^

                   Minnesota >*X
Second Session
April 29-30, 197O
Duluth, Minnesota
Vol.2
In the Matter of Pollution of Lake Superior
and its Tributary Basin-Minnesota-
Wisconsin - Michigan
     U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR • FEDERAL WATER QUALITY ADMINISTRATION

-------
                       T.  G.  Frangos





            MR.  FRANGOS:   Well,  I  understand  your  ques-     |

                                                           I

  tion,  and  that is  precisely,  again,  the  purpose  of  these



  hearings,  because  at  that  time we will have  a  record



i  upon which we  can  determine what the State's  course of

i

!  action ought to be and  at  the same  time  we  can bring to
i
|

|  you specifically the  situation in each one  of  these



j  communities and proceed along the lines  that  you sug-
I
i

  gested,  again  anticipating this  October  deadline that



  now stands.



            MR.  STEIN:   I would say,  from  my  point of



  view,  that something  as you have done in this  Du Pont



  matter is  the  right procedure.  I am not talking about



  the merits of  this yet.



            MR.  FRANGOS:   Right.



            MR.  STEIN:   Now,  I am  just speaking  for my



  part of  the operation and  I have another hat--standards



  compliance.  I would  think,  in any  case,  that  Defore we



  would  consider a request for an  extension and  act on



  that from  any  particular State if there  were  an  inter



  state  situation involved,  I can  almost assure  you that



  our agency would check  this  out  with the other States

-------
                     T. G. Prangos






involved, because I think any dealing with a date in an




interstate situation evolves with the Federal Government




and the other States and once this is done this will




affect their programs too.




          Maybe we are reaching for this procedure, but




if this is all agreeable, it seems to me that this would




be the equitable way of trying to do this.  That is, if




you feel that any date should be modified, if you notify




us, and perhaps you can do this beforehand, check with




the States, if you don't do that we will check with the




other States involved, and then perhaps we can come up



with a judgment on that.




          MR. FRANGOS:  Well, I think that sounds like




the proper course.  As you know, we are really just




starting to get into this compliance area, and when you




get involved with standards and the conference, this




hasn't always been clear what the procedure should be,




but I think the ones that you outlined are the ones that




we intend to pursue.




          MR. STEIN:  Yes.




          Mr. Purdy.




          MR. PURDY:  Mr. Chairman, I am concerned about

-------
                                                     441





                     T. G. Frangos






tying ourselves up in procedures to the point of where




we can't respond.  I can visualize the problems within



Michigan and then attempt to recognize what this means




on the country as a whole in the way of compliance dates,



and I am wondering if you are interested in the interim




dates or the final compliance date?  There are many



interim dates that are adjusted 30 days, 45 days, 60



days .



          MR. STEIN:  No, no, no.  Here, that is another



point.  I think you raised a good point.



          One, and I noticed, paucity of interim dates



in the Wisconsin presentation; maybe they are here.  I



think we can have a distinction between the interim




dates and the final date, certainly.  If an interim



date is adjusted, of course, at least our Regional Office




should be informed.  If the Regional Office thinks that



that adjustment of an interim date will be so firm or



so important as to throw the chances of meeting the




final date out, they will report to us and we will get



in touch.  If not, I think we don't make any move on




the interim date.




          The question here that comes up, though, is

-------
                     T. G. Frangos






when we have a final date established by your State




agency, sent in to the Secretary of the Interior, and the




Secretary of the Interior accepts that as both a State




date and a Federal date, then the shifting of that date




presents some problems.  I think this is going to be--




I think Mr. Frangos alluded to this—this is going to be




hard work and undramatic.  But I suspect if we are going




to do pollution control, we are going to have to get some'




kind of procedure where we are going to have to coordi-




nate any modifications of these final dates, both from




the Federal people and the State people, since they are




legal dates binding on both.




          MR. PURDY:   I am satisfied with this sort of



approach.




          MR. STEIN:   All right.




          MR. PURDY:  ¥e do have some, I think, 30, kO




compliance dates coming before our Commission every



month.




          MR. STEIN:  Righi:.




          MR. FRANGOS:  Well, let me just respond to,




I think, the request  for the format on abatement sched-




ules.  And the reason these were not included, because

-------
                     T. G. Prangos



it was our feeling that out of these hearings we will


know exactly what kind of schedules we are talking about


and we can present these to the conferees when we recon-


vene.  In the meantime, we would anticipate working with
                                                         I
the regional people of FWQA and see if we can't develop  !
                                                         i

something that is at least acceptable to them.  If not,  \


at least they are fully advised of what the status is in


each situation.


          MR. STEIN:  Well, again, I think we appreciate


the attitude of the States in this, particularly the


States at this table, and I think by working together we


can work this out.  Federal-State programs are never very


easy to manage, but we just have to face it, I guess.


          Are there any other comments or questions on


the Wisconsin report?


          MR. BADALICH:  Mr. Chairman, the completion


dates for the projects under the interstate water quality


standards, wouldn't they be earlier than the date that we


set for this conference, January of 197^?


          MR. STEIN:  Yes.


          MR. BADALICH:  It is my understanding all of


the interstate water quality standards throughout the

-------
                                                     444





                     T. G. Frangos






country were, you know, accepted by the Secretary last




year or maybe even the year before this.  So if you




are talking about a 3- or 4-year period, it will be




well within the January 1974 date.



          MR. STEIN:  Yes.  But I think the conference




recommendation, and I am looking for--



          MR. BADALICH:  That is Recommendation No. 5.




          MR. STEIN:  Yes, Recommendation 5, the phrase




says, "This action is to be accomplished by January 1974




or earlier if required by Federal-State water quality




standards."




          Well, I think we set something up which is




completely consistent, at least, from a technical ana




legal point of view.  The dates that Mr. Frangos is con-




cerned about are those earlier dates, earlier than




January 1974,as required by Federal-State water quality




standards, which are binding on this conference, and Wis-




consin is holding these meetings to consider the equities




in perhaps extending some of these dates.




          MR. FRANGOS:  Yes.




          MR. STEIN:  And this is the problem.




          MR. FRANGOS: Well, let me make this perfectly

-------
                       T.  G-  Frangos


  clear—that  we  do  not look  to  the outside  date  set  by

  this  conference as  any reason  for easing  up  on  any  of

  these  restrictions.   We  view this apart from whatever

i  legal  commitments  and responsibilities that  we  have
|
!  strictly  from our  own State point of  view  that  these are
i
1  very  serious and that we are exercising every legal and

I  administrative  device that  we  have  to get  cleanup.
|
!            MR. STEIN:   Right.   Well, if I  don't  get  a
i
|
  voluntary response,  I am going to move around and try  to

  poll  the  people.  You don't have to answer this  if  you

  have  no feeling.

