HSlMfc

omore


WATER USE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
GUIDE
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
Public Health Service
Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control

-------
Delaware

s,y,tz- z---™ ' f	„,	„v«oSi-r5
Estuary
v -•; *A	 - v, -S	v	/; r-"-^;v.,.v, w^. X.,::	.vJ,r<-^

Comprehensive
	""***>« ' """" " •'
Study
WATER USE ADVISORY COMMITTEE
GUIDE
Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control
Region II , New York, New York
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
Public Health Service

-------
A- GUIDE FOR SUB-COMMITTEE' MEMBERS
This guide has befen prepared for those persons (a/o
the organizations they -represent) who-serve cm the
four sub-committees of the Delaware-Estuary Compre-
hensive S.tudy's Water-Use Advisory Committee.
DELAWARE ESTUARY COMPREHENSIVE STUDY (DECS)
Division of Water Supply, and Pollution Control
Public Health Service
Department of Healthy ^Education,, and Welfare
.321 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106
Code 21S	597-U360
December, 196U'

-------
1
Table of Contents	Page
Table of Contents 		1.
Statement of Initial. Request to Sub-Committees by DECS.	2
Introduction ...... . . . . . . . . ... . . . . .	3
PART I
1.	The Delaware Estuary Comprehensive Study (DECS) .			5
A.	Brief Description 			5
B.	The DECS Advisory Committee Structure 		-6
2.	Information Relative to Water Quality Indicators and Watel* Use .	12
A.	Abbreviated Definitions of Water Quality Indicators ...	12
B.	Present Major Uses of the Estuary ............	lii
C.	Map Locating INCODEL Zones and Major Water Users ....	15
PART II
1. . Explanation of Assignments			-		17
A.	Phase I		 . . 					18
m
B.	Phase II				20
PART III (Reference!Material)
1.	Address by.James W. Quigley, Assistant Secretary, Dept. of
Health, Education, and Welfare 		22
2.	The INCODEL Standards		 				31
3> Definitions 		 	 . . 			3&
k. Water Quality Objectives and Guides 					 . .	37
Water Quality Criteria				1*3

-------
2
STATEMENT OF INITIAL REQUEST TO SUB-COMMITTEES OF
THE WATP USE ADVISORY COMMITTEE BY THE DECS.
(Presented at the 2nd Meeting of the Sub-Committees)
The Delaware Estuary Comprehensive Study requests that , .
the sub-committees of the Water Use Advisory Committee .under-
take as their initial task, the preparation of the first part
of a report on the present and future use and needs (objectives)
of the organizations represented, relative to the waters in the
estuary. These uses and: needs or water quality objectives
should maker use of indicators (or parameters) in the descriptive
material, but as objectives they need not include quantitative
information. .Limits or ranges should be reserved:for the .second
phase of the report.
The second phase will be requested after the Study, along
with the Policy,^Advisory Committer and Technical Advisqry Com-,
mittee, have reviewed and returned the initial report to the
Water Use Advisory Committee. Inter-committee discussions might
delay the second phase to some extent. This should allow suffi-
cient time for all sub-committee members to be, able to obtain
the information necessary for the second phase.

-------
3
Introduction
At the second meeting of'the sub-committees of the Water Use Advisory
Committee, the Statement on the.previous page was given to those present.
This requested that..a report be prepared.in two phases: (1) to determine,
in general termswhat water quality objectives the organization he or she
represented sought relative to the waters of the Delaware estuary; (2). to
determine these same (or possible new or different) objectives in quanti-
tative terms.
This guide was prepared to simplify these.tasks for the sub-committee
members, and to assist members' in eliciting responses from the organizations
they represent.
Part I of this guide briefly explains (1) the DECS and (2) the current
quality and uses of the waters of the Delaware Estuary. Part I also con-
tains a map showing the zones 'into which the estuary"has been divided by the
existing interstate water pollution control legislation. Also'shown are the
major municipalities and "industries that use the wate'r of the estuary.
Part II deals with YOUR ASSIGNMENTS. Please read this very carefully
and use the following materials in wording the water quality objectives sought
by your organization.
.Part III contains certain reference materials .that snouicrbe useful to
all members of the four sub-committees.
For the general information of all sub-committee members:
1.	The Delaware estuary is that 86 miles of the,. Delaware River
stretching from Trenton, N.J. to Liston Point, Delaware that
is subjected to the oscillating motion of the tides.
2.'	The existing zones of the estuary were originally promulgated
in the "Reciprocal Agreement for the Correction and Control
of Pollution of the Waters of the*Interstate Delaware River".
'(A copy of the Agreement is contained in Part III of this
guide). The "Reciprocal Agreement" was formulated under the.
auspices of the Interstate Cbitimissio'ri on the Delaware River'
Basin (INCODEL) and have been 'commonly called the INCODEL
Standards. The Delaware ..River Basin Commission, INCODEL's,
successor, has adopted'the Standards as a part of it's'Com-
prehensive Plan. They have been the basis for regulating
the quality of the water of "the entire main stem of the
Delaware River since 19^5 •
Most of the materials contained in "this guide-have'been prepared fyy the
DECS staff. However, the DECS staff is particularly indebted to Mr. George W.
Burke, Jr., Chief, Water Quality Criteria and Practices, Water Supply and
Pollution Control Division of the U.S. Public Health Service, for permitting
the use of much of his material on Water Quality, Mr. Frank Dressier, Executive
Director of the WRA/DRB for his assistance in the initial phase of this guide,
and members of all DECS committees who assisted in its development.

-------
h
PART I
1.	The Delaware'Estuary Comprehensive Study (DECS)
A. Brief Description
B'. 'The DECS Advisory Commibtee otructure
&
2.	Information Relative to Water Quality Indicators and Water Use
¦M*
A.'	Abbreviated Definitions of Water Quality Indicators
B.	Present Major Uses of the Estuary
C.	Map Locating INCODEL Zones and Major Water'Users
*Data on .the present water quality of the.Delaware Estuary is
•in the process of being compiled and will be made available.
**Specific information on the effects of various concentrations
of water quality indicators will be made available.

-------
PART I
The Delaware Estuary Comprehensive Study (DECS)
A. Brief Description.
In late .19$1 the Division of Water. Supply and Pollution .
Control of. the U.S. Public.Health Service .initiate^ ..the Delaware
Estuary Comprehensive Study. The Study was requested by the
States, INCODEL and the City of Philadelphia, who desired an
intensive s.tudy of the area in-which water quality was most
critical... They wished to know the cause and effect relation-
ships of pollution, the economic relationship between water and
waste treatment, and water use. The study covers the .length-
of the Delaware River from Trenton, New Jersey to Liston Point,
Delaware; This 86 miles of river, known as the eistuary, is
encompassed by one of the most heavily populated and industrialized
areas in the country.
Authorization for the.study is derived from Section 2(a) of
Public Law 660, 8hth Congress 1956'; as amended by .Public Law 87,
88th Congress 1961, which is entitled "Comprehensive Programs for
Water Pollution Control" and reads as follows:
"The Secretary shall, after careful investigation in
cooperation with other Federal agencies, with State water
pollution control agencies and interstate agencies, and
with the municipalities and industries involved, prepare
or develop comprehensive programs for eliminating or
reducing the, pollution of interstate waters and tribu-
taries thereof and improving the sanitary condition of
surface and .underground waters. In the development'of
such comprehensive programs due regard shall be given
to the improvements which are necessary to conserve such
waters.for public water supplies, propogation of fish
and aquatic life and wildlife, recreational purposes, and
agricultural, industrial, and'other legitimate uses. For
the purpose of this'section, the Secretary is authorized,
to make joint investigations with any such agencies of the
condition of any waters in-any State or States; and of the
discharges of any sewage,1 industrial wastes or substance
which may adversely affect such waters."
The Delaware Estuary Comprehensive Study is developing
techniques for the accurate appraisal of the water quality of
the estuary. These techniques include technical procedures
for forecasting the estuarine water quality on both a short~t-—"
and a long-term basis. It is the intention bf the Delaware
Estuary Comprehensive Study to develop these approaches1 as they
apply to comprehensive water pollution control, in cooperation
with other agencies, and to provide a meaningful evaluation- of
the present and future steps which must be taken to result in an
optimum level of quality in the estuary.

-------
6
The technical procedures for forecasting the estuarine water
quality involve the development of mathematical models for use
with high speed computers. The models are general models which
may be adapted to any one of several water quality parameters -
such as dissolved oxygen, chlorides and turbidity. All the factors
that significantly -affect the dissolved oxygen concentration in
the estuary &re being expressed mathematically. A partial list of
these factors includes photosynthesis, sunlight, temperature, carbon
dioxide, nitrogen\ domestic and industrial waste, "storm water over-
flow, benthal deposits, hydraulics, reaeration, turbulence, stream
flow, and wind; All of these must be considered and investigated,
although some-may not be as significant as others.
The use of the procedures being developed by the DECS will
permit an accurate appraisal of the effect of the addition of new
or.enlarged municipal and industrial water supply systems or
waste treatment facilities before they are constructed. Also, the
best locations•for such supplies or facilities may be determined.
As new,data are generated, :they"niay be coded and- incorporated
into the models immediately. This includes data which may expand
or refine the models themselves - as for example, information from
dye, tidal current meter, and photosynthetic studies, as well as
changes in hydrography and new methods of waste, treatnjent..
These new engineering techniques will provide a firmer basis
for many decisions; however, the computers will not in themselves
produce a plan. It still remains for the engineer to exercise sound
judgment using data from all sources, including computers, when
preparing the final Water Pollution Control Plan.
With the assistance of the various agencies involved, the Public
Health Service's Delaware Estuary Comprehensive Project"will provide
a dynamic Water Pollution Control Plan which will be flexible and
adaptable to future area changes and.development, as well as con-
sistent with both the economic environment and the desires of the
people of the area.
B. The DECS Advisory Committee Structure.
In order to meet the requirements of Section 2(a) of Public
Law 660 (See quote in Part I.A. of the Guide) the DECS, with the
assistance of the states and the DRBC, developed a supporting
Committee Structure which it considered would be best suited for
the estuary basin*

-------
7
The following pages present an outline of the Committee
Structure now in operation.
Sub-Committees	Sub-Committees
Industry	Recreation, Conservation,
Fish & Wildlife	Fish & 'Wildlife
General, Public.
Industry-
Local Governments & Planning
Agencies
1. Policy Advisory Committee
Membership
Agencies with the legal power to ab?>^ water pollution and to
implement ..a comprehensive plan.
Delaware Water Pollution Commission
Floyd I'. Hudson, M.D., Executive Secretary, State Board of Health
John Bryson, Director, Water. Pollution-Control Commission
New Jersey Health Department
Alfred H. Fletcher, Director, Division of Environmental Health
Robert Shaw, Asst. Director, Division of Environmental Health
Pennsylvania Health Department
Karl M. Mason, Director, Bureau of Environmental Health .
Walter A. Lyon, Director, Division of Sanitary! Engineering
Delaware River Basin Commission
James F. Wright, Executive Director
Herbert Hewlett, Chief of Planning
U.S. Public Health Service
Earl J. Anderson, Regional Program Director, Region.II (Chairman)
Everett L. MacLeman, Project Director, DECS
Members, of ,the Policy Advisory Committee are responsible foj?
representing other state and federal.agenciesj especially those
with related water resources programs. Personnel of the other
agencies are. invited by the members to attend meetings of the
Policy Advisory Committee. (To date, representatives from the
Corps of Engineers, Department.of Interior, ^nd, Department of
Agriculture have attended meetings, while copies of minutes hav6
been forwarded to various state agencies.)

