114 



I think that point should be recognized more widely than it is in 

 the clarion call for that common objectiA'e of "no waste discharge." 

 Let me try and apply this to the problem of slndge disposal, and it 

 was currently of major concern in southern California. 



Digested sludge is the treated underflow from waste treatment 

 processes. These materials among others are discharged into the 

 southern California coastal area by especially designed systems, and 

 for the most part, with a high degree of effectiveness. 



Xevertheless, there are those that sav sludges should not be dis- 

 charged into the sea because of their trace metal content or other 

 toxic materials. But even those who advocate no ocean discharge 

 appear to be advocating using the sludge on land, and the organic 

 farmer feels that is the most proper use. I would like to point out that, 

 in my judgment, first, if there is any significant hazard associated 

 with the discharge of the sludge, and I don't believe there is, but if 

 there is, we are far better off putting the sludge in the sea than putting 

 it on the land. Studies have shown that if digested sludge is dis- 

 charged properly at sea, only the larger particles settle close to the 

 discharge. The small particles are dispersed in the ocean water and 

 ultimately settle over a large fraction of the ocean floor. 



Theoretically the sludge could settle over the bulk of the ocean 

 floor in time. Correspondingly, the concentration, grams of toxicant 

 per square meter of area on the bottom decreases as the area over 

 which the sludge is dispersed increases. Digested sludge is just one 

 small fraction of the organic fallout that normally occurs on the 

 ocean floor. 



These materials that do settle to the ocean bottom are being covered 

 continuously and are removed from contact from the water and the 

 organisins tliat live in it, and ultimately man, so that it is essentially 

 taken out of contact with our living resources. 



"What happens if you put sludge on the land ? First, the fraction of 

 the land area over which the sludge can be spread is a very small 

 percentage of what would be the ultimate dispersing area in the sea. 

 Whatever materials are in the sludge will be concentrated in time in 

 the surface soils and agricultural practices continue to keep it in the 

 surface layers. These materials will enter into the flora and fauna of 

 the area, and ultimately into the human focxl chain and man himself 

 probably at a much more rapid rate than if you put them in the sea. 



I am not saying that the disposal of these materials on land is bad. 

 In fact, it is currently being practiced, and nobody has ever sliown 

 any significant hazards. But what I am saying is that there is very 

 little logic for banning digested sludge discharge to the open sea. So, 

 whenever bans are posed, one ought to look seriously at the possible 

 and real consequences of alternative methods of handling the waste 

 bceause ultimately we have some waste residue that must be disposed 

 of 121 our environment. 



Senator Tuxnf.y. I would assume that it would depend upon one's 

 ability to get the sludge into the sea as to whether or not that alterna- 

 tiA'e is viable as contrasted with landfill. 



I am thinking particularly of inland ai'eas. whei-e maybe the only 

 means of disposing of the sludge woidd be into rivers as opposed to 

 land fill, and Avhat micfht be a reasonable plan to move sludge into the 

 sea if you are living in a coastal area, would be unreasonable if you 

 lived in an inland area. 



