, the Federal Government
20        Report,  that you estimate  that this is  not going to
21        be a sizeable consideration, maybe in the range of
22        a tenth of a degree.  As a biologist, I can predict
23        with some confidence that  any permanent warming of
24        Lake Michigan, even  if very slight, will have wide-
25        spread ecological effects.  It could change the

-------
   	2261
 1                     R. A. MAC MULLAN
 2       biological patterns of the  lake, and  even  though we
 3       are not concerned, apparently, that this is  going  to
 4       be a problem, I would  like  to point out that we do
 5       feel, that we are concerned, that some widespread
 6       problems could result  from  this even  to changing
 7       the climate, and so forth and so on,  on a  sizeable
 8       portion of the eastern side of Lake Michigan where
 9       our prevailing westerly winds affect  the rainfall
10       very much as they come across Lake Michigan.
11                 And we also would have a possibility of
12       mean summer temperatures being increased.  Certainly
13       warming the water would hasten even more the
14       eutrophication--or biological aging--of Lake Michigan
15       which is alleged to be proceeding at  from  300 to
16       500 times its natural  rate. Now, I don't  want to
17       seem to be using scare tactics by comparing  Lake
18       Michigan to Lake Erie, because the two lakes are
19       very dissimilar.  Lake Erie is shallow and has a
20       relatively rapid flow-through time period; Lake
21       Michigan is deep and has a  very  slow  flow-through
22       period.  These latter  conditions warrant extreme
23       caution, however, in the disposition  of any  non-
24       biodegradable wastes,  because they are going to be
25       in the  lake for a long time? the water doesn't move

-------
                                	2262
 l I                    R.  A.  MAC MULLAN

 2       much.   The important thing  is  that what roust be

 3       avoided at all costs is permitting the development

 4       of a highly eutrbphic fringe around the edges of

 5       Lake Michigan.  This would  drastically curtail (if

 6       not even eliminate)  its recreational use.   Here  we

 7       can, I'm sure, and we must  apply the lessons that

 3       we have learned with Lake Erie with profit.

 9                 Senator Muskie of Maine has been endeavor-

10       ing to make the Atomic Energy Commission face up to

H       the fact that heat can be as much a pollutant as

12       radioactivity, and should therefore be a concern of

13       that commission in its atomic energy licensing pro-

14       cedures.   Of course, heat  can also be of benefit,

15       but nonetheless,  we  have to be concerned about

16       what its effect will be.

17                 Possible thermal  effects fall into two

18       possible categories, local  and basin-wide, and into

19       two types within those categories, short-term and

20       long-range.  it seems to me that evaluation and

21       mitigation of any local effects should be an obliga-

22       tion of the research project developer, much as  it

23       is. in hydro-power situations,  but widespread ecologi

24       cal influences should be financed as a broad based

25       industry-wide responsibility.

-------
   	2263
 I                      R. A. MAC MULLAN

 2                  One  possible  solution  to financing the

 3        industrial obligation might  be to place a tax (basec

 4        on  volume  of cooling water used)  on each plant as

 5        it  cones into  production.  Such  a tax  could be

 6        extremely  small—and still yield sufficient revenues

 7        over  the years to  provide a  substantial fund for

 8        environmental  studies,  mitigation of damages, and

 9        eventually enhancement  of the environment which is

10        or  may  be  affected,  we don't have any pat answer,

11        and I am no expert on taxes, but surely this con-

12        ference can and should  address itself  to this problem

13        and recommend  a solution.

14                  There is another thing that  is inherent

15        in  this concept, I think, and that is  that it isn't

16        just  a  matter  of saying to industry, well, you are

17       going  to have to do this and  that, and  you are going

18        to  have to do  more things.   We have to fully

19        appreciate that in this, as  in any other kind of

20        pollution, if  we want clean  water ultimately it goes

21        back  down  to where the  consumer,  that  is us, are

22        going to have  to pay f&r it. The margin of profit,
23        ^f  it could be squeezed any  thinner it would have

24        been, I think,  and if it can be  squeezed thinner it

25        shall be,  but these  things that are going to cost

-------
                                                             2264
 1




 2




 3




 4




 5




 6




 7




 8




 9




10




11




12




13




14




15




16




17




18




19




20




21




22




23




24




25
               R. A. MAC MULLAN




money we are going to have to  pay  for,  and  this




means you ana  I ana Joe Doaks.    so it  is all




right for us to say that we  want  these  things.   It




is inferred automatically that we  are willing to




pay for thsmn.  And this Nation can pay  for  them.




             second specific area  of pollution which




I believe this conference should  explore is that of




pesticides.  And that is quite a  bit closer to my




heart.  It is  particularly gratifying to me to




observe che attention which  has been given  already




at this conference to this form of pollution by




Senator Nelson and in the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration    report on water problems
Lake Michigan.   Last  year,  it was proposed to spray




dieldrin  in  Michigan    Berrien County,  a tributary




watershed of Lake  Michigan,  to control Japanese beetles
 I  opposed  that  application,  and it has been postpc




            In evaluating pesticides,  the two factc




 most  important  to an  entomologist, toxicity and pe
 sistency,  are  the same ones which cause natural




 resources  managers the greatest concern.  Of the two,




 persistency poses the greatest environmental thrca




 because  of the increased likelihood that the pesti-




 cide  will  hit  non-target organisms sometime through
in
ned.
rs
r-'

-------
   	2263
 1                     R. A. MAC MULLAN

 2       its  life.  The half-life of dieldrin  in  soil,  for

 3       example, is more than  eight years,  and  it is  toxic

 4       at varying levels  to a broad  spectrum of organisms.

 5       It has affected guppies in the  laboratory at  concen-

 6       trations as low as 1.8 parts  per  billion.  Wisconsin

 7       researchers have analyzed fish  which  contained as

 8       high as 4.18  parts per million  of dieldrin, or about

 9       2,500 times the level  which affected  those laboratory

10       guppies.  Fish from Lake Michigan have  been found

11       to contain  .25 to  .3 parts per  million  of dieldrin.

12       Whether that  is a  dangerous level we  do  not know.

13       We can be sure that dieldrin  is dangerous at  some

14       level to any  form  of fish or  animal life.

15                 DDT also has a very long half-life,  and,

16       of course, these half-lives vary  according to condi-

17       tions, but in DDT  it may be from  five to twenty years

18       for  half-life.  Because of the  concentration  of DDT

19       and  other chlorinated  hydrocarbons as they pass

20       through the biological food chain,  a  residue  level

21       far  below that lethal  to any  organism can ultimately

22       prove totally destructive somewhere along the line.

23       Levels in water may be concentrated 10-fold by algae|l

24       10 to 100-fold by  zooplankton,  1,000-fold by  fish,

25       and  20 to 100,000-fold by fish-eating birds.   There

-------
                     	2266
 1                         R. A. MAC MULLAH
 2          seems little doubt, as an example, that this is one
 3          of the important reasons for the drastic decline in
 4          numbers of pur national bird, the bald eagle.
 5                     Recent analyses of DDT residues in cohc
 6          salmon and their eggs from Lake Michigan showed
 7          concentration in the fish flesh of from 1 to 5
 8          parts per million and in the eggs of from 1 to 3
 9          parts per million.  Some coho fry hatched from
10          eggs taken from Lake Michigan salmon last fall
11          are showing typical symptoms of pesticide poison-
12          ing.  We have had larger losses of these young
13          fish in our hatcheries than we had anticipated.
14          They are not yet catastrophic to our coho program,
15          but they are serious.  we cannot definitely say
16          that pesticides are responsible, because some
17          virus diseases of young fish have symptoms like
18          those of pesticide poisoning.  There are also
19          possibilities of a deficiency of some chemical,
20          like iodine or thiamin.  We are having tests made
21          to try to determine the exact cause.
22                     Nonetheless, we have every reason to
23          believe that pesticides are one of the prime
24          suspects as a possibility.
25                     The concentrations are very close to

-------
   	2267
 1                        R. A. MAC MULLAN
 2        those which have been shown to affect lake trout
 3        survival in some eastern lakes.  And they actually
 4        exceed those which have been shown in British
 5        Columbia research to affect coho salmon under  some
 6        conditions,  we most certainly are close to the
 7        danger point.  And we most certainly cannot stand
 3        a build-up.
 9                   And this, I think, is just about the
10        nub of this problem here.  Here we have automati-
11        cally in a fish just newly introduced into Lake
12        Michigan concentrations of DDT at a point which
13        in other cases has been detrimental to the repro-
14        duction of fish.  If we haven't  learned in this
15        Nation the lesson from this DDT, despite the great
16        things that DDT did in its day, but if we haven't
17        learned our lesson and if we are still going to
18        be unaware and unthinking about what we do with
19        even greater poisons, then I think that we
20        ought to have our heads knocked  together.
21                   I believe that this conference  should
22        develop a plan to stringently  control pesticides
23        residues in the Lake Michigan  basin, with  particulalr
24        emphasis on those chemicals which are relatively
25        persistent or, as we have come to term  them,  "hard.

-------
   	2268
 l                      R. A.  MAC  MULLAN

 2        we have identified  seven--DDT, dieldrin, a.ldrin,

 3        endrin, heptachlor,  lindane,  and chlordane--which

 4        we believe should be either banned entirely or

 5        used only under the most careful controls.  And

 6        again  I am not putting.a timetable on this, but thifc

 7        should be our goal.  Malathion, raethoxychlor and

 8        other  relatively non-persistent chemicals provide

 9        acceptable substitutes, although more inconvenient,

10        for most uses.  And I am confident that we would

11        be developing more  and  more as we go along.  I am

12        pleased to see the  comments again in the Federal

13        water  pollution Control Report here calling for

14        some supervision and monitoring and identification

15        of the quantities  of these.   That is the first  step

16                  Third and finally,  I would like to dis-

17        cuss briefly  the problem of oil discharges  from

18        shipping.  I  choose not to refer  to them as  "spills

19        because we doubt that  they are very often accidenta

20        Recently,  18  ships passed  through the Detroit  River

21        and  Lake  St.  clair. Subsequently, an oil film was

22        discovered which covered a vast portion of  the lake

23        and  was moving  down the river toward Lake Erie.

24        The  circumstances  were such that  the oil unquestion

25        ably came  from  one of  those vessels.  Yet despite

-------
  	2269
 I                      R. A. MAC MULLAH

 2        efforts by our Water Resources investigators,  the

 3        Federal water Pollution Control Administration,

 4        the coast Guard and Canada, the offender was not

 5        identified.

 6                  Last summer, an oil slick covering several

 7        square miles was reported in Lake Michigan.  As far

 8        as I am aware, the cause was never determined.

 9                  These oil discharges can cause death to

10        thousands of ducks and other waterfowl.  They  can

11        cause secondary effects by destroying plants and

12        other aquatic organisms upon which waterfowl and

13        fish feed.  They can result in tremendously expen-

14        sive clean-up operations for.boat owners, marina

15        operators, and beach managers.  They need not be

16        of the magnitude of the Torrey canyon disaster to

17        have those effects.

18                  The sooner these oil discharges are dis-

19        covered, the greater the liklihdOd of determining

20        the cause.  I was pleased, therefore, by the plan

21        of Mr. Paul Cannon, Chicago area manager of the

22        Federal Aviation Administration, for reporting of

23        oil slicks by commercial and private pilots.  I

24        would like to see this conference take a strong

25        position in this matter, so that those responsible

-------
   ^__	2270


 1                       R.  A.  MAC MULLAN




 2         for  such discharges  can be identified and brought



 3         to account.



 4                   In conclusion, let me say that I believe



 5         this conference to be extremely timely.  You may



 6         be sure that my Department will extend to you



 7         every possible assistance and support.  I appreciate



 8         this opportunity to  bring these matters to your



 9         attention.



10                   Thank you, gentlemen.



11                   MR. STEIN:  Thank you.



12                   (Off the record.)



13                   MR. STEIN:  May we get back on the record



I4                   Are there  any comments or questions of



15         Dr.  MacMullan?



16                   yes, Mr. Poston.



17                   MR. POSTON:  I appreciated very much Dr.



18         MacMullan's  concern  for pesticides.  To us this



19         has  been a problem that is very difficult to get a



20         handle on and to have definite recommendations as



21         to what ought to be  done.


22
                    One of the things in which I was interested,


23
          whether he has any suggestions as to whether or not



          there might  be state legislation for licensing or



25         total prohibition, how he might suggest that this

-------
                   	2271
 I                       R.  A.  MAC  MULLAN

 2         could be  handled.

 3                   OR.  MAC MULLAN:   Mr. Poston,  we are talk-

 4         ing on that subject  in Michigan right now.  Two or

 5         three things are  involved.

 6                   First there are  certain chemicals which

 7         we think  we ought to stop  using just as quickly as

 8         we can, and this, of course,  is a very controver-

 9         sial subject,  but I  would  suggest right now, I thir

10         without too much  contradiction from any of the

11         quarters  who are  involved,  that DDT is particularly

12         virulent  and that it can almost always be replaced

13         by something else.

14                   Secondly,  we have the problem of --. well

15         that is one thing.

16                   There are  some other things,  like

17         dieldrin, for example, which is a particularly

18         nasty one, we think, and we should work very quick

19         ly toward eliminating the  use of that,  I think,

20         almost entirely.

21                   Secondly,  there  is a large area that we

22         can operate in to solve this problem by regulating

23         the use of these  things.  I think of an example of

24         a poured  concrete basement wall in an institution

25         that serves food, for example, where you have an
k

-------
                                 	2272
 1                        R. A.  MAC  MULLAN

 2        ant  problem.   There  one of  the  roost dastardly
 3        chemicals  could be  used probably with safety within
 4        that confine  if the  material were completely safe-
 5        guarded from  getting into the environment
 6                    Ideally,  if we could find a chemical,
 7        the  best pesticide  that I would endorse would be
 8        extremely  persistent, because that is one of the
 9        best qualifications  of a  pesticide, if it were
10        completely able to  kill one target organism that
11        you  wanted to.  Then you  have got the ideal.
12                    So that  persistency in itself is not bad
13        Persistency is bad  because  of the non-target organi
14        it hits.  So,  we have that  second problem of very
15        careful regulation  of even  the  most potent chetilcal
16                    The third problem,  as I see it,  is a very
17         general and difficult one to get at and that is the
18         indiscriminate use—and by that I don't mean the
19         professionals at all, because  they are discriminate
20         but the indiscriminate use by  the innocent  house-
21         wife or rose gardener who dumps a thousand  times
22         as  much chemical, perhaps innocently,  on his garden
23         than he needs to, and this contributes to this load
24         this pesticide load, unwittingly.  YOU can't expect
25         the housewife to read the fine print.   I can't even
a.

-------
   	•    	2273
 1                      R. A. MAC MULLAN

 2        understand those organic compounds  that  are  put  on

 3        the  can  of a buzz bomb.  So we have this problem

 4        of regulating for the  people,  just  like  the  food

 5        and  drug does, what things are  safe to use and what

 6        aren't.

 7                  Our approach in Michigan  at this time  is

 8        to,  through  legislation, try  to set up a board,

 9        something more  than an advisory board, which has

10        the  responsibility  for determining  when  and  how

11        these things are  to be used.   And I think it might

12        be very similar to  the water  Resources Commission,

13        where they  decide when and  what can be done.

14                   If we had this board and if it were a

15        well-constructed board representing all people

16         concerned,  it should have  the authority to say

17         when and when not all governmental agencies, right

18         down to townships and villages, and so  on, would

19         use these pesticides; and I would  give  it another

20         authority if I had my way about it: they would

21         also have the responsibility and the  authority  to

22         regulate the licensing of individuals.

23                   For example, I think that we  are at a

24         point now where, I'll bet you before  I  get kicked

25         out of  my job that we are going to have some  of

-------
   ^___	2274
 1                       R. A. MAC MULLAN

 2         these things eliminated, like DDT and others,

 3         the actual elimination of those which are the most

 4         nasty.

 5                   And lastly, I have to end up on an

 6         optimistic note, that with this technology we have

 7         I don't think we are very far away from developing

 8         chemicals to use to do these very worthwhile jobs

 9         that have to be done much more safely.  I think

10         we laugh about my ideal pesticide, but I think we

H         will come to it some day or very closely to it.

12                   And in that same line, I think again,

13         just like in pollution control, we have to have

14         a steady pressure, not an unwielding pressure,

15         we have to have a steady pressure to move this

16         way, just as this conference is doing here, becaus^

17         if we don't we will do things like we did with the

18         race situation where we sit for a hundred years

19         after we fought a civil war to solve it.

20                   We have to push.  We have a responsibility

21         as government leaders to see that we move forward

22         steadily and reasonably, but we have to do this.

23                   MR. STEIN:  Thank you. Dr. MacMullan.

24                   Are there any further comments or ques-

25         tions?

-------
                                           	2275
 1                      R. A. MAC MULLAN

 •2                  MR. KLASSEN:  I would  just  like to ask

 3        a question, Mr. Chairman.
 4                  Does Michigan control  the application of
 5        herbicides and pesticides that the farmer, not
 6        the professional, but the farmer applies?  if  so,
 7        I would be interested to know how you control
 8        this.  This is a difficult problem.
 9                  DR. MAC MULLAN:  No, we don't have any
10        control.  As a matter of fact, there  are  some
11        gentlemen here who can correct me if  I am wrong on
12        this, our control amounts principally to  licensing
13        the applicator, for a crop duster or  something
14        like that, and we don't have any regulations on
15        the farmer or on the housewife.
16                  I would like to say a  word  in defense of
17        the farmer, though, because I am accused  sometimes
18        of being a little bit inconsiderate of him.  The
19        unconscious pressure of the agricultural people
20        has done a lot, probably more than anyone else,
21        to come along with developing new uses and better
22        chemicals.  So we have this pressure  of the  indust

^3        itself.
24                  A good example is the  use of DDT to  sprap
25        for Dutch Elm disease.  Now,  in  our Michigan state

-------
   	,	      2276



 1                       R. A. MAC MULLAH




 2         University, in cooperation with our Department of



 3         Agriculture, this problem of  using so much  DDT in




 4         municipalities -- and this is probably  one  of  the



 5         large major sources of infection  -- we  now  have a



 6         system whereby we use roethoxychloride with  a



 7         helicopter, a technique which is  not unreasonable,



 8         in fact the price may be similar.  This thing  was




 9         developed without any law or  anything,  and  this



10         was a good move.



11                   But I think that if we  can regulate  very



12         carefully the use by  state agencies and all governf-



13         mental agencies, this will be a big example and



14         then we will be able  to point the finger a  whole



15         lot more at the other  uses which may be  indiscriminj-




16         ate.



17                   And secondly, I am  very glad  to see  the



18         recommendation here that at least we know county



19         by county how much we are putting on.   I am quite



20         concerned about Lake  Michigan because we are  sur-



21         rounded by fruit country and  there have been  very


22
          harsh chemicals used  on the fruit orchards  and thi


oo

          may be one of the greater sources to Lake Michigan



24                   MR. KLASSEN:  Mr. Chairman, this  is  real



25         interesting.  While we have a man here  that knows

-------
  	      ,   	  2277


 1                       R. A. MAC MULLAN




 2         this, I would like to ask a couple more questions.



 3                   In Illinois approximately 15 percent of



 4         the application is done by these professionals



 5         that you are controlling.  The other 85 percent,



 6         we figure, comes from the individual farmer.   I



 7         just wanted to ask if this same general figure applies



 8         to Michigan.




 9                   And secondly, I was interested in your



10         comment that you were glad to see in this Federal



11         Recommendation that there would be a county by  •



12         county reporting or recording.  Could you tell



13         me so far -- I am asking this as we need this



14    .     information -- the second question, how you would



15         go about in Michigan, which would also apply to



16         Illinois, to get this amount that is being applied



17         county by county from the individual farmer if you



18         have no control over him?   I am asking for infor-



19         mat ion.




20                   DR. MAC MULLAN:  Well, to answer your



21         second question first, I don't have any idea that


22
          I can give you right here about how to do that.



23         That is a tremendously difficult job.  It would




          certainly have to be done by some kind of a sam-
25
pling.  But all j am doing here is endorsing whole-

-------
   	2278
 1                       R. A. MAC MULLAN

 2         heartedly the idea that we should identify this

 3         problem.

 4                   I have talked to some of my friends in

 5         Agriculture who say that when we found this out

 6         we would be surprised at how little it is because

 Y         the farmers themselves have developed better

 g         techniques, and, of course, no farmer wants to

 9         spend money for pesticides that arenrtt going to do

10         him some good.

11                   I think it can be done, it would have

12         to be done on a sampling basis and it might not

13         be able to be done on a county-by-county basis.

14         But we have had more difficult problems that we

15         have solved before, so I would just dismiss that

16         and say that the statisticians and agriculturists

17         can do this, at least give us a better idea.

18                   To answer your first question about what

19         percent the farmers are guilty of,  I have been

20         talking again to my agricultural friends and wonder

21         ing if we could identify what percent is by the

22         housewife, what percent is by the farmer, what

23         percent is by governmental agencies, and I think

24         the answer is, because we have been through it

25         back and forth, we don't know,  we have had a

-------
   	2279
 1                       R.  A.  MAC  MULLAN

 2         couple  of studies.   One  study I am aware of in

 3         Red Cedar River,  I  believe,  said that about 70

 4         percent of it, Ralph,  was through municipal drains,

 5         something like that.  But again, this is a very

 6         typical area.

 7                   I think that one of the largest sources

 g         is run-off on streets from settled communities

 9         going through municipal  sewage disposal plants, and

10         this I am very optimistic about because this is

n         something that we have a better way of controlling,

12         perhaps.  This is another figure that I think it

13         would be worth our while to find out.

14                   MR. KLASSEN:  We don't agree with that

15         in Illinois.  We have had some studies made by the

16         State water Survey in the chain of lakes, I don't

17         want to belabor this point, but it shows, and I

18         think this is pretty much the country over, not onj.y

19         this country but other countries, that a very

20         large percentage comes from agricultural run-off,

21         particularly, and this will show that I am not a

22         farmer but have many farmer friends that tell me

23         that if they  get a rain within  24 hours after they

24         make an application of fertilizer they  lose from

25         60 to 70 percent in their run-off into  the streams
„

-------
                                              	2280
 I                       R. A. MAC MULLAH

 2                   DR. MAC MULLAN:  Well, that may be true,

 3         Mr. Klassen.  I am not familiar with that.

 4                   MR. STEIN:  A point in there, and I

 5         think this is well taken, is Mr. Biglane here?

 6         Just to be sure.  Down in Louisiana where they

 7         were using endrin on, oh, I guess they were using

 g         it on the sugar cane and on cotton, when we got a

 9         fast run-off the local conditions in the bayous

10         were absolutely devastating; even relatively large

H         animals in the bayous, the reptiles, were just

12         wiped out.  And I think that is fairly well docu-

13         mented.  I don't think there is any doubt.

14                   Another thing we found there was that

15         when a commercial sprayer would go up, what they

16         would do is just run the airplane over a field

17         and if a little stream were there they would apply

18         the pesticide to the stream as well as the field;

19         this was the simple thing to do, and you got a big

20         dose coming in that way.  And I think with some of

21         those you can, possibly with education or building

22         ditches and being careful of the run-off, a lot of

23         this can be prevented.

24                   DR. MAC MULLAN:  Mr. Stein, that would

25         be a fourth area that we might move forward in.

-------
                                         	  2281
 1                       R. A. MAC MULLAN

 2         I didn't mention it deliberately because I think

 3         we have cone so far along that line.

 4                   In Michigan, for example, and there are

 5         other people who know more about this than I, I

 6         think we have been so concerned that our actual

 7         mechanics of application are pretty tightly

 9         regulated and that again is something that is

 g         relatively easy to take care of.

10                   MR. STEIN:  Thank you very much.

11                   Are there any further comments or ques-

12         tions?

13                   (No response.)

14                   MR. STEIN:  If not, I think we will call

15         on Mr. Klassen now.

16                   Mr. Klassen.

17               ILLINOIS PRESENTATION  (CONTINUED)

18
                    MR. KLASSEN:  Mr. Chairman, due to the
10
          cooperation of my fellow conferees, we have kept
20
          delaying because of the inability of President
21
          Egan of the Metropolitan Sanitary District to be
22
          here for the last several days.  He is with us
23
          this morning, and with the concurrence of my
24
          Conferees I am going to call on President John
25

-------
  ^_____	2282

 1                        C. W.  KLASSEN

 2         Egan of  the Metropolitan  Sanitary District of

 3         Chicago.

 4
                     STATEMENT OF  JOHN  E.  EGAN,
 5
                     PRESIDENT,  METROPOLITAN SANI-
 6
                     TARY DISTRICT OP GREATER CHICAGO
 7

 8                    MR. EGAN:   Mr.  Chairman,  gentlemen of

 9         the Conference, distinguished guests,  ladies and

10         gentlemen, and the members of the Sanitary Distric

11         of Greater Chicago;

12                    There was a time,  and it has not been

13         too long ago, when I  might have been a trifle

14         self-conscious about  standing up here  and  talking

15         to a gathering like this.  There was a time when

16         a good many of you, or  at least the organizations

17         you represent, had some fairly  harsh things to

18         say about  the Metropolitan Sanitary District of

19         Greater Chicago.

20                    But on this happy  occasion,  I  feel

21         absolutely certain that we're all friends,  we're
22
          all here for the same purpose,  to  protect  the  heal
23        and well-being and the enjoyment  of  the  people  who

24        live in the states bordering  on  Lake  Michigan.

                    Ever since the sanitary District was
;h

-------
   	2283
 1                          J.  E.  EGAN
 2         organized  back in 1889,  more than three quarters
 3         of a century ago, we have been active in fighting
 4         pollution  of Lake Michigan.  Consequently, we can
 5         lay some claim to being pioneers in the battle
 6         which1 brings us together this morning.
 7                   Lots of water has flowed-^opposite the
 g         usual direction,  I might add—down the Chicago Riv^r
 9         since our  war against contamination and pollution
10         began.  In the course of this battle, the Metropol^.-
11         tan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago has been
12         sued, we have been enjoined, we have been estopped
13         we have been condemned, we have been restrained.
14         we have been hamstrung and interfered with and
15         persecuted in all of the thousand and one ways kno^n
16         to men and their lawyers.  But our heads are still
17         unbowed and we're still heart and soul with you in
18         this fight that will take our united action to win
19                   One of the recent contributions to the
20         battle was made by the Metropolitan  Sanitary
21         District of Greater Chicago last October.  Through
22         the good offices of congressman John Kluczynski
23         and many of his colleagues in both Houses, the
24         trustees were able to present at a congressional
25         hearing our protest against the dumping of dredginfgs

-------
 l                          J. E. EGAN




 2         in Lake Michigan.  The Array Corps of Engineers



 3         was most cooperative and ordered the dumping




 4         stopped.



 5                   Every time I say, "The Metropolitan



 6         Sanitary District of Greater Chicago,"  I realize



 7         what a mouthful it is.  Perhaps I should take time



 3         out for a moment or two and explain just why we



 9         have been so identified by such a long title.



10                   We were originally organized by the



H         state Legislature in 1889 as the Sanitary District



12         of Chicago.  But today and for the past several



13         decades we have functioned as a "Multi-Municipal-



14         ity" that includes Chicago and 114 distinct com-



15         munities.  We protect the water supply of some



16         five and one half-million souls through the collec



17         tion and treatment of sewage.



18                   And now for a bit of a confession:



19                   If we have been in the vanguard of the




20         battle against this problem, Chicago has also been



21         one of the very first to be guilty of water pollu-



22         tion.  Our corporate guilt goes back to the days



23         when we dug our first sewers and began dumping



24         our waste matter into the lake.  To avoid pumping



25         this same waste matter back into the domestic

-------
  ^_	2285
 I                          J.  E.  EGAN

 2         water system,  the city  dug water intake tunnels

 3         into the lake.  In time,  these tunnels had to be

 4         extended farther and farther as the volume of

 5         waste got greater and greater.

 6                   We can probably date our real awakening

 7         to the dreadful situation facing us on August 2, 1^85

 8         That was the day of a record-breaking rainfall of

 9         some six inches.  That was the day when the resi-

10         dents of the city turned on their water faucets

11         and foul sewage poured out.

12                   That was the day Chicago realized at

13         last that something drastic had to be done to

14         correct a condition that was causing citizens to

15         absorb cholera, typhoid and dysentery germs with

16         their drinking water, diseases which at the time

17         caused fifty out of each thousand deaths every

18         year.

19                   The sanitary District has come a long

20         way  since that day.  How far we have come can

21         best be summed up in the words  of Dr.  Luther Terry

22         former U.S. Surgeon General and head of the U.S.

23         Public Health Service:

24                   "Today Chicago has  one of the best,

25         most efficient,  and most  superbly maintained

-------
   ^_	.	2286
 1                          J. E. EGAN
 2         waste treatment plants in  the whole world.  The
 3         modern complex of  facilities treats the waste of
 4         five million people and thousands  of  industries
 5         every day."
 6                   Another  citation we all  like to quote
 7         is  from the American Society of Civil Engineers,
 8         who termed the sanitary District "One of the
 9         seven Wonders of American  Engineering."
10                   What have we done to deserve this?
11                   Well, we've invested something more
12         than a ha If-billion dollars in this "complex of
13         facilities," including one of the  finest research
14         laboratories in the world  built at a  cost of
15         over two million dollars.
16                   We maintain 71 miles of navigable canals
17         linking the Great  Lakes-St. Lawrence  seaway with
18         the inland waterway system to the Gulf of Mexico.
19                   We maintain some 400 miles  of intercept-
20         ing sewers,  we collect and treat one billion 250
21         million gallons of sewage  every day.
22                   We operate the largest sewage treatment
23         plant in the world.
24                   And you  all know about the  feat that
25
          played what was perhaps the most important part

-------
   	2287
 l                          J. E. EGAN

 2         in our fight against waterborne diseases.  This

 3         was the construction of the 28-mile Sanitary and

 4         Ship canal and a system of locks.

 5                   Even though we now offer primary and

 6         secondary treatment of our sewage, and we are

 7         well on the way to completion of tertiary treat-

 3         ment, this flow of water away from Lake Michigan

 9         has not been without its trials and tribulations.

10         It has caused considerable criticism and some

H         rather harsh words and a good deal of legal action

12         that I mentioned lightly a few moments ago.  But

13         all of that sort of thing, I trust, is water over

14         the dam--over the Brandon Road dam at Joliet, to

15         localize the figure of speech.

16                   In spite of the trials and tribulations

17         we have suffered, regardless of the accolades

18         that have come our way for our successes, believe

19         me, ladies and gentlemen, every single one of us

20         involved with the Sanitary District realizes that

21         we have still a lot to learn.  We know full well

22         that it is only by pooling our collective experience

23         and by working together with all of you that we car

24         hope to prevent the disaster which stares us in

25         the face.  And it is a disaster which threatens

-------
   	2288
 !                          J. E. EGAN

 2         our very  lives, as well as the  full  enjoyment

 3         that Lake Michigan can bring  to all  of us  in

 4         the years to cone.

 5                   The communities served by  all  of us here

 6         today, this vast and constantly growing  Midwest

 7         Megalopolis, still have a serious  fight  on our

 g         hands, a  fight that is literally for survival, a

 9         fight that actually goes back to those biblical

10         times when Moses laid down the  law of sanitation

11         for the wandering Isrealites.

12                   But I must raise a  question, a question

13         which, I am sure, will not meet with popular

14         response:

15                   DO WE HAVE THE ANSWER?

16                   We at the Sanitary  District thought

17         that we had the answer in 1900  when  we reversed

18         the Chicago River.

19                   We thought we had the answer when we

20         built the world's largest sewage treatment plant.

21                   We again thought we had  the answer when

22         we erected the largest installation  of the zimpro

23         process.

24                   We have investigated  a great many pro-

25         posals of late, but, frankly, we do  not  know the

-------
   	2289
 j                          J. E. EGAN

 2         answer.  And in the course of reading the papers

 3         that have been presented at this conference,  I

 4         have serious doubts as to where the  solution  lies.

 5                   Is there enough money available--yes,

 5         even ELederal rooney--to do the job for even  Lake

 7         Michigan alone?

 g                   It seems to me that if' this gathering

 9         of knowledgeable and dedicated people has revealed

10         anything, it has disclosed the need  for a radicall

11         new approach to the problem.  Model  T methods just

12         aren't effective in a "jet" society,  we can't

13         wait ten or twenty years for presently known

14         methods to be implemented,  we must  come up with

15         something that will do the job NOW,  and by  that

16         I mean within the next four to five  years.

17                   I hate to face the prospect, but  even

18         that time may not be enough in which to save  the

19         lake.

20                   It seems to me that we must take  every

21         step we can to curtail further pollution by known

22         methods right now.  But, in the meantime, we  must

23         turn to our universities and our other research

24         facilities to zero in on this job.   We must do

25         what we did when we needed an atom bomb,  we  must

-------
   	2290
 !                           J.  E.  EGAN

 2         organize  every  resource of science  and man's

 3         energy  to come  up with  a practical,  workable

 4         answer,   we  need  a new  Manhattan Project  and  we

 5         need  it nowl

 6                    Much  as I  dislike to  conclude on  this

 7         pessimistic  note,  I  think it would  be  a mislead-

 8         ing and tragic  course to pursue if we  did not

 9         readily admit that while our discussions  have

10         delineated the  problem,  it now  remains for  us

11         to find a  solution.

12                    And when and  if we find a  solution  it

13         will  not  only save Lake  Michigan, but  end the

14         growing fears of  men all over the globe who are

15         beginning  to realize their survival  depends on

16         the answer.

17                    It is a  fight  that can be  and will  be

18         won by sessions like this  today, accompanied  by

19         our firm and high  resolution to fight  shoulder

20         to shoulder for this, our  common cause.

21                    MR. STEIN:   Thank  you. President  Egan,

22         for a very comprehensive  and provocative  statement,

23                   Are there any  comments or  questions?

24                    Speaking for the  Federal Program,

25         President  Egan has been  one  of  the most forward-

-------
   	2291
 1                        J. E. EGAN
 2        looking and  cooperative water  Pollution Control
 3        administrators  in  the  country  on any level,  and I
 4        think  if we  had men  like  President Egan  we  could
 5        show that  this  complicated problem of Federal,
 6        State, municipal and  industrial cooperative  rela-
 7        tionships  can work.
 8                  I  would  like to just say one thing.  One
 9        of the other major cities in the country was in
10        Washington the  other week with a considerable
11        delegation arguing with us about our requirement
12        that  they  upgrade  their treatment plant, and the
13        answer was,  "For a large city in the country we
14        provide  the best treatment.   Why are you bugging
15        us?"
16                  And I said, "You do?  Are you going to
17        take  on  Chicago?"
18                  so he said, "No, we have to discount
19        Chicago."
20                  MR. EGANi   Thank you, Mr. Stein.
21                  MR.  STEIN:  Thank you.
22                  (Applause.)
23                  MR.  STEIN:  Mr. Vogt.
24
25

-------
                                                         2292

 1                          J.  E.  VOGT

 2
                 MICHIGAN PRESENTATION (CONTINUED)
 3

 4                   MR.  VOGT:   Mr. Chairman, the next

 5        speaker that I would like to call for Michigan

 6        is Mr.  John Calkins.  He is the chief Deputy

 7        Director of the Michigan Department of Agriculture,

 8        and he  will present  Mr. Dale Ball's statement.

 9        Mr. Ball is the Director of Agriculture in Michigan

10                   We are also passing out at this time

11        copies  of Mr.  Calkins'  statement.

12
                    STATEMENT  BEFORE FEDERAL CONFERENCE
13
                    ON POLLUTION OF LAKE MICHIGAN AND ITS
14
                    TRIBUTARY  BASIN, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS,
15
                            February 6,  1968
16
                    BY B. DALE BALL, DIRECTOR,  MICHIGAN
17
                         DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
18

19                   PRESENTED  BY JOHN CALKINS,  CHIEF

20                   DEPUTY DIRECTOR, MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT

21                             OF  AGRICULTURE

22
                    MR.  CALKINS:   Thank you, Chairman Stein.
23
         Mr. vogt,  conferees, ladies and gentlemen:
24

25                   The  Michigan Department of Agriculture

-------
   	2293
 !                        JOHN CALKINS

 2        is closely involved in the management of Michigan

 3        natural resources,  including those specific aspects

 4        of natural resources management which are the con-

 5        cern of this conference.

 6                  The Director of Agriculture is a member

 7        of the state Water Resources Commission, the Air

 8        Pollution control commission, and is chairman of

 9        the State soil Conservation Committee.  The

10        Director of Agriculture is chairman of the drainage

11        boards for all of the more than 1,000 established

12        inter-county drains within the state.

13                  A major responsibility of the Michigan

14        Department of Agriculture is in consumer protection

15        guaranteeing the wholesoraeness and sanitation of tho

16        food supply of Michigan's more than 8 million

17        residents.  But the department is also deeply

18        involved in matters that affect the livelihood of

19        93,000 Michigan farm operators who control the

20        management of more than 13 million acres of

21        Michigan   land area—about one-third of the total

22        area of the state.

23                  The record should note that Michigan

24        farm land managers have made outstanding contribu-

25        tions  in natural resources management.  Substantial

-------
                   	     229^
 1                        JOHN CALKINS

 2        increases in food have been accomplished without

 3        increasing acreage.
 4                  A study of the Department of the Interior

 5        January 1968 report, "Action for Clean Water,"

 6        reveals that probably three aspects of Michigan

 7        agriculture are of special concern to this con-

 8        ference.  These are sedimentation, agricultural

 9        fertilizers, and agricultural pesticides.
10                  While this report does not list sedimen-

11        tation as a major area of concern, I think it

12        deserves mention.
13                  In Michigan, organized soil conservation

14        districts are in operation in all but two of the

15        state's 83 counties.  soil conservation districts

16        are vitally concerned with sedimentation problems,

17        and in every case a major portion of each district's

18        efforts are directed to reducing soil erosion and

19        resultant sedimentation.  The leadership of Michigai

20        83 soil conservation districts is largely from

21        agriculture.
22                  Agriculture is .only one of the factors

23        involved in soil erosion.  Major contributors are

24        uncontrolled erosion  from building sites, roads
25        and stream banks.   It is interesting to note  that

-------
   	  2295
 1                       JOHN CALKINS

 2       agricultural  soil  scientists  set  standards  for

 3       soil  erosion  losses that  are  as much  as  20  tiroes
 4       less  than known examples  of erosion that is presently

 5       occurring in  connection with  building and construction

 6       sites.
 7                 The report on water pollution  problems
 8       that  preceded this conference states  that eutrophi-
 9       cation  is a threat to  the usefulness  of  Lake
10       Michigan and  states this  is due to several  elements
11       and that the  element most amenable to control is

12       phosphorous.   About two-thirds of the present
13       annual  supply of  phosphate going  into Lake  Michigan

14        (estimated to be  about 50 million pounds) comes
15       from  municipal and industrial wastes.
16                 The other third is  a composite of all non-

17       point sources. An unknown fraction of this latter
18       third is natural  in origin.   It gets  into the water

19       by leaching from  soils and rocks  on the  watershed.
20       One of  the contributing  factors,  according  to the
21       report,  is the residue from applications of phos-

22       phate-rich fertilizers to farm lands.
23                 An  interesting  fact pointed out in this
24       pre-conference report  is  that we  know the source
25       of two-thirds of  the phosphate pollution going into

-------
   	2296
 !                        JOHN CALKINS

 2        Lake Michigan--this is municipal and industrial

 3        waste waters.  Wherever phosphate-bearing waters

 4        can be captured and put through a treatment plant,

 5        techniques are now available for removing a high

 6        percentage of the phosphate content at a reasonable

 7        cost.

 8                  In regard to phosphates originating in

 g        farm fertilizers, it is important to recognize the

10        following facts:

U                  (1)  Agricultural fertilizers have con-

12                  tributed greatly to soil conservation.

13                  (2)  Phosphates in fertilizers are

14                  cldsely bonded into the soil and not

15                  readily subject to loss into watersheds.

16                  In fact, so closely bonded are phosphates

17                  that farmers must resort to banding

18                  fertilizer directly into the plant root

19                  areas.

20                  (3)  In today's agriculture, scientifically

21                  blended "custom" fertilizers aife Often

22                  applied according to a field prescription

23                  so as to minimize over-application of any

24                  elements involved.

25                  (4)  Agriculture in general is very

-------
   	2297
 1                        JOHN CALKINS

 2                  careful in application of fertilizers,

 3                  which are an expensive item in farm

 4                  production.

 5                  (5)  The fraction of phosphate eutrophica

 6                  tion contributed by agricultural ferti-

 7                  lizers is as yet an unknown fraction of

 8                  the one-third composite that is contribut

 9                  ed by all sources other than municipal

10                  and industrial wastes.

11
                   Identifying these phosphate losses from
12
         agricultural fertilizers and developing methods of
13
         holding them to an absolute minimum is of real
14
         concern to agriculture.
15
                   When and if such losses can be identified
16
         and science comes up with better ways of keeping
17
         these expensive phosphates bound into the farmer's
18
         topsoil, there is no question that, without outside
19
         coercion,  agriculture will take advantage of this
20
         knowledge.  There has already been great progress
21
         in this direction.
22
                   Now, in regard to pesticides, even critic^
23
         of pesticide usage admit that pesticides are a
24
         necessary tool in agriculture and natural resources
25

-------
   	2298
 1                       JOHN CALKINS
 2       management.  Food shortages by 1984 have been
 3       predicted, even with the use of pesticides for a
 4       more productive agriculture.  Agriculture is con-
 5       cerned that through public hysteria, aroused often
 6       by innuendo, agriculture will be robbed of one of
 7       its most important working tools.
 8                 As many of you know, representatives of
 9       Michigan agriculture were in court within the  last
10       few months to answer a citizen's suit concerning
11       the use of certain pesticides.  Much of the pub-
12       licity surrounding this legal action involved
13       innuendo, and the public was often hard-pressed
14       to sort fact from fiction.  The case involved  the
15       use of so-called "hard" pesticides, certain
16       chlorinated hydrocarbons.
17                 No segment of our society is more concerned
18       with the proper use of "hard" pesticides than
19       agriculture.  Such pesticides are registered at
20       the Federal level under standards developed jointly
21       by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the
22       Department of Health, Education and welfare.   in
23       Michigan, in addition to Federal registration,
24       pesticides roust have label registration by the
25       Michigan Department of Agriculture, and we maintain

-------
                               	2299
 1                        JOHN CALKINS
 2        one of the most modern laboratories in the Nation.
 3                  In the continual search for better
 4        methods of pest control,  agriculture is in the
 5        forefront.  Michigan State University has a
 6        nationwide reputation for leadership in this
 7        field.  Right now MSU is  fast developing the finest
 8        pesticide research facility in the entire Midwest
 9        and one of the finest to be found anywhere in the
10        world.
11                  Agriculture is  in desperate need of rea-
12        sonable finite tolerances for pesticide residues.
13        Analytical technology has made such advances that
14        we can measure down to a  few parts per billion
15        rather than to half a part per million considered
16        as "zero" a few years ago.  As a result, good and
17        safe mi lie has been barred from the market and
18        dumped for no reason other than the increasing
19        sensitivity of our instruments.
20                  The substitution of finite tolerances for
21        insignificant negligible residues, instead of a
22        mathematical concept of zero, does not concern
23        safety,3  but it does concern our ability to feed
24        ourselves at reasonable cost.
25                  It is important that these answers be

-------
                                     •	,	2^00


 1                        JOHN CALKINS




 2        provided,  and not only from a public health  stand-



 3        point; the controversy and atmosphere of  uncertainty



         has delayed the correction of unnecessary restric-



 5        tions and  has discouraged industrial research



 6        efforts  that might have been directed toward



 7        developing safer, more selective and more efficient



 8        pesticides.




                    There is interesting research on  record



         that points  up the vital need for more research



         and more facts before we make decisions that would



I2        have repercussions, not only throughout agriculture



         but that would affect the present and future food



         supply of  every citizen.



I5                   Specifically, may I refer to a  recent



         study by a Michigan State University scientist.



17        I believe  Dr. MacMullan referred to this  earlier.



18        This study took place near my own backyard, along



19        the Red Cedar River that runs through rich southern


20
         Michigan farm land and a number of communities,


21
         including  my home town of East Lansing, Michigan.


22
                    This research, conducted by Dr.  Matthew


23

         J. Zabik,  involved collection of water samples


24
         throughout the season at 14 points along  the Red



         Cedar River.  some of these points were adjacent to

-------
   	2301
 l                        JOHN CALKINS

 2        intensively used agricultural lands and some were

 3        below municipal sewage outlets.  Dr. Zabik's study

 4        showed that 70 to 90 per cent of the pesticide

 5        pollution in the Red Cedar River comes from urban,

 6        not farm and rural, sources.  He also found very

 7        little evidence of land wash contributing to the

 8        Red Cedar pollution problem.

 9                  Dr. Zabik stated that the key to cleaning

10        up the river is to raise the level of treatment

11        at sewage plants along the waterway so that more

12        nutrients and other pollutants will be removed.

13        He noted that tertiary treatment of this type would

14        also significantly decrease the pesticide residue

15        in the river, since much of it is carried by

16        suspended matter.  Dr. Zabik stated that it is

17        currently "very, very difficult" to determine the

18        exact effects pesticides have on aquatic life.

19                  Another example that points up the need

20        for more research in the area of chemical residues

21        is a recent study indicating that certain chemicals

22        generally of urban or industrial origin and closely

23        related to the so-called "hard" pesticides, have

24        been detected in bird's livers and eggs in greater

25        quantities than the organochlorine, or "hard",

-------
   	2302
 1                        JOHH CALKINS

 2        pesticide residues.

 3                  These compounds are polychlorobiphenyls

 4        closely associated with our common industrial and

 5        household plastics, and they are known to be toxic/

 6                  The purpose of citing these last two ex-

 7        amplea is to establish the fact that until we know

 8        aore about the sources of chemical pollution and

 9        their effect upon nan and his environment, the scien-

10        tific implicationo of pesticide residue tolerances,

11        and the means to definitely measure and identify

12        these residues, we oust proceed with reason and

13        caution in developing workable guidelines for the

14        use of pesticides.  It does not make sense to out-

is        law all uses of chlorinated hydrocarbons.  And I

16        would like to say right here that the Michigan

17        Department of Agriculture has curtailed its use of

18        "hard" pesticides in many, many areas, even though

19        we did use or did plan to use dieldrin this last

20        fall to control an infestation of Japanese Beetles.

21        The record will show that we have greatly decreased

22        our use of it and we are substituting other pesti-

23        cides for the use of DOT and some of the other

24        "hard" pesticides.  But there are sensible and

25        responsible uses for these tools, the hard pesticides,

-------
   	;	 23Q3

 1                        JOHN CALKINS

 2        in natural resources management.

 3                  Agriculture has demonstrated it is will-

 4        ing to follow sound scientific guidelines establish-

 5        ed in the areas of erosion control, fertilizer

 6        application and pesticide usage.

 7                  The facts will prove that Michigan is

 8        taking aggressive action in the area of water

 9        conservations

10                  ...Our pesticide research facilities

11                  are among the best in the world.

12                  ...Soil conservation districts are active

13                  in soil and water management throughout

14                  the state.

15                  ...Governor Roroney has recommended a

16                  billion dollar program to reduce pollu-

17                  tion in Michigan, including a S335 millioji

18                  state bonding provision.

19                  .. .The Michigan Water Resources commissioji

20                  is now carrying out and will continue to

21                  carry out a comprehensive program  of

22                  pollution abatement to protect and preser

23                  the quality of Lake Michigan water.

24
                   Thank you.
25
\re

-------
   	2304
 1                        JOHN CALKINS

 2
                         BIBLIOGRAPHY
 3

 4                   1. "The Effect of Urbanization  on
                       Sedimentation in  the Clinton
 5                      River Basin," University  of
                       Michigan, July  1967.
 6
                    2.  Committee on Appropriations,
 7                      House of Representatives, Report
                       of the Surveys and  Investigations
 8                      Staff, National Agricultural
                       Chemicals Association, reprint
 9                      pages 17 and 18,  1965.

10                   3.  National Academy  of Science,
                       Report of the Pesticide Residues
11                      Committee, 1965.

12                   4. "Chlorinated Hydrocarbons  in
                       British Wildlife,"  NATURE
13                      Magazine, October 21, 1967,
                       pages 227-229.
14

15                   MR. STEIN:  Thank you,  Mr. Calkins.

16                   Are there any comments  or questions?

17                   (No response.)

18                   MR. STEIN:  I would like to point out

19        one aspect of your paper which  I  agreed with, and

20        i think this is a very important  one as long  as  it

21        is brought up and might save everyone a good  deal

22        of time, and that is that zero  tolerance  controvers;

23        The notion of someone saying that you can't have

24        any of any specific material or if you  find any  in

25        there leads to some very peculiar results.  What

-------
   	2305
 1                     JOHN CALKINS

 2       this means in practice is we use existing tech-

 3       niques, and, for example, if they can detect with

 4       using existing techniques down to five parts per

 5       million, if that testing doesn't show any material

 6       like that, the product is considered to be reason-

 7       ably safe and is out on the market.  This technique

 g       is just as good until the next bright young boy

 g       comes up with an improved technique and instead

10       of five parts per million will find five parts

H       per billion, and suddenly all these products

12       which were on the market and everyone was using

13       that didn't seem to cause anyone harm suddenly

14       become unsafe and we run into a controversy.  Then

15       what happens, in a year or two someone comes up

10       and finds out how to detect the stuff down to

17       five parts per trillion and we are in this opera-

18       tion all over again.
19                 so I think we have to not be too glib

20       or get ourselves involved with something which we

21       think is a poison and talk about zero tolerance

22       and we are not going to have any of this, because

23       while that has been done in the past, it has led

24       to a lot of fruitless controversy that has had to

25       be resolved.  I think Mr. Calkins is right, we have

-------
      	2306

 l                        JOHN CALKINS


 2       to come  up with finite numbers or perhaps we can prbvio


 3       a kind of escape hatch.  This zero tolerance


 4       technique is not the one that works, and  I think


 5       this has been fairly well demonstrated.


 6                  Thank you very much.


 7                  Mr. Vogt.

 8                  MR. VOGT:  The next presentation will  be


 g       by Dr. Peter I. Tack on behalf of the Michigan


10       Association of Conservation Ecologists.

11                  We are now passing to the conferees


12       copies of the remainder of the presentations, so


13       please keep them handy.


14
                THE POSITION OF THE MICHIGAN
15
           ASSOCIATION OF CONSERVATION ECOLOGISTS
16
               ON LAKE MICHIGAN EUTROPHICATION
17
                              BY
18
            PETER I. TACK, CHAIRMAN AND PROFESSOR
19
             DEPARTMENT OF FISHERIES AND WILDLIFE
20
                     PROFESSOR OF ZOOLOGY
21
                  MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
22
                    EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN
23
                 PRESENTED FEBRUARY 6, 1968

24
      MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION OF CONSERVATION ECOLOGISTS  MEETING

25                     CHICAGO, ILLINOIS

-------
                                     	2307


 1                        P. I. TACK




 2                 DR. TACK:  Mr. Chairman, Conferees,



 3       ladies and gentlament



 4                       INTRODUCTION



 5                 I have been asked by the President of



 6       the Michigan Association of Conservation Geologists



         to present the position of this organization on



 8       the pollution of Lake Michigan.



 9                 In order to save tine, in going  over the



10       name of this organization I will use the initials



11       M-A-C-E and simply pronounce it MACE.



12                 MACE is an organization of practicing



13       environmental scientists and allied administrators



14       whose membership embraces the great majority of



15       the competent experience in observation of the



16       decline of quality of the aquatic environment in



17       Michigan.



18                 It is my purpose at this Conference to
19
         proclaim the deep concern of the members of this
2fl
 "  I      organization about the rapid decline of water



21        quality in Lake Michigan.  This  lake,, with  its


22
         22,400 square miles of surface,  1,661 miles of


23
         shoreline, and large volume of formerly high quality



         water is a large and important segment of human



25        environment.  The size of this segment alone

-------
   	    .	2308

 l                         P. I. TACK

 2        demands our very best efforts to preserve it in

 3        its cleanest possible state.

 4                  Among the roost important economic

 5        considerations is that of public water  supplies for

 g        many municipalities.  This reason also  commands our

 7        best efforts.  There are, of course, many other

 g        reasons.  Perhaps the most pressing demand for

 g        cleaning and preserving the water quality of Lake

lO        Michigan is economic.

11                  While little effort has been  devoted to

12        compiling the economic value of this resource,

13        this value may be hinted at through the losses

14        experienced by Michigan communities along Lake

15        Michigan as a result of the alewife mortality of

16        1967 and the ensuing odors which drove  away vaca-

17        tionists.  The Michigan Tourist and Resort council

18        has estimated this loss alone as 55 million dollars


19
                     THE CONCERNS OF MACE
20

21                  The rapid increase in the apparent effects

22        of eutrophicatibn on water quality in Lake Michigan

23        is one of the most urgent causes for concern.  The

24        evident blooms of blue-green algae are  unmistakeabl^

25        indicators of enrichment of this environment, which

-------
   	   2309
 1                         P.I. TACK

 2        has long been characterized by cold, clean, trans-

 3        parent water.  These algae require certain minimal

 4        levels of mineral nutrients to sustain populations

 5        which may be described as a bloom.  These nutrients

 5        have evidently been increased in abundance to the

 7        point where these blooms may be sustained.  Esti-

 g        mates of the contributions of mineral nutrients

 9        have been made for at least some tributary streams.

10        These estimates are impressive in view of the known

H        ability of these algae to respond vigorously to

12        minute changes in level of such nutrients as

13        phosphorous.

14                  Not all of the pollution problems arise

15        out of eutrophication, however.  The presence of

16        appreciable amounts of pesticides in this environ-

17        ment are cause for grave concern.  The amounts of

18        pesticides in fishes from Lake Michigan are now

19        approaching levels where they may be expected to

20        affect population levels and success of restoration

21        of fishes to Lake Michigan.  While cause and effect

22        relationships have not been firmly established, the

23        high mortalities occurring among the coho fry at

24        the time they cease their dependence on stored yolk

25        and start feeding on natural foods are suspected to

-------
   	2310
      - - • —  - ---—-.--•--"           -                    ,^
 1                         P. I. TACK

 2        result from the relatively high pesticide burdens

 3        of these fishes.  This suspicion is not casual or

 4        capricious.  There is enough scientific evidence

 5        to cause deep concern.

 6                  The continuing presence of type E

 7        botulism toxins in Lake Michigan must also be view-

 8        ed with concern.  Eutrophication of the Lake water

 9        is implicated in the presence of this toxin.  This

10        toxin is produced only in the absence of oxygen

11        or the presence of very small amounts of oxygen.

12        This condition may occur where the oxygen is

13        reduced by organic wastes or dead alewives which

14        also provide a protein base on which the organism

15        can grow.  The prospect of increased warming of

16        Lake Michigan waters in the near future, as a

17        result of thermonuclear power plants now under

18        construction, can also be expected to make the

19        cleanup of these waters more difficult.  The higher

20        temperature will increase growth of algae, bacteria

21        and similar organisms and may be expected to heightjen

22        the decrease of oxygen and the production of

23        botulism toxin.  The vast amount of heat planned tc

24        be added to Lake Michigan is cause for deep concerr

25                  There are, of course, many other reasons

-------
   	 2311

 I                          P.  I.  TACK


 2         for urging action to clean up these waters.  The


 3         aesthetic reasons cannot be denied in a society


 4         that has become acutely aware of the quality of


 5         their environment and which demands an improved


 6         quality habitat in which to live.


 7                   THE  URGENCY OF THE PROBLEM


 8
                    The  Michigan  Association of Conservation

 9
          Ecologists wishes to emphasize the urgency of this

10
          problem,  we request immediate arrangements for


          organized and  concerted action to  rehabilitate

12
          these waters.   Any deferment of action will have

13
          long-range effects on water quality.  The levels

14
          of mineral nutrients now in the Lake will sustain

15
          appreciable algae blooms for many  years since

16
          these minerals are recycled many times through

17
          successive generations  of algae, animals which live

18
          on algae,  ending ultimately in fish.  The very lone

19
          period of residence  of  water in Lake Michigan will

20
          also insure the long term residence of these

21
          nutrients.  it may be unrealistic  to expect

22
          instantaneous  or sharp  reductions  in the amount of

23
          mineral material entering the Lake,  but every

24
          effort should  be made to insure such reduction as

25
          quickly as possible.

-------
   	     2312


 1                          P. I. TACK




 2                   The entire history of the battle for dee



 3         water has been characterized by its slow gains.



 4         The losses generally have exceeded the gains by a



 5         substantial margin.  This has been true even where



 6         the size of the water involved was infinitesimal



 7         in comparison with Lake Michigan.  The magnitude of



 8         this job is enormous, and little experience is



 9         available for guidance in a work of this magnitude.



10         There are also many governmental agencies and sub-



11         divisions involved, which complicates the approach



12         greatly.  These obstacles to progress are not



13         cited to overawe or discourage those involved, but



1^         are given to emphasize the need for immediate and



I5         concerted action.



16


              FURTHER ACTIONS WHICH SHOULD BE TAKEN

17




18                   Many positive and progressive steps can



19         be taken at an early date to improve the quality



20         of water entering Lake Michigan through its many



21         tributaries.  Among the first of these steps should


22
          be the setting of realistic goals for achieving


21
          interstate water quality standards.  These goals



          should be set and announced with maximum participa-



          tion of state and local governmental units and
n

-------
   	2313
 1                          P.I.  TACK
 2         their  agencies.   Each community's part in achieving
 3         these  improvement goals should be delineated so
 4         the magnitude of individual jobs may be readily
 5         comprehended. Among the specific steps which may
 6         be taken would be the formation of local, water she<},
 7         state  and regional citizens committees to focus
 8         attention on jobs to be done at each level.  Jobs
 9         which  are in need of this kind of attention are
10         the anticipation of the approach to capacity of
11         local  waste water treatment plants, correlating
12         widespread information on such topics as thermal
13         pollution, and relating progress and problems to
14         the public.  This would permit the development of
15         public support for increasing the capacity of
16         treatment plants before the pollution of receiving
17         streams becomes  intolerable.
18                   Watershed committees should assist in
19         coordinating public support for water improvement cfn
20         an area basis.  State and regional committees should
21         assist in the broader coordination of problems and
22         progress, as well as in the development of support
23         for bonding and  appropriations issues.  There is
24         great  need for public support at every level of
25         government if progress is to be made in improving

-------
   	.	231*1
 !                         P. I. TACK

 2        quality of water in Lake Michigan.  The public

 3        appears to be demanding improved environmental

 4        quality, but the translation of this demand into

 5        action over so wide an area as the watershed of

 6        Lake Michigan will require a great and concerted

 7        effort involving the best leadership at every

 8        level.

 9
                AWARENESS OF PROGRESS BEING MADE
10

11                  In focusing on what needs to be done

12        to improve this vast segment of environment, the

13        tendency is to overlook or discount progress of

14        the past or present,  we do not wish to do this.

15        The efforts to reduce or remove phosphates from

16        detergents should be applauded and encouraged in

17        every possible way.  so also should the progress

18        being made in reducing the pollution from pleasure

19        craft on our public water be applauded and support-

20        ed.  Many localities and industries are taking stej

21        to control their own waste disposal problems.  Thee

22        are encouraging signs of public support for this

23        environmental improvement surge.

24

25
s
e

-------
   	2315

 1                          P.  I.  TACK


 2
                        FINANCIAL SUPPORT

 3

 4                   The cost of any program to clean up


 5         Lake Michigan will ultimately fall on the citizen


 6         either through taxes, increased cost of goods and


 7         services,  loss of recreational places, or a com-


 8         bination of these.  it is, therefore, with a clear


 9         conscience that we urge bonding and taxing programs


lO         to finance the proposed clean-up program.  The


II         cost of such a program will be great, and they wii:.


12         need to be spread over long periods of time.


13
                        EDUCATION NEEDED

14

15                   Finally, there is a great need for a


16         coordinated and cooperative educational enterprise


17         associated with this program.  Many of the pollu-


18         tional problems now being encountered never should


19         have arisen.  The selection of different alterna-


20         tive methods of waste disposal could have avoided


21         many problems.  The recovery of many waste products


22         has in the past proved profitable, but were adopted


23         reluctantly.


24                   Further progress in developing profitable


25         uses for waste products should be vigorously pursue!

-------
   	2316
 !                          P. I. TACK

 2         The dissemination of information and knowledge

 3         about recovery of wastes is important and should

 4         be promoted.  These are essentially educational

 5         processes, which are now of pitifully small

 6         proportions.  Education is needed also to achieve

 1         support for the program.  This support will be

 8         more easily won if a coordinated education program

 9         is instituted.

10                   MR. STEIN:  Thank you. Professor Tack.

11                   Are there any comments or questions?

12                   MR. VOGT:  Mr. Chairman, I have a comment

13                   Dr. Tack, in the further actions which

14         you are proposing that should be taken, I am sure

15         that you are well aware that the first step in

16         this series of actions that you have suggested

17         has already been accomplished in Michigan in that

18         water quality standards for the interstate waters

19         have been adopted following many public hearings

20         around the state and also a plan of implementation

21         has been developed and the various water uses whicl

22         are to be protected have also been defined follow-

23         ing many public hearings, also following the sugges

24         tions that you have proposed here whereby citizens'

25         groups have been involved in great depth.  And I

-------
     .	      •	2317
 I                          P.  I. TACK

 2         think  that  you  are well  aware  of  that.

 3                  DR. TACK:   I am,  sir, aware of that.

 4         My charge here  is merely to urge  that we proceed

 5         with these  things vigorously and  that we set

 6         realistic goals in achieving these standards.

 7         I realize we have plans, but achieving is another

 8         matter,  and this is  what we are urging.

 9                  MR.  STEIN:  Thank you.

10                  Are  there  any  further comments or

11         questions?

12                  That  was a very thorough and thought-

13         provoking  statement.  Very good.

14                  Mr.  Vogt.

15                  MR.  VOGTj   The next appearance was to be

16         by Mr. Leonard J. Goodsell, Executive Director of

17         the Great  Lakes commission, but I believe the

18         state  of Illinois introduced Mr.  Goodsell*s state-

19         ment in the record last Friday,  because, of course

20         the Great  Lakes commission does include all of

21         the states  that are  represented here  in Illinois

22         and introduced Mr.  Goodsell's statement already,

23         so we can pass that.

24                   The next presentation will be by Mr. John

25         Kennaugh of the Grand River Watershed Council.

-------
   ^___	2318
 1                        J. H. KENNAUGH

 2                   John, copies of your presentation have

 3.         been distributed to the Conferees.

 4                   MR. KENNAUGH:  Thank you, John.

 5
             THE ROLE OF LOCAL COMMUNITIES TO COMBAT
 6
               THE NATIONAL WATER POLLUTION PROBLEM
 7
            THE MICHIGAN GRAND RIVER WATERSHED COUNCIL
 8
          609 Prudden Building,  Lansing, Michigan, 48933
 9
                   JERROLD H.  KEYWORTH,  Chairman
10
               JOHN H. KENNAUGH,  Executive Secretary
11  I

12                   MR. KENNAUGH:  Mr. Chairman, Conferees,

13         ladies and gentlemen:   I am John H. Kennaugh,

14         Executive Secretary of the Michigan Grand River

15         Watershed Council,  and you will note from our

lfi         paper that this is a governmental entity represent-

17         ing the local communities throughout the Grand

18         River watershed area.

1®                   It is my privilege to present on behalf

20         of the Council our paper under the title, "The

21         Role of Local Communities to combat the National
99                               '
**         Water. Pollution Problem."
00
                   THE WATER POLLUTION PROBLEM

                    Three significant factors are contribu-

25         ting to the water pollution problem in our streams

-------
   	2319
 t                       J.  H.  KENNAUGH

 2        and in our lakes.   We all recognize these as

 3        PEOPLE, PROSPERITY and PRODUCTS.  The State of

 4        Michigan is not unlike the other progressive states

 5        of our country.  The  population has increased thre«

 6        fold during the past  sixty years and is projected

 7        to increase approximately two tiroes by the turn of

 8        the century.  Our prosperity has likewise changed,

 9        which is reflected in the changing water demands

10        of our people.  At the beginning of the century th<

11        domestic demand for water was five gallons per day

12        per person.  Today the people of our state are

13        demanding 160 gallons per day and by the year 2015

14        A.D. this demand is projected to be 240 gallons

15        per day per person.  Needless to say, the demand

16        for water further indicates the need for water to

17        provide the products  that are essential to meet

18        the pace set by the increasing standard of living.

19                  Pollution sources are varied in types ant

20        extent.  The concern to control the pollution of

21        water for DOMESTIC use did not occur until the

22        ground and surface waters became a public health

23        problem.  A major contribution to the pollution

24        problem was the advent of urbanization, which

25        created the need for more intensive collection and

-------
   	2320
 !                        J. H. KENNAUGH

 2         disposal of human wastes.  Michigan communities

 3         have developed lagoon systems, primary and secon-

 4         dary treatment plants.  But it is apparent longer

 5         range plans need to be developed to meet the in-

 6         creasing demands for quality treatment to preserve

 7         our limited water resources.  New products utiliz-

 8         iag phosphate compounds is only one example of new

 9         wastes that are not removed by the standard treat-

10         roent process.  At the same time, our increasing

11         demand for existing products and our cultural

12         demand for new products is surpassing our present

13         ability to maintain the ecological balance of our

14         natural environment.  Enlargement of existing

15         facilities and provision for tertiary treatment will

16         resolve many of these problems.

17                   Disposal of INDUSTRIAL WASTES into Our

18         streams was once a practical solution to the

19         problem of balancing equities between our natural

20         resources and the economic stability of our coro-

21         rounities.  The balancing of equities now lies

22         between preserving the limited natural resources

23         as against the demands of the increasing population

24         and the rapidly changing standard of living.

25         Industrial pollution once involved the disposal of

-------
   	2321
 !                       J. H. KENNAUGH

 2        relatively simple chemical wastes and the normal

 3        domestic wastes.  Increased production and develop-

 4        ment of new processes has placed greater strain on

 5        our waterways.  Environmental control in modern

 6        industrial plants has caused more intensive heat

 7        exchange conditions in our streams and lakes and

 3        further contributes to the damages on our

 9        natural resources..

10                  URBANIZATION around our major cities has

11        also taken a toll from our natural resources.  In-

12        tensive development for  industrial parks, shopping

13        plazas and residential areas has changed not only

14        the topography of the land but has placed new

15        values on the remaining  natural resources.  Lack

lg        of adequate controls on  area-wide improvements has

17        contributed to soil erosion problems.  Increased

18        land values are  influencing the potential develop-

19        ment of flood plains.  Projections for surface

20        water  recreation indicate  the demandswill triple

21        by the turn of the  century as compared to a doublir

22        of the population.  Intensified use  of chemical

23        products  results in greater  loadings of these  waste

24        in our waterways.   All of  these factors have a

25        deleterious effect  on the  natural characteristics

-------
                                                        2322

 1                       J. H. KENNAUGH

 2        of our streams and  lakes.

 3                  AGRICULTURAL LAND MANAGEMENT has been

 4        emphasized  for many years  in order  to save the

 5        soi.l for agricultural use.  Greater emphasis  is

 6        now required in order to protect  the water courses

 7        as well as  the land.  Deforestation, intensified

 8        farming practices,  utilization of marginal lands

 9        and residential development of farming areas  have

10        further contributed to the problem  of runoff  and

11        soil erosion.  Better products and  methods for

12        fertilizing have contributed significantly to the

13        eutrophication of our streams and lakes.  Intensiv

14        use of herbicides and pesticides  to satisfy the

15        agricultural and community needs  on the one hand

16        has, on the other hand, disturbed the natural bal-

17        ance of our environment.

18
                    WATER POLLUTION CONTROLS
19

20                  At one time THE  INDIVIDUAL was respon-

21        sible for exercising his own controls on the  use o

22        his water resources.  For  the most  part this  re-

23        quired budgeting his supplies to  meet his needs.

24        Because of  his nomadic habits, many of these  needs

25        could be satisfied  by moving about.  Pollution

-------
   	2323
 1                        J. H. KENNAU6H

 2         concerned him only as it disturbed his aesthetic

 3         appreciation of his resources.

 4                   Communal living allowed greater exchange

 5         of goods and capabilities, provided sustained

 6         stability for the new society, enhanced the cul-

 7         tural appreciation of the people, and created viable

 8         opportunities to further establish the social

 9         environment,  community efforts and goals were

10         developed through various GOVERNMENTAL STRUCTURES

11         Community needs were satisfied through informal

12         and formal cooperative effort.  intensified need

13         for the use of the natural resources resulted in

14         a further need to effectively manage the use of

15         these resources and to preserve the unused

16         resources.  Communities were organized politically

17    .     as townships, villages, cities and counties with

18         the authority from the state to affect health,

19         safety and welfare concerns of the community.

20         The goals of the community were generally satisfie^

21         until the needs and concerns were changed from a

22         local matter to regional, state and interstate

23         matters.

24                   Problems that could not be solved

25         locally or problems that were a mutual concern of

-------
                                                        2324
 I                        J. H. KENNAUGH
 2         other municipalities became a matter for state
 3         resolution.  Water and air are the most common
 4         elements of our environment.  Unrestrained use of
 5         these elements will have a direct or indirect
 6         effect on others utilizing the same resources.
 7         Standard controls for using these resources on
 8         a regional basis has necessitated state interven-
 9         tion to protect the safety, health and welfare
10         concerns for the people of the state.
11                   Local pollution problems have become
12         regional, state, interstate, national and inter-
13         national problems, because all flowing water
14         relates the communities from the headwaters of
15         the local watershed all the way to the sea.  water
16         salinity, anadromous fish, ocean tides, drought
17         and economic changes are no longer isolated
18         problems affecting just a local area but are parts
19         of a complex relationship between all people.  FED
20         ERAL intervention becomes paramount in resolving
21         the far reaching problems beyond the limits of our
22         local communities and states.  The state is pri-
23         marily responsible for protecting the health,
24         safety and welfare of the people? however, the
25         Federal Government  is applying controls affecting

-------
           	2325
 1                        J. H. KENNAUGH

 2         local conditions through the administration of

 3         financial aid.  Pollution control by the Federal

 4         Government has been effected through the adminis-

 5         tration of construction grants, award of research

 6         grants, conducting enforcement proceedings, spon-

 7         soring comprehensive planning, and encouraging the

 8         establishment of water quality standards.

 9                   An essential concept that cannot be over

10         looked is that our country is organized under a

11         democratic form of government that has been create^

12         "of the people, by the people, for the people."

13                   Our RESPONSIBILITY AS INDIVIDUALS has

14         enlarged from a local concern for our natural

15         resources to a regional and national responsibilit;

IQ         While at one time we may have considered ourselves

17         conservationists because of our efforts to effec-

18         tively utilize our present resources, we now have

19         to regard ourselves as stewards, or trustees,

20         because we realize that none of these resources

21         can be considered our private property, but will,

22         at one time or another, become the property of

23         someone else.

24

25

-------
   	2326
 1                        J.  H.  KENNAUGH

 2
               INVOLVEMENT OP GRASS  ROOTS  GOVERNMENT
 3

 4                   The  Michigan  State  Legislature dramati-

 5        cally  stepped  forward in  1964 when it adopted

 6        enabling  legislation  called the "Local River Manag

 7        ment Act."  The preamble  states this  is:

 g                   "An  act  to  enable local units of
                     government  to cooperate in  planning
 9                   and  carrying  out a  coordinated
                     water management program in the
10                   watershed which they  share."

H                   According to  the provisions of the

12        legislation, a Watershed  Council may  be formed to

13        represent  the  governmental units in a river basin.

14        The  Council  may then  perform  the following func-

15        tionss

16                   "Conduct, or  cause  to be conducted,
                     studies  of  the  water  resources of
17                   the  watershed,  including investiga-
                     tions of water  uses,  water  quality
18                   and  the  reliability of the  water
                     resource.
19
                     "Prepare periodic reports concerning,
20                   among other things, trends  in water
                     use  and  availability,  emerging water
21                   problems and  recommendations for
                     appropriate public  policies and pro-
22                   grams necessary to  maintain adequate
                     water resources for the watershed area.
23
                     "Request the  Michigan Water Resources
24                   Commission  to survey  the watershed for
                     the  purpose of  determining  minimum
25                   levels of stream flow necessary for

-------
                           _   2327
 1                       J.  H.  KENNAUGH

 2                  health,  welfare and safety.

 3                  "Advise  agencies of federal,  state
                    and local governments as to the
                    council's view of the watershed's
                    problems and needs
 Cooperate with federal,  state and
 ocal agencies in providing strea
 auges,  water quality sampling
stations,  or other water  resource
                    local agencies in providing stream
                    gauges,  water quality sampling
                    data-gathering facilities or pro-
                    grams that aid the council in its
                    responsibility for studying and
                    reporting on water conditions.

                    "Establish special project funds
                    as needed to finance special studies
                    outside its annual budget capacity
                    and for this purpose the council may
                    accept gifts and grants from private
                    individuals, corporations, and local,
13

14                   The MICHIGAN GRAND RIVER WATERSHED

15         COUNCIL was organized June 1966.  The council

          serves on behalf of fifty-nine governmental units

17         representing over one million people in an area

18         of over 5570 square miles.  Membership by the

          governmental units is voluntary, which presently

20         includes fifty-two members.

2i                   The WATERSHED COUNCIL is comprised of

22         representatives from the governmental units

23         according to population.  The WATERSHED COUNCIL

24         elects its own Executive committee and adopts its

25         own program.  Each representative is assigned to

-------
                                            	2328
 1                        J. H. KENNAUGH

 2         one of the  following committees: Administrative

 3         control Committee, Finance control Committee,

 4         water Quality control committee, water Quantity

 5         Control Committee.   Technical Advisory Committees

 6         may be created to investigate and report on

 7         specific projects.

 8                   The effectiveness of an organization

 9         is recognized by the vitality of its members.

10         Action is the result of Planning and Impleroenta-

11         tion.  The  WATERSHED COUNCIL, through its Execu-

12         tive committee and subcommittees have been active-

13         ly involved leading to action programs, and I will

14         identify a  few.

15
                    TYPE II COMPREHENSIVE WATER
16
                      RESOURCES PLANNING STUDY
17

18                   The Grand River Basin was designated

19         in 1963 by  the Federal Government for a Type II

20         study to be completed in 1969 at an estimated

21         cost of $2,000,000.  At the time the organization-
22
          al structure for the study was created, there was
23
          no agency that could directly represent the local
nj
          governmental units in the Grand River Basin.

25                   Following the organization of the

-------
                              	2329
 1                        J. H. KENNAUGH

 2         MICHIGAN GRAND RIVER WATERSHED COUNCIL, Governor

 3         George Romney authorized this Council to advise

 4         and consult the state of Michigan at the Federal

 5         Coordinating Committee on behalf of the local

 5         governmental units.  The representatives of the

 7         WATERSHED COUNCIL have actively participated in

 8         planning process of the study.  Periodic reports

 9         have been prepared regarding the progress of the

10         program and the WATERSHED COUNCIL will actively

11         participate in relating the contents of the final

12         report to all governmental units, public agencies

13         and other organizations.  The WATERSHED COUNCIL

14         also expects to serve a vital role in coordinating

15         the efforts of the governmental units to implement

16         the recommendations of the plan.

17
                WEST MICHIGAN WATER SUPPLY STUDY
18

10                   The WATERSHED COUNCIL considered the

20         need to determine the availability of additional

21         water supply for a twelve-county area on the west

22         side of Michigan.  A technical advisory committee

23         was created to conduct a privately financed study

24         to determine the feasibility of supplying Lake

25         Michigan water to the twelve-county area.

-------
                                       	2330

 l                        J. H. KENNAUGH


 2
                     FLOOD PLAIN PROTECTION

 3

 4                   Flood damages in the Grand River Basin


 5         have been nominal to this date because of the


 6         limited development in the flood plain area.  The


 7         trend in urbanization indicates the need to develo


 8         adequate controls to safeguard against unnecessary


 9         damages in the future and to assure minimal flood-


10         ing conditions.  On behalf of the governmental


11         units, the WATERSHED COUNCIL has filed application^


12         for flood plain studies to be conducted by the


13         Corps of Engineers.  The WATERSHED COUNCIL is


14         also formulating control measures that can be


15         incorporated by the municipalities in subdivision


16         control ordinances, zoning ordinances, comprehen-


17         sive plans and building control ordinances.


18
                 WATER QUALITY STREAM  STANDARDS
19


20                   The Water Resources commission has


21         adopted water quality stream standards to be


22         applied to the intrastate  streams.  The WATERSHED


23         COUNCIL has transmitted this information to all


24         the governmental units in  the basin and sponsored


25         several informational meetings  to assist public

-------
     .	:	2331
 l  IJ. H. KENNAUGH
 2         officials to understand the program.  Each govern-
 0         mental unit has been requested to adopt a resolu-
 o
 .         tion designating their preferred stream use.
 •         These resolutions will be presented at the water
 5
          quality hearing for advisory purposes to the
 o
          Water Resources Commission.

 8                   STREAM MONITORING PROGRAM
 9
                    Essential to enforcing quality standards
n         on the streams in the Grand River Basin, a monitorf
12         ing program will be required.  To date there is
..         no systematic way for collecting, analyzing and
Id
14         storing data on the water conditions of our stream^
15         The WATERSHED COUNCIL is preparing plans to insti-
16         tute a program that will utilize the water techni-
17         cians from the water treatment plants across the
18         basin to collect, analyze and report the water
19         conditions according to standard procedures.
20         Reports have indicated that of the 2,700,000 Ibs.
2i         of ortho phosphate  (asp) entering Lake Michigan
22         from Michigan streams, 1,153,000  Ibs., over 42
23         percent is from the Grand River Basin.  Other
24         parameters will also be identified to assure
25         effective control on stream quality according to

-------
   	2332

 1                        J. H. KENNAUGH


 2         the adopted standards.


 3
                      SOIL EROSION CONTROLS
 4

 5                    Sedimentation in  the Grand  River Basin

 6         streams  is considered to be one of  the major

 7         pollution  factors.  The WATERSHED COUNCIL is

 g         preparing  soil erosion control data that can be

 9         used by  property owners, developers and govern-

10         mental units to prevent the unnecessary erosion

11         of soil  due to poor land management practices.

12                           o   o   o

13                    The WATERSHED COUNCIL programs have

14         revealed problem areas that exist in  the Grand

15         River Basin.  Evaluation of these problems has

16         required involvement by the members.  Knowledge

17         of problems by concerned people is  the foundation

18         for a planning process which determines desirable

19         solutions  and methods of implementation.  LOCAL

20         PARTICIPATION in the development of plans provides

21         strong assurances the plan can be implemented.

22         An essential step that can not be overlooked is

23         the educational process of the grass  root forces

24         of the communities.  Public acceptance is neces-

25         sary and it remains a vital privilege in our

-------
                	___	2333
 1                        J. H. KENNAUGH

 2         democratic government.

 3                   The MICHIGAN GRAND RIVER WATERSHED

 4         COUNCIL is a statutory entity composed of and

 5         representing the governmental units in the Grand

 6         River Basin according to the "Local River Manage-

 7         raent Act."  It functions:

 g                   "to enable local units of govern-
                    ment to cooperate in planning and
 9                   carrying out a coordinated water
                    management program in the watershed."
10

11                   The WATERSHED COUNCIL is comprised of

12         the grass root elements of the communities and

13         provides them the opportunity to become involved

14         in the planning aspects of a water management

15         program and continue their involvement by carry-

16         ing out the program.  This involvement allows

17         direct and personal relationships with state and

18         Federal officials in the development of regional

19         water management programs assuring that these

20         programs shall be 	"of the people, by the people,

21         for the people."

22                   The MICHIGAN GRAND RIVER WATERSHED

23         COUNCIL recognizes the need for a united effort

24         to preserve our water resources.  The program of

25         the WATERSHED COUNCIL has exemplified its concern

-------
 l                       J. H. KENNAUGH




 2        and demonstrated its ability to  involve  the




 3        people in  sharing in the  responsibilities  for




 4        preserving these water  resources.   The MICHIGAN




 5        GRAND RIVER WATERSHED COUNCIL  dedicates  its




 5        support  to local, state and Federal agencies to




 7        abate pollution in our  streams,  lakes and  Lake




 8        Michigan.




 9                   Thank you.




10                   MR.  STEIN:  Thank you, Mr. Kennaugh.




11        Are there  any  comments  or questions?




12                   MR.  KLASSEN:  Mr. Chairman.




13                   MR.  STEIN:  Yes.




14                   MR.  KLASSEN:  I would  just like  to ask




15        a couple of questions,  purely  for  information,




16        because  this is a real  interesting approach and




17        one that we have talked about  and  have come close




18        to in several  respects  in Illinois.




19                   I would just  like to ask the speaker




20        the following  questions:




21                   Do you have actually any authority to




22        implement  your plans?




23                   And  secondly, what are your official




24        relationships, we'll say, with the Michigan Water




25        Resources  council?  Is  it necessary that they

-------
                               :	 2335
                         J. H. KENNAUGH

 2         receive approval from your agency, for example,

 3         on the additional 10 percent Federal grants and

          this type of thing?

                    I'm for a grass root approach like this,

          but being on a State level in Illinois, there is

          always the question whether you are merely a

          planning agency for cooperation or have some

          official status in connection with your own State

          government.

11                   My second reason for asking this, I was

12         born and raised and spent a good share of my life

13         in thev Grand River Basin, so I have a personal

14         interest in it.

15                   MR. KENNAUGH:  Technically we are not

16         a planning agency, but were organized to assist

17         local communities in coordinating their planning

18         efforts, nor are we a regulatory agency.  This is

19         a responsibility of the designated State agencies

20                   But we serve in an advisory capacity

21         for them and for our local communities and for

22         Federal agencies, only on an advisory basis.

23                   MR. KLASSEN:   Good.  Thank you.

24                   MR. STEIN:  Thank you

25                   Are there any further comments or

-------
                                     	2336

 1                        J. H. KENNAUGH


 2         questions?


 3                    (No response.)


 4                   MR. STEIN:   If  not,  thank you  very  much,


 5         sir.


 6                   Mr. Vogt.


 7                   MR. VOGT:  Mr.  chairman, I  talked with


 8         Mr. Klassen regarding  Mr.  Goodsell's  statement,


 9         and there is some question as  to whether his


IQ         statement was actually entered into the  record


H         by the  state of  Illinois.


12                   Therefore, I should  like to enter Mr.


13         ooodsell's statement on behalf of Michigan for  the


14         record.  Mr. Goodsell  is  the Executive Director


15         of the  Great Lakes commission.


16                   MR. STEIN:   Without  objection,  this


17         statement will be entered as if read.


18                   MR. KLASSEN:  Mr. Chairman, I  also  want


19         to say, with headquarters at Ann Arbor,  Michigan,


20         and this is why I felt  that  Michigan should have


21         the prerogative  of introducing this.


22                   MR. VOGT:' Thank you, Mr. Klassen.


OQ
                  STATEMENT OF LEONARD J. GOODSELL


24                       EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR


25                     GREAT LAKES COMMISSION

-------
   	2337
 1                        L.  J.  GOODSELL

 2                   MR.  GOODSELL:   Mr. Chairman, ladies and

 3         gentlemen:
 4                   I am Leonard J. Goodsell, Executive

 5         Director; Great Lakes commission, which is dedicated

 6         to the service of the eight states which border on
 7         the Great Lakes — Illinois, Indiana, Michigan,
 8         Minnesota, New York,  Ohio, Pennsylvania and

 9         wisconsin--on water resources matters.
10                   Preserving and enhancing the quality of
11         the waters of the Great Lakes basin has long been
12         the concern and interest of the Great Lakes
13         Commission.  A few short years ago water quality

14         wasn't considered to be a major problem in the
15         Great Lakes.  The lakes were considered by some to
16         be unpollutable.  Since its establishment by the

17         states in 1955, the Great Lakes Commission has
18         worked toward instituting water quality management

19         programs.  In 1964 we were successful in having

20         the problem of pollution control referred to the
21         International Joint commission for study and
22         surveillance.  The gathering here today is indica-

23         tive that water quality management can no longer
24         be treated as an unwanted stepchild.  It is admitt
25         edly a real and major problem and will require

-------
   	2338
 1                        L.  J.  GOODSELL
 2         financial, educational,  research and political
 3         input  to effect its solution.   The Great Lakes
 4         Commission believes we  should continue to inarch,
 5         in  an  orderly  and  business-like manner, to con-
 6         serve  the waters of the Nation.
 7                   Please let  me review the Federal water
 g         Pollution control  legislation:
 9                   Federal  water Pollution Control Act
10                   of 1948. PL 84-660  -  This is  the first
11                   identifiable  Federal  program for water
12                   pollution control.   The Act  was limited
13                   in scope and  was  never implemented with
14                   adequate appropriation.  Government's
15                   earlier  role  had  been confined to the
16                   Rivers and  Harbors  Act of 1899,  Public
17                   Health Service Act  of 1912,  and Oil
18                   Pollution Control Act of 1924.
19                   1956  Amendments to  the Federal Water
20                   Pollution Control Act of 1948 -  Araend-
21                   ments established basic policy that
22                   water pollution problems are best solved
23                   at the local  level; authorized grants to
24                   the  states  and interstate agencies for
25                   water pollution control agencies for

-------
   	2339
 1                       L. J. GOODSELL
 2                  water pollution control activities and
 3                  grants for waste treatment plant con-
 4                  struction; provided a system for Federal
 5                  control; and encouraged interstate com-
 6                  pacts for joint solution to common water
 7                  problems.
 g                  Federal water Pollution Control Act
 9                  Amendments (1961), Pi 87-88 - Extended
10                  Federal Pollution abatement authority
11                  to all interstate and navigable waters;
12                  increased construction grants and
13                  encouraged research activities.
14                  water Quality Act of 1965, PL 89-234 -
15                  Provided for the adoption and enforce-
16                  rnent of water quality standards for
17                  interstate waters and portions thereof.
18                  The Act set up a separate agency*
19                  Federal water Pollution Control Adminis-
20                  tration as part of D/HEW  (since trans-
21                  ferred to D/Interior); increased con-
22                  struction grants and authorized research
23                  and development grants to develop ways
24                  of preventing the discharge of untreated
25                  wastes from storm sewers or combined

-------
 !                       L. J. GOODSELL




 2                   storm-sanitary sewers.




 3                   Clean Waters Restoration Act  (1966),




 4                   PL 89-753 - Provided grants for coordi-




 5                   nated river basin planning, increased




 6                   research spending; extended grants  for




 7                   construction beyond June 30,  1967;  and




 8                   authorized appropriation for  FY 68  of




 9                   $450 million, $700 million for PY 69,




10                   $1.0 billion for PY 70, $1.25 billion




11                   for PY 71; provided increases in the




12                   percentage of Federal grants  for neces-




13                   sary treatment works with a maximum




14                   Federal grant of 55 percent if a state




15                   takes full advantage of Federal incen-




16                   tives.




17                   In compliance with the Water  Quality Act




18         of 1965, each of the Great Lakes states had,  prior




19         to June 30, 1967, adopted water quality criteria




20         applicable to interstate waters or portions there-




21         of within the state, and adopted plans  for the




22         implementation and enforcement of the water qua lit




23         criteria adopted.  These criteria and plans,  when




24         approved by the secretary of the interior, then




25         becomes the water quality standards applicable to

-------
 1                        L.  J.  60ODSELL



 2         such interstate waters or portions thereof.



 3                   Section 10  (b)  of the Act states "Con-



 4                   sistent with the policy of this Act,



 5                   State and interstate action to abate



 6                   pollution of interstate or navigable



 7                   waters shall be encouraged and shall not



 g                   except as provided..., be displaced by



 9                   Federal enforcement action."



10                   I raise these points for information,



11         because many of us believe that legislation deal-




12         ing with pollution control was intended, and



13         should be progressive in full ccraplianos with the



14         law when they adopted criteria and plans as



15         provided for in the water Quality Act of-1965,




16         section 10 (c).



17                   The Notice of this Conference cites



18         section 10 (probably Subsection (d) ) as the basis



19         for calling this Conference.



20                   Recent inquiry reveals that of the eight



21         Great Lakes states that adopted criteria and plans



22         in accordance with Section 10  (c) of the Act, as



23         amended, only two have had, through the approval




24         of the secretary, standards established.



25                   Questions arise:  Does this conference

-------
  ^___	;	2342
 !                       L. J. GOODSELL

 2         indicate that the provisions of the Water Quality

 3         Act of  1965 are not adequate to do the job?  What

 4         future  actions and activities can we expect under

 5         Subsections  (c) and (d) of section 10 of the Act?

 6                   A Conference has been held on the

 7         pollution of the waters in the calumet area and

 g         lower Lake Michigan* and control and abatement

 9         actions are underway.  possibly through this

10         conference we may be able to tie together and

H         correlate the several actions now underway

12         incidental and pertinent to the water quality

13         management of Lake Michigan.

14                   A second item, and I'm sure this is farai

15         iar, is, in accordance with Water Pollution Contro

16         Act, as amended, what can be expected in the way

17         of Federal support funds for the water quality

18         management program?

19                   Previously,  the authorization for appro-

20         priate amounts of money (under the clean waters

21         Restoration Act of 1966) were outlined—$450

22         million for FY 68, $700 million for FY 69.  For

23         FY 68 Congress appropriated $203 million.  The

24         authorized total of $3.55 billion for construction

25         of sewage treatment facilities spread over five

-------
 !                       L. J. GOODSELL

 2         years (FY 67 through FY 71) was considered to be

 3         a minimum figure for Federal participation.  As

 4         of April 1967 it was estimated that 1,884 applied-

 5         tions for construction grants were pending, with

 6         a total eligible cost amounting to $13 billion.

 7         If the Federal share amounts to 40 percent, the

 g         cost will be $5.2 billion; at 55 percent, the

 9         cost will be $7.15 billion.  The actual Federal

10         cost will be somewhere between these two figures.

11         Funding at the full authorization level is not
   /
12         adequate to do the job.

13                   A third item is the research effort to

14         support the water quality management effort.  The

15         water Pollution control Act provides for sizable

16         sums to conduct research.  in the summer of 1965 tine

17         Department of the Interior announced that, in its

18         experimentation to develop new uses of coal, it

19         had developed a process, then in pilot plant stage,

20         which uses coal as a filler material in sewage

21         treatment.  It was reported that the two-stage

22         filter process would remove all suspended solids,

23         reduce BOD by 70 percent to 90 percent, remove

24         phosphates in excess of 70 percent, detergents by

25         90 percent.  The process was described as being

-------
 !                        L.  J. GOODSELL


 2        advantageous  in that,  in contrast  to  bio-oxidation

 3        systems,  it does not produce nitrates from nitrogeik

 4        compounds.  The total  in-plant  time for  the process

 5        was stated to be from  two  to four  hours.

 6                  To  my mind,  if the facts I  have  are  cor-

 7        rect, here is one  action directed  primarily to the

 g        problem of making  more use of coal (The  coal used

 9        as the filter medium is fully usable  foi. fuel,

10        following its use  in the filters), a  constructive

11        action that may point  the way for  a real break-

12        through in the  sewage  treatment process.

13                  I don't  know to what  extent this  coal
                  /
14        filtration process has progressed, but a success-

15        £ul process of  this type would  save the rounicipali-

16        ties and industries of the lake region millions of

17        dollars and may do a job that we're apparrently

18        not doing too well now.  Our research dollars

19        should be applied  to research of this  nature.

20                  To  summarize my three points:

21                  (1)    For information,  how are actions

22                  under  Subsection (c)  and (d), Section 10,

23                  of  the water Pollution Control Act,  as

24                  amended,  to be correlated and follow-on

25                  actions established?

-------
 1                        L. J. GOODSELL




 2                    (2)  For information, what are  the




 3                   dollar and tine schedules for the pedera




 4                   water treatment facilities program?




 5                   States, municipalities and private




 6                   entities will wish to set their schedule^




 7                   accordingly.




 8                    (3)  For recommendation, guide  the




 9                   research expenditures into developing




10                   treatment and handling facilities which




11                   will produce effluents of the quality




12                   desired, avoid the "quick-fix"  solutions




13                   and which can be applied on an  economical




14                    ly sound basis.




15                    In the final analysis, economic and




16         political considerations will dictate how well




17         we do in passing on clean waters to the generation




18         to come .



19



20




21                   MR. VOGT:  I should now like to call




22         Mr. James Rouman, on behalf of the Michigan United




23         Conservation Clubs.




24                    Is Jim in the room?




25                    (No response.)

-------
   	_	23*16
 1                        J.  L.  ROUMAN
 2                  MR. VOGT: Apparently Mr. Rouman is not
 3        here,  Mr. Chairman. We do have a copy of his
 4        statement.  Therefore,  I should like to enter it
 5        just the same as if he  had presented it.
 6                  MR. STEIN:  Will he be here later?
 7                  MR. VOGT: There is some question.   I
 8        really don't know whether he will or not.  Would
 9        you suggest that we hold it temporarily?
10                  MR. STEIN:  Well,  I tell you,  let's go
11        off the record here.
12                  (Off the  record.)
13                  MR. STEIN:  If he comes,  we will let him
14        read it.
15                  MR. VOGT: I'm sure he would like to.
16        He  was here last week.
17                 - MR. STSIN:  Right.
18                  MR. VOGT: If he comes in later on
19        today, we will give him an opportunity to present
20        it.
21                  MR. STEIN: without objection,  this will
22        appear in the record as if read.
23                  MR. VOGT: Thank you.
24
25

-------
   	23*17

 1                         J.  L.  ROUMAN

 2
                  STATEMENT OF JAMES  L.  ROUMAN
 3
                       EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
 4
               MICHIGAN UNITED CONSERVATION  CLUBS
 5

 6                   I am James L.  Rournan,  Executive Director

 7         of the Michigan United Conservation  Clubs,  with

 8         headquarters located in  Lansing, Michigan.

 9                   MUCC is a statewide, non-profit,  non-

10         government, non-partisan organization  of Michigan

11         citizens.  it is composed of about 350 sportsmen

12         and conservation-related clubs and individuals

13         throughout the state, with  a total membership of

14         approximately 70,000.

15                   We in MUCC have been greatly concerned

16         about the deteriorating  quality  of the waters in

17         the Great Lakes Basin and the need for careful

18         protection by high standards in  the  setting of

19         interstate water quality criteria; we  have  expressed

20         this concern in hearings which have  been held in

21         our state.

22                   We believe that the primary  uses   designit-

23         ed for these waters should  be water-based recreation

24         and the production of fish  for sport and hitman  food.
25
While these uses do not preclude carefully controlled

-------
   	23^8

 !                         J. L. ROUMAN


 2         commercial uses, such as industrial cooling and


 3         navigation, we believe that the following practices


 4         create urgent problems and should be rapidly


 5         discontinued:


 6                   Industrial discharge of solids and oil?


 7                   Disposal of wastes high in oxygen demand

                    and nutrients;

 8
                    Accumulation of persistent poisons;

 9
                    Pilling in marshy or shallow water areas

10                   for "development."


11                   For longer range consideration, we call


12         attention to two other areas:


13                   Heat  loading from manufacturing process

                    and generation of electric power.

14
                    Discharge or spill of oils and other

15                   wastes from commercial vessels.


16
                           DISCUSSION

17


18                   While all of these items  apply to all


19         the  Great Lakes, we believe the demand  is most


20         urgent on Lake  Michigan because of  the  rapid


21         growth of population and commerce in  this water-


22         shed and the  slow turnover of water  in this


23         portion  of  the  Great Lakes  river  system.


24                   To  abate  or avoid these problems, we


25         urge that a policy  be developed that  would  prohibi

-------
 1                         J. L. ROUMAN




 2         the discharge of solids into the lake or any




 3         tributaries along the lines indicated in the




 4         announcement made in 1967 by the Engineering




 5         Corps, Department of the Army, and that wherever




 6         possible,  the dredging necessary to maintain




 7         harbor depths be done in such manner as to




 8         minimize the adverse effects on the lake by




 9         placing the spoils on shore; and further, that




10         each state take steps to minimize erosion from




11         construction of highways, housing and other develop




12         ments.




13                   From the algae growths that are appear-




14         ing along  the beaches and the tremendous increase




15         in the volume of forage fishes, it is obvious that




16         the nutrient levels in Lake Michigan are already




17         quite high.  With the burgeoning population in the




18         Lake Michigan basin, much of which will be resident




19         on or near the shores,  we believe it is especially




20         urgent that means of reducing oxygen demand and




21         the nutrient load be attacked vigorously now.




22                   We have rather fragmentary information




23         on the quantities of persistent poisons now present.




24         in the lake.  Available information indicates that




25         the persistent chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticides

-------
   	2 33Q
 1                         J. L. ROUMAN
 2         have already reached levels that will produce  pro-
 3         found changes  in the ecology of the  lake.  The
 4         obvious effects on the reproductive  capacities
 5         of salmon and  trout need no discussion.  These
 6         programs already command a great deal of general
 7         interest.  More important, we believe, will be the
 8         effects on the basic food chain and  on the bird
 9         populations in the lake basin, which may be more
10         subtle but non the less devastating,  some of these
11         more subtle effects are already apparent in colon*
12         ies of birds that nest in the Great  Lakes basin
13         area,
14                   The  discharge of heat from power genera-
15         tion and other industrial uses has a potential
16         for markedly altering the character  of the lake
17         and the climate around it.  Any appreciable increa
18         in temperature of Lake Michigan combined with  the
19         already plentiful supply of nutrients has a
20         potential for  accelerating eutrophication and  pro-
21         ducing more rapid degradation of water quality.
22         It seems to us that the differences  between southern
23         and northern Lake'Michigan may now be due, in  part
24         to the heat loading around the south end of the
25         lake.

-------
   	2351
 I                        J. L. ROUMAN

 2                  The additions in heat loading resulting

 3        from building of new steel plants and the ten

 4        thermonuclear generators planned or building on
 5        the lake could make a much more marked change in
 6        the lake,  we urge that industry be made respon-
 7        sible for studies of the local effects of their

 g        heat load and that coordinated studies of the
 9        overall effect of the total heat load be projected

10        for power generation and other industrial sources
11        to provide a basis for some forecast as to the
12        total effect of the temperature on the lake and
13        its resulting effect oh the climate.
14                  In the past year, newspapers have re-

15        ported two discharges of oil into the lakes with
16        some reference to their adverse effects.  One of
17        these was discharge of Oil from industrial sources

18        the other a spill or discharge from shipping,  we

19        urge that a mechanism for continuous monitoring
20        of oil slicks be developed and put into practice
21        as rapidly as possible so that these oil discharge^

22        can be discovered early, the damage minimized and
23        the responsibility fixed on the offending party.
24                  we feel we must comment on one other

25        facet of the proposals that have been made for

-------
   	2352


 1                         J. L. ROUMAN




 2         water use in various parts of the country.  The



 3         concept of an industrial river, we believe, has



 4         no application in the Great Lakes Basin.  One



 5         industrial river, discharging a maximum waste



 6         load, would in time extend to the whole river



 7         system.  If we remind ourselves that Lake Michigan



 8         is just a wide deep place in a river system, we



 9         can see that any move to promote industrial rivers



10         will eventually result in making Lake Michigan an



11         industrial lake.



12                   Finally, in the overall solution of



13         these and other problems, we hope that the obvious



14         solution will not be utilized.  It would be r«la-



15         tively easy to divert the outfalls from many areas



16         on the periphery of Lake Michigan to other water-



17         sheds.  This, we believe, would compound the



18         problems of the other watersheds  and aggravate



10         the difficulties arising from withdrawals  from



20         Lake Michigan by the reversing of river systems.


21


                            SUMMARY
22




23                   We urge immediate  consideration  of the


24
          following:



25                    l.  Abatement of  the discharge of  solids

-------
   ^	2333
 !                         J.  L.  ROUMAN

 2                   into the  Lake Michigan system and fillinc

 3                   by erosion.

 4                   2.  Reduction in disposal of wastes high

 5                   in oxygen demand and nutrients into Lake

 6                   Michigan  and its tributaries.

 7                   3.  Curtailment of the use of persistent

 8                   pesticides and the release of other

 9                   poisons in the Lake Michigan watershed.

10                   4.  Steps to halt filling of shallow

II                   areas of the lake.

12                   5.  Initiation of studies on the effects

13                   of heat loading that will enable us to

14                   forecast the effects of various levels

15                   of heat loading on the waters and the

16                   climate.

17                   6.  A monitoring system to detect and

18                   trace discharge of oils.

19                   7.  Agreement on means to prohibit

20                   industrial classification of waters in

21                   the Lake Michigan watershed.

22

23

24                   MR. VOGT:  I would now like  to  call on

25         Mr. Keith Wilson, representing  the National

-------
   	2354-
 1                         J. L. ROUMAN
 2         Association of State Boating Law Administrators.

 3                   Mr. Wilson?
 4                    (No response.)
 5                   We might follow a similar procedure

 6         with Keith Wilson's statement, Mr. Chairman, and
 7         if he comes in later on today we will give him

 8         an opportunity to present it.  If not,  I would
 9         like to have it entered into the record as though

10         it was presented.
11                   MR. STEIN:  I think, by the way, this

12         is a very interesting statement, I have been
13         going through this, and this should be  read kind

14         of carefully by the conferees.
15                   MR. VOGTi  I have a  letter  from the
16         Michigan Manufacturers' Association,  and this  is

17         directed to the Honorable Stewart L.  Udall and
18         is signed by Mr. John C. McCurry, General Manager
19         of MMA.  I would like to enter this  letter in  the

20         record.
21                   MR. STEIN:  This  letter will  be intro-

22         duced into the record without  objection.

23              MICHIGAN MANUFACTURERS' ASSOCIATION

24              JOHN  C. MC CURRY,  GENERAL  MANAGER
25                      DETROIT, MICHIGAN

-------
   	2355
 !                        J. C. MC CURRY

 2
          The Honorable Stewart L. Udall
 3         secretary of the Interior
          Conference on The Pollution of the
 4          waters of Lake Michigan
          c/o Sherman House
 5         Randolph & Clark Streets
          Chicago, Illinois
 6

 7         Dear Mr. secretary

 8                                                           L
          On behalf of the Michigan Manufacturers Associatioiji
 g
          I appreciate the opportunity of submitting some

          brief comments to you in connection with the

          current conference on "The Pollution of the waters
12
          of Lake Michigan and Its Tributary Basin".  The
13
          Association and its members recognize  the impor-
14
          tance of water, not only for industrial and com-
15
          mercial purposes but also for  such individual
16
          purposes as home and recreational use. Michigan
17
          manufacturers  recognize their  responsibility to
18
          return  their effluent in a condition and  quality
19  I                                                    J
          that does not  cause injury to  other users or impair
20
          other uses; given present day  technological knowl-
21
          ed^e, developments, and processes.  This  recogni-
22
          tion is attested to by  the millions of dollars
23
          .spent in  recent  years by Michigan industry volun-
24
          tarily  or to meet  lawfully established criteria
25

-------
   	2356
 l                         J. C. MC CURRY

 2         and standards.
 3                   Michigan has had effective water pollu-
 4         tion control laws for approximately forty years.
 5         As conditions have changed and new problems .have
 5         developed, these statutes have been updated,  we
 7         believe Michigan today has laws on the books that
 3         effectively meet the challenge of the tiroes.
 9                   Next in importance to an adequate and
10         effective body of law is a calm, well-reasoned
11         administration of such law.  We believe that the
12         Michigan agencies administering the state's water
13         laws have done, are doing, and will continue to do
14         an effective job in administration and enforcement
15         Administrative agencies have sought and, with few
16         exceptions so far as industry is concerned, have
17         secured voluntary cooperation and compliance.  Mud
18         has been accomplished by this procedure.  sometime^
19         it may seem to others that the process is cumber-
20         some and tine consuming.  However, it has produced
21         and will continue to produce results and the pro-
22         gress has been orderly.  Too frequently difficult
23         problems ares attacked with an element of hysteria.
24         Hysteria itself accomplishes little of lasting val^je
25         and is conducive to costly mistakes.  A sound,
„.

-------
     	.    	2357

 1                         J.  C.  MC  CURRY

 2         well-reasoned and  logical approach offers the best

 3         and most effective  method of solving water pollu-

 4         tion problems.  This is the course Michigan is

 5         following—and properly so.

 6                   Last June, the Michigan Water Resources

 7         commission adopted, under the provisions of the

 8         Federal Water Quality Act of 1965, water quality

 9         standards and a plan of implementation and enforce

10         ment.  Upon your approval of the plan, as submitted

11         Michigan, its citizens and its industries will

12         have guidelines and criteria to meet and follow.

13         As has been the case in the past, Michigan and its

14         job providers will meet their responsibilities.

15                   I thank you for  the privilege  of express

16         ing by this means the opinions of Michigan Manu-

17         facturers1 Association.

