PB-230 729 POLLUTION OF THE INTERSTATE WATERS OF THE GRAND CALUMET RIVER, LITTLE CALUMET RIVER, CALUMET RIVER, WOLF LAKE, LAKE MICHIGAN AND THEIR TRIBUTARIES. CON- CLUSIONS OF TECHNICAL SESSION. HELD AT CHICAGO, ILLINOIS ON FEBRUARY 2, 1966 Federal Water Pollution Control Administration Washington, D. C. 2 February 1966 DISTRIBUTED BY: Nation) Technical MmutiM Swvtei ------- COM1IHTS Agenda Itea Page Opening Statement by Mr. Murray Steio 4 54 Report of Water Quality Criteria, Calumet Area - Lover Lake Michigan, January 1966 12 Questions and Answers 56 Statement of Joseph Chantigney, Chairman of the Great Lakes Region, Izaak Walton League of America, and General Vice-Chairman, Cook County Clean Streams Committee 83 ------- CC»CLUSIONS OF TICHHieAL J,ISSICIt In the Matter of: Conference on the Pollution of the Interstate Waters of the Grand Calumet River, Little Calumet River, Calumet Riv*r, Wolf Lake, Lake Michigan and their Tributaries, convened at 9:05 a.m., Wednesday, February 2, 1966, at the Lincoln Roo^ Bismarck Hotel, Chicago, Illinois, ------- ATTENDANCE AT THE PRESS CONFERENCE PARTICIPANTS Murray Stein Chief, Enforcement Program Federal Water Pollution Control Administration Washington, D, C. H. W. Poston Regional Program Director Federal Water Pollution Control Administration Chicago, Illinois Blucher A. Poole Conferee representing Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board Colonel Frank W. Chesrow Conferee representing Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago ------- Opening Statement - Mr. Stein OPENING STATEMENT BY M9, MURRAY STEIN May we get started? I do think that we have achieved a remarkable breakthrough in water pollution control here now. Before we get into the substance, I think we should for the record indicate the tremendous efforts made by the various people here. On ny right, of course, we have Blucher Poole of Indiana. Next to bin is Mr. H. W. Post on of our office here, the regional program director with headquarters in Chicago. On ay left is Mr. Frank Chesrow. Mr. Clarence Klassen sat through all the sessions, but he could not be here today. In addition to that, going through these negotia- tions while I was in the snow has been ay long-time colleague and former Chicago citizen and member of the staff of the Sanitary District, Mr. Peter Kuh. They say the mark of a good administrator is where someone delegates all the stuff and Just has to ------- Murray Ptein snowbound, that is just about what I have done. In addition, I would like to call your attention to the Technical Committee. The members of the Committee were as follows: F. W. Kittrell of our Department. Dr. C. A. Bishop of thti U. S. Steel Corporation. H. H. Gerstein, City of Chicago Department of Water and Sewer*. Harold C. Jordahl, Department of the Interior, Madison, Wisconsin. Dr. A. J. Kaplovsky, Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago. R. C. Mallatt, American Oil Company. Perry Miller, Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board. R. S. Nelle, Illinois Sanitary Water Board. The alternates were as follows: Grover Cook of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, who is our enforcement repre- sentative in Chicago. Joseph L. Minkin of our Department. Ross Harbaugh, Inland Steel Company. James Vaughn of the City of Chicago Department nf Watftr and S«nr«rr«. ------- 6 Murray Stein John CUT, Department of the Interior. Dr. David Lordi, Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago. J. S. Baua, Cities Service Oil Company. Benn J. Leiand, Illinois Sanitary Water Board. I read these names into the record to indicate all the effort that has gone into this. These people have »et constantly. I would also say that the results achieved in no small measure stem from this Technical Committee and the Conferees. The Technical Committee and the Conferees I think constitute as distinguished a board as I have ever seen on water pollution and on industrial matters. I think if you would go through the country anywhere and try to come up with a board as distinguished as that, aside from a few friends I see in the audience whom we left out, you could not assemble a better group than this. This is why I think these results were achieved. This may be an indication of the magnitude of the problem from the standpoint of the State, the Federal government and the industry side. I think working in the Chicago problem we had the recognized top technical and professional talent in the field. So you caa see you did have a problem, because this is where the people have ------- Murray Stein gravitated to. I also do believe that we have achieved what many of us through the years sometimes believed was im- possible. I think we got a major breakthrough, and we have achieved three things. One, I think we have m program that will save Lake Michigan, It will save the lower end of Lake Michi- gan. It will clean up pollution in the Lake and preserve the water quality of the Lake for the maximum number of uses, present and future. This is a specter that has been haunting many of us for many years. I think we have a program that will do it. Secondly, I think we have a program which will be accomplished in a reasonable time. Within a few years you will be able to see it — in your lifetime and my lifetime I hope. I certainly think our children and our friends and neighbors will be able to enjoy it. This isn't one of these long-range programs where the millennium may come and we all may see greener pastures. We're going to see our way to clear, clean water in the Lake and preserve that clear, clean water within a few years. We're going to be so specific that the citizenry and the press and the industry and everyone can check on ------- 8 Murray Stein us and see if we have done our job. The third point is that I think the program is such that it can be lived with. This is a program which can be endorsed, as it has been endorsed in the Technical Committee, by the State agencies, by the city authorities, by the Sanitary District, by the Federal agencies, and by the municipalities and industries involved. Now, not everyone is going to like everything in this program, but I think in view of this sort of com- plex matter this is really an achievement. I think we also have two or three more generalized points before I go into the main part of the development. One is that I don't believe we have had a more complex pollution problem anywhere in the country. Secondly, because we were dealing with a re- source like Lake Michigan, which is one of our great fresh water resources and which if it goes very probably could not be recovered, we had to be very, very careful and in many cases have had to make very exacting demands and ask for heroic efforts. I think it is to the everlasting credit of the municipalities involved here and of the industries to recognize this, to recognize that we may be asking for ------- 9 Murray Stein things to preserve Lake Michigan that possibly Bight not be necessary where you hud a fast-flowing river, because if the lake ever went we could never recover it. And I think they came across. The third may be of interest to the professionals in the room. I think what we have cone up with here in terms of a program may be the blueprint of what pollution control will look like throughout the country. I think because of the complexity of the problem and the necessity to do a job we have come up with answers which very well may be the bible for other parts. I wouldn't say they are going to duplicate this exactly, but I cannot see a solution to another pollution case or the development of standards, as we are required to do under the new federal law, taking place without using what we have done here as the document to take off from. Now, you will recall at the original conference held last March we had agreed that the municipalities should take immediate action to clean up pollution. Spe- cifically, we said: "The Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board, the Illinois Sanitary Water Board and the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago will institute immedi- ate action in their respective jurisdictions that all ------- 10 Murray St«in sewage receive at least secondary treatment plus adequate effluent disinfection wi+Mn one year after tb* Issuance of the summary of the conference." The siuuiary of the conference was issued April 14, 1965. The date hare that we're going to check is April 14, 1966, Let's see how well we've done. I think we have to in this aspect of the prograa, as well a* in other aspects, give all credit to the treaendouft help and cooperation we have received froa Mayor Dvley, from Governor Kerner and from Governor Branigin. I don't think without their help and assistance we could have moved this prograa forward. I'm a "big city" boy, au4 I recognize how difficult running a city is. But with all his problems, Mayor Daley has never beon too busy to give a sympathetic ear to this prograa and to help us aove the prograa for- ward. 1 think without that we would not be so far ahead. Mow, what we are going to deal with here largely is the industrial waste prograa. May we have those sheets distributed, Mr. Kuh and Mr, Cook? We have at the last conference established a schedule for municipal waste treataent. As far as I know, except for some specialized cases where there is tertiary treatment, this prograa we have for secondary ------- 11 Hurray Stein treatment and adequate disinfection of the effluent is generally about as high a regimen of treatment as you have fro* cities anywhere in tbe country. The Conferees, as we agreed when we were here last, met in executive session on January 31 and February 1, 1966 and agreed to the following: 1. Based upon the report of the Technical Committee and review of comments submitted to the Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board, the Illinois State Sanitary vater Board, and the Metroi ilitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago, the Conferees ft*ree to the "Report of Water Quality Criteria, Calumet Area-Lower Lake Michi- gan," January 14, 1966 