REPORT
                 on the
        ILLINOIS RIVER SYSTEM
 EFFECTS ON  WATER QUALITY
       OF  RECOMMENDED
    IMPROVEMENT MEASURES
              January 1963

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
            Public Health Service
     Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control
       Great Lakes-Illinois River Basins Project

-------
                      REPORT




                      ON THE




               ILLINOIS RIVER SYSTEM
             EFFECTS ON WATER QUALITY




        OF RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENT MEASURES
                   January 1963




U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,  EDUCATION, AND WELFARE




               Public Health Service




  Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control




     Great Lakes-Illinois River Basins Project

-------
              EFFECTS ON WATER QUALITY OF RECOMMENDED
                        IMPROVEMENT MEASURES

                          TABLE OF CONTENTS


SECTION                                                 PAGE


INTRODUCTION                                               1

TREATMENT OF MUNICIPAL WASTES                              3

     Secondary Treatment

     Chlorination

          Bacterial Reduction

          BOD Reduction

INDUSTRIAL WASTES                                          9

     Treatment

     Industrial Waste Ordinances

COMBINED SEWER SPILLAGE                                   10

INTEGRATION OF DECREASED WASTE LOADS                      11

SUMMARY                                                   12

REFERENCES                                                lU

TABLES

-------
                          INTRODUCTION
       A previous report, "Water Quality Conditions,, "(l) described
the existing condition of the Illinois River System as determined
from physical, chemical, biological, and bacteriological
determinations.  Another report, "Water Quality Goals,"(2) set
forth desirable water quality goals for these waters.   A third
report, "Recommended Measures for Improving V7ater Quality/'(3)
discussed possible improvements and recommended those  that were
considered reasonable and feasible.  The purpose of this report
is to discuss the effects which certain recommended measures can
be expected to produce.  The effects are presented as  changes in
bacterial or organic loads currently being placed on the river
system.  The organic pollution loads are stated in terms of
Population Equivalent (PE) and in terms of pounds of ultimate BOD
per day.

       The recommended measures that have been evaluated in thiB-
report are the following:

            No less than secondary treatment should be provided
       for all sewage being discharged to the Upper Illinois
       River System and the main stem below Lockport.

            The Metropolitan Sanitary District (MSD) should
       undertake an extensive study to determine the best
       plan to attain the recommended goal on stream coliform
       density.  The technical practicability of disinfecting
       the canal at several locations and/or the disinfecting
       of treatment plant effluents and storm water overflows
       should be studied.  In this report the technical
       practicability of disinfecting sewage treatment plant
       effluents is considered established.  Chlorination of
       treatment plant effluents is evaluated as a possible
       procedure, and therefore recommended for partial attain-
       ment of the stream coliform density goal and the
       coincident decrease in discharge of BOD.

            Industrial pollution should be decreases! by treat-
       ment at the site if needed or by connection to  a
       municipal' sewer system.

            The recently enacted industrial waste.ordinance
       should be reviewed for possible revisions that  will
       encourage industrial practices which minimize the
       quantity and strength of industrial wastes delivered
       to the MSD sewer system.

-------
            The Metropolitan Sanitary District should
       immediately undertake comprehensive engineer-
       ing studies to determine the best plan for the
       separation of storm and sanitary severs, and the
       plan should be implemented as it becomes available.
       Suggested short-term improvements should be made
       in the meantime.

       Other recommendations that have not been evaluated in this
report are the following:

            The Metropolitan Sanitary District should   .  ;
       continue its present experimental program of
       artificial reaeration of the river system in order
       to determine whether it is practical to increase
       oxygen concentrations by this method under the con-
       ditions that prevail.

            The Metropolitan Sanitary District should
       continue the program for the detection of unknown
       submerged outfalls, illegal connections to storm
       sewers, and other types of illicit connections.

            The use of the canals in the Chicago area for
       cooling water by air conditioning, thermal power,
       and industrial installations should be regulated
       and limited.

            The MSD and other responsible agencies should
       increase the emphasis given to research and
       development programs for improvement of treatment
       techniques and other measures to protect the quality
       of receiving waters.

            The "water year" for computation of the average
       allowable diversion should begin on March 1, and
       should continue for a two-year period if necessary
       for balancing the water account when circumstances
       dictate, to foster better utilization of the
       authorized diversion.

       The evaluated improvement measures will not solve the
problems related to nutrients and alkyl benzene sulfonate (ASS)
(3), and new treatment procedures must be developed to correct the
problems resulting from the discharge of these substances.

-------
                    TREATMENT OF MUNICIPAL WASHES
Secondary Treatment

       It was previously reported that the present municipal waste
load to the river system is 1,450,000 PE (l)(3).  The individual
municipalities have been evaluated with regard to the installation
of secondary treatment facilities.  The estimated discharged PE
load from each of the municipalities after the installation of
secondary treatment facilities is shown in detail in Table 1.  A
summary of the raunicipal loadings by the major subbasin is as
follows:

                           Present  Present   Load After Improvements
                           Raw PE   Load PE       PE     .Pounds per
                           	  	  	  	Day BOD
Illinois River System -
Lake Michigan to Lockport  8,808,400 928,600    889,300   216,000

Illinois River - Lockport
to Grafton (Main Stem)     1,752,400 517,400    379,700    92,500

       In the area above the confluence of the Des Plaines River
and the Sanitary and Ship Canal (Loci-sport), 16 communities or
institutions discharge waste to streams without secondary treat-
ment.  The population of the 16 communities totals 6l,000, and
they•discharge 48,000 PE to the streams.  After installation of
secondary treatment facilities, it is estimated that the waste dis-
charged to the streams from these 16 communities would be
approximately 8,700 PE or 2100 pounds per day ultimate BOD.  This
represents a decrease of about 10,000 pounds,  or 82 per cent
of the municipal waste load from these 16 communities, but only
a 5 per cent decrease in the waste load in the entire area when
the effluent from the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater
Chicago (MSD) is considered.

       Along the main stem between Lockport and Grafton, 84 of
127 communities or institutions discharge waste with less than
secondary treatment. The population of the 84 communities
totals 223,000 and they discharge 170,000 PE to the river.  After
installation of secondary treatment facilities, it is estimated
that the waste discharged to the stream from these communities
would be approximately 33,000 PE.  This is a decrease of 137,000
PE or 33,500 pounds per day of ultimate BOD.  This represents an
80 per cent decres.se in the municipal waste load from these 84

-------
 locations and a 26 per cent reduction in the total municipal
 waste load discharged to the river from all 127 locations
 between Lockport and Grafton.

