[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]
TAR i0o WOO 71 IT -OP Great Lakes Basin Commission 1975 Annual Report F__ both government and the public. The past year was one in which the service potential f the Commis- 0 sion's planning capabilities began to be realized more clearly across the entire Great Lakes Region and in which the Commissioners, administrators, and staff worked together closely and carefully to produce maximum results with the financial re- sources at hand. . .... .... ... The first portion of the comprehensive coordi- 7qwlw nated joint plan (CCJP) for the Great Lakes ad- vanced with the publication of the first half of the 27 books reporting the 7-1/2 year Great Lakes Basin Framework Study, foundation of the CCJP. More than 25,000 volumes of the Framework Study were requested, and those published were distributed to federal, state, regional, and local planners and to Basin. Commission members, libraries, educa- tional institutions and the public. The remainder will be published in fiscal year 1976. The first local elements of the CCJP were fur- nished to the Commission by the State of New York in the form of a detailed description of projects in the Erie-Niagara basin. Other portions of New York and portions of Pennsylvania will be incorporated into the CCJP by the end of fiscal year 1976. Ohio, Indiana, and Michigan moved toward con- tributing to the CCJP as they continued addressing the Maumee River basin's problems in a Level B study under Commission leadership. It is expected that the initial phase of the CCJP will be completed for the entire Basin by the end of fiscal year 1977. Although the proposed study of the Fox-Wolf River basin in Wisconsin was not approved to start in fiscal year 1976, by year's end plans were under wa to repropose it for funding, since the need for y it has not diminished. Similar Level B studies of special problems in other Great Lakes states will be 77@", o Their Excellencies, the Governors of Illinois, proposed until the more urgent problems of the L Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, New York, entire Basin area have been addressed through Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin, and to the US Level B studies, as mandated under Public Law Water Resources Council for transmittal to the 92-500. Congress through the President of the United Under the leadership of the US Water Resources States: Council, Basin Commission members and staff Despite a financial setting that involved a fixed began work on the Great Lakes portion of the 1975 operating budget in an economy with upward spi- National Water Assessment. This is the first such raling costs, the Great Lakes Basin Commission national assessment of water problems and experienced a rewarding fiscal year 1975 owing to priorities since 1968. The Great Lakes portion will its broadened coordination through new special be used in updates of the Great Lakes Basin committees and increased reporting services to Framework Study data and the CCJP. From the Chairman As needs arose, the Great Lakes Basin Commis- require application of scientific, technical, and sion continued to address today's problems and administrative expertise. It will be mandatory to seek their solutions. One of the continuing prob- depend on a strong natural resource coordinating lems, shoreline recession, has been aggravated by agency, knowledgeable of Canadian interests and storms and high lake levels. In September 1974 the activities, for joint planning among the state and Commission participated in a Great Lakes shore- federal governments. lands conference sponsored by the legislature of During the next fiscal year we expect to repro- the State of Michigan. In December 1974 the Com- pose studies vital to future coordination of the mission's Standing Committee on Coastal Zone conservation, use, and development of Great Lakes Management, with funding assistance from the resources. Future costs are expected to be much State of Michigan, sponsored a workshop on greater than today's, both in dollars needed and in shoreline recession rates and published the pro- resources used. Without the information and data ceedings. that our proposed studies would supply to de- The Coastal Zone Management Committee, the cisionmakers at all levels of government, their job US Water Resources Council, and the US Office of would be even more difficult. Management and Budget helped the Joint Great How the Great Lakes Region can continue to Lakes Basin Commission/Federal Regional Coun- provide its share of the nation's wealth at present cil Task Force develop a shoreland damage reduc- and projected rates of consumption and still main- tion strategy. Implementation of this strategy, tain an aesthetic environment is of personal con- which was approved by the eight Great Lakes cern to all US citizens. With your assistance, the states last year, will be a continuing task. The work Great Lakes Basin Commission will endeavor to of the Coastal Zone Management Committee and meet the states' and nation's needs through con- the joint Task Force will provide still another di- tinued, effective comprehensive planning. mension to the CCJP. Concern about the impact of transportation facilities on the coastal zone led the state members of the Basin Commission to request that the Com- mission establish a committee to review transpor- tation problems and policies in the Basin. This was done just prior to the end of the fiscal year. The Frederick 0. Rouse committee's objectives are to foster comprehensive Chairman transportation planning in the Great Lakes Region, provide for discussion of transportation problems and issues, stimulate coordination among state and federal agencies, and bring transportation ChaLrman's LaReir ......... problems to the attention of the Basin Commission. The Transportation Committee encourages (C(0)MPIr8h(31MF&8 (CG(E)1rdLM2t8d1 coordinated use of water, land, and air modes, and @okt Flan ,@r- provides a unique forum for examining nationally significant multimodal transportation problems Stmas Membeirs of the and interstate issues in the Region. Comm@sslan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FD It is increasingly obvious that by the year 2020 3,z- available minerals, energy, and areas of desirable land and water may be in short supply. Even if we Fkand&R Repart . . . . . . . . . . . . conserve the resources, the job of planning for use, CGMM@ssa'onairs andl development, and conservation of these finite c,,' supplies will become more difficult. Recommend- A@tarnates ................ IrD ing best policies for use of limited available re- Photos courtesy of Minnesota nepartrient of Natural Re- sources among an overabundance of demands will sources and E. Prosser. C nt X @Ai .Or 'Vt A N ME; Z4 .4 4.4- % comprehensive coordinated joint plan (CCJP) The CCJP for the Great Lakes Basin is well under I 1@ for the wise use of water and related land way with the publication of half the volumes re- resources in the Great Lakes Basin i's required of porting the Great Lakes Basin Framework Study. the Basin Commission under Public Law 89-80. When complete, that study will become the Level The CCJP will include an inventory of Great Lakes A portion of the CCJP. resources and their preseht use, predictions of fu- It is anticipated that development of the next ture demands on the resources, and development portion of the comprehensive plan will he acceler- of recommended plans, programs and projects to ated for completion by the end of fiscal year 1977 meet future resource needs of the Region. The CCJP through inventories of projects and programs that will be based upon the results of Basinwide and affect water and related land resources in the Great local planning studies. Lakes Basin. C p Y E5) h a n s HO v,,,,:,,, Maintenance of the CCJP will involve a continu- Maumee River Basin Level B Study ous planning process. The Commission will need The Maumee River Basin Level B Study is the to foster expanded coordination of data collection first Level B study in the Great Lakes Basin. Re- and research programs applicable to the Great started in 1974 after a national change in Level B Lakes Region and will continue to examine feder- study plans, the Maumee study addresses parts of al, state, interstate, regional, local, and non- Michigan, Indiana, and Ohio and is managed by governmental plans. Work performed during the Commission staff. It is the nation's first Level B past year by state and regional agencies will be study restructured to reflect the Water Resources major contributions to the CCJP. Council's new approach to Level B planning. Great Lakes Basin Framework Study Study time was shortened to two years, participat- The Framework Study represents the first com- ing states assumed major leadership roles, public prehensive set of commonly based water and land participation was encouraged at every planning data published on the United States portion of the step, and study organization was streamlined by Great Lakes Basin. The value of this coordinated reducing the size of the planning group and pro- data is indicated by the fact that planning organi- viding planners with a strong judgmental role. The zations used extensively the data gathered during Maumee study is scheduled for completion in the years of study in draft form. Spring 1976. Fourteen of the 27 Framework Study volumes The study's first phase was completed and its were published, and by year's end nearly 1,000 second of three phases begun within the year. copies of each were distributed to member agen- Phase one, an initial assessment of the basin's cies and other study participants and, at cost, to the problems, needs, and opportunities, was described public. More than 25,000 volumes ordered by the in two reports published in August .1974. A Pre- fiscal year's end indicated widespread demand. sentation of First-Cut Planning is an interim report that describes the initial assessment and presents Erie-Niagara River Basin Plan tentative alternative solutions to the problems dis- The first local planning study was added to the covered. A public information brochure, Planning comprehensive coordinated joint plan in May with for the Water and Related Land Resources of the the official adoption of baseline elements of the Basin, was issued to provide a general description Erie-Niagara River Basin Plan, a New York State of the study. Both reports were distributed to more regional plan. than 1,200 Maumee basin residents. The State of New York presented an inventory Phase two, the development of a detailed defini- and description of water projects completed or tion and refinement of problems and revised alter- under way, such as wastewater treatment plants, native solutions, began with the review and harbor improvements, and reservoirs. screening of the broad alternatives specified in phase one. A major part of this review occurred 1975 National Water Assessment during a series of five public workshops held in The 1975 National Water Assessment, the first five basin cities during October 1974. These work- undertaken by the US Water Resources Council shops, which attracted more than 400 people, were since 1968, is a 3-1/2 year effort to identify and arranged by the Maumee study Citizens' Advisory describe the nation's severe water problems and Committee, which solicited public reaction to the establish priorities for solving them. This assess- study before and after the workshops. In March the ment is designed to reflect both national and Great Citizens' Advisory Committee Goals Report was Lakes regional-state viewpoints. published. Preliminary problem identification was begun, Also in phase two, details of alternative plans aided by an assessment work group and a public were developed by the Maumee Planning Board review group. Portions of the assessment as well as from a series of technical papers by State, Federal, subsequent national assessments will provide an and local agency participants. The technical pa- ongoing mechanism for updating the Framework pers drew on available data and assessed the major Study, and thus the Level A portion of the CCJP. areas of concern, which