18
                                very truly yours,
19
                                 (Signed*  J.  C. McCurry
20

21                               JOHN c. MCCURRY
                                General Manager
22

23                             _   _   _

24

                    MR. VOGT:   I would now  like to call on
25

-------
   	2358

 x                          GEORGE DLESK


 2         Mr.  George  Dlesk,  who will present a statement

 3         on behalf of the Pulp and Paper Mills in the

 4         Michigan.Portion of the Lake  Michigan Basin.


 5
                           GEORGE DLESK
 6
                       SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT
 7
                  PACKAGING CORPORATION  OP AMERICA
 8

 9                   MR.  DLESK:   Mr. Chairman, Members of

10         the  Conference and other distinguished guests,

11         ladies  and  gentlemen:

12                   I am George Dlesk,  Senior Vice Presi-

13         dent, Pulp,  Paper and Paperboard Division, Packag-

14         ing  Corporation of America.  I have been asked to

15         present the following statement:

16                   This statement expresses the views of

17         sixteen companies  who have signed it.  They are al

18         located in  the Lake Michigan  drainage basin, in

19         the  State of Michigan.  It is made in response to

20         an invitation by the  water Resources Commission

21         of Michigan dated December 29,  1967.  These com-

22         panies  represent approximately 98 percent of the

23         5,300 tons  of the  daily pulp  and paper production

24         in the  Michigan portion of the basin.  This is

25         equivalent  to over ten million pounds per day of

-------
    	2339
 1                         GEORGE  DLESK
 2        paper or would be approximately two pounds per day
 3        for the five and a half million people in the basin
 4        area.  The production represents a substantial
 5        contribution to the economy of Michigan.
 6                  This Statement is presented by members
 7       .of an industry whose very life blood depends on
 8        sound conservation principles.  Our primary raw
 9        materials are trees and water.  Their renewal and
10        enhancement are vital to our existence.  And
11        speaking of conservation, our industry collects
12        and uses a tremendous amount of waste paper every
13        year.  Ours was the first major industry to form
14        its own water improvement research organizations:
15        the Pulp Manufacturers Research League, founded
16        in 1938, and the National Council for Stream
17        Improvement, founded in 1943, twenty-five years
18        ago.  As a result of our applied research and
19        process refinements, the organic pollutional load
20        per ton of production has been reduced some 70
21        percent over the last twenty years.
22                  we urge that this Conferences
23                  (1)  Take into consideration that the
24        Michigan Water Resources Commission (WRC) has had
25        an increasingly effective pollution abatement

-------
   	2360
 1                         GEORGE DLESK

 2        program over a period of many years.  As a result

 3        of this program, evidence clearly shows that the

 4        basin rivers in the state of Michigan, such as the

 5        Kalamazoo River, have better water quality today

 g        than ten years ago; and better ten years ago than

 7        twenty years ago.  The WRC has issued orders of

 8        determination against any polluter whenever

 9        technologically feasible methods of treatment

10        would measurably benefit the receiving waters.

11        The Water Quality Criteria, Enforcement and

12        Implementation Plans submitted by the WRC to the

13        PWPCA in accordance with the requirements of the

14        1965 Federal water Quality Act insures that the

15        WRC's policy of enhancement of Michigan   water

16        quality will continue in the years ahead.  In its

17        recommendations, the conference should rely

18        heavily on the technical advice of the state water

19        pollution control agencies in the Lake Michigan

20        Basin.

21                  2.  Make only those recommendations

22        which will produce a measurable  improvement in

23        the water quality of Lake Michigan.  Emotionally

24        or politically inspired recommendations by this

25        Conference are not likely to stand up under the

-------
                                            	2361
 l                         GEORGE DLESK

 2         hard realities of techological and economic

 3         feasibility.  The recommendations must be both

 4         effective and realistic.

                    3.  Limit its recommendations to inter-

 6         state waters only.  Based on the record of accom-

 7         plishraent, and the water Quality Standards and

 8         implementation plans now under development for

 9         intrastate waters by the Michigan WRC and other

          State agencies, the protection of these intra-

          state waters can most effectively remain under

12         the exclusive authority of the individual states.

13                               Respectfully submitted,

14
                    Michigan Carton Company - Battle Creek
15                   Mead Corporation - Escanaba and Otsego
                    Allied Paper Corporation - Kalamazoo
                    Brown company - Kalamazoo
                    Hawthorne Paper company - Kalamazoo
                    Georgia Pacific Company - Kalamazoo
                    National Gypsum company - Kalamazoo
18                   American Can Company - Menominee
                    S. D. Warren - Muskegon
19                   French Paper company - Miles
                    Menasha corporation - Otsego
20                   Hammermill Paper Company - Watervliet
                    Simpson Lee Paper company - vicksburg
21                   Rockford Paper Mills - Rockford
                    Weyerhaeuser Company -
22                               Plainwell  and White Pigeon
                    Packaging Corporation of America -
23                               Filer City and Grand Rapids

24                   He w*«.t-' to thank you for the opportunity

25         to appear before you

-------
    	2362.


 I                         GEORGE DLESK

                                                            •


 2                  MR. STEIN:  Thank you.



 3                  Are there any comments or questions?



 4                  MR. HOLMER:  Mr. Chairman.



 5                  Mr.  Dlesk,  your third recommendation



 6        relates to the suggestion that this conference



 7        limit its recommendations to interstate waters



 8        only and that the protection of these intrastate



 9        waters  can most effectively remain under the



10  ,      exclusive authority of the states.



11                  The problem that perplexes me is whether



12        it is appropriate for the states to have different



13        standards applied according to a different tirae-



14        table with different degrees of water quality



I5        than those which apply to intrastate waters.  In



lfi        Wisconsin we have felt it appropriate to think



I7        in terms of intrastate standards that are strictly



18        comparable with those which we have suggested for



19        interstate waters.


OA
                    What is the advantage of leaving these



21        under the exclusive authority of the States?


22
                    MR. DLESK:   Well, I agree that the fram£


23
          work has been established and that we are probably



          all working within the same relative arena.  Prob-



25        ably the enforcement administration of the intra-

-------
   	  2363
 1                          GEORGE  DLESK
 2         state waters is the key that we would care to consider
 3         in this statement.
 4                   MR. STEIN:   Maybe we can clarify this,
 5         and I do this just in the interest, I hope, of
 6         clarification, because I think the Congress has
 7         already made a determination.
 g                   A lot of these companies are old friends
 9         I think we have met in other areas of the country.
10         I also thought we have dealt with them on a
11         reasonable basis looking for measurable improve-
12         roents, that we haven't had any emotionally or
13         politically inspired recommendations.
14                   I might say that the notions of what
15         was reasonable and feasible have not always met
16         the -- at least our views of that have not always
17         had the unanimous agreement and enthusiastic support
18         of a  lot of the companies mentioned here.  But,
19         again, I would like to point out that I think we
20         have  always been able to work out an agreement
21         and an accommodation in every case, whatever the
22         philosophy was, and by and large I think we get
23         along very well.
24                   NOW, this notion &t intrastate waters
25         can most effectively remain  under  the exclusive

-------
 1                     GEORGE DLESK




 2       authority  of the individual  States.  Under the




 3       present  law we can come  in on an  intrastate problem




 4       if  it is a navigable stream  (and  most waters are)




 5       on  the request of the  Governor.




 6                  Now, this has  happened  involving pulp




 7       and paper  mills in the past,  we  right  now have—




 8       and many of these companies  are represented there—




 9       one in Puget sound which we  were  called in by




10       Governor Rossellini of Washington.   The question




11       here is  if it is exclusively under  intrastate water




12       systems and the state  feels  it is a  big problem,




13       the Governor asks us in.



14                  Now, we were also  asked in on the Detroit




15       River by Governor Swainson of Michigan.  You did




16       have and still do not  one of the  companies listed




17       herebut a  pulp   and   paper   company




18       in   that   area.  That  company  has  agreed  to




19       a   Michigan  enforcement requirement   to clean




20       up   and  is  moving  ahead   with  the  other




21       industries.




22                  So I do think  that under  the  Federal




23       law this notion of anything  being under the exclu-




24       sive authority of the  individual  States has been




25       changed; that that doesn't exist  anymore, we do

-------
   	.	2365
 1                         GEORGE DLESK

 2        need the Governor's request to come in, but we can

 3        have Federal jurisdiction in an intrastate natter

 4        and we have been called in several times in cases

 5        involving pulp and paper mills.

 6                  Again, to point out to the audience,

 7        as far as I can see, we have never gone to court

 8        with a pulp and paper mill, and I agree with you,

 9        the challenge is to keep them in business and not

10        put them out of business.  As far as I know, the

11        record will show that they are still thriving and

12        in business after these pollution control cases.

13                  MR. KGLKERi  You may leave me even more

14        confused than I was.

15                  MR. STEIN:  Right.

16                  (Laughter.)

17                  MR. HOLMER:  The recommendation is that

18        the recommendations from this Conference be limited

19        to interstate waters, and there are quite a number

20        of intrastate waters that are within the basin of

21        Lake Michigan.  If these are adopted by -- or  if

22        the Secretary after this conference is concluded

23        makes recommendations and they are not limited to

24         interstate waters, they would be Federally enforce

25        able without the request of the Governor, if I

-------
   	2366



 1                     GEORGE DLESK




 2       understand  the procedure.




 3                 MR. STEIN:  The only way we  can enforce




 4       them  is  if  discharge in an  intrastate  water affects




 5       water quality in an interstate water,  and the only




 g       way we can  move to enforce  under our own jurisdic-




 7       tion, standards or no standards, is where the




 8       pollution in one state endangers the health or




 g       welfare  of  persons in another state.




10                 If neither of those situations apply,




11       we will  need the request of the Governor of the




12       State before we go in.  In  other words, there must




13       be pollution of interstate  waters and  that pollu-




14       tion  must endanger the health or welfare of per*




15       sons  in  another state.  The likelihood of your




16       endangering health or welfare of persons in another




17       state without pollution of  interstate waters is




18       not very likely except in that case where we can't




19       go in.   This doesn't affect you as it would shell-




20       fish  cases.  But these four states need not worry




21       about that provision of the Federal law, I don't



22       believe.




23                 MR. HOLMER:  I an sure we don't worry




24       about the shellfish.  But there has been consider-




25       able  evidence in the report, in the pre-Conference

-------
   	,	•__	2367


 1                          GEORGE  DLESK




 2         report of the PWPCA, to demonstrate that pollution



 3         in the tributary streams does affect the health



 4         and welfare of all.



 5                   MR. STEIN:  And in that case we would



 6         have -- now, I am talking theoretically and not



 7v        in terms of a specific case.  But I think the



 8         Federal law is clear on this.  If you have a dis-



 9         charge from a tributary stream going into Lake



10         Michigan and this affects the welfare of all the



11         people around Lake Michigan and contributes to



12         the eutrophication of the lake, assuming this is



13         so, I would think there was no doubt that we



14         would have Federal jurisdiction to go in and



15         abate that pollution, no question.



16                   Some people may argue that, but I think



17         they can just argue.  They are not going to pre-



18         vail.



19                   MR. HOLMER:  Thank you.


20
   |                 MR. STEIN8  Are there any further com-



21         raents?


22
                    (No response.)


23
                    MR. STEINt  If not, Mr. Vogt„



24                   MR. VOGTs  The next appearance will be



25         by Mr. A. R. Balden, Chairman of the Natural

-------
                	2368
   	———_	.—g.
 1                       A. R. BALDEN
 2        Resources Committee of the Michigan Chamber of
 3        Commerce.
 4                  MR. STEIN:  Thank you for coming up,
 5        Mr. Balden.  And I am going to depart here, because
 6        here is an old friend.
 7                  Unless you think we just go out and
 8        criticize people for lack of pollution control,
 9        I am delighted that Mr. Balden is here because
10        the Chrysler Corporation, with which he has been
11        associated, in my experience has been one of the
12        most forthright corporations in the United States
13        in its pollution abatement program.  They have  not
14        waited for State, Federal or local officials to
15        come up and force them to do things, develop
16        standards, develop criteria.  They have put in
17        the devices which they have believed on their own
18        would do the  job, and in a good many cases they
19        have shown the way.
20                  Tn  that Detroit case, for example, that
21        i pointed out, that we went into awhile ago, when
22        we looked at  the various polluters we found that
23        Chrysler was  doing a good job; and while we had
24        recommendations to make about other cities and
25        some thirty-three industries in the area, we didn't

-------
   	     .          	                  2369

 1                          A. R. BALDEN


 2         about Chrysler.  They already were doing the job.


 3                   Mr. Balden, we are delighted to have

 4         you here and delighted to have a company like


 5         yours with a pollution policy such as you have


 6         represented here.  Thank you.


 7                   MR. BALDENs  Thank you very much, Mr.

 8         Stein.


 9
                   STATEMENT OF A. R. BALDEN
10
             CHAIRMAN, NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE

11
                  MICHIGAN CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

12

13                   MR. BALDENi 'Conferees, Ladies and


14         Gentlemen:

15                   My name is Al Balden and I am presently


16         the chairman of the Natural Resources Committee


17         of the Michigan State Chamber of Commerce.  I have


18         been a member of this committee since its incep-


19         tion in 1962 and have been particularly gratified


20         to see the work of this fine organization in a

21         leadership role to protect the natural resources


22         of cur state of Michigan.


23                   To assure the continuation of these

24         natural resources to the extent that they shall


25         always be maintained at their optimum, the Michigaik

-------
   	237.0
 I                        A. R. BALDEN

 2        State chamber of Commerce has placed water pollu-

 3        tion control, the utilization of water resources,

 4        the preservation of all of our resources, and air

 5        pollution control high on its priorities  list in

 6        program planning.

 7                  In retrospect, looking back at  the

 8        initial goals set up in 1962, it is with  pleasure

 9        that we can count among our accomplishments the

lO        enactment of a practical yet firm water pollution

H        control law, an effective air pollution law, and

12        other laws that strengthen the state   role in

13        guidin9 its own destiny.

14                  I would like at this point to digress

15        from the script.  There is another item that came

16        to my attention and that is that two or three

17        years ago when it became evident that the state

18        of Michigan, the water Resources Commission, was

19        going to have to accelerate its activities in

20        water pollution control and that in order to so

21        accelerate these activities it would need a great-

22        ly enlarged staff, our Chamber of Commerce Natural

23        Resources group took an active stand in helping

24        obtain these funds.

25                  We believe we have placed Michigan in a

-------
                                                	2371
                          A. R. BALDEN

          leadership role among states by demonstrating

          that appropriate measures can be taken at a

          state level.  This deomonstrates clearly that

          business and state government have common objec-

          tives in meeting problems of this nature and 'that

          they can and are working together harmoniously

          in meeting a serious problem.

                    I would like to point out,  however,

10         that it did take the leadership and initiative

n         °* the state Chamber to bring all industry and

12         other segments  of the economy together to assist

13         ^"s Water Resources  Commission in taking the

14         appropriate steps.

15                   Members  of  our committee  and other

16         representatives  of Michigan  industry  met many

17         times  in  many hearings before  the water  Resources

18         Commission to assist  in  formulating effective

19         criteria  within  the technical  capability avail-

20         able to industry,

21                   Thus,  it was with  considerable  satisfac-

22         tion that  eventually  the proposed standards were

23         agreed to  by  all concerned and in June 1967 were

24         submitted  to  the secretary of the Interior for

25        his approval.

-------
   	2372

 !                         A. R. BALDEN

                                                            •
 2                   Since that time, hearings have continued


 3         and enforcement orders are being issued to hundreds;


 4         of communities and scores of industries, particu-


 5         larlY those who have critical sewage problems.


 6                   In a confidential survey conducted by


 7         the state chamber, it was revealed that almost


 8         every industry is engaged in some phase of


 9         improvement of their industrial waste treatment


10         facilities, involving the expenditure of many


11         millions of dollars in the very near future.


12                   Through all of this steady progress,


13         there is an understandable hesitancy on the part


14         of some to effect final control until the state-


15         adopted standards have the requisite approval  of


16         the secretary of the interior.

17                   We are very happy to represent the


18         industry of Michigan at this conference,  we want


19         to take this opportunity to offer our full coopera


20         tion and to promise our continued interest in


21         correcting the pollution problems of Lake Michigan


22                   The critical need at the moment is  to


23         take away the atmosphere of uncertainty that


24         hovers  over us.   This can be accomplished by  the


25         immediate Federal approval  or disapproval  (with

-------
   	2373
 I                        A. R. BALDEN

 2        reasons) of the submitted water  quality  standards.

 3                  We are pleased to note that  while full

 4        approval of the standards has  not been accomplished],

 5        conversations  between the Federal Water  Pollution

 5        Control Agency and the  various states  have been

 7        initiated.  This conference will serve a positive

 8        purpose if it  accelerates action leading to full

 9        agreement on the standards.

10                  In the meantime, we  are moving ahead

n        on  the establishment of intrastate standards in

12        our state.  Last August the time table was announcejd

13        for hearings to assign  water quality standards to

14        designated water uses for intrastate waters.

15        These hearings are to be completed in December.

16        The standards  are  substantially the same as those

17        involved in interstate  waters  and thus are affected

18        by  the  same uncertainty until  the basic  parameters

19        are approved by the  secretary  of the Interior.

20                  In order to accelerate pollution control

21        in  Michigan, Governor Romney has proposed a supple

22        mental  appropriation to implement a $14.4 million

23        Federal-State-local  pollution  control program and

24        $335 million  in general obligation bonds to help

25        finance  long-range pollution  control.

-------
                    	237J*
 1                         A.  R.  BALDEN

 2                   Among the proposals called for by the

 3         Governor are funds  for sharing with Federal and

 4         local units of Government the cost of the construe

 5         tion of pollution treatment facilities.

 6                   I point this out to you to indicate that

 7         we mean business in Michigan and are progressing as

 8         rapidly as possible toward the timely elimination

 9         of pollution to Lake Michigan.

10                   We have much to gain by this step.  I

11         should point out that  the tremendous salmon and

12         trout propagation program that we now have going

13         for us depends on clean water.  The fact that it

           exists today in our waters should encourage all

15         of us to act promptly  to assure that it continues

16         to grow and to prosper.  I submit that the alarmisjt,

17         who would have us smothering in pollution within

18         the next few years,  has not yet visited our clear

19         streams and the exciting waters of Lake Michigan.
20
                     I  invite  all  of you to come up and go Co:
10
21          salmon fishing  sometime.,

22                    MR. STEIN:   Thank you,  Al.

23                    Are there any  comments  or questions?

24                    (No response.)
25
                     MR.  STEIN*   Thank you for a good statement

-------
                                     	2375



 1                      A. R. BALDEN




 2                  (Off the record.)




 3                 MR. STEIN:  with that we plan  to  recess




 4       for lunch, but let me give you the schedule.   We




 5       will start at 1:30, and we expect that Governor




 6       Knowles will go on at 2:00.  But we  reserve the




 7       privilege of interrupting the speaker who is




 8       making his presentation when Governor Knowles




 9       arrives to give Governor Knowles the opportunity




10       to stay with his schedule, and then  we will take




11       up with that speaker later.




12                 We stand in recess until 1:30.




13                  (Whereupon, at 11:55 a.m., a luncheon




14       recess was taken.)




15




16




17




18




19




20




21




22




23




24




25

-------
                                                       2376
 1                     KEITH CHAMBERS

 2
                    AFTERNOON SESSION
 3
                                       (1:30 p.m.)
 4

 5                MR. STEINt  May we reconvene?

 B                Mr. vogt?
                  ^.
 7                MR. VOGT:  Mr. Chairman,  at this  point I

 8      would like  to call on Mr. Keith Chambers, represent-

 9      ing the southern Lake Michigan  Fishermen's  co-Opera-

10      tive Association.

11                Keith Chambers.

12
                   STATEMENT OF KEITH  CHAMBERS
13
               SOUTHERN LAKE MICHIGAN  FISHERMAN'S
14
                        CO-OP ASSOCIATION
15
                       SAUGATUCK. MICHIGAN
16

17                MR. CHAMBERS:  I want to  thank the chair-

18      man and this committee for allowing me to appear

19      here today.

20                In the fifties of this century, Lake

21      Michigan had alewives in alarmingly vast numbers.

22      in the winter of 1959 and the spring of  1960, the

23      alarmed few of us in the commercial fishing industry,

24      had laws changed to allow trawling  for the  taking of

25      these species.

-------
                                                      2377
 1                     KEITH CHAMBERS
 2                All these changes that have taken  place  in
 3      the Great Lakes are not news or history  to us.   As
 4      I am the fifth generation in commercial  fishing,
 5      that we know of, these changes affect our livelihood
 6      to the extent of how to operate, what type of equip-
 7      nent and for what species to fish.
 8                Last year (1967) between Wisconsin and
 9      Michigan, trawlers have produced over 50 million
U>      pounds of alewives.  They are being utilized in
11      fish meal and the pet food industry.  In the future,
12      they may be used as protein concentrate.
13                «P>»4 a inaa v • a a 1 <*«.»•{ ft* A 4 *»_/•»*« *4*»nll<> a 1 B «•«•»_
                 — •-••• J — —•• tm »-^.—••»••— o^— —•«» A^MWAAJf ««^««a>U>
14      ed the Great Lakes States of pollution, to the point
15      that we cannot turn away from the problem.N  what
16      the public and other people cannot understand is
17      that about nine times the amount of dead alewives
18      washed on beaches, sank to the bottom of Lake
19      Michigan to add further to the already alarming
20      conditions of polluted Lake Michigan.
21                After this year's die-off of alewife,  we
22      encountered five feet of decaying alewives on the
23      bottom of Lake Michigan in from sixty feet of water
24      to ninety feet of water.  In miles from  shore,  this
25      would be about 2 miles to 3% miles from  shore on

-------
                                                      2378
 1                     KEITH CHAMBERS

 2      the Michigan  State side of Lake Michigan.  Each

 3      state would vary as far as miles because of greater

 4      or lesser slope of lake bottom near  shore.

 5                This committee already knows the impor-

 6      tance of the  effects that this amount of dead fish

 7      can do to our fresh water basin.  This depth of

 8      water is very, very serious, as drinking water is

 9      taken from this area.  Spawning beds are ruined

10      for both sport and commercial species.  Yachts and

11      small boat enthusiasts relax and utilize this area.

12                Fishery managers from soro<5 states believe

13      the coho salmon, which preys on alawivea, is ths

14      long-range solution for alewife control.  This year,

15      the State of  Michigan sold ovar 1 million pounds

16      of salmon that entered two rivers to spawn and die.

17      Next year's estimated run or die-off is near or over

18      4 million pounds.

19                When enough salmon are planted to control

20      the alewife,  what figure will be projected to the

21      annual die-off salmon is not talked about or thought

22      about, but should be brought to your attention and

23      also to the attention of the public.  Are some

24      people trying to trade one problem for another?

25      Ecological balance is needed and has to be a must;

-------
                                                      2379
 I                     KEITH CHAMBERS

 2      just as pollution control is a roust.

 3                in August  1967,  we offered a solution

 4      for the floating dead alewives that would help

 5      stop tons and tons of dead alewives front reaching

 6      the beaches.  This operation would use surface

 7      trawls instead of bottom trawls,  which are used to

 8      catch live alewives.  The surface trawls or seines

 9      would skin the surface to a depth of about twenty

10      feet.  This would skin the dead floating fish and

11      a portion of the sinking ninety percent that nobody

12      sees to a depth of twenty or more feet.

13                These past seven years  we have been and

14      are constantly improving and developing skills,

15      knowledge,  research, equipment,  facilities, and

16      markets.  The marketing is the major problem, as

17      the sales control the amount of alewives caught or

18      produced.  All of this has  been done by Lake Michigan

19      trawlers, Wisconsin and Michigan,  at no cost to

20      state or Federal governments.

21                I have some figures here that I didn't

22      have entered here just to bring the point that this

23      is not an operation that is a six-week period as

24      some people have surmised,   what  I have done here,

25      Z have broken this down to a unit of effort.  NOW,

-------
   I                                                     2380
 1                     KEITH CHAMBERS
 2      this  unit of effort that I am referring to is per
 3      hour.  This per hour is the actual time that this
 4      net  is  being towed.  This does not include time
 5      going to the fishing grounds or back.
 6                1966, January, hourly average in poundage
 7      was  5,190 pounds per hour.
 8                February was 2,120 pounds per hour.
 9                March, 1,855 pounds per hour.
 !0                April, 2,800 pounds per hour.
 11                May,  27,576 pounds per hour of effort.
 12                June, 13,160.
 13                July, 1,440.
 14                August,  1,212 pounds.
 15                September,  2,455.
 16                October,  1,300.
 17                November, 2,160 pounds.
 18                December, 1,860 pounds.
,19                I could go through.  In '67 it has gone
 20      up somewhat.
                  If the same cooperation were received by
 22
        the  local commercial operators as is suggested to
 no
        foreign vessels, we believe we could expand the
        fleet and catching ability to exceed the help which
 25
        these foreign vessels could give.  in addition, this

-------
                                                       2381


 1                     KEITH CHAMBERS



 2      would not require changes in the Federal Law.



 3                I am also representing sixteen trawlers



 4      from Wisconsin.  They have sixteen trawlers and in



 5      1965 -- I am speaking just of the Wisconsin Trawlers



 6      at the moment—they produced 11 million pounds of



 7      alewife; in '66, 24 million pounds;  '67, 35 million



 8      pounds.  These figures are verified by the Wisconsin




 9      Conservation Department.



10                In the figures that I gave for our



11      cooperative, this is just one vessel and these



12      will be verified by the Bureau of Commercial



13      Fisheries at Ann Arbcr.



14                In 1968 the projected figure of the



15      Wisconsin Trawlers is 45 million pounds.  In fish



16      that would probably be about a million or more.



17                This year this is what they anticipate.



18      However, the fish meal plants have advised the



19      fishermen that they can only pay 15 dollars per ton



20      due to the low price of fish.meal caused by heavy



21      imports.  At this price no Alewife will be caught


22
       in 1968 because the trawlers cannot fish at this



23      price.




                 If no trawlers operate, there will be


25
       another 45 or more million pounds of alewife left

-------
                                                       2382



 I                      KEITH  CHAMBERS



 2      to  die  and  pollute  the waters  of Lake  Michigan



 3                The  trawlers  listed  in this  booklet are



 4      55-foot steel  trawlers,  modern in every respect,



 5      equipped with  the latest electronic equipment, such



 6      as  Fish Finders,  Marine  Radios,  and Depth Sounders.



 7      All but one are of  the modern  stern Ramp design.



 8      This  fleet  is  second  to  none in its size range on



 9      the Great Lakes,  the  Gulf States or the coast



10      Trawlers.



11                The  operators  have from two  to ten'years



12      experience  and have the  most efficient nets and



13      equipment available.  No Canadian trawlers a re


14          _  _
       needed.


15



16



17



18



19



20



21



22



23



24



25

-------
   	           2383


 l


 2


 3


 4


 5                           AND THE


 6


 7


 8


 9


10


11


12


13                      FACTS AND  FIGURES


14          COMPILED BY WISCONSIN LICENSED TRAWLERS


15


16


17


18

                        AND SOME ANSWERS
19


20


21
                            January 1968
22


23


24


25

-------
     	2384

 1


 2


 3
                    ROBERT ANGWALL

 *                    75 Bay Shore, Marinette Wisconsin

                      Telephone RE 2-2923


                      — representing the following Wisconsin Trawlers:
 6

                                                                        Hold Capacity
                    ART SWAER, Oconto, Wisconsin — 3 boats	25 tons each

 g                  SUSIE Q FISH CO., Two Rivers, Wisconsin — 2 boats	25 tons each

                    RULEAU BROS., Cedar River,  Michigan — 1 boat	25 tons

                    ROBERT ANGWALL, Marinette, Wisconsin — 1 boat	60 tons
10
                    OLE JOHNSON, Oconto, Wisconsin — 1 boat	25 tons

                    WILBUR REED, Oconto, Wisconsin — 1 boat	25 tons

12                  FRANK LE CLAIR & SON, Two Rivers, Wisconsin 1 boat	25 tons


13


14


15                                        Facts  and Figures

16
                    •  In  1965 11  million  pounds  of  Alewife were  caught by Wisconsin
                        Trawlers.
17

                    •  In  1966 24  million  pounds  of  Alewife were  caught by Wisconsin
18                      Trawlers.


19                  •  In  1967 35  million  pounds  of  Alewife were  caught by Wisconsin
                        Trawlers.

20
                        The above figures can be verified  at the  Wisconsin Conservation
                        Department, Green Bay, Wisconsin.
21

                    •  In  1968 it would be projected that the Wisconsin Trawlers  could
22                      produce 45 million pounds of Alewife or about 1 billion fish.


23


24


25

-------
                                                     	2385

 1

 2

 3

                  However the Fish Meal plants have advised the fishermen that they
                  can only pay $15.00 per ton due to the low price of fish meal caused by
                  heavy imports. At this price no Alewife will be caught in 1968 because
 5                the trawlers cannot fish at this price.

 g                If no trawlers operate, there will be another 45 million pounds of Ale-
                  wife left to die and pollute the waters of Lake Michigan.
 7
                  The trawlers listed in this booklet are 55 foot steel trawlers modern
                  in every respect, equipped with  the latest electronic equipment such
                  as Fish Finders, Marine Radios, and Depth Sounders. All but one are
                  of the modern Stern Ramp design.  The Fleet is second to none in its
                  size range  on the Great Lakes, the  Gulf States or the Coast Trawlers.

10                The operators have from  2 to 10 years experience and have the most
                  efficient nets and equipment available.   No Canadian  Trawlers are
                  •needed.


12

13


14                                  Answers to the Problems

15
                  Under the supervision and in coordination with  the Bureau of Com-
                  mercial Fisheries utilize the Wisconsin Trawlers to catch Alewife before
                  they die off and before they drift onto the beaches.

17
                  Enter  into Lease Agreements with the individual trawlers for fixed
                  amounts. Items  to be considered:
18
                       1. Disposal  of fish caught.
19                     2. Length of fishing day.
                       3. Areas to  be fished.
                       4. Bottom trawling and surface skimming.
                       5. Dollar value of fixed amounts.
21

                  We  have trucks available for each  boat to transport  these fish to
                  market or  wherever we have to go to dispose of them.

23

24

25

-------
                                                       2386
 !                     KEITH CHAMBERS
 2                MR.  CHAMBERS:   I  think  that will  be  it,
 3      unless  there are any questions.
 4                MR.  STEIN:   Let roe ask  you, do  you think
 5      that you have  the  equipment to  seine all  the
 6      alewives so we won't have a die-off if  it could be
 7      made economically  feasible  for  you and  worth your
 8      while?
 9                MR.  CHAMBERS:   This is  really an  unknown.
10      We can  project or  produce figures of live alewives.
11      The rate of floating or dying is  another  question.
12      we feel with eight to  ten boats that we could  take
13      care of a hundred  mile strip or area, but this has
14      not been done.
15                MR.  STEIN:   Here  is what I am getting
16      at.  we had a  tremendous  alewife  die-off  on the
17      beaches last year.  Do you  have the  physical
18      equipment to catch all these alewives,  and  let's
19      suppose you received a subsidy  or some  money to
20      help you with  this, so they wouldn't be any
21      nuisance on the beaches?
22                MR.  CHAMBERS:   I  would  say close  to  that,
23      but there will be  some nuisance.  I wouldn't want
24      to  stand here and say that we  could guarantee it.
25      But if  you produce another—now,  not live ones, but

-------
                                                       2387



 1                   KEITH CHAMBERS



 2      the dead ones floating off the lake, if you took



 3      off 20 or 30 or 50 or 100 million pounds, this



 4      definitely has got to be a tremendous improve-



 5      nent.



 6                MR. STEIN:  Well, here, what I an doing



 7      is looking for some way so we won't have that die-



 8      off next year.  Mow, you say no Canadian trawlers



 9      are needed.  If we get an estimate and we get the--



10      if you don't have the capacity and we have Canadian



11      trawlers, this may be a method of getting rid of



12      the alewives. wouldn't it?



13                MR. CHAMBERS:  There  are  boats  that



14      are  not  being  utilized  today.   There  is  two,



15      there  have  been  two,  large  trawlers  in the



16      75-foot  class  area  that  hold  60  tons  that



17      are  not  being  used.   These  are  owned  by



18      people  in the  Great  Lakes.



19                MR. STEIN:  But that is just two.  What



20      I am saying, do we have enough equipment to handle
21
       the Lake Michigan problem on the American  side?
22
                 Let us suppose money were no object; we




23      were to tell you to come up with a fair price




24      Could the American Trawler Fleet get enough boats




       into Lake Michigan to be reasonably sure we wouldn't

-------
                                                        2388


 1                    KEITH CHAMBERS




 2     have alewives  littering the beaches this year?



 3               MR.  CHAMBERS:  I believe there are other



 4     ways of doing  it than by importing Canadian boats.



 5               MR.  STEIN:  Like what?



 6               MR.  CHAMBERS:  I think there are vessels



 7     in the United  States Navy, for one example, that



 8     could be utilized.



 9               MR.  STEIN:  No, I don't think — let's look



10     at this.  Here is what I am thinking.     What I an



11     looking for is a reasonable method, and I am just



12     exploring this, that we in the states can get



13     together to get rid of these alewives so we won't



14     be faced with  the nuisance problem next year.  Now,



15     you have an American fishing fleet.  I think we have



16     to look to private enterprise for that.  The question



17     is--let me make this first assumption--with the boats



18     available both from the Canadian and the American



19     side you would have no doubt that we could seine


20
      enough alewives so we wouldn't have the problem, is



21     that correct?


22
                MR.  CHAMBERS:  Yes.



23               MR.  STEIN:  All right.  Now, if this is



 4     the case, the  question is, if we can't do it with


25
      the American fleet alone we have to determine where

-------
                                                       2389

 1                    KEITH CHAMBERS
 2     we can get it.
 3               What would you think the cost would be to
 4     augment your costs so this could be the kind of
 5     enterprise—and I an not suggesting this, that we
 6     are going to do this, but j; an exploring the
 7     possibility.  Supposing the states and we wanted to
 8     get together and use the existing commercial fleets,
 9     giving, preference, of course, to the American boats,
10     but augmenting this with Canadian boats, how much
11     would this cost us? HOW much would we have to put
19
      up in Federal funds and Stats funds or public funds to
13     have you utilize this method so we wouldn't have
 4     this alewife nuisance?
15               MR. CHAMBERS:  well, this is a rather hard
16
      question to answer for two reasons.  One of them is
17
      we do not know the number of days that this would be
18
      needed.  NOW, for an operation that these vessels
19
      cruise, they would have to be contracted by the day,
20
      not by the poundage, because we have no outlet for
21
      the poundage,  so what we feel is just is 550 dollars
22
      a day.  This is a vessel, the crew and the captain.
23
                MR. STEINi  How much of this would have to
24                           A
      come from public funds?  For example, you are going
25
      to get some money for the alewife catch, aren't you?

-------
                                                       2390
 1                     KEITH CHAMBERS
 2                MR.  CHAMBERS:   If  there  is  a  place for
 3     them.  This  is what  controls our production now,
 4     the ready  markets  that we have  control  the produc-
 5     tion that  we now have.
 6                MR.  STEIN:  All right.   Let me  ask you,
 7     a boat would cost  550 dollars a day to  control
 8     alewives?
 9                MR.  CHAMBERS:  Yes.
10                MR.  STEIN:  All right.   Now,  how many  boats
11     do you think we would need?  I  am  trying  for a ball-
12     park estimate  here.
13                MR.  CHAMBERS:  There  are twenty available—
14                MR.  STEIN:  No, how many boats  do you
15     think we would need  to control  the whole  problem?
16                Let's suppose I had all  the money in the
1?     world and  I  said to  you, "Mr. Chambers, you get  a
18     fleet of boats and seine those  alewives as they  come
19     up," how many  boats would you think you would need?
20                MR.  CHAMBERS:  If  you want  roe to be perfect-
21     ly frank and honest  --
22                MR.  STEIN:  Yes.
23                MR.  CHAMBERS:  '—I don't know.
24                MR.  STEIN:  Well,  if  we  are going to come
25     up with this as a possible solution,  and  I think

-------
                                                       2391


 1                   KEITH CHAMBERS



 2      this has some intriguing possibilities* it is much



 3      better to seine those alewives, much better than bul!



 4      dozing then off the beaches once they get on there,



 5      If we are thinking in terras of this, — in terns



 6      of an immediate public program to deal with this



 7      and are going to utilize your boats — we are



 8      going to have to come up with some kind of cost



 9      estimates to see if this is feasible —-



10                MR. CHAMBERS:  Right.



11                MR. STEIN*  	and if we have the



12      resources to do it.   I think you have raised



13      a very, very interesting possibility.   But I
14
       do believe we are going to have to have you
15      people go home with our fishery experts and sharpen



16      your pencils and see if we can come up with an



17      estimate.



18                MR. CHAMBERS:  Right.  NOW, we are here



       for a starting point.  And this, I say, your twenty



       vessels that you now have is a starting point.  This


21
       is what is going to prove your knowns and your un-


22
       knowns, where at the moment I wouldn't say 40 would



       do it, maybe 20 can do it, maybe 10 can do it.  I



24      doubt it.  I doubt it very much.


25
                 But I would say it is in the realm of 30

-------
                                                      2392
 1                    KEITH CHAMBERS

 2     boats.  I would say.  But this  is  just a halfway
 3     educated guess.
 4               MR. STEIN:  Thirty boats would amount to
 5     what, about  15 thousand dollars a  day?  Right?
 6               MR. CHAMBERS}  In that realm, yes.
 7               MR. STEINi  How many  days would you think
 8     they would have to run to do the job?
 9               MR. CHAMBERS:  well,  we  found last year
10     it started when the run was tapering off, so that
11     would have been from the first  part of July through
12     the middle of August—no, it wasn't.  It was over by
13     August, actually,  we had Federal  meetings in Muskegor
14     August 3rd,  and it was done.  so it would be roughly
15     around a four or five week period.
16               MR. STEIN:  In other  words, you would
17     estimate that the clean-up program probably would
18     cost about a half   million dollars?
13               MR. CHAMBERS:  Yes.
20               MR. STEIN:  All right.
21               Now, again, if this is an estimate, we can
22     come up with firm figures and put  it to you with the
23     resources of the four States and  the Federal
24     Government, and if we  cannot have   an alewife problem
25     here with about a half a million dollar expenditure

-------
  I                                                   2393
 !                    KEITH CHAMBERS

 2     from public funds, this nay be something very well

 3     that the Conferees may very carefully consider.

 4     But I think before we can entertain a proposition

 5     like that,  we pretty much have to have cost figures

 6     and a kind of check from the Bureau of Commercial

 7     Fisheries and your state fisheries groups that

 8     this would reasonably do the job.

 9               But it seems to me that what you are

10     presenting here may be an avenue that we would

11     seriously consider.

12               MR. HOLMER:  It certainly so appears, Mr.

13     Chairman.

14               But I have a preliminary question.

15               The last paragraph of your statement, Mr.

16     Chambers, says, "If the same cooperation were

17     received by the local commercial operators as is

18     suggested to foreign vessels."

19               I wonder if you could elaborate a little

20     bit as to what you mean by the same cooperation?

21               MR. CHAMBERS:  Well, the articles that we

22     have read within the past week,  that the Government

23     was going to lease these Canadian vessels and man

24     them with American crews to get by this Federal

25     curtailment,  well,  being selfish, like all humans

-------
                                                    239^
                     KEITH CHAMBERS

2     are, I would like this kind of a deal.  I would

3     rather lease my boat to the government and sit hone

4     and draw the same kind of money without endeavoring

5     to work it or to earn your keep, so to speak.

6               MR. HOLMERs  But this is what you meant

7     by this statement?

8               MR. CHAMBERS:  well, I mean I am just

9     bringing out a point here.  This is, I think, a

10     better deal for the Canadians than what it is for

11     the Americans.  This was the example I am using.

12               MR. STEIN:  Before we get into it, I think

13     what we have to do, and I don't think there is any

14     question, at least I hope I am speaking for the

15     Conferees--

16               MR. CHAMBERS:  could I interrupt here for

17     just a moment?  what I am trying to emphasize or

18     bring out here is that when help is needed let's

19     take care of what we already have first.

20               MR. STEIN:  Sure.

21               MR. CHAMBERS:  And from there on, let's
22     See where we have to go.

23               MR. STEIN:  I don't think there is any

24     question here, and I don't know that I speak for all

25     the conferees, that at least the people at this

-------
                                                     2395
 1                   KEITH CHAMBERS
 2    table would  prefer  to  use—after  all.  Lake Michigan
 3    is  an American lake--we would  prefer to use American
 4    equipment  and American resources  before we go some-
 5    where else.
 6               I  think what we  do need,  though, is kind
 7    of  a hard-nosed  nuts and bolts proposition where  we
 8    can determine what  is  needed and  for how long to
 9    rid   Lake:  Mich ig.an of -alewives or keep it
10    under control.   secondly,  how  much  it is going to
11    cost.  And thirdly, how much American equipment and
12    American personnel  we  have available.   And then if
13    we  have to augment  that by a foreign source,  we
14    will do it.
15               But I  think  until we have those first
16    questions  answered, it is  going to  be very hard for
17    the public agencies to mount the  program if we are
18    going to use  the  fishing fleet  as  an instrument of
19    control this summer.
20               I  do think,  sir,  we  all have a lot of work
21    to  do and  this very well may prove  to the benefit
22    of  your group and the  Governmental  group if this
23
     proves  to  be  feasible.   it  is  certainly an avenue
24     that we have  to pursue.
25              MR. CHAMBERSs   Right.   I  agree with you

-------
                                                         239$

 I                     KEITH CHAMBERS


 2     a hundred percent.

.3                But here  are  the  questions that have been

 4     asked  me  since these news releases  came  out.   "Well,

 5     this is  fine, the Canadians are  coining in to  kill

 6     off the alewife.  what  are  you fellows going  to do?"

 7     This is what has been projected  to  the public.

 8                So I would like to have the public  read

 9     some of  this, possibly,  to  either counteract  it or

10     get some  true basic figures out.

11                DR. BORUFF:   Mr.  Chairman.

12                MR. STEIN:  Yes,  Dr. Boruff.

13                DR. BORUFF:   Using your terminology, while

14     we are in this nuts and bolts  consideration,  we

15     should also consider the cost  of drying  these fish

16     to fish meal, which hasn't  been  in  your  discussion
 > .                                     " .
17     so far.   This would also not be  a small  figure.

18                MR. STEIN:  That's correct.

19                MR. CHAMBERS:  This  is a  little bit out

20     of my  realm.  I think Mr. Angwall is here who can

21     probably—

22                MR. STEIN:  Well,  I  think we have pursued

23     this as far as possibly we  can go now, and I  do

24     think  this warrants a little technical workup so we

25     have something really specific to deal with,  and I

-------
                                                        2397
 1                     KEITH CHAMBERS
 2     would  suggest  that we might try to get the technical
 3     staffs together to work this up.1                    ,
 4                MR.  CHAMBERSi  Fine.
 5                MR.  STEIN:  Are there any further comments
 6     or  questions?
 7                If not,  thank you very much, Mr. Chambers.
 8                MR.  CHAMBERSi  Thank you.
 9                (Applause.)
10                MR.  STEIN:  Mr. Holmer.
11
                   WISCONSIN PRESENTATION
12                       "
13                MR.  HOLMERj  Mr. Chairman, fellow Conferees
14     ladies and gentlemen.
15                It is a  great privilege for me to present
16     to  this audience the Governor of the state of
17     Wisconsin,  the Honorable Warren P. Knowles.
18
           STATEMENT OP THE HONORABLE WARREN P., KNOWLES
19                          GOVERNOR
                      STATE OR WISCONSIN:;
20
21                GOVERNOR KNOWLES:  Mr. Stein, Conferees,
22     ladies and gentlemen.
23                I am very pleased to have the opportunity
24     to  be  here today,  and I want to express my apprecia-
25     tion to Mr. Stein  as Chairman and to the state of

-------
                                                       2398,
 j                    GOVERNOR W.  P.  KNOWLES



 2       Michigan  for interrupting their  presentation that



 3       I might have this  occasion  to  present  the  Wisconsin



 4       story.



 5                  I  am happy to  really have  this opportunity



 6       to  join with those who share the Wisconsin interest



 7       in  the future of Lake Michigan and the enhancement



 8       of  America's great water resources.



 g                  It is my purpose  to  preface  the  formal



10       introduction of Wisconsin's presentation with the



H       firm  assurance that the  Badger State,  to the extent



12       °f  its resources,  will give full and aggressive



13       support to the conference recommendations,  which



14       are capable  of accomplishment.



15                  Having been a  member of the  Wisconsin



16       Legislature  or Executive Branch  of government for



17       a period  of  24 out of the last 28 years, I am fully



18       cognizant of the history of Wisconsin's pollution



19       problems  and the programs which  have been  enacted



20       into  law. I myself have always  been concerned as



21       a conservationist  with the  matter of preservation



22       of  our water, our  land,  and our  forests as our roost



23       precious  natural resources. I,  therefore,  at this



24       time  would like to briefly  review the  history of



25       the anti-pollution activities  in the state of
                           -    :-'r' ' '•

-------
                                                       2399
 1                 GOVERNOR W. P. KNOWLES

 2     Wisconsin.

 3               During the early days of my  legislative

 4     experience, from 1940 until 1948,  there was  very

 5     little recognition given to the problem  or  the

 6     effects of lake and stream pollution.  In 1949,

 7     however, Wisconsin did enact the  water pollution

 8     control law.  This law created a  committee  on water

 9     pollution and appropriated funds  for the study  of

10     pollution and the enforcement of  abatement  provisions,

H               During the period again from 1950 to  1965,

12     while the water pollution committee was  active,  little,

13     if any. further attention was given tc legislation

14     concerning water pollution.

15               In early 1961, legislation was introduced

16     relative to detergents and also a boat toilet law

17     was passed.  The detergent bill deferred the effec-

18     tive date of a prohibition against non-degradable

19     detergents until 1967.  The boat  toilet  law was

20     vetoed.

21               In 1963, another unsuccessful  attempt was

22     made at passage of legislation to restrict  the  use

23     of boat toilets.

24               Shortly after I took office  in 1965 as

25     Governor, I created the Governor's Committee on water

-------
                                                       2400

 l                    GOVERNOR W.  P.  KNOWLES




        Resources,  composed of both citizen  and  legislative-
 A                                 -



 .       members.  This  special committee  held  hearings




 4       throughout  the  state for an 8-month  period  and




 _       developed a broad and comprehensive  anti-pollution




 6       control program for Wisconsin.




 7                 In June, 1966,  at a  resumed  session of




 8       our  legislature, with bipartisan  support we enacted




 g       a  sweeping  statewide anti-pollution  program that




10       has  won praise  from both secretary of  the interior




U       Udall and from  Administrator Quigley of  PWPC.




12       Secretary Udall, speaking here  in Chicago,  said,




13       "It  was the finest piece of legislation  yet enacted




14       in the national fight to preserve clean  water."   It




15       became a model  for legislation  in other  states.




16                 Some  of the provisions  of  the  law are  as




17       follows:




18                 First, it consolidated  the state  water




19       responsibilities in one  department.




20                 Secondly, it organized  water management




21       regions to  utilize the technical  staff in a most




22       efficient and effective  manner.




23                 Thirdly, it provided  financial assistance




24       to accelerate construction  of  pollution  prevention




25       and  abatement facilities.  A six  million dollar

-------
                                                      2401
 1                  GOVERNOR W. P. KNOWLES

 2       annual state program of grants for communities

 3       will generate $300 million of pollution abatement

 4       effort to supplement the approximately $2 million

 5       annually which has been granted by the Federal

 6       Government  to Wisconsin communities.  Tax

 7       incentives are also provided to encourage industria

 8       participation in our pollution abatement efforts.

 9                 Fourth, we planned water use management

10       and protection through the Department of Resources.

11                 We established criteria to balance  the

12       various uses of water.

13                 Sixth, to control pollution by identify-

14       ing the sources of pollution, issuing orders  to

15       correct that pollution and implementing control

16       through the enforcement wherever needed.  And

17       this we are doing.

18                 We enacted in this law also a provision

19       for shoreline and flood plain zoning. Every county

20       in Wisconsin is required to adopt zoning ordinances

21       to regulate the use within 1,000 feet of lakes

22       and 300 feet from streams.  Most counties have

23       already accomplished this and others are going

24       to complete their work during 1968.  These local

25       regulations include sanitary codes to protect all

-------
                                                      24-02
 1                    GOVERNOR W.  P.  KHOWLES

 2       of our waters,  including Lake  Michigan.

 3                  The  law  further provided  supervision and

 4       proper operation of the  sewerage  facilities  and

 5       the  installation of septic  tanks  by licensed

 6       sewerage  plant  operators and the  granting  of

 7       permits for  septic tank  installation.

 8                  The  law  further provided,  as enacted in

 9       1965, for a  department designated as the water

10       Resources Center at the  University  of Wisconsin.

H       It appropriated $600,000 for research at that

        tine, which  has been since  supplemented and  we

13       will continue  our  efforts to provide for new ways

14       of abating and  preventing pollution in our lakes

        and  streams.

I6                  And  ten, it provided specifically  to

1?       regulate  the water quality  and water structures

18       to insure the  proper development  of necessary

19       means to  solve  them.
20
21
24
25
          NOW, this legislation has been on the boo*

in Wisconsin for two years.  Our Resource Developnen
22       Board and  its  regional  counterparts  are  established

23       and are already  functioning  effectively
          The water Policy Board has issued more tha

43 orders, and in addition more than 50 of the order
                                                             8
                                                             n
                                                             8

-------
                                                      2^03



 1                 GOVERNOR W. P. KNOWLES



 2     issued earlier by the committee on Water pollution



 3     have been referred to the Attorney General's office



 4     for prosecution.



 5               we are very proud of our Wisconsin program.



 6     we are proud of the progress that is already being



 7     made to deal with water pollution from all sources



 8     within the State.



 9               We are also determined--determined to



10     proceed at full speed with the execution of the



11     program.  In December, for instance, we held hearings



12     on pollution on the Upper Fox River and the Root



—     River and other streams in southeastern Wisconsin.



14     Last month we held two days of hearings on pollution



15     on the Lower Fox River, and now we are beginning a



16     series of separate hearings on the Milwaukee River



17     outside of Milwaukee County.



18               All of these hearings are necessary as a



19     prerequisite to new and more rigorous orders to



      municipalities and industries who may be contaminating



21     or polluting these rivers.  Abatement.orders will be


22
      issued just as rapidly as possible and we intend to



23     enforce these orders strictly to require compliance



      by both municipalities and industries wherever it is



25     possible to do so.

-------
                                                       2404
 1                  GOVERNOR W.  P.  KNOWLES

 2                Wisconsin, too, has welcomed the decision
 3      by  Congress to require all  States to adopt inter-

 4      state water quality standards.  Wisconsin not only
 5      moved quickly to adopt these interstate standards,

 6      but it is applying these to the inland waters as

 7      well.

 8                Giving strength to our anti-pollution
 9      effort was the enactment last year of a sweeping
10      reorganization of our State Government, reducing
H      the total number of agencies from 87 to 28.  The

12      Reorganization Act brought  most of our State
13      natural resource functions  together under one

14      coordinate Department of Natural Resources.  In

l5      addition, we gave the power to control air pollution
16      and solid wastes to the  newly created Department of
17      Natural Resources.

18                The idea of separate agencies administer-
19      ing State responsibilities  for fish and game and

20      water simply would not stand.  Our land resources,
21      our fish and game, our forests,  our lakes are so
       intertwined that they have  to be managed together
23      for proper environmental control.  This was our goal,
24      This is what we have begun  to do.

25                In addition, we have established a Natural

-------
                                                      2405



j                 GOVERNOR W. P. KNOWLES



2     Resources Council of State Agencies to work as a



3     coordinating body to represent the natural resource



4     interests and activities of the various agencies of



5     State Government.  I net with this group again



6     yesterday morning.  It involves all of the agencies



7     that have anything to do with air, land, water,



8     education, highways and agriculture, soil and water,



9     and so forth.



10               And while we recognize that we do have a



11     serious pollution problem and note the intensity of



12     action that we are engaged in to combat pollution,



13     it is appropriate to emphasize that Wisconsin
                              /


14     waters have not reached a critical stage as they



15     have in many states.   Fishing is good in the great



16     majority of our lakes and streams, and their use



17     for recreational facilities and tourist attraction



18     has not been diminished.  Yet, we will not be



19     satisfied until we have insured the maintenance of



20     high water quality in all of Wisconsin's 8,500 lakes



21     and our 20,000 miles of rivers and streams.



22               But, thanks to the new anti-pollution



23     program, Wisconsin means business,  we want action



24     to clean up our waters and we're getting that action.



25               Business and industries, municipalities

-------
                                                        2406.

 1                 GOVERNOR W. P. KNOWLES




 2     are cooperating.  The public is now concerned and,



 3     too, with the various groups of conservation, women's



 4     clubs and civic organizations throughout the state



 5     they are becoming more and more participants and



 6     involved in the problem of eradicating and eliminat-



 7     ing contamination and pollution in the rivers and



 8     streams of our state.



 9               I would hope that the Federal Government



10     and Congress are equally interested in action.



11      Unfortunately, it has been repeatedly pointed out



12     during the course of this conference that the



13     Federal Government has seriously defaulted on its



14     commitment in the battle against pollution.  The



15     Federal Government has failed to live up to either



16      the letter or the spirit of the financial commitment



17      under the Federal water Pollution Control Act of



18      1965.


19
                 I earnestly urge the members of Congress



       from the four States represented at this Conference


21
       to make every effort to redeem the commitment Con-


22
      gress itself made to the states in the passage of the



23      Federal water Pollution Control Act.


24
                 The record is clear.


25
                 Congress authorized 450 million dollars for

-------
                                                       2407

j                  GOVERNOR W. P. KNOWLES


2       pollution control in 1968.  $204 million was


3       actually appropriated.


4                 second, the 1969 authorization was


5       supposed to be $700 million, but only  $225 million


6       has been requested in the President's  budget.


7       instead of the $1 billion $150 million  promised


8       for this two-year period, all states will now


g       share only about $429 million or $""700  million


10       less than was promised.


H                 And third, an Interior Department Task


12       Force recommended immediate action to  deal with


13       the alewife problem and called for a Federal


14       appropriation of $1.6 million for a concentrated
                           o

15       attack on this Lake Michigan blight.   Yet, the


IS       proposed 1969 budget would provide only $100,000


17       in new funds.


18                 Obviously, the question confronting the


19       President and the congress in establishing the


20       Federal budget is one of priorities.


21                 We in the four states of Illinois, Indiana


22       Michigan and Wisconsin are acutely aware of the agonj/


23       that accompanies the establishment of  priorities for


24       government spending.  Our State budgets require a


25       degree of very fine tuning  far beyond the experience  of

-------
                                                       2408
 1                  GOVERNOR W. P. KNOWLES

 2      the Federal Government.
 3                In Wisconsin, for example, our current
 4      biennial budget of 1 billion 100 million dollars
 5      was financed without a tax increase for the first
 6      time in 14 years.  The achievement was possible for
 7      several reasons, but among the most important was
 8      the willingness of our legislature and the Chief
                )                   .
 9      Executive to establish priorities of need and to
       invest the state   resources according to those
11      priorities.
12
                 We faced the fact that no government or
13      no family can do all the things that it would like
14      to do.  we recognized that we had to decide, item
       by item, what purpose would be achieved first, second
16         , ,
       and last.
17
                 we made our choices and the battle against
18
       air and water pollution is high on our list of
19
       priorities.  As a result, our State grants and
20
       incentives to municipalities for treatment plants
21
       and tax credits to private enterprise are fully
22
       funded and the grants have been made In many
23
       instances in the early part of January of this year.
24
                 All too often, Federal officials and
25
       political spokesmen have publicly set every desirable

-------
                                                       2409


 1                  GOVERNOR W. P. KNOWLES



 2       objective as a goal.  They ignore the realities



 3       of resource allocation and they have made every



 4       promise, held out every hope, and kindled every



 5       flame.  In short, they have ignored priorities



 6       and responsibilities while holding out false hopes



 7       to the public.  And believe me, we can no longer



 8       afford, either at the state or the Federal level,



 9       to operate on deficiency budgets to a point where



10       we are close to bankruptcy at the national level



11       at the present time.



12                 As I indicated in my opening remarks,



        Wisconsin is prepared to cooperate fully in the



14       support of the recommendations that are developed



        by this Conference,  we are unequivocally committed


16
        to meet our responsibilities in the preservation of


17
        Lake Michigan.  It must be recognized, however, that


18
        the Federal Government has established certain


19
        obligations beyond the financial commitments under


20
        the Federal Water Pollution control Act.


21
                  Let me mention a few specifically:


22
                  First, the Federal Government must


23
        recognize and help the states deal with the grow-


24
        ing threat to Lake Michigan which is created by


25
        the menace of the alewife.

-------
                                                       2410


 1                   GOVERNOR W. P. KNOWLES



 2       The alewife problem demands and deserves  immediate



 3       attention  for  several reasonst



 4                  First,  tons of alewives that wash  up



 5       onto Lake  Michigan shores pose a serious  threat to



 6       the tourist and recreation industry  of the four


 7       States and are an extremely unpleasant nuisance



 8       to those who live near the lake, and certainly an



 9       economic loss  to  all of the States who are involved



10       in the promotion  of tourists, recreation  and con-



11       servation  activities.


12                  Secondly, the Conferees here today are



13       acutely aware  of  the pollution problems caused by



14       the excessive  nutrients.



15                  Every schoolchild knows the story  of


16                                              •
        the Indians who,  hundreds of years ago, placed


17
        small fish beside his corn seeds as  he planted



        them.  This early method of fertilization of the


19
        soil may have  been done for other reasons, but


20
        certainly  its  effect as far as the fertilization

21
        of the ground  was a good one.

22
                   Just think of the tremendous fertilizing


23
        effect on  the  bottom of Lake Michigan where  skin

24
        divers tell us that alewives are from three  to

25
        six feet deep  on  the bottom at some  portions of

-------
                                                       2411



 I                   GOVERNOR W. P. KNOWLES




 2       the lake.  That huge amount of nutrients helps to



 3       nourish all of the undesirable growth that we're



 4       trying in other ways to reduce.



 5                 Thirdly, the publicity given  to the



 6       pollution of Lake Michigan has raised the expecta-



 7       tions of the people to the extent that  they are



 8       looking for immediate and dramatic improvement in



 9       the water quality.  The elimination or  the drastic



10       reduction in the number of alewives would provide



11       tangible results that the public anticipates and



12       expects.



--                 Both Michigan and Wisconsin have under-



14       taken programs of stocking Lake Michigan and Lake



15       Superior with coho salmon.  These, of course,



16       have had a phenomenal growth with their voracious



17       and enormous appetites for alewife.  At the same


IP
        time, the coho is generating a new enthusiasm among



19       sports fishermen and have the potential for boost-



        ing the tourist industry along the shores of the


21
        Great Lakes.


22
                  If the Federal Government were to



23       marshal  its anti-pollution forces in the battle


24
        against the alewives, we could make significant


25
        gains within a short period of time and demonstrate

-------
                                                        2412
 1                    GOVERNOR W.  P.  KNOWLES

 2        our  determination to fight  pollution in Lake
 3        Michigan.
 4                  Other  specific obligations,  I think,
 5        include:
 6                  First,  the establishment of a feasible
 7        and  aggressive timetable for abatement of industria
 8        and  municipal pollution  around the lake.
 9                  second,  guideslines must be established
10        to eliminate the  dumping of waste and sewage by
11        boats  into the Great Lakes.
12                  Third,  dredging and the deposit of
10
         polluted waste by the corps of Engineers must be
14
         controlled while,  at the same time,  maintaining
         adequate channels for commercial  shipping.
16
                   I recognize, as everyone at this
17
         Conference,  that  these problems are very difficult
18
         and  very complex.   But like those challenges we
19
         face within each  state,  they must be dealt with
20
         and  overcome.
21
                   I have  often said that  we do not have
22
         a magic wand, those of us who are in legislative
23
         or executive positions.   There is not at the present
24
         time a miracle pill that would dispose of pollution
25
         wastes in  one fell swoop.  it is  going to take

-------
                                                       2413



 1                   GOVERNOR W. P. KNOWLES



 2       money, patience, understanding, and  public  support.



 3       The problem is  smelly and slimy and  green,  and



 4       there is only one way we are  going to  really  cope



 5       with this problem and that is through  the utiliza-



 6       tion of our best efforts and  talents and green-



 7       backs as a means of solving the problem.



 8                 I want this conference  to  know that



 9       under my administration, and  with the  cooperative



10       efforts of the  Legislature, the state  agencies and



11       our people, Wisconsin stands  ready to  do its  part



12       in the fight against water pollution within our


13
        State as well as in our border waters.



14                 If the Federal Government  will actively



15       fulfill its role, the role that it has created


16
        for itself, I think we can make even more progress.

17
        We are certainly willing to recognize  and to  cooper4te


18
        with the Federal Government on a  partnership  basis


19
        in treating these problems.


20
                  And so I urge the members  of congress to


21
        review the water pollution problems  in the  terms

22
        of the nation's priorities of need.  If they


23
        determine that  anti-pollution efforts are truly


24
        a priority item, I hope they  will secure adequate

25
        Federal financing for the program.   If the  problems

-------
                                                       2414


 1                   GOVERNOR W.  P.  KNOWLES



 2       related to water pollution  are  not  so urgent as



 3       to take the priority over all other national needs,



 4       then  let  then tell  us  so, let then  tell the Americai



 5       people, so that the public  will no  longer  antici-



 6       pate  the  fast Federal  action that has been so



 7       long  promised.



 8                 Our challenge  is  to reverse the  trend



 9       of more than 50 years  of contamination,  pollution,



10       eutrophication and  netting  in our lakes, streams



11       and rivers.  I am here prepared to  say to  all of



12       you that  Wisconsin  is  ready, willing and able to



13       do its part.



14                 Thank you.



15                  (Applause.)



16                 MR. STEINt   Thank you very much  for a



17       very  complete and inspiring speech,  Governor.



18       I am  sure it sets a pattern and a blueprint for



19       the State-Federal cooperative Program.



20                 We will now  return to the Michigan



21       presentation.



22                 Mr. Vogt.


23


               MICHIGAN PRESENTATION  (CONTINUED)
24



25                 MR. VOGTi Mr. Chairman,  I have  several

-------
                                                       2415
                         JOHN VOGT



 2       letters and  communications which  I would  like  at


 3       this  time  to introduce  into  the record, and  they


 4       are being  distributed now.   we will  not read them,


         but I would  like to  just  read the name of the


 6       person who wrote the letter  and the  city  or  the


 7       organization which he represents.


 8                 The first  letter is from Mr. H. Wybenga,


 9       the city Superintendent of the city  of zeeland,


10       Michigan.


11                 The second letter  is from  the City of


12       Charlevoix,  dated January 15, and is signed  by


13       Mr. James  Taylor, City  Superintendent.


14                 The third  letter is dated  January  4th


15       from  a firm  of attorneys  at  Bridgman, Michigan.


16       The firm name is Lagoni & Davis,  and the  letter


17       is signed  by Mr. William  O.  Lagoni,  Chairman,


18       Park  Committee, City of Bridgman.
19
                  The next communication  is  dated  January  1!
         from  the  Parke-Davis Company  at  Detroit,  and  it  is



         signed by Mr. Charles H.  Kupsky,  General  Manager.


22
                  The next communication is  from  the  Martin



         Marietta  corporation, and it  is  from Mr.  Roy



24        Calvin, the Director of Public Relations  for  the


25
         Corporation,
th

-------
                                                     2416
 1                         JOHN  VOGT
 2                  Next is a  statement prepared by Mr.
 3        John Kinney and Mr.  Charles B. Wurtz,  consulting
 4        Engineer and consulting Biologist, respectively,
 5        for the Dunbar & Sullivan Dredging Company, and
 6        this is dated the 22nd of January, 1968.
 7                  The next communication with attachments
 8        is from the Joseph B.  Stinson Company, dated
 9        January 31st, signed by Joseph B. Stinson.
10                  The next is  a communication from the
11        Michigan Society of Professional Engineers, dated
12        January 22nd, signed by Clair Aiken, Vice President
13        of the Society.
14                  The next statement is from the Michigan
15        Society of Planning Officials, dated January 16,
16        signed by Mr. Bruce c. Brown, Executive Secretary.
17                  The next is  a statement by the Michigan
18        Pesticide Council, dated January 31, and it is signed
19        by Mr. Norman Spring,  Chairman, Michigan Pesticide
20        council. Grand Haven.
21                  The next statement is from the Michiana
22        Watershed, Inc., at Niles,  dated January 26, 1968,
23        signed by Mr. S. R.  Dunnuck, Jr., Secretary of
24        the Berrien County chapter.
25                  Mr. Chairman, these communications were

-------
                                                       2417
 !                      CITY OF ZEELAND

 2       all addressed to Mr. L. F. Oeming, the Executive

 3       Secretary of the Michigan Water Resources Commis-

 4       sion as a result of the notification by  him  to

 5       these people inviting statements either  orally

 6       or written.  These  written statements  I  would  like

 7       to have introduced  into the  record.

 8                 MR. STEIN:  Without objection, they

 9       will appear in the  record as if read.

10                 (Which said statements are as  follows:)

11       CITY OF ZEELAND           ZEELAND'S "1970" PLAN
                                  Building for the Future
12
               21 south Elm Street   -  Zealand,  Michigan
13

14                                 January 8, 1969

15       Michigan Water Resources Commission
        200 Mill Street
16       Lansing, Michigan   48926

17       Attention:  Mr. Loring F. Oeming, Executive
                    Secretary
18
        Dear Sirs
19

20                 In answer to your  letter dated December

21       29, 1967, and the instructions I received from

22       the City council at their January 2, 1968 meeting,

23       I would like to make the following statement on

24       the city's behalf:

25                 The activated sludge plant which treats

-------
                                                       2418
 1                     CITY.OF ZEELAND

 2        the city's waste materials was expanded two years

 3        ago.  At present we are at 50% plant capacity with

 4        the' B.O.D.   and suspended solids removal at 90%

 5        or above.  Our average B.O.D.   in milligrams per

 6        liter is 14 with the suspended solids at 28 mi 111-

 7        grams per liter.  This would place in the north

 8        branch of the Black River a 30 pound average of

 9        B.O.D. waste and a 83 pound average waste of

10        suspended solids per day.  Our average flow is

11        just under one-half million gallons per 24 hours.

12        Therefore, I am sure that the city does not con-

13        tribute to the pollution of Lake Michigan which

14        is twelve miles from the city.  I understand that

15        the change of water in Lake Macatawa is about a

16        two year cycle.

17                  The City of Zeeland is interested in

18        the watershed  and would do everything in its

19        power to retain or restore the lake to its original

         condition.

21
                              Respectfully yours.
                              CITY OP ZEELAND, MICHIGAN
                              (Signed) Herb Wybenga
                              H. Wybenga, City Superintendent
23        HW/nt
         ccs  Mr. Donald Pierce, Michigan State Health Dept.
              Mr. Carl Danielson, Zeeland Councilman
              Mr. Leon Van Harn, Zeeland City clerk
              Mr. Tom Hoogerhyde, Mich. State Health Dept.

-------
                            rCHARLEVOIX
 2                    •...-.

 3                    CITY OP  CHARLEVOIX
               PPPICE OP CITY SUPERINTENDENT
 4                   CHARLEVOIX,  MICHIGAN
 5
                                    January 15,  1968
 6

 7       Mr. Loring P. Oening
        Executive Secretary
 8       water  Resources Commission
        200 Mill Street
 9       Lansing, Michigan  48926
10
        Dear Sirs
11

12       Subject*  Federal conference  on Pollution of Lake
                  Michigan and  ita  Tributary Basin
13	—:—  	
                  We are a Recreational community with a
14
        winter population of  3000 and a summer  population
lo
        of 7000, located on the  northerly  part  of Lake
16
        Michigan.  In fact, we  are  real water-minded,  as
        Lake Michigan is our  west city  boundary,  connected
18
        by a channel to 60-acre  Round Lake,  that  forms
19
        the center of the community.  It is,  in turn,
20
        connected by a channel  to Lake  Charlevoix,  which
21
        is the third largest  lake in  Michigan.  This
22
        receives the flow from  the  drainage  basin of two
23
        small rivers; namely  the Boyne  River and  the Jordan

25       River •

-------
                                                        2^20
 2

 3

 4

 5

 6

 7

 8

 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
                      CITY OF CHARLEVOEC
                Located as we are., we  see many places

     where  raw  sewage is allowed  to flow into the

     rivers and lakes from  industries,  clubs, and

     residences,  plus the bilge water from many boats.

     In view  of this, we strongly recommend more

     stringent  laws and closer policing to correct

     this problem.

                            Respectfully submitted,
                            CITY  OP CHARLEVOIX
                             (Signed)  James Taylor
                            James Taylor
                            City  Superintendent

     JT/bg
Win. O. Lagoni
John E. Davis
                    LAGONI & DAVIS

                   Attorneys at Law

                  310 Red Arrow Highway
                Bridgroan, Michigan 49106
               Telephone
           HOpkins 5-1111
                                January 4,  1968
     Mr. Loring  F. Oeming
     Executive Secretary
     Department  of conservation
     200 Mill Street
     Lansing, Michigan
     Dear Mr. Oeroing:   Re;
Federal conference on
Pollution of Lake Michigan
and its Tributary Basin

-------
   •                                                    2421



 1                     CITY; OF BRIDGMAN



 2                 At the request of the Mayor  and  the  city



 3       Council for the City of Bridgman, Michigan,  I  an



 4       responding to your letter and  invitation dated



 5       December 29, 1967.



 6                 The city of Bridgman has a thirty  acre  paf k



 7       located on the shores of Lake  Michigan.  Both  the



 8       residents of the city of Bridgman and  Lake Township



 9       use the beach extensively, as  do others from all



10       over the United states.



11                 The City is very concerned that  unless



12       some action is taken immediately to control  the



13       pollution of Lake Michigan one of our  greatest



14       natural resources will be lost to the  public.   Z  am



15       sure you are aware of the alewives problem,  and the



16       money  loss of revenue due to the campers and swimmeis



17       who stayed away from the Lake. Not only have  we  had



18       a  serious loss of revenue, but have had to expend



19       considerable funds to clean the beach.



20                 There is no question in our  mind that



21       Lake Michigan is being polluted.  You  have only to



22       walk the beaches and look at the water to  determine



23       this,  we have been unable to  obtain any assistance




24       in the abatement of any pollution in our area, ex-



25       cept by our own efforts through the city.  The City

-------
                                                       2422

 1                     CITY OF BRIDQMAN

 2       has  spent  a  considerable  amount of money cleaning

 3       up the  beaches  in the  City.   Unless some immediate

 4       action  is  taken by the Federal and State govern-

 5       ment to assist  the local  communities the pollution

 6       of Lake Michigan will  occur  faster than the local

 7       efforts can  be  taken  to control it.

 8                  It is our hope  that immediate action will

 9       be taken to  control the pollution of Lake Michigan.

10       You  may be assured of  our enthusiastic support of

11       any  measures taken to  abate  the pollution.

12
                                  Sincerely,
13                                 (Signed) William O. Lagoni
                                  William O-. Lagoni, Chairman
14                                 Park Committee, City of
                                  Bridgman
15       WOL:jmh

16       CCs   Clerk,  City commission

17                        .'---.

18                  PARKE-DAVIS &  COMPANY

19                     Detroit,  Michigan  48232  U.S.A.
                                            Holland, Michigan
20                                           18,8 Howard Avenuu

21                                 January 12, 1968

22
        Mr.  Loring P. Oeming
23       Executive  Secretary
        Water Resources commission
24       200  Mill Street
        Lansing, Michigan  48926
25

-------
                                                       2^23

 j                  PARKE-DAVIS & COMPANY

 2
        Dear Mr. Oeming:
 3

 4                  I would  like  to  thank you for your

 5       letter  of  invitation to the  Federal conference

 6       on  pollution  of Lake Michigan and its tributary

 7       basin scheduled for January  31.  1968.

 8                  It  will  be impossible for me to attend

 9       this session; however,  we, as a company,  are

10       extremely  interested in obtaining a transcript

11       of  the  information gathered  at  this meeting,  we

12       feel this  approach of having industry and state

13       governments assemble to discuss problems that are

14       of  mutual  concern  is extremely  necessary and

15       essential  in  order that we better understand each

16       others  problems and concerns.

17                  I would  like  to  thank you again for the

18       invitation and would hope  that  it would be possible

19       for you to transmit any information obtained at

20       this meeting  to us.

21
                                 Respectfully yours,
22                                (Signed)  Charles H.  Kupsky
                                 Charles H. Kupsky
23                                General Manager

24       jw

25                         '  - -  -

-------
                                                         2424

  1                       MARTIN MARIETTA


  2

                   MARTIN MARIETTA  CORPORATION
  3


  4                   Lake Michigan  Pollution


  5

                   Martin Marietta Corporation's  policy
  6

         incorporates  the basic concept  that  the  environ-
  7

         ment  adjoining  its  facilities will be  protected
  8

         from  pollution. continuing  recognition  is  being
  9

         given to  governmental policies  and satisfaction
 10

         of  legal  requirements as  they concern  land  reclama-


         tion,  control of atmospheric and water pollution.
 12

                   In  new construction or the modernization
 13

         of  company  installations, the corporation requires
 14

         that  all  relevant regulations pertaining to air


         and water pollution are met.
 16

                   In  the interest of hastening an overall
 17

         solution, it  is suggested that  any legislation
 18

         considered  for  pollution  abatement should include
 19

  I      incentives  that might encourage the  entire  indus-
 20 |                          -

 .6        trial community, rather than relying on  solely
 21

         punitive  legislation.  The company encourages
 zz

         full  participation  of our staff in seeking  solu-
 23

         tion  of pollution problems and  feels that Govern-


         ment-industry teamwork is the best avenue for
25

-------
                                                        2425

 1               J. E.  KINNEY AND  C.  B,  WURTZ

 2       meaningful progress.

 3

 4

 5               ENVIRONMENTAL  CONSIDERATIONS OF

 6            DREDGING,  POLLUTION,  AND THE GREAT LAKES

 7
                     (Progress  Report No. 1)
 8

 g                         Prepared by

10
                    John  E. Kinney
11                   Consulting Engineer
                     1910  Cambridge  Road
12                   Ann Arbor,  Michigan  48104

13                           and

14                   Charles B.  Wurtz
                    Consulting Biologist
15                   Lasalle college
                    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania  19141
16

17                           for

18                Dunbar & Sullivan  Dredging  Co

19                      22  January  1968

20

21
22                 As  a  result  of the Federal water pollu-

23        tion  control  conference agreement of December 21,

24        1965,.against the  disposal of "deleterious waste

25        solids"  into  Lake  Michigan,  representatives of

-------
                                                        2426



 1                    J. E.-KINNEY AND C. B. WURTZ



 2        dredging companies met with Frank DiLuzio, then



 3        Assistant secretary of Interior in charge of



 4        water pollution, in Washington, D.C.  In Mr.



 5        DiLuzio's stated opinion such a prohibition with-



 6        out determining alternatives and without a deter-



 7        ruination of the evidence that such disposal was



 8        in fact causing pollution was premature.  He re-



 9        ported that the Corps of Engineers and the Federal



10        Water Pollution Control Administration (FWPCA)



11        were arranging a joint study of various methods of



12        handling dredged material and that until the study



13        was completed, dredging and disposal would continue



14        as in the past.



15                  The congress subsequently funded such a



16        joint study (§1 million) and later extended it by



17        a second appropriation (for a total of $6 million)



18        for the second year of research and analysis.  Two
19
         years was the original estimate of time required.
         but it now appears this was too optimistic a fore-



21        cast.


22
                   Because of the vital significance of the


23
         decisions on the dredging industry, representatives


24
         of that industry decided to undertake a separate


25
         and independent study.  The industry felt that if

-------
                                                       2427
 I                    J.  E.  KINNEY AND C.  B.  WURTZ
 2        there are adverse  effects  from disposing of
 3        dredged material in the lakes, a solution might
 4        include changes in practice of haulage and/or
 5        dumping.  As the contractors in the activity
 6        their knowledge of practicalities would be of
 7        value.  The dredging industry representatives
 8        volunteered this assistance to Mr.  DiLuzio when
 9        he described the advisory  committee being assembled
10        to coordinate and  evaluate the study.   He agreed
11        industry representation on the committee could
12        be helpful but an  invitation was never extended.
13                  One other factor motivated the dredging
14        industry's independent study.  permits to dispose
15        of dredged material in Lake Erie were  refused by
I6        the corps on the basis of  a letter  memorandum from
17        the PWPCA.  This letter offered the opinion that th
18        material to be dredged "could" cause pollution
19        since it contained organic matter.   Whether it woul
20        cause pollution and to what extent  were not defined
2i        The dredging representatives felt that a better
22        guideline was required.
23                  In order to develop data  from which sound
24        conclusions could  be drawn Dunbar and  Sullivan
25        Dredging Company retained  two consultants,  an

-------
                                                       2428-,



 1                 J. E. KIHNEY AND C.  B. WURTZ




 2        aquatic biologist and a sanitary engineer, to out-



 3        line surveys in Lake Erie and Lake Michigan.  The



 4        analytical work was to be done by independent



 5        laboratories,  the Detroit Testing Laboratory, Inc.,



 6        and the pollution Control Laboratories, Inc., in



 7        Chicago.  Appraisal of data and conclusions are



 8        the responsibility of the consultants.



 9                  The  surveys were designed to define;



10                  1.  whether the sampling procedure em-



11                  ployed by the FWPCA at the site where



12                  dredging is to be done accurately measure



13                  the  polluting potential of the material



14                  to be dredged.



15                  2.  whether the water quality over the



16                  authorized dumping sites varies from lake



17                  quality at remote sites.



18                  3.  whether the water quality at the dis-



19                  posal site varies at time of dumping, and



20                  if so,  for what period of time.



21                  4.  Whether there is an influence on


99
'                  water quality from disposal of dredged




23                  material which extends beyond the dis-



24                  posal area.



25                  5.  Whether there is a detrimental

-------
                                                       2429



 1                 J.  E.  KINNEY AND C.  B.  WURTZ




 2                  physical or biological effect on the




 3                  lake bottom due to the dredged material.



 4                  6.  Whether there is a detrimental



 5                  physical, biological or chemical effect



 6                  on the water quality in the  lake due to



 7                  the disposal of dredged material.



 8                  Such answers are required to determine




 9        whether lake disposal of dredged material should



10        cease.  The importance of such a decision is




11        emphasized by consideration of the alternatives



12        for disposing of such material,  either on shore



13        or within diked areas.   Such approaches:



14                  -- require specialized equipment and make



15                  bottom dump scows obsolete.   The economic




16                  impact on dredging companies and on the



17                  Corps of Engineers is highly significant



18                  —increase the cost of disposal some




19                  three hundred per cent (300%) .  With 108



20                  harbors on the Great Lakes the increased



21                  cost would be so great as to cause a



22                  large reduction in the number of harbors



23                  maintained for navigation.  This will



                   directly depress the local economy of



25                  each city so  affected.

-------
                                                       2430



 1                 J. E. KINNEY AND C. B. WURTZ



 2                  -- fill in marsh land and  this  in  turn



 3                  adversely affects  the ecology of the



 4                  lakes.  On-shore disposal  would neces-



 5                  sarily utilize cheaper  land and this woul



 6                  be the marshy bottoms so important as



 7                  water fowl habitat and  sources  of



 8                  biological nutrients,   in  addition,



 9                  these marsh lands  act as a sponge  which



10                  controls the balance of a  lake  water



11                  level and the inland water table through



12                  its hydrostatic head.   The effects of



13                  filling the marsh  lands along the  east



l4                  coast is now apparent in the salt  water



15                  intrusion.



l6                  -- permit seepage  over  long periods of



17                  time of the organic and mineral nutrients



18                  which may be in the dredged material.



19                  This occurs because rainwater,  falls on



20                  such sites and leaches  the salts from



21                  the fill.  This does not occur  when the



22                  material is compacted in the bottom of



23                  a lake, especially if covered by the



                   siltation resulting from bottom currents


25
                   Thus, with the constant leaching from
d

-------
                                                       2431

 I                 J .  E .  KINNEY AN$ ;C.  B.  WURTZ


 2                  shore or dike disposal the overall


 3                  contribution of nutrient to the lake


 4                  would undoubtedly be greater.  If the


 5                  material is deposited directly into the


 6                  lake the potential contaminants remain


 7                  contained and do not enter into chemical


 8                  or biological recycling.


 9                  -- are obviously limited by land avail-


10                  ability.  Since land wash, street wash,


11                  reservoir drawdown and residual dis-


12                  charges from treatment plants contain


13                  organics, there will always be material


14                  other than silt or sand in dredgings.


15                  Hence this problem of disposal requires


16                  a longer term solution than permitted by


17                  land availability.

18

                      TEST SITE LOCATIONS
19

                   The two studies were in Lake Michigan
20

         and Lake Erie.
21

                   The Lake Michigan disposal area is in
22

         Indiana waters  at the site authorized by the
23

         Corps of Engineers.  Dredged material came from the
24

         Indiana Harbor  Ship Canal.
25

-------
                                                        2432
 1                 J. E.  KXNtfEY AND  C,  B. WURTZ
 2                  The  disposal  site is located 1.5  miles
 3       northeast of the  FIW Gong  --  about 8 miles  from
 4       shore  and about 12  miles from the  City of Chicago
 5       intake.   Depth of water at the site is approxi-
 6       roately 55 feet.
 7                  Sampling  stations were arranged on a
 8       grid with distances from 0.5  miles to  7.0 miles.
 9       The latter was eastward of the disposal site and
10       considered to  be  the control  point as  representa-
11       tive of  lake water  quality.  It is 14  miles from  th|e
12       entrance of the Indiana Harbor Ship Canal.   Depth
13       of lake  at that point is 72 feet.
l4                  The  Lake  Erie site  is downstream  from
15       the Detroit River Light and west of the west outer
16       channel  between Bouy No. 5 and Bouy No. 7.   The
17        authorized disposal site extends for 9000 feet
18        adjacent to the west outer channel and for  a dis-
19        tance  of 5000  feet  to the  west.  The site is about
20        2 miles  from the  Michigan  shore.   Sampling  stations
21        were on  a grid and  varied  from 1000 feet from the
         disposal point to the extreme corners  of the over-
23        all area. The lake depth  in  this  area -r 15 to  18
24        feet.
                    The  water quality analyses done on

-------
                                                       2433


 1                J . E . KIHNBY AND C . B . WURTZ



 2        samples drawn from the Indiana dumping grounds



 3        in Lake Michigan include water quality measure-



 4        ments at depths of five feet,  thirty feet, and one



 5        foot from the bottom.  A series of 27 samples was



 6        taken July 28, 1967, when no dumping was being



 7        done.  A second series, of 33  samples, was taken



 8        October 15,  1967,  at 15 to 20  hours after a dump



 9        of 91,000 cubic yards of material dredged from



10        Indiana Harbor.  Since the material dredged is



11        primarily solid, the most direct assessment of



12        dump effects on lake water would be the measurement



13        of total solids present in the water.  These data,



14        among others,  were collected by Pollution control



15        Laboratories,  Inc.  Some analyses of the data



16        follow*



17        Total solids in Water of Indiana Dumping Grounds



18                                      July 28, 1967



19        Depth                    5 ft.    30 ft.   Bottom



20        Range of Values        166-207   152-201  152-207
21



         Standard Deviation (s)   14        14       19
22


         Variance (S2)           216       202      369
Zd


         Coefficient of

           Variation (V)         7.7*      8.0%     10.7%


25

-------
                                                       2434

I                 J. E. KINNEY A»D C. B. WURTZ

2        Total solids in water of Indiana Dumping Grounds

3                                    October 15, 1967

4        Depth                    5 ft.    30 ft.   Bottom

5        Range of Values        139-192   137-204  140-176
           or mg/1
B
         Standard Deviation (s)  18        19       11
7
         Variance (S2)          327       346      131
8
         Coefficient of        10.8%     11.4%     6.9%
9          Variation  (V)

10
                   It is apparent from the preceding data
11
         that the lake water in the dumping ground is
12
         fairly uniform with very little variation about
13
         the mean at each stratum.
14
                   Although the various water strata appeare

         to deviate little from each other,  a further
16
         analysis was done to determine whether or not
17
         there was a correlation between dumping and total
18
         solids present.  Spearman's rank order correlation
19
         coefficient was developed for this determination.
20
                   With one exception none of the derived
21
         coefficients showed any correlation.  The excep-
22
         tion is the comparison between the five-and-thirty-
23
         foot depths (T=0.855)  on October 15th.  A correla-
24
         tion in these upper water strata is not surprising
25

-------
                                                        2435
 1                 J. E. KINNEY AND C. B. WURTZ
 2        within 24 hours of a dump,  what is surprising is
 3        the lack of correlation between 30 feet and the
 4        bottom (T«0.391).  It is obvious that some pro-
 5        nounced horizontal shear effect was dispersing the
 6        suspended solids in the deeper water on that day*
 7        With the limited data to date no suggestion as
 8        to the nature of this phenomenon can be offered
 9        except that it probably relates to the internal
10        hydraulics of the lake.
11                  The conclusions drawn from evalution of
12        data on solids are supported by other analytical
1-        data.  However, the concentrations reported for
14        BOD, oil and grease, suspended solids, turbidity
         and bacteria were so low, similar  appraisal is
16        not feasible.
                   The range of data from all stations,
18
         including the station at the point of dumping,
19
         demonstrates that the resultant water quality
20
         after dumping is not significantly different
21
         from the quality before dumping and definitely
22
         not of impaired quality.
23
24
25

-------
                                                        2436
 i

 2

 3

 4

 5

 6

 7

 8

 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
          J.  E.  KINNEY AND C. B. WURTZ

                               July  28

                             Before  Dumping
PH

BOD ppm

Oil and grease ppm

Suspended solids ppm

Coliforms
(confirmed)/100 ml.

Fecal Enterococci

Turbidity JTU
PH

BOD ppm

Oil and grease ppm

Suspended solids ppm

Coliforms
(Confirmed)/100 ml.   8-94

Fecal Enterococci

Turbidity JTU
Dump
Site
8.0-8.
<5
0
0
0
2-9


Dump
Site
8.2
5
1
0
8-94
0
0-5
7 Area
Stations
3 8.0-8.3
<5
0
0
0
0-10
October 15
After Dumping
7 Area
Stations
8.2-8.3
5
1
0
4-172
0
0-10
Control
Stations
8.1-8.3
<5
0
0
0
4-6


Control
Station
8.3
5
1
0
14-130
0
2-9

-------
                                                       2437
1                 J. E.  KINNEY AND C. B. WURTZ
                   The data show no difference between the
2                                     "
_        two dates for oil, suspended solids and turbidity
3
         which confirms the conclusion drawn for solids.
5                  Also there was no significant difference
6        in PH or BOD measurements.
7                  The data on bacterial counts show an
8        increase in coliforms for the day sampled after
g        dumping, but with no measurable fecal streptococci
10        However, it should be noted that the coliforms
n        were relatively low  (less than 200) and that the
12        control station seven miles to the east had con-
13        centrations in the same order of magnitude.  The
14        highest values were surface samples with analyses
15        at lower depths showing lesser concentrations.
16        For example, the surface sample at the dump site
17        had a coliform count of 94 but at 5 feet the count
18        was 33, at 30 foot depth the count was 21, and one
19        foot from the bottom the count was 8.  In similar
20        manner at the corresponding depths at the control
21        station the counts were 130 (surface), 33 (5 ft.),
22        21 (30 ft.) and 14 (bottom).  This indicates not
23        only that the higher counts were prevalent in the
24        lake but were wind influenced.
25

-------
                                                        2438



 1                 J. E. KINNEY AND C. B. WURTZ



 2                Analysis  of Material Dredged



 3                   There  are two questions with respect



 4         to material to be  dredgeds



 5                   —  does  the  Peterson dredge, which



 6                   actually measures only  a surface layer



 7                   of  the material,  provide a representa-



 8                   tive sample  of the material to *>«



 9                   dredged?



10                   --  does  the  analysis of the material



11                   dredged  provide a true  indication of



12                   the effect of lake disposal of the



13


14
                    Considering  the second  question first,



          the issue  resolves itself into determination of


16
          whether any material should be disposed of into


17
          the lake if it is  "polluted" by any proposed yard


18
          stick  or whether any material  can be disposed of


19
          in the lake if it  does  not  cause  pollution?


20
                    There  is a big difference.  According


21
          to Federal law (Section 10 (c) (5)  "the discharge


22
          of matter  into such interstate waters or portions


23
          thereof; which reduces  the  quality of such waters


24
          below  the  water  quality standards .... is sub-


25
          jeat to abatement."  Clearly the  test is whether

-------
                                                        2^39
 1                 J. E. KINNEY AND C. B. WURTZ
 2        it adversely affects water quality rather than
 3        whether it may be classified as polluted per ae.
 4                  It is important to note that the eonfer-
 5        ence recommendation did not propose exclusion of
 6        dredged material but rather "deleterious waste
 7        solids and other such material".  To be deleterious
 8        it must have an adverse effect.  simply calling
 9        material "polluted" does not demonstrate effect.
10                  Analysis of the scow material as it
11        left Indiana Harbor Ship Canal showed a BOD of
12        167 rng/gr, a coliform MPN of 1100 per gr and
13        fecal enterococci counts of 0 to 4000 per gr.
14        This could be classified as polluted in terms of
15        bacterial content but it caused no measurable
16        effect on the lake quality.
17                  The bottom sample studies completed to
18        date have been chiefly on materials intended for
19        disposal in the Lake Erie dumping ground.  These
20        analyses were performed by the Detroit Testing
21        Laboratory.  Of particular interest in this work
22
         is the difference in results obtained by the use oi
23        different samples.  One sampler, the petersen grab
24        sampler, is a small clam bucket that samples
25
         bottom materials to a maximum depth of about four

-------
 1                 J. E. KINNEY A'ND C.  B. WURTZ
 2         inches.   (This  type sampler has been used by the
 3         FWPCA.)  A second sampler was a tube sampler that
 4         took a core of  bottom  material to a depth of three
 5         feet.  The second sampler gathers material from
 6         depths below the zone  of recent deposition in
 7         which contaminants are actively reacting with
 8         overlying  waters.
 9                   Pour  sites within the Old Rouge-Detroit
10         River system were sampled.   These were all taken
11         from undisturbed bottoms and included: (1) A site
12         in  the Detroit  River above  the confluence with
13         the Old Rouge River, (2) A  site in the mouth of
14         the Old Rouge River, (3) A  site in a slip off the
15         Detroit River below the outfall of the Detroit
16         sewage effluent,  and,  (4) A site  in the Detroit
l?         River downstream from  Site  3.
18                   The Biochemical Oxygen  Demand (BOD)
19         test was one  of  several analyses  done  on this
20         bottom material.   (Other analytical results have
21         not yet  been  critically reviewed.)   The BOD data,
22         expressed  as  ppm,  are  tabulated below.
23
24
25

-------
                                                       2441

 1                 J.  E.  KINNEY AND C. B. WURTZ

 2
             Site       Petersen Sample    Tube sample
 3
              1              93.2            16.4
 4
              2              12.8            15.1
 5
              3             123.2            31.5
 6
              4              62.6            16.6
 7

 8                  At Sites 1, 3 and 4 the petersen samples

 9        showed significantly higher BOO values than did

10        the tube samples.  No significant difference was

11        found at site 2, where the values were practically

12        the same.  These data clearly demonstrate the

13        inadequacy of the Petersen grab sampler as a

14        device for measuring potential pollutional loadings

15        from bottom materials to be removed by dredging.

16        In this instance, for example, the sampling

17        technique showed four-fold increase over actual

i8        BOD loads present.

19
                            SUMMARY
20

21                  An appraisal of the problem of disposal

22        of dredged material points up the fact that a

23        simple prohibition on the disposal of such material

24        into lakes does not solve the problem.  In fact,

25        alternately proposed solutions such as on-shore

-------
                                                       2442
 1                 J. E. KINNEY AND C. B. WURTZ
 2        or within diked area disposal will create even
 3        greater adverse effects on the ecology of the
 4        lake over a long period of time.

 5                  The study which is supposed to be
 6        underway in Lake Michigan by the corps of

 7        Engineers and the Federal Water Pollution Control
 8        Administration jointly should be completed before
 9        rash decisions are made.

10                  The data from surveys in Lakes Erie and
         Michigan financed by the dredging industry
12        demonstrates very clearlys
13                  — that the sampling procedure employed
                   by the FWPCA does not measure the pol-

15                  luting potential of material to be
16                  dredged.

                   -- the water quality over the authorized
18                  disposal sites indicates lake water
19                  quality is not adversely affected by the

20                  dumping.
21
                   --there is an indication of quality
22                  change at the dumping site but it is very
23                  transient (of short duration) and of
24                  less than 24 hours.
25                  The evaluation of all the data from thj.8

-------
                                                       2443
 1                        J. B. STINSON

 2        study is not completed.  These data plus those

 3        which should be made available from the Federal

 4       ' study will adequately answer the question as to

 5        whether there are any physical, biological or

 6        chemical adverse effects on lake water quality or
                               /
 7        bottom materials.

 8                  However, until there are data which

 9        indicate these conclusions are in error, it is

10        our opinion that the continuance of disposal of

11        dredged material in Lake Michigan is not detri-

12        mental and is in the public interest.
13

14

I5                  THE JOSEPH B. STINSON GO.

I6         Designers and Builders of Automation Equipment
                    Area Code 419-332-8286
17             406 Justice St., Fremont, Ohio, 43420
18
                                    January 31, 1968
19

20        Gentlemen:
21
                   Several weeks ago I met with a group of
22
         boating officials and members of the press at a lodal
23
         yacht club.  It was decided at that meeting a
24
         resolution would be presented at this conference.

-------
                                                      2444


!                       Jv (B* STINSON




2        I endeavored to impress upon these people the



3        injustice they would be doing to the boaters if



4        they were to settle  for a partial pollution



5        control system.



6                  I also noted at the meeting the Federal



7        water Pollution control Administration   report



8        August 7, 1967, indicated a total of 25 states and



9        the Province  of Ontario approve holding tanks,



10        or no discharge of sewage.  Therefore, a holding



11        tank would be the best consideration because



12        there would be no limitations on your voyaging.



13        With this in mind it would be even more ridiculous



14        to settle for a partial treatment unit, which is



15        subject to human tampering, human failure, and



16        mechanical failure; especially since more than



17        35 states now do not approve of the disinfectant



18        devices.  Chlorine can be dangerous if not proper*



19        ly handled or stored.  Last Friday 15 persons in


20
         Fort Bragg, North Carolina, were overcome by leak-


21                                         •
         ing chlorine gas.  I also call your attention to


22
         Hawaii, with all its surrounding water, calls for


23
         sewage control and has approved the holding tank.


24
                   We now have a design criteria from both


25                                                           .
         the American Boat and Yacht Council and The National

-------
                                                      2445
 I                       J. B. STINSON

 2       Sanitation Foundation for holding  tanks and  stand-
 3       ards  for  shore  connections.
 4                 In my opinion  no  self-respecting boat-
 5       man wants to add  to  the  pollution  problem, no
 6       natter how infinitesimal.   However, we must  be
 7       assured the lawmakers are equally  as  zealous in
 8       cleaning  up the major sources.   How can we,  as
 9       boaters,  ask others  to stop polluting the waters
10       if we are willing to settle for  partial measures,
11       or perhaps try  to get out of it  altogether.
12                 The production of the  coin—operated dock
13       mounted discharge pumps  will give  24-hour availi-
14       bility for discharging.  This  leaves  no reasonable
15       excuse to consider questionable  quality of sewage
16       discharge into  the water.
17                 In conclusion, I  have  attached copies of
18
        letters from water control  boards  from various
        states, presently without water  pollution laws,
        stating their opinions and  other pertinant infor-
21
        mation for your contemplation.
22
                                    Respectfully submitted,
                                    (Signed) Joseph B. Stins^n
24
25

-------
 1                        J. :Bi  STINSON




 2

          BOATING REGULATIONS  IN THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM*

 3

                           AUGUST 1964

 4




 5                   NATIONAL PARKS AND MONUMENTS



 6


                    Water Sanitation - (1)  No fish,  offal,

 7


          bottles,  cans,  rubbish or other refuse shall be

 8


          discarded or  otherwise disposed in the waters.

 9


                    (2)   All vessels operating on the waters

10


          shall have a  waste receptacle  aboard in which all

11


          rubbish and refuse shall be deposited.  Receptacles

12


          shall only be emptied  in facilities provided at

13


          docks or other  specified places.
14


                    (3)   No person shall discharge or other-
15


         wise permit the disposal of toilet wastes  into
16                                       .


          the waters within One-half mile from the nearest
17


          shore,  unless such wastes are  adequately treated
18


         by an effective sewage disposal system,  including
43


         chemical or heat  process,  which results in dis-
20


         posal of liquid and  solid wastes  without pollution
AL


00        of the  waterss  except,  that no wastes of any kind
£A                                   '    • .


_,        may be  disposed in the waters  within one-half mile
23


2        of any  watdr  supply  intake.




25                   Inspections  - The Superintendent or his

-------
                                                        2447
 1                        Jv B.  STINSON

 2        authorized representative may at any tine board

 3        any vessel while afloat or underway to examine

 4        documents, licenses, and/or permits relating to

 5        operation of the. vessel and to inspect such vessel

 6        to determine compliance with regulations.

 7
                   NATIONAL RECREATION AREAS
 8

 9                  Water Sanitation - (1)  No fish, offal,

10        bottles, cans, rubbish or other refuse shall be

11        discarded or otherwise disposed in the waters.

12                  (2)  All vessels operating on the waters

13        shall have a waste receptacle aboard in which all

14        rubbish and refuse shall be deposited.  Receptacles

15        shall only be emptied in facilities provided at

16        docks or other specified places.

17                  (3)  No person shall discharge or other-

is        wise permit the disposal of toilet wastes into the

19        waters within one mile from the nearest shore, un-

20        less such wastes are adequately treated by an

21        effective sewage disposal system, including chemi-

22        Cal or heat process, which results in disposal of

23        liquid and solid wastes without pollution of th.e

24        waterss  except, that no wastes of any kind may be

25        disposed in the waters within one mile of any

-------
                                                        2448

 !                        J. B. STINSON

 2        water  supply  intake  or within  shadow Mountain

 3        National  Recreation  Area.

 4                   Inspections -  The Superintendent  or his

 5        authorized representative may  at any tine board

 6        any vessel while  afloat or  underway to  examine

 7        documents,  licenses, and/or permits relating to

 8        .operation of  the  vessel and to inspect  such

 9        vessel to determine  compliance with regulations.

10
         *Excerpts from National park Service Publication
11
         (F.R.DOc. 64-6745)
12

13                             - - -

14
              ORSANCO  ACTS TO CONTROL BOAT WASTES
15

16                   The Ohio River Valley water Sanitation

17        Commission (ORSANCO) recently  passed a  resolution

18        aimed  at  controlling the discharge of wastes from

19        boats  and floating facilities  in its jurisdic-

20        tional area.  The increased popularity  of boats

21        and rising  river water quality have demanded

22        this action.  The resolution reads as followsi

23                   "WHEREAS:  The discharge of untreated

24        wastes from commercial and  pleasure watercraft

25        and floating  facilities operating within the

-------
                                                        244-9
                         J.  B.  STIMSON
 1
         Compact District may cause pollution  contrary  to
 2
         the  language and intent of the Ohio River Valley
 3                              • •
         Water Sanitation Compact:  and
                   "WHEREAS:  Substantial progress has been
 5
         made in eliminating discharges of  untreated wastes
 6
         from municipalities, industries, and  other on-
         shore installations in the Districts
 O
 g                  "NOW THEREFORE!  For purpose  of safe-
..        guarding  the waters of the District as  specified
n        in Article I of the compacti
12                  "BE IT RESOLVED:  That the  following
         measures  are herebv adopted bv the commission  to
Id                          —    ~~    . •"•     .
u        be followed by the signatory states for the joint
15        cooperative control of waste discharges from
16        watercraft and floating facilities, such measures
17     x   to become effective January 1, 1967:
18                  "1.  NO marine waste-disposal system on
j9        any watercraft or floating facility operated on
2Q        waters within the District shall be so  constructed
2i        and operated as to discharge inadequately treated
22        wastes into these waters.
23                  "2.  All marine waste-disposal systems
24        shall be  sealed or otherwise rendered inoperative
25        on waters where use of such systems is  prohibited

-------
                                                        2450


 i                        j.  B; STINSON




 2        federal, state  or  local regulations.



 3                   "3.   On  waters within  the compact  Dis-



 4        trict where the operation of marine waste-disposal




 5        systems is permitted, such systems on  or within



 6        any watercraft  or  floating facility shall  include



 7        a suitable operating treatment device  for  the




 8        maceration and  disinfection of wastes  prior  to



 9        discharge. In  lieu  of treatment, wastes from



10        watercraft and  floating facilities shall be



11        collected  in holding tanks properly equipped so



12        that the wastes can be discharged to approved



13        shore-based installations.



14                   "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVEDi  That the



15        Commission request that each of  the signatory  statejs



16        take steps to carry out the provisions of  this




17        resolution; and



18                   "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED:  That the Cora-



19        mission direct  the Engineering Committee to  pro-


20
         vide a guideline memorandum for  use in implementing



21        this resolution; and



22                   "BE IT FURTHER RESOLVEDi  That,  following



23        the effective date on this resolution, the U.S.



 4        Cbast Guard and appropriate signatory  state  enforcej-


25
         raent agencies,  in  connection with their routine

-------
                                                         2451

                            B. STINSON


 2        licensing inspections of watercraft and floating


 3        facilities operating within waters of the compact


 4        District, be requested to report to the appropriat


 5        state agency or to the Commission those water-


 6        craft and floating facilities not complying with


 7        this  control measure."


 8


 9        HIGHLIGHTS,  WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FEDERATION,

                            May 1965
10


11


12

                                RULES AND
13

                                REGULATIONS
14

                                COVERING
15

                                DISPOSAL OF
16

                                WASTES FROM
17

                                WATERCRAFT
18


19

                                .Adopted by the
20

                                 Texas State Board of Health
21

                                 June 13, 1966.
22


23

          TEXAS STATE  DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
24


25

-------
                                                         2452

 1                         J.  B.  STINSON


 2

         RULES  AND REGULATIONS  COVERING
 3

         DISPOSAL OF WASTES  FROM WATERCRAFT
 4.                    '



 5             1<0  PURPOSE


 6                   To prescribe methods and procedures for


 7                   the construction and operation of marine


 8                   toilet devices for use on watercraft.


 9                   Such rules and regulations are con-


10                   sidered necessary to assure that the


11                   water resources of this State can be


12                   developed to provide maximum benefits,


                    i.e., water  supply, recreation and other


14                   beneficial uses influenced by quality


15                   conditions.


16             2-°  AUTHORITY FOR RULES AND REGULATIONS

17
                    2.1  The  state Department of Health was


18                        established  by Article 4414af Titl«


19                        71,  1925, Revised Civil Statutes of

20
                         Texas,  to better protect and pro-

21
                         mote the health of the people of

22
                         Texas.


23                   2.2  Article 4419, Title 71, 1925, Re-

24
                         vised Civil Statutes of Texas,

25
                         states  that "The state Board of

-------
                                                        2^53


 1                        J. B* ST.rNSON




 2                       Health  shall  have  general  supervi-



 3                       sion  and control of  all  matters




 4                       pertaining to the  health of citizenii



 5                       of this state."  By  virtue of




 6                       Article 44183, Title 71, 1925,



 7                       Revised Civil statutes of  Texas,



 8                       the Commissioner of  Health has  the



 9                       power, with the approval of the



10                       State Board of Health, "to prescribe



11                       and promulgate such  administrative



12                       rules and regulations not  inconsis-



13                       tent  with any law  of the state  as



14                       may be deemed necessary  for the



15                       effective performance of the duties



16                       imposed upon  the State Department



17                       of Health and its  several  Officers



18                       and Divisions."



19                  2.3  Article 4477«1, Vernon's Texas



20                       Civil statutes. Section  20. (b),



21                       "The  Texas state Department of



22                       Health shall  take  all necessary



23                       procedures essential to  the protec-



24                       tion  of any spring,  well,  pond,


25
                        lake, reservoir, or  other  streams

-------
 1                       J. B.  STINSON



 2                       in Texas, from any condition or



 3                       pollution resulting from sewage



 4                       that may endanger the public health



 5                       and shall have full authority to



 6                       enforce all the laws of this State



 7                       relating thereto."



 8                  2.4  These Rules and Regulations shall



 9                       constitute the policy of the state



10                       Board of Health and shall be en- ,



H                       forced by the appropriate Local



12                       Health Officer as set forth in



13                       Articles 4427 and 4430, vernon's



14                       Statutes of Texas.



15             3.0  DEFINITIONS



l6                  3.1  These rules and regulations for



17                       marine toilets have been adopted



18                       by the Texas State Board of Health.



19                       The following definitions shall



20                       apply in the interpretation and



21                        enforcement of these regulations.


99
                    3.2  Boat means any vessel or other



23                        watercraft, whether moved by oars,



24                        paddles, sails, or other power


25
                         mechanism, inboard or outboard, or

-------
                         J.> B.  STINSON




2                        any other vessel  or  structure




3                        floating upon the waters  of  this




4                        State, whether or not capable  of




                         self -locomotion,  including but not




6                        limited to cabin  cruisers, house-




7                        boats, barges, marinas and similar




8                        floating objects.




9                  3.3   Marine Toilet means  any toilet on




10                        or within any boat.