with the following provisions. These criteria are contained in this book (indicating). As you will recall, there are some 200 items. These criteria will be placed in the record. (The Report referred to follows:) ------- 12 Water Quality Criteria REPORT OF WATER QUALITY CRITERIA CALUMET AREA-LOVER LAKE MICHIGAN JANUARY 14th 1966 4th Edition ------- 13 Water Quality Criteria WATER QUALITY CRITERIA CALUMET AREA-LOWER LAKE MICHIGAN INTRODUCTION This report on the Calumet Area and Lower Lakes of Michigan is adapted from a report "Recommended Water Quality Criteria" submitted by a Technical Committee appointed in April, 1965. A conference on pollution of the interstate waters of the Grand Calumet River, Little Calumet River, Calumet River, Wolf Lake, Lake Michigan and their tributaries (Indiana-Illinois), called by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare under the provisions of Section 8 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 USC 466 et seq.), was held in Chicago, Illinois, March 2-9, 1965. Conclusions and recommendations of the Conferees included the following items that are pertinent to this report: "The Conferees will establish a Technical Committee as soon as possible which will evaluate water quality criteria and related matters in the area covered by the conference and make recommendations to the Conferees within six Months after the issuance of the summary of the conference." ------- 14 Water Quality Criteria "The Indiana Stream Pollution Control Board, the Illinois Sanitary later Board, and the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago, maintaining close liaison with the Technical Committee created by the Conferees will develop a time schedule for the construc- tion of necessary industrial waste treatment facilities. Such a schedule shall be submitted to the Conferees for their consideration within six months after the Issuance of the summary of this conference." Subsequently the Conferees met on April 7, 1965 and appointed the Technical Committee which held its initial session on the sane date. Since than the Committee has met at approximately two-week intervals, with most of the meetings continuing for two days. The Committee consisted of one representative of each of the four regulatory agencies (the States of Illinois and Indiana, the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago, and the Federal government), two repre- sentatives of Industry (U. S. Steel Corporation and American Oil Company) and one each of the City of Chicago Department of Water and Sewers, and the U. S. Department of the Interior. ------- 15 Water Quality Criteria GUIDE LINES FOB ADOPTING BASIC CRITERIA At its second meeting the Committee agreed on the following guidelines for its deliberations: "Water quality criteria for various uses will be applied to the existing situations. The criteria that are developed will recognize the existing water quality, the need for improvement of water quality in certain areas, and the possibility that criteria will not be United by existing levels in all cases. It is realized that quality criteria set at present cannot be binding for all time but will need reconsideration and possible revision at regular intervals in the future. Water quality needs for present and potential uses will be considered. Effluent standards will not be considered by this Committee." Considerable discussion was devoted to-definition of the phrase "water quality criteria" used by the Conferees in their charge to the Committee. Relying on the usual interpretation of the word "criteria," it was concluded that the Conferees intended that limits of constituents recommended by the Committee would be used as guides in judging the suitability of water quality for various uses and in planning improvements in water quality through waste reductions where needed, but would not ------- 16 Water Quality Criteria necessarily be applied as standards or requirements. BASES TOR DEVELOPMENT OF CRITERIA After considering various bases for development of water quality criteria the Committee agreed that criteria should be based on: 1. Present ami potential water uses. 2. Preservation of present good quality. 3. Improvement of degraded quality where technically and economically feasible. 4. Reconsideration and revision of regular intervals as future developments may dictate. It was concluded that adoption of uniform criteria for specific uses, regardless of location of uses, would not provide a practical basis for a pollution abatement program for Lake waters. For example, the sheltered areas between the Calumet Harbor Breakwater and the Indiana Harbor Bulkhead (Figure 1 - Appendix) receive the major discharges from waste sources. Obviously, it is impractical to expect water of the same high quality in this area, regardless of the degree of waste treatment achieved, as that which will be found several miles out in the open Lake. If the sources of municipal supply in the sheltered area are given adequate protection, the water ------- 17 Water Quality Criteria in the open Lake inevitably will be of still better quality. Based on this reasoning, the water area of the lower Lake was divided into three zones as shown in Figure 1. Most of the water area is defined as Open Water, which is that area aore than 200 yards offshore and outside of a line from the outer end of the Caluiet Harbor Break- water to and along the outer edge of the Inland Steel Bulkhead Line and thence through the U. S. Steel Water Supply intake to the outer end of the Gary Harbor Break- water. The Inner Harbor Basins is the area shoreward of the above line, but not including Shore Water. Shore Water is all water within 200 yards of shore except in the Inner Harbor Basins, where it is that water within 200 yards of existing onshore recreational areas. (Figure 1 follows:) ------- 18 j-«m CO H LAKE MICHIGAN LOCATION MAP CALUMiT-LOWER LAKi MICHIGAN f HUM 1 ------- 19 Water Quality Criteria Other water bodies for which criteria were developed included the Little Calumet River, the Grand Calumet River, and Wolf Lake. The reach of the Little Calumet River involved is from the State line to the con- fluence with the Cal-Sag Channel. In accordance with Federal jurisdiction in interstate enforcement it was con- cluded that the Committee should concern itself with only those reaches of the two Rivers that are downstream from the State line in Illinois, and with that portion of Wolf Lake that lies in Illinois, General water use categories were adopted for the development of criteria. These water uses are: 1. Municipal Water 2. Industrial Water Process - Cooling 3. Recreation a. Whole Body Contact b. Limited Body Contact 4. Fish and Wildlife 5. Commercial Shipping 6. Esthetics 7. Wastewater Assimilation Existing and potential uses of the delineated bodies of water for which quality criteria were considered ------- 20 Water Quality Criteria are noted in Table I (Appendix). The location!! of principal water uses are shown in Figures 2A and 2B (Appendix). Al- though there has been use of water for irrigation in the Little Calumet Basin, it has been so limited that it was concluded this very minor use did not justify special con- sideration. Constituents for which water quality criteria were considered for each of the bodies of water are indi- cated in Tables II through VI (Appendix). It should be noted that the constituents for both Ope. Tater and the Inner Harbor Basins, given in Table II, are the same. (Table I, Figures 2A and 2B, and Tables II through VI follow:) ------- TABLE I EXISTING AND POTENTIAL WATER USES 21 a s AREA AS DEFINED Open Water Inner Harbor Basins Shore Water Little Calumet River Grand Calumet River Wolf Lake X - Present Use O - Future Use S £ Municipal X X o i c S3 £ ° Industrial easing am X X X 41 » e << Recreatio Body Cont X X 1 g a ' s Recreatio Body Con X X X X X •-* Wastewat Assimilat X X X X X X ------- V , ' "*!' ii Rainbow Beach 78OOS ftamoc* Baach TWOS JockwnPaik-SSnl St Baoch 57lh St Beach 49th. St Beach 3lft St. Beach RooMOTitM-iith St. Baach nOOS Oh« SI Beach SOON. Ook St Beach IOOO North AM Beach I7OON. »rm*oot Aw. Baach 20OO 'vrebtter Avt Beach 220O Fuller-on Ave B«och 24OON Monlrote AM Btach 4400 Fo*ttr Ave Beach $200 Hollywood A« Btoch S7OO Thornaala Ave Beach 5934 AlbwnAve Beach 66OO North Shore Avt Beach 67OO Catumbra Avt Beach 6726 Pratt Ave Btoch 6800 Forx»ll Btuch 69-7100 Touhy Ave -Roqtr» Pk Blach 7I-72OO Jorvit Avt BtOCh 74OO Howard Si Beach 7COO Roger* Ave Btoch 7700N Junewiy Terract Btoch 'BOON Inawtry, Railrooo* and Caflmercial IkMfciitrial OiKharaa Area Q Foretl Prattrva, Parks * Cantor Ra yj" — 1 S'-'yA 66th St Crib Four Milt Crib Carter Horritan Crib Watarwomt Intake ------- USES ALUMf T AREA-LOWER LAKEMICHI9AM -MiMM M*rMMt C«M*rmc* ------- - ^. Muitrial Diicharg* Arto Far*H PrtMrvt , Pork* C*nt»r R«tid*ntiol Ntighbarhaodt OuorriM,Clay Stwogt TrMtnwfll W«rh« Golf Couritt , Country Club* Water Supply Intokct Storm SM«r Marino or Launcning Roropt Diichargt Point Mann , Swamp Wooatd Ar«at Airport WATER USES CALUMET AREA-LOWER Hlinoit- Indiana Inttntatt ------- fflkft ' I . ) \ k ^W) WATER USES CALUMET AREA-LOWER LAKF MICHIGAN IHinoi*-lndiona Inltrtlat* Conftrtne* Rtgien Pinw»< '•• T«eh«.t«l CwraitlM M Wilti Cmli'r ------- LECENO Norttiorn Indiana Power Ce. - BinWwni SlMl Midwtit Stttl Gor,-M<*orf No. 2 Gory-HobortNo I U S SlMl Universal Atlo* Ctmarrt Nortnwn Indiana Powtf Ce Sl'vici Eati Chicago WW imokt Inland Stttl Sincloir Oil Yo«ng«lown Union Whiting— Hommonfl Wattrworkt kitak* CommomMaHh-Ediion Llvir Brelhcn Amtncar, Mam U S Sltil USSltfl Wiscontin Bl John»on Btach B2 Oqdtn Btach B3 WtlH B*ach B«ach B5. Eo« CMc««0 SMCh B6 Whrtinj Btach BT. Hammond Btach BB Calunwl Btoch 99OO5 B9 Calumtt Stack 9600S. 642 last S* Start-Wolf Lak« Gtntral Chtmcal Ford Mobil Intake Inlokt Sptnctr InttflAkt Stttl ------- TABLE H CONSTITUENTS CONSIDERED FOR WATER QUALITY CRITERIA Open Lake and Inner g Harbor Basins en *3 CONSTITUENTS Coliform Bacteria Fecal Streptococcus Turbidity Color (True) Threshold Odor Number Odor Temperature^ " Oil FloatingjSolids and Debris Bottom Deposits