National Technical Information Service
PB-253 694
POLLUTION OF THE INTERSTATE AND INTRASTATE WATERS
OF THE UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER AND ITS TRIBUTARIES -
- MINNESOTA AND WISCONSIN
PROCEEDINGS OF CONFERENCE, SESSION (2ND), HELD AT
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA, ON FEBRUARY 28, MARCH 1 AND
20, 1967. VOLUME 1
FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL
ADMINISTRATION
1967
-------
Second Session of the Conference in the Matter
of Pollution of the Interstate and Intrastate Waters of the
Upper Mississippi River and Its Tributaries in the States
of Wisconsin and Minnesota, convened at 9:^0 a.m., on
Tuesday, February 28, 1967, at the Leamington Hotel,
Minneapolis, Minnesota.
PRESIDING:
Mr. Murray Stein, Assistant Commissioner
for Enforcement, Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, Department of the
Interior
CONFEREES:
Dr. M. M. Hargraves, Chairman of the Minnesota
Water Pollution Control Commission
lyle H. Smith, Executive Engineer, Minnesota
Water Pollution Control Commission
Chester S. Wilson, Special Assistant, Attorney
General, State of Minnesota
Dr. Demetrius 0. Jelatis, Mayor of Red Wing,
Minnesota
-------
IA
CONFEREES (Continued):
Freeman Holmer, Director, Department of
Resources, State of Wisconsin
Theodore F. Wisniewski, Acting Chief,
Division of Water Resources, Department of
Resource Developmentj State of Wisconsin
0. J. Muegge, Member, Wisconsin Water
Resources Advisory Board
Andrew C. Damon, Legal Counsel to the
Department of Resource Development, State
of Wisconsin
p. Odegard, Executive Director, Minnesota-
Wisconsin Boundary Area Commission
H. W. Poston, Acting Regional Director,
Great Lakes Region, Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, Department of the
Interior
-------
CONTENTS
FADE
Opening Statement
by Murray Stein
STATEMENT OF;
Hon. Qaylord Nelson, United
Senator fro* the State of Mffci 14
Hon. Warren P. Knowlea, Governor of the
State of Wisconsin, aa read by Mr.
Freeman Ho liner 4l
H. W. Poston, Conferee and Acting Regional
Director, Great Lakea Region* Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration M4
Albert C. Print*, Jr., Sanitary Engineer,
Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration 54
Lyle H. Smith, Conferee and Executive Engineer,
Minnesota Water Pollution Control
Cowlaalon 300
-------
2-A
PARTICIPANTS;
Hon. Gaylord Nelson, United States Senator
from the State of Wisconsin
Albert C. Printr, Jr., Sanitary Engineer, Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration
Frank E. Mil, Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration* United States Department of the Interior,
Great Lakes Region, Chicago, Illinois
Arthur V. Dlenhart, Manager of Engineering,
Northern States Power Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Kerwlh L. Mick, Chief Engineer and Superintendent,
Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District, Minneapolis, Minnesota
John P. Badallch, City Engineer, City of South
St. Paul, Minnesota
Otto Bonestroo, Consulting Engineer, Village of
Cottage Grove, Minnesota
Arnold Steffes, City Engineer, Hastings, Minnesota
Robert F. Hubbard, Assistant General Superintendent,
Cargill Corporation, Minneapolis, Minnesota
John J. Klein, Town Board of Supervisors, Kagan
Township, Dakota County, Minnesota
John M. Mason, North Suburban Sanitary Sewer
District
John 0. Pldgeon, City Attorney, Bloo*lngton,
Minnesota
-------
2-B
PARTICIPANTS
Mrs. William Whiting, President of the League
of WoBen Voters of Minnesota
John Pegora, Vice President, Clear Air, Clear
Water - Unlimited
Thonas C. Savage, Vice President, Port Snelllng
State Park Association
Arthur A. Ebert, President, Minnesota Chapter,
American Society of Sanitary Engineering
Robert E, Scheible, Chief of Sanitary and
Electrical Engineering, Department of the Army, Headquarters,
Fifth United States Army
-------
2-C
LIST OF ATTENDANCEt
Thomas Aamodt, St. Crolx Valley Chamber of Commerce,
Stillwater, Minnesota
Dean E. Abrahamson, Self, 1092 25th Avenue, S. E.,
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Gerald S. Allen, Sanitary Engineer, Seroo
Laboratories, 4205 31st Avenue, South Minneapolis, Minnesota
Clarence Alt, President, Rahr Malting Company,
567 Grain Exchange, Minneapolis, Minnesota
P. C. Anderegg, Utll. Super., Great Northern Oil
Box 3596, St. Paul, Minnesota
Ron Andersen, S.M.C.A., P. 0. Drawer 2095, Mankato,
Minnesota
David Anderson, Hydrologlet, U. S. Geological
Survey 1002, Post Office Building, St. Paul, Minnesota
Lester Anderson, Co. Goran., R. R. #2, Mapleion,
Minnesota
Phil Anderson, Comm., R. R. #1, Mankato,
Minnesota 560°!
Jack Arthur, Biologist, T. C. Project, Naval
Air Station
Robert Aiher, Self, 10510 Wenfcworth Avenue,
South Bloomln,$ton, Minnesota
Donald Asmus, Village Engineer, Village of
Mlnnetonka, 13231 Minnetonka Drive, Mlnnetonka, Minnesota
-------
2-D
LIST OF ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED);
John Badalich, City Engineer, South St. Paul
Municipal Building, South St. Paul, Minnesota
James Baird, City Engineer, City of Winona, Winona,
Minnesota.
I. N. Barr, MPCC Comm., Minnesota Department of
Health, Minneapolis, Minnesota
W. W. Barr, General Chemist, American Crystal
Sugar, Denver, Colorado
W. G. Baakerville, Assistant Manager, Upper
Mississippi Towing Corporation, 7703 Normandale Road,
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Mrs. Ottey M. Bishop, League of Women Voters
0. M. Bishop, Area Director, U.S. Bureau of Mines,
East 58th Street at Mississippi River, Minneapolis,
Minnesota.
Dreng BJornaraa, District Director, United States
Steel Corporation, West 2590 First National Bank, St. Paul,
Minnesota.
Lea Blacklock, Consulting Naturalist, Box 78,
Route 1, Hopkins, Minnesota
Mrs. Les Blacklock, Box 78, Route 1, Hopkins,
Minnesota
-------
P-D-1
LIST OP £TT£NI)AHCE (CONTINUED);
D. S. Blaisdell, Blalsdell and Associates, 780
Summit Avenue, St. Paul, Minnesota
Carl V. Blomgrean, Federal Water Pollution Control
^dminJatration, Regional Director, Kansas City, Missouri
Grady Boeek, Engineer, Brooklyn Park
Otto Bonestroo, Consulting Engineer, Bonestroo
Roacne Anderllk, 1381 Eustls Street, St. Paul, Minnesota
-------
2-E
LIST OP ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED)I
Paul I, Boudreau, Manager, Ford Motor Company,
Plant Eng. Department, 966 South MieaiBBippi Boulevard,
St. Paul, Minnesota
£. C. Bredeson, Great Northern Railway Company,
1?5 East 4th S reet, St. Paul, Minnesota
L. H. Breinhurst, Engineer, Minnesota Department
of Health, 1564 Fairmont, St. Paul, Minnesota
W. R. Prose, Chemist, Green Giant. Company, LeSueur,
Minnesota
iarl Brown, Vel Tax Chemical, 1125 Chllds Road,
St. Paul, Minnesota
Dale S, Bryson, Engineer, TCUMRP, Naval Air
StatIon
Mrs. Donald H. Buokman, League of Women Voters,
6738 Humboldt Avenue South, Richfield, Minnesota
John T. Carroll, Manager, Worthington Corporation,
4020 West Glenlake Avenue, Chicago, Illinois
Keith P. Caswell, Engineer, 77O8 Lakelane Avenue,
Caswell Engineering Company, Osseo, Minnesota
Melford Chrlstensen, North Sub, Sanitary Sewer
District, 14^8 County Road J
J, M. Clarke, Secretary, FWPCA, 2815 42nd Avenue,
South Minneapolis, Minnesota
-------
2-P
LIST OP ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED);
E. V. Comstock, Engineer, 1446 County Road J
Grover Cook, Chief, FWPCA Great Lakes Region,
33 last Congress, Chicago, Illinois
Mrs. William Crampton. League of Women Voters,
606 Peggy Lane, White Bear Lake, Minnesota
Norman Cruse, Assistant Secretary, Minnesota
Pet. Council, 604 Buildings Exchange, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Andrew C. Damon, Legal Counsel, Department of
Resource Development, State of Wisconsin
Nicholas Dean, 1805 Fremont Avenue, South Minn-
eapolis, Minnesota
Arthur Dlenhart, Engineer, NSP, Minneapolis,
Minnesota
Phil Duff, Dally Rep. Eagle, Red wing, Minnesota
James Taylor Dunn, Minnesota Historical Society,
St. Paul, Minnesota
Lou B. Edsail, Cenex, Incorporated, Route 1,
Box 160, South St. Paul, Minnesota
Carl W. Rhraan, Sierra Club, 4OO Maple Avenue,
N. E,, Minneapolis, Minnesota
P. K. Emery, Chairman, Pollution Concern Commission,
900 Mt. Curve, Minneapolis, Minnesota
-------
2-0
LIST OF ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED)I
Ron Evans, Co. Conm. Blue Earth, 1104 Woodland
Avenue, Mankato, Minnesota
William W. Ewald, Manager, W. S. Nott, 201 North
3rd Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Ray W. Farley, Jr., Attorney, MSSD, 828 Minn.
Building, St. Paul, Minnesota
Luella Fenske, WPCC Board of Health, Minnesota
Herbert Flueck, State Cons., St. Paul, Minnesota
Donald Fluegel, Attorney, Hastings, Minnesota
Mrs. Nell Franey, League of Women Voters,
1323 Hedmarenay, White Bear Lake, Minnesota
Steve J. Qadler, MSPE, 2120 Carter Avenue,
St. Paul, Minnesota
Edwin Geldreloh, FWPCA, Clnncinnato, Ohio
Robert Gilbertson, Serlo Laboratories, 4203 31st
Avenue, Wouth Minneapolis Minnesota
Dennis £. Gilberts, Engineer, NSP, Minneapolis,
Minnesota
L. J. Glllls, American Pipe Service, 2231 Edgewood
Avenue
(?ary Ginner, Engineer, Minnesota Department of
Health
Luverne Graham, Citizens League, 9030 Dupont,
South MlnmapoUs, Minnesota
-------
2-H
LIST OF ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED)i
Robert Grilling, Engineer, Department of Housing
and Urban Development
Chaunoey Qreene, Sierra Club, 4852 Drew Avenue,
South
Mrs. Blair Hackney, League of Women Voters
Dean Hahn, Chemist, Hawkins Chen., Incorporated,
3100 East Hennepln, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Dyane Hall, Manager, Rural Cooperative Power
Association, Elk River, Minnesota
Donald Halverson, Department of Housing, 1030
Midland Bank Building
Clifford W. Hanblin, Manager, St. Paul Water
Department, 216 City Hall, St. Paul, Minnesota
Gilbert Ham, Director, Clear Air Clean Water,
1708 University, St. Paul, Minnesota
Mary Hannah, League of Women Voters
Robert E. Hansen, Project Consultant, City of
South St. Paul, 211 Grand, South St. Paul, Minnesota
Dr. M. M. Hargraves. VPCC, 716 4th Street, S. V.,
Rochester, Minnesota
Mrs. M. M. Hargraves, 716 4th Street. S. W.,
Rochester, Minnesota
Ellsworth Harpole, State Health Department, WPC,
University of Minnesota Campus, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Raymond Halk, President, Federal Water Pollution
-------
2-1
LIST OF ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED)!
L, A. Mauser, Chief, Corpe of Engineers,
1217 United States Poet Offloe, St. Paul, Minnesota
Frederick Helee1, Minnesota Department of Health,
Pergue Falls, Minnesota
R. J. Hendershott, MACE, 112 Wayside Road, Hopkins,
Minnesota
Norman Hendrlokson, Banister Engineering Company,
310 Snelllng Avenue, North, St. Paul, Minnesota
Riohard J. Hesse, Engineer, St. Paul District
Corp of Engineers
Eugene A. Hiokok, 141*? Wayzata Boulevard, Wayzata,
Minnesota
Mrs. Veils Hlvely, 239 Bedord S. I., League of
Women Voters
Maurice Hobbs, Minneapolis Star
Robert N. Hodapp, Co. Conn. Blue Earth Company,
420 Main Street, Mankato, Minnesota
Fi«eeman Holaar, Director, Wlsoonsln Department
of Reeouroe Development, State Offloe Building
George Hopfenbeok, Jr., Attorney, ACS, 120O Ameri-
can Nation Bank, Denver, Colorado
William B. Homing, Biologist, FWPCA, Minneapolis,
Minnesota
Mrs. C. R. Humphries, League of Women Voters,
-------
2-J
LIST OF ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED);
R. P. Hubbard, Carglll, Incorporated,
Minneapolis, Minnesota
C. R. Humphries, President, St. Crolx River
Association, Route 5, Stlllwater, Minnesota
Elmer Huset, Assistant Manager, St. Paul Water
Department, 216 City Hall, St. Paul* Minnesota
Dr. Charles Huuer, Associate Professor of Zoology,
Clear Air Clear Water, 5345 Woodlawn Boulevard, Minneapolis,
Minnesota
Demetrius Jelatls, Mayor, Conferee, Red Wing,
Minnesota
C. H. Johannes, Public Health Engineer, Nino.
Water Pollution, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Frank Hall, FWPCA, Chicago, Illinois
A. C. Johannsen, President, Izaalc Walton League,
Faribault, Minnesota
Robert Johnson, Reporter, St. Paul Dispatch
Dr. Walter Johnson, University of Minnesota
Phllo Janes, Superintendent, Newport Cold Storage
Company, Newport, Minnesota
Mrs. Glen Kaiser, President, League of Women Voters
Olln L. J. Kaupanger, Minnesota Emergency Conserva-
tion Committee, Minneapolis, Minnesota
-------
2-K
LIST OF ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED) I
Bruce R. Kelley, Engineer* 40 9th Avenue, South,
Hopkins, Minnesota
Harold, Kernkamp, Mayor, Cottage Grove, Newport,
Minnesota
Riohard Klenltz, Reporter, Milwaukee Journal
C. E. Klester, Engineer, Self, 2317 Stlnson Boule-
vard, N. E.
John J. Klein, Eagan Township, 1495 Lone Oak Road,
St. Paul, Minnesota
K. B. Knox, Manager, St. Paul Ammonia Prod., Incor-
porated, St. Paul, Minnesota
Les.Knutson, Engineer, Village of Lexington
Raymond Knutson, Great Northern Oil Company, Pine
Bend, Minnesota
William Konlarskl, Com. Soott Company, Belle
Plaine, Minnesota
George R. Koonoe, Minnesota Health Department,
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Mrs* Delores Kost, League of Women Voters, White
Bear Lake, Minnesota
W. C. Krog, Jr., Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce,
702 Second South, Minneapolis, Minnesota
R. 0. Lalne, Attorney, 1228 West hoyt Avenue,
St. Paul, Minnesota
-------
2-L
LIST OF ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED)I
Riohard Lambert, Twin City Barge and Towing
Company, St. Paul, Minnesota
Keith Larson, Superintendent, City of South
Saint Paul, Minnesota
Roland Larson, Manager* Bloomington Chamber of
Commerce, Bloomlngton, Minnesota
Clarenoe Leer, Engineer, Sohoe11 and Madaon,
Incorporated, 50 9th Avenue, South
James A. Llndsey, Engineer, City of Chaska -
Jordan
Ronald Llndstrom, Manager, V. S. Nott Company,
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Soott Linsley, Engineer, Minneapolis-St. Paul
Sanitary District, St. Paul, Minnesota
Lulck, Pollution Committee, 4242 Washburn Avenue
North
Kenneth M. MaoKenthun, Biologist, USDI, Cincinnati,
Ohio
Malcolm K. MacKenzie, St, Peter Chamber of Com-
merce, St. Peter, Minnesota
Lowell Marsh, Secretary, Minneapolis-St. Paul
Sanitary District.
Mary H. Marsh, Associate Editor, Newsletter,
An. Water Resources Association
-------
2-M
LIST OP ATTENDANCE {CONTINUED)!
Jack Mason, NSSD, Minneapolis, Minnesota
John M. Mason, Esquire, First; National Bank
Building, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Douglas A. Maulwuicf, Chemist, South St. Paul,
800 8th Avenue, South, South St. Paul, Minnesota
John Maurloe, Attorney, Boise Cascade Corpora-
tion, Post Offloe Box 1368, Boise, Idaho
John MoQulre, Minnesota Department of Public
Health
A, A, Menard, Armour and Company, South St.
Paul, Minnesota
Martin Menk, Engineer, St. Peter, Minnesota
Kerwin Mlok, Engineer, Minneapolis- St. Paul
Sanitary District
Robert Miller, Chemist, Northwestern Refining
Company, St. Paul Park
V. K. Montague, Attorney, 409 Aiworth Building,
Duluth, Minnesota
George Mortens, Mayor, St. Peter, Minnesota
John Moyle, Minnesota Division of Game and Pish
0. J. Muegge, Resource Development Board, State
of Wisconsin
Jaok Nelson, Superintendent, Paries Board, Pie roe
County, Ellsworth, Wisconsin
»- -t- « — — - \Mi ,
-------
2-N
LIST OF ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED);
Glen Northrup, Planning Director, Burnsvllle,
Minnesota
H. Peter Odegard, Director, Minnesota Wisconsin
Boundary Area, Hudson, Wisconsin
Albert; Ofstad, W. S. Nott Company
Dr. Theodore Olson, Professor of Public Health
Biology, Universi&y of Minnesota
Mrs. Theodore Olson, League of Women Voters,
4752-l6th Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Clarence Oster, Engineer, FWPCA, Naval Air Station
Albert Ostrin, President, Commercial Chemical,
Shskopee, Minnesota
Mrs. G. £. Mann, League of Women Voters, Fergus
Palls, Minnesota
Dale Bergstedt, Engineer, North Star Research
Development, Minneapolis, Minnesota
E. W. Hough, Assistant: Dean, Carbondale, Illinois
Julian Lauchner, Engineer, Southern Illinois
University, Carbondale, Illinois
Robert H. Paddock, Engineer, U, S. Bureau of
Public Roads, Madison, Wisconsin
Ward M. Parten, Long Lake, Minnesota
John Paulson, Student Burroughs School
-------
2-0
LIST OF ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED);
John Pegors, Vice President, Clear Air Clear
Water Unlimited
Robert: Pendergast, Engineer, Twin City Testing
Laboratory4 St. Paul, Minnesota
Commander Gerard Perron, U. S. Coast Guard,
Dubuque, Iowa
Donald Perwein, Assistant Public Health Engineer,
State of Minnesota, University of Minnesota Campus,
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Richard Peter, Engineer, Public health, Rochester,
Minnesota
Douglas Peterson, Superintendent, ACS, Chaska,
Minnesota
M. Barry Peterson, T. C. Metro Planning Commission,
St. Paul, Minnesota
John Pldgeon, Attorney, Bloomington, Minnesota
John Plngel, Health Protection Engineer, Argonne,
Illinois
J. R. Porterfield, Superintendent, American
Crystal Sugar, Denver, Colorado
H. w. Poston, Regional Director, FWPCA, 33 East
Congress Parkway, Chicago, Illinois
John Rademacher, Chief, FWPCA, Washington, D. C.
-------
2-P
LIST OF ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED)I
Dan Reloux, Vloe President, J. L. Shlely,
St. Paul, Minnesota
Arthur Renqulst, Attorney, NSP, Minneapolis,
Minnesota
Lorell Richie, Hearings Offloe, Minnesota
Department of Health
William Ridge, Sngr. Apprais., City Hall,
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Roger Rleok, Recreation Resource - Department
of the Interior, Ann Arbor, Michigan
George M* Robertson, Attorney, Wlnona, Minnesota
Maurice Robins, Chief Chemist, Mlnneapolis-St. Paul
Sanitary District
Ira Rogers, Director, Public Affairs, Minnesota
anployees Association, St. Paul, Minnesota
John Rose, Robblnsdale Sportsman's Club
Robert Rosene, Eagan Township, St. Paul, Minnesota
Dr. Clayton Rudd, President, Natural History
Society, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Orlando Rusohmeyer, Instructor, University of
Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Roooo Russo, Oper. Manager, Cenex, Incorporated.
South St. Paul, Minnesota
-------
2-Q
LIST OF ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED!;
John Rutford, Minnesota House of Representatives,
St. Paul, Minnesota
Paul Ruud, V. E. Engineer, Midland Consultants,
Incorporated, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Clyde Ryberg, Administrative Assistant, Senator
H. T. McKnlght, Chaslca, Minnesota
Franklin Ryder, Corps of Engineers, 1217 Post
Office and Custom House, St. Paul, Minnesota
William T. Sayere, Deputy Project Director,
FV1PCA Twin Cities Project, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Thomas C. Savage, Port Snelllng State Park
Association, St. Paul, Minnesota
Robert Schelble, 5th U. S, Army Headquarters,
Chicago, Illinois
Marvin Schley, PWPCA, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Ed Sohmld, Reserve Mining Company, Silver Bay,
Minnesota
Robert Sohoen, Chemist, American Crystal Sugar,
Chaslca, Minnesota
Richard L. Schroer, St. Paul, Minnesota
David Schuenke, Attorney, U. S. Department of
the Interior, Solicitor's Office, Washington, D. C.
Howard J. Scott, Field Engineer, National Coal
Association, Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin
-------
LIST OF ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED):
Norman Sefer, Technical Director, Great Northern
Oil Companyi St. Paul, Minnesota
t
Donald Selford, Vice President, Twin City Shipyard,
St. Paul, Minnesota
H. J. Setzer, M.D., Izaak Walton League
Robert Sharp, Bureau of Sport Fish and Wildlife,
St. Paul, Minnesota
Otto Shelton, District Manager, Mid American
Trans. Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota
John Skrypek, Minnesota Conservation Department,
St. Paul, Minnesota
Lyle Smith, Engineer, WPCC, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Allen Scllle, Minnesota Conservation Department,
St. Paul, Minnesota
Robert Speer, PWPCA, Red Wing, Minnesota
Lloyd Sprlggle, Wisconcon Conservation, Bay City,
Wisconsin
Arnold Steffes, City Engineer, Hastings, Minnesota
Robert} C. Sterrett, Archer Daniels Midland
Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Mr5 H. Storlle, League of women Voters
James Sullivan, Tzuak Wal'.;on League, Minneapolis,
Minnesota
-------
2-S
LIST OF ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED);
Wayland Swain* Inst. School of Public Health,
Minneapolis* Minnesota
F. C. Swan* Refinery Manager* Northwestern
Refining, St. Paul* Minnesota
Donald Thimsen, Minnesota Department of Health
WPC, Minneapolis, Minnesota
Thomas A. Thompson* Director of Public Works*
Minneapolis* Minnesota
Mrs. R. H. Thommssen* Secretary-Treasurer,
Minnesota-Wisconsin Boundary Area Comm.
Richard Thorpe* Minnesota-Wisconsin Boundary Comm.
Joyce Tritschler* League of Women Voters
Frances Tustison* Secretary, FWPCA, Naval Air
Station
Robert C. Tuveson, Minnesota WPC Comm. Albert
Lea* Minnesota
John 1. Vance* Ex. President* MFC, 220 Griggs
Midway Building* St. Paul* Minnesota
Robert N. Varnum, Plant Sup. Cargill, Inc.,
Savage* Minnesota
Irin Veblen* Student* John Burroughs School*
Minneapolis* Minnesota
George Walker, Honeymead Products Company*
Manlcato* Minnesota
-------
2-T
LIST OF ATTENDANCE (CONTINUED);
George R. Watson, Vice President, Western Oil
and Fuel Company, Minneapolis, Minnesota
E. L. Weber, Asst. Comm., State Fire Marshal,
St. Paul, Minnesota
Mrs. William Whiting, President, League of
Women Voters, University of Minnesota
Arthur Whitney, Attorney, North Suburban Sanitary
Sewer Llstriot
William Williams, Councilman, Cottage Grove,
Minnesota
Betty Wilson, Press, Rosemount, Minnesota
Theodore P.. Wlsnlewski, Acting Director, Water
Resources Division, Wisconsin Department of Resource
Development, Madison, Wisconsin
Quentln K. Wood, Eden Prairie, Minnesota
F. L. Woodward, Minnesota Department of Health,
Minneapolis, Minnesota
Gordon Yeager, Writer, Rochester Post Bulletin,
Rochester, Minnesota
Wlllard 2ell, Northwest Airlines Sportcmens
Association, 10310 York lane, Minneapolis, Minnesota
-------
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
PROCEEDINGS
OPENING STATEMENT
BY
MR. MURRAY STEIN
MR. STEIN; The conference is open.
This conference in the matter of pollution of
the interstate and intrastate waters of the Upper "iasisslppi
River and its tributaries in the States of Wisconsin and
Minnesota, is being held under the provisions of Section 10
of the Federal Water pollution Control Act, aa amended. The
Secretary of the Interior is authorized to call a confers-.ce
of this type when requested to do so by the Governor of a
State, and when on the basis of reports, surveys, or studies,
he has reason to believe that pollution of interstate waters
subject.to abatement under the Act is occurring.
In a letter dated September 9, 1963, Governor
Karl Rolvaag of Minnesota requested a conference, as did
Governor John Reynolds of Wisconsin, in a letter dated
September 17, 1963.
I accordance with these requests, as well as on
the basis of reports, surveys, or studies, a Federal-State
-------
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
enforcement conference was held on Febi uary 7-8, 1964, in St.
Paul, Minnesota.
The purpose of the conference Is to bring together
representatives of the State water pollution control agencies,
representatives of the Federal Water Pollution Control Admin-
istration, and other interested parties, to review the existing
situation, the progress which has been made, to lay a basis
for future action by all parties concerned, and to give tre
State, localities and industries an opportunity to take any
indicated remedial action under State and local law.
The conference technique Is rather art old one. It
is used by many States informally In the normal conduct of
their business In the field of water pollution control. The
concept of the conference was proposed by the United States
Supreme Court as long ago as 1921 in the famous case of New
York against New Jersey involving interstate pollution. I
would like to quote briefly from the Court's opinion:
"We cannot withhold the suggestion, inspired
by the consideration of this case, that the grave
problem of sewage disposal presented by the large
and growing population living on the shores of New
York Bay Is one more readily to be most wisely solved
by cooperative study and by conference and mutual
concession on the part of representatives of the
-------
5
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
States so vitally Interested In It than by pro-
ceeding In any court however constituted."
We strongly support the conference technique and
we measure our success by the situations which are solved at
the conference table rather than in the courts.
fls specified in Section 10 of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act, the official water pollution control
agencies of Wisconsin and Minnesota have been notified of this
conference. The Wisconsin Department of Resource Development
la being represented by Mr, Freeman Holmar, Mr. Theodore
Wlsnlewski, Mr. 0. J. Muegge, Mr. Andrew Damon, Mr. P.
Odegard, and Mr. Alan Kirschner, who I understand will be
here later.
The Minnesota Water Pollution Control Commission
is being represented by ^r. M. M. Hargraves, Mr. Lyle Smith,
Mr. Chester S. Wilson, and Mayor Demetrius Jelatis of Red wing,
Minnesota.
You can see we have quite a forum up here of
conferees.
The Federal conferee Is Mr. H. W. Poston, who
is Director for this region of the Federal water Pollution
Control Administration, with headquarters in Chicago, Illinois.
My name is Murray Stein, and I am from head-
quarters of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration
-------
6
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
in Washington, D. C., and the representative of Secretary
Udall.
As I look at this group of conferees, one of my
functions is to be sure, looking at the shortage of Federal
people, that nothing comes to a vote.
(laughter.5
I would like to welcome the conferees as old
frltnds, and one in particular, Chester Wilson, whom I think
all of us owe a debt of gratitude too, because, if I may say,
more than anyone else he la the man I learned the business
from many years ago. He is really the grand old man of water
pollution control, and worked in this for many, many years.
The parties to this conference are the Wisconsin
Department cf Resource Development, the Minnesota Water
Pollution Control Commission, and the United States Department
of the Interior. Participation in this conference will be
open to representatives and invitees of these agencies and
such persona as inform me that they wish to present statements.
Now, this is under the new amendment to the law,
but I would suggest before you see me, if you are from either
one of the States, that you try to make arrangements with
your State agencies, because we prefer that the States manage
their own tine.
However, only the representatives of the official
-------
7
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
State water pollution control agencies and the United States
Department of the Interior constitute the conferees.
Both the States and Federal governments have
responsibilities In dealing with water pollution control prob-
lems. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act declares that
the States have primary ri^nts and responsibilities for taking
action to abate and control pollution. Consistent with this,
we are charged by law to encourage the States in these
activities.
At the sane time, the Secretary of the Interior
Is charged by law with specific responsibilities in the field
of water pollution control In connection with pollution of
interstate and navigable waters. The Federal Water Pollution
Control Act provides that pollution of Interstate or navigable
waters, whether the natter causing or contributing to the
pollution is discharged directly into such waters, or reaches
such waters after discharge into a tributary, which endangers
the health or welfare of any persons, is subject to abatement.
The first session of this conference, as indicated,
was held on February 7-8, 1964. At the first conference
session, the conferees unanimously agreed to the following
conclusions and recommendations: ,
1. Pollution in these waters from industries, munlci- t
pailties and storm overflow sources has created i
i
-------
8
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
a health hazard to persons engaging In water
contact activities, causes visual nuisances, Inter-
feres with fish and fishing, causes sludge banks
which give off noxious odors, ard floating sludge,
and Interferes with bottom aquatic life, and with
feeding and spawning grounds for fish propagation.
This pollution must be abated.
2. The visonsln and Minnesota water pollution control
agencies have active water pollution control
programs. The delays. If any, are those which may
be expected to occur In the execution of the pollu-
tion abatement program of a large metropolitan area.
3. The Federal water pollution control program in
conjunction with both State agencies and In keeping
with State staff and fund limitations, Is to con-
duct an Intensive survey of the Mississippi River.
Participation Is to be on a cooperative basis by
all agencies, both on the technical level and in
advisory and policy direction capacities. This
study project is to Include but not be United to
investigation of Municipal, industrial, and Federal
installation wastes, thermal sources of pollution,
agricultural sources of pollution, bulk storage
areas, pipelines, barges, collform bacteria, BOD,
-------
9
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
suspended solids, sludge deposits, oil, algae,
tastes and odors, pesticides, and with the coopera-
tion of the Corps of Engineers, low flow augmenta-
tion. The study can be modified or expanded at the
request of the technical committee.
4. At the suggestion of the Wisconsin conferee, the
conferees agreed that the study area be extended to
include St. Croix Falls, Wisconsin, and Taylors
Falls, Minnesota.
5. The study and report is to be planned and carried
out so that features relating to Twin City metro-
politan area sewage disposal will be completed, if
at all possible, in time to report the findings and
recommendations by January 1965, and the opening of
the 1965 Minnesota State Legislature.
6. This study is not a substitute for, but a supplement
to, already existing State programs for pollution
control and abatement.
7. At the completion of the study and the report of
its findings, the conference will be reconvened at
the call of the Chairman of the conference to deter-
mine necessary action.
As you see, we are almost as good as our word,
Just slightly late, and I think part of this has to do with
-------
10
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
the complicated problem that we found. However, on thing I
can say li that when we promised to be back after we do a study,
we do come back, and we don't file a report on the shelf to
gather dust.
The study of the Upper Mississippi has been completed.
Accordingly, this conference has been reconvened to consider
dtid evaluate the report of the study findings and to determine
necessary action to be taken in the study area.
Mow a word about the procedure governing the eon-
duct of the conference. The conferees will be called upon to
make statements, and the conferees may call upon participants
whom they have invited to the conference to make statements.
In addition, we will call upon any other Interested individuals
who wish to present statements. At the conclusion of each
statement, the conferees will be given an opportunity to comment
or ask questions, and at the conclusion of the conferees'
comments or questions I may ask a question or two. This
procedure has proven effective in the past in developing a
clear statement of the problem and In reaching equitable
solutions.
At the end of all statements we will have a dis-
cussion among the conferees and try to arrive at a basis of
agreement on the facts of the situation. Then we will attempt
/
to summarize the conference orally, giving the conferees, of
-------
11
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
course, the right to amend or modify the summary.
After the discussion here, we will consult the
conferees later. The may this might be handled Is that the
conferees may go Into executive session and have an announce-
ment to make after the executive session.
Under the Federal law, the Secretary of the
Interior is required at the conclusion of the conference to
prepare a summary cf It, which will be sent to all the con-
ferees. The summary, according to law, must Include the
following points;
1. Occurrence of pollution In navigable waters
subject to abatement under the Federal Act;
2. Adequacy of measures taken toward abatement of
pollution} and,
3. Nature of delays, If any, being encountered
in abating pollution.
However, if there are any modifications of these
desired by any of the conferees, I think we should consider
these.
The Secretary of the Interior is also required
to make recommendations for remedial action, if such recom-
mendations are Indicated.
A record and verbatim transcript will be made
of the conference by Mr. Al Zlmtner. Mr. Zlmraer is making this
-------
12
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
transcript for the purpose of aiding us in preparing a
summary, and also providing a compiete record of what is said
here. We will make copies of the summary and transcript
available to the State agencies. We have found that, general-
ly, for the purpose of maintaining relationships within the
States, that the people who wish summaries and transcripts
should request them through their State agency rather than
come directly to the Federal Government. The reason for tWa
is that when the conference has been concluded, we would
prefer that the people who are interested in the problem to
follow their normal relations In dealing with the State govern-
ments, rather than the Federal Government, or these matters.
This has worked successfully In the past, and we will be roost
pleased to make this material available to the States for
distribution.
I would suggest that all speakers and participants
making statements, other than the conferees, come to the
lectern and identify themselves for the purpose of the record.
I would like to suggest, in view of the number
of conferees here, that the conferees do the sane, because I
do think the man who is the reporter and facea a group like
this, is like being faced with taking a transcript of the
legislature without being familiar with the cast of characters.
Until he becomes familiar with that, I think it would be
-------
13
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
better practice If the conferees would Identify themselves
too.
Before we get Into the conference, I believe we
have a distinguished member of the President's Federal Water
Pollution Control Advisory Board In the room, the only
representative of the Advisory Board from Minnesota and this
part of the country. He Is an attorney In town. I wonder if
he would stand up?
Mr. Raymond Halk. There he Is.
(Applause.)
MR, STEIN: Thank you.
Mr. Halk has been very helpful In providing us
with guidance on the general operations of the program, par-
ticularly with relation to the Enforcement Section, and we
appreciate his constructive criticism.
At this point I would like to call on another
one of my bosses in Washington. When we come to the office,
until the phone rings and you get a call from the Hill or
the Capitol, you don't know which one of your bosses Is
calling you up. I would like to say that in addition to the
people downtown, we have 535 up on the Hill. However, not
all of then pay that much attention to water resources.
This gentleman has been one of the guiding
spirits in the Congress on water resource legislation, water
-------
Opening Statement - Mr. Stein
pollution legislation, specific pollutants, and the elimina-
tion of them. He Is one of a handful of men In the legislative
body who knows probably as much about our program or the con-
ditions of water resources in the United States as anyone.
Senator Oaylord Nelson.
(Applause.}
STATEMENT OP THE HONORABLE GAYL01D NELSON,
UNITED STATES SENATOR PROM THE STATE OF
WISCONSIN
SENATOR NELSONj Mr. Stein, Conferees from the
State of Wisconsin and the State of Minnesota, and Mr. Boston,
the Federal Representative:
I appreciate very much the opportunity to appear
here this morning.
My statement is brief. I an a member cf the
Senate and the committee, but I an not here as a representative
of that committee. I am here as a representative of Folk
County. I am glad that your map-makers put my county up on
the river there (Indicating).
I am here as a private citizen, having been born
and raised on the Upper St. Crolx River, and one who Is con-
cerned, as I know all of you are, about the preservation of
-------
15
Hon. 0. Nelson
the quality of that: river* as well as the restoration of the
quality of the Mioaissippl River.
In all the almost twenty years that I have had
the privilege of being in public office, I have not seen a
more distinguished panel of concerned citizens than the panel
convened here of conferees from Wisconsin and Minnesota to
consider this report.
I have read it three tines now. My comments will
certainly not be directed to any of the specific details.
There may be those here today who nay have some
observations or suggestions as to the details of the approach
to this problem. I think It Is a very fine report. I think
it tackles one of the most important problems that this
country faces.
One of the additional reasons that this Is a
particularly Important conference is that it is, I hope, the
beginnings of an approach to the solutions of the pollution
of one of the greatest watersheds in the world, the Upper
Mississippi.
I would hope that we would have succeeding con-
ferences from here all the way to the Oulf of Mexico, and that
in the next decade we will lick the whole problem of the
quality of the water of the Misslslppi.
I want to commend the conferees and the technical
-------
16
Hon. Q. Nelson
members who have participated In putting this report together.
The release of the report on pollution of the
upper Mississippi River and Its major tributaries represents,
I think, a significant milestone In this Nation's battle
against water pollution. At the outset, I would like to
commend all the people who have been involved in the making
of this precedent-setting report.
We all owe a debt of gratitude to former Governors
John Reynolds of Wisconsin and Carl Rolvaag of Minnesota,
who had the courage and foresight to call for this conference.
The members of the conference, including the
representatives from Wisconsin and Minnesota, the Chairman
of the conference, Mr. Murray Stein, and the many experts
from the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration who
have worked on this project deserve the highest praise for
what I think is an outstanding Job they have done.
To a large extent the success of a study such as
this depends on the support of the industries, municipalities
and private citizens who are Involved. As we enter the
second phase of this program — the abatement phase — the
support of these people becomes even mor« critical because
they are charged with the responsibility of rectifying the
pollution situation which the report indicates exists In the
upper Mississippi and its tributaries.
-------
17
Hon. 0. Nelson
And to these very same people falls the ultimate
responsibility for maintaining clean water once It is flowing
again In these rivers.
The great challenge o" stopping water pollution in
this country is directed to these groups of people -- the
Industries, the municipalities, the concerned citizens. Without
their support and cooperation, the waters of this Nation will
never be cleaned up.
MR, STEIN: Senator, I am going to violate the
first rule of a bureaucrat. I never wanted to Interrupt a
Senator, but perhaps you won't mind. You talk In terms of
industries, municipalities, and concenred citizens. How
about the group such as we have here — our State and Federal
participation? Do you think that a group of that kind has a
part in this?
SENATOR NELSON: Yes, Murray. I think I make
reference later on to the Federal Government and the States.
The fact of the matter is, Mr. Stein, that water is
in interstate commerce, almost all of it, and that the only
way this country will clean up Its waters, its rivers and the
Great Lakes, is by Federal-State conferences, which bring all
the parties together, regardless of State or city or county
boundaries, and evaluate the problem, sitting down at a
conference such as this with a specific proposal, and with
-------
18
Hon. Q. Nelson
deadlines .for meeting compliance with the proposals.
As you know better than anybody else In this room,
we have had a number of State-Federal pollution conferences
in the United States> and they have been remarkably success-
ful. If you had told me a half a dozen years ago that you
would ever get the City of Detroit and some 56 industries
together on an agreed plan to clean up the Detroit River, I
would not have believed you. You completed that conference a
few months ago.
I think it is one of the most remarkable accom-
plishments in the field of water pollution control that we
have ever had in the United States, because It involved a
tremendous city; it Involved some of the biggest industries
in America; it involved some of the most complicated problems
that have ever been confronted in this field; and after dis-
cussing it at considerable length, there was an agreement
among the industries and the City of Detroit on a proposal
from the conferees to clean up the water there.
I don't think there really is any other way that
we can successfully clean up the waters involving Interstate
pollution other than this kind of a conference, and, as I
said, I hope this is the beginning of a series of conferences
that will go from here to the Gulf of Mexico.
I also hope it calls to the attention of the
-------
19
Hon. 0, Nelson
people of Minnesota and Wisconsin additional problems, one
of them involving Lake Superior, which is the second greatest
body of fresh water In the world| in terms of surface acreage
the largest body of fresh water in the worldj and in terms of
water capacity next to Lake Baikal in Russia. The second
greatest body of fresh water in the world, that lake, is now
being polluted by Duluth and Superior and other municipalities.
I would hope, Mr. Stein, that you and your people
would give some consideration after this conference to an
evaluation of that situation, so that we can get a conference
and get a program of abatement of pollution of Lake Superior,
since it is one of the most delicate bodies of pure water any
place in the world, and we ought to tackle that one next.
Then Lake Michigan after that.