-------
8
Functions:
A.	Attain consent among states on pollution abatement,
policy and plans and assure full coordination of
effort and understanding.
B.	"Coordinate &nd assist in the inclusion of established
water pollution control plan's in overall comprehensive
lifeter Quality Plan.
C.	Relate Study to possible interim procedures for pollution
abatement *
D.	Advise the P.H.S. relative to the present DECS and
future, studies involving water pollution control in
the estuary.
2. Technical Advisory Committee
Membership
I Agencies participating in work of study
II Personnel familiar with technical aspects
of water quality control
Delaware Water Pollution Commission
N.C. Vasu'kij Assistant Engineer
New Jersey Health Department
Harry H. Hughes, Principal Health Engineer
Pennsylvania Health Department
George A.. Elias, Regional Engineer, Region VII
Kenneth Schoener, Asst. Chief, Stream Quality Section,
Delaware' River Basin
Delaware River Basin Commission
Robert A. Buckingham, Head, Water Quality Branch
Cj»ty of - Philadelphia'
Joseph Rad'ziul, Chief, Research & Development Unit,
Water Department
Industry
Liqyd Falk," Waste- Consultant,-E.I. duPont de Nemours & Co.-
U.S. Pish and Wildlife Service
George Spinner^ Supervisor, Trenton Area Office
Bureau of Outdoor Recreation*
U.S. Public Health Service
Robert V1. Thomann, Technical Director, DECS (Chairman)

-------
Functions:
A.	Keep agency represented appraised of the status of
the DECS - in this manner the agency has one of its
personnel who has a complete understanding of the
technical phases of"the DECS.
B.	Assist P.H.S. in planning and coordinating DECS-j
C.	Provide technical assistance.
1.	assist iii the organizing of various projects
2.	provide additional qualified personnel for
special phases of study
3.	review preliminary drafts of reports
U. advise Policy and Water Use'Committee
on technical matters.
Water Use Advisory Committee
Membership
Recreation, Conservation, Fish and Wildlife
Edmund H. Harvey, President, Delaware Wiidlife"Federation
General Public
Frank W. Dressier, Exec. Director, Water Resources Assoc./
Delaware River Basin
Industry
William B. Halladay, Supervisor-Pollution Control,
The Atlantic Refining Company
Local Governments and Planning Agencies
Carmen F. Guarino, Chief, Sewerage Operations,
City of Philadelphia
U.S. Public Health Service
Everett L. MacLeman, Project Director, DECS (Chairman)
Functions:
A.	Indicate the needs and desires of the people of the estuary
relative to water use with -water quality as a criterion.
(It is for this function that this guide was developed -
also see Part 1,2).
B.	Act as a public relations group.
C.'	Assist in special non-technical phases of the DECS.

-------
10
Sub-Committee Membership (November 1961;)
(1) Recreation, Conservation and Fish and Wildlife
A.	Shellfish Industry
B.	Audubon Society
C.	Pennsylvania Pleasure Boat Association
D.	Delaware'River Yachtsmen League
(Corinthian Yacht Club)
E.	Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen's Clubs
F.	New"Jersey Federation of Sportsmen's. Clubs
G.	Delavrare Wildlife Federation
H.	Izaac Walton League
I.	Philadelphia Conservationists
J.	Outdoor Writers' Association of 'America
K.	Marine Resources Committee
(2) General Public
A.	WRA/DRB
B.	League of Women Voters
C.	Federation of Women's Clubs
D.	Delaware Valley Council
E.	Joint Council of Pennsylvania Farm Organizations
F.	New Jersey Farm Bureau Federation
G.	New Jersey State Grange
H.	American Water Works Association
I.	Delaware State Grange
J.	Water Pollution Control Federation
K.	Delaware River Watersheds Association
L.	Pennsylvania State Chamber of Commerce
M.	New Jersey State Chamber of Commerce
N.	Delaware State Chamber of Commerce
0.	Greater Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce
P.	Pennsylvania Economy League
Q.	Forward Lands, Inc.
(3) Industry
A. N.J. Manufacturers' Assoc.
Petroleum
A.	Texaco, Inc.
B.	Gulf Oil Corp.
C.	The Atlantic Refining Co.
D..	Mobil Oil Co.
B. Penna. Manufacturers' Assoc.
E. Sinclair'Refining Co.
F'. Sun Oil Co.
G. Tidewater Oii Co.
Steel
A.	U.S. Steel Corp.
B.	The Colorado Fuel and Iron Corp.
C.	H.K. Porter Co., Inc.

-------
11
Electric Utilities
A.	Public Service Electric & Gas Co.
B.	Philadelphia Electric Co.
Paper
A.	Patens on Farchraent Paper Co..
B.	Bestwell Gypsum Co.
Food
A.	Kind & Knox GelatinCo.
B.	National Sugar Refining Co..
Chemical'
A.	Hercules Powder Co.
B.	Cary Chemical Co.
C.	Rohm & Haas Co.
D.	Allied Chemical Corp.
E.	Harshaw Chemical Co.
F.	E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co.
Miscellaneous
A'. Eastern Gas & Fuel Assi^.-
B.	Radio Corp.. of America
C.	Westinghouse Electee f!orp.
Distillers
A. Publicker Industries, Inc.
Local Governments and Planning
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G..
H.
I.
J.
L.
C.	Atlantic City Electric Cq.
D.	Delaware Power & Light Co.
C. MapAndrews & .Forbes Co.
D-. Scott Paper Co. ¦
C. Campbell Soup Co.
G.	Shell Chemical Co.
H.	.Penna. Industrial Chemical
Corporation
I-.	The Monsanto Co.
Ji	Atlas ChemicalJlnd..j Inc.
K'.	WiJ. Zinc Co.
:L.	7MC ¦flor-o-i-stion
D..	Linde-Co.
E.	U.S., Gypsum Co.
M. N..J, League of
Municipalities
N. . .Bureau-of State &
Regional Planning
0. Perm-Jersey Trans. Study
P.. .Pa. State Planning Board
Q_. Pa.. State Assoc. of Boroughs
R. Pa.. League ..of Cities
S. .Pa,. State Township
Supervisors Assoc..
T. "Pa.. Municipal Authorities
Association
,U. , Lower -Bucks County
Municipal Authority
City of Burlington
City of Bristol
City of Camden
City of Chester
City of Dover
City of Philadelphia
City of Trenton
City of Wilmington
Levittown, Pennsylvania
Regional Conference of Elected
Officials
Delaware State'Planning Commission
Delaware.River Port Authority

-------
12
2. Information Relative to Water Quality Indicators and Water Use
A. Abbreviated Definitions of Some Water Quality Indicators
(a)	Temperature
Temperature may be defined as the degree of hotness or
coldness measured on a definite scale. A common unit of tempera-
ture is the Fahrenheit degree. It should be noted that the
maximum dissolved oxygen saturation is higher at lower tempera-
tures. For example, at 32°F the saturation value is lh.6 mg/l,
while at 77°F it is 8.I4 mg/l. Temperature changes in streams
or bodies of water may result from natural climatic phenomena or
from the introduction of industrial wastes, such as the discharge
of cooling water. Temperature is important and sometimes critical
for many uses of water. It affects palatability, treatment pro-
cesses, natural purification, many industrial uses and the suita-
bility of the water as a habitat for aquatic life.
(b)	Chlorides
Chlorides are an approximate measure of. the amount of salt-
water that has mixed with fresh water. Chloride contamination of
a water course may result from saltwater intrusion, sanitary
sewage, or from industrial effluents.
(c)	Dissolved Oxygen
Various levels of dissolved oxygen are necessary to maintain
aquatic life and to facilitate natural purification of the normally
occurring organic matter and man-made wastes in streams. The
oxygen concentration of a body of water is supplied through aeration,
algal photosynthesis, and incoming fresh water and is utilized
primarily in the stabilization of organic matter. (See temperature
section for oxygen saturation-temperature relationships.)
(d)	pH.
pH is a measure of the relative alkalinity or acidity of a
liquid.	A pH of 7 is neutral while values higher than 7 are con-
sidered alkaline and values below 7 are regarded as acidic.
(e)	Turbidity
Turbidity of water is attributable to suspended and colloidal
matter which give a murky appearance to the water and diminishes the
penetration of light. Turbidity may be caused by suspended solids
which may result from natural processes of soil errosion or from
the addition of domestic or industrial waste. Turbidity reduce^
light penetration, thus decreasing algal photosynthesis and therpro-
ductivity of the organisms upon which fish feed.

-------
13
(f)	CoHf orm Bacteria
.'Coliform bacteria are used as an indicator .of pollution on
the basis of their being; present, in large numbers in the fecal
discharges of warm blooded animals and the ease with which their
presence may be determined. For the specific identification -of
pathogenic (disease causing) bacteria and the elimination of
interference due to coliform bacteria of soil origin, additional
more complicated tests are necessary. There are two.primary
techniques, for detecting- coliform organisms, the older is referred
to as the Host Probable Number (MPN) test. The newer method is the
Membrane Filter Technique (MF). A quantitative relationship between
the two tests has not been established; however, on comparable samples
the results of an MF test will generally be lower.than those of the
MPN.,
Limits have been set by most states for the concentration of
coliform bacteria in bathing waters. The bacterial requirements
of water for industrial use vary widely.
(g)	Phenols
Phenols are by-products of certain manufacturing processes.
The presence of phenols in water will produce -a disagreeable
taste when combined with chlorine.
(h)	Synthetic Detergents (aBS)
ABS is the measure of the concentration of a type of deter-
gent presently in use. Most detergents in use today are not
easily degradable by conventional methods of waste treatment.
Their presence in a stream above certain concentration may cause
a nuisance condition manifesting itself as unsightly foam.