            Have  you come  to  any conclusion  yet on the

  proposal  for Du Pont?

            MR. FRANGOS:  Yes, we would recommend  that

  very  strongly.

            MR. STEIN:   Do you want to  comment on  that,

  Mr. Purdy?

            MR. PURDY:   I  did.   I agreed with  it.

            MR. STEIN:   Yes.  How about you?

            MR. MAYO:   I think there  are three principal

  points going for the  recommendation.  First, it  assures

  a  60-percent reduction in the  wastes  now.  Second,  there

  are specific interim  dates  provided for.   And third,

-------
                                                     446





                     T. G. Frangos






it will end up with the complete elimination of the dis-




charge and you can't ask for anything better than that.



          I would suggest that we concur in the recom-




mendation .



          MR. STEIN:  How about Minnesota?




          MR. BADALICH:  Well, Mr. Chairman, as long as




the system is going to be a closed system and recycling




the waters, we see no problem.  I think Du Pont should be




complimented on their program.




          MR. STEIN:  Right.  The sole point is that the




project will be in effect on May 1,  1972, which is a




little later than it was originally anticipated.  But




there will be an interim cleanup.




          I guess the views are unanimous that this is a




reasonable program on the part of Du Pont.   And, again,




I think I would join with Mr.  Badalich on this, because,




when we had the first session  of the conference, you




recognize that we had a real vexing problem with this




red water coming out of the TNT plants.  There were many




remarks made that the technology was not available




to handle this waste.  Now, if the industry has come up




with a system that is in effect a closed system and

-------
                     T. G- Frangos






completely eliminates this waste, I think this is a




wonderful thing and a real breakthrough, and I hope




this will work out.




          So I think the conference can stand on record




on that and we will take these views back to the Sec-




retary of the Interior.




          Are there any other comments or questions?




          MR. FRANGOS:  Just a point of clarification,




Murray.  The point is we need to proceed, and are you




suggesting that we can go ahead and tell these people




yes?  Or do we need some action out of the Secretary's




office?



          MR. STEIN:  I don't want to act ultra vires.




          MR. FRANGOS:  Right.




          MR. STEIN:  I am going to recommend that the




Secretary approve this, certainly with the backing and




the views of the conferees on this, that we go ahead.




Now, the problem, as you know, Tom — and let this get off




the record.




          (Off the record.)




          MR. STEIN:  Back on the record.




          MR. MAYO:  I have one more question, Mr.

-------
                     T. G- Frangos






Frangos.



          Does the Wisconsin boat toilet law apply  to




federally-documented pleasure boats?




          MR. FRANGOS: I believe it would apply.    The




only specific limitation in the law is whether it is in




interstate commerce, and perhaps you can answer that




better  than I can.  It would hinge on that definition




and I am not certain whether it does or not.




          MR. STEIN:  Are there any other comments  or




questions?




          If not, thank you very much, Mr. Frangos, for




an excellent report.  As always, the Wisconsin report is




very informative.




          May we call on Michigan.




          MR. PURDY:  Mr. Chairman,  I would like to have




Mr. Courchaine give Michigan's report.






         ROBERT J. COURCHAINE, REGIONAL ENGINEER




           MICHIGAN WATER RESOURCES  COMMISSION




                    LANSING,  MICHIGAN






          MR. COURCHAINE:  Mr. Chairman, conferees,




and gentlemen.

-------
	449




                    R.  J.  Courchaine






          At  the  first session  which  began  in  Duluth,




Minnesota,,  on May 13,  1969,  a  joint report  was  submitted




on  behalf of  the  Michigan Water Resources Commission  and




the Michigan  Department of Public  Health which  outlined




various  State programs to abate pollution and  enhance  the




quality  of  the waters  of  Lake  Superior  and  its  tributaries




          This current report  describes current programs




undertaken  by Michigan to implement the State-oriented




recommendations of the Secretary of the Department  of  the




Interior stemming from the first session.   Information




in  this  report related to these recommendations has been




reviewed, updated and  amplified.




          Recommendation  No.  1  was that a Technical




Committee be  formed.   Two staff members of  the  Michigan




Water  Resources Commission have represented Michigan  at




all meetings  of this Technical  Committee.




          Recommendations 2  and 3  referred  to  the Reserve




Mining Company.




          Recommendation  No.  4  requires the States  sub-




stantially  strengthen  water  quality surveillance plans




for the  Lake  Superior  Basin  and report  to the  conferees




at  the next session of the conference.

-------
                                	____	450_





                   R. J. Courchaine






          Michigan's water quality surveillance programs




for the Lake Superior Basin were described in detail in




Chapter V of the "Report on Water Pollution Control in




the Michigan Portion of the Lake Superior Basin and Its




Tributaries."  This report was submitted at the conferenc^




called by the Secretary of the Interior in May 19&9-  An



updating of the information presented in the first report




is included in Appendices A,  B, C,  D and E of this report




Data from the tributary monitoring program and bacterio-




logical monitoring program have been placed in STORET.




          During the summer of 19^9 algae samples were




collected from four locations in Lake Superior to provide




qualitative and quantitative  algal  data.




          Recommendation 5.  Secondary biological waste




treatment be provided by all  municipalities discharging




directly to or affecting Lake Superior by January 1974.




          On April 7,  1970, letters were sent to munici-




palities now having primary treatment and affecting Lake




Superior water quality or its bays  or harbors, explaining




that they would be required to provide secondary biologi-




cal waste treatment or its  equivalent by not later than




January 1974 and 80 percent reduction of total phosphorus

-------
.	451



                    R.  J.  Courchaine




by  January  1975-   The  letter  requested  each  municipality



to  transmit formal verification  of their  intent  to  volun-



tarily  comply  with these  pollution control requirements.



A stipulation,  including  performance  schedules,  will  be



developed when such verification is received.  If verifi-



cation  is not  received, the Water Resources  Commission



will  initiate  procedures  leading to the issuance of a



final order of determination  to  insure  that  the  require-



ments of the conference are met  timely.   A copy  of  the



letter  sent to municipalities  is included in Appendix G

                a

of  this  report.



          Recommendation  6 requires continuous disinfecti
i
I

on
 throughout  the  year  for  all  municipal  waste  effluents.



