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

    FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION

-------
       Errata Sheet. Proceedings  (Vol.7)Conference - Pollution   3448
       of Lake Michigan and its Tributary  Basin, March  iy68
       Executive Session. Insert after  page 3447.Replaces 3543.
                                                    j          i
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    Mr. Poole, do you have any problem
 3
          taking these up in order or do you want to  do
 4
          this the other way?
 5
                    MR. POOLE:  Well, I think,  as I
 6
          glance through them, it seems to me  as  you  go
 7
          through the recommendations that the discussion
 8
          will undoubtedly bring out where there  is IB.
 9
          feeling there is a need for research,  and so
10
          I  am sorry to apparently disagree  with  Freeman,
11
          but I would have no problem in treating the
12
          research at the end.
13
                    MR. STEIN:  How  about —
14
                    MR. POOLE:  I didn't think on Mr.
15
          Poston's revised recommendations that  he  sent
16
          out to us that he had treated research  as
17
          adequately in his revisions as he  did  in  his
18
          first draft.  But I guess we can do  it  either
19
          way.  I am afraid that--
20
                    MR. POSTON:  We  can go back  and take
21
          the first draft, raaybe.
22
                    MR. POOLE:  I am afraid  if we try
23
          to  nail down here all of the research needs
24
          that any of us will dream up that  we are  probably
25

-------
                                                              3264

 1                   The Executive Session of the Conference

 2         on the Matter of Pollution of Lake Michigan, and its

 3         Tributary Basins, convened at 9:30 o'clock a.m. on

 4         March 7, 1968, at the Sherman House, Chicago, Illinois.

 5         CHAIRMAN:

 6             Murray Stein
               Asst. Commissioner for Enforcement
 7             Federal Water Pollution Control Admin.
               U. S. Department of the Interior
 8             Washington, D. C.

 9         ALSO PRESENT:

10             Dr. Bregman
               Deputy Assistant Secretary
ll             U. S, Department of the Interior
               Washington, D. C.
12
           CONFEREES:
13
             FEDERAL:

14             H. W. Poston, Regional Director
               Great Lakes Region
               Federal Water Pollution Control Admin.
               U. S. Department of the Interior
16             Chicago, Illinois

17             Assisted by:

18             Robert J. Schneider, Deputy Regional Director
               Great Lakes Region
19             Federal Water Pollution Control-Admin.
               U. S. Department of the Interior
20             Chicago, Illinois
an
               Illinois Sanitary Water Board
21            STATE OF ILLINOIS:

               Clarence W. Klassen, Technical Secretary
               Illinois Sanitary Wate
               Springfield, Illinois
23
               Assisted by:
24
               Douglas Morton, Sanitary Engineer
25              Illinois Sanitary Water Board
               Springfield, Illinois

-------
   	:	     3263

 1        CONFEREES  (CONTINUED):

 2          STATE OP INDIANA:

 3            John S. Mitchell, Director
              Indiana Department of Natural Resources
 4            Indianapolis, Indiana

 5               and

 6            Blucher Poole, Technical  Secretary
              Indiana Stream Pollution  Control  Board
 7            Indianapolis, Indiana

 g            Assisted by:

 9            Perry  S. Miller, Assistant  Director
              Division of Sanitary Engineering
10            Indiana State Board of Health
              Indianapolis, Indiana
11
            STATE OF MICHIGAN:
12
              Loring F.  Oeming, Executive Secretary
13            Michigan Water Resources  Commission
              Lansing, Michigan
14
              Assisted by:
15
              Ralph  W. Purdy, Chief Engineer
16            Michigan Water Resources  Commission
              Lansing, Michigan
17
            STATE OF WISCONSIN:
18
              Freeman Holmer, Administrator
19            Division of Resource Development
              Department of Natural Resources
20            Madison, Wisconsin

21            Assisted by:
22
              Theodore F. Wisniewski
              Assistant  to the Administrator
23
              Division of Resource Development
              Department of Natural Resources
24            Madison, Wisconsin

25

-------
   	3266

 1         OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE:

 2             D. E. Alton, Pollution Control Engineer
               Kaiser Engineers, Inc.
 3             Chicago, Illinois

 4             Neil Baldwin, Assistant Editor
               Chemical & Engineering News
 5             Chicago, Illinois

 6             Col. Roger A. Barnes, Deputy Division Engineer
               U.S.A. Corps of Engineers
 7             North Central Division
               Chicago, Illinois
 8
               Dr. Lawrence Beer, Staff Engineer
 9             Commonwealth Edison Company
               Chicago, Illinois
10
               Olga Berger
11             4631 Lawn Avenue
               Western Springs, Illinois
12
               John E. Bessert, National Sales Manager
13             Zimpro Division of Sterling Drug, Inc.
               Olen Ellyn, Illinois
14
               Harry V. Bierma, Chairman
15             Clean Streams Committee
               Illinois Audubon Society
16             Chicago, Illinois

17             R. M. Billings, Assistant to Vice-President
               Research and Engineering
18             Kimberly Clark Corp.
               Neenah, Wisconsin
19
               Mrs. Russell Bonynge, Chairman
20             Lake Michigan Inter-League Group
               League of Women Voters
21             Wilmette, Illinois

22             R. J. Bowden, Chief
               Calumet Area : Surveillance Unit
23             Federal Water Pollution Control Adm.
               Chicago, Illinois
24
               L. L. Bradish, Executive Secretary
25             Cook County Clean Streams Committee
               River Forest, Illinois

-------
   	   326?

 1        OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE  (CONTINUED):

 2            T. E. Branagan, Manager
              Wisconsin  Paper Industry
 3            Neenah, Wisconsin

 4            John R. Brough, Director
              Air & Water  Control
 5            Inland Steel Company
              East Chicago, Indiana
 6
              Dale S. Bryson, Acting Director
 7            Minneapolis  Program  Office
              Federal Water Pollution Control Adm.
 8            Minneapolis, Minnesota

 9            Mrs. Dolores A. Burkee, Chemist
              City of Kenosha
10            Kenosha, Wisconsin

11            J.  Floyd Byrd, Head
              Environmental Control  Section
12            Charmin  Paper Products
              Procter &  Gamble  Company
13            Cincinnati,  Ohio

14            J.  Roland  Carr, Regional  Editor
              Engineering News  Record
15            Chicago,  Illinois

16            Joseph T.  Chantigney,  Chairman
              Great  Lakes I.W.L.A.
17            Dolton,  Illinois

18             Edward C.  Cleave
               2638 Hillside Lane
19             Evanston,  Illinois

20            Robert J.  Conroy, Manager
               Operations Evaluation
21             Union Tank Car Company
               Chicago,  Illinois
22
               G. F.  Craun, Sanitary Engineer
23             U. S.  Public Health Service
               Chicago,  Illinois
24

25

-------
   	^268
 1         OTHERS  IN ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED):

 2            3ruce Cross,  Bureau Chief
              McGraw-Hill Publications
 3            Chicago,  Illinois

 4            Quincy Dadisman, Reporter
              Milwaukee Sentinel
 5            Milwaukee, Wisconsin

 6            Mrs.  Miriam G.  Dahl, Chairman
              Common Pollution
 7            Wisconsin State Division,  I.W.L.A.
              Milwaukee, Wisconsin
 8
              R.  G. Dalbke, Engineer
 9            Kaiser Engineers, Inc.
              Chicago,  Illinois
10
              Irvin L.  Dickstein, Chief
H            Pollution Surveillance
              Federal Water Pollution Control Adm.
12            Ohio  Basin Region
              Cincinnati, Ohio
13
              Mrs.  J. Dintenfass
14            Arlington Heights League of Women Voters
              Hoffman Estates, Illinois
15
              Mrs*  J. R. Doty, Vice-President
16            DuPage County League of Women  Voters
              Glen  311yn, Illinois
17
              Marshall C. Elmore, Chairman
18            Pollution Committee
              Lake  County Pish &  Game Protective Assn. of Indiana
19            Whiting, Indiana

20             S.  A. Foust, Project Engineer
              Union Carbide
21            Whiting, Indiana

22            J.  A. Fowler, Engineer
               Sinclair Refining Company
23             East  Chicago, Indiana

24             Herbert D. Fritz, Management Consultant
               P & W Engineers, Inc.
25             Chicago, Illinois

-------
           	3269

 1        OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED):

 2            C. W. Oansv, Representative
              American Petroleum Institute
 3            Chicago, Illinois

 4            George Oockstetter, Superintendent
              Republic Steel Corporation
 5            Chicago, Illinois

 6            James F. Orutsch
              Coordinator of Waste Disposal
 7            American Oil Company
              Chicago, Illinois
 8
              C. Fred Ournham, Vice-President
 9            C. W. Rice & Company
              Chicago, Illinois
10
              Alfred F. Hanson
11            Plant Engineering
              Johnson Motors
12            waukegan, Illinois

13            Art  Harris, Pollution Writer
              Indianapolis News
14            Indianapolis, Indiana

15            Robert A. Hirshfield, Staff  Engineer
              Commonwealth Edison Company
16            Chicago, Illinois

17            Paul W. Horeyseck, Associate Director
              Continental Can Company
18            Chicago, Illinois

19            James W. Jardine,  Commissioner
              Water & Sewers
20            City of Chicago
              Chicago, Illinois
21
              Mrs. Philip Haynes, Jr.
22            The  Calumet Press
              Highland,  Indiana
23
              Mrs. Eileen Johnston
24            President  & Michigan  Alumni  Club Water Resources Chmn
              Wilmette League  of Women Voters
25            Wilmette,  Illinois

-------
    	:	"32 7 o^
 1         OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED):

 2             Peter V. Judd, Manager
               Midwest Regional Office
 3             NUS Corporation
               Chicago, Illinois
 4
               Richard Klenitz
 5             Milwaukee Journal
               Madison, Wisconsin
 6
               F. W. Kittrell, Senior Consultant
 7             Federal Water Pollution Control Adm.
               Cincinnati, Ohio
 8
               Fred G. Krikau
 9             Environmental Control Engineer
               Interlace Steel Corporation
10             Chicago, Illinois

11             L. E. Langdon, Vice-President
               Pacific Flush Tank Company
12             Chicago, Illinois

13             Allen S. Lavin, Attorney
               Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago
14             Chicago, Illinois

15             Kenneth Lehner, Superintendent
               Chemical Services
16             Wisconsin Electric Power
               Milwaukee, Wisconsin
17
               James  P. Linse, Pollution Writer
18             Gary Post-Tribune
               Gary,  Indiana
19
               Ralph  Luken, Assistant  Professor
20             Water  Resources Commission
               University of  Michigan
21             Conservation Department
               Ann  Arbor, Michigan
22

23             Gerald Marks,  Trustee
               Metropolitan  Sanitary  District  of Greater Chicago
24             Chicago, Illinois

25

-------
   	3271

 1         OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED):

 2             David W.  Martin, Engineer - Manager
               Green Bay Metropolitan Sanitary District
 3             Green Bay, Wisconsin

 4             Glenn W.  Metcalfe
               Supervisor of Sanitation
 5             Chicago Park District
               Chicago,  Illinois
 6
               J. H. Miller, Chief Engineer
 7             Wisconsin Steel
               Chicago,  Illinois
 8
               Mrs.  Herbert Moore
 9             17^2  N. Prospect Avenue
               Milwaukee, Wisconsin
10
               Herbert Moore
11             Consulting Engineer
               Milwaukee, Wisconsin
12
               A. Thomas Munizzo, Assistant Director
13             Special Services
               Chicago Park District
14             Chicago,  Illinois

15             H. D. McCullough, City Engineer
               City  of Milwaukee
16             Milwaukee, Wisconsin

17             S. W. McKibbins, Manager
               Special Projects
18             Continental Can Co.
               New York, New York
19
               John  S. McLean, Sanitary Engineer
20             Federal Water Pollution Control Adm.
               Washington, D. C.
21
               Patrick M. O'Connell
22             Northwestern University
               Svanston, Illinois
23
               Richard A. Pavia, Assistant Commissioner
24             Department of Water & Sewers
               City  of Chicago
25             Chicago,  Illinois

-------
   	:	3272
 1         OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED):

 2             C. Peraberton,  Jr.,  Director
               Technical Programs
 3             Federal Water Pollution Control Adm.
               Chicago, Illinois
 4
               John H. Pingel
 5             Senior Health Physicist
               U.S. AEC Chicago Operations Office
 6             Argonne, Illinois

 7             Thomas J. Powers
               Industrial Waste Consultant
 g             Federal Water Pollution Control Adm.
               Cincinnati, Ohio
 9
               Ernest D. Premetz,  Deputy Regional Director
10             U. S. Department of the Interior
               Bureau of Commercial Fisheries
11             Ann Arbor, Michigan

12             Isaac B. Putnam, Chemist
               Sanitary Engineer
13             U. S. Navy Department
               Great Lakes, Illinois
14
               Ronald E. Reder
15             Nuclear Licensing Administrator
               Commonwealth Edison Company
16             Chicago, Illinois

17             Philip A. Reed, Filtration Engineer
               Chicago Water Purification Division
18             Chicago, Illinois

19             Clifford Risley, Jr., Director
               Chicago Program Office
20             Federal Water Pollution Control Adm.
               Chicago, Illinois
21
               D. F. Roberts, Sanitary Engineer
22             Harza Engineering Company
               Chicago, Illinois
23
               E. N. Rogers, Chief Estimator
24             Dunbar & Sullivan Dredging Co.
               Chicago, Illinois
25

-------
   	3273
 1         OTHERS  IN ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED):

 2             Mrs.  Samuel  Rome
               Water Resources  Chairman
 3             Illinois  League  of  Women Voters
               Chicago,  Illinois
 4
               Judie Romeo
 5             Assistant Midwest Bureau Chief
               Chemical  Week Magazine
 6             Chicago,  Illinois

 7             Erie  F. Ross,  Chicago Editor
               Steel Magazine
 g             Chicago,  Illinois

 9             Edward C. Rubin, Regional Manager
               Chicago Pump - PMC  Corporation
10             LaOrange, Illinois

11             LeRoy E.  Scarce, Director of Laboratories
               Federal Water Pollution  Control Adm.
12             Chicago Program  Office
               Chicago,  Illinois
13
               Harry E.  Schlenz, President
14             Pacific Flush Tank  Company
               Chicago,  Illinois
15
               D.  A. Schwartz
16             Technical Services
               Nalco
17             Chicago,  Illinois

18             Walter E. Scott
               Assistant to Administrator
19             Division  of  Conservation
               Department of Natural Resources
20             Madison,  Wisconsin

21             C.  Owsley Shephard, Special Writer
               Chicago's American
22             Chicago,  Illinois

23             Don Shires,  Manager
               Public Information
24             Inland Steel Company
               Chicago,  Illinois
25

-------
                                          	327^

 1         OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED):

 2             Mrs. J. Shubeck
               league of Women Voters
 3             Arlington Heights, Illinois

 4             Mrs. Milton Sibley
               Precinct Captain
 5             Michigan City, Indiana

 6             M. W. Sibleyj Water Engineer
               Rock Island Railroad
 7             Michigan City, Indiana

 8             Charles M. Squarcy
               Assistant to Vice-president
 9             Inland Steel Company
               East Chicago, Indiana
10
               Mrs. Cecil M. Stephens
11             League of Women Voters
               Highland, Indiana
1*
               Howard W. Stern, President
13             Aquatic Controls Corporation
               Waukesha, Wisconsin
14
               Donald L. Usborne, Engineer
15             Great Lakes Dredge & Dock Co.
               Chicago, Illinois
16
               James C. Vaughn, Engineer
17             Water Purification
               City of Chicago
18             Chicago, Illinois

19             T. W. VerValin
               162 E. Ontario
20             Chicago, Illinois

21             Frank I. Vilen, Superintendent
               Water Pollution Control
22             Kenosha, Wisconsin

23             DeYarman Wallace, Research Supervisor
               Youngstown Sheet & Tube
24             Youngstown, Ohio

25

-------
                                            	3275

 1      .   OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED):

 2             R. D. Watkins
               Public Relations
 3             U. S. Steel Corp.
               Chicago,  Illinois
 4
               R. V. Weil, Assistant Manager - Engineering
 5             Sinclair  Refining Company
               Harvey, Illinois
 6
               J. S. Whitaker,  Coordinator
 7             Environmental Health
               Union Carbide Corporation
 g             New York, New York

 9             B. P. Willey, Director
               Water Purification Laboratory
10             City of Chicago, Bureau of Water
               Chicago,  Illinois
11
               Mrs. Bertram G.  Woodland
12             League of Women  Voters
               Homewood, Illinois
13
               Mrs. Robert Zilly, State Chairman
14             Michigan  League  of Women Voters
               Stevensville, Michigan
15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

-------
   	3276
 !                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

                     PROCEEDINGS
 3
 4                  MR. STEIN:  The Executive  Session  of

 .        the Four-State Federal Enforcement Conference on

 6        Pollution of Lake Michigari and its Drainage  Area

 7        is open.

 «                  We have had an extensive conference.

 9        I think all views have been  fairly well  aired.

10        The situation is so complicated  that the State

^        and Federal representatives  have gone back and

12        have thought about the problem and perfected

13        their positions over the past few weeks,  we  are

14        here to try to arrive at conclusions and recom-

15        mendations, and I suspect, unless there  is a

16        movement  to the contrary, that the Conferees will

17        sit until this job has been  accomplished. I

jg        hope if we are expeditious we can do it  today.

19                  The technique we are going to  try  to

20        use is very similar to the one that  we have  used

2i        in the past.  We will come up with the specific

22        recommendations on the points that are raised,

23        trying to cover the material that we have to

24        cover because of the statute and perfect the

25        conclusions and recommendations.

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                   At  that point,  a  draft will  be  made  of
 3
         these.  We will  try  to get  these typed.   Then  we
 4
         will distribute  typed copies  to all  the Conferees
 5
         and go over them.  Nothing  that is said at any
 6
         interim point is to  be considered irrevocable,
 7
         that is until we are satisfied with  the final
 8
         draft, and that will be  the conclusions and
 9
         recommendations.  It is  often expeditious  to get
10
         a draft typed that we are all in pretty general
11
         agreement on and make a  few adjustments later
12
         when these draft papers  come  in.
13
                   Before we  start, the Department  of the
14
         Interior was very interested, as you may  know,
15
         the Secretary's office,  in this conference, and
16
         we have a representative  of the Secretary  of the
17
         Interior here, Deputy Assistant Secretary  Bregman,
18
         who will give us the views of Secretary Udall  on
19
         various problems which the Conferees may  take  up.
20
                   Dr. Bregman.
21
                   DR. BREGMAN:   Thank you.
22
                   The Secretary  asked me to make a brief
23
         statement to you.  He wanted  to wish you good
24
         luck and Godspeed in your deliberations today.
25

-------
   ^	:	3278

 I                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
         He would  like  to make  some  very  hard,  aggressive

 3
         and  specific action  recommendations  as a  result

 4
         of this conference.  There  are some  particular

 5
         points he felt especially strongly about  that he

 6
         wanted to be sure I  mentioned to you,  and I would

 7
         like to Just read a  few  of  his comments.

 8
                   First dealing  with the control  of

 9
         phosphates.  We have heard  at the conference

10
         that it is feasible  to build tertiary  treatment

11
         plants for the control of phosphates.   It is

12
         economical in  terms  of the  benefits  that  can be

13
         achieved.  The technology is available.   I am

14
         certain that you will agree that the removal of

15
         phosphates from wastes entering  the  lake  should

16
         be required, and that you will suggest a  realistic

17
         time period in which to  do  this.

18
                   Second is  the  question of  thermal pollu-

19
         tion.  The Secretary has purposely left open the

20
         question of temperature  in  Lake  Michigan  in his
21
         approval of the State water quality  standards in
22
         the case of each of the  States here.   He  wanted
23
         the conference to discuss this question and he
24
         hopes that your conclusions will take  into account

25

-------
   	3279

 l                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         the large number of nuclear utilities  that  are

 3
         planned for the lake and the considerable amount

 4
         of heat that will therefore enter  the  lake  at

 5
         specific points.  I would hope that you will

 6
         consider a definition of appropriate mixing

 7
         zones, perhaps adopt a uniform definition,  and

 g
         will ask for rather stringent limits on allowable

 9
         temperature increases.

10
                   Then comes one of our favorite subjects,


         polluted dredgings.  We have heard over and over

12
         again at this conference that polluted dredgings

13
         must not be dumped into Lake Michigan.  Gentlemen,

14
         this means anywhere in the lake, not just a ban

15
         on dumping near heavily-populated  areas with

16
         particularly pollution-conscious newspapers.

17                           >
                   Sewage from boats.  There/has been

18
         general agreement at the conference that dumping

19
         of raw sewage from vessels into ;the lake must

20
         stop.  I would hope that the Conferees will

21
         recommend to each of their States  passage of

22
         appropriate State legislation to accomplish

23
         this goal.  And we would hope that this would

24
         be done during this year.

25

-------
   	.	-    	  .3280
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    Surveillance.  The moat effective
 3
         control for  unexpected  emergencies,  such as
 4
         oil spills,  is an  adequate  surveillance  program
 5
         that will  spot polluting Incidents as  soon as
 6
         possible.  The Secretary would hope  to see the
 7
         Conferees  Initiate the  activity required to
 8
         develop such a program  on a Joint Federal-State
 9
         basis.  FVPCA and  the Coast Guard already have
10
         begun to discuss the development of  a  surveillance
11
         program, and I believe  that participation by
12
         the States and cities would ensure its success.
13
                    As far as conventional wastes  go,
14
         tight timetables for minimizing the  flow of
15
         conventional wastes from municipalities  and
16
         industries into the lake should be recommended.
17
                   Agricultural  wastes.   We have  heard
18
         that many  of the problems in Lake Michigan are
10
         the result of agricultural  runoffs that  include
20
         contaminants such  as fertilizers and pesticides.
21
         I would hope that  the conference will  develop a
22
         plan of action for handling this type  of waste.
23
                   There are a number of other  problems,
24
         I am sure, that you will be taking action on,
25

-------
   	3281

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         and I won't try to mention  them  all,  but  feel
 3
         very confident of a successful conclusion of
 4                                                    ;
         the conference.  I am particularly heartened
 5
         by the faces I see around the conference  table.
 6
         I think the residents of the Lake Michigan area
 7
         are indeed fortunate to have Conferees  of your
 8
         expertise and dedication.   You are, without
 9
         question, as able a group of State pollution
10
         control administrators as any in the  Nation.  I
11
         personally have known some  of you for a long
12
         time and a good deal of what I have learned about
13
         water pollution I have learned from you.
14
                   Gentlemen, I wish you  luck.
15
                   MR. STEIN:  Thank you, Dr.  Bregman.
16
                   (Applause.)
17
                   MR. STEIN;  Now as to  the procedures.
18
         We have, at least I have, specific recommendations
19
         from the regional office of the  Federal Water
20
         Pollution Control Administration ana  some from
21
         the State of Wisconsin.  If there are any more,
22
         perhaps we should have them, and I suggest we
23
         might try to dovetail any suggestions we  have
24
         from all the Conferees and  try to get a coordinated
25

-------
   	3282

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         approach  and see  If  we can work this out.
 3
                    Do you  all have copies of the Federal
 4
         conclusions?
 5
                    And we  also have Wisconsin's.

 6
                    May I suggest, Just to start, to see

 7
         how  this  goes,  that  we read the Federal conclu-

 8
         sions,  and I would suggest, Mr. Holmer, with
 9
         the  Wisconsin conclusions or suggestions,  that

10
         any  time  you feel that they should work in or
11
         we would  modify or substitute one of yours, you
12
         might  call the attention of the Conferees  to
13
         that,  because I think you are most familiar with
14
         the  material in yours.  But there is only  one
15
         way  to start and  that is to begin.
16


17
                         CONCLUSION #1
18


19               i,
                 1.  Lake Michigan is a priceless natural
20
         heritage  which the present generation holds in
21
         trust  for posterity, with an obligation to pass
22
         it on  in  the best possible condition."
23
                    Are there  any comments on that?   Or
24
         do the Conferees  think that this is an agreeable
25

-------
   	3283

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         way to start the conclusions?
 3
                   MR. OEMING:  Mr. Stein.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
 5
                   MR. OEMING:  I wonder  if  it  might not
 6
         be a little more precise here  if we were  canvassed
 7
         on these rather than Just  throw  the question open
 8
         here, if you just canvassed and  got an expression
 9
         from each of the Conferees on  this?  This is rather
10
         than throw the question on the table.
11
                   MR. STEIN:  All  right, I  think  that is
12
         a fair approach.
13
                   Again, if you get passed  on  that,  you
14
         are not passed forever.  The reason I  do  this
15
         is to give you more flexibility.
16
                   All right.
17
                   Michigan?
18
                   MR. OEMING:  Satisfactory.
19
                   MR. STEIN:  Illinois?
20
                   MR. KLASSEN:  0. K.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  Indiana?
22
                   MR. POOLE:  0. K.
23
                   MR. STEIN:  And Wisconsin?
24
                   MR. HOLMER;  All right.
25

-------
                                                        328*1-

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right,  fine.
 3
                    Let's  go to #2.
 4
                    FROM THE AUDIENCE:   Mr.  Stein,  would
 5
         you  please make  more  use of the microphone?
 6
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
 7
                    FROM THE AUDIENCE:   It  is  very difficult
 8
         to hear  you.
 9
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right,  we  are going
10
         to try to do  that. Now, as I told you  people
11
         when you came  here, this is an executive session
12
         and  this is going to  be a working session back
13
         and  forth. We will do the best we can  with  the
14
         microphones.
15

16
                          CONCLUSION #2
17

18
                 M2. Water uses of Lake Michigan  and its
19
         tributaries for  municipal water supply, recreation,
20
         including swimming, boating,  and  other  body
21
         contact  sports,  commercial fishery,  propagation
22
         of fish  and aquatic life, and esthetic  enjoyment,
23
         are  presently  impaired by pollution  in  many  parts
24
         of all four of the States that border upon and
25

-------
   	      3283

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         have common boundaries within  the  lake.   The
 3
         sources of this pollution  include  wastes from
 4
         municipalities, industries, Federal  activities,

 5
         combined sewer overflows,  agricultural  practices,

 6
         watercraft, natural runoff, and  related  activi-

 7                                            „
         ties throughout the drainage basin.

 8
                   Illinois?

 9
                   Wisconsin?

10
                   MR. HOLMER:  I am not  quite  sure  of

11
         the purpose of the language in the third, fourth

12                                       „
         and fifth lines, which reads,  impaired  by

13
         pollution in many parts of all four  of  the

14
         States that border upon and have common  boun-

15
         darles within the lake.    This strikes me as
16
         being kind of an awkward phrase, to  begin with.
17
                   Is it the purpose of this  language  to
18
         indicate that this is interstate pollution?   Is
19
         that the purpose of this language?   Otherwise
20
         I think it is Just awkward.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr.  Poston,  do you want
22
         to comment?
23
                   MR. POSTON:  Well, I think this is
24
         intended to set forth that we  are  polluting
25

-------
                                                        3286

 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         Lake  Michigan  and  its  pollution  affects  our
 3
         water uses,  and  I  would  say  that it  does say
 4
         that  it  is interstate  in nature.
 5
                   MR.  HOLMER:  It would  read so  much
 6
         easier if there  were a period  after  the  word
 7
         "pollution," for example.
 8
                   I  am not trying to raise a problem
 9
         of whether there is interstate pollution or
10
         not,  because I think this is taken care  of
11
         later in the--
12
                   MR.  STEIN:   Where  do you mean  a
13
         period after "pollution"?
14
                   MR.  HOLMER:  In the  fourth line,
15
         "The  water uses  of Lake  Michigan  are presently
16
         impaired by  pollution."  We had  evidence that
17
         this  is  to some  extent true.
18
                   MR.  STEIN:   And strike  the rest?
19
                   MR.  POSTON:  I would go along  with
20
         that.
21
                   MR.  OEMING:  May we have an understand-
22
         ing what we  are  talking  about, Mr. Stein?  Would
23
         you please--
24
                   MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
25

-------
   	3287

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. OEMING:  Mr. Stein,  may  I  try
 3
         to clear this up now?
 4                            .                '-
                   Mr. Holmer, are you  saying that the
 5
         paragraph two would read this  way:
 6
                   "Water uses of Lake  Michigan and its
 7
         tributaries for municipal water  supply,  recrea-
 8
         tion, including swimming, boating,  and other
 9
         b o;d y contact sports, commercial  fishery,
10
         propagation of fish and aquatic  life,  and
11
         aesthetic enjoyment, are presently impaired
12
         by pollution."  The rest of the  paragraph be
13
         stricken?
14
                   MR. HOLMER:  No, the last of the
15
         sentence is all.  "The sources," include  that
16
         sentence.
17
                   MR. OEMING:  Oh, I see.
18
                   MR. STEIN:  And we strike the  rest of
19
         that sentence, right?
20
                   MR. OEMING:  And then you go on and
21
         say, "The sources of this pollution include
22
         wastes," and so on and so forth?
23
                   MR. HOLMER:  Yes.
24
                   MR. OEMING:  0. K.,  I Just wanted a
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          comment.
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   Did you understand that
 4
          proposal?
 5
                    Mr.  Poston,  are you in agreement with
 6
          that?
 7
                    MR.  POSTON:   I will agree to that.
 8
                    MR.  STEIN:   Mr. Oeming?
 9
                    MR.  OEMING:   Mr.  Stein,  I don't know
10
          as  I  am clear  on this,  but I wonder what is
11
          the purpose of putting in "and its tributaries"
12
          if  we are  speaking in  the context of interstate
13
          pollution  of Lake Michigan.  I raise a question
14
          here  as to the bearing of the phrase "and its
15
          tributaries" on the water uses of Lake Michigan
16
          and the interstate problem that we are talking
17
          about in Lake  Michigan.
18
                    MR.  STEIN:   Your proposal would be,
10 I                          •             •
          then,  to strike "and  its tributaries"?
20
                    MR.  OEMING:   Yes, "Water uses of Lake
21
          Michigan."
22
                    MR.  STEIN:   This is a Jurisdictional
23
          point.   Do you have any problem with that?
24
                    MR.  POSTON:   Where is the —
25

-------
                                               	3289

 !                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                   MR. STEIN:  Let me read that.  "Water

 3
         uses of Lake Michigan and its tributaries."

 4
                   The point made by Mr. Oeming is that

 5
         here we are talking about effects of pollution

 6
         and interstate effects, and he does not see the

 7
         point, if we are dealing with this interstate

 8
         Jurisdictional question, why we are dealing with

 9
         the tributaries in Lake Michigan which are not

10
         interstate in the effects.

11
                   MR. POSTON:  I might ask the Chairman,

12
         in calling this conference, for a ruling concerning

13
         the Secretary's directive when he asked us to

14
         consider pollution in the basin, in the Lake

15
         Michigan and the whole basin, what--

16
                   MR. STEIN:  I think what the Secretary

17
         meant was that any material that got into Lake

18
         Michigan, whether it was discharged directly

19
         into the lake or a tributary of the lake, would

20
         be covered by the conference if this were en-

21
         dangering the health and welfare of persons in

22
         another State.

23
                   What Mr. Oeming is saying, as I under-

24
         stand him on this point, is that since we are

25

-------
                            	3290
 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2       dealing with  the  effects of  pollution,  the
 3       place where you get  the  interstate  effect would
 4       be  in Laxe Michigan  and  not  the  tributaries.
 5                 MR.  POSTON:  Well-,  we  do  have some
 6       streams that  are  interstate,  like the  St. Joseph
 7       River, for one, and  the  Menominee River.
 g                 MR.  OEMING:  Mr. Chairman, in that
 9       context,  then, I  would say the water uses of
10       Lake Michigan  and spell  out  the  interstate

H       tributaries.
12                 MR.  POSTON:  O.K.
13                 MR.  OEMING:  Then  I would be content.
14                 MR.  STEIN:  All right, let's see  if

15       we  can--
16                 MR.  OEMING:  If you want  to  be  specific,
17       say the St. Joe River and others.
18                 MR.  STEIN:  I  don't know  that we  ca,n     !
19       be  that specific  with all this catalogue  of industries

20       for those rivers.
21                 MR.  HOLMER:  Mr. Chairman, I think
22       the jurisdictional problem is covered  in  the
23       second sentence if we are willing to concede
24       that the  sources  of  this pollution 'include
25       wastes from activities throughout the  drainage

-------
   	:	    3291
 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         basin.
 3
                   MR. OEMING:  I think so.
 4
                   MR. HOLMER:  This I think we can
 5
         concede, and it would not then require tributaries-
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.  There are two
 7                  .          '        '
         proposals, to either strike out  and its tribu-
 8
         taries" and put "and interstate tributaries .
 9
         What would you suggest is the way to do this?
10
                   MR. OEMING:  My suggestion, Mr. Chairman,
11
         in the light of Mr. Holmer's interpretation and
12
         yours, with the last sentence in there that you
13
         could strike "and its tributaries"  and you would
14
         be saying the same  thing.
15
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr. Poston, are you in
16
         agreement?
17
                   MR. POSTON:  Well, I still like the
18
         use of that word  "interstate tributaries" there,
19
         Mr. Chairman.
20
                   MR. STEIN:  All right,  let us see if
21
         we can find some  other Conferees  and try to get
22
         a consensus.
23
                   Mr. Poole?
24
                   MR. POOLE:  In view of  Mr. Holmer's
25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
         remarks,  I  don't  see  that  the words  "and its
 3
         tributaries"  contribute  anything.
 4
                   MR.  STEIN:   Mr.  Klassen?
 5
                   MR.  KLASSEN:   Illinois geographically
 6
         is not  involved in  this  discussion because  we
 7
         have nothing  like this,  but  I would  say I am
 8
         agreeable either way.  I personally  would like
 9
         to see  the  tributaries spelled  out rather than
10
         leaving it  in  general  on the basin,  but either
11
         would be  0. K.
12
                   MR.  STEIN:   Yes.   Here is  the problem,
13
         Mr. Klassen,  as I see  it.  If we talk  in terms
14
         of general  water uses  and  you list all these
15
         water uses, that  is all  right.  But  if we name
16
         the St. Joseph and  the Menominee and then we
17
         talk about  all these  damages, these  damages
18
         Just aren't current in those specific  uses.
19
                   MR.  POSTON:  I will concede,  Mr.
20
         Chairman.
21
                   MR.  STEIN:   Yes.   I think  this is the
22
         point.
23
                   Let  me  read  this in order  to make sure
24
                   MR.  POSTON:  In  light of this, where
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         it says the related activities throughout the
 3
         drainage basin.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
 5,
                   Let me read this  again,  so there is
 6
         no mistake.
 7
                   "2.  Water uses  of  Lake  Michigan for
 8
         municipal water supply,  recreation,  including
 9
         swimming, boating, and other  body  contact sports,
IP
         commercial fishery, propagation  of fish and
U
         aquatic life, and aesthetic  enjoyment are presently
12,
         impaired by pollution.   The sources  of  this pol-
13
         lution include wastes from  municipalities,
14
         industries, Federal activities,  combined sewer
15
         overflows, agricultural  practices, watercraft,
16
         natural runoff and related  activities throughout
17
         the drainage basin."
18
                   MR. OEMING:  Mr.  Chairman.
19
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
20
                   MR. OEMING:  Mr.  Chairman, may I say
21
         that Michigan now subscribes  to  the statement
22
         as you have read it.
23
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr.  Poole?
24
                   MR. POOLE:  We buy  it.
25

-------
   	329*1

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   Mr.  Holmer?
 3
                    MR.  HOLMER:   Yes.
 4
                    MR.  STEIN:   Mr.  Klassen?
 5
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Yes.
 6
                    MR.  STEIN:   Mr.  Poston?
 7
                    MR.  POSTON:   Yes.
 8
                    MR.  STEIN:   All  right.
 9

10
                          CONCLUSION #3
11

12
                    "3.   Eutrophication is  a threat now
13
          to  the  usefulness  of  Lake  Michigan and other
14
          lakes within the Basin. Unless checked, the
15
          aging of Lake  Michigan will be accelerated by
16
          continuing pollution  to the extent that it will
17
          duplicate the  Lake Erie eutrophication condition.
18
          Feasible methods exist for bringing this problem
19
          under control.  They  need  to be applied."
20
                    MR.  OEMING:   Mr. Chairman.
21
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
22
                    MR.  OEMING:   May I comment?  Again I
23
          would wonder what  is  the pertinence of the
24
          phrase  "and other  lakes within the Basin" in the
25

-------
                                                         3295

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
          context  that we are  talking about  Lake Michigan?
 3
                   MR. STEIN:  What  is  the  meaning of
 4
          that?
 5
                   MR. POSTON:  I think what we are talking
 6
          about is there are many  lakes  around Lake Michi-
 7
          gan with a similar problem.
 8
           N        MR. OEMING:  Well, we understand that,
 9
          we accept this premise.   I  mean there isn't any
10
          question that there  is eutrophication in inland
11
          lakes.
12
                   MR. POSTON:  Right.
13
                   MR. OEMING:  In the  context of this
14
          conference, however, what does  that mean with
15
          respect  to Lake Michigan?   Let's say Higgins
16
          Lake in  the center part  of  Michigan.
17
                   MR. STEIN:  Your  proposal,  as  I get
18
          it, is we put a period after Lake  Michigan?
19
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.
20
                   MR. STEIN:  And strike "and other lakes."
21
                   MR. POSTON:  I  think  we  have Lake Winne-
22
          bago, which is one lake  that has a lot of problems.
23
                   MR. STEIN:  Is  that  an interstate
24
          problem?
25

-------
      	:	^296
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  POSTON:   It flows into Green Bay;
 3
          it  is  part of  the Fox  River system.
 4
                    MR.  STEIN:   And does  it contribute
 5
          to  the.eutrophication  of the lake?
 6
                    MR.  POSTON:   Well, everything that
 7
          comes  into Lake  Winnebago comes right on out
 8
          into--
 9
                    MR.  STEIN:   I understand this.  What
10
          we  are bothered  about  here is the Jurisdictional
11
          point.
12
                    I think your points are well taken,
13
          but the question that  is raised here is in
14
          these  preliminary operations when we are talking
15
          about  damages  or effects, and we are talking
16
          about  interstate effects, are we stretching it
17
          a little too far or in a sense  weakening it by
18
          not Just writing the "bare statement  that eutro-
19
          phication is a threat  now to the usefulness of
20
          Lake Michigan?   And then we pick up  all the
21
          sources, whether they  are a polluted lake--
22
                    MR.  OEMING:   That is  right.
23
                    MR.  STEIN:   --or an industry or  a city
24
          or  anything.
25

-------
   	32Q7

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. OEMING:  You  are going  to  pick
 3
          them up anyway.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  Would this  be agreeable,
 5
          to  putting a period after Lake Michigan?
 6
                   MR. POSTON:  0. K.
 7
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
 8
                   Now, are there any other comments?
 9
                   MR. OEMING:  One  more,  Mr.  Chairman,
10
          for Michigan and then I will be finished.
11
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
12
                   MR. OEMING:  I wonder if it would help
13
          the understanding of everybody if when we  say
14
          "will duplicate the lake" we qualified this and
15
          said, well, ultimately or in some period of
16
          time duplicate.
17
                   I don't feel strongly about this, but
18
          I wonder if there is any point in it?
19
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr. Klassen.
20
                   MR. KLASSEN: I do feel  strongly  about
21
          bringing in Lake Erie.  We  have no testimony  in
22
          this conference about Lake  Erie,  and  I wouldn't
23
          like to say it is going to  duplicate  Lake  Erie
24
          because then I would be afraid we might  have  a
25

-------
   	3298

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          tendency to duplicate the recommendations in
 3
          Lake Erie and I thought they were pretty weak.
 4
          Why can't Lake Michigan stand on its own?
 5
                    MR. STEIN:   I don't know how weak that
 6
          is in Lake Erie.
 7
                    MR. OEMING:  I don't agree with that.
 8
                    MR. STEIN:   Maybe the people don't
 9
          think it is weak  who  have to live there.
10
                    MR. KLASSEN:  What does Lake Erie
11
          have to do with this  problem?  We have no
12
          evidence at all.
13
                    MR. STEIN:   I agree with you.
14
                    MR. KLASSEN:  All right.
15
                    MR. STEIN:   I saw that when it came
16
          up, and I don't know  on the basis of the record
17
          here that we can  make any conclusions on Lake
18
          Erie.  The record in  this conference certainly
19
          wasn't directed toward the question and we don't
20
          have substantiating evidence on that.  I think
21
          we would be well  advised to stay away from it.
22
                    MR. OEMING:  May we have a ruling from
23
          the Chairman as to what we are going to do with
24
          this now?
25

-------
                  	3299

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR. STEIN:   Can we  say,  "Unless
 3
          checked, the aging  of  Lake  Michigan will be
 4
          accelerated by  continuing pollution" period?
 5
                    MR. OEMINQ:   Right.
 6
                    MR. STEIN:   All right?   Because  the
 7
          other,  as  far as  this  conference,  is gratuitous.
 8
                    MR. OEMING:   That is  a good word.
 9
                    MR. POOLE:   Now would you read that,
10
          Mr. Chairman?
11
                    MR. STEIN:   Yes.  Here is how we have
12
          it, and I  will  entertain further changes:
13
                    "Eutrophication is  a  threat now  to
14
          the usefulness  of Lake Michigan.   Unless checked,
15
          the aging  of Lake Michigan  will be accelerated
16
          by continuing pollution."
17
                    And then  the other  two sentences follow!
18
                    "Feasible methods exist  for bringing
19
          this problem under  control.   They  heed to  be
20
          applied."
21
                    All right?
22
                    MR. OEMING:   Michigan now subscribes.
23
                    MR. HOLMER:   I want to be real sure.
24
          I know  we  are all agreed that eutrophication
25

-------
   ^___	3300

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          needs  to be the  object of our attention and our
 3
          aggressive  action to  abate and reverse it.   But
 4
          I am not sure that we may not in that next
 5
          sentence be stating more thar we can state  with
 6
          certainty:   "Feasible methods exist for bringing
 7
          this problem under control."   I hope this is true.
 8
          We heard evidence that there  are things that can
 9
          be done  and certainly we want to do them.   But
10
          I think  it  is a  little strong.
11
                   MR. STEIN:   0.  K.   We want to entertain
12
          the points, but  I think it might be helpful, if
13
          you can,  when you raise your  points to come up
14
          with a suggestion for a drafting change one way
15
          or the other. You may want to think about  that,
16
          but I  would like that point raised  by Mr. Holmer
17
          to be  opened for discussion.
18
                   MR. OEMING:   Mr.  Chairman.
19
                   MR. STEIN:   Yes.
20
                   MR. OEMING:   As  I understand the  issue
21
          here now, it is  over  this  bringing  the problem
22
          under  control, Mr.  Holmer,  and I wonder if  a
23
          change in wording might be  inserted that feasible
24
          methods  exist for removal  of  phosphates from
25

-------
   	3301
 1                  •    EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
          sewage  and wastes,  point sources  of  sewage  and
 3
          wastes.
 4
                   MR. HOLMER:  I wouldn't argue  about
 5
          that.   I  am not  sure whether  that is all we
 6
          ought  to  say about  it.
 7
                   MR. STEIN:  Do you  have a  suggestion^
 8
                   MR. HOLMER:  I didn't have any language
 9
          on  this precise  point.   I was raising the question.
10
                   MR. STEIN:  Well, let's try it this
11
          way.   Let's try  to  get Mr.  Oeraing's  suggested
12
          language.  And again this is  a draft and this
13
          is  a key  point.
14
                   How would you  say that  again,  Mr.
15
          Oercing?
16
                   MR. OEMING:  I would strike "bringing
17
          this problem under  control" and insert in lieu
18
          thereof "for removing phosphates  from sewage and
19
          from point sources  of sewage  and  waste discharges."
20
                   MR. STEIN:  Why do  you  say point
21
          sources?
22
                   MR. OEMING:  0. K., if  you don't want
23
          to  use  point sources--
24
                   MR. POSTON:  How about  the word nutrients|?
25

-------
   	3302

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   For  removing phosphates
 3
          from--
 4
                    MR.  OEMING:   Sewage and waste dis-
 5
          charges.
 6
                    MR.  STEIN: —sewage  and industrial
 7
          waste discharges?
 8
                    MR.  OEMING:   Yes.
 9
                    MR.  STEIN:   Let's  try it that way.
10
                    MR.  OEMING;   Kick  that one out and let
11
          them shoot it  down.
12
                    MR*  STEIN:   All  right.
13
                    Are  there any other comments?

14
                    If not,  do you have any objection
15
          to  the last sentence,  "They need to be  applied"?
16
                    MR.  OEMING:   No.
17
                    MR.  STEIN:   0. K.
18
                    Let  me read  this again in total and
19
          see if we  may  have a possible agreement:
20
                    "Eutrpphica.tion  is  a threat now to
21
          the usefulness of  Lake Michigan.   Unless  checked,
22
          the aging  of Lake  Michigan will be accelerated
23
          by  continuing  pollution.  Feasible methods exist
24
          for removing phosphates  from  sewage and industrial
25

-------
   	3303

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         waste discharges.  They  need  to be applied."
 3
                   All right?
 4
                   PROM THE AUDIENCE:  Are phosphates
 5
         the only contributors to eutrophication?
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  Pardon?
 7
                   MR. MITCHELL:  I would hope  that
 8
         the inference is not given to the people here
 9
         today that we are not concerned about  removal
10
         of phosphates from our inland lakes because
11
         we struck out that last  part of the first
12
         sentence.
13
                   MR. STEIN:  Oh, no, no, no.  Here,
14
         let me make this abundantly clear, Mr. Mitchell.
15
         I think you put your finger on something that
16
         has to be very clear.
17
                   We recognize that what we are doing
18
         in this enforcement conference is limited by
19
         the Federal Jurisdiction to interstate waters
20
         if we are going to clean up the phosphate
21
         problem.  This necessarily has to be a primary
22
         responsibility of the States.
23
                   We are just in a Federal-State enforce-
24
         ment case dealing with the aspects of the problem
25

-------
   	3304

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         which endanger health  or welfare  of  persons  in
 3
         States other  than  that in which the  discharge
 4
         originates.
 5
                    I would  say  for Indiana and  perhaps
 6
         Michigan,  the bulk of  your  program is  going
 7
         to be directed to  the  danger  to the  people
 8
         within your State,  but that is not the province
 9
         of this  conference.  And I  think  when  the State
10
         people raise  this  question, they  are entirely
11
         correct,  it doesn't mean that this isn't at
12
         least as  important a problem  as we are dealing
13
         with here.
14
                    Let me go through #3 again.
15
                    Michigan,  are you in agreement with
16
         it as redrafted?
17
                    MR. OEMING:  I am satisfied.
18
                    MR. STEIN:  Indiana?
19
                    MR. POOLE:  Yes,  we are in agreement.
20
                    MR. STEIN:  Wisconsin?
21
                    (No response.)
22
                    (Mr. Klassen raised his hand.)
23
                    MR. STEIN:  Mr. Poston, are  we in  shape?
24
                    MR. POSTON:  Feasible methods of
25

-------
               	3305

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         removing phosphates from sewage &.nd industrial

 3
         waste discharges, is this the--

 4
                   MR, STEIN:  Yes.

                   MR. POSTON:  Is "discharges" on there?

 6
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.

 7
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.

 8
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Read the last sentence

 9
         the way you have it.

10
                   MR. STEIN:  I think you mean the next

11
         to the last.

12
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Yes, that is right.

13
                   MR. STEIN:  "Feasible methods exist

14
         for removing phosphates from sewage and industrial

15
         waste discharges."  And then, "They need to be

16'               „
         applied.

17
                   MR. HOLMER:  Mr.  Chairman, I would

18
         like to avail myself of the privilege of going

19
         back.
20
                   MR. STEIN:  Sure.
21
                   MR. HOLMER:  The  word  "removal"  is
22
         a  little absolute.
23
                   MR. STEIN:  What  would you suggest?
24
                   MR. HOLMER:  Reduction or something

25

-------
          	3306

 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
          of  that  sort?  Removal implies  100  percent and
 3
          nobody has  said  that  yet except in  the  laboratory.
 4
                   MR.  OEMING:  Gee,  I don't know.   I
 5
          wouldn't look  at it that way.
 6
                   MR.  STEIN:  Again, these  are  words
 7
          of  art.   I  am  not sure that  there is unanimity
 8
          on  that,  on the  meaning  of the  word "removal".
 9
          It  didn't have that meaning, I  don't think, to
10
          Mr. Oeming  or  to me.
11
                   If this is  unclear, I think we should
12
          clarify  it, but  is this  a real  point.
13
                   MR.  HOLMER:  The word "partial"  would
14
          clarify  it  for me, but that  sounds  too--
15
                   MR.  STEIN:  Or you could  say  "sub-
16
          stantial  removal" if  you want to.
17
                   MR.  HOLMER:  All right.
18
                   MR.  POSTON:  Do you want  to say  90
19
          percent  or  95?
20
                   MR.  OEMING:  No, no.
21
                   MR.  STEIN:  No, no.   You  see, now we
22
          have kicked over  the  traces.
23
                   (Laughter.)
24
                   Let's work  this one step  at a time.
25

-------
                   	3307

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   For substantially  removing or--
 3
                   MR. HOLMER:  If  the  other  Conferees
 4
         have no problem with  the word  "removal",  I
 5
         will withdraw.
 6
                   MR. OEMING:  I would like  to  satisfy
 7
         Mr. Holmer.  If "substantial"  would  satisfy him--
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  Would  "substantial"
 9
         satisfy you?
10
                   MR. HOLMER:  Yes.
11
                   MR. STEIN:  Let's  change the  participle
12
         to make it read a little better.   "For  substantial
13
         removal of phosphates."  0.  K.?
14
                   0. K., we are in agreement on 3«
15
                   Let's go to 4.
16

17
                         CONCLUSION #4
18

19
                   "4.  Evidence of severe bacterial
20
         pollution of tributaries has been found in  the
21
         Fox River between Lake Winnebago and Green  Bay,
22
         Wisconsin^ in the Milwaukee  River within
23
         Milwaukee County, Wisconsin; in and  downstream
24
         from cities along the Grand  River in Michigan
25

-------
                           	3308
   	_            __       -                            ——

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         and the St. Joseph River in  Indiana  and

 3
         Michigan; and in  the  streams  of  the  Calumet

 4
         area, Illinois  and Indiana.  Although the

 5
         bacterial quality of  Lake Michigan is generally

 6
         good in deep water, the water is  degraded along
 7
         the shoreline and in  harbor  areas.11

 8
                   Any comment? Michigan?

 9
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes,  I have a comment,

10
         Mr. Chairman.  In view of the discussion on

11
         the previous three points, I  question how

12
         pertinent this statement is with  respect to the

13
         waters of the Grand River in  Michigan below

14
         Lansing, let's say, and the  record that was

15
         presented at the  conference  did not  show an

16
         excessive bacterial pollution in  the St. Joseph

17
         River, at least to the point  where it affected
18
         Lake Michigan.
19
                   And in  the  last sentence,  this is too
20
         sweeping a statement  since on the Lake Michigan
21
         shoreline there are no beaches which from tests
22
         are even suspicious as to the degradation that
23
         is talked about here.
24
                   MR. STEIN:  You mean along the Michigan--
25

-------
                          	3309

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                   MR. OEMING:  Shoreline.
 3
                   MR. STEIN:  You mean in the State
 4
         of Michigan?
 5
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.

 6
                   MR. STEIN:  You are not talking about

 7
         beaches in the whole lake?
 8
                   MR. OEMING:  Only about Michigan.

 9
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.

10
                   MR. OEMING:  But the first portion

11
         of this I question, in the light of your

12
         comments and the previous discussion about

13
         interstate pollution here.
14
                   MR. HOLMER:  Was there evidence of
15
         interstate bacterial pollution presented at
16
         the conference?  We are concerned, obviously,
17
         about bacterial pollution, I am not raising
18
         that question, but  I am wondering whether this
19
         is  an appropriate  conclusion of this  conference.
20
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr. Poston or Mr. Schneider?
21
                   MR. POSTON:  I  think what we  are
22
         saying here  is evidence of severe bacterial
23
         pollution of tributaries  has been found in  the
24
         Fox River and in the other locations,  the
25

-------
                                      	3310

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          Milwaukee River.   I think this is what we
 3
          are  saying here.
 4
                    MR.  POOLS:   Well,  I want to agree at
 5
          least in part  with Mr.  Oeming, that in my
 6
          Judgment, at least, there is severe bacterial
 7
          pollution in the  St.  Joseph  River immediately
 8
          below the Indiana-Michigan State line, but I
 9
          question very  seriously if this bacterial
10
          pollution has  much, if  any,  effect on Lake
11
          Michigan.
12
                    Now, on the second point, which is
13
          the  last sentence, I  don't think that the water
14
          is degraded along the entire shoreline of Lake
15
          Michigan within the State of Indiana, for
16
          example.   And  I think that last sentence is
17
          too  sweeping a statement.
18
                    MR.  STEIN:  Are there any other
19
          comments?
20
                    Is there a  suggestion for modifying
21
          this,  changing it, or how do you want to dispose
22
          of this  point?
23
                    MR.  POOLE:  Well,  I think I could buy
24
          it,  just to get something started, without
25

-------
                                                        3311

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         quibbling about  the  first  sentence,  provided
 3
         you  doctored up  that last  phrase  in  the second
 4
         sentence.
 5
                   MR. BOSTON:  Could  we put  in some
 6
         modifying term,  "at  points along  the shoreline"?
 7
                   MR. POOLE:   Water is  degraded at
 8
         points  or sections,  or something  like that,
 9
         along   the  shoreline.
10
                   MR. STEIN:   "Degraded at points."
11
         Could we say--is  "many"  points  too strong?
12
                   MR. OEMING:  "At some points along
13
         the  shoreline."
14
                   MR. STEIN:   "At  some  points."
15
                   MR. OEMING:  I would  buy "at some
16
         points."
17
                   MR. STEIN:   All  right.
18
                   All right,  now,  are there  any other
19
         comments?
20
                   MR. POSTON:  Read that,  would you,
21
         Mr.  Chairman?
22
                   MR. STEIN:   "Although the  bacterial
23
         quality of  Lake  Michigan is generally good in
24
         deep water, .the  water is degraded at some points
25

-------
   	3312
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          along the shoreline and in harbor areas."
 3
                    MR. OEMING:   The point, I think, Mr.
 4
          Chairman, here that I  want to be sure we are
 5
          clear on is that we are not contesting the fact
 6
          that  bacterial quality in the Grand River in
 7
          Michigan below Lansing, let's say,  is not
 8
          degraded or is degraded.   We are not contesting
 9
          this.
10
                    The only question in my mind is, as
11
          Mr. Poole has pointed  out, does this degradation
12
          carry over to affect the  lake?
13
                    MR. STEIN:  Well, I think the last
14
          sentence--
15
                    MR. OEMING:   And I want to be sure
16
          that  it  doesn't say that*
17
                    MR. STEIN:  Well, it doesn't, as I
18
          read  the last sentence.  It says, "Although
19
          the bacterial quality  of  Lake Michigan is
20
          generally good in deep water, the water is

          degraded at some points along the shoreline
22
          and in harbor areas."   I  think we are--
23
                    MR. OEMING:   I  think we are all right.
24
                    MR. STEIN:  I think it is  clear.
25

-------
                     	3313

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. OEMING:  I think it is all right.
 3
                   MR. STEIN:  As I read that, we are not
 4
         dealing with, except on some of your rivers
 5
         that I am not going to get into here, but as far
 6
         as Lake Michigan is concerned we are not dealing
 7
         with an interstate bacterial effect.
 8
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  0. K.
10
                   MR. OEMING:  0. K.
11
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr..0eming, what  do you
12
         think of 4?
13
                   MR. OEMING:  I am satisfied,  with the
14
         insertion of the phrase "at some points" after
15
         the word "degraded," to leave paragraph 4 the
16
         way it is .
17
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr. Poole?
18
                   MR. POOLE:  We are satisfied.
10
                   MR. STEIN: Mr. Holmer?
26
                   MR. HOLMER:  No objection.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr. Klassen?
22
                   (No response.)
23
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr. Poston?
24
                   MR. POSTON:  All right.
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   All  right,  let's  go on with
 3
         #5.
 4

 5
                          CONCLUSION #5  AND #6
 6

 7
                    "5.   Pollution has contributed to the
 8
         growth of  excessive  Inshore algal populations which
 9
         have  occurred  in the  vicinity  of  Manitowoc to Port
10
         Washington, Wisconsin;  Chicago, Illinois; the
11
         entire eastern shore  of Lake Michigan,  and near
12
         Manistique, Michigan.   Short filter runs in water
13
         treatment  plants have  occurred at Green Bay,
14
         Sheboygan, and Milwaukee,  Wisconsin;  Waukegan,
15
         Evanston,  and  Chicago,  Illinois;  Gary,  and
16
         Michigan City,  Indiana;  Benton Harbor,  Holland,
17
         Grand Rapids,  and Muskegon, Michigan and other
18
         cities.  Phosphate fertilizer  concentrations
19
         now exceed critical algal  growth  values in many
20
         areas.  Excessive sludgeworra populations, indi-
21
         eating pollution of lake bed sediments, have
22
         been  found at  points  one mile  off the shore near
23
         Manitowoc; Sheboygan;  Port Washington,  Wisconsin
24
         to Waukegan, Illinois;  and Chicago,  Illinois  to
25

-------
 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         Muskegon, Michigan.   Sludgeworms were  not  found
 3
         in  shallow waters  subject  to wave  action."
 4
                   What do  you mean by  "short filter runs"?
 5
                   MR. POSTON:  This is in  the  water
 6
         treatment plants the  algae tend to plug  up
 7
         the sand beds and  require  frequent washing.
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  This is  Just a clarifying
 9
         suggestion.  When  you talk about "short  filter
10
         runs in water treatment  plants have occurred,"
11
         I am suggesting that  this  may  be a word  of
12
         art or a phrase of art which is incomprehensible
13
         to any but the experts.  Possibly  if we  are
14
         going to commune with people other than--
15
                   MR. POSTON:  Could we say "interference
16
         with water treatment  plant operations  have
17
         occurred at"--
18
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes,  I think so, "because
19
         of algae."
20
                   MR. POSTON:  0.  K.
21
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.  Yes.  0. K.,
22
                   MR. STEIN:  Are  there any comments
23
         on this with that change?  I think that  was
24
         Just clarifying.
25

-------
   	3316

 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                    MR.  POQLE:   Read  it.
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.   That sentence
 4
          starts  this  way  now,  instead of "short filter
 5
          runs  in the  water  treatment plant":
 6
                    "interference  with water treatment
 7
          plant operations "because of algae  have occurred
 8
          at"--
 9
                    MR.  OEMING:  Yes.  0. K.
10
                    Are  you  ready  for other  comments?
11
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes,  now  we  are  ready
12
          for comments.
13
                    MR.  OEMING:  Mr.  Chairman, I am not
14
          certain--! am  fairly  certain, let's say,  that
15
          the question about  the entire eastern  shore
16
          was fully  resolved  at the conference from the
17
          record  at  the  conference, and I particularly
18
          remember this  because  I  questioned Dr. Bartsch
19
          about his  findings.   And if I remember the
20
          testimony  correctly,  he  had identified algal
21
          problems up  as far  as  Muskegon, and I  asked
22
          him whether  he knew of algal problems  north  of
23
          Muskegon on  the  Michigan shore. He said  he  did
24
          not,  but that  was not  because they weren't there
25

-------
   	3317

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         but because he hadn't looked at it.
 3
                   Now, under those circumstances, the
 4                                    '      .      •  :       .
         entire eastern shore may be somewhat presumptuous
 5
         here, and I wonder if we couldn't be a little
 6
         more specific.  We would be willing to go on
 7
         the eastern shore as far as--what?
 8
                   And I would also like to see that
 9
         possibilities exist, beyond this.  I mean I
10
         don't want to rule this out, you understand.
11
                   MR. POOLE:  Well, would anybody
12
         object to just striking the word "entire" and
13
         just say the eastern shore of Lake Michigan?
14
                   MR. OEMING:  No.  That would be all
15
         right.  That .would leave me running room here
16
         to deal with other problems that haven't been
17
         identified here at the conference.
18
                   MR. STEIN:  Where is that?
10
                   MR. OEMING:  Just "entire," just
20
         strike that word.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.  Are there any
22
         other comments?
23
                   MR. POOLE:  I don't think the words
24
         "phosphate fertilizer concentrations" contribute
25

-------
   	3318

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         much.
 3
                   MR. POSTON:  I would eliminate  the
 4
         word  "fertilizer."
 5
                   MR. STEIN:  What  line  is  that in?
 6
                   MR. POOLE:  Right after the word
 7
         "cities."
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  You want just to strive
 9
         "fertilizer", right?
10
                   MR. POOLE:  Yes,  Just  "phosphate
11
         concentrations."
12
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
13
                   MR. POOLE:  Now,  one other point,
14
         and I raised this issue before,  about the
15
         sweeping statement that sludgeworms existed
16
         from  Chicago to Muskegon, Michigan.  And I
17
         note  the sentence that has  been  added which
18
         says  "Sludgeworms were not  found in shallow
19
         waters subject  to wave action."
20
                   I am  still raising the question as
21
         to what evidence is there that sludgeworms
22
         exist all the way from Chicago to Muskegon?
23
         I didn't get it; I might have been  asleep during
24
         that  part of the testimony.
25

-------
   	3319

 !                 •    EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
                   MR. STEIN:   If you  were  asleep,  we were

 3
          dreaming  the  same  dream.

 4
                   (Laughter.)

 5
                   MR. POSTON:  I think what we  have

 6
          reference to  is  in this  report on  the biology

 7
          and  the chart with sludgeworm population

 8
          numbers per square meter which shows the

 9
          existence of  sludgeworms in varying quantities,

10
          probably  not  right up  close next to the shore-

11
          line, but all the  way  up here to Muskegon.

12
                   MR. POOLE:   My question  is how many

13
          sampling  stations  did  you have in  that stretch

14
          of the river?    Were they 100 feet apart,  100

15
          yards apart,  10  miles  apart,  or  what?

16
                   MR. POSTON:  Grover, can you give us

17
          that information?

18
                   MR. COOK:  Yes, this was based on about

19
          750  sampling  stations.   The stations were 1

20
          mile offshore, 7 miles offshore, 10 miles, and

21
          then scattered in  the  middle  part  of the lake.
22
          They were, as I  recall,  about a  mile apart along

23
          that shoreline.

24
                   MR. POOLE:   You found  sludgeworms at

25

-------
   	:	:	3320

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         every one  of  them?
 3
                    MR. GOOK:  Absolutely.   The  only
 4
         reason we  didn't find  them  in  the  shallow  water
 5
         was because the sediments Just weren't permitted
 6
         to occur that would encourage  the  growth of
 7
         sludgeworms.
 8
                    MR. KLASSEN:  That is shallow water—
 9
                    MR. COOK:  Shallow water is  where
10
         wave action shifts the sand.
11
                    MR, KLASSEN:  Three  or four  feet?
12
                    MR. STEIN:  What  depth?
13
                    MR. COOK:  Oh, up to about 50 or 60
14
         feet.  From 50 or 60 feet shoreward you don't
15
         find the kind of bottom that will  permit the
16
         growth of  sludgeworms because  of the shifting
17
         sands.  I  may be wrong about that;  50  or 60
18
         sounds too high.  Probably  30  or 40 feet.
19
                    MR. STEIN:  All right, are we in
20
         pretty much agreement on this?
21
                    I think so.  This is a technical
22
         evidentiary point anyway, and  I think  it is
23
         an indication of the ubiquitouaneas of„the
24
         sludgeworms that they are found at  every
25

-------
                                          	3321
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION
 2
         sampling point, even if they are not proved  at
 O
         every inch.  It makes the point.
 4
                   Are there any other suggestions or
 5
         modifications here?  If not, maybe I should
 6
         read this again:
 7
                   "5'  Pollution has contributed to
 8
         the growth of excessive inshore algal popula-
 9
         tions which have occurred in the vicinity of
10
         Manitowoc to Port Washington, Wisconsin;

         Chicago, Illinois; the eastern shore of Lake
         Michigan, and near Manistique, Michigan.
13
         Interference with water treatment plant
14                                          F
         operations because of algae have occurred
15
         at Green Bay, Sheboygan, and Milwaukee,
16
         Wisconsin; Waukegan, Evanston, and Chicago,
         Illinois; Gary arid Michigan City, Indiana;
18
         Benton Harbor, Holland, Grand Rapids, and
19
         Muskegon, Michigan, and other cities.  Phosphate
         concentrations now exceed critical algal growth
21
__        values in many areas.  Excessive sludgeworm
u
         populations  indicating pollution of lake bed
f>A
         sediments have been found at points one mile

         offshore near Manitowoc; Sheboygan; Port Washington

-------
     	3322

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         Wisconsin,  to  Waukegan,  Illinoisj  and Chicago,
 3
         Illinois,  to Muskegon,  Michigan.   Sludgeworms
 4
         were not found in  shallow  waters  subject to
 5
         wave action."
 6
                    Mr.  Oeming?
 7
                    MR.  OEMING:   Satisfactory.
 8
                    MR.  STEIN:  Mr.  Poole?
 9
                    MR.  POOLE:  I'll buy  it  because I find
10
         the words  "at  points one mile offshore."
11
                    (Laughter.)
12
                    MR.  STEIN:  Right.  I was going to
13
         bring that up  as a rebuttal to  your next point.
14
                    Mr.  Holmer?
15
                    MR.  HOLMER:   I would  raise  one further
16
         question about this paragraph.  The first part
17
         of it relates  to algal  growth and  phosphates and
18
         then we skip to sludgeworms.  Should  we  have a
19
         new number?
20
                   MR.  STEIN:  Yes,  I wondered about that
21
         too.
22
                   What  do you think?  Why  did you put
23
         them together?
24
                   MR.  OEMING:  I think  it  would  be
25

-------
   	,	3323

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          relative.
 3
                    MR.  POSTON:   Maybe when we get all
 4               .
          done we  could  take  all  the  numbers out.
 5
                    MR.  STEIN:  Well,  I am not sure
 6
          that you should  not--
 7
                    How  about putting 6 before excessive
 8
          sludgeworm populations?   Right?
 9
                    MR.  OEMING:   Yes,  I like that.
10
                    MR.  STEIN:  Let's  have action.
11
                    Can  we have a reratification?  Mr.
12
          Poole, do  you  agree with 5  and 6?
13
                    Mr,  Klassen?
14
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Yes,  I agree,  partieu-
15
          larly because  there are  no  sludgeworms, apparently,
16
          between  Waukegan and Chicago.   That is 40 miles;
17
          sounds good.
18
                    (Laughter.)
19
                    MR.  STEIN:  Maybe  you rely on wave
20
          action.
21
                    Mr.  Boston?
22
                  ,  MR.  POSTON:   O.K.
23
                    MR.  STEIN:  Right.
24
                    Number 6.
25

-------
   	3324

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  OEMING:   Number 7 now.
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   Seven,  yes,  Number Seven.
 4

 5
                          CONCLUSION #7
 6

 7
                    "7-   The small quantity of  oxygen
 8
          normally dissolved in  water is perhaps the
 9
          most  important single  ingredient necessary for
10
          a healthy,  balanced, aquatic  life environment.
11
          The discharge  of treated and  untreated municipal
12
          and industrial wastes  with their high concen-
13
          trations of biochemical oxygen demand have
14
          caused oxygen  depletion in many of the Lake
15
          Michigan tributaries and in some harbors.  At
16
          present the main body  of Lake Michigan has not
17
          evidenced signs of oxygen deficiency."
18
                    Any  comment?
19
                    Yes.
20
                    MR.  HOLMER:   Could  we delete the
21
          word  "their" in the fourth line as being too
22
          inclusive?   There are  some--
23
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.  How about thatV
24
                    MR.  POSTON:   Yes.
25

-------
                                                        3325

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN: Strike  "their" in the
 3
         fourth  line.
 4
                   MR. POSTON:  0.  K.
 5
                   MR. STEIN:  Are  we  ready with that?
 6
         I don't  think I have to  reread  that,  if there
 7
         are no  further changes.
 8
                   Mr. Oeming?
 9
                   MR. OEMING:  Satisfactory.
10
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr.  Poole?
11
                   MR. POOLE:  0. K.
12
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr.  Holmer?
13
                   MR. HOLMER:  0.  K.
14
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr.  Klassen?
15
                   (No reply.)
16
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr,  Poston?
17
                   MR. POSTON:  Satisfactory.
18
                   MR. STEIN:  Namber  8.
19

20

                         CONCLUSION #8
21                        	

22

                   "8.  In addition to one  existing
23

         nuclear power plant, five  nuclear  power plants,

         three of which will have twin reactors,  are.
25

-------
                                                        3326

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          proposed  or  under  construction at Lake Michigan
 3
          cities  for completion  between  1970 and 1973.
 4
          A  special evaluation of the  combined impact
 5
          of siting many reactors on  the shores  of the
 6
          lake, in  relation  to retention and flushing
 7
          characteristics  and to accumulation of radio-
 8
          huclides  in  aquatic organisms,  is.desirable."
 9
                   Do you take  this up  later in the
10
          specific  recommendations?
11
                   MR.  POSTON:   Yes,  in the recommenda-
12
          tions.
13
                   MR.  STEIN:   All right.
I4
                   MR.  OEMING:   I have  a question.
15
                   MR.  STEIN:   All right,  Mr.  Oeming?
16
                   MR.  OEMING:   Mr. Chairman,  I don't
17
          question  the sentence  itself,  the last sentence,
18
          but  I question whether it is in the proper place
19
          here.   This  begins to  take on  the aspect of a
20
          conclusion--!  mean of  a recommendation--
21
                   MR.  STEIN: Right.
22
                   MR.  OEMING:  --rather than a  conclusion.
23
                   MR.  STEIN:   What do  you think about that?
24
                   MR.  POSTON:   It is covered in the
25

-------
   	3327

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         recommendations.
 3
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.  Well, when we  say
 4
         something is desirable, it begins  to  take on
 5
         that aspect.  You are trying to formulate a
 6
         conclusion and your 'Conclusion is  well stated,
 7
         I mean the conclusion I think is well stated.
 8
         Ve might modify this some way to cover what you
 9
         are trying to get at without getting  a recom-
10
         mendation mixed up here.
11
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.
12
                   Can we say something like this—unless
13
         you have something else to suggest, and I am
14
         just trying to get the sense of it--can we  say:
15
                   "The combined impact of  siting many
16
         reactors on the shores of the lake, particularly
17
         in relation to retention and flushing character-
18
         istics and the accumulation of radionuclides in
19
         aquatic organisms may raise significant pollution
20
         control problems."
21
                   MR. POSTON:  0. K., I'll buy it.
22
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.
23
                   MR. HOLMER:  Mr. Stein?
24
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
25

-------
   	3328
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  HOLMER:   On page 4 of the Wisconsin
 3
          statement,  the third paragraph reads:
 4
                     The use  of  Lake Michigan for cooling
 5
          waters  for massive  new petrochemical and nuclear
 6
          electrical  generating plants creates thermal
 7
          changes which  may have an adverse effect on the
 8
          condition of the  lake."
 9
                    MR.  STEIN:   What do you think about
10
          that?
ll
                    MR.  HOLMER:   For one thing,  I don't
12
          understand flushing and retention characteristics.
13
          I  am not  sure  what  that means.  That may refer
14
          to this business  of warming the water.  But if
15
          it doesn't,  I  don't see reference to that part
16
          of our  problem anywhere in the conclusions.
17
                    MR.  STEIN:   That is the point.  Yours
18
          is a little  broader, because you bring up petro-
19
          chemical  as  well  as nuclear.
20
                    What would you think of using Mr.
21
          Ho liner's  second sentence,  at least?
22
                    MR.  OEMINQ:   Mr. Chairman, may I
23
          comment?
24
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.  Mr. Oemlng?
25

-------
   	3329

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. OEMING:  I kind  of  like  what you
 3
         have said, using the phrase  "particularly in
 *
         relation to."
 5
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
 6
                   MR. OEMING:  And then instead  of
 7
         "may raise problems," I think  "may have  adverse
 8
         effects upon the lake."
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
10
                   MR. OEMING:  Pollution  problems,  and
11
         this is getting pretty general.
12
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
13
                   MR. POOLE:  Well,  my observation,  if
14
         I listened to Freeman correctly,  was he  was
15
         confining it pretty much to  temperature,  and
16
         I had interpreted this #7 as talking about nuclear
17
         plants as an attempt to cover  both, as far as   I
18
         am concerned, temperature and  radionuclides  in
19
         the water.
20
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.
22
                   MR. OEMING:  In that context,  I like
23
         this .
24
                   MR, STEIN:  Right.   Let me try to  reread
25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          this  and  let's see  if we can work it out:
 3
                    "in addition to one existing nuclear
 4
          power plant,  five nuclear power plants,  three
 5
          of  which  will have  twin reactors, are proposed
 6
          or  under  construction at Lake Michigan cities
 7
          for completion between 1970 and 1973-  The
 8
          combined  impact of  siting many reactors  on the
 9
          shores of the lake,  particularly in relation
10
          to  retention  and flushing characteristics  and
11
          to  accumulation of  radionuclides in aquatic
12
          organisms,  may have  adverse effects upon the
13
          lake."
14
                    Now, let  me raise the point that Mr.
15
          Holmer raised.  Are  we communicating when  we
16
          talk  about retention and flushing characteristics
17
          or  what do you mean?  Do you mean that is  going
18
          to  raise  the  temperature?  Because if it is not
19
          clear to  the  Conferees around here, it is  sure
20
          not going to  be clear to people outside  the field.
21
                    MR. SCHNEIDER:  I think in the report
22
          it  was brought out  that there may be a buildup
23
          or  could  be a buildup of radionuclides to  all of
24
          these sources, and  because of the low volume of
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          outflow that  this  is  a  special problem.
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:  In other words,  you are
 4
          not  talking about  temperature  here at  all?
 5
                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:   No,  I don't  think--
 6
                    MR.  OEMING:   Not exclusively,  are you?
 7
                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:   I don't think  so.
; s
                    MR.  POSTON:   Not exclusively.
 9
                    MR.  OEMING:   No,  I don't think so.
 10
                    MR.  STEIN:  But you  don't bring it up
 11
          at all  here,  right?   When you  are talking about
 12
          retention  and  flushing  characteristics,  as  I
 13
          understand it,  Mr. Holmer,  they don't  relate
 14
          it as we might have thought, and I thought  this
 15
          at first,  that they relate this to temperature.
 16
          They are talking about  the possible radioactive
 17
          effect.
 18
                    Now,  I think  if we are dealing with
 19
          both temperature and  radioactivity, let's say so.
 20
                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:   All  right.
 21
                    MR.  STEIN:  All right, let's look at
 22
          that again.
 23
                    "The combined impact of siting many
 24
          reactors on the lake, particularly to"--
 25

-------
                                           	3332

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION
 2


 3
MR. MITCHELL:  "May create thermal
          changes."
 4
                    MR.  STEIN:  Well,  "particularly in
 5
          relation  to  heating of  water"?
 6
                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:   Waste heat.
 7
                    MR.  STEIN:  Waste heat,  waste water
 8
          heat,  right?
 9
                    MR.  OEMING:   Mr.  Chairman,  may I
10
          suggest  for  a  moment, could we  suspend discussion
11
          here?  I  think  we  may have some  wording that will
12
          clear  this up. If you  will Just give us a minute,
13
          I want to  confer  with Mr. Cook.  Could we come
14
          back to  this?
15
                    MR.  STEIN:  Yes.   All right.
16
                    MR.  OEMING:   Where is Mr.  Cook?  Put
17
          out a  call for him, will  you?
18
                    MR.  POSTON:   Grover?
19
                    MR.  OEMING:   Yes.
20
                    MR.  STEIN:  All right, we  will get him.
21
                    In order not  to lose  any time, can we
22
          take up  the  next  one?
23
                    All  right,  let's go to #9.
24

25

-------
                                                        3333


 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2


 3
                         CONCLUSION #9

 4


 5
                   H9.  Watercraft of all  types  plying

 6
         the waters of Lake Michigan and its  tributaries

 7
         are contributors of both untreated and  inade-

 8
         quately treated wastes in local harbors  and  in

 9
         the open lake, and intensify local problems  of

10                           „
         bacterial pollution.

11
                   MR. OEMING:  Well, I stumble  over

12
         "all types", Mr. Chairman.  I am  not sure  that

13
         a rowboat or an outboard motor is contributing

14
         untreated s(.ewage to the lake.

15
                   MR. STEIN:  Well, let's strike  of all

16
         types", 0. K.?

17
                   You know, I wonder why  we  use a  general

18
         term like watercraft and then not try to get

19                                           „             i.
         specific and particularize  and say   of  all types.

20
         You know, this is a good type of  redundancy.

21
                   (Laughter.)
22
                   I  come from New York and  the  master

23
         was Harry Balogh, who was the announcer at Madison

24
         Square Garden years ago.  One of  his favorite

25

-------
   	3334

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          phrases  was  "Once again let me reiterate."
 3
                    (Laughter.)

 4
                    Let's  go to  watercrafts.
 5
                    MR.  OEMING:   Plying the waters.

 6
                    MR.  STEIN:   Right.

 7
                    MR.  HOLMER:   Do  you want  the  word
 8
          "bacterial"  in the last line?
 9
                    MR.  STEIN:   Do you  want Just  bacterial?
10
          Why don't  we strike that?   In talking about a

11
          nutrient problem--

12
                    MR.  OEMING:   Yes,  I would kind .of like
13
          to strike  "bacterial",, make  it more broad.
14
          Broaden  it.
15
                    MR.  STEIN: --and intensify local

16                           „
          pollution  problems,  ,it should be,  for  a literary
17
          sense, right?  All right.
18
                    MR.  POSTON:   How does  this read now?
19
                    MR.  STEIN:   It reads now:
20
                    "Watercraft  plying  the waters of  Lake
21
          Michigan and its  tributaries  are contributors
22
          of both  untreated  and  inadequately  treated  wastes
23
          in local harbors  and in the open lake,  and
24
          intensify  local  pollution  problems."
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  OEMING:   I buy it.
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   Mr. Oeming?
 4
                    MR.  OEMING:   I buy it.
 5
                    MR.  STEIN:   Mr. Poole?
 6
                    MR.  POOLE:   We buy it.
 7
                    MR.  STEIN:   Mr. Holmer?
 8
                    MR.  HOLMER:   0. K.
 9
                   (Mr.  Klassen  raised his hand.)
10
                    MR.  STEIN:   Mr. Poston?
11
                    MR.  POSTON:   Yes.
12
                    MR.  STEIN:   Mr. Klassen does too, just
13
          saying- this  for  the record.
14
                    Where  is Mr.  Cook, off looking for the
15
          sandwich  island?
16
                    MR.  POSTON:  .Here  he is,  here is
17
          Grover.
18
                    MR.  STEIN:   Number 10.
20
                          CONCLUSION #10
21-                         J

22
                    "10.   Oil  discharges from industrial
23
         plants and commercial  ships,  and careless loading
24
         and unloading of  cargos,  despoil beaches and
25

-------
   ^___	3336

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          other recreational areas,  contribute to taste
 3
          and  odor problems and treatment problems at
 4
          water treatment plants, coat the hulls of
 5
          pleasure boats, and may be toxic to fish and
 6
          other aquatic life."
 7
                    I have one kind  of technical comment.
 8
          Is that oil selective,  it  Just coats the hulls
 9
          of pleasure boats and misses the other boats?
10
                    (Laughter.)
11
                    MR. POOLE:  Strike the word "pleasure"
12
          and  make it Just "the hulls of boats."
13
                    MR. KLASSEN:   Not only boats, it coats
14
          the  beaches too.
15
                    MR. STEIN:  I think this is specific
16
          enough.
17
                    Are there any other comments on this?
18
                    Let's poll the group.  Mr. Poole, do
19
          you  have any comment?
20
                    MR. POOLE:  I am happy if you strike
21
          the  word "pleasure".
22
                    MR. STEIN:  Right.
23
                    Did you look at  the new #10?
24
                    MR. OEMING:  Yes, but I am lost at what
25

-------
                                           	3337

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         we are striking and what we are not.
 3
                   MR. STEIN:  We are striking  "pleasure";
 4
         "the hulls of boats."
 5
                   MR. OEMING:  Oh, all right.
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  You may have one in Michigan
 7
         that can pick out the pleasure boats, but they
 8
         don't have it in the other States.
 9
                   (Laughter.)
10
                   Mr. Klassen?
11
                   MR. KLASSEN:  It is all right.  I  Just
12
         wonder whether instead of "toxic" we could say
13
         "deleterious."
14
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  How about that?
15
                   MR. KLASSEN:  It might  give it a bad
16
         taste and still be all right.
17
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.  All right?
18
                   MR. OEMING:  Mr. Chairman, this is
19
         fine as far as it goes, and I hope?-.somewhere in
20
         here we can touch upon this problem of ship
21
         wrecks or abandoned ships in the  lake, and I
22
         brought that out at the conference.  I don't
23
         think that is going to be the last time we are
24
         going to face up to that problem.  This is a
25

-------
   	:	3331

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          potential here that I think I would like to
 3
          see  the  Conferees  recognize.
 4
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.   Well,  I don't think
 5
          that is  covered here.
 6
                    MR.  OEMING:  I am wondering,  if we
 7
          are  going to put it in,  maybe it ought  to be
 8.
          here.
 9
                    MR.  POSTON:  Yes.
10
                    MR.  OEMING:  I don't have wording on
11
          this, but--
12
                    MR.  SCHNEIDER: Are you  talking about
13
          the  States recommending  action on  this  Federal
14
          legislation?   That affects  this.
15
                    MR.  OEMING:  Yes,  yes, yes.
16
                    MR. STEIN:    Really, with the  discharges,
17
          "careless  loading"--
18
                    MR.  OEMING: We have to  deal  with this
19
          other in  terms  of  potential  sources, you see.
20
                    MR.  STEIN:   I  think that probably should
21
          be a special point.
22
                    MR.  OEMING: All  right,  I am  willing
23
          to reserveV:that.
24
                    MR.  STEIN:   I  am not trying to rule  here,
25

-------
   	3339

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
          because you  really have  a  good point.
 3
                    MR. POOLE:   I  missed part of the
 4
          expression.  I  take  it you were talking about
 5
          oil within a tanker,  is  that  it?
 6
                    MR OEMING:   Yes,  yes.
 7
                    MR. POOLE:   Can  you resolve  all that
 8
          by just striking  the  word  "discharges" and saying
 9
          "oils and  industrial  plants and commercial ships"?
10
                    MR. OEMING:  Floating or  sunk.
11
                    MR. HOLMER:  On  page four of our state-
12
          ment, again, we dealt with this  more broadly and
13
          we avoided the  problem of  oil,  per  se, and ships,
14
          and so on, by saying,  "The  danger of spills of
15
          pollutant  chemicals,  whether  accidental or
16
          deliberate,  is  so prevalent that it must  be con-
17
          sidered as a source and  treated  as  such."
18
                    Now,  these  are the  conclusions  and later
19
          we will make recommendations  relating  to  it.
20
          Would not  this  sentence meet  your need?
21
                    MR. POSTON:  I think we should  recognize
22
          oil, because there are probably  more emergencies
23
          created by oil  spills  than  any other one  thing,
24
          and they receive great attention.
25

-------
   	33*10

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   •MR. HOLMER:   Well,  but we will need,
 3
          then,  to have another  conclusion relating to other
 4
          pollutant chemicals,  is my point.
 fr
                    MR. STEIN:   Yes.
 6
                    MR. HOLMER:   And I  am trying to short
 7
          circuit the problem.
 8
                    MR. SCHNEIDER:   Couldn't you just
 9
          add "particularly"?
10
                    MR. HOLMER:   I would have no objection,
11
          or  "notably oil",  or  something of that sort.
12
                    MR. MITCHELL:  If you would read #10
13
          as  a general statement, oil is a pollutant
14
          problem in any water,  and what we are trying
15
          to  say is that recently it has become a more
16
          prevalent danger in  Lake Michigan, aren't we,
17
          to  emphasize it rather than to make just a
18
          broad general statement?
19
                    MR. STEIN:   That is right, I think so.
20
                    MR. MITCHELL:  And I don't think we
21
          can give the emphasis  to it that will reflect
22
          the concern which has  been indicated just by
23
          making a generalized  statement.
24
                    MR. STEIN:   Would you consider oil a
25

-------
                                                        3341

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         pollutant chemical, sir?
 3
                   MR. MITCHELL:  Yes,  sir.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  Oh, you  do?
 5
                   MR. MITCHELL:  Oh, yes.
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  All right, let me  try this
 7
         on for size, if we can do this as a conclusion:
 8
                   "The danger of spills of pollutant
 9
         chemicals, particularly oil, whether accidental
10
         or deliberate, is so prevalent that it must be
11
         considered a significant source of pollution of
12
         the waters of Lake Michigan and treated  as  such."
13
                   MR. OEMING:  You did pretty well  off
14
         the top of your head.
15
                   MR. STEIN:  Well, it is largely using
1<»
         his words.
17
                   0. K.?  And that may be able to handle
18
         this 10.
19
                   MR. MORTON:  He keeps saying 10.   We
20
         are working on #9.
21
                   MR. OEMING:  It is a new number 10.
22
                   MR. STEIN:  It is a new number.
23
                   MR. MORTON:  O.K.
24
                   MR. STEIN:   Is that all right?
25

-------
   	33*12

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   Now, do you want  to  get  into  any of the
 3
         specifics?  Do you want to  get into  any of these
 4
         specifics?
 5
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:  I think  what  we  tried
 6
         to do with  10 was identify  some  of the  specific
 7
         sources.  And I  think this  is  what you  were trying
 8
         to do, wasn't it?
 9
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.
10
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:  Identify a specific
11
         source as the spills from vessels.
12
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.  Yes.
13
                   MR. STEIN:  Now,  do  you  want  to  get
14
         into specific sources after that or  are we
15
         narrowing it too much?
16
                   MR. HOLMER:  Our  point is  that we need
17
         a whole system of surveillance on  these potential
18
         dangers throughout the basin and the development
19
         of appropriate responsive mechanisms.
20
                   MR. STEIN:  I think  we are going to
21
         get to that later.  But I wonder,  have  you laid
22
         the groundwork,  do you think,  with this broad
23
         statement and we will pick  up  the  other later?
24
                   The point is, if  he  is talking about
25

-------
   	3343
 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         pollutant  chemicals and  oil,  the  lists,  the
 3
         specific lists you have,  relate  to damages- «Just
 4
         due  to oil, not  the others, and  I think  Mr.
 5
         Holmer had a broader  base.  I don't know if we
 6
         can  get narrowed down to  those specifics without
 7
         really cutting down the  broad statement, but
 8
         this  is a--
 9
                    MR. OEMING:  Well,  I agree with Mr.
10
         Holmer in  this sense,  that  there  are other
11
         potential  problems here  from  spills of other
12
         chemicals  than oil or losses  due  to shipwreck
13
         or other things  that  ought  to be  included in
14
         this, unless you want to  make a  separate state-
15
         ment  on chemicals as  differentiated from oil.
16
         And  I am satisfied to put them together.
17
                    MR. STEIN:   Would you  be able  to find
18
         this  in your record for  the typing?
10
                    Let's  do it this  way;  let's leave it
20
         the way the stenographer  has  it  and we will go
21
         over  this  with the second draft,  0. K.,  and
22
         hold  this  in particular.
23
                    MR. POSTON:  Can  we read that  one
24
         final time?
25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE..SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   If she can find it again.
 3
          That is why I  made this move.
 4
                    (The record was read by Mrs. Rankin
 5
          as  follows:)
 6
                    "The danger of spills of pollutant
 7
          chemicals, particularly oil, whether accidental
 8
          or  deliberate, is so  prevalent that it must be
 9
          Considered a significant source of pollution
10
          of  the waters  of Lake Michigan and treated as
11
          such."
12
                    MR.  STEIN:   Thank you.  Can we poll
13
          on  that now?
14
                    Mr.  Holmer?
15
                    MR.  HOLMER:  All right.
16
                    MR.  STEIN:   Mr. Poole?
17
                    MR.  POOLE:   All right.
18
                    MR.  STEIN:   Mr. Oeming?
19
                    MR.  OEMING:  Yes.
20
                    MR.  STEIN:   Mr. Klassen?
21
                    Mr.  Poston, may we hear an expression?
22
                    MR.  POSTON:  You would replace the whole
23
          of  #9  with that?