-------
lli
B. Present Major Uses of the Estuary
Figure 1 presents information on the withdrawal and discharge
of water by the major municipal and industrial installations
along the estuary. It can be noted that these water use activi-
ties are heavily concentrated in the Zone III area, although
withdrawal of water for municipal purposes is limited to Zone II.
More specifically, present uses in Zone II include boating,
water skiing, some sport fishing and municipal and industrial
water supply and waste disposal. ¦ Navigation, waste disposal,
industrial water supply (mostly cooling water) and some boating
constitute the primary water uses in Zone III. The waters of
Zone IV are vised primarily for navigation, industrial cooling
water, waste-disposal, boating, sport and commercial fishing and
some bathing. The latter two uses are concentrated primarily
in the middle and lower portions of the, Zone.

-------
PAGE NOT
AVAILABLE
DIGITALLY

-------
16
PART II
1. Explanation of Assignments
A.	Phase I
B.	Phase II

-------
17
PART II
1. Explanation of Assignments
At the first and second meetings of the sub-committees, the
DECS's Project Director explained, procedurally, how the work of the
sub-committees would dovetail with the work and conclusions of the DECS.
In brief:
1. Each member of the sub-committee is expected to elicit from
the organization which he or she represents just what water quality-
objectives the organization seeks relative to the water resources
of the Delaware estuary.
2o Each sub-committee will then meet and review the water quality
objectives developed by each member organization or work group
of organizations and prepare a report by April 1, 1965 summarizing
the ideas of the sub-committee.
3« The reports of the four sub-committees with a summary prepared
by the Water Use Advisory Committee correlating the work of the
sub-committees, will constitute Phase I of the report requested
by the DECS. The Water Use Advisory Committee will meet on
April 1^, 1965 to undertake the preparation of the summary.
Phase I of the Report will be reviewed by the Staff of the
DECS and members of the Policy Advisory Committee and the Technical
Advisory Committee. Comments and questions will then be directed
to the Water Use Advisory Committee.
Phase II of the Report will include, as previously indicated,
quantitative information with the stated objectives of Phase I
serving as guides. At that time, the DECS will be preparing an
interim report utilizing the information set forth in Phase I.
In addition, information on cost benefits from recreation, fish
and wildlife might also be available.
6.	The reports of the. four sub-committees with a summary prepared by
the Water Use Advisory Committee correlating the work of the
sub-committees, will constitute Phase II of the report requested
by the DECS.
7.	Phase II of the Report will then be reviewed by the Staff of the
DECS and members of the Policy Advisory Committee-and Technical
Advisory Committee. Comments and questions will then be directed
to the Water UseAAdvisory Committee.
A time schedule for the above assignments will be prepared at a
later date.

-------
18
A. Phase I
The' immediate assignment of-all members of all four sub-
committees is to elicit from the organization he or she represents
the water quality uses and needs (objectives) his or her organi-
zation seeks relative to the waters in the estuary. If possible,
these uses and1 needs, or water quality objectives, should make use
of the indicators in the descriptive material.
A Water Quality Indicator may be defined as follows:
"A water impurity or characteristic which serves as a measurement
bf quality and the suitability of water for particular uses.
Examples of indicators are: DO (dissolved oxygen), BOD (bio-
chemical oxygen demand), pH, chloride, and sulfate."
In handling its assignment, each organization that is represented
on the four sub-committees should ask and answer these questions:
1.	' What uses does this organization (or the members
thereof) make of the waters in the estuary now?
What needs of this organization do these waters
now fill?
2.	In the future, what uses do we hope to make of the
waters in the estuary? Or what needs of ours do we
look to the waters in the estuary to fulfill in the
future?
For some of the organizations, the answers to the two questions in
the most general terms will be the water quality objectives they seek
for the estuary. While it will be desirable in most cases that these
objectives include indicators, the use of indicators is not"expected from
all organizations.
Quite obviously, most industries, municipalities and recreation groups
will want to use indicators in describing their water quality objectives.
If you "do use indicators, please use them in general terms, that is, don't
attempt to specify limits or ranges. Limits or ranges will be dealt with
in Phase II.
The attached paper entitled "Water Quality Objectives and Guides"
shduld be extremely helpful in the development of Phase I.

-------
19
The following .outline is one form which may be used in the preparation
of Phase I:
Sub-Committee: Recreation, Conservation,. Fish !and Wildlife
Group: Boating
Subject: Present and Future Water Uses and Needs of Pleasure
Boats, on the Estuary.
Participants:' 1- ABC Boating League
2.	Area Yachtsmen's Association
3.	Marina Owner's Association
I. Present Uses
A narrative with some statistical data on the facilities,,
type of craft, type of activity, etc., should be included in
this section-. It wili be necessary in the narrative to relate
the present use to areas of the estuary.
II. Future Desired Uses
A narrative similar to that of Section I should cover the
future uses which the group feels would be desirable in the
different areas.
Ill. Effect of Water Quality on Use
This section should include a discussion of the restrictions,
if any, on boating that are imposed by the present water quality.
An indication should also be given of the water quality levels
that are necessary for the fulfillment of future.boating desires.

-------
20
B. Phase II
Before Phase II is reached, the Water Use Advisory Committee will
have reached a joint understanding on generally stated water quality
objectives for the estuary. The achievement of joint understanding may
be difficult in some cases. For example, some organization might like
the quality of all the estuary's waters to be such-that they can be used
for drinking water purposes some time in the future. This is not likely
to be an attainable objective simply because the oscillating motion of
the tides makes some parts of all estuaries very salty at all times (that
is, the waters have a high concentration of chlorides).
Other organizations are likely to want fairly high minimum levels
of certain indicators to enhance the passage or growth of some species
of fish. The achievement of this minimum level may be costly and may
have an adverse economic impact on this region. For example, DECS has
determined that to achieve a minimum dissolved oxygen level of 4.0 parts
per million in critical sections of the estuary would require a probable
total investment in waste treatment facilities on the order of several
hundred million dollars. The Water Use Advisory Committee, thus, will
have to determine if such objectives are feasible.
In making such determinations, it is likely that some objectives
sought by some organizations will not be attainable.
With this preliminary explanation, the assignment you will be
asked to handle in Phase II will be somewhat clearer.
If the water quality objectives your organization specified it
would like to see achieved (in Phase I) are shown to be attainable in
part or whole, your organization will -then be asked to define these
objectives quantitatively, that is, you will be asked to establish
indicator limits or ranges. Numerous examples of such limits or ranges
will be found in Part III. If your objective is regulated by certain
common standards '(for example, the U.S. Public Health Service's drinking
water standards), copies of such standards will be made available to you.
The attached paper entitled "Development of Water Quality Goals"
should be of assistance in the preparation of Phase II.
Sub-committee chairmen have been given copies of the USPHS "Drinking
Water Standards" and the publication "Water Quality Criteria" prepared
by the Resources Agency of California for the State Water Quality Control
Board. Both of these publications should provide considerable assistance.

-------
21
PART III
The selected material included in Part III is for reference
to be used as needed.
PART III
1.	Address by James M.Quigley, Assistant Secretary, U.S.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare 	
2.	The INCODEL Standards 	
3* Definitions			
U. Water Quality Objectives and Guides, Mr. George W. Burke .
Water Quality Criteria, Mr. George W. Burke 	

-------
22
ADDRESS *
By
James M. Quigley
Assistant Secretary, U.S. Department of
Health, Education, and Vie If are
It is a pleasure for me to be here and to have the opportunity to
participate in this annual Delaware River Basin Xfeter Resources
Conference.
These conferences have been held each year for more than a.generation.
In that time an awful lot of water has gone under many bridges and much of
it has been polluted.- Because this.was true thirty years ago wise and
prudent men were, moved to call the first of these conferences. Because it
is still true it is still wise and prudent that we continue to meet to con-
sider and discuss the problems of water resources in the Delaware River Basin.
Such discussions in and of themselves will neither advance nor retard the
development of the water resources of the Delaware. Words are one of the few
things that man can use freely — can even abuse — without polluting our water
resources. At least they do not pollute directly. Obviously if we talk too
long when we should be acting, if needless words become a substitute for needed
action, then what we say can be a contributing factor to the lowering of water
quality.
But those who are familiar with the work of these annual conferences would
agree that, while the word quality may not always have been of the highest,
/
(This is the chance you take when you invite an after dinner speaker like itself)
that generally the words used in these meetings, the discussions which have taken
Delivered at the Annual Delaware River Basin Water Resources Conference, The Inn,
Buck Hill Falls, Pennsylvania, October 19, 1961;, 7:15 p.m.

-------
place at your annual conferences have been the prelude to and not a substitute
for effective action. The good people who have been the moving force behind
these conferences can look back with satisfaction on what has been accomplished.
Despite the many frustrating delays, despite the failure to achieve some of
your goals, much that has been done, much that would have gone undone, has
resulted directly and indirectly from your annual conferences.
Because I believe this will continue to be true in the future, I am
grateful for this opportunity to discuss with you one of the most complex
problems, one of the difficult challenges we face — the matter of preserving,
protecting, and restoring water quality.
In the July 1963 issue of the Delaware Basin Bulletin it was noted that
"perhaps the most.difficult and complex water problem that will have to be
faced in' .the Delaware Basin .in the near and far future is that of water quality."
I wish I could disagree with that statement but I can't. I wish I could come
before you this evening and say, while that might have been true when it was
written in July 1963, it is no longer the case. If I did, I would not fool
you or nyself and I.have no desire to do either.
The problem of preserving, protecting and restoring the water quality in
the Delaware River Basin, as in many other areas of our country, is a formidable
challenge. To belittle it would be a mistake. However, to over-estimate it
would be equally erroneous. Because you have struggled long and so far without
complete success to develop and implement a realistic set of water quality
standards for the Delaware River doesn't mean that it can't be done. In fact,
this is all the more reason why it must be done. Unless a comprehensive water
quality program can be developed with dispatch and implemented with determination,
the long ranged potential for the growth of this area is certain to be limited.

