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.)
------- |