186 



DONALD J. BENSON 



Therefore, the requirement of spent liquor 

 solid recovery as suggested by the report is unwarranted. 

 Levels of spent sulfite liquor in Puget Sound are not 

 harmful to other uses and users of the waters. It is 

 the conclusion of the industry that an expenditure in 

 excess of 40 million dollars required for installations 

 essential to such recovery is not justified for the in- 

 consequential benefits that might be derived. Further, 

 the cost of evaporation and burning of spent sulfite liquor 

 would be increased substantially because of air pollution 

 control requirements expected due to the locations of 

 all of the mills in question. In certain cases substan- 

 tial improvements of inner bay water quality may be 

 achieved either by the removal of settleable solids or 

 better outfall location at costs much more commensurate 

 with expected results. 



We have one final comment regarding the 

 FWPCA report. Tests were run on finger ling salmon holding 

 them in live boxes very close to the mills and waterfront 

 docks under particularly unfavorable circumstances of wind 

 and tide. The fish in some of these boxes were affected, 

 apparently, by toxic materials occasionally released by 

 sludge beds close to the municipal waterfronts. The report 

 offers no evidence that such troubles beset naturally 