                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes, sir.
25

-------
     	33^5
 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION
 2
                    MR.  POSTON:  You wouldn't want to
 3
          just  add  that  on?

                    MR.  STEIN:  Well,  it is  another broad
 5
          point.  If the Conferees want to  take this up
 6
          as  another--
 7
                    MR.  OEMING:  I wouldn't  object to
 8
          that, if  the Chairman doesn't feel from his
 9
          vantage point  that we mess this up too much.
10
                    MR.  STEIN:  No, no, no.   Now, if you
11
          want  to,  we should leave that first,  do you

          want  to--is your proposal to add on what you
13
          have  in #10 as we have revised it?
14
                    MR.  POSTON:  Well, I was  really
15
^         thinking  of leaving 10 as was and  then add the
16
          danger of pollutant chemicals, especially oil,
17
          putting that on the end.

                    MR.  STEIN:  In the end?   This is just
19
          a literary thing, but it seems to  me,  if we are

          putting these  both in one proposal  to perfect

          a draft,  that  the sentence we just  read as Mr.

          Holmer's  sentence was a  broader sentence than
23
          this  and  that  might come first and  this would
24
          logically follow.  Is that all right?
25

-------
   	33^6

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION
 2
                    MR.  POSTON:   0. K.
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.
 4
                    Now,  what do the Conferees think about
 5
          haying that first sentence which we have been
 6
          polled on to be followed in #10 by the sentence
 7
          as  modified here, which reads:
 8
                    "Oil  discharges from industrial plants
 9
          and commercial  ships,  and careless loading and
10
          unloading of cargos,  despoil beaches and other
11
          recreational areas, contribute to taste and odor
12
          problems and treatment problems at water treat-
13
          ment plants, coating  the hulls of boats, and
14
          may be deleterious to  fish and other aquatic
15
          life."
16
                    Are we in agreement to adding that?
17
                    Yes.   All right, everyone is in

          agreement on that.
19
                    Are you ready to go back?

                    MR.  OEMING:  .Yes,  I think we are.
21
                    MR. STEIN:   All right.
22
                    MR.  OEMING:   I am not sure you are

•          going to buy it,  but we will try.
£n
                    MR. STEIN:   All right.
25

-------
                                                        3347
 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
              EXECUTIVE SESSION
         CONCLUSION #8  (Continued)








          MR. OEMING:   "The combined  impact  of



siting many reactors on the shores  of the  lake



poses a threat, particularly with respect  to



thermal problems and to accumulation  of  radio-



nuclides in the ecosystem."



          MR. POSTON:  In  the what?



          MR. OEMING:  Ecosystem.



          MR. STEIN:  Oh,  boy.



          MR. OEMING:  Wait a minute,  before you



strike me down on that, this is a term that



pulls in fish and wildlife and insects and the



whole business here.



          MR. SCHNEIDER:   Ecologic,  you mean?



          MR. OEMING:  Yes.



          MR. STEIN:  You mean there  isn't a word



for this that we can put in the family newspaper?



          MR. OEMING:  Well, in the food chain,



in the food chain.




          MR. STEIN:  Well, I don't know.  How



do the Conferees feel about it?  Do you  want to

-------
    	33^8

 i                       EXECUTIVE;SESSION


 2
         use  eco?
 3
                    MR.  HOLMER:   You  do have a problem.
 4
         We are  concerned  about  this because of the food

 5
         chain part of  it,  and ecosystem,  although it

 6
         is a relatively new  word, is very expressive.

 7
                    MR.  OEMING:   Well, if you want to
 8
         put  "the  food  chain" in there,  I  don't object,

 9
         if that makes  it  more sensitive.

10
                    MR.  PURDY:  Aquatic insects, fish—
11
                    MR.  OEMING:   Or else  use aquatic

12
         insects,  fish, and so forth.

13
                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:  Biomass.
14
                    MR.  STEIN:  Oh, no, no,  no.   Here we
15
         go.
16
                    Suggested  as  a substitute for ecosystem
17
         was  biomass.             v
18
                    (Laughter.)
19
                    I  don't  know,  I- think part of our
20
         function  here  is  to  try to  get  this out in terms
21
         that at least  Klassen and I can understand next
22
         week when we go home.
23
                    (Laughter.)
24
                    And  I am ashamed  to admit this.   Let's
25

-------
 l                      EXECUTIVE SESSION



 2
         go off the record.

 «
                   (Off the record.)


 4                  MR. OEMING:  Well, O.K.,  let's  get


         off of this, Mr. Chairman.

 c
                   Would you buy this, the Conferees buy


         this, strike the "ecosystem" term and use


 8        "insects, birds, fish, and aquatic  life"?


 9                  MR. STEIN:  All right.  We could use


10        biota, but that is all right.


11                  MR. OEMING:  Oh, you are  going  to go


         back to biota now?


13                  (Laughter.)


14                  MR. STEIN:  Well, that has trickled


         down to us.  But I think we are all right.


16                  MR. OEMING:  Something has trickled

17
         down to me that hasn't to you.


                   (Laughter.)

19
                   MR. STEIN:  Well, you are much  higher

20
   I      in the hierarchy.

21
                   You know, when I took economics, they

22
         used to have a hierarchy of liquidity of  the

23
         things that are the most valuable.  Money was

24
         obviously the thing you could trade, and  they

25

-------
   	_.	3330

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          used to have the kids working on what you would
 3
          have that was lowest on that pyramid and they
 4
          came up with a doubtful Rembrandt.
 5
                    (Laughter.)
 6
                    But this is what happens.   I do think
 7
          we  have to guard against the danger  of being a
 8
          bunch of specialists with a Jargon where we are
 9
          Just talking to ourselves and not really communi-
10
          eating outside.

                    MR. OEMING:  Yes, you are  right.
12
                    MR. STEIN:  Let's try that again;  Let
13                                        ,
          me  read the first sentence and you pick up the

          second:
15
                    "in addition to one existing nuclear
16
          power plant, five nuclear power plants, three of
17
          which will have twin reactors, are proposed or
18
          under construction'at Lake Michigan  cities for
19
          completion between 1970 and 1973."
20
                    Now Mr. Oeming.
21
                    MR. OEMING:  "The combined impact of
22
          siting many reactors on the shores of the lake
23
          poses a threat, particularly with respect to
24
          thermal problems and to accumulation of.radionuelid
25
BS

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                                                      „
         in  the  insects,  birds,  fish and aquatic life.

 3
                   MR.  STEIN:  Right.

 4
                   Are  there  any comments?

 5
                   MR.  KLASSEN:   What evidence is there —

 6
         we  have been in  this  now for four or five years —

 7
         that the products  of  radiation, radionuclides,

 8
         do  pose a threat?

 9
                   FROM THE AUDIENCE:  None.

LO
                   MR.  OEMING:  Voice from the audience.


                   FROM THE AUDIENCE:  The AEC discharges

12
         at  drinking water  standards, that is the dis-

L3
         charges--

14
                   MR.  STEIN:   I am sorry, sir, we

15
         announced before we  are going to have to confine

L6
         this to the Conferees.

17  '
                   MR.  KLASSEN:   I merely asked the

18                                          .  , .
         background for this  statement.  This has not

19
         been our experience,  and I wondered, before

20
         we  put this in,  because this is, in the public

21
         mind, again, posing  a threat that is popular

22
         and mysterious.   Before I would subscribe to

23
         that I would want  some  foundation, because this

24
         has not been our experience.

25

-------
   	:	.	3352

 !                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
                   MR. STEIN;  Mr.  Poston?

 3
                   MR. POSTON:  I think I might  ask  Dr.

 4
         Weinberger whether he would  care to  comment on

 5
         it?

 6
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes,  he is here.

 7
                   DR. WEINBERGER:  I am sorry,  I  didn't

 8
         hear.

 9
                   MR. POSTON:  I wonder if you  would

10
         care to answer a question  here that  Mr. Klassen

11
         has posed concerning the potential effect of

12
         location of nuclear power  plants, nine  nuclear

13
         power plants around the  south end of the  lake,

14
         and particularly with respect to the hazards

15
         from radionuclides, radiation that might  come

16
         from such a plant potential.

17                     '  i.
                   DR. >FEINBERGER:  Well, in  most  cases

18
         one needs--

19
                   MR. STEIN:   Why don't you come up

20
         here.

21
                   (Off the record.)
22
                   MR. STEIN:  All  right, we  are ready
23
         again.

24
                   Now, the question--and let me get the
25

-------
 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         questibn--! don't think  there  is  much  doubt
 3
         that with any power plant, whether  it  is  a
 4
         nuclear power plant or a steam power plant
 5
         or any plant using cooling water  we are
 6
         worried about thermal pollution.  The  question
 7
         that Mr. Klassen raises  is:
 8
                   Given the safety factors  in  these
 9
         nuclear power plants and the kind of discharges
10
         put out;, are we Justified in referring to an
11
         accumulation of radionuclides  in  the food chains,
12
         the ecosystem--! talk like this,  too,  but I
13
         don't put this out in the record--in the  biota
14
         that has been Justified  by the record.
15
                   Would you care to comment on that,
16
         Dr» Weinberger?
17
                   DR. WEINBERGER:  Murray,  I have not
18
         seen the record and have not seen any  data
19
         concerning any accumulation.   For one  thing,
20
         I think they are talking about the  construction
21
         of additional plants.  As I say,  I  have jjust
22
         not seen any data.  I would be happy to check
23
         it out with Mr. Cook in  terms  of  what  have been
24
         the measurements on that.
25

-------
   	333^

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    I would say there  is no question —
 3
                    MR.  POSTON:   There are no plants there.
 4
          It  is  new plants  that we are concerned with.
 5
                    DR.  WEINBERGER:  Well, as I  read the
 6
          comment,  this  is  why I was saying,  I think the
 7
          concern here is  over new plants.  With the safe-
 8
          guards available  and as long as one maintains an
 9
          adequate  surveillance  system,  making sure  that
10
          the  safeguards are  in  effect,  there need not
11
          be  any accumulation.
12
                    MR.  POSTON:   This  would apply to any
13
          pollutant,  really,  in  any plant.
14
                    DR.  WEINBERGER:  Yes.
15
                    MR.  OEMING:   Dr. Weinberger,  are we
16
          too  strong when we  say that  new plants  pose a
17
          threat?   I  think  this  is what  is bothering us
18
          here.  Granting that  there are methods  to  control
19
          these  things,  are we  too strong in  saying  that
20
          these  pose  a threat to the birds,  fish  and
21
          aquatic life through the accumulation?
22
                    I would like your  opinion.
23
                    DR. WEINBERGER:  Larry,  again I  have
24
          difficulty  in  the use  of the words  "pose a threat"
25

-------
   	   3355

 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2                                              '
          in  that  I  think  almost any  installation would
 3
          pose a threat  if it wasn't  operated properly
 4
          in  that  sense.
 5
                    I  see  the thing that  I  think  is
 6
          bothering  you, it implies that—it could imply
 7
          a threat because they don't know  what to do with
 8
          it, and  I  think,  as Mr.  Stein has indicated,
 9
          that certainly if one puts  in the safety.methods
10
          the problem  is minimal or there is no problem.
11
          So  again I think it is a question of phrasing
12
          that is--
13
                    MR.  STEIN: Yes.   Let  me try to do this,
14
          and I think  possibly the pet names we have  used,
15
          and let  me try to get at the problem so we  can
16
          all agree  and  meet on this,  something like  this.
17
          Can we say:
18
                    "The combined  impact  of siting many
19
          reactors on  the  shores of the lake must be
20                         -     "
          considered so  that this  activity  will not result
21
          in  pollution from the excess--from wastewater
22
          heat or  from the discharge  of excessive amounts of
23
          radionuclides."
24
                   MR.  KLASSEN:   Yes.  Yes,  that is  an
25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          entirely different statement.
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.   All right.   Well,
 4
          we  are  trying  to get  the state of the art into
 5
          what  we have.
 6
                    MR.  OEMING:   Now,  could we stop there
 7
          and read it back,  have her  read it back so we
 8
          are sure we have it right?
 9
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
10
                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:  I  might say,  this was
11
          a recommendation from the AEG  Committee on
12
          Reactor Safeguards and they  expressed concern
13
          about the buildup  because of the flushing action,
14
          and this is their  wording.
15
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes, but this is  the
16
          wording we got into trouble  with.  You  see, the
17
          difficulty--
18
                    MR.  POSTON:   Maybe if we take this
19
          out Mr. Klassen would be satisfied.
20
                    MR.  STEIN:   I think  Mr. Klassen deals
21
          with  the facts,  not with what  we take out.
22
                    The  difficulty, I  think, that we have
23
          here--and let  me get  off the record on  this.
24
                    (Off the record.)
25

-------
                                 	3357

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Just to make my position
 3
          clear,  I  think it  ought to  be in there, but if
 4
          we  say  the wording "pose a  threat"  and I agree
 6
          to  that wording and somebody says what is that
 6
          threat, I  couldn't tell them.
 7
                    MR.  STEIN:  Right.
 8
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   But your last wording call-
 9
          ing  attention to  this  potentiality is good.
10
                    MR.  STEIN:  Right.
11
                    MR.  OEMING:   Now  could we have it
12
          again?
13
                    MR.  STEIN:  Would you read that back,
14
          please?
15
                    (Record  read  as follows:   "The combined
16
          impact  of  siting many reactors  on the shores  of
17
          the lake must  be considered so  that this activity
18
          will  not result in pollution from wastewa*e-r  heat
19
          or  from the  discharge of excessive  amounts of
20
          radionuclides.")
21
                    MR.  STEIN:  All right.  Now, if we  have
22
          done  that,  fine.
23
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Sounds  like a lawyer's
24
          statement,  but it  is good.
25

-------
   	3358

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  That  is my  job.
 3
                   Now we will go to 11.
 4
                   MR. OEMING:  Did you get the  agreement
 5
         of everybody on that?
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes, everyone.  Do  I get
 7
         a disagreement?
 8
                   If not, let me go to 11.
 9

10
                        CONCLUSION #11
11

12
                   "ll.  Disposal of polluted dredged
13
         material in Lake Michigan open water causes
14
         discoloration, increased turbidity, and oil
15
         slicks.  Additionally, the pollutants contained
16
         in dredged solids, nutrients, and toxic material,
17
         which are responsible for deterioration of water
18
         quality."
19
                   Is that a sentence, the second  one?
20
                   MR. OEMING:  Something went wrong.
21
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:  I guess we don't have
22
         that.  You must have a revised copy.
23
                   MR. STEIN:  Well, all right,  I  think
24
         we get the idea.  We don't have a complete sentence
25

-------
                                       	 3359

 1                       EXECUTIVE"SESSION

 2
          and we will  fix  it  up,  but let's  have a
 3
          comment.
 4
                    MR.  HOLMER:   Mr. Chairman,  I would
 5
          like  to  refer  again to  our statement  on page
 6
          three.   In this  case we deal  directly with
 7
          the totality of  dredging,  not alone  the
 8
          pollutional  aspects of  it, but a  couple of
 9
          other things.
10
                    "The maintenance of waterways for
11
          commercial and navigational use is a  constantly
12
          necessary  activity  if siltation is not to render
13
          the waterway unusable.   The continued deposition
14
          of dredged material in  the deeper portions of
15
          Lake  Michigan, however, poses a distinct threat
16
          to the quality of the lake.
17
                    "Alternative  methods of disposal are
18
          more  expensive and  pose problems  of  their own,
19
          some  of  which  include further pollutional hazards."
20
                    I'  think these are all true  statements
21
          and are  based  on the record which was made here
22
          at Chicago a month  ago.  I think  they provide an
23
          adequate foundation for the same  kind of recom-
24
          mendationsor recommendation,  at least, dealing
25

-------
   	.	3360

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 «?>
 2
          with this subject when we get to that point.
 3
                    MR. STEIN:   Well,  yes.  You raised
 4
          some interesting points here.  In a way one
 5
          of  your statements,  it seems to me, goes farther
 6
          than the statement of the Federal people. They
 7
          talked in terms of disposal  of polluted dredged
 8
          material and say it  causes deterioration, turbidity
 9
          and oil slicks.  You  talk about "continued dis-
io
          posal of dredged material"-- without a modifier--

11
           in the deeper portions of the lake poses a
12
          distinct threat to the quality of the lake."
13
                    Now, on several of these points, and
14
          maybe I am not clear  on the  record, I am not
15
          sure, that the record  abundantly supports that
16
          statement.   Maybe it  does.
17
                    MR. OEMING:  Well, modify it.
18
                    MR. STEIN:   Well,  no, I am just--
19
                    MR. OEMING:   Yes.  "The continued
20
          deposition of dredged material containing
21
          nutrients,  toxic material,"  and whatever else
22
          you want to put in there.
23
                    MR. STEIN:   Now, let me again ask, to
24
          work on your statement, Mr.  Holmer, is siltation
25

-------
   	3361

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
          the  only  reason  they  do  this,  dredge  those
 3
          harbors?  Don't  they  also  dredge  them because
 4
          of some industrial waste discharges?
 5
                   MR. HOLMER:  Well, but  you  do  it  for
 6
          the  purpose of maintaining navigational--
 7
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  But you say  "if
 8
          siltation is not to render the waterway
 9
          unusable."
10
                   MR. HOLMER:  Oh, I see.
11
                   MR. STEIN:  Siltation may be too
12
          narrow.  This may be  the situation in Wisconsin,
13
          but  I think when you  get some  of  these industrial
14
          harbors here, they may have some  other material
15
          they are dredging out.
16
                   MR. HOLMER:  We  were using  siltation
17
          in the broad sense to include  industrial depo-
18
          sition, but I would be glad to substitute the
19
          word "deposition" there.
20
                   What I was  trying to do, Mr. Chairman,
21
          is to indicate that I think our conclusions need
22
          to relate not only to the  fact that disposal
23
          of polluted dredged materials causes  turbidity,
24
          et cetera, but that it is  a necessary activity.
25

-------
   	:	:	3362

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          I  think this  is  also a conclusion.
 3
                    I  think it is also a conclusion that
 4
          the  alternative  methods may "be more expensive.
 5
          This  Is something I  think  we need to recognize
 6
          and  be  prepared  to cope with.   And  that it may
 7
          not  be  an  easy problem to  solve because of the
 8
          additional dangers of  further  pollution.
 9
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.   Let me  try this.
10
          I  don't know,  I  think  Mr. -Oeming is working on
11
         .this.
12
                    Would  it be  acceptable to you in the
13
          first sentence if  we said,  "The maintenance
14
          of waterways for commercial  and navigational
15
          use  i.s  a consistently  necessary activity"  period?
16
          Because  this is  the  main point we want to  make.
17
                    The  point  is  that  we wanted  to  do that
18
          and maybe  we don't get  into  this notion of what
19
          is causing it.   We said a  constantly necessary
20
          activity.  I think again we  have to take  the
21
          notion  that—and let me give you my view  and  I
22
          hope it  is the view  of  everyone--that  the  Corps
23
          of Engineers is  Just going to  have  to  keep up
24
         with this  dredging activity  if we are  going to
25

-------
       .	3363

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         keep  the harbors  open.   Now,  I think  the Corps
 3
         has pointed  out many, many  times,  when we deal
 4
         with  another polluter,  like a city or an industry,
 5
         we give them a time  to  clean up.   Anyone can clean
 6
         up pollution by closing an  industry,  putting a
 7
         padlock on the city  hall.   The challenge is to
 8
         keep  the industry going and the  city  going and
 9
         yet clean up pollution.
10
                   I  think the Corps is asking for the
11
         sameiklnd of  consideration.   They are  doing not
12
         only  a useful activity  but  an essential activity
13
         in our country.   They are asking for  the same
14
         kind  of time schedule or consideration of the
15
         time  schedule, and the  notion that the answer
16
         is not Just  to stop  the  activity, in the same way
17
         as you wouldn't come out with an answer in your
18
         State to Just shut down  an  industry.   And I
19
         think this first  sentence possibly does it.
20

                   Do you  have the second sentence there?
21

                   MR. OEMING:   I have something to try on
22

         you.
23       J

                   MR. STEIN: Right.
24

                   MR. OEMING:   "The continued deposition
25

-------
   	:	3361.

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          of dredged material containing nutrients,
 3
          oils,  solids  of sewage and industrial waste
 4
          origin in the deeper portions of Lake Michigan,
 5
          however,  poses a distinct threat to the quality
 6
          of the lake."
 7
                    MR. STEIN:  All right.
 8
                    MR. OEMING:   Then the-rest of it,
 9
          I  am - -
10
                    MR. STEIN:  What do you think about
11
          it,  do you want that last sentence or not?
12
                    MR. OEMING:   No.
13
                    MR. STEIN:  Do we really mean that?
14
                    MR. OEMING:   I don't think it is
15
          necessary.
16
                    MR. POOLE:  Give that once more, please.
17
          You  are looking at the Holmer draft now?
18
                    MR. STEIN:   Yes, we are.
19
                    MR. OEMING:   We are looking at the Holmer
20
          draft,  Mr. Poole,  and  starting with the fourth
21
          sentence.
22
                    MR. POOLE:  Yes.
23
                    MR. OEMING:   "The continued deposition
24
          of dredged material"--now, we quality this--
25

-------
                                                        3365

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         "containing nutrients, oils, solids of  sewage
 3
         and industrial waste origin in the deeper
 4
         portions of the lake poses a distinct" threat."
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  Anywhere in the lake,
 6
         isn't it?
 7
                   MR. OEMING:  Well, anywhere in the
 8
         lake, yes.
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  In the lake, in Lake
10
         Michigan.
11
                   MR. OEMING:  Not necessarily  in  the
12
         deeper portions, but in Lake Michigan.
13
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes, in Lake Michigan.
14
         And we don't need the "however", do we?
15
                   MR. OEMING:  No.
16
                   MR. STEIN:   All right.
17
                   Let me read this again, as I  get  Mr.
18
         Oeming's proposition.  The whole thing  would read:
19
                   "The maintenance of waterways for
20
         commercial and navigational use. is a constantly
21
         necessary activity."
22
                   MR. OEMING:  Period.
23
                   MR. STEIN:  Period.  "The continued
24
         deposition of dredged material containing nutrients
25

-------
   ^____	3366

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          oils,  solids  of  sewage  and industrial waste
 3
          origin in  Lake Michigan poses  a distinct
 4
          threat to  the quality of the lake."

 5
                    Are we in  agreement  on that?

 6
                    Mr. Klassen?

 7
                    MR. KLASSEN:   Yes, if it follows--
 8
          I  Just want  to point this  out--if it follows,
 9
          then,  that in the recommendations the Conferees
10
          go on  record  as  the  target objective to dump
11
          nothing into  Lake Michigan.  In other words,
12
          not have it as a dumping ground.
13
                    If  this conclusion says that, then I

14
          am for it.
15
                    MR. STEIN:  I don't  know that it
16
          necessarily says this.
17
                    MR. OEMING:   I don't think it does.
18
                    MR. KLASSEN:   This is what it says.

19
                    MR. STEIN:  Well,  .you know, I Just
20
          heard  a sotto voice  from another Conferee that
21
          he didn't  think  it said it.
22
                    If  we  can  devise a conclusion like
23
          this where both  groups*on this are satisfied,
24
          I  think we have  got  the problem stated.
25

-------
   	33^7

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                    The question,  one  of  the hard issues
 3
         we  are  going to have  to  face, and I don't think
 4
         there is  any question on that,  is the action
 5
         program on what we  are going to do with the
 6
         dredged material.   We are going to face that.
 7
         I don't know that we  can prejudge that here
 8
         without a prolonged discussion.  I think we
 9
         have laid the problem out where we all can
10
         agree on  it.
11
                    May I make  a suggestion on this,
12
         gentlemen?  And I really mean this.   This is
13
         going to  be one of  the hardest  things the
14
         Conferees are going to have  to  grapple with.
15
         Let's see if we can leave it here.  Again this
16
         isn't the last word.   And while we are here,
17
         I suggest the Conferees  in the  recesses might
18
         on  this point get together,  because  this is one
19
         we  are  going to have  to  come to later, and let's
20
         see if  we can get a formulation.   I  am sure if
21
         we  get  stopped on this now,  without  some pre-
22
         liminary  probing in an informal way  among the
23
         Conferees, we may be  here for the rest of the
24
         day Just  on this point.
25

-------
   	3368,
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    So procedurally,  let's see If we--
 3
          Are  we in agreement more or less with this?
 4
          You  are going to have another crack at it after
 5
          we get it typed up.
 6
                    Yes.
 7
                    MR. HOLMER:  One  more plea for the
 8
          extra sentence.  I feel we  heard substantial
 9
          evidence to this point at the conference.  I
10
          append this purely as a factual statement as a
11
          matter of full disclosure to the people in the
12
          basin.  There is no reluctance on our part to
13
          insist on use of different  methods of disposal,
14
          but  we certainly can't do so in any false
15
          expectation.
16
                    I realize there are price tags on
17
          everything we have said so  far, "but this is
18
          a special case and I think  merits a special
19
          mention.
20
                    MR. STEIN:  All right.  Let's again
21
          get  the Conferees.
22
                    What do you think of this last sen-
23
          tence?  Do you want it or not, "Alternate
24
          methods of disposal are more expensive and
25

-------
   	3369
 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         pose problems of their own"--
 3
                   MR. OEMING:  It is a flag.   I  think
 4
         I could buy it.
 5
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr. Poole?
 6
                   MR. POOLE:  I think we  can  buy that.
 7
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr. Klassen?
 8
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Well, Mr.  Oeming's
 9
         wording completely changed,  in my opinion;,•: the
10
         statement of Mr. Holmer's.
11
                   MR. HOLMER:  No, no, no,  I  am  talking
12
         about the next  sentence.
13
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Well, I  am going back
14
         here.  I interpret the second sentence that
15
         this could prohibit  the dumping  of any material
16
         into Lake Michigan,  and I think  this  is  one
17
         of  the things that these  Conferees should address
18
         themselves to.  The  way it has been changed,
19
         that Lake Michigan could  be  used as a dumping
20
         ground for material  unless it was polluted
21
         material, and that completely changes the whole
22
         concept.
23
                   MR. STEIN: Of what?
24
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Of what--
25

-------
   	:	3370
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSIO^

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes, original, you are
 3
          right,  that is correct.
 4
                    MR.  KLASSEN:  The continued deposition
 5
          of dredged material,  that means all dredged
 6
          material.   Now we modify it to say only
 7
          polluted dredged material.  And I think that
 8
          this  conference ought to go on record that Lake
 9
          Michigan will  not become a dumping ground for
10
          anything and then set up a time schedule when
11
          this  is  going  to be accomplished.
12
                    I don't think it is as difficult as
13
          you  think  it is.  It  is just a question of
14
          concept, whether we want to open the door to
15
          have  Lake  Michigan be a dumping ground or not
16
          a  dumping  ground.
17
                    MR.  POSTON:  I would comment on Mr.
18
          Holmer's statement.   He says alternative methods
19
          of disposal are more  expensive,  and we have
20
          found that sometimes  you change that method
21
          of disposal and find  it cheaper.
22
                    MR.  HOLMER:  I think it probably is
23
          too broad.   I  would say "may be more expensive."
«4
                    MR.  POSTON:  We  have run into that.
25

-------
   	3371

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN:   "May be," he  will  change
 3
         it  to  "may be."  All right.
 4
                   But we still have  some very  fundamental
 5
         problems, and I think Mr. Klassen has  raised  one.
 6
         We  have a real issue here.   It is very clear
 7
         that the statement that Mr.  Holmer  originally
 8
         made has been changed, although I would  say tha't
 9
         this statement here is consistent with the state-
10
         ment that the Federal Water  Pollution  people
11
         made when they talked about  polluted dredgings,
12
         although that may be a little more  ambiguous.
13
                   Now, the question  here, would  you say,
14
         Mr. Holmer, or did you mean  that the continued
15
         deposition of dredged material poses a distinct
16
         threat to the lake, any dredged material^
17
                   MR. HOLMER:  There are some  dredged
18
         materials the polluted nature of which may be
19
         subject to question, and by  using the  conclusion
20
         it  constitutes a distinct threat we were willing
21
         to  concede that even what may be considered as
22
         unpolluted dredgings may in  fact be included
23
         in  that category, which, of  course, is the point
24
         that Clarence is making, I believe.
25

-------
                                     	3372

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   And so we made  it broad here  and,  then,
 3
         of course, we have a corresponding  recommendation
 4
         in back that we think deals with that.
 5
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
 6
                   I am trying to  come  to a  conclusion
 7
         here and trying to get the Conferees  to agree.
 8
         Let me give you the two alternatives.
 9
                   "The continued  deposition of  dredged
10
         material in Lake Michigan poses a distinct
11
         threat to the quality of  the lake"  or "The
12
         continued deposition of dredged material con-
13
         taining nutrients, oils,  solids of  sewage and
14
         industrial wastes origin  in Lake Michigan poses
15
         a distinct threat to the quality of the lake."
16
                   I think that phrase  "containing nutrients,
17
         oils, solids of sewage and industrial wastes
18
         origin" is a phrase We have to decide whether
19
         we are going to leave in or we can  get  along
20
         by leaving it out.  I take it Mr. Klassen would
21
         like to leave it out.  Mr. Holmer sees  that in
22
         this use of the term "threat" that  that could be
23
         left out.
24
                   How do the other Conferees feel?
25

-------
   	3373
 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                   MR. HOLMER:  I feel  comfortable with Mr.
 3
          Oeming's  statement,  "because  that is  true, too.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:   Yes.
 5
                   You don't  feel comfortable with Mr.
 6
          Oeming's  statement?
 7
                   MR. KLASSEN:   Well,  it depends  on
 8
          what  this is leading to.  If it is  leading to
 9
          permitting  dumping in  Lake Michigan  and having
10
          Lake  Michigan become  a dumping ground,  then,
11
          no, I am  not for  it.
12
                   MR. STEIN:   No.  As  I look at this,
13
          Mr. Klassen, I don't know that this  is  leading
14
          to—either  one of them,  possibly either one,
15
          is getting  to this conclusion.   This is something
16
          we are going to have  to  meet head on later.
17
                   MR. KLASSEN:   Let's  wait until  we
18
          get to the  recommendations and face  it.
19
                   MR. STEIN:   But how  do we  want  to
20
          handle this?  Will we  buy Mr.  Oeming's  statement
21
          now or the  one without the^-
22
                   MR. OEMING:  Tentatively.
23
                   MR.-STEIN:   Tentatively?   Let's leave
24
          it there.
25

-------
   	3374

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
                   MR. KLASSEN:   What he  said  is  correct.
 3
                   MR. STEIN:  What?
 4
                   MR. KLASSEN:   What he  said  is  correct.
 5
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.   You are
 6
         always going  to have a chance  to sign off
 7
         at the end.
 8
                   How about that last  sentence,  do you
 9
         want it?  Is  there any objection?
10
                   MR. POSTON:  What is the last  sentence?

11
                   MR. STEIN:  "Alternative methods of
12
         disposal may  be more expensive"--
13
                   MR. KLASSEN:   All right.
14
                   MR. STEIN: --"and pose problems of
15
         their own, some of which include further
16
         pollutional hazard."
17
                   MR. KLASSEN:   This is  right.   I don't
18
         know why it should be in there,  because  every-
19
         thing we are going to do here  is going to
20
         cost people and industry money,  so why point
21
         our finger here at the poverty-stricken  Corps
22
         of Engineers when we are not doing the same
23
         thing to industry or cities?   I  don't know why
24
         we have got to bring money into  this  thing.
25

-------
 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION



 2                 MR. STEIN:   Do you  agree  with Klassen?



 3                 MR. OEMING:  It may Include  further



 4       pollutional hazard, do you want  to  buy that?



 5       Strike  that qualification about  expensive and pose



 6       problems of their  own.   You have said  it if



 7       you  say, "alternate methods may  include further



 g       pollutional hazards."



 9                 MR. KLASSEN:   Yes.   This  is  kind of



10       an academic statement.



11                 MR. OEMING:  0. K., it is academic,




12       I admit, but--



13                 MR. KLASSEN:   You say  the same thing



14       about ever municipal and Industrial waste.



15                 MR. OEMING:  You don't like  it at all?



16                 MR. STEIN:   All right, let's--



17                 MR. OEMING:  Let's  take it out.



18                 MR. STEIN:   All right.



19                 MR. OEMING:  Take it out.



20                 MR. KLASSEN:   It sounds like you are




21       trying  to trade money  for Lake Michigan.



22                 MR. STEIN:   Yes. All  right.  I think



23       we are  very close  to an  agreement.   Let me read




24       this again before  we slip.



25                 "The maintenance of waterways for

-------
   ^_______	3376
 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         commercial  and navigational  use  is  a constantly
 3
         necessary activity.   The continued  deposition of
 4
         dredged material  containing  nutrients,  oils,
 5
         solids of sewage  and  industrial  wastes  origin
 6
         ir. Lake Michigan  poses a distinct threat to
 7
         the quality of the  lake."
 8
                   May  we  have an expression?
 9
                   (No  response.)
10
                   MR.  STEIN:  If there  is none,  we  adopt
11
         that  and we substitute this  for  #11 here and  we
12
         go on to #12.
13

14
                         CONCLUSION #12
15

16
                   "12. Pesticide pollution of  Lake Michi-
17
         gan and its tributary streams  results from  the
18
         application of these  materials  by spraying  and
19
         dusting.  Pesticides  are used  most  heavily  in
20
         the Lake Michigan Drainage Basin in areas of
21
         extensive fruit growing.  These  areas are:   The
22
         Wisconsin portion of  the Green  Bay  watershed; the
23
         Milwaukee area; the  southeast  quadrant  of the
24
         Basin, and  the area  along the  northeast shore
25

-------
                                                        3377
 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
          from Manlstee to Traverse  City, Michigan.   The
 3                              .
          ever-increasing use  of these  materials  threatens
 4
          water uses for recreation,  fish and wildlife,  and
 5                          •
          water supplies.
 6
                   What happened  to the  ecosystem here?
 *7
                    (Laughter.)
 8
                   MR. OEMING:  Mr.  Chairman.
 9
                   MR. STEIN: Yes.
10
                   MR. OEMING:  I have a couple  of ideas
11                                               „         „
          on  this  one.  I stumble- over:the word  pollution
12                             «
          in  the first place.   Pesticides are found in
13
          Lake Michigan," and  I am not  sure whether the
14
          testimony at the hearing showed this or not, but
15
          I am accepting that  probably  they are found in
16
          Lake Michigan.
17
                   Strike the word  "pollution  and say:
18
          "Pesticides are found in Lake Michigan  and its
19
          tributary streams  resulting from the application
20
          of  these materials"  period.
21
                   Now, I don't care where it comes from;
22
          it  is there.  "The ever-increasing use  of these
23
          materials"--or where it  exists--"The ever-increasin
24
          use of these materials threatens water  uses for
25

-------
      .         	:	:	3378

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          recreation,  fish and wildlife, and water supplies."

 3
                    MR.  STEIN:  All right.

 4
                    MR.  OEMING:  I question what is added

 5
          here because that might be the situation today

 6
          and it might not be tomorrow.

 7              .       <-,
                    MR.  POSTON:  I think we will buy that.

 8
                    MR.  STEIN: Any comment?

 9
                    (No response.)

10
                    MR.  STEIN: All right.  Let me reread

11
          this.  This  has been accepted  by them.  This

12
          reads this way:

13
                     Pesticides are found in Lake Michigan

14
          and its tributary streams resulting from the

15
          application  of  these materials.  Pesticides --

16
                    MR.  POSTON:  Then you go down.

17
                    MR.  STEIN:  Period.   Then you strike

18
          everything to  the last sentence.  "The ever-

19
          increasing use  of these materials threatens water

20
          uses for recreation, fish and  wildlife, and water
21
          supplies."
22
                    Is this agreeable?
23
                    Do we have any comment?  I don't want
24
          to  rush you, move this, by too  fast.
25

-------
   	3379

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    (No  response.)
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.   Twelve.
 4
                    MR.  OEMING:   Thirteen now.
 5
                    MR.  STEIN:   Thirteen.
 6

 7
                         CONCLUSION #13
 8

 9
                    "13.   A  contaminant entering directly
10
          into  Lake  Michigan,  or dissolved in the water
11
          that  feeds the  lake,  mixes with and eventually
12
          becomes  an integral  part  of the lake water as a
13
          whole--regardless  of  the  point of origin around
14
          the periphery  or on  the contributing watershed."
15
                    Why  did  you  use the word "contaminant"
16
          instead  of "pollutant"?  I think, as I read the
17
          laws  of  all four States and the Federal law,
18
          we have  safely  been  using the word "pollutant".
19
          "Contaminant,"  we  just don't have it in front
20
          of any of  them.
21
                    MR. MITCHELL:  What is  the purpose
22
          of that  conclusion?
23
                    MR. STEIN:  Do you want  to answer that?
24
                    MR. POSTON:   I  think this is to indicate
25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          that through the currents  mixing in the lake
 3
          that pollution in one place affects the other
 4
          and that,  therefore,  we have interstate pol-
 5
          lution,  pollution going from one area to the
 6
          other.
 7
                    MR. STEIN:   Mr.  Klassen.
 8
                    MR. KLASSEN:  We raised this point
 9
          at  the  final day of the other conference.   I
10
          again ask  for your definition of pollution or
11
          a pollutant.  What do you  mean by pollution
12
          or  a pollutant?
13
                    MR. STEIN:   Well, all right, what I
If.
          mean by pollution, in the  Federal Act, and I
15
          don't think it is any different essentially
16
          in  any  of  your State  Acts, in the Federal  Act
17
          it  means any condition of  any discharge into
18
          a water which endangers the health or welfare
19
          of  any  person.
20
                    Now, in addition here, of course, we
21
          have to have an interstate, but that doesn't
22
          relate  to  the definition.
23
                    Anything in the  water that endangers
24
          the health or welfare of any person.  When we
25

-------
         	3381

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         want  to  deal with welfare,  we  can give you a
 3
         longer list of specifics and that is  public
 4
         health,  public and  industrial  water supply,
 5
         agricultural,, industrial, recreational, water
 6
         use of fish and wildlife.
 7
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   You have answered ay
 8
         question.
 9
                    MR.  STEIN:   Right.
10                                 "                   .
                    MR.  HOLMER:  On the  top of  page two
11
         in our statement we tried to respond  to Mr.
12
         Klassen's  requests  for a definition as an
13
         alteration of  the properties of any water in
14
         any way  that creates a nuisance or impairs
15
         water quality  to a  degree that affects adversely
16
         the beneficial use  of  such  water.
17
                    I think this is what you said,  but
18
         we tried to state it pretty formally,  because
19
         I think  this ought  to  be one of our conclusions
20
         somewhere  along the way  so  that we are dealing
21
         with  an  agreed—not necessarily these  words, but
22
         any of them.
23
                    MR.  STEIN:   I  understand what you said.
24
         Now,  we  have had problems with this,  and I think
25

-------
   .	33PP-.
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          although  Mr. Klassen has  been working with  this
 3
          for years,  at least Mr. Oeming and  Mr.  Poole
 4
          were working on  a  committee.  And whenever  we
 5                    .
          start hammering  out a  definition of pollution—we
 6
          have not  been entirely successful in getting  the
 7
          exact wording—every State  has something different
 8
                     MR. OEMING:  Yes.
 9
                     MR. STEIN:   Now,  the problem, Mr.
10                       o
          Holmer, that I have with  your definition--! don't
11
          think it  is the  meaning,  since we are all in
12
          agreement—is with the phrase "nuisance" itself.
13
          Not all the States, including the Federal Govern-
14
          ment, have been  as successful with  the  use  of
15
          the concept of nuisance  to  abate pollution as
16
          possibly  Wisconsin has.   Accordingly,  this  raises
17
          sort  of extraneous problems.
18
                     I have worked  with some  of these
19
          people more than others.   I don't  believe we
20
          have  a problem with Wisconsin.   I  think essen-
21
          tially we do not have  a  difference  between the
22
          Federal and State  concept as to  a  definition
23
          of pollution.   If  there  is, I  don't see it.
24

25

-------
   	3383

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         and I have looked at your  programs  and  we
 3
         have grappled with this and worked  on this
 4
         for a long time.  We have  come up with  an
 5
         agreed definition in a suggested State  act--
 6
                   MR. OEMING:  That is right.
 7
                   MR. STEIN:  --that  I think Mr. Poole
 8
         and Mr. Oeming were on a committee.  If you
 9
         take the definition that is most frequently
10
         used, it is the one in that suggested act.
11
         More States have adopted that than  anything
12
         else, but there is a lot of variation.
13
                   Now, the question is, do  you  want to
14
         go into that or not?
15
                   MR. KLASSEN:  The definition  in the
16
         model act is the one that  Illinois  uses.  I
17
         merely say that some place in here  the  Conferees
18
         should agree, when they say pollution,  what
19
         we are talking about.  And I  think  it is for
20
         our own protection so that what we  say  can't
21
         be misinterpreted, and further if we ever get
22
         into anv legal action, I think that this is going
23
         to be necessary as a basis for what we  are
24
         talking about.  I think this  is pretty  basic.
25

-------
                        	3384
 l                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                    If you  suggest and  say that the
 3
         record will show  that  It is the  definition
 4
         in the model act,  that is  good enough for  me.
 5
                    MR. STEIN: Here  is  the question,  Mr.
 6
         Klassen.   There are  two  of us around  the table
 7
         here, Mr.  Poole and  myself, who  started working
 g
         on that model act  in about f&8 or '^9.  I  hate
 9
         to tell you how long  ago  we started  on our  first
10
         draft of that definition.  It has been accepted
11
         now.  The  problem  is,  to the  possible chagrin
12
         of Mr. Poole and myself  and Mr.  Oeming and the
13
         others, and Illinois that  has adopted it,  we
14
         have never been able to  get the  Congress to
15
         adopt that and we  are  operating  under the  Federal
16
         law.  The  Congress has said that pollution is
17
         anything which endangers health  or  welfare.
18
                    Now, in  the  construction  of that, I
19
         put that together  with that Section 2 and  I coxae
20
         up with substantially  the  definition  we have
21
         under the  Act.  I  don't  know  if  you want to
22
         spell that out here  or not.   The problem that
23
         I would have with  this,  and let  me  make this
24
         abundantly clear,  we have  to work this out
25

-------
                                                        3385

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         under the direction given us under  the Federal
 3
         Act and the Congress.  I don't want it to be
 4
         construed that I am raising myself  by my own
 5
         boot straps and wiggling in a definition that
 6
         we have developed through the years and put
 7
         out to the States that the Congress hasn't
 8
         developed in the back haHs of the Congress when
 9
         they have given us a definition to  work with.
10
                   There is going to be no difference
11
         in the operation.  I think I would  say this,
12
         that we believe that ?the definition of pollution--
13
         and it is not defined in the Federal Act--that
14
         pollution in the Federal Act and pollution as
15
         defined in the suggested State Act  are perfectly
16
         compatible and have the same meaning for the
17
         purpose of the Lake Michigan case.
18
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Fine.  This is in the
19
         record from the Chairman and this is all right
20
         with me.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  We will put this out as
22
         a conclusion.
23
                   MR. KLASSEN:  All right.
24
                   MR. STEIN:  I don't think there is
25

-------
   	2386.
 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         any doubt about that.
 3
                   MR. KLASSEN:  You  satisfied icy
 4
         question.
 5
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
 6
                   But let's get on to  13.
 7
                   MR. HOLMER:  Well, whoops.
 8
                   MR. OEMING:  We were working on  13,
 9
         yes.
10
                   MR. HOLMER:  The last one on page 2?
11
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes, that is 13 now.
12
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Mr.  Chairman, I don't
13
         want to prolong this by going back, but I
14
         wonder in the one on pesticides whether there
15
         should be the words "may threaten water uses
16
         for recreation, fish," because as I recall, and
17
         I think I questioned Mr. Carbine on this,  they
18
         had no direct evidence that  it was threatening
19
         so far as toxicity.
20
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes,  that was pretty, weak.
21
         It was pretty weak testimony.
22
                   MR. STEIN:  I have no objection  to
23
         that.  Mr. Holmer raised this, you know, in
24
         his dredging operations.  When used as a threat,
25

-------
   	3387

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         this has an implication of  "may"  in it,  that
 3
         is a threat.  It is always  a question  of how
 4
         many modifiers you put before a word like
 5
         "threat".  I have no objection if you  want  to
 6
         put that--
 7
                   MR. OEMING:  In the context  that  the
 8
         Chairman has expressed here, I would just as
 9
         soon leave it the way it is.
10
                   MR. KLASSEN:  0. K.
11
                   MR. OEMING:  I am satisfied, despite
12
         the fact that the record was weak, and I think
13
         we will get to that when we get to the recom-
14
         mendations.
15
                   MR. KLASSEN:  0. K.
1*
                   MR. OEMING:  Mr. Chairman, addressing
17
         myself now to 13, if we are going to use "A
18
         pollutant entering directly into the lake,"
19
         I  think we are redundant in using the  last
20
         phrase, "regardless of the point of origin",
21
         because we have said that it either enters
22
         the lake directly or feeds the lake.
23
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes, you are exactly right.
24
                   MR. OEMING:  L am satisfied to leave it
25

-------
                               	3388

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          right there.
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.   Can we put a
 4
          period after  "whole", is that your point?
 5
                    MR.  OEMING:  Yes,  put a period after
 6
          "whole".
 7
                    MR.  STEIN:   Right.
 8
                    MR.  OEMING:  Now,  if the Conferees
 9
          are  not satisfied yet with this question of
10
          what is a pollutant,  I wonder if this might
11
          help to get over that hump,  to say that sub-
12
          stances capable of causing unlawful pollution--
13
                    MR.  POSTON:  That is the same thing.
14
                    MR.  STEIN:   That is the same thing with
15
          more words.
16
                    MR.  OEMING:  Is it worse or is it
17
          better?
18
                    MR.  POSTON:  How about the word
19
          "persistent"  there?
20
                    MR.  OEMING:  All right.
21
                    MR.  STEIN:   No, no, no.  I think you
22
          said the  same  thing,  but it is no longer a
23
          colorless phrase.
24
                    MR.  OEMING: . All right.
25

-------
   	     3389

 1                     EXECUTIVE .SESSION

 2
                    MR. STEIN:   You  know,  you  are using
 3
          your  Michigan legal  concept  that runs  with
 4
          the-- When we  use a word, a suggested pollutant,
 5
          what  I was trying to find  was  a neutral word
 6
          that  is  not going to be a  phrase out of a
 7
          Wisconsin  Statute, an  Illinois  statute or
 8
          a  Michigan statute.  This  always creates
 9
          problems,  and I  think  we have  to try that
10
          here.
11
                    MR. OEMING:  How does  it read now?
12
                    MR. STEIN:   It reads:
13
                    "A pollutant entering directly into
14
          Lake  Michigan or dissolved in  water  that feeds
15
          the lake mixes  with  and eventually becomes
16
          an integral part of  the lake water as  a whole"
17
          period.
18
                    MR. POOLE:   Well,  I  have some difficulty
19
          with  that, Mr.  Chairman, and I  will  cite you
20
          the example of  bacteria, which  I--there are
21
          too many of them, Klassen  has  a pollutant,
22
          and I doubt seriously  if bacteria entering
23
          into  one point would come  to the part  of the
24
          lake  as a whole and  I  even doubt if  BOD does,
25

-------
                                                        3390

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
         which is  our most  commonly  used term in
 3
         respect to pollution.  When I  read that first
 4
         I think it may  Just  confuse the issue that
 5
         there are persistent pollutants.
 6
                   MR. STEIN: How about putting the
 7
         word "persistent"  in before "pollutant",
 8
         Mr. Poole?
 9
                   MR. POOLE:   I  could  buy that.
10
                   MR. STEIN:   All right.
11
                   MR. KLASSEN:   Let me ask,  was one
12
         reason for putting this  in  to  attempt to Justify
13
         this as an interstate  problem?
14
                   MR. STEIN:   No, it is not  an attempt
15
         to Justify it.  I  think  we  had the current
16
         study here.  I  think,  as far as I understood
17
         this case, people  were talking in terms of
18
         possible  cul de sac  at the  end of the State or
19
         humps in  the lake, and the  notion that we have
20
         heard from Drs. Bartsch  and Baumgartner  was  that
21
         a persistent pollutant getting anywhere in the
22
         lake would go around that lake and the discharge
23
         of water  from the  lake was  so  slow that you were
24
         probably  stuck with  that for hundreds of years
25

-------
   	3391

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         and it was apt to wind up anywhere, and  this,  in
 3
         their judgment, was a significant factor in  this
 4
         lake problem and why we all had  to work  together
 5
         with it.  I think, right, that is important.
 6
                   MR. KLASSEN:  I don't  question that.
 7
         But then this is sort of a general conclusion
 8
         and circumstantial evidence rather than  any
 9
         fact.  This is all right, I am not quibbling
10
         about this.  But if this is a justification
11
         for this being a four-State problem--
12
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes, I think this  is
13
         substantially correct.
14
                   Yes, Mr. Holmer.
15
                   MR. HOLMER:  It would  ease my. reading
16
         of it a little bit if we could change  "eventually
17
         becomes" to "may become."  A lot of things
18
         happen to persistent pollutants.  They may be
19
         deposited on the bottom and may  be volatized--
20
                   MR. STEIN:  Is this all right?  Yes,
21
         all right.
22
                   Is this agreeable?  "And may become"?
23
         All right?
24
                   (No response.)
25

-------
  ^__	3392

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.
 3
                    MR.  OEMING:   "May eventually become"?
 4
                    MR.  STEIN:   "May."  You don't need
 5
          the  "may eventually."
 6
                    (Laughter.)
 7
                    All  right,  let me try this again,
 8
          gentlemen:
 9
                    "A persistent pollutant entering
10
          directly into  Lake Michigan or dissolved into
11
          the  water that feeds  the lake mixes with and
12
          may  become an  integral part of the lake water
13
          as a whole."
14
                    All  right?
15
                    (No  response.)
IS
                    MR.  STEIN:   Let us see if we can go
17
          to the  next page,  to  14.
18

19
                         CONCLUSION #14
20

21
                    "14.  The massive die-off of alewives
22
          that occurred  in 1967  created conditions that
23
          severely restricted recreational uses causing
24
          losses  in millions of  dollars to the tourist
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
          industry and  certain  municipalities.   Although
 3
          the  dead fish were not the  result  of  pollution,
 4
          they caused pollution and are  therefore a
 5
          concern to water pollution  control agencies."
 6
                   MR.  HOLMER:  We didn't want to mention
 7
          money a few minutes ago.
 8
                   MR.  OEMING:  That is in  a different
 9
          context.  We  are talking about the cost.
10
                   MR.  STEIN:  No, no, no,  we  are talking
11
          about damages  here.
12
                   MR.  KLASSEN:   The economic  losses.
13
                   MR.  OEMING:  That is within our--
14
                   MR.  POSTON:  Mr.  Chairman,  I would
15
          like  to introduce here a copy of a letter, for
16
          the  record, from Representative John  W.  Burns,
17
          Eighth District of Wisconsin, in which he
18
          writes to me  as Great Lakes Regional  Office:
10
                   "Dear Mr. Poston:  I understand that
20
          you will be the Federal  representative on the
21
          March 7 meeting in Executive Session  of the
22
          Conferees to  the Lake Michigan pollution
23
          conference.   Combating the  serious pollution
24
          problem caused by the die-off of millions of
25

-------
   ^___	.	3394
 !                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         alewives  will no doubt be on your agenda.
 3
         This  problem merits  high priority attention.
 4
         I urge  that  you  and  all Conferees give  close
 5
         attention to the proposal of the  Wisconsin
 6
         trawlers  to  seine Lake Michigan to remove
 7
         large numbers of alewives.   I would appreciate
 8
         your  reply concerning  this  matter."
 9
                    MR.  HOLMER:   Mr.  Chairman.
10
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.

                    MR.  HOLMER:   May  I Join in  Mr.
12
         Poston's  request that  this  letter be  entered
13
         in the  record?
14
                    MR.  STEIN:   It  will be  entered into
15
         the record.
16
                    MR.  HOLMER:   And  I won't have to
17
         duplicate  it  by  introducing another one?
18
                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:  Yes,  it  will be  in
19  I
         the record.
20
                    MR.  POSTON:   I  also have  here--
21
                    MR.  STEIN:   If  we  have  any  more
22
         requests  of  letters relating  to operations like
23
         trawling,  this might have a  better  place in the
24
         record when we come to  the  specific operations
25

-------
   	,	:	3395

 1                      EXECUTIVESSESSION

 2
         rather than the general conclusions.   I
 3
         don't know what this  letter  is,  but  if it
 4
         deals with a trawler  program,  I  think  it
 5
         would "be more meaningful  in  the  record when
 6
         we  come up with how we are going to  get at
 7
         the alewife problem rather than--
 8
                   MR. POSTON:  Do it later?
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
10
                   MR. POSTON:  0. K.
11
                   MR. KLASSEN:  I think, Mr.  Chairman,
12
         there is a--I didn't  hear this,  but  a  written
13
         editorial, ¥ B ,B M,,  February 23, about the
14
         problem, and it quotes the Federal Bureau of
15
         Fisheries in Ann Arbor that  "hundreds  of millions
16
         of  alewives are now lying out in the middle of
17
         the lake."  I don't know  whether this  should ;go
18
         into the record or whether this  should be further
19
         explored.  I don't know whether lying  on the
20
         water, in the water,  on the  bottom?   Maybe that
21
         is  something that —
22
                   I am serious.   I would like  to get
23
         some information on this.
24
                   MR. STEIN:  I am serious.   I don't know,
25

-------
                                                        3396
 l

 2

 3

 4

 5

 6

 7

 8

 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25
              EXECUTIVE SESSION


after all, we are in the same--at  least I am

in the same Department with these  fellows.  Do

we have anyone here from that Bureau?

          MR. POSTON:  Premetz is  here from the

Bureau of Commercial Fisheries.

          MR. STEIN:  Yes, I saw Mr. Premetz.

          MR. KLASSEN:  Maybe we ought to put

this in the record?

          MR. STEIN:  Yes, let's put it in the

record.

          (Which said editorial is as follows:)


             EDITORIAL

             WBBM     RADIO ?8


            630 N. McClurg Court

          Chicago, Illinois  60611
SUBJECT:
BROADCAST:
Alewives and More Trouble
322

February 23, 1968
6:25, 8:45 AM,
12:15, 4:50, 10:55 PM
          Chances are very strong  that we will

have another serious odor problem  on Lake Michigan

-------
   	3397

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2

         this year.  Hundreds  of millions  of  alewives
 3

         are now lying out  in  the middle  of the  lake.
 4

         That is the estimate  of the Federal  Bureau  of
 5

         Fisheries in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
 6
                   Surveys  recently completed indicate
 7
         that this year's hatch of alewives is  the  largest
 8

         ever known.  When  next June comes around, we  are
 9

         going  to be in a lot  of trouble.
10

                   Let's forget about  Chicago's  beaches
11

         being  closed.  Let's  forget about the  awful
12

         stench that comes  in  from the lakefrorit.   Con-
13

         sider  only that the States bord'ering the  lake
14
         lost 55 million dollars in tourist trade  last   :
15

         year because of dead  alewives.   At least  one
16

         steel  plant suffered  a 5 million dollar loss
17

         when it had to stay idle for  10  days.
18

                   To avoid another alewife disaster,
19

         action has to be taken now.   We  think  the  most
20

         logical action is  to  have trawlers catch  alewives


         before they begin  to  die by the  millions  along
22

         the shoreline.
23

                   Congress should act now to permit the


         use of Canadian-built trawlers to help  catch
25

-------
                                      	3398

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          the  alewives.   Present laws, forbid foreign
 3
          built ships from being used in American
 4
          fishing operations.   Only about 18 American
 5
          trawlers are available this year,  and most
 6
          of them are too small to be effective.
 7
                    We need Federal loans—on a 50/50
 8
          basis with the four  States around  Lake Michigan.
 9
          We need to develop new equipment to fight the
10
          alewives invasion.  We nee-d to find ways to
11
          handle an alewives catch more  efficiently.
12
          We need barriers erected against the alewives
13
          so they won't  wash up on the lakefront.  And
14
          we need these  things before next June when
15
          the  problem will once again become overwhelming.
16

17
                    MR.  STEIN:  Can you  briefly indicate
18
          and  direct yourself  to that statement?  Just
19
          what about these alewives?
20
                    Give your  name.
21
                    MR.  PREMETZ:   Ernest Premetz, Deputy
22
          Director,  Bureau of  Commercial Fisheries.
23
                    I think this  particular  article stems
24
          from discussion of last year's die-off.  As you
25

-------
                                                         3399

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          know,  the original estimates were made on the
 3
          basis  of  fish lying on the beaches.  However,
 4
          subsequently trawlers in the area found massive
 5
          quantities on the bottom and in some areas
 6
          they were three  to six feet deep on the bottom,
 7
          that is dead alewives.
 8
                    I don't know whether these are still
 9
          lying  on  the bottom or not.  I would think they
10
          have pretty well deteriorated, but they could be.
11
                    MR.  STEIN:   Well, thank you, Mr. Preinetz.
12
                    All right,  let's see if we can get
13
          back to #14.
14
                    MR.  POOLE:   I move adoption of #14,
15
          Mr.  Chairman.
16
                    MR.  OEMING:  I support it.
17
                   f MR.  STEIN:   Do I hear any other?
18
                    (No  response.)
19
                    MR.  STEIN:   It is adopted.
20
                    Fifteen.
21

22
                        CONCLUSION #15
23                      	

24
                    "15.   Discharges of untreated and
25

-------
   ^___	3400

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         inadequately treated wastes  originating in
 3
         Wisconsin,  Illinois, Indiana,  and Michigan
 4
         cause  pollution  of  Lake Michigan which endangers
 5
        . the health  or welfare  of persons in States other
 6
         than  those  in which such discharges originate.
 7
         This  pollution is subject to abatement under the
 8
         provisions  of the Federal Water Pollution Control
 9
         Act,  as  amended  (33 U.S.C. 4-66 et seq.)11
10
                   MR. KLASSEN:   Second,Mr.  Poole's motion.
11
                   MR. STEIN:   What is  that?
12
                    (Laughter.)
13
                   Adopt  15?
14
                   MR. OEMING:   Where are we?
15
                   MR. STEIN:   Fifteen.
16
                   MR. POOLE:   Well,  I  will move we adopt
17
         15.
18
                   MR. STEIN:   Fifteen.  Is that agreeable?
10
                   MR. OEMING:   No.
20
                   MR. STEIN:   All right.
21
                   MR. OEMING:   Standing by itself, I
22
         think that  it is not complete  enough.   If you
23
         will  remember, Mr.  Chairman, in many previous
24
         conferences you  have attempted to identify what
25

-------
   	3*101

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          you  mean  "by  in what way you endanger the
 3
          health  or welfare,, and I have in aiind that if you
 4
          are  making a finding of interstate pollution the
 5
          pollution is evidenced by this or this, and I
 6
          think it  would put  this in better context if
 7
          we could  do  this, expand this to that point.
 8
          And  the record is very clear in my mind at the
 9
          conference,  from  the Federal presentations and
10
          everybody's, that the primary problem is nutrients.
11
          Where does it say?
12
                    MR.'SCHNEIDER:  I think it is covered
13
          in Number--
14
                    MR.  OEMING:  If it is, then I will
15
          withdraw  my--
16
                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:  --Number three..
17
                    MR.  OEMING:  Number three?
18
                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:   I think Number three
19
          and  Number thirteen.
20
                    MR.  OEMING:  Thirteen?
21
                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:  Oh, no, I see what
22
          you  me an.
23
                    MR.  OEMING:  Yes. Well, I have in
24
          mind such wording as that in large measure
25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          the  pollution originates from nutrients or

 3
          such other--which fertilize the lake,  and

 4
          then if you want to add some others,  that is

 5
          fine.

 6
                    But I  would like to put the  emphasis

 7
          on this so that  people understand this here.

 8
          Otherwise, we are going to have a Lake Erie

 9
          on our  hands tomorrow in everybody's  minds.

10
                    MR. POOLE:   I think I agree  with him.

11
          I will  withdraw  my earlier motion.


                    MR. STEIN:   All right.  Let  me try

13
          this.

14
                    I am not going to change his language.

15
                    MR. OEMING:  The language is fine as it

16
          stands, but it doesn't go far enough.

17
                    MR. STEIN:   No, no, you are  right.

18
          Let  me  do  this again.

19                   „
                     Discharges of un.treated and inadequately

20
          treated wastes originating in Wisconsin, Illinois,

21
          Indiana and Michigan cause pollution  of Lake

22
          Michigan which endangers the health or welfare

23
          of persons in States  other than those  in which

24
          such discharges  originate.  In large  measure

25

-------
 !                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
          this  pollution  results  from nutrients which

 3
          fertilize  the lake.   This  pollution is subject

 4
          to  abatement  under  the  provisions  of the Federal


          Water Pollution Control Act as amended."


                    All right?

 7
                    MR. POOLE:  Read that sentence again.

 g
          You went too  fast,  "in  large measure"--

 9
                    MR. STEIN:   "This pollution"--


                    MR. POSTON:   No, "in large measure."

11                               .1
                    MR. STEIN:     In large measure this

12
          pollution  results from  nutrients which fertilize

13
          the lake."

14
                    MR. OEM1NG:   That is very good, Mr.

15
          Chairman.

16
                    MR. STEIN:  It is exactly what you

17
          said.   Let's  go off  the record.

18
                    (Off  the  record.)

19
                    MR. STEIN:  Let's go back on the record.

20
                    MR. OEMING:   This was after the word

21
          "originates"?

22
                    MR. STEIN:  Yes.

23
                    Are you in  agreement with that, Mr.

24
          Poole?

25

-------
 !                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  POOLE:   Yes.
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   Do you move now with
 4
          this  amendment?
 5
                    Is everyone  in agreements

                    MR.  KLASSEN:  Yes.

                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
 8
                    MR.  HOLMER:   We thought that nutrients
 9
          were  one,  but there--and I  realize you have got
10
          "in  large  measure" there, but I wonder if you
11
          want  to put in the persistent pesticides again
12
          and maybe  oil?
13
                    MR.  OEMING:   Well--
14
                    MR.  STEIN:   Now--
15
                    MR.  OEMING:   The  interstate problem
16
          subject to this  conference, now, this is where
17
          we are--
18
                    MR.  STEIN:   This  is always the problem
19
          that  you get when you  open  the door to specifics.
20
                    MR.  OEMING:   Yes.
21
                    MR.  STEIN:   The problem, and I think
22
          trying to  resolve this, or  get a formula that
23
          will  resolve it, I think Mr. Oeming's point is
24
          that  when  we are dealing with the lake as a whole
25

-------
                           	. 3^03

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         and the four States and the Federal Government
 3
         are dealing with the nutrient problem,  the
 4
         problems such as oil and pesticides or persistent
 5
         pesticides at the present time are really
 6
         specialty problems, and I am not sure he wants
 7
         to put them in the same series as the nutrients.
 8
                   MR. OEMING:  No.
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  I think this is what he
10
         is driving at.
11
                   MR. OEMING:  This is right, Mr. Chairman.
12
                   Well, let me put it this way, that the
13
         problem that sticks out to me, and I am sure
14
         everybody, is the attempt to save the lake here
15
         from degradation due to these nutrients and the
16
         algal growths.  Now, this does not necessarily
17
         exclude a special problem such as an oil loss
18
         from Benton Harbor getting down into Indiana,
19
         let's say, but many of these are not immediate,
20
         of such immediate effect on the lake as a whole.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  All right, I know, I am
22
         trying this.  Let me try this sentence to get--
23
         pardon me.
24
                   MR. MITCHELL:  It seems to me that the
25

-------
                                                         3^06

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          language  "in large  measure" still leaves the
 3
          door  open for a lot of  minor problems.and I
 4
          am  not  trying to change the wording.
 5
                    MR. STEIN:  All  right.   Are  you
 6
          satisfied?
 7
                    All right.
 8
                    MR. HOLMER:   I go with  Oeming if--
 9
                    MR. STEIN:  All  right   All  right.
10
          If  we can do that,  then I  think I can  dispense
11
          with  another reading because we are all in
12
          agreement with that.  Is that correct?   Again
13
          you are going to have another crack at  it.
14
          We  are  going to have this  typed up and  you
15
          are going to get this back.
16
                    MR. HOLMER:   Mr.  Chairman, I  want
17
          to  be sure  that we  are  not leaving conclusions
18
          at  this point.   I want  the conference  to be
19
          under no  illusions  on that score.
20
                    MR. STEIN:  No.   No.  As a matter of
21
          fact, we  are not closing the door on anything.
22
                    MR. HOLMER:   Well,  what I am  saying
23
          is  that there are a significant number  of
24
          additional  conclusions  that I think we  need
25

-------
   	3^07

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2

         to arrive  at  before  we  start looking at the
 3
         recommendations.
 4
                    MR.  STEIN:   This  is fine, and we will
 5
         be glad  to take  them up, but I do think that
 6
         we should  recess  for lunch.   Again it is to
 7
         the point.
 8
                    Do  you  think  we can make it back by
 9
         1:30, gentlemen?
10
                    All  right,  we will recess until 1:30.
11
                    (Whereupon,  at 12:00 noon a recess
12
         was taken  until 1:30 p.m.)
13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

-------
   	   .	3^08

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
               AFTERNOON SESSION,  MARCH 7,  1968
 3
                                        (1:30 p.m.)
 4
                    (Off the record discussion.)
 5
                    MR.  STEIN:   We  are  ready to reconvene.
 6
                    MR.  POSTON:  What is the status  of
 7
          this  now?
 8
                    MR.  STEIN:   We  are  going to meet tonight
 9
          until about  5  or thereabouts.   We  will recess and
10
          meet  tomorrow  at 9j we will run until 12j  we will
11
          reconvene  Tuesday until we conclude.  0.  K.?
12
                    MR.  POSTON:  Tomorrow morning at S?
13
                    MR.  STEIN:   Nine.
14
                    MR.  POSTON:  How about 8 o'clock?
15
                    MR.  KLASSEN: Good,  let's start  at
16
          8  o'clock.
17
                    MR.  MITCHELL:   Very good.  Very good.
18
                    MR.  POSTON:  You know, this is  a pretty
19
          important  Job  to be fiddling  around with  time here
20
                    MR.  STEIN:  Do you want to start  at 8?
21
                    MR.  HOLMER:  No.
22
                    MR.  STEIN:   No.
23
                    MR.  KLASSEN: Sure.
24
                    MR.  HOLMER:  I  will do it if the others
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         want to and you are willing,  Mr.  Chairman.   I
 3
         prefer--
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  I think you are  kidding
 5
         yourself.  I vrill take a  consensus  here.
 6
                   What do you think?
 7
                   MR. OEMING:  I  will go  for 8:30.
 8
                   MR. POOLE:  I will  compromise  on  8:30.
 9
                   MR. KLASSEN:  8:30.
10
                   MR. STEIN:  8:30  tomorrow morning.
11
                   MR. POSTON:  We got half  an  hour  on
12
         you anyway.
13
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
14
                   Mr. Holmer, let's proceed.
15
                   MR. HOLMER:  Mr.  Chairman, Section 10
16
         of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
17
         specifies what should be  in the summary  and
18
         recommendations that come out of  this  conference.
19
         There are three parts to  this.  The first part
20
         is the occurrence of pollution and  the second
21
         is the adequacy of the abatement  measures.  The
22
         third is the nature of delays  encountered in
23
         abating pollution.
24
                   We have drafted a document which  is
25

-------
                            	3^10

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         before you, which deals with  each  of  these  things.
 3
         The conclusions  that we have  discussed  this
 4
         morning do part  of the Job, but  it has  seemed
 5
         to us that there are several  additional sources
 6
         of pollution  that we feel  in  the conclusions
 7
         ought to--a foundation laid that will lead  to
 8
         the appropriate  recommendations.
 9
                   On  page two of our  statement,  for
10
         example, we refer to "A major and  continuing
11
         complication, resulting in pollutional  discharges,
12
         are combined  sewers that are  found in many
13
         communities.  The efficiency  of  a  treatment
14
         plant is irrelevant, if slgificant portions of
15
         the pollutional  load are,  in  fact,  not  treated
16
         at all."
17
                   I think this is  a conclusion  that we
18
         could very easily come to.
19
                   If  I may, in this part of the session,
20
         let me go then up on page  three--
21
                   MR. STEIN:  Let's take one at a time.
22
                   MR. HOLMER:  Do  you want to take  them
23
         one at a time?
24
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
25

-------
                                    	3411

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  HOLMER:   All right.
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   0.  K.   Your  last paragraph,
 4
          this  reads:
 5
                    "A major  and continuing  complication,
 6
          resulting  in pollution discharges,  are the
 7
          combined sewers  that are  found in  many communi-
 8
          ties.   The efficiency  of  a treatment plant is
 9
          irrelevant, if significant portions of the
10
          pollutional load are,  in  fact,  not treated at
11
          all."'
12
                   Let  me throw this  open for comment.
13
                   Don't  you think "the  efficiency of the
14
          treatment plant  is  irrelevant"might be a little
15
          strong?
16
                   MR.  HOLMER:   I  am  willing to modify
17
          it.
18
                   MR.  STEIN:   Yes.   We  recognize that you
19
          have  to do that.  But  I am not  sure that when we
20
          provide, as we are  talking about here,  secondary
21
          treatment plus chlorination  of  the  effluent,  even
22
          if we have a stormwater overflow,  that what we
23
          are doing is irrelevant.   It might  be  recognized.
24
                   (Discuasion  across the table,  inaudible
25
          to the reporter.)

-------
  ^_____	3412
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  MORTON:   It doesn't affect the
 3
          treatment  per  se,  but  it affects--
 4
                    •'ii\.  PC-OLE:.  The results.
 5
                    MR.  MITCHELL:   The  results of treatment
 6
          are  affected by  it.
 7
                    (Inaudible to the  reporter.)
 8
                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:   Mr.  Chairman.
 9
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
10
                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:   I  think we did give
11
          recognition  to this in the  second--where it did
12
          mention  combined sewer overflows  as a source of
13
          pollution.
14
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
15
                    MR.  POSTON:   In conclusion #2 we did
16
          say  that the sources of this  pollution  include
17
          wastes from  municipalities,  industries, Federal
18
          activities,  combined sewer  overflows, and we
19
          went on  throughout the drainage basin.
20
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.  0. K.
21
                    MR.  HOLMER:   On page three in the
22
          bottom two sentences we refer to  pesticides,
23
          fertilizers  and  the use of  chemicals to clear
24
          highways.  It  seems to us that the use  of
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         de-icers is a matter of concern  to which this
 3
         conference ought to direct  its attention.  .We
 4
         have prepared a recommendation relating to
 5
         this, and in order to provide a  foundation for
 6
         a recommendation we would need to have  something
 7
         like this in the summary of the  conference.
 8
                   The same thing applies with respect
 9
         to the business of erosion  from  highway con-
10
         struction and other construction.  We had
11
         substantial evidence on this point in our
12
         conference.  We believe there should be
13
         recommendations on that point also, and so
14
         we would like some summary  statement with
15
         respect to these two items.
16
                   MR. STEIN: Yes.   0. K., I think  this
17
         is a point.
18
                   Do you have any comments there?
19
                   MR. POSTON:  Pardon?
20
                   MR. STEIN:  Do you have any comments
21
         now?
22
                   MR. POSTON:  Well, I think we had
23
         recognized in our report, I was  going to go
24
         back through the conclusions and see if these
25
         had been brought out.

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION.


 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   I don't think so.   I

 3
          didn't  recall  them.

 4
                    Haven't  we  covered the pesticides

 5
          pretty  much?

 6
                    MR.  HOLMER:   Yes,  pesticides and

 7
          fertilizers  I  have no  problem with.

 8
                    MR.  STEIN:   All  right.  Let me try

 9
          this  on for  size:

10
                    "in  the  area covered by the conference"

11
                    MR.  POSTON:   Could we Just include

12
          that  as one  of the iterns--

13
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.

14
                    MR.  POSTON:  --on item #2?

15
                    MR.  STEIN:  --the  extensive use of

16
          chemicals  is employed  to clear highways.

17
                    MR.  HOLMER:   You can almost leave

18
          it  there.

10
                    MR.  STEIN:   "in  constructing highways
20
          and buildings  extension erosion has resulted.
21
          The results  of both  these  activities contribute
22
          substantial  pollutants to  Lake Michigan.
23
                    MR.  POOLE:   I have a little trouble--
24
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. POOLE:   Our  technical  committee
 3
         on  the  south end  of Lake Michigan  took this
 4
         matter  of chlorides into consideration,  those
 5
         of  us who recall  the blue  book,  in that  there
 6
         were chloride limitations  established that
 7
         went up a little  bit to the  year 2000.  Now,
 8
         I think they were primarily  considering  Just  the
 9
         increase in sewage and the increase  in chlorides
10
         as  you  got a greater volume  of sewage, although
11
         I am not sure that they may  not  have taken this
12
         use of  salt into  consideration.  But what has
13
         prompted this, as I remember that  blue book,
14
         we  still had a chloride limitation for the year
15
         2000 and it was pretty low,  and  if this  technical
16
         committee was right, I don't know  whether this
17
         deserves the word 'substantially11 contributing
18
         or  not.
19
                   MR. POSTON:  Mr. Chairman,, we  have
20
         got some comments here on  this.
21
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:   Mr. Poole, there was  a
22
         paper presented to the 8th Conference of Great
23
         Lakes Research, March  29 and 30  of 1965, by Mr.
24
         Ownbey  and Mr. Willeke.  The subject was "Long-Term
25

-------
   	3^16

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         Solids Buildup  in  Lake Michigan."   And  they
 3
         considered  this problem of  chloride buildup
 4
         and one of  their conclusions was  that  the
 5
         chloride buildup need cause no great alarm.
 6
         Let me read this paragraph:
 7
                   "There are several implications  in
 8
         the foregoing calculations. First,  the pro-
 9
         Jected future concentrations"--of  chemicals--
10
         "are relatively low.  Therefore,  chloride
11
         buildup need cause no great alarm.   Second,
12
         the municipal contribution  is quite small.
13
         Therefore,  as far  as Lake Michigan  is  concerned,
14
         there would be  little reason for  removing
15
         chlorides from municipal wastes.   Third, if
16
         a reduction in  buildup rate is desired,
17
         attention should be focused on the  large
18
         brine sources on the eastern shore  of  Lake
19
         Michigan.   Fourth, a large  portion  of  the
20
         total chloride  comes from rural runoff,  a
21
         source which is difficult if not  impossible
22
         to control.  If road salting proves to  be  a
23
         significant factor in rural runoff,  this could
24
         conceivably be  controlled."
25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                    I  don't  know, I  think--  Is Mr.

 3
          RIsley here?   He was  supposed  to be.

 4
                    MR.  POOLE:  I  personally don't--!

 5
          am not contesting  the silt from highway

 6
          construction and other  urban construction.

 7
          I think  there  are  grounds  for  a lot of

 8
          improvement  there  and it is time we started

 9
          on them.   I may not have this  thing in

10
          perspective at all, but I  have had the

11
          feeling  that we have  got a hell of a  lot of

12
          things to  worry about with respect to Lake

13
          Michigan before we get  to  worrying much about

14
          the chlorides.

15
                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:   Yes.   Well,  I think

16
          that is  the gist of this paper.

17
                    MR.  STEIN:  Let's work this  out.
18
                    You  have raised  two  questions,  Mr.

19
          Holmer.  One,  the question of  silt from these
20
          construction sites, which  we are all  aware is
21
          a pretty bad one.  And  the other one,  the
22
          chlorides.
23
                    I would like  to  get  an agreement at
24
          least on this  putting the  chemicals on the road.
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         I  wouldn't say it was particularly a rural
 3
         problem.   Putting chemicals for de-icing on
 4
         the  road  I suspect might be as much of an
 5
         urban problem"as a rural problem.
 6
                   But the question here is, is this a
 7
         significant problem that you want us to take
 8
         up?
 9
                   MR, HOLMER:  I think it is potentially
10
         severe enough that this conference needs to make
11
         a  recommendation on the subject.   The recommen-
12
         dation is a relatively simple one, that the
13
         PWPCA evaluate the potential danger from de-icers
14
         and  set at rest a good many of the concerns that
15
         have been felt about this nationwide.
16
                   We have conducted research in Wisconsin
17
         on this subject and have reported that within
18
         the  last  15 months to the Association of State
19
         Highway Officials.  The report indicates that
20
        .there is  a distinct buildup, but  that there is at
21
         present no clear indication of imminent danger.
22
                   I would think that this conference would
23
         like to have the Federal Water Pollution Control
24
         Administration report back to us  specifically on
25

-------
 I                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION



 2
          this  subject with  their  finding if  it confirms

 3
          what  we have discovered;  if  it confirms what


          Blucher feels  about  this,  fine.  But I don't

 5
          think that we  want to  just avoid dealing with

 6
          this  subject which is  of  great popular concern

 7
          and I think we have  got  to address  ourselves to

 8
          that.

 9
                   MR.  STEIN:   I  think you are right.  I

10
          think we have  several  problems here: one of the


          silt,  one of these de-icers,  and the other of


          the beaches. •  You  know,  whatever you say about

13
          pollution control  in the  exotic terms we use,

14
          if  the public  doesn't  feel we are handling those

15
          problems, they are not going  to feel we are

16
          handling pollution problems.

17
                   Can  we all say,  though, and let's try

18
          to  get this, that  we feel  there really is a

19
          problem from the runoff  from  road and building

20
          construction in the  silt?  This isn't Just a

21
          problematic operation, is  it?

22
                   MR.  PURDY:   No.

23
                   MR.  OEMING:  Not in Lake  Michigan.

24
                   MR.  STEIN:   What?

25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                    MR.  OEMING:   Not  in Lake Michigan.
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   You don't feel you have
 4
          something  from silt  either?

 5
                    MR.  OEMING:   No.

 6
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.   Then,  let's

 7
          try  it  in  this way.   Can we  say:

 8
                    "There  has  been considerable concern

 9
          expressed  about ;the  use of  chemicals to  de-ice

10
          roads and  the  effect of runoff from road con-

11
          struction  and  building sites on water quality


          of Lake Michigan.  The effects"--

13
                    You  want to stop  right there?

14
                    MR.  HOLMER:   Stop  right there.

15
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.   0. K.
16
                    MR.  HOLMER:   That  is enough.
17
                    MR.  STEIN:   0. K., let's stop  there.
18
                    MR.  HOLMER:   I think it makes  a record.
19
                    MR.  STEIN:   0. K.  .Right.
20
                    Are  we  all in agreement with that
21
          conclusion?
22
                    MR.  POSTON:   Read  it once more.
23
                    MR.  STEIN:   Do you want to read it  back?
24
                    (Record read as follows:  "There has
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         been considerable concern expressed about  the
 3
         use of chemicals to de-ice roads and  the effect
 4
         of runoff from road construction and  building
 5
         sites on water quality of Lake Michigan.")
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  Period.  All right.
 7
                   If there is no objection, let's  try
 8
         to do that.  I think, we have  laid the foundation
 9
         there to what we are going to do.  Right.
10
                   MR. HOLMER:  The second thing in  the
11
         Water Quality Act has to do with the  adequacy
12
         of abatement measures.  I think this  has been
13
         touched on directly or indirectly.  This is
14
         not a problem.  But there are not in  the con-
15
         elusions any comments with respect to the nature
16
         of delays encountered in abating polluting.
17
                   I think there are a number  of very
18
         important points that need to be made, and
19
         they are made starting on the bottom  of page
20
         five and running to the top of page eight.in
21
         this statement of ours.  The  subjects involved
22
         are the fact that there are problems  in recog-
23
         nition of existence of pollution.  For instance,
24
         the problem of thermal pollution was  denied,
25

-------
   	3^22

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          really,  and there  are  still many questions about

 3
          it.   Well,  I think the fact that there are un-

 4                      .
          certainties of knowledge is an important part

 5
          of  the problem.