were the Lima, Ft. Wayne, 0 0 777@D T @_r II-,q @0_ T ! @ - rc z@@ C)) Tr-@) C(] Do ca), @, c(li-, Donal and Toledo urban sectors, Maumee Bay, agricul- tural and environmentally fragile sectors, land use, TO erosion and sedimentation, water quality, fish and 'Al wildlife, outdoor recreation, flooding and drain- f, age, and water supply. In phase three alternative plans will be pre- 14 sented to Maumee basin residents in a series of public forums during the coming year, and then development of the recommended plan will begin after a public reaction period. The final Maumee study plan will become part of the CCJP. 1V Great Lakes Environmental Planning Study- Proposed PPtNDI X 16 The major objective of this study is to integrate ._-4e PRZAT 84SIM FR' Drainage currently available analytical methodologies and @@-Ar - __4 - use them to develop models of physical, chemical, and biological processes of the Great Lakes. The utility of the overall modeling effort lies in its ability to evaluate the consequences of alternative planning and -resource development strategies. GREAT LAKES BASIN FRAMEWORK STUDY This study is designed to produce a tool for plan- Appendixes Published in FY 1975 ners, engineers, and economists to use in evaluat- 2 Suface Water Hydrology ing planning alternatives. 3 Geology and Ground Water 5 Mineral Resources Fox-Wolf Level B Study-Proposed 10 Power This study was first proposed in 1972 but re- 11 Levels and Flows mains unfunded despite resubmission each suc- 13 Land Use and Management ceeding year. The study is a top priority of the 15 Irrigation Governor of Wisconsin. The US Environmental 16 Drainage Protection Agency has referred to the Fox-Wolf as 17 Wildlife one of the most polluted rivers in the United States. 18 Erosion and Sedimentation Solving water quantity and land use issues as well 19 Economic and Demographic Studies as water quality problems will require approval of 21 Outdoor Recreation a two-year Level B study, another building block of 22 Aesthetic and Cultural Resources the CCJP. 23 Health Aspects Great Lakes Region Water and Energy Study To be Published in FY 1976 A proposal to perform this two-year Level B 1 Alternative Frameworks study was submitted to the US Water Resources 4 Limnology of Lakes and Embayments Council in response to issues raised by the national 6 Water Supply, Municipal, Industrial, Rural energy crisis. Some such issues that arose in the 7 Water Quality Great Lakes area pertained to future drilling in the 8 Fish lakes for oil and gas, power plants sited along the C9 Commercial Navigation shores, and land use by transmission lines. The R9 Recreational Boating proposed study was not funded and will be resub- 12 Shore Use and Erosion mitted in anticipation of approval. 14 Flood Plains The study would help resolve resource use con- S20 State Laws, Policies and Institutional flicts and provide a regional perspective on na- Arrangements tional energy policies. It would contribute data to F20 Federal Laws, Policies and Institutional the CCJP and to the national planning strategy at Arrangements US Water Resources Council level, aid state de- Report cisionmakers, and provide local guidance. Environmental Impact Statement he major water resources activities of the on the same stream. eight Great Lakes state members of the Basin The Northwest Indiana Regional Planning Commission form a background for the Commis- Commission, State Board of Health, and Depart- sion's coordination of plans'for Great Lakes water ment of Natural Resources began assisting the and land resources. State Planning Services Agency with the inventory During the year, the states emphasized coastal phase of the coastal zone management program. zone management programs and wastewater The state flood plain management program was treatment and water quality improvement under established through legislation, and minimum Sections 303 and 208 of Public Law 92-500, the US standards were published by the Natural Re- Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972. sources Commission (NRC). Three Great Lakes Flood prevention and shore erosion control along Basin communities passed flood plain ordinances with legislation on power siting and mining land approved by the NRC. reclamation received strong interest, as did trans- Water quality plans for three areas were given portation. top priority for completion, and at year's end two areas were finishing work programs and a third Illinois was designated for attention under Sections 303 and 208 of Public Law 92-500. Under the Illinois Department of Transportation Indiana continued intensive participation in the Division of Water Resources, the state coastal zone Basin Commission's Maumee River Basin Level B management program finished the first year of the Study. three-year development phase involving 14 municipalities, two counties, and 59 miles of Lake Michigan shoreline. Ten state agencies worked cooperatively under the program in concert with the US Soil Conservation Service, US Army Corps of Engineers, Northeastern Illinois Planning ge Commission, League of Women Voters, and Lake Michigan Federation. The state initiated a flood plain regulation pro- grarn concentrating on areas subject to increasing pressures of urbanization and created a Governor's Task Force on Flood Control. Illinois is actively pursuing its program to obtain flood insurance coverage for all eligible municipalities throughout the state. Flood prone areas are mapped, flood frequency data are com- piled, flood limits are defined, and technical ad- vice and assistance is provided to local com- munities enrolled in the program. Illinois embarked on a five-year program for ,7 alleviation of flood damages in the urban areas of the state. Indiana The Little Calumet River Regional Recreation Area Study was performed by the state to review alternative means of providing recreation facilities along the Little Calumet River. The study comple- ments a proposed US Army Corps of Engineers i project for flood control and recreational boating 9 t a t (Bc-)) M B-D-) m b I ai Michigan The New York