11                  3.4   Other Disposal Unit  means any  de-




12                        vice on or within any boat,  other
                             a ma fine toilet, which is in-
14                       tended for use in the disposal of



15                       human body wastes.



16                  3.5  Sewage means all human body waste.



17                  3.6  Holding Tank - a tank to be used



18                       for receiving and retaining sewage.



19                  3.7  waters of the state means all




20                       streams, lakes, reservoirs, water



21                       courses and all other bodies or



22                       accumulations of water, natural or



23                       artificial, which are contained witl




24                       in or flow along the border of or



25                       through the territorial jurisdictior

-------
                                                        2456


                             Bv STlfcSON


 2                        of the state.



 3                   3.8  Septic Action -Sewage undergoing



'4                        putrefaction under anerobic condi-



 5                        tions.



 6              4.0  SEWAGE DISPOSAL DEVICES AND EQUIPMENT


 7                   4.1  Any marine toilet located on or



 8                        within any boat operated on waters


 9                        of this State shall have securely


10                        affixed to the discharge outlet a



11                        holding tank located on the boat,


12                        provided so as to meet the follow-



13                        ing specifications;


14                   4.1.1  The holding tank shall be so con-


15                          structed as to prevent the rexnova



IB                          of the sewage held therein except



17                          by pumping therefrom by onshore



18                          facilities.
                                                          " A,


19                   4.1.2  The holding tank shall be con-


20                          structed of material which will


21                          withstand the corrosion effects



22                          of the sewage and the disinfecting


23                          chemicals used.  It shall be so


24                          located as to minimize the possi-



25                          bility of rupture.
'

-------
                                                        2^57
 1                        J.vTB.  STINSON
                                    I
 2                   4.1.3  The  holding tank shall be pro-

 3                          perly vented to the outside of th

 4                          boat in such a manner as not to

 S                          defile the interior of the boat

 6                          structure.

 7                   4.1.4  The  contents of holding tanks

 8                          shall be discharged only to on-

 9                          shore facilities constructed,

10                          operated, and maintained so as

11                          to prevent possible entrance of

12                          waste materials into the waters

13                          of the state.

14                   4.2  contents of other disposal units

15                        shall  be disposed onshore in such

16                        a manner as not to create a public

17                        health nuisance and to prevent pos-

18                        sible  entrance into the waters of

13                        the state.

20                   4.3  Refuse, including garbage, rubbish,

21                        and litter, shall be deposited on-

22                        shore  in approved type receptacles,

23                        which  are maintained properly, with

24                        ultimate disposal in such a manner

25                        as to  prevent the creation of a

-------
                                                        2^58


 1                         J.. B. . ST.XB.gON



 2                         public health nuisance  as  well as



 3                         prevent possible  entrance  into the



 4                         waters of the state.



 5              5;0  MINIMUM STANDARDS



 6                   5.1   Compliance with these rules  and



 7                         regulations will  be considered as



 8                         meeting minimum standards.



 9                   5.2   Other devices for the control  of



10                         wastes, from watercraft  may be  con-



11                         sidered as acceptable provided that



12                         the local health  authority assures



13                         the state Department of Health in



                          writing that  such devices  are  being



                          inspected and maintained in  such a



16                         manner as not to  constitute  a  hazar|3



17                         to health.



18                   5.3   These rules and regulations  are not
19
designed to supersede more restrict
20
                         rules and regulations or  ordinances



21                        adopted by  local political  subdivi-


22
                         sions of the state for the  regula-


23
                         tion of marine toilets and  waste  frpn


24
                         watercraft  in their area  of juris-



                         diction.
                                                             ive

-------
                                                        2459
                         J. B. STINSON

 2             ONTARIO WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION
                       801 Bay street
 3                         Toronto
   A. VANCE,LL.D.   Telephone 365-1491     D. S. CAVERLY
   Chairman                              General Manager
   H.H. ROOT,  M.P.P.                       W. S. MacDONNELL
   Vice-chairman
                                November 27, 1967
         AIRMAIL

 7
         Mr. Joseph B. Stinson,
 8

 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
President
The Joseph B. Stinson Company Limited,
406 Justice Street
FREEMONT, Ohio   43420,
U.S.A.
Dear Mr. Stinson:

          Re:  Ontario Regulation 365/66


          Thank you for your telephone call

today to our Mr. Murphy.

          The above Regulation becomes effective

June 1, 1968.  As of that date, all pleasure

craft in the Province of Ontario will be required

to have a device to hold sewage aboard for sub-

sequent disposal ashore, or a macerator chlorinator
which may be used with a temporary OWRC permit un-

til June 1, 1971.

          While there is no doubt that this  law wil

be enforced, we are looking to the Minister's

Office for a public statement to this effect to
1

-------
                                                        2^60

 !                        J. B. STINSON

 2         quell any rumours that the  law will be  changed.

 3                   Enclosed  are two  copies  of  application

 4         form No. 1 which you should use to apply  for

 5         acceptance of your  holding  tanks.  If you will

 6         be kind enough to complete  the applicable sec-

 7         tions of the form and send  one copy to  us,  it

 8         will receive our prompt attention.  We  will also

 g         appreciate receiving a brief description  of the

10         dockside sewage pump which you propose  to market

11         in Ontario.

12                   I trust that this is satisfactory.

13
                            Yours very truly,
14                           (Signed) P. G. Spenst
                            P. G. Spenst, Supervisor.
15                           Plumbing and Boating  Branch,
                            Division of sanitary  Engineering
16

17                             - - -

18
               ONTARIO WATER  RESOURCES COMMISSION
19
                          Toronto
20

21                           December 5, 1967

22
          The Joseph B. Stinson Company,
23         406 Justice Street,
          FREEMONT, Ohio  43420,
24         U.  S. A.

25                           ATTENTION:  Mr. Joseph  B. Stinso
                                        President

-------
                                                        2461
 1                        J.  B.  STINSON

 2        Gentlemen:

 3                  Rej   Acceptance of jonny Trap Holding Tanpc
 4                  The Jonny Trap holding tank system as

 5        described in your application on Form No. 1 dated

 B        November 30, 1967 is accepted for use on pleasure

 7        boats in the waters of the Province of Ontario.

 8        This acceptance relates only to its use as a

 9        device for the storage of human excrement for

10        subsequent disposal ashore in compliance with

11        Ontario Regulation 365/66 and does not constitute

12        an endorsement for the durability of its components

13        the operation of its associated parts or its suit-

14        ability^for any other purpose.

15                  This acceptance is contingent upon this

16        system's being installed and arranged so that

17        sewage consisting of human excrement deposited

18        into it or into any toilet connected to it is

19        prevented from entering any water.

20                  This acceptance is given on the under-

21        standing that persons owning boats on which this

22        system is installed are required to obtain OWRC

23        approvals to operate the devices on their boats.

24                               Yours very truly,
                                (Signed)   T. M. Murphy,
25                               T. M. Murphy,  Technician,
                                Plumbing and Boating Branch.

-------
                                                                                               2462
                         APPUCATIGM  FOR APi'KOVAE. OS
           S TREATMENT,  S7OKA©S, ©?. DISPOSAL OF SGWA©S CONSISTING  OF
                        HUMAN EXCREfclaN?  IN A  Pi.SA5i33S BOAT


Complete in duplicate, retain copy and forward original  to:

           Ontario Water Resources Commission,
            Division of Sanitary  Engineering,
           Watercraft Pollution  Control Program,
           801 Bay Street, Toronto 5, Ontario.
This application shall be made by or on behalf of the owner (owner  includes a lessee) of  the boat and the device described  herein.
A	         Tel. No.
                  (Name of Applicant—Please Print)
                  	         Age
                   (Permanent  and temporary, if any,
                  address of Applicant — Please Print)
B.                                      DESCRIPTION  OF BOAT
                                                                     "X

    Model Name or Number	 Mfr.

    Outboard	•.  Inboard	  Sailboat	 Other 	

    Length Overall 	Ft.  Beam (Max.)  	Ft.  H.P	

    Hull Material: Wood	Aluminum	 Fiberglass	 Other  	
                                                                                     type

    No. of  Berths		  (convertible or otherwise) Passenger  Rating  	

    Licence No	•	 Registered  No. (if applicable)	  Registered Name  	
C.                                         TYPE OF DEVICE

     1. Storage device  requiring  dockside pumping to  remove contents

     2. Storage device  equipped  with pump  to empty contents

     3. Portable  container for manual emptying

     4. Other  	
                                               (Type)

     5. Treatment device intended for overboard  discharge                  	
    (Where a device mentioned in item 5 is to be used, a  temporary permit that expires June 1,  1971 is required).
D.                                         MODEL FEATURES

     1. Model  Name or Number	
                                                                           (Manufacturer)
     2. Has Device  been subjected to tests covering design, construction,
       installation and operating characteristics?                               	
                                                                                 Yes             No

     3. Name and Address of Testing Agency	

     4. Attach results of or information relating to such tests to application.

     5. Is permanent placard with operating instructions provided with the  device?	
                                                                                 Yes           '  No

     6. Is a chemical additive used in the operation of the device?
                                                                                 Yes             No

     7. Name of chemical to be used	

     8. Is a tracer dye added in the operation of the device?
                                                                                 Yes             No

     9. Name of tracer dye to  be  used	

    10. Is device a self-contained recirculating type?
                                                                                 Yes             No

-------
                                                                                                    •2463

    11. Is device recirculating with head  and storage tank separate?	
                                                                                     Yes              No
    12. Number  of usages  between recharge cycles  		
    13. Initial  charge 	Imp. Gal.
    14. Total capacity 	Imp. Gal.
    NOTE: Please  attach specifications for device together with operating instructions.
E.                                            HOLDING TANK
     Holding tank material	
     2. Capacity  	Imp. Gal.
     3. Diameter of  inlet  opening 	inches
     4. Diameter of outlet  opening 	•—inches
     5. Diameter of piping  from toilet to holding tank 	trade size inches
     6. Diameter of piping from holding tank to pump-out connection  	  trade size inches
     7. Diameter of pump-out connection  	trade size inches
     8. Material  for piping	
     9. Is holding tank  provided with sewage level indicator?
                                                                                     Yes              No
    10. What provision is made in the  design of the holding tank for cleaning the tank and piping? 	
F.                          TREATMENT  DEVICE  FOR A PLEASURE BOAT FROM A
                                   JURISDICTION  OTHER THAN ONTARIO
     If the owner of the pleasure boat is from a jurisdiction other than Ontario, please complete this section.
     1. Address  where applicant is ordinarily resident 	.-,,.,
       Address  in Ontario,  if any  	
     2. Does the device for the storage, treatment or disposal  of sewage  in your boat comply with the laws of the
       jurisdiction  in which the applicant is ordinarily resident?                   	
                                                                                     Yes              No
       If the answer is yes, please enclose documentary evidence of the compliance referred to.
     3. Is the pleasure boat registered or licensed in the jurisdiction in which
       the applicant is ordinarily  resident?                                       	
                                                                                     Yes              No
     4. Has approval of the device described herein in the jurisdiction in which the
       applicant is ordinarily resident ever been refused, suspended  or  cancelled?  	     	
                                                                                     Yes             No
     5. Is the pleasure boat being or  to be operated in Ontario water
       and if so which water? 	

       I certify that the information in this application is true, complete, and accurate.
               Name  of  Applicant     	
                                                                         (Please Print)
               Signature of Applicant
               or of
               Authorized Officer
               or Agent thereof	
               Name  and Title of
               Authorized Officer
               or Agent		
                                                                         (Please Print)
       Dated  at  	this.'.	day of  	19.
    AFFIX
 CORPORATE
 *   SEAL

-------
 1                        J.vB. STINSOK

 2
                STATE WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
 3
                    47 Trinity Avenue,  S.W.
 4
                    Atlanta, Georgia  30334
 5

 6                               December  15,  1967

 7
          Mr, Joseph B. Stinson
 8         The Joseph B. Stinson Company
          406 Justice street
 9         Freemont, Ohio  43420

10
          Dear Mr. Stinson:
11

12
                    In reply to your  letter to Mr. R.  S
13         Howard of December 13, the Georgia water Quality

14         Control Board acknowledges receipt of the plans

15         and literature for your "Jonny Trap" marine hold-
is
          ing tank system and your coin operated pump.

17                   After reviewing this literature it is
| A
          my opinion that the abovementioned equipment will

          meet the requirements of chapter 730-4 of the
20
          Rules of the state water Quality control Board
21
          when properly installed.  However, the coin
22
          operated pump should be installed only at those
23
          locations with approved on-shore disposal facili-
          ties.
25
                    The Georgia water Quality Control Board

-------
                                                        2465,
 1                        J. -B> 6TINSON

 2         is pleased to see new equipment in the field of

 3         marine sanitation.  There is a need for such a

 4         system as yours at present and this should in-

          crease with greater demand to be placed on

 6         Georgia's recreationa1 water in the future.

 7
                                Sincerely,
 8                               (Signed) Marshall Gaddis
                                Marshall Gaddis
 9                               Marine Technologist

10

11

12                   COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

13                  STATE WATER CONTROL BOARD

14   P.  O.  BOX 11143   Richmond, Virginia  (703)  707-2241

15
                                January 4, 1968
16

17         Mr. Joseph B. Stinson, President
          The Joseph B. Stinson Designers
18            and Builders of Automation Equipment
          406 Justice Street
19         Freeraont, Ohio   43420

20
          Dear Mr. Stinson:
21

22
          This will acknowledge your letter of December 13,
          1967, requesting a statement of consent from our

24
          office to permit the sale of your marine sewage

25
          holding tank system in the state of Virginia.  As

-------
                                                        2466
 1                        J.-B. STINSON

 2         you are aware, we have no authority to approve

 3         the selling of any manufactured equipment.

 4                   As you are also aware, we have no  laws

 5         in Virginia concerning control of pollution  from

 B         individual boats and are in no position at the

 7         present time to approve or disapprove any pollu-

 8         tion abatement devices for boats.  However,  we

 9         do not offer any objections to your selling

10         these devices in Virginia, and the staff would

11         recommend your system for approval by the Board,

12         should any law be passed that would make us  the

13         responsible agency for approving such facilities.

14
                                Very truly yours,
15                               (Signed)  Charles E. Cooley
                                C. E. Cooley, Director
16                               pollution Abatement Division

17         CEC/mjs

18

19                 FLORIDA STATE BOARD OP HEALTH

20                        Jacksonville

21
                                November 22, 1967
22

23               Waste    -    Marine Toilets / 47

24

25

-------
                                                        246?
 1                   J. B. STINSON


 2

          Mr. Joseph B. Stinson

 3         President

          Joseph B. Stinson Company

 4         406 Justice street

          Fremont, Ohio    43420
 5


 6         Dear Mr.Stinson:


 7

          Your inquiry of November 11, in regard your
 8

          products "Jonny Trap" and "COP" is acknowledged.
 9

          The Board of Health does not presently have
10

          specific legal control or regulations on marine


          toilets.  state law and Board of Health regula-
12

          tions do prohibit the pollution of surface waters
13

          and any equipment or device which would adequately
14         •

          prevent pollution from toilets on boats could be
15

          sold and used without objections.  we would be
16                                 J          	

          most favorable to the principle of a holding tank


          with discharge to marinas properly equipped for
18   •      	;	B	s	*^	-	*—

          that purpose.
19              f—*	

                    The board does not endorse for sale or
20
/

          advertising purposes any particular equipment,
21

          but offers no objections to its use if adequately
22,                         '               "

          designed for the purposes intended.



24                               Yours very truly,

                                (Signed) Charles E. Cook

25        CEC:jb                 Charles E. Cook

-------
                                                        2468^
 1                          3'. B. STINSON

 2
                   STATE  CONSERVATION COMMISSION
 3
                    East  77th and Court Avenue
 4
                      Dea Moines,  Iowa  50308
 5

 6                                December 5,  1967

 7
          Joseph  B. Stinson  Company
 8         406 Justice street,
          Fremont,  Ohio    43420
 9

10         Dear  sirs

11
                     In reference to your letter regarding
12
          a  sewage holding and discharge system.
13
                     It is against Iowa law to discharge
14
          raw sewage in  Iowa waters,  we do not at this
15
          time, however, have a law covering an approved
16
          system  on holding  or disposal units.  In any
17
          future  proposed legislative asking's I'm sure
18
          we would be for holding tanks rather than a treat-
19
          roent  discharge type installation.
20
                     If we can be of further assistance
21
          please  feel free to call on us.
22

23                                Very truly yours,
                                 (Signed) Lewis M.  Boers,
24                                LEWIS M. MOERS, Supv.
                                 Waters Section
25

-------
                                                       2469
                          J* "Bv STINSON

 2        LMBscp
          cci file
 3

 4

 5
                          STATE OF  KANSAS
 6
                FORESTRY, FISH AND GAME  COMMISSION
 7
                             BOX 1028
 8
                           Pratt,  Kanaaa- 67124
 9

10                              November 6,  1967

11
          Mr. Joseph B.  Stinson
12        President
          The J«s«ph B.  Stinson Co.
13        406 Justice street
          Fremont, Ohio   43420
14

15        Dear Mr. Stinsons

16
                    In reply to your letter  of October 31,

          we are not in  a position to  approve or disapprove
18
          yOur-product called the  "jonny Trap".  There is
19
          no fish and game regulations concerning this matt
20
          but the state  Health Department does control the
21
          type of sanitary facilities  that can be used
22
          around public  waters, and the  state Park Authorit
23
          controls the type of apparatuses that are under

          the jurisdiction of concessionnaires.  In some

-------
                                                      2470
 I                          Jv B. STINSON

 2          cases  these  concessionnaires may be under the

 3          supervision  of the water controlling agency in

 4          which  case it is usually the corps of Engineers

 5          or  the Bureau of Reclamation.

 6                   In the few  cases  where concessionnaires

 7          are located  on Fish and  Game Lakes, we do have

 8          control but  it would  be  up  to the concessionnaire

 9          to  maintain  and operate  such facilities.   Before

10          he  can install additional facilities he must have

11          an  approval  from this Department giving us the

12          details along with specifications and so  forth,

13          so  that we can better judge its   merit.

14                   I  would suggest that you contact the

15          State  Department of Health,  state Office  Building

16          fifth  floor,  Topeka,  66612,  regarding the feasibi

17          ity and the  approvability of such equipment;  and

18          I would also contact  the State Park Authority,

19          801 Harrison,  Topeka,  66612,  regarding the instal

20
           lation of such equipment on areas under their

21          jurisdiction.

22
                                 Yours truly,
                                 (Signed) Geo. C. Moore
                                 GEORGE C.  MOORE
                                 Director
„          GMCses

-------
                                                     2471

 1                         J.  B.  STINSON

 2             STATE  PARK AMD  RECREATION COMMISSION

 3                      STATE  OF  NEW MEXICO
                                 November 14*  1967
 5

 6        Mr. Joseph  B.  Stinson,  President
          The Joseph  B.  Stinson Company
 7        406 Justice Street
          Fremont, Ohio   43420
 8

 9        Dear Mr. Stinson:

 10
                    Thank you for your letter dated
 11
          October 31,  1967, regarding the marketing of
 12
          your products,  the  "jonny Trap" and "COP's"*
 13
                    We are certainly happy to hear that
 14
          these  systems  are available to boaters.  However,
 15
          New Mexico  has not  yet reached a decision regard-
 16
          ing the use of toilet facilities on boats.  When
 17
          this problem is resolved and law is passed, we
 18
          would  perhaps  be in a position to approve or dis-
 19
          approve the installation of your product aboard
 20
          watercraft  in  New Mexico.
21

22
                                 Sincerely,
                                 JAMES L.  DILLARD
23                                DIRECTOR
24                                BY I   C.  E.  ROUGH
25         CER/lyw
(Signed)  C. E. Rouch
3Yt  C. E. ROUCH
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER

-------
                                                       24-72

 1                          Jii"B.* STINSON

 2
        STATE  OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATION
 3
                      DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
 4

 5                                November 7, 1967

 6
        Mr.  Joseph B.  Stinson,  President
 7       The  Joseph B.  Stinson Co.
        406  Justice street
 8       Fremont,  Ohio     43420

 9
        Dear Mr.  Stinson:
10

11                   Your letter of October 31,  1967, re-

12       garding  the "Jonny  Trap" and "COP's",  to Mr. Charles

13       6. Bolwell, Chief,  Division of Enforcement,  has

14       been referred  to this office.

15                   we would be happy to receive any litera-

ls       ture you have  pertaining to your products; however,

17       we do  not give approval for general use  or endorse arjy

18       product.   Any  proposal  to utilize this equipment at

19       a specific location would be reviewed  and approved

20       only for that  specific  location if the facilities

21       were found to  be adequate.

22
                                 Yours very truly,
23                                (Signed)  Carleton A. Maine
                                 Carleton A. Maine,  Chief
24                                Div. of water pollution Contjr
                                 Department of Health
25

-------
                                                       2473
 1                          J> ,=-B> STINSON


       CAMtnn

 3
       cci  Charles O. Bolvell, Chief
 4           Division of Enforcement


 5

 6

 7                      STATS OP WYOMING

 8                   OAMB AND FISH COMMISSION

 g                          CHEYENNE   82001


10
                                November  3,  1967

11

12      Joseph B. Stineon,  President
       The Joseph B. Stinson Company

13
       Fromont, Ohio  4343O
15      D«ar Mr. Stinson t


16
                    At th« pr«sont  tine  %r« do not have a
17
       law demanding or prohibiting any  facilities for
18
       handling wastes on our boate.
19
                    We have not asked our legislature for
20
       a  "narine head" law, but we  anticipate doing this
21
       in  conjunction with our  State Department of Public
22
       Health and this will be done when the criteria is
23
       drawn up for the water quality standards for this
24
       state .  we do have waters  that rest within National
25
       Park boundaries that prohibit the discharge of any

-------
 !                         Jv B. STIHSON

 2      wastes into the waters,

 3                   Our legislature will not convene until

 4      1969 and at that time we will have a law submitted

 5      to them for their consideration.

 6
                                 Sincerely,
 7                               (Signed)   William S. Kozas
                                 William S. Kozas
 8                               Watercraft Officer

 9      WSK/blw

10                            - - -

11
            MICHIGAN SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS
12
                        533 South Washington
13
                       Lansing,  Michigan 48933
14

15                                  Please address reply tos

16                                Dow Chemical Company
                                 Plant Engineering
17                                464 Building
                                 Midland,  Michigan  48640
18

19                                January 22, 1968

20
        Mr.  Loring F. Oeming,
21       Executive Secretary
        Water Resources Commission
22       200  Mill Street
        Lansing, Michigan  48926
23

24       Dear Mr. Oemingt

25

-------
                                                 	  2M-75
               MICHIGAN SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS

2
          FEDERAL CONFERENCE ON POLLUTION OF LAKE  MICHIGAN
3         AND ITS TRIBUTARY BASIN

4
                    In answer to your  letter of  December  29,

          1967 to Mr. John J. Carey, President of  the
6
          Michigan Society of Professional  Engineers, we
7
          take this opportunity to thank you for request-
8
          ing our participation in this Conference,  it
9
          is certainly a project which is worthy of  iraroed-
10
          iate action and which affects a wide area  of

          central United states.  The  statement  which 1 am
12
          attaching is the policy issued by the  National

          Society of Professional Engineers.  This is also
14
          the policy of the Michigan Society of  Professiona
15
          Engineers and we hope it will supply you with the
16
          facts and views of the Michigan Society  of Pro-
17
          fessional Engineers.
18
                    Should you desire  any further  informa-
19
          tion or comments, please feel free to  call or con-
20
          tact me.
21

22                               Sincerely,
                                 (Signed)  Clair  H. Aiken, P.
23                               Clair  H. Aiken,  P.E.
                                Vice President,  M.S.P.E.
24
          Enc.  (1)
25

-------
 1              MICHIGAN SOCIETY DP PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS


 2          cc:  Mr. John J. Carey, President, M.S.P.E.
                3486 woodland Road
 3               Ann Arbor, Michigan  48104


 4          ibe


 5


 6


 7          MICHIGAN SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS


 8                      533 South Washington


 9                     Lansing,  Michigan 48933


10
                                 January 22, 1968
11


12          NATIONAL SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS


13               POLICY  46-B—WATER POLLUTION


14
                     The pollution of the streams,  lakes
15

           and other waters of the United States is a
16
           serious problem which requires continuing atten-
17

           tion.  In accordance with the principle express-
18

           ed by the National conference on Water Pollution
19

           held in 1960, NSPE believes that the goal of
20

           pollution abatement is to protect and enhance the
21

           capacity of water resources to serve the widest
22

           possible range of human needs.  The society con-
23

           siders that this goal can be realized most effec-
24

           tively through a positive policy of providing the
25

-------
                                                   2477
 1              MICHIGAN SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS
 2         best possible water  quality  consistent with
 3         engineering  and  economic  factors  and the public
 4         interest.
 5                   The society recognizes  that the pri-
 6         mary responsibility  for preventing  and control-
 7         ling water pollution rests with state and local
 8         governments.  The  exercise of Federal responsi-
 9         bility, with respect to international, inter-
10         state and navigable  waters,  should  recognize
11         state rights regarding pollution  control.  Federa
12         aid, when necessary,  should  be designed to sup-
13         plement non-Federal  efforts  ,  and the programs
14         of  Federal financial aid  should be  administered
15         through appropriate  state and local agencies and
16         the existing facilities of Federal  agencies with
17         responsibilities for water pollution prevention.
18                   The society considers the current Feder
19         water pollution  control laws to be  consistent wit!
          the foregoing policy. Any future revisions in
21
          these laws should  preserve the existing Federal-
          State relationships.
23
                    The society considers that granting
24
          authority to any Federal  agency to  establish and
25
          promulgate water quality  standards  would be

-------
                                                        2^78

 1              MICHIGAN SOCIETY ,OP PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS

 2         contrary  to the  NSPE  policy of preserving proper

 3         Federal-state  relationships.  The Federal Govern-

 4         ment  should provide research and technical

          assistance to  facilitate  the establishment of

 6         water  quality  criteria by the states

 7

 8

 9            MICHIGAN SOCIETY OF PLANNING OFFICIALS

10                     1937 Cromwell Drive

11                     Holt,  Michigan 48842

12
                                January 16, 1968
13

14

15

16

17
Mr. Loring Oexning
Executive Secretary
Water Resources commission
200 Mill Street
Lansing Michigan
          Dear Mr.  Oeming,
lo
         \

19                    The  Board of Director's of the Michigan

          Society of Planning Officials,  at its regular

21
          meeting on January 12,  1968,  went on record as

22
          favoring in total any efforts to control water

23
          pollution in Lake Michigan and its tributaries.
24
          It  regrets that  it cannot send an official MSPO
25
          Board  member to  voice its endorsement in person

-------
                                                       2*79
 1              MICHIGAN SOCIETY OP .PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS

 2          at your conference scheduled for January 31,

 3          1968.

 4                    The Board also asked me to express  to

 5          you, on its behalf, their appreciation  for keep-

 6          ing them informed on the statue of programs
                            • •   s
 7          sponsored by the Water Resources commission.

 8          The cooperative efforts made by the commission

 9          are very much appreciated.

10
                                 Sincerely,
11                                (Signed) Bruce c. Brown
                                 Bruce C. Brown
12                                Executive Secretary

13

14

15             STATEMENT BY MICHIGAN PESTICIDE COUNCIL

16                               FOR

17          WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE

18                    CHICAGO,  ILL., JAN. 31, 1968

19
                     The Michigan Pesticide Council has  as

           its purpose the taking of such action deemed

           necessary to protect or restore the quality of

„          our environment through the control of pesticides
23

           This council is composed of representatives of teju

25          organizations with a membership of over 65,000

-------
                                                       2480
 1                   MICHIGAN;PESTICIDE COUNCIL
 2          citizens distributed over the entire state of
 3          Michigan.
 4                    The application of the pesticides DDT,
 5          dieldrin, and related chlorinated hydrocarbon
 6          insecticides over and on the lands and waters
 7          of the watershed of Lake Michigan during the
 8          past two decades,  and the subsequent movement
 9          of these chemicals downstream into the lake,
10          have brought about a serious state of contamina-
11          tion of its waters.  The success of a twenty
12          million dollar investment in establishment of
13          the coho and chinook salmon in Lake Michigan is
14          in jeopardy.  The bald eagle, our national emblem
15          has virtually disappeared from its shores as a
16          nesting bird.  Reproduction in colonies of herr-
17          ing and ring-billed gulls, essential scavengers
18          of the lake shore,  has been impared.
19                    We realize that pesticides are but one
20          of many forms of pollution with which Lake
21          Michigan is afflicted,  we believe that all forms
22          of pollution are significant, and call upon duly
23          constituted authority to halt further pollution
24          of the waters of Lake Michigan with these per-
25          sistent chlorinated hydrocarbon pesticides by

-------
                                                        2481
 j                  KECHIGAN-: .PESTICIDE COUNCIL

 2         ordering to cease and desist  from  the use of

 3         the named pesticides, the  following:

 4                   (1)  all municipalities  using DDT in

 5                        Dutch elm disease control programs,

 6                   (2)  all municipalities  and public

 7                        agencies using DDT  in  mosquito

 8         .               control programs, and

 9                   (3)  all public  agencies using dieldrin

10                        and similar chemicals  in wide-

11                        spread insect  control  programs

12                        such as for the Japanese beetle.

13                   We highly approve the action now being

14         contemplated to clean up Lake Michigan, but con-

15         sider it long overdue,  we urge immediate, prompt,

I6         and vigorous measures before  it is too late.

17
                                 (Signed)  Norman Spring
18                               Norman  Spring,  Chairman
                                MICHIGAN PESTICIDE COUNCIL
19                               1416 Lake Avenue
                                Grand Haven,  Michigan
20

21                            . - _        '

22
                   MICHIANA WATERSHED, INC.
23
                   BERRIEN COUNTY CHAPTER
24
                      STATE OP MICHIGAN
25

-------
                                                       2482

 1                    MICHIANA. "WATERSHED,  INC.

 2                  2010 Bond Road,  Niles,  Mich.

 3
                                  January  26,  1968.
 4

 5          Mr.  Loring Oeming
           Michigan Water  Resources commission
 6          Lansing,  Michigan

 7
           Dear Mr.  Oemingt
 8

 9                    We are pleased to  know that you will

10          represent the state  of  Michigan at the inter-

H          state  conference on  water pollution of Lake

12          Michigan at Chicago  on  January 31.

13                    As a  priceless water resource of our

14          State,  our  organization is vitally interested

15          in preserving the purity of  the waters of Lake

16          Michigan for the  present and future generations

17          use  and enjoyment,   we  ask that you accept this

18          letter  as proxy vote for our membership of 186

19          persons on  your behalf.

20                    We hope particularly that in your presejn-

21          tation  of the case for  Michigan that you will

22
           emphasize the need for  the improvement of water

23          quality in  the  St. Joseph River which is one  of

24          the  contributors  to  the deteriorating condition

25
           of Lake Michigan.  Your files  are  amply supplied

-------
                                                      2483

 1                    MICHIANA-WATERSHED, INC.



 2        with  authenticated  information  previously gather-




 3        ed by your  own staff  and  Federal agencies and




 4        presented at  hearings over the  past years at




 5        Elkhart, Indianapolis and  South  Bend,  Indiana,




 6        and Niles,  Michigan,  and  we believe that the only




 7        point that  needs  to be made at  this time is that




 8        there has been no improvement in the situation.




 9        As previously reported, the major source of




10        pollution of  the  St.  Joseph River is the waste




11        water treatment plant of  the City of south Bend,




12        Indiana, which although recently constructed,  is




13        inadequate  for the  load imposed upon it.




14                  As  you  know,  South Bend has been order-




15        ed by the Indiana Stream  Pollution Commission  for




16        the past three years  to construct the improvements




17        necessary to  bring  its waste water treatment plant




18        up to acceptable  standards,  and the City of South




19        Bend  has completed  engineering  work and  has plans




20        ready to complete this work,  which would be of




21        great benefit to  Michigan citizens and the citi-



22
         zens  of other states  bordering  Lake Michigan.




23        However, repeated applications  for Federal funds




         which are available to assist in this project  and




         are allocated by  the  Indiana Stream Pollution

-------
 1                    MICHIANA WATERSHED,.INC.
 2         Board have been denied.  As a result, no improve-
 3         raent ha si been made and the water quality of the
 4         St. Joseph River is as bad as when we first
 5         brought the natter to your attention in 1963.
 6                   We hope that your testimony at the
 7         forthcoming hearing, with proper emphasis, will
 8         result in prompt action being taken to improve
 9         the waters of the St. Joseph River.
10
                                Very truly yours,
11                               (Signed)   s. R. Dunnuck, Jr.
                                S. R. Dunnuck, Jr. Secy.
12                               Berrien County Chapter
13
14

15                   MR. VOGT:  NOW, this morning, Mr.
16         Chairman, I made reference to a statement which
17         I had from Mr. Keith Wilson and which there was
18         some indication that Mr. Wilson would be present
19
          to deliver this statement.  Over the noon hour
20
          I learned that Mr. Wilson will not be present and
21
          that it is requested that this statement not be
22
          incorporated into the record.
23
                    Therefore, I request that the recorder
24
          not include this as a part of the record.
25
                    MR. STEINt  That will be done.  so

-------
                                                       2^85

 !                         R. W. PURDY


 2        ordered.

 3                  MR. VOGT:  We are now at that point


 4        in Michigan's Presentation where the State


 $        Report will be presented.  This will be presented


 6        in two parts by Mr. Ralph Purdy, the Chief


 7        Engineer of the Michigan Water Resources comrois-


 8        sion, and by Mr. Donald Pierce, chief of the


 g        Waste water Section of the Michigan Department


10        of Health.


11                  I will ask Mr. Purdy to begin the


12        presentation.


13
                   STATEMENT OF RALPH PURDY

14
                        CHIEF ENGINEER

15
              MICHIGAN WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION

16

17                  MR. PURDY:  Mr. Chairman, Conferees,


13        ladies and gentlemen.


19                  Before entering directly into our


20        report -- this need not be on the record, this


21        part.


22                  (Off the record.)


23                  MR. PURDY:  We are now ready to start


24        on our report.


25                  We have presented this report to the

-------
                                                       2486
 I                          R. W. PURDY

 2         conferees and, Mr. Chairman, we would ask that
 3         the entire report be considered as a part of the
 4         record.  We will not read it, needless to say,

 5         in its entirety today.
 6                   I would like to turn directly to the

 7         Preface,  page xi.

 8
 9                            PREFACE

10
11                   This report contains information on
12         the municipal and industrial waste disposal

13         situation in the Michigan portion of the inter-
14         state waters of Lake Michigan and in the tribu-
15         taries to Lake Michigan in Michigan.  It delineate
16         the statutes that provide the local units of goverfi

17         roent authority to build, own and Operate waste
18         treatment facilities.  it delineates the state

19         statutes for control of water pollution.  It
20         delineates the accomplishments that have been

21         made in controlling pollution and the measures
22         that are being taken to provide improved control.
23         it also describes the uses being made of these

24         waters and water quality conditions.

25                   The report was prepared for presentation

-------
                                                      2487
 1                         R. W. PURDY

 2         to the conferees at the Federal Conference called

 3         by the secretary of the interior for their con-

 4         sideration and appraisal in (1) arriving at con-

 5         elusions as to whether waste discharges originat-

 6         ing from Michigan sources are endangering the

 7         health or welfare of persons in a state other

 8         than that in which the discharge or discharges

 9         originate, (2) determining the adequacy of

10         measures that have been taken for abatement of

11         pollution, and (3) determining the nature of

12         delays, if any, being encountered in abating

13         pollution.

14                   The area encompassed by the report in-

15         eludes all of the Michigan portion of Lake

16         Michigan and its tributaries.

17                   All sources of municipal sewage and

18         industrial waste discharges to surface waters

!9         are covered.  The nature of waste treatment or

20         control measures in effect are described and the

21         state agency action to control pollution and

22         evaluate accomplishments is related.

23                   The files and records of the Michigan

2*         water Resources Commission and Michigan Depart-

25         ment of Public Health are the sources of

-------
                                                       2488





 1                          R. W.  PURDY




 2         information contained  in  the  report.  The



 3         employed  staffs  of both agencies  collaborated



 4         in assembling  the material  and  preparing the



 5         report.



 6                    Now, under Statutory  Authority,  Part A,



 7         we describe the  authority for local units  of



 8         government to  build, own, and operate waste



 9         treatment facilities.  Some nineteen statutes




10         are  listed.  I only wish  to point out number



11         three, Act 342,  Public Acts of  1939, which



12         authorized counties to establish  and provide



          connecting water, sewer and/or  sewage disposal



          improvements.




15                    Act  245, Public Acts  of 1947, an act


16
          to regulate the  ownership,  extension, improvement


17
          and  operation  of public water and sewage disposal


18
          systems lying  within two  or more  public corpora-



19         tions.


20
                     Act  185, Public Acts  of 1957, an act


21
          to authorize   the establishment of a department


22
          and  board of public works in  counties.



23                    Act  320, Public Acts  of 1927, and this


24
          is a very important act in  our  pollution control


25
          program.   It is  an act to authorize legislative

-------
                                                       2489
 1                         R. W. PURDY
 2         bodies of municipalities to issue and sell bonds
 3         necessary for the construction of sewage disposal
 4         plants whenever a court of competent jurisdic-
 5         tion shall have ordered same.
 6                   Act 373, Public Acts of 1925, is a
 7         companion act just as important and this is an
 8         act to authorize legislative bodies of municipali-
 9         ties to issue and sell bonds necessary for the
10         construction of storm and sanitary sewers when*
11         ever a court of competent jurisdiction shall
12         have ordered same.
13                   Under part B, the authority for the
14         control of water pollution, some twenty-one acts
15         listed.  On page 4 I would like to call your
16         attention to number 8, Act 245, Public Acts of 19:
17         This is the act that created the Water Resources
1 A
          Commission to protect and conserve the water re-
19         sources of the State, to have control over the
          pollution of any waters of the State and the
21
          Great Lakes, with power to make rules and regula-
22                          •
          tions governing the same and to provide penalties
23
          for the violation of the act.
24                   Number 10, Act 329, Public Acts of 1966,
25
          an act to provide State grants for sewage treatmei t

-------
                                                       2^90
 j                          R. W.  PURDY
 2         facilities  and  to provide  for  administration of
 3         the  grants  by the water  resources  commission.
 4                   Number 12, Act 253,  Public  Acts  of
 5         1964,  an  act to enable local units of government
 6         to cooperate in planning and carrying out  a  co-
 7         ordinated water management program in the  water-
 8         shed.  This is  the act described to you by Mr.
 9         John Kennaugh this morning of  the  Grand River
10         Watershed Group.
11                   Number 13, Act 222,  Public  Acts  of
12         1966,  an  act to provide  for the exemption  of
13         industrial  water pollution control facilities
14         from certain taxes.
15                   Act 98,  Public Acts  of 1913,  an  act
16         providing for the  supervision  and  control  by the
17         director  of the department of  public  health  over
18         sewerage  systems,  and  providing penalties  for
19         violations.
20                   Number 17, Act 288,  Public  Acts  of
21         1967,  an  act to regulate the subdivision of  land;
22         and to promote  the public  health by providing
23         authority to the department of public health to
24         approve subdivisions not served by public  sewers
25         on basis  of suitability  of soils.

-------
                                                       2491

 1                         R. W. PURDY




 2                   Under the statutes that we have cited,



 3         we believe that it provides a basis for Michigan



 4         communities to do whatever is required in the



 5         way of abating pollution, and also the acts have



 6         been provided to enable the state and other regu-



 7         latory agencies to require the necessary pollu-



 8         tion abatement facilities.



 9                   On page 5, starting in on the Legal



10         History, I will not go through all of this.  To



11         brief it very quickly*



12                   In 1929 the Michigan Legislature



13         enacted the stream Control Commission Act, Act




I4         245, establishing a 5-member commission consisting



15         of the Director of Conservation, the state Health



16         Commissioner, the Highway Commissioner, the com-



17         missioner of Agriculture and the Attorney General




18                   This Commission issued many orders.



19         One in particular was appealed to the court and



20         the constitutionality and authority of the stream



21         Control commission to issue orders requiring the



22         abatement of pollution of the waters of the state



23         was reviewed in City of Niles versus stream Con-



24         trol commission.  This was decided March 11, 1941


25
          In the course of that decision the court made

-------
                                                        2492
 1                           R. W. PURDY
 2          eoxne notable objections,  among which is the
 3          following:
 4                    "in order to stop pollution of the
 5                    river,  it was necessary for the coro-
 6                    mission to take action against the
 7                    City of Niles,  inasmuch as it was the
 8                    first city in the state on the course
 9                    of the river below the Indiana cities
10                    and thus opened the way for suit to
11                    compel the Indiana cities to stop pol-
12                    lution of the waters of the river.  It
13                    is an instance where the state must
14                    clean up its own dooryard before being
15                    in a position to a sic or seek to compel
16                    its neighbor to clean up.  This was not
17                    an arbitrary exercise of power by the
18                    Commission but a practical movement
                     toward accomplishment of a most desir-
20                    able end."
21
                     The most notable series of cases in-
           volving the enforcement of an order of the cora-
23
           mission was against the city of port Huron.  This
           was issued February 11,  1936.  The city failed to
25
           comply with this order and the Commission filed

-------
                                                      2493


 1                          R. W. PURDY




 2         a bill of complaint on December 9,  1939, to en-



 3         force it.  The circuit Court denied the relief



 4         sought by the commission and the matter was



 5         appealed to the Supreme court.



 6                   The Supreme court reversed  the decision



 7         of the lower court and validated the  order of



 8         the Commission.  The Supreme court  referred to



 9         the agreement made by the city that construction



10         of the sewage plant would not materially reduce




11         pollution in the river.  In disposing of this



12         contention, the court stated:



13                   "The record contains sufficient testi-



14                   mony to substantiate the  state's con-



15                   tention that the present  raw sewage



16                   disposal method is a constant menace



17                   to the health and well-being of the



18                   down-river communities as well as to



19                   tourists.  This evidence  clearly justi-



20                   fies the Commission's order. Under



21                   the authority of the City of Miles case


22                   ,supra,

                    where similar arguments were advanced,



23                   it is no defense to a statutory charge



24                   of river-water pollution  that others


25
                    have or are contributing  to that

-------
 1                       R. W. PURDY
 2                  condition."
 3                  The City of port Huron failed to comply
 4        with the order of the Supreme court,  and conse-
 5        quently the Attorney General filed a  motion for
         final process to enforce the decree.   The court
 7        stated that the injunctive relief sought by the
 8        motion of the Attorney General will be granted
 9        in October of 1950,  but even this did not end
10        the controversy because the city of port Huron
11        experienced difficulty in selling the bonds to
12        raise the money for  the construction  of the
13        sewage treatment works
14                  I pointed  out to you Act 320, Public Acts
15        of 1927, under the statute section, that this
16        authorized the legislative bodies of  municipalities
17        to issue and sell bonds necessary for the construc-
18        tion of sewage disposal plants "whenever a court of
19
         competent jurisdiction in this State shall have
         ordered the installation of a sewage or garbage
21
         disposal  system  in any of the governmental
22
         agencies  ormunic ipalities  here mentioned
23        and the plans therefore shall have  been prepared
24
         and approved by the state commission of Health."
25
         After  reviewing  the  various  authorities,  the

-------
                                                       2495



 1                         R. W. PURDY




 2         court held that whenever a municipality finds it




 3         necessary to raise money for the issuance of




 4         bonds for the purposes of complying with a court




 5         order involving the public health of the state,




 6         no referendum of approval by the people is neces-




 7         sary.




 8                   Another point raised by Port Huron .was




 9         that the  levy ing of the tax for the payment of




10         such bonds would exceed the tax limitations pro-




11         vided by the city charter.  This, by the way, is




12         a contention which is usually made by muhicipali-




13         ties whenever they are faced with complying with




14         an order of the water Resources Commission.  In




15         its opinion the court rejected this contention




16         by holding that there is ample authority to levy




17         taxes for the purposes mentioned in Act 320, and




18         that even though the tax limitations were exceed-




19         ed, such defense is not valid when the the city




20         is required to comply with a court order.




21                   The series of cases referred to has




          paved the way for enforcement of Water Resources




23         Commission orders and has enabled Michigan munici-




          palities to finance construction of projects



25
          necessary to comply with Commission orders.  The

-------
 L                          R. W.  PURDY




 2         water  Resources  Commission  has  secured court



 3         orders directing 26  units of government in the



 4         Lake Michigan  Basin  to abate pollution of the



 5         waters of the  state  by the  construction of sewage



 6         treatment facilities and court  action is now



 7         underway against 4 units of government.



 8                    NOW,  in addition,  the Director of the



 9         Department of  Public Health, acting pursuant



10         to authority vested  in him  by Act 98,  Public Acts



11         of 1913, and Act  219, Public Acts of 1949, has



12         prohibited the  extension of municipal sewer



13         systems and additional connections to existing



14         systems where  such is  deemed necessary to control



15         pollution and  protect  public health.  The authorif



16         of the Director  to so  act has been upheld by Mich:


17
          gan court decisions.



18                    Financial  inability in the state of


19
          Michigan is not  a defense against the abatement



          of a nuisance  either by private citizens or by


21
          a  municipal entity.


22
                     On page 11,  chapter IX, under Pollution


23
          Control Program, and I will be  following the text


24                ,
          very closely here;


25
                     Administration of water pollution

-------
                                                       2497
 1                          R.  W.  PURDY
 2
           control  functions  in Michigan necessarily follows
 3
           the division of statutory responsibility set

           forth in the previously cited statutes subject
 5
           to correlation,  wherever possible,  of member
 6
           department  interest, and objectives  with those
 •7
           of the water Resources Commission.   The water
 8
           Resources commission and the Department of Public
 9
           Health and  their respective staffs  carry the
10
           principal burden of water pollution control in

           Michigan at the state  level.
12

13
     WATER RESOURCES  COMMISSION  POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAM
14

15
                    The goal  and objective of the Michigan
16
           Water Resources commission is to bring all exist-
17
           ing unlawful pollution under continuing effective
18
           control  and prevent the development of unlawful
19
           pollution from new  sources,  population growths,
20
           or increased industrial expansion and, where such
21
           incidents occur, limit their duration and inten-
22
           sity to  the fullest extent consistent with requir
23
           ments of the water  Resources Commission statute.
24
           Under the Michigan  statute (Appendix A) ,  it is
25
           unlawful for any person directly or indirectly to

-------
                                                       2^-98

 1                          R. W. PURDY




 2          discharge into the waters of the state any suo-



 3          stance which is or may become injurious to the



 4          public health, safety or welfare; or which is



 5          or may become injurious to domestic, commercial,



 6          industrial, agricultural, recreational or other



 7          uses which are being or may be made of such



 8          waters; or which is or may become injurious to




 9          the value or utility of riparian lands; or which



10          is or may become injurious to livestock, wild



11          animals, birds, fish, aquatic life or plants or



12          the growth or propagation thereof be prevented



13          or injuriously affected; or whereby the value



14          of fish and game is or may be destroyed or



15          impaired.  The discharge of any raw sewage of



16          human origin, directly or indirectly into any



17          waters of the state is prima facie evidence of




           a violation of the statute unless such discharge



19          is permitted by an Order, rule or regulation of



           the Water Resources Commission.


21
                     Where inadequacies in control of waste


22
           discharges are determined to exist, an opportunit


23
           is provided for establishment of voluntary cor-


24
           rective action.  When it appears to the Michigan


25
           Water Resources Commission that a voluntary

-------
                                                      2^99
 1                          R.  W.  PURDY
 2          program will  not be successful or may not be
 3          accomplished  within a  reasonable time period,
 4          statutory procedures are  initiated.   Orders adopt
 5          ed contain specific effluent restrictions and
 6          specific dates  for  approval of construction plans
 7          and specifications,  awarding of construction
 8          contracts and commencement of construction, and
 9          the completion  of construction and attainment  of
10          pollution abatement as required by the Order.
11                    Sewerage  systems must be developed on
12          the basis of  separate  sewers for storm water and
13          sanitary waste  water.   When at all feasible,
14          separated sanitary  wastewater systems shall not
15          be discharged into  combined systems.   If such
16          discharge does  occur,  control facilities roust  be
17          developed on  the combined system so as to protect
18          present and future  water  uses of the  receiving
19          waters  consistent with the requirements of the
20          Water Resources Commission statute.   Problems
21          associated with the  overflow of storm and sani-
22          tary waste from existing  combined sewerage system
23          to public waters must  be  corrected.
24                    Nutrient  discharges,  particularly with
25          respect to phosphates,  to public waters must be

-------
                                                      2500



 1                         R. W. PUKDY



 2         controlled.  Persons proposing to make a new or



 3         increased use of waters of the stat© for waste



 4         disposal purposes are required, coincident with



 5         the new or increased use, to utilize such techno-




 6         l°gy &nd processes which are known for the re-



 7         raoval of phosphorus compounds and as a long-term



 8         objective, all existing waste discharges will be




 9         required to provide facilities for the removal



10         of phosphorus compounds by June \, 1977.



H                   The discharge of sanitary waste from



12         recreational watercraft will be controlled by



13         rules and regulations to be adopted by the water




14         Resources commission.  Proposed rules and regula-



15         tions  (Appendix B) have been presented at a pub-



16         lie hearing and final action is scheduled prior



17         to June 1, 1968.



18                   I believe, Mr. Chairman, that this is



19         a very outside date and that final action will



20         be taken prior to that time.



21                   The Michigan Water Resources Commission



22         will prevent the development of new problems by




23         continued implementation of Section 8  (b) of its



24         statute which requires the filing of a statement


25
          of use by any person proposing to make a new or

-------
                                                      2501
 1                          R. W.  PURDY
 2          substantial  increase in  use of waters  of  the
 3          state  for  waste  disposal purposes.   The Comrois-
 4          sion,  upon receipt of  a  statement,  makes  an Order
 5          stating  such minimum restrictions as may  be
 6          necessary  to guard adequately against  unlawful
 7          uses of  waters of the  state.
 8                    Water  quality  standards for  water uses
 9          of  all inter- (Appendix  C)  and intrastate
10          (Appendix  D)  waters have been adopted. Water
11          use designation, together with a plan  of  imple-
12          mentation  and enforcement of the standards  have
13          been adopted for the interstate waters.   Public
14          hearings are now being held prior to the  designa-
           tion of  waters uses for  the intrastate waters.
           All public hearings will be completed  by  November
           1,  1968.  Designation  of all water  uses to  be
           protected  by the intrastate standards  within the
19
           state  is scheduled to  be completed  by  January  1,
20          1969.
21
                     On interstate  waters, where  noncoroplianfe
22
           with the standards is  determined to exist as the
23
           result of  a  discharge  from  an existing municipal
24
           wastewater treatment plant,  treatment  facilities
25
           adequate for meeting established water quality

-------
                                                       2502

 1                          R. W. PURDY


 2          standards must be provided no later than June 1,


 3          1972.  secondary treatment is required as a


 4          minimum unless it can be demonstrated that a


 5          lesser degree of treatment or control will pro-


 6          vide for water quality enhancement commensurate


 7          with present and future water uses.  Exception

 Q
           to the requirement for at least secondary treat-


 9          ment must be justified to the satisfaction of


           the Michigan water Resources commission and the


11          Federal Water Pollution Control Administration.

12
           Presently identified existing discharges of raw

13
           sewage of human origin to public waters must be

14
           corrected by June 1, 1972.  Year-round disinfec-


           tion of all final effluents from municipal sewage

16
           treatment plants is required.  Industrial waste

17
           discharges must meet the same effluent require-

18
           rnents as municipal waste effluents and industrial

19
           waste problems identified in the interstate plan

20
           reports must,  no later than June 1, 1970, have

21
           adequate treatment or control facilities.  Prob-

22
           lems associated with the overflow of storm and

23
           sanitary waste from existing combined sewerage

24
           systems must be corrected no later than June 1,

25
           1977.

-------
                                                      2503
 I                          R.  W.  PURDY


 2                    The  water Resources Commission staff


 3          .aspects  each  incipient pollution problem regu-


 4          iarly.  All Orders  now adopted by the commission,


 S          to both industries  and municipalities, require


 6          routine analysis and reporting of the quality


 7          of wastes discharged to public waters.  in addi-


 8          tion surface water  quality and waste effluents


 9          are monitored  so as to identify the  need for


10          corrective action to abate existing  problems


11          and whenever possible so as to detect and


12          identify  the approach of pollution conditions in


13          time to initiate appropriate corrective action


14          prior to  the development of a statutory injury.


15          The water Resources Commission staff reviews and


16          approves  or rejects plans for industrial waste


17          treatment or control facilities and  counsels


18          with management  on  industrial waste  treatment


19          or disposal problems,   it develops appropriate


20          restrictions and time schedules for  commission


21          approval  to correct or prevent pollution problems


22          and participates in enforcement procedures


23          initiated by the Commission through  statutory


24          hearings  and enforcement of commission Orders in


25          court when voluntary compliance is not forthcomin

-------
                                                       2504



 !                         R. W.  PURDY




 2                    Mr.  vbgt,  I  would like to interrupt



 3         my  part  of this presentation at this time now



 4         to  have  Mr.  Pierce present the Department of



 5         Public Health  and Pollution Control.



 6                    MR.  STEIN:   Before Mr. Pierce appears,



 7         we  may take  a  recess.



 8                    I  want  to  tell you about -.-that  n ois-e



 9         in  the  back.  , I  guess you were a backdrop



10         for a TV show. YOU  are  the first guy here I



11         know who could compete successfully with that



12         Corps of Engineers Map.   I guess that is a



13         compliment.



14                    (Laughter.)

                                 «,

15                    MR.  PURDY*   It ruined my ego to see



16         all the  television cameras leave.



17                    MR.  STEIN:   By the time they get to



18         you, you will  be  out of  focus, though.



19                    (Laughter.)



20                    Maybe that guy who got lost in the



          Loop will be able to distinguish you.


22
                     (Laughter.)



23                    we will stand  recessed for ten minutes



24                    (Recess.)



25                    MR.  STEINi   Mr. Vogt.

-------
                                                      2505

j                          D.  M.  PIERCE


2                    MR.  VOGT:  Mr.  Pierce,  will you now


3          please carry on with the  state Report.



4
                  STATEMENT OF DONALD M.  PIERCE

5
                CHIEF OF  THE WASTE WATER  SECTION

6
                  MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF  HEALTH

7


8                    MR.  PIERCE:   Mr. Chairman and Conferees


g          ladies and gentlemen.


10                    I shall plan to follow rather closely


11          the prepared report except to  supplement to


12          some extent for the purpose of amplifying or


13          illustrating a point.


14                    The  Department  of Public Health, act-


IS          ing through its Division  of Engineering, exer-


16          cises supervisory control over all public sewer-


17          age systems.  The Director of  the Department is


18          required by statute. Act  98, Public Acts of 1913,


19          as  amended,  to "exercise  due care to see that


20          all sewerage systems are  properly planned, con-


21          structed and operated  so  as to prevent unlawful


22          pollution of the streams,  lakes,  and other water


23          resources of the state".   The  companion statute,


24          Act 245,  Public Acts of 1929,  as  amended, defines


25  j        unlawful pollution  and authorizes the Water

-------
                                                       2506
 1                          D. M. PIERCE

 2          Resources commission to "establish such pollu-
 3          tion standards for lakes, rivers, streams, and
 4          other waters of the state in relation to the
 5          public use to which they are or may be put, as
 6          it shall deem necessary".  Such pollution stan-
 7          dards and the water quality criteria relating
 8          to the public uses, currently being promulgated
 9          for both interstate and intrastate streams, pro-
           vide the framework upon which decisions are made
           and actions taken in relation to the planning,
12
           design, construction and operation of all sewer
13
           systems and treatment works.  Elements of this
14
           supervisory program include the planning and
15
           approval of facilities, control of operation,
16
           including the training and certification of
17
           operators, and the review of required operation-
18
           al reports from each plant.
19
                     Now, in the area of Facilities Planning
20
           and Approval.
21
           1.   Review engineering reports establishing the
22
                basis of design for projects involving col-
23
                lection and treatment of waste water and
24
                consult with the engineers and municipal
25
                officials on elements of the proposed design

-------
                                                      2507
 1                          D.  M.  PIERCE

 2               prior  to development  of  plans and specifi-
 3               cations  for the  project,  require modifica-
 4               tion of  proposed design  where appropriate
 5               and, when found  to be satisfactory,  approve
 6               same.
 7          2.    Review,  approve  or reject and secure changes
 8               in  plans and specifications  submitted for
 9               new municipal  systems or for changes in
10               existing systems,  both for collection and
11               treatment.   No public sewerage system may
12               be  built or altered without  specific approva
                by  construction  permit.
14          3.    Conducts inspections  to  determine that con-
                struction of public sewerage systems con-
                forms  to approved plans  and  specifications.
17          4.    Require  reduction of  overflows from  exist-
18
                ing combined sewer systems.   Adoption of
19
                accelerated programs  for effective control
20
                of  overflows from such systems is strongly
21
                urged.   Progress has  been made in several
22
                communities by sewer  separation.
23
           5.    Require  municipal rather than private owner-
24
                ship of  all sewerage  systems serving the
25
                public in the  belief  that more dependable

-------
                                                      2508
 1                          D. M. PIERCE
 2               and effective operation and overall pollu-
 3               tion control is thereby assured.
 4          6.   counsels with officials of municipalities
 5               and their consulting engineer agents as to
 6               the need and methods for collection and
 7               treatment of waste water.
 8          7.   Strongly encourage and, where appropriate,
 9               require the development of multi-community
10               area planning to provide effective services
11               and pollution control facilities utilizing
12               sound management principles.  Many such
*3               areas are currently served by an integrated
14               system of sewers, interceptors, and treat-
15               ment works.  Others are being so planned in
18               several areas.  Examples are metropolitan
                areas whose core cities are Battle Creek,
18               Benton Harbor, St. Joseph, Grand Rapids,
                Jackson, Kalamazoo, Muskegon and Traverse
20               City.
21
                     I should point out here, parenthetical-
22
           ly,  that all of these communities lie within the
23
           Lake Michigan water Basin, Watershed, and there
24
           are  many other examples one might cite for the
25
           other major river basins.

-------
                                                      2509



 1                         D. M. PIERCE




 2         8.   Encourage the admission of  industrial  wastes




 3              in municipal sewerage  systems where  such




 4              wastes will not adversely affect the system




 5              and its performance  in relation to effective




 6              pollution control.




 7         9.   Foster, encourage and  assist communities in




 8              the adoption of effective and practical




 9              sewer use ordinances for the control of




10              industrial wastes to be admitted to  the




11              sewerage system.  In many instances, tech-




12              nical assistance and counsel is provided




13              in the location, analyses and evaluation




14              of wastes, particularly those toxic  to




15              biological treatment processes and in  the




16              development of effective corrective  measures




17              and controls.  Examples are metal plating




18              wastes at Cadillac,  Ludington and Wyoming




19              brought under effective control within the




20              last year.



21         10.  Encourage and, where appropriate, require



22
               communities to conduct studies, pilot  or




23              plant scale, to provide a dependable basis




24              of design for unusual  combinations of



25
               industrial and municipal wastes to be

-------
                                                      2510




 1                          D. M. PIERCE




 2               treated where sufficient information is not



 3               available for design purposes.  Such studies



 4               were made at Battle Creek for cereal pro-



 5               ducts and paper mill wastes to be treated



 6               at the municipal plant.  Similarly, require



                studies, either pilot or plant scale, to



                develop a basis of design where an extrerae-


 Q
                ly high degree of treatment is required.



                Such a study was completed last year at



                Jackson.


12
           11.  Encourage and assist communities to conduct


13
                studies to establish effective methods for


14
                removal of phosphates from their wastes


15        ]
                at existing treatment works.  Such studies


16
                were made at Lake Odessa and Whitehall last


17
                year.


18
           12.  Require facilities for removal of phosphates


19
                in the design of all new treatment works,


20
                consistent with the adopted policy of the


21
                Water Resources Commission, which has earlie


22
                been stated in the record here today.


23
           13.  Require expansion and improvements of muni-


24
                cipal facilities, both for collection and


25

                treatment as present capacity is approached,

-------
                                                       2511
1                          D.  M.  PIERCE

2               rather  than wait  until the facilities are

3               overloaded before taking action.  Approval

4               of sewer  extensions is withheld where

5               additional loadings would exceed the capa-

6               city  of the system until an acceptable

7               program for relief is officially adopted.

8               "Sewer  bans" have been imposed in several

9               such  circumstances where approval of

10               extensions of  sewers have been denied for

11               some  time, up  to  a period of two years in

12               some  cases. Authority for such action has

13               been  tested and upheld in the courts.

14          14.   Order changes  in  facilities or their opera-

IS               tion  when requirements of the statutes have

16               not been  met.   Alternatively, cases involv-

17               ing deficiency in facilities are referred

18               to the  water Resources commission for

19               action.

20          15.   As agent  for the  water Resources commission,

21               review, approve or reject plans submitted

22               for new sewer  systems, other than municipal,

23               or for  changes in existing ones.

24          16.   Assist  and encourage local health department^

25               to effectively direct and control the

-------
                                                       2512





 1                          D. M. PIERCE




 2                installation of private  sewage  disposal



 3                systems where public  sewer  systems  are not



 4                available  for connection.



 5          17.   Require construction  of  separate  sanitary


 6
                 sewers for new community systems.   And this


 7
                 policy and action has been  in effect  for


 8
                 some  five years and in some cases longer



 9                than  this.


10


           Facility Operation - Supervision, Visitation





12
           1.    Require the effective operation of  all


13
                 treatment works, including  pumping  stations


14
                 and sewer  system appurtenances. This


15
                 authority  is directly conferred by  statute.


16
           2.    Require all municipalities  to submit  re-


17
                 ports monthly on the  operation  of treat-


18
                 ment  works.  standard report forms  are pro-


19
                 vided by the Department  and each municipal-


20
                 ity is advised as to  the minimum  informa-


21

                 tion  to be reported and  the frequency


22

                 (number of days per week) of reporting.


23

                 Included are both physical  data and labora-


24

                 tory  analyses to establish  loadings on the


25

                 plant, performance of plant units,  and the

-------
                                                       2513



 I                          D. M. PIERCE



 2               volume and characteristics of the plant



 3               effluent.  Such information is used to



 4               determine effectiveness of overall plant



 5               performance, deficiencies of component



 6               facilities, capacity reserves for additional



 7               loadings, and operational problems and



 8               shortcomings.  Action is taken to assist



 9               in corrective measures and to require




10               correction.



11          3.   Supervise operation by on-site inspection,



12               instruction and consultation with plant



13               operating personnel.  Adequate services of
                           /


14               this nature requires visitation once during



15               each three months on the average.



16

                Operator Certification and Training

17




18          1.   Require all municipalities to employ



•W               operators whose competency, for the parti-



20               cular job,that is, has been certified by



21               the Department.  By statute, it is raanda-



22               tory that the person in responsible charge




23               of the plant be so certified.  Over 600 --



24               I will say parenthetically here that about




                685 -- operators have been so certified on

-------
 1                          D. M.  PIERCE




 2               the basis of education,  experience,  and




 3               written examinations.  About  200  operators




 4               with  plant experience are  examined each




 5               year.  A high percentage of applicants are




 6               certified operators  seeking to  establish




 7               qualifications  for a higher plant classifi-




 8               cation, of which  there are four classifica-




 9               tions.




10          2.   Conduct formal  group training sessions to




11               impart specific information related  to




12               effective operational control,  to provide




13               opportunity for exchange of information and




14               experience and  to provide  incentives for




15               self-study and  development.   Over 325




16               operators attend  a 2-day meeting  each year




17               conducted by Department  engineers and




18               chemists.  A series of four 5-day sessions




19               in laboratory procedures involving chemical




20               and bacteriological analyses  are  currently




21               being conducted by the Department staff.




22               Eighty operators  who presently  perform such




23               tests at their  plants are  registered. Even-




24               ing courses are held throughout the  state




25               for a 12-week period each  year  in either

-------
                                                      2515



1                        D. M. PIERCE



2             mathematics, chemistry,  or hydraulics  as



3             applied to wastewater works  operation,  in



4             a cooperative program with other  agencies



              and  organizations.   Special  courses  in pro-



6             cess control, safety and related  areas are



7             sponsored with other groups.



8         3.   Encourage operators  to meet  on  a  regular



9             schedule, usually about  once  monthly,  on



10             their own initiative to  exchange  informa-



11             tion on plant operational problems and



12             experiences and to incite speakers to  dis-



13             cuss selected subjects related  to facilities



14             design and maintenance,  laboratory equip-



15             ment, etc.  About 10 such groups  meet  regu-



16             larly with about 200 operators  participating,


17


               Disinfection Policy and Practice
18



19
          1.   Require all municipalities  to  disinfect  the
an
              plant effluent before discharge  to  the  sur-



              face waters of the state.  This  policy  was


22
              adopted in January 1967.



                   I think, Mr. Chairman, with your per-


24
         mission, it might be of interest to read this


25
         policy  statement, because there are a couple of

-------
                                                       2516
 1                         D.  M. PIERCE
 2         points that I should like to bring out.
 3                   Pardon me.  I will leave the rostrum
 4         to find the statement.
 5                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
 6                   Appendix  E, in my copy we don't have
 7         one either.
 8                   Here we are.
 9                   MR. PIERCE:  The Department policy
10         letter on this matter was issued to all munici-
11         palities of the state on January 4.  It reads as
12         follows:
13                   "For many years most communities and
14         others operating sewage treatment plants have
15         chlorinated their treated wastewaters before
16         discharging them into our streams and lakes.
17         This practice has provided a large measure of
18         protection to the public health.  Present trends
19         in public need for  higher water quality to permit
20         increased use of our public waters for all forms
          of aquatic recreation and other uses involving
22
          intimate human contact require refinements in
23         present practices for bacteriological control of
          treated sewage effluents and greater vigilance
25
          by those responsible for the operation of the

-------
                                                      2517



 1                        D. M.  PIERCE




 2         facilities  involved.   Greater  concentrations of




 3         people  living  close to lakes and streams,  coupled




 4         with year-round recreation,  including fishing in




 5         late fall,  winter and  early  spring,  requires




 6         continuous  bacteriological control whenever sewage




 7         is  discharged  to the public waters.   seasonal




 8         chlorination during the summer recreation  season




 9         no  longer can  be depended upon to provide  a full




10         measure  of  protection  to the public  health.




11                  "It, therefore, is the declared  and




12         established policy that:




13                  "All municipalities  and others discharg-




14         ing treated sewage from sewage treatment plants




15         to  the  public  waters of the  state be required to




16         provide  effective bacteriological control  over




17         the effluent therefrom by the  continuous applica-




18         tion each day  of th6 year' -- and those words are




19         here underlined -- 'continuous  application  each




20         day of  the  year'of chlorine  or other effective




21         chemicals in facilities approved by  the state




22         Department  of  Public Health.   Effective control




23         requires sufficient testing  at approved points




24         of  sample collection to assure the maintenance




25         of  an adequate residual of chlorine  or other

-------
                                                        2518
 !                         D. M. PIERCE

 2         disinfecting agents, supplemented by occasional

 3         testing for organisms of the coliforxn group.

 4         Adequate disinfection should reduce consistently

 5         the concentration of coliform organisms to one

 6         thousand or less per hundred mi Hi liters."

 7                   It is a source of great satisfaction

 8         to those of us who work on problems of this

 9         nature to be able to report to you today that

10         so far as we can determine there is 100 percent

11         conformity with this declared policy.  Three weeks

12         ago, I knew of one town that was still holding

13         out and that was not chlorinating on a year-

14         round basis, and I believe that one town is now

15         in the bag and we are 100 percent.

16                   MR. STEIN:  Some of us, Don, have been

17         waiting twenty years for this day, and I am glad

18         to hear that Michigan is the first State to

19         announce that they have done it.  This is wonder-

20         ful.

21                   MR. PIERCE:  Thank you.  We are very

22         happy, too.

23                   At this point I should like to read,

24         and to some extent discuss,  studies made beginning

25         last summer on removal of phosphates from waste

-------
                                                       2519


 !                         D.  M.  PIERCE




 2         water at municipal  treatment  plants.   I am going




 3         on now with the  script.




 4                   During the  past  year studies have been




 5         made by several  Michigan municipalities on removal




 6         of phosphates  from  the waste  water collected in




 7         their community  sewer  systems.  Two general




 8         methods were utilized:   One involving the addition




 9         of iron salts  either  to  the raw sewage or activate^




10         sludge with or without the addition of polymers;




11         the other involving management of the activated




12         sludge process without chemical additions.  The




13         latter method  is an extension and adaptation of




14         the work conducted  at  San  Antonio and other




15         installations  as reported  by  the Federal water




16         Pollution Control Administration.  The central




17         objectives of  these studies were:




18              1.   To determine phosphate concentrations




19                   and  loadings at  several municipal treat-




                    ment plants.




               2.   To determine the amenability of wastes



22
                    at various  locations to phosphate re-




23                   moval  by  one or  more methods in rela-




                    tion to primary  sedimentation, trickling



25
                    filters and  activated sludge.

-------
                                                       2520  .

 1                         D. M. PIERCE
 2         3.    To explore the effect of chemical additions
 3              for phosphate removal on the removal of BOD
 4              and suspended matter at primary, trickling
 5              filter and activated sludge installations.
 6         4.    To study the degree of compatibility of
.7              iron salts with biological and chemical
 8              (polymer)  treatment systems, when added for
 9              phosphate removal.
10         5.    To furnish information upon which design of
11              facilities for phosphate removal may reason*
12              ably be predicated.
13         Studies of this nature were prompted by:
14         1.    The acute and pressing need to develop base
15              line data for the design and management of
16              facilities at several existing wastewater
17              treatment plants for removal of a high per-
18              centage of phosphates from the plant effluentu
19         2.    Preliminary studies by the DOW chemical Com-
20              pany at the Midland, Michigan wastewater
21              treatment plant in February 1967 -- that is
               a municipal plant there -- indicating that
23
               iron salts held promise for effective phos-
 4              phate removal in both primary and biological
25
               treatment systems.

-------
                                                       2521



 I                         D. M.  PIERCE




 2         3.    The  need  to apply the  principles developed




 3              in the  san  Antonio,  Texas,studies to indivi-




 4              dual, peculiar  circumstances  in order to




 5              determine how such principles  might be




 6              applied effectively  in the  design of bioiogi-




 7              cal  treatment facilities  with a high degree




 8              of phosphate removal for  such circumstances.




 9                  A  variety  of study methods and procedure




10         were  followed.  some involved  bench studies only,




11         using jar tests  on the wastes  undergoing treat-




12         ment  at the  plant; others included full-scale




13         plant operation  applying  the knowledge acquired




14         in  the bench work; and others  were conducted at




15         pilot plants built to  establish  a  basis Of design




16         for facilities to be added.




17                  The  first  of these studies was conducted




18         at  Grayling, a resort  community  of less than 2,000




19         resident  population  (Appendix  P),  and the second




20         at  Lake Odessa,  the  trickling  filter plants.




21         These two plants, selected  for full plant scale




22         study, were  not  selected  on the  basis of the




23         excellence of  the facilities for removal of phos-




24         phates by chemical methods. On.  the contrary,  the




25         facilities and the wastes to be  treated were far

-------
                                                       2522
 1                         D. M. PIERCE

 2         from ideal, as detailed in the report in the
 3         Appendix.  The plants were grossly overloaded
 4         for significant periods during the study and no
 5         formal facilities were available for the feeding
 6         and mixing of the chemicals with the wastes to be
 7         treated.  Actually, these plants were selected
 8         for study because of the urgency for exploring
 9         methods for removal of phosphates from these
10         particular wastes where phosphate  build-up in
11         the receiving waters are at critical levels today,
12                •'
          one a major trout stream of national reputation
13
          and the other a small recreational lake.
14              Bench studies at Grayling indicated that
          90 percent or more of total phosphates could be
16
          removed from the raw wastes by plain sedimentation
17         with the addition of about 20 milligrams per liter
18
          of ferrous chloride, about 40 milligrams per liter
19
          your text says an equal amount, and this is in-
20
          correct; it is about 40 milligrams per liter --
21
          of sodium hydroxide as calcium carbonate alkalinit
22
          and about 0.5 milligrams per liter of an anionic
23
          polymer.  It was indicated that the caustic could
24
          be added a few seconds following quick mix of the
25
          iron salt with the raw sewage and that a selected

-------
                                                      2523


 1                        D. M.  PIERCE



 2         polymer,  if added following an  interval  of  about



 3         5 minutes, would form  a  good  floe  after  a short



 4         period  of about ten  to fifteen  minutes of slow



 5         flocculation and would effectively remove the



 6         phosphates.  A very  low  order of removal of



 7         total phosphates was experienced when no polymer



 8         was added.  These principles were  applied to



 9         full-plant scale operation within  the limitations



10         of the  facilities.   The  iron and caustic were  adde



11         to the  sewage at the lift station  with no formal



12         mixing  facilities and  the polymer  was added at the



13         entrance  to the settling tank with crude and



14         temporarily rigged mixing equipment.



15             I  might say here  by way of explanation that



16         the ferrous chloride was introduced as the  sewage



17         entered the lift station at the discharge of the


ip
          incoming  sewer.  Then  as it flowed across this


19                    '
          small lift station and was pumped  in a force main


20
          to the  treatment plant,  the caustic was  added


21
          through a plastic tube into the force main. The


22
          force main had a contact time averaging  about  six


23
          minutes,  actually varying from  about four to eight


24
          minutes,  and then the  polymer was  added  in  a


25
          rising  box before discharge  over  three  weirs  into

-------
                                                      2524



 1                         D.  M.  PIERCE




 2         three separate settling tanks.   The mixers were



 3         installed near the  inlet end of the tanks.  These



 4         were jerry rigged without actually any real pro-



 5         vision for the slow flocculation that was deter-



 6         mined by the bench  studies to be necessary.



 7                   During much  of the period of plant



 8         scale application,  which was from June 20 to



 9         September 14,  as detailed in the appendix, the



          plant was grossly overloaded hydraulically by



11         reason of seasonal  influx of tourists and a



12         National Guard encampment,connected to the



13         community sewer system.  Actually, the overflow
14
          rates in the settling tank ranged from about five
15         gallons per square foot per day to some 2500,



16         representing an overload at maximum flows of



17         some three tiroes.   in spite of these adverse



          circumstances total phosphate removal ranged


19
          between 60 percent and 80 percent with a most



          probable mean value of 72 percent.  Correspond-


21
          ingly,  suspended solids removal ranged from 60


22
          percent to 87 percent with a mean value of 78


23
          percent representing an increase of about 27 per-


24
          cent compared with performance when chemicals  were


25
          not added.  Removal of 5-day BOD increased from a

-------
                                                     2525



                         D. M. PIERCE




2        mean value of about 40 percent before and after




3        the study to about 56 percent during the study.




4        It should be noted here that the raw sludge was




5        hauled to a land disposal site.  Actually, this




6        plant has a digester and ordinarily supernatant




7        would have been returned, but they had some




8        difficulty with the heating coils and it was




g        necessary to abandon the digester some months




10        before this study commenced.  so these studies




11        are without benefit of supernatant return.




12                  Ths cictsiil for all. of the "^oints for




13        all of the test data are shown in figure ill A,




14        figure IV A and figure v A, should you wish to




15        refer to this,on pages 86, 88 and 90.




16                  Work of a similar nature, both in bench




17        studies with jar tests and full-scale plant opera-




18        tion, was performed at the Village of Lake Odessa




19        (Appendix G), and this report begins on page 95 of




20        the appendix.  Here the municipal treatment facili-




21        ties include trickling filters and sludge diges-




22        tion facilities.  The same chemicals were applied




23        to the raw sewage as at Grayling in about the




24        same concentration except that the dosage rates




25        of the ferrous chloride  were less effectively

-------
                                                        2526



 1                         D. M. PIERCE




 2         controlled, resulting in rather widely fluctuating




 3         dosage rates, ranging from daily averages of about




 4         15 mg/1 to 60 mg/1.  Actually the ferrous chloride




 5         was introduced at a constant rate and the rates of




 6         flow of the incoming sewage varied widely, about




 7         four to one.  NO mixing or flocculation equipment




 8         was installed.  Wastes varied widely from day to




 9         day and week to week in strength and quantities




10         by reason of changing admixtures of wastes from




11         a food processing plant.  Total period of the




12         plant scale study both with and without chemical




13         treatment was 87 days including 33 days when valid




14         operating data were obtained under controlled




15         chemical feeding conditions.  These data generally




16         confirmed Grayling observations although removal




17         of total phosphates, 5-day BOD and suspended




18         solids by primary sedimentation was somewhat lower




19         It was further indicated that:




               1.   Trickling filter performance is enhanced



21
                    as measured by 5-day BOD and suspended



22
                    solids removal, by this regime of chemi-




23                   cal additions to the raw sewage.  Most



24
                    probable mean values for overall plant



25
                    suspended solids removal increased from

-------
                                                      2527

 !                         D.  M.  PIERCE




 2                   about 78  percent without chemical addi-



 3                   tives to  about 89 percent with chemicals




 4                   Correspondingly, BOD removal increased



 5                   from about 60 percent to about 80 per-



 6                   cent.




 7              2.    Overall plant reduction of total phos-



 8                   phates was quite stable with values



 9                   generally between 75 percent and 92



10                   percent removal and a mean value of



11                   82 percent.



12              3.    Total phosphates in the digester super-



13                   natant were  quite low with most values



14                   below 75  mg/1.  This appears to confirm



1s                   the findings of E. A. Thomas as reported



I6                   in his published work conducted at the



17                   treatment plant for the community of



18                   Uster in  Zurich, Switzerland.



19                   Other work involving use of ferrous



20         chloride  and polymers  was performed last summer



21         at the village of Whitehall and the city of




22         Traverse  city.  The studies thus far have been



23         bench scale,  employing jar tests similar to those



24         at Grayling  and Lake Odessa.  Results have general


25
          ly confirmed the earlier findings at the other two

-------
                                                       2528

 1                         D. M. PIERCE
 2         plants.  At Traverse City it is planned to explore
 3         further, by pilot plant studies, how to most
 4         effectively remove phosphates from their peculiar
 5         wastes in a biological treatment process requiring
 6         a high order of removal of BOD and suspended
 7         matter.  The municipal sewage includes substan-
 8         tial quantities of wastes from cherry processing
 9         operations.
10                   Rather extensive studies of phosphate
11         removal by metallic ion precipitation in a biologi
12         cal system were commenced last September at the
13         municipal activated sludge plant of the City of
14         Warren.  A pilot plant was installed as the first
15         step in a study to eatablish a basis of design
16         for extending the present capabilities of the
17         plant to meet an effluent requirement of 8 mg/1
18         20-day BOD and 80 percent removal of total phos-
19         phates.  Pilot plant components consist of acti-
          vated sludge units followed by rapid sand filters.
21         Ferrous chloride or aluminum sulfate were fed into
22
          the aeration tanks near their point of overflow
23

          end of the first three months of daily operation
          at about 15 mg/1.  No polymers were added.  At the
24
25
          and testing seven days a week of composite samples,

-------
                                                       2529



 1                         D.  M.  PIERCE



 2         it was established  that)



 3              1.   Total phosphates precipitated by metal-



 4                   lie ions  were removed by activated



 5                   sludge in the order of 70 percent or "



 6                   higher consistently and an additional



 7                   10 percent or more was removed by the



 8                   rapid sand filters.



 9              2.   The addition of iron or aluminum direct-



10                   ly in the mixed liquor for phosphate



11                   removal is compatible with the activated



12                   sludge process  when operated for high



13                   degree BOD removal.



14                   Other work of a pilot plant nature is



15         being conducted by  the cities of Detroit and


16
          Trenton under demonstration grants from the



17         Federal water Pollution Control Administration.


18
          Both projects utilize  activated sludge.  Data


19'
          obtained will be used,  hopefully, for the design


20
          of formal facilities to be added to the existing


21
          primary plants for  improved treatment, including

22
          phosphate removal.   The pilot plant at Detroit has


23
          a  nominal capacity  in  excess of 100 gpm and is


24
          very flexible and adaptable to a wide variety of


25
          control patterns and methods.  Both plants have

-------
                                                       2530


 I                         D.  M.  PIERCE




 2         been operating for  about four months.  Biologic



 3         methods utilized to date for phosphate removal



 4         conform generally with the San Antonio procedures.



 5         Although results thus  far have not demonstrated



 6         a consistent high order of removal of phosphates,



 7         they are at this point inconclusive and indicate



 8         that much more work will be required to establish



 9         predictable patterns of phosphate removal by these



10         methods on these wastes.



11                   In addition  to the specific installation)



12         which we have discussed here, there are many treat-



13         ment plants in Michigan where tests have been



14         performed to establish the level of phosphates



15         in the municipal wastes, their variations and some



16         of their specific characteristics.  In some of



17         these plants, jar tests have been made in the



18         laboratory using chemical additives to determine



19         amenability of the  wastes and dosage rates require 1



20         for phosphate removal.  In others, preliminary jar



21         test studies have been made on activated sludge



22         without chemical additives.  Similar studies are



          planned at several  plants involving a wide variety


24
          of conditions, methods,  procedures and objectives.


25
                    As each study progresses it will add in

-------
                                                       2531
 j                         D. M. PIERCE

 2         some way to our knowledge of the mechanisms by

 3         which phosphates may be effectively and economical

 4         ly removed as a companion process to meet the over

 5         all treatment objectives now being established.

 6                   I should like to go back for a moment,

 7         Mr. Chairman, and comment on the indication of

 8         costs gleaned from the studies at Grayling and

 9         Lake Odessa, full plant scale studies.

10                   In those particular circumstances where

11         the total phosphates in the raw wastes were quite

12         high, ranging at Grayling from 40 to 60 milligrams

13         per liter and in Lake Odessa in the area of 30 to

14         50 milligrams per liter, these particular chemical|s

15         resulted in a cost of approximately, in the case

16         of Grayling, three cents per thousand gallons,

17         30 dollars a million gallons; in the case of Lake

18         Odessa, a little bit more than this, perhaps

19         three and a half cents per thousand gallons.

20                   This completes my portion of the report.

21                   MR. STEIN:  Thank you, Mr. Pierce.

22                   At the request of the Michigan Conferees

23         Mr. Pierce has to get a plane soon, and I think

24         that they have asked us to change their original

25         requirement and ask that questions or comments on

-------
                                                      2532


 1                        D. M.  PIERCE

 2
          Mr.  Pierce's  portion of  the presentation  be made

 3
          now  and withhold  your  comments  or questions on


          the  one made  by Ralph  Purdy.  Mr. Purdy will

 5
          return for an additional presentation.

 6
                    MR. PIERCE:  Thank  you,  sir.

 7
                    MR. STEIN:   Are there any comments  or

 8
          questions to  Mr.  Pierce?

 9
                    MR. HOLMER:  Mr. Pierce,  you  say three

10
          and  a half cents  per thousand gallons for chemi-

11
          cals?

12
                    MR. PIERCE:  Yes.

13
                    MR. HOLMER:  This does not include

14
          the  cost of operation  nor the removal of  sludge?

15
          It is strictly the chemical costs?

16
                    MR. PIERCE:  yes, sir,  strictly.
17
                    MR. HOLMER:  I have one other that
18
          doesn't relate to this subject  but  to the certi-
19
          fication of plant operators,  we admire your
20
          system and have adopted  it ourselves.
21
                    We  do not certify industrial  treatment
22
          plant operators.  I noticed,  or thought I did,
23
          in something  Indiana said yesterday to  the effect
24
          that they were in the  business  of certifying
25
          industrial plant  operators.   Is Michigan  in that

-------
                                                    2533



 1                         D. M.  PIERCE




 2         business too?



 3                   MR.  PIERCE:  No.  No.  Actually,  one



 4         of  the  fundamental reasons  for  this  is that under



 5         the statute  requiring  certification,  this deals



 6         only with the  public sewerage  systems and does



 7         not relate to  industrial  establishments where



 8         they discharge directly to  the  stream.  That



 9         statute is the water Resources  commission Statute



10         differentiated from the Health  Department statute



11         and this does  not contain such  a  specific provi-



12         sion.



*3                   I  might say  here, parenthetically,



14         with Ralph Purdy's permission,  that  consideration



15         is  being given now by  the water Resources coro-



16         mission to the establishment of such a system



17         with respect to discharge of industrial wastes



18         to  the  stream.



19                   MR.  HOLMER:  With respect  to the



          nutrient removal again, we  note in the tables


21
          attached to, or that are  a  part of this record,


22
          differentiation between 9-hour  sampling and 24-


23
          hour sampling. Is this a significant distinction


24
          that ought properly to lead us  to  some conclusion


25
          with respect to phosphorus  rich versus less rich

-------
                                                     253^



 1                          D. M. PIERCE




 2          influent?




 3                    MR. PIERCE:  I doubt it.  Actually,




 4          we reported here for your benefit the actual




 5          period of the sampling.  In our analysis of




 6          the difference in the raw waste in the perform-




 7          ance during periods of full-day sampling as




 8          compared to 9-hour sampling, we were unable to




 9          identify any specific variations in the capabilit




10          of chemical treatment for removal of phosphates,




11          although there was a difference, obviously, in




12          both rates of flow, average rates of flow during




13          the period, and of phosphate concentrations.




14          But the percent removal seemed to be independent




1s          of this, and this was observed also throughout




16          the period as flow rates changed, as concentra-




17          tions changed.  But even though it was impossible




18          here to regulate chemical additions in relation




19          to phosphate concentration, there did not seem




20          to be much difference in the percent of phosphate



21
           removal under any of these circumstances.




22                    MR. STEIN:  Are there any further




23          questions?




24                    MR. WISNIEWSKI:  Mr. Chairman.


25
                     Mr. Pierce, on page 85 in your report,

-------
                                                       2535


 1                          D. M. PIERCE




 2          with reference to the grayling situation,




 3          Appendix F, I guess.  Yes, that is in Appendix




 4          F,  page 85 .,




 5                    MR. PIERCE:  I will depend again on

                                 •

 6          my  good friend Ralph here to find the page.




 7                    Yes.




 8                    MR. WISNIEWSKI:  A glance at the




 9          percent removal of the total phosphates indicates




10          that on the 24-hour sampling your results were




H          consistently lower than they were on the 9-hour




12          sampling and that they were in the range of




13          possibly 60 to 70 percent, with most of them




14          near the 60 range.




15                    MR. PIERCE:  yes.  You will notice




I6          here, however, that there is a great difference




17          in  the rate of flow during this period.




18                    MR. WISNIEWSKI:  Rate of flow was sub-




19          stantially lower during the 24-hour periods than




*°          during the 9-hour periods.




21                    MR. PIERCE:  Yes, correct.




22                    MR. WISNIEWSKI:  So you should have




23          gotten better results.




24                    MR. PIERCE:  Well, actually, you will



25
           note that during the 24-rhour sampling period

-------
                                                       2536
 1                          D.  M. PIERCE

 2          that there was quite a variation.  There were

 3          both low and high removals.  And we thought

 4          that the extent of the data here, that the

 S  .        number of days of sampling was not sufficient

 6          to demonstrate conclusively one way or the

 7          other that there was a significant difference.

 8          Had all of the figures been low or all had been

 9          high, it would have indicated a clearer trend.

10                    MR. WISNIEWSKI:   The only thing I am

11          pointing to here is that the 24-hour tests

12          indicate that you never reached the 80 percent

13          everybody talks about on the practical operation

14          if you will draw a straight line through there,

15          it will hit at about 75 percent and you will

16          find that there are one, two, three, four, five,

17          six, below the 75 percent line.

W                    MR. PIERCE:  well, this is correct.

19          And also if you will look at the 9-hour sampling

20          days, there are many of those days that were in

21          the area of 60, 70 percent removal.  But when

22          you look at the total pattern of phosphate re-

23          rooval,  taking all of those figures and treating

24          them as a whole, on page 86, Figure ill A, you

25          will note here that the mean -- or the most

-------
                                                       2537
 1                         D. M.  PIERCE
 2         probable or centering  value for all  of  the  data
 3         is  71.5 percent removal, ranging  generally  from
 4         about 65 to 80.  That  is four days when the
 5         removal was less than  60 percent, between 55
 6         and 60, one day when it was better than 80.
 7                   Now, I should like to point out again
 8         here that in the Grayling  circumstance  that
 9         the plant was grossly  overloaded  during this
10         period, that there were no normal and  us ual
11         facilities for the feeding or mixing or the
12
          flocculation of the chemicals, and as a matter
13
          of  fact, everything was working against the
14         removal of phosphates, and that here, in spite--
          the point that we are  making here, very factually
16
          is  that in spite of almost insurmountable obsta-
17
          cles in the removal of phosphates by this
18
          method, the mean value of  removal of total
19
          phosphates was 71.5 percent.
20
                    MR. WISNIEWSKI:  No, I  think  the  times
21
          when you had the very  high concentrations of the
22
          order of 74 to 79 milligrams per  liter  in the
23
          raw wastes were the times  when you were getting
24
          these higher percentage removals  of  30  percent,
25
          let's say, but this meant  that you had  left in

-------
                                                        2538

 1                          D. M. PIERCE




 2          your effluent at least 20 milligrams per liter



 3          of total phosphorus which you were discharging



 4          to the stream,  when your concentrations were



 5          30 milligrams per liter or under, your efficiency



 6          ran in the 50 to 60 percent range.



 7                    MR. PIERCE:  We only had four days,



 8          as I just pointed out, that were under 70 percent



 9          removal.



10                    MR. WISNIEWSKI:  There is one other



11          factor we note in the narrative, you indicate



12          that there is a substantial increase in soluble



13          iron in the effluent.



14                    MR. PIERCE:  This is correct.



15                    MR. WISNIEWSKIi  Did you notice any



16          deposits of iron below the outfall from this



17          treatment plant, any deposits in the stream at



18          any point?



19                    MR. PIERCE:  No.  No.  But --



20                    MR. WISNIEWSKI:  Was there any increase


21
           in the cloudiness of the water?



22                    MR. PIERCE:  No.  But this does not


23
           mean that this would not occur.  Actually, there


24
           is a good deal of flow here with a fairly high


25
           velocity at this point.  There is a great deal

-------
                                                      2539

 1                          D.  M. PIERCE




 2          or quite a bit of turbidity in the effluent which



 3          would mask an appearance of this kind for such a



 4          short period.



 5                    MR. WiSNIEnoKli  But the iron content



 6          was around 8 milligrams per liter, which is quite



 7          high.



 8                    MR. PIERCE:  Averaged, I believe, about



 9          six, from about four to about eight.



10                    MR. WISNIEWSKI:  We don't like to talk



11          in averages in Wisconsin,  we like to take the



12          worst condition and correct for that.



13                    MR. PIERCE:  Touch* *



14                    MR. STEIN:  Mr. Poole.



15                    MR. POOLE:  I want to pursue this a


16
           little with Don.  I was having a private conver-


17
           sation here, but did I hear you say that phos-


18
           phates at Grayling were 48 parts per million or



19          better?


20
                     MR. PIERCE:  They went from 40 to 60


21
           quite frequently.


22
                     MR. POOLE:  How much did they run at


23
           the other place?


24

                     MR. PIERCE:  Somewhere normally between


25
           30 and 40 with departures from those values.

-------
 1                         D. M.  PIERCE




 2                    MR.  POOLE:   We  must  be  accomplishing



 3          this  removal without doing  anything,  then.   I



 4          don't have any phosphates on our  raw  sewage,



           but I am looking  at them  here  for"East  Chicago



 6          and Gary and Michigan  City  and Mishawaka  and



 7          South Bend, and in the effluents  they are running



 8          6  to  8 parts per  million, and  I don't know what



 9          the raw sewage is.  But the point I am  trying



10          to make,  I had assumed that we were getting



11          very  little phosphate  reduction through these



12          just  ordinary  activated sludge plants.  East



13          Chicago uses some alum and  they have  been averag-



14          ing three and  a half parts  in  their effluent, whi^h



           I  suspect on the  basis of what I  have heard  in



16          the last few days is the  benefit  from the chemi-
17          cal.
18
                     But  if  our  plants  are  not  removing  any
19          substantial  portion  of  phosphates,  our  fellows



           are  either making a  mistake  in  their  detormina-



21          tion of  the  effluents or we  are talking about a


22
           much lower range of  phosphates  than you are.



23                    And  so I think I am prepared  to  follow


24
           along with Ted in that  I am  questioning now


25
           whether  you  have any justification  for  saying

-------
 1                          D.  M.  PIERCE



 2         you  can  remove  80 percent  of  the  phosphates  on



 3         the  basis  of  this work.



 4                    MR.  PIERCE:  well,  Mr.  Poole,  we have



 ^         observed,  in  the studies we have  made thus far



 6         in a number of  places, that phosphate concentra-



 7         tions vary widely and  often unpredictably from



 8         sewage to  sewage.   in  Detroit,,for example,  the



 9         phosphate  concentration  is more on the order of



10         10,  sometimes  15, sometimes lower than 10.  At



11         some other places we have  found it at 15 or  20.



12         This particular situation  at  Grayling is a resort



13         community  with  an unbalanced  number of iaundro-



14         mats,  a  great  deal  of  detergents, and I can't



15         explain  what  the reasons were at  Lake Odessa.



16  .       It may have had something  to  do with cleaning



17         operations in  connection with the canneries.



18         But  this we haven't got  into.



19                    Actually, here in our studies we have



          made these as  preliminary  investigations without



21         selecting  the  places for the  purpose of making


22
          an academic study,  but rather for the purposes of


23
          solving  a  problem that existed.


24
                     These installations may not be at  all


25
          typical.  And  1 can't  say  whether the — I can't

-------
                                                       25^2
 j                          D. M. PIERCE


 2          predict whether we would have the same experience

 3          with other wastes under a wide variety of condi-

 4          tions, some with low phosphate concentrations,

 5          some with high and some with other constituents

 6          which might interfere with this.  All we have

 7          to offer you today is the experience that we

 8          have presented here on these particular installa-

 9          tions.

10                    MR. POOLE:  This has been most helpful

11          and I am not going to turn this into a technical

12          session, but I think you well appreciate, as do

13          many of the rest of us, that you can start out

14          with a BOD of a thousand or with a suspended

15          solids content of a thousand and it is no trick

16          at all to get a 90 percent reduction.  But if

17          you start out with a BOD of a hundred or a hundrejl

18          twenty-five, then when you commence talking about

19          a 90 percent reduction, why, it is a horse of

20          a different color.

21                    The only thing I am saying here now is

22          that what I am interested in is a phosphate

23          removal process that will take these sewages

24          that apparently have 10, 12, 15 parts per

25          million in the raw sewage and will give us the

-------
                                                       25^3
 1                          D.  M.  PIERCE
 2          80  percent  reduction on that,  because,  as I
 3          indicated here,  these  are all  preliminary
 4          figures  and not  over too long  a period  of time,
 ^          but the  highest  result I have  for the averages
 6          on  any of them was  eight and a half parts per
 7          million  for one  plant  and it ran from three and
 8          a half up to eight  and a half.  so, I would
 9          assume that their raw  sewage phosphates couldn't
10          be  over  12  to 15 or else the activated  sludge
11          process  all along has  been removing more phos-
12          phates than we have been giving them credit for.
13                   MR. PIERCE:   May I just say,  Mr. Chair-
14          man,  that thus far  all of the  studies that we
15          have  made,  both  in  bench scale, and in plant
16          scale, have shown great promise of effective
17          phosphate removal in connection with various
18          processes,   certainly  a great  deal, or more
19
           studies  needs to be made, and  we plan to make
           such  studies at  a number of places in Michigan
           with  a wide variety of conditions, and  I would
22
           hope  that if each of the four  states would make
23
           equal studies and equal explanations that we
24
           might soon  have  a variety of conditions with
25
           experience  that  could  be used  as the basis for

-------
 l                          D. M. PIERCE




 2          judgment.




 3                    MR. STEIN:  Is there any other comment?




 4                    Mr. Klassen?




 S                    MR. KLASSEN:  Mr. Chairman, just two




 S          questions for information.




 7                    Don, we recognize that Michigan has




 8          probably had as much if not more actual experienc




 9          in the chlorination of sewage than any of the




10          other states.  This is the reason for my asking




11          you these two questions.




12                    Have you made any studies, are you




13          concerned with, the possibility that in chlorinat




14          ing our sewage from our modern industrial coro-




15          munities that we may be chlorinating hydrocarbons




16          so we are ending up with chlorinated hydrocarbons




17          that could be toxic in the stream?  That is one.




18                    The second one is along the same line




*9          in a little different areas  That we may be




20          building up a chlorine immunity to the patho-




21          genie organisms in the sewage which later, if




22          that same water is picked up and used for water




23          supply, that chlorination of the water supply




24          would not be bacterially effective.




25                    And ray reason for raising these two

-------
                                                       25^5

 1                         D. M. PIERCE



 2         questions, because I think there are two countrie



 3         Germany and England, do not chlorinate sewage



 4         based on these two reasons.  I wondered what your



 5         experience has been in Michigan.



 6                   MR. PIERCE:  Actually, I am afraid



 7         that I can't throw any light on those questions,



 8         as you might suspect.  we don't have a good deal



 9         of apprehension about this, however.



10                   We have no evidence to indicate that



11         chlorinated hydrocarbons are creating problems



12         in the stream, the receiving stream, but this



13         doesn't mean that there may not be isolated
14
23
           problems.  I think this is deserving of study.
15                    And the other question, I think, is



1          a speculative one and one that we can only con-



17          jecture about at this point



*                    And while I can appreciate the grounds


19
           for your question, I am afraid I can't help you.



20                    MR. STEIN:  I think we had some other


21
           comments.  Unless you do.  Do you want to ask



           something?
                     MR. VOGT:  I would like to go back to
24
           Mr. Poole's comment about the phosphates in the


25
           effluent,  say, at South Bend, where, Blucher,

-------
                                                       25^6


 1                          D. M. PIERCE



 2          you mentioned that, as I recall it, south Bend



 3          does use some alum, or one of the plants.



 4             .MR. POOLSt  East Chicago uses alum.



 5          Their average is three and a half against an



 6          average of the other plants, I would say, of abou



 7          seven.



 8                    MR. VOGT:  Don,  didn't the work over



 9          at warren indicate that alum did prove rather



10          effective in removing  or did help in removing



11          phosphates in the pilot study that they conduct-



12          ed over there, that most of the time was spent on



13          the use of the iron salts, but as I recall they



14          also used alum for a short time and did find



15          fairly good results with the use of alum, which


IB
           would indicate that perhaps East Chicago, by



17          the use of alum, is, in effect, helping the biologi


18
           cal process in the reduction of the total phos-



19          phates?



                     MR. PIERCE:  Yes, this is correct.


21
           They used alum for a short period, which they


22
           expect to explore further, and had about the


23
           same dosage rates and about the same results.


24
                     And there at warren, incidentally,


25
           the phosphates ranged from about 15 to about 35

-------
                                                       2547

 1                     D.  M.  PIERCE



 2          total phosphates.



 3                    MR.  KLASSEN:   I had one other question.



 4                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.



 5                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Dp you chlorinate the



 6          effluent from  lagoons?   And one of the staff



 7          here said that we noted that Texas exempts



 8          lagoons from chlorination.  Apparently that was



 9          approved by the Department of the interior.



10                    Do you chlorinate lagoon effluents in



11          Michigan, require it?  we do in Illinois, and I



12          just wondered  whether you do.



13                    MR.  PIERCE:  You always get to the



14          bottom of it,  don't you?
                   (


15                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Lagoon is really pretty



16          much at the bottom of it.



17                    MR.  PIERCE:  No, actually, Mr. Klassen,



18          we haven't chlorinated the effluent from lagoons



19          as yet.  we are exploring methods for this,



20          recognizing that we have a special problem,



21          particularly where we have a high concentration



22          of algae.



23                    But  our lagoon operations in Michigan


MJ
           are strictly on a seasonal discharge basis for



           very, very short periods of time,  we discharge

-------
                                                       2548

 !                         D. M. PIERCE



 2          only for about two weeks in late fail and  two



 3          weeks after the ice has come off in  the  spring,



 4          so while this is less hazardous, perhaps,  less



 5          reason for chlorination than a continuous  dis-



 6          charge, it is something that we want to  get  to*



 7          And we are looking to the Federal Government,



 8          to the researchers and anybody else  that can



 9          shed light on how to manage a lagoon effluent



10          with effective disinfection.



11                    We haven't swept it under  the  rug,



12          but we haven't found a good way to do this  for



13          those two short periods of high rate discharge.



14                    MR. STEIN:  Are there any  further



15          questions or comments?



16                    DR. BORUFFs  Mr. Chairman, as  a



17          chemist, or maybe modified as an ex-chemist,



18          the speaker's tables are in terms of phosphate



19          P04?



20                    MR. PIERCEs  Yes, sir.



21                    DR. BORUFF:  Others, I believe,Dr.



22          weih-berger talked about parts per million of



23          phosphorus.  As a chemist I want to call atten-



24          tion that 30 parts per million of phosphate woul


25                            "
           be about 10 parts per million of phosphorus, so
.

-------
                                                      25^9
 i




 2




 3




 4




 5




 6




 7




 8




 9




10




11




12




13




14




IS




16




17




18




19




20




21




22




23




24




25
               D. M. PIERCE
you have got to divide by about three, in case




there is some confusion here regarding the




methods of reporting.




          MR. PIERCE:  Correct.  Thank you.




          MR. STEIN:  Thank you, Dr. Boruff.




          Mr. poole.




          MR. POOLE:  I was talking about phos-




phates and I assumed that was what Don was talk-




ing about.  Am I correct?




          MR. PIERCE:  That's correct.




          MR. POOLE:  I had a question of Mr.




Purdy, if we are discussing that part of it now.




          MR. STEIN:  No, no.  we have to wait.




We are just discussing Mr. Pierce's part.




          MR. POOLEj  All right.




          MR. STEINs  Do we have any further




comments or questions?




          Mr. Poston.




          MR. POSTON:  I would like to ask Mr.




Pierce if there were designed mixing facilities




and facilities to add chemicals in the regularly




the plant designed to mix and receive chemicals




and settle them out, wouldn't you expect




appreciably better results than you got at

-------
                                                      2550

 !                         D.  M.  PIERCE




 2          Grayling and Odessa?




 3                    MR. PIERCE:   Yes.   Yes,  indeed.  This




 4          is discussed briefly  in the appendix in the




 5          reports.




 6                    We hope  that within the year we may




 7          have some experience  that will throw some light




 8          on this.




 9                    We have  one  chemical precipitation




10          plant in Michigan  in  this basin,  at petoskey, whi




11          has good formal facilities and which they use




12          during the summer  months, adding  chemicals for




13          regular chemical precipitation plant,  we want




14          to do some work at Petoskey on the  use of iron




15          salts and on various  other chemicals for the




16          removal of phosphates, and we plan  to go in




17          there in March and to get a good  month, month




18          and a half of sound information on  background




19          without chemical feed, and then to  go on with




           this for two or three  or four months or perhaps




           longer, and explore what can be done with good




22          formal facilities, with the addition of chemicals




           for phosphate removal.



24
                     This would  give us a much better feel


25
           on what can be done and hopefully we will have

-------
  I                                                     2551

 1                         D. M. PIERCE




 2          a waste that is lower in phosphates.



 3                    MR. POSTON:  That is all I have.



 4                    MR. STEIN:  Do we have any more coxn-



 5          rnents or questions?  you had better ask Mr.



 6          Pierce now; he is going to leave.



 7                     (No response.?



 8                    MR. STEIN:  Thank you very much, Don,



 9          for a very illuminating statement.  we enjoyed



10          it.



11                    MR. PIERCE:  Thank you, sir.



12                    MR. STEIN:  I think at this point we



13          will call on Mr. Holraer again to accommodate



14          someone from Wisconsin who asked to make a



15          statement.



16                    Mr. Holmer.


17




18                    WISCONSIN PRESENTATION


19




20                    MR. HOLMER:  Mr. Stein, I appreciate


21
           the tolerance of the delegation from Michigan


22
           in allowing us twice to do this in the same


23
           afternoon.


24
                     We have been treated over the last


25                                  "
           several days to appearances by patient women from

-------
                                                        2552
                                HOLMER
 2         other states.  The roll of women in the fight
 3         on pollution in which we are all engaged is a
 4         very important and significant one.  The roll
 5         of The Izaak Walton League in our respective
 6         states in keeping the public awareness of the
 7         problem and helping us toward solutions is also
 8         well known.
 9                   We have from Milwaukee, Wisconsin,
           Mrs. Eugene Dahi, who fills in both capacities an
           who has been very helpful to the State of Wiscon-
12
           sin and to the Division of Resource Development
13
           in our water pollution effort.  She is present-
14
           ing a statement this afternoon on behalf of the
           Wiscbfisin Izaak Walton League, and it is a
16
           privilege for me to present to this audience
17
           arid to my fellow Conferees, Mrs. Dahl.
18
ig                  STATEMENT Op MIRIAM DAHL
2Q              CHAIRMAN OF THE POLLUTION PROGRAM
21                  WISCONSIN STATE DIVISION
22               IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE OF AMERICA
23
                     MRS. DAHL:  Thank you, Mr. Holmer.
24
           And thank you for your very generous indulgence
25
           in allowing me to do this at this time.

-------
                                                       2553

 1                        MIRIAM DA HI,



 2                   Mr. Williams has the copies for every-


 3         one.  I don't know where they are.