 Chlorination

        Laboratory studies on the effects of chlorination of
 sewage treatment plant effluents with respect to reduction in
 BOD and reduction in coliform density were carried out by the
 GLIKBP laboratories. Experiments were performed using effluent
 obtained from each of the three plants of the Metropolitan San-
 itary District.  The results of these experiments, as well as
 information available in the literature, are discussed in
 subsequent paragraphs.  From the laboratory findings it was
 estimated that chlorination of the Metropolitan Sanitary Dis-
 trict effluents would result in a 99 per cent reduction in
 coliform density under the conditions specified, and that a
 reduction of about 38,000 pounds of ultimate BOD per day could
 be expected.  Chlorination of MSD effluents alone, without
 elimination of other discharges such as storm water overflows,
 would not reduce the coliform densities in the Upper Illinois
 River. System to the desired water quality goals.

                       Bacterial Reduction

        Table 2 presents calculated levels of coliform densities
 at various sampling points in the Upper Illinois River System
 between Wilmette and the Kankakee River with and without
 chlorination of sewage plant effluent.   In this table,  Column 1
 identifies the location of the sampling point and the average
•flow in cubic feet per second (cfs).   Column 2 presents the
 coliform levels as the geometric mean of about JO individual
 samples at each station observed during the study period,  April
 through August  1961.   Column 3 presents the estimated coliform
 densities that would be expected to result from the combined
 flows of tributaries or known inputs  with the main stream.
 Column h is an estimate of the coliform densities that  would be
 expected following the chlorination of MSD effluents and
 assuming no storm water overflow or other sources.  The estimated
 levels in this column are based on assumptions that such
 chlorination would result in a 99 Per cent* reduction in the
 coliform density of the effluent, and that the mixture  of

 *  This assumption was  applied following laboratory studies  on
 the effects of chlorination on the MSD effluents,  in which  a
 chlorine residual of up to 0.5 mg/1 was observed following  15
 minutes contact time,  which confirmed the  accepted values used
 in sanitary engineering practice

-------
chlorinated effluent with the stream would result in changes
in proportion to those observed in Column 2 'between individual
stations.  Ely applying .the proportionality factor, the
estimated levels in Column h take into account the changes in
the pattern of natural dieoff or multiplication of colifonn
organisms that might take place, under these conditions.  Column
5 is an estimate of colifonn densities that would be expected
following the chlorination of MSB effluents, and includes the
effects of other assumed coliform inputs between stations.
The levels presented in this column were calculated as follows:
The observed densities (Column 2) and calculated densities
(Column-3) were scanned for increases or decreases between
stations.  Wherever an increase occurred that was not due to a
known input such as a tributary inflow or treatment plant dis-
charge; this increase was added arithmetically to the estimated
density of the upstream station (Column 5) to arrive at an
estimate of the density likely to be present at the next station.
Where a decrease occurred, a proportionate decrease was applied
to the estimated density of the upstream station to arrive at
an estimate of the density at the next station. Thus, the
densities estimated in Column 5 reflect the effects of other
sources including storm water overflow discharges.

       In summary, the estimates of colifora density presented
in Column k represent the idealized conditions wherein all
sewage discharged to the Upper Illinois River System would be
treated and chlorinated, and those in Column 5 represent the
chlorination of sewage plant effluent without the elimination
of other discharges including storm water overflows.

       The methods of calculation that were used in arriving
at the estimates presented in Table 2 are illustrated by the
examples that follow:

       Because the first three sampling points, US 3^0.7,
338.6, and 336.9, would not be affected by chlorination of
the treatment plant effluents, no change in coliform density
would be expected,  therefore, the levels observed during the
study period (Column 2) were extended to both Columns 4 and
5-

       Below NS 336.9,. the North Side Sewage Treatment Plant
discharged 391 cfs of treated effluent with an estimated
coliform density of 440,000 per 100 ml.  Combining the flow
at NS 336.9 with the flow from the North Side Plant  and the
respective coliform densities, resulted in a calculated a^/erage
coliform density at the next station, NS 33^.9, of 160,000.

-------
(Plow times conform density, Station A, plus flow times
coliform density of inflow, divided "by combined flow).  This
number was inserted in Column 3 opposite NS 334.9-.  Next, a 99
per cent reduction was applied to the coliform density of the
North Side Plant effluent,  which resulted in an estimated
density of 4,400 per 100 ml.  This was inserted in Columns 4 and
5 opposite the North Side Plant.  Since there was no appreciable
difference between the observed and calculated levels in Columns
2 anffl 3, at NS 334.9, a proportionate change due to chlorination
would be expected in the estimated coliform density at this point;
therefore, combining the flows as before, the estimated density
at NS 334.9 due to chlorination was found to be 6,800 per 100 ml.
This value was inserted in both Columns 4 and 5.

       Between NS 334.9 and NS 333.4 there was an observed
decrease in coliform density of 20,000 per 100 ml.  This decrease
in density was applied to the estimated density of 6,800 calcu-
lated for NS 334.9 as a proportionate decrease, and resulted in
an estimate of 6,000 at NS 333.4.  This number was inserted in both
Columns 4 and 5-

       Between NS 333.4 and NB 331.4 is the confluence of the
North Branch of the Chicago River with the North Shore Channel.
Combining flows of the two streams with the observed coliform
densities, the calculated coliform density at the downstream
station NB 331.4 was 140,000 (Column 3).  Combining flows of the
two streams with the calculated coliform density after chlorina-
tion  at NS 333.4 (6,000) and the observed coliform density of
the tributary (fl,000) resulted in an estimated density of 8,600.
Because the observed value at this station (Column 2) was greater
than the calculated value (Column 3); & proportionate increase
was first applied to 8600, which resulted in a calculated density
of 10,000.  This number was entered in Column 4.  Since the
observed increase of 20,000 at this station could also be due to
other discharges, this increase was added to 8600 to give a
total of 28,600 (rounded to 29,000).  This number was entered in
Column 5 opposite NB 331.4.