 6
                   Determining  the means of abating

 7
          pollution.   The  requirement for research.   I

 8
          think we need to recognize that there  may be  in

 9
          some  areas  still needs for additional  research

10
          and experimentation, and this  is a source of

11
          delay.

12
                   Now, I would want to make it clear,

13
          I am  not calling for inaction.  We have to

14
          apply the best known methods when they are

15
          necessary,  but it  may  be that  there are occasions

16
          in which you would delay while awaiting the

17
          results  of  research.

18
                   Another  source of problem for us

19
          is  the limited manpower pool against which we

20
          are drawing to do  the  things that need to be
21
          done.  I think we  ought to recognize this, not
22
          as  an excuse for inaction, but as a source of
23
          delay.
24
                   Now, still another area where we have
25

-------
   	3^23

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         got problems, and I think we ought  to recognize
 3
         this in the summary of the conference,  is  the
 4
         fact that we are dealing with some  large and com-

 5
         plex problems.  One of the recommendations  ought

 6
         to be that we separate sewers and that  we  devise

 7
         regional collection systems and  that we try to

 8
         bring together both industries and  municipalities.

 9
         These things take time and I think  we ought to

10
         recognize that we are dealing with  political as

11
         well as engineering realities in anything we do.

12
                   There are political and legal considera-

*3
         tions aside from this.  We need  to  have in  our

14
         States the kind of record on which  we 'can  proceed

15
         to enforce our orders, and this  is  necessary.
16
                   There are other areas where new  legis-

17
         lation is required.  We heard a  suggestion  this
18
         morning that we ought to adopt legislation  this

19
         year.  Well, that is not going to be very possible
20
         in Wisconsin with the legislature not in session.
21
         So this needs to be built into our  system.
22
                   Finally, there are a couple of sources
23
         of uncertainty that I think we need to  recognize.
24
         The first is that of defining with  clarity  what
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
         constitutes  pollution  and what constitutes  the

 3
         degree  of  abatement  to be expected of  munici-

 4
         palities,  industries and government installations.

 5
         I  think we are talking here  about some of  the

 6
         problems of  simply collecting and evaluating the

 7
         data  that  it takes in  order  to,properly manage

 8
         a  river, and we have got some problems here

 9
         that  will  take time.

10
                    Finally, you have  got this fiscal

11
         uncertainty  that  I am  not going to beat over

12
         the head again.   I think it  is a tripartite

13
         responsibility or a  quadripartite involving
14
         Industry,  municipalities, States and Federal
15
         Government.   And  until that  is resolved we
16
         have  got a built-in  delay.

17
                    I  think it would be a mistake not
18
         to incorporate a  statement of this kind in  the

19 ;
         summary of the conference.
20
                    MR.  STEIN:   Well,  I don't know,  do you
21
         have  a  proposal?
22
                    MR.  HOLM^R:  Yes,  Sir,  four:-pages of it.
23
         Do you  want  me to read it?
24
                    MR.  STEIN:   Your proposal is four pages?
25

-------
 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                   MR. HOLMER:  Yes,  sir.
 3                                           3
                   MR. STEIN:   To be  put in  or  something
 4
         more  succinct?
 5
                   MR. HOLMER:  This  is  as succinct as
 6
         it  can be.   (Laughter.)
 7
                   MR. STEIN:   Do we  have any other views
 8
         on  this?
 9
                   MR. KLASSEN:   I will  express  my views.
10
         I have a  tremendous respect  for my  colleagues
11
         from  Wisconsin, but I  am not in favor  of  putting
12
         this  in.  Frankly, this  sounds  like the stories
13
         we  hear from industry, all the  reasons  that
14
         they  can't do something.
15
                   I am not in  favor  of  putting  all of
16
         these reasons why the  Job can't be  done as
17
         officially recognized.   As they appear  and if
18
         and when  they appear,  and I  agree that  they
19
         might, let's solve them  then.   But  I don't think
20
         that we ought to recognize the  fact that  all
21
         of  these  things could  be  delays.
22
                   MR. OEMING:  Mr. Chairman.
23
                   MR. STEIN:   Mr. Oeming.
24
                   MR. OEMING:  I  don't  disagree with Mr.
25
         Klassen.  I respect his  Judgment in this  as well.

-------
                                                        3^26

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          But  I  think what Mr.  Holmer is talking about
 3
          is the reason for delays up to the present
 4
          time.   We  are not talking about why there
 5
          should be  reason for  delay in the future.
 6
                    MR. HOLMER:  In some Instances I am
 7
          talking about the reasons why or the things
 8
          that we have to take  into account in order to
 9
          minimize the corrective action.  For instance,
10
          legislation--
11
                    MR. OEMING:  You cited, Mr.  Holmer,
12
          the  statute.  It is perfectly clear in the
13
          statute that we are supposed to put our finger
14
          on what were the natures of the delays, if
15
          any, that  brought us  to this point.  This is
16
          the  way I  look at it, Mr. Chairman.
17
                    And I thought that is where  the main
18
          thrust of  your argument went.  Not that we are
19
          paving the way for excuses in the future.
20
                    MR. HOLMER:  I am trying to  recognize
21
          when we get to making recommendations  we are
22
          going  to put a timetable on and we are going to
23
          put  it Just as tight  as it can possibly be, and
24
          I don't think that we are  proposing-  here that
25

-------
   	3*127

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         we in any way try to  delay  the achievement  of
 3
         the preservation of Lake  Michigan.   I  don't
 4
         think that is the question.
 5
                   I think the question is,  in  setting
 6
         our timetable in our  recommendations we  want
 7
         to be realistic.  There is  no point in setting
 8
         a timetable that we can't meet. And I  think if
 9
         we don't recognize that research  is sometimes
10
         necessary in areas in which we do not  have  the
11
         information, I think we would be making  a mis-
12
         take.
13
                   MR. OEMING:   Yes.
14
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr. Poston?
15
                   MR. POSTON:  Well, I felt tha.t we have
16
         talked about this, it is  like many  other parts
17
         of presentations that have  been made and is not
18
         particularly pertinent to bringing  this  up  in
19
         the summary as a most important thing.   There
20
         are many things that were discussed in the  five-
21
         day period of our deliberations last month, and
22
         I don't feel that every one of these points
23
         need be covered, inasmuch as they will be in
24
         the record for those who want to study this out.
25

-------
   	3^28
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   Again let me try to bring
 3
          you  back.   The statute says that in the summary
 4
          we have to discuss the nature of the delays.
 5
          Now,  as I  see  this,  the nature of the delays
 6
          in the problem of cleaning up pollution of Lake
 7
          Michigan on the basis of what you said are due:
 8
          one,  to the complexity of the problem; secondly,
 9
          to the notion  that we are dealing with political
10
          entities that  have to be brought together;
11
          thirdly, that  in order to solve the problem
12
          we may have to have new legislation; fourth,
13
          that we may have to have and we haven't resolved
14
          yet  the problem of adequate financing; and
15
          fifth, that we do not have the answers, the
16
          definitive answers,  to all the problems and
17
          they have  not  been able to be related.
18
                    As far as I can see, this is in 'summary
19
          what the nature of the delays here are--
20
                    MR.  OEMING:  That is right.
21
                    MR.  STEIN:   --and I think the statute
22
          requires us to say something on that and we
23
          should give consideration to that in the time
24
          schedule.
25

-------
 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   But I am wondering if we  can't  arrive
 3
         at some kind of generalized summary of  the
 4
         nature of the delays up to now or recognize
 5
         that, because I suspect if we get into  the
 6
         specifics, into details, we may run into  some
 7
         problems.
 8
                   What you are saying is, I think,
 9
         entirely correct, and unless we recognize that,
10
         we are going to set up a false time schedule,
11
         fool ourselves, fool the people, and in my
12
         estimation a time schedule that is  too  tight,
13
         unable to be realized, is worse than the  too
14
         easy time schedule, because when you get  a too
15
         tight time schedule and the time schedule isn't
16
         met and you can't enforce it, the time  schedule
17
         is past and then you are rolling on and you
18
         are  continuing  to  pollute.
19
                   What you have to have is  a reasonable
20
         time schedule that is going to be met.  And I
21
         don't know, if you--
22
                   MR. HOLMER:  I will accept that state
23
         ment.
24
                   MR. STEIN:  If you want to put  these
25

-------
   	3430

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         in these generalized terms as to the nature
 3
         of delays, maybe we can try  that.
 4
                   MR. OEMING:  May I suggest,  Mr.
 5
         Chairman, that you have formulated here  a
 6
         general framework for what has concerned me
 7
         as imposed upon us by the statute, and I don't
 8
         believe we are going to resolve this right
 9
         here at the  moment.  But how would it  be to
10
         have the Secretary take that portion out of
11
         your statement here and bring it back  in and
12
         see if we can resolve this into a general
13
         statement of--
14
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
15
                   MR. OEMING:   --what are the  nature
16
         of the delays, rather than an exposition.  I
17
         think  this has some difficulties with  it,  Mr.
18
         Holmer.  An  exposition  such  as this  is fine,
19
         but to boil  this  down,  and it seemed to  me
20
         that the Chairman  did this.  And finally,  there
21
         are a  couple of  things  that  occurred to  me
22
         that we might add  to  this yet along  the  same
23
         lines  of this statement, but would formulate  the
24
         kind of a  job that we should do here under  the
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         statute to meet this requirement.
 3
                   MR. STEIN:  Let the Secretary use
 4
         that as a point and we will give this to the
 5
         Conferees and let them work this over.
 6
                   Now, I see Mr. Klassen shaking his
 7
         head.   And you know, it may have taken me 20
 8
         years  to learn this, but I know when Klassen
 9
         shakes his head I don't want to go ahead without
10
         pausing.
11
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Just let me make one
12
         comment, Mr.  Chairman, and this Is a comment
13
         and a  prediction.
14
                   The polluters are going to capitalize
15
         on every one  of these delays that we recognize,
16
         and I  am speaking specifically now of certain
17
         industries that gave nothing but excuses at
18
         the last time that they need more time to study.
19
         We have heard this for 25 years, and I am not
20
                    ;
         for building  into this some Justifications that
21
         they can go back and say, "Well, you said this
22
         could  be a delay, so we need more time to study."
23
         I  am not in favor of including them in there.
24
                   And if I am outvoted, it is all right.
25

-------
    	:	:	3432

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  POSTON:   You  mean your idea is
 3
          to  be  on with  cleanup  of the lake,  is that
 4
          what you are saying?
 5
                    MR.  OEMING:   Mr.  Klassen--
 6
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Well,  we know these
 7
          things, but  why  give  justification for somebody
 8
          that is now  polluting  the lake that  shouldn't
 9
          be  to  capitalize and  they say, "Well,  you
10
          recognize  this yourself,  so how can  you criticize
11
          us  for not going ahead?   We need to  further
12
          study  this problem."
13
                    MR.  OEMING:   I  know your concern,
14
          Mr. Klassen, but how do we  answer this question?
15
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   What  question?
16
                    MR.  OEMING:   The  framers of  the statute
17
          must have  had  in mind  that  we  must look over our
18
          shoulder and say what were  the reasons?   Other-
19
         wise,they  wouldn't have  put it in there.   How
20
         would  you  propose to get  over  this question that
21
          is  in  the  statute--
22
                    MR.  KLASSEN:  What,  timetable?
23
                    MR.  OEMING:   --as to what are the nature
24
          of  the delays, if any,  that have  occurred? .
25

-------
       .	3^33

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. KLASSEN:  When the delay occurs,
 3
         face it then and solve it.
 4
                   Now, I am for setting deadlines
 5
         and if the deadlines are not met at the time
 6
         the deadline is reached, then to evaluate
 7
         whether you are going to make an extension.
 8
                   MR. OEMING:  Well, you are--
 9
                   MR. KLASSEN:  It has been my position
10
         with Illinois and Indiana.  I never said I
11
         was against extending deadlines but I was
12
         against extending deadlines 18 months before
13
         the deadline was met.
14
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes, I appreciate, you
15
         are looking at it a little differently than
16
         I am in that as I read subsection 4 of the
17
         statute,  it says that the conference summary
18
         include the nature of delays, if any, being
19
         encountered in abating pollution.  Now, that
20
         means as  of this time.  It doesn't look forward
21
         to setting time schedules that aren't met in
22
         the future, but what are they today, what have
23
         they been.
24
                   MR. KLASSEN:   I don't know of any
25

-------
 I                       EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          delays  right now,  I honestly don't.

 3
                    MR. OEMING:   I think I can think of

 4
          some.

 5
                    MR. KLASSEN:   If somebody wants to

 6
          outline an industrial  problem that can't be

 7
          solved, I would like to hear about it.

 8
                    MR. OEMING:   Well, let me point out

 9
          to you, Mr. Klassen, that in the conference

10
          itself  I think it  was  obvious that there was

11
          a  good  deal of reservation on the part  of the

12
          Conferees that the matter of taking care of

13
          phosphates was a practical and reasonable

14
          matter, where it may be different today.  But

15
          as short a time ago as  a month ago this was

16
          not universally accepted by the Conferees.

17
                    MR. KLASSEN:   That is right.

18
                    MR. OEMING:   So isn't that a  delay,

19
          the fact that we didn't know, perhaps,  or

20
          weren't ready to accept--

21
                    MR. KLASSEN:   It was a month  ago, but

22
          it is not a delay  today.

23
                    MR. STEIN: All right, let's  put it

24
          this way.  I think we have the formulation of

25

-------
                                                       3^35


 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         a statement that the Secretary will  type  for you.

 3
         Whether we adopt that, expand it with a few other

 4
         items that Mr. Oeming wants or eliminate  it cora-

 5
         pletely we will determine as we go on.  I think

 6
         we have drawn the issue and I understand  the

 7
         views.

 8
                   Let me make one point.  There is

 9
         something in the statute — this has always been

10
         a vexing point to me.  The statute says we

11
         have  to determine the nature of the  delays,

12
         if any.  Now, Mr. Klassen, I have always  felt

13
         that  this was something that was thrown in the

14
         compromise of the legislation, and every  line

15
         of our legislation is a compromise,  possibly

16
         as a  sop or a Justification to the polluters

17
         to indicate that the record would indicate why

18
         we haven't cleaned this up until now.

19
                   But it is in the statute and it is
20
         something we are going to have to meet one way
21
         or the other.
22
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Yes.  It is  not a
23
         mandatory thing in the statute, only if you
24
         have  these obstacles.
25

-------
                  	3436

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR. STEIN:  No, it says the Secretary
 3
          must include in the summary the nature of the
 4
          delays,  if any.
 5
                    MR. KLASSEN:  If any.
 6
                    MR. STEIN:  Now, if there are none,
 7
          let's say it.
 8
                    MR. KLASSEN:  All right.  I haven't
 9
          heard any yet.
10
                    MR. STEIN:  All right.
11
                    MR. OEMING:   If there weren't any
12
          delays,  I don't know why we are here.
13
                    MR. KLASSEN:  I am talking about
14
          future delays.
15
                    MR. OEMING:   Yes, I know you are,
16
          Clarence.
17
                    MR. STEIN:  All right.
18
                    Yes, Mr.  Wisniewski.
10
                    MR.WISNIEWSKI:  In view of Mr. Klassen's
20
          comments that there have been no delays, should
21
          we  then  in the summary include the statement
22
          under the subject of nature of delays that
23
          there have been no  delays in the abatement of
24
          pollution of Lake Michigan?
25

-------
                                  	3^37
 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                   MR.. KLASSEN:   I  didn't  say that.   I
 3
         said I know of no delays from here  on that  we
 4
         ought to recognize.  There have been delays.
 5
                   MR. OEMING:  Don't you  think we  can
 6
         fix that up by saying  that up to  this point in
 7
         time?
 8
                   MR. KLASSEN:   Yes, yes.
 9
                   MR. OEMING:  This is what I am  talking
10
         about.
11
                   MR. STEIN:   I  think we  have a statement
12
         to work on.   Let's either  expand  it or analyze
13
         it and go ahead.
14
                   Do  you have  another point,  Mr. Holmer?
15
                   MR. HOLMER:  Only with  respect  to the
16
         recommendations when we  start in  on them, which
17
         I assume will be almost  forthwith,  that we  may
18
         want to consider the order in which we review
19
         the recommendations dealing with  the research
20
         and information needs  first and going then
21
         through a logical sequence and ending up with
22
         the treatment recommendations.  It  seems  to
23
         me that until you have dealt with the research
24
         and information needs, the preventive measures
25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          you  want to take,  the  collection facilities

 3
          recommendations, you are not really prepared to

 4
          deal with treatment recommendations,  because

 5
          all  of  these lead  up to and tend to govern the

 6
          treatment recommendations.   I make that as a

 7
          general preface  to the recommendations.

 8
                    MR.  STEIN:   Are there any other

 9
          comments on that?

10
                    MR.  KLASSEN:  I would like to hear

11
          some of these.   It is  in the same category as

12
          delays.  If we  are going to predicate the

13
          recommendations  on necessary research,  I think

14
          I  know  what Mr.  Holmer means, if it is  on

15
          research on phosphates, maybe we ought  to get

16
          some of that basic information before we get

17
          into these.  I  would be willing to give it a try.

18
                    MR.  STEIN:   Well, we might give that

19
          a  try because  we have  Dr. Weinberger here today.

20
          If you  have any questions,  we can sift  out the

21
          additional information and the research we might
22
          need before we  can come into recommendations, if
23
          that is what you want  to do.
24
                    MR.  HOLMER:   That is what I would suggest

25

-------
   	3^39

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   What are the particular

 3
          areas  where  you  think you may need some more


          additional information and research so we can

 5
          get  started  on them?

 6
                    MR.  HOLMER:   Well,  we begin on page

 7
          9  and  they deal  with  water--

 8
                    MR.  STEIN:   Is this in your statement?

 9
                    MR.  HOLMER:   On my  statement,  yes, sir.

10
          They deal  with water  quality  monitoring, the


          question of  establishing a priority for the

12
          review of  water  consumption needs of the basin,

13
          the  thermal  pollution recommendation,  because

14
          I  think until  you  deal with what--how you are

15
          going  to get at  the thermal pollution problem

16
          on a research  basis we wouldn't want to make any--

17
                    MR.  STEIN:   Well, it is a question--

18
          we have a  thermal  pollution man here,  too,  and

19
          I  asked him  to come up.

20
                    What do  you  want to deal with first?

21
          Do you  want  to deal with thermal?

22
                    MR.  HOLMER:   I think that probably

23
          another issue  that may come first--and I am

24
          not  sure that  the  Conferees want to go with this.

25

-------
   	3440

 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
          Maybe  they  may want  to--.
 3
                   MR.  STEIN:   No,  I  think you have a
 4
          point.   Let me put this  and  you may have
 5
          several  points.   I think the areas we are
 6
          pushing  at  are these:
 7
                   We were out  to U.  S.  Steel yesterday;
 8
          I  think  these  people have  shown what they can
 9
          do in  industrial  pollution.   I  think we are
10
          pretty much squared  away on  what can or can't
11
          be done  on  municipal pollution.  We have several
12
          problems.
13
                   If you  want  a  brief on information
14
          on that, one is the  thermal  pollution problem,
15
          another  is  the phosphate problem, possibly the
16
          interim  problem to deal  with the alewives, which
17
          I  think  is  a straightforward program, and I
18
          don't  know  that the  facts  are in doubt there.
19
          But other than the thermal pollution problem,
20
          and we have Mr.  McLean here, or the phosphate
21
          problem, and we have Dr. Weinberger here, do
22
          we have  any other real problems we need any
23
          research on here  or  information?
24
                   MR.  POOLE:   How about pesticides?
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN:  And pesticides.
 3
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.
 4
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Can't we take these up
 5
         as we come to the Federal recommendations?
 6
                   MR. STEIN:   No--well, the suggestion
 7
         of Mr. Holmer was--this was what I originally
 8
         thought we might do, is just take them in order
 9
         and as they came up get into these.  He suggests
10
         that before we even go into the recommendations
11
         we have to have a discussion of this type.
12
                   Now, this is the question of a vote
13
         you want to take.  Do you want to take these
14
         one at a time and as the questions come up get
15
         them or go into these theoretical discussions
16
         first?
17
                   MR. OEMING:  Mr. Chairman.
18
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
19
                   MR. OEMING:  May I suggest that you
20
         provide Mr. Holmer the Opportunity to make a
21
         statement here about—we are talking all around
22
         the subject.   Can't we get him to make a state-
23
         ment about what is concerning him in the order
24
         of presentation here--
25

-------
 I                     EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.

 3
                   MR. OEMING:  --or what he has in mind?

 4
         Can we get this down and then we can  talk about

 5
         it?

 6
                   MR. HOLMER:  Well, I think  that there

 7
         are--

 8
                   MR. OEMING:  Specifics, now.

 9
                   MR. HOLMER:  --with respect to such

10
         things as alewives, for example, and  I am Just

11
         taking this, we would recommend that  Michigan


         and Wisconsin continue their efforts  to develop

13
         better control of alewives.  I think  we ought

14
         to make such a recommendation  out of this

15
         conference.  And that all  four States and

16
         Federal agencies cooperate with the Bureau of

17
         Commercial Fisheries in an early warning system.

18
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  May I, and this  is

19                                                     %
         Just  procedural, rather than get right now into

20
         the specifics of the recommendations  procedurally,

21
         what  order would you like  us to take  these up  in?

22
                   MR. HOLMER:  I would like to deal  with

23
         research  and information first,

24
                   MR. OEMING:  0.  K., now.

25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   What  kind of research
 3
         and  information?
 4
                    MR.  HOLMER:  In my  order,  water
 5
         quality monitoring  comes first.   I think we
 6
         ought to take  some  steps to improve  our  water
 7
         quality mbnitoring  so  we know where  we are  and
 8
         are  going  to be, and so  I suggest and make  a
 9
         recommendation here.   From  there  go  to the
10
         basic question of water quantity,  which  I
11
         think has  got  to underlie some of  our decisions
12
         with respect to collection  and  treatment later
13
         on.  Then  I would get  into  the  thermal pollution
14
         problem and then into  the control  of alewives
15
         and pesticides, fertilizer  application,  de-icers
16
         and detergent  research.
17
                   MR. STEIN:  Are you suggesting we  do
18
         this before we take up the  specific  recommendations^
19
                   MR. HOLMER:  I am suggesting that  you
20
         need informationr-
21
                   MR. STEIN:   No,   there are two ways
22
         of doing this.
23
                   MR. HOLMER:  These are specific
24
         recommendations.
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN:  I understand  that,  sir,
 3
         but I think there are two ways of doing this.
 4
         One, we can run down the specific recommenda-
 5
         tions and as these questions come up we can
 6
         grapple with them or we can defer in dealing
 7
         with the specific recommendations and take them
 8
         in this order first.  Now, what would you like
 9
         to do?  And I am Just talking procedure.  I am
10
         not talking--
11
                   MR. HOLMER:  But in what  order  do you
12
         take up your specific recommendations, then?
13
         What is the logic in the arrangement so that
1*
         we are proceeding in an orderly fashion?
15
                   MR. STEIN:  I am not sure that  this
16
         isn't a seamless web and wherever you start
17
         you J>ust have to grab hold of it.   I don't have
18
         any brief for the way we begin to get at  this.
19
                   Here is the only feeling  that I have.
20
         If we deal with a theoretical discussion, we
21
         are not going to have any specific  proposals.
22
         If we immediately start with specific proposals
23
         and take them off, as far as I am concerned,
24
         as we have gone now from 1 to 15, now maybe
25

-------
   	,	.    	3445.

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         we will get to 20 or 30, but I would hate to
 3
         get through the day and find that we were
 4
         still at 15.
 5
                   And maybe this is the way to do it.

 6
         Maybe this is the fastest way in the end.

 7
                   MR. HOLMER:  Let me explain, Murray.
 8
         I am not talking about theoretical discussions
 9
         at this point at all.  I am talking about a
10
         series of specific recommendations.  And I
11
         think we ought to deal with specific recommen-
12
         dations, we ought to go through one at a time.
13
                   I am perfectly willing to go with the
14
         Federal.  I am suggesting tha-t I think we might
15
         find it more  satisfactory to deal with their
16
         recommendations relating to research before we
17
         deal with their recommendation relating to
18
         municipal wastes.
19
                   MR. STEIN:  I have no objection to
20
         that if the Conferees would agree to that.
21
         Now, I would  like to hear an  expression.
22
                   MR. POSTON:  We tried to group these
23
         recommendations, as you can see, and we started
24
         out with municipal pollution, municipal waste,
25

-------
                                                        3446

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         combined sewer wastes, industrial waste, Federal
 3
         installations, general headings, power plants,
 4
         dredging, watercraft, land use practice, surveil-
 5
         lance.  This is one of the items that you in-
 6
         eluded under research.  And then finally research,
 7
         alewives and progress evaluation.
 8
                   MR. OEMING: Well, as much as I don't
 9
         like to take sides here, I am satisfied in my
10
         own mind at this point in the discussion that
11
         the question of research that is needed could
12
         logically come from the discussion of other
13
         recommendations.  That is, this would boil down
14
         to the need for research, unless there is some-
15
         thing I miss here, Mr. Holmer, that you feel
16
         that there is an important element here that
17
         ought to precede for some specific reason, and
18
         I haven't heard that yet.
19
                   MR. HOLMER:  Well, if you will look
20
         at the Federal recommendations on research, 24,
21
         25* 26 and 27, they recommend that research be
22
         accelerated in ways to reduce the rate of
23
         eutrophication; non-point nutrient sources be
24
         identified and quantified, and control methods
25

-------
   	3447

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         be developed; present research be strengthened
 3
         in ways to remove nutrients, and so on.
 4
                   Now, if these are to be our research
 5
         recommendations, then is there an inconsistency
 6
         here with the earlier recommendations that
 7
         relate to these subjects?  I find it a little
 8
         awkward to .do both, you see, without having
 9
         laid out the precise areas of research that we
10
         need to do so that we know that our recommenda-
11
         tion is not going to be changed when we get to
12
         the research recommendation.
13
                   MR. POSTON:  Well, I think we have
14
         some difficulties in assigning these research
15
         projects to researchers and that in this —
16
                   MR. HOLMER:  You mean ways?
17
                   MR. POSTON:  To get people that will
18
         take on the particular Job that you are talking
19
         about.
20
                   MR. STEIN:   No.  No,  we are going to--

                   MR. POSTON:  It may be a State agency
22
         or Federal agency,  some other agency that would
AV
         finally do this.
24
                   MR. STEIN:   Let's get an expression.
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                   MR. STEIN:   "to be controlled by"--
 3
                   MR. OEMING:  By 1977.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes,  "controlled."
 5
                   All right.  May we go on to 7?
 6
                   MR. HOLMER:  Sir.
 7
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
 8
                   MR. HOLMER:  I have two additional
 9
         recommendations that I think would be useful
10
         coming out of this conference.  One is that
11
         each State water pollution  control agency
12
         formally adopt policies encouraging the dis-
13
         charge of treatable industrial waste following
1*
         needed preliminary treatment to municipal
15
         sewer systems.
16
                   And the second, that each water pol-
17
         lution control agency adopt policies encouraging
18
         unified collection systems  serving contiguous
19
         urban areas where feasible.
20
                   Now, these are related.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  Just procedurally, isn't
22
         your second point related to industrial wastes
23
         rather than on the combined wastes?
24
                   MR. HOLMER:  I would be glad to take
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         going to spend up until that 5 o'clock hour
 3
         you were talking about Just on--<
 4
                   MR. HOLMER:  Mr. Stein, let me apologize
 6
         to my fellow Conferees.  I wanted to expedite
 6
         our proceedings.  I haven't and I withdraw it.
 7
                   MR. STEIN:  All right, let's go.
 8
         Let me make a suggestion.  I have read 24, 25>
 9
         26, 27.  The way they have read this, if you
10
         take these up first, I don't know that we
11
         would be any farther ahead.  As a matter of fact,
12
         I am not sure we wouldn't have lost four yards.
13
         It is like running against a defense of the Green
14
         Bay Packers.
15
                   But let me suggest this.  I think we
16
         are going to have the best of both possible
17
         worlds.  We all know what the research impli-
18
         cations are.  Let's take them up one at a time.
19
         If you can tab a research implication in any
20
         of these recommendations that we cannot go
21
         ahead with this without flagging that and going witl
22
         it, let's bring it up.  Now, let me try this
23
         and you follow in your stuff.
24
                   Recommended actions.  One--
25

-------
                           	3^50
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION.

 2                   MR.  OEMING:   Mr.  Chairman.
 3                   MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
 4                   MR.  OEMING:   Now  I  have to  get in
 6        here  before  you  get  into recommendations.
 6                   I  have,  I  think,  two questions that
 7        bear  upon  your consideration  and the  Conferees'
 Q
         consideration  of these specifics and  recommended
 9
         actions.
                    Number one,  I would like to have an
         expression of  the  Conferees whether we are
12
         going to deal  with effluent criteria, effluent
         standards,  in  dealing  with  the problem of  Lake
14
         Michigan or  are  we going to deal with water
         quality standards  to protect  the uses of Lake
16
         Michigan,  and  the  implementation of these
17
         standards  to be  done as necessary to  get the
18
         end result that  we are seeking in Lake Michigan.
19
                    Perhaps  I  had better drop it there
20
         and then I have  a  next question depending  upon
21
         the answer to  this one.
22
                    MR.  STEIN:   I don't know.  Do you
23
         people want  to try that?
24
                    MR.  POOLE:   Would you restate it, please?
25

-------
                                          	34-51

 I                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                   MR. STEIN:  The question  is  are  we

 3
         going to water quality standards in the  lake

 4
         or are we going to work with  effluent  standards.

 5
                   FROM THE AUDIENCE:  Pardon me, sir,

 6
         is the loud speaker on?

 7
                   MR. STEIN:  I haven't got the  faintest

 8
         idea.

 9
                   But I tell you, if  you have  ever been

10
         to a pollution control meeting for  the past 50


         years and you haven't heard that question  raised,

12
         you haven't been to a pollution meeting.   You

13
         haven't missed one.  This is  the fundamental

14
         question we always discuss.

15
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Is there an official

16
         Federal interpretation on this, Mr.  Chairman?

17
                   MR. STEIN:  No.

18
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Can we use  either?

19
                   MR. STEIN:  Use either or both.  I

20
         am ready to hear from you people on this.

21
                   Let me give you my  view on this  since

22
         none of them have spoken up.

23
                   You know, Larry, this has  been a

24
         question that has been raised at every pollution

25

-------
   	3^32

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         control meeting that I have ever been to in

 3
         my life.  I think if you raise this in the
 4
         philosophic way you have raised it, I have

 5
         never heard it resolved yet and I am not sure
 6
         you have.  It is my view that we move in and

 7
         we take these one question at a time and

 8
         knock these off, because if you are going to
 9
         get into this question of stream standards versus
10
         effluent standards and what we are going to do
11
         on the theoretical basis, we can have a long
12
         discussion, come to some kind of Mexican stand-

13
         off, and then the first issue we get in we are
14
         going to contradict ourselves.
15
                   MR. KLASSEN:  May I ask one question?
16
         And this is not theoretical, this is practical.
17
         It was asked of us by the Federal Water Pollution
18
         Control.
19
                   You are making recommendations here
20
         for effluent standards.  Does that mean that
21
         you are assuring the Conferees that if these
22
         effluent standards are met .that the water quality
23
         standards that you have approved will be met?
24
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr. Poston?
25

-------
   	3^53

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. POSTON:  No, I don't think that
 3
         is the intent here at all.
 4
                   MR. OEMING:  Well, gentlemen, we are
 6
         in a maze now.
 6
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Isn't this the pertinent
 7
         question?
 8
                   MR. OEMING:  This is the pertinent--
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  No, I think your question
10
         is pertinent.  There may "be another answer to
11
         it, and I don't know that this answers the
12
         question.  Either the effluent standards have
13
         to be met as a minimum.--
14
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Yes.
15
                   MR. STEIN:  Now, if the water quality
16
         standards are not met, you may have to do some
17
         more.
18
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Yes.
19
                   MR. HOLMER:  Well--
20
                   MR. STEIN:  But as a minimum you
21
         would have to meet these effluent standards to
22
         get started.
23
                   MR. KLASSEN:  After they have spent
24
         money on this, the water quality standards that
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          the States have proposed that have been accepted
 3
          might not be met.
 4
                    MR. STEIN:   Well,  I would hope that
 &
          their effluent standards were related--
 6
                    MR. KLASSEN:   This was my question.
 7
                    MR. STEIN:   —to the water quality
 8
          standards.
 9
                    MR. KLASSEN:   The  way these have been
10
          worked out by the  Federal Water Pollution Control,
11
          is  there assurance, and this is the same ques-
12
          tion Federal Water Pollution Control asked the
13
          State of Illinois  on  our effluent standards,
14
          can we be assured  that  the effluent quality
15
          standards that the State of  Illinois proposed
16
          will meet the water quality  standards?   We made
17
          the recommendations before.   Now you are making
18
          them.  I am asking you  the same question.
19
                    MR. STEIN:  What question do  you ask
20
          us  you couldn't be sure in every case?   And I
21
          never knew,  Clarence,  that you ever thought we
22
          were smarter than  you.
23
                    MR. KLASSEN:   You  are reading something
24
          into that.
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   (Laughter.)
 3
                   MR. STEIN:  No, I am not reading a
 4
         thing.
 5
                   MR. KLASSEN:  You gave an honest
 6
         answer to it.
 7
                   MR. STEIN:  I am not reading a thing
 8
         into this.
 9
                   MR. KLASSEN:  You gave an honest
10
         answer.
11
                   MR. STEIN:  I think when we have run
12
         millions of automobiles out, we are reasonably
13
         sure that when an automobile comes off a pro-
14
         duction line that it is going to run.  I wish
15
         we were as definitive on water.  All we are
16
         doing is the best we can.
17
                   Now, as I Judge these, and I haven't
18
         discussed this with our technical people, I
19
         assume that what they are saying, that if-these
20
         effluent standards are met the water quality
21
         standards are going to be met.  They absolutely
22
         don't know any more about water quality control
23
         than Mr. Holmer, Mr. Poole, Mr. Oeming, Mr.
24
         Klassen, Mr. Stein.  We can't provide the
25

-------
   ^____	3456

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         definitive answer.  I am not sure  that  they
 3
         can.  This is their closest and "best  guess.
 4
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Good.
 5
                   MR. STEIN:  Now, the way I  would
 6
         suggest running this to cut through this
 7
         Gordian knot is that if these effluent  stan-
 8
         dards you feel are not reasonable  to  meet
 9
         the water quality standards, then  we  should
10
         take these up and deal with them.  But  I don't
11
         think you can ask the Federal people, as they
12
         wouldn't ask you, to make a prediction  or come
IS
         up with a judgment on a tolerance  which is
14
         more than anyone can do given the  state of the
15
         art today.  What can you do?  We can  only do
16
         our best.
17
                   Hopefully, they have their  water
18
         quality standards; they feel these effluent
19
         standards can reasonably meet them.   If they
20
         do that in 100 percent of the cases,  I  will be
21
         surprised.
22
                   MR. KLASSEN:  You have answered my
23
         question and I think if this is what  we all
24
         understand, I think this is what we do  understand,
25

-------
   	:	:	3457.

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          this kind  of-~
 3
                    MR. STEIN:  Yes.
 4
                    MR. KLASSEN:  This  kind  of  a—
 6
                    MR. STEIN:  Yes.
 6
                    MR. KLASSEN:  I  think you gave  a
 7
          very fair  statement of it.
 8
                    MR. HOLMER:  But would it not be
 9
          better  in  the long run for us  to be dealing
10
          with the obligation each of us as  States  has
11
          assumed to achieve the water  quality  standards
12
          which were approved just before this  conference
13
          for some of us by the Secretary of the Interior?
14
                    Do we know whether  it is necessary
15
          to do all  of these things  in  all of the waters
16
          of the  basin in order to achieve these standards,
17
          would be one question that automatically  comes
18
          up.  Is it going to prove necessary to do more
19
          in some places in order to achieve those  water
20
          quality standards?
21
                    Wisconsin is prepared to do more if
22
          that is what is required.
23
                    MR. STEIN:  All right.
24
                    MR. HOLMER:  Because we  believe in  the
25

-------
      	3^58

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         water  quality standards.
 3
                    MR. STEIN:   All  right.   As  I read
 4
         the  first  one,  and  you know,  I  don't  want to
 5
         get--again,  this  is the crucial point here.
 6
         The  question is  they talk,  and  I  am not sure
 7
         they go  on with this  advanced waste treatment,
 8
         I am not sure I  know what  advanced means,  but
 9
         if you are going  to provide waste treatment to
10
         provide  this kind of  treatment.
11
                    Now,  the  problem  is,  if any less is
12
         going  to be  provided  you are  going to meet the
13
         water  quality standards.   If  any  more is  needed
14
         you  are  going to  have to get  that more to meet
15
         the  water  quality standards.  Isn't that  correct?
16
                    MR. HOLMER:   But  my point is I  am not
17
         interested in whether the  discharge has  got
18
         one  part per million  of elemental phosphorus.
19  I
         I am concerned  about  getting  the  phosphorus in
20
         the  shoreline down  to the place where we  don't
21
         have nuisance algae.
22
                    I  feel  the  same way about BOD.   We
23
         want to  protect the quality of  the water,  not to--
24
                    MR. STEIN:   This  is the old business.
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         Now,  how are we going to be able to determine

 3
         whether any polluter or any discharger is

 4
         meeting a program?   It seems to me the fastest

 5
         way we can determine this, and you determine

 6
         this  in all your State programs when you issue

 7
         a permit, is what they are producing and what

 8
         kind of effluent they are producing.  Now, if

 9
         you get a situation where you believe that they

10
         don't have to meet this to meet the water quality

11
         standards, I think we have to face that situation.

12
         Again if we get to a situation where given this

13
         this  isn't quite enough and they are going to

14
         have  to even do more than this to achieve this,

15
         then we are going to have to meet that.

16
                   But it seems to me if we are going to

17
         kick  off a program where we can measure results,

18
         we have" to deal with the individual polluters,

19
         decide what kind of improvement these polluters

20
         are going to make and when they are going to do

21
         it and check to see if they have done it, because

22
         otherwise you won't know what they have done.

23
                   MR. HOLMER:  Well, but this is our

24
         responsibility to see that the burden and the

25

-------
            	3460

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          responsibility for doing this  is  discharged

 o
          in accord with the proper management of the


          various  basins involved in our problem.


                    MR.  STEIN:   In other words, you

 g
          don't want us  to give  you--we  are not supposed


 7         to have  any specifics  on what  the individual

 g
          polluters are  going to do.  We are going to

 9
          leave it up to you and maybe after five years


          if we find the waters  are not  meeting those


          qualifications and these guys  have primary

12
          treatment or no treatment at all, that this;is

13
          the  Judgment we move in.

14
                    How  does that put us ahead of where

15
          we are today,  Mr. Holmer?  Don't  you think that

16
          we and the public are  entitled to know specifically

17
          what each of these sources of  pollution are

18
          going to do and when they are  going to do it?

19
                    MR.  OEMING:   Mr. Chairman, may I

20
          take you on for a while?

21
                    MR.  STEIN:  Sure.

22
                    (Laughter.)
23
                    MR.  OEMING:   Let's start here with

24
          the  basic Federal statute which says that the

25

-------
     	3461

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         States were supposed  to  adopt water  quality
 3
         standards on interstate  waters.
 4
                   PROM THE AUDIENCE:  Would  you  use
 5
         the microphone, please?
 6
                   MR. OEMING:  I don't know  whether
 7
         I can or not.
 8
                   The States  have  all adopted water
 9
         quality standards for Lake Michigan.   The
10
         Federal statute, so far  as I can  read it,
11
         does not say that accompanying these standards--'
12
         it says a plan of implementation,  doesn't  it?
13
         They want a plan of implementation with  the
14
         standards.
15
                   The States  have  also adopted plans
16
         of implementation along  with their standards,
17
         have submitted those  to  the Secretary of the
18
         Interior, and the Secretary has approved those,
19
         with a few exceptions here and there which
20
         do not necessarily complicate this issue at
21
         this time.
22
                   I am asking you  and the  Conferees
23
         whether the recommendations on specific  ef-
24
         fluent restrictions now  mean that'whatever you
25

-------
   	:	:	.3462

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2

          subscribe  to  here  must  now  go back and be
 3

          incorporated  in  the  standards?   My question
 4

          primarily—the basic  question is what  is  the
 5

          relation of the  standards and plans of imple-
 6

          mentation  which  have  now been approved by the
 7

          Secretary  of  the Interior for Lake Michigan,
 8

          what relationship  does  that bear to this
 9

          conference?
10

                    I think  that  is the basic question
11
          that needs to be answered.
12

                    MR. STEIN:  Well, here,  you  know,
13

          this is a wonderful question; I  am glad you
14

          asked it.
15

                   Mr. Klassen, when the  Congress  enacted
16

          the provisions dealing with standards, they
17

          specifically did not  repeal the  enforcement
18

          provisions.  Governor Kerner  of  Illinois  asked
19

          for an enforcement case.  We under the Federal
20

          statute had no option but had to respond  to
21

         that case.   In order  to get a response to that
22

         case, these people have come up with recommended
iA

         actions to  clean up the streams.  The kind of
24

„       Judgment they are going to make  on each individual
25

-------
                      	   3^63

 1                  .    EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         polluter—and by the way,  if these individual
 3
         polluters do not measure up at the conference
 4
         stage,  we can go to a hearing and then to court,
 5
         and the way we Judge these polluters is exactly
 6
         the way you, Mr. Poole, Mr. Holmer and Mr.
 7
         Klassen do it, whether each of them are putting
 8
         out a specific effluent requirement so they
 9
         will not pollute.
10
                   In order that they will be on notice,
11
         that you will be on notice, that we-will be on
12
         notice, I think we have to give these waste
13
         dischargers  a clear indication of what we
14
         expect  of them.  I would hope"that the Federal
15
         people  have  come up with recommendations which
16
         are consistent with the standards and the
17
         standards will be met and  there will be no
18
         conflict.  If there is, maybe we should hear it.
19
                   But you have to  recognize that we
20
         have the first stages of an enforcement action
21
         initiated, not by us, but  by a governor of a
22
         State,  that  if at the first stage of this
23
         enforcement  action satisfactory results are
24
         not achieved we are going  to a hearing and we are
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         going  to  court.  And  if you  do not  want  to
 3
         put your  cities and industries on notice
 4
         right  now what you are going to  expect of them
 5
         and what  the Federal  Government  is  going to
 6
         expect of them, I think we are doing  them a
 7
         tremendous disservice.
 8
                   MR. OEMING:  I say that--
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  I say  that if we are
10
         asking them to spend  millions of dollars they
11
         are entitled to know  what we are asking  them
12
         to do  at  the earliest possible opportunity,
13
         and this  is the time.
14
                   MR. OEMING:  Mr. Stein, I don't
15
         disagree  with what you say,  but  I say that this
16
         is in  the plans of implementation at  present.
17
         Otherwise it wouldn't have been  approved by
18
         the Secretary.
19
                   MR. STEIN:  Well,  if there  is  no
20
         difference in this plan of implementation,
21
         all we have to do is  sign off on it.
22
                   MR, OEMING:  There  are differences,
23
         however, here in these proposals.
24
                   MR. STEIN:  If there are  differences,
25

-------
 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          these are  the ones  to be  brought  up.
 3
                    MR. OEMING:  0.  K.   This  is  what I
 4
          am  talking about.
 6
                    MR. STEIN:  But I  think the  thing
 6
          is  to get  down  to specifics.
 7
                    MR. OEMING:  All right.
 8
                    MR. STEIN:  All right,  let's deal
 9
          with the first  one.
10
                    MR. HOLMER:  Are we  going this way?
11
                    MR. STEIN:  Well,  go on.   We are; not
12
          cutting you off.
13
                    MR. HOLMER:  I  thought  you were going
14
          to  go from here now into  the--
15
                    MR. STEIN:  Twenty-four?   No.  As
16
          I understood the consensus,  it was  to  go the
17
          other way.  Now, I  may have  misread this.
18
                    MR. HOLMER:  Going into Item One of
19
          the recommendations?
20
                    MR. STEIN:  Yes, that is  what I under
21
          stood was  the consensus of the Conferees of all
22
          the States.  I  think you  were  in  favor of going
23
          the other  way,  but  as I polled the  others they
24
          wanted to  start with Number  One.
25

-------
   	3^66

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                    MR. HOLMER:  Yes.   But  I  am wondering
 3
         if we  are  through with Larry's question.
 4
                    MR. OEMIKG:  I  am not through,  but
 5
         I am holding it tack.
 6
                    MR. STEIN:  He  is not through;  he
 7
         said,  he is holding it back.  And I  think if
 8
         we proceed, these things  will come  out.   So far
 9
         we have achieved unanimity not only  in this
10
         case,  with another case.  My notion  is if we
11
         get started, all these questions  will  come out.
12
                    We are not going to "bypass  anything.
13
         I am ready to take this up in any order that  is
14
         suggested.  As I gather from the  Conferees, at
15
         least  four of them want to take this  up from
16
         Number One, and I have no brief in not taking
17
         up the research first, but this is their  judgment.
18
                    MR. HOLMER:'  I  am not arguing that.
19
         I just wanted this question of stream  standards
20
         and effluent standards (inaudible to  the  reporter)
21                                                   *      i
                    MR. OEMING:  Yes.
22
                    MR. STEIN:  I am not sure  that  we
23
         have,  sir.  What I am suggesting  is  that  we can

         talk about these stream standards  and effluent
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         standards, as I have talked  for  the  past quarter
 3
         of a  century, and we could sit at  these  meetings
 4
         and talk, but we are always  going  to be  faced
 5
         with  this.  If we are  going  to get through with
 6
         our business and get through with  this,  recog-
 7
         nizing his point—and  I don't disagree with
 8
         what  Larry says philosophically—what I  am
 9
         suggesting is procedurally we take this  up
10
         when  we meet them.
11
                   MR. MITCHELL:   May I ask a question?
12
                   If a polluter was  able to  achieve
13
         either standard but not both, how  would  you
14
         enforce?
15
                   MR. STEIN:   The difficulty,!  think,
16
         Mr. Mitchell, is if we ever  get  into a  situation
17
         where both weren't compatible and  you could
18
         achieve one but not the other, it  would  have
10
         to be construed in favor  of  the  polluter.  I
20
         wouldn't  doubt that.   I would think  bb'th these
21
         approaches would have  to  be  compatible.
22
                 '  MR. MITCHELL:   Certainly that  is
23
         what  I thought Mr. Oeming  was saying too.  I
24
         thought you were suggesting  that they ought
25

-------
   	•     	;	3^68

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          to  be  compatible and that certainly the
 3
          State  standards, which everyone had approved
 4
          and everyone had been working with, that any
 5
          effluent standards certainly ought to be
 6
          somewhere in compatibility with those statements
 7
          and--
 8
                    MR. STEIN:  I think we  are in agree-
 9
          ment with that.   The question here is*-
10
                    MR. MITCHELL:  Then I heard you say,
11
          though,  that we  ought to advise industry of what
12
          these  standards  are, and I thought when we
13
          passed our State plans, had all the hearings,
14
          we  were  setting  the record pretty clear that
15
          the State did want to clean up the pollution
16
          and the  inference was that our State plans
17
          didn't give that impression to industry.  I
18
          don't  think it is true.
19
                    MR. STEIN:  If I gave that impression,
20
          I didn't mean to.   The notion is  here, with
21
          these  requirements here, if these are not
22
          compatible with  your State plans, with your
23
          State  standards  and your State implementation
24
          plans, we should point this out.   But I think
25

-------
                                         	     3.^69

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         industry is required  to ^degree  of  certainty,
 3
         and I think if we do  not give  them the  same
 4
         story from the standards we approve  and the  en-
 5
         forcement conference, we are falling down  on
 6
         our  Job.  And I think the only way  we  can get
 7
         at this to see if these things coalesce is by
 8
         getting at the details.
 9
                   I think the sooner we start,  the
10
         better we might be.
11
                   MR. OEMING:  I am ready to start.
12
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
13

14
                       RECOMMENDATIONS #1  AND #2
15
                    "l.  Advanced waste  treatment  be  pro-
16

17
         vided by municipalities  serving  a  population of
18
         5,000 or more  or receiving  for treatment  wastes
19
         in quantities  exceeding 200 pounds  per  day of
20
         BOD.  Such  treatment  to  achieve  90 percent five-
21
         day BOD removal or an effluent containing a
22
         maximum of  20  parts per  million  removal and an
23
         effluent containing not  more  than  1 part  per
24
         million of  elemental  phosphorus.   This action
25

-------
                      	3^-70

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         to be accomplished by December 1972."
 3
                   MR. OEMING:  I  am  ready.
 4
                   MR. POOLE:  Mr.  Chairman,  the  first
 5
         one is where we come to considerable variance
 6
         with what my idea of the  State standards and
 7
         the implementation plan have been.
 8
                   First, and before  I get  into what I
 9
         consider a variance, I do  not want  to associate
10
         advanced waste treatment  with 90 percent removal
11
         of BOD.
12
                   MR. STEIN:  May I  make a  suggestion
13
         on this?  I  always have problems with this.  Can
14
         we strike, for the sake of argument—and if you
15
         want put it  backr-let's say  "waste  treatment be
16
         provided," because this "Advanced"  is a  color
17
         word and I don't know that it adds  anything one
18
         way or the other.  I am Just trying to get us
19
         closer together.
20
                   Instead of talking about  advanced waste
21
         treatment, let's say "Waste  treatment be provided
22
         by the municipalities."   I agree with you on
23
         that.  0. K.?
24
                   MR. POOLE:  All right.
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   The second part of it I think  is more
 3
         important where there is a variance.  We said
 4
         in our plan of implementation that we would
 5
         require secondary treatment, and if activated
 6
         sludge was used we would expect 90 percent BOD
 7
         removal*, if trickling filters were used we would
 8
         expect 80 percent BOD removal, and that we would
 9
         decide which type was applicable depending upon
10
         the given situation.  We did not say anything
11
         about 20 parts per million BOD.
12
                   We said phosphates would be removed
13
         when feasible, or something to that extent.
14
         A month ago we talked about 80 percent removal
15
         of phosphates.  Now this says 90 percent or, as
16
         I read it, not more than one part per million
17
         of elemental phosphorus.
18
                   So these recommendations are quite
19
         different from what was in the Indiana plan
20
         that has been approved, and I think perhaps
21
         maybe this might have some bearing on the
22
         question that Mr. Oeming raised.
23
                   MR. STEIN:  Maybe I should have read
24
         this first.  I think you have got several points
25

-------
   	3472

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          and it seems to me I have heard some of this
 3
          before somewhere.
 4
                    Let's take the first one up, this
 5
          trickling filter, 80 or 90 percent.  What is
 6
          your view on that?
 7
                    What is wrong with Poole putting
 8
          in trickling filters when he needs it, and if
 9
          he is going to put in trickling filters, why
10
          have we got this 90 percent?
11
                    MR. POSTON:  Well, I think our people
12
          feel that we need to get maximum treatment now.
13
                    MR. STEIN:  No, no, no.  Now, here,
14
          you know the issue as well as I do.  You get
15
          a lot of trickling filters around and you have
16
          arguments that dealing with a small city if
17
          you are going to get a 90 percent removal, to
18
          some people in the audience, you almost are
19
          going to have to go to an activated sludge
20
          operation or something of that kind.  They realize
21
          when one of those plants go sour, you will have
22
          a lot of trouble, and a lot of smaller communi-
23
          ties can run a trickling filter, they can run
24
          between 80 and 85 percent and get a lot less
25

-------
                          	3^73

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         trouble.  What is the issue  if the  States  want
 3
         to get the implementation plans  and the  water
 4
         quality set to where in their Judgment a city
 5
         that has a trickling filter  plant or they  think
 6
         it might be better  if they operate  a trickling
 7
         filter plant, that  it might  be the  best  opera-
 8
         tion?
 9
                   An activated sludge plant,  I might
10
         point out, just doesn't operate  on  an automatic
11
         pilot, and if the town is committed,  as  many
12
         towns are, to having the fire chief do this in
13
         his spare time or the mayor's brother-in-law
14
         run the plant, maybe some of the States  feel
15
         he  miught  do better with a trickling filter
16
         doing 85 percent.
17
                   This is the issue.  I  think we have
18
         all heard these arguments before.   The notion
19
         is why are we asking for a routine  90 percent?
20
                   MR. POSTON:  In general,  90 percent
21
         is attainable in an activated sludge  plant--
22
                   MR. STEIN:  That's right.
23
                   MR. POSTON:  --and most towns  with a
24
         population of 5,000 might go to  that.  Whereas
25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         we have  recognized  in  the  second recommendation
 3
         that  for towns under 5,000 population we would
 4
         permit an 80  percent removal of five-day BOD--
 5
                    MR.  STEIN:   Do you mean to say that
 6
         in Indiana that you are not--and I Just want
 7
         to understand the recommendation--that you are
 8
         not going to  permit a  trickling filter plant
 9
         in a  town of  over 5,000, 6,000, 7,000?
10
                    MR.  POOLS:   Well,  I think we might
11
         not on the Lake Michigan watershed, "but I
12
         wouldn't say  that for  the  State as a whole.
13
         That  is,  if they come  in with a trickling
14
         filter plant.
15
                    Where there  is a critical water
16
         situation, you say  no,  go  to the activated
17
         sludge because it would give you a higher
18
         percentage of removal.
19
                    I am not  quibbling so much about
20
         the 90 percent for  the towns above 5,000 that
21
         he has here as I am about  the remainder of it, and
22
         I want to point out  that the  remainder of it
23
         was not  in the Indiana standards and plans.
24
         I don't  know  whether it is in those for the
25

-------
   	•      	3^73

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         other three States or not.  You have  come  down
 3
         to a 20 parts per million BOD and  if  you happen
 4
         to have a 400 in the raw, you go to 90  percent
 5
         removal right away instead of 80.  And  if  I
 6
         followed, and God knows I don't profess to be
 7
         an expert on phosphate removal, but the thrust
 8
         of the testimony that I got a month ago was
 9
         that there are now ways to remove, on an average,
10
         80 percent of the phosphates.
11
                   There was also in the Michigan
12
         testimony, as I recall it, their results on
13
         two plants that were dealing with  raw phosphates
14
         in the neighborhood of 50, 60 parts per million,
15
         and as soon as you impose that one part per million
16
         elemental phosphorus on these plants, if I
17
         followed Purdy right, you have got something
18
         considerably above 90 percent removal, and I
19
         had only heard the 90 percent removal after I
20
         got this last Monday.
21
                   MR. STEIN: What would you suggest?

         And again to try to move this forward. Mr.
23
         Poole, would you suggest other numbers for
24
         the 20,  90 and 1?  Would that help  it?
25

-------
                                     	3^76

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR. POOLE:  I would like to know what
 3
          some of the other people think.
 4
                    MR. STEIN:  Mr, Oeming?
 5
                    MR. OEMING:  Mr. Chairman, my question
 6
          is what is the significance of BOD removal on a
 7
          town of 5>000 up on the head waters of a tribu-
 8
          tary stream in Indiana, Michigan, or Wisconsin
 9
          in relation to the water quality standards that
1°
          have been accepted and approved in Lake Michigan?
11
                    MR. POSTON:  Are you looking at me?
12
                    MR. STEIN:  Yes, or anyone you want
13
          to call on.
14
                    MR. POSTON:  I think, first off, that
15
          when we made these changes I think this was done
16
          because the Conferees wanted more specificity
17
          and this was the reason we got into putting some
18
          more qualifications.
19
                    It was my understanding relative to
20
          phosphorus removal that it can be done effectively.
21
          And I think I might agree with you, Mr. Oeming,
22
          that insofar as interstate or pollution from a
23
          community 100 miles upstream or maybe even
24
          considerably less than that might not affect
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         the lake Insofar as bacteria are concerned
 3
         or BOD, but I think we generally had the
 4
         conclusion that the people in the States
 5
         wanted to have a quality water as well as
 6
         those people that live around the lake.
 7
                   MR. OEMING:  Well, that may be.
 8
         But we are still dealing with an interstate
 9
         water quality problem here and not aimed
10
         within the State, and if I sense these States
11
         around here, they are all adopting water
12
         quality standards for intrastate waters.
13
                   I question now, in view of what you
14
         say, why this should be in here, this BOD
15
         removal, at all municipalities.  If we are
16
         aiming our guns here at Lake Michigan, which
17
         I think we are, then we ought to stay there.
18
                   And secondly, Mr. Poston--
19
                   MR. POSTON:  I think it is going to
20
         be necessary to have an adequate waste treatment
21
         plant to remove the nutrient problem, phosphates
22
         specifically, back upstream, whereas it might
23
         not be necessary to handle the bacterial prob-
24
         lem upstream because of its remoteness from the
25

-------
                                  	3^78

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          lake.
 3
                    MR.  OEMING:   Look,  I am not arguing
 4
          about  the  phosphate  removal.   We have got to
 5
          remove  phosphates.   I  am going to argue about
 6
          90  percent in  a  minute •.
 1
                    But  Michigan has  accepted the premise
 8
          that phosphates  have got to be removed whether

 9
          it  is  100  miles  upstream or at the lakeshore.
10
          So  let's get away from that argument.
11
                    What I am  arguing,first of all,is  what
12
          relationship does a  500-pound load in the upper
13
          tributaries, a BOD load,now,  in the upper
14
          tributaries, have to the water quality in
15
          Lake Michigan?
16
                    MR.  POSTON:   Well,  I think, of course,
17
          some of it depends upon the proximity to the
18
          lake.
19
                    MR.  OEMING:   Yes, yes,  yes.
20
                    MR.  POSTON:   If you get up there
21
          far enough, it is all  satisfied by the time  you
22
          get to  the lake.
23
                    MR.  OEMING:   Yet  you want a uniform
24
          requirement here all over the tributaries
25

-------
                                	3479

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         predicated on what,  on Lake  Michigan quality?
 3
         This  is my question.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  Let  me ask  you,  Mr.  Oeming,
 5
         do you have a suggestion on  modifying or
 6
         amending this?
 7
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  Go ahead.   Let's try that.
 9
                   MR. OEMING:  My  suggestion is that
10
         treatment be provided sufficient  to  achieve not
11
         less  than 80 percent removal of phosphorus,
12
         total phosphorus.
13
                   MR. STEIN:  That's 80 of phosphorus,
14
         all right.
15
                   MR. OEMING:  Total .phosphorus.   Now,
16
         we ought to know what we're  talking  about.
17
                   MR. STEIN:  All  right.
18
                   MR. OEMING:  We're talking about total
10
         phosphorus.
20
                   MR. STEIN:  All  right.
21
                   MR. POSTON:  Phosphorus.
22
                   MR. PURDY:  What is the difference,
23
         total phosphorus--
24
                   MR. STEIN:  All  right.  First, let's
25

-------
              	3^80

 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         go  down.
 3
                    "Waste  treatment be provided by
 4                   '              ,
         municipalities serving a population of 5>000
 5
         or  more  in quantities  exceeding 800 pounds
 6
         of  BOD."
 7
                    Do you  have  any objection to that
 8
         first  sentence?
 9
                    MR.  OEMING:  Yes.
10
                    MR.  STEIN:   What is your objection?
11
                    MR.  OEMING:  Well,  I Just had the
12
         answer from Mr. Poston that  if the BOD is
13
         satisfied  before  it  gets to  the lake it has
14
         no  influence on it,  it becomes an intrastate
15
         problem.
16
                    Well, if he  didn't say it, then he
17
         ought  to correct  it.
18
                    MR.  STEIN:   What would you suggest
19
         we  use for the first sentence?.
20
                    MR.  OEMING:  Strike it out.
21
                    MR.  PURDY:   I  don't think you can set
22
         uniform  ones.
23
                    MR.  OEMING:  I don't think you can set
24
         a uniform  BOD requirement as  it relates to  the
25

-------
   	3481

 1                     EXEJUTIVE SESSION

 2
         water quality in Lake Michigan or in the
 3
         receiving stream.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:   Yes.  But. what I am
 5
         trying to get is a draft that we can work
 6
         with.  Let's try this.
 7
                   MR. OEMING:  Well, "Waste treatment
 8
         be provided"--
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  --"be provided by
10
         municipalities serving a population of 5,000
11
         or more. "
12
                   Right?  Let's go on.
13
                   "To achieve 90 percent five-day BOD
14
         removal"?
15
                   MR. OEMING:  No.
16
                   MR. STEIN:   No?  To achieve what?
17
                   MR. OEMING:  To achieve 80 percent
18
         removal--
19
                   MR. STEIN:   --of phosphorus?
20
                   MR. OEMING:  --of total phosphorus.
21
                   MR. STEIN:   That is all?
22
                   MR. OEMING:  Well, you can put a
23
         minimum in there.  I  would say this should be
24
         a minimum of 80 percent.
25

-------
 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN:  A minimum  of  80  percent
 3
         phosphorus  removal?
 4                .         .-       .

                   MR. OEMING:  .Removal.
 5
                   MR. STEIN:  And no  requirement  that
 6
         they—and an effluent which will not affect
 7
         the water quality  standards of Lake Michigan--
 8
                   MR. OEMING:  0. K.
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  --as approved by the State
10
         of Michigan and the Secretary of the Interior?
11
                   MR. OEMING:  All right.
12
                   MR. STEIN:  No, I am Just trying to
13
         get a proposal.
14
                   MR. OEMING:  That's implied.
15
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  All  right,  let's go
16
         on with the next.  Eighty percent of total
17
         phosphorus.
18

                   Let me see if I can put Mr.  Oeming's
19
         proposition in words sro we have  something to
20

         work with.  0. K.?  In other  words, you wouldn't
21                           '              '

         draw a distinction between 5,000 or under 5,000?
22

                   MR. POOLE:  Oh, yes, I would want to,
Zo

         on the time limit  only.

                   MR. STEIN:  Oh.  But let's do that
25

-------
3^83
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
EXECUTIVE SESSION

later .

ttrr
\\







aste treatment be


municipalities to achieve at

reduction of

effluent whi



total phosphorus

ch will





provided by all

least an 80 percent

removal and an

not degrade the water

quality standards . for Lake Mi


by the appropriate S

the Interior

Is

MR

MR

yes .

Go

MR

MR

MR

where?

MR

MR

MR


tt
*

this--

. OEMING

. STEIN:



on , Mr .

. HOLMER

. STEIN:

. HOLMER



. OEMING

. STEIN:

. HOLMER


tate and






chigan as approved

the Secretary of





: This is what I am saying.

0. K.



Holmer .

: Eighty


What I wanted to--





percent of what?

Total phosphorus.

: Well,




but the total from



: From the raw sewage.


Prom raw sewage.


: Of current loadings or

future loadings? What if we


excluding these from

MR


. CEMING


sewage?


develop means of



: Well, we say at least,



-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         Mr* Holmer.
 3
                    MR. POSTON:  You  still  ought  to  treat-
 4
                    MR. HOLMER:  At least 80  percent?
 5
                    MR. OEMING:  Yes.
 6
                    MR. HOLMER;  My point la,  though,  it
 7
         may be possible to find  other  means  of  excluding
 8
         phosphorus from the  loadings,  in  which  case  I
 9
         am not sure  that 80  percent  removal  would  be
10
         necessary.   If we get down  to  20  percent of
ll
         what we have now, would  we  require  another 80
12
         percent?
13
                    MR. OEMING:  I got over that  hump,
14
         Freeman, when we convinced  ourselves that  we
15
         could remove 80 percent  of  the phosphorus  from
16
         the raw sewage and we should do it.
17
                    MR. HOLMER:  All  I am saying  is  that
18
         if there is  an easier and a  better  way  than  me-
ld
         chanical suppuration  method--
20
                    MR. OEMING:  Oh,  I see.
21
                    MR. HOLMER;  --it  may be  that we
22
         would want to go that route  rather  than to get
23
         at it--
24
                    MR. STEIN:  Yes.   I  am  trying to put
25

-------
                               	        3485

 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         Mr.  Oemlng's  proposition in words.
 3
                   Now,  as  I always understood this  problem,
 4
         and  maybe I don't, but the  notion was  that the
 5
         best way to deal with phosphorus is to keep
 6
         all--it is like radiation.   The more you  can
 7
         keep out, the  better you are.   0. K.
 8
                   Now,  the point is, as much as you
 9
         can  keep out  at the source  and  not  let get
10
         into the system, you are ahead. But if we have
11
         a feasible means of removing 80 percent of
12
         the  phosphorus  of anything  that goes in,  isn't
13
         the  objective  to get as  close to zero  as  possible?
14
                   MR.  HOLMER:  I would  say  so.
15
                   MR.  OEMING:  Yes.
16
                   MR.  HOLMER:  And  I would  say this is
17
         our  objective.
18                                                        *
                   MR.  STEIN:  Now,  if that  is  true,
19
         what is wrong with his proposal?  Let's suppose
20
         he keeps them  out at the source and you still
21
         remove 80 percent, you are  getting  more phos-
22
         phorus out and wo are getting closer to zero.
23
                   Remember in his proposal  you  are not
24
         specifying primary, secondary,  90 percent,  80
25

-------
                           	3486

 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         percent,  aerated  sludge,  trickling filter.
 3
         What we are  saying  is waste  treatment be
 4   .       .              .
         provided  by  municipalities  to  achieve a
 5
         minimum of 80  percent total  phosphorus
 6
         removal and  an effluent  which  will not cause
 7                                           '         .
         deterioration  of  Lake Michigan water quality
 8
         standards as approved by the appropriate
 9
         States and by  the Secretary  of the Interior.
10
                   So as I understand it,  this is--  Isn't
11
         that a good  way to  start?
12
                   MR.  HOLMER;  What  I  am  looking for
13
         is  a recommendation that will  stand the test
14
         of  time and  the change of circumstances. I
15
         am  not sure  that  80 percent  will  be enough.
16
                   MR.  STEIN:  At least, we said.
17
                   MR.  POSTON:  I am  not either.
18  s
                   MR.  HOLMER:  What?
19
                   MR.  POSTON:  I am not either.  That
20
         is  why--
21
                   MR.  STEIN:  No,  the  proposition says
22
         at  least  80  percent.
23
                   MR.  HOLMER:  And this is why I would
24
         suggest  language  such as to require programs,  In
25

-------
                                          	3^-87

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         exclusion of treatment, to reduce  current  dis-
 3
         charges of phosphorus so that we start with
 4
         the current base and use the 80 percent  on that
 5
         tc a level which will reduce the phosphorus
 6
         content, of shoreline water so as to preclude
 7
         the growth of algae in nuisance quantities.
 8
         This is our objective] this is what we are
 9
         trying to get at.
10
                   If you put 80 percent, you are in
11
         the same problem with this that we really  are
12
         with BOD; we are defining an effluent standard
13
         and not defining the goa.l we are shooting  at.
14
         We want to reverse the eutrophication.   If 80
15
         percent doesn't work., then we ought to go  to
16
         90 percent and whatever else is needed.
17
                   MR. STEIN:  Well, here,  let's  get to
18
         Mr. Oeming.  The point is, when we talk  of the
19
         amount of phosphorus to preclude the growth of
20
         algae, in some cases it might be ?0, it  might  be
21
         30, it might be 10.  Well, I don't know.   This
22  I                                 '
         is a question the Conferees--
23
                   MR. HOLMER:  I don't know--
24
                   MS. STEir-T:  The point is that  if we
25

-------
                                               	3488
 I                        EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
           agree that no phosphorus is delightful,  why
 3
           do you want to let this stuff go in?
 4
                     MR. HOLMER:   I don't want to let it go
 5
           in.   But I don't believe in taking phosphorus
 6
           out for the sake of taking phosphorus out.  Our
 7
           purpose is to stop eutrophication of the lake and
 8
           this nuisance that we  are complaining about.
 9
                     MR. STEIN:   Let me put this back
10
           to you.  Of course* this is a point that the
11
           Federal Government and the State Governments
12
           can engage on.  Again, Freeman, if we come up
13
           with the proposition that you can remove phos-
14
           phorus enough, without a number, sufficient
15
           to remove the algae,  and the algae are not
16
           removed and we then have to move against
17
           your specific cities or industries, who
18
           will ask, "Why the devil didn't you tell
19
           us at the conference what we had to do?"
20
           are you going to say that we Jur.t left it
21
           up to them?  Don't you think they are
22
           entitled to know within a ball park figure
23
           of the minimum they have to do before they
24
           are faced with our coming in and getting
25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
           them in  a court action?  We are in a Federal
 3
           enforcement  case here.
 4
                     And  do you realize what you are
 5
           asking us to do?  You are asking us to turn
 6
           these cities loose through the conference
 7
           stage of this  operation to say that they are
 8
           going to Just  reduce phosphorus, enough not
 9
           to  produce algae, and then if that doesn't
10
           work we  are  going to come in on them, when
11
           they didn't  have any specifics on what they
12
           had to do?  I  don't know.
13
                     MR.  HOLMER:  But you are ignoring
14
           our responsibilities as States to issue the
15
           orders to these communities.
16
                     MR.  STEIN:  Not at all.
17
                     MR.  HOLMER:  And to enforce the
18
           interstate water quality standards.  It seems
19
           to  me that we  can all agree here informally that
20
           80  percent is  what we ought to do first and I
21
           am  sure  we will all do at least 80 percent.
22
                     MR.  STEIN:  Well, if we are going
23
           to  do 80 percent, maybe we. had better put it
24
           down.
25

-------
   	3*190

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR. HOLMER:  Well, but this may not
 3
          do the Job.
 4
                    MR. STEIN:   We said at least 80
 5
          percent.
 6
                    MR. POOLE:   (Inaudible to reporter)
 7
          tacked on this phrase I had worded about
 8
          meeting the water quality standards that I
 9
          thought was intended  to cover this if 80 percent
10
          wasn't enough.
11
                    MR. STEIN:   That is right.
12
                    MR. HOLMER:  All right.  Then let
13
          us look at one other  problem, and that is the
14
          far upstream tributaries.  We are going to
15
          require it anyway, but I am not sure it is an
16
          appropriate action for this conference to say
17
          that any effluent standards, including this
18
          phosphorus one, ought to be imposed as a number.
19
          I think this is a mistake for us to make at
20
          this point in this respect as in the other.
21
                    MR. OEMING:  Well, it seemed to me,
22
          Mr. Chairman, that out of this conference one
23
          significant piece of  information came out, at
24
          least one, and that was the first time that
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         there was sound evidence that we could  remove

 3
         80 percent, not 90 "but 80 percent.  Dr. Wein-

 4
         berger testified, the State of Michigan testi-

 5
         fied as to this, and I felt that there  was

 6
         pretty general agreement now that methods were

 7
         available.  And such being the case, within

 8
         the context of at least the Michigan standards,

 9
         we can say that we want 80 percent removal.

10
         Even though we didn't say so, we said we wanted

11
         to remove phosphorus, but I think we can now

12
         say 80 percent and make it stick.  And  I

13
         wouldn't like to see it left open unless the

14
         Conferees feel differently.  It seems to me

15
         that our obligation is to specify now what we

16
         mean by removing phosphorus.

17
                   And I look at another thing that came

18
         out of the conference and that was to the effect

19
         that we want to get all the phosphorus  we can

20
         out, whether it is 80 percent or something elsej

21
         but we are tempering here with what we  know,

22
         that if we can get 80 percent and if that isn't

23
         going to be enough we will have to go back and

24
         ask for more.  I don't see how we can deal with

25

-------
   	3^92

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
          this  any  other way to  take  care of the problem

 3
          in Lake Michigan.

 4
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.   Well,  I would

 5
          agree.

 6
                    You  know, for  years,  Mr. Holmer,

 7
          we have been dealing with,  say,  Mr. Oeming,

 8
          Mr. Poole and  Mr.  Klassen on this.  Whenever

 9
          we have come up with Mr. Oeraing on a require-

10
          ment,  the first thing  that  Larry has said to

11
          me is  give me  a number,  what do we have to do.

12
          And I  think the States and  the  cities and the

13
          industries, if we  are  going to  ask someone to
14
          spend  something, do something,  are entitled
15
          to this kind of operation and a number to do it.
16
                    The  difficulty that I have is asking
17
          big industry to spend  maybe tens of millions
18
          of dollars or  a city to  spend hundreds of
19
          millions  or even a small one.when  they are
20
          putting this restriction on them and then
21
          saying, "You know, you haven't  really done
22  -          •"" ••
          the Job.   This is  not  enough."
23
                    While we are here,  I  think we have to
24
          resolve this,  resolve  this  with the States,
25

-------
   	   3^93

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         because we have been pushed for years by
 3
         Michigan, and I hope Larry won't mind me
 4
         using him, to give them specific numbers
 5
         on what the Federal Government means and
 6
         what we are going to be satisfied with.   I
 7
         have been persuaded that is what you need.
 8
                   MR. HOLMER:  Mr. Stein, the Water
 9
         Quality Act of 1965 says that the Secretary
10
         of the Interior should make recommendations
11  •'
         to the water pollution control agencies.  This
12
         is a recommendation to the water pollution
13
         control agencies, I realize, in essence,
14
         although it applies directly to the industries.
15
                   MR. STEIN:  No, here is what happens.
16
         Let me explain this law.
17
                   He makes recommendations  to the
18
         agencies first.  If the agencies don't do
19
         it under their law, we proceed against the
20
         polluters directly.
21
                   Now, the Secretary can make this
22
         recommendation unilaterally or he can make
23
         a recommendation in consonance with the
24
         States.  Every time we have had unanimous
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          agreement by the States, the Secretary,  whom-
 3
          ever we have had as  Secretary through the
 4
          years,  has adopted those recommendations.
 5
          Where the States aren't unanimous about  this,
 6
          he  just under the law is obligated to come up
 7
          and make his own recommendation.
 8
                    But the point is,  Mr. Holmer,  and
 9
          let me  make this clear, we recognize, and I
10
          know you are acutely aware,  the State is not
11
          the polluter.   You are representing your State
12
          here.  If the  recommendation comes up that is
13
          not being met at the next stage,  we don't
14
          proceed against the  State,  we proceed against
15
          that city and we proceed against  the industry.
16
                    It is my notion that we should be
17
          clear and precise with that  city  and industry
18
          that is going to have to spend the money as to
19
          what we expect them  to do at as early as  possible a
20
          stage;  and as  Mr. Oeming has constantly  pointed
21
          out to  me, this means numbers; and if we don't
22
          give them numbers they may  .come a cropper.
23
                    MR.  HOLMER:  This  is a  legitimate
24
          course  for the Department of the  Interior to
25

-------
   ^__	:	3^95

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
          take  if  and when  the  situation is  reached
 3
          where the water quality  standards  governing
 4
          Lake  Michigan  are not achieved. Now,  the
 6
          responsibility for  achieving those water
 6
          quality  standards rests  with the agencies of
 7
          the States around this table.
 8
                   MR.  STEIN:  Mr. Holmer, again,  don't
 9
          try that whipsaw.   I  have  been around  for a
10
          long  time.  There are two  provisions in  this
11
          law,  enforcement  and  standards. Every time we
12
          talk  about the enforcement procedure you
13
          switch to the  standards.   Don't tell us  we

1*
          are going to abrogate or get put of the  en-
15
          forcement business  Just  because the Congress
16
          adopted  the standards.   The Governor of
17
          Illinois asked us to  come  in under an  enforce-
18
          ment  action; we are proceeding under an  enforce-
19
          ment  action.   If  you  think you are going to
20
          quote another  section of the law or another
21
          program  to cut out  the Governor of Illinois'
22
          request  and the Secretary's response to  it, I
23
          think we Just  can't respond to that kind of
24
          operation.
25

-------
   	3^96

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR. HOLMER:   We share the aspirations
 3
          of the Governor of Illinois for a clean Lake
 4
          Michigan in full measure.  We think that the
 5
          standards for Lake Michigan that were approved
 6
          by the Secretary are good ones and ought to be
 7
          achieved.  And I think that the recommendations
 8
          ought to insist that they be achieved.
 9
                    Now, if we fail as States, I have no
10
          brief for the States against the Secretary's
11
          moving in, against the individual polluters
12
          in the States under the enforcement procedure.
13
          I think this is entirely appropriate and de-
14
          sirable.
is
                    MR. STEIN:  This isn't the question.
16
          Again you backed away.  The point is we are
17
          in an enforcement action.  The Governor of
18
          Illinois has invoked the enforcement action.
19
          Here we are.  We are coming up to you and the
20
          States.
21
                    The Secretary has to make recommenda-
22
          tions to you and your industries and your
23
          cities.  We hope that you will Join with us
24
          unanimously in getting meaningful recommendations,
25

-------
                                                        34-97

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         because if we don't  do this,  I don't know that
 3
         we are doing all  the States  and  the  cities and
 4
         industries here a service.
 5
                   I don't know.   Now, where  do we go
 6
         in this first operation?  Mr. Oeming has a
 7                     '                .   ' -
         proposal.  Are you in favor  of what  he said
 8
         or don't you like that at least  80 percent?
 9
                   MR. HOLMER:  If the other  States go
10
         on the 80 percent phosphorus  removal with the
11
         understanding we  may go  higher,  this is all
12
         right with me.
13
                   MR. STEIN: Yes, I  think that "at
14
         least" means higher.
15
                   MR. OEMING:  That  is what  I meant
16
         to sayj you go higher when you get the technology.
17
                   MR* HOLMER:  I think we ought to
18
         be stronger than  that.
19
                   MR. STEIN: Well,  how?
20
                   You know,  I left the table to consult
21
         with Dr. Weinberger. I  like  to  be as strong as
22
         I can, and he is  the best technical  guy I know.
23
         I think I stretched  the  strength to  the breaking
24
         point with the 80.  If we could  do better, you
25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          know I  would toe delighted to hear it.
 3
                    MR* KLASSEN:   Are you downgrading
 4
          Poole and me when you said he is the best
 5
          technical  man you know?
 6
                    MR. STEIN:   No, that is a different
 7
          kind of a  technician.
 8
                    (Laughter.)
 9
                    You know, he is younger than we are.
10
          When we grew up, I never even heard of phosphates,
11
          hardly, except in a fertilizer.
12
                    Well, if we  are agreed with that—now,
13
          how do  you feel about  this?
14
                    MR. POSTON;   I think that this leaves
15
          out some of the larger communities around the
16
          lake that  are located  right on the shore insofar
17
          as  biological treatment is concerned.
18
                    MR* STEIN3   What would you suggest?
19
                    MR. POSTONt   Well, I think what I
20
          really  like is Number  #1 as stated, and if you
21
          insist  on  the 80 percent phosphate removal,
22
          and if  the others do,  I would go with the
23
          insertion  of 80 percent,
24
                    MR. STEIN:   What do you want, you
25

-------
                                           	3^99

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          want  that 90  percent also?
 3
                    MR.  POSTON:   For  treatment plants
 4
          located  along the  lake, I think they have got
 5
          to  remove--
 6
                    MR.' STEIN:  What  do you think of that?
 7
                    MR.  OEMING:   We have covered that,
 8
          Mr. Chairman,  in  the last phrase in the statement,
 9
          the joint Stein-Oeming statement here--
10
                    MR.  STEIN:  Thanks.
11
                    (Laughter.)
12
                    MR.  OEMING:  --when we said to meet
13
          the water quality  standards.
14
                    MR.  PURDY:  We said secondary treatment
15
          in  our standards.
16
                    MR.  OEMING:   We said secondary treat-
17
          ment  in  our  standards, Mr.  Poston.  What more
18
          do  you want?   How  many times do we want to go
19
          through  this  to further identify it?
20
                    MR.  POSTON:   As Mr. Stein indicated,
21
          this  is  a separate action different than the
22
          standards.
23
                    MR.  STEIN:  No.
24
                    MR.  OEMING:   Oh,  I am afraid that I have
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         to have  some  problems with  this,  because  you
 3
         may be asking the  States  to go  back  and start
 4
         hearings all  over  again..
 5
                   MR. POSTON:  There hasn't  been  any
 6
         reference to  your  standards in  this  so far.
 7
                   MR. OEMING:  Oh,  yes,  there has.
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  There were.  I said to
 9
         meet the water quality standards  approved by
10
         the States and the Secretary of  the  Interior.
11
         As far as I understand that, the  standards
12
         include  the implementation  plan.
13
                   MR. OEMING:  It is incorporated by
14
         reference here.
15
                   MR. STEIN:  Is  there  any disagreement
16
         on this?
17
                   MR. POSTON:  0. K.  I  didn't get that.
18
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes,  it  is interpolated,
19
         Wally.
20
                   Mr. Chairman,  before  you proceed with
21
         this, we didn't  cover two other  items.
22
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
23
                   MR. OEMING:  One  of them is. we
24
         skipped  over  this  differentiation of populations.
25

-------
                                                	3301

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         And I am a little bit fuzzy on this.   I don't
 3
         have a very firm recommendation for you.  But
 4
         this is a question that ought to be resolved
 5
         with respect to primarily, now, lagoons, sewage
 6
         lagoons.  And Michigan has struggled with this
 7
         problen: under 5,000, what do you do about
 8
         sewage lagoons?
 9
                   Now, the second question is  the termi-
10
         nation date here.  Now, some of the States may
11
         not have difficulty, but let me remind you that
12
         Michigan sits on four of the Great Lakes and
13
         we already are fighting the battles on the east
14
         side of the State; we are starting them on the
15
         west side of the State.  Logistics work against
16
         a uniform date here.  When I say logistics, I
17
         mean the whole gamut of engineers, financing,
18
         construction, and to try to make 50--isn't it 50?
19
         --50 communities meet one December date with
20
         the procedural problems involved poses some
21
         real difficulties.
22
                   MR. STEIN:  0. K.  Let's see if we
23
         can handle these one at a time.
24
                   Are you worried about lagoons, not
25

-------
   	3302

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         in  the  degree of  treatment but in  the  phosphate
 3
         removal?
 4
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.  And here  is--let
 5
         me  cite  this--
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  What happened  to Leon?
 7
         Where is  that professor?
 8
                   Come here.  He keeps leaving.
 9
                   MR. POOLE:  I want to make a suggestion
10
         before he leaves  today.
11
                   MR. OEMING:  Let me state how we  tried
12
         to  handle this first and if this strikes any
13
         sparks here.
14
                   We have notified all the communities
15
         in  Michigan, not  only in the Lake Michigan
16
         basin but all communities, as follows:
17
                   "That persons making a new or
18
         increased use of  the waters of the State for
19
         waste disposal purposes will be required, co-
20
         incident with the. new or increased use, to
21
         utilize such technology and processes  which
22
         are known for the removal of phosphorus com-
23
         pounds, and that  as a long-term objective
24
         all existing waste discharges will be  required
25

-------
                                                        3503
 l




 2




 3




 4




 5




 6




 7




 8




 9




10




11




12




13




14




15




16




17




18




19




20




21




22




23




24




25
              EXECUTIVE SESSION





to provide facilities for the removal of



phosphorus compounds by: June 1, 1977."



          That is in the standards also.  And



we call attention to the fact that 1977 is an



outside date.



          Now, this conforms with the guidelines



issued by the Secretary and are in the approved



standards, this outside date of June 1, 1977.



It doesn't mean that we are going to wait that



long.