However, to answer your question, I don't think
there is any other way to do it than to bring together all of
the people representing the State governments and representing
the industries and the citizens of the various States, since
all of this does involve interstate pollution and not just
intrastate pollution.
I think it is appropriate at this time to note
that the sole purpose of this conference report is to suggest
a constructive and practicable program to restore the water
quality to an acceptable level.
-------
20
Hon. 0. Nelson
The great honesty and Integrity of the report of
this conference Is gratifying to every concerned citizen.
Many people have recognized the pollution of the upper
Mississippi and Its tributaries for many years. I am certain,
however, that none of us have realized the magnitude of the
problem as revealed by the report. The facts are that these
waters are perilously close to being a huge cesspool.
The report spells out a debasement of water
quality In this reach of the river which is certainly unac-
ceptable to any thoughtful citizen. We are not here, surely,
to assess blame and to wrangle about responsibility. The
fact is the whole Nation is responsible for the degenerated
condition of our fresh water resources. The river water here
la hardly better or worse than other major rivers. Every
major river basin from coast to coast is polluted, to one
degree or another. We all condoned it; we all participated
in itj we all share the responsibility. Historically, all
civilizations used their water courses as the conduit for
waste disposal. Because of the remarkable capacity of water
to cleanse itself, this worked very well up until recent
years. In the past half century we have increasingly loaded
streams beyond their natural capacity, and we have introduced
new Industrial wastes that are not biologically degradable.
I am sure that if we could turn the clock back
-------
21
Hon. 0. Nelson
fifty years and had the benefit of hindsight, all of us —
municipalities, the Federal Government, industries and the
general public — would agree to pay the cost to prevent the
damage from occurring in the first place.
The problem now is to look to the future and
rectify a problem it is within our power to cure. That In-
volves first a frank recognition of the existing situation.
The report points out very vividly that America's greatest
river is being pumped full of human wastes and industrial
sewage, and Is disturbingly contaminated with typhoid bacteria,
polio virus, and so forth.
Municipal sewage plants on the upper Mississippi
discharge millions and millions of gallons of sewage into the
river each day; contained in this sewage are oxygen consuming
wastes equivalent to raw sewage from a population of one
million people and conform bacteria equivalent to raw sewage
from a population of 1,200,000 people. The Twin Cities area
has an estimated population of 1,500,000 people; the amount
of pollutants being pumped into the Mississippi each day
from these treatment plants is roughly equivalent to the
pollution that would be caused by dumping the untreated
sewage of all the inhabitants of the metropolitan area directly
into the river.
Industries along both the Mississippi and
-------
22
Hon. 0. Nelson
Minnesota Rivers each day are dumping tremendous amounts of
dangerous chemicals, as well as conform bacteria and oxygen
consuming wastes* Into these waters. Phosphates, ammonia
and organic nitrogen all stimulate algal growth that, In
turn, creates a nuisance condition which adversely affects
water supplies and recreational uses. Phenols make the waters
smell and impart a strange taste to the water as well as to
the fish which live in that water.
The report contains many more seriously disturbing
statistics. I don't think it Is necessary to go through then
all here. In the final analysis, the report offers a tre-
mendous challenge to the people of Wisconsin and Minnesota
to take the firm steps necessary to save the river,
The remedial program recomm nded In the report,
I think, is a sensible one. By spreading the abatement
program over a three-year period, the conference recommenda-
tion does not Impose undue hardship on anyone Involved, Z am
confident that an orderly approach to resolving this problem
will lead to a more satisfactory solution.
The State-Federal conferences around this country
have produced excellent results elsewhere in the past few
years, and I am sure this one will be every bit as fruitful
as those conferences that have been held elsewhere In this
country. The technique has brought representatives of the
-------
23
Hon. Q. Nelson
States of Minnesota and Wisconsin and the Federal Government
to the conference table to discuss with Industry and local
units of government a reasonable course of pollution abate-
ment. In the long run, cooperative efforts of this type by
all levels of government* concerned citizens and Industry,
will lead to a better America, a finer environment in which
to live.
When we consider the Mississippi River Basin is
one of the most significant watersheds in the world, it is
indeed an exciting prospect to consider Its restoration as
a high quality water resource for recreation, municipal and
industrial use. This should be but the first of a series of
conferences aimed at cleaning up the river from here to the
Qulf of Mexico. A clean and clear Mississippi will repay
the investment one-thousand-fold in esthetic, recreation and
economic value. Some time ago a similar conference was called
for the Indiana and Illinois waters of Lake Michigan and a
clean-up program is now under way. Similar conferences, as
I said previously, are needed for other take Michigan waters
and for the Duluth-Superior Harbor, where priceless water
assets are slowly but surely being destroyed.
I might add, Mr. Chairman, that many times the
question Is raised about the cost and so often people will
say, "Well, we will put Industry to a competitive disadvantage
-------
2k
Hon. 0, Nelson
in the expenses created." The fact of the matter is that
the value of fresh water far surpasses the cost of cleaning
it up.
In this country today there Is available about
600 billion gallons of water for dally consumption. The
total available supply in America Is 600 billion gallons a
day. The dally consumption In this country now Is 3*10 billion
gallons a day.
By the year 1980, which is thirteen years away,
we will be using 600 billion gallons of water dally In this
country, the total national supply; and by the year 2000,
which Is a little over thirty years away, we will be using
1,200 billion gallons of water per day, by the best estimates
of the hydrolegists who testified before our committee in
Congress. We will then, thirty-three years from now, be
using twice the national supply of fresh water daily, which
means, of course, that on the average we will use the water
twice; but since water is not equally distributed in this
country, it being in greater abundance in many places where
there are fewer people, what really la going to happen is that
in the great metropolitan areas on the East Coast and here in
the Midwest, we will be using water ten, twenty, or thirty
times. The Mississippi River will be used ten, fifteen,
twenty times, and if every Industry and every municipality
-------
25
Hon. 0. Nelson
has to take dirty water out of the river, pay the cost of
cleaning it up so that It Is potable or usable for Industrial
and municipal purposes, return It to the river dirty, and
does that ten or fifteen times, the cost of doing that will
be prohibitive.
So, from a pure Investment, economic standpoint,
the cheapest and most economical thing we can do la clean up
the Mississippi River from the beginning to the end, and this
apart from the fact that a clean river such as this great
river affords an additional benefit of recreation, with all
of the esthetic values that go with that, plus the economic
value that goes with having an attractive source of recreation
for people from all of the United States.
Now, Mr. Chairman, I had Just one question that
I was nut sure about in reading the report.
On Page 32 of the report, in the left-hand
column, It says:
"SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS - ST. CROIX RIVTR
Municipal Sources
No specific recommendations.
Industrial Sources
No specific recommendations,"
I have not had the chance to look at the detailed
report. I am not txtetly sure what this means, but In looking
-------
26
Hon. 0. Nelson
at the report itself, I note with gratification that the
lower St. Croix, by any comparative terms that you have con-
sidered around this country, is one of the cleanest rivers
there is.
Incidentally, I asked the Department of the
Interior a year ago to see If they could find another river
in America this close to a metropolitan complex that was un-
polluted, and, so far as I can find out, this is the only
major river in a metropolitan area in all of the United
States which is still relatively unpolluted.
Of course, the reason is the Mississippi runs
through the cities, and nobody got onto the St. Crolx to
pollute it, but it is a remarkably Important river.
I note that St. Crolx Falls from my hometown in
Polk is introducing some pollutants. So is Taylors Falls;
so is Hudson; so is Stillwater; and I am wondering why the
report does not suggest specific recommendations for meeting
that.
MR. STEIN: Well, I believe the persons who
prepared the report will come up.
I had the same question as you. Senator.
Let roe indicate I agree with you on the value of
the St. Croix River, because in the Department of the Interior
I had received some questions and we did examine the river0
-------
2?
Hon. G. Nelson
In the United States. We did find the Allagash River in
Senator Muskle's State, but it would probably take a day and
a half to get up there from any paved roads. This is one
of the few rivers near a metropolitan area that is a clean
stream, and it is a delight at the present time and is some-
thing which should be preserved.
What has been done in this report is that we have
general and specific recommendations. Maybe we lawyers will
have to flip and try to figure out how the engineers do things.
They love to factor things out.
The;? have made general recommendations. These
apply to the St. Croix River. I think the time schedule is
the same, and the recommendations as to a clean-up are about
the same.
When they talk about specific recommendations,
they mean those recommendations in addition to the general
recommendations that will have to be made to clean ur a par-
ticular pollution situation because of the nature of that
situation.
I think we can consider ourselves pretty lucky
in the St. Croix River by finding that the general recommenda-
tions will be sufficient to clean it up. We should be happy
to find that they don't have any kind of exotic or esoteric
problem for which you need a specific recommendation, but the
-------
28
Hon, 0. Nelson
general recommendations will be sufficient.
SENATOR NELSON: Then, as I understand you, the
municipalities on the Wisconsin side and the Minnesota side
of the river, if the conference recommendations are approved,
will then be required to comply with a water quality standard,
just as Industries?
MR. STEIN: That's right. For example, as I read
the report, the,general recommendations call for all muniei-
• *
palitles providing secondary treatment find chlorinatlon of
t
the effluent. If thlCinunlcipallties and industries on the
\t.»
St. Croix would do this, this would handle it.
While we are on this, Senator, you mentioned Lake
Baikal. I would like to make a comment and then ask you
whether you would make a comment on this.
I certainly was interested in your analysis of
the Russian lake. I have never been able to find out how
deep that lake IB, and how much water those Russians have in
it. I wish I could get some information on It.
Other than that, as you know, the Great Lakes
are our greatest source of fresh water supply on this continent,
and probably the greatest single source of fresh water supply
in the world. Lake Superior, so far as we have been able to
determine, is in the best condition of all the Great Lakes.
We were out at Lake Tahoe, which is the purest
-------
?9
Hon. G. Nelson
you can find, I guess of the water around, and even that Is
threatened.
I think the Issue Is this: When you get pollution
of one of the lakes, once a lake goes, I don't knew that you
can turn back the clock and restore that lake.
We have had tremendous success in Chicago, and I
think we are having success in Lake Erie. We have had success
in the Detroit River, because these people are faced with a
catastrophe, and they know it. We have had this Great Lakes
litigation for years. You have been litigating against their
putting the effluent back In the lake.
If those lakes go and we lose that fresh water
resource, the whole economic structure of the midwestern
States and perhaps the economic strength of the United States
may decline. That is how important this resource Is. However,
you have a different situation here. You have a river and
your problem in a sense is easier, but being easier, it
presents a more subtle challenge.
Generally speaking, the wastes In this area are
amenable to known methods of treatment. You don't have the
same problems that we have in some of these other river basins
In the country. Presumably, once we clean up these wastes
and keep the Mississippi River clean, we can have a clean
river and restore it.
-------
30
Hon. G. Nelson
The question Is whether we can relax in a situation
like this, at a time when we don't have the hard catastrophic
event facing us, when we art ready to do the Job here.
You spoke of the whole Mississippi River, Senator.
As an old, experienced water resource man working In this
\
field — I see the Corps of Engineers people are here -- I know
full well the history of flood control on the Mississippi River.
On the Mississippi River, the American people have had
devastating flood after devastating flood right through the
19?0'8 and the '30's and the 'JiO's before we did anything about
it. The question here is whether we are going to have to face
this catastrophe here or whether we are going to be wise enough,
It seems to me, to deal with the problem that we know how to
deal with before this happens.
SENATOR NELSON: I realize that your concern here
today is the Mississippi River, and I certainly did not want
to divert the conversation to some other business, because
this is very important business, but I could not pass up the
chance to say something before such a distinguished panel,
which has some authority to do something about It.
As I say, It would be a great step to continue with
it after this. Our problem in this country is that we let
the waters become polluted, and then we have a great outcry,
such as on Lake Erie, and then we say, "Let's d^ something
-------
Hon. Q. Nelson
about It."
We are sitting here with the two greatest bodies
of mater In the world, the Mississippi and Lake Superior, and
now IB the tine to do something abcat it.
I appreciate very much the chance to appear here
today, and I again want to commend the technical staff and
those who have put together this very fine report.
MR. STEIN: I wonder If I could ask the conferees
if they have any comments or questions?
DR. JELATIS: Mr. Chairman, I am Mayor Jelatls
from Red Wing.
I think I should challenge one of the statements
that Senator Nelson has made, and, if I quote correctly —
SENATOR NELSON: I consider It lucky If you only
challenge one.
(Laughter.)
DR. JELATIS: I think you said none of us recog-
nize the magnitude of the problem as presented In this report.
I see many people here in the audience who have
lived downstream, as we have in Red Wing, that have recognlEed
the magnitude of the problem, and I am sure the turn-out here
shows trie interest in the problem.
SENATOR NELSON: None of us who don't live on the
river, I should have said.
-------
32
Hon. G. Nelson
(Laughter.)
MR. STEIN: Are there any further comments? •
I meant to ask one last question, Senator. j
' i
As a member of the Interior Committee, and this !
*
is the committee which Is concerned with water resources and • ''
the water resource questions In our Department, you have read
this report.
Do you think that the solutions here presented In
the report are practical solutions?
SENATOR NELSON: I have read just about every
report that has come cut of the Federal-State conferences in
the past ten years. I think this is the finest one that I
have seen. I think it is, without attempting to judge the
case, since I don't feel qualified tc make any comment as to
how one detail or another might affect one municipality situa-
tion, or an industry situation, but I would say overall that
it Is a very, very reasonable report with very reasonable \
i
i
recommendations. I see nothing In It that cannot be compiled !
with. j
i
i
What you are suggesting Is a water quality , I
standard that can be met by the treatment and the equipment [
that we have already manufactured in this country to meet this '
state of the art. I see nothing unreasonable about it.
I think it is a very fine report in general,
-------
33
Hon. G. Kelson
without attempting to make a Judgment on some particular
detail.
MR. STEIN: Yes,
MR. WILSON: Mr. Chairman?
MR. STEIN: Yes, sir.
MR. WILSON: May I just make a brief comment,
seconding what has Just been said by my colleague from Red
Wing In reference to the Senator's Intimation that no one
recognized the magnitude of this problem before this report?
I might say by way of Introduction, although I
think it is quite well known to a good many here, that my
contact with this interstate pollution problem on the
Mississippi and the St. Croix Rivers probably goes back much
further than anyone else's in this audience, back to the days
when your State Board of Health, after World War I, the
Minnesota State Board of Health and the Wisconsin Board of
Health, were struggling both with their ir.trattate and Inter-
state pollution problems, without benefit of any special water
pollution control agencies, and making considerable progress
therewith.
Both of those agencies recognized the magnitude
of the problem on the Mississippi River, which in those days
was going from bad to worse into a state of pollution.
As a result of the efforts of the Minnesota
-------
Hon. 0. Nelson
State Board of Health, without any Federal Intervention what-
soever, because no Federal law existed for water pollution
control activities at that time, the Twin Cities got their
resources together, organlEed the Minneapolis-St. Paul
Sanitary District, and proceeded at great expense to construct
the Twin Cities Sewage Disposal System and Treatment Plant at
Pigs Island, which was the first of its kind in any metro-
politan area on the entire Interior river system of the
country.
The result of that was that the people downstream
below the Twin Cities for the following twenty years enjoyed
a cleaner river than anywhere else on the Mississippi, Ohio
or the Missouri Rivers.
Duluth was likewise ahead of all other communities
In providing sewage disposal and treatment at the head of the
lake.
The present situation resulted, as everyone knows,
I think, from the fact that the population explosion of recent
years outran the estimates of the engineers who constructed
those earlier systems. That also was recognized by these
State agencies of both States, notably by the Minnesota Water
Pollution Control Commission, which in the meantime had beer.
created in 19^5.
The Commission called the attention of the Twin
-------
35
Hon. Q. Nelson
Cities Sanitary District Board of Trustees to this situation,
that the population explosion and the growth of industry in
this Twin Cltiea area was exceeding their previous estimates
as to the capacity of their plant, and that in the course of
a very few years, It would become overloaded if not expanded.
The Board of Trustees of the Twin Cities plant
undertook a study of this situation, and it became very
evident that in order to deal with this problem, there would
have to be an expansion of the authority of that district to
cover the entire metropolltar area.
The Twin Cities Sanitary District, when first
created and now, was limited to the boundaries of the two
cor.tij-.io Jo cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul. Its authority
to deal with suburban problems was limited to the making of
contracts by the separate cities to take care of the sewage
through the main systems of these suburbs.
That was a very unsatisfactory way tc take care
of this expanding outside population, because it did not
provide adequate legal or financing authority to build the
Immense Interceptor sewers which were going to be necessary to
take care of that outside population in time to prevent the
overloading. The authorities of the district sought action by
the State Legislature.
Now, I was raised on the St. Crolx River, where,
-------
36
Hon. G. Nelson
In early days we had a lot of log Jams, and when you had to
loosen up a log Jam you had to find the key log, and I am
going to say that the key log In this jam with which we are
confronted now is in the Minnesota Legislature through failure
to heed these recommendations of the State water Pollution
Control Commission and the Board of Trustees of the Twin
Cities Sanitary District, and provide the necessary authority
to get on with the Job fast enough.
At the Legis:atui"e of 196l, in response to these
efforts, a bill was introduced to provide for expansion of
the sanitary district. It was not passed, and accordingly the
district then proceeded with the utmost means at its disposal
to plan for and launch the expansion project which is now on
the point of completion.
The completion of that project had a much higher
cost than the construction of the original plant which was
completed in 1938. The completion of that project, which was
initiated without any Federal Intervention whatsoever, will
result in a very substantial clean-up of the Mississippi River
below the Twin Cities.
It will not make it good enough. We should not
kid ourselves about that. Much more must be done. South St.
Paul has got to make some very marked improvements, and all
the other communities on the Minnesota River and the tributary
streams.
-------
37
Hon. 0. Nelson
The Minnesota Water Pollution Control Commission
is on the way to deal with those problems, and I think it is
ralr to say that if It had not been for those oil spills in
the winter of 1Q62 which got everybody stirred up -- and,
of course, it is a great American custom that hardly anybody
moves to deal with a big problem in this country until some
calamity happens — those oil spills for which the Minnesota
Water Pollution Control Commission, according to the findings
of the State Board of Health, was in no way responsible, got
everybody stirred, with the result that the Legislature passed
some legislation at the 1963 session which Improved the situa-
tion somewhat, but still did not provide the necessary authori-
ty for expansion of this district.
However, in the meantime this expansion project
was actually going on, and If you ask me, on the basis of
considerable experience as Chairman of the Minnesota Water
Pollution Control Commission In past years, as legal consultant
for the State Board of Health, having held the first hearing
Tor them under the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, and
some considerable familiarity with these problems In different
parts of the country, I think that this problem would have
been solved without any Federal intervention In the law by the
initiative of the Minnesota Water Pollution Control Commission
and State Board of Health and the cooperation of the Wisconsin
-------
38
Hon. G. kelson
authorities.
Now, maybe It would not have proceeded quite so
fast. In fact, I am sure that those oil spills were a very
potent factor in getting the legislature in 1963 to pass the
laws that they did, and also those oil spills were responsible
for the calling of this conference. If those oil spills had
not occurred, 1 don't think we would be here today at all.
I don't blame the Governors of the two States for
asking the Federal Government to come in here, and I think
the expenditure of the money that has been spent on this effort
by the Federal authorities has been very beneficial, because
they have done a great deal which the Minnesota Water Pollu-
tion Control Commission did not have the money to do. But
the Water Pollution Control Commission was fully aware of the
existence of all the sources of pollution to which attention
is called in this report, and has already started to deal
therewith by holding a series of hearings in 1962 for the
purpose of establishing standards and taking enforcement
action before anybody thought of calling this conference, or
calling any Federal authorities.
Now, getting right back to the key log of this
jam, the important thing at the door of the Minnesota Legis-
lature right now Is to enlarge that sanitary district so that
it will have the legal authority and financial capacity to
-------
39
Hon. G. Nelson
construct the large workJ which are necessary to prevent
another overloading.
As I say, the completion of this present project,
together with what has to be done at South St. Paul and the
other communities, will do very much to clean up this rivert
but the capacity of that la limited, and unless this legis-
lature provides for am adequate authority to anticipate needs
and construct these interceptors to deal with the problems
before they occur, we will be In another overloading jam
between five and ten years from now,
I personally am glad that the Federal authorities
have come in here and made the study that they did, because
I think they might be quite helpful in getting this matter
through in the Legislature, which has now passed up three
sessions without acting on this problem of the expansion of
the district. I hope that it will be helpful In getting the
Legislature at this stage to take that action which will fore-
stall another jam.
And, may I say, Senator, as a life-long citizen
of Stillwater, Minnesota, that the citizens of Stillwater,
Minnesota, of Washington County, Minnesota, and of the State
of Minnesota, are Just aa concerned and just as vigilant to
protect the natural advantages of the St. Crolx River which
they, above all people, prize most highly as anybody, anywhere,
-------
Hon. Q. Nelson
Including the State of Wisconsin.
MR. STEIN: Thank you for your statement, Mr.
Wilson.
You know, that goes to show you what happens when
you pour oil on troubled waters.
(laughter.)
Senator?
SENATOR NELSON: I just would like to say that
Chester Wilson is one of the distinguished conservationists
In this country, and if you would write that speech out, I
will go up there and give It to the Legislature.
(Laughter. )
For reasons that you may not suspect, I am most
grateful for the criticism that you and Dr. Jelatis have made.
This is the first time in my life that I have ever been
accused of understating a pollution problem.
(Laughter.)
I am glad today to say it happened.
I an not going to leave the conference. However,
I have to call my office and see what's going on in Washington,
and see to it that they don't spend any money while I am gone.
I will be right back.
MS. STEIN: Thank you very much.
(Applause.)
-------
Hon. W. P. Knowles
MR. STEIN: At this time I would like U call on
Mr. Freeman Holmer for a statement of Governor Warren P.
Knowles of Wisconsin.
STATEMENT OP HON. WARREN P. KNOWLES,
GOVERNOR OP THE STATE OF WISCONSIN,
AS READ BY MR. FREEMAN HOLMER, A
CONFEREE
MR. HOLMER: Recognizing the Importance and
significance of this conference, Governor Knowles was unable
to be here and asked me to present to the members of the
conference and those of us who are attending and considering
this subject with us, a relatively brief statement of his
support of the conference and his hope for its success.
Mr. Chairman, Members of the Federal-State
Conference on Water Pollution of the Upper Mississippi;
Three years ago, my predecssor joined with the
then-Governor of Minnesota to request a conference on the
pollution of the upper Mississippi River and its major
tributaries.
The summary contains a substantial amount of in-
formation, very little of which is new to those of us who have
been concerned with doing something to correct the situation.
-------
Hon. W. P. Knowles
Although only a few of the installations affected
by the specific recommendations of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration are located in Wisconsin, I can assure
you that we in Wisconsin plan to use our resources to assure
compliance with the conalusions of your conference. The ex-
panded staff authorized by the 1965 Legislature and the
further expansion of staff and local assistance grants in-
cluded in my budget recommendations for 1967-69 exceed sub-
stantially the suggestions incorporated in the summary report
and are evidence of this intention.
Wisconsin's representatives at the conference
will have a number of suggestions for specific modification
of the recommendations. For example, we cannot condone,
under Wisconsin Ian,', either the operation of an open dump or
a sanitary landfill in a flood plain (Sec. 1M.OU5, W.S.).
We have a question relating to storm waters. There are others.
The clean-up of the Mississippi can only occur
rapidly and effectively with determined State and local
leadership. I am sure that your conference provides a focus
of public attention on the problem on one of our boundaries.
We are already moving to cope with the problems
of our other Inter-.and intrastate waters. We welcome the
technical assistance we have already received from the Federal
agencies in this connection and hope that Federal budgetary
-------
Hon. W. P. Knowlea
policy will permit these agencies to keep pace with our own
effort.
In this connection. It might well be appropriate
for the conference to record Its recommendation that the
Congress make available local assistance funds for the con-
struction of waste treatment facilities at not less than the
level authorized by the 89th Congress and that It augment the
funds available for expedited mapping of flood plains In both
Minnesota and Wisconsin.
Again, I would extend my best wishes for a success-
ful culmination of your efforts.
Sincerely, signed Warren P. Knowlea, Governor.
MR. STEIN: Thank you, Mr. Holmer.
Are there any questions or comments?
(No response.)
MR. STEIN; Again, I would like to express my
appreciation for this statement.
Maybe I will Join with the Senator. It is a fine
thing to find that the States are criticizing us for not going
fast enough or far enough, and we are delighted to have it.
Before we start the Federal presentation, we will
recess for ten minutes.
(Whereupon a recess was had.)
MR. STEINj May we reconvene?
-------
H. W. Poston
While these are, of course, formal conferences,
on the part of the enforcement action, we try to keep them as
flexible as possible. You are beginning to see the shape of
the procedure new.
What we are going to try to do Is have the
Federal presentation before lunch, and then recess for lunch.
When we come back we will call on the States In the safest
possible way, alphabetical order. Minnesota will be called
on first. Minnesota will make a statement and will call on
Its participants, and then Wisconsin will make Its statement.
You can be sure that everyone who has something relevant to
say will be given an opportunity to be heard.
At this point, I would like to call on Mr. H. w.
Postor. for the Federal presentation.
Mr, Poston.
STATEMENT OF H. W. POSTON, CONFEREE
AND ACTING REGIONAL DIRECTOR, GREAT
LAKES REGION, FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION
CONTROL ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF
THE INTERIOR
MR. POSTON: Mr. Chairman, Fellow Conferees,
Ladies and Gentlemen:
-------
H. W. Poaton
I have a five-page report here which I had intended
to read to you this morning and tell you •ome of my optimism
for feeling that we are going to clean up this pollution
problem on the upper Mississippi River.
I think that Senator Nelson has quite eloquently
laid out to you much of this problem. He has said, in more
eloquent language and terms than I can ever say, all of the
things that concern this particular problem on the upper
Mississippi River. Then Chester Wilson came forth, and he
also has elaborated on parts of this problem.
Really, my objective and the reason that I am here
is to develop with these conferees an action program, and the
sooner we can get at this action program, the sooner I am
going to satisfy the objective and the reasons for my being
here.
So I propose, Mr, Chairman, to enter in the record
the statement that I have here, and to move along with the
presentation of our Federal Report.
Mr. Albert Printz, Jr., has directed and carried
on this Investigation in the upper Mississippi River area
with a competent ataff here located at the Naval Air Station,
and I would like to call on Mr. Printz to give to you what he
has prepared here in this Federal Summary and pollution Abate-
ment Recommendations, and I will call on Mr. Printz at this tine.
-------
H. W. Poston
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
That statement of yours will be Included as if
read In the record, and I want to thank you for giving up your
time. I know you certainly did § great deal of work.
Mr. Wilson, I would like to say that your statement
was excellent. In this field, Mr. Wilson is, as you can tell,
a veritable encyclopedia, I didn't know he was going to make
that statement at the conference now, but it will persist.
MR, WISNIEWSKIs Mr. Chairman, does Mr. Poston's
statement contain anything the conferees should know in order
to draw up their conclusions?
MR. POSTON: I will have a copy prepared and sub-
mitted to you shortly.
MR. WISNIEWSKIs If it does, we would like copies
for all of the conferees.
MR. POSTON: We will so do this.
MR. STEIN: Thank you.
(The following is the statement submitted by
Mr. H. W. Poston:
It gives me great pleasure to be in the Twin
Cities today for the second session of this conference. It
hardly seems possible that three years have elapsed since the
first session of the conference adj ourned and a formal study
was initiated. I am optimistic today, much more sc than I was
-------
4? :
H. W. Poston j
i
three years ago, that these vat*!1* oan be a leaned up — and
kept clean. My optimism 1* baaed on three things that have
happened In this three-year periods First, we have had j
i
momentous Federal and State legislation; on the Federal i
level the Water Quality Aot of 1965 and the Clean Waters
Restoration Aet of 1966. Secondly, we have seen a marked
ohange In public opinion and there Is now overwhelming public
sentiment In support of clean water. And, third, we have a
report, and I say with Justifiable pride, one which outlines
an action program which. If Implemented, will result In the
clean water we all want — and which the people of this area
have a right to expect.
Let me elaborate briefly on each of these three
points In order, starting with the new legislation. The
requirement establishing water quality standards on Inter-
state waters throughout the country was brought about by
the Water Quality Aet of 1965. This represents a major
departure In water pollution control. As a matter of fact,
It Is the biggest thing going today not only In the field
of water resources but In the whole field of environmental
management and control.
In taking this unprecedented step the Congress
said, in effect i Water pollution In this country has gone j
-------
48
H. W. Poeton
far enough. The time has oome to call a halt. From here
on there are going to be standards of quality for all the
major lakes and streams of this country, and those standards
are going to be enforced. This taste is now at a crucial
stage, and we In the Federal Water Pollution Control Admini-
stration are doing everything we oan to help the States
carry out the letter and spirit of the law. There Is much
at stake, and tine Is running out. The purpose of the Water
Quality Standards provision Is both preventive and curative.
Reduced to fundamentals, the object Is to preserve those
waters that are still clean and to restore to acceptable levels
of cleanliness those waters that have become polluted.
The enactment of the Clean Waters Restoration Act
of 1966 marked the beginning of a new offensive In America % .
war on pollution. This landmark legislation makes It quite i
clear that the Federal Government Is prepared to do more
than It ever did before to win the battle for clean water.
At the sane tl*e, the Federal law calls for a comparable
all-out effort by the States, the local municipalities, and
American industry. Although the solution to pollution Is
not merely opening the flood gates of the Federal Treasury, i
much greater Federal financial assistance Is now available j
i
than ever before. '
-------
H. W. Pooton
At the last session of the conference, we heard
reference to the fact that the river could never be cleaned
up because of the storm water overflow problems and that a
solution to these problems was too expensive. The
MlnneapollB-St. Paul Sanitary District, as many of you know,
was among the first in the United States to receive Federal
funds under the Demonstration Grant provisions of the Act,
aimed toward a solution to the overflow problem. The pro-
gram which is now being pursued, using local funds as well
as Federal, hopefully will go a long ways towards demon-
strating the practical control of these overflows. The
Amendments of 1966 also contain authorization for doubling
the amounts of monies given to the State water pollution
control agencies for furtherance of their programs. These
program grants are to be utilised by the State agencies for
the extension of their programs.
The new amendments also included new provisions
relative to the section dealing with grants for construction
of municipal waste treatment plants. The dollar limitation
on the amount of Federal funds in the project will be
removed on June 30, and the limitations then will be on a
straight percentage basis of the total project cost. The
new amendment authorizes appropriations of $430 million for
-------
50
H. V. Poston
next year and gradually Increases the annual authorization
to $1.25 billion by 1971.
Maw of the mid we stern States arc now proceeding
to amend their legislation In order that they night take
greater advantage of the Federal money. It Is now possible,
with the State contributing a share of the cost of construc-
tion and the project being a part of an overall unified
approach to the States1 water pollution control plan, that
local communities can get their treatment plants built or
updated for a local expenditure of as little as 15 percent
of the project coat. Some of the Midwestern States which
have or are considering modifying their legislation are Ohio,
Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, and Wisconsin.
One other indication that the Federal Government
means business and Intends to do Its share In the cleanup
is the regulations governing tax credit for construction of
industrial water pollution control facilities, water pol-
lution abatement works have been exempt from the suspension
of the investment tax credit if certain conditions are
satisfied. This means that under certain conditions,
industries can deduct up to seven percent of the cost of
new waste treatment plant construction from its income tax
liability notwithstanding the general suspension of the
-------
li. W. Post on
Investment tax credit. This IB certainly an additional
Incentive for Industries to move ahead now In the cleanup
program. Already, some Minnesota firms have sought Informa-
tion concerning the procedures to be followed.
The second of the three significant changes* that
of the change In public opinion, has simply been a general
raising of the sights as to what can and should be done.
People In this area have come to realize that something
must be done now to protect and improve their precious
heritage of clean water. I think it can be said that the
people are now taking the lead in water pollution control.
Public debate no longer centers on whether or not we can
afford the cost of waste treatment; the question Is now,
"How soon can the Job be done?" From the publicity I have
seen concerning our report, I am convinced that the citizens
and their leaders want action now to restore the quality of
the waters of this area.
This brings me to the final point, that is, the
study which was carried out by Federal personnel. This
study has fulfilled the directives issued at the time of
the last conference, which was to assess the pollution
problem and to propose remedial action. The Minnesota
Water Pollution Control Commission joined with the Federal
-------
52
h. W. Poeton
Government in the study of this Area. Minnesota health
Department engineers participated In many activities —
from river and Industrial waste surveys to Joint studies
of pathogenic bacteria and viruses.
The Federal study has added a great deal of
specific Information to that which was available three
years ago. Foremost among these additions Is the specific
Information obtained relative to the strength and quantity
of waste o on Ing from all sources. Through cooperative
efforts with both the State of Minnesota and the MSSD
(Minneapolls-St. Paul) a complete analysis of the District's
waste was performed for the first time. The first tracing
of pathogenic bacteria and enteric viruses was accomplished
as a joint Federal-State venture. The rivers were also
biologically characterized for the first time as was the
evaluation of the tainting of fish flesh In the streams of
the study area. The results of this activity have proven
to be so useful that the techniques employed have been
adopted at other Federal studies around the country. The
same holds true for the simple, yet highly successful,
methods employed In the first refined determination of the
tine of travel In the waters under study.
Many of the problems that existed three years ago
-------
53
H. W. FOBton
still exist today, but many of th* problems are on the way
towards corrective action. Several cities and Industries
have already initiated actions recommended in our report.
I feel that with the background Information furnished by
the study and the resultant recommendations, we have pointed
the way toward the improvement of these waters for all
legitimate uses. The Federal Mater Pollution Control
Administration is vitally Interested In seeing that the
waters of the entire Mississippi River basin along with other
basins throughout the country are restored and protected for
the future.
I believe that we conferees, meeting here today,
have a priceless opportunity to map the grand strategy for
victory in this war against water pollution In this area.
We have been given the tactical weapons to do this. We
have strengthened Federal and In many Instances State
legislations we have enthusiastla public support! and we
have. In this report, a recommended action program. That
Is why I said at the outset that I am optimistic that these
waters can be cleaned up — and kept clean!
-------
A. C. PRINTZ, JR.
MR. STEIN: Mr. printz?
STATEMENT OP ALBERT C. PRINTZ, JR.,
SANITARY ENGINEER, FEDERAL WATER
POLLUTION CONTROL ADMINISTRATION,
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
MR. PRINTZ: Thank ycu.
Mr. Chairman, Conferees, Ladies and Gentlemen;
For the record, I an Albert Printz, Sanitary
Engineer with the Federal Water Pollution Control Administra-
tion.
In presenting the Federal recommendations of the
conferees, I will abridge the booklet entitled "Summary and
Pollution Abatement Recommendations for the Upper Mississippi
River and Major Tributaries," and will frequently refer to
various tables and figures therein. I therefore ask that the
report contents be entered into the record In their entirety,
beginning with the map preceding Page 1,
MR. STEIN: DC you want this Included in the
record?
MR. PRINTZ: Yes. Since I will frequently
refer to various tables and figures in this report throughout
the presentation, I would therefore aak that the contents of
-------
55
A. C. Printz, Jr.
the report be entered into the record In their entirety,
beginning with the map which precedes Page 1.
I should also like to include in the proceedings
by reference only, rather than complete reproduction, a
supplementary report of the Project entitled "A Report on
Pollution of the Upper Mississippi River and Major Tributaries."
MR. STEIN: The report entitled "Summary and
Pollution Abatement Recommendations for the Upper Mississippi
River and Major Tributaries," without objection, will be in-
cluded in the record as if read.
The other document will be Included as an exhibit
and will be on file at the Federal offices in Washington and
in Chicago, and also the office in Minneapolis.
MR. HOLMER: Mr. Chairman, as a matter of Informa-
tion, the entering of this document in the record at this
point, will it create any problems in the development of any
possible amendments thereof in the course of the conference?
MR. STEINs No. I think the sole purpose is to
save time.
MR. HOLMER: All right.
MR. STEINs Again, let me indicate what this
document is, and what Mr. Printz' role is.
This is a document containing the findings and
-------
56
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
the recommendations of our investigators. It is not sacro-
sanct because It Is printed rather than written or mimeographed.
The purpose of entering It as If read would be to save time.
How long do you think It would take, about forty
minutes?
MR. PRINTZ: Yes, sir.
MR. STEIN: This would take about ar. hour's worth
of time. We could. If you wish, have him read the whole docu-
ment, but the only effect the entry has Is one of saving ti-ne.
MR. HOLMER: Thank you.
-------
57
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
(The following is the report submitted by
Mr, A. C. Prlntz, Jr.;
SUMMARY AND POLLUTION ABATEMENT
RECOMMENDATIONS
FOR THE UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER
AND MAJOR TRIBUTARIES
FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ADMIN.
TWIN CITIES-UPPER MISSISSIPPI RIVER PROJECT
-------
58
IS MHtt
LEGEND
MSSO Minntapalit - St. Paul Sanitary District
FIGURE I-For the development of pollution abatement recommendations
investigations were conducted on water quality, sources and quantities
of wastes, and the extent of pollution in 270 miles of river.
-------
A. C. PRINT2, JR.
INTRODUCTION
The investigation of water pollution along the
Upper Mississippi River and its major tributaries, a summary
of which is presented herein, was conducted by the Twin
Cities-Upper Mississippi River Project of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration. The investigation was made
under the authority of Section I0(d) (l) of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Pet as amended (33 U.S.C. 466 et
seq. ) and at the request of the conferees of the Federal-
State conference on water pollution held in St. Paul,
Minnesota on February 7 and 8, 196*1. The Conference, in
turn, was held in response to a Joint request from the
Governors of Minnesota ard Wisconsin to state pollution in
the area and was called by the Secretary of the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare.
The investigation was conducted tc gather in-
formation on water quality, sources and quantities of vastes,
the extent of pollution, and necessary abatement measures
in the following river reaches: Upper Mississippi River from
the Rum River at Anoka, 10? miles downstream to the outlet
of Lake Peplnj lower 110 miles of the Minnesota River; and
the lower 52 miles of the St. Crolx River (see Figure l).
-------
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
Surveys of municipal ard industrial waste sources
..ere Joint efforts of the Project, the appropriate State
regulatory agencies, and in mar.y Instances the municipality
^r industry involved.
The summary of the 1st session ,-f the Conference
indicated that the investigations would be carried out in
conjunction with both states and agencies. To this end, we
are most appreciative of the cooperative attitude exhibited
by all with whom the Project dealt. Participating agencies
included the staffs of Minnesote's Department of Health and
Department of Conservationi Wisconsin's Department of Resource
Development and Department of Conservation; as well as many
other federal, municipal ard private organizations.
All desired Information on waste sources and
stream quality, collected over the years by the Minnesota
Department of Health, Wisconsin Department of Health, and
the Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District Sewage Treatment
Plant (MSSD) was made available to the project by these
agencies.
Laboratory procedures were performed in accordar.ce
with "Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and waste-
water, Eleventh Edition." Any deviatior.s were based on
proven research described in the literature. '11 calculations
-------
(except those on flow frequencies) were based on date
collected during the survey period (June 196*1 - October 1965)
?nd reflect conditions resulting from waste loadings being
discharged during that perlsd.
The main body of this report contains a more
detailed description and discussion of all Project findings
along with appropriate maps, figures ard tables. The Informa-
tion provided In the Summary and Conclusions which follow, is
a condensation of all the irformation contained in the main
body of this report,
SUMMARY OF
WATER USES
Water uses in practice along the Mississippi,
Minnesota a= d St. Croix Rivers are summarized below end
illustrated in Figures 2 through 7.
POTABI£ WATER SUPPLY
Minneapolis and St. Paul use the Mississippi
System as a source of potable water supply for themselves and
tnar.y of the suburbs. Other communities depend on ground
water sources. The water intakes for Minneapolis and St.
Paul, located Just upstream from Minneapolis, withdraw an
-------
62
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
average of 103 million gallons per day (mgd) and serve
approximately 873,000 people.
WONPOTABLE INDUSTRIAL PROCESS WATER
Significant amounts of untreated water from the
Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers are used by four industries
in their processes at seven locations within the study area.
No use is made of the St. Croix River for this purpose.
On the Mississippi River, barge and gravel
washing is carried out at two locations, each. Both activ*-
tles are of a seasonal nature, operating from April thr.iug
October, Barge washing, conducted near downtown St. Paul
(river miles 840.4 and 837.3), requires about 2 million gallons
per operating season. Gravel washing is performed about 6
miles farther downstream (river miles 826.5 and 825.0) aid
requires 650 million gallons of water per operating seal or.