       Between KB 331.4 and 329.0 there was an observed increase
in coliform density of 60,000 per 100 ml (Column 2).  This in-
crease was applied first to the calculated density of 10,000
(Column 4) for station NB 331.4 as a proportionate increase,
which resulted in an estimated level of 14,000 for NB 329.0.
This value was entered in Column 4.  It was also assumed that be-
cause of the observed increase between these stations, other
discharges contributed the additional coliform bacteria.  There-
fore the increase of 60,000 was added to the estimated coliform

-------
level (Column 5} for KB 331.^, -which resulted in an estimated
level of 89,000 for Station KB 329.0.  This number was en-
tered in Column 5.

       The estimates of coliform density at subsequent
stations were calculated in this manner.  The estimates in
Column 4, calculated on the basis of proportional changes
as observed during the study, reflect the idealized condition
if all sewage would be fully treated and chlorinated.  The
estimates in Column 5 reflect the effect of chlorination on
the sewage now received and treated at the MSB'plants, and take
into account the effect of existing storm water overflows and
other discharges.

       In comparing the estimated coliform levels presented"
in Columns h and 5 with the interim, water quality goal of
10,000 coliform.bacteria per 100 ml for the Upper Illinois
River System and the ultimate goal of 5,000 coliform bacteria
per 100 ml, it is likely that these goals can be realized
through the corrective measures listed below:

       1.  Chlorination of the effluent of the MSB sewage
              treatment plants. This measure has been
              evaluated as a step leading toward attainment
              of the quality goals.

       2.  Chlorinating any other sewage before it enters the
              river system as storm water overflow or other-
              wise, and possibly

       3.  Additional direct chlorination of the canal
              system itself.

Chlorination of the MSD effluents alone, without the additional
efforts listed above, would result in a partial reduction of
the coliform density of the Upper Illinois River System, but
would not bring the water quality within the recommended goals.

       These calculations cannot be extended at this time be-
yond the headwaters of the Illinois River at the Kankakee
junction because the data obtained on the lower river were
not concurrent with the data used in the upper river calcula-
tions.  However, it is expected that the effects of chlorina-
tion would be extended to the lower river and would be
beneficial in reducing the coliform densities found there.
These benefits would become less apparent as coliform
bacteria are introduced into the main river at downstream
points.

-------
                                                          8

                         BOD Reduction
         Available information (5)(6)(?) indicates that in the
  ordinary practice of sewage disinfection with chlorine, vherein
  a residual of up to 0.5 mg/1 is present after a 15-minute con-
  tact time, a reduction in BOD-can be expected. The quantity of
  BOD reduction to be expected has been expressed as follows:

         .1.  A reduction 0$ two mg BOD for each mg of chlorine
  added.
  cent.
         2.  A percentage BOD reduction varying from 10 to 35 per
f        The experiments performed by the GLIRBP laborabory tended
"! to- confirm the first of the two generalizations expressed  above
 • more so than the second.  These experiments showed that in
 '• terms of chlorine dosage, the BOD reduction could vary from
 • less than one to about three milligrams for each mg of chlorine
  added.  In terms of per cent.BOD reduction, the variations
  ranged from near zero to 73 per cent.  Further study of the
- data revealed a relationship-between chlorine consumption
  (dosage minus residual) and per cent BOD reduction, which in
  effect showed that the percentage of BOD reduction which could
  be expected through chlorination was dependent on the chlorine
  consumed by the treated effluent.  This implies that effluent
  from the activated sludge process having a low chlorine con-
  gumption will have a lower"percentage of BOD reduction than
  yaste water with a higher consumption.  In terms of chlorine
  consumption, one milligram of chlorine consumed could be expect-
  ed to reduce the BOD by two mg, on the average.
  r
  i
  i      These experiments further .indicated an average chlorine
-•  consumption of 1.3 mg/1 by the effluents from the MBD plants.
  This indicates that an average reduction of BOD of 2.6 mg/1
  fyight be expected.

         Based on these experiments, the expected reduction in
  BOD of the effluents from the three MSD plants were calculated
  by applying the above relationship to the total daily flow.
  These calculations, tabulated in Table 3, indicate that a BOD
.. reduction-of 38,000 pounds per day (rounded from 37,TOO) can
  be. achieved with an applied chlorine dosage of 18,3^0 pounds.
  These calculations are based on the BOD values of the plant
  effluents obtained during the April-May, 1961 study of these
  plants.

-------
                        INDUSTRIAL WASTES

Treatment

       It was previously reported that the present known and
evaluated industrial pollution to the river system is 970,000 PE
(l) (3).   Individual industrial plants have been evaluated based
on plant inspections and other available information in order to
determine what decrease in the above industrial waste load is
feasible.  Internal improvements and new and/or improved waste
treatment procedures have been estimated for industries where
applicable.  It has been assumed that some industries will
connect to local sewerage systems when they become available.
Industrial wastes that will be connected to sewerage systems
have been assumed to receive secondary treatment for purposes
of this report.  Industrial wastes connected to the MSB system
have been assumed to receive secondary treatment which currently
reduces the BOD 90 per cent, and therefore, only 10 per cent of
the connected waste load is assumed to be discharged to the river.
Wastes discharged to other sewerage systems have been assumed to
receive secondary treatment giving 85 per cent removal of BOD,
because this degree of removal is generally accepted as being
within the capability of secondary treatment.

       Detailed results showing the industrial pollution to the
river, taking into account the above estimated improvements, are
shown in Table 4.  These results are summarized for the three
major industrial areas as follows:

                   Present Load         Load after Improvements
                       Pounds per                  Pounds per
Area           PE	day BOD           PE	day BOD
Chicago-MSD    291,300    71,000         56,190137500
Joliet         178,000    43,500         76,000       18,500
Peoria-Pekin   400,000    97,500         90,4-50       22,000

    Total      869,300   212,000        222,64-0      54,000

These estimates show that the industrial waste load to the river
can be reduced by approximately 75 per cent.

Industrial Waste Ordinances

       The estimated effect of a program based on an industrial
waste ordinance which includes a method of levying sewer service
charges based on the quantity and quality of industrial wastes

-------
                                                                10
discharged is shown in Table 5-  These estimates are based on
a five-year study made by the City of Cincinnati (8) which
indicated a 13.3 per cent reduction in the BOD load.  It is
assumed that the industrial waste load in the MSB is equal to
90 per cent of the difference between the influent PE at the
MSB plants and the connected population; the other 10 per cent
is considered to be contributed by surface runoff and other
sources.  Eased on these values, it is estimated that the total
load to the sewer system can be decreased by 390>000 ^E.  With
the current treatment plant efficiencies at approximately 90 P6*"
cent, the total load discharged to the streams would then be
decreased by 39,000 PE or about 10,000 pounds per day of ultimate
BOD.

