United States
Environmental Protection
Agency

 

 

 

 

 

As EPA emers Us foon?eemh year. we can 

,ono?e upon :rs many eoeonw/xs/wnews.

T/ws report soecn?oe/ly addresses our ee/w'evemems
dunno fxsoe/ 7983, as we? as {he Che/lenges We!
WW us no [he fun/re.

l8 my hope I/7/s WW be
usefu/ fo [hose who are mvprovmg our
enwrormyem and preservmg {he Cher/shed nan/re/
resOurces Wei are so p/enm?o/ our Regxon

fr [eke {he besz? efforts of of us?cmzons,
government a?zgenexes, ermromHeme/Isis end 
Io H869 Io [he [asks sm/ e/veed.

M, .

     
   

l/e/des VT

eg/on 

 ?j lLlH Li 

Hf.) Mrs- 59f? Hahn?11m: mm 11:? we arm

LH 41.11 an L7 0 ng Lil vii-18H] moi) [11(19me

pun eat'ir'ul ax {aawam 8mm aqi
w; {1:4 1m] 4:141 Jag.) 1. EL pug aldwad LIOIHILLJ 

121;; "mm? ?930le ?37 ?-3319 mg); Eganqu; :9.Ja?JLfa?Jl 6L11 51-LJ ISI. .1 C: ?mcygaLJmm '9 Helpw
"sinfivulm?A Lujuf?aa at.? 89111318 ms aqi

 

 

But the very things that made the Midwest great also make it vulnerable to
erwironmental damage. The Regions coal-fired power plants emit much of the sulfur
dio><ide that falls to Earth as acid rain. threatening Wilderness in the Midwest as well as
lakes. streams and forests in the Northeast

Valuable topsoil. often tainted by fertilizer and pesticide residues, routinely erodes
inte streams. rivers and the Great Lakes. Industrial hazardous wastes present specral
disposal and Contamination problems. The Regions high concentration of chemical,
steel and paper industries also causes significant environmental impacts.

EPA IS working in partnership with all Region states to help address. these issues
and to find creative solutions to the challenges of the future.

 

WASTE MANAGEMENT

EPA faces no greater Challenge than protecting
America from the consequences of rrnorooer
hazardous waste drsoosal. There are. thousands of
abandoned waste dumps In farmers tre ds and

Inner In roadsmte ditches and on river banks?
often oontaminatrmg our sor , water and arr.

 

Because of the threat these
dumps pose to human health and
the environment, Congress passed
the Comprehensive Environmental
Response. Compensation and
Liability Act in 1980. This law is
commonly known as Superfund
because it created a 5-year, $1.6
billion fund to finance the cleanup
of hazardous waste sites throughout
the Nation. Eighty-seven percent of
the Superfund money comes from
taxes on the manufacture or import
of certain chemicals and petroleum;
the remainder comes from general
revenues.

The most important aspect of
Superfund is that it allows EPA to
take immediate action when neces-
sary to protect human health and
the environment. Before Superfund,
the Agency was unable to act so
swiftly. EPA is now authorized to
clean up a problem and then, where
possible. to recover those expenses
from the parties responsible for
creating the problem.

More than 2,900 abandoned
hazardous waste dump sites are
thought to exist in Region and are
being evaluated for their potential
to endanger public health and the
environment. Of these sites, 141
have been selected by the states
and EPA for inclusion on the
National Priorities List, a catalog of
546 sites throughout the Nation
which are eligible for Superfund
cleanups. The Midwest has more
sites on the list than any other area
in the country.

Thirty-one of the Region's 141
sites were in various stages of
cleanup during 1983. ranging from
exploratory studies to actual
hazardous waste removal.

A St Materials
Outboard Marine Corp.
i Wauconda Sand 8: Gravel
Cross Brothers/Pembroke
Johns-Manville
'4 Byron Salvage Yard

LaSalle Electric

INDIANA

- Mldco I

Poet Farm
. Bennett Stone Quarry

Region Superfund National Priorities List Sites



 
  
  
   

 

O.

I
.6.
0 
.9 .

 

LLINOIS

Acme Solvent

Seymour
Envirochem

Lemon Lane Landfill

 

Lake Sandy Jo
Northside Sanitary Landfill
Reilly Tar 8i Chemical

MICHIGAN

Berlin 8: Farro

OHIO

. Liquid Di5posal Inc.
Northernaire Ptating
. Gratiot County Landfill

a? Chem-Dyne
a Coshocton City Landfill
Lesion/Poplar Oil

r. .
.. 335223? a om 
it Field's Brook

Rose TWP Dum 
3. Land?? MINNESOTA 6 New Lyme Landfill
Verona Well Field New Brighton/Arden Hills 0 Arcanum Iron 8: Metal
Novaco Industries Reilly Tar 0 Summit National
- I 1 Waste DiSposal Engineering 0 Bowers Land ill

ar 6mm unicrpal Well LeHillier 0 Allied Chemical

0 Spiegelburg Landfill

0 Springfield TWP Dump

0 Packaging Corp. of America
0 Forest Waste Products

0 South Andover Site
0 Arrowhead Refinery
0 Morris Arsenic Dump

WISCONSIN

0 Cliff/Dow Dump
0 Cemetery Dump Site

0 Rasmussen's Dump

KEY:

Sites where cleanup work was performed during
FY 1983 or earlier.

0 Sites to get funding in FY 1984.
. Sites where no action has yet acourred.

0 Mid-State Disposal. Inc. Landfill

 

Distribution of Hazardous Waste Producing Plants

 

Region has the highest concentration of industrial hazardous waste producers in the
United States?an estimated 3,240 in 1981, the most recent year for which data are available.

However, Superfund distinguishes
between emergency situations that
require immediate action to protect
human health and sites that present
a longer?range problem. EPA con-
siders the special demands of each
situation before deciding on the most
appropriate response.

When immediate action is needed
at a site, it usually involves neutral-
izing, isolating or removing chemi-
cals to prevent fires, explosions, or
public health risks. Ordinarily, these
actions are limited by law to six
months and a total cost of $1 million.
EPA can act quickly to alleviate dan-
gerous situations at any abandoned
dump site, whether or not it is on the
National Priorities List.

In fiscal 1983, Region supervised
29 immediate removals, 14 of which
were at sites on the National Priori-
ties List. The cost of these operations
was $6.6 million.

 

In several instances during 1983,
immediate removals were sufficient
to clean up a site and made further
action unnecessary. After two drums
exploded at the abandoned Alburn
Incinerator site in South Chicago last
summer, EPA supervised the remov-
al of about 300,000 gallons of bulk
wastes and 6,500 drums of flame
mable wastes. SUperfund money
financed the $1.3 million cleanup.

EPA also acted swiftly to prevent
potentially dangerous situations
at three abandoned metal plating
companies in the Region. At each
location, containers of hydrogen and
cyanide were found in close proxi-
mity. When these substances are
mixed, they react violently to form
the lethal hydrogen cyanide gas.

Hixon Plating, near a residential
area in Bushnell, Illinois, was
cleaned up in four days at a cost of
$45,500. Danville Plating, across the
street from an elementary school in
Danville, Illinois, was cleaned up in
less than a month at a cost of
$89,500. Peerless Plating's acid and
cyanide were removed from an aban-
doned Muskegon, Michigan, site in
less than a month for a cost of
$70,000.

The heart of the Superfund
program, however, is what the
Agency calls "Remedial Cleanups.?
These cleanups, usually of large,
severely contaminated sites, involve
extensive studies and plans to en-
sure that the job is done in the best
and most cost-effective way possible.
Some remedial cleanups can take
several years to complete.

Because industries in the six
Region states produce and handle
more hazardous waste than any
other area in the country, there are
many related problems.

 

Among the worst of Region V's
hazardous waste sites is the Chem-
Dyne site in Hamilton, Ohio?a
former chemical waste transfer,
di5posal and storage facility. Fires,
explosions and fish kills have
resulted from operations at the
10-acre site, and the air, soil, surface
water and groundwater have been
contaminated.

Almost $2.7 million has been
spent to remove wastes from the
facility, where 9,000 drums and
220,000 gallons of liquid were aban-
doned. The completion of the Chem-
Dyne surface cleanup in September,
1983. was a major highlight of the
Region's Superfund program.

The Chem-Dyna cleanup was
largely financed by 112 companies
whose wastes were disposed of at
the site. with the State of Ohio and
EPA also contributing to the cost.
EPA used its Superfund authority to
negotiate a $2.4 million settlement
with the 112 companies, and has
sued the operators of Chem-Dyne
and major waste generators who
have refused to participate in the
cleanup.

EPA is now trying to determine the
extent and severity of soil and
groundwater contamination at the
site, with that work scheduled for
completion by the summer of 1984.

The surface cleanup of another
National Priorities List site was
completed during fiscal 1983 at the
abandoned Seymour Recycling Corp.
facility near Seymour, Indiana. More
than 250,000 gallons and 60.000
drums of hazardous wastes were
removed from the 14-acre site,
which was considered one of the
worst in the Region. This cleanup
was entirely paid for by some of the
companies whose wastes were
found at the site.