CCJP Committee reviewed the Water pollution abatement programs, coastal state-adopted Erie-Niagara Basin Plan to identify zone management, fisheries management, com- elements for the Great Lakes Basin Commission prehensive water resources planning, a plan to comprehensive coordinated joint plan (CCJP). The determine policies for multimodal transportation, state thus provided the first baseline elements (i.e., and specific future facilities needed were vital set of programs and projects completed or under way) to the Commission's CCJP. The state Depart- concerns. ment of Environmental Conservation also gener- The state administered nearly $400 million in ated CCJP baseline elements for the St. Lawrence, municipal wastewater treatment system projects Black, and Oswego river basins. These are to be during the year and issued 1,300 permits under the reviewed and will then come under Commission National Pollution Discharge Elimination System consideration. in cooperation with the US Environmental Protec- tion Agency. The state completed water quality management Finishing the second year of a coastal zone man- plans for eight of the 26 New York rivers tributary agement program that included assessment of to the Great Lakes Basin. Plans for more tributaries shoreline recession rates in high risk areas and were begun. building setback requirements, the state began drafting a report identifying shoreland areas of greatest concern. The state legislature sponsored a Great Lakes Shorelands Conference. Among the programs given state support was the Maumee River Basin Level B Study. Minnesota Minnesota launched four new programs affect- ing the Great Lakes area: designation of public waters, development of a comprehensive state water policy, a program to accelerate acquisition of land and water areas, and a program to coordinate state agencies. Due to a redefinition of public waters by the state legislature, the Department of Natural Resources (DNR) generated a program under which each county will inventory its surface waters and clas- sify them as mutually agreed with DNR. Under a $20 million program, the state began to accelerate acquisition of almost 55,000 acres of parklands, wildlife areas, forests, trails, river shorelands, and fisheries. The state continued monitoring and regulating water.quality and developing management plans for its 39 river basins. In a move toward increased coordination among state agency water programs, Minnesota directed attention to programs for flood plain protection, Wild and Scenic River designa- tions, critical area planning, and one-stop licens- ing and approval for proposed power plants. New York New York's Department of State directed the first year of a coastal zone management program. Shoreland data and problem descriptions were gathered, and critical coastal issues and priorities were defined. Ohio Water Plan (Level C study), both of which will affect the Lake Erie basin. Activities of the Ohio Environmental Protection The shoreland management program addressed Agency in the Great Lakes Region included issuing the disposal of polluted dredge spoil, flooding $111.5 million in construction grants for wastewa- problems in the Toledo area, and implementation ter treatment facilities planning, design, and con- of provisions of the Coastal Zone Management Act, struction in the Lake Erie basin; completion of Public Law 92-583. waste loads and allocation reports for the Grand, More than 150 communities became eligible for Ashtabula, Maumee, Cuyahoga, and Chagrin Riv- flood insurance, under ODNR administration. ers; completion of water quality surveys of the A land capability analysis for Lake County was Sandusky and Portage Rivers; designation of three published as part of the Ohio Land Capability "208 agencies" in the Lake Erie basin;and partici- Study to determine land suitability for various pation as the assistant study manager for the uses. Maumee River Basin Level B Study. The Ohio Department of Natural Resources (ODNR) completed a State Comprehensive Out- Pennsylvania door Recreation Plan and the Northeast Ohio The state's high priority Great Lakes activities were beach erosion control at Presque Isle State Park, completion of the Lake Erie portion of the state comprehensive water quality management plan, second-year development of a coastal zone management program, and expansion of sport fish- ing and boating opportunities. -lot V The Lake Erie area of Pennsylvania's Com- prehensive Waste and Water Quality Management 13@ Study neared completion at the end of the year. The Restoration and Enhancement of Sport Fisheries and Boating Program continued and in- cluded a study of the feasibility of stocking fish species such as lake trout and coho salmon in Lake F1, Erie tributaries and acquisition of fishing and boat- 1, ing access sites. 01, Wisconsin State legislative action highlighted Wisconsin's year with the introduction of bills to provide wet- lands protection, cede state ownership of the Apostle Islands to the federal government, and require electric utilities to file 10-year advance plans for power plant construction. Under pending legislation the Apostle Islands in Lake Superior would become part of Apostle Is- lands National Lakeshore. The proposed wetlands law would require local governments to adopt or- dinances within two years of enactment to require permits for local entities who wish to take 'actions affecting wetlands of two acres or more. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources began formulating rules to implement new open pit copper, zinc, and lead mining legislation that will require permits for prospecting and mining and will regulate reclamation. 8 PIP 4W 'tp Y-T7'@j he Commission water and land ya;sx 1075 with officiall Canaeie--t fed---ml F--nd A resoucces plans among all levels of gc-isni- vincis Observers in attep-da---ce. Fox-matioz o-$ 01113 ment in the Unitad of the Groat -,aew man-ding committees for coastal rL;An- Lakes Region. To bring @-I"S @:a & -"'hesi,7e non- agarcant and trensportatio-n indicatsi 4LI,- Corn- duplicative manuaxth@, aftIlD,4!ght states, 12 missiozYc in a uniffied, Easirwida is:u- fect ral agencies, and an-11:a(ars-m-5 commission p--czz4i t-- :':r!