 4                   May I say at this point, while we  are


 5         waiting to see if we have got the copies, that


 6         our approach to this problem has been on specifi-


 7         cation.  We don't think that we are in the field


 8         of experts,  we think that we are in the field


 9         of generalities and specification in the area


10         of the goals which we want to reach.


                    I would like to say, too, that our


12         goals are based on very definite specification,


13         which if there is time and if you wish to hear


          them I would be glad to explain later, or if


          there are questions I will be glad to answer


16         them.


17                   Shall I begin?


18                   MR. HOLMER:  Yes.

19
                    MRS. DAHL:  There should be copies

20
          coming.

21
                    Mr. Chairman and members of the

22
          committee, ladies and gentlemen, fellow conserva-

23
          tionists.

24
                    The Wisconsin Division of the izaak

25
          Walton League of America represents some 1500

-------
                                                       2554

                         MIRIAM DAHL



 2         members  in  24  chapters  situated  throughout  the



 3         state  of Wisconsin.  It is  a  democratically



 4         organized group  of citizens who  are  sincerely



          interested  in  conservation  and outdoor  recreation



          and whose individual proposals when  adopted are



 7         included in the  conservation  Policies of  the



 8         Izaak  Walton League.  This  explanation  is cited



 9         to show  that the positions  here  taken are from th<>



10         membership  body  and thus comprise a  truly repre-



11         sentative voice  from concerned conservationists.



12                   The  long history  of persistent  and



13         arduous  work of  conservationists cooperating
14
          with  government  and  others  has  brought  some
15         gratifying  results  in  good  laws,  concentrated



16         research  and a  program of correction which  is



17         commendable.  This  is  a good  start.



18                   We have the  laws  to do  the job, but


19
          apathy  remains  firmly  existent, wasting  more of



          the  too brief remaining time  estimated necessary


21
          by our  experts  to do the job.  we need to acceler-


22
          ate  the implementation of corrections on a  more


23
          rapid schedule. This  is the  reason we are  here


24
          today,  we  believe  a larger more  closely coordi-


25
          nated effort is needed NOW.

-------
                                                      2555


 1                        MIRIAM DAHL




 2                   We suggest that a working group  repre-



 3         senting government, industry, municipalities,



 4         che general public  (who are now  largely  excluded)



          and conservationists from the Lake Basin area



 6         should meet with only ONE purpose --  to  work on



 7         the problems of the LAKES area.  ALL  research



          data on the lake, including the  lowest to  the



 9         highest forms of life ought to be considered with



10         regard exclusively for the best  possible condi-



11         tion of the waters.  This new approach could,



12         with imagination, (the hidden ingredient of



13         invention), reveal some new techniques in  solu-



14         tions of problems which have not previously been



15         considered in the routine processes of attempted
16
          corrections.  It could also offer real  solutions
17         instead of partial and "make-do" measures.  The



          comparative economic value of full correction now



19         instead of creating a need for more costly changes



          to meet the anticipated increase of existing


21
          problems in the future is evident to'any thinking


22
          business executive or to any politician concerned


23
          with the tax structure.


24
                    The members of the Wisconsin Division


25
          of IWLA are not interested in a debate with

-------
                                                      2556




 !                         MIRIAM DAHL




 2          industry nor with government,  we do not wish




 3          to become involved with personalities or posi-




 4          tions.  We approach the problem (a huge one,




 5          we realize) of returning this priceless resource




 6          into a fine workable asset which will produce




 7          economically while also fulfilling the functions




 8          of life-giving beauty and recreation.  All of




 9          these goals can be accomplished with full use




10          of all our expertise coupled with common sense




H          and with a singleness of purpose not divided by




12          personal or partisan problems which has, accord-




13          ing to history, lost many causes and nations.




14          we would hope to benefit from the lessons it




15          teaches, for without the Lake resources -- imagine




I6          if you can, the results on our lives.




17                    The above proposal is a NEW approach.




18          This new overlook can reveal different ideas.




19          Possible new solutions will .come from such perti-




20          nent questions as "is this necessary?"  "What are




21          the alternatives?"  "What is the very lowest scal
-------
                                                     2557

 i                        MIRIAM DAHL


 2         and wise use, or of a selfish,  short-sighted


 3         purpose made to  look benevolent?"


 4                   Let us not forget  that we who  comprise


 5         a  very minute population  of  the world, are


 6         privileged  to enjoy this  magnificient  gift.   So

 i
          many  of us  do not  recognize  or  realize its magni-

 a
          tude  and rarity because of the  over-exposure  of


          daily association.  We have  become callous toward


          this  tremendous resource.


11                   The Wisconsin Division of the  IWLA

12
          urges an end to  inaction  and a  firm move into

13
          an active program  of implementing the  laws which

14
          make  it possible to reclaim  our Great  Lakes Basin

15
          area, we strongly urge further that this hearing

16
          be the catalyst for a strong active pollution

17
          elimination program beginning now.  We have the

18
          authority.  We have the technological  ability.

19
          We have the research data necessary.   There is

20
          nothing to  stop us except our own indecisiveness.

21
          In the face of the rapidly increasing  tempo of

22
          destruction, we cannot begin too soon  to stop

23
          this  despoilage and to reach our mutual  objective

24
          of a  Great  Lakes Basin  wisely  used and  wisely

25
          preserved.

-------
                                                       2558


 1                         MIRIAM DAHL




 2                    The Wisconsin Division  of The  izaak



 3          Walton League of America to  the last  member  is




 4          ready and willing to help,   we urge that action



 5          begin today.



 6                    Thank you.



 7                    And it is signed J. Michael Borden,



 8          who is President of the Wisconsin State  Division



 9          of the izaak Walton League of America.   And  I



10          am the chairman on that level of  the  pollution



11          programs.




12                    MR. STEIN*  Thank  you,  Mrs. Dahl.



13                    (Applause.)




14                    MR. STEIN:  Are there any comments



15          or questions?



16                    (No response.)




17                    MR. STEIN:  If not, thank you  very


18
           much.


19
                     MRS. DAHLs  There  are no questions?


20
                     MR. STEIN:  There  are none.  Thank


21
           you very much.


22
                     Mr. Vogt, may we push on, please?


23



24               MICHIGAN PRESENTATION (CONTINUED)




25

                     MR. VOGTs  We will return now  to Mr.

-------
                                                       2559

 ^                         R. W. PURDY



 2         Purdy, who will continue with the state of


 3         Michigan Report.


 4

                   STATEMENT OF RALPH PURDY
 5

                        CHIEF ENGINEER
 6

              MICHIGAN WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION
 7

                         (CONTINUED)
 8


 9                   MR. PURDYs  Picking up on page 20:

1Q                       CHAPTER  III


                 DISCHARGES TO SURFACE WATERS
11



12                        INDUSTRIES


13

                     The Water Resources Commission staff
14

           has under surveillance 231 industries which dis-
15

           charge treated or untreated waste water to public
16

           waters in the Lake Michigan Basin.  The 231
17

           industries that discharge waste effluents to
18

          - surface waters are listed in Appendix H, and


           for just a moment I would like to turn to that
20

           to show the information that has been included
21

           in this.
22

                     We first show the industrial discharges
23

           to Lake Michigan, some 16 are listed, the company
•4

           name,  the product, its location, the treatment

-------
                                                       2560

j                       R. W. PURDY

2        that is provided, the waste flow data where such

3        is available,  pounds of BOD per day, suspended

4        solids pounds  per day, the pollution status rating,

5        which I will explain in a few moments, whether an

6        order has been adopted and, if so,  when,  and cer-

7        tain other remarks that might be pertinent to

8        that plant.

9                  The  pollution status ratings are updated

10        annually and represent the water Resources comrois-

H        sion staff's effort to fairly appraise each

12        incipient pollution problem as indicated  by a

13        review of operating reports, observations, inspec-

14        tions or surveys during the preceding calendar

15        year.  The ratings are by letter code as  follows:

16                  A.  Control adequate

17                  B.  Control provided - adequacy not
                                     established
18                  C.  No control - need not establish

19                  D.  Control provided - protection un-
                                     reliable
20                  E.  Control inadequate

21                         c - construction underway

22                         p - plans being prepared

2*                         s - studies underway

24                  Table 1 summarizes the pollution status

2S        ratings of the 16 industries which have effluent

         discharges directly to Lake Michigan:

-------

Pollution
Status
Rating
A
B
B - Studies in progress
C
D
D - Construction in
progress
E
No rating given
Table 1
Type of Industry
Electric pood and
Chemicals Power Packing Minerals paper
2 3 2 2
1
1


1

1
11 1



Total
9
1
1


1

1
3

Total
2 4 532
16

As shown by the table, only  2  of  the  16 have D or E pollution


status ratings.
                                                                        ro
                                                                        ui
                                                                        a\

-------
                                                       2563


 1                       R. W. PURDY




 2                  In addition to the 16 industries which




 3        have effluent discharges directly to Lake Michigan,




 4        215 have effluent discharges to inland surface




 5        waters tributary to Lake Michigan.  The pollution




 6        status ratings for these industries are summarized




 7        by tributary river basins in Table 2, 56 have D




 8        or E pollution status ratings.



 9


                     GOVERNMENTAL UNITS

10




11                  The 193 governmental units that dis-




12        charge waste effluents to public waters are




13        listed in Appendix I, together with the type of




14        treatment provided, waste effluent data where




1s        such is available, abatement action taken and




16        present status.  And we have done this again for




17        all of the discharges in the Lake Michigan Basin.




18        The data was obtained from records of the Michigan




19        Department of Public Health and the files of the

                          /

 "        Michigan Water Resources Commission.  The waste




21        effluent data reflects the average for the month




22        of August 1967.  Only 6 discharge their waste




23        effluent directly to Lake Michigan.  The remainder




        (188) discharge to various tributaries, some within



25
         a short distance from the lake and others several

-------
                  Table  2
Summary of  Industrial Surface' Water Discharges
         in the  Lake Michigan Basin
               April 1,  1967


"**—»^^^
Pollution" 	 -^___River Basin
Status Rating, " ~~~^^___^
April 1, 1967 . ^~~~~~-^-~^_
A
C Construction in progress
P Plans being prepared
S Studies underway
B
C Construction in progress
P Plans being prepared
S Studies underway
C
C Construction in progress
P Plans being prepared
S Studies underway
D
C Construction in progress
P Plans being prepared
S Studies underway
E
'C Construction ' in progress
? Plans being prepared
S Studies underway
No Rating Given ' '
. Total

0)
(!) Q*
t, ^
0 io
.:,



'1







1








4



?s.  Lo  o-  which have dual  i-3tir.::~.
                                                                                               to
                                                                                               VJJ
                                                                                               0\
                                                                                               ro

-------
                                                       2564,
 l

 2

 3

 4

 S

 9

 7

 8

 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

IB

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
                         R. W. PURDY
  hundred miles inland.
            The 6 with a discharge to Lake Michigan
  are:
Governmental Unit

  Gladstone

  Harbor Pointe

  Harbor Springs

  Petoskey


  Suttons Bay

  wequetonsing
Population  	

  5,400     Primary

    800

  1,430
     Treatment
Primary (septic tank)

Primary (fine screen)
  6,400     Primary (chemical
               precipitation)

    420     Secondary (lagoons)

  1,000     Primary (Irahoff tank)
       You will note that they are all rather small,

  the largest with a population of 6,400.  Approxi*

  roately 2.3 million people live in the Michigan

  portion of the Lake Michigan Basin.  A large

  percentage (43%) live in rural areas where collec-

  tion and treatment of waste water by a central

  system is not necessary or feasible at the present

  time.  They, in the roost part, are served by

  individual systems, such as a septic tank followed

  by a subsurface percolation field.  All but 4 per-

  cent of the population readily accessible to centra

  systems are served by formal collection and treat-

  ment systems with approximately 72 percent of the

-------
                                                      2565
4                        R.  W.  PURDY
2        population serviced receiving treatment by secon-
3        dary biological processes.   Fifty-three govern-
4        mental units have been identified as permitting,
5        allowing or suffering  the discharge of raw sewage
6        of human origin to public waters and in all in-
7        stances the water Resources Commission has, as
A
         a minimum, held an initial informal conference
         with the responsible governmental unit to discuss
10        and encourage an appropriate water pollution
         abatement program.   This initial action has been
12
         followed in 22 instances by formal statutory enforqe
13
         ment proceedings.  The others are currently pro-
14
         grossing satisfactorily but remain under continuing
         review.
16
                   In Chapter 4 we have described the Lake
17
         Michigan Basin and the water uses in the basin.
18
         I will not go through  this in the interest of
19
         saving time this afternoon.  I woo Id like to
20
         point out, though,  that some 650,000 people in
21
         Michigan use this as a water supply and that
22
         recreational use of our shoreline of 1,660 miles
23
         is very important to the economy of Michigan.
24
                   I would like to skip over now to page 32.
25

-------
                                                       2566

 j                        R. W.  PURDY

                        CHAPTER  V

 2                         PART I

          THE  RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE  LAKE  MICHIGAN

 3
          ALEWIFE  DIE-OFF AND  RESULTING WATER QUALITY

 4


 5
                   Observations  of depressed water  quality

 B
         conditions and  increased bacteria counts concur-

 7
         rent  with the annual  alewife die-off along the

 8
         Michigan  shoreline  of Lake  Michigan led to a

 9
         laboratory study of the problem  (Appendix  J).

10
         Six tubs, three containing  Lake  Michigan water


         and three containing  Lansing tap water, were

12
         placed  in an open area  exposed to sunlight. Two

13
         of the  tubs containing  Lake Michigan water and

14
         two containing  Lansing  tap  water each received

15
         one-freshly dead 6-inch alewife. chemical, bac-

16
         teriological, and algal changes  were monitored

17
         over  the  next 23 days,  from August  16 to September

18
         8, 1967.  The dead  fish provided an environment

19
         which allowed a population  explosion of coliforro

20
         bacteria. Decomposition of the  fish tissues

21
         resulted  in a nutrient  release which in turn

22
         enabled a dense algal bloom to develop,  coliform

23
         and fecal coliforro  bacteria populations as high

24
         as 1,500,000/100 ml and 3,500/100 ml, respectively,

25                                         .
         developed in the tubs containing a  dead alewife.

-------
                                                       2567


 1                        R. W. PURDY




 2                  Abnormally high coliform bacteria



 3        populations developed along Lake Michigan beaches



 4        during the summer of 1967.  The presence of dead



 5        alewives was probably a major reason for this



 6        abnormality.  The high counts partially negate



 7        the value of beach bacteria sampling as an indica-



 8        tion of sewage contamination.



 9                  Phosphate released from the decomposing



10        fish in the tubs was rapid.  Each single dead



11        alewife in approximately 6.8 gallons of water



12        released more than 2.0 mg/1 soluble orthophosphate



13        as PO4 within two days.  soluble orthophosphate



I4        in these tests reached concentrations as high as



15        6.3 mg/1.  The total phosphate released from



16        these four fish during the test ranged from a low



17        of 113 mg to a high of 201 mg P(>4 per fish.



18                  In the tubs containing alewives, blooms



19        of small single-celled, green algae developed



20        shortly after nutrient release.  In 1 case the



21        algae population grew from less than 100 cells/ml



22        to a maximum of 3,187,800/ml.  These exploding



23        populations utilized the available soluble



24        orthophosphate.  concentrations of this phosphorus


25
         fraction dropped while total phosphate continued

-------
                                                       256^

 1                        R. W. PURDY



 2        to increase.


 3                  One agency has estimated that a  few


 4        hundred million pounds of alewives died in Lake


 5        Michigan during 1967.  For the purpose of  this


 6        report we will use 300 million pounds.  Analytical


 7        work by the u. S. Bureau of commercial Fisheries


 8        on several groups of alewives has shown that


 9        alewives about 6-inches long contain approximately


         2.23 grams of phosphorus per pound of fish.  Thus,


         300 million pounds of dead alewives could  release


12        2,300 tons of phosphates into Lake Michigan.  The


13
         concentration of soluble orthophosphate as PO4


         commonly claimed sufficient to create nuisance


         algae conditions in water is 0.03 mg/1.  If two-


16
         thirds of the released phosphorus was in the form

17
         of soluble orthophosphate the potential from this

18
         source alone exists to bring approximately 11 cubic

19
         miles of phosphorus-free water to the point nuisanc

20
         algae blooms could occur.

21
                   It is generally acknowledged that during

22
         the summer the water mass along Michigan's west

23
         coast from Benton Harbor-St. Joseph to Little

24
         Point Sable is discrete and moves northward unless

25
         broken up by strong winds.  The U. S. Bureau of

-------
                                                       2569
 I                        R. W. PURDY
 tt

 2        Commercial Fisheries  aerial survey showed that


 3        most of the dead alewives were concentrated in the


 4        southern tip of Lake Michigan and in a band along


 5        both shores in the southern two-thirds of the


 6        lake,  windrows of dead alewives collect in the


 7        shallow water beach zone.  Nutrients from the


 8        decomposing fish were released into this discrete,


 9        surface water mass which is already enriched by


10        the tributary rivers draining urban and agricul-


11        tural areas.  There are 2,240,000 acre feet of


12        water in Lake Michigan along the shoreline out


13        to the 30-foot depth contour from the Indiana-
                                      i

14        Michigan state line to the tip of the Leelanau


15        Peninsula.  Assuming two-thirds of the phosphorus


16        released during alewife decomposition is available


17        for uptake then only 18,700,000 pounds of decompos-


18        ing alewives would be necessary to bring that


19        amount of phosphorus-free water to the critical


2°        nuisance-algal-producing level.  This stretch of


21        shore comprises approximately 20 percent of the


22        total Lake Michigan coastline.  Twenty percent of
23
         the estimated alewife die-off of 300 million
24


         probable that more than the 18,700,000 pounds
         pounds is 60 million pounds.  It seems highly

25

-------
                                                       2570

 1                       R. W.  PURDY


 2        needed  to  bring  the nutrient  concentration  to


 3        nuisance-potential levels  would  accumulate  in


 4        this area.


 5                   Growing alewives concentrate  phosphorus


 6        already present  in the  lake,   it is  normal  for


 7        phosphorus to be recycled  upon their death,  but


 8        because of their unusually high  population  and


 9        habit of dying during a  short period of the


         year in the alongshore waters, the phosphorus is


11        released in a relatively small volume of water.

12
         It  is concluded  that  phosphate released from de-

13                               '
         composing  alewives in the  alongshore water  mass

14
         of  Lake Michigan is a significant factor in the


         production of algae.  Nuisances  which can develop

16
         with increases in algal  populations  include a

17
         reduction  in transparency,  reduction in length

18
         of  filter  runs at water  plants,  possible taste and

19
         odor problems in drinking  water,  interference with

20
         swimming,  and deposition of filamentous algae on

21
         beaches.

22
                    Departing a moment  from the text,  the

23
         presentation made by  the commercial  fisher it an

24
         on  the  number of pounds  of alewives  that they

25
         could harvest from the lake to represent a  meana

-------
                                                       2571
 1                         R. W.  PURDY
 2         of harvesting  a  substantial portion of the amount
 3         of phosphates  in the  lake.   I am not arguing that
 4         we shouldn't  stop the  discharge  of phosphates
          into  the  lake, but another  benefit that would be
 6         derived would  be that  you would  remove and harvest
 7         phosphates  that  are already present in the lake.
 9                             CHAPTER V
                                PART 2
 9              INVESTIGATION OF  NUISANCE ALGAE CONDITIONS
10                    ALONG LAKE  MICHIGAN SHORELINE
11
12
                    In  early August  of  1966  the  water
13
 0         Resources  Commission  received  complaints indicat-
          ing  that several Lake Michigan beaches around
          Muskegon and  Grand  Haven  had unusually high
16
          concentrations  of algae in  the inshore waters.
17
          The  subsequent  Water  Resources Commission survey,
18
          and  it  is  shown in  detail in Appendix K, showed
19
          that approximately  32 miles of Lake  Michigan shore
20
          line had nuisance accumulations of Spirogyra and
21
          Cladophora in August  of 1966.   This  problem was
22
          first observed  6.5  miles  south of Muskegon at
23
          Norton  Township Park  and  extended intermittently
24
          to Benona,  25 miles north of Muskegon.  At some
25
          beaches in this area  the  accumulations were not

-------
                                                       2572  :
 1                       R. W. PURDY

 2        sufficient to cause nuisance conditions.

 3                  Sixty miles of shoreline from South

 4        Haven to pentwater  (excluding the area described

 5        in the above paragraph) had noticeable accumula-

 6        tions of Cladophora but little or no Spirogyra.

 7        In most areas the Cladophora was lying on the

 8        bottom in windrows and was not as objectionable

 9        as was the Spirogyra in suspension.  Personnel

10        in charge of these beaches voiced only moderate

11        complaints concerning the necessity to rake up

12        the algae once a week or so.  In the area where

13        Spirogyra was a problem, park managers received

14        complaints of green-stained bathing suits and

15        conditions unfit for swimming.  The presence of

16        Spirogyra could not be traced to the tributaries

17        since it was not found in any of the river samples

18                  Based on algal species composition of the

19        8 areas studied, Holland and Manistee could be

20        described as being the least indicative of enrich-

21        ment.  Populations found at Benona, Muskegon and

22        St. Joseph were the most indicative of enrichment.

23        There were striking differences in the quantity

24        and quality in the insore phytoplankton and that

25        found beyond 600 feet.  Benona is the best example

-------
                                                       2573
 i                        R. W. PURDY
 2        of this where the inshore plankton was dominated
 3        by eutrophic species of oligotrophic waters.
 4        This suggests that during the summer of  1966
 5        the water masses inshore and offshore from 600
 6        feet out remained separate for long enough periods
 7        to support radically different algal populations.
 8                  On the basis of this short-term survey
 9        there is an apparent relationship between the
10        areas in which nuisance algae occur along the
11        Michigan coastline of Lake Michigan and  the proxi-
12        mity of sources of plant nutrients contributed
13        via major tributaries draining urban and agricul-
14        tural areas.  Assuming future weather and current
15        patterns similar to those experienced in 1966,
16        coupled with continued contributions of  present
17        water quality from tributary streams and the
18        existing water quality of Lake Michigan we may
19
         expect reoccurrences of nuisance algae conditions.
20                         CHAPTER V
                           PAR? 3
21            BACTERIOLOGICAL MONITORING OP WATERS
22               ALONG LAKE MICHIGAN SHORELINE
23
24                                                       •
                   The Michigan Water Resources Commission
25
         maintains an annual summer sampling program of

-------
                                                       2574
 j                        R. W. PURDY

 2        Michigan's Great Lakes coastline  surface waters.

 3        Bacteriological data presented  in Appendix  L

 4        were obtained in 1966 and  1967.   Only  the minimum,

 S        maximum, and geometric mean values  for each sarapl-

 6        ing location are expressed in this  report  (Appen-

 7        dix L, Table 1, Figure 1) however results for  all

 8        samples collected and referred  to are  on file  in

 9        the Lansing office of the Water Resources Commis-

10        sion.

11                  Of the 47 locations in  the Lower  Penin-

12        sula for which there is  1966 and  1967  data  avail-

13        able, 36 had geometric mean values  over 1,000

14        organisms per 100 ml in  1967, while in 1966 there

15        were only 4 such locations (Appendix L, Figure 1),

16        in 1967 the total number of sampling locations in

17        the Lower Peninsula was  expanded  to 69 and  of  these

18        49 had geometric mean values over 1,000 organisms

W        per 100 ml.

20                  The 1967 data when examined  in detail

21        reveals a definite rise  to peak coliform concentra-

22        tions and then a decline for each location  during

23        the sampling period of June through August. In

24        the extreme southern Lower Peninsula locations,

25        the peak concentrations  occurred  in the latter

-------
  I                                                     2575
 !                        R. W. PURDY
 2        half of June whereas in the northern portion
 3        of the Lower Peninsula they appeared in  early
 4        August.  Peak concentrations  for  locations  between
 5        these 2 areas followed a gradual  time  progression
 6        from south to north within these  limits.
 7                  Studies have shown  that dead and  decay-
 8        ing alewives contribute coliforxn  organisms  to  the
 9        surrounding waters and apparently provide a suit-
W        able nutrient enriched environment  for bacterial
11        growth and propagation.  The  bacteriological peaks
12        coincide with the time of appearance of  large
13        concentrations of dead alewives.  The  highest
14        alewife concentrations occurred in  the area from
*5        st. Joseph to Frankfort (Appendix L, Map 1).
16                  The few sampling locations which  did not
17        follow this pattern are located in  the northern
18        portion of the Lower peninsula above Frankfort
19        where lower concentrations of dead  alewives were
20        observed and where industrial waste discharges
21        from fruit canning operations contribute coliform
22
         to surface waters in the Traverse City area.
23                  From this information,  a  correlation
44
         appears to exist between the high total  coliform
25
         concentrations and the elevated alewife  mortality

-------
                                                        2576

 1                         R.  W.  PURDY

 2         of 1967.   Therefore,  until the alewife situation

 3         is corrected the assessment of the safety of

 4         these waters for full body contact requires the

 5         utilization of the  sanitary survey and data other

 6         than that obtained  during the alewife die-off.

 7         All of the public beaches in Michigan along the

 8         Lake Michigan shoreline are considered to be of

 9         satisfactory sanitary quality for full body con-

10         tact.

11                   Data from the Upper Peninsula's portion

12         of Lake Michigan   coastline is limited at this

13         time.  However,  a tabulation of the available

14         data has  been included in Appendix L, Table 2.

15                   The next  few sections will relate to

16         waste surveys and studies that have been made in

17         Lake Michigan where large discharges of industrial

18         waste are being  made  to these waters.

19                          CHAPTER  V
                             PART 4
20           BIOLOGICAL AND WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATIONS
            IN THE  VICINITY OP  THE E. I. DU PONT DIS-
21              CHARGE TO LAKE MICHIGAN NEAR MONTAGUE

22

23
                    Four investigations of water quality and

24         aquatic fauna have  been conducted since 1957 in

25
          the immediate vicinity of the E. I. DuPont submarine

-------
                                                       2577
I                        R. W. PURDY
2        discharge to Lake Michigan at Montague.  The  most
3        recent investigation took place  in  September  1967
4        (Appendix M) .
5                  The studies of the bottom animals have
6        not demonstrated any apparent injury  even  in  the
7        immediate vicinity of the outfall.  Scuds  and
8        midges have been the dominant-animals.   Minnows
9        and alewives have been observed  swimming normally
10        in the discharge as it bubbles to the surface.
H        The bottom material is fine, clean  sand  with  no
12        deposit.
13                  Water samples taken directly over the
14        discharge in September 1967 contained 0.65 mg/1
15        ammonia.  NO ammonia was detected 100 feet in any
16        direction from the discharge.  Other  water quality
17        parameters showed little variation  at all  sampling
18        locations.'
19                        CHAPTER V
                            PART  5
20          RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY IN THE VICINITY  OP THE
21            DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY BRINE DISCHARGE TO
22                  LAKE MICHIGAN NEAR LUDINGTON
23
24                  On August 10, 1967, a  reconnaissance
         survey of the water quality and  benthic  macroin-

-------
                                                       2578


 j                       R. W. PURDY




 2        vertebrate populations was conducted in Lake



 3        Michigan in the vicinity of the Dow Chemical



 4        company discharge near Big sable Point  (Appendix



 5        N) .



 6                  The discharge containing waste brines



 7        moved north with the alongshore current in the



 8        valley between the third and fourth sand bars.



 9        Conductivity remained very high, 40,000 micromhos,



10        as far as 1/2 mile northeast.  At this point the



11        brine mass commenced to become significantly di-



12        luted and lost its identity, although traces could



13        be detected 21/2 miles distant.



14                  Several bottom samples were visually



15        examined in the field to judge roughly if the



16        brine mass was grossly affecting the benthic



17        fauna.  Five samples were analyzed in the labora-



18        tory.  Conclusions were that the benthic fauna in



19        the immediate vicinity of the discharge was vir-



20        tually eliminated, but that the effect was local.



21        Populations commenced recovering 100 feet from


22
         the discharge and returned to near normal within



23        200 yards, depending on direction from discharge



24        point.


25
                   Rough water prevented detailed sampling

-------
                                                       2579
 1                        R. W.  PURDY

 2        at this tine.  Further investigations are schedule:

 3        to more clearly identify  the  affected area.

 4                        CHAPTER V
                            PART 6
           BIOLOGICAL  INVESTIGATIONS IN  THE  VICINITY OF

 6          THE  PACKAGING CORPORATION OF  AMERICA'S DIS-

 7            CHARGE TO  LAKE MICHIGAN NEAR MANISTEE

 8

 9                  Macroinvertebrate surveys of the Lake

10        Michigan bottom in the vicinity of  Packaging

H        Corporation of America (PCA)  discharge have  been

12        made in 1957 before  the operation started, in

13        1958,  and in  1962.   The bottom  animal populations

14        in the vicinity of the discharge were indicative

15        of a clean water environment.   However,  the

         effluent tended to "float"  to the lake surface

         and complaints of undesirable odors and unnatural

18        colors increased.  In  1966  PCA  added brine from

19        the discharge  of a nearby chemical  company to thei

20        effluent.  Effectively preventing the undesirable

21        "floating."

22                  Investigation in  1967 (Appendix O)

23        revealed chloride concentration on  the lake  bottom
24
         at the discharge was  248 mg/1.   The  effluent was
         apparently  flowing  offshore  at  this  time as

-------
                                                        2580

 1                         R. W. PURDY



 2         concentrations of 130 mg/1 were found 4,000 and



 3         8,000 feet west northwest.  Alongshore parallel



 4         to the discharge concentrations were generally



          less than 20 mg/1.



 6                   No objectionable bottom deposits could



 7         be found in the vicinity of the PCA discharge



 8         during any of the surveys.  The bottom animal



 9         populations sampled a mile north and south of



10         the discharge were typical of a clean water enviro



11         rnent.  Species diversity of the bottom fauna



12         community was lower in the discharge zone, 3.5



13         species/square foot, than in the zones to the



14         north and south, 6 species/square foot.


is                         CHAPTER v

                            PART 1


16           AQUATIC BIOTA INVESTIGATIONS IN THE VICINITY



17              OP THE BIG ROCK POINT NUCLEAR REACTOR


18


IQ
                    Beginning in 1960, collections  (usually



          biannual) of aquatic plants and animals have been
21
          made in the vicinity of the Big Rock Point Reactor
22
          radiological analysis.  Background radiation


23
          levels (gross beta)  were established prior to

24
          September 1962 when the Big Rock Point Reactor


25
          went critical.
for

-------
                                                      258l


 I                        R. W.  PURDY



 2                   Plankton,  filamentous  algae,  periphyton,



 3        crayfish,  and minnows  have been  collected from



 4        the Lake Michigan  shore  zone  in  the  vicinity of



         the cooling water  discharge and  at 2 control sta-



 6        tions, one three miles east and  the  other three



 7        miles west of the  reactor.  The  radioactivity of



 8        plankton has not varied  between  these stations



 9        on a given date.   The  seasonal and annual changes



10        noted are  apparently related  to  fallout and



11        natural background.



12                   However, since going critical,  radio-



13        activity counts of other biota collected in the



14'        Big Rock Point vicinity  have  been generally high-



15        er than at the 2 control stations.   During this



16        period background  radiation levels throughout the



17        state have been decreasing.   Although levels in
18
         the Big Rock  point biota  are  higher  than the
19        biota controls,  they are  similar  in magnitude  to


20
         the  levels  found before criticality (Appendix  P)



21                         CHAPTER V

                            PART 8


22              OTHER TRIBUTARY AND LAKE  MICHIGAN



23                    MONITORING PROGRAMS


24



25
                   Water  quality monitoring  of  Great  Lakes

-------
                                                         2582
                          R. W. PURDY


 2        tributary streams was.initiated by the Water


 3        Resources Commission in May of 1955 to obtain


 4        background radioactivity information.  In 1963,


 5        the program was expanded to include a variety of


 6        water quality data.  The specific objectives of


 7        this program were to determine long-term trends


 8        in the chemical, physical and bacteriological


 9        characteristics of tributary streams to the Great


10        Lakes in Michigan's Lower Peninsula.


11                  Initially 1 sampling station was estab-


12        lished on each of 28 drainage basins in the Lower


13        Peninsula, 12 of which are located on tributaries


14        discharging to Lake Michigan.  This provided


15        coverage of all the major basins as well as those


16        known to be receiving significant discharges of


17        industrial or domestic wastes.  The 12 tributary
18
          basins contain approximately 63 percent of Michiga
19         total land area in the Michigan basin and discharg


          approximately 60 percent of the total flow contri-


          buted to Lake Michigan from Michigan tributaries

22
          Approximately 87 percent of the total population

23
          in the Michigan portion of the Lake Michigan Basin

24
          reside in the monitored basins.
  II
25
                    The monitoring stations (Appendix Q,
8

-------
                                                        2583



 1                         R. W.  PURDY



 2        Table  1) are  located as  close  as  possible to the



 3        mouths of  the basins and, with 1  exception,  below



 4        all  Known  sources  of waste.  The  exception is the



 5        station on the  Kalamazoo River near Saugatuck



 6        where  the  effluent from  the  Saugatuck sewage



 7        treatment  plant discharges downstream from the



 8        sampling point. In this instance,  the volume of



 9        effluent is small  in relation  to  volume of river



10        flow and sampling  below  the  outfall was not



11        justified  due to difficulty  of collection.



12                   Samples  are  collected every 2 weeks and



13        analyzed by the Commission's laboratory in Lansing



14        The  collection,  storage,  preservation and analyses



         of all samples  are in  accordance  with methods and



16        procedures prescribed  by Standard Methods for the
17
         Examination  of Water and Wastewater,  Twelfth Editi
18                  A  summary  of  data  collected  for  this



         program  in 1965 and  1966  is  presented  in Tables


20
         2,  3 and Figure 1  of Appendix  Q.   The  monitored


21
         tributaries  and their drainage areas are shown


22
         on  Map 1.  In addition, the  data  from  individual


23
         stations for selected parameters  has been  graphi-

24
         cally presented in Figures 2 through 13 for  the


25
         years 1965 and 1966, illustrating any  seasonal or
n,

-------
  I                                                     2584



 1                        R.  W.  PURDY




 2         short-term fluctuations in water quality.



 3                   in addition to the regular monitoring



 4         of Lake Michigan tributaries,  the commission staff



 5         has inaugurated a  program of sampling of raw



 6         water from Lake Michigan.  This is done at various



 7         water treatment plants around  the perimeter of



 8         the lake.  The intent of the program is to estab-



 9         lish existing water quality at the various intakes



10         and indicate any trends which  occur in the quality



11                   The samples are collected prior to any



12         treatment by the plants and are handled in the



13         manner described for  tributary samples.  These



14         samples are currently collected annually.  The'



15         first series was collected in  1967 and the results



16         are shown in Table  4 of Appendix Q.  sampling loca-



17         tions are outlined on Map 2.



18                   In addition to the program conducted by



19         the Water Resources Commission the Michigan


20
          Department of Public  Health requires that each



21         water treatment plant submit monthly operating


22                                                       :
          reports which contain results  of physical, chemica



23         and bacteriological tests which are made on the


24
          raw water supply.   Data submitted in 1966 is


25
          summarized in Table 5 of Appendix O.  The 2 programs

-------
                                                       2585
 I                        R. W. PURDY
 2        supplement each other and furnish  fairly  complete
 3        documentation of water quality at  water intakes
 4        in Lake Michigan.
 S                  The staff of the water Resources  Conunis-
 6        sion conducts various surveys throughout  the  state
 7        in accordance with its programs of pollution  pre-
 8        vention and abatement.  Table 6, Appendix Q,  con-
 9        tains data from several such surveys which  were
10        conducted in the Lake Michigan Basin.   The stations
11        shown on Map 3 are ones which were located  closest
12        to Lake Michigan  (most downstream)  and are  indica-
13        tive of tributary water quality at the time of
14        the surveys.  This information is  presented to
15        cover areas of the basin not included  under long-
I6        range monitoring.  Samples in some cases  were
17        collected over 24-hour periods while others were
18        single grab samples.
19                  Routine sampling of the  state   surface
20        waters for obtaining background radioactivity
21        data was initiated in 1955 with the establishment
22        of 4 sampling stations on 2 eastern Michigan
23        streams.  In 1956 the number of stations  was  in-
24
         creased to 11, of which 8 were on  5  different  stret
25        and 3 were at municipal water  supply  intakes on
ms

-------
                                                       2586

 l                         R.  W.  PURDY


 2         the  Great JLakes.


 3                   In 1958 the  number of sampling stations


 4         was  increased to 26,  in 1960 the sampling network


 5         was  expanded to 31  stations and in 1963 to 38.


 6         These include 13 stations  on Great Lakes waters


 7         and  25 on interior  rivers  or streams.   Twelve


 8         stations are at municipal  water supply intakes.


 9         Map  4, Appendix Q,  locates the sampling stations.


10                   The data  obtained by this program is


11         published yearly as part of the report, "State


12         of Michigan,  Water  Quality Monitoring  Program,


13         water Quality Records",  and is available in the


14         files of the water  Resources commission.


15                   Five water quality .parameters were


16         selected as  being indicative of the chemical water


17         quality of the Lake Michigan tributaries; dissolve<


18         oxygen,  biochemical oxygen demand,  chlorides,


19         phosphates,  and nitrate nitrogen.   Table 2,


20         Appendix Q,  is a summary of these  5 parameters  by


21         river basin.

22

                       Dissolved Oxygen
23	


24                   The 2-year average of the DO values for


25         the  monitored streams  ranges from  8.6  mg/1 to

-------
                                                       2587


 1                        R. W.  PURDY




 2         11.4 rag/1.  The lowest recorded  single value was



 3         6.0 mg/1 which was found  in  the  Pine River at



 4         Charlevoix and the Kalamazoo River  at Saugatuck.



          The Kalamazoo exhibits the lowest  2-year average



 6         while the Pine and the St. Joseph  rivers exhibit



 7         the highest 2-year averages.



 8                  The individual  Figures 2-13,  Appendix



 9         Q, illustrate the seasonal variations which



10         occur in the DO levels, with the higher values



          present in the winter  months and the lower values


12
          found in late summer and  early fall.


13


                  Biochemical Oxygen  Demand
14



15
24



25
                   The 2-year averages of  BOD  values  range
         from a  low of  1.7 mg/1 in the Manistee  River  to


17
         a high  of 5.5  rag/1 in the Grand River.   Only  3 of


18
         the rivers, the St. Joseph, the Grand,  and  the


19
         Kalamazoo have BOD's above  3.0 mg/1.


20
                   The  individual graphs illustrate  fairly


21
         steady  BOD values throughout the  2-year period


22
         with little indication of seasonal or other trends


23


                          Chlorides
                   The 2-year averages of chloride values

-------
                                                       2588

1                         R.  W.  PURDY

2        range  from a low of 3 rag/I tn the Boardman River

3        at  Traverse City to a  high of 71 rag/1 in the

4        Manistee  River at Manistee.  Three rivers have

5        values below 10 rag/1 as an average.

6                   The individual graphs indicate no parti-

7        cular  trend through the 2-year period.
8
                       Phosphates - PO4
9                      •"•"••"    '   • ••.•-•-•-.-i_  i

                    The 2-year averages of phosphate values

         range  from a low of 0.008 mg/1 in the Manistee

12        River  to  a high of 0.57 rog/1 in the Black River at
13
         South  Haven.  In general the higher values are
14
         found  in  the southern  part of the state which
15
         is  the most densely populated with the exception
16
         of  the Boardman River  at Traverse City which
17
         exhibits  a high value.
18
                    The individual graphs indicate a seasona
19
         trend  .in  phosphate values with the high readings
20                       ,
         occurring in the winter months.
21
                    To find the  total amount of phosphorus
22
          (P)  being contributed  to Lake Michigan from
23
         Michigan  tributaries,  calculations were made using
24
         drainage  area and flow data from U. S. Geological
25
         Survey records and PO4 data from the tributary

-------
                                                         2589
 1                         R. W. PURDY
 2         monitoring program.  Prom the calculations  (Appen-
 3         dix R) ,  the estimated annual average amount of
 4         total phosphorus  (p) discharged is 2,700,000
 5         pounds per 1,350 tons.
 6
                     Nitrate Nitrogen NO^-N
 7
 8                   The 2-year averages of nitrogen values
 9         range from a low of 0.188 mg/1 in the White River
10         to a high of 1.029rog/l in the Grand River.  The
11         highest values are again found in the southern
12         part of the state.
13                   The individual graphs indicate a seasonapL
14         fluctuation in nitrogen values with high readings
15         in the winter months and low readings during the
          summer.
17                         CEhJ'JUR V
                            PART 9
18              VESSEL POLLUTION - OIL AND RUBBISH
19
20
                    The number of incidents of oil pollution
21
          from vessels engaged in commercial navigation
22
          reported to the water Resources Commission has
23
          increased markedly in recent years.  These inci-
24
          dents have ranged from the most serious--a sinking
25
          of an oil barge on the Lake Michigan coast, and

-------
                                                        2590
 j                        R. W. PURDY


 2        the subsequent massive fouling of stretches of

 3        beaches for over 200 miles; to the nearly con-

 4        tinuous summertime complaints of swimmers smeared

 $        by heavy fuel oils.

 6                  The increasing number of complaints

 7        has, in general, corresponded with the increase

 8        of vessels on the Great Lakes using oil as fuel.

 9        These have been vessels solely engaged in lake

10        commerce as well as the growing number of vessels

11        engaged in ocean commerce.  Nearly all vessels

12        inbound into the Great Lakes via the St. Lawrence

13        seaway use oil as fuel.

14                  An attendant problem associated with

15        Great Lakes commercial navigation is the indiscrim

16        nate overboard disposal of garbage/ dunnage, and

17        trash.  The effects of this problem grow increas-

18        ingly worse with the use of plastics and other

19        non-destructible containers.  There is an increas-

20        ing public and private cost in the removal of this

21         debris from Great Lakes beaches.  The aesthetic

22        damage is even more serious.

23                         CHAPTER VI

                          CONCLUSIONS
24


25
                    The citizens and government of Michigan

-------
                                                       2591




 !                         R.  W.  PURDY




 2         are very keenly aware  of the value of clean




 3         water,  both in Lake Michigan and in inland lakes



 4         and streams.   The people have supported,  and



 5         State government has developed,  broad-scale and



 6         fast moving programs of pollution control.



 7                   Michigan law provides  a full and effec-



 8         tive statutory basis for preventing and control-



 9         ling pollution.  The state Legislature has repeat-



ID         edly shown its willingness to enact additional



11         laws as the need for them emerges.



12                   Through its  Water Resources commission,



13         its Department of Public Health  and its Geologi-



14         cal Survey, Michigan has an aggressive, effective



15         and large-scale program of water pollution control




*6         in1 active operation.  The Michigan plan for



17         effectuating this program in 1967-68 has been



18         fully approved by the  Secretary  of the interior.



19                   The state has an ongoing and appropriate



20         ly expanding program of waste disposal surveil-



21         lance and water quality monitoring which is fully



22         responsive to the needs for detecting and identify



23         ing its pollution problems.



24                   The water Resources Commission and



25         Department of Public Health have amply demonstrated

-------
                                                       2592

                                                            I

 !                         R. W. PURDY




 2         that when pollution problems are  identified  they



 3         can and  do take proper corrective action.



 4                   The state Legislature has responded



 5         generously to Executive requests  for  successive




 6         increases in State expenditures for pollution



. 7         control.




 8                   The Water Resources Commission has



 9         adopted water' quality standards for all waters



10         together with a plan for implementation and  en-



11         forcement of the interstate waters within a  time




12         period that is fully consistent with  the objec-



13         tives set forth in the Federal report, "Water



I4         Pollution Problems 6f Lake Michigan and Tributar-



15         ies".




16                   The Michigan agencies recognize the



17         pollution problems on waters tributary to Lake



18         Michigan and have in operation aggressive programs



19         for their full and timely correction.  The present



20         deficiencies in waste treatment at inland loca-



21         tions do not contribute to pollutional conditions



          in Lake Michigan except as a residual phosphate



23         loading carries on down to the lake.




                    The water Resources Commission recognize


25
          the phosphate problem in accelerating stream and

-------
                                                      2593


 1                        R. W. PURDY




 2         lake water enrichment,  and has adopted a state-



 3         wide policy and comprehensive program for phos-



 4         phate removal from waste discharges, with schedul-



 5         ed early completion dates.



 6                   The recently accelerating algae problem



 7         in Lake Michigan along its Michigan shore appears



 8         to derive significantly from phosphate concentra-




 9         tions in alewives and its deposition in near-



10         shore waters from the decomposition of these



H         fish following their increasingly massive seasonal



12         die-off.  The control of alewife populations



13         appears to be an essential element of algae



14         control.



15                   Oxygen deficiency problems in the



16         Michigan waters of Lake Michigan are not disclose



17         by data collected by the Michigan Water Resources



18         Commission.  The absence of such problems is sub-



19         stantiated by findings  of the u. S. Department of



20         Health, Education, and Welfare   Public Health



21         service studies under the Great Lakes-Illinois




22         River Basin   Project.



23                   These findings, which were cited by



24         Special Master Albert E. Maris in his report to


25
          the u. S. Supreme court on the Chicago diversion

-------
                                                       259^



 !                         R. W. PURDY




 2         litigation among the lake states, further show




 3         no open-lake pollutional concentrations of




 4         ammonia nitrogen, nitrate nitrogen, phosphates,




 5         ABS, toxic metals, or other physical parameters.




 6                   NO Lake Michigan bathing beaches in




 7         Michigan have been closed or considered for




 8         closing due to water pollution.  Bacteria counts




 9         at all such beaches, attributable to human sewage




10         are well within the limits recommended in the




11         Federal report for this conference.




12                   The discharge of sewage, garbage, trash




13         and oils from interstate carriers, and the loss




14         of oils and other pollutional cargo from such




15         carriers resulting from shipwrecks, are of deep




16         concern to the people and government of Michigan




17         because of their serious injury and threat of




18         injury to recreational water use.  Early and full




19         answers are heeded as to where the responsibility




20         lies for coping with this problem, as is the




21         establishment of procedures for effective enforce-




22         roent and for the prompt effectuation of emergency




23         measures to prevent and control accidental pollu-




24         tional losses from such carriers.




25                   The implementation of Michigan's plan

-------
                                                     2595
 1                         R. W. PURDY
 2         and achievement of the improvements in water
 3         quality in Lake Michigan will be'greatly enhanced
 4         by the earliest possible approval of the Michigan
 5         standards by the secretary of the interior.
 6                   Accomplishment of the Michigan pollu-
 7         tion control program is dependent largely upon
 8         the availability of funds to build the necessary
 9         municipal waste treatment facilities.  Full
10         funding of the Federal grants authorized for
11         this purpose in the Clean waters Restoration
12         Act of 1966 is urgently necessary.  A massive
13         state bonding proposal providing for full state
          partnership in financing has been recommended by
          Governor Romney to the 1968 Legislature.
16                   In addition to the information that
          I have presented in this report, along with the
18
          appendices, I would like to mention some informa-
19         tion on water filtration facilities.
20
                    We have some eight water treatment
21         facilities on Lake Michigan.  Six of the eight
22
          discharge  their filter backwash to Lake Michigan
23
          without treatment.  The two most recently built
24
          plants, one is by far the largest of all of those
25
          on the Lake in the Michigan section, have provided

-------
                                                       2596
                          R. W. PURDY

2         settling facilities to remove these solids before

3         the discharge of the backwash water to Lake

4         Michigan.

S                   In addition to that, a new water

6         treatment plant at New Buffalo is being required

7         to build facilities to hold the solids from

8         filter backwash as a part of the initial plant

g         construction.

10                   Earlier in this conference, information

11         was presented that indicated dissolved oxygen

12         deficiency in the st. Joseph River and the

13         Menominee River.

14                   Mr. Courchaine, do you have this

IS         information to present to the conferees?

16                   As a part of the surveillance program

17         established in our plan of implementation which

18         was submitted in June, we immediately started on

19         our surveillance activities,  we are presenting

20         data collected as a part of this activity in July

21         of 1967.  The one report deals with the inter-

22         state water quality monitoring, section 1, Lower

23         Portion of Menominee River Basin, Chemical and

24         Physical Measurements on Grab Samples Sampled on

25         July 24-25, 1967.  You will note that these

-------
                                                          2597
 1                          R. W. PURDY

 2          samples were obtained throughout  the day so that

 3          it represents both night and  day  conditions.

 4                   (Which said report is  as follows:)
 5
 6

 7

 8

 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

-------
                 Interstate Water Quality Monitoring
                               Section I
                Lower Portion of Menominee River  Basin
         Chemical and Physical Measurements on Grab Samples
                     Sampled on July 24-25, 196?
                                                                     2598
Sampling Location

Menominee River. 1st Street Bridge
in Menominee
Menomjnee River. U.S. 4I  Bridge in
Menominee
Menominee River. Dam above M-180 Bridge,
in Menominee
Menominee River. Wallace & McAllister
Bridge
LJ ttje Cedar River, Co.  Rd.  Bridge
just west of Ingalls

Date
7/24
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25

7/24
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25

7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25

7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25

7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25


Time
2340
0215
0600
0943
1320
1710
1947
Average
2400
0224
0605
1005
1330
1720
1955
Average
0010
0232
0620
1025
1415
1735
2002
Average
0045
0300
0715
1055
1450
1800
2030
Average
0105
0315
0735
1113
1500
1815
2042
Average
Temp.
QC
24
25
22
23
24
25
26
24.1
24
24
23
24
24
25
26
24.3
24
23
23
24
24
25
25
24
23
23
23
24
24
25
2J5 	
23.9
22
22
21
24
25
26
22 	
23.9
D.O.
mq/1
6.2
6.4
6.4
5.6
6.1
6.0
6.4
6.2
7.0
6.2
6.6
2.8
6.8
6.4
7.4
6.2
5.4
4.8
5-0
3.0
5.0
7.2
6.6
5-3
7.2
7.0
6.4
6.0
7.4
7.8
7-4
7.0
7.2
7.2
5.8
6.2
8.0
10.4
9.6
7.8

-------
                                                                      2599
Sampling Location

Henominee .River. Co. Rd. Bridge  S.E.
of  Koss
Menominee River. Chalk Hill
Bridge five miles west of
Banat
Menominee River, Co. Road 374
Bridge four miles west of Nathan
Henpminee Ri ve r, Railroad Bridge
1.5 miles S.W. of Faithorn
Sturgeon River. U.S. 2 Bridge
3/4 mile west of Loretto
V/hi te Creek. Co. Road 1st Bridge above
mouth, two miles south of Norway

Date
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25

7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25

7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25

7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25

7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25

7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25

T ime
•0120
0330
0750
1148
1510
1830
2052
Average
0200
0400
0820
1221
1535
1900
2115
Average
0230
0420
0845
1240
1555
1940
2130
Average
0305
0445
0920
1307
1620
2010
2200
Average
0330
0510
0950
1342
1635
2110
2219
Average
0345
0520
1000
1430
1645
2205
2232
Temp
°C
22
23
22
23
25
25
25
23.6
23
22
23
24
24
24
24
23.4
22
23
23
23
24
24
25
23.4
21
22
22
24
24
24
23^i
22.9
20
22
21
24
25
24
24
22.9
12
14
13
18
19
16
16
D.O.
mq/ 1

 6 8
 6.8
 6.6
                                                                     ,8
                                                                     ,0
                                                                    7.4
 6.8

 6.6
 6.8
 6.6
 5.9
 6.8
 6.6
 6.6

 7.0
 7.4
 7.0
 6.8
 7.6
 7.9
 7.3

 6.2
 6.0
 6.4
 6.6
 6.8
 7.0
 6.8
 6.5

 6.8
 7.0
 8.4
 7.8
 7.6
 7.2
                                                  Average  15.4
 7.4

 7.2
 7.4
 8.4
 7.2
 6.2
 6.4
 JL_0.
 7.0"

-------
Sampling Location

Henominee River. U.S.  8 Bridge S.
or Norwav
Menominee River. U. S. 4l Bridge
S.E. of Iron Mountain
Menom?nee R ive r, M-95 Bridge S,
Klngsford
of
                                                                      2600

Date
7/25
-7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25

7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25

7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25
7/25


Tjme
0355
0530
1015
1405
1655
2225
2241
Average
0410
0545
1035
1450
1705
2245
2255
Ave rage
0450
0600
1100
1505
1725
2205
2210
Average
Temp
°C
22
20
22
24
23
23
2% 	
22.4
22
22
22
24
23
22
23
22.6
21
21
23
24
23
21
2^ 	
22.3
                                                                  D.O.
                                   7.2
                                   7.2

                                   7.0
                                   7.4
                                   7,2
7.3

6.8
6.6
6.4
6.9
6.8
6.0
6.8
6.6

6.8
6.6
7.0
6.8
7.4
7.2
                                                                   7.0

-------
                 Interstate Water Quality Monitoring
                             Section II
     Upper Portion of Menominee River and the Brule River Basins
         Chemical and Physical Measurements on Grab Samples
                      Sampled on July 26, 1967
                                                                     2601
Samp ling Loca t i on

Menominee River. U.S. 2 Bridge
N.  oi Iron Mountain
Paint River. U.S. 1^1 Bridge N. of
Crystal Falls
Brule River,  End of Wise Co. Road at
U.S.G.S. Gage
Brule River. U.S. 2 and lUl Bridge,
S. of Crystal FalIs
Brule River.  Co. Rd.  Bridge W.  of
Pen toga
Brule River. Co.  Rd.  Bridge just
below mouth of Iron River
Brule River,  M^l89 Bridge

Date
7/26
7/26
7/26

7/26
7/26
7/26
7/26
7/26
7/26

7/26
7/26
7/26

7/26
7/26
7/26

7/26
7/26
7/26
7/26
7/26
7/26

7/26
7/26
7/26
7/26
7/26
7/26

7/26
7/26
7/26
7/26
7/26
7/26

Tempi
Time °C
0925 22
1335 22.5
)9**0 23 	
Average 22.5
0050 21
0200 22
0750 19
1126 20
l*t*45 23
1615 23.5
Average 21.4
0905 19
1313 20.5
1 9/45 23
Average 21 .k
08*45 18
1255 20
1920 22 	
Average 20.3
0010 19
03*+5 18
0705 17
.1050 17.5
1650 22
1800 23 	
Average 19-^
23*40 18
0320 18
06*45 1 7
1021 17
1630 22
1735 22
Average 19
2315 19
0250 19
0615 16
09^*3 1 7
15^5 23
1715 2*4
Average 19-7
                                                                  D.O.

-------
                                -2-
                                                                   2602
Sampling Location




1f6n Kiver, Co.  Rd. #137

Da te
7/26
7/26
7/26
7/26
7/26
7/26


Time
2250
0230
0550
0924
1520
1635
Average
Temp.
°C
19
19
19
15
20
21
18.8
0.0.
mq/1
7.4
7.4
6.9
7.0
8.2
9.0
7.7

-------
ro
ON
o
U)

-------
                                                        2604
                          R. W.  PURDY
 2                   MR.  PURDY:   If we look  at the  averages
 3         you will note  that these are all  above 6 milli-
 4         grams per liter from the standpoint of dissolved
 5         oxygen
 6                   If we should  look at  the  worst condi-
 7         tion on the Menominee  River, you  would note  that
 8         this would be  at the dam above  M-180 Bridge  in
 9         Menominee, where at one period  it fell to 3
10         milligrams per liter,  and the Menominee  River
H         at the U.S. 41 Bridge  in Menominee,  where one
12         sample of the  seven obtained showed a value  of
13         2.8 milligrams per liter.
14                   The  second report is  the  Interstate
15         Water Quality  Monitoring, St. Joseph River Basin,
I6         Chemical and Physical Measurements  on Grab
17         Samples Sampled on July 17-20,  1967.
18                  (Which said report is  as follows:)
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

-------
                                                                                               2605
                                Interstate Water Quality Monitoring
                                     St.  Joseph River  Basin
                       Chemical and Physical  Measurements on Grab Samples
                                   Sampled on July 17-20, 196?
Sampling Locat ion

St. Joseph River at Griswold
St.  in Hi 1Isdale, Hi 1Isdale
Co.
St. Joseph River at Moore
Rd., HM Isdale Co.
St. Joseph River at Rainey
Rd. , Hi IIsdale Co.
St. Joseph River at
Moshervi1le Rd., Hi 1 Isdale
Co.
St. Joseph River  at 1 4
Mile Rd. ,. Calhoun Co.

Date
7/17
7/17
7/17
7/17
7/18
7/18
7/18

7/17
7/17
7/17
7/17
7/18
7/18
7/18

7/17
7/17
7/17
7/17
7/18
7/18
7/18

7/17
7/17
7/17
7/17
7/18
7/18
7/18

7/17
7/17
7/17
7/17
7/18
7/18
7/18


Time
0937
1356
1630
2100
0140
0315
0745
Average
0955
1428
1640
2110
0155
0345
0800
Average
1017
1444
1653
2130
0210
0410
0840
Average
1037
1458
1708
2145
0225
0430
0855
Average
1 107
1526
1735
2235
0315
0500
0920
Average
Temp.
°C
17
19.5
21
18
17
18
JJ 	
18.5
17
19
19
19
18
19
j_2 	
18.6
16.5
20.5
22
20
18
18
18
19-0
17.5
21.5
22
20
19
19
18
19-6
18.5
21.5
21
20
19
19
j2 	
19.7
D.
0.
mq/ 1
0
3
6
2
0
0
0_
1
1
3
4
2
0
0
_0
1
7
10
10
8
6
6
_z
8
8
11
11
.7
6
6
7
8
8
10
9
6
5
5
	 7_
7
.6
.5
.2
.6
.0
.7
i°-
.9
.6
.4
.0
.8
.0
.7
J-2
.9
.8
.4
.6
.3
.7
.8
. i
.2
.6
.4
.2
.7
_q
.5
. ]
•k
.8
.3
.8
.2
.3
. 7
.0
'.7
BOD5
rr,o/i
7
-
3
-
10
-
12
8
5
-
2
-
2
-

3
1'
-
2
-
1
-
I
~
i
-
i
-
0
-
i
1
i
-
i
-
r
-•
i
i
.3
-
.4
-
.5
-
.iA
.5
.7
-
.8
-
.4
- •
_jj
.5
.7
-
.0
-
.7
-
. 7 '
.8
.9
-
.8
-
.9
-
.4
.5
.6
-
.4

.2

j_
.4
pH
7.4
--
7.4
--
7.2
—
Isi
7.3
7.6
.--
7.6
--
7.5
--
7.5
7.6
8.1
--
8!4
. --
8.1
--
8.0
8.2
8.2
--
8.7
—
8.2
--
8.1
8.3
8.2
--
8.3
--
8.0
--
8.1
8.2
Remarks

Patches of oiI fi1m.
Water at  this station was
barely moving.  The
surface was covered with
duckweed  and other
vegetation.  Water had a
brown color.
Downstream from Hi 1Isdale
S.T.P. - Abundant attached
vegetation and scr^s sl'jdgs.
Water was clear.
Downstream from Jor.esvi ! !e.
Downstream fron Liichfield.
Abundant attaches vegetation.
Downstream f,-c"< Tekc----r.a.
Water was slightly curtiid.

-------
                                                                                          .2606
Sampling Location

Coldwater River at Gower  Rd.
Branch Cc .
St. Joseph River at
Arborgast Rd., Branch Co.
_St. Joseph River at  S towel 1
Rd., St. Joseph Co.
Big Sv.'an Creek 3'. Burr  Oak
Rd. , Branch Co.
St. Joseph River at Far rand
Rd. , St. Joseph Co.
Date
7/17
7/17
7/17
7/17
7/18
7/18
7/18

7/17
7/17
7/17
7/17
7/18
7/18
7/18

7/17
7/17
7/17
7/17
7/18
7/18
7/18

7/17
7/17
7/17
7/17
7/18
7/18
7/18

7/17
7/17
7/17
7/18
7/18
7/18
7/18

Time
1127
1544
1750
2255
0335
0520.
0935
Average
1142
1558
1804
2305
0345
0535
0950
Average
1232
1640
1855
2350
0435
0630
1030
Average
1211
1624
1830
2330
0415
0610
1015
Average
1252
1653
1908
0000
0445
0640
1045
Average
Temp.
°C
19
22
21
19
!9
20
20
20.0
19
21
20
20
19
19
20
19.7
21
23
22
21
20
21
20
21.1
22
25
22
20
18.5
19
20
20.9
22.5
24
23
21
20
21
21
21.8
P.O.
8.
10.
8.
6.
6.
6.

7.
8.
9.
9.
8.
7.
7.

8.
8.
9.
9.
8.
7.
6.

8.
10.
10.
8.
6.
5.
6.
8.
7.
11.
12.
12.
10.
8.
8.
y ' ,
10.
7
0
8
6
2
2
I
7
0
4
6
1
2
0
I
1
2
8
6
4
1
8
4
2
0
6
6
1
9
0
2
9
8
2
0
9
9
5
6
6
BODg
mq/l _jj
1
1
-
1
-
|
1
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
1
4
-
4
-
3
-
.9
.5
-
.0
-

.5
.0
-
.6
-
.3
-
.4
.6
.2
-
.6
-
.7
-
8.
8.
-
7.
-
8.
8.
8.
-
8.
-
8.
-
8.
8.
8.
-
8.
-
8.
-
iH
I
2
•-
9
• -
i
1
1
•-
2
'-
1
-
1
1
2
-
3
-
3
-
Remarks
Abundant attached vegetation
Water was clear. Rain on
the 3rd sampling run.
People were observed
fishing and swimming at
this station.


Downstream fron Union City.
Water was slightly turbid.
Rain on the 3rd sampling
run.




Water s 1 ight ly turbid.
Green color.
Rain on the 3rd sampling
run.


_3_.4 3.3
4
3
-
2
-
1
-
1
2
8
-
6
-
4
-
_i
6
.0
.2
-
. I
-
.8
-
.6
.2
.2
-
.8
-
.9
-
i°_
.2
8.
8.
-
8.
• -
7.
-
8.
8.
8.
-
8.
-
8.
-
8.
8.
3
2
-
2
-
9
-
1
1
4
-
5
-
4
-
4
4

•Downstream from Bronson
S.T.P. Water was clear
and moving rapidly.





Downstream from outlet
of Sturgeon Lake. Water
was slightly turbid with
a green color.




                                              -2-

-------
                                                                                             2607
Sampling Location

St. Joseph River at  Sixth
St.  in Three Rivers,  St.
Joseph Co.
Gourdneck Creek at  VW Ave.
in Vicksburg,  Kalamazoo Co.
Gourdneck Creek  at W Ave.
in Vicksburg,  Kalamazoo Co.
Portage Creek at  22nd  St.,
Kalamazoo Co.
Portage River at  Fifth St.
in Three Rivers,  St.  Joseph
Co.
Reeky River  at W.  Michigan
in Three Rivers,  St.  Joseph
Co.

Date
7/18
7/18
7/18
7/18
7/19
7/19
7/19

7/18
7/18

7/18
7/18
7/19
7/19
7/19

7/18
7/18
7/18
7/18
7/19
7/19
7/19

7/18
7/18
7/18
7/18
7/19
7/19
7/19

7/18
7/18
7/18
7/18
7/19
7/19
7/19


Tjme
.1050
1540
1730
2136
0145
0350
0835
Average
0930
1430
Average
1630
2055
0055
0300
0805
Average
0945
1445
1644
2103
Oi05
0307
0812
Average
1020
1520
1711
2125
0130
0355
0840
Average
1040
1530
1718
2130
0135
0400
0845
Average
Temp.
°C
21
21
22.5
23
21
21
21
21.5
21
22
21.5
24
24.5
24
23
22
23.5
20
23
23
23.5
21.5
22
21
22.0
20
21
22
22
21
19
18
20.4
19
21
22
21
20
18
J8
19.9
0.0.
mq/l
9.
10.
10.
10.
9.
9.
8.
9.
9.
11.
10.
5.
5.
5.
5.

5.
7.
10.
9.
9.
8.
8.

8.
6.
7.
7.
7.
6.
6.

7.
8.
8.
8.
8.
7.
8.
7.
8.
0
0
2
0
4
4
2
5
8
6
7
7
8
4
0
4
5
6
2
5
4
2
4
4
7
4
8
8
0
6
4
0
0
2
8
8
4
8
2
8
3
BOD5
mq/ 1 pH
4.
--
5.
—
6.
--
2.
4.
1.
4

9

2

4
7
1
8

8

8

8
8
8
.4
--
.4
—
.4
--
.6
.5
.3
Remarks
Rai n
sampl
Rocky





Water
stopped on 1st
ing run.
, sand bottom.





clear. Rain on








the
2nd sampl ina run.
1.
20
--
14
--
12
15.
5.
--
6.
—
>8.
—
6.
>6.
1.
1





3
8

6

2

6
8
9
8
7

7

8
7
8

3

8

8
8
8
.3
.6
—
.7
—
.1
.8
.1
—
.2
—
.1
—
B 1
.2
.0



Downstream from Simpson-Lee
Paper
turb i
color


Bass
this.
Co. Water was
very
d with a green-gray
.


& b luegi 1 1 seen
station. Heavy



at

attached vegetation.
Heavy
sampl i



Very
fog on the last
ing run.








fast current. Water
was clear. Rain .on the
1.
—
1.
—
1.
1.
1.
--
1.
--
1.
--
9

4

2
6
6

8

9

JLi
2.
2
8

8

8
8
8

8

8

8
8
. 1 2nd sampl ing run.
—
.0
—
.2
.1
.2
--
.4
__
.2
--
J*
.3















Rain on the first three
sampl
1 ight





ing runs. Water
green color.





was







-------
                                               2608

Sampling Location
Prairie River at Three Rivers
Rd. , St. Joseph Co.






St. Joseph River at
Constantine Road, St. Joseph
Co.





Fawn River at Big Hill Rd.,
St. Joseph Co.






Fawn River at Stubey Rd.,
St. Joseph Co.






Fawn River at Three Rivers
Rd., in Constantine, St.
Joseph Co.






Date
7/18
7/18
7/18
7/18
7/19
7/191
7/19

7/18
7/18
7/18
7/18
7/19
7/19
7/19

7/18
7/18
7/18
7/18
7/19
7/19
7/19

7/18
7/18
7/18
7/18
7/19
7/19
7/19

7/18
7/18
7/18
7/18
7/19
7/19
7/19


Time
1115
1555
1743
2035
0030
0340
0730
Average
1130
1610
1758
2148
0155
0415
0925
Average
1345
1800
1955
2332
0410
0620
1100
Average
1330
1745
1942
2314
0350
0605
1040
Average
1145
1625
•1814
2158
0205
0425
.0935
Average
Temp.
°C
19
20
21
21
20
19
18
19.7
21
22
21
22.5
22
21
20
21.4
20
21
22.5
21
20
19
19.5
20.4
21
21
23
21
20
19
|g
20.6
22
21
20.5
21
20
19.5
15
20.4
D.O.
mq/ 1
8.
9.
8.
7.
6.
6.

7.
9.
9.
9.
9-
8.
8.
• / »
8.
8.
8.
8.
7.
6.
6.

7.
8.
7.
7.
5-
6.
6.
6.
6.
8.
8.
8.
8.
7.
8.
8.
S.
2
0
2
4
4
4
_0
5
0
4
2
4
4
2
2
7
4
6
2
0
2
2
2
4
6
6
0
2
6
4.
8
9
2
4
2
0
8
0
0
1
80D5
mq/l
1
-
1
-
1
-
I
1
3
-
3
-
4
-
_i
3
1
-
1
-
0
-
1
. 1
5
-
>7
-
3
-
6
*5
1
-
1
-
0
-
_2_
1
.5
-
.7
-
.5
-
.2
.5
.8
-
.7
-
.2
-
.0
.7
.6
-
.3
-
.8
-
. l
.2
. 1
-

-
.0
-
.6
•*»
.1
-
.2
-
.9
-

.5
PH
8.

8.
-
8.
-
8.
8.
8.
-
8.
-
8.
-

sT
8.
-
8.
-
8'.
-

s7
8.
-
8.
-
8.
-
8.
8.
8.
-
8.
-
8.
-
8.
8.
0
•-
1
•-
0
•-
2
1
3
-
3
-
4
-
.5
4
2
-
3
-
3
-
1
3
2
-
1
-
3
-
^
?
0
-
1
-
0
-
2
1
                         Remarks

                         Downstream  from Centreville.
                         Rain on  the  2nd sanpling
                         run.
                         Downstream  from Three
                         Rivers  S.T.P.  Water was
                         siightly  turbid wi th a
                         green  color.
                         Rain  the 2nd sampling run.
                         Downstream  from Sturgis
                         S.T.P.  Rsin on the first 2
                         sampling  runs.  Water was
                         clear.
-k-

-------
                                               2609
Sampling Location

St. Joseph River at Washington 7/18
St. (U.S.-131) in Constantine, 7/18
St. Joseph Co.
Whi te Piqeon River at Sevison  7/18
Rd. , St. Joseph Co.
White Piqeon River at Blue
School Rd., St. Joseph Co.
White Piqeon River at M-103,
St. Joseph Co.
St. Joseph River at Elkhart
Co. Rd. 25 in Bristol,
Indiana

Date
7/18
7/18
7/18
7/18
7/19
7/19
7/19

7/18
7/18
7/18
7/18
7/19
7/19
7/19

7/18
7/18
7/18
7/18
7/19
7/19
7/19

7/18
7/18
7/18
7/18
7/19
7/19
7/19

7/18
7/18
7/18
7/18
7/19
7/19
7/19


T ime
1155
1630
1821
2203
0215
0435
0938
Average
1315
1735
1930
2300
0330
0550
1030
Average
1250
1720
1915
2246
0300
0535
1015
Average
1215
1695
1848
2218
0230
0450
0950
Average
1230
1700
1858
2227
0240
0505
1000
Average
Temp.
°C
20
21
22
21.5
21
20
21
20.9
20
20
23
21
19
19
19
20.1
21
21
22
22
21
20
20
21.0
21
20
21
21
20.5
19
19
20.2
20
20
22
21
21
19
19
20.3
D.O.
6005
mq/ 1 rug/ 1
8
10
1 fl-
IC
10
9
_i
9
.8
.2
.2
.2
.0
.6
. 2
77
2
-
4
-
3
-
_i
3
.8
-
.4
-
.7
-
.6
.6
7.8 1.1
7
7
6
6
o
6
6
5
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
7
8
8
7
6
6
6
7
10
12
1 1
9
7
7
_z
s
.2
.0
.4
.0
.2
.0
.7
.6
.8
.0
.0
.2
.2
.8
.5
.6
.6
.2
.4
.4
.2 .
.2
.2
.6
.2
.4
.8
.6
.0
.2
.4
-
1
-
1
-
-
.7
-
.3
-
_PH
8.
-
8.

8.
-
8.
8.
8.
-
8.
-
8.
-
3
-
3
-
4
-
6
4
2
-
2
-
3
-
_0.7 8.1
1
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
2
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
1
4
-
5
-
2
-
_2
3
.2
.4
-
.0
-
.6
-
.4
.9
.2
-•
.2
-
.0
-
.2
.2
.1
-
.0
-
.6
-

.6
8.
7.
-
7.
-
7.
-
8.
7.
8.
-
8.
-
8.
-
3
9
-
8
-
9
-
1
9
1
-
2
-
1
-
8J
8.
8.
-
8.
-
8.
-
8.
8.
2
4
-
5
-
3
-
4
4
                         Remarks

                         Rain on the 2nd sampling run.
                         Water was slightly turbid
                         with a green color.
                         Rain on the 2nd sampling run.
                         Dov/nstream from White Pigeon
                         and the Weyerhaeuser Co.
                         Water v/as very turbid •.-.•i.th a
                         gray-green color.  Heavy
                         vegetation.  Rain on the
                         2nd sampling run.
                         Rain on the 2nd sampling run.
                         Water v/as slightly turbid
                         with a green color.
                         Rain on the 2nd sampling run.
                         Water v/as slightly turbid
                         wi th a green color.
-5-

-------
                                  2610

Sampling Location
Christiann Creek at
Redfield Rd. , Cass Co.




St. Joseph River at Bertrand
Rd. ,. Berrien Co.






St. Joseph River I/1* mile N.of
Miles, just upstream from
confluence wi th
Dowagiac River, Berrien Co.




Oowaqiac River at M-62, 2.5
miles west of Dowagiac,
Cass Co.


Dowaqiae Creek at M-62, 2
miles west of Dowagiac,
Cass Co.


Dowaaiac River at Front St.
(U.S. 31-33) , Berrien Co.







Date
7/19
7/19
7/20
7/20
7/20

7/19
7/19
7/19
7/19
7/20
7/20
7/20

7/19
7/19
7/19
7/19
7/20
7/20
7/20

7/19
7/19
7/20
7/20

7/19
7/19
7/20
7/20

7/19
7/19
7/19
7/19
7/20
7/20
7/20


Time
•1030
1715
00^*5
0335
0730
Average
1100
1 M*3
17^5
2115
0115
OU10
0755
Average
1207
1530
1835
2215
0200
0**55
0815
Average
11*1*5
211(0
0530
1020
Average
11*1*0
2130
0525
1015
Average
1125
1506
1815
2155
011*5
01*30
0840
Average
Temp.
°C
21.5
25
23
22
21
22.5
23
21*
25
23
23
21
21
22.9
22
21*
25
23
22
22
2J 	
22.7
25
20
18
18
20.3
21*
22
19
20
21.3
19
20.5
22
22
20
17
D.
0.
mq/ 1
7
9
6
6
6
7
6
10
12
11
8
6
6
8
7
10
11
9
9
9
8
9
8
8
7
8
8
8
5
i*
_z
6
8
8
9
7
8
7
.1*
.0
.6
.6
BOD5
mg/l 2
1
2
1
-
.6
.0
.6
-
8
8
8

H_ Remarks
.3
.5
.5
--
.'t 1.3 3.J
.2
.8
.2
.6
.2
.2
.8
.^
.9
.8
.0
.0
.8
.6
.2
.0
.3
.2
.0
.6
.0
.0
.2
.7
.6
.k
.5
.8
.8
.6
.6
.0
.6
1
6
-
9
-
7
-
6
7
>7
-
10
-
8
-
_ __f.

2
1
1
1
1
5
3
3
2
3
I
"-
2
-
1
-
.6
A
-
.5
-
.0
-
.0
.2
8
8

8

8

8
8
.1*
.2 Downstream from South Bend,
Indiana S.T.P. Water was
.6 slightly turbid.
--
.5
--
.1*
.1+
.8 8.3 Just downstream from Miles
-
.0
-
.2
-
o
•5
.2
.7
.it
.1*
.7
.0
.2
.8
.8
.7
.7
-
,i)
-
.9
-

8

8

S.T.-P. Water /.-as' turbid
.6 with a brown color.
--
.6
—
8.5
3
8
8


S
8
8
8
8
8
8

8

8

.5
.3
.1*
--
--
.1+
.3 Downstream fro
-------
                                                                                             2611
Samjling Locati on

St. Joseph River at Bear
Cave Campsite, Berrien Co.
Farmers Creek at Hipp Hollow
Rd., Berrien Co.
Love Creek at Hipp Ho 11ow
Rd. , Berrien Co.
St. Joseph River at Berrien
County Sportsman Park,
Berrien Co.
Pipestone Creek at River Rd.
Berrien Co.
Hickory Creek at U.S.  33,
Berrien County

Date
7/19
7/18
7/19
7/19
7/20
7/20
7/20

7/19
7/19
7/20
7/20

7/19
7/19
7/20
7/20

7/19
7/19
7/19
7/19
7/20
7/20
7/20

7/19
7/19
7/20
7/20

7/19
7/19
7/19
7/19
7/20
7/20
7/20


T i ma
1251
\6Qk
1930
22**5
0230
0530
0900
Average
1500
2150
05^5
lO^iO
Average
1510
2200
OSOO
1055
Average
1312
1623
IS-liO
2305
0250
0550
0920
Average
1530
2215
0612
1105
Average
1335
1623
2005
2325
03'-0
06-0
03H3.
Aversce
Temp.
°C
23
2i*
2k
23
22
21
21
22.6
20
19
16
16
17.8
22
21
18
18.5
19.9"
23
24.5
2k
22
21
20
2J 	
22.2
22.5
19.5
17.5
D.
0.
mg/J
11
13
12
11
9
8
_a
10
8
6
6
_z
6
8
8
7
6
7
13
15
15
11
7
6
_2
ll
10
7
7
.0
.0
.8
.2
.k
.2

77
.0
.0
.6
.0
.9
.0
.7
.6
.6
.7
.6
.i*
.2
.2
.8
.8
• 0
TI
.0
.8
.8
BODs
ma/1
8.
--
9.
--
7.
--
6.
7.
2.
if.
2.
k.
3.
3.
3.
3.
_j.
i.
10.
--
10.
--
6.
-T

T.
2.
1.
1.
_L2_ 9.0 1 .
19.6
20.5
23
2k
20
18
17
17
19.9
8
8
9
8
6
7
6
JL
7
.7
.8
.8
.6
.it
.0
.8
i!
.9
1.
2.
--
2.
--
1.
—
1.
2.
5

5

2

1
9
5
6
6
8
6
1
1
k
2
3
0

T

8

0
5
2
2
2
2
5
2

it

5

2
0
£H
8

3

8

8
8

8
8
8
8
8
8
8
6
8
8

g

fl

8
8
8
8

8
8
8

7

3

8
's
.7
—
.8
--
.5
--
_.6
77
—
.2
.2
• 3.
.2
.2
.3
.2
.2
.2
.7
--
.7
--
.5
--
• O
7s'
.7
.6
--
.6
.6
.3
—
.k
--
.3
._
J.
. i
Remarks

Downstream from Buchanan
S.T.P.  SIight oi1  fiIm
in pUces.
Downstream from Eau Claire.
Downstream from Flamm
Pickle Co.
Downstream from Berrien
Springs S.T.P.   Very
turb'd.
Downstream from Sodus
Fru i t Exchange
Downstream from Stevensvi 1 le.
Floating clur.ips of sluciga  .
Fungi abundant.  Wacsr '/<.?s
very curbid.
                                               -7-

-------
Samp Ii nq Loca t i on

St. Joseph River at  C  & 0
Railroad bridge  in St.
Joseph, Berrien  Co.
Date    Time
Temp.
 °C
7/19
7/19 '
7/19
7/19
7/20
7/20
7/20
13*49
1700
2015
2350
0320
0625
1000
23
2*4
2*4
23
22
21
22
12. *4
1*4.2
1*4.2
1*4.2
1*4. *4
13.2
1*4. *4
                                                                                           2612
D.O.
mq/I   mq/l   pH
Remarks
                            10.3   8.5   Downstream from St. Joseph
                                        and Benton Harbor S.T.P  s.
                            10.6   8,8

                             9.0   8.6
                                    Average 22.7    13-9
                                            -8-

-------
                                                         261


 1                         R. W. PURDY



 2                   MR. PURDY:  Again the samples are



 3         collected throughout the day so that we have a



 4         representation of both night and day conditions.



 5         The only place where we show a serious dissolved



 6         oxygen deficiency is in the very headwaters of

                            j

 7         the St. Joseph River in Rillsdale county, --; one



 8         above Hillsdale where there is very little, if any



 9         flow; the second location just below Hillsdale



10         and below, the effluent from the Hillsdale sewage



11         treatment plant, and there the average value is



12         1.9 and we do have some zero values.



13                   But I believe if you will look through



14         that data that it indicates that the remainder



15         of the St. Joseph River in particular has quite



18         satisfactory dissolved oxygen levels.



17                   That completes my presentation, Mr.



18         Stein.



19                   MR. STEINi  Thank you, Mr. Purdy.



                    Do we have any comments or questions?



21                   MR. POOLE:  I have one question going


22
          way back.



23                   MR. STEIN i  Yes.



24                   MR. POOLE:  My question is back earlier


25
          in the afternoon, Ralph, where you were referring

-------
  1

  2

  3

  4

  5

  6

  7

  8

  9

 10

 11

 12

 13

 14

 15

 16

 17

 18

 19

 20

 21

 22

23

24

25
j                                                     .2614
                        R. W.  PURDY

       to these  court  orders  you  obtained  in Michigan.
                  The question is, how long does  it take
       from  the  time that you initiate proceedings until
       you get a court order,  approximately?
                  MR. PURDY:   In some  instances this
       may be in as short a period  as two  months.   In
       other cases it  has extended  up through two,  to ;two
       and a half years.
                  But in general I would say that within
       a period  of three to six months that we have
       obtained  a court decree.
                  I am  not suggesting  --•
                  MR. STEIN:   May  I  make a  comment  on
       the question, on the Michigan  problem?
                  This  procedure of  this court order
       bond, as  you know, developed in Michigan  during
       the 1920's before we had this  revenue bond
       financing, and  a city  wasn't restricted by  its
       statutory debt  limit as if they had a court
       order.  Michigan always comes  up with these
       ingenious devices to handle  something, and  they
       .love  to  litigate'up there.
                  And I suspect that a lot  of these suits
       unless I  an wrong, are kind  of friendly ones.

-------
                                                       2615
 I                        R. W. PURDY
 2        There is really no argument.
 3                  MR. PURDY:  In some instances they are
 4        really quite friendly.
 $                  I would not recommend this as a way to
 6        accomplish pollution control on an expedient
 7        basis, though,  because when we do go into court
 8        we lose time.
 9                  MR. STEIN:  Are there any other comments
10        or questions?
11                  MR. HOLMER:  I have one, Mr. Chairman.
12                  MR. STEIN:  Yes.
13                  MR. HOLMER:  The section on alewife
14        overlaps,  of course, what Mr. Pierce was telling
15        us about phosphate removal policy, which is
16        reiterated in the conclusions you have read.
17        i can understand from what Mr. Pierce said  that
18        where you have got a lake or a stream that you're
19        wanting to protect against phosphorus, the policy
20        makes pretty good sense.
21                  If I understand what you are saying
22        about the alewife concentration on inshore waters,
23        as far as discharges to those waters are concerned
24        in terms of preventing algal growth, you are sug-
25        gesting that such a policy would not be useful,

-------
                                                        2616!i


1                        R. W. PURDY



2        since there is enough phosphorus  there already.



3                  MR. PURDY:  I am saying that we  have



4        to attack both problems if we are to  correct  the



5        nuisance algal problems that we have  on  our Lake



6        Michigan beaches.  This is the bridge that our



7        commission has crossed,  we feel  that we need



8        to control the phosphate discharges from our



9        point sources,  we feel for this  program to be



10        fully effective that the alewife  problem must



11        also be solved.



12                  The alewife does not in itself place



13        the phosphate in the lake.  it only serves to



14        collect it from throughout the lake and  reconcen-



15        trate it in our inshore waters.



16                  MR. MITCHELL*  Mr. Purdy, you  stated



I7        that a massive state bonding program  has been



18        pro po&e.d  by Governor Romney.  Can you describe



19        the proposal?


«A                            "        -
23                  MR. PURDY:  This proposal was  described



21        by Lieutenant Governor Milliken on the first  day.



22        It includes 285 million dollars to pay Michigan's



23        25 percent share in the Federal program.   In  addi-



24        tion to that, it would pre-finance the 75  percent



25        share so that this program would  not  be  fully

-------
                                                        2617

 1                        R^. W. PURDY



 2        dependent upon the full funding of the Federal


 3        program at this time.



 4                  Throughout the period between now and


 5        1980 we are hopeful that the Federal Government


 6        will, at least by that time, commit as much money


 7        as is presently authorized in the Federal Bill,


 8        and this money is essential;to the program through-


 9        out the full period of time.


10                  In addition to that, 50 million dollars


         has been proposed to help small municipalities


12
         build collection sewers.  This would not be a


13
         grant, but it would be a loan.  It would also


14        serve to place the full faith and credit of the


         State behind the issuance of bonds for this pur-


         pose .


17                 MR. STEIN:  Yes, Mr. Poston?

18
                  MR. POSTON:  Mr. Purdy, you say that the

19
         Water Resources commission recognizes the phos-

20
         phate problem in accelerating stream and lake

21
         water enrichment and has adopted a statewide

22
         policy and comprehensive program for phosphate

23
         removal from waste discharges along with scheduled

24
         early completion dates.

25
                   Would you care to elaborate a little on

-------
                                                        2618
 1                        R. W.  PURDY
 2        the proposals  for phosphate  removal and  also  the
 3        scheduled  completion dates that  your  commission
 4        has in mind?
 5                   MR.  PURDY:   Right  at the moment, we
 6        concur with Dr. Weinberger in that chemical pre-
 7        cipitation, whether it be by the metallic  ion
 8        or some other  chemical as mentioned by Dr. Wein-
 9        berger, should- be the  approach that we use
10        immediately.
11                   We have adopted the policy  that  any
12        new or increased use of waters of the state shall
13        incorporate phosphate  removal as a part  of the
14
         design of  the facility, so if  this  facility were
15        scheduled  to go in operation a year  from  today,
16        that would be the day that we would  ask for
17
         phosphate  removal.
                    In addition to this, Lake  Odessa,  one
19
         of  the communities reported by Mr. Pierce, lying
         within the Lake Michigan Basin,  is under  an  order
21
         of  the Commission to have phosphate  removal  as a
22
         part of  its treatment operations, I  believe  by
23
         1970.  I would have to check that in the  report
24
                    The city of Traverse City  has entered
25
         into a voluntary treatment with  the  Commission to

-------
                                                       2619
                         R. W. PURDY

2        provide phosphate removal by 1971, if memory

3        serves me correctly.

4                  MR. HOLMER:  Have you adopted a standard

5        a parameter of some kind?

6                  MR. PURDYt  We are asking the people

7        to shoot at and attain an 80 percent removal of

8        total phosphates at the present time.  Our Coromis-

g        sion first established this as a goal for Detroit

10        in another enforcement matter some two years ago.

11        At that time it was not certain that we could read

12        this level.  However, rather than place in a

13        maximizing phosphate removal as an objective, we

14        felt that we should give our consulting engineers

15        a specific goal to scramble for and they have

16        been doing a pretty good job of scrambling,  we

17        may not reach this in all instances,  we may go

18        above it.

19                  MR. STEIN:  Are there any further ques-

20        tions or comments?

21                  (No response.)

22                  MR. STEIN:  I notice that you have a

23        pretty good DO level on the Menominee River,

24        better than when we were up there.

25                  MR. PURDYt  Yes, sir.

-------
                                                        2620
 j                         R. W.  PURDY

 2                   MR.  STEIN:   That is one way to clean
 3        up  pollution,  for  the  pulp and paper mills to
 4        stop  pulping operations,  but I don't recommend
 5        that  generally.
 6                   MR.  PURDY:   That particular plant was
 7        not in Michigan.
 8                   MR.  STEIN:   I  know.
 9                   MR.  MITCHELL:   I was curious to know a
10        little bit more  about  your state financing.  If,
11        then, your Legislature agrees with your Governor
12        and accepts the  bond issue,  is it required to go
13        before a  referendum?
14                   MR.  PURDY:   That will have to go before
15        the people and be  supported.
16                   MR.  MITCHELL:   And what time might that
17        come  about?
18                   MR.  PURDY:   Hopefully, if the legisla-
18        tion  clears through the  Legislature in this ses-
20        sion, it  could be  placed before the people in
21        November.
22                   MR.  MITCHELL:   The same time that
23        Illinois  might have theirs -- will youri -beu-
24        put "before the people?  •
25                   MR.  PURDY:   If  Illinois is scheduled

-------
                                                       2621




l                        R. W.  PURDY




2        for November,  it would be  the  sane  time.




3                  MR.  STEIN:   Mr.  Prangos.




4                  MR.  FRANCOS:  With reference to the




5        proposed  rules for control of  watercraft  pollu-




6        tion,  is  it correct,  is my reading  correct,  that




7        the rules as you propose them  would not preclude




8        devices that would result  in discharges to the




9        water  courses  directly?




10                  MR.  PURDY:   will you restate that?




11                  MR.  FRANGOS:  Well,  in  Section  2(b)iii--




12                  MR.  STEIN:   Why  don't you point to the



13        page in his report?




14                  MR.  FRANGOS:  Yes.




15                  MR.  PURDY:   I have it.




16                  MR.  STEIN:   What page is  that,  Ralph?




17                  MR.  PURDY:   Page 56.




18                  MR.  STEIN:   All  right.




19                  MR.  PURDY:   Where we could approve the




20        discharge --




21                  MR.  FRANCOS:  My question is, you  do




22        not rule  out the use  of devices that would in




23        effect result  in a discharge to any water.course




24        on which  this  boat may be  traveling at the time?




25                  MR.  PURDY:   That's correct.   However,

-------
                                                       2622
 1 .                        R. W.  PURDY
 2         in  our public hearings we have made it very clear
 3         that at the present  time we of the staff do not
 4         know of a macerator  chlorinator device which we
 5         could recommend to the Commission that it would
 6         approve.
 7                   MR. STEIN:   Are there any other comments'
 8                   (No response.)
 9                   MR. STEIN:   This is a funny way of read-
10         ing this.  I don't know, I don't see your lawyers
11         here;  I guess they all went home.
12                   MR. PURDY:   We have worn out a lot of
13         people.
14                   MR. STEIN:   Yes.
15                   The way I  read this, this may or may not
16         permit a discharge depending upon your circumstances
17         It  is clear one or two don't permit a discharge.
18                   Now, unless  you say that the sewage
19         discharge is non-pollutional, then they can't
20         get iii and there is nothing to indicate that
21         you are going to have  a discharge overboard that
22         is  going to meet that.  As a matter of fact, so
23         far you haven't.
24                   MR. PURDY:   Well, as you know, this is
25         a very controversial issue.  in the public

-------
                                                       2623
 j                         R. W.  PURDY

 2        hearings  our  commission did make it very clear

 3        that  at the present  time the only devices that

 4        they  could approve would be under items i and ii.

 5        This  does not preclude that at some later date

 6        that  some ingenious  person  may come forward with

 7        a  device  which could be approved.

 8                  MR. STEIN)   I am  not sure that that

 9        phrase that we are talking  about in the Chicago

10        Ordinance did not  leave the same kind of escape

11        hatch.  But I think  the question, as far as I

12        see,  is developing in  the states of not approving

13        a  device  at the present time as a practical matter

14        which discharges wastes from the boats,

15

16                  MR. PURDY:   Yes.

17                  MR. STEIN:   Are there any other comments

18        or questions?

19                   (No response.)

20                  MR. STEIN:   If. there are not,  thank you

21        very  much for a very complete presentation.

22                  Mr. Purdy, did you want this entire re-

23        port  included in the record?

24                  MR. VOGT:  Yes, sir,  we do,  Mr. Chair-

25        man.

-------
                                                         2624



 I                         R. W. PURDY




 2                    MR.  STEIN:  Without objection,  this




 3         will be  entered in its entirety as  if read.




 4                   (The  report referred to  is as followss)




 5




 6




 7




 8




 9




10




11




12




13




14




15




16




17




18




19




20




21




22




23




24




25

-------
                                       2625
               REPORT
                 on
  WATER POLLUTION CONTROL
                in the
                          ON
                                BUTARIES
    HIGAN  PO
GAN BASIN
          Prepared aim Published
                by (the
 MICHIGAN WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION
    DEPARTMENT >OF CONSERVATION
                 and
MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF PUBLKTHEALTH
            State of Michigan
            January 31, 1968

-------
                                                                          2626
                        MICHIGAN WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION
                            DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION
George F. Liddle, Chairman, Representing Municipal Groups

John E. Vogt, Vice Chairman, Representing Director, Department  of Public  Health

B. Dale Ball, Director, Department of Agriculture

Gerald E. Eddy, Representing Director, Department of Conservation

James Murray, Representing State Highway Commission

Lynn F. Baldwin, Representing Conservation Groups

Jim Gilmore, Representing Industrial Groups


                     Loring F. Oeming, Executive Secretary

                         Ralph W. Purdy, Chief Engineer


Michigan Department of Public Health, Dr. R.  G. Rice, M.D.,  Acting Director

     John E. Vogt, Chief. Division of Engineering

-------
                                                       2627
                  ^enort
                    on
          V'at°r Pollution  Control
                  in the
             Michigan Portion
                  of the
 Lake Michinan 3asin anH its Tributaries
PreoareH for Presentation  on  Behalf of  the
    Michioan Water Resources  Commission
                  of the
        Henartnent of Conservation
   Michiqan Oenartment of Public  Health
                  at the
         Conference Called hy  the
         Secretary of the Interior
                    on
 Pollution of the Waters of Lake  Michigan
                   and
            Its Tributary Basin
   (Illinois-Indiana-Michiqan-wisconsin)

             January 31 , 1968

-------
                                                                              2628
                                  CONTENTS
  LIST OF-ILLUSTRATIONS  .  .  . .  .	     v

  PREFACE	    xi

  I.  STATUTORY AUTHORITY  .... 		     1
           Michigan Law Relating to Water Pollution Control .........     1
                A.  Authority for local units of government to build,
                       own, and operate waste treatment facilities	     1
                B.  Authority for the control of water pollution	     3
           Legal History.  .	     5

 II.  POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAM	    11
           Water Resources Commission Pollution Control Program .	    11
           Department of Public Health Pollution Control Program	    13
                Facilities Planning and Approval. .......	    13
                Facilities Operation. . . .  ;	    15
                Operator Certification and Training 	  	 .    15
                Disinfection Policy and Practice. . . . .  .	    1.6
           Studies on Removal of Phosphates from Waste Water at
              Municipal Treatment Plants	    16

III.  DISCHARGES TO SURFACE WATERS.  . . 	 ..............    20
           Industries . .  .	    20
           Governmental Units 	 	  ..........    22

 IV..  LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN DESCRIPTION AMD WTER USES.	...-.';-    23
           Basin Description. .		    23
           Water Uses	    27

  •V.  1.   The Relationship Between the Lake Michigan Alewife Die^off and
              Resulting Water Quality .....	    32

      2.   Investigation of Nuisance Algae Conditions Along Lake Michigan
              Shoreline .	    3H

      3.   Bacteriological Monitoring of Waters Along Lake Michigan
              Shoreline	    35

      4.   Biological and Water Quality Investigations in the Vicinity of
              the.E. I. duPont Discharge to Lake Michigan at Montague . ...    36

      5.   Reconnaissance Survey in the Vicinity of the Dow Chemical Company
              Brine Discharge to Lake .Michigan near Ludington ...;....    37

      6.   Biological Investigations in the Vicinity of the Packaging
              Corporation of America's Discharge to Lake Michigan near
              Manistee.	 .:	    38
                                          111

-------
                                                                            2629


     7.   Aquatic Biota Investigations in the Vicinity of the Big Rock
             Point Nuclear Reactor	    39

     8.   Other Tributary and Lake Michigan Monitoring Programs. ......    40

     9.   Vessel Pollution - Oil and Rubbish . .  ,  .	  .    43

VI.  CONCLUSIONS		    44

APPENDIX A - Act 245, Public Acts of 1929, as amended. ...........    47

APPENDIX B - Control of Watercraft Pollution	  .    53

APPENDIX C - Michigan's Interstate Water Quality  Standards .........    57

APPENDIX D - Michigan's Intrastate Water Quality  Standards .........    63

APPENDIX E - Chlorination Policy . .  	  ............;.    69

APPENDIX F - Studies on Removal of Phosphates at  Grayling., Michigan	    73

APPENDIX G - Studies on Removal of Phosphates at  Lake Odessa, Michigan ...    93

APPENDIX H - Industrial Surface Water Discharges  in the Lake Michigan
                Basin.	   113

APPENDIX I - Municipal Waste Water Discharges in  the Lake Michigan
                Basin	   131

APPENDIX J - Possible Effects of the  Alewife Die-Off on Lake Michigan
                Water Quality. ;...........  	 	  .   145

APPENDIX K ~ Preliminary Survey of Algae Problems - Lake Michigan
                Beaches and Phytoplankton Survey - Michigan Inshore
                Waters of South-Central Lake Michigan. ... ........   163

flPPENDIX L - Summary of Bacteriological Data for Lake Michigan Waters. .  .  .   177

APPENDIX M - Biological Surveys in the Vicinity of the E. I. duPont
                  de Nemours and Company Discharge to Lake Michigan.  ....   183

APPENDIX N - Reconnaissance Survey of the Dow Chemical Company Brine
                  Discharge to Lake Michigan	  .   199

APPENDIX 0 - Benthic Macroinvertebrate Study - Lake Michigan at Manistee
                  in the Vicinity of Packaging Corporation of America's
                  Waste Disposal Pipeline	   209

APPENDIX P - Radiological Investigations of Aquatic Biota in the.Vicinity
                  of the Big Rock Point Nuclear Reactor.	  .   221

APPENDIX Q - Tributary Monitoring Data and Special Surveys 	   233

APPENDIX R - Phosphorus Input to Lake Michigan .	'.  .   259
                                        iv

-------
                                                                            2630
                             LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
                                     MAPS


                                     Title _________                Page
K-l     Areas in S.E. Lake Michigan affected by nuisance algae ...... . .  .  166

K-la    Location of plankton sampling stations. . ...... .........  170

K-3     Plankton concentrations 75* offshore and 1 mile offshore ........  173

L-l     Lake Michigan beach sampling locations. .......... ......  179

M-l     Combined chemical and bottom fauna sampling stations - vicinity
           of duPont discharge. Montague, Michigan, September 10,  1957 .....  189

M-2     Combined chemical and bottom fauna sampling stations - vicinity
           of duPont discharge, Montague, Michigan, September 6, 1967 .....  190

N-l     Water quality sampling locations in the vicinity of the Dow
           Chemical Company discharge, .Big Sable Point. .  . . . .  . ......  206

N-2     Benthic macro invertebrate sampling stations in the vicinity of the
           Dow Chemical Company discharge off Big Sable Point ........  .  207

0-1     Sampling stations in the vicinity of Packaging Corporation of.
           America's pipeline, Manistee, Michigan ...... .........  216

0-2     Sampling stations in the vicinity of Packaging Corporation of
           America's pipeline, Manistee, Michigan ...............  219

P-l.     Lpcation map, Big Rock Point Nuclear Power Reactor. .... .....  .  225

Q-l    .Basins in water quality monitoring program. . ..............  236

Q-2     Raw water intakes .............  ..............  252

Q-3     Special surveys ....... ...... ..... .....  .....  255

Q-4     Radioactivity sampling locations .................. ...  257

-------
                                                                            2631
                                      TABLES
No. _   Title _ _ Page

1       Direct industrial discharge to Lake Michigan. .... ..........  20

2       Summary of industrial discharges in the Lake Michigan Basin .......  21

3       Direct municipal discharges to Lake Michigan ............ .  .  22

G-l     BOD removal - Lake Odessa, Michigan ....  ........ ...... 105

G-2     Sludge digestion data - Lake Odessa, Michigan ..... ........ 109

H-l     Direct industrial discharges to Lake Michigan ............ .. 115

H-2     Industrial surface water discharges in the Lake Michigan Basin. .... 116

1-1     Municipal waste water discharge inventory in the Lake Michigan Basin.  . 133

J-l     Lake Michigan water quality off Frankfort ........... ; . .  . 153

J-2     Coliform and fecal coliform bacteria populations ............ 154

J-3     Water quality in tubs during decomposition of alewives. ........ 156

J-4     Algae cell counts, experimental tubs.  .  ..... . .  . .  . .   . . . .  . 159

K-l     Phytoplankton dominants from the mouths of seven tributaries and
           eight locations near shore in southcentral Lake Michigan .....  . 172
K-2     Algal conditions of selected Lake Michigan beaches.
K-3     Soluble orthophosphate concentrations as PO^ in mg/1 along the
           southeast -central Lake Michigan shoreline and in nearby
           tributaries. ........... .................. 175

K-U     Plankton composition from the mouths of seven tributaries and
           eight locations near shore in southcentral Lake Michigan ..... .176

L-l     Summary of bacteriological data for Lake Michigan waters. ....... 181

L-2     Upper Peninsula bacteriological data tabulation. .... ........ 182

M-l     Quantitative survey of benthic macroinvertebrates, vicinity of
           duPont discharge near Montague, September 10, 1967 ..... .... 191

M-2     Quantitative survey of benthic macroipvertebrates , vicinity of
           duPont discharge .near Montague, September 6, 1967 ...... ;  .  . . 192

M-3     Lake Michigan surface water quality, vicinity of E. I. duPont
           discharge, September 10, 1957. . . . ........ ........  .  . . 193


                                         vi

-------
                                                                            2632

                               TABLES CONTINUED


No.	.	Title	.	Page

M-4     Lake Michigan surface water quality, vicinity of E. I. duPont
           discharge, September 6, 1967	.'	194

M-5     Amphipods, oligochaets and midges in benthos samples from
           Lake Michigan	 187

N-l     Water quality, Lake.Michigan, in the vicinity.of the Dow Chemical
           Company discharge, Big Sable. Point .  .	204

N-2     Benthic macroinvertebrate organisms per square foot in the vicinity
           of the Dow Chemical Company discharge, Big Sable Point 	  . 205

0-1     Sampling locations, chemical and benthic macroinvertebrate study,
           vicinity of Packaging Corporation of America's pipeline,
           Manistee, Michigan		212

0-2     Results of survey in the vicinity of Packaging Corporation of
           America's pipeline, Manistee, Michigan 	 	 217

0-3     Tabulation of chemical and physical data, vicinity of Packaging
           Corporation of America's pipeline, Manistee, Michigan	  .. 218

Q-l     Tributary water quality station description 	 ... 235

Q-2     Summary of selected water quality parameters.	 238

Q-3     Coliform data - tributaries	-....-	251

Q-4     Sample results - domestic water intakes  	 253

Q-5     Sample results - domestic water intakes-. 	 ... 254

Q-6     Data from special surveys	 256

R-l     Flow data - tributaries	262

R-2     Phosphorus contributed to Lake Michigan  	 263
                                       Vll

-------
                                                                             2633

                                    FIGURES
No.                                  Title
F-l     No chemical treatment - suspended solids - Grayling, Michigan ......  83

F-2     No chemical treatment - BOD - Grayling, Michigan. ............  84

F-3     Chemical treatment - total phosphate - Grayling, Michigan  .......  85

F-3a    T-P04 removal- Grayling, Michigan  ......  ....  .........  86

F-H     Chemical treatment - suspended solids - Grayling, Michigan .......  87

F-4a    Suspended solids removal - Grayling, Michigan  ....... ........  88

F-5     Chemical treatment - BOD - Grayling, Michigan  .............  89

F-5a    BOD removal- Grayling, Michigan  . ... ................  .  .  90

G-l     Suspended solids removal - Lake Odessa, Michigan ...... ...... 101

G-2     Suspended solids - Lake Odessa, Michigan ....... ......... 102

G-3     BOD removal - Lake Odessa, Michigan ................ ...... 103

G-4     BOD - Lake Odessa, Michigan ............  .......... 106

G-5     Phosphate removal - Lake Odessa, Michigan ... ............ 107

G-6     Total phosphates - Lake Odessa, Michigan ................ 108

J-l     Coliform and fecal coliform bacteria populations in  experimental
           tubs ... .............. ...  , ..... ........ 155

J-2     DO, BOD, and pH concentrations in experimental tubs  with decomposing
           alewives ............ ...... .......  ..... 157

J-3     Ammonia, soluble orthophosphate , and total phosphate concentrations
           in experimental tubs containing decomposing alewives ........ 158

J^4     Relationship between coliform bacteria, total phosphate,, soluble
           orthophosphate and plankton algae - control tubs  . . ...  .  .  '• . . 160

J-5     Relationship between coliform bacteria, total phosphate, soluble
           orthophosphate and plankton algae - test  tubs ............ 161

J-6     Relationships between potential total phosphate release as PO^ from
           dead alewives and. volume of phosphorus -free water, .......  ... 162

K-2     Total phytoplankton count at each location compared  to the inshore
           beach tow - Lake Michigan. ...........  ......... . 171
                                         Vlll

-------
                                                                                 2634
                                 FIGURES CONTINUED
                                      Title _______ . _______ Page
 L-l     Bacteriological data for Lake Michigan waters .............  180

 M-3     Number of species of bottom animals per square foot and  their
            tolerance status, duPont survey, Lake Michigan,  1957  .....  ...  195

 M-4-     Number of species of bottom animals per square foot and  their
            tolerance status, duPont survey, Lake Michigan,  1967  ........  196

 M-5     Relationship between water depth and tolerance status  of benthic
            fauna, E. I. duPont survey, Lake Michigan, September  1957 ......  197

 M-6     Relationship between water depth and tolerance status  of benthic
            fauna, E. I. duPont survey, Lake Michigan, September  1967 ......  198

 N-3     Benthic macroinvertebrate species per square  foot and  their
            tolerance status, vicinity of Dow Chemical Company  discharge,
            Big Sable Point ..........  .................  208

 0-3     Number of bottom dwelling macroinvertebrates  and their tolerance
            status, vicinity of Packaging Corporation  of America's pipeline,
            Manistee, Michigan ..........  .  . .  ............  220

. P-2     Annual radiological concentration averages  in the vicinity of Big
            Rock Point Nuclear Reactor .........  .  ...........  226

 P-3     Plankton radioactivity near Big Rock Point  Reactor ...........  227

 P-4- .    Periphyton radioactivity near Big Rock Point  Reactor ..........  228

 P-5     Filamentous algae radioactivity near Big Rock Point Reactor  ......  229

 P-6     Crayfish radioactivity near Big Rock Point  Reactor ...........  230.