On the Minnesota River, sugar beet washing and
fluming is conducted during the winter (4-month period) near
Chaska. Barge washing Is conducted at two locations (river
miles 13.2 and 8.0) between April and November of each year.
The former operation requires about 700 million gallons per
season and the latter ones require about 800 thousand gallons
per season.
-------
03
A. C, Prlntz, Jr.
COOLING WATER
One processing Industry and five steam-
generating plants utilize Mississippi and Minnesota River
waters for cooling purposes. No use Is presently being made
of the St. Croix River for this purpose.
The Mississippi River serves the one processing
industry located at South St. Paul and three of the steam-
electric generating plants, located in Minneapolis, St. Paul,
and Red Wing. Together, they use cooling water at a maximum
rate of 1,100 mgd.
The Minnesota River serves two of the steam-
electric generating plants, located near Mankato and
Bloomington. They use cooling water at a maximum rate of
mgd.
HYDROELECTRIC POWER
There are five hydroelectric plants within the
study area and all utilize the Mississippi River. One is
located 10 miles above Minneapolis and the other four are
located in Minneapolis at St. Anthony Palls and Lock..& Dam
No. 1.
The total capacity of these plants is 42,260
-------
I
FlGUHC * - C«miMrci«l »tti»pn»|
LEGEND I i OtttgnotM wfttrt each ut« is practictd *xr*n«ivily.
R6URES 2-7. SUMMARY OF WATER USES.
-------
65
A. <*. Prlntz, Jr.
KW» 3.2 percent of the total steam-electric power plant
capacity in the study area.
IRRIGATION AND STOCKWATERING
Very little use is made of the Mississippi River
system for irrigation and stockwatering.
Permits for withdrawal of irrigation water have
been issued to persons along the Mississippi River above
Minneapolis and near North Lake in Pool No. 3l along the
Minnesota River at Jordanj and along the St. Croix River Just
a'aove Prescott. There may also be some use for irrigation
by truck farmers along the north bank of the Mississippi
River just above Lock & Dam No. 2 and along the lower 35
miles of the Minnesota River.
Very limited use is made of the rivers for stock-
watering. Small numbers of cattle have been seen drinking
from the Mississippi River Just above Lock & Dam No. 2 and
from the Minnesota River above Chaska.
COMMERCIAL SHIPPING
Although river traffic in the Twin Cities area
is significant, it is less than on the remainder of the
-------
66
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
Mississippi River. During 196^ over five and cne-half
million tons of materials were received and shipped at the
ports of Minneapolis and St. Paul. In this same year there
were l,c>56 commercial lockages made through Lock & Dam No. 2.
Docking facilities extend upstream as far as the northern city
limit of Minneapolis where the nine-foot channel ends.
The shipping channel extends upstream on the
Minnesota River as far as Shakopee (river mile 25.1). During
1963 over two and one-quarter million tons of materials were
received and shipped along this reach.
Commercial shinping exterds upstream on the St.
Croix River as far as Stillwater (river mile 23.3). In com-
parison to the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers, barge traffic
on the St. Croix River is very light.
Receipts consist generally of only two products,
coal and superphosphate. Of the 30,56? tons of materials
received in 196^, 17,939 tons were coal. Coal receipts are
expected to increase significantly after b'.-ie Allen S. King
Power Plant becomes operational.
COMMERCIAL PISHING
Commercial fishing is practiced on the Mississippi
River in and below Pool No. 2 and on the lower 23 miles of
-------
67
A. C. Printz, Jr.
the St. Crolx River, known as Lake St. Crolx. The major
source of fish in this area, however, has always been Lake
Pepin In Pool No. 4. Pish caught commercially in Pools 3
and 4 during 1964 were valued at *91,320. No figures w<^re
available for catches in Pool No. 2 that year. The 1964
catch in Lake St. Crolx totaled 511,586 pounds and was valued
at $15j750. The predominant species of fish caught commercially
are carp, buffalo, catfish and drum.
SWIMMING AND WATER SKIING
Swimming is practiced throughout the reach below
Red Wing (Lake Pepin^ and the lower St. Crolx River from
beaches as well as boats. There are eight beaches along Lake
Pepln and seven beaches on the St. Croix River, however,
which receive heaviest use. Approximately 650 people can
normally be found along each of the two rivers using these
beaches on a typical warm, sunny weekend day.
Water skiing is generally practiced in four
areas, two on the Mississippi River and two on the St. Croix
River. On the Mississippi River it is practiced near Anoka
at the upper end of the study area and near Red Wing at the
lower end. As many as 75 people make use of these areas on
good days. Limited skiing is also practiced near St. Paul
-------
68
A. C. Printz, Jr.
Park, seven miles Uelow MSSD. The two areas on the St.
Croix River receiving heaviest use by water sklera are near
Hudson (river mile 1?,0) ar.d Afton (river mile 11.0).
Approximately 150 people make use of these areas on good days.
PLEASURE BOATING
Pleasure boating is practiced from April to
September through out all three of the major streams under
consideration. Greatest use, however, is made of the St.
Croix River below Stillwater, ard the Mississippi River below
Lock and Dam No. 2.
SPORT FISHING
Fishing Is an Important summer, as well as winter,
recreational activity in the area under consideration. The
St. Croix River and the Mississippi River below its confluence
with the St. Croix receive the greatest use although fishing
is practiced to some extent over the entire area.
ESTHETIC ENJOYMENT
The scenic beauty afforded by the streams in
-------
A. C. Printz, Jr.
this area has resulted in the location of about 30 parks
along their banks. The two parks receiving greatest use are
the Interstate and O'Brien State Parks, both located on the
St. Croix River. The former is located on both sides of the
river near Taylors Palls and St. Croix Falls. The latter
is situated on the Minnesota shore midway between Taylors
Palls and Stillwater. A large river oriented park is proposed
for the area adjacent to the mouth of the Minnesota River.
In addition, there are many scenic highways that
border on the streams under consideration. Plans are being
developed to construct a national parkway following the course
of the Misslst'lppi River on both sides from Canada to the
Gulf of Mexico.
MAINTENANCE OP HABITAT POR AQUATIC LIFE AN" WATERFOWL
Pish can be found throughout the streams in the
study area in varying numbers and species. DueKB, white
egrets, and herons can also be found along many reaches of
the three rivers. The Mississippi River serves as a major
artery in the continental system of flyways serving wildfowl
migrations. Pools 2,3 and 4 are spring and fall concentra-
tion areas for several species of duck. As many as 10,000
-------
70
A. C. Printz, Jr.
ducks at a time have been seen In the Spring Lake area
(Immediately above Lock & Dam No. 2).
WASTE DISPOSAL
Fifty-nine significant waste water producers
utilize the major streams within the study area for dispcsal
purposes. Their discharges total 1,800 (mg-i). The steam-
electric generating plants contribute 85 percent of this
amount. Municipalities and other industries contribute 12
and 3 percent, respectively. In addition to the above
contributors there are more than 100 combined and storm sew
-------
n
A. C. PrintE, Jr.
making It less attractive for all uses. Oxygen consuming
materials (measured by 5-day (20°C) BOD) can limit or destroy
fish, fish food organisms, and other desirable aquatic life
by reducing the dissolved oxygen concentration In the water.
Complete depletion of dissolved oxygen results In the
generation of offensive odors. Suspended solids, Including
silt from land erosion, create turbidity which not only
makes the water less suitable as a source of supply and for
recreational uses, but can also be damaging to fish. Larger
suspended solids eventually settle out, forming a sludge
blanket on the bottom. This sludge blanket smothers fish
food organisms and may affect navigation. Nitrogen, phos-
phorus, and heat promote the growth of algae (simple plants,
many microscopic In size) which, in turn, create nuisance
PC idltions affecting water supplies, recreational uses, and
» ^hetlc quality. Excessive ammonia nitrogen concentrations
.ffect fish lif*. Some chemicals, such as phenols, Impart
undesirable tastes and odors to the water and the flesh of
fish. Seme of the Intestinal bacteria, present in sewage in
astronomical numbers, may be pathogens which can reinfect man.
The location of all waste sources Investigated
are shown In Figure 8. The most significant sources and the
\
amounts of materials discharged by them are depicted in
Figures 9, 10, and 11.
-------
ST. CROIX FALLS
Industrial trattt
Stmoat trtatmtnr plant
Power plant
Wottr trtatmant plant
Untrtattd domttiic wastt
Ftdtral mtt«Hatl«n» (di*cAar«mo re itiifoc* vatvrri
SCALE
505
i.... i I
15 Mil**
FIGURE 8-Location of waste sources investigated
-------
73
1600 r
V
\
LEGEND
| 5-OoyBOD
STP Stwogt Trcatmtnt Plant
SCALE
I....? f
15 V,l«»
NOTE' Ont population «quivol«nt tquali 0,17 pounds 3-doy BOD.
FIGURE 9-Mo»t significant con ributort of BOO during 1964-1965.
-------
1 800
505
i.... i i
LE9EMD
| Total Suspended Solid*
STP Stwagi Tr«otmtnt Plant
NOTE > Ont populot.en »quival*nt tquolt 0,20 pound* tusptndtd iol>dt.
FIG UK E I0-Mo*t ti|nif leant contributor* et Susptnded Solids
during 1964-1965.
-------
75
LE6EMP
STP Stwogt Treatment Plant
I
SCALE
!....? f
IS Mitts
NOTE' Ont population tquivaltnt tquol* I x 10" eelifarms.
FIGURE II-Most significant contributors of Coliform Bacteria
during 1964-1963 »«F«FIB
-------
T6
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
FEDERAL INSTALLATIONS
Twelve Federal installations within the Project's
study area watershed handle their own waste disposal. Others
discharge to municipal sewerage systems. Table 1 (see
Appendix) gives information on the type of treatment and place
of final disposal of wastes from each of these 12 installations,
None have any measurable effect on water quality
in the portions of rivers under study. One, however, the
93**th Troop Group Officers' Club, has unsatisfactory waste
treatment facilities which discharge effluent to a marsh area
adjacent to the Minnesota River, fhese wastes present a poten-
tial health hazard to water users along the lower Minnesota
River.
MUNICIPAL SOURCES
MISSISSIPPI RIVER
There were five primary and seven secondary
municipal sewage treatment plants discharging 208 mgd of
wastes to the Mississippi River investigated. The primary
plants are those operated by MSSD, Hastings, Prescott, Lake
City* and Pepin. The secondary plants are those operated by
Anoka, South St. Paul, Newport, Inver drove, St. Paul Park,
-------
?7
A. C. Printz, Jr.
Cottage Grove, and Red Wing.
At the time of the survey these sources contributed
the following loadings of constituents:
1. Oxygen-consuming wastes equivalent to raw
sewage from a population of 1,800,000.
2. Collform bacteria equivalent to raw sewage
from a population of 1,200,000.
3. Suspended solids equivalent to raw sewage
frocr a population of 920,000.
4. Approximately 42,000 pounds of organic and
ammonia nitrogen compounds per day.
5. Approximately 24,000 pounds of phosphates
per day.
6. Approximately 850 pounds of phenols per day.
The MSSD Is the largest plant and contributes
91 percent of the municipal wastes volume. Of the total
municipal contribution, MSSD13 waste effluent contained 88
percent of the oxygen consuming materials; 95 percent of the
conforms; 92 percent of the suspended solids; 85 percent of
the organic nitrogen, ammonia nitrogen, and phosphates; and
essentially 100 percent of the phenols.
The South St. Paul sewage treatment plant (SSP)
is the second largest one and contributes 7 percent of the
municipal wastes volume. Of the total municipal contribution,
-------
78
A, C. Prlntz, Jr.
this source discharged 11 percent of the oxygen consuming
materials, 2 percent of the conforms, 6 percent of the
suspended solids, 12 percent of the organic and ammonia
nitrogen, and 9 percent of the phosphates.
The other 10 plants contributed the remaining 2
percent of the municipal wastes volume and from 1 to 6 per-
cent of the various constituents discussed above.
Table 2 (see Appendix) summarizes the information
obtained on the characteristics of wastes from all municipal
sewage treatment plants investigated. Loading rates of the
various constituents discharged from each plant to the river
are summarized in Table 3 (see Appendix).
MINNESOTA RIVER
There were seven communities and a Masonic home
discharging to the Minnesota River within the study area. Two
of the communities (Mankato and Shakopee) and the Masonic
home provide primary treatment. Only one, the City of
Henderson, la without any treatment facilities. The remaining
four communities (Chaska, Savage, Burnsvllle, and Cedar Grove)
provide secondary treatment. At the time of the survey,
these sources contributed the following loadings of
constituents:
-------
79
A. C. Printz, Jr.
1. Oxygen consuming wastes equivalent to raw
sewage from a population of 2*1,600.
2. Collform bacteria equivalent to raw sewage
from a population of 12,500.
3. Suspended solids equivalent to raw sewage
from a population of 19,300.
4. Approximately 850 pounds of organic and
ammonia nitrogen per day.
5. Approximately 550 pounds of phosphates per day.
The Mankato sewage treatment plant Is the
largest one on the Minnesota River and contributes 4.5 mgd,
about 7^ percent of the total municipal wastes volume. Of
the total municipal contribution, Mankato>s waste effluent
contained 85 percent of the oxygen consuming materialsj 54
percent of the conforms j 69 percent of the suspended solidsj
69 percent of the nitrogenous compoundsj and 49 percent of
the phosphates.
The second largest municipal contributor of
oxygen consuming wastes and conforms was Shako pee, which
contributed 7 and 24 percent of the totals, respectively.
The remaining plants discharge much smaller quantities of
wastes. Additional information on municipal waste charac-
teristics and stream loading rates from these plants is
summarized in Tables 2 and 3.
-------
80
A. C. Printz, Jr.
ST. CROIX RIVER
Six communities discharge wastes to the St.
Croix River within the study area. Two (Osceola and Still-
water) provide primary treatment and the remainder (St.
Croix Palls, Taylor Palls, Bayport, and Hudson) provide
secondary treatment. At the time of the survey, these
sources contributed the following loadings of constituents:
1. Oxygen consuming wastes equivalent to raw
sewage from a population of 9**00.
2. Coliform bacteria equivalent to raw sewage
from a population of 1,600.
3. Suspended solids equivalent to raw sewage
from a population of 7000.
4, Approximately 400 pounds of organic and
ammonia nitrogen per day.
5. Approximately 500 pounds of phosphates per day.
The Stillwater, Minnesota primary sewage treatment
plant is the largest single contributor on the St. Croix
River. It discharges 1.8 mgd, about 58 percent of the total
municipal wastes volume. Of the municipal contribution,
Stillwater's waste effluent contained 78 percent of the oxygen
consuming materials; 54 percent of the conforms; 75 percent
of the suspended solids; 57 percent of the nitrogenous com-
pounds; and 5^ percent of the phosphates.
-------
81
A. C. Printz, Jr.
The remaining five plants are much smaller In
capacity, receiving less than 0.6 mgd each. Additional In-
formation on municipal waste characteristics and stream loading
rates from these plants Is summarized In Tables 2 and 3.
INDUSTRIAL SOURCES
MISSISSIPPI RIVER
Fourteen manufacturing and processing plants, two
water treatment plants, three steam-electric generating plants,
and two barge washing facilities were Investigated on the
Mississippi River. The fourteen manufacturing and processing
plants referred to are Swift & Co«» Union Stockyards, Armour
& Company, King Packing Co., Northwestern Refining Co., J. L.
Shiely Co., General Dynamics Liquid Carbonlcs Division, St.
Paul Ammonia Products Co., Great Northern Oil Co., Northwest
Cooperative Mills, Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., H.
D. Hudson Manufacturing Co., Foot Tanning Co., and Pittsburgh
Plate Glass Co. The two water treatment plants investigated
are owned and operated by the City of Minneapolis.
Tie barge washing facilities investigated were
those of the Minnesota Harbor Service and Twin City Shipyard.
These industrial sources, excluding the three electric plants,
-------
82
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
discharge wastes at the rate of about 35 mgd to the river.
The steam-electric plants utilize as much as 1,093 mgd of
river water for cooling purposes, returning It directly to
river after use. These sources, together contributed the
following loadings of constituents:
1. Oxygen consuming wastes equivalent to raw
sewage from a population of 35>000.
2. Coliform bacteria equivalent to raw sewage
from a population of 170.
3. Suspended solids equivalent to raw sewage
from a population of 70,000.
4. Approximately 4,500 pounds of organic and
ammonia nitrogen compounds per day.
5. Approximately 2,500 pounds of phosphates
per day.
6. Approximately UO pounds of phenols per day.
7. Approximately 600 pounds of fluoride per day.
8. Approximately 160 billion British Thermal Units
(BTU) of heat per day (when steam-electric plants
are operating at full capacity}.
Table 4 (see Appendix) summarizes the Information
obtained on the characteristics of wastes from all industries
investigated. Loading rates of the various constituents
discharged to the river are summarized in Table 5 (see Appendix).
-------
83
A. C. Printz, Jr.
MINNESOTA RIVER
Eleven manufacturing and processing plants, two
steam-electric generating plants, and two barge cleaning
facilities were investigated on the Minnesota River. The
eleven manufacturing and processing plants Investigated were
the North Star Concrete Co., Archer Daniels Midland Co., Blue
Cross Rendering Co., Green Slant Co., Minnesota Valley Milk
Processing Assoc., American Crystal Sugar Co., M. A. Oedney
Co., Rahr Malting Co., Owens-Illinois Slass Co., American
Wheaton Glass Co., and Carglll, Inc. The two steam-electric
generating plants (Wilmarth and Blackdog) referred to are
owned and operated by the Northern States Power Company. The
two barge washing facilities are those of Twin City Shipyards.
One industry. Honeymead Products Co., located on che Blue
Karth River near its confluence with the Minnesota River,
was also Investigated. These industries, excluding the twu
electric plants, discharge wastes at the rate of 18 mgd to
the river. The steam-electric plants utilize as much as 405
mgd of river water for cooling purposes, returning it to the
river after use. The Blackdog electric plant passes the
water through a cooling pond before returning it to the river.
At the time of the survey, these sources, together, contributed
the following loadings of constituents:
1. Oxygen consuming wastes equivalent to
-------
84
A. C- Printz, Jr.
raw sewage from a population of 273,000.
2. Collfcrm bacteria equivalent to taw sewage
from a population of 40,300.
3. Suspended solids equivalent to rait sewage
from a population of 238,000.
4. Approximately 1,200 pounds of organic and
ammonia nitrogen per day.
5. Approximately 950 pounds of phosphates per day.
6. Approximately ?40 pounds of oil and grease
per day.
7. Approximately 60 billion BTU of heat per day
(when steam-electric plants are operating at
full capacity and discharging cooling water
directly to river.)
Additional information on industrial waste
characteristics and stream loading rates Is summarized in
Tables 4 and 5.
ST. C10IX RIVER
There are two industries (Andersen Window Co. and
United Refrigerator Co.) on the St. Crolx River. Together
they discharge wastes at the rate of 0.5 mgd. These sources
contributed the following loadings of constituents:
1. Oxygen consuming wastes equivalent to raw
sewage from a population of 330.
-------
85
A. C. Printz, Jr.
2. Suspended solids equivalent to raw sewage
from a population of 300-
3. Approximately 3 pounds of organic and ammonia
nitrogen pjr day.
4. Approximately 5 pounds of phosphates per day.
5. Less than one pound of chromium per day.
Additional information on industrial waste
characteristics and stream loading rates is summarized in
Tables 4 and 5.
COMBINED SEWER OVERFLOWS
The cities of Minneapolis, St. Paul, and South
St.. Paul each have combined sewers with regulators that divert
excess flows directly to the Mississippi River.
The Minneapolis-St. Paul combined sewer system
has more than 80 overflow points. It is estimated that over
a perlcJ of one year, up to 3.5 percent of sewage reaching
the MSSD treatment plant nay be lost without treatment. The
total of these figures represent about 7.5 million pounds of
5-Day (20°c) BOD and 9.5 million pounds of suspended solids
on a yearly basis. This overflow occurs over about 10 per-
cent of the time In a given year.
The South St. Paul combined sewer system is very
-------
86
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
similar in design to that of the Twin Cities. South St. Paul
has a more serious surcharging problem along a considerable
portion of the interceptor, however, during periods of
maximum dry-weather flow. In general, the interceptor has
only about one-half the required capacity to handle the
maximum dry-weather flow plus the runoff from a rainfall
intensity of 0.0*1 inches per hour. It is estimated that
South St. Paul's overflow system contributes about 6 million
pounds of 5-Day (20°c) BOD and 5 million pounds of suspended
solids on a yearly basis.
AGRICULTURAL AND NATURAL POLLUTION
Nutrients are the primary products of concern
resulting from agricultural activities and the natural death
and decay of plant and animal life. Among the nutrients,
nitrogen and phosphorus are considered the most important.
At times, suspended solids, resulting from erosion, are also
of concern.
MISSISSIPPI RIVER
Approximately 40,000 and 20,000 pounds per day of
total nitrogen and phosphate (as POjj) respectively, would be
expected to enter the Mississippi River above Lake Pepln from
-------
87
A. C. Printz, Jr.
agricultural and natural sources at the mean August flow
(9,^80 cfs at St. Paul).
MINNESOTA RIVER
Approximately 6,000 and 4,000 pounds per day of
total nitrogen and phosphate (as fO^) respectively, would be
expected to enter the study area via the Minnesota and Blue
Earth Rivers from agricultural and natural sources at the
mean August flow (2,677 cfs at Carver).
Turbidity, occurring naturally, is considerably
more than 25 units in waters entering the study area at
Mankato except on occasions of low stream flows after long
absences of surface runoff. The sand-silt-clay mantle,
through which the river flows Is largely responsible for this
condition. Land erosion within the drainage basin also
contributes to this problem.
ST. CROIX RIVER
Approximately 13,000 and 2,000 pounds per day of
total nitrogen and phosphate (as PO^) respectively, would be
expected to enter the study area via the St. Croix River from
agricultural and natural sources at the mean August flow
(3,580 cfs at Stlllwater).
-------
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
SUMMARY OF WATER QUALITY
AND
INTERFERENCE WITH WATER USES
GENERAL
Ideally, a stream should be high In dissolved
oxygen, low In temperature, turbidity, nitrogen, phosphate,
phenol and bacteria.
A dissolved oxygen concentration of at least
three ng/1 Is required In order to maintain a suitable
habitat for rough fish. A minimum of five mg/l Is required
for game fish.
Water temperatures should not exceed 93°F In
order to maintain a suitable habitat for rough fish and to
be suitable for limited body contact activities (e.g. boating
and commercial shipping.) The maximum temperature permitted
for whole body contact activities (e.g. swimming and water
skiing) and for Irrlgational or cooling water use is 90°P.
To be suitable as a source of potable supply and as a habitat
for game fish, the water temperature should not exceed 86°F.
Waters used as a source for potable supplies and
for whole body contact activities, such as swimming and water
-------
89
A. C, Printz, Jr.
skiing, should have a turbidity of not greater than 25
Jackson units. Most other water uses require a turbidity of
less than 250 Jackson units.
Nitrogen in the ammonia form should not exceed
1.0 mg/1 for game fish and 2.0 mg/1 for rough fish. Inorganic
nitrogen and phosphorus in concentrations greater than 0.3
mg/1 (as nitrogen) and 0,03 (as phosphate) at the time of
spring overturn are generally considered sufficient to produce
algal blooms in lakes. (Pools behind locks ar.d dams become
lakes at low-stream flows.)
Phenolic compounds in concentrations greater than
0.001 mg/1 produce undesirable tastes and odors in chlorinated
drinking water supplies. In concentrations greater than 0.01
mg/1 they taint fish flesh.
Sewage polluted waters frequently contain
pathogenic bacteria which, if Ingested, can cause gastro-
intestinal diseases such as typhoid fever, dysentery, anc
diarrhea. Body contact with sewage-polluted waters can cause
eye, ear, nose, throat or skin Infections. Viruses, which
cause diseases, including polio, hepatitis, and meningitis,
may also be present.
Sewage also contains readily detectable conform
bacteria which typically occur in the feces of man and other
warm-blooded animals. Not all coliform bacteria are of
-------
90
A. C. Prlntz, Jr. ;
Intestinal origin, however. Though generally harmless In I
themselves, coliform bacteria are always present In sewage- I
polluted waters and have, therefore, been considered Indicators '
of the probable presence of pathogenic bacteria. ;
!
Many water pollution control agencies evaluate |
water quality on the basis of total coliform count, which
Includes those of Intestinal as well as non-Intestinal
origin. In this report a total coliform density of greater
than 5,000/100 ml Is considered to be unsafe for any water
use Involving limited body contact (e.g. boating, commercial
shipping, and fishing) or for irrigation and stock and wild-
life watering. Waters used as a source of potable water
supply should not have a total coliform density greater than
4,000/100 ml. The total coliform density In waters used for
whole body contact activities (e.g. swimming and water skiing)
should not exceed 1,000/100 ml.
In this study a more selective test was used to
identify fecal coliform bacteria, in addition to the total
i
coliform. This permitted a better evaluation of the sig-
nificance of total coliform counts since the presence of fecal
I
oollform bacteria is positive proof of fecal contamination.
More recently, refined methods for isolation and
detection of Salmonella organisms (producers of many intestinal
diseases, including typhoid fever) have made it more practical
-------
91
A. C. Printz, Jr.
to test for these specific infectious disease bacteria.
General water quality conditions found in the
study area during the Project's survey are shown in Figure
12. Figures 13 through 18 show the river reaches that were
found to be unsuitable for various water uses because of the
water quality. The streams' flow (daily average) during this
period ranged from 1.3 to 10 times the 7-consecutive day,
once in 10-year low flow.
MISSISSIPPI RIVER
ANOKA TO ST. ANTHONY FALLS
The water quality of the Mississippi River between
Anoka and St. Anthony Falls was unsatisfactory from a bac-
teriological standpoint, only. The average total collform
density in this segment ranged from 5,000 MPN/100 ml at Anoka
to 4,OOO MPN/100 ml a short distance above St. Anthony Falls.
Fecal collform counts were approximately 10 percent of the
total counts. Almost all of this bacterial pollution originates
upstream from the study area on the Mississippi and Rum Rivers.
The only sources of bacterial pollution of any consequence
along this segment are the Anoka sewage treatment plant and
some of the metropolitan combined sewer overflows, including
Bassett Creek. The Minneapolis water treatment plant and the
-------
TAYLORS
FALLS
DISSOLVED OXYGEN - mj/l
FISH PALATABILITY
r
REACH OF LOWEST
PALATABILITV
TOTAL COLtFORM - MPN/IOOml
<
),OOO-5,000
5,000-100,000
100,000-1.000,000
1,000,000-10,000,000
Nott D.O. o«4 C«*if«rm itv*it *n the Minnitota Mivtr 9ft
American Cry»tat 9wt»t C*. »e» in op«rati*N.
FIGURE 12 - Typical wottr quality condirions during low flew
ptriodt in 1964 end |»€S
-------
LE6END CU OttifiWM* iMMMNMt rMCM*.
FHRJRES 13-ML WVER REACHES UNSUITABLE FOR WftiOUS WATER USES.
-------
A. C, Prlntz, Jr.
Riverside steam-electric generating plant also discharge to
this segment but do not contribute to the bacterial pollution,
Minneapolis Water Works officials reported that a few
tributaries to this segment are sometimes a source of high
algal populations in the vicinity of their water Intake.
In Its present condition this segment of river
is suitable for all uses except whole body water contact
activities (e.g. swimming and water skiing). Before these
activities could be practiced safely, the average total con-
form density would have to be reduced to less than 1,000
organisms per 100 ml. Since water quality in this segment doea
not change appreciably with variations In flow (In the low and
Intermediate ranges), the water Is suitable for all uses except
whole body contact activities even at very low flows.
ST. ANTHONY FALLS TO MSSD OUTFALL
This segment of river receives waste water from
more than 80 combined sewer overflows serving the Twin Cities
as well as from the Minnesota River, High Bridge steam-electric
generating plant, Minnesota Harbor Service, and Twin City
Shipyard.
In dry weather the water quality is nearly as
good as it Is upstream of St. Anthony Falls. During and
immediately following rainfall, however, the combined sewer
-------
95
A. r. Printz, Jr.
overflows discharge Into the reach, affecting the bacterio-
logical quality. These discharges were sufficient In the
summer and early fall of 1964 to increase the monthly average
total collform density along the segment from 4,000 MPN/100
ml at the upper end to approximately 30,000 MPN/100 ml at the
lower end. Collfcrm data collected by the Minneapolis-St.
Paul Sanitary District between 1942 ard 1955 show similar
average values at these locations for August and September.
Fecal coliform counts were approximately 10 percent of the
total counts.
The Minnesota River- at Its mouth is usually lower
in quality than the Mississippi River immediately above their
confluence. During the summer and early fall of 1964 the
Minnesota River had an effect on dissolved oxygen and turbidity
levels In the Mississippi River. The average dissolved oxygen
level decreased from 8.O to 7.7 wg/1 and the average turbidity
Increased from /_ 25 to 60 units as a result of the Minnesota
River's Inflow.
The other waste sources in this reach do not have
an appreciable effect on water quality.
In its present condition this segment of the
river is generally unsuitable for body contact activities such
as swimming, boating, fishing, and navigation. Before the
water would be suitable for the latter three activities, the
-------
96
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
average total conform density would have to be reduced to
leas than 5*000 organisms/100 ml. To make this segment suit-
able for swimming or water skiing, the average total coliform
density would have to be reduced to less than 1,000 organisms/
100 ml and the turbidity reduced to 25 units or less in the
reach below the mouth of the Minnesota River.
MSSD OUTFALL TO LOCK & DAM NO. 2
This segment of river receives wastes from the
two largest contributors in the study area (MSSD and South
St, Paul sewage treatment plants) as well as from 16 other
smaller sources discussed previously and listed in Tables 2
and 4. As a result of these waste discharges this 21.1 mile
reach of river had the lowest water quality of the entire
study area.
Dissolved oxygen levels decreased from an average
of 7.8 mg/1 Just above the MSSD outfall to an average of
2.9 mg/1 in the vicinity of Spring Lake during the summer and
early fall of 1964. The minimum dissolved oxygen level
measured at this lower station during the same period was
0.5 rog/1. Winter levels were only slightly higher than summer
levels In the lower 10 miles of this segment. The minimum
dally river flow during this period has a recurrence Interval
of 4 years.
-------
97
A. C. Printz, Jr.
Ammonia nitrogen levels exceeded 1.0 mg/1 ^the
maximum permitted for game fish) one or more times during the
summer survey at all stations in the entire segment. Values
were highest at a point two miles below the South St. Paul
plant outfall, ranging from 0.57 to 2.01 mg/1- (2.0 mg/1 is
maximum permitted for rough fish) and averaging 0.96 mg/1
during the summer and early fall of 1964. Ammonia nitrogen
values were slightly higher during the winter of 1964-1965.
The bacteriological quality of the river de-
creased markedly below the MSSD outfall. The total coliform
density ranged from 460,000 to 17,000,000 MPN/100 ml,
averaging 6,500,000 MPN/100 ml between June and October of
1964 at a point 8.8 miles below the plant outfall. Above the
outfall, the total coliform density averaged about 30,000
MPN/100 ml over this aame period. The fecal coliform density
throughout this reach averaged about 20 percent of the total
density.
Pathogenic bacteria and viruses were also isolated
from stream and waste samples collected along this segment.
Fourteen species of Salmonella bacteria and three types of
viruses were Isolated from the MSSD effluent. Five species
of Salmonella were isolated from the South St. Paul plant
effluent. Ten species of Salmonella were found in the river
a distance of six miles below MSSD (two miles below South
-------
98
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
St. Paul), Ten miles downstream of MSSD, seven species of
Salmonella were found.
Biologically, the river was relatively unpolluted
above the MSSD outfall. Conditions changed abruptly however,
at this point. Here, a zone of degradation began and ex-
tended downstream to the vicinity of the South St. Paul sewage
treatment plant outfall. The remainder of the segment, down
to Lock & Dam No. 2, was a zone of active decomposition. The
river bottom was composed of organic sludge along the entire
length of this segment. No clean water associated bottom
organisms were found.
Carp was the predominant species of fish through-
out Pool No. 2. In the reach between South St. Paul and
Spring Lake, game fish made up only 6£ of the total fish
population. In the two-mile reach above Lock ft Dam No. 2,
they made up only 9% of the total population. Of all the
fish evaluated in the atudy area by a taste panel, the flesh
of those caught between South St. Paul and Lock & Dam No. 2
received palatabllity ratings which were among the lowest.
Ratings ranged from 3.8 to 4.4, * rating of 4 or below In-
dicated the fish flesh to be unacceptable.
The water quality found in this segment during
the Project's surveys indicated that it was consistently suit-
able for only one use — cooling water. To make this segment
-------
99
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
suitable for uses such aa pleasure beating, navigation,
fishing, stock and wildlife watering, irrigation, and the
maintenance of rough fish, the minimum dissolved oxygen
concentration should be maintained above 3 mg/l and the
average collform density maintained less thar. 5,000 organisms/
100 ml.
LOCK & DAM NO. 2 TO LOCK & DAM NO. 3
This segmer.t of river, which lies in the pollu-
tion recovery zone, has three small waste sources discharging
to it. (Hudson Manufacturing Co., Hastings Sewage Treatment
Plat.t, and Prescott Sewage Treatment Plant). The dissolved
oxygen level was generally increased by 1 or 2 mg/1 during
passage over Lock & Dam No. 2. Waff- quality in this reach
Is also enhanced by the St. Croix River which enters the
Mississippi River abcJt four miles below Lock \ Dam No. 2.
The minimum dissolved oxvgen concentration re-
corded during the smmer and early fall of 196^1 between Lock
& Dam No. 2 and t\
-------
100
A, C. PrlntZj Jr.
Ammonia nitrogen levels were highest In the faur-
mlle reach below Lock & Dam No. 2. During the surveys In
the winter of 1964-1965, they ranged from 1.49 to 2.59 mg/1,
averaging 2.12 mg/l.
The bacteriological quality of this segment was
better than In the previous one, but was still poor. The
total collform density 1.2 miles below Lock & Dam No. 2 ranged
from 2,300 to 350,000 MPN/100 ml, averaging 74,500 MPN/100 ml
during the June-Ocotber 1964 period. Additional contributions
by the Hastings and Preacott sewage treatment plants offset
the Improvement In bacteriological quality that would have
resulted from dilution by the St. Crolx River. Below the
St. Crolx River the coliform density decreased progressively
with distance downstream due to natural dieoff. Just above
Lock & Dam No. 3 the collform density ranged from 3,300 to
130,000 MPN/100 ml, averaging 31*000 MPN/100 ml during the
June-October 1964 period. Fecal collform densities averaged
10 to 20 percent of the total densities in this segment.
Floating algae were found In greater numbers In
the four-mile reach immediately below Lock & Dam No. 2 than
at any point upstream. Their monthly average density at the
one-foot depth ranged from 10,690/ml (In May) to 34,450/ml
(In October) and averaged 21,200/ml, over the April-December
1964 period. Although these densities were rather high, they
-------
101
A. C. Printz, Jr.
created no problems. Their presence was apparent only by
microscopic examination. Their Increase in density was due,
primarily, to the Increased nutrient load.
Greater numbers of game fish were found In this
segment than In any of the previous ones. The Minnesota
Department of Conservation determined that In 1964 game fish
made up ^6% of the total fish population in this pool.
The water quality found In the four-mile reach
between Lock Je Dam No. 2 and the mouth of the St. Croix River
was unsuitable for all uses practiced. It would have been
considered suitable for rough fish if the maximum ammonia
nitrogen level had not exceeded 2.0 tng/1 and the minimum dis-
solved oxygen concentration had not fallen below 3 mg/l.
The reach between the mouth of the St. Crolx River
and Lock & Dam No. 3 was considered suitable for rough fish
but not for game fish. Ammonia nitrogen levels exceeded 1.0
ing/1 and the minimum dissolved oxygen concentration fell below
5 mg/1.
To make the entire segment between Lock & Dan
Nos. 2 and 3 suitable for uses such as swimming, water skiing,
boating, sport and commercial fishing, and navigation, the
average total conform density should be reduced to less than
1,000 organisms/100 ml; the maximum ammonia nitrogen concentra-
tion reduced to 1.0 mg/1; and the minimum dissolved oxygen
-------
102
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
concentration Increased to 5.0 rag/1.
LOCK & DAM NO. 3 TO CHIPPEWA RIVER
This segment of river also lies in the pollution
recovery zone. It receives waste water from three municipal
sewage treatment plants (Red Wing, lake City, and Pepin),
two processing Industries (Foot Tanning Co. and Pittsburgh
Plate Qla38 Co.), and the Ked Wing steam-electric generating
plant. These sources have little effect on water quality,
however. Lake Pepin, which Is a predominant portion of this
segmentj serves as a settling basin for silt and organic sludge
carried In from upstream.
The water quality in this segment was unsatis-
factory from a bacteriological standpoint. The average total
collform density decreased from 31,000/100 ml at the upper end
to 250/100 ml at the lower end during the summer and early
fall of 1964. Pecal collform densities were from 5 to 10
percent of the total collform densities. Most of the con-
forms found in this segment had entered from upstream. The
three sewage treatment plants in this segment, however, also
added significant amounts of conforms.
The Red Wing sewage treatment plant, largest of
the three, was monitored on ten occasions for pathogenic
bacteria and viruses. Positive results were obtained nine of
-------
103
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
the ten times from effluent samples. In all, seven species
of Salmonella In addition to Polio, Coxsackie, and ECHO viruses
were isolated.
Algal densities out in the mainstream were
generally lower than those found in the previous segment. In
shallow areas along the shores, however, densities were very
high. During the summer of 1965, a greenish "pea soup con-
sistency" algal bloom was observed In Lake Pepin at Stockholm
Wisconsin's bathing beach. Rocks along the bathing beach
were coated with a green slimy mass of algal cells. Another
bloom was also observed at the Lake City Marina. The water
was colored "pea green" and a thick green slime coated boat
hulls. These and other observations demonstrate that algal
populations can and do become a problem In the lower part of
the study area.
Results of chlorophyll-a analyses on the plant
cells found on artificial substrates placed in the river In-
dicated that attached algae were about six times as abundant
on those substrates in Lake Pepin as compared to those located
elsewhere upstream. This Increase in attached algal growths
on substrates and free-floating algae In quiescent shallow
areas was due largely to the nutrient and organic load received
from upstream sources.
Nutrient concentrations In Lake Pepin were above
-------
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
values generally considered sufficient to produce algal blooms
in lakes. Inorganic nitrogen levels averaged 0.70 mg/1 at
the upper end and 0.5^* mg/1 at the lower end. The ort'iophos-
phate level remained fairly constant throughout the entire
segment, averaging 0.56 mg/1 (as Kty).
Game fish were present in far greater numbers In
this segment than anywhere else in the study area. The
Minnesota Department of Conservation found that 68§£ of the
fish population in Pool No, *l were game fish. Flesh palata-
blllty tests made by a taste panel on fish caught at five
stations distributed throughout this segment showed that flavor
improved with distance downstream as far as midway through
Lake Pepln. Beyond this point there was no detectable improve-
ment.
In general, the water quality found in this seg-
ment Indicated that it was suitable for maintenance of game
i
fish as well as rough fish, esthetic enjoyment, and as a i
\
source of cooling water. The reach below the head end of Lake J
, !
Pepln was also suitable for limited body contact activities and ,
!
stock and wildlife watering. In addition to all of these uses, |
the reach below Lake City was also suitable for whole body
contact activities (e.g. swimming and water skiing).
The upper reaches in this segment would also be
suitable for all these water uses if the average total coliform
-------
105
A. C. Printz, Jr.
density were reduced to less than 1,000 organlsms/iOO mg.
MINNESOTA RIVER
MANKATO 70 C HA SKA
This segment of river receives waste water from
five sources In the Mankato area (Honeymead Products Co.,
Mankato sewage treatment plant, Archer Daniels Midland Co.,
Blue Cross Rendering Co., and Wiimarth electric plant) and one
each from the cities of Le Sueur (Qreen Giant Co. plant),
Henderson, and Belle Plalne (Minnesota Valley Milk Processing
Association plant).
Except for a moderately high turbidity and ccli-
forn density, the water in this 79,9 mile segment was of
reasonably good quality. The turbidity (resulting primarily
from erosion) generally ranged from 25 to 220 units. The high
values occurred during and immediately following periods of
surface runoff. No one portion of the segment was consistently
more turbid than another.
During the summer and early fall of 1964 the total
coliform density in the river at Mankato Just above the mouth
of the Blue Earth River averaged approximately 5,000 MPN/100
ml. Waste sources from the Mankato area Increased the average
density to about 80,000 MPN/100 ml. At the 7-consecutive-day,
-------
106
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
once in 10 year summer ION flow these waste sources would be
expected to Increase the collform density to approximately
400,000 organisms/100 ml at a point 10 miles downstream.