          Now, then, with areference to these



smaller communities where lagoon systems appear



to be a real answer to many of our problems,



the policy is this, that:



          "Generally these requirements may be



reasonably met by waste stabilization lagoons



in small communities and others where lagoons



will provide equal or greater assurance of .



meeting established water quality objectives for



the receiving waters other than nutrients and



may be provided by other types of treatment



facilities for such conditions.  Waste stabili-



zation lagoon process does not provide a high

-------
   	3504

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          degree  of removal of phosphates.  Therefore,
 3
          such installations may not be adequate fo*
 4
          discharge of the effluent at certain locations
 5
          such as inland lakes and impoundments.  When
 6
          practical methods are developed for efficient
 7
          removal of phosphates in the lagoon process,
 8
          by modification of design features or by
 9
          process control methods,owners of any such
10
          facilities will be required to incorporate
11
          and utilize such features and methods."
12
                    Now, we have got these sheep  and
13
          goats here.  I am trying to resolve this.
14
                    MR.  STEIN:  Do you want to comment
15
          on this?
16
                    DR.  WEINBERGER:  Well, Larry, let
17
          me ask  the question about the modification of
18
          lagoons.   Would this include perhaps the
19
          addition  of a chemical treatment phase beyond
20
          it?
21
                    MR.  OEMING:  Yes, it could.
22
                    DR.  WEINBERGER:  All right.
23
                    MR.  OEMING:  It could, yes.
24
                    DR.  WEINBERGER:  I think the statement
25

-------
   	     •..  •	      3505

 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
          Larry has made is--
 3
                   MR.  STEIN:   Let  me  ask--we  are having
 4
          this problem,  and  this may relate  to  all, Leon,
 5
          with these  lagoons and small  installations—do
 6
          we have a reasonable method of phosphate removal
 7
          to offer them  now?  I  am not  talking  about a
 8
          conventional treatment plant.   I am talking
 9
          about a man running a  lagoon.
10
                   DR.  WEINBERGER:   Murray,  I  think there
11
          are two questions, really.  I  think one, recog-
12
          nizing the kind of installation where you approve
13
          a lagoon in the first  place,  suggests that the
14
          type of phosphate  removal  that we  might  be
15
          recommending,  such as  chemical precipitation,
16
          might not be the way to  go right now. So that
17
          I would say that although  there is  a  technique
18
          available, it  may not be applicable for  a lagoon
19
          where they don't have  the  kind of  operation needed
20
          for a chemical treatment.
21
                   Do I make that clear?
22
                   MR.  OEMING:  You  got it  clear  to me.
23
                   DR.  WEINBERGER:   0.  K.
24
                   MR.  OEMING:  Mr.  Purdy wants to ask
25

-------
     •	3306

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          something here.
 3
                    MR.  PURDY:   In Michigan our lagoons
 4
          are  operated as  storage lagoons so that they
 5
          are  not flow-through  lagoons,  and they are
 6
          discharged in the spring and fall, and there
 7
          are  certain locations that this type of 100
 8
          percent control  during the warm dry weather
 9
          months  offers  more protection  to other water
10
          quality objectives than what a conventional
11
          treatment plant  would offer.  So from this
12
          standpoint, there are certain  places we would
13
          like to be able  to continue to approve the
14
          lagoon  as an acceptable treatment device.
15
                    DR.  WEINBERGER:  Yes.  Again I am
16
          not—I  don't think that is the question, really,
17
          because I think  you are talking there probably
18
          in terms of organic loading--
19
                    MR.  PURDY:   Yes.
20
                    DR.  WEINBERGER:  --for doing this and
21
          a lack  of dilution.
22
                    MR.  PURDY:   Yes,
23
                   .DR.  WEINBERGER:  I think what one is
24
          talking about here now is specifically with
25

-------
                                       	3307
 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         regard  to  the phosphate  removal.
 3
                    MR. OEMING:  Yes.
 4                  ...
                   •DR. WEINBERGER:  What  I  am suggesting
 5
         is  that for  those  situations where a lagoon Is
 6
         normally employed, you do not have the  kind of
 7
         operation, operating personnelr-
 8
                    MR. OEMING:  You are never going to have,
 9
                    DR. WEINBERGER:  --that  with  the kind  of
10
         chemical treatment that  we could use we can
11
         immediately  say, you can put that  in tomorrow
12
         and it  will  be operating.  We cannot make  that
13
         statement, Murray, because I think what is going
14
         to be involved there, if you make  that  recom-
15
         mendation, these communities are going  to  have
16
         to get  themselves a better operator and a  whole
17
         series  of  operating things.
18
                    I  want to make the distinction between
19
         a technique  for doing it.
20
                    MR. OEMING:  So what we  are saying
21
         here, what we are looking at, is some exclusions
22
         now because  of the lagoon problem.   This is what
23
         I am concerned with and  the phosphate requirement.
24
                    DR. WEINBERGER:  I don't know whether
25

-------
                 	3308

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          this  is appropriate,  Murray, for me to make
 3
          this  comment.
 4
                    MR.  STEIN:   No,  it's all right.
 5
                    DR.  WEINBERGER:   We, of course,
 6
          will  move immediately into this matter exploring
 7                         •'.-•_
          how one for those particular installations can
 8
          come  up with a scheme for--
 9
                    MR.  OEMING:  Good.
10
                    DR.  WEINBERGER:   --removing the
11
          phosphates.
12
                    MR.  OEMING:  All right.
13
                    MR.  STEIN:   I think his statement is
14
          correct.  Let  me see  if I  can put this in
15
          blunter terms.
16
                    As I see  it, the lagoons deal with
17
          small communities.   The amount of phosphates
18
          you are going  to get  out of them with their
19
          flow, particularly  a  holding operation, are
20
          relatively small.
21
                    MR.  OEMING:  Yes.
22
                    MR.  STEIN:  0. K.  Now, really,
23
          while theoretically we may have a chemical
24
          precipitation  of removing  these phosphates from
25

-------
   	3309

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         these lagoons, we have to recognize the

 3
         practicalities of the matter; this is a

 4
         relatively sophisticated system and lagoons

 5
         are employed by small communities and the

 6
         likelihood of this system being operated

 7
         efficiently there is not too good.  Therefore,

 8
         in the total program, the kind of statement that

 9
         Larry had that when the technique comes up we

10
         pick the lagoons up, that this does not--in other

11
         words, when we are talking about phosphate

12
         removal, we are really talking about phosphate

13
         removal from a conventional treatment plant.  Is

14
         that correct?

15
                   All right.

16
                   MR. POOLE:  Say for the small communi-

17
         ties you set a final date beyond 1972.  I would

18
         assume that by the time we reached that date we

19
         would be able to handle the lagoons.  Is that a

20
         fair assumption?

21
                   DR. WEINBERGER:  Yes, sir.

22
                   MR. OEMING:  0. K.

23
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.

24
                  'MR. OEMING:  This falls within my

25

-------
   	3310

 !                       EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          question.

 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   0.  K.   I think we are

 4
          pretty close to  an agreement here.

 5
                    Now, your second point,  Larry,  is on
 g
          that "all people  finishing in December 1972?"

 7
          How soon do you  think it would take you,  and

 8
          we  have done this  in perhaps some  other Indus -

 9
          trial  States where you had this problem,  to

10
          come up with a schedule of date for date  and

11
          community by community?

12
                    MR.  OEMING:  Well, Mr. Chairman, I

13
          look at it generally in this way,  that our

14
          program is aimed at the larger communities

15
          right  now.  Let's  say Traverse City has got a

16
          problem.  And this one has now got a date of

17
          '71, hasn't it?   Seventy-one.  Some of them are

18
          going  to be advanced.

19
                    But as we go along, we are going to

20
          schedule these,  we have got to schedule them,

21
          and I  can't tell you at this time  which ones
22
          will  come first  and which ones come last here,
23
          you see.  I can  do it in a short time, but I
24
          am not prepared  here.
25

-------
                                                         3511

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   The only  thing I  can say is  that 1972
 3
         as a fixed date for 50 communities to  meet this
 4
         represents some practical problems.
 5
                   MR. STEIN:  I recognize  that now.
 6
         May I Just raise two questions to  you?
 7
                   One, what do you  think a practical
 8
         terminal date would be?  And  I am  not  asking
 9
         for this now.  We are coming  back.   You may
10
         want to think about it.  What a practical
11
         terminal date would be?
12
                   And secondly, how long it  would  take
13
         you to come up with a schedule for all your
14
         communities, none of them to  be beyond what
15
         you consider a  practical terminal date?
16
                   MR. OEMING:  Could  we do this, Mr.
17
         Chairman?  Could we come back here to  this
18
         conference with a series of dates  for  these,

         and it looks like this might  be extended,
20
         might go--the last one might  be '73  or possibly
21
            , I don't know, but starting immediately
22
         some of them will be in advance of this and
23
         some of them will go beyond this, but a
24
         scheduling of the 50 communities we are talking
25

-------
                                 	3512

 l                       EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          about  here.

 3
                   MR.  STEIN:   Yes.

 4
                   MR.  OEMING:   This  is  the kind of


          thing  that--

 6
                   MR.  STEIN:   Yes.

 7
                   MR.  OEMING:   And  taking into con-

 8
          sideration,  Mr.  Chairman,  the procedural

 9
          problems.  ¥e  have  to  issue  notices--

10
                   MR.  STEIN:   I recognize--

11
                   MR.  OEMING:   --We  have to hold

12
          hearings, we have to do all  these things.

13
                   MR.  STEIN:   No  one is suggesting

14
          here that any  of the States  do  not just proceed

15
          under  the normal procedures. I think we should

16
          have an  idea of  how long  this is going to  take

17
          you.

18
                   MR.  OEMING:   Yes,  we  could do this.

19
                   MR.  STEIN:   And  a  reasonable date.

20
                   Let  me ask the Federal people something.

21
          Are you  satisfied that the  implementation  plans

22
          of all the four  States here  reasonably meet the

23
          secondary treatment requirement?

24
                   MR.  POSTON:   You mean--

25

-------
               	3513

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
                   MR. STEIN:  That  you put  In.

 3
                   MR. POSTON:    --the implementation

 4
         of  the  standards?

 6
                   MR. STEIN:  The implementation plan,

 6
         yes.

 7
                   MR. POSTON:  That they  put  in?

 8
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.

 9
                   MR. POSTON:  I think so.

10
                   MR. STEIN:  0. K., then we  are  set.

11
                   MR. POSTON:  Which is 1972.

12
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes,  we said  that.

13
                   MR. POSTON:  This is where  we  got  this

14
         date.

15
                   MR. STEIN:  No, no, I am  not talking

16
         about the date now.  Let's  take one thing at

17
         a time.  I am talking about the treatment.
18
                   You see, what we  did, we  incorporated

19
         by  reference the standards  as approved by the
20
         State meeting the standards as approved  by us.
21
         Now you are convinced that  this is  going to
22
         substantially meet what you are asking in
23
         proposals 1 and 2?
24
                   MR. POSTON:  You  mean you are  asking
25

-------
 I                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
         me whether--

 3
                    MR. STEIN:  When  you said--

 4
                    MR. POSTON:  --secondary will be the

 5
         90 percent?

 6
                    MR. STEIN:  Yes.

 7
                    MR. POSTON:  Equivalent to 90

 8
         percent?

 9
                    MR. STEIN:  Yes,  whether they will

10
         have  to do that  substantially.   And I am not

11
         saying in  every  case.  To meet those water

12
         quality standards  in Lake Michigan.

13
                    MR. POSTON:  I think that is right.

14
                    MR. STEIN:  Right.   Then we are about

15
         in agreement, aren't we?

16
                    MR. POSTON:  Pretty close.

17
                    MR. STEIN:  All right.

18
                    MR. POSTON:  I would like to suggest,

19                                                     »
         Mr. Chairman, that at the completion of these
20
         we ask the secretary to  take  dictation or have
21
         our reporter give  dictation to a secretary and
22
         that  she bring this back to us at an early time.
23
                    MR. STEIN:  Oh, yes,  you are going to
24
         get this to go over again.
25

-------
     	.	;	3315

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                    MR.  POSTON:  Tonight or will this be
 3
          tomorrow?
 4
                    MR.  STEIN:   I  don't know.   I am going
 5
          to Jaave  to talk to--I  have  known Virginia a long
 6
          time  and she  is about  the hardest worker I know,
 7
          but she  is human.   She has  got the hardest Job
 8
          here.  I am not pushing  her to the wall.  You
 9
          can be assured you  are going to get this typed
10
          as rapidly as  it  is humanly possible.  But I
11
          am not going  to do  anything and make a commit-
12
          ment  on  when  she  is going  to get this typed
13
          stuff out to  you, tonight  or tomorrow, until
14
          I talk to her privately.
15
                    Do  you  have  any more on the first two?
16
                    Let me  leave this with the d.ate.  Let
17
          me suggest this,  and I think Mr. Oeming raises
18
          a point.   On  this'72 date may I suggest that all
19
          the States may want to come back'with ,a terminal
20
          date  and a notion whether  they can give; .dates
21
          for each community  that  they are dealing with.
22
          In other words, I am not prejudging, but let me,
23
          Just  to  make  this clear, do this by example.
24
                    Let's suppose  December '72 is the date.
25

-------
   	.	3516

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION
                                             «
 2
          If you can finish .everything by December '72--
 3
          by the way, I think this does not necessarily
 4                 '                           •
          relate to Illinois or Indiana.  Possibly the
 5
          recommendation should state that the dates set
 6
          for Illinois or Indiana that we set in the past
 7
          stand, because —
 8
                    MR, OEMING:  Oh,  I see.
 9
                    MR. STEIN:  --they don't have this
10
          problem.   This is just Wisconsin and Michigan.

11
          These people pretty much have their dates and
12
          are fairly well engaged right down -to the nines*
13
          There may be some disagreements, but we have a
14
          date tabbed for each source.
15
                    But Wisconsin and Michigan, I think,
16
          have the  problem. 0-ne, let's suppose--and I am
17
          just supposing--that you should have a terminal
18
          date when you are going to  finish it all,
19
          December  '72 or whatever.  Then to give you the
20
          flexibility whether you can have a date that
21
          you are going to have sufficient work done for
22
          each community and industry of when they are
23
          going to  do it or when you  can have that
24
          information, if that is possible.  Do I make
25

-------
   	3317

 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION ;

 2
          myself  clear?
 3
                    MH.  KOLMER:  Well,  we expect that
 4
          this will  be done  by  '72.
 5
                    MR.  STEIN: '  0. K.   Then I don't think
 6
          you have this  problem.
 7
                    MR.  HGLMER:  We  don't have it.
 8
                    MR.  STEIN:   No.   Then I think this
 9
          is Mr.,  Oeraing.   And we have done this with you
10
          before, Larry,  in  Detroit.   But I don't think
11
          you have the problems  if you  expect it can be
12
          done by '72.
13
                    In other words,  do  what you have done
14
          in Detroit, either decide,  give us a date for
15
          each city  and  industry,  or tell us when you
16
          expect  to  have a date  for  the Conferees for
17
          each city  and  industry.  0. K.?
18
                    MR.  OEMING:  All right.
19
                    MR.  STEIN:   All  right.
20
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   For the purpose of the
21
          record, there  are  territories in Illinois in
22
          this conference that are not  covered by the
23
          Illinois-Indiana conference.
24
                    MR.  STEIN:   Are  you having trouble
25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         with  the  '72  date?
 3
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   No.
 4
                    MR.  STEIN:  And are there areas in
 5                                  ••'•••
         your  State too,  Mr. Poole?
 6
                    MR.  POOLE:  No.  The only place,
 7
         John  and  I were  just  looking here,  that we
 8
         would have trouble with the '72 date is •
 9
         possibly  on a few of  the little towns in the
10
         St. Joseph basin. I  haven't counted up how
11
         many  of those there are, but this may cause
12
         a little  problem.
13
                    MR.  STEIN:  Yes.   Well, why don't we
14
         when  we come  back see if we can zero in on that.
15
                    Let's  see if  we can go to #3-
16
                    Pardon me.  Do you want to say
17
         something?
18
                    MR. POOLE:   I want to say something
19
         about phosphates before you get off of them
20
         while Dr. Weinberger  is here.
21
                    Within the  past month since the
22
         conference was started  we are beginning to
23
         get a lot of inquiries  from our consulting
24
         engineers on how do  you do this and what do
25

-------
                                                	3519

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
         you  do,  et  cetera,  and so  forth and so on.   And

 3
         I would  like  to  suggest  that  Mr.  Poston--and I

 4
         think Dr. Weinberger  is  going to have to take

 5
         the  primary initiative on  this--consider arranging

 6
         a seminar,  presumably here in Chicago, for  the

 7
         consulting  engineers  of  the area.      It may

 8
         take a two-day seminar,  I  don't know--where

 9
         they bring  in people  from  the manufacturers and

10
         equipment people and  the universities, or

11
         wherever they are,  where they can get down

12
         and  talk about the  nuts  and bolts of this thing.

13
                   Personally, I  think it would be a very

14
         good idea and will  speed the  whole program  up a

15
         good deal.

16
                   MR.  KLASSEN:   I  want to endorse that,

17
         Mr.  Chairman.

18
                   MR.  OEMING:  I endorse it 100 percent.

19
                   MR.  KLASSEN:   That  is a real good
20
         idea I can  endorse.
21
                   MR.  STEIN:  Any  time he can come  up with
22
         an idea  that  can put  Dr. Weinberger to work,
23
         I will endorse it too.
24
                   MR.  KLASSEN:   Personally, I think this
25

-------
                                	       3320

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          is  necessary.
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes,  this is  good.
 4
                    DR.  WEINBERGER:   Speaking for Mr.
 5
          Poston and myself,  we  will  do that.
 6
                    MR.  POOLE:   I don't know about a
 7
          time,  but I would hope it  could be  done within
 8
          the next 60 days.  That is, the sooner we get
 9
          it  done, the quicker we get the show on the  road.
10
                    DR.  WEINBERGER:   We will  make every
11
          effort to have it done within 60 days.
12
                    MR.  POSTON:   What specifically?
13
                    DR.  WEINBERGER:   Phosphate removal.
14
                    MR.  POSTON:   Yes, I know, but for
15
          consulting engineers  on design?
16
                    MR.  POOLE:   Yes.   And I think what
17
          we  should do,  and I don't  know as it has to  be
18
          limited to the consulting  engineers of the four
19
          States, but what I  will propose to  do is to
20
          encourage our firms to send representatives
21
          here to this conference or seminar, or whatever
22
          you want to call it.
23
                    MR.  STEIN:   I think for the sake of
24
          the stenographer and  the record, we had better
25

-------
   	       3321

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         take a 10-minute recess.
 3
                    (Recess.)
 4
                    MR. STEIN:  May we  get  back?
 6
                    I didn't notice that 4  here before,

 6
         but I see  that is what we covered before.

 7

 8                      RECOMMENDATION  #3


 9
                    What do you think about this  3>

10
         continuous disinfection?
11
                    MR. HOLMER:  Just a minute, Mr.
12
         Chairman,  I am lost.
13
                    MR. STEIN:  Yes, that is on recom-
14
         mended actions.  Take your time.
15
                    MR. HOLMER:  I have a question whether
16
         we should  aim for December of '69 or May of '69.
17
         We would be inclined to move  the  date forward  to
18
         coincide with the recreation  season, which is  the
19
         most important time of the year for this to occur.
20
         If the other Conferees find this  date necessary,
21
         that is all right with us.
22
                    MR. STEIN:  All right.   May of  '69.
23
                    Where is Mr. Klassen?
24
                    (Across-the-table discussion  inaudible
25
         to the reporter.)

-------
   	:	3522
 !                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   The  proposal Is that we
 3
          get  this  into  the  recreation season by May '69,
 4
          chlorination.   This  is proposed by Wisconsin.
 5
          Do the other States  feel they can meet this?
 6
          Or else we have lost another year.
 7
                    I think  the point is abundantly
 8
          clear,  if we wait  until December that is not
 9
          the  recreation season and  the full effect--
10
                    MB.  HOLMER:  If  you wait until then,
11
          you  may as well make it May '70.
12
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.   Well, we are better
13
          off,  we have got a little  leeway here.  I wouldn't
14
          want to push it back, but  to all intents and
15
          purposes  if we are going to get the recreation
16
          season in 1969* what do you think of this
17
          recommendation?
18
                    MR.  OEMING:  Well, Mr. Chairman, I
19
          don't like to  put  Michigan on the spot here of
20
          having to go back  and say  to our communities,
21
          "Well,  you have got  another year now."  We have
22
          got  them  all coming.
23
                    MR.  STEIN:   To what?  No, we are
24
          pushing them up a  year.
25

-------
   	:	3523
 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                   MR. OEMING:  Well,  wait  a  minute,
 3
         we  are doing it now.  And  I  don't  want them  to
 4
         come and  say, "Well, you fellows in  Chicago
 6                                      ^
         decided we could wait until  '69  so we  are  not
 6
         going to  use chlorination."
 7
                   MR. STEIN:  No.  What  date do you
 8
         want?
 9
                   MR. OEMING:  We  are doing  it now.
10
                   MR. STEIN:  In other words,  then,  you
11
         don't have any problem?
12
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes,  but  when you start
13
         monkeying with dates here--
14
                   MR. POSTON:  You are saying  they
15
         might want to shut  them  off  until  such time?
16
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.   It  costs  money
17
         for some  of these communities to put chlorine
18
         in  and they will say, "We  can save this now
19
         because the recommendation from  Chicago says
20
         we  can go until  '69.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  No,  no, "not later," it says,
22
                   Mr. Klassen, Wisconsin has proposed
23
         we  move the December  '69 to  May  '69  for chlori-
24
         nation.
25

-------
 !                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
                    MR.  KLASSEN:.  We  are  chlorinating

 3
         now.  I would  say  that Mr.  Oeming's  argument

 4
         has some  validity,  but we would invoke  our

 5
         own Illinois requirements on  them and require

 6
         that  they continue  to  chlorinate and not dis-

 7
         continue  to  '69.

 8
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.  But we are  talking

 9
         about this date.   Can  we change it from December

10
         to May?   Will  you  love me in  December as you did

11
         in May?

12
                    (Laughter.)

13
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Well, you can change it

14                       x-o
         as of March 7,  '68,  as far  as I am concerned,

15
         because we are  doing it  now.

16
                    MR.  STEIN:   How about you, Mr.  Poole?

17
                    MR.  POOLE: I am Just  looking  at the

18
         St. Joseph.  I  think everything in the  Lake

19
         Michigan  basin  is  doing  it  now,  and  we  have

20
         got three or four  in the St.  Joseph  basin.

21
         There are only  two  that  I would have any

22
         reservations on.  The  City  of South  Bend has

23
         us in court on  our  order for  them to chlorinate.

24
         The time  is overdue  and  It  Just depends on how

25

-------
                                                	3525

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
         rapidly we  can move  it through  the  court.

 3
         The  City  of Ligonier has primary treatment

 4
         and  no chlorination  and  I don't know what

 &
         the  status  of Ligonier to add  the--

 6
                   But those  are  the  only two that  I

 7
         can  see.

 8
                   MR. STEIN:  Well,  about a court

 9
         case, you know, none of  us can  argue,  but

10
         that shouldn't affect our putting a  date.

11
                   MR. POOLE:  I  don't  think this  creates

12
         any  insurmountable problems.

13
                   MR. STEIN:  If we  put it  May?

14
                   MR. POOLE:  That would make no

15
         difference.

16
                   MR. STEIN:  All right, let's put it

17
         May.

18
                   MR. KLASSEN:   You  have the same

10
         problem,  however, Mr. Chairman, because  the

20
         two  Federal installations in Illinois, Great
21
         Lakes and Fort Sheridan, are now both
22
         chlorinating, and I  hope you see that they
23
         continue  and not postpone until '69.
24
                   MR. STEIN:  We will  do our best.
25

-------
   	^___	3526

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
           Here are the Army engineers.
 3
                     MR. KLASSEN:  I have already talked
 4
           to the Colonel and he assured me they were
 6
           going to continue, although they are out of
 6
           our Jurisdiction, of course.
 7
                     MR. OEMING:  May 1970?
 8
                     MR. SCHNEIDER:  No, May '69, isn't
 9
           it?
10
                     MR. OEMINGi  May '69?
11
                     MR. POSTON:  That was the last I heard,
12
           May of '69.  Is that right, Murray?
13
                     MR. STEIN:  Yes, May of '69.
14
                     MR. POSTON:  The recommendation is
15
           unchanged except for the date, May of  '69?
16
                     MR. STEIN:  Right, May of '69.
17
                     Now, I think that we have to incor-
18
           porate that with the above.  But is there--
19
                     MR. OEMING:  Let's not tell  them that.
20
                     MR. STEIN:  --any problem on that?
21
                     MR. HOLMER:  Mr  Chairman, I
22
           am reluctant to have us take action on
23
           that recommendation about which I am so
24
           ill-informed.
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR. STEIN:  No, I think this
 3
          recommendation really relates to just two
 4
          States.
 5
                    MR. HOLMER:  Well, but it  Is
 6
          recommended that is the preface to this.
 7
                    MR. STEIN:  Yes.
 8
                    MR. HOLMER:  And--
 9
                    MR. STEIN:  No, I would have  put
10
          this another way.  The dates and deliberations
11
          of that conference have not appeared in the
12
          record of this conference.  All I think we
13
          have to put in is a statement.  The  way I
14
          would put that—in any statement — is that
15
          any recommendations that we have on  the
16
          schedules, because they are earlier, are
17
          not meant to modify or supersede the recom-
18
          mendations made for the Illinois or  Indiana
19
          communities in an earlier conference.   We
20
          really didn't cover those in these.  That
21
          was already done.  In other words, this
22
          conference is not covering that.
23
                    MR. KLASSEN:  This area again is
24
          not in the Illinois-Indiana conference.
25

-------
   	3528

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR. STEIN:  I know, but the ones
 3
          that are.
 4
                    MR. KLASSEN:  Yes.
 5
                    MR. STEIN:  Right.
 6
                    MR. POSTON:  What does this mean now
 7
          to lagoons?
 8
                    MR. STEIN:  I hope nothing.
 9
                    (Laughter.)
10
                    MR. POOLE:  Pour?
11
                    MR. MILLER:  Lagoons?
12
                    MR. STEIN:  Lagoons?  On chlorination
13
          or--
14
                    MR.POSTON:  I thought we were talking
15
          relative  to chlorination.
16
                    MR. STEIN:  All right, here we go.
17
          Do you want to chlorinate the effluent from the
18
          lagoon?
19
                    MR. MILLER:  Why not?
20
                    MR. KLASSEN:  Sure.
21
                    MR. STEIN:  All right.
22
                    MR. OEMING:  Who has done that?  Are
23
          you doing that?
24
                    MR. KLASSEN:  Sure.
25

-------
   	3529

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. POOLE:  We have  done  it  on  most
 3
         of ours, any of  them  that  are  critical.   I
 4
         wpuld have  to have Mr. Hert  up here to answer
 6
         that question.
 6
                   MR. OEMING:  We  aren't  very  successful
 7
         in doing this job.
 8
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Why  is the  question
 9
         raised?
10
                   MR. STEIN:  That is  what  I wonder.
11
                   MR. POSTON:  Well, because the  lagoons
12
         were brought up  here  and relative to phosphate
13
         removal.
14
                   MR. STEIN:  Here,  let me  put it this
15
         way. Isn't  it more critical  on the  phosphatg
16
         removal en  lagoons than the  chlorination  from
17
         lagoons, really, as a pollution control measure?
18
         Do we really have to  cover this question  of
19
         chlorinating effluent from lagoons?
20
                   MR. HOLMER:  Well, 3 refers  to  treat-
21
         ment plants as it is worded.   The question didn't
22
         arise with us.
23
                   MR. STEIN:  Is this  really a problem,
24
         chlorination from lagoons, except that the
25

-------
   	3530

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         Federal Government has  to worry about?
 3
                    MR.  POSTON:   Well,  I  think it is a source
 4
         of  bacteria.
 5
                    MR.  STEIN:  Do you  mean that--do you
 6
         think  it covers  lagoons or not?
 7
                    MR.  OEMING:   Well,  I  think we get
 8
         over this  hump--
 9
                    MR.  POSTON:   This is  the question
10
         I am asking.
11
                    MR.  OEMING:   I think  we get over
12
         this hump,  Mr. Chairman,  going  back again,
13
         that if you are  talking about discharges to
14
         Lake Michigan, I doubt  whether  you are  con-
15
         ceined about whether Portland up in the head-
16
         waters of  the  Grand River disinfects the year
17
         round.   We  are concerned,  but from the  stand-
18
         ooint  of this  conference you  are not.
19
                    MR.  STEIN:  That is right.   That is
20
         why I  would say  I  could see--
21
                    MR.  OEMING:   So this  eliminates lagoons
22
         pretty much.
23
                    MR.  STEIN:  That is why I said I
24
         see how we  would be concerned with phosphates
25

-------
                                	3531

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         possibly from lagoons.
 3
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  But it seems a  little
 5
         remote to me, unless you have some itty bitty
 6
         communities on the lake that I don't  know
 7
         about with a lagoon.  The likelihood  is that
 8
         they would be upstream, wouldn't  they?
 9
                   MR. OEMING:  Why don't  we say dis-
10
         charging to Lake Michigan and that will get
11
         over a lot of the lagoon humps here.
12
                   MR. STEIN:  I think we  would be
13
         better to leave it this way and leave it up
14
         to State interpretation without getting into
15
         that thicket.  You know, we are tilting at a
16
         windmill here.  This doesn't have any substance.
17
                   I can see where it can  be a very
18
         critical problem for many of the  States where
19
         some of the lagoons need to phlorinate, but
20
         I can't Conceive that the chlorination of
21
         effluent from lagoons one way or  the  other is
22
         going to terribly affect pollution of Lake
23
         Michigan.
24
                   If I am wrong on that,  I would like
25

-------
                                   	3332

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         to hear  it.
 3
                    MR. OEMING:  I can't  get  excited  about  tha
 4
                    MR. STEIN:  That  is  right.   We have  an
 5
         intriguing question, but  let's back away.   0.  K.?
 6
                    All right.   Now>  combined sewers.
 7
                    MR.. HOLMER:  Murray, before  you--
 8

 9                      RECOMMENDATION #4

10
                    MR. POOLS:   What  did we  do about 4?
11
                    MR. STEIN:   Oh.
12
                    MR. OEMING:  You  must  be looking, at
13
         something different here.   4?
14
                    MR. SCHNEIDER:  4. What  we are going to
15
         say,  and I thought I handled that  before,  we are
16
         going to say that unless  you want  to raise this
17
         issue that the  actions of this conference  do not
18
         supersede the time schedules established by other
19
         actions  for  the--
20
                    MR. OEMING:  That I  can  vote on. That
21
         I  can vote on,  but I can't  vote  on this.
22
                    MR. STEIN:   That  is  right.
23
                    MR. OEMING:  Yes.
24
                    MR. STEIN:   --which  have been estab-
25
         lished by previous actions, and  we are Just not

-------
   	,	     3533

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          covering  that.
 3
                   MR. OEMING:  Either  the  requirements
 4
          or  the  time  schedules.
 5
                   MR. STEIN:  Either,  yes.   We  Just
 6
          don't cover  that.
 7
                   MR. POSTON:  Would  that  be as a
 8
          recommendation  then  or--
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  No,  that is  Just  a
10
          statement.
11
                   MR. POSTON:  A  statement.   And it
12
          will be put  right at this  point?
13
                   MR. STEIN:  We  can  put it  at  any
14
          appropriate.point.
15
                   MR. PURDY:  How about putting it
16
          in  a conclusion?
W
                   MR. STEIN:  Or  a conclusion.
18
                   MR. OEMING:  That probably ought to
19
          be  in the conclusions, Wally.
20
                   MR. POSTON: ' Pardon?
21
                   MR. STEIN:  A conclusion.   Because I
22
          do  not  think we can  ask either Wisconsin or
23
          Michigan  to  rule on  this.
24
                   MR. OEMING:  No.
25

-------
          	:	3534

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   And I don't know that
 3
          they should.   I  think we have definite dates,
 4
          there is  a procedure, things are going back
 5
          and  forth, we  are engaged.   I think that the
 6
          democratic process will work itself out, and
 7
          if pollution  control  were to be moved forward
 8
          by you two States getting into this,  that would
 9
          be fine.   I suggest it wouldn't and you are Just
10
          going to  buy  into our headache and there is no
11
          reason to do  that.
12
                    0.  K.?
13
                    MR.  HOLMER:  Before we leave 1, 2, 3
14
          and  the conclusions--
15
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
16
                    MR.  HOLMER:  The  introduction to this
17
          simply says "it is recommended that."  I would
18
          prefer, if it isn't too much trouble  for my
19
          fellow Conferees, that it read:
26
                    "it is  recommended that the water
21
          pollution control agency of each State take
22
          action to assure  the  following local  actions:"
23
                    In  other words, the recommendation
24
          applies to the State  pollution control agency,
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         and I want us to feel the direct burden of
 3
         this responsibility.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  0. K.  Right.  As far
 5
         as we are concerned, there is no problem there
 6
         because the law says that after these recom-
 7
         mendations are made the Secretary has to make
 8
         these recommendations to the state water pol-
 9
         lution control agency.  He has no option.  In
10
         other words, he must take these recommendations
11
         and make them to you.  He doesn't make them to
12
         anyone else.
13
                   If there is no objection, can we do that?
14
                   MR. OEMING:  Sure.
15
                   MR. STEIN:  Pine.  All right.
16
                   MR. HOLMER:  I would have the same,
17
         then, to introduce "Combined Sewers."
18
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.
19
                   MR. MILLER:  What is the wording?
20
                   MR. STEIN:  The same statement every
21
         time it appears.
22
                   MR. MILLER:  What is the statement?
23
                   MR. STEIN:  Do you want to repeat that?
24
                   MR. HOLMER:  "The water pollution
25

-------
                                       	3336


 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION




 2        control agency of each State take action to



 3        assure the following"—



 4                  MR.  OEMING:  Why don't they drop it



 5        there?



 6                  MR.  STEIN:   Yes.



 7                  MR.  HOLMER:  "to assure the following:"



 8                  MR.  STEIN:   "to assure the following",



 9        right, period.



10                  MR.  HOLMER:  Colon.



11                  MR.  STEIN:   Or colon.  Right.  Good.



12                  Now, may we go on to  5;


13



14                      RECOMMENDATION #5


15



16                  "5.   Adjustable overflow regulating



17        devices be installed  on existing combined sewer



18        systems, and so designed and operated as to



          utilize to the fullest extent possible the



          capacity of interceptor sewers  for conveying


21
          combined flow to treatment facilities.  The


22
          treatment facilities  shall be modified where


23
          necessary to eliminate bypassing.  This action

A J

          to  be  taken as soon as possible and not later


25

-------
  ^__	,	:	3537
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         than December 1970."
 3
                   MR. POOLE:  I have  trouble  with  the
 4
         second sentence, Mr. Chairman.   I  don't  know
 5
         whether that means that you seal off  every bypass
 6
         on every treatment plant or not.   And if it does,
 7
         I don't know how you operate  them  all.
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  That sounds  like an  engineer-
 9
         ing question, Mr. Poole.  Let me ask  our engineers,
10
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Suggestion:   Could you  say
11
         non-emergency?
12
                   MR. POSTON:  Well,  I think  we  had
13
         authorized bypassing--
14
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Oh, we don't  authorize.
15
                   MR. POSTON:  I didn't  think we had
16
         any unauthorized bypassing.
17
                   MR. HOLMER:  Would "minimize" be better
18
         than 'eliminate?
19
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes, to minimize.
20
                   MR. KLASSEN:  The only time you  bypass
21
         is in an emergency.  Why not  say a non-emergency
22
         bypass?
23
                   MR. STEIN:  Well, "to eliminate non-
24
         emergency bypassing1?  Or "to  minimize" might be
25

-------
   	3538

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         "better.
 3
                   MR. OEMIKG:  I  think so.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  How about'minimize'?
 5
         Will you buy that, Blucher?
 6
                   MR. POOLE:  Yes, I  can buy  that.
 7
         The only thing, I didn't  want somebody  to be
 8
         coming around saying you  had  to pour  concrete
 9
         in all the bypasses that  you have at  the sewage
10
         plants .
11
                   MR. STEIN:  I used  to know  a  fellow
12
         who operated in Kansas City who would have
13
         loved that program.
14

                   (Laughter.)
15
                   He paved a creek there.
16

                   (Across-the-table discussion, inaudible
17
         to the reporter.)
18

                   MR. STEIN:  Are we ready to move on?
19

                   MR. SCHNEIDER:' Well, I think Illinois
20

         is already requiring ponding of this  bypass so
21

         that you really don't have any bypass to the
22

         stream.  Is this the case in some of  your areas
23

         now?
24

                   MR. MORTON:  That is correct.
25

-------
                                         	3339

 1 ||                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. KLASSEN:  We  already have  some
 3
         of them.
 4
                   MR. POOLE:  You can  do  that in some,
 5
         but I am thinking of the Mishawaka sewage plant,
 6
         which is right up on the bank  of  the  river and
 7
         is in the city park and the corporate limits
 8
         of the City of South Bend is immediately west
 9
         of it.  There is no place there to put a pond.
10
                   MR. STEIN:  Are we satisfied with 5?
11
         As you well know, this is one  of  the  most
12
         difficult problems we have  in  the field,  and
13
         the notion that you are going  to  come up with a
14
         program that is going to be perfect in this area
15
         is nice, but we have to recognize the facts of
16
         life.  Don't you think you  have gone  as  far as
17
         you can?
18
                   All right, let's  try 6.
19

20
                       RECOMMENDATION #6
21

22
                   "6.  Effective immediately,  combined
23
         sewers be separated in coordination with all
24
         urban reconstruction projects, and prohibited
25

-------
   	•     	3540

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          in  all  new developments,  except where  other

 3
          techniques will be  applied  that will prevent

 4
          pollution.  Pollution  from  combined sewers to

 5
          be  eliminated  by July  1977."

 6
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Are we on 6, Mr.

 7
          Chairman?

 8
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes,  we  are,  sir.
 9
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Another practical problem
10
          is  a  number of urban developments right  in the
11
          hearts  of  cities, and  Poole raised this,  I Just
12
          don't know how you  eliminate combined  sewers.
13
                    MR.  POSTON:   I  think that is the
14
          reason  we  put  in this  phrase,  "except  where
15
          other techniques will  be  applied that  will
16
          prevent pollution." In other words, we have
17
          an  extensive combined  sewer overflow problem
18
          research and demonstration  project, and  the

19
          purpose of this is  to  find  other ways  to  handle
20
          these problems.
21
                    With that in mind, and with  the
22
          conversations  that  were held here before, we
23
          felt  that  this would take care of a particular
24
          area  where you would have a little likelihood
25

-------
 !                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          of  separation, a built-up  industrial  area such

 3
          as  here in Chicago.

 4
                   MR. KLASSEN:  I  don't want  to get  to

 5
          nit-picking on words, but  other techniques

 6
          will be applied or can be  applied?  I could

 7
          visualize areas here  in Chicago where the only

 8
          alternative would be  to collect and treat.  And

 9
          as  Mr. Poole pointed  out,  we have  situations

10
          like this, they are in the heart of a city,


          and I don't know just how  you would do that.

12
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes, all right.  Let me

13
          try this.  I think this may be a little better.

14
                    But other  techniques can be applied

15
          to  control pollution.

16
                   MR. KLASSEN:  That is right.

17
                   MR. STEIN:  Because you  are not going

18
          to  prevent--

19
                   MR. KLASSEN:  The idea is good, of

20
          course.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  "Can be applied to control,"

22
          right?
23
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Yes.

24
                   MR. STEIN:  And  then we  are in better

25

-------
   ^___	35*12

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          shape.   Because  we  all recognize the special
 3
          problems that  crop  up in every city.  You are
 4
          going to do the  best you can.
 5
                    I grappled with this.  You know,
 6
          in  Washington  we spent $100 million on the
 7
          stormwater problem  and what we have done is
 8
          ameliorate it.   We  selected the outfalls and
 9
          cut them down,  cut  the percentage of the overflows
10
          down,  but we didn't prevent it. We didn't cut
11
          it  out}  and this was the best  we could do, at
12
          least at the time we thought it was the best
13
          we  could do, because the alternative we had was
14
          ripping  up the city and not allowing an auto-
15
          mobile to drive  through for 15 years, which might
16
          have been a better  solution, I don't know.
17
                    So you had to do the best you could,
18
          and the  notion that you are going to completely
19
          prevent  pollution with this, maybe we are
20
          stretching it.
21
                    0. K.
22
                    MR.  OEMING:  Along the same lines,
23
          Mr. Chairman,  would you mind substituting
24
          "controlled" instead of "eliminated"?
25

-------
   	3543

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN:  "to be controlled by"—
 3
                   MR. OEMING:  By 1977.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes, "controlled."
 5
                   All right.  May we go on to 7?
 6
                   MR. HOLMER:  Sir.
 7
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
 8
                   MR. HOLMER:  I have two additional
 9
         recommendations that I think would be useful
10
         coming out of this conference.  One is that
11
         each State water pollution control agency
12
         formally adopt policies encouraging the dis-
13
         charge of treatable Industrial waste following
14
         needed preliminary treatment to municipal
15
         sewer systems.
16
                   And the second, that each water pol-
17
         lution control agency adopt policies encouraging
18
         unified collection systems serving contiguous
1^
         urban areas where feasible.
20
                   Now, these are related.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  Just procedurally, isn't
22
         your second point related to industrial wastes
23
         rather than on the combined wastes?
24
                   MR. HOLMER:  I would be glad to take
25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          it up there.
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   By the way, I thoroughly
 4
          agree with your--
 5
                    MR.'HOLMER:   I want to be sure that--
 6
                    MR.  STEIN:   I thoroughly agree with
 7
          your point, but I think that is the best way
 8
          of handling industrial wastes where it can "be
 9
          done.
10
                    Your second point, let's have this
11
          again.
12
                    MR.  HOLMER:   This has to do with the
13
          adoption of policies  encouraging unified
14
          collection systems serving contiguous urban
15
          areas where feasible,  metropolitan sewerage
16
          systems.  You recommended this in your original
17
                    MR.  POSTON:   We have that in our
18
          book here, but for some reason it got left
19
          out.  It is #15 in the book here.  I think
20
          that should be included.
21
                    MR.  HOLMER:   We did too.
22
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.  Now, where do you
23
          think—again,  this doesn't seem to me to fit
24
          under "Combined Sewers".
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                   MR. POSTON:  No,  it  is  a  separate  one

 3
         by u.tself.

 4
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:  Land use  practices,

 6
         probably.

 6
                   MR. STEIN:  .Of  land  use practices?

 7
         No,  it isn't.

 8
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:  I think that  is  the

 9
         only place--

10
                   MR.HOLMER:  Why don't  you retitle


         "Combined Sewers"  "Recommendations  Relating

12                                 „
         to Wastewater Collection  ?  A coined phrase.

13
                   MR. STEIN:  Well, isn't your  other

14
         one  really an industrial  waste?   As far as I

15
         can  see--and Freeman, this  is  one I agree  with

16
         you  on.

17
                   MR. HOLMER:  It may  be a  municipal

18
         waste.

19
                   MR. STEIN:  I  think  that  may  be  the

20
         most important  recommendation—your first  one,

21
         I would  like to hold  it--probably the most
22
         important single  recommendation  we  can  make
23
         on industrial wastes  is  the one  you Just made,
24
         even more important than  all the treatment we
25

-------
   	3546

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          are coming to.
 3
                    MR. POSTON:   This is a little different
 4
          thought here.
 5
                    Read that.
 6
                    MR. STEIN:   This should be a separate
 7
          heading.
 8
                    MR. POSTON:   Right.
 9
                    MR. STEIN:   Does this read exactly
10
          this way or did you change it?
11
                    MR. HOLMER:   I don't know that we
12
          changed it much.  ¥e probably changed it some--
13
                    MR. STEIN:   Yes, because I--
14
                    MR. HOLMER:   Relating to syntax.
15
                    MR. SCHNEIDER:  I think this further
16
          deals with septic tanks, doesn't it?
17
                    MR. POSTON:   Right.
18
                    MR. SCHNEIDER:  And this one doesn't.
19
                    MR. STEIN:   Yes. . Here, let's do this
20
          as a--on a procedural matter, Freeman, not that
21
         -we are going to take this up.  Let's finish the
22
          combined sewer first.   Let's take your industrial
23
          wastes up first on the next issue.
24
                    Does anyone have anything under this
25

-------
                                                      3347


 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION



 2
          combined  sewers?


 3                   /             x
                    (No response.)



 4                   MR. STEIN:   No?



                    Then  let's  go  on to  industrial wastes.

 £
          What  is your first  suggestion?



 7                   MR. KLASSEN:   On 7?

 a
                    MR. STEIN:   No,  no,  Freeman has one


 9
          before we start on  7.


10




11                      RECOMMENDATION
12


| A

                   MR. HOLMER:  "That  each water pollution


14
          control  agency  formally adopt policies encouraging



          discharge of treatable industrial wastes (follow-


16
          ing needed preliminary treatment) to municipal


17                 .„
          sewer  systems.


18
                   MR. STEIN:   Are  there  any comments on



19        that?


20
                   MR. OEMING:   Yes.   Well, I like the


21
          idea,  except that  I would  like to suggest to


22                                                 „
          try Mr.  Holmer  out on  striking the words  adopt


23                M               „
          policies and Just say  formally encourage the


24                              „
          discharge of treatable --


25

-------
                                                        35^8

 !                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                    MR.  HOLMER:   All right,  that is

 3
          agreeable  to me,  sure.

 4
                    MR.  STEIN:  All  right.   Why don't

 5
          you  straighten it out on yours, because I may

 6
          ask  you  to read this again,  Freeman.   What

 7
          page are you on?

 8
                    MR.  HOLMER:   I am on page 13 of mine,

 9
          3.1.  If you just start with "encourage" in

10
          the  second line--

11                                      M
                    MR.  OEMING:   Strike "adopt  policies"?

12
                    MR.  HOLMER:   Why don't you  Just start

13
          with "encourage."
14
                    MR.  OEMING:   All right.   All right.

15
          All  right.

16
                    MR.  HOLMER:   And then follow with

17
          the  last three lines?
18
                    MR.  STEIN:   "Formally" too.  "Encourage

19
          discharge." All right. Let me read  this again:
20
                    "it  is  recommended that each State
21
          water pollution control agency encourage discharge
22
          of treatable industrial wastes (following needed
23
          preliminary treatment)  to  municipal sewer systems."
24
                    MR.  OEMING:   0.  K.
25

-------
                                                       35^9

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   Any objection?
 3
                    (No  response.)
 4
                    MR.  STEIN:   If none,  let's see if
 5
          we  can do  that as  #7  under "industrial Wastes".
 6
                    0. K.,  let  me go on to 8.
 7

 8
                        RECOMMENDATION #8
 9

10
                    "8.   Industries not connected to
11
          community  sewer systems and producing wastes
12
          in  quantities  exceeding 800 pounds of BOD."
13
                    It seems to me we are going over the
14
          same  ground.
15
                    MR.  OEMIUG:  Yes.
16
                    MR.  S;TEIN:   "industries producing
17
          lesser quantities," and so forth and so on.
18
                    I don't  know,if we are going to run into
19
          all this,that  it pays even reading this since
20
          we  have come to a  conclusion first.
21
                    Does anyone suggest a substitute?
22
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Except there is one
23
          thing involved here,  Mr.  Chairman, that industry
24
          raises that we will have to answer.   What do we me ah
25

-------
                                                        3550

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         by secondary  treatment?
 3
                    MR. OEMING:  Well,  I  think this  goes
 4
         deeper  than that.
 6
                    MR. KLASSEN:   In  New  York it's 70
 6
         percent, Alabama it's 75, Indiana 80,  Illinois
 7
         85, now we have got  90.
 8
                    MR. STEIN:  I  will  give you  my view
 9
         of this on the record from  grappling with  this
10
         problem every week of the year  in every State
11
         in the  Union.
12
                    Gentlemen, the sooner we drop primary
13
         treatment,secondary  treatment,  advanced treatment
14
         and tertiary  treatment and  talk in terms of the
15
         treatment  for the specifics that we need   the
16
         better  off we are going  to  be.   We have meaning-
17
         less--not  only meaningless, they are elastic
18
         terms,  and any time  you  are dealing with rubber
19
                                                        %
         words you  are in trouble.   So I think  we--
20
                    MR. OEMING:  I think,  Mr. Chairman, we
21
         should  go  back to somewhat  the  same wording,
22
         except  we  aren't talking about  phosphorus--
23
                    MR. STEIN:  Right.
24
                    MR. OEMING: --that  we had in recommenda-
25
         tion #1.   We  have been over that same  ground.

-------
   	3531
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         The same arguments apply here as applied  to
 3
         this 8'06 pounds of BOD for municipalities
 4
         and the relationship between this and  the  stan-
 5
         dards and all this.
 6
                   Why couldn't we Just say  that the
 7
         States proceed to implement the standards  in
 8
         accordance with their approved standards and
 9
         plan of implementation?
10
                   MR. STEIN:  Well, we can  say,"industries
11
         not connected to community or municipal sewer
12
         systems"--maybe "community" is the  word, but
13
         the word we used in the Federal Act is "municipal"-
14
         "industries not connected to public sewer  systems
15
         or municipal sewer systems discharge wastes,
16
         provide treatment--collection of wastes and
17
         treatment so as not to result in a  degradation
18
         of the water quality of Lake Michigan as pro-
19
         vided in the standards approved by  the appro-
20
         priate States and by the Secretary  of the  Interior.
21
                   MR. OEMING:  Amen.
22
                   MR. STEIN:  All right?
23
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Yes.
24
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
25

-------
   	:	3532

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  POSTON:   Does this mean, then,
 3
          that we  will have  no requirement for any
 4
          stream,  tributary,  intrastate streams and
 5
          tributary,  until  such  steps occur or until
 6
          damage  occurs?

 7
                    MR.  OEMING:   No.   No.  Now, you are
 8
          in  touch with  the  States in this region, you
 9
          have got telephones, you get our plans of
10
          implementation.
11
                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:  No, what he is talking
12
          about is intrastate streams.
13
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
14
                    MR.  OEMING:   0.  K., this is what I
15
          am  talking about.
16
                    MR.  STEIN:   The  point is, what we
17
          are dealing with  is with pollution of the
18
          Interstate  waters  of Lake  Michigan.  Now, I
19
          don't know--let me  pick a  city of yours, Just
20
          for fun.  You  don't care?
21
                    MR.  OEMING:   Sure, go ahead.
22
                    MR.  STEIN:   I don't know what Traverse
23
          City discharges, but let's  say Traverse City
24
          discharges  into a  tributary in Lake Michigan
25

-------
 !                     -EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
          and  let's  suppose  they  were discharging their

 3
          wastes  in  raw  without  any treatment.   I don't

 4
          think I would  have  to  wait very long  if they

 5
          were doing that  to  know  that the small flow

 6
          that that  had  from  Traverse City down that

 7
          tributary  was  going to affect Lake Michigan,

 8
          and  I would say  you are  in violation.

 9
                    MR.  OEMING:  Yes.

10
                    MR.  STEIN:   And I don't know that there

11
          is any  mystery.  What  we are going to have to do,

12
          presumably the States  have an implementation

13
          plan, don't they, on these industries to provide

14
          treatment--

15
                    MR.  OEMING:  Yes.

16
                    MR.  STEIN:   --to meet necessary

17
          standards.   Is it true or not?

18
                    MR.  OEMING:  Yes.

19
                    MR.  STEIN:   Now, either you are going

20
          to meet it or  you are  not.

21
                    MR.  OEMING:  Sure,

22
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.   Is  there any

23
          question?

24
                    Is this any  different--let  me ask you--

25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          is  this  any different than when they have
 3
          put in a plan?
 4
                    MR.  POSTON:  Well, I don't think we
 5
          know what is in the plan in certain communi-
 6
          ties--
 7
                    MR.  OEMING:  Oh, for heaven's sakes,
 8
          Wally, you have approved our plans.
 9
                    MR.  POSTON:  --that are on intrastate
10
          streams.
11
                    I might give you an example.  What
12
          are the  industries on the Fox River going to be
13
          required to do that discharge into Green Bay,
14
          what is  going  to be required?
15
                    MR.  HOLMER:  They are going to be
16
          required to regulate their discharges so as
17
          to  achieve the superior State water quality
18
          standards on Green Bay.
19
                    MR.  POSTON:  "They are going to be."
20
                    MR.  HOLMER:  Well--
21
                    MR.  OEMING:  They have got to be.  We
22
          said--
23
                    MR.  POSTON:  We don't have that there.
24
                    MR.  HOLMER:  We have our intrastate
25

-------
                                             	3355

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         standards through the period of public hearing
 3
         and we are going to issue orders to achieve those
 4
         standards and these are designed to achieve our
 5
         interstate standards.
 6
                   MR. OEMING:  We have got this re-
 7
         sponsibility.
 8
                   MR. POSTON:  When will this--what?.
 9
                   MR. OEMING:  We have got this re-
10
         sponsibility, Wally, whether it comes out of
11
         a sewer into Lake Michigan or out of a tributary
12
         stream, we have got the responsibility.  And
13
         I don't think there is any indication here on
H            .
         anybody's part that they don't accept this
15
         responsibility to see that those standards
16
         are met.
17
                   MR. STEIN:  Well, I think we have
18
         argued this before.  What-I think Mr. Oeming
19
         proposes is a parallel for the industrial wastes
20
         and what we decided on in municipal wastes.
21
                   Tell you what we do, let's type it
22
         up this way.   If you have second thoughts and
23
         you can't do it, we are going to do this again.
24
                   But I think, and I am always ready
25

-------
   	;	3536

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         fcr a  discussion,  but, gentlemen,  this  is  the
 3
         same--you know, we are the  second  lap around
 4
         on the merry-go-round on the  same  argument,
 5
         and let's try to  go on.
 6
                   Next #9-
 7

 8
                       RECOMMENDATION  #9
 9

10
                   "9.  Continuous disinfection  be  provided
11
         for industrial effluents  containing collform
12
         bacteria in excess  of 5,000 per 100 milliliter,
13
         and those \fhere pathogenic bacteria and viruses
14
         may be present by  December 1969."
15
                   MR. OEMING:  Well,  I  think you are
16
         putting yourself  in a  strait jacket,  that  is my
17
         only question about this, because  it is not  only
18
         the concentration  of coliforms,  but it  is  the
19
         quantity that is involve'd here.  Now, 10 gallons a  4
20
         ute at 5 thousand  coliforms doesn't bother me,
21
         but 10 million gallons at 5 thousand does bother me,
22
         And so the impact  bothers me.
23
                   MB. STEIN:  Yes.
24
                 - MR. OEMING:  You are  putting  yourself
25

-------
         .	._	:	;	         3357

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         in a  istraitjacket,  it  seems  to  me.
 3
                   MR. STEIN:  What  do you  think about
 4                  .                           '
         it?  Don't you think the  way--
 5
                   MR. POSTON:   What is your  suggestion?
 6
                   MR. OEMING:   Well,  this  is the diffi-
 7
         culty with trying  to do things like  this.
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  We  have handled this  before.
 9
         I am not  giving you  something that hasn't come
10
         up before.
11
                   MR. OEMING:   All  right.
12
                   MR. STEIN:  The way we do  this is:
13
                   "Continuous disinfection be provided
14
         for industrial effluents  containing"--
15
                   MR. POSTON:   Coliform.
16
                   MR. STEIN:  --"coliform"--or "patho-
17
         genie organisms"--!  don't know what  he means  by
18
         "and viruses"--"pathogenic  organisms which  may
10
         have a  deleterious effect on  those coming into
20
         contact with the receiving  waters."
21
                   MR. OEMING: —"with  the waters of  Lake
22
         Michigan."
23
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  In other words, where
24
         this is a hazard they have  to do it, unless you
25

-------
            	3558
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         want--
 3
                    MR.  POSTON:   Well,  I think this is what
 4
         we are after too.
 5
                    MR.  STEIN:   No,  I understand that, but
 6
         the question is,  there are two ways to determine
 7         '
         whether it is  a hazard.  Here is what Larry is
 8
         saying.  Either you are going to do it where you
 9
         find any pathogenic organisms in it at all and
10
         make them disinfect or where  it is going to be
11
         a  significant  amount of pathogenic organisms.
12
         What Larry is  saying,  in excess of 500 per ?.100
13
         milliliter is  not  the  test of significance.
14
                    MR.  OEMING:   No.
15
                    MR.  STEIN:   And I think he has a point.
16
                    MR.  OEMING:   Your test is the better
17
         test.
18
                    MR.  STEIN:   That's  right.
19
                    MR.  POSTON:   Which test is that?
20
                    MR.  OEMING:   The one that Mr. Stein
21
         proposed here  or  advanced.
22
                    MR.  STEIN:   You see, given this test,
23
         theoretically  you  could have  a guy putting out
24
         100 million gallons a  day at  450 coliforms per
25

-------
                                                        3559

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         100 railliliters and not require him. to dis-
 3
         Infect, and then you could have a guy putting
 4
         out 3 gallons a day per 55 hundred and require
 5
         him to disinfect.  You know, It doesn't make
 6
         much sense.
 7
                   MR. OEMING?  Could we go back to your
 8
         statement, Mr. Stein?  I liked what you said,
 9
         again, the one that you read here.
10
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  We are protecting
11
         public health with this, aren't we, people,
12
         right?
13
                   MR. POSTON:  Yes.
14
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.  Let's go.
15
                   "Continuous disinfection be provided
16
         for industrial effluents containing pathogenic
17
         organisms which will deleteriously affect those
18
         coming into contact with Lake Michigan waters."
19
                   MR. OEMING:  Right.
20
                   MR. STEIN:  And then you make a
21
         judgment.  Right.
22
                   MR. KLASSEN:  One other suggestion, Mr.
23
         Chairman.  In order to keep these consistent with
24
         the Department of the Interior technical advisory
25

-------
   	3360

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         committees and previous ones, we  ought  to use
 3
         fecal coliform.  We were  told this  is the term
 4
         and the technical advisory committee at the
 5
         Indiana-Illinois conference  spent a lot of time,
 6
         and you have one of your  experts,  here on that,
 7
         Mr. Kittrell, who I think argued  this point.
 8
         This is all right with us, but just to  keep--
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  No, I  changed that to
10
         put "pathogenic organisms" to get away  from the--
11
         Instead of "coliform, viruses," cut them all out.
12
         I used the phrase "pathogenic organisms".  The
13
         difficulty is--
14
                   MR. POSTON:  How do you analyze for
15
         pathogenic organisms, then?
16
                   MR. STEIN:  What?
17
                   MR. POSTON:  How do you make  this analy-
18
         sis  or determination?
19
                   MR. STEIN:  Well, you use your standard
20
         methods. And you guys are going to  change it all
21
         the time.
22
                   Let me go off the record  here.
23
                   (Off the record.)
24
                   MR. STEIN:  What we are doing  is trying
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         to give you people  the flexibility.   Again,
 3
         you see, if you are  talking  about  detail,  we are
 4
         talking about a principle here,  when  you are
 5
         going to determine  that an industry has  to dis-
 6
         infect its effluent. When you  are  going  to have
 7
         to determine that an industry  has  to  disinfect
 8
         its effluent is when they are  going to have
 9
         wastes in the effluent which are causing a
10
         hazard to health, right?  And  this is the
11
         determination you make by your standard  methods.
12
         Isn't this all the  same?
13
                   MR. KLASSEN:  No.
14
                   MR. POSTON:  No, I don't think so.
15
                   MR. KLASSEN:  No,  it is  not.  Patho-
*6
         genie bacteria is not in the same  category.
17
                   MR. OEMING:  No.
18
                   MR. KLASSEN:  And  I  Just say--
19
                   MR. STEIN:  I didn't say pathogenic
20
         bacteria.
21
                   MR. KLASSEN:  How  does it read?   Do you
22
         cut out coliform?
23
                   MR. STEIN:  That's right.   I said
24
         "Continuous disinfection be  provided  for industrial
25

-------
   	3562

 I                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         effluents  containing  pathogenic  organisms

 3
         which may  have  a  deleterious  effect  on  persons

 4
         coming  into  contact with Lake Michigan  water.

 5
                    MR'. KLASSEN:  That  puts  the onus

 6
         and  the requirement on the  State water  pollution

 7
         control agency, and while I am no  bacteriologist,

 8
         Just the isolation of typhoid organisms in  water

 9
         is a real  tricky  job.

10
                    MR. OEMING:  Clarence, your argument


         is with the  term  "pathogenic" versus "fecal."

12
         Would you  say that fecal would represent pretty

13
         much the pathogenic strains that you are con-
14
         cerned  about?
15
                    MR. KLASSEN:  I would  defer to Mr.
16
         Kittrell or  somebody.  We were required to  put
17
         it in our--  Here he  is.
18
                    MR. STEIN:  Kit,  do you  want  to answer

19
         that?   How would  you  do that?
20
                    MR. KITTRELL:  I  am not  sure  Just
21
         what the question is.
22
                    MR. STEIN:  I see what Clarence's
23
         point is.  Clarence's point,  if  we don't give
24
         you  the escape  hatch  on coliform bacteria and
25

-------
   	3563

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         we make him Isolate a pathogen, he may be  in
 3
         a little Jam, as we all are.
 4
                   Then he raises the further question,
 6
         isn't the term "coliform" obsolete, do we  use
 6
         "fecal coliform" now?
 7
                   MR. KITTRELL:  Well, I wouldn't  say
 8
         that the total coliform determination is ob-
 9
         solete by any means.  It is still very commonly
10
         used in combination with the fecal coliform
11
         determination.
12
                   In the case of Lake Michigan standards,
13
         the technical committee accepted the use of the
14
         fecal streptococci because they had a long
15
         record of the use of fecal streptococci here in
16
         order to have a good background of information
17
         on it.
18
                   MR. STEIN:  Let me try this again.
19
                   "Continuous disinfection be provided
20
         for industrial effluents containing pathogenic
21
         organisms or indicator organisms--or organisms
22
         indicating such--or indicator organisms which
23
         indicate the presence of such pathogens which
24
         may have a deleterious effect on persons coming
25

-------
   	,	      3564

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          into contact."
 3
                    All right?
 4
                    The difficulty that I have, Clarence,
 5
          is  we are in a state  of flux on the terminology;
 6
          they start fooling with coliform bacteria, then
 7
          they are in fecal strep, then they are fecal
 8
          coliforms, and we talk about coliform.  I am
 9
          looking for the generic term.  If you don't want
10
          Just "pathogenic organisms", you sea, the patho-
11
          gen is the indicator,  and whatever they come up
12
          with in their latest  methods, this is the one
13
          we  use, if this is our principle.
14
                    MR. HOLMER:   You  didn't use a number,
15
          though?
16
                    MR. STEIN:   No, no.  I don't think--
17
                    MR. OEMING:   You  can't, no, by itself.
18
                    MR. STEIN:   You see, what Mr. Klassen's
19
          objection to my original formulation was when
20
          I  talked about pathogenic organisms, we can't
21
          always find the pathogenic  organisms.  I Just
22
          expanded that to say  pathogenic organisms or
23
          indicator .organisms showing the presence of
24
          such pathogenic organisms.
25

-------
   ^	3363

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. KITTRELL:   I would  Just  like
 3
          to  insert "the probable presence."
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  Probable.   Well--
 5
                   MR. KLASSEN:  As a  lawyer what  kind
 6
          of  a  case could you build up  against the  "probable
 7
          presence of indicator organisms"?
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  I would suggest  we  don't
 9
          use "probable".  At least the theory is
10
          statistically you have to have these pathogens
11
          possible when you get enough  of the. iridieators.
12
          I have always been arguing that,  anyway.
13
                   MR. KLASSEN:  We were told by Federal
14
          water pollution to put in the term  "fecal coli-
15
          form" and we did it, we like  it.
16
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.  Well, again
17
          why don't you think about that?   I would  strongly
18
          recommend, on the basis of the past 10 years
19
          experience, seeing them go from "coliform"  to
20
          "fecal coliform" to "fecal strep" to "staphy-
21
          looocci,"  that we use the generic term
22
          "indicator organisms," because next week  I  am
23
          afraid the scientists may shake us loose  with
24
          a new test.
25

-------
   	-     	3566

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    Let's  go on,  see  if we can move
 3
          on  to  the  next.
 4

 5
                       RECOMMENDATION #10
 6

 7
                    MR.  STEIN:   "Detailed action plans
 8
          for adequate treatment  of all industrial wastes
 9
          be  developed within six months by each industry
10
          on  the attached  list  and submitted to the State
11
          water  pollution  control agency for approval
12
          prior  to reporting to the Conferees.   Such
13
          plans  shall  identify  the principal character-
1*
          istics of  waste  material now being discharged,
15
          the quantities,  the proposed program for con-
16
          struction  or modification of control facilities
17
          and a  timetable  for accomplishment giving target
18
          dates  in detail.   Treatment facilities to be
19
          constructed  by December 1972.  Industries shall
20
          be  added or  removed from the attached list at
21
          the discretion of  the Conferees."
22
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   I would like to first of
23
          all request  that all  of the Illinois industries
24
          on  this list be  deleted, because in every instance
25

-------
             	356?

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         they are already committed  to  a  date prior  to

 3
         December 1972.  This will Just give them  an
 4
         added reason to delay.

 6
                   MR. STEIN:  Are there  any other

 6
         comments?

 7
                   MR. POOLE:  Well, yes,  I talked to

 8
         Mr. Poston about this.  I was  a  bit flabber-

 9
         gasted with- the Indiana list.  The printed

10                     o
         document had 8 or 12, I forget which,  and there

11
         was half of them that were  wrong.  We  corrected

12
         that in our presentation, and  he has come up

13
         here now with a bunch of industries that  we
                                                 \
14
         didn't even know we had and some others that

15
         we are sure are hooked onto municipal  sewer
16
         systems.
17
                   I don't know how  to  resolve  that.
18
         That is, we had in our reports and implemen-
19
         tation plan all of the industries that main-
20
         tained their own outlets which we considered
21
         were of any significance, and  I  believe in
22
         most of them, like Klassen, we had lesser
23
         dates than 1972.
24
                   MR. STEIN:  How about  this fundamental
25

-------
   	    3368

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          statement?  Are we in agreement on that?
 3
                    MR. OEMIKG:  No, I am not.
 4
                    MR. STEIN:  You are not?  All right.
 5
                    May I make a suggestion on the  list?
 6
          This is one of the areas, as you know, where
 7
          both the Federal and State people or any  people
 8
          can get in a lot of trouble.  A list is only
 9
          good if it is deadly accurate, and you can't
10
          make any mistake, I mean none.  If you are not
11
          100 percent, forget the list technique.
12
                    Now, the only way we can work
13
          something like that, if you are going to use a
14
          list,is before we publish any of them, the
15
          State  and Federal people in every individual
16
          State  are going to have to be in complete
17
          agreement on that,because this is something
18
          that the press and the TV people have been
19
          talking to me about ever since I have been
20
          here.   Any list,  and you can have a list of
21
          521 names, all you have got to do is have one
22
          man listed in the wrong spot and that casts
23
          a  doubt on your whole list if you are right
24
          on 520.  No one likes to be classified as a
25

-------
   	3569

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         polluter or possibly other people downstream

 3
         from a polluter don't like to see him get an

 4
         award or be a nonpolluter if he is a polluter.

 5
                   I would strongly recommend that if we

 6
         have these problems on this list that the State

 7
         staff and the Federal staff get together before we

 8
         put out any other one, be sure they are right.

 9
                   MR. KLASSEN:  But the Conferees

10
         reading this have to agree to the removal,

11
         and this is why none of the--I am not in

12
         quite the same category as Indiana--none of

13
         the industries listed here should be on this

14
         because they are all committed to a date that

15
         precedes December 1972.

16
                   MR. STEIN:  Well, let me again, and

17
         I dont want to be stuffy, but I think the pro-

18
         cedural way of handling this, we are not going

19
         to remove anything until we have established

20
         a list.  The Conferees have not endorsed any

21
         list yet.  In other words, we don't have a list,

22
         Now, maybe your communities should not ever

23
         get on this list, but--

24
                   MR. KLASSEN:  How do we keep off the

25

-------
              	             3570

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          list?   That is all I would like to know.
 3
                    MR. STEIN:  That is what I say, before
 4
          we promulgate any list, and we are all going to
 5
          reconvene here, I suggest that if we agree with
 6
          this list technique that the States and our
 7
          people get together and we be sure we are 100
 8
          percent right, and if we are not going to be
 9
          100 percent right on the list let's use another
10
          technique of control, because that is the best
11
          administrative boomerang we have if you are
12
          not completely accurate.
13
                    MR. POOLE:  I agree with you, Mr.
14
          Chairman, except that if we expect to wrap this
15
          thing up by Tuesday of next week, I think that
16
          overnight some of us might think about a re-
17
          vision of phraseology of this paragraph 9 that
18
          would cover all of the industries that are
19
          contributing in any way to pollution without
20
          the list and give us an opportunity to come in
21
          with the list at a little later date.
22
                    MR. STEIN:  What do you think of
23
          that approach?  That is what we used in the
24
          southern end of the lake.
25

-------
   	3371

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                   Let us  suppose that  we  get this
 3
         business and we get  detailed plans,  action plans
 4
         for all the industries, and  the States  come up
 5
         with a progress report in "x"  amount of time,
 6
         and if someone wants  to  promulgate  a list  on
 7
         the basis of the  progress report,  this is  fine.
 8
                   MR. HOLMER:  I have  two  problems
 9
         with this recommendation even  with  your
10
         interpretation.
11
                   This is  the Lake  Michigan  enforcement
12
         conference, and on the attached list there are
13
         a lot of industries  whose impact  on  the waters
14
         of Lake Michigan  is  questionable.  We  are  back
15
         to that same old  problem again.
16
                   And the  second is I  am bothered, as I
17
         know Mr. Poston is,  by the  use of  this word
18
         "adequate" in some of our plans of  implemen-
19
         tation, and so on--
20
                   MR. STEIN:  Let's get your first
21
         point.  Your first point is, Mr. Holmer, as
22
         we have done in other cases, if the  States
23
         are going to come up with progress  reports,
24
         you are going to  provide the industries that
25

-------
   	3572

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         you  are  reporting  on,  right,  with the  impact?
 3
         In other words,  any  list,  if  you want  to use
 4
         that term loosely, will be yours.
 5
                    I  think  if  an industry is  left off
 6
         or a city is left  off  that the  Federal people
 7                           •                     . •          •
         think should be  on it,  I would  hope, at least
 8
         at the discussion  stage, and  this is just  a
 9
         technical question,  then they should get on,
10
                    But I  think  the  best  way we  have
11
         worked this  in the past is to have each of the
12
         States come  up with  the cities  and the indue-
13
         tries  that they  are  going  to  report  on.  Right?
14
         You  make your own  determination.   If there is
15
         a disagreement with  that,  then  we will talk to
16
         you.
17
                    In other words,  your  first point
18
         will  be  taken care of.  If you  don't believe
19
         anyone has an impact  on the lake, you  don't
2"
         put  them on  the  list  and they are not  on the
21
         list.  0.  K.
22
                    MR.  HOLMER:   And then we have  a  dis-
23
         cussion.
24
                    (Laughter..)
25

-------
   	3573

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN:  And I hope this discussion--
 3
         this is a factual one--I hope this discussion
 4
         would take place before we ever go to a progress
 5
         meeting.
 6
                   MR. HOLMER:  Right.
 7
                   MR. STEIN:  Because I see absolutely
 8
         no point in bandying around a city's name or an
 9
         industry's name in one of these conferences when
10
         it is not relevant, because it never does them
11
         any good and this thing should be handled before-
12
         hand.
13
                   And your second point on that "adequate"-
14
         where do we have that?
15
                   MR. HOLMER:  The top of line nine.
16
                   MR. OEMING:  The first line, item 9.
17
                   MR. STEIN:  What do you suggest?
18
                   MR. HOLMER:  Well,  I have some very
19
         different language which would require facilities
20
         to achieve the interstate standards, but—
21
                   MR. PURDY:  We said that.
22
                   MR. OEMING:  That is accepted.  We
23
         said that.
24
                   MR. STEIN:  We've already--
25

-------
   	.	    3574

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. HOLMER:  That is determined?
 3
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.
 4
                   MR. POOLS:  I don't find any
 5
         trouble with the word "adequate" myself.
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  Did you find trouble
 7
         with it?
 8
                   MR. POOLE:  No, I don't.
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  Why don't you read that
10
         in connection with the standards?  And I am
11
         not sure that that is a problem.  In other
12
         words, I think what the detailed action plans,
13
         adequate or whatever—you know, I don't like
14
         that word myself, that is a colorless word--
15
         but I think that has to be related to the
16
         meaning of the standards.  And if you can come
17
         up with anything better, fine.  But I think
18
         these mean detailed plans for treatment which
19
         will have them meet the water quality standards
20
         have to be prepared.
21
                   And I would suggest we rework that
22
         and we come in with a--if we are going to think
23
         in terms of a progress meeting, and I don't want
24
         to anticipate, and if we do and if we have it in
25

-------
   	    3373


 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2

         six months, the States will come up with  the
 3

         cities and the industries, and as far as  I am
 4

         concerned if any historian or any one of  the
 5

         press   wants to put that together and  make
 6
         a list, they are welcome.  Right?  I think
 7
         that is the best way to handle that.
 8


 9

                      RECOMMENDATION #11
10


11

                   MR. STEIN:  Now, 11:
12

                   "in addition to recommendations of
13

         this conference, the industries in the area"--
14

                   MR. OEMING:  We ran through that with
15
         the municipalities, used the same statement,
16

         Mr. Chairman.  Remember?
17

                   MR. STEIN:  That is a conclusion.
18

                   MR. OEMING:  You don't want to  vote
19

         on that.
20

                   MR.' STEIN:  No, no, let's make  that--
21                                    '

                   MR. POSTON:  We put this in the con-
22

         elusions.
23

                   MR. OEMING:  That is in the conclu-
24

         sions.
25

-------
   	.    	3376

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:  Yes.  All  right.
 3
                    Now,  I have one more thing  to  suggest.
 4
         You may want to do  it here.
 5
                    Freeman,  we can take up  your second
 6
         point as a special  point on that planning  point
 7
         now before we  recess.  That may  be Just  as well.
 8
                    MR.  HOLMER:  Yes.
 9
                    MR.  OEMING:  Mr. Chairman.
10
                    MR.  STEIN:  Yes, pardon  me»
11
                    MR.  OEMING:  Go ahead, Freeman.
12

13
                      RECOMMENDATION #3.3
14

15
                    MR.  HOLMER:  "it is recommended  that
16
         each water pollution control agency adopt
17
         policies encouraging unified collection  systems
18
         serving contiguous  urban areas where  feasible."
19
                    MR.  OEMING:  Could we  change that
20
         wording as  we  did in the other, "encourage"
21
         instead of  "adopt policies"?  Strike  "adopt
22
         policies"  and  say  "encourage unified."
23
                    MR.  STEIN:  And let some editor  find
24
         a heading  for  that, like  Regional Planning  or
25

-------
                                 	3377
 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION
 2
         Regional Systems or something  of  that type.
 3
         0. K.?
 4
                   I think  that  is  important  enough
 5
         to be set out by itself.   We will  put that
 6
         under--oh, at the  end,  in  one  of  the end
 7
         numbers.  Make it  33 now for the  time being.
 8
         We will switch the numbers  later.
 9
                   MR. POSTON:  Mr.  Chairman,  I think
10
         one of the advantages of this  is  to  also foster
11
         the elimination of septic  tanks,  and I wonder
12
         if we could get that wording in there too.
13
                   MR. STEIN:  Where is that?
14
                   MR. POSTON:  Similar to  our Recom-
15
         nendation #15-
16
                   xMR. HOLMER:  Let's see,  I  had one on
17
         those.
18
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:   In other words,  Just
u
         put this back in.
20       ^
                   MR. POSTOX:  This ,/15 covers both of

         them, 15 in the book.
22           '
                   MR. OEMING:  Oh,  in  there.
23
                   MR. MILLER:  I don't know  why they

         left that #15 out.
25

-------
                                                       3578

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR. SCHNEIDER:  Just forgot it, that's
 3
          all.
 4
                    MR. MILLER:   Well,  we regrouped these
 5
          and then didn't put in any heading.
 6
                    MR. STEIN:   Here is what they had, and
 7
          maybe they combined it.  Let's--again,  we may be
 8
          getting off and it may be getting late.
 9
                    In 15,  and  you may  want to expand
10
          yours,  Freeman, they  say:
11
                    "As a matter of policy, planning
12
          provide for the maximum use of areawide sewerage
13
          facilities"--and your language may be better--
14
          "discourage the proliferation of small  inefficient
15
          treatment plants in contiguous urbanized areas,
16
          and foster the elimination of septic tanks."
17
                    Do you want to add  something  on
18
          septic  tanks to the language  we just adopted
19
          for yours or not?
20
                    MR. HOLMER:   No.  On page  four we
21
          said something about  it in our identification
22
          of  pollution, but we  did not  follow through
23
          with a  specific recommendation, for  this reason:
24
                    The impact  of septic tanks on Lake
25

-------
                                                       3579

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION
 2
          Michigan,  per se,  is  relatively limited, and
 3
          so  we  didn't.   What I said on page four is,
 4
          "There is, throughout  the basin, extensive use
 5
          of  domestic  sewage disposal by septic tank"--
 6
                    MR.  STEIN:   Well,  I am not--
 7
                    MR.  HOLMER:   I think it is a simpler
 9
          issue,  in  a  sense,  from metropolitan districts.
 9
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right,  if you don't
10
          want it in there,  that is fine.  O.K.
11
                    Mr.  Poston,  would you make a note

          for when we  come back,  if you want to bring
13
          up  the  septic  tank  issue we  will  do it.
14           .   •
                    MR.  OEMING:   I think, Mr. Chairman,
15
          one comment  on this that I  don't  want to over-
16
          look here  is  that  by  following 15 you would
17
          get hold of  some of these nutrients that escape
18
          you through  the septic  tank  business.   That  is

          the only relationship  I  see  that  makes it a  part.

_,                   MR.  POSTON:   Yes.
21
__                   MR.  STEIN:   No,  I  am hot suggesting
£Z
__         that we  eliminate  the  septic  tank recommendation.
£a
                    MR.  OEMING:   No.
fA
                    MR.  STEIN:  What Mr.  Holmer  is
25

-------
   	3580


 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         suggesting, it doesn't fit with  this areawide
 3
         planning.
 4
                   MR. OEMING4- Yes.
 5
                   MR'. STEIN:  And he would rather we
 6
         take this up in another point.
 7
                   MR. OEMING:  Oh, all right.
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  I am just  delaying con-
 9
         sideration for it and not tacking it onto his
10
         proposal that we have adopted.
11
                   0. K.
12
                   Now--
13
                   MR. POSTON:  Are we supposed  to--
14
                   MR. POOLE:  May I--
15
                   MR. STEIN:  Wait a minute.
16
                   MR. POOLE:  You are getting ready to
17
         adjourn, I guess.
18
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  We won't take any
W
         more points up, but we will hear everything that
20

         everyone has to say.
21

                   MR. POOLE:  Well, I noted in  the
22                                  '

         revised recommendations or in the printed
23                                         .

         recommendations there were three that dealt
24

         with oil.  I think they were numbered 18, 19 and 20
25

-------
   	3381

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         And the revised recommendations  touch it very
 3
         lightly, if at all,  and I  Just wondered,. I
 4
         think this may have  "been an  oversight in Mr.
 5
         Poston's office, and I was going to  suggest
 6
         that they might come "back  to us  in  the morning
 7
         with some suggestions for  recommendations on
 8
         oil that might shorten things up tomorrow.
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  Rather than answer that,
10
         come back with a report.   0. K.?
11
                   Are there  any other comments or ques-
12
         tions?
13
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:   What are  we supposed
14
         to do vrith this municipal, now?
15
                   MR. POSTON:  Septic tank.
16
                   MR. STEIN:  You  raise  that in another
17
         point.  Put it in  the form of a  recommendation
18
         to put in.
19
                   MR. KLASSEN:  No night session?
20
                   MR. STEIN:  Now, before we go off,
21
         tomorrow's meeting will be at 8:30,  but a change
22
         of place.  The Crystal Room. I  think It is on
23
         this floor in one  of these rooms.
24
                   MR. COOK:  Right next  door.
25

-------
                       	3582

                        EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR. STEIN:  We stand recessed  until
 3
          8:30  tomorrow morning, Crystal Room.
 4
                    (Whereupon, at 5:05 p.m., an adj.ourn-
 6
          ment  was  taken until 8:30 a.m. the following
 6
          morning.)
 7

 8

 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

-------
                                                 	3583
 !                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

                 MORNING SESSION,  MARCH  8,  1968
 3
                                        (8:30 a.m.)
 4
 5
                   MR. STEIN:   We will  convene.
 g
                   We are  on  page 2,  old 11, now 12,
 7
         Federal installations.
 8

 9                    RECOMMENDATION  #12
10

11                 MR. STEIN:   Let's  go.
12
                   "Federal  installations  in the basin
13
         provide degree of treatment  at least as good
14
         as  that recommended  herein for other comparable
15
         waste  sources; and,  specifically,  that the
16
         Great  Lakes Naval Training Center &nd Fort
17
         Sheridan provide  advanced waste treatment  to
18
         achieve an effluent  containing not more than
19
         20  ppm of 5-day BOD  and  not  more  than 1 ppm
20
         of  elemental phosphorus.  Disinfection to  be
21
         accomplished by December 19°9» and treatment
22
         facilities to be  constructed by December 1972."
23
                   My suggestion  on this is that we
24
         have a greater degree  of specificity that
25

-------
   	3384


 *                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2

          we are asking for from the Federal people than


          we did with the State people.   In looking this


          over this morning in the clear light of day,
 5                                     '                   •

          I hope, I looked up at the 10  above and I think
 6

          that might be that "detailed action plans for
 7

          adequate treatment of all industrial wastes be
 8

          developed- within 6 months." I am not talking
 9

          about the time or anything. That may be the
10

          approach and cut through these lists and deal
11

          with something we have done before.
12

                    If we are thinking--! hope we will


          be--in terms of periodic progress, meetings,
14

          which is what we are going to  have to do in
15

          order to move this ahead and check on and
16

          let people know we are making  progress,
17

          during the first progress meeting or two,
18

          the States will 1) develop a list of in-
19

          dustries and cities indicating the degree
20

          of treatment they are going to ask from
21

          those cities and industries, 2) we will


          also do that with the Federal  installations,
23

          3) draw up the schedule we are going to have,


          and 4) determine the status of the progress.
25

          In other words, I think this is not

-------
   	3385

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         something in  conflict.   I  think  all  you States
 3
         have done this before and  this would be possibly
 4
         the way of handling  this.
 5
                   Is  this agreeable?
 €
                   MR. OEMING:  Mr.  Chairman,  I  think
 7
         generally it  is agreeable.  I would  like to
 8
         Just clarify  a point or  two.  You  are expecting--
 9
         this is the State program,  what  the  State is
10
         requesting of industry and  municipalities?
11
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
12
           ,        MR. OEMING:  Not  their plans  as such?
13
                   MR. STEIN:  No, not the—
14
                   MR. OEMING:  0. K.
15
                   MR. STEIN:  It is the  kind of report,
16
         and again I don't want to flag or  say too much,
17
         but:the kind  of report that Mr.  Klassen,  Mr.
18
         Poole and you have given us in varying--! don't
19
         think Wisconsin has  been involved  in as complex
20
         a case where we had  as many cities,  but this
21
         would be very comparable to the  report  that
22
         you have got.
23
                   Now, particularly with,  I  think--let
24
         me give you this because maybe this  is  the  kind
25

-------
                                                       3586

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         of operation we have had.   I  think Mr. Klassen
 3
         has given us some excellent reports  on cities,
 4
         as you have, and I think Perry Miller and

 5
         Blucher Poole have developed  as good a format

 6
         as I have seen in Industrial  waste reporting

 7
         for this purpose.  And if you would  look at the

 8
         reports that they have given  on the  lower end
 9
         of Lake Michigan, this would  be fine.  In other
10
         words, then we would know what each  city and

11
         what each industry was going  to do.  Every time
12
         we came out with a list the list would be up to
13
         snuff, and it would be a list put in by the
14
         States and we put in the Federal list.  If we
15
         have any questions on your  list, we  would have
16
         it here; you would check with us.  Secondly,
17
         as we were developing this, when we  came to
18
         the meetings I hope we would  have an exchange
19
         of information so we would  get all the ideas in
20
         and then be able to go ahead.
21
                   MR. OEMING:  That is understood.
22
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
23
                   MR. OEMING:  The  other question I have
24
         is that when you said from all industries, all
25

-------
  	3387

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         municipalities and the Federal establishments.
 3
         Now, this still refers to those that we consider
 4
         have an impact on the lake.
 5
                   MR.  STEIN:  Right, covered by the
 6
         case.  Now,  I  think, again, there may be a
 7
         question about any single industry or any
 8
         single city,  but this should be worked out
 9
         on the staff  and if there is the question,
10
         we will zero  in on this at a progress meeting.
11
         In other words, something like #10 or a variant
12
         of that will  apply to the cities that we have
13
         on the industries, but this will apply to
14
         what we did with 1 and 2, this will apply to
15 I
         Federal installations and it will apply to
16
         industry. All right?  And we will straighten
17
         that up with  the next number.
18
                   MR.  OEMIN6:  One more, Mr. Chairman.
19
         I don't want  to take too much time.
20
                   MR.  STEIN:  All right.
21
                   MR.  OEMING:  But I want to be sure we
22
         understand each other,  and I think it would be
23
         helpful.   This is a suggestion.
24
                   That I don't believe we should come
25

-------
   	:	3388


 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION



 2
          in with  Just  a list  that we  think  has  an

 g

          impact on  the. lake.   I would think that  that



          listing, however we  produce  it here, should show



          whether  the State  considers  this to have an


 6
          intrastate significance  or not.  Now,  if you

 7
          want  to  make  it that broad,  we are willing to


 g
          go that  far.