Region experts will work during
1984 to confirm the possible exist-
ence of buried wastes at Seymour
Recycling and will also continue
studies of nearby soil and ground-
water contamination.

As the Superfund program has
matured, EPA's budget for short- and
long-term actions has increased.
Nationwide, $24.7 million was spent
in fiscal 1983 on removal actions;
$64 million was spent on the deve-
lopment of studies, plans and clean-
ups for National Priorities List sites.

During fiscal 1983, Region 
committed $10.1 million for
remedial cleanups at 28 sites. An
additional $6.6 million was obli-
gated for immediate removals at 19
sites. Region also recovered $14.3
million in cleanup costs and
completed negotiations that will
yield more than $57.5 million for
work on 10 sites.

The Region has also helped the
states update their existing data base
on hazardous waste sites. During fis-
cal 1983. state and EPA investigators
evaluated 570 sites based on avail-
able documentation and physically
inspected 175 others. This program
is helping EPA and the states identify
sites that may need Superfund-
financed cleanups in the future.

Much work remains to be done.
More than $31 million is budgeted
for Superfund work in Region 
during fiscal 1984, and the Region
plans to provide additional cleanups
by vigorously pursuing settlements
with parties responsible for
hazardous waste sites.

Hazardous Waste:
Who Produces 

 

Transoortation
equipment and motor
freight transportation: 10%

Petroleum refining.
primary and fabricated
metals: 8%

 

Machinery and electrical
machinery: 7%

 

Electrical. gas and
sanitary services and
other: 4%

 

Chemicals: 71%

How It Is Disposed Of

  

Surface Impoundment: 38%
Landfill: 3%
Land treatment. 1.4%

Other: 6%

 

Underground iniection: 57%

 

Dioxin

 

Almost daily, newspapers and radio
and television stations carry stories
about the poisoning of America by
hazardous chemicals.

Public concern over this contami-
nation is intense and was heightened
in February, 1983, when the govern-
ment announced that it would
relocate the residents of Times
Beach. Missouri, because of exten-
sive dioxin contamination.

Dioxin was a contaminant in
?Agent Orange," the defoliant used
by US. forces during the Vietnam
War. Many servicemen have reported
that their exposure to Agent Orange
has caused a variety of health
problems, but scientists are mystified
about exactly how this chemical
affects the human body.

Dioxin, or more specifically,

is created during
the manufacture of a
chemical often used as an ingredient
in certain herbicides. It is perhaps
the most toxic man-made substance
known and poses a threat at levels
that, until recently, were too minute
to measure.

EPA is responding to public con-
cern over the effects of dioxin by de-
veloping a nationwide strategy to do
the following:

1. Determine the extent of dioxin
contamination throughout the
United States and the associated
risks to humans and the environ-
ment.

2. Clean up sites already contami-
nated by the chemical.

3. Evaluate ways of preventing
future contamination.

4. Investigate methods of destruc~
tion or disposal.

EPA will work closely with other
concerned government agencies,
including the states and the Federal
Centers for Disease Control. on this
project.

Until more research is done, EPA's
Cancer Assessment Group is regard-
ing dioxin as both an initiator and
promoter of cancer, that is, it is
thought to cause cancer in humans
and to accelerate the formation of
cancers caused by other means.

Based on its suspected carcino-
genic potency, the Agency estimates
that individuals exposed to soil or
fish tainted by dioxin could have a
significant cancer risk under certain
very limited exposure conditions.

As part of the Agency's dioxin
strategy, Region and the states
have already begun taking soil
and fish samples at several sites
throughout the Region. First to be
sampled were locations in Michigan.
where dioxin has been found in fish
from the Tittabawasee and other
rivers.

In order to learn more about the
occurrence and distribution of dioxin.
Region will sample a variety of
industrial areas likely to be contami-
hated, as well as "control sites?
where EPA does not believe produc-
tion or extensive use of dioxin-
contaminated products has occurred.

 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

Just as Superfund was created

to remedy the hazardous waste
problems of the past, the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act of
1976 (RCRA) was written to prevent
such problems in the future.

Because of RCRA, EPA is actively
involved in managing hazardous
wastes from the time they are cre
ated until their disposal or destruc-
tion, Through the use of a ?cradle to
grave? waste tracking system, EPA
and the states can ensure that haz-
ardous substances are being proper-
ly handled and disposed of.

EPA also issues permits to hazard-
ous waste disposal, storage and
treatment facilities that meet Agency
standards for safe Operation and
maintenance. In Region V, about
1,600 existing facilities are qualified
to legally operate until a final RCRA
permit decision is made.

Before final permits are issued,
each facility is inspected and its
Operating record is reviewed.

   

GENERATION

 

 

Region is now evaluating the
permit applications of 166 facilities
and continues to process the
applications of others. First priority
is given to the largest facilities and
those with the most potential for
causing environmental harm.

The states, with financial help
from EPA, provide considerable as-
sistance in the RCRA permitting pro-
cess. They review applications for
completeness and accuracy, later
helping to draft the actual permits.

The RCRA permitting process
makes special efforts to see that pub-
lic Opinion is reflected in the Agen-
cy's final decisions.

One of the Agency's highest
priorities is to authorize states to
Operate their hazardous waste prog-
rams in place of the Federal RCRA
program. TO do that, a state must
change its laws and regulations so
that they conform to, or are stricter
than. Federal laws and regulations.

TREATMENT

 

States are expected to Qualilfy for
final authorization in 1985. All
Region states are seeking final
authorization, which would entitle
them to administer all aspects of the
Federal RCRA program.

Part of the RCRA program involves
making sure that waste handlers are
meeting applicable standards.
Sometimes this means onsite in?
spection or the review of records and
reports. If a deficiency is found,
warning letters or compliance orders
are sent. When the violation is partic-
ularly serious, civil or criminal action
is pursued.

in fiscal 1983, EPA and the states
inspected more than 2,200 facilities
in the Region and took more than
1,250 enforcement actions. These
efforts helped bring at least 600
waste handlers back into
compliance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TRANSPORTATION

 

 
 

 

Toxic Substances

The Toxic Slabstances Control Act

of 1976 was designed to con-
trol these chemicals that present an
unreasonable risk to human health
or the environment.

The act required EPA to compile an
inventorv of commercially avaiiable
chemicals and authorizes EPA to Dro?
hibit or limit the manufacture, use or
disoosal of particular chemicals that
present an imminent hazard to
human health or the environment.
The law also requires manufacturers
to notify EPA 90 days before begin-
ning production of a new chemical.

EPA's Region office has develop-
ed an active inspection program to
ensure compliance with TSCA and
regulations developed under that
law. During fiscal 1983, 58 facilities
in the Peoion were for
compliance with the premanirfactu-
ring notification requirement.

EPA also manufacturers
and processors to report information
on the production and use of about
250 chemicals that may cause occu-
pational or public health problems or
environmental damage.

Of immediate concern to EPA are
two suhstances regulated under
TSCA?asbestos and 
biphenvls (PCle. At one time both of
these chemicals were widely used
because of their desirable phv3ical
and chemical properties. Their use
was restricted after it was learned
that they are persistent in the envi-
ronment and can cause severe
hearth prohlems. Asbestos is a carci-
nogen. and PCBs can cause skin.
liver and reproductive disorders.

 



CAUTION

mm

A toxic environmcil contaminant 
special and dlspOSOi in accordance with
US Environmental Proteaion Agency Regulations

40 CFR Tat?Far Disposal Information contocr
menearesr U.S E.P A Office



 

In (use of occrdenr or call toll tree the 5.
Coast Guard Notional Rasputin? Cenrer.
60042443602



Also Contact
Tel No

.1.





Since PCB regulations went into
effect in 1979, Region has inSpec-
ted about 950 facilities. Only about
half of those were complying with
the regulations on use, storage. dis-
posal, marking and recordkeeping.
PCBs are no longer produced in the
United States, but many still exist as
insulation in electrical transformers
and capacitators in utility networks,
railroads and subway systems.

Because so many facilities are not
complying with the PCB regulations.
EPA will work with the Ohio Environ?
mental Protection Agency and the

Michigan Department of Natural
Resources to impact 250 additional
facilities during fiscal 1984.

In addition to performing inspec?
tions. Region reSponds to emer-
gencies involving Spilled PCBs, takes
enforcement action when necessary.
and answers inquiries regarding the
procer use and control of PCBs. In fis-
cal 1983, Region initiated 118 PCB
enforcement actions?more than 40
percent of EPA's national total.

PCB disposal and destruction is
strictly controlled by EPA. Environ-
mental engineers and specialists in
Region review applications from
companies or research institutions
who want EPA approval to diSpose of
the chemical. Those who can demon-
strate their ability to provide efficient
and safe diSposal or destruction are
authorized by the Region to do so.

During fiscal 1983. Region 
approved diSposal of PCBs at seven
commercial destruction facilities and
in one industrial boiler. One of the
commercial facilities approved was
the SCA Chemical Services Inc.
incinerator in South Chicago. SCA
has one of only three commercial
incinerators in the Nation available
to burn high concentrations of PCBs.
EPA required strict controls on the
operation of the incinerator to ensure
that the company will safely destroy
PCBs that might otherwise remain
in the Midwest for lack of disposal
options.