pH Dissolved Oxygen BOD Ammonia Nitrogen Nitrogen (Total) Meth. Blue Act. Substance Chloride Cyanide Fluoride Dissolved Iron Phenol-like Substances Sulfates Phosphates (Total) Filtrable Residue (Tot. D'dSolids) Misc. Trace Contaminants Radionuclides Municipal Water X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X Industrial Water - Processing X X X X X X X X X X Industrial Water - Cooling X X X Recreation - Whole Body Contact Recreation - Linated Body Contact X X X X X X X X Fish and Wildlife X X X X X X X X X X X X Commercial Shipping X X X Esthetics X X X X X X X X Wastewater Assimilation X X X ------- 25 TABLE HI CONSTITUENTS CONSIDERED FOR WATER QUALITY CRITERIA $ Shore Water 3 CONSTITUENTS Coliform Bacteria Fecal Streptococcus Turbidity Color (True) Threshold Odor Number Odor Temperature Oil Floating Solids and Debris Bottom Deposits EH Dissolved Oxygen BOD Ammonia Nitrogen Nitrogen (Total,1 Meth. Blue Act. Substance Chloride Cyanide Fluoride Dissolved Iron Phenol-like Substances Sulfates Phosphates (Total) Filtrable Residue (tot, IV d Solids) Misc. Trace Contaminants Radionuclldes Municipal Water Industrial Water - Processing Industrial Water - Cooling Recreation - Whole Body Contact X x X X X X X X X X X X X Recreation - Limited Body Contact X ic u_x_ X ,., x- X X X Fish and Wildlife X X X X X X X X X X X x Commercial Shipping Esthetics X X X X X X X X Wastewater Assimilation X 1 X X ------- TARLE IV CONSTITUENTS CONSIDERED FOR WATER QUALITY CRITERIA 26 Little Ci lu met HIVIT From St.ite Line to % Junction With 2» Calumot Sa)f. Channel CONSTITUENTS t"«»lifitri>i M.ii li'n.i !-V<%ll SI r«>nlui'iic<-ii«; hirtii.lilv Col'itr (True) Thri-shrucl OtU.r Numlwr Odor Temperature — - -,-— ^ .,-.-.--. . . ™™ — - - . — _ . — . .Oil Floating fiCflitis ami Debris Bottom Deposit s PH Dissolved Oxvgfn BOD Ammonia Ni1n»j;rn Nifw^-n (Total) Moth. Blue Act. Sulwl.iiH-e Chloride CvanUlo Fluoride Dissolved Iron Phenol-like Suhstanc-es Sulfates Phosghatcs (TfJtal) Filtrablp Residue (Tot. D*d Solids) Misr.Trarc Contaminants Radionuclides . Municipal Water . _ _ ! Industrial Water - • , ' Processing ' j Industrial Water - | Cooling ] ' Recreation - Whole i : . • Body Contact ! v ... Recreation • Limited ; * Body Contact X ~ x~ X X ... -x-- X x Fish and Wildlife X ...... x X X X L x X X X X X i i , Commercial Shipping 1 • X i*1 ! • Esthetics 1 i : ' X -^ X X X X Tl i ! j I j Wastewaier Assimilation X_ X X X ------- TABLE V CONSTITUENTS CONSIDERED FOR WATER QUALITY CRITERIA Grand Calumet River State Line to Junction with Calumet River CONSTITUENTS CoUfortn Bacteria Fecal Streptococcus turbidity Color (True) Threshold Odor Number Odor Temperature Oil Floating Solids and Debris Bottom Deposits pH Dissolved Oxygen BOD Ammonia Nitrogen Nitrogen (Total i Meth. Blue Act. Substance Chloride Cyanide Fluoride Dissolved Iron Phenol-like Substances Sulfates Phosphates (Total) Filtrable Residue (Tot. D'd Solids) Misc. Trace Contaminants RadionucMdes Municipal Water Industrial Water - Processing X 1 X X X X X X X X X Industrial Water - Cooling u_l_ X If Recreation - Whole Body Contact Recreation - Limited Body Contact Fish and Wildlife Commercial Fishing Esthetics X X X X X X X X X Wastewater Assimilation X ^ X X X ------- 28 VI CONSTITUENTS CONSIDERED FOR WATER QUALITY CRITERIA Wolt Ulke « M :_> CONSTITUENTS Coliform Bacteria Fecal Streptococcus Turbidity Color (True) Threshold Odor Number Odor Tcmppr.it ure Oil Floating Solids and Debris B«Uom Deposits pit Dissolved OxvK''f 'IJOB Ammonia NitroKW Nitrogen (Total) Meth. Blue Act. Substance Chloride Cyanide Fluoride Dissolved Iron Phenol-like Substances Sulfatcs Phosphates (TotalT Filtrable Residue (Tot. D'd Solids) Misc. Trace Contaminants Radionuflides Municipal Water Industrial Water - Processing Industrial Water - Cooling Recreation - Whole Body Contact X X X X X X X X X " ' X"" X X X Recreation - Limited Body Contact X X X X X X X L_jx_ '/ Fish and Wildlife X | ^_j X X ' X"" X X X X X X X Commercial Shipping Esthetics X X X X X •X X X Wastewater Dissimilation X L_X_I X 'X ------- 29 Water Quality Criteria Criteria first were selected for each constituent for each water use in each area. Once the complete tabula- tion of criteria for all water uses in an area had been developed, the most stringent criteria for any of the water uses were selected as the governing values for that area. Sone of the criteria recommended are at or near the lower limits of detectability of analytical procedures included in "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater." The Committee concludes that "Standard Methods" of analysis should be employed where applicable, but recognizes that other approved Methods nay be required in judging compliance with some of the criteria. For example, the Committee recommends an annual average of 0.02 mg/1 and a single daily value of 0.05 mg/1 of ammonia nitrogen in the open water of the Lake. The limit of detectability of this compound by the "Standard Methods" procedure may be as low as 0.03 mg/1, but reproducibility is erratic below 0,. 1 mg/1. However, the accepted method used by the Great Lakes-Illinois River Basins Project Labora- tory has a sensitivity and precision of 0.01 mg/1. Successful application of the criteria requires that analytical results be reproducible among the several laboratories involved in the program. A round-robin pro- gram of replicate sample analysis recommended by the ------- 30 Water Quality Criteria Committee has been initiated by the laboratories to ensure reproducibility of results. A major, and probably the major, water quality problem of the area is taste and odor in municipal water supplies. The types of taste and odor n.ost difficult and costly to control by water treatment are "chemical," or "hydrocarbon," and "medicinal," or "phenolic." Since the "Standard Method" for threshold odor is recognized as sub- jective rather than objective, it is especially important that every effort be exerted to ensure the maximum possible reproducibility of threshold odor results among the labora- tories . CRITERIA The criteria recommended by the Committee are incorporated in the following tables, 1 through 6. The Committee feels that it is establishing * precedent in recommending criteria which, if attainable, will ensure the highest quality water that is reasonably feasible. ------- 31 Water Quality Criteria TABLE 1 CRITERIA OPEK WATER Control Points - Chicago South District Filtration Plant and Gary-West Plant Intakes Collform Bacteria - MPN/100 ml Annual Average (Arithmetic) Not more than 200 Single Dally value or Average (1) Not more than 1,500 FecalStreptococci - Number/I00 ml (Tentative) (2)Not more than 25 Turbidity No turbidity of other than natural origin that will cause substantial visible contrast with the natural appearance of the water. True Color - Units Annual Average Not more than S Single Daily Value or Average Not more than 15 Threshold Odor(Hydrocarbonand/or Chemical) (3) Daily Average Not more than 4 Single Value Not more than 8 Odor Ho obnoxious odor of other than natural origin. Temperature - Degrees F Not more than 85 ------- 32 Water Quality Criteria Oil Substantially free of visible floating oil. Floating Solidsand Debris Substantially free of floating solids and debris from other than natural sources. Botton Deposits Substantially free of contaminants that will: (1) adversely alter the composition of the bottom fauna; (2) Interfere with the spawning of fish or their eggs; (3) adversely change the physical or cheBical nature of the bottom. pH - units Annual Median Within range 8.1 - 8.4 Dally Median Within range 7.7 - 9.0 Dissolved Oxygen - Per Cent Saturation Annual Average Not less than 90 Single value Not less than 80 AnuBonia Nitrogen (N) - m/\ (4) Annual ..verage 0.02 Single Daily Value or Average 0,05 Total nitrogen (N) (4) 0.4 Methylene Blue Active Substance - ag/1 Annual Average Not more than 0.05 Single Daily Value or Average Not more than 0.20 ------- 33 Water Quality Criteria Chlorides (CD - «g/l 1965 1970 1980 1990 2000 Annual Average Not sore than 8 9 10 11 12 Single Daily Value or Average Not more than Cyanides (CN) - ag/1 Single Value Fluorides (F) - ag/1 Annual Average Single Daily Value or Average Dissolved Iron (Fe)- ag/1 Annual Average Single Daily Value or Average Phenol-like Substances - ag/1 (Tentative) (5) 15 (through 1970) Not more than 0.025 Not more than 1.0 Not more than 1.3 Not aore than 0.15 Not acre than 0.30 Annual Average Single Value Sulfates (SCU) - ag/1 Annual Average Not more than 0.001 Not acre than 0.003 1965 1970 1980 1990 2000 Not more than 23 24 26 28 30 Single Dally Value or Average Not More than fotal Phosphates (PO4) - «g/l (Tentative) (6) Annual Average Single Dally Value or Average 50 (through 1970) Not acre than 0.03 Not more than 0.04 ------- 34 Water Quality Criteria Flltrable Residue 1965 1970 1980 1990 2000 (Total Dissolved Solids (mg/1) Annual Average 162 165 172 179 186 Single Daily Value or Average Not More than 200 (through 1070) Miscellaneous Trace Contaminants and Radionuclidee Shall not be present in concentrations that will prevent meeting PBS 1962 Drinking Water Standards after conventional treatment. (1) If more than one sample per day is examined, the limit shall be the daily average. If only one sample per day is taken, the single value shall govern. (2) Pending accumulation of adequate data on existing densities of Streptococcus. Probably can be lowered. (3) The Chicago South District Filtration Plant Control Laboratory will be the reference laboratory for Threshold Odor. (4) Tentative pending study of additional data and evaluation of potential reductions at the sources. (5) Pending study of additional data and evaluation of potential reductions at tne sources. (6) Pending thorough determination of existing concentra- tion in Lower Lake Michigan Conference Area. ------- 35 later Quality Criteria TABLE 2 CRITERIA INNER HARBOR BASINS Control Points - Hamaond and East Chicago Water Intakes ColHor» Bacteria - MPN/100 •!. Annual Average (Arithmetic^ Not aore than 2,000 Single Daily Value or Average Not more than 5,000 (1) Fecal Streptococci- Muaber/lOO »1 Hot »ore than 100 Turbidity No turbidity of other than natural origin that will cause substantial visible contrast with the natural appearance of water. True Color - Units Annual Average Mot more than 5 Single Daily Value or Average Mot Bore than 15 Threshold Odor (Hydrocarbon and/or Cheaical) Units T2T Annual Average Not aore than 8 Single Daily Value or Average Not nore than 20 Odor No obnoxious odor of other than natural origin. Teaperature - Degrees F Not isore than 85 Oil Substantially free of visible floating oil. ------- 36 Water Quality Criteria Floating Solids and Debris Substantially free of floating solids and debris from other than natural sources. Bottom Deposits Substantially free of Muck and debris of other than natural origin. pH - Units Annual Median Within range 8.0 - 8.5 Daily Median Within range 7.S - 9.0 Dissolved Oxygen -Per Cent Saturation Annual Average Mot less than 80 Single Daily Value or Average Not less than 65 i^ Nitrogen - «g/l (2) Annual Average 0.05 Single Dally Value or Average 0.12 Methylene Blue Active Substance - «g/l Annual Average Mot More than 0.10 Single Daily Value or Average Mot aore than 0.30 Chlorides - ag/1 1965 1970 1980 1990 2000 Annual Average Not more than 16 18 20 22 24 Single Dally Value or Average Not more than 30 (through 1070) Cyanides - ng/1 Single Value Less than 0.1 ------- 37 Water Quality Criteria Fluorides - mg/l Annual Average Mot worm than 1.0 Single Dally Value or Average Not more than 1.3 Dissolved Iron - mg/l Annual Average Mot more than 0.15 Single Daily Value or Average Mot more than 0.30 Phenol-like Substances - iag/1 (Tentatlve) Annual Average Not more than 0.002 Single -ally Value or Average Not more than 0.005 Sulfates - mg/l 1965 1970 1980 1990 2000 Annual Average Not more than 35 36 39 42 45 Single Daily Value or Average Mot More than 75 (through 1970) TotalPhosphates - mg/l (Tentative) (2) Annual Average Not more than 0.05 Single Daily Value or Average Not more than 0.10 filterable Residue 1965 1970 1980 1990 2000 (Total Dissolved Solids) - mg/l " Annual Average Not more than 187 190 197 204 211 Single Daily Value or Average Not more than 230 (through 1970) ------- 38 Water Quality Criteria Miscellaneous Trace Contaminants and Radionuclides Shall not ba present in concentrations that will prevent Meeting PBS 1962 Drinking Water Standarda after conventional treatment. (1) Except during periods of stormwater overflow when coliform ahould not exceed 24,000/100 •!. (2) Tentative pending study of additional data and evaluation of ootwntial reductions at the sources. If vore than one sample per day is examined, the limit shall be the daily average. If only one sample per day is taken, the singls value shall govern. ------- 39 later quality Criteria TABLE 3 CRITERIA SHORE WATER Control Points - Existing Sampling Points At Bathing Beaches. Bacteria - number per 100 «1 by MF Techniques (Tentative)(1) (a) The number of bacteria snail b* the Arithmetic Average of the last five consecutive s&nple results. (b) Satisfactory area if MF Conforms are less than 1000 and MF Fecal Streptococci are less than 100. (c) Satisfactory area if MF Collforss are fro* 1000 to 5000 and MF Fecal Streptococci are less than 20. (d) A single sample result of over 100,000 Coliforms shall require Immediate investigation as to the cause. Items to be considered in the judgment of cause and action to be taken Include th* sanitary survey, winds, currents and weather conditions. Turbidity No turbidity of other than natural origin that will cause substantial visible contrast with the natural appearance of water. ------- 40 Water Quality Criteria TrueColor - Unite Annual Average Mot »ore than 5 Single Daily Value or Average Mot More than 15 Odor Mo obnoxious odor of other than natural origin. Temperature - DegreesF Hot more than 85 Oil Substantially free of visible floating oil. Floating Solids and Debris Substantially free of floating solids and debris from other than natural sources. Bottom Deposits Substantially free of Buck and debris of other than natural origin. pH - Units Daily Median Within range 7.0 - 0.0 DissolvedOxygen - Per Cent Saturation Annual Average Not less than 90 Single Value Mot less than 80 Aamonia nitrogen (if) - ag/1 (TsBtstiYe) (2) Annual Average Mot more than 0.05 Single Dally Value or Average Mot »ore than 0.12 ------- 41 Water Quality Criteria Methylene Blue Active Substance - mg/1 Annual Average Not more than 0.02 Single Daily Value or Average Not more than 0.05 Cyanides (CN) - mg/1 Single Value Not more than 0.025 Phenol-like Substances - ng/1 (Tenta- tive) (?)" Hox more than 0.05 Phosphates 0*%) ~ (Tentative) (3) /nnual Average Not more than 0,03 Single Daily Average or Value Not more than 0.04 Miscellaneous Trace Contaminants and Radionuclides Shall not be present in concentrations that will prevent meeting the PHS 196? Drinking Water Standards after conventional treatment. (1) Pending evaluation of data on bathing beaches during 1965 which are now being collected. (2) Pending study of additional data and evaluation of potential reductions at the sources. (3) Pending thorough determination of existing concentra- tions in Lower Lake Michigan Conference Area. Lower limits may be desirable. If more than one sample per day is examined, the ------- 42 Water Quality Criteria limit shall be the daily average. If only one sample per day is taken, the single value shall govern. ------- 43 Water Quality Criteria TABLE 4 CRITERIA LITTLE CALUMET RIVER Control Point - Wentworth Avenue Bridge. Colifor* Bacteria - MPH/100 ml Maxlmua Value 5000 except during periods of stormwater runoff. Fecal Streptococci - Number/100al Maximua value 500 except during periods of stormwater runoff. Turbidity Mo turbidity of other than natural origin that will riuae substantial visible contrast with the natural appearance of the water. True Color - Units Annual average not more than 25. Single daily value or average not »ore than 50* *1 Odor No obnoxious odors of other than that of natural origin. Temperature Degrees F Single daily value or average not »ore than 90. Oil Substantially free froa visible floating oil. ------- 44 Water Quality Criteria FloatingSolids and Debris Substantially free of floating solids and debris from other than natural sources. Bottom Deposits Substantially free of sludge banks. pH- Unite Annual median within range 6.5 - 9.0. Dissolved Oxygen - mg/1 Average (May through September) not less than 4.0. Single daily value or average not lesa than 2.0. BOP - mg/1 Single daily value or average not more than 10.0. Ammonia Nitrogen - mg/1 (2) Single daily value or average not more than 1.5. Methylene Blue Active Substance - mg/1 'Jingle daily value or average not more than 0.5. Cfyanides - mg/1 Single daily value or average not more than 0.025. Phenol-like Substances - mg/1 Single daily value or average not more than 0.02. Total Phosphates-mg/1 (2) Held for additional data analysis. (Appears to be from surface runoff.) ------- 45 water Quality Criteria (1) If more than one sample per day IB examined, the Halt shall be the dally average. If only one sample per day Is taken, the single value shall govern. (2) Tentative pending study of additional data and evaluation of potential reductions at the sources. ------- 48 Water Quality Criteria TABLE 5 CRITERIA GRAND CALUMET RIVERA Control Point - Baltimore and Ohio Chicago Terminal Railroad Bridge. Coliform Bacteria MPK/100 ml. (Tentative) Maximum Value 5000 except during periods of stormwater runoff. Fecal Streptococci - Number/100 ml Maximum value 500 except during periods of stornwater runoff. True Color - Units (Tentative) Annual Average 25 Single Daily Value or Average*^' Not more than 50 Odor No obnoxious odors of other than that of natural origin. Temperature - Degrees F Not more than 90 Oil Substantially free of visible floating oil. Floating Solids and Debris Substantially free of floating solids and debris from other than natural sources. ------- 47 Water Quality Criteria Bottoa Depoa its Substantially free of sludge banks. pH - Unite Annual Median Within range 6.S - 9.0 Dissolved Oxygen - «g/l (Tentative) Average (Hay through September) Single Daily Value or Average BOO - ag/1 (Tentative) Single Value ABMOO la-Nitrogen - mg/1 (Tentative) Single Value 3.0 Not less than 1.0 Less than 10.0 Mot more than 5.0 Methylene Blue Active Substances - (Tentative) Single Value Chlorides - »g/l (Tentative) Annual Average Single Dally Value or Average Phenol-1 ike Subs tances - «g/l (Tentative!" Single Value Total Phosphates - «g/l (Tentative) Reid for additional data analysis. Filterable Residue (Total Dissolved Solids) - (Tentative) Not more than 0.5 75 Not more than 125 Not «ore than 0,020 Single Value Not more than 500 ------- 48 Water Quality Criteria (1) It is recognized that the Grand Calumet River at the State Line is essentially treatment plant effluent from Hammond due to the nature of the natural drainage flow. In addition to the concentration limits, the pounds per day of each constituent shall be limited to the loads that would occur at these concentrations with a flow of 20 cfs. Combined s tor mater overflows shall be eliminated as soon as possible. Criteria consider only existing conditions. If the proposed dam changes conditions, then the criteria should be reconsidered. (2) If store than one sample per day is examined, the limit shall be the dally average. If only one sample per day 1* taken, the single value shall govern. ------- 49 later Quality Criteria TABLE 6 CRITERIA WOLF LAKE Control Point - Illinois -Indiana State Line - Wolf Lake Culvert*1* Bacteria - Number per 100 ml by MF Techniques (a) The number of bacteria shall be the Arithmetic Average of the last five consecutive sample results. (b) Satisfactory area if MF Coliform are less than 1000 and MF Fecal Streptococci are less than 100. (c) Satisfactory area If MF Conforms are from 1000 to 5000 and MF Fecal Streptococci are less than 20. (d) £ single sample result of over 100,000 Coliforms shall require immediate investigation as to the cause. Items to be considered in the judgment