 P-7     Shore minnow radioactivity near Big Rock Point Reactor .........  231

 Q-l     Summary of selected water quality parameters  - tributaries ......  .  237

 Q-2-13   Water 'quality of Lake Michigan tributaries, 1965 and 1966  .......  239-250
                                          ix

-------
                                                                                 2635
                                      Preface
     This report contains information on the  municipal  and industrial waste disposal
situation in the Michigan portion of the interstate waters of Lake Michigan and in
the tributaries to Lake Michigan in Michigan.  It delineates the statutes that
provide the local units of government authority to build,  own and operate waste
treatment facilities.   It delineates the State statutes for control of water
pollution.  It delineates the accomplishments that'have been made in controlling
pollution and the measures that are being taken to provide improved control.  It
also describes the uses being made of these waters and  water quality conditions.

     The report was prepared for presentation to the conferees at the Federal
conference called by the Secretary of the Interior for  their consideration and
appraisal in (1) arriving at conclusions as to whether  waste discharges originating
from Michigan sources  are endangering the health or welfare of persons in a state
other than that in which the discharge or discharges originate, (2)  determining
the adequacy of measures that have been taken for abatement of pollution, and (3)
determining the nature of delays, if any, being encountered in abating pollution.

     The area encompassed by the report includes all of the Michigan portion of Lake
Michigan and its tributaries.

     All sources of municipal sewage and industrial waste  discharges to surface
waters are covered.  The nature of waste treatment or control measures in effect
are described and the  state agency action to  control pollution and evaluate
accomplishments is related.

     The files and records of the"Michigan Water Resources Commission and Michigan
Department of Public Health are-the sources of information contained in the report.
The employed staffs of both agencies collaborated in assembling the material and
preparing the report.
                                        XI

-------
                                                                                  2636
                                   CHAPTER I



                               STATUTORY AUTHORITY


                MICHIGAN LAW RELATING TO WATER POLLUTION CONTROL


A.  Authority for local 'units of government. to build, own., and operate waste treatment
    facilities:

    1.  Act 107, Public Acts of 1941 L An act to authorize township water
           supply and sewage disposal systems, and the issuance of revenue
           bonds or notes therefor.

    2.  Act 116, Public Acts of 1923 - An act to authorize townships to
           establish and maintain garbage systems or plants for the
           collection and disposal of ^garbage or contracting therefor,
           constructing .or acquiring and maintaining sanitary sewers
           and sewage disposal plants: to provide for making, levying
           and collecting of special assessment bonds.

    3.  Act 342, Public Acts of "1939 - An act to authorize counties to
           establish and provide connecting water, sewer and/or sewage
           disposal improvements and services within or between cities,
           villages, townships and.township improvement districts
           including disposal facilities and services and to provide
           methods for obtaining money for the aforesaid purposes.

    4.  Act 3, Public Acts of 1895 - An act to provide for the
           incorporation of villages and to define their powers and
           duties.

    5.'  Act 215. Public Acts of 1895 - An act to provide for the
           incorporation of cities-of the fourth class and to define
           the powers and duties of such cities.

    6.  Act 279, Public Acts of 1909 - An act to provide for the
           incorporation of cities and for revising and amending
           their charters.

    7.  Act 312, Public Acts of 192-9 - An act to provide for the
           incorporation by any two or more cities, villages or
           townships, or any combination or parts of same for
          • supplying sewage disposal.

    8.  Act 245, Public Acts of 1947 - An act to regulate the ownership,
           extension, improvement and operation-of public water and
           sewage disposal systems lying within two or more public
           corporations; and to provide for the payment and security
           •of revenue bonds issued for the construction, acquisition,
           extension and improvement of such systems.

-------
                                                                               2637
 9.  Act 82, Public Acts of 1955 - An act to provide for the acquirement
        by a city of the water' supply system and/or sewage disposal
        system of a metropolitan district and to permit such a city to
        own., maintain, operate, improve, enlarge and extend such systems
        either within or without its limits.

10.  Act 76, Public Acts of 1965 - An act to authorize counties, townships,
        villages, cities and any other governmental unit to construct waste
        disposal systems by agreements or contracts with governmental units
        or agencies of another state.

11.  Act 185, Public Acts of 1957 - An act to authorize the establishment
        of a department and board of public works in counties; to
        authorize the issuance and payment of bonds ; and to prescribe
        a procedure for special assessments 'and condemnation.

12.  Act 233, Public Acts of 1955 - An act to provide for the
        incorporation of certain municipal authorities to acquire,
        own, extend, improve and operate sewage disposal systems and
        to provide.for the issuance of bonds to acquire, construct,
        extend or improve sewage disposal systems.

13.  Act 320, Public Acts of 1927 - An act to authorize legislative
        bodies of municipalities to issue and sell bonds necessary for
        the construction of sewage disposal plants whenever a court of
        competent jurisdiction shall have ordered same.

.14.  Act 373, Public Acts of 1925 - An act to authorize legislative
        bodies of municipalities to issue and sell bonds necessary - for
        the construction of storm and sanitary sewers whenever a court
        of competent jurisdiction shall have ordered same.
15.  Act 94, Public Acts of 1933 - An act to authorize public corporations
        to purchase, acquire, construct, improve, enlarge, extend or
        repair public improvements within or' without their corporate
        limits, and to own, operate and maintain the same; to provide
        for the issuance of bonds and refunding bonds payable solely
        from the revenues of public improvements; to provide for the
        imposition of special assessments against properties
        benefited by such public improvements, and for the issuing
        of special assessment bonds for the purpose of refunding-
        outstanding revenue bonds.

16.  Act 278, Public Acts of 1909 - An act to provide for the
        incorporation of villages and for changing their boundaries; to
        provide for acquiring by purchase, land without its corporate
        limits necessary for the disposal of sewage and garbage. .  .

-------
                                                                                 2638
   17.  Act 188, Public Acts of 1951- An act to provide for the making of
           certain public  improvements by townships: to provide for
           assessing the whole or a part of the cost thereof against
           property benefited; and to provide for the issuance of bonds
           in anticipation of the collection of such special assessments,
           and for the obligation of the township thereon.
                                       t
           Improvements which can be made under this act include
           construction and maintenance of sewers.

   18.  Act 359, Public Acts of 1917 - An act to authorize the incorporation
           of charter townships; to provide a municipal charter therefor;
           and to prescribe the powers and functions thereof including the
           installation of garbage disposal systems, the laying of storm
           and sanitary sewers and the installation of water systems.

   19.  Act 202, Public Acts of 1943 - An act relative to the borrowing of
           money by municipalities, and the issuance of bonds, notes and
           certificates of indebtedness; to provide for tax levies and
           sinking funds; to create the municipal finance commission; and
           to prescribe its powers and duties.
B. Authority for the control of water pollution:

    1.  Act 28, Public Acts of 1955 - Great Lakes Basin Compact.  An act
           providing for cooperation of agencies of the state with the
           great lakes commission.

    2.  Act 243, Public Acts of 1959 - An act to regulate trailer coach
           parks; to prescribe the powers and duties of the director of
           the department of public health; and to provide remedies and
           penalties for violations.

    3.  Act M-0, Public Acts of 1956 - An a.ct to codify the laws relating
           to drains, and such structures and mechanical devices as will
           properly purify the flow of such drains; and to provide for
           the assessment and collection of taxes.

    4.  Act 20, Public Acts of 1964 - An act to regulate the impoundment
           and utilization of surplus water and to prescribe certain
           powers and duties of the water resources commission.

    5.  Act 291, Public Acts of 1965 - An act to protect riparian rights
           and of the public trust in navigable inland lakes and streams;
           to regulate the uses thereof including dredging and placing
           spoil on bottom lands; and to prescribe the duties and powers
           of the department of conservation.

-------
                                                                               2639
 6.   Act  17,  Public  Acts  of  1921  - An act  to  provide  for  the  protection and
       conservation of the  natural resources- of  the  state  and  to  create a
       department of-conservation.

 7.   Act  247,'Public Acts of  1955 - An act to authorize the department  of
       conservation to regulate  the filling  in of  submerged  patented lands.

 8.   Act  245, Public Acts of  1929 - An act to create  a water  resources
       commission to protect and conserve the water  resources  of.the state,
       to have  control over  the  pollution of any waters  of the state and
       the great lakes,  with power to make rules and regulations  governing
       the same and to provide penalties  for the violation of  the act.

 9.   Act  222, Public Acts of  1949 - An act to authorize public  corporations
       to accept grants"and  other aid from the U.S.  Government and from
       industries for the construction  of pollution  abatement  facilities;
       and to authorize  public corporations  to enter into  contracts with
       industries for the use of disposal facilities.

10.'  Act  329, Public Acts of  1966 - An act to provide state grants for
       sewage treatment  facilities and  to provide  for administration of
       the grants -by the water resources  commission.

11.   Act  211, Public Acts of  1956 - An act to prescribe certain powers
       and duties of the water resources  commission  in making  studies
       and investigations in the establishment of  sewage disposal
       districts.

12.   Act  253, Public Acts of  1964 - An act to enable  local  units of  •
       government to cooperate in planning and carrying  out  a  coordinated
       water management  program  in a watershed,  and  to prescribe  certain
       powers and duties of the  water resources  commission.

13.   Act  222, Public Acts of 1966 - An act to procide for the exemption of
        industrial water  pollution control facilities from  certain taxes.

14.   Act  98, Public  Acts  of  1913  - An act  providing for the supervision
       and control  by the director of the department of  public health
       over sewerage systems, and providing  penalties for  violations.

15.   Act  87, Public  Acts  of  1965  - An act  to  license  and  regulate  garbage
       and refuse disposal  and to provide penalties  for  violation.

16.   Act  196, Public Acts of 1963 - An act to control and prohibit the
        littering  of public  and private  property  and  waters.

17.   Act  288, Public Acts of 1967 - An act to regulate the  subdivision
        of land; and to  promote the public health by  providing  authority
        to the department of public health to approve subdivisions not
        served by  public  sewers, on basis of suitability of  soils.

-------
                                                                                2640
   18.  Act  218,  Public  Acts of  1967  -  An act  to protect  the public health
           by  providing  for the  supervision and control of  bathing beaches
           open to  the public; and  to prescribe' the  functions of health
           agencies.

   19.  Act  61, Public Acts of 1939 - An act to provide for a supervisor'of
           wells; to  provide for the  prevention of waste  and for the control
           over- certain  matters,  persons and things  relating to the
           conservation  of  oil and  gas.  and for the making and promulgation
           of  rules,  regulations  and  orders relative therefor; to provide
           for the  plugging of wells  and for the entry on private property
           for-that purpose; to  provide for the enforcement of such rules,
           regulations and  orders and of the provisions of  this act and to
           'provide  penalties for the  violations thereof;  to prevent damage
           to  or  destruction of  fresh water supplies and  valuable brines by
           oil, gas,  or  other wastes; to require the disposal of salt water
           and brines and oily wastes produced incidental to oil and gas
           operations, in such a  manner and by such methods and means that
           no  unnecessary damage  or danger to  or destruction of surface or  .
           underground resources  shall  result.

   2.0.  Act  3'06,  Public  Acts of  1927  -  An act'to provide  for county and:
           district health  departments; to prescribe their  powers and
           duties;  to provide for the apportioning of funds appropriated
           by  the state, for aid  to city, county and district health
           departments.

   21.  Act  350,  Public  Acts of  1865  -  An  act to protect fish and to
           preserve the  fisheries by  preventing the unlawful dumping into
           the waters of certain  materials.


Legal History

     Prior to  1929  authority of the State of Michigan to  abate pollution rested upon
a basis of .common law.   In  1913 the Michigan Supreme Court  held in Attorney General
ex rel Township of  Wyoming  vs. City of  Grand Rapids, 175  Mich. 503, that the state
Attorney General acting under his broad common law powers had the authority to file
suits on behalf of  the State of Michigan to compel the City of Grand Rapids to abate
the public nuisance that it  was making  in the  wafers of the Grand River by discharging
raw sewage therein.   In  its  decree  the-  Supreme Court ordered that the City con.«=-*-"'ir:t
such works as  were  necessary to abate the pollution within  one year.

     In 1929 the Michigan Legislature enacted  the Stream  Control Commission Act
(Act 245, Public Acts of 1929) establishing a  5-member Commission consisting of the.
Director of  Conservation, the State Health Commissioner,  the: Highway Commissioner,
the Commissioner of Agriculture and the.Attorney General.  •  This Act defined unlawful
pollution as the discharge  to the waters of the state of  "any waste or pollution of
any kind that  will  tend  to  destroy  fish life or be injurious to public health1'.  The
law further  provided  the Stream Control Commission with authority to ascertain arid
take appropriate action where existing  conditions in any  lake, river, stream or other.
waters of the  state were deemed by  the  Commission to be unreasonable and against public
interest.  In  order to insure compliance with  Stream Control Commission_Orders, the
statute provided for  a formal notic.3, hearing  and Order procedure.

-------
                                                                                   2641
     The constitutionality and authority of the Stream Control Commission  to  issue
Orders requiring the abatement of.pollution of the waters of. the state was reviewed
in City of Miles vs. Stream Control Commission, 296 Mich. 650, decided March  11,
1941.  In that case the City of Niles appealed from an Order of the  Stream Control
Commission directing the City to begin construction of a sewage treatment  plant for
the purpose of preventing the discharge of raw sewage into the St. Joseph  River.
The Supreme Court sustained the authority of the Commission, validated this Order
and compelled the City of Niles to comply.

     In the course of that decision the court made some notable observations, .among
which is the following:

          "In order to stop pollution of the river, it was necessary for
          the Commission to take action against the City of Niles, inasmuch
          as it was the first city in the state on the course of. the river
          below the Indiana cities and thus opened the way for suit  to compel
          the Indiana cities to stop pollution of the waters of the river.
          It is an instance where the state must clean up its own dooryard
          before being in a position to ask or seek to compel its neighbor
          to clean up.  This was not an arbitrary exercise of power by the •
          Commission but a practical movement toward accomplishment of a
          most desirable end."  (Quoted on p. .157, 305 Mich. Rep.)

     However, the most notable series of cases involved the enforcement of the Order
which was issued by the Stream Control Commission against the City of Port Huron.
On February 11, 1936, .the Commission issued an Order against the City of Port Huron
requiring it "to proceed to the construction of a sewage treatment plant and  the
necessary collecting and intercepting sewers, pumping stations, force mains and
other appurtenances in connection therewith, all when and as approved by the
Michigan Department of health to permit treatment for the sewage of  the City before
'its discharge to state waters".  The City failed to comply with this Order and the
Commission filed a bill of complaint on December 9, 1939, to enforce it. '  After an
extended trial the Circuit Court denied the relief sought by the Commission and the
matter was appealed to the Supreme Court.  In the course of its opinion (Stream
Control Commission VS. Port Huron, 305, Mich. 1953), reversing the decision of the
lower court and validating the Order of the Commission, the Supreme  Court  referred
to the agreement made by the City that construction of the sewage plant would not
materially reduce pollution in the river and that its present method of sewage
disposal did not create a public nuisance to the people residing along the river,
as well as those in the cities of Marysville, St. Clair, Marine City and Algonac
situated within 30 miles below Port Huron.  In disposing of this contention, the
court stated (p. 157):

          "The record contains- sufficient testimony to substantiate  the
          ttate's contention that the present raw sewage disposal method
          is a constant menace to the health and well-being of the down-
         - river communities as well as to tourists.  This evidence clearly
          justifies the Commission's order.  Under the authority of  the
          City of Niles case, supra, where similar arguments were advanced,
          it is no defense to a statutory charge .of river-water pollution
          f-hdt others have or are contributing to that condition. "

-------
                                                                                  2642
     A contention made by the City consisted of invoking the doctrines 'of
"balancing of equities" and "comparative injury".  These doctrines are always
invoked when a number of municipalities or industries contribute to the pollution
of a body of water, each one claiming that it should not be required to abate its
contribution to the pollution until the others are required to do 'likewise.  In
disposing of this contention the Supreme Court said (p. 157-158):

          "Even if we should concur with the trial judge in his
          conclusion that a  'balancing of equities' favors the city,
          this is not a proper case for the application of that
          doctrine.  The doctrine of  'comparative injury' should be
          confined to those situations where the plaintiff can be
          substantially compensated.  This principle is distinguished
          in City of larrisonville vs. W. £. Dickey Clay Manufacturing
          Company,, 289 U. £. 334, 337 (53 tup. Ct. 602, 77 L. Ed. 1208)."'
          "The doctrine of  'comparative -injurv ' should not be invoked
          to justify the continuance of an act. that tends' to impair
          public health. "

     Another contention made by the City of Port Huron was its financial inability
to comply with the Order.   In disposing of this issue against the City, the court
stated (p. 159):

          "The act creating the Commission was under the police power
          vested in the state, and the order in question was not
          arbitrary to unreasonable but became necessary .by reason
          of the previous refusal of the City of Port fLron to. stop
          pollution of the £t. Clair and Black rivers.  The evidence
          justified the order of the Commission., and the decree
          entered below must, be vacated.

          "We are not unmindful of the situation caused by war conditions
          and the fact that the city of Port luron will have difficulty
          in complying with, the Commission ' s order due to necessary
          materials now required for war purposes.  This however, does
          not, and should not, prevent the city from immediately taking
          those steps necessary to insure the carrying out of the mandate
          of the Commission, but a reasonable time should be allowed for
          completion of the project.  We apprehend that the State and
          city can agree upon the time that is necessary,  and if .they
          cannot, this is a matter which can be determined by the. trial
          judge upon proper proofs . "

     The City of Port Huron, however, failed to comply with the order of the Supreme
Court and consequently the  Attorney General filed a motion for final process to
enforce the decree.  The court rendered its opinion in People ex rel Stream Control
Commission VS. City Of Port Huron,. 323 Mich. 541.  In a per curium opinion reviewing
the events that had occurred including reference to war conditions that had made it
impossible for the City to  procure necessary materials for construction and that
time was required for this  purpose, and pointing out that the City had authorized
the issuance of bonds totalling $1,600,000 for construction of .the sewage disposal
plant j the court stated :

-------
                                                                                   2643
          "This phase of the situation presents a matter for practical
          consideration.   The problem is one that cannot be solved other
          than by the construction of proper facilities necessary for
          the treatment of the raw sewage.  .. .    The condition existing
          is one, as indicated in the prior opinion of this court, that
          should be remedied as soon as possible.  If the course the .city
          commission claims it is pursuing is followed with reasonable
          diligence, it seems clear that the desired result can be
          accomplished in the not far distant future.  .  .   It seems
          expedient now that a definite date should be fixed prior to
          which the sewage disposal plant,  the intercepting. sewers and
          other necessary appurtenances shall be completed so that the
          existing situation may be ended.

          "The injunctive relief sought by the motion of the attorney
          general will be granted effective as of October I,  1950."

     Even this, however, did not end the controversy because the City of Port Huron
experienced difficulty in selling the bonds to raise the money for construction of
the works.  Apparently the bonding houses wanted a decision from the State Supreme
Court validating the proposed -bonds.  Consequently, upon the city treasurer's
refusal to countersign the bonds, mandamus proceedings were initiated and the
matter was decided by the Supreme Court in Port Huron Mayor vs. Treasurer, 328 Mich.
99.  In its opinion the court reviewed the prior proceedings, the various resolutions
and the ordinances adopted-by the City for the issuance of the bonds.  The court
pinpointed the critical issue as follows (p. 106):

          "The most important question raised by the pleadings is whether
          the issuance of the general obligation bonds of $1,600,000 must
          be approved by  a 3/5 majority of the  qualified electors of the
          city of Port huron after due notice has been given to them in
          the same manner and to the  extent that is required for issuance
          of other general obligation bonds issued under the charter of
          the city of Port huron and by the home rule act."

     The bonds had not been submitted to the electors for approval and thus tue court
was faced with the responsibility of deciding whether its previous Orders could be
complied with without reference to a referendum for the issuance of the bonds.
Act 320, Public Acts of 1927, authorized the legislative bodies of municipalities
to issue and sell bonds necessary for the construction of sewage disposal plants
"whenever a court of competent jurisdiction in this State shall have ordered the
installation of a sewage or garbage disposal system in any of the governmental
agencies or municipalities herein mentioned and the plans therefore shall have been
prepared and approved by the state-commissioner of health.- .  ."


     Another statute known as the Municipal Finance Act, namely Act 373, Public Acts
of'1925, contained the same  provision with reference to the construction of
"necessary storm and sanitary sewers".

-------
                                                                                 2644
     After reviewing, the various authorities, the court held that whenever a
municipality finds  it necessary to raise money for the issuance of bonds for the
purpose of complying with a'court order involving the public health of the State,
no referendum of approval by the people is necessary.  Its opinion on this point
stated:

          "The action of the plaintiffs was in strict accord with our
          pre-emptory order for the installation of a sewage treatment
          system in Port I.uron.  The'proposed bond issue was not to
          raise money for- ordinary municipal purposes or improvements,
          but to carry out  the order of- this Court, and prevent.
          defendant from further polluting public streams and
          endangering the health and comfort not only of its own
          inhabitants but also of all others in any way affected  .
          by the pollution  of the waters by the filth from the Port
          Luron sewers.  This no longer created solely a problem of
          Port f.uron but one of the State and this may have been the
          reason for enactment of Act No. 320., supra, sections of
          which we have quoted.  The order was for the protection
          of the people of  the State of, Michigan.  It transcended
          local purposes.

          "Claims of defendant that notice and a vote of the electors
          of Port I.uron were necessary are fully answered by sections 7
          and 8 of P.A. 1927, No. 320. supra.  The city of Port I.uron
          was bound to carry out the ord.er of this court3 which confirmed
          the previous order of the Stream Control Commission.   There was
          neither necessity. occasion., nor any reason to publish the
          resolution authorizing the issuance of the bonds, nor, as
          previously stated, did it require the vote of 3/5 of the
          electors."  (Emphasis supplied.)

     Another point raised was that the levying of the tax for the payment of such
bonds' would exceed the tax  limitations provided by the city charter.  This is a
contention which is usually made by municipalities whenever they are faced with
complying with an Order of  the Water Resources Commission.  In its opinion the
court rejected this contention by holding that there is ample authority in Act 320,
Public Acts of 1927, to levy taxes for the purposes mentioned in that statute; and
that even though the tax limitations were exceeded, such defense is not valid when
the City is required to comply with a court order.
          *
          1 >
     The Supreme Court thereupon issued its writ of'mandamus ordering the city
treasurer to countersign the bonds and in due time the sewage' disposal system of
the City of Port Huron was  built and is now in operation.-

     The series of cases referred to has paved the way for enforcement of Water
Resources Commission Orders and has enabled Michigan municipalities to finance
construction of projects necessary to comply with Commission Orders.  The Water
Resources Commission has secured court orders directing 26 units of government in
the Lake Michigan Basin to  abate pollution of the waters of the state by the .
construction of sewage treatment facilities and court action is now underway against
4 units of government..

-------
                                                                                   2645
     In addition,  the Director of the  Department  of  Public  Health,  acting pursuant  to
authority vested in him by Act 98, Public  Acts  of 1913  and  Act  219, Public Acts of
1949, has prohibited the extension-of  municipal sewer systems and additional
connections to existing systems where  such is deemed necessary  to control pollution
and protect public health.  The authority  of the  Director to so act has  been upheld
by Michigan court  decisions.

     Financial inability in the State  of Michigan is not a  defense  against the
abatement of a nuisance either by private  citizens or by a  municipal entity.
                                        10

-------
                                                                                 2646
                                    CHAPTER II
                             Pollution Control Program


     Administration of water pollution control 'functions in Michigan necessarily
follows the division of statutory responsibility set forth in the previously cited
statutes subject to correlation, wherever  possible, of member department interest
and objectives with those of the Water Resources Commission.  The Water Resources
Commission and the Department of Public Health and their respective staffs carry the
principal burden of water pollution control in Michigan at the state level.


              Water Resources Commission Pollution Control Program


     The goal and objective of the Michigan Water Resources Commission is to bring
all existing unlawful pollution under continuing effective control and prevent the
development of unlawful pollution from new sources, population growths, or increased
industrial expansion and, where such incidents occur, limit their duration and.
intensity to the fullest extent consistent with requirements of the Water Resources
Commission statute.  Under the Michigan statute (Appendix A), it is unlawful for any
person directly or .indirectly to discharge into the waters of the state any substance
which is or may become injurious to the public health,- safety or welfare; or which is
or may become injurious to domestic, commercial, industrial, agricultural, recreational
or other uses which are being or may be- made of such waters; or which is or may become
injurious to the value or utility of riparian lands: or which is or may become
injurious to livestock, wild animals, birds, fish, aquatic life or plants or the
growth or propagation thereof be prevented or injuriously affected: or whereby the
value of fish and game is or may be destroyed or impaired.  The discharge of any raw
sewage of human origin, directly or indirectly into any waters of the state is prima
facie evidence of a violation of the statute unless such discharge is permitted by an
Order, rule or regulation of the Water Resources Commission.

     Where inadequacies in control of waste discharges are determined to exist, an
opportunity is provided for establishment of voluntary corrective action.  When it
appears to the Michigan Water Resources Commission that a voluntary program will not
be successful or may not be accomplished within a reasonable time period, statutory
procedures are initiated.  Orders adopted contain specific effluent restrictions and
specific dates for approval of construction plans and specifications, awarding of
construction contracts and commencement of construction, and the completion-of
construction and attainment of pollution abatement as required by the Order.

     Sewerage systems must be developed on the basis of separate sewers for storm
water and sanitary waste water.  When at all feasible, separated sanitary wastewater
systems shall not be discharged into combined systems.  If such discharge does occur,
control facilities must be developed on the combined system so.as to  protect present
and future water uses of the receiving waters consistent with the requirements of the
Water Resources Commission statute.  Problems associated with the overflow of storm
and sanitary- waste from existing combined sewerage systems to public waters must be
corrected..
                                        11

-------
                                                                                    264?
     Nutrient discharges, particularly with respect to phosphates, to public waters
must be controlled.  Persons proposing to make a new or  increased use of waters of
the state for waste disposal purposes are required, coincident with the new or
increased use, to utilize such technology and processes  which are known for the
removal of phosphorus compounds and as a long-term objective, all existing waste
dischargers will be required to provide facilities for the removal of phosnhor^.o
compounds by June 1, 1S77.

     The discharge of sanitary waste from recreational- watercraft will be controlled
by rules and 'regulations to be adopted by the Water Resources Commission.  Proposed
rules and regulations (Appendix B) have been presented at a public hearing and final
action is scheduled prior to June 1, 1968.

     The Michigan Water Resources Commission will prevent the development of new
problems by continued implementation of Section 8  (b) of its statute which requires
the  filing of a statement of use by any person proposing to make a new or substantial
increase in use of waters of the state for waste disposal purposes.  The Commission,
upon receipt of a statement,makes an Order stating such minimum restrictions as may
be necessary to guard adequately against unlawful uses of waters of the state.

     Water quality standards for water uses of all inter-(Appendix C) and intrastate
(Appendix D) waters have been adopted.  Water use designation, together with-a plan
of implementation and enforcement of the standards have  been adopted for the interstate
waters.  Public hearings are now being held prior to the designation of waters uses for
the intrastate waters.  All public hearings will be completed by November 1, 1968.
Designation of all water uses to be protected by the intrastate standards within the
state is scheduled to be completed by January 1, 1969.

     On interstate waters, where noncompliance with the  standards is determined to
exist as the result of a discharge from an existing municipal wastewater treatment
'plant, treatment facilities adequate for meeting established water quality standards
must be provided no later than June 1,'1972.  Secondary treatment is required as a
minimum unless it can be demonstrated that a lesser degree of treatment or control
will provide for water quality enhancement commensurate  with present and future water
uses.  Exception to the requirement for at least secondary treatment must be justified .
to the satisfaction of the Michigan Water Resources Commission and the Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration.  Presently identified  existing discharges of raw
sewage of human origin to public waters must be corrected by June 1, 1972.  Year-round
disinfection of all final effluents from municipal sewage treatment .plants is required.
Industrial waste discharges must meet the same effluent requirements as municipal
waste effluents and industrial waste problems identified in the interstate-plan
reports-must, no later than June 1, 1970, have adequate treatment or control
facilities. Problems associated with the overflow of storm and sanitary waste from  '
existing combined sewerage systems.must be corrected no  later than June 1, 1977.

     The Water Resources Commission staff inspects each  incipient pollution problem
regularly.  All Orders "now adopted by the Commission, to  both industries and
municipalities, require routine analysis .and reporting of the quality of wastes
discharged to public waters.  In addition surface water  quality and waste effluents
are monitored so as to identify the need for corrective  action to abate existing
problems and whenever possible so as to detect and identify the approach of pollution
conditions in time to initiate appropriate corrective acti~- rn-ior to the development
                                        12

-------
                                                                                  2648
      of a statutory 'injury.  The Water Resourc.es Commission staff  reviews  and  approves
 or  rejects plans for industrial waste treatment  or control facilities  and  counsels
 with management on industrial waste treatment  or disposal  problems.  It  develops
 appropriate restrictions and time, schedules for  Commission approval  to corr.ect or
 prevent pollution problems and participates- in enforcement procedures  initiated by
 the Commission through statutory hearings and  enforcement  of Commission  Orders in
 court when voluntary compliance is riot forthcoming.


              DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH POLLUTION CONTROL PROGRAM


      The Department of Public Health, acting through.its Division  of Engineering,
 exercises supervisory control over all public  sewerage  systems.  The Director  of
 the Department is required by statute, Act 98, Public Acts of 1913,  as amended, to
 "exercise due care to see that all sewerage systems  are properly planned,  constructed
 and operated so as to prevent unlawful pollution of the streams, lakes,  and other
 water resources of the state'!.  The companion  statute,  Act 245, Public Acts of 1929,
 as  amended, defines unlawful pollution and authorizes the.  Water Resources  Commission
 to  "establish such pollution standards for lakes,  rivers,  streams,, and other waters
 of  the state in relation to the public use to  which  they are or may  be put, as it
 shall deem necessary".  Such pollution standards and the water quality criteria
 relating to the public uses, currently being promulgated for both  interstate and
 intrastate streams, provide the framework upon which decisions are made  and actions
 taken in relation to the planning, design, construction and operation  of all sewer
 systems and treatment works.  Elements of this supervisory program include the
 following:

 Facilities Planning and Approval
i
 1.    Review engineering reports establishing the basis  of  design for projects
      involving collection and treatment of waste water  and consult with  the engineers
      and municipal officials on elements of the  proposed design prior  to development
      of plans and specifications for the project;  require  modification of  proposed
      design where appropriate and, when found  to be  satisfactory,  approve  same.

 2.    Review, approve or reject and secure changes  in plans and specifications  submitted
      for new municipal systems or for changes  in existing  systems, both  for collection
      and treatment.  No public sewerage system may be built or altered without specific
      approval by construction permit.

 3.    Conducts inspections -to determine that construction of public sewerage.systems.
      conforms to approved plans and specifications..

 4.    Require reduction of overflows from existing  combined sewer systems.  Adoption
      of accelerated programs for effective control of overflows from such  systems is
      strongly urged.  Progress has been made in  several communities  by sewer .
      separation

 5.    Require municipal rather than private ownership of all sewerage systems serving
      the public in the.belief that more dependable and  effective operation and over-
      all pollution control is thereby assured.
                                         13

-------
                                                                                    26*1-9
 &.   Counsels with officials of municipalities and their consulting engineer agents
      as to the need and methods for collection and treatment of waste water.

 7.   Strongly encourage and, where appropriate, require the development of multi-
      community area planning to provide effective services and pollution control
      facilities utilizing sound management principles.   Many such areas are currently
      served by an integrated system of sewers, interceptors, and treatment works.
      Others are being so planned in several areas.  Examples are metropolitan areas
      whose core cities' are Battle Creek, Benton Harbor, St. Joseph, Grand Rapids,
      Jackson, Kalamazoo, Muskegon and Traverse City.

 8.   Encourage the admission of. industrial wastes in municipal sewerage systems where
      such wastes will not adversely affect the system and its performance in relation
      to effective pollution control.

 9.   Foster, encourage and assist communities  in the adoption of effective and
      practical sewer use ordinances for the control of industrial wastes to be
      admitted to the sewerage system.  In many instances, technical assistance and
      counsel is provided in the location, analyses and  evaluation of wastes,
      particularly those toxic to biological treatment processes and in the
      development of-effective corrective measures and controls.  Examples are
     .metal plating wastes at Cadillac, Ludington and Wyoming brought under effective
      control within the last year.

10.   Encourage and, where appropriate, require communities to conduct studies, pilot
      or plant scale, to provide a dependable basis of design for unusual combinations
      of industrial and municipal wastes to be  treated where sufficient information is
      not available for design purposes.  Such  studies were made at Battle Creek for
      cereal products and paper mill wastes to  be treated at the municipal plant.
      Similarly, require studies, either pilot  or plant  scale, to develop a basis
      of design where an extremely high degree  of treatment is required.  Such a
      study was completed last year at Jackson.

11.   Encourage and assist communities to conduct studies to establish effective
      methods for removal of phosphates from their wastes at existing treatment works.
      Such studies were made at Lake Odessa and Whitehall last year.

12.'   Require facilities for removal of phosphates in the design of new treatment
      works, consistent with the adopted policy of the Water Resources Commission.

13.   Require expansion and improvements of municipal facilities, both for collection
      and treatment as present capacity is approached, rather than wait-until the
      facilities are overloaded before taking action.  Approval of sewer extensions
      is withheld where additional loadings would exceed the capacity of the. system
      until an acceptable program for relief is officially adopted.  "Sewer bans"
      .have been imposed in several such circumstances.  Authority for such action
      has been tested and upheld in the courts.

14.   Order changes in facilities or their operation when requirements of the statutes
      have not been met.  Alternatively, cases  involving deficiency in facilities are
      referred to the Water Resources Commission for action.

-------
                                                                                  2650
15.   As agent for the Water Resources.Commission, review, approve or reject plans
      submitted for new sewer systems, other than municipal, or for changes in
      existing ones.

16.   Assist and"encourage local health departments to effectively direct and control
      the installation of private sewage disposal systems where public sewer systems
      are not available for connection.

17.   Require construction of separate sanitary sewers for new community systems.


Facility Operation - Supervision, Visitation

 1.   Require the effective operation of all treatment works, including pumping
      stations and sewer system appurtenances.

 2.   Require all municipalities to submit reports monthly on the operation of
      treatment works.  Standard report forms are provided by the Department and
      each municipality is advised as to the minimum information to be reported and
      the frequency (number of days per week) of reporting.  Included are both
      physical data and laboratory analyses to establish loadings On the plant,
      performance of plant units, and the volume  and characteristics of the plant
      effluent.  Such information is used to determine effectiveness of overall plant
      performance, deficiencies of component facilities, capacity reserves for
      additional loadings, and operational problems and shortcomings.  Action is
      taken to assist in corrective measures and to require correction.

 3.   Supervise operation by on-site inspection, instruct-ion and consultation'with
      plant operating personnel.  Adequate services of this nature requires 'visitation
      once during each 3 months on the average.


Operator Certification and Training

 1    Require all municipalities to employ operators whose competency has been certified
      by the Department.  By statute., it is mandatory that the person in charge of the
      plant be so certified.  Over 600 operators•have been so certified on the basis
      of education, experience, and written examinations.  About 200 operators with
      plant experience are examined each year.  A high percentage of applicants are
      certified operators seeking to establish qualifications for a higher plant
      classification.

 2.   Conduct formal group training sessions to impart specific information related to
      effective operational control-, to provide opportunity for exchange of information
      and experience and to provide incentives for self-study and development.  Over
      325 operators attend a 2-day meeting each year conducted by Department engineers
      and chemists.  A series of four 5-day sessions in laboratory procedures involving
      chemical and bacteriological analyses are currently being conducted by the
      Department staff.  Eighty operators who presently perform.such tests at their
      plants are registered.  Evening courses are held throughout the state for a-
      12-week period in mathematics, chemistry, or hydraulics as applied to wastewater
      works operation, in a cooperative program with other agencies and organizations.
      Special courses in process control, safety and related .areas are sponsored with
      other groups.
                                         15

-------
                                                                                    2651
 3.   Encourage operators to meet on a. regular schedule, usually about once monthly,
      on their own•initiative to exchange information on plant operational problems
      and experiences and to invite speakers to discuss selected subjects related to
      facilities design and maintenance,  laboratory equipment, etc.   About 10 such
      groups meet regularly with about 200 operators participating'.


Disinfection Policy and Practice

 1.   Require'all municipalities to disinfect the plant effluent before discharge to
      the surface waters of the state.  This policy was adopted in January 1967,
      (Appendix E).   Virtually all communities in the state are conforming to this
      policy.

 2.   Require the provision of adequate facilities and their operation, monitoring
      and testing in such a manner as to  assure continuous effective disinfection.

 3.   Require regular reporting on forms  furnished by the Department of chlorine used
      daily, results of chlorine residual readings, and related information.  Over 60
      communities are performing bacteriological analyses on the chlorinated effluent
      as a check on the chlorine dosage and chlorine residual regimens.  Many other
      small communities are currently planning-to apply additional refinements in
      control this year.


                      STUDIES ON REMOVAL  OF PHOSPHATES FROM
                    WASTE WATER AT MUNICIPAL TREATMENT PLANTS


      During the past year studies have been made by several Michigan municipalities
on removal of phosphates from the waste water collected in their community sewer
systems.  Two general methods were utilized:  One involving the addition of iron
salts either to the raw sewage or activated sludge with or without the addition of
polymers; the other involving management  of the activated sludge process without
chemical additions.   The latter method is an extension and adaptation of the work
conducted at San Antonio and other installations as reported by the  Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration.  The central objectives of these studies were:

      1.  To determine phosphate concentrations and loadings at several
          municipal treatment plants.

      2.  To determine the amenability of wastes at various locations to
          phosphate removal by one or more methods in relation to primary
          sedimentation, trickling -filters and activated sludge.

      3.  To explore the effect of chemical additions for phosphate  icuioval
          on the removal of BOD and suspended matter at primary, trickling
          filter and activated sludge installations.

      4.  To study the degree of compatibility of iron salts with biological
          and chemical (polymer) treatment systems, when added for phosphate
          removal.
                                         16

-------
                                                                                   2652
      5..  To furnish  information upon which design of facilities for phosphate
          removal may reasonably b.e predicated.

Studies of this nature were  prompted by:

      1.  The acute and pressing need to develop base line data for the
          design and  management of' facilities at several existing wastewafer
          treatment plants for removal of a high percentage of phosphates
          from the plant effluents.

      2.  Preliminary studies by the Dow Chemical Company at the Midland,
          Michigan wastewater treatment plant in February 1967 indicating
          that iron salts held promise for effective.phosphate removal in
          both primary and biological treatment systems.

      3.  The need to apply  the principles developed in the San Antonio,
          Texas studies to individual, peculiar circumstances in order to
          determine how such principales might be applied effectively in
          the design  of biological treatment facilities with a high degree
          of phosphate removal for such circumstances.

      A variety of study methods and procedures were followed.  Some involved bench
studies only, using jar tests on the wastes undergoing treatment at the plant; others
included full-scale plant operation applying the knowledge acquired in the bench.work;
and .others were conducted at pilot plants built to establish a basis of design for
facilities to be added.

      The first of these studies was conducted at Grayling, a resort community of less
than 2,000 resident population (Appendix F).  Bench studies indicated that 90% or
more of total phosphates could be removed from the raw wastes by plain"sedimentation
with the addition of  about 20 mg/1 of ferrous chloride as iron, an equal amount of
sodium hydroxide and  about 0.5 mg/1 of an anionic polymer.  It was indicated that
the caustic could be  added a few seconds following quick mix of the iron salt with
the raw sewage and that a selected polymer, if added following an interval of about
5 minutes, would form a good floe after a short period, of slow flocculation and
would effectively remove the phosphates.  A very low order of removal of total
phosphates was experienced when no polymer was added.  These principles were applied.
to full-plant scale operation within the limitations of the facilities.   The iron -and
caustic were added to the sewage at the lift station with no formal mixing facilities
and the polymer was added at the entrance to the settling tank with crude and
temporarily rigged mixing equipment.  During the period of plant scale application
the plant was grossly overloaded hydraulically by reason of seasonal'influx of tourists
and National Guard encampment.  In spite of these adverse, circumstances total phosphate
removal ranged between 60% and 80% .with a most probable mean value of 72%.
Correspondingly, suspended solids removal ranged from 60% to 87% with a mean value
of 78% representing an increase of about 27% compared with performance when chemicals
were not added.  Removal of  5-day BOD increased from a mean value of about 40% before.
and after the study to about 58% during the study.  It should be noted here that the
raw sludge was hauled-to a land disposal site.
                                         17

-------
                                                                                  2653
      Work of a similar nature, both in bench studies with jar tests and full-scale
plant operation, was performed at the Village of Lake Odessa•(Appendix-G).  Here the
municipal treatment facilities include trickling filters and sludge digestion
facilities.  The same chemicals were applied to the raw sewage as at Grayling in
about the same concentration except that the dosage rates of the ferrous chloride
were less effectively controlled, resulting in rather widely fluctuating dosage rates,
ranging from daily averages of about 15 mg/1 to 60 mg/1.  No mixing or flocculation
equipment was installed.  Wastes varied widely from day to day and week to week in
strength and quantities by reason of changing admixtures of wastes from a food
processing plant.  Total period of the plant scale study both with and-without
chemical treatment was 87 days including 33 days when valid operating data were
obtained under controlled chemical feeding conditions.  These data generally confirmed
Grayling observations although removal of total phosphates. 5-day BOD and suspended
solids by primary sedimentation was somewhat lower.  It was further indicated that:

      1.  Trickling filter performance is enhanced, as measured by 5-day
          BOD and suspended solids removal, by this regime of chemical
          additions to the raw sewage.  Most probable mean values for
          overall plant suspended solids removal, increased from about
          78% without chemical additives to about 89% with chemicals;
          Correspondingly, BOD'removal increased from about 60% to
          about
      2.  Overall plant .reduction of total phosphates was quite stable
          with values generally between 75% and 92% removal and a mean
          value of
      3.  Total phosphates in the digester supernatant were quite low
          with most values below 75 mg/1.  This appears to confirm the.
          findings of E. A. Thomas as reported in his published work
          conducted at the treatment plant for the community of Uster
          in Zurich, Switzerland.

      Other work involving use of ferrous chloride and polymers was performed last
summer at the Village of Whitehall and the City of Traverse City.  The studies thus
far have been bench scale, employing jar tests similar to those at Grayling and Lake
Odessa.  Results have generally confirmed the earlier findings at the other 2 plants.
At Traverse City it is planned to explore further, by pilot plant studies, how to most
effectively remove phosphates from their peculiar wastes in a biological treatment
process requiring a high order of removal .of BOD and suspended matter.  The municipal
sewage includes substantial quantities of wastes from cherry processing operations.

      Rather extensive studies of phosphate removal by meiralli0 ion precipitation in
a biological system were commenced last September at the municipal activated sludge
plant of the City of Warren.  A pilot plant was installed as the first step in a
study to establish a basis of design for extending the present capabilities of the
plant to meet an effluent requirement of 8 mg/1 20-day BOD and 80% removal of total
phosphates.  Pilot plant components consist of activated sludge units followed by
rapid sand filters.  Ferrous chloride or aluminum sulfate were fed into the aeration
tanks near their point of overflow-at about 15 mg/1.  No polymers were added.  At
the end of the first 3 months of daily operation and testing it was established that:
                                          18

-------
                                                                                  2654
      1.  Total phosphates precipitated by metallic ions were removed by
          activated sludge in the order of 70% or higher consistently and
          an additional  10% or more was removed by the rapid sand filters.

      2.  The addition of iron or aluminum directly in the mixed liquor
          for phosphate  removal is compatible with the activated sludge
          process when operated for high degree BOD removal.

      Other work of a pilot plant nature is being conducted by the cities of Detroit
and Trenton under demonstration grants from the Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration.  Both projects utilize activated sludge.  Data obtained will be used,
hopefully, for the design of formal facilities to be added to the existing primary
plants for improved treatment, including phosphate removal.  The pilot plant at
Detroit has a nominal capacity in excess of 100 gpm and is very flexible and
adaptable to a wide variety of control patterns and . methods.  Both plants have
been operating for about 4 months..  Biologic methods utilized to date for phosphate
removal conform generally with the San Antonio procedures.  Although results thus
far have not demonstrated a consistent high order of removal of phosphates, they are
at  this  point  inconclusive and  indicate that much more work will be required to
establish predictable  patterns of phosphate removal by these methods on these wastes.

      In addition to the specific installations which we have discussed here, there
are many treatment plants in Michigan where tests have been performed to establish the
level of phosphates in the municipal wastes, their variations and some of their specific
characteristics.  In some of these plants, jar tests have been made in the laboratory
using chemical additives to determine amenability of the wastes and dosage rates
required for phosphate removal.  In others, preliminary jar test studies have been
made on activated sludge without chemical additives.  Similar studies are planned at
several plants involving a wide variety of conditions, methods, procedures and
objectives.

      As each study progresses it will add in some way to our knowledge of the mechanisms
by which phosphates may be effectively and economically removed as a companion process
to meet the overall treatment objectives now being established.
                                         19

-------
                                                                                2655
                                     CHAPTER III
                             DISCHARGES TO SURFACE WATERS
Industries

     The Water Resources Commission staff has" under surveillance 231 industries which
discharge treated or untreated waste water to public waters in the Lake Michigan Basin.
The 231 industries that discharge waste effluents to surface waters are listed in
Appendix H, together'with their pollution status rating, type of treatment provided,
waste effluent data where such is available and formal abatement action taken by the
Commission.  The pollution status ratings are updated annually and represent the
Water Resources Commission staff's effort to fairly appraise each incipient pollution
problem as indicated by a review of operating reports, observations, inspections or
surveys during the preceding calendar year.  The ratings are by letter code as
follows:                      •    -

                 A.  Control adequate
                 B.  Control provided - adequacy not established
                 C.  No control - need not established  "
                 D.  Control provided - protection unreliable
                 E.  Control inadequate

                     c - construction underway
                     p - plans being prepared
                     s - studies underway

     Table 1 summarizes the pollution status ratings of the 16 industries which have
effluent discharges directly to Lake Michigan:
                                      Table 1
Pollution ' Type of
Status
Rating
A
B
B - studies in progress
C
D
D - construction in
progress
E
No rating given
Total
Industry
Electric Food and
Chemicals Power Packing
2 32.
1





1
1 1
2 i+ 5
Minerals Paper Total •
2 9
1
1 ' 1


1 . 1

1
1 3
3 2-16
     As shown -by the table, only 2.of the 16 have D or E pollution status ratings.

     In addition to the 16 industries which have effluent discharges directly to Lake
Michigan, 215 have effluent discharges to inland surface waters tributary to Lake
Michigan.  The pollution status ratings for these industries are summarized by
tributary river basins in Table 2; 56 have D ,or E pollution status ratings.
                                        20

-------
                                                              Table 2
                                            Summary of Industrial Surface Water  Discharges
                                                     in the Lake Michigan Basin
                                                           April 1, 1967

^~---~^_^^
Pollution •—— ~^^River Basin
Status. Rat ing, • ~~~~^^^^^
April 1, 1967 ' ^~""-- — ^_
A
C Construction in progress
P Plans being prepared
S Studies underway
B
C Construction in progress
P Plans being prepared
S Studies underway
C
C Construction in progress
P Plans being prepared
S Studies underway
D
C Construction in progress
P Plans being prepared
S Studies underway
E .
C Construction in progress
? Plans being 'prepared
S Studies underway. .
' No Rating Given
Total ...
0)
 O
S ^
6



1















1
8

A '
10 --^
C •
10 CL,
•«33



















i

i


•0-"^
o. •
•S-3
i




















' i



01
c
•H
CLi





. 1










2




3



H
U
2


1



1













4

to
•o
b
g
03 ..
1



1











2




4


01
• H •
«
4J
0)
03




1







1







1
3

a>
4->
ra
• H "
C
to
E



1



1










1

3
6
01

0)
•a
Q) O*
OT fb
CL, E
2



1







1








4


0),
4-i
•H
.C.
3
i




i


i












3

o
bO
01
. 3
E
7



3


1




1 .
' 1


1

2

4
20


•a
I
o
19



15
2


2



7


2
1
1
1
1
11
62

•a
B
^ ro
0 ^H
10 H
rH O
m x
2



3







1
1


. 1 '

1 '
1
3
13
o
N
fO
m
r-\
ro
X
17



7
-.3

• 1




-.1
1
•1

. 7
1
2
1
4
46

c
V
X 10
0 X
to
CQ U)
2



















1
3

3
$
IX
3
to-
a,
7



4







1



1



1
14
a
w
o
to
8

1

2

.2

1



1
4
1

1


1'
r.
28

DO
10
b C I/I
O -H 10
C fO 0)
•H t. t,
E Q <
3



1











1




5


rH
10
J I-1
3 O
01 :-
78
0
1
2
39
7
2
4''
14
0
0
0
14
7
2
2
17
2
7
5
35



_1
•3
o



31



52



4



25



31
35
228*
"'•'Ate - The 22B status ratings summarized  in this  table  reflect the ratings for 215 industries, 13 of which have '.iual  ratir.,-.<.
                                                                                                                                             (O

-------
                                                                                  2657
 Governmental Units

      The  193 governmental units that discharge waste effluents to public waters are
 listed  in Appendix I, together with the type of treatment provided, waste effluent
 data  where such is available, abatement action taken and present status.  The data
 was obtained from records of the Michigan Department of Public Health and the files
 of the  Michigan Water Resources Commission.  The waste effluent data reflects the
 average for the month of August 1967.  Only 6 discharge'their waste effluent directly
 to Lake Michigan.  The remainder (188) discharge to various tributaries, some within
 a short distance from the lake and others several hundred miles inland.

      The  6 with a discharge to Lake Michigan are:


          Governmental Unit   Population  	Treatment 	

          Gladstone             5,400     Primary
          .Harbor Pointe           800 .    Primary (septic tank)
          Harbor Springs        1,430     Primary (fine screen)
          Petoskey              6,400     Primary (chemical precipitation)
          Buttons Bay             420     Secondary (lagoons)
          Wequetonsing          1,000     Primary (Imhoff tank)

    'Approximately 2.3 million people live in  the  Michigan  portion  of  the  Lake
Michigan Basin.   A large percentage (43%)  live in  rural areas where collection  and
treatment of waste water by a  central system is  not  necessary or  feasible  at the
present time.   They,  in  the most  part,  are served  by individual systems,  such as
a septic tank followed by a subsurface  percolation field.   All but  4%  of  the
population readily accessible  to  central  systems are served by formal  collection
and treatment systems with approximately  72% of  the  population serviced   receiving
treatment by secondary biological processes.   Fifty-three governmental units have
been identified as permitting,  allowing or suffering the discharge  of  raw sewage
of human origin to public waters  and in all  instances the Water Resources  Commission
has, as a minimum, held  an initial  informal  conference  with the responsible
governmental unit  to  discuss and  encourage an  appropriate water pollution  abatement
program.  This  initial action  has been  followed  in 22 instances by  formal  statutory  .
enforcement proceedings.   The  others are  currently progressing satisfactorily but
remain under continuing  review.
                                        22

-------
                                                                                  2658
                                      CHAPTER  IV
                    LAKE MICHIGAN' BASIN  DESCRIPTION AND WATER USES


                                  BASIN  DESCRIPTION


Introduction

      Lake  Michigan  is  the  sixth  largest fresh water lake on earth, with an area of
22,400  square miles and a  volume of  1,116 cubic miles.  The lake surface elevation
averages about  580  feet above sea level, common with Lake Huron.  It is divided into
2 deep-water basins, by a  submerged  ridge running roughly from Grand Haven to
Milwaukee.  The average depth of the ridge is approximately 232 feet.  'The maximum
depth of the lake,  923 feet,  is  in the  northern basin.  The.land drainage area is
45,460  square miles, 64% of which is in Michigan.  The lake surface accounts for
over  31% of the total  drainage area.  Discharge of Lake Michigan occurs through the
broad,  deep Straits of Mackinac  (no  measurable gradient) into Lake Huron, and by
diversion  into  the  Chicago Sanitary  and Ship Canal 'and subsequently into the
Mississippi River system.   The latter discharge is approximately 3,100 to 3,200 cfs
(combined  direct diversion'and domestic pumpage).  The normal outward flow into Lake
Huron has  not been  precisely  determined.  It is estimated to be between approximately
40,000  and 55,000 cfs.         .

      Lake  Michigan  occupies a great  valley in the Paleozoic sedimentary rocks which
lap onto the southern  edge  of the Pre-Cambrian Canadian Shield.  This valley
'originated in pre-glacial  times  and  in  rock least, resistant to erosion.  Jack L.
Hough in his Geology of  the Great  Lakes (1958) suggests that the existence and
orientation of  this feature exerted  a strong influence on subsequent glacial ice
movement which  was  responsible for the  final shaping of the .Lake Michigan Basin. .
The existing Great  Lakes are  of  comparatively recent origin, the present levels
having  been reached only about 2,500 years ago.

      The coastline  of  Lake Michigan, with the exception of Green Bay, Little Traverse
Bay and Grand Traverse Bay is quite  regular.  Lake Michigan is characterized by'few
natural good harbors;  however, the outlets of drowned estuary lakes in the mouths of
several Michigan rivers  have  been improved and. protected to provide excellent facilities

    -  Some  of the Nation's  finest beaches are found along the east coast of Lake Michigan
The 1,058  miles of  Michigan shoreline are comprised of relatively.limited areas of
sedimentary rock outcrops  and shingle beaches; some areas of till and clay bluff, and
many  hundreds of miles of  sand.   'Sands  are either piled high in the great dunes or low
and undulating  in the  beach ridges.  Sands that slope gradually into deeper waters,
provide an excellent swimming facility.
                                         23

-------
                                                                                   2659
Lake Levels

     Knowledge of the hydrology of Lake Michigan is essential for the solution of
most practical problems pertaining to this body of water.  The United States Lake
Survey has recorded water levels for over 100 years, and has made detailed surveys
of the bottom topography.  The Great .Lakes Research Institute began a continuing
program of fundamental investigations in 195U.

     The principal natural factors which affect the longer-period fluctuations of
the level of -Lake Michigan are precipitation and evaporation.  Precipitation falling
directly on the lake surface raises the surface immediately.  Precipitation falling
on the land surface of the drainage area has a delayed and variable effect.  Average
annual precipitation varies from about 28 inches on the northern part of the lake to
about 32 inches on the southern part.  Evaporation from the lake surface has been
estimated as being approximately equal to precipitation upon it.

     The levels of Lakes Michigan and Huron for 105 years (1860-1965) have ranged
between 583.68 feet (1886) and 577.09 feet (196H), a range of 6.59 feet.  The highest
modern level occurred in 1952, 582.69 feet.  The level of Lakes Michigan and Huron is
affected by the diversion at Chicago of 3,100 cfs (withdrawal) and the diversion into
Lake Superior of 5,000 cfs via the. Long Lake and Ogoli projects.  The net effect of
both diversions is to raise the levels of Lakes Michigan and Huron about 0.1U foot
above what it would be without withdrawals and additions.

     Levels follow a seasonal pattern with highs generally occurring in summer and
lows in winter or early spring.  With any single year, variations average about 1.1
foot.


Lake Currents

     Surface currents are produced mainly by wind action and differences in barometric
pressure over different parts of the lake.  Brief windstorms may create surface waves
which cause strong local currents of short duration.  Strong winds of longer duration
will produce a transfer of water toward the leeward shore and a temporary circulation
which is affected by the shape and topography of the lake basin.  Close to shore in •
shallow water the alongshore drift produced by moderate waves approaching at an
oblique angle may reach velocities of 1 or 2 miles per hour.  Such water movements
are of a temporary nature.  In addition, there appears to be patterns of permanent,
or at least seasonal, circulation involving a slow drift of the water.

     There is a southward drift along the western side of the lake which continues
around the south end and turns northward on the eastern ..side, where it becomes more
pronounced.  Around the Beaver Island group in the north and in the major southern
basin there are counter-clock-wise swirls.  Between these swirls the surface water
tends to move eastward along lines which are curved with their convex sides to the
south.

     The prevailing westerly winds,  coupled with the flow toward the outlet,  are
considered the cause of the above flow patterns.  Some authorities dispute the
counter-clock-wise swirls described  above.  Northeasterly winds can alter normal flow
patterns.  At times the flow through the Straits of Mackinac is temporarily reversed.
                                        24

-------
                                                                                  2660
Population

     There were more  than  2,250,000 people  in the Michigan portion of the Lake  .
Michigan Basin in  1960.  The population varied from the densely settled metropolitan
areas of Grand Rapids and  Lansing to the virtually uninhabited State and Federal
forests in the Upper  Peninsula. • The area can be divided into the 3/traditional zones
of Michigan:  the  relatively densely settled and intensely developed souther Lower
Peninsula had 26%  of  the land area and 83%  of the 1960 population, while the moderately
populated northern' Lower Peninsula had 21%  of the land, and 11% of the population, and
the sparsely -settled  Upper Peninsula had 17% of the land and only 6% of the 1960
population.  The 1960 population densities  were below 17 people.per square mile for
the Upper Peninsula,  nearly 27 people per square mile for the northern Lower Peninsula
and over 150 people per square mile for the southern Lower. Peninsula.  Based upon past
history, the population will be approximately 2,800,000 in this.area in 1980, with the
bulk of this increase in the southern Lower Peninsula.


Economy

     Bogue and Beales1 Economic Areas of the United States (1961) categorizes the
''Western Michigan  Lake Shoreline" as a "siibregion", the "Upper Peninsula - Eastern"
and the "Lower Peninsula - Northwestern" as "areas".  Following is a summary of the
general economy of these units:

Western Michigan Lake Shoreline

             1960  population            976,000 change 1950-1960 24%
             Land  area                      6,662 square'miles

     The early economy was largely timber oriented.  As the great timber resources
iwere cut, the logs were floated to the sawmills located at the mouth of all principal
rivers.  Around these mills and the docking facilities required to transport the sawn
timber, there developed many of the cities  of western Michigan-^Grand Haven, Muskegon,
Manistee, Ludington,  Traverse City.  With the end of the timber harvest, the sawmill
towns were able to convert their economies  to a general manufacturing and wholesale
and retail trade base.  This transition was made possible in a large measure by the
existing lake port'transportation facilities.  There are 2 metropolitan areas in the
subregion—Grand Rapids and Muskegon.  Grand Rapids made a rather natural transition
in its economy—:from  sawmills to furniture  to a modern industrial city, manufacturing
a wide range of fabricated metal products,  automobile parts, machinery, etc.  Muskegon.
once one of the world's leading producers of lumber, has .become a manufacturing center
of engines, automobile parts, foundry products, etc.  The smaller cit5es of the sub- .
region are also manufacturing oriented.  Food processing, canning =rid marketing are a
significant segment of the economy, .Western Michigan is one of the Nation's leading
fruit arid vegetable growing regions.  This  is made possible by the climatic influence
of Lake Michigan.   Apples, cherries, peaches and pears are the leading tree fruits.
Truck farming and  small fruit producing are also major agricultural enterprises.
The ientire west coast of Michigan-is used intensively for recreation.  Tourism and
summer residences  furnish  a substantial income to non-agricultural workers in rural
areas.
                                        25

-------
                                                                                2661
Upper Peninsula - Eastern Area

              1960 population                128,521 change 1950-1960 3.6%
              Land area                        7,832 square miles

     The general unsuitability of much of the area to agriculture (both climate and
soils), the lack of mineral wealth,  and its remoteness to population centers are
reflected by the sparse population of the eastern Upper Peninsula.  Nearly a third
of the population is centered in the cities of Escanaba, Menominee and Sault Ste.
Marie.  All 3 are important ports on the Great Lakes.  The past economy of the.area
was natural resource oriented (timber, fish., recreation).  The current economy is
based on wood-using industries (pulp, paper,, wood products), light manufacturing
and recreational facilities, resorts and summer homes.  Although farming has declined
in general, that remaining is more efficient and more profitable.

Lower Peninsula - Northwestern Area

              1960 population                141,019 change 1950-1960 2.6%
              Land area                        6,147 square miles

     The economic history of this area was once timber—the northern Lower Peninsula
of Michigan together with areas in other states bordering the Great Lakes was the
site of the world's greatest white and red pine forest.  This vast region was logged
off in the last 4 decades of the 19th Century,  During the logging, and for a
considerable period afterwards, the most extensive forest fires in this Nation's
history ravaged these pine lands, often burning over the same area several times.
Not only were the few'remaining trees destroyed, but of even more significance was
the destruction of the soil.  The meager humus and organic matter on the northern
sandy soils were .consumed.  For over a generation the burned lands remained bare
and stark.  Gradually the burns were re-forested, but not with the original species.-
'The great pine stands were replaced by aspen, oak, pin cherry and jack pine.  So
great an amount of land was re-forested by these rapid growing, hearty species that
they became a valuable resource.  Once again wood products utilization is an important
aspect of the economy.  The great wooded stretches are gaining in economic importance
with recent development of an expanding wood using industry (particle board, pulp and
paper).  Farming is an important part of the economy, providing employment for nearly
1/3 of the population.  The trade, services, construction and employment by the
recreation industry is increasing yearly.


Agriculture

     Of the 48 counties which lie wholly or partially in the Lake Michigan Basin,
dairying is the most important type of agricultural activity in 25 of them.  Field
crop production is the most important in 13 of the counties, fruit production in 8
of the counties and poultry production and livestock production in 1 of the counties
each.
                                        26

-------
                                                                                   2662
 Land Use

     'The land use of the Lake Michigan basin ranges from the intensive use of the
 metropolitan areas of the southern Lower Peninsula  to the extensive  use of the forests
 in  the northern Lower Peninsula and the Upper Peninsula.   The dominant land use in  the
 southern Lower Peninsula is farmland, with over 80% of some counties devoted to
 agricultural use.  The percentage-of forest land ranges from below9% in Clinton
 County in the southern Lower Peninsula to over 90%  in Roscommon County in the northern
 Lower Peninsula and in. several .counties in the Upper Peninsula.  The value and use  of
 the land is reflected in the fact that the percentage of  publicly-owned land ranges
 from a low of 0.01% for VanBuren County in the southern Lower Peninsula to a high of
 nearly 61% for Schoolcraft County in the Upper Peninsula.
                                      WATER  USES


      The  waters of the Lake Michigan Basin  serve a multiplicity of uses.  They are
used  for  public water supply,  temperature control, waste assimilation, recreation,
commercial  fishing,  commercial navigation and agricultural  irrigation.


Public Water  Supply

      One  of the most important uses  is  for  public water supply.  The waters of Lake
Michigan  are  of excellent  quality  for this  purpose, being moderate in hardness, very
low in turbidity and chlorides, and  showing little change from year to year.  Twenty
three municipalities,  with a 1960  population of. nearly 650,000 people, use Lake
Michigan  as a raw  water supply.  These  municipalities withdrew over 90 million
gallons a day in 1966.


Cooling Water

     There  are  6 steam generation  plants using Lake Michigan water for cooling purposes,
1 of them utilizing  nuclear energy.   Three  of these plants are owned by municipalities
and 3 are privately  owned.


Recreation

     Water  has  always  been- a major focal point for outdoor activities.  People seek.
water in  which  to  swim,  fish,  hunt, boat and water.ski.  They seek water beside which
to camp,  hike,   picnic  and  drive.  In addition, .they seek water just to look at for  .
aesthetic enjoyment.   The Great Lakes Region comprises the largest source of fresh
water in  the  world and  has  been traditionally utilized for water-oriented recreation.
Lake Michigan is the second largest of  these lakes and the only one which lies entirely
within the  boundaries  of the United .States.   It has a total shoreline of 1,661 miles
(1,058 in Michigan)  about 1,300 miles of which are suitable for recreation.   Although
806 of these  recreational miles are located in the State of Michigan, only 40 miles
                                        27

-------
                                                                                  2663
or 5% is in public ownership.  Lake Michigan's shoreline receives extensive
recreational use, especially in the southern Lower Peninsula.  Michigan's recreational
shoreline supports a full range of'recreational activities.   Its 806 miles contain
115 miles of beaches and 691 miles of bluffs and sand dunes.  There are 14 state.
parks and thousands of acres of other publicly-owned land adjacent to Lake Michigan.
It is estimated that there may be as many as 50,000 seasonal dwellings in the Michigan
portion of the Lake Michigan basin, many of which are located along the shore of Lake
Michigan.


coating

     Pleasure boating has changed from the luxurious cruise  vessels of the early -
1900's to the many thousands of recreational watercraft of today.  The State of
Michigan had a total of 399,000 motor-powered craft registered in 1965.  In addition,
non-motor-powered craft were estimated at 50^000.  There are a considerable number of
boats registered in other states that use Michigan waters.

     In order to serve the vast flotilla of watercraft using Lake Michigan waters,
there are 108 marinas equipped with boat slips, either on or contiguous to Lake
Michigan.  In addition, there are harbors of refuge located  at no more than 30-mile
intervals along the established cruising lanes of Lake Michigan.


Sport Fishing

     Fall waterfowl hunting and year-round sport fishing activities are popular uses
of the waters of Lake Michigan.   Many of the offshore islands and Waugoshance Point
are famous for their waterfowl shooting.  The Lake Michigan  sport fishery is supported
by the great variety of fish listed below:

     Lake Sturgeon               Cisco                       Yellow Perch
     Rainbow Trout               American Smelt              Rock Bass
     Brown Trout                 Smallmouth Bass             Walleye
     Brook Trout                 Largemouth Bass             Carp
     Northern Pike               Black Crappie               Suckers
     Muskellunge                 Bluegill                    Bullheads
     Lake Trout •                 Coho Salmon

     Fishing for yellow perch is by far the most popular use of the fishery.   Thousands
of anglers line the many navigation piers to take advantage  of the abundance of these
high value food fish during the year-round open season.  Other species of particular
importance in the sport fishery are echo salmon, walleyes, smallmouth bass and
northern pike.   Sport fishermen are fortunate in that the.lake provides "deep sea"
fishing for such highly valued fish as the lake trout, muskellunge and steelhead.
Ice fishing for perch and walleyes is a popular winter pastime on the many bays of
Lake Michigan.


Commercial Fishing

     The Lake Michigan commercial fishery had its beginning  with the Indians and early
employees of the fur trading companies.  As the land area was settled early in the
19th Century the demand for fishery products increased and new types of-gear evolved.
                                        28

-------
                                                                                  2664
     Production reached a  peak of 47,356,000 pounds in 1908.  Although there have
been high peak years., average annual production has not fluctuated widely from
26 million pounds.   In recent years, the fishery resource has been marked by changes
in the composition of the  catch with fish of lower value.replacing those of higher
value.  These changes are  generally attributed to predation of the sea lamprey>
introduction of exotic species, and in certain instances, over-fishing.

     Catches of sturgeon,  lake trout, lake herring, and•suckers from Lake Michigan
have reached all-time lows in recent years.  Chubs and. yellow perch have maintained
or increased -their abundance while the exotic species, carp, smelt, and alewife, have
increased sharply. .  It is  generally agreed that these changes have been due to
biological and economic changes'rather than changes in water quality.

     The decline of  commercial fishing on the Great Lakes is closely associated with
what has happened to the lake trout and whitefish.   These 2 high-valued fish once
represented a bounteous resource.- In 1885, 6,431,000 pounds of lake trout were
caught in Lake Michigan.   Production rose.to higher levels in many years and was up
to 11,749.000 for Lake Michigan in 192.1.  This picture changed with the invasion of
the Great Lakes by the sea lamprey.  The catch of lake trout started to drop rapidly
in Lake Michigan around 1947.  By 1963, lake trout catches were down—partly because
of fishing restrictions—26,000 pounds in Lake Michigan.

     Whitefish production  has followed a somewhat similar trend.  Some 8,653.000
pounds were caught in Lake Michigan in 1885.  By 1963 production was down to 298,000
pounds in Lake Michigan.

     The situation of the  industry brightened to a degree in 1964 and 1965, particularly
with regard to the valuable whitefish.  Over 846,000 pounds of whitefish were taken from
Lake Michigan in 1965.  In 1959 only 11,000 pounds were taken from that lake.

     The following illustrates the depth distribution of the major, species:

          Inshore and shallow:  Carp, sturgeon, suckers,  yellow perch
                                and walleyes

          Shallow to intermediate:  Lake herring, lake whitefish and smelt

          Deep water:  Chubs, lake trout (young are shallow to intermediate)

          All depths:  Alewife

     The productivity of shallow areas is high when compared to deep-water productivit-
The shallow waters of Green Bay and of the narrow band around the shoreline-are the
most important in relation to the fishery resources.   These shallow areas are also
important to the life cycles and movements of some of the deep-water species.

     For a detailed  analysis of the commercial fishery of Green Bay see Michigan Water
Resources Commission staff report:  Commercial Fishing in the Michigan Waters'of
Green Bay, October 30., 1963.
                                        29

-------
                                                                                  2665
Commercial Navigation

     Commercial navigation is of great significance to the past, present and the
future economy of the Great Lakes region.  In the past, settlement patterns and the
locations of cities and industrial complexes were either determined by proximity to
lake commerce or strongly influenced by it.  Much of today's commercial and industrial
activity of the Great Lakes region is geared to lake shipments.  The potential of the
St. Lawrence Seaway is being fulfilled and promises to provide even closer links
between the Great Lakes and world markets.  With each passing season there are
increases in .direct foreign shipments, both to and from lake ports.

     Although there were few adequate natural harbors in Lake Michigan, improvement
of navigation facilities paralleled that of the development of the commercial
capabilities.  In early times, only canoes, Mackinaw boats and other small sailing
vessels used the harbors provided by western Michigan border lakes (Muskegon, White,-
Pere Marquette, etc.) and these were not greatly hindered by the always present sand
bars which partially-blocked the entrances to these lakes.  But as commerce increased
and larger vessels began using Lake Michigan and the developing ports, navigation
improvements became a necessity.  At first, local citizens assumed the responsibility
for these improvements.  Sand bars were cut through and lined with cribs or wood piles.
This was followed shortly thereafter by the first breakwaters--stout timber cribs,
sunk to the lake bottom, filled with rocks and timber-decked.  Some of these early
efforts remain as a part of the substructure of the existing breakwaters.  At South
Haven (.1868), Holland (1860), and Grand Haven (1857) these early structures have
passed or are near the century mark.

     As more elaborate improvements became necessary, the cost.s and engineering
capabilities soared beyond the abilities of local citizens.  At the direction of
Congress, the U. .S. Army Corps  of Engineers assumed responsiblity for harbor and
channel improvements.    A Federal assistance project was authorized for Holland as
.early as 1852.  To date 22 Federal projects have been authorized in Michigan on Lake
Michigan.  Expenditures for these projects have been substantial—over $44,000,000.
These costs have been incurred from new work (over $13,000,000), maintenance
($24,447,000) and rehabilitation ($6,b7b,467).  The relatively high figure for
maintenance results from annual dredging required at many of the harbors.  Littoral
movement of shore sediments is a process which is continually filling artificially
deepened harbor entrances.

     Current freight movements on Lake Michigan are based on intrastate, interstate
and international commerce.  In 1964, 22,422,595 tons of freight were moved at
Michigan ports on Lake Michigan.

     An 'important segment of this movement is uy railroad car ferry.'  Since .Lake
Michigan provides a geographical interruption to cross-continental rail routes, the
ferry service is an essential link in the rail transportation system.  Three railroads
operate ferry service across Lake Michigan:

     The Grand Tunk-Western Railroad, Muskegon to:  Milwaukee, Wisconsin
     The Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, Ludington to:  Milwaukee, Wisconsin;
          Manitowoc, Wisconsin and Kewaunee, Wisconsin
     The Ann Arbor Railroad, Frankfort to:  Manitowoc, Wisconsin; Kewaunee,
          Wisconsin and Menominee and Manistique, Michigan
                                         30

-------
                                                                                  2666
Agricultural Irrigation

     The use of Lake Michigan waters for agricultural irrigation  is  of  little
significance in the total water use picture.   Less than 400 acres are presently
known to depend upon Lake .Michigan as a source of irrigation water.  ..The  greatest
amount of this irrigated acreage, approximately 300 acres,  is located in  Leelanau
and Grand Traverse counties.
                                        31

-------
                                                                                  266?
                                  CHAPTER V
                                   Part 1
                  THF RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE LAKE MICHIGAN
                  ALEHIFE DIE-OFF AND RESULTING l-'ATER QUALITY


     Observations of depressed water quality conditions and increased Dacuci-xa counts
concurrent with the annual alewife die-off, alone; the Michigan shoreline of Lake
Michigan led to a laboratory study of the problem (Appendix J).  Six tubs, 3 containing
Lake Michigan water and three containing Lansing tap water< were placed in an open
area exposed to sunlight.  Two of the tubs-containing Lake Michigan water and 2
containing Lansing tap water each received 1'freshly dead 6-inch alewife.  Chemical,
bacteriological, and algal changes were monitored over the next 23 days, from
August 16 to September 8, 1967.  The dead fish provided an environment which allowed
a population explosion of coliform bacteria.  Decomposition of the fish tissues
resulted in a nutrient release which in turn enabled a dense algal bloom to develop.
Coliform and fecal coliform'bacteria populations as high as 1,500,000/100 ml and
3,500/100 ml, respectively, developed in the tubs containing a dead alewife.

     Abnormally high coliform bacteria populations developed along Lake Michigan
beaches.during the summer of 1967.  The presence of dead alewives was probably a
major reason for this abnormality.  The high counts partially negate the value of
beach bacteria sampling as an indication of sewage contamination.

     Phosphate released from the decomposing fish in the tubs was_rapid.  Each single
dead alewife in approximately 6.8 gallons of water released more than 2.0 mg/1 soluble
orthophosphate as POij within 2 days.  Soluble orthophosphate in these .tests reached
concentrations as high as 6.3 mg/1.  The total phosphate released.from these 4 fish
'during the test ranged from a low of 113 mg to a high of.201 mg P04 per fish.

     In the tubs containing alewives, blooms of small single-celled, green algae
developed shorf/ly after nutrient release.  In 1 case the algae population grew from
less than 100 cells/ml to a maximum of 3,187,800/ml. :These exploding populations
utilized the available soluble orthophosphate.  Concentrations of this phosphorus
fraction dropped while total phosphate continued to increase.

     One agency has estimated that a few hundred million pounds of alewives died in
Lake Michigan during 1967.  For the purpose of this report we will use 300 million
pounds.  Analytical work by the U. S. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries on several
groups of alewives has shown that alewives about 6-inches long contain approximately
2.23-grams of phosphorus per pound of fish. - Thus, 300 million pounds of dead alewives
could release 2,300 tons of phosphates into Lake Michigan.'  The concentration of
soluble orthophosphate as PO^ commonly claimed sufficient to create nuisance algae
conditions in water is 0.03 mg/1.'  If two-thirds of the released phosphorus was in
the form of soluble orthophosphate the potential from this source alone exists, to
bring approximately 11 cubic miles of phosphorus-free water to the point nuisance
algae blooms could occur.
                                        32

-------
                                                                                   2668
     It is generally acknowledged that during the summer the water mass along Michigan's
west coast from Benton Harbor-St.'Joseph to Little Point Sable is discrete and moves
northward unless broken up by strong winds.  The U. S. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries'
aerial survey showed that most of the dead alewives were concentrated in the southern
tip of Lake Michigan and in a band along both shores in the southern two-thirds of
the lake.  Windrows of dead alewives collect in the shallow water beach zone.
Nutrients from the decomposing fish were released into this discrete, surface water
mass which is already enriched by the tributary rivers draining urban and agricultural
areas.  There are 2,240,000 acre feet of water in. Lake Michigan along the shoreline
out to the 30-foot depth contour from the Indiana-Michigan state line to the tip of
the Leelanau Peninsula.  Assuming two-thirds of the phosphorus released during alewife
decomposition is available for uptake then only 18,700,000 pounds of decomposing
alewives would be necessary to bring that amount of phosphorus-free water to the
critical nuisance-algae-producing level.  This stretch of shore comprises approximately
20% of the total Lake Michigan coastline.  Twenty percent of the estimated alewife
die-off of 300 million pounds is 60 million pounds.  It seems highly probable that
more than the 18,700,000 pounds needed to bring the nutrient concentration to
nuisance-potential levels would accumulate in this area.

     Growing alewives concentrate phosphorus already present in the lake.  It is
normal for phosphorus to be recycled upon their death, but because of their unusually
high population and habit of dying during a short period of the year in the alongshore
waters, the phosphorus is released in a relatively small volume of water.  It is
concluded that phosphate released from decomposing alewives in the alongshore water
mass of Lake Michigan is a significant factor in the production of algae.  Nuisances
which can develop with increases in algal populations include a reduction in
transparency, reduction in length of filter runs at water plants, possible taste
and odor problems in drinking water, interference with swimming, and deposition of
filamentous algae on beaches.
                                         33

-------
                                                                                 2669
                                  CHAPTER V
                                   Part 2
                  INVESTIGATION OF NUISANCE ALSAE CONDITIONS ALONG
                                LAKE MICHIGAN SHORELINE


     In early August of 1965 the Water Resources Commission received complaints
indicating that several Lake Michigan beaches around Muskegon and Grand Haven had
unusually high concentrations of algae in the inshore waters.  The subsequent Water
Resources Commission survey (Appendix K) showed that approximately 32 miles of Lake
Michigan shoreline had nuisance accumulations of Spirogyra and Cladophora in August
of 1966.  This problem was first observed 6.5 miles south of Muskegon at Norton
Township Park and extended intermittently to Benona, 25 miles north of Muskegon.
At some beaches in this area the accumulations were not sufficient to cause nuisance
conditions.

     Sixty miles of shoreline from South Haven to Pentwater (excluding the area
described in the above paragraph) had noticeable accumulations of Cladophora but
little or no Spirogyra.  In most areas the Cladophora was lying on the bottom in
windrows and was not as objectionable as was the Spirogyra in suspension.  Personnel
in charge of these beaches voiced only moderate complaints concerning the necessity
to rake up the algae once a week or so.  In the area where Spirogyra was a problem,
park managers received complaints of green-stained bathing suits and conditions unfit
for swimming.  The presence of Spirogyra could not be traced to the tributaries since
it was not found in any of the river samples.

     Based on algal species composition of the 8 areas studied, Holland and Manistee
could be described as being the least indicative of enrichment.  Populations found
at Benona. Muskegon and St. Joseph were the most indicative of enrichment.  There
were striking differences in the quantity and quality in the inshore phytoplankton
and that found beyond 600 feet.  Benona is the best example of this where the inshore
plankton was dominated by eutrophic species of oligotrophic waters.  This suggests
that during the summer of 1966 the water masses inshore and offshore from 600 feet
out remained separate for long enough periods to support radically different algal
populations.

     On the basis of this short-term survey there is an apparent relationship between
the areas in which nuisance algae occur along the Michigan coastline- of Lake Michigan
and the proximity of sources of plant nutrients contributed via major tributaries
draining urban and agricultural areas.  Assuming future weather and current patterns
similar to those experienced in 1966, coupled with continued contributions of present
water quality from tributary streams and the existing water quality of Lake Michigan
we may expect reoccurrences of nuisance algae conditions.

-------
                                                                                 2670
                                   CHAPTER V
                                    Part 3
                     BACTERIOLOGICAL MONITORING OF WATERS
                        ALONG LAKE MICHIGAN,SHORELINE


     The Michigan Water Resources Commission maintains an annual summer sampling
program of Michigan's Great Lakes coastline surface waters.  Bacteriological data
presented in Appendix L were obtained in 1966 and 1967.  Only the minimum, maximum,
and geometric mean values for each sampling location are expressed in this report
(Appendix L, Table 1, Figure 1) however results for all samples collected and referred
to are on file in the Lansing office of the Water Resources Commission.

     Of the 47 locations in the Lower Peninsula for which there is 1966 and 1967 data
available, 36 had geometric mean values over 1,000 organisms per 100 ml in 1967, while
in 1966 there were only 4 such locations (Appendix L, Figure 1).  In 1967 the total
number of sampling locations in the Lower Peninsula was expanded to 69 and of these
49 had geometric mean values over 1,000 organisms per 100 ml.

     The 1967 data when examined in detail reveals a definite rise to peak coliform
concentrations and then a decline for each location during the sampling period of
June through August.  In the extreme southern Lower Peninsula locations, the peak
concentrations occurred in the latter half of June whereas in the northern portion
of the Lower Peninsula they appeared in early August.  Peak concentrations for
locations between these 2 areas followed a gradual time progression from south to
north within these limits.

     Studies have shown that dead and decaying alewives contribute coliform organisms
to the surrounding waters and apparently provide a suitable nutrient enriched
environment for bacterial growth and propagation.  The bacteriological peaks coincide
with the time of appearance of large concentrations of dead alewives.  The highest
alewife concentrations occurred in the area from St. Joseph to Frankfort (Appendix L,
Map 1).

     The few sampling locations which did not follow this pattern are located in the
northern portion of the Lower Peninsula above Frankfort where lower concentrations of
dead alewives were observed and where industrial waste discharges from fruit canning
operations contribute coliform to surface waters in the Traverse City area.

     From this information, a correlation appears to exist between the high total
coliform concentrations and the elevated alewife mortality of 1967.  Therefore,
until the alewife situation is corrected the assessment of the safety of these waters
for full body contact requires the utilization of the sanitary survey and data other
than that obtained during the alewife die-off.  All of the public beaches in Michigan
along the Lake Michigan shoreline are considered to be of satisfactory sanitary
quality for full body contact.

     Data from the Upper Peninsula's portion of Lake Michigan's coastline is limited
at this time.  However, a tabulation of the available data has been included in
Appendix L, Table 2.
                                        35

-------
                                                                                  2671
                                   CHAPTER
                                    Part 4
                BIOLOGICAL AND WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATIONS IN
                THF VICINITY OF THE E.  I.  DU PONT DISCHARGE TO
                          LAKE MICHIGAN NEAR MONTAGUE


     Four investigations of water quality  and aquatic fauna have been conducted
since 1957 in'the immediate vicinity of the .E. I. duPont submarine discharge to
Lake Michigan at Montague.  The most recent investigation took place in September
1967 (Appendix M).

     The studies of the bottom animals  have riot demonstrat'ed any apparent injury even
in the immediate vicinity of the outfall.   Scuds and midges have been the dominant
animals.  Minnows and alewives have been observed swimming normally in the discharge
as it bubbles to the surface.  The bottom  material is fine, clean sand with no
deposit.

     Water samples taken directly over  the discharge in September 1967 contained
0.65 mg/1 ammonia.  No ammonia was detected 100 feet in any direction from the
discharge.  Other water quali-ty parameters showed little variation at all sampling
locations.
                                        36

-------
                                                                                 2672
                                     CHAPTER V
                                      Part 5


                   RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY IN THE VICINITY OF THE
                     HOW CHEMICAL COMPANY BRINE DISCHARGE TO
                           LAKE MICHIGAN NEAR LUDINGTON


     On August 10, 1967, a reconnaissance survey of the water quality and benthic
macroinvertebrate populations was conducted in Lake Michigan in the vicinity of the
Pow Chemical Company discharge near Big Sable Point (Appendix N).

     The discharge containing waste brines moved north with the alongshore current
in the valley between the third and fourth sand bars.  Conductivity remained very high,
40,000 tnicromhos, as far as 1/2 mile northeast.  At this point the brine mass commenced
to become significantly diluted and lost its identify, although traces could be
detected 2 1/2 miles distant.

     Several bottom samples were visually examined in the field to judge roughly if
the brine mass was grossly affecting the benthic fauna.  Five samples were analyzed
in the laboratory.  Conclusions were that the benthic fauna in the immediate vicinity
of the discharge.was virtually eliminated,, but that the effect was local.  Populations
commenced recovering 100 feet from the discharge and returned to near normal within
200 yards, depending on direction from discharge point.

     Rough water prevented detailed sampling at this time.   Further investigations are
scheduled to more clearly- identify the affected area.
                                        37

-------
                                                                                 2673
                                     CHAPTER V
                                      Part 6
                 Bini_nr,icAL INVESTIGATIONS IN THE VICINITY OF THE
                 PACKAGING CORPORATION OF AMERICA'S DISCHARGE TO
                            LAKE MICHIGAN NEAR MANISTEE


     Macroinvertebra'te surveys of the Lake Michigan bottom in the vicinity of
Packaging Corporation of America (PCA) discharge have been made in 1957 before the
operation started, in 1958, and in 1962.   The bottom animal populations in the
vicinity of-the discharge were indicative of a clean water environment.  However,
the effluent tended to "float': to' the lake surface and complaints of undesirable
odors and unnatural colors increased.  In 1966 PCA added brine from the discharge
of a nearby chemical company to their effluent.'  Effectively preventing the
undesirable "floating".

     Investigation in 1967 (Appendix 0) revealed chloride concentration on the lake
bottom at the discharge was 248 ing/I.  The effluent was apparently.flowing offshore
at this time as concentrations of 130 mg/1 were found 4,000 and 8,000 feet west
northwest.  Alongshore parallel to the discharge concentrations were generally less
than 20 mg/1.

     No objectionable bottom deposits could be found in the vicinity of the PCA
discharge during any of the surveys.  The bottom animal populations sampled a mile
north and south of the discharge were typical of a clean water environment.  Species
diversity of the bottom fauna community was lower in the discharge zone, 3.5
species/square foot, than in the zones to the north and south, 6 species/square foot.
                                         38

-------
                                                                                 2674
                                     CHAPTER V
                                      Part 7
               AQUATIC BIOTA INVESTIGATIONS IN THE VICINITY OF THE
                         BIR ROCK POINT NUCLEAR REACTOR .


     Beginning in 1.960, collections (usually biannual) of aquatic plants and animals
have been made in the vicinity of the Big Rock Point Reactor for radiological analysis.
Background radiation levels (gross beta) were established prior to September 1962 when
the Big Rock Point Reactor went critical.

     Plankton, filamentous algae, -periphyton, crayfish, and minnows have been collected
from the Lake Michigan shore zone in the vicinity of the cooling water discharge and
at 2 control stations, one 3 miles east and the other 3 miles west of the reactor.
The radioactivity of plankton has not varied between these stations on a given date.
The seasonal and annual changes noted are apparently related to fallout and natural
background.

     However, since going critical, radioactivity counts of other biota collected in
the Big Rock Point vicinity have been generally higher than at the 2 control stations.
During this period background radiation levels throughout the state have been
decreasing.  Although levels in the Big Rock Point biota are higher than the biota
controls, they are similar in magnitude to the levels found before criticality
(Appendix P).
                                         39

-------
                                                                                 2675
                                    CHAPTER V
                                     Part 8
                          OTHER TRIBUTARY AND LAKE MICHIGAN
                                MONITORING PROGRAMS


     Water quality monitoring of Great Lakes tributary streams was initiated by the
Water Resources Commission in May of 1955 to obtain background radioactivity
information.  In 1963, the program was expanded to include a variety of water
quality data.  The specific objectives of this program were to determine long-term
trends in the chemical, physical and bacteriological characteristics of tributary
streams to the Great Lakes in Michigan's Lower Peninsula.

     Initially 1 sampling station was established on.each of 28 drainage basins in
the Lower Peninsula, 12 of which are located on tributaries discharging to Lake
Michigan.  This provided coverage of all the major basins  as well as those
known to be receiving significant discharges of industrial or domestic wastes.  The
12  tributary  basins contain approximately 63% of Michigan's total land area in
the Michigan basin and discharge approximately 60% of the total flow contributed
to Lake Michigan from-Michigan tributaries.  Approximately 87% of the total
population in the Michigan portion of the Lake Michigan Basin reside in the monitored
basins.

     The monitoring stations (Appendix Q, Table 1) are located as close as possible
to the mouths of the basins and, with 1 exception, below all known sources of waste.
The exception is the station on the Kalamazoo River near Saugatuck where the effluent
from the Saugatuck sewage treatment plant discharges downstream from the sampling
point.  In this instance, the volume of effluent is small in relation to volume of
river flow and sampling below the outfall was not justified due to difficulty of
collection.

     Samples are collected every 2 weeks and analyzed by the Commission's laboratory
in Lansing.  The collection, storage, preservation and analyses of all samples are
in accordance with methods and procedures prescribed by Standard Methods for the
Examination of Water and Wastewater, Twelfth Edition.

     A summary of data collected for this program in 1965 and 1966 is presented in
Tables 2, 3 and Figure 1 of Appendix Q.  The monitored tributaries and their drainage
areas are shown on Map 1.  In addition, the data from individual stations for selected
parameters has been graphically presented in Figures 2 through 13 for the years 1965
and 1966, illustrating any seasonal or short-term fluctuations in.water quality.

     In addition to the regular monitoring of .Lake Michigan tributaries, the Commission
staff has inaugurated a program of sampling of raw water from Lake Michigan.  This is
done'at various water treatment plants around the perimeter of the lake.  The intent  of
the program is to establish exisitng water quality at  the various intakes and indicate
any trends which occur in the quality.

-------
                                                                                    26?6
     The  samples  are collected prior  to any  treatment by the plants and are handled
in the manner  described  for tributary samples.  These samples are currently collected
annually.   The first series was collected  in 1967 and the results are shown in Table 4
of Appendix Q.  Sampling locations  are outlined on Map  2.

     In addition  to  the  program conducted by the Water  Resources Commission the
Michigan  Department  of Public Health  requires that each water treatment plant submit
monthly operating reports which contain results of-physical, chemical and bacteriological
tests which are made on  the raw water supply.  Data submitted in 1966 is summarized in
Table 5 of  Appendix  0.   The 2 programs supplement each  other and furnish fairly complete
documentation  of  water quality at water intakes in Lake Michigan.
     The  staff of the  Water Resources Commission conducts various surveys throughout
the state in accordance  with its programs of pollution  prevention and abatement.
Table 6,  Appendix Q,  contains data  from several such surveys which were conducted in
the Lake  Michigan Basin.   The stations shown on Map 3 are ones which were located
closest to  Lake Michigan (most downstream) and are indicative of tributary water quality
at the time of the surveys.   This .information is presented to cover areas of the basin
not included under long-range monitoring.  Samples in some cases were collected over
21-hour periods while  others were single grab samples.

     Routine sampling  of the state's  surface waters for obtaining background
radioactivity  data was initiated in 1955 with the establishment of 4 sampling stations
on 2 eastern Michigan  streams.   In  1956 the  number of stations was increased to 11,.of
which 8 were on 5 different  streams and 3 were at municipal water supply intakes, on
the Great Lakes.

     In 1958 the  number  of sampling stations was increased to 26, in 1960 the sampling
network was expanded  to  31 stations and in 1963 to 38.  These include 13 stations on.
Great Lakes waters and 25  on interior  rivers or streams.  Twelve stations are at
municipal water supply intakes.  Map  4, Appendix Q, locates the sampling stations.

     The data  obtained by  this program, is published yearly as part of the report,
"State of Michigan, Water  Quality Monitoring Program, Water Quality Records", and
is available in the  files  of the Water Resources Commission.

     Five water quality  parameters  were selected as being indicative of the chemical
water quality  of  the  Lake  Michigan  tributaries; dissolved oxygen, biochemical oxygen
demand, chlorides, phosphates,  and  nitrate nitrogen.   Table 2, Appendix Q, is a
summary of  these  5 parameters by river basin.

Dissolved Oxygen

     The 2-year average  of the.DO values for the monitored streams ranges from 8.6  m'g/1
to 11.4 mg/1.   The lowest  recorded  single value was 6.0 mg/1 which was found in the
Pine River  at  Charlevoix and the Kalamazoo River at Saugatuck.  The Kalamazoo exhibits
the lowest  2-year average  while  the Pine and the St.  Joseph rivers exhibit the highest
2-year averages.

     The individual Figures  2-13, Appendix Q, illustrate the seasonal variations
which occur in  the DO levels,  with-the higher values present in the winter months
and the lower  values  found in late  summer and early fall.

-------
                                                                                  2677
 Biochemical Oxygen  Demand

     The  2-year averages of BOD values range from a low of 1.7 mg/1  in  the  Manistee.
 River to  a high of  5.5 mg/1 in the Grand River.  Only 3 of the rivers,  the  St.
 Joseph, the Grand,  and the Kalamazoo have BOD's above 3.0 mg/1.

     The  individual graphs illustrate fairly steady BOD values throughout the 2-year
 period with little  indication of seasonal or other trends.


 Chlorides

     The  2-year averages of chloride values, range from a low of 3 mg/1  in the
 Boardman  River at Traverse City to a high of 71 mg/1 in the 'Manistee River  at
 Manistee.  Three rivers have values below 10 mg/1 as an average.

     The  individual graphs indicate no particular trend through the  2-year  period.


 Phosphates - P0t+

     The  2-year averages of phosphate values range from a low of 0.008 mg/1 in the
 Manistee River to a high of 0.57 mg/1 in the Black River at South Haven.  In general
 the higher values are found in the southern part of the state which  is the most
 densely populated with the-exception of the Boardman River at Traverse City which
 exhibits a high value.

     The  individual graphs indicate a seasonal trend, in phosphate values with the
 high readings occurring in the winter months.

     To find the total amount of phosphorus (P) being contributed to Lake Michigan
 from Michigan tributaries, calculations were made using drainage area and flow
 data from U.  S. Geological Survey records and PO^ data from the tributary
monitoring program.   From the calculations (Appendix R),  the estimated annual
 average amount of total phosphorus (P) discharged is 2,700,000 pounds per l.,350 tons.


 Nitrate Nitrogen N03-N

     The 2-year averages of nitrogen values range from a low of 0.188 mg/1 in the
 White River to a high of 1.029 mg/1 in the Grand River.   The highest values are
 again found in the southern part of the state.

     The individual graphs indicate a seasonal fluctuation in nitrogen values with
 high readings in the winter months and low readings during the summer.

-------
                                                                                   2678
                                     CHAPTFR V
                                       Part 9
                         VESSEL  POLLUTION - OIL AMD RUBBISH


     The  number.of incidents  of oil pollution from vessels engaged in commercial
•navigation reported to  the  Water Resources Commission has increased markedly in
recent years.   These incidents  have ranged from the most serious—a sinking of an
oil barge on the Lake Michigan  coast, and the subsequent massive fouling of stretches
of beaches for  over 200 miles;  to the nearly continuous summertime complaints of
swimmers  smeared by heavy fuel  oils.

     The  increasing number  of complaints has, in general, corresponded with the
increase  of vessels on  the  Great Lakes using oil as fuel.  These have been vessels
solely engaged  in lake  commerce as well as the growing number of vessels engaged in
ocean commerce.   Nearly all vessels inbound into the Great Lakes via the St. Lawrence
Seaway use oil  as fuel.

     An attendant problem associated with Great Lakes commercial navigation is the
indiscriminate  overboard disposal of garbage,•dunnage, and trash.  The effects of
this problem grow increasingly  worse with the use of plastics and other
non-destructible  containers.  There is an increasing public and private cost
in the removal  of this  debris from Great Lakes beaches.  The aesthetic damage
is even more serious.

-------
                                                                                  2679


                                    CHAPTER VI



                                   CONCLUSIONS


     The citizens and government of Michigan are very keenly aware of the value of
clean water, both in Lake Michigan and in inland lakes.and streams.  The people have
supported, and State government has developed, broad-rscale and fast moving programs
of pollution control.

     Michigan law provides a full and effective statutory basis for preventing and
controlling pollution.  The State Legislature has repeatedly shown its willingness
to enact additional laws as. the need for them emerges.

     Through its Water Resources Commission, its Department of Public Health and  its
Geological Survey, Michigan has an aggressive, effective and large-scale program of
water pollution control in active operation.  The Michigan plan for effectuating this
program in 1967-68 has been fully approved by the Secretary of the Interior.

     The State has an ongoing and appropriately expanding program of waste disposal
surveillance and water quality monitoring which is fully responsive to rthe needs for
detecting and identifying its pollution problems.

     The Water Resources Commission and Department of Public Health have amply
demonstrated that when pollution problems are identified they can and do take
proper corrective action.

     The State Legislature has responded generously to Executive requests for
successive increases in State expenditures for pollution control.

     The Water Resources Commission has adopted water quality standards for all waters
together with a plan for implementation and enforcement of the' interstate waters within
a time period that is fully consistent with the objectives set forth in the Federal
report, 1'Water Pollution Problems of Lake Michigan and Tributaries".

     The Michigan agencies recognize the pollution problems on waters tributary- to
Lake Michigan and have in operation aggressive programs for their full and timely
correction.  The present deficiencies in waste treatment at inland locations do not
contribute to pollutional conditions in Lake Michigan except as a residual phosphate
loading carries on down to the lake.

     The Water Resources Commission recognizes the phosphate problem in accelerating
stream and lake water enrichment, and has adopted a state-wide policy and comprehensive
program for phosphate removal from waste discharges, with scheduled early completion
dates.

     The recently accelerating algae problem in Lake Michigan along its Michigan shore
appears to derive significantly from phosphate concentrations in alewives and its.
deposition in near-shore waters from the decomposition of these fish following their
increasingly massive seasonal die-off.  The control of alewife populations appears
to be an essential element of algae control.

-------
                                                                                 2680
     Oxygen deficiency problems  in the Michigan waters of Lake Michigan are not
disclosed by data collected by the Michigan Water Resources Commission.  The absence
of such problems is substantiated by findings of the U. S. Department of Health,
Education and Welfare's Public Health Service studies under the Great Lakes-Illinois
River Basin's Project.

     These findings, which were  cited by Special Master Albert E. Maris in his report
to the U. S. Supreme Court on the Chicago diversion litigation among the lake states,'
further show no open-lake pollutional concentrations of ammonia nitrogen, nitrate
nitrogen, phosphates, ABS, toxic metals, or other physical parameters.

     No Lake Michigan bathing beaches in Michigan have been closed or considered for
closing due to water pollution.  Bacteria counts at all such beaches, attributable
to human sewage, are well within the limits recommended in the Federal report for
this conference.

     The discharge of sewage, garbage, trash and oils from interstate carriers, and
the loss of oils and other pollutional cargo from such carriers resulting from ship-
wrecks, are of deep concern to the people and government of Michigan because of their
serious injury and threat of injury to recreational water use.  Early and full answers
are needed as to where the responsibility lies for coping with this problem, as is the
establishment of procedures for effective enforcement and for the prompt effectuation
of emergency measures to prevent and control accidental pollutional losses from such
carriers.

     The implementation of Michigan's plan and achievement of the improvements in
water quality in Lake Michigan will be greatly enhanced by the earliest possible
approval of the Michigan standards by the Secretary of the Interior.

     Accomplishment of the Michigan pollution control program is dependent largely
upon the availability of funds to build the necessary municipal waste treatment
facilities.  Full funding of the Federal grants authorized for this purpose in the
Clean Waters Restoration Act of 1966 is urgently necessary.   A massive state bonding
proposal providing for full state partnership in financing has been recommended by
Governor Romney to the 1968 Legislature.

-------
                                                      2681
               APPENDIX A
Act 245,  Public Acts of 1929,  as amended

-------
                                                                                          2682
                                        State  of Michigan

                                   WATER  RESOURCES COMMISSION

                            Act 2^5, Public  Acts of 1929, as  amended  *
     An act to  create  a  water resources  commission  to protect  and  conserve  the water  resources
of the state, to have  control over the pollution  of any   waters   of   the   state  and the great
lakes, with power  to make  rules and regulations governing  the  same, and  to  prescribe the powers
and duties of such commission;  to prohibit   the  pollution of any waters  of the state and the
great lakes;  to   designate   the commission as the  state agency to cooperate and negotiate with
other governments  and  agencies in matters  concerning   the water resources  of the state; and to
provide penalties  for  the  violation of this act.

     Sec. 1.  For  the  purpose of carrying  out  the  provisions  of  this  act  there  is  hereby
created a water resources  commission,  hereinafter referred  to as the  commission, which shall
consist of  the director of  conservation,  the  commissioner of  health,  the highway commissioner,
the director of agriculture,  and 3 citizens  of   the  state to be  appointed by the governor, by
and  with  the  advice  and   consent  of the senate, 1  from groups representative of industrial
management, 1 from groups  representative of municipalities, and 1  from groups representative of
conservation associations  or interests,'  for   terms  of 3  years each except that of the members
first appointed, 1 shall be  appointed for  a term  of 1 year,  1 for a term of 2 years, and 1 for
a term of 3 years. Vacancies shall be filled  for the unexpired  term  in   the  same  manner as
original appointments.   Members  of the  commission  shall be entitled  to  actual and necessary
expenses incurred  in the performance of  official  duties. It shall  be the duty of the department
of administration  to provide suitable office facilities for the use of the  commission.

     Each of the aforesaid state officers  is   hereby . authorized   to designate a representative
from his department to serve in his stead  as a member of the commission  for 1 or more meetings.

     Sec. 2.  The  commission shall organize   and make its own rules and  regulations and pro-
cedure and shall meet  at least" once each month and  shall keep  a record of its proceedings.  The
commission shall protect and conserve the  water resources  of the   state  and shall have control
of the pollution of surface  or underground waters of the state of  Michigan  and the great lakes,
which are or may be affected by waste disposal of municipalities,  industries, public or private
corporations, individuals,   partnership  associations,  or any other entity.  The commission is
empowered to make  or cause to be made surveys, studies  and investigations of the uses of waters
of the state, both surface and underground, and to  cooperate  with  other  governments, govern-
mental  units   and agencies  thereof  in  making  such surveys, studies and  investigations.  The
commission shall assist  in an advisory capacity any flood  control  district  which may be author-
ized by the legislature  of this state.   The  commission in the public  interest shall have the
right and duty  to  appear and present evidence, reports  and other   testimony during the hearings
involving the creation and organization  of flood  control districts.  It  shall also be the duty
and responsibility of  the  commission to advise and consult with the legislature on the obliga-
tion of the state  to participate in the  costs  of  construction  .and maintenance as provided for
in the official plans  of any flood control district  or   intercounty  drainage  district.  The
commission shall have  authority to, and  shall  enforce the  provisions of  this act and shall make
and promulgate  such rules  and  regulations  as shall be deemed necessary to carry out the pro-
visions of this act.  The rules and regulations  of the commission shall be promulgated in con-
formity with the   provisions  of Act No. 88  of   the  Public Acts  of 19^3,  as  amended,  being
sections 2^.71  to  2^.82, inclusive, of the Compiled Laws of 1948.

    . Sec. 2a.   The water resources commission  is  hereby designated the state agency to cooperate
and negotiate .with other governments,  governmental units and  agencies   thereof  in  matters
concerning  the water  resources  of the  state,  including but not limited  to flood control and
beach erosion control.   The   commission  is  further  authorized   to   take  such steps as may be
   Amended by Act  11?,  P.A..19^9,  effective May  18,  19^9; Act  165, P.A.  1963, effective
              September 6,  1963;  and Act ^05, P.A. 1965, effective October 29, 1965.

-------
                                                                                         2683


necessary to take advantage of any act of congress heretofore or hereafter enacted  which may be
of assistance in carrying out the purposes of this act.

     The commission shall report to the  governor  and to the legislature at least  once in each
year any plans or projects being carried on or considered and  shall include in  such  report re-
quests for any legislation needed to carry out any  proposed projects or agreements made neces-
sary thereby, together with any requests for appropriations.

     Sec. 3.  The commission shall be authorized to bring any appropriate action in the name of
the people of the state of Michigan, either at law or in  chancery as may be necessary to carry
out the provisions of this act, and  to  enforce  any and all laws relating to the  pollution of
the waters of this state.  Whenever  the  attorney  general  deems  it necessary, he  shall take
charge of and prosecute all criminal cases arising under the provisions of this  act.

     Sec. 4.  The commission or any agent duly appointed by it shall have the right to enter at
all reasonable  times  in  or upon any private or public property for the purpose of  inspecting
and investigating conditions relating to the pollution of any waters of this state. The commis-
sion shall have the right to call  upon  any  officer, board, department, school, university or
other state institution and the officers or employees  thereof for any assistance deemed neces-
sary to the carrying out of this act.

     Sec. 5.  The  commissipn  shall  establish  such  pollution  standards  for lakes, rivers,
streams and other waters of the state in relation to the public use to which they are or may be
put, as it. shall deem necessary.  It  shall  have  the authority to ascertain and determine for
record and in making its order what volume of water actually flows in all streams,  and the high
and low water marks of lakes and other waters of the  state,  affected by the waste disposal or
pollution of municipalities, industries, public and private corporations, individuals, partner-
ship associations, or any other entity.  It shall have authority; to make regulations  and orders
restricting the polluting content of any waste material  or  polluting  substance discharged or
sought to be discharged into any lake, river, stream, or other waters of  the  state.  It shall
have the authority to take  all  appropriate  steps to prevent any pollution which  is deemed by
the commission to be unreasonable and against  public  interest  in view of the  existing condi-
tions in any lake, river, stream, or other waters of the state.

     Sec. 6. (a)  It shall be unlawful for any person directly or indirectly to  discharge  into
the waters of the state any substance which is or  may  become  injurious to the public health,
safety or welfare;  or  which  is  or may become injurious to domestic, commercial, industrial,
agricultural, recreational or other uses which are being or  may  be  made  of   such  waters; or
which is or may become injurious to the value or utility of riparian lands;  or  which is or may
become injurious to livestock, wild animals, birds,  fish, aquatic life or plants or  the growth
or propagation thereof be  prevented  or injuriously affected; or whereby the value of fish and
game is or may be destroyed or impaired.