Region also approved permits
for 19 research and development
facilities investigating treatment and
disposal methods for PCBs.

 

 

 

 

Asbestos

In order to carry out its duties under
the Toxic Substances Control Act,
EPA administers an asbestos control
program in schools throughout the
Nation.

The program is designed to limit
the exposure of students, teachers
and staff to asbestos fibers from
deteriorating ceiling tiles or Sprayed-
on insulation.

The 1982 EPA "Asbestos in
Schools? rule requires school dis-
tricts to check each of their schools
for the presence of friable asbestos,
easily crumbled fibers that were pop-
ular between 1940 and 1973 as fire-
proofing and insulation materials. If
friable asbestos is present, school
districts must notify parents, teach-
ers and school employees. Typically.
school districts seal, encase or
remove the asbestos.

Asbestos is valued for its heat re-
sistant and indestructible qualities.
but it can pose a significant danger to
human health if it is not completely
sealed in a product. Otherwise, it can
break into tiny fibers that float almost
indefinitely in the air. These fibers
are smaller and more buoyant than
ordinary dust particles and therefore
are easily inhaled and swallowed.

The presence of asbestos particles
in the body can cause lung cancer
and asbestosis, a chronic lung dis?
ease that makes breathing increas?
ingly difficult and, in severe cases.
can cause death. Some fibers are ex-
pelled by the lungs; others remain in
the body indefinitely and can result in
other types of cancers that develop
15 to 40 years after the first expo-
sure. Mesothelioma. one such dis-
ease, is a cancer of the membranes
that line the chest and abdomen. It
almost never occurs in people who
have not been exposed to asbestos,
and it is always fatal.

To safeguard children and school
workers, EPA requires each school

Asbestos In Schools
Program Progress

 

 

Total no. r?
Dlpub'": 4,165 2.057 3.912 1,677 4.102 2.083

Schools

 

Public
Schools 4,092 2.057 3.856 1.637 4.040 2.079

Inspected

 

Public Schools
Needing Correc- 983 248 275 401 860 713

titre Action

 

Total No. Of
Non-Public 1,343 498 1,007 544 936 945

Schools

 

Non-Public
Schools 1.330 498 873 514 819 928

Inspected

 

Non-Public
Schools Needing 295 27 84 184 173 381

Corrective Action

 

A 
T:;;:ctwe otton 589 144 204 255 490 557

system to impact all of its schools for about 80 percent of the inspected
friable asbestos and to maintain districts are not complying with the
records of these inspections. regulations. Noted were improper
recordkeeping practices, improper
sampling and testing programs and
failure to notify and warn officials
and parents that friable asbestos
was present. EPA also discovered
that some districts had taken
improper corrective action. resulting
in the continued presence of

Most of 23.270 schools in the asbestos in schools.
Region were inspected between
1979 and 1982, when EPA operated
a voluntary asbestos program for
schools. Of the 22,723 schools

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Region helps school districts
by conducting asbestos workshops
and providing technical expertise.
In addition, a program coordinator in
each state helps school districts
meet their obligations under the
"Asbestos in Schools" rule.

Region Specialists. along with
members of the American Associa-
tion of Retired Persons. will inspect
an additional 250 school districts

inSpected, approximately 4'634 in fiscal years 1984 and 1985.
requrred corrective measures. EPA will fund the efforts of the
EPA inspection of 42 school retired persons' association.

districts in Region revealed that

 

Pesticides

The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide
and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) charges
EPA with controlling the manufac-
ture, distribution and use of the 800
million pounds of pesticides used in
the United States each year. Because
20 percent of those pesticides are
manufactured and used in the Mid-
west, this Region has a major role in
the enforcement of the act.

When properly used, pesticides
can control disease?carrying insects
and minimize crop damage. How-
ever. these same chemicals are also
poisons that can endanger man, ani-
mals and the environment if used
improperly.

Region is responsible for seeing
that pesticides are used safely and
pr0perly in its six states and that
manufacturers comply with their re-
sponsibilities under the law. The
Pesticides Section of the Waste
Management Division:

1 . Monitors pesticide use by pro-
fessional pest control operators.
aerial applicators, homeowners.
industry officials, and farmers.

2. Protects the public by ordering
manufacturers to stop sales of
pesticides when products
violate the terms of the law.

3. Assesses monetary civil penal?
ties for major violations of FIFRA.

4. Supervises state inspections of
the 3,200 pesticide manufactur-
ers in the Region.

5. Oversees state-administered
pesticide compliance programs.

All pesticides used in the United
States must be registered with EPA.
In order to obtain a registration,

a manufacturer must provide the
Agency with information regarding
the pesticides contents, toxicity,
persistence in the environment,

short and long-term environmental
effects, safety and use, and effects
on humans and the environment.

Before registering a pesticide,
EPA is required to determine whether
the product can perform its intended
function without causing ?unrea-
sonable adverse effects" on human
health or the environment.

EPA and the states collect and
analyze pesticides to see that they
are labeled in accordance with the
registration they have been given by
the Agency. It is illegal to use a pesti-
cide for purposes, or in a manner.
other than Specifically directed on
the label. In fiscal 1983, Region 
issued 21 ?Stop Sale" orders

 

because products were improperly
labeled?in some cases due to
inaccurate antidote instructions.
Seven manufacturers also agreed, at
EPA's request, to recall certain
products from the market in fiscal
1983 because of serious FIFRA
violations.

When attempts to work with a
manufacturer fail, or when a particu-
larly serious violation of FIFRA
occurs. EPA may assess monetary
civil penalties. The Region Pesti-
cides Section proposed 106 such
penalties in 1983.

FIFRA requires that certain highly
toxic pesticides be used only by, or
under the supervision of, applicators
who have been certified by the EPA
or by states with an EPA-approved
pesticides program. By October 1.
1983, there were 138,000 certified
private applicators and 53.000
commercial applicators in Region V.
The pesticides Section has played a
major role in helping all of its states
assume responsibility for the
certification programs.

Along with certification, FIFRA
authorizes EPA to delegate pesticides
enforcement functions to the states.
All six states in Region V, with the
aid of EPA grants. have developed
enforcement programs and are now
assuming primary enforcement
responsibilities under FIFRA.

Future work by the Pesticides
Section will include laboratory audits
to guarantee the accuracy of data
submitted by pesticide manufactur-
ers, monitoring of pesticide importers
and exporters, continued oversight of
state enforcement and certification
programs, and the close monitoring
of certain pesticides.

WATER QUALITY

Whm?l Cox'wgr?ess massed the Clear? WaTer Act in 972,
EJEJJBCUVQ was "to and mamtm? the (phermcal.

DhVSIrjal, and gf the \fmters 

To this and, the Act ?hshablm. 
the country by Ju y E, 1983miners 1 GE: 5

 

 

These goals are ambitious ones,
and have not yet been entirely
achieved. However, Region water
quality experts have worked closely
with the six states to control the flow
of municipal and industrial wastes to
the Great Lakes and other waters.
EPA has helped to finance municipal
sewage treatment plants otherwise
beyond the reach of some towns and
cities and has assisted the states in
developing management plans for
their streams, lakes, and rivers.

To achieve the goals of the Clean
Water Act, Congress required all dis-
chargers to apply for and receive perv
mits that significantly limit the
amounts and kinds of pollutants they
can discharge into navigable waters.
This pollution control program.

known as the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES), required all dischargers

to treat their wastewater so that it
meets certain basic standards. Each
state in Region has been autho-
rized by EPA to run the NPDES
program and is in charge of issuing
permits and ensuring compliance
with them.

Nearly 1,500 major dischargers in
Region now hold NPDES permits,
with 92 percent of them in comp-
liance with those permits.

Because municipal wastewater
can be just as damaging to water
quality as industrial effluent, the
Clean Water Act expanded an exist-
ing construction grants program to
help municipalities build or improve
sewage treatment facilities. Projects

funded range from sewer rehabilita-
tion to sophisticated treatment
plants handling hundreds of millions
of gallons of sewage each day.
Before any project is funded. it is
reviewed for cost effectiveness and
environmental compatibility.

Region awarded $753.4 million
in construction grants during fiscal
1983 to help local governments build
wastewater treatment plants and
other facilities designed to improve
water quality. Two hundred and ten
projects were completed during that
year, and 140 more are planned for
fiscal 1984. when the Region ex-
pects to award $782 million in
grants.

EPA CONSTRUCTION GRANTS, FY 83

Illinois

Indiana

Michigan

Minnesota

Ohio

Wisconsin

 

 

 

 

 

 

50 100
Millions of Dollars

.tL.

200 250

 

Detroit sewage, once the single - ?Newt?.
largest contributor to the eutrOphica- 
tion of Lake Erie, is being effectively
treated to meet conventional pollu-
tion control requirements. Construc-
tion of treatment plants such as De-
troit's have helped reopen beaches
and return fish to previously barren
waters throughout the Region.