-------
2h
This Is so for the very obvious reason that the quality of available
water pretty much determines what can — and perhaps even more important —
what cannot be done. To cite the most obvious example, you may sail or
swim in water with a high salt quality but you won't drink much of it and
it's not what you need if you want a bumper crop.
The Delaware River is one of the great rivers of the world. It is
not as mighty as the Mississippi nor as long as the Nile. In the language
of Detroit I suppose it could only be called a compact. But, in the
language of one well-known automobile ad, one might be tempted to describe
it as "the best all-round compact anyone has come up with yet." For
•within its relatively short run from the Catskills^to the bay, the Delaware
does an all-round good job of supplying drinking water to our municipalities
and recreational waters for our sportsmen. The Delaware furnishes water in
sufficient volume to sustain one of the great industrial complexes in the
world. And for a substantial portion of its length it's in sufficient depth
to encourage the growth of some of the finest port facilities. Many rivers
twice as long do not help men half as much as the Delaware.
Man has used the Delaware well, but man can't do everything he's done
with the Delaware River and not pay a price. Part of that price has
been a deterioration of the quality of the water which flows within its
banks. The challenge we face is: first, maintain the quality of this river
where it is good; second, keep it from getting worse; and, third, to improve
it where possible.

-------
T© these ends, the U.S. Public Health Service is, as you are all
well aware, engaged in making a comprehensive study of the.Delaware
Estuary. This study seeks to compile a complete and detailed inventory
of the source of pollution in the entire basin. This information is
essential to the development of any intelligent over-all water quality
plan. The development of such a plan for the Delaware is the second
phase of our Department's study. And it is, as you can easily appreciate,
the more difficult part of our assignment.
Gathering the facts is' one thing, deciding what you do with them
is another. In developing this comprehensive plan for the Delaware River
we: must first find out where we are but then we must decide where we want
to go. Such a decision involves very difficult value judgments as to
present and. potential water uses.. Certainly an unclouded crystal ball
w6uld indeed be a very handy device at a certain critical stage of this
study. However, without the gift of prophecy but with the benefit of all
the facts that deligent surveying and high speed computers can make available
to us and with the aid of the best advice we can get from representatives
of industry, conservation, recreation, farm and civic organizations, we will
do our best to develop a sound and feasible comprehensive ^pollution control
program for the Delaware River Basin. We have no illusions that such a plan
will be perfect and that it will not have its critics and even its detractors.
But for what it will be worth it is our present intention to do our best and .
hope to complete our study and submit our report by 1967.
And what will this PHS Delaware Estuary study be worth? The answer
could be a great deal or absolutely nothing or something in between. What

-------
the final answer will be depends on how effectively it is implemented.
The best study, the most comprehensive plan, isn't worth anything
unless and until something is done about it.
A classical case in point is to be found in the history of the
INCODEL Standards. Back in 1939, twenty five years ago, INCODEL
promulgated standards of water quality for the main stem of the Dela-
ware . These were not a bad set of standards at the time they were
promulgated but it was 19hS before these standards were finally adopted
by all of the basin states. Once adopted, the enforcement of these
standards and the equally important matter of quality of the water of
the Delaware's many tributaries was in the hands of the basin states.
How well or how poorly the states carried out their responsibilities in
this regard is not something that needed be commented upon at this time.
The Delaware is a better river because of INCODEL's standards. How much
better it might have been had they been fully implemented is a matter
of speculation.
This bit of history should help us appreciate the challenge now
confronting the Delaware River Basin Commission. Unless the Public Health
Service's Estuary Study becomes the basis for effective and efficient and
continuing pollution abatement activities then the quality of the water
in the Delaware basin is almSst certain to be in one direction — downward.
And', if,.this proves to be the fate of water quality in the Delaware, it
is difficult to visualise the future of the Delaware River Basin moving
in a contrary direction.
We are all here because we realize the importance of maintaining a
balanced water- quality in the Delaware. We are all here because we believe
that the unique partnership of the states and the Federal government embodied

-------
in the Delaware River Basin Commission affords the best chance yet of
achieving this needed water quality-'. The Federal government through
the Corps of Engineers, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the Public Health
Service especially.and through numerous agencies and departments of the
Federal Government generally has, and, I am confident, will continue to
make a full contribution to the effective working of this partnership.
There is a big job to be done. Working together, I believe we can
do it. The answers will not always be easy and they will very often be
expensive and in this imperfect world of ours it is to be expected that
the cost will not always be equitably distributed. Some industries and
some municipalities may in fact have to pay more than their fair share
of the cost and all them will no doubt be convinced that they are doing so.
But the alternative of not doing the job will prove to be far more
expensive and unfair to everybody. Unfair in the sense that to limit the
growth and development of this area is indeed to restrict the common good.
And surely none of us.deceive ourselves on the vital point that there is
a direct correlation between water quality and sound economic and social
development.
This is-the challenge inherent in the question of water quality in
the Delaware River Basin. The PHS Survey should provide us with a sound
basis for meeting that challenge. It should not moreover serve as an
excuse for not facing up to it. Because the survey will not be completed,
until 1967..is no excuse why existing pollution situations should not be
corrected between now and that date.
To those who might be tempted to say, "Why do anything now because
when the new standards are promulgated we'll probably have to do more", I

-------
would answer: "You're right and you're wrong*" Because you are probably
right in assuming that you will have to do more in the future is not a
valid excuse for doing nothing now. I find it necessary as Assistant
Secretary, to point out that the same law under which the Public Health
Service is conducting its comprehensive study of the Delaware River also
authorized the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare to bring an
enforcement action to abate interstate pollutions. These are not alter-
nate approaches to the problem. The mere fact that our Department is
engaged in the comprehensive survey does not mean that an enforcement
action is suspended and can not b§ called under the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Law.
Quite obviously, however, if the survey is moving forward in good
order and there is every, indication that it is part of an orderly process
for improving.the quality of the Delaware River, it could be argued that
more good would be accomplished more quickly by not simultaneously pro-
ceeding on two separate routes — via the enforcement and comprehensive
route. I personally find merit in that position. But surely if the
making of a survey is used covertly or openly as an excuse for not abating
present pollution and that pollution falls within the purview of the
Federal statute then it is difficult to perceive how the enforcement
provisions of that law can long remain inoperative.
I trust I have made ny point. We in our department have our responsi-
bility and authority under the law. It is not a responsibility that we
seek to avoid nor an authority that we wish to throw around and abuse.

-------
29
As part of the Federal establishment, the Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare is anxious to do everything it can to enable Uncle Sam to
be an active, constructive participating partner in the partnership unique
arrangement which is the Delaware River Basin Commission. To date, I
believe, we have been. By working together I am confident that we can
and will develop and effectuate a comprehensive program for pollution con-
trol which will assure water of quality in the Delaware River Basin for
all legitimate purposes. If we fail to achieve this objective, history will
judge us harshly and it should.

-------
30
Reciprocal Agreement for the Correction
and Control of Pollution of the Waters
of the Interstate Delaware River.
(INCODEL Standards)