@:Aemcc of the ccasta: %ons P-Rd t@-ns- CoordRnccc)),@Rcn Transportation Committee the coastal zone boundary. A strategy for reducing At the request of the state commissioners, a shoreland damage caused by storms and high lake standing committee on transportation was estab- levels was developed by the joint Federal Regional lished just prior to the fiscal year end to examine Council/Great Lakes Basin Commission Task transportation problems from a regional and Force. Sites and projects were recommended for multimodal perspective in relation to the Basin's five pilot programs to be funded. The strategy was coastal zone management, water,. land use plan- developed with the aid of the Coastal Zone Stand- ning, and energy needs. ing Committee, US Water Resources Council, and The committee began planning a series of work- US Office of Management and Budget, and was shops to examine transportation in the Basin. The endorsed by the Great Lakes states' Governors. objective of the first workshop will be to stimulate International Coordination a vigorous exchange of ideas among government, In addition to inviting Canadian federal and industry, and research concerns regarding all provincial observers to quarterly meetings, the modes of transportation in the Great Lakes Region. Commission continued serving on boards and The workshop will examine the strengths and committees of the International joint Commission weaknesses of transportation in the Region, the (IJC). The executive director of the Commission c problems resulting from its deficiencies, issues to staff chairs the Social Sciences, Economic, and be addressed in resolving the problems, and Legal Aspects Committee of the Research Advisory priorities for addressing the problems. The com- Board of the IJC, and the Great Lakes Basin Com- mittee hopes to use the results of the workshop as mission staff helped arrange and sponsor the IJC's background information for reviewing regional workshop on public participation in June 1975. transportation planning and for making recom- Other types of assistance were given the IJC mendations about transportation to the Great through the Pollution from Land Use Activities Lakes Basin Commission. Reference Group and the Upper Lakes Reference Coastal Zone Management Committee Group. This committee was established to coordinate interstate matters regarding the coastal zone. Its Pollution from Land Use Activities Reference members are representatives from six federal Group agencies and from the coastal zone management The IJC established a binational Pollution from programs of the eight Great Lakes states. Land Use Activities Reference Group (PLUARG) The committee held workshops in December under the terms of the 1972 Great Lakes Water 1974 and February 1975. In the first workshop, Quality Agreement between the United States and techniques for measuring rates of Great Lakes Canada to assess the extent of pollution from land shoreline recession were analyzed. The published uses such as agriculture, forestry, and urban de- workshop proceedings, which contain current velopment and to recommend remedial measures data on shoreline recession in the Great Lakes will to the two countries. .help guide the Flood Insurance Administration in The study plan had four major tasks which, in the development of criteria for flood insurance the United States, were to be performed by federal programs. agencies, consulting firms, and university re- The second.workshop concentrated on coastal searchers. Because of their experience in water and zone boundary determination and management land planning, Great Lakes Basin Commission staff program segmentation. Representatives from the were asked to work on portions of the major tasks. Office of Coastal Zone Management, National Tasks A and B drew on existing data, a large Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (US amount of which was derived from the Great Lakes Department of Commerce) and the States of Maine Basin Framework Study. Task A assessed current and Massachusetts reported their coastal activities land use problems based on information already to the committee. available. Task B inventoried land use, with em- A paper, "Power Plant Siting Issues and Policies phasis on projections for the future. in the Great Lakes Coastal Zone," was written for Task C is an intensive study of several water- the committee, revised, and considered for publi- sheds representative of specific land uses, and cation. Among subjects discussed by the commit- aims to relate water quality at the river mouth to tee was the Lake Levels Report of the International upstream land use practices. Basin Commission joint Commission. Lake levels were noted to have staff helped develop studies of streambank erosion vital impact on shore erosion and delineation of under this task. 10 Task D is designed to diagnose the degree of Basin through fiscal year 1979. It was published by impairment of water quality in the Great Lakes that the Commission, and by year end nearly 1,000 has resulted from land use activities. The Basin copies had been distributed on request. Sufficient Commission staff developed the plan of study for booklets remained available to fill anticipated re- the US portion of Task D. The staff is. also par- quests throughout fiscal year 1976. ticipating in the implementation of the study plan, National Conference on Water beginning work on studies of the significance of This conference, sponsored by the US Water Re- contaminants that enter the Great Lakes from sources Council, was held in Washington, DC, in tributary runoff and from erosion of Great Lakes April 1975. The Commission Chairman and Execu- shorelines. tive Director served as vice chairman and secre- IJC - Upper Lakes Reference Group - Task Group F- A The staff assisted the IJC in obtaining informa- tion necessary for developing a predictive model X to simulate future waste loads received by Upper Great Lakes waters. To aid further in