DeSpite Significant improvements
in many areas, many of the Region's
waterways still have pollution prob-
lems. Fish consumption remains
banned or restricted on portions of the
Lower Great Lakes and on the Grand,
Tittabawasee and Fox Rivers. Con-
taminated sediments have caused
poor water quality and have restrict?
ed Sports and recreational activities
on segments of the Mahoning,
Chicago, Cuyahoga and Ashtabula

I I - ?if? I - ?if" I
Rivers. .2

Of special concern to EPA are The Northeastern Ohio Regional Sewer sSoutnerly Wastetidter Treatment Pia-tit, CfLV'lelld
industries that discharge harmful

chemicals into the Region's streams.

 

lakes and rivers. Some industries requirements and define allowable State and Federal initiatives,

are improperly routing toxic chemi- levels of these chemicals in waste- c0upleo With construction giants.
cals through municipal wastewater water. EPA is also helping the states helped reduce rates
treatment systems, often with develop pretreatment programs that by 47 percent for municipalities and
disastrous consequences to the limit industrial discharges of certain 65 percent for inoustr.es during
treatment plants and the streams chemicals into muniCipal sewer fiscal 1983.

into which they discharge. Because systems,

. ln" lntl"l"l
of these tOXIcants, more than 100 (Names a ?d d'bu'drg

municipalities in the Region have Sometimes industries Violate the ere?called point sources ?are?rnaior
sludge contamination problems. terms ofltheir NPDES permits: . contributors to the Region 5- water
discharging substances that kill tish quality piomems, bot they re not the
EPA and the states have identified or contaminate public water only ones. Noripoini souices. such as
330 industries and 485 municipali- supplies. When this happens, EPA urban and agricultural runoff and
ties which discharge, or are likely to has several enforcement options septic tank Seepage, also nave a
discharge, toxic chemicals. Control? In fiscal 1983, Region referred nine treniei'iu'ous impact. EPA believes
ling toxicants will be an important cases to the Department of Jusnce that water quality problems in many
activity during 1984. as Region for prosecution?the serious areas will peisist untess these non-
works with the states to identify step the Agency can take. The Region poii it sources effectively
violations of water quality standards, also issued 21 legally binding controlled.
assemble data, develop testing administrative orders to force

compliance with water quality
standards, while the individual states
also took action to make sure that
dischargers complied With the Clean
Water Act.

 

 

During the past 10 years, Region 
has worked with the US. Depart?
ment of Agriculture, several major
universities and a number of local
soil conservation districts to evaluate
the impact of nonpoint source pollu?
tion and to develop methods for its
control. EPA's Great Lakes National
Program Office, located in Chicago,
has actively encouraged the use of
farming methods that reduce soil
erosion. In addition, the states of
Wisconsin and Ohio have de-
veIOped their own programs
designed to minimize pollution from
nonpoint sources.

Region also helped states docu-
ment basic water quality in their
streams, lakes and rivers and pro?
vided more than $138,000 in fiscal
1983 to help restore and protect pub-
licly owned lakes. Ten of 27 lake re-
storation projects begun in 1976 are
now complete.

The most ambitious lake restora-
tion project in the Region took place
at Lake Lansing, Michigan, where
rich bottom sediments were dredged
to remove the nutrients upon which
algae and weeds were thriving. This
project was completed in fiscal 1983
at a cost of about $4 million.

A Special emphasis in 1984 will
be to improve the quality of the Grand
Calumet River and Indiana Harbor in
the Gary, Indiana, area. The Region
plans to reduce harmful industrial
and municipal wastewater dis-
charges through aggressive monitor-
ing and enforcement and will work
to find environmentally sound
methods of dredging the heavily
contaminated sediments of the
harbor and ship canal.

Region has always been a leader
in helping its states develop pollution
control programs and in encourag-
ing the states to assume active roles
in managing environmental issues.

Michigan was the first state in the
country to assume full responsibility
for a NPDES program, Illinois for con-
struction grants and Minnesota for
pretreatment. All Region states
now fully Operate their NPDES per-
mit programs; five of the six operate
all or part of their construction grants
programs and four are preparing to
operate pretreatment programs.
Michigan will soon become the first
state in the Region to Operate its own
wetlands protection program.

In addition to the construction
grants and other financial help,
Region provided $35.8 million in
fiscal 1983 to help the states run
their water quality programs.

 

Wetlands

 

Region is also acting to protect

its remaining wetlands, which are
vital to the growth and maintenance
of a healthy environment. These
lowaing swamp and marsh areas
nurture young fish and animals and
are nature's way of controlling
erosion and floods.

For too long, wetlands were
viewed only as another obstacle to
development and growth. They were
filled in and paved over to such an
extent that only 30 percent of the
Nation's wetlands still exist.

In order to minimize damage to
wetlands. Region routinely reviews
applications for US. Army Corps of
Engineers "dredge and fill" permits.
At EPA's direction, the Corps can
modify, restrict or refuse to grant
permits for projects that will damage,
or are likely to damage, valuable
swamps and marshes.

Region suggested permit
changes that saved 380 acres of wet-
lands from destruction during fiscal

 



It!? fl ll 

 

   
 

Sulrface 

APP icetion Interaction 

?1'f Partially with Vegetation A High Quality
Treated Wetlands

Weetewater Effluent

 

 

1983?3 91 percent reduction from
the 416 acres that would have been
destroyed if the permits had been
granted without comments.

EPA is also working with the states
to identify and protect the Region's
unique wetlands.

Although wetlands are fragile
environments that should be pro-
tected, EPA feels there are ways in
which man can use these natural
systems to help with his own envi-
ronmental problems. As a result,
Region is studying ways of using
wetlands to enhance traditional
wastewater treatment processes.
After sewage has been treated by
normal means, the purified waste-
water can be discharged into a
swamp for further refinement. As the
water soaks through the soil and
vegetation, many remaining conta-
minants are filtered out before the
water finds its way into underground
aquifers or surface lakes and
streams.

One of the more successful exper-
iments in wetlands wastewater
treatment is taking place at Hough-
ton Lake, Michigan. As many as one
million gallons of treated effluent are
released each day into a SOC-acre
marsh near the town's sewage treat-
ment plant.

Because of the complexity of na?
tural systems, the use of wetlands
for wastewater treatment purposes
must be carefully designed and mon-
itored. it is most suitable for small
communities with a relatively small
volume of effluent. Region experts
are now developing an environ-
mental impact statement on the en-
gineering, ecological and legal as-
pects of using wetlands for waste
treatment purposes.

 

Drinking and Groundwater

 

Quality

Even though the United States is
generally known for the purity and
safety of its drinking water, several
thousand Americans become ill
each year from contaminated
water. To protect the public from
such health hazards, Congress
passed the Safe Drinking Water
Act in 1974. The act was the first
legislation to call for nationally
enforceable drinking water
standards.

Regulations issued in 1975 set
limits on bacteriological, chemical
and physical contaminants in drink-
ing water. Schedules were estab-
lished for routinely detecting and
treating those contaminants in all
water systems regularly serving
more than 25 people.

EPA reviews drinking water
regulations at least once every
three years, as the Safe Drinking
Water Act requires, and changes
them when necessary. As part of
that process, EPA has proposed
new standards to more adequately
safeguard public health from the
threat of toxic compounds. If the
proposed standards are adepted,
public water systems will have to
expand their detection and

treatment programs to include
volatile organic chemicals and
particularly hazardous substances
such as asbestos and PCBs.

Region provides technical help
and money to public water systems
and the states so that they can
comply with the regulations and
improve the quality of their water.
Region provided $4.7 million in
grants for this purpose during fiscal
1983 and has given 
Michigan, Minnesota. Ohio and
Wisconsin primary reSponsibility
for their public water supply
programs. Ninety-four percent of
the Region's 8,300 community
water systems are providing water
that meets the requirements of the
Safe Drinking Water Act.

Groundwater, which is the
source of potable water for 50
percent of Americans, is normally
of better quality and requires less
treatment than surface water.
However, it is especially vulnerable
to many types of pollution,
including leaking hazardous waste
injection wells. A 1981 survey of
the Nation's groundwater indicated
that a significant number of
drinking water sources are
contaminated by volatile 
organic chemicals.

 

Region officials are especially
concerned about this type of conta-
mination and have begun a 10-year
program in which every underground
community water supply in the six
states will be tested for volatile
organics.

Wells in urban industrial areas,
near hazardous waste diSposal sites,
or in areas susceptible to contamina-
tion will receive first priority.

When chemicals are found in
levels that could pose a health risk
to people drinking the water, EPA
will work with the states to find an
uncontaminated water source or to
treat the groundwater until it is
acceptable under the Safe Drinking
Water Act.

During fiscal 1983, approx-
imately nine percent of all under-
ground drinking water sources in
the Region were tested. The states
of Minnesota, Wisconsin and Ohio
have already begun their own
testing programs for volatile
organics, and the Region
intends to supplement the work of
those and other states by providing
funds and laboratory assistance as
necessary.

In order to protect underground
water supplies. EPA requires states
to implement underground injection
control programs. These programs
require the licensing of underground
hazardous waste injection wells to
ensure that they don't poison drink-
ing water supplies.