-------
31
Article 1
Each of the signatory States pledges to each of the other signatory
States faithful cooperation in the control of future pollution and in
the correction of existing pollution of the waters of the interstate
Delaware river and its west branch from the New York - Pennsylvania
boundary line down to the Atlantic ocean. In order to effect such ob-
jects, each of the States agrees to enact adequate legislation, if
necessary, to enable 
-------
32
Zone II: Zone two is that part of the.Delaware river extending from
the head of tidewater at Trenton, New Jersey, and Morrisville, Pennsylvania,
to a line drawn perpendicular to the channel of the Delaware river from the
mouth of Pennypack Creek in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to the corresponding
point on the New Jersey shore.
The' drainage basin contributary to this zone is somewhat more densely
populated than that of Zone one, and it. contains more sewered communities
and industrial establishments*
The principal uses of the waters of the Delaware river in Zone two are
expected to be for water supply, after treatment or purification, and for
recreation, navigation, maintenance of fish and aquatic life, agricultural,
industrial and other purposes.
Zone III: Zone three is that part of the Delaware river extending from
the aforesaid line connecting the mouth of Pennypack Creek in Philadelphia
and the corresponding point in New Jersey to the Pennsylvania - Delaware
boundary line.
The drainage basin contributary to this zone contains populous metro-
politan areas including Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and Camden, New Jersey.
The principal uses of the waters of the Delaware river in Zone three are
expected to be for navigation, industrial water supply, and other purposes.
The water in this zone, however, should be of such sanitary quality that
it will not be unfit for use as sources of water supply, will not be harmful
to fish life, and will not adversely affect the quality of the waters of
the tidal tributaries.
Zone IV: Zone four is that part of the Delaware river extending from the
Pennsylvania - Delaware boundary line to the Atlantic ocean.
The principal uses of the waters of the Delaware river in Zone four are
expected to be for navigation, industrial water supply, commercial fishing,
shellfish culture, recreation and other purposes.
In order to attain conditions of cleanliness and sanitation of the waters
of the Delaware river which will be consistent with the appropriate existing
and future quality and uses of such waters, the following minimum require-
ments shall apply to the several zones herein provided. It is the purpose
and intent of such requirements to apply to artificial (not natural) causes
of pollution.
Article III
In order to put and maintain the waters of the Interstate Delaware, river
and its west branch as aforesaid, in a clean and sanitary condition, no
sewage, industrial wastes or other polluting matter shall be discharged into,
or be permitted to flow or fall into, or be placed in any respective zone of
the interstate Delaware river as herein established, unless such sewage,
industrial waste or other artificial polluting matter shall first have been
so treated as to produce an effluent which will meet the following minimum
requirements:
-------
33
Zone 1: (l) Such effluent shall be free of noticeable floating
solids, color, oil, grease, or sleek, and practically free of suspended
solids.
(2)	Such effluent shall be sufficiently free of turbidity that
it will not cause noticeable turbidity in the water of the Delaware river.
(3)	Such effluent shall show a reduction of organic substances of
at least eighty-five per centum (8%) as measured by the bio-chemical
oxygen demand, and furthermore, such effluent in no case shall exceed a
biochemical oxygen demand df fifty (50) parts per million, and further-
more, the discharge of such effluent, after dispersion in the water of
the river, shall not cause a reduction of the dissolved oxygen content
of such water of more than five per centum ($%). The aforesaid reduction
in dissolved oxygen content shall be determined by the average results
obtained from dissolved oxygen tests made upon samples collected on not
less than six (6) consecutive days from points in the river above and
below the point or points of effluent discharge.
(li) Such effluent shall be of such quality that the most probable
number of organisms of the Coli Aerogenes group shall not exceed one (1)
per milliliter in more than ten per centum (10$) of the samples of sewage
effluent tested by the confirmed test; and provided, further, that no
single sample shall contain more than one hundred (.100) organisms of the
Coli Aerogenes group in one (1) milliliter.
(5)	Such effluent shall be sufficiently free of acids, alkalis,
and other toxic or deleterious substances, that it will not create a
menace to the public health through the use of the waters of the Delaware
river for public water supplies, for recreation, bathing, agriculture and
other purposes; not be inimical to fish, animal or aquatic life.
(6)	Such effluent shall be free of offensive odors and also be
free of substances capable of producing offensive tastes and odors in
public water supplies derived from the Delaware river at any place above
or below the discharge of such effluent.
Zone 2: (1) Such effluent shall be free of noticeable floating
solids, color, oil or grease, and practically free of both suspended solids
and sleek.
(2)	Such effluent shall be sufficiently free of turbidity that it
will not cause noticeable turbidity in the water of the Delaware river.
(3)	Such effluent shall show a reduction of organic substance of
at least eighty-five (85) per centum as measured by the bio-chemical
oxygen demand, and furthermore, such effluent in no case shall exceed
a-bio-chemical oxygen demand of one hundred (100) parts per million, and
furthermore, the discharge of Buch effluent, after dispersion in the water
of the river, shall not cause a reduction of "the dissolved oxygen content
of such water of more than ten (10) per centum. The aforesaid reduction
in dissolved oxygen content shall be determined by the average results
obtained by dissolved oxygen tests made upon samples collected on not
less than six (6) consecutive days from points in the river above and
below the point or points of effluent discharge.
-------
Such ef f-luent-} shalibb ' of;su'ch' quality- that thei most:'probable,}
number3 'of organisms' of -thes Goli - Aerbgenes^ -group 'shallr not'rexceed;:>>one r-(&')"!
per milliliter' i^ffiore than twenty-five ' (25)! per''centum'of: .the:samples;
of sewag^J ef!flueht ''tested by the- confirmed'' test ;¦¦• andiprovided,: further,',
that no singie^^sample-shall "cbntairi :m6re'1'than! one; hundred i(lQO.):>organisms
of the Coli Aerogenes group in one (1) milliliter.
(5) < rSucH;-:eTfluent' shall" be "suffi'di^ntly free' ;of-. acids",' aikaUdTs,
and 'dtfi&r tb^'c~?6r' dieleteriouV subs'tances'-i' aquatic 'life ^
(6,-j^^Such?^ffliten%:^slia,ll'-b'e free^Gf offensive odoris-"arid also,.be
free of-'sub^tances'^capable'-bf "prb^uciiig-offensive.'.t5astes^or-todo!rs in'
public water supplies derived from the Delaware river afr'any place below5
the discharge of such effluent.
Zonen3: i3(1). -.Such .effluentc,shall ,.be;: fr.ee. ,of.,-jiojtijcgab.le floating--,.,
solids /:oilJorogrease:y and: substantially - free ;of. bo^h;;_susppnded; solids ,-and
sleek. .
;.(2j)HSuch.Geff luent shall be sufficiently .-free, of^iarbidity • that.^itj
willonotqcauseosubstantia'l turbidity linjthe. fWater.,>of 7theKDelaware,¦
after dispersion.;,in; the water.j"of. the-river-.
lfy)s Such-veffluent shalij.show^ia->;re4uctionr off/at rleas,t. vfiftyTtive
(55) i?er?.centum-of the ^tptal;-suspended solids ^and-a-f^eduction^qf \ijot, ilgss-
than thirty.rfive?,-.(.35j) •~pei? centum of^jihe .ibiPschejnipal jgeggand^. ,t(LtJV-is. tjife,
intent of this ...requirement', to ires tore thejvdi^s.olvediqxygejri£icor^tgnti, of
the river water in this zone to at least fifty (50l;?pe;c- ^cgntum Ksat;ur%tipn ~ ¦
To accomplish this it may be necessary in the case of certain wastes, to
obtain reductions-' greater'-than- thbse^-required1 ^lihder ^this ?±temcO'>
^-)f-0SuchP eff luehtvr:,ifr'iti'be-discharged ¦ within^ttto Smiles rof :a
• Wter'^WbrIsintake' or' w-ith-in-1^re^udicial influence;'thereof jV.shall
at all times be effectively treated'"wi'th a-germicide; :
(5)-.. Such effluent shall be sufficiently free of acids,.alkalis,
and pthe^i6xic'/r^ a.^i'eterit^s. subsi^ceS^ tRat^itI,Viil^pt!'cfea''B^a'
mer^c^jb^ |>he^'pub^c0 health"thr'^gh ; tlJe' ^use.l:'o^, the inters ^of^tffe^De'laftare J
river f^^lj&blicJ^afcfer:s^^pHieilinjbr'''rlBnS4r,'iuchH^^rs;ufifit,.Jf8J,t indU^-':
trialJanfiTrc&ttg3e&tB^watfe^o^'tfte^fieiSw^e -rivef'tio^
be harmful 'tb^fistf'^fe/""
(<&)' ".^ttch1|efflu^i^lsHa'^ll_ ^"^'abti^cal^r1 freefo'f5 substance^' capable
of producing' 6f f ehts'ive ta'St'e^1""or'" odor'sriin( ^Bli'crrwa'ter SiiopliBs'^e^ived
from the Delaware river.
..Zpne.^UJu-XiX 'Suclirref fluent" shall'be;free" of' noticeably 'floating
solids^ -oil,, or. grease.,t ,and.rsubs(t|intlally_\free pfrboth-suspended. solids
and'sieepiU..
(2)	SiicK effluent' shall'^be-sufficiently Tree" 6f ,turb'idity'thdt..
t"T'-'i-'? r-"1"01 LI	'O f™- 	 -'¦- 1ir+rf'-{Ya
it will not cause substantial turbidity in t>ne waters of the' De'la^cire""r^ver
after dispersion in the water of the river.
(3)	Such effluent shall show a reduction of at least fifty-five
(55) Per centum of the total.-suspendedr solids .ancLshall be subject to
sucii further treatment as may oe needed to prevent a nuisance.
-------
35
(lj) Such effluent, if it be discharged within prejudicial influence
of a public water works intake, or of recreational areas, or of shellfish
grounds, shall at all times be effectively treated with a germicide,
except that in the case of recreational area influence, such treatment
need not be provided during the period from October fifteenth to May
fifteenth of each year.
(5)	Such effluent shall be sufficiently free of acids, alkalis,
and other toxic or deleterious substances that it will not create a menace
to the public health through the use of the waters of the Delaware river
for public water supplies or render such waters unfit for commercial
fishing, shellfish culture, recreational, industrial, or other purposes.
(6)	Such effluent shall be practically free of substances capable
of producing offensive tastes or odors in public water supplies derived
from the Delaware river.
It is further recognized by the signatory States that the quality
of the waters of the intrastate tributaries of the Delaware river and
its aforesaid west branch are of interstate concern at their points of
confluence with the Delaware river and its west branch. Therefore, it
is also agreed that sewage, industrial waste or other artificial polluting
matter discharged into, or permitted to flow or to fall into, or be placed
in any intrastate tributary of the aforesaid Delaware river shall be
treated to that degree, if any, necessary to maintain the waters of such
intrastate tributary immediately above its confluence with the aforesaid
Delaware river in.a condition at least equal to the clean and sanitary
condition of the waters of the Delaware river immediately above the
confluence of such tributary.
Analyses and tests regarding the minimum requirements herein
prescribed, shall be determined in accordance with the provisions con-
tained in the American Public Health Association's latest edition on "Standard
Methods for the Examination of Water and Sewage."
The aforesaid requirements as to treatment of sewage, industrial
wastes or other artificial polluting matter and as to the sanitary quality
of receiving waters are minima. It is the intent and purpose of these
requirements to accomplish reasonable and adequate control and correction
of pollution. Due to the many variable factors involved, however, and.
to the impossibility of forecasting future developments with certainty,
it may be necessary in the future to impose additional requirements,
particularly in Zones two and three.
The minima herein prescribed therefore shall be considered the
_'irst steps toward attaining the objectives sought, and if necessary may
oe required to be supplemented in the case that the general application
of such minimum requirements does not adequately improve and maintain
the sanitary quality of the waters of the Delaware river.
END OF INCODEL STANDARDS
-------
36
Definitions
MATER QUALITY CRITERIA - Rules, tests or other information which will
aid in making a decision regarding the suitability of quality of water
for use. Includes objectives, guides, standards and goals as. described
herein.
WATER QUALITY INDICATOR - A water impurity or characteristic which serves
as a measurement of quality and the suitability of water for particular
uses. Examples of indicators, are: DO, BOD, pH, chloride, sulfate and
ABS. (To be used in Phase I.)
WATER QUALITY PARAMETER - Parameter is often used the same as indicator
However, because of dictionary definition of parameter as a mathematical
term, the term indicator is preferred when referring to quality of water.
(To be used in Phase II, but may also be used in Phase I if desired.)
WATER QUALITY OBJECTIVES - Word descriptions of the quality of' water desired
for use. There should be objectives" for each use. The descriptions should
include the characteristics desired, or not desired, but need not include
quantitative information. They need not be limited by the practicality of
measurement. Guides or other criteria are needed to determine realization
of the objectives. (Describes fairly well the work to be undertaken in Phase I.)
WATER QUALITY GUIDES - Quantitative information on the effects and"limiting
concentration of water pollutants with respect to uses of water. An example
of a guide is a list of concentrations of a pollutant showing the uses affected
by these concentrations and the nature of the effect. Another example is a
curve showing the relationship of fluoride concentration in drinking water to