Beyond this point* and until reaching Chaska, the density
would show a general decrease because ofbacterial dieoff.
Dissolved oxygen concentrations were consistently
high (greater than 6.0 mg/1) in this segment. Waste loadings
found during 1964 and 1965 do not have an appreciable effect
on oxygen resources, even at low stream flows.
Algal densities at the one-foot depth were high
throughout the entire segment, but were generally highest
around Belle Plaine. Here, the density averaged 46,400/ml
between April and December of 1964. Their presence in these
numbers were generally obvious only upon microscopic examina-
tion, due partly to the natural turbidity of the water. At
times, however, the water did have a greenish cast. Nutrient
levels were well above values considered necessary to produce
algal blooms in lakes. (Pools behind dams essentially become
lakes at low stream flows.) Inorganic nitrogen and phosphates
(as POjj) levels averaged about 1.0 mg/1 and 0.29 mg/1,
respectively.
Bottom organism populations were very sparse
(usually less than 10 mean numbers per square foot) throughout
the entire segment. This was due to the sand and gravel
-------
107
A. 0. Printz, Jr.
bottom which provided few areas for organisms to attach them-
selves. The only region of organic sludge deposition was in
the five-mile reach immediately below the Qreen Giant Company
at Le Sueur. Pollution sensitive animals were present at most
of the stations in this segment, but they generally accounted
for less than §0# of the total kinds.
Because of the sparsity of bottom animals, turbid
waters, and extreme range of flows there is a poor fish
population in the Minnesota River. Of the fish present in
this segment, only 15# were game fish The palatability of
fish caught at Mankato and Belle Plalne was also evaluated by
a taste panel. Carp and walleye pike found in the vicinity
of Mankato were considered in the intermediate range of
palatability. Only carp were evaluated at Belle Plaine and
they were of slightly lower palatability than those caught at
Mankato.
The waters of this segment were considered suit-
able for use as a source of cooling water, esthetic enjoyment,
and maintenance of a clean water associated organism community.
The waters were not suitable for irrigation, stock
and wildlife watering, and limited body contact activities
(e.g. boating and fishing) because the average collform density
along the entire segment exceeded 5,000 MPN/1^ ml. The waters
were not suitable for whole body contact activities {e.g.
-------
108
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
swimming and water skiing) because the turbidity exceeded
1,000 MPN/100 ml along the entire length.
CHASKA TO MOUTH
This segment of river receives far greater quanti-
ties of wastes than the previous one. Its quality Is lowest
during the late fall and winter while one seasonal industry,
the American Crystal Sugar Company Is In operation. This
segment also receives waste from the municipal sewage treat-
ment plants of Chaska, Shaopee, Savage, Burnsvllle and Cedar
Grove. The M. A. Qedney Co., Rahr Malting Co., Owens-Illinois
Glass Co., American Wheaton Glass Co., Carglll, Inc., Twin
City Shipyard and Blackdog electric plant also discharge to
this segment.
During the period between June and October 196^,
while American Crystal Sugar Company was out of operation,
the dissolved oxygen profile decreased steadily from Shakopee
(river mile 25.0} to the mouth. Above Shakopee the dissolved
oxygen concentration ranged from 3.1 to 10.7 mg/1, averaging
6.6 mg/1.
Turbidity levels In this segment during the summer
period were slightly higher than those found In the previous
segment, especially near the mouth. The turbidity averaged
70 units at Chaska and 110 units near the mouth. It ranged
-------
109
A. C. Printz, Jr.
from 25 to 2ftO units over the entire segment.
River temperatures exceeded 90°F at tines of low
stream flow In a one-mile reach Immediately below the Blackdog
steam-electric generating plant when cooling water was dis-
charged directly to the river. On one occasion the temperature
Immediately below the point of discharge reached approximately
100°F.
The average total conform density exceeded 5,000
MPN/1OO ml over the entire segment. The density during summer
was highest In the vicinity just below Shakopee. At that
point (river mile 23.0) the coliform density ranged from
24,000 to 2*40,OOO MPN/100 ml, averaging approximately 80,000
MPN/100 ml. Fecal coliform densities were between 10 and 20
percent of the total densities.
Algal densities and nutrient levels were of the
same magnitude aa those found in the previous segment.
Although algal densities were high, they created no nuisance
conditions.
There was a general increase in the number of
bottom organisms below Chaska due primarily to the presence
of organic sludge deposits. Pollution tolerant sludgeworms
comprised the largest portion of the benthlc population with
as many aa 237 and 487 P*r square foot being found in the fall
and winter, respectively. Clean water associated animals were
-------
110
A. C. Printz, Jr.
even less abundant In this segment than in the previous one,
Sane fish made up only 1% of the total fish population.
The palatability of carp caught in this segment
immediately above the Blackdog power plant was also evaluated.
They had the lowest level of palatability of all the fish
assessed in the entire study area.
During the winter, dissolved oxygen levels were
much lower and conform densities were Much higher in the
lower 27 miles of river as a result of the additional wastes
contributed by American Crystal Sugar Company. Ice cover
also served to reduce dissolved oxygen levels by preventing
reaeration. Except in a short reach of open water Immediately
below the Blackdog power plant, the dissolved oxygen concentra-
tion averaged less than 3 mg/1 along the lower 20 miles of river
during a three-day survey in February 1965. Dissolved oxygen
concentrations at the mouth varied from 0.0 t-j 4.0 mg/i,
averaging 1.8 mg/1.
Due largely to American Crystal Sugar Company's
and Rahr Halting Company's discharges, collform organisms
In the river Increased from 220 MPN/lOO ml above the American
Crystal Sugar outfall to 500,000 MPN/lOO ml at a point 4.7
miles below the outfall. The collform density decreased
progressively with distance downstream below this point. Near
the mouth, It averaged 9,600 MPN/lOO ml.
-------
Ill
A. C. Print*, Jr.
The waters in this segment below Chaska were un-
suitable for Irrigation, stock and wildlife watering, naviga-
tion, and limited body contact activities because the average
eoliform density exceeded 5,(XX) MPN/100 ml.
The minimum dissolved oxygen concentration during
the summer was too low below Shakopee and the maximum
temperature was too high between river miles 8.ft and 3.0 for
the waters to be suitable for the maintenance of game fish.
Even If the DO and temperature had been suitable, however» It
Is very doubtful that game fish would have been present In
great numbers because of the limited available food supply.
The waters were usually too turbid to be considered
suitable for whole body contact activities (e.g. swimming and
water skiing.)
During the winter survey this segment was also
considered unsuitable for all fish because of extremely low
dissolved oxygen levels. In addition, ammonia nitrogen levels
exceeded the limit considered suitable for game fish.
fo make the waters In this segment suitable for
uses such as boating, fishing, stock and wildlife watering,
irrigation, and the maintenance of rough fish, the minimum
dissolved oxygen level should be maintained above 3 mg/1 and
the average collform density maintained less than 5*000
organisms/100 ml.
-------
112
A. C. Printz, Jr.
ST. CROIX RIV1R
Pollution In the St. Croix River Is very slight.
The water quality was suitable for all uses practiced in all
except a few small isolated areas where coliform densities
were high. These included the Immediate vicinity of municipal
waste outfalls belonging to Taylors Palls, St. Croix Palls,
Osceola, Stillwater, Bayport, Hudson, and the Andersen Window
Company industrial outfalls. The esthetic quality was
affected in a few locations along the shoreline where algal
blooms had occurred during late summer.
The municipal and industrial waste sources along
the St. Croix River do not produce any significant changes in
the general water quality even at very low flows. Agricultural
and natural pollution, however, contribute nutrients In amounts
generally considered sufficient to support nuisance algal ;
blooms. Pollution from boats is sometimes evident In back- i
i
war.er areas, where debris ia found occasionally. !
To make the waters suitable for body contact '
i
activities, at all locations, waste effluents should receive ;
i
more complete disinfection before being discharged. Better 1
control of natural and agricultural sources is required if
nutrient concentrations are to be lowered sufficiently to ;
reduce algal densities in late summer. Greater control of j
discharges from boats la also required in order to protect
-------
113
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
the esthetic as well as the bacteriological quality of the
waters.
OBSERVATIONS
STATE PROBLEMS
The problem of controlling water pollution Is
critically Important In this urbanized society. The problem
Is very complex In the variety and depth of Interests Involved
and In the governmental arrangements that exist to do something
about It. Much of the authority of water pollution control,
however, rests with the State governments. Therefore, progress
toward solving the problem will be Influenced In a very large
measure by the effectiveness of State action.
When a State budget Is prepared, water pollution
control activities have to compete with other desirable pro-
grams for a share of available funds, particularly where It
Is e subsidiary activity of another agency (such as a Public
Health Department). Up to now this has usually resulted In
a shortage of funds and staff for most State water pollution
control programs. The most serious Impact of this shortage
Is the necessary concentration of available resourcM to meet
urgent critical needs at the expense of comprehensive measures
-------
114
A. C. Printz, Jr.
and long-range planning.
In view of the growing pressure that will be
exerted on the State pollution control agencies as pollution
problems become more Intense and the public concern more
insistent, there Is a great need for a strong, efficient
agency in every State with adequate resources In finance,
personnel and technical equipment.
In 196'! the Public Health Service contracted the
Public Administration Service, Chicago, Illinois, for a study,
the central purpose of which was to develop standards against
which State agencies and other Interests could gauge the
adquaey of personnel complements and budgetary support for
State water pollution control programs. Minimum and desir-
able staffing and budget needs were determined for each State,
Th
-------
COMPARISON OF NEEDED AND ACTUAL STAFFING AND BUDGET ALLOCATIONS
TO STATE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCIES
STATE
Minnesota
Minimum, 1964
Desirable, '64
Actual FY «66
Actual FY «67
Wisconsin
Minimum, 1964
Desirable, '64
Actual FY '66
Actual FY «67
TOTAL
STAFFING
58
104
35
35
71
126
24
81
AVERAGE TOTAL
SALARY $ BUDGET $
530,000
6,849 946,000
338,336
345,327
646,000
6,849 1,145,000
8,094 267,206
1,193,832
TOTAL BUDGET
PER CAPITA (CENTS)
15
27
16
28
-------
116
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
The investigators feel that staffing and budget
needs for the State water pollution control agencies in the
State of Minnesota and Wisconsin should be maintained no lower
than the "desirejle" level given in the preceding table.
MEfROPOLIfAK PROBLEMS
The complicating factor in the water pollution
problem Is that water refuses to recognize city, county, or
State boundaries. It simply flows downhill. When a city
falls to clean up its own wastes, the chief victim is not
the city itself but its neighbor downstream; similarly, when
the city meets its responsibilities, It is the neighbor who
appears to benefit most.
The problem is compounded when the cities within
a given metropolitan area attempt to meet their responsibili-
ties on an Individual basis. Such an approach results In
much duplication of effort, higher unit costs, and no guarantee
that a solution will ever be obtained. Certainly, there is
very little hope that the optimum solution could ever be
achieved under such an approach.
Planning and action to alleviate metropolitan
problems of sewage collection, treatment, and disposal can
be harJled best by a single authority. Through this approach
-------
117
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
efforts can be coordinated and directed most efficiently
toward a set of consistent objectives. This reduces the
possibility of one city Inadvertently solving Its problems at
the expense of another. The metropolitan approach can also
be economically advantageous since, within limits, the per
capita Investment for the construction and operation of sewage
treatment facilities decreases as the size of the facility
Increases. Whether the best solution lies in the use of one
or several plants is Irrelevant; the Important point 1* that
all sewage facilities be planned as part of an integrated
system encompassing the entire metropolitan area.
In the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area,
there are approximately 80 communities. The two core cities
operate a sanitary district created In 1933 to handle wastes
from Minneapolis, St. Paul, and those adjacent outside areas
which might contract with either of the two cities for sewage
disposal. To date, approximately JO communities have con-
tractual arrangements with then. Plans prepared by the
Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District as required by Minnesota
law, to eventually serve the remaining communities has met with
resistance. The Minnesota Water Pollution Control Commission
has approved the engineering aspects of these plans, consider-
ing them as an acceptable solution to the metropolitan sewage
problem. Many of the suburbs, however, have expressed
-------
118
A. C. Prints, Jr.
opposition to the plan, principally its financial aspects.
Many of these suburban communities wish to form separate
districts while others are providing for their own sewage
disposal.
There has been an Increasing awareness of the
need for coordination in solving the metropolitan area sewage
disposal problems on the part of city, county, and State
officials, civic leaders, and most State legislators. Many
of then have submitted proposals but unfortunately, none have
been fully accepted by all the factions involved. Several
bills pertaining to the metropolitan problem have been sub-
mitted to the legislature in previous sessions. Some passed;
others died In committee. Although little progress toward
a solution has actually been made, the concern show by these
activities offers a note of optimism.
The investigators feel that all communities within
the metropolitan area should unify their positions and press
for the establishment of an overall metropolitan sanitary
authority. This authority should control all plant operations
on a unified basis and provide for the coordination of local
policy in the development of a regional water strategy. This
authority should, however, fall under the Jurisdiction of
the Minnesota Water Pollution Control Commission.
-------
119
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
CONCLUSIONS
Sewage and industrial wastes discharged to the
Mississippi River from Minnesota cause pollution in the
interstate waters of the Mississippi River which endangers
the health and welfare of persons in Wisconsin and, therefore,
is subject to abatement under the provisions of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Act.
1. The following sources of waste water dis-
charged to the Mississippi during the period of Investigation:
Anoka Sewage Treatment Plant
Minneapolis Water Treatment Plants
NSP Riverside Steam-Electric Generating Plant
NSP High Bridge Steam-Electric Generating Plant
Minnesota Harbor Service
Twin City Shipyard
Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District Sewage
Treatment Plant
Swift Company
Union Stockyards
Amount and Company
King Packing Company
So. St. Paul Sewage Treatment Plant
-------
120
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
Newport Sewage Treatment Plant
Inver drove Sewage Treatment Plant
Northwestern Refining Company
St. Paul Park Sewage Treatment Plant
J. L. Shlely Company - Larson Plant
J. L. Shlely Company - Nelson Plant
General Dynamics - Liquid Carbonic Division
St. Paul Ammonia Products Company
Great Northern Oil Company
Northwest Cooperative Mills
Cottage Grove Sewage Treatment Plant
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing.Company
Hudson Manufacturing Company
Hastings Sewage Treatment Plant
Prescott Sewage Treatment Plant
S. B. Foot Tanning Company
Pittsburgh Plate Glass Company
Red Wing Sewage Treatment Plant
NSP Red Wing Steam-Electric Generating Plant
Lake City Sewage Treatment Plant
Pepin Sewage Treatment Plant
2. The following sources of waste water dis-
charged to the Minnesota River during the period of field
-------
A. C. Prlnte, Jr.
Investigation:
Honeymead Products Company
Mankato Sewage Treatment Plant
Archer Daniels Midland Company
Blue Cross Rendering Company
NSP Wllmarth Power Plant
Green Qlant Company
City of Henderson
Minnesota Valley Milk Producers Cooperative Asaoc.
Chaska Sewage Treatment Plant (Includes Gedney
Co. wastes)
American Crystal Sugar Company
Rahr Malting Company
Shakopee Sewage Treatment Plant
Owens-Illinois Forest Products
American Wheaton Glass Company
Savage Sewage Treatment Plant
Minnesota Masonic Home
Cargill, Inc.
Twin City Shipyard
Burnsvllie Sewage Treatment Plant
NSP Blackdog Power Plant
Cedar Grove Sewage Treatment Plant
-------
122
A. C. PrintE, Jr.
3. The following sources of waste Mater discharged
to the St. Croix River during the period of Investigation;
3t. Crolx Palls Sewage Treatment Plant
Taylors Falls Sewage Treatment Plant
Osceola Sewage Treatment Plant
Stlllwater Sewage Treatment Plant
Andersen Window Company
Bayport Sewage Treatment Plant
United Refrigerator Company
Hudson Sewage Treatment Plant
4. The discharge of excessive amounts of wastes
produced oxygen concentrations below 5 mg/1 in the following
stream reaches:
a. Mississippi River between the Minneapolis*
St. Paul Sanitary District sewage treatment
plant and Lock and Dam No. 3 (39.4 mile reach)
during summer of 1964.
b. Mississippi River between the Minneapolis-
St. Paul Sanitary District sewage treatment
plant and St. Crolx River (25.0-mile reach)
during the winter of 1964-1965.
c. Minnesota River between Shakopee and its
mouth (25.4-mile reach) during the summer
of 1964.
-------
123
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
d. Minnesota River between Chaska and its
mouth.(27.7-mile reach) during the winter
of 1964-1965.
5. The discharge of excessive amounts of
wastes produced oxygen concentrations below 3 mg/1 in the
following stream reaches;
a. Mississippi River between the Minneapolis.
St. Paul Sanitary District sewage treatment
plant and Lock it Dam No. 2 (21.1-mile reach)
during the summer of 196*4 and the winter of
1964-1965.
b. Minnesota River between Chaska and the mouth
(27.7-mile reach) during the winter of 1964-
1965.
6, Minnesota River temperatures exceeded 90 and
93°P on occasion in a one-mile reach immediately below the
Northern States Power Company's Blackdog steam-electric
generating plant.
7. The average turbidity exceeded 25 Jackson
units in the following stream reaches during the summer of
1964:
a. Mississippi River between the Minnesota
-------
A, C. Prlntz, Jr.
River and the head of Lake Pepln (59.0-tnlle
reach).
b. Minnesota River from some point above
Mankato (the limit of the study area) to the
mouth.
8. Ammonia nitrogen levels exceeded 2.0 mg/1
in the Mississippi River between Lock ft Dem No. 2 and the
St. Crolx River (3.9-raile reach) during the winter of 1964-
1965.
9. Ammonia nitrogen levels exceeded 1,0 mg/1
in the following stream reaches:
a, Mississippi River between the Minneapolis-
St. Paul Sanitary District sewage treatment
plant and Lock & Dan No. 3 (39.4-mile reach)
during the period of the survey.
b. Lower 15 miles of the Minnesota River during
the winter of 196*4-1965.
10. Phenol levels occasionally exceeded 0.01
mg/1 in a 20-mile reach immediately below the Minneapolis-
St. Paul Sanitary District sewage treatment plant.
11. The average concentration of the nutrients,
inorganic nitrogen and phosphorus, exceeded 0.3 (as N) and
-------
125
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
0.33 (aa P) mg/l, respectively, throughout the three major
streams studied.
12. Average collforn densities exceeded 1/000
MPN/100 ml In the following stream reaches during all surveys;
a. Mississippi River from son;* point above
Anoka (Unit of study area) to Lake City.
b. Minnesota River from some point above
Mankato (limit of study area) to the mouth.
13. Average collform densities exceeded 5,000
MPN/100 ml In the following stream reaches during all surveys:
a. Mississippi River between St. Anthony Falls
and the head of Lake Pepln (70-mile reach).
b. Minnesota River between the Blue Earth River
at Mankato and the mouth (109.2-mile reach).
14. Pathogenic bacteria and enteric viruses were
present in the following stream reaches:
a. Mississippi River between St. Paul and Qrey
Cloud Island (10 miles below the Minneapolis-
St. Paul Sanitary District Plant).
b. Mississippi River immediately below Red Wing
sewage treatment plant.
-------
126
A. C. Printz, Jr.
15. Algae reached nuisance proportions In the
following locations:
a. Mississippi River's Lake Pepin In shallow
areas along the shorelines.
b. St. Croix River's Lake St. Crolx in shallow
areas along the shorelines.
16. Bottom sediment consisted of a mixture of
organic sludge and sand in the following stream reaches during
196*15
a. Mississippi River between Lock & Dam No. 1
and the Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District
sewage treatment plant (ll.3-nlle reach).
b. Mississippi River between Lock & Dam No. 2
and the head of Lake Pepin (30-mile reach).
c. Minnesota River along a five-mile reach
immediately below the Green Giant Company
(at LeSueur).
d. Minnesota River between American Crystal
Sugar Company (at Chaska) and the mouth (27.7-
miie reach).
e. All of Lake St. Croix (lower 23 miles of the
St. Croix River.
-------
127
A. C. Printz, Jr.
1?. Bottom sediment consisted almost solely
of organic sludge in the following stream reaches during 196**:
a. Mississippi River between the Minneapolis-
St. Paul Sanitary District sewage treatment
plant and lock & Dam No. 2 (21.1-mile reach).
b. All of Lake Pepin (lower 22 miles of
Mississippi River under study).
18. Pish caught in the lower 10 miles of the
Minnesota River and in the segment of Mississippi River
between South St. Paul and the St. Crolx River had lower
levels of palatabllity than fish caught elsewhere in the study
area.
RECOMMENDATIONS
GENERAL
River water quality shall be preserved or upgraded,
as required, to permit maximum use and full recreational en-
joyment of the waters. Remedial measures necessary to attain
this goal are given in the recommendations. The recoramenda- j
j
tlons are given in two groups: General and specific. General j
i
recommendations cover the broad objectives of pollution ]
-------
128
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
abatement In the Project area. Specific recommendations are
given for the solution of particular problems and are offered
in addition tof not in place of, the general recommendations.
These recommendations represent the initial phase
of a long-range and more comprehensive water resource develop-
ment program for the entire Upper Mississippi River Basin.
They apply to problems needing Immediate correction.
Although fertilization of the rivers and backwater
areas is undesirable, no recommendations are made at this
time concerning the installation of specialized treatment
facilities designed to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus compounds
in the waste effluents. Operation of treatment facilities so
as to optimize nutrient removal will reduce the problem.
-------
RIVER SEGMENT
129
(MAXIMUM OR MINIMUM CONCENTRATIONS
FOR ANY ONE SAMPLE)
PROM
(RIVER MILE)
TO DO (Mln. )
(RIVER MILE) mg/1
COLIFORM GUIDE
(Maximum)1
Mississippi River
871.6 (Anoka)
836.3 (MSSD)
836.3 (MSSD) No deterlora- A&C*
tlon in present
level
(75mg/l)
815.2
(IAD No. 2) 3 B
815.2 (I&D No. 2) 763.5
(Chlppewa
River)
Minnesota River
109.2 (Mankato)
30.0 (Chaaka)
30.0
(Chaska)
0.0 (Mouth)
No deteriora-
tion in present
level
(75 mg/1)
B
B
St Crolx River
52.0 (Taylors
palls)
0.0 (Mouth)
No deteriora-
tion in pr'esent
level
(7 $ mg/1)
*See following pages for explanation of Collform Guide.
2Collform Guide C. applies to the segment between Anoka
and St. Anthony Palls, only.
-------
130
A. C. Print•« Jr.
MUNICIPALITIES, INSTITUTIONS, AND INDUSTRIES
GENERAL RECOMMEND AT IONS
It IB reoosMended that:
PROTECTION OP EXISTING WATER QUALITY
1. There be no further decrease in quality of
any of the waters within the Study Area (Mississippi River
between Anoka, Minnesota, and the outlet of Lake Pepin;
Minnesota River in and below Mankato, Minnesota; and St.
Crolx River in and below St. Crolx Falls, Wisconsin.)
ENHANCEMENT OP WATER QUALITY
t. Water quality be enhanced as stipulated in the
regaining reo emendations to provide the following dissolved
oxygen and oollfom levels in the given segments of the
Mississippi, Minnesota* and St. Crolx Rivers during flows
equal to or greater than the 7-oonseoutlve-day, once in 10*
year summer and winter low flows. (Refer to Table on Page 129)
(1) Colifom Guides
COLXFORM GUIDE A - Recreational whole body use.
The water uses for which this guide is intended are those
that entail total and intimate contact of the whole body with
the water. Examples of such use are swimming, skin diving.
-------
131
A, C. Printi. Jr.
and water skiing. In wnloh the body It totally immersed and
some ingestIon of the wtter way be expected. The reoommandal
guide value for conforms is 1,000 per 100 milllllters
(1,000/100 ml). For all waters In which oollform levels
are below the guide value of 10OOAOO ml, the water Is
considered suitable provided there Is proper Isolation from
direct feoal contamination as determined by a sanitary
survey. Situations may arise wherein waters having oollfom
counts somewhat higher than the guide value oan be used,
provided supplemental techniques are used to determine safe
bacterial quality. The analysis for feoal streptococci Is
more definitive for determining the presence of organisms
of Intestinal origin, and Is suggested as the supplemental
technique to be employed. A oollfom level of 5*OOOAOO ml
IB considered satisfactory, provided the feoal streptococcus
count Is not more than 20AOO ml, and provided) also that
there Is proper isolation from direct feoal oontamlnatlon
as determined by a sanitary survey.
The waters designated for whole body contact use
should be maintained acceptable for this use at least
between May and October, inclusive. During the remainder
of the year when the weather Is unsuitable for whole body
contact aotlvities, these waters should conform to Conform
Guide B.
-------
132
A. C. Printz. Jr.
COLIPORM GUIDE B - Recreational, Halted body
contact use and commercial shipping (barge traffic). The
water uses for which this guide IB intended are those that
entail limited contact between the water ueer and the
water. Examples of such uses are fishing, pleasure boating,
and commercial shipping. Recommended guide value for coil-
forms is 5,000/100 ml. For all waters in which oollform
levels are below this guide value, the water is considered
suitable for use, provided there is proper isolation from
direct fecal contamination as determined by a sanitary survey.
COLIFORM GUIDE C - Applies to municipal water
source. Where municipal water treatment includes complete
rapid-sand filtration or its equivalent, together with
continuous post-ohlorlnatlon, source water may be considered
acceptable If the oollform concentration (at the Intake)
averages not more than 4,000/100 ml.
If the foregoing water quality is assured, then
the water will be suitable for the following uses in each
of the given river segments.
-------
A. C. Printz, Jr.
WAf.lR USE
a. Source of municipal
water supply
133
RIVER SEGMENT
Mississippi River:
Anoka -St. Anthony Falls
St. Croix River;
Taylors Falls - Mouth
Maintenance of habi-
tat for Group I fish
Whole body contact
recreational acti-
vities
Maintenance of habl-
Mlsslssippl River:
Anoka - MSSD
IAD No. 2 - Chlppewa River
Minnesota Riven
Mankato - Chaslca
St. Croix River:
Taylors Falls - Mouth
Mississippi River:
Anoka - Minnesota River
IAD No. 2 - Chlppewa River
St. Croix River:
Taylors Falls - Mouth
All portions of 3 major streams
tat for Group I1T fish
Irrigation All portions of 3 major streams
Stock and wildlife All portions of 3 major streams
watering
Limited body contact All portions of 3 major streams
recreational activities
h. Source of non-potable All portions of 3 major streams
industrial process water
1. Source of cooling water All portions of 3 major streams
J. Commercial fishing All portions of 3 major streams
k. Navigation All portions of 3 major streams
-------
A. C. Prints, Jr.
WATER USE RIVER SEGMENT
1. Hydroelectric power All portions of 3 major streams
generation
m. Esthetic enjoyment All portions of 3 major streams
3 * 3ce following for explanation of Group I and
Group II fish.
(3) GROUP I FISH - Are those generally sought after by sport
fishermen and Include but are not limited to the following
speclest Walleyed Pike, Sauger, Northern Pike, Black
Grapple, White Grapple, lArgemouth Bass, Smallmouth Bass,
Rook Bass, White Bass, Blueglll, Channel Catfish, Sturgeon,
Plathead Catfish, Green Sunflsh, Punpklnseed Sunflsh, and
Brown front,
(ft) GROUP II FISH - Are those generally sought after by
commercial fishermen In this area and Include but are not
limited to the following species: Carp, Qulllback, Sheeps-
head, Brown Bullhead, Blgmouth Buffalo, Northern carpsucker,
Northern Redhorse, Longnose Gar, Shortnose Gar, Bowfln,
Mooneye, Olstard Shad, Common Sucker, Spotted Sucker, Yellow
Bullhead, Black Bullhead, Golden Shiner, Perch, and River
Sue leer.
-------
135
A. C. Prints, Jr.
TREATMENT OF MUNICIPAL WASTES
3. All municipalities and other institutions
discharging souage to the rivers under Investigation provide
at least secondary biological treatment plus continuous dis-
infection of the effluent. This treatment Is to produce an
effluent containing no »ore than:
a. 20 percent of the Mass of 5-day (20°C)
BOO originally contained In the effluent.
b. 20 percent of the mass of suspended
solids originally contained In the
effluent,
o. 5,OOO collfomsAoo ill (except where
"d" applies).
d. 1,000 collfonoB/100 ml between May and
Octoberf Inclusive, where receiving
waters are used for whole body contact
activities (see preceding list).
These limits are to be followed exoept where more
stringent ones are given In the specific recommendations or
are required by State Water Pollution Control agencies.
REPORTS BY MUNICIPAL TREATMENT PLANTS
-------
136
A. C. Prints, Jr.
4. Municipal waste treatment planta Maintain at
least the minimum laboratory control and records as recom-
mended by the Conference of State Sanitary Engineers at
their 38th Annual Meeting in 1963 (See Appendix). In
addition* all plants should maintain a record of oMorlne
feed rates and those plants of 2 million gallons/dhy
capacity, or greater, should provide analyses for total
and feoal conforms on a onoe per week basis. Results of
laboratory tests and other pertinent records should be
summarised Monthly and submitted to the appropriate State
agency for review and evaluation. Tneee records are to be
maintained in open files of the State agency for vse by all
persons with a legitimate Interest.
PHOSPHATE REMOVAL
5. New waste treatment faoliltlee be designed to
provide adequate capacity of individual units and components
as well as maximum flexibility In order to permit later
modification in operating procedures so as to effect the
greatest amount of phosphate removal. Existing plant facili-
ties should be operated so as to optimise phosphate removal.
MONITORING OF WATER QUALITY
-------
137
A. C. Printz. Jr.
6. The States of Minnesota and Wisconsin
establish a program of monitoring and surveillance In
area waters for evaluating progress In Improvement of
stream quality resulting from Implementation of actions
recommended by the conferees. The FWPCA should establish
monitoring stations where appropriate on portions of the
Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers within the State of
Minnesota to aid in the evaluation. Water quality surveil-
lance activities should be oooromated and all information
made available to the States, the FWPCA, and other parties
with a legitimate interest.
BYPASSING AND SPILLING OF WASTES
7. All present and future sewerage and sewage
treatment facilities be modified or designed and operated
to eliminate bypassing of untreated wastes during normal
maintenance and renovation operations. The appropriate
State agency (Minnesota Water Pollution Control Commission
or Wisconsin Department of Resource Development) is to be
contacted for approval prior to any expected bypassing of
waste. All accidental or emergency bypassing or spillage
should be reported Immediately.
-------
138
A. C. Printz. Jr.
PRETREATMENT OP WASTES
8. Wastes (such as sludge from the St. Paul
water treatment plant) which discharge Into a municipal
sewerage system be pretreated to avoid any detrimental
effect on waste treatment operation.
PROTECTION AGAINST SPILLAGE
9. Programs be developed by those responsible
for the facilities to prevent or minimise the adverse
effect of accidental spills of oils* gases, fuels, and
other matorlal capable of causing pollution. The elements
of such programs should Include:
a. Engineering works such as catchment
areas, relief vessels, and dikes to
trap spillage.
b. Removal of all spilled materials in a
manner acceptable to the regulatory agencies.
o. Immediate reporting (by those responsible
for the facilities) of any spills to the
appropriate State agency.
d. In-plant surveys and programs to prevent
accidental splllc.
-------
139
A. C. Printi. Jr.
COMBINATION STORM AND SANITARY SEWERS
10. Combined storm and sanitary sewers be pro-
hibited In all newly developed areas and be eliminated In
existing areas wherever opportunity to do so Is afforded
by redevelopment. Present combined sewers should be con-
tinuously patrolled and operated so as to convey the maximum
possible amount of combined flows to and through the waste
treatment plant. In addition, studies to develop effective
control of wastes from this source should be continued by
the MSSD and should be Initiated by the City of South St.
Paul. Although the Immediate problem Is a bacterial one,
both studies should also consider the discharge of BOD and
solids. Methods to be used to control wastes from combined
sewers and a time schedule for their accomplishment should
be reported to the conferees within two years after Issuance
of the Conference Summary.
TREATMENT OF INDUSTRIAL WASTES
11. All industries discharging wastes to the
rlver-3 under Investigation, unless otherwise specified,
provide treatment sufficient to produce an effluent
-------
140
A. C. Printz. Jr.
containing no more than 20 percent of the mass of 5-day
(20°C) BOD and suspended solids originally contained In
the untreated process waste. Settleable solids and ooll-
forme In the effluent are not to exceed the following:
a. Settleable solids - 5 ml/1
b. Conforms - 5,000/100 ml (except where
"o" applies).
c. Conforms - 1,OOO/1OO ml between May ani
October, Inclusive, where receiving
waters are used for whole body contact
activities (see preceding list).
REPORTING OF INDUSTRIAL WASTES
12. Industries discharging wastes to the waters
maintain operating records containing information on waste
discharge rates and concentrations of constituents found in
significant quantities in their wastes.
This information should be summarized and submitted
to the appropriate State agency at monthly intervals for
review and evaluation. These records are to be maintained
in open files of the State agency for use by all persons
with a legitimate interest.
-------
141
A. C, Printt, Jr.
VESSEL WASTES
13. All wateroraft provide adequate treatment on
board or arrange for suitable on-shore disposal of all
liquid and solid wastes.
GARBAGE AND REFUSE DUMPS
14. Garbage or refuse not be dumped along the
banks of the river and no open dumps be allowed on the
flood plain. Material in present dump sites along the
river banks should be removed and the appearance of the
bank restored to an eethetioally acceptable condition.
Present open dumps on the flood plain should be converted
to sanitary landfills operated acceptably to the appropriate
State agencies.
UPSTREAM BACTERIAL CONTROL
15. Waste sources upstream frommnd outside of
the study area on the Mississippi, Minnesota, and St. Crolx
Rivers and their tributaries be sufficiently controlled so
that waters entering the study area conform to General
Recommendation No. 2.
-------
142
A. C. Printz, Jr.
SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS - MISSISSIPPI RIVER
Specific recommendatIona are offered In addition
to, and not In place of* the general reoonmendatlone.
MUNICIPAL SOURCES
It la recommended that:
MSSD TO SOUTH ST. PAUL - MAXIMUM
BOD AND SUSPENDED SOLIDS LOADINGS
1. Maximum waste loadings from all sources
between and Including the Mlnneapolls-St, Paul Sanitary
District and the South St. Paul Sewag* Treatment Plants
be such that a minimum dissolved oxygen content of 3.0
mg/1 can be maintained during the 7-consecutive-day, once-
ln-10-year l.-»w sunnier flow In the reach of river between
Mississippi River miles 836.4 and 815.2. To attain this,
combined wastes loads from these sources should not exceed
68,500 pounds/day* of 5-d«f (20°C) BOD, exclusive of combined
sewer overflows. Suspended solids loadings discharged to
this reach (exclusive of combined sewer overflows) should
not exceed 85,500 pounds/day In order to minimize sludge
depotIts.
-------
1U3
A. C. Prints, Jr.
MAXIMUM PHENOLIC LOADINGS
2. Maximum loadings of phenolic wastes from the
Mlnneapolls-St. Paul Sanitary District sewage treatment
plant, Northwestern Refining Co., Great Northern Oil Co.,
and Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., all combined,
not exceed 110 pounds/day In order to maintain the stream
concentration of this material under 0.01 mg/1 at stream
flows equal to or greater than the 7-consecutive-day, onoe-
ln-10-year low flow.
BYPASSING AT MSSD
3. An engineering study of the Mlnneapolls-St.
Paul Sanitary District sewerage system be undertaken to
determine what changes are required to make unnecessary
the practice of bypassing wastes periodically for the
purpose of cleaning the Inverted siphon under the Mississippi
River.
HASTINGS PLANT
4. The BOD removal efficiency at the Hastings,
Minnesota, primary sewage treatment plant be Increased from
-------
A. C. Prints, Jr.
the 5 percent figure found during the survey to a minimum
of 30 percent until secondary biological treatment facili-
ties are In operation.
INDUSTRIAL SOURCES
It !• recommended that:
WATER TREATMENT PLANTS OF THE CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS
1. Treatment facilities be provided capable of
producing an effluent with a suspended solids concent; rat ion
not exceeding that found In other treated effluents being
discharged to the sane reach of river. At no time should
the dally average suspended solids concentration exceed
50 *gA.
The two water treatment plants of the City of
Minneapolis discharge sand filter baokcwash water to the
river without prior treatment. Together the two plants
discharge approximately 0.69 «gu of backwash water having
an average suspended solid« concentration of 1*900 mg/1.
SWIFT & CO., ARMOUR & CO., AND
SO. ST. PAUL UNION STOCKYARDS
-------
A. C. Prints, Jr.
2. The industries in the South St. Paul area
(Swift & Company, Armour * Company, and the St. Paul Union
Stockyards) provide an effective method of control and oor-
reotion of direct discharges to the Mississippi River.
These include so-called clean waste waters, watering trough
overflows, truck washing wastes, surface drainage, and hog
pen flushings. The coliform densities of any of these dis-
charges should not exceed 5*000/100 ml once the control
devices are in operation.
NORTHWEST COOPERATIVE MILLS
3. Additional treatment be provided to reduce
the suspended solids concentrations of the compositing pond
effluent to substantially the same levels found in other
effluents being discharged to the same reach of river after
satisfactory treatment. In no instance should the dally
average suspended solids concentration exoeed $0 mg/1.
The discharge from the compositing pond averages
46,000 gallons/day (gpd) and contains about 420 mg/1 of
suspended solids.
FOOT TANNING COMPANY
-------
146
A. C. Prints, Jr.
4. Any Additional facilities constructed for
the company's waste produce an effluent of a quality
acceptable to the Minnesota Water Pollution Control Cocwnle-
sion (MWPCC) and In conformity with recommendations In this
report. The possibility of discharging the settled waste
to the Red Wing sewerage system In lieu of additional treat-
ment should be considered and a report on the conclusions of
such questions submitted to the MWPCC.
On April 1, 1966, the company submitted to the
MWPCC plans and specifications for a primary olarifler and
a study plan for evaluating secondary treatment methods,
SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS - MINNESOTA RIVER
MUNICIPAL SOURCES
No specific recommendations.
INDUSTRIAL SOURCES
It is recommended that s
GREEN GIANT COMPANY
1. An additional pump be provided for standby
purposes at the waste water sump for use when the main pump
-------
A. C. Prints, Jr.
fails. The sanitary and miscellaneous process wastes should
be handled as specified by General Recommendations 3 *nd 11.
This company had pump IAllures at the waste water
collection sump where process waste is collected and pumped
to ridge and furrow fields. When pump failure occurs, the
waste Is discharged directly to the river. Some sanitary
and miscellaneous process wastes are discharged directly
to the river without treatment as a normal practice.
AMERICAN CRYSTAL SUGAR CO. AND
RAHR MALTING CO. MAXIMUM BOD
AND SUSPENDED SOLIDS LOADINGS
2. Maximum waste loadings from all sources
between and including the American Crystal Sugar Co., and
the Rahr Malting Co. be such that a minimum dissolved oxygen
content of 3*0 mg/1 can be maintained during the 7-consecutive-
day, onoe-ln-10-year low winter flow in the reach of river
between Minnesota River miles 29 and 0. To attain this,
combined waste loads from these sources should not exceed
12,000 pounds/day of 5-day (20°c) BOD during winter when
there Is no ice cover in the vicinity of the Blaokdog power
plant. At times of complete ice cover, the maximum waste
loading of 5-day (20°C) BOD from these sources should not
-------
148
A. C. Prints, Jr.
exceed 6,500 pounds/day. In no case, however, should
treatment efficiency be less than that specified In the
General Recommendations.
NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY BLACKDOG PLANT
3. A water temperature of not greater than
90°F be maintained In the lower Minnesota River. To attain
this, the existing cooling pond should be utilized to Its
fullest extent during the summer at stream flows less than
1500 ofs. During these periods the tliermal addition to
the Minnesota River should not exceed 13.5 billion BTU/day.
SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS - ST. CRCDC RIVER
MUNICIPAL SOURCES
No specific recommendations.
INDUSTRIAL SOURCES
No specific recommendations.
FEDERAL INSTALLATIONS
Federal Installations contribute less than 0.1
-------
149
A. c. Prints, Jr.
percent of the pollution entering the three major streams
studied. Although their contributions are small, full
consideration is still given to Federal installations. In
compliance with Section 11 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act as amended (33 U.S.C. 466 et seq.)
U. S. ARMY - NIKE MISSILE INSTALLATIONS
GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS
It is recommended that:
1. A minimum of one hour per day be devoted to
proper treatment, plant operation and maintenance.
2. The treatment facilities be operated such
that removal efficiencies approach those for whlcn the
plants were designed.