     (b)  The discharge of any  raw  sewage of human origin, directly or indirectly into any of
the waters of the state shall be considered  prima  facie  evidence of the violation  of section
6 (a) of this act unless, said discharge shall have been permitted by an  order,  rule  or regula-
tion of the commission.  Any  city,  village  or  township  which permits, allows or suffers the
discharge of such raw sewage of human origin into any of the  waters of the state by  any of its
inhabitants or persons occupying lands from which said  raw sewage originates, shall  be subject
only to the remedies provided for in section 7 of this act.

     (c)  Whenever a court of competent  jurisdiction  in this state shall have,  ordered the in-
stallation of a sewage disposal system in any township, and the  plans therefor  shall have been
prepared, and approved by the state .health  commissioner,, the township shall have authority to
issue and sell the necessary bonds for the.construction and installation thereof, including the
disposal plant and such intercepting and other.  sewers as may be necessary to permit  the effec-
tive operation of such system. Such bonds shall be issued in the same manner as  provided for in
Act No. 320 of the Public Acts of 1927, being  sections 123.2W to 123.253 of the Compiled Laws
of 1948, or any other act providing for the issuance of bonds in townships.

     (d)  Any violation of any provision of section 6 shall be  prima  facie  evidence of  the
existence of a public nuisance and in  addition to the remedies provided for in  this  act may be
abated according  to  law  in an action brought by the attorney general in a court  of competent
jurisdiction..

-------
                                                                                          268^


     •Sec.  7.  Whenever in the opinion of the commission any person shall violate or is about to
violate the provisions of this act,  or fails to control the polluting content or substance dis-
charged or to be discharged into any waters of the state,  the commission may notify the alleged
offender of such determination by the commission.   Said  notice  shall contain in addition to a
statement  of the specific violation  which the  commission believes to exist,  a proposed form of
order  or other  action which it deems appropriate to assure  correction of said problem within a
reasonable period of time  and  shall set a date for a hearing on the facts and proposed action
involved,  said  hearing to be scheduled not less than 4 weeks or more than 8 weeks from the date
of  said notice  of determination.  Extensions  of the date, of hearing may be granted by the com-
mission or on  request.  At such hearing any interested party may appear,  present witnesses and
submit evidence.  Following such hearing,  the final  order  of  determination of the commission
upon such  matter shall be conclusive,  unless  reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the
administrative  procedures of Act No. 19? of the Public Acts of 1952,  as amended,  being sections
24.101  to  24.110 of the Compiled Laws of 19*4-8,  or  any  amendment  thereto  in the circuit court
for the county  of Ingham,  in or for  the  county in which such person resides, or for the county
in  which the violation occurred, upon petition therefor  filed within 15 days after the service
upon said  person of the final order  of determination.             '

     Sec.  8.  (a)  Whenever any person shall feel himself  aggrieved  by the restriction of pol-
luting content,  waste or pollution,  or any other order of the commission, .he shall have a right
to  file a   sworn  petition  with  the commission,  setting forth the grounds and reasons for his
complaint  and asking for a hearing of the  matter involved.   The  commission shall thereupon fix
the time and place for' such'hearing  and shall notify the petitioner  thereof.  At  such hearing
the petitioner  and any other interested party may  appear,  present witnesses and submit evidence.
Following  such  hearing, the  final  order   of  determination of the commission upon such matter
shall be conclusive unless reviewed  in accordance  with the   provisions  of  the  administrative
procedures of Act No. 197 of the  Public  Acts  of  1952,   as amended,   being  sections 24.101 to
24.110  of  the Compiled Laws of 1948,  or any  amendment  thereto  in  the  circuit court for the
county  of  Ingham,  or for the county  in which such  person resides,  or for  the  county  in which
the alleged violation occurred.

     (b)   On  and after May 18,  l°49i  any  person  requiring  a new or substantial increase over
and above  the present use now made of the  waters of the  state for sewage or waste disposal pur-
poses shall file with the commission a written  statement setting forth the nature of the enter-
prise or development contemplated, the amount of water  required  to  be  used,  its source,  the .
proposed point  of discharge of the wastes  into  the waters  of the state,  the estimated amount so
to  be discharged,  and a fair statement setting  forth the expected bacterial,  physical,  chemical
and other  known characteristics of the wastes.   Within 60 days of receipt of the  statement,  the
commission shall make an order stating such minimum restrictions as in the judgment of the com-
mission may be  necessary to  guard  adequately   against  such unlawful uses of the waters of the
state as are  set forth in section 6.  If the order  is not acceptable to the user,  he may request
a hearing  on  the matter involved,  following which  the commission's final order of determination
in  this connection shall be conclusive unless reviewed in accordance  with the provisions of the
administrative  procedures  of Act No.  197 of the Public Acts of 1952,  as  amended,  being sections
24.101  to  24.110 of the Compiled Laws  of 1948,  or  any amendment  thereto   in the circuit court
for the county  of Ingham,  in or for  the county  in  which  the  user resides,  or for the county in
which the  use is contemplated,   upon  petition   therefor filed  within   15  days after service
upon said  user  of the final order of determination.

     Sec.  9.  Any duly appointed agent of  the  commission   shall  have authority  to enforce the
provisions of this act and may  make  criminal  complaint against any person violating the same.
After service of a written notice  of determination,  setting forth specifically any violation of
this act,  any person who shall fail  to comply with the order of the commission shall be subject
to  the  penalties of this act.

     Sec.  10.  Any person,  except a municipality,  who discharges any   substance into the waters
of  the  state  contrary  to the  provisions  of section 6 or who fails to comply with any restric-
tion, regulation or final  order of determination of the  commission made  under the provisions of
this act shall be  guilty of a   misdemeanor   and upon conviction thereof shall be punished  by a
fine of not less than $500.00  and  in the discretion  of  the.  court it may impose an additional
fine of not less than $500.00  per  day  for  any  number of   days during  which such  violation
occurred:  Provided,   however,   That   such person  shall  not be subject to  the penalties of  this
section if the .discharge of. the effluent is in  conformance  with and obedient  to a rule,  regula-
tion or order of the commission. In  addition to the minimum fine herein  specified,  the attorney


                                                 51

-------
                                                                                         2685


general,  at the request of the department of conservation,  is  authorized to file a suit in any
court of competent  jurisdiction  to recover tho full value of the injuries done to the natural
resources of the state by such violation.

     Sec. 11.  Wherever the word "person" is used in this act, it shall be construed to include
any municipality, industry, public  or  private  corporation, co-partnership, firm or any other
entity whatsoever.  Wherever the words "waters of the state"  shall  be  used in this act, they
shall be construed to include lakes, rivers and streams  and all other water courses and waters
within the confines of the state and also the great lakes bordering thereon.

     Sec. 12.  This act shall  not  be. construed as repealing any of the provisions of the law
governing the pollution of lakes and streams, but shall  be  held and construed as ancillary to
and supplementing the same and in addition to the laws now in force,  except as the same may be
in direct  conflict  herewith.  This  act  shall not be construed as applying to copper or iron
mining operations, whereby such operations result in the  placement, removal, use or processing
of copper or  iron  mineral  tailings  or  copper.or iron mineral deposits from such operations
being placed in inland waters on bottom lands  owned by or under the control of the mining com-
pany and only water which may contain a minimal  amount  of  residue as determined by the water
resources commission resulting from such placement, removal, use or processing being allowed or
permitted to escape into public waters;  or applying to the discharge of water from underground
iron or copper mining operations subject to a determination by the water resources commission.

     Sec. 12a.  The provisions of this act shall be construed as  supplemental  to and in addi-
tion to  the  provisions  of Act No. 316 of the Public Acts of 1923, as amended, being sections
261.1 to 277.10, inclusive, of the Compiled Laws of 19^8; and nothing  in  this  act  shall  be
construed to amend or repeal any law of the  state  of  Michigan relating to the public service
commission, the department of  conservation and the department of health relating to waters and
water structures, or any act or parts of acts not inconsistent with the provisions of this act.

-------
                                                2686
           APPENDIX B
CONTROL OF WATERCRAFT POLLUTION
               53

-------
                                                                               268?
                      MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION
                           WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION

                             PROPOSED RULE FOR THE
                        CONTROL OF WATERCRAFT POLLUTION


     By authority conferred on the Water  Resources  Commission by  Sections  2  and  5

of Act 245, Public Acts  of  1929, as amended, being  CL '48,  §  323.2  and  § 313.5,  the

following'is hereby promulgated, to go into effect  on January 1,  1970.

R 323.AAA.

     1.  TERMS DEFINED

         (a)  The term "watercraft" means any contrivance used or capable  of being

              used for navigation upon water whether  or  not capable of  self-propulsion,

              except passenger or cargo-carrying vessels subject  to the Interstate

              Quarantine Resultions of the United States Public Health  Service adopted

              pursuant to Title 42 United States Code §  241,  243, 252 and  262-272.

         (b)  The term "sewage" means all human body  wastes,  treated or untreated.

         (c)  The term "litter" means any bottles,  glass, crockery, cans,  scrap

              metal, junk,  paper,  garbage, rubbish, or similar refuse discarded  as no

              longer useful or usable.

         (d)  The term "marine toilet" means any toilet  on  or within any watercraft.

         (e)  The term "Commission" means the Water Resources Commission,  Department

              of  Conservation.

         (f)  The term "non-pollutional"  means incapable of causing.unlawful pollution

              as  defined in Section.6.

     2.  MARINE TOILETS  - RESTRICTIONS AND POLLUTION  CONTROL  DEVICES

         (a)  No  person shall operate a marine toilet on a  watercraft on the waters

              of  the state  so as to discharge any sewage into such  waters  unless such

              sewage has.been rendered non-pollutional by passage through  a  device

              which has been approved by  the Commission.

-------
                                                                                  2688
          (b)  No person  owning or operating a watercraft having a marine toilet shall
              use or  permit  the use of such toilet on the waters of the state unless the
              toilet  is  equipped with one of the following pollution control devices:
              i.  A holding  tank which will retain all sewage that is produced on
                  the watercraft, or
             'ii.  An  incinerating device which will reduce to ash a 1.1 sewage that is
                  produced on the watercraft, or
            iii. ;A device which has been determined by the Commission to be capable
                  of  rendering the sewage discharges non-pollutional in accordance with
                  the requirements of Act 245, Public Acts of 1929, as amended.
          (c)  No person  shall dispose of sewage accumulated in holding tanks or in
              any other  container on a watercraft in such a manner that the sewage
              reaches or may reach the waters of the state except through a sewage
              disposal facility which has the approval of the.State Department of
              Public  Health or its designated representative.
P. 523.AAB.  WATERCRAFT REGISTRATION - MARINE TOILET FACILITIES
     Persons when making application for a certificate of number for a watercraft
pursuant  to i 3, Act  303, Public Acts of 1967, (CL '48,  § 281.653)  shall disclose at
such time to the Commission whether such watercraft has  within or on it a marine
toilet, and if so, whether such toilet is equipped with  one of the pollution control
devices as required by this Rule.  The Commission may request the Secretary of State to
provide it with the name of any applicant whose application indicates the absence of
such pollution control device on a.marine toilet.
R 323.AAC.  DISPOSAL  OF LITTER
     The  disposal of  litter shall be subject to the provisions of Act 106 of the
Public Acts of Michigan  for 1963.
January 29, 1968
                                          56

-------
                                                       2689
                 APPENDIX C
MICHIGAN'S INTERSTATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
                    57-59

-------
COMMISSION  OBJECTIVE:
     WAUHS IN WHICH THE FOISTING QUALITY IS BFTTFR THAN TWF ESTABLISHED STANDARDS AS Of THE 3ATE  IUC'1 STANDARDS
BECOME EFFECTIVE WILL NOT BE LOWERED IN QUALITY BY ACTION OF. THE  WATER ([SOURCES  COMMISSION UNLESS AND UNTIL IT
KU BEEN AFFIRMATIVELY DEMONSTRATED THAT THE CHANCE rN QUALITY VILl NOT BECOKF.  INJURIOUS 10 I HE FUBLIC HEALTH.
SAFETY. OK  WELFARE: OR BECOME INJURIOUS TO DOMESTIC.  COMMERCIAL.  INDUSTRIAL. AGRICULTURAL. RECREATIONAL DR OTHER
USES WHICH  ARE BEING MADE OF SUCH WATERS: OR BECOME INJURIOUS To  THE VALUE OR UTILITY OF RIPARIAN  LANDS: OH
BECOME INJURIOUS TO LIVESTOCK.  WILD ANIMALS. BIROS. FISH. AQUATIC LIFE OR PLANTS. 0* THE GROWTH OR PROPAGATION
THEREOF BE  PREVENTED OR INJURIOUSLY AFFECTED: Oil WHEREBY THE VALUE OF FISH AND  GAME HAY BE DESTROYED OR IMPAIRED.
     WATEK  WHICH DOES NOT MEET  THE STANDARDS WILL BE  IMPROVED IN  QUALITY TO MICT.TKE STANDARDS.
                                                                                                                                                         2690
WATER
WX*R
^
^%s
A
WATER SUPPLY
(1.) DOMESTIC
cul irwry and food
processing.
(2.) INDUSTRIAL
Such as cool ing
and manufacturing
process.
B
RECREATION
(1.) TOTAL BODY
CONTACT
Such AS swimming,
water ski ing and skin
revent nuisance.

Present at all times in


prevent nuisance.

At the average low river flow of
naintained for;
i pec res: Not less than 6 at
»ny cime.
o tolerant fish - warm Mater
peeves ; Average dai ly 00 not
less than 5 . nor shal 1 any
single value be less than <+.
Pecies: Average daily DO not
ess tnan U, nor shal 1 any
ingle value be less than 3.
At greater flows the 00 shall
e in excess of these values.


prevent nuisance.


3
SUSPENDED ,
COLLOIDAL 8
SETTLEABLE
MATERIALS

de* i onatrrl u*,c.


des ignated u*r.
No objectionable
desi gnated use.


desi gnated use.
No Objectionable




color, or depot I is m
quantities sufficient to


designated use.

RESIDUES
(0>tir "-, 4nd nutet i*|
Of unrvitural origin
«nd oi Is)

visible f i In of' Oi I .
materials. NO globules
of grease.

visible film of Oil',
gasoline or related .
materials. No globules
of grease.

visible f i Im of oi I .
materials. No globules
of grease,
Lr^i"r'i::x:,,,
visible f i Im of oi 1 .
gasol in* or related
materials. No globules
of grease.

materials. No globules
of grease.



fjei_i_d_ues_: No -evidence.
Df such material e«cept
materials. No globules
of grease.

visible fill of oi 1 .
maierjals. No globules
of .grease.
TOXIC a
DELETERIOUS
SUBSTANCES
Cyanide: Normally not'
upoer 1 imit of 0.2 «g/I. '
detectable with a minimum
upper Limit of 0.05 mg/t .
Phenol : limitations as.
defined under A-8.



or may become injurious to




application factors may be
used in specific cases when
ustified on the basis of
available evidence and
approved by the appropriate


related to toxicants. Toxic
and deleterious .substances
which are or may become
use.


-
                                                                                60

-------
                                                                                                                                                2691
QUALITY        STANDARDS
TOTAL
DISSOLVED
SOL10S
("9/1)-
FOK GREAT LAKES t CON-
The maximum shall not
exceed 200.
average shall not excee
of 10 is a desirable
condition* are less than
10.
FOR INLAND WATERS:
Shall not exceed 500 as
a monthly average, nor
exceed 750 at any time.
Chloride*: The monthly
average shell not excee
125.
Shall not exceed $00 as
a monthly average nor
125-
tions less than those
which are or may become
injurious to the
designated use.

which are or may become
injurious to the

becomes available on
deleterious effects.


minerals. Maximum
1*0% as determined by the
formula (Na x 100)
when the bases are ex*
pressed as milliequiva-



tions lest than those
which are or may become
injurious to the
designated use.

NUTRIENTS
Phosphorus, ammonia.

from' industrial .
limited to the'extent
adverse effects on water
and slimes which are or
may become injurious to
the designated use.

from industrial,
municipal, or domestic
the stimulation of
growths of algae, weeds
and slimes which are or
may become injurious to
the desi gnated use.
from Industrial ,
municipal ,• or domestic
animal sources shall be
the stimulation of
growths of algae, weeds
and slimes which are or .
may became injurious to
the designated use.

municipal, or domestic
animal sources shall be
the stimulation of'
growths of algae, weeds
and slimes which are or
may become injurious to
the designated use.
municipal , or domestic
animal sources shall be
the stimulation of
growths of algae, weeds-
end slimes which are or'
may become injurious to
the designated use.
rom industrial ,
nimal sources shall be •
i mt ted to the extent
he stimulation of
rowths of el gee, weeds
may become injurious to
Oj concentrations shall
on form to USPHS Or Inking

rom industrial,
unicipal, or domestic
nimal sources shall be
imited to the extent
timulation of growths of
Igae, weeds and slimes
which' are or may become
njurious to the des.rg-
ated use.
8
TASTE 8 ODOR
PRODUCING
SUBSTANCES

may become injurious to
Monthfy average phenol
O.OOS «g/l for a single
-.ample.

origin shall be less

stances of unnatural
origin shall be less
than those which are or
the designated use.

ori gin shal 1 be less
than those which are or

origin shall be less
than those which are
fish or game.

stances. of unnatural
than those which are or
may become injurious to




origin shall be less
than those which are or
may become Injurious to

<* 9
TEMPERATURE**
<°F>







90°F maximum

90°F maximum


Ambient 'Increase 1 imi t
;r:To!d «•--• '»» w.
fish - warm
w.t.r ip.cl.1 56° to ""• 10° 85°
max.
Tolerant fish- 32° to 59° 15°
warm water
species. 60° to "«• 10* . 87°
max.








10
HYDROGEN
ION
(pH)
pN shall not have *n
more than 0. 5 uni t



range 6.5-8.8 with a
maximum induced,
variation of 0.5 unit

Maintained within the
range 6.5*8.8 with a
maximum Induced


maximum induced

maximum artificially
range. Changes, in
the pH of natural
waters outside these
values must be toward
neutrality (7.O.).
pH thai I not have an
ounces.




ange '6.5-8.8 with a
maximum induced
arfation of 0.5 uni t
within-this range.

RADIOACTIVE
MATERIALS
An upper limit of 1000
beta activity (in absence
limit Is exceeded the
specific radionucl idet
present must be identified
fact that the concentre'
tion of nuclides will not
produce exposures above
established by the Federal
Radiation Council.
It shed when information
become* available on
deleterious effects.

Standards to be estab-
lished when information
becomes available on

Standards to be estab-
iccomes aval (able on

Standards to be estab-
tecomes available on


An upper limit of 1000
Strontium-90). If chit
limit is exceeded the
specific r'adionucl'ides
present must be identified

tion of nuclides will not
produce exposures above
the recommended limits
established by the Federal
Radiation Council.
lished when information
becomes available on
deleterious effects.

                                                                  For  the Great Lakes  and connecting waters no heat load in sufficient quantity to
                                                                  create conditions which are. or may become injurious  to the Public health,  safecv
                                                                  or welfare; or which are or  may become injurious to  domestic, comerciat, industrial,

                                                                  waters; or which are or nay  become Injurious to the  value or utility of riparian
                                                                  lands; or which are  or may become Injurious  to livestock, wild animals, birds, fish
                                                                  or aquatic life or the growth or propagation thereof.
                                                                                      61

-------
                                                       2692
               APPENDIX  D
MICHIGAN'S  INTRASTATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS
                   62-64

-------
                                              2693
  WATER QUALITY STANDARDS

            for

MICHIGAN INTRASTATE WATERS
    .State of Michigan
Water Resources Commission
Department of Conservation
   Adopted January T968
           65

-------
                                                                                                                                                                  2694
COWISSIW 'OBJECTIVE:
     MATERS IH WHICH THE  EXISTIKS QUALITY IS BETTER THAN THE  ESTABLISHED STANDARDS AS OF THE DATE SUCH STANDARDS BECOKE
EFFECTIVE WILL WIT PE  LOWERED IN CUALITY BY ACTION Cf THE WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION UNLESS AND UNTIL IT HAS BEEN ,
AFFIRMATIVELY OP-TTSTRATED THAT THE CHAS3E IN QUALITY WILL KOI BECOKE INJURIOUS TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY. OR
WELFARE! OR 8ECOMF INJURIOUS  TO DOMESTIC. CCWERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL. AGPICULTURAL. RECREATIONAL OR OTHER USES WHICH ARE
BEING MADE OF SUCH WATERS;  OS BECOXE  INJURIOUS TO THE VALUE OR UTILITY OF RIPARIAN LAKOS. OR SECCKE INJURIOUS TO
LIVESTOCK, WILD A.N!**ALS.  BIRDS, FISH, AQUATIC LIFE OR PLA.VTS, "OS THE GROWTH OR PROPAGATION THEREOF BE PREVENTED OR
INJURinjSLY AFFECTED  OR  KHERE8Y THE VALUE OF FISH AKD GAKE KAY BE DESTROYED OR IMPAIRED.
     WATER WHICH pnrS  SOT KEET THE STAKDARDS WILL BE IMPROVED IN QUALITY TO MEET THE STANDARDS.
WATER
^VR.
^
^
A
WATER SUPPLY
(1.) DOMESTIC
Such as drinking.
culinary and food
processing.
(2.) INDUSTRIAL -.
Such as cool ing-
process.
B
RECREATION
(I.) TOTAL BODY
CONTACT
Such as swimming.
water skiing and skin
diving.
(2.) PARTIAL BODY
'CONTACT
Such as fishing,
hunting, trapping

^
FISH, WILDLIFE
AND OTHER
AQUATIC LIFE
such as
\9 P opag j




b
AGRICULTURAL
I,.—
Such as livestock
Mater Ing, Irrigation
and spraying.
COMMERCIAL
AND OTHER
Such as" navigation,
hydroelectric and
• steam generated •
electric power and
uses not included
elsewhere In these
standards r
1
COLIFORM
. GROUP
(organ! was/ lOOnl
or MPN)
The monthly aeoqatric average
shall not exceed 5000 nor shal
20J of the samples examined
exceed 3000, nor exceed 20,000
in more than 5$ of the samples

series of 10 consecutive
examined exceed 10,000. The
average for the same 10 con-
secutive samples Shall not
exceed 1000.
The geometric average of any •
samples shall not exceed 1000
nor shall 20% of the samples
examined exceed 5.000. The
fecal co li form geometric
average for the same 10
consecut ' ve samples sha 1 1 not
exceed 100.
The geome trie ave rage of any
samples shall not exceed 5000
nor shall 20% of the samples
examined exceed 10.000. The
fecal co li form geometric
average for the same 10 con-
exceed 1000.
The geometric average of any
samples shall not exceed 5000
nor shall 20% of the samples
examined exceed 10,000. The
fecal co li form geometric
secutive samples shall not
exceed 1000.




The geometric average of any
series of 10 consecutive
samples shall not exceed 5000
nor shall 20% of the samples
fecal col iform geometric
average for the same 10 con-
exceed 1000. .
series of 10 consecutive
samples shall not exceed $000
nor shal) 20% of the samples
examined exceed 10,000. The
fecal col iform geometric
average for the same 10
consecutive samples shall not
exceed 1000.
2
DISSOLVED
OXYGEN
(og/l)
Present at all tines in





Present at al 1 times in
Sufficient quantities to
prevent nuisance.



At the average low flow of :
occur once in 10 years the
following DO values shall be '
maintained in rivers capable
of supporting: Intolerant
fish, cold-water species
than ft at any time;
Intolerant fish, warm-water
iDecies (bass. Dike, Dan-
fish) - Average daily DO
not less tnan 5. nor shal)
any. single value be less
than 
-------
                                                        2695
QUALITY   STANDARDS
TOTAL
DISSOLVED
SOLfPS
(mg/l)
S-lall not exceed 500 as
average shal 1 not
any single value
exceed 1 25.


Shal 1 not exceed 500 as
125.

lions less than chose
which are or may become
injurious CO the
designated use.


des ignated use .
becomes available on






minerals. Max i mum
percentage of sodium
formula (Ha x 100)
(Na+Ca+Mg*k)
ients per 1 Iter,


which are or may become
injurious to the
designated use.
fctw,.
' *»•"
H shal 1 not have an
ources.



ange 6.5-8.8 with a
ariaclon of 0.5 uni t
within this range.

II
RADIOACTIVE
MATERIALS

present must be identified
fact that the concentra-
tion of nucl ides wi 1) not
produce exposures above
the recommended limits
established by the Federal
Radiation Counci 1 .
i shed when information


Standards to be estab-
lished when information


ished when information
becomes available on

ished when information
becomes available on






An upper limit of 1000
5trontium-90). If this
limit is* exceeded the
specific radionucl ides
by complete analysis in
'act that the concentra-
tion of nuclides will not
iroduc* exposures above
the recommended limits
established by the Federal
Radiation Counci t.
1 ished when information
deleterious effects.


-------
                                                                                                  2696
C.  Fish, wildlife and other aquatic life.

     These additional water qua I ity .standards for DISSOLVED OXYGEN apply to inland lakes
naturally capable of supportinq:

Intolerant fish, cold-water species (trout, whitefish, cisco)

     a.   In warm-water   lokes with little water exchanr)C which ore capable of  sustaining cool
     stratum of we I I-oxygenated  water throuqhout the summer (above a hypol imnion with very
     little oxyqen):  maintain more than 6 mg/I  of dissolved oxyqen throughout the epiI imnion
     and the upper one-third of  the thermocline during the entire summer stagnation period.
     At all other times  the dissolved oxygen concentration must be maintained  at natural
     levels except in prescribed mixinq zones.

     b.   In lakes capable of sustaininq hiqh oxygen values throughout the hypolimnion during
     periods of stagnation:  maintain dissolved oxyqen values greater than 6 mg/I  throughout
     the entire lake.

     c.   In lakes which  serve as principal anadromous fish migration routes:  maintain more
     than 5 mq/I of  dissolved oxyqen throughout the epiIimnion and the upper one-third of
     the thermocline in  strat.ified lakes during periods of migration.  In unstratified lakes
     maintain more than  5 mg/I  of dissolved oxygen throughout the entire lake  during  periods
     of migration.

     d.   In shallow, unstratified cold-water lakes:  maintain dissolved oxygen greater than
     6 mg/I throughout the entire lake.

Intolerant fish, warm-water species (bass, pike, panfish)

     a.   In warm-water lakes with little water exchange:   maintain dissolved oxygen values
     greater than 5 mg/I  throuqhout the epiI imnion and the upper one-third  of  the  thermocIin*.
     during the entire summer stagnation period.  At all  other times the dissolved oxygen
     concentration must  be maintained at natural levels except in a prescribed mixing zone.

     b.   In warm-water lakes with a high rate of water exchange:  maintain oxygen  values
     greater than 5 mg/I  throughout the epil imnion and the upper one-third  of  the  thermocline
     during the entire summer stagnation period.  At all  other times the dissolved oxygen
     concentration must  be maintained at more than 5 mg/1  except in areas where natural
     oxygen depressions occur.

     These additional water quality standards for TEMPERATURE apply to inland  lakes
naturally capable of supportinq:

Intolerant fish, cold-water species (trout, whitefish, cisco)

     a.  Small  warm-water lakes with little water exchange which are capable of  supporting
     trout in the thermocline or hypolimnion and shallow,  unstratified cold-water  lakes
     shall not be artificially warmed.

     b.  Large warm-water lakes with little water exchange which are capable of  supporting
     trout in the thermocline or hypolimnion shall  not receive a heat load  which would warm
     the  thermocline or  hypolimnion. Surface waters may  be warmed I0°F when ambient temperature
     is less than 45°F and 5°F when ambient temperature  is greater than 45°F.   Maximum limit
     is 85°F.

     c.   In lakes which serve as principal anadromous fish migration routes the-temperature  of
     the epiIimnion shall not be elevated more than 5°F  above  ambient during the times of.
     migration, and shall, in no instance, interfere with  migration.  If  ambient water
     temperatures in the migratory channels during the times of migration exceed 65°F they may
     not be artificially increased to greater than 70°F.

Intolerant fish, warm-water species (bass, pike, panfish)

     In warm-water lakes incapable of supporting trout:   surface waters may be warmed I0°F when
     ambient temperature is less than 45°F and 5°F when  amblent, temperature is greater than
     45°F.  Maximum  limit is 85°F.

Anadromous fish migrations


     Warm-water rivers that serve as principal  migratory  channels for anadromous fish species
     and that have ambient water temperatures in excess  of 65°F during the  times of mi-gration
     may not be artificially warmed to greater than 70°F.   At  other times of the year the
     standards  for  intolerant fish, warm-water species in  rivers apply.

                                               68

-------
                                        2697
   APPENDIX  E
CHLORINATION POLICY
        69

-------
  GEORGE ROMNEY, Governor

ALBERT E. HEUSTIS, M.D., Director
     January 4, 1967
                                                                                  2698
                       STATE OF MICHIGAN
                       DEPARTMENT   OF
PUBLIC  HEALTH
                       3300 N: IOGAN, LANSING. MICHIGAN 48914
      DEPARTMENT LETTER NO. 35-1
     TO:       Municipalities Operating Sewage Treatment Plants
               Bureau Chiefs
               Division Chiefs
               Directors of Full-Time Local Health Departments.

     FROM:     John E. Vogt, Chief
               Division of Engineering

     SUBJECT:  Disinfection of Sewage Treatment Plant Effluents

     For many years most communities and others operating sewage treatment plants
     have chlorinated their treated wastewaters before discharging them into our
     streams and lakes.  This practice has provided a large measure of protection
     of the public health.  Present trends in public need for higher water quality
     to permit increased use of our public waters for all forms of aquatic recrea-
     tion and other uses involving intimate human contact require refinements in
     present practices for bacteriological control of treated sewage effluents
     and greater vigilance by those responsible for the operation of the facilities
     involved.  Greater concentrations of people living close to lakes and streams
     coupled with year-round recreation including fishing in late fall, winter and
     early spring requires continuous bacteriological control whenever sewage is
     discharged to the public waters.  Seasonal chlorination during the summer
     recreation season no longer can be depended upon to provide a full measure
     of protection to the public health.

     It therefore is the declared and established policy that:

           All municipalities and others discharging treated sewage from
           sewage treatment plants to the public waters of the state be
           required to provide effective bacteriological control over the
           effluent therefrom by the continuous application each day of the
           year of chlorine or other effective chemicals in facilities approved
           by the State Department of Public Health.  Effective control requires
           sufficient testing at approved points of sample collection to assure
           the maintenance of an adequate residual of chlorine or other disinfecting
           agents, supplemented by occasional tests for organisms of the coliform
           group.  Adequate disinfection should reduce consistently the concen-
           tration of coliform organisms to 1000 or less per 100 ml.
     Approved:


-------
                                                 2699
          APPENDIX F
STUDIES ON  REMOVAL OF PHOSPHATES
              AT
       GRAYLING, MICHIGAN
               73

-------
                                                       2700
     STUDIES  ON  REMOVAL  OF'PHOSPHATES.

                    AND

       RELATED REMOVAL OF  SUSPENDED
   MATTER AND BIOCHEMICAL  OXYGEN  DEMAND

                    AT

           GRAYLING, MICHIGAN

          MARCH .-  SEPTEMBER 1967


              CONDUCTED BY:

.OTTO GREEN.,  FRED  EYER,  AND DONALD PIERCE
          DIVISION OF ENGINEERING
   MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF  PUBLIC  HEALTH

                    AND

         THE  DOW CHEMICAL  COMPANY

-------
                                                                                   2701
                                   INTRODUCTION


     Grayling is a community of 2,000 located on the Au Sable River, a famous trout
stream which is"probably enjoyed by more people than any other Michigan river.
Grayling's wastewater treatment plant, which has been in operation since 1938 and
was recently expanded in 1964, has facilities for primary sedimentation and
chlorination.  Present river studies have shown a deterioration of water quality
downstream from the plant.  There is an indication of excessive algal and slime
growths and higher than normal bacteria counts.  It is the concensus•that a higher
degree of treatment, of which nutrient removal is an essential part, would improve
this situation and help preserve one of Michigan's great natural resources.

     Preliminary studies on phosphate removal using ferrous chloride and polymers
by the Dow Chemical Company at the Midland municipal wastewater treatment plant
showed promise of very substantial reduction of total phosphates and suspended
solids by application of the chemicals to raw sewage followed by sedimentation.
Agreement was reached with the Dow Chemical Company and the City of Grayling that
a study would be undertaken at Grayling utilizing the principles and procedures
developed at Midland and adapting them to their particular waste characteristics
and physical facilities.

     The initial bench studies conducted in late March and early April 1967, indicated
that Grayling sewage responded to chemical treatment in a fashion quite similar to the
Midland experience.  These studies were made cooperatively by personnel of the Depart-
ment of Public Health and Dow's Technical Service and Development Section.  Upon
review of the bench scale work with the City Manager and the Council of Grayling,
it was decided to proceed with plant scale studies.  The City's consulting engineers
were instructed to install temporary facilities for minor modification, of the
sedimentation tanks and, with Dow's assistance, install chemical feeding and mixing
equipment.  This work was performed by the engineers, Dow staff, and Grayling personnel.

     The plant scale studies'were performed by personnel of the Department of Public
Health, the Dow Chemical Company and the Superintendent of the Grayling plant in
various combinations.  These studies were commenced in mid-June and terminated in
mid-September.  During most of this period, the plant loadings were usually high by
reason of tourist influx in the area and the encampment of troups of the National
Guard where facilities are connected to the Grayling sewer system.


                                 PURPOSE OF STUDY


     To conduct a cooperative study with the Dow Chemical Company -to ascertain the
amenability of Grayling waste water to treatment utilizing various forms of iron in
conjunction with ionic polymers for removal of phosphates, and related higher removal
of suspended matter and biochemical oxygen demand, by both bench scale work and actual
plant operation.
                                         76

-------
                                                                                 2702
                         DESCRIPTION OF PLANT FACILITIES
The Grayling wastewater treatment facilities consist of the following:

     1.  A sewage lift station located approximately 600 feet upstream from
         the plant.  The station contains a grit chamber with a bar screen,
         grit removal facilities, and a comminutor.  There are 3 centrifugal
         pumps:  one - 250 gpm, one - 300 gpm, and one - 500 gpm.  These
         pumps are float operated by level variations in the water surface
         of the wet well.  Normally, chlorine is applied in the wet well
         for odor control during the summer months but was not utilized
         during the period of this study.

     2.  Approximately 600 feet of 8-inch force main from the lift
         station to the treatment plant.

     3.  A flow splitting chamber which divides the flow delivered in
         the force main equally among the primary sedimentation tanks.

     4.  Three primary sedimentation tanks, each 26 feet by 8 feet, with
         an average water depth of 8 feet, equipped with mechanical sludge
         and scum removal equipment.

Detention.times and. overflow rates for various combinations of pumps are as follows:
Pumping Rates
GPM
250
250 + 300
250 + 300 + 500
Surface Overflow Rates
Gals / sq. ft. / day
577
1,270
2,430
Detention
Hours
2.5
1.1
0.6
     5.  One sludge digestion tank of 4,012 cubic feet capacity which was
         not in use during the test period.  All sludge was pumped to a
         tank truck and disposed of at the City's sanitary land fill.

     6.  Chlorination facilities consisting of 1 chlorinator with a
         maximum feed rate of 40 pounds per day and a chlorine contact
         of 695 cubic feet volume.  This tank is baffled to produce an
         end around flow.  Contact period at 250 gpm pumping rate is
         20.8 minutes.

     7.  The laboratory is fully equipped to conduct a program of
         wastewater analysis; i.e. , solids analysis, BOD determinations,''
         pH, and colorimetric analyses.
                                         77

-------
                                                                                   2703

                                PRELIMINARY  STUDIES


     Preliminary surveys were conducted  during a 3-week period beginning March 27,
1967.  During the first week, samples  were collected and analyzed for suspended
solids, BOD, pH, sludge analyses and phosphates on raw sewage and chlorinated
effluent to determine plant  loadings and performance.  On March 30,  hourly samples
were analyzed for ortho and  total phosphates during a 15-hour period to establish
some indication of hourly and diurnal  variations.   During the following 2 weeks,
these studies on plant loading and performance were continued except for phosphates.
Jar tests were conducted from April 3-10 for phosphate removal.


                                    JAR  TESTS


     Jar tests were conducted using various  concentrations of iron,  both ferric and
ferrous; several polymers of the anionic, cationic, and nonionic types and NaOH as
calcium carbonate alkalinity.  Order of  addition,  time of contact and types of
mixing and flocculation were also studied.

     It was found that iron, in both ferrous and ferric forms in concentrations
ranging from 15 mg/1 to 30 mg/1 would  substantially remove both *0-P04 and T-P04.
Concentrations below 15 mg/1 showed little reduction.  The use of ferrous iron
resulted cqnsitently in the  90% range  of PO^ removals.  Results, when using ferric
iron, were consistently lower.

     Contact periods, ranging from 0.5 minutes or less to 20 minutes between the
iron and sewage were equally effective in phosphate removal.  Only 3 of the 6 polymers
studied appeared to be effective.  One anionic worked well in concentrations from
0.1 mg/1 to 1.0 mg/1 and another from  0.25 mg/1 to 1.0 mg/1.  The cationic polymer
gave excellent results at a  concentration of 30 mg/1; however, at this concentration
costs would be prohibitive.

     The studies indicated that the polymers should have 30 seconds to 60 seconds
rapid mixing followed by 5-10 minutes  slow flocculation in order to completely
develop the floe.

     Further jar studies were conducted using' 20 mg/1 ferrous iron with 6 minutes
detention followed by addition of UO mg/1 of NaOH as CaCos alkalinity with 5 minutes
detention and final addition of the most effective anionic polymer in concentrations
ranging from 0.1 to 1.0 mg/1 with 1.0  minute rapid mix and slow flocculation for
10-15 minutes.

     Tests were conducted within the indicated ranges to further optimize the dosage
rates and reaction times attainable with the available plant structures.

     Samples of the above showed consistent  removals of 90% or more of O-PO^ and T-PO^
in filtered and unfiltered portions respectively.  Turbidity as measured with a Helige
turbidimeter at 50 m.m. gave readings in the 10-20 range, representing an 80-95%
reduction.  Iron content was increased from trace concentrations in the raw wastes
to 1.0-4.0 mg/1 in the treated effluent.


* 0-P04 - Orthophosphate
  T-P04- Total phosphate
                                         78

-------
                                                                               2704
                             PRELIMINARY PLANT -STUDIES


      On April 11, ferric chloride and the selected polymer treatment was conducted
 on a plant scale for a period of 3 hours.  The ferric iron was fed at the pumping
 station with approximately 6 minutes detention through the 8-inch force main.  The
 polymer was dripped into the splitting chamber, giving a very short mixing period
 between polymer additions and settling in the 3 sedimentation tanks.

      On the following day, ferrous chloride was fed at. the same location, followed
 8 seconds later by 40 mg/1 of NaOH as CaC03 alkalinity.  This polymer was fed at
 the splitting chamber.  The test period was 5 hours.

      On both days, samples were collected at 15-minute intervals.   Little overall
 reduction of T-PO^ occurred.  However, filtered samples of the clarifier influents
 showed a high incidence of phosphate tie-up by the ferrous iron.   The use of ferric
 iron did not show this.  The polymer treated portion would not develop an adequate
 floe, so settleability and overall removals were very low.

      Grab samples of the clarifier influents from both test periods were mixed slowly
 and an adequate floe formed which settled very well.  These samples showed high
 reductions of both 0-PO^ and T-POi|.


              OBSERVATIONS ON JAR TESTS AND PRELIMINARY PLANT STUDIES


 1.   Grayling waste water is amenable to treatment with ferrous iron in conjunction
     with NaOH and polymers for removal of phosphates and suspended matter.

 2.   Suspended matter, O-PO^ and T-PO^ pan be reduced to a high degree with this
     type of treatment, under closely controlled conditions.

 3.   Successful application of this method of treatment will require modifications
     at the plant to accommodate flocculation devices for polymer.

 4.   Ferric iron showed promise of good removals.   Further study is needed to
     demonstrate effectiveness of iron in this form.
                          MODIFICATION OF PLANT FACILITIES


      Following the preliminary plant studies the Grayling City Manager and  Council
 decided to apply this technique in a full-plant study.   It was decided to adapt  the
 present facilities at minimum cost making only minor changes in the  facilities with
 no change-in the pumping pattern, to determine what might be accomplished with these
 facilities at this time.  It was recognized that formal modifications  of the  plant,
• including modification of the pumping pattern to eliminate surging.,  and the addition
 of permanent facilities for chemical feeding, mixing and flocculation  devices would
 be required to determine the capability of this plant for effective  phosphate removal.
                                          79

-------
                                                                                 2705
     The inlet ends of the 3 settling tanks were modified by removing the wooden
dispersal baffle and installing motor driven vertical flocculators located 3 feet
from the inlet end.  A picket fence baffle was installed 6 feet from the inlet wall
across the entire tank width, vertically from a point about 1 foot below the water
surface to a depth of about 6 1/2 feet.

     Chemical feed equipment was located at the pump station to feed FeCl2 -and NaOH.

     Polymer feed equipment was installed at the flow solitter chamber and controlled
by a float switch which engaged when the flow rose above the weirs and began to enter
the settling, tanks.


                         PROCEDURE FOR CHEMICAL ADDITION


     Iron chloride in the ferrous form (FeCl2) was fed at the entrance to the pump
station grit chamber at a concentration of 15-30 mg/1.  Sodium hydroxide was fed at
the comminutor at a concentration of 30-50 mg/1 approximately 8 seconds after iron
addition.

     Mixing of these chemicals-with the raw waste was accomplished in the wet well
pumps and maintained in the force main.  Contact time thus provided ranged from 4-8
minutes, most commonly about 6 minutes.


                       OVERFLOW RATES AND DETENTION PERIODS
     Surface overflow rates and detention periods are dependent on rates of pumping at
the lift station.   The pumping charts for June 20 to August 31 reveal that during
periods of daytime sampling (8 a.m.  to 5 p.m.v) rates of flow varied from about 200
to 550 gpm through the sedimentation tanks.   During dry weather, the average flows
for these hours ranged from 300 to 400 gpm.   Generally, pump combinations changed
10 to 15 times per hour with corresponding variations in rates of flow of 100 gpm
or  more through the sedimentation tanks.

     Detention periods and surface overflow  rates for the observed flows based on the
net effective tank area and volume computed  by deduction of the portion of the tanks
between inlet wall and picket fence baffles  are as follows:
Rate of Flow
GPM
. 200
300
400
550
Detention Time
Hours
1.40
1.60
1.20
0.87
Surface Overflow
Gal / sq. ft. /
600
900
1,200
1,650
Rates
day




                                         80

-------
                                                                             2706
     The very unstable flow pattern experienced most of the time undoubtedly inter-
ferred with effective mixing and flocculation and with settling of suspended' matter.

     Comparison of rates of flow through the sedimentation tanks from June 20 to
August 15 with those for the periods March 29 to June 8 and August 15 to September 14
reveals that a marked increase in flow occurred during June 20 to August 15.  This
period corresponds with the period of encampment at the National Guard whose sanitary
facilities are tributary to the Grayling sewer system.


                                PERIOD OF THE STUDY


     Full-scale plant studies for phosphate removal were commenced on June 20 and
continued through September It.  Chemicals were added 7 days per week for the entire
period except for September 1-7.  Generally, samples were collected and analyzed 3
days per week.  On 9 days, chemicals were added in less, than established dosage rates
by reason of equipment malfunctions and other unusual circumstances.  Data for these
days are not included in the reported results.


                         .SAMPLING AND TESTING PROCEDURES

1.  All flow measurements were obtained by a float-controlled recorder located
    behind a rectangular weir following the 3 sedimentation tanks.  The flow recorder
    was corrected with a head recording device and was considered to be reasonably
    accurate.

2.  Sampling was. carried out by automatic samplers composited in proportion to flow
    during 24-hour periods; manually collected 9-hpur composited samples, 8 a.m. to
    5 p.m.; and grab sampling (not included in the reported data).

3.  Laboratory analyses for suspended solids, BOD, ortho and total phosphates and iron
    were conducted according to Standard Methods with one exception:  a portion of the
    iron analysis was conducted with an atomic absorption apparatus.


                                DISCUSSION OF DATA

     All the data obtained is graphically represented in Figures I-VA except for
periods when the sewage concentration was affected greatly by sewer flushing (2 days);
rain (2 days); when a settling tank was down for repairs (1 day); and those days when
there was no chemical treatment or only partial chemical feeds.  (See also discussion
under "Period of the Study".)

     During  the period March 29-June 8 before treatment was commenced, suspended solids
removals were usually between 30% and 65% with the effluent concentration averaging
between 60 mg/1 and  90 mg/1.   The arithmetic average of all samples, both 24-hour and
9-hour composites, was 157  mg/1  in the raw sewage and 78 mg/1 in the effluent giving
a removal of about 50%.
                                         81

-------
                                                                                   270?
     Removal of suspended solids during chemical treatment, despite high flows and
intermittant pumping, averaged between 70% and 85% with the effluent concentration
generally between 40 mg/1 and 60 mg/1.  The arithmetic average during the period
was 224 mg/1 in the raw sewage and 50 mg/1 in the effluent giving a removal of
The average increase in suspended solids removal during the treatment period was
     Statistical plots of the data for suspended solids removal for both periods
are shown in Figure IVA.  All data for each period are arranged in order of magnitude
and plotted on normal probability paper against probability of occurrence.  During
the period when no chemicals were added, there were wide variations in percent
removal ranging from extreme values of 23% to a high value of 81% and a centering
or most probable mean value of 51%.  Performance was much more stable during the
period of chemical treatment as indicated by the much flatter curve plotted through
values ranging from 60% to 87% removal with a most probable mean value of 77.5.
Applying the overlapping test for statistical difference between the 2 means in the
range of 3 standard errors, it is found that the difference is statistically sig-
nificant and could not occur by mere chance even if the 10 low values for Curve B
were elevated so as to be arranged along an extension of the upper part of the curve.

     BOD removals before treatment averaged 35% to 50% with the effluent concentration
averaging between 85 mg/1 and 120 mg/1.  The arithmetic average of all samples was
170 mg/1 in the raw sewage and 101 mg/1 in the effluent, giving a removal of 41%.  BOD
removals during treatment averaged between 50% and 70% with the effluent concentration
averaging between 65 mg/1 and 80 mg/1.  The arithmetic average during this period was
178 mg/1 in the raw sewage and 74 mg/1 in the effluent, giving a removal of 58%.  The
average increase in BOD removal during treatment was 17%.

     Statistical plots for percent BOD^remo.val are shown in Figure VA in the same
manner as for suspended solids.  It is apparent that very wide changes in percent
removal were experienced during the period when chemicals were not added.  The
predictable mean value can be determined with values ranging from 0% to 55% removal.
However, during the period of chemical additions all except 3 values were 51% removal
or higher with all except 4 values between 51% and 69%, giving a relatively stable
mean of 57 or 58.  Here also, the difference in performance during the 2 periods was
statistically significant representing real changes which cannot be accounted for by
chance.

     Total phosphate analyses during periods without chemical treatment showed no
appreciable removal.

     Total phosphate concentrations during chemical treatment usually ranged between
30 mg/1 and 60 mg/1 in the raw waste and between 9 mg/1 and 18 mg/1 in the effluent.
The phosphate removal averaged between 60% and 80%.  The arithmetic averages during
treatment were 47.5 mg/1 in the raw sewage and 13.5 mg/1 in the effluent, giving a
removal of 72%.

     Total iron analysis of the waste water indicated an average of 1.0 mg/1 to 1.3 mg/1
in the plant effluent without chemical treatment.  During treatment, the iron in the raw
waste increased to 1.9 mg/1.  The average iron concentration in the effluent during
treatment was 6.1 mg/1, ranging from 4 mg/1 to 8 mg/1.  At the 7-day once in 10-year
drought flow of about 40 cfs, a sewage flow of 0.4 MGD with a concentration of 6 mg/1
of iron in the waste discharge would produce a concentration in the total river of
about 0.1 mg/1.
                                          82

-------
                                                                        2708
     so
see   O
 so
                                                                                 V
  O O.so
                                                    MAT
                                                                           Jou6
                                      83

-------
                                                                                                2709
       250
        ZOO
I
  100     O
I-
    0\  0.50
    1
       o.as
I
          -24-
                       A/0
                                                         2L
                                                      T#£A TMEJV T
                                            30 O
                               S/IM/'i.l.fi/G-
MA*crf      AP*»ll-
                                                         AfAY
                                                                                            rl  V* r
                                                                                            JOIOE

-------
                                                                                2710
•70
(,0
                 jui-r
                               A06UST
                                                   SEPT.
                                       85

-------
K

                              °
                                 PROBABILITY     46 8OO3

                                 X 90 DIVISIONS    ..oil. ul...
                                                                    jzr/9
   ».S9
             99.9 99.8       99   98     95    90      80    70   60   50  40   30   20
                                                                                            2   1   0.5   0.2 0.1 0.05     0.01
90
8°
 SO
40
 20
    ^M
           :nc
        !E

       ..i..._

        :t-
            .n:
           TT~rr
           it;:
              _ i __
                          -^-H
                                Pt

:Ef
-i'O
                                     ^!^-
                                     mr.
          M
           L14-t-'
                                          o e
                                                 -I • u-
                                                 -H-rr
TtEt

.ri.:/
                          DOP-O*
                                •y.L>j
                                i..t 4
                                                                           :T
                                 7/^P
                                                                                                         i
                                                                                                 	j	
                                                                                                    -h--t:
                                                                                                             ... i	
                                                                                                               -1 --  •
   0.01     0.05 0.1  0.2   0.5   1    2
                                                TO    30   40   50   CO   /O    SO     90


                                                                    L  To   off
                                                                                                      ro

-------
  0.56
V
  o.zs
                                                                  2712
                                          A/\
                                                      \
                  •9 HOt/f J'/>/VS>t./AfG-
              T* -N Plj »-  X «S
              <^<
      juwe
                                  87

-------
00
00
              D4.6

              Michigan Department of Health



                  99.99
             ,   60
95      90       80    70   60    50   40    30     20        10      5        21    0.5    0.2  0.1  0.05     0.01
                                99.9 99.8  99.5   99
                  0.01      0.05 0.1  0.2    O.S   1     2
                                                                         10       20     30    40   50    60    70    80
                                                                                                                                                 98    99   99.5   99 8 99. a
                                                                                                                                                                                                              ro
                                                                                                                                                                                                              ->3
                                                                                                                                                                                                              H
                                                                                                                                                                                                              U)

-------
                                                                  2714
JUNE
            JULY
4U60ST
                                           SEPT.
                            89

-------
              D4.6

              Michigan Department of Health
                   99.99
                  90
                                 99.9 99.8  99.5   99    98       95      90        (10    . 70    60   50    40    30     20
                                                                                                                                   10
                                                                                                                                                    Z     1    0.5    0.2  0.1 0.05      0.01





..I :.ii 	
M ••:!••••


i






. i
-------
                                                                              2716
                      OBSERVATIONS DURING CHEMICAL TREATMENT


1.  Percent total phosphate removal followed the same general pattern as suspended
    solids removal.

2'.  Percent phosphate removal appeared to be independent of the flow rate and raw
    suspended solids concentration.

3.  Percent phosphate removal appears to be independent of the raw phosphate
    concentration.

4.  Removal of suspended solids was consistantly in the range of 70% to 85% and the
    concentration in the treated effluent was generally in the range of W mg/1 and
    60 mg/1 although raw waste concentrations varied greatly from day to day with
    extreme values ranging from less than 150 mg/1 to greater than 300 mg/1.

5.  Percent BOD removal followed much the same pattern as suspended solids removal.

6.  During the period of chemical treatment, concentrations of suspended solids and
    BOD were much more uniform in the treated waste than noted during periods when
    chemicals were not applied.


                                    CONCLUSIONS


The following conclusions may be deduced from these studies:

     1.  Bench scale studies demonstrated that thorough mixing of ferrous
         iron with raw sewage for a period of 1 minute or less forms an
         insoluble product of unknown structure with little or no
         measurable orthophosphates and that total phosphates in the
         range of 80% to 90% or higher may be removed thereafter from
         the waste by the addition of alkalinity and anionic polymers
         with gentle flocculation followed by a short period of
         sedimentation.

     2.  Bench studies indicated removal of turbidity in the order of
         80% to 95%.                                       .

     3.  Bench studies demonstrated that certain polymers are more
         effective than others.

     4.  Plant scale studies confirmed bench scale observations that
         thorough mixing of the polymer followed by gentle flocculation
         are essential for maximum effective removal of total phosphates

     5.  Plant scale studies demonstrated that removal of 65% to 75% of
         total phosphates, removal of 70% to 85% of suspended solids,
         and removal of 50% to 70% 5-day BOD can readily be achieved
         on the Grayling waste water with minor alterations in the
         conventional primary treatment facilities.
                                          91

-------
                                                                          2717
Mixing and flocculation achieved with the minor modifications
made and installed at this plant were much less than required
for maximum removal of total phosphates.    Installation of
equipment and facilities in a conventional manner.for such
purposes may be expected to increase substantially the
effectiveness of removal of total phosphates with related
higher percentages of removal of waste constituents as
measured by the suspended solids and BOD  tests.
                                 92.

-------
                                                2718
          APPENDIX G
STUDIES  ON REMOVAL OF PHOSPHATES
              AT
      LAKE ODESSA, MICHIGAN
               93

-------
                                                     2719
   STUDIES ON REMOVAL OF PHOSPHATES

                 AND

    RELATED REMOVAL OF SUSPENDED
 MATTER AND BIOCHEMICAL OXYGEN DEMAND

                 AT

        LAKE ODESSA, MICHIGAN

         MAY - OCTOBER 1967
           CONDUCTED BY:

        WASTEWATER SECTION
      DIVISION OF ENGINEERING
.MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH

                 AND

      THE DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY

-------
                                                                                  2720
                                   INTRODUCTION


     Lake Odessa is a community of 1,800 located on the shores of Jordan Lake, an
inland lake in west-central Michigan, where intensive water-related recreational
activities are carried out on a year-round basis.  The rate of eutrophication of
Jordan Lake, a naturally eutrophic lake, has been greatly accelerated by the organics
and nutrients discharged from the municipal wastewater treatment plant in recent years.
It has been determined that a higher degree of treatment, including nutrient removal,
is necessary to preserve and enhance water quality for accustomed and desired
recreational uses.

     Studies on phosphate removal using ferrous chloride and polymers, being conducted
cooperatively by the Department and the Dow Chemical Company at Grayling, Michigan,  -
showed excellent promise of substantial reduction of total phosphates and suspended
solids.  With this background, arrangements were made with the Dow Chemical Company
and the Village of Lake Odessa to conduct a study at Lake Odessa, utilizing the
principles.developed by Grayling, and adapting them to these particular waste
characteristics and physical facilities.

     Initial bench studies, conducted early in June 1967, indicated that Lake Odessa
waste water would respond to chemical treatment in a manner similar to that experienced
at Grayling.  It was then decided to proceed with plant scale studies.  No significant
modifications in plant facilities were made and temporary facilities for chemical
feeding were installed.

     The plant scale studies were performed cooperatively by personnel of the
Department, the Dow Chemical Company, and the Village of Lake Odessa.  These studies,
begun in early June 1967, were conducted through September.  During this period, plant
loadings fluctuated widely as a result of the operations of a sizeable food processing
industry in the Village.


                                 PURPOSE OF STUDY
     To conduct a study, cooperatively with the Dow Chemical Company, to ascertain the
amenability of Lake Odessa waste water to treatment utilizing ferrous .chloride in
conjunction with anionic polymers for removal of phosphates, and related removal of
suspended matter and biochemical oxygen demand, by both bench scale work and plant
scale operation.


                         DESCRIPTION OF PLANT FACILITIES


     The Lake Odessa .wastewater treatment facilities, constructed in  1954 to replace
an earlier plant, consist of:

     1.  Combination comminutor-screen chamber.
     2.  Parshall flume-measuring raw wastewater flow.
                                          96

-------
                                                                                2721
                                              r
     3.   One  primary sedimentation  tank,  12 feet x 50  feet  with an average
         water depth of 8 feet,  equipped with mechanical sludge  and scum
         removal equipment.   (.Volume =  1,800 cubic feet)

     4.   Pumping station - primary effluent  plus  portion of  trickling filter
         effluent pumped to trickling filter with two 450 gallons-per-minute
         pumps.

     5.   One trickling filter -  62 feet diameter  x 6 feet media  depth.
         (18,100 cubic feet  of media)  Recirculation from trickling filter
         effluent to trickling filter influent.

     6.   One secondary sedimentation tank  -  identical to primary sedimentation
         tank.

     7.   Disinfection facilities - gas  type  chlorinator with a capacity of  .
         150 pounds a day, equipped  to  feed  chlorine both to primary and
         .secondary sedimentation tank inlets.  The sedimentation tank
         serves as a chlorine contact chamber.

     8.  "One, fixed cover, sludge digestion  tank  with capacity of 13,758 cubic
         feet.  Original plant septic tanks, with a capacity of  13,330  cubic
         feet, are used for sludge storage and concentration.

     9.   Sludge drying beds  with a total area of  6,560  square feet.

    10.   Service building with a laboratory  fully equipped to conduct a
         program of wastewater analysis; i.e., solids analyses,  BOD
         determinations, pH, colorimetric  analyses.


                                BENCH SCALE  STUDIES


     Jar tests were conducted during the period June 7-15, 1967, using  variable speed
laboratory mixing apparatus  with 6 jars in parallel, to determine amenability of Lake
Odessa waste water to phosphate  removal by chemical treatment.   Various concentrations
of ferrous chloride, polymers and sodium hydroxide were used. Order of addition, time
of contact and types of mixing and flocculation were studied.

     It was found that iron in the form of ferrous chloride, in  concentrations ranging
from 15 to 40 mg/1 (Fe++) would  consistently remove orthophosphate in the 90% range.

     Contact periods, ranging from 1 to 5  minutes between the iron and  waste water,  were
equally effective in phosphate removal. Following the  experience gained in the Grayling
studies, only 2 anionic polymers were used in the bench scale studies,  1 proving to  be
very effective and superior to the other.

     The bench scale studie's indicated  that  the polymers should  have approximately 1
minute of rapid mixing, followed by  2-3 minutes of slow flocculation in order to
develop an optimum floe.

      It was determined that .the chemical  dosage  regime to be established for plant
 scale studies would include the following average feed rates:

      1.  Ferrous iron = 30  mg/1. -  (as Fe++); Sodium hydroxide  = 30 mg/1,
          (as CaC03)-, polymer =  0.5  mg/1.


                                         97

-------
                                                                                 2722

                        OBSERVATIONS - BENCH SCALE STUDIES


1.   Lake Odessa waste water is amenable to treatment with ferrous iron in con-
     junction with sodium hydroxide and polymers for removal of phosphates, under
     closely controlled conditions.

2.   Successful application of this method of treatment may require modifications
     in plant facilities to accommodate chemical feeding, mixing and flocculation
     devices for optinum floe development with polymers.


                                PLANT SCALE STUDY


     Following the bench scale studies, it was determined by the Lake Odessa Village
Council to proceed to apply this technique in a full-plant study.  It was decided to
determine what degree of phosphate removal could be achieved by the addition of
chemicals in a manner as closely approaching the principles followed in the bench
scale studies as possible without modification in plant facilities.

     Chemical feed equipment was located at a sewer manhole some 500 feet upstream
from the comminutor chamber at the plant site to feed ferrous chloride and sodium
hydroxide into the raw wastewater flow.  Polymer feed equipment was installed at
the coraminutor chamber.  All chemicals were applied.with electrically driven
diaphragm-type chemical-feed pumps.


                         PROCEDURE FOR CHEMICAL ADDITION


     Iron chloride in the ferrous form (FeCl2) was fed into the plant influent sewer
through plastic tubing inserted through a manhole located some 500 feet upstream from
the comminutor chamber, extending upstream from the manhole.  Sodium hydroxide was
fed through plastic tubing inserted through the same manhole, extending downstream
from the manhole a distance such that the sodium hydroxide was applied to the waste-
water flow some 10-15 seconds after the iron was applied.  Turbulence in the sewer
was depended on for mixing of these chemicals with the raw waste.  The contact time
while flowing through the 500 feet of sewer to the comminutor chamber averaged about
4 minutes.  Polymer was fed to the raw waste flow at the comminutor chamber.


                              PRIMARY SEDIMENTATION


Surface Settling Rates and Detention Periods

     Surface settling rates and detention periods were dependent on rates of raw waste
flow arriving at the plant from the gravity sewer.  Daily average surface settling rates
varied during the study period from 170 to 970 gallons per day per square foot, with
wide fluctuations occurring throughout the entire period, caused essentially by
variations in operations at a local food processing industry..  Average daily primary
sedimentation detention periods varied from 1.9 to over 10 hours during the survey.
                                         98

-------
                                                                                 2723
                               SECONDARY TREATMENT


Trickling Filter Loading Rates

     Trickling filter loading rates during the formal study period during which
chemicals were fed, CAugust 6 to September 13) ranged from 1 to 47 pounds of 5-day
BOD per day per 1,000 feet3.   During the period of study following cessation of
chemical feeding, (September 14 to 29) these loadings ranged from 5 to 43 pounds of
5-day BOD per day per 1,000 feet3.
Sedimentation - Surface Settling Rates and Detention Periods

     Since the secondary settling tank is identical to the primary settling tank, and
flows through the secondary tank are equal to those through the primary tank, surface
settling rates and detention periods were identical to those reported under "Primary
Sedimentation".


                                 SLUDGE DIGESTION


     A record of sludge digester loadings and gas production is presented for the
months April-October, inclusive, for the years 1966 and 1967 for comparative purposes.
In 1967, the monthly average digester loading ranged from 12.4 pounds volatile solids
per day per 1,000 feet3 (May) to 52.5 pounds volatile solids per day per 1,000 feet3
(July).


                               PERIOD OF THE STUDY


     Full-scale plant studies for phosphate removal were conducted from July 5 through
September 29, 1967.  Samples were collected and analyzed 5 days per week.  Testing was
limited to BOD and suspended solids during the initial period July 5-20 when no
chemicals were fed.  Chemical feeding was commenced on July 21.  The period
July 21-August 3 was considered as a "start-up period" during which the process and
techniques were stabilized.  Sampling and testing for BOD, suspended solids, and
ortho and total phosphates were conducted during this "start-up period".  (Data for
this period is not included in the reported results.)  Continuous chemical feeding with
sampling and analysis for BOD, suspended solids and phosphates was carried out from
August 6 through September 13.  On 6 days during this period, chemicals were added in
less than established dosage rates by reason of equipment malfunctions and other
unusual circumstances.  Data for these 6.days are not included in the reported results.
Complete data on BOD, suspended solids and phosphates was obtained and is reported
herein for the period September 14-29, following cessation of chemical feeding.
                                          99

-------
                                                                                 2724
                          SAMPLING AND TESTING PROCEDURES


1.  All flow measurements were obtained by a flow recorder operating in conjunction
    with a 6-inch parshall flume located in the comminutor chamber.

2.  Sewage sampling was accomplished by use of suction-type constant rate composite
    samplers.  Hand collected samples were obtained for digester supernatant liquor
    analyses.

3.  Laboratory analyses for suspended solids, BOD, and ortho and total phosphates
    were conducted according to Standard Methods.  Iron analyses were performed using
    an atomic absorption apparatus.  Digester sludge was examined by X-ray defraction
    for presence of "Vivianite" - ferrous phosphate [Fe3 (P04>2 • 8H20].


                                DISCUSSION'OF DATA


     The data obtained during the study is graphically represented in Figures I
through V, and in Tables 1 and 2, except for periods where only partial or no chemical
feeding was accomplished.  (See also discussion under "Period of the Study".)

Suspended Solids

     Statistical plots of the data for suspended solids removal for periods both with
and without chemical treatment are shown in Figure I.  All data for each period are
arranged in order of magnitude and plotted on normal probability paper against
probability of occurrence.  During the period of no chemical treatment, percent
removals of suspended solids varied widely from extreme values of 65% to a high of
about 90% with a centering or most probable mean value of 78%.  Performance was much
more stable during the period of chemical treatment as indicated by the flatter curve
plotted through values ranging from about 82% to 95% removal with a most probable
mean value of 89%.  Applying the overlapping test for statistical difference between
the 2 means in the range of 3 standard errors, it is found that the difference is
statistically significant and could not occur by mere chance.  Figure II also
illustrates the more stable performance at a higher level of efficiency of BOD
removal attained during the period with chemical treatment as compared with the period
when no chemicals were added.

Biochemical Oxygen Demand

     Statistical plots for BOD removal are shown in Figure III in ^he same manner as
for suspended solids.  It is apparent that very wide changes in BOD removal were
experienced during the period when chemicals were not added.  Percent removal of BOD
during this period ranged from a low value of 24% to 73%.  However, during the period
of chemical treatment, all except 3 values were 72% removal or higher with all except
6 values between 72% and 89%, indicating a much more stable condition-.  The mean value
for percent BOD removal during chemical treatment was 82%.  Here, also, the difference
in performance during the 2 periods was statistically significant, representing real
changes which cannot be attributed to chance.
                                           100

-------
 I
2
v
§
Q
\
    90-
80-
      OjOl
               ai
                        I    I      I
                I   I    I    I     I  .    I     I
                                                                                                      SOLID3
                                                                                           \    \
10
                                             20   »0   40  SO  «0  7»  to
                                                                            90
                                                                                           9S   •»
ro
->i
M
VJI

-------
                                2726
T#£Ar*1£*tT  STUDIES
   102

-------
                                                                                                    1114        II
o
OJ
aoi
                                                                                                                                                  99.M
                                                                                                                                                                              10
                                                                                                                                                                             -^3
                                                                                                                                                                              IV)

-------
                                                                                  2728
     Table 1 shows also that the percent removal of BOD with chemical treatment
exceeded that obtained without chemicals in each trickling filter loading range with
respect to both minimum and average percent BOD removals attained within each loading
range.  It is noted that trickling filter loadings during the chemical treatment
period remained below 50 pounds per day per 1.000 feet . while higher loadings were
experienced on 7 days during the period when no chemicals were used.  Figure IV shows
that BOD removal was at a higher level and more stable during the chemical treatment
period.

Phosphates

     Total phosphate' concentrations during the period of chemical treatment usuaij-y
ranged between 20 mg/1 and 60 mg/1 in the raw waste and between 4 mg/1 and 7 mg/1 in
the final effluent.  A statistical plot of phosphate percent removal values obtained
during the chemical treatment period is shown in Figure V.  Except for 3 days in this
period,.the total phosphate removal was 75% or above, ranging between 75% and 93%. with
a 'mean value of
     Total" phosphate analysis during periods without chemical treatment showed low and
widely varying removals, ranging from 0% to' 49%.  (See Figure VI)

Iron

     Total iron analysis indicated an average of 1.2 mg/1 in the plant effluent during
the chemical treatment period, ranging from 0.7 ing/1 to 10.0 mg/1.

Sludge Dig'estion Liquor

     Monthly average sludge digestion data for the months of April through October,
both for 1966 and 1967, are shown in Table 2.  These data show average monthly values
of gas production, volatile solids loadings, and temperature.  It is noted that a large
withdrawal of digested sludge from the digester was made in mid-July 1967. undoubtedly
accounting for the decreased gas production, rate during that month.

     Analysis of total phosphates and orthophosphates in the digester supernatant
liquor made during the period preceeding chemical treatment showed an average of
about 373 mg/1 total phosphates and 81 mg/1 orthophosphates.  These values represent
the average results of samples collected and analyzed on 7 days preceeding chemical
treatment.  Supernatant samples collected and analyzed on 10 days during the latter
portion of the chemical treatment period showed an average of 69 mg/1 total phosphates
and 22 mg/1 orthophosphates.  While this data on the digester supernatant liquor is
limited in quantity, it appears to support the conclusions drawn by E. A. Thomas in
his report on studies at the Uster treatment plant at Zurich, Switzerland, that even
though iron-phosphate sludge is fed continuously to a digester, the phosphates bound
in it apparently are not liberated in the sludge digestion process, rather, a further
reduction of the phosphate concentration in the digester liquor takes place, indicating
that the  iron-phosphate sludge is capable of binding additional phosphates in the
digester.
                                          104

-------
                                                           2729
               Table 1

         LAKE ODESSA,  MICHIGAN
                1967
    WASTEWATER TREATMENT STUDIES

 TOTAL PLANT BOD REMOVAL COMPARISON
AT ^VARIOUS TRICKLING FILTER LOADINGS

     July 5-September  29, 1967
          (42 days  data)
Trickling Filter
5-day BOD Loading
lbs/day/1000 Ft. 3
1-10
11-20
21-30
31-40
41-50
51-60'
61-70
71-80
81-90
91-100
101-110
No Chemical Treatment
Number
of
Values
1
4
4
5
- - -
. - - -
3
• _ _ _
1 •
1
2
% 5 -day BOD Removal
Range
	
24-72
50-65
43-93
No Values
No Values
52-69
No Values
	
	
61-73
Arithmetic
Average
66
50
60
65
- - -
- - -
59
_ _ _
39
69
67
With Chemicals Added
Number
of
Values
7
5
4
3
2
- - -
- - -
. - - -
_ _ _
_ _ _
- - -
% 5 -day BOD Removal
Range
65-95
40-87
59-96
78-88
74-83
No Values
No Values
No Values
wo Values
No Values
No Values
Arithmetic
Average
81
72
84
82
78
_ _ _
- - -
_ _ _
_ _ _
_ _ _
- - -
                   105

-------
                                                        2730
                        TREATMENT
X	« PR/MA #Y EFFLUENT


                        106

-------
'04
 .

  "0.01
                                                       #r/*?o\/AL - M JAVA AY
                                                                      of rar/tt
12    S    10
                      30  40  SO  CO  70  80     90   «S   98  99
                                                                                                99.99
to
-j
U)

-------
                                     2732
       r#£ATrt£m STUDIES
TOTAL  PHOSPHATES
       108

-------
                                                           Table 2


                                                    LAKE ODESSA, MICHIGAN
                                                           1967
                                               WASTEWATER TREATMENT STUDIES


                                                  SLUDGE DIGESTION DATA
Year
Gas Produced
(100 Ft,3./day)
Volatile Solids
Ibs/day
Volatile 'Solids
lbs/day/100 Ft.3
Temperature °F
Gas Produced
per pound of
Volatile Solids
pH
April
'66
. 18
260
19.0
91
6.9

'67
15
270 i
19.7
92
5.6

May
'66
14
170
12.4
92
8.2

'67
16
170
12.4
92
9.4
6.8
June
'66
24'
180
13.1
	
13.9

'67
30
320
23.4
92
9.4
6.5
July
'66
31
400
29.2
92
7.8

'67
22
720
52.5
92
3 . 1=''
6.1
August
'66
20
290
21.2
92
6.9

'67
23
350
25.5
91
6.6
7.0
September
'66
29
480
35.0
92
6.0

'67
35
4
550
40.2
91
6.4
6.4
October
'66
34
550
40.2
90
6.2

'67
24
390
28.4
90
6.2
6.7
o
ID
   *  Large  withdrawal of digested sludge in mid-July.
to
-^3
U0
U)

-------
                                                                                 273^
                      OBSERVATIONS DURING CHEMICAL TREATMENT


1.  Percent phosphate removal followed a general pattern similar to suspended solids
    removal.

2.  Percent phosphate removal appeared to be independent of the flow rate and raw
    suspended solids concentration.

3.  Percent phosphate removal appears to be independent of the raw phosphate
    concentration.

4.  Removal of suspended solids was consistently in the range of 83% to 90%, even
    though raw waste suspended solids concentrations varied greatly from day to day
    with extreme values ranging from less than 300 mg/1 to more than 900 mg/1.  The
    mean value of 89% represents significant improvement over the mean value of 78%
    removal of suspended solids attained without chemical treatment.

5.  Percent BOD removal followed much the same pattern as suspended solids removal.

6.  During the chemical treatment period., suspended solids and BOD concentrations
    were much more uniform in the treated waste than noted during the period when
    chemical treatment was not used.

7.  No deterioration in sludge digestion was observed during or following the
    chemical treatment period as determined by common parameters such as gas produced
    per unit weight of volatile solids and pH.  Further, a decrease in both total and
    orthophosphate concentrations in the digester supernatent liquor was observed
    during and immediately following the chemical treatment period.

8.  At the conclusion of the chemical treatment period, an analysis of the digester
    sludge by X-ray defraction technique., revealed the presence of a high concentration
    of ferrous phosphate [Fe3 (PO^) •  8^0], a phosphate rock commonly known as
    "Vivianite".  It appears that this is the insoluble product formed when ferrous
    iron is mixed with raw sewage.


                                    CONCLUSIONS
1.  Bench scale studies demonstrated that thorough mixing of ferrous iron with Lake
    Odessa raw waste water .for a period of 1 minute or less forms an insoluble
    product with little or no measurable orthophosphate and that total phosphate
    removal .from the wastes in the range of 80% to 90% or higher may be attained
    by the addition of alkalinity and anionic polymers with gentle flocculation
    followed by a short period of sedimentation.

2.  Plant scale studies demonstrated that removal of 73% to 95% of total phosphates,
    removal of 83% to 95% of suspended solids and removal of 72% to 95% of BOD can
    readily be achieved on the Lake Odessa waste water with existing treatment
    facilities equipped with chemical feeding even in the absence of any mixing
    and flocculation facilities.
                                         110

-------
                                                                                2735
3.   Mixing and flocculating achieved were much less than required for maximum
    removal of total  phosphates.  The installation of facilities and equipment for
    these purposes  may  be  expected to increase substantially the effectiveness of
    removal of .total  phosphates.

4.   The return of digester liquor to the plant process under the chemical treatment
    regime described  above should have no adverse affect upon the removal of total
    phosphates.
                                        1:3:1-112

-------
                                                       2736
            APPENDIX H
INDUSTRIAL SURFACE HATER DISCHARGES
               IN
      THE LAKE MICHIGAN BASIN
                113

-------
                                       2737
        TABLE  I
DIRECT    INDUSTRIAL
  DISCHARGES     TO
  LAKE    MICHIGAN

1.
2.

3.


5.

6.




7.

8.



9.

10.

11.

12.
13.

Itt.

15,

16.

Company Name
Bay Street Steam Plant
Cherry Growers, Inc.

Consumers Power
Company
Consumers Power
Company
Dow Chemical- Company

E. I. duPont
de Nemours and
1 Company


Frigid Foods, Inc.

Inland Lime and Stone -
Company, Division
Indiana Steel
Company
Leelanau Fruit
Company
Manistique Pulp and
Paper Company
Medusa Portland Cement,

Morgan McCool
Northport Cherry
Factory . . -
Packaging Corporation
of America
Penn-Dixie Cement
Corporation
U.p. Power Company

Product
Electricity
Canning
products
Electricity

Electricity
Chemicals

Synthetic
rubber, freon
acetylene


Canned
cherries
Limestone and
wash aggregate


Processed
cherries
Paper

Cement

Food products
Canned '
cherries
Paper
board
Cement

Electricity

Locat ion
Traverse City
Suttons Bay

Port Sheldon

Big .Rock Point
t
Ludington

Montague




Suttons Bay

Gulliver



Suttons Bay

Manistique

Charlevoix

Traverse City
Northport

Filer City .

Pet os key

Escanaba


flow 5-ddy BOD Solids Status
Treatment MGD ibs/day Ibs/day Rating

Screening 0.8 No Data Available -

Temperature 175 No Data Available • A
control
A
1.0 1,000 A

Septic tank I'/. 3 4,:i^8 A
coagulation ,
sed imenta t ion
Disc. 1500' off
shore
Screening, city - - No Data Available - - . A
sewer
Septic Ldiin. and 0.168 40.6 -A
settling basins -(8 hours)


Vibrating screens -. - N6 Data Available - - B
and chlorination
. City sewer, save- 2.028 2,729* 16,572* 'Dc
all, ponds
Package - - No Data Available - -
treatment plant • '
Screening . 547 1 ,866 109 • E
Vibrating screens - - No Data- Available - - A
screens
Settling 10.0 . 20,000 13,500 BS

Septic tank, - - No Data Available - - A
. settling ponds
------ NO Data Available ------ A


Date of
Order of
Determination Remarks

Seasonal
operation


I960 on radioactive
of effluent
Brine wastes to
• Lake Michigan
June 25; 1964




Decmeber 20 ,
1963




June 26, 1963






submitted
content















March 26, 1964 *Reflects loading
for old system
April 28, 1966 New plant




Plans to relocate to
off-water location


September 24,
1959


Cooling waters
only








            114-115

-------
                           THE
                                TABLE   2
                 INDUSTRIAL         SURFACE
                  WATER        DISCHARGES
                                    IN
                    LAKE        MICHIGAN        BASIN
                                  1967
                                                                                                                        2738
                                                                  Discharge Characteristics
                                                                      after Treatment
Company Name
UPPER PtMINSULA
1. Mvnoaiinee River Basin
American Can Company,
Me nominee Mill

Daggett Cheese
Coapany


( Homer-Wauseca )

Receiving


Wax paper Hfi nominee Heno-ninee
River

Cheese Daggett Little
Cedar
River

iron ore

Suspended Pollution Date of
Treatment Flow 5-day BOD Solids Status Order of


Federson t. l.i2G l,6t--8 S.U89
vacuum disc
save -a 1 Is
Septic tar.*., A
wney r.auled
by floor wash
to swan.?
lagocn for
mine
drainage
Remarks


Additional con-
trol facilities
being installed






   Harma Mining Company    Mining
   (Groveland Mine)        iron ore
                                 Randville   Pine Creek    Lagoons
   Inland Steel Company    Mining     Iron River
                       iron ore
  Palestine Cheese
  Company
   Scott Paper Company
   White House Milk
   Company
                                 Stephenson
Gr. wood   Menoninee
and pulp

Butter and  Stephenson
Powdered
Milk
Iron River   Septic tank,  0.360
           lagoon for
           acid mine
           drainage

Little Cedar Septic tank,  0.02
River       haul whey

Kenooinee    side hill    0.070
River       save-alls

Little Cedar Conb. waste   O.Q3
-------
                                              2739
Discharge Characteristics
	'after Treatment
Company Name
LOWER PENINSULA
10., Pine River Basin
East Jordan Canning
Company
Howes Leather
Company, Inc.
Northern Michigan
Electric Co-op
11. Elk River Basin
Columbia Fruit
Division, Michigan
Fruit Canners, Inc.
Elk Rapids Packing
Company
Taas Foods, Inc.
Lamina Tool and Die
Corporation
12. fioardman River Basin
Chef Pierre, Inc.
Morgan-McCool , Inc .
Parsons Corporation
Traverse City
Canning Company
13. Betsie River Basin
Elberta Packing
Company
Pet, Inc.
Pet Milk Company,
Pct-Ritz Foods
Division
Product
Vegetables
and fruit
Tannery
Power
Vegetable
canning
Cherry
canning
Vegetable
canning
Plating
Pie
Food
Products
Tube
fabrication
Canned
fruit
Canned
fruil;
Frozen
cherries
Pies,
apple and
cherry
Location
East Jordan
Boyne City
Advance
Ellsworth
Elk Rapids
Central
Lake
Bella ire
Traverse
City
Traverse
City
Traverse
City
Traverse
City
tiDerta
Frankfort
frank fort
Receiving
St ream
Jordan River
Lake
CharJevoix
Lake
Charlevoix
Intermediate
Lake
Elk Lake
Intermediate
Lake
Intermediate
Lake and
Cedar River
Boardman
Lake
Boardman
River
Grand
Traverse Bay
Mitchell
Creek
Boardman
River
oetsie Lake
Betsie Lake
Betsie Lake
Treatment Flow 5-day BOD Solids .
Provided MGD Ibs/day Ibs/day
City sewer,
lagoons
Primary 0. SCO 1 ,800 3 ,000
settling
Settling
lagoon for
fly ash
Spray .569 1,713 3,037
irrigation,
vibrating
screens
Screening . 500 BOO 150
and
c h lor i nation
Rotary
screen
Batch
treatment
of cyanide
Septic tank,
dry well
Screening
Settling
lagoon
Screening 5«7 1,866 109
Screening
Screening "20 760 150
Screening 600 930 235
Status Order of
Rating Determination Remarks
E
E September 29,
1951
Bpc September 29,
1965
A
Bs Seasonal
opera t ion
*s
A
A
C March 30, 1966
B August 29, 1963
E
B

D

-------
                                  2740
Discharge .Characteristics .
, ' after 'Treatment ' . - 1967
Company Name -
LOWER PENINSULA CONTINUED
14. Manistee "River Basin
Great Lakes Chemical
Corporation
Hardy Salt Company' .

— Michigan Chemical
Corporation
Horton Salt and
Chemical Company

. Packaging Corporation
of America,
American Box Board
Division
15. Big Sable River Basin

16. Lincoln River Basin

17. Pere Marquette River Ba;
Dow Chemical Company




, Harbison -Walker
Refractories Company

Sanders Meat Packing
Company
Stokely-Van Camp ,
. Inc.

18. Pentwater River Basin

19. White River Basin
Hooker Chemical "
Company


1 Miseo" Precision
Casting Company
Whitehall Leather
Company, Division
of Genesco
PVoduct-


Bromine
''
Salt

Bromine
chemicals
Salt,
magnesium ,
bromine
Paper-
board






sin
Chemicals




Magnesite


Meat
Packing
'Cannery





Chemical Cl2
Caustic HCL


Metal
Castings '
Tanning


Location


Tiler City

Manistee

• East Lake

Manistee


Filer City







-
Ludington




Ludington .


Custer

Scottville-





Montague



' Whitehall

Whitehall '


Receiving
.Stream


Manistee
Lake
Manistee
Lake
Manistee
Lake -
Manistee
Lake

' Manistee
Lake
Lake
'Michigan





Lake
Michigan
and Pere
Marquette
River
Pere
Marquette
River
Black River

-Pere
Marquette .
River

:

White take



White Lake

White Lake


• , Suspended Pollution Date of
Treatment .' Flow 5-day BOD Solids Status Order of
Provided • HGD Ibs/day Ibs/day Rating' Determination ' . Remarks


Septic tank, 0'.**23
brine wells
Settling '8.0
lagoon
Condenser 0 . 120

Eductors 15 '


Settling . - 5.00
lagoons
Settling 10.00
lagoons

industries located in

...

Clarifier,
brine to
Lake Uf4 . 5
Michigan not
included
Clarifiers, 5.3'
coagulant • . *
acids
. Lagoon - - No

Screening . 0.500
•and
chlorination

.

Sedimenta- 900
tion, sand
' filtration;
chlorination
Sedimenta- . - - No
tion traps
Lagoon to 1.2
lake



.Neg- W',-500 April 25, 1957
ligible
•p

. Veg- 17
ligihlo
h.eg- 19,00' April 30V 1959 '
ligible • . .

2,000 .5,000 A_ • -September 2K,
• '1959
20,000 13,500 • . Bs .






7,000 .A May 22, 1957

Neg- 8,000 . A
ligible

Neg- 500 B March 23, 1961
ligible. -

Data Available - - D

300 • .175- A May 2t, 1956 Seasonal



. .

3,000 A • ' June 28, 1956



Data Available - - . c

2,100' 608 • Bso


118

-------
                                                                                                                                2741
Company Name
                                           Receiving     Treatment
                                            Stream •      Provided
Discharge Characteristics
	after Treatment	    1967
               - Suspended  Pollution    Date  of
Flow  5-day BOD   Solids       Status     Order of
HGD    Ibs/day    Ibs/day	Rating   Determination
                                                                                                                             Remarks
LOWER PENINSULA CONTINUED
20. Huskegon River Basin
Brooks and Perkins,
Inc., Cadillac
Manufacturing Division
Campbell, Hyanf and
Cannon Foundry Company
Central Concrete
Products -Company
Consumers Power
Company, B.C. Cobb
Plant '
Continental Motors
Corporation , Down-
town
Continental Motors
Corporation, Getty
Street Plant
Denham Manufacturing
Company
Evart Products
Company
Gerber Products •"
Company
H, J. Heinz Company
Kaydon Engineering
Corporation
Lake way Chemicals,
Inc .
Liberty Dairy
Company
Naph-Sol Refining
Company
Ott Chemical Company •
Paris Gravel Company-
Aluminum
sheet
preparation
Castings
Washed
gravel
Electric
power
Auto
engines
Auto
engines '
Electro-
plat ing

Baby food
Pickles
Bearing
Alcohol
base
• detergents
and dye
intermedias
Bottling
plant
Petroleum .
refining

Washed
sand and
Cadillac
Muskegon
Big Rapids
Muskegon
Muskegon
Muskegon
Big Rapids
Evart
Fremont
Lake view
Muskegon
Muskegon
Evart
North
Muskegon
Muskegon •
. Big Rapids
Clara River
. Ruddiman
Drain
Muskegon
River
Muskegon*
River
Muskegon
Lake
Muskegon
River
Muskegon
River
Twin Creek
Darling
Creek and
Fremont
Lake ,
Tamarack
Lake
South Br.
Ruddiman
Creek
Black River
and Mona
Lake
Muskegon
River
Muskegon
River
Little Bear
Creek
- Muskegon
River
Ion exchange' - - No Data Available - - B
Oil recovery - - No Data Available — - A '
Settling - - No Data Available - - - A
ponds
Settling 450 No Data Available
lagoons for
sludge and
fly ash ' . - -
Oil 0.81 130 • 450 Dpc
separator
CN and 0.46 38 196 A
• chrome.
treatment ,
oil sepa-
ration, acid .
neutralizing . -
Cr treatment .0916 No Data Available • May 24 , 1956
Cooling - - No Data Available - - B
water
Spray 1.0 No Data Available A
irrigation, " . • . -
• cooling
water to •
stream -
Screening .- - No Data Available - -
Clarifiers . .270 9 119 ' Eps October 27, 1966
Seepage 0.344 700 7,500 Bs May 24, 1962
lagoons . •
Wash and . . . " . -
cooling 0.171 161 143 - August 24, 1966 New plant .
water . -
API sepa- 5.0 " 175 405 A July 24, 1958
rator and
lagoon
Seepage .4175 1,045 •£,.£ August 29, 1967 Hew treatment
lagoons • facilities under
construction
Settling - - No Data Available'- - A
ponds
                   gravel

-------
       Company Ha
            Receiving     Treatment
Locat ion     Stream  .     Provided
                                                                              Discharge Characteristics
                                                                              	after Treatment	    1967  •
                                                                                              Suspended  Pollution    Date of
                                                                              Flow  5-day BOD   Solids     Status      Order of
                                                                             . _M_GD    Ibs/day    Ibs/day    Rating    Determination
                                                                                                                                        27^2
LOWER PENINSULA CONTINUED
20. Muskegon River Basin Continued
Sealed Power
Corporation
Speas Company
Wallace Stone
Company
Warren, S. D.,
Company
Auto parts Muskegon
Heights
Apple Fremont
juice
Washed Hersey
stone and
gravel
Paper Muskegon
pulp
Ruddiman
Drain' and
Mona Lake
Cole Drain,
Brooks Creek
and Fremont
Lake
Muskegon
River '
Muskegon
• Lake
Reduction - - Ho Data Available - - D
of chrome
Cooling ' 1.12 No Data Available A July 26, 1961
water to
stream
Settling - - No Data Available - - B-
pond s
Clarifiers, 12.0 13,000 18,000 E December 7, 1955
save-all,
sludge
lagoons
21. Grand River  Basin
Allen Packing
Company
American Motors
Corporation,
Kelvinator Division
Amway Corporation


A.S.P. and
Manufacturing
Company

tAttwood Corporation


Placing Company
Aunt Jane's Foods,
Division of the
Borden Company
Bissell, Inc.


Sanitary sewage
Industrial wastes
Challenge Porcelain
Company
Cherry Growers, Inc.

Clark Equipment
Company
Crystal Refining
Company
Slaughter-
packing



Home
cleaning
products '
Plating



Cadmium
plating
Plat ins
Pickle
processing

Sheet metal
parts
fabrication


Bathtubs

Cherry
canning
Machinery

Oil
refininc
Charlott e County
farm drain
Wyoming Plaster
Creek

Ada Grand River


Grand Haven Grand River



Lowell Flat River


Edmore Stoney
Creek .

Walker Indian Mill
Creek



Grand Haven Grand River

Bailey • Fish Creek

Jackson Grand River

Carson City Fish Creek

Lagoon - - No Data Available - - A

Chemical - - No Data Available - - A
treatment

Stabilize- .063 809 . 187 D July 23, 1964
tion
lagoons
Chemical 0.084 No Data Available D
precipita-
t.on neutra-
lization
Cyanide and 0.20 • Su Eg December 15, 1960
chrome
reduction
Screening .0242 74. 7 • 29.8 E June 28, 1967 New treatment
- facilities
planned
Settling 0.03 20 16 . April 24, 1958
tanks

. A
A
None .090 25

Seepage - - No Data Available 	 D March 25, 1965
lagoon .
Lagoon ' 12 ' D Occasional J.6ss
of oil to river
Oil ' 0.043 3
remova 1

-------
                                                                                                                                   2743
                                                                         Discharge -Characteristics
                                                                             after Treatment
Company Name
LOWER PENINSULA CONTINUED
Product

Locat ion

Receiving
Stream

Suspended Pollution . Date of
Treatment Flow 5-day BOD Solids- Status Order of
Provided MGD Ibs/day Ibs/day Ratine Determination Remarks

21. Grand River Basin Continued
Detroit Gasket and -
Manufacturing Company,
- Extruded 'Metal Division

Eagle Ottawa Leather
Company
Electro Chemical
Finishing Company





Federal Mogul


General Motors
.Corporation, Diesel
Equipment Division


General Motors
Corporat ion ,
Oldsmobile Forge
Division
General Motors
Corporation,
Oldsmobile Division •

Gibson Refrigerator
Company
Gibson Refrigerator
Company
Grand Rapids Brass
Company
Hastings Aluminum
Products , Inc .
Hastings Manufacturing
Company .

Hilf inger Jackson
Corporat ion



Hupp Corporation

Hudsonville Dairy


Indian Summer, Inc.

.Extrusion
and
aluminum
anodizing
Hide-
•tanning
Electro
plating





Lead, tin,
copper
plating
Metal
manufac-
turing


Forgings



Crank
shafts and
connecting
rods
Cooling
Equipment •
Cooling
Equipment •
Zinc die
casting
Aluminum
coating
Auto '
parts

Zinc
plating
auto parts







Apple '
juice and '
Belding



Grand Haven

Hiddleville






Greenville


.Grand Rapids
Wyoming



Lansing
-


Delta
Township,
Eaton
County
Greenville

Belding

Wyoming

Hastings

Hastings


Jackson




Belding'

Hudsonville


Belding

Flat River



Grand River

.Thornapple
River





Flat River


Grand River
Plaster
Creek


Grand River



Jenne
Drain,


Flat River"

Flat River

Buck Creek

Fall Creek

Thornapple
River

Grand River




Flat River

Rush Creek
to Grand
River
Flat River

Phosphate '.70 6.0 150 B
and oil
removal _ .

Screening 1.4 . 16,000- 24,000 Ecp September 28,
1960
Cyanide, .300 No Data Available ' .April 27, 1967
chrome and .
other metal
treatment,
lagoons ,
neutraliza-
tion
Chemical 0.3 No Data Available
treatment, . . - -
lagoons
Cyanide and - - No Data Available - - A
chrome 2.120 8 D November 30,
reduction , • 1967
settling
ponds
Oil removal - - No Data Available - - A



Chemical ..072 2 A February 24, 1960
treatment
lagoon .

Lagoon 0.1 No Data Available A

Oil • .04 .No Data Available B
separator
Cooling - - No Data Available - - B March 25, 1965
waters
- - No Data Available - - A

Chrome .28 Ho Data Available A November 30,
and oil . • 1961
removal
Cooling and '0.24 15 'B May 22, 1957
anodize rinse
to river and
phosphate
recovery
Oil - - No Data Available - -
separator
Septic tank 0.33 20 ' 35 D


Settling .418 1,500 - 589 . B
pond .
Jervis Corporation
vinegar

Metal    -  Grandville   Grand River
finishing
Chemical      0.788   No Data  Available
treatment of
cyanides and
•chrome sed-
imentation

-------
                                                                                                                    2744
                                                                   Discharge Characteristics
                                                                       after Treatment
Company Name
LOWER PENINSULA CONTINUED
Product

Location

Receiving
Stream

Treatment
Provided

Suspended
Flow 5-day BOD Solids
MGU l&s/day Ibs/day

Pollution Date of
Status Order of
Rating Determination Remarks

21. Grand River Basin Continued
Keeler Brass Company
Kroeger Company
LeFere Forge and
Machine Company
Company, Inc.
Light Metals
Corporation
Michigan Consolidated
Gas Company .
Michigan Milk
Producers Association
1
Municipal Power Plant
National Fruit
Products Company ,.-Inc .
Nelson Metal
Products , Division
of Midland Ross
Corporat ion •
New York Central RR
Ore-Ida Foods , Inc .
Owens-Illinois Glass
Company
Packaging Corporation
of America , American
Box Board Division
. Packaging Corporation
of America, American
Metal
-i -ring
office
Truck hubs
and gear
blanks
•Metal
stamping
Extrusions"
Gas
compressor
station
Milk
plant
Electric
" Power
• Cherry
process
Die cast
plant

tFruit and
vegetable
freezing
Glass
Corrugated
. boxes
Paper
cartons -
Middleville
Township,
Kent '
County
Jackson
Paris
Township,
Kent
County
Wyoming
Six Lakes
Ovid
Grand Haven
Kent City
Grandville
Jackson
Greenville
.Charlotte
Grandville
Grand Rapids
Thornapple
River
Creek
Grand River
Plaster
Creek
Roy's Creek
Drain
First Lake
at Six
Lakes Drain
Maple River
Grand River
Ball Creek
Buck Creek
. Grand River
Dickerson
Creek
Butternut
Creek
Roy's Creek
Drain '.
Grand River '
Cyanide
reduct ion ,
neutraliza-
tion , sludge
removal
sludge,
chlorination
Oil
separator
Septic tank
and urder-
drained sand
filter, with
chlorination
Chemical
neutraliza-
tion, sedi-
mentation
sludge lagoon
Cooling
water
Spray
irrigation
Cooling
water
Stabiliza-
tion , ground
seepage and
irrigation
None
Oil traps
Primary
clarif ier ,
lagoons ,
spray
irrigation
Sedimenta-
"tion
None '
Save-alls
- - No Data Available - -

.265 233 280
- - No Data Available - -
0.54 344
H-.32 No Data Available
0.5 15 8.87
0.34 No Data Available
0.1 No Data Available
- - No Data Available - -
0.07 No Data Available
- - No Data Available - -
- - No Data Available - -
- - No Data Available - -
2.5 3,000 6,500 .
A
July 26, 1956
B History of oil
losses
E .' September 29,
1965
DS August 26, 1960 - -
A March 21, 1955
A November 29, Cooling water to
1962 'stream
A • Seasonal
discharge
B July 28, 1966
A
B September 23,
1964
' ?."
B
B
Box Board Division

-------
                                               2745
uischarge Characteristics
	after Treatment
1967
Company Name
LOWER PENINSULA CONTINUED
Product

Location

Receiving
Stream

Treatment Flow 5 -day BOD Solids
Provided MGD Ibs/day Ibs/day

Status Order of
Rating Determination Remarks

21. Grand River Basin Continued
Pet Milk Company
Pittsburg Forging
Company
•Ranny Refrigeration
Rockford Paper Hills,
Inc.
Samary Food Products
Saranac Manufacturing
Company
Swanson Pickle Company
Store-A-Way , Inc .
Super Food Service
Trailmobile .
Universal Metal
Products
1 Utilex Corporation
White Products
Corporation
Withrow Pickle
Company
Wolverine Finishes
Corporation
Wolverine World Wide,
Inc.
Condensed
milk
Forging
Refrigera-
tors
Box "
board
Fruit
processing
Plating
and
buffing
Pickle
brining
Meat
processing
Food ware-
house and
office
Washing
trailers
and tank
trucks
Metal
products
Plating
Water
heaters ,
water soft-
eners and
plumbing
ware


Shoes ,
tanning
Coopersville
Jackson
Greenville
Childsdale
Coopersville
Saranac
Ravenna
DeWitt
Grand
Rapids

Saranac
Fowlerville
Middleville
Sand Lake
Wyoming
Rockford
Deer Creek
Grand River
Flat River
Rogue River
Deer Creek
Grand River
Crockery
Creek
Lookingglass
River
Creek
to Plaster
Creek
Grand River
Red Cedar
River
Thornapple
River
Round Lake
Plaster
Creek
Rogue River
In-plant - --No Data Available - -
controls
Oil 0.07 No Data Available
skimmer
Lagoons 0.015 JO
Clarifiers 1.0 1,200 4,000
"Spray • 0.03 300
irrigation
and
screening
Cyanide and .150 No Data Available
chrome treat-
ment , lagoon
seepage
lagoon
In-plant . .001 10 ?0
controls
sludge
grease
removal
None .200 35
Cyanide and .350 - 20 . 120
chrome
settling
lagoon, oil
skimmer
Cooling 0.01 5 S.7M "
water
- - No Data Available - -
Chemical - - No Data Available - -
precipita-
tion
Screen ing , . 600 2 , 000 1 , 000
clarif iers ,
vacuum filter
B
A

B
A July 29, 1965 Does not run
every year
July 29, 195U
Bc '
A January 26 ,
1961.
November 30 ,
1961
June 22, 1961
C ' 65 Ibs/day
phosphate
B January 28,
1953
A October 26,
1961
C
Bc
Ds March 26, 1952

-------

Company Name
LOWER PENINSULA CONTINUED
22. Black River Basin
Bohn Aluminum
Corporat ion


DeWitts Poultry
Processing

Donnelly Mirrors

Hart and Cooley
Manufacturing Company

H. J. Heinz and
Company


Holland Suco Color
Company

Holland Die Casting,
Inc.
James DeYoung
Generating Station
Keeler Brass Company


Meade , Johnson and
Company
Miles Laboratories ,
Inc.
Parke, Davis and
Company


1
23. Kalamazoo River Basin
Albion Malleable Iron
Company

Allegan Metal
Finishing Company

Allied Paper
Corporation, Monarch
Division
Solids
Oxygen demand
wastes
Allied Paper
Corporation, Bryant
Division
Solids ' '
Oxygen demand
wastes
Allied Paper
Corporation, King
Division
' Solids
Oxygen demand
wastes

Product


Extrusion
aluminum


Poultry
processing

Glass
mirrors
Furnace
supplies

Canning,
pickles,
vinegar
and cider
Organic
colors and
chemicals
Zinc
castings
Electric
power



Drugs

Drugs

Synthetic
1 drugs ,
chemicals



Iron
castings

Electro-
plating

Paper





Paper





Paper






Location


Holland



Zeeland


Holland

Holland


Holland



Holland


Holland

Holland

Zeeland


Zeeland

Zeeland

Holland





Albion


Allegan .


Kalamazoo





Kalamazoo





Kalamazoo






Receiving
Stream


Wildwood
Drain to
Lake
Macatawa
Black River


Lake
.Macatawa
Black River
via County
Drain
Lake
Macatawa


Lake
Macatawa

Black River

Lake
Macatawa
Brower
Drain

Black River

Hunter
Creek .
Lake
Macatawa




Kalamazoo
River

Kalamazoo
River

Portage
Creek -




Portage
Creek




Kalamazoo
River




after Treatment
Suspended
Treatment Flow 5-day BOD Solids
Provided HGD Ibs/day Ibs/day


(Jickel .180 23 55
recovery and
. neutraliza-
tion
Septic tank, 0.106 3.1 8.0
screening, and
sand filters
Lagoons .098 103 294

'Septic tank, .010 3u 21
stabiliza-
tion ponds
Screening .850 2,225 1,000



Clarifier . 800 1 ,700 HOO


Neutraliza- .223 59 48 '
tion lagoon
Cooling .- - No Data Available — -
water
Lagoon and .015 M 2
neutraliza-
tion of acid
Activated .182 90 197
sludge
Lagoon 1.17 107 60

Primary 7.2 im»
settling
and C12
ox idat ion


Dust ' 0.780 4,511
collection,
settling
Cyanide and .007 No Data Available
metal treat-
ment
Clarifier 2.0 . 400 300





Clarifier «.0 8,000 7,000.





Clarifier .8 900 100 .





1967
Pollution Date of
Status Order of
Rating Determination Remarks


Dc October 25, 1956






Es

E., April 23, 1952
P

E



' D May 27, 1965


B March 25, 1959

June 28, 1967




B

B

A . February 2U , 1950



A

CP


D March 28, 1963 Ground water
contamination

October 2t,
1951

A
A




A
E •

October 2*4 ,
1951

A
!••


-------
                                                 27^7
Discharge Characteristics
    after Treatment
Company Name
LOWER PENINSULA CONTINUED
23. Kalamazoo River Basin
Aluminum Extrusions,
Inc.
American Aggregate
Corporat ion
Brown Paper Company
Mill 1
Solids
Oxygen demand
wastes
Brown Paper Company
Mill 2
Solids
Oxygen demand
wastes
Brunswick Corporation


Division of Gulf and
Western (Scotts, Inc.

Clark Equipment
Company
Consumers Power
Company
Consumers Power
Company
Corning Glass Works


Culligan Soft Water,
Inc.
DeKleine Packing
Company

I Eaton, Yale and Towne
Product

Continued
Extrudes
aluminum
Gravel
washing
Parchment
and wax
paper


Parchment
and wax
paper


Furniture


)

Fork lift
trucks
Electric
power
Electric
power
Glass, TV
tubes

Water '
softening
Pickles
.and
relish
, Gears
Location


Charlotte

Kalamazoo

Parchment




Parchment




Kalamazoo




Battle
Creek
Battle
Creek
Corns tock

Albion


Battle
Creek
Bentheim


Marshall
Inc., Marshall Division
Fresh-Pak Corporation
General • Foods
Corporation
Grand Trunk Railroad
Company

Kellogg Company

Lakeside Refining
Company


Lorton Products
ornpany

Menasha Corporation,
Paper Board Division
Solids .
Oxygen demand
wastes
Michigan Fruit
Canners, Inc.

Murray Packing
Company

Canning •
Cereal

Repair
of
equipment


Fuel
oil


Rendering,
fertilizer
products
Paper
Board



Fruit and .
vegetable
canning
Slaughter
and
packing
Martin
Battle
Creek
Battle
Creek

Battle
Creek
. Kalamazoo



East ' •


Otsego




Fennville


Plain we 11


Receiving
Stream


Battle Creek
River
.Kalamazoo
River
Kalamazoo
River



Kalamazoo
River



Allen Creek


River

. Kalamazoo
River
Battle •
Creek River
Kalamazoo
River
Kalamazoo
River

Kalamazoo
River
Black Creek
to Big
Rabbit River
Kalamazoo
River
Gun River
Battle Creek
River
Battle Creek
River

Battle Creek
River
Allen Creek



Kalamazoo


Kalamazoo
River •



Mann Creek •
via County
Drain - '
Kalamazoo
R'iver

Treatment
Provided


Lagoons

Sedimenta-
tion
Lagoon




Lagoon




Sedimenta-
tion, oil
separator
chrome
treatment ,
lagoon
Oil
removal
Cooling
water
Cooling
water
Clarif ier.
neutraliza-
tion
Controlled
discharge
Septic tank.
screen

Lagoons

None
Cooling
water
Oil
separator

Cooling
water
Oil floata-
tion, skim-
ming.
•recovery
Septic tank,
irrigation

Save-all*




Irrigation


Lagoons


Suspended
Flow 5-day BOD Solids
MGD Ibs/day Ibs/day


- - No

- - No

- - No




- --No




0.252




- - No

- - No

- - No

0.03


.00&

- - Ho


0.144

0 . 20
- - Ho

' .369


- - No

- - No



0.050


0.356




.500


- .010




Data Available - -

Data Available - -

Data Available - -




Data Available - -




20. 
-------
                                            2748
LOWER
23.










24.



25.