           In  January 196?  a  policy was  adopted by  the


 Michigan  Department  of Public  Health requiring year-round



 disinfection  of waste effluent from all municipal  treat-



 ment  plants prior  to discharge to the  surface waters of


 the State.  With the exception of the  city of Bessemer th|is



 program is  in full force and effect at  all such  communi-



 ties  within the Lake Superior  Basin.   The city of  Besseme[r



 is under  order  of  the Water  Resources  Commission to pro-



 vide  chlorination, phosphorus  removal  and improved secondary

-------
                   R. J. Courchaine






treatment by not later than December 1971-   Growing



numbers of Michigan communities are instituting bacter-




iological testing programs as a check on chlorine




residuals and regimens.  Appendix H lists the 19°9



bacteriological quality of municipal waste  discharges




to the Michigan portion of the Lake Superior Basin.




          Recommendation 7 requires disinfection of




industrial effluents containing pathogenic  organisms




or organisms which indicate the presence of such patho-




gens .



          Where a public health hazard can  be anticipated




or shown to exist from an industrial waste  effluent, dis-




infection of the waste is required prior to discharge.




          Recommendation 8.  Waste treatment be provided




by municipalities to achieve at least 80 percent reduc-




tion of total phosphorus to be accomplished by January




1975, not later than January 1975.




          On April 7 letters were sent to municipalities



explaining that they would be required to install and




operate facilities for achieving a minimum of 80 percent




removal of total phosphorus from their wastes by not




later than January  1975-  The letter to municipalities

-------
                   R. J. Courchaine


now having primary treatment also suggests that their

engineers evaluate the need for providing additional

treatment in light of the State's intrastate water

quality standards.  We have requested each municipality

to transmit formal verification of their intent to

voluntarily comply. The stipulation including performance

schedules will be developed when such verification is

received.  If such verification is not received, the Com-

mission will initiate statutory enforcement procedures

leading to the issuance of a final order of determination
                                                         i
                                                         j
to assure that the requirements of the conference are met;
                                                         i
timely. Copies of the letters sent to the municipalities j

are included in Appendix I.

          Recommendation 9* discharges of compatible

industrial wastes to municipal sewer systems be encouraged

Industries not connected to municipal sewer systems pro-

vide treatment equivalent to that of municipalities, this

action to be accomplished by not later than January 197^-.

          Michigan has had a long-standing program that

encourages the discharge of industrial wastes to munici-

pal collection and treatment systems where such wastes

are compatible or can be made compatible by pretreatment.

-------
                   R. J. Courchaine
          Appendix J includes a description of the type
                                                         i
 of waste treatment provided by industries, the status  of j

 their treatment and abatement action being taken to      ,
                                                         i
                                                         i
 implement this recommendation.  This abatement action  is
                                                         I
                                                         I
 listed in an addendum which has been added to the report :

 dated April 1970.  There are currently three industries  \

 listed which have a total of five discharges directly  to j

 Lake Superior.  All three industries have satisfactory   ;
                                                         i
 abatement programs which adequately control the quality  j

 of their discharges.                                     j

          The Hoerner-Waldorf Pulp and Paper Mill at     ;
                                                         i
 Ontonagon discharges wastes into the Ontonagon River near|

 the mouthy  affecting water quality in Lake Superior.

 The company has been notified of the need to provide

 secondary treatment of its wastes by January 1974.

          A recent amendment to Act 245, Public Acts of

 1929, requires that every industrial or commercial

 entity which discharges liquid wastes into any public

 lake or stream shall have waste treatment facilities

under the control of operators certified by the Commis-

 sion.  The  rules  of certification are contained in

Appendix K.

-------
 .	435


                    R. J.  Courchaine



           Recommendation  10  calls  for  a  listing  of waste


i sources which have a  deleterious effect  on  Lake  Superior


 water quality.   This  has  been  added, as  I mentioned,  "by


 an  addendum  to  the Michigan  report dated April 1970.  Thi


 addendum  lists  some 16  communities, 4  of which are alread


 under order  of  the Water  Resources Commission to provide


 improved  treatment, including  phosphorus removal.


           Where abatement actions  are  pending on the  othe


 communities, the Water  Resources Commission will either


 enter into a stipulation  or  will enter an order  requiring


 accomplishment  of treatment  in accordance with a time
i
| schedule  which  will require:


           A  date for  retaining engineers;


           A  date for  submitting preliminary engineering
j

 reports;


           A  date to initiate detailed  engineering plans


 and specifications;


           A  date to submit detailed engineering  plans


 and specifications;


           A  date to arrange  financing;


           A  date to initiate construction;


           And a final completion and compliance  date.

-------
                    R. J. Courchaine




           Appendix J lists the industrial waste effluent



 dischargers within the Lake Superior Basin while Appen-


 dix L lists the municipal waste effluent dischargers.


 The tables in these Appendices summarize information on


 the type of discharge, type of treatment provided,  im-



 provement needs and the program for remedial action



I where such is needed.
i

           Recommendations 11 and 12, unified collection
I
I

 systems serving contiguous  urban areas  be encouraged and
i
!
 pollution control agencies  accelerate programs  to pro-


 vide for the maximum use of areawide sewerage facilities.


           Act 228,  Public Acts of  1967,  is an act to


 regulate the subdivision of land and to promote the


 public  health by providing  authority to the Michigan



 Department of Public  Health to approve  subdivision



 developments  not served  by  public  sewers,  contingent on


 the suitability  of  soils.  This new program has  already



 had a beneficial effect  in  accelerating municipal col-


 lection  and  disposal  systems  in nearby  developing areas


 and preventing use  of septic  tank-tile  field systems in


 unsuitable  areas.



           Act 329,  Public Acts of  1966,  as amended,

-------
	457




                   R.  J.  Courchaine






 establishes  authority  to  provide  State  grants  for  sewage



 treatment  facilities in conjunction  with  Federal grants




 under  United States Public  Law  84-660,  as  amended.



 Pertinent  provisions of Act 329 dealing with unified



 waste  collection  and treatment  programs are shown  in  the



 report.




           Recommendation  13.  Each State  water  pollution



 control  agency lists the  municipalities or communities



 having combined sewers, a proposed plan for minimizing



 bypassing,  and Recommendation 14, existing combined sewers



 be  separated is coordination with all urban reconstruction



 projects .



           Appendix M of the report includes a  list of



 municipalities having  combined  sewers.