3. Laboratory analyse* and records maintenance
consistent with recommendations of the Conference of State
Sanitary Engineers for plants of 0.25 *gd capacity be
carried out* A report of these functions, including results
of analyses, are to be furnished to the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Administration upon request.
SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS
NIKE SITE NO. 20, ROBERTS, WISCONSIN
-------
150
A. C. Prints, Jr.
No specific recommendations.
NIKE SITE HO. 40, FARMINQTON, MINNESOTA
It is raoomended that*
1. Discharge of affluent to the roadBide dltoh
be terminated at aoon as possible. The present outfall
sewer line should be extended so as to dlsc;jarge the
effluent Into the unnamed creek which at present ultimately
receives the waste,
2. Continuous ohlorination facilities be acti-
vated Immediately with disinfection sufficient to produce
a free chlorine residual of 0.5 mgA after a 15 minute
contact at peak flow rates.
NIKE SITE NO. 70, ST. BONIFAC1US, MINNESOTA
•Ko specific recommendations.
NIKE SITE NO. 90, BETHEL, MINNESOTA
It is recommended that continuous ohlorination
facilities be activated Immediately with disinfection suf-
ficient to product a free chlorine residual of 0.5 mg/1
after a 15 minute contact at peak flow rates.
-------
151
A. C. Prints, Jr.
U. S. AIR FORCE - AIR DEFENSE COMMAND
OSCEOLA, WISCONSIN STATION
It Is recommended that a schedule of maintenance
practices be Instituted consistent with aooepted procedurea
for operation of oxidation ponds so as to Insure satisfac-
tory treatment.
U. B. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS
LOCKS AND DAMS
It is recommended that t
1. Present plans be continued concerning Im-
provement or replacement of Inadequately sized treatment
facilities.
2. At stream flows of 7,000 cubic feet per
second (cfs) or less (as measured at the St. Paul gage),
as much water as possible be passed over bulkheads before
the Taintor gates at Look * Da» No. 2. At flows of 3*000
cfs or less, the equivalent of the inflow to Pool No. 2
should be passed over the bulkheads,
FLOATING DREDGE THOMPSON
-------
152
A. C. Prints, Jr.
It IB recommended that a planned schedule of
analyses be continued on effluent from the waste treatment
facilities so as to Insure adequate removals prior to over-
board discharge of effluent.
U. S. AIR FORCE - 93*TH TROOP CARRIIH GROW
OFFICERS CLUB
It Is reaoramended that the present single compart-
ment sept la tank be changed to a two compartment tank. A
subsurface tile field of adequate size should be installed
to supplement the present field.
-------
153
A. C. Printz. Jr.
SCHEDULE FOR REMEDIAL PROGRAM
MUNICIPALITIES, INSTITUTIONS, AND INDUSTRIES
In light of the excellent progress the state
agencies nave made In making various Industrial firms and
municipalities aware of the need for abatement facilities,
the following time schedule for the foregoing remedial
program Is recommended. The time periods given commence
with the Issuance of the Conference Summary by the Secretary
of the Interior.
a. Submission of preliminary plans for remedial
facilities within 6 months.
b. Submission of final design for remedial facilities
within 12 months.
c. Financing arrangements for municipalities completed
and construction started within 18 months.
d. Construction completed and plants placed Into
operation within 36 months.
e. Existing schedules of the State agencies calling
for earlier completion dates are to be met.
-------
154
A. C. Prints, Jr.
FEDERAL INSTALLATIONS
Schedules for Federal installations requiring
only operational and maintenance changes shall be initiated
immediately. Changes required at Nike Site No. 40 and the
Ft. Snelllng Officers Club should be completed and made
operational within 6 months.
SCHEDULE MODIFICATIONS
It is recognised that modifications in this
schedule may be necessary. These may Include:
a, A leaser time where the control agency hairing
Jurisdiction considers that a practical method
of control can be in operation prior to the time
stated.
b. ma few industries and municipalities eome varia-
tion from this schedule may be sought from the
appropriate State and local pollution control
agencies. In such oases After review the conferees
may make appropriate recommendations to the Secre-
tary of the Department of the Interior.
-------
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
APPENDIX
-------
A. C. Printz, Jr.
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF FEDERAL INSTALLATIONS
FACILITY
TYPE OF TREATMENT FINAL DISPOSAL
U. S. Air Force
Ofloeola Air Force Secondary
Station
934th Troop Carrier Primary
Group Officers Club
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Upper St. Anthony Falls
Lower St. Anthony Falls
Lock & Dam No. 1
Look & Dam No. 2
Look & Dam No. 3
U. S. Anay
Nike Site No. 90
Administration Site Secondary
Launch Site Primary
Dog Kennels Primary
Ground
Marsh area near
Minnesota River
Primary
Primary
Primary
Primary
Primary
Ground
Ground
Ground
Ground
Ground
Tributary to
Rum River
Ground
Ground
-------
FACILITY
156
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
TYPE OP TREATMENT FINAL DISPOSAL
Nike Site No. TO
Administration Site
Launch Site
Dog Kennels
Nike Site No. 40
Admlnist rat ion-Launch
Site
Radar Control Site
Dog Kennels
Nike Site No. 20
Administration Site
Launch Site
Dog Kennels
Twin Cities Army
Ammunition Plant
Cooling ft Storm Water
Secondary
Primary
Primary
Secondary
Primary
Primary
Secondary
Primary
Primary
None
Slough
Ground
Ground
Unnamed Creek
Ground
Ground
Pond
Ground
Ground
Round Lake
Zeolite Softener Back-
wash Water
Other Wastes
(Company
Owned)
None Rice Creek
(Tributary on
Mississippi Riv.)
(to municipal system)
-------
nut
nni,
MA M
IMU
iff*
0.*
399
tfk
ZW
as
9> * »
•t.7 • I*5
>*!* i lo?
81
.-. . m
•m. M**. Wf*
KB.*
IT*
M*
107
06
a
a*. 7
K.f
L3.S
13.5
-S.6 « io7
k.S I »*
l.tfl
m
19.1
3.9 » 10*
.} * tif
2.}
T»
au
UT
*
l.U >
5.5 » 1
3,« s
Ma tru»4
Mfan mull.
W9.0
61
JM
216
38
0,5
40.*
a.i . wf
8,7 • vr
l.k i loj
2.8 i UP
M9.*
O.W5
2*0
16
HO
39. J
a.t«
J.ll M
1.3 * vr
613.8
1*
SOT
JM
209
UB
9.t > M
6.6 « 107
k.i , ID!
Z.O I »'
kt
***
672
35*
»6
133
86
30
1.6 I 10
1.1 I 107
J.5 * »
S.Oi K>
»09
JO->
12
7.9
j*
a.o
3.3 « »I
t.o* ur
1,3 • »
*,» » IB5
81
av nr1
TT*.«
m
MfUMT
81
259
15T
ITS
6T
0.5
f.t
.
8.3 » »"
1.& J »T
o*
T.I » IflJ
51 « HT
60
J9
I, Collfno Owl 11 •• mn
t JUao rt«*tv«« ia**tvi&l
3. CoHfon teMtttvi MI
•Ml* «U
-------
TUU 2 (OMU.M4)
•me matt CBUkenumcs
sana
•lauiimm
**^»Tpl'Z
•mtenoi
cnukt 9TF2
stuior»« s»3
Sx.no Sir1
txrnxrlU* SIT1
OMtr drew Sfr*
n. csfliz urn
St. Crolx ftllx SIT
nylon F«au sir1
OxecoU SIT1
JtUl««.r SCT 1'1
Mjport srr1
M.on SIT
DILI
106.5
70.0
29.k
23.9
Ik 1.
10.5
7.3
51.9
51-8
U. .3
21.2
19. k
16.3
not
MOD
».»
o.ok
O.k6
O.J1
0.22
0.51
0.09
0.16
0.070
0 007
1 79
O.ko
0 56
purauffioff
SOVD
«!,*»
500
2,300
k.TOO
1,700
k.kOO
2,200
1,100
500
930
7,k80
1,000
5,000
1 *
8S
•
X
>
X
IE
S
M?
K
X
i
V
z
*
X
X
1
1 —
£t
n
So
B
X
X
X
X
b
I ™
1°
X
X
X
X
X
X
i
r
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
•
•
ij
fe
>
•
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
5-MI
KC
M/l
139
686
111
TO*
J.18
>127
> 11
>122
10
303
?1
1*1
55
122
20
2hO
lU
180
8k
J»T
9
liO
?5.1
CM
•i/1
25*
227
-
380
27*
263
85
260
71
521
l>-9
19fl
9k
k60
301
275
17k
320
*3
_
acm
TOBU., «O
130
71
266
Ik?
?2k
90
89
2k
288
k8
311
59
l«k
6k
115
V
252
95
105
71
178
8
712
28
ITtMOI
•> SOLOS
fOUtlU, lt/1
105
55
2kl
«7
18k
95
72
Ik
135
35
253
k5
9*
52
98
32
UK
76
95
52
103
6
18k
26
im
TOBU,,«f/l
15.1
U.3
35.0
12.8
17.7
21.0
18. fe
9.5
36~7
15.9
9.k
18.1
OOKVIMT
DOB
V
1-3
0.2
0?8
2.k
0.6
0~8
0.1
3'7»
0.6
0.6
k.5
6.8
[OK
IOIU,
nnenun
•i/i
7.1
12 3
32.1
12.5
19. a
31"*
-
16.9
28.7
17.7
15 9
.
COLDM
(nmn
TOTW.
Wl
6.82 i 107
3.9 x 106
>*.e x loj
1.3k X 10'
3.60 x 107
2.55 x 10'
1.7 > 10^
6.7 x 10*
1.0 I 107
k.8 i IB5
2.7 I 107
3.5 x 105
-
l.k i 107
7.k i 105
1.8 x lo|
1.2 X 106
>1.9 x 107
1.3 i 10°
6 3 x 10?
l.O I l5 9 x Iflf
«k 0 x 10°
1.82 x 107
1.53 x 10'
k.Z i 10^
3.k i 10*
3.3 x 10*
l.k i 105
8.7 x 10*
1.1 x 10'
-
5.7 » 10?
17 x 10'
1.0 i 106
5.8 x 10'
3.5k i 107
1.3 x 106
3.1 x 10^
5.5 x 10'
.
msmu,
TB
<32
0
9k
k2
91
>92
93
M>
83
ko
53
96
*>
OTicmcr
KBT
SDBPflDCD
some
k5
0
UQ
60
73
83
81
ke
67
62
32
96
87
1. Conform «niltl«l «r« x«Mir«4 wUlt eklorlnatlon fullltlM nrt orrnt
2. Also r*e«lm» iadaxtrl&l wmitvx
1. Collfom imitiri mrt •«• < vkllt th* plot MU not e«l°rtl«ttn«.
CJO
-------
TABLE 3
or DOMESTIC tusn laumjio HATES 10 STREAKS
soraci
(dSSISSIFTT RJVH1
ABofc* SW
Hilt-»t p. San. Dl«t
so. st. Pma. sir
lewport SIP
Xnver Grove ET^
St, P«ul Park SIT
Cottage Grw* s*P
Ruttcgi SIP
Pretext* sfp
Bed Wing STP
blu City STP
Pepia SIP
HBB!
NILE
TO. 5
»36.3
3J2.U
131.0
"W.3
1?9.0
HM.^
113.?
KX),S
TTO.?
rn.f>
767.2
.'.VO.
«•»
MTE
NOB
0.16
118.6
It.?
0.056
o.oeo
0.35
0.1? .
0.80
0.135
2.»
0.?6
0.05l>
jwauw or onrai ccmrnaan DISCMHOH!
S-MX
•OD
lb./
>35
365
170,000
10.900
16
•CRP« le
ISO
1«
790
150
830
175
70
Volatile
ID. /any
»ltr<-ig*n
Tct«l
Ib./day
?f.5
126,000
8,270
1?
to ground
135
130
660
5
Ti
qo
"°3
lb./««y
fatal
Ph >sphate
Ib./itay
6
«
.
a
chtng Hive:
?
«
8
2
65
1
<1
1<)5
»,100
?,300
10
}
155
190
MO
U5
>ao
55
5
Conform
Tot»I
»o./M.»
»1.0 « I0l3
>1.1 I IQl7
2.1 It 101'
5.0 x Ifll2
1,1 « lol1'
6." « »«
?.0 i loW
1.1 X lol11
1.7 * 1011
?.3 x lo111
?.? » 10«
Fecal
»o./J«y
>'>.5 x lO1'
3.1 x 10«>
1-3 x 1O1'
1.2 , 1011
3.7 x lO1^
?,l x 101'
<•>.! x W1"1
?.6 x 1013
3.7 x 101'
?.l x 1011
1.1 X 101?
KDmsont nvtit
Muikato STP
Heoderson
Chttkl STP
Slajtnpee STP
S«»ge STP
Bttrrwville STP
Cedar drove STP
106.5
?0.0
IN.1!
23.9
ll.. k
13.5
7.'
I..5I.
0.04
o.w
O.Jl
0.??
0.51
0.09
3,5*0
85 {E»t
160
305
>»
to
15
J.6SO
100(Ert
560
235
"•5
M5
(45
2,090
65(K«t)
ItTO
2»
K
150
15
570
15{Elt.)
60
•w
?5
T5
15
50
1
2
1.
3
1
370
15(l.t.)
"•5
<»s
K
»5
2',
6. - » loJ1-
2.0 x l^Cwt
J.3 * lolk
I.OKl^'
5.6 x 10U
9.3 x 1012
1.? K 1012
1.5 M 10W
6. ix 1013
I.1* x W11
2.=ixlOU
?.7 x 1O1?
3.1 x 10U
tl. WOK RIW*
st. er i» r»u« SIP
fBjl-JTf Mil StP
Oiceola STP
StlUwter STP
Biyp-srt 3ff
Hudson GIF
51. T
•jj.')
H.1
71. P
!>.'•
If.'
O.lt
0.07O
O.OTT
i.r>
1.W
ry-
(J5
10
115
1,250
10
110
100
20
75
1»0«)
n
130
(to
so
to
775
W
1?0
TO
5
TO
?35
3'1
"•5
<1
f
<1
1
IT
V
l*0(E»t.)
10
25
X.1",
100(Kst.)
.
7.0 X 101?
3.; i lo1'
•-.'< * lo1'
1.5 x 10r?
.
.
"•.•> x 10U
1.7 x 1011
•'-',~- x w"
-;.1 x 101"
-
-------
fa*** k
fmnua or aauenaa, wans CMMCKMKICS
coo
ffl
"i
,.
*
m/l
-*/1
nm
••A
nn
••/» •«/»
fnu. IractL
tvu city
Union ttoetytrW
Uq. OU*. M»
mm. mmlff 1 Hf(. On.
cooiiaf IIMOT (DM 3^)
Ir»«trf Out* (DM &t>>
CvalLim «*<
"
PCXM tteMSnf
«-. «ut< (ITT «1>
tn«<« >ut« (HT 300)
IM VIM roMT ru>t
ajj.a
rge.s
710.7
MM for
-H*?!**
AJ*_
O.OTO
o.au
U.08
l.M
l.OJ
1.01
foiw fo
1J«JL2S",
«tor««« fool
IMw for C. vtr.
•rat. t ««tt.
(Inf. to tecooi»}
MM r«r
is»ttm*
Ve*»* for
T-T
1200
Wo
6.5
325
571
jftge
17980
10850
5ft*
105
,'H
169
1.19
1*3
296
1J.8
1.6
llj.l
119.2
0.1.
t.9
«e.2
0.2
8.1
Wk.O
1..7
iB.fc
JMLljO.
ii
.
56.?
.Mu
s.»
5.8
1.6
7.6
1.2. <>
17.8
26
_A»1J«_
-1
.t.MS* .».
Ch
o
-------
SIM**** Of rXDUSWIAL 'rfASTKS CJW8*CTI*IS*ie$
MM Una rat* of *iMMkr*».
-------
a OF mm staanetm imunut men UMBOD
(knit* «r» In roundj/Dny. *K*gt M»n aotrt
ru
1. HM1MHB rwitt of
2. HIM* DITU>I>( tool!•» pond.
-------
163
A. C. Prints, Jr.
EXCERPTS PROM
"RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MINIMUM PERSONNEL, LABORATORY
CONTROL AND RECORDS FOR MUNICIPAL WASTE TREATMENT WORKS"
m
THE CONFERENCE OF STATE SANITARY ENGINEERS
IN COOPERATION WITH
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
1963
PLANT CAPACITY 0.25 MGD
LABORATORY CONTROL
In a plant of this size, the operator should
oonduct the following tests;
(1) Settleable solids (Imhoff Cone) onoe or twice a
week using grab samples. The grab samples should
be taken at a tine of representative flow and
should reflect varying days of the week and hours
of the day.
(2) Relative stability (methylane blue) daily, Monday
through Friday.
(3) Chlorine residual of effluent daily, Monday through
Friday; twice dally when stream conditions require.
-------
164
A. C. Print z. Jr.
For activated sludge plants, In addition to the
above testa, sludge Index tests dally and a
colopljr.etrlc dissolved oxygen test weekly.
RECORDS
Usually personnel and time limitations will
permit the keeping of only minimal records. However, two
types of records should be kept: (1) a diary-type log
snowing a necessarily wide variety of useful and Important
Information such as unusual maintenance work, failure of a
piece of equipment, accidents, unusual weather, flooding,
bypassing* complaints, visitors, etc.; and (2) a tabular
record showing the observation or results of each labora-
tory test made and other available measured data such as
plant flow, volume of sludge, or time sludge pumped. Em-
phasis Is placed here on the need for the operator to record
the data available to him with etrlct regularity and In a
form best suited to his schedule.
PLANT CAPACITY 0.5 MGD
LABORATORY CONTROL
For a plant other than activated sludge the
following tests should be conducted:
-------
165
A. c. Prints, Jr.
(1) Settleable solids (Imhoff Cone) dally, Monday
through Friday. Tests should be made at
varying hours during the day.
(2) Relative stability (raethylene blue) dally,
Monday through Friday. Tests should be nade at
varying hours during the day.
(3) colorlmetrlo pH of raw waste water occasionally.
(4) Chlorine residual of effluent dally; twloe dally
when stream conditions require.
(5) Total Bollds of digested sludge occasionally and
when sludge 10 drawn to the drying beds.
(6) pH of digested sludge occasionally and when the
sludge Is drawn to the drying beds.
For an activated sludge plant the following
tests should be conducted:
(1) Settleable solids (Imhoff Cone) dally.
(2) Relative stability (nethylene blue) dally.
(3) Sludge Index dally.
(4) Mixed liquor dissolved oxygen (oolorlnetrloally)
dally.
(5) Sludge depth measurements In primary and secondary
settling tanks dally.
(6) pH of digested sludge when sludge is drawn.
(7) Total solids of digested sludge when sludge Is drawn.
-------
166
A. C. Prints, Jr.
RECORDS
A diary should be kept similar to the 0.25 MGD
plant, but with a full-time operator It should be more
comprehensive. Regularity Is emphasized.
The laboratory control record also Is slightly
more detailed because of the additional tests specified and
with a full-time operator should be maintained with ease.
Consultation with State regulatory agency representatives,
university personnel, and/or other experienced personnel, and
attendance at short courses In his state will assist the
operator to establish and maintain suitable records. These
records should be accurate and complete for the Items
specified.
PLANT CAPACITY 1.0 MGD
LABORATORY CONTROL
For primary and trickling filter plants the
following tests are specified:
(1) Scttlsable solids (Imhoff Cone) dally.
(2) Relative stability (methylene blue) dally.
(3) BOD's of raw waste, final effluent, and of such
other components as possible once a week and
preferably twice a week. Samples should be
-------
167
A. C. Print z, Jr.
3-hour composites taken at 11 a.m., 12 noon, and
I P.m.
Suspended solids of ran waste, final effluent
and of such other components as possible once a
week and preferably twice a week.. Simples should
be 3-hour composites taken at 11 a.m., 12 noon,
and 1 p.m.
(S) pfc of digested sludge when drawn or when operating
difficulties are experienced or anticipated.
(6) Total solids of digested sludge when drawn or
when operating difficulties are experienced or
anticipated.
(7) DO of receiving stream at least twice a week
above and below the plant discharge.
(8) Chlorine residuals of effluent daijy; twioe dally,
when stream conditions require.
For activated sludge plants the following
test:* are specif led s
(1) Settleable solids (Imhoff Cone) dally.
(2) Relative stability (nethylene blue) dally.
(3) BOD1s of raw waste, final effluent, and of such
other components as possible twice a week. Samples
should be 3-hour composites taken at 11 a.m.,
12 noon, and 1 p.m.
-------
168
A. C. Printz, Jr.
(4) Suspended solids of raw mat*. Mixed liquor,
aund final effluent onoe a week. Samples should
be 3-hour composites taken at 11 a.m., 12 noon,
and 1 p.m.
(5) pH of digested sludge when drawn or when operat-
ing difficulties are experienced or anticipated.
(6) Total solids of digested sludge when drawn or
when operating difficulties are experienced or
anticipated.
(7) Depth of sludge in primary and final settling
tanks daily.
(8) Sludge index daily.
(9) Dissolved oxygen (oolorijMtrio) of mixed liquor
daily.
(10) DO of receiving stream at least twice a week
above and below the plant discharge.
(11) Chlorine residual of effluent dailyi twice daily,
when stream conditions require.
RECORDS
For a plant of this sice considerable care
and technical competence is required in assembling and
recording the data. Included in the supervision be the
understanding and patience needed to interpret the control
-------
169
A. c. Printz* Jr.
procedure carried on. To establish and maintain adequate
recorda, some guidance will be needed from state regulatory
agency representativea* university personnel* and/or other
experienced Individuals.
PLANT CAPACITY 5.0 MID
LABORATORY CONTROL
Following are recommended test procedures
for plants other than activated sludge:
(1) Settleable solids dally.
(2) Relative stability dally.
(3) Dissolved oxygen of raw waste, effluent and
receiving stream above and below the plant
discharge 5 days per week.
(4) pH of raw waste and effluent 5 days per week.
(5) BOD»s of raw waste and effluents 3 times per
4
week on 24-hour composite samples.
(6) Suspended solids of raw waste and effluents
3 times per week on 2ft-hour composite samples.
(7) ph of digested sludge when drawn or as necessary
to control digester operation.
(8) Total and volatile solids of digested sludge
when drawn or as necessary to control digester
-------
A. C. Prlntz, Jr. 17°
optratIon.
(9) Volatile acids of digested sludge when drawn
or as necessary to control digester operation.
(10) Chlorine residual of effluent dally, twice dally
when stream conditions require.
For activated sludge plants the recommended
test procedures are as follows:
(1) Set tie able solids daily.
(2) Relative stability or nitrates 5 days per week on
24-hour composite samples.
(3) Dissolved oxygen of raw waste, effluent and re-
ceiving stream above and below discharge 5 days
per week,
(4) pli of raw waste and final effluent dally.
(5) BOD'S of raw waste and effluents 5 days per week
on 24-hour composites.
(6) Suspended solids of raw waste and effluents 5 days
f
per week on composite samples.
(7) Sludge index daily on each shift.
(8) Mixed liquor DO (oolorlmetrlo) dally on each
shift.
(9) Sludge depth in primary and final settling tanks
daily on each shift.
(10) pll of digested sludge when drawn or as needed to
-------
171
A. C, Prints, Jr.
oontrol digester operation.
(11) Total and volatile solids of digested sludge
when drawn or as needed to eontrol digester
operation.
(12) Volatile acids of digested sludge when drawn or
as needed to control digester operation.
(13) Chlorine residual of effluent dally, twice dally
when stream conditions require.
RECORDS
The size of this plant makes It desirable
to keep dally records of all operations - many of them on a
shift basis. With a full-time superintendent and a staff of
trained men. Including a chemist In an activated sludge plant,
there should be no difficulty In maintaining the records In
a highly competent manner. The specified personnel should
assure the Interpretation and use of the oontrol Information
in such a way as to obtain the maximum treatment efficiency.
Since this falls In the large plant category
there may be considerable flexibility In the form of records
and various oontrol procedures. In addition to the recorded
laboratory oontrol and diary-type log Information, this
plant may need to record a number of other determinations.
-------
172
A. C. Printz, Jr.
Some of these might Include alkalinity, ORP, heavy metals,
or certain components Indicative of particular Industrial
waste problems.
There are frequent needs to record other
Information which contributes markedly to the control
procedure. Some of these data Include the following:
(1) Weather and wind direction In the event of odor
prr-blems.
(2) In addition to the raw waste flow, a record
of bypassing.
(3) Amount of course solids handled; I.e., grit
screening, dried sludge hauled from beds, or
sludge removal from digesters.
(U) Primary and secondary settling tank cleanup -
hours of hosing or skimming and/or maintenance, etc.
(5) Trickling filter maintenance - nozzle cleaning,
dosing or reolrculatlng pump operation, humus
sludge pumping to primary tanks, etc.
(6) Activated sludge operation - air volume and
blower operation, volume of sludge return and
waste, replacement or cleaning dIffusers, etc.
(7) Sludge handling - In addition to volume of sludge
pumped and time, such Information as amount of
reoIroulatIon or transfer of digested sludge, gas
-------
173
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
mixing, supernatant withdrawal, final sludge
to drying beds OP filters, disposal of sludge
from beds, conditioning chemicals for filters,
Incineration, etc,
Records of the above operations nay be kept
In a form most convenient to the superintendent. Because
of the wide variation In plants of this size and Individual
needs, the way these records are kept will vary considerably,
PLANT CAPACITY 10.0 USD
(Or larger)*
(•Note enclosed In parentheses has been added by the Twin
Cities-Upper Mississippi River Project.)
LABORATORY CONTROL
Required test procedures for plants other
than activated sludge are:
(1) Settle able solids dally.
(2) Relative stability dally.
(3) Dissolved oxygen of raw waste, effluent and re-
ceiving stream above and below discharge 5 days
per week.
(ft) pH of raw waste and effluent daily.
(5) BOD's of raw waste and effluents daily, Monday
-------
174
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
through Friday, based on 24-hour composite
sample8.
(6) Suspended Bolide of raw waste and effluents
dally, Monday through Friday, based on 24-hour
composite samples.
(7) pH of digested sludge when drawn or as needed
to control digester operation.
(8) Total and volatile solids of digested sludge
when drawn or as needed to control digester
operatIon.
(9) Volatile acids of digested sludge when drawn or
as needed to control digester operation.
(10) Chlorine residuals of effluent dally, twice dally
when stream conditions require.
For an activated sludge plant the required
test procedureB are:
(1) Settleable solids dally.
(2) Relative stability or nitrates dally on 24-hour
composite samples.
Ik
(3) Dissolved oxygen of raw waste, final effluent
and receiving stream above and below discharge
5 days per week.
(4) pH of raw waste and final effluent dally.
(5) BOD*s of raw waste and effluents dally, Monday
-------
A. C. Printz, Jr.
through Friday, on 24-hour composite samples.
(6) Suspended solids of raw mist* and final Affluents
dally, Monday through Friday* on 24-hour composite
samples.
(7) Sludge Index dally on each shift. Solids should
be determined In conjunction with the BOD and sus-
pended solids determinations.
(8) Mixed liquor DO (oolorlmetrlo) dally on eaoh
shift.
(9) Sludge depth In primary and final settling tanks
dally on each shift,
(10) pli of digested sludge when drawn or as needed to
control digester operation.
(11) Total and volatile solids of digested sludge
when drawn or as needed to control digester
operation.
(12) Volatile acids of digested sludge when drawn or
as needed bo control digester operation.
(13) Chlorine residual of effluent dally, twice dally
when stream conditions require.
RECORDS
The comments on records for the 5.0 MOD
plant also apply to the 10.0 MGD plant. The administrative
-------
176
A. C. Prints, Jr.
personnel should select the record style best suited to
their specific needs. Many more items of control data
also may be desirable, based on the superintendent's judg-
ment and on special conditions.
With a larger staff the 10.0 MOD plant may
be able to carry on special projects beyond that possible
in the smaller plants. Such projects may Include special
studies on industrial wastes or operational research pro-
jects. These projects may result in published Information
which can be valuable to many others with similar problems.
A plant of this size normally is expected
to produce an annual operating report containing compre-
hensive records of the year's activities and performance.
This procedure enables the superintendent to transform the
daily records into summary and unusual Information which
is quite helpful to others.
(The document entitled HA Report on Pollution of the Upper
Mississippi River and Major Tributaries" is on file as
Exhibit 1 at the offices of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration.}
-------
177
A. C. Printz, Jr.
MR. STEIN: Mr. Printz? j
MR. PRINTZs Mr. Chairman, I might alao add that i
}
a limited number of copies of the larger report have been
reproduced for selective distribution to those agencies or
persons having a need for more detailed facts and Information
than are presented In the summary report. Individual copies
of this report will be available upon written request to our
offices at the U. S. Naval Air Station here in Minneapolis.
It Is expected, however, that the report entered into the
record will serve the need of most of the people here present.
INTRODUCTION
The Investigation of water pollution along the
upper Mississippi River and its major tributaries was conducted
by the Twin Cities-Upper Mississippi River Project of the
Federal Mater Pollution Control Administration. The investiga-
tion was made under the authority of Section 10 (d) (l) of the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended.
The investigation was conducted to gather informa-
tion on water quality, sources and quantities of wastes, the
extent of pollution, and necessary abatement measures for the
Mississippi River from the Rum River at Anoka, 10? miles down-
stream to the outlet of lake Peplnj the lower 110 miles of j
I
the Minnesota River; and the lower 52 miles of the St. Croix j
-------
178
A. C. Printz, Jr.
River.
Surveys of municipal and Industrial waste sources
were Joint efforts of the Project, the appropriate regulatory
agencies of the States Involved, and In many Instances the
municipality or industry Involved.
All desired Information on waste sources and
stream quality, collected over the years by the Minnesota
Department of Health, Wisconsin Department of Health, and the
Mlnneapolls-St. Paul Sanitary District was made available to
the Project upon request.
To add a bit more to this, we might say that each
of the States was extremely coooerative, and gave a great deal
of assistance to the municipalities and the industries. 1
believe on every occasion on which the Project visited
industrial waste sources, we were accompanied by a member of
the Minnesota Department of Health, one of their engineers, if
this source happened to be In Minnesota. On many other
occasions, such as on stream sampling or time and travel
studies, we had the fortune of having some of the State people
along with us to give us assistance.
Manpower Is not always as available In the Federal
Government as many peoole seem to think it Is.
Each of the two States, along with many other
-------
1T9
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
distinguished citizens around the area and from the States,
participated as members of our Project Committee. So though
only a few meetings were held of this committee, they were
informed of the activities by weekly activity reports, and
this served a great purpose In thet the States were fully
aware of what we were doing, what progress was being made, and
could report it to their various constituents.
All laboratory procedures were performed In
accordance with the latest edition of "Standard Methods for
the Examination of water art Hastewater."
I might add here, there were several cooperative
studies between the Project, the Minneapolis Department of
Health, and also the Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District
laboratories.
All calculations (except those on flow frequen-
cies) were based on data collected between June 1964 - October
1965 and reflect conditions resulting from waste loadings
being discharged during that period.
WATER USES
The waters in the study area are used for a wide
range of purposes regardless of the suitability of the water
quality for these uses. The zones of extensive utilization
-------
180
A. C. Printz, Jr.
of the waters for the identified uses are summarized on
Figures 2 through 7 of the summary report.
We do not have slides to present thest, I think
everybody can look at the figures where these are delineated.
These uses included those for public water supply,
nonpotable industrial process water, cooling water, hydro-
electric power, Irrigation and stock watering, commercial
shipping, sport and commercial fishing, swimming and water
skiing, pleasure boating, maintenance of habitat for aquatic
life and water fowl, esthetic enjoyment and waste disposal.
Isolated uses, however, do occur In some zones not shown in
these figures.
SUMMARY OP WASTE SOURCES
The numerous sources of waste in the study area
were investigated to determine the waste characteristics as
well as the quantities being discharged. These data, when
combined with the characteristics of the rivers themselves,
provided the basis for determining future effects and abate-
ment needa.
. »*
Mississippi River
On the Mississippi River, five primary and seven
-------
181
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
secondary municipal sewage treatment plants discharging 208
mgd of waste were Investigated. At the time of the survey
these sources contributed the following loadings of constitu-
ents:
Oxygen-consuming wastes equivalent to raw
sewage from a population of 1,800,000 people.
Collform bacteria equivalent to raw sewage
from a population of 1,200,000 people.
Suspended sollda equivalent to raw sewage from
a population of 220,000.
Approximately 1|2,000 pounds of organic and
ammonia nitrogen compounds per day.
Approximately 24,000 pounds of phosphates per
day.
Approximately 850 pounds of phenols per day,
and other miscellaneous constituents.
The Kinneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District sewage
treatment plant Is the largest waste source and contributes
91 percent of the municipal wastes volume. Of the total
municipal contribution throughout the entire study area, the
District's waste effluent contained 88 percent of the oxygen
consuming materials; 95 percent of the conforms; 92 percent
of the suspended solids; 85 percent of the organic nitrogen,
ammonia nitrogen, and phosphates; and essentially 100 percent
-------
182
A. c. Printz, Jr.
of the phenols.
The South St. Paul sewage treatment plant is the
second largest waste source and contributes 7 percent of the
municipal wastes volume to the Mississippi River.
Also investigated on the Mississippi River were
Ik manufacturing and processing plants, two water treatment
plants, three steam-electric generating plants, and two barge
washing facilities. These Industrial sources, excluding the
three electric plants, discharge waste at a rate of about
35,000,000 gallons per day to the river. The steam-electric
plant utilizes as much as 1,095 mgd for river water for
cooling purposes, returning it directly to the river after use,
These sources together contributed the following loadings of
constituents;
Oxygen consuming wastes equivalent to raw
sewage from a population of 35*000.
Suspended solids equivalent to raw sewage from
a population of 70,000.
Approximately 4,500 pounds of organic and
ammonia nitrogen compounds per day.
Approximately 2,500 pounds of phosphates per
day.
Approximately 160 billion British Thermal
Units (BTU) of heat per day (during the tine when
-------
183
Albert C. Prlntz, Jr.
steam-electric plants are operating at full
capacity.
Approximately 600 pounds of fluoride per day.
Approximately ^40 pounds of phenols per da>.
Collform bacteria equivalent to raw sewage
from a population of 1JO.
Tables 2 through 5 summarize the information con-
tained on the characteristics of waste from all the municipal
and Industrial sources investigated as well as the loading
rates of the various constituents discharged from each plant
to the rivers.
The Cities of Minneapolis, St. Paul, and South
St. Paul each have combined sewers with regulators that divert
excess flows directly to the Mississippi River.
The Mlnneapolls-St. Paul combined sewer system
has more than 80 overflow points. Discharges from these
points represent atout 7.5 million pounds of 5-day (20°c)
BOD and 9.5 million pounds of suspended solids on a yearly
basis. This overflow occurs over about 10 percent of the time
In a given year. South St. Paul, however, has a more serious
surcharging problem along a considerable portion of the inter-
ceptor during periods of maximum dry-weather flow. It is
estimated that South St. Paul's overflow system contributes
about 6 million pounds of 5-day (20°c) BOD and 5 million
-------
184
Albert C. Printz, Jr.
pounds of suspended solids on a yearly basis.
Minnesota River
On the Minnesota River, seven communities, one
Institution, eleven manufacturing and processing plants, two
steam electric generating plants, and two barge cleaning
facilities, discharged to the river. At the time of the sur-
vey, these sources altogether contributed the following load-
Ings of constituents:
1. Oxygen consuming wastes equivalent to raw
sewage from a population of 297*600.
2, Collform bacteria equivalent to raw sewage
from a population of 52,800.
3, Suspended solids equivalent to raw sewage
from a population of 257*300.
4. Approximately 2,050 pounds of organic and
ammonia nitrogen per day.
5. Approximately 1,500 pounds of phosphates
per day.
6. Approximately 7*10 pounds of oil and grease
per day.
7. And again during the time when the f.team-
electric plants are operating at full capacity and
discharging cooling water directly to river.
-------
185
A. C, Printz, Jr.
approximately 60 billion BTU of heat per day.
St. Croix River
Discharges to the St. Croix River come from six
communities end two industries. At the time of the survey,
combined loadings of constituents were discharged to the river
equal to:
1. Oxygen consuming wastes equivalent to raw
sewage from a population of 9*730.
2. Collform bacteria equivalent to raw
sewage from a population of 1,600.
3. Suspended solids equivalent to raw sewage
from a population of 7*300.
it. Approximately 400 pounds of organic and
ammonia nitrogen per day and 500 pounds of phosphates
per day.
Nutrients entering the study area are most sig-
nificant during the month of August. It Is estimated that
total nitrogen and phosphates enter the waters of the study
area from agricultural and natural sources in the following
amounts:
Mississippi River above Lake Pepln --
40,000 pounds/day total nitrogen
20,000 pounds/day phosphate
-------
186
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
Minnesota River — 6,000 pounds/day total nitrogen
4,000 pounds/day phosphate
St. Croix River -- 13*000 pounds/day total nitrogen
2,000 pounds/day phosphate
IMPAIRMENT OP USES
The typical water quality conditions which existed
during the low flow periods of 19&t and 1965 are well defined
in Figure 12 of the summary report. An examination of this
figure Mill show the ranges of dissolved oxygen throughout
the study area. These were actual levels and not projections
to the 7-conaecutlve-dayj once-in-10-year low flow. Also
depicted are the total collform contents of the rivers and
the reaches of lowest fish palatability.
In Figures 8 through 13 of your report the uses
of the river which were impaired because of existing water
4uality are revealed by river reach. Comparison of these
figures with the earlier ones numbered 2 through 7 will relate
the areas where uses were practiced even though the existing
water quality was unsatisfactory for various reasons, these
being either chemical, biological or bacteriological in
nature,
The figures on these two pages are organized in
-------
187
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
such a manner that with the exception of the bottom two on
Page 2, I believe you will be able to compare the two sets of
figures.
Specific attention Is directed to the uses of
the waters for both whole body and limited body contact
activities.
From these you will get an idea of where these
uses were practiced, and where the water quality was net
satisfactory for that practice.
Included within Pages 13 through 20 In the summary
report are the details of the levels of existing water quality
In the various reaches of the rivers. We won't go into detail
of what these things are. However, examples of what may be
found within this reach are such things as levels of dissolved
oxygenj levels of other chemical constituents, e.g., phenols,
ammonia nltrogeni bacteriological levels, e»g., total collform,
fecal coliform, pathogenic bacteria, and virusesj existing
biological conditions, e.g., species of fish, bottom condi-
tions, algal densities and related indicators of water
quality; and also the levels of constituents required to
achieve a water quality suitable for various uses.
CONCLUSIONS
It can be concluded from the Investigations, that
-------
188
A. C. Printz, Jr.
sewage and Industrial wastes discharged to the Mississippi
River from Minnesota cause pollution in the interstate waters
of the Mississippi River which endangers the health and
welfare of persons in Wisconsin and, therefore, is subject
to abatement under the provisions of the Federal Water Pollu-
tion Control Act.
During the period of study, the staff Investigated
a total of 33 sources of wastes to the Mississippi River, 21
sources to the Minnesota River, and eight tc the St. Croix
River. These sources are listed on pages 23 and 24 of the
summary report. In total, there were 62 individual sources of
waste that were investigated.
A detailed synopsis of conditions found during
the survey is presented or. pages 24 and 25. Highlights of
these findings Include:
1. The lowering of the DO level to below 3.0
mg/1 on 21.1 miles of the Mississippi River during the
summer of 1964 and th'.? winter of 196^-1965.
Mr. Bryson did point out the 21.1 miles of the
Mississippi River. The dissolved oxygen level was also
lowered to below 3.0 milligrams per liter on 27.7 miles of
the Minnesota River durirg the 1964-1965 winter.
2. You will also find that pages 2k and 25
will point out the exceeding of the average concentrations
-------
189
A. C. Printz, Jr.
cf inorganic nitrogen levels of 0.3 afe/1 and 0.03 mg/1 of
phosphorus throughout the three major rivers under study.
3. The average coliform densities exceeded
5,000/100 ml during all surveys in 70 miles of the Mississippi
River and in 109 miles of the Minnesota River.
Our map only shows the Minnesota River from the
community of LeSueur. We extend the study area farther up
the Minnesota River to the area of Mankatc.
4. The detectable presence of pathogenic bacteria
and enteric viruses in the 10 miles of Mississippi River below
the M.S.S.D. outfall and immediately below the Red Wing sewage
treatment plant.
5. Also the reaching of nuisance conditions due
to algal blocm In shallow areas along the shorelines of both
Lake Pepin and Lake St. Croix.
6. Also the presence of bottom sediments con-
sisting almost solely of organic sludge in 21.1 miles of the
Mississippi River and in all of L?ke Pepin during 1964.