Company Name
PENINSULA CONTINUED
Product

Location

Receiving
Stream

Treatment
Provided

Discharge Characteristics
Suspended Pollution Date o.f
Flow 5-day BOD Solids Status Order of
HGD Ibs/day Ibs/day . Rat ing Determination Remarks

Kalamazoo River Basin Continued
New York Airbrake
Company
Sanitary sewage
North American-
Extrusions Corporation
Pet Milk Company
Plainwell Canning
Company
Ralston Purina Company
Shakespeare Corporation
Union Steel Products
Company
Valley Metal Products
Company
Waldorf Paper Products
Company, Mac Sim Bar
Division
Solids
Oxygen demand
wastes
Weyerhaeuser Company
Solids
Oxygen demand
wastes
Black River Basin
Du-well Decorative
Company
Michigan Fruit
Canners , Inc .
South Haven Chemical
Company
Paw Paw River Basin
Burnette Farms
Packing Company
Clark Equipment
Company
Coloma Cooperative
Canning Company
Hartford Metal
Protection Company
Pumps ,
mot ors ,

Aluminum
tubing
and
anodizing
Dairy
products
Canned
fruit
Dog and
cat food
Electro-
plating
Wire
products
Aluminum
extrusion
Paper
board
Paper
Decora-
tive
Metal
Fruit
products

Canning
vegetables
and fruits

Canning
Chrome •
plated
parts
Galesburg
Parchment
Wayland
Plainwell
Battle
Creek
Kalamazoo
Albion
Plainwell
Otsego
Plainwell
Bangor
South Haven
South Haven
Lawrence
Benton
Township,.
Berrien
County
Coloma
Hartford
Kalamazoo'
River
Travis Creek
Rabbit River
Kalamazoo
River
Battle Creek'
River
Kalamazoo
River
Kalamazoo
River
Kalanazoo
River
Kalamazoo
•River
Kalamazoo
River
Black River
Black River
Black River
Brush Creek
Ox Creek
Paw Paw
River
Pine Creek
Trickling
filter, oil
floatation
and removal
Septic tank
neutraliza-
tion , lagoons
In-plant .
controls
Seasonal
spray
irrigation

Plating
recovery
system
Complete
treatment
. for plating
waste
Neutraliza-
t ion , lagoon
Clarifier
and stabili-
zation lagoons
Activated
sludge
Complete
plating .
waste
treatment
Screening
Controlled
discharge
Septic tank
and spray
irrigation
.Cooling
water
Screening,
irrigation ,
lagoon
Complete
plating
'waste
.192 7.13 5.58 September- 28,
1955
A
A
.7 • 124 E October 30,
1957
.049 145 27 A
.0436 49u B
- - No Data Available - - B
- - Ho Data Available - - A February 23,
1966
- - Ho Data Available - - BC
- - No Data Available - - B
1.1 2,035 940
A
B
1.75 3,800 2,600
B
Dc
0.20 .122 A
0.447 2,316 403.4
- - No Data Available - - A
0.050 300 B
.050 No Data Available • A
- - No Data Available - -
.071 84.5
treatment

-------
                                                                                                                                       2749
                                                                               Discharge Characteristics
                                                                                    after Treatment   -       1967
Company -Name
LOWER PENINSULA .CONTINUED
Product

Location

Receiving
Stream

Suspended Pollution Date of
Treatment . Flow 5-day BOD Solids Status Order of
Provided MGD .Ibs/day Ibs/day Rating Determination Remarks

25. Paw Paw River Basin Continued
Honee Bear Canning
Company
Midwest Timer Service,
Inc.


Millburg Fruit
Exchange (Kay Foods)
Murch- A. F. and
Company

Pearl Grange Packing
Company


Pet Milk Company,
Musselman-Dwan Division

Quality Frozen Foods
Sill Farms


Watervliet Paper
Company
Welch Grape Juice
Company
Fruit
products .
' Chrome
plating


Canning

Grape_ and
cherry
juice




Canning
vegetables
and fruits
Cherry
processing

Juices,
jams
Lawton

Hagar
Townsh ip,
Berri en
County
Millburg

Paw Paw

Bent on
Township,
Berrien
County
Paw Paw


Lawrence


Lawton

Townl ine
1 >rain
Pratt Drain



Blue Creek

.Jennings
Drain

Yore and
Stoef fer
Drain

Paw Paw
River

River
Brush Creek


River
Lawton Creek

Lagoons - - No Data Available - - A July 28, 1960

Lagoons -' - No Data Available - - A .July 28, 1960



Oxidation - - No Dat;* Available .- - B
[>cnds
Septic tank, 0.72 300 i>" September 21,
si-. ray irrip.a- . 1961
tion ...
oeptic tank, ,u?r> 100 ' .A
lap.oon, spray
irripat ion

Screening, 0,10 740 33S E
j.j-ray
irrifcution-
Screening - - No Dal -i Ava i lablo - - B
Screen inj? , - - No Data Available - - B
spray
irrigation
Save -a lie 1.75 3, 000 1? ,'JO'i . A
Screening, 0.8 1 ,000 A
spray
                                                                 irrigation
26.'St.  Joseph River Basin
    Alpha,  Inc.
                            Metal    .  ' Eau Claire
                            plat ing
                            and  tubing
    American International   Aluminum    Coldwater
Extension    Chemical
Drain and    treatment,
other waters  lagoon

St.  
-------
                                                            2750
            Discharge Characteristics
                after Treatment         1967
Company Name
LOWER PENINSULA CONTINUED
26. St. Joseph River Basin
Kawneer Company
Plant No. 1

Kingston Products
Corporation , Douglas
Manufacturing Division


Kirsch Manufacturing
Company
Kirsch Manufacturing
Company
Lamb-Knit Goods
Michigan Mushroom
Company

Midland Hire
Corporation


Municipal Power Plant

Quincy Products •
Company

Research Holding and
Film Company
Rudy Manufacturing
Company

Schaefer Manufacturing
Company


Schmidt Packing
Company
Silver Mill Frozen
Foods, Inc.
Simplicity Pattern
Company, Inc.

Simpson-Lee Paper
Company

Stover Soft Water
Service

United Food, Inc.



Weyerhaeuser Company


Whirlpool Corporation

Product

Continued
Building
products

Electro-
plating



Metal
industry
Metal
industry

Mushrooms
and
asparagus
Electrical
wire


Electri-
city
Refrigera-
tion coils




Heat
exchangers

Electro-
plating
and
anodizing
Meat
packing
Fruit
packing
Paper
patterns

Paper


• Recharge
water
softeners
Canned and
frozen • .
food

Paper


Nickel
plating
Location


Niles


Bronson




Sturgis

White
Pigeon
Colon
Niles


Three
Rivers


Cold water

•Quincy


Mendon

Dowagiac


Union City



Niles

Eau Claire

Niles


Vicksburg


Berrien
Springs

Sodus



White.
Pigeon

Benton
Harbor
Receiving
Stream


St. Joseph
River

County
Drain



Fawn River
1
White' Pigeon
Lake
Sturgeon Lake
St. Joseph
River

St. Joseph
River


Cold water
River
Marble Lake
Drain

St. Joseph
River
Pine Lake
Drain

St . Joseph
River


Dowagiac
Creek
Farmers
Creek
St. Joseph
River via
fcacey Creek
Gourdneck
Creek

St. Joseph
River

Pipestone
Creek via
County
Drain
White Pigeon
River

St. Joseph
River
Treatment
Provided


Septic tank,
chrome
treatment
City and
chemical
treatment
of plating
.wastes
Oil
reraova 1
None

Septic tank
Vibrating
screens

Cooling
water.
closed
system
Cooling
tower
Chemical
destruction
of CN
Oil trap.
ponds
cooling
water to
lagoons
In-plant
control


None

Lagoons

Save-all
units

Sedimenta-
tion with
coagulation .
Controlled
discharge

Screening ,
irrigation

- .
Floatation,
save-all, '
clarifiers
Chemical
treatment
Suspended Pollution Date of
Flow 5-day BOD Solids Status Order of
MGD Ibs/day Ibs/day Rat ing Determinat ion Remarks


0.612 50 Dp February 25,
1953

0.158 100 A March 21, 1950




0.15 4 200 A

0.7 8 204

- - No Data Available - - Dp
0.025 200 A


- - No Data Available - - A January 3,
196«*


- - No Data Available - -

.056 50 7. if Dsp May 28, 1958


0.120 No Data Available B

0.305 u.i Ap December 3,
1964

0.08 50 ES



- - No Data Available - - C

0.68 500 110 Dcp January 21,
1966
1.18- 1,350 2,360 Dps . Additional !
all units
planned
4.21 2,306 - 2,692 , BS December 5,
1957

0.01 . No Data Available . April 26, 1956


- - No Data Available - - Bsp



2.0 u,200 5,000 B


0.144 No Data Available A September 23*
1964
and lagoons

-------
                                                                                                                                         2751
                                                                                Discharge Characteristics
                                                                                	aj^ter Treatment
                                                                                1967
         Company Name
                             Product
                                         Location
                                                                                                Suspended  Pollution   Date, of
                                                     Receiving     Treatment     flow  S-day BOD  • 'Solids     Status     Order of
                                                      Stream	Provided	HGD  	Ibg/day    Ibs/day.   Rating1   Determination
LOWER PENINSULA CONTINUED  .

  Industries with Discharges  in Hinor Drainage Areas
      BU-Mar Poultry
      Elk Rapids
      Packing Company
      Onekama Canning
      Company

      Petoskey Plating
    .  Company  -.

      Smeltzer Packing
      Company
                             Poultry     Borcula
                             processing
                        Pigeon River  Settling
                                     basins*
                                     lagoons
Fruit
packing
Canning
cherries

Auto
parts

Cherries
and
apples
Lake
Leelanau•
Onekama


Petoskey


Benzonia
Lake
Leelanau
Portage
Lake
            Herring
            Lake
Screening
and
chlorinatioa

Screening
             Chemical
             'treatment

             Screening
                                                                            August  29,
                                                                            1967  •
                                                                                                                     June  22, 1961
                                                                125-130

-------
                                                      2752
           APPENnix  I
MUNICIPAL HASTE  WATER DISCHARGES
               IN
     THE LAX*:  MICHIGAN
               131

-------
                                                               TABLE  I
                                                          MICHIGAN'S
                                                                                                                                  2753
                         MUNICIPAL       WASTE       WATER
                                                                         DISCHARGE
                                                           INVENTORY
                                           LAKE       MICHIGAN       BASIN
1.  HENOHINEE (HICH.)-
        munity^
                                           I
                                                                    Discharge Characteristics
                   Receiving  Treatment  Population
                    Waters    Provided  (1961  est.)
                             Suspended
5-day BOD  5-day BOD  5-day BOD   Solids
Influent   Effluent   Effluent   Influent
  mg/1	mg/1    % Removal   mg/1
Suspended  Suspended
 Solids   •  Solids
Effluent   Effluent
  me/I'   % Removal
                                                                                        Flow
                                                                                        MGD
                                                                                                                 Status and Abatement Action
   Alpha


   Caspian
   Crystal. Falls
Armstrong  Primary         300
Creek      ST
                   Iron
                   River
          Primary
          IT
                   Iron
                   River
                                          1.U90
                   Paint      None          2,200
                   River
          Primary         600
          ST
                                                   '	NO Data Available		
                                		No Data Available	
                                                                     No Data Available
                                                    	 Ho Data Available - - 	
   Iron Mountain -   Henotninee  Primary      1U.UOO      280
   Kingsford         River
                                                          0.150 Staff recoroirendation on..
                                                               adequacy of present treat-
                                                               ment to be presented to HRC
                                                             -  by Harch 1, 1968.

                                                          0.220 Program in progress.
                                                              . Facilities to be in
                                                               operation by June 30, 1969.

                                                          0.060 Staff recommendation on
                                                               adequacy of present treat-
                                                               ment to be -presented to WRC
                                                             -  by Harch 1, 1968.

                                                          1.18  Final Order adopted       M
                                                               November 21, 1950.  Staff
                                                               recommendation on adequacy
                                                               cf present treatment to be
                                                               presented to WRC by
                                                               March 1, 1968
   Iron River        Iron       Primary       3,300     136
                   River
                   Henominee  Primary      11,400      89
                   River
                                                                        30.      161
                                                                        27       107
                                                                                        0.30  Final Order adopted'      X .
                                                                                              November 21, 1950. . Staff
                                                                                              recommendation on adequacy
                                                                                              of present treatment to be
                                                                                              presented to WRC by ...
                                                                                              March 1, 1968

                                                                                        1.89  Staff"recommendation on
                                                                                              adequacy of present treat-
                                                                                              ment to be presented to WRC
                                                                                              by Harch 1, 1968.
   Mineral Hills     Iron       Primary
                   River      ST
   Norway
   Stambaugh.
                   Menominee  None
                   River
   South Republic '•  Michigansae Primary
                   River  '    ST
                                          3,200
                                                    	 	 _ _ - No Data Available 	
                                                    __ 	  ____ 	 NO Data Available ----------
                                                   	Ho Data Available	- -
                   Iron      Secondary -     1,900     188
                   River      AS
                                                                                        0.030 Staff recommendations on
                                                                                              adequacy of present treatr  .
                                                                                              ment to be presented to WRC '
                                                                                              by Harch 1, 1968.

                                                                                        0.320 Order adopted August 29,
                                                                                              1967.  Program'-in progress.
                                                                                              Facilities to be in •
                                                                                              operation by July 1, 1968.
                                                                                        0.010 Staff .recommendation on
                                                                                            .  adequacy of present treat-'
                                                                                              ment to be presented to WRC
                                                                                              by March 1, 1968..
                                                                                        0.09  Final Order adopted      £•
                                                                                            .  November 21, 1950.'  Staff
                                                                                              recommendation on adequacy
                                                                                            '  of present treatment to be
                                                                                              presented to WRC. by "
                                                                                              March 1, 1968
   Stephenson
                   Little
                   Cedar
                   River
         'Secondary
          TF   "
                   Menominee  Primary
                   River.      ST
                                                    ___:.	-NO Data Available -__-.--.
                                                          0.18  Staff.recommendation on
                                                               adequacy of present treat-
                                                               ment to be 'presented to WRC
                                                               by Harch 1, 1968.  '

                                                          0.015 Staff I'ecoramendations'on
                                                               adequacy of present treat-.
                                                               ment to be presented to WRC
                                                               by March 1, 1968.
              9  Designates Orders which have, been confirmed by court action.
              *fc Designates Orders which are currently under court review.
                                                           132-133

-------
                                                        2754
Discharge Characteristics
Community
2. BIG CEDAR
Pinecrest
Medicare Facility
3. FORD ' ' .
». ESCANABA
' Palmer
5. DAYS
Gladstone
6. RAPID
Masonville
7. VHITEFISH

8. STURGEON
Sagola
1
9. MAKISTlqUE
ilanistique
10. PINE
Boyne City
Charlevoix
East Jordan
H^ ELK
Bellaire
Receiving Treatment
Haters Provided
Big Cedar Secondary
River . TF
Warner Primary
Creek ST
Lake Primary'
Michigan
Rapid Nona
River
West Primary •
Branch ST
Sturgeon
Manistique Primary
River
Lake Primary
. Charlevoix • •
Pine Primary
River
Lake . Primary ;
Charlevoix
•Inter- • None- •• ' ,
mediate
River
Elk R1*MT> Ppiaanr '
Suspended Suspended Suspended • V j
S-day BOD 5-day BOD 5-day BOD Solids ' Solids • Solids \f-
Population Influent Effluent' Effluent Influent Effluent 'Effluent Flow
(I960 est.) mi/1 '• . mg/1 \ Removal mg/1 • mg/1 ' t Removal KGD Status and Abatement Action


850 •-- 	 	 	 No Data Available 	 - - - T 0.085 . .
5, MOO 230 158 .. 29 260 110 56 0.67 Staff recommendation on
. ' ' ' . ' adequacy of present treat-
ment to be presented' to HRC- .
.by March 1, 1968.
" ' . ' . ' September 30, 1966.
- ' Corrective program underway

U.SOO 37 22 '.• U3 31 17 • U7 1.68 Final Order adopted.
' ' ' • ' '.: ' ' October 21, 1950. '
2,800 88 09 U7 ' 95 39 58 0.22 Final Order adopted ,
'.'••'.••. ' ' ' . September 23, 1952.
2,800 .217 ' 130 ' UO 202 61 61 0.38
' - ' ' »'
1,920 113 -65 UO .151 . 6Sf 58 0.086 Final Order adopted
'.'"-• ''...' ' '"'" J6- W5°-
December 16, 1966.
Corrective program' underway
1.015 '--„.•--.---. No Data Available .----.---_•- 0.10? Tinal nivlA^ MAnnt** Mav 9^-

-------
                                                                                                                                              2755
                                                                           Discharge Characteristics

12.







13.






1U.





15.

16.

17;


Community'
BOARDMAN

KAlkaska
Traverse City




BETSIE
Beulah

Elberta

Frankfort

XANISTEE
• Manistee

Hanton


BIG SABLE

LINCOLN

PERE 'MARQUETTE

Custer
Receiving Treatment .
Waters . Provided

'
.River L
Boardman ' Primary
River




.
LaJce . IT
Betsie Primary
River
Betsie Primary
River

Hanistee Primary
River
Cedar and None
Nanton
Creeks






Black None
Creek
. • Suspended Suspended Suspended •
5-day BOD 5-day BOD 5-day BOD Solids . Solids . Solids
Population Influent Effluent Effluent Influent Effluent Effluent
(196<4 est.) 'mx/1 mg/1 % Removal mg/1 mg/1 ' % Removal

'
Available
18,500 . 203 16U 19 185 66 63





. ' .

• 550 161 100 .39 213 78 62

1,690 397 331 19 220 107 51


8,300 182 128 . 30 155 ' 69 52

1,050 ----:- 	 - - No Data Available ------- 	 .-'-



- • ' . . • . • ' •'

•

. ' '

V . •• .
Flew
HGD Status and Abatement Action •

0 137

3..60 ' Signed a Stipulation for
secondary treatment and
phosphate removal* Plant
scheduled for construction '
by December 31, 1970..

o.ouu •

0.081 Order of Determination
adopted August 22, 1950.
o.m . - - ' •


0.52

0.105 Conference held before WRC
December 16, 1966.
.Corrective program underway '





0 037 Conference held before WRC
December 16. 1966.
    Ludington
    Scottville
                                                                                                                            1  Corrective program  underway •
Pens       Primary        9,000
Marquette
River

Pere       Secondary • .  .1,245
Harquette  L
River
                                                                    39  .       IB         93         63
                                                       --	No Data Available		' - -   0.125
18. PE1ITWATER

    Hart
                     Pentwater  Secondary
                     River -     L .  .  '.

                    • Pentwater ' Secondary
                     River      L
                         1,990


                         1,030
            -  -  -  -  No Data Available


            	  No Data Available
 0.199  Final  Order of Determination
   -   .  adopted  September 26,'.1963.
19.  WHITE

    White Cloud
                     White
                     River
                     White
                     River
           Primary       1,000
           IT  •       .
                                Primary
                                             .2,800
270


162.
 0.46


.0.21

-------
                                                         2756
                   i-
 scharge Characteristics V'
Discharg
Coonunity
20. HUSKEGON
Big Rapids

Cadillac

. . Evart -

Fremont
Howard City
Harion


Huskegon


Muskegon Heights

Newaygo

North Muskegon .

Reed City



21. GRAND
Ada Township
(Ada)

Township
Ashley


Be Id ing

Kent County
Caledonia


- Carson City



Casnovia

Receiving
Waters

Muskegon
River
Clam
River
. Muskegon
River
Muskegon
River
Creek
Middle
Branch
River
Muskegon
River

Muskegon
River
* ' Muskegon
River
Muskegon
River
Muskegon
River



Thorn-
apple
River
Mill
Creeks
Ashley
• Drain

Flat
River
River
Thorn- .
- apple •
River
Fish •'
Creek


Ball
Creek
Treatncnt
Provided

Primary

Secondary
AS
Primary

Secondary
TF
None
None


Primary


Secondary
AS
Primary

Primary .

Primary




Primary
ST
None

None


Secondary
L .
None

Primary
' ST • •'

None



Hone

Suspended Suspended Suspended
5-day BOD 5-day BOD 5-day BOD Solids Solids Solids
Population Influent Effluent Effluent Influent Effluent Effluent.
(1961 est.) mgVl mg/1 % Removal mg/1 . mg/1 % Removal

10,100 218 98 18 229 92 55'

10,300 208 30 85 232 • 52 77

1,775 ' 70 29 59 71 18 32

3,100 513 15 97 221 27 88




13,000 127 93 27 110 51 61


19,900 237 23 90 281 21 91

1,150 160 105 35 199 ' 62 68

1,000 230 163 31 191 127 33

. 2,180 623 272 51 270' 171. 36




' . ' - ' •'





.. . . . o ata Availa le

5,000 - . . 	 	 	 No Data Available 	 	 	


710 ' - 	 	 -»_•--' 	 NO Data Available --, 	 •----'-..


.1,200 	 	 	 '-No Data Available 	 	 	



. . 371 	 	 	 No Data Available 	 -----
.; .
V
Flow
MGD

0.60

0.95

0.28

0.338

0 09


7.86


1.86

.0.08

0.27

0.11




0.05


0 . 50
0 01


0.50


0.071


0.12



0.'-37

Status and Abatement Action

Final Order adopted
May 23, 1952.
Final Order adopted
July 28, 1960.



««
Final Order adopted
January 21, 1966.
December 16, 1966.
Corrective program underway
Preliminary studies under-
way for proposed advanced
treatment needs.
• Final Order adopted
January 24 , 1950.




Order of Determination
adopted July 26, 1950.
Additonal treatment needs
being investigated.

Conference held before WRC
February 24, 1966.
Corrective program underway
Final. Order adopted • ,-
July 28, 1966. Corrective
program underway
August 29, 1967.
Correct ive program underway


February 24, 1966.
Corrective program underway .
Conference held before WRC
.February 21, 1966'.
Corrective .program underway
Final Order adopted
January 17, 1968. Plant
to be in .operation by
June 1, 1969.
^onfer^nce held before WRC
February 24, 1966. -

-------
                                                         2757
V/    Discharge Characteristics ^
Community
21. GRAND CONTINUED
Cedar Springs
Coopersville
Delhi Township
Delta Township
DeWitt
DeHitt Township
Dimondale
Edmore
East Lansing
Eaton Rapids
Fowler
Fowlerville
Gaines Township
(Cutlerville)
Gaines Township
(Dutton)
Grand Haven
Grand Ledge
.Grand Rapids
Grandville . .
Grant
Greenville
Hastings
Receiving
Waters
Cedar .
Creek
Deer
Creek
Grand
River ' '
Grand '
River
Looking-
glass
River
Looking-
glass
River
Grand
River
Stoney
Creek
Cedar
River
Grand
River
Peet
Creek
Red
Cedar
River
Buck
• Creek
Plaster
Creek
Grand
River
Grand
River
Grand
. River
• Grand
River
Crockery
Creek
Flat
River
Thorn- .
apple
River '•
Treatment
Provided
Secondary
L
Secondary
TF
Primary
Secondary
AS
Primary
None
None
Secondary
L
Secondary
AS
Primary
Secondary
TF
Secondary
L
Nona
None '
Primary
Primary
Secondary
AS
Secondary
AS
Secondary
TF '
Primary
Primary
Suspended Suspended Suspended
5-day BOD 5 -day B6i» 5-day BOD Solids Solids Solids
Population .'Influent Effluent Effluent Influent Effluent Effluent
(1964 est.) mg/1 mg/1 % Removal ' mg/1 . . mg/1 • % Removal
1,770 	 	 	 No Data Available 	 	
1,580 225 73 " 68 203 72 65
5 ,000 ' 288 127 56 304 87 71
7,600 206 - 21 ... 91 211 .12 .93
- 1,240 260 ' 190 27 352 '' 136 ' 55



37,800 .' 122 29 - 74 157 87 SB
4,300 357 234 34 291 145 49
850 . 561 .59 89 245 37 85'
1.670 . o



11,700 • 15U ' 71 • 51 128 56 51
5,500 199 111 13 233 .66 62
220,300 96 13 86 129 21 81
8,500 138 13 91 235. 9 95 '
730 290' 20. 92. 367 11 85
7,200 187 •' 118 36 201 71- 63
.7-.000 .236 165 . 30 267 U5 ',«
now . • '
HGD ' Status and Abatement Action
0.177
0.21 Conference held with WRC
February 21 , 1966 .
• Corrective program underway
0.19
0.718
0.053-Order of Determination
adopted January 25, 1962,' -
0.76 Final Order adopted
July 28, 1966. Facilities '
to be in operation by
.February 1, 1966.
0.090 Final- Order adopted
January 19, 1967.. Plant
to be in operation by
June 1, 1969. '
0;123
6.1
.0.27 'Final Order adopted
• September 25, 1951
0.085
0.167
Conference held before WRC •
February 21, 1966.
Corrective program underway
Conference held before WRC
February 21 , 1966,.
Corrective program underway
. 1.91
0.18
37.1 Order adopted
•November 22 , 1919 .
0.72 Final Order adopted .
.July 26, 1961
0.013 ••
1.05


-------
                                                            2758
y	Discharge Characteristics^  V
Comunity .
21. GRAND CONTINUED

Hud sonv i 1 le

Ionia

Jackson

Kent City
Kent County
Airport
Laingsburg

Lake Odessa



Lake view
Lansing

Leon! Township, ,
Jackson County

Leslie

Lowpll

Lyons
Mason

Michigan
Reformatory
(Ionia)
Middleville

Nashville


Ottawa County
(Grand Valley
State College)
Ovid



Paris
Township (Part)
(City of
Kent wood)
Receiving
Waters


Butter-
' milk
Creek
Grand
River
Grand
River
Ball
Creek
Plaster
Creek
Looking-
glass
River
Little
Thorn-
apple
River
Tamarack
Creek
Grand
River
Grand
River

Huntoon
Creek
Grand-
River
Grand
River
Grand '
River
Grand
River

Grand
River
Thorn-
apple
River
Grand
River

Maple
River


Plaster
Creek

Treatment
Provided


None

Primary

Secondary
AS
Secondary
sr
L
None

Secondary
TF


Secondary
L
Secondary
AS
None

Primary

Primary
ST
None
Secondary
AS
Primary


Primary
IT
Primary


Secondary
L

None



None .


Suspended Suspended Suspended
5 -day BOO 5 -day BOD .5-day BOD Solids Solids Solids
Population Influent- Effluent Cffl.ucnt Influent effluent Effluent
(I960 est.) mg/1 BE/1 I Removal ni/1 rag/1 % Removal




6,750 90 59 ' .35 136 '72 <47

U8,SOO 108 6 93 206 . 16 92



1-

1,810 207 65 72 U26 63 88



122,000- 159 9 90 341 27 87

5,000

1,810 139 78 12 116 87 39

2,600 119 73 33 66 32 39


5,000 '261 3 99 260/8 97

. 2,500 275 155 03 1U7 78 16


1,200 ' - - - 	 	 No Data Available 	 	 	

1,525 	 	 .- No Data Available 	 160 76 19


.. 	 '.- 	 	 	 Ho Data Available 	 	 	 --.


1,500 . '.-------- -•-'- No Data Available -------------



19 ,000 	 .-.-- 	 No Data Available 	 	 	 . ~ ~ :~


\1/
Flow
MGD Status and Abatement Action

bef WRC
February- 2«*, 1966.
. ' Corrective program underway
1.20

9.07 Tertiary treatment program
underway .
0 . 062
0.50 -

February 21, 1966. Final
Order under consideration. '
O.i*2i* Final Order adopted
August 29, 1967.
Corrective program underway
0.113
22.2.
'0.50 Conference held before URC
February 214, 1966.
. Corrective program underway
0.169 Final Order adopted *
'July 25, 1951.
0.260
Conference held before WRC
February 2u, 1966.
Corrective program underway
0.232

0.60


0.120

0.171


-


0.15 Final Order adopted
'. July 28, 1967'. Plant to
be in operation by
August 1, 1968.
Conference held before WRC *
February. 21 , 1966.
Corrective program underway


-------
                                                          2759
^
      Discharge Characteristics '
Community
21. CRAMP CONTINUED
Parma


Perry

Pewamo

Pine Rest
Hospital
(Cutlerville)
'
Plainfield .
Township ,
Kent County.


Portland
Rockford

Sand Lake •

St. Johns

1
Saranac

Sparta

Spring Lake

Stan ton

State Prison
•of Southern
Michigan
(Jackson)
Vemnontville


Walker


Uebberville



Williamston


Woodland



Wyoaing

. Receiving
Waters

McKay
Brook and
Sandstone
Creek
Looking-
glass
River
Stony
Creek

Buck
Creek
"

York & Mill
Creeks &
Lambert on
Lake
Grand River
Rogue
River
Black
Creek
Hayworth
Creek

Lake
. Creek

Nash
Creek .
Grand
River
Fish
Creek

Grand
River


Thorn-
apple
River
Tallman
Creek

Red
Cedar


Grand
River

. McArthur
Drain and
Woodland
. Drain'
Grand
River
•Treatment
Provided

None . •


None

None

Secondary
AS

.




Primary'
Primary

Secondary
L
Secondary
TF

Primary
ST

Secondary
•TF
Primary
IT
Secondary
L

Secondary
TF


None


None


None



-Primary


Primary
IT


Secondary*
TF
. Suspended Suspended Suspended
5-day BOD 5-day BOD S-day BOD Solids • Solids Solids
Population Influent Effluent Effluent- Influent Effluent 'Effluent
(196U est.) nw/1 mg/1 % Removal mg/1 mg/1 » Removal

BOO


1,1400 .
/
4400 .

500 a

•1 hi
1



3,500" • 253 1U7 U2 . 327 1U5 ' 55
2,075 173 71 59 228 '59 714

395 	 	 -No Data Available 	 	 . 	 	 - - -

5,900 liu 13 91 155 30 80

N Data Available
1'1°°

3,000- 260 - 34 . • 87 3W3 «7 ' 86

2,060 16U. 1114 30 186 8U 53 •

1,200

6,500 . 172 31 83 1U7 U7 68



BOO -----------No Data Available ------'------


8,270 - - ' 	 	 No Data Available --'-----


700 -----------No Data Available ---•------'---



2;215 191 ; 1U5 25 250 90 £,'J


375 • 208 1? 89 .285 9 96



SJ.OOO 100 • 19 81 . 155 33 '76

i ''
Flow
HGD Status and Abatement Action
M '
0.08 Final Order adopted
April 27., 1967.
Enforcement proceedings in
progress.
O.li Conference held before WRC . ;
.' . February 21, 1966.
Corrective program underway
Conference held before WRC
February 21, 1966.
Corrective program underway
0 .05

1 20 F* 1 Ord d *
July 2B-. 1966.
Corrective program underway


0.293 Health Dept.l Agreement • •
0.186 Final. Order adopted
February 26, 1952.
0.010 • .

. 0.65'


0.11 Conference held before WRC .
February 21 , 1966.
Corrective program underway
0.271 Final order adopted &
February 26, 1952
0.29 •
0. 12 Conference held before WRC
February 21, 1966. .
Treatment provided .'
0.90 Additional treatment
facilities, including
phosphate removal, .
underway.
0..08 Final Order, adopted
September 27, 1967.
Corrective program - underway .
0.827 Conference held before WRC
February 21, 1966.
Corrective program underway
0.07 Final Order adopted . :
January 17, J.968. Plant
to be iii operation by
June 1, 1969.
u.ij;. Final Order adopted •
• July 25, 1951. Additional
facilities underway.
0.027 Final Order adopted *
January 28, 1959. • ;

-
7.25 Final Order adopted * ,: .
August 25, 1919

-------
                                                           2760
    Discharge Characteristics
Cotonunity
22. BLACK (HOLLAND)
com ng

Holland '

Holla d Townshi
Ottawa County

• .Township

Zealand
Zealand •
Township,
Ottawa County
23. KALAMAZOO
Albion

Allegan

Battle Creek

Bellevue


Charlotte



Douglas



Fennvi lie
Galesburg


Hopkins


Kalamazoo

Marshall

Olivet
Receiving
Waters
Black
River

Laxe
Macatawa
Black
River
Black
River

Black
River
Black '
River

Kalamazoo
River
Kalamazoo
River
Kalamazoo
River
Battle
Creek
River
Battle
Creek
River
River
Kalamazoo
River


Creek
Kalamazoo
River

Rabbit
River

Kalamazoo
River
Kalamazoo.
River
Indian
Creek
Treatment Populat ion
Provided (1964 «t.)
None ' 500


nonary 21,800

None • —

None 500


Secondary 3,900
AS
None ------


Primary 12,800

Primary 5,000
IT
Secondary 10,700
TF
None ' ' 1 30G


Secondary 8,100
TF
None ' • 1 000

Septic tanks -600
.tile fields


L
None . 1,110.' .


None 550


Secondary - • 81 ,200
AS
Primary . 6,700

• Secondary l,18b
I
Suspended- Suspended Suspended /
5-day BOD S-day BOD 5-day BOD Solids - Solids Solids v/
Influent Effluent Effluent- Influent Effluent Effluent " Flow
«a/l rag/1 % Removal mg/1 mg/1 % Removal MGD



132 82 . " .38 122 53 48 2.71

-

--------'--- Ho Data Available 0 OS


191 • 9 94 251 23 B9 0.388



117 77 32 124 .67 \ 42 2.22

198 . my • 24 - 212 107 42 0.38
l ' • • •
385 98 75 468 58 - 87 10.7




• 298. 43 86 207 116 ' 44 0.55



A ' h




	 	 . ... 	 NO Data Available ---' 	 	 	 0.14


.__' 	 	 - NO Data Available - - ^ - - - --,---- 'o..055


208 18.5 89 . — ' . 82 	 . 24.5

7U 62 16 ' - 106 43 57 2.14


Status and Abatement Action

August 24,- 1966.
Corrective program underway



.August 24, 1966.
Corrective program underway
August 24, 1966.
Corrective program underway


August 24, 1966.
Corrective program underway





*
Order adopted April 28,
1954
XX
December 15, 1966.

Order of Determination
adopted September 26,
1950.
August "24, 1966. ' -'
Corrective program underway
Conference held before WRC
August 24, 1966.
Correction by individual
on-site systems.
Conference held before WRC
August 24, 1966. ' '
Corrective program underway
Conference held before WRC .
October 28, 1966.
Corrective program •underway
Final order adopted
December 19, 1950.
Final order adopted
September 27, 1949.'
February 18, 1965. •
.110

-------
                                                                                                                                           2761
Community
Receiving.
Waters
Treatment Population
Provided' (1964 est'.)
• '< ' ' Discharge
f
\s
Characteristics
Suspended Suspended
5-day 'BOD 5-day BOD 5-day BOD Solids Solids '
Influent Effluent Effluent 'Influent Effluent
-mg/1 mg/1 % Removal ' mg/1 mg/1
1
Supsended ^ /
Solids •'•"'
.Effluent Flow • •
% Removal HGD Status and Abatement Action
3. KALAMAZOO CONTINUED . '
Otsego
Parchment •
Plain we 11
Portage (Part)
Saugatuck
• Spring Arbor
Springfield
Springport
. Kalamazoo
River.
Kalamazoo
River
Kalamazoo
River
Kalamazoo
River
Kalamazoo
River
Kalamazoo
River
Kalamazoo
River
. Rice
Creek
Secondary 4,300
TF-
• Secondary 1,565
TF
Secondary . 3 ,400
TF
Secondary 1,400
AS
Primary . 925
Secondary 700
L
Secondary 4-,600
TF
None 690
407 ' 183 50 •
149 27 '82
" 224 - 53 • 76
252 25 90
207 177 16

•


316 65
168 ' 27
255 74 .
234 ib
246 122

'


72 0.46 Final Order adopted
October 24, 1951.
84 0.319 Final Order adopted
October 24, 1951.
71 ' 0.314 Final Order adopted
October 24, 1951.
93 . 0.14
50 0.44 Final Order adopted
July 26, 1950.

March 25, 1959. Treatment
provided by City of Battle
Creek
August 24, 1966.-
Corrective program underway
2U. BLACK (SOUTH HAVEN)
Bang or
1 ' .
Black
River and
Maple
Creek
Ttlar*tr
Secondary 2,110
L -
Mnna llfifl '

. No Data


.

"' . * "
.October 25, 1962.

                                                                                                                        August 24, 1966.
                                                                                                                        Corrective program underway
South Haven
                 Black .    .Secondary     6 ,400
                 River     AS
                                                                          94        201
Benton Township   Paw Paw   . Secondary   '.26,000
(Part)         '  River .  .   AS
                                                                  - -  - No Data Available ----------
r"1™na
-Hartford -
Lawrence
Lawton
Paw Paw'
Watervliet
Paw Paw
River
Paw Paw
River
Paw Paw
River
Paw Paw
River
Paw Paw
' River .
Paw Paw
River •
Primary
Primary
. Primary
Secondary
: L
Primary
Primary
1,470-
2,305

1,400.
3,100
.. 1,820
228 141 . 38
149 97 35

-. - * 	 ' 	 	 - NO Data.
289. . . 236 16
- i . _. . 	 	 NO -Data
"153 91 40
325 190 40

Available 	 -. - 	 	
334 118 63
Available 	 '- - -
      Final•Order•adopted
      September  27, 1949;
      Treatment  provided
      by City of Bento'n Harbor

0.25  Final Order adopted
      February 21, 1956. -

-------
                                                                                                                                                      2762
                      Receiving  Treatment   Population
                       Waters    Provided    (I960  est.)
                                                                              Discharge Cha.
                                                                                           .ract eristic s  \X^
                                                                    SuspendedSuspendedSuspended
                                   S-day BOl)  5-day SOU  5-day HOD   Solids   -  Solids   '  Solids
                                   Influent .  Cffluent   Effluent   Influent   Effluent   Effluent   Flow
                                     OR/1	ng/1     \ Removal    mg/1	ng/1     % Removal  MGD   Status and Abatement Action
                                                                                                                     ii3ed-  J  -,
                                                                                                                     ds   •  \/
26. ST. JOSEPH (MICH.)

    Andrews
    University
St.  Joseph Primary
River   '
                         7,000
                                   __..-. . ... - |j0 Data Available ------
       Plans  for  secondary
       treatment  have  been
       approved.
    Bent on Harbor     St. Joseph Secondary    3b,bO() -       y>nt
    and St. Joseph    River      AS               -

    Berrien Springs   St. Joseph Primary        1,950       |?o
                      River             •
    Branch County
    Medical
    Facilities
                      Sway
                      Creek
                                 Primary
           Secondary     ?,?7o
           TF
                                                                        -  - Ho Dot.i Available  ---.--,----
                      St. .Joseph  Primary
                      River
                                                5, BOU
    Cassopolis
                      Ground
                     • Haters
           Secondary     2,030
           b & SI
    Centreville       Prairie    None
                      River
                     •  Farmers     None
                       Creek
    Glen Oaks         Prairie     None
    Coonunity  -   -.    River
    College
                                                                               No D.ii.1 Available
                                                                               No 1M1.1 Av.iil.aMi.-
    Colo)water         Coldwater  Secondary      9,700.      238
                      River      TF
    Coldwater Stqte   Mudd Creek Secondary
    Home and                     AS
    Training School
    Constantine       St. Joseph  Primary
                      River
    Dowagiac          Dowagiac    Primary        7,600 .      137         100    .     26
                      Creek.            .  •   "  .                    .  *    .   -
                                                                               No Data Available
                                                                           NO Data Available  - -. -  - -•-' --------
    Hillsdale
                       St. Joseph Secondary     7,000       160
                       River    •   TF  .            ' "   .
5.51  Final Order adopted
      September 27, 1919.

O.lb  Staff recommendation on
      adequacy of present treat-
      ment to be presented to WRC
      by Harch 1, 1968.

      Staff recommendation on
      adequacy of present treat-
      ment to be presented to WRC
   .   by March 1, 1968.

6.80  Staff recommendation'on
      adequacy of present treat-
      ment to be presented to WRC
      by March 1, 1968.

0.78  Staff recommendation on
      adequacy"of present treat'
      ment to be presented to WRC
      by. March' 1, 1968.

0.70.1 Staff recommendation on
      .ido-juacy of present treat-
      ment to be presented to WRC
      by Harch 1, 1968.

0.100 Conference held before HRC
      August 24, 1966.
     'Corrective program underway

O.TS  Staff recommendation on
      adequacy of present treat-
      ment to be presented to WRC
      by Harch 1, 1968.

0.311 Staff recommendation on
      adequacy, of present, treat-
      ment to be presented to WRC
      by March-1, 1968.

0.15  Final Order adopted
      February 18, 1965.  Staff
      recommendation on adequacy
      of present treatment to be'
      presented to WRC by
      Harch 1, 1968.    'j

1.25  Order of Determination
      adopted September 26, 1957.
      Staff recommendation on '
      adequacy of present treat-  -
      to be presented to WRC  '
     •by Harch.1, 1968.  •-

0-056 Final Order adopted
      June 21, 1965.  Corrective
      program underway.'

      Order of Determinaition
      adopted April. 28, 1966.
                                                                                                                                 . . .  i.-i:,: .-i .'/,  V"»'.>.  'Jtatl
                                                                                                                                 recommendation on adequacy
                                                                                                                                 of  present treatment to be
                                                                                                                                 presented to WRC by
                                                                                                                                 March  1,'196B.

-------
                                                                                                                                               2763
                                                                      I                                  V-
                                                                     \/_	Discharge Characteristics  M/
                     Receiving  .Treatment   Population
      Connnunity	Waters	Provided    (1961  est_._)_
                                                         Suspended  Suspended  Suspended
                       '5-day BOD  5-day BOD   5-day  BOD   Solids    .Solids   .   Solids
                        Influent    Effluent    Effluent    Influent   'Effluent    Effluent
                          JDfl/1	mg/1	V Removal    mg/1	mg/1      \ Removal
 V
Flow .
HGD
                                                                                                                                 Status  and  Abatement  Action
26. ST.  JOSEPH CONTINUED  ' .    .
    Joriesville       St.  Joseph  None •
                     River
    Litchfield       St.  Joseph  None
                     River
    Nile s
    Quincy
    Reading     .     Unnamed     None
                     Dra ins
    Sturgis
                     White
                     Pigeon
                     River
    Union City
    Vicksburg
                     St. Joseph  Secondary.
                     River       L  -
MISCELLANEOUS DRAINAGE AREAS
1,900


1,000
                     St.  Joseph  Primary      15,800
                     River
                     Marble      Primary     .  1,600
                     Lake
                                               1,130
    Stevensvilie     Hickory     None            700
                     Creek
Secondary     9,500
Tr
    Three Rivers    -St. Joseph  Primary       7,400
                     River
                                               1,670
                     Portage     Secondary     2 ,220
                     Creek       TF
Bridgroan

Chikaming
Township
(Sawyer, Lake-
side, Union
Pier)
Escanaba

Galien

Tanner
Creek
Galien
River



Portage
Creek
Galien
River
Secondary
K
None '




Secondary
AS S TF.
None

1,1450

3, 480




15,000

750

    Harbor Pointe    Lake    .    Primary
                     Michigan   ' ST
    Harbor.Springs   Lake   ' •    "Primary  .     1,430
                     Michigan   • FS.
                          	No Data Available -----


                          	No Data Available	 -


                           93         47          49         177          69





                          150   '      77      '    46         539        ''  76
                                                                               No  Data Available
                                                         .__.__..___'No Data Available ------------
                                                           264          39         85         388
                                                           105    '     59          U4         136        "  60
                                                         ___--__---- No Data Available - - - -
                                                           125         75         60        212
0.190 Final Order adopted
      January 17, 1968.

0.100 •.Final Order adopted
      January 17, 1968.
                                 •J
2.89  Staff recommendation on
      adequacy of present treat-
      ment to be presented to WRC
      by March 1, .1968. -

0.10  Staff recommendation on
      adequacy of present treat-
      ment to be presented, to WRC
      by-March 1, 1968.

0.113 Final Order adopted
      July 27, 1967.  Corrective
      program underway.

0.070 Final Order adopted
     " May 26, 1967. •Facilities
      to be in operation by
      June 1, 1972.  '

1.05  Staff recommendation on
      adequacy of present treat-
      ment to be presented to
      WRC by March 1, 1968.

1.29  Final Order adopted
      October 30, 1959.  Staff
      recommendation on adequacy
      of present treatment to be
      presented to HRC by
      March 1, 1968.

0.167 Staff recommendation on
      adequacy of present treat- "
      ment to be presented to WRC
      by March 1, 1968..

0.20  Order of Determination
      adopted January 23, 1951.
      Staff recommendation on
      adequacy of present treat-
      ment ' to be presented to WRC
      by March 1, 1968.
                        .........-.Ho Data Available ------------


                        	 --No Data Available 	 	






                          214         28         88        190         30         86


                        - - - r	..--NO Data Available -	-



                        	No .Data Available -•--		





                       "	.__-	NO Data Available	
                                                                                                                           0.145 Final Order adopted
                                                                                                                                 September 2U,  1959.

                                                                                                                           0.348 Conference held before WRC
                                                                                                                                 August 25, 1966.
                                                                                                                                 Corrective program underway
0.075 Conference held before WRC
      August 25, 1966.
      Corrective program underway

0.080 Staff recommendation- on
      adequacy of'present treat-
      ment to be presented to WRC
      by March 1, 1968.

0.143 Staff recommendation on
      adequacy of present treat-
      ment to be presented to WRC
      by Harch 1, 1968. -

-------
                                                                                                                                               2764
                                                                          Discharge Charac
                                                                                          teristicsMx
                 Receiving   Treatment
  Cocnmunit '       Waters     Provided
                                             Suspended  Suspended'  Suspended
             S-day BOD   5-day BOD  5-day BOD   Solids     Solids     Solids
Population .  Influent    Effluent   Effluent   Influent   Effluent   Effluent   Flow
(1964 cst.)    rog/1-    .  tng/1	% Removal    mg/1	rag/1	t jtempval ' MGD   Status and Abatement Action
                                                                                                                     V
MISCELLANEOUS DRAINAGE AREAS CO
Lake Painter-
Township yille
Drain
New , Galien
Buffalo River
Onekama Portage
Lake
Petoskey
Lake
Michigan
NTINUED
•
Secondary 2,130 ' 230 92 60 2M7 231
AS . .

Primary . 6,400 241 174 29 309 77
CP

August 25, 1966.
Corrective program underway
16 3 03 final Order adopted .
October 19, 1942
December 16, 1966.
Corrective program underway
76 ' 0.843 Staff recommendation on .
adequacy of present treat-
Suttons Bay      Lake        Secondary
                 Michigan  .  L
                 Deer and    None
                 Spring
                 Creeks
Wequetonsing
                                                                          Ho Data Available
                                           1,800
                 Lake        Primary
                 Michigan    IT
                                                               .-_.-_ No Data Available ------------
                                                                          No Data Available
                                                                                    ment  to  be  presented to WRC
                                                                                    by March 1, 1963.

                                                                              0.042  Staff recommendation on  •
                                                                                    adequacy of present treat-
                                                                                    ment  to  be  presented to WRC
                                                                                    by March-1,  1968.

                                                                              0:18   Final Order adopted      "
                                                                                    February 23, 1967.
                                                                              0.100  Staff recommendation on
                                                                                    adequacy of present treat-
                                                                                    ment to be presented to WRC
                                                                                    by  March 1, 1968.
                                                                  Abbreviations

                                                      FS	Fine Screen
                                                      CP	  . Chemical Precipitation
                                                      ST	Septic Tank
                                                      IT'	Irahoff-Tank
                                                      AS  	 Activated Sludge
                                                      TF  .  :	Trickling Filter
                                                      L   	 Lagoons
                                                      SF  ...:.... Sand Filter  '
                                                      SI  .	Spray Irrigation

-------
                                                         2765
              APPENDIX J
POSSIBLE EFFECTS OF THE ALEWIFE DIE-OFF
                  ON
       LAKE  MICHIGAN WATER OUALITY
                   145

-------
                                                                                 2766
                    Possible Effects of the Alewife Die-off on
                           Lake Michigan Water Quality

                              August-September 1967


     Observations of past years on the condition of the Lake Michigan shoreline waters
by the Michigan Water Resources Commission indicated a depression of water quality and
general nuisance conditions during periods of alewife die-offs.  The 1967 die-off was
exceptionally heavy in June and July and created massive accumulations of dead and
dying alewives along Michigan's Lake Michigan beaches.  The value of our beach water
sampling program for bacteriological analysis was questionable.  Coliform bacteria
far exceeded the levels approved for safe swimming with several instances of
concentrations in excess of 500,000/100 ml.  A small scale laboratory study was made
during August and September to investigate the water quality degradation potential of
decomposing alewives.  Our experiment was not intended to be a definitive study of the
problem.  Our data cannot be accurately expanded to apply to Lake Michigan due to the
crudeness of the experimental design.  However, our results lead to conjecture on the
significance of alewife die-offs to shoreline water quality conditions in Lake
Michigan.


                                     METHODS


     Field studies were made to sample the surface waters of Lake Michigan for various
water quality parameters during the period of alewife die-off.  Sample locations were
along a transect line from the beachwash out into the lake for 2,000 yards.  The
principal parameters measured were coliform bacteria concentrations, dissolved oxygen,
and biochemical oxygen demand.  Two thousand yards offshore 25 gallons of Lake Michigan
water were collected in clean 5-gallon glass containers for use in laboratory studies.
Dying alewives were collected and iced for use in these laboratory studies.

     Laboratory experiments were designed to evaluate the extent of water quality
degradation created by the decomposition of alewives.  Six plastic tubs of approximately
8-gallon capacity were used as the experimental containers.  These were divided into
2 series of 3 tubs each.  Series 1 tubs were filled with approximately 7 1/2 gallons
of Lansing tap water.  Series 2 tubs were filled with approximately 7 1/2 gallons of
Lake Michigan water.  Two tubs, 1 from each series, were controls and no fish were
introduced into them (Tubs 1A, 2A).  One whole, freshly-dead 6-inch alewife was
placed into the second tub of.each series (Tubs IB, 2B).  The remaining tub of each
series received a freshly-.dead 6-inch alewife that had been cut into 6 pieces
(Tubs 1C, 2C).  These chopped fish were to simulate those broken up by wave and
abrasive action in the beach waters.  All 6 tubs were placed on the roof of the
Michigan Water Resources Commission building in downtown Lansing and covered with a
double layer of cheesecloth to guard against excessive contamination.

     As the fish underwent decomposition  various parameters were measured.  Dissolved
oxygen, biochemical oxygen demand, pH, nitrate nitrogen, ammonia nitrogen, soluble
orthophosphate, and total phosphate determinations as well as coliform and fecal
coliform counts/100 ml .of water were made on all tubs before the introduction of
fish and at irregular intervals throughout the 23 days of the study.  Samples were
always taken in the afternoon.


                                   146-147

-------
                                                                                    2767
     On the 9th day of the study the presence 'of algae was obvious.   Grab samples
were taken for algae counts at that time and on the remaining sample dates.  These
samples were counted by using a Sedgewick-Rafter counting chamber and the populations
presented as number of cells/ml.
                                              i
     Sampling was conducted in the following manner:  1) Samples for dissolved oxygen
analyses were taken from all 6 tubs: 2) The 2 tubs containing chopped fish [1C, 2C]
were vigorously agitated to simulate wave action: 3) The remaining tubs were gently
stirred: 4) Water samples were taken from all tubs for the other chemical and algal
analyses.                                                           •


                                  FIELD STUDIES


     On August 3, 1967 an attempt was made to collect water samples of Lake Michigan
at Ludington, Michigan.  Due to gale conditions on the lake, samples were limited to
those taken from the lake side of the south breakwater at Ludington.  Coliform
bacteria counts ranged between 13,000 and 2^,000/100 ml; fecal coliforms were
between  10 and 50/100 ml; dissolved oxygen was lower than would be expected,
7.2 to 7?8 mg/1, although still above 85% saturation; and BOD was higher than
would be expected, 8,8 to 1§,0 mg/1.  Temperature was 24-25°C.  The alewife die-off
was well past its peak at this time and location, with only scattered masses of
several hundred fish floating around the breakwater.

     On August 15, 1967 another effort was made to collect field data on Lake
Michigan.  It was necessary to go north to Frankfort, Michigan since virtually no
dead alewives were encountered to the south.  Even the waters off Frankfort contained
very few dead alewives.  Apparently the shoreline waters .from Ludington to Frankfort
had been recently "cleansed" by a new water mass created by upwelling.  Water
temperatures taken by the Water Resources Commission Beach Survey on August 15,
1967 at Frankfort averaged 15°F  lower than those taken on August 1, 1967.

     Quantities of broken and decomposed alewives were present in the beachwash and
in decreasing numbers out into the lake.  At 2,000 yards from shore it, was almost
impossible to find a dead alewife.  In collecting fish for the laboratory study only
4- fish were found in a dying condition and 2 were considered as freshly dead.  All
other fish observed were too decomposed for use in the study.

      Water quality was poorest in the beach waters containing accumulated alewives
and improved with increased distance from the shore (Table 1).  Dissolved oxygen
ranged from a low of 9.2 mg/1 inshore to 11.2 mg/1 2,000 yards offshore.  This was
magnified by a 16°F difference in temperature and accompanying changes in oxygen
saturation levels.  The BOD's. were slightly higher (6.0 mg/1) in the beachwash
area than one would normally expect to find when alewives are absent.  The highest
coliform counts were found inshore.  Their diminution offshore correlates well with
diminution of BOD,  Duping periods of maximum alewife accumulation the BOD must be
exceptionally high with accompanying effect on dissolved oxygen concentration.
                                         148

-------
                                                                                  2768
                                LABORATORY STUDIES


 Bacteriological Aspects

      Extremely high coliform and high fecal coliform populations  developed  in the
 4  study tubs containing fish, while both control  tubs maintained  very  low populations
 (Table  2,  Figure 1).  Following a near logarithmic  increase,  peak populations of
 coliforms  were attained 5 to 9 days after the  introduction  of fish.  These  population
 maxima  ranged from 360,000 to 1,500,000/100 ml before diminishing to approximately
 1.000/100  ml in all tubs with.fish.  Fecal coliforn) populations peaked at maximum.
 counts  ranging from 1,000 to 3,500/100 ml.

      These data suggest that high coliform counts recorded  from Lake Michigan beaches
 during  the 1966-1967 periods of alewife die-off are most probably due to the accumulated
 dead  fish.   These high  counts partially negated the value of  beach bacteria sampling as
 an  indication of sewage contamination.   Fecal  coliforms are now included with coliforms
 as  a  standard test on beach surveys to enable  differentiation between contamination from
 alewives and sewage.  The high fecal coliform  populations measured in the study tubs
 should  be  investigated  further to determine if they arose naturally or from
 contamination.   If they occurred naturally the detection of human sanitary wastes
 along Lake Michigan beaches during alewife  die-offs will be impaired.


 Dissolved  Oxygen and Biochemical Oxygen Demand

      Extreme changes in DO and BOD were apparent  in the experimental tubs (Figure 2
 and Table  3).   By the end of the .second day DO in 3 of the 4  tubs  with alewives was 0
 and <1.0 mg/1 in the 4th.   DO returned  between the  9th and 12th days with the develop-
 ment  of  algae blooms.   DO rose to a measured high of 29 mg/1  on the 12th day, but
 'in all probability oxygen was 0  at  night.   BOD increased from  2 mg/1 in test tubs
 with  alewives to concentrations  between -45  and 104  mg/1.


£H

      Because  of  its  relationship with algal  populations, DO, and carbon dioxide, the
 pH in the test tubs  most  probably underwent  more extreme variation than our data
 show  (Figure  2 and Table'3).    It would not  be unusual to record diurnal variations
of well over  a unit  in  a  natural algae  bloom condition.  It is doubtful if our pH
data could be meaningfully  interpreted.


Nutrient- Release

      It was  planned, to  measure several  forms of algal nutrients during the experiments.
However, the  added analytical  load  came during our busiest season and we compromised
on ammonia nitrogen,  soluble orthophosphate, and total phosphate.

     Ammonia  nitrogen increased  to-between  9.6 and  14.0 mg/1 in the experimental tubs.
Peak concentrations were  measured on the 9th day,  after which the animonia level
decreased (Table  3 and  Figure- 3).
                                       149

-------
                                                                                    2769
     Phosphorus was released rapidly from the decaying fish (Table 3 and Figure 3).
Each single dead alewife released-more than 2.0 mg/1 total phosphate within 2 days.
This early release was virtually all as soluble orthophosphate, the form most readily
taken up by algae.  As algal blooms developed,the available soluble orthophosphate
decreased to 0 in the Lake Michigan water tubs.  Total phosphate remained relatively
steady, suggesting it had been assimilated into the algae cells.

     Soluble orthophosphate concentrations peaked as early as the second day and as
late  as  the ninth day.  Maximum concentration was 6.3 mg/1.  Total phosphate released
from the individual  fish  ranged between 113 and 201 mg PO^ based on. average tub water
volume of 6.8 gallons.
     As the nutrients became available they were utilized by algae which quickly built
up dense blooms of small, single celled, green algae (Table 4).  A dominant form was
Chlorococcum, characteristically associated with dead fish.  Other genera prominant
in the algal flora were Scenedesmus, Euglena.  and  Chlamydomonas.   Lesser numbers(of
several additional genera were also present.

     The algal populations of the tubs containing fish exploded from less than
100 cells/ml to maximum populations ranging from 565,800 to 3,187,800 cells/ml.
Relationship of this build up with bacteria populations and nutrient concentrations
are .graphed in Figures U and 5.  The tap water control tub was apparently contaminated^
for the algal population increased from 35 cells/ml of unknown genera to 11,765
cells/ml, predominately Chlorococcum and Scenedesmus.  Algal cell counts in the lake
water control remained low, attaining a maximum population of only 759 cells/ml with
diatoms predominating.


                                   DISCUSSION
     One agency has estimated that a few hundred million pounds of alewives died in
Lake Michigan during 1967.   For the purpose of this report we will use 300 million
pounds.  Analytical work by the U.S. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries on several groups
of alewives has shown that  alewives about 6-inches long contain approximately 2.23
grams of phosphorus per pound of fish.  Thus, 300 million pounds of dead alewive's
could release 2,300 tons of phosphates into Lake Michigan.  The concentration of
soluble orthophosphate as POi). commonly claimed sufficient to create nuisance algae
conditions in water is 0.03 mg/1.   If two-thirds of the released phosphorus was in
the form of soluble orthophosphate the potential exists from this source alone to
bring approximately'11 cubic miles-of phosphorus-free water to the point at which
nuisance algae blooms could occur.  The relationship between the amount of dead
alewives, phosphates released, and water mass fertilized is portrayed in Figure 6.

     It is generally acknowledged  that during the summer the water mass along Michigan's
west coast from Benton Harbor-St.  Joseph to Little Point Sable moves northward and is
discrete unless broken up by strong winds.  The U.S. Bureau of Commercial Fisheries
aerial survey during the die-off showed that most dead alewives were concentrated in
the southern tip of Lake Michigan and in a band along both shores in the southern
                                      150

-------
                                                                                   2770
 two-thirds of the lake.  Windrows of dead alewives collect in the shallc:, .r water
 beach zone.  Nutrients from the decomposing fish would be released into this
 discrete, surface water mass which is already enriched by tributary rivers draining
 urban and agricultural areas.

      There are roughly 2-,240,000 acre feet of water inside the 30-foot depth contour
from the Indiana-Michigan state line to the Leelanau Peninsula tip.  Assuming 2/3 of
the phosphorus released during alewife decomposition is available for uptake then
18,700,000 pounds of decomposing alewives would.be necessary to bring that amount
of phosphorus-free water to the critical nuisance algae producing level.  This '
stretch of shore comprises approximately 20% of the total Lake Michigan coastline.
Twenty percent of the estimated alewife die-off of 300 million pounds is 60 million
pounds.  It seems highly probable that more than the 18,700,000 pounds needed to bring
the nutrient concentration to nuisance-potential levels would accumulate in this area.

      Growing alewives concentrate phosphorus which is already present in the lake.  It
 is normal for phosphorus to be recycled upon their death, but because of their
 unusually high population and habit of dying during a short period of the year in
 the  alongshore  waters, the phosphorus is released in a relatively small volume of
 water.  It is concluded that phosphate released from decomposing alewives in the
 alongshore  water mass of Lake Michigan could be a significant factor in the production
 of algae.  Nuisances which can develop with increases in algal populations include a
 reduction in transparency, reduction in length of filter runs at water plants,
 possible taste and -odor problems in drinking water, interference with swimming,
 and deposition of filamentous algae on beaches.


                                  •'   SUMMARY


 1.   Routine monitoring of Michigan's swimming areas showed degradation of water
      quality, in association with alewife die-offs in the summers of 1966 and 1967.

 2.   A simple experiment to trace various water quality .parameters in open tubs
      containing single decomposing alewives was undertaken.

 3.   Significant changes in water quality in the experiments include:

      a.  Increase in coliform and fecal coliform bacteria counts.
      b.  Increase in BOD.
      c.  Decrease in DO to anaerobic conditions followed by increase.
          which accompanied algae build up.
      d.  A great increase in algal cell numbers.
      e. . Rapid release of ammonia and phosphates..

 4.   Decomposition of masses  of alewives  in  the  alongshore waters  of Lake
     Michigan  could promote  phenomena  of'unknown magnitude similar to
     those which  occurred  in  the study  tubs

 5.   Abnormally high coliform bacteria counts due to the presence of  dead
      alewives partially negate-the  value of beach bacterial sampling  as
      an indication of sewage contamination'.
                                         151

-------
                                                                                 2771
The discrete, alongshore  water mass  of Lake Michigan's southeastern
shore is already enriched by tributary rivers draining urban and
agricultural land.  Additional nutrients from decomposing alewives
could be a significant factor in the  increased production of .algae.
Such growths.could result in reduction in transparency, reduction in
length of filter runs at water plants, possible taste and odor problems
in drinking water, interference with  swimming, and deposition of
filamentous algae.on beaches.
                     Field work  by:   Ronald B.  Willson,  Aquatic Biologist
                                     James McDonald,  Water Pollution Investigator
                                     James Westenbarger, Water Pollution Investigator

              Chemical analyses  by:   Russell Krueger, Chemist

       Bacteriological analyses  by:   Division of Sanitary Bacteriology and
                                     Chemistry, Michigan Department.of Public
                                     Health

                Laboratory work  by:   Carlos Fetterolf, Chief,
                                     Water Quality Appraisal Unit
                                     James McDonald
                                     Ronald B.  Willson
                        !             John Robinson, Aquatic Biologist

                         Report  by:   Ronald B.  Willson
                                     Carlos Fetterolf
                                     Water Quality Appraisal Unit
                                     Water Resources  Commission
                                     Michigan Department of Conservation
                                     January 27, 1968.
                                   152

-------
                                                                   2772
Table 1.  Lake Michigan water  quality off Frankfort south
          of the south breakwater, August 15, 1967.
Distance off
shore
Beach wash
10 feet
25 feet
50 feet
75 feet
100 feet
100 yards
200 yards
300 yards
i
500 yards
1000 yards
2000 yards
Distance off
shore
250 yards
2000 yards
. Temperature Coliforms
°C c/100 ml
18
16.5
17
17
16
15
15
15
15
14
13
9
Total solids
mg/1
. 170
165
Contaminated
2,600
2,800
1,000
800
300
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
<100
so P04 T :
pH mg/1 m;
8.3 0.00 0
8.3 0.00 -0
BOD ' Dissolved oxygen
mg/1 mg/1
6.0
4.9
3.7
6.2
2.2
'1.4
1.2
1.6
1.8
1.8
1,8
1.6
P04 N03
g/1 mg/1
.00 0.20
,.00 0 . 20
9.2
9.4
9.6
9.8
9.8
10.0
10.4
10.6
11.0
11.0
11.0
11.2
Hardness
mg/1
130 .
135
                           153

-------
          Table 2.  Coliform and fecal coliform bacteria populations
                    in experimental tubs,  August-September 1967.
Lansing tap water series
Lake Michigan water series
Time in 1A Control IB Whole fish 1C Chopped fish 2A Control
. .days Coliform Fecal Coliform Fecal Coliform Fecal Coliform Fecal
Start <10 — <10 — . <10 — <10
1 <2 . ^100 4,000 200 6,000 1,000 <100 < 100
2 <2 <2 17,000 3,500 20,000 700 <100 <10
5 <2 <2 110,000 3,000 220,000 200 <2 <2
7 <2 <2 360,000 1,000 100,000 1,000 <2 <2
9 <2 <2 150,000 500 430,000 500 <2 <2
12 <2 <2 10,000. <100 20,000 <100 <2 <2
23 <2 <2 2,000 <100 <1,000 <100 <2 <2
2B Whole fish 2C Chopped fish
Coliform Fecal Coliform Fecal
<10 — <10
25,000 2,200 7,000 400
60,000 2,100 • 20,000 .200
500,000 2,100 750,000 300
350,000 3,000 1,500,000 1,000
190,000 1,100 220,000 <100
10,000 <100 <10,000 <100
< 1,000 <100 <1,000 <100
to
-J
--J
U)

-------
                                                                                                          277^
           Figure  I.   Coliform and fecal  coliform bacteria populations .in  experimental  tubs,

                       August-September,  19&7-
                       TAP   WATER — COLtFORMS
                                                                       LAKE   WATER —COLIFORMS
  tOflOOflOO
   I,OOO,OOO
0  IOO.OOO
     10,000
u
ID
JO

E

o
o
u
       100

         ll  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I
          0          5          10         15        2O
                                                                  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I I   I  I I  I  !  I  I  I
                                                                                                           IO.OOO.OOO
                                                                                                          1,000,000
                                                                                                          IOO.OOO
                                                                                                          IO.OOO.
                                                                                                         1,000
                                                                                                          100
                               DAYS
                                                                                 DAYS
                                                       LEGEND:


                                                      • WHOLE   ALEWIFE

                                                       CHOPPED  ALEWIFE


                                                       CONTROL
 O
 O
 u
 <0
 JD
 O
 u
 (0
 u
 0)
0)

|
                  TAP  WATER — FECAL  COL I FORMS
                                                                   LAKE   WATER	FECAL  COLIFORMS
     10.000
     1,000
       IOO
        10
                              10 .        13


                               DAYS
                                                              I  I  I  I  I  I I  I  I  I  I  I  I  I  'I !  I  I  I  I  I  I

                                                 20        0         5         10        IS         20
                                                                                                          10,000
                                                                                                         I.OOO .
                                                                                 DAYS
                                                         155

-------
Table 3.  Water quality in tubs during decomposition of alewives,
          August-September 1967.  All concentrations in mg/1 except pH.
. Lansing tap water, series
' • .
Time in
days
. Start . .
1
2
5 . '
' 7 ' •
9
12 .
23

Time in
days
Start
1.
2
5
7
. 9
12
23

Temp. .
°C
—
29 :
25
27
26
31'
28
—


Temp.
°C
'--
29
25
.27
26
31
28
--

.DO '
5,8
7.0
7.3
7.1
6.7
6,8
8.0
8.0


DO
8.0
7.7
7.2
7.1
7.3
7.0
8.0
9.0

BOD
0.6
0.4
1.6
2.2
2.3
2.0
--
1.6,


BOD
. 1.6
3.5
2.2
1.5
1.5
1.0
-
• 2:0
Control - 1A
oH NO — N NH — N
9.t- 0.00
9..1 —
8.1* -'- 0.0
7;6 -- 0.0
7.5 -'- 0.0
7.5 .--• 0.0
7.3 . 0.00 0.0
7.3 0.00 — '

Control 2A
pH NO,-N NHi-N
8.3 0.15
8.t —
8.2 — 0.0
8.2 .-- 0.0
8.2 -- 0.0
8.1 — 0.0
8.0 0.00 0.1
7.8 O.-OO

SO POU T POU
0.05 O.tO
6.05 0.25
.0.00
0.00
0.05
0.00 0.30
0.1 0.25
0.00 0.25


SO POU T POu
0.00 0.10
0.00 0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00 0.05
0.00 0.10
0.00 0.15

Temp.
°C
--
29
25
27
26
31
28



Temp.
°C
—
29
25
27
26
31
28
--

Whole alewife -
DO BOD pH N03-N NH
5.8 .0.
6.3 >13.
0.0 36
0.0 51
0.0 61*
0.0 100
3.2
8.0 38
Lake

DO BOD
. 8.0 . 1.
1.0 11
0.0 28
0.0 t5
0.0 til
t.O tt2
29.0
10.5 16
6 9.t 0.00
t 8.1
.7.0 '-- 3
7.0 '-- 8
7.1 -- 13
7.2 -- It
- 7.2 0.00 11
.7.7 0.00
Michigan water,
Whole alewife -.
pH N03-N NH
6 8.3 0.15
7.6
7.3 — 3
7.1* -- 8
7.5 — 10
7.7 — 12
- 9.6 0.00 3
7.9 0.00
IB
?-N

—
.6
• 8 .
.0
.0
.0
--
1






Chopped alewife - 1C
SO POij T POU
0.05 O.tO
2.1 2.5 .
t.3 t.3
5.7
6.1
6.3 8.1'
5.5 6.2
0.30 8.0
Temp.
»C
—
29
25
27
26
31
28

DO
5.8
3.2
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
20.0
10.0
BOD pH NO,-N NH3-N
0.6 9
33 7
39 7
60 6
90 7
68 7
8
lOt 8
.t 0.00
.3
.0 -- 3.8
.9 -- . 8.0
.0 — •' 10.0
.1 -- 13.0
.2 0.00 7.i*
.0 0.00
SO POU
0.05
. 3.7
t.3
5.0
5'. 3
6.0
t.5
0.10
T PP.,
O.tO
M.O
t.3
--
-
8.t
5.8
20.0
series 2
2B
3-N

--
.7
.6
.0
.0
.2
--
Chopped alewife - 2
SO POU T POL
0.00 0.10
2.1 2.8
3.7 3.7
t.5.
U.7
t.O 7.1
0.75 t.t
0.00 t.5
Temp.
°C
--
29
25
27 .
26
31
28
—
DO '
8.0
1.5
0.9
0.0
0.0
18.0
28. t
16.6
BOD p
1.6 8
11 7
17 7
32 7
tt 7
t6 7
— 10
20 7
H N03-N NH3-N
.3' 0.15
.6 — .
.3 — 3.2
.t -- 7.t
.t -- 9.6
.9 — 9.6
.0 0.00 0.2
.7 0.00
C
SO POM
• 0.00
1.6
2.1
1.9
1.8
0.2
0.50
0.00

0.10
1.9
2.1
-

t.7
2.5
2.5
                                                                                                                              ro

-------
46
         Figure 2.  Dissolved oxygen,  biochemical oxygen demand,  and pH concentrations in
                     experimental tubs  containing decomposing alewives, August-September 1967.
            IA-CONTROL
               10      13

                DAYS
            8A-CONTROL
                                          TAP-   WATER   SERIES
                                 a  so
                                             IB-WHOLE  ALEWIFE
                                                                     10  100
                                                                                 1C-CHOPPED  ALEWIFE
10      IS

 DAYS
10      15

 DAYS
                                             LEGEND —


                                         LAKE    WATER  SERIES
    — B.ao
    — DO.
      pH
                                 6  60
                                            2 B-WHOLE   ALEWIFE
                                       .11111 \^r"\ i i  i i i  i i  i i i i  i • i
                                                                                2C-CHOPPED  ALEWIFE
               IO      IS  .   20

                DAYS
                                    10      IS

                                     DAYS
                                                                                                                                     to

-------
                                                                                            2777
     Figure 3-   Ammonia, soluble orthophosphate, and total  phosphate concentrations
                 i.n experimental tubs  containing decomposing  alewives, August-September,  1967-
      TAP   WATER   SERIES-I
                                           LAKE    WATER   SERIES-2
              I A-CONTROL
   i  i i  i i  i -i i  i i  i r	i i  i i  i
 0       5       (O .     15      2O
12
          IB —WHOLE  ALEWIFE
                  \

                                           LEGEND:
                                          • AMMONIA
                                           TOTAL
                                           PHOSPHATE
                                    	 SOLUBLE
                                           ORTHOPHOSPHATE
                                                                   2 A-CONTROL
                10      15      20

                 DAYS
21
         1C-CHOPPED   ALEWIFE
                                   —{POSSIBLE
                                       EXPERIMENTAL
                                        ERROR)
              A

IO      IS

 DAYS
                                                              EC-CHOPPED  ALEWIFE
                                                                     10      15

                                                                      DAYS
                                                                                         18
                                                                                         IS
                                                                                   20
                                            158

-------
                                                                    2778
Table 4.  Algae cell counts  (Sedgewick-Rafter), experimental
          tubs, August-September 1967.
   Lansing tap water series
Lake Michigan water series

Time in
days
9
12
23
1A
Control
no fish
35
427
11,765
IB
- Whole
fish
52
18,768
2,145,000
1C
Chopped
fish
8,856
97,290
3,187,800
2A
Control
no fish
• 86
259
759
2B
Whole
• fish
75,900
409,515
621,000
2C
Chopped
fish
130,065
565,800
455,400
                            159

-------
                               Figure
                                        Relationship between coliform bacteria, total phosphate, soluble orthophosphate and plankton algae
                                        experimental control tubs with Lansing tap water and Lake Michigan water, August-September 1967.
1.3

                                                                                                       LAKE   WATER
                                                                                                        2-A  CONTROL
                                                                                            LEGEND^
                                                                                                         ALGAE
                                                                                                         COLIFORM   BACTERIA
                                                                                                         TOTAL  PHOSPHATE
                                                                                             ------- SOLUBLE    ORTHOPHOSPHATE
                                                                                                                                               IO.OOO
                                                                                                                                               1,000
                                                                                                                                               100
                                                                                                                                               10
                                                                                                                                               0.1


                                                                                                                                               0.01
                                                                                                                                               000
                                         10
                                                      15
                                                                   20
                                                                                                           10
                                                                                                                        15
                                                                                                                                     20
                                            DAYS
                                                                                                             DAYS
                                                                                                                                                                   ro

-------
                                                                         2780
Figure 5.  Relationship'between coliform bacteria,  total  phosphate,
           soluble orthophosphate,  and  plankton algae,  experimental
           test tubs with Lansing tap water and.Lake  Michigan  water,
           August-September 1967.

                      TAP   WATER   SERIES

Number of algal cells/ml Number of algal cells/ml
Number of coliform bacteria/100 ml " Number of coliform bacteria/100 ml
- 5 •
IB- WHOLE ALEWIFE
/\ .'/
/"'. .\X
f~~"~~ 7^\ • 	
1 /
! /
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
> 5 10 15 2O
DAYS
LEGEND
	 COL
	 TOT
	 SOL
LAKE W/
2B— WHOLE ALEWIFE

/" 	 ' -,/
/ \
-; — 	 	 ^^ ' ""-•-.
f ^
*
li \ • -
:' \
'....; 	 \





c
AE
FORM
AL f
UBLE
\~TEf





1C- CHOPPED ALEWIFE
,^ • '""->-.... :
1 \
/i ^ — "^ ' v
i
X
\
i i i i : i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i r.
IQPOO
too
10
"if
1
01 .
O.OI
0
10,000
1,000
100
10
•-t
~^
Ql
0.01
o
 5       10       IS

          DAYS
                                                                - 20
                                                   DAYS
                             161

-------
                                                                                                            2781
                   Figure 6.  Relationships between potential total phosphate release as PO^
                             from dead  alewives anil volume of phospnoru.T-free water which
                             could be brought  to 0.0:1 mg/1 solubla orthophosphate 'assuming 2/3
                             of the phosphate  released was soi'iLle orthophosphate).
   250,000
   2OO.OOO
«/>
> 25O.OOO

UJ

    IOO.OOO
     5O.OOO
                                                                            I
                                                                                                  18
                                                                                                  12.
                                                                                                      \tt
                                                                                                      O
                                                                                                      m
                                                                                                      o
                                                                                                  6
                                1.000
2.0OO
3.OOO
    0
4.OOO
                                        TONS    OF    PHOSPHATES
                                                    162

-------
                                                           2782
               APPENHIX K
              SURVEY OF ALGAE PROBLEMS -
          L»KE ''ICHTSAN REACHES
                   i»=ND
          PHYTOPLANKTON SURVEY
MICKTPAM INSHORE WATERS OF S^UTH-CEMTRAL
              LAKE MICHIGAN
                   163

-------
                            Preliminary Survey of Algae Problems,                              2783
                                   Lake Michigan Beaches,

                                     August U, 5, 1966.


A brief reconnaissance •survey of Lake Michigan shoreline from South Haven north to
Meinert's Park in Muskegon County was made on August k and 5, 1966 to learn if an algae problem
was present in this area and, if so, to determine its extent.  Complaints had been received
prior to the survey stating that undesirable algae accumulations were occurring along some of
these beaches.  A minimum of 500 feet of shoreline was inspected at each of the 12 public
beaches shown on Figure 1.  Qualitative samples of. plankton and algae were obtained from
these beaches.

Filamentous algae (Cladophora)  and alewives (Alosa psuedoharenqus). were present in moderate
amounts at the South Haven public beach.  Several windrows of algae, fifteen feet in length
and one foot wide, were observed on the bottom in shallow water near shore.  Decaying alewives
were mixed in this algal mass and one fresh-dead alewife was found per 25 feet of shoreline.
The lifeguards stated that the algae and alewives had been a nuisance this year and the
cause of numerous complaints.  Proceeding north from South Haven, the next seven beaches had
less of an algae and alewife problem, with the exception of the Allegan County Park where
conditions were similar to those at South Haven.

At the Grand Haven State Park,  Assistant Park Manager Marvin Gebbins said that algae
accumulations and dead alewives had been a problem this year.  The algae became so             '
concentrated at times that he thought it would have been wise to close the beach to swimming.
Bathers complained that their bathing suits had been stained by the algae.  He observed that
algae concentrations had varied with wind direction and intensity.  There was not much of a
problem at the time of my visit so I could not confirm his statements.  Cladophora was
observed in one-foot clumps on  the bottom near shore.  At Norton Park, 5i miles to the north,
an obvious algae problem existed.  The waves washing on shore appeared green because of the
intense concentration of suspended Spi rogyra.   The one-half mile of shoreline examined had a
strip of thick algae extending  20 feet offshore.  Decaying alewives were fairly abundant in this
unsightly mass.  The algae was  so concentrated that a swimmer could not see his feet while
standing in knee-deep water.  The life guard said that this condition had been present in
varying degrees of severity all summer.

Bronson Park, k^ miles further  north, had similar, but less pronounced conditions.

Lloyd Park, 12 miles north of Bronson Park, had clear water, no alewives, and only scattered
clumps of algae.

Meinert County Park, 5 miles to the north of Lloyd Park, had conditions as bad as Norton
Park.  Mrs. Ramthum, who has operated the park for the last 13  years, said that this was the
first time she had seen a problem of this type.

This survey substantiates the complaints received by the Water  Resources Commission which
stated that algae accumulations at some Lake Michigan beaches had reached nuisance proportions.


                                                  John G.  Robinson
                                                  Aquatic Biologist
                                                  Michigan Water Resources Commission
                                                  3/15/67


Imh

-------
                                                                                     278^
                         iMeinert Park
                         i  Lloyd Park
                           Bronson Park
                          Norton Twp. Park
                          '    Grand Haven
                           \   Port Sheldon
                         Hoi land State Park
                        Lake town Twp. Park
                       Saugatuck City Park
                ,	•_ _A_1I legan County Park
                           i!  GJenn Beach
WISCONSIN
 ILUNOIS
                                              Figure 1.   Areas in southeastern Lake
                                              Michigan affected by nuisance algae.
                                              Preliminary survey August k, 5» 1966
       LEGEND

       " Cladophora
Cladophora and
Spirogyra      ;
                      090    IQ    ZO    30   «D


                             ICALK IN MILES
                                    166

-------
                                                                                               2785
                                    PHYTOPLANKTON  SURVEY

                          MICHIGAN  INSHORE WATERS  OF  SOUTH  CENTRAL

                                        LAKE  MICHIGAN

                                     August  9-11,  1966

On August k and 5 a reconnaissance  survey of  several  beaches  along  Lake  Michigan  showed  that
nuisance accumulations of algae  were present  around Muskegon  and  intermittently for  25 miles
to the north.  The purpose of this  follow-up  survey was to  determine  the offshore extent
of these accumulations and to compare the plankton  populations  in the  problem areas  with
those from other areas.

Between St. Joseph to the south  and Manistee  to  the north,  a  shoreline distance of 163 miles,
eight beaches were sampled  (see Figure  1).   Four  lake  samples  were taken at  each location,
one each at the following distances offshore:   1 mile,  1/3  mile,  600  feet and 75  feet.   A
sample was also taken from tributary streams  at  seven of  the  locations.


                                          Methods

Plankton was obtained by towing  a plankton net with a 20" diameter  opening and #25 silk  bolting
cloth two feet below the water's surface for  300 feet.   The samples were preserved with  formalin
immediately after collection.  Lake samples were taken  upwind from  the tributaries in order
to avoid river plankton.  The plankton was   identified  and  counted  in  each sample by
examination of 10 fields on two  slides at  100 power.  The count was made with a microscope
using a 10X ocular  and 10X objective.   Identifications were  made using  43X and 97X  objectives.
Each one-celled alga, filament and  colony were counted as  one  organism.  This  method  fails
to take into account the size of the plankton. Therefore,estimates  of  dominance by volume
were made by examining concentrated samples under  low power.   The term "total plankton count"
refers to the summation of counts made at all four  lake stations  at each location.

St. Joseph and St. Joseph River

The total plankton count was higher here than at any  other  location (see Figure 2).   The most
abundant algae were:   Anabaena 1 mile and  1/3 mile  offshore;  Melosi ra  at 600  feet;  and
Fraqilaria at 75 feet offshore.   Volume  comparisons (see Table 1) show that Melosi ra and
Anabaena were the dominant phytoplankton offshore  and that  Fraqilaria  was predominant inshore.
The comparatively high counts found at St. Joseph  indicate  enriched conditions.   The
predominant algae found here (with  the exception of Frag ilaria) are the  type  commonly found
in eutrophic (rich in nutrients) situations.

The St. Joseph River (avg. discharge> 3,269 cfs) was  greenish-brown in color  because of  the
large standing crop of algae. Melosi ra  made  up  56% of  this population numerically and  75%
of its volume.  Actinastrum. Scenedesmus. and Pediastrum were also  very  abundant.  This  river
had the highest plankton count of the seven sampled.

South Haven and Black River

The total plankton count at this station was  fourth highest of the  seven sampled  with
Dinobryon numerically dominant and  Melosi ra and  Ceratiurn also abundant.   The  concentration
of blue-green algae was seond only  to that found  in the St. Joseph  area.  Blue-greens are
often abundant in enriched situations and are often associated with nuisance  conditions.
Gomphosphaeria and Anabaena (blue-greens) were  found  in every lake  sample but not in the river.
Ceratium. Fraqilaria and Me 1osi ra dominated  in  volume.

The Black River (a relatively small river) had  the  second  lowest  plankton count of the  stream
samples.  Numerically, Navicula  constituted Wk of  the  phytoplankton.

Holland. Lake Macatawa, and Black River

This area had the third highest  blue-green algae concentration due  to the comparatively  high
numbers of Anabaena.  Other features, however,  such as  low  total  counts  dominated by typical
oligotrophic (nutrient poor) types  such  as Fraqilaria and Dinobryon indicate  that nutrients
were not abundant.


                                              167

-------
                                                                                                2786
 Lake Macatawa, which  contributes a  relatively small flow to Lake Michigan at Holland, was
 grass-green with  a  bloom (intense concentration) of the blue-green nuisance alga,
 Aphanizomenon.  The total  phytoplankton consisted of 85% blue-greens while the remainder
. was mainly Pediastrum.

 Grand Haven and Grand River

 The phytoplankton of  this  area was  very similar to that found at Holland except that
 Spi roqyra. a  nuisance-type filamentous algae, was numerically and volumetrically dominant in
 the sample taken  in the  beach  tow (75 feet offshore).

 The Grand River  (avg  flow  >  3,52** cfs) had a low phytoplankton count with the numerically
 dominant Helosi ra making up  27% of  the total.  Actinastrum and Pediastrum were the
 dominant non-flageI late  greens.  Fraqilaria was also abundant.  The blue-green Aphanocapsa
 and Gonphosphaer i urn represented 11% of the total potamoplankton (river plankton).

 Huskegon. Muskeqon  Lake  and  River

 Because of rough  water only  the samples from 1/3 mile and 75 feet offshore were collected.
 Spi roqyra was dominant  in  number and volume in the inshore sample.  This profusion of
 Spi roqyra is  evidence of highly enriched conditions.  Asterionella and Fraqilaria were dominant
 further offshore  where very  litt.le  Spi roqyra was found.

 Muskegon Lake was similar  to Lake Macatawa in having a bloom of Aphanizomenon.  Anabaena.
 Anacystis and Gomphosphaerium were  also present, makina the blue-greens equal  to 8k% of the
 total plankton.   Average flow of the Muskegon River is  > 1,877 cfs.

 Benona (Stoney Lake)

 All samples taken here except the beach tow had exceptionally la-/ plankton concentrations
 (see Figure 2).  The  beach tow had  by far the highest count of the four due to the
 numerically and volumetrically dominant Spiroqyra.   Asterionella and Fraqilaria were dominant
 in the three  samples  taken further  offshore.   Only two filaments of  Spi roqyra  were counted
 in the sample taken 300  feet offshore.

 It is interesting to  note  that the  offshore samples  at  this station  contained  the smallest
 amounts of plankton noted on the survey even though  nuisance quantities of algae had
 accumulated near  the  shore.

 Lading ton. Pere Marquette Lake and  River

 This area had the second highest total phytoplankton count  of the group due to Melosi ra which
 was also abundant in  the Pere Marquette River.   It  made up  97% of the total  potamoplankton.
 There were relatively few blue-green algae present  in Lake  Michigan  and none  in the river.
 Fraqilaria and Asterionella were second and third in dominance in the lake samples.   Spi roqyra
 was not found in  the  offshore samples and only  in very small  quantities in the beach tow.

 Visual observations of the beach area and shallows  indicated good water quality.

 Manistee. Manistee Lake  and River

 As was expected,   this area had a low total  phytoplankton count and a  low count in the  beach
 tow.   The dominants were Fraqilaria  and  Asterionella.   Anabaena.  Tabellaria and  Dinobryon
 were present   in low numbers at all   stations.

 The Manistee  River had the lowest  total  count of the entire  survey.   All  alga  was sparse
 including the dominant pennate diatoms.

 There wes very little difference in  the  inshore  and  offshore  phytoplankton counts at  this
 station (sse  Figure 2 and 3).  The   low phytoplankton count  in  this area corresponded with
 the very clear,  clean appearance of  the  swimming  beach.
                                                168

-------
                                                                                               2787


                                   Observations and Summary

 1.  Combining the information gained from the reconnaissance surv.-y of Ae:tusi. k, 5 and the
 follow-up survey of August 9~11, 1966 it is possible to roughly outline rhc ar.-'ris which had
algae problems    see Table 2).  Approximately 32 miles of '«-ke Michigan *.hornli.ne had
nuisance accumulations cf Spi roqyra and Cladophora in Auuiist of 1966.  Thi:, problem was first
observed 6.5 miles sou^ of Muskegon at Norton Township Pork and exicr.dc-d intermittently
to Benona, 25 miles no1ih of Muskegon.  At some beaches in thi^ ores the accumulations
were not sufficient to cause nuisance conditions.

Sixty miles of shoreline from South Haven to Pentwater (excluding the areo described  in the
above paragraph) had noticeable accumulations of Cladophora but little or no Spi roqyra.
Since Cladophora lays on the bottom in windrows it was not as objectionable as was the
Spi roqyra in suspension.  Personnel in charge of these beaches voiced only moderate
complaints concerning the necessity to rake up the algae once a week or .so.  In the area
where Spi roqyra was a problem, park managers received complaints of green-stained bathing
suits and conditions unfit for swimming.

2.  Comparing the eight  areas studied, the algae at Holland and. Man! s tee could be
described as being the least indicative of enrichment.  That found at Benona, Muskegon
and St. Joseph were the most indicative of enrichment.

3.  There were, striking  differences in the quantity and quality in the inshore phytoplankton
and that found beyond 600 feet.  Benona is the best example of this wh'-^re the offshore plankton
population was lower (see Figure 2) than the other six areas, while the inshore count was the
highest registered.   The inshore plankton was dominated by autrophic species (Spi roqyra and
Cladophora)  while the offshore organisms were more typical of ol iqstropmc waters.  This
suggests that during the summer of 1966 the water masses inshore -.mo offshore from 600 feet
out remained sufficiently different for long enough periods to L-aiopori  radically different
alga) populations.

4.  Me 1 os i ra. a filamentous diatom, was the dominant algae found fit Z<.. Joseph and,
Ludington, except in the samples taken one mile offshore.   These nigh MfIos i r 
-------
                                                                    2788
                           FIGURE  I.  Location  Of  Plankton
                                       Sampling  Stations
                                         August 9-11 1966
090    10    20    3O   4O

         I     I
        9CALC  IN •ILCS
A )  Sampling  Location
               170

-------
                                                                                2789
900 -
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
 100
                 FIGURE  2.   Total phytoplankton  count (summation of
                              air the counts of all  four lake  stations)
                              at  each  location compared  to the
                              inshore  beach  tow.  Lake Michigan,
                              August, 1966.


                                      LEGEND'
        808
                   530
           110
                  I
                   m
                      57
           = Total  Phytoplankton  Count

           »Beach  Tow  Phyfoplankton  Count

            Numbers  Indicate Clump  Count



                                  681
                                         313
            288
                             1
                                 123
                           137
                                                       569
                                                              • 742
                                                                  277
                                                                          3O8
                                                            68
     ST. JOSEPH
SOUTH
HAVEN
HOLLAND
GRAND
HAVEN
BENONA    LODINGTON  MANISTEE
                                       171

-------
                                                                                                  2790
                      Table  1.   Phytoplankton dominants from the mouths
                     of seven tributaries  and eight  locations near shore
                      in southcentral  Lake Michigan, August 9-11, 1966.

                                      Numerical Dominants
                                          Volumetric Dominants
Code and Location Station* Species %
A




B




C




D




E


F



G





- St. Joseph



St. Joseph River
- South Haven



Black River
- Holland



Lake Macatawa
- Grand Haven



Grand River
- Muskegon

Muskegon Lake
- Benona



- Ludington



Pere Marquette
River
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
2
4
5
1
2
3
4
1
2
3
4

5
Anabaena
Anabaena
Melosi ra
Fragi laria
Melosi ra
Dinobryon
Dmobryon
Melos i ra
Dinobryon
Navicula
Dinobryon
Fragi laria
Fragilaria .
Fragi laria
Aphani zomenon
Fragi laria
Fragi laria
Fragi laria
Spi rogyra
Melosi ra
Fragi laria
Spi rogyra
Aphan i zomenon
Fragi laria
Fragi laria
Fragi laria
Spi rogyra
Fragi laria
Me 1 os i ra
Me 1 os i ra
Melos i ra

Melos i ra
27
33
52
24
56
21
47
24
23
84
36
36
53
52
73
33
36
35
43
27
25
38
77
47
40
33
53
59
82
69
80

97
Species
Ceratium
Melosira
Anabaena
Me 1 os i ra
Act i nastrum
Melosi ra
Ceratium
. Fragi laria
Fragi laria
Synedra
Anabaena
Dinobryon
Anabaena
Navicula
Pedlastrum
Dinobryon
'As te r i one 1 1 a
Tabel laria
• Fragi laria
Ped last rum
Asterionel la
Fragi laria
Fragi laria
Asterionel la
Asterionel la
Asterionel la
Fragi laria
Asterionel la
As te r i one 1 1 a
Fragi laria
Frangi laria

Navicula
%
23
22
17
19
19
21
26
14
19
4
15
25
13
11
12
20
11
24
32
16
22
27
8
21
30
32
19
17
7
21
9

1
First
Anabaena
Melosi ra
Melos i ra
Fragi laria
Melosi ra
Melosi ra
Me 1 os i ra
Fragi laria
Ceratium
Navicula
Fragi laria
Fragi laria
Fragi laria
Fragi laria
Aphani zomenon
Fragi laria
Fragi laria
Spi rogyra
Spi rogyra
Melosira
Fragilaria
Spi rogyra
Aphani zomenon
Fragi laria
Fragi laria
Fragi laria
Spi rogyra
Fragi laria
Melosira
Melosira
Melosi ra

Melosira
Second
Fragi laria
Ceratium
Anabaena
Melosira
Ped i as t rum
Fragi laria
Ceratium
Ceratium
Tabel laria
Synedra
Tabellaria
Ceratium
Anabaena
Navicula
Ped i as t rum
Tabel laria
Tabel laria
Fragi laria
Fragi laria
Ped i as t rum
Asterionel la
Fragi laria
Fragi laria
Asterionel la
Asteripnel la
Asteripnella
Fragi Uria
Asteripnel la
Asterionel la
Fragi laria
Fragi laria

Ped i as t rum
H - Man is tee
    Man is tee Lake.
Fragi laria
Fragi laria
Fragilaria
Fragilaria
Fragilaria
30  Asterionella  18
54  Asterionella  27
47  Asterionella  28
47  Asterionella  25
20  Anacystis      20
Fragilaria
Fragilaria
Fragilaria
Fragilaria
Fragilaria
Asterionel la
Asterionel la
Asterionel la
Asterionel la
Anacyst is
*Station number refers to distance offshore:
 5-river mouth.
                 1-one mile; 2-1/3 mile; 3-600 feet; 4-75 feet;
                                               172

-------
                                                      2791
                           INDIANA
   LEGEND:


) 32-100 PLANKTON


^100-200 PLANKTON

lzOO-600 PLANKTON  5|S
™                  ^1™
              HGURE  3.   Plankton  Concentrations
                           75 feet  offshore and
                           I  mile  offshore
                                August, 1966
173

-------
                                                                                                 2792
                         Table 2.  Algal  conditions  at  selected Lake
                                   Michigan beaches, August  1966.
 Beaches  checked

 St.  Joseph
 (Jean  Klock  Park)

 South  Haven
 (City  Beach)

 Glenn  Beach
 (7 miles north of
 South  Haven)

 Allegan  County Park
 (I0i miles north of
 South  Haven)

 Saugatuck City Beach
Lakewood Township Park
(5 miles north of
Saugatuck)

Holland State Park

Port Sheldon Twp. Park


Grand Haven State Park
Norton Township Park
(6j miles south of
Huskegon)

Muskegon State Park
Lloyd Park
(12 miles north of
Muskegon)

Mefnert Twp. Park
(17 miles N of Muskegon)

Benona Beach
(25 miles N of Muskegon)

Little Sable Point
(6? miles N of Benona)

Cedar Point Twp. Park
(6 miles N of Littte Sable
Point)

Pentwater State Park
Beach

ludington City Beach

Manis tee
Dominant
algae
Fragi laria

Fragi laria
_•- '

-.-
» —

	

Fragi laria
	

Spirogyra

	

Spirogyra

	

	 	

Spirogyra

	

	

-~-

Melosira
Fragi lari a
Nuisance algae
tvpe
Anabaena

Cladophora
Cladophora

Cladophora
Cladophora

Cladophora

Cladophora
Cladophora

Spi rogyra
Cladophora
Spi rogyra
Cladophora
Spirogyra
Cladophora
Cladophora

Spi rogyra
Cladophora
Spi rogyra
Cladophora
Cladophora

Cladophora

Cladophora

None
None
Nuisance algae
concentration
Sparse

Moderate
Sparse

Moderate
Sparse

Sparse

Moderate
Sparse

Abundan t

Very abundant

Abundant

Sparse

Very abundant

Very abundant

Abundant

Abundant

Sparse

_..
	

Observations
No problem
observed
SI ight problem
No problem
observed
Slight problem
No problem
observed
No problem
observed
SI ight problem
No problem
observed
Moderate problem
observed
Severe problem
observed
Moderate problem
observed
No problem
observed
Severe problem
observed
Severe problem
observed
Moderate problem
observed
Moderate problem
observed
No problem
observed
Clean water
Clean water
                                              174

-------
                                                                                            2793
  Area
Location

1.  St. Joseph
    8-9-66

2.  South Haven
    8-10-66

3.  Holland
    8-10-66

k.  Grand Haven
    8-10-66

5.  Muskegon
    8-10-66

6.  Benona
    8-10-66
7.  Ludington
    8-11-66

8.  Man istee
    8-11-66
                     Tabel  3-   Soluble orthophosphate concentrations as PO^
                               in mg/1 along  the southeast-central Lake Michigan
                               shoreline and  in nearby tributaries, August 9-1V. 1966.
Sample Stations
1 Mile
Off Shore
0.01
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
1/3 Mile
Off Shore
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
No sample
0,00
600 Feet
Off Shore
0.01
0.00
0.01
0.00
No sample
0.01
75 Feet
Off Shore
0.02
0.01
0.00
0.00
0.01
0.00
River
Sample
0.19
0.56
0.17
0.36
O.t6
No sig-
nificant
tribu-
tary
0.00


0.01
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00


0.01
                                            0.03
                                                          0.01
                                              175

-------
                               279^
Table •» . Plankton composition from
Genera
Phytoplankton
Non-Flagellate Greens
ActlnaitruM
Ank 1st rode sows
•otryococcus
Chore) la
CMorococcuM
Closterlun
Coelastrun
DIctyosphaerluB
Dlonrphococcus
Euaitrum
Gleocystls
Nlcractlnlum
Oocystls
P*d last run
•lanktospnaerta
Scenedesnus
Selena strum
Sphaerocystls
Staurastrun
Westella
Flagellate
Ceratlum hlrudlnella
Eudorlna
Glenodlnlum
Gonlun
Pandor i na
Perldlnlum
P 1 eodor 1 na
Totals
Filamentous -Greens
Osci 1 latorls
Splrogyra
Ulothrlx
Totals
Yellow-Green
Dtnobryon '
Diatoms
Cent r Us
Cyclotella
Stephanodlscus
Totals
Pennates
Cynbella
Diatoms
Dlatomella
Fragllarta
Gyros) gnu kutzlngll
Havlcula
Synedra
Tabellarla
Totals
Blue-Greens
Anabaena
Anacystis
Aphanlzomenon
Aphanocapsa '
CoelosphaerluRf
Gonphosphaerla
Lyngbye
rterlsmopedla
Totals
Protozoa
Copepoda
Naupllus larvae
Total zooplenkton
Total phytoptankton
Total plankton
Total species
ST.
JOSEPH
ST. JOSEPH RIVER SOUTH
Al* A3 Al Ajj /^ g]^ m?
P** 2 28 6 119
P P -
3
P 1
P P
1


2 13 t*»
d


" p

2 15 **6
II 25 13
P 8




p
II 25 21



2
.2 0

II 66 7



80 152
80 152



2
7 34 9


12 9
1 4
8 54 20

13 119 50
P P

1 '
P 2

14 1 19 52
2 5 7
p
P 2
2 18 33
4 25 40
48 359 291
52 384 33 1
17 19 14


7 27 7 1
2 29
P

p

IS 1 79 7 2
6 23 32
2

1

6
II 2
8 12 31 32

p


0000

28 58


4 6
p
25 358 28 4



4 7
26 2 22 13

2 1
14 71 3 2
4 3 4
50 80 33 23

2123
1 P 1




536S
6 21 8 10
P 2 1
P 3 3
20 27 SO 26
110 632 133 124
130 659 183 ISO
20 21 20 lv
*The station nur*b*rt Indicate the following distances
**"P" Indicates that the
organism was
present but not
the mouths of seven tr
fbutarie* and

August 9-H. 1966. Numbers Indicate the frequency of occurrence
of organisms or clump* in 10 fields al 100 po-cr.
LAKE MIS-
BLACK HACA- GRAHD KEGON BENOHA
HAVEN RIVER HOLLAND TAWA GRAND HAVEN RIVER rUSKECC.1 LAKE (SIDNEY LAKE)
18 1 II 1
1 2
P 2
41 4
P
• p •! P P P
pp 2PPI PPPPP
1 1 P
1
PI.. - . P


15 3 P


3


41 3 1 0
16 4 S
P P 2



4

16 4 2 9

p

2
0200

29 13 19


57 4 1
p
57 k 1

2
4

32 II 1 6

77
10 2 4
25 1 6
69 26 88 IS

24 S 1 8
P 1




24 5 1 9
14 1
2 1
2 1 3
25 ** 1 9
45 7 2 16
236 57 92 53
281 64 94 69
24 16 14 IS
offshore: 1 -
counted for qui

1 1
2 1





5 2
S
p



4
1
9 1




0 0

15 7



P





21 28

1
2 1
3
24 35

4 7
1


2
6 8
1 1
3 5
2 2
1 2
19 40
59 53
78 93
17 16
1 mile:
1

4 25
2 1


1

9 29
3




S

8 .


1
1
2 0

7



1
3




64 1

13
1
6 1
88 2

4 IS
1 9
146
1 P
P

4 3
6C
7
S 12
2 1
23 22
40 43
123 201
163 244
25 16
Z - 1/3

P






6 1
S 2




6 3

II 5


1

0 1

19 5


1 1

2 1

7 5


31 16



II 6
.49 27

8 4
p


P P
8 4
2
1 1
1 1
28 28
95 44
123 72
17 16
mile: 3
imitative purposes.

P p
3 2 17
7




3 338
1
. 2


P 2
1
P
1 1 4


2 59
3
2 59 3

2


p
29
p
29
61*
'i


13 44 17

4 2
1
972
28 69 21

3 1
p

4
2 8
P
P
3 3 12
2
2 3
1 2 2

IS 19 9
37 137 107
52 156 116
18 19 17
- 600 feet; 4



2 10
1 2


2


. 8 1 P
P 2


1
1
p
9 1 3


2 82

2 82 0

10 4




2

'
1

20 58 22

1 4
2
10 17
48 119 24

2 1 12
3 4
209
P P
p
3 3 4
8 4 229
2 1
IP?
2 1
1
22 10 8
79 215 272
101 225 280
21 15 21
- 75 feet.


P P
2
P





2 P
3



1

20 0 4

P
2 300

0 0 2 300

2


1 P

1 2
7 6 '<9 94



IS 8 20 109

2 P
P 1 4
1 1 3 52
25 15 43 259

2 4 5
P 1 3

P P P
3 P
P
P
p

6 10 7 1.
32 20 60 S69
38 30 67 570
14 15 14 20



PERE
HAR-
OJUETT'E
LUDIUGTON RIVEF
rj_ j2_ y_ G4_ GJ_
1
1 p
p
1
p

p



1 2
P


4 P 4
P 1 P
P P -1

2
P 2 1 2
P
4 0-6 4 3


1

00010

1


p p

1 101 195 221 245

10 9 18. 5
2 1

35 8 59 25 2

13 J
1
P 1 1
47 17 78 46 S

7 3
P 1 f

\
p
P P 2

P P
P P P
3 4 3 5 12
59 123 283 277.253
62 127 286 282 265
18 14 17 18 8



HADISTCC
HANISTEC RIVER
IM_ H2_ J3_ H4_ Hi.
P
4
P
P P P







9 4 1
1 P 1 1





96012




00000

92121


2 4
P 1
3 672




24 40 41 JZ 3
1
6 4 1
.1133
2132
41 62 77 58 7

II 1 2 P.
PI . P 3
p
P
P

1
p
1
1 212 .S 1
3 3 13 S 3
79 74 87 68 15
82 77 100 73 18
13 14 14 IS 16


176

-------
                                                     2795
S'IMMAPY  rip  BACTERIOLOGICAL DATA
             FOR
     LAKH MICHIGAN MATERS
                -ITS

-------
                                       2796
                          MAP  I
                   LAKE  MICHIGAN
 MANISTEE

LUDINGTON
                    BEACH .SAMPLING LOCATIONS
    GRAND  HAVEN •

      25
  SOUTH  HAVEN
a ST.  JOSEPH
  BUFFALO
             MICHIGAN
              INDIANA "
                                 MICHIGAN
                                  OHIO
     179

-------
                                      FIGURE  I
                           BACTERIOLOGICAL  DATA
                                        for
                           LAKE MICHIGAN WATERS
                                       along
                MICHIGANS  LOWER  PENINSULA COASTLINE
20.000
         1966 Geometric mean
         1967 Geometric mean
                                  1966 8 1967
Connecting lines for illusf. only
No value assigned
                                                        I  I I  I I  I I  I I  I  I I  I I
                 20.000
                                                                              10,000
                                                                            —  5.000
                                                                               1.000


                                                                                500
                                                                                100
      I 2 3456789 10 II 141516171819212223242526272829303132333941434751535456575859606263646566
                                    LOCATION NUMBER
                                                                                 10
                                                                                     ro
                                                                                     -a

-------
                                                                                  2798
SUMMARY OF BACTERIOLOGICAL DATA FOR LAKE MICHIGAN WATERS
      ALONG MICHIGAN'S LOVER PENINSULA COASTLINE
                   1966 and 1967

Sampling
Locations Hln.
1. Grand Beach. 430
2. Hew Buffalo < 30
•3. Harbert Beach < 30

It. Warren Dunes <• 30
State Park

5. Ueko Beach 91

6. Glenlord OO
Beach

7. Pine Beach <30
8. Silver Beach < 30

9. St. Joseph >30

10. Jean Klock 430
Park

II. Berrlen Co. > 30"
Park
12. Hagar Twp.
Park

13. Roadside Park

14. Covert Twp. - 430
Park

IS. Harry LaBar >30
. Drake Recre-
ation Area
16. 13th Ave. Pk. ISO
South Haven.
17. South Haven < 30

l6. Glenn ISO

19. A Megan Co. < 30
Park

20. Ganges Twp.
Park

21. Douglas Beach 36
1
22. Saugatuck Oval 36

23. Hacatawa Park < 30

24. . Lake Hacatawa 36
Outlet
25. Holland State < 30
Park

26. Grand Haven 36
State Park

27. Grand Haven 430
Beach

28. North Beach < 30
.Park

29. Norton Twp. < 30
Park

30. Lake Harbor < 3D
31. Muskegon City 36
Park

32. Pere Harquette<30
Park

33. Huskegon State <30
Park

31*. Pioneer Co. -•* .
Park

35. Duck Lake
Outlet
Note: 1966' results are-
1966 Reiults
Geo.
Han. Mean
46,000 3,800
46,000 774
930 146

4,300 406


4,300 583

. 2 ,400 ' 498
j

4,300' 300
9,300 385

9.300 717

9,300' 390


2.300 105

..