the proportion of the population having dental fluorosis. Guides may be
presented in.the form of acceptable concentrations of pollutants for specific
uses of water. (Guides should form the basis for Phase II.)
WATER QUALITY GOALS - Values for selected indicators which serve as the.water
quality target for a water pollution control program. Goals are usually set
for particular geographical areas such as reaches of stream or areas of lakes'.
(Describes the work to be accomplished by Phase II.)
WATER QUALITY STANDARDS - Quantitative and qualitative descriptions of the
quality of water normally acceptable for uses. Standards are usually estab-
lished by a recognized organization or governmental agency. They should not
be confused with regulations although standards may be promulgated as regu- .
lations. Standards may include objectives, guides and other criteria for
evaluating water quality. (Final results based on both Phase I and II with
other factors and information considered).
-------
37
September 1961;
Water Quality Objectives and Guides
by George W. Burke, Jr.*
A water quality standard consisting solely of a list of specific measurements
may be frequently misused by application without consideration of polluting
substances which are not included in the list. In an attempt to prevent
this, standards usually include statements such as the ones found in the
1962 Public Health Service Drinking Water Standards namely "Drinking water
should contain no impurity which would cause offense to the sense of sight,
taste or smell. Under general use, the following limits should not be
exceeded." Then selective measurements which have been associated with the
absence of objection are listed. Also "Drinking water shall not contain'
impurities in concentrations which may be hazardous to the health of the
consumers. It should not be excessively corrosive to the water supply system.
Substances used in its treatment shall not remain in the water in concentrations
greater than required by good practice. Substances which may have deleterious
physiological effects, or for which physiological effects are not known, shall
not be introduced into the system in a manner which would permit them to reach
the consumer." This if followed by a list of substances with limiting con-
centrations recommended and limiting concentrations which are grounds for
rejection of the supply.
The preliminary statements should be considered as quality objectives and
the list of substances with their limiting concentrations should be considered
as guides. In one instance the guides are recommended and in the other"the
guides are used as grounds for rejection of the supply because the impurities
constitute hazards to health.^
Standards of water quality such as these can be written and used without the
implication or connotation of regulations, for example, the World Health
Organization's International Standards for Drinking Water. -This document is
not a regulations it is provided to.encourage uniformity in the examination of
waters and the expression of results and provides a standard for what con-
stitutes acceptable drinking water. It, however, can serve as a reference for
the development of regulations with respect to drinking water.
With the above in mind we might state objectives of quality for the various uses
of water and selected guides or references to applicable guides, which can be
used to determine whether or not a water meets the objectives.
Although numerous groupings of water uses can be made for the purpose of stating
quality objectives and guides, it would be desirable to consider, groupings which
represent either common usage or uses with similar quality requirements. For
this purpose the following groups will be used.
*
Chief, Water Quality Criteria and Practice Section, Technical Services Branch,
Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control, Public Health Service, U.S.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Washington, D.C.
-------
30
1.	Municipal'(including domestic)
2.	Industrial (not including cooling)
3•	Irrigation.
U.	Livestock.,and,Wildlife
5.	Recreation ('including swimming, boating and other esthetic enjoyment)
6.	Fish and Other Aquatic Life
7.	Water Transportation, Cooling and Power Production
8.	Waste Assimilation and Transport
Municipal
A municipal water supply should contain no substances which will harm people
drinking it, 'bathing in it, or otherwise using it, cause damage to or otherwise
make difficult its transmission in the water supply system or its use in various
types of equipmenti Such a water should be free of organisms which could cause
harm to health and organisms which indicate the presence of wastes which might
contain disease causing organisms. It should be free of toxic or radioactive
chemicals and substances which cause taste, odor, color turbidity. It should
be free of minerals which cause undesirable physiological effects or economic
damage. It should not be subject to extremes in alkaline or acid reaction
and should have a pleasing temperature. Of course, it is recognized that
evaluation of the' quality of water against these objectives requires more
specific guides. Such guides are available and adequate for most situations.
The Public He_alth Service Drinking Water Standards provide sufficient concentra-
tion guides for most substances likely to be found in waters at harmful-levels.
In specific instances, however, knowledge of the presence of harmful substances
not listed requires consultation of additional references to determine limits
for safety. Of the other numerous references available for evaluating the
acceptability of'specific impurities Water Quality Criteria, Second Edition is
probably the most useful.
Source waters for municipal supplies should not contain substances which will
prevent the usual methods of treatment for producing a suitable water supply.
Conditions or substances which can impair the quality of water or interfer with
its treatment and usefulness are listed as follows and the objective of pollution
control should be to prevent them from being excessive.
1.	Bacteria and other living organisms
2.	Unnatural deposits in the stream, particularly when of sewage or-
other waste origin
3•' Substances causing color, odor and taste
li. Floating materials such as oils, grease, foam, sewage solids and refuse
5• Toxic and radioactive chemicals.
6.	Decomposable organic matter
7.	Extremes in pH
8.	Minerals, particularly those not removed by ordinary treatment..
9.	Elevated temperatures.
-------
39
Industrial
Objectives for industrial water supplies can be expressed much the same as
those for municipal supplies. Although the industrial group includes a much
larger variety of tjses with special quality needs the objective of quality is
to prevent damage to equipment and product and to persons involved. It has
often been claimed that waters suitable for municipal supply will be suitable
for industrial use. There are exceptions however and.when special needs exist
special considerations of quality must be made. Guides for making these
considerations are provided in water quality criteria.
Irrigation
Waters over a wide range of quality can be used for irrigation. However, with
a lowering of quality there is an increase in the problems of irrigation water
management and a decrease in the crops which can be successively irrigated.
Some aspects of quality will not only reduce the water's utility but will make
it unsuitable as an irrigation supply for certain crops.
Quality for irrigation is measured principally in terms of its salt content,
however, consideration must also be given to the presence of living organisms
and radioactive or other substances which could be toxic to or contaminate the
crops being irrigated and impair their quality, or which could be leached-into
and contaminate the ground water. The quality objectives for irrigation water
should include:
1.	The absence of salts in concentrations which will harm the plants
or the soil or which will require excessive quantities of water L~
leach the salts from the soil solution;
2.	The absence of toxic substances in concentrations which will be
harmful to crops or contaminate them and thereby harm consumers.
3.	The absence of substances which will be leached into and contaminate
the ground waters.
k» The absence of living organisms which will contaminate the crops or
harm people working the irrigated fields.
Of the numerous references providing guides for evaluating the safety and
utility of an irrigation water, Water Quality Criteria, Second Edition is
probably the most useful.
Livestock and Wildlife
It has been assumed that water safe for humans would be safe for livestock
and even though animals have greater tolerance to many substances than humans
it is desirable that for highest production they be provided water meeting the
Drinking Water Standards. In considering objectives of quality or for pollution
control, it should be remembered that livestock and wildlife must be able to
use the water directly from streams.
-------
ho
Pollution control programs for protecting water for livestock and wildlife
should provide waters which are free from, or do not contain sufficient
amounts of the following substances to cause harm to animals either drinWng
them or swimming in them.
1.	Bacteria or other living organisms.
2.	Unnatural sediment or deposits particularly when from sewage or
other waste origin.
3.	Floating materials such as oil, grease, foam, sewage solids and refuse.
Iu Substances causing objectionable color, odor, and taste.
5.	Toxic and radioactive chemicals.
6.	Decomposable organic matter.
7.	Minerals.
Although guides for limiting the amounts of undesirable substances are not
very plentiful, some useful information is contained in Water Quality Criteria,
Second Edition.
Recreation
The enjoyment of water for recreation depends not only upon its quality with
respect to toxic, irritating and infectious substances but also its quality
with respect to the senses. Characteristics or quality of water which affect
its usefulness as a recreation water for swimming, boating or other esthetic
enjoyment are included as follows:
1.	Visible floating suspended and suspended solids (r^ticularly when
from sewage, industrial or other waste origin)
2.	Sludge banks
3.	Slime infestation
li. Heavy growths of attached plants or animals
5.	High concentrations of plankton
6.	Discoloration or excessive turbidity from sewage, industrial wastes
or even material sources
7.	Evolution or gases especially H2S
8.	Visible oils and greases including emulsions
9.	Excessive acidity or alkalinity
10.	Surface active agents which cause foam when aerated or agitated
11.	Elevated temperatures which would be objectionable directly or would
cause cloudness above the water because of excessive evaporation
12.	Living organisms which can cause health impairment
Objectives for quality of waters suitable for recreation should include'the
following: 1) They should be esthetically enjoyable, i.e., free from obnoxious
floating or suspended substances, objectionable color and foul odorsj 2) they
should contain no substances that are toxic upon ingestion or irritating to the
skin of human beings; 3) should be reasonably free of organisms which produce
disease or other health impairment and organisms which indicate the presence
of wastes which could contain them; and U) they should be free of substances
which would impair safety.
Much of the quality desired is stated subjectively and not many guides for
limits of undesirable substances are availalbe. However, Water Quality Criteria,
Second Edition provides considerable information on what is being used.
-------
Ill
Fish and Other Aquatic Life
Fish and other aquatic life are sensitive to a iryriad of water impurities
and extensive studies have been conducted to relate their effects on'this use.
Even so the many problems of variations in investigating procedures, standardi-
zation ol' terms and the interrelationships of various water impurities have
prevented the definition of the quality of water which is suitable for propo-
gation of fish and other aquatic life, .although details regarding the effects
of particular impurities in specific situations must be considered on an
individual basis, the following can be "listed as important factors of quality
of water for this us?.: Dissolved oxygen., pH, ionising salts as indicated by
conductivity- light psnetration as influenced by color and turbidity, tempera-
ture, toxic and radioactive substances, substances which would cause objectionalbe
taste and odor in fish flesh.
The objectives of pollution control to protect waters for fish and other
aquatic life should include the prevention of changes, as measured by the
conditions or quality factors listed above, which would impair production of
the normal aquatic fauna and flora of the particular area. Consideration
should also be given to possible contamination with organisms, or radioactive
or toxic substances, which may not adversely affect the fauna and flora, but
would be harmful to consumers of aquatic foods contaminated with them (for
example, the concentration of mercury in shellfish as in the Minamata case and
virus contamination.of clams resulting in infectious hepatitus outbreak.)
Guides for determining a water's suitability would, vary from place to place and
with differences in waters because the interrelationships of the impurities in
the water and the combined effect on the aquatic life. For relatively clean
water, guides have been recommended (see Water Quality Criteria, Second Edition),
but as the number and variety of impurities in water increase, evaluation becomes
more difficult and much research is needed to determine no-effect .levels.
Water Transportation, Cooling, and Power Production
It has sometimes been stated that these uses require little in the way of
quality. Even though this may be true, it should not be concluded that quality
is not important to them. Damages which may result from impaired water quality