One other thing that ought to be pointed out on
the nap is the area entitled or called "Spring Lake." This
is mentioned in your report. However, we did neglect to put
Spring Lake on the map in your report, so for those of you
who don't know where Spring Lake is, Mr. Bryson has Just
pointed it out to you.
-------
190
A. C, Prlntz, Jr.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The recommendations to the conferees relate to
the remedial measures necessary to preserve or upgrade
existing water quality to permit maximum usage of the waters
within the study area.
The recommendations are given In two groups, as
Mr. Stein earlier pointed out: General and specific. General
recommendations cover the broad objectives of pollution abate-
ment in the Project area. Specific recommendations are given
for the solution of particular problems and are offered in
addition to, and not in place of, the general recommendations.
These recommendations apply to problems In need of immediate
attention and are not to be construed as being lor.g-range
objectives of a comprehensive water resource development
program for the Upper Mississippi River Basin. These recom-
mendations are applicable to the 62 waste sources listed on
pages 23 and 2b of the summary report.
Relative to general recommendations for munici-
palities, Institutions and industries;
1, It Is recommended that there be no further
decrease In quality of any of the waters within the
study area as previously defined,
-------
191
A. c. Printz, Jr.
2. It Is recommended that water quality be
enhanced as stipulated In the remaining recommenda-
tions to provide the following dissolved oxygen and
collform levels in the given segments of the
Mississippi, Minnesota and St. Croix Rivers during
flows equal to or greater than the 7-consecutlve-
day, once-ln-10-year summer and winter low flows:
I will refer to various coliform guides in this
next section. These are well defined In the text and will
not be mentioned here.
-------
192
RIVER SEGMENT
PROM TO
(RIVER MILE) (RIVER MILE)
(MAXIMUM OR MINIMUM CONCENTRATIONS
FOR ANY ONE SAMPLE)
DO (Mln. ) COLIFORM QUID!
rag/1 (Maximum )*
Mississippi
River
871.6 (Anoka) 836.3 (MSSD) No deterioration
in present level
(7 5 mg/1)
836.3 (MSSD)
815.2
(L&D No. 2)
815.2
(L&D No. 2} 763.5
(Chippewa
River
A&C
C applies to seg-
ment between
Anoka and St.
Anthony Palls
B
Minnesota
River
109.2
(Mankato)
30.0
(Chaska)
30.0
(Chaska)
0.0
(Mouth)
No deterioration
in present level
T7 5 rag/1)
B
B
St. Croix
River
52.0 (St.
Croix Falls)
0.0
(Mouth)
Nc deterioration
In present level
(7 5 mg/1)
A&C
-------
193
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
If these water quality conditions are assured,
the various river segments will be suitable for the use
delineated on page 28 of the Report and also depicted on the
display in the lobby. The display, however, is not to be
Included within the published report.
Continuing with the general recommendations, all
municipalities and other institutions discharging sewage to
the rivers under investigation provide at least secondary
biological treatment plus continuous disinfection of the
effluent. This treatment is to produce an effluent containing
no more thans
20 percent of the mass of 5-day BOD
originally contained In the Influent.
°0 percent of the mass of suspended solids
originally contained in the Influent.
5,000 collforms/100 ml (except where "d"
applies),
1,000 co 11 forms/100 -nl between May and October,
Inclusive, where receiving waters are used for whole
body contact activities.
These limits are to be followed except where more
stringent ones are ^iven In the specific recommendations or
ar.: retired by Stnte xator pollution control agencies.
Municipal waste treatment plants maintain at least
-------
19*4
A. C. Prints, Jr.
the minimum laboratory control and records as reconended by
the Conference of State Sanitary Engineers at their 38th
Annual Meeting In 1963. In addition* all plants should vain-
tain a record of chlorine feed rates and those plants of 2
million gallons per day capacity or greater should provide
analyses for total and fecal conforms on a once-per-week
basis. Results of laboratory tests and other pertinent
records should be summarized monthly and submitted to the
appropriate State agency for review and evaluation. These
records are to be maintained in open files of the State agency
for use by all persons with a legitimate interest.
Hew waste treatment facilities be designed to
provide adequate capacity of Individual unita and components
as well aa maximum flexibility In order to permit later modi-
fication In operating procedures so as to effect the greatest
amount of phosphate removal. Existing plant facilities should
be operated so aa to optimize phosphate removal.
The Statea of Minnesota and Wisconsin establish a
program of Monitoring and aurvelilanoe In area waters for
evaluating progress in Improvement of stream quality resulting
from implementation of actions recommended by the confereea.
The Federal Water Pollution Control Administration should
establlah monitoring stations where appropriate on portlona
of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers within the State of
-------
195
A. C. Printz, Jr.
Minnesota to aid In the evaluation. Water quality surveillance
activities should be coordinated and all Information made avail-
able to the States, the federal Water Pollution Control
Administration, and other parties with a legitimate Interest.
All present and future sewerage and sewage treat-
ment facilities be modified or designed and operated to
eliminate bypassing of untreated wastes during normal main-
tenance and renovation operations. The appropriate State
agency is to be contacted for approval prior to any expected
bypassing of waste. All accidental or emergency bypassing or
npillage should be reported Immediately.
Wastes such as the lime sludge from St. f&vl
water treatment plant, which discharge Into a municipal
sewerage system, be pretreated to avoid any detrimental effect
on waste treatment operation.
Programs be developed by those responsible for
the facilities to prevent or minimize the adverse effect of
accidental spills of oils, gases, fuels, and other material
capable of causing pollution. The elements of such programs
should Include:
Engineering works such as catchment areas,
relief vessels, and dikes to trap spillage.
Removal of all spilled materials in a manner
acceptable to the regulatory agencies.
-------
196
A. C. Prints, Jr.
Immediate reporting (by those responsible
for the facilities) of any spills to the appropriate
State agency.
In-plant surveys and programs to prevent acci-
dental spills.
Combined storm and sanitary sewers be prohibited
In all newly developed areas and be eliminated In existing
areas wherever opportunity to do so Is afforded by redevelop-
ment. Present combined sewers should be continuously patrolled
and operated so as to convey the maximum possible amount of
combined flows to and through the waste treatment plant. In
addition, studies to develop effective control of wastes from
this source should be continued by the MSSD and should be
initiated by the City of South St. Paul. Although the immedi-
ate problem Is a bacterial one, both studies should also con-
sider the discharge of BOD and solids. Methods to be used to
control wastes from combined sewers and a tine schedule for
their accomplishment should be reported to the conferees with-
in two years after issuance of the Conference Summary.
All Industries discharging wastes to the rivers
under investigation, unless otherwise specified, provide
treatment sufficient to produce an effluent containing no
more than 20 percent of the mass of 5-day (2O°C) BOD and
suspended solids originally contained In the untreated process
-------
19?
A. C, Printz, Jr.
waste. Settleable solids and conforms In the effluent are
not to exceed the following:
Settleable solids - 5 ml/1
Conforms - 5*000/100 nl (except where "c"
applies)
Coliforms * 1,000/100 ml between May and October,
inclusive, where receiving waters are used
for whole body contact activities.
Industries discharging wastes to the waters
maintain operating recorda containing information on waste
discharge rates and concentrations of constituents found in
significant quantities in their wastes.
This information should be summarized and sub-
mitted to the appropriate State agency at monthly intervals
for review and evaluation. These records are to be maintained
in open files of the State agency for use by all persons with
a legitimate interest.
All wateroraft provide adequate treatment on board
or arrange for suitable on-shore disposal of all liquid and
solid wastes.
Garbage or refuse not be dumped along the banks
of the river and no open dumps be allowed on the flood plain.
Material in present dump sites along the river banks should
be removed and the appearance of the bank restored to an
-------
198
A. C. Printz, Jr.
esthetically acceptable condition. Present open dumps on
the flood plain should be converted to sanitary landfills
operated acceptably to the appropriate State agencies.
Waste sources upstream from and outside of the
study area on the Mississippi, Minnesota and St. Crolx Rivers
and their tributaries be sufficiently controlled so that
waters entering the study area conform to General Recommenda-
tion No. 2.
Specific Recommendations - Mississippi River
Again, these specific recommendations are offered
in addition to* and not in place of, the general recommenda-
tions.
Municipal Sources
It Is recommended that:
Maximum waste loadings from all sources between
and including the Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District and
the South St. Paul Sewage Treatment Plants be such that a
minimum dissolved oxygen content or 3.0 mg/1 can be maintained
during the 7-consecutive-day, once-In-10-year low summer flow
in the reach of river between Mississippi River miles 836.4
and 815.2. To attain this, combined wastes loads from these
sources should not exceed 68,500 pounds/day of 5-day BOD,
-------
199
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
exclusive of combined sewer overflows. Suspended solids
loadings discharged to this reach (exclusive of combined
setter overflows) should not exceed 85,500 pounds/day in order
to BinlBlze sludge deposits.
MaxlBun loadings of phenolic wastes froa the
Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District sewage treatment plant,
Northwestern Refining Co., Great Northern Oil Co., and
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co.* all contained, not
exceed 110 pounds/day in order to maintain the stream con-
centration of this material under 0.01 mg/1 at stream flows
equal to or greater than the 7-consecutive-day, once-ln-10-
year low flow.
An engineering study of the Minneapolis-St. Paul
Sanitary District sewerage system be undertaken to determine
what changes are required to make unnecessary the practice
of bypassing wastes periodically for the purpose of cleaning
the Interceptor transporting wastes to the plant.
The BOD removal effleieney at the Hastings,
Minnesota primary sewage treatment plant be increased from
the 5 percent figure found during the survey to a minimum of
30 percent until the secondary biological treatment facilities
are In operation.
-------
200
A* C. Prints* Jr.
Industrial Sources
It is recoMended at the water treatment plants of
the City of Minneapolis that;
Treatment facilities be provided capable of pro-
ducing an effluent with a suspended Rollds concentration not
exceeding that found in other treated effluents being dis-
charged to the MM reach of river. At no tl«e should the
daily average suspended solids concentration exceed 50 •g/l.
The industries in the South St. Paul area, Swift
it Company, Armour & Company, and the St. Paul Union Stock-
yards, provide an effective Method of control and correction
of direct discharges to the Mississippi River. These Include
so-called clean waste waters, watering through overflows,
truck washing wastes, surface drainage, and hog pen flushings.
The coliform densities of any of these discharges should not
exceed 5,000/100 *1 once the eontrol devices are in operation.
Additional treatment be provided at Northwest
Cooperative Mills concentrations of the compositing pond
effluent to substantially the aasie levels found in other
effluents being discharged to the sasw reaeh of river after
satisfactory treatment. In no instance should the daily
average suspended solids concentration exceed 50 «g/l.
Any additional facilities constructed for the Foot
Tanning Company's waste produce an effluent of a quality
-------
201
A. C. Prints* Jr.
acceptable to th* Minnesota Water Pollution Control Commie-
•lon and in conformity with recommendations in this report.
The possibility of discharging the settled waste to the Red
Wing sewerage aystem in lieu of additional treatment should
be considered and a report on the conclusions of such questions
submitted to the MWPCC.
Specific Recommendations - Minnesota River
Industrial Sources
It is recommended that at the Green Giant Company
an additional pusip be provided for standby purposes at the
waste water sump for use when the main punp falls. The
sanitary and Miscellaneous process wastes should be handled
as specified by the General Recommendations.
Maximum waste loadings from all sources between
and including the American Crystal Sugar Co. and the Rahr
Malting Co. be such that a minimum dissolved oxygen content
of 3.0 mg/1 can be maintained during the 7-consecutive-day,
onee-in-10-year low winter flow in the reach of river between
Minnesota River miles 29 and 0. To attain this, combined
waste loads from these sources should not exceed 12*000 pounds
day of 5-day BOD during winter when there ia no lee cover In
the vicinity of the Blackdog power plant. At times of complete
-------
20C
A. C, Prints, Jr.
ice cover, the maximum waste loading of 5-day BOB froB these
sources should not exceed 6,500 pounds/day. In no ease, how-
ever, should treat»ent efficiency be less than that specified
In the General Recommendations.
A water temperature of not greater than 90°f be
•alntalned In the lower Minnesota River. To attain this, the
existing cooling pond at the Northern States Power Company
Blackdog plant should be utilized to Its fullest extent during
the summer at stream flows less than 1500 efs. During these
periods the thermal addition to the Minnesota River should
not exceed 13.5 billion BTU/day.
FEDERAL INSTALLATIONS
Although their contributions are snail, full
consideration In still given to Federal installations, in
compliance with Section 11 of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act as amended.
general Recommendations
At U. S. Army Mike Missile Installations it IB
recommended that:
A minimum of one hour per day be devoted to proper
treatment plant operation and maintenance.
-------
203
A. C. Prints, Jr.
The treatment facilities be operated such that
removal efficiencies approach those for which the plants were
designed.
laboratory analyses and records Maintenance con-
sistent with recommendations of the Conference of State
Sanitary Engineers for plants of 0.25 «g<* capacity be carried
out. A report of these functions, including results of
analyses, IB to be furnished to the Federal Vater Pollution
Control Administration upon request.
SpecIfie Recomaendations
Nike Site No. *0» Farming ton, Minnesota
It Is recommended that;
Discharge of effluent to the roadside ditch be
terminated as soon as possible. The present outfall sewer
line should be extended so as to discharge the effluent into
the unnaned creek which at present ultimately receives the
waste.
Continuous chlorlnation facilities be activated
immediately with disinfection sufficient to produce a free
chlorine residual of 0.5 »g/l after a 15-mlnute contact at
peak flow rates.
-------
204
A. C. Printz. Jr.
Nike Site No. 90, Bethel, Minnesota
It is recommended that continuous chlorlnatlon
facilities be activated immediately with disinfection
sufficient to produce a free chlorine residual of 0.5 mg/1
after a 15-minute contact at peak flow rates.
U» 3. Air Force - Air Defense Command
Osceola, Wisconsin Station
It is recommended that a schedule of maintenance
practices be instituted consistent with accepted procedures
for operation of oxidation ponds so as to Insure satisfactory
treatment.
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers
Locks and Dams
It is recommended that:
Present plans be continued concerning Improvement
or replacement of inadequately sized treatment facilities.
At stream flows of 7*000 cubic feet per second
(cfs) or less (as measured at the St. Paul gage), as much
water as possible be passed over bulkheads ahead of the Taintor
gates at Lock • Dam No. 2. At flows of 3,OOO cfs. or less*
the equivalent of the inflow to Pool No. 2 should be passed
over the bulkheads. The Corps has already agreed to continue
-------
205
%
A. C. Prints, Jr.
this practice.
Floating Dredge Thompson
It is recommended that a planned schedule of
analyses be continued on effluent fro» the waste treatment
facilities so as to Insure adequate removals prior to over-
board discharge of effluent.
U. S. Air Force - 93*>th Troop Carrier Qroup
Officers Club
It is recommended that the present single compart-
ment septic tank be changed to a two-compartment tank. A
subsurface tile field of adequate sice should be Installed
to supplement the present field.
SC«DULE FOR REMEDIAL PROGRAM
MUNICIPALITIES, INSTITUTIONS, AND INDUSTRIES
The investigators have prepared a schedule for
remedial action. The suggested time schedule periods should
commence with the issuance of the Conference Summary by the
Secretary of the Interior.
-------
206
A, C. Prlntz, Jr.
a. Submission of preliminary plans for
remedial facilities within 6 months.
b. Submission of final design for remedial
facilities within 12 months.
c. Financing arrangements for municipalities
completed and construction started within 18 months,
d. Construction completed and plants placed
Into operation within 36 months.
e. Existing schedules of the State agencies
calling for earlier completion dates are to be met.
FEDERAL INSTALLATIONS
Schedules for Federal Installations requiring only
operational and maintenance changes shall be initiated Imme-
diately. Changes required at Nike Site Mo. 40 and the Ft.
Snelllng Officers Club should be completed and made operational
within 6 months.
SCHEDULE MODIFICATIONS
It It recognized that modifications in this
schedule nay be necessary. These may Include:
a. A lesser time where the control agency
-------
A. C. Prlntz, Jr. 207
having jurisdiction considers that a practical
nethod of control can be in operation prior to the
tine stated.
b. In a fen Industries and municipalities
some variation from this schedule nay be sought from
the appropriate State and local pollution control
agencies. In such cases after review the conferees
•ay make appropriate recooraendations to the Secretary
of the Department of the Interior,
Mr. Chairman, this concludes the abridgement of the
Summary and Pollution Abatement Recommendations Report for
the Upper Mississippi River and Major Tributaries..
MR. STEINs Thank you for a very comprehensive report,
Mr. Prlntz. Are there any questions or commentB?
MR. vriSNIKWSKIi Mr. Chairman, I would suggest that we
defer the questions or the comments until after lunch. It
is 12 o'clock now.. I have a number of questions chat would
take considerable time.
MR. STEIN: All right. I think that is a fair request,
Ve will recess until a quarter after one.
(Whereupon, at 12:00 noon, a luncheon recess was taken
until 1:15 p.«. of the same day.)
-------
A. C. FrintE, Jr.
AFTERNOON SESSION
(1:15 p.m.)
MR. STEIN: May we reconvene*>
In the Interests of saving time, and In deference
to comity between the States — what comity means I never
quite understood myself — we are going to reverse the alpha-
betical order. Wisconsin will go first. Wisconsin believes
that It can save time by making its presentation first, and
thus will avoid a lot of \innecessary questions. We will now
turn the time over to Wisconsin. Wisconsin can proceed in Its
own way.
First, we will ask for any questions from Wisconsin,
and then, of course, Wisconsin may make any statement it wishes,
Mr. Wisnlewskl?
MR. WISNIEWSKI: Thank you, Mr-. Chairman.
Mr, Prints, on Page 19 of the report which was
submitted as an exhibit and on which you briefed the informa-
tion, In the right-hand column, In the second to the last
paragraph, there is a statement that:
"The waters in this segment belon Chsaka
were unsuitable for irrigation, stock and wild-
life watering, navigation, and limited body contact
activities because ths average eoliforft dens .ty
-------
*. C. Frintz, Jr.
exceeded 5,000 MPK/100 i.l."
Was It intended that irrigation waters and
navigation waters have colifcrtr, standards set on them?
KR, PRINT?: Yes, It was, tc this extent: The
Irrigation part does, Mr. Wisniewski, need, I think, some
clarifIcatirn, which was not included In the summary, but
is Included In the supplemental report on Page III-?6, and
going on to Page ??, and the table at III-P2. It Is In the
larger part.
I might just refer you to my copy (handing same
to Mr. Wisniewski ).
It is Intended at this point that the irrigation
which we considered as a use being damaged because of the
average colifcrm density, be clarified in that table with a
footnote referring only to those products that are eaten raw
and uncooked, so to this extent we did Intend It to be a
coliform guide, but it would relate to Irrigation only in that
sense.
Navigation, yes, because navigation we consider
a limited body contact due te the contact which the boat
operators come Into with the water.
MR. WISNIEWSKI: Thank you.
Under the General Recommendations in the right-
hand column, the last paragraph above the table, you indicate
-------
A. C. Prlntz, Jr. Sl°
that no recommendations are made with reference to the
fertilization of the rivers and backwater areas insofar as
provision of specialized treatment facilities.
14 there a reason for this? Is this because we
don't have the knowledge for application of adequate treatment
facilities within economic practicability?
MR. PRINTZ; No, sir. We feel now that we do have
that knowledge, but the reason for inclusion of this statement
was the fact that we believe that proper operation and else
operation consistent with the general guideline relating to
Tta
phosphate removal, No. 5* will do a great deal to minimize
this problem; but as far as knowing how to construct and
operate plants, yes, the Administration feels we now have that
knowledge and it can soon be made available to any consulting
engineers that would desire that information.
MR. WISNIEWSKI: Well, we can't quite agree with
operation plants In the north being similar to those in the
southern part of the United States, and the experiments here
show that you won't get the same results as you get In the
Texas area on removal of phosphates by this process.
MR. STEIN: Ted, I'm with you.
This Is just for clarification. In order that
this record Is going to be meaningful, what do we recommend
for phosphates, specifically, when you say we have recommenda-
tions?
-------
211
A. C. Printz, Jr.
MR. PRINTZ: We have a recommendation tha; new
waste treatment facilities be designed to provide adequate
capacity of individual units and components, as well as
maximum flexibility in order to permit later modification in
operating procedures so as to effect the greatest amount of
phosphate removal, and existing plant facilities should be
operated so as to optimize phosphate removal.
MR. STEIN: All right.
Off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. STEIN; All right.
MR. WISNIEWSKI: What do you mean by "flexibility"?
MR. PRINTZ: Flexibility in the manner In which
a plant can be manipulated, the different amounts of sludge
returned, withheld, etc., so that when Mr. Wlsniewskl becomes
convinced that something can be done in Wisconsin through the
manipulation of a plant, that plant can be manipulated In the
proper manner.
MR. STEINi I think I understand what you are
saying.
Are you satisfied with that, Ted?
MR. WISNIIWSKI: Not completely. This Is some-
thing that has to be studied more thoroughly, because it Is
inadvisable to build a lot of extra capacity If you don't
-------
A. C. Print?., Jr.
need it. If there is anctKer approach to the problem.
I think this matter of removal of fertilizer
elements should receive mere research and be supported by
Federal funds.
KR. PHINTF; To that extent, I would like to say
that there will be a phosphate removal demonstration study
at Detroit, Michigan, and I believe the results obtained there
would apply to the State of Wisconsin.
There are going to be at least three studies in the
country. The portion for the Midwest will be at Detroit.
Federal funds are going into the studies.
MR. WISNIEWSKI: On Page 29, in the l«?ft-hand
column under "Treatment of Municipal Wastes," you Indicate
certain limiting concentrations that will need to be present
in the effluent as discharged, such as 20 percent of the mass
of 5-day BOD originally contained in the influent, and so on.
for the ether parameters.
What provision is being made to take care of
growth In the community? For example, if we keep taking
20 percent out and later on we double the population over a
period of years, we have actually increased the amount of
pollution going into the stream using this ns a basis.
MR. PRINT?: I believe I emphasized — at least,
I intended to emphasise at the beginning of my verbal statement.
-------
213
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
if I can be permitted to check my notes here, the fact Is
that these are what we feel are solutions to the Immediate
problems and are not to be considered as long-range objectives
or a part of the overall comprehensive program,
life believe that this will take care of the immedi-
ate problems in all cases where the general recommendations
apply* recognizing, of course, that as the States establish
their criteria and standards on intrastate waters In compli-
ance with the Mater Quality Act of 1965, they will be cog-
nizant of this and will take that into consideration. But
these were Intended to be the degrees of treatment to meet
the immediate needs.
MR. WISNIEWSKI: On that same page, under Item 6,
"Monitoring of Water Quality," It refers to the fact that
the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration should
establish monitoring stations where appropriate on portions
of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers within the State of
Minnesota to aid in the evaluation.
There is no such offer made to Wisconsin under
this subject of "Monitoring of Water Quality." In fact, you
suggest that both Minnesota and Wisconsin establish monitoring
and surveillance stations, but then you offer your assistance
to the State of Minnesota, but not to the State of Wisconsin.
(Laughter.)
-------
Reproduced from _,_
! b«si »v»il»bl« copy. ^lr A. C. Prints, Jr.
MR. PRINT?: I must admit, air, it la somewhat
discriminatory, as rr>ad»
A bit of background information, perhaps: A
necessary part, we feel, of each enforcement action tr -iicct
the abatement conditions recomf.-.on.Jp'J is the establishment of
a surveillance program to makr* 3ur called
for" Is being done,
To this extent, the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration has already expended approximately
$36,000 to establish three automatic monitoring stations
within the study area. The locations of these ntatlcns, un-
fortunately for Wisconsin, are til locate.' within the State
of Minnesota. The reason is that we felt the particular loca-
tions selected would have to be in Minnesota in order to
accomplish what we desired.
I assure you, however, the Federal Government will
cooperate with Wisconsin in any monitoring program.
I might pclnt out, as I see Mr. Stein looking at
me somewhat quizzically, the uppermost station will be on the
Mississippi River at the Northern States Power Company's
Riverside Plant f«r the purpose of monitoring water In that
upp«»r reach. We feel that this location Is very representative
of water In that area,
The second station will be located on the lower
-------
215
A. C. Printz, Jr.
Minnesota River at approximately Mile Point 8. This Is In
the vicinity of the new airport approach bridge across the
Minnesota River. I believe It la Mile Point 3 Instead of
Mile Point 8. Excuse me.
The third station will be located farther down-
stream on the Mississippi River at the site of the Shtely Sand
and Gravel operations.
The Minnesota River and the Mississippi River
stations are located within the flood plain, and hence are
going to be housed in trailer units, so that they can be
moved out during the flood periods. Data from these stations
will be telemetered back to the Project headquarters, whe.. _•
there wiJl be a continuous reporting of four parameters looking
to the characterization of that water. These will be dissolved
oxygen, pH, temperature and conductivity.
These data, when collected, will be nade available
to the States. They will be ontered into the Administration
program for the storage of data and will be available to others
that have need for this.
MR. STSIN: I wonder If we may clarify this.
The establishment of parameters I think Is a
technical operation and It nl^ht bo left >.
-------
A. C. Prints, Jr.
Mlnnc-sota really is necessary for an appropriate monitoring
system -- "where appropriate on portions of the Mississippi
River and the Minnesota River," "to aid in the evaluation." I
don't know, but it may be wise to put something down below
the confluence at the State border on the Mississippi. In
the recommendations you were talking In terms of evaluations,
and you right propose as much flexibility in this as you
propose with reference to the handling of phosphates.
Why do we have to come to this conclusion now?
Is this all right?
MR. WISNIEWSKI: It might be advisable to have a
r.cnltorlng station bftlow the new power plant on the St. Croix.
MR. STEIN: That is right.
How would it hurt the recommendation if we struck
that phrase, "within the State of Minnesota"?
If your tlr-ee stations are valid here in the
locations that you mentioned, I don't think we or Wisconsin
or Minnesota will object to these points, but the limitation
of placing tt.ls within the State seems to me possibly to cut
off flexibility on where you could establish monitoring
stations.
MR. PRINTZ: The reason it was cut off in this
respect Is that we feel the primary responsibility of the
surveillance lies with the State, and this is an added help
-------
217
A. C, Printz, Jr.
here to the States.
MR. STEIN: I understand that.
Let me read this again. What you say Is:
"The Federal Water Pollution Control Administra-
tion should establish monitoring stations where
appropriate on portions of the Mississippi and
Minnesota Riv«rs,"
and then you say,
"within the State cf Minnesota to aid In the evalu-
ation,"
If our purpose is so help In the evaluation, how
would It hurt if we dropped that phrase and said,
"The Federal Water Pollution Control Administra-
tion should establish monitoring stations where
appropriate on portions of the Mississippi, Minnesota
and St. Croix Rivers"?
MR. PRINTZ: We could refine It toy saying, "with-
in the study area."
MR. STEIN: That is right. Give yourself the
flexibility here.
Let's go off the record a minute.
(Discuss'jn off the record.),
MR. STUN: Back on the record.
Don't you think that would be better If we gave
-------
218
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
ourselves that flexibility?
MR. PFilNTZ: It would provide more flexibility,
Mrt. STEIN: Yes.
MR. WISNIEWSKI: The next Item is on Page 30.
At the top you cover combination storm and sanitary sewers
and indicate means of doing some control work on them.
However, there is no specific reference to storm
waters alone, and there is a feeling developing throughout
the country at the present time that we may have to treat
storm waters in order to protect our receiving streams.
Has any consideration been given In the study to
the storm water problem exclusive of the sewer problem?
MR. PRINTZ: We agree with you that this is a
problem of growing concern, and It will become more so when
the combined sewer problem is taken care of.
However, once again, in determining the immediate
abatement needs, this did not appear to be one that could
be taken care of adequately or economically at this time, but
we would hope that the two States again would look to this,
perhaps in their implementation plans in connection with the
water quality standards as a long-range problem, or a problem
that could be taken care of perhaps within the next ten-year
period.
MR. WISNIEWSKI: On that same oage, In the right-
-------
219
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
hand column under "Garbage and Refuse Dumps," you state:
"Garbage or refuse not tie dumped along the
banks of the river and no open dumps be allowed
on the flood plain. Material In present dump sites
along the river banks should be removed and the
appearance of the bank restored to an esthetically
acceptable condition."
So far so good.
"Present open dumps on the flood plain should be
converted to sanitary land fills operated accept-
ably to the appropriate State agencies."
In Wisconsin we have Section 1W0*4^5 in an area
where the dump would be subject to inundation as a result of
periodic flooding, or might be washed into a surface water.
This in effect means to us that we could not even locate a
sanitary land fill in a flood plain.
Is it your opinion that changing a dump to a
sanitary land fill would afford sufficient protection so that
you could keep the sanitary land fill in the flood plain?
MR. PRINTZ: No, sir, but it Is very commendable
that the State of Wisconsin has recognized that, and it is
for that reason that additional wording was put in to the
effect that If it should be converted, it should be operated
acceptably to the appropriate State agencies.
-------
220
A. C. Printz, Jr.
In this case, Wisconsin, of course, would not
allow the location of It, and, Dr. Margraves, you might
clarify this point, but I don't believe Minnesota has such
legislation or does prohibit them at this time from the flood
plains. Jfence the converting would be the next-best step.
DR. MARGRAVES: We will comment on that later,
because we have a four-page legislative report, let us say,
that takes care of it.
MR. PRINTZ: Ml right.
MR. STEIN: Do you propose a dump on the flood
plain?
MR. PRINTZ; No, we don't.
MR. STEIN: Then why do you recommend against it
if you think that the Wisconsin statute position is solid?
I have been in this business, I think, as long as
most people. Just to prolong this a bit, what is the difference
between a dump and a sanitary land fill?
MR. PRINTZ; fie would be very much opposed to any-
t'hing of this nature within the flood plain.
MR. STEIN; You don't want to answer the juestion,
You know, a sanitary land fill reminds me of the Holy Roman
Empire. They always said It was neither holy, nor Roman,
nur an empire, and I don't know the difference between a dump
anci a sanitary land fill, because I have found very few of
-------
221
A. C. Printz, Jr.
those which were sanitary or land, or really a fill.
However, If the Wisconsin position is solid and
there should not be any dumps or land fills on the flood
plain, why can't we adopt that as a recommendation?
MR. PRINTZ: That would be agreeable with the
investigators."
MR. STEIN: All right, fed?
MR. WISNIEWSKI: Now I would like to comment
about the conclusions. This reads:
"Sewage and industrial wastes discharged to
the Mississippi River from Minnesota cause pollu-
tion in the interstate waters of the Mississippi
River which endangers the health and welfare of
persons in Wisconsin and, therefore, is subject to
abatement under the provisions of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act,"
We feel complimented that there Is no such thing
with reference to Wisconsin in this report.
Then we go to Page 3^ —
MR. STEIN; Ted, would you talk up a little bit
for the Minnesota delegation?
MR. WISNIEWSKI: I keep pushing this microphone
closer and they keep taking it away from me. Do you want me
to read that over again?
-------
222
A. C. Printz, Jr.
DR. HARORAVES; Mr. Chairman, this is primarily
because of a physical disability. Our good friend, Chester,
with his hearing aid is only getting half of this, and for
the sake of the Minnesota delegation, we want him to get it
all.
MR. STEIN: Mr. Wilson, would you mind moving
your chair over in this direction?
MR. WISNIEWSKI: I think I will read that paragraph
again because I think it Is pretty important,
MR. POSTON: Where is it?
MR. WISNIEWSKI: It is or Page 23, the first
paragraph under "Conclusions."
"Sewage and industrial wastes discharged to
the Mississippi River from Minnesota cause pollu-
tion in the interstate waters of the Mississippi
River which endangers the health and welfare of
persons In Wisconsin and, therefore, is subject to
abatement under the provisions of the Federal Water
Pollution Control Act."
I stated that we in Wisconsin feel complimented
because this same kind of a statement is not made about any
sources in Wisconsin causing problems for the people in
Minnesota.
However, I would refer you then to Page 3^»
-------
A. C. Prints, Jr.
In the first paragraph It says:
"In light <;f the excellent progress the
MWPCC"
-- and I am assuming that means the Minnesota Wpter Pollution
Control Commission —
"has made In making various industrial firms and
municipalities aware cf the need for abatement
facilities, the following time schedule for the
foregoing remedial program is recommended. The
time periods given commence with the Issuance of
the conference summary by the Secretary of the
Interior."
£m I to understand from that that since Wisconsin
has made such excellent progress, they have not found it neces-
sary to mention It here at all, and at the same time they don't
want us to comply with any of these schedules?
MR. PRINT?: No, sir. The lack of a pat on the
back here is a mistake.
(Laughter.)
We had every intention cf pointing out the
excellent progress that Wisconsin has made, and will continue
to make. However, no matter how many ti^es we review, re-
read and re-edit, we are guilty of an omission.
We do feel Wisconsin has made a trerr.endous gain,
-------
224
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
has done a good job, and still has to comply with the recom-
mendations of the conferees.
MR. WISNIEWSKI: Those are all the comments I
have, Mr. Printz.
MR. WILSON; Mr. Chairman.
MR. STEIN: Yes.
MR. WILSON; In view of the fact that Just now,
because of my hearing defect, it was recognized that I
probably could not hear all this conversation and I was In-
vited down here to this end of the table so I could catch the
point, I vnould like to make a couple of comments at this time
on the relationship between the State of Wisconsin and the
State of Minnesota in dealing with this water pollution control
program.
To my good friend, Mr. Wisniewskl, here --he and
I have been associated In these efforts for a good many years
in different capacities — I want to say that Minnesota has
always recognized the outstanding leadership shown by the
State of Wisconsin In this field. They were ahead of us In
pioneering, In systematic efforts to deal with the water pollu-
tion control program, and set up the Wisconsin Water Pollution
Control Committee in connection with the State Board of
Health many, many years ago, and Mr. Wisniewskl has long
served as their director before the new Wisconsin organization
-------
225
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
under their 1965 law was formed.
All through the years there has been very close
cooperation between the State of Wisconsin and the State of
Minnesota. We more or less followed their smoke when we
framed our Water Pollution Control Act of 19^5, which set up
our Commission. It was composed somewhat differently, but
still in much the same manner, with representatives of the
Board of Health and the Conservation Department and other
interested agencies, and very closely Integrated with the
Board of Health.
We followed their example in setting our law and
worked closely with the Commission in studying the problems
on the Mississippi River, and I am very sure that if there
is anyone who has drawn any erroneous conclusions from the
fact that the framers of this report here did not mention
the excellent progress that the V.:isconsln authorities had
made in dealing with their problems, it was simply because of
the fact that it so happens that on the Mississippi River the
worst pollution problems are in Minnesota, the ones that call
for the greatest effort and attract the greatest attention.
It has been a comparatively simple matter for ths
Wisconsin authorities to require the towns on the Wisconsin
side of the Mississippi River to provide sewage treatment
facilities, whereas it has been a problem that ended with
-------
226
A. C. Printz, Jr.
tremendous difficulties, as our Chairman here, Hurray Stein,
recognized at the opening session of this session, in which
he complimented the authorities for the manner In which they
have dealt with this pollution problem here in this State's
metropolitan areas as compared with other areas of the country.
Now, certainly, that cooperation is going to con-
tinue, and I am sure that full credit will be given to the
leadership and progress In Wisconsin, as well as the credit
to which I think our own Minnesota Water Pollution Control
Commission Is entitled for the way they have tackled the
metropolitan problem.
Wisconsin has, of course, had even greater
Industrial and metropolitan problems in the Milwaukee area and
on the Wisconsin River, with all the paper mills. They have
had tremendously difficult problems in this area, and have
dealt with them aggressively. I think that we can count on
the same kind of action in both States from now on.
MR. FRIOTZ: Mr. Chairman, with your permission
I will get together with the court reporter and correct this
omission before the report is printed in the record as read.
MR. STEIN: I think Mr. Wilson's remarks are well
taken.
By the way, some of you may not know this, and I
am sure most of you don't, but years ago Mr. Wilson was a
-------
s. C. PrlntE, Jr.
craekerjack. If not the crackerjack, court reporter. He does
take notes In shorthand and he takes the best notes of anyone
I have known In the business.
However, I do think his point Is well taken about
the Job that the States have done In this area.
This Is kind of a paradox In this field, where
you get the Federal Government coming In with a report and a
study like this, oddly enough In places where the States are
doing a pretty good Job, and the difficulty Is,.1 think, we
have the same problem all over the country. Where the States
are dealing with their big, big cities, as you are here In
Minneapolis and St. Paul, you have a very, very difficult
situation.
Secondly, If the States were doing nothing and the
cities and Industries consequently were doing nothing, the
report is a relatively simple matter. Mr. Wilson has
worked with us on many occasions In the Missouri where there
was absolutely no treatment at all. People were putting
their wastes in raw, and there we could send a crew out and
they could come up with the results in a month, or, at the
most, two months.
Where a State or two States have had active
programs, we have had a considerable amount of work.
When they are in the process of trying to develop a
-------
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
district to handle this, they get buffeted about In the
Legislature. Where everyone Is providing, or almost everyone
Is providing some kind of treatment, you can't say they are
all bad, and you all have to put this In. You have to go
through the area with a scalpel and examine each plant *--o see
If they are putting in adequate treatment, and what has to be
done to improve It.
This is the complicated area that we have In
pollution control. I think the fact that we spent so long in
the study and we have this big panel, and this Is such a
complicated problem, is a reflection of the active programs
of Minnesota and Wisconsin.
If these States did not have these active programs,
we probably could conclude this conference in a half hour and
say, "Everyone is putting waste in raw. Get secondary treat-
ment," and go home. This would be very easy.
But, I do think the point that Mr. Wilson has made
Is well taken, and we have to recognize the difficulty of
the problem. It Is more difficult to deal with gradations of
color than with blaek and white,
Mr. Holmer?
MR. HOU
-------
229
A. C. Printz, Jr.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, In which
organization there IB the Public Health Service.
Conform Guide C, which appears on Page 2?, and
I would like to have Mr. Printz comment on It, suggests ari
•
average concentration of not more than 4,000 per 100 ml.
I would like to have him comment on the distinction
between this and the Public Health Service standards with
respect to municipal water sources.
MR. PRINTZ: Yes. The municipal water supply
suggested criteria by the Public Health Service is 5,000 per
100 ml. However, at the present time, the only water supplies
being taken from the rivers were within the State of Minnesota,
and where we did apply this "C" we did utilize the guide recom-
mended by the State, and that is 4,000 per 100 ml, as opposed
to the Public Health Service less stringent one of 5»000 per
100 ml.
MR. HOLMERs Will this have any effect on the
water quality criteria which are being adopted by the several
States in their correlation as we move along towards the
activities for the rest of this year? Illinois, as I under-
stand it, has adopted 5,000. Our rough draft is 5,000.
MR. PRINTZj I don't believe so.
MR. STEINj Wisconsin is 5,000 too?
MR. HOLMERs Yes.
-------
230
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
MR. STEIN: We are dealing with water. Is there
any advantage In not having uniformity with the rest of the
country on this?
MR. WISNIEWSKI: Mr. Chairman, I would like to
comment on that and ask Mr. Prlntz If this isn't related to
the number of stages of treatment of the water -- for example,
if this is associated with complete rapid sand filtration
or its equivalent with continuous post-chlorlnation.
Now, If there were additional stages ahead of thJs
or behind this, you could probably handle the water with a
lower quality from the collform standpoint.
MR. PRINTZ: I am not sure I fully understood
what you said due to the muffling of the microphone, but this
could be reworded In such a way so that it could bring out
more about the treatment; yes.
MR. WISNIEWSKI: For example, if you wanted pre-
chlorination, presettllng, and filtration.
MR. STEIN: Let me try this:
As I understand this operation, Minnesota has
It,000, and I think Mr. Holmer is exactly right in pointing
out that It is 5*000.
As you know, for years we were with the Public
Health Service, and that was the figure of 5,000. Possibly
it may not be In all the other 49 St/ates other than Minnesota,
-------
231
A, C. Prlntz, Jr.
but pretty close to those 49 deal with 5,000.
I think Wisconsin, if we are dealing with 5,000,
is complying with the Public Health Service recommendations
and the recommendations followed by the public Health Service
not only in a vast number of States, but practically all of
the States, almost unanimously. I would estimate it is 48 or
47 at the least. I know of no other State other than
Minnesota that has this 4,000.
The issue la because Wisconsin is a neighboring
State,
By the way, I agree with Minnesota that it should
be as low as possible, but with the one State in the Union, as
far as I know, that is a little lower, is this the time to get
Wisconsin down to that lower standard just because they happen
to have that wonderful neighbor next-door?
(Laughter.)
So, if it is 5>000 and Minnesota wants to maintain
4,000 and exceed the requirements, what is the difference?