                    COMBINED SEWER SPILLAGE

Chicago Metropolitan Area

       A complete evaluation of the effects of all of the measures
presented for reduction of combined sewer spillage cannot be made
at this time.  Additional studies would be needed to evaluate
several of the methods, as noted below.

       Separation of storm water and sanitary sewage at the source
would eliminate untreated sanitary wastes from the storm water
spillage.  The ultimate BOD load from spillage, as computed in a
previous report (l), is about 56,000 pounds per day, about 16 per
cent of the total load in the Sanitary and Ship Canal.   However,
the portions of the spillage load attributable to sanitary sewage
and to storm runoff have not been determined.  Therefore, the
effect of eliminating the sanitary sewage from the total spillage
cannot be calculated.

       The effect of connecting industrial waste sewers directly
to interceptors, in cases where the plant is located near an
interceptor, would be small in relation to the overall pollution
load.

       The construction of additional sewage treatment facilities
in outlying areas, or the alternative construction of relief
interceptors to serve these areas, would reduce the BOD spilled
to the waterways an estimated 10 per cent in the areas  served.

       The effect of selective interception of wastes would be
small in relation to the total pollution load of the streams.

-------
                                                                11

       Hie provision of adequate capacity at each of the three
main treatment plants is a primary consideration.  The MSB
construction program to increase the capacities of these plants
is considered to be.sufficient for present requirements.  It is
estimated that the planned treatment plant additions would reduce
the BOD spillage about 6000 ultimate pounds per day in an average
year.

       Primary sedimentation tanks for storm water would provide
up to 40 per cent reduction in BOD in the flow through the tanks.
The total effect would depend on the size of the tanks provided,
which would be determined by an economic study.

Lower Illinois River

       Since no studies of sewer systems have been made for cities
in the Lower Illinois River Basin, evaluation of the recommenda-
tions for reduction of combined sewer spillage has not been attempted.
             BiTEGRATION OF DECREASED WASTE LOADS

       Analysis of the main channel from Wilmette to the junction
of the Des Plaines River and the Sanitary and Ship Canal indicates
that the total load is  308,000 pounds per day of ultimate BOD.
This is based on five 30-day sampling periods in April-May, June,
July, and August, 1961, and January, 1962.  This load to the main
stem is from the following sources:

            KS 340.7 (Wilmette Intake)            16,190 pounds per day

            North Side Sewage Treatment Plant     2k,Ok-Q

            North Branch Chicago River             3,210

            Chicago River                         10,850

            West-Southwest Sewage Treatment Plant 122,210

            Calumet-Sag Channel Junction          21,4jO

            Calculated Storm Spillage             56,000

            Industrial Waste Load                 5^,300

                                 Total           308,270 pounds per day

-------
                                                                12

This total load compares favorably with the total load of 353,000
pounds per day of ultimate BOD applied to the main stem and tribu-
taries that was obtained from the inventory of known waste sources
plus calculated storm spillage.

       Table 6 is a summary of the estimated results of the
recommended improvement measures to both the Upper and Lower
Illinois River.  The improvement measures will reduce the ultimate
BOD load to the Upper Illinois River by 122,000 pounds per day.,
and the load to the Lower Illinois River by 136,500 pounds per day.
                            SUMMARY

       The estimated results of the recommended improvements are
summarized in Table 6 and are as follows:

       1.  Adequate secondary treatment at 16 communities or
institutions that are tributary to the river system between Lake
Michigan and Lockport would decrease the pollution load by
approximately 10,000 pounds of ultimate BOD per day.

       2.  Chlorination of the MSD sewage treatment plant effluents
alone would not attain the recommended goal on stream coliform
density, although substantial improvement would result.  The MSD
should undertake an extensive study to determine the best plan to
attain the recommended goal on stream coliform density.  The
feasibility of disinfecting the canal at several locations and/or
disinfecting of treatment plant effluents and storm water overflows
should be studied.

       3.  Chlorination of the MSD sewage treatment plant effluents
would be expected to.decrease ultimate BOD discharges by 38,000
pounds per day.

       k.  Between Lake Michigan and Lockport, the connection of
known inadequately treated industrial wastes to secondary treat-
ment facilities, or adequate on-site treatment, would decrease
the pollution load to the main channel by approximately 58,000
pounds of ultimate BOD per day.

       5.  Enactment of an ordinance allowing the MSD to assess
sewer service charges based on quantity and characteristics of
industrial wastes would induce industries to decrease waste

-------
                                                                13
discharges to the sewage treatment plants.  It is estimated
that this might decrease the discharge of ultimate BOD from
the sewage treatment plants by 10,000 pounds per day.

       6.  The planned additional capacity at the MSB treatment
plants will decrease the ultimate BOD of storm spillage by
an estimated 6000 pounds per day.

       7.  The installation of adequate secondary treatment
facilities at 84 communities or institutions that are now
tributary to the main stem of the Illinois River between
Lockport and Grafton would decrease the pollution load by
approximately 33,500 pounds of ultimate BOD per day.

       8.  Below Lockport, the connection of known inadequately-
treated industrial wastes to secondary treatment facilities
or adequate on-site treatment, would decrease the pollution
load by approximately 103>000 pounds of ultimate BOD per day.

       9.  The combined estimated effect of the improvement
measures discussed herein would be to reduce the ultimate
BOD load to the upper river system from 33^,000 pounds to
21^,000 pounds per day, and to the lower river from 270,000
to 133.»500 pounds per day.

-------
                            REFERENCES
1.   Report on the Illinois River System, Water Quality
     Conditions. U. S. Department of Health, Education
     and Welfare, Public Health Service  (1963)-

2.   Report on the Illinois River System, Water Quality
     Goals. U. S. Department of Health, Education and
     Welfare, Public Health Service (1963).

3.   Report on the Illinois River System, Recommended
     Measures for Improving Water Quality. U. S. Department
     of Health, Education and Welfare, Public Health Service ,
     (1963).

k.   Chlorination of Sewage and Industrial Wastes.  Manual
     of Practice No. 4.  Subcommittee on Chlorination of
     Sewage, Federation of Sewage and Industrial Wastes
     Associations, October 12, 1951-

5.   Warrick, L. F.  Practical Aspects of Sewage and Waste
     Chlorination.  Water and Sewage Works,  98: 179-183  (1951).