include the following:
1.	Coprosion, cavatation, and delignification as caused by excessive
acid, alkali, salt and dissolved gases
2.	Blockage of intake and channels and loss of reservoir capacity
caused by floating debris and solids
3.	Loss of hydraulic capacity, increased friction and loss of life of
hulls caused by infestations of slimes, worms, barnacles and other
growths living on nutrients in the water
U- Odors and other nuisances caused by decomposition of organic matter
'5>. Fire hazards and economic losses caused by oils and tars
The specification of limiting concentrations of substances which cause these
damages is seldom used in quality standards, however, pollution control programs
should include the objective of limiting the objectionable substances to as low
a level as can be maintained with the usual methods of waste management, treat-
ment, and disposal.
-------
k2
Waste Assimilation and Transport
It should hot be assumed that no amount' of quality deterioration will affect
a water',s utility for assimilating and transporting waste because use of
water for'this purpose should'be permitted only insofar as multiple use is
not prevented. Even the poorest quality of water serving this purpose should
also be useful for water transportation and should not create a nuisance.
Therefore, when attempting to state objectives of quality for this use the
following should be considered,.
1.	D:luting capacity for waste components which do not degrade and
affect other uses - A water which contains a maximum allowable
concentration of a given substance doesn't serve as a diluting
water (e.g. a water containing 2^0 mgcl/l shouldn't be permitted
to receive chloride wastes which will raise this concentration if
the water is to be used subsequently for municipal and certain
industrial supplies because it will damage these uses; a stream
carrying a maximum load of radioactivity won't serve as a receiving
stream for radioactive wastes).
2.	Temperature influences greatly the capacity of a water to assimilate
decomposable wastes. Increasing temperature speeds up decomposition
and also reduces dissolved oxygen reserve.
3» Acids, alkalies, and toxic substances affect flora and fauna and
therefore, influence the capacity of the water to assimilate
decomposable wastes.
U. Dissolved oxygen must be present if decomposition of wastes is
to be accomplished in a suitable manner without nuisance.
Oxygen demanding substances present in the water affect the capacity
of the water to assimilate additional substances of this kind.
-------
hi
"WATER QUALITY CRITERIA"*
By
GEORGE W. BURKE, Jr/**
Describing the quality of water which we want becomes more difficult
as we impose greater demands on a more or less fixed but unevenly distri-
buted water resource * In water quality control programs, we attempt to
describe quality of water because waters vary widely, one being suitable
for a particular use while another is not, and most water uses are
accompanied by changes in water quality. Water has buoyancy and is the
most nearly perfect solvent; as a result, it can carry a nyriad of sub-
stances in suspension or solution. It is these substances which determine
water's utility, and in describing water quality, our attention is directed
to them and the effects they produce on water uses or to physical, bio-
logical and chemical characteristics which may not specifically identify
substances in water but have been associated .with the usefulness of water.
In using quality to evaluate water's usefulness, we need criteria. Some
criteria have been recommended as standards, some have been promulgated as
regulations or requirements and some have been established as goals or
objectives. Each servfes its particular purpose but these various terms have
created confusion in describing quality needs or desires.
If we define WATER QUALITY CRITERIA as rules, tests or guides which are
useful in making a decision regarding a water's suitability (and this is
how the dictionary defines them), we recognize the other terms as special
types of criteria. WATER QUALITY REGULATIONS are descriptions of quality
required, by law. STANDARDS are quality descriptions backed by some
authoritative body; they can be used as recommendations or requirements, or
they can be promulgated as regulations. WATER QUALITY OBJECTIVES and GOALS
are frequently used as descriptions of water which is desired or which is the
target 6£ a particular water pollution control program.
Early in the development of quality criteria for drinking water, the
quality objective was simply stated as freedom from substances causing offense
to the senses of sight, taste and smell. This was apparently a standard used
by a State supreme court judge early in this century. He decided that the
testimony of experts need not be weighed with tenderness and care to determine
what constitutes wholesome water as any ordinary mortal knows whether water
is fit to drink and use. Certainly we use the response of the senses as
criteria of water quality, they help to place suspicion on a water, but addi-
tional criteria are needed to support a decision on suitability of water and
control of its quality for various purposes.
* Presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Technical Task Committee
on Industrial Wastes, San Francisco, California, November 18-20, 1961*.
¦JHtChief, Water Quality Criteria and Practice Section, Technical Services Branch,
Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control, Public Health Service, U. S.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Washington, D.C.
-------
Water Quality Control
Early in the last century, London found that waste waters had caused
a deterioration of the quality of the River Themes and was impairing the
water supply. In 1829, the Chelsea Water Works Company commenced filter-
ing its water through sand to improve its quality. The quality criteria
used were based on esthetics, the senses and possible doubts. At about
the same time, a Royal Commission was appointed to study the London water
supply situation. This Commission recommended moving the water supply
intakes upstream where the water was less impure. It took over 20 years
and the tragic experiences of two cholera epidemics to obtain action on
this recommendation. The intakes were moved at about the same time that
removal of the Broad Street pump handle, on recommendation of Dr. Snow,
terminated the epidemic and substantiated Dr. Snow's conclusion that polluted
water was the most important vehicle transmitting the disease. A study of
distribution of the disease showed that the area served Chelsea Water Works
Company's filtered water suffered lower disease incidence. Even though the
particular.quality responsible for disease transmission could not be identi-
fied, knowledge that the water was affected by wastes and as a result caused
people to become sick was sufficient to convince authorities to act. These
actions constituted quality control without being able to measure the quality,
only the effect of it.. More than 20 years went by before discoveries by
Pasteur and Koch .provided the foundation for bacterial analysis which sup-
ported the development of bacterial criteria for water quality.
During the early 1930's, observations in the western United States led
to the conclusion that severe mottling of tooth enamel was caused by some-
thing in the drinking water. Not until a later developed chemical test fof
determining fluoride in water was applied to the affected areas was high
fluoride demonstrated to be the cause.
These situations serve to illustrate the association of drinking water
with diseases or other harmful effects before substances in the water could
be identified and related to the undesirable effects, and how quality con-
trol criteria could be established before the quality could be described.
Control measures prescribed to produce an acceptable quality can be based on
a general description of quality or knowledge that the measures produce quality
acceptable to the user or they can be based on a specific description of
quality and knowledge that that particular quality has been acceptable to
the iser. The latter method is to be preferred because it permits more exact-
ing design and a quality requirement, standard or goal for checking the
product. Of course, much more detail regarding quality and its effects must
be understood and even then some quality control activities which are require-
ments not based on specific quality might be required.
-------
16
Drinking Water Standards
A review of the development of the Public Health Service Drinking
Water Standards will show how additions- to knowledge of the effect of
quality lead to more detail in the description of quality requirements.
It also illustrates the need for facility and operating requirements to
insure protection of that quality. In the report of the Commission
recommending the 1911; standards a simple quality objective was stated as
follows, "	free from injurious effects Upon the human body and
free from offensiveness to the sense of sight, taste or smell." The
Commission pointed out that the standard recommended was one- of "limits
of impurity" and not one of "purity". It also pointed out that, although
knowledge of the water supply source, its treatment and storage, is desired
to make a judgment on the safety of the supply, sometimes the procurement
of reliable information is impractical and judgments must be based upon
laboratory examinations. When laboratory examination is the sole basis of
judgment, limits for those substances which are not actually dangerous
should be more liberal and limits for those impurities which are of definitely
dangerous character should be more restricting. The 191U standard was one
for bacteriological quality only because the Commission members could not
reach agreement regarding the details on physical and chemical characteristics
which should be required.
In 1925 revised standards included sections on source and protection,
bacteriological quality, and physical and chemical characteristics. The
bacteriological quality requirements were made more liberal. With regard
to physical and chemical characteristics, it was stated that the water should
be clear, colorless, odorless and pleasant to the taste, should be free from
toxic salts and should not contain excessive amounts of soluble mineral
substances nor chemicals employed in treatment. It was pointed out in the
standards that the chemical and physical tests described need be made only
when there was presumption that the water did not meet this objective and
then the results of the tests should be compared to limits specified for
determining suitability of the water.
The 19h2 standard added sampling requirements for bacteriological examina-
tion. It adjusted some of the physical and chemical limits and added limits
for additional chemicalsj namely, fluoride, arsenic and selenium. It also
added requirements to prevent over-treatment of softened waters.
The 19i|6 revision made adjustments in the system standards and in chemical
limits, 6.g., fluoride was raised from 1 ppm to 1.5 ppm.
The 1962 revision modified the .system standards, the bacteriological
standards and the chemical and physical limits. This standard added new limits
for chemicals and radioactivity and deleted the requirements on softened waters.
Thus we see that the drinking water standards were revised four times in
less than 50 years, each revision including more detail for defining water
quality requirements and continuing to include water system requirements for
protecting this quality. The additional detail was made possible by-new in-
formation on the effect of quality and was made necessary by additional
pollution or pollution potential.
-------
h6
Quality and Other Water Uses
We seefn to have done much more to develop criteria for drinking water
quality than criteria for other water uses. Quality is important to most
of the other uses and their needs must be considered by pollution control
programs. Some of the other water uses, their needs and their effects on
quality are briefly described.
Irrigation
Water is required for plant growth and the quality of this water affects
the growth and the soil supporting it. Some substances in the soil moisture
are required and some Can be directly harmful to the~plant. As water is
consumed by the plant, substances in the soil moisture may become concen-
trated if they are not leached away by water draining through the soil,
solution.. The quality of irrigation water determines the quantity required
for transpiration and leaching to maintain a satisfactory quality of soil
moisture. Quality of the soil moisture also determines the soil structure
and thereby the irrigation and draining characteristics.
Although little has been demonstrated which provides.good criteria, the
biological quality of irrigation water is of concern to health authorities
responsible for protecting consumers of the irrigated crop and workers in
the irrigated fields. Another quality of concern is the effect of radio-
activity and pesticides on irrigated crops.
Industrial Water Supplies
Quality of water is important to industry because of the harm which can
be caused directly by substances in the water, uur modern industry in many
instances requires a very special quality of water which must be provided,
by special treatment. To industry, however, one of the greatest functions
of water is the transport of wastes away from the site of use. Treatment
is expected to remove most of the waste substances before the water is
returned to streams. However, it is known that not all substances contri-
buted by industrial processes are removed by present treatment methods.
Even cooling, the largest industrial use of water, contributes impurities
such as corrosion-inhibiting chemicals, disinfectant chemicals and organisms
from various growths in the cooling systems. Waste heat, although not an im-
purity as such, is a physical characteristic which must be considered in
judging the quality of water for various uses.
Recreation
