Milestones in Water Pollution Control
GORDON E. McCALLUM, Assistant Surgeon General and Chief
Division of Water Supply and Pollution Control
U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare
Public Health Service
Washington, D. C.
It's been a longtime since I've had the pleasure of sitting in a boat collecting
water samples, but I remember what it was like. In particular, I recall how often
we would seem to be standing still. The motor would be chugging away, but the
landmarks ahead seemed to be stationary. We thought we were moving but not
getting very far. Then suddenly we'd look back and find the overhanging tree
which seemed frozen on the bank opposite us a hundred feet to the rear.
This is somewhat my feeling today. In preparing for this assignment I looked
at the paper I gave five years ago, in 1959, before this same group. At that time
I suggested an urgent need for developing new methods of waste purification,
methods that would remove more of the common organic and inorganic pollutants,
and more of the complex synthetic chemicals and other substances that resist biological action.
I pointed out that no fundamentally new sewage treatment process has been
devised since the development of the activated sludge process 43 years before. My
question was: "If we cannot treat wastes sufficiently to avoid nuisance conditions
under our best, most modern practices today, how shall we meet the water needs
of future generations?"
I then proceeded, with the use of slides, to show the shortcomings of today's
conventional methods. I showed that, on the basis of a flow of 1.25 BGD, one
municipal usage of Lake Michigan water increased solids from 170 to 654 parts per
million, of which 348 PPM remained after treatment; that nutrients increased from
0.35 PPM to 7 PPM, of which 5 PPM - 25 to 30 tons per day - of nitrates and
phosphates remained after treatment; and none of the dissolved mineral salts were
removed.
My plea at that time was to you -- the leaders of our profession — to help
solve this problem. Subsequent understanding, interest, and response have been
most encouraging. This has been reflected in a number of ways. In 1961 -- just
two years after my discussion with you -- there was legislative action by the Congress which directed the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare to develop
and demonstrate "practicable means of treating municipal sewage and other
waterborne wastes to remove the maximum possible amounts of physical, chemical, and biological pollutants in order to restore and maintain the maximum
amount of the Nation's water at a quality suitable for repeated reuse."
Application for research and demonstration grants reflect a growing interest
among our academic colleagues. Inquiries and requests for technical assistance
on problems of water reuse have risen sharply in the past two years.
While the actual number of research projects supported — more than 200 this
year -- is important, we consider the type of research represented to be even more
significant. The trend in investigations of conventional waste treatment processes
is leveling off; original studies of new and advanced methods of waste treatment
are rising rapidly. Hitherto unexplored fields include research on systems analysis,
theoretical and applied engineering, oceanographic, and estuarine studies.
- 435 -