 9                   MR.  POSTON:  I think this is a good



          point, Larry,  and  I  think it is very good.



11                   MR.  STEIN: Yes.


12
                    MR.  OEMING:  Because now everybody


13
          will  understand each other,  there  won't  be all


14
          these questions,  if  you  left somebody  off, why


15
          don't we talk about  this one. Let's set it


16
          all  down and  tell  whether the State feels it


17
          has  intrastate or  interstate significance.



                    MR.  STEIN: Right. I don't  want to


19
          anticipate^-the reason I am  laying the ground-

20
          work here, Larry,  because I  heard  a few rumblings

21
          from Mr. Klassen  before  when he talked about

22

          dumping  of dredgings. If we are  going to have

23

          an even-handed administration of  the  law, the

24
          question that I am going to  have  to ask or

25

-------
                       	3589

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         anyone, I hope, would have to ask is, if you
 3
         are talking about dredging are we talking
 4
         about the same kind of interstate implications?
 5
         And if this doesn't have an interstate impli-
 6
         cation, why are we interested in that if we
 7
         are not interested with a city or an industry
 8
         that is putting in a lot more waste?  You see?
 9
                   So I am trying to cut across this
10
         kind of thing and let the State do the report-
11
         ing on that.
12
                   0. K.
13
                   MR. OEMING:  Our wording,-then, will
14
         be developed and you will try to get that.
15
                   MR. STEIN:  It will be very close
16
         to this wording.
17
                   MR. OEMING:  We will have to get that
18
         by each industry, it will have to be--
19
                   MR. STEIN:  By each city--
20
                   MR. OEMING:  No.  The way this reads
21
         it sounds like each industry and each munici-
22
         pality has to bring in a plan.  What we are
23
         saying is the States--
24
                   MR. STEIN:  No, we will say, action
25

-------
   	.	3390

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          plans  will  be  developed by each State out-
 3
          lining--
 4
                   MR.  POSTON:   The thought was that there
 5
          would  be  industry reporting to you and then you
 6
          would  come  back with a brief--
 7
    '               MR.  STEIN:  Yes.
 8
                   MR.  OEMING:   Well,  No. l--let me
 9
          clear  this,  now.  I  don't want to get off the
10
          track  here.  What you  are asking the States
11
          to do  is  to look at  their problems, their
12
          municipal-industrial problems, and come in and
13
          tell the  Conferees here what their program is
14
          to correct  them, not the industry**; program yet,
15
          because  in  six months  you can't do this.
16
                   MR.  POSTON:   That's right.
17
                   MR.  OEMING:   The procedures get
18
          involved  here.
19
                   MR.  STEIN:  Yes.
20
                   MR.  POSTON:.'  This is not what--
21
                   MR.  STEIN:  This is right.
22
                   MR.  OEMING:   Just so we understand
23
          each other.
24
                   MR.  POSTON:   Yes.  No question.
25

-------
   	3591

 I                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN:  If you want  to take
 3
         the time, we can do this* I would  say within
 4
         six months each State water pollution control
 5
         agency shall identify the municipal and
 6
         industrial sources of wastes contributing
 7
         pollutants to the lake; shall indicate whether
 8
         they have an inter- or intrastate effect;
 9
         indicate their plans for abating such pollution
10
         from these sources together with a timetable;
11
         treatment facilities are to be constructed
12
         not later than 1972, and that is about it.
13
                   And then we revise the list and I
14
         guess continuous disinfection and  the other
15
         things all apply.
16
                   All right, if we--
17
                   Pardon me.
18
                   MR. MORTON:  This is still Federal
19                                  :
         installations you are referring to?
20
                   MR. STEIN:  No, no, no,  let me go
21
         on to the next phase.
22
                   The Federal Government will provide
23
         a comparable list for Federal installations.
24
                   MR. MORTON:  The reason I raise the
25

-------
   	3592

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         question  is  because  of the  dateline  of
 3
         December  '72 and  I don't  think we  can  stand by
 4
         on that score in  view of  the  fact  that  we  had
 5
         special legislation  passed  by the  State Legis-
 6
         lature in October of 1967 which  requires an
 7
         earlier date for  action.
 8
                    MR. POOLE:  As  I  understood  the
 9
         Chairman,  this would apply  to us and also  that
10
         this  list you will coine in  with  will be more
11
         like  the  one you  had in your  water quality
12
         standard  reports  and then you may  have  a date
13
         after each specific  installation?
14
                    MR. STEIN:  That  is correct.
15
                    MR. POOLE:  And then we  can  come to
16
         a decision as to  whether  that longest  date is
17
         too long  or not,  is  the way I interpret what
18
         he has said.
19
                    MR. STEIN:  That  is correct.
20
                    MR. KLASSEN:  In  other words, Mr.
21
         Chairman,  Just  to clarify this for Illinois,
22
         on #9 we  are to  submit, then, the  list of
23
         industries that  are  involved? I asked yester-
24
         day that  all of  the  industries be  removed from
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         the list if we are going to hold to the '72
 3
         date, because we have a shorter time.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  No, we would expect
 5
         each industry with its time—
 6
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Right.
 7
                   MR. STEIN:  --but if any industry
 8
         came in with a time longer than 1972, I
 9
         would expect that some very pointed questions
10
         would be asked by the Conferees.
11
                   MR. KLASSEN:  All right.
12
                   MR. OEMING:  But we have to justify
13
         it.
14
                   MR. STEIN:  That is right.
15
                   May we go on then?
16
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:  Did we get his question
17~
         settled about the intrastate?
18
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes,  I- indicated in
19
         that that the State would indicate whether it
20
         was intra- or' interstate.
21
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:  I see.  So it will be
22

         a complete listing, then?

                   MR. OEMING:  And it will include those
24

         that we consider adequate, now.
25

-------
                                                        359^-

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                    MR. STEIN:  Adequate,  surely.
 3
                    MR. SCHNEIDER:  And  it will  also
 4
         indicate whether  it is intrastate or not.
 5
                    MR. OEMING:  That  is right,  yes.
 6
                    MR. SCHNEIDER:  0. K.
 7

 8
                    RECOMMENDATIONS #13  AND #14
 9

10
                    MR. STEIN:  Now let's go on  with 12,
11
         which  is now 13,  we are  on page 3-
12
                    "The  Federal Water Pollution Control
13
         Administration  meet with the Atomic Energy
14
         Commission and  other  interested parties  to
15
         develop guidelines for pollution control from
16
         nuclear ^powerplants,, with special attention
17
         given  as to how radioactive  wastes and heat
18
         discharges affect Lake Michigan and its
19
         tributaries.  A report is to be given  to the
20
         Conferees  within  six  months."
21
                    Let me  read the next one, too.  Maybe
22
         we  can take these both.  I don't know  why we
23
         have got two here.
24
                    "The  Federal Water Pollution Control
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          Administration and  the  State  pollution control
 3
          agencies,  in  cooperation with power companies,
 4
          conduct  a  special study as  to how thermal dis-
 5
          charges  affect the  aquatic  environment of the
 6
          lake,  especially as they might relate to en-
 7
          couraging  undesirable growths of algae.   Results
 8
          of  the study  are to be  provided the Conferees
 9
          in  one year."
10
                    Are there any comments on this?
11
                    MR. OEMING:   Excuse me, go ahead,
12
          Clarence.
13
                    MR. KLASSEN:   Very  definitely.  And
14
          on  the first  one, I don't know why the States
15
          have been  dealt out of —
16
                    MR. STEIN:  That  is right.
17
                    MR. KLASSEN:   --this developing of
18
          guidelines.   The State  of Illinois has a
19
          legal  responsibility--
20
                    MR. OEMING:   Yes.
21
                    MR. KLASSEN:   --under a radiation
22
          protection act,  and I don't know about the
23
          rest of  the States,  but the State of Illinois
24
          wants  to be included in developing these
25

-------
                   	     3396

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         guidelines.
 3
                   MR. OEMING:  Michigan  does  too.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  That's why I  read  them
 5
         both  together.
 6
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:  Wonderful.
 7
                   MR. STEIN:  That  is why I said let's
 8
         take  them both.
 9
                   MR. OEMING:  Since when did you get
10
         so backward?
11
                   MR. STEIN:  Wait  a minute.   Is that
12
         your  comment?
13
                   MR. KLASSEN:   Yes, that is  my  comment.
14
                   MR. STEIN:  Let's go,  if we are  going
15
         to continue.
16
                   MR. OEMING:  Mr.  Chairman,  the thing
17
         that  troubles me, I think,  is that we are  going
18
         to have before us within the next two or three
19
         months under our procedure  statements of new
20
         use on some of these plants.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.
22
                   MR. OEMING:  And we have got to  act
23
         on them under our statute within 60 days.   Now,
24
         what  do we do?  I mean with this six  months
25

-------
iin.
                                      	3397

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         report and then some decisions to be made
 3
         here,  how do we act on this?
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  Let me make this  comment,  agaj.n,
 5
         to cut through this.  I am all in favor of
 6
         reports when we have to do a report.  I think
 7
         Mr.  McLean went home, didn't he?  I went
 8
         through this temperature stuff when it came
 9
         up last time very thoroughly with our experts
10
         in Washington, and I think the notion is
11
         pretty clear, at least I feel competent to
12
         give you this because it is not that complicated.
13
                   Here is what they say.  That with the
14
         thermbcline in the lake--that is going down to
15
         a strata  where you can get relatively cool
16
         water—the question of temperature control for
17
         Cooling water in the lake should not be a very
18
         difficult one if we use the proper approach and
19
         proper planning.  Now, cooling towers are one
20
         thing, but we sometimes get an esthetic reaction
21
         to cooling towers and they are expensive.  The
22
         notion is that you can do this in a lake without
23
         having cooling towers if you take your water
24
         down at the proper strata and run it through.
25

-------
                                                        3598

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    Their notion is,  too, if you are
 3
          going  to  go without cooling towers and use
 4
          the  cooler stratas  of water and rely on mixing^--
 5
          and  I  have been through this in various parts
 6
          of the lake with them—they say that you should
 7
          have a maximum rise of three degrees tempera-
 8
          ture within a 200-foot radius of the outfall.
 9
          And  if you are going to use it for mixing,
10
          you  do this and you raise it up, it is not
11
          going  to  work anyway because you^-need this.
12
                    Now, if we know this now and these
13
          are  the facts, I think we are on our way
14
          toward a  conclusion on thermal pollution
15
          which  may be very important to the lake.
16
                    They also agree that this will
17
          materially affect the lake  from heat damage  and
18
          deleterious effects on algal growth, and so
19
          forth.
20
                    Now, are  there any comments on that?
21
          I don't know, if we are that far ahead, why
22
          do we  need a year's study?
23
                    MR. POSTON:  I think if you are Just

          going  to  have 200 feet out  there, that is one
25

-------
   	3599

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         thing, but I question whether a billion
 3
         gallons of water a day pumped into  one place
 4
         is going to dissipate 20 degrees  of tempera-
 5
         ture in 200 feet.
 6
                   MR. PURDY:  This is ray  point, Wally,
 7
         that the last big reactor that I  know about
 8
         will use about 2,000 cubic feet per second
 9
         of water for cooling purposes.  Now, 200 feet
10
         out from the outlet you might just  as well
11
         say the outlet.
12
                   MR.' POSTON:  Yes.
13
                   MR. PURDY:  This is nothing.
14
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:  This is as big as
15
         the flow from the Grand River.
16
                   MR. OEMING:  Bigger.
17
                   MR. PURDY:  This represents the
18
         average flow from the Grand River.   The fact
19
         is a study is being made now to relate how
20
         the flow from the Grand River and the heat
21
         flow from the Grand River dissipated in Lake
22
         Michigan, because the Grand River had roughly
23
         a 20-degree temperature increment over that
24
         of the lake naturally during certain periods
25

-------
   	3600
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          of  the  year and its flow is about 2,000 cubic
 3
          feet  per second.   And some of the initial
 4
          studies indicate  that you can find the Grand
 5
          River in Lake  Michigan by temperature along
 6
          some  6  miles from the mouth.
 7
                    So when we talk about 200 feet, it
 8
          is  nothing.
 9
                    MR.  STEIN:  Well, all right.
10
                    MR.  POSTON:  I would submit also
11
          that  in certain areas of the  lake that it
12
          isn't over 25,  35 feet deep where they will
13
          take  this  out  and the thermocline will be
14
          below that.
15
                    MR.  STEIN:  Well, they can put a
16
          pipe  out then.
17
                    MR.  POSTON:  No, it is too far--
18
                    .MR.  OEMING:  Mr. Chairman, without
19
          getting into design details-here, I think my

          concern is whether or not these two recbmmen-
21
          dations represent an obstacle that is sufficient
22
          to  await the results of these studies before
23
          any development goes on.

                    MR.  STEIN:  Let me  try to reframe
25

-------
   	36oi

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         it if you have these points on this stuff.
 3
         And again what we are going to be faced with,
 4
         and Mr. Oeming points out, is just that in
 5
         Michigan and Minnesota on the atomic energy
 6
         reactor there the people are faced right now
 7
         with the notion of whether they are going to
 8
         permit the discharge of the wastes or have
 9
         a closed system.
10
                   May I suggest this, to try to get
11
         around this, that the States and the Depart-
12
         ment of the Interior set up a special committee
13
         on dealing with both nuclear discharge and the
14                                          .
         thermal pollution aspects of powerplants and
15
         reactors, that this group meet with the Atomic
16
         Energy Commission and other interested parties
17
         to develop, if possible, guidelines for pollu-
18
         tion control from nuclear powerplants, and
19
         this group pay special attention to thermal
20
         discharges which affect the aquatic environment
21
         of the lake.   .  ,  Now  a representative of
22
         the group or perhaps the State representative
23
         of this group should be able to appear at any
24
         hearing that comes up in any State  and
25

-------
   	3662

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          reflect the latest thinking of the group when
 3
          the  hearing comes up within the next year.
 4
          I  think if you are going to fool with this
 5
          on a case-by-case basis, we are going to
 6
          be faced with real hard questions of whether
 7
          we are going to have a closed system or an
 8
          open system and permit this material to run
 9
          back into the lake at all,  or what kind of
10
          thermal pollution we are going to have.  Each
11
          one  is going to be a battle.
12
                    I would suggest that the four States
13
          and  the Department of the Interior get together
14
          and  that we have a relatively unified position
15
          during the next year as we  are hopefully
16
          developing the guidelines.
17
                    MR. OEMING:  Well, Mr. Chairman, I
18
          think your suggestion is a  good one, that is
19
          to establish a committee that would be a very
20
          active committee.
21
                    MR. STEIN:  Yes.
22
                    MR. OEMING:  It has got to be
23
          active because we have impending right now
24
          construction.
25

-------
   ^__	3603

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.
 3
                   MR. POSTON:  Now, let's get at this
 4
         in detail a little bit.  Would you say that
 5
         the FWPCA head this up and then each of the
 6
         States provide a man for this committee?
 7
                   MR. STEIN:  We would do that.  I
 8
         would suggest when we come back next Tuesday
 9
         we all have -nominees, and this committee be
10
         active for discussions with the AEC to develop
11
         guidelines, discussions among themselves as
12
         to what studies are needed, and mutual dis-
13
         cussions so they can get you the latest
14
         information reflecting all the views for
15
         any decisions or hearings you may have during
16
         the next year.     At the first progress
17
         meeting they should at least give us a report as
18
         to what they found and how long it is going
19
         to take them before they are going to be able
20
         to come up with relatively definitive suggestions
21
         or recommendations to the Conferees.
22
                   MR. OEMING:  This would be helpful
23
         to me.
24
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
25

-------
                                       	3604

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR. QBMING:  I don't know how the
 3
          rest of them feel.
 4
                    MR. STEIN:  If this is agreeable,  ,
 5
          we will try to get a knowledgeable man and
 6
          you put one on.  I suspect that given the
 7              •               '
          contacts we have to make and the travel and
 8
          the money involved, it might be best if a
 9
          Federal man were chairman, although I don't
10
          object if a State man is chairman'.
11
                    MR. OEMING:  No, 1^-
12
                    MR. STEIN:  That is just a chore.
13
                    MR. KLASSEN:  How is this going to
14
          fit in with Senator Muskie's committee and
15
          his investigations and hearings?
16
                    MR. OEMING:  He is on another tack, it
17
          seems to me, Clarence--
18
                    MR. STEIN:  Yes.
19
                    MR. OEMING: --on the statutory powers
20
          of the AEC, and so on.
21
                    MR. STEIN:  Yes.
22
                    MR. OEMING:  What we are trying to
23
          do here is resolve the questions now that are
24
          immediate to the States--
25

-------
                                        	3605
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  Here, let's go--
 3
         pardon me.
 4
                   MR. OEMING: --and to get some sense
 5
         here so when a State comes back and says we
 6
         are going to require so-and-so, there is some
 7
         assurance that everybody is agreed that this
 8
         is all right.
 9
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Today.
10
                   MR. OEMING:  This is what I am talking
11
         about, today.
12
                   MR. STEIN:  Let's go off the record.
13
                   (Off the record.)
14
                   MR. STEIN:  To get back on the record,
15
         I think our view as pollution control agencies
16
         is broader  than that.  We know we are.interested
17
         in both thermal pollution and the nuclear dis-
18
         charge.  For us, we don't have that problem.
19
         In other words, you are going to consider both
20
         aspects in  any plant.
21
                  MR. KLASSEN:  This brings my next
22
         question.  On these hearings that you are
23
         talking about, which, of course, are all right to
24
         get at the  issues, is this going to be limited
25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          to  thermal pollution or are we going to get into
 3
          nuclear?
 4
                    •MR. STEIN:  Nuclear.
 5
                    MR. OEMING:   Yes.
 6
                    MR. STEIN:  I hope so.   This is a
 7
          State  hearing.  Wait a moment, now,  Clarence.
 8
          The hearings I was talking about  are State
 9
          hearings  and you set the rules for those.  What
10
          I was  suggesting is that this committee would
11
          be  valuable in bringing the latest material and
12
          evidence  to you.
13
                    We are not setting the  rules for those
14
          hearings.  Presumably when any plant comes in to
15
          you, into the State of Illinois,  whether it is
16
          a nuclear reactor or any other one,  and they
17
          are going to discharge a waste, they are going
18
          to  have to get a permit from you.  If you want
19
          to  hold a hearing, this committee will be avail-
20
          able to give you the information.
21
                    But you are setting the rules in the
22
          hearing in Illinois, not us.
23
                    MR. KLASSEN:  0. K., that is all I
24
          want to know.
25

-------
                                                        3607
 l




 2




 3




 4




 5




 6




 7




 8




 9




10




11




12




13




14




15




16




17




18




19




20




21




22




23




24




25
at it.
of that.
now.
    EXECUTIVE SESSION






MR. STEIN:  All right.




MR. OEMING:  That is the way I look








MR. KLASSEN:  That will take care








MR. STEIN:  Right.




MR. OEMING:  We are agreed on that








MR. STEIN:  Yes.








   RECOMMENDATION #15
          MR. STEIN:  Fifteen, dredging.  Here



we go.  If we get by this, we will make it.



         "Dumping of polluted dredgings into



Lake Michigan basin waters be prohibited.  All



dredgings are to be considered polluted unless



the Department of the Interior and the States



involved certify otherwise."



          MR. KLASSEN:  Two questions.



          MR. STEIN:  Yes, sir.



          MR. KLASSEN:  "Be prohibited": one,



by whom?  Second  question, does this supersede

-------
   	3608

 I                       EXECUTIVE SESSION



 2
          the  agreement between the Corps of Engineers

 3
          and  the  Department of the Interior?

 4
                    MR. STEIN:   Well,  here,  I will answer

 5                    '            •       '           •
          your first question first because  I think I can

 6
          answer  that.

 7                       '      -        ••'"'.
                    As  far as I know,  the Corps of Engineers

 8
          has  statutory authority to do this dredging, and

 9
          as a consequence to dispose  of the dredging s.

10
                    As  far as I know,  that is a Federal


          function.   I  don't think that the  State has

12
          any  power  to  prohibit them.   We certainly in

13
          the  Department of the Interior don't.  The

14                          .
          only one that can govern the Federal dredging

15
          of the  Corps  of Engineers is the Congress that

16
          puts out the  law, and anything else you are

17
          going to say  on that might be rhetoric, but those

18
          are  the  facts.

io
                    0.  K.

20
                    Now, I do not think that we are here

21
          to supersede  the agreement between the Depart-

22
          ment of  the Interior,  at least the Federal

23
          people  aren't, and the Corps of Engineers.  If

24
          we were, we would be exceeding our authority.

25

-------
                                                         3609

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         This agreement was made at the Secretarial
 3
         level, and I don't think it is for us  to  even
 4                                 -      .
         consider that.
 5
                   MR. KLASSEN:  In other words, this

 6
         is a policy type of recommendation by.  these

 7
         Conferees, what we are saying here.

 8
                   The other question I asked is,

 9
         according to my interpretation of this, this

10
         "certify otherwise", in other words it would

11
         take "all dredgings are considered polluted

12
         unless the Department of the Interior  and the

13
         States of Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois and
14
         Indiana, the five, certify otherwise"?
15
                   MR. STEIN:  No, I--
16
                   MR. KLASSEN:  That is the way you
17
         read it.
18
                   MR. STEIN:  That is the way  I read it.

19
         You know, I saw a preliminary draft of this--
20
         and again I ask you, Clarence, if we are  going
21
         to finish by noon, let's try to be very lenient
22
         on this drafting.
23
                   I think what they meant, the way I think
24                          _        •.                .
         it would have to be to make sense, that the
25

-------
   	3610


 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
         appropriate  State  and  the  State involved,  was it.

 3
         I don't  know that  you  can  put  It "all  dredgings


         be considered polluted," but  "dumping  of  polluted


         dredgings into Lake Michigan  waters  be prohibited,"

 B
         if you want  to make  that as  a  policy  statement,

 7
         and that  the Corps of  Engineers is  to have the

 8
         advice of  the appropriate  State and the  Depart-

 9
         ment of  the  Interior as  to the pollutional

10
         character  of any dredgings.  But I would  not

11
         imagine  that we would  go around for the  other


         three States  if someone wanted  to put  something

13
         in Illinois  waters.

14
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   That is what  this  state-

15
         ment says.

16
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes, it  does, but  I  don't

17
         think it was  meant that way.

18
                    MR.  KLASSEN: It  is going  to be redrafted

19
         for consideration?

20
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.

21
                    MR.  KLASSEN:  0. K.,  I will wait for

22
         the redraft,  then.

23
                    MR.  STEIN:  Are  there any other  comments?

24
                    MR.  OEMING:  Yes.

25

-------
   ^___	   .	3611

 !                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                   MR. MITCHELL:  Yes.

 3                             .
                   MR. OEMIHG:  Go ahead, Mr, Mitchell.

 4                     '           .  .   .      •
                   MR. MITCHELL:  You made one statement

 5
         that if carried a little bit farther doesn't seem

 6
         to be quite correct in my thinking, that the

 7
         Corps of Engineers has a right to dump polluted

 8
         dredging without worrying about any other agency's

 9
         obligations and responsibilities  under the law,

10
         was what you said, or at least could be inferred


         from what you said.  I am sure that that is not

12
         what you meant, is it?


                   MR. STEIN:  No, I don't think I said

14
         that.  The key question that--and I think Mr.

15
         Klassen was asking a key question here--the key

16
         question was prohibited by whom, who has the

17
         active statutory authority.  I was just directing

18
         myself to that as a legal operation.

19
                   Now, we have, and we go before the

20
         same committee of the Congress, worked with the

21
         Corps of Engineers for years.  The Corps of

22
         Engineers is very sensitive to that, and they

23
         don't operate without taking other agencies

24
         or States views into consideration.

25

-------
                                      	3612

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                    The only  thing we  are  talking in
 3
         terms  of was the question  of the bare  legal
 4
         power.  And I answered this.  That  is  how I
 5
         answered Mr. Klassen.
 6
                    But I fully agree  with you that we
 7
         have to work this out, and the Corps has  been
 8
         responsive to that  as far  as I can  see,  very
 9
         responsive to that, in the disposal of the
10
         dredgings in this area.
11
                    MR. KLASSEN:   I  also think,  Mr.
12
         Chairman,  the fact  that  we don't object to
13
         your statement doesn't necessarily  mean that
14
         we agree with it, because  in the State of
15
         Illinois we don't think  that the Corps of
16
         Engineers  can dump  anything  in the  waters
17
         in Illinois without a permit from the  State
18
         of Illinois.  So this is your  interpretation,
19
         and I  don't say it  is incorrect  or  not, but
20
         I just want this on the  record.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.   Well, I  think,
22
         Mr. Klassen, this is truev I hope we can  solve
23
         this question by avoiding  this,  because this
24
         has been—not just  in this area—this  has  been
25

-------
   	     . •      	;	3613

 !                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         on the record for many,many times. We have had

 3
         States when I worked for the Public Health


         Service that said we couldn't send a doctor

 5
         in there to practice unless he was licensed

 6
         in that State, and they firmly believed that.

 7
         I don't think they ever sustained it.

 8
                   But this is not the kind of productive

 9
         Federal-States rights issue to resolve a question

10
         on.  I think we can work this out.

11
                   Now, I have several questions to ask--

12
                   MR. OEMING:  You were going to

13
         recognize me.

14
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes, sir.

15
                   MR. OEMING:  Mr. Chairman and members

16
         of the conference,! think I am a little concerned

17
         about what we are talking about in the way of

18
         implementation, the effective date here.

19
                   MR. STEIN:  That is right.

20
                   MR. OEMING:  I was impressed with

21
         the presentation made by the Corps.  If we

22
         were accepting presentations from others, we

23
         would say this was a good proposal, a program

24
         proposal to take care of this matter.  And as I

25

-------
   	3614

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          understand it,  the  Corps of Engineers proposes
 3
          to  have  a report ready by December of this
 4
          year,  at which time they will have some firm
 5
          recommendations  to  make as to how they are going
 6
          to  handle this  dredging problem.
 7
                    Are  we saying here that we are washing
 8
          this whole thing out and saying immediately we
 9
          will not go for  any more dredgings?
10
                    MR.  STEIN:   That is the question I
11
          was going to ask.   If we are giving  the cities
12
          a deadline and  the  industries a time schedule,
13
          as  we  have to  do with everyone, I think we have
14
          to  afford the  Corps the same operation.
15
                    Now, may  I make this suggestion on
16
          dredging?   It  is not a simple one.   I think
17
          the Corps is moving ahead.
18
                    Can we ask the Corps to do what we
19
          are asking the States and the Federal Government
20
          with the other installations to do?   At the
21
          first  progress meeting in six months r and the
22
          Corps, we know,  is  working on this very hardT
23
          we will  ask them to make a  presentation to the
24
          Conferees  on their  program of dredging and
25

-------
                                       	3615

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         dumping in Lake Michigan.  We then will have
 3
         and the Conferees will have an opportunity to
 4
         deal with that in detail, you make your
 5
         determination whether you have some recommen-
 6
         dations or you can do it.
 7
                   As far as I can see, gentlemen, it is
 8
         the same kind of thing we are doing with  the
 9
         States and their industries and their cities/ and
10
         I think the Corps is entitled to exactly  the
11
         same consideration
12
                   MR. OEMING:  This, then, would  mean
13
         to me, Mr. Chairman, that "dumping of dredgings
14
         into Lake Michigan waters be prohibited"  would
15
         have to be modified, to some extent, then.
16
                   MR. STEIN:  We wouldn't come to that
17
         now.
18

                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.
19

                   MR. STEIN:  In other words, the answer
20

         would be here, analogous to one of the others,
21

         that the Corps at the first six months progress
22

         meeting will give us a detailed report on their

         policies and what they are going to do about
w4

         dredging in the lake.
25

-------
   	3616

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                    Yes.
 3
                    MR. KLASSEN:   I  can't buy that open
 4
         end--
 5
                    MR. STEIN:  All  right.
 6
                    MR. KLASSEN:   --blank check type  of
 7
         thing,  to  hear  in  six months what  the Corps
 8
         policies are.   I think it  is our responsibility
 9
         to lay  down what we as Conferees think the
10
         Corps policies  ought to  be  and  let them work
11
         in our  ball park instead of our  working in theirs.
12
                    MR. STEIN:  What  do you  think,that
13
         dumping of polluted--
14
                    MR. KLASSEN:   Give them  six months
15
         to come in with a  progress  report,  but tell
16
         them what we would like  to  see  them do.
17
                   MR. OEMING:  The  objective being  to
18
         ultimately get  rid of--
10
                   MR. KLASSEN:   The objective.
20

21
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.   Now.  is this
22
         sufficient as a target objective for you  in 15,
23
         considering the modification of the second  sen-
24
         tence that we talked about?  Is this  0. K.?
25

-------
  ^__	3617

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. KLASSEN:  What is the modification?
 3
                   MR. STEIN:   The modification is that
 4
         the pollutional characteristics of the dredgings
 5
         will be considered in—rather,  the Corps will
 6
         consult with the appropriate State and the
 7
         Department of the Interior as to the pollutional
 8
         characteristics of the dredgings.
 9
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Well, that is pretty
10
         fuzzy,  they are going to consult.
11
                   What we are concerned with, under
12
         Illinois law we can prohibit anything going
13
         into the lake that is going to  be, let's say,
14
         detrimental to the Chicago water supply.  At
15
         the present time it is questionable whether
16
         we  could prevent the  Corps from taking dredgings
17
         from Indiana and dumping it out there.  This
18
         right now is my concern. We don't  want this to
19
         take place while they are making this report.
20
                   MR. POOLE:   Well, I think I could answer
21
         that one.
22
                   We have got an understanding with the
23
         Corps that there will be no dredgings from the
24
         Indiana Harbor Canal  in 1968 disposed of in the
25

-------
   	3618

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          lake.   So the six months thing I don't think
 3
          will be in effect or in that specific a problem.

 4
                    MR. STEIN:  Mr.  Mitchell

 5
                    MR. MITCHELL:  Gen. Tarbox's statement

 6
          Indicates, Mr. Klassen, that the Corps plans

 7
          on placing no polluted dredged material in Lake

 8
          Michigan from Calumet and Indiana Harbors

 9
          during calendar year 1968.

10
                    MR. KLASSEN:  Let me ask an official

11
          question of the Federal Water Pollution Control

12
          Administration.  What is your current agreement,

13
          if any, with the Corps of Engineers on this subject)?

14
                    MR. STEIN:  Mr.  Poston?

15
                    MR. KLASSEN:  Written or verbal.

16
                    MR. POSTON:  At this time the Corps

17
          of Engineers have divided all of the dredging

18
          areas in Lake Michigan that they think might

19
          require dredging, and they have separated them
20
          into areas that are considered to be nonpollu-
21
          tional dredgingSj and areas that have polluted
22
          materials, and they have gone to the local
23
          agencies and to the States and asked for land
24
          locations where they can discharge this
25

-------
                	3619

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         dredged material on land.  And at some of these
 3
         p laces the polluted dredged materials will
 4
         be put on land.  This is the second classi-
 5
         fication.
 6
                   The third classification is polluted
 7
         dredged materials as to where they think they
 8
         are going to have to dredge, and we have indi-
 9
         cated to them that they are polluted dredged
10
         materials and our recommendations have been
11
         that they should not be dumped in the lake.
12
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr. Morton.
13
                   MR. POSTON:  Col. Barnes is here.  I
14
         think--
15
                   MR. STEIN:  Wait.
16
                   Do you have a question?
17
                   MR. MORTON:   No.
18
                   MR. POSTON:  He might want to comment
19
         on that.
20
                   Is that about the status?
21
                   COL. BARNES:   There is one category
22
         I  think you have left out,  and that was the
23
         category where the material was polluted where
24
         it was essential to the economy as determined
25

-------
                                                         3620

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          by  the  Governor of the State that that—or by.
 3
          the  State,  rather,  local people,  that the
 4
          harbor  had  to be dredged and we had no place
 5
          to  put  it..
 6
                   Now,  we have recognized the problems
 7
          in  the  Chicago  area and are  going to stick by
 8
          what we have  previously said we are going to do
 9
          in  this area.
10
                   MR.  POSTON:   Well,  I  referred to this
11
          as the  third  category,  the last category,  and
12
          we have not given any  approval  on that.
13
                   COL.  BARNES:   I know  you have  not.
14
          But that  still—O.K.
15
                   ,MR. KLASSEN:   I think this  is  important,
16
          Colonel.  You said  the  Governor or the  State  or
17
          the local people, and  then stick  by what you
18
          stated  for the  Chicago  area.  Could you  restate
19
         what you  stated for  the  Chicago area?   I would
20
          like to know this.
21
                   COL.  BARNES:   We have no plans  to
22
         dump any. polluted materials in  Lake Michigan  into
23
         the Chicago area, either in Indiana waters or-
24
         in Illinois waters.
25

-------
   	3621

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Over what period?
 3
                   COL. BARNES:  In  '68.  Beyond  that
 4
         we don't know yet.  But we will probably have
 5
         the results of our pilot program by  then and
 6
         can better Judge what we are going to  do in  '69.
 7
                   MR. KLASSEN:  0. K.
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  Are we satisfied?
 9
                   MR. POSTON:  Mr. Klassen,  I  think
10
         there is some rock excavation in the Calumet
11
         Harbor that is to be dredged.
12
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
13
                   MR. POSTON:  Removed.
14
                   MR. STEIN:  Gen* Tarbox spoke  about
15
         that at the last meeting.
16
                   MR. POSTON:  Right.
17
                   MR. STEIN:  Did you hear that?
18
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Yes.
19
                   MR. STEIN:  But they consider  that
20
         nonpollutional.
21
                   MR. MORTON:  You mentioned Calumet
22
         Harbor.  By that do you mean Calumet Harbor
23
         in Illinois or Calumet Harbor in Indiana?
24
                   MR. STEIN:  I think he meant Illinois.
25

-------
   	.	.	3622

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  POSTON:  I  think he  meant Illinois.
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   You never  like to para-
 4
          phrase  anyone  else,  but as I  recall what Gen.
 5
          Tarbox  said, there were a couple  of rock out-
 6
          croppings  that he is  shaving  off  and getting
 7           '  • •      •          '                     . •
          in  and  these are  relatively innocuous.   But
 8
          other than that,  no  material  is  being dumped,
 9
          as  far  as  I understand, won't be  dumped for
10
          this  year,  and that  is as far as  the Corps
11
          program is going.
12
                    So I think we can adopt this  procedure
13
          and get the report from the Corps, and  during
14
          the interim time  you are  not  going to have your^
15
          water supply endangered because  nothing is going
16
          in.   0. K.?
17

18
                      RECOMMENDATION #16
19

20
                    MR.  STEIN:   Let us  move on to 16, water-
21
          craft.
22
                    "The  four States adopt uniform
23
          requirements controlling  the  discharge  of
24
          wastes  from watercraft.   It is  further
25

-------
   	3623

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2                                                '
          recommended  that  all  marinas  and other
 3
          installations  serving watercraft be  required
 4
          to  provide the proper disposal  facilities.
 5
          This  recommendation shall  take  effect by
 6
          March 1969."
 7
                   MR.  POOLE:   Mr.  Chairman.
 8
                   MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
 9
                   MR.  POOLE: .  I  am in sympathy with
10
          the first two  sentences  of the  recommendation.
11
          The Indiana  Boating Law  specifically exempts
12
          Lake  Michigan  from our boating  requirement.
13
          Now,  our legislature  doesn't  meet until January
14
          1969  and it  adjourns  from  about the  10th until
15
          about the middle  of March.
16
                   So here is  Poole  again raising this
17
          question of  dates, but we  Just  can't make/that
18
          date.
19
                   MR.  STEIN:   What  date do you want?
20
                   MR.  POOLE:   We' need an authorization
21
          from  the Governor to  recommend  amendments to
22
          the Indiana Boating Law, and  this  will be done.
23
          We are going to recommend  it  to the  appropriate
24
          committee next Wednesday.   But  we  can't comply
25

-------
   	     -  	3624



 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION



 2




 3         with the  sense,  of  this recommendation.



 4                   MR. STEIN:  How would you change



 5         it?  Whit amendment would you  suggest?




 6                   MR. MITCHELL:  I  don't  think  that



 7         this committee  ought  to tell a legislature



 8         that they have  to  pass the  law.   You  might



 9         require the States tb propose  such legis-



10         lation.




11                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.



12                   MR. MITCHELL:  And we can propose



13         it come Wednesday  morning.



14                   MR. STEIN:  Well, I  would agree



15         with you, because  this is going to come up



16         again.



17                   Well, shall we say that the first



18         two sentences are  a policy  operation  and that



19         the four State  water  pollution control  agencies



20         make appropriate legislative recommendations



21         either to their—I don't know  how you do it--



22         either to the Governor or the  legislature.



23



24



25

-------
   	3623

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                    0. K.?
 3
                    MR. OEMING:  Well,  it could be the
 4
          other way, Mr.  Chairman.
 5
                    MR. STEIN:   Yes.
 6
                    MR. OEMING:  You  could .say that the
 7
          States  take  such  steps as are necessary to
 8
          control  the  discharge  from  watercraft and to
 9
          see  that  the marinas are provided with
10
          facilities to take  care.
11
                    MR. STEIN:   Here  is what we are
12
          getting  at,  and we  listened to these people.
13
          I  think  there is  a  point on this uniformity
"
          on your  lake.
15
                    MR. OEMING:  Oh,  yes,  uniformity.
16
                    MR. STEIN:   The boaters say, you
17
          know, they take a boat from one  State to
18
          another  and  they  are on  the lake, and I think
19
          for  the  ease of all administration we would
20
          be--
21
                    MR. OEMING:  Put  uniform" in there.
22
                    MR. STEIN:   Yes.
23
                    MR. OEMING:  0. K.   But my point,

          Mr.  Chairman, is  that  it may not be necessary
25

-------
   ^______	3626

 I                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          to  require  by  statute  the marinas  to  do  this.

 3
                   Now, we  are  not in Michigan.   We are

 4              '
          meeting  with the marinas.  They will  provide

 5
          the facilities, there  isn't any question about

 6
          it,  and  whatever you say you are going to re-

 7
          quire.

 8
                   I think  whatever steps are  necessary

 9
          to  get it,  whether it  is by statute or by--

10
                   MR.  STEIN:   I understand what  you

11
          mean.  The  difficulty  that Mr. Poole  has is

12
          this.  You  take the first two  sentences: you

13
          may not  have to do it  by statute;  they do.  The

14
          point is, if he has to do it by statute  and we

15
          impose a date  on him,  we can easily set  a date

16
          when we  do  this by administrative  order, but

17
          how do you  do  that with a legislature, Larry?

18
                   MR.  OEMING:  Yes.  Well, I  was getting

19
          off the  legislative kick onto  being required to

20
          take whatever  steps are necessary, whether it

21
          is  statutory—

22
                   MR.  STEIN:   How would you do this?

23
          Would you strike the last sentence?

24
                   MR.  OEMING:  No.  That is, "it  is

25

-------
                                                         3627

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         further recommended that the States  take
 3
         whatever measures are necessary  to assure
 4
         that marinas provide"--
 5
                   MR. STEIN:  No, no,  "This  recommen-
 6
         dation shall take effect by"--
 7
                   MR. OEMING:  Oh,  the  "take effect"
 8
         thing?  Well, this they have got to  iron out.
 9
         Ours is taken care of.  I don't  have any problem
10
         there.
11
                   MR. POOLE:  I am  not quibbling.
12
         The quicker it  can take effect the better
13
         I will be pleased, except I--
14
                   MR. OEMING:  I would like  to see
15
         1970, as far as we are concerned, because  that
16
         is what our regulation says now.
17
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Mr. Chairman,  may  I
18
         make a suggestion?
19
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
20
                   MR. KLASSEN:  That they immediately--
21
         and I am implementing the first  sentence--
22
         immediately the four States get  together  to
23
         see if we can--and I think  we  can--come up with
24
         some uniform regulations, and  I  am saying
25

-------
   	3628

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          regulations  in the  broad sense, so that all four
 3
          States  have  the same  regulations.
 4
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.   Kow about that?
 5
                    Let's try this,  that the four States
 6
          get  together.   And  I  think the important thing
 7
          here really  is uniformity.
 8
                    MR.  OEMING:   I think so.
 9
                    MR.  STEIN:   The  four States get
10
          together coming up  with uniform regulations.
11
                    How  long  would this take, six months,
12
          do you  think,  to do this?
13
                    MR.  KLASSEN:  Oh, no, no, no.  I think
14
          we could do  it in the next 30 days.
15
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right, within the
16
          next 30 days.   Is this reasonable?
17
                    MR.  PGOLE:   No,  my calendar is full
18
          the  next 30  days except for next Tuesday.
10
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes,  I know.  Well, I
20
          hope not next  Tuesday.
21
                    All  right,  we will give you 60 days.
22
          But  why don't  you come up in the next 60 days
23
          with uniform requirements?
24
                    Now, at the end of those 60 days,
25

-------
   ,	3629

 I                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         would you in addition to coming up with the

 3
         uniform requirements on this--how about Illinois,

 4                             -     -                 .
         since you are so far advanced, taking the

 5
         chairmanship of this and let's have a--you

 6
         don't want it?

 7
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Oh, yes, yes.  Modesty

 8
         Isn't one of our virtues.

 9
                   MR. STEIN:  I know that.  All right.

10
                   (Laughter.)

11
                   MR. POSTON:  Is the--

12
                   MR. STEIN:  And the Federal people

13
         will be there with you, I hope—

14
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Well, don't leave this

15
         yet, Mr. Chairman.

16
                   MR. POOLE:  We are not going to.

17
                   MR. STEIN:  Wait.  Wait.

18
                   MR. KLASSEN:  The next thing, the

19
         Federal people be there to tell us what the

20
         Federal Government is doing on interstate

21
         traffic.
22
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  They can say that
23
         real fast.
24
                   MR. KLASSEN:  0. K.
25

-------
   	'         	3630

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    (Laughter.)
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
 4
                    MR.  POSTON:   Go ahead.
 5                 .
                    MR.  POOLE:   I don't want you to
 6
          depart  too far here  from sentences 1 and 2
 7
          of Recommendation  15,  now,  by Just rubbing
 8
          all  that out and saying the States get
 9
          together--
10
                    MR.  STEIN:   No, no, no,  no.
11
                    MR.  POOLE:   --and unify  a program.
12
                    MR.  STEIN:   No, no, no,  no.
13
                    MR.  POOLE:   That  is the  first thing.
14
                    The  second  thing  is that you can't!
15
          participate in it  as  one State representative.
16
          I want  to  propose  that we turn around  and
17
          recommend  the  same damned thing to you as far
18
          as commercial  vessels  are concerned as we are
19
          recommending to the  States  on this general
20
          watercraft thing,  because I am firmly  convinced
21
          that the only  feasible and  practicable way  to
22
          control commercial vessels  is through  the
23
          Federal establishment.
24
                    MR.  OEMING:   Amen.
25

-------
   	    .	3631


 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION



                   MR. STEIN:  All  right.   Now,  if

 3
         all  the States agree with  that,  this  is---1  am


         not  sure you do.


 6                  MR. OEMING:  I do.

 6
                   MR. STEIN:  I  haven't  heard from


         Wisconsin.

 g
                   MR. KLASSEN:   Not  only agree,  but--

 9
                   MR. HOLMER:  I beg your pardon?

10
                   MR. STEIN:  Do you agree with these


         other  three States  that  the  Federal Government

12
         should try  to assume the regulation of commercial


         vessels?

14
                   MR. OEMING:  Vessels in interstate

15
         commerce is what we are  talking  about,  commercial,

16
         cargo carriers.

17
                   MR. STEIN:  Do you want to  put that

18
         in here?

19
                   MR. POOLE:  I  thought  we discussed

20
         this earlier as to  whether or not that you  as

21
         Federal Conferees can be involved in  a recom-

22
         mendation that involves  Federal  legislation.

23
                   MR. STEIN:  No,  but we—

24
                   MR. POOLE:  And  if you can't--

25

-------
                	3632

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    Yes,  I want to put It in as one of
 3
          the  recommendations  of the  four State Conferees.
 4
                    MR.  STEIN:   Right.  All right.
 5
          You  can put this in,"Commensurate requirements
 6
          controlling the discharge of wastes from  com-
 7
          mercial vessels be adopted  by the Federal
 8
          Government." And I don't know that you have
 9
          to put  this in terms  of legislation.   Maybe
10
          we can  do-- Now,  we  can say that within  60
11
          days  the States and  the Federal Government
12 j
          will  report on what  our program is to do  it.
13
          Now,  you can either  do this by regulation or
14
          by seeking legislation or something of that kind.
15
                    Let  me again give you the problem that
16
          we have in the  Federal level with this.   One,
17
          this  has to be  legislation  and getting a  bill
18
          through the Congress.  Secondly,  it is relatively
19
          easy  to control an American boat  or an American
20
          ship, but what  we  are dealing with on the Federal
21
          level--and,  Mr. Poole, you  know I have been
22
          working for this • every time I try at this--
23
          what  you are dealing  with on the  Federal  level
24
          is you  are dealing with foreign boats, and we
25

-------
                                      	3633

 1                .      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         always have  this battle  with the  merchant
 3
         marine, any  time you begin  getting  strin-
 4
         gent on American flag vessels  for whatever
 5
         reason, waste disposal,  sanitary  facilities,
 6
         safety facilities, you suddenly find  a
 7
         fleeing of the registry  from the  United
 8
         States registry to another  registry,  and
 9
         you wonder what you have accomplished.
10
         And then you may be thrown  back on  the
11
         notion that  the only way you are  going to
12
         get this is by treaty, and  this is  a  very,
13
         very involved question for  us.
14
                   MR. POOLE:  I  understand  that.  But
15
         I don't want the_ f our States here to  come up
16
         with legislation and have to follow through
17
         and in addition to the City of Chicago having
18
         a representative over on the St.  Lawrence
19
         Seaway to catch the boats that are  coming into
20
         the Port of Chicago for  the States  of Indiana
21
         and Michigan and Illinois and Wisconsin to have
22
         representatives sitting  over there  to catch
23
         them that happen to be coming in.   This is
24
         why I say that regardless of the  complications--
25

-------
   	3634

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right,
 3
                    MR.  OEMING:   This is as--
 4
                    MR.  POSTON:   Mr.  Chairman,  the
 5                '              .'..'•
          Recommendation #15 on  watercraft  is intended
 6
          to  imply that  the type of ordinance or regu-
 7
          lations  would  eliminate anything  but  holding
 8
          tanks  or incinerators,  some type  of treatment
 9
          or  holding that would  eliminate discharge to
10
          the lake.   And I wanted to  make sure  whether
11
          everybody else understood this.
12
                    MR.  STEIN:   Well, that  is Recommendation
13
          #16, and if it implies  that I don't read it in that
W
          at  all.
15
                    MR.  OEMING:   It has got to  be restated.
16
                    MR.vSTEIN:   What  is in  here that would
17
          give us  even the glimmer of that  indication?
18
                    MR.  POSTON:   The  fact that  we require
19
          land facilities was the--
20
                    MR.  OEMING:   I think it needs to be
21
          restated if that is what you mean.
22
                    MR.  STEIN:   No.  If you mean that,
23
          and I  don't know that  the Conferees want to
24
          come to  that Judgment  now,  I would like the
25

-------
   	3635

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         Conferees of the States, and this was  the
 3
         point of that two-month meeting  that Mr.
 4
         Klassen points out, I would like the States
 5
         to get together when you talk about uniform
 6
         requirements and see if you can meet this
 7
         issue.  But I don't read the implication in
 8
         here.
 9
                   MR. OEMING:   Mr. Chairman,  apropos
10
         of all this, I Just want to report here that
11
         at the conference Michigan stated that it would
12
         have regulations in effect by June of  '68.
13
         The regulation has now been adopted, and we
14
         may be a little bit before the fact here, I
15
         don't know what this means, what this  implies
16
         in the way of a change in our regulations, but
17
         I just want to throw this out so that  we--
18
                   And we are adopting what Wally Poston
19
         has said, no discharges overside from—well,
20
         except at the present time we have excepted
21
         macerator chlorinators.  This is what  you are
22
         even--
23
                   MR. KLASSEN:  You have excepted not

         accepted?
25

-------
   	3636

 1                      EXECUTIVE SES'SION

 2
                    MR.  OEMING:   We have not accepted.
 3
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   You have not accepted.
 4
                    MR.  OEMING:   They will not be approved
 5
          as  of now.
 6
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   In other words, what
 7
          you are saying,  and I  think this is something--
 8
          I know there are a lot  of boating people here
 9
          that have been waiting  for these Conferees to
10
          come up with something.  As I understand
11
          Michigan's position, you favor the so-called
12
          model boating ordinance without approval of
13
          the macerator chlorinator?
14
                    MR.  OEMING:   That is correct.
15
                    MR.  KLASSEN!   So do we.
16
                    MR.  POSTON:   Without discharge overside?
17
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Without discharge overside.
18
                    MR.  POOLE:   I think so do we, except that
19
          I';don't: know what is going to be available five
20
          years from now,  and--
21
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   That is right.  That is
22
          right, neither do we.
23
                    MR.  STEIN:  How about, are you the
24
          same way?
25

-------
   	3637

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.
 3
                   MR. STEIN:  I don't know that—
 4
                   MR. KLASSEN:  The model act leaves
 5
         it open.
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
 7
                   MR. KLASSEN:: This is why, Mr. Chairman,
 8
         I don't think this is going to take long for us
 9
         to get together.
10
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.
11
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Because I think all
12
         the States--! don't want to speak for all of
13
         them--but are pretty much in agreement that
14
         sometime in the future there may be some approved
15
         methods--
16
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
17
                   MR. KLASSEN:  --but right now there is
18
         not, and the macerator chlorinator that has been
19
         promoted by the boating people is not acceptable
20
         to the four States.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.
22
                  . MR. KLASSEN:  I think this is something
23
         that they ought to know.
24
                   MR. STEIN:  This is true for Wisconsin,
25

-------
   	3638

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          isn't it,  sir?
 3
                    MR.  HOLMER:   Yes.
 4
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.   Well,  as I under-
 5
          stand it--and  here is  why I don't know whether

 6
          you want to adopt the  principle--as I read that
 7
          model ordinance and read your approach, you are
 8
          given several  options.  One, in the future if

 9
          you believe that something is developed you can
10
          exercise it.
11
                    MR.  OEMING:   Yes.
12
                    MR.  STEIN:   As of now you have not
13
          adopted any option except the holding tank.
14
                    MR.  KLASSEN:  That is correct.
15
                    MR.  STEIN:   But your law and your
16
          regulation permits you to adopt another option
17
          if and when a  device  comes  in.
18
                    MR.  OEMING:   Right.
10
                    MR.  STEIN:   Now,  I think possibly
20
          we should leave it that way.
21
                    MR.  KLASSEN:  Right.
22
                    MR.  STEIN:   Because if this is the
23
          philosophy, and I know you have worked this out
24
          very hard, unless you  want to change it here
25

-------
   	     3639

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         to say no dumping overboard, because  this
 3
         makes a switch.
 4
                   MR. KLASSEN: I think you stated it
 5
         properly.
 6
                   MR. STEIN: Right.
 7
                   MR. OEMING:  You stated it  properly.
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  0. K.  Then let's  see
 9
         if we can go on.
10

11
                      RECOMMENDATION #17
12

13
                   MR. STEIN:  "17.  The United States
14
         Department of Agriculture be requested to
15
         submit a report within six months on  programs
16
         for preventing pollution from agriculture."
17
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Wastes.
18
                   MR. STEIN:  Does this mean  stuff like
19
         spraying of Dutch Elm, for Dutch Elm  disease
20
         and stuff, or what do you mean?
21
                   MR. OEMING:  No, I didn't think so.  I
22
         think you are talking about siltation, aren't
23
         you,  Mr. Poston?
24
                   MR. PURDY:  Fertilizers?
25

-------
   ^_	3640

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN:  Is this pesticides and
 3
         insecticides as well as siltation?  What do
 4
         you mean there?
 5
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:  I think we meant
 6
         principally siltation, land—use practices.
 7
                   MR. OEMING:  I think you should
 8
         say so.  I think you should say so, then.
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  Do you cover pesticides
10
         in here?
11
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.  That is why I
12
         raise the question here.  You don't want to
13
         overlap.  I have got another idea on pesticides.
14
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
15
                   MR. OEMING:  But aren't you looking
16
         at siltation here primarily?
17
                   MR. STEIN:  For siltation?
18
                   MR. POSTON:  Well, it is land use
19
         practices and we tried to give it a general
20
         heading.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  From agricultural land
22
         use practices.  All right, then, let's put it
23
         down, because otherwise you are going to--right?
24
                   MR. COOK:  No, it is more than that.
25

-------
             	3641
 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. OEMING:  Let's  get  straight  on
 3
         what we mean here.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  What do you mean?  Right.
 5
                   MR. COOK:  Feed lots, dairy  practices,
 6
         siltation.
 7
                   MR. POOLE:  Duck ponds.
 8
                   MR, COOK:  Duck ponds,  the whole
 9
         broad coverage except pesticides.
10
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Spraying  for Japanese
11
         beetles?
12
                   MR. OEMING:  No, I  am not so sure.
13
                   MR. STEIN:  No, they don't mean  that.
14
         Except spraying.  They mean everything except
15
         pesticides, this is what was  meant there.
16
                   All right.
17
                   MR. MITCHELL:  What type of  report?
18
         A report of what the problem  is or repoTt  of
10
         what their proposals should be?   'We ought  to
20
         spell that out.
21
                   MR. OEMING:  If I were  the Department
22
         of Agriculture I wouldn't know what to do  if I
23
         got this.
24
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:  I think this was
25

-------
                                       	3642
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          brought up,  we don't know.   In the first
 3
          meeting we really don't know what programs
 4
          they have, if any,  and we would like to find
 5
          out.
 6
                    MR. KLASSEN:  Who are they going to
 7
          report to, us?
 8
                    MR. STEIN:   Us.  But again,  Mr.  Oeming
 9
          points out if he were given a directive like
10
          this,  what would you come in with?
11
                    MR. KLASSEN:  I--
12
   I                 MR. MITCHELL:  That is right.
13
                    MR. KLASSEN:  It  is your recommenda-
14
          tion.   I don't know.   And I don't know what the
15
          Department of Agriculture,  the Federal Department
16
          of  Agriculture,  has to do with feed lots in the
17
          State of Illinois.
18
                    MR. OEMING:  As far as we are concerned,
19
          we  have control over those.
20
                    MR. KLASSEN:  So  dovwe.
21
                    MR. OEMING:  So if we want to exercise
22
          it,  we have  got it.  The Department of Agricul-
23
          ture,  we don't worry about  them.
24
                    MR. KLASSEN:  I think this is a little
25

-------
   	36^3

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         vague.
 3
                   MR. STEIN:  All  right,  do  you want
 4
         to work on  that now or can we have something
 5
         on Tuesday  perfecting this?  Let.'s do  that.
 6
                   MR. OEMING:  Let's perfect that.
 7
                   MR. STEIN:  All  right.
 8
                   Eighteen.  I think we all  know what
 9
         we mean, but we had better perfect it.
10
                   MR. MITCHELL:  Mr. Chairman,  Tuesday
11                                          .
         is getting  lengthier by the minute here.
12
                   (Laughter.)
13
                   MR. MITCHELL:  I would  rather discuss
1*
         an item like this, it is only 9:30>  in  a little
15
         bit more detail.
16
                   MR. STEIN:  All  right,  I am  ready.
17
                   MR. MITCHELL:  It seemed to me,  if
18
         I am trying to interpret what the FWPCA wants,
19
         is they would like for the experts in  the  Depart-
20
         ment of Agriculture to come back  and point out
21
         some future ideas and programs that  might  be
22                   ,
         accepted by States and Federal Government  to
23
         start cutting down on some of the pollution
24
         problems that are currently being caused by
25

-------
   	3644

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          agriculture?   Then that is a little bit more
 3
          specific in telling them what you want.
 4
                    MR.  POSTON:  .Sediments, pesticides,
 5
          fertilizers.
 6
                    MR.  OEMING:   Oh--
 7
                    MR.  STEIN:   Oh, no.  Wait, wait,  wait.
 8
          The  difficulty is, I  thought we said we weren't
 9
          going to cover pesticides here, they were coming
10
          later.  Now,  if we are talking about sediment
11
          and  siltation and land runoff, can we be specific?
12
                    Let  me try  this:
13
                    "The United States Department of
14
          Agriculture be requested to submit a report
15
          to the Conferees within six months on agricul-
16
          tural programs which  the--on programs which the
17
          State water pollution control agencies--on
18
          programs to prevent pollution from agricultural
19
          land use such as siltation, feed lot operation:—
20
          what else do you have?
21
                    MR.  KLASSEN:  Could you get in there
22
          the  word "practices"  to cover all of this
23
          "agriculture practices"?
24
                    MR.  STEIN:   Agriculture practices--
25

-------
   	:	3645

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. KLASSEN:  All right.
 3
                   MR. STEIN:   --such as  siltation,
 4
         feed lot operation—what else?
 6
                   MR. COOK:  Dairying.
 6
                   MR. STEIN:   Dairy farming--dairying.
 7
         What?
 8
                   MR. MORTON:  A dairy is a feed  lot
 9
         operation as far as--
10
                   MR. STEIN:   Is it?
11
                   MR. COOK:  Two different operations,
12
                   MR. STEIN:   All right.
13
                   MR. COOK:  Murray, may I say  a  word?
14
                   Actually, Secretary Freeman right
15
         now has ordered a report of this nature and
16
         it will be out within  six months and this was
17
         in our thinking when we developed this  recom-
18
         mendation.  It will cover the whole field of
19
         agriculture.
20
                   MR. STEIN:   All right.
21
                   Are you satisfied, Mr. Mitchell?
22
         I think they are a little more specific.  All
23
         right.
24

25

-------
 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                      RECOMMENDATION #18
 3

 4
                   MR. STEIN:  "The United States
 5
         Department of Transportation and State highway
 6
         departments be requested to submit reports within
 7
         six months on programs for preventing pollution
 8
         from highway construction."
 9
                   MR. OEMING:  I would leave it up to
10
         the U. S. Department of Transportation.  They
11
         are the ones who are riding herd on the State
12
         highway departments and they have got a good
13
         handle on them.
14
                   MR. STEIN:  I have no objection if
15
         you want the State--
16
                   MR. MITCHELL:  I am sure our State
17
         highway department has the same feelings that
18
         we have on the pollution control board, they
19
         like to have a voice in the things as they go
20
         along.
21
                   MR. OEMING:  But they have got the
22
         voice through the Transportation now, haven't
23
         they, through the U. S. Department of Trans-
24
         portation?
25

-------
  ^_____	         3647

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN:  How do you want  this?
 3
                   MR. OEMING:  I don't know how we  can
 4
         insert ourselves in here as a peacemaker  between
 5
         the two of them.
 6
                   MR. KLASSEN: I am wondering,  Mr.
 7
         Chairman, why are we injecting highway depart-
 8
         ments in water pollution.,  In each of  the
 9
         States, if there is any water pollution from
10
         highway construction, this is the State's  re-
11
         sponsibility.
12
                   MR. OEMING:  That is right.
13
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Why are we getting  them
14
         in the act?
15
                   MR. OEMING:  The highway commissioner
16
         sits on my commission.
17
                   MR. KLASSEN:  What?
18
                   MR. OEMING:  The highway commissioner
19
         is a member  of my commission.
20
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  Now, why  don't--
21

         if we are dealing with this--
22

                   MR. KLASSEN:  What is the problem?
23
                   MR. STEIN:  No, let me raise this
24
         question.  I think Mr. Klassen has a  very good
25

-------
              	3648

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         point.   Can we say the States will submit
 3
         a  report to us on their programs for this?
 4
         Because  this is part  of the State program unless
 s
         you  have it,
 6
                    MR.  KLASSEH:  Why are we picking on
 7
         highway  construction  any more than--
 8
                    MR.  BOSTON:   Well, this has to do with
 9
         sediment.   Construction of roads, farming,  and
10
         urban developments are sources of sediment.
11
         This is  the intent for land—use practices,
12
                    MR.  KLASSEN:  Is this a problem in
13
         Lake Michigan?
14
                    MR.  OEMING:   Wait a minute.  Have we
15
         had  any  testimony that sediment siltation from
16
         highway  construction  is a problem?   I don't
17
         remember anything in  the conference testimony.
18
                    MR.  KLASSEN:  Why was this brought
19
         in?
20
                    MR.  OEMING:   Why is this  a problem?
21
                    MR,  POSTON:   Because this is one  of
22
         the  sources of sediment in our streams.
23
                    MR.  OEMING:   Well, I guess my lot is,
24
         too,  in Lansing,  but—
25

-------
   ^__	         .	36*19


 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION



 2                 MR. KLASSEN:  So are parking  lots.


 3                 MR. POSTON: Not until your  lot  is subject



         to construction is it any source of--



 5                 MR. OEMXNG:  Oh, I could get  ridiculous,



 6       but I am not going to here.


 7                 MR. PURDY:  Gardening.



 8                 MR. OEMING:  Yes.


 9                 MR. STEIN:  Let me ask you  this.  I



10       know in the Potomac River, for example, that


11       the highway construction and the subdivision


12       construction together make a significant  con-



18       tribution to the appearance of that river and


14       the silt.  Are they significant here?   Is this



         a significant problem here or not?  I don't


i
-------
                 	3650

 I                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         We haven't  got the  silt  out  and  the  people
 3
         aren't--
 4
                   MR.  OEMING:  Well,  you have  a different
 5
         problem there;  that is a different kind of
 6
         situation.
 7
                   MR.  STEIN:  Yes. The people  aren't
 8
         sure we have  cleaned up  the  river because  they
 9
         still see  it run muddy.
10
                   Is  this a significant  problem in
11
         Lake Michigan  or not?
12
                   MR.  KLASSEN:   Let  me say this from
13
         my standpoint,  if highway construction is  a
14
         significant problem so far as Lake Michigan
15
         pollution is  concerned,  we ought to  direct
16
         ourselves to  that and really take some action.
17
         But frankly,  I haven't heard anything  to indicate
18
         highway construction is  this. If it is, let's
19 I
         do something  about  it.   If not,  let's  not waste our
20
         time on it  and get  on to something else.
21
                   MR.  STEIN:  All right.
22
                   May  I make this suggestion?   Let's
23
         eliminate #18  here  and the Federal water
24
         pollution control agency representatives will
25

-------
   	•  	3651

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         make a report, because I haven't seen  this
 3
         or the evidence to support this, at  the  first
 4             '
         progress meeting in six months on this siltation
 5
         problem from lots and highways and either say
 6
         it is significant or it is not significant.
 7
         If it is significant, we will take it up then.
 8
         0. K.?
 9
                   MR, POOLE:  I think that is quite
10
         in order, Mr. Chairman, with  the conclusion
11
         that we added yesterday, which was that  concern
12
         has been expressed about de-icing, and so on*
13
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  Well, I  think this
14
         de-icing is in the same category.  Unless I
15
         can see some real evidence that de-icing is  a—
16
         that salt is a deterrent to Lake Michigan, and
17
         I have seen evidence the other way,  I  think  we
18
         have to be persuaded.  I haven't seen  the evidence
19
         yet.
20
                   MR. POOLE:  No.  Well, I didn't finish,
21
         The conclusion was about de-icing and the effect
22
         of highway and building construction on  the  quality
23
         of water in Lake Michigan.
24
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.
25

-------
       •	:	3652

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                    MR. POOLE:   So now if you are asking

 3
          for a report in six months--

 4
                    MR. STEIN:   Right.

 5
                    MR/ POOLE:   --we are deepening our

 6
          recommendations and arming our conclusions.

 7
                    MR. STEIN:   Right.  Thank you.

 8


 9
                       RECOMMENDATION #19

10



                    MR. STEIN:   "Each State water pollution

12                                            ,i
          control agency establish a permanent --

13
                    MR. OEMING:   You should read 19 also,

14
          Mr. Chairman, in connection with that.

15
                    MR. STEIN:   All right, I will.

16
                     Each state  water pollution control

17
          agency establish a permanent program to determine

18
          how much,  when, where,  and what kinds of pesti-

19
          cldes are  being used.   Findings to be reported

20
          to  the Conferees annually."
21
                    MR. KLASSEN:   May I make one suggestion
22
          here.  Let's include what we are really after
23
          to  determine the levels in the water of these
24
          pesticides.  This is what we really want to know.
25

-------
   	  3633
 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. OEMING:  Mr.  Chairman.
 3
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
 4
                   MR. OEMING:  Maybe  this would  save
 5
         time here.  Michigan  is deeply involved  in  this
 6
         pesticide program, you heard  the Director of
 7
         Conservation from the State,  and others  are
 8
         concerned with it.  But we  are in a  thicket
 9
         here as to what we do--how  much escapes  to  the
10
         streams, all these things.  This is  a  very
11
         complicated problem. And I  am not certain that
12
         we are ready yet to propose any legislation.
13
         There is some legislation proposed,  but  I don't
14
         know where it is going.
15
                   I would suggest that this  is the  kind
16
         of subject that would lend  itself to further
17
         exploration by a technical  committee established
18
         by this Board of Conferees  to consist  of one
10
         member from each of the States and headed by  a
20
         member of the Federal Water Pollution  Control
21
         Administration regional office in Chicago.  And
22
         here is what I have in mind.
23
                   MR. STEIN:  Why do  you want  to get  the
24
         regional office in Chicago?
25

-------
   	365**

 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
                    MR.  OEMING:  Well,  I  don't care.

 3
                    MR.  STEIN: The reason I  was thinking,

 4
         I  see  one  non-Federal  expert  on pesticides

 5
         sitting  in the audience, and  I  don't know tco

 6
         many in  the country.   If this is going to be

 7
         meaningful,  we are  probably going  to have to

 8
         comb the country  to find a real good man  for

 9
         you.

10
                    MR.  OEMING:  I have an idea,  Mr.

11
         Chairman,  and  some  of  the members  aren't  aware

12
         of this, probably,  but we did such a thing at

13
         the Lake Erie  conference with respect to  deter-

14
         gents, you will recall,  and I felt that was

15
         very productive.  It was the  most  productive

16
         effort in  this line, in  this  kind  of ah.area.

17
         And I  don't care  much  whether you  head it--who

18
         you head it up by.   But  I am  looking at this,  that
19
         this kind  of a technical committee would  go into
20
         the matter,  explore with the  various people who
21
         are working in this field with  relation to the
22
         significance,  the water  pollution  significance
23
         here.  And I am very impressed, and I want to
24
         recommend  highly  to you  an article by Mr. Page--
25

-------
   	3655

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
        Dr. Page Nicholson of  the Federal Water  Pollution

 3
        Control Administration that  came out  in  November

 4
        of  '67.  This highlights, it seems  to me,  all  of
 5
        the aspects that we are  concerned with as  a  board.

 6
        He certainly should be called upon.

 7
                  There are people that I sought to  have

 8
        called at this conference, and I am still  unhappy

 9
        about this.

10
                  MR. STEIN:  Who?

11
                  MR. OEMING:  There was a  Dr. Reinert

12
        of the University of Michigan who is  deeply  in-

13
        volved in the fish problem in Lake  Michigan, and
14
        I couldn't get him to this conference.   That is,
15
        Mr. Poston asked--! asked Mr. Poston  to  ask  him,
16
        Poston wrote him and we  got  somebody  else  that
17
        Just generally talked about  the thing.
18
                  Now, I think--
id
                  MR. STEIN:  Doesn't this  Reinert  work
20
        for us?
21
                  MR. OEMING: --that it is  time  we got—
22
                  MR. STEIN:  He doesn't work for  us.
23
                  MR. OEMING:  He is  in the commercial
24
        fishery down there.  He works for the  Department
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          of  the  Interior  and you passed this  on to
 3
          Carbine and Carbine did not see fit  to send
 4
          him here to tell us what he knows.   And I
 5
          know  he knows  something that would have been
 6
          helpful to  this  board.
 7
                   MR.  STEIN:   Let me just go off the
 8
          record.
 9
                    (Off the  record.)
10
                   MR.  OEMING:   The point I am trying to
11
          make  here,  Mr. Chairman,  I don't want to make
12
          an  issue of this, but  the point I am trying to
13
          make  is that the record at the conference is
14
          woefully weak  in this  area.  All we  have is a
15
          concern expressed.   We  did not get any informa-
16
          tion  that we could  act  upon.  And I  don't feel
17
          that  these  recommendations are very  productive.
18
                   It seems  to  me that what is productive
19
          is  somebody to sit  down and get their teeth into
20
          it  and  put  this  into perspective by  calling the
21
          experts, everybody  in  the country, which the
22
          detergent people did.   They went through and
23
          called  everybody who they thought knew anything
24
          about detergents.
25

-------
   	3657

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2

 3
                    I want the same  thing  done  here.
 4
                    MR. POOLE:  That is  why  I would
 6
          endorse that.  As you recall the Lake
 6
          Erie, we had a technical committee, but
 7
          it was authorized to ask anybody that it
 8
          wanted to come in and participate.  And it
 9
          seems to me that that pattern  you  had for
10
          Lake Erie is quite  applicable  to the  pesti-
11
          cide situation.
12
                    MR. STEIN:  Is this  agreeable With
13
          the people here?  If this  is--
14
                    Yes.
15
                    This is a question we  have  all the
16
          time and that is why I  didn't  want to limit
17
          this.  It might be  wise, as we did in your
18
          commit"tee that we had on the water quality
19
          standards in  the lower  end of  Lake Michigan
20
          where we had Kittrell,  who almost  put full
21
          time on the  job, and to get a man like  Page
22
          Nicholson up here to do something  like
23
          this.
24

25

-------
   	3658

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2

 3
                    But let's say that a technical
 4                 .                 '
          committee to work on pesticides,  chaired
 5
          by the Federal Water Pollution Control
 6
          Administration, and having representatives
 7
          from each State will be established.
 8
          Findings and determinations on the pesti-
 9
          cide problem and a program to control it
10
          will be reported to the Conferees by this
11
          committee.   A first report will be made
12
          to the Conferees in six months.  The com-
13
          mittee, among other things, will determine--
14
          will explore the amounts of pesticides in
15
          the waters  of Lake Michigan--in the Lake
16
          Michigan drainage basin and a--
17
                    MR. OEMING:  And evaluate the water
18
          quality problems.
19
                    MR. STEIN:  --and evaluate the
20
          water quality programs in connection there-
21
          with.
22

23

24

25

-------
     	3659

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   Now, let's go on to surveillance, 20.
 3
                   MR. OEMING:  Did you say PWPCA is a
 4
         member of that committee?
 5
                   MR. STEIN:  'Chairman,11! said.
 6
                   MR. OEMING:  0. K., I missed it.
 7
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  Because we are
 8
         probably going to have to break one of our
 9
         experts loose to handle this.
10
                   MR. OEMING:  0. K.
11
                   MR. POSTON:  Mr. Chairman, we would
12
         like to insert in here something relative to
13
         septic tanks.
14
                   MR. STEIN:  All right,  yes.
15
                   MR. POSTONi  We have a paragraph here.
16
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:   Well,  this is from the
17
         Wisconsin  recommendation,  2.1 on page  11,  and
18
         it  seems to me that  it is  a lot  broader and
19
         could  be very well incorporated  a* another
20
         recommendation.
21
                   MR.  STEIN:   Yes, go on.   Mr.  Oeming
22
         was  raising a question about  septic  tanks
23
         yesterday.
24
                   MR.  SCHNEIDER:   Well, I  will  read it
25

-------
   	3 660

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          the  way I would propose to change it,  Mr. Holmer.
 3
                    "it is recommended that each of the
 4
          State  water pollution control agencies have
 5
          drafted,  and seek introduction in 19&9* parallel
 6
          legislation designed to achieve controls of use
 7
          of unincorporated land areas and of lands bor-
 8
          dering on streams and lakes in the basin.  Such
 9
          legislation should relate to the creation of
10
          subdivisions," and I would think wherever located,
11
          "regulation of water supply and sewage disposal
12
          systems," and I have inserted, "the latter with
13
          particular reference to control and elimination
14
          of septic tanks."  And then next, "minimizing
15
          flood  hazards and the control of erosion and
16
          runoff."
17
                    Pardon?
18
                    MR. OEMING:  We have got no  problem.
19
          You  have  no problem with us.  We have  got it
20
          already,  so--and Wisconsin has too, I  think.
21
                    MR. STEIN:  Did you propose  that?
22
          Is that agreeable to you, Mr. Holmer?
23
                    MR. HOLMER:  We think it's a good
24
          recommendation.
25

-------
 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN:  How about the other States?
 3
                   MR, POOLE:  We will buy that, but I
 4
         remind you of an experience I had several years
 5
         ago when I was on the National Research Council
 6
         Committee on Sanitary Engineering and  the
 7
         Director of the National Research Council came
 8
         in and said that the space agency had  asked them
 9
         to start thinking about the disposal of waste,
10
         in space and he wanted this committee  to do it
11
         and Gordon Fair said, "That is simple, Just open
12
         the hatch and put it into orbit," and  we dis-
13
         missed it with that and then we got into a two-
14
         hour argument about septic tanks.
15
                   (Laughter.)
16
                   I don't want this conference here to
17
         deteriorate into what that meeting did.
18
                   MR. STEIN:  You have one of  the
19
         Nation's experts on septic tanks working for
20
         you.  I haven't seen him for awhile *
21                          •
                   MR. POOLE:  Which one is that?
22
                   MR. STEIN:  Who is your colleague?
23
         You know, the deputy who handled that  during

         the war.  What was his name?
25

-------
                                                         3662

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. POSTON:  Joe Queen.
 3
                   MR. STEIN:  No.  Who was that other
 4
         fellow working there?
 5
                   MR. PC-OLE:  Helder?
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  Heixle*.   Heide.r,, -ye.s .
 7
                   MR. KLASSEN:  I think this is a  good
 8 .
         recommendation.  However, it will take some  real
 9
         modifications and different thinking in many of
10
         our legislatures, because now we are invading

         private property that may or may not in any  way
12
         have anything to do with water pollution.
13
                   But I am willing to give it a try
14
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.  Let's see  if
15
         we can have this drafted for the consideration
16
         of the Conferees on Tuesday.  I don't think
17
         this one should present too much of a problem
18
         and we are pretty definite on it.
19
                   May we go on?
20

21
                      RECOMMENDATION
22

23
                   MR. STEIN:  Surveillance.  "Each State
24
         «rater pollution control agency monitor tributaries
25

-------
                                 	366-3

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         near  the  point of  discharge  to Lake  Michigan
 3
         and report  results to  the  Conferees  annually,
 4                                           -
         Measurements  should be made  of all  constitu-
 5
         tuents necessary to determine water  quality,
 6
         including pesticides,  and  quantities  of inputs
 7
         to the lake."
 8
                   MR. OEMING:   My  first  question,  Mr.
 9
         Chairman, is  shouldn't this  "including pesti-
10
         cides" be included in  this committee activity
11
         here, that  they ought  to determine?   As I  read
12
         Page  Nicholson,  there  are  some problems here.
13
                   MR. STEIN:   Shall  we strike that for
14
         now?
15
                   MR. OEMING:   Include that  in the other
16
         committee.
17
                   MR. STEIN:   Yes, let's strike that
18
         from  this one here. That  raises some technical
19
         problems  right now.
20
                   Are there any—
21
                   What we  have done, gentlemen, is we have
22
         struck "including  pesticides" because of
23
         technical difficulties at  this time  until
24
         the committee comes in with  its  recommendations.
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                   Are there  any  other  comments  on  this
 3
         one?
 4
                   If not,  let's  go  on  to  21;
 5

 6
                      RECOMMENDATION #21
 7

 8
                   MR. STEIN:   "The  Department of the
 9
         Interior establish a monitoring program for
i°
         Lake Michigan that will  include determinations
11
         of those characteristics and constituents  that
12
         will indicate trends in  water  quality."
13
                   I am not sure  what that means.
14
                   MR. OEMING:  I am not so  sure either.
15
                   Can you  tell us,  Mr. Poston,  what
16
         you mean by this, what you  have in  mind?
17
                   MR. POSTON:  What we had  in mind was
18
         sampling in the lake to  give you quality of
19
         lake water from time to  time.  This would  be
20
         done this year and--
21
                   MR. OEMING:  You  are doing it now,
22
         aren't you?
23
                   MR. POSTON:  No.
24
                   MR. OEMING:  Aren't  you?
25

-------
                                                         3665
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2

                    MR.  POSTON:   No.
 3

                    MR.  OEMINQ:   0. K.
 4  •               .-          .   •  .

                    MR.  STEIN:   This  would seem to me
 5                           . •               . '
          to make  more  sense.  I don't  want to quibble
 6
          with this.   But we have a couple of vague
 7                                             •
          recommendations here  that anyone can drive a
 8
          truck through.  I don't know  what tributaries
 9
          the States are going  to monitor, etc.  If you
10
          mean that  we  should set up  a  really joint
11
          monitoring program in which we are going to
12
          come to  an agreement  with the States that they
13
          are going  to  set up monitoring points on certain
14
          tributaries and look  for some stuff; the Federal
15
          Government is  going to get  out in the lake and
16
          do it; we  are  going to exchange information—I
17
          think we have  got one thing.   But, .1 believe
18
          if this  is going to be meaningful and we are
19                         ,           •       '
          all not  going to go off in different directions,
20                 :

          we must  work  together.  Again, this seems
21
          like a technical committee's  Job in which
22

          we get a plan worked  out,  you know,  where each Statje
23

          is going to come forward and  where you are going
24


25

-------
   	3666

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
         to monitor .what we: are.-going, to find .so  .
 3
         that  the  results -will  dovetail  and ; be
 4
         meaningful/.
 5
                   Yes, sir.
 6
                   MR. MITCHELL:   I  Just read Mr.  Holmer's
 7
         recommendation on  page 9>  1.1.   It is  almost
 8
         identical to what  you  Just  said,  Mr. Chairman.
 9
                   MR. STEIN:   All  right.
10
                   MR. OEMING:  You  know,  I like  that a
11
         little  better, Mr.  Chairman,  "for improvements
12
         in the  water quality monitoring," because this
13
         implies that there isn't any and we know there
14
         is a  lot  of monitoring in  the States and--at
15
         least in  the States.
16
                 .  MR. STEIN:   Well, this is  Just FWPCA.
17
         Can I say there  that--
18
                   MR. OEMING:  ' No,  it isn't, Mr.  Chairman.
19
                   MR. MITCHELL:   1.1 there.
20
                   MR. OEMING:   "Including State  repre-
21
         sentation."
22
                   MR. PURDY:   "including State  represen-
23
         tation,"  you see.
24
                   MR. STEIN:   Oh.   Yes.
25

-------
 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                   Can we make  this a  committee,  a
 3
         Conferee action?
 4
                   MR. OEMING:  I don't see  any reason
 5
         why not.
 6
                   MR. STEIN:   Yes, that  the Conferees

 7        •
         have a Joint committee for this,  the cities  and
 8
         the States, to develop recommendations for
 9
         improvement in the water quality monitoring
10
         program of the State agencies in Lake Michigan
11
         and the Federal—water quality monitoring
12
         programs of the State  agencies and  the Federal
13
         Government in Lake Michigan, work out a co-
14
         ordinated program and  submit  such recommen-
15
         dations to the Conferees for  comment at the
16
         next--in six months at the next  progress meeting.
17
         0. K.?  This would be  fine.
18
                   Thank you.  All right.
10

20
                      RECOMMENDATION #22
21

22
                   MR. STEIN:  Now 22.  "The Coast Guard
23
         be requested to step up aircraft pollution
24
         patrols on Lake Michigan,  report all suspected
25

-------
                                	3609

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         pollution cases Immediately to the Federal Water
 3
         Pollution Control Administration, and report semi-
 4
         annually to the Conferees on surveillance activities
 5                         •          ' .  •
                   What does this mean?
 6
                   MR. POSTON:  The Coast Guard does
 7
         considerable helicopter surveillance, and we
 8
         considered that they might be amenable to
 9
         making some visual observations at times of
10
         other flights and on special flights since
11
         they are interested in oil pollution spills
12
         and could report back to the agencies through
13
         the Federal Water Pollution Control Agency.
14
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  Well, I am hesitant
15
         on this again, and you know I don't want to be
16
         too defensive with the Federal agencies, but
17
         the implication here is the Coast Guard doesn't
18
         do this now.  As far as I know, they are report-
19
         ing every oil spill they see.
20
                   You may want to improve this or
21
         something, but the Coast Guard is charged
22
         with enforcing all the laws of the United
23
         States as they relate to water and they are
24
         pretty alert, as far as I can see, on oil spills.
25

-------
   	3669
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         What more do we want them to do?
 3
                   MR. OEMING:  Well, they wai.t--
 4
                   MR. POOLE:  They  could step  up.
 5
                   MR. POSTON:  Step it up,  yes.
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  Well, again--
 7          '      • "        '            '          '...'•
                   MR. POSTON:  Do you know  what they
 8
         do?
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  What?
10
                   MR. POSTON:  Do you know  what they
11
         do?
12
                   MR. STEIN:  No, but I haven't heard any
13
         testimony as to what they do or what  they  don't
14
         do.
15
                   MR. POSTON:  That is what I  would
16
         like to know.
17
                   MR. STEIN:  Well, but you say
18
         "requested to step up."  Now, if you  want  a
W
         report from the Coast Guard and we  are going
20
         to request them on their program and  a co-
21
         ordinated program with us,  this is  fine.   But
22     •         -'         .         • '   .    •  '
         I would hate to make a recommendation on some-
23
         thing for a step-up when we haven't really
24
         had any testimony or heard  what they  are doing.
25

-------
                              	36EO

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                    MR. OEMING:  How would  it  be,  Mr.

 3
         Chairman,  if we  Just requested the Coast Guard

 4
         to inform  the Conferees as to their  present--

 5
                    MR/ STEIN:  And future.

 6
                    MR. OEMING: --present and  future

 7
         plans for  monitoring and reporting?