           In its  supervisory capacity over municipal



 waste  collection  and treatment  systems, the Michigan



 Department  of Public Health continues to  promote the



 most effective utilization  of these  systems.   Adjustable




 regulating  devices at  points of combined  overflow  are one



 of  a number  of techniques utilized to make use  of  system




 storage  capacities and minimize combined  overflows.




           In Michigan's water quality standards program




 and plan of  implementation, the Commission has  developed

-------
                   R. J. Courchaine



a policy wherein all new sewerage systems are to be


developed on the basis of separate sewers for storm-


water and sanitary wastewaters.  Whenever feasible,


separated sanitary wastewater systems are not to be


discharged into existing combined systems.  If such a    |


discharge does occur, control facilities must be developed
                                                         !

on the combined system to provide for enhancement of the |


receiving water quality commensurate with present and    I


proposed future water uses and must be consistent with   j

                                                         i
the requirements of State law.  In those areas where


noncompliance with the standards is determined to exist


as the result of overflows of sanitary wastewater in


storm runoff, the Commission is requiring the best


practicable treatment or control no later than June 1,


1977.


          Recommendation 15.  The States institute


necessary controls  with respect to chlorinated hydro-


carbon insecticides.


          Act 233,  Public Acts of 1959, as last amended


by Act 91,  Public Acts of 1968,  provides for the licensing


of persons  engaged  in the business of applying pesticides


and economic  poisons  out of doors, with the licensing

-------
 	439



                    R. J.  Courchaine




 program being  administered "by  the  Director  of  the Michi-


 gan Department  of Agriculture.  The act further  estab-


 lishes an Advisory Committee to consult with and aid  the


 Director in the administration of  the act.  The  committee


I is composed of  representatives of  the Department of Pub-
|

j lie Health, Department  of Natural  Resources, the Aero-
!

! nautics Commission,  the Water  Resources Commission, and

I
I the Pesticide Research  Center  of Michigan State University


           Based upon agricultural  research  at  Michigan
I

I State University, the Michigan Department of Agriculture
I
|
j was advised that almost all uses of DDT in  Michigan could
I

j be replaced by  using other generally less persistent


 pesticides.  A  regulatory action cancelling registrations


 for the general sale of DDT followed, effective June  27,


 1969-


           A copy of Act 91, Public Acts of  1968, is


 attached as Appendix N.


           Recommendation  16.


           Uniform State requirements for controlling


 wastes from watercraft be adopted.


           As previously reported,  the Michigan Water


 Resources Commission in January 1968 adopted rules and

-------
                                                       460




                    R. J. Courchaine




|  regulations  to  control pollution from marine toilets  on



  watercraft.   The  rules do not allow the macerator-
i


!  chlorinator  and do authorize the use of holding tanks



  or  incinerators.  The rules became effective January  1,



i  1970,,  and  public  acceptance of this program has generally



I  been  encouraging.  Private marina operators are beginning
i
I
i  to  install pump-out stations and treatment facilities

i
  where  these  are needed, and the Michigan Waterways Com-



  mission has  accelerated its program to provide similar
\
\

j  facilities at State harbors of refuge on the Great Lakes.

i
i
!  Two State-assisted marinas  (one at Marquette and one at

i

I  Ontonagon) are planning to  install pump-out stations on



i  Lake Superior.

i
           Recommendation 17.   The dumping of polluted


  dredged material into Lake  Superior be prohibited.



           Act 247, Public Acts  of 1955,  as amended,



  authorized the former Department of Conservation to regu-



  late the deposition of materials on State bottom lands.



 All requests  for deposition of  materials on such lands ar



 evaluated  to  determine,  prior  to the issuance of a permit



 whether the material  to  be  deposited contains substances


 which  will  cause pollution.

-------
 	461


                    R. J. Courchaine



           Recommendation 18.  Programs "be developed by


 appropriate State and Federal agencies to control soil


 erosion in the basin.


           Under the authority vested in the Department


 of Natural Resources to protect and conserve the natural


 resources of the State, permits to allow the construction


 of culverts, bridges, road improvement projects involv-


 ing public waters and structures affecting navigation
I

| must be issued under Act 211, Public Acts of 1965 by the


 Hydrological Survey Division of the Bureau of Water


 Management.  This same Division issues permits when


 underground utility projects are to cross or be within


 50 feet of a stream, lake or reservoir.  The objective is


 to insure good construction practices so that water-


 courses are protected from siltation and unreasonable


 obstruction to flow.  Portions of the "Handbook of


 Specifications for the Protection of Natural Resources"


 which outlines procedures to prevent siltation are pre-


 sented in Appendix 0.


           Under provisions of Act 296, Public Acts of


 1936, Michigan has been divided into 82 soil conserva-


 tion districts.  In the Lake Superior Basin these districts

-------
                   R. J. Courchaine






 have  developed  programs with highway construction  firms




 and utilities to help reduce erosion during construction.




 Similar  programs are being developed to deal with  sub-




 dividers  and shopping center developers.  The districts




 urge  landowners to have provisions written into easements




 that  require pipeline companies to restore topsoils  after




 the completion  of construction.



          Recommendation 19.  The discharge of visible




 oil from  any source be eliminated.




          Discharges which cause visible films of  oil,




 gasoline  or related materials on public waters are not




 permitted under any of the water uses listed in the




 Interstate Water Quality Standards adopted by the  Michi-




 gan Water Resources Commission on June 28, 1967.




          There are no known potential sources of  major




 spills of oil or other hazardous materials in the  Michi-




 gan portion of the Lake  Superior Basin.




          Now,  changes in other programs.




          Michigan's  Clean Water Bond Program.




          The bond program that was described in Chapter




1 of Michigan's  report to the first session has gotten




under  way.  In  June  1969 the Michigan State Legislature

-------
                    R. J.  Courchaine


| passed  implementing  legislation  to provide for  spending

 $285 million  of  the  bond  proceeds for  sewage  treatment

 works and  intercepting  sewers.   In July  1969  implement-

 ing legislation  was  passed  to  authorize  the use of the

 remaining  $50 million for grants to assist in financing

 construction  of  collecting  sewer systems.

            A priority list of projects  has been  developed

 and has been  approved by  the Commission  and the Michigan

 Legislature.  At each monthly  meeting  of the  Commission

 a  report is presented which lists changes in  the status

 of grant offers  and  developments since the previous

 meeting and summarizes  all  action to date.  The report

 submitted  at  the April  1970 meeting is included in

| Appendix P.
j
            Water  use  designation  for upper peninsula

 waters previously exempted.