6.   Grune, Werner W.  Sewage Chlorination in Review.  Water
     and Sewage Works, 103 R&D:  R283-291  (1956).

7,   Laubusch, Edmund J.  Chlorination of Waste Water.
     Water and Sewage Works, 108:  R350-357  0-959)-

8.   Sewage Disposal . Ninth Annual Report, Cincinnati, Ohio
     (1958), p.19-

-------
                                                          TABLE la

                          REDUCTION IN MUNICIPAL WASTES BY INITIATION OF SECONDARY TREATMENT
                                   ILLINOIS RIVER SYSTEM - LAKE MICHIGAN TO LOCKPORT
Community
Waukegan. Park City
   Trailer Park
Country Side Manor
   Subdiv.
Gilmer
Lincolnshire C.C..
Lockport
Valleyview


Park Side Subdiv.
Worth-Ridgeland Plant
Worth-Oketo Plant
Black Oak-Ross
Schererville
Dyer
Griffith (Part)
Highland (Part)
Munster (Part)
Lincoln Gardens
Receiving
Stream
Skokie Cr>

Des Plaines R.

Des Plaines R.
Cal-Sag Channel
Deep Run Creek
Des Plaines R.
Midlothian Creek
Cal-Sag Channel
Cal-Sag Channel
Cady Marsh-Hart
Cady Marsh-Hart
Hart Ditch
Cady Marsh - Hart
Little Cal. R.
Little Cal. R.
Existing
Raw PE'
Lake County,
1,200
200
100
Will County,
300
5,000
300
Cook County,
2,800
3,800
4,300
Existing
Discharged PE
111. .
800
200
100
111.
300
2,600
100
111.
2,800
3,800
2,800
Final PE with
Secondary Treatment

180
30
15

45
750
45

320
570
645
Lake County./- -Indiana
17,000
1,250
3,600
7,100
5,430
5,150
1^000
15,000
1,000
3,000
5,700
4,880
4,500
650
2,550
185
540
1,065
815
770
150
                                                         58,530
                                                     48,230
8,675

-------
                                                       TABLE  lb
                         REDUCTION  IN MUNICIPAL
                                           MAIN
Cqnmunity
Jbliet
Joliet Fringe-
  yrban-Unincorp.
Smaller Sources  -
  JEhree
Spring Valley
Depue
{smaller Sources-
'  Eight
Gardner
     City
Morris
Smaller Source s-
  Seven
WASTES BY INITIATION OF SECONDARY TREATMENT
STEM - LOCKPORT TO GRAFTON
Receiving
Stream

Spring & Hickory Cr.
I & M Canal, Hickory
Creek


Illinois River
Lake Depue


Trib. to Mazon &
Illinois River
Claypool Cr.
Illinois River
Existing
Raw PE
Will. County, 111.
71,600.

6,000
1,600
Bureau County, 111.
5,300
1,920
4,438
Grundy County, 111.

i,o4i
2,852
7,900
Existing
Discharged PE

50,100

6,100
'1,300

3,710
1,536
3,930


937
2,500
4,500
Final PE with
Secondary Treatment

10,470

900
240

795
288
665


156
428
1,185
         2,881
2,570
432
Smaller Sources-
  ,6ne
Smaller Sources-
  Two
  Kankakee County, 111.

           328
   Kendall County, 111.


           359    .
  290
  320

-------
                                                     TABLE Ic
                        REDUCTION  IN MUNICIPAL WASTES BY INITIATION OF SECONDARY TREATMENT
                                          MAIN STEM  - LOCKPORT TO GRAFTON
Community
Smaller Sources-
  One
Seneca
Marseilles
North Utica
LaSalle
Peru
Smaller Sources-
  Six
Smaller Sources-
  One
Smaller Sources-
  One
Henry
Lacon
Smaller Sources-
  Two
Havana
Receiving
Stream
Rat Run Cr.
Illinois River
Illinois River
Illinois River
Illinois River
Illinois River
Illinois River
       Existing
       Raw PE

  Knox County, 111.
                                                  LaSalle County, 111.
   Lee County, 111.

            306
Livingston County, 111.

            936
 Marshall County, 111.

          2,278
          2,175
Illinois River
   Mason County, 111.
          3,400
Existing
Discharged 'PE
                                                           700
2,302



  250



  840


2,000
1,950

1,290


2,210
             Final PE with
             Secondary Treatment
                                                         120
1,675
4,347
1,014
11,000
10,460
1,257
4,347
1,014
7,150
6,800
251
652
152
1,650
1,569
                                                                                381
                                                                                 46
                                                                                140
                           326

                           215


                           510

-------
                                                     TABLE Id

                        REDUCTION IN MUNICIPAL WASTES BY INITIATION OF SECONDARY TREATMENT
                                          MAIN STEM - LOCKPORT TO GRAFTON
Community
N. Chillicothe
Chillicothe
Rome (U)
El Vista

Bellevue
Smaller Sources-
  Ten
Granville
Smaller Sources-
  Four
Sunnyland
E. Peoria
Creve Coeur
North Pekin
Delavan
Pekin
South Pekin
Smaller Sources-
  Four
Receiving
Stream
Senachwine Cr.
Illinois River
Illinois River
Trib. to Kickapoo
  Cr.
Illinois River
Illinois River
Farm Cr.
Illinois River
Illinois River
Illinois River
Br. of Main Ifcteh
Illinois River
Lost Cr.
  Existing
  Rav PB

  Peoria County., 111.

   2,259
   3,054
   1,347
   2,000
   3,354
  Putnam County, 111.
   1,048

   1,227
Tazewell County, 111.

   1,000
  10,000
   6,684
   2,025
   1,377
  23,000
   1,007

   1,952
Existing
Discharged PE
     2,000
     2,7^0
     1,010
     1,800

     1,405

     2,980


       940

     1,090
       875
     7,500
     5,900
     2,025
     1,300
    16,100
       860

     1,705
Final PE with
Secondary Treatment
         339
         458
         202
         300

         234

         503
         157

         184
         150
       1,500
       1,003
         304
         207
       3,450
         151

         293

-------
                            TABLE le

REDUCTION IN MUNICIPAL WASTES BY INITIATION OF SECONDARY TREATMENT
                  MAIN STEM - LOCKPORT TO GRAPTON

Community
Washburn
Smaller Source s-
One
Hardin
Ashland
Beardstown
Astoria
Receiving
Stream
Snag Cr.