 8
                    MR. STEIN:  Right.

 9
                    MR. POSTON: 'O.K.

10
                    MR. STEIN:  Right.  0.  K.?

11


12                                    ,
                      RECOMMENDATION #23

13


14                             H
                    MR. STEIN:  "23.  The State water

15
         pollution  control agencies arrange for water

16
         quality analysis, including planktonic algae

17
         counts, to be performed daily at  the following

18
         water filtration plants:  Green Bay, Milwaukee,

19                                  .
         Evanston,  Chicago (both plants),  Gary, Michigan
20
        -.City, Benton Harbor, and Grand Rapids.   Results
21
         be reported annually to the Conferees."
22
                    MR. OEMING:  Mr. Chairman, I think
23
         there is a question here, not in  most of these,
24
         at least>  that I know of, but at  least
25

-------
       .	:	;	    367*

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
          differentiating between  Grand Rapids  and
 3
          Benton Harbor capabilities.  Now,  presently
 4
          Grand Rapids is doing  tests.  They are  not
 5
          doing them daily, and  I  question whether
 6
          there is a need for  daily  at this  time.
 7
          Certainly, as far as we  are concerned,  we
 8
          are willing to ask and secure or urge them,
 9
          Benton Harbor, tc do the same testing.
10
                   Now, when we say "required-let1 s
11
          say, "arrange," that says  "arrange for";
12
          I guess we are all right there.  But  I  would
13
          question the daily--
14
                   MR. STEIN:  How  frequently  do  you
15
          think it would have to be  done?
16
                   MR. OEMING:  I would like to  start
17
          out here, Just as a starting point, that twice
18
         weekly, and let's see where we get with  this
19
          first.
20
                   MR. STEIN:  To be--can we--
21
                   MR. PO&TON:  Why not Just leave  out
22
          "daily," then,  and Just  say, "be performed
23
         at the following"--
24
                   MR. STEIN:  Can  we say "be  performed
25

-------
                             	3672

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         at  least  twice weekly"?
 3
                    MR,  OEMING:   Something like that.
 4
                    MR.  STEIN:   How about that?
 5
                    MR.  OEMING:   That would be all right.
 6
                    MR.  STEIN:   Let's try that.
 7
                    MR.  OEMING:   Would you say "at least
 8
         twice weekly"?
 9
                    MR.  STEIN:   "At least twice weekly."
10
                    MR.  OEMING:   This would be a minimum.
11
         And then  I would suggest one more, and maybe we
12
         are getting into too much detail--
13
                    MR.  STEIN:   No.
14
                    MR.  OEMING:   --but as the counts
15
         increase  to vary the--or there is a variation
16
         in  species to  increase this, if you want to
17
         be  specific, Wally.
18
                    MR.  STEIN:   No, I don't think we
19
         need that.
20
                    MR.  OEMING:   All right.
21
                    MR.  STEIN:   Is this agreeable to
22
         everybody?
23
                    Yes,  Mr.  Morton.
24
                    MR.  MORTON:   I would like to make a
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         comment similar to Michigan's in that the
 3
         City of Evanston may have difficulty making
 4
         that frequency desired.  Now, the City of
 5                                         .
         Chicago already does this, has for many years,
 6
         so this is not a problem specifically.
 7
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
 8
                   MR. MORTON:  But Evanston--
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  Can Evanston do it  twice
10
         a week?
11
                   MR. MORTON:  I would question it on
12
         all parameters.  They do some parametersr-
13
                   MR. OEMING:  No, this  is a gross —
14
                   MR. MORTON:  ^*and what they feel neces-
15
         sary in order to process their water, but not as--
16
                   MR. OEMING:  Well, Mr. Morton,  I
17
         guess maybe you have got a point here as  to
18
         how extensive this must be in the analysis.
19
         What we are talking about is gross counting
20
         with some identification, not complete identi-
21
         fication.
22
                   But this is what Grand Rapids is
23
         doing.  I don't know, I suppose  Chicago is
24
         doing more than anybody else in  this area,
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          but I would think that we would have difficulty
 3
          requiring maybe some of the--a smaller plant
 4                     .                ••
          like Benton Harbor to do a complete identification.
 5
                    A gross counting would certainly help,
 6
          and this is the basic thing, a gross counting
 7
          and with some identification of the more sig-
 8
          nificant, of the more specific--
 9
                    MR. STEIN:  Let's try this, if there
10
          is no serious objection, and see how it works.
11
          At least it will give us something to go on.
12
          I know when you are dealing with these small
13
          plants that you are going to have a little
14
          slippage--
15
                    MR. OEMING:  Yes.
16
                    MR. STEIN:  --in this testing with
17
          the best of intentions.
18
                    Is this agreeable?  Is there any
19
          objection to this one?
20
                    If not, let's go on.
21
                    Research.
22
                    MR. OEMING:  You are going to say "at
23
          least twice weekly"?
24
                    MR. STEIN:  "At least twice weekly."
25

-------
   	3675


 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2

                    MR.  OEMING:   All  right,  fine.
 3

                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:  There was  one  other
 4

          that we  had  talked  about putting in, #19 in
 5

          the  original report.   That  wasn't--
 6
                    MR.  STEIN:   What  page is that?
 7

                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:  I think 66.
 8

                    MR.  OEMING:   Yes, that is  right.   Yes,
 9
          you  were talking about it.
10

                    Maybe  that  is not the one.  I  had
11

          better not say.
12

                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:  17,  18 and 19  were all
13

          combined in  other recommendations.
14

                    MR.  OEMING:   Yes.
15

                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:  We eliminated  or  forgot.
16

          Well, 19 wasn't.  It  was  Just  left out.


                    MR.  OEMING:   18 isn't, remember?
18

                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:  No,  that is right, 18
19

          isn't, but we  will  talk about  that later.   But I
20             *     .  .

          think 19 ought to be  considered now.
21

               RECOMMENDATION 19 PROM FWPCA REPORT
22	

                    MR.  STEIN:   All right, 19  reads:


ni                  "State  water pollution control
24

          agencies compile  an inventory  of all sites
25

-------
 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
         where potential  exists for  major  spills  of

 3
         oil and  other hazardous  material;  and  require

 4
         that measures be taken where  necessary to

 5
         prevent  the  escape  of this  material  to the

 6
         waters.

 7
                   MR. OEMING:  Lake Michigan,  as long

 8
         as you are talking  about Lake Michigan,  I don't

 9
         want to  be running  into  Lansing,  that  isn't

10
         going to get in  the lake.

11
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:  Well, if you had a

12
         major spill  on a tributary--

is
                   MR. OEMING:  It depends  on where it
14
         is, Bob.  I  mean we get  a little  unrealistic
15
         to find  out  there is an  oil tank  up  80 miles
16
         with dams-in between and all  this  stuff.  That
17
         isn't ever going to get  there.

18
                   MR. STEIN:  Do we understand that
19
         this applies to  pollution of  Lake  Michigan?
20
                   MR. PQSTON:  We already have a questionnaire
21
         out to you folks through Mr.  Pemberton in which
22
         he is compiling  this information  now.
23
                   MR. OEMING:  Well,  that  is one thing.
24
         But we are talking  about Lake Michigan here now.
25

-------
   	367f

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         We will answer your  questionnaire.
 3
                   MR. POSTON:  0.  K.   Put in Lake
 4
         Michigan, then.
 5
                   MR. OEMING:  Well,  this is what I suggest
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  "And  other hazardous material
 1               -                         .'•'•'.
         which may affect  the waters  of Lake Michigan"?
 8
                   MR, OEMING:  Yes,
 9
                   MR. STEIN:.  All  right.  And, then we
10
         will go on with that.  0.  K.?
11
                   MR. OEMING:  That  is in Mr. Holmer's—
12
                   Freeman, isn't that  one of yours?
13
                   MR. HOLMER:  Well,  ours is 2.3> but
14
         I have no objection--
15
                   MR. OEMING:  Is  that close enough?
16
                   MR. HOLMER:  --to  using 19.
17
                   MR. STEIN:   0. K.   We're  about set.
18
                   , Now, any others?   When are yo,u going
19
         to take up this 18 here?
20
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:   I  thought that that
21
         could go in--oh,  it  probably ought  to go in now.
22

23             RECOMMENDATION  18 FROM  PWPCA REPORT

24
                   MR. STEIN:   All  right.  Let me read
25

-------
   	3678

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          this.   We have run into this  problem before.

 3
          Let me  -give you the problem.

 4
                    "The discharge of oil from any source

 5
          into any waters of the  Lake Michigan basin be

 6
          stopped entirely.

 7
                    This brings us back  to that zero

 8
          tolerance.   The way we  resolved it in the lower

 9
          end of  the  lake was "all visible oil."  Is that

10
          what you mean?

11
                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:  Well,  I think we would

12
          like to establish  some  kind of a principle here.

13
          Could we leave that in  and then simply add
14
          another sentence,  "in the absence of more
15
          definitive  surveillance techniques a visual

16
          observation should be the basis  for enforcement
17
          of  the  recommendation"?   Would that be--
18
                    MR.  STEIN:  Well, again you are
10
          raising this question of zero  tolerance on
20
          this operation. Every  time we get a new
21
          technique everyone who  was in  compliance is
22
          not in  compliance.  Here is the  issue.
23
                   You  go to these big  steel companies
24
          and the petroleum  companies and  they are putting
25

-------
   	3679

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         in tens of millions of dollars to get  an

 3
         operation where they will not produce  any

 4
         visual oil or meet our requirements, and

 5
         as far as they are concerned they want a

 6
         little certainty and figure if they have

 7
         done this they are going to be off the hook.

 8
         maybe for 10 or 20 years and we are not going

 9
         to bother them.  What we are doing here is

10
         what we have always done with the zero tolerance


         technique, we say, "o. K., you fellows, spend

12    •           '.
        $25 million, cut out all the visual oil, but

13
         as soon as we can improve our technique you
14                          .
         are not going to be in compliance again and we

15
         are going to be around and we are going to ask
16
         you to do a little more."  Now, this is from a

17
         regulatory agency point of view.
18
                   We have all lived with this  for the

19
         past 20 years and been burned by it,  I  think
20
         we possibly should avoid going down that road,
21
         becaus.e we have tried it, and on its face it
22
         looks good, but it doesn't work.  I would like
23
         to hold,  if we could,  in principle, away from
24
         that zero tolerance,  that any time you  are going
25

-------
                                                        369G

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         to run up with a new technique every  industry
 3
         and city that was in compliance automatically
 4                  -    '   '                '
         runs out of  compliance.
 5
                   MR. POOLE:  I support you,  Mr. Chairman.
 6
         A literal interpretation of 17, I pointed out
 7
         before, would mean a filling station  can't even
 8
         dump one oil change, a filling station anywhere
 9
         on the watershed.
10
                   MR. POSTON:  Seventeen?
11
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:  He means  18.
12
                   MR. OEMING:  Eighteen.
13
                   MR. POOLE:  That "stopped entirely"
14
         has always bothered me.
15
                   MR. STEIN:  Could we do it  the same
16
         as we had it in the lower end of Lake Michigan?
17
         And we have worked through this with  Illinois
18
         and Indiana now and I think they can  live with
19
         it and I hope the rest of the States  do.  It
20
         reads something like, "The discharge  of visible
21
         oil from any source into any waters--into the
22
         waters of Lake Michigan is prohibited," or some-
23
         thing of that kind.
24
                   MR. OEMING:  I am happy.
25

-------
   	366-1

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                   MR. POOLE:  Yes.
 3
                   MR. STEIN:  All  right.   Let's  see if»-
 4
                   MR. POSTON:  Leave  off  the  word

         "entirely."
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes,  that--
 7
                   MR. OEMING: "Visible oil."
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  "Visible oil."   And that
 9
         "entirely," you know, is again that zero tolerance
10
         there.   "Entirely" here  is  like when  you say

         "no smoking" and  then you  put up  "positively."
12
                   (Laughter.)
13
                   You know.
14
                   All right.  "Be  eliminated."  All right.
15
                   Now may we go  on?
16
                   Yes.
17
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:   You know, you  raised
18
         the point yesterday about  these interstate
19
         carriers, the tankers.
20
                   MR. OEMING:  The  tankers that  are sunk.
21
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:   And I have  something
22
         here that I think might  go  to the recommendation
23
         that you had in your report.
24
                   MR. OEMING:.  Yes.
25

-------
   ^__	3682

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                    MR. SCHNEIDER:   That an  immediate
 3
         inspection program be  conducted, and  I  don't
 4
         know by whom, of  all vessels  used  for the
 5
         transport  of liquid petroleum products  to

 6
         determine  either  their seaworthiness  or whatever
 7
         else you have to  determine, and  then  that  any
 8
         such vessels found to  constitute an oil spillage
 9
         hazard be  barred  from  Lake Michigan.
10
                    MR. POOLE:   By whom?
11
                    MR. STEIN:   Who  is  going to inspect
12
         those?
13
                    MR. SCHNEIDER:   I don't  know.
14
                    MR. PURDY:   Well, your lake carriers
15
         are inspected annually anyhow as far  as their
16
         seaworthiness, aren't  they?
17
                    MR. SCHNEIDER:   I believe so.  But
18
         maybe there is some--
19
                    MR. STEIN:   Well, we had a--
20
                    MR. SCHNEIDER:   This was the  point
21
         down in Puerto Rico, as I  understood, that
22
         this was an old decrepit vessel  that  broke up
23
         on a reef  down there or something.
24
                    MR. STEIN:   Well, this isn't  going
25

-------
                  	       3683

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2

         to get at that problem, though, Bob.
 3

                   How, let me tell you, we  are  moving very

         slowly--and I ask you to do  this--you people  all
 5          '     -..'.-'•         '      .          •
         recognize the problems we have with our Oil Pol-
 6
         lution Act.  We are moving slowly in perfecting
 7
         techniques on oil pollution  control, and there
 8
         is legislation that has passed the  Senate; now
 9
         before the House Committee.   I think we should
10
         move on this carefully.
ll
                   The best way that  we can  see  to
12
         do this--and this is one of  our proposals--
13
         is to keep a list nationally of these
14
         boats and indicate the bad actors our staff
15
         finds in some of these people.  The reason
16
         is that the guy who is going to leak oil
17
         in San Diego, New Orleans, Philadelphia
18

         or Baltimore is going to do  it in Chicago.  Once
19
         we have surveillance of that, we have a.pretty
20

         good idea of someone you can get at.
21

                   I think on this question  of boats being
22

         decrepit that good housekeeping and a good  attitude
23

         are Just as important with relation to  these  oil  spills
24                                                            r

         from boats.  A man can run a relatively decrepit  bokt
25

-------
                                                         3684

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION.

 2
          and be  careful and  do a reasonably good Job.
 3
          A  man can have the  most modern operation or
 4                             •                    . •
          facility, and with his attitude he is going
 5
          to have oil  spills  in every port  he is  in.
 6
                    So £ wonder if we could approach
 7         '                                .
          that a  little more  carefully.
 8
                    MR. OEMING:  Mr.  Chairman,  maybe I
 9
          haven't communicated"here what I  had in mind.
10
                    What is concerning me is two  things,
11
          a  vessel gets sunk  out  here, not  through
12
          carelessness or because it  is  an  old vessel,
13
          but it  gets  sunk and  it has got oil in  it.
14
          And witnes.s  the Morazan problem,  we have been
15
          fussing with this and I hope that this  gets
16
          taken care of this  summer.
17
                    The second  is an  accident like we
18
          had in  the Detroit  River could happen here
19
          where a vessel sinks, it has got  cyanide on
20
          it  or it has got some destructive material in
21
          it.  Now, we don't  seem to  be  able to get
22
          hold of  this.   It has taken a  little  time.
23                                          vl
          We  are  hopeful we will  get  hold of this  Morazan
24
          problem with this several thousand gallons up here,
25

-------
                                                         3685

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   But I am looking for some mechanism
 3
         to get some responsible people rather than
 4
         filing suits,and it takes so damned long to
 5
         get the suit filed and get it heard.  We are
 6
         filing a suit on this Morazan thing.
 7
                   But this is not going to prevent a
 8
         hazard if that boat should break up out there
 9
         and that oil get on our beaches this summer.
10
         This is what I am aiming at.
11
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:  Well, isn't that in
12
         the old pollution act now the Secretary--
13
                   MR. STEIN:   Well, we can do this.  No,
14
         this is what is proposed.  We don't have that
15
         in legislation now.
16
                   MR. OEMING:  I see.
17
                   MR. STEIN:   I think we are going to
18
         have to have a lot of legislation, work on
19
         legislation in getting this through.  A bill has
20
         passed the Senate.
21
                   The issue here is this--and I think
22
         it is  very little different than on taking one
23
         of your highways in Michigan or something--if
24
         a man  is driving a car or a big truck and it
25

-------
   	3686

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          stalls in midst of the road, you have got two
 3
          problems.  It .just may be due to his negligence
 4
          when you have one or it may be due not to any
 5
          negligence at all.  If he gets stalled, what
 6
          you try to do is at his own expense get him to
 7
          drag that away so traffic can continue.  If he
 8
          can't do that, then you recognize that the
 9
          impediment on the life of the city is so much
10
          that you put out the city's police funds and
11
          you get out a tow truck and you take his auto-
12
          mobile away.  But if the guy wants to get his
13
          car back, he has to pay for it.  0. K.
14
                    The analogy is something like that
15
          when any vessel sinks, with cyanide, oil, or
16
          anything.  The first move is, M0. K., you have
17
          done this, this may be due to your fault or
18
          not, we are not getting into this.  You have done
19
          this, remove it, remove it at your  expense.  If
20
          you can't remove it at your expense, then we
21
          consider the consequences of that act so grave
22
          to  other people that there is going to be a
23
          mechanism where a Federal"--it will have to
24
          be  Federal, I guess--nwhere a governmental
25

-------
       	  .   	366?
 !                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          agency will  take  the  action under its own
 3
          expense  to remove it  and then  we will have
 4
          some machinery to get the money back.   0. K.
 5
                   I  don't want to go into any particular
 6
          point, but from the Federal point of view we are
 7
          going to need  legislation to do this.
 8
                   Sir?
 9
                   MR.  MITCHELL:   What  is the Federal
10
          legislation  today in  regard to if you have a
11
          major oil spill?   Is  there any responsibility
12
          by  the tanker  or  the  company that owns the
13
          tanker if there is a  major oil spill?
14
                   MR.  STEIN:   Do you mean under Federal
15
          law?
16
                   MR.  MITCHELL:   Yes.   What is it?
17
                   MR.  STEIN:   No,  in order for the oil
18
          spill to be  abated under the Federal law, it
19
          has to be a  discharge due to a wilful act or
20
          gross neglect,  and this  is--
21
                   MR.  OEMIN6:   They are hung on that
22
          "wilful."
23
                   MR.  MITCHELL:   Can new legislation be
24
          proposed to  change that?
25

-------
   	  3638,
 !                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2  I
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes,  sir.  Yes,  sir.   As
 3
          I  said,  with a legislation  like that,  you have
 4
          to be  a  better lawyer than  I am to win a case.
 5
                    MR-.  OEMING:  Mr.  Chairman,  I am ready
 6
          to pass  on and pass  over this.

                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.
 8                                         ,
                    MR.  OEMING:  I just hoped that we
 9
          might  come up  with something.
10
                    MR.  STEIN:   The bill  is through the
11
          Senate and the new legislation  takes  that out
12
          and also provides  that we can go  on our own
13
          if we  can't get the  ship to do  this,  clean it
14
          up and then try to get reimbursed later on,
15
          the same way as you  tow away a  car.
16
                    MR.>MITCHELL:   And you  are  suggesting
17
          that the Conferees should not make any decision
18
          in regard to this  new legislation, we  should
19
          Just ignore it?
20
                    MR.  STEIN:   No, no, I would  suggest
21
          that the best  effect  that you can have on this
22
          legislation,  sir,  is  the kind of  effect that
23
          every  one of your  States^ and especially Illinois
24               '                 '".   '         •   .  •
          has had  before.  You  know well1 how to  talk  to
25

-------
      .	:	:	3689

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         legislators> and I don't  think  that  the
 3
         enforcement  conference or the mechanism
 4
         of an  enforcement conference is the  best way
 5
         to get your  impact on  the legislative  process
 6
         felt.  You know very well how to do  that.   Now,
 7
         if you want  to use this,  this is all right,
 8
         but I  think  this is through the Senate,  you
 9
         know who the House Committee people  are.
10
                   MR. POOLE:   I couldn't see,  Mr.  Chair-
11
         man, we have much the  same issue as  commercial
12
         watercraft, where it would hurt anything for at
13
         least  the State Conferees  to put themselves  on
14
         record with a recommendation that the  current
15
         Federal Oil Pollution A.ct be at least  materially
16
         strengthened.
17
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
18
                   MR. POOLE:  Something of that  sort.
10
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.  Now, if  you
20
         want to say that--
21
                   MR. POOLE:  We  have been pretty  free
22
         here with recommendations  for legislation  for
23
         the States every time we  come up with  a  problem tha
24
         the  States don't have.
25

-------
   	3690

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                    MR. STEIN:  All right.

 3
                    MR. POOLE:  So I for one would favor

 4
          a recommendation.

 5
                    MR. STEIN:  Let me put it down that

 6                                                 ,
          the State Conferees believe that the protection

 7
          of the waters of Lake Michigan from oil pollu-

 8
          tion require the material strengthening of the

 9
          existing Federal Water Pollution Control Act.

10
                    0. K.?

11
                    MR. POOLE:  Yes.

12
                    MR. STEIN:  Is that fair?
13
                    MR. POOLE:  Yes, I was going to say
14
          oil, but I guess it is--
15
                    MR. STEIN:  Oil, I guess, yes, let's
16
          revise that, say oil.  Although it has been
17
          Incorporated.  But by Tuesday we"jwill have the
18
          proper titles,   0. K.?
19
                    May we go on to research?  Because we
20
          have got one major point yet.
21
                    Mr. Klassen?
22
                    MR. KLASSEN:  I have been working on
23
          something here,  Mr. Chairman, to go back again,
24
          I don't want to  delay this, but the boat show
25

-------
   	3631

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         opens tonight in Chicago and I think  that
 3
         we have some kind of an obligation to  give  a
 4
         statement regarding this watercraft,  and I  have
 5
         one proposed here.  I don't know whether you
 6
         want to get into it now, but it would  give  a
 7
         statement of the Conferees, at least  it would
 8
         be for some guidance as to what we are thinking.
 9
         I don't know whether you want to--
10
                   MR. STEINr  Why don't--
11
                   MR. KLASSEN:  This has to do with my
12
         charge as committee chairman for this.
13
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
14
                   (Laughter.)
15
                   MR. MITCHELL:   We had a quick meeting.
16
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Yes.
17
                   MR. STEIN: Here,  let's do this now,
18
         this is 13.
19

20
                      RECOMMENDATION #13
21                     	

22
                   MR. STEIN:   "The  four States within
23
         60:days meet and agree upon uniform rules and
24
         regulations  for  controlling wastes from watercraft,
25

-------
                  	3692
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION;

 2
          These  rules  and regulations  will  generally
 3
          conform with the Harbor Pollution Code adopted
 4
          by the City  of Chicago  in the Model Boating
 5
          Act which prohibits  outside--
 6
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Overside.
 7
                    MR.  STEIN:   --overside  disposal but
 8
          specifically prohibiting the use  of the•macerator
 9
          chlorinator.  Since  each of  the four States
10
          operates under different statutes,  Conferees
11
          will recommend to their respective  boards,
12
          legislatures,  and so  forth,  approval of the
13
          proposed uniform rules  and regulations to be
14
          effective by April 1969."
15
                    How is that date with you, Blucher?
16
                    MR.  KLASSEN::   Recbffimended.
17
                    MR.  POOLE:   I don't mind  making it
18
          effective then.
19
                    MR.  STEIN:  All right.   0. K.
20
                    MR.  OEMING:   Ours  is going to be
21
          changed.
22
                    MR.  STEIN:   Do you want us to meet
23
          with you or  Just the  States  on those?
24
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Oh,  no, no, no, we  will
25

-------
   	:	3693

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         invite the Federal Government.
 3
                   Off the record.
 4
                   (Off the record.)
 5
                   MB. OEMING:  Mr. Chairman.
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
 7
                   MR. OEMING:  This poses a little  doubt
 8
         in my mind here as far as Michigan is concerned.
 9
         I would hate something like this to come  out  and
 o
         give the impression to the boating fraternity
 .1
         that the Michigan regulations which have  now
 L2   •                     •                          '
         been adopted may be changed again.  We have
 .3
         gone through the battle here and we have  got
 14                                              .
         them adopted, and I don't want this to imply
 15
         that as a result of this conference we are
 16
         going to go back and change things.
 L7
                   MR. KLASSEN: All right.
 18
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.  Could we  say--
 L9
         let me have this.
 20
                   MR. KLASSEN:  All right.
 21
                   MR. OEMING:  "These rules and regula-
 22
         tions will generally conform with the Harbor
 23
         Pollution Code  . adopted by the City of  Chicago
24
         and the regulations adopted by the Michigan Water
25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          Resources Commission."
 3
                    MR. STEIN:  And the regulations
 4
          adopted by the Michigan--what do you call
 5
          yourself, Water Resources?
 6
                    MR. OEMING:   Water Resources Commission.
 7                                    .               .
          You can say the State  of Michigan if you want,
 8                         ;
          if you want something  to hang it on.
 9
                    MR. STEIN:  --Water Resources Commission
10
          and the Model Boating  Act."
ll
                    Let me read  this again:
12
                    "Representatives of the Conferees ""•-
13
          and I  Just didn't put--do you want the four
14
          States in there?  That is why he put the Federal
15
          Government.
16
                    MR. KLASSEN:  This is why I brought
17
          it up  here, so the Conferees could act on this
18
          statement,  because I think we are obligated
19
          to make some statement.
20
                    MR. STEIN: All right.
21
                    "Representatives of the Conferees within
22
          60 days meet and agree upon uniform rules and
23
          regulations for controlling wastes from watercraft.
24
          These  rules and regulations will generally conform
25

-------
   	3695

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         with  the Harbor  Pollution  Code adopted by the
 3
         City  of Chicago,  the  regulations  adopted by
 4
         the Michigan Water  Resources  Commission, and the
 5
         Model Boating Act which  prohibits overside
 6
         disposal, but—we don't  have  the  sentence right.
 7
                   MR. KLASSEN:   "And  specifically"?
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  MAnd," not "but."
 9
                   MR. KLASSEN:   "And."

10                                                          «
                   MR. STEIN:   "And specifically prohibits--
11
         right?
12
                   MR. KLASSEN: That is right.
13
                   MR. STEIN:   --"jprohibits  the use of
14
         the macerator chlorinator.  Since each of the
15
         four States operates  under different statutes,
16
         Conferees will recommend to their respective
17
         boards, legislatures,  and  so  forth,  approval of
18
         the uniform rules and regulations to be/effective
19
         by April 1969^"
20
                   Is this fair?'
21
                   MR. OEMING:  Our effective date is
22
         January 1970, isn't it?
23
                   MR. PURDY.:   Yes.
24
                   MR. KLASSEN:   Well,  could  we say
25

-------
   	       .	3696

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          "unless otherwise"--
 3
                    MR. STEIN:  Then why have the date?
 4                   '                          .   -      .
                    MR. HOLMER:  You can't depart from
 5
          a legislative act.
 6
                    MR. KLASSEN:  No, you can't.
 7              •••'-•           •     •
                    MR. STEIN:  "Approval of the proposed
 8
          rules and regulations" and then let it be period.
 9
          Let them ask you about your individual dates.
10
                    Do you think you want a date in there,
11
          Clarence?
12
                    MR. KLASSEN:  Well--
13
                    MR. STEIN:  If we could get it, I
14
          always--
15
                    MR. KLASSEN:  What do the rest of
16
          them think about this?
17
                    MR. POSTON:  I think we ought to have
18
          a date.
19
                    MR. MITCHELL:   It could be the date
20
          on seeking introduction  not on the date of
21
          accomplishment of the passage of legislation.
22
                    MR. POSTON: Effective date. I think—
23
                    MR. KLASSEN: Well,  it didn't say
24
          legislation,  it said regulations.  We don't
25

-------
                                                        3697

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         need legislation in Illinois.
 3
                   MR. POOLE:  We can't adopt  regulations,
 4
         Clarence, without legislation.  Where  you have
 5
         got a law that specifically exempts "boats on
 6
         Lake Michigan we can't come in and adopt a
 7
         regulation covering boats on  the  Take.
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  I think you would be
 9
         better off without this date  here.  The only
10
         date you can come.up with is  the  date  they
11
         are going to write their recommendation.
12
                   MR. KLASSEN:  All right.
13
                   MR. STEIN:  So let  me read--
14
                   MR. POOLE:  I want  to ask Mr; Oeming
15
         about whether the Michigan regulation: specifically
16
         prohibits macerator chlorinators--
17
                   MR. OEMING:  No.
18
                   MR. POOLE:  --or whether this is
10
         Just a policy of the State of Michigan.
20
                   MR. OEMING:  No. It says that you
21
         would approve the reeirculating device such
22
         as holding tanks or the incinerators  and that
23
         any other device will be subject  to the approval
24
         of the Commission.  And at the present time we
25

-------
                 	;	3698

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          are not approving macerator chlorinators.
 3
                    MR. STEIN:   Yes.  But the statement
 4                    •-.-••
          we have here, and I am just asking as a drafts-
 5
          man now,  says it specifically prohibits the
 6
          use of the macerator  chlorinator.  You don't.
 7
                    MR. PC-OLE:   No.
 8
                    MR. OEMING:   No.
 9
                    MR. STEIN:   "And does not approve the
10
          use of"--

11
                    MR. KLASSEN:   "Does  not approve,11
12
          all right.   That is good.
13
                    MR.  STEIN:   "And does not approve."
14
                    MR.  KLASSEN:  I think we are obligated
15
          to  let the  boating  fraternity  know where we
16
          stand  on  this, because  a lot of them are wanting
17
          to  put this  in.
18
                    MR.  STEIN:  All  right.   Let me read
19
          this again,  and  I think we've  got it:
20
                    "Representatives  of  the Conferees within
21
          60  days meet and agree  upon uniform  rules  and
22
          regulations  for  controlling wastes from watercraft.
23
          These  rules  and  regulations will  generally conform
24
         with the  Harbor  Pollution  Code  adopted  by  the City
25

-------
                                	3699

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          of Chicago,  the regulations adopted by the
 3
          Michigan Water Resources Commission, and the
 4
          Model  Boating Act which prohibits overside
 5
          disposal and does not approve the use of the
 6
          macerator chlorinator.   Since each of the
 7
          four States  operates  under different statutes,
 8
          the Conferees will recommend to their respective
 9 ^         '
          boards,  legislatures, and so forth, approval

10                                                      „
          of the proposed uniform rules and regulations.
11
                    MR. KLASSEN:   All right.
12
                    MR. STEIN:   All right?
13
                    MR. KLASSEN:   All right.
14
                    MR. STEIN:   We are in shape.
15
                    Thank you,  Mr. Klassen.
16
                    MR. OEMING:  That will  fix you up in
17
          good shape.
18
                    MR. STEIN:   We have one major issue that
19
          we are going to have  to get.  Let's get on with it.
20
          And I  don't  mean research;  it's alewives.
21

22                  RECOMMENDATIONS #24-28

23
                    MR. STEIN:  "'24. Research be accelerated
24
          in ways  to reduce the rate of eutrophication."
25

-------
                                                        37PO

 I                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  OEMING:   I wonder about that.
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   What does that mean?
 4
                    MR.  OEMING:   Yes.
 5
                    MR.  STEIN:   What does that mean,
 6
          gentlemen?
 7
                    MR.  OEMING:   Aren't we trying to
 8
          reduce it by what we  are trying to do here
 9
          in others?   I  don't know.
10
                    MR.  POOLS:   I wonder what is wrong
11
          with 25 in the printed book instead of four
12
          specific--                              •
13
                    MR.  STEIN:   What page on the printed
14
          book?
15
                    MR.  MITCHELL:  Sixty-seven.
16
                    MR.  POOLE:   Doesn't 25 cover every-
17
          thing that is  in these four and more?
18
                    MR.  P03TON:   Supposed to be, yes, sir.
19
                    MR.  STEIN:   'Why don't we use that?
20
                    MR.  SCHNEIDER:  This was suggested--
21
                    MR.  POSTON:   Well, more specificity
22
          was requested last time.
23
                    .MR.  OEMING:   Was it?
24
                    MR.  STEIN:   I don't know that we got
25

-------
   	     3701

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         more specificity.
 3
                   MR. PQOLE:  I don't either.  The only
 4                        '.      .-..-.
         thing, 25 confines the research to the paper
 6
         and steel industries and they broadened that
 6
         in 28, as I JT^emember it.  I don't know how much
 7                     """     . . .
         research is needed in the steel industry.
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  Neither do I.
 9
                   Well, we can strike out those
10
         particulars.
11
                   Let me try this.  How about 25 and
12
         strike out "particularly of the paper and steel
13
         industries"?
H
                   MR. MITCHELL:  One of the things that
15
         I have been asking Mr. Poole about is the
16
         increased use of the method of recirculatir.g
17
         the effluents, and I feel that it looks like
18
         a lot of industries are now trying to do that.
19
         We have noticed it somewhat in Indiana.  And
20
         I don't know whether we need research to find
21
         out cheaper ways or better ways of making this
22
         available or to prove to people that it is.more

         economical or what, but it seems to me if more

         and more people went to recirculation it certainly

-------
   	:	37P8

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         would reduce a lot of our pollution problems.
 3
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  Well, I think  they
 4
         are recognizing that on the housekeeping features.
 5
                   Now, again, I don't know, I defer  TOO Mr.
 6
         Poole and the experts on that, in the question of
 7
         research.  For example, right in Chicago,
 B
         Wisconsin Steel has gone to that, U.S. Steel
 9
         had so much water they didn't.  I think the
10
         idea of recirculation is here.
11
                   Now,you have to adapt that to the
1*
         particular plant, the particular process.  I
13
         am not sure that we ever would have solved
14
         this sugar beet waste problem, which you don't
15
         have here, unless we got a recirculating system.
16
         Do you want to put it in specifically?
17
                   MR. MITCHELL:  I was suggesting  that
18
         the two largest industries we have in the  Lake
19
         Michigan area are paper and steel, and I would
20

         not want to think that--if we need research  to
21

         assist them in continuing the trend of recircu-
22

         lation, we ought to come forth with some research,
23

         we ought not to eliminate them from the need
ffH

         for research.
25

-------
                   	3703

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN:  No,  I  don't  think  we  are
 3
         eliminating them.
 4
                   MR. MITCHELL:  Someone suggested  we
 5
         take them out.
 6
                   MR. -STEIN:  No,  I  was suggesting
 7
         making the list and other—here is what  it
 8
         says, "improved treatment  and other measures for
 9
         handling  Industrial wastes," without a  bill
10
         of particulars.   Because once you single out
11
         two industries,  then here  they have got  several
12
         more industries, they have got pulp and  paper,
13
         oil, and food processing.  The difficulty is,
14
         once you get on  the list you are really
15
         limiting yourself rather than doing it.
16
                   MR.  MITCHELL:   I understand.
17
                   MR.  STEIN:  Right.
18
                   How  is 25 this  way, then?  Do you want
19
         to put  anything  on recirculation?  "including
20

         recirculation''' I would like to put  in there.
21

                   MR.  POOLE:   I  don't think it would
22

         hurt.   It  is a thing  that I think we  all  are
23

         encouraging.
24

                   MR.  STEIN:   All right, let's do that.
25

-------
   	3704

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                     Strike  "particularly the paper
 3
          an.  iieel  industries"  and say "improved
 4
          treatment  and other  measures  for handling
 5
          industrial wastes,  including  recirculation."
 6
                    MR. POOLE:   0.  K.
 7
                    MR. STEIN:   Right?   I think that
 8
          is  an  improvement.
 9
                    Right.   Thank you,  Mr. Mitchell.
10
                    MR. KLASSEN:   May I make one other--'
11
                    MR. STEIN:   Yes,  sir.
12
                    MR. KLASSEN:   --suggestion, Mr.
13
          Chairman,  an addition.
14
                    I would  like  to see the thought in
15
          here  that  we emphasize  the utilization of present
16
          knowledge, intensify the use  and utilization
17
          of  present knowledge,  and not give the image that
18
          we  need a  lot more research.   I am not too sure
19
          we  do.'  I  would like to see some of the present
20
          knowledge  put into practice that we know about.
21
                    MR. OEMING:   Agreed.
22
                    MR. POSTON:   Do you want to put that
23
          in  a  conclusion?
24
                    MR. -STEIN:   No, let's put that right
25
          here.

-------
   	      •	3705
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    All  right,  let's  start this again.
 3
          Let's  say,  put:
 4
                    "Present  knowledge on pressing
 5
          problems  on Lake  Michigan--pressing problems
 6
          of  the Lake Michigan  basin  be vigorously
 7
          employed  in the  control of  water pollution."
 8
                    MR.  POOLE:   Would you do that again,
 9
          please, Mr. Chairman?
10                              „
                    MR.  STEIN:    Present knowledge on
11
          pressing  problems  of  the Lake Michigan basin
12
          be  immediately employed to  abate water pollution.
13
                    MR.  POOLE:  Where  are you putting
14
          that,  at  the end?
15
                    MR.  STEIN:   Right at the beginning.
16
                    MR.  POOLE:   Oh.
17
                    MR.  OEMING:   Why  don't we then drop
18
          down and  say,  "Areas  in which research appears
19
          to  be  needed to  include"?
20
                    MR.  STEIN:   No, don't start--then say:
21
                    "Areas  in which research is needed-^"
22
          go  right  on from  there, right?
23
                    MR.  OEMING:   All  right.
24
                    MR.  STEIN:   Right?  And then we have
25

-------
   	3706

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          that in perspective.
 3
                    Is that all right?  Do you see
 4
          where that is?
 5
                    All right,  I think that will meet
 6
          what Mr. Klassen has  pointed out.
 7                                            .            .
                    Are we in agreement with that,
 *
          gentlemen?
 9
                    MR. OEMING:  Now, may I suggest one
10
          more thing,  Mr. Chairman?
11
                    MR. STEIN:   Yes.
12
                    MR. OEMING:  In talking with Dr.
13
          Weinberger yesterday, he indicated that he
14
          was  preparing some research and going into
15
          some studies on nutrient removal from waste
16
          stabilization'lagoons.  Is that important
17
          enough to put in here?
18
                    MR. STEIN:   No,  I don't — this is a--
19
          let  me put it this way.
20
                    MR. OEMING:  I guess you have got
21
          it in here,  nutrients from wastewaters.
22
                    MR. STEIN:   Nutrients, we are going
23
          out  with those duck farmers on Long Island in
24
          a couple of  weeks, and if we can solve it there
25

-------
      	37Q7

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
         we will  get  it here.  He knows  how to do it.
 3
         It is a  question  of economics.
 4
                   MR.  OEMING:  0.  K.

 5
                   MR.  STEIN:  A  guy  dealing with a

 6
         little old lagoon, you know.

 7
                   MR.  OEMING:  0.  K., skip it.

 8
                   MR.  STEIN:  All  right.   Let's  try

 9
         this next one.

10
                   MR.  OEMING:  Alewives?
11
                   MR.  STEIN:  Alewives.

12
                   MR.  OEMING:  Wait  a minute,  "industrial

13
         waste treatment --well,  that is  in.
14


15
                      RECOMMENDATION #29
16


17
                   MR.  STEIN:  Alewives.
18
                   MR.  OEMING:  Alewives.

19
                   Mr.  Chairman.
20
                   MR.  STEIN:  Yes.
21
                   MR.  OEMING:  If you .will permit  me,
22
         I would like to offer a  substitute for this 29.
23
         And let me read it.  I am sure that  you  can't
24
         evaluate it today, but I would like  to toss it
25

-------
                    	37Q8

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         into  the  record.
 3
                    MR. STEIN:  Go ahead.
 4
                    MR. OEMING:  "it  is  recommended  that
 5
         the Great Lakes Basin Commission  and  the Great
 6
         Lakes Fishery Commission, in conjunction with
 7
         the affected States and  appropriate Federal
 8
         agencies,  develop a long-range program  for
 9
         control and management of the  alewife.  How-
10
         ever, in  order to cope with the immediate
11
         problem,  it is recommended  that the Federal,
12
         State and local governmental agencies involved
13
         should give their complete  support to the
14
         recommended program that is currently being
15
         coordinated and developed by the  Great  Lakes
16
         Basin Commission to make every effort to reduce
17
         the damages that could be done by the most
18
         likely massive die-off of alewives this coming
19
         spring and summer."
20
                   I offer this tentatively as a sub-
21
         stitute,  Mr. Chairman, with the provision  that
22
         you may wish--I don't want  to quarrel about this
23
         now too much, but I would like you to have a
24
         chance to  look this over when  it  is typed  up and
25

-------
  ^__	  3709

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          see whether you  could  accept  this  as  a sub-
 3          .
          stltute.
 4
                   And let me tell  you a  little of
 5
          the background of this.  First of  all, the
 6
          Great Lakes Basin Commission  is  mentioned
 7
          here, they are active  in this area in trying
 8
          to pull things together to take  care  of
 9
          these problems.  Mr. Mitchell, who is the
10
          co-chairman of a committee on the  Great Lakes
11
          Basin Commission, has  assisted in  the develop-
12
          ment of the wording that I have  presented
13
          here, which started with my Department of
14
          Conservation Director, who is also on the
15
          Great Lakes Basin Commission  and is active
16
          in this matter.
17
                   This is the  background.
18
                   MR. STEIN:   Yes.
19
                   MR. OEMING:  And I  would like you
20
          to accept it in  this way.
21
                   MR. STEIN:   Right.
22
                   MR. POSTON:  Do  you want copies of
23
          that made and distributed  here?
24
                   MR. OEMING:  Well,  it  is up to you,
25

-------
                                           	3710

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         how you want to—

 3
                   MR. STEIN:  Let's get  the proposals

 4
         on the table.

 5
                   Here is what we have had, and I

 6
         have been listening to the testimony on the

 7
         alewives that we have had before, been working

 8
         with the problem and talking to  the powers-that -

 9
         be in Washington.

10
                   Now, I think we have two problems

11
         as we see it here.  One, we have a long-range

12
         solution problem here, probably  to get the

13
         ecology put into balance.
14
                   MR. OEMING:  Balance.
15
                   MR. STEIN:  Whether it is coho salmon
16
         or something else, I don't doubt that this
17
         eventually will be worked out.

18
                   The notion, though, as I again under-
19
         stand the testimony, we are going to have an
20
         alewife problem, probably a severe one this
21
         summer7 in '69$ '70 might be another peak year.
22
         And for three years, at least, or perhaps more,
23
         until this happens.  Unless we take some real
24
         action to handle the alewives, we will have
25

-------
      	3711

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         these tremendous nuisance conditions this
 3
         summer.  As the Conferees have pointed out
 4
         already,  the death of alewives may not be
 5
         caused by pollution,  but when they die they
 6
         sure cause a pollution problem.
 7
                   Here is what we had in mind, and I
 8
         think unless we get to work within the next
 9
         couple of weeks, we are going to miss the
10
         season.  There are six critical weeks, as I
11
         understand it.  The thought was this, that if
12
         we  could  seine these  alewives while they were
13
         alive before they died,  we would be better off.
14
         Getting these alewives out would do two things.
15
         We  wouldn't have dead alewives and as an
16
         incidental thing,  we  would be lowering the
17
         phosphate content of  the lake.
18
                   The point is,  what do you do with the
W
         alewives?   Who gets the  alewives?   And I think
20
         we  have to deal with  present equipment.   I was
21
         Just  on the phone  yesterday.   Either we  use
22
         American  trawlers--and I don't know that we
23
         have  enough.   If we have to  do it,  we may have
24
         to  use  foreign trawlers,  such as  Canadian trawlers.
25

-------
   	3713
 I                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         To do that, you may have to  get an amendment
 3
         to the Jones Act, and Senator  Proxmire  of
 4
         Wisconsin has an amendment in  and they  are
 5
         awaiting the deliberations of  the Conferees
 6
         to determine what the Department of the Interior
 7
         is going to say on that, whether we have to
 8
         get it or not.
 9
                   Here was the thought.   In  exploring
10
         this, and I am absolutely not  sure of the
11
         definitive figures, but I think we have a ball
12
         park estimate, that it costs about $550 to
13
         keep a trawler in the water  a  day.  There is
14
         a six-day week period.  Perhaps we can  do
15
         this for $500 thousand.  Here  is the  approach.
16
                   The Federal Government, perhaps, the
17
         Federal Water Pollution Control Administration--!
18
         don't know who else-r-will make the effort to
19
         get this out of its operating  funds,  possibly, and
20
         can come up, say, with something around a
21
         quarter of a million dollars.  Now, if  the
22
         four States will match to bring It up to a
23
         half a million, and you may  have to go higher,
24
         but I don't know that we can go higher  out of
25

-------
   	3713

 1          :            EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         our operating funds, it won't be too much,
 3
         it is about $63 thousand a State, and this
 4
         will mean much less than some of the proposals
 5
         I have heard from the various States.  If
 6
         we can assemble a trawler fleet augmented by
 7          ;:.                     '        .  ' •          •
         barges, because I don't think they will be
 8
         able to ride up to the grinders all the time
 9
         and come back and make the trip, there will not
10
         be enough capacity in those meal grinders to
11
         take care of the alewives, and even if there
12
         were we would produce so much meal we would
13
         wreck the meal market.
14
                   So the notion is, one, we put as
15
         many alewives into these meal grinders as we
16
         possibly can.  The States would have to supply
17
         us with sites to put the alewives in a land
18
         disposal unit and cover it, and this may wind
19
         up as a fertilizer, and then we would have to
20
         work--again think of this program as trawler
21
         to barge and then the barge to a disposal system,
22
         either a grinder or a site.  Any of the alewives
23
         which would get through the network, and I don't
24                •         .      •           '.....
         know that we could be perfect on this, would be
25

-------
                            	3714

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2

          the responsibility of the cities and the
 3

          counties to pick up.  They would have to
 4

          have standby equipment in the same way as
 5

          they have snow removal equipment.  This
 6

          would be part of the program so when the
 7

          alewives--some of them are going to get
 8

          through—would begin hitting the beaches,
 9

          no one would wring their hands in anguish
10

          for responsibility.
11

                    Where do we pick up the alewives?
12

          I think we would have to rely on the State
13

          fish and game departments and the Pish and
14

          Wildlife Service.  What I am suggesting here
15

          is that if we are going to handle the alewife
16
          problem this year, we immediately appoint a
17

          committee.  I don't care who the coordinating
18

          committee is so long as you have one.  Perhaps
19
          we can be ready to appoint the members by
MV

          the time we come here next Tuesday.  The
21

          Federal-State committee should get together
22

          within, I would say, two weeks after next
23

          Tuesday with a proposal whether you can get


          up the State money.  Maybe you will want to
25

-------
   	3715

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         look at this this weekend.    Whatever  you
 3
         do, it is  going  to  cost money, either
 4
         State money or Federal money. Then  come up  with a
 6
         program where we are going  to be  able  to work
 6
         on a reasonable  variant of  this program to
 7
         handle the alewife  program  this season.
 8
                    Mr. Mitchell?
 9
                    MR. MITCHELL:   I  think  what  you have
10
         Just suggested has  already  been done by the
11
         Great Lakes Basin Committee, and.  Mr. Chuck
12
         Stoddard,  who is the Regional Coordinator
13
         for the Department  of the Interior, and I were
14
         appointed  co-chairmen with  five States  and
15
         all four of these States  plus Ohio, and we
16
         met and we formed a working task  force  which
17
         was headed up by Joe Puncachar from the Fish
18
         and Wildlife Service, who works in  the  Com-
19
         missioner's Office  directly under the  Commissioner,
20
         and this work group came  up with  a  six-point
21
         program to take  care of the dead  alewife problem
22

         for the summer,  as  well as  they could  work  out
23

         a program, and on your desk back  in Washington
24

         and on my  desk and  others back home since we
25

-------
   	.     	3716:

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         have  been  here an  invitation has  been sent to
 3
         them  for a conference  to be  held  here in this
 4              '  .                                     '    •
         hotel on March 20th  to begin the  implementation
 5
         of such  a  proposed program.
 6
                    Briefly, the program consists  of
 7
         these points,  although some  of the  details are
 8
         yet to be  worked out,  and so that everybody
 9
         knows exactly what this  means back  home  in
10
         specifics,  but one is,  and one thing  we  cannot
11
         overlook,  that the long  range has to  be  given
12
         high  priority or we will be  having  massive die-
13
         offs  forever.   That has  to be done.
14
                    MR.  STEIN:   I  think that  is  correct.
15
         But the  question is, sir,  where is  the money
16
         going to come  from this  year?
17
                    MR.  MITCHELL:  That is right.   Well,
18
         there  is more  than Just--first of all, we  need
19
         a good monitoring program  to find out where

•         they  are and  in which  direction they are heading,

         and each State  is being  asked  to  supply  and each
22
         Federal  agency  is being  asked  to  supply  a  portion
23
         of this  monitoring program,  which will be  co-
24
         ordinated by  the Bureau  of Commercial Fisheries,
25

-------
 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         and my people in my State  are working with
 3                       7
         our National Guard people  to determine  if we
 4
         can supply two weeks of aerial monitoring and
 5
         each State is being asked  these questions now
 6
         back home.
 7
                   And then the second one is that
 8
         Chicago had such good success in using  diverting
 9
         techniques to keep the alewife from coming
10
         into the intakes that we are asking the  Chicago
ll
         people and one of the Fish and Wildlife  people
12
         to come up with a technical bulletin that will
13
         be sent to all intakes people so that they  can
14
         apply some of the same successful methods.
15
                   And the other one is that we need to
16
         then--we do, though, have some disagreement with
17
         the comments that you made in regards to whether
18
         you should make an effort of. picking up  live
19
         alewife or dead alewife.  There are six billion
20

         pounds of alewife out in Lake Michigan, which
21

         is about 95 percent of the total fish population,
22

         and all estimates from the fisheries people is
23

         that any trawling effort would just hardly be

         noticeable, that probably the best effort ought
25

-------
   ^___	3718

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          to be applied if after you have monitored
 3
          you find out where the dead fish are and in
 4
          which direction the winds are carrying them
 5
          and that you then set up a priority system
 6
          of what areas you must prevent this if at all
 7
          possible,  and then that you coordinate your
 8
          skimming operations of dead alewives in front
 9
          of these high priority areas.
10
                  • 5.MR. STEIN:   How would you--
11
                    By the way, I made no statement,
12
          I  said this  is a reasonable variant because
13
          we had to  do that.  But how would you do the
14
          skimming,  with nets or other devices?
15
                   :MR. MITCHELL: No, with trawlers.
16
                    MR. STEIN:   With trawlers?
17
                    MR. MITCHELL:  Yes.
18
                    MR. STEIN:   Here is what I am getting
19
          at,  Mr.  Mitchell,  and I look at this from the
20
          question are we' going to prevent it this summer.
21
                    The question is, either we get all
22
          these devices and  a coordinating committee and
23
          we ask all  the people to do it and maybe it will
24
          work,  or else what we do, we recognize we have a
25

-------
   	3719

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         crisis here,and we probably will have  on Lake
 3
         Michigan, we pool our resources and our funds
 •4        '  •          •          •     - •     '
         and get a fleet together and put some  active man
 5                          •-..'•-'
         in charge that can call the shots.  And again
 6
         we have no brief as to who that is.
 7                         .  .
                   I think your key point is we are
 8
         going to have to have someone in the Federal
 9
         Pish and Wildlife Service or the!State fish
10
         service who is going to have to tell us where
11
         to go out and get these fish where it  is going
12
         to be the most productive, because this isn't
13
         the kind of information or the kind of know-how
14
         that is ordinarily available to water  pollution
15
         people.
16
                   MR. MITCHELL:  The Bureau of Commercial
17
         Fisheries has indicated they would be  glad to
18
         be chairman of the monitoring operation and
19
         try to coordinate this information so  that
20
         we could make' those decisions.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  What I am asking, sir,
22
         is how can we best get the people assigned and
23
         the money assigned to the problem?  You think
24
         that would be best done by this other  group in
25

-------
                                                         3720

 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         a non-water  pollution  control  group?   Because
 3
         if someone else wants  to put up  that money
 4
         other  than Water  Pollution  Control  and the
 5
         Federal  Government,we  would be delighted.   But
 6
         I haven't seen any volunteers.
 7
                   MR.  MITCHELL:   No, you are the first
 8
         from the Federal  establishment to volunteer
 9
         any money.
10
                   (Laughter.)
11
                   MR.  MITCHELL:   In fact--
12
                   MR.  STEIN:   And I haven't seen any
13
         State  come up  with any money.
14
                   MR.  MITCHELL:   And I want to be  sure
15
         you come to  our meeting  with your money because
16
         I think  maybe--
17
                   MR.  STEIN:   No, the  question is,  sir,
18
         the question I am making, if we  are talking about
19
         coming here  with  money,  this means  our money
20
         is available only on a matching  basis,  sort of
21
         like at  a charity drive.  If you want  to put
22
         up the money to match  us, we will match you.
23
                   But  the point  is, I  am not sure  that
24
         we should not  start  this  almost  immediately and
25

-------
                      	3723.

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          come  forward with the  plan and try to assemble in
 3
          the  suite  and put them together.   Is your view
 4
          that  you want to  wait  and go through this
 5
          mechanism  of the  meeting or we have to kick
 6
          something  off right  now?
 7
                    MR. MITCHELL:  No, the  working group
 8
          headed  by  Mr. Puncachar is meeting next, I
 9
          think,  Tuesday and Wednesday,  I am not sure,
10
          in Ann  Arbor to finalize  the specifics of the
11
          plan.   And I am certain that knowledge that
12
          money is available from the PWPCA to match
13
          money with the States  can be reconciled and
14
          developed  in--
15
                    MR. STEIN:   Not available; it may be
16
          available.
17
                    MR.  MITCHELL: All right,  may be
18
          available.
19
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.   We are  ready to talk
20
          to you  with  an active  program. I think the key,
21
          and the figure  we  don't have from anyone,  Mr.
22
          Mitchell,  is  really what  this  is  going to cost
23
          this  summer.
24
                    MR.  MITCHELL:   The Bureau of Commercial
25

-------
   	3722

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          Fisheries has tried to analyze what this would
 3
          cost if we would talk about skimming of dead
 4
          alewife in front of high priority locations.
 5
                    MR. STEIN:  How much?
 6
                    MR. MITCHELL:  And they are talking
 7
          about less than $500 thousand.  It was 300--
 8
                    MR. STEIN:  All right.  Now, what
 9
          are you going to do with the fish after you
10
          skim them?
11
                    MR. MITCHELL:  Then, as you have
12
          already indicated,  we are already in process
13
          in Indiana, and I presume the other States
14
          are doing the same, contacting the people who
15
          have these high priority places and saying,
16
          "if you want the skimming operation you will
17
          have to provide the sanitary landfill to take
18
          care of the fish that are collected."
19
                    And the other stage is that, with
20
          Michigan's errorts, analyses have been made
21
          of the various types of beach cleaning equip-
22
          ment that seem to work, because there are
23
          still going to be some come to the beaches.
24
                    MR. STEIN:  That is right.  Will that
25

-------
   	^723

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         be a state and--rather, local  and  city  respon-
 3
         sibility?
 4
                   MR. MITCHELL:  It would  be  proposed
 5
         that some State agency purchase  the equipment,
 6
         assign an operator, and then sublease it  on
 7
         an hourly or unit-sized basis  so that each
 8
         community can afford  the best  equipment to
 9
         keep their beaches clean.  This  is being  worked
10
         out and cost figures  are being obtained of
11
         what this would be.
12
                   MR. STEIN:  All  right.
13
                   MR. MITCHELL:  And so  I  would suggest
14
         that no doubt if you  get this  money--
15
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  By the way,  do  you
16
         have a suggestion of  anyone now  who could really
17
         run this and be the operating  chief of  this for
18
         this year?
19
                   MR. MITCHELL:  Well, I would  assume
20
         that this would be finalized next  Tuesday and
21
         Wednesday.  Right now Mr.  Puncachar,  of the
22
         Pish and Wildlife Service, is  heading up  the
23
         work task force.
24
                   MR. STEIN:  Maybe he is  the man.
25

-------
   ^___	 372*1

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                    MR.  MITCHELL:  Maybe he Is.
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   But I think we should
 4
          put a man in charge and start making plans.
 5
          I know we may have the problems unless we

 6
          do this,  and I suggest this next week.  There

 7
          are two factors:  1) that we put someone in
 8
          charge; 2) if we  are going to get up some
 9
          Federal and State money for a coordinated
10
          effort, we get to work and get it up   Now,
11
          I know and have worked with you long enough
12
          in the States that I haven't seen it any
13
          easier for you to wave a magic wand and get
14
          the check finally out.
15
                    Unless  we start right now, Mr.
16
          Mitchell, and Unless your States start right
17
          now, we are going to miss this year.  I am
18
          sure there isn't any time to waste.  I think
19
          the plans we have outlined are very close to
20
          each other.  If we come back here next Tuesday
21
          and endorse a man who is going to coordinate
22
          these plans and we try to see with all the
23
          four States here and the Federal Government
24
          what kind of statement we can make on getting
25

-------
                                                         3725

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          the  funds  and  matching this  and getting to
 3
          work,  I  think  we  will  be in  much better shape.
 4
          Because  I  think if  we  are going to do this,
 5
          Mr.  Oeming, Mr. Klassen,  Mr.  Holmer,  Mr.
 6
          Poole  and  yourself  are going  to have  to go
 7
          back when  yo\\  finally  get through here, knock
 8
          on your  Governor's  door or your State comp-
 9
          troller's  door and  tell him   what the bite is
10
          going  to be.
11
                    MR.  MITCHELL:   I would hope,  though,
12
          that we would  not in that with  two separate  groups
13
                    MR.  STEIN:   No,  we  don't want--
14
                    MR.  MITCHELL:   —recommend  the State
15
          agencies going back home  and  trying to  get
16
          approval--
17
                    MR. STEIN:   No.  This  is  precisely
18
         what we do not want to  do.
19
                   Here is our  problem,  sir.   We would
20
         be delighted if your agency,   if  this  is the
21
         appropriate agency, would do it. But  here  is  what
22
         we are faced with.  The people who  bore the
23
         brunt of this last year when we had the alewlfe
24
         problem were the pollution control  agencies.
25

-------
   	3726

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         There is no way we can absolve ourselves from
 3
         this responsibility.
 4
                   It seems to me we have got two
 5
         problems.  Either we are going to do the Job
 6
         ourselves or be darned sure that someone else
 7
         is going to move ahead and do the Job.  But
 8
         we can't sit back and let something dissolve
 9
         in coordinating committees and have one of
10
         these smelly summers again, because the people
11
         are not going to come to these fancy commissions
12
         or resources or planning groups, but they are
13
         going to come to the water pollution agencies and a:
14
         us how about it.
15
                   MR. MITCHELL:  It is the same con-
16
         elusion the Great Lakes Basin Commission reached,
17
         and I think—well, Mr. Poston has been to our
18
         meetings--
19
                   MR. POSTON:  Yes.
20
                   MR. MITCHELL:  You were at the meeting
21
         when we discussed this, I believe, and Mr.
22
         Stoddard, who represents this group on there
23
         as co-chairman of the committee, and I am
24
         certain that we can work out a solution that
25

-------
   	,	3727

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2                     ,
          certainly would take advantage of your offer.
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:  I don't want to bandy
 4
          names around,  but I have known Chuck Stoddard
 5
          for a^long time and he is an active go-go guy.
 6
          He may be your man.
 7
                    Is he here?  I haven't seen him.
 8
                    MR.  MITCHELL:  No, he is not here.
 9
                    MR.  STEIN:  Why don't the States
10
          and you get together?  I am certain that
11
          the sooner we put a man in charge to
12
          assemble this, the sooner we are going
13
          to be able to get up a definitive budget:
14
          the sooner we are going to be able to go back
15
          to our respective agencies and get the money;
16
          and the sooner we are going to be able to
17       ''
          assemble the trawler fleet.  If we don't start
18
          now, every day lost is going to be tough,
19
          because we are going to have to make the hard^
20
          crunchy decision whether we have enough American
21
          trawlers or we have to go somewhere else and
22
          get them.  If we do, we are going to have
23
          to try to get a, bill through the Congress and
24
          we are going to have to get certain real
25

-------
                                                         3720

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          commitments  on these  land  disposal  sites  and
 3
          the  States are going  to have  to be  satisfied that
 4
          we have  got  enough earth-moving equipment there
 5
          to cover up  the alewives when they  hit the site.
 6
          And  I  don't  think, given all  those  tests, that
 7
          there  is any time  to  be lost.
 8
                   MR.  MITCHELL: We already have  a man
 9
          assigned to  this full time in Indiana who is
10
          trying to work out our responsibility.
11
                   MR.  STEIN:   Yes. I think what  we all
12
          have to  agree  on is the--I don't think we are
13
          going  to have  trouble getting a Federal man or
14
          a State  man.  What we need is a central man
15
          that we  can  all agree on and  who is going to take
16
          this job on.
17
                   Could you contact  this group and see
18
          if we  can be almost ready  to  go by  next Tuesday,
19
          at least with some assignments, and I would hope
20
          budget so we can begin talking money?  Because
21
          without  money we are  not going to do it.
22
                   MR.  OEMING:  This matter, then, Mr.
23
          Chairman, is laid  on  the table until Tuesday
24
          to permit Mr.  Mitchell to  give some evaluation to
25

-------
   	.      	     3729

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         the questions you have raised  here,  that have
 3
         been raised, and we discuss  it further on
 4
         Tuesday, is that the--
 5
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr.  Mitchell,  would you
 6
         and Indiana and your group come  back with a
 7
         proposal, and I think the  proposal,  the long-
 8
         range one, won't be hard to  work out.  But the
 9
         other proposal should be a definitive proposal
10
         of who is going to coordinate  the thing, what
11
         you expect the Federal Government and the States
12
         and the communities to do  in order to get this
13
         alewife problem solved,and maybe we  can all
14
         subscribe to that when we  come back  on Tuesday.
15
         0. K.?
16
                   MR. MITCHELL:  I beg to differ with
17
         you on the long-range program; it won't be
18
         easy to work out.  The long-range program
19
         requires considerable amount of  Federal
20
         appropriation for lamprey  control and for
21
         stocking of predator fish  which  has  not been
22
         forthcoming, and if we don't get it  forthcoming
23
         we are not going to solve  the  problem.
24
                   MR. STEIN:  Sir, here  is what I meant,
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          and I am sorry. .I meant the recommendation
 3
          won't be hard to work out.
 4
                    MR. MITCHELL: All right.
 5
                    MR. STEIN:   Because we are In agreement.
 6
                    MR. OEMING:  I think this is the best
 7
          way to leave this.
 8
                    MR. STEIN:   But as operators, let me
 9
          put it this way:  You understand, sir, that
10
          for the long-range problem, as far as we in
11
          water pollution are concerned, the long-range
12
          solution of the alewife problem will rest in
13
          other people's hands  other than the water
14
          pollution, agencies, and it is very easy to
15
          make a recommendation when someone else is going
16
          to do the work and get the money.
17
                    The way we  are going to be Judged is
18
          if we are going to stop pollution this year,
19
          next year,  and the year after.  Where pollution
20
          is, there we have  to  put in the work, there
21
          we have to put up  the money, and there we have
22
          to work as  operating  agencies.  This is where
23
          we are going to have  to show our mettle as
24
          water pollution people, and I think we are going
25

-------
    .  	:	3733:

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2

         to have  to  do that very  soon*
 3

                   All right.
 4

                   MR. OEMING:  Good  enough.
 5

                   MR. STEIN:   if we  are set  on that,
 6

         let me get  the  last point, progress  meetings.
 7


 8

                     RECOMMENDATION #30-32
 9


10

                   MR. OEMINGt  Do you want six-months
11
         progress meetings, is  that It?
12

                   MR. STEIN:   I  would suggest until we
13

         get this case squared  away and  we  have so much
14

         In Lake  Michigan that  we have progress meetings
15

         every six months until the Conferees decide—
16

                   MR. OEMINO:  Otherwise?
17

                   MR. STEIN:   --they want  them for a
18

         longer period.  We have  used this  in other
19

         cases.
20

                   Our experience has been  In St.  Louis
21

         and in,  oh, the lower end of  the lake and  In
22                                                       .

         other places that after  the  first  two or  three
23

         progress meetings we don't have to have them
£r9

         that frequently anymo.ce*-.- .,  But  I think with all
25

-------
              	.	;	3732

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         the problems and the pressures we are going to
 3
         have here, we should have progress meetings to
 4
         be held on a. six-months basis unless the Con-
 5
         ferees decide they want to hold  them on a
 6
         different basis and the conference to be re-
 7
         convened at the call of the Chairman. 0. K.?
 8
                   Yes, sir.
 9
                   MR. HOLMER:  Mr. Chairman, I have been
10
         unaccustomedly quiet this morning, as you may
11
         have observed.
12
                   There were some here yesterday who
13
         I believe misunderstood Wisconsin's motivation
14
         and intent in endeavoring to strengthen the
15
         recommendations of this conference and the
16
         summary of its conclusions and findings.  This
17
         seemed to center about the desire of Wisconsin
18
         to comply with the Federal Water Pollution Control
19
         statute to include some reference to reasons
20
         for delays.
21
                   I find that phrase appearing here in
22
         Recommendation #30, and I want to assure my
23
         fellow Conferees that Wisconsin hopes never
24
         to use those three words and would be perfectly
25

-------
   	3733

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         happy to see them deleted from Recommendation
 3
         30, but I think I would not make such a motion.
 4
         I find this recommendation perfectly acceptable.
 5
                   But I did want to clarify our intent
 6
         to proceed vigorously and aggressively with
 7
         our program to protect the quality of the
 8
         waters of Lake Michigan, and nothing we did
 9
         yesterday was intended in any way to deter us
10
         from that goal.
11
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.  By the way, I
12
         think that should be clear; I think I understood
13
         what you said.  The statute talked about reasons
14
         for delays, and as far as I understand it means
15
         reason for delays in the past, which was Just a
16
         factual statement.  I didn't have any problem
17
         with this.  Anyone who wants to equate that as
18
         being a reason for delay in the future and as
19
         excuse for delay in the future I think is mis-
20
         reading the statute and misreading the intent or
21
         the plain words of what any Conferees said.
22
                   I don't know that we need the progress
23
         reports in dealing with reasons for delays in the
24
         progress meetings.  I would Just say that 30
25

-------
                	3734

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2

          should read that:
 3

                    "Progress meetings be held at least
 4

          semi-annually unless the Conferees agree on
 5

          another schedule."
 6
                    And 31:
' l
                    "The conference will be reconvened
 8

          at the call of the Chairman."
 9

                    I don't know that we should give a
10

          charter in the progress meetings as reasons
11

          for delays.  This is one of the places I don't


          think it should be.  Right.
13

                    MR. KLASSEN:  The only difference is,
14

          Mr. Chairman, in this if there are any reasons
15

          for delay, the State in their report is assuming
16

          the responsibilities for those reasons and not


          the entire conference.
18

                    MR. STEIN:  Right.


                    MR. KLASSEN:  That is the main dif-
20

          ference.
21

_.                  MR. STEIN:  Right.  And they will be
Za

„.        questioned on that too.
*o

24                  MR. KLASSEN:  That is right.


                    MR. STEIN:  If there are reasons.
25

-------
   	;	;	3735

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          But I think--
 3
                    MR. KLASSEN:  I think it ought to
 4
          be in 30.
 5
                    MR. STEIN:   You do?
 6
                    MR. KLASSEN:.  Yes.
 7
                    MR. STEIN:   You want this detail in 30?
 8
                    MR. KLASSEN:  Well--
 9
                    MR. STEIN:   Well, all right.
10
                    MR. OEMING:   We give them anyhow.
11
                    MR. KLASSEN:  We give them anyway.
12
                    MR. STEIN: All right.  I have no
13
          objection  to that,  if  you want it.
14
                    MR. OEMING:   Acts of God, war some
15
          place.
16
                    MR. STEIN:   All right.
17
                    MR. POOLE:   Now, what are you going
18
          to do?  Are  you  revising 30 and 31 and 32 or
19
          are you leaving  them as they are?
20
                    MR. STEIN:   Let me read  them as we
21
          are going  to have them for you;
22
                    "30.   Progress meetings  be held at
23
          least every  six  months unless the  Conferees
24
          decide on  another schedule for such meetings.
25

-------
   ^_	3736

 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         At  these  meetings  progress  reports  will be
 3
         submitted by  the Conferees"--and  I  think this
 4
         isn't  Just the States because  we have  got Federal
 5
         installations--"by the Conferees  that list the
 6
         pollution sources,  remedial phases  completed,
 7
         reasons for delay,  and dates  that abatement of--
 8
         completion of  abatement  work  are  expected."
 9
                    "31. The conference  will be reconvened
10
         at  the call of the Chairman."
11
                    MR.  OEMING:  Mr.  Chairman.
12
                    MR.  STEIN:  Yes.
13
                    MR.  OEMING:  I would  offer  for the
14
         consideration  of the  Conferees  and  you as
15
         Chairman  one additional  either  comment, con-
16
         elusion or recommendation,  and  that is that the
17
         Conferees urge full implementation  of the fund—
18
         or  full funding of the authorizations in the
19
         Federal Water  Pollution  Control Act.
20
                    MR.  STEIN:  How about the four States
21
         making that recommendation?   The  provision we
22
         have is,  as you know, by restriction,
23
                    MR.  OEMING:  Yes, I understand your
24
         problem.
25

-------
              	      373?

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.
 3
                   MR. OEMING:  But I throw this  out
 4
         for the consideration of the Conferees.  You
 5
         can handle it some way--
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  No, we have handled  this
 7
         "before, but is this something' that the four
 8
         States want to join in?
 9
                   MR. POOLE:  Yes.
10
                   MR. HOLMER:  Yes.
11
                   MR. STEIN:  We will draw one up  like
12
         that.  We have had these in other conferences
13
         for your consideration.
14
                   MR. OEMING:  I think the Governors
W
         have all presented this argument, we have  too
16
         in our presentation.
17
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.
18
                   MR. OEMING:  Do you agree?
10
                   MR. KLASSEN:  What?
20
                   MR. OEMING:  Are you agreed that we
21
         should have as the four States a recommendation
22
         that urges full implementation of the authori-
23
         zations in the Federal Act for grants?
24
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
25

-------
                         	      3736

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                   MR. KLASSEN:  As  an  added to,  but
 3
         not gear the whole program-^-
 4
                   MR. OEMING:  Oh,  no,  no.
 5
                   MR. KLASSEN: --to Federal grants,
 6
         yes.  All right.
 7
                   MR. OEMING:  No,  no,  this Just stands
 8
         by itself, that we are urging.
 9
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Yes.
10
                   MR. OEMING:  All  right.
11
                   MR. STEIN:  Mr. Klassen?
12
                   MR, SCHNEIDER:  Are you- talking about
13
         construction grants or as a whole?
14
                   MR. OEMING:  Construction grants.
15
         Construction grants.
16
                   MR. STEIN:  All right,
17
                   MR. POSTON:  I have a recommendation
18
         here for #22 on surveillance, and I  would like
19
         to read it to you.
20

21
                      RECOMMENDATION #22
22

23
                   MR. POSTON:  "Representatives  of the
24
         four States and the Federal Water Pollution Control
25

-------
                           	3739

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         Administration agree to meet within 60 days
 3
         for the purpose of developing a. plan to
 4
         undertake a lakewide surveillance program
 5
         designed to provide a continuing assessment
 6
         of water quality.  Such information would
 7
         provide a baseline from which improvements
 8
         or other—or further deterioration of the--
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  You don't need that.
10
                   MR. POSTON:  --open waters of Lake
11
         Michigan would be measured.
12
                   MR. OEMIKG:  You don't need that
13
         last part,  Wally.
14
                   MR. STEIN:  You don't need it.  How
15
         about cutting out the self-serving statements?
16
                   (Laughter.)
17
                   MR. STEIN:  We have had so many
18 r
         baselines for improvement through the years
19
         and gotten  millions of dollars from State
20
         legislatures or the Congress to show a baseline
21
         for improvement and the lake has gotten worse
22
         all the time.  Let's not jinx ourselves.
23
                  MR. OEKING:  Would it weaken you to
24
         drop that?
25

-------
                      	3740
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2                  MR. POSTON: No, no.
 »
                   MR. OEMING:  Just say we are going

         to meet and have a--

 6                  MR. STEIN:  Yes.

                   MR. POSTON:  This surveillance program
 1
         would consider the use of aerial reconnaissance
 g
         and other scientific techniques as new tools in
 9
         this undertaking, new techniques such as infrared

         and color film photography.

11                  MR. STEIN:  Haven't we got this here?
12
         What this adds is this is the pitch, and I
i*
         suspect you would get this out, but we did
14
         make a recommendation that we would hope that
15
         the States and we would work out a coordinated
16
         monitoring program.

17                  MR. OEMING:  That is right.
18
                   MR. STEIN:  But they would have
19
         monitoring at the major tributaries--would you
20
         mind waiting?  Thank you.
21
                   But we would have monitoring at the
22
         tributaries, the States would do that, and we
23
         try to do the open lake and try to dovetail it.
24
                   Now, it seems to me that the use of
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         infrared photography or any other improved
 3
         technique or the notions you have are  the
 4
         kind of details that the technical  committee
 5
         might come up with, and I don't know that you
 6
         would want to be specific on those  unless you
 7
         had s ome.
 8
                   MR. OEMING: Mr. Chairman, I  would buy
 9
         about half of this, the first portion:
10
                   "Representatives of the four States
11
         and the FWPCA agree to meet within  60  days for
12
         the purpose of developing a plan to undertake
13
         a lakewide surveillance program designed to
U
         provide continuing assessment of water quality"
15
         period.  Or "coordinated."
16
                   MR. POOLS:  I have Just l>een listening
17
         to this, Mr. Chairman.
18
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
19
                   MR. POOLE:  I am not prepared to get
20
         it all cluttered up with infrared at this moment.
21
         I am certainly willing to consider  it.
22
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
23
                   Well, if you go back to surveillance
24
         on 20, are you suggesting that as a substitute
25

-------
                                                         371*2

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          for  what we have already done?
 3
                    MR.  POSTON:   We said  we would handle
 4
          this by a committee,  didn't we?
 5
                    MR/ STEIN:   Yes.   What is the dif-
 6
          ference with this  and  what  we have already
 7
          decided,  Mr.  Poston?   What  is the difference?
 8
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   It  speeds it up,  for
 9
          one  thing.
10
                    MR.  POSTON:   Speeds it up,
11
                    MR.  STEIN:   You mean  you have added
12
          the  60  days?
13
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Added the 60 days  and
14
          recognized  some  techniques  that  could be used.
15
                    MR.  OEMING:   I  don't want to be
16
          bombed  with techniques  yet.
17
                   MR,  STEIN:  No, this  is  the question.
18
          Don't you think  the committee should--
19
                   MR.  OEMING:   I  think we  are able  to
20
          Judge techniques.  We don't have  to be  told what
21
          techniques  we  should consider.
22
                   MR.  STEIN:  All right.
23
                   MR.  KLASSEN:  Assuming  the  committee
24
         gets moving on it.
25

-------
   	,	37*13
 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN:  If there is any substantial
 3
         difference between that and what we have already
 4
         decided for 20, we will put it in.  The only
 5
         thing I can decide at the present time is the 60
 6
         days, and I aia not sure who wrote that, but he
 7
         might have an interest in an airplane company.
 8
                   (Laughter.)
 9
                   MR. OEMING:  You are suspicious, Mr.
10
         Chairman.
11
                   MR. STEIN:  0. K.
12
                   Are there any other comments?
13
                   MR. POSTON:  I would like to go back
14
         to this one on dredging and get clarified in
15
         my mind what came out of that.
16
                   MR. OEMING:  Oh, me.
17
                   MR. KLASSEN:  We are going to have a
18
         restatement ready for Tuesday, is my understanding,
19
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.
20
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  You are going to have a re-
22
         .statement ready for Tuesday.  Right?
23
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Right.
24
                   MR. POSTON:  Who is going to do that?
25

-------
                                             	37:44

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:  Well,  that is what I was
 3
          going to  suggest.   I  think  we  have got these,
 4
          I would hope that  we  would  "be  able to get the
 5
          points in draft form  from Mrs. Rankin.  I don't
 6
          know if we can get these from  her today.
 7
                    But  I will  tell you  what our plans
 8
          are.   I am going to try to  be  here about  noon
 9
          on  Monday.  Mr. Poston,  I would suspect by
10
          this  time, by  working with  Mrs. Rankin and
11
          the girls, that you would have a list of  the
12
          recommendations.  I am going to try to go over
13
          them,  and as you know in these things I wear
14
          many hats and  my oldest hat is just by being
15
          a draftsman.  I am not going to change anything,
16
          but I am  going to  try to draft it the way we
17
          have.  And as  you  know,  I can  argue something,
18
          but when  I adopt my drafting hat, I just  draft.
19
                    And  we will attempt  by Monday after-

          noon to have a draft  of this completed.
21
                    Now,  if  any of you come into town on
22
          Monday afternoon,  get in touch with the regional
23
          office, that may be your best  base, to see where

          we  are, and as  soon as we get  this material
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         available, we will be able to get  the  draft
 3
         to the Conferees and hopefully you will be
 4
         able to look at these on Monday when you
 5
         come in or tonight.  I would hope, if  we have
 6
         done our work well, there will be  no surprises.
 7
                   In other words, I am going to give
 8
         you back what you said and no additions or
 9
         modifications.  I am going to try  to put it
10
         in a clear and succinct   form and get it back
11
         to you.
12
                   0. K.?
13
                   MR. OEMING:  Pine.
14
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
15
                   What time do you want to reconvene
16
         on Tuesday?  Ten o'clock?
17        '.
                   Ten o'clock.  Indiana has a  problem.
18
         They can't get here before.
19
                   MR. OEMING:  I thought he had a problem
20
         about  10.
21
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Well, I would  prefer
22
         to meet at 11, but--
23
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.   Let's not--
24
                   MR. KLASSEN:  We won't quibble  over
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          an hour.   I1 will  either be here or be repre-
 3
          sented  at 10,  but if  I  am not here,  I will be
 4
          here  shortly 'after.
 5
                    MR.  OEMING:   We are going to meet
 6
          at 10 o'clock  on  Tuesday?
 7
                    MR.  STEIN:  Ten o'clock on Tuesday
 8
          in this hotel,  the room to be announced.   They
 9
          have  a  couple  of  big  conventions in town  next
10
          week, lumbermen or something, but they will
11
          squeeze us in  somewhere.
12
                    Gentlemen,  let's see if we can  do
13
          this, I hope we can,  in one day, but I would
14
          like  a  commitment. And I would hope .that the
15
          next  session would be the last one we need to
16
          get our conclusions and recommendations out and
17
          we will not have  to adjourn.   I will ask  that
18
          we either be prepared to do this, agree or
19
          disagree,  or I  am going to ask you to sit until
20
          we come to that Judgment and  not go home.  0. K.?
21
                    Thank you.  With that we are recessed
22
          until 10  o'clock  Tuesday.
23
                    (Whereupon, at 11:15 a.m., an adjourn-
24
25
         ment was  taken  until  10  aim.,  Tuesday,  March 12,  19
58.

-------
 1                    The Sxecutiva Session of the Conference

 2         on the Matter of Pollution of Lake-Michigan, and its

 3         Tributary Basins,  reconvened at 10 ofclock a.m., on

 4         March 12, 1968, at the Sherman House,  Chicago, Illinois,

 5
           CHAIRMAN:
 6
               Murray Stein
 7             Asst. Commissioner for Enforcement
               Federal Water Pollution Control Adm.
 8             U. S. Department of the Interior
               Washington, D. C.
 9

10         CONFEREES:

11           FEDERAL:

12             H. W. Poston,  Regional Director
               Great Lakes Region
13             Federal Water Pollution Control Adm.
               U. S. Department of the Interior
14             Chicago, Illinois

15             Assisted "by:

16             Robert J. Schneider, Deputy Regional Director
               Great Lakes Region
17             Federal Water Pollution Control Adm.
               U. S. Department of the Interior
18             Chicago, Illinois

19          . STATE OF. ILLINOIS:

20             Clarence W. Klassen, Technical Secretary
               Illinois Sanitary Water Board
21             Springfield, Illinois

22
               Assisted by:

23             Benn J. Leland, Sanitary Engineer
               Illinois Sanitary Water Board
24             Chicago, Illinois

25

-------
 1        CONFEREES (CONTINUED):

 2          STATE OP INDIANA:

 3             John E.  Mitchell,  Director
               Indiana  Department of  Natural Resources
 4             Indianapolis,  Indiana

 5               and

 6             Blucher  Poole,  Technical Secretary
               Indiana  Stream Pollution Control Board
 7             Indianapolis,  Indiana

 8             Assisted by:

 9             Perry E. Miller,  Assistant Director
               Division of Sanitary Engineering
10             Indiana  State  Board of Health
               Indianapolis,  Indiana
11
            STATE OP MICHIGAN:
12
               Loring F.  Oeraing,  Executive Secretary
13             Michigan Water Resources Commission
               Lansing, Michigan
14
               Assisted by:
15
               Ralph W. Purdy,  Chief  Engineer
16             Michigan Water Resources Commission
               Lansing, Michigan
17
            STATE OF WISCONSIN:
18
               Freeman  Holmer,  Administrator
19             Division of Resource Development
               Department of  Natural  Resources
20             Madison, Wisconsin

21             Assisted by:

22             Theodore P. Wisniewski
               Assistant to the  Administrator
23             Division of Resource Development
               Department of  Natural  Resources
24             Madison, Wisconsin

25                           _  _ „

-------
   	'37H
 1        OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE:

 2            Herbert D. PaIk
              Municipal Management Consultant
 3            P & W Engineers, Inc.
              Chicago, Illinois
 4                                 .                  .         .
              S. A. Poust
 5            Union Carbide
              Whiting, Indiana
 6
              James W. Jardine
 7            Commissioner of Water &  Sewers
              City of Chicago
 8            Chicago, Illinois

 9            James E. Kerrigin
              Assistant to Director
10            Water Resources Center
              University of Wisconsin
11            Hydraulic & Sanitation Laboratory
              Madison, Wisconsin
12
              Ragner Kummen
13            775 Van Buren
              Gary, Indiana
14
              R. C. Mallatt, Coordinator
15            Air & Water Conservation
              American Oil Company
16            Chicago, Illinois

17            P. J. Marschall, Consultant
              Abbott Laboratories
18            Wllmette, Illinois

19            J. H. Miller, Chief Engineer
              Wisconsin Steel
20            Chicago, Illinois

21            Eugene A. PiIon, President
              Lake Excursions, Inc.
22            Milwaukee, Wisconsin

23            Stan Twardy, Coordinator
              Air & Water Conservation
24            Standard Oil
              Chicago, Illinois
25

-------
                                            	275©

 1         OTHERS IN ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED):

 2             R. V. Weil
               Assistant Manager - Engineering
 3             Sinclair Refining
               Harvey, Illinois
 4
               Howard Zar
 5             University of Chicago
               Chicago, Illinois
 6
 7

 8

 9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

-------
                                       	3151
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    (Due to inclement weather,  Mr.  Mitchell,
 3        Mr. Poole, Mr. Miller, Mr. Oeming, and  Mr.  Purdy
         were not present when the session reconvened.  The
 4        record will  show at what point in the proceedings
         they arrived.)
 5
                    MR. STEIN:  I would recommend that
 6
         without making any prejudgments here, it may
 7
         be productive—and I have no notion when these
 8
         people come  in, they may be very late--we may
 9
         put the time  to good use if you would go over
10
         this and if  there are any suggestions that  we
11
         can put in, we will.
12
                    Again, let me indicate that what  we
13
         tried to do here, I hope, was come up with  a
14
         draft reflecting the Judgment of the  Conferees,
15
         and we did not try to put any new thoughts  in
16
         or add anything new or change anything.  So if
17
         this could be stated better, and I see  some
18
         parts in here where it could be stated  better
19
         now, or it could be clearer or it could put
20
         our ideas  forth better, we would be glad to
21
         have that, and then we can wait until the other
22
         Conferees  come over before we adopt them.
23                                   .                 .'
                    MR. KLASSEN:  Mr. Chairman, this  is
24
         off the record.
25

-------
                               	3732

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    (Off the record.)
 3

 4                                        .
                        CONCLUSION #16
 5

 6
                    MR.  STEIN:   We did make certain minor
 7
          changes  in the conclusions.   I think this was a
 8
          relatively straightforward  typing job.   The
 9
          recommendations are the ones that we will go over,
10
          except the last conclusion,  and I would like to pre
ll
          sent  to you—I am not sure  Illinois would have
12
          the  problem, probably this  is an Indiana problem--
13
          the  one  that reads:
14
                    "l6.  Federal enforcement actions
15
          already  in effect on  the Menominee"--Menominee?
16
          Where  did that come from?  Oh--"the Menominee
17
          and  the  Calumet River area  remain in full force
18
          and  effect and are thus supplemented but not
19
          supercended"--"seded" that  should be--"by this"--
20
          I  would  say "by this  conference" there, first
21
          of all.
22
                    It don't think Wisconsin or Michigan
23
          or Illinois will have any trouble. The  word is
24
          full force and effect!'  I don't know what —
25

-------
                        	3733

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
                   MR.  HOLMER:  I have  a problem with
 3
          the word  "superseded"  even  now.  Do  you want
 4
          to change "c"  to  "s"?
 5
                   MR.  STEIN:   Pardon?
 6
                   MR.  HOLMER:  . S-u-p-e-r-s-e-d-e-d.