MR. WISNIEWSKI: I still don't think my point
was caught.
The point I am making is that the coliform con-
centration in the raw water is normally used in determining
the number of stages of water treatment that will be necessary
to produce a satisfactory potable water, and we may have a
-------
232
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
situation here where this 4,000 is being geared to an existing
water treatment plant which does not have all the stages that
are needed, for example, to properly handle a 5,000 per 100 ml
water, but can handle the 4,000 per 100 ml water, so that It
isn't a question of the collform standard alone in relation
to drinking water supplies. It is the coliform standard,
plus the number of stages of treatment that are provided.
MR. PRINTZ: Correct.
MR. WILSON: Mr. Chairman, on that point, may I
ask Mr. Wlsnlewski a question?
Are there any municipal water supplies being
drawn from the Mississippi River or the St. Croix River, fcr
that matter, anywhere below the Twin Cities, drawn past the
south Wisconsin line?
MR. WISNIEWSKI: I don't know of any. Do you,
Mr. Muegge?
MR. MUEGGE: No, there are none.
MR. WILSON: There are rone. I think the nearest
one below the Twin Cities is Davenport and Rock Island.
MR. MUEGGE: It should be recognized, however,
that we are establishing a crite* a which may become a
standard, and this will probably exist for some time. There
is no reason, therefore, why the 5,000 limit that has been
used throughout the country for water supplies with
-------
233
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
sedimentation gravity filters and post-chlcrlnation, should
not prevail,
I would say that if Minnesota wished to be more
stringent, It could still do so in their operations within
Minnesota, We have plants and have raw water quality that
has a coliform content of much higher than 5,000, and they
are not producing a water that conforms with that established
by the United States Public Health Service for a safe drinking
water supply. Actually, I think your whole solution would be
to continue to add to your water plants and produce water from
a poor source that will be wholesome and healthful for the
people.
MR. WILSON: Mr. Chairman, might I just add that
when 1 called attention to the fact that there are no present
municipal water supplies being taken from the Mississippi in
this stretch of the river, I am in nu way implying that the
standards should be lower beyond the needs of existing uses
or even of the possibilities that with the increasing popula-
tion it may be necessary for some of these communities to take
water from the Mississippi River. Therefore, I for one am in
favor of holding the standards to the highest practicable
level and letting you call attention to the fact that the
Minnesota Water Pollution Control Commission has imposed the
very highest reasonable standards in adopting the standards
-------
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
which it did on the Mississippi River, especially above the
St. Anthony Palls Dam, where the supply ia taken from the
Mississippi pool.
fhey are now in litigation and in a battle which
is going tc the Supreme Court because that standard was
attacked as being too high.
MR. STUN: Do you have anything, Mr. Poston?
MR. POSTON: Mr. Chairman, It appears to me that
inasmuch as other States along the Mississippi River have a
standard of 5»000 coliform per 100 ml in such situations, that
If we want to get or. with the rest of the program we should
Insert "5,000" Instead of the "4,000" in the report here, and
that Minnesota can then hold to their more restrictive require-
ments within the State of Minnesota.
This is probably the only way we can agree to a
staniard for this particular place today.
MR. STEIN; I don't think there Is really any dis-
agreement here. We are all aware of Minnesota's 4,000. I
don't think they are going to object to 5»000 in the contigu-
ous waters.
MR. SMITH: If Minnesota is 4,000, why go up to
5,000?
MR. STEIN: Well, here is the situation; Looking
beyond this, obviously, we are going to have to set a standard
for interstate waters.
-------
A. C. Printz, Jr. 235
MR. SMITH: This la not what we are j,>lng infcra-
state.
MR, STEIN: Walt a minute. So we are coming up
with a requirement here today.
I don«t know that you can expect the Federal
Government to require one standard for the water intake of
Wisconsin and another standard for the water Intake of
Minnesota In areas that are absolutely contiguous to each
other, or even anywhere else. We have these collform standards
for raw water Intake recommended anywhere throughout the
country.
Now, this does not prevent anyone from adopting
a more rigid standard, or more rigid requirement.
The Public Health Service Is the guardian of the
health of the people here, and, endorsed by the State and
Territorial Health Office, nave come out with this figure of
5,000 that they have endorsed throughout the country.
When, to the best of my knowledge and belief — and if I am
wrong, I would like to be corrected — the United States has
adopted that 5*000 figure, on what basis do you suggest that
we in the Federal Government go to Wisconsin and tell them
that they have to come down to ^,000, just because their
wonderful neighbor across the river has that now?
Suppose we were dealing with Illinois and Indiana.
-------
236
A. C. Printz, Jr.
There would be no question that «e would endorse 5.000 for
I
both. Or New York or New Jersey.
What basis do we have for asking Wisconsin to
come down to 4,000, when the Public Health Service has recom-
mended 5*000, when *»8 States, as I far as I know, have the
5,000 figure, and we have plant after plant with a raw water
Intake of 5»000 turning out a 3&fe and potable water supply
with no Incidents of disease?
Go ahead, Mr. Muegge.
MR. MUEOOE; Mr. Chairman, as long as this has
been discussed here, I would suggest we leave it up to the
executive session to make a determination.
MR. STEIN: Right.
Are there any further questions, Mr. Wlsnlewski?
MR. WISNIEWSKI; I would just like to suggest that
one possible solution to this might oe taking the table on
Page 26 and striking the "C" out of the section or the St.
Croix River, and just use the "A" there.
I can't understand why the "C" was included. Is
there any water Intake on the St. Crolx now?
MR. PRINTZ: No, there is not.
MR. WISNIEWSKI: If we Just strike the "C'' there,
it would not appl: to any Wisconsin waters, because the other
section applies to the Mississippi River above Anthony Falls.
-------
237
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
MR. STEIN: All right.
Mr. Prlntm, I have two fast questions. Why did
you cone down to three parts per million for oxygen In some
of the places?
MR. PRINTZ: We came to three parts per million
oxygen In two of the places, one the reach of the river on
the Mississippi below the Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary
District, and also on the lower 30-mile reach of the Minnesota,
the reason being that the levels we called for, the three
milligrams per liter, are the minimum dissolved oxygen levels
which will occur only at that minimal flow of seven consecu-
tive days once In ten years. As It turns out —
MR. STEIN: Just a minute. Don't go too fast.
The question here is this: Assuming the present
loadings, supposing the, place grows and you get bigger load-
Ings, what do you do? If we are going to hit three at the low
ebb once for seven consecutive days every ten years, that is
all right; but if you put the figure 3 in* that will permit
new portions to come in and lower the requirement to 3*
At the risk of oversimplification here, 3 parts
per million gof oxygen Is not a very desirable level for flih
life for reasonably good sport fish. Striking towards the
lower levels, 4 or 5 Is much better.
MR. PRINTZ: I will give you a bit of background
-------
238
A. C, Prlnt2, Jr.
as to why this was done.
As we Indicated in the report as I presented it,
if all the conditions were met we would have available certain
water uses in those reaches of the river. As it turns out,
by our calculation, If all those conditions are met, there
will be on the Mississippi River in that reach for about 75
percent of the time a dissolved oxygen of 5""milligrams, or
higher.
MR. STEIN: That Is assuming again, Mr. Prlntz,
the present loadings. I hope the area is going to grow.
If we give someone a requirement, if we are going
to have 5 parts per million 75 percent of the time, let's say
it; but if we give anyone a loading of 3* we can permit new
Industry and new cities to come in witn relatively small treat-
ment and go down to that level for 100 percent of the time,
not 75 or 25 percent.
MR. PRINTZ: Sir, we specified loadings with
this purpose in mind: Our engineering studies, as well as
the mathematical model developed for the river, have given us
the allowable loading which can be put into the critical
reaches to Insure maintenance of this oxygen level. We have
not attempted to apportion this maximum loading out, and we
are recognizing that this is --
MR. STEIN: I am aware of that.
-------
239
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
MR. PRINTZ: Yea.
MR. STEIN: But let's try to translate what you
have done here, sir.
I recognize what you have done In the engineering
way. You based your control on the loadings when you put
3 parts per million in the stream.
MR. PRINTZ; Yes.
MR. STEIN: What is going to happen five years
from now when someone has this 3 parts per million of oxygen,
which isn't very good, and they say, "We can Increase the
loadings 75 percent of the time Immediately and we won't do
violence to your stream"?
I think that when we get down to this, the key
control to the stream is that you have the water quality in the
stream, and then we work back to the effluent requirements and
the effluent standards and the loading requirements.
Once we have lowered the requirement in that
stream to 3» and you are depending on your effluent require-
ment or your loadings at the present time to keep that up,
it seems to me you have left the door open for someone to
chip away at that and chip away at that. And who can surely
maintain that 3? You don't mean 3 here; you mean 5 here at
least 75 percent of the time; you mean 4 some part of the time;
and 3 for seven consecutive days once every ten years. I think
-------
240
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
we have given everyone an open-door Invitation to get down.
By the way, I raised this point with the States,
because I think we should have the same viewpoint and
philosophic approach here. Any number you want la all right
with me, but I think setting the lowest depth that we hit
once In ten years as a requirement Is an invitation to go down
to that, Instead of keep it up.
I suggest you keep in touch with that.
I have one further question. Turn to Page 29.
When you talk in terms of a 20 percent of the mass
of 5-day BOD, that could mean an 80 percent reduction in BOD,
more or less. Is that correct?
MS. PRINTZ: That Is part of the general recom-
mendations .
MR. STEIN: Now, you talk in terms that are to
meet an immediate problem, and I think that is right.
Now, as I look at your 80 percent, if obviously
you get 80 percent, you don't have to use secondary treatment.
Then we come to the question: What do we mean by
secondary treatment?
We give you the question again. You have two
choices here, and I an leaving out the intermediate ones of
adding chemicals for purposes of simplification, unless you
want to bring it in, but we go In there with a trickling
-------
241
A. C. Printz, Jr.
filter, or an activated sludge plant. With an activated
sludge plant properly operated, you should get 90 and above,
and not 80. If you are going to run a trickling filter and
you are operating under optimum conditions, you are going to
get an 80 percent reduction.
However, the likelihood of your running under
optimum conditions all the time and hitting that 80 percent,
as I think we all know, is remote.
So here we are faced with this dilemma, and I ask
you to do this: If we are talking about an 80 percent reduc-
tion, are we fooling ourselves and kidding the public by
thinking that putting in an activated sludge, or, rather, a
trickling filter, we are going to get 80 percent all the time?
If we are going to run in the 70»s or 75 and this is what we
want, let's say so, but if you are talking in terms of 90
percent treatment, let's get up to the 90 percent.
Now, as far as I can see, we are left with this:
A trickling filter plant which will operate at optimum
efficiency, which ia almost impossible to achieve to get this,
or an indifferently run activated sludge treatment plant.
Why the 80 percent recommendation?
MR. PRINTZ: Well, the 80 percent was recommended
to take care of all of these smaller sources of waste to the
same area, and, of course, in addition, to take the place of
-------
242
A. C. Printz, Jr.
a specific recommendation in which loadings are specified.
MR. STEIN: In other words, you say the treatment
plants in Minneapolis-St. Paul probably would have to have a
higher degree of removal than this?
MR. PRINTZ: Yes.
MR. STEIN: All right.
In other words, they will probably have to have
a well run activated sludge plant, or its equivalent. Is that
right?
MR. PRINTZ: Yes.
MR. STEIN: Pine. In other words, you have put
this general recommendation in for the smaller plants?
MR. PRINTZ: Yes.
MR. STEINi This is what I am getting at. What
do you specify, a trickling filter?
MR. PRINTZ: There will be both.
MR. STEIN: All right.
Are we looking for violations when we talk in
these terms? In other words, are we going to be faced with
the situation where, when we talk about this 80 percent removal
around the smaller plants in Wisconsin and Minnesota around
here, we find the bulk of these plants not being SO, but in a
range between 70 and 80?
Again, I an talking for the State agencies, as
-------
A. C. Printz, Jr.
well as us. This Is the most vexing kind of regulatory
problem you get, where the fellows are not really blatantly
polluting, but they are all below a specific requirement.
I am raising this question with you, because if
we are going to look at this stringently and we mean the 80
percent, are we going to pass up the 70 and 75 percent, and
how many plants do you get like that?
Maybe we will leave that until later too.
MR. WISNIEWSKI: I am Just trying to do some
figuring here.
MP. STEIN: All right.
MR. WISNIEWSKI: Actually, there Is an Inconsistency
here, where you say that municipal wastes should be treated so
that you have Just 20 percent of the mass remaining and then
accept a permissible loading at 68,500 pounds for the stretch
governing the Metropolitan Sewage District, plus South St.
Paul. The Metropolitan Sewage District alone has 268,000
pounds of BOD coming in. This 68,000 represents 26 percent,
so that actually by using the limiting loading, you are only
asking for 7*1 percent removal; whereas in the other section
on the top of Page 29 you are asking for 80 percent removal.
MR. PRINT2; The specific recommendation on the
Mississippi River referred to a maximum 800 of 68,500 pounds per
day of 5-day 20°C BOD from- that reach of river which would include
-------
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
both the Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District and South St.
Paul,
The district right now has secondary treatment
under construction, and hopefully will be up to design
capacity -- that la, design at the time -- by around August
of this year. That 75 percent I believe will still on3y take
it down to about 98,500 pounds per day. We are calling for
a total from them as well as South St. Paul of below 68,500,
which would mean, depending upon how the State would apportion
out the allowable loading, there could be a much higher
degree of removal reiulred of the Sanitary District than the
80 percent specified under the general recommendations.
MR. WISNIEWSKI: The actual figures show that
68,500 represents fb percent of the 268,000 that is now being
discharged, or was being discharged out of the Metropolitan
Sewage District plant. Divide 268,000 into 68,500 times 100,
and you will find that that is one-sixth, or 26 percent
remaining.
MR. STEIN: Let me go to this again.
I can see the recommendations you have made for
St. Paul and Minneapolis and maybe some of the industries for
reducing their wastes.
In order to meet this general requirement, why
don't you pick one of these small towns here? What would you
-------
245
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
recommend? Say we have this requirement. Do you know any
small town here that needs a waste treatment facility that
you have recommended in the area? What would you recommend?
MR. PRINT?: Are you throwing that question to me?
MR. STEIN: Yes, to you.
MR. PRINTZ: I myself woujd probably recommend
an activated sludge plant. However, there are trickling filter
plants within the study area that are giving consistently
higher than 80 percent removal.
We have built in a checks and balance system here
by requiring minimum laboratory conditions and records as well
to be submitted to the State for evaluation. This is not
being done at the present time, but we think it will go a long
way towards Insuring proper operation of these treatment
plants.
MR. STEIN: Do you think with trickling filters
you can get over 80 percent?
MR. PRINT?: With proper operation, yes.
MR. STEIN: All right. Again, this is the point
I want to make.
I agree with you that you would recommend It
would be safe to put in the activated sludge plant. The
notion that they can get 80 percent removal with a trickling
•
filter plant is, I would say, problematical at best, but
-------
246
A. C. Printz, Jr.
it requires a kind of management of treatment plants that
at least I have not experienced in the United States ,
Maybe you are different here, but I don't know
why you should be, because you have town councils, and they
have Just so much money. The tendency, when you get a
trickling filter plant, is that it is put there on automatic
pilot and they let the thing run by itself.
I think here maybe we could do this with a hard
look at reality. What I am asking is that we don't come back
in five years, when we have all these plants built, and find
90 percent of the small towns with technical violations —
with everyone that doesn't put in an activated sludge plant in
violation of this operation, having somewhere between 60 and
80 percent removal.
This may or may not be a critical situation or a
pollution situation, but If we are going to put this in, I
think we should give the States something which they can
check off fairly rapidly and enforce.
MR. PRINTZ: One comment I would like to make to
Mr. Wisnlewskl: I believe the 268,000 to which he was
referring perhaps came out of Table 3» relating to the
Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary District.
I might point out that these are constituents
discharged after there Is approximately 30 percent treatment
-------
247
A. C. Printz, Jr. '
arid may not be the influent to which you were referring when
dividing It by 68,500.
MR. WISNIEWSKI: The Influent would be consider-
ably higher, and they would have to go well over 90 percent,
MR. PRINTZ: Again I say we did not attempt to
apportion the loading out or speak in terms of percent removal
for the larger waste sources.
We felt our Job was to determine what the maximum
allowable loadings to that stream could be from any sources
within a specific reach In order to maintain the minimum
conditions as specified. We would leave this up to the
State to apportion, and we would hope that the State, in
apportioning out the allowable loadings, would take cogni-
zance of future growth and would perhaps set aside a certain
amount of that allowable loedlng for such future growth,
MR. STEIN: Are there any farther questions or
comments?
MR. MUEQCE: I would like to ask Mr. Printz a
few questions.
Mr. Frlnfcz, another proposition: On Page 20,
under the St. Croix River, in the last paragraph, In your
second sentence, you Indicate;
"Better control of natural and agricultural
sources Is required if nutrient concentrations
-------
A. C. Printz, Jp.
are to be lowered sufficiently to reduce algal
densities in late summer."
Have you anything In mind as to the method by
which you are going to accomplish this?
MR. PRINT?: Well, basically, we might say that
at this time about all we can do is endeavor to work with
the agencies that are responsible in this area, such as the
Soil Conservation Districts, to indoctrinate them into the
problems of nutrients and help them to develop and put forth
the conservation programs which would lead to a reduction of
nutrients into the stream.
Here again we point this out as a need, but do
not call for any specific recommendations.
MR. MUEOQE: Then in the next sentence it refers
to greater control of discharges from boats.
As you perhaps know, Wisconsin is exempt now on
the St. Croix River, but I Just call attention to that.
MR. PRINTZ; This boat thing, of course, as it
says, Includes "as well as the bacteriological quality," so
here again we are speaking of debris, and other unsightly
things, such as beer cans.
MR. M'JEQGE: Wouldn't It be well to have a recom-
mendation in the record that holding tanks be provided?
MR. PRIHT?: Because of this difference between
-------
A. C. Printz, Jr.
the two States, the recommendation was prepared as It Is,
In terms of adequate treatment,
I am afraid we would have to leave this up to
the States to define what "adequate treatment" would be.
MR. ODEGA.RD: Mr. Chairman, speaking from a
position in between the two States, the Minnesota-Wisconsin
Boundary Area Commission is requesting that ooth States adopt
the Wisconsin tandard of holding tariKS, and we do have legis-
lation In that connection, as well as the Federal Government,
to see fit to support this sort of a standard.
MR. STEIN: You mean jn beats?
MR. OD2QARE: On boats.
MR. STEIN: Just holding tanks?
MR. ODEOARD: Yes.
MR. STEIN: Hew about the new toilets that are
being developed?
You mean to hold until you come on the land?
MR. ODIGARD: To hold It.
MR. STEIN: How about the treatment devices on
the boats?
MR. ODEGARD: The conclusion of the Commission,
having studied this, is that they are inadequate In local
situations, as far as local problems in our own rivers.
MR. STEIN: I guess we should leave this on the
-. ,»»__ „».«_.. w «.,.,» 4m. UU«*- An imtt An u4«-
-------
250
A. C. Printz, Jr.
on the boat, whether you hold them, put them in tanks and
hold them and then dispose of them when you get to shore, or
do you have an adequate waste disposal method on board ship?
Now, of late, because of the great Interest In the
problem, there have been some devices coming forward which
cost In the price range of the average small boat owner,
which may prove highly valuable and work, and the Federal
Government is In the process now of evaluating these devices.
You may have come to your conclusions that
holding tanks are the way out, and the only way out, I don't
think our Department or the Federal Government has come to
that conclusion yet.
We are In the very active process now of having
several projects going on testing these devices, so, in
answering your specific question, I doubt very much whether
the Federal Government at the present time would plug for
just a holding tank ordinance. You may have a device on the
boat, or a holding tank, depending on which works, but I don't
think the scientific Judgment is that the holding tank is the
only reasonable device to use on a small boat.
MR. ODEOARD: The recommendation that the Commis-
sion arrived at was not a scientific or a chemical basis, but
on the basis of the local situation, where boats are lined up
along shore and kids are swimming all about them.
-------
251
A. C. Printz, Jr.
Even chlorinating the sewage Is not really
appropriate in a situation like that, and, therefore, the
Commission Is making a recommendation for legislation in both
States to get together on this particular point,
MR. STEIN: You very well way have a point there.
I don't doubt that in the least, that you may be in local
situations In your State where, because of the nature of the
water system, particularly in lakes, you don't grind up sewage
into the lake, even though it would be chlorinated, because
of the nutrients that would be coning into it. This may be
entirely appropriate.
Your question was, will the Federal Government
support you on this. My feeling now is, and I have worked with
State legislation, that I am not sure our scientific staff has
given us clear enough signals whsre we could go ahead with
that and put that out as legislation necessarily that we would
support.
I would suggest that in the situation you have,
particularly In your boundary area with all those snail lakes,
that there be a Judgment that you want no wastes put in the
lakes, treated or untreated, because you want to protect those
lakes from overfertillzation, and eutrophlcation might be a
fine administrative point, and you could go ahead.
I would be glad to come up and talk to other
-------
252
A. C. Printz, Jr.
people on the local situation. I don't think you are going
to get the Federal Government to come out with a statute
proposing that within the real close future. We have a lot of
work to do yet.
MR. ODEGARD: I was thinking of the support in
terms of Federal boats.
Would they conform to the State laws?
MR. STEIN: Oh, yes, I would hope we would.
Again, let me say this: We deal with independent
Federal agencies. I would think if we came to a Judgment with
your State groups that the way to manage pollution control on
X body of water in an inland locked body of water, that the
thing to do in that body of water was to provide holding
canks, we would be prepared to go ahead and work with you and
recommend that for all the Federal boats in the area, surely.
MR. WILSON: Mr. Chairman, may I Just make a
comment on that problem?
I want to concur very strongly in the comments
made by the Chairman. The Minnesota-Wisconsin Interstate
Commission has very gravely oversimplified the problem. This
is not simply a case of an agreement between the States of
Minnesota and Wisconsin, because the Mississippi River simply
teems with boats that come all the way up from the Gulf of
Mexico and from the Ohio River and the Missouri River. Unless
-------
253
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
two things are done, first, to pro ide adequate disposal
facilities all along the banks where boats may pump out the
contents of their holding tanks, and, second, to have the
same regulations In force all the way up and down the
Mississippi River and the Ohio River and the Missouri River,
and even around on the Gulf of Kexlco, so that the boats of
traveler? coming up the river will all be equipped with
the type of holding tanks, it is simply foolish for Minnesota
and Wisconsin, even assuming they could agree on it, to adopt
any such restriction.
This is really a Federal problem, to secure the
adoption all the way up and down these Interstate navigable
waters of a uniform requirement which all the boats can comply
with.
MR. STEIN: Mr. Muegge?
MR. MUEGGE: I have one other question — in fact,
1 have two, one that I would like to have a comment on, and
that Is regarding the paragraph in the left-hand column on
Page 29 at the bottom of the page entitled "Phosphate Removal."
"New waste treatment facilities be designed
to provide adequate capacity of individual units
and components as well as maximum flexibility in
order to permit later modification in operating
procedures so as to effect the greatest amount of
-------
A. C. Printz, Jr.
254
phosphate removal."
Does the Federal Water Pollution Control
Administration have In mind what may be required In the* future
In the way of phosphate removal that should be incorporated
in existing plants?
MR. PRINTZ: Do we have In mind what will be
required In the way of phosphate removal so that they can be
incorporated Into existing plants?
MR. MUEGGE: Yes.
MR. PRINTZ; As I have indicated, we feel we do
have Information of this type. Mr. Wisnlewskl does not feel
that we have it of this type, because our work
that has been carried out has been done so In the South.
However, as I have Indicated, the Federal
Government is sponsoring three demonstration projects around
the country for phosphate removal, one of which will be in the
Midwest in the City of Detroit, This is already under con-
struction at this time, and we will soon, I hope, have results
which we can make available to the engineers from Wisconsin,
and to the other northern States.
MR. MUEOOE: Very good.
MR. STEIN: All right.
MR. MUEQGE: I have one question left, which Is
a matter of information.
Your records show a considerable fecal count,
-------
255
A. C. Prlntz, Jr.
coliform count, in some of the Industrial wastes. I would
like to pick out a few here like --
MR. PRINTZ: Which table are you on?
MR. HOLMER: Table 4.
MR. MUEGQE: There Is ^ne on Table 4 above the
Pittsburgh Plate Glass. Why do they have a high fecal coli-
form count?
MR. PRINTZ: This Is the Pittsburgh Plate Glass
Company?
MR. MUEGGE; No, the one above that. That is the
Foot Tanning Company. I'm sorry. I will find one In a minute.
I gave you the wrong one.
How about the American Crystal Sugar Company?
Why do they have a high fecal coliform, a high fecal strep?
MR. PRINTZ: I believe this you will find would
be inherent within the type of processes that they utilize,
this being working with sugar beets. I think we have found
the same thing over in the Red River of the North.
MR. STEIN: Off the record.
(Discussion off the record. )
MR. MUEGQE: As I remember the report on this
particular Industry, the sewage i» discharged to the community
sewage system.
MR. STEIN: This may be. We don't know that all
-------
'Jr-
the sewage Is discharged to It. This is a question of an
in-plant operation.
We have had these questions come up before. We
hav^ always found fecal strep In some quantities, and we found
thorn recently in pulp mills.
When someone has raised a question I Ike Mr-. Muegge
just raised, wren we investigated these cases, we always
found extraordinarily high counts in the past, and a con-
tamination source of someone's pumping these organisms
into what we felt was a culture medium. They were proliferat-
ing very rapidly.
Generally, when this happens and you get these
high counts and you find the source, everyone is delighted
to stop it right away.
MR. MUEOQE: I would Just like to ask Mr. Print*
if thry made any special study to find out what caused that?
MR. PRINT?: In reply to that, and reviewing the
Page IV-3£ in your text concerning the waste source from the
American Crystal Sugar Company, to the best of my recollec-
tion there were no special In-plant studies carried out.
I do believe, however, that at the present
time this would be an academic question, because the
American Crystal Sugar Company has recently Installed a closed
-------
257
ft. C. Printz, Jr.
system, which I believe we wilJ hear about later and which
will update our report.
The reason I would net be in a position to
elaborate on it Is that I believe It is an academic question.
Pffi. MUEGGE: Alt right.
MR. STEIN: Off the record.
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. STEIN: I think at this point we will take a
ten-minute recess.
I think the portion after we recess is going to
be a very vital one. We are going to hear from Dr. Hargraves
of Minnesota.
Minnesota has, as I understand it, some very
special views and special problems with relation to this.
For those people from Minnesota who are In the audience, this
may well be the most productive part of the session to listen
to. You have heard the Federal Report and Wisconsin, and I
think It is only fair that we make every effort to give Dr.
Hargraves the full audience and hear what he has to say about
that.
With that, we will recess for ten minutes.
(Whereupon a recess was had.)
-------
258
M. M. Margraves
MR. STEIN: May we reconvene?
Dr. Margraves, will you proceed?
STATEMENT OF DR. M. M. HARQRAVES,
CONFEREE AND CHAIRMAN OP THE MINNESOTA
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL COMMISSION
DR. HARORAVES: Mr, Chairman, Fellow Conferees,
ladles and Gentlemen:
Part of this will be prepared. We are going to
divide this Into two sections. I an primarily going to Intro-
duce the subject and give a little talk, and Lyle Smith, who
knows, of course, so much more than I about the technical
aspects of this, this being In water pollution, will have a
statement, I believe, that you can use.
The Minnesota Water Pollution Control Commission
does welcome, for many reasons, the reconvening of this
conference.
I had prepared a statement. In fact, as you may
well have guessed, as newspaper Items came out over the last
four or five days, I became more and more agitated, until I
an afraid my wife thought she was going to have to put me away
for a little while until I calmed down.
(Laughter.)
-------
S59
M. M. Margraves
Consequently, each day I wrote statements, and
they became more and more or less and less violent -- I will
put It that nay — and the things that I do have to say are
In part Just going to be said off the top of my head, because
I have had fourteen years now on the Water Pollution Control
Commission and one needs about that long at least, being a
physician of my type, perhaps to absorb all of the things that
happen and that are of importance in water pollution control.
To me this has been a challenge, not just from
the standpoint of technicalities, but this is a socio-
ecological-economic problem, and it has far greater ramifica-
tions from ny standpoint than the number of colon bacilli that
are found in somebody's outlet in a certain stretch of the
river, or I would have been off the Commission long ago.
I feel that people who get interested in these
things, Just as many of you who are on many commissions and
many committees, do it out of a public service spirit.
I am on the Water Pollution Control Commission,
as you very well know, as a volunteer without salary, and on
my own time as a physician. So is Mr* Tuveson, an attorney,
and so is Mr. Scott, who represented industry. The other four
members of our Commission are ex offielo men from the govern-
ment, and their work piles up on their desks, but their salary
goes on, as does it, I presume, if they have to get out of
-------
M. M. Hargraves 26°
town. t
We art at a cross-roads in Minnesota and we have
seen it coning. People might well have said* "you should have
seen it a long tine before." Many things have happened In
the last six years.
When Chester Wilson was my tutor as Chairman of
the Water Pollution Control Commission back In the 1950's, we
•et rather lackadaisically, I would say, at ten o'clock in the
morning, and we were usually through at about three, and we
often held quarterly meetings, or meetings every two months.
It la a little irritating to have it thrown up to you by cer-
tain individuals In power that we are not efficient because we
are not full-time, because we meet quarterly.
Sinee Z have been Chairman of the Commission, we
have one to two days a Month at 8:30 in the morning, and we
have worked until exhaustion, around 5 or 6 o'clock at night.
This goes on week after week.
This problem has multiplied, and It has multiplied
in large part because of difficulties of getting some of these
Jobs done. If it is not tremendous, it is horrendous.
I think you deserve to know where some of these
things arise and the fact that unhappily Minnesota may not
be able to qualify by June 196? and we will be having this
enforcement taken on by the Federal Government.
-------
261
M. M. Hargraves
How, this 10 a sad situation, but it has arisen
from a aeries of circumstances.
As I say. I am a physician. I take care of
patients. I can hardly stop from thinking in the terns of
a physician, because the river system which we have I consider,
and have for a long time, a very sick patient.
There is a time when we are called in consultation,
and in the practice of medicine, since I am primarily a con-
sultant in certain diseases, leukenlas, lymphomas, blood
diseases and others, I often have patients referred to me, and
sometimes, because patients prefer to com* back to you because
this happens to be your specialty, even though you return them
to their home doctor with recommendations and the like, some-
tines they come back to me, and this is not an ethical thing
to happen because I have supposedly stolen patients.
we called the Federal Government in — the family
did, at least; the Commission didn't (Laughter) — the family
called in consultation, and, if you will remember, three years
ago we had a long two-day seaslon. With all due respect to
Mr. Stein and his tremendous schedule and his need to catch
the plane thirty minutes after I read my last statement, this
actually was the end of our conference so far as this sick
patient was concerned. Then, two and a half years later, a
week ago, or two weeks ago last Saturday, in fact, this big,
-------
262
N. M. Hargravea
square box of six volumes arrived on my front porch as a
preliminary consultation for me to digest to help take care of
the patient.
In the meantime, other things have happened,
such as there was an article In the paper, because It has
been hinted that we will not be able to meet the June 1967
deadline, which we felt sure that we could. When we first got
word of this when this bill was signed a year and a half ago,
we took our staff and divided It up Into teams of four, four
•ten In four groups. We started holding hearings, and taese
four task forces were to go out and carry out what is re':*ssa~y
In our law, which I will get to in a few Moments.
•>,.
Now, two years ago, McCallum in the Public Health
I
Service hid a study made, which I think has always been an
important study, and I am happy to note that the Federal Govern-
ment has Included It — you may find it on Page 21, if you wish
— but in this study they took representative States, and from
the amount of work and the amount of water and various other
things that technicians used to arrive at a figure, they felt
that Minnesota could get along with Its water and ita water
problems at that time with a staff of 58 people, but ita
desirable staff was 1(A people.
At the present time, we have been allotted 40, and
at the present time we have 27. The four task forces have
-------
263
M. M. Margraves
been completely lost. Other States have been able to pay
more Money, and I'm sorry, Mr. Stein, that the Federal
Government didn't get more of them, because I would have had
something on you, but you did take our biologist away from
us (laughter), and this Is all. The engineers have gone
elsewhere.
You cannot run a sewage disposal plant and a
sanitary district and a water pollution control commission
without competent engineers, and with a salary schedule such
as we have, and by sos>e of my Judicious writings to different
States I find the average salaries are lower than the median,
even including many of the southern States, which is no re-
flection on the southern States — they are considered not to
be as high In qua!ity with water pollution control because of
•any physical as Hell as thermal factors as the north is.
•;.';ils m«!ans then that this problem has arisen,
that this report has been given, that this seemingly participa-
tion of the Federal Government has not lived up to my expecta-
tions. It has not lived up to some of the expectations of our
staff.
Me expacted from some of the wording of the law,
as well as out of feh« context of the proceedings of the first
one, that we would have such cooperation, but so far as this
part or this stretch of the waters of Minnesota Is concerned,
-------
N. N. Hargraves
this la the flrat time Mr. Stein and I have met, or the first
time tone of the others have seen each other again, to get
together periodically to discuss the things and aee how the
whole thing was going philosophically, ecologically, socio-
logically, as well aa the technical figures.
MOM, If this country of nearly 200 Million people
doesn't believe those facts of life In dealing with Its sewage
disposal problems, we are going to be In a sad way.
The contrary night be said of what was done on
the Rainy River, and without Federal help except that It was
International. With frequent conferences with the Interna-
tional Commission tilth Canada and the United States, Minnesota
arid Ontario, this entire problem was studied, conferences were
held, there was agreement, and we have given the paper com-
panies and the cities up there an adequate opportunity, we
have held hearings, and when we were agreed, without need of
the Federal Government, even though 1u Is an international
water, we have already issued the orders for the paper com-
panies in Baudette and In International Falls.
There are economic repercussions to this thing
since, unless my memory serves me wrong, this may cost the
paper company $10 million at one crack. These things don't
come cheaply.
Something ought to be said to the people
-------
265
N. N. Htrgraves
downstream who have been complaining about the upstream,
because again these various social aspects were taken into
account.
In the ward, every patient you see has a past
history, as well as a present history, and this patient has
had a bad past history of two Mars, the Second World War and
the Korean War, the lack of engineers, the lack of personnel,
the lack of material, and obviously the first plant on tne
Mississippi system that we were proud of certainly went Into
disrepute. I an sure that Mr. Mick and Mr. Robins and those
out there have done their best in order to upgrade this plant
as best as they could.
But do you overnight just build another plant
because at the moment you have so much sewage?
A five-year study was given, and they spent the
money for it, a five-year study to see -hat they would need.
At that time we didn't have the so-called "pill." (laughter)
It was a very unfortunate thing. We didn't have some of the
Agricultural advantages we have now, and people began to
flock to the big city until, as you well know, we have a
complex of over around 80 or 90 communities, many of which
aren't even near a stream, and this has become a problem that
has given rise actually to the study.
When the five-year study was up, we ordered, if
-------
M. M. Hargravie
»,
I may say so to Mr. Mick — I think we did — he was ready)
anyway. They went ahead and they spent $23 million, I under-
stand, In updating a plant and moving a railroad and filling
In and building more Islands, and various other things, and
have had a plant which can, and I hope without difficulties
will be upgraded perhaps 90 or 92 percent before too long.
Was this a waate of tine? Did the river suffer
ao badly following this study which may project us into the
next thirty or forty year* to handle the problem? They spent
another $500,000, so that we can still go on and plan sewage
and sewage disposal facilities to take care of an even larger
population If the pill Is aa effective as we hope (laughter).
Well, now, this la the patient and this is the
problem. South St. Paul la In the sane fix, and they have
been doing upgrading in-plant work. They have a bad situa-
tion, we know. We have ridden then. We will see that they
get on the ball eventually and get this taken care of.
We aren't loath to accept the help of the Federal
Government on this, and I want to say tvat the work that they
have done has been of tremendous help. But I think you ought
to know that thlc lesa than 300 miles of river, which waa
studied by a ataff which I think reached a maximum of 32,
with our ataff doing everything at Its low ebb of 27 at the
preaent tlae for carrying out the State work — this raxlmun
-------
26?
N. N. Hargraves
staff of 32 people took three years to do this study and
coat three quarters of a Million dollars.
As a State organization, I think you can see that
if we duplicate this sort of thing, it Is a problem, and a
problem that has to be net.
One of the difficulties vae pointed out today as
far as legislation is concerned. Very often — well, I
shouldn't say that and I won't say it. Legislation is passed
by lawyers and, for some reason for the most part, with due
regard to my friend, Mr. Tuveson, on the Commission, lawyers
often don't think biologically or ecologically, or appreciate
some of the problems that are necessary to be net in planning
working out population livability. Doctors don't often do it
either, unhappily, but this enters largely into the problem.
When we take on a project now — and I want you
to get this — when we take on a project to do anything about
streams in classification, in setting standards, we have to
meet the criteria that was set up by the legislature.
Now, in the so-called Rosenneler Bill, they
accepted the New York type of criteria, in which they set up
certain classes of water, very much as you have seen, I an
sure, in the criteria that we have set up. New York was the
first to work this out, to «y knowledge, and it took them
well over fifteen yeara to classify the waters of Mew York.
-------
268
M. N, Margraves
New York does not have the amount of water we have, although
they are a large State, and, aa I say, for the cost and the
work and the amount of this done for this less than 300 miles
of stream, we still have 4,000 miles of interstate streams
that have to be classified where we have to set standards.
Fortunately, as I say, the Red River of the North
has been finished, and the Rainy ftlver has been finished, but it
leaves us with an appalling number yet of areas to be done,
Including small streams such as the Cedar River that goes
through Austin, the Blue River that goes down through Iowa,
and so on. These are all interstate waters.
Now, before we aet standards, we have these many
criteria to meet and we have to take into account a tremendous
number of things, and if you want to read the law, on Page 2k
you will see what faces us in the next five weeica — not Page
24 of this, but of the Water Pollution Control Statute.
But let me Just say that it is recognized that due
to variable factors no single standard of quality and purity
of the waters is applicable to all waters of the State or to
different segments of the same waters.
This, I think, you often forget, because the
Mississippi isn't one body of water.
The second one has to do with conducting public
hearings after due notice.
-------
269
M. M, Hargrav«8
"In adopting the classification of waters
and the standards of purity and quality above
mentioned, the CoMlsalon shall give consideration
to the size, depth, surface area involved, volume,
direction, rate of flow, stream grade, temperature
of water.
"(b) The character of the district bordering
said waters and Its peculiar suitability for the
particular uses, and with a view to conserving the
value of the sane and encouraging the *oat appro-
priate uae of land bounding on these waters for
residential, agricultural, industrial or recreational
purposes,
"fc) The uses which My have been made or are
being made or may be nade of aaid water for trans-
portation, domestic and Industrial consumption,
bathing, fishing, fish culture, fir* protection, etc.,
have to be taken into consideration in classifying
*
all such waters.
"(d) The extent of present defilement or
fouling of aald waters which has already occurred or
resulted from past discharges therein, the need for
standards for effluent fron disposal systems entering
the waters of the State."
-------
?70
N. M. Margraves
Then, Subdivision 4:
"The Commission, after proper study and after
conducting public hearings"
-- well, need I go on?
This has been done in about 280 miles of the
Minnesota and the Mississippi livers. It has taken a staff of
32 people or less, and three-quarters of a million dollars, to
make these determinations which we are talking about In these
standards, and this is our job before we can classify any small
lake, river, creek, or other body of water in the State of
Minnesota.
Veil, we have a dedicated group of engineers and
they work night and day. The number of nights they go out and
talk to councils, to talk to mayors, to talk to the League of
Women Voters or Izaak Walton Leaguers, or others, where they
may answer questions, la phenomenal, and, of course, Is not
necessarily reimbursed.
Now, to go back to the report. The legislature
la in session. I am giving you this background because here
stems the law -- whether we can work, or how we can circumvent
or get it changed in order to classify our waters by June and
be able to set standards. You can see that Minnesota is in a
position to have passed upon It enforcement proceedings and
that these things have to be done In the next 18 months,
-------
N. M. Hargraves
unless we make use of the last clause that Is In the enforce-
ment law.
Now, the report la helpful. As I said, It pro-
vides all of this detailed evaluation of river conditions, of
pollution sources, areas of unsatisfactory water quality.
Some of the information presented was previously lacking. We
did not know about it.
With respect to the specific Information on such
things, for example, as ammonia and phenols, and various
other things, Mr, Smith will talk about them.
On the side of failure with this, as I say, to
me there has been a sense of a lack of rapport.