Region water quality personnel
worked with the states of Wisconsin,
Illinois and Ohio during fiscal 1983
to help them develop underground
injection well programs compatible
with the Safe Drinking Water Act.
Region is administering the pro-
grams in the other three states.

Because of Congressional concern
during fiscal 1983 about the integrity
of hazardous waste injection wells,
Region participated in a Special
program to evaluate the regulations
governing the operation and con-
struction of those wells. Data gather-
ed by the regions will be used by EPA
to make recommendations on how
hazardous waste injection wells
can be made safer.



5.



Drinking water well:nnb 

GREAT LAKES




?fn? Hilrw=hr51.;

[1-1 Ir'rjj'w CH r? 


a:?it~ I it:


 

In addition to steel mills and
ports, the lakes support recreational
and fishing industries with combined
total revenues of more than $1.1
billion a year.

DeSpite their awe-inspiring size,
the lakes are eSpecially sensitive to
environmental insult. Only one
percent of the water entering the
Great Lakes system flows out the
St. Lawrence River in any single year,
leaving toxic pollutants to accumu-
late in bottom sediments or fish.

Municipal sewage, toxicants.
industrial wastes and agricultural
runoff have all contributed to the
dramatic decline of the lakes. The
most obvious problems were clearly
apparent during the 1960's, when
rotting fish. bobbing debris, and
algae-choked waters shocked the
international community into action.

Since then, EPA has worked to
restore the lakes to their original
grandeur. EPA's Chicago-based

Great Lakes National Program Office.

working closely with Region V's
Water Division, tracks compliance
with 1972 and 1978 U.S.-Canada
Great Lakes water quality agree-
ments. Those agreements mandate
cooperative pollution control and
research efforts in order to protect
and improve water quality in the
Great Lakes.

The US. and Canada have spent
more than $7.6 billion since 1972 to
construct and upgrade municipal
sewage treatment facilities in the
Great Lakes Basin. Three hundred
and ninety plants in the basin now
are effectively treating 97 percent of
the sewage, with a corresponding
improvement in water quality.

Industrial discharges into the lakes
are now limited and monitored by the
states and EPA water quality person-
nel. EPA has established a compre-
hensive data gathering network to
measure pollutants in the water,
fish. sediments and air of the Great
Lakes ecosystem.

EPA also has helped identify 25
key ?areas of concern" in the US.
where the use of Great Lakes
water is limited because of its poor
quality. These areas are divided
into two classes: Class A, where
environmental degradation and
impairment of beneficial uses is
severe; and Class B, where some
environmental degradation is
obvious and where uses may be
impaired. These sites are illustrated
in the accompanying map.

In 1984. the Great Lakes National
Program Office will begin an inten-
sive survey of the Detroit River, a
Class A area of concern. The river's
sediments are contaminated by PCBs
and mercury~a situation that makes
fish consumption restrictions man-
datory. Recreational use of some
parts of the river is limited because
of sewage overflows and poor water
quality. EPA, working with the
State of Michigan, will determine
what special measures are needed
to restore water quality in the river.

The Great Lakes National Program
office uses its research vessel, the
Roger R. Simons, to assist in gather-
ing data. During fiscal 1983, the ship
cruised Lakes Michigan, Huron, and
Erie. EPA scientists sampled the
water and biota, using the on-board
laboratory to check for biological acti-
vity and water chemistry.

Guided by the surveillance plan
developed by the international
Joint Commission (IJC). EPA is
using the Roger R. Simons to
regularly assess conditions in the
lakes and to detect year-to-year

 

 

This photograph documents the flow of
phosphorus into the waters of Lake
Ontario The white and grey Colors indicate
land. white bright blue. aquamarine. yellow.
green. red and pink indicate varying concentra-
tions of phosphorus The blue shades Signify
the presance of phosphorus in amounts less
than 1 milligram of phosphorus to 1 liter of
water. The pink signifies the presence of phos-
phorus in amounts greater than 2.41 milligrams
per liter

 

changes. The IJC is a Six-member
board established by the US. and
Canada in 1909 to protect the
waters shared by both countries.

As required by the U.S.-Canada
Great Lakes Water Quality Agree-
ment of 1978, EPA keeps an inven?
tory of dischargers into the lakes and
reports anually on their compliance
records.

The Great Lakes program office
also acts as support staff for Region 
Administrator Valdas V. Adamkus in
his role as the Great Lakes National
Program Manager and the US.
cochairman of the 
Water Quality Board.

PHOSPHORUS

Phosphates historically have been
the biggest environmental insult to
the Great Lakes. Phosphates, which
come from fertilizer-laden agricul-
tural runoff and industrial and
municipal wastes, stimulate the
growth of algae and deprive lake
water of the diffused oxygen necces~
sary to support aquatic life.

Considerable progress has been
made in controlling phOSphorus
pollution in the Great Lakes since the
passage of the 1972 Clean Water
Act. Bans on phOSphates in deter~
gents, along with a vastly improved
and expanded network of sewage
treatment plants, have resulted
in a dramatic decline of phOSphorus
discharges to the Great Lakes.

Twelve years ago, EPA ordered the
cities of Detroit and Cleveland to
reduce their heavy phOSphorus dis-
charges into Lake Erie. The Detroit
wastewater treatment plant now
complies with the international
standard for phosphorus. and Cleve?
land is close to compliance. The over-
all amount of phosphorus going into
Lake Erie from municipalities has
dropped from 6,700 tons annually in
1975 to 2,700 tons annually in 1981.

Because of reductions such as these.
US. wastewater treatment plants
meet the international standard for
phOSphorus.

The problem of phosphorus
pollution from agricultural runoff,
however, has yet to be solved.
Demonstration projects funded by
the Great Lakes National Program
Office have shown that soil conser-
vation practices, e3pecially minimum
tillage, are effective in reducing the
erosion of phosphorus?laden topsoil.

EPA believes that low-cost soil
conservation practices, existing
water pollution control regulations
and detergent phosphate limits will
effectively protect the Great Lakes
from excess phOSphorus.

Although phosphorus. sewage and
industrial effluent have been signifi-
cantly reduced, another type of
pollution threatens the long?term
well-being of the lakes and the
people who use them. Toxic sub-
stances such as PCBs and DDT are
ubiquitous in the Great Lakes Basin
and are emerging as its most critical
problem.

But PCBs and DDT are only two of
the nearly 1,000 contaminants that
have been found. Control programs
have helped reduce the concentra?
tions of some of these chemicals in
area plants and animals, but sport
and commercialfishing industries
are threatened.

Contaminant levels in most large
Great Lakes fish exceed US. Food
and Drug Administration limits for
commercial sale. and sports fisher-
men in all of the lakes are advised to
avoid or restrict their consumption of
certain kinds of fish.

 

Areas of Concern

LAKE MICHIGAN

Fox River/Southern Green Bay. Wisconsin

Milwaukee Estuary. Wisconsin

Waultegan Harbor. Illinois

Grand Calumet River and lndiana Harbor Canal, Indiana

LAKE ERIE

. St. Clair, Michigan Ontario
. Detroit River. Michigan
Rouge River. Michigan
"r Raisin River. Michigan
. . Maumee River, Ohio
7 . . Black River, Ohio
i i i Cleveland. Ohio
1 Ashtabula, Ohio

3? LAKE ONTARIO

i Buffalo River, New York
. Niagra River, New York

. . .i Hamilton Harbor. Ontario

Cornwall-Massena,

Ontario-New York

  
  
 
 
 
 
   
  

LAKE SUPERIOR

0 St. Louis River. Minnesota
0 Thunder Bay, Ontario

0 Nipigon Bay, Ontario

0 Jackfish Bay. Onatario

0 Peninsula Harbour. Ontario

Class A
9 Class 

LAKE MICHIGAN

Manistique River. Michigan
0 Menominee River. Michigan LAKE ERIE
. Shebovgan. Wisconsm 0 Clinton River, Michigan

. Muskegon Lake. Michigan .
0 White Lake Montaque. Michigan . Wheatley Harbour, Ontario

LAKE ONTARIO

Eighteen Mile Creek. New York
Rochester Embayment. New York
Oswego, New York

Toronto Waterfront. Ontario

Port Hope, Ontario

Bay of Quinta, Ontario

LAKE HURON

0 Spanish River Mouth. Ontario 
Penetary Bay to Sturgeon Bay. Ontario
0 Collingwood Harbour, Ontario

 

 

 



LAKE SUPERIOR

Lake Superior, the largest, deepest
and cleanest of the Great Lakes, has
not entirely escaped pollution.
Taconite mining residues, similar to
asbestos particles, have been found
in the drinking water of communities
on the western shores of the lake.
forcing them to install filtration
plants for the first time.

PCB levels in lake trout still exceed
the standards in the 1978 
ada agreement, although levels of
toxicants in herring gull eggs appear
to be falling.

Eutrophication is not considered to
be a serious environmental problem
in Lake Superior.

LAKE MICHIGAN

Lake Michigan, the only one of the
Great Lakes entirely within the US,
has serious contamination prob?
lems, partly because of the large
amounts of PCBs discharged into
Waukegan Harbor at Waukegan,
Illinois, over a period of many years.
Because it is a long, narrow cul-de-
sac, Lake Michigan requires a longer
period to flush itself of contami-
nants than do most of the other lakes.