of cause and action to be taken include the sanitary survey, winds, currents and weather conditions. ------- 50 Water Quality Criteria Turbidity No turbidity of other than natural origin that will cause substantial visible contrast with the natural appearance of water. True Color - Units Annual Average Not more than 5 Single Daily Value or Average Mot More than 15 Odor No obnoxious odor of other than na'.urxl origin. Temperature - Degrees F Not more than 85 Oil Substantially free of visible floating oil. Floating Solids and Debris Substantially free of floating solids and debris from other than natural sources. Bo11 am Depos i ts Substantially free of »uck and debris of other than natural origin. pH - Units Daily Median Within range 7.0 - 9.0 Dissolved Oxygen - Per Cent Saturation Annual Average Not less than 90 Single Value Not less than 80 ------- 51 Water Quality Criteria Ammonia Nitrogen (K) - mg/1 (Tentative (3) Annual Average Hot more than 0.05 Single Daily Value or Average Not more than 0.12 Methylene Blue Active Substance - mg/1 Annual Average Mot wore than 0.02 Single Daily value or Average Not more than 0.05 Cyanides (cv) - ag/1 Single Value Not more than 0.025 Total Phosphates (PO4) - mg/1 (Tentative) (4) Annual Average Mot more than 0.03 Single Daily Average of Value Mot more than 0.04 (1) Criteria apply at beaches as well as at Toll Road Bridge Station. (2) Pending evaluation of data on bathing beaches during 196S which are now being collected. (3) Pending study of additional data and evaluation of potential reductions at the sources. (4) Pending thorough determination of existing concentra- tions in Lower Lake Michigan Conference Area. Lower 1in its nay be desirable. If more than one sample per day is examined, the limit shall be the daily average. If only one sample per day is taken, the single value shall govern. ------- 52 Water Quality Criteria PROCEDURES FOR APPLICATION OF CRITERIA CONTROL POINTS The committee recommends that the following sampling stations serve as control points to judge compliance with the recommended criteria. This recommendation is not in- tended to exclude sampling at such other points as may be found necessary to ensure effective pollution abatement and continuing monitoring and control of pollution. OPEN WATER 1. Chicago South District Filtration Plant - Dunne or Shore Intake Crib, or both in combination. ?. Gary Water Intake, West. INNER HARBOR BASINS 1. Hammond Water Intake. 2. East Chicago Water Intake. SHORE WATER Existing sampling points at bathing beaches. LITTLE CALUMET RIVER Wentworth /venue Bridge. GRAND CALUMET RIVER Baltimore and Ohio Chicago Terminal Railroad Bridge. WOLF LAKE Culvert through Earthen Dike Road on Illinois-Indiana State line. ------- 53 Water Quality Criteria LABORATORY METHODS Analytical methods shall adhere to the procedures approved by the Laboratory Directors representing the Illinois and Indiana pollution control agencies, the Metropolitan Sanitary District of Greater Chicago, the Chicago Bureau of Water and the Great Lakes-Illinois River Basins (GLIRB) Project. The Technical Committee is aware of the variations in the procedures followed in determination of threshold odor by the several laboratories involved and that none adheres to "Standard Methods," and recognizes that quantitative values reported by the laboratories quite probably have little true relationship to each other. In order to place threshold odor results on a comparable basis until a uniform procedure can be adopted, the Committee recommends that all official determinations be performed by one organization, such as the Chicago South District Filtration Plant. In this way the South District Filtration Plant method would serve temporarily as a standard for reference procedure. Recent discovery of wide variations in ammonia results obtained by four laboratories on two samples has cast some doubt on the comparability of analytical results. The pro- gram of the Laboratory Directors to achieve uniformity in meth- ods and results should be pressed with all possible speed. ------- 54 Murray Stein MR. STEIN (continuing): I might say that, except in possibly specialized cases where we haven't got criteria yet, except in cases where you have an exceptional situation like Tahoe or some other crater lake of that kind, as far as I know these criteria are as high as I have seen estab- lished anywhere for water quality control other than possibly for shellfish beds. These are extremely high, and I think they will clean up and preserve the Lake. The Conferees accepted these criteria with the following provisions: (a) These Water Quality Criteria are subject to subsequent adjustments by the Conferees when investigations or laboratory findings so justify. (b) Laboratory techniques and methodology are to be coordinated by the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration laboratory. 2. The Conferees adopt the following maximum time schedule for control of waste discharges of industries: Preliminary Engineering Plan Documents Dec. 1966 Final Engineering Plan Documents June 1967 Construction complete and facilities in operation Dec. 1968 ------- 55 Murray Stein Such documents »re to be filed in sufficient ti»e so that they may be approved by the appropriate water pollution control agencies by the above date*. 3. The Conferee* recognize modifications in this schedule may be necessary. These may include: (a) A leaser time where the control agency having Jurisdiction considers a practical method of control can be in operation prior to the time stated. (b) la a few industries some variation from this schedule may be sought from the appropriate State and local pollution control agencies. in such cases after review the Conferees may make appropriate recommendations to the Secretary of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. 4. The conference is to be reconvened at the call of the Chairman to evaluate progress toward pollution control in the waters of the conference area. If any of the Conferees has anything to add, we will call on .him, or if you people have any questions to ask, we can sit up here en masse and try to answer them for a while. We will be available individually after we ------- 56 Murray Stein adjourn here to answer your Individual question*. But does anyone have anything to say now or does anyone have a question before we break up? QUESTION: I have a question back here, Mr. Chairman. ME. STEIN: Would you identify yourself? MR. RICHARD LEWIS: I am Richard Lewis from the Chicago Sun-Times. You indicated in your opening statement that it would be some little time but not a millennium before this program was carried out, and in the printed sheet you indi- cate that it is agreed that construction will be completed and facilities will be in operation about two years from now. MR. STEIN: Yes. MR. LEV IS; My question is: Can you five us an estimate on when the Lake will be clear and on when you will be able to Judge by routine tests and visual observations as to whether this program is going to work? MR. STEIN: By the way, we will be doing that during the two-year period. You don't have to wait for the end of the construction. I think you were here, Mr. Lewis, at the last conference. We heard, even up to now, that many of the ------- 57 Questions and Answers Industries had made improvements in reducing their waste load of various substances by as much as 90 per cent. I think the city programs are going into effect this spring. Now, the effect on the Lake, on the improvement of the Lake, should be continuous. We should be able to see by this summer the effect of the program up to now. I think you have to always expect a little time lag, and this is .just the mechanics of the way nature operates between the cessation of a discharge, or the ade- quate treatment of wastes, and the showing up of improvement in the watercourse. But I expect that if this program is working, we should see a steady and progressive type of improvement from now on. We are going to keep this under surveillance. To answer your question as to how soon after December 1968 we should achieve optimum results in the maxi- mum kind of clean-up, we have not been able to get an abso- lutely definitive answer on that from oux scientists. That is not because they are ducking. It is much, much easier to predict the clean-up in a stream. We haven't had too much experience with lakes. But I might say in streams we have gotten sub- stantial clean-ups from one to three years after the work was completed. ------- 58 Questions and Answers I think here you are just going to see a spectrum of a clean-up, and I expect that these waters will be getting better and cleaner all the tine from now on. MR. LEWIS: Thank you. MR. STEIN: Are there any further questions? Yes? QUESTION: What happens if, say in December of this year, you discover one or more industries don't have their preliminary plans ready? What happens if they are not meeting the time limit? MR. STEIN: Again, I think we believe,in talking and dealing with these industries, that they are going to have their plans ready. We feel that we have given then a reasonable schedule. But, as you know, the law is very clear. If you don't have the plans ready, then the notice of the violation is sent to the Secretary, and the next step in this is a hearing. If that doesn't work, the next step is court action. I might say though, sir, that we have dealt with some 1,200 industries, in my experience in water pollution control, and with some of the major industries in the country, as we're dealing with here. Never once have we been to court with an industry. I don't anticipate that ------- 59 Questions and Answers here. I anticipate that the industries will work with it* very closely to get the plans ready. How, I do know — and I think I speak for Mr. Klassen, who is not here, but certainly for all the Confers* here and for myself — that industry after industry has been coming in to see Be, both on a formal and on an informal basis, and I am sure they are seeing the State and the District people too, making an effort to get these plans