Now, I hope you take this kindly, all of you in
the Federal Government. I know you are busy. I am a
consultant too, and my telephone rings from all over the
country every day, while I am in the midst of doing an examina-
tion of a patient, or taking the history, or some other
delicate situation, particularly in a family scrap trying to
settle things. I get a call from somebody in Los Angeles
or elsewhere and spend twenty minutes with him over the
telephone giving consultation. I know this happens to you,
I know life is full of too much of this, but it seems to me
that if these conferences are going to be successful, if
these conferences are going to be what we hoped they were
-------
M. N. Hargraves
going to be, certainly lie want to enter into tlM spirit of
cooperation and expect to get the ea»e aplrlt of cooperation
tack.
Mr. Poeton told me today that he was glad to
hear that I was In favor of practically all of the things
that had been suggested, and that now we sort of had a big
brother — he didn't put It that nay, but I can't remember
hie exact words (Laughter) — that we DOM had a big brother
who could help enforce some of these things for us that we
couldn't do alone. I tarn willing to believe him. I mm still
willing to go along, but say, to get back to Medicine, the
patient still has to be In the hands of the local doctor.
The federal Government la still a consultant that nay be
called in.
And while there may be people hanging around at
the moment hoping for the decease of the patient because of
what they may get from the will and the possessions, I am
sure that none of ua here are really anxious to lose the
advantages that we will get and can get from close cooperation,
fro* frequent consultation, from letting them do for ua on a
national scale with computers, and with specialised equipment
and laboratories, which the layman really knows nothing about
in making so many of these technical determinations, and cer-
tainly which I know nothing about.
-------
273
M. M. Margraves
I Just wanted to get thla off my chest. This
may be my swan song In this, but I feel very strongly about
it.
I am going to ask Lyle Smith now to pick this
up, and he can get Into what I consider the more picayunlsh
material (laughter), because It takes skill and knowledge and
training to be able to separate the particles and find the
ones that are of worth and that can be of some help. So, Mr.
Smith, If you will?
MR. STEIN: Doctor, are you available for comment
or questions now?
DR. HARQRAVES: Yes.
MR. STEIN: As you know, I do agree with a good
deal of what you have said.
As a matter of fact, you know, as was pointed out,
we were, I guess, called In here by your family.
DR. MARGRAVES: You are quite right.
MR. STEIN: By your family. The governors called
us In. This Is the nicest way, really, Doctor, that we have
ever been called Federal Illegitimates.
DR. MARGRAVES: Veil, you aee, I'm a physician,
where I have to call things, I guess, by the way they happen
(Laughter).
-------
M, M. Margraves
MR. STEIN: I an not through.
DR. HARORAVES: No? I thought you Mere through
(Laughter).
MR. STEIH: No.
Mow* of course, you mentioned the period of
fifteen years In Men York. That 18 true. New York completely
changed their law, completely changed the organization, and I
dare fay, with reapect to people In New York, fro* the Gover-
nor on down, they are not very proud of that fifteen-year
record of classification.
The entire procedure la working very, very
differently In Hen York now.
However, you did mention two rivers, and I was
a little aurprlaed. One was the Red River of the North, and
the other waa the Rainy River. On the Red River of the North
He did a study, a survey, and the standards have been
developed, or the States say they have developed them. Fine.
I am glad we could help then.
The Rainy River ia a different point. Waters
have been misused in the Rainy River.
I remember I cane to work with the Federal Hater
Pollution Control Program in 19*18, about the aane tine aa
the Wisconsin agency cane to work with us. Summer after
summer those fellows went to the beautiful, convivial aoclal
-------
275
N. M. Margraves
affairs, not the way ** come up here, up to the Rainy River,
International Pall*. They cane back with beautiful brochure*,
and studies went on year after year after year. They were
delighted to cone up to the Rainy River.
Fart of the solution, I hear, for one portion of
the Rainy River solving the problem la that we are going to
stop pulping operations here, do that in Canada, give a permit
for a pipeline to ship the waste across, siake the paper on
this side, and then we got a report fro* some people that It
was putting our American families out of work.
DM. HARORAVBS: Our feeling Is that Ontario Is
right along with us, and Ontario will not permit It. If they
do it will be the biggest blow to Canadlan-U.S. relations In
this area.
MR. STEIN: I SB sure, sir, that Ontario la along
with you, but this la a question we have, and I think this la
why the federal law has been amended all these times, and
this is something we have to consider.
Doctor, I don't want to argue with you. A lot
has been done on these rivers, but I do think the reason
that our law has been amended ao many tines, and you have seen
the increased tesipo of Federal activity, is the spectacle that
is being presented to the Congress of repeated meetings since
19*19 on the problem, when an order comma out in 1965-66.
-------
276
M. M, Hargravea
This isn't unuiual.
We were up at New York and on the Like Erie case,
and we discovered an order which had been outstanding since
1906. This may be why the conferees asked us to cone in.
But these are the only two rivers. Doctor, that you mentioned.
However, there is a letter, I think, that Dr. Barr sent to
Mr. Qulgley, the Commissioner, and this Is why I an encouraged
on this issue;
"Such formal classification and enforcement
procedures including Issuance of orders where
Indicated, have already been completed for the
waters of the Mississippi and Minnesota Rivers in
the Twin Cities metropolitan area, and for the
entire reaches of the Red Riser of the North and the
Rainy River."
In other words, now, we might argue and talk about
philosophy, and you night talk about standards and situations
that you will probably face. This is true, but I do think in
the area that we are concerned with today, we don't have this
Impediment, because, evidently, the State* have done well.
DA* HARQRAVES: Mr. Stein, do you appreciate that
we Issued orders on the Mississippi and we went through days
and days of classification, and we are still tied up in court?
-------
2?T
M. N. Margraves
MR. STEDI: Yea.
DR. HARORAVESi Regarding the classifications
and standards, and we did the MM thing fcr the Minnesota
River, and we are tied up In courts there.
MR. STBIN: Yes.
DR. HARQRAVSS: the lega] speed with which this
is settled, of course, will alter what our orders will have
to be changed to, but we do not feel even though this has
been — what, five years, six years since you conducted the
inquisition -- at any rate, we are still waiting for the court
to settle this problem, and it la going to the Supreme Court,
because I think it is that isiportant. So we are not quarreling
with you.
I mm explaining tc you that this is the procedure
that we have to go through to §
-------
278
M. N. Margraves
These are the three area*, the Rainy River, the
Red River of the North, and the Mississippi In the Twin Cities
area, where there has been eztenalve help. Ne are happy to
have that here.
How, we were called in by both governors, and
this should be clear. We were asked to eoa» In here. We
didn't Just COOMB in — and this la a point that should be made
clear — we didn't Just COM In because we were asked. As I
read this sorning, we cane here also on the basis of reports,
surveys and studies. Ne cane here on our own initiative, aa
well aa being requested to COM*.
I lev* theae medical analogies, because It Is a
wonderful thing to hear the doctor, but his point of regarding
us aa pure conaultants that may be called in la a delightful
nay of putting It. The point it, we arc not Just here as a
consultant. We are here on our own authority to do a Job.
We also have the role of a consultant becauae we were asked in
by the governors.
How, this has to be Made claar. Aa to theae
arguments that the doctor la Baking, I a* not arguing against
theae things. Theae arguments that the doctor la Baking have
been arnde over and over to the Congress.
I tMnk the pollution problem la so big that we
all have to work on this together, and this interposition of
-------
279
M. M. Hargraves
protecting States' right* doesn't seem to me to be the nay
to be really conducive to getting at the problem. It Just
sets up a snoke screen and creates some acrimonious feelings.
I think the Job Is so big that we have to do it.
Now, whether I think that or not, the arguments
made by Dr. Margraves and other State people to the Congress
have been plainly and vociferously repeated. The Congress
passed a law giving the Federal Government certain powers.
I think as Federal officials we have to do a job as conscien-
tiously as Or. Hargraves and his associates do In his State.
We are sworn to uphold the Federal law. We are here to try
to do this Job in as reasonably and as gentlemanly a way as
possible.
The point is that when Dr. Margraves spoke about
the law — I feel that we are all Americans -- we don't feel
we are Illegitimates outside the family. We don't feel
Wisconsin and Minnesota have a Chinese Wall that somehow is
restricted to Federal people. We are all American people.
We are a mobile community. People use this country. We are
here to work together with the representatives of the State
governments.
Now, as far as I can see, there la a strong move-
ment in the States to welcome us in. Certainly from what
Senator Nelson said this morning, it indicated to me that
-------
280
M. M. Hargravea
he thought our activities were welcome and worthwhile.
DR. HARORAVES: Of course, any statement can be
twisted around as they wish, but I have been welcoming you In.
MR. STEIN: Yes.
DR. HARORAVES: And I appreciate the work that has
been done.
I have simply explained to the people of Minnesota
the tremendous problem that lies ahead for all of the waters
of the State of Minnesota.
MR. STEIN: They do.
DR. HARORAVES: We still have 4,000 miles of
Interstate waters, and many of the tributaries of these large
rivers, the Mississippi River, very likely, will be Included
well on up beyond the Twin Cities.
MR. STEIN: Yes.
DR. HARORAVES: So that I am quite In favor that
we have close cooperation, that we understand each other, that
we get together and have conferences; and, as I say, this la
an Important point In the llfeblood of the entire country of
America, because If we don't solve It, why, we are In trouble.
We are lost.
MR. STEIN: Dr. Hargraves, I would like to say
one thing on that point.
I appreciate your problem with all the waters you
-------
281
N. N. Hargrave*
have here. I appreciate the problem with the many different
fresh waters you have In Minnesota. Even you cite the New
York problem as a much smaller one, and I think perhaps you
are right. But let me say that the kind of problem that you
have is really a blessing. You are blessed Kith an abundance.
In dealing with a water problem, I think we are much better
off dealing with something like Minnesota* where you have this
abundance of riches and all these waters are classified, than
one of these arid Western States, where classification is easy,
because we don't have any water and we are dealing with dry
stream beds.
The problem here is how to manage the water, and
I think In neeting that problem we should utilize our ingenuity
and be able to do it, because I think here is the place that
we can solve the problem. Whatever you do on the deaert with
an Intermittent stream, all the classification and treatment in
the world isn't going to help, but you can be helped here.
I look at Minnesota from the point of view of water
quality and water resources as being one of the most fortunate.
if not the most fortunate State in the Union.
DR. HARQRAVES: No, but are you trying to tell me
that by June, because we cannot hold all of these hearings,
you will be happy to classify the other 4,000 miles?
-------
282
M. N. Margraves
MR. STEIN: Mo. I don't lay I would be happy to
do anything.
Ml. HARORAVES: I know, but this la,the question
that faces us.
MR. STEIN: No, that Is not the question.
DR. HARORAVES: We Mould like to do it ourselves,
but thia is our dilemma.
MR. STEIN; Yes, I can understand that. According
to thia, the point again is I have two specific charges In
Minnesota. Specifically, one is on the Red River of the North,
where we nave the problem net on classification, and the other
Is here. I don't think that June deadline Is going to affect
us. In other words, we can discharge our obligations relating
to interstate enforcement operationa.
The other problem we have, air -- I ask you to look
at this In a sympathetic way, and I have read the Commissioner's
comments and have read Dr. Barr's comments and I look at both
sides — is that Congress passed a law giving us a particular
deadline. The notion is that if that law is not complied with
by that deadline, the Pederal official In charge la charged
with the statutory obligation to do something. This is the
point.
DR. HARORAVES: This is the point, and I think
this is what the people of Minnesota have to understand, that
-------
283
N. M. Margraves
Me are at this particular point in history.
I read every bit of the hearings before Congressman
Blatnik'8 committee, and this Mas one of the prime worries of
many manufacturers, of many Congressmen, of many organizations,
that none of these things be done Mithout proper hearings and
allowing the people to be heard Mho Mere going to be most
affected. I think Minnesotana should know this, and this is
not of our staking. That is the Comiaslon1* --
MR. STEIN: Again, I an Just relating the law and
stating the bare facts of the law, and this is what I think
should be understood. When the Congress passed the law, in
setting up its deadline and requiring the Federal Government
to do something about it if the State did not do it within
the stipulated tine, It, the Congress, also heeded the argument
that this should not be done Mithout a proper hearing.
The point is, they aiade provisions for a hearing in
the Federal statute.
I smst adult to Minnesotans and anyone In any State
that I sympathize with you certainly on this. However, the
difference — and this Is the significant difference — is
that If that tine cones, these Mill be Federal hearings In
setting these standards, and not State hearings.
-------
284
M. K Hargraves
I think evtryone Is agreed that It will be prefer-
able to have this done Initially by State hearings. I don't
think there Is any argument here, but I think the awkward fact
remains -- and this should be very clear • - that If standards
satisfactory to the Secretary of the Interior are not on file
by the end of June of this year, or July 1st, as you know,
the Federal Government Is under a statutory obligation to act.
Now, as I also understand It, and I don't know what
the response will be In the country, only two States out of
the fifty are falling behind as much as Minnesota, that la,
Minnesota and one other State. The other State doesn't have
that much water.
Now, again, and I an talking to the people of
Minnesota, Doctor, and certainly to you, If we deal with a
busy executive In Washington who looks at the report and
sees that 48 of the 50 States may be In substantial compliance,
I think the judgment would be that this Isn't tio bad, possibly,
that we will Just have to face those two States and do what
we can.
We would like to work with you on this. I know
Chester Wilson has been with us as part of our group outside
this State In other pollution situations throughout the
country. We who have worked In this field all know how
-------
285
M. M. Margraves
difficult It Is to get a river cleaned up and get compliance.
I an not here to criticize you. I know how hard
you work.
DR. HARORAVES: No criticism whatsoever.
MR, STEIN: Yes.
DR. HARORAVES: Another point Is that we have only
that part of the Minnesota River classified from Chaska, if
I an right. Ve atill have to go from Mankato to Chaska. We
have the Mississippi River classified only so far down to
Hastings* or about above Hastings, those several miles, so
that all the rest of this river clear down through Lake Pepln
in the study area will have to be classified yet under the
circumstances which I have outlined. So will the St. Crolx,
I presume, because we held a hearing there only to have them
settle this problem whether they could go in or not, but this
has not been made clear up into Polk County.
We have to give a certain number of days' notice
of hearings to all of these people. We have a small staff to
do It, and I must admit your conference makes me feel pretty
brassy, not from what you do, but from the situation.
MR. STEIN: Well, this may be the situation, sir,
but, as you said before, and I think this Is right, we had up
to 32 people working and we put in $750,000, three-quarters of
a million dollars. Mr. Poston says not quite that much.
-------
286
M. M. Hargravea
Now, I think the longer a report lies on a
shelf or a desk, you are going to find that with the delays
that come even now in trying to get this adjusted and putting
It out, a good portion of the work that la in here, or several
features, have to be altered, and will have to be updated.
Again, we were aaked in by the governors, and we
came in on our own initiative. We are always faced with this
specter, Doctor, of putting in a lot of personnel resources
and funds in an area, and coming up with a dry report that is
put on the shelf. I have seen to many of these in the Govern-
ment , and nothing ever gets done about it,
Considering the Investment we have made in this
area in this report, we should strive to make it viable and
see what we can do with it, and what we can do to help clean
up this river, and, at the same time, move our program ahead.
I don't think we are going to get It cleaned up without
moving your program ahead.
DR. HARORAVES: I agree with you, and I would like
thla river to be cleaned up too. But, as I say, the people
of Ninneaota I think should understand where we stand.
Ve can hold our hearings and we can issue our
orders en the data tnat has been presented. Ve appreciate
that. Ve appreciate the cooperation we have had, and I would
not want this to end with any hard feelings, and none was
-------
28?
M. M, Hargraves
meant.
This IB an explanatory situation because of
reasons I think I have adequately covered.
MR. STEIN: Yes. Anything else?
MR. POSTON: I Mould like to make one comment to
Dr. Margraves.
I an the Regional Director for the Federal Water
Pollution Control Administration. We have the Great lakes
region, which includes the Upper Mississippi Basin and the
Great Lakes Basin. Some ten States are included in this
region and our activities cover grants, enforcements, research,
and planning. I would like to assure Dr. Margraves that any
request that he may nake of me for assistance or cooperation,
I will give my personal attention to.
I have not received any requests, but I do hope
that this can be a means for making us work closer together.
I would like to add that I have made offers of assistance in
some of the other areas,
As I indicated before, my desire is to get clean
water. I decided Bone time in the past that when I forget
this objective of clean water, I can get far afield and my
efforts come to naught at tines because of wandering aside
from my major objectives* but I do wish to assure you that
-------
283
M. N. Hargravea
within my capabilities I Hill give personal attention to any
request that you Mka.
DR. HARGRAVES: Vail, I can assure you that those
of us on the Commission and on the staff are in favor only of
clean water alao.
MR. WILSON: Mr. Chairman?
NR. STEIN: Tea.
MR. WILSON: May I have an opportunity to Mke
two comments in view of what I eonaider to be a very urgent
situation?
NR. STEDi: Tea.
NR. WILSON t And to comment on the need for an
immediate clarification, while the Ninnesota Legislature la in
session, of the present position of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration on the propoaed program of. the Ninnesota
Water Pollution Control Comlaalon.
Aa I aaid this morning, that program waa started
before the incidents occurred that led to this conference
which opened in 1964. it waa a very clearly thought out
program under our law for the adoption of the atandarda
necessary for enforcement.
Now, there ia no time here to discuss the policy
and adviaability of adopting water pollution control
standarda.
-------
289
M. M. Hargraves
As I Mentioned, the State of Wisconsin up until
1965 Mde a very notable progress in dealing with their
Municipal and industrial water pollution control problems
without any standards at all.
A great many leading engineers and authorities
used to consider that standards were unnecessary, that it was
•ore effective for water pollution control agencies to do as
Wisconsin and the majority of other States used to--deal with
each case on its Merits, issue orders for the construction of
necessary sewage treatment works, and that they got along a
lot faster that way if they did not have to go to all the
trouble of classifying waters and adopting standards.
However, we are past that point now, because the
Federal law requires the adoption of standards.
Now, the old Minnesota law Mde the adoption of
standards necessary only for enforcement purposes. Before the
Rosemeier Act of 1963 was adopted, the Commission could lay
out Its own program and decide as a matter of strategy where
It was necessary to crack down with enforcement proceedings
and adopt standards for the areas where the critical cases
existed, mat was all that was necessary under the old
Minnesota law.
Let me show you, ladies and gentlemen, a copy of
the aoat recent iaaue of the Suggested State water Pollution
-------
290
N. N. Hargraves
Control Actfpublished by the Federal Mater Pollution Control
Administration. The provialona a* to standard! in that Aet
are very similar to those In the Ninneaota law. They do not
contain these intensely complicated and cumbersome require-
ments of the Rosense!er Aet adopted in 1963, and I want to
aay that those provisions adopting the highly complicated
Men York system of elaasifioatlons and standards were injected
into that Aet by amendment late in the session without any
opportunity for hearings, and without any recommendation by
the Water Pollution Control Commission.
Nevertheless, the Commission is now saddled with
the additional burden, very time-consuming, very money-consum-
ing, of going through all that complicated process that is
required under the Mew York statute, which has now been loaded
on to them.
This situation had already developed when this
conference opened in February 1964. The Ninneaota Commission
under the old law had already proceeded in the summer of 1962
to hold hearing* which ran for a period of anyway eight daya
or so, spread over a period of several months, and adopted
standards for the area where the most critical condition
existed — that la to aay, in the Mississippi River from
Anoka to the mouth of the at. Crolx River -- with the Intention
-------
291
N. M. Margraves
aa faat as time would permit of adopting standards for the
other waters of this State In the order of priority, as they
determined the need for enforcement action.
Mow, I Mould Just like to read something to Indicate
that the Commission had every reason to believe that that was
a sound program which had the approval of the Federal authori-
ties because at the opening, or, rather, Just before the
adjournment of the opening session of this conference In which
we are now participating, three years ago, on February 8,
1964, our Chairman here, Murray Stein, had this to say about
that Minnesota program, which was already underway. I am
quoting now from Mr. Stein's remarks, which you can read In the
recorded record of that proceeding:
"I do think that If you went around the country
and saw how pollution problems were handled, you
would realise that In coping with a metropolitan
problem as is presented by St. Dual and Minneapolis,
your State agencies have done a Job--and I can say
this after listening to this for several days--
which in my opinion is as good as any State has
done in dealing with this problem."
Then, later, in the published summary of that
session of this conference, I would like to quote this from
the official statement received from the Public Health
-------
292
M. M. Hargraves
Service t
"The Wisconsin and Minnesota water pollution
control agencies have active water pollution control
programs, me delays, If any, are those which nay
be expected to occur In the execution of the pollu-
tion abatement program of a large Metropolitan area."
Then this fro* the summary of this report which
we have been discussing here all day, and you can read It your
self on Page 3*. Mr. tflsnlewski has already referred to It,
and I agree with him that there was a serious omission when
Wisconsin was not Mentioned along with Minnesota.
"In light of the excellent progress"
— get that, ladles and gentlemen —
"In light of the excellent progress the
Minnesota water Pollution Control Commission
had made In staking various Industrial firms and
municipalities aware of the need for abatement
facilities, the following time schedule for the
foregoing remedial program Is recommended."
There is nothing in all of those statements to
indicate that anybody thought that the Minnesota Water Pollu-
tion Control Commission, along with Wisconsin, was slacking
or lacking or lagging in attacking this program with the ut-
most vigor.
-------
293
M. M. Hargraves
And now, what 1* the situation? It has been
precipitated, this very difficult dilenna which we are in at
the present time, by the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendment of 1965* particularly by this language — I won't
read it all, but the substance of it is that in order to
comply with the provisions of this Federal Mater Pollution
Control *ct as enacted in 1965, since the initial session of
this conference, the State, before June 3O» 196? — that la
this year, only a fen Months away — must first file a letter
of Intent that they will before June 30 adopt water quality
criteria applicable to interstate waters In the portions of
such States, and (b) a plan for implementation and enforcement
of the water quality criteria adopted.
This situation has been precipitated because the
head of the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration has
now completely switched around fro* a position that waa atated
by Mr. Stein and told the Minnesota water Pollution Control
Commission that their strategy and their plan will not meet
the requirementa of the Federal law.
Now, that statement has been picked up by members
of the legislature who are called to be critical of the
Niter Pollution Control Commission, and every other State
agency which, in their opinion, or in the opinion of some of
their constituents, naa fallen down on the Job.
-------
29**
N. M. Margraves
In my opinion, it la an outrageous injustice to
the hard-working, unpaid citizen members and the hard-working
and certainly not overpaid official members of the Minnesota
Water Pollution Control Commission to be attacked in any
Measure for the work which they have done above and beyond the
call of duty in trying to cone up with thia water pollution
control program.
(Applauae.)
Thia position of the Federal Government has dis-
credited the Comulsalon and fed fuel to the fire of the
critics of the Water Pollution Control Commission in the
Minnesota Legislature, with the result that they are even now
talking about wiping out the present CommiesIon and reorganiz-
ing them.
Now, that la one of the common practices of the
legislature. Every time something goea wrong, for which the
legislature is usually at fault for not furnishing the salary
scales, not furnishing the money to provide the necessary
competent people to do the Job, the legislature tries to cover
its own shortcomings either by passing some kind of a law or
by reorganizing the outfit and still doesn't give them what
it takes to do the Job.
The legislature can reorganize this, or any other
State agency. I have been through several reorganications,
-------
295
N. N, Hargravea
and I a* here to aay this: Ninety percent of the success of
any enterprise depend! on having good people to carry It on,
and even though they have an Imperfect organisation. If you
have an adequate staff of competent people with money enough
to do a Job, they Mill get a Job done, You ean have the
•oat perfect organisation In the world, and If you don't give
them the ataff and the money to do the job* it will not
succeed.
Now, if this position of the head of the Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration continues through this
session of the legislature, what I MB afraid of la that the
action of this legislature will be no help to the program what-
ever. It may result In a reorganization, a totally new body
of men taking over the functions of this hard-working Water
Pollution Control Commission, which over the years has gained
a tremendous amount of knowledge of this problem and willing-
ness to contribute their servieea to the public welfare. That
•111 delay the program, if there is a reorganisation.
Furthermore, if, as has been intimated, the
federal Government hat to come in here after June 30th and
hold these hearings on 4,000 miles of streams and then adopt
the standards, they are probably going to come out with
about the same standards that would have been adopted much
aooner by the Minnesota Hater Pollution Control Commission
-------
296
H. N. Hargrave*
If it had been permitted to carry on its plan and program.
I can't »e* what slightest advantage can occur
to th* advancement of these tremendously difficult Jobs by
having the federal Government atep in here and take over this
whole thing, but there are even some membera of the legislature
who are willing to lie down and let them do that, who say,
"Well, okay. If the federal Government wants to cone in here
and spend the money, why, let them do it."
To tie, that would be a terribly shameful thing
for the people of the State of Minnesota, who, along with the
people and agencies of the State of Wisconsin, are able to
take care of this job themselves.
There la widespread complaint all over the country
about the encroachment of the federal Government on local
agencies, and it hat been due almost entirely to the fact
that State legislatures and State agencies have not done a
good job on some important measure of the public welfare.
Here la an example of where an outatandlng Job,
recognised, aa I said, by Mr. Stein, who knows this problem
as well or better than any man in this country, la on the way
to being discredited with a gross injustice to these hard-
working members of the Commission, simply because of this
arbitrary decision taken by the head of the Water Pollution
Control Agency, and I think that if there la anything that
-------
297
M. N. Hargraves
can be dona while thla leglaiature it in session to aecure a
reversal of that position, to secure a firm statement that
the Federal Water Pollution Control Administration recognises
the difficulties with which the Minnesota Water Pollution
Control Commission has had to cop* and la ready to stand be-
hind it, that would do Bore to expedite the solution of these
difficult problems than anything I can think of. However,
if the Federal Government persists in this position which
has already been taken by the agency and the Water Pollution
Control Commission is discredited, you may be very sure that
the ultimate solution to these problems Mill be delayed much
longer than it could have been accomplished if the Federal
Oovernment stands behind the Commission and backs it up in
the sound program which it has undertaken.
MR. STEIN: Mr. Wilson, you spoke for the record.
I do not want to belabor this, but you made the
ststement repeatedly that the head of our Agency took an
arbitrary position.
Ron was that arbitrary?
MR. WILSON: What?
MR. STBIMi I'm sorry. Chester, you said that
the head of the Agency has taken an arbitrary position.
Would you specify why you think that Has arbitrary,
and how it is arbitrary, considering what the law says?
-------
298
M. N. Hargravee
MR. WILSON; I think that he has miaconatrued
the law.
It la an azloai ajsong administrators, and let •*
•ay that I have had long experience in both administration
and law, twelve yeara aa head of the Minnesota Conaervatlon
Department, a even and a half yeara aa Chairman of the
Minneaota Water Pollution Control Commission, and I dla-
oovered by long experience that there la acre than one nay
to akin a eat. I think that the head of the Agency haa taken
a very narrow view.
Lawa are auppoaed to be oonatrued in accordance
with their Intent. If there la any intent that la emphasized
In this Federal Act, It la that the State agenciea should be
given the firat opportunity to deal with every problem, and
that I know of fro« having prealded over some of the largest
hearings ever held by the Federal Water Pollution Control
Agency.
It la the policy of the Act to give the State
agencies the first chance to deal with every problem, and by
the position taken by the head of the Agency now, that chance
la being cut off. I do not think that that la neceaaary, and
that is why I say that the position of the Agency la arbi-
trary and waa not in accord with the spirit of the law,
MR. 3TIIH: Thank you, Nr. Wilson.
-------
299
M. M. Hargravet
I think I Just have to say this for the record,
and I don't think this Is any place to prolong a discussion.
I think the statute is clear. It says criteria fro* the
States have to be set up by June 30th of this year. I think
the Congress and the committees abundantly Indicated that
they expected this to be done at that tine.
There have been various discussions in the
Administration. The Commissioner, the head of our Agency,
has discussed this with Department Counsel, the Department of
Justice has been over, the Secretary of the Interior has
reviewed It and talked thia over with the chairmen of the
committees who developed the legislation and with counsel
to the committees. I think they are all in complete agreement
that the law means what it says, and the Commissioner la
proceeding within the Intent of the statute.
Obviously, lawyers have differences on the law,
but I am saying this Just so that the record will be clear.
Are there any further commenta or questions?
(No response.)
MR. STEIN: Mr. Smith?
MR. SMITH: Mr. Chairman, I have two statements,
one on progress which will take fifteen minutes, and then
comments on individual recommendations, which will take
three-quarters of an hour to an hour.
-------
L. H. Smith .
300
i
MR. STEM i Let's taks the first portion and we
Mill *•* how the people f**i after you ar* through with that.
STATEMENT OF LTLE H. SMITH, CONFEREE
AMD BZECVFIVB ENGINEER, MINNESOTA
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL COMMISSION
NX. SMITH: I should lite to bring you up to date
on the progress that has been mads sine* the last report, and '
i
SOBS of this will prove to point out the fact* as the Chairman ,
i
has said, that the report is somewhat atale already in some (
i
areas, j
«
First, liquid storage.
Regulation wTC * relating to the storage of oil
and other pollutional liquids was adopted by the Commission
in June 196ft. This regulation requires adequate diking of
facilities, use permits, and reporting of spills. The enforce-
ment program has been rather limited because of lack of staff.
Ciaasifications and standards
Classlflostlons and standards were adopted by the
Commission for the reach of the Mississippi River from Anoka
to Hastings in 1963, before the convening of the first session
of the conference.
-------
301
L. H. Smith
In the Interim, th* Commission also has adopted
clasaifioations and standards for the Minnesota River from
Carver Rapids to the mouth. These are Regulations VPC 5
and 6, which were adopted in November 1965.
The CosMlssion also developed statewide water
quality criteria applicable to all waters of the State, both
Interstate and intrestate, completed the required hearings,
and probably will adopt the* in the near future. The criteria
are one part of the requirements placed on the State by the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act. An implementation and
enforcement plan for the interstate waters is also being
prepared and will be submitted* together with the criteria,
by June 30, 1967.
Metropolitan Sanitary District
The 1963 legislature required that a comprehensive
sewage works plan be prepared by the Minneapolla-St. Paul
Sanitary District and reviewed by the Water Pollution Control
Commission.
Th* District submitted a report to the Commission
with a plan for a comprehensive sewage work* plan to serve
nearly all of the metropolitan area. A hearing on this plan
was held by the Commission on Noveaber 4, 1964, and a report
to the 1965 leglaiature was submitted with recommendations
-------
308
L. H. Smith
for implementation of the plan. It waa recommended that the
administration of this comprehenaive engineering plan and
conatruetIon of the facilities described therein ahould be
done by a Metropolitan aanltary district composed of all
towns and Municipalities within the aervlce area outlined
In the plan* Including Minneapolis and St. Paul and suburbs,
replacing the existing Minneapolia-St. Paul Sanitary Diatrlct.
Creation of this diatrict would require a special act of the
legislature.
Art«r considerable debate and controversy, par-
ticularly regarding methods of financing, a bill designed to
enlarge the Minneapolis-St. Paul Sanitary Diatrlct to provide
aervlce to the area described In the Comprehensive Sewage
Works Plan for the Twin City Metropolitan Area failed of
adoption In the 1965 session of the legislature. However,
efforta will again be made in the 196? legislature to pass
an act of this kind, since there la atill a critical need for
aueh a diatrict to do the planning, financing, construction
and operation of Interceptor aewers and aewage treatnent
work* in this metropolitan area,
MB. 3TBIH: Nay I ask a question to clarify thin?
Does that bill take In that big area you were talking about,
or Just that Modified plan?
MR. SMITH: There are several bills. One bill
-------
303
L. K. Saith
takes In the whole seven-county area, and even an additional
area cutsi.de of the seven counties. Another bill la »ore
Halted In Its scope.
MR. STEIN: Both bills are still alive?
MR. SMITH: Yes. Our session of the Legislature
started In January, and it runs until May 22nd. These bills
are still being considered by the coMltteea or aubooMltteea
of the various legislative groupa.
MR. STEIN: Are you concentrating on one act, or
does It still go to both acts? They are two competing acts.
MR. SMITH: I shouldn't say two. There are about
a half dozen right now with various aspects, and the CoMls-
slon has not supported any particular bill.
MR. STEIN: Oh, you have not?
MR. SMITH: No.
MR. STEIN: All right.
MR. SMITH: These haven't gotten to that stage.
MR. STEIN: Very well.
MR. SMITH: SOURCES OF POLLUTION.
The statement presented by the Cossiission at
the flrat session listed all sources of pollution In the study
area with a brief statement regarding their status.
In the Interest of brevity we shall discuss here
only those sources which have made significant progress in
-------
304
L. B. Smith
the interim. However, Information on all of the other main
stem sources, including those considered satisfactory, those
which are essentially unchanged, and known existing or po-
tential sources not actually discharging yet, will be
furnished if desired.
Municipal
I would like to take up the municipal portion
first. The following municipalities within the study area
have made Improvements as Indicated below.
MlnneapoT-ls-St. Paul Sanitary District
In the spring of 1964, the District initiated
construction of secondary treatment units which are designed
to increase the plant capacity to 2l8 MOD. These facilities
are designed to provide about 75 percent reduction In BOO
and 83 percent reduction in suspended solids based on the
modified activated sludge process, or an effluent strength
of about 65 mgA 5-day BOP and about 50 mgA suspended
solids. Provision is also made in the layout and design
of plant units to Increase the future capacity to about
40O NOD and the BOD removal to at least 90 percent, or an
effluent of about 20 to 25 mgA of 5-day BOD utilising the
-------
305
L. H. Smith
step aeration activated sludge process.
These facilities are the result of engineering
studies of the future needs for sewage works In the
Mlnneapolls-St. Paul Metropolitan Area which were started
In 1956 and updated by another engineering and financing
study completed In the fall of 1965 in accordance with
Laws of 1963, Chapter 882.
The secondary treatment units are In operation,
however full utilization cannot be made of these treatment
units until the sludge filtration and incineration facili-
ties are completed as scheduled for August 1967. Trial
operation of the secondary treatment units for treatment
of the full sewage flow In May and June 1966 showed an
average reduction In BOO of about 77 percent. Experience,
however, showed that the existing sludge disposal facili-
ties were not capable of disposing of the increased quantity
of waste sludge produced, consequently plant operation was
adjusted to treat about one-third of the flow by secondary
treatment and two-thirds by primary treatment until the
additional sludge disposal facilities are completed. This
method of operation from July through September 1966
accomplished an average of about kf percent reduction in
BOD of the sewage.
In Nay, 1966, the District received a 50 percent
-------
306
L. 11. Smith
Federal grant in the amount of about $870,750 under the •
i
Federal Water Pollution Control Act to aid in reconstruc-
tion of about 15 major regulator stations on combined
•ewer overflows in the Twin Citiea. This project was the
first in the country to receive a grant offer under this
program and is to demonstrate a new and unusual method of
reducing the volume of sewage carried by storm water to the
Mississippi River during and following heavy local rains.
South St. Paul
The oity is presently having plans and specifi-
cations completed for a new Interceptor sewer and the
first stage of construction of improvements to the sewage
and Industrial waste treatment facilities. Contracts for
construction of these facilities are expected to be awarded
soon. The oity also applied for a 50 percent demonstration
grant under provisions of the Federal Water Pollution
Control Act for separation of the industrial waste from the
other combined sewers.
Invar Grove Height s
The village constructed a new contact stabilization
-------
307
L. H. Smith
activated sludge plant with a capacity for 0.5 MGD of
sewage flow* replacing the small aeration plant nerving
South Grove Subdivision of the former Inver Grove Township.
This plant Is like the Burnsvllle and Newport plants and
Is capable of 90 percent reduction In 3-day BOD of sewace.
Haetings
The olty has completed plans and specifications
for a new modified activated sludge treatment plant which
will more than triple the capacity of the present primary
treatment plant and will provide secondary treatment.
Construction of these Improvements Is scheduled to start
this spring. This plant will have a design capacity of
about 1.83 MGD and will produce an effluent of about 50
mg/1 5-day BOD or about 80 to 83 percent reduction In BOD.
Lake City
The city initiated construction of a new modified
activated sludge treatment plant In the summer of 1966. This
plant replaces an existing Inadequate primary plant. It
has a design capacity for sewage flow of 500,000 GPD and
Is expected to produce an effluent of about 50 mg/1 of
-------
308
L. H. Smith
5-day BOD or ftbout 75 to 80 percent reduction In BOD. The
plant is nearlng completion.
Burnsvilleand Eagan Township
After public hearIngB the Commission granted
variances from the classification and standards for the
Minnesota River to permit Burnsville and Eagan Township
to construct temporary treatment works and discharge the
effluent into the river until interceptor sewers and
sewage treatment works are planned and constructed by a
sanitary district or other area-wide service agency. It
is estimated that these temporary treatment facilities
now under construction will serve until 1970 to 1975 as
the ease may be. This should be sufficient tine to plan
and construct needed interceptor sewers and sewage *;reat-
ment works under a metropolitan plan providing legislation
creating a metropolitan sanitary district or authority to
plan and construct these facilities is passed by the 1967
Legislature.
The Burnsville plant is a contact stabilization
modification of the activated sludge process designed for
1.0 USD (million gallons per day) to increase the total
plant capacity to 1.5 MOD. These temporary plant units
-------
309
L. H. smith
srfould •fcrovlfil about 90 percent removal of 5-day BOD.
E&gan Township is construeting two email temporary
aerated sewage stabilisation ponds with capacity of 150,000
and 75*000 GPD. These ponds are expected to provide at
least 80 percent removal of 5-day BOD and will serve Halted
residential and commercial development in the township,
Bayport
The village constructed a new sewage treatment
plant in 1964 to provide about 90 percent removal of 5-day
BOD using the contact stabilization modification of the
activated sludge process. The plant capacity of 650,000
GPD (gallons per day) also provides capacity for the sewage
flow from the State prison,
Industrial
Now, on the industrial side.
Minneapolis Mater Treatment Plants
Engineering studies are being made to improve
treatment, Including possible reuse of line and settling of
filter backwash.
-------
310
L. H. Smith
Northern States Power Company, RiversidePlant
A company report of river temperature studies
was received and shows that after adequate mixing the
river water temperature will be below the 93°F limit
specified In our present standards. Re-evaluation of the
need for cooling facilities will be necessary If the stream
standard must be changed to 86°F.
Twin City Shipyard. Inc. (St. Paul and Burnsvllle)
The company provided treatment consisting of
settling, screening and filtration.
Cenex, Inc. (Formerly Northwest Cooperative Mills)
Interceptor ditches and pumping facilities were
provided to Intercept leakage from the gypsum pond.
Northwestern Refining
A flue gas stripper and higher diking to protect
the oil recovery ponds during flood stages were Installed.
-------
311
L. H. Smith
Minnesota Miningand Manufacturing Co.
Additional treatment facilities are under con-
struction, Including equailcatIon, neutralization and
biological treatment by the activated sludge process.
H, D. Hud son Manufaoj; urlng Co.»
Facilities were provided to treat metal finishing
wastes by chemical precipitation.
honeymead Products Co.
A flood wall for containment of oil spills and
waste treatment facilities consisting of aeration, neutrali-
zation, sic limn Ing and settling were provided by the company
in 1966.
Minnesota Valley Milk Processing Cooperative Association
Secondary treatment facilities consisting of an
oxidation channel system were provided by the company In
1966.
-------
312
L. H. 3»ith
American crystal Sugar Co,
The company provided a treatment and reolroulatlon
system oonalstlng of a meohanioal olarlfler and a sludge
pond. All process waste la to be reolroulated for reuse
In the plant, and only cooling water will be discharged.
Rahr HaltIng Company
The oorapany has authorized construction of a
screening and flow equalization system which Is an essential
step toward Joint treatment with Shakopee. Studies on
Joint treatment are being made by engineers employed by
both the company and the city.
M. A, Gedney Co.
The company formerly discharged Its waste to the
Chaska system, but this proved unsatisfactory and the
company subsequently constructed separate stabilization
ponds.
-------
313
L. H. Smith
I know that a number of municipalities and
industries listed In this interim; report are present and have
indicated that they would like to Bake statements which will
be In More detail,
MR. STEIN: Or, Margraves asked that we put a
question at this tine. Nay we have a show of hands for those
who feel they want to make statements?
(There was a show of hands.)
MR. STEIN: Thank you very such.
MR. SMITH: Some of them are not present now.
MR. STEIN: Is this a good time to bre k?
MR. SMITH: This is a good tine to break. Our
next portion would be to review in detail the recommendations
of the report.
MR. STEINi Off the reecrd.
(Discussion off the record.)
MR. STEIN: We will stand recessed until nine
o'clock tomorrow morning.
(Whereupon, at 4:^5 p.m., an adjournment was
taken until Wednesday, March 1, 1967* at 9:00 a.m.)
------- |