 7
                   MR.  STEIN: Right,  thanks.
 8
                   That is  the  only  one, I think,  on
 9
          which you may  have an  issue.   I think as far
10
          as Illinois  is concerned, and  I think Wisconsin
11
          is concerned,  on  the Menominee and the Calumet
12
          River cases  we have a  reasonable solution.
13
          Particularly in the Menominee, 1 don't look
14
          for a reconvening  of that.   But other than
15
          that, I don't  think they are--
16
                   MR.  LELAND:  Did  you change "superseded
17
          by this"--
18
                   MR.  STEIN:  -"by this conference,"  yes.
19
                   MR.  LELAND:  Instead of "enforcement
20
          action"?
21
                   MR.  STEIN:   Yes,  "conference" instead
22
          of "enforcement action." And  I don't know  if
23
          Indiana would  have trouble  with that "full  force
24
          and effect"  or not.
25

-------
   	3754

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    We might have a more colorless one by
 3
          saying,  and I think this is  Just a general
 4
          statement,  "and the Calumet  River area are
 5
          supplemented but not superseded by this con-
 6
          ference,"  and leave out the  other stuff.
 7
                    What do you think  of that?
 8
                    All right, leave it..
 9
                    Strike "remain in  full force and
10
          effect  and are thus" and put in "are  supple-
11
          mented  but not superseded by this conference,"
12
          and  Jxist let's make that a flat statement,
13
          because  I  ara anticipating we obviously don't
14
          have the record here to make any judgments on
15
          that Calumet conference.  The others  don't
16
          present  a  problem of that type.
17
                    So with that change, let's  see if
18
          we can  do  that.
19
                    Now, any other?  In looking over the
20
          other one,  I think a key recommendation, and I
21
          ask  it  possibly from almost  a literary point
22
          of view,  I  am not sure that  that #1 is abundantly

          clear.   Number .One under Recommendations.
24
                    (Off the record.)
25

-------
                                	3755

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2

 3
                       RECOMMENDATION #1
 4                      •

 5
                   MR. STEIN:  Looking  this over, we
 6
         might consider putting a period in Recommendation
 7
         #1 after the word "quality" and then put "such
 8
         waste treatment will provide"  and a period after
 9
         "Wise on sin" and this to start a  new sen.tence.  And
10
         I think that will stop that mouthful.   0. K.?
11
                   MR. HOLMER:  The last sentence,  "This
12
         action is to be accomplished."
13
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  Now, because of  the
14
         change, we don't have verbs in  all of these.
15
         Some read full sentences, some "to be." We
1*
         can go through that and adjust that as  we go
17
         along, if you wish.
18
                   But you will find this throughout  the
19
         recommendations.  Some of them are complete  sen*
20
         tences and 'some are phrases without the complete
21
         verb.
22
                   All right.  "Is to be," let's do that.
23
         In other words, we have a period after  "quality,"
24
         then "Such waste treatment will"--"that" is
25

-------
   	:	37-5'fr
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          crossed out—a period after "Wisconsin.  This
 3
          action is to be accomplished."
 4
                    0. K.  I think that reads a lot better.
 5
                    MR. POSTON:  How about total phosphorus?
 6
          Phosphorus is really--
 7
                    MR. STEIN:   Phosphorus instead of
 8
          phosphates?
 9
                    MR. POSTON:  Yes.
10
                    MR. STEIN:   All right.  Years ago
11
          Klassen used to run these glossaries.  I wish
12
          you would dp that lately so I can understand
13
          your terms.
14
                    0. K.  Let  me read the first one
15
          again just for size the way we have it:
16
                    "Waste treatment be provided"—if we
17
          are going to follow your view, and maybe we
18
          should be consistent  about this, Mr. Holraer,
19
          we  should say "Waste  treatment is to be"?
20
                    MR. HO.LMER:  I would prefer it.
21
                   •MR. STEIN:   All right.
22
                    "--is to be provided by all munici-
23
          palities to achieve at least 80 percent reduction
24
          of  total phosphorus and to produce an effluent
25

-------
                              	3757

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         which will not result in degradation  of  Lake

 3
         Michigan's waters.  Such waste treatment will

 4
         provide compliance with the water  quality

 5
         standards for Lake Michigan as approved  by

 6
         the Secretary of the Interior and  the appropriate

 7
         State water pollution control agencies of Illinois,

 8
         Indiana, Michigan or Wisconsin.  This action

 9
         is to "be accomplished as soon as possible,  but

10
         not later than December 1972.

11
                   MR. KLASSEN: Murray, you left  out

12
         "Lake Michigan's water"--you left  out "quality."

13
         Did you--

14
                   MR. STEIN:  Inadvertently.   I  am  sorry.

15
                   MR. KLASSEN:  All right.

16
                   MB. STEIN:  0. K.

17
                   Now, if we can go down to 2, let's

18
         see if we can try to perfect that.

19


20
                       RECOMMENDATION #2
21


22
                   MR. STEIH:  Let's put a  period after
23
         "'•Ms cons in" at least and say "This action,"
24
         same thing, Instead of that dash.
25

-------
   	3758

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    All right?
 3
                    MR. KOLMER:  In the first line after
 4
          "systems" I would insert a "to" and then if you
 5
          go to the third line, after "and" instead of "that
 6
          will" if you put another "to," then you have got
 7
          your verb forms in a little more clearly.
 8
                    MR. STEIN:   Where is the—
 9
                    MR. HOLMER:  The first one would be
10
          after "sewer systems."
11
                    MR. STEIN:   Yes.  Yes, that is right.
12
                    MR. HOLMER:  And then "and to meet
13
          the water quality standards for Lake Michigan"
14
          in the third line.
15
                    MR. STEIN:  --"and to meet."  Yes, that
16
          is better.
17
                    All right.   Have we all got that?
18
                    MR. COOK:   Murray,  would it be a
19
          good idea to have someone sit in and correct
20
          copies for Poole and Oeming when they come in?
21
                    MR. STEIN:   Yes, someone should work
22
          along with us.
23
                    We.may have more time than you imagine
24
          on It.
25

-------
   	:	3759

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                    (Laughter.)
 3
                    MR. POSTON:  I  think you  need an "are
 4
         to. "
 5
                    MR. STEIN: --"are  to," how about that,
 6
         "sewer systems are  to"?
 7
                    MR. HOLMER:  All  right.
 8
                    MR. LELAND:  Which  line  are you on?
 9
                    MR. POSTON:  Line 1 of #2,  "industries
10
         not connected to municipal  sewer systems are to
11
         provide"--
12
                    MR. STEIN:   Well, then we have got
13
         something, you know.   Is  that all  right?
14
                    MR. HOLMER:  It tracks fairly well.
15
                    MR. STEIN:   All right.
16
                    MR. LELAND:  You  want a  "to" in the
17
         third line also?
18
                    MR. STEIN:   Yes,  we have got the "to"
19
         in  the third line,  "and  to."
20
                    All right, I think  that  is  clear
21
         enough.
22

23
                       RECOMMENDATION  #3
24

25

-------
  ^_____	3_7_6Q

 l                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                    MR. STEIN:   Then  let's  go  on  to  3.

 3
                    MR. HOLMER:  The  second line,  the word


          "identify,"  I think we have  done  that.   I  think

 5                                                   it
          what you want'is a list.  In other words,  Within


          six months each State water  pollution control

 7
          agency shall identify  the municipal  and  industrial

 S               „
          sources --


 9                   MR. STEIN:   Yes.


10                   MR. HOLMER:  Wouldn't the  verb "list"


          in lieu of "identify" be more sensitive  of our

12
          feelings?


13                   MR. STEIN:  All right,  let's put "list."

14
                    Let me give you a  notion of what I think

15
         we have to do since we are  in this list  business.

16
          I think we have to .list all  the sources  in the

17
          basin.  Those that are not  contributing  to the

18
          degradation  of the waters we put  off and we make

19
          it clear,  in other words, that there is  no

20
          argument,  that if you have an upstream city

21
          that is not  contributing to  the degradation, we

22
          all agree with it.  And I think this is  where we

23
          can create a lot of public  confusion and also

24
          not move the program forward.

25

-------
                                                         3761
 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
              EXECUTIVE SESSION
          In other words, if we are in agreement



that this city is not within the scope of the



conference as a degradation, the first meeting



we agree and as far as I am concerned they are



off and we are through with that city or industry



completely.



          Then we have another list contributing.



With that list they are either going to have to



do some work or they have already put in



satisfactory treatment facilities.  As we come



back to these progress meetings, that list will



be whittled down until they are gone.



          But the first list^ what we have to



come to an agreement with—and this is the worst



kind of thing we can do for ourselves and the



public—is for one party to put out a city on



a list saying, yes, they are in it, and the



other one saying they are not in it, and the



innocent bystander is the city and the industry



concerned.  I think we should make that definite



and whittle down this list as soon as we can,



and I think the first ones to do that are the



State agencies.

-------
   	3762

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   If anyone has a complaint about  the
 3
         State evaluation of this, let's hear  them.  And
 4
         if they don't, we will have something to go with,
 5
         and I think hopefully at the first meeting will
 6
         be the big cut, we will get that list down to
 7
         manageable proportions.  I suspect that when
 8
         we get that down, cut that down, that will be a
 9
         real good indication of the progress  we are
10
         making.
11
                   MR. HOLMER:   Then shouldn't the list
12
         be identified as one of discharges of wastewater
13
         rather :than--
14
                   MR. STEIN:  Sources of waste contributing
15
         pollution to the Lake Michigan basin.
16
                   MR. HOLMER:  Contributing pollution.
17
                   We have a lot of municipalities and
18
         industries who are doing a good Job,  and I am
19
         sure every other State does,, and they hate to
20
         find themselves listed as polluters when they--
21
                   MR. STEIN:  All right, contributing
22
         wastewater.  Right?
23
                   MR. HOLMER:  Yes, or discharging
24
         wastewater.
25

-------
   	:	370

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN:  Discharging wastewater.
 3
         All right.
 4
                   All right.
 5
                   MR. LELAND:  --"shall list the
 6
         municipal"--
 7
                   MR. STEIN: --"and industrial sources
 8
         of waste discharging wastewater."
 9
                   MR. LELAND:  --"sources of waste dis-
10
         charging wastewater"?
11
                   MR. STEIN:  --"list the municipal
12
         and industrial sources"--cross out "of waste"--
13
         "discharging wastewater."  0. K.?
14
                   All right.
15
                   MR. POSTON:  I don't think that sounds
16
         very good.
17
                   MR. STEIN:  Why?
18
                   MR. POSTON: "The  list of municipalities
19
         and industries would be better.
20
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.
21
                   MR. POSTON: "Discharging wastewater."
22
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.   "municipalities
23
         and industries," all right,  "discharging waste-
24
         water."   That is better.
25

-------
                                         	3764

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    And hopefully, the first list will
 3
          include  a tremendous  number of municipalities
 4
          and  industries which,  as far as this enforce-
 5
          ment conference,  are  free and clear.
 6
                    0.  K.?   And I think the rest of that
 7
          might be all  right.
 8

 9
                        RECOMMENDATION
10

11
                    MR. STEIN:   Pour, it should be "is
12
          to be provided."   "This action is to be
13
          accomplished.
14

15
                        RECOMMENDATION #5
16

17
                    MR. STEIN:   And 5 reads, "Unified...
18
          serving  contiguous urban areas ought to be
19
          encouraged."
20

21
                        RECOMMENDATION #6
22

23
                    MR. STEIN:   "Adjustable overflow

          regulating devices are to be installed."
25

-------
                                         	    3765

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2 „
                   MR. SCHNEIDER:  Shouldn't #4  be
 3
         "disinfection is to be"?
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes, I said  that.
 5
                   MR, SCHNEIDER:  Oh.
 6
                   MR. STEIN:--"are to be installed  and
 7
         so designed."
 8
                   And the last sentence, "This  action
 9
         is to be taken as soon as possible."
10

11
                       RECOMMENDATION #7
12

13
                   MR. STEIN:  7.  "Effective    immediately,
14
         combined sewers ape to be."
15
                   And last sentence, "Pollution  from
16
         combined sewers IP to be."
17

18
                       RECOMMENDATION #8
19

20
                   MR. STEIN:  And 8, after "municipal
21
         sewer systems" "is to be."
22

23
                       RECOMMENDATION #9
24

25

-------
                                                 	3766

 1    .                  EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   And on 9, "Continuous
 3
          disinfection is to be provided."
 4

 5
                        RECOMMENDATION #10
 6

 7
                    MR.  STEIN:   Now,  "This group will"--
 8
          and I  hope that "will" is a declaratory will.
 9
          We  all recognize that when we say we will meet
10
          with the Atomic Energy Commission, maybe we had
11
          better put "representatives" after "Commission."
12
                     MR.  HOLMER:  I have a little problem
13
          on  the bottom  of page 2--
14
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
15
                    MR.  HOLMER:  --with the words "for deal-
16
          ing with."
17
                    MR.  STEIN:   What number?
18
                    MR.  HOLMER:  Number 10,Just the last
19
          line.
20
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
21
                    MR.  HOLMER:--"set up a special committee
22
          for dealing with." That is kind of a loose phrase
23
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.
24
                    MR.  HOLMER:  I have a quick suggestion.
25

-------
    	                        3767

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         IB this to do the research on sources  or  is  it
 3
         to set up regulations?
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  I think it is to--
 5
                   MR. HOLMER:  Or to do both?
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  I hope it is not to--I
 7
         don't know that you are going to have  the
 8
         technical people--
 9
                   MR. HOLMER:  No.
10
                   MR. STEIN:  --to do the research.
11
         As I visualize it, there are two problems,
12
         main problems, that you are going to have here -
13
         now.  One is to determine what, if any, should
14
         be the requirements for heat discharges from
15
         the plants, and the second, what, if any, you
16
         are going to allow to be the radioactive  content
17
         of the wastewater or you want to have  a closed
18
         system.
10
                   I would suspect that ore this you
20
         would want to--you would necessarily have to
21
         sit as a group or have them evaluate the  advice
22
         of the experts in the field.
23
                   MR. HOLMER:  0. K.  I would  make a
24
         suggestion, then.
25

-------
   	:	T768

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
 3
                    MR.  HOLMER:   That  deleting the "for
 4
          dealing with both"  and simply call it a special
 5
          committee  on the  nuclear discharges  and thermal
 6
          pollution.
 7
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right,  that is better.
 8
          Right.  Thanks.
 9
                    MR.  COOK:  Murray,  I  have  the word
10
          on  these other people,  if you wane it.
11
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
12
                    (Off the  record.)
13
                    MR.  STEIN:   Let's  get on with #10.
14
                    Now, "This group,"  I  would suggest
15
          "This group will  meet  with the  representatives
16
          of  the Atomic  Energy Commission."   I think
17
          this is all right.  What I would  say,  the "will"
18
          here is declaratory.   Obviously you  need two
19
          for a meeting*  I have  no doubt that they will
20
          meet with  us,  you know,  but  I think  if  we put
21
          it  this way it will be  strong enough so we can
22
          be  sure of the meeting.   0. K.?
23
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Just  another off the
24
          record.
25

-------
   	3769

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   (Off the record.)
 3
                   (During the off-the-record discussion,
 4
         Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Poole, Mr. Oeming and  Mr.  Purdy
 5
         arrived.)
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  Let us Just finish this  one,
 7
         then we can go back.
 8
                   MR. HOLMER:  I have several other
 9
         changes to suggest in 10.
10
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
11
                   MR. HOLMER:  At the beginning,  would
12
         it not be better to say the States and the
13
         Department of the Interior will appoint  members
14
         of a special committee?
15
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
16
                   MR. HOLMER: --"will appoint members of"
17
         instead of "set  up."
18
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
10
                   We will go back after this one, gentle-.
20
         men,  and pick them all up.   This will save time.
21
                   MR. HOLMER:  On the next page,  the
22
         sentence that starts at the top of the page,
23
         instead of calling it a group,  let's say  the
24
         committee.  We do in the next sentence.
25

-------
                                         	3770
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2                  MR.STEIN:  "This committee," all right.
 »
                    MR. HOLMER:  And in the last sentence,
 4
          "representatives of the committee" again "will be
          available" instead of "this group."  It sounds
 g
          awfully informal,  you know.
 7                  MR.  STEIN:   Yes.  You are right. O.K.
 8
                    Gentlemen,  I think--
 9
                    MR.  QEMING:  Mr. Chairman, may I make
          a statement?
11                  MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
12                  MR.  OEMING:  The State of Michigan
13
          regrets the inconvenience caused this conference,
14
          but it was due to  circumstances beyond our
15
          control this morning.
16
                    MR.  STEIN:   We recognize that.
17
                    MR.  POOLE:   The State of Indiana the
18
          same.   We got  behind  a stalled truck on Dan Ryan,
19
          traffic was backed up for 50 blocks.
20
                    MR.  STEIN:   Well, you made it all the
21
          way up to here?
22
                    MR.  POOLE:   Yes.
23
                    MR.  STEIN:   I was worried about that.
24
                    (Off the record.)
25

-------
                                                        3771

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   What we  have done up to
 3
          now,  we  have  gone  over the Conclusions and up
 4
          to  10 in the  Recommendations,  but I suggest the
 5
          fastest  thing we  can  do  is go  back.  I would
 6
          suggest  in order  to give you  time to think this
 7
          through--! don't  think there  are any changes.
 8
          Do  you want then  to be read?
 9
                    MR.  OEMING:  If you  give me about 10
10
          minutes--
11
                    MR.  STEIN:  Yes.
12
                    MR.  OEMING:   —I think I can check off
13
          quite a  few of these,  Mr.  Chairman.  I don't
14
          know  about Mr. Poole.   But if  we run into a
15
          snag,  why don't you just hold  up instead of
16
          trying to read it?
17
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.  Let me put
18
          it  this  way.   We  changed the  last conclusion, right|?
19
                    MR.  OEMING:   The last?  Yes.
20
                    MR.  STEIN:   Now, go  back here.  Let
21
          me  say this.   "Federal enforcement actions
22
          already  in effect  on  the Menominee River and
23
          the Calumet River  area"--strike "remain in full
24
          force and effect  and  are"--"are supplemented
25

-------
   	;	3772
 l                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         but not superseded by this conference."  And
 3
         that will, I think, get us around first base.
 4
                   Now, may I make a suggestion?   I
 5
         do not think there are any other surprises,
 6
         even changes, in format in the other conclu-
 7
         sions.  While you and Mr. Poole go over that,
 8
         we will stand recessed until you catch up with
 9
         the recommendations.  O.K.?
10
                   MR. OEMING:  I would appreciate that
11
         very much, Mr. Chairman.
12
                   MR. POOLE:  Yes.
13
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  We will stand
14
         recessed until you give us the word.  I think
15
         you will find this precisely as we—if we
16
         didn't, we made a mistake.
17
                   We will stand recessed until these
18
         people are ready.
19  I
                   (Recess.)
20
                   MR. STEIN:  Do we have any questions
21
         on these conclusions?
22
                   .MR. OEMING:  Yes.
23

24

25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2

 3
                       CONCLUSION #10
 4

 5
                   MR. OEMING:  Mr. Chairman, I have

 6
         Just one on the Conclusions themselves,  and

 7
         it is a minor one.  On page 3 under  item 10
 8
         where we say "coat the hulls of"--and if I

 9
         remember correctly, the Chairman raised  the

10
         question why are we only concerned about pleasure

11
         boats. Let's say  coat the hulls of  boats.
12
                   MR. STEIN:  Boats, yes.
13
                   MR. OEMING:  We have gone  back to
14
         pleasure here again.
15
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes, that is right,
16
         strike "pleasure."
17
                   MR. OEMING:  And as far as Michigan
18
         is concerned, the conclusions are acceptable

         to us through 16 as now placed before us.
20
                   {Mr.  Miller arrived.)
21
                   MR. STEIN:  How about Indiana,  is that
22
         all right?
23

24

25

-------
                                                         377$

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2

 3
                       CONCLUSION #16
 4

 5
                   MR. POOLE:   Let me  read what  I have
 6
         for 16:
 7
                   "The Federal enforcement  actions
 8
         already  in effect  on  the Menominee  River area  and
 9
         the Calumet River  area are  supplemented but not
10
         superseded by this conference."
11
                   MR. STEIN:   Right.
12
                   MR. POOLE:   That  is  the way it is?
13
                   MR. STEIN:  We  took  out all the color
14
         words.   Right?
15
                   MR. POOLE:   That  is  all right.  I
16
         Just wanted to make that clear.
17
                   MR. STEIN:   All right, let us go over
18
         these recommendations.   We  have been down to 10
19
         without  any substantive  operation,  but  let me
20
         give you the changes.  Largely these are literary
21
         changes,
22

23
                       RECOMMENDATION #1
24

25

-------
                                         	37*5

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN:'  Recommendation 1.   "Waste
 3
         treatment", insert  "is to."   After  "total"  the
 4
         word is  "phosphorus," "80  percent reduction of
 5
         total phosphorus" instead  of  "phosphates."
 6
         All right?
 7
                   MR. POOLE:  All  right.
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  0. K.:  put a  period after
 9
         "quality."  It starts, "such  waste  treatment,"
10
         strike  "that"
11
                   MR. OEMING:  Strike the word "that"?
12
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes, go down  to "Wisconsin"
13
         in the next-to-the-last line,  put a period.
14
         Capital  "This" and after  the  word  "action" the

         word  "is."
15

16
                   MR.  OEMING:   Do  you  want to discuss
17
         these one at a time, Mr. Chairman?
18
                   MR.  STEIN:  Yes,  any time you--
19
                   MR.  OEMING:   All right.
20
                   My notes  from last week  show that
21
         we considered  this  matter  of  "but  not later than
22
         December  '72," and  you  remember I  pointed out
23
         that we got some 250 communities,  we got a
24
         factor into this thing,  plus 50 over 5,000,
25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          and  I  think we agreed upon "This action is

 3
          to be  substantially accomplished by December

 4
          1972."  That is the way my notes read.

 5
                    Now, I am satisfied with that because

 6
          we have  got some tailenders here that I am

 7
          pretty sure that logistically I can't--! Just

 8
          from a practical standpoint can't do this.

 9
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.  Is that

10
          agreeable?

11
                    MR.  OEMING:   Do you recall this, Mr.

12
          Chairman?

13
                    MR.  STEIN:   I recall it.

14
                    Is this all right?

15
                    MR.  POOLE:   Well, this would  suit me

16
          better,  because we discussed it before  we came

17
          up here,  and I think we can meet our 10 that

18
          is over  5*000, but there are 15 below 5,000,

19
          most of  them down in the 1,000 to 1,500 popu-
20
          lation bracket.  And I don't know whether we can
21
          work all  that  15 in or not.
22
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right, let us —
23
                    MR.  OEMING:   May I comment a  little
24
          further  on this?
25

-------
   	3777

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                    In  order  that  it doesn't appear that
 3
         we  are mishmashing  around  with this,  if you
 4
         want  to apply the same principle  here with
 5
         respect to reporting  on  municipalities, I am
 6
         willing to do that, if you think  this leaves
 7
         us  too wide open.   That  is,  the number of the
 8
         program that  I  am working  on is to hit the
 9
         big ones first, the big  producers of  phosphorus
10
         first.  These are the ones that we want to get
11
         out of the lake as  fast  as possible,  and then
12
         we  will hit the smaller  ones later.   And if you
13
         want  a reporting in here,  if the  Conferees feel
14
         that--
15
                    MR. STEIN: We  have a reporting in
16
         there.
17
                    MR. OEMING:  0.  K.   Then if you do,
18
         then  I think  that this vjould be consistent
19
         now with your reporting  on these  things.
20
                    MR. STEIN:  Let  me put  this as an
21
         understanding.  Let's see  if we can do that.
22
         It  may be  stronger  if we leave it this way,
23
         with  the understanding that  for small communl-
24
         ties  when  you have  the reporting  you  may want
25

-------
      	3778

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          to go over, or do you want to do this?
 3
                    MR. OEMING: Now, which way?
 4
                    MR. STEIN:  I don't care.
 5
                    MR/ OEMING:  I would like to see it
 6
          "is to be substantially" and then the Conferees
 7
          can take a whack at our program if they don't
 8
          like it.
 9
                    MR. STEIN:  All right.  Let me read
10
          the sentence as you have done it:
11
                    "This action is to be substantially
12
          accomplished by 1972."
13
                    MR. OEMING:  December, yes.
14
                    MR. STEIN:  By December you want?
15
          All right.
16
                    MR. OEMING:  Yes, that is all right.
17
                    MR. STEIN: --by December 1972."
18
                    MR. OEMING:  Yes.
19
                    MR. STEIN:  All right.
20
                    The point is, and I think.we are
21
          going to--this is fair game, gentlemen, when
22
          we come up with these progress reports and if

          there are some of the big polluters you don't
24
          have a schedule for in any way by 1972, and I
25

-------
   	3779

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         am not talking about intervening events like
 3
         acts of God like today, we know there are some
 4
         slippages, but I think the question will be
 5
         properly raised whether this is a substantial
 6
         accomplishment.
 7
                   MR. OEMING:  I think this is right.
 8
         This is my understanding.
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
10
                   Look at #2 at the end--oh, wait.  Let
11
         me go on.
12
                   If that is correct, the last sentence
13
         reads:
14
                   "This action is to be substantially
15
         accomplished by December 1972."
16

17
                       RECOMMENDATION #2
18

19
                   MR. STEIN:  "2.  Industries not con-
20
         nected to municipal sewer systems are to".  And
21
         the next sentence will be "and to", strike  "that
22
         will."  After "Wisconsin" put a period.
23
                   Now, do you need--
24
                   MR. POSTON:  I have a suggestion, Mr.
25

-------
   	3780

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          Chairman,  and that is  that we eliminate #2
 3
          by including in the first line of the first
 4
          recommendation "provided by all municipalities
 5
          and industries with separate outlets," and
 6
          that way we  would eliminate the need for #2,
 7
          we would provide the same for industries as
 8
          we require for municipalities.
 9
                    MR. STEIN:  No, I am not sure we have
10
          all the  implications of that.  You know.
11
                    MR. POSTON:   I think what we are
12
          after is the same kind of--
13
                    MR. OEMING:   I changed my mind, I
14
          changed  my vote.
15
                    MR. STEIN:  Wait,  here,  let me make
16
          this  clear.   In this kind of stuff we are
17
          really not writing a novel or a scenario,
18
          and repetition,  so you are sure of yourself,
10
          is not to  be decried.   I would look at that
20
          very,  very carefully before you--
21
                    MR. OEMING:   Yes.
22
                    MR. STEIN:   --see what you are buying.
23
          I  am  a little afraid of that, and I think we
24
          might have too--
25

-------
   ^___	3781
 I                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    What do  you people think?
 3
                    Wisconsin?   Would you prefer keeping
 4
          it  separate?

                    MR.  HOLMER:   I think they are separate
 g
          enough  that--

 7                  MR.  STEIN:   All right.

 8                  MR.  HOLMER:   --even if they said
 g
          almost  the same, I would like to do it separately.

10                  MR.  STEIN:   All right.

11                  MR.  POSTON:   I think what I am really
12
          trying  to  do is make  assurance that we get
13                                                     ~~~
          phosphate  removal  out of industry's  waste.

14                  MR.  LELAND:   Let's put it in there

15        then.
16                  MR.  POSTON:   Pardon?
17
                    MR.  LELAND:   Put it in the second one
18
          too.

10                  MR.  POSTON:   Pretty hard to word.  It
20
          can be  put in  there.

                    MR.  STEIN:   Well,  if we  are talking in
22
          terms of degradation  of water quality,  and the
23
          big issue  is on the cities,  my notion again--!
24
          may be  mistaken on  this,  but whenever we have
25

-------
                                 	3782

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         dealt with  an  industrial waste  process,  whether
 3
         it  is phosphates  or  anything else,  we  have  to
 4
         kind of  tailor this.   I think we  can come up
 5
         with this 80 percent phosphate  bench mark for
 6
         municipalities and know what we are doing.
 7
                   I am not sure,  gentlemen, in dealing
 8
         with industrial wastes  you  may  want to go higher
 9
         or  lower, depending  upon the kind of operation,
10
         and give ourselves a little more  flexibility
11
         and rely on those standards.
12
                   You  know,  this is the--well--
13
                   MR.  OEMINO:   Mr.  Chairman, are we
14
         past that point?
15
                   MR.  STEIN:   Yes.   How about  your
16
         last sentence?
17
                   MR.  OEMIN.G:   Yes, I think we might be
18
         pretty much inconsistent here if  we didn't  adopt
19
         the same sentence that we have  for municipalities.
20
                   MR.  STEIN:   Are you going to have any--
21
         all right.
22
                   MR.  OEMING:   Well, I  think you have
23
         got to depend  here upon the Conferees--
24
                   MR.  STEIN:   All right.
25

-------
              	3783

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. OEMING:  --looking at our
 3
         schedules, and so on.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
 5
                   The last sentence will read, "This
 6
         action is to be substantially accomplished by
 7
         December 1972."
 8
                   MR. OEMING:  That is right.  We
 9
         understand that in this case, the same as with
10
         municipalities, we bring in the problems that
11
         we see and tell the Conferees what we are doing.
12
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  All right.
13
                   MR. POSTON:  In the case, then, of
14
         industry inland, would it be anticipated that
15
         we would remove phosphates out of these wastes?
16
                   MR. PURDY:  They have got to meet the
17           .
         water quality standards for Lake Michigan.
18
                   MR. STEIN:  You have got to read that
19
         in line with the approach we have taken, and
20
         we have been through this, in line with 3.  The
21
         point is, if you feel that an industry is not
22
         contributing to the degradation of Lake Michigan
23
         and they are in the basin, put them on the first
24
         list and we all agree with that, as far as I am
25

-------
                                                       3784

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          concerned  they are  out of  the  case.   Or  if
 3
          they have  proper  treatment, you know.  I don't
 4
          think  there  is--
 5
                    MR.  OEMING:  I have  a question of
 6
          Wally.
 7
                    MR.  STEIN:  Yes.
 8
                    MR.  OEMING:  Does this  concern you,
 9
          Wally?  I mean  it  is my concept that we would
10
          report  for Michigan industries whether we have
11
          a phosphate  problem at an  "x"  industry.
12
                    MR.  STEIN:  Right.
13
                    MR.  OEMING:  And if  we  do have, this
14
          affects Lake Michigan, we have got to report on.
15
          it.
16
                    MR.  STEIN:  Right.
17
                    MR.  OEMING:  We are  obligated  to do so.
18
                    MR.  STEIN:  Yes.
19
                    MR.  POSTON:  Well, I--
20
                    MR.  HOLMER:  If  they have got  one
21
          part per million, you are not  going to insist

          upon 80 percent removal.
M«*
                    MR.  STEIN:  And you  may have,  I don't

          know, I don't  want  to pick on  any industry--let's

-------
                                                         3^85
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2

          get off the record.
 3

                    (Off the record.)
 4

                    MR. STEIN:  So I think with in-
 5

          dustrial processes you have this.  We all
 6

          know of both kinds of plants on what we have
 7

          to do with phosphates.  In a way, we are
 8

          deluding ourselves if we believe that we
 9

          are going to an industrial plant area and not
10

          make a plant-by-plant analysis of the phos-


          phate problem, and what is reasonable for
12

          them to do in that area.
13
                    If a guy is putting out a pound of
14

          phosphates a week, why would you want him to
15

          get 80 percent removal?  or if a guy is putting
16

          out 5,000 pounds an hour, 80 percent removal
17

          isn't going to begin to meet the problem.  Right.
18

                    All right.
19

20

                        RECOMMENDATION
21
22

                    MR. HOLMER:  In 1, I have been fretting
23

          about the phrase "all municipalities."  This


          includes all incorporated places, and I don't
25

-------
   	3786

 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         want  to  go  back  up  to  5,000  by any means.
 3
                   MR.  STEIN:   No,  no,  we  have  a
 4
         definition  of  municipalities.   Do you  want to
 6
         strike  "all"?
 6
                   MR.  HOLMER:  Well, what--
 7
                   MR.  STEIN:   In the act.
 8
                   MR.  HOLMER:  What  is the definition?
 9
         I have forgotten.
10
                   MR.  STEIN:   Oh,  it means that any--
11
         and peculiarly enough  they include State as a
12
         municipality^-any city,  county, parish that
13
         has Jurisdiction to run  a  sewage  collection
14
         and disposal facility.   In other  words--
15
                   MR.  HOLMER:  Yes.
16
                   MR.  STEIN:   In other words,  they would
17
         have  to  be  eligible to come  in for a Federal
18
         grant to be: a  municipality.
19
                   MR.  HOLMER:  Well, if that is the
20
         understanding--
21
                   MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
22
                   MR.  HOLMER:  --I have no objection
23
         to  "all," then.
24
                   MR,  STEIN:   That is  right.  I think
25

-------
   	378?

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         the definition applying in  the Federal  act
 3
         will apply, and I don't think you  are going
 4
         to be hit with these little  outfits  that  don't
 5
         have any.
 6
                   Yes .
 7
                   MR. LELAND:  Are you eliminating
 8
         utility operations?
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  No, utility  operations,
10
         if they have that jurisdiction, are  included.
11
         They are not public.
12
                   Well, here, if you are going  to  do
13
         this--do you want to strike  "all"?
14
                   MR. HOLMER:  With your explanation,
15
         it doesn't bother me any more.
16
                   MR. STEIN:  Again, gentlemen, here
17
         is what I want to say.  I have been  through
18
         this--and I will say much more with  our own
19
         staff than you people--if you are  going to
20
         get the notion that we are going to write  a
21
         document here which is going to be designed
22
         to take care of all possible operations, I
23
         think we are deluding ourselves. What we have
24
         to do is recognize that we are going to take
25

-------
                  	3789

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         Joint action by the Conferees and have  to
 3
         utilize  these in a reasonable manner.   If
 4              '
         we don't, we are going to fall apart and a
 5
         court is going to tell us we are Just not
 6
         going to do it.
 7
                   So I think on some of these points,
 8
         we are kind of straining at gnats here, because
 9
         anyone who tries to impose some of these
10
         interpretations is going to come a cropper.
11
         No one does that and stays in public office
12
         very long.
13
                   Let's go to 3.
14

15
                       RECOMMENDATION #3
16

17
                   MR. STEIN:  "Within six months each
18
         water pollution control agency shall--strike
19
         "identify" and put the word "list"--"shall list
20
         the municipalities and industries"--then strike
21
         the rest of that line and put--"discharging
22
         wastewater," and that is it.
23
                   MR. POOLE:  Read that again,  because
24
         I have it marked up.
25

-------
   	,	=	3789

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR.  STEIN:   The  sentence  reads,  first
 3
         sentence:
 4
                   "Within  six  months  each State  water
 5
         pollution control  agency shall list  the municl-
 6
         palities and industries discharging wastewater
 7
         to the Lake Michigan basin."
 8
                   MR.  POOLE:   0. K.
 9
                   MR.  STEIN:   All  right, that's  the
10
         way, and then  read on.  No further  changes.
11
                   MR.  OEMING:  We make  a complete  list  and
12
         then we say which  ones are causing—contributing,
13
         in our view, to the Lake Michigan problems?
14
                   MR.  STEIN:   Right.  And hopefully  the
15
         first go-around will really cut the list down
16
         to size.
17
                   MR. WISNIEWSKI:  Are  stormwaters
18
         included in your definition of wastewater?
19
         Probably not, I would  suggest—
20
                   MR. STEIN:   Let me ask a question
21
         here.  I wouldn't  think--! would hope that a
:22
         community upstream with stormwater isn't, but
23
         let's suppose that--
24
                   MR. WISNIEWSKI:   I was thinking of
25

-------
   	              3790

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         Chicago, for example, that has got stormwater
 3
         running into Lake Michigan.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  Yes,  they are
 5
         included.
 6
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Runoff from  parking  lots
 7
         very often is highly polluted.
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes, sure,  right.
 9
                   MR. WZSNIEWSKI:  Do you want to  then
10
         list discharging wastewater or stormwater?
11
                   MR. STEIN:  Well, wouldn't wastewater
12
         include stormwater?
13
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Yes, I think so.
14
                   MR. WISNIEWSKI:  If we  agree on  it.
15
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.  0.  K.
16
                   MR. OEMING:  Mr. Chairman.
17
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
18
                   MR. OEMING:  At the bottom of page 1,
19
         under 3, we have a repetition here now and we
20
         also have a conflict with 1 and 2, "Treatment
21
         facilities are to be completed as soon as  possible
22
         but not later than 1972."  Why does  that have to
23  I
         be in there?  We have already--
24
                   MR. STEIN:  It doesn't. Strike the
25

-------
   	379*

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         sentence.
 3
                   All right.
 4
                   All right,  let's  go  on  to  #4.
 5

 6
                       RECOMMENDATION #4
 7

 8
                   MR. STEIN:  #4, Just some  literary:
 9
                   "Continuous disinfection is  to  be
10
         provided,"  "is to" after  "disinfection,"  and
11
         the second  sentence,  "This  action is to be."
12
                   MR. OEMING:  Mr.  Chairman, as I
13
         remember, we beat this around  a good deal as
14
         to, first of all, the chlorination of  lagoons,
15
         and I think you indicated that something  ought
16
         to be in here about where the  bacterial quality
17
         affects Lake Michigan.   Is  my  recollection correct?
18
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes,  we  did that on 9, on
IV
         industrial  waste effluent.
20
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes, but with respect to
21
         this chlorination of all sewage effluents —
22
                   MR. STEIN:  Now,  here is the point,
23
         as I understand it. When we are dealing with
24
         this, first of all, the  lists  we  are going to
25

-------
   ^_______	3792

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         be dealing with are Just the places that affect

 3
         Lake Michigan.  In other words, this will not-—

 4
         everything here, and we haven't repeated that

 5
         phrase over and over again.

 6
                   MR. OEMING:  I appreciate that.

 7
                   MR. STEIN: In other words, if you

 8
         get a lagoon upstream and you by this list say

 9
         that it is off the list, as far as we are con-

10
         cerned it is out of the case.

11
                   MR. OEMING:  All right.

12
                   MR. STEIN:  Now, if it deleteriously

13
         affects Lake Michigan, then we have got to

14
         think of it.

15
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.

16
                   MR. STEIN: 0. K.?

17
                   MR. OEMING:  I guess I am always
18
         thinking about people taking things out of
19
         context.
20
                   MR. STEIN:  No, no, no.  Otherwise we

21
         have to repeat this every--
22
                   MR. OEMING:  I know.
23
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.  This  was not
24
         intended that if you have a lagoon on the St.
25

-------
   	3793

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         Joseph River way upstream or something  and  you
 3
         are not going to find a bug that is going to
 * •
         reach the operation that it is the concern  of
 5
         this conference anyway.
 6
                   MR. OEMING:  I see.  All right, I
 7
         am satisfied with your interpretation.
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.  0. K.
 9
                   Now, 5.
10
                   MR. LELAND:  Murray?
11
                   MR. STEIN: Yes, sir.
12
                   MR. LELAND:  Chlorination in  the  Calumet
13
         River area is already or should be an accomplished
14
         fact.  You have covered it in the conclusion in  16.
15
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
16
                   MR. LELAND:  You don't have to repeat
17
         it here or make reference to it?
18
                   MR. STEIN:  We haven't talked about
19
         the Calumet--if you meet the requirement--
20
                   Again let me say this.  As I  see  this,
21
         a compliance with this operation is this.   You
22
         come in with a list of cities and industries.
23
         A tremendous number of the cities and industries
24
         are not going to affect Lake Michigan,  and  you
25

-------
   	3794

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          say  these  cities  and  industries are out.   Other
 3
          cities  and industries—you are going to have
 4
          two  operations--either they are going to  do this
 5
          or they have  already  done  it.
 6
                    Now, you and Mr.  Klassen have come in
 7
          many times in the case and you have said  they
 8
          have had secondary treatment since 1960 or
 9
          they are already  providing chlorination.   If
10
          that's  the case,  all  we need is the first report
11
          and  as  far as I am concerned they are off the
12
          list.
13
                    MR. LELAND:   All right.
14
                    MR. STEIN:  And pur idea is to get
15
          this list  narrower and narrower and smaller
16
          and  smaller,  as we have done in every case,
17
          putting these Judgments against it.
18
                    I suspect,.again,  as I say, the biggest
19
          cut  in  the list will  come  at the first progress
20
          meeting, when we  will be able  to get the  thing
21
          down to manageable proportions and know what we
22
          are  dealing with.  And this has always been the
23
          way  we  have worked with this.
24
                    All right.
25

-------
   	      .	3795

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2

 3
                       RECOMMENDATION #6
 4

 5
                   MR. STEIN:  "Adjustable overflow
 6
         regulating devices are to."
 7
                   And the last sentence, "This action
 8
         is to be."
 9
                   All right?
10
                   All right.  Let me take a break as
11
         we go along with this to give you the schedule.
12
                   As you know, we are always blessed at
13
         these conferences by having the ever-popular
14
         international expert, Clarence Klassen, who
15
         has one of his innumerable speaking engagements
16
         today, and in order to try to dovetail this,
17
         I think the plans fit very well—he is going
18
         to talk to some fashion show or something this
19
         noon.
20
                   MR. KLASSEN:  As usual, you are not
21
         dealing in facts, Mr. Chairman, but go ahead.
22
                   (Laughter.)
23
                   MR. LELAND:  It is more interesting
24
         this way.
25

-------
   	5	3796

 I                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
                    MR.  STEIN:  We will  recess  between

 3
         12 and  1:30, "because  I think it is  important

 4
         to have him here  and  then we will be  able  to

 5
         do this.


                    All  right,  let's--

 7
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   For  the record,  I  am

 8
         speaking  to the National Waterworks Association

 9
         on the new f luoridatiorr  law, which  is one  of

10
         the few States  in the Union that now requires

11
         fluoridation.  I  don't believe there  is  anybody


         around the table  that has  this.  This is not a

13
         fashion show,  Mr. Chairman.  I wish it were.

14
                    MR.  POOLE:  Breaking in on  that,

16
         would you  take all these letters that these

16
         Wisconsin  women have  been  writing to  my

17
         Governor who are opposed  to f luoridation

18
         and want us to rule it out as  an action  of this

19
         conference?

20
                    MR. KLASSEN:   Will we  take  them?   We

21
         have got them.

22
                    (Laughter.)

23
                    MR. POOLE:  Send me  copies  of  your

24
         replies.   I don't know how to  answer  them.

25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR.  KLASSEN: I am always willing to
 3
         accommodate another expert, Mr. Chairman.
 4
                   MR.  STEIN:   All right.
 5
                   MR.  WISNIEWSKI:  There are more
 6
         people drinking fluoridated water in Wisconsin
 7
         than any place else in the country.
 8
                   MR.  OEMING:   Mr> Klassen, don't tell
 9
         them that Michigan has required fluoridation.
10
                   MR.  KLASSEN: I didn't.  I said except
11
         Michigan.
12
                   MR.  OEMING:   0. K.
13
                    MR. STEIN:   Let's go on to 7.
14

15
                       RECOMMENDATION #7
16

17
                   MR.  STEIN:   Let's go to 7, first line,
18
         "combined  sewers  are  to be separated."
19
                   The  last sentence is "Pollution from
20
         combined sewers  is to  be controlled."
21
                   All  right?
22
                   (No  reply.)
23

24

25

-------
                                         	3798

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2

 3
                        RE COMMENDATION #8
 4

 5
                    MR.  STEIN:   Now,  8,  we  have after
 6
          "sewer  systems,"  "to  municipal sewer systems
 7
          is  to be  encouraged."
 8

 9
                        RECOMMENDATION #9
10

11
                    MR.  STEIN:   The next one,  9,  "Con-
12
          tinuous disinfection  is to  be  provided."
13
                    All  right?
14

15
                      RECOMMENDATION #10
16

17
                    MR.  STEIN:   The first sentence in 10,
18
          "The States  and the Department of the Interior"--
19
          strike  "set  up"--"will appoint members  of a"--
20
                    MR.  OEMING:   Now,  Just  a moment,  Mr.
21
          Chairman,  I  don't have that.  Will what?
22
                    MR.  STEIN:   --"will  appoint members  of
23
          a special" instead of "set  up," strike  "set up"
24
          and insert in  lieu thereof,  "will appoint members
25

-------
                         	3799
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          Of."
 3
                    Strike  "for dealing with both" and
 4
          put  "on"  instead,  "on nuclear discharges"--
 5
          I will read  this  sentence.   And then it reads,
 6
          "The  committee will  meet with representatives."
 7
                    And  the  last sentence reads "Repre-
 8
          sentatives of  the  committee."
 9
                    MR.  POOLE:   You are going too fast
10
          for me, Murray.   Committee  will meet with
11
          representatives of AEC--
12
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
13
                    MR.  POOLE:   —or  Just with AEC?
14
                    MR.  STEIN:   With  representatives  of
15
          the Atomic Energy  Commission.
16
                    MR.  OEMING:   Well,  Mr.  Chairman,
17
          we are going a little  fast  here.   Maybe I
18
          missed it.
19
                    MR. STEIN:   Yes.
20
                    MR. OEMING:   Is there  any implication
21
          here  or indication as  to what  we  have in mind
22
          in the way of composition of  this  committee?  I
23
          mean who  is to be  on  it?  Are  we  Just going to
24
          leave it  you can appoint--
25

-------
                                                         33QQ

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   The Conferees will —
 3
                    MR.  OEMING:   I got it.  I missed it.
 4
                    MR.  STEIN:   The Conferees will —
 5
                    MR.  OEMING:   Sorry. Pass ine over.
 6
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.
 7
                    MR.  POOLE:   The last sentence reads,
 8
          "Representatives of the committee will be
 9
          available to appear"?
10
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes, "of the committee."
11
          In other words,  the idea is if they are going to
12
          take  a year or so to  do this, they had better
13
          make  their views felt.
14
                    All right.
15
                    With that,  gentlemen, vie are all
16
          caught up.  You  came  in at a good time,- because
17
          11 deals with dumping, you know, of dredgings.
18
                       RECOMMENDATION
20
21
                    MR.  STEIN:  All right, 11.
22
                    MR.  KLASSEN:  Are we open for comments
23
          on this?
24
                    MR.  STEIN:  Yes, sir.
25

-------
   	3801

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. KLASSEN:  This doesn't  seem like
 3
         a very positive statement  to me.  We  want to
 4
         have the target objective  of this group  to
 5
         stop Lake Michigan being used as a  dumping
 6
         ground, and that polluted  dredgings as of now
 7
         is to be discontinued. To  me this is  real fuzzy.
 8
         We are Just going to advise the Corps of Engineers
 9
         and they are going to tell us in six  months what
10
         their program is, and this is--I think this is
11
         a backward step.
12
                   MR. OEMING:  Mr. Chairman.
13
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
14
                   MR. OEMING:  May T point  out once
15
         again that I think we should bear in  mind
16
         in whatever we say here that there  now exists
17
         an agreement between the Secretary  of the
18
         Interior and the Secretary of the Army which--
19
                   MR. KLASSEN:  That is right, the
20
         Secretary of the Army.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  Secretary of  the Army.
22
                   MR. OEMING:  Secretary of the  Army,
23
         at top secretarial level here.  And I question
24
         what these Conferees can do outside of that
25

-------
   	.	3808

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          agreement.   If I recall the agreement correctly,
 3
          and  I think it was understood there would be
 4
          copies here today* it spells out a program for
 5                          .        •                   •
          investigation and a report by December of this
 6
          coming year and it spells  out that this does not
 7
          involve the discontinuance of dredging.  Am I
 B
          wrong or right?
 9
                    MR. STEIN:   You  are right.
10
                    MR. OEMING:   In  1968.   Now,  are we
11
          in a position here to abrogate this agreement
12
          no   matter  how we feel about dredgings, I mean
13
          the  dumping of dredgings?
14
                    MR. STEIN:   This is what I understood
15
          the  consensus was when I left here, and this is
16
          why  this was drafted  this  way.
17
                    I have one  other point to make that I
18
          think I made last time and I think the Corps has
19
          made this to me many,  many times.   They have
20
          said,  in dealing with polluters, we are going
21
          to ask for  the cessation of pollution,  say,  by
22
          1972,  or in other ways 1977 or chlorination  by  1969
23
          Here they have been doing  a practice,  say  for
24
          50,  60 years.   All right.   We are  asking them
25

-------
                                                         3803
 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
              EXECUTIVE SESSION
to come up with an abatement program.  What  they
say is, "Aren't we entitled to  the  same  kind of
consideration you in the States  or  the Federal
Government give to any other municipality  or
any other industry?"
          The notion is, that is  right,  there
is the agreement.  I would think, and the
object of this, this is such a  technical question
that we think the Corps should  be asked  to come
before the Conferees with its program, and that
is in six months, to indicate what  is going  to
be done.  In the interim—and I  think everyone
knows what has happened with the  dredging  as
well as I do and what part public opinion  has to
play in it—where there is any question  of
dredged material going anywhere, according to
this recommendation the State and the Interior
will be on publi'c record to the  Corps and  other
interested people—and other interested  people
means the press and the public and  anyone  who wants
to knpw--what their view of that material  is.
          The way I look at it,  if  we have a
faster way or a more definitive way of getting
Department

-------
 1



 2
	38 04

               EXECUTIVE  SESSION





at  the  problem,  unless we  get  that first report
 3        from the Corps, there may be a way of doing



 4        this, but I think I was reflecting what the



 5        Conferees were saying.  In. other words, we



 6        are not coming up, and it is clear, with a



 7        definitive judgment on this until we get the



 8        first report from the Corps.



 9                  Now, we are not coming up with



10        definitive judgments on a lot of other things,



         like pesticides, agricultural runoff, as I


12
         read this, policy on thermal nuclear plants,



         until we get this.  And as I got the consensus


14
         of the Conferees, this was about the best we



         could do with this dredging at this stage of


16
         the agreement.  If we can do more. I would



         like to know this.


18
                   I know that Illinois is prepared to


19
         go farther.


20
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes, I understand.


21
                   MR. STEIN:  I don't think there is any

22
         question on that.  You have to recognize, as far


23
         as the Federal Government is concerned,there is-an ^gree-


24
         ment, and I am not sure that any of the States


25

-------
   	           3805

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         are prepared at the present time, given  the

 3
         existing facts, prepared to go much  farther

 4
         than this.  If you are, I will entertain

 5
         anything we can do or put the Illinois views

 6
         in as separate views if you feel that strongly

 7
         about it, Mr. Klassen.

 8
                   MR. KLASSEN: Well, Just one point.

 9
         So far as Illinois is concerned, our State

10
         law and our present operation, we can prohibit

11
         anything going into Lake Michigan in Illinois

12
         waters.  It isn't our particular concern about

13
         this, because we know when the permits are
14
         applied for and there are no permits issued by
15
         the Department of Public Works until the water
16
         pollution control agency countersigns this.
17
         So I think we have a tight control even  over
18
         the Corps of Engineers where--they might not
19
         agree, I understand; I am not involved in this--
20
         but that they have got to get a permit from the
21
         State of Illinois.  I think there is some
22
         question about it, but this hasn't been  made
23
         an issue.
24
                   What the State of Illinois is  concerned
25

-------
                                	__J806

 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
         about, what kind  of  a  control  the  other States
 3
         have  over  the  prevention of  polluted material
 4
         going into Lake Michigan by  the Corps or by
 5
         anybody.   This is what our concern is.
 6
                    We are  set up  to handle  our own
 7
         problem and to prevent this.
 8
                    MR.  POOLE:   Well,  we don't have any
 9
         specific control  as  you  do in  your law,  but
10
         I have assumed, maybe  wrongly,  that the  Indiana

11
         Pollution  Control Law  covered  Indiana waters.
12
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   You  are right.
13
                    MR. STEIN:  Well, I don't know that
14
         anyone else of the other States wants to comment
15
         on  this.   I do think,  Mr. Klassen, that  we are
16
         going to have  a lot  of these very, very  difficult
17
         problems to handle if  we are going to solve Lake
18
         Michigan,  and  that dredging  is  one of them.  The
19
         big strides that  are made here  are in the kind
20
         of  treatment that is going to  meet water quality
21
         requirements plus chlorination, and I think this
22
         in  large measure  will  result in a  very high
23
         degree of  waste treatment, plus the removal of
24
         phosphates.
25

-------
                                                         3907

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   On the other problems,  like  in  this,
 3
         we are showing the way, even in the kind  of
 4           '               .      .
         treatment we are asking here.  But I think in
 5
         stuff like dumping of dredgings--we are striking
 6
         out in a very new field,.we are feeling our way
 7
         along, we are trying to do this with four States
 8
         and the Federal Government--! don't know  how
 9
         much farther we can move now before we try to
10
         get the Corps report and a pretty exhaustive
11
         study on their program to see if  this  is  satis-
12
         factory to meet all the States  programs.
13
                   Mr. Mitchell, did you have something
14
         you wanted to say?
15
                   MR. MITCHELL:  This thing probably
16
         worried me more over the weekend  than  any other
17
         recommendation, because we left rather hazy
18
         about it.
19
                   MR. STEIN: Yes.
20
                   MR. MITCHELL: Probably  more  hazy than
21
         all of them, and I was wondering  who was  the
22
         poor guy who was going to have to write the
23
         recommendations for us this morning.
24
                   When I read this one, if I would guess,
25

-------
   	3808

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          that the public expects we as Conferees to say
 3
          something rather definite about dumping of
 4
          polluted dredged materials into Lake Michigan,
 5
          and yet I recognize the importance of the
 6
          Corps problem of time to work out the difficult
 7
          problem that it is.  And so I would guess that
 8
          the statement as it is now presented to us
 9
          doesn't seem to me to be definite enough.
10
                    MR. STEIN:   What would you suggest
11
          we  do?
12
                    MR. MITCHELL:  Well, I wrote one up
13
          here.  I don't know if I like it entirely myself,
14
          but I might throw it  out for consideration.
15
                    MR. STEIN:   Go ahead.
16
                    MR. OEMING:  Before you read it--
17
                    MR. MITCHELL:  All right.
18
                    MR. OEMING:  --let me see if I can get
19
          a preamble here; you  don't'have to use it as a
20
          preamble.
21
                    But aren't  we dealing here with
22
          getting the stuff out of the lake on a long-
23
          term basis, some term?  You say 1972 for
24
          industries, 1972 for  phosphates, out whatever
25

-------
                                               	  3809

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          date  you  want.   And then you have got an
 3
          interim problem here.
 4         '                  '
                    Now,  Illinois thinks they have
 5
          resolved  this.   I  don't believe that Michigan
 6
          has resolved  this.   And I think in order to be
 7                        •    •
          consistent with the present agreement that we
 8
          ought to  deal with  it  in this sense.
 9
                    I read what  Mr. Mitchell has, and I
10
          think we  are  getting closer to what my thinking
11
          is, that  we should  set a goal to get the
12
          dredgings out of the lake--
13
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
14
                    MR.  OEMING:   --which would conform
15
          to the program that has been presented to
16
          these Conferees by  the Corps.  They are working
17
          on a  solution and  they will ultimately have
18
          something, so why  can't we  put a target date on
19
          that?
20
                    MR.  STEIN:   We could.
21
                    MR.  OEMING:   And  then try to deal with
22
          this  interim  problem in some way.
23
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
24
                    MR.  OEMING:   And  I think Mr.  Mitchell
25

-------
                                                         3810

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         maybe
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   We. will be glad to
 4
         entertain it.
 5
                    Let  me  say  for this, and I put
 6
         this down this way, the notion was, as I got
 7
         the views when we left here,  that we
 8
         really didn't  have  the information to set this
 9
         target date  now.      i thought that at least the
10
         implication  here  was  that at  the first progress
11
         meeting in six months when we got the program
12
         of the Corps you  might want to set  your target
13
         date then.  If you  think that we are ready to
14
         talk more definitely  than that now, I would be
15
         delighted.  But I didn't get  that from the
16
         last meeting.
17
                    Mr.  Klassen?
18
                    MR.  OEMING:  You are right.
19
                    MR.  KLASSEN:  One point,  we have been
20
         pointing everything to the Corps of Engineers
21
         and dredgings. but  there are  other problems.
22
         We were recently  approached prior to an appli-
23
         cation, there  is  no application filed, they

         demolished the Lake County Waukegan Courthouse,
25

-------
   	3811
 I                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         and we were approached about If an application
 3
         was made to put this demolition material  in  the
 4
         lake to build a breakwater whether we would
 5
         approve it and we said no.  Now,  this has
 6
         nothing to do with the Corps of Engineers.   But
 7
         we intend to keep anything out of the lake in
 8
         Illinois that is going to in any way affect
 9
         the quality of the water, and the material from
LO
         that courthouse is plaster, brick, pipe,  old
11
         radiators, door casings--
                   MR. LELAND:  Floor tiles.
L3
                   MR. KLASSEN:  —floor tile—Mr. Leland
14
         made the inspection—and we said  no.
15
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.
16
                   MR. KLASSEN:  We Just want to make
17
         sure that the other States are taking the same
18
         attitude.
19
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.  Here  again--
20
                   MR. KLASSEN:  This does not involve
21
         dredging of the Corps of Engineers.
22
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.
23
                   Before we let Mr. Mitchell go forward
24
         with that, I think this is precisely what this is
25

-------
                         	3812

 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
          that  we  have  down here was  intended to cover,
 3
          because  I  would not  doubt  that if the Corps  or
 4
          anyone else wanted to put  this dredging in the
 5
          lake  and you  would come  up  and you would give
 6
          what  you just said was your diagnosis of the
 7
          pollutional effects  of that material, I would
 8
          hope  that  you would  not  have a different view
 9
          than  Mr. Poston and  the  Federal people on the
10
          pollutional effects  of the  material.   I think
11
          in  the existing state of affairs,  particularly
12
          around in  the Illinois waters,  this would work
13
          for this year.
14
                    Now,  the question here,  I am not
15
          sure  whether  the other States  have gone through
16
          the public debate  that we have had in Illinois
17
          on  this  dredging and they are  far  enough along
18
          with  their program.  What this  intended to do
10
          was to have holding  action  for a six-months
20
          operation  where  we could have  this kind of
21
          discussion.   Now,  if we  can set a  date or be
22
          more  definite,  fine, but I  think we are still
23
          going to have to go  through this.at possibly

          our first  meeting  and at the  same  time have  this
25

-------
   	3813

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         designed so we are protecting Illinois  existing
 3
         program.
 4
                   Mr. Mitchell, do you want to offer
 5
         anything?
 6
                   MR. MITCHELL:  Well, I assume from
 7
         your discussion here that you are suggesting,
 8
         and I am attempting to agree with you, that we
 9
         cannot set a final date because we lack too
10
         much information.
11
                   MR. STEIN:  That is right.
12
                   MR. MITCHELL:  But I think maybe up
13
         to the sentence I talk about a date it makes
14
         a little bit better--
15
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
16
                   MR. MITCHELL:  "The prohibition of
17
         the dumping of polluted material or dredging
18
         into Lake Michigan should be accomplished as
19
         soon as possible consistent with the laws of
20
         the States involved and the need to provide
21
         maintenance dredging to prevent economic hard-
22
         ship for the port and the region.  The Depart-
23
         ment of the Interior and the States involved
24
         must certify all material or dredging free
25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          from pollutants  before  any dumping is  permitted."
 3
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Would you change it
 4
          to  "deposition"  instead of "dumping"?
 5
                    MR.  STEIN:  Well,  here, I have a few
 6
          Just theoretical problems  with this.
 7
                    What you  are  doing is saying con-
 8
          slstent with the laws of. the State, which may
 9
          give a loophole, and  then  you say we should
10
          certify the  pollutional aspects and possibly
11
          the  States should do  it and the Department of
12
          the  Interior.  In one place you are easing up
is
          or  someone might say  you might be easing up
14
          consistent with  the laws of the State.
15
                    The  second  thought, you are  asking us
16
          to  make a  certification that I am not  sure we
17
          can  do under our existing  law.  I guess anyone
18
          can  certify  anything.   But the point is, is this
19
          going to have  any force and effect?
20
                    I  have worked with the Corps of
21
          Engineers  for  many, many years on pollution
22
          problems,  and  whatever  you have felt,  I have
23
          always felt  they have been cooperative.  My
24
          notion is  in working  with  the Corps, it is
25

-------
   	3815

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         something like working with you people,  in
 3
         working out an agreement with them or us  on  a
 4
         program to abate the pollution, I think  we will.
 5
         be farther ahead than any kind of arm's  length
 6
         certification from Interior or any other  program
 7
         to the Corps.  Now, this is Just, again,  my
 8
         experience.

 '•
                   I think your first sentence, probably
10
         with modifications, is a better formulation
11
         than this.  Could you read that again?
12
                   MR. MITCHELL:  I add the--I didn't
13
         recognize your fear about the laws of the State.
14
         I was trying to accomplish something for  Illinois
15
         because they have this law which prohibits it
16
         now, and I thought if we try to have an enforce -
17
         inent with a date in it, we ought to allow them
18
         to recognize their own law that they have which
19
         prohibits it now.
20
                   MR. STEIN:   Would you read it again?
21
                   MR. MITCHELL:  I will be glad to read
22
         it again:
23
                   "The prohibition of the dumping of
24
         polluted material or  dredging into Lake Michigan
25

-------
   	3816

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
          should  be  accomplished as  soon as  possible

 3
          consistent with  the  laws of  the State  involved

 4
          and  the need to  provide  maintenance  dredging

 5
          to prevent economic  hardship for the port and

 6
          the  region."

 7
                    MR.  STEIN:  May  I  look at  that again?

 8
                    Let  me just try  this on  for  size,  be-
 9
          cause I think  your first sentence  is better.
10
                    "The prohibition of the  dumping of
11
          polluted material"--"polluted" is  the  word?--

12
          "polluted  material into  Lake Michigan  should
13
          be accomplished  as soon  as possible.  It is
14
          recognized that  the  State  of Illinois  has a
15
          legislation and  a positive program in  this area.
16
          The  other  States should  develop commensurate--
17
          should  develop programs—shall develop programs
18
          on this as soon  as possible."
19
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Could I suggest a-slight
20
          wording change?
21
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
22
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   You  said "polluted
23
          materials."
24
                    MR.  STEIN:  Yes.
25

-------
   	3817

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                   MR. KLASSEN:   Should it be  "polluting
 3
         material"?
 4
                   MR. STEIN:   "Polluting materials."
 5
                   MR. KLASSEN:   Yes.
 6
                   MR. STEIN:   I  was reading his  stuff.
 7
                   MR. KLASSEN:   Yes.
 8
                   MR. MITCHELL:   That's  better.
 9
                   MR. STEIN:   Then we can say:
10
                   "it is recognized — the need must be
11
         recognized to provide  maintenance dredging to
12
         prevent economic hardship for the ports  and
13
         the region.  The Corps of Engineers and  the
14
         States will be requested to report to the
15
         Conferees within six months concerning their
16
         programs.  At that time  the Conferees shall
17
         consider adopting a coordinated  approach toward
18
         the discharge of dredging, together with a
19
         target date for putting  the program into
20
         operation."
21
                   Is this--
22
                   MR. OEMING:  I am willing to let it
23
         rest there for a moment  until you get that
24
         typed up and take a look at it.
25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.
 3
                    We have  Just got one other big
 4
          problem and it is  12  o'clock.   Let's get that
 5
          typed  up and we will  do that.   We will have
 6
          that for you after lunch, because the other
 7
          big problem is the alewife problem,  and I think
 8
          from there on  we have free sailing,  I hope,
 9
          most of the afternoon.
10
                    Sir?
11
                    MR.  HOLMER:  Is that six months from
12
          the date of the recommendation?
13
                    MR.  STEIN:   Well,  we can make that
14
          a  time.  Now,  I would--
15
                    MR.  HOLMER:  I don't want to conflict
16
          with the Secretary of the Interior again.
17
                    MR.  STEIN:   We will  talk about that
18
          when we come back.  Generally  the six months
ID
          runs from the  time the Secretary  sends this
20
          out,because we have no notion  that the Secretary
21
          is going to adopt  this at all. Right?
22
                    We will  stand recessed  until 1:30.
23
                    (Whereupon, at 12:00 noon an adjourn-
24
          ment was taken until  1:30 p-m.)
25

-------
   	3819

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                       AFTERNOON SESSION
 3
                                        (1:30  p.m.)
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  Let's  reconvene..
 5

 6
                RECOMMENDATION #11  (Continued)
 7

 8
                   MR. STEIN:  The  first  sentence,  that
 9
          "should," how about changing that  to "shall,"
10
          Mr. Mitchell?  0. K.?
11
                   MR. MITCHELL:  Fine.
12
                   MR. OEMING:  Fine.
13
                   MR. STEIN:  Let's  put,  "The  State  of
14
          Illinois has a legislative and positive  action
15
          program in this area."
16
                   MR. MITCHELL:  I wish  Mr.  Klassen  was
17
          here to discuss that, but  I  read that  bill and
18
          as I read it that bill itself doesn't  prohibit
19
          dumping, it Just gives Mr. Klassen the authority
20
          to veto the Board of Public  Works.   It doesn't
21
          say it shall prohibit it or  anything,  so I don't
22
          know that we should mislead  people  as  to what
23
          that bill actually says.
24
                   MR. STEIN:  Well,  no.   Let's wait  until
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          Mr. Klassen comes in.  But I am just trying to
 3
          perfect the language here if he doesn't buy
 4
          this.
 5
                    The other States "will" instead of

 6
          "shall".
 7
                    MR. OEMING:  Let's wait until Murray
 8
          finishes.
 9
                    MR. STEIN:  Let's just get this
10
          grammatically.
11
                    MR. OEMING:  Yes.
12
                    MR. STEIN:  The Corps of Engineers
13
          and the States, capital S.
14
                    All right?  Wait a minute.
15
                    MR. POSTON:  I understand that the
16
          Corps will not complete their studies until
17
          about December 1968.  Six months would run us
18
          up to about October, and I wonder, they will %
19
          have some  preliminary results, but not all of
20
          the results of their financing.
21
                    MR. STEIN:  Don't you think the
22
          Corps can  give us a reasonable approach?  In
23
          other words, they have got to put everything
24
          back.  Why don't they give us what they have?
25

-------
                                                         3821

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                   MR. POSTON:  I am sure  they would
 3
         be willing  to give us what  they had.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  Otherwise we would be
 5
         moving  the  whole  thing back  another three
 6
         months.
 7
                   MR. OEMING:  We are  out of phase here.
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.   Perhaps they can
 9
         adjust.
10
                   MR. POSTON:  I wanted to make you
11
         aware  of  this potential.
12
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes,  we  are well aware
13
         of the  potential, but I  think  we  bent over
14
         quite  a way toward the Corps.   I  think in the
15
         six-monUte deadline they  can bend  toward us,
16
         and  maybe we can  arrive  at  an  accommodation.
17
                   Why don't you  read this, Benn?
18
                   "Prohibition shall be accomplished,"
19
         instead of  "should," right?    "|t is re cognized " —
20
         now, here is the  question —"that  the State of
21
         Illinois  has a  legislative  and positive action
22
         program in  this area."
23
                   Is this true?
24
                   MR. LELAND:  Yes.  Senate Bill Number
25

-------
                                                         3832

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          We also have--
 3
                    MR. STEIN:   Why did you raise the
 4
          question?
 5
                    MR. MITCHELL:  The issue that I
 6
          raised here,  Mr.  Chairman, is that as I
 7
          interpret  our law in  Indiana and, as I under-
 8
          stand, Michigan's or  Wisconsin's or anybody's
 •                   .
          law prohibits pollution of the waters of our
10
          States, which I consider a positive legislation.
11
          As I read  the Illinois laws, it gives Mr.
12
          Klassen or any successor the veto power
13
          over the Board of Public Works against the
14
          dumping of any material into Lake Michigan,
15
          and I don't know that that is any more than
16
          Just a veto power over the dumping of any
17
          .material.   And that from a pollution viewpoint,
18
          all of our laws are fairly equal.
19
                    MR. LELAND:  It is Just that in
20
          addition to the Central Water Board Act we
21
          have this  specific legislation dealing with
22
          this specific problem, but that--
23
                    MR. MITCHELL:  Yes, that is right.
24
          But it does give  your Board or Mr. Klassen
25

-------
   	   .	3823
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         the veto power over the Board of Public Works.
 3
                   MR. LELAND:  In the issuing  of  these
 4
         permits.
 5
                   MR. MITCHELL:  In the  issuing of
 6
         permits, yes.
 7
                   MR. LELAND: There is also an executive
 8
         order of the Governor on this matter which  at
 9
         the moment is even overriding that, but that is
10
         another--
11
                   MR. MITCHELL:  That is not legislative.
12
                   MR. LELAND;  No.
13
                   MR. STEIN:  Maybe we should  strike
14
         those two sentences.
15
                   MR. POOLE:  Well, you  could  say it is
16
         recognized the State of Illinois has specific
17
         legislation  and  identify that.
18
                   MR. LELAND:  Yes,  that--
19
                   MR. STEIN:  Has specific legislation?
20                                               -.$
                   MR. POOLE:  Yes.  But  I  think we  have
21
         a  positive program,  that is  the  Department  of
22
         Natural Re--
23
                   MR. LELAND:  Take  out  the positive
24
         program.  Has specific legislation in  this  area.
25

-------
   	3824

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    (At this  point,  Mr.  Klassen arrived.)
 3
                    MR. STEIN:   In this  area.
 4
                    Let's  strike the other.   The next
 5
          sentence--we  don't  need it,  right--"The other
 6
          States will"?
 7
                    MR. HOLMER:   I am concerned about
 8.
          the  second sentence which is not a recommen-
 9
          dation at  all but a statement.
10
                    MR. STEIN:   It is  just a factual
11
          statement .
12
                    MR. HOLMER:   I realize.   I  am wondering
13
          if this  is the appropriate place for  it.  I was
14
          reading  the alewife description a little later
15
          on,  and  there is a  lot of  narrative there--
16
                    MR. STEIN:   Yes. Well, the  point is,
17
          I think  in some  of  the recommendations what
18
          we have  done, in order to  get  over the hump,
19
          is to put  in  some narrative  in order  to give
20
          a credence to the recommendations.
21
                    MR. HOLMER;:   wen, if this  is
22
          regularly  done,  fine.   I Just  wanted  to be
23
          sure we weren't  doing  it unknowingly.
24
                    MR. STEIN:   No.   Here, let's try this.
25

-------
                	3825

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   Let's say, "it is recognized that
 3
         the State of Illinois has specific legislation
 4
         in this area."  And then strike it and go down
 5
         to, "The need must be recognized to provide
 6
         maintenance dredging to prevent economic hard-
 7
         ship for the ports and the region," and so forth.
 8
                   Is this all right?  Let me read that.
 9
                   You have got "the Corps of Engineers
10
         and States will be requested to report and you
11
         struck out above that "the States will develop
12
         programs."
13
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
14
                   MR. POOLE:  I don't think that should
15
         interfere with them reporting.  That is, I have
16
         been trying to keep this thing short as much as
17
         possible.  We were approached several years ago
18
         by a large industry that wanted to take some of
19
         its potent waste and barge it out in the lake,
20
         and we said nothing doing.  And there is a lot
21
         of this, and as Mr. Klassen pointed out this
22
         morning, we say the same thing on demolition of
23
         a building, it is not dredging.  And this is
24
         why I like the first line of what is here now.
25

-------
   	3826

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR. STEIN:  Yes.  I think we are In
 3
          shape.
 4
                    Let rce try this, read it to you:
 5
                    "The prohibition of the dumping of
 6
          polluting materials into the lake shall be
 7
          accomplished as soon as possible.  It is
 8
          recognized that the State of Illinois has
 9
          specific legislation in this area.  The need
10
          must be recognized to provide maintenance
11
          dredging to prevent economic hardship for the
12
          ports and the region.  The Corps of Engineers
13
          and the States will be requested to report to
14
          the Conferees within six months concerning
15
          their programs.  At that time the Conferees
16
          shall consider adopting a coordinated approach
17
          toward the discharge of dredging, together
18
          with a target date for putting the program
19
          into operation."
20
                    MR. HOLMER:  Is the "discharge of"
21
          necessary?
22
                    MR. OEMING:  Disposal of dredging.
23
                    •MR. HOLMER:  I think we wanted to deal
24
          with dredging.
25

-------
   	  3827
 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                    MR. STEIN:  Yes, what  is  your—
 3
                    MR. HOLMER:  I don't know,  I would
 4              '  '         '
          take  out  the three words,  "the discharge of."
 5
          I don't  think it adds anything.
 6
                    MR. STEIN:  Toward  dredging?
 7                       '   .               '  '
                    MR. HOLMER:  Yes.
 8
                    MR. LELAND:  No.
 9
                    MR. OEMING:  Well,  it  seems  to me
10
          that  the  main thrust of  our Job  here  is as  to
11
          what  are  we going to do  with  the dredging when
12
          we have  got it.
13
                    MR. STEIN:  Right.
14
                    MR. OEMING:  The only  modification
15
          I would make would be toward  the disposal of
16
          dredged materials.
17
                    MR. STEIN:  Disposal of dredged
18
          material?
19
                    MR. HOLMER:  Discharge bothers me.
20
                   'MR..STEIN:  All right,  toward the
21
          disposal  of dredged material, how about that?
22
                    MR. HOLMER:  All right.
23
                    MR. OEMING:  This is good now.  It
24
          encompasses everything.  You  are not  limited.
25

-------
   	          .	3826

 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.   All right.  That
 3
          is  good.
 4
                    MR.  OEMING:  Yes,  dredged materials,
 5
          the disposal  of dredged  materials.
 6
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right, are we set now?
 7
          Let me  read this again so we are not entirely--
 8
                    How did that speech go, Clarence?
 9
                    MR.  KLASSEN:  It was good.  I didn't
10
          get down  to describing the bikinis, though.  I
11
          had to  leave.
12
                    MR.  STEIN:   I  know it was good.  What
13
          did you do beyond that?   I haven't heard you
14
          make a  speech that wasn't good yet.
15
                    MR.  KLASSEN:  0.  K., I will agree
16
          with what you say, Mr. Chairman.
17
                    MR.  STEIN:   That is all right.
18
                    (Laughter.)
19
                    MR.  STEIN:  It  shows you to what
20
          extent  you have to go  to get agreement around
21
          here.
22
                    (Laughter.)
23
                    MR.  STEIN:   Here is where we stand
24
          on  this.
25

-------
   	.	385T9

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    Clarence,  this is a key  point  for
 3
         you.
 4
                    "The prohibition of the  dumping  of
 5
         polluting  materials  into Lake Michigan shall  be
 6
         accomplished as soon as possible.   It is recog-
 7
         nized that the State of Illinois has specific
 8
         legislation in this  area.  The need must be
 9
         recognized to provide maintenance  dredging
10
         to prevent economic hardship for the ports and
11
         the region."
12
                   MR. KLASSEN:  What is the purpose
13
         of that sentence?
14
                   MR. OSMING:  I have another thought
15
         here.  Are we weakening this statement so  much
16
         and diluting it by not putting in here that
17
         this interim business—let me have that.   I
18
         keep feeding the newspaper men.    "The need
19
         must be recognized to proyide maintenance
20                               "   •
         dredging in the interim to prevent economic
21
         hardship."  I hate to see  this--
22
                   MR. STEIN:   All  right.
23                                   6
                   MR. OEMING:  --qualified quite so much.
24
                   MR. STEIN:   How  about that?   All right.
25

-------
                                                        3830

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  MITCHELL: .1 will buy that.
 3
                    MR.  LELAND:   Why not say provide
 4
          interim maintenance?
 5
                    MR.  STEIN:   No,  in the interim.
 6
                    MR.  OEMING:   That is right, an
 7
          interim period here while  we are fussing with
 8
          this  thing.
 9
                    MR.  STEIN:   All  right.
10
                    "The need must be recognized to
11
          provide maintenance dredging in the interim."
12
                    All  right?   They are going to have
13
          maintenance  dredging  all the time.  It is
14
          maintenance  dumping in the interim, but that
15
          is  all right.
16
                  — Jlto  provide maintenance dredging
17
          in  the interim."
18
                    MR.  OEMING:
                    MR.  STEIN:   Aren't we going—wait a
20
          minute.
21
                    MR.  KLASSEN: Do we have to put that
22
             there?
23
                    MR.  STEIN:   Wait a minute, Larry.
24
          Are we going to have  to have maintenance dretlglng
25                                                    '

-------
   	3831

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         from here  on  out?
 3
                    MR. OEMING:  No.   I  guess  it is
 4
         modifying  the wrong  place.   I  am trying to
 5
         get this in here that we aren't  modifying
 6
         the initial premise  here that  the prohibition
 7
         shall be accomplished as soon  as possible  and
 8
         that we are going  to continue  to have  maintenance
 9
         dredging,  but from now until as  soon as possible
10
         there is going  to  be interim dredging  and
11
         interim dumping.
12
                    MR. MITCHELL:   We  are  going  to have
13
         long-time  dredging and interim dumping.
14
                    MR. OEMING:  And you are going to
15
         have long-time  dredging  and  maybe not  interim
16
         dumping, I don't know.
17
                    MR. POSTON:  I wonder, Mr. Chairman,
18
         if we might strengthen it a  little by  adding
19
         a sentence at the  end which  would say  it is
20
         the intent that the  target date  be not later
21
         than, say, July '69.
22

                    MR. STEIN:  I  wouldn't want  to put
23

         it off that long until we got  our information.
24

                    MR. OEMING:  Well, Mr. Chairman, do
25

-------
   	3832
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          you  get what I am driving at here?  I would
 3
          like to see this  in here somehow so that we
 4
          tighten this up.   I am not trying to loosen
 5
          it.   If what I have said is loosening it,
 6
          then I  don't want it.
 7
                    MR. KLASSEN:  I still wonder why we
 8
          need to recognize "to  prevent economic hardship."
 9
          If it is a fact,  why do we have to put it in
10
          there?   It looks  like  we are giving a sop to
11
          somebody or making excuses or opening the
12
          door or something.
13
                    MR. STEIN:   Let's try this.  Let's do
14
          that first sentence,  "The prohibition of dumping
15
          of polluted materials  into Lake Michigan shall
16
          be accomplished as soon as possible.  In the
17
          interim, it must  be recognized that we must
18
          provide maintenance dredging to prevent economic
19
          hardship for the  ports  and region."
20
                    MR. KLASSEN:   Of course this is the
21
          same thing we criticized Wisconsin for.
22
                    MR. STEIN:   No.
23
                    MR. OEMING:   Who criticized Wisconsin?
24
                    MR. KLASSEN:   I did.
25

-------
   	3833

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                    MR.  OEMING:  Well,  I  was  going to say.
 3
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   You  did too.
 4
                    MR.  OEMING:  I did?
 5
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   You  said we couldn't
 6
         agree  and  now  we  are back on  the same thing,
 7
         offering reasons  why we  can't get the Job done.
 8
                    MR.  STEIN:  No,  we  can get  the Job
 9
         done.
10
                    Let's read the whole  thing  now.
11
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Maybe I misinterpreted.
12
                    MR.  STEIN:  Let's  read this as we
13
         have it, as I  suggested:
14
                    "The prohibition of the dumping
15
         of polluting materials into Lake Michigan
16
         shall  be accomplished as soon as possible.
17
         In the interim, it is recognized that we must
18
         provide maintenance dredging  to prevent economic
19
         hardship for the  ports and the  region.   Cog-
20
         nizance is taken  that the  State of  Illinois
21
         has specific legislation in the area.   The
22
         Corps  of Engineers and the States will  be
23
         requested  to report to the conference within
24
         six months concerning their programs.   At
25

-------
                                                         3834

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          that  time the Conferees shall consider
 3
          adopting a coordinated approach toward the
 4
          disposal of dredged material together with
 5
          a  target date for putting the program into
 6
          operation."
 7
                    MR. OEMING:   I am still annoyed
 8
          here.
 9
                    MR. STEIN:   Don't fight with Illinois,
10
          for goodness sakes.  They may have a change
11
          in the  government next week.
12
                    (Laughter.)
13
                    MR. OEMING:   I want the record to
14
          show  that I didn't criticize Wisconsin,  Mr.
15
          Klassen.
16
                    MR. KLASSEN:  Let the record show that.
17
                    (Laughter.)
18
                    MR. STEIN:   What do you think  of
19
          that?
20
                    MR. OEMING:   I like it.
21
                    MR. KLASSEN:  What  measures you
22
          have  to go through to  get agreement, Mr. Chairman.
23
                    MR. STEIN:   Yes.  Maybe we had better
24
          get this. Why don't you, before we do this, and
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          this  is  a very important one,  get a girl in
 3
          to type  this  up.
 4
                    (Off the  record.)
 5
                    MR.  STEIN:   Well,  do you want to buy
 6
          that,  "The prohibition of the  dumping of polluted
 7
          material into  Lake  Michigan  is to be accomplished
 8
          as soon  as possible.   The Corps of Engineers
 9
          and the  States will be requested to report to
10
          the Conferees  within  six months concerning
U
          their  program. At  that time the Conferees
12
          shall  consider a  coordinated approach toward
13
          the disposal  of dredged material together with
14
          a target date  for putting the  program into
15
          operation."
16
                    That is a good suggestion.  What do
17
          you think of  that?
18
                    MR.  MITCHELL:  We  buy it.
19
                    MR.  HOLMER:   I would like to march
20
          forward  with Illinois.
21
                    MR.  OEMING:   I agree with Illinois.
22
                    (Laughter.)
23
                    MR.  STEIN:   0. K.   I think we are in
24
          shape.   That is a very good  suggestion.  0. K.?
25

-------
   	3836

 1                       EXECUTIVE. SESSION

 2
                    MR.  POOLE:   Mr.  Chairman,  I hate
 3
          to  go  on record as  agreeing with Illinois,
 4
          but I  will.
 5
                    (Laughter.)    :
 6
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Well,  you understand,
 7
          I am taking  out the fact that  everybody knows
 8
          that Illinois  has  a legislative program.
 9
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes,  I recognize that.
10
                    Let  me give  you  this again completely.
11
                    Here is  the  way  this reads:
12
                    "11.  The prohibition of the dumping
13
          of  polluting material  into  Lake Michigan shall
14
          be  accomplished as  soon as  possible.  The Corps
15
          of  Engineers and the States will be  requested
16
          to  report to the Conferees  within six months
17
          concerning their programs.   At that  time the
18
          Conferees shall consider adopting the coordinated

          approach toward the disposal of dredged material,

          together with  a target date for putting the
21
          program into operation."
22
                    (Off the  record.)
23
                 --"toward the disposal  of dredged material,
24
          together with  a target date for putting the program
25

-------
   	383?

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          into  operation."
 3
                    All  right.   We will look at that again.
 4
                    Let's  go on to 12.
 5

 6
                      RECOMMENDATION #12
 7

 8
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right, 12.  Let's go
 9
          on  to that alewife business.
10
                    MR.  OEMING:  Mr. Chairman, I have
11
          one suggestion.   I like it very well except
12
          the last  sentence.
13
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
14
                    MR.  OEMING:  I would like to throw
15
          this  suggestion  on the table.
16
                    In the last line where the word
17
          "this" appears,  put in "a" and then insert
18
          after "program":  "which would accomplish the
19
          above objective," then go on "with funds and
20
          personnel."
21
                    So it  would read--
22
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.
23
                    MR.  OEMING: --"to assure the success
24
          of  this program,  the  Conferees recommend that
25

-------
                                                         3838

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          the States concerned and the Federal Government
 3
          support a program which would accomplish the
 4
          above objective with funds and personnel."
 5
                    (Across-the-table discussion,
 6
          inaudible to the reporter.)
 7
                    MR. STEIN:  All right, that is all
 8
          right.  That is good.
 9
                    Are there any other comments or
10
          suggestions?
11
                    MR. KLASSEN:  Mr. Chairman, what is
12
          your interpretation of this in the way of a
IS
          positive program?  I am asking for information,
14
          really.
15
                    MR. STEIN:  The information deal is,
16
          we all know this, as far as I can see everyone
17
          can come forth with a plan, and not that I
18
          deprecate the planners, but, you know, this
19                                                   %
          is a wonderful operation.  Every time I come into
20
          Chicago they come forth with a new plan.  One
21
          time I find they are going to have ski slides,
22
          the next time they are going to be swimming off
23
          the Wrigley Building, the next time I come and
24
          hear they are going to have deep tunnels. You
25

-------
                                                         3839
 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
              EXECUTIVE SESSION
know, these are great things, and I am all



for the planning.