Lake Michigan trout still contain
the highest levels of PCBs and DDT in
the Great Lakes system, except for
Lake Ontario, and exceed US. Food
and Drug Administration limits for
commercial sale. Consumption ad-
visories for sports fishermen are in
effect in many parts of the lake.

Serious water pollution problems
persist near certain metrOpolitan
areas, most notably in the vicinity of
Indiana Harbor.

Class A areas of concern are:
Southern Green Bay, the Milwaukee
Estuary, Wisconsin; Waukegan
Harbor, and the Grand
Calumet?Indiana Harbor, Indiana,
area.

 

 

LAKE HURON

With the exception of Lake Superior.
Lake Huron is the least polluted of
the lakes. However, discharges into
the Saginaw River have made the
Saginaw Bay area a Class A area

of concern.

Fish consumption bans are in
effect for portions of the Saginaw
River because of PCBs, P835 and
dioxin, and a fish consumption
advisory is in effect for southern Lake
Huron and Saginaw Bay. The bay has
recently shown substantial improve-
ment, mainly because of effective
municipal wastewater treatment.

But existing pollutants and a lack of
controls on agricultural runoff
complicate water quaiity problems
there.

LAKE ERIE

With an average depth of only 58
feet, Lake Erie has the smallest vol-
ume of water and is the shailowest of
the Great Lakes. Since its drainage
basin contains the largest p0pulation
and is heavily industrialized, it is not
surprising that Lake Erie has faced
the most severe and widely
publicized pollution problems.

At one time in the mid-1960's.
massive algae blooms choked off
oxygen to 65 percent of the lake's
bottom water. Pollution, overfishing
and other factors nearly decimated
the lake's most desirable Species
of fish.

Many lakeshore beaches were
closed because of pollution caused
by untreated sewage and masses
of algae.

Considerable progress has been
made since then, especially in
reducing municipal and industrial
discharges.

Municipal dischargers are now
complying with international phos-
phorus limits, and many area coun-
ties are encouraging farmers to use
no-tiil methods that will reduce soil
losses, resulting in improved water
quality and reduced farming costs.

Seven areas of concern affect Lake
Erie. They are located on the Rouge.
Detroit, Raisin, Maumee, Black,
Ashtabula and Cuyahoga rivers.

 

LAKE ONTARIO

Since most of Lake Ontario's water
comes from Lake Erie and the heavily
polluted Niagara River, this lake is
the most contaminated. It ranks only
behind Lake Erie as the lake with the
most phosphorus loading.

Portions of the eastern end of the
take have suffered oxygen depletion
because of nutrients entering Lake
Ontario from the Bay of Ouinte.
Although its water quality is better
than Lake Erie's, Lake Ontario
suffers from accelerated eutrophi-
cation due to excess phOSphorus
loading and toxic contamination.
Industry has Spilled Mirex and other
toxic substances into the Niagara
River and Lake Ontario, resulting in
a fish consumption advisory for fish
caught in both US. and Canadian
waters of the lake.

As in Lake Erie, some improve-
ment has been made, but continued
efforts are necessary. To a consider?
able extent, improvement in Lake
Ontario depends on improvement in
Lake Erie.

in the U.S., the Class A area of
concern affecting Lake Ontario is the
Niagara River, where much improve-
ment is expected when existing
pollution control programs are fully
implemented.

 

Radiation

EPA administers programs designed
to protect humans and the environ-
ment from exposure to harmful
levels of radiation.

EPA's Office of Radiation Programs
measures levels of radiation in the
environment, analyzes data on its
effects, issues standards to limit
human exposure, and responds to
emergencies involving radioactive
materials.

There are two types of radiation:
ionizing and nonionizing. Ionizing
radiation, which comes from X-rays.
nuclear power plants, uranium
wastes and other sources, is radia?
tion that can remove electrons from
atoms. Its primary health effect is an
increased risk of cancer.

Nonionizing radiation, from radio
and television transmitters and mi-
crowave ovens, does not change the
structure of atoms. However, it can
heat body tissue, possibly producing
biological effects.

EPA, concerned with both types
of radiation, develops standards
that limit human exposure to it.
The Agency also has developed
guidelines on the quantities and
concentrations of radioactive mate-
rials that may be released into
the environment.

As part of its environmental
studies and support activity. the
Office of Radiation Programs
maintains a nationwide system that
monitors background radiation as
well as the amount of fallout from
the atmospheric testing of nuclear
weapons.

 

EPA checks air, precipitation, sur-
face water, drinking water, and milk
for radiation in each of the 50 states.
Data from the system are used to
determine normal background levels
of radioactivity, to identify trends in
radiation levels and to help officials
protect public health in case of an
emergency.

In Region V, radiation experts
help other Federal agencies evaluate
and test state and county emergency
reaponse plans. These plans are
designed to protect people and the
environment in case of a major
release of radioactivity from any of
the Region's 22 nuclear power
plants. Agency personnel are also
available to provide technical assis-
tance if such an emergency arises.

Region experts also survey and
recommend cleanup options for sites
contaminated by radiation and are
investigating selected industries for
potential radiation problems.

In the City of West Chicago, Illinois,
EPA is working to determine the
extent of radioactive contamination
from a thorium extraction plant that
Operated in the city between 1931
and 1973. Radioactivity has been
detected on the grounds of the
plant, as well as at the city's sewage
treatment plant, in residential areas,
in a creek and in a park. The Agency
is working with West Chicago offi-
cials to minimize human exposure to
radioactivity. The Agency expects
to recommend possible cleanup
Options.

 

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES

If Region were to be personified. the Eovironmental
Semces would be its hands, eyes and ears

Working out of of?ces Westlake. Ohio; Grosse He,
Michigart; and Chrcago. the profeSSJonals this group do

much of the Region's field, laboratory aod emergency
WOt'k

 

Engineers, scientists and tech-
nicians from this division serve the
Air, Water and Waste Management
programs to achieve 
environmental goals.

The Environmental Services
Division has five branches: the
Central District Office in Chicago, the
Eastern District Office in Ohio, the
Environmental Monitoring Branch,
the Central Regional Laboratory and
the Quality Assurance Office, all in
Chicago.

The Field Investigations Section,
located in the district offices. takes
air and water samples, monitors
environmental control practices at
Federal installations and helps with
regional water supply and solid
waste management programs as
needed.

The Spills Response Section.
working out of the Central District
Office in Chicago, is capable of
quickly responding to oil and
hazardous materials emergencies
anywhere in the Region. Its profes-
sionals are trained to help state and
local authorities control such
incidents without harm to human
health or the environment. This
section also develops and oversees
cleanups of abandoned hazardous
waste dumps requiring immediate
action.

The Environmental Monitoring
Branch manages and analyzes air
and water quality data gathered in

the field. These data are stored in
Special computer systems linked to
all Region states, giving Agency
program managers quick access to
current information about environ-
mental conditions in any particular
location. This branch also oversees
EPA grants and contracts relating to
environmental monitoring.

The Central Regional Laboratory
in Chicago is the largest of EPA's
regional laboratories. It provides
analytical and technical support
services to the air, water and
waste divisions, the Central and
Eastern district offices, and the
states. When needed, the labo-
ratory will perform tests for other
EPA regions, analyzing air, soil,
water, fish, and plants for traces of
chemicals in amounts as small as
10?5 grams.

Laboratory and field personnel
are periodically audited by the
Quality Assurance Office to see
that they analyze and gather their
data properly. Because the
Agency's policy is to produce data
of known quality, data gathering
and laboratory procedures must be
uniform among EPA's laboratories
and anyone who does work for the
Agency. Scientists from the Quality
Assurance Office routinely check to
make sure that states, private
contractors and EPA's own labs
have the proper staff, equipment
and quality assurance programs to
conform to EPA's standards. This
section also certifies state and
municipal laboratories that test
drinking water under the Safe
Drinking Water Act.

 

 

3 GOVERNMENT OFFICE. l934 T554033

U.S.EPA Region Organizational Chart

 

0F COUNSEL

 

BRANCH

SOLID 3

EMERGENCY RESPONSE BRANCH
WATER. 6i

LAW BRANI. 

 

 

REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR
.J'tlti 

DEPUTY REGIONAL "i

 

(arm?! ?fNERr-tt
thuTNI ?Wv DIVISIUN

 



 

Oi'rii? 
Marmot



v: n. :t Mm
Mint: 5- air

nlJH-Llf; AFFAIRS

_l 

I I 

UHF AT 
NAMONAI 

 

 

 

I 

 

AIR I

f?I
DIVISION



mama-159.1.55: 



 

 

I. Hunt-iv 'rl

 

 

 

 

 

 

For Further Information

If you would like additonal information about
Specific US. EPA programs, please visit the
Office of Public Affairs, US. EPA Region 
230 South Dearborn Street. Chicago. Illinois
60604. or call (312) 353-2072.