ready. I think we till have to be realistic and logical. I see a tremendous change in industry la doing this. Let me put it as bluntly at I can. I don't think a major steel company puts a couple of fellows on an airplane and flies them to Washington to visit with me just for a social visit. X think they mean business. Thank you. QUESTION: IB there any one major substance polluting the Lake, the elimination of which could enable the program to get off with a major leap? MR. STEIN: I would not like to specify a major substance polluting the Lake. I think one of the really complicated problems that we have in the Chicago area is that we have a variety of materials polluting the Lake. ------- 60 Questions and Answers Now, there is one substance that we are grappling with at this point, and that is phosphate removal. This is a nutrient that may contribute to the premature aging or putrefaction of the Lake. While this is a etibeCance of which we don't have that much control, you may hear a lot of talk about phosphate removal. However, there are bacteria going into the Lake which are from human wastes. This will be stopped with dis- infection in the spring. This should make a big difference. We also have industrial wastes, and we know what they are. They are largely from the petroleum, or oil, industry and from the steel industry. Each of these wastes is fairly well cataloged. Each one of them can be trouble- some. They are going to be expensive to the industry to remove. They recognize these wastes as well as I do. I think if you want a detailed list of the wastes from the various industries, I will be glad to talk to you later. QUESTION: In putting this together in the last few days, did you give any consideration at all to what this is going to cost industry and, secondly, to whether you might recommend some bill for Federal aid to help them build some of these facilities? MR. STEIN: Let me answer your second question ------- Questions and Answers first, because that is easy. Recemendations for legislation come from the President. And I work on legislation. That's another "halo" I wear. One of the beauties of the job I have is that, because I work on legislation and help prepare the Administration's report on legislation, I can't talk about it. (Laughter) But there have been legislative pro- posals for help for industry. On the other point, these people here can tell you quite a bit about public financing. I have at least a feeling that in the administration of this law, unless an industry volunteers to us what it costs, this really is not much of our business, what the private financing is. We are interested in industry doing the job. Very often they have reasons, either competitive reasons or financial reasons, to arrange their long-tent or short-term financing in a certain way. They nay not wish, for whatever reason they have, to reveal this kind of financing. We are happy to get these figures when we can get them. However, we respect that aspect of industry. I think, if thes? figures are made available to us, we wi'l collate them, and we will make them available, but I suggest any question you have on industrial costs be directed to the industry. ------- 62 Questions and Answers QUESTION: What about the State and municipality figures? Have you got those? MR. STEIN: I think I would like each of the people to speak for himself. QUESTION: Could we get some sort of Just "boxcar" figures? MR. STEIN: Do you have State and municipality figures to clean this up, Mr. Poston? QUESTION: Just a round figure. MR. POSTON: t don't have one offhand. MR. STEIN: Grover, do you have one? MR. GROVIR COOK (Chief, Enforcement Activities, Region V, Federal rater Pollution Control Administration) : No, I don't. QUESTION: Well, Mr. Stein, Just off the top of your head, would you be willing to make an estimate what' both the public and private figures Right be? MR. STEIN: I an surrounded by engineers here. I would prefer they do it. MR. POOLE: I will yield to Poston. I can't do it. MR. STEIN: Mr. Poston, do you want to try? MR. POSTON: I can't give a figure. QUESTION: One million? Two million? Ten ------- 63 Questions and Answers million? MR. STEIN: I suspect it will be more than two million. MR. POSTON: I would say over ten million. I wouldn't say now much over. QUESTION: Ten million for everything or Just for the public bodies? We just want a round figure. Nobody is going to hold you to it. MR. PCSTON: I think Youngstown has a figure of $11 million that they gave for their own one plant. QUESTION: Are you talking about a municipal plant or about all industries? MR. POSTON: This is an industrial plant. This is Youngstown Sheet and Tube. MR. STEIN: Let He say this: I can see the re- luctance of these people, but I don't want to mislead you on this. I suspect a figure like $10 million is very, very low. That's not even in the ballpark. MR. POSTON: That's right. MR. STEIN: It's going to be considerably higher. Do you want to give them a figure (to Mr. FOBton)? MR. POSTON: No, I'm not going to — MR. STEIN: You once gave a figure for mil the Great Lakes, didn't you? ------- 84 Question* and Answers MB. P06TON: That's easier. MB. STEIN: Wit? don't you give them that figure? What dit. you say? This is just to give an idea of the magnitude. MB. P06TOW: i*e nere talking about a five-year program or a ten-year program to clean up all of the pollu- tion in the Great Lakes, that it would be something in the magnitude of $20 billion. QUESTION: Billion? QUESTION: Million or billion? MB. P08TON: Billion. This is a big problem. QUESTION: Did you say a five- or a ten-year program? MB. P06TCW: Ten-year. This would include com- bined sewers — elimination of combined sewers — and cer- tain research needed. MB. STEIN: Just a moment* Just to give you an idea, we have some figures here for the District alone. Colonel Chesrow probably can give those. This Is just the Sanitary District. COLONEL CHESROK: The Metropolitan Sanitary Dis- trict of Greater Chicago anticipates that our present needs are close to $200 million, and our anticipated expenditures within the next ten years will be, in round figures. ------- Questions and Answer* approximately $400 million additional. QUESTION: Just for this purpose alone? COLONEL CHESROW: Yes. QUESTION: Just for pollution control? COLONEL CHESROW: Yes. That is for building new plants and for doing the work that is necessary to prevent pollution and for control of the pollution of Lake Michigan. QUESTION: This is all new? This isn't something you were doing? COLONEL CHESROW; No, no. This is new. MR. STEIN: That is Just the District. I Bight give you another idea of the magnitude. I don't want to speak for this area, but this might help. I think in the future years it is pretty well agreed that when we talk in terms of "water resources" — and don't forget we are dealing with Corps of Engineers* projects and big dams, Bureau of Reclamation dams, and so forth — the biggest single item of expenditure in water resources is going to be for pollution control. In other words, nationally, an item in water re- sources, and a major item, is going to be for pollution control. You can, going back, Just look at the amounts that we spent for dams in this country in the past. These ------- 66 Questions and Answers amounts will appear small in the future when we are going to have larger expenditures nationally for pollution con- trol. In other words, I don't think anyone should be aisled by the notion that this is not going to be a Major cost. This nay very well be, after the roads program, the area of public works that is going to be the most signifi- cant in cost in the country. I think the Chicago area, having a problem like that, would have to recognize this if we are going to do the job. Y«s? QUESTION: Mr. Stein, you spoke of secondary treatment of domestic wastes. Does that mean that you are going along with the dumping of sewage effluent into the Lake after it has been treated a second time, that that is permissible now? MR. STEIN: The situation we have here is that Indiana puts out effluent that gets into the Lake after it is treated, or it gets into a tributary of the Lake. Isn't that correct? MR. POOLS: That's right. MR. STEIN: We recognize that this is a question that is before the Supreme Court, and we are a party to that case too. We take no position on that. If anyone decides ------- 67 Questions and Answers this question of discharge of effluent to the Lake or not, the Court is going to decide it. What we are doing is taking the situation here as we find it, where these people discharge wastes into the waters, and our job is to abate it, that is, lessen it as much as possible. We are doing the best we can with that. By the way, there are some Illinois sources that discharge into the Lake too. QUESTION: But you are still going to allow it? MR. STEIN: There will be no prohibition, and I don't know that we have that authority, sir. There will be no prohibition against the discharge of wastes at all into any waters of the country. Let ae again make this abundantly clear, because this is a very pertinent question, but I think you have to understand this. One, this question right now is before the Supreme Court of the United States. We are a party to the case, as are Illinois and the other Lake States. We are going to abide, as everyone else is I'M sure, by the Court's decision. Secondly, our law speaks in tens of "abating" pollution. Again, I aa an old crossword puzzle fan. "Abate" •eans "diminish." That Beans you don't tell the people ------- 68 Questions and Answers not to put anything in at all. If we did that, then we would possibly have been given a different statutory Ban- date. In other words, we find where the wastes are going, and we try to get then to do the job as best we can. You can be sure there will be no increase of sewage going into the Lake. At the end it will be better. QUESTION: Has the Sanitary District gone along with this abatement program? COLONEL CHESROW: We are against all pollution going into Lake Michigan, and our stand is that we're opposed to pollution of all sorts, of any