Quality of water determines to a great extent its utility for recreation.
Some substances may make water uninviting to a swimmer, even though they may
noJ-, cause the water to be unsafe. Some substances endanger the swimmer's
health and some eliminate the aquatic life which contribute to the value of
viater as a recreation resource. Recreational use of water can damage its
quality by the contribution of gasoline, oils and toilet wastes from boats,
garbage-from picnic areas and waste waters from fixed recreational installa-
tions and housing accomodating visitors.
-------
hi
These are but a few of the uses of water but they illustrate the
necessity for considering both the quality needs and quality effects of
water uses when multiple use is demanded.
State Requirements for Quality Protection
For the control, of water pollution and maintaining quality needed for
various uses requirements vary widely among the $0 states. Some use
criteria similar to the early drinking water standards, whereas others have
very comprehensive requirements. A brief review of selected States'
requirements related to water quality protection will indicate their scope.
Requirements are usually directed to waste water effluents or to stream
water quality.
Examples of the former are:
State A - requires all effluents to be of primary treatment or better.
State B - requires effluents to be treated according to the classifi-
cation of the stream receiving them, viz. those for raw
wastes, those for primary or better effluents and those
for secondary effluents.
State C - simply requires that effluents contain no substances
which will be injurious to uses of the stream - these being
described as domestic water supply, conduct of a commercial
enterprise, and fish and wildlife propagation.
(Note that the requirements are tending toward stream quality)
Those States directing attention to the stream quality are:
State A - although regulating effluents, describes conditions in the
stream which must be prevented, viz., 1) sludge deposits,
2) debris which would be unsightly or deleterious, 3) nuisandc-s,
color or odor, lr) toxicity harmful to life.
State B - states that materials which will cause pollution- cannot be
discharged - then describes pollution as: l) floating
material injurious to life, 2) substances depositing in the
stream, 3) oxygen, deficiency, i;) coliforms, $) selected
chemicals by concentration.
State C - sets water quality objectives for each river basin. These
include specified limits for 1) Dissolved Oxygen, 2) Toxic
Wastes, 3) Taste and Odor, h) Color, 5) pH, 6) Dissolved
Solids, 7) Temperature, 8) Fluoride, and 9) Special Conditions.
State D - classifies streams.,, and sets water quality standards by
classification including limits for 1) floating and settleable
solids, 2) pH, 3) Dissolved Oxygen, U) toxic and deleterious,
substances, £) odor producing substances, 6) phenolic com-
pounds, 7) sewage and waste effluents.
-------
The variety of water pollution control or water quality protection
requirements of the States probably results from a number of differences
including: ' 1) the extent of the need in magnitude and variety to control
pollution,'2) structure of State laws and regulations and 3) the location
of responsibility for pollution control within the State government.
Water Quality Objectives by Use
Notwithstanding the differences, the States' quality protection
requirements have one thing in common, viz., the controls attempt to pro-
vide a quality of water in the stream to meet the needs of various water
uses. The means of doing this and the quality of water produced are not
always the same, even though the group of uses being protected may be the
same. The difficulty of producing a given water quality varies with con-
ditions at different locations, even though the quality desired for a
specific use may be the same at all points of use. If we describe this
desired quality in words, without quantification, we may be able to agree
on a set of quality objectives for each water use, regardless of location.
Then with these objectives in mind we can review pertinent quality guides
which quantify quality and effect and the problems of producing desired
quality and arrive at a compromise which describes the -quality we can
accept as a goal under a specific set of conditions.
Use of water of course are numerous but for practical purposes we can
group them: 1) municipal, 2) industrial, 3) irrigation, I;) livestock and
wildlife watering, $) recreation including swimming, boating and other
esthetic enjoyment, 6) fish and other aquatic life, 7) water transportation,
cooling, and power production", 8) waste assimilation and transport.
A statement of water quality objectives for each of these uses should
define the quality of water desired. This definition should not be concerned
with how practical it is to obtain this quality or measure it by analytical
tests. Take, for example, water-for municipal and industrial uses. Such a
water should not contain substances which will (1) harm people drinking it,'
bathing in, or otherwise using it, (2) cause damage to or otherwise make
transmission difficult in a i*ater supply system, or (3) damage industrial
equipment or products manufactured. Such a water should be free of wastes
and organisms which could harm health and cause disease. It should be free of
toxic and radioactive chemicals and substances which cause taste, color, odor
and turbidity. It should be free of minerals which cause undesirable physio-
logical effects or produce-economic damage. It should not be subject to
extremes in alkaline or acid reaction and should have a pleasing temperature.
Of course these, as quality objectives, leave much to be desired in the way
of measurement. However, they do.provide a framework within which measure-
ments can be designed and a particular level of quality can be- specified as a
goal, a standard or a requirement by regulation. The current Public Health
Service Drinking Water Standards cover most of the items and provide guides
for determining compliance.
-------
Water Quality Guides
As used in this context water quality guides are water quality criteria
organized in a way to facilitate the specification of quality to meet the
¦objectives of a particular use- The information should aid in making a
decision regarding the level of quality which should be provided to meet
the needs of particular uses under a described set of conditions. Ideal
guides would quantify the damages various levels of quality would cause
particular uses. Such guides would enable the description of quality which
would provide maximum benefits commensurate with costs of providing the
quality.
An attempt is currently being made to develop a guide relating cost of
municipal water supply purification to quality of the source water. Pre-
liminary study has indicated" that very good correlations exist between
certain quality indicators and the cost of chemicals used to treat the water.
Even in the absence of ideal guides, organization of present knowledge
of the effects of quality on uses can help in developing goals for a particular
program. The best collection of this knowledge is found in Water Quality
Criteria, Second Edition. Data from this and other sources are being assembled
in what we call use-concentration spectra. A Spectra of concentrations for
various water impurities, potential pollutants, or quality indicators, are
listed alongside water uses affected" by the impurity. Concentrations greater
than the one opposite the use are damaging to the use. A study of the spectrum
quickly shows the water uses which are damaged by any particular concentration
of a water pollutant. With information on the value of the damage to these
uses a damage figure could be developed for a particular quality deterioration
or a benefit could be calculated for a particular quality improvement, in a
given situation.' Even without damage quantification, however, the relative
importance of quality levels can be determined from the spectra.
Another form of guide is a tabulation of threshold concentrations of
various pollutants for water uses. Using lines for the pollutants and columns
for uses the tabulation quickly shows the-critical concentration for any
particular pollutant when attempting to protect multiple uses. The following
will illustrate how such a tabulation could be presented. In the squares are
several bits of information - each square for a particular water pollutant and
a particular water use. In the upper half is a concentration which has.been
shown to be a limiting concentration of this pollutant for this particular use.
Sometimes the concentration is a tolerable one or causes no impairment. When
the square is divided by a diagonal line the concentration is a recommended
limit but when the dividing line is horizontal the concentration should not be
exceeded or.the use may be denied. When there is a dotted line the value above
the line is for treated water, i.e., drinking water (in Municipal column only)
and the value below the line is for water before treatment, i.e., stream water.
In the lower portion of the square is the lowest concentration which can be
measured by available practical analytical methods.
-------
5'0
To show how 'this tabulation .might be used take a few examples from
the attached illustration. Coliforms are shown to be limited to 1 in
potable water and for source of municipal supply and for irrigation
supply the recommended limit is 5000. For recreation involving swimming
a limit of 2l;00 is "recommended.' A recommended limit of 70 is shown in
the fish column - this is only for shellfish however. Note the analytical
test will measure to levels below 1/100 milliliters.
Chromium is shown to be limited to 0.05 in drinking water, recommended
at 5-300 in fish waters, 5-500 in livestock supplies and 3.U-17-3 in irrigation
supplies.
The cyanide lire shows that protection of fish will also protect muni-
cipal water supply. Likewish in the case of sulfate, protection of fish
will provide protection of municipal and other supplies. One serious caution
should be sounded for this table, viz., most of the values shown are taken
from the literature concerned with specific tests - they show either effect or
no effect levels and can hardly be used as recommendations for general appli-
cation. The table doe3, however, give some idea of the relative importance of
controlling a particular pollutant for protecting the various uses - it will
aid in interpreting the significance of a particular concentration of a pollu-
tant to the various uses. The figures in the table can and should be referenced
so that the documented information can be studied further if desired.
Water Quality Goals
For a comprehensive water pollution control program we need water quality
goals. These goals describe a level of quality which should be exceeded at
all times within the design conditions of the program. Before establishing these
goals consideration should be given the quality needs of the uses to be made
of the water, the penalties of not meeting these needs, the capability and
economics of controlling the stream water quality while permitting all uses,
and the administrative and political problems of pollution control. It should
be recognized that this quality may'not be as good as desired by some users
but it should be as good as can be provided commensurate with the econony of
the water use area.
To develop water quality goals for a given water use area one should
determine the water uses to be protected. Considering the quality objectives
of these uses and the potential pollution, a group of water quality indicators
(or parameters) should be selected.
A review of water quality guides should reveal a critical concentration
or level for each water quality indicator; For example, take the quality
indicator "fluoride" and a group of uses as follows:' municipal water supplies,
industrial water supply, fish and other aquatic life, and stock and wildlife
watering. The water quality objective for each of these uses might be to ¦
assure freedom from substances which would cause esthetic or physiological harm
-------
51
or economic damage. The fluoride threshold for each might read as follows,
respectively*' 0.8, 1.0, l.£, 10,0 and 5.0. Now if each of these uses is
.to be protected it is obvious that the water in the stream should be kept
below 0.8 ppm fluoride. If the uses to be protected included only fish
and aquatic life, irrigation and stock and wildlife watering the fluoride
concentration might be permitted to rise to 1.5 ppm. The critical threshold
limit would be selected and it would become the first choice for the water
quality goal insofar as fluoride as an indicator is concerned. The critical
figures for each quality indicator would be the first selection for water
quality goals.
Consideration should then be given to the feasibility and costs of pro-
ducing quality to.meet these goals. When cost becomes an inhibiting factor,
consideration should be given, to the penalties of providing a poorer quality..
A balance between these two will indicate the goals which should be estab-
lished.
In the absence of sufficient cost data to make a decision, the best judg-
ment available should be used in arriving at the goals. This judgment should
be provided by those most concerned and responsible for the use of water and
the control of pollution. Current research and future efforts should improve
our capability for eliminating much of the subjective judgment required and
for providing the data and system which' will-make obvious the optimum quality
in any given set of conditions.
-------
52
WATER QUALITY GUIDES
Indicator
or
Impurity
Municipal
Swimming
Fish
Livestock
Wildlife-
Irrigation

Coli
MPN
100 ml
1
5otkt ~
/"
2h00 /
A\
70* /
/<\

5000

Cr+6
mg/l
0.05
<0.05

•5-30^/
/£o.o5
5-500/
X0.05
3.U-
17. y/
yS <0.05

CN
mg/l
0.01 0.2
^/o.oi

0.08-/
0.5/
/ 0.01



Phenols
mg/l
1.0
>/l.o

2700/
/1.0
15,009/
y/ L.O


SulXate
mg/l
250
/l.O

90
/1.0
250
2000
f 1.0
336-960
576
1.0

* SHELL FISH WATERS
-------