Illinois River
Indiana Cr.
Illinois River
Ditch to. Harris Br.
Existing
Ra-w PE
Woodford County, 111.
1,064

237
Calhoun County, 111.
1,000
Cass County, 111.
1,064
6,294
Fulton County, 111
1,200
Existing
Discharged PE
930

154
650
930
6,294
780
Final PE with
Secondary Treatment
160
"
36
150
160
944
180
  TOTALS
222,344
169,874
33,080

-------
                                                  TABLE 2a
                           ESTIMATED EFFECTS OF CHLORINATION OF SEWAGE EFFLUENTS ON
                            COLIFORM DENSITIES IN THE UPPER ILLINOIS RIVER SYSTEM
Sampling Point.      Avg
     or             Flow
Tributary Inflow    cfs
           Coliform Density
               per 100 ml	
4-month Geometric Mean
Calculated
      (1)
           (2)
   (3)
North Shore Channel and North Branch Chicago River
NS 340.7*
NS 338.6*
NS-336.9*
MSD-NSSTPa
NS 334.9
NS 333.4
NB 333.4*
NB 331.4
NB 329.0
NB 325.8
South Branch,
CH 326.9*
CH 325. 8*
SB 324.3
SB 322.8
SS 320.0
SS 317.3
MSD-WSWb
SS 314.0
ss 307.9
SS 304.1**
cs 304.1**
700
706
710
391
1,110
1,114
48
1,177
1,182
1,194
Chicago River,
566
569
1,770
1,787
1,832
1,848
1,392
3,176
3,215
3,218
641
(200)
(3,500)
(8,200)
440.000
160^000
140,000
(71,000)
160,000
220,000
390,000
and Sanitary and Ship Canal
(680)
(9,100)
200,000
280,000
260,000
230,000
(680,000)
420,000
460,000
270,000
23,000
                                                            160,000


                                                            140,000
                                                            270,000
                                                            430,000
  Estimated Coliform Density
            per 100 ml
Assuming Treatment and Chlorination
of All Sewage  of MSD Plant Effluents
      (4)
                                                ;(2oo)
                                               (3,500)
                                               (4,200)
                                                4,400***
                                                ,6,800
                                                ,6,000
                                              (71,000)
                                               10,000
                                               14,000
                                               25,000
                                                 (680)
                                               (9,100)
                                               15,000
                                               21,000
                                               20,000
                                               18,000
                                                6,800***
                                               13,000
                                               14-000
                                                8^200
                                                5,900
(5)
                                      (200)
                                    (3,500)
                                    (8,200)
                                     4,400***
                                     6,800
                                     6,000
                                   (715000)
                                    29,000'
                                    89,000
                                   260,000
                                      (680)
                                    (9,100)
                                   130,000
                                   210,000
                                   200,000
                                   180,000
                                     6,800***
                                   no, ooo
                                   150,000
                                    88,000
                                    12,000

-------
                                                           TABLE 2b
Campling Point      Avg
    or              Flow
Tributary Inflow    cfs
        Co-Liform Dens ity
          per 100 ml
4-Month Geometric Mean
Calculated
Estimated Coliform Density
       per 100 ml
assuming Chlorination	
    (D                                  (2)                    (3)
South Branch., Chicago River, and Sanitary and Ship Canal  (continued)
  SS 300.5          3,847
  ss 296.2          3,836
  SS 292.1          3,819
  SS 291.1          3,808

Dee Plaines River
  DP 292.7*           290
  -DP 285.8          4,158
  HP 278.0          4,175

Kankakee River
 200,000
 110,000
  61,000
  72,000
  (4,200)
  79,000
  64,000
KR 277.5*
Illinois River
IR 271.5
Calumet River and
CA 332.7*
CA 328.1*
cc 325.8*
CA 327-0*
1C 322.4*
LC 320.2*
LC 320.1
MSD-CalG
cs 317.9
CS 314.9
4,017

8,344
Cal-Sag
275
281
9
282
293
183
434
227
583
603
(20,000)


17,000
Channel

(2,000)
(5,400
(2,300,000
(4,000
(40,000




(150,000)
(51,000)
300,000
120,000
190,000



230,000
 67,000
                                                            42,000
                                                           140,000
  (4)


 6,800
 3,700
 2,100
 2,500
(4,200)
 3,100
 2,500
                                                                                       (20,000)
                                                       4,600
                                                       (2,000)
                                                       (5,400
                                                   (2,300,000
                                                       (4,000
                                                     (40,000
                                                    (150,000
                                                     (51,000
                                                       3,000***
                                                      30,000
                                                      48,000
                                                                            (5)
67,000
37,000
18,000
29,000
(4,200)
39,000
32,000
                                                                         (20,000)
                                               11,000
                                               (2,000
                                               (5,400
                                           (2,3CO,COO
                                               (4,000
                                              (40,000
                                             (150,000
                                              (51,000
                                                3,000***
                                               30,000
                                              100,000

-------
                                                          TABLE 2c
Sampling Point      Avg
    or              Flow
Tributary Inflov    cfs
        Colifonn Density
          per 100 ml
4-Month Geometric Mean
Calculated
Estimated Go-lifOrffl Density
      per 100 ml
assuming Chlorination
     (1)
        (2)
     (3)
Calumet River and Cal Sag Channel  (continued)
  es 311.5          618            110,000
  cs 308.5          623             98,000
  CS 304.1          641             23,000
Illinois Rivera
  IR 271.6        6,620
  IR 270.6        6,620
  IR 263.5        6,770
   28,000
   27,000
   32,000
                                                        28,000
                                                        25,000
                                                         5,900
                      (5)
                                                58,000
                                                52,000
                                                12,000
*    These points, either upstream from MSD discharges  or located on  tributaries, are not
     affected by these discharges.

**   Indicates junction of Calumet-Sag Channel, and  Sanitary and Ship  Canal.

**#  Present MSD effluent reduced "by 99 per cent.

p..  MSD Northside Sewage Treatment Plant Effluent.
t>.  MSD West-Southwest Sewage Treatment Plant  Effluent.
c.  MSD Calumet Sewage Treatment  Plant Effluent.
a.  July 1962 data.

I  ) indicates no influence expected from  chlorination  of MSD effluents.