            After  issuance  of the Attorney General's

 opinion. Number  4590 described in Chapter 1 on Michigan's

 report to  the first  session, the Michigan Water Resources

 Commission held  a public hearing on August 20,  1969, on

 the proposed water use  designations for those waters

 previously exempted.  The recommendations resulting from

-------
                   R. J. Courcbaine






the hearing and previous staff recommendations were




adopted by the Commission on November 19,  19^9^ and




are presented in Appendix Q.



          That ends my report,  Mr.  Chairman.




          (Which said report follows:)

-------
                                                     465
    FOR THE RECONVENED CONFERENCE
            SECOND SESSION
                  ON
  POLLUTION OF THE INTERSTATE WATERS
                  OF
LAKE SUPERIOR AND ITS TRIBUTARY BASIN
 (MINNESOTA - WISCONSIN - MICHIGAN)
              CALLED BY
 MURRAY STEIN, CONFERENCE CHAIRMAN
     DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
      STARTING APRIL 29, 1970
         DULUTH, MINNESOTA
             ON BEHALF OF
                 THE
 MICHIGAN WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION
   DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
                 AND
 MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH
              APRIL 1970

-------
                                                                       466
                MICHIGAN WATER RESOURCES COMMISSION
John E. Vogt, Chairman, representing the Director, Michigan Department
     of Public Health

Stanley Quackenbush, Vice Chairman, representing the Director, Depart-
     ment of Agriculture

Gerald E. Eddy, representing the Director, Department of Natural
     Resources

John P. Woodford, representing the State Highway Commission

George F. Liddle, representing Municipal Groups

John H. Kitchel, representing Organized Conservation Groups

Jim Gilmore, representing Industrial Management  Groups
                                  Ralph W. Purdy
                                  Executive Secretary

-------
                                                                         46?
Purpose







     At the first session which began in Duluth, Minnesota on May 13,



1969, a joint report was submitted on behalf of the Michigan Water



Resources Commission and the Michigan Department of Public Health which



outlined various state programs to abate pollution and enhance the



quality of the waters of Lake Superior and its tributaries.





     This current report to be presented at the second session,  will



describe programs undertaken by Michigan to implement the state-oriented



recommendations of the Secretary of the Department of the Interior stemming



from the first session.  Information in this report related to these



recommendations has been reviewed, up-dated and amplified.

-------
                                                                                      468
                               RECOMMENDATION^

          A Technical  Committee to evaluate water quality criteria for
          Lake Superior be  formed of  the conferees and such representa-
          tives as  they may designate, within two weeks of the Executive
          Session.   The purpose of the Committee is to develop Particular
          water quality criteria as guidelines for modification ot tne
          Federal-State Water Quality Standards.  The provision of the
          necessary secretarial assistance to the Committee will De me
          responsibility  of the Federal conferee.  The Committee may
          coordinate its  activities with other committees or agencies,
          or engage consultants, as it determines appropriate.  At the
          next session of the conference, the Committee will report to
          the conferees on  recommendations agreed upon for changing or
          modifying existing water quality criteria to reflect desired
          quality conditions in Lake  Superior.

      The Technical Committee has been formed and has met on three separate occasions.

 Two staff members  of  the Michigan Water Resources Commission have represented

 Michigan at all meetings of the Technical Committee.  The chairman of the com-

 mittee,  Dale Bryson of the  Federal Water Pollution Control Administration, will

 present  a report on the recommendations of the committee at the reconvened con-

 ference,  second session.


                               RECOMMENDATION 4

          The  FWPCA and the States substantially strengthen water quality
          surveillance plans for the Lake Superior Basin to insure that
         plans  are  sufficiently sensitive to monitor changes in water
         quality.   The FWPCA and the States are requested to report to
          the  conferees at the next session of the conference concerning
         their program.

     Michigan's water quality surveillance programs for the Lake Superior Basin

were described in detail in Chapter V of the "Report on Water Pollution Control  in

the Michigan Portion of the Lake  Superior Basin and Its Tributaries".  This report

was submitted at the conference called by the Secretary of the Interior on pollu-

tion of Lake Superior and its  tributary basin in May 1969.  An updating of the

information presented in this  chapter and in Appendices L, M, N, 0 and P of the  first

report is included in Appendices  A,  B,  C,  D and E of this report.  Data from the tribu-

tary monitoring program and bacteriological monitoring program have been placed  in

                                      -3-

-------
                                                                                   469
STORE!.  During the summer of 1969 two or three algae samples were collected from

four locations in Lake Superior to provide qualitative and quantitative algal data.

This data is stored in STORET and is shown in Appendix F.


                               RECOMMENDATION 5

         Secondary biological waste treatment or its equivalent be provided
         by all municipalities discharging directly to or affecting Lake
         Superior or its bays or harbors or interstate tributary streams.
         This action is to be accomplished by January 1974 or earlier if
         required by Federal-State Water Quality Standards.

     On April 7, 1970 letters were sent to municipalities now having primary treat-

ment and affecting Lake Superior or its bays or harbors explaining that they would

be required to provide secondary biological waste treatment or its equivalent by

not later than January 1974 and 80% reduction of total phosphorus by January 1975.

The letter requested each municipality to transmit formal verification of their

intent to voluntarily comply with these pollution control requirements.  A Stipula-

tion, including performance schedules, will be developed when these letters are

received.  If verification is not received, the Commission will initiate procedures

leading to the issuance of a Final Order of Determination to insure that the re-

quirements of the conference are met timely.  A copy of the letter sent to the

municipalities is included in Appendix G.


                               RECOiMENDATION 6

         Continuous disinfection be provided throughout the year for all
         municipal waste treatment plant effluents which are discharged
         to or affect Lake Superior or its bays or harbors or interstate
         tributaries.  This action is to be accomplished as soon as
         possible and not later than May 1970.

     In January 1967, a policy was adopted by the Michigan Department of Public

Health requiring year-round disinfection of waste effluent from all municipal

treatment plants prior to discharge to the surface waters of the state.  This

program is in full force and effect at all such communities within the Lake

                                      -4-

-------
                                                                                     470
 Superior basin.   In addition,  growing numbers of communities are instituting

 bacteriological  testing programs  as  a check on chlorine residuals and regimens.

 Appendix H lists the 1969  bacteriological quality of municipal waste dischargers

 to the Michigan  portion of the Lake  Superior Basin.