the study, the Commission staff and States of Minnesota, Michi- 4@ gan, and Wisconsin' assisted representatives from Environment Canada, Canada Centre for Inland Waters, and the US Environmental Protection Agency. Interagency Committee for Marine Sciences and Engineering Commission staff helped the Interagency Com- mittee for Marine Sciences and Engineering (ICMSE) of the Federal Council for Science and Technology organize the Second Federal Confer- ence on the Great Lakes, held at Argonne National Laboratory, Chicago-in March 1975. Conference focus was on the effects of energy production on 1 the Great Lakes and on the need for further assess- ment of these effects through energy-related Great Lakes research programs. The Commission's Pub- *NOW lic Information Office will publish the proceedings as they did for the First Federal Conference on the Great Lakes. Public Priorities for Great Lakes Research For the Department of Interior's Office of Water Research and Technology, the staff surveyed pub- lic interest organizations regarding the priorities tkey place on Great Lakes research. The 149 or- ganizations polled were asked to rank in impor- tance a number of selected research needs. Appen- Ile, dix 1, Alternative Frameworks, Great Lakes Basin -,-,w Framework Study, served as a foundation for selecting the research needs. The report of this study will be published by the Commission's Pub- *N'A lic Information Office in fiscal year 1976. Great Lakes Basin Programs, FY 75-FY 79 This is the title of a 54-page booklet that catalogs planning, research, and data acquisition programs either under way or a;nticipated in the Great Lakes tary, respectively, on a panel addressing the role of Public attendance at the quarterly meetings of the federal, state, and local governments in water Commission was actively encouraged through planning. Recommendations emerging from the pre-meeting press announcements. The League of panel were for increased state leadership, federal Women Voters, American Association of Univer- -funding in block grants to states, and increased sity Women (AAUW) and the Lake Michigan Fed- coordination among governments. The recom- eration were among the citizen groups who sent mendations from this and other panels were ex- representatives to the meetings. pected to effect possible amendmerits to the Fed- The AAUW continued to monitor the Basin eral Water Resources Planning Act, Public Law Commission through its Great Lakes Task Force. 89-80, under which the Basin Commission was This group conducted a survey of congressmen to established. determine their knowledge of and support for Winter Navigation Season Extension Basin Commission activities and will report their The Commission chairman served on the Great findings early in fiscal year 1976. Lakes-St. Lawrence Seaway Winter Navigation Public involvement was an integral part of the 1975 National Water Assessment, Great Lakes Re- Board and the executive director on its Working gion, through establishment of a public review Committee. The Board is composed of representa- group. The Maumee River Basin Level B Study tives of the US Army Corps of Engineers, US Coast included a continuously helpful Citizens' Adviso- Guard, US Environmental Protection Agency, St. ry Committee (CAC) that arranged a series of pub- Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation, Na- lic workshops held in October 1974. The Public tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Information Office provided press releases about US Maritime Administration, US Department of the workshops and published an interim report Interior, Federal Power Commission, and Great and a public information brochure describing the Lakes Commission. The goal of the program is to Maumee study. This study alone more than dou- demonstrate the practicability and desirability of bled the Commission's circulation file for the year-round navigation on the Great Lakes. Maumee River basin. Staff prepared the Report on Great Lakes Directory the October 1974 Workshops for basinwide dis- tribution, and published the Citizens' Advisory The Commission staff surveyed research insti- Committee Goals Report. tutes, universities, libraries, and state, provincial, federal, regional, and international governmental Great Lakes Basin Library agencies concerned with Great Lakes water and In response to user requests and to new fields related land resources and began preparations to and emphasis in the planning and coordination publish a directory of information concerning programs of the Basin Commission, the collection them. This directory is sponsored by the National of Great Lakes water and land resources informa- Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, acting tion in the Great Lakes Basin Library grew to on behalf of the Interagency Committee on Marine 15,000 documents and books and 200 newsletters, Sciences and Engineering. magazines, and journals. Because it is a selected federal depository, the Public Involvement library also receives many new federal documents. The Communicator, monthly newsletter of the As a federal depository, the library receives all Commission, grew in circulation from 10,400 to federal publications that relate to water and land more than 13,000 during the fiscal year in response resources in the Great Lakes Basin and is open for to the enlargement of Commission programs. Dis- public use. Governmental agencies, local re- tributed without charge, the Communicator was searchers in natural resource subjects, and citi- read throughout the Basin in both the United zens' action groups are frequent users. States and Canada. Growth necessitated the large task of inventory- To support the Communicator as well as diver- ing, updating indexes, and rearranging documents sified programs of the Commission that include to make them more easily accessible. The growth provision for public response and participation, required the library staff to plan for conversion to the Public Information Office maintained a specif- the Superintendent of Documents classification ically adapted, categorized circulation file. Public system used in many government libraries. inquiry increased in response to the Commission's Commission staff activities and increased need increased activities and the publication of 14 of the for data related to new projects required expanding 27 Great Lakes Basin Framework Study volumes. and updating reference materials. 