-------
                                              TABLE 3

                                      MSB Treatment Plant Effluents
                               Estimated BOD Reduction Due to Chlorination
Treatment Plant

Worths i&e
W-SW
Jalumet
Flow
MOD
231
852
138
   Total

Without
Effluent BOD
Chlorination
Ultimate
5 Day BOD"1" BOD
mg/1 Pounds/Day
10.8
16.4
13-5
23,000
180,000
21,700
224,700

With Chlorination
Estimated
5 Day BOD*
mg/1
8.2
13.8
10.9
Ultimate
BOD
Pounds/Day
17,500
152,000
17,500
187,000
BOD
Reduction
Pounds/Day
5,500
28,000
4,200
37,700
Chlorine Requirement
(to 0.5 mg/1 residual)
Pounds/Day
3,460
12,800
2,080
18,340
   Estimated 5 day BOD = 2.6 mg/1 reduction by Chlorination assuming average chlorine  demand of  1.3 mg/1
   for all plants

   Data taken from April-May 1961 study.

-------
                 TABLE 4 a

EFFECTS OF IMPROVEMENTS ON WASTE LOADS TO THE
    ILLINOIS RIVER SYSTEM FROM INDUSTRIES
Map PHS
Location Industrial River
Code Code Mileage
Increased
PE from
Effluent Present PE Present Future Future PE Sewage- Treat-
_MGD (5- Day BOD) Treatment Treatment '(5" Day BOD) ment Plants
NORTH BRANCH CHICAGO RIVER
N-l

N-2
N-3





39

28C
31A

39,
261


1-325.6-3.0

,20Q 1-325.6-2.0
1-325.6-1.4

34C,34B,
,28A

ILLINOIS
0.42

17.50
0.07

0.72

IoVf5
RIVER SYSTEM
11, 500(2) Wone

1,200 Grease
2,100 None

1,500

16,300
AND MINOR TRIBUTARIES
Divert Wastes
to MSD
Sep . None
Divert Wastes
to MSD
Divert Cone. Wastes
to MSD

- LAKE MICHIGAN
0

1200
0

600

"TBoo

1150

0
210

90

I4~50

TO KANKAKEE RIVER
1-1

1-2

1-3

1-4

1-5

20A

22E

20A

29E



1-327-0

1-321.6

1-320.6

1-317.4

1-314.8

9.0

0.18

0.4o

0.17

21.0

3,600(2)

7,000 None

20,000(2)

1,600(2) Oil Sep

144,000

Divert Cone.
Wastes to MSD
Divert Wastes
to MSD
Divert Wastes
to MSD
Improved Oil
Sep.
Divert Wastes
to MSD
10QO

0

0

1000

0

260

700

2000

0

14400


-------
         TABLE
Map PHS
Location Industrial
• Code Code
River
Mileage
Effluent
,MGD,
Present PE
(5 -Day BOD)
Present
Treatment
Future Future PE
Treatment (5-Day BOD)
Increased
PE from
Sewage *Treab-
ment Plants
ILLINOIS RIVER SYSTEM AND MINOR TRIBUTARIES - LAKE MICHIGAN TO
KANKAKEE RIVER
1-6

1-7

1-8
^
i-9


.1-10


i-n


1-12
1-13



39,34l,33E,33B
29E,28B,20F
29A

26H

29A


34H


39


341
28B

39, 341,340, 33E
28A,28C,20R
1-313

1-290

1-289

1-288


1-288


1-286


1-284
1-280



-3

.7-2.4

.8

,9-7.8


.9-0.2


.5-1.0


.5
.0



4

50

3

68


.95

.0

.0

.0


21.0 .


0


0
0

11



.12


.80
.65

• 38

29,000^'

40,000

$£,000

25,000


1,000


2,000


1,000
92,500

4,400

(Cont'd)
Oil and Grease
Sep. sed.
Oil Sep. and
Lagooning
Screening

Oil Sep.

.
Sed. and By-
Product Re-
covery
Sedimentation


Oil Separation
Oil Separation




Divert Wastes
to MSD
Improve Oil
Sep.
Internal Im-
prov. & Sed.
Improve Exist-
ing Treatment
Facilities
Install Oil
Separators

Divert Wastes
to Joliet Dis-
posal Plant
Internal Improv.
Secondary Treat-
merit
Internal Improve-
ments

0

30,000

8,000

19,000


500


0


500
14,000

2,200
-••• '.

2,900

0

0

0


0


i,4oo


0
0

0

190765  387,100
76,200
21,660

-------
                  TABLE
Map PHS
Location Industrial
Code Code
River Effluent Present PE
Mileage ' . MGH (5~Day BOD)
Present
Treatment
Increased
Future Future PE PE from
Treatment (5~Day BOD) Sewage Treat
ment Plants
CALUMET SAG CHANNEL AND TRIBUTARIES
C-l

C-2

C-3

C-4

c-5

C-6


C-7

C-8

C-9


C-10



33C,29B

33E,33C,29B

28c,20Q

28A

20Q

341


28B

33C,33E

20F,24,28A
28B,29E,33A
34A,34B,34H
29A
39,33C,33E
24C,29B,28A

1-303.4-26.6

1-303.4-26.2

1-303.4-25.2-
3-7
1-303.4-25.2

1-303.4-25.1

1-303-4-24.1


1-303-4-21.9

1-303.4-18.0

I-303.4-l6.3-
8.9-11.2

1-303.4-13.3



0*7 C\ TO Oi'VX* *
o ( « u j.y,c.uu
f r\\
85.0 10,000^'

10.0 18,000
/p\
4.0 3,200

0.40 4,400

0.50 3,000


1.50 1,800

48.0 1,500
/ *
8.0 4,700^'


27.0 21,000
94,08 900-


Sed.and Oil
Separation
Sed.and Oil
Separation
Grease Sep.

None

None

Filtration"


None

Sedimentation
and Oil Sep.