                                RECOMMENDATION 7

          Continuous disinfection  be  provided for industrial effluents con-
          taining pathogenic organisms or organisms which indicate the
          presence of such  pathogens  which are discharged directly to or
          affect  Lake Superior  or  its bays or harbors or interstate tributaries.
          This action should be accomplished as soon as possible and not
          later than May 1970.

      Where a public health hazard can be anticipated or shown to exist from an in-

 dustrial waste effluent, disinfection of the waste is required prior to discharge.


                                RECOMMENDATION 8

          Waste treatment be provided by municipalities to achieve at
          least 80 percent  reduction  of total phosphorus from each State.
          This action  is to be  accomplished by January 1975 or earlier if
          required by  Federal-State Water Quality Standards.  At the next
          session of the conference,  the conferees will present a detailed
          time schedule  for  their proposed programs.

      On April 7,  1970 letters were sent to municipalities explaining that they would

 be  required  to install  and operate facilities  for achieving a minimum of 80% removal

 of  total phosphorus from their wastes by not later than January 1975.  The letter to

 municipalities now having primary treatment also suggests that their engineers

 evaluate the need for providing additional treatment in light of the State's Intra-

 state Water Quality Standards.   The letters requested each municipality to transmit

 formal verification of their intent to voluntarily comply with these pollution con-

 trol requirements.  A Stipulation, including performance schedules, will be developed

when these letters are received.  If such verification is not received, the Commission

will initiate procedures leading to the  issuance of a Final Order of Determination

to assure that the requirements of the conference are met timely.  Copies of the

letters sent to municipalities  are included in Appendix I.

                                      -5-

-------
                              RECOMMENDATION 9

         Discharges of compatible industrial wastes to municipal sewer
         systems be encouraged.  Industries not connected to municipal
         sewer systems provide treatment equivalent to that of munici-
         palities so as not to cause degradation of Lake Superior water
         quality.  This action is to be accomplished by January 1974 or
         earlier if required by Federal-State Water Quality Standards.

     Michigan has had a long standing program that encourages the discharge of

industrial wastes to municipal collection and treatment systems where such wastes

are compatible or can be made compatible by pretreatment.


     Appendix J includes a description of the type of waste treatment provided

by industries, the status of their treatment and any abatement action being taken

against these industries.  There are currently three industries listed which have

a total of five discharges directly to Lake Superior.   All three have satisfactory

abatement programs which adequately control the quality of their discharges.



      A recent amendment to Act 245, Public Acts  of 1929,  requires that every in-

 dustrial or commercial entity which discharges  liquid wastes  into any public lake

 or stream shall have waste treatment  facilities  under the  control of  operators

 certified by the Commission.   The  rules  of certification  are  contained in Appendix
                              RECOMMENDATION  10

          Each State water pollution  control  agency make necessary cor-
          rections  to  the list in Appendix A  (U. S. Department of the
          Interior  report "An  Appraisal of Water Pollution in the Lake
          Superior  Basin", April 1969) of municipal and industrial waste
          discharges to  the  Lake Superior Basin.  In addition, informa-
          tion should  be provided on  each source to indicate whether it
          discharges pollutants, including nutrients, that have a dele-
          terious effect on  Lake Superior water quality.  Detailed action
          plans for treatment  of all wastes having deleterious effects
          should be developed  where not already completed.  Such plans
          shall identify the principal characteristics of the waste
          material  now being discharged, the proposed program for con-
          struction or modification of remedial facilities, and a time-


                                      -6-

-------
                                                                                   472
          table for  accomplishment,  giving target dates in detail.  This
          list shall be presented  to the conferees at the next session
          of the conference.

      Appendix J lists the industrial waste effluent dischargers within the Lake

 Superior basin while Appendix L lists the municipal waste effluent dischargers.

 The tables  in these appendices summarize information on the type of discharge,

 type of treatment provided, improvement needs and the program for remedial action

 where such  is needed.  These tables are revised editions of those originally sub-

 mitted in Appendices I and J of "Report on Water Pollution Control in the Michigan

 Portion of  the Lake Superior Basin  and its Tributaries".


                             RECOMMENDATION 11

          Unified collection systems serving contiguous urban areas be
          encouraged.


                             RECOMMENDATION 12

          Each of the State's water pollution control agencies accelerate
          programs to provide for the maximum use of area-wide sewage
          facilities to discourage  the  proliferation of small treatment
          plants  in  contiguous urbanized areas and foster the replacement
          of septic  tanks with adequate collection and treatment.

     Act  228, Public Acts of 1967, is  an act to  regulate the subdivision of land,

 and to promote the public health by providing authority to the Michigan Department

 of  Public Health to approve  subdivision developments not served by public sewers,

 contingent on the suitability of soils.   This new program has already had a

beneficial effect in accelerating  municipal  collection and disposal systems in

nearby developing areas  and  preventing use of septic tank-tile field systems in

unsui tab le are as.


     Act 329,  Public Acts of 1966, as  amended, establishes authority to provide

state grants for sewage  treatment  facilities  in  conjunction with federal grants

under United States  Public Law  84-660,  as  amended.   Pertinent provisions of Act

329 dealing  with unified waste  collection and treatment programs  are as follows:

                                      -7-

-------
"Sec. 7.  Effective July 1, 1968 a grant shall not be made until
the local agency's governing body has adopted and submitted to the
water resources commission a comprehensive long-range plan for the
control of pollution in the area within its jurisdiction, herein-
after referred to as the official plan.  If more than 1 local agency
has authority to provide service for sewage collection in the same
area, the required plan may be submitted jointly by the local agencies
concerned or by 1 local agency with the concurrence of the others.

"Sec. 8.  An official plan shall:

     (a)  Provide for timely construction of sewage treatment
         facilities which will prevent the discharge of un-
         treated or inadequately treated sewage or other wastes
         as defined by Act No. 245 of the Public Acts of 1929,
         as amended, being sections 323.1 to 323.12a of the
         Compiled Laws of 1948, into the waters of the state.

     (b)  Provide for adequate planning, zoning, population
         projections and engineering and economic studies to
         delineate with all practicable precision those portions
         of the area which public sewerage systems may reason-
         ably be expected to serve within 10 years, and within
         20 years, and any areas in which the provision of such
         services is not reasonably foreseeable.

     (c)  Be in compliance with the state pollution control plan
         required by United States Public Law 84-660, as amended.

     (d)  Set forth a time schedule and proposed method of fin-
         ancing, construction and operation of the pollution
         control system.