type, going into Lake Michigan. QUESTION: Is the District planning to put sewage that has had secondary treatment into the Lake? COLONEL CHESROW: Never. No effluent of any sort. QUESTION: Mr. Stein, you called this a "remark- able breakthrough." Could you describe in layman's terms Just what these criteria mean and what industry and the municipalities are going to be doing so as to indicate to the general public just what this is going to mean? MR. STEIN: Yes. I think a few of the criteria can give you an indication. One, the conform count refers to bacteria or a ------- 69 Questions and Answers bug found in the intestines of a warm-blooded animal at water intakes. Generally speaking, it has been considered satisfactory if the count was 5,000. The count we are shooting for at the Chicago water intakes is 200. for example, you have industries here, the petroleum industry and the steel industry, both of then, which have very vexing oil problems. The criterion here is "no visible oil discharge." What I think we have is a cutback of pollutants to practically the irreducible minimum. I think in all reasonable respects we are going to keep the Lake practically pure, considering the multi- millions you have living along the shores and the tremendous industry you have along the shores. Obviously, you cannot return this to the days of Fort Dearborn or the Indians, but I think, with the criteria that we have here, some people may think we have come pretty close. QUESTION: Is there anything major that you have compromised on, that is not in this report, that you think ought to be in it? S MR, STEIN: No. As a matter of fact, this is what I think, sir, is so remarkable, when I talk about the "remarkable breakthrough" in here. ------- 70 Questions and Answers I think that, with industry, with the localities, with the States, and with us, we have gotten a pollution control program that I do not think cowpromises in one respect, and I don't want to qualify this by even saying "essential" respect. I think if you got some professor, for example, in one of the respected universities, to cone up with a "blue sky" plan to clean up Lake Michigan, or if we put one of our planning staffs to work on that, they would not have cone up with anything that is much different than what emerged here. That is what T think is so remarkable. Yes? QUESTION: Mr. Stein, would it be premature to think that these criteria will be adopted, say, along the Ncrth Shore and up around Milwaukee where they are having problems? I aa just talking about our immediate vicinity now. MR. STEIN: I would answer that, yes, I would hope they would do something around Milwaukee where they are having problems. Now, again, let me give you what our law provides, We can only come in, on our initiative, when pollution in one State endangers health or welfare in another State. ------- Questions and Answera Obviously — at least ve think that is the situation in Milwaukee — while this may affect the Lake generally, it is at the present tine largely a Wisconsin problem. We would love to see Wisconsin get at that. I think the fact of those Milwaukee beaches being closed is an indication that everything is not just fine around there. If the Governor of Wisconsin should ask us to come in, we would be delighted to come in and help to try to clean that up. So far, we haven't had the invitation, and I don't know that we are holding our breath expecting it. QUESTION: How about the North Shore, now, where you have Abbott Laboratories, Johnson Motors, etc.? MB, STEIN: Well, again, I think that tiie North Shore is something that we would like to see cleaned up. That is outside the area of the case. Again, I think it's outside your jurisdiction too, isn't it, Colonel? COLONEL CHESROW: Yes. MB. STEIN: We do think Mr. (Classen has a very active program. He has done a very good job in the State in cleaning up almost all areas of pollution, and, as Mr. Klassen and the rest of the Illinois people know, we stand ------- 72 Questions and Answors ready to help again. Now, again, we cut the case off on both Bides, and in Indiana too, around the Burns Ditch area in Indiana, because we had to cone in on an interstate area. I Bight say in Indiana, in the Burns Ditch area, the National Steel and Bethlehem are doing a superb Job. In other words, there is no couplaint. I would say that the people in Indiana outside the area of the jurisdiction of the case are doing and are going to do as much as we are asking for inside the area. I hope on the Illinois side they will do the same. QUESTION: Mr. Stein, to your knowledge, do any other countries have this water pollution problem? MR. STEIN: They rll have. Mow, I say that on the basis of experience, reports and knowledge. I don'r want to talk about the other countries, because I will leave that for the State Department, in specifics. But I have taken many trips to Alaska and Hawaii, where you are supposed not to have pollution problems, and the pollution problems that you have in the so-called remote or undeveloped areas Hake our problems look easy. There are tremendous problems in these areas. Mow, let me say I think this again deals with ------- 73 Questions and Answers the problem of infant mortality and the kind of life we live in this country. We're in one of the few countries where you can go to any town in the country and, with safety, turn on the faucet and drink a glass of water. I don't know that you would want to do this in any other countries. Again, let me tell you, because I worked in these programs for many years, that in the Indian health program we discovered that the infant mortality of those Indians was many, many times what it was in the rest of the population. Of course, they had many diseases. That has been reversed. And do you know why? We found that the big problem cane when the children were weaned. Once we got the public health nurses out and had the mothers boil the nipples on the bottles, because of the kind of water supply, it completely changed the picture in infant mortality there. Of course, then, once you do that, you see, you are living with a rising birth rate, and you begin having other problems, but at least we got then over that hurdle. The answer to this is, I think, the essential point in our standard of living. The reason we can live the way we do is because of the quality of water we have in this country, and we have to keep it that way. ------- 74 Questions and Answers QUESTION: Mr. Stein, I am a layman, but I fail to understand why things get so bad up in Milwaukee that the beaches are closed. Why wouldn't it affect just a few •lies down the shore, the North Shore, here? And how about Michigan across the Lake? MR. STEIN: Our scientists have been working on this all the time, and, you know, I wish you'd work with us. To go in, of course, we have to prove that pollu- tion goes across a State line. The hardest thing you can do is trace a bug, particularly out in lake currents. Sir, before we cane here there was very little known about these lake currents. No one knew where the waters went. Sure, we can trace the bugs outside of a sewage outfall, but to trace a Wisconsin bug over a Michigan or Illinois State line is something else. Now, our people have done a tremendous job here. By the way, one of your distinguished Congress- men, *nd a man who I think ran for the Senate, Sidney Yates, was on the Appropriations Committee handling the Weather Bureau's appropriation, and he, naturally, is a very in- fluential man at the Weather Bureau. He got us maps of the weather going back into the 1800*s to try to trace currents. What the people would do is drop oranges in and ------- Questions and Answers folio* the oranges around and try to develop current patterns. We found this couldn't be done, because the currents vent one way on top, below that they went another place, and below that they were different. They varied, and you had to do then for a period of time. What we did was got something like inverted Texas towers that went down into the water with electronic devices, at various levels, checking the currents. We are Just beginning to get a picture of that. The way it looks here, the lower end of Lake Michigan is a kind of self-contained cul de sac, and I an not sure that that material from Milwaukee really does get down here in viable state. Yes? QUESTION: Speaking of beache , what about the beaches down around the lower end of the Lake that are closed now? Are they going to be opened? MB. P06TON: It is anticipated that the beaches will be opened. QUESTION: When? MR, POSTOW: June. QUESTION: Oh, really? MB, PCS TON: Or the norval ti»e. ------- Questions and Answers QUESTION: All of then? ME. PCBTON: The Conferees came out in March a year ago with the recommendation that chlorination be in- stalled by June of this year. QUESTION: How many are closed now down there? MR. PQSTON: Well, Hammond. That is the only one that is closed. QUESTION: Hammond is the only one closed? COLONEL CHESEOW: I'd like to qualify that. There is none in Illinois. QUESTION: I understand. Hammond is the only one that is closed? MR. POSTON: Yes. QUESTION: We are almost out of film. Could you answer two questions, very briefly? No. 1, by what percentage will Lake pollution be reduced from its present level with full compliance? MR. STEIN: You are going to like the answer. I think full compliance will reduce pollution to a maximum. I would consider that, in a practical program, a hundred per cent reduction. That is, the Lake will not be pure, but you do have a polluted condition, and it will restore it to a non-polluted condition. QUESTION: Secondly, what penalties may be invoked ------- Questions and Answers against municipalities and industries which do not comply with these criteria? HE. STEIN: We can have a public hearing or take then to court, and we have done that. QUESTION: What penalties? MR. STEIN: That would be up to the court to assess. We have never had to go to trial. In the St. Joseph case, at a pretrial session, the City Attorney said, "Are you going to put us all in Jail or put a padlock on the City