12 STATEMENT OF REVENUE AND EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE GENERAL FUND Years ended June 30, 1974 and 1975 1975 Major Restricted Funds Publishing Maumee National Balance 1974 Framework River Water For Total Total Study Basin Study Assessment Operations Revenue: Federal government agencies: Operating $204,500 $205,500 $205,500 Other 166,038 367,244 $ 50,252 $132,000 $30,000 154,992 State governments: Operating 208,000 240,000 240,000 Other -0- 7,500 7,500 578,538 820,244 50,252 132,000 30,000 607,992 Less provision for uncollectible revenues -0-- 5,000 5,000 578,538 815,244 50,252 132,000 30,000 602,992 Expenditures: Salaries and fringe benefits: Salaries and wages 313,397 432,157 Payroll taxes 15,081 24,803 Retirement 13,220 14,435 Health and life insurance 12,537 17,173 354,235 488,568 46,928 49,967 15,778 375,895 Other expenses: Travel 19,908 32,708 Subcontracted services 15,289 83,898 Rent 37,880 46,594 Communications 8,748 10,794 Postage 2,351 3,224 Meetings and conferences 1,114 3,186 Insurance 1,300 1,120 Repairs and maintenance 49 2,236 Printing and reproduction 29,982 114,628 Annual report 1,273 2,967 Professional services 2,500 3,550 Other services 3,523 14,196 Supplies 6,011 16,847 Subscriptions 232 2,152 Furniture and equipment 2,134 16,046 Miscellaneous 10 1,709 132,304 355,855 73,662 50,632 6,582 224,979 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 486,539 844,423 120,590 100,599 22,360 600,874 EXCESS OF REVENUES OVER EXPEND- ITURES (EXCESS OF EXPENDITURES) 91,999 (29,179) (70,338) 31,401 7,640 2,118 Fund balance at beginning of year 224,284 316,283 144,216 61,387 -0- 110,680 FUN D BALANCE AT END OF YEAR $316,283 $287,104 $ 73,878 $92,788 $ 7,640 $112,798 See notes to financial statements. UFi*nancial Report BALANCE SHEET - GENERAL FUND June 30, 1974 and 1975 Assets 1974 1975 Cash on deposit in United States Treasury: Restricted: Printing of Framework Study $144,216 73,878 Maumee River Basin Study 61,387 92,788 National Water Assessment -0- 7,640 Other (included in deferred revenue) 10,000 -0- 215,603 174,306 Unrestricted 135,172 197,105 350,775 371,411 Petty Cash 50 50 Accounts receivable: Grant receivable - State of Wisconsin 22,000 13,500 Grant receivable - State of Illinois .0- 1,300 Grant receivable - State of New York -0- 1,100 Federal government agencies (including unbilled of $6,738 in 1974 and $42,634 in 1975) 47,628 78,986 Other -0- 2,307 69,628 97,193 Allowances for uncollectible accounts -0- (5,000 69,628 92,193 Advances and deposits 4,106 2,999 $424,559 $466,653 Liabilities and Fund Balance Liabilities: Accounts payable $ 22,006 91,691 Unearned revenue -0- 27,369 Retirement plan payments withheld and accrued 1,670 1,720 Accrued annual leave 39,700 49,383 Accrued sick leave 2,600 3,400 Accrued unemployment 2,300 5,986 68,276 179,549 Deferred revenue - grants for 1974-75 received in advance 40,000 -0- Fund balance: Major restricted funds: Printing of Framework Study 144,216 73,878 Maumee River Basin Study 61,387 92,788 National Water Assessment -0- 7,640 205,603 174,306 Balance for operations: Appropriated - Printing of Framework Study 67,000 67,000 Reserve for future operations 43,680 45,798 110,680 112,798 316,283 287,104 @424,559 $466,653 See notes to financial statements. 14 BALANCE SHEET-PLANT AND EQUIPMENT FUND June 30, 1974 and 1975 1974_ 1975 11 Assets Furniture, equipment and library books - Note A Furniture and equipment $38,072 $54,118 Library books 1.5,305 15,305 $53,377 @69,4 2 3 Source of Funds Appropriations from unrestricted General Fund revenues $53,377 $69,423 See notes to financial statements. NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Year ended June 30, 1975 Note A - Accounting Policies The accounting records of the Commission are maintained on the accrual basis of accounting. Furniture, equipment and library books have been recorded in the Plant and V_A Equipment Fund at cost. No provision for depreciation has been provided. V The Commission is exempt from Federal income tax under Section 501 (c)(3) of Ir" the Internal Revenue Code and is treated as an organization which is not a private foundation. f" I I The salary and related fringe benefits of the Commission chairman is provide d by the Water Resources Council and these costs are not included in the financial statement. n Note B - Lease Agreement The Commission has entered into a lease agreement for the rental of office facilities extending to October 31, 1975, which requires a monthly payment of $4,094. Rental payments aggregated $37,880 and $46,594 in fiscal 1974 and 1975 respectively. Note C - Pension Plan The Commission has a pension plan for most of its employees. Contributions for fiscal 1974 and 1975 amounted to $13,220 and $14,435 respectively. Great Lakes Basin Commission In our opinion, the accompanying financial statements 3475 Plymouth Road identified above present fairly the financial position of P.O. Box 999 the General Fund and the Plant and Equipment Fund of Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106 the Great Lakes Basin Commission atiune 30,1975, and We have examined the balance sheet of the General Fund the results of its operations for the year then ended in and the Plant and Equipment Fund of the Great Lakes conformity with generally accepted accounting princi- Basin Commission as of June 30, 1975, and the related ples applied on a basis consistent with the preceding statement of revenue and expenditures and changes in year. fund balance for the year then ended. Our examination was made in accordance with generally accepted audit- Linscheid, Austin & Frohm ing standards, and accordingly included such tests ofthe 300 Michigan National Bank Building accounting records and such other auditing