     (e)  Be reviewed by the official planning agencies having
         jurisdiction within the local agency, including the
         regional planning agency, if any, for consistency
         with programs of planning for the area, which reviews
         shall be transmitted to the water resources commission
         with the plan.

"Sec. 10.  (1)   The water resources commission may approve the official
plan as submitted or, if it finds the plan to be inconsistent with
proper local or regional water pollution control, it may return the
plan for appropriate modification.  Where more than one local agency
is involved in an official plan and the local agencies are unable
to agree upon an official plan which the commission will approve,
the commission shall develop the necessary official plan.

    (2)  The commission may provide technical assistance to local
         agencies in coordinating official plans.

    (3)  The commission shall cooperate with all appropriate federal,
         state, interstate and local agencies and with appropriate
         private organizations."

-------
                              RECOMMENDATION  15

          Each State water pollution control  agency list the municipalities
          or communities  having combined sewers.  The listing should include
          a proposed plan for minimizing bypassing so as to utilize to tne
          fullest extent  possible  the capacity of interceptor sewers tor
          conveying combined flow  to treatment facilities. _The States are
          requested to  report on the listing  of municipalities at the next
          conference session.   Construction of separate sewers or other
          remedial action to prevent pollution from this source is to be
          completed by  December 31,  1979, or  earlier if required by Federal-
          State Water Quality Standards.


                              RECOMMENDATION  14

          Existing combined sewers be separated in coordination with all
          urban reconstruction projects except where other techniques can
          be applied to control pollution from combined sewer overflows.
          Combined sewers  should be prohibited in all new developments.

      Appendix M includes  a list of municipalities having  combined  sewers.


      In its supervisory  capacity over municipal waste collection and treatment

 systems,  the Michigan  Department of Public Health continues to promote the most

 effective utilization  of  these systems.  Adjustable regulating devices at points

 of combined overflow are one of a number of techniques  utilized to  make use of

 system  storage capacities and minimize  combined overflows.


      In Michigan's water quality standards  program and  plan of implementation, the

 Commission has developed a policy wherein all new sewerage systems  are to be

 developed on  the basis of separate sewers  for storm water and sanitary waste waters.

 Whenever  feasible, separated sanitary wastewater systems are not to be discharged

 into existing combined systems.  If such a  discharge  does  occur, control facilities

 must be developed on the combined system to provide for enhancement of the receiving

water quality commensurate with present and proposed future water uses and to be

 consistent with the requirements of state  law.   In those areas where noncompliance

with the standards is  determined to exist  as the result of overflows of sanitary

waste water in storm runoff, the Commission is requiring the best practicable

 treatment or control no later than June 1,  1977,

                                      -q-

-------
                                                                                   475
                             RECOMMENDATION IS

         The States institute necessary controls to ensure that the con-
         centration of DDT in fish not exceed 1.0 micrograms per gram;
         DDD not exceed 0.5 micrograms per gram; Dieldrin not exceed 0.1
         micrograms per gram and all other chlorinated hydrocarbon
         insecticides, singly or combined, should not exceed 0.1 micro-
         grams per gram, * (limits apply to both muscle and whole body
         and are expressed on the basis of wet weight of tissue).  Other
         such environmental standards for insecticides in the Lake Superior
         Basin be established upon agreement by the States and the FWPCA
         after establishing an intensive monitoring program.

     Act 233, Public Acts of 1959, as last amended by Act 91, Public Acts of 1968,

provides for the licensing of persons engaged in the business of applying pesticides

and economic poisons out of doors, with the licensing program being administered by

the Director of the Michigan Department of Agriculture.  The act further establishes

an Advisory Committee to consult with and aid the Director in the administration of

the act.  The committee is composed of representatives of the Department of Public

Health, Department of Natural Resources, the Aeronautics Commission, the Water

Resources Commission, and the Pesticide Research Center of Michigan State University.


     Based upon agricultural research at Michigan State University the Michigan

Department oi7 Agriculture was advised that almost all uses of DDT in Michigan could

be replaced by using other, generally less persistent materials.  A regulatory

action cancelling registrations for the general sale of DDT followed, effective

June 27, 1969.


     A copy of Act 91, Public Acts of 1968 is attached as Appendix N.


                             RECOMMENDATION 16

         Uniform State requirements for controlling wastes from the
         watercraft under such State's jurisdiction should be adopted.
         These requirements should generally conform with the require-
         ments approved by the conferees to the Lake Michigan (Four
         State)  Enforcement Conference.   Commensurate interstate re-
         quirements controlling the discharge of wastes from commercial
         vessels should be the responsibility of the Federal Government.
         The States and the FWPCA are requested to report on this
         recommendation to the conferees at the next conference session.

                                      -10-

-------
      As previously reported,  the  Michigan Water Resources Commission in January 1968

 adopted rules and regulations to  control pollution from marine toilets on watercraft.

 The rules do not allow the  macerator-chlorinator and do authorize the use of holding

 tanks or incinerators.   The rules became effective January 1, 1970 and public

 acceptance of this program  has  generally been encouraging.  Private marina operators

 are beginning to install pump-out stations and treatment facilities where needed

 and the Michigan Waterways  Commission has accelerated its program to provide similar

 facilities at state harbors of  refuge on the Great Lakes.  Two state assisted  marinas

 (one at Marquette and  one at  Ontonagon) are planning to install pump-out stations on

 Lake Superior.


                              RECOMMENDATION 17

          The  dumping of polluted dredged material into Lake Superior be
          prohibited.

      Act 247, Public Acts of  1955, as amended,  authorized the former Department  of

 Conservation  to regulate the deposition of materials  on state bottom lands.  All

 requests  for deposition of materials on such bottom lands  are evaluated to determine,

 prior to  the issuance of a permit, whether  the material to be deposited contains

 substances which will cause  pollution.


                            RECCMCNDATION 18

         Programs be developed by  appropriate State and Federal agencies to
         control soil erosion  in the Basin.   The Wisconsin conferees will,
         before the next session of  the conference, distribute information
         to the other conferees  concerning  the action plan developed by
         the Red Clay Interagency  Committee,  and will report on the activ-
         ities of the Red Clay Interagency  Committee  at the next conference
         session.   Following this  report the  conferees will give this matter
         further consideration with  a view  toward making specific recommenda-
         tions.