          The notion is, I think everyone has



worked out a plan.  As far as I can see, the



Great Lakes Commission has got a reasonable



plan to clean this up, and if we put in



another plan, we are just going to get into



conflict with it.  The issue is, we have got



to put the plan in operation.



          We would like, if we could possibly



do this, to have this run completely locally



and not have any Federal funds or people in it.



But I don't think it is possible.  So we are



prepared to put in a considerable amount of



Federal money, if the States will match it.



          In addition to this, we would like some-



one locally to set the people up who ar? going



to run the program, and if you cafl't do it,



we have the people available.  In other words,



we have biologists, we have engineers who have



had experience with commercial fishing and who



have been in many commercial fishing runs.  If



you want to have them, we will put them in for the

-------
   	38*0

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          chore.  But if you put a man into this^
 3
          we will be glad to put in staff men to do it.
 4
          In other words, we would like it to be a local.
 5
          program.
 6
                    It seems to me that if we are going
 7
          to lick the interim alewife prob.lem we have to
 8
          have several elements to it, and these elements
 9
          are concerned here.  One, if the Great Lakes
10
          Commission task, force can work up a program,
11
          fine, we will be glad to cooperate.  The elements
12
          of that program seem to be the skimming of
13
          alewives when they are in the water before
14
          they get to shore, the proper disposal of the
15
          alewives on shore in properly disposed sites
16
          where they are closed and where they are
17
          covered, and with the notion that the States
18
          will get together with the localities, including
19
          the counties and the cities, where they will have
20
          a program to take care of the alewives that get
21
          past the skimming net lines.
22
                    What we are prepared to do is put
23
          in money matching the States up to a limit,
24
          you know, but I think we can more or less
25

-------
   	3841

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         match, and also where  the  States  can  break
 3
         loose personnel to  run the program, and we
 4
         would be delighted  if  you  could,  to provide
 5
         either the staff  or the  supervisory personnel
 6
         or both.  In other  words,  we  think this
 7
         program is so important  that  we are not quibbling
 8
         with the program  of the  Great Lakes Commission,
 9
         which looks reasonable and has these  elements
10
         in it.  We are ready to  buy their planning.
11
         What we are doing is we  are saying we are
12
         putting our money in,  we are  putting  our
13
         personnel in.  We hope you will match us with
14
         the money because if you don't, I don't think
15
         the program is going to  get off the ground.
16
         I think we may be more flexible because of our
17
         large program and being  able- to disengage
18
         personnel to work on this  program than possibly
19
         the States were,  but we  have  to get disposal
20
         sites from the States  to put  the  alewives in
21
         and also an agreement  from them that  they are
22
         going to take the alewives off when they hit
23
         the beaches.
24
                   The only  string  we  have
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          on  the  money thatwehave,  is  that you at least
 3
          have  to match it.   As  far  as  personnel is con-
 4
          cernedj  we  are ready to let anyone designated
 5
          by  the  State agencies  run  this  and we will
 6
          provide the staff,  but if  you can't provide
 7
          supervisory personnel, we  stand willing and
 8
          able  and I  think we have the  people to step
 9
          in  and  accept the  supervisory jobs if you
10
          want  them.   The point  is,  we  believe this should
11
          be  a  State  and a local function.  The only way
12
          we  would step in here  is if requested by the
13
          States  concerned where you could not find the
14
          men.
15
                   Blucher  Poole has been with us.
16
          You know, we have  graduate sanitary engineers
17
          who have had advance expedience in commercial
18
          fishing,  and particularly  our guys in the
19
          Pacific Northwest.   If you want this, I will
20
          Just  get those guys out here  for the period
21
          of  getting  the alewives out.
22
                   MR. POOLE:(Inaudible) you mean?
23
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
24
                   MR. POOLE:  I recommend him most highly,
25

-------
   	38*3

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes,  I  think he would  be
 3
         the man for the Job.  Because we  have some
 4
         people who are both  sanitary  engineers  and have
 5
         a  tremendous background in  commercial fishing,
 6
         and if this is the man you  want and  you don't
 7
         have personnel of your own, we will  Just get
 8
         him here  for you.
 9
                   MR. KLASSEN:  I mentioned  to  translate
10
         this, you know, into action.  When you  say  "we"
11
         do you mean the Department  of the Interior?
12
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes,  sir.
13
                   MR. KLASSEN:  And "you" meaning—this
I4
         leaves me a little--
15
                   MR. STEIN:  Well, here, let me tell
16
         you this. I have talked about funds--
17
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Yes.
18
                   MR. STEIN:  --to  the Assistant Secretary,
19
         that is Max EdwardsT-
20
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Yes.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  --and  to the Commissioner,
22
         Joe Moore, and they  have indicated that we  can
23
         agree to  put in funds.  As  I  understand it,  the
24
         program for seining  and  the putting  this on  shore
25

-------
   	38*5

 I                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          and the States even have to put up 75 thousand

 3
          dollars each,  I am not sure that I can go above


          that 250,  in other words.   But more or less a

 &
          50-50 match.

 6
                    MR.  KLASSEM:  What concerns me, you

 7
          say nyounj  I represent the Water Pollution

 8
          Control Agency, and I presume, then, it will

 9
          be up to us to translate this in our own State

10
          whether our Department of  Conservation, Depart-


          ment of Public Works, or who does it.  These

12
          are the things we are going to have to—

13
                    MR.  STEIN:  This is a hard question,

14
          Mr. Klassen.

15
                    MR.  KLASSEN:  Yes.

16
                    MR.  STEIN:  The  difficult time I

17
          had with this is when I got back with all these

18
          planners,  I recognized we  needed personnel and

19
          we needed money, and the pitch that I went back

20
          to our people with is we will Just have to take

21
          this out of operating funds.

22
                    MR. KLASSEN:  All right.

23
                    MR. STEIN:  Now, the question here is

24
          where we get this, I think when this Great Lakes

25

-------
   	3844

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         will amount  to about  a half  a  million dollars
 3
         and run over a six-weeks  period.
 4
                   MR. KLASSEN:   What is a matching,
 5
         50-50?
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.   Now,  they have
 7
         indicated that we  can start  working on that
 8
         operation.   If we  talk about 50-50,  and I
 9
         hope the States won't quibble  among themselves
10
         on this, this means a quarter  of  a million
11
         dollars for  the Feds, a  quarter of a million
12
         dollars for  the States.   This  means  maybe 65
13
         to 75 million bucks per  State.   The  issue--
14
                   MR. KLASSEN:   Thousand.
15
                   MR. STEIN:  What?
16
                   MR. POOLE:  You said  million.
17
                   MR. STEIN:  Thousand.
18
                   MR. KLASSEN:   We realize you are a
19
         Federal man, but that is  all right.
20
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes.
21
                   (Laughter.)
22
                   MR. STEIN:  I  scaled  that  down.
23
                   The problem is  that  this may run
24
         over a half  a million dollars.  If it does
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          Commission comes up with it,  we are Just going
 3
          to have to approach this with an open conscience
 4
          and free will and see that the States and we
 5
          come forward and get the money and the personnel
 6
          and put them together.

 7                '             •                •
                    The problem is time is running out.
 8
          I  talked to the Federal co-chairman over this
 9
          weekend a long time about this, Ray Clevenger,
10
          and it is his view, and I concur in this,
11
          unless we put this together during this month
12
          and we are ready to go  in April, we are dead
13
          for this season.  We are ready to come and meet
14
          with you as far as we can, but this depends
15
          on the Commission.
16
                    Mr. Mitchell  and his group have
17
          a  plan,  we are not arguing with that plan a
18
          bit,  we are ready to support  it'Whole hog,"
19
          but I think the question is to put that plan
20
          into operation.  There  are several things
21
          that it is going to take to put the plan
22
          into operation: one of  money, one of personnel,
23
          one of sites that the States  are going to give
24
          us to put those alewives in,  and another is
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         cooperation and equipment  from the  localities
 3
         to do  their Job.  If  the States  can produce
 4
         this,  we are prepared to put  in  what personnel
 5
         you need and the money you need, and I  think
 6
         to match you, in doing the Job in the skimming
 7
         and the coordination  of the program.
 8
                   MR. KLASSEN:  What  is  the status of
 9
         the Great Lakes Commission program, John?
10
                   MR. MITCHELL:  Well, tomorrow the
11
         working group meets--and by the  way, there is
12
         a representative from the  Pish and  Game Com-
13
         mission and Department of  Conservation  on  the
14
         working group—and  they are going to discuss
15
         the seven points in the program  and allocate
16
         the various responsibilities  for 100 percent
17
         implementation of those seven points, with a
18
         cost factor, and then those State representatives
19
         are going to go back  and explore how much  of
20
         that commitment they  can meet through their
21
         State  government and  how much the local govern-
22
         ment can meet of that and  then come back the
23
         20th in the Crystal Room here at this hotel
24
         to make final decision on  apparently how much
25

-------
   	3848

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         coordination  they  can  get.   Now,  it works
 3
         out  that  if every  State can't  participate
 4
         because of some financial difficulties,  then
 5
         we go ahead with the program in  the other
 6
         States.   And  then  if every  local  community
 7                                                   .
         can't participate, we  Just  go  ahead with the
 8
         other communities  that can.  It  is very
 9  I
         flexible.
10
                   And let  me briefly--first of all,
11
         it has to be  the long-range  program of main-
12
         taining or trying  to ascertain the need  and
13
         develop the need for an ecological balance
14
         of fishlife.   That has to be number one  or we
15
         will be cleaning up fish the rest of  our lives.
16
                   The second thing  is  the monitoring
17
         program.  And, of  course, the  Federal Govern-
18
         ment, through the  Bureau of  Commercial Fisheries,
19
         simply can't  do the monitoring of where  these
20
         dead alewives are  and where  they  are  going all
21
         by themselves and  each State has  got  to  help
22
         with their boats and their  aircraft.
23
                   The third is the  diverting  techniques
24
         where we  can  assist the people who have  water
25

-------
                                                         3849

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         intakes to divert.
 3
                   Then we need to go  in,  and  each
 4
         State is going to be asked  to  establish  their
 5
         various areas into three categories of priority.
 6
         Number one priority would be  high-use areas,
 7
         public beaches.  The second would be  semi-public
 8
         use areas, which would be beaches in  front  of
 9
         housing developments and homes in cities and
10
         towns along the beach.  The third would  be  non-
11
         public areas which might be industrially-owned
12
         and which would have no serious problems con-
13
         nected with the alewife on  the beaches.
14
                   And then the operation  for  skimming
15
         would be done with those States that  can help
16
         support it financially and  then they  would
17
         move in, the local responsibility would  be
18
         to help unload the skimmed  alewives and a place
19
         for landfills.  Now. if some  local community
20
         who has a public beach says,  "We  don't have
21
         a landfill," then you really  can't skim  because
22
         you have got to have some place to put it.
23
                   So if the local community provides
24
         the landfills and the State provides  the cost
25

-------
   	3850

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          share  and the Federal Government provides
 3
          the  cost share,  if all three provide it,  then
 4
          hopefully we can get to all the priority one
 5
          areas.   Time is  a factor.   You simply may not
 6
          be able to get to any of the number two areas.
 7
                    Then you need to have this beach
 8
          cleanup program of those areas that you were
 9
          not  able to get  to and those areas in which
10
          you  were not able to successfully skim 100
11
          percent.  And we are in Indiana exploring the
12
          possibility of buying some of this beach cleaning
13
          equipment and then subleasing it to the local
14
          communities simply because no local community
15
          can  afford it--it is very expensiver-and to
16
          try  to  then keep it moving up and down our
17
          beaches, because we have only 44 miles of
18
          shoreline and we.have only 6, if I remember
19
          right,  6 high-priority areas out of the whole
20
          area,  6 public beaches.
21
                    MR. STEIN:   Let  me make one point
22
          before  you go on.
23
                    The Federal funds that I am talking
24
          about  are contingent upon  all of the States
25

-------
   	3851

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         participating. And, Mr. Mitchell,  you  pointed
 3
         out that some States might  and some  States
 4
         could not.  Now, if any States cannot,  I  am
 5
         not sure that we can get Federal funds.
 6
                   MR. MITCHELL:  I  am glad to  hear
 7
         that, because I didn't understand  that.
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  The Federal  funds are
 9
         contingent—this is like a  fund raising operation.
10
         We will put the money in, but unless the  States
11
         are interested enough to put their money  up,
12
         I have no assurance that we can give you  any
13
         Federal money.
14
                   If any State wants to wash out  on
IS
         this, this is, of course, the State's  privilege.
16
         But the string on the Federal money  is that
17
         the States are going to shox/ the interest in
18
         this because we want to help the States out,
19
         and if they are not interested enough  in
20
         cleaning up their own house, maybe you want
21
         to have another stinking summer.
22
                   MR. MITCHELL:  From my glimpse  around
23
         the area, I don't think any States are considering
24
         anything but doing their damnedest to raise
25

-------
   	385g

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          the  money--
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes,  but--
 4
                    MR.  MITCHELL:  --and I have already
 5
          heard Mr.  Klassen express--
 6
                    MR.  STEIN:   But what I am trying to
 7
          do is say the  limitation that I have--and this
 8
          is what I was  asked to do so there would be no
 9
          misunderstanding--the  limitation that I have
10
          on the availability of Federal funds Is that
11
          the  States are going to put up their own money
12
          or else we are not participating.
13
                    MR.  MITCHELL:  We will do our best.
14
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.
15
                    MR.  KLASSEN:  It  sounds like this
16
          is the only going program.   And, John,- I will
17
          take your evaluation  of it.  You feel that this
18
          program is far enough  along that with the
19
          answers to the States  participation and money
20
          through the State representative on the Great
21
          Lakes Basin Commission that this thing will go?
22
                    MR.  MITCHELL:  Well, after the meeting
23
          tomorrow,  at which we  will  try to assess how
24
          much each one  of  these efforts is  going to
25

-------
   	3853

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         cost and  then how much it  means  for each
 3
         State  to  commit  itself, not  only just to
 4
         the cleanup out  in  the water but maybe the
 5
         beach  cleanup and maybe the  monitoring
 6
         program and that sort of thing,  then each
 7
         State  is  going to be asked to go home and
 8
         check  signals with  their Governors  and any
 9
         other  budget groups that are necessary to
10
         be able to come  back here  on March  20th with
11
         firm answers.
12
                   The best  information we have is
13
         that this seems  to  be a reasonable  approach.
14
         We learned something last  year,  I think, in
15
         the last  minute  attempt that we  all had to
16
         make in trying to clean up our beaches.  But
17
         based  upon the information we have,this seems
18
         to be  the reasonable approach.
19
                   MR. KLASSEN:  0. K.
20
                   MR. MITCHELL:  I hope  that we can
21
         improve it.
22
                   MR. STEIN:  Are  there  any comments
23
         on 12?
24
                   I think that is  it. You  might
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         glance  at  11.
 3
                    Do you want  to go  to 12?
 4
                    MR. HOLMER:  I have a  further
 5
         question.  How  far  does  this 500 thousand
 6
         dollars, assuming we are all in  the  pot,
 7
         go  toward  the program  of skimming as the
 8
         task force has  looked  at it up to this  point?
 9
         Is  this  two-thirds  of  it or--
10
                    MR. MITCHELL:   No, I think--
11
                    MR. HOLMER:  —half of it  or  what?
12
                    MR. MITCHELL:   It depends  upon  how
13
         much of  the areas the  States are going  to
14
         consider as priority one areas.   Now, the
15
         skimming operation  is  not going  to be able
16
         to  include every mile  of shoreline of Lake
17
         Michigan.
18
                    MR.  HOLMER:   That is  right.
19
                    MR. MITCHELL:   It simply cannot be
20
         done for 500 thousand  dollars.   But  they  thought
21
         if  they  would make  priority one,  priority two,
22

         and priority three, they were hoping that they
23

         could do it for priority one, as I understand it.
24
                    And this  is  the reason the work group
25

-------
                                       	385S

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          is  meeting tomorrow,  to come back with
 3
          their  priorities  and  to see if their earlier
 4
          estimate  was  nearly correct or not.  And I
 5
          really can't  answer that any more than that
 6
          right  now.
 7
                    MR. HOLMER:   0.  K.  It is the
 8
          priority  one  areas--
 9
                    MR. MITCHELL:  Which are high public
10
          use areas.
11
                    MR. HOLMER:   --we hope for sure?
12
                    MR. MITCHELL:  Which is where you have
13
          your pollution problems.
14
                    MR. HOLMER:   All right.
15
                    MR. STEIN:   Then we are agreed on
16
          12.
17

18
                       RECOMMENDATION #11
19	

20

                    MR. STEIN:   Let's go back to 11 and
21

          Just glance at that.   You have all had this
22

          and this  looks good to me.
23

                    MR. OEMING:   Mr. Chairman, just a
24

          little cleaning-up  language.
25

-------
       .	38 §6
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes.
 3
                    MR.  OEMING:   The  second sentence:
 4
          "The  Corps of  Engineers and the States are
 5
          requested  to report  to the  Conferees."
 6
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.
 7
                    MR.  OEMING:   And  then at the end
 8
          of  that  sentence  where it says  "concerning
 9
          their program  maintenance"  put  a comma "at
10
          which time the Conferees will  consider."
11
          We  haven't said when  the Conferees were going
12
          to  consider.  Are we  going  to  consider it -at
13
          that  time?   Then  I think we should say so.
14
                    MR.  STEIN:   You want  to--
15
                    MR.  OEMING:   Put  in  the phrase "at
16
          that  time--at  which  time the Conferees."
17
                    Mr.  Poston,  after the word "maintenance"
18
          in  the fourth  sentence put  a comma and then  "at
19
          which time the Conferees will  consider."
20
                    MR.  LELAND:   Is it program maintenance
21
          or  maintenance program?
22
                    MR.  OEMING:   It is maintenance program,
23
          I guess.
24
                    MR.  STEIN:   Why do we need "maintenance"?
25

-------
 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         They are programs.
 3
                   MR. OEMING:  Programs.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  Strike  "maintenance."
 5
                   MR. OEMING:  All  right.   Strike
 6
         "maintenance."  Now it becomes "concerning
 7
         their program, at which time  the  Conferees
 8
         will consider adopting."
 9
                   MR. STEIN:  Right.  All  right, very
10
         good.
11
                   MR. HOLMER: Mr. Chairman,  on  your
12
         way to 13, on the second line of  12  I think
13
         there was a Freudian slip,  because this is
1*
         certainly an odoriferous problem  and I  am glad
15
         that they ended it with "mum."
16
                   MR. OEMING:  "Phenonemum."
17
                   (Laughter.)
18
                   (Off the record.)
19

20
                      RECOMMENDATION #13
21                    	:—-~

22
                   MR. STEIN:  Let's go to  13, and you
23
         have a redo of 13.  It reads, "The four States
24
         will within 60 days."
25

-------
                             	3850

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                    Do you have it?
 3
                    All right.   Do you want to read 13?
 4
                    MR. POOLE:   Well, I have got three
 5                                           '
          drafts of this now.  Which one are we going
 6
          to use?
 7
                    MR. STEIN:   Let me read the draft
 8
          you are  going to use:
 9
                    "The four States within 60 days will
10
          meet and agree upon uniform rules and regulations

U
          for controlling wastes from watercraft.  These
12
          rules and regulations will generally conform"—
13
          let's straighten that out--"will conform generally
14
          with the Harbor Pollution Code adopted by the
15
          City of  Chicago and the Model Boating Act."
16
                    Should that be caps?
!7
                    MR. OEMING:  Yes, I guess so.
18
                    MR. STEIN:   I guess so.  --"and the
19
          Model Boating Act, but specifically prohibiting
20
          the use  of the macerator chlorinator.  Since
21
          each of  the four States operates under different
22
          statutes, Conferees will recommend to their
23
          respective boards, legislatures, and so forth,
24
          approval of the proposed uniform rules and
25

-------
   	3839

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         regulations to be  effective  by April  1969.
 3
         Commensurate requirements  controlling the
 4
         discharge  of wastes  from commercial vessels
 5
         will be  the responsibility of  the  Federal
 6
         Government."
 7
                    O.K.?
 8
                    O.K.?
 9
                    MR. POOLE:   Where  did  the idea creep
10
         in  that  the rules  and  regulations  had to specifical|ly
11
         eliminate  the macerator  chlorina.tor?
12
                    MR. STEIN:   I  thought  we talked
13
         about  that the last  time.   This  is what—by
14
         the way, this is  the specific  language that
15
         Mr. Klassen put in last  time and was  agreed
16
         to  by  the  Conferees.
17
                    MR. PURDY:   No,  it isn't.
18
                    MR. STEIN:   Wait a moment.   As I
19
         pointed  out, this  is not a--as  the last time,
20
         this is  not a case of  last resort. Now, let's
21
         work this  out.
22
                    MR. POOLE:   I  thought  the last time
23
         we  agreed  the rule does  not approve the use
24
         of  the macerator  chlorinator.   All I  am
25

-------
   	3860

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          objecting to is to writing things like that--
 3
                    MR. KLASSEN: That is right.
 4
                    MR. POOLS: --in a law or a regulation--

 5
                    MR. STEIN:  Yes, that does hot--

 6
                    MR. KLASSEN:  Approve, that was the

 7
          language we agreed on.
 8
                    MR. STEIN:  That does not approve?
 9
                    MR. KLASSEN:  Yes, does not approve,
10
          does not presently approve.
11
                    MR. STEIN:  Does not presently
12
          approve?
13
                    MR. KLASSEN:  Yes.  We took the words
14
          "specifically prohibited" out.
15
                    MR. STEIN:  I guess you are right,
16
          Mr. Poole.
17
                    MR. OEMING:  Mr. Chairman, we have
18
          another problem.  What is the meaning of the
19
          term April 1969?  Is that when all of the
20
          regulations or legislation  is to become
21
          effective or what?
22
                    MR. STEIN:  Didn't we have a discussion
23
          on that?
24
                    MR. POSTON:  Yes.
25

-------
   	3863.

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes,  because  you
 3
         remember that we  are already in  a box on
 4
         this because Michigan has  just adopted its
 5
         regulations and  they become  effective on
 6
         January 1, 1970,  isn't it?   1970.
 7
                   MR. MITCHELL: I  think  the  date was —
 8
                   MR. OEMING:  And that  is an alter-
 9
         ation, isn't it?
10
                   MR. MITCHELL:  When the date was
11
         last mentioned we suggested  that we  couldn't
12
         make the rules effective,  that we could, though,
13
         make such recommendations, and  I think we got
14
         the recommendations part in  here but we forgot
15
         to take out the  date.
16
                   I could recommend  tomorrow, which
17
         we are going to  recommend  tomorrow,  this change.
18
                   MR. OEMING:  We  recommend, sure.
19
                   MR. MITCHELL: And  we  don't need a date
20
         for a recommendation,  this late, anyhow.  We
21
         can use it within a month.
22
                   MR. STEIN:   Did  we put a period after
23
         regulation?
24
                   MR. OEMING:  Where did this come--Mr.
25

-------
   ^__	3862

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          Klassen had a draft of this,  and you took it
 3
          with you.   What happened to it?
 4
                    MR. PURDY:   This is different.
 5
                    MR. POOLE:   Let me  read the draft
 6
          I  took with me that somebody  handed to me.
 7
                    MR. STEIN:   Go ahead.  That is what
 8
          we have been looking for all  weekend.
 9
                    MR. POOLE:   "The representatives
10
          of the Conferees within 60 days meet and agree
11
          upon uniform rules  and regulations for controlling
12
          wastes from watercraft.  These rules and
13
          regulations will generally conform with the
14
          Harbor Pollution Code adopted by the City of
15
          Chicago,  the regulations adopted by the
16
          Michigan Water Resources Commission, and the
17
          Model Boating Act which prohibits 'overside1
18
          disposal and does not approve the use of the
19
          macerator- chlorinator."
20
                    MR. KLASSEN:  That  is the one we
21
          couldn't find.
22
                    MR. POOLE:   "Since  each of the four
23
          States operates under different statutes,
24
          Conferees  will recommend to their respective
25

-------
                                            	     3863

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          boards,  legislatures,  et cetera,  approval of the
 3
          proposed uniform  rules and regulations."
 4'   •-.'••
                    MR.  STEIN:   Right.   That is what
 5
          we  have--let's get  that duplicated.
 6
                    (Laughter.)
 7
                    Mr.  Poole, you are  worth your weight
 8
          in  gold.   Depending on characters like Klassen
 9
          and myself, we Just didn't have the  record on
10
          that.
11
                    MR,.  KLASSEN:   We are off the gold
12
          standard now.
13
                    MR.  STEIN:   That is 13.  But let's
14
          get that back.  That is  exactly right.
15
                    MR.  OEMING:  We agreed  on  it once.
16
                    MR.  STEIN:   We agreed on it once.
17
          Our problem was,  it is  like the dinosaur,
18
          we  lost  it and we were  trying to  reconstruct it.
10
                    (Laughter.)
20
                   'MR.  KLASSEN: Mr.  Chairman,  I am
21
          happy to  announce,  and  this will  indicate  the
22
          activity  of the States,  I  am  happy to announce
23
          that we have all  agreed  that  April 10 is  a
24
          mutually  agreeable  date.   I Just  canvassed
25

-------
   	38 6»

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          all of the participants.   We can meet in
 3
          Chicago April 10.
 4
                    MR. STEIN:   Good.
 5
                    MR. KLASSEN:   So we are not going
 6
          to  take the 60 days.
 7
                    MR. STEIN:   Wonderful.  But we will
 8
          give you that anyway.
 9
                    MR. KLASSEN:   I will send you a
10
          letter.
11
                    MR. STEIN:   All right.  Now--
12
                    MR. HOLMER:   Maybe the Secretary
13
          won't recommend it.
14
                    MR. STEIN:   Do  you want to bet?
15
                    MR. KLASSEN:  We will go ahead anyhow.
16
                    (Laughter.)
17
                    MR. OEMING:   Fourteen, Mr. Chairman?
18
                    MR. STEIN:   Fourteen.  We will have
19
          thirteen back.
20
                    Fourteen.
21

22
                       RECOMMENDATION #14
23                      	—

24
                    MR. HOLMER:   In the next to the last
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         line of 14, I think after the word  "elimination"
 3
         if you pick up from the last line the words
 4
         "in urbanized areas" so that it reads  "and  to
 5
         the elimination in urbanized areas  of  septic
 6
         tanks affecting Lake Michigan's water quality"
 7
         I think it would be smoother.
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  All right, let's  see
 9
         what these people think.
10
                   MR. POSTON:  The  last sentence?
11
                   MR. POOLE:  John  and I agreed on
12
         the legislative proposals we were going to
13
         present to one of our committees tomorrow
14
         and now you have rung in about four more on
15
         us, so that is my only comment.
16
                   MR. STEIN:  What  do you suggest?
17
                   MR. POOLE:  I think we will  present
18
         the three we agreed on Friday.
19
                   MR. STEIN:  What  are the  three you
20
         agreed on?
21
                   MR. POOLE:  Watercraft, pesticides
22
         and dumps, open dumps.  Isn't that  it?
23
                   MR. STEIN:  Do you want to cut out
24
         sewer septic tanks?
25

-------
   	3866

 !                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                    MR.  POOLE:   Well, I don't care in

 3
          the waning days of my time in Indiana to get in

 4
          a fight in the Indiana Legislature about

 5
          septic tanks,  which we pretty well delegated--

 6
                    MR,  STEIN:   Well, I would hate to outlast

 7
          your waning days; you have been waning for 25

 8
          years.

 9
                    (Laughter.)

10
                    MR.  POSTON:  A little stronger every

11
          day.

12
                    MR.  POOLE:   We pretty well delegated

13
          the septic tank problem to local.zoning and

14
          planning commissions  and to local health

15
          departments.

16
                    MR.  STEIN:   How do you want to handle

17
          this one?

18
                    MR.  MITCHELL:  I think the problem

19
          here is if you read that one sentence,"Such

20
          legislation should relate to the creation of

21
          subdivisions,  to the  control of siltation, to

22
          the regulation of water supply and sewage

23
          disposal systems, and to the elimination of

24

          septic tanks in urbanized areas," you are saying

25

-------
   	     .      	3867

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
         we need a Statewide  zoning control  act.
 3
                   MR. STEIN:   Do you want  to  put a
 4
         period after  "disposal"--
 5
                   MR. MITCHELL:   And I don't  think
 6
         anybody is  quite  ready to make that move yet.

 7
                   MR. STEIN:   Do you want  to  put a
 8
         period after  "disposal systems"  to  strike--
 9
                   MR. POOLE:   What kind  of  legislation

10
         would you propose on  the control of siltation,
11
         Just to get practical for a minute  here?  I
12
         racked my brains  in  preparing  our  reports to
13
         submit to the Secretary  on what  we  would say
14
         about the control of  siltation,  and about
15
         all we could  say  was  we  would  cooperate  with
16
         the soil conservation districts  in  any way we
17
         could.
18
                   MR. STEIN:   I  can't  answer  that,
19
         and since we  can't answer it,  do you  want to
20
         otrike that one?   Is  the way to  handle siltation
21
         at the present  time  to propose legislation or
22
         do we wait  that agricultural report?   Let's
23
         strike it.
24
                   MR. OEMING: I don't have any   idea
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         "how you do it.
 3
                    MR. STEIN:  No, and I can't tell you
 4
          anything that I can suggest.
 5
                    Let's strike the control of siltation,
 6
          unless anyone has any other.  I am agreeable.
 7
                    "Such legislatiori"--all right.
 8
                    What else?
 9
                    We have a suggestion "to the elimi-
10
          nation in urbanized areas of septic tanks."
11
                    MR. OEMING:  Mr. Poole has trouble
12
          with that, but I wonder if you have as much
13
          trouble if you read that "in urbanized areas,"
14
          Blucher?
15
                    MR. POOLE: Oh, I don't have so much
16
          trouble if you read it and go on "affecting
17
          Lake Michigan's water quality."
18
                    MR. OEMING:  Yes.  That should be--
19
                    MR. POOLE:  I only know of one place
20
          that we have.
21
                    MR. STEIN:  Do you want to put "in
22
          urbanized areas'1 after "elimination"?
23
                    MR* POOLE: I don't know as we need
24
          any legislation.  The one problem we have got,
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         they need money, that is all it boils  down
 3
         to.  It is an unincorporated area.
 4
                   MR. HOLMER:  I think you could
 5
         delete "in urbanized areas" because if a
 6
         septic tank affects Lake Michigan water
 7
         quality I would like to eliminate that too.
 8
                   MR. STEIN:  Well, wait a minute.
 9
                   MR. HOLMER:  Whether it is urbanized
10
         or not.
11
                   MR. STEIN: Let's go back on  this
12
         one, on the whole operation.
13
                   I am not sure that we aren't putting
14
         ourselves in a bind by talking about legislation.
15
                   MR. POOLE: Well, we are.  As soon as
16
         you get into subdivisions, you get into zoning
17
         and planning.
18
                   MR. STEIN:  Wait a minute.   "Each
19
         of the State water pollution control agencies
20
         institute programs designed to"--how about that?
21
                   MR. OEMING:  All right.
22
                   MR. STEIN: Because the legislation--
23
         institute programs or accelerate programs.
24
         Have you got programs like this?
25

-------
    	3870

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                    MR.  POOLE:   We thought we had.
 3
                    MR.  OEMING:   Sure.
 4
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right, put "accelerate."
 5
          --"accelerate  programs."  And then we can put
 6
          that siltation back in, "designed to achieve
 7
          pollution controls of  the unincorporated land
 8
          and particularly land  bordering," etc.  "Such
 9
          programs  should relate to the creation of
10
          subdivisions,  the control of  siltation, the
11
          regulation"--you can leave out that too--"of
12
          water supply and sewage disposal systems, and
13
          the elimination of septic tanks."  And then
14
          I don't think  we will  have a  problem.  The
15
          problem is the legislation here.
16
                    MR.  OEMING:   Yes.
17
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right?
18
                    MR.  MITCHELL:  What happened to our
19
          pesticide legislation?
20
                    MR.  OEMING:   That's coming.
21
                    MR.  POOLE:   That's  coming.
22
                    MR.  MITCHELL:  No,  it doesn't say
23
          anything about legislation.
24
                    MR.  POOLE:   No, they are not going to
25

-------
   	        387*

 !                     EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         raise the--


                   MR. STEIN:  No  legislation.

 4
                   MR. POOLE:  Not going  to  raise  that

 5
         question.


 6                 MR. STEIN:  We  are  not raising  the

 7
         question  of  legislation.


 8                 MR. MITCHELL:   We did  decide to

 9
         propose some pesticide  control legislation.


                   MR. STEIN:  Pesticide comes  later.


                   MR. MITCHELL:   Doesn't say  anything

12
         about legislation,  though.


                   MR. STEIN:  No. No.   If  you want  to do

14
         this when we get  to the pesticides, we will

15
         get  to  it.

16
                   MR. MITCHELL: 0. K., all  right.

17
  .1                MR. STEIN:  But let's  take  up

18                    .
         pesticides  later.

19
                   MR. MITCHELL:   All  right.

20
                   MR. STEIN:  Let's  look at 14 now.

21
                   We may  be able  to  buy  this.   Here

22
         is  the  way  this reads:

23
                    "Each of  the  State  water  pollution

24
         control agencies  accelerate  programs  designed

25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          to  achieve  pollution control of unincorporated
 3
          land  and  particularly of lands "bordering on
 4
          streams and lakes  in the basin.  Such programs
 5
          should relate  to  the creation of subdivisions,
 6
          to  the control of  siltation, the regulation of
 7
          water supply and  sewage disposal systems, and"
 8
          --cross out the "to"--"the  elimination of septic
 9
          tanks in  urbanized areas affecting Lake Michigan's
10
          water supply."
11
                   That I  think we can all buy, can't
12
          we?
13
                   MR.  POSTON:   Water quality.
14
                   MR.  STEIN:  Water quality.
15
                   Yes.
16
                   MR.  HOLMER:   In the middle  or the
17
          third line, I  am  not quite  sure what  the un-
18
          incorporated land  reference does.  In other
19
          words, isn't it to achieve  pollution  control
20
          of  lands  bordering on streams and lakes in
21
          the basin?   Obviously our programs are going
22
          to  be Statewide,  but I am not sure why we
23
          pick  on unincorporated land.
24
                   MR.  STEIN:  Yes.   I think to achieve
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          pollution  control  of lands  bordering on
 3
          lakes  and  streams  in the basin.  0.  K.?
 4
                    All  right.  All right?
 5
                    MR.  OEMING:   No.
 6
                    MR.  STEIN:  No?
 7
                    MR.  OEMING:   No,  we have a problem,
 8
          Mr.  Chairman.
 9
                    MR.  STEIN: All right.
10
                    MR.  OEMING:  How do  you  get pollution
11
          control  of unincorporated land?
12
                    MR.  STEIN:  We struck it.
13
                    MR.  HOLMER:   It was taken  out.
14
                    MR.  OEMING:   What did you  decide?
15
                    MR.  STEIN:  Here  is the way it  reads:
16
                    "Each  of the State  water pollution
17
          control  agencies accelerate programs designed
18
          to achieve pollution controls of  lands bordering
19
          on lakes and streams in the basin."
20
                    MR.  OEMING:   You  put it back in again.
21
          That is  what I am  saying, how do  you get  pollu-
22
          tion control of  lands?
23
                    MR.  POOLS:  Ask Wisconsin.  They
24
          proposed it.
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  HOLMER:.  All  right.
 3
                    MR.  POSTON:  I have got a suggestion,
 4
          that we  go back  to--
 5
                    MR.  STEIN:   Let Wisconsin explain.
 6
                    0. K.
 7
                    MR.  HOLMER:   For  instance,  the
 8
          regulation of  water supply  and sewage disposal
 9
          systems, we are  firmly convinced that unless
10
          you control subidivisions  you are going to
11
          have people too  close  together, the resulting
12
          use of private sewage  disposal systems is
13
          going to create problems.
14
                    MR.  PURDY:   You control  the use of
15
          the land so as to  get  pollution control.
16
                    MR.  HOLMER:   Oh.   Oh, Murray,  the
17
          problem is  that  I  think, as  you read "pollution
18
          control" you have  left off  "use of,"  and it is
19                                                     »
          the control of the use of land, and I think
20
          you have been  saying control of lands bordering
21
          on streams  and lakes in the basin.   It is
22
          control of  the use.
23
                    MR.  MITCHELL:  Does Wisconsin have
24
          State zoning powers?
25

-------
    	__	3875

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                   MR. HOLMER:  Yes,  sir,
 3
                   MR. MITCHELLi   Such aa  you  described?
 4
                   MR. HOLMER:  Ours  are reserve powers*
 5
         The  law requires  that the counties  adopt zoning
 6
         ordinances.  If they fail to do so, we  may adopt
 7
         ordinances for them.
 8
                   MR. MITCHELL:  For  that  county?
 9
                   MR. HOLMER!  Yes.
10
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.  Here  is what
ll
         I  think you mean, and I  don't know  whether you
12
         are  going to buy  it, but I understand  what you
13
         mean now.  Now let's try this:
14
                   "Each of  the State water  pollution
15
         control agencies  accelerate  programs  designed
16
         to achieve pollution controls by  regulating
17
         use  of lands bordering on streams and lakes in
18
         the  basin."
19
                   That is the proposal.  All  right?
20
                   MR. OEMING:  I don't have any problem
21
         with this, but—
22
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.  All right.
23
         But  I am  trying to  put in words what  I  think
24
         Mr.  Holmer said.  This is what he is  proposing,
25

-------
   	3876

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          and if the States can see their way  clear
 3                                              ,
          to this, I think, this is a great step.  I
 4
          don't know if you can.
 5
                    MR. MITCHELL:  The only thing I
 6
          take issue with is that we have a tremendous
 7
          upsurge in public responsibility for zoning
 8
          by local government in Indiana, and we have
 9
          got no indication whatsoever that our local
10
          zoning people aren't going to be able to ade-
11
          quately control the use of lands.  At one time
12
          in our history, about four or five years ago,
13
          we had some concern, but right now we are
14
          moving much faster than even any seven—what,
15
          the 712 funds r-what do they call thentt
16
                    MR. PC-OLE:  7Q1*
17
                    MR. MITCHELL:--?Ql funds
18
          are available.  So I would be reluctant to
19
          go back to our legislature and tell  them we
20
          believe in Statewide zoning.
21
                    MR. STEIN:  No, I don't believe this
22
          proposes this, sir.
23
                    MR. OEMING:  Let's get over
24
          Let me try this on you.
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                    MR.  PCSTON:   How about my suggesting
 3
          one?
 4
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.
 5
                    MR.  POSTON:   I would go back to the

 6
          beginning,  what  we  started out with here, and
 7
          say  that  as a  matter  of policy planning provide
 8
          for  the maximum  use of areawide sewerage
 9
          facilities, discourage the proliferation of
10
          small  inefficient, treatment plants in contiguous
11                                        '  .
          urbanized areas  and foster the elimination of
12
          septic tanks.
13
                    MR.  POOLE:  I can buy that.
1*
                    MR.  MITCHELL:  I have read that some
15
          place.before.
16
                    MR.  POSTON:   Yes.
17
                    (Laughter.)
18
                    MR.  STEIN:   Is this the way we want
19
          to go?
20
                    MR.  POSTON:   That is where we started.
21
          We have been clear  around the barn.
22
                    MR.STEIN:  Well, naturally.  Is this
23
          all  right?
24
                    MR.  HOLMER:   Well,  there are two things
25

-------
   	38TI

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
          wrong with it,

 3
                    (Laughter.)

 4            '                         .            •         •
                    "I pointed out Tooth of them at our

 5
          February session.   One of them, we are opposed

 6
          to  all inefficient plants,  not only .the small


          ones, and the other has, instead of "elimination"


          I  think it ought to be 'replacement of septic

 9
          tanks."  I Just don't want to eliminate them

10
          without having some sort of replacement for

11
          them  that meets our requirements.

12
                    MR. STEIN:   All right.

13
                    MR. OEMING:   Let  me try one on you,

14
          Mr. Chairman.

15
                    MR.' STEIN:   Yes.

16
                    MR. OEMING:   "Each of the State water

17
          pollution control  agencies  accelerate programs
18
          designed to ac.hieve control of pollution

 9
          emanating from unincorporated land and

 0                  •>••'.
          particularly of lands  bordering on streams
21
          and lakes of the basin."
22
                    Isn't that what we. are talking about?
23
                    MR. STEIN:   Is that agreeable?
24
                    I think some of these guys have got
25

-------
                                 	3879

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         a bug on about septic  tanks and  if  they want
 3
         to put in anything specific,  I don't want  to
 4
         hold them back, particularly  those  that put
 5
         nutrients into the lake,
 6
                   MR. OEMING:  Well,  I guess I  had
 7
         better withdraw from this  discussion because
 8
         I. don't have any problem^  We have  control
 •   .
         over the septic tank building law on lakes
10
         and streams.
11
                   (Across-the-table discussion  inaudible
12
         to the reporter.)
13
                   MR. POOLE:   I am not trying to defend
14
         septic tanks, Judge.   I am Just  trying  to  keep
15
         this within bounds.
16
                   MR. STEIN:   That is right.  I have
17
         no objection with that if  this is what  you
18
         want to say.
19
                   MR. POOLE:   Well, I like  yet  #15 in
20
         the printed book better than  anything that has
21                                       ,*•
         been proposed, because when you  attempt through
22
         Indiana legislation to regulate  the use of land

         bordering on streams and basins, and particularly
£r9
         when you ask the pollution abatement agency to
25

-------
   	3890

 1                      EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
          attempt  to  do  this,  you  are  spelling out a
 3
          tremendous  chore,  in my  Judgment.
 4
                   MR.  STEIN:   Yes, I agree  with you.
 5
                   MR.  POOLE:   The  only way  we could
 6
          possibly do it,  the  Natural  Resources Depart-
 7
          ment  has the power for flood plain  zoning and
 8
          we  have  been—this is John's department, but
 9
          they  are working in  that direction.  But this
10
          is  something you just don't  do overnight in
11
          a State.
12
                   MR.  STEIN:   Gentlemen,  let me try
13
          this.
14
                   Let  me have your attention.  I think
15
          I have  zeroed  in and eliminated all the objec-
16
          tions and got  this in, and this is  really a
17
          revision of that 15  in the book,  which would
18
          be  1^ here.
19
                    "Each  of the State water  pollution
20
          control  agencies accelerate  programs to provide
21
          for the  maximum  use  of areawide sewerage
22
          facilities, discouraging the proliferation of
23
          small treatment  plants in contiguous urbanized
24
          areas,  and  foster the replacement of septic
25

-------
                                          _ 3881
 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         tanks . "
 3
                   Get a girl in and see  if we can
 *
         get that
 5
                   I don't think I have added anything,
 6
         but I think what I have done is  gotten all  the
 7                      .
         views and I think this is what you are really
 8
         saying.
 9
                   Didn't we get a piece  of paper here?
10
         Look at this v 13 while we are looking at this
ll
12
                   (Recommendation 14 was read as follows:
13
         "Each of the State water pollution control
14
         agencies accelerate programs to provide for
15
         the maximum use of areawide sewerage facilities,
16
         discouraging the proliferation of small treat-
17
         ment plants in contiguous urbanized areas, and
18
         foster the replacement of septic tanks.")

                   MR. SCHNEIDER;  No, we want elimination
20
                   'MR. MITCHELL:  Not replacement.
21
                   MR. STEIN:  Then you take this up
22
         with Mr. Holmer.
23
                   MR. POSTON:  You want to eliminate
24
         septic tanks.
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.HOLMER:  I don't want to eliminate
 3
          them without an adequate substitute.
 4
                    MB. MITCHELL:  We don't want to keep
 5
          replacing old ones with new ones either.
 6
                    MR. HOLMER:  That's right.  That's
 7
          right.
 8
                    (Laughter.)
 9
                    MR, HOLMER:  All right, but why don't
10
          you say the replacement rather than the elimi-
11
          nation  and then say what you want it replaced
12
          by, which is adequate treatment, which, I think
13
          is what Murray was doing.
14
                    MR. MITCHELL:  Oh, you think we are
15
          going to eliminate them and not have anything
16
          to replace them by?
17
                    MR. HOLMER:  You didn't say so.
18
                    (Laughteri)
19
                    MR. MITCHELL:  All right.
20
                    MR. STEIN:  ¥e want to add a phrase
21
          onto that?
22
                    MR. POOLE:  Say"have replacement
23
          with sewers.
24
                    MR. HOLMER: "with adequate treatment."
25

-------
   	3883

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                   MR. STEIN:'  "With adequate  collection
 3
         and treatment. ?
 4                                  •          •       •
                   MR. POOLE:  Yes, collection  and
 5                  B
         treatment.
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  "And the  replacement of

 7
         septic tanks with adequate collection  and
 8
         treatment.
 9
                   MR. OEMING:  Right.
10
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.   All  right.
11
         Now we are in shape.
12
                   MR. POOLE:  Of course  we still tell
13
         them  in Indiana when  we are  fighting with them
14
         that  they can build a privy  if they don't want
15
         to subscribe  to the sewer system,  but  I guess
16
         that's too backward for Wisconsin.
17
                   (Laughter.)
18
                   (Off the record.)
19

20
                       RECOMMENDATION  #13
21

22
                   MR. STEIN:  All right,  did we look
23
         at this 13?   I don't  think there is any problem,
24
         is there?
25

-------
   	388*1

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    (Discussion off the record.)
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right, it should read,
 4               •         •••'••
          "The  representative  of the Conferees within 60
 5
          days  will meet"—no,  "representatives of the
 6
          Conferees within 60  days will meet and agree."
 7
          All right.
 8
                    0. K.
 9
                    MR.  POOLS:   Move for adoption.
10
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.
11
                    MR.  OEMING:  I second.
1*
                    MR.  STEIN:   We are going to get 14.
13

14
                      RECOMMENDATION #15
15

16
                    MR.  STEIN:   Let's go on to 15.  That
17
          is on pesticides.
18
                    MR.  OEMING:  Mr. Chairman.
19
                    MR.  STEIN:   Fifteen.
20
                    MR.  OEMING:  Mr. Chairman, I have a
21
          couple of small changes I would like to suggest.
22
                    In the first sentence, a technical
23
          committee on pesticides, do you want to put
24
          "should"  or not?  Just "be established," I guess
25

-------
  ^___	3889

 I                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         that is all right.


 8                  MR. STEIN:  Or "will be."


                   MR. OEMING:  "will be established"--


 5                  MR. STEIN:  All right.


 6                  MR. OEMINGi  --"to be chaired by a

 7
         member of the Water Pollution Control Administra-

 8                                                  „
         tion with representatives from each State.

 g
                   Now, here, "The Committee shall

10
         evaluate the pesticide problem and recommend


         to the Conferees a program to monitor and

12
         control it.


                   MR. STEIN:  Wait.  --"evaluate the

14
         pesticide problem and recommend to the Conferees"--

15
                   MR. OEMING:  --"a program to monitor

16
         and control it," always referring back to the

17
         program, monitor the program and control it.

18
                   Then go on and say, "The first report

19                                                         „
         will be submitted in six months to the Conferees.

20
                   MR. POOLE:  Would you read that again?

21
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes, sir, I will.

22
                   The second sentence, Mr. Poole,

23
         strike "and," insert: "the committee shall"--

84
                   MR. POOLE:  You said "will" before,

Z5

-------
                                    	3886

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          but that is all right.   Go ahead.
 3
                    MR.  OEMING:   All right.
 4
                    MR.  POOLE;   That's all I got written
 5
          down.
 6
                    MR.  STEIN:   No,  he said that in the
 7
          first  sentence.
 8
                    MR.  OEMING:   "The  committee shall
 9
          evaluate," strike "of",  and  then go on, "the
10
          pesticide problem and"--insert--"recommend to
11
          the Conferees  a program to"—and insert--
12
          "monitor and control  it."   Strike the rest of
13
          the sentence.
14
                    MR.  STEIN:   And  then we have the
15
          last sentence,  "The  first  report"^-
16
                    MR.  OEMING:  --"will be submitted in
17
          six months."
18
                    MR.  STEIN:   All  right.
19
                    MR.  POOLE:   We would kind of like
20
          to  see you add another sentence.
21
                    MR.  STEIN:   What is that?
22
                    MR.  POOLE:   Well,  "it is recommended
23
          that the States seek  legislation to license
24
          commercial applicators," which I believe Michigan
25

-------
     	388?

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         already has.
 3
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.  The only question
 4
         I have, Mr. Poole, and I would have no  objection
 5
         to this because I can't object, we already have
 6
         it, but is  this a proper recommendation for  a
 7
         pollution control group like this?  I mean what
 8
         relationship can we say this has to the pollution
 9
         control program, the fact that you are  licensing
10
         it?   If you can tell me that, then I am satis -
11
         fied.
12
                   MR. MITCHELL:  Well, I think  our
13
         feeling has been all along, how do you  know
14
         the magnitude of the problem until you  know
15
         the magnitude of the use, and through the
16
         licensing of commercial applicators we  would
17
         hope to some way determine  with how much: of the
18
         various things these pesticides are being used.
19
                   MR. OEMING:  All right.
20
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
21
                   MR. POOLE:  I will go a step  farther.
22
         In one of our--
23
                   MR. OEMING:  You don't have to.
24
                   MR. POOLE:  Well, we almost got sued
25

-------
   	3888

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          last  year over turning over to the newspapers
 3
          that  an  applicator  was responsible for a fish
 4
          kill,  and it got real  sticky.
 5
                    MR. OEMING:   0.  K.
 6
                    MR. STEIN:   I think  you can drop
 7
          "it is recommended."
 8
                    "The States  seek legislation to
 9
          license  commercial  applicators."  That is all
10
          we need,  right?
11
                    MR. LELAND:--"shall  seek"--
12
                    MR. STEIN:   "The States shall seek
13
          legislation to license commercial applicators."
14
          Right?
15
                    Let me read  that again.  Can we have
16
          the girl  in?
17
                    (Discussion  off  the  record.)
18
                    MR. STEIN:   "A technical committee
19
          on pesticides will  be  established, to be
20
          chaired  by a member of the Federal Water
21
          Pollution Control Administration with repre-
22
          sentatives from each State."
23
                    Let me start again.
24
                    "A technical committee on pesticides
25

-------
   	    3889

 !                     EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
         will be established to be chaired by a member

 3
         of the Federal Water Pollution Control Adminlstra-

 4
         tion with representatives from each State.  The

 5               •            •.'•.'•
         committee shall evaluate the pesticide problem


         and recommend to the Conferees a program of

 7
         monitoring and control.  The first report will

 8
         be submitted in six months to the Conferees.

 9
         The States shall seek legislation to license

10                              „
         commercial applicators.


                   MR. HOLMER:  Could we add two words,

12       „„
         "and users ?

13
                   MR. STEIN:  Oh, boy.  Well, all right.

14
         Let's  listen.

15
                   MR. HOLMER:  We have a particular

16
         problem in which we are  aware of a user of
17
         pesticides who uses them in  the course of a

18
         business.  Now, I  realize that commercial

19
         in  this context of using pesticides could be

20
         used very broadly, but this  happens inside a
21
         city  limits, for example, and it bothers, us
22
         some.
23
                   MR. STEIN:  Well,  this is all  right.

24
         By  the way,  I have no objection  to this  if  the

25

-------
   	_____	3890
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          States want to do it.   But,  you know,  when
 3
          you deal with a user  of pesticides,  and I
 4
          assume you have some  tall buildings  in
 5
          Milwaukee, you are dealing with the  lady
 6
          who has an apartment  on the  14th floor of
 7
          that building.   Now,  I  don't know.   If you
 8
          want to put this in--
 9
                    MR.  HOLMER:   I am  really asking the
10
          question and I  am not going  to push  it.
11
                    MR.  STEIN:  But I want you  to know
12
          what you are taking on.  And if you  can regulate
13
          that lady up there, I  am with you.
14
                    MR.  HOLMER:   I wasn't--
15
                    MR.  STEIN:   I never have been able
16
          to  do that because I  have one like that at home.
17
                    MR.  HOLMER:   I meant commercial users.
18
          I didn't mean  individual users. I meant commercial
19
          users.
20
                    MR.  LELAND:   Commercial applicators
21
          and users.
22
                    MR.  MITCHELL:  What would  really be
23
          the difference  between  a commercial  applicator
24
          and a commercial user?
25

-------
 I                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
                   MR. HOLMER:  Well,  I was  thinking
 3
         of  the guys  flying  the planes or otherwise.
 4
                   Well, we  can certainly take care of
 5
         this  in Wisconsin.
 6
                   MR. STEIN:  Do you  want to say
 7
         commercial applicators and  users?
 8
                   MR. HOLMER:  I would leave off the
 9
         users.
10
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.  All right.
11
         I think you  are biting off  quite a bit.
12
                   All right,  leave  off  "users".   Let's
13
         see if we can have  that.
14
                   Let's go  on to 16.   The Department
15
         of  Agriculture.
16
                   MR. LELAND:  Have we got a new 14
17
         coming in and 15?
18
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes,  you are going to
19
         have  14 and  15.   They are rewrites, but they
20
         are the same.
21

22
                      RECOMMENDATION #16
23

24
                   MR. STEIN:   Sixteen.
25

-------
   	   3898

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                    MR.  POOLE:   Well,  I can buy 16.
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:  Alliright,  any objection
 4
          to  16?
 5
                    MR.  POOLE:   All I  want to say is  that
 6
          I don't  know whether  we want to pitch feed  lot
 7
          operators  or dairying back in the hands of  the
 8
          Department of  Agriculture.  We have treated
 9
          them  .lust  as any other industry.
10
                    MR.  KLASSEN:  We have too.
11
                    MR.  OEMING:   I think I would subscribe
12
          to  what  Mr.  Poole says.  We  don't differentiate
13
          or  exclude them from  our statute, feed lot
14
          operators  or dairying operators.  This has  a
™
          sense of doing that,  doesn't it?
16
                    MR.  STEIN:   Yes, I think you have
17
          got a point, you are  right.
18
                    "Such as siltation and bank stabili-
19
          zation," and let's leave it  at that,  0. K.?
20
                    MR.  OEMING:   Yes.
21
                    .MR.  STEIN:   All right, let's strike it.
22
                    (Discussion off the record.)
23
                    MR.  STEIN:   Here is the way this  reads:
24
                    "The United States Department of
25

-------
                                                         3893
 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
              EXECUTIVE SESSION
Agriculture be requested to submit to the Conferees



a report within six months on agricultural



programs to prevent pollution from agricultural



land use such as siltation and bank stabilization."



          MR. OEMING:  Period.



          MR. STEIN: Period.








             RECOMMENDATION #17








          MR. STEIN:  Seventeen.



          MR. KLASSEN:  I will move its  adoption.



          MR. POOLE:  Second.



          MR. MITCHELL:  Pass.



          MR. STEIN:  All right.  If no  objec-



tion, we go on to 18.







             RECOMMENDATION #18








          MR. LELAND:-'-"shall compile"?



          MR.-STEIN:  "Shall" before  "compile,"



"shall compile."



          "A report shall be" or  "will be"?



"Will be."

-------
                                                         3894
 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
              EXECUTIVE SESSION
          All right?  Is  that  all  right  on  182


          MR. OEMING:   I  haven't got  the "wills"
          _*> - ss
and the  "s~rrails" in here  right, Mr. Chairman.

          MR. STEIN:  All right.   "state pollu-

tion control agencies shall  compile."

          Next  sentence,  "A  report will  be

submitted."

          MR. OEMING:   Good.


          MR. WISNIEWSKI:  Who is  going  to  report

on the storage  of materials  and oils  on  Federal

property?

          MR. KLASSEN:  No.  6.

          MR. WISNIEWSKI:  Great Lakes Naval

Base, and so forth.

          MR. STEIN:  All right, could we have

them?  All right.


          MR. WISNIEWSKI:  Training stations,

naval base.


          MR. STEIN:  Let's  add, "state  water

pollution control agencies and the U. S. Depart-

ment of  the Interior."  Right?  All right.  That

is a good point.


          All right.  On  18, we have  got the

-------
                                                         3895
 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
              EXECUTIVE SESSION






U. S. Department of the Interior.








             RECOMMENDATION #19








          MR. STEIN:  Nineteen.



          "Shall" before "arrange"



          "Results will be."  All right?








              RECOMMENDATION #20








          MR. STEIN: Twenty is the Coast  Guard.



"will be requested."



          And 21, "the discharge of visible



oil shall be eliminated."



          MR. HOLMER:  Wait a minute.



          MR. STEIN:  Are we down to 21?  I



don't want to move too fast.



          MR. HOLMER:  In 20, the aircraft



monitoring, does that stand by itself?  We



are not monitoring the aircraft.



          MR. OEMING:  Monitoring by aircraft?



          MR. STEIN:  "Monitoring by aircraft."



          All right.

-------
    	     3896

,. 1                      EXECUTIVE-'SESSION

  2

  3
                       RECOMMENDATION #21
  4

  5
                    MR. STEIN: Down to 21.
  6
                    MR. OEMING:  Are you ready on 21?
  7
                    MR. STEIN:  Yes, air.
  8
                    MR. OEMING:  I would like to suggest
  9
          a change:  "The discharge of visible oil from
 10
          any source in such a manner as to reach the
 11
          waters of Lake Michigan shall "be eliminated"--
 12
                    MR. STEIN:--"from any source "---go
 13
          ahead.
 14
                    MR. OEMING:  *--"in such a manner as
 15
          to reach the waters of Lake Michigan."
 16
                    MR. KLASSEN:   What is the difference
 17
          there?
 18
                    MR. OEMING: We are going back to this
 19
          basin again.  Are you concerned or is this
 20
          conference concerned about what happens ;at
 21
          Laingsburg,  half a dozen dams--
 22
                    MR. KLASSEN:   All right, but I didn't
 23
          see any difference in your wording.
 24
                    MR. OEMING:  Oh. yes,"in such a manner
 25

-------
   	3897

 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         as  to  reach  Lake  Michigan."
 3
                    MR.  KLASSEN:"As  to reach the waters
 4
         of  Lake Michigan"?
 5
                    MR.  OEMING:   That's right.
 6
                    MR.  STEIN:  .Same thing.
 7
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Same thing.
 8
                    MR.  STEIN:  What do you  care?
 9
                    MR.  POOLE:  You  a re going to cut the
10
         word "basin" out, aren't you?
11
                    MR.  OEMING:   That's  right/ "basin"
12
         comes  out  of there.
13
                    MR.  STEIN:  All  right.
14
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   Oh.
15
                    MR.  STEIN: If we cut out "basin" we
16
         could have done the same thing.  But  let's leave
17
         it  this way.
18
                   Do you have any  objection  to this?
19
                   This reads, "The discharge  of visible
20
         oil from any source in  such  a  manner  as to reach
21
         the waters of  Lake Michigan  shall  be  eliminated."
22
                   MR.  OEMING:   That's  right.
23
                   MR.  STEIN:  All  right.
24

25

-------
   	3898

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2

 3
                       RECOMMENDATION #22
 4

 5
                    MR. STEIN:  Twenty-two, "shall be
 6
          immediately employed."
 7
                   --shall be employed immediately."
 8
          0.  K.,  let's not split an infinitive.
 9
                    MR. MITCHELL:  Where is it?
10
                    MR. OEMING:  Just interchange "employed"
11
          and "immediately."
12
                    MR. STEIN:  That is not really an
13
          infinitive but let's do it, anyway.--"shall
14
          be  employed immediately."
15
                    MR. POOLE: Shall what?
16
                    MR. MITCHELL:  You guys have got me
17
          lost.
18
                    MR. STEIN:  "Present knowledge of
19
          water  pollution control shall be  employed
20
          immediately to abate water pollution."
21
                    MR. POOLE:  0.  K.
22
                    MR. STEIN:  We  are on 22.
23
                    MR. LELAND:--"and research," leave
24
          out the--
25

-------
   	      3899

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  STEIN:  Where is that?
 3
                    MR.  LELANB:  In the second line,
 4            .            :
          "and,"  and take out the "that."
 5
                    MR.  STEIN:   Strike out "that" at the
 «
          end of  the second line and put "shall" after
 7                ...                    '
          the word "research" on the third line?
 8
                    MR.  LELAND:  No, "shall be vigorously
 9
          pursued."
10
                    MR.  STEIN:--"and research" instead
11
          of "that," right.
12
                    How  do you have that?
13
                    MR.  LELAND:  No.
14
                    So it will  read, "and research on
15
          pressing water problems shall be vigorously
16
          pursued."
17
                    MR.  STEIN:--"on water pollution
18
          problems shall," after "problems" on the
19
          third line.
20
                    Here is  how it reads:
21
                    "Present knowledge of water pollution
22
          control shall  be employed immediately to abate
23
          water pollution in the Lake Michigan basin and
24
          research on pressing  water pollution problems
25

-------
   	3900

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2

          shall be vigorously pursued,"
 3

                    Are we all right on 22?
 4


 5

                       RECOMMENDATION #23
 6


 7

                    MR. STEIN:  How about 23, does that
 8

          satisfy you, Larry, on those boats?
 9

                    MR. POOLE;  No,
10

                    MR. STEIN: No?  Let's hear it.
ll

                    MR. OEMING:  You have got to give me
12

          a chance to think a minute.
13

                    MR. POOLE:  I suggested, "it is
14

          recommended by the State Conferees that Federal
15

          legislation for the control of oil be strengthened.
16

          I don't want to be so presumptuous as to spell
17

          out everything that the Federal legislation should
lo

          cover.  But this seems to me to be pretty weak.
19

                    MR. OEMING:  Yes.
20

                    MR. STEIN:  All right.
21

                    "it is recommended by the State
22

          Conferees that Federal legislation for the
23

          control of oil pollution of Lake Michigan


          be strengthened"?  Or oil on Lake Michigan,
25

-------
                                         	3901
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION
 2
          oil pollution?   Oil  pollution of  Lake Michigan
 3
          be strengthened—oil pollution on Lake Michigan
 4
          be strengthened.  Right?

                   MR.  OEMING:   You  said "on Lake

 6         Michigan," didn't you,  Mr.  Chairman?
 7                  MR. STEIN:   Yes.

 8                  MR. OEMING:  All  right.

                   MR. STEIN:   "it is  recommended  by

         the State Conferees  that Federal  legislation

         for the control of oil pollution  on  Lake

12        Michigan be strengthened."  Right?  "it  is
13
         recommended."  And then let's  go  on  to  2k.
14
                   MR. KLASSEN: Mr.  Chairman.
15
                   MR. STEIN:   Let me  read 23 once more:
16                  ..
                    It is recommended  by the  State
17
         Conferees that Federal legislation for  the
18
         control of oil pollution on Lake Michigan be
19                     „
         strengthened.
20
                   Yes?
21
                   MR. KLASSEN: In no  place here do  we
22
         have a requirement that the Federal  Government
23
         move  toward the control of wastes from inter-
24
         state watercraft.  Is this  the place  for it or
25

-------
   	3902

 1                       EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         under  15?
 3
                    MR.  STEIN:   No, we  had  that,  we
 4
         had  that before.   Let's  go  back on  the  boats
 6
         way  before,  Clarence.
 6
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   You had it,  but now
 7
         you  have substituted 13.
 8
                    MR.  STEIN: No, no,  no,  no.
 9
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   All right,  if it is
10
         in there,  0. K.
11
                    MR.  STEIN:   No, no, no.
12
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   That  is all  right.
13
         If you are sure it is  in there—
14
                    MR.  OEMING:  Let's  check this out,
15
         Clarence,  What are you talking  about now?
16
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   On  13,  we revised  13,
17
         we omitted "Commensurate requirements controlling
18
         the  discharge  of  wastes from commercial vessels
19
         be the responsibility  of the  Federal Government."
20
                    MR.  STEIN:   No, I had that on my  13.
21
                    MR.  KLASSEN:   But it  wasn't on the
22
         one  that we  Just passed.
23
                    MR.  LELAND:  We have  a new 13.
24
                    MR.  KLASSEN:  We  have a new 13.
25

-------
   	3903

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                   MR. LELAND: It wasn't  on  the  one
 3
         passed out.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  Well,  they didn't type
 5
         the last sentence on 13.
 6
                   MR. KLASSEN:  Will it  be  included?
 7
                   MR. STEIN:  I hope so.  I have, and
 8
         let's put this down, "Commensurate  requirements
 9
         controlling the discharge of wastes from com-
10
         mercial vessels is to be the responsibility
11
         of the Federal Government."
12
                   MR. OEMING:  Yes.
13
                   MR. KLASSEN: 0. K.
14
                   MR. STEIN:  That is in 13.
15
                   All right.  Twenty-four.
16
                   MR. HOLMER:  Twenty-three.
17
                   MR. STEIN:  Back to 23.
18
                   MR. HOLMER: I wonder if it would not
19
         be appropriate for us to Join in with the
20
         President's recommendation that  legislation of
21
         this sort be extended to cover other pollutant
22
         chemicals as well as oil?  This  was a part of
23
         last week's message, and it  always  concerns me;
24
         I realize that oil is our most nagging  and
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          persistent problem,  but I  wonder if we should
 3
          not  also make  the  record clear that we would
 4
          support  strengthened legislation governing the
 5
          control  of pollution from  other chemicals?
 6
                    MR.  STEIN:   Well--
 7
                    MR.  POSTON:   You are talking about
 8
          spills now,  I  assume?
 9
                    MR.  HOLMER:   Well, yes.
10
                    MR.  WISNIEWSKI:   Oil isn't the only
11
          thing  that floats.
12
                    MR.  MITCHELL:  No, but right now
13
          the  oil  control  act  is the weakest act that we
14
          are  considering.
15
                    MR.  STEIN:   I  follow.
16
                    MR.  MITCHELL:  And there may not be
17
          any  other legislation  in regard to the others,
18
          I don't  know.  But we  were wanting to point
19
          out  that this  oil  control  act is very weak
26
          and  at the present--
21
                    MR.  HOLMER:  Hasn't been enforced
22
          anyway.
23
                    MR.  STEIN: No, no, it is not a question
24
          of--let  me tell  you  this.   You know,  I am in
25

-------
   	3905

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         charge of the enforcement--
 3
                   MR. HOLMER:  I agree.   I  agree.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:  No,  let me  give  you  this,
 5
         and I told you this before.
 6
                   MR. HOLMER:  I know.
 7
                   MR. STEIN:  In order for  the discharge
 8
         to be enforceable, it has  to be due to gross
 9
         neglect or wilful.
10
                   MR. OEMING: Wilful.
11
                   MR. STEIN:  Now, if you can  prove--
12
         and you know, you have got your own lawyers in
13
         your States--if they can prove a  case  on wilful
14
         or gross neglect, as I said before,  they are
15
         better lawyers than I am.
16
                   MR. OEMING:  You can't  do it.
17
                   MR. STEIN:  This isn't  a  question of
18
         a will to enforce.  We got the law,  and you
10
         take this up with the fellows you have back working
20
         with you in your States and see what they  can
21
         do with that.  I can't do very much.
22
                   MR. OEMING:  I Just want  to  support
23
         you in that, Mr. Chairman -
24
                   MR. STEIN:  I know.
25

-------
   	3906

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  OEMING:   We had wilful in our
 3
          act.   Under wilful violations we collect a
 4
          fine,  and the  attorney general could never
 5
          enforce it.
 6
                    MR.  STEIN:  Of course not.   You see,
 7
          what  they are  getting at is  a specific thing.
 8
          We  have something in  the Oil Pollution Control
 9
          Act that in effect makes the enforcement of
10
          that  act difficult in the extreme.   The success-
11
          ful cases we have had since  that amendment
12
          are zero.     I think this is what we are
13
          trying to get  at.
14
                    Now,  the question  here again is if
15
          you want to dilute that by putting something
16
          else  in, and this is  up to you.  I  don't care.
17

18
                      RECOMMENDATION  #24
19

20
                    MR.  STEIN:   Let's  go to 24.
21
                    MR.  OEMING:   Mr. Chairman, I would
22
          like  to suggest that  you delete the second
23
          sentence and let it stand as the first sentence.
24
                    MR.  STEIN:   All right.  I thought
25

-------
   	3907

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
          that might be a  suggestion.
 3
                   MR. HOLMER:  Yes,  indeed.
 4
                   MR. STEIN:   If no  objection,  we will
 5
          do  that.
 6
                   MR. MITCHELL:   Good.
 7
                   MR. KLASSEN:   Amen.
 8
                   MR. POQLE:  I will  buy that.
 9
                   MR. HOLMER:  A second suggestion,
10
          with respect  to  the first sentence and  in
11
          view of  the President's  proposal to follow
12
          the Wisconsin procedure--
13
                   (Laughter.)
14
                   MR. STEIN:   He may have had:.New York
15
          in  mind.
16
                   (Laughter.)
17
                   MR. HOLMER:  Quite possibly.   And
18
          Illinois  and  Michigan.
19
                   MR. STEIN:   Yes.
20
                   MR. KLASSEN:   Thank you.
21
                   MR. HOLMER:  But I wonder if  it would
22
          not be appropriate  for us State Conferees to add
23
          a second  sentence or  an  additional clause that
24
          would acknowledge the fact that he has  made a
25

-------
    	3908

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          proposal which we would find very helpful.
 3
                    MR. POOLE:  I haven't read
 4
          the proposal yet.  I couldn't subscribe
 5
          to that.
 6
                    MR. STEIN:  I would--
 7
                    MR. POSTON:  You couldn't?
 8
                    MR. POOLE:  No.
 9
                    MR. STEIN:  Let's go off the
10
          record.
11
                    (Off the record.)
12
                    MR. HOLMER:  Then let's skip it.
13
          Let's go to 25-
14
                    MR. STEIN:  Let's go to 25
15

16                  RECOMMENDATIONS #25 AND 26

17
                    MR. STEIN:  Twenty-five.
18
                    And 25 a boiler plate, I hope.
19
                    All right
20
                    MR. OEMING:  Mr. Chairman, in connection
21
          with 25, this reconvening every six months, what is
22
          the mechanism here?  Who initiates this or do we
23
          decide this?
24
                    MR. STEIN:  Here is the way we've done
25

-------
 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION
 2
         this.
 3
                   Let's go off the record on this.
 4
                   (Off the record.)
 5
                   MR. STEIN:  I think again it is  like
 6
         these other things, you have to rely on the
 7
         past performance and good faith.  I do not
 8
         think we have ever called a meeting without
 9
         thoroughly canvassing you and getting your
10
         approval on the date.  And this is the way we
11
         intend to continue.
12
                   MR. OEMING:  I was thinking who  do
13
         we look to, and I think we look to you as
14
         Chairman of the conference.
15
                   MR. STEIN:  Yes, that's right,
16
         around six months.  We have one of these
W              '  .
         massive tickler files in Washington and
18
         around five months something is going to come

         up which says you have got to do something
*v
         about reconvening that Lake Michigan conference
21
         and then I will get on the telephone and if I
22
         can get Wally in town or something, I will say
23
         to him,  "How about calling your States and seeing
24
         when they want to reconvene?"  And then he will
*v

-------
   	3910

 1                    '  EXECUTIVE  SESSION

 2
         be on  the  phone with you, as usual.   We  have
 3
         been through this many times before--
 4
                    MR.  OEMING:  Yes, we've  been through
 5
         it.  I Just wanted  to--
 6
                    MR.  STEIN:  And we make  an  adjustment
 7
         on the date.
 8
                    Now, the  advantage of doing it this
 9
         way is I think we can give you every  reasonable
10
         assurance  that your wishes will be met in
11
         selecting  the  date  and you won't have or any
12
         of us have an  arbitrary  date Imposed  on  us
13
         to go  to a meeting, that is all.
14
                    MR.  OEMING:  It would be about September,
15
         wouldn't it, September or October?  After the
16
         Secretary  gets his  recommendations off,  then
17
         we count the six months, don't we?
18
                    MR.  STEIN:  I  think, gentlemen, if
10
         you are talking about September or October of
20
         this year  and  you are thinking of holding a

         progress meeting in this case right before the
22
         first Tuesday  after the first Monday  in  November,
23
         I think we are Just whistling in the  dark.  You
24
         know we are going to wait until after election.
25

-------
   	3911

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          I  don't think it is  going  to  be  possible
 3
          to hold a  progress meeting until after election.
 4
                    MR. OEMING: All  right.   That gives
 5
          me enough.
 6
                    MR. STEIN:  0. K.
 7
                    MR. KLASSEN: Mr. Chairman,  is it
 8
          necessary  to put in  the record to file with
 9
          you  a  comment that the Illinois  Conferee
10
          agrees with these or is this  the consensus?
11
                    MR. STEIN:  No,  I am going  to bring
12
          these  in as unanimous.
13
                    MR. KLASSEN:  O.K.
14
                    MR. STEIN:  Unanimous  agreement.
15
          Now, I think the advantage, as you all know,
16
          of unanimous agreement, we have  never had
17
          any  Secretary,  and we haVe had a variety of
18
          Secretaries deal with these,  change a unanimous
19
          agreement  before.  And I think the essence
20
          of the program  to clean up Lake  Michigan  is
21
          to get this unanimous agreement,  because  this
22
          business of getting  a complicated program like
23                                        '
          this working where two or  more parties are in
£r9
          disagreement or where a State or the  Federal
25

-------
 1                       EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          Government or anyone is telling the other
 3
          to go fly your kite isn't going to get the
 4
          program going.
 5

 6                   And speaking here on the conclusions

 7         of this, I think that the great thing we have

 8         achieved here, I hope this won't be under-

 9         estimated, is the unanimity among the States

10         and the Federal Government on the program.

11         This la a very difficult program, and the

12         fact that as diverse a group as we have have

13         been able to achieve that.unanimity I think

14         reflects possibly the importance that we all

15         accord the goal of saving Lake Michigan and

16         the recognition that if we don1t come up with

17         this unanimous program we may have some very

18         dire consequences.

19
                    I want to thank all you people. There
20
          have been tremendous accommodations by all
21
          parties to come up with this agreement.  This
22
          has not been easy.  It has taken a long time,
23

24

25

-------
                                                         3913

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
             I say, in all deference, and this may be
 3
         a partisan statement, the reason we have been
 4
         able to achieve that in a complicated situation
 5
         like this is that what we are doing is sitting
 6
         around the table with a bunch of pros who have
 7
         been working in large measure with each other for
 8
         the past quarter of a century.  I am not sure
 9
         that this could be done, really, in a situation
10
         like this without that professional expertise
11
         and the long personal relations that we have
12
         all had.  We have dealt with some of the most
13
         fundamental problems in water resources, the
14
         kind of problems that I think a lot of people
15
         talk about at meetings, skirt, and maybe have
16
         long-range planning programs and research
17
         programs for, and we have met them and come to
18
         an accommodation with them.   And I would like
19
         to congratulate all the Conferees for their
20
         flexibility and constructive suggestions.  I
21
         think without it we never could have arrived
22
         at this stage.
23
                   As a matter of fact, I think I would
24
         match this program for the saving of Lake Michigan
25

-------
   ^___	:	3914

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
          in concrete form with any pollution program
 3
          not Just anywhere in the country but anywhere
 4
          in the world.   But I do think we need it.
 5
                    Yes.
 6
                    MR.  MITCHELL:  I would like to add
 7
          to that statement, though, Mr. Chairman, that
 8
          I know there are some support groups who have
 9
          been with us all through our hearings, the
10
          League of Women Voters for one and some others.
11
          It is easy, really,  for us who sit around tables
12
          and set up these guidelines, but unless the
13
          people back home really want to do the Job and
14
          spend the money that is going to be required,
15
          we will never get it done.  I would hope that
16
          these support groups won't consider that Just
17
          because we have issued a report that stops here.
18
          We hope that they will be able to carry the ball
19
          a little bit farther to really get the support
20
          for these bond issues and other things that
21
          have to be forthcoming.
22
                    MR.  STEIN:   This is the essential
23
          part.  And let me say, I can put this very
24
          succinctly, I  agree  with John Mitchell completely.
25

-------
     	3915

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION


 2
                   The kind of pollution  control  people
 3
         get is  the kind of pollution  control  they demand.
 4
         And without your demanding  it and  going  out  and

 6
         working for it, you are not going  to  get it.

 6
         Any official agency sitting around the table

 7
         and coming out with this alone Just doesn't

 8
         do the Job, and this is the answer to the

 9
         question.

10
                   The Federal Government really,  by  and

11
         large, except for those Federal  installations,

12
         or the States, the few State  installations, we

13
         are not the polluters, and  this  is what  you
14
         have to understand.  Pollution really
15
         in essence gets cleaned up by the  municipalities

16
         and the cities who are creating  the pollution
17
         and the citizens groups and the  people In the
18
         area creating the climate where  they  feel they

19
         have to go ahead.  It is not  us.
20
                   Are there any other comments or
21
         questions?
22
                   MR. POSTON:  I might say--
23
                   MR. OEMING:  Mr. Chairman.
24
                   MR. POSTON:  Go ahead.
25

-------
   ^__	3916

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR.  OEMING:   May the State of
 3
          Michigan have  a chance?
 4
                    MR.  STEIN:   Try to stop you.
 5
                    (Laughter.)
 6
                    MR.  OEMING:   Well, I would Just
 7
          like  to say on behalf  of the State of Michigan
 8
          that  we are extremely  gratified with the way
 9
          in which the Chairman  has conducted this
10
          conference in  his  tact and his ability to
11
          draw  out all of these  different viewpoints
12
          and pull them  together into something that
13
          we can  all subscribe to, the States and the
14
          Federal Government.  This is no mean accomplish-
15
          ment  in itself,  Mr.  Chairman.  I mean to be
16
          able  to pull people  like Klassen and Poole
17
          and Oeming and Holmer  together and pull some-
18
          thing out of them  that everybody can subscribe
19
          to as a good program is not easy, and a great
20
          deal  of credit belongs to you here.  I mean
21
          this  sincerely.
22
                    MR.  STEIN:   Thank you.  That is the
23
          first nice thing anyone has said to me since
24
          my mother kissed me when I graduated from high
25

-------
   	3917

 1                     EXECUTIVE  SESSION


 2
          school.
 3
                    (Laughter.)
 4
                    MR. HOLMER:  I want  to  say amen to

 5
          that.

 6
                    MR. STEIN:   I  think  some  of the

 7
          press  and  the TV"people  are  going to be here

 8
          and we are supposed  to have  a  press conference.

 9
          You are all welcome,  if  you  want  to appear

10
          before them to   answer their questions.  As

11
          far as I am concerned, the State  people can

12
          have first crack at  this, because —

13
                    MR. OEMING:  I am  sure  you can
14
          handle it  in fine shape, the way  you have.
15
                    MR. STEIN:  Any way you  want to do it.
16
                    Now,  let me say one  thing in passing.
17
          I  do think we have a little  time, and I put
18
          this to you, on most of  our  problems, possibly
19
          even the nuclear reactor and powerplant prob-
20
          lems.  We  do not--and I  repeat this—we do not
21
          have any time on that alewife  problem if we
22
          are going  to meet it this year.  We are what,
23
          in March now?
24
                    MR. POSTON:  Right.
25

-------
   	3918

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR. STEIN:  My Information, and I
 3
          have talked to many people about this, unless we
 4            '
          have not Just plans  but an operating program
 5
          and a staff in the field by April, I don't
 6
          think we are going to assemble the boats, the
 7         .
          personnel, the money, the sites and the local
 8
          cooperation to cope with the alewife problem
 9       :  .                                  .     '
          this year.  I would say don't wait for any
10
          recommendations to come out from us.  We will be
11
          overtaken by events if we do this.
12
                    Let me make this clear, because I
13
          said this informally in answer to questions
14
          from members of the press, but let me indicate
15
          this to you.  I think we can get up some Federal
16
          money,  but the string on this is to be able to
17
          have the State money match it.  I hope the
18
          States  will not quibble and will be forthcoming
19
          with that so we can make it go.
20

                    Now, in addition to that, we are going

          to  need a staff to make this program go.  We
22

          would hope that you would designate the people
23

          from this area to run the program.  If necessary,
w4

          we  will supply a supporting staff and if you
25

-------
     	3919

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         require it and you can't break anyone loose,
 3
         we will supply supervisors for you.  But we
 * ''             '  '            '.'•'"'
         are not asking for this.  We will Just do this
 5
         on demand.  We think the alewife program is
 6
         so important that we are ready to break these
 7                       '               -           .
         people loose.  We would like you people to do
 8
         it.
 9
                   Now, the question again, and let me
10
         make this clear, the concomitants of getting
11
         the Federal money are that the States come
12
         forth with their money, that the States come
13
         forth with a viable program, that is a skimming
14
         program, sites to dispose of this and a local
15
         program to handle this on the beaches.
16
                   If you can't blast or Jar loose any people
17
         from your State programs to run this operation,
18
         we will supply the people.  But whether it is
19
         your interstate agency or your State program,
20
         I would recommend that the more local people
21
         you can put in charge the better we will like
22
         it.  We will take the support positions.  How-
23
         ever, if you can't,  call on us.  0. K.?
24
                   MR. OEMING:  You have given us a good
25

-------
   	3Q20

 1                     EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         message here--
 3
                   MR. STEIN:  All right.
 4
                   MR. OEMING:  --to carry back  to
 5
         our people, Mr. Chairman.
 6
                   MR. POSTON:  Mr. Chairman,  in response
 7
         to Mr. Poole's request for a work shop  on ad-
 8
         vanced waste treatment, particularly  relating
 9
         to phosphate removal, I would report  that we
10
         have plans underway to do this about  mid-April.
11
         We will be in touch with you relative to getting
12
         out invitations to consulting engineers  in your
13
         particular State--
14
                   MR. POOLE:  Good.
15
                   MR. POSTON: --for this purpose.
16
                   MR. STEIN:  Are there any further
17
         questions?
18
                   If not, again I want to thank you.
19
         You know, you say this sometimes repeatedly,
20
         I say this, not Just myself, but some of the
21
         people around the table, and we have  been in
22
         many hearings in many pollution cases,  but
23
         I do not  think that in all the years  that I
24
         have been in pollution control, and I suspect
25

-------
   	3922

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
         this is  true for  some  of  the  others,  that
 3
         we have  ever been dealing with as  complex
 4
         and as important  a case as  this.   This  is,
 5
         I might  say, even more complex than  the Lake
 6
         Erie situation, because that  was gone,  you
 7
         know. What do you do?  This is the hard
 8
         kind of  operation,  where  you  really  have to
 9
         strive for a program and  dealing with a lot
10
         of States and a lot of problems.   We also have
11
         dealt with a Federal Government which has a
12
         strong point of view and  four States  which
13
         have been noted for their excellent  water
14
         pollution control programs  and the-independence
15
         of their thought.
16
                   (Laughter.)
17
                   I will  say that in  dealing with this
18
         problem  this has  been> and  I  know  this  may be
19
         trite, one of the most rewarding experiences
20
         that I have had.   We have worked our way through
21
         and have come up  with  a program that exceeds my
22
         fondest  expectations.  I  defy anyone to come up
23
         with a better program  than  the Conferees have
24
         produced here.  This is,  indeed, an  accomplishment.
25

-------
                                          	   3928

 1                      EXECUTIVE SESSION

 2
                    MR. OEMING:   I have got to say
 3
          something more.   This  exemplifies the
 4
          partnership that  I  thought was in the Federal
 5
          Water Pollution Control Act between the
 6
          Federal Government  and the States, what has
 7
          happened here, in my book.
 8
                    MR. STEIN:   With that,  we stand
 9
          adjourned for this  session of the conference.
10
          Thank you all very  much.
11
                    (Whereupon,  at  3:30 p.m., the Executive
12
          Session was adjourned.)
13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25


                                       » U.S. COVHMICBT PRINTUieorFICe: I Mi O-*U-WT'(VOC 7»

-------