procedures Port Huron, Michigan 48060 as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We Certified Public Accountants previously made a similar examination of financial statemerfts for the preceding year. August 19, 1975 15 (as of June 30, 1975, includes those who served only part of this fiscal year and dates of service.) Illinois Ohio Dr. Leo Eisel, Commissioner Ned E. Williams, Commissioner Illinois Department of Transportation State of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency L. Murray Pipkin, Alternate Commissioner Dr. Robert W. Teater, Alternate Commissioner Illinois Department of Transportation Ohio Department of Natural Resources 7/74 to 11/74 Ralph 0. Fisher, Alternate Com- 7/74 to 4/75 Ira L. Whitman, Commissioner missioner 7/74 to 1/75 William Nye, Alternate Indiana Commissioner William J. Watt, Commissioner 7/74 to 1/75 Earl Richards, Alternate Executive Assistant to the Governor Commissioner William J. Andrews, Alternate Commissioner 7/74 to 1/75 William Mattox, Alternate Indiana Department of Natural Resources Commissioner Michigan Pennsylvania William D. Marks, Commissioner C. H. McConnell, Commissioner Michigan Department of Natural Resources James P. Dooley, Alternate Commissioner Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Michigan Department of Natural Resources Resources Vernon M. Beard, Alternate Commissioner Minnesota Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Archie Chelseth, Commissioner Resources Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Don Rye, Alternate Commissioner Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Wisconsin Joseph Sizer, Alternate Commissioner Thomas G. Frangos, Commissioner State Planning Agency Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources Andy Kozak Stanley W. Welsh, Alternate Commissioner Staff Assistant to the Governor Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources 7/74 to 6/75 Peter L. Gove, Commissioner New York Federal Power Commission Ogden Reid, Commissioner Lenard B. Young, Commissioner New York State Department of Environmental Federal Power Commission Conservation Orel E. Haukedahl, Alternate Commissioner John A. Finck, Alternate Commissioner Federal Power Commission New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Albert W. Bromberg, Alternate Commissioner U.S. Department of Health, Education and Wel. New York State Department of Environmental fare Conservation Richard E. Friedman, Commissioner 7/74 to 4/75 Ronald W. Petersen, Commissioner Region V 7/74 to 4/75 Peter Mack, Alternate Hiroshi Kanno, Alternate Commissioner Commissioner Region V 0 0 comHnR a a RUnIB11137 QLHid OR-5 16 U.S. Department of Housing and Urban U.S. Department of State Development (Position temporarily unfilled) George J. Vavoulis, Commissioner Louis Janowski, Alternate Commissioner Region V Office of Canadian Affairs Harry P. Blus, Alternate Commissioner Scott Gudgeon, Alternate Commissioner Region V Office of Legal Advisor 7/74 to 11/74 A. Dean Swartzel, Alternate 7/74 to 11/75 William Trueheart, Commissioner Commissioner 11/74 to 4/75 Slaton C. Blackiston, U.S. Department of the Interior Commissioner Miss Madonna F. McGrath, Commissioner 7/74 to 11/74 John Crook, Alternate North Central Region Commissioner 7/74 to 11/74 William Drescher, Alternate Com- 7/74 to 11/74 Gilbert Kulick, Alternate missioner Commissioner 11/74 to 6/75 John D. Winslow, Alternate Com- U.S. Department of Transportation missioner The Honorable David W. Oberlin, Commissioner St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation U.S. Department of justice George E. Wilson, Alternate Commissioner Walter Kiechel, Jr., Commissioner St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation Land and Natural Resources Division Rear Admiral James S. Gracey, Alternate Commissioner U.S. Department of Agriculture U.S. Coast Guard Arthur H. Cratty, Commissioner Commander Charles R. Corbett, Alternate Soil Conservation Service Commissioner Robert S. Fellows, Alternate Commissioner U.S. Coast Guard Soil Conservation Service 7/74 to 11/74 A. A. Heckman, Commissioner 7/74 to 6/75 Robert Gasior, Alternate U.S. Department of the Army Commissioner Brigadier General Walter 0. Bachus, Great Lakes Commission Commissioner Robert W. Kellum, Commissioner Corps of Engineers, North Central Division Colonel Harlan W. Johnson, Alternate Colonel Leonard J. Goodsell, Alternate Commissioner Commissioner Corps of Engineers, North Central Division Canadian Representatives Louis D'Alba, Alternate Commissioner Ray Robinson (Federal) Corps of Engineers, North Central Division Derck Foulds Colonel James E. Hays, Alternate Commissioner Environment Canada Corps of Engineers, Detroit District William A. Steggles (Provincial) Ontario Ministry of the Environment U.S. Department of Commerce Eugene J. Aubert, Commissioner Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory Dr. Arthur P. Pinsak, Alternate Commissioner Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory Commander Darrell W. Crawford, Alternate Commissioner Lake Survey Center 7/74 to 4/75 Kenneth MacDonald, Commis- sioner U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Francis T. Mayo, Commissioner Region V Harlan D. Hirt, Alternate Commissioner *ift-0 17 Region V Iom . ..... ..... ..... Aw all Great Lakes Basin Commission 3475 Plymouth Road, P.O. Box 999 Ann Arbor, Mi. 48106 313/763-3590 FTS 374-5431 3 6668 14111306 0 Postage and Fees Paid Great Lakes Basin Commission CORE R1 Y M T G @ M RE GREAT LAKES BASIN COMMISSION Frederick 0. Rouse, Chairman Member State of Illinois State of Indiana State of Michigan State of Minnesota State of New York State of Ohio Commonwealth of Pennsylvania State of Wisconsin Department of Agriculture Department of the Army Department of Commerce Department of Health, Education & Welfare Department of Housing & Urban Development Department of the Interior Department of justice Department of State Department of Transportation Energy Research and Development Ad mini stra.tio n Environmental Protection Agency Federal Power Commission Great Lakes Commission