     Under the authority vested  in the  Department of  Natural Resources to protect

and conserve the natural  resources of the state, permits to allow the construction


                                     -11-

-------
                                                                                    >477
of culverts, bridges, road improvement projects involving public waters and



structures affecting navigation must be issued under Act 211, Public Acts of 1965



by the Hydrological Survey Division of the Bureau of Water Management.  This same



Division issues permits when underground utility projects are to cross or be within



50 feet of a stream, lake or reservoir.  Ihe objective is to insure good construction



practices so that watercourses are protected from siltation and unreasonable ob-



struction to flow.  Portions of the "Handbook of Specifications for the Protection



of Natural Resources" which outlines procedures to prevent siltation are presented



in Appendix 0.





     Under provisions of Act 296, Public Acts of 1936 Michigan has been divided



into 82 soil conservation districts.  In the Lake Superior basin these districts



have developed programs with highway construction firms and utilities to help



reduce erosion during construction.  Similar programs are being developed to deal



with subdividers and shopping center developers.  The districts urge land owners



to have provisions written into easements that require pipeline companies to restore



topsoils after the completion of construction.








                             REGOMMENDATICN 19



         The discharge of visible oil from any source be eliminated.



     Discharges which cause visible films of oil, gasoline or related materials



on public waters are not permitted under any of the water uses listed in the Inter-



state Water Quality Standards adopted by the Michigan Water Resources Commission




on June 28, 1967.





     There are no known potential sources of major spills of oil or other hazardous




materials in the Michigan portion of the Lake Superior basin.
                                      -12-

-------
                                                                                   478
                            Changes in Other Programs

 Michigan's  Clean Water Bond Program
      The bond program that was described in Chapter 1 of Michigan's report to the
 first session has gotten underway.  In June 1969 the Michigan State Legislature
 passed implementing legislation to provide for spending $285 million of the bond
 proceeds for  sewage treatment works and intercepting sewers.  In July 1969 imple-
 menting legislation was passed to authorize the use of the remaining $50 million
 for  grants  to assist in financing construction of collecting sewers.

      A priority list of projects has been developed and has been approved by the
 Commission  and the Legislature.  At each monthly meeting of the Commission a report
 is presented which lists changes in the status of grant offers and developments
 since  the previous month's meeting and summarizes all action to date.   The report
 submitted at  the April 1970 meeting is included in Appendix p.

Water  Use Designation for Upper Peninsula Waters Previously Exempted
     After issuance of the Attorney General's  Opinion,  Number 4590 described in
 Chapter 1 on Michigan's  report to the  first session,  the Michigan Water Resources
Commission held a public hearing on August 20,  1969 on the proposed water use des-
ignations for those waters previously  exempted.   The  recommendations resulting
from the hearing and previous  staff recommendations were adopted by the Commission
on November 19,  1969 and are presented in Appendix Q.
                                      -13-

-------
                                                                       479
                             APPENDIX A
Bacteriological Data for Lake  Superior Waters Along Michigan's Coastline

-------
                                  MAP  |
                         LAKE    SUPERIOR
                   BEACH   SAMPLING  LOCATIONS
1.   Little G iris
     Pt. Park
2.   Black River Park
3.   Porcupine Mts.
     State Park
Ontonagon Twp.
 Park
Stanford Twp.
 Park
McLain  State
Park
 9.
10.
Ft.  WMkins      11 .
 State  Park      12.
Baraga  State     13.
 Park
Arvon Twp. Park  14.
Marquette
Mun i s ing
Grand Marais
Lake Superior
 Camp Grounds
Bay V i ew
                                                                                                cc
                                                                                                o

-------
                                       TABLE  I

                 SUMMARY  OF  BACTERIOLOGICAL DATA  FOR LAKE SUPERIOR WATERS
                      ALONG  MICHIGAN'S UPPER  PENINSULA COASTLINE
1967  Results
1968  Results
1969 Results
Sampl i ng
Locat ion
1 . Little Girls
Pt. Park
2. Black River
Park
3. Porcupine Mts.
State Park
4. Ontonagon Twp.
Park
5. Stanford Twp.
Park
6. McLain State
Park
7. Ft. Wi Ikins
State Park
8. Baraga State
Park
9. Arvon Twp.
Park
10. Marquette
1 1 . Muni s ing
12. Grand Marais
13. Lake Superior
Camp Grounds
14. Bay View



Min.
230

230

230

230

230

<30

<30

<30

<30

<30
<30
91
91

<30



Max.
930

230

930

230

230

230

210

930

1,500

9,300
91
91
430

91


Geo.
Mean
462

230

385

230

230

41

52

206

212

527
519
91
198

53


No. of
Samples
2

2

5

2

2

7

6

4

2

2
2
1
2

2



Min.
36

1,500

36

<30

<30

<30

<30

230

430

73
<30
<30
<30

<30



Max.
1 ,500

24,000

2,300

2,300

430

l ,500

930

2,300

2,300

2,300
24,000
<30
360

750


Geo.
Mean
246

4,337

287

313

130

1 10

42

822

994

237
684
30
63

80


No. of
Samples
4

4

8

4

4

8

12

4

2

8
8
3
6

8



Min.
30

9

73

30

30

30

30

36

30

30
30
3
3

3



Max.
230

930

750

230

230

36

230

2300

73

4300
230
360
930

230


Geo.
Mean
51

98

164

71

52

32

43

169

37

181
57
36
52

49


No. of
Samples
6

6

6

6

6

6

6

7

6

6
6
6
6

6 -fr
00
H

-------
                                                  482
         APPENDIX B
Radioactivity Sample Results

-------
                RADIOACTIVITY  SAMPLE RESULTS
                           WATER  INTAKE
                       MARQUETTE,  MICHIGAN
                      MICROMICROCURIES / LITER
Year January   February March   Apr!1   May

1959
I960
1961
t-O
V 1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
Act. % +*
0
0
0

4 53
0
2 105
6 37
10 23
4 53
<1 -

Act. % +
2 80
0
0

4 53
6 28
4 53
< 1
< 1


0
Act. % + Act. % + Act. % +
0 — 0
3 53 4 45
0 0 0 —

0 — 3 53 0 —
4 53 0 7 28
<} -
6 37 <1 -- <1 --
6 37 3 37 <1
<1 — <1 — <]
*] - <1 -
0
Act. % + Act. % + Act. % + Act. % + Act. % + Act. % + Act. % +
0 -- 0 -- 0 -- 0 6 140 5 35
3 60 0 o — • 0 -- 0 -- 0 --
0 — 0 0 — 4 53 6 28 4 53 7 23

11 16 0 0 — 5 37 19 10 0 -- 0
15 12 10 19 8 23 4 53 0 — 0