—

2,400 223


1.500 222


2.400 467

9.300 318

9.300 .1,111

2.400 327


—


4.300 202'

9,300 834

1,500 256

1,500 169

2,300 206


7,500 407.


4.300 383


9,300 206


21,000 372


9,300 348
930 145


2,400 185


930 99


—


--

"967
No. of .
Samples Kin. Mai.
5
5
4

20


5

5


15
20

25

25


5

—


—

5


5


5

45

5

5


--


9

15

10

9

24


25 '


20


10


5 '.


12
10


35


20


--


—

200 34,000
TOO' 39,000
700 19.000

100 19,000


600 13,000

700 6,000


400 .19,000
400 500 ,000

800 1 ,700 ,000

200 2 1 ,000


600 17,000

1,100. 78,000


?,300 -17,000
1
600 100.000


1,100 10..000


1,600 6,200

200 500 ,000

1,600 10,000

600 16,000


TOO 18,000


500 25,000

500 13.000

600 37 ;000

vp.
. . Park

49. Benzie State
Park

50. Empire Park
51. D. H. Day ' 4 30
Stale Park
52. Leland Twp.
Park

53^ Northport 4 30
Hun. Beach

54.' Suttons Bay 36
Village Park

55. Elmwood Twp.
'Park

• 56. Traverse City < 30
Mun, Park

57. Clinton Beach <- 30

58. Sunset Beach 4300
59- Bryant Beach 430

60.. Traverse City 4.30
State Park
/
61. Barnes Twp.
Park

62. Charlevoix < 30
City Park

63. Bay View < 100
Recreation Club

64. Petoskey City- 100
"Beach -
65. Ueque.tonsing 4.100

66. Harbor SprlngsI40,000 783 10


— >


7.500 285 '3


9,300 741 15

140,000 11,080 5
110,000 3,709 5

930 . 94 15


. --


100,000 461 30


' 1.200 413 >


50,000 631. 5

40,000 719 ' 5

40,000 413 10


•-


..


—


100
< 400
<200



-------
                                                    2799
7-7-67  7-9-67  7-17-67  7-18-67  7-19-67  7-24-67
                          UPPL'P Pr.NJNfHILA nACTKI-UOLO'UCAI. DATA TABULATION


 Sampling Location.	

 70.  State Roadside Park, W; of Gros Cap

 71.  Lake Michigan Picnic Ooumls, S.E. of
      Rrevoort                     .   .

 72.  Roadside Park at Cut P.iver Bridge                  36       .930

 73.  Twp. Camp Hround at Epoufette                      36       150

*74.  State Roadside Park F.. of Naubinway                91       210

                                                                  230

 75.  End of Public Access Road-Maubinway                91       230

 76.  Dutch John's Point Park                                                      210

 77.  State Roadside Park N.E. of Thompson                                         230

 78.  Portage Bay Forest Campground                 '                                        4,300

*79.  Fayette State Park                                                            91

                                                                                    91

                                                                                   930

 80.  Peninsula Point Campground                                            91.

 81.  Twin Springs Park                                                                    24,000

 82.  Gladstone Beach                                                                       4,300

*83.  Ludington Beach, Escanaba                                            230

                                                                           230

                                                                           230

*84.  Fox Park, Menominee County               .  -
-------
                                                              2800
                  APPENDIX n
      BIOLOGICAL SURVEYS  IN THE VICINITY
         . .          OF  THE
E. I.  DU PONT OEf NFMOURS  AND COMPANY DISCHARGE
                     TO
                 LAKE MICHISAN.
                     183

-------
                                                                               2801
                      Biological Surveys in the Vicinity of the
                    E. I.  duPont de.Nemours and Company Discharge
                         to Lake Michigan, Montague, Michigan
                       Seotember 10, 1957 and September 6,  1967


     In September 1957 and 1967 biological surveys were conducted in the vicinity of
the E. I. duPont de Nemours and .Company (duPont) discharge  to Lake Michigan.   The
purpose of these surveys was•to determine the effects of the discharge upon the biota
in this area.

     Bottom-associated organisms.and their community structures are particularly
useful in evaluating the effects of wastes on aquatic life.   Some species of aquatic
animals spend their entire life cycle in association with the lake bottom while other
species have stages (egg,  larval and/or pupal) dependent on the aquatic environment
for varying periods (from  as short as 2 weeks'to more than  a year).  Therefore the
individuals in a benthic community have been exposed to their, aquatic environment
for extended periods of time.   Their populations reflect the long-term water quality
conditions to which they have  been exposed.

     Benthic animals are important in the food chain of fish.  Desirable sport fish
are companion species of benthic macroinvertebrates typically found in environments
with good water quality.  Healthy populations of bottom organisms provide the proper
bases of the food chain to support populations of desirable sport fish.  Water quality
changes sufficient to alter the benthic community will also alter the fish population.


                                        METHODS
     Quantitative (areal) samples and  some qualitative collections  of the  bottom-
dwelling macroinvertebrates were made  with a Petersen dredge  in 1957  and. a Ponar
dredee. in 1967 (Figures 1 and 2)=  U.  S,  Standard #30 brass screens were used  for
sieving these samples.   Samples were fixed with formalin.and-labeled  as collected.
Samples were washed and sorted and the organisms were identified and  tabulated in
the Lansing laboratory (Tables 1 and 2).   Animals were assigned a tolerance status
according to published accounts and/or the past experience  of the authors.   Tolerance
status refers to the animal's relative ability to withstand and/or  respond to  adverse
environmental conditions.  Individual  tolerances are generally derived from an
animal's reaction to organic wastes and attendant oxygen depletion  or modification
of bottom deposits.

Tolerance status may be generally defined as:

     Tolerant - organisms that can grow and develop  within  a  wide range of
     environmental conditions.  They are  often found in water of poor
     quality.  These species are generally insensitive to a variety of
     environmental stresses.
                                        18^-185

-------
                                                                                  2802
      Intolerant  -  organisms whose  growth arid development are dependent  .
      upon  a  narrow ran.ge  of optimum, environmental conditions.  They are
      rarely  found  in  areas  of organic  enrichment.  They cannot adapt to
      adverse stiuntions and are  replaced by less sensitive organisms if
      the quality of their environment  is degraded.

      Facultative - organisms with  the  ability to survive over a wide
      range of conditions.   They  possess "medium" tolerance and often
      respond positively to  moderate  organic enrichment but cannot
      tolerate severe  environmental stresses.

      In addition to tolerance status,  the diversity of animals present in a given
benthic community  is  significant.  In  general, pollutional communities are
characterized by very low species  diversity, while normal undisturbed communities
contain many different soecies.

      In 1957 and 1967 water samples  were collected for chemical analysis at each
bottom samolins  station (Tables  3  and  4).
                               Observations and Results
Benthos
     The Federal Water Pollution Control Administration (FWPCA, 1963) found that 3
types of organisms dominated  the benthos in Lake Michigan.  Amphipods (scuds) were the
most abundant, followed by  sludgeworms (oligochaetsj, and then midges (tendipedids)
which were moderately abundant.

     The intolerant scud  (Pontoporeia affinis) prefers a habitat of sand or gravel and
is not numerous in organic  sediments.  Oligochaets, on the other hand, thrive in areas
of organic decomposition  which may result from organic wa^te discharges.  For this
reason an increase in oligochaets accompanied by a decline in amphipods in the
vicinity of organic waste discharges is considered evidence that the environment
is adversely affected.

     A tabulation was made  to compare the percent of amphipods, oligochaets and
midges reported by the FWPCA  throughout Lake Michigan and by the Michigan Water
Resources Commission (MWRC) in the vicinity of the duPont outfall (Table 5).  This
comparison shows that the percent of intolerant amphipods is similar in the 4 studies
reported.  Pronounced differences occurred in the percent of midges and worms.  This
could be influenced by the  difference in sampling areas.  Eggleton (1935) and FWPCA
sampled over a large area of -Lake Michigan.  We confined our sampling to depths of
less than 50 feet.
                                           186

-------
                                                                                2803
   Source
                                       Table 5

                Amphipods, oligochaets and midges in benthos samples
                   from Lake Michigan, 1931, 1957, 1962, and 1967
        Percent      Percent     Percent     Percent* .    Average
Year   Amphipods   Oligochaets   Midges   Miscellaneous   no./m*
Eggleton
MWRC
FWPCA
MWRC
1931
1957
1962
1967
65
66
48
60
24
6
39
8
_._
25
—
30
11
3
13
2
1 ,243
3,002
4,229
4,756
*Midges are included in miscellaneous by-the FWPCA.
in this manner.
                                   They also cited Eggleton's data
     In 1957 3 of the 10 samples (4, 5, and-.6; t igure a.; were collected from the
immediate vicinity of the duPont discharge.  Stations 1, 2.and 3 were approximately
1/2 mile south and stations 7, 8, and 9 were 1/2 mile .north at varying distances
offshore.  Station 10 was taken just off the mouth of the White Lake Channel.  In
general, the species composition was similar at all stations (Figure 3).

     In the sample collected nearest duPont's discharge (station 6) the number of
amphipods was noticeably lower than at similar depths elsewhere (Table 1), 7/sq.
foot versus 48 and 156/sq. foot.  It should be noted, however, that this location was
closer to shore than the other stations and could have .been subject to unstable
substrate sands.  This was  apparently the situation at station 1 in only 4 feet of
water 250 feet from shore where only 10 midges of 3 species were found.

     In 1967 11 bottom samples were taken within 500 feet of duPont's discharge and
7 from 1 mile or more distant (Figure 2).  There was a great deal of similarity
between the number of species and their tolerance status from these 2 areas (Figure 4),
as there was in 1957.  Intolerant amphipods were present.at all 11 stations within 500
feet of the discharge but their, abundance was less, 105/sq. foot compared to 521/sq.
foot for those stations more than 500 feet from the discharge.  Proximity to the
discharge is apparently not the only factor affecting amphipod abundance.  Average
sample depth in the discharge area was 18 feet and 28 feet in the control area.
There appears to have been a direct relationship between depth and amphipods: with
greater "depth more amphipods were present (Figures 5 and 6).

     Reconnaissance surveys, of the aquatic fauna were conducted in the discharge
vicinity in 1961 and. .1963.  There has been no apparent injury in the immediate discharge
area or remote from it.  Amphipods and midges have been the dominant animals.  Minnows
and alewives have been observed swimming normally in the discharge as it bubbles to
the surface.

     Bottom materials have been of fine, clean sand with no deposit on all 4 inspections.
                                           187

-------
                                                                                  2804
Water Quality

     In conjunction with the 'benthos studies water samples have been analyzed in 1957
and 1967 (Tables 1 and 2).  Waste contaminants have always been well within the MWRC
Order of Determination.

     Water samples taken directly over the discharge in September 1967 contained
0.65 mg/1 ammonia. .No ammonia was detected 100 feet in any direction from the
discharge.  All other water quality parameters measured'were very near normal in
all sampling locations.  .


                                        SUMMARY


1.  Biological surveys were conducted in 1957 and 1967 to determine if the E. I.
    duPont wastewater discharge to Lake Michigan had any -effect on the surrounding
    bottom fauna populations.

2.  These studies indicate that the discharge has not had a significant effect on
    the benthic communities.  Intolerant species were present at all stations
    regardless of proximity to the discharge.

3.  Water samples were collected and analyzed at all bottom sampling stations.  The
    waste constituents of the duPont discharge could not be detected 100 feet from
    the outfall.
                1957 Field and laboratory work by:  Carlos M. Fetterolf, Jr.,
                                                    Aquatic Biologist
                                                    Edwin S. Shannon, Sanitary Engineer

                               1967 Field work by:  D. James Seeburger, Aquatic Biologist
                                                    Ronald B. Willson, Aquatic Biologist

               1957 and 1967 Chemical analyses by:  Russell Krueger, Chemist

               1967 Laboratory work and report by:  D. James Seeburger
                                                    Water Quality Appraisal Unit
                                                    Michigan Water Resources Commission
                                                    Michigan Department of Conservation

January 26, 1968


                                   .Literature Cited
Eggleton, F. E.'1935.  The deep-water bottom fauna of Lake Michigan.   Papers of the
Michigan Academy of Science, Arts and Letters, Vol'. XXI, (1935).   pp.  599-612 as cited
by FWPCA, 196°

FWPCA, 1963;  Lake Michigan studies.  Special report number LM-H, Biological Studies.
FWPCA, Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control, Great Lakes-Illinois River
Basins Project.  pp. 1-20.

                                          188

-------
                                                                             2805
Figure 1.
       Combined  chemical and bottom fauna sampling  station vicinity  of
       duPont  discharge Montague,  Michigan, September 10, 1957.   From
       U.S.G.S.  quadrangle.
            N
    E. I. duPont  discharge
LAKE MICHIGAN
                                              (£•


                                              W
                                              '...
                                             . a:
                                                                                  4
                                                                                  4-;
                                                                                  .1
                                                                                  •i /
                                                                                   I.
                                                                                  t
                                                                                  •i
                                                                                  •T
                                             •    <   '   '           '         -J-
                                             y _(U T- ^^*rt£i^ ^-_ _,-tt -,:-;J. .
                                   V-
                                                                      .   - — ..*-. •

                                                 _' ?"   -=•   •  .    . ...  •''«. .    Oll.oi
                                                   • ..'   • I-.-'     ••-    *•'"• . ...•—-
                                                    _    i" •  •  i .        ' »»°
                                                                          .  .

                                                                         l.oi/C.mj '
                       Scale in miles
                       0            I
                        I	        I
                                     189

-------
Figure 2.    Combined chemical and bottom fauna sampling stations,  duPont
             discharge and vicinity, Montague, Michigan, September  6,  1967.
             From U.S.G.S. quadrangle.
                                                                                   2806
   E. I. duPont discharge
        LAKE MICHIGAN
                                         190

-------
                              Table !•   Quantitative survey of benthic macroinvertebrates, Lake Michigan, vicinity of
                                        E. I.  duPont discharge near Montague, September 10, 1957.
Station
Depth
. Distance offshore
Distance along shore from discharge

T Oligochaeta (aquatic earthworms)
Mollusca (snails and clams)
I Somatogyrus sp.
F Valvata sp.
T Sphaeriidae
Turbellaria (flatworms)
F Dalyellja sp.
F Nematoda (roundworms )
Amphipoda (scuds)
I Pontoporeia affinis
F Hydracarina (water mites)
Diptera (flies and midges)
Tendipedidae (pupae)*
F Hydrobaenus sp.
F Calopseetra sp.
F Tanytarsus sp.
F Glyptotendipes sp.
F Cryptaehironomus sp.
T Tendipes attenuatus
Total number of organisms/sq. ft.
Total number of tolerant
organisms/sq. ft. .
Total number of facultative
organisms/sq. ft.
Total number of intolerant
organisms/sq. ft.
Total number of species/sq. ft.
Total number of tolerant species/sq.
Total number of facultative
1
4' •
250'
1/2 mi. S.



	

	


	

	
	

	
	
	
	
1
3
6
10
6

i» ,

0

3
ft. 1
2
2.
12'
1,000'
1/2 mi. S.

1

	

	

	
	

156
1

3
	
• ' 1
	
23
1
66
249
64

29

156

7
2
it
3
21'
2,000'
1/2 mi. S.

12

	
19
3

1
	

U61
10

4
1
6
	
	
• "4
135
652
146

45

461

10
3
6
4
24'
2,000' at
discharge
Number
9

—
.1
—

—
1

436
4

	
	
7
	
	
7
49
514
58

20

436

8
2
5
5
18'
1,500' at
discharge
of animals
37

	
	
	

• 	 .
	

73
	

	
12
7
1
10
	
3.
.113
HO

30

73

7
2
i»
6
12'
500' at
discharge
per square
29

	
	
	

	
	

7
1

M
3
3
	
6
	
72
121
97

17

1

7
2
4
7
12'
800'
1/2 mi. N.
foot
1

	
	
	

---
	

48
	

1
	
1
1
13
3
43
110
43

. 19

48

7
2
4
8
18'
1,200'
1/2 mi. N.

39

	
	 :
1

	
	

82


	
	
	
• 	
13
	
84
219
. 121

13

82

5
3
1
9
22'
2,000'
1/2 mi. N.

13

	
12
	


	

UU1
3

	
	
	
	
1
7
53
530
66

23

441

7
2
4
10.
18'
White Lake
Channel
1 1/8 mi. S.

32

3
—
17


	

128


6
	
1
	
1
12
33
227
76

20

131

8
3
3
   species/sq. ft.
Total number of intolerant
   sper.ies/sq. ft.
^-Tolerance status T = tolerant, F - facultative, I = intolerant.
      of the Tendipedidae pupae are included in tabulation of animals present.

-------
Station 1 2 }b 5 6 78 9 10
Distance offihore 1500', at 1600' . at 1700', at 2000'. at 6780'. »c ISOO' 'WO' 1500' 1500' 1 mile

Nollutca (snaili and clam)
F Am! col* »p. ....... 2 ; (, .. .•. .. n
F Halito^a *p. -- -- -- - .5 -- 2 S
T- Ollgoch*«ta (aquatic earth-orm) It 2 5 255 9 3 7. "O 73 -- V*
Cladocera («ac«r Me**)
F Oaphnia tp. -- - -- 1.
1 Poniooorela affinit 6lt IDO 87 D1S 8*.b 66 r6* 7* 75 1063

Tendipedidae. (pufH«r -'- U 2- 5 "7 <« 9 9
F Predlameia b*thyphi la -- -- -- -- -- -- 2
F Hydrobavrms ^imulani -- -- — - -- " 2lfl 7
Tendtpedlnae -- D
F Polyptdilum Mlinoense ... }
r £ypT!^X«Ts.niHi :: :: :: '*_ :: :; ;: :: • :: ::
F C'vc-totendipej lobiferui -- — -- k
f Clyp'otendlpe* vp. -- -- -• . -- -- lit •- 101 ]9
F "jrniich.'a nai» -- - -- -- - -- -- -- -
F HaTni'Vch'iT'ip. -- -- " « -- 67
T Tendip«< airovi-idi» -- 92
* Ie_ndjpg» acKrtaAu* '73 5 "0 225 S -- 237
T Ta'ndl He* aothratinm 5
T Tendipci atten^atu} • — -- — -- it Sit -- 6<. 81 9
T Tend! pet rlpariji* -- " " -- •• •- -- <"
Ht«6«r of organitmi/iouare fool . 98 2<*7 109 9M 875 500 1*56 • 769 Hi 7 l'7l
Total nu«*«r of tolerant •ninwU/iq, ft. 32 10) 115 6 17 10
1500' 1 Mil. »00'. at 1500' 1500' 1500' 1500' 1 "til.

I 27 -- - - •- -- 77
5 57 -- - "2 )<• 17 1
.... j j .. 2 -- 2
<<8 ni.9 1} )0 )0 89 <• S36

9 — 1 7 " S / «•
1- i, ....
...... 9

II 1". II "j II I- II
jg
2 !5 l\ 16 39 t! *
it 2
1. .- to 2
ID •- 62 — " S) «

IDO .- .. .- D6 KB
18 -- 9
31) 1276 172 . D3 "7 )» 87 S9D
ill 92 60 71 58 65 SS
83 35 39 )2 29 *" H »
D8 1 ID9 IJ 30 30 89 • 1 506
9 9 S 6 7 7 . •• 8

I 1 I 1 1 1 ' '

PO
00
o
00

-------
                                                                                    2809
                  Table  3.   Lake Michigan surface water quality,  vicinity
                             of E.  I.  duPont discharge,  September  10, 1957
                                             :  Temp.  '•  DO'   BOD    Cl'   S04        NH3    Cu
Station	Location	  Odor   Depth  °C     . mg/1 .  mg/1  mg/1  mg/1  pH   mg/1  mg/1

  10     White Lake channel              18'    13.5  10.6   1.1    5         8.2

   1     250'  offshore, 1/2               4'     9.3  10.8   2.5
         mile S. of discharge

   2     1,000' offshore, 1/2   None     12'          10.6   1.6              8.2    0.0.   0.0
         mile S. of discharge                  •

   3'    2,000' offshore, 1/2
         mile S. of discharge            21'    10.5  10 '.'H   1.1

         duPont effluent                                    72     32    36   7.2    9.0  Trace

   5     Immediately above      Strong   18'    10     10.6   3.1    6    18   7.9    0.4   0.0
         discharge                     .                           .;

   6     500'  offshore at       None     12'    10.5  10.7   1.4        .      8.3    0.0   0.0
         discharge

   7     800'  offshore, 1/2              10'   -10.5  10.8   2.1
         mile N. of discharge

   4     2,000' offshore.at  .            24    10.5  10.6   1.1
         discharge

   8     1,200' offshore, 1/2   None     18'    10.5  10.8   1.8              8.0    0.0 .
         mile N. of discharge

   9     2,000' offshore, 1/2            22'    10.0  10.8   1.8
         mile N. of discharge
                                              193

-------
                        Table 4.    Water quality -of Lake Michigan, vicinity of
                                    duPont discharge, Montague, Michigan,
                                    September 6, 1967.
Station
1-A
1-B
2
3
•it
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
It
15
16
17
IP
Location
10' N.W. of discharge - 1,500' offshore
10' N.W. of discharge - 1,500' offshore
100' W. of discharge - 1,600' offshore
200' W. of discharge - 1,700' offshore
500' W. of discharge - 2,000' offshore
1 mile W. of discharge - 6,780' offshore
100' N. of discharge - 1,500' offshore
200'. N. of discharge - 1,500' offshore
500' N. of discharge - 1,500' offshore
1 mile N. of discharge - 1,500' offshore
1 mile N. of discharge - 1 mile offshore
2 miles N. of discharge - 1,500' offshore
2 miles N. of. discharge - 1 mile offshore
200' E. of discharge - 1,300' offshore
100' S. of discharge - 1,500' offshore
200' S. of discharge - 1,500' offshore
500' S. of discharge - 1,500' offshore
1 mile S. of White Lake outlet - 1,500'
offshore
1 milo C nf Uhi+a T.nV-o niii-lof - 1 milo
Odor
Strong
chemical
Strong
chemical
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
None
M^ne
Depth
20'
Surface
18'
19'
24 .
1*7'
21'.
20'
. 19'
17'
33'
11'
35'
ii'
18'
17'
16'
16'
id1
°C
17
18
17
17
17
1"4
17
18
17
17
17
17
17
18
18
18
18
18
Ifi
mg/1 mg/1 pH mg/1 mg/1
9.3 0.9 8.6 12 0.0
9.U 1.0 8.6- 12 0.0
	 	 g 5 	 j. 	


	 __ Q g H 	









_._ _„_ ___ Q 	

OR 16 _: 	 u 	
mg/1 .mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
0.65 0.0 Neg. 0.2
0.60 0.0 	 '0.2



0 0 --- ---- ---





00



--_ --- ---- 0 0

. — 	 	 n o
offshore
                                                                                                                                              00
                                                                                                                                             .H>
                                                                                                                                              o

-------
                                                                           2811
  Figure  3.    Number of species  of  bottom animals per square foot and their

               tolerance status,'duPont  survey,  Lake Michigan,' 1957.
                                        = Intolerant
                                        = Faculative
                                        = Tolerant
    15
           o

           c/r
           o
           LT>
           CM
                 O
                 x:
                 to
                 O
                 O
                 o
                       a;
                       fn
                       o
                       M-l
                       O
                   O
                   O
                   O




O

—
o.
0



0)
o
X." .
0)
14-1
M-i
o
..
o
o
LO
«
H


a)
o
x:
to
14_)
14-1
O
_
o
o
CN
«'
fH
discharge
M-i
O
Q) .

O
^
to
IH
• 0

—
o
o
00
of discharge

01
o
x:
to
14^
14..- -
o
_
o
o
(N
*1
H
of discharge

.®
o
XT'
to
(4_4
14H
O .
_
O
o
o
«t
CN
x:
4->
O
^H
(1)
C
.c
x:
o

OJ
'y

4-* '
•H
x:
3
w
0)
•H
O
0)
10
             1/2 mi. S.
                           Discnarge

                             area
                                       195

-------
              HI

              I

              CO
              MH
o
.c
in
MH
                                          Figure   4.  Number of species of  bottom animals  per
                                                       square foot and their tolerance status,

                                                       duPont survey, Lake Michigan, 1967.
              Q
              o
              in
ID'
O)
        15
•H
3
4-> .

o
1)
££
•3

a)
•H
*C '
*••

MH
O

•
CO
CU
01
H
•M
3
O
CU

10

.o>
•rH '
CT
- 3

MH
O


to
CU





£
o

MH

O
..
O
o

«s
H

1

CO

0)

^r^
10
MH
O

O
. O
in
•*
r-)

1

•'.
.


o>
f-.
o

co
MH
O
_
O
o
CO
«>
H

. ' 1

W


cu
O

MH
MH
o
_
o
0

r,
iH

1

3t


o>
SL,
O

10
MH
0
_
0
0

^
H

1

3


CU
o'

CO
MH
0
_
0
o
o

CM

1

3
                           o
                           o
                           UV
             o
             o
             (N
                    o
                    o
o
o
CM
O
o
o
o
CN
o
o
o

CO
MH
MH
O

-.
O
00
p^
•»
ID
CU

o

co
MH
MH
0

_
O
o
in
01
t,
O

CO
MH
MH
0

•- .
O
o
in
0)
t.
0
•42
CO

MH-
0

_
0
O
in
                                                                              •H
                                                                              E-
O
O
rH
o
o
CM
O
O
                                                                                                        CU
                                                                                                        (4
                                                                                                        o
                                                                                                       MH
                                                                                                       O
                                                                                                       O
                                                                                                       O
                                                                                          CU
                                                                                         •(4
                                                                                          O
                                                                                         JC
                                                                                          10
                                                                                         MH
                                                                                         MH
                                                                                          O
                                                                                         z.

                                                                                          0
                                                                                         •H
                                                                                          E
                                                                                                 O
                                                                                                4=
                                                                                                 at
                                                                                                MH
                                                                                                MH
                                                                                                 0
                                                                                                                    O
                                                                                                                    'O
E

CM
                                                                      o
                                                                      4=
                                                                      V)
                                                                      MH
                                                                      MH
                                                                      O
E

CM
     O.
     01
    43
        10
         0
               South

              Control
                                 Discharge  Zone
= Intolerant.
                                                              = Faculative
                                                                                       North Control
                                                                                     1= Tolerant
                                                                                                                                          ro
                                                                                                                                          00
                                                                                                                                          M
                                                                                                                                          ro

-------
                                                                        2813
     Figure  5.  Relationship between water depth and tolerance status
                 of benthic-.fauna.  F-. I. duPont survey,  Lake Michigan,
                 September 1957.
                   100
                (C

               •i-T
                C
               M-i
                O
                bf
                rfl
                4->
                C
                
-------
                          Figure 6.     Relationship between water depth and  tolerance status of

                                        benthic fauna.  E. I. duPont survey,  Lake  Michigan,

                                        September 1967. *                 .
                    100
ID
00
••H
c
Iti
                
-------
                                                       2815
             APPENDIX  N
        RECONNAISSANCE  SURVEY
               OF THE
DO'-' CHEMICAL COMPANY BRINE DISCHARGE
                 TO
            LAKE  MICHIGAN
                  199

-------
                                                                                2816
                 Reconnaissance  Survey  of  the  Dow Chemical Company
               Brine  Discharge to  Lake  Michigan near  Big Sable Point,
                              Mason  County, Michigan

                                  August 10, 1967


     This reconnaissance survey was conducted, to determine the n-eneral effect of the
Pow discharge on the bottom fauna of Lake Michigan near Big Sable Point.  High winds
and increasingly rough water  forced early termination of the study before the affected
area could be clearly determined.


                               METHODS  AND TECHNIQUES


      Water samples were collected with a  Kemmerer sampler,  fixed in the field if
 necessary, and returned to Lansing for analyses (Table 1).

      Separate samples were collected, for  conductivity measurements from which a
 nomograph was constructed for use with a  remote-probe conductivity meter (Solu Bridge).
 By making several traverses perpendicular to  shore the course of the brine  discharge
 on this particular day was roughly determined.

      Quantitative (areal) collections  and some  qualitative  samples of the bottom-
 dwelling macroinvertebrates were made  with a  Ponar dredge.   U.S. Standard #30 brass
 screens were used for sieving these samples.   Samples were  fixed with formalin and
 labeled as collected.  Samples  were washed and  sorted and the organisms were identified
 and tabulated in the Lansing; laboratory (Table  2).  Animals were assigned a tolerance
 starus according to published accounts and/or the past experience  of the authors.
 Tolerance status refers to the  animal's relative  ability  to withstand and/or respond
 to adverse environmental conditions.  Individual  tolerances are generally derived from
 an animal's reaction to organic wastes and attendant oxygen depletion or modification
 of bottom deposits.

 Tolerance status may be generally defined as:

      Tolerant - organisms that  can grow and develop within  a wide  range
      of environmental conditions.  They are often found in  water of poor
      quality.  These species are generally insensitive to a variety of
      environmental stresses.

      Intolerant - organisms whose growth  and  development  are 'dependent
      upon a narrow range of optimum environmental  conditions.   They are
      rarely found in areas of organic  enrichment.   They cannot  adapt to
      adverse situations and are replaced  by less  sensitive  organisms if
      the quality of their environment  is  degraded.
                                       2CXO-201

-------
                                                                                  2817
     Facultative - organisms with the ability to survive over a wide
     range of conditions.  They possess "medium" tolerance and often
     respond positively to moderate organic enrichment but cannot
     tolerate severe environmental stresses.

     In addition to tolerance status, the diversity of animals present in a given
benthic community is significant.  In general, pollut.\onal communities are
characterized by very low species diversity, while normal undisturbed communities
contain many different species.


                             Observations and Results


     The Dow brine discharge to Lake Michigan is located approximately 2 1/2 miles
north of the Pig Sable Point lighthouse, Mason County, Michigan.  Near the discharge
the conductivity in micromhos of the bottom water ranged between 270,000 and 110,000
(78,000 and 30,000 mg/1 Cl respectively) (Table 1).  By trailing the conductivity
probe it was determined that.the brine flowed north in a band about 300 feet wide
and 2 feet thick between the third and fourth sand bars which were approximately
900 feet offshore (Figure 1).  Conductivity remained very high, 40,000 micromhos
(8,000 mg/1 Cl), as far as 1/2 mile northeast of the discharge.  At this point the
brine mass commenced to become significantly diluted and lost its identity.  Traces
could be detected 2 1/2 miles northeast of the discharge.  High conductivity,
22,000 micromhos (3,700 mg/1 Cl)v was found 500 feet southwest of the discharge,
but the concentration 900 feet southwest of the discharge was insignificant.  The
water mass immediately above the brine had low conductivity.

     Dissolved oxygen of the bottom water in the area of very high conductivity was
between 2.5 mg/1 and 7.0 mg/1.  The extent of this low oxygen area was not fully
determined.

     Quantitative samples of the benthic macroinvertebrate fauna were taken at 5
locations (Figure 2 and Table 2)..  An additional 10 samples were visually evaluated
to roughly determine the extent of the effect of the brine on the bottom animals.
Sixteen species were found altogether, 2 intolerant, 12 facultative, and 2 tolerant.

     Bottom animals were virtually eliminated in the immediate vicinity of the
discharge where only 1 animal was found.  However, populations commenced recovering
a short distance away and appeared near normal as close as 200 yards west of the
discharge.  Almost all of the qualitative samples had populations dominated by
midges with a few snails, oligochaets and scuds.

     Intolerant scuds were scarce in the 2 samples taken 900-1,000 feet offshore over
1 mile north and south of the discharge.  Whether this is an effect of the brine
following the trough between the sand bars will be evaluated on another survey.

     Greater species diversity (13 species) was apparent at a depth of 60 feet 2
miles north of the discharge than it was at the same depth immediately off the
discharge (4 species).

     All bottom sediments were composed of fine, clean sand.
                                           202

-------
                                                                                   2818
     A second water quality and benthos survey has been scheduled for the summer of
1968.  Our purpose will be to more clearly define the extent of chemical and
biological -effects surrounding the Dow discharge.


                                Field work by:  D. James Seeburger,  Aquatic  Biologist
                                                Michael E.  Newton, Aquatic Biologist

                                    Report by:  D. James Seeburger
                                                Water Quality Appraisal Unit
                                                Michigan Water Resources Commission
                                                January 27, 1968
                                          203

-------
Table 1.  Water quality, Lake Michigan,  in the vicinity of the Dow Chemical  Company

          discharge, Big Sable Point, August 8, 1967.
Station
A
B
C
0
E
F
Temperature
Location °F
At point of discharge
300 ft. NE of discharge
900 ft. NE of discharge
2 miles K of discharge 1 mile offshore
100 ft. west of discharge
2 1/2 miles S of discharge
67
67
67
58
67
67
DO
mg/1
2.5
6.9
3.3
10.0
9.0
8.6
Depth
ft.
18
18
19
60
20
12
Cond.
jcmhos
110,000
125,000
270,000
260
290
520
Cl
mg/1
30,000
33,000
78,000
7
10
82
Na Hg Ca
mg/1 mg/1 mg/1
	
__. ...
5,500 9,100 25,000
...
	 	 	
... ... ...
     Solu Bridge conductivity and mg/1 of Cl as determined from nomograph
Station
G
H
I
J
K
L
H
N
0
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
H
Location
Control - 3/1* mile offshore from Lincoln River outlet
At point of discharge
100 feet towards shore from discharge
200 feet towards shore from discharge
300 feet towards shore from discharge
100 feet NE from discharge
200 feet NE from discharge
300 feet NE from discharge
900 feet NE from discharge
1/2 mile NE from discharge
1 1/2 miles NE from discharge
100 feet west from discharge
100 feet SW from discharge
200 feet SW from discharge
500 feet SW from discharge
900 feet SW from discharge
2 1/2 nlles S of discharge 1/2 mile S of lighthouse
Conductivity
in 44. mhos
220
30,000
20,000
U.OOO
U20
20,000
7,000
17,000
UO.OOO-f
10,000
385
270
1*0,000
HO, 000
22,000
U20
1*00
Cl
_m^t/l
6
5,600
S.UOO
1*1*0
25
3, MOO
850
3,000
8,000+
8,000
20
10
8,000
8,000
3,700
25
22
                                                                                                                ro
                                                                                                                oo

-------
                          Table 2.   Benthic macroinvertebrate organisms per square foot in the vicinity of the Dow Chemical Company
                                    discharge off Big Sable Point, Lake Michigan, August 8, 1967.
Tolerance status
^ and species
Station
Sampler
Depth

1
Ponar
18 feet
At discharge
900 feet offshore
2
Ponar
18 feet
1 1/2 miles north
of discharge
900 feet offshore
Mollusca (clams, snails)
I Lymnaeidae (Stagnicola) sp.
F Valvata sp.
T Sphaeriidae




3
Ponar
60 feet
2 miles north of
discharge 1 mile
offshore
1
it
. 16
it
Ponar
60 feet
1 mile offshore
from discharge

5
Ponar
12 feet
1/2 mile south
of ligt thouse
1,000 feet offshor

 T  Oligochaeta (aquatic earthworms)

    Coelenterata (hydroids)
 F    Hydra sp.

    Cladocera (water fleas)
 F    Daphnia sp.

    Amphipoda (scuds)
 I    Pontoporeia affinis  .

    Coleoptera (beetles)
      Elmidae
 F      Dubiraphia vittata

    Diptera (flies and midges)
 F    Tendipedidae (pupae)2

 F        Prodiamesa (M) bathyphila
 F        Diamesa TF) campestris
 F        Diamesa (P) fulva

•F        Calopsectra sp.
 F        Hicrotendipes tarsalis
 F        Pseudochironomus sp.
 F        Tendipes (T) staegeri
 6

 1

33
                      29


                       2


                       1


                     578
                                           103
                                               25
                                                                    12
    Total no. of organisms/sq. ft.                    1
    Total no. of tolerant organisms/sq. ft.           0
    Total no. of facultative organisms/sq. ft.        1
    Total no. of intolerant organisms/sq. ft.          0

    Total no. of species/sq. ft.                      1
    Total no. of tolerant species/ sq. ft.            0
    Total no. of facultative species/sq. ft.          1
    Total no. of intolerant species/sq. ft.           0
95
 2
92
 1

 6
 1
 it
 1
    ^T = Tolerant, F = Facultative, I - Intolerant
    ?None of the Tendipedidae pupae are included in tabulation of animals present.
661
 i»5
 37
579

 13
  2
  9
  2
119
  i|
 12
103

  t|
  1
  2
  1
M3
 0
37
 6

 3
 0
 2
 i
                                                                                                                                                        rv>
                                                                                                                                                        oo
                                                                                                                                                        ro
                                                                                                                                                        o

-------
Figure '   .  Water  quality sampling locations  in the vicinity of the Dow
             Chemical  Company discharge, Big Sable Point, Lake Michigan,
             August 8, 1967.
                                                                                 2821
                                       206

-------
                                                                             2822
Figure  2.    Benthic macroinvertebrate sampling  stations  in  the  vicinity of
             the Dow Chemical Company discharge  off  Big Sable  Point, Lake.
             Michigan, August 8, 1967.
           Lake Michigan
                                        207

-------
                                                                               2823
                     15  r
                V)
                0)
                o
                0)
                0)
                -Q

                3
                     10  U
           Stations
D
Intolerant
Facultative
                                                              I Tolerant
 Figure 3.  Benthic macroinvertebrate species per square foot and their
            tolerance status, reconnaissance survey vicinity of the
            Dow Chemical Company discharge to Lake Michigan, Big
            Sable Point, August 8, 1967.
                                      208

-------
                                                         2824
               APPENDIX  0
     BENTHIC  MACROINVERTEBRATE  STUDY

LAKE MICHIGAN AT  MANISTEE  IN THE VICINITY
                  OF
   PACKAGING  CORPORATION OF AMERICA'S
        WASTE DISPOSAL  PIPELINE
                   209

-------
                                                                               2825
                           WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION
                                V .

                         Benthic Macroinvertebrate Study

                  Lake Michigan at  Manistee in the Vicinity of
                       Packaging Corporation of America's
                            Waste Disposal Pipeline

                               September 1, 1967


     This survey was conducted to ascertain the effect that Packaging Corporation of
America's (PCA) waste discharge to  Lake Michigan has on the benthic macroinvertebrate
population in the vicinity of the discharge.  PCA's plant at Filer City is located on
the south end of Manistee Lake in .Manistee County,  Michigan and produces paper
products from pulp wood.   Their waste disposal pipeline to Lake Michigan was
originally designed to remove the majority of their waste load from the south end
of Manistee Lake.  Manistee Lake and its tributaries have long supported one of the
largest steelhead runs in Michigan's Lower Peninsula.  The primary purpose of the
waste diversion to Lake Michigan was to guard against unlawful pollution and protect
the water quality in Manistee Lake, particularly during times of fish migrations.  The
original use of Lake Michigan for waste disposal purposes was covered by an Order of
the Michigan Water Resources Commission adopted June 28, 1956 and amended September 24,
1959 following statements of new and increased use by the American Box Board Company,
which as of July 31. 1959 merged into PCA.

     Members of the Water Resources Commission staff have conducted several studies of
waste quality and biological conditions in the vicinity of the Lake Michigan outfall
throughout the years.  Conditions found have generally been satisfactory.  One aspect
that was periodically questionable  was the lowering of aesthetic and recreational
values of Lake Michigan waters adjacent to the discharge.  Complaints of undesirable
odors and unnatural colors increased as public contact with these waters increased.
During December 1963 the  Water Resources Commission staff demonstrated that PCA was
not conforming to the original -restrictions and concluded that' the undesirable odors
and colors in Lake Michigan as a result of the PCA discharge were detrimental to uses
being made of the lake.

     PCA was requested to take corrective action.  The company proposed to increase
the specific gravity of its.waste through the addition of brines which were being
discharged to Manistee Lake by a neighboring company.  Studies by PCA indicated this
would eliminate the color streaking and the movement of the wastes toward the shore-
line.  The WRC thought the. PCA proposal worthy of a trial.  On August 15, 1964 a brine
pumping station was .completed and through its operation the specific gravity of the
waste being discharged to Lake Michigan was increased.  Ori September 21 and 22, 1964
an inspection of the pipeline outfall area and Lake Michigan beaches disclosed no
detectable odors or visible discoloration.

-------
                                                                                 2826
     Background benthic macroinvertebrate studies in the vicinity of the discharge
had been made on July 15-17, 1957 (before the waste pipeline became operative),
September 11, 1958 and September 14, 1962 (before the brine pumping station was
operative).  These surveys demonstrated that the bottom animal population in the
vicinity of the discharge was indicative of a clean water environment.  No detrimental
effects could be ascertained when the 1958 and 1962 conditions were compared to the
background bottom animal population.  During the summer of 1966 a question was raised
regarding the effects that the addition of brine and the resulting change in the
chemical and physical properties of the PCA waste might have on the invertebrate
population in the vicinity of the Lake Michigan discharge.


                                     METHODS


     On September 1, 1967 chemical and biological samples were collected at 16
locations along the Lake Michigan shore (Figure 1 and Table 1).


                                    Table 1

       Sampling locations, chemical and benthic macroinvertebrate study,
      Lake Michigan, vicinity of the PCA pipeline outlet, Manistee County,
                               September 1, 1967.
Station No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Depth
in feet
35
31
20
31
33
14
34
31
16
14
37
31
25
28
16
25
Distance from
shore in feet
4,000
4,000
1,000
8,000
4,000
1,000
8,000
4,000
1,000
500
8,000
4,000
1.000
4,000
1,000
4,000
Approximate direction and
distance from the PCA discharge
4 miles NNE
3 miles NNE
3 miles NNE
1 mile NNW
1 mile N
1 mile NNE
7,000 feet WNW
3,000 feet WNW
PCA discharge area
500 feet ESE
1 mile W
1 mile SW
1 mile SSW
3 miles SSW
3 miles SSW •
4 miles SSW
















    Benthos samples were collected with  a  Ponar dredge at all stations.  Only completely
closed dredge hauls were evaluated.  One dredge haul was evaluated from each of the 16
stations.  Samples were screened with a U.S. Standard Number 30 soil seive.   A complete
species list of benthic macroinvertebrates together with their tolerance status is
presented in Table 2.  Tolerance status is derived from an  animal's reaction to organic
wastes and attendant oxygen depletion or modification of bottom deposits.  . Tolerance
status may be generally defined as:


                                          212

-------
                                                                               2827

     Tolerant  - organisms tluit can prow and develop within a wide  range  of
     environmental conditions.  They are often found  in water of poor  quality.
     These  species are generally insemsitive to a variety of environmental
     stresses.                                                                  .

     Intolerant '- organisms whose growth and development are dependent upon  a
     narrow range of optimum environmental conditions.  They are rarely  found
     in areas  of organic enrichment. • They cannot adapt to adverse  situations
     and are replaced by less sensitive organisms if  the quality of their
     environment is degraded.

     Facultative - organisms with the ability to survive over a wide range of
     conditions.  They possess '''medium" tolerance and often respond positively
     to moderate organic enrichment but cannot tolerate severe environmental
     stresses.


     In addition to tolerance status, the diversity of animals present in a given
benthic community is significant.  In general5 pollutional communities are
characterized  by very low species diversity, while normal undisturbed communities
contain many different species.

     Conductivity and temperature readings were taken near the surface and near
bottom at each sampling station with a Solu Bridge.  The conductivity readings were
converted to mg/1 of chlorides with a nomogram calibrated for chlorides  in Lake
Michigan at Manistee.  Transparency was measured with a standard Secchi  disc at
all sampling stations.  Temperatures, transparency, conductivity, and chloride
concentrations are .presented in Table 3.


                                  OBSERVATIONS


     The bottom material at the majority of stations was clean sand with the exception
of stations 8  and 9 which had a thin layer of light flocculent material  over clean
sand.  The extent of this light deposit was limited.  No unnatural  odors were observed
throughout the survey.  An inspection of the Lake Michigan beaches  both  to the north
and south of the pipeline indicated very clean waters with no visual discoloration
or detectable  debris along the shore.


     For the evaluation of this benthic survey the stations have been grouped into 5
zones (Figures 2 and 3) with zones N-l and N-2 north of the discharge zone and zones
S-l and S-2 south of the discharge zone.

     Zone N-2 (stations 1,  2 and  3)  extends  from  2 to  5  miles  north of the  discharge.
In this zone 10 species of  bottom-associated organisms were  sampled.  Four  of these
were tolerant,  5 facultative,  and  1  intolerant.   The intolerant  species was the  scud
Pontoporeia affinis.   Chloride content  of  the water  in this  zone  ranged between  22
and 27  mg/l and the  Secchi  transparency was  between  9  and  10.5 feet.

     Zone N-l (stations 4,  5 and  6)  extends  from  1/2 to  2  miles  north of the discharge.
In this zone 12 species of  bottom-associated organisms were  sampled.  Two of these
were tolerant,  9 facultative,  and 1  intolerant.   Again the intolerant species was
Pontoporeia affinis.   The chloride content of  the water  in this  zone ranged between
15 and 19 mg/1 and the Secchi transparency was  12 feet throughout.


                                         213

-------
                                                                                    2828
     The discharge zone  (stations 7. 8, 9 and 10) extends from 1/2 mile north to 1/2
mile south of the PCA discharge.  Station 9 is in the immediate vicinity of the
discharge.  In the discharge zone 7 species of bottom-associated organisms were
sampled.  Four of these  were tolerant and 3 faculative.  No intolerant animals were
collected from this zone.  The chloride content of the water ranged between 15 mg/1
at the surface to 248 mg/1 near the bottom in the immediate vicinity of the discharge.
The Secchi transparency  readings ranged between 9 and 13 feet throughout the zone,
with the less transparent water occurring nearest the shore.

     Zone S-l (stations  11, 12 and 13) extends from 1/2 mile to 2 miles south of the
discharge.  In this zone 17 species of bottom-associated organisms were found.  Three
of these were tolerant.  13 facultative and 1 intolerant.  The single intolerant species
was once again Pontoporeia  affinis.  The chloride content of the water ranged
between 15 and 17 mg/1 and the Secchi transparency was between 6.5 and 13 feet.
Again the less transparent water occurred nearest the shore.  This phenomenon was
apparently associated with wave action in the shallower water rather than any
discoloration from, the discharge.  Wind was from the WSW at more than 10 mph.

     Zone S-2 (stations  14, 15 and 16) extends from 2 to 5 miles south of the
discharge.  In this zone 11 species of bottom-associated organisms were found.  Three
of these were tolerant,  7 facultative and 1 intolerant.  The single intolerant form
was again Pontoporeia affinis the same species collected from zones N-2, N-l and S-l.
The chloride content of  the water ranged between 10 and 17 mg/1 and the Secchi
transparency was between 6.5 and 7 feet.


                            SUMMARIZATION OF RESULTS


     From the physical,  chemical and biological data obtained from this survey the
following conclusions may be reached:

     1,  In the immediate vicinity of the PCA discharge a thin layer of a
         soft white material forms a deposit of limited area.  No trace
         of this material could be. found in the zones adjacent to the
         discharge.  Apparently wave action or currents prevent the
         accumulation of greater amounts of this material.

     2.  Water in the immediate vicinity of the PCA discharge at a depth of
         16 feet was saturated with oxygen.

     3.  Surface chloride concentrations in Lake Michigan in the vicinity
         of the PCA discharge ranged between 10 and 27 mg/1.  The chloride
         concentration near bottom in this area was 248 mg/1.  Chloride
         readings taken  near bottom 500 feet offshore at the discharge
         (station 10) showed that the chlorides had dropped to 41 mg/1
         while readings  taken near bottom 4,000 feet (station 8) and
         8.000 feet (station 7) offshore at the discharge showed
         concentrations  of 130 mg/1.  This demonstrates that the 'majority
         of the PCA waste was moving"away from shore on this date.
         Chloride measurements made near bottom 1 mile north and 1 mile
         south of the PCA discharge showed no significant concentrations
         of Chlorides.
                                         214

-------
                                                                               2829
     '(.   A series Oi'. water temperatures taken  in the  vicinity of the PCA
         Lake Michigan discharge showed virtually no  differences between
         temperatures found in the adjacent  zones.

     5.   Secchi transparency readings taken  in the vicinity of the PCA
         Lake Michigan discharge showed no decrease in transparency of the
         surface waters.   Suspended solids from a water sample taken near
         the bottom in the immediate vicinitv  of the  discharge were only
      ''  7 mg/1.

     6.   Benthos samples collected  from -2  zones  extending,  from  1/2-5 miles north of
         the  PCA Lake  Michigan  waste  discharge and  from  2  zones  extending  from  1/2-5
         miles  south  of the  discharge were representative  of  bottom animal populations
         indicative, of a clean  water  environment.   Samples collected from  the discharge
         zone  itself  did not contain  intolerant  scuds  found in the other zones,
         although significant numbers of- facultative and tolerant  forms were collected.
         The  soecies  diversity  in this  zone was  lower  than that  of the adjacent zones.
                                   CONCLUSION

     Near a waste discharge of this nature we may anticipate that the bottom fauna
will be changed in the prescribed mixing or discharge zone.   At present we can show
no adverse effects on the benthic macro/invertebrate populations sampled in the zones
adjacent to the PCA Lake Michigan dsicharge when these populations are compared to
bottom animal populations tb**- existed in 1957. prior to the  discharge of waste at
this point.
                                   Field work by:
                              Laboratory work by:
                                       Report by:
Michael E. Newton,
Aquatic Biologist
D. James Seeburger,
Aquatic Biologist

Michael E. Newton
D. James Seeburger
Blanchard Mills,
Water Pollution Investigator •

Michael E. Newton
Water Quality Appraisal Unit
Michigan Water Resources Commission
January 9. .1968
                                        215

-------
                                                                                             2830
 Figure 1.   Location of benthic macroinvertebrate sampling statipnCj
 Lake  Michigan a-t Hanistee in the vicinity of the Packciftinn Corporation
 of  America waste disposal pipeline, September 1, 1967,  showing depths
 from  U.S.  Lake Survey chart.  (• = Kairij.linr station)   ( X = sampling
 station and pipeline discharge point)
  •i')
 t,
*
              •
             11
         \f->
                    7
                                                              scale in f«at
                                               216

-------
                              Table 2.   Results  of a survey of  the  bottom-dwelling macro!nvertebrate population. Lake Michigan at Man is tee
                                        in the vicinity of  the  Packaging  Corporation of America waste  disposal pipeline:  September I, 1967.
                                        (I = intolerant to  pollution,  F « facultative  to pollution and T =  tolerant  to  pollution).
Zone
Station
•** _ M 9 • ^t." Ml

12 3 45
Distance from shore in feet 4.000 4,000 1,000 8,000 4,000
Depth in feet '
Oligochaeta (aquatic earthworms)
Tubif icidae
Chaetoqaster sp.
Stvlaria sp.
Amphipoda (scuds)
Pontoporeia affinis-
Hydracari.na (water mi tes)
Tendipedinae (true midges)
Pelopi inae
Oiamesa (P) bathyphila
Diamesa (P) campestris
Hydrobaeninae
Psectrocladius elatus
Psectrocladlus sp.
Te ndipedinae (pupae )
Cryptochi ronomus sp. 3
35 31 20 31 33

T 4 120 104
F 2
F. 7

12 14 37
F 2


F 7
F

F .7
F 2
F 4 4 9
F 9
Cryptochi ronomus sp. 9(Lipina)F
Cryptochi ronomus rol 1 i
Cryptochi ronomus nr . •
camptolabis
Cryptochi ronomus unk.
Calopsectra sp.
Tanytarsus (T) sp. 2
Tanytarsus (Stictochi ronomus)
sp. 1
Tendipes attenuatus
Tendipes plumosus
'Tendipes ri par Jus
Tend! pes (L) modestus
Tendipes (C) atroviridis
Hicrotendipes tarsalis
Harnischia nr. nais
Glyptotendipes lobiferus
F

F •
F
f 5
F

F. 2
T
T 9
T 122 30
T
T
F .
'F' • '2
F


6 789 10 II 12
1,000 8,000 4,000 1,000 500 8,000 4,000
14 34 31 16 14 37 31

23 16 39 .
2
II 2

II 16 .



22 5
. .2

4 9

2 42
4 425
4
2.

2
2

4

4
.74

39 11 50 21 5 9 50
.2 • ' .
9
2

18
•it **S"2 .-• -*

13 14 IS 16
1,000 4.000 1,000 4,000
25 28 16 25

.2 24

5 . • - •

22 II



2


2

2 5
7 ..12
20 4 28 II







2
2

2 23 21 14





Pelecypoda
     Sphaer!idae (fingernai1  clams)
Number of species/sq. ft.
Number of individuals/sq.  ft.

Number of intolerant species
Number of faculaiive species
Number of tolerant species
3
15
1
0
2
2
6
0
2
0
7
276
1
3
3
2
6
0
2
0
9
205
1
6
2
5
74
1
3
1
4
38
a
2
2
5
77
0
I
4
3
29
0
1
2
2
7
0
1
1
13
104
1
10
2
8
83
0
6
2
3
24
1
1
1
8
42
1
5
2
5
60
0
3
2
7
59
1
3
3
                                                                                                                                                                           CO
                                                                                                                                                                          U)

-------
                                                                           2832
                Table 3.  Tabulation of chemical  and  physical  data  from
                Lake Michigan in the vicinity of  the  Packaging Corporation
                of America pipeline out.let,  Man is tee  County.

                                September 1,  1967
 Sampling station
 1   Surface          ---         57
 1   Bottom           35 ft.      46
 2   Surface          ---         57
 2   Bottom           31 ft.      48
 3   Surface          	         56
 3   Bottom           20 ft.      51
 4  Surface          	         52
 4  Bottom           31 ft.      46
 5   Surface          ---         52
 5   Bottom           33 ft.      46
 6  Surface          	         46
 6  Bottom           14 ft.      44
 7   Surface          ---         52
 7  Bottom           34 ft.      46
 8  Surface          ---         48
 8  Bottom           31 ft.      44
 9  Surface          ---         46
*9  Bottom           16 ft.      44
10  Surface          	         46
10  Bottom           14 ft.      42
11   Surface          ---         50
11   Bottom           37 ft.      44
12   Surface          ---         48
12   Bottom           31 ft.      45
13   Surface          	         50
13   Bottom           25 ft.      48
14  Surface          	         50
14  Bottom           28 ft,      43
15   Surface          ---         48
15   Bottom           16 ft.      45
16  Surface          	         50
16  Bottom           25 ft.      43
Seech i
transparency
9'

10'

10.5'
—
12'
_•__
12'
	
12'
._ _
13'
---
9.5'
—
9'
—
12.5'
—
13'
—
9'
---
6.5'
—
7'
—
6.5'
—
71
---
250
250
260
260
270
270
230
230
220
230
220
240
220
700
240
700
220
1 ,200
220
330
220
230
230
230
220
230
220
220
200
220
220
230
conduct i vi ty
 mg/1
chlor i des

  22
  22
  24
  24:
  27
  27
  17
  17
  15
  17
  15
  19
  15
 130
  19
 130
  15
 248
  15
  41
  15
  17
  17
  17
  15
  17
  15
  15
  10
  15
  15
  17 '
*Water collected near bottom with a Kemmerer  water  bottle  at Station 9-B (the
 Packaging Corporation of America Lake Michigan  discharge)  contained 7 mg/1
 suspended sol i ds and 12.5 mg/1  diss.olved oxygen.
                                          218

-------
                                                                                         2833
Figure 2.   Location of benthic  macroinvertebrate  sampling  stations,
Lake Michigan at Manistee  in  the  vicinity  of .the  Packaging Corporation
of America waste disposal  pipeline, September  1,  1967,  illustrating
established sampling zones.   (• = sampling station)  (J( = sampling
station and pipeline discharge  point)
      *
     o
                                                            seal* in f«at
                                             219

-------
      figure  3.  Number of bottom-dwelling macroinvcrtebrate .-.pncifr;
                and their tolerance status from  five sampling 7,onf!.-»
                Lake Michigan, at Manistno in the vicinity of t.ho
                Packaging Corporation of America waste disposal
                pipeline, September 1, 1967.
                                                                        283^
UJ
o
UJ
Q.
18

17

16

15

14

13

12

II

10

 9

 8

 7

 6

 5

4

 3

 2

  I
                                        INTOLERANT
                                        FACULTATIVE
                                        TOLERANT
                              SAMPLING     ZONES
18

17

16

15

14

13

12

II

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

I

0
                                    220

-------
                                                            2835
                 APPENDIX p
RADIOLOGICAL  INVESTIGATIONS OF AOUATIC 3IOTA
           IN THE  VICINITY OF THE
       BIG  ROCK  POINT NUCLEAR REACTOR
                     221

-------
                                                                               2836
                        MICHIGAN WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION

           Radiological Investigations of Aquatic Biota in the Vicinity
                       of the Big Rock Point Nuclear Reactor

                                   1960-1967
     Beginning in 1960 collections of aquatic plants and animals for radiological
analysis have been made twice a year in the vicinity of Consumers Power Company's
Big Rock Point Nuclear Reactor.  Data collected prior to September 1962 when the
reactor went critical are indicative of the radiation levels to be expected due -to
fallout and natural background sources.

     The Big Rock Point Reactor site is located on the south shore of Little Traverse
Bay, Lake Michigan, in Charlevoix .County, Michigan.  The immediate and general area
is heavily wooded and sparsely populated.  The shore line is rocky, barren; and
exposed to wind and wave action.  Stations for the collection of aquatic biota
have been established at Mount McSauba Point, Big Rock Point, and Nine Mile Point
(Figure 1).  Mount McSauba Point is approximately three miles southwest of the
reactor and Nine Mile Point is approximately three miles east of the reactor.
From Mount McSauba Point to Nine Mile Point the six foot depth contour occurs
between fifty and three hundred yards offshore.  Generally the depth increases
rapidly beyond this contour to depths greater than one hundred feet a mile from
shore.  Bottom type of the inshore area is uniformly rocky with underlying gravel
and some sand.

     The direction of current -flow is important at this location due to the proximity
of the water intakes at Charlevoix and Petoskey.  Studies of Lake Michigan surface
currents have shown that the major surface current structure of Lake Michigan can
change greatly over a three week period.  In spite of this instability, a northward
current paralleling the east shore of the upper half of Lake Michigan is usual.
These studies suggest that when westerly winds are blowing, a clockwise current
circulates in Little Traverse Bay, resulting in a westward moving current past the
reactor site towards Petoskey.  Wind direction data from the U.S. Coast Guard Life-
boat Station at Charlevoix indicate,  that the westward moving shore current would
be the normal one.

     Monthly water samples have been collected and analyzed from six locations in
the Big Rock vicinity (Figure 1).  The annual monthly average-radioactivity counts
of these samples have been plotted together for comparative purposes in Figure 2
along with similar averages from six samples taken considerable distances from
Charlevoix.  Three of the latter were from Lake Michigan and three from large rivers.
This comparison indicates that the radioactivity concentrations found in the
Charlevoix area are similar to those found at other locations in Michigan.

     Plankton samples were secured with a standard number 20 silk bolting cloth net
towed through the very clear water.  Collections of other aquatic organisms were made
near shore in water less than three feet deep.  Gross alpha and beta concentrations
of these organisms are reported in microcuries per gram x 10~7 on an oven dry basis.
                                     222:-;223

-------
                                                                                  2837
     The radioactivity of plankton collected near Big Rock Point has not varied
siginificantly from the counts of plankton at the two stations three miles distant
(Figure 3).  Considerable variations have occurred from year to year since 1960
probably because of variations in the amount of fallout.  Since plankton moves with
the currents it is a poor monitor of localized changes in radioactivity such as
would be expected at Big Rock Point.

     The radioactivity of the other biota collected at Big Rock Point has been
generally higher since 1962 than it has been at either Nine Mile Point or Mount
McSauba Point.  The largest difference occurred in the periphyton and filamentous
algae (Figures 4 and 5).  Crawfish and shore minnows also had higher counts at Big
Rock Point than elsewhere (Figures 6 and 7).  Despite these increases it is
significant that these higher counts are not greater than those found before the
reactor went critical.

     A general rise in the radioactivity was observed in 1963.  Since this also
occurred in watercourses distant from Big Rock (Figure 2) it is reasonable to
attribute the rise to increases in fallout from nuclear testing.  From this 1963
high a general decline in radioactivity has taken place except for the biota in
the immediate vicinity of the Big Rock Point Reactor.


                            Field collections by: Carlos M. Fetterolf, Jr.,
                                                  Michael E. Newton,
                                                  D. James Seeburger,
                                                  John G. Robinson,
                                                  Robert F. Carr,
                                                  Aquatic Biologists

                        Radiological analyses by: Russel Krueger, Chemist

                                       Report by: Carlos M. Fetterolf, Jr., Chief
                                                  Water Quality Appraisal Unit
                                                  John G. Robinson
                                                  Michael E. Newton

January 24, 1968
                                       224

-------
FIGURE 1  .  LOCATION HAP, BIG ROCK
POINT NUCLEAR POWER REACTOR, SHOWING
H.W.R.C. SAMPLING POINTS.
4= AQUATIC BIOTA
• = WATER
FROM U.S.L.S. CHART NO. 70, 1957
                                                         HARBOR SPRINGS
                                       LITTLE TRAVERSE BAY
                                                               PETOSKEY  (E)
                                                             BEAR RIVER  (F)
                                                                 WATER SUPPLY
                                                                 IXIE CEMENT CO.
                                                                    (D)
                                                       BOYHE CITY
                                                                                          oo
                                                                                          U)
                                                                                          00

-------
Figure 2.
Annual radiological concentration averages of monthly water samples taken in the  vicinity of

Big Rock Point Nuclear Reactor (•) and other locations (Q),  1961-1967.
    ABCDEFGHIJKLABCDEFGHIJK!
                                                                                                                                                       ro
                                                                                                                                                       oo

-------
                                                                      2840
 100,000
 10,000
r-
i
o
 I
  1,000
 in
 v
•H
 O
•H
    100
           •  ' |        I        I        I        I       'I   '   ' I   *



             Figure 3.  Plankton radioactivity near Big Rock Point Reactor.
                             PLANKTON
                           9/27

                          Critical
                        Mt.  McSouba  Point •-•*•*••••

                        Big Rock  Point       M  * *

                        Nint  Milt Point    -o-o-o
                               I   ,  ,   I
         I960
1961
1962
1963
1964
                                                  1965
                                         1966
                                        1967
                                     227

-------
                                                                   2841
100,000
             I    " •     '  •   I   '  •   I   • '    I
            Figure 4.  Penphyton radioactivity near Eig Rock Foint Reactor.
                          PERIPHYTON
                      Mt. McSauba  Point •-••••••-••
                      Big Rock  Point      x x  *
                      Nine  Mile Point    -0-0-0-
        1960
1961
1962
1963
                                       1964
                                               1965
                                         1966
                                                               1967
                                 228

-------
                                                                       2842
 100,OOC
           ' Figure 5.  Filamentous algae radioactivity near Big Rock Point Reactor.
  10,000
I
00
ID
O.

in
v
•H
t,

O
O

o
•H
s
   1,000
    100
                              FILAMENTOUS
                                  ALGAE
                            t
                            9/27
                          Critical
         1960
                  1961
                        Mt.  McSauba  Point  •-•-•-•-
                        Big Rock Point       *  * *
                        Nine  Mile Point     -o-p-.-o
                               I
                                       I
                     1
1962
                                  1963
                                          1964
                        1965
                                                           1966
1967
                                   229

-------
 100,000
                                                                          2843
 10,000
              Figure 6.  Crayfish radioactivity noar ^ig Rock Joint Peactor.
                                  CRAYFISH
I
DO
8.
t.
3
u
o

o
•H
5;
  1,000
    100
            .  . 1
          I960
1961
                         Mt. McSauba  Point  •-•••••••••••

                         Big  Rock  Point       *  K  x

                         Nine Mile Point     -0-0-0-
                               _L
                             I  I   .   .  I   .
1962
1963
196U
1965
                          1966
                         1967
                                     230

-------
 100,000
  10,000
              Figure 7.  Shore minnow radioactivity near Big Rock Point Reactor.
                                                                        2844
c-
 i
 o
X


E
 
-------
                                                  2845
       APPENDIX 0
TRIBUTARY MONITORIMR DATA
           ANO
     SPECIAL  SURVEYS
           233

-------
                                                       -Table  1
                                      Tributary Water Quality Station Descriptions
        Basin

         No.   River
                                               Location
rv>
 i
ro
U)
vn
 10    Pine River at Charlevoix


 12    Boardman River at Traverse City


 14    Manistee River at Manistee


 17    Pere Marquette River at Ludington


 18    Pentwater River at Pentwater


 19    White River near Whitehall


 20    Muskegon River at Muskegon


 21    Grand River at Grand Haven


 22    Black River at' Holland


 23    Kalamazoo River at Saugatuck


 24    Black River at South Haven


*26    St. Joseph River at St. Joseph
North bank at U.S. Highway 31 bridge in Charlevoix


Park Street bridge in Traverse City


Maple Street bridge in Manistee


North wall of channel at Coast Guard Station in Ludington


North wall of channel at Coast Guard Station in Pentwater


South wall of channel at red tower near Whitehall


South wall of channel at Coast Guard Station in Muskegon


South wall of channel below Corps of Engineers in Grand Haven


South wall of channel across from State Park in Holland


U.S. Highway 31 bridge in Saugatuck


Dyckman Avenue bridge in South Haven


Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad bridge, below U.S. Highway 31

bridge in St. Joseph
        *The station at the mouth of the St. Joseph  includes  flow  from  the  Paw  Paw  (Basin  No.  25).
                                                                                                                         00

-------
                                                     284?
     LAKE
BASINS  IN
         MAP I
 STATE  OF  MICHIGAN
   MICHIGAN  PORTION
 MICHIGAN   DRAINAGE  BASIN
WATER  QUALITY   MONITORING   PROGRAM

BASIN BASIN
NUMBER NAME
1 MENOMINEE
1 CEDAR
3 FORD
4 ESCAN8A
5, DAYS
6 RAPID
7 WHITEFISH
8 STURGEON
9 MANISTIOUE
10 PINE (BOYNE JORD,
II ELK
12 BOARDMAN
13 BETSIE
14 MANISTEE
19 BIG SABLE
16 LINCOLN
17 PERE MAROETTE
18 PENTWATER
19 WHITE
20 M'.'SKEGON
21 GRAND
22 BLACK (HOLLAND)
23 KALAMAZOO
24 BLACK (SOUTH HAVE
23 PAW PAW
26 ST JOSEPH
MISCELLANEOUS
TOTAL
DRAINAGE
AREA /
(SO. MILES) *•
2.087
387
477
941
73
137
322
212
1,450
AN) 370
452
295
252
2.120
206
99
740
'72
49O
2.660
5,530
176
2.060
N) 287
444
3,033
3.5S8 '
29,000 '

J
/^





























-------
r\>
Ol
-J
                                          FIGURE I

                 SUMMARY   OF   SELECTED   WATER   QUALITY   PARAMETERS

                             LAKE   MICHIGAN   TRIBUTARIES

                                        1965—1966









12
II
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Q
Dissolved Oxygen
Arithmetic Average
' Of Two Years
Data, 1965—1966


Mg./l.


-
:
-.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-





















£ £ £ E a E E S E
X azuicEiuujZui
w < aEyJSuiwo0-

•j * S | Im
Ul
u
a.














e
7
6
5
4
3
2
1

5
— Day B.O.D.
Arithmetic Average

Of

Data,









-
-
-
-
-
-
-'
a
b















1
il?











-




i z
5 §£ -j
3
I
£
h
U



Ill
III
; 1-5
1C
U

S
,§
1

y


Two Years
1965-1966


Mg./l.











-
lllllll
5S|£S££&
5 £ 5 a £ E E a
lilitpil
10 K ^ 1 1
i u |z 0
S
HI





80


70

60

50

40

30

2O

10
Chlorides-CI.
Arithmetic Average
Of Two Years
Data, 1965—1966
i-


'

-

-

-

-

- '

'1
££
I|

° i
H £
S|*?gz|
j1 •* s;!1 8
is .
ID u
a












1.0
09
o.e
07
06
OS
0.4
03
0.2
01
Phosphates— PO.
Arithmetic Average
Of Two Years.
Doto, 1965 — 1966







- •
- •
-.'
-
-
-
-
-
1
£ j
E :















,1
5S|§
: E -' 0


Mg./l. .












E..I.I.
, £ £ 1 15 £ |5 £
c £ £ S E S S £
- :cKo*oz£'»ii^UJ§§5>>§§§S>^

XzOXO2ua*u|WZbJ
^2° 5°— •~SJ*
§£l|°! *l|l|
^><" » tf|«*
«> s
.32 • • ' 8
< &
« .
                                                                                                ro
                                                                                                oo
                                                                                                -{=•

-------
                                                      TABLE   2
                                       SUMMARY     OF
                                   WATER      QUALITY
                                                        IN
                                   LAKE      MICHIGAN
                                                          SELECTED
                                                          PARAMETERS

                                                          TRIBUTARIES
Surface Water





Board Riv
man '
raverse ty


Manistee River,


_

Ludington '


White River,
f\) Whitehall
CO
• Huskegon River,
-

Grand River
Grand Haven


Holland
Kalamaz River
t k



South Haven

. St. Joseph Riye

• Parameter


Cl




Cl


DO
BOD
POt,
N03-N


Cl
POU
N03-N
DO
Cl . '
. POM
DO
BOD
Cl
N03-N
DO
Cl
N03-N .

BOD.
Cl
•«>„
• N03-H

BOD
Cl
N03-N


Cl
N03-N


BOD
PO,
N03-N
, DO
Cl
' PO,
B03-»
Jan.


"




7-



""
0.0
0.39


0.1
0.32
12.4
12
0.0
0.76
. 13.8
7
0.0
0.23
12.4
IV
0.28

4.7
SO
1.0
1.7B

0.5
1.55


U.I
.1.80
6
|? •
•>.6
0.25
0.85
- l?.l
1.63
Feb. Mar.


5 4




-2 16


10.7
2.0
0.0
0.46 --.


50 - --
0.1 -- .
0.41
11.0
11 .
o.o
0.81
9.7
1.7
20 •
0.0
0.35
9.7

0.30

"4.6
20 -- '
0.3
2.21

2.9
19
1 . 38


18
0.1
1.61


2.7
• o.i . --
0.71
12.1
12
0.3
r.84 --
Apr. May


2 4




0 2



1,4
0.0
0.40


33 36
0.2
•0.31
11.0 . 10.0
9 9
0.0
O.&'J
11.2 10.0
2.6
36 52
0.15
0.3P
10.5 9.H
18 10
0.42

4.U
22 «4
0.3
1.20

3.5
18 10
'0.35
0.88


20 31
0.05
0.83


1.6
0.1
0.60
10.3 7.2
9 10
0\ 2
1.60 ' --
June July


.1




0


8.0 7.2
1.2
0.0
p.o


32
0.0
0.0
8.6 ~*.f>
8
0.0
0.0
9.2 11.6
0.7
56
0.?
• o.o
6.9 6.8
>2
0.0

10.6
0.1
0.0

"4.5 --
22
0.0 •
0.0


29
0.0
0.29


1 .6
2.1
0.37
10.4 .
11
0.0 — '
0.0
Aug.







--



1.6
0.0
0.18
7.9

0.2
0.25
8.0
l.i.O
0.09
9.2
0.0
0.02


0.12

5.5
-'-

4.0




1.0

-
13.8
'
Sept.


-




--



1.2
0.1
o.m
7.2

a?
0.2
0.1"
7.4
5
0.1
0.11
R.;.
1.6
0.0'
«.
-------
                                                                                          2850
                                              FIGURE .2.

                                         PINE     RIVER

                                          CHARLEVOIX
                 T   r   T
                                irr
                                             ''• '   I    '    '   '
                                            [Nltrotts-NOj-N |
  K-0



    10


    8


    6


    4


    2


  1-0


    10


    8


    6


    4


    2


  h-0





    10
C>
z
                                            Phosphates—P04 I
5-Day  B.0.0.
                         i   l    l
O—i



10



8



6


4



2


0—1



10


8



6



4



2
                                               10
     J   FMAMJ   J   A   S   0  N   D   J   F   M   A  M  J   J   A   SONO


                         1965                                         1966



                                  NOTE:  DASH  LINES  INDICATE  PERIODS.
                                      . . FOR. WHICH  DATA  IS NOT  AVAILABLE.
                                                 239

-------
                                          FIGURE  3
                                  BOARDMAN      RIVER
                                    TRAVERSE    CITY
                                                                                      2851
 M>

  10

   8

  10

   8


*  6

   4

   2


 M>
                                         Nitrates
	.1 ——-. i
-N03-N]
                                        Phosphates —P04 |
                                        | 5-Day  B.O.D.
                                       10

                                       8

                                       6

                                       4


                                       2


                                       °

                                       !0

                                       8

                                       6

                                       4.

                                       2
                                                                                     10
 |	Q Ll   i   I    I   I    j   i  J -I   II   |   I    I   I    1   I    I   1   .. ._L ...  I   I   _| O	I

    JFMAMJJASONOJFMAMJJASONO
                        1965
                                                                  1966
                                NOTE   04SH  LINES  INDICATE   PERIODS
                                     FOR  WHICH  DATA  IS  NOT AVAILABLE
                                             240

-------
                                                                                      2852
                                         FIGURE   4

                               MANISTEE      RIVER

                                     MANISTEE
                    i    i    i   i    i    I   MI
                                      | NHrotes-NOj-Nl
                                                          I    i    I   I    I    T
                                     I Phosphotes-P04
                                                                                      0—1


                                                                                      125

                                                                                      100

                                                                                      75

                                                                                      50

                                                                                      25

                                                                                      0	|


                                                                                      10


                                                                                      8

                                                                                      6

                                                                                      4

                                                                                      2
 125

 100

 75

 50

 25

	O


  10

  8

  6

  4

  2
                                         Chlorides-CI. !
5-Day B.O.D.
10
                                                                               210
                                     Dissolved Oxygen
                                                     I       I           I    I   I    I
  JFMAMJJASONDJFMAMJJASOND
                                                                                      10
                              NOTE-  OASH  LINES  INDICATE PERIODS
                                   FOR WHICH  DATA  IS NOT AVAILABLE.
                                           241

-------
                                                                                    2853
                                       FIGURE  5
                          PERE    MARQUETTE    RIVER
                                      LUDINGTON
 0


O5


0.4


0.3


0.2


O.I
                                FIT
                                       Nitrates- N03-NJ
                                                     1   I    I
                                                                        I   I    I    I
0	|


0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

O.I


°-H

125

100


75


50

25


°-H

10

8

6

4

2

0	1




10
Phosphates —
125


100


75


50

25
                                        Chlorides-CI. i
                                      j 5—Day  B.O.D |
                                     Dissolved  Oxygen
 10
 _0 I    I   I    I   I    I   I    -I    I   I    I    ill    i   i   • I  •  I   I    I    I   I    I   I    I o_
   J   FMAMJJ    ASOND   J    FMAMJ    J   A*  S   0   N   0
                     1965
                                                                 1966
                               NOTE  DASH LINES INDICATE PERIODS
                                    FOR  WHICH  DATA IS' NOT AVAILABLE.
                                           342

-------
                                                                                           2854
                                            FIGURE   6

                                   PENTWATER     RIVER
                                         PENTWATER
V.
b>
S
—0

 0.5

 O4

 0.3

 0.2

 O.I

	0


  10

  8

  6

  4

  2
    10

     8

     6

     4

     2
          I    \   I   IIIIII"I   T I  I   I    I    I   III    I    I   I    I
                                          ! Nltrotes-N03-N|
                                          : Chlorides-CI.
                                          | 5— Day B.O.D. |
                                        | Dissolved   Oxygen1
                                                                    1966
0—

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

O.I

0	


10

6

6

4

2

0	


10

e

6

4

2

0	
                                                                                          10
                                   NOTE -  DASH LINES  INDICATE  PERIODS
                                        FOR  WHICH  DATA  IS NOT  AVAILABLE.
                                              243

-------
                                                                                               2855
                                            FIGURE   7
                                      WHITE    RIVER
                                        v WHITEHALL
 1—0

  0.5

  0.4

'  0.3

  0.2

   O.I

 I	0

  125

  100

,   75

   50

   25

 I	°

   10

    8

    6

    4

    2

 I	0



   10
 \	0
             I    T
                                           i    I]  I    I
                                           Nitrates-N03-N~
! Phosphates—f
  Chlorides-CI
    Day  B.O.D ]
 0	

 0.5

 0.4

 0.3

 0.2

 0.1

 0	

 125

 100

 75

 50

 25

.0	

 10

 8

 6

 4

 2

 0	
                                                                                              10
                                  NOTE  DASH LINES INDICATE  PERIODS
                                       FOR  WHICH DATA IS  NOT AVAILABLE.
                                                244

-------
                                                                                         2856
                                           FIGURE     8


                                    MUSKEGON      RIVER


                                          MUSKEGON
    0.5



    04



>   0.3
o>


    0.2



    O.I
  125



  100



  75



  50



  25




I	:°



   10




   8



   6



   4



   2
     10
i    T^Iiiir
                                        I   I    I  I  I   I    II
                                          [~Phqsphates-PC4 I
                                           I Chlorides — Cl
                                           |5—Ooy B.O.D. |
                                          .Dissolved  Oxygen j
                                                                                 0	|




                                                                                 0.5



                                                                                 O.4



                                                                                 0.3



                                                                                 0.2



                                                                                 0.1



                                                                                 0	1



                                                                                 125



                                                                                 100



                                                                                 75



                                                                                 50



                                                                                 25



                                                                                 °^



                                                                                 10



                                                                                 8



                                                                                 6



                                                                                 4



                                                                                 2



                                                                                 0.	I
                                                                                           10
                                   NOTE  DASH  LINES  INDICATE PERIODS

                                        FOR  WHICH  DATA  IS NOT AVAILABLE.
                                                245

-------
                                    FIGURE  9

                             GRAND      RIVER

                             GRAND      HAVEN
                                                                                2857
                                 [Phosphates—P04
                                 Dissolved Oxygen
                     I   I    I   I    I   I    I   I   I    I   I    I   I    I   I'll
    I   I    I   I
JFMAMJJASOND   JFMAMJJASOND
                  1965
                                                           1966
                           NOTE  DASH LINES  INDICATE  PERIODS
                               FOR  WHICH  DATA IS NOT  AVAILABLE.


                                      246

-------
                                   FIGURE  10
                             BLACK    RIVER
                                 HOLLAND
                                                                            2858
JFMAM   J   JASOND   J  F.MAMJ   JASON  0
                 1965
                                                         1966
                              NOTE  DASH  LINES INDICATE PERIODS
                              FOR  WHICH  DATA IS NOT  AVAILABLE. '
                                      247

-------
                                          FIGURE  II

                                KALAMAZOO      RIVER

                                       SAUGATUCK
                                                                                      2859
  0.5


  0.4


  0.3


  02


  0.1
                          Illll   I  I  I   I   I    I  . I    I
                                        '            '
                                        Phosphotes —4
 125


 100


  75


 , 50


  25
>,
9
z
  10


   8


   6


   4


   2
  10
        I    I   111
                                         Chlorides-CI. j
                                        | 5-Day B.Q.O. j
                          s
                                       Dissolved  Oxygen |
I	o I    I    i   I    I   I    I    I   I    I   I    I  I  I   I    I    I   I
0.5


0.4


03


0.2


O.I


0	



125


100


75


50


25


0	



IO


8


6


4


2
                                                                                        10
    J   FMAMJ   JASONO  J   FMAMJ   J'ASONO
                       1965
                                                                  1966
                                 NOTE  DASH  LINES  INDICATE  PERIODS
                                     FOR  WHICH  DATA  IS NOT  AVAILABLE.
                                            248

-------
                                                                                      2860
                                           FIGURE  12
                                     BLACK     RIVER

                                     SOUTH     HAVEN
                           ]    I   I   T    i	l_ |	[	I    I   I    1    I   I    I
                                         ["NiTraTe's-NOj-N |
                                          Phosphotes-PO^ I
O	


125


100


75


50


25

0—


10


8

6


4


2

0	
                                                                                           10
  125


  100


  75


  50


  25

 	O


  10


   8


   6


   4


   2
                                           Chlofides-CI {
5-Day  B.O.D.
   10
I	n'l   I    I
                    I   I    I    I
                                                                       I    I    I    I   I
    J   FMAMJ   JASONDJFMAMJ   JA   SON.D


                        1965                                         1966


                                  NOTE  D4SH LINES INDICATE  PERIODS
                                       FOR  WHICH DATA  IS  NOT AVAILABLE. .
                                              249

-------
                                              FIGURE    13

                                   ST.    JOSEPH     RIVER

                                         ST.     JOSEPH
                                                                                           2861
o>
2
           I    I   I    I    I  • I    I    I           i
     05


     04


     03


     0.2


     O.I
     125


     100


     75


     50


     25
      10
                                            Phosphates—P04
                                             Chlorides-CI
                                            ,5—Doy B.O.D.
                                                                                    1   I
                                        ^ | Dissolved Oxygen
           I    I    I   I    I    I   I    I    I
                                                I   .1   I    I
                                                                  I    I    I   I    I    I
0	1


O.5


04


03


02


O.I

0	i


125


100


75


50


25

0	|


10


e


6


4


2


Q—I




10
       JFMAMJ   JASONDJFMAMJ.  JASOND


                          1965                                         1966


                                     NOTE-   OASH LINES  INDICATE  PERIODS
                                           FOR  WHICH  DATA  IS  NOT  AVAILABLE
                                                250

-------
                                                        TABLE
                                WATER
QUALITY
MONITORING
PROGRAM
                                       COL I FORM
           COUNTS    1965—1966
                                          MONTHLY
              TEST    RESULTS


BoarUir. .:. . U^r, Traverse City
Pere Marquette River, Ludington
White River, Whitehall
Huskegon River, Huskegon
Grand River, Grand Haven
Black River, Holland
Kalamazco Riv-r, Saugatuck
Black Stiver, 'iouth Haven



<30
91
<30
430
...
91
230
1,300



36 <3U
	 	 l.ttOO
	 , 36
	 ".'00
9,300 --- 9,300
9,300 	 9,300
430 --- ' 930
9,300 	 9,300

1965

---. 2,300
230 	 2,400
36 --- 390
1,500 	 2,400
9,300 210,000
430 214,000 	
930>140,000
2,300 43,000 	



1,100,000
750
255
. 9,300
7,500
2,300
1,300
4,300



	 <30 <30
930 	 9',300 1,500
36 --- 130 <30
4,300 	 9,300 16,000
9,300 2,300 9,300
	 2,300 <30 230
930 150 91
	 43,000 93,000 9,300



<30 <30 <30
230 . 9,300 91
_ 36 <30 <30
1,500 1,300 2,300
300 4,300 43,000
91 91 930
210 230 930
43,008 43,000 4,300



930 36
- . 930 150
<30 <30
130 2,300
43. ?00 4,300
91 91
91 2,300
43,000 9,300

1966

1,300
91 200
91 900
930 2.000
9,300 4,000
230 1,600
430
5,300



14,000 8,500 	
1,600 350
200 <100 —
3,400 300 ---
8,000 ll.OOC 	
<200 100 —
200 . 300
1,200 15,050 — '



IDC
14,000
300
30C
:-,T:C
...
...
...



<100
«:o
.' 1.V
:,05:
5,-c:
:::
4.-;
^ , C ? .'

ro
m
     SJ-;t«: Results for 1965 and the first 5 months in 1966 are reported as MPN/100 ml.

        Results for the remainder of 1966 are expressed as org/100 ml.  •
                                                                                                                       ro
                                                                                                                       oo
                                                                                                                       ch
                                                                                                                       ro

-------
   LAKE
SAMPLING
        MAP  2
STATE   OF   MICHIGAN
 MICHIGAN   PORTION
MICHIGAN    DRAINAGE   BASIN
 LOCATIONS —RAW  WATER  INTAKES
                                               2863
DRAINAGE
BASIN
NUUBCR
1
2
3
4
5
t
7
8
9
10
II
12
13
14
19
16
IT
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26

BASIN
AREA
NAME (SO. MILES)
MCNOMINEE
CEDAR
FORD
ESCANBA
DAYS
RAPID
WHITEFISH
STURGEON
MANISTIOUE
PINE (BOYNE JORDAN)
ELK
BOARDMAN
BETSIE
MANISTCE
BIG SABLE
LINCOLN
PERE MAROETTE
PENTWATER
WHITE
MUSKEGON
GRAND
BLACK (HOLLAND)
KALAMAZOO
BLACK (SOUTH HAVEN)
PAW PAW
ST. JOSEPH
MISCELLANEOUS
2,067
387
477
941
73
137
322
212
1,450
370
452
295
252
2,120
206
99
740
172
490
2,660
5,530
176
2,060
287
444
3.O33
3,528
;
                    252

-------
                                                       TABLE  4
                                               SAMPLE    RESULTS
                                        DOMESTIC     WATER     INTAKES



                                                LAKE    MICHIGAN
                                                        1967
Intake Sampled
i.
2.
3.
tt .
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.

St. Joseph, Hichigan
Benton Harbor, Michigan
South Haven, Hichigan
Grand Haven, Hichigan
Huskegon, Hichigan
Ludington, Hichigan
Northport, Hichigan
Traverse City, Hichigan
Gladstone, Hichigan
Arithmetic Averaj
Total Fecal
Coliforro Coliform
org/100 ml org/100 ml Do
700 180 10.4
100' <10 11.2
300 30 9.6
<100 <10
<100 • 10
600 20 --
<100 <10 9.3
<100 <10 ?.3
—


BOD S.S.
13
12
12
6 •
- . 8
9
2.6 0
1.9 0
6
4
i7

T.D.S.
170
155
165
170
135
185
165
175
195
150
166
pH
8.2
8.2
8.2
8.1
8.2
8.2
8.4
8.1
7.9
8.0
a. 2
HO,-»
0.30
0.25
0.35
0.30
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.20
0.00
0.10
0.21
Cl
6
6
8
10
4
24
' 5
5
4
4
7.6
NHq-N
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0'
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
SO
P0h
0.00
0.00.
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total
0.25
0.20
0.25
0.20
0.20
0.25
0.00
0.00

0.169
Fe
0.8
1.2
1.0
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.35
Ca
40
36
40
40
36
44-
34..
36
34
36
37
Hg Ha
12 5.1
11 4. a
12 5.5
12 6.9
10 4.4
11 6.0
11 4-. 2
9 4.2
11 3.7
11 4.1
11 4.9
K
o.e
0.7
0.8
0.9
0.7
0.9
0.7
0.7.
0.7
0.7
0.76
so,,
30 •
24
29
29
19
23
22
20
23
23
24
Alkal
125
115
120
125
110
115
110
110
110
110
115
Hard-
ness'
150
135
150
150
130
155
130
130
130
135
139
Phenol
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
—
0.000
CN
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00.
0.00
0.00
Cr»6
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
As
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
O'.OO
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hn
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
Co
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
F
0.20
0.10
0.10
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.15
0.10
0.10
0.1S
0.13
Zn
0.0
0.0
o.o'
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
ro
w
tx
     Note: All results are mg/1 except pH and as otherwise noted.


     Sample result:; were obtained from grab samples taken during summer and fall of 1967.
                                                                                                                       (O

                                                                                                                       00

-------
                                           TABLE 5

                                        LAKE MICHIGAN

                                  SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY

                                   MUNICIPAL PLANT INTAKES

                                            1966
                                                                                                2865
Municipality

St. Joseph



Benton Harbor



South Haven



Holland



Wyoming



Grand Rapids



Muskegon Heights



Muskegon



Ludington



Traverse Ci ty



Gladstone



Escanaba



Menominee
Min.
Max.
Avg.

Min.
Max.
Avg.

Min.
Max.
Avg.

Min.
Max.
Avg.

Min.
Max.
Avg'.

Min.
Max.
Avg.

Min.
Max.
Avg.

Min.
Max.
Avg.

Min.
Max.
Avg.

Min.
Max.
Avg.

Min.
Max.
Avg.

Min.
Max.
Avg.

Min.
Max.
Avg.
   Coliform
Tot, orq./ 100 ml

          0
     11,000
      1,325

          0
    110,000
      2,375

          4
      1,100
        210

          3
     46,000
        512

          0
      2,400
        135

          0
      2,400
 Not determined

          0
     1 1 ,000
        340

         - 4
         1!
        155

          3
      1,100
         60

          0
         30
          5

          3
      1,100
         45

          3
        1*30
         35

          3
     24,000
        300
Chlorides
  mg/1

    5
   13
    7

    4
   13
    8

    7
   13
   10

    5
   12
    8
Hardness
  mq/1

   112
   232
   120
   196
   144
                                                                                   Temp
                                                                                    °F
                                                                         _fiH
   151
   119

   125
   165
   134
    1                126
   15               166
    9               138

    1                124
   10               160
    6               135

                    118
                    154
                    133

        DATA    NOT   AVAILABLE
                    124
                    140
                    129
                    110
                    136
                    125

                    136
                    112
                    129
32
76
50
33
77
49
33
72
49
33
73
48
31
71
51
33
73
47
33
72
48
33
73
46
7.5
8.8
8.1
7.7
8.7
8.1
7.8
8.5
8.2
7.6
8.8
8.3
7.6
8.8
8.2
7.8
8.7
8.2
8.0
8.4
8.2
7.2
8.5
8.0
              34
              80
              48

              33
              68
              45

              34
              70
              42

              34
              70
              47
7.9
8.6
8.3

7.0
8.2
7.5

7.7
8.5
8.1

7.4
8.5
8.1
* Data shown represent a  yearly  average,  a  yearly minimum  and  a  yearly maximum.


                                               254

-------
                        LAKE
                                                MAP  3
                                    STATE    OF    MICHIGAN
                                     MICHIGAN    PORTION
                                    MICHIGAN     DRAINAGE    BASIN
                                       SPECIAL     SURVEYS
                                                                                          2866
 2
 3
 4
 9
 6
 r
 6
 9
 10
 II
 12
 13
 14
 15
 16
 17
 IB
 19
20
21
 BASIN     BASIN
NUMBER    NAME
  I  MENOMINEE
    CEDAR
    FORD
    ESCANBA
    DAYS
    RAPID
    WHITEFISH
    STURGEON
    MANISTIOUE
    PINE (BOYNE JORDAN)
    ELK
    BOARDMAN
    BETSIE
    MANISTEE
    BIG SABLE
    LINCOLN
    PERE MAROETTE
    PENTWATER
    WHITE
    MUSKEGON
    GRAND
 22 BLACK (HOLLAND)
 23 KALAMAZOO
 24 BLACK (SOUTH HAVEN)  287
 25 PAW  fUU       444
 26 ST. JOSEPH      3,033
    MISCELLANEOUS   3,528
                                                255

-------
                                                          TABLE    6
                                    DATA      FROM     SPECIAL     SURVEYS
                                    MICHIGAN'S     PORTION      OF    THE
                                  LAKE     MICHIGAN     DRAINAGE     BASIN
Station
Hunber
1

2

3

1

5

6

7 '


St. Joseph River at C & 0
Railroad Bridge in St. Joseph
Escanaba River at River
Houth
Menominee River, 1st Street
Bridge in Henominee
Black River (U.P.) U.S. -2
Bridge, Naubinway
Manistique River (U.P.)
H-219
Sturgeon River (U.P.)
U.S. -2 Bridge
Ford River, U.S. -2 Bridge
naba
Date
1967
7-19
7-20
8-23
8-21
7-24
7-25
10-13

11-11

11-11

10-10

Total fecal
Temp. Coltform Coliform
°C org/100 ml org/100 ml DO BOD pH S.S.
22.7 13,200 2,600 13.9 9.8 8.6 51

18.8 5.000 100 6.1 4.6 7.7 11

24.1 1,700 -- 6.2 3.2 7.5 7

-- 7.7 3

-- 7.3 25

.- 7.7 2

7 .2,800 -- 11.6 1.8 8.2 5

T.D.S.
320

135

. 160

155

175

130

190

N03-N
0.00

0.10

0.00

0.10

0.10

0.15

0.10

Total SO
NHi-N POu POu
0.0 0.60 0.05

0.0 0.15 0.00

0.0 0.15 0.05

0.0 0.15 0.05

0.0 '-- 0.00

0.0 -- 0.00

0.0 0.10 0.00

Ca Hs Na
58 23 8.5

25 10 3.2

26 7 2.1

34 11 1.1

27 6 1.6

26 8 2'. 5

12 18 1.6'

K Cl
0.9 10

0.7 0

0.5 0

0.1 0

0.5 0

0.6 0

0.5 0

Hard-
ness
246

100

95

130

92

98

180

Alkal-
inity Phenol
175 0.00

85 0.00

80 0.00



70

85

165

Cn Cr*6 Fe
0.00 0.00 --

0.4

0.00 0.00 0.25



0.00 0.00 0.5

0.00 0.00 0.4

0.1

Note: Station numbers 1, 2 and 3 were 2W-hour comprehensive surveys conducted during the summer of 1967.  Station numbers U, 5 and 6 were grab
    sampled once during 1967 as part of the interstate water quality monitoring program and station number 7 was grab sampled once during 1967
    as part of a background water quality monitoring program.                                                ,



All results are ng/1 except pH and as otherwise noted.
                                                                                                                                      to
                                                                                                                                      CO

-------
                                              MAP   4
                                   STATE    OF    MICHIGAN
                                     MICHIGAN    PORTION
                         LAKE    MICHIGAN    DRAINAGE   BASIN
                                                                                         2868
                         RADIOACTIVITY
                                                SAMPLING    LOCATIONS
19
20
21
22
23
24
23
26
 BASIN    BASIN
NUMBER   NAME
  I  MENOMINEE
  2  CEDAR
  3  FORD
  4  ESCANBA.
  9  DAYS
  6  RAPID
  7  WHITEFISH
  8  STURGEON
  9  MANISTIOUE
  10  PINE (BOYNE JORDAN)
  II  ELK
  12  BOAROMAN
  13  8ET5IE
  14  MANISTEE
  19  BIG SABLE
  16  LINCOLN
  17  PERE MAROETTE
  IB  PENTWATER
    WHITE
    MUSKEGON
    GRAND
    BLACK (HOLLAND)
    KALAMAZOO
    BLACK (SOUTH HAVEN)
    PAW PAW
    ST. JOSEPH
    MISCELLANEOUS
                                              257-258

-------
                                             2869
  APPENDIX R
PHOSPHORUS  INPUT
       TO
  LAKE MICHIGAN
         259

-------
                                                                               28?0
                         Michigan Portion of Lake Michigan

                           Watershed Calculated P In-outs
                                By Sources Based on
                             Tributary Monitoring Data


     To find the.total amount of phosphorus (P) be\ng contributed to Lake Michigan
from Michigan lands and waters/ drainage area and flow data were used from USGS
records and P04 dara from the Water Quality Monitoring Program.  Calculations were
made on a basin and/or region basis.  Certain river basins have no flow data available
since USGS does not have gaging stations on all Michigan streams.  Flows for these
streams were calculated by finding the ratio of flow (cfs) to area (sq. tni.) for an
adjacent or similar basin and multiplying-this by the area (sq. mi.) of the unknown
basin.

     The amount of phosphorus (P) contributed by each basin to Lake Michigan per year
was calculated by use of the following formula:

               Pounds P per year = MGY x 8.34 Ibs/gal x Avg.  mg/1 P

     Basins which have neither flow data nor PO^ data available were calculated by
using the average Ibs. P/sq. mi. figure of an adjacent or similar basin.

     The ''miscellaneous basins" are drainage areas along the  lakeshore which are not
drained by a major stream.  These areas were totaled and multiplied by the average
Ibs. P/sq. mi. figure for all basins.

     The Menominee and St. Joseph rivers are interstate waters which drain lands
other than Michigan lands.  The Menominee Basin is equally proportioned, half in
Michigan and half in Wisconsin.  It was assumed that since the 2 halves of the basin
are similar in population and types of land use that Michigan would be responsible
for 50% of the phosphorus (P) present at the mouth of the river.

     The St. Joseoh River Basin was treated differently.  PO^. data from a river survey
conducted July 17-20, 1967, was used to determine the proportion of the load from
Michigan lands.  There are gaging stations present at Mottville and Miles and samples
were taken at these locations during the survey.  Mottville is located near the
Indiana-Michigan border just before the St. Joseph enters Indiana.  Miles is located
near the same border where the river enters Michigan again.  The Michigan load should
be equal to the load at the mouth, minus the load at Miles, plus the load at Mottville.
Using this formula, it was determined that Michigan contributed 51% of the total
phosphorus (P) load of the St. Joseph River.

     The total calculated amount of phosphorus (P) contributed to Lake Michigan from
Michigan lands and waters based on 1964 data was 1.728,806 pounds.  The amount
calculated from 1965 data was 2,721,838 pounds.  This 54% increase can be attributed
to the higher flows and more land runoff in 1965 than in 1964.
                                    26Q>:26l

-------
                                                                                   2871
     The following is a comparison of average river flows over the period of gage
record to the average flows for 1964 and 1965.  A check of the stations with the
longest periods of record reveals that 1964 was a relatively dry year with flows
averaging 30% below the long-term average, while 1965 was a slightly "wet" year
with flows approximately 7% above the long-term average.  This would indicate that
1965 better represents the "'average'' flow of Michigan tributaries to Lake Michigan.



Basin
No.
1
3
4
9
12
14
15
17
19
20
21
. 22
23
25
26




Surface Waters
Menominee
Ford
Escanaba
Manistique
Boardman
Manistee
Big Sable
Pere Marquette
White
Muskegon
Grand
Black (Holland)
Kalamazoo
Paw Paw
St . Joseph
uses
Period
of
Record
(years )
53
11
24
27
13
14
23
26
8
43
39
5
35
14
35
Average
Flow For
Period
of
Record
(cfs)
3,098
324
895
1,330
186.
1,933
137
608
367
1,889
3,362
45.2
1,296
373
3,025
Average
Flow
For
1964
(cfs)
2,123
300
673
1,179
163
1,697
129
513
301
1,334
. 1,631
42.5
770
284
1,464


% of
Average
Flow




87
88

84

71
48

59
76.1
48
Average
Flow
For
1965
(cfs)
N.A.
N.A.
N.A.
N.A..
190
2,059
N.A.
739
458
2,191
3,416
77.7
1,188
438
3,043


% of
Average
Flow




102
106

121

115
101

92
117
100.6
Conclusions:

     The estimated total phosphorus (F) contributed by Michigan to_ Lake Michigan
in 1965 was 2,700,000 Ibs. or about 7,400 Ibs/day.  fn~is figure was obtained by
multiplying average PO^ concentrations obtained from a year-round monitoring program
times average yearly flows of surface waters tributary to the lake.  It should be
recognized that some of the basins(40%) are not monitored for water quality or for
flow and assumptions and extrapolation of data had to be made to allow calculation
of-the total phosphorus load. .Thus the 2,700,000 Ibs. is at best a rough estimate.
The 1965 figures were used because they most nearly represent an average year for
flow discharge to Lake Michigan.

     If the 2,700,000 Ibs. of phosphorus were spread evenly throughout Michigan's
Lake Michigan basins it would equal about 90 Ibs. of phosphorus per square mile per
year, or if spread equally among the Michigan population it would equal about 1.2. Ibs.
of phosphorus per person per year.  It is obvious that the phosphorus load is not
spread evenly throughout the basins or equally among the population;  Some of the
phosphorus discharged in the upstream portions of the basin is utilized in the stream
and may never reach the lake.  Thus the 2,700,000 Ibs. per year is the amount actually
discharged to the lake and not the amount discharged throughout the basin.
                                       262

-------
                                                                                        TABLE  2

                                                    PHOSPHORUS        CONTRIBUTED       TO
                                                                                          BY
                                                                   MICHIGAN'S       TRIBUTARY      BASINS
LAKE      MICHIGAN
Flow at Mouth
Basin
Number
^
. 2
3
1
5
6
7
1
9
10
11
12
13
11
15
16
17
IB
19
20
21
22
23
21
25
26


River Basin Naue
Henoninee (Mien.)
Cedar
Ford
Cscanaba
Days
Rapid
Vhiteflsh
Sturgeon
Manistique
Pine (Boyne - Jordan)
Elk
Boardraan
Betsie
Manistee
Big Sable
Lincoln
Pere Marquette
Pentvater
White
Muskegon
Grand
Black (Holland)
Kalamaeoo •
Black (South Haven)
Paw Pan
St. Joseph (Mich..)
Miscellaneous Basins
TOTAL
Drainage
Area
(Sq. Miles)
2,087
387
177
911
73
137
322
212
1,150
370
152
295
252
2,120
206
99
710
172
190
2,660
5,530
176'
2,060
287
111
3,033
3.528
29,000
1961
Calendar
Year
Average
CFS
1,170

320
730




1,550
278

220

1,980
210

530
121
390
1,510
1,810
113
990
181
320
1,250


1965
Calendar
Year
Average
CFS
1,010

190
920




1,850
322

250

2,200
250

770
179
590
2,180
3,860
210
1,530
312
500
2,201


Average POn Content
1961
Average
Soluble POU
.15

.02
.15




.02
.01

.28

.02
.01

.01
.01
.06
.13
.56
.09
.12
.29
.29
.30


1965
Average
Soluble POU
TO/1
.15

.01
.15




.01
.03

.13

.01
.10

.10
.01
.09
.12
.16
.21
.07'
.19
.19
.25


Phosphorous Contributed by Basin
Ibs. Phosphorous
(POi,-P) per
Calendar Year
1961
113,916
1,101
1,157
71,095
1,016
1,907
1,182
2,951
20,182
1,801
2,879
10,037
3,019
25,710
5,151
2,622
13,761
805
15,192
127,111
669,006
6,603
77,311
31,615
60,115
213,175
168.991
1,728,806
Ibs. Phosphor
(PO,,-P) per
Calendar Ye
1965
98,360
2,581
3,181
89,596
601
1,131
2,666
1,755
12,011
6,272
7,661
21,100
1,688
11,283
16,231
7,800
19,992
1,162
31,175
193,215
1,152,795
32,722
69,531
108,800
159,061
357,266
275.890
2,721,838
ous Pounds Pr
(P04-p) p
ar Contribute
1961
51.6
11.1
8.7
75.6
13.9
13.9
13.9
13.9
13.9
1.9
6.1
110.5
12.1
12.1
26.5
26.5
18.6
1.7
31.0
17.9
121.0
37.5
37.5
120.7
136.1'
80.3
17.9

osphorous
er Sq. Mi.
d by Basin
1965
17.1
6.7
6.7
95.2
8.3
8.3
8.3
8.3
8.3
17.0
17.0
71.0
6.7
6.7
78.8
78.8
67.6
6.8
70.1
72'.6
208.5
185.9'
33.8
379.1
358.3
117.8
78.2

Population
by Basin
1960
61,000
2,000
1,500
13,600
6,500
2,000
2,500
1,000
9,000 •
12,100
.12,500
29,100
1,000
31,100
3,100
3,100
23,800
7,100
20,100
192,000
919,000
51,000
. 117,000
29,000
50,500
211,300
133,100
2,281,900
Population
per SQ. Hi.
30.7
5.2
3.1
11.5
89.0
11.6
7.8
1.7
6.2
33.5
27.7
99.7
15.9
11.7
15.1
31.3
32.2
13.0
11.0
72.2
171.6
289.8
202.1
101.1
113.7
69.7
37.7
78.69
Pounds Phosphorous (PO^-P)
per Person per Year
1961
1.78
2.20
2.77
5.23
0.16
0.95
1.79
2.95
2.21
0.15
0.23
1.36
0.76
0.83
1.76

0.58
0.11
0.76
0.66
0.71
0.13
0.19
1.19
1.20
1.15
1.27
0.76
1965
1.51
1.29
2.12
6.59
0.09
0.57
1.07
1.76
1.33
0.51
0.61
' 0.72
0.12
0.16
5.21
2.52
2.10
0.16
1.72
1.01
1.21
0.61
0.17
3.75
3.15
1.69
2.07
1.19
Hot*:  1)  Flow for basins 2, 5, 6,'7, 8, 10, 11, 13. 16, 19, and 24 were obtained from yield ratios of similar basins.
      2)  POtf values for basins 2, 3, S, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15, 16, and 25 were obtained from yield ratios of similar basins.
      3)  POi* values for basins 1 and 4 were obtained from comprehensive surveys.
      t)  The values used for the "miscellaneous basins" were averages of all basins.
                                                                                                                                                                            CO
                                                                                                                                                                            -4
                                                                                                                                                                            TO

-------
                                                         2873


 1                         R. W. PURDY


 2                 MR. STEIN:  we will recess now.   Our


 3       present: plans call for a reconvening at  9:30  at


 4       the  same place tomorrow at which time we will hear


 5       from Wisconsin.  The Wisconsin presentation,  includ-


 6       ing  its participants, is estimated to take  about


 7       two  hours.


 8                 After that we will have questioning of


 9       Mr.  Schneider on the Federal Recommendations


10       and  conclusions.  If anyone has anything he wants


11       to contribute, he should get in touch with  his


12       State representative or the Chairman, because


13       this phase of the conference may be coining  to a


14       close.


15                 We stand recessed until 9:30\tomorrow
                                               I

16       morning.


17                 (Whereupon, at 6:00 p.m., an adjournment


18       was  taken.)

19


20


21


22


23


24


25


                                      » U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : I9U O—3I2-M7 (VOL. 5)

-------