Hall?" The Judge said, "Well, not prejudging the case and not making any assumptions, of course, I won't do that, but I sure can dip into your till." QUESTION: There must toe some maximum penalty. MR. STEIN: No, there is not a maximum penalty. QUESTION: Death? (Laughter) MR. STEIN: No, I think this is in terms of a civil offense, not a criminal offense. And the point i* that you have in your experience seen people who have tried to defy Federal court orders, and what has happened to then. You don't do that. Either you become poorer or your movement is restricted, because, while it might toe a civil penalty, if you don't obey a court, you are in conteapt of ------- 78 Questions and Answers court. QUESTION: The court could levy a floe? MR. STEIN: They could levy a fine, or, if you are in contempt of court, they can lock you up, I assume. QUESTION: Mr. Stein, what did you mea.i when you said that the honeymoon for industry is over? MR. STEIN: Did I say it here? QUESTION: You were quoted on the wires as saying that. MR. STEIN: Specifically in relation to what? QUESTION: In reference to water pollution in lower Lake Michigan. Did that illustrate, for instance, that industry had not been cooperating with you, or what? MR. STEIN: I don't recall that. I'm not saying I didn't say that. But the point is I don't know that we have ever had a honeymoon with industry. As a matter of fact, I think the honeymoon with industry is beginning. You can quote me on that. Because I think we're getting along with industry very well, and ve're going ahead with a cooperative, Joint program to clean up Lake Michigan. If I described the situation that we had with industry before as a "honeymoon," it wasn't very apt. OUESTION: Could vou describe, say, three key things that industry is going to be doing now, in layman's ------- Questions and Answers terms, that they haven't been doing? MR. STEIN: I don't know that it is three. One major thing is to keep the maximum wutte* out. What they will be doing — and I don't want to underestimate this -- is installing housekeeping facilities. The has1, way you can keep a pollutant out is to keep it out of the pipes. Mice you get it in the pipes, you have to treat it, and you have a problem. If you can keep it out in the process, not let it get into those wastepipes, you are that far ahead. The second thing industry will be doing is constructing, installing and maintain!^ collection and treatment systems for all the wastes that they can't possibly keep out. They will have to reduce them to the maximum practicable limit, within the scope of the criteria and the objectives. The third thing they will have to do, of course, is keep an accurate surveillance program, or someone will have to keep an accurate surveillance program, to see how this is working, QUESTION: Will you be keeping a surveillance pro- gram? MR. STEIN: We will be working with the State and local government to keep a surveillance program. We would ------- 80 Question* and Answers hope the States and local agencies would abeorb as such of that as possible. But, as I pointed out, a surveillance program will be accomplished, and it will be done, whether we have to do this ourselves or not. In other words, we are under- writing it. Again, let me wake this k<*y point with this, because none of these facilities is worth very much unless they are operated, speaking of the municipal facilities, seven days a week, 36S days a year. With the industrial facilities, if they are open around the clock, that's when they have to be operated. There is no point, for example, in having a beautiful water facility in Chicago that doesn't give you clear, good, potable water 365 days a year, 24 hours a day. By the sane token, there is no point in putting in all these installations unless they work around the clock, because the waters will get polluted if they don't. If you want to go to many large cities, particular- ly in the Eastern half of the country, and ask me where the •ajor pollution discharge sources are, I will take you to the discharge points of the sewers and the Industrial waste treatment plants. In other words, they have to work, and we have ------- 81 Questions and Answers to recognize that you are going to have to have an adequate, continuous surveillance operation. Now, let ne again take one More second on that. If your electric utility doesn't work or your gas or your telephone doesn't work, you know it immediately, and you get customer response. We have no built-in protection like that with water pollution control facilities. The people don't know it. It's insidious. The only way you can do that Is to have automatic monitoring, with check- ups, and to have our scientists out there all the tine to see that the system is operating at its optimum capacity. QUESTION: When you get it cleaned up, how much dirtier will the Lake be than when the Indians were here? You said it won't be absolutely pure. MR. STEIN: I don't know how much. I think very little. In other words, I would hope, when we got these Lakes cleaned up, particularly Lake Michigan, that we would be able to utilize these Lakes for all the water uses for which the Lakes were capable of being utilized when the Indians were here. I would hope that we would be able to support tne same biota and the same kind of fish it could support when the Indians were here, and I think that's doing pretty well. ------- 82 Questions and Answers QUESTION: Will you have time for Individual interviews, Mr. Stein? MR. STEIN: Yes. I an available all day. MR. JOSEPH CHANTIGNEY (Chairman of the Great Lakes Region for the Izaak Walton League of America): Mr. Chairman, my name is Joseph Chantigney. I aa representing the Izaak Walton League of America and also the Cook County Clean Streams Committee. I have prepared a brJ«sf statement on behalf of both organizations, and I want to know, and ask in Mr. Chesrov's presence, if we could have this entered into the record today. MR. STEIN: Yes. We will place that in the record as if read. ------- 83 Joseph Chantigney STATEMENT OF JOSEPH CHANTIGNEY, CHAIRMAN OF THE GREAT LAKES REGION, IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE OF AMERICA, AND GENERAL VICE-CHAIRMAN, COOK COUNTY CLEAN STREAMS COMMITTEE MR. CHANTIGNEY: My nane is Joseph Chantigney. I aa Chairman of the Great Lakes Region for the Izaak Walton League of America. I an here today to present the views of the Izaak Walton League's entire membership. I would like to start my comments by saying we welcomed the Federal hearing held March 2, 1965, which eventually led to the signing of the new water pollution bill by President Johnson, and which became effective October 2, 1965. President Johnson showed his concern and sincerity when he said, and I quote: "No one has a right to use America's waterways — that belong to &11 the people — as a sewer." We of the League were heartened and encouraged by this statement. When the Izaak Walton League was organized, they had the foresight to see what a hazard pollution was in any form. Soon afterward, they advocated legislation to control all pollution on coastal and inland waters. I would like ------- 84 Joseph Chantigney to emphasize the /act that the Izaak Walton League has been fighting in every conceivable way for 44 years to prevent water- pollution. I would like to quote from a speech Senator Paul Douglas delivered on January 15, 1966 at the 44th Annual Founder's Day Dinner of the Izaak Walton League of America: "Throughout the Nation and in Washington, D. C. as well, the League was in the forefront of the campaign to alert the people to the problems of pollution and to secure enactment of enforcement legislation. There can be no doubt that the decades of work by hundreds of Izaak Walton League chapters across the country laid the groundwork for public insistence that effective action be taken by the Federal government. Without the work of the League on the local and State levels, this overdue public concern would still be largely unnoticed." I attended the two-day session on Water Quality Criteria held in the Prudential Building on January 4 and 5, 1966. I want to say it was most encouraging to hear the tremendous reduction in water pollution some of our large industries have accomplished since the original hearing. I would like to publicly compliment Wisconsin Steel Company. Through my own work as General Vice-Chairman of ------- 85 Joseph Chantigney the Cook County Clean Streams Committee, I have been in- formed that their overall program calls for the complete elimination of all outfalls. This, in my opinion, is the ultimate in water pollution abatement. Knowing what Wis- consin Steel's program is, I must express grave disappoint- ment in some of our other industries, who do not appear to be trying to attain this goal. At this point I would like to give our views on the Water Quality Criteria. We are pleased to have these standards set up, but we feel that these standards still fall far short of fulfilling .his Nation's health and recreational needs. If the end results will produce water of a quality for fishing and water contact sports, then the Izaak Walton League of America, which is pledged to defend all of this Nation's natural resources, will feel that the thousands of Izaak Walton League members who have worked so diligently and voluntarily for more than 44 years will not have strived in vain. We of the Izaak Walton League of America wish to thank you for this opportunity to present and express our views here today. ------- 86 Murray Stein ME. STEIN: Are there any other further questions or comments? (No response.) If not, Colonel Chesrow, Mr. Poston, Mr, Poole and the technical staff — and I ask then to stay with me -- will be available for comments. I night say to you fellows front the press that this is your chance. Looking around the room, I see we have got more top scientists in here from various levels of government and industry than I have seen assembled in one place for a long time. So here's your chance to ask your questions. Thank you for coming. (Whereupon, at 10:05 a.m., the meeting was ad j ourned.) ------- |