This office maintains a supply of EPA
publications, Operates and informal speakers'
bureau and coordinates regional distribution
of environmental films. There is no charge to
the public for these Services.

lfyou encounter an environmental problem.
report it first to y0ur local, and then your
state, pollution control agency. Those
numbers are listed on the right. For specific
information about US. EPA programs call:

 

U.S.EPA RegionV [312] 353-2000
Air Pollution (312)353-2212
Automobile Problems
Catalytic Converters (202) 382-2640
Certifying a Carfor 
Fuel Economy [313) 668-4329
Fuel Switching [312} 886-4577
Imports (312} 886-6082
Tampering with
Emission Controls (202) 382-2640
Warranty 8:
After-Market Parts (202) 382-2940

Great Lakes
National Program Office t312)353~2117
Hazardous Waste, Superfund {312) 353-9733
Oil 8- Chemical Spills

National Emergency

Response Center {8001424-8802

Region Emergency

ReSponse Center (3121353-2318
Pesticides (312)353?2192
Radiation (31218866175
Toxic Substances (31218866006

Water Quality
Wastewater Treatment . . . . (312] 353-2121
Drinking Water {312i 353?2650
Wetlands {312i 886?6678

ILLINOIS

Illinois Environmental Protection Agency

2200 Churchill Road

Springfield, IL 62706

(21 7} 782-5562

24vhour number: (2 I 7} 782-3637
INDIANA

Indiana State Board of Health

1330 W. Michigan Street

Indianapolis. IN 46206

(3171633-0100

24-hour number: {317) 633?0144
MICHIGAN

Michigan Department of Natural Resources

Stevens T. Mason Building

Lansing, MI 48909

(517)373-1220

24Ahour numbers: {517) 373-7660

(800} 292?4706

MINNESOTA

Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

1935 W. County Rd. 8-2

Rosewlle. MN 55113

(612)296-7373

24-hour number: {612) 296-7373
OHIO

Ohio Envuronmental Protection Agency

361 E. Broad St.

Columbus. OH 43215

(61514668508

24Ahour number {Within Ohio only].

[800} 282-9378
WISCONSIN

Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

PO. Box 7921

Madison, WI 53707

(6081 266-2621

 

United States
Environmental Protection
Agency

Region 

230 South Dearborn Street I

Chicago, Illinois 60604

 

Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
$300.00

 

 

THIRD CLASS
BULK RATE
Postage and Fees Paid-

EPA 

Permit No. (3-35

 

 

The Foresight Society Environmental Congress

6300 N. Michigan Avenue of Mid-Michigan
Suite F-24 310 E. Ashman
LanSing, MI 48917 Midland, MI 48640

14 March 1983

Mr. Valdus Adamkus

Regional Administrator, Region 

United States Environmental
Protection Agency

230 S. Dearborn Street

Chicago, IL 60604

Dear Mr. Adamkus:

Based on the levels of 
TCDD) reported in 1978 to have been found by Dow Chemical Company
scientists in soil samples from its Michigan Division site in Midland,
Michigan (up to 100 parts per billion) and given the soil
contamination levels which prompted the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency to evacuate the Times Beach, Missouri contamination site (loo-1,000
parts per billion), we believe a serious threat to occupational and environ-
mental health may exist at and in the vicinity of the Dow Michigan Division
site that requires your immediate attention and action. Support for this
conclusion is contained in Attachment II.

Because construction, process change?over and process decommissioning
activities at the Dow Michigan Division site are likely to increase the
concentration of associated with respirable particles in the
air downwind to levels representing an unacceptable risk of human health
injury, we are recommending that you consider ordering all such activities
halted there until such time as a thorough quantitative characterization of
the levels of in area soils and dust is obtained and a health
risk assessment is performed. Support for this recommendation is contained
in Attachment 

Thank you for your immediate attention to these requests.

Attachment I is the list of individuals, agencies and organizations
receiving photocopies.

SincerelyLarry E. k, M.S. Andrea K. Wilson

Director Director

The Foresight Society Environmental Congress of
Mid-Michigan

cj

Attachments

Photocopies:



Albosta
Dingell

. Florio

. Gore, Jr.
Kildee
Oberstar
. Obey

. Traxler

. Nolpe

. Scheuer

LICDULUZDLDO



.8. Senate:

.Ammr
Chaffee
Gorton
Levin
Packwood
Riegle

. Stafford



Michigan Representatives:

 

. Alley
Armbruster
Barcia

Bush

Dodak

Hayes
Muxlow
O?Neil, Jr.
. Ostling
Van Singel



Michigan Senators:

. DeGrow
Engler
Hart
Irwin
Young



.5. House of Representatives:

Attachment I

Michigan Agencies:

 

. Tierney, Chair, NRC
Aust, Chair, TSCC
Pridgeon, Director, MDA
Hoefer, Chair, NRC

. Tanner, Director, DNR
Smith Director, DPH
Kelley, AG



U.S. Agencies:

Director, Health and Human
Services

J. Hernandez, Acting
Administrator, EPA

Environmental Groups:

 

M. Campbell, Pollution Probe
of Toronto

D. Hebert, Lone Tree Council

S. Sylvester, Citizens For A
Better Environment

E. Silbergeld, EDF

M. Van Putten, Great Lakes
Natural Resources Center

T. Washington, MUCC

Rucke?lshaus, Midlanders;;to talk

about EPA ?s 

Four Midlanders will participate in a
Washington. DC. meeting about the
Midland and national dioxin sampling

programs. US. Rep. Donald A-lbostal

has announced.

Albosta. Charles, said he ar--

ranged the June 12 meeting with En-
vironmental Protection Agency Ad-
ministrator William Ruckelshaus to
review the eiTorts on the dioxin

program, which has been controversial -

locally.

?The purpose ofthe meeting will be to
see where the EPA is at in terms of the
dioxin study ahd particularly?the
samples taken lastyear in Michigan.
We also need to make sure comparable
sampling is being done at other sites, as
promised earlier. so that there will be
good data to compare the Midland
samples to."Alboeta said.

Samples taken in Midland were to be
analyzed fordioxin at thepartspert?ll-
ion level, and an Albosta aide said the
congressman wants to know what other

mplih

kl? . -

sites are ing tested at that level. and
whether the EPA is preparing a health
r? Ink analysis to give the public some-
more than numbers to gauge the
risk posed by dioxin.

Joining Albosta at the meeting with
Ruckleehaus are to be Midland mayor
Joseph Mann. county board chairman
Scott MacDonald, Midland Area
Chamber of Commerce director Wil-
liam Welch and Diane Hebert. director

of the Environmental Congress of
Mid-Michigan.



 

Midland CIVIC leaders
"to. meet EPA



BY KEITH NAUGHTON

News Staff Writer

5 A contingent of Midland politi-
be], business and environmental
leaders is scheduled to meet with

the administrator of the U. S. Envi-

Commissioners

ronmental Protection Agency June
12 to discuss the agency?s national
dioxin study. 

. In a Washington, meeting

with EPA Administrator William
Buckelshaus, the Midland political
and business tifficials will discuss
their concerns about how the Mid-
land dioxin study ?ts in? with the
national study.

The officials are" worried that n:

the results of the Midland dioxin
Study are not released at the same

time as the rest of the nation? 8?

study, ?it will tend to make us look
pretty bad in the press,? Said Scott

- MacDonald, chairman of the Mid-

iand= County 33393113 of

1 Diane Hebert, president of the

Environmental Congress of: Mid-

- Michigan, said she will .offer ?an

entirely different perspective? i3f

. ?she' able to' attend.

Ms. Hebert?s environmental

group has pushed for an intensive?

dioxin study of Midland and wants
the results as soon as possible

.ied by the EPA for dlexin
?ontamiri?atidn. -Diox'in is a' liighly

itoxic {chemical byproduct which
genes caused? cancer and death ?in
tsonlabratory animals. ii i
.- Soil samples we?re taken in Mid-
last Qctober, butine EPA 1313233333
tyetreleas?d results 33.33 

  
 

on U.S3dlox1n study:

Ms. Hebert said she is concerned
her' perspective will not be heard at
the June 12 Washington meeting
because she will not be able to
aiirird the trip. 

U. S. Rep. Donald. Albosta, 
Charles, arranged the meeting and

his  local staff announced Friday

that Ms. Hebert would be 

attending.

Ms. Hebert said she only heard"
about the meeting Friday and did?

not- confirm that she would attend. -.- 3

Ms. Hebert said she believes Al-?

bosta should- pay her _way because

the Midland city and chunty boards

will pay to send MacDonald, May-

or Joseph Mann, and County

Health Director Winifred Oyen.

the county commissioners will not
approve the expense.

rMacDonald was among- a group
of city, county and business ofii-

cials that met with EPA officials in."

1
i


Washington,D. C. iaht Nov. 