Oil Separation



Divert Cone.
Wastes to MSD
Divert Cone.
Wastes to MSD
Internal Improve-
ments
Internal Improve-
ments
Divert Cone.
Wastes to MSD
Divert Cone. Wastes
to MSD and Inter-
nal Improv.
Divert Wastes to
MSD
Improve Existing
Treatment Fac.
Divert Cone. Wastes
to Bloom Township
Sanitary District
Improved Oil Sep.
Internal Improve
and Divert Cone.
Wastes to MSD
5,200

2,500

9,000

1,600

500

500


0

700

750


14,000
500


1,400

750

0

0

399

200


180

0

320


0
4o

• • j, • •
316.08    87,700
35,250
3,280

-------
TABLE 4d
PHS
Industrial
Code
River
Mileage
Effluent
ma
Present PE
(5-Day BOD)
Present
Treatment
Increased
PE from
Future Future PE Sewage Treat-
Treatment (5-Day BOD) ment Plants
DES PLAOTDS RIVER
39,34B,34C
34l,28A,20R




26H

26H
26E

341

20-0

20F

20H

28A,20-0


34H






1-264.2

1-264.6
1-165.5

1-162.0

1-161.3

1-161.0

1-160.2

1-160.1


1-157.8
1.15


T35
ILLINOIS

3.0

1.0
0.60

9.0

12.0

1.80

1.50

4.70


70.0
4,000


4,000
RIVER SYSTEM AND MOTOR
TO SPOOK
10,200

9,000
3,000

1,500

50,000

12,500

4,000

30,000


1,500




Divert Wastes to
MSD and Internal
Improvements

1,000


1,000
200


200
TRIBUTARIES - KA1KAKEE RIVER
RIVER
Screening

Sedimentation
Divert Wastes
to PSD
Oil Separa-
tion
By-Products
Recovery
Divert Wastes
to PSD
Divert Wastes
to PSD
None


Sedimentation

Sed. and Internal
Improvements
Internal Improv.
Divert to PSD

Internal Improv.

Divert Cone. Wastes
to PSD
Divert to PSD

Divert to PSD

Divert Cone. Wastes
to PSD and
Internal Improv.
Oil Separation

5AOO

4,500
0

750

25,000

0

c

7,500


750

0

0
450

0

2,500

1,800

600

1,500


0

-------
                                             TABLE
PHS.
Industrial
Code


20R .
20-0

26H

20R


28C, 28B

39, 341, 28A
28B, 28C

River Effluent
Mileage ..MGD .
ILLINOIS

1-151.7 17.0
1-151.5 8.50

1-151.3 1.20

1-151.0 5-50


1-148.1 2.30

3.60

141.70
Present PE
(5 -Day BOD)
Present
Treatment
RIVER SYSTEM AND MINOR TRIBUTARIES
TO SPOON
86,000
31,500

5,000

175,000


6,500

1,200

426,900
RIVER (Cont'd)
None
By-products
Recovery
Screening

Secondary
Treatment for
Cone . Wastes
Primary Treat-
ment



Future Future PE
Treatment (5- Day BOD)
- KANKAKEE RIVER

Secondary Treatment
Secondary Treatment

Sed. and Internal
Improv.
Secondary Treatment
for all Wastes

Internal Improv.

Internal Improv.




13,000
5,000

2,000

26,000


3,300

600

93,500
Increased
PE from
Sewage Treat-
ment Plants


0
0

0

0


0

0

5,950
(l)   Garbage incinerator.
(2)   2k
        Hour ' PE.  value estimated from eight-hour observations.
(3)   Total  PE.,  value of industries drained by the State Street Ditch.
M   Total .. PE  value of industries drained by the Summit-Lyons Conduit.
(5)   Adjusted PE ,  value from seasonal industries.

-------
                           TABLE k-f :

                      P. H. S. INDUSTRY CODE
11     Coal Mining and Processing     28B

Ik     Quarrying                      28C

20A    Sugar Refining                 29A

20C    Canning-Vegetables             29B

20F    Meat Packing                   29E

20G    Poultry Processing             3QA

20H    Milk Receiving                 3IA

20-0   Distillery                     33A

20P    Rendering                      33B

20Q    Vegetable Oil Manufacture      33C

20R    Food - Miscellaneous           33E

22E    Fur and Hair

24     Wood Products

26E    Jute or Hemp Paper Mill

26H    Paper Board Mill               34H

26l    Paper Mill - Miscellaneous     3^1


28A    Basic Chemicals                39
Intermediate Chemicals

Finished Chemicals

Petroleum Refining

By-Product Coke Plant

Petroleum-Miscellaneous

Rubber Products

Tanning

Ferrous Metal Manufacture

Non-Ferrous Metal Manufacture

Blast Furnace

Ferrous Rolling Mills

Ferrous Metal Fabrication

Won-Ferroxis Metal Fabrication

Metal Plating

Fabricated Metal-Rolling Mills

Metal Fabricating - Miscell-
                    aneous

Miscellaneous Manufacturing

-------
                               TABLE 5
Estimated Industrial Waste Loads Before and After the Adoption of a
  Comprehensive Industrial Waste Ordinance by the Metropolitan
  Sanitary District.
                         PE Load to MSB Plants       PE Load to River System

                         Before     After   .         Before       After

Population Connected     4,750,000   4,750,000       475,000      475,000

Industrial               2,950,000   2,560,000       295,000      256,000

Others                     330,000     330,000        33,000       33,000

    Total                8,030,000   7,640,000       803,000      764,000

-------
                          TABLE 6

         SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED EESULTS OF IMPROVEMENTS

.Upper Illinois River System - Lake Michigan to Lockport

   Present Total BOD Load

      a.  Municipal                  226,000
      b.  Industrial                  71,000
      c.  Calculated Storm Spillage   56,000
          Total Load                                      353/000

   BOD Reduction by Improvements

      a.  Secondary Treatment of Municipal . Waste  10,000
      b.  Industrial Waste Reduction              58,000
      c.  Industrial Waste Ordinance -MSD          10,000
      d.  Chlorination of MSD Effluents           38,000
      e.  Stormwater Overflow Control
             Through Short-Term Improvements       6,000
          Total Pounds of BOD Reduction by
             Improvements                                 122,000
   Total BOD Load After Improvements                      231,000

Lower Illinois River System - -Loclsport to. Graf ton (Main Stem)

   Present Total BOD Load

      a*  Municipal                  126,000
      b .  Industrial
          Total Load                                      270,000

   BOD Reduction, bjr Improvements

      a.  Secondary Treatment of Municipal. Waste,  33 j 500
      b.  Industrial Waste Reduction             103,000
          Total Pounds of BOD .Reduction by
             Improvements                                 Ijp^JpQO
   Total BOD Load After Improvements                      133.^500


   All values are ultimate BOD, pounds per day.

-------