At that meeting, the Midland of-
ficials aired the same complaints
about the dioxin study which they
plain to discuss with Ruckelshausj

They requested meeting with

:Midland was one of the first corn- Ete?uclrelshaus last fall 3 '3

munities in the country to be 
renter-cc ExecutiVe Director William

Midland Chamber of Chm--

i?Welcn and its president, Philip
VaiiDam, histo will attend the up-
?comingmeetinr 
EAlso invited to the meeting are.
Mighiganf S. senators Ca'3rl Le-
'a'nd Doriald Reigle, as well as?
3333.. .R3ep.3 .-3Bob City.3i
I in i -i 

 

-

MacDonald said he expects the' 

trip will cost about $830 per person, 1
but he is willing m?

puv Ida-mm:
actuarial-am Inna-?-

Wanaqyomm
1?;anme 


ammpmaampam?m ?Randal-[nu mun-311W?
?rndm n?mmMmu ma 3mm


pun 
6:11me

mum'mnmm




'summ

pun Hum-mm as pun-m mm pm 99371
'm



linmm 





mm cortun?marr ?7861 ?97. 
?macaw? Wm

ocumruvxozumumm mnadrdm







mt: ruin-mm.? Ilium ?mm an 




mum 



lanthanum (Wm 

man-pup monomnsm an '7861 1113! ?smu

I I ?1 ,1
?mu; ?r 3

mama

muck 





 

 

38.
39.
40.
?3

42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.

untrimmuei?thlzegialnmeardus.
terin

'and -

radar Hi9 

mmr?dxigan, 
mardredw?n?huu?stat?nglev?lsof thopmgramin


J. Oar

Muted by M. amen 



11?1? i. 'Iii'.?di" a.hV*..L I 
.- it: lllit1:air-J - it??uh: 
. . .111juntdl?hlr.44. 193191"
:3 ?f 

I I . u: [53 Ill. IDS ?1?14" 

Pan: sell' .liae outfit! mud: apricot; and 1977.126 mnu' 'oh'aues' .wer?'t?i?re?r?P?
roiled a 'garm'?uLFAdd?? We? bu?hb?r??' '1
"of water to' rub'.in'_ the? p'owderft'I ?Fun?? Chen?- 01?? wind aandm'vater la-
lenly' the -- spot hasdisappc'ared' . suspension of the bacteria 15 mixed With enongb.topsoil to bury the m?we rep
?ning fast isthe"" -and "ms city of Dallas ha;
ion 0113 i110}: molecule not'just medlatclj' pnor to planting; Contact 1.13 billion tons- 

ma; element in the pmteinaceous"l:z van? arm ?173 

- {ht uiwcnt of 13.4'Inmion . .
In! Surrounding iL?y'W" Peacefuj 'rRoad.'. Nevada 

'l r- . . =37: of..J- - 
mall spray Enzootn onIn_?lettuce ?5'21 Califorma95959..- .- ?y . - ?erryinhout 32 
-. t" . fizz-raid . 
eye? imagine the eniyme .. - 
roctly'o?to each cell's nucleus 
=ing to the 


    

 

   
  
  
 
 
   
 
 
 
 
    
   
   

. - 
?wctions _gomg?n n1] their. . ..

[ca'n mamd-DN? 
got a call from?the-eeusaymg 155,4

    

Protein_XYZ. Please get {if}1 "0th 
Lit"; I .. 
4- . Wm amazes?3,511 SCENARIO 13s am.


?nIt?honds'fseparating' the" 'two 
open at the XYZ pati??; 1.
o?catioan' RNA corresponding 
moire unto match the _site. An
'EtitcheS the. pieces_1tOgether._ 

enzyme pries off the'new'XYZj: J:
piece so Head 30 out into thegv-
proudly bearing the banner af?x?I 

tiger'RNA. In the cell it 20011:: If"; 5- .12.

heIpt?btein factory where it is 1 
3n the track. There it waits _er 5 . :59-?7-93-4 ..
her amino acids to arrive; Along??:1 

. lThei?Kcadernyi?ward fort'lnsens tivity
rneIm their taxis, and standz..z . If.? . . - i 

   

  
 

 
     
   

   

- 41:? vii-?L?to: and}: scientists live with themselvesIkno 
0e; on: :tptinte?i - they have contributed to national and intern 
. - .-.- . need wonder no more. 
't for ?Ch 9mg?? landscape in Midland, ?Michigan when 10h - . 

Ewe. -. John Davidson is one of the experts who is routinely quot?d by the apologists for
awmm? landscape spraying. When the state of Misso 

a

.- .. sprayed out of existence. it was John Davidson who was quoted as an experLEThe?ea:
??1??.33?1?2?th?lfgwi pert said 2.4.51 um good for what ails the same time? 
atteittiogiilto?r were gomgto court to explain exactly v. -

. 'hat was wrong with airing defer-in" 'and
.. . - s. ?22; ded 'ds. . - .
[MR-hanging an-ele'en-ic :55- . mentally 

. 

 

 

 

 

I I - izgi??. I I 

. .. . . .The veterans got clobbered,.ofoourse. Theywere simply forced into a settlement by I
?335??me mineral the court system. with Dow Chemical reaping the b?ne?ts. The bime?ts were thit sim-
9L: in; drip-In!1d sitive information about Agent Orange. dioxin-End Dow_ will Edi be disclosedzo' the .- 6'
anon ofram._He_ erenhrnegzig? '111em1cal effects ?wc?gyg, {The cayerupIoomplete,'Dandson retired recently As if to _dash anothertcu of Lea'
I _of.t_he ?1 eommunjcabon?' the faces of.wounded retirement party featured inml'm - 
"=ch threenresearch}, fproud of Agent Orange" T-shin. which was presented to Davidson. i never
mad that re?; The Mdland, Michigan prints didn issue's peep about the'insensi?vity?of the 
8.0:er distance, _m?uenoeb . T?shirt incident- They were busy worrying locals about the tise of table saith? on 
Vth'. Salts "f3; 'Midland has three land?lls that have 1brinespills, noeid?ntai 
530d {Release into the air of such things as chlorineand bromine and these things'l're not 1 . 3'01" 
.?I'Stoldnsa reported. But the use of table salt is set up as anIogre of monurnentnl dimension. uncn:
?13 growth Jn the meantime Davidson goes his way. Those who lionized him said over.
when it ?15 "sealer! stand for the number of stars on his shotildcr. The 16,000 vets who exit-?: the tor c:
ihhung thenmg I, were invented have a different p?oint?of?ewn ?f1 i 3 you r:
min-Jim?; -. . 2437? -. 1' 1.421%; 

. smith; and. -- sew?,
?e??hi.- 

$3351.

.. WEDNESDAY wins 1.

 

.ev . 
News Staff Writer ?1.5.61 . ?ii.

  



Dow Chemical Co. had yet
another brine spill in 
gship iri- Midland County -_recen_tl
?fienmpa'ny' said today. 
."While. more ?workers were in 

fspec?ting part. of a brine production.
i pipeline Thursday. a gasket start-
i -jed to leak and eventually. 6, 000 .gai-
i ions 0; brine gspilled onto ttie
.
-, u: The brine "spilled from a _llne'f'II

salong Monroe Rdad,? a. half mile

-. '::east of Waldo. The spill is not far?
.I'trom we see of ?a 500,000 gallon

shrine spill Dow had _in Lama

.EITownship in April-.- 
. i? The turn Spills are unrelated and
gnot elong the same pipeline, said:
'EDow spokeswoman Mary _Be
Curtiss. .. . ..
?Brine is a salty. water that Dow_-
23; uses in many of its "chemical pro-
sg'duction processes. The Midland-
5b'ased chemi?ai- giant has system
set hundreds of brine wells through-
fitdiit Midland,? Saginaw and? Bay
'1counties.?- -
".45 When the brine began to leak
1?5 g-Thur?sday, the workers were able?.
to take action to contain it immedi-
irately, Ms _Curtiss' said graze-.111
,Arvacuum truck was brought to
?scene 'end suckeuipImnst 


 

 

   
    

 

st {Curtiss said Dow "hopesztn?

  



the
it"s:



HEEL:
as
If
E.
Bilg-
at?


 

LDow? rereals second
.nne In Larkm

The set: began alt-:11 a. in and
wasp! gged by6p_. In, .. sheSaid__. 
The time spilled .nnto property
owned Iby Consumers Power Co. ..
?Cons'umers and the state Depart-

its; meat of .Natural Resources were

L.



'1

notified immediately, the: Curtiss .

.?said: - 

ePart ol? the spill was on Dow
property. Dow owns all the proper-
.715! where it has brine pipelines.

The area of the spill' lS .?sparsely.
.vhgetated." So trees and other lo-
_gliage experienced little or do darn- -
._{egs Ms. Curtiss saidn 

Following the April brine spill in:
:D'arklo Township, many residents.
.?w?atched leaves on large trees earl:
iiahd die:-

nFriday, Dow returned to the.
_site or the' most recent spill and

removed the soil that. had been.

ssoaked brine; Ms. Curtiss

a
1?

?_Dow 'came back Saturday and
'freplaced the soil with. fresh pix-t
I-andsand, IsheSaid 

Residents along Perrihe Road in .

ELarkln Township still are waiting.
for Dow: to reimburse ?them I-inr



their losses from the- April spill.

proach the residents. nest sweetest"-
them seem-_- ,2

eth

 
           
 

 

?l



 

